T HE P RACTICE

OF

B EST P RACTICES

Mtys Gspr

Discussion Papers, No. 14 Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative OPEN SOCIETY INSTITUTE

T HE P RACTICE

OF

B EST P RACTICES

Mtys Gspr

Discussion Papers, No.14 Published in 2000 by the Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative Open Society Institute Ndor utca 11 1051 Budapest Hungary tel: (36-1) 327-3104 fax: (36-1) 327-3105 e-mail: lgprog@osi.hu listserve: lgi-announce-subscribe@egroups.com www.osi.hu/lgi ISSN 1417-4855 Distributed by the Network of Institutes and Schools of Public Administration in Central and Eastern Europe Hanulova 5/B 840 02 Bratislava 42 Slovakia phone/fax: (421-7) 785-357 e-mail: nispa@nispa.sk www.nispa.sk

Produced by Arktisz Studio Budapest

INTRODUCTION TO THE SERIES

The development of democratic and effective government at subnational levels remains one of the central tasks of transition in Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. The sharing of expertise between countries can contribute significantly to the reform process in the region. Pursuing this goal, the Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative (LGI) has launched a series of discussion papers, which will be distributed widely throughout Central and Eastern Europe. The series will report the findings of projects supported by LGI and will include papers written by authors who are not LGI grant recipients. LGI offers assistance for the translation of the papers into the national languages of the region. The opinions presented in the papers are those of the authors and do not necessary represent the views of the Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative.

Mtys Gspr has been working in the field of public administration since 1975. After working in local governance, research institutes and higher education he shifted to the private sector in 1988. He has worked as consultant in local governmental management for local, regional and national organizations in Hungary as well as for international organisations. He was the initiator, organizer and one of the founders of the Hungarian Telecottage movement, the result of which will be more than 200 Telecottages operating in Hungary by the end of 2000 helping underdeveloped regions and social groups. He operates the one and only Hungarian best practice on-line database of social and public administrational innovations. Comments can be addressed to : manyo@mail.alba.hu.

Acknowledgements
On behalf of the participants on the project, I would like to express our gratitude for LGIs nancial support. In particular, I would also like to thank Adrian Ionescu for his assistance and advice. I also wish to thank all our additional partners for their cooperation and contributions, which have led to the success of the program. The list of contributors can be found in Appendix 1. Mtys Gspr Cskberny, Hungary November 28, 1999

Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 About the objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Antecedents in Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 The course of the program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Preliminary overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 1. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 What does best practice mean? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Why is it important? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 Upon what principles are the systems operating? . . . . . . . . . . . .7 2. Goals and results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 Stakeholders map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 Concrete objectives and expected results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 3. Organizational framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 Issues related to organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 Organizational map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 Figure 3.1 Proportion of organizational participation for 45 best practice systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 Roles and structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 Figure 3.2 Roles and structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 4. Users and needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 The unknown needs of the invisible user . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 The dimensions of needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 User = service provider . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21 5. Information content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23 Content directory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23 Merged boundaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23 Focal points of the content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 Replacing rigid parameters and structures with versatile searches and links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

Figure 5.1 Focal points of the content in best practices systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25 6. Building blocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 Model selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 Modes of providing information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 Descriptions and links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 Nonfixed structural elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27 Fixed structural elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27 Figure 6.1 The information pyramid in best practice systems . .30 7. Information sources and selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31 The significance of selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31 Principles of collection and selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31 Sources and methods of selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33 Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36 8. Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38 Best practices knowledge base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38 Services built on the knowledge base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39 Public and/or private services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 9. How can the systems be sustained? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45 A few introductory thoughts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45 Expenditures to be taken into account . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46 Sources of revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47 Figure 9.1 Potential sources of revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49 Appendix 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58 Thanks to the Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58 Appendix 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59 I. Analysis of Best Practice Systems and Organizations . . . . . .59 II. Best Practice Survey Partners in Central and Eastern Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64

Introduction

About the objectives

The Local Government and Public Reform Initiative (LGI) launched a research program in February 1998. The intention of the program was to examine the following issues: 1. How and within what service and organizational frameworks are innovations and best practices spreading in advanced countries? 2. What is the current situation in Central and Eastern Europe concerning the collection and promotion of innovative initiatives? 3. What kind of support service program can facilitate the evolution of best practice systems within the region? The results of the research can be used in the following ways: 1. The foundations can be laid for best practice systems in Central and Eastern Europe. LGI and its cooperating partners can initiate the establishment of these national best practice systems. These national systems provide support for social and public administration reforms in their respective countries; 2. LGI and its cooperating partners can also set up a regional system of information exchange; 3. The publication of periodicals can also be a useful support service They provide information and assistance for the development and improvement of these best practice systems and for all interested organizations, including government, local government and NGOs.

