From e-Government to Public Information Management – …...From e-Government to Public Information...

Research in progress paper

Keywords: e-Government, Local government, Municipality, Public information management, Strategy

From e-Government to Public Information Management –

The Maturity and Future of Information Management

in Local Governments

Olli-Pekka Kaurahalme,

Antti Syväjärvi and Jari Stenvall

University of Lapland, Finland

European Group of Public Administration Annual Conference

Study Group 1: E-Government

Bucharest, 7th-10th of September 2011

What is the future of e-government in local public administration? The orientation of e-government discussion and assessment is orientated towards IT applications in governmentuse. In this study the focus is shift to the strategic maturity of administrations that areresponsible of the design and implementation of “e-Government 3.0”, the public informationmanagement authorities.

In Scandinavian countries local government is largely responsible of the e-government futureand the modernisation of public services. Information management function of localauthorities has the central role in this evolution. In this paper a novel framework is used toassess strategic maturity of public information management in local government. Frameworkis used in preparatory analysis of fresh empirical data to assess the current state of Finnishmunicipalities and the future development needs of public information management.

EGPA 2011, Bucharest Study Group 1

Olli-Pekka Kaurahalme, Antti Syväjärvi and Jari Stenvall, University of LaplandResearch in progress

Introduction

Like processes of almost any public administration innovation and modernization, the development of e-Government is also characterized by various phases and cycles. At the same time there are differences in theintroduction, development and prospect of e-Government between countries, regions and levels ofgovernment. Typically e-Government strategies are quite controversial subjects as those should be based oneven more advanced vision or might otherwise have national, regional or governmental differences. Thus thenext generation is not only characterized by a “higher level”, but it also involves consolidation processes andintegration at different e-Government conditions. Before governing the distinctive features of the nextgeneration or future e-Government it is needed to study the maturity of e-Government.

So what is the level or future of e-Government in local public government? Advances in information andcommunication technologies have made a contribution to the modernisation public administration (Eifert &Püschel, 2004; Henman, 2010). However, in many cases this is usually done via central government and steps forchange in local public administration is took in somewhat isolated silos and on the basis of autonomous activity.The latter is obvious in current case and therefore especially for countries in Northern Europe with autonomouslocal governments, i.e. municipalities. As local governments are largely responsible for future e-Government andpublic services it is important to understand both the maturity of e-Government and the future characters ofnew emerging e-Government. The latter is also valid in more centralized public administration. In this study aframework is introduced for assessing the local government properties of maturity in public informationmanagement.

The e-Government is a rather complex evolutionary process covering the whole government. In order to studyboth the wide nature and the future implications of new e-Government, thus the public informationmanagement is introduced as a key factor. There is a need to understand the maturity of e-Government. Inmany cases, the current practices of e-Government are built during the era that has been highlighted by theinformation and communication technology (ICT). But the e-Government is not only an ICT revolution but rathera complex evolutionary process to be governed. It is claimed here that one should move from traditional e-Government to public information management. This transform is multidimensional and even multidisciplinaryin nature since the public administration needs more cohesive, holistic and even operational policy in order toface the future e-Government.

Hence, it is important to understand how e-Government is changing and having new future implications. The e-Government should be able to meet such frames that complex governmental needs can be tackled. Theargument is made that it is time to link the focus of ongoing e-Government discussion more closely to the studyof public information management. Public information management means how governments provide improveand manage appropriate information and information based systems and resources by planning, organizing,executing and evaluating (e.g. Choo, 2006). Public information management in line with e-Government showspreconditions and characters that make it possible to reach “e-Government 3.0”.

In this study it is showed how municipalities are indeed heterogeneous with huge differences, but alsoknowledge about true nature of public information management is revealed in order to guarantee possibilitiesfor the future e-Government 3.0. Future e-Government is rather complex and multifaceted and thus maturityand characters of information management are scrutinized. In local government level, the municipality drivendevelopment has been slow, resources have been limited and changes have occurred in isolated silos. This hasproduced local solutions on the basis of autonomous activity. On the other hand central governments havetypically aimed for enterprise architectures and strategies that do neither observe variations among local



governments nor respect other multidimensional aspects than technology. Due to the abovementionedcomplexity, we need to focus both e-Government and Information management.

Focus from e-Government to Public Information Management

The on-going information technology enabled reform of public sector is usually discussed under the title of e-Government. A number of e-government definitions focus the concept into the use of IT’s in achieving betterpublic services and government in general (OECD, 2003; Bannister, 2007). Some definitions remember toconnect the concept into the change of organisational processes (as in European Commission, 2011) which isfundamental to successful reform; and some into the continuous innovation (UN, 2008, p. 69) which essential tothe progress of e-government.

A look at the methods for assessing e-government reveals more of the concept. Various maturity models areproposed and used for assessing the state of e-Government. Models describe a set of progressive phasesthrough which the evolution may occur. One of the first and most cited of these models is the one of Layne andLee (Layne & Lee, 2001). It defines the progressive phases of e-government from the simple online presence tothe full integration of governmental processes. Among others, similar models are also presented by Andersenand Henriksen (2006), Moon (2002) and United Nations in the well-known e-Government assessments (UN,2008).

As well as the e-government definition itself, these classification schemes tend to have technology orientatedfocus. Advance on these ladders follow technological developments of e-government information systems.These models may be useful in indicating the current state and depicting visions of e-services and e-government.However, they can be criticized of presenting time variant metrics and goals that can limit the holisticdevelopment and assessment of e-government (Bannister, 2007) when only the measured aspects will bemanaged. If technological progress is measured, the governmental, organisational and strategic capabilities haveminor attention. E-Government domain of knowledge (research, policy and practice) is overly technologyfocused which may limit the holistic development and reform of public sector.

Development steered by the impetus of e-government, the overall excitement about opportunities ofinformation technology faces a set of challenges. Repeatedly e-government initiatives and programs haveconfronted challenges on meeting the goals, costs limits or schedules (Homburg, 2008) (Newman, 2001).Studying municipalities, Moon has found problems due to excessive expectations, legislation, politics andorganisational change capability. The size and the managerial structures of municipalities were found assignificant factors in the implementation of e-government. To foster the development, there is a need ofinteractive co-operation among various stakeholders and governmental agencies both horizontally (interagencyrelations) and vertically (state and federal government). (Moon, 2002)

For example, Toivanen (2006) made a pioneering research on implementing electronic service provisioning inFinnish municipalities. Findings align with the ones of Moon. Development is restricted by lack of resources,horizontal co-operation and strategic plans. In Finnish context the heterogeneity of the municipalities is an issue



to focus, but even the largest of cities lack capacity and capabilities to major reforms (Syväjärvi, Stenvall,Laitinen, & Harisalo, 2009). The municipalities wish for strategic co-operation and collective solutions especiallywhen novel and reformative changes are in question (Syväjärvi & Kaurahalme, 2010).

