Wednesday, June 02, 2004

Six months into 2004

Ian prompted me to take another look at this post - my thinking about what would happen in 2004. I thought I'd repost it first (I've stripped out much of the excess text) and then later in the week or possibly next week (depending on how the next few days go) I'd revisit it. Reposting it whilst probably a sin in the blog world also allows me to see if anyone has any comments on it before I go ahead and write my own thinking. So, here it is, from December 31st 2003 (if you want the full post, it's here): 1. Citizen at the centre Since the beginning, e-government has been about putting the citizen at the focal point for service delivery. I don’t for a second think that people go out and deliver things without that maxim in sharp focus, but they have been constrained by a variety of things – natural inertia, lack of system capability, old style business process and so on. This year, things change and the citizen will be squarely in the middle. That will mean: - Dramatically fewer websites (maybe not fewer in number, but certainly fewer that have to be visited to get the task done); More focused content that is written in people speak, not government speak; More transactions grouped together in logical ways (so Child Benefit and Child Tax Credit will next to each other, ditto Council Tax Benefit and Housing Benefit); Central and local services will start to be aggregated – with the local government people probably leading the way (many already see themselves as a kind of one stop shop for government), but probably not until close to year end 2004; Consistent navigation and controls so that there is no relearning necessary. People know how traffic lights work – and we don’t change that from town to town, so why on earth would we keep changing look and feel?; Consistent multi-channel delivery will show up, again near the end of the year, where trying to get at something via the ‘phone will feel similar to the web. The folks at the call centre will be using the same interface as you would use if you were online, so consistency will increase … and the website will be updated if your question isn’t fully covered by what is already online. 2. The Rationalisation of Brands This won’t fully happen in 2004 but during the year we’ll see, I think, a shift to service delivery from a relatively generic thing. It won’t be about the department of this or the department of that, it will be about “you’re the citizen, what do you need”. Departments will still exist – maybe a couple fewer – but there’ll be aligning themselves much more closely, to back up the trend identified in (1) above. Once you start rationalising the brand, all kinds of interesting things probably happen. Who owns the end to end service? Where do you go when it goes wrong? How do you track something that is being dealt with through multiple back office units, all with different processes? These issues and others like them will force more co-location of resource, more interworking of systems and a greater ability to join up in the future (after all, once the wave hits, why get in the way of the next one?). This will mean things like syndication going mainstream – to the point that any content will be available anywhere and so you won’t necessarily even know the source brand. Once you start doing this – you can get definitive information about, say, child care from three government entities, Mothercare and Boots – you probably spend less time looking and more time using the information, and you probably get it from brands that you trust on an every day basis rather than having to think about where the definitive source would be. If you’re shopping on Waitrose.com (Ocado) and you happen to buy nappies for the first time, it’s probably logical that they pop up some screens about what government services you’re eligible for as a recent parent. Maybe you even save money on your shopping because they can process the claim in real time, using services and data sourced from government but presented in a non-government branded way. 3. A Shift From Silo To Enterprise Allied to (1) and (2) then is a change in the way that things are designed and constructed – to remove the issues about end to end ownership, support and delivery. As long as things are built inside fortresses, bashing down the walls and linking a couple will be hard (impossible?) and relatively pointless. I’m guessing our would-be CIO will focus first on how we shift from the silo to the enterprise or, at least, from talking about the enterprise to doing it. Central infrastructure is part of this (but I would say that, wouldn’t I), but it’s not all of it. A base of solid standards for, say, web services security and interoperability would be fundamental – after all, usage of MMS (whilst still low) was pretty non-existent until you could guarantee that sending from Vodafone to O2 would work. A decision on, say, what a trusted government mobile phone number for SMS messages would be is important. Then some components are built a few times, in a sufficiently generic way, and deployed many times (adhering to the standards identified) and plugged (through a set of bespoke adapters) into the multitude of systems in place. Once we’re through that battle, maybe we can attack the multitude of systems and see what can be rationalised and componentised there – reducing the amount of infrastructure and the complexity of delivery. Ideally, this speeds up introduction of new services and reduces the risk of failure – if it doesn’t do that, we shouldn’t do it. 4. Business Leadership to the Fore For (3) to happen though, technology needs to be seen as the servant to the business and the business owners have to take ownership of the widest possible agenda. I’m guessing that, today, most governments commissioning a new service build a new IT system to support it. That might have made sense before (it certainly made things simpler through reducing interdependence in projects and delivery), but it doesn’t make any sense now. If (1) – (3) are to happen then, increasingly, business processes will be designed from the citizen into government rather than government outwards. That will mean a greater degree of cross-business alignment and rationalisation. Perhaps certain departments will own key processes for all of government, perhaps a department will not only own how it works but also actually run it for everyone else (one way for money to get in to government, say). This is the hardest thing to see how it works. It requires fundamental changes at a base organisational level in any government that undertakes it. That will mean new structures, new incentives, new controls and disciplines. I didn’t say it would be easy, but the emergence of a trend like this will show a true appetite in a government for tackling the very hardest problems. For a long time (since almost the first week I got involved in e-government), I’ve said that the web allows us to put a veneer over the complexity of government, hiding it from our citizens and buying time to allow us to engineer the really complicated changes beneath. That’s still true and we’ve all bought some time – but it’s time to start tackling the hard stuff for real now. 5. Success stories will be common, and will become a non-event By the end of 2004 a handful of services will be mainstream, i.e. they will have significant usage when compared with, say, buying books online or banking online. Perhaps 40-50% of people will use an online channel for just a few services, finding that it’s quicker, easier and a richer experience than trying to use the ‘phone. Incidentally, as more private sector businesses outsource their call centres abroad, I wonder whether web usage of things like banking will increase – if you can do self service, why make the call? If that’s right, then government benefits too – the more people who are online and who are comfortable transacting online, the more people will feel comfortable using the services available from government. What are these services? Some are already there – the congestion charge claims 70% of payments are made online or through SMS. I think they got there by making the offline (in this case telephone) process so ridiculously painful that pretty much everyone found the path of least resistance (the absolute path of least resistance is, of course, not to drive into London and many people it seems chose that one). The online driving test service is already doing well, so the papers say and is a natural start point (kind of a “my first government transaction online”) for a generation that already expects the Internet to do pretty much everything that they need. This will be closely followed, I imagine, by Student Loans. So, fast forwarding a few years on in your life cycle, the next place where usage ought to be significant this year is in the area of benefits and tax credits. The latter already had a banner year in more ways than one and with renewals due in April, online has surely to be the way to go. On top of those, I think there will likely be another sleeper hit or two. Something that will catch most of us by surprise, like the 1901 Census or the Flood Warning site – perhaps something like Diana’s Inquest, or the publication of the Hutton report or maybe news that London will host the 2012 Olympics (followed by publication of the plans for development to meet that need). Events like these will drive traffic to the web from both existing and new users who can then move on to other government services. Beyond that, I think the services that really catch on will be invisible government services – the things that government does that aren’t really associated with government. The 1901 Census was one such thing – I wonder how many people really connected that with government? Booking a squash court at your local leisure centre might be another – after all, many such centres are run by local authorities. But what really interests me are the spontaneous things that we might get people to sign up for as a lead in to other things. Let’s say that when you send in your (paper) tax return, we take your mobile phone number – and text you when the processing is complete and ask you to visit a website to confirm payment details for the refund; or perhaps we arrange to text you when the cheque for your child support money is in your bank; or we make a deal where we’ll email you when we have something to send you, rather than adding to your mail pile at home and you can visit a secure area to check what it is and decide whether you want a hard copy (printed right where you are or sent via snail mail, but your choice). These services won’t be obvious “tick in the box” services – i.e. they don’t exist offline and so when they go online it’s hard to know how to count them (after all, 100% online makes sense at a certain point in time, but at some point, the baseline has moved and you might be putting 50% online of what you had then and another 25% of services that didn’t exist before).