Antecedents in Hungary
Prior to the research program, the outlines of a similar initiative had already evolved in Hungary. The Ktf (Fountainhead) program already organized
1

wide-ranging partnerships for the implementation of a Hungarian system of best practices. LGI has supported this development from the very beginning. This undertaking also conforms to the objectives of the above research program by presenting an operating best practice system in Central and Eastern Europe. LGI entrusted the experts at Kzigkonzult to set up a Best Practices International Research Center. This report presents the results of the meeting held for the principal and potential development organizations and institutions. Hopefully, the results of this program will be a source for democratic development in the region and for the improvement of public administration practices.

The course of the program

In the rst stage of the program, extensive research was conducted on the Internet. International on-line best practice systems were located. The results of this survey can be found in Appendix 2. The list is incomplete, yet it sufces for examining the eld of best practices. In this phase, a list of potential Central and Eastern European partners was completed from the newsletters and informative publications of NISPAcee News, NGO news, SIGMA, PUMA, OECD and others. There was also a series of useful consultations with a number of partners, represented by Chris Cardy, Bob Dubinsky, Adrian Ionescu, Glen Wright and Gbor Pteri.

Preliminary overview
At the start of the research program, the assumption was that no best practice system dealing with the public sector had yet evolved in any of the Central and Eastern European countries. This assumption was based on the knowledge and personal experience of the experts involved in the program. There was also the expectation that there may be some initiatives which would be worthwhile to assist. Helping these initiatives ensures the
2

development of databases founded on existing and available good practices and international experience. This involves less risk yet it conforms to the objectives of the program. Based on questionnaires sent to 16 countries, there are no more than two functioning systems in the region (in the Czech Republic and Hungary)1 and four systems in development (Bulgaria, Estonia, Romania and Ukraine). On average, information was received from two organizations per country.

1. Denitions
What does best practice mean?
The data collected and selected by information systemsespecially those which propagate new ideasdiffers depending on the interpretations, principles, concepts, methods or denitions of the content. The choice is rather wide. The most frequent and characteristic ways to dene best practices are the following: a method of achieving maximum impact performance, the optimal means, techniques and procedures for solving problems, achieving goals and fullling needs, paths leading to organizational excellence, solutions which have already been applied elsewhere, solutions, the results of which have been proved by experience, solutions which can be sustained legally, politically, socially, nancially, institutionally and strategically, solutions which are sufciently documented (sometimes in a xed format), solutions which can be shared with and used by others. A regional variable may also effect the denition of best practices, for example, HABITAT2 regards partnership as an element of key importance. This is a genuinely important factor when considering the sustainable development of settlements and communities. Other fundamental values are also frequently included in the denition of best practices. These are concretely dened developmental directions used to inuence the choice and the dissemination of best practices. Innovative actions3 and projects differ from best practices in that their solutions are absolutely or selectively original. This means that the solutions have not been applied anywhere else. Innovation, in all cases, is an
4

implemented developmental project, the results of which can be analyzed. Proven success is not an unconditional requirement. Initiatives, inventions and reinventions,4 ideas5 and visions differ from innovation because systematic implementation is not necessary in these cases. The practical implementation of ideas may be done in various stages. Models are referred to when good solutions or innovations can be described in accordance with a given set of criteria. These criteria are characterized by parameters or indicators concerning the objectives, output, input or process of solutions. In this case, solutions are comparable, quantiable and can be ranked. The precise procedure of selection is important here, such as benchmarking (see Chapter 7 for greater detail). Systems are dened by models which characterize the operation of the given organization or area in detailed processes. Models also detail the structured search and collection of the solutions.6 A prototype is a specic link between models and innovations.7 This enables rst-hand analysis, methodical transfer and dissemination of a new solution. It also lters out initial problems, applications and improvements of the solution before distributing it. Recommendation is a category very closely related to models and prototypes. Recommendations are collected on the basis of particular good solutions. These solutions are direct references, i.e., the application of the recommended innovation in practice. In other cases they refer to the analysis of practical experience and the formulation of good solutions as examples to be followed.8 Case studies, examples, reports and essays can be very structured, yet from the viewpoint of the survey, these should be regarded as soft categories. Whether their outcome is negative or positive, they can still be highly educational. LGI has a typical case study system regarding these methods (54). Each of the abovementioned elements are used within systems which gather and disseminate information about best practices and solutions.
5

When analyzing the content of a new application, we dene the requirements in terms of the usability of the service.