In some countries the de-centralised local government authorities such as autonomous municipalities areresponsible of a majority of public sector administration and service delivery. In these societies the localgovernments have a key role in the development of e-government. The strategic maturity and organisationalstructure of the local government institution implementing e-government are less covered in research literature,albeit their success is the prerequisite in meeting the expectations set for e-government.

The information management as a unit in a municipality has traditionally been responsible for the managementof IT resources and the delivery of IT-services. In our research the concept of public information managementcovers the function of IT Governance. IT Governance is an integral part of enterprise governance that aims toensure alignment of organisations business- and IT-strategies maximising the strategic value of IT (VanGrembergen, De Haes, & Guldentops, 2004; De Haes & Van Grembergen, 2004). The public informationmanagement is an enterprise level function that should involve the whole local government. In addition to IT-management, the public information management function is a multifaceted, cross-organisational function thatshould involve holistic management of information assets and information based processes.

Public information management is an interesting field of administrative research. Focus is on local governmentscapabilities implementing e-government. It is the missing link between e-government policy research and e-government as technology applications domain. It covers issues on organisation and management of strategicalignment, governance and resources in local administrations implementing e-government.

In this work we focus on assessing the strategic maturity of public information management in municipalities.Abovementioned e-government maturity models do not provide any framework for us. Thus, in this paper weinitiate a framework, where – instead of technology application – the progress involve developments inorganisation, co-operative structures, strategic management, steering, policy and legislation, cultural resourcesand financial management. These issues are traditionally covered in administrative research. Their evolutionaffects strategic capabilities that are prerequisites for progress in e-government implementation.

Framework is used in analysis of empirical data on Finnish municipalities. Research questions asked are: what isthe state of strategic maturity of public information management in local government; and what are the steps tobe taken for more strategically capable municipalities to foster e-government development.

Maturity framework for public information management

The concept of maturity refers to a set of generic properties defining the whole organisation or a solution. Asnoted earlier e-government maturity models (as the classic Layne & Lee, 2001) focus on properties of e-government implementations. The concept of capability refers to a specific measure in the organisation. Sets ofcapabilities are defined by process orientated models such as Capability Maturity Model, ITIL and COBIT that are



often used as quality frameworks of information management units and projects. The model initiated here forour research purposes is a maturity model aiming to discuss organisational and administrational properties oflocal government. Maturity in this sense would be a set of prerequisites to e-government development.

The model of public information management maturity presented in this paper was initiated by Syväjärvi andIhalainen (Syväjärvi & Ihalainen, 2011). This preceding work was based on study of information managementdriven change in public sector (Ihalainen, 2010) and on a classic strategic typology of Miles and Snow (Miles &Snow, 1978). Typology consists of four progressive stages describing the strategic orientation and propertiesidentifying organisations maturity. Stages are named after the status of information management in theorganisation: Information management as a support function, as a constituent function, as a core function andas an innovation driver. It should be noted that the four levels of the model do not appear as distinct stages.They represent classified sets of properties that may or may not be interconnected or occur simultaneously in aspecific case. Our claim is that a national public sector with municipalities demonstrating higher ranking in thistypology has better potential for progressive, cost-efficient, rational, nationally effective and equal developmentof e-government.

The strategic orientation at each stage is defined and analyzed by utilizing correspondingly the four stages inclassic strategic typology of Miles and Snow as described in earlier parts. Municipalities on different phases haveproperties of strategic reactors, defenders, analysers and prospectors (Miles & Snow, 1978). The entrepreneurial,engineering and administrative challenges presented by Miles and Snow are formulated to fit the context ofmunicipalities and public strategy. These challenges are utilised in defining the phases. Some property-dependencies in the model have been adopted from the works of Toivanen (2006) and Moon (2002).

The framework is simplified into a table in Appendix 1.

Assessment dimensions

Finally, a set of conceptual perspectives are needed for defining each stage. Interesting classifications are puttogether in a government project in Chile (Iribarren et al., 2008). For our purposes a simple classification ofdimensions is needed, such as the assessment dimension used by Esteves and Joseph (Esteves & Joseph, 2008).The dimensions are based on the STOPE model of Bakry (Bakry, 2004) but the modifications made by Estevesand Joseph are well reasoned and suitable for our research. The assessment dimensions are Organisation,Strategy, Economics, Technology and Operations and Services dimension.

Organisation dimension: In this dimension assessed are the management practices, responsibilities, functionalstructure, internal and external co-operational relationships, steering and regulation. (adapting Bakry, 2004)Also the organisational culture and awareness are considered in this dimension (as in Esteves & Joseph, 2008).Miles’s and Snow’s (Miles & Snow, 1978) concept of administrative challenge emerges in this dimension. Itshows the orientation on rationalising the organisation and enabling its development. Organisation dimensioncovers a collection of properties that set preconditions and limitations to the other dimensions.

Strategy dimension: Strategy assessment focuses on the strategy process; existing strategy as a vision, long termgoals, plans, identified success factors and strategic documents; strategy leadership, implementation and



measurement; and results of strategic management. (classification of municipal strategy elements as byRannisto, 2005) Strategy dimension covers properties that steer the development of other dimensions.

Economics dimension: This dimension focuses on assessing economic metrics, cost-benefit, sustainability andfinancial possibilities of e-government development (Esteves & Joseph, 2008). Economics dimension is heavilypreconditioned by the organisation dimension and it covers properties that influence the developmentresources of Technology dimension and Operations and Services dimension.

Technology dimension: Assessment of the technology dimension examines whether the technology usedsufficiently satisfies the municipal needs (Esteves & Joseph, 2008). This means the assessment of available IT-infrastructure and -services provided to municipality by information management unit should be considered inthis dimension. The concept of engineering challenge of Miles and Snow (Miles & Snow, 1978) emerges indiscussing this dimension. It shows the technology-related potential for organisational success in theenvironment. Technology dimension covers properties that influence the short term development of Operationsand Service dimension.

