Docstoc

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND GOOD GOVERNANCE.doc

Document Sample
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND GOOD GOVERNANCE.doc Powered By Docstoc
					COURSE MATERIAL
Volume II (Technology & Implementation)
Page 1 – Content page

Page 3 – Preface as in Vol I

Page 5 – onwards

      1. IT and Good Governance, J C Kapur, Professor Information
          Technology, Indian Institute of Public Administration, New Delhi
      2. Public Private Partnership for e-Governance, J Satyanarayana, CEO,
          NISG: p. 120-127, Promise of E-Governance – Operational
          Challenges, M P Gupta, 2004
      3. An Investigation of the Methodologies of Business Process
          Reengineering
      4. BPR case Study – Nethrajyoth International Hospital
      5. Prosci’s Change Management Maturity Model
      6. ICT Intervention in Rural development – Information Villages in
          Pondicherry, paper presented K G Rajamohan, Scientist, MS
          Swaminathan Research Foundation, ICT for development workshop
          conducted by NISG, July 2004.
      7. What is Open Source Software?
      8. Accelerate your Portal Implementation “10 best Practices”, Nitin
          Lalwani, Headstrong
      9. Trust in Electronic Environment – Vakul Sharma, Advocate & Cyber
          Law Consultant
      10. Request For Proposal (RFP) framework for reference




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                               1
      INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND GOOD
                GOVERNANCE

                                                                    Jagdish C. Kapur
                                                    Professor Information Technology
                                              Indian institute of Public Administration
                                                                            New Delhi


   Of late there is renewed debate on problems of governance and administration in
   India. Administrators, politicians, academics, citizens at large, and even
   businessmen are talking about issues like constitutional reforms, good
   governance, transparency, corruption, ethics, state in the market economy, new
   role of government under economic liberalisation, electronic governance, etc.
   Also, the classical models of governance/administration with emphasis on division
   of work, rule orientation, and bureaucratic hierarchy with rule-book defined
   regulations and lines of authority is giving room to new ways of governance in
   the form of "New Public Management". The new public management paradigm
   seems to have born out of the frustration of a common man, the citizen of a
   country, for not receiving the quality of service that he expects or pays for. Not
   many of them go to the Consumer Redressal forums at the District, State, or
   National level. Every day there is some or the other news of a citizen grievance in
   the press. Be it a court judgment, “VIPs can‟t derail passengers” on the front
   page of the Times of India of October 8, 2000 or “Parking pirates pinned” on the
   front page of the same date of the Hindustan Times stating, “Central Economic
   Intelligence Bureau uncovers a racket”. The second page has a heading “Filling
   up coffers – MCD officials made money from restoration work”. This, as would
   seem to a common citizen, is only a tip of the iceberg. Discounting the desire
   (and perhaps, the need for survival) of the media to sensationalise news, the
   message is loud and clear that we are not governing the way we ought to. The
   efficacy of the governmental way of managing its affairs has been debated time
   and again. A number of researchers, civil servants, and common citizens have
   written volumes on the subject. Can governance be improved? Is it possible to
   learn from over five decades of administrative experience of independent India?
   Do we feel the need to review our working style, our attitude towards the
   common citizen, and our mindset to build a “vision” for excellence in governance
   for the future? Is it time to bring response systems and organizational processes
   and structures in tune with changes in technology? Can modern technology,
   particularly, Information Technology help us? Will the present-day Information
   Revolution empower the common citizen of the Country to get what is due to
   him?

2. The world over, people are talking more about "good governance" and "public
   management" and less about "public administration", per se. In India, the
   process of reforms in administration began as early as 1949 with the setting up
   of the O&M division in the Government of India. The recent decision to review the
   Indian Constitution is a landmark in Indian Administration. However, most of the
   'reform' efforts have been on paper only. They have all talked about improving
   effectiveness, efficiency, responsiveness, record-keeping and filing systems,




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                        2
   integrity in public service, right to information, and accountability, etc. Even the
   World Bank has identified a number of parameters of good governance, like
   political and bureaucratic accountability, independence of judiciary, participation
   of religious and social groups, and freedom of expression and information, etc.
   Phrases like, 'reinventing government', 'mission-driven government', 'market-
   oriented government', 'service-first', and 'empowering citizens', etc. have been
   used frequently in India also. At best, they reveal some "good intentions" only.
   Even if some of these had been achieved to a reasonable level, there would not
   have been so much of a debate, so much of a crisis, so much of turbulence that
   there would be need for "redefinition" of the role of government itself. The
   disappointing fact is that we have not been able to convert promises into
   performance and agenda into action to any significant level. Hopefully,
   opportunities provided by IT will have an impact on governance of the Country.
   Need to rightsize the government and restructuring and redesigning would
   become the order of the day. Remedies like across-the-board budget cuts,
   employment and salary freezes, reorganizations, endless task forces, and the like
   never address the systemic issues that create and sustain poor government
   “business” processes. What does make a difference, is analysing the
   governmental current business and making sure the business processes work for
   government‟s “customers”.

3. The turbulent business environment that is prevailing in the world has triggered a
   compelling need to search for new management paradigms that will enable
   organizations succeed. Even the great sustaining obsession with virtues that
   motivated governmental organisations for so many decade is becoming
   secondary to the need to get closer to the customer. While “Quality” of service is
   a prerequisite, innovation and speed, and not the track record, precedence,
   experience, or history will have value. There is no time for experimentation, no
   room for maneuvering and certainly no future in tinkering with weak systems.
   Nothing short of a total overhaul will do if governance is to succeed in a difficult
   environment. For thinkers and administrators who have the vision to do blue-sky
   thinking, the perspicacity to draw up a clear strategy, the knowledge to recognise
   and select good technology solutions and the leadership to rally the team around
   a common cause - redesigning of government processes - presents a real
   opportunity. An opportunity to architect an altogether new vision for governance,
   an opportunity to obliterate age old systems that have now turned into
   anachronism in the new global scenario and an opportunity to make innovation
   as the „life infusing force‟ to revitalise governmental organisations and make
   them organic, in the true sense of the term.

4. One of the reasons for inadequate implementation of the reform process in the
   governmental agencies is that the reforms have been suggested as
   generalisations and the same are too vague to be implemented. They reflect
   good intentions and good policy statements. Implementing them is a big
   question. In addition, there are some typical characteristics of government and
   public agencies that inhibit implementation of good governance and good public
   administration. These include:


          Monopoly and governmental protection resulting into inefficiency.

          Too inward looking, therefore lack of initiative for innovation.




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                          3
              Grown into huge and unwieldy size like the legendary dinosaurs finding it
               impossible to adapt to the flexibility required in the present day world
               order.

              Caught in a cobweb of rules and regulations and cumbersome procedures
               resulting into passing the buck onto the next seat or "disposal" meaning
               shifting the file from one table to another.

              Arbitrary and extra-constitutional authority through use of "discretion and
               judgement" resulting into nepotism and corruption of the highest order.
               Selection, posting, transfer, and "allocations" have no relation to
               competence, capability, performance, or relevance to organisational
               requirements.

5. Public Administration in general and governance in particular, once again, is at
   the crossroads and so are governmental organizations in India. Process of
   governance cannot remain unaffected by powerful winds of change and the
   Information Technology revolution sweeping the globe. The direction we choose
   now would determine India's future status worldwide. We cannot afford to miss
   the bus once again. It is now or never situation. However, I am not suggesting
   use of IT for its sake alone. Not IT by itself, but it is only effective deployment of
   computers coupled with communications that will ensure success in a world that
   demands higher and higher standards of innovation and customer service. IT will
   continue to change at a mind boggling speed in terms of price performance,
   leading to significant shrinkage of time and space. In the context of
   administration, it has to be used as an "enabling technology" to achieve the
   broader goal of "good governance". But how do we go about it! Let us look at
   some of the agenda items of good governance, like:

               Effective and efficient administration.

               Improvement in quality of life of citizens.

               Establish legitimacy and credibility of institutions.

               Give responsive administration by becoming citizen friendly and citizen
                caring.

               Ensure accountability.

               Give freedom of information and expression.

               Reduce cost of governance.

               Make every department result-oriented.

               Improve quality of public services.

               Improve productivity of employees.

               Remove corruption and reestablish credibility by ensuring integrity of
                individuals.




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                           4
               Remove discretion and authority/power to oblige.

               Use IT based services to de-mystify procedures and improve the citizen-
                government interface.

6. The foremost requirement for implementing the reform agenda is to translate it
   from "macro" to "micro", from generalization to organisation-specific and attempt
   its implementation for each process of governance. This would need a
   "fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of government processes";
   marginal improvements here and there have not helped during the last five
   decades. The new agenda for governance will be to "achieve dramatic
   improvement in critical, contemporary measures of performance, such as cost,
   quality, service, and speed" of individual public organisations/departments.
   Though difficult to imagine, it needs to be emphasised that an institution or a
   government department is NOT created or established for the welfare of its
   employees, nor for the benefit of trade unions or their federations. IT IS
   CREATED FOR SERVICING THE CUSTOMER, THE CLIENT, THE
   BENEFICIARY, THE CITIZEN. An organisation is built by employing personnel
   in the expectation that the people will carry the organisation to achieve its goals
   and mission and not the other way round. Therefore, all effort of an organisation
   has to be directed to a one-point programme "service to the customer”.
   Administration will have to embrace "quality" as the cornerstone of its service-
   philosophy and cut out all unnecessary waste. It will have to show to the world
   that it can provide high quality, low cost services on a regular basis to its
   customers. And that it would not feel shy of using the required enabling
   technology for the purpose. Only then the purpose of good governance would be
   served. In fact, the call for good governance, for strengthening civil society, and
   for a more humane and transparent government is becoming louder.

7. Out of a very large number of possibilities for Information Technology
   applications for Good Governance (new Public Administration or Public
   Management), some are indicated below:

              Urban Services: Development of an on-line integrated information and
               monitoring system for delivery, accounting, compliance, and payment for
               services like water supply, electricity, telephones, etc. There is a need to
               use web technologies to create electronic networks at all points of contact
               between the citizens and the concerned governmental agencies. Citizens
               in the urban areas should be able to obtain and submit electronically all
               forms for any service or clearance from the government. It should be
               possible for them to pay their bills electronically. Conformance to delivery
               of service would be critical for the concerned agencies to achieve. They
               would be expected to have a measure of their current level of
               conformance to delivery and fulfill the new standards that may be
               established.

              Compliance and Payment of Taxes: It should be possible for a citizen
               to pay taxes and duties of all kinds electronically. Filing of returns on
               account of income tax, sales tax, house tax, etc. need to be facilitated
               through the use of IT. This would reduce, if not eliminate, the need for a
               “personal” contact with the concerned government official and the
               consequential manipulation.




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                            5
     Filing of Complaints: A common citizen feels harassed if required to visit
      a Police Station to lodge a complaint or a FIR (First Information Report)
      against any violation of law. Things would be different if such complaints
      can be lodged electronically.

     Managing Traffic on the Roads: Traffic violations and alleged attendant
      corruption/payoffs represent some of the most glaring forms of bad
      governance. A hand-held electronic card reader-cum-recorder along with
      electronic speed sensors should do the trick of punishing the offenders of
      traffic laws. Electronic synchronisation of traffic signals on main roads
      would be boon for road users. Temper proof electronic fare meters
      installed on taxis and autos would save the citizens of the harassment at
      the hands of unscrupulous operators of these services.

     Development Projects: Application of IT based models for planning and
      execution of development projects at the national, state, district, and
      village levels would help ensure significant achievements with minimum
      time and cost over-runs. Benefit to the rural masses would be tremendous
      through increased production, productivity, and market access.

     Social Security of Employees in the Country: The world‟s largest and
      the oldest Provident Fund Organisation is EPFO (Employees Provident
      Fund Organisation) managed by the Government of India. Following
      statistics are relevant:
      - 3,30,000 organisations covered.
      - 23.5 million members.
      - Rs 7,800 crore PF contribution in 1998-99.
      - Rs. 3,632 crore Pension Fund contribution in 1998-99.
      - Several hundred crore PF arrears to be recovered.
      - Huge arrears owed by managements' of employers on non-
          compliance.

      The Government of India issued some time back a half-page
      advertisement in leading dailies captioned “Reinventing EPFO”. The
      motivation for the same came from the internally felt-need for providing
      adequate “service to the customers” and the compelling external
      environment of meeting its mandated goals and objectives. The result is
      an ambitious time-bound organization-wide IT Reform.

      EPFO has set up a Multi Disciplinary Task Force for “conceptualizing and
      putting in place a comprehensive organization-wide Information
      Technology Reform agenda that would create a countrywide integrated
      information backbone”. The objectives are:

     To improve client service in order to reduce turn around time in claim
      settlement to 2-3 days.

     To qualitatively improve the reach and effectiveness of the compliancs
      programme.

     To qualitatively improve the delivery of the pension programme.




e-Governance for Smart Governance                                       6
          To retool the bookkeeping and reconciliation of accounts and the
           management of money flows so that the accounting function can
           effectively support the above programmes.

          Managing Imports and Exports Cargo: In the case of one of the
           largest economic activities of the Indian Economy, Imports and Exports,
           five entities, namely Ports (or airports), Shipping Lines (or airlines),
           Customs, Container Stations, and Importers (and exporters) are involved
           in the process. Though the Customs work at the Port is "computerised",
           there are long queues for entry of shipping bills into the computer before
           an exporter gets permission to 'cart' his cargo into the Container Station.
           Once in the Container Station, similar details are entered by the Container
           Freight Station in its computer. Employees unions, 'agents', and customs
           staff are 'happy' with the present situation with long queues and people
           seeking favours of kind or another. It is for every one to see as to what
           happens behind the scenes. An integrated IT reform would ensure that the
           exporter transmits his shipping bill electronically from his office before his
           container leaves his factory. The computer at both, the customs and the
           container station, would thus have all the details before the container
           arrives there. As soon as the cargo arrives at the gate, the terminal
           operator at the gate enters only the container number to verify the details
           and grant permission to cart the cargo into the container station. This
           process would take a few seconds against many minutes (at times an hour
           or so) taken at present. But then there would be no 'direct contact'
           between the exporter and the concerned 'staff'. The efficiency through this
           would, perhaps, increase a few hundred times. We are not sure as to what
           would happen to some of the parameters, like corruption, transparency,
           etc. of 'good (or bad) governance'!

8. These are but a few examples of infinite possibilities for the government to
   become "citizen-friendly" using IT as enabling technology. Through innovative
   design of IT systems, it would be possible for a consumer to pay his bills for
   consumption of water, electricity, or for paying house tax, or making a railway or
   an airline reservation while sitting at home or by visiting a kiosk. Prevention of
   frauds, cheating, and other malpractice can be ensured through design of the
   system itself. Despite extensive use of computers in many governmental
   organisations, a wide gap exists between the information the users get and what
   they really need in terms of achieving their key result areas. The users are often
   handicapped due to poor quality data, poor both in terms of reliability and
   timeliness and therefore, unusable for decision making purposes. Unusable for
   providing user-friendly services.


9. It is possible to use IT to ensure transparency and complete objectivity in
   appointment, posting and transfer of employees. Large scale appointments for
   skill oriented jobs can be fully automated. In spite of availability of transfer
   guidelines issued by a department from time to time, there is ample scope for
   using 'discretion' or 'judgement' for favouring any applicant. It is possible
   through development of a computerised system to 'generate' a priority list for
   transfers on the basis of a 'weighted' score computed as per the transfer
   guidelines. The system can identify applicants who are eligible for transfer and
   then put them in order of priority through weighted score. Though complete
   transparency and strict objectivity can be ensured by the computerised system




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                          7
   by 'numerating' the weights and the scores in the transfer guidelines, there
   would be no scope for 'compassion' or 'other considerations'. But then there
   would be need for framing the guidelines 'dispassionately' and frequent change in
   these guidelines would not be permitted. However, to begin with, the
   computerised system may be used to reduce the 'domain of discretion' of the
   decision-maker. It can be extended to a foolproof and fully 'objective' system in
   the second stage.

10. The problem of unauthorised construction in a city like Delhi has crossed
    menacing proportions. In order to solve this problem, a fully computerised
    system can be developed to monitor the status of every single property in the
    city. In fact the database for the purpose can link it to the water supply,
    electricity connection, and property tax systems.

11. There are a large number of areas representing interface between IT and
   Governance. Highly professional systems for communication, information, and
   control can be successfully designed and implemented for benefit of the society.
   Some of them may be in areas like:

       Integration of passport, driving licence, ration card, income tax identification,
        voter identification, etc. into an electronic (SMART) card that can serve the
        purpose of being a “citizen card”.

       Registration of vehicles.

       Monitoring of traffic violations through SMART CARD.

       Public distribution system.

       Immigration information and monitoring.

       Management of public health.

       Water and power supply.

       Property taxes.

       Monitoring of primary education.

12. Government Process Redesigning to succeed requires a paradigm shift. A radical
    change in the way we think – about our products, our services, our customers,
    organisation structures, about the way we manage. In other words, a change of
    mindset is needed. But it needs a lot of training to convince that the mind needs
    a change. Government has to learn, rise to the occasion, change, and be
    receptive to change. It has to identify and drop decades-old operational practices
    and create stunning pictures to demonstrate how government can truly work
    well.

