laurence millar

67 %
33 %
Information about laurence millar
Education

Published on March 28, 2008

Author: UpBeat

Source: authorstream.com

New Zealand eGovernment 2003 Report Card:  New Zealand eGovernment 2003 Report Card GOVIS 2003 conference November 2003 Laurence Millar laurence.millar@prosperos.co.nz Agenda:  Agenda Brown University assessment of global eGovernment, including New Zealand In depth presentation on the results Four other assessments of New Zealand eGovernment/e-Readiness Discussion and conclusions Center for Policy Studies Brown University:  Center for Policy Studies Brown University Comprehensive review of eGovernment at local, state and country level http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Taubman_Center/ Annual study of global eGovernment published annually since 2001 Brown University Assessment:  Brown University Assessment Overview of results Description of methodology Focus on New Zealand assessment Example of top achieving country New Zealand ranking in Global eGovernment survey:  New Zealand ranking in Global eGovernment survey 2001 New Zealand scored 36.8%, ranked 26th 2002 New Zealand scored 42.3%, ranked 81st Overview of results 2002:  Overview of results 2002 Every region and most countries have improved since 2001 survey. 50% increase in government websites that offer services fully executable online (from 8% to 12%). 77% of web sites provide access to publications and 83% have links to databases. 14% show privacy policies, while 9% have security policies. 33% of government websites have some form of disability access, meaning access for persons with disabilities (dramatic increase from 2% in 2001). 19% of agencies responded to the email responsiveness test, 75% did not and 6% had broken email links. 43% of sites are multilingual, meaning that they offer information in two or more languages. Overall change from 2001 to 2002:  Overall change from 2001 to 2002 New Zealand ranking (2002):  New Zealand ranking (2002) Improved score from 36.8% to 42.3% Large number of countries improved score much more dramatically (eg South Korea from 33.4% to 64.0%) NZ dropped from 26th ranking to 81st Different countries as neighbours  New Zealand 2001 to 2002:  New Zealand 2001 to 2002 NZ neighbours 2001:  NZ neighbours 2001 NZ neighbours 2002:  NZ neighbours 2002 Brown University Assessment:  Brown University Assessment Overview of results Description of methodology Focus on New Zealand assessment Example of top achieving country How does the scoring work?:  How does the scoring work? 1,197 national government websites for the 198 nations selected from executive offices, legislative offices, judicial offices, Cabinet offices, and major agencies serving crucial functions of government. Functions included health, human services, taxation, education, interior, economic development, administration, natural resources, foreign affairs, foreign investment, transportation, military, tourism, and business regulation. Websites for subnational units, obscure boards and commissions, local government, regional units, and municipal offices were not included. Regardless of the type of system or cultural background of a country, websites were evaluated for the presence of various features dealing with information availability, service delivery, and public access. Features defined as services only if the entire transaction could occur online. Print out a form and mail back does not count as an online service. Searchable databases are services only if they result in a service response. Also email responsiveness test - "I would like to know what hours your agency is open during the week. Thanks for your help." Access to Information:  Access to Information Services Provided “Enable”:  Services Provided “Enable” Only 12% of sites offer services that are fully executable online. Of this group, 7% offer one service, 2% have two services, and 3% have three or more services. Most Frequent Online Services, 2002 18 sites Order Publications 7 sites Travel reservation 6 sites Search and Apply for Jobs 5 sites Apply for Passports; Renewal of vehicle license; File complaints/police reports. 4 sites Order birth/death certificates; File taxes 3 sites Apply for patents; Check exam results Privacy and Security and multi-language :  Privacy and Security and multi-language Only 14 percent (up from 6 percent in 2001) of examined sites have some form of privacy policy on their site. Only 9 percent have a visible security policy (up from 3 percent in 2001) . About half (43 percent) of national government websites have foreign language features that allow access to non-native speaking individuals. Ninety-five countries had no language translation on their site other than their native tongue. Disability Access:  Disability Access 33% of sites had some form of disability access (up from 2% in 2001) TTY (Text Telephone) or TDD (Telephonic Device for the Deaf) phone numbers. "Bobby Approved," deemed disability-accessible by a non-profit group that rates Internet web sites for such accessibility (http://www.cast.org/bobby/). Web accessibility consistent with standards mandated by groups such as the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) or legislative acts of the national government. Ads, User Fees, and Premium Fees:  Ads, User Fees, and Premium Fees Twice as many government websites in 2002 