Category: eGovernment

  • Bill of Rights for Web Services

    Tim O’Reilly asks Do We Need A Bill of Rights for Web Services? What kinds of terms of service do you think would create open-source-like freedoms in the web services world?

    Phil Wainewright comments and asks to the commercial aspects. IMHO, these are just some of the aspects one has to consider. The wider organisational, political, and cultural aspects are just as important, if not more. Of course, I speak mainly about government, but quite frankly, I don’t think the situation is much different in the private sector.

    Tim is coming to Copenhagen for the Reboot conference. I’ll be arranging a small brunch seminar with Tim and Cory Doctorow on Saturday 21 June, and thought we should spend some time trying to find some answers to Tim’s questions. My blogging collegue René Løhde and a few other colleagues from our agency and our ministry, as well as a few CIOs from other ministries will participate. I guess we will show Tim and Cory our national Infostructurebase and talk about our experiences with web services and XML. But I also want to introduce Tim and Cory to our new IT-policy framework, which will go public really-soon-now, and hear what they think.

  • Pre-announcing priorities

    Mark Forman about getting the e-government priorities right:

    “It’s about architecture, it’s about focus on the customers, and it’s about results”

    Mark could have written the Danish e-government strategy, as next week’s announcement from our ministry will show. I could tell you more, but we have sealed lips until Friday 13 June. Hmmm, what a date to pick for a major announcement …

    Journalists are welcome to contact us for preparing articles and news coverage.

  • Architecting health

    The US Federal health architecture: FCW writes that the Department of Health and Human Services is working on an enterprise architecture plan that would include every federal department dealing with health care issues, in what could become the biggest enterprise architecture plan in the federal government.

    “We have a huge data management challenge,” Dr. Claire Broome, senior adviser to the director for integrated health information systems at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    You can say that again. I don’t know much about the US situation in this area, but I guess it indeed is a huge issue everywhere. I’m getting involved in a Danish project about one of the big issues in health architecture: medication. Well, I don’t know the right terminology in this area, but we are starting to look at the architectual issues around everything related to the “life situation” we can call “taking/getting medicin”. This is an incredibly complex area. The prescription based medicin seems to be especially interesting. The doctor – prescription – ordering – packaging – distribution – taking – cycle is the immediate process, but there are related processes which are important too, such as the whole money flow, with transactions worth more than 20 billion dollars a year.

    Although it is not the scope of the work I’m currently involved with, the medicine pricing practice seems to be an issue too. Appearently, the pharmaceuticals are a bit too smart with their pricing upgrades. With a well architected medicine system, such tricks would be difficult, if not impossible. At least if the architectural principle openness were used. Maybe we need a CMR, Central Medicine Register, which uniquely identifies and describes all medicine? The problem is not that the data is not digitised, but that it is scattered around in dozens of databases that don’t interoperate well.

    It’s a good case for doing some enterprise architecture, but also a challenging one.

  • Down the dirt road

    Enterprise buses and dirt roads. Jon Udell (blog and Infoworld column) picks up on Cape Clear’s Annrai O’Toole‘s memorable characteristic of web service-oriented architecture, “the information bus runs on a dirt road!”. Cape Clear’s hilarious Switch video introduced the dirt road bus a while ago. Now, Udell sees a fleet of buses in the SOA-debates, I’m hearing names such as enterprise service bus, universal Web services information bus, enterprise information bus, and message bus.

    The “dirt road” is our protocols, SMTP and HTTP, and how they’re routable, cacheable, and proxy-able in ways that we’ve yet to fully exploit. As Udell writes:

    The idea of dirt roads also evokes, for me, Larry Wall’s famous anecdote about the University of California’s approach to designing walkways. At the Irvine campus, according to Larry, planners just sowed grass everywhere and let the paths that emerged define where to put the sidewalks. I wonder about this a lot, lately, when thinking about the differences between LAMP (Linux/Apache/MySQL/Perl|Python|PHP) and .NET/COM or J2EE/EJB. Where’s the inflection point between these two styles? When you harden an architecture for robust transactions, how do you preserve the fluidity that the agile enterprise requires?

    Excellent questions. Great metaphors. In my experience, the bus metaphor is not unproblematic. The rumours about a global middleware mafia might be exaggerated, but I get suspicious whenever I hear people talk about the bus as if it was an “omnibus”, an omnipotent bus, i.e., a miracle cure/silver bullet. Although it may be a “polybus”, a polypotent bus, one that, as Darren’s video says, …and it’s like a bus that can go on a lot of different surfaces, like, you know, ice and snow…, but, and that’s what the video doesn’t say, that it might not be appropriate for everything. This is BTW a classic argument in technology policy studies (from Dick Schlove, see my PhD). What I’m trying to say here is that as SOA moves into the mainstream, it’s getting critical to check its limitations. What is it good at? And what is it not good at?