Operations and Services dimension: This dimension focus on the state of municipalities’ back- and front-officeimplementation. Typical e-Government maturity models and indexes can be used to assess the services.Benchmarking, operational efficiency and user satisfaction may be used to assess the back-office operation andmodernisation of the internal processes. Care must be taken if operational and service dimensions are discussedseparately as the e-services ought to be well integrated to the operation of the organisation. Assessment of thisdimension reveals the success of an information management function to the general development of amunicipality. Miles’s and Snow’s (Miles & Snow, 1978) concept of entrepreneurial challenge emerges in thisdimension. It concerns the set of solutions required for being successful in the environment.

I Municipal information management as a support function

This is the lowest stage of the model. Intention is not to oppose the support-function nature of IT-serviceprovisioning which is considered traditionally as a major part of information management function. The higherstages are rather complementary than substitutive.

Organisation dimension: Concept of information management is seen solely as a unit maintaining the ICTservices and infrastructure for the municipality. It does not contribute to the organisations processes. It does nothave acknowledged status in the organisation other that as a helpdesk that reacts on instant requirements. ITmanagement focus is on providing the technological necessities. Communication with other municipal actors isfocusing on service-level and financial issues. It is or it easily could be contract based and outsourced. Thestrategic co-operation between administrative sectors is minimal. Information management is not involved inthe municipality’s highest decision-making (executive group). Steering relationships and responsibilities are ad-hoc. (Syväjärvi & Ihalainen, 2011; Ihalainen, 2010) Administrative challenge is related to establishing ad-hocpractices to the faced situations.

Strategy dimension: There is no established strategy, strategy process nor long-term plans for steering IT-enabled development of the municipality. Strategic alignment to municipal strategy is non-existing or focuses



solely on financial savings. There may be strategic plans for the information management unit on itsorganisation and internal development.

Municipality is strategically a reactor: Focus is on isolated problem solving, fire extinguishing and reacting tosituations; Top management has not clearly articulated (or established) the organisations strategy; Managementdoes not fully shape the organisations structure and processes to fit a chosen strategy. There is a risk of ultimatefailure: management maintains the organisations current strategy-structure relationship despite the changes ofthe environment. (Miles & Snow, 1978)

Economics dimension: Information technology is seen mainly as a cost, rather than an investment that gainefficiency elsewhere. Economics are based on internal cost-efficiency rather than optimal usage of resources.Excess costs are caused by overlapping purchases and resources between municipalities and even sectors of amunicipality. Partial optimisation, isolated solutions and small-unit size result to high risks and low cost-benefitmeasure of investments.

Technology dimension: Level of technology depends on the quality and economic efficiency of the work done ininformation management. IT skills related to infrastructure maintenance may be sufficient in informationmanagement unit. There may be lack of skilled employees in specific areas. Suppliers have a strong impact onthe technological development. Technology resources, purchases and solutions overlap between administrativesectors and especially between municipalities due to lack of co-operation. There may be problems on ITcorresponding the municipality’s needs. Engineering challenge is related to creating and maintaining sufficientIT-services.

Operations and services dimension: Developing operations and services may be highly personified due topersonal interests and skills, rather than being institutional and strategic. Evolution of e-government constructson isolated solutions to personified or sectored demands. Development is unequal between municipalities.Development of IT based modernisation of municipality is slow. There are major difficulties on developing newservices or operation models. Entrepreneurial challenge is related to light benchmarking and following marketsto make the most necessary investments.

II Municipal information management as a constituent function

Organisation dimension: Information management has an acknowledged status as function that is in interactionwith other administration sectors. Information management is seen as a partner with whom developmentrequirements of IT-infrastructure and organisation processes are communicated. Main focus in the interaction isstill operative as the information management function does not have an integral part in long term planning ofservices and operations. Municipalities have established co-operation to gain cost savings in IT-infrastructure.Administrative challenge is related to organising the IT-services for quality and cost-efficiency.

Strategy dimension: Municipality recognises the role of information management function in improvingorganisation processes, efficiency and modernity. The need for joint planning is recognised and focus shiftstowards proactivity. Information management function does development and planning in order to fulfilmunicipal requirements. The goal of information management is to fulfil the requirements set by the municipal



central management. Strategic work in information management emerges, but alignment to the municipalstrategies is weak or non-existing. There are still great insufficiencies on strategic vision, goal setting, success-factor identification, measurement and strategy process.

Municipality is strategically a defender: organisation tends to aim for stability and avoid major investments andinnovative solutions in order to maintain the cost-efficiency and quality of the current operation. In stableenvironment this approach would be sufficient, but it is not if the municipality´s responsibility and goal is todevelop the information society and national e-government maturity. (adapting Miles & Snow, 1978).

Economics dimension: Focus is still heavily aligned to cost-efficiency, but understanding towards IT investmentsemerges. Compared to support function phase, it is easier to reason and to get funding for IT relatedinvestments. Economic resources are insufficient in other than the most resourceful municipalities.

Technology dimension: Better resources and emerging co-operation have initiated improvements. Municipalityis generally satisfied to the IT-services quality and cost-efficiency. Engineering challenge is related to improvingthe quality and cost-efficiency of IT-services.

Operations and services dimension: Better resources and IT-services and emerging external co-operation haveinitiated improvements. Some successful changes are due to planned, resourceful and well run projects.Resourceful municipalities may gain higher phases of e-government maturity, but the heterogeneity in resourcesand cost-benefit-rationality maintains unequal development. Improvements are still isolated and there aredifficulties on developing novel, innovative services and operation models.

Entrepreneurial challenge is related to stabilising and standardising the processes and technology in order tomaintain cost-efficiency and quality simultaneously somewhat responding to the demand. This limits thedevelopment of novel systems. There is some tendency is to avoid general development and trends in theenvironment. (adapting Miles & Snow, 1978)

III Municipal information management as a core function

Organisation dimension: Municipal management recognise and acknowledge information management as astrategic core function in municipality. Information management function aligns towards strategic planning ofcore processes in addition to providing IT-infrastructure. Information management unit has a distinguished rolein the top management of the municipality. Strategic inter-municipal co-operation emerges. Administrativechallenge is related to differentiating organisations structure and processes to accommodate both stable anddynamic areas of operation.

