14349737 Your Seat at the Table the Development of E Government Groupware and Its Future
-
Upload
licservernoida -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
0
description
Transcript of 14349737 Your Seat at the Table the Development of E Government Groupware and Its Future
qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmrtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqw
“YOUR SEAT at THE TABLE”:
The Development of e-Government Groupware and Its Future
Naoya Makino100106040
Langara College
Department of Computing Science
and Information System
CPSC2211 – Human-Computer Interaction:
Section 1
Bryan Green
March 16, 2009
In 2006, five years after September 11th, New Yorkers were terrified by a small craft
crash, which reminded them of the traumatic terrorist attack. However, all national security
agencies knew what was going on at each moment; they were able to determine that this was not
a terrorist attack within two hours, shared the up-to-date information with different agencies and
gathered more than eighty updates to collectively make the decision (DiGiammarino and
Trudeau, 7). Intellipedia, a wiki site that lets sixteen national intelligence agencies to speedily
share classified information, is an innovative use of collaborative government tool: e-
Government Groupware. This is one of the practical uses of groupware, which is an information
technology to that lets people effectively share information (Baecker, 1995). Facing the toughest
challenges of the times, such as climate changes, financial crisis, energy, and others, a
government itself is no longer capable of solving these very complicated issues; effective use of
groupware in governments is key to surviving in the 21st century. While this change is still in
development and therefore has noticeable problems such as information retrieval, security and
privacy, allowing citizens’ engagements help governments become more accountable to people.
Enhancing human interactions and organizational interactions, groupware changes the
way people cooperate with each other. Groupware is to be “intentional [group] processes and
procedures to achieve specific purposes” and to “support and facilitate the group’s work”
(Baecker, 1995). According to De Sanctis and Gallupe, groupware can be categorized into four
different systems: Face to Face Interaction (same time, same place), Remote Interaction (same
time, different place), Ongoing Tasks (different time, same place), and Communication and
Coordination (different time, different place) (Baecker, 1995); the matrix demonstrates the each
system with examples:
2
(Cscwmatrix.jpg, 2007). Each system has its own purposes and usages, and one that can be used
in e-government most effectively is a cooperative hypertext and organizational memory. These
are “an integrated communication and data base network application, designed to gather,
organize and distribute information among work groups, regardless of individual members’
physical locations” (Conner, 1992). As an example of organizational memory, Intellipedia
records and structures collaborative knowledge into a hypertext to enhance collectively educated
decisions. Advancing research and development in this field, some governments notice the power
of organizational memory and start various experimental projects.
3
Groupware is used in governments to enhance the interactive relationships with citizens
and improve public services: e-Government Groupware (eGG). Leo G. Anthopoulos – a PhD
candidate in the Department of Informatics, of Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece –
states that eGG “is a tool that can be used for establishing public servants” (354). This may be
informative tools or collaborative tools that a government applies groupware to interact with
citizens, promoting better public services. For instance, a government lets citizens see how the
government uses tax, monitoring each transaction to eliminate corruptions and inefficient uses of
tax spending. According to Whitehouse.gov, every American is able to see detailed tax spending
in the stimulus plan at Recovery.gov (“Remarks of President Barack Obama”, 2009). This is an
example of government-centered design of eGG: top-down procedure. Top-down procedure is
that a “central government supervises the design and execution of national e-Government
initiations” (Anthopoulos, 354). On the other hand, bottom-up development is another use of
eGG. This means that it encourages citizens to involve themselves in discussions and actively
engage in governments (Anthopoulos, 354). Top-down and bottom-up development of eGG need
improvements over time and face their own problems.
