Public Service ICT Partnership Maturity Model

7/30/2019 Public Service ICT Partnership Maturity Model

1/13

Public Service ICT Partnership

Maturity Model


2/13

Contents

Maturity Model............................................................................................................1Contents .....................................................................................................................2Introduction .................................................................................................................3Public Service ICT Partnership Maturity Model...........................................................3

Methodology ............................................................................................................3Levels of the Model.................................................................................................4

1. Priority setting ........................................................................................................42. Standardising .........................................................................................................43. Delivering ...............................................................................................................64. Performing .............................................................................................................65. Transforming ..........................................................................................................7Recommendations ......................................................................................................8

Apply this maturity model as a method:...................................................................8Use the methodology:..............................................................................................8

Extend this maturity model:.....................................................................................8

2


3/13

Introduction

It was proposed to map a selection of public service technology partnerships tounderstand what lessons can be learned in developing and managing these.

The outcome of this research is the development of a Public Service ICTPartnership Maturity Model.

This was produced based on a Benchmarking of Best Practices (attached as aseparate document) which provides examples on each of the areas of the model.

Recommendations for next steps are described on how Kent Connects can use thisapproach.

Public Service ICT Partnership Maturity Model

Methodology

Maturity models1 are increasingly used in the development & management of ITorganisations. The maturity model enclosed at the end of this document has beenadapted from the Software Engineering Institutes Maturity Model2.

This can help partnerships improve their processes by measuring how wellthey can and do perform on the areas selected below. Using the Benchmarking ofBest Practices, they can also benchmark themselves against other partnerships.

Partnerships can use this maturity model in the following contexts:

1. Strategic planning

Situations where this may occur include developing a business plan for thepartnership, reviewing its progress over the year or in appraising the professionaldevelopment of the partnership team.

o Developing high maturity in a particular area: Ensuring that it has

achieving all of the processes for that particular area (A-H3)o Aiming to reach a higher maturity level as a partnership:Ensuring it has

achieved all of the processes for that particular level (1-54)

2. Project planning

Situations where this may occur include reviewing a programme to producerecommendations for the next phase or in developing project plans for specificpriorities within its strategy (i.e. public service redesign).

1http://ivi.nuim.ie/itcmf.shtml

2

http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/3 See the Maturity Model section4 See the Levels of the Model section

3
http://ivi.nuim.ie/itcmf.shtmlhttp://ivi.nuim.ie/itcmf.shtmlhttp://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/http://ivi.nuim.ie/itcmf.shtmlhttp://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/


4/13

o Coordinating an appraisal of an IT function:Selecting targets to move up

a maturity level in types of IT function (i.e. infrastructure)o Producing recommendations for improvement: Setting targets to

consolidate maturity levels in areas and move up levels in others

Levels of the Model

The maturity model is based on five levels of maturity described below. Whatfollows is the description of each level of the model.

1. Priority setting

This is a process that achieves the work needed to define the objectives of thepartnership and the processes that enable the delivery of the activities required tomeet them.

Typical partnership at this level:

o A shared strategy is developed to outline the priorities to guide future

operational decisions and agree to use external standards.

o Processes are set out to scope out the development of locally developed

architectures and infrastructures, creating sub-groups to initiate this process.

o Investment is used in an ad-hoc way monitored by generic indicators.

The distinction between priority setting and standardising processes is around thelevel of institutionalisation of the processes.

2. Standardising

This is a process that is planned and delivered according to the partnershipsobjectives. This includes institutionalising, resourcing and monitoring its processes,groups and activities.


o Issues are mapped to develop shared priorities and inform how investment is

allocated to projects supported by the partnership.

o Standardised processes and infrastructure are implemented to support

partners to reach an agreed level of maturity in core areas (i.e. procurement).

o Funding works on a co-financing basis to ensure commitment by individual

partners in projects.

4


5/13

The distinction between standardising and delivering processes is around the scopeof standards, processes & procedures.