Strategy dimension: Information management vision, goals and success-factors are identified. Its operation andresults are measured. Information management integrates into strategy-process of the municipality. Alignmentof IT- and municipal strategies has emerged. Municipality is strategically an analyser: It has a dual rolesimultaneously maintaining the efficiency-driven IT- management and having a distinct role in moderate reformsof municipal functions still minimising the risks involved in novel investments. There is a need of simultaneously



being aware of current performance and sensing the novel developments and trends (adapting Miles & Snow,1978).

Economics dimension: More of the IT investments yield savings in the core operations of the municipality.Investments may increase but only if they are beneficial for the whole municipality. Funding releases for specificstrategic goals. Municipal resources and selected co-operational strategy dictate the investment possibilities.Due to internal co-operation partial optimisation inside municipality can be avoided. Intra-municipal or regionaloptimisation of the resources depends on the co-operational strategies selected by municipalities.

Technology dimension: Municipality is satisfied to the IT-services quality and cost-efficiency. Strategic planninghas replaced personified, isolated development. Engineering challenge is related to achieving and protecting theequilibrium between conflicting demands for technological flexibility and for technological stability (Miles &Snow, 1978) .

Operations and services dimension: There is organisational and strategic potential to develop fully integratednovel, innovative services and operation models. The modernisation of municipal operations and services are onthe development track. Resourceful municipalities may gain highest phases of e-government maturity. Stillheterogeneity in resources, cost-benefit-rationality and in the co-operational strategies maintains unequalnational development. Entrepreneurial challenge is related to locating and exploiting new IT-enabledpossibilities while simultaneously maintaining a cost-efficient core of the operation. (adapting Miles & Snow,1978)

IV Municipal information management as an innovation driver

Reaching the highest possible potential in e-government development requires overcoming the wickedresource-obstacles of municipalities. Our hypothesis is that this is not possible without shifting the focus from asingle municipality to the maturity of a whole public sector.

Organisation dimension: In this phase information management can be seen as an entity that representschange-driver, innovator and creativity in municipal sector. Information management function has a capability,resources and mandate to act as a change-driver, to develop and implement strategic reforms in order to fosterthe e-government development. That means there is a specific actor that is responsible of the holistic, overallreform of municipal organisation and public service delivery. IT-Governance is functional and integral part ofmunicipal governance which ensures the strategic alignment (Van Grembergen et al., 2004) (De Haes & VanGrembergen, 2004). Governmental steering and strategic co-operation in different governmental levels is wellestablished to enable wide optimisation of resources and solutions, and to equalise the national development.Administrative challenge in the whole public sector is how to facilitate rather than control organisationaloperations. That is how to deploy and coordinate resources among numerous decentralised units and projectsrather than to plan the operation of the whole organisation centrally.

Strategy dimension: IT- and municipal strategies are aligned and inseparable where applicable. Co-operationalstrategies ensure the regional, national and even international optimisation of resources. National municipalsector is strategically a prospector: it is a flexible leader that has capability to create novel, innovative solutions.



Economics dimension: Resources and solutions are well shared and optimised as well regionally as nationallyover the municipal sector. Municipal heterogeneity in resources does not hinder the development.

Technology dimension: Municipality is satisfied to the IT-services quality and cost-efficiency. Engineeringchallenge is related to avoiding long-term commitments to a single type of technological processes to maintainflexibility in the widely optimised environment (as in Miles & Snow, 1978) .

Operations and services dimension: Municipal sector is capable of significant reforms for e-governmentexcellence with continuing modernisation of public services. New organisational structures sharing resourcesand solutions dissolve the unequal development between regions and municipalities. Entrepreneurial challengeis how to locate and develop product and market opportunities ( must develop and maintain the capacity tosurvey a wide range of environmental conditions, trends, and events... invests heavily in individuals and groupswho scan the environment)

Research setting

This study is based on the work done and the needs of an on-going research and development project. Theproject studies organisation and strategies of municipal information management function in a group ofmunicipalities in Northern Finland. The purpose of the project has been to find out the state and developmentneeds of the participating municipalities in order to facilitate development interventions in future projects.Hence, methodologically the study has action research orientation, and the current project aims to investigatethe current situation and initiating change proposals. For the purposes of the project, empirical data has beencollected in two methods. The project conducted a national survey where ZEF tool was utilized. The survey wascompleted by 76 municipalities; respondents were selected from municipalities’ top executives. The purpose ofthe survey was to collect current national data on the subject for the project needs.

The survey had three background variables. First of them was the number of inhabitants (size) of themunicipality, which roughly indicates the potential resources available. Median size of a Finnish municipality isnot far from 10000 inhabitants. As well in the group of respondents, 50 % of the municipalities had less than10000 inhabitants (referred as “the small municipalities”); “the large municipalities” with more than 10000inhabitants being the other group analysed. The second background variable tells us if a person in charge ofinformation management function or unit is a member in municipality’s executive group. This person is referredgenerically as an “information manager”. This indicates both the strategic role of information management inthe municipality and the capability of internal strategic co-operation. Third background variable tell us ifmunicipality has written current information management strategy. The distributions of the latter twobackground variables are presented in the results. The background variables are relatively un-interconnectedand it is reasonable to analyze them separately.

The status, organisation and strategic orientation of the six participating municipalities were studied moreclosely by interviews. The municipalities represented well the major part of Finnish municipal sector. Medianpopulation was close to average municipality of about 10000 inhabitants. Aim was to construct understanding of



the situation in the particular municipality. The executive municipal officials who were in charge of the generalmunicipal development and had a best understanding of the information management in strategic level werecalled for interview. They were free to choose their accompanying persons in the interview. The freedom ofchoice was due to the heterogeneity of the municipalities.

Some of the interviews were in-person interviews and some were group interviews. Interviews were semi-structured. The themes and some research questions were listed in interview guide, but the interview moved onin unstructured manner. Unstructured interview is usually used studying relatively new domains as the one wehad in hand. Avoiding strict structure was due to heterogeneity of the interview situations and municipalities,the uncertainty of researchers about orientation and attitude of the interviewee. Also as part of regionaldevelopment project the municipality specific issues had to be discussed along the topics. Some pre-listed open-ended questions were used in the conversational interview in order to have some coherence between theinterviews, survey and theory.