Top-down development of e-Government Groupware is implemented in various countries
and areas, achieving the number of government’s accomplishments. The primary case of top-
down procedure is Intellipedia in US, as described above. Intellipedia is “used to collect
information across a variety of federal intelligence agencies” (Mintz, 22). It enables various
agencies to share confidential information, keep up-to-date, and discuss with different groups,
often across different agencies, to make collective decisions. In a case of Intellipedia, it clearly
shows the positive result of information sharing in the case of 2006 small plane crash in New
York City. This mixed use of two groupware features, discussion boards and collective 4
knowledge building, helps the agencies to determine collective decisions speedily and distribute
the most up-to-date information and has “dramatically changed [their] capacity to share
information in a timely manner” (DiGiammarino and Trudeau, 7). Another illustration of top-
down procedure is eEurope 2005. The european committee is aiming to set up online public
services and open wide range of governmental contents accessible throughout widely available
broadband infrastructure (“eEurope 2005: Executive Summary”, 2007). This administration
enables stronger communication between governments and provides wider citizens’ access to
information. This top-down transition of eGG is still under implementation, and it has not used
the full strengths of groupware to become more effective eGG.
While top-down improvement of e-Government progresses remarkably in these areas,
there are considerable shortcomings. In the case of eEurope 2005, there is no citizen
engagement. Although it allows a variety of information available on the Internet and has many
targets, eEurope 2005 has no specific focus on problem solving, resulting in passive
communications with citizens. In fact, eEurope targets a variety of the Internet-based services,
such as e-learning, e-health, and a dynamic e-business environment (“eEurope 2005: Executive
Summary”, 2007); however, none of these provides a platform for citizens to engage with the
governments in discussions. That is, these are only one-way communications, treating citizens as
passive, “read-only”, participants. Although these developments of infrastructures are important,
e-Government must be carefully designed to ensure collaborative works. This poor interaction
with the public results in less satisfaction, reducing the public engagement (Anthopoulos, 360).
Users’ active engagement is essential in groupware; therefore, citizen-centered eGG is
recommended to make government more effective.
5
In addition to top-down practice of eGG, citizens join public transactions, engaging in
conversations to improve public services: bottom-up development. One of the best uses of
groupware is to enhance collective knowledge and create organizational memory. Therefore,
ensuring collaborative environment in eGG is crucial; “rather than pushing citizens out of
government, collaborative technologies allow [citizens] to invite them in” (DiGiammarino and
Trudeau, 10). An interesting bottom-up development of eGG is happening in Great Lakes
communities. Great Lakes Wiki is a community wiki site that allows the public to discuss
environmental issues and share their stories and experiences. The Vice President of National
Academy of public Administration, Frank DiGiammarino, describes in Virtual Networks: An
opportunity for Government that this site “allows private and nonprofit organizations to
collaborate online with government leaders on projects” (9). The wiki community currently has
over 1500 members with science, environment, politics and general interests backgrounds
(Cheredar, 2008). It is run by MediaWiki – web-based wiki software – so that even if users are
not residents of the communities, they can still contribute to the development. Yet it is very open
and has low security in login, it maintains professional level articles and active discussions. This
achievement is remarkable, and it has potential development not only in the communities
themselves, but also future opportunities in eGG models.
Having these different approaches of e-Government Groupware, there are number of
issues that prevent governments from becoming more accountable. The primary concern of eGG
is that systems must be easily retrievable and readily available. The fundamental aspect of
organizational memory is that information is organized and structured so that it is easily
accessible and retrievable, especially when dealing with large amount of data, which is often a
case of eGG. In order to deal with enormous amount of information, its technology must be 6
automated and personally customizable. Yaka is an example of semi-automatic structuring; it
manages an information system based on the concept of subject (Ochoa, 2).
“When a user submits a document to the [Organizational Memory System (OMS)],
associating a subject to it, Yaka detects the item and automatically extracts meta-
information, such as its keyword and summary. Users can subscribe to a subject or search
the information repository to find relevant information” (Ochoa, 2).
Using this technology, Sergio F. Ochoa explains, users on OMS would be able to reacquire
information and search relative topics easily (2). Information retrieval is leading edge science in
OMS, which structures information and searches relational databases as well for information
within documents. One of the knowledge management activities is called knowledge
organization, which “establishes relationships and context for collected knowledge” (Ochoa, 2).
XQuery, for example, is a commercial query language for examining semi structured data
(Ochoa, 2). The use of this powerful query language enables massive data in governments to be
effectively managed and organized for retrieving.