5


6/13

3. Delivering

This is a process that is tailored from the partnerships standard processes to aparticular activity. This includes creating the processes, policies & resources

specific to that field.


o Rationales for delivery in targeted areas of work are clarified. This informs

setting of funding and targets for development of specific projects (such as aparticular service to share, process to re-engineer or system to implement).

o Through this level of prioritisation, support is provided by the partnership to

develop common processes in those areas, particularly where compliance is

required or where there is a need to transition to new models.

o This is often supported by bespoke training or experts and monitored by

indicators designed specifically for that field.

The distinction between delivering and performing processes is how systematic thecreation and management of processes is to specific activities.

4. Performing

This is a process that establishes quantitative objectives for managing andmonitoring the quality and performance of partnership activities.


o Information and performance systems are developed and financed to

systematically analyse needs and opportunities partners need to focus on.

o As partnerships progress through this level of maturity, they move to more

real-time analysis of evidence to iterate responses to emerging demands.

o This can be supplemented by providing experts to help partners understandhow to optimise the use of business intelligence to forecast future trends.

o This evidence-based approach drives the development of strategy and

investment in its delivery, as well as quality assurance of performance ofsystems and auditing to identify opportunities for re-using existing solutions.

The distinction between performing and transforming processes is how much thepartnership applies the analysis of performance to develop improved processes andactivities.

6


7/13

5. Transforming

This is a process that is continually improved based on an evidence-basedunderstanding of its needs & resources. This includes the development of new

processes & activities that support the change required.


o Information systems enable partners to use the evidence base to move from

delivery of services to strategic management of the public service ICTmarketplace of their local area.

o Savings and income generation drive investment to manage risk of any future

budgetary pressures and move towards alternative commercial models.

o Shared infrastructure and architecture are developed to streamline processes

across all priorities of the partnership and aligned to locally agreedarchitectures in relevant areas such as customer services or procurement.

o Common principles are developed by partners and applied systematically in

projects that redesign online services to meet customer needs.

o Professional development and performance management are extended to

include change management to support the transformation needed to deliverthe strategic vision of the partnership.

Its important to note that partnerships will not necessarily fit into a particular levelacross all its areas of work. Typical partnerships are described to help peoplesituate where their partnership broadly sits.

There may partnerships which could identify as being firmly on a particular level (i.e.Level 1 - Priority setting) but also demonstrating examples from a much higher level(i.e. Level 3 - Delivering). They would focus on the intermediate level (i.e. Level 2 -Standardising) to then be able to reinforce their processes at the higher level.

7


8/13

Recommendations

The following recommendations provide options of how this maturity model could beapplied to meet Kent Connects strategic and project planning objectives:

Apply this maturity model as a method:

o Of benchmarking Kent Connects to other partnerships on a specific function

or priorities from its strategy or business plano Of appraising how future Kent Connects projects perform across the criteria

to identify and capture good practices in a standardised way

Use the methodology:

o To produce maturity models for priority areas from the PS ICT Strategy (i.e.

information governance, customer service) or future research requirements

Extend this maturity model:

o By adding features (i.e. professional development required) that can help

partnerships move up levels of the maturity modelo By exploring the feasibility of benchmarking it to other recognised maturity

models of specific ICT functions (i.e. SFIA Skills Framework) or of sectorsKent Connects works with (i.e. Health Informatics Capability Maturity Model)

8


9/13

Type Priority Setting Standardising Delivering Performing Transforming

A. How do technologypartnerships define theirpriorities?

Outlining priorities in shared ICTstrategy

Analysing and attempting to reachconsensus on which level -borough/local/regional - currentproblems and future challengescan be tackled by differentpartners

Clarifying rationales for sharedservices and development of newinfrastructure / architecture andscoping most suitable areas fordelivery

Pooling efforts to researchissues, map assets and developsystems to monitor performance

Moving from supporting deliveryof services to building thecapacity of local authorities to sellservices and use market analysisto rationalise & joint procure

B. How is partnershipfunding allocated todelivering its priorities?

Funding agreed in strategy inadvance

Funding based on priorities &approved by board and managedby partnership office in responseto calls for proposals

Funding divided up into areas ofwork with specific objectives,budget lines & metrics for thoseareas

Funding based on multi-criteriaanalysis (ROI, payback, etc) andCEO commitment to sponsorprojects

Funding from savings from jointprocurement or e-auctions toimplement transformationalprojects

C. How effective are technology partnerships (TP) at supporting shared or collaborative:

Infrastructure Agreement on common use ofexternal architecture (such as PSICT Information Architecture) toscope opportunities for sharedinfrastructure

Implementation of nationallydefined infrastructure (such asPSN)

Development of infrastructure inselected geographical or serviceareas (i.e. digital districts)

Provision of health check toidentify any securityvulnerabilities associated withdevices managed by partners onshared infrastructure

Development of a singleinfrastructure across the localarea to facilitate integratedprovision and shared servicesthat can produce significantsavings

Services Development of shared servicesboard to provide forum forpartners to explore opportunitiesfor collaboration

Establishment of serviceframework contracts for sharedservices that can quantifyexpected savings

Development of tools to helppartners work through thebusiness case and work throughdifferent shared services models

Development of asset andservices register so partners canidentify opportunities for reusingexisting ICT solutions or sharingservices

Development of online portalservice & functionality to enableother partnerships to implementand manage their own online

Procurement Developed of sharedprocurement strategy with agreedstandards

Development of managementinformation system to managecollaborative contracts

Development of sharedprocurement in specific areas

Development of onl ineexpenditure analysis dashboardto enable managers to haveaccess to statistics & quantify theperformance of their processes

Development of joint venture toprovide a managed transactionalservice for buying and sellingservices with an integratedservice catalogue

Customer Insight Development of commonapproach, with guidance,templates & worked examples

Development of academyproviding training in research /analytical techniques

Development of project withgovernment agency to simplify abusiness process

Implementation of systems tomanage information and data aswell as joint strategic needsassessments or audits of software assets

Development of online dashboardto enable residents to access andvisualise information to identifyopportunities for improvement

Self Service / New Channels Development of shared customerservices workfl ow andarchitecture

Development of online tools withother partners to introduce selfservice or new channels tocitizens

Implementation of a common,scalable self service portal for aspecific service

Integration of metrics into everylevel of their operation to relateinformation to industry widebenchmarks & iterate efforts inresponses to user needs

Development of self reporting toolby several partners, accompaniedby a system to monitor costsavings & better cross agencyresolution

9


10/13


D. To what extent do TPs help their members?

Exploit opportunities forshared services

Development of shared serviceprinciples

Development of programme withsenior managers to rationalisesystems in particular serviceareas to reduce costs

Development of tool to showpartners how to make thetransition to a new commercialmodel

Market analysis of demand forservices offered by partnership

Provision of support to partners todevelop business cases tosupport shared services withforecast savings

Standardise processes formore efficient delivery

Establishment of a commonframework to inform the businesscase for joint investment in future

shared capabilities

Development of toolkit withproviders to demonstrate benefitsof a common approach

Development & implementation ofcommon standards which supportinteroperability with other

systems on a particular area (i.e.ePetitions)

Development of common office toshare comparable performance &value for money data

Development of a suite ofmandatory, technical standards,access to frameworks and

develop joint requirements

Support their members to beable to adapt to externalfactors

Review corporate ICT strategies

to inform development of shared

partnership strategy

Organise workshops with decisionmakers & external experts aroundscheduled themes to develop aprogramme of work

Development of toolkit to enablea particular group of users (i.e.carers) to teach each other ICTskills

Developing a prototype to enablelocal authorities to adapt methodsfrom other areas to their localneeds

Development of a lab to organisestudy exchanges on specificpriorities to identify improvementsand incubate new services

E. How do technology partnerships:

Work with individual orclustered partners

Enable partners to share goodpractice & participate in anationally accredited network

Create thematic groups to providea collective voice for partners


Work with analytics specialists toprovide advanced visualisationsof statistical data to predictdemand of partners services

Work with specialists to enable

partners to inform & redesign

their services

Aim to work with prospectivepartners

Listing of core services offered topartners

Form sub-regional groupings totest whether shared services canoffer source of savings

Organise seminars on its priorityareas to showcase its work toprospective partners

Work with support organisationsto develop training on how towork in public-privatecollaborations

Development of joint venture withcompany to provide a managedservice with commercialexclusivity in specialist areas

10


11/13


F. To what extent do technology partnerships (TP) translate their priorities into the development of:

Shared ICT operating model &architecture

Establishment of area-widestrategy to better identify &remove cost and duplicationsupported by use of national ICTinformation architecture

Development of target operatingmodel and associatedarchitecture which allorganisations can transition to inline with local requirements

Development of shared operatingmodel workflow on one of thelayers of the en terpr isearchitecture

Development of an action plan todeliver objectives of the strategysupported by commoninfrastructure for shared deliveryand systems for monitoringperformance

Deve lopment of sharedinfrastructure (i.e. CRM) thatconforms to shared data,technical & security architecture

Shared targets / processes Shared agreement to comply withgovernment technical, data andsecurity standards

Standardisation of processesthrough sign up by partners tolocally developed agreements(i.e. data sharing)

Development of guidance,templates & worked examples onhow to comply in a particular area(i.e. open data)

Development of common office toshare comparable performance &value for money data

Development of systems that useaudit of assets to make thesharing, buying and selling ofservices more efficient

Shared training / developmentprogrammes

Development of commonapproach to a particular area ofdevelopment (i.e. projectmanagement)


Development of academyproviding training in a particularspecialism (i.e. business processre-engineering)

Support to partners to developevidence-based propositions tosupport shared services ordevelop new business models

Design of accredited programmeto develop local leadership

G. What type of resources do TPs have to support their work?

Staff Roles Consultancy and projectmanagement provided byresource team

Capability managers for each subgroup, as well as projectmanagers for specific projects

In house team supported bycategory experts as required (i.e.secondments from partners)

Consultants responsible forfacilitating the creation andoptimisation of priority projectsacross the partnership

Joint venture / managed servicewith private company

Funding Subscript ions, corporate

sponsorship or government

grants

Co-financing on a project by

project basis

Consultancy fees for specific

work partnership can add value to

(i.e. R&D)

Savings from eAuctions or joint

procurement

Sale of products & services

11


12/13


H. How do technology partnerships evaluate and manage performance?

Design indicators to monitor

the successful delivery of

projects

Savings identified as singleindicator for measuring success

Split of efficiency / improvementindicators to evaluateeffectiveness of projects ondifferent objectives

Indicators created and monitoredfor each priority area (i.e. sharedservices, infrastructure)

Analysis of return on investmentof projects funded by partnership

Cost-benefit analysis factoring ininvestment in changemanagement required

Share lessons learned & reviewbusiness processes

Develop R&D programmes foreach priority theme

Development of network,organising seminars & events to

tackle priorities

Development of academyproviding training on a particular

field

Baselining services across thepartnership, developing an

assessment process for projects,developing a comparableapproach to key metrics tomeasure progress

Immersive research within thepartners user sites to plan

development of projects toimprove change processes

Audit assets owned bypartners to identify potentialfor sharing

Development of shared approachto audit assets

Development of managementinformation system to managecollaborative contracts or auditassets

Monitoring usage data through asystem to identify behaviouralchanges in a particular field (i.e.home energy use)

Development of onl ineexpenditure analysis dashboardto enable managers to haveaccess to statistics & quantify theperformance of their processes

Integration of shared financialmanagement system withmarketplace facility to simplifypurchasing process

12


13/13

13

Public Service ICT Partnership Maturity Model

Documents

Transcript of Public Service ICT Partnership Maturity Model