Involvement in e-government – trick or trade? Kim Viborg Andersen Department of Informatics, Copenhagen Business School Oslo, October Presented at Workshop on user involvement and representation in e-Government projects The Fourth Nordic Conference on Human Computer Interaction Octobre 14-18, Oslo, Norway

Abstract / key points E-government has the potential to transform interaction patterns, but from end-user point of view few results Involvement in design and implementing IT projects – lost the Scandinavian touch? Leading to succesfull projects (?) and less resistance to implementation Balance participation objectives on rationel-technocratic motives versus (?) democractic motives Involvement fading out? Replaced by new mechanisms fueled by NPM? Oslo, October

From the Danish menu (summer 2006) #1 ”When you have found the form needed, you can complete the form at the computer or print it and complete the form by pen. NB. It is very important that you sign the form by pen – otherwise the form is not valid” Oslo, October

”We...do not use to respond to inquiries from the citizens. An answer will therefore be mailed by ordinary mail. Therefore it is important that you state your full name and postal address when you send s to the agency” From the Danish menu (summer 2006) #2 Oslo, October

”If you have questions regarding the progress of your case/ inquiry, please call the staff in the office hours: Monday, Tuesday, Wednes, and Friday 9:30 AM till 12:30 PM Thursday: 10:00 AM till 12:30 PM” From the Danish menu (summer 2006) #3 Oslo, October

Institutional top-down participation versus bottom-up driven participation Oslo, October

Participation issues Multiple technical channels for participation– fewer institutionalized? Willingness to pay split from finance of the services Normative views on involvement Limits to participation (professional ethics, time, etc. ) Oslo, October

Participation in government Positive og negative regulation The citizen role –Voter –The user and the target of regulation The company Politicians The employee Oslo, October

Maturity models of e- government Oslo, October

Maturity models – CapGemini, Economist, Accenture Oslo, October

Maturing eGovernment Maturing eGovernment – The challenge: digital services Oslo, October

Process rebuilding Oslo, October

The case of teaching evaluation Oslo, October

Teaching at universities Free of charge for students Income for universities generated by number students that pass the examns Quality standards for teaching performance Mandatory to evaluate teaching performance Oslo, October

Teaching evaluation Students’ feedback Process and ex post Formalized evaluations Major challenges –Low participation rate –Legitimacy problems –Lack of transparency Oslo, October

The conventional teaching evaluation process Oslo, October

The online teaching evaluation at the ITU Oslo, October

Online evaluation Quantitative and qualitative results displayed Teachers response to comments published Students and teachers prompted for response Teachers obliged to response to all individual comments Oslo, October

Concerns Decrease the academic level/ ambitions More focused on (good) feedback than learning cycles Hyper-efficiency rather than building acacemic sound institutions Evaluation favors easy courses Replaces dialogue on teaching performance Oslo, October

Outcome Increased and more accurate bottom-up information AND more top-down control Lack of experimental/ rich media Higher participation rate Students choose NOT to be anonymous Formal evaluation culture established (no complaints) Improvement of current teaching Highlight management of teaching To be replicated by other universities? Oslo, October

Conclusion & perspectives Oslo, October

Digitalization of government City hallInstitutions/ street level bureaucrats Support activitites Core activities Oslo, October

Point of departure (normative statements) New IT applications are to be initiated and oriented towards the end-users primarily IT-capabilities among staff is acute need of updating Politics, values, people, and attitudes towards technology is the key to better design and implementation The added value (not cost) of each public servant should be in focus The core activities, not the support/ flow of document should be in the periscope designing the new government Oslo, October

Thank you for your attention! Questions ?? Contact at Oslo, October