Why is it important?
Why do system hosts regard the distribution of good solutions to be important? The answer to this may seem self-evident, but it will allow us to move forward and eventually dene the content more accurately. The basic technique of social, community and public service innovation is the systematic collection and dissemination of new solutions proven in practice.9 Individual and communal creativity is treated and utilized as a resource of social signicance in advanced countries. One can nd good examples of this in American primary health care and the sustainable development programs of local communities.10 The major international, regional and national development programs are based on the collection and dissemination of best practices; these programs economize on the risk of research and pilot schemes and thereby speed up the process of development.11 The signicance of this source of social creativity is demonstrated by the evolution of an entire intellectual industry that collects and disseminates best practices. In these processes, in addition to spreading innovations, specic business services are also available.12 Best practice systems are widely used for the purpose of developing public administration in the Western world from Canada to Australia. Many metasystems operate and provide information about systems of best practices around the world; there are some metasystems in the eld of public administration as well.13 A list of these programs can be found in Appendix 2. The creativity of people within small and larger communities and organizations is perhaps the most important engine and resource of development in advanced countries. This is utilized, kept alive, systematically reinforced, supported and empowered by the public, and even by the business sector. Many tenders, competitions and prizes reward the developers
6

and users of best practices. These forms of recognition also serve as the basic instrument of collecting and assessing genuinely good practices.14

Upon what principles are the systems are operating?

System and service hosts are continuously searching for guarantees, which they need to build into their operation. These guarantees are needed to secure the information about genuine best practices, which is then made available to the widest possible range of users in the most effective way and format. Experience in this area is usually formulated into concepts, principles and recommendationsa kind of fundamental philosophy of systems operation. The fundamental concept of a system containing and providing information about best practices answers the following questions of principle.15 What is the denition of good practice, and what is the nature of the information to be gathered? (see above) How is the subject matter of the system delineated in terms of content? (see Chapter 5) Regarding strategy, why is the collection and dissemination of best practices important? What is the aim to be achieved? (see Chapter 2) How and from what sources is information gathered about best practices? (see Chapter 7) How is the information evaluated, how are the genuinely good practice cases selected and which information is suitable for dissemination? (see Chapter 7) To whom does the system wish to provide service, e.g., local, regional, national, international users, main users groups, etc.? (see Chapter 4) Through what services does the system guarantee the best utilization of its information for the users? (see Chapter 8) In what way does it guarantee the timeliness and updating of information about best practices available in the system?
7

 Is the evaluation of the impact of disseminating information about best practices intended (in other words, the actual utilization of the system)? This rst report attempts to create a sufciently broad and secure basis of information for answering the questions above. It has formulated the requirements which need to be set for Central and Eastern European regional and national systems. These requirements have been based on learning and assessing the experiences of similar systems which are already functioning.

2. Goals and results

Stakeholders map
The missions, strategies, goals and results of the systems that collect information about good practices can be approached and evaluated on the basis of several criteria. The range of stakeholders is quite wide, and the following are the most characteristic groups: Citizens are the end-users of all the services and benets provided by developing settlements, institutions and service provider organizations. Voluntary organizations are enabled to contribute and to exercise political and/or economic pressure through their knowledge of possible new solutions. Politicians and community leaders want to be successful and effective in their positions and are willing to utilize information about best practices. Experts in the elds of public administration and public service rely on the information about best practices in their continuous education. Hosts and nanciers of programs, facilitating economic and social development, also rely on information concerning best practices (maximization of output, the minimization of input, achievement of the greatest positive impact within the shortest possible time and the minimization of developmental risks). The business sectorprivate rms that provide public services, are suppliers or have other interests thereinfor whom it is important that their institutions appear in the public and voluntary sectors linked to these solutions. Research and development organizations achieve better results as organizations responsible for information dissemination and for improvement of solutions. The cost-efciency of their operation can also be substantially improved.
9

 Central and local governments could evolve into friendlier, cheaper and more efcient states through the dissemination and application of proven solutions best suited to local conditions. In contrast to the traditional practice of central governments of issuing general regulations, it would mean conducting continuous dialogue. Regional and local governments have a stake in turning best practices into the general norm. The systematic exploration of solutions that spare the budget and provide the best performance and the comparison thereof are decisive factors in professional operation.