For this article, the data of the fresh survey has been initially analysed by cross-tabulation and correlationswhere appropriate. As ZEF uses continuous variables we had a chance to use Pearson correlations in directanalysis. Cross-tabulations were used after classification of the continuous variables to the 5-step Likert scales.Depending on the statement scales range from “none” to “much” and from “fully agree” to “fully disagree”. Theinterviews have been analysed by searching thematic connections to the theoretical model presented in thenext chapter. Quotations have not been widely used, but the findings are mirrored to the concepts of the model.The purpose of the theoretical model is to have a framework for the data analysis. The empirical findings willalso be used to validate, to support the hypothesis and causalities set in the model, and to further develop it.

Results

This study focus on the organisation and strategy dimensions in our model. The other dimensions are more orless defined by the organisational realities and strategic choices. Brief results on other dimensions are reportedfor the causalities between dimensions. Data is fresh and the analysis is still in progress.

It is important to note that for the projects purposes the statements and themes used in the survey and theinterviews do not directly correspond to the academic model constructed above. There is no immediateconceptual link between the model and the empirical data now in hand.

Results: Strategic orientation

Survey included six statements on the steering of strategic goals alignment and steering relations. Statementsand the distribution of the answers are presented in a table in Appendix 2. The answers give quite positiveinsight into the strategic orientation of the municipalities. Nevertheless, great deal of answerers still cannotagree with the claims and number of neutral answers may indicate certain novelty of the subject.



It is interesting to note that the municipality’s size and the information manager’s participation in the executivegroup do not explain the differences. Smaller communities tend to have only slightly less co-operative planning,slightly less active information management function and slightly more active administrative sectors. This maybe due to smaller resources and thus more focus on the maintenance of the infrastructure.

Cross-correlations of the continuous, non-classified statements-variables were conducted. Survey support(correlations range 0,582 – 0,684, while p < 0,001) the foresight that information management relateddevelopment plans have certain tendency to support the reform of municipal services especially if: 1) plans aremaintained, 2) information management is active promoting new ideas for the development and 3) the plansare made in co-operation between administrative sectors. Also, vice-versa, the municipality’s generic strategicgoals steer the development of the municipal information management if planning is co-operative (Cp=0,486;p<0,001).

Interviews support the survey results: yearly planning is well established in most of the participatingmunicipalities. Yearly plans are made in close communication between the information management andadministrative sectors, wherein information management is representation ranges from a chief informationofficer to the sole IT-specialist in the smallest municipalities. However, this planning is most often IT-infrastructure and problem orientated, lacking visioning. The strategies that are established in someparticipating municipalities usually define the organisation, responsibilities and role of IT-infrastructuremanagement.

The survey shows that nationally 43 % of the municipalities have information management strategy written. Inthe last 57 % it is still planned or at least thought as beneficial. Worth of notice is that no-one chose an option“no, and it is not needed”. Slightly more often the larger municipalities had a written strategy (48 % versus 40%).

This produces the existing empirical environment where the municipalities are generally happy with the cost-efficiency and quality of the IT-services available in the municipality. Quite probably positive survey results alsoindicate the same instead of strong e-services or modernisation strategies. Actual strategies are studied later inthe project-set related to this study. Probably the positive findings on planning do not contribute to solving theproblems in strategic capabilities for reforms and innovative transformations.

Municipalities admit this. The importance of well managed and strategic IT-based reforms is acknowledged.Smaller municipalities are “eager to be advanced in relation to their size and resources”, but due to theirresources their role at best is “following the larger ones”. Larger municipalities acknowledge the importance ofhaving information management strategies renewed and related to the service reform. At one municipality,information management is distinctively well acknowledged in the city-strategy. Its role is defined as beingconnected to all development, driver in work-practices development and transformative reforms. It thus has acentral role in modernization processes.

Typical reason why the municipalities see established, service connected information management strategyimportant is its steering role in the councils. Better strategic plans would reason and ease the IT- and



modernization related investment decisions. The councils tend to focus to the cost-aspect of IT. Another reasonis that as the resources are small, functioning strategy would help prioritizing and long term resourcing.Communications with administrative sectors would also be facilitated with the strategy.

Results: Strategic goals

The project wanted to clarify the generic orientation towards goals of information management. The subjectiveimportance and success in potential goals were studied. Goals were divided as: 1) cost-efficiency of IT-servicesand -infrastructure provisioning; 2) developing the cost-efficiency of the municipal operations and services; 3)developing and modernizing municipal operation and services.

In the survey, background variables do not strongly influence the answers. Smaller municipalities tend to valuethe cost-efficiency of IT only vaguely more (Cp=0,260; p=0,27). If the information manager is a member in theexecutive group the IT cost-efficiency tends to be a slightly less important and the orientation is a bit moretowards generic municipal efficiency and development (by cross-tabular analysis). Again, if a written informationstrategy exists the tendency is slightly towards the development of municipal operations.

Here it is important to notice that the mutual correlations between the goal-variables were small but statisticallysignificant (p<0,05): the answerers did not see great difference between the importance of these goals beingbarely able to place them in any order. This notice was verified in the interviews. Municipalities understood theimportance of all three types of goals. Due to practical reasons and resource restrictions the cost-efficiency wasstill clearly the most influential one. Some municipalities also conduct TCO- and cost-benefit-analysis. IT-servicesquality and service modernization need are measured by user-satisfaction-surveys and benchmarking in thelargest municipalities. One municipality also had connected the e-services development to their BSC-model as acritical success factor. Measurement is reasonably emerged in the larger interviewed communities.

The corresponding success-in-goals-variables had even higher mutual correlations (Cp=0,804, 0,615 and 0,419;p<0,001). Is success equal in all of these factors? Reliability of this result is questioned as typically only the ITcosts are followed, the other factors being merely subjective insights or results of benchmarking at best. Largermunicipalities tend to be less satisfied or generally more critical towards the success of the goals. If informationmanager is in executives group, there is slightly more criticism towards IT cost-efficiency and slightly lesscriticism towards success in supporting municipal development. It is important to notice that, generally themunicipalities that have written strategy are more satisfied to success in the goals.

Interviews revealed clearly that all the municipalities had been able to build and well establish an organisationwell suitable for their specific needs to provide IT-services and –infrastructure management. This results togeneral satisfaction to the IT-quality and cost-efficiency in the municipalities. On the other hand, municipalitiesinterviewed collectively admit that significant modernization and reform is not either possible (smaller) orreasonable in the current environment.