Besides of the information retrieval, the privacy of stored information is an essential issue
to get significant involvement from the participants. Ochoa warns that if privacy is not protected,
it could result in following negative effects; it could lead to the absence of participation and
dishonesty. Also participants may hesitate to share information, generating poor quality
discussion and participation (2). In order to encourage the full participation with well protected
privacy, Kobsa and Schreck recommend a new method called anonymization, which is “to
control the relation between the user and his data, and encryption, which protects the data from
inspection while being interchanged” (Ochoa, 3). Health services, for instance, need to access a
7
large quantity of personalized data for statistical purposes. Clearly, these data are very sensitive;
nevertheless, it needs to be identifiable which person has had which treatment and whether the
treatment was successful, where and when, and many others. Also the data should be pursuable
the specific patient throughout different treatments in time and space (“Identification versus
anonymity”, 36). That is, data and its identity must be connected while providing anonymity.
The contradiction between anonymity and linkability can be met by using cryptographic
methods, such as one-way hush-function (“Identification versus anonymity”, 37); it is a
procedure that produces a bit-string – hash value – for given inputs, generating an unique
character string, which is also infeasible to access an input by given hush value. Effective use of
this system contributes to the preservation of privacy, increasing the number of contributors.
In order to address these privacy issues, eGG needs to ensure the protection of the stored
knowledge and private information, needing to meet several requirements. Ochoa proposes the
following requirements to supply secure and trustworthy groupware.
“Automatic privacy enforcement: A level of privacy should be guaranteed to
everyone, even users who are not conscious of privacy issues.
“Privacy level expectation: Users should expect privacy to be similar to that of face-
to-face work, but with greater archiving capacity. That is, the author-information link
could be gradually softened, but the content of the submitted information would not
be lost.
“Relevant information preservation: It should be possible to reconstruct and replay
information generating activities, even if it is not possible to identify contributors,
exact times and other detailed information. For example, in the case of information
8
generated in a decision support system, it should be possible to reconstruct the
reasons why a decision was made.
“Ethical guidelines: There should be some ethical guidelines to prevent misuse of the
system, but some amount of privacy should be guaranteed even if the ethical
guidelines were not respected. For example, anonymity should not be revoked for
ethical reasons, but it should also be technically impossible to revoke it, i.e., the
information needed to reverse anonymity should not be stored.
“Privacy awareness: Users should be able to easily access the applicable ethical
guidelines. Also, the system should provide a level of awareness on privacy issues,
avoiding information overload” (Ochoa, 4).
It also notes that users must know what information is stored and the level of identification with
which it will be stored (Ochoa, 4). All e-Government applications should meet these
requirements; Whitehouse.gov, namely, meets the above requirements. It ensures that the
privacy policy applies to every visitor: Automatic privacy enforcement. Also the policy states
that the private data are securely stored by commercially reasonable tools and techniques:
Privacy level expectation. It is easily accessible to the privacy policy and states directly which
personal data are stored, for what purposes and who has access to that information: Privacy
awareness and Ethical guidelines (“Privacy Policy”). Stating these policies help visitors
understand how the data are treated and increase the satisfaction, which contribute to more
participation.
Security is a critical concern in eGG; since collaborative works let many people access to
a system, it creates new security issues that do not exist for individual-based system. Presenting
in Evaluating and Implementing a Collaborative Office Document, Andy Adler introduces four 9
decisive vulnerabilities (671). Server vulnerabilities occur when collective data and privacy
information is stored in a concentrated database, which increase an intensive point of
vulnerabilities. Secondary concern is client vulnerabilities. It has a high chance of virus
transmission when multiple participants access a same application, sending emails and editing
documents. Moreover, access control is an additional issue in groupware; since it is often a case
that collaborative works have a well defined group of contributors, most groupware requires a
login with a username and a password. Users may forget a password or accidentally let them out.
“This is a significant concern in a web-based system, where a user logging into the system from
an untrusted PC may inadvertently reveal access codes” (Adler, 671). Final, but equally
important, consideration is access level control. Having different access settings are frequently
required in collaborative work. A document may be available to public as “view-only” while
endeavours in a government have access to edit. Other possible system-access capabilities are
followed: editing, document viewing, access to previous versions, access to change records and
auditing software, workflow and approvals, forcible unlocking of files, adding new documents,
adding new group members, and downloading of files from the system (Adler, 672). Having
these diverse options, it is difficult to make collaborative applications simple to use for ordinary
citizens. Because of this reason, eGG repeatedly fails usability and simplification of access.