   For decades, government officials followed the dogmas of the quiet past in doing
   government‟s work. Legal mandates or internal tradition built a morass of
   process that did little to serve the citizen. Government officials, seemingly
   trapped in labyrinth of outmoded ways of doing business, simply asked for more
   money and people (budget allocation and additional manpower) to keep




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                          8
   operations float. There was little, if any, incentive to rethink how government
   conducted its business. The result was an escalation of expenditure for services
   delivered at minimal and often declining performance levels.

   Today, our resources are no longer unlimited and government performance no
   longer can be a hit or miss proposition. In the present scenario the government
   must operate with dwindling resources and contend with a public frustrated with
   its efforts. Government must find a new way to work – it must reengineer for
   results. It has to take a very hard step of examining its mission and how, on a
   day-to-day basis, it can deliver on that mission from the perspective of its
   customers. It has to fundamentally change how to do its business so that it is
   responsive and accountable to customers and other stakeholders. It has to create
   IT enabled “super counters” in its departments and eliminate the endless maze
   citizens have to negotiate in going from door to door, floor to floor, to obtain
   services. Time for services has to be cut from months and weeks to days and
   hours. It has to change its structure, service delivery, and technology base to
   strengthen quality through vital performance measure. There has to be a culture
   committed to quality, excellence, and continuous improvement in governmental
   working.

13. Training in IT for Good Governance: There is a need for imparting, high
    quality professional level, training for electronic governance. The training has to
    be imparted to the working government officials. In addition to series of short-
    term, awareness and skill oriented courses, a programme on e-governance at the
    master's level of 12 months duration on a full-time basis would be required for
    government officials. The focus should be on IT applications in management of
    public systems. Special emphasis may be laid on government process redesign
    and identification of enabling technologies. All this would need the necessary
    infrastructure in the form of state-of-the-art computer centre, highly competent
    faculty, innovative course design, and high quality courseware. All this can be
    achieved through creation of a “Centre for Excellence in E-Governance”. If
    necessary, the programme may be organized through collaboration with some
    reputed international level institute in this area.

   It has been observed during training programmes, many government executives
   state that concepts like JIT (Just in Time) will work in Japan but not in India. We
   do not perhaps have that kind of work discipline. Others say that concepts like
   BPR (Business Process Reengineering), MRP II (Manufacturing Resource
   Planning), etc. may work in the West but not in India because the concept of
   „integration‟ is not internalised in us.

   What they are unable to answer very often is “What will work here or what is the
   Indian Paradigm”. It is difficult to answer this question because the Indian
   Paradigm has to be crafted out of a conglomeration of centuries old procedures
   and systems, “seasoned and experienced” people, self-defined concepts and
   theories, obsolete computers, and sky-high aspirations and longings.

14.Agenda for IT enabled Governance: There is an urgent need to train and
   empower the government officials with IT tools of computers and
   telecommunications. Investment on IT products and services has to be treated
   not as expense or cost saving, but investment for future growth. It is an
   investment in the vision for future. It should provide open access to citizens with
   data owned by public as much as by the government. The shift has to be:




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                        9
              From                                  To

Unwieldy paper files with torn covers,   Computer based files
frayed corners and with pins sticking
out

Hierarchical authority                   Networked power

Wielding power through hiding            Empowerment through
information                              sharing information

Expenditure orientation                  Performance orientation

Individualistic                          Organisational

Compliance/Inspection orientation        Achievement orientation

Batch processing                         On-line processing

Delayed access                           Instant access

Delayed response                         Prompt response

Repeated manual data entry               EDI

More time for routine repetitive work    More time for creative work

Fear of unknown                          IT savvy

Status quo                               Continuous improvement




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                              10
   Public Private Partnership for e-Government


                                                                J Satyanarayana IAS
                                        CEO, National Institute for Smart Government,
                                                                           Hyderabad,
                                                                                India



[ABSTRACT : e-Government is a complex, multi-functional process that has the
promise of transforming government. However, governments do not have the
required financial, managerial and technological resources to implement e-
government in a sustainable manner. There are complementarities between the
public and private sectors in the skillsets and resources required for success in e-
government. PPP is a model that exploits this fit. This paper discusses the different
PPP models, the conditions necessary for its success and a few case studies.]
(KEY WORDS – e-Government; PPP; Accountability; BOO; BOOT; JV; Political
will; Monopoly)

       e-Government is the process of transformation of the relationships of the
government with its constituents – citizens, businesses and employees – using the
tools of ICT (Information & Communications Technology) to bring about enhanced
access, transparency, accountability and efficiency in delivery of government
information and services. Implementation of e-government raises several
organizational, process-related and technological issues. It is a complex issue that
needs multi-dimensional approach.

        New technologies demand new types of implementation models. Adopting
conventional procurement methods would not take us far on the path of e-
government. In the conventional approach, the project ownership lies with the public
sector itself along with the responsibility for funding it and bearing the entire risk.
Can we not think of newer models that enable sharing of funding responsibility and
risk ? In this paper, we discuss the Public Private Partnership or PPP model for e-
government, which is being increasingly tried out in different parts of the world.

        The concept of PPP has been brought into operation over a decade ago,
primarily in relation to the construction and operation of public infrastructure
projects like bridges, airports, highways, hospitals etc. PPP is a reform that is a
„generation next‟ to privatization. Privatization is the process of involving the private
sector in the ownership and management of ongoing and existing projects and
businesses of the public sector. In PPP, the private sector partner is inducted into a
project right from the stage of initiation to completion and management. The word
„PPP‟ is used interchangeably with PFI or Public Finance Initiative – a concept in use
in the UK. Though PPP has been in vogue for over a decade, not much research has
taken place in this area- and very little in its relation to e-government. The
experience has also not been extraordinary. In UK, as of end of 2002, 512 PFI deals
have been signed, of which 208 are in local governments. PFI scheme in education
and health have caused considerable controversy, while PFI IT projects have proved
practically difficult to get right.




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                          11
  2. Why PPP for e-Government ?

      What could be the provocation for governments to start looking at PPP
more seriously now in relation to their e-government plans? The reasons could be
many and different for different governments.

(a) Combining accountability with efficiency: The most common belief is that
PPP for e-government would combine the accountability and domain expertise of
the public sector with the efficiency,        cost-effectiveness and customer-centric
approach      of the private sector.     Conceptually this is sound.       Despite the
shortcomings like legacy mindset, bureaucracy, red tape and lack of responsiveness
to citizen needs, the public sector is still the largest repository of domain expertise
in addition to possessing the monopoly of exercising statutory powers. The public
sector, however is not adept at absorption of new technologies. The private sector
on the other hand, is reputed to be efficient           and cost-effective and    more
importantly, agile enough to absorb and apply new technologies in innovative ways.
Therefore it is possible to create a win-win situation combining the core strengths of
the public and private sectors to fulfill the objectives of e-government i.e. delivery
of efficient online services.

(b) Complexity and size of e-government: All said and done, e-government is a
difficult game. It involves application of complex ICT technologies and management
practices to equally complex business processes of the government over a sustained
period. This is complexity compounded ! The situation appears more intractable if
we visualize the government to be a complicated amalgamation of heterogeneous
agencies with dynamically changing business processes, cross-communications and
dependencies.       It is a tall order to expect the government organization to
accomplish the task of e-government in any meaningful timeframe. An assessment
of the magnitude of effort involved in e-government in India, puts it at over
1,25,000 man years! Theoretically, the private sector is supposed to be able to
raise „unlimited‟ resources provided there is economic sense in the e-government
exercise.    There is thus a reasonably good match between the need of the
government and the resource of the private sector.

(c) Pace of implementation: ICTs change fast. This applies to all its segments –
hardware, software and networks.          Newer versions and releases of software
operating systems, database servers, application servers, and security software are
released at regular intervals by the vendors to maintain and capture market share.
Networks and devices are no exception. As is often said „the only thing that is
constant is change‟! The typical life cycle of a large e-government initiative is 18 to
24 months from initiation to completion. Lot of water would have flown under the
bridge during this period, in terms of technological advances. In this fast-changing
technology scenario, it is impractical to plan for implementing projects one after the
other.     By the time a second batch of projects is finished, they would be
incompatible or out of sync with the fist. We need to adopt a „carpet-bombing‟
approach after we have designed appropriate architectures and readied the people.
It is not possible to attain and maintain such a high pace in implementing e-
government, if the government attempts the task by itself. This is a compelling
reason to join hands with the private sector.

(d) Resources: The combined effect of the huge size of e-government effort and
the great speed of implementation is that investments required in e-government
sector are very large over a continuous period of 5 years. It is estimated that India




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                        12
needs $ 8 billion of investment in e-government sector over a 3-5 years period -
excluding the cost of communication and access infrastructure. This is sixteen times
higher than the current annual IT spend of about half- a-billion in the government
sector. Add to this the stupendous requirements in the managerial and human
resource fronts. No government can be equal to this task. Tapping the „unlimited‟
financial, managerial and manpower resources of the private sector is a viable
alternative in this regard. Structuring appropriate public-private partnerships that
complement and supplement each other in functional, technological and resource
areas is the key.

(e) Weathering the storm: e-government is an evolutionary process that spreads
over at least 2 decades before its impact is felt in a widespread manner. Example
is Singapore. This process typically involves the following phases:

   1. Implementation of an innovative e-government project in one or two
      agencies.
   2. Taking up of a few pilot projects in different sectors on stand-alone basis.
   3. Creation of core information infrastructure.
   4. Design of overall business and Technology architectures.
   5. Creation of institutions that focus on e-government .
   6. Multiple large-scale e-government projects.

         Out of the above, the stage 3 through 6 require political will, vision and
leadership, coupled with technology leadership and managerial excellence on a
continuous basis. Major programs and initiatives can receive a setback in the event
of a disruption or discontinuity in any of the above stages. Political risk is the most
critical. One way of hedging the risk is to create stakes outside the system of
governance that exert pressures at appropriate times, to continue the ongoing e-
government initiatives. PPP is an effective way of creating such stakes that provide
continuity during political and administrative transitions. The contractual rights and
obligations created through PPP agreements, most often, survive the political
upheavals.

3. Necessary but not sufficient !

        We have argued out the case         for private sector involvement      in e-
government – on the grounds of efficiency, competence, resource and continuity that
it can bring to bear. Why is it then, that we have not so far seen the private sector
making a beeline for partnering governments significantly anywhere in the world –
not even in the hey days of the dotcom era? The answer is simple. All the above
circumstances – a to e – are necessary but not sufficient to enthuse the private
sector. The entrepreneurs are not sitting out there with tons of money and
resources to venture into the risk-prone area called e-government unless they also
see a set of other conditions that are conducive to success, prevailing in the
country or state.      Let us look at those conditions, which, together with the
necessary circumstances mentioned at (a) to (e) above, make a set of conditions
sufficient to attract investments from and, more so, involvement of the private
sector in the saga of e-government.

       First and the foremost circumstance that the entrepreneurs look for is the
        existence of a strong political will to implement e-government. This
        will should be manifest in the form of an explicitly stated vision for e-
        government and a leadership     that keeps asserting “we can do IT”. The




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                        13
    leadership has got to exhibit a spirit or commitment that is undaunted by
    criticism, opposition and resistance at every stage and an unflinching faith
    that „e-government is the right answer‟ - even in the face of initial failures.
    The role of political leadership in this context is more crucial in developing
    countries where e-government has to compete with more pressing demands
    from development and welfare sectors.
   The emergence of             a few successful e-government             projects
    implemented purely in the public sector is another factor favored             by
    entrepreneurs.     These are required to mould the political         and public
    perception on the potential of e-government and create hope. Private sector
    cannot be expected to be the „opening batsman‟ in this filed!
   Mere political leadership, not backed up by administrative grit and
    determination would not create enthusiasm among the private sector. We
    need champions of e-government among the top echelons of the civil
    service. These champions have to carry the sermon of e-government and
    evangelize it across various government agencies.
   Transparency and fair play in award of the contracts form the next set of
    prerequisites that the private sector entrepreneurs look for, before venturing
    their resources into e-government.           The tender procedures of the
    government are cumbersome and those for e-government could be more
    elaborate and cumbersome.          It is an extremely difficult - but possible -
    task to demonstrate the transparency in e-government decision-making.
    However, when accomplished over a few projects, this task of demonstrating
    the transparency creates trust, especially among the major technology
    players. It would create the abiding confidence that the resources sunk
    into bidding for e-government projects would not be lost. And if lost, it
    would be in favor of a competitor who has made a better value proposition.
    Transparency       promotes healthy competition.         And      coupled with
    consistency, it promotes the spirit of partnership.
   Entrepreneurship is about risk-taking – risk in anticipation of reward. A
    partnership in e-government, therefore, presupposes that the risk is also to
    be shared by the partners – the government and the private entrepreneur.
    Civil servants – and political executives even - are known to be averse to
    risk. The environment is conducive to the argument „heads I win-tails you
    lose‟ against the       private sector partner.     One of the pre-requisite
    characteristics that an entrepreneur would, therefore, like to see is the
    propensity to take risk among political and administrative echelons. A few
    innovative and potentially risky projects implemented successfully against
    all odds, create a fertile ground for generating a conviction among intending
    entrepreneurs and IT companies to gravitate towards partnering e-
    government. The grooming of a batch of Chief Information Officers who
    chant the mantra of e-government is a good augury in this context.
   While a set of sporadic and isolated e-government projects sprinkled across
    several sectors would be adequate to enthuse the private sector, attempts
    to draw up comprehensive architectures and the „big picture‟ of e-
    government would undoubtedly make them commit to the cause. e-
    government architectures provide a stable platform for the PPP exercise to
    go on for sustained periods. The exercise of developing more mature and
    complete architecture is in itself a good ground for long-term public-private
    partnerships in areas of technology, business process reform and human
    resources development.
   At the end of the day, business and industry tend to move to areas that
    have current or future market potential. It is far-fetched to imagine




e-Governance for Smart Governance                                         14
        that ICT industry would choose the PPP route to e-government unless it
        makes economic sense. Volume and value of transactions and sustainability
        of the business operations are key things here. Creation of excellent e-
        government solutions is only a part of the job done. More important is to
        create and maintain markets for them. The value that customers see in an
        e-service is the foundation for a long-term business opportunity. This
        requires a real hard-selling effort in the initial, post-launch period of every e-
        government project. Such an effort is to be led by the government to be
        carried forward by the private partner.

  5.4. PPP for What ?

         PPP model of implementation is more suitable to particular areas of e-
government and not to all. The criteria for PPP include long-term nature of demand
for a service, profitability and amenability to structuring a commercial framework
and business model for PPP. The following areas are recommended for PPP. The list
is illustrative, not exhaustive.

Information Infrastructure Projects.

       e-government architecture
       Data centers
       Communication backbone
       Call Center
       e-government gateway
       e-payment gateway

Government-to-Citizen Projects

       Citizen service portals
       Integrated service centers
       Agency service centers.
       Networks of Kiosks.

Government-to-Business Projects

       e-procurement
       G2B portal.

     While contemplating e-government initiatives in the above areas, it is a good
practice to evaluate whether it is a fit case for PPP and if so, what form of PPP is best
suited (as discussed below).

 5. Forms of PPP


       PPP can be of different forms, depending on the shares of government and
the private sector in the investment, control as also on the strategic nature and
commercial viability of the project/initiative. Let us see these different models of
PPP.

5.1. JV Model:      In this model, an SPV (Special Purpose Vehicle) is formed to
undertake the e-government project and /or to provide e-services. The joint venture




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                           15
can be led by the government or by the private partner depending upon the strategic
nature and sensitivity of the domain.

JV model is the preferred option for typically projects involving

       (a) delivery of services, which are basic and permanent in nature
       (b) setting up of infrastructure with steady returns envisaged in long term
       (c)      handling of sensitive data and       information relating to citizens,
       businesses and government.
       (d) close coordination with and cooperation from a host of government
           agencies.

   The extent of government share varies from 51% to 11% . For instance, it could
   be:
        51% in category (a) with government retaining management control;
        49% in category (b) with private partner in control;
        26% in category (c) with government representative being present on the
         Board to ensure that the priorities of the government/citizen are taken
         care of ;
        11% in category (d) to provide the stamp of the government to lend
         credibility to the JV in its interactions with government agencies.

The following guidelines are useful while structuring a JV for e-government.

      i.     The share of the government in the equity of the JV need not always be
             in cash. It can be in the form of tangible assets like land, building and
             equipment or in the form of intangible assets like the right to access
             government information and databases for providing e-services.

     ii.     The selection of a partner is usually done through an open competitive
             process.    The pre-qualification criteria are required to be quite stiff
             considering the long-term or near-permanent nature of the partnership.
             Companies with a long standing (at least 10 years), high turnover during
             the preceding 3 years (in relation to the expected annual turnover of the
             JV) handsome profitability (exceeding 15%) and good track record in the
             particular area of e-government to be handled by the JV.

           “ In the short-term term the most viable (and perhaps desired) e-
             government partners may be multinational companies that have proven
             experience and capacities to deliver. However, long-term development of
             local ICT companies can, and often should be part of e-government
             planning.   One effective strategy might be to pair an experienced
             multinational company with a suitable local company in the development
             and delivery of e-government applications. This can promote the transfer
             of technology and skills to local industry which at the same time ensuring
             that outsourcing producing results.”[1]

    iii.     It is strongly recommended that, despite the stringent criteria adopted for
             selection of the partner, a JV should not be formed straightway. The bid
             documents should hold out formation of JV as an option to be exercised
             after the selected partner has established its credentials by executing a
             pilot and running it successfully for a period of 6 months. This would
             serve three purposes. Firstly, it would establish the viability or otherwise




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                          16
                 of the e-government project. Secondly, it would enable the government to
                 make an accurate assessment of the technical, organizational and
                 managerial capabilities of the partner.    Thirdly, it would enable the
                 partners to estimate the business model more accurately (than at the RFP
                 stage) through an analysis of the transaction data and trends recorded
                 during the pilot phase.

           iv.   It is necessary to draw up the RFP and the bid evaluation criteria as
                 clearly as possible to enhance the transparency of the selection process.
                 Looking around for successful implementations elsewhere could be one
                 good way.

           v.       The agreements, both at the pilot stage and the JV stage, should be
                 drafted with considerable care engaging the best legal experts, as these
                 documents regulate the partnership over a long period.

5.2. BOO Model : Build-own-operate Model

            In this model, the selected partner designs, develops and implements the
        project, most often, entirely at its cost and operates the system for a pre-
        specified period. The options of the partners are kept open till the end of the
        period – also known as the concession period. The revenue model of the project
        is either based on transaction charges (paid by the citizen or the government) or
        on EQI/EMI (Equated Quarterly Installment/Equated Monthly Installment) paid
        by the government to the operator/service provider. The revenue model could
        also be a combination of a fixed EQI/EMI plus transaction charges.

            The BOO model is suitable for projects that involve setting up physical
        infrastructure like service center(s) for delivering services to the citizens. Good
        examples are e-government projects relating to issue of driving licenses,
        registration of vehicles, and provision of integrated services to citizens across the
        counter. The important aspects in drafting the RFP (Request for Proposal) for a
        BOO Project are

           (a) to    determine the period of concession during which the partner
           (Concessionaire) is authorized to deliver the services and
           (b) the bid parameters dealing with the transaction charges and / or EQI/EMI
           to be quoted by the competitive bidders.
        BOO model is usually applied to e-government projects that adopt time-tested
        technologies and have a fairly reliable revenue model.


     5.3. BOOT -Build-own-operate-and-Transfer-model

             This is almost identical to the BOO model except that the government
     exercises the option to get the ownership of the assets created by the partner at the
     end of the project. The transfer cost is usually a small percentage – 5 to 10 % - of
     the initial capital cost of the project. The BOOT model is adopted where the
     technology is time-tested and the ICT assets are expected to outlast the concession
     period.




         e-Governance for Smart Governance                                         17
  4. ASP Model – Application Service Provider model


       The ASP model is an example of PPP where the partnership is quite tenuous.
In this model, the government contracts to avail the services of the partner for
delivery of services as per mutually agreed service levels and commercial terms.
The revenue model is typically transaction-based. The ASP model is suitable to e-
government initiatives that involve

       a) A requirement to launch the services in a short time frame.
       b) The technology is not complex and widely accepted and practiced in the
          private sector
       c) The nature of information is not so critical to governance.

Examples of ASP model are - design and hosting of websites that provide fairly static
information to the citizens, provision of simple services like downloading/filing of
forms and provision of MIS services in the G2G arena to the government agencies.
The service provider is usually not precluded from using its ICT infrastructure to
serve other government agencies or private agencies. Most often the ASP model is
useful to leverage the existing ICT infrastructure and management skills already
established by service providers. This creates a win-win situation by enabling the
optimum utilization of ICT by leveraging the infrastructure already set up in the
private sector and thereby reducing the transaction cost to the government/citizen.
The ASP model also saves the government agencies of the hassles of designing
complex technology models.

5.5. Facilities’ Management: FM

       FM is an arrangement whereby the responsibility of maintaining and/or
managing the ongoing e-government projects/assets is outsourced to a private
company on a fixed cost per period. Legally, there is no partnership between the
government and private sector in an FM model. However the involvement of the
private sector could be substantial in this arrangement. Hence FM has been grouped
under PPP. As mentioned, FM is ideal for ongoing, operational e-government
projects especially those involving maintenance of sites in geographically distributed
locations. The scope of the FM arrangement may include not only the typical annual
maintenance of assets but also supply of consumables and spares and also front-
ending the government agency to provide services to the citizens. The following are
the benefits of FM:

          a) FM frees the key personnel of the organization from the hassles of
             day-to-day technical problems and enables them to focus on their core
             business strengths.
          b) FM results in cost savings to the tune of 15 to 20% in maintenance by
             virtue of specialization of the partner in that area.
          c) FM helps maintain/deliver high quality services to the citizens due to
             enforcement of the SLA (Service Level Agreement) between the
             „partners‟.




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                       18
  6. Issues in PPP for e-government.

All is not well in PPP for e-government. The partnerships tend to get into problems
every now and then. Let us examine the issues that come up and ways to ensure
that they do not threaten PPP relationships.

      6.1. Lack of congruence in objectives:       PPP is about the partnership in
      realizing shared objectives. The various models in sharing the investment
      and controls are only organizational mechanisms. The success of PPP
      depends on the degree to which the public and private sector partners align
      themselves along these objectives. Failure to realize this certainly leads to
      failure of the venture.     „The development of a shared vision for the
      partnership between the two parties takes time and both must commit to
      developing an understanding of each other’s objective and be sympathetic
      where these do not necessarily match their own‟ says an official spokesman
      of UK government, which pioneered the PFI concept. The objective of
      providing convenient, high quality e-service may often conflict with the
      objective of making the initiative a commercially sound and viable
      proposition. Clarity on objectives has to be achieved by both the parties at
      the outset.

      6.2. Risk and Control: Sharing of risk and control is another slippery
      area. Most often, governments attempt to transfer the risk to the partner
      without passing on the related controls to the partner quoting “public interest”
      as the reason. This results in one partner calling the shots and expecting the
      other partner to play the game! An example is setting up a portal with
      substantial private investment with the government trying to prescribe and
      control what services are to be offered and at what transaction cost.
      Operational controls should be passed on to the private partner in proportion
      to the risk transferred. This promotes adoption of innovative approaches
      rather than inhibiting them.

      6.3. Clash of cultures: The organizational cultures of the private and
      public sector differ widely in all parts of the world. This is bound to result in
      conflicting situations, in as much as e-government involves substantial
      process reform needing interaction between the partner company and the
      government agency or agencies in charge of the „domain‟. The agencies
      look at the surveys, interviews and studies conducted by the consultants of
      partner company as interference and disturbance from their „normal duties‟.
      The private partners tend to look at            the government employees as
      bureaucrats with antiquated ideas that have outlived their time. Both the
      views are substantially wrong. It is necessary to create a joint control and
      review mechanism that creates mutual trust and confidence, especially during
      the initial period of the project.

      6.4. Monopoly: Several of the e-initiatives depend, for their viability, on
      the principles of aggregation of demand and economy of scale. Very often
      there is space for only one partner in areas like e-procurement, country or
      state portal, data center, gateway and the like. This is likely to result in a
      situation of monopoly.- the monopoly of the state being replaced with the
      monopoly of the private partner and more importantly, monopoly of a
      particular technology. While a monopoly appears to be inevitable, at least in




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                        19
      the initial periods of e-government growth, the following methodology is
      recommended to mitigate its impact.

             The operational monopoly          can be handled by         defining the
      commercial features of the contact unambiguously while notifying the project
      to an open bid. The service levels and the formula for determination of the
      transaction/ service charges have to be spelt out in the RFP.               The
      service/transaction charges could be a combination of a fixed base plus viable
      cost. The following factors are to be considered in arriving at the formula :

                    -      Projected customer base and transaction volume
                    -      Length of the concession period
                    -      Fee structure of the existing services
                    -      Price elasticity of the new services
                    -      Capacity for growth.

      The model should provide for (a) revision of the charges, especially
      downward revision, as it often happens with advance in the ICT sector (b) a
      slab system where the transaction charge gets smaller with the increase in
      volume.

             The technology monopoly can be mitigated by prescribing open
      standards in conformity with the technology architecture approved by the
      government and ensuring that there is scope for developing interfaces with
      other systems that may be developed concurrently or in future.

 Once the agency attains clarity and definiteness on the above issues and factors
 them into the business model of the RFP and a transparent process adopted, one
 need not worry about a monopoly situation in e-government.


 7. Case studies in PPP

       PPP for e-government is relatively a new concept. There are not many major
success stories as yet. The following cases, are a few examples of PPP

7.1 RCB Singapore: The Registry of Companies and Businesses, Singapore
partnered with four private companies, Crimson Logic, Dunn & Bradstreet, Singtel
yellow pages and DP Information Network ,with a view to provide value-added online
information services on companies registered in Singapore. The following are the
salient features:

a) RCB owns all the data. The partners have been permitted to replicate the RCB
   database and sell the information with value-addition through transforming the
   data into information in the forms required by different clients.
b) The revenue model rests on a revenue-sharing mechanism out of the service
   charges collected from the end users.
c) The pricing of services is jointly decided by RCB and the partner, based on the
   following general principles:
        online services should be cheaper than conventional over-the-counter
           services.
        The charges for new services are calculated on a nominative basis and
           notified.




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                      20
d) RCB entered into partnership with 4 companies to avoid a monopoly situation
   (pointed out in earlier section ).

7.2 Singapore Land Authority (SLA):

       SLA offers online services that provide information on property ownership,
land tenure, land area, last transacted price, survey plans etc. SLA attempted at PPP
with the following salient features:

           a. The selection of the partner was through an open tender.
           b. There would be a sole private partner, so as to exploit the economies
              of scale in providing land information.
           c. SLA owns the application, having paid for its development.
           d. The partnership works on a revenue-sharing model.

7.3 Road Transport Authority, Andhra Pradesh, India:-

        The RTA is responsible to issue learning licenses & drivers licenses,
registration of vehicles and collection of road taxes and other transport related
services.    The services are provided at 37 service centers of RTA where the
processes were entirely manual. The agency decided to provide computerized
services using PPP model, in 2000. The partnership went through a turbulent period
but finally got stabilized by 2002 and is running smoothly at present. A classic BOOT
model was adopted in this case.

  8. Summary

         PPP can be a powerful instrument in the implementation of the e-government
if (a) there is a PPP policy laid down by the state (b) there is a shared vision between
the government and the partner(s) (c) the right functional areas are chosen at first
to experiment PPP and (d) appropriate financial models are crafted for governing the
partnerships.

Reference

1. „Roadmap for e-Government in the Developing World – 10 Questions e-
Government leaders should ask themselves‟; Working Group on e-Government in the
Developing World, Pacific Council on International Policy, April 2002




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                         21
         An Investigation of the Methodologies of
             Business Process Reengineering

                                       Mihail Stoica, Nimit Chawat, Namchul Shin
   Information Systems Department School of Computer Science and Information Systems
                                                                         Pace University
                                                                     New York, NY 10038




Abstract: Companies continue to reexamine and fundamentally change the way they
do business. Intense competitive pressures and a sluggish economy provide the
motivation for continued efforts to "deliver more with less." Properly executed,
reengineering can be an effective tool for organizations striving to operate as effectively
and efficiently as possible. This study examines various methodologies of business
process reengineering (BPR) and the reasons for failure of BPR efforts. Our examination
of BPR research shows that companies need a BPR methodology that takes a holistic
and systematic approach.

Keywords: business process reengineering, business process improvement, business
process reengineering methodology, holistic approach

        1. Introduction

   Business Process reengineering (BPR) is the redesign of business processes and the
   associated systems and organizational structures to achieve a dramatic
   improvement in business performance. BPR is not downsizing, restructuring,
   reorganization, automation, or new technology. It is the examination and change of
   five basic business components: strategy, process, technology, organization, and
   culture.
   BPR, as a term and as a practice, has a short but a complicated history.
   Reengineering became very popular in the early 1990s. However, the methodology
   and approach were not fully understood or appreciated. Some improvement projects
   given the title "BPR" were poorly planned and executed, and the term came to be
   viewed by many in negative terms. Employees and organizations cringed at the
   thought of another "BPR" experience. Towards the end of the 1990s and after
   2000, the term itself is used less often, or is changed so that the projects are not
   associated with the "BPR" of the past.
   Despite abuses of the practice and the negative associations of the name, the
   practice of redesigning business processes along with associated technologies and
   organizational structures is more popular today than ever.   Companies      continue
   to     reexamine       and fundamentally change the way they do business. Intense
   competitive pressures and a sluggish economy provide the motivation for continued
   efforts to "deliver more with less." Properly executed, reengineering can be an




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                            22
effective tool for organizations striving to operate as effectively and efficiently as
possible.

2. Background


The continuing demand for business process improvements has resulted in a
proliferation of consultants, methodologies, techniques, and tools for conducting
BPR projects (Kettinger, Teng, and Guha 1997). In fact, the market is flooded with
methodologies for BPR. The situation is further complicated by the fact that business
processes are different in different industries, and methodologies must be tailored
to the processes of each specific industry.
A report by Prosci (2003) states that good reengineering projects design and
implement solutions that are customer focused, capitalize on best practices and
learning from others, are designed for the future, and produce significant bottom-
line improvements for the business.
The above guidelines provide a basic framework for judging the effectiveness of a BPR
project. The methodology selected for each specific project impacts
the size of the improvement and how fast the improvement will be realized.

The initial period of BPR was characterized by a chaotic "trial and error" approach
and a lack of universally accepted methods. A study done by Kettinger et al.
(1997) places these methodologies, techniques and tools (MTTs) into a classification
framework that permits project planners to assess the "fit" between their unique
organizational problems and available MTTs. Methodologies are considered the
highest level of abstraction for conceptualizing problem solving methods. At the
next level of abstraction, a technique is commonly understood to be a procedure or
a set of specific steps for accomplishing a desired outcome. At the lowest, most
concrete level is the tool, which typically refers to instruments or certain tangible
aids in performing a task. In the Kettinger et al.'s study (1997), a tool is defined as
a computer software package to support one or more techniques.

A typical methodology developed by Gateway, a BPR consulting firm, helps
illustrate three levels of abstraction of MTTs for BPR. The Gateway
methodology consists of six stages: preparation, identification, vision, technical
design, social design, and transformation. Within each stage, there are many
specific activities. As a part of the vision stage, for instance, one of the activities is
to "identify value-adding activities" To accomplish this effectively, a technique
called activity-based costing (Tunney and Reeve 1992) can be used in conjunction
with a software tool called Easy ABC-Plus developed by Cost Technology Inc.

Kettinger et al. (1997) use eleven categories of BPR techniques, which were
identified by the researchers through an iterative process of literature research,
classification and Q-sort. These categories can be used as a "primary index" for
understanding and learning reengineering techniques. Primary indexes, in turn, are
subdivided into "secondary indexes." For example, the "creative thinking" category
contains techniques such as brainstorming, nominal group technique, out-of-the-box
thinking and force field analysis, all of which encourage unrestrained development of
ideas aimed at identifying alternatives in problem formulation and solving. Many
techniques belong to a single category, while others are assigned to more than one
category. These categories and typical techniques are listed below:



•   Project management: budgeting, project scheduling (PERT, CPM, Gantt)




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                           23
•   Problem solving and diagnosis: fishbone diagramming,      Pareto    diagramming,
    cognitive mapping


•   Customer requirement analysis: QFD, benchmarking, focus groups

•   Process     capture   and      modeling:     process flowcharting, IDEF, role
    activity diagramming, speech interaction modeling

•   Process measurement:        activity   based   costing, statistical process control,
    time motion studies

•   Process prototyping and simulation: hierarchical colored       petri    net,   role
    playing, simulation techniques

•   IS systems analysis   and    design:    software reengineering, CASE, JAD/
    RAD

•   Business planning: critical success factors, value chain analysis, core process
    analysis

•   Creative thinking: visioning, out-of-box-thinking, affinity diagramming, the
    Delphi method

•   Organizational analysis and design: employee and team attitude opinion
    assessment, job design, team building techniques

•   Change management: search conferences, assumption surfacing, persuasion
    techniques




Techniques for project management, problem solving and diagnosis are essential
for management and basic problem analysis of all projects, regardless of their
particular characteristics.


Fitzgerald and Murphy (1996) state that since BPR is considered by much literature
as automatically good for an organization, there have been few reports of actual
BPR failures. Estimates of failure rates vary: Caron, Jarvenpaa, and Stoddard
(1994) report a 50 % failure rate, while Murphy (1994) reports a failure rate of 70
%. As a result, many companies only begin to consider BPR when they are faced
with a survival-threatening crisis and radical surgery is required. One example is
Rank Xerox, which was forced to reengineer its business processes when their
market share plummeted from 90 percent to 9 percent following the entry of
Japanese competitors into their marketplace (Hammer and Champy 1993).


One of the key issues in BPR is "how" questions. Because of the high failure rate
of BPR projects and the high costs and effort involved, it is important that
companies use a structured approach to reengineering. Andrews and Stalick (1992)
have argued for a systemic approach to BPR, suggesting that "reengineering . . .
should be based upon numbers and facts, not guts and politics." BPR projects
cannot be planned meticulously and organized into precise steps prescribed as
universally applicable in all situations (Caron et al. 1994; Hammer 1990).
Nevertheless, since BPR requires a fundamental reappraisal of business operations,


    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                         24
    a methodology that can act as an anchoring framework to coordinate the complex
    web of BPR activities is essential. It is also important to have clear progress
    guidelines. Many researchers have noted that BPR projects often confuse motion
    with progress and charge about in random directions hoping that any
    recommended changes can be successfully implemented as a matter of course
    (Evans 1993). Caron et al. (1994) state that implementing BPR recommendations
    may require a fundamental change in organizational culture and mind-set, and that
    this cannot be left to chance but must be carefully managed. They also argue that
    transparency in BPR projects is vital and must intensify as the project proceeds.