Results: Observations in Organisation dimension

The information management related personnel in the interviewed municipalities range from two to ten. Thesmallest communities have one IT-support officer and a municipal executive (as development and/or financialmanager) in charge of the strategic planning and contracts. The internal co-operation between the informationmanagement personnel and the administrative sectors is generally good. It is based on yearly operationalplanning and is mostly IT-infrastructure orientated. CIO is acknowledged member of executive group in one ofthe municipalities. But in all of the municipalities the role of information management is well acknowledged. Thesurvey told that nationally 42 % of the municipalities have information manager in the executive group. Herein isno significant difference between smaller and larger municipalities.

Results: Inter-municipal co-operation

The measure of current and future expected inter-municipal co-operation was asked in the qualitative scaleranging from “none” to “much”. Expectedly, smaller communities do more inter-municipal co-operation: 56 %(23 %) of the smaller (larger) communities claim to do “much” co-operation whereas the numbers were 25 % (60%) in the other side of the scale (none, little or neutral). Other background variables did not have mentionableinfluence.

Four of the six communities have outsourced the IT-services to regional municipal-owned special purposecompany. The smallest and one mid-size city are self-sufficient in the IT-management. The reasoning formaintaining self-sufficiency is based on supporting local employment, cost-independency and –efficiency,keeping the knowledge and project management “in the house” for successful transformations and to beingable to select services and solutions scalable to municipals own needs.

This co-owned special purpose company for IT-service delivery is the most distinct channel of inter-municipal co-operation in the region studied. Informal forms of co-operation consist of co-procurement-pool and peer-support as experiences exchange in seminars and face-to-face meetings. “Co-procurement has producedpioneer-ship in the (most important) health sector”. Co-operation is not strategic, but it organizes on-demandbasis on solving individual IT challenges and it contributes to the general satisfaction to IT-services. Onemunicipality had been participating on a loose strategic alliance of small group of cities combining two regions.

The inter-municipal co-operation will increase in 26 % of the large and 31 % of the small municipalities (all whostrongly agree the related question). It may increase in up to 72 % of the municipalities (all who agree or fullyagree). Interviews reveal that the thoughts on future increase of inter-municipal co-operations are quite positiveand observing. New co-operation is expected, not in the well established IT-service production, but to supportthe reformative changes by resource-sharing and new information systems development. Regional co-operationwould be of interest although there are be neither resources nor a capable authority for organizing it. Thecollective conception is that any novel development ought to be “as nationwide as possible” – regional co-operation means regional-optimization at best.

Increase of co-operation is partially related to the increasing utilization of municipal-owned special purposeorganisations (Cp=0,472; p<0,001). These vehicles will be utilized more in the future (strongly agreeing) by 52 %



(26 %) of the smaller (larger) municipalities. The numbers for agreeing or strongly agreeing are even 81 % (63 %).This is partly due to a very recent emergence. The expectations of most of the interviewed municipalities focusto a newly established nation-wide municipal-owned information management company. For its shareholdersthis company is expected to provide the wished services for IT governance and project management. It isexpected to channel an inter-municipal network to foster nationwide standardization and co-procurement ofinformation systems. Many of the municipalities see that this new coordinative channel will set the service andoperations development orientated information management strategy in the future.

Results on the other dimensions

Funding was found as the most important factor hindering the development of IT related reforms in both, in theinterviews and the survey. Factor was surveyed in the scale from “none” to “very much”. Funding hinders thedevelopment “very much” in 44 % (29 %) of the small (large) municipalities. Information managers’ seat in theexecutives group (“yes” 14 % versus “no” 29 %) and the existence of a written strategy (“yes” 18 % versus “no”30 %) relate positively to the economic resources.

“IT-providers have too much influence in the municipal information management” –statement is agreed by 47 %(39 % disagrees and 13 % are neutral). If the information manager is in the executive group, the IT-providersinfluence is less of a problem: 35 % agrees, whereas in the opposite case 57 % agrees the statement. Also theexisting information management strategy seems to decreases the influence of IT-providers: 44 % agrees,whereas in the opposite case 51 % agrees the statement). Unexpectedly, the size of the municipality hadnegligible influence by itself. Most (5/6) of the interviewed municipalities agree the above statement.

Results: Framework-based maturity assessment

The initial survey was not based on the model properties and the intention of the project was not to assessmunicipalities nationally. What still can be said is that the distribution of the survey results on the strategicorientation, executive group representation and strategy existence demonstrate the heterogeneity of themunicipalities. Presumably it indicates that the municipalities range quite evenly to the first three stages of themodel.

This presumption is supported by the interviews. Information management as a function is well acknowledgedand the need of joint planning is recognized over the studied field. As the support function orientated IT-infrastructure provisioning wear major part of the smaller municipalities’ resources the realization of strategicaction is vague despite the eagerness. Municipalities generally have well established co-operation or fit-for-purpose-organisation to achieve satisfactory IT-infrastructure. Mid-size municipalities and cities seem to haveemerging strategic function and the properties of information management as a constituent function –stagecome out. In the more advanced municipalities the properties of information management as a core function –stage are clearly emerging, but the state is quite personified to active chief information officers.

The briefly reviewed properties on Technology and Economics dimensions loosely validate some interrelationsbetween dimensions of our maturity model. Supported by both study-methods, the municipalities clearly seethe inter-municipal co-operation as the method to overcome resource restrictions in order to foster e-



government development beyond satisfactory IT-infrastructure. This reasons the inclusion of co-operationrelated properties that progress through our maturity model.

Conclusions

This study introduced a maturity model of public information management in local government. Mirroringempirical data to the model the strategic capabilities of e-government progress of Finnish municipalities wasstudied. The four maturity stages identified are: Information management as a support function, as aconstituent function, as a core function and as an innovation driver. This study focuses on assessing theorganisation and strategic management of the public information management in municipalities as these areseen as the prerequisites for success in e-government implementations.

The state of actual e-government implementation is well covered in the IT applications orientated majority of e-government assessments. Earlier research has pointed out the problems in e-government initiatives (Homburg,2008; Newman, 2001); restrictions set by municipal economic resources and emphasized the role organisationaland strategy dimensions have in general e-government development (Moon, 2002; Toivanen, 2006) and inspecific cases (Syväjärvi & Kaurahalme, 2010).