Concrete objectives and expected results

The following arguments support the need for wide access to best practice information systems and their services. Through such services: The evolving new forum of innovations creates the broadest possible facility for the ow of innovations and experiences. The contacts, which are made here, and the multiplication of good practices generate additional ideas and initiatives. This process reinforces creativity and turns it into a phenomenon permeating the entire society. This acts as a catalyst. Gaining knowledge about the solutions developed by others, and applying these, creates partnerships and cooperative relations. These are reinforced both in terms of local and international cooperation. The horizontal ow of experience and the evolution of direct cooperation reduces the dependence of user organizations on hierarchic organizational systems. Citizens inuence community decisions and development more actively and effectively. They are helped by the knowledge of what others have done in similar situations. The members of a community explore the causes of problems and search for solutions.

10

 It is possible to expect local and higher-level politicians to know about and to pursue best practices. It becomes possible to assess and to forecast the impacts and conditions of new alternative solutions, applied to community and public service problems. Using existing experiences and contacts, it becomes possible to plan and introduce ones own solutions more efciently and more securely. Organizations, which are able to learn and to apply new solutions, become more competitive. The achievements of those organizations, which have applied the best and proven solutions, become requirements when assessing or auditing the standard of operation of others. Creative and innovative communities, organizations and people in the vanguard win recognition and greater support. The risks and costs of large-scale developmental programs (those which are related to a specialized area or higher level national or international programs) decline. The rapid spread of practical experience results in the acceleration of development processes. Applied solutions open to analysis are useful in science and education. It is possible to respond to and to prepare for the most important and most topical problems of practice. The comparison, exchange and adaptation of experiences between specialized areas and sectors (private, public and voluntary) becomes possible. Using the best practice information system makes additional related services and activities (e.g., research, training, consulting) possible. The capability of the private sector to sell its services and to adjust to the new solutions suitable to the needs of practice improves.

11

In summary, the collection and dissemination of information is much cheaper and involves much less risk than experimental development. The operation of a forum for new ideas has an impact on social creativity, which is the indispensable source of problem solution and development, and it also has a synergistic impact on the use of resources and capabilities.

12

3. Organizational framework
Issues related to organization
The fundamental question to be answered is: Who is to establish and operate best practice systems? The stakeholders map (see the previous section) shows which sectorsmarket, public and voluntaryhave stakes in such systems. Two subsequent questions follow: Who recognizes this need and can deal with the task? Who can nance the dissemination of innovation using such methods? This issue will be addressed in somewhat greater detail in Chapter 9. It is also important to know if organizations are collecting and spreading best practices on their own or in cooperation with others. If they have developed cooperative arrangements, then what is their size and composition? Exploring the organizational background of systems in operation will have a prophetic value for Central and Eastern Europe. Operating under different conditions (nancial position, operation of alliances and cooperative arrangements) organizations with the same mandate will be able to adopt and follow the practices of other countries tailored to their individual requirements.

Organizational map
The on-line systems studied in this report can be categorized into 45 cases according to organizational relations. In some cases, the partnership hid the decisive organization which ran the system. In the case of a number of systems, the solution was typically a multisectorial one, hence the number of systems and organizations differed. The table belowFigure 3.1 presents the proportion of organizational participation. Best practice systems are rarely organized and operated by only one organization. All together, stakeholders entered into partnerships in 75% of the cases. In the case of a state initiative (or in the case of a decisive
13

