To Örebro University

The concept of human-centredness is frequently used within strategies and expectations in the field of digitalisation. But what does it really mean, and what does putting humans at the centre entail? We aim to highlight different perspectives of these questions and reflect on the various components of human-centredness.

What does it mean for the public sector to be human-centric? There are many expectations in this area from international organisations, as well as from Nordic and Baltic countries, where initiatives are underway clearly aimed at achieving a human-centric public sector.

In this report, we reflect on the concept from three different dimensions: governance, public services and innovation. We consider how these dimensions are interconnected and the challenges involved. What role does politics play in promoting human-centric governance? How can and should priorities be set from a human-centric perspective? What are the limits and possibilities for public administration to work in a human-centric way? Our aim is not to provide ready made answers but to encourage questions and discussions – alongside decision makers, practitioners, researchers, and others with an interest in the topic.

Purpose: This study aims to examine the results and influences of the practical implementation of a Digital Index Framework (DIF) for assessing digital government among government agencies.

Design/methodology/approach: The authors use a mixed methods approach in a case study of a project using the DIF and involving two government agencies in Sweden. The analysis focuses on interpreting quantitative results from the DIF and using the schematic theory of evaluation influence to study qualitative data on how the DIF assessment process influences the participants of the project.

Findings: The quantitative results show the multifaceted spread of digitalisation among activities for carrying out core processes in government agencies, revealing differences in automation, levels of digital service and the exchange of data. The qualitative analysis shows influences from the DIF in how the participants acquire skills to learn about the development of digitalisation and are primed towards certain cross-government challenges.

Originality/value: The study analyses the influence on public sector practitioners from a theoretical framework for assessing digital government by using evaluation research. This entails experiences of a project using a DIF in the context of core processes among public servants in public administration. This is a novel approach to studying practical results and influences in using a framework for assessing digital government; showing how assessment can be used for learning and development of digital government among practitioners.

This thesis addresses the question: How can a Digital Index Framework (DIF) provide an assessment of digitalisation of core processes in government agencies? It aims to understand how digitalisation can be assessed in the context of public administration and core processes. The research is grounded in the multi-disciplinary field of digital government and applies mixed methods: literature review, design science and case studies. The thesis finds that benchmarking digital government faces recurring criticism regarding how assessments are conducted and what they measure. By examining the design of a DIF, the thesis proposes design principles for assessing digitalisation, focusing on how digital technologies support administrative processes. This includes a process view highlighting interaction with society, internal case handling and data exchange. Examining digitalisation through a DIF highlights core processes and contributes to scholarly discussions on linking public administration with digitalisation. Focusing on core processes, the thesis presents a classification of eight types, which can support both assessing digitalisation and studying phenomena such as artificial intelligence and digital services. The thesis also contains results concerning the influences from the practical implementation of the DIF among practitioners in government agencies. The engagement with the DIF fostered skill development, deeper reflections on cross-government processes and led to policy learning and change.

Based on the perspective of e-government practitioners at a government agency in Sweden, this article analyses the design-process with the aim of unearthing the design-principles of a Digital Index (DI). The DI is developed to address challenges of how to: understand; appraise; learn from and develop e-government – by combining digital technologies with the context of public administration. This study applies a design-science research method and analyses the initial steps of the design-process: awareness of the problem, suggestion, and development. The results show how the abstract artefact – the DI – is constructed and how it is based on three main design-principles. Firstly e-government should be contextualised with the nature of public administration – which means relating digital technologies vis-a-vis core-businesses of a public authority. Secondly: digital technologies support administrative processes and must be premised on the classification of information and law. Thirdly, apply a process view of e-government that highlights the relationship between internal administrative procedures, the interaction with citizens/companies and the sharing of government data. The discussion highlights how the DI is relevant for research on e-government by offering some concrete as well as general perspectives on how to combine e-government and public administration.

This literature review looks at research conducted on the phenomenon of benchmarking e-government during the years 2003 to 2016 and entails 27 articles. The review shows how this field has changed over time, its main findings and what the potential benefits are for the public sector in using the results from benchmarks. The findings reveal how initial research created taxonomies of benchmarks and criticised them for being too focused on measuring online services. This research was followed by even more criticism on how benchmarks can have a negative impact on e-government policy and development. During the same time-period there is research giving methodological support on how to improve ways of benchmarking. Later research offer theoretically and conceptually informed critique of benchmark-studies. The review finds that there are mainly implicit assumptions about the potential benefits in using benchmarks for improving e-government. The article concludes by discussing the implications of the findings in terms of the lack of context and relevance in benchmarks for e-government in relationship to the nature of public administration and makes suggestions for ways forward.