According to our interview-based observations, the legacy of information management, the IT-infrastructuresand -services provisioning, is well established and least problematic in the municipalities. Regardless of their sizeand resources municipalities are generally satisfied to the cost-efficiency and quality of their IT-infrastructureand -services. The traditional support function has been organized rationally according to the municipal need.Outsourcing, co-operative structures and in-house resources are utilized functionally. Internal organisation isalso functional; information management has well established co-operation with the administrative sectors onIT-infrastructure development. Functional strategies define the development of organisation and goals of IT-management. Strong role of suppliers in municipal development is still a problem to overcome. IT-managementas support function has usually grown up to an acknowledged partner, as constituent function.

Regardless of the municipality’s size and resources they are eager to be advanced, open to reforms andinnovation. They are willing to face future e-government and they acknowledge the central role of informationmanagement function. In the interviewed municipalities the strategic orientation was advanced, informationmanagement function was seen as a development actor and a need to improve strategic planning and alignmentwas acknowledged. Information management typically emerges as a constituent function. Most advancedmunicipalities can have core function properties emerging, information management being the central driver ofsuccessful e-government implementations. There the personal activity of information manager plays a key role.

Despite the mature IT-services and acknowledged strategic orientation slow e-services development is typical toFinnish municipalities (Toivanen 2006). This study verifies that lack of economic resources has practically ceasedthe modernization in less resourceful municipalities and even larger ones are incapable of major and novel,reformative changes. This corresponds well to the earlier case studies (as Syväjärvi & Kaurahalme, 2010 andSyväjärvi et al., 2009). Regardless that they are eager and aware, less resourceful municipalities have practical



difficulties in advancing from support function -level. Municipalities are heterogeneous and current e-government development is unequal.

To foster and equalize the development, to get more municipalities in the development track and to enableemergence of innovation drivers requires better strategic alignment and overcoming the resource restrictionshindering development in a majority of municipalities. Strategic alignment would require established IT-governance in the municipalities (Van Grembergen et al., 2004; De Haes & Van Grembergen, 2004). IT-governance models and practices suitable for municipalities of various sizes would be an interesting and novelfield of further studies.

E-government development requires overcoming the wicked resource problem of local informationmanagement. Municipalities accept that this requires novel strategic co-operative structures. Co-operationstrategies play the key role in overcoming the resource obstacles. They would pave the way for a better andwidely optimized resource sharing. Information management’s co-operational strategy defines the group ofactors with whom it operates in the development of e-government information systems. As said, in IT-management, the required structures are well developed. But in the development of information systems foroperations and services, municipalities are strategically self-sufficient and operatively often engaged withsuppliers. Some functional inter-municipal structures exist for co-procurement, but they lack commitment tostrategic work. Stronger organizations are needed.

Collective conception of the municipalities is that novel co-operation is expected to facilitate new innovationsfor operations- and service-reforms. Nationwide solutions are widely welcomed. Strategic role in this matterwould be willingly offered to inter-municipal actors. Doubtful voices still remind that this requires taking care ofscalability and suitability issues, and well managed local reform by local authorities. This means that localinformation management should still play an important role in the success of reformative processes.

Many of Finnish municipalities are joining a co-owned company just emerged for information systemsdevelopment and standardization. It is expected and may evolve into a central actor in strategic developer for itsshareholders. This brings a novel nation-wide channel for co-operation. The inter-municipal co-operation hasmost often taken place between the same municipalities and inside a certain region (Haveri, 2003).

But municipalities have different emergent strategies. Varying co-operational strategies remain to be studied.National resource-optimization: spreading and wide application of developed solutions require nationalcoordination. Decentralized systems do not seem to emerge horizontal coordination (van Os, 2010). The role ofcentral government, vertical coordination with holistic, cohesive and strategic policy remains important.

The future work will consist of studying the applicability of different co-operational strategies in municipalitiesas method for reaching higher strategic maturity to foster e-government development. The model will beenhanced for example by validating interrelations between reviewed domains, studying IT-governance andstrategic alignment in municipal context and evolving the theory of co-operational strategies.



References

Andersen, K., & Henriksen, H. (2006). E-government maturity models: Extension of the Layne and Lee model.Government Information Quarterly, 23(2), 236-248.

Bakry, S. H. (2004). Development of eGovernment: A STOPE view. International Journal of NetworkManagement, 14(5), 339-350.

Bannister, F. (2007). The curse of the benchmark: an assessment of the validity and value of e-governmentcomparisons. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 73(2), 171-188.

Choo, C. W. (2006). The Knowing Organization. How organizations use information to construct meaning, createknowledge, and make decisions. Oxford University Press.

De Haes, S., & Van Grembergen, W. (2004). IT Governance and Its Mechanisms. Information Systems ControlJournal, 1.

Eifert, M., & Püschel, J. O. (2004). National Electronic Government. London: Routledge.

Esteves, J., & Joseph, R. (2008). A comprehensive framework for the assessment of eGovernment projects.Government Information Quarterly, 25(1), 118-132.

European Commission. (2011). ICT for Government and Public Services. Information Society. Retrieved June 27,2011, from http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment/index_en.htm.

Haveri, Arto (2003) Intermunicipal Cooperation as a Part of Local Governance. Journal of the FinnishAssociation of Local Government Studies. 3/2003.

Henman, P. (2010). Governing electronically: e-government and the reconfiguration of public administration,policy and power. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Homburg, V. (2008). Understanding e-Government - Information Systems in Public Administration. Routledge.

Ihalainen, H. (2010). Tietohallinto osana julkishallinnon sähköistyvää muutosta. Dissertation. University ofLapland.

Iribarren, M., Concha, G., Valdes, G., Solar, M., Villarroel, M., Gutiérrez, P., et al. (2008). Capability MaturityFramework for eGovernment: A Multi-dimensional Model and Assessing Tool. Electronic Government:Lecture Notes in Computer Science (p. 136–147). Springer Berlin / Heidelberg.

Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional E-government: A four stage model. GovernmentInformation Quarterly, 18(2), 122-136.

Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C. (1978). Organizational Strategy, Structure and Process. New York: McGraw-HillBook Co. USA.

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment/index_en.htm.



Moon, M. J. (2002). The Evolution of E-Government among Municipalities: Rhetoric or Reality? PublicAdministration Review, 62(4), 424-433.

Newman, J. E. (2001). Modernising Governance. New Labour, Policy and Society. SAGE Publications.