state role) this is somewhat more restrained (67%). While business and voluntary sectors rely on the opportunities offered by partnership more vigorously (86-88%), the 20% difference does not indicate different cooperation strategies. In the vast majority of cases, multisectorial cooperation of organizations is characterized by the organizational relations of collecting and spreading best practices for the operation of the public and the voluntary sectors. This conforms completely to the stakeholders map. Due to the strong trend of establishing partnerships in best practice systems, new organizations are rarely created for the sake of the best practice. As a joint action by several participants, the tasks are performed on the basis of a division of work, with generally one supervisory organization or body. Everyone does what one can do best. Of course, there are exceptions as well. Arthur Andersen Global Best Practices is run by the management consulting company which specializes in spreading best practices with respect to all three sectors.16 The public sector, which undertakes the greater role of professional and nancial responsibility, is the most decisive sector. It is notable that alliances among local governments (on occasion, even individual local governments), central government agencies (as well as their institutions and alliances17) and public sector organizations have a nearly identical weight. Their respective signicance is equalled by voluntary organizations. Those who work in the international eld have a more decisive presence and importance in spreading social and economic innovation. Fifty-one percent of the examined organizations are running national systems, while 38% of them are working internationally with an international target audience. Both gures have decisive importance. If organizations are examined with respect to their scope of operation, then best practice services run for regional and local purposes also need to be included (11% of the systems studied were of this kind). It is interesting to review the operating organizations according to their proles. The results speak virtually for themselves and strongly conrm the stakeholders map and the expected advantages previously outlined.
14

Figure 3.1 Proportion of organizational participation for 45 best practice systems18

a) Sectorsscope of userspartnership Sector Business sector Public sector Voluntary sector Total number Total (%) International number 02 08 10 20 38 National19 number 04 18 5 27 51 Local20 01 04 01 06 11 Total 007 030 016 053 100 013 057 030 100 Partnerships number (%) 06 20 14 40 86 67 88 75

number number (%)

b) Operating organizations by prole Type of organization Municipal associations

21

Number 09 08 08 08 04 03 03 02 45
23

(%) 20 18 18 18 08 07 07 04 100

Universities, teaching and other research institutes22 Government agencies and their associations Consulting rms Movement projects (broad partnership)project organizations25 Regional and local governments26 Specialized press27 Total International donor organizationsprivate and public24

In summary, it can be established that the dissemination of economic and social innovation is generally implemented through multisectorial cooperation of the interested organizations (with the participation of all three main sectors playing a decisive role). Local, national and international systems organically supplement and presuppose one another. These
15

facts have explicit importance from the viewpoint of using, running and nancing the systems.

Roles and structures

Roles of the organizations spreading social and economic innovation can be categorized by three levels and, within each of these, as two types front-line and hinterlandas shown by Figure 3.2.
Figure 3.2 Roles and structures
Frontline Supervisory decision-making bodies Service provider network Local developers System hosts: The organizations which select and assess best practices, decide on services, supervise, make recommendations and decisions. Operators: The organizations which are directly operating and providing the best practice services. Innovators: Local groups that are also users and that are creating and applying innovative solutions. Hinterland Social developers:28 The programs, which create best practice systems, and the organizations and cooperations that provide comprehensive frameworks for them. Service provider partners: Service organizations which are supplementing or supporting best practice systems or are based on them. Supporting environment: Local organizations and programs that are encouraging and supporting initiatives.

Innovators are special. They are the sources and, at the same time, the most frequent users of best practice systems. They are rarely individuals, and in the greatest number of cases they are smaller or larger teams. These work as organizational cellse.g., local action groups,29 innovation or learning groups,30 or development work teamswithout which good local initiatives could not come into being. The systems and services expressly target these primary, frequently informal organizations. In many cases systems build on these groups, encouraging their establishment, assisting
16

their activities, organizing their contacts, establishing network operation and, on occasion, providing a uniform image of these elementary organizations.31 A good number of membership organizations can be found behind these systems, which prove how important these roots are.32 An expressly supportive environment is needed in order to provide a creative atmosphere in which to work and to give courage to the staff members of the organizations to take the initiative, particularly in the public sector. Institutional support most frequently comes in the form of local development programs, innovative strategic plans, incentives, qualifying systems, standards and prizes. Certain municipalities33 run their own best practices systems, by the help of which they can motivate and, at the same time, serve their own politicians, ofcials and staff members.34 The operators of best practice systems are specialized service centers generally employing only a few people.35 They are the ones who directly collect information on innovative practices, directly provide some of the services (see Chapter 8 for more detail) and maintain contact with users. Although the range of possible services is extraordinarily wide, it is necessary to use many different resources (computer networks, press, conference programs, experts). These teams can remain small because they tend to expand their capacity through cooperative arrangements and contracting, depending on needs and tasks. A exible network of service providing partners is able to serve the related needs of best practice systems and to utilize their inherent service opportunities (see Chapter 8 for greater detail).36 In most cases mutually advantageous cooperation makes it possible for operators or system hosts to avoid making additional investments for the development of related services. Moreover, they can also rely on the support of service providing partners in establishing basic services (e.g., providing Internet service, consultation, transfer of rights of use).37 It also frequently occurs that an institution which provides related services (information service, publications, training, archives, consultation and events) is the same institution that runs the best practices system. A new service sometimes develops out of
17