were likely to rely on ads (8%) as in 2001. Ads are much more prevalent than user fees (1%) or premium fees (0%). The only countries that have started to move into premium fee areas are Canada, and to a lesser extent, Australia. Five percent of Canadian public sector websites had areas requiring payment to enter. Restricted Areas:  Restricted Areas Some countries have started to develop restricted areas on their websites that require a username and password for accessibility. Sometimes, this is for security reasons, while at other times, it occurs through an interest in personalizing service delivery. This year, 6% of government websites across the world had restricted areas. Public Outreach:  Public Outreach Email Responsiveness:  Email Responsiveness “ It is useful to have email contact information on government websites, but this material is not helpful unless there is someone who actually answers the email.” Metric for eGovernment Index :  Metric for eGovernment Index phone contact information addresses publications databases links to other sites audio clips video clips foreign language access not having ads not having premium fees not having restricted areas not having user fees disability access having privacy policies having security policies having a portal connection allowing digital signatures on transactions an option to pay via credit cards email contact information search capabilities areas to post comments broadcasts of events option for email updates option for website personalization Four points were awarded to each website for the presence of the following 24 features: Metric for eGovernment Index:  Metric for eGovernment Index Features provided a maximum of 96 points for particular websites. Up to four points were awarded, based on the number of online services executable on that site (1 point for one service, two points for two services, three points for three services, and four points for four or more services). Totals for each website within a country were averaged across all of that nation's websites to produce a 0 to 100 overall rating for that nation. Top Countries:  Top Countries The top country in the 2002 ranking is Taiwan at 72.5 percent. This means that every website analyzed for that nation has nearly three-quarters of the features important for information availability, citizen access, portal access, and service delivery. In second position is South Korea (64.0%). Brown University Assessment:  Brown University Assessment Overview of results Description of methodology Focus on New Zealand assessment Example of a top achieving country How did NZ score (2002)?:  How did NZ score (2002)? Full details are not provided in the research report Scores for some of the criteria have been provided How did NZ score (2002)?:  How did NZ score (2002)? How did NZ score (2002)?:  How did NZ score (2002)? How did NZ score? For the following functions, not reported individually, NZ scored an average of 26% :  How did NZ score? For the following functions, not reported individually, NZ scored an average of 26% phone contact information addresses links to other sites audio clips video clips having a portal connection allowing digital signatures on transactions, an option to pay via credit cards email contact information areas to post comments broadcasts of events option for email updates option for website personalization Brown University Assessment:  Brown University Assessment Overview of results Description of methodology Focus on New Zealand assessment Example of top achieving country – South Korea South Korea:  South Korea In 2001 South Korea scored 33.4% - less than New Zealand (36.8%). In 2002 South Korea scored 64% and was ranked in second place. Check out the government portal - http://www.kois.go.kr/ - English language, focused on overseas items of interest. Ministry of Commerce, Industry, and Energy http://www.mocie.go.kr/ :  Ministry of Commerce, Industry, and Energy http://www.mocie.go.kr/ “ The Korean (Republic of Korea) sites are mostly bilingual, interactive, informative and well organized. As shown in the mocie site,, the navigation bar at the top displays all categories of provided information. It also provides statistical data on the side such as the stock prices and exchange rate. The search feature, link to the sitemap and contact information can be located very easily from the opening page. In addition, the colorful link bars to sites of affiliated groups and governmental agencies facilitate access to a variety of information.” Comments from Brown University report – Best practises of Top Government Sites Brown University Assessment:  Brown University Assessment Overview of results Description of methodology Focus on New Zealand assessment Example of top achieving country 2003 update New Zealand ranking in Global eGovernment survey:  New Zealand ranking in Global eGovernment survey 2001 New Zealand scored 36.8%, ranked 26th 2002 New Zealand scored 42.3%, ranked 81st 2003 New Zealand scored 35.5% ranked 13th Change in scoring 2003:  Change in scoring 2003 phone contact information addresses publications databases links to other sites audio clips video clips foreign language access not having ads not having premium fees not having restricted areas not having user fees disability access having privacy policies having security policies having a portal connection allowing