OECD. (2003). The e-government imperative.

Os, G. van. (2010). Vertical coordination and decentralization. Coordination of e-government policy in Denmarkand The Netherlands. Annual conference of European Group for Public AdministrationEuropean Group ofPublic Administration. Toulouse.

Rannisto, Pasi-Heikki. (2005). Kunnan strateginen johtaminen Tutkimus Seinänaapurikuntien strategiaprosessienstrategisina johtajina. Dissertation. University of Tampere

Syväjärvi, A., & Ihalainen, H. (2011). Tietohallinto osana kunnallista itsehallintoa - valinnat ja strategisuuskeskiössä. In A. Haveri, J. Stenvall, & K. Majoinen (Eds.), Kunnallisen itsehallinnon peruskivet (pp. 297-311). Kuntaliitto.

Syväjärvi, A., & Kaurahalme, O.-P. (2010). Social media as a function of municipal openness, democracy anddeveloped information management (in finnish) Sosiaalinen media osana kuntien avoimuutta, demokratiaaja kehittynyttä tiedon hallintaa. Kunnallistieteen aikakauskirja, Kunnallistieteen yhdistys (Journal of theFinnish Association of Local Government Studies), 4/2010.

Syväjärvi, A., Stenvall, J., Laitinen, I., & Harisalo, R. (2009). Information Management as Function of DataMining and ICT in City Government. Conference of European Group for Public Administration Research,Malta.

Toivanen, M. (2006). Sähköisten asiointipalvelujen kehittäminen kunnissa. Dissertation. University of Tampere.

UN. (2008). UN E-Government Survey 2008 - From E-Government to Connected Governance. New York (p.246). New York.

Van Grembergen, W., De Haes, S., & Guldentops, E. (2004). Structures, Processes and Relational Mechanismsfor IT Governance. In W. Van Grembergen (Ed.), Strategies for information technology governance (pp. 1-36). Idea Group.



Appendix 1

Support function Constituent function Core function Innovation driver

Org

aniz

atio

n

IM is seen as a unit responsible solely of ITinfrastructureIM unit is not present in strategic planning ofthe municipalityCo-operation between administrative sectorsis minimal focusing on technology and facedoperative situations

IM function has an acknowledged status as apartner in a municipalityIM unit is still not present in strategic planningof the municipal operations and servicesEstablished co-operation betweenmunicipalities for infrastructure efficiency

IM function contributes clearly on generalmodernisation of municipalityIntra-municipal communication for strategicplanning is well establishedStrategic inter-municipal co-operationemergesIM unit has a role in the top management

A specific actor is responsible of the overallreform of municipal operationsIT-Governance is functional and integral partof municipal governanceGovernmental steering and strategic co-operation enable wide optimisation ofresources

Stra

tegy

There is no established, functional strategy orclear long term plansAny plans are infrastructure specific and notintegrated to municipal developmentReacting to needs and problems definesinformation management function

Need of joint planning with IM for municipaldevelopment is recognisedStrategic planning evolves but clear alignmentto services and operations is missingOrganisation tends to aim for stabilityavoiding major openings to maintain cost-efficiency.

IM functions vision, goals and success-factorsare identified; results are measured.Alignment of IT- and municipal strategies hasemerged.Strategy drives moderate modernisation, butrisk taking ability does not allow majorreforms for other than most resourcefulmunicipalities.

IT- and municipal strategies are aligned.Operational strategies ensure wideoptimisation of resources.Municipal sector is a strategic prospectorbeing capable of creating novel, innovativeservice- and operative solutions.

Econ

omic

s

Information management is seen mainly as acost unitCost-efficiency of technology investments arepoorly analysed or resources are sparse forreal cost-efficiency fostering investmentsEconomic resources are insufficient

Cost-efficiency drives economics, butunderstanding the value of IT investmentsemerges and the funding of IT relatedinvestments is slightly released.Resources problem is still evident

Costs and investments may increase, but onlyif they are cost-efficient from the point ofview of the whole municipalityInternal co-operation yields better resource-optimisationResources are dependent on the inter-municipal co-operational strategies

Resources and solutions are well shared andoptimised as well regionally as nationally overthe municipal sector.Municipal heterogeneity in resources doesnot hinder their development

Tech

n.

Suppliers have a strong influence on thedevelopmentTechnology overlap between administrativesectors and municipalitiesProblems on IT infrastructure correspondingthe municipality’s needs

Municipality is generally satisfied to the IT-services quality and cost-efficiency.Technology resources and purchases overlapSuppliers influence is noticeable

Municipality is satisfied to the IT-servicesquality and cost-efficiency.Supplier influence is decreased due to ownstrategic plans and better co-operation.

Municipality is satisfied to the IT-servicesquality and cost-efficiencyBalance between long term commitments andtechnological flexibility remains an issue

Op

ser

vice

s

Development is highly personified and/ordriven by suppliersEvolution of e-government constructs onisolated solutions to demandsThere are major difficulties in developing newsolutions, the modernisation is slow

Successful modernisations are establishedand repeatable.Improvements are still isolated and there aredifficulties on developing novel, innovativeservices and operation modelsThe development is heavily dependent on themunicipality’s resources

The modernisation of municipal operationsand services are on the development track.E-Government maturity is dictated byresources and chosen co-operative modesMunicipal heterogeneity and cost-benefit-rationality maintain unequal development.

Municipal sector is capable of significantreforms for e-government excellence withcontinuing modernisation of public services.New organisational structures sharingresources and solutions dissolve the unequaldevelopment between regions andmunicipalities.



Appendix 2

StatementStrongly

agreeAgree Neutral Disagree

Stronglydisagree

Generic strategic goals steer the development ofinformation management 15 % 45 % 20 % 14 % 6 %

Information management related development isplanned in co-operation with administrative sectors 15 % 40 % 24 % 17 % 4 %

Information management is active in promoting newideas for the development of municipal services 10 % 32 % 39 % 14 % 6 %

Information technology related development ideasarise mainly from the administrative sectors 7 % 39 % 35 % 18 % 1 %

Information management related development plansare maintained in regular basis 14 % 37 % 25 % 20 % 4 %

Information management related development planswell support the modernisation of municipal services 17 % 42 % 30 % 9 % 3 %

From e-Government to Public Information Management – …...From e-Government to Public Information...

Documents

Transcript of From e-Government to Public Information Management – …...From e-Government to Public Information...