While the concerns in security and privacy are still in questions and under development,
the citizen-centered and open environments in e-Government enable citizens to play an essential
part in government by using the great strengths of groupware. As described above, there are still
remaining problems in security and privacy, admitting Ochoa that “they are not enough to
guarantee privacy to all users” (3). Although these problems need to be considered and further
developments are required, one of the best advantages of groupware, which is enhancing the 10
collective knowledge and sharing valuable information with others, can be met not by restricting
the login security, but by opening a gate widely. It is clear that having a complicated security
system reduces the number of participants. In fact, a survey in Digital City of Trikala – the first
Digital City in Greece – shows that while 82% of the citizens have high interests and understand
the importance of digital public services, only 10% of participants have confidence of digital
usage of public service (Anthopoulos, 361). The survey in the Digital City of Trikala shows that
people often fail to participate in e-Government applications due to the complicated security
systems and uncertainty about the system itself. Therefore, easy-to-use and comfortability of an
application are important; using the existing commercial applications and easy login access meet
these interests. For instance, Great
Lakes Wiki uses a commercially
available application, MediaWiki, to
minimize the user memory load.
Furthermore, Change.gov – the
official web site of the presidential
transition of Barack Obama – allows
users to login using OpenID (a single
digital identity across the Internet).
The use of a widely used login system
enables enormous number of
participants to be involved in discussions, generating “103512 people submitted 76031 questions
and cast 4713083 votes” in Open for Question Period (Lee, 2009). Using existing applications
lower a barrier and increase satisfaction. It must, however, ensure the privacy protection and
11
Change.gov lets users share their feedback about the U.S. health care system (Eldon, 2008)
need an established privacy policy, clearly stating the safety. This combination of widely opened
accessibility and clear privacy policy makes governments more transparent.
Active improvements of citizen-centered collaborative applications change governments
through e-Government Groupware in the future. Having web-based collaborative groupware,
citizens now actively gather and share information to improve their communities or government
services. There are an increasing
number of citizen-centered programs
that enable people to share
information and make government
transparent; EveryBlock.com, for
example, releases city crime statistics
with online maps to help people track
crime. Neighborhood Knowledge
California, moreover, “identifies communities at economic risk by tracking tax delinquency, fire
violations and other signs of deterioration" (Crovitz, 2008). These projects use groupware tools
to share government information, which
used to be inaccessible, to inform
citizens and advocate for a transparent and responsive government, changing the relationship
between a government and citizens fundamentally. It used to be one way relations; a government
had informed people with very limited resources and messy format. Now, these collaborative
applications empower citizens by providing unbiased information. Coordination features of
groupware are widely used in these new projects, pushing governments to become more
transparency and accountable. In addition, it is clear that these are not top-down developments; it 12
(Work, 2008)
is a bottom-up and citizen-centered procedure. The
power of the Internet and widely available commercial
groupware enable citizens to become a significant part
of government, taking a “seat at the table”.
In conclusion, although e-Government
Groupware needs to address future enhancements,
particularly in information retrieval, security and
privacy, having collaborative works and organizational
memory (the key features of groupware) dramatically
improve citizens’ participations in politics and
contribute to government transparency. In order to
ensure their significance and influence, governments
must use groupware features effectively to “meet rising expectations for openness,
accountability, effectiveness and efficiency in the public sector" (Crovitz, 2008). At the same
time, citizens take their own collaborative tools to engage in politics as well as to participate in
their communities. It is, however, not perfect and therefore needs more experiments and further
involvements from both governments and citizens are crucial. People need more understanding
about the systems and further participation; governments must understand the power of
collaborations and the needs of transparency. It is clear that governments must advance from 1.0
to 2.0, inviting us in.
13
“In 2006, Time magazine named you the person of the year. In 2008, this was finally reflected in politics” (Marks, 2008).
