DPADM/UNDESA AD HOC GROUP OF EXPERTS MEETING ON E-GOVERNANCE AND CHANGES IN ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURES AND PROCESSES July 2004, Seoul, Korea

Transcription

1 DPADM/UNDESA AD HOC GROUP OF EXPERTS MEETING ON E-GOVERNANCE AND CHANGES IN ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURES AND PROCESSES July 2004, Seoul, Korea AIDE MEMOIRE

2 Mandate The General Assembly has directed DPADM/UNDESA to hold an Ad Hoc Expert Group Meeting on a pertinent issue under the thematic focus of the Division. In order to fulfill this mandate, the proposed meeting is being undertaken as part of the programme budget. It will focus on the promise and challenges of a networked government. Background The Weberian model of government is being profoundly challenged by a number of forces. One with considerable potential to alter the landscape of public administration is that of e-government. The practitioners and proponents of e-government propose that information and communication technologies, and the underlying public sector reforms they support, may erode hierarchies, government silos and traditional ways of delivering services. Replacing these structures and processes will be horizontal, leaner, dynamic and networked ones. Government workers will be liberated to better utilize and create knowledge, and management fundamentally reconfigured. However, as the structures of e-government are continuously constructed, it is important to test their actual performance as against their promise and design. Has this flattening effect actually taken place? Are we witnessing more organic, knowledge-rich, integrated, collaborative, and cross-sectoral policy design and implementation? Indeed, there is already some evidence of this occurring in governments that are in the more advanced stages of e- government development, yet to what degree and with what levels of success? The stage for this research of for these questions has been set by the World Public Sector Report 2003, E-government at the Crossroads. With relation to the organizational changes in public administration, including the networked government it stated: The discussion about restructuring the e-government sector cannot conclude without a review of the record of the use of ICT by governments to support the transformation of the hierarchical structures of public administrations into networked structures. ( ) Transforming public hierarchies into public networks is uncharted water, though arguably, this constitutes the most important ICT application that a public administration can build. It does not enter into public awareness as an imminent task with relevance to people s well being (erroneously, as one can argue). It is by and large avoided by many civil servants and politicians, as it may have far-reaching consequences for the emancipation of people, with all the ensuing consequences of the unavoidable shift in control of power and resources. If use of modern ICT has the capacity to dismantle and build at the same time, it can achieve the most extensive impact by reshaping human society and by enabling us all people, governments and businesses to operate as networks. However, one can ask, what has suddenly become wrong with organizations of public administration that rank grades of authority one above the other? They have been created by society as a convenience and have functioned reasonably well for at least as long as the nation state has been around, and in effect, much longer. Large-scale hierarchical

3 organizations have been perfect for large governments. They have been very effective in moving power and resources in order to secure power, develop economies or win wars. The answer is: networks that use ICT and the speed and precision that they offer. i People have known networks at least as long as hierarchies though and, till now, have opted for the latter when choosing a preferred form for the organization of government. Networks are flexible and adaptable, they can react to a changing environment and they can move around people and resources to re-adapt to a task. But they have major problems too, e.g. difficulty in focusing on the fulfilment of a given task beyond a certain size or level of complexity or difficulty in co-ordinating and executing decisions in order to concentrate resources. Modern ICT facilitates communication in human interactions. It has offered its capacities to hierarchies and to networks. Hierarchies have not been able to use it too well as it has threatened vertical structures. Networks have embraced it. ICT does not eliminate their advantages and is capable of smoothing out their disadvantages. Networks can use it to enhance flexibility and reconfigure capacities. More importantly, they can use real-time processing to reintegrate command and decentralize execution. ICT has converted networks into powerful, efficient forms of social organization. The big business hierarchies gave up first. Multi-national corporations (MNC) had the structures of networks but did not act much like them. They used networks for moving investments to low tax rate jurisdictions and employing assets developed at home for the exploitation of international factor cost differentials (mainly labour). Over time they have converted these rudimentary networks into horizontal corporations Global Production Networks (GPN), or vehicles for the creation and diffusion of international knowledge as well as the creation of local capacity to internalize the disseminated knowledge. Small and medium sized enterprises (SME) have organized themselves into networks within the decentralized networks of large corporations, thereby forming a structure of internally decentralized networks connected to external networks throughout the globe. Firms have become networks of different elements organized around a business project: loose networks with common interests, customers, objectives and functions. The bottom line of this change is offering whatever customers want, anywhere, anytime. In the midst of all this activity, we still see the silos of government organizations: focused on maintaining boundaries of their jurisdictions, internal standards, rules and structural hierarchies. The networked economy has not stopped needing them. But it needs them at different levels of speed and flexibility. A vibrant private sector that is sophisticated and intensive in its use of ICT for digital business needs a vibrant public sector that is sophisticated and intensive in its use of ICT. We see many efforts of government organizations to adjust. On-line, customer interface e-government applications have a very strong business focus. E-procurement mimics e-commerce. Business-focused e- government platform applications have become a standard in many national portals. More importantly though, the people have not stopped needing governments either, for facilitation of the expression of developmental preferences; for direct involvement in the production of public value; and eventually, for the creation and protection of public space

4 in which public value can be produced and delivered by a multitude of agents. They also need the information, knowledge and other resources that are locked up inside the silos of government organizations. Their availability and more efficient use in the public interest than is possible right now also constitutes an increasingly important public end. It is beginning to appear that governments can create a considerable amount of public value just by reproducing themselves as networks. This would be a very complex undertaking, an e-government project for the millennium. It would need political will, popular support, skills and persistence. It would need ICT too. However, it would be pointless to assume that technology alone can change the way in which government works by affecting organizational practices and structures. Institutional and structural embeddedness are powerful enough to bring on board objective technologies, yet produce no or little change if the adoption of these technologies is not accompanied by a process of reform. Attempting such a transformation of government seems possible though. Governments at the central and local level are structured as rudimentary networks. These networks have been used for the control and transmittal of information and resources in a vertical way. Governments are already surrounded by private business networks and formal and informal social networks. This does not and cannot mean the simple change of a hierarchical government into a horizontal government overnight. If that were to happen, in many countries this would mean no government at all overnight. These countries do not even have capable public organizations at the central or at the local level (physical infrastructure, skilled civil servants) that can be converted into capable nodes of a network. Additionally, a culture that has prevented importation of the NPM revolution may not prove conducive in this case either. For other countries, the power sharing that comes with networks would not be easily accepted by the financial or political elite. The alternative seems to be to just do nothing. Slowly growing conflict between the private and the public sector, between hierarchies and networks, between technology and organizations does not have at its base, a hostile ideology, leader or even a face. It does not look like it will erupt before the next election and piece-meal management of it seems like a splendid alternative. Enough flexibility to accommodate the business needs and enough collusion between the government and the media to cope with the sentiments of the public seem like the right modalities here. And indeed, they may work for a relatively long time. The illusion of doing nothing is not new. But it freezes the capacity of societies to develop. It erodes economic and political power from within. Time will pass and somewhere, someone will start experimenting with the new ideas. The force locked within these transformations is so powerful that if networked government happens mainly in the industrialized countries of the North, the gap between them and the countries of the

5 South will grow again, for a new reason. Wherever it happens though, it will immediately create a new centre of gravity for growth and development. A groundbreaking, visionary study has no hesitation in pointing to the future. It states, A new paradigm is emerging. We call it the networked state. ( ) Along with the new structure comes a new and emerging capacity to link ideas, people, organizations and information in new ways. This means building a society that is capable of the creation and diffusion of information and knowledge on an unprecedented scale. The Ad Hoc Expert Group Meeting will address the intended and unintended impact of e- government for the structures and processes of government, as well as examine the lessons to date. The debate is large and presentations will serve to illustrate its nature and scope, including the theoretical frameworks concerning the motivation for government agencies to adopt e-government and restructure their operations. Case studies from several countries will provide more specific examples of the challenges faced in implementation, as well as change realized, through the study of national systems, and sectoral implementation. Objectives Experts will be selected to prepare and present papers on the themes outlined above, as well as to participate in the meeting s discussions. This will allow for a rich and engaging debate and cross-fertilization of ideas and issues. It is expected that the meeting will: Identify major issues and trends in structural and process changes associated with e-government development; Enhance the knowledge of UN staff, UN missions and partner organizations on these important issues; Enrich the ability of DPADM to better serve the Member States in this area of e- government; Facilitate the creation of new partnerships. A publication devoted to the meeting will be produced that would contain inter alia all main presentations as well as reflection of the discussion, recommendations and conclusions from the meeting. Venue The Meeting will be held in Seoul, Republic of Korea, in conjunction with the 26 th Congress of International Institute of Administrative Sciences (IIAS), 14 to 18 July This will allow the Group of Experts Meeting to benefit from the presence in Seoul of a

6 large number of experts and practitioners in matters related to public administration and to draw them into the meeting as additional presenters and participants. Agenda While a detailed agenda will be developed, it is envisaged that following the opening session of the Expert Group Meeting in which the main objectives will be presented, keynote presentations will be made by experts based on their respective background papers. General discussion will also be held. The meeting will conclude with a brainstorming session and discussion of main conclusions and recommendations. Budget Resource persons (3) 310 x 5 days 6, Air fare 12,342 (Argentina, CA/USA, India) Sub Total 19,022 Consultancy fee to IIAS 2,000 To produce background papers Sub Total 2,000 Travel KMB Staff (1) x 4 days 1,240 Sub Total 1,240 Report (on-line) 5,000 Total 27,262