these. In-house solutions are natural for such organizations, as they can be very effectively and efciently organized.38 The system host is the ownerof whom there can be severalwho decides what the system should contain and provide, and ensures the necessary resources. The system host fullls two functions and there is often an organizational structure that corresponds to these. The functions are: (a) a higher-level strategic decision-making bodysuch as the board of directorskeeps the entire system in direction and (b) a part of the organizationmanagement committees, working groupswhich makes recommendations in the direction and supervision of practical implementation, as well as performing operative work, if needed, by relying on specialized groups39 or specialists for certain areas.40 A frequently found solution, in the case of organizations issuing tenders or competitions, is that they employ juries consisting of well-known experts at both levels in order to award supports and prizes.41 Some of the latter are frequently external advisors, part-time or contracted staff members. Best practice systems and services are characteristically subsystems or subprograms of comprehensive social and economic developmental institutions, complex organizational coalitions and partnerships.42 43 Their background is either national or international to a more or less equal extent. The presence of these exible qualities is important in the collection and dissemination of the initiatives and implemented innovations, both from the professional and the nancial point of view. This arrangement makes clear that the best practice systems and services constitute an instrument for a much broader, more comprehensive set of economic and social goals. In general, partnerships and coalitions are administered and operated by coordination councils.44 The extremes within the organization of best practices are remarkable, for example, between the small circles of local initiatorscreative people, who innovateand the large national and international coalitions. These extremes create mechanisms that grow from the foundations but also nurture them.45 The inevitable organizational essence of best practice sys18

tems is that innovation information systems are, by necessity, international46 and local at the same time; the global solution is only viable in the longer term and in direct cooperation with the local solution.

19

4. Users and needs

The unknown needs of the invisible user
A large part of the target audience for information service systems will presumably remain unknown in the modern world. The buyer of a book is also unknown in advance (except in the case of textbooks distributed in a narrow circle). Only at the completion of the publication, when the exact content and price of the book are known, can the clientele be targeted. In the case of Internet-based service systems, masses of invisible users will have access to services. What can be done in this situation? 47

The dimensions of needs

Taking the stakeholders map (see Chapter 2) as the point of departure, one can accurately identify the users of best practice systems. Any enumeration of a targeted audience in this case would probably result in endless lists. The key issue is concentrating on information content and services, and thereby determining who should be the target audience among a wide public. When designing the system, the following issues bring the solution nearer: By sectors: Private sectorbusiness-like partnership; Public sectoreffectiveness and efciency of public services; Voluntary sectormobilizing community resources. By content: Addressing professionsfor instance, health care, environmental protection; Addressing complex subject matters and problemscommunity development, local governments; Examination of activitiese.g., public procurement, application of new technologies.
20

By level of knowledge: Interested layman, politician; Student, self-taught individual, activists; Practicing expert; Expert, researcher. By supported activity: Information, transfer of knowledge; Establishing and operating contacts; Transfer of knowledge, improvement of skills; Task/problem solving; Recognition of results, feedback.

User = service provider

Focusing on the client delineates user needs and denes a specic range of contents and services. According to the practices of operating systems, it is useful to make distinctions between the various groups of users and to differentiate service packages accordingly. The three different categories of users are: The internal circle (partners, members, subscribers, information sources) who are exclusive and frequent users as well as service providers. Contacts are regular. The circle of external interested parties who make use of the services on an ad hoc basis. Signicant work relationships, in which the maintenance of the services and their development, are important. Interested partners constitute the largest circle. They could become buyers or even members of the internal circle. Attention must be paid to them as well, not the least because of the publicity of the system through advertising. In all three categories, it can be said that the users are also service providers. Thanks to modern information and communication technology,
21