    3. INVESTIGATION OF BPR METHODOLOGIES




    Valiris and Glykas (1999) state that methodologies exist to solve many frequently
    occurring problems. They consider a problem to be any expression of concern
    about a situation and regard a methodology as a structured set of guidelines (or
    principles) that enable an analyst to derive ways of alleviating this concern.
    According to Valiris and Glykas (1999), the central concerns that BPR
    methodologies try to alleviate stem from differences between business activities
    and organizational strategy, and between current and desired productivity of
    organizational resources.

    They classify existing BPR methodologies into two main categories according to the
    approach they take to BPR: management accounting and information systems
    (Figure 1). They also identify a new trend: methodologies that view BPR from
    an organizational theoretic perspective and concentrate on the understanding
    and analysis of the organization by using principles such as accountabilities and the
    role of individuals in business processes.



    Davenport and Short (1990) prescribe a five-step approach to BPR:




                   Use as an
                  enabler for
Management        automation       IS
Accountants                        developers
              Business     Information
              Process      Technology

                     Tries to
                      create
                      major
                    impact on




        Figure 1: Two Different Approaches to BPR
        (Valiris and Glykas 1999)




        e-Governance for Smart Governance                                      25
Step 1 - Develop a business vision and process objectives: BPR is driven by a
business vision that implies specific business objectives such as cost reduction,
time reduction, output quality improvement, QWL/learning/empowerment.

Step 2 - Identify the processes to be redesigned: Most firms use a high-impact
approach that focuses on the most important processes or those that conflict most
with the business vision. Not many firms use an exhaustive approach that
attempts to identify all the processes within an organization and then prioritize
them in order of redesign urgency.

Step 3 - Understand and measure the existing processes: Avoid the repeating old
mistakes and provide a baseline for future improvements.

Step 4 - Identify IT levers: Awareness of IT capabilities can and should influence
process design.

Step 5 - Design and build a   prototype of the new process: The actual design should
not be viewed as the end      of the BPR process. Rather, it should be viewed as a
prototype, with successive    iterations. Prototypes help produce quick delivery of
results when projects are      implemented, improving performance and customer
satisfaction.

Fitzgerald and Murphy (1996) made use of their practical experience with
systems development methodologies and combined this with specific BPR
methodological guidelines from current literature. The relevance of systems
analysis is confirmed by Earl (1994), who sees it as an essential skill in BPR. As
discussed earlier, many BPR researchers have stated that BPR projects cannot be
planned meticulously in small precise steps. However, Evans (1993) adopts a bridge
metaphor to suggest a broad framework for BPR projects. Evans proposes four
general stages:

Stage 1: To Be: Define where the organization wants to       be and what it requires
         of its business processes as a consequence.
Stage 2: As Is: Define current business processes.
Stage 3: The Plan: Make a plan to accomplish the move from the "as is" stage to the
        "to be" stage.
Stage 4: The Crossing: Implement the plan.
Although Fitzgerald and Murphy (1996) acknowledge the fact that this general
high-level approach has its advantages, they argue that it has weaknesses as well.
One weakness is that it tries to build a vision of the future process before
understanding the current process. This requires a fresh and open mind, but it
must be grounded in a thorough understanding of the operation of the current
process. The term "process" in business process reengineering means differentiating
between the logical activity of what the process does or should do and the physical
manifestation of how the process is accomplished.
Fitzgerald and Murphy (1996) adapt the structured approach to devise their BPR
methodology. The methodology is expressed as a series of phases, each of which
addresses a basic question. These are summarized below:

•   Select the process to be reengineered: "Where are we going to start?"
•   Establish process team: "Who is going to do it?"



    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                       26
•   Understand the current process: "Where do our stakeholders see us now?"
    This   phrase    also   establishes the  current   physical  to   logical
    mapping of the process.
•   Develop a vision of the improved process:
•   "Where do our stakeholders want us to be?" In this phase, the new logical model
    of the process is defined.
•   Identify the actions needed to move to the new process: "What do we need to
    achieve?" Here, the new physical process model is established.
•   Negotiate/execute a plan to accomplish these actions: "How will we achieve it?"


The methodology is expressed from a first-person point of view, reflecting the fact
that culture and mind-set changes are required. These can only come from within
the company itself, not from actions taken by external consultants.


The methodology is based on an iterative approach. At any stage, it is permissible
(and may indeed be desirable) to revert to a previous stage for further
refinement. In practice, processes that work well during later phases often go
through considerable revision and reconsideration in earlier stages.


As in the development of any methodology, Fitzgerald and Murphy (1996) mention
the need to test a new model so it can be verified empirically and validated and
modified as appropriate. In the case of BPR, this poses a problem since a typical
reengineering project can last between one and two years. It has been argued that
BPR efforts cannot be uniformly applied across different cultures but need to be
tailored to the specific contingencies of the situation (Murphy 1994; Caron et al.
1994). For these reasons, Fitzgerald and Murphy (1996) propose an action research
approach described in Figure 2.
•
• According to the report by Prosci (2003), the recommended approach for a
    business process reengineering project includes the following phases:]

•   Project planning and launch: team selection, objective setting, scope
    definition, methodology selection,     schedule    development,   consultant
    selection,     sponsor     negotiations,     change management planning, and
    team preparation

•   Current state assessment and learning from others: high-level process definition,
    benchmarking, customer focus groups, employee focus groups, and technology
    assessment

•   Solution    design:      process    design,     enabling technology architecture,
    organizational design, and job design


•   Business case development: cost/benefit analysis, business case preparation, and
    presentation to key business leaders

•   Solution development: detailed process definition, system requirements writing
    and    system development,      training development, implementation planning,
    operational transition plan, and pilots and trials


•   Implementation: larger-scale pilots and phased implementation, measure-
    --ment systems, and full implementation




     e-Governance for Smart Governance                                      27
•   Continuous improvement: on-going improvement and measurement of new
    processes and systems


                           Select Process to be reengineered



                                Establish Process team


                              Understand Current Process




                           Develop a vision of improved Process


                          Identify actions needed to move to a
                             new process

                           Negotiate/execute plan to accomplish
                                         actions


Figure 2: A Methodology for Business Process Reengineering (Fitzgerald and Murphy
    1996)

When asked about what they would do differently next time, participants in Prosci's
benchmarking research made the following suggestions:

•   Spend more time for planning. Many participants would extend the overall
    interval, if necessary, to ensure that planning is comprehensive. Planning
    activities that should receive more focus include the following:

    -learn about BPR and best practices before starting the project
    -establish clear objectives and scope
    -carefully select a reengineering methodology
    -clarify roles and contributions from managers and team members
    -prepare the team for reengineering

•   Increase team training on reengineering and change management.
•   Carefully select team members to ensure they have the      competencies   to
    ensure     a     successful reengineering project (the best, brightest, most
    respected and well-networked in the organization). Seek team members who
    can be dedicated to the project (more than 80% of their time is devoted to
    the project).

Prosci (2003) found the following startup activities to be of most importance:

•   Secure   executive    management      support     and sponsorship.
•   Communicate the need for change throughout the organization.
•   Define the scope and boundaries of the project clearly.



    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                        28
•    Establish measurable objectives for the project.
     •    Select team       members   with   experience,    skills, leadership, and full-time
          availability.

     •    Train the team on business process reengineering techniques and tools.




    Post Implementation                                             Successful
                                                                    Change
          Implementation

         Concept & Design

           Business need



                                Awareness    Desire   Knowledge   Ability   Reinforcement



     Figure 3 summarizes this process and shows decision points and deliverables.




     Another important decision to be made when starting a BPR project is with whether
     to use a continuous-improvement methodology or a business process
     reengineering (BPR) approach. The three major differences between the two are:
     1) the BPR goal is to achieve a breakthrough gain and achieve dramatic process
     performance, 2) BPR is not a continuous improvement, and 3) typically BPR targets
     greater than 50% improvement.

     Figure 4 shows dramatic performance improvement achieved by BPR.

     Figure 4: Dramatic Performance Improvement Achieved by BPR

            Breakpoint:
         Performance that
             Produces
           Extraordinary
              Results



                                                                            Time




           e-Governance for Smart Governance                                                29
Muthu, Whitman,         and Cheraghi (1999)        summarize methodologies previously
investigated:


Activity Methodology 1                   Methodology 2
1       Develop vision & strateqy        Determine customer requirements & goals for the
                                         process
2       Create desired culture           Map and measure the existing process
3       Integrate       &     improve Analyze and modify existing process
        enterprise
4       Develop             technology Design the reengineered process
        solutions
5                                        Implement the reenfineered process

Activity Methodology 3                    Methodology 4              Methodology 5

1       Set direction                     Motivatinq reenqineerinq Preparation

2       Baseline and benchmark            Justifying reengineering   Identification

3       Create the vision                 Planning reengineering     Vision

4       Launch problem         solving    Setting      up       for Technical     Si       social
        projects
                                          reengineering             desiqn
5       Design improvements               As Is description        Si Transformation
                                          analysis
6       Implement change                  To-Be      design    and
                                          validation
7       Embed                continuous Implementation
        improvement



Methodology #1: Underdown (1997)
Methodology #2: Harrison and Pratt (1993)
Methodology #3: Furey (1993)
Methodology #4: Mayer and Dewitte (1998)
Methodology #5: Manganelli and Klein (1994)


Based on the above five methodologies, Muthu et al. (1999) developed a
consolidated methodology (Figure 5).




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                                 30
Figure 5: A Consolidated BPR Methodology (Muthu et al. 1999)


4. WHY BPR PROJECTS FAIL? WHAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT IT?

Malhotra (1998) estimates that 70% of the BPR projects fail and states that the
most important obstacles are: 1) the lack of sustained management commitment
and leadership, 2) the unrealistic scope and expectations, and 3) the resistance to
change.

Based on interviews with BPR consultants', Bashein et al. (1994) outline the
positive preconditions for BPR success: senior management commitment and
sponsorship, realistic expectations, empowered and collaborative workers, strategic
context of growth and expansion, shared vision, sound management practices,
appropriate people participating full-time, and sufficient budget. They also identify
negative preconditions related to BPR: the wrong sponsor, a "do it to me" attitude,
an overly cost-cutting focus, and a narrow technical focus. Negative preconditions
relating to the organization itself include: an unsound financial condition, too many
projects under way, fear and lack of optimism, and animosity toward and by IS and
HR specialists. To turn around negative conditions, firms should do something
smaller first, conduct personnel transformation, and get IS and FIR teams involved.




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                      31
King (1994) views the primary reason for BPR failure overemphasis on the tactical
aspects while leaving the strategic dimensions unattended. He notes that most
failures of reengineering are attributable to the process being viewed and applied at
a tactical rather than strategic level. He argues that there are important strategic
dimensions to BPR: developing and prioritizing objectives, defining the process
structure and assumptions, identifying trade-offs between processes, identifying
new product and market opportunities, coordinating the reengineering effort, and
developing a human resources strategy. He concludes that the ultimate success
of BPR depends on the people who do it and on how well they can be motivated to
be creative and to apply their detailed knowledge to the redesign of business
processes.

Prosci (2003) summarizes the mistakes commonly made by top management during
a large-scale change:

•   Not being directly involved with the project – this mistake occurs when the
    sponsor      fails to keep informed about the project's progress, delegates
    sponsor roles to others, and does not intervene soon enough when problems arise.

•   Sending inconsistent signals or not communicating enough - the following errors
    are typical of those cited: "tries to control things using old style of command
    - the message was mixed." "fails to communicate adequately with the staff
    "dictates change without communicating the benefits"

•   Ignoring the impact of change on employees – top management tends to focus
    on the business issues and neglect the employee side. Employees can
    become fearful and confused without adequate information and guidance.

•   Shifting focus or changing priorities too soon – the fourth mistake of top
    management sponsors is changing their priorities midstream in the project,
    or diverting their attention to other areas before the project was through
    implementation. Projects can incur      high    resistance   and     require
    strong sponsorship not only at the beginning of the project, but also
    throughout their implementation.
•   Not providing adequate resources - the fifth mistake is not providing
    Adequate resources, e.g., people, time, and money and failing to engage all
    management levels in the change. Sponsors tend to undermine efforts by not
    allocating    resources appropriately   and underestimate the    amount of
    sponsorship time and effort required.

    5. CONCLUSION: A HOLISTIC APPROACH TO BPR METHODOLOGY


An examination of BPR research shows that companies need a methodology that
takes a holistic view of the organization. One notable BPR methodology is Agent
Organisation Theory Based Methodologies Relationship Morphism Analysis (ARMA)
proposed by Valiris and Glykas (1999). This methodology combines accounting BPR
principles (e.g., efficiency, effectiveness, and cost), organizational-theoretic
concepts (e.g., roles and accountabilities), and some powerful systematic business
modeling techniques applied from IS development (Figure 6).




     e-Governance for Smart Governance                                     32
                                   Organisation
                                   Theory Based
                                   Methodologies




              Figure 6: An Overview of ARMA (Valiris and Glykas 1999)

According to Valiris and Glykas (1999), ARMA highlights the importance of
organizational strategy and its links to business processes throughout the redesign
exercise. It also provides a set of modeling techniques, to support the modeling of
business processes that go beyond the limitations of existing modeling techniques. It
views the organization from both an individualistic (employee level) and a holistic
(business process level) view, and integrates both static and dynamic aspects of the
organization. The ARMA methodology presented by Valiris and Glykas (1999) may go
beyond the limitations of other existing BPR methodologies because it takes a holistic
and systematic approach to BPR.


6. REFERENCES



Anonymous,    2003,    "Best  Practices in  Change           Management."        Prosci.
   http://www.prosci.com/ change-management bpl.htm

Caron, M., S.L. Jarvenpaa, and D.B. Stoddard, September 1994, "Business
   Reengineering at CIGNA Corporation: Experiences and Lessons Learned From
   the First Five Years." MIS Quarterly, pp. 233-250.

Davenport, T.H. and J.E. Short, Summer 1990, "The New Industrial Engineering:
   Information Technology and Business Process Redesign." Sloan Management
   Review, pp. 11-27.

Davenport, T.H. and D.B. Stoddard, June 1994, "Reengineering: Business Change of
   Mythic Proportions?" MIS Quarterly 18(2), pp. 121-127.

Davenport, T.H. and M.C. Beers, 1995, "Managing Information About Processes."
   Journal of Management Information Systems, 12(1), pp. 57-80.



    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                       33
Earl, M., 1994, "The New and the Old of Business Process Redesign." Journal of
   Strategic Information Systems, 3(1), pp. 5-22.

Evans, K., 1993, "Reengineering and cybernetics." American Programmer, 6(11),
   pp. 10-16.

Fitzgerald, B and C. Murphy, 1996, "Business Process Reengineering, The Creation
    and Implementation of a Methodology." The Canadian Journal of Information
    Systems and Operational Research.

Grover, V., S.R. Jeong, W.J. Kettinger, and J.T.C. Teng, 1995, "The Implementation
   of Business Process Reengineering." Journal of Management Information
   Systems, 12(1), pp. 109-144.

Hammer, M. and J. Champy, 1993, Reengineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for
  Business Revolution. Harper Collins, London.

Hiatt,    J.     BPR      Online Center.                            Learning
   http://www.prosci.com/index.htm

Kettinger, W.J., J.T.C. Teng, and S. Guha, March 1997, "Business Process Change:
   A Study of Methodologies, Techniques, and Tools." MIS Quarterly, pp. 55-80.

King, W.R., Spring 1994, "Process Reengineering: The Strategic Dimensions."
   Information Systems Management, 11(2), pp. 71-73

Malhotra, Y., Fall 1998, "Business Process Redesign: An Overview." IEEE
   Engineering Management Review, 26(3). http://www.brint.com/papers/
   bpr.htm

Muthu, S., L. Whitman, and S.H. Cheraghi, November 1999, "Business Process
   Reengineering: A Consolidated Methodology." Proceedings of The 4th Annual
   International Conference on Industrial Engineering Theory, Applications and
   Practice, San Antonio, Texas, USA.

   Strassman, P. A., 1995, "Reengineering, excerpt from The Politics of Information
   Management." The Information Economi cs Press.

Tunney, P.B., and J.M. Reeve, Summer 1992, "The Impact of Continuous
   Improvement on the Design of Activity Based Cost Systems." Journal of Cost
   Management, pp. 43-50.
   http://www.eil.utoronto.ca/tool/list.html

Valiris, G. and M. Glykas, 1999, "Critical review of existing BPR methodologies."
Business Process Management Journal, 5(1), pp. 65-86




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                     34
e-Governance for Smart Governance   35
BPR Case Study
                   Nethrajyoth International Hospital




  e-Governance for Smart Governance                     36
                    BPR Case Study
           Nethrajyoth International Hospital


        Source: Business Process Reengineering, Jayaraman M S; Natarajan
  Ganesh; Rangaramanujan A V, TATA Mcgraw Hill Punblishing Co.Ltd. 1998)




BACKGROUND SCENARIO

       Nethrajyoth International Hospital (Nethra) is reputed institution in southern
India committed to providing high quality ophthalmic care services. It is managed as
a voluntary non-profit service institution focused at serving the economically weaker
sections of the society. With this objective in mind. Nethra provides free treatment to
nearly 30 percent of the patients. About 50 percent of the cataract surgeries
performed in one particular year were done free of charge.