2 comments:

  1. As the culprit responsible for encouraging you to post this I suppose it’s little short of impolite not to respond. I write in somewhat pessimistic mood having spent a very interesting afternoon recently with a unitary council undertaking (in my opinion) some groundbreaking work with its CRM programme and customer contact services. With well over a £ million already invested, this same authority is keen to forge partnerships with others that may have built and implemented solutions fitting into their larger vision, the payback being the opportunity to ‘buy into’ (at a fraction of the initial investment cost) a working package already in place. The technology is there, the BPR has been done (nearly 400 maps produced taking an estimated 15 man years to complete) and support, systems integration etc. available from their private sector partners if requires. Visitors to this forward thinking town hall have been blown away by the efficacy and robustness of its systems. Yet time and again, these visiting authorities have seen fit to return home and do nothing or start re-engineering the same wheel, often failing in the process and certainly racking up un-necessary costs in both financial and human terms. With few real examples of proper partnership working (real joint ventures, real pooling of resource, real clubbing together to achieve economies of scale with vendors) I can’t see how your ‘cross-business alignment and rationalisation’ or for that matter ‘more transactions grouped together’ will ever really become a reality when most organisations seem to be suffering from terminal symptoms of the ‘Not Invented Here Syndrome’. And that’s just among local authorities.

    Add to this the zillions of miles of red tape in Whitehall, the hotchpotch of frequently incongruent systems in operation often in the same department is there really any chance of pulling this lot together to deliver a simple, one-stop experience for the citizen? Ever?

    With around 470 local authorities across the country it is they who should be holding the vendors to ransom not the other way round, yet my inbox is littered with sob stories of PSOs purchasing solutions only to find themselves locked into ridiculous licence and support agreements falling little short of banditry on the part of suppliers. Without sounding heartless, this predicament is largely their own fault because of the ‘go it alone’ mentality pervading the public service industry as a whole – often the result of ‘big P’ and ‘little p’ politics.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Add to this the zillions of miles of red tape in Whitehall, the hotchpotch of frequently incongruent systems in operation often in the same department is there really any chance of pulling this lot together to deliver a simple, one-stop experience for the citizen? Ever? "

    Ever? yes. soon. hmmmm. tough challenge. can be done, but inertia is hard to overcome. especially when it's caused by treacle.

    ReplyDelete