References
Adler, Andy and Nash, John C and Noel Syvie. “Evaluating and implementing a collaborativeoffice document system”. December 7, 2005. Interacting with Computers. Volume 18,Issue 4, July 2006, 665-682. ScienceDirect. Langara College, Vancouver, BC. March 6,2009 < http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V0D4HRMTXR-1>
Anthopoulos, Leo G and Siozos , Panagiotis and Tsoukalas , Ioannis A. “Applyingparticipatory design and collaboration in digital public services for discovering and redesigning e-Government services” . Government Information Quarterly, Volume 24,Issue 2, April 2007, Pages 353-376
Baecker, Ronald M, et al. Readings in human-computer interaction : toward the year 2000. 2nd
ed. San Francisco, Calif. : Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, c1995, 741-479.
Cheredar, Tom. “Great Lakes Wiki - And The Changing Face of Online Communites”. April 28,2008. NewAssignment.Net. March 8, 2009. <http://newassignment.net/blog/tom_cheredar/apr2008/28/great_lakes_wiki>
Connor, D. (1992). Making the Most of Information. In Coleman (1992), 63-68.
Crovitz, L.Gordon. "From Wikinomics to Government 2.0". May12, 2008. online.wsj.com.March 1, 2009. <http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121055303906183983.html#>
Cscwmatrix.jpg. July, 30, 2007. Wikipedia. March 13, 2009<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cscwmatrix.jpg>
DiGiammarino, Frank and Trudeau Lena. "Virtual Networks: An Opportunity forGovernment. " Public Manager 37.1 (2008): 5-11. ABI/INFORM Global. ProQuest.
Langara College, Vancouver, BC. 1 Mar.2009 <http://www.proquest.com.ezproxy.langara.bc.ca:2048/>
“eEurope 2005: Executive Summary”. April 5, 2007. eEurope 2005.<http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/eeurope/2002/news_library/documents/eeurop2005/execsum_en.pdf>
Eldon, Eric. More open government: Obama transition site Change.gov gets user comments.November 26, 2008 <http://venturebeat.com/2008/11/26/more-open-government-obamatransition-site-changegov-gets-user-comments/>
14
Identification versus anonymity in e-government. FIDIS. March 09, 2009. <http://www.fidis.net/resources/deliverables/forensic-implications/d54-anonymity-inelectronic-government-a-case-study-analysis-of-governments-identityknowledge/doc/2/ >
Lee, Jose. "Open for Questions Round 2: Response". January 9, 2009. Change.gov. March 1,2009. <http://change.gov/newsroom/entry/open_for_questions_round_2_response/>
Marks, Aaron. "The Top 10 Political Technology Stories of 2008" NextgenGOP THE FUTUREOF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. december 30, 2008<http://www.nextgengop.com/2008/12/30/the-top-10-political-technology-stories-of2008/#>
Mintz, Daniel. "Government 2.0-Fact or Fiction? " Public Manager 36.4 (2007): 2124. ABI/INFORM Global. ProQuest. Langara College, Vancouver, BC. 1 Mar.2009 <http://www.proquest.com.ezproxy.langara.bc.ca:2048/>
Ochoa, S., Herskovic, V., Pineda, E., Pino, J. “A Transformational Model for Organizational Memory Systems Management with Privacy Concerns”. February 10, 2009. Journal of Information Science. ScienceDirect. Langara College, Vancouver, BC. March 7, 2009. < http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.langara.bc.ca:2048>
Privacy Policy. Whitehouse.gov. March 9, 2009. < http://www.whitehouse.gov/privacy/ >
"Remarks of President Barack Obama -- Address to Joint Session of Congress", Whitehouse.gov.February 24, 2009 <http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-of-PresidentBarack-Obama-Address-to-Joint-Session-of-Congress/>
“Your Seat at The Table”. Change.gov. March 16, 2009. <http://change.gov/open_government/yourseatatthetable >
Work, Henry. “EveryBlock Launches as Local News Aggregator for SF, NYC, and Chicago”.January 23, 2008. TechCrunch. March 13, 2009. <http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/01/23/everyblock-launches-as-local-news-aggregatorfor-sf-nyc-and-chicago/ >
Homework Help
https://www.homeworkping.com/
15