        In view of the excellent reputation of the Institution, patients from all over
India flock to Nethra for treatment with the result that the number of patients is
increasing at the rate of 25 percent per annum. The hospital wishes to increase the
number of poor patients cared for without charging an excess fee for patients who
pay for the services.

       The hospital has the following resource constraints in trying to meet its
service objective.

      They simply can‟t recruit more surgeons or consultants. Their team consists
       of internationally reputed professionals who are deeply committed to a social
       cause, and are wiling to work for long hours and weekends without looking for
       extra benefits or compensation. It is difficult to find such socially committed
       individuals.
      The modern medical equipment (for example, Excimer Laser which costs
       Rs.15 million) is quite expensive to acquire and maintain. Nethra has to think
       several times before making such high investments, as this can lead to either
       one or all of the following:

       -- An increase in the charges paid by the „paying patients‟
       -- A decrease in the number of „free patients‟
       -- A combination of both
       Which would all go against the mission and objectives of the institution?

       Even these high costs of hospital equipment, Nethra have managed to raise
donations from the public, and currently provide all treatment (for paying patients)
at a charge 10 –15 percent below the rates prevailing in other hospitals. The
percentage of free patients is also increasing slowly.

  THE OLD PROCESS

       The hospital system found it difficult to cope with the ever-increasing number
of patients pouring in. Computers were there but were discrete islands, One for




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                        37
fixing up appointments, one for registration, one for payments and accounts, and so
on.

        A patient had to first report at registration. After registration, he was given a
registration slip and sent to one of the junior consultants for the preliminary
examination. If the patient were lucky, he would join a small queue thereby going
through the preliminary faster. If the queue was long, it could take an hour or more.

       After the prelim, the patient was sent to the dilatation lounge from where he
would move on to the consultant‟s chamber. The consultant, after examining the
patient, would decide upon a treatment.

        The consultant would either perform minor remedial treatment himself or
complete the treatment procedure. Or, he would prescribe certain medical
procedures, like laser treatment., to be carried out. In which case, the secretary
would write it down on a piece of paper and hand it over to the patient, requesting
him to go down to the cash counter, pay for the treatment and get the receipt. After
this, a ward boy would take him to the concerned person who would administer the
medical procedure.

        If any surgery was needed, its nature was indicated. The patient would then
go back to the appointment desk to fix up dates for the surgery and all the medical
tests to be undergone prior to the surgery.

       The patient had a tough time running here and there and often waited for
long durations to fix up further appointments, make payments, etc.

        The patients‟ moving back and forth crated a problem for the hospital too.
When a patient‟s name was called out for a medical procedure/consultation, the
person would be missing. He would return, and wait again, not knowing that his
name had already been called out, and feel frustrated with such delays, The hospital
staff felt equally frustrated with such delays, vanishing acts and the like.

       On certain days, the schedule went haywire due to the chain reaction of such
delays. Also, the consultants‟ time and equipment utilization seemed to be affected
because of such incidents. This created a concern that a non-profit institution like
Nethra could really not afford to waste resources. Maybe, seeing each patient
continuously through the whole process, by cutting out wasteful delays, was the key
to attending to more patients and also makes better utilization of resources.

       Thus, the attention of hospital administration got focused on eliminating
wasteful waiting time in the patient service fulfillment process.

  THE ANALYSIS

       The overall patient waiting time was dependent not only on the waiting time
between two medical procedures, but also on the time taken for each procedure,
which could vary case to case.

         The time spent on the procedure per se was dependent on several factors like
the patient‟s general health, the condition of his eyes, etc. The reengineering
initiative at Nethra was therefore restricted to eliminating the waiting time between
medical procedures.




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                          38
      The methodology adopted at Nethra, for eliminating patient waiting time,
comprised just three steps:

   1. Identify causes/situations/activities contributing to the waiting time between
      procedures.
   2. Examine each of these and try to eliminate the cause or obliterate the activity
      using IT.
   3. Obliterate every activity, which merely increases the waiting time without
      adding value to the service.

   HOW REENGINEERING WAS CARRIED OUT?

        As a first step, many patients were asked to give feedback and suggestions
for cutting down the waiting time.

       Simultaneously, three meeting sessions were conducted with select people at
all levels: the ward boys, secretaries, nursing staff, consultants, and the Chief
himself.

„Perceived Waiting Time’

       During the discussions, a young ward assistant pointed out that one should
not merely go by the clock time, but must cut down what is actually perceived as
waiting time by the patient. He quoted several instances where patients, who were
seen through all procedures most expeditiously, except the initial registration,
complained bitterly over the five-minute delay in registration. “ As against that,” he
observed, “ patients who are promptly registered and put through the preliminary
examination followed by dilatation do not complain seriously about delays.”

       The Patient’s Point of View
       --    In process waiting (like waiting to see the consultant after dilatation)
             did not upset the patients but out of process waiting did (like being
             asked to wait before registration).
       --    After all procedures were completed, making a patient wait for any
             formalities., even for a very short time, left a bad impression. Such
             waiting was seen as purposeless and the patient became most
             „impatient‟ at that point.

       A comprehensive list of all possible instances/ causes/activities that could be
eliminated was generated based on the discussions and feedback. After the study, a
prototype of the reengineered system was developed with these inputs.


  THE REENGINEERED NETHRAJYOTH


       In the smoothly implemented reengineered system, there are about 60
terminals, spread throughout the Nethra complex, linked to a central database,. Each
terminal has the facility to give appointments, register patients, collect payments,
schedule surgery, and so on.




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                       39
       Appointments can now be given for a six-month window as opposed to the
two-month window that existed earlier. When an appointment is cancelled/delayed
by a patient, another waiting patient is quickly routed through to fill the slot.

        Patients coming in to register at the reception desk can make an advance
payment at any one of the 16 counters. They are then allocated to one of the junior
consultants (the system does the allocation by round –robin method to ensure equal
distribution of patients to all consultants).

        On completion of the preliminary, they are led to the consultant‟s lounge for
dilatation. If there is any unexpected delay, the patient is kept informed in the
consultant‟s lounge for dilatation. If there is any unexpected delay, the patient is
kept informed. The consultant‟s secretary takes charge of the patient and organizes
the dilatation, followed by an examination by the consultant.

       Further to the examination, if the patient needs to undergoe any medical
procedures, the secretary organizes the payment, gives the receipt, and personally
„hands over‟ the patient to the next service representative --- the specialist in charge
of the medical procedure. Any cross consultation, if required, are quickly fixed up
and the patient is escorted to the other consultant‟s cabin.

       If surgery is required, the secretary, using a terminal, fixes dates for the
surgery and for all prior medical check-ups.

        The nerve center of the reengineered system is the software that constantly
keeps track of the patient as he goes through the treatment process. Any delay
beyond a certain limit, in any process, is flashed as an amber alert to the public
relations officer who meets the patient personally, and takes mid-course corrective
action by seeing him through the system expeditiously. The PRO, in turn, converts
the amber alerts, into red alerts when he needs the intervention of the
Superintendent or the Chief.

       Since each patient is continuously monitored through the process, the system
at Nethra resembles a WIP (Work In Process) monitoring system on a shopfloor,
rather than a routine hospital management system.

  BENEFITS OF REENGINEERING

       By continuously optimizing the patient waiting time, the system has

--     Resulted in nearly 80 percent increase in the productivity of the scarcest
resource – the consultants.
--     Achieved a matching increase in the utilization of expensive medical
equipment.

        The system gives complete control over the patient to the hospital‟s service
representatives, which enables them to track the patient and see him through all the
required procedures quickly. The patients are also free of stress as they do not have
to run from one end to another, and are treated and seen through swiftly
        The system has clearly achieved the following significant benefits out of the
reengineering exercise:

      Cost reduction and surplus generation for investment in basic research.




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                         40
          o   More number (and percentage) of free patients.
          o   No increase in costs for paying patients.
          o   Charges maintained at 20 percent below the charges levied at other
              hospitals.
          o   More investment directed towards prevention of eye ailments and
              basic research.

          o   Service quality enhancement for patients.
          o   They are attended to quickly and feel more secure and comfortable.
          o   No running around for appointment/payment etc.
`
          o   Work life enrichment for staff.
          o   Smooth flow of work without „zigzag‟ patient movement.
          o   Better ambience to handle patients leading to qualitative improvement
              in the self-esteem of the staff.

    REFLECTIONS

Reengineering at Nethra conveys a few interesting thoughts.

       Reengineering initiatives may not seem to provide dramatic improvements in
voluntary non-profit institutions like Nethra, or such institutions. Anyway, use their
resources in the most optimal manner within the limits of available technology.
Moreover, they operate with minimum overheads.

        The process objective, viz., „cut down patient waiting time‟ was simple
enough to be easily understood and internalized by everyone down the line in the
institution.

        The choice of methodology depends upon the context of the situation, culture
of the organization, etc. What was adopted at Nethra, for instance, does not
religiously follow the five-step methodology detailed there. This only reaffirms:
reengineering is much like a spiritual experience often eluding hard core clearly
defined methodologies and procedures.

        An innovative move in reengineering the layout of the hospital, while shifting
to their newly – built premises, has in a way obliterated the use of software to keep
track of each patient. The waiting lounge for each consultant now consists of an
optimal number of chairs to accommodate the waiting patients and their support
persons, restricting the entry to the patient and the support person per patient.
About 20 percent of the patients come without support persons, and that leaves
some cushion. If, in any lounge, a patient can‟t find a vacant seat, the PRO knows
that the waiting time is increasing in that lounge or bay. No need for an amber or red
alert!




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                       41
    Prosci’s Change Management Maturity Model


   Introduction


Organizations are facing larger and more frequent changes in the current economic
climate. A changing marketplace, empowered workforce and technological
advancements have created an environment where change is becoming 'business as
usual.' In this environment, organizations are beginning to recognize the importance
of building the competency to rapidly and successfully change.

Prosci's Change Management Maturity Model is based on benchmarking research and
interactions with companies going through change. In March 2004, a study was
completed to understand the usefulness of such a model and where organizations
ranked their current competency level. While nearly 85% of the 160 companies
placed themselves Level 3 or lower, we found a broad spectrum of change
management capabilities - from none at all, to wide-spread organizational
competence. Prosci's Change Management Maturity Model describes the varying
levels of change management capability across organizations. The maturity model
has five levels or stages, from no change         management to organizational
competency. Each level involves more attention and management of the people side
of change.

Research shows that a 'one-size-fits-all' approach does not work when managing
change, since each change and each impacted group is different. However, a
common methodology that is built on situational awareness and customization allows
the entire organization to move towards Level 4 or Level 5 while retaining the
flexibility for individual groups and departments.

The following pages contain a more detailed explanation of each level as well as the
action steps your organization can take to move to the next level of the model.




Prosci © 2004.




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                     42
  Level 1 - Ad hoc or Absent Description



At Level 1 of the maturity model, project teams are not aware of and do not consider
change management as a formal approach for managing the people side of change.
Projects at this level can have one or more of the following characteristics:


         Project leadership is focused only on the "concrete" or tangible aspects of
          the project including funding, schedule, issue tracking and resource
          management.
         Communications from the project are on a 'need to know' basis only and
          typically infrequent.
         Employees find out about the change first through rumors and gossip rather
          than structured presentations.
         Executive support is in the background as evident through funding
          authorization and resource allocation, but active and visible sponsorship is
          not present.
         Supervisors and managers have little or no information about the change,
          and have no change management skills to coach their employees through
          the change process.




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                        43
            Employees react to change with surprise; resistance can be widespread.
             Productivity slows and turnover increases as the change nears full
             implementation.

When is change management used on a project at this level?

Change management is applied on a project at this level only as a last resort when
employee resistance jeopardizes the success of the project.

Level of integration between project management and change management

At this level, change management is reactive and an add-on to the project. No
integration with project management takes place at the beginning of the project.



Steps for moving to Level 2


Step 1        Attend change management training, purchase change management
              resources or engage change management consultants.
Step 2       Apply change management to isolated projects and use change
             management techniques to help projects that are currently experiencing
             resistance to change.


Level 2 – Isolated Projects

Description

In Level 2, elements of change management begin to emerge in isolated parts of the
organization. The effort to manage the people side of change is infrequent and is not
centralized. Characteristics of this level are:
        A large variation of change management practices exists between projects
         with many
        different change management approaches applied sporadically throughout the
         organization; some projects may be effectively managing change while others
         are still in Level 1.
        Elements of communication planning are evident, but          there   is   little
         sponsorship or coaching as part of change management.
        Managers and supervisors have no formal change management training to
         coach their employees through the change process.
        Change management is typically used in response to a negative event.
        Little interaction occurs between the isolated project teams using change
         management; each new project "re-learns" the basic change management
         skills.




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                         44
When is change management used on a project?

Change management is applied on a project when resistance emerges or when the project
nears implementation with only isolated projects using change management at the beginning
of their project. Some elements of communication planning occur early in the lifecycle.

Level of integration between project management and change management

In Level 2, change management is not fully integrated into project management. On projects
that use change management, the project team is aware and knowledgeable of change
management. In certain instances, a change management advocate can encourage the
integration of change management and project management.

  Steps for moving to Level 3


  Step 1      Create knowledge about the different change management initiatives being
              used in the organization and begin research in change management best
              practices.

  Step 2      Create clusters of project teams applying change management principles.
              Begin collection of knowledge and tools across the organization.


  Step 3      Celebrate change management successes.


   Step 4     Begin building support for using change management with executives          and
              senior leaders who oversee multiple projects.


  Level 3 - Multiple Projects


Description

At Level 3, groups emerge that begin using a structured change management process.
Change management is still localized to particular teams or areas in the organization.
Organizations at this level can have one or more of the following characteristics:
      Structured change management processes are being used across multiple projects;
       multiple approaches and methodologies are being utilized.
      Some elements of knowledge sharing emerge between teams in the organization;
       experiences are shared between teams in some departments or divisions.
      While change management is applied more frequently, no organizational standards
       or requirements exist; pockets of excellence in change management co-exist with
       projects that use no change management.
      Senior leadership takes on a more active role in sponsoring change and consider this
       role part of their responsibilities, but no formal company-wide program exists to train
       project leaders, managers or coaches on change management.
      Training and tools become available to project leaders and team members; managers
       are provided with training and tools to coach front-line employees in future changes.

When is change management used on a project?


    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                        45
Change management is initiated at the start of some projects, with a large fraction still
applying change management as a reaction to employee resistance during implementation.

Level of integration between project management and change management

In Level 3, teams who are successful at change management integrate change management
with their overall project management methodology at the inception of the project.
Communication planning is integrated at the planning phase, and other plans are developed
prior to implementation.


   Steps for moving to Level 4




Step 1            Enlist executive support for applying change management on every
                 project and or building change competencies at every level in the
                 Organization

Step 2      Select a common methodology that can be used throughout the     organization.
                Begin acquiring the tools and training necessary to rollout the common
                methodology.

   Level 4 - Organizational Standards Description

In Level 4, the organization has selected a common approach and implemented standards
for using change management on every new project or change. Note: a common
methodology does not mean a 'one-size-fits-all' recipe - effective methodologies use
repeatable steps but are built on understanding the situation and using the appropriate tools
for the specific change. Organizations at this level can have one or more of the following
characteristics:
        There is an enterprise-wide acknowledgement of what change management is and
         why it is important to project success.
        A common change management methodology has been selected and plans are
         developed for introducing the methodology into the organization.
        Training and tools are available for executives, project teams, change leaders,
         managers and supervisors. Managers and supervisors are provided formal training in
         change management.
        A functional group may be created to support change initiatives, with roles like
         'Director of Change Management'; organizations create a 'center of excellence' -
         individuals, groups or administrative positions dedicated to supporting change
         management efforts and buildingchange management skills.
        Executives assume the role of change sponsors on every new project and are active
         and visible sponsors of change.
        Resistance and non-compliance is expected in isolated instances. Some project teams
         still do not understand why they are using change management. Adoption is not yet
         at 100% and the organization is in the process of building change management skills
         throughout the organization.

When is change management used on a project?

At Level 4 teams regularly use a change management approach from the beginning of their
project. Change management work begins at the planning phase of the project.


    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                       46
Level of integration between project management and change management

Project management and change management are integrated from the beginning, to the
point where they are not separable. Project teams follow both project and change
management milestones.

  Steps for moving to Level 5

Step 1            Create a formal position or staff group that is responsible for the
                 effectivedeployment, training and improvement of change management
                 competencies.

Step 2         Correct non-compliance. Analyze gaps in the organization that are not
               applying the selected methodology and develop plans to implement
               improvements

   Level 5 – Organisational Competency


Description

Level 5 is having change management competency as part of the skill set of the
organization. Organizations at this level can have one or more of the following
characteristics:
        Effectively managing change is an explicitly stated strategic goal, and executives have
         made this apriority.
        Employees across the enterprise understand change management, why              it is
         important to project success and how they play a role in making change successful.
        Change management is second nature - it is so commonplace that it is nearly
         inseparable from the initiatives.
        Managers and supervisors routinely use change management techniques to help
         support abroad range of initiatives from strategy changes to individual employee
         improvement.
        The organization gathers data to enable continuous improvements to the common
         change management methodology, tools, and training.
        Extensive training exists at all levels of the organization.
        Higher ROI, lower productivity loss and less employee resistance are evident across
         the organization.