    Here I’m not just thinking of the ROI-stuff, which is emerging everywhere these days. My overall impression is that we could really use a good SOA anthropologist or perhaps a WS ethnographer, because we really need to see SOA as a long (cultural) revolution, perhaps especially when we talk about it in government.

    Hmm. Robust agility. Why not?

  • Best Practices en masse

     
    The UN-Habitat’s Best Practices & Local Leadership Program, physically based in Nairobi, Kenya, run the great Best Practices Database. Subscribers to Government Technology International get free access.

  • Going private

    FCW: McDonough leaving GSA: Frank McDonough, deputy associate administrator for the Office of Intergovernmental Solutions at the General Services Administration and a leader in the agency’s Trail Boss program, is leaving for a position in the private sector.

    I’ve known Frank for a couple of years, and have enjoyed working with him on GOL-IN. Good luck out there, Frank.

  • 4th in the world

    David Fletcher writes about Accenture’s 2003 eGov survey. Denmark has is now 4th on the maturity rank, after Canada, Singapore, and the US. That’s one step up from last year.

    It is very strange, but MovableType simply resists to make a clickable link to the Accenture report! Instead, it spits out Internal Error. I first thought it was my templates that are getting too heavy, but it still just wont post the link. Very strange. I’m sure there’s a logical explanation (is it too long an URL? nah?) Of course, as Stepan points out, it’s the TrackBack auto discovery that chokes on the 3MB-file. Switching it off for this message.

  • Enterprise architecture workshop

    “Enterprise architecture in e-government – Northern perspectives” is the title of a workshop we are arranging on 24-25 April 2003 in Copenhagen. From the invitation letter:

    The Danish Government is working on a white paper about a national framework for enterprise architecture. This white paper will be launched in the near future, and as part of the “next step”, we want to invite a number of our international colleagues to Wonderful Copenhagen, not only to enjoy the spring with us, but also to share experiences and ideas.

    We have invited one of the world’s leading experts on enterprise architecture in government, Brian Burke of Meta Group. He will deliver the opening keynote presentation on the workshop. The rest of the workshop will be focused on selected themes in eGovernment, illustrated with cases, presented by the participants, and discussed in interactive sessions. The last session on the workshop will be a discussion of “next steps”, with identification of possible areas of cooperation or exchange of experiences.

    We will set the final agenda based on the participants’ wishes and inputs. Our initial list of themes looks like this:

    • Drivers and barriers for eGovernment
    • Enterprise architecture in practice
    • Governance models for public sector IT
    • Common Infrastructure Projects in the public sector
    • Patterns of a lean and mean government machine 😉

    Interested? Let me know.

  • EA White papers

    Phil points to some white papers developed for the Federal Enterprise Architecture Program Management Office (FEA-PMO) by the Industry Advisory Council (IAC) Enterprise Architecture SIG. The white papers are: Advancing Enterprise Architecture Maturity (PDF), Business Line Architecture & Integration (PDF), Interoperability Strategy – Concepts, Challenges, and Recommendations (PDF) and Succeeding with Component-Based Architecture in e-Government (PDF)

    Those Danes waiting for our national white paper on IT architecture, as well as anyone else waiting for the English translation, must wait a while longer. It’s being lifted to a higher political level than we first expected.

  • OECD on e-gov

    Edwin Lau and The E-Government Task Force and the OECD E-Government Working Group has a new E-Government Imperative Policy Brief which summarises the main findings of the OECD Flagship Report on EGovernment.

    The Policy Brief highlights policy lessons from current experience in OECD member countries and suggests 10 guiding principles for successful e-government implementation:
    1 Leadership and Commitment
    2 Integration
    3 Inter-agency collaboration
    4 Financing
    5 Access
    6 Choice
    7 Citizen engagement
    8 Privacy
    9 Accountability
    10 Monitoring and evaluation

    A random quote:

    In many OECD countries, existing budgetary arrangements act against efficient e-government by funding through traditional government silos, and by not recognising ICT expenditure as an investment. Organisations need incentives for cross-organisational projects and tools for measur-ing returns on investment. This can be achieved through a government-wide approach to the assessment of e-government benefits and the sharing of savings.