digital signatures on transactions an option to pay via credit cards email contact information search capabilities areas to post comments broadcasts of events option for email updates option for website personalization. +PDA accessibility Net effect is to reduce scores by 16% New Zealand ranking in Global eGovernment survey:  New Zealand ranking in Global eGovernment survey 2001 New Zealand scored 36.8%, ranked 26th 2002 New Zealand scored 42.3%, ranked 81st 2003 (adjusted to reflect change in approach) New Zealand scored 51.5 ranked 13th How did NZ score:  How did NZ score How did NZ score?:  How did NZ score? New Neighbours (2003):  New Neighbours (2003) 2003 Summary of study findings:  2003 Summary of study findings Continues to be steady increase in information and services available on-line. Slow loading speed of many sites. Privacy and security policies need more prominence. Regular updates are essential. Brown University study conclusions for NZ assessment:  Brown University study conclusions for NZ assessment Volatile score in 2002 probably a result of sampling. Steady improvement in NZ eGovernment capability. Absence of second language option on NZ sites should be a concern. Agenda:  Agenda Brown University assessment of global eGovernment, including New Zealand Four other assessments of NZ eGovernment/e-Readiness Discussion and conclusions Other eGovernment surveys:  Other eGovernment surveys UNPAN - United Nations Public Administration Network http://www.unpan.org/egovernment2.asp#survey UNCTAD http://www.unctad.org/Templates/Search.asp?intItemID=1397&lang=1&frmSearchStr=ICT+development+indices&frmCategory=doc&section=this#doc IBM/EIU – Economist Intelligence Unit http://www.ebusinessforum.com/ Accenture - http://www.accenture.com/xd/xd.asp?it=enweb&xd=industries\government\gove_thought.xml Other eGovernment surveys:  Other eGovernment surveys Review of approach and NZ assessment. Each survey is a major work and could easily be the subject of a single presentation. Provide an overall impression of the different perspectives that can be taken, and how NZ fares under each. UNPAC:  UNPAC Researched 144 countries in 2001 Created an eGovernment index: Measure of web presence in 5 stages Emerging, Enhanced, Interactive, Transactional, Seamless Measure infrastructure PCs, internet hosts, telephones, mobile phones, TVs and population % online Human Capital Measure Human Development Index, Information Access Index, Urban as % of population UNPAC results:  UNPAC results New Zealand ranked 3rd in the World New Zealand web presence – one of 17 countries assessed as level 4 (transactional): “Complete and secure transactions like obtaining visas, passports, birth and death records, licenses, permits where a user can actually pay online for a services pay parking fines, automobile registration fees, utility bills and taxes. Digital signatures may be recognized in an effort to facilitate procurement and doing business with the government. Secure sites and user passwords are also present.” No country achieved level 5 (seamless) UNPAC NZ ranking:  UNPAC NZ ranking Infrastructure index PCs/ population 13th Internet hosts/population 6th Percent of population online 13th Phone lines/population 18th Mobile phones/ population 26th TVs/ population 23rd Human Capital Index Human Development 18th Information Access Index =1st (with 17) Urbanisation 18th UNPAC New Zealand rating:  UNPAC New Zealand rating Referenced in Cabinet paper (June 2003) http://www.eGovernment.govt.nz/docs/cab-paper-strategy-200306/. New Zealand ranked 3rd in the World. Biggest factor is web presence – we scored well because of the assessment that we are level 4. Ranking of top 20 nations (all assessed as level 4 or 3.5 for web presence) determined by infrastructure and human capital indices. UNPAC conclusions:  UNPAC conclusions Indispensible elements of success Visionary leadership and political will Commitment to deliverable outputs and services Accountability for results Respect for the needs of citizens Has eGovernment made a difference? Improving administrative practices  Providing information and services  Increasing transparency and accountability ? UNCTAD assessment:  UNCTAD assessment Measures ICT development of the nation Connectivity (Internet hosts, PCs, landlines and mobiles) Access (users, literacy, GDP, cost of calls) Policy (internet exchange, local loop, domestic long distance, ISP market structure) New Zealand ranked 15th in 2001, 15th in 2000, 14th in 1999. No more recent published work EIU/IBM:  EIU/IBM Measures the “e-readiness’ of 60 countries using a wide range of factors – almost 100 criteria. 