this special quality of the systems cannot be forgotten. Moreover, this should be utilized as much as possiblelike in the case of operating best practice systems.48 The fact that users are involved in the evaluation of solutions and also in the system as service providers is extraordinarily important. The actual users of the solutions are the target audience, making up a virtual but very lively critical forum. Their judgement constitutes the most certain guarantee that the presented innovations are really best practices. Determining the main user groups does not generally mean selecting one out of the above-mentioned three levels. Instead, it means establishing the needs to be satised at the different levels. The more the Internet is accessible to increasingly larger groups of users, information technology systems are becoming more capable of providing a wider range of services. The number of people who have Internet access in their homes is increasing in advanced countries. At the same time, community solutions for Internet access are spreading in the countries in transition.49 According to a Hungarian survey, 64% of Internet users are seeking news, public information and services.50 Presumably, the situation is similar in other countries as well. Best practice systems are providing services that fulll this general and intense need.

22

5. Information content
Content directory
In addition to the systems that have been studied, (home page addresses can be found in Appendix 2) we are providing a content directory (also with home page references) within this publication. These lists enumerate the concrete subjects that can be found in best practice systems. The collection is a useful start for new systems wanting to build and expand links pointing to valuable contents.

Merged boundaries
The analysis of the content of best practice systems, which spread economic, social and administrative innovation, has shown that their subject matter is partially overlapping. This was one of the most striking conclusions of the survey. It is rather difcult to draw sharp boundaries between them. Identical headings may occur in systems whose focus (see below) differs substantially. Therefore content denition requires a practical approach.. It is useless to insist upon pure categories of theory and demarcation, and there is no reason to be afraid of eventual overlaps. The curiosity of the user is more important. But the main issue is that the user must be able to nd his/her way and to search the information system properly. Content differentiation should be regarded as a specic approach, which may, in many cases, repeat elements of other systems (and may also serve to link these systems). Emphasis must be placed on interrelations. In this way system build-up and expansion can be simplied and made more exible. It is no longer necessary to constantly modify the structure, and the user can easily nd the interrelations that are important for him. The user may not even have to think originally. In addition to the denition of fundamental search criteria and main categories of content, it is also necessary to categorize solution by inves23

tigating their most important properties or linking them with the appropriate references to all possible search criteria. This may be relevant within a given topic to the user. The categorization of systems focuses on channeling, attracting attention and orientation, instead of structure and arrangement. The general ndings of the survey support this statement. In addition to specifying the focus on contente.g., local government, environmental protection, health care, etc.the actual information available in the system at all times will generate the most precise division of content. The basic question is whether the given solution is interesting for the users or not. If the answer is yes, then the parameters and structure of the system must be adjusted accordingly. Merged system boundaries are most apparent in system procedures, whichbeside the denite stress on important pointsprovide a rather wide scope for expanding contents: for example, community development and healthy communities, or local government excellence and innovations.

Focal points of the content

The content analysis of more than 50 systems have found the following characteristic approaches to content, which are illustrated by examples in Figure 5.1

Replacing rigid demarcation and structure with versatile searches and links
In summary, it can be deduced that best practice systems with content focus are able to better handle the complexity of their subject matter and the difculties of structure. This can be achieved through a exible denition of subjects and simple structure. Furthermore, it ensures convenient and variable search possibilities with extensive links, both in terms of organization and content.
24

Figure 5.1 Focal points of the content in best practice systems

Base dimensions Professional focus Focal point Narrow differentiation by activity Examples Ethnic conicts, multicultural policy and local governments51 Acquisition52 Organizational learning53 Performance management54 WWW best practices55 Environment protection56 Health care57 Housing58 Welfare public services59 Management60 Enterprise for Economic Excellence (19) Central government61 Local government62 Civic Practices Network (14) National Civil League (41) Arthur Andersen Global Best Practices (1) Community and town development63 Recommendations based on the analysis of local best practices65 Collection of innovations assisting the development of a given area66 See the references in Figure 3.1 See the references in Figure 3.1 Use of IT in public administration67 Internet in public administration68

Broader more complex approach to a specialized area

Organizational focus

Private sector Public sector (central and local government, public service providers) Voluntary sector (NGOs) Mixed and complex subjects and partnerships (public/private, public/voluntary)

Geographical focus

Local and regional (city area, county, state)64

National International Combined focus The most varied combinations of the above approaches

25

6. Building blocks
Model selection
What should be the nature and the size of structural elements from which best practices systems evolve? The answer to this question is extremely important when deciding the size and operationincluding services and productsof the systems.

