A MODEL OF JUSTICE AS A PLATFORM A CASE STUDY OF OPEN DATA DISCLOSURE

Transcription

1 A MODEL OF JUSTICE AS A PLATFORM A CASE STUDY OF OPEN DATA DISCLOSURE Giulio MICHETTI Arianna TONIOLO Simone ROSSI Alessandro PIRANI 1

2 who we are We are a group of consultants and researchers based in Italy. Within COGruppo, from several years we work in the judiciary system to support organizational change, digital transformation and innovative practices. In 2016 we founded Opendatagiustizia, a collective engaged in promoting open data in the judiciary system from a cultural point of view and with operative projects. We are actively supporting Turin Court in a project aimed at publishing open data. 2

3 theoretical framework open data Deep change in defining public administration s action open government Citizens right to the utmost transparency from public administration More efficiency in government Citizens affecting policy-making Increase in participation, interaction and social inclusion Stimulation of economic growth 3

4 theoretical framework Evolution of public administration ideal-type of reference Weberian bureaucracy Laws and formal rules Rigid hierarchy defining discretion and spaces of action Standardization of organization response New Public Management Incorporation of managerial practices from private sector Control over inputs and output of processes Incitement for innovative practices Emphasis on diffusion of best practices New Public Governance Plural and pluralistic public action Management of inter-organizational networks Focus on processes outcome public value Openness to dialogue with citizens and stakeholders Allowed and facilitated by datification 4

5 empirical context PCT Digital reform of civil justice in Italian judiciary system. One of the most relevant digital transformation in public administration. Based on obligation of electronic filing and offices computer system. Generation of new practices and new relationships between offices and actors. System s database collects a huge amount of data. Great variety of social and economic issues. Great opportunity to put data at work to engage with stakeholders. 5

6 empirical context 1. Judiciary system has not yet understood how to use at best the data produced by its own action (beyond jurisdiction) 2. Relationship between judiciary system and its stakeholders is crucial for quality and quantity of services provided 3. Open data initiatives are a fundamental mean to energize and fill with meaning the relationship between judiciary organizations and their organizational environment 6

7 theoretical framework Models of interaction between judiciary organizations and their environment EXTRACTIVE MODEL PLATFORM MODEL goals Court actors Operational critical issues Development of innovative service Limited willingness to change Operational resources Technical resources Adoption of innovative practices Management of socio-economic phenomena Open data publication Willingness to collaborate Analyses of social challenges Public policies Project addressed to critical issues 7

8 research question analysing the dynamics emerging when judiciary world meets open data government frame from an organizational and systemic point of view. which could be the best Court activity area to engage with open data? what are the main obstacles to the publication process (hierarchical, technological, administrative ones)? what are the drivers supporting Courts engaging the environment outside from their comfort zone? 8

9 empirical setting Open Data Giustizia Torino A project in progress by opendatagiustizia.it 9

10 empirical setting DISCOVERY FOCUS EXPLORATION OPERATION Public event First contact with open data Workshops with administrative staff Selecting activity areas more relevant for stakeholders Workshops with working groups Assessing for every area disposable data, opportunities and obstacles Working groups Data extraction from database and data manipulation Non-autonomous people Family Evictions Families and individuals financial troubles 10

11 analysis Behavioural hints from workshops 1. Administrative officers may be not completely aware of data gathered and treated through office activity 2. Participants has never questioned about the importance of data processed for the territory and the social system 3. Some officers had some trouble to catch the raw and disaggregated nature of open data 11

12 analysis Operational obstacles 1. Lack of data Data required by other administration with paper forms, not reported in the judiciary information system (family group) 2. Absence of a variable Data not compulsory for the information system that are hardly filled by offices (non-autonomous people and eviction groups) 12

13 analysis Organizational system considerations Technology Bureaucracy Organizational culture An informational system design to be coherent with existing traditional way of working Lack of business intelligence Difficult data extraction Quality of data Lack of interoperability Little space and resources for strategic initiatives and longterm goals Lack of a stable organizational role to manage innovation, stakeholder engagement, data quality Courts leadership assume this role, but relying too much on individuals is not effective No economic or organizational rewards for effort toward innovation Bureaucratic institutional logic implies cognitive boundaries toward innovative practices Strong cognitive effort to think about Court systemic role Impacts on how data are defined, treated and stored 13

14 final remarks Participatory methodologies based on service design thinking are very helpful to boost innovative initiatives. The Turin case is in progress. We will hopefully present in the future project s outcomes, together with obstacles, and test the platform interaction model. Suggestions for further research: Case studies, experiences and best practices of stakeholders engagement triggered by open data disclosure Organizational and behavioural impacts of open data publication within Courts 14

15 challenges Challenges for practitioners: Identify innovative service based on data Spread knowledge and awareness about open data, inside and outside judiciary organizations Stimulate stakeholders (in particular non profit organizations) to start a dialogue with judiciary organizations, expressing needs, looking for opportunities Judiciary organizations could become an important catalyst for social innovation and data-driven innovative policies. Opendatagiustizia group will gladly support all projects and experiences that will go in this direction. 15

16 opendatagiustizia.it wants to thank Turin Court President Massimo Terzi and all the project participants Thanks for your attention Giulio Michetti - michetti@cogruppo.it Arianna Toniolo - toniolo@cogruppo.it Simone Rossi - rossi@cogruppo.it Alessandro Pirani - pirani@cogruppo.it 16