When and how is change management used on a project?

Change management begins before projects begin.




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                         47
Level of integration between project management and change management

When organizations have developed a high level of change management competency,
change management steps are completely integrated into project management. Planning
and design phases have both project and change management elements and are viewed as
standard practice.

Appendix - Results from the Maturity Model benchmarking study

One hundred and eighty (180) individuals participated in the CM Maturity Model study.
Individuals commented on where they were in the model, where they would like to see
themselves, and how the model would be helpful.

Current model level and goal model level

Participants overwhelmingly identified themselves in the lower three levels of the Maturity
Model. Only 16% felt that they were a Level 4 or 5. The average competency level was
"2.4." When asked what level was their goal, over 50% of participants indicated Level 5,
and a full 80% indicated either Level 4 or Level 5.

Analysis was conducted to measure the gap between a participant's current level and their
goal level. 70% indicated they would like to move up two levels or more in the model.

How would the model be useful


Participants location in the maturity model

Participants commented on how the model would be useful in their organization. 90% of
participants stated that the model would be useful or very useful. The most frequent uses for
the model were:




•   Communication tool in organization - the model is useful for communicating with
    individuals throughout the organization, from executives to change management
    practitioners about where we are today and where we need to be in the future.




     e-Governance for Smart Governance                                      48
•   Framework for building change management program.

•   Support mechanism for continuous improvement efforts.

•   Tool for talking with executives - the model demonstrates to leaders the importance of
    change management, their role as a sponsor and the need for necessary resource
    allocation to deal with the people-side of change - "Discussing the [CM] maturity model
    with senior management and executives begins the dialog for improvement. "

•   Systematic tool for consistent change management application - the structured approach
    of the CM Maturity Model would provide organizations with a way to standardize change
    management throughout the organization.

•   Strategic tool supporting organization's goals - most organizations are facing larger and
    more frequent changes than ever before.

•   Executive communication tool - beyond convincing leaders of the importance of change
    management, the model can be used to present leaders with an actionable model for
    implanting change management throughout an organization "The model would help
    provide a framework for executives and/or for the change agents.




     e-Governance for Smart Governance                                      49
        ICT Intervention in Rural Development -
          Information villages in Pondicherry


                                                        K G Rajamohan, Scientist ,
                                       M S Swaminathan Research Foundation (MSSRF)



Initiatives

  M S Swaminathan Research Foundation (MSSRF) believes that information and
  communication technologies can play a major role in environmentally sustainable
  rural development, not only reaching the poor but also helping them to achieve food
  security and social justice.

  MSSRF held an Interdisciplinary Dialogue on Information Technology: Reaching the
  Unreached in January 1992. The dialogue participants concluded that ICTs would
  have a major role to play in promoting sustainable agriculture and rural development
  in the developing world. To be of use to farm families, the generic information found
  in the networks, including the Internet, should be rendered into locality-specific
  knowledge that farm families, and rural women and men, can act on. This was the
  model adopted for implementation in this project.

  Mobilization

  The project began in 1998 at the village of Villianur, 20km from Pondicherry, in
  Union Territory of Pondicherry, South India. The first efforts of villagers and project
  staff were to develop mutual understanding. In Pondicherry we have certain initial
  advantages: an accessible government and reasonable telecom infrastructure. The
  level of poverty is high in rural areas. An earlier program of the Foundation for
  community asset building based on biological technologies had been fully operational
  in this region and the ICT project was expected to complement this program.

  To understand the communication habits of the population in the rural areas,
  especially among the poorer households, MSSRF conducted detailed survey in 1998
  .A very considerable amount of information transaction takes place between the rural
  poor households and this also acts as a primary source of information. The linkages
  with external institutions were normally weak. Project work during the mobilization
  phase determined that the information requirements of the villagers could best be
  met by strengthening the existing linkages. The generic knowledge from external
  sources would have to be transformed – that is, selectively compiled, edited, and
  integrated with local knowledge – to become relevant or useful in the local context.
  Hence, the project gave highest priority to locally relevant information.


  Methodology

  The value addition center at Villianur has access to the Internet through three dial-
  up accounts. This also functions as the hub of a local area network for data and voice
  transmission covering the project villages. An EPABX, similar to the ones used in
  offices for providing intercom facility, is the key instrument in this hub. For power we
  are using a hybrid of solar photovoltaic plant with line power. Solar devices power all



e-Governance for Smart Governance                                        50
  PCs and computers are connected to LAN with Windows NT. There is a room
  available for people to hold meetings. Now we are introducing Spread Spectrum
  technology for communication between the villages, and organizing videoconference
  meetings with govt. officials and rural peoples. The project staff set up knowledge
  centers in consultation with traditional village institutions. An important feature of
  this project is the strong sense of ownership that the village communities have
  developed towards the village centers. Almost in all villages, the local people
  demanded the knowledge center, once the need was felt. MSSRF did not launch any
  center on its own.

  Prior to setting up these Village Knowledge Centers, participatory rural appraisal was
  carried out in the hamlets. In each case, the community has identified and provided
  an accessible place and two to four volunteers. The community also agrees to
  provide quality space rent-free, electricity; telephone bills and agrees to
  compensate the volunteers whenever needed. The volunteers are young men
  and women chosen by the community. They manage the village center on a
  voluntary basis. The project pays NO money to them. In turn, the project provides
  all the needed equipment, training and data. An MOU is signed to this effect and is
  renewed whenever necessary.

  The village center operators were trained in PC operations and in using the data-cum
  voice network. They were trained in maintaining a register to log use of the center
  by the local residents. Training was also imparted in basics of management, and in
  handling queries from illiterates. The staff in the centers frequently met them, and
  all the center operators and the staff met once every month (the last Saturday) to
  sort out issues. This also helped the project staff in maintaining a view of the
  changes in the community needs and perceptions.

  Although all knowledge centers perform the same function, viz. satisfying the
  information needs of the local community, they are not managed the same way.
  Different villages have evolved their own ways of managing the center. Some are
  located in public buildings like radio room, community hall, some in temples and at
  least one in a private house.

          Knowledge                     Model pattern
          Centers
          Kizhur                 Village Development Council + Family
          Embalam                Temple Trust + Women SHGs
          Veerampattinam         Grampanchayat (fishermen community)
          Poornonkuppam          TempleTrust + Grampanchayat
          Pillaiyarkuppam        Biocenter -Training cum Demonstration         of
                                 biovillage concept
          Thirukanchipet         Dalit community – Govt . TV center
          Villianur              Hub Center (operated by project staff)
          Kalitheerthalkuppam    Gramapanchayat + Milk Cooperative Union
          Nallavadu              Grampanchayat (fishermen community)
          Periakalapet           Grampanchayat(fishermen community)



  Innovation


  We have shown that empowering people through access to timely and relevant
  information can make a difference in the life of the rural poor. We have also
  demonstrated that new ICTs can play a crucial role in this effort. Information
  provided in the village knowledge centers is locale specific and relates to prices of



e-Governance for Smart Governance                                      51
  agricultural inputs (such as seeds, fertilizers, pesticides) and outputs (rice,
  vegetables), market (potential for export), entitlement (the multitude of schemes of
  the central and state governments, banks), health care (availability of doctors and
  paramedics in nearby hospitals, women‟s diseases), cattle diseases, transport (road
  conditions, cancellation of bus trips), weather (appropriate time for sowing, areas of
  abundant fish catch, wave heights in the sea), etc. Unique to our project is the fact
  that most information is collected and fed in by the local community itself. Local
  volunteers operate the centers.

  Technology Initiatives

        The project has experimented with the use of hybrids of technologies to
         overcome the limitations on expansion of available infrastructure of telecom
         and electricity into rural areas. One hybrid is that of wired and wireless
         technologies to provide access to data and voice networks. This technology
         based on 2-way [VHF] radius is found to be easy to deploy and stable, but
         provides only low bandwidths [not exceeding 9.6 KBPS] of access.

        This project examined the possibility of using several technologies like Time
         Division Multiple Access (TDMA), Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA)
         combined with Wireless in the Local Loop and Direct Sequence Spread
         Spectrum (DSSS). This project is currently testing the World Space Radio
         Satellite communication.

        Other hybrid technology is Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum
         technology. This technology allows a complete wireless network to start with
         as little as two radios, and gradually grows, a node at a time, into a very
         large and complex wireless network. New nodes can be added at any time
         with the sole requirement that they must have line of sight connectivity to
         another node. The new node, once attached, becomes a potential attaching
         point for other nodes. The line speed is [11 Mbps].

        The other hybrid relates to source of power. It involves line and solar
         photovoltaic electricity to generate an extremely stable source of power
         [that can function for long hours without either source of electricity]. This was
         necessary because of frequent power failure.

        This project uses KU band satellite based Internet connectivity (64 kbps)
         for Internet connection and has been distributed through Spread Spectrum to
         villages.

        Indian National Center for Ocean Information Services (INCOIS) has
         provided the Potential Fishing Zone (PFZ) electronic bulletin board for Rural
         Knowledge Centers programme in January 2004. The board displays the
         information on potential zones of fish aggregation including latitude,
         longitude, depth, direction and distance from the landing centers / light
         houses.

        We have developed Community Banking Software for use by Self Help Groups
         supported by both District Rural Development Agency (DRDA) and banks. The
         computers in our knowledge centers are used to maintain the accounts and
         transactions of these SHGs.

        Thus we use new technological tools in our effort to bridge the social and
         economic divide between the haves and have-nots.

        Veeranam drinking water project (State Government of Tamil Nadu drinking
         water project) and Neyveli Lignite Corporation (Central Government Mine)


e-Governance for Smart Governance                                        52
          have adopted VHF technology after seeing this project. EID Parry Ltd. (Private
          Company) has adopted Spread Spectrum Technology.

   Blending of traditional technology with frontier technology by adding value
   to traditional practices

Public Address System


We are using both traditional and modern technologies to spread the information to the
villages. Indeed our chairman Prof. Swaminathan is keen that we should take
advantage of both the new and the traditional technologies. Three years ago we started
using public address system in Veerampattinam. The information requirement in this
village is focused on the safety of fishermen while at sea, and on fish occurrence near
shore. Wave height forecast 48 hours in advance; downloaded from a US Navy web site
(http://www.nemoc.navy.mil/Library/Metoc/Indian Ocean Bay of Bengal/Models
/Swaps/Series/ index.html) is broadcast over loudspeakers strategically placed in
different locations. The system is also used for announcing various government
schemes related to fishermen on a regular basis, fish market details, employment
news, and distribution of rice, kerosene, sugar etc. in the local fair price shops.

The other fishing village called Nallavadu is also finding the system very effective and
useful in spreading the information to the entire village.

   Community Newspaper

   “Namma Ooru Seithi”, a community newspaper, was started on February 18, 2002.
   The newspaper is published twice a month and is distributed free. It carries
   information that people could use in their daily life. Reaching the unreached is the
   concept behind this newspaper run exclusively for people in rural areas in
   Pondicherry. 7,500 copies are distributed through local volunteers in 31 villages.

      Enhancement of Livelihood security through Knowledge empowerment

   Information on various micro-enterprises training

   Regularly MSSRF is providing information on various micro-enterprises training
   announcements in this newspaper and also arranged micro enterprises training at
   Villianur hub center through appropriate experts and also providing information
   about forming women SHGs, arranging bank loans to start micro enterprises, making
   market linkages, and computer training to the youth. Local milk society is provided
   the computer to speed up their business.

   Mere information is not enough for solving the problems of the poor people.
   Developing linkages with data providers on the one hand and with markets, on the
   other, is a major goal of this initiative. We not only provide information, we also act
   as a facilitator.

   Micro-Enterprises Training for Fishermen Community

   Prof M S Swaminathan visited Pondicherry in August 2002 and had an informal
   interaction with the fisher folk. He saw that they were finding it difficult to make both
   ends meet during the 45 day fishing ban despite the rice and money provided by the
   government. It was he who suggested that we provide a basket of opportunities to
   the people in the coastal areas during lean periods

   After several meetings and surveys it was found out that there was a scope for
   making ornamental artifacts from shells. Now the village women make curtains,


e-Governance for Smart Governance                                         53
  lampshades, garlands, showcase items, flower vases and other stuff from different
  kinds of shells.
  In the last two months we provided training in camphor making, candle making,
  soap oil and phenyl production. Now they sell their products in our knowledge
  centers, Govt. exhibitions and temple festivals. We are in the process of making
  market linkages with other parts of India. Every month we will plan to provide one
  low-cost micro enterprises training to the village community. The next training is on
  screen-printing. These small-scale cottage industries will strengthen the knowledge
  center activities in the form of e-rural commerce with some revenue accruing to the
  KC.

  Women Empowerment

  Gender concerns are central to the project. More than half the volunteers are
  women. This has positively reflected in the increase in the number of women users.
  In the evening some knowledge centers (KCs) provide counseling to women. Many
  women have formed Self Help Groups (SHGs) paying monthly subscriptions. They
  borrow money from the SHGs, when there is a need, especially for education of
  children and starting cottage industries. The interest on the money borrowed accrues
  to the SHGs. The KCs help women get training related to new economic opportunities
  like incense stick manufacturing, pickle making, phenol and soap oil production and
  ornamental artifacts from seashells. Handling of PC and answering men‟s questions
  give women new confidence and status in the community. The agricultural laborers,
  especially women, whose wages are paid partly in grains, are also anxious to know
  the sale prices.



  Sustainability

          The completed project has led to identification of a few key elements that
  should go into a successful use of ICTs in rural development in the Indian context.
  For many the criteria for evaluating telecentres until now seem restricted to the
  financial “success”. The bottom line being if a telecentre or radio station makes
  money, then it is sustainable. No consideration about social sustainability or the
  impact on social change. Sustainability deals with a wider range of issues. Let us
  look at ownership, for example: community ownership is key to the
  sustainability of a community communication project. However, this ownership
  can have multiple facets. Having a legal title to the facility is one of these, but it is
  not sufficient to guarantee sustainability. Having managerial responsibility, control
  over content, and a say in the project‟s future are equally important. Sustainable
  community ownership requires that the community has not only legal
  ownership, but that also is prepared to take responsibility for the project
  because it has internalized the sense of ownership.

  From the six years of experience, this project has collected several success stories.
  Based on govt. entitlements information, several women have got loans and have
  started their own businesses. Some of them obtained training in new business
  opportunities. Now the village women volunteers and self help group members have
  established good relationships with govt. departments and officials and contest
  elections to local panchayats and societies. Through market information several
  farmers get a good price for their grains from different markets. Information
  provided on various farming techniques and pest control methods help the rural
  community extensively. Many farmers get the information on inter-cropping and
  multi cropping and implement it in their fields. Most people are using the animal
  husbandry database, doctors‟ addresses and wireless phone (in emergencies) facility.




e-Governance for Smart Governance                                        54
  Schoolteachers are using our Educational CDs to improve the science / arithmetic
  knowledge of children. They also prepare question papers using the computers in the
  KCs and issue the printed question to the students. Many children/students/public
  are getting training in MS Office, Adobe PageMaker and Adobe Photoshop. Educated
  youth surf the net and develop market linkages with several companies making milk
  powder, fruit juice, etc. Through Internet many students get public examination
  results and mark sheets, education course details, software development details,
  entrance examination results, medical and engineering counseling details, etc. Many
  college students and research students are preparing their project reports using the
  knowledge center computers. Many students use computer dictionary.

  Panchayat (Local body) leaders are keeping the accounts, typing letterheads / letters
  in the knowledge centers. The resource persons of District Rural Development
  Agency and Small Scale Industries Corporation of Pondicherry use the centers for
  preparing course material, training guides, trainer‟s details, summary of the training,
  etc.

  Employment news provided by the knowledge centers is found very useful. Several
  people have got employment in fire service department, army, private companies,
  police service, education department, etc. Private companies and employee unions
  are also using our system and preparing their accounts, salary certificates,
  subscription details, employee details, etc.

  Many old people share their traditional medicinal information and make it available
  for all the networked villages.

  Villagers have used the facilities available at the centers to prepare petitions to
  appropriate authorities to get roads, streetlights, drainage facility, bus facility,
  compound wall for cremation place, etc.

  Weather report is very useful for farmers, brick manufactures, fishermen etc. If
  somebody wants to contact a person in the village they call the village knowledge
  center phone. When a govt. official receives an application from the villagers, if
  he/she needs any clarification, the official uses the wireless telephone at the KC to
  contact a higher official to be able to take an immediate decision. This is appreciated
  both by the official concerned and the applicant. Based on bullion and silver prices
  provided at the KC, people buy gold (whenever the price is low). Many pregnant
  women benefited form the medical care information about pregnancy. A few people
  got STD / ISD code information from the village knowledge centers. In the morning,
  many villagers are visiting the center to read the daily newspaper. LIC agents are
  using Internet to find out the various income tax schemes, commission, and also
  submit their yearly reports to the clients using computer/printer facility. Govt officials
  use the knowledge centers extensively; they type their letters and reports, and issue
  caste certificates, monthly income certificates, voting cards, ration cards, etc.
  Now we are collaborating with Aravind Eye Hospital at Pondicherry. The hospital
  provides training for our village volunteers in basic ophthalmologic examination. In
  the past one-month our village volunteers have identified several cases and sent the
  patients to the hospital for free eye treatment. The officials of eye hospital also take
  part in the weekly village meetings and explain the various eye problems to the rural
  community.


  Lessons Learnt

        The programme has been designed on the Antyodaya principle of
  Mahatma Gandhi, i.e., ensure that the poorest person in the village gains
  from the technology and that technology does not further enlarge the rich-
  poor divide. Some of the lessons we have learnt are the following.


e-Governance for Smart Governance                                         55
          Connectivity, content and sustainability should receive concurrent attention.
          Constraints must be removed on the basis of a malady-remedy analysis; for
           example, wired and wireless technologies could be used where telephone
           connections are not adequate or satisfactory. Similarly, solar power can be
           harnessed where the regular supply of power is irregular. The approach
           should be based on the principle that there is an implemental solution for
           every problem.
          The information provided should be demand driven and should be relevant
           to the day-to-day life and work of rural women and men. Also, semi-
           literate women should be accorded priority in training to operate the centre,
           since this is an effective method of enhancing the self-esteem and social
           prestige of women living in poverty.
          Knowledge dissemination should be linked to access to the inputs needed to
           apply the knowledge for economic activities.
          The Knowledge Centres should operate on the principle of social inclusion,
           thereby presenting a win-win situation for all.
          The programmes designed to empower rural families with new knowledge
           and skills should be designed on the antyodaya model, where the
           empowerment starts with the poorest and most underprivileged women and
           men.
          The local population should have a sense of ownership of the Knowledge
           Centre. It should be client managed and controlled, so that the information
           provided is demand and user driven.
          The local population should be willing to make contributions towards the
           expenses of the Knowledge Centre, so that the long-term economic
           sustainability of the programme is ensured. Contributions in cash or kind
           generate a sense of ownership and pride and create an economic stake in
           the operation of the centre.

  Proposed Phase of the Research Project

  Based on an analysis of the outcome of the completed phase of the project,
  evaluation data, and ongoing policy changes, the goal of the proposed phase is to
  enable the Union Territory of Pondicherry become the first Millennium Development
  State in the country based on UN Millennium Development Goals.

  Climate Management is key to managing Water, Energy, Health, Agriculture,
  Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management.

  Out of the Rural Knowledge Centers programme was born the idea of “National
  Virtual Academy for Food Security and Rural Prosperity [NVA]”, which aims to
  bring together experts and grassroots level people in a two-way communication. The
  ultimate goal of NVA is the promotion of human security and happiness in all its
  dimensions.

  Recognition


  This project has won two international awards viz., Motorola Dispatch
  Solution Gold Award 1999 and Stockholm Challenge Award 2001 under the
  Global Village Category.




e-Governance for Smart Governance                                      56
             What is Open Source Software?


                                         (Source: The Open Source Initiative 2002
                                 http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition_plain.php)




  Open source software (OSS) by definition means that the source code is freely
  available, the source code may be used, copied, extended, and redistributed with or
  without modifications, and may be offered either with or without a fee. Where a fee
  is charged it is most commonly charged for warranties, support, or for accepting
  indemnity or liability obligations to your customers. Where a fee is charged you
  cannot charge for the original source code.

  A few noteworthy examples of OSS are: Sendmail: the program that routes over
  80% of all email on the Internet; Perl: the programming language that allows
  dynamic features on many web sites. Apache; is the most popular web server
  software in use on the Internet; BIND (the Berkeley Internet Name Daemon): the de
  facto DNS (Domain Name System) server for the Internet; Mozilla is the open code
  software used in the popular Netscape browser.

   The OSS application that is probably creating the most excitement in public sectors
                      at the moment is Linux, or versions thereof.

  The 'Open Source Initiative' (OSI) And The Open Source Definition

  The 'Open Source Initiative' (OSI) is a non-profit corporation based in the U.S.
  dedicated to managing and promoting the Open Source Definition for the good of the
  community, specifically through the OSI Certified Open Source Software certification
  mark and program.

  The Open Source Definition spells out the essential qualities of open source software.
  However, the term "open source" itself is subject to misuse, and because it's
  descriptive, it can't be protected as a trademark. Since the community needs a
  reliable way of knowing whether a piece of software really is open source, the OSI is
  registering a certification mark, 'OSI Certified', for this purpose. OSI has also
  created a certification logo.




  If either of these marks appear on a piece of software, the software is being
  distributed under a license that conforms to the 'Open Source Definition'. Use of
  these marks for software that is not distributed under an OSI approved license is an
  infringement of OSI's certification marks and is against the law.




e-Governance for Smart Governance                                      57
   Open Source Definition And Distribution Criteria

  Open source doesn't just mean access to the source code. For a software application
  to be considered 'open source' it must meet certain distribution criteria. These
  criteria in effect 'define' what constitutes OSS. The criteria are:

  1. Free Redistribution

  The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a
  component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several
  different sources. The license shall not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.

  2. Source Code

  The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in source code as
  well as compiled form. Where some form of a product is not distributed with source
  code, there must be a well-publicized means of obtaining the source code for no
  more than a reasonable reproduction cost preferably, downloading via the Internet
  without charge. The source code must be the preferred form in which a programmer
  would modify the program. Deliberately obfuscated source code is not allowed.
  Intermediate forms such as the output of a preprocessor or translator are not
  allowed.

  3. Derived Works

  The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be
  distributed under the same terms as the license of the original software.

  4. Integrity of The Author's Source Code

  The license may restrict source code from being distributed in modified form only if
  the license allows the distribution of "patch files" with the source code for the
  purpose of modifying the program at build time. The license must explicitly permit
  distribution of software built from modified source code. The license may require
  derived works to carry a different name or version number from the original
  software.

  5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups

  The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.

  6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavour

  The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific
  field of endeavour. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a
  business, or from being used for genetic research.

  7. Distribution of License

  The rights attached to the program must apply to all to whom the program is
  redistributed without the need for execution of an additional license by those parties.

  8. License Must Not Be Specific to a Product
  The rights attached to the program must not depend on the program's being part of
  a particular software distribution. If the program is extracted from that distribution



e-Governance for Smart Governance                                       58
  and used or distributed within the terms of the program's license, all parties to whom
  the program is redistributed should have the same rights as those that are granted
  in conjunction with the original software distribution.

  9. The License Must Not Restrict Other Software

  The license must not place restrictions on other software that is distributed along
  with the licensed software. For example, the license must not insist that all other
  programs distributed on the same medium must be open-source software.

  Open Source Software Licensing Arrangements

  The licenses for most software are designed to maintain the integrity of a commercial
  vendor's intellectual property and ensure a suitable return on investment is possible.
  Supporters of open source software claim that this takes away the freedom to share
  and change the software as desired. Open source software is usually distributed
  under an arrangement that provides the freedom they desire. There are several
  licensing models for OSS. Some require that all changes made to the source must be
  freely distributed with the modified product. Other licenses permit an organisation to
  make changes and keep the changes private.

  The most common license is the GNU General Public License (GPL) which is
  structured to guarantee any user's freedom to share and change the licenced
  software. The GPL applies to most of the Free Software Foundation's (FSF) software
  and to any other program whose authors commit to using it; the GNU Lesser General
  Public License covers some other FSF software but its use is being phased out.
  Currently the OSI lists 34 approved licences. These licences are available at
  http://www.opensource.org/licenses/

  The GPL is designed to make sure that users have the freedom to distribute copies of
  OSS software unhindered with all the usual rights, i.e. the source code is provided,
  the software can be changed or pieces of it can be used in new free programs and
  that the user is aware that these rights exist. The user's rights are protected through
  allocation of copyright and provision of a licence to give legal permission to copy,
  distribute and modify the software.

  Author protection is provided because the GPL ensures all users understand there is
  no warranty for the software. If the software is modified by someone else and
  passed on, the recipients know that they do not have the original. Accordingly, any
  problems introduced by others will not reflect on the original authors' reputations.
  The GPL also provide a mechanism to avoid a situation where redistributors of
  software could obtain patent licenses and, in effect, make the program proprietary.

  Other Types of Software

  Open source software is not the same as Freeware. Freeware is the name of
  compiled programs that are distributed free-of-charge (compiled programs can only
  be read by the hardware that is to run the application). Freeware as a rule is not
  normally modifiable by the user. There is a large amount of Freeware available in the
  public sphere - ranging from small help programs (such as a MS 'Frontpage' editor
  add-on) to well-known applications such as Microsoft's Internet Explorer.

  Commercial software sold without the source code being available, and without the
  right to change or redistribute it, is called Proprietary Software. It is the licence
  conditions, in particular, of such Proprietary Software that has prompted the
  development of open-source alternatives. The majority of licences impose



e-Governance for Smart Governance                                       59
  restrictions on the number of computers the software can be installed on, the right to
  change the software, and the right to redistribute it. The licence conditions for
  proprietary software grant users the right to use the software subject to specific
  terms, not to owning the software.

  One other term people are regularly confronted with is 'Shareware'. Shareware is in
  fact a method of software distribution and marketing, and not a type of program.
  This 'try-before-you-buy' approach to software has been adopted by traditional
  'shelfware' companies, proprietary software distributors and now, nearly every large
  software company provides some type of free trial version of their software.

  Types Of Open Source Software



  Some Commonly Used Open Source Software In Government And Business

  4.1 Linux

  Linux is the program most commonly associated with Open Source Software. Linux,
  or, more accurately, GNU/Linux, was originally designed for running on Intel-based
  PCs, but is now available for other platforms, such as Macintosh, Alpha 14, and Sun
  SPARC.

  Linux is developed under the GNU General Public License and its source code is freely
  available to everyone. This means that Linux can be distributed freely as long as the
  source code accompanies the program. If any parties want to distribute changes and
  modifications they make to Linux, they must also distribute the source code for such
  changes.

  This, doesn't mean however, that Linux and its assorted distributions are free.
  Companies and developers may charge money for it as long as the source code
  remains available. Linux may be used for a wide variety of purposes including
  networking, software development, and as an end-user platform. Linux is often
  considered an excellent, low-cost alternative to other more expensive operating
  systems.

  4.2 Free BSD/BSD

  BSD (originally: Berkeley Software Distribution) refers to the particular version of the
  UNIX operating system that was developed at and distributed from the University of
  California at Berkeley. A number indicating the particular distribution level of the
  BSD system (for example, 4.3 BSD") customarily precedes "BSD".

  BSD UNIX has been popular and many commercial implementations of UNIX systems
  are based on or include some BSD code.

  4.3 Apache

  The Apache HTTP Server Project is a development project aimed at creating a robust,
  commercial- grade, extensible, and freely-available source code implementation of
  an HTTP server for contemporary operating systems including UNIX and Windows
  NT.

  The Apache server is the most used web server on the Internet, and has
  approximately 72% of the market share, according to the surveys carried out by


e-Governance for Smart Governance                                        60
  Netcraft. There are currently over five million Apache web servers on the Internet.15
  A summary of the survey is available at http://www.netcraft.com/survey/

  Apache can be used on a number of platforms and with many operating systems.
  Amongst the most common operating systems used by the Apache web server are:
  FreeBSD, Sun Solaris and Linux. Apache may be seen as a reference implementation
  for the HTTP standard for all platforms for which it was developed.

  4.4 BIND/DNS

  BIND (Berkeley Internet Name Demon) is an implementation of the DNS protocol
  (Domain Name System) and provides a freely distributable reference implementation
  of the most important components of the DNS protocol. This includes: a name-
  server, a DNS library for translating names to and from IP addresses, and a tool for
  verifying that a DNS server is working according to the standard.

  BIND is the predominant name-server on the Internet and is essential for using
  domain names, e.g. www.agimo.gov.au, to find the IP address on a computer on the
  Internet.

  4.5 Sendmail

  Sendmail is the most popular server for Internet email. Approximately 75 percent of
  all email servers on the Internet are variations of Sendmail. Sendmail is freely
  available and can also be re-distributed freely.

  Sendmail offers three main types of services: email routing (including various forms
  of authentication and encryption devices), email storage and retrieving (including
  support for POP and IMAP) and opportunities for expanding the email program
  (expansion such as delivery confirmations and integration with a PKI).

  4.6 Perl

  Perl is a programming language with extremely versatile      text-manipulation abilities.
  Perl works with third-party databases like Oracle, Sybase,   Postgres, and many others
  through the abstract database interface called DBI. Perl     can also work with HTML,
  XML, and other mark-up languages. This makes it a            powerful tool for making
  interactive and dynamic web pages.

  A large majority of commercial web pages offering dialogue with the users and
  access to database servers are developed with Perl. One example of this is
  eBay.com. Perl can be integrated in web-servers, thus improving processing speed
  substantially.

  Open Standards

  Open Source Software (OSS) has the benefit that it is built to conform to open
  standards developed by non-partisan international standards bodies. This makes it
  possible for open source and proprietary software that conforms to these standards
  to interoperate and exchange data.

  The availability of the source code makes it possible to adapt and improve the
  program as required. It also makes it possible to create versions for new computer
  platforms and to gain detailed knowledge as to how the program works. If the
  program needs to be corrected, a user can make the changes himself, assuming he



e-Governance for Smart Governance                                        61
  knows how. The program can also be adapted to the local environment - for
  example, in a different language, if the suppliers cannot supply one already made.

  Many free programs have limitations on how they can be used. A common example
  is that a program cannot be used for commercial purposes. Such restrictions do not
  exist in respect of software distributed under GPL. If users want to use the program
  on new platforms (e.g. in embedded systems), this is also acceptable.




e-Governance for Smart Governance                                    62
     2003 headstrong A                 GLOBAL                CONSULTANCY




            Accelerate Your Portal Implementation
                                  10 Best Practices

                                                           Nitin Lalwani, Headstrong

 Over the last several years many organizations have embraced portal technologies to
transform and extend their existing boundaries. These technologies have enabled
organizations to collaborate with employees, partners, and suppliers, thereby removing
silos and providing them with centralized access to applications and personalized
information. The key to deriving the most value from a portal deployment, however, is to
aggregate data, content, and processes from existing applications, providing users with
custom views into the applications they need to perform their jobs effectively. As a result,
organizations make better-informed decisions, increase productivity, increase
profitability, reduce costs and remain competitive in the marketplace.

Implementing a portal solution is not just about implementing technology; rather
success is typically dependent on managing the operational, political and social issues
that might occur as a result of implementing the portal. The challenges and business
issues may be unique for each company, but there are some consistent themes related
to change management, operational changes, and political issues common to all
organizations that can impede the progress of the portal initiative.

Timing the implementation of a portal solution is important as well, and the best time to
implement a portal solution depends on many factors such as:

o   Type of portal (employee, customer, supplier or
    partner) to be designed,
o   Functionality and features desired,
o   Structure and content to be displayed,
o   Complexity of the applications to be integrated,
    and
o   Number of back-office systems to be integrated.

The notion of accelerating a portal project is defined by three dimensions - time, quality, and
scope. The focus of this paper is to introduce best practices for
decreasing the time (duration) to implementation, while maintaining a consistent quality
level and defined scope as shown in figure 1.




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                           63
                                        Figure 1


     TIME




Through Headstrong's portal implementation experiences we have identified ten best
practices critical to accelerating the time of your portal implementation. The practices
are presented in no particular order of importance, each contribute to accelerating the
portal implementation.

1 Ensure tight coordination between business and IT communities


Only through business and IT communities working together will the fastest path to
portal implementation be achieved. With reference to portal implementations, there are
three facets that further illustrate why tight coordination between IT and business
communities are critical:

•   To align the portal project with business goals and objectives, identify business
    drivers and expected benefits before implementation begins. This will cause
    fewer changes in requirements during the pre- and post-implementation periods.

•   Have the correct mix of business and IT members working together to
    accelerate implementation time. On one hand, the business team members have an
    in-depth knowledge of business processes, both from an "as is" perspective and a "to
    be" goal.     On the other hand, the IT team (or integration services firm in most
    cases) creates visual diagrams, mock-ups and workflows for all the portal
    functionality based on how the system needs to be designed.         Both the IT and
    business community work jointly to validate these requirements.


•   The business and IT communities need to work together to plan for changes in
    business processes, as well as individual responsibilities and organizational
    changes, that might occur as a result of a portal implementation. It is only through


    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                   64
    this collaboration that the organization can effectively manage and overcome the
    normal resistance to change that will impede and slow down the time it takes to
    implement the portal.

2   Sell the portal project from top down within the business organization



Buy-in from all levels of your organization is paramount to success of the implementation -
executive, management, functional groups, and end users. Garnering deep and lasting
cooperation across silos (IT departments, business units, support functions) is a
challenge that must be anticipated and addressed at the outset of the project, and it
must come from the top down.

It is critical to have a business sponsor working closely with the team and
championing the effort throughout the organization. He or she plays the role of change
agent and to some extent educator as the portal is being implemented. Your project can
be accelerated if you have the support and participation of the business sponsor. If the
sponsor is at a high enough level in the organization, buy in for the implementation from
all divisions is more likely, and issues can be resolved in a timely manner. Without senior
management involvement political boundaries, integration challenges, and competing
budget intentions will surface and jeopardize the portal success.



3 Know your portal products


To accelerate the time to market of your portal, it is critical to select the right portal
product and corresponding third party products that will serve your business environment
best. Perform product evaluations before purchasing a portal product. Evaluation in-
cludes business, technical, architectural, and due diligence ratings based on criteria critical
to your business.

Further, a team with a strong understanding of portals and supporting products, such
as the content management system, will definitely accelerate the design and development
time. It is imperative that the team understands what functionality is available "out-of-
the-box". Out-of-the-box functionality ensures quick solutions and a faster return on
investment. Through this understanding, the business analysis team will properly set
user expectations of the portal interface options and technical constraints. Understanding
the product capabilities, strengths, and weaknesses will avoid encountering typical
mistakes for first time implementers - resulting in getting it right the first time.


4   Deliver high business value, low complexity requirements first


Document and prioritize requirements for the portal implementation as well as content
channels that would add utmost value to the core business of the organization. Initially,
focus on implementing high business value, low complex functionality in a rea-
sonable timeframe, rather than aiming for all functionality that would require a longer
period of time as shown in figure 2. To accelerate the portal deployment, prioritize the
requirements, keep it simple and improve them once the organization has gone through a
learning curve. Ensure that the content structure and priorities are documented and
agreed by the business and IT and integration services firm.




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                         65
This agreement is imperative since there may be changes in the organization structure
and new employees might have different agendas, which will affect the requirements
and their prioritization.




   e-Governance for Smart Governance                                  66
5   Defer integration with complex legacy applications

If you have a complex homegrown or mature application that could prove
difficult to integrate with the portal, consider integrating the application at a later
time. However, if you have an application that is less complex and the
architecture is relatively new, then it might be a candidate for integration in the
pilot phase. For example figure 3 represents a particular client environment that
has a mix of applications using J2EE technology and others based on mainframe
technology. In a pilot phase its recommended that you design portlets for the
java-based applications and leave the mainframe applications as stand alone
applications for integration in a later phase.




The key to accelerating your portal implementation is deliver results with a scalable
and dependable solution in a short time frame and expand the application over time
to meet your business needs.


6   Develop vendor relationships


It is critical to understand relationships with all the vendors that are involved in a
portal implementation. Focus on partnerships between your portal vendor and
middleware, content management, integration firms, collaboration, business




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                        67
intelligence, and other relevant technology segments. These relationships will yield
information and capability to successfully navigate your portal implementation.
Service integration firms have strong relationships with portal vendors and con-
sequently more leverage to get issues resolved quickly through their support
channels.     Take advantage of their ability to escalate issues through the portal
vendor's professional services, R&D and engineering groups in order to drive faster
and more precise solutions to problems.

7   Architect your portal solution for integration


It is essential to consider the big picture from the very beginning. Understanding
the existing hardware, network requirements, and infrastructure will help you
identify the impact of the portal solution on the existing technology.

As you are defining the portal solution, design the system architecture for
scalability. Employee, partner, and customer users will have an impact on your
infrastructure if the number of users will increase substantially. Be sure that the
selected software, existing hardware and infrastructure will support the growing
needs of your portal. Analyze your architecture for redundancy of applications
and functionality.


Create technical designs that illustrate and clearly define how portal will integrate
with business applications, operate within the current systems environment, and
integrate with new technologies such as the content management solution.
Leveraging    existing   technology     environments,     creating   development
standards, designing components for reuse can significantly accelerate your
development time.


Assess the risks and develop a mitigation strategy to handle security risks for a
portal implementation. Analyze security from top down, collectively examining
the different levels that make up a portal: the network, applications or services,
online database searches, storage and transactions. To combat security threats,
design mechanisms such as software packages, firewalls, and intrusion detection
systems.

The portal architecture will enable the organization to understand the impact to
current environments prior to the portal implementation. With this knowledge
the organization can then confidently commit to procuring hardware, software,
security systems, infrastructure and human capital as required to create a portal
solution that has high performance standards.

8   Build content competency centers

Determine clear project ownership for this effort. Designating a portal owner
provides a common point for portal coordination efforts. The services integration
firm works with the pilot community to define content production, review,
approval and publishing capability. Develop a content governance model, which
will help future communities to create their content based on the same structure.
The governance model clarifies responsibilities of business people to produce
content, streamlines accountability and establishes a measuring tool for future




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                      68
  communities. Document and communicate the model to stakeholders enabling
  the business to allocate resources, prepare for changed jobs and responsibilities
  thus reducing time to acceptance.

  Assign business resources to each content area during the requirements gathering.
  These resources are content owners so that knowledge transfer within the
  organization will be easier when the integration services firm leaves. Another
  benefit of allowing the business to own the content is that different communities
  will work in parallel reducing project life-cycle time.


  9   Use a proven deployment methodology


  A portal methodology defines activities, techniques, roles, activities and
  deliverables for the project. Using a proven methodology streamlines the pro-
  cess and reduces the learning curve for project team members. Experience and
  capability will enable a team to navigate a project more effectively resulting in less
  rework, and meeting optimal delivery expectations. The project management plan
  should clearly define roles and responsibilities that are understood by the inter-
  nal staff as well as the integration firm. Documentation at all levels will prepare
  you for a smooth and efficient deployment. Identify a strong project manager
  with the authority and expertise in deploying portals to make decisions quickly
  and effectively.

  Focus on reusable components that will reduce the design time significantly and
  tend to accelerate the development of the portal. Leveraging third party cus-
  tomized portlets and framework will accelerate your development time. Use
  frameworks and powerful tools that are available on the market for rapidly
  creating, customizing and maintaining J2EE web applications. These applications
  adapt readily to changes in business and technical requirements and are built
  using traditional programming techniques.

  Pilot one portal community and its functionality, develop the portal structure and
  framework, and then continue to rebuild your portal solution. The ability to test
  the pilot solution and understanding


Employee
Participation




                                                                    Time




      e-Governance for Smart Governance                                       69
from your mistakes will help mitigate the risk of rework when you are building
your portal solution.

Headstrong's experience has revealed that user participation in a portal
community will drop quickly after the initial rollout. Consequently, the
objective during the expansion phase is to retain and build participation in the
community through the release of new functionality, features, and introducing
new communities and channels; shown in figure 4. It is also critical to keep
content vibrant so that portal users visit the portal.


A strong proven methodology is derived from a history that includes the portal
framework extensions, techniques, dependencies and lessons learned. Using a
strong proven methodology, provides a predictable outcome, accelerates time to
market and is critical for success.


10 I Communicate, communicate, communicate

Communication is critical to the success of any portal implementation. A
communication plan needs to be adopted where the business, IT, and the
integration partner need to discuss, brainstorm and resolve issues on a regular
basis. Promote the portal internally and to partners. It is imerative that business
owners and end users are involved and committed to the implementation project.
It is best to have the individuals involved with the portal implementation meet
on a weekly basis to share information. Maintain strong feedback that aims to
improve the overall quality of experience for sponsors., users, and business
partners. A weekly meeting gives everyone an opportunity to share issues and
get different insights on the challenge faced.

Access to content owners, data managers, data maintainers and application
managers is also necessary to bring these functions into the portal. Use the
communication medium to eliminate silos and reengineer the organization. Other
groups that may be planning sophisticated Web sites or competing portal efforts
must be aware of the upcoming consolidation. The business owners should be
the owners should be owners of the content and they should feel that they are
the stewards of the organization‟s data by effectively communicating during the
course of the implementation.


Conclusion


As portal product vendors continue to mature their products and expand t h e i r
relati on ship with middleware, collaboration, content management, and other
vendors, organizations will deploy portal products to extend their boundaries. With a
proven methodology, effective communication, and sponsorship from all levels,
enterprises will be able to realize business value from a portal deployment through
aggregating data, content, and processing from existing applications, and by




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                      70
providing constituents with custom views into the applications they need to do their
jobs effectively. Incorporating these best practices into your portal implementation
will enhance your capability to accelerate the portal implementation. These
accelerators have been harvested from numerous implementation engagements for
our clients and ourselves across the globe. These accelerators have been refined after
each project and will help you improve the success of your portal implementation.
We hope these lessons will guide you and assist you to achieve your portal
objectives rapidly.


 About Headstrong

 Headstrong is a global consultancy focused on helping clients achieve measurable
 results with their business and systems integration efforts. We help our clients align
 technology initiatives with business goals while integrating their business with their
 customers, suppliers and employees to improve enterprise value. We offer a full range
 of integration services, including opportunity assessment, design and implementation,
 post implementation optimisation and application/solution maintenance. With a 20-
 year track record of proven results, our client base includes many of the world's most
 respected companies. Headstrong is headquartered near Washington DC, with a global
 presence across North America, Europe and Asia-Pacific. For more information, visit
 www.headstrong.com or e-mail us at information@headstrong.com.

 About the Author


 Nitin Lalwani has extensive experience in setting strategic vision, project management,
 requirements analysis, design and development of information systems with expertise
 in portal development and CRM technologies. He has led a variety of engagements for
 clients within the financial services, healthcare, public sector and telecommunications
 industries. He received his engineering undergraduate degree from the University of
 Bombay in India and an MBA from the University of South Carolina.


© 2003 Headstrong Corporation. "Headstrong", logo and designs are registered
trademarks of Headstrong Corporation. All other names and logos may be trademarks of
other companies. All rights reserved.

This paper was originally published at http://www.headstrong.com




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                          71
              Trust in Electronic Environment


                                                                     Vakul Sharma


Cyberspace represents a 24x7x365 medium, which is always in flux. Cyberspace is a
virtual space-it has no boundaries, no geographical mass. It is a space inhabited by
bytes. It represents an interconnected space created by computers, computer
systems and computer networks.

Regulating Cyberspace

Regulating cyberspace means regulating not only the computers, computer systems
and computer networks but also the man behind the machines. It could only be
achieved, if and only if, the law recognizes the man and the machine both as victims
and perpetrators of cyber crimes.

Interestingly, the law has been able to recognize the man and the machine and their
role in cyber crimes. Have you ever heard that a crime has been committed against a
knife or a revolver? But a crime could be committed against a computer!

Components of Cyberspace


Netizen

Cyberspace is a place where the entry is not bound by geographic boundaries. Any
person who lives in this cyberspace is part of the community referred to as Netizen.

Netizen, unlike citizen has no physical existence. He is an unknown entity. He has no
fixed geographic coordinates. He traverses cyberspace from one set of coordinates to
another. Is the Netizen an alien? In a virtual space, Netizen exist, citizens don‟t!

Technology

Laws are being enacted to regulate technology. But the question is – could you
regulate technology by enacting technology intensive laws. Presently, the debate
centers on technology specific vs. technology neutral laws.

Emergence of Cyber Laws

Cyber Laws are here to regulate both man and the machine. It is recognition of the
fact that the new emerging medium also requires regulatory environment.

Defining Cyber Laws

Cyberspace requires cyber laws. Physical laws have limitations in the sense that they
are uni-dimensional in application. They are meant for the physical world, which is
static, defined and incremental, whereas cyberspace is dynamic, undefined and




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                      72
exponential. It   needs   dynamic   laws,   keeping   pace   with   the   technological
advancement.

The word “cyber law” encompasses all the cases, statutes and constitutional
provisions that affect persons and institutions who control the entry to cyberspace,
provide access to cyberspace, create the hardware and software which enable people
to access cyberspace or use their own devices to go “online” and enter cyberspace.

Cyber Laws are in fact an umbrella term and covers issues and practices related to
E-commerce, E-governance, Copyright, Trademarks, Patents and Cyber Crimes.

Electronic Governance & Cyber Laws

The Information Technology Act has given legal recognition to electronic records
(like: data, record or data generated, image or sound stored, received or sent in an
electronic form or micro film or computer generated micro fiche), subject to the
requirements that the information remains accessible so as to be usable for a
subsequent reference.

Use in Government and It’s Agencies

Use of electronic records and digital signatures in government and its agencies for
filing, issue, grant, receipt or payment of money is now an acceptable mode [S.6].

Electronic records or information, whenever retained, as required by law must be
retained in the format in which it was originally generated, sent or received [S.7].

Electronic Gazette

Rule, regulation, order, byelaw, notification or any other matter could now also be
published in the Electronic Gazette apart from the Official Gazette. The date of
publication shall be deemed to be that date on which the Gazette was first published
in any form [S.8].

Electronic governance as envisaged in the IT Act does not confer a right upon any
person to insist that any Ministry or Department of the Central or State government
(or any authority or body) to accept, issue, create, retain or preserve any document
in the form of electronic records or to participate in any monetary transaction in the
electronic form [S.9].

Digital Signatures

It has been realized that Internet being a public network would never be secure
enough and there would always be a fear of interception, transmission errors,
delays, deletion, authenticity or verification of an electronic message using Internet
as a medium. Hence the goal was to protect the message, not the medium.

The idea was to adopt a technology that makes communications or transactions
legally binding. The functional equivalent approach extended notions such as
“writing”, “signature” and “original” of traditional paper-based requirements to a
paperless world. That is, in order to be called legally binding all electronic
communications or transactions must meet the fundamental requirements, one
authenticity of the sender to enable the recipient (or relying party) to determine who




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                        73
really sent the message, two message‟s integrity, the recipient must be able to
determine whether or not the message received has been modified en route or is
incomplete and third, non-repudiation, the ability to ensure that the sender cannot
falsely deny sending the message, nor falsely deny the contents of the message.

It led to the acceptance of cryptography, a data encryption technique, which
provided just that kind of message protection. Based on the nature and number of
keys cryptography has evolved into Symmetric (private key cryptographic system)
and Asymmetric (public key cryptographic system) cryptography. In symmetric
cryptography a single secret key is used for both encryption and decryption of a
message, whereas in asymmetric cryptography encryption and decryption is done
involving an asymmetric key pair consisting of a public and a private key.

Digital signatures are based on asymmetric, or public key, cryptography and are
capable of fulfilling the demand of burgeoning e-commerce by not only providing
message authentication, integrity and non-repudiation function but also making it
highly scalable. Another important feature is the involvement of a trusted third party,
“Certifying Authority”, to issue digital signature certificate.

Digital Signatures & Public Key Infrastructure

The basic problem with the aforesaid digital signature regime is that it operates in
online, software driven space, without human intervention. Sender sends a digitally
signed message; recipient receives and verifies it. The only requirement is that both
sender and the recipient to have digital signature software at their respective ends.
How about authenticity? Suppose A sends to B a digitally signed message, how
would B make sure that it is the message indeed originated from A? How to
authenticate that the message was from A only, and not from A 1 or A2.

This calls for a participation of a trusted third party (TTP) to certify for individuals‟
(subscribers) identities, and their relationship to their public keys. The trusted third
party is referred to as a Certifying Authority (CA). The function of a CA is to verify
and authenticate the identity of a subscriber (a person in whose name the Digital
Signature Certificate is issued).

A digital signature certificate securely binds the identity of the subscriber. It contains
name of the subscriber, his public key information, name of the certifying authority
who issued the digital signature certificate, its public key information and the
certificate‟s validity period. These certificates are stored in an online, publicly
accessible repository maintained by the Controller of Certifying Authorities or in the
repository maintained by the CA. Every CA has to maintain operation as per its
certification practice statement (CPS). The CPS specifies the practices that each CA
employs in issuing digital signature certificates.

To accept or reject digital signatures, one must ask the following questions:

   (a) Whether the Certifying Authority (trusted third party) is a licensed one?
   (b) Whether a digital signature has been created as per the technology standards
       prescribed under the law?
   (c) Whether the digital signature verification process has been successful?

Affirmative answers to all above questions will give legal inviolability to the digital
signatures by making them legally binding to the signer (sender).




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                           74
Digital    signature    establishes    the     principle    that,     in   an    electronic
environment, the basic legal functions of a signature are performed by way
of a method that identifies the signer of an electronic message and also
confirms that the said signer approved the content of that electronic
message.


Privacy on the Net


Privacy is the claim of individuals, groups or institutions to determine for themselves
when, how and to what extent information about them is communicated to others.
Right to privacy is more of an implied obligation. It is the „right to be let alone‟.

In the legal parlance, the issue of confidentiality comes up where an obligation of
confidence arises between a „data collector‟ and a „data subject‟. This may flow from
a variety of circumstances or in relation to different types of information, which could
be employment, medical or financial information. An obligation of confidence gives
the data subject the right not to have his information used for other purposes or
disclosed without his permission unless there are other overriding reasons in the
public interest for this to happen. That is, where an obligation of confidence arises, it
is unlawful for a data user to use the information for a purpose other than that for
which it was provided.

The technological advancements are threatening the privacy rights of the individual.
Search for that elusive personal information is what matters the most. As one
marketer puts it “Using a customer‟s birth date is fine- if the customer gave you that
information. But if you don‟t have a relationship with a customer, and you approach
her with an offer using that birth date, that is fairly offensive”.


The issue of privacy has also to be looked from the point of ‘freedom of
expression’    –   as   a   fundamental      right   of   every     citizen.    The    Indian
Constitution lays down under Article 19 certain fundamental rights to every
citizen. The Art. 19 uses the expression ‘freedom’ and mentions the several
forms and aspects of it, which are secured to individuals, together with the
limitations that could be, placed upon them in the general interest of the
society.


Bibliography

Sharma Vakul: Handbook of Cyber Laws (Macmillan), 2002

Sharma Vakul: Information        Technology    –     Law and   Practice (Universal         Law
Publishing), 2004




    e-Governance for Smart Governance                                                 75

				
yan198555 yan198555
About