2003 rankings Scandinavia leads - Scandinavians wholeheartedly embrace the information society. In Asia - South Korea (16th) is making the largest strides, spurred by an ambitious government and heavy infrastructure spending. Small countries have an edge - Smaller, nimbler economies are better able to implement nationwide projects. EIU/IBM conclusions (2003):  EIU/IBM conclusions (2003) Economic downturn affects e-readiness Most countries have improved their scores since last year, thanks to continued rollout of broadband services, uptake of mobile telephony, and a spate of Internet-related legislation and government programmes. No country is a back-pedaller Even in tough economic times, governments are pushing through IT infrastructure projects; programmes to bring the Internet to schools, post offices and other public venues; and legislation to encourage e-business and safeguard its participants. They are reducing connection charges by liberalising local telecoms markets, subsidising public access and encouraging price competition. And they are putting government services online at a fast clip. EIU/IBM - New Zealand rating:  EIU/IBM - New Zealand rating New Zealand position 20th in 2001, 18th in 2002, 17th in 2001 2003 position by factor (weight) Infrastructure (25%) 9th Business environment (20%) 12th Consumer and business adoption (20%) 21st Legal and policy environment (15%) 18th Social and cultural infrastructure (15%) 19th Supporting e-services (5%) 21st Measures the business e-friendliness of countries Accenture:  Accenture 2000 survey “Connecting the Dots” NZ not included 2001 survey “Rhetoric v reality – closing the gap” NZ 9th out of 22 2002 survey “Realizing the vision” NZ 14th out of 23 2003 survey “Engaging the customer” “Countries were selected based on the location of Accenture offices worldwide. This approach resulted in the exclusion of New Zealand, which had been surveyed in past years, from our 2003 study.” Accenture overall comments (2003):  Accenture overall comments (2003) eGovernment matures through a series of plateaus – from basic capability to service transformation Value drives eGovernment visions CRM underpins eGovernment Increasing take-up is a priority New eGovernment targets are needed eGovernment Maturity stages:  eGovernment Maturity stages Accenture comments on NZ (2002):  Accenture comments on NZ (2002) A number of foundation projects have been announced but have not yet resulted in an increase in the delivery of mature online services. New Zealand has lost ground as other countries have focused on increasing [service] maturity The number of agencies delivering more sophisticated services at the Transact level remain very limited. Although many services are interactive and designed around the needs of citizens, few responded to the needs of the visitor on an individual basis There are few if any services that are approaching best in class New Zealand may not keep up with the rate of change in the delivery of mature online services by other countries Agenda:  Agenda Brown University assessment of global eGovernment, including New Zealand Four other assessments of New Zealand eGovernment/e-Readiness Discussion and conclusions Conclusion from surveys:  Conclusion from surveys There are differences between the surveys Measure different aspects of eGovernment Differences in sampling. It is important that we seek out and review the findings from the unfavourable as well as the favourable surveys. My overall impression is that NZ could accelerate the realisation of eGovernment benefits. NZ – where are we going?:  NZ – where are we going? By June 2004, the Internet will be the dominant means of enabling ready access to government information, services and processes. By June 2007, networks and Internet technologies will be integral to the delivery of government information, services and processes. By June 2010, the operation of government will have been transformed through its use of the Internet. How good is this strategy?:  How good is this strategy? In the Accenture model, our peer group has achieved Internet integral to the delivery of Services (we want to be there by 2007) Canada is on its way to transformation (we want to be there by 2010). With the level of commitment shown by South Korea in 2001/2002, we can achieve our strategic goals in a much shorter time frame. Possible reasons for not moving faster:  Possible reasons for not moving faster Service delivery is much harder in larger countries, and the value of online is therefore higher. Cooperation between agencies around citizen life events is time consuming and expensive (cf Change of Address). NZ government machinery is complex. Does it matter?:  Does it matter? I imagine this audience is generally supportive of the strategic benefits of ICT enabled service delivery. Businesses increasingly use ICT to empower customers, and improve service delivery quality and efficiency. NZ government agencies are missing the opportunities being taken up elsewhere. We have not made the progress we could have made since 1997. Government Web Participation (presentation April 1997):  Government Web Participation (presentation April 1997) 100% 0% BREADTH - % of Central Government Agencies DEPTH of Content Corporate Introduction Full Info & Services Delivery Online Billing Systems Integration Eligibility & Forms Online Publications Site Searching Info & Services Descriptions Organisation Contact Info ] ] All agencies with web sites All agencies with full web sites Government Web Participation (progress since 1997):  Government Web Participation (progress since 1997) 100% 0% BREADTH - % of Central Government Agencies DEPTH of Content Corporate Introduction Full Info & Services Delivery Online Billing Systems Integration Eligibility & Forms Online Publications Site Searching Info & Services Descriptions Organisation Contact Info ] ] All agencies with web sites All agencies with full web sites 2003 estimate Conclusion and call to action:  Conclusion and call to action NZ strategic objectives are too timid. Need a commitment to service delivery. ENABLE NOW!!

Add a comment

Related presentations

Related pages

Laurence Millar | LinkedIn

View Laurence Millar’s professional profile on LinkedIn. LinkedIn is the world's largest business network, helping professionals like Laurence Millar ...
Read more

Laurence Millar | Facebook

Laurence Millar is on Facebook. Join Facebook to connect with Laurence Millar and others you may know. Facebook gives people the power to share and makes...
Read more

Lawrence M. Miller - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lawrence M. Miller is the author of eight books on management and leadership and consultant to major corporations on creating high performing cultures.
Read more

Laurence Millar - ICANNWiki

Laurence Millar is currently the Managing Director at GVG Limited, and a Trustee and Treasurer at 2020 Communications Trust. Professional Experiences
Read more

laurence millar (@gvgnz) | Twitter

The latest Tweets from laurence millar (@gvgnz). NZ Government CIO from 2004-2009. How can govt change to exploit ICT?. Wellington NZ
Read more

Johnny Miller - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Johnny Miller — Golfer — Personal information; Full name: John Laurence Miller: Born (1947-04-29) April 29, 1947 (age 68) San Francisco, California
Read more

Laurence Miller - kleiderkreisel.de

Nike, Michael Kors, Zara... Kaufe, verkaufe oder tausche deine Kleidung, Accessoires, Kosmetik und noch mehr Secondhand-Lieblinge! Spare und verdiene - Auf ...
Read more

Laurence Miller Gallery

LAURENCE MILLER GALLERY 20 West 57th Street New York City 10019 Tue-Sat 11-5:30 (212) 397-3930 contact@laurencemillergallery.com
Read more

Laurence Müller | Facebook

Laurence Müller ist bei Facebook. Tritt Facebook bei, um dich mit Laurence Müller und anderen Nutzern, die du kennst, zu vernetzen. Facebook gibt...
Read more

Laurence Müller - Rechtswissenschaft - Juridicum | XING

XING ist Deutschlands größtes berufliches Netzwerk: Mit XING finden Sie Ihren Traumjob, knüpfen wertvolle Kontakte, tauschen Wissen aus – und haben ...
Read more