Modes of providing information

Naturally, all three basic modes of expressiontext with tables, graphics with pictures and multimediaoccur in the systems. Text is naturally used in the majority of cases. Pictures are more rare but they can be successfully used in illustrating best practices.69 At the time of the survey, the use of multimedia was very rare in the area studied (community innovation), but some existed even then.70 The development of information technologyprimarily on the part of userswill enable the distribution of multimedia solutions to a wider audience. Preparations need to be made in advance. Collecting information (e.g., preparation of video materials) is not particularly difcult for multimedia-oriented presentations. These are already presented in different but linked services (CD-ROM publications, training courses, presentations and media).

Descriptions and links

We need to distinguish between the two essentially different basic structural elements: the descriptions of best practices and the links to them. The majority of the systems contain both elements. There are, however, a good number of systems that deal only with the latter type of information. Such guiding applicationswhich are somewhat simple but doubtless very usefulcould be referred to as best practice metasystems.71
26

Generally, they are not independent but usually part of a major service system.

Nonxed structural elements

The best practice information that appears as structural elements can be characterized in a number of ways. The most general question is whether the system contains xed or nonxed elements in its content structure and the extent to which they exist. There are some solutionsrelatively few that belong to the latter category. These are either very small (a few short paragraphs)72 or they are document type (adopting nished materials which do not adhere to a uniform structure).73 An advantage of a solution with nonxed elements is the relatively simple editing. Its disadvantage appears for the user, because solutions of this type are difcult to compare and the descriptions may not contain all the relevant information. The acceptable usage of this solution in international systems is only to awaken interest and attention, to assist additional research and to help nd contacts. Descriptions that are similarly xed are also a characteristic of media-based systems (cf. Figure 3.1).74

Fixed structural elements

Systems containing xed structural elements have more or less precise elements. References are made to this in the appropriate place in the description below. The following elements are built into a pyramid-shaped structureproceeding from the top downwardwhich provides an increasingly broader description of the given subject in increasingly greater depth of detail (Figure 6.1). Standardization is necessary when creating regional and worldwide BP/IP systems. Typical methods of organization of best practices are presented below. 1. The title line generally contains a description of the innovation and of the references. Its purpose is:
27

 to provide a review of the content of the best practice system, with the help of a list of examples, to select the needed information about references (those applying the solution) and about their evaluation (e.g., a list of prize-winners),75 to progress towards more detailed information or to seek additional contacts. 2. The abstract can be viewed as a variant of the title. It provides slightly more information about a particular solution (its essence and results). Its purpose is the same: making progress more secure. It also assists in better identication of the solution. A specic form of this descriptive variant is when the solution is characterized by a few single-quality parameters (region, ecosystem, scale, partnership, keywords).76 This description is important, because at the next level there is information about fees (password protected or other), and it also assists in minimizing downloading time. In such cases, references are made to provide the possibility and the method to obtain more detailed description or documentation (see Point 4). 3. One-page descriptions usually contain a formally xed structure,77 consisting of: the description, the name and geographical location of the organization(s) applying the solution, the date and circumstances of the origins of the solution (background problem), a short description of the essence of the solution, its content denition, illustrations of the solution (photographs, layout schemes, schematic representations of interrelations and diagrams), a description of the most important conditions of the solution (stafng, nancial, legal and technical), the achievements and the results, which present facts and gures,
28

successes and failures (a good example: LGI Ethnic Conicts, Multicultural Politics and Local Governance Case Study Database (54)), contact information, other sources of information and additional contacts (specialized literature, collaborating organizations and contact information), references to more detailed descriptions and documentation and the methods for obtaining them (see under Point 4),78 independent evaluation and auditing, e.g., prizes won. Some systems provide an opportunity for interactive evaluation.79

These general descriptions are traditional. Examples can often be found for using hypertext, which grants the user direct access through keywords to: description in greater detail and access to level 4 (see below), other information, contacts and solutions that help the user to fully understand the given section.80 System hosts tend towards uniformity by requiring that the descriptions of the references be presented in a uniform structure. The electronