What do we do about sharing data?

October 31, 2008

If the Conservatives get in at the next election, all that work on sharing data and services might have been wasted according to a report today:

Keep our data ‘carefully controlled’
Friday, October 31, 2008

The shadow security minister, Dame Pauline Neville-Jones, has told a conference that the government needs a less-joined up approach to information systems.

The former chairwoman of the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) said to the RSA Conference in London that a Conservative government would be likely to adopt “separate, disaggregated and carefully controlled information systems and databases”.

Dame Pauline said the “lax security culture that has emerged” must be tackled with greater regulation and oversight of the transfer of information. The recent spate of data losses suggest that the government will have to work within a policy framework that favours disaggregated IT systems, she added.

“Access to data, and the transfer of data, must be based on clear and legitimate business need. And the information supplied must be limited: it should meet the requirements of that business request, nothing more,” she said.

http://www.publicservice.co.uk/news_story.asp?id=7553&topic=e-government

Another model, but flawed?

October 30, 2008
I found this, by chance!

http://chesterrep.openrepository.com/cdr/bitstream/10034/37773/1/wood,webb,page-conference%20paper%20july%202007.pdf

Measurement of Customer Satisfaction & Performance

Measurement within a Local Government Framework

Sheena Wood, Paul Webb, Steve Page

Chester Business School, University of Chester

Its interesting, but as a useful model for transformational government, I believe flawed.
Its an interesting one, especially in comparison with the CIPFA PIN model...

Who is doing what at the moment in local government? Joined-up research…

October 26, 2008

I had been in touch with Brendan McCarron of the CIPFA Performance Improvement Network in the past and it had been he that had pointed me to the paper on the Scottish Accounts Commission on gap analysis that I’ve mentioned before:

He has been working with Simon Speller, councillor and academic (who was referenced in the aforementioned report) on customer satisfaction in a series of works for the CIPFA Performance Improvement Network – Improving Customer Satisfaction.

On the 9th October I gave a short presentation in Preston on an academic view of customer satisfaction for the ESD-Toolkit group looking at Customer Insight which is related to the one on profiling. This also provided some feedback to my research – ESD-Toolkit – Customer profiling & satisfaction

On November 11th I am presenting another academic view at the EiP conference in London, the EiP Group is looking at Customer Insight, Citizen Engagement and Change In Local Government

How many more networks are there? I’ve also been involved with Socitm‘s discussions around metrics and these overlap with the ESD-Toolkit since both employ GovMetric, a couple of whose staff I had conversations with at the outset of my research.

Are we all talking to each other folks or are you relying upon me talking to you?


I before E

October 25, 2008

An important thread running through my thesis is the need for sorting out the infrastructure before implementing e-government. This isn’t just the hardware or architecture but also the human resource one, the change management and the carrying-out of re-engineering where necessary.

This also the explains my proposal for systems thinking as part of transformation of services.

There are two not-recent but very accessible papers available on the Internet on the subject of government needing to use system thinking. These are:

System failure – Why governments must learn to think differently by Jake Chapman with the second edition published in 2004

Systems thinking and The Practice of Government by Geoff Mulgan from an OU conference in 2001

Since systems thinking still has some way to go in government, these are stll very relevant! At the same time a hot-off-the-press government consultantion on Digital Inclusion manages to state on page 12 that: “Balancing individuals’ preferences must be balanced with the efficient delivery of public services so that the cost to the taxpayer is not unreasonable compared to the cost of choice.” The only way that new technolgies should be paid for is improving systems and we have a long way to go…


Some questions about anchoring expectations

October 19, 2008

The service user has expectations – are we aware of them?

The service provider has a view upon the service user’s expectations.

Do they equate? The gap may be in the service users favour, if the provider is being generous, but does the service user really want or need that generosity? Can there be too excellent a service?

In contrast, the citizen may be setting their sights too low. From a previous experience they may not expect the quality that the service provider is obliged by law or even common decency to deliver. We should be delivering excellent service quality.

How do we anchor expectations in these terms or provide realistic pledges or promises of service?

I propose that consultation and co-production of processes with the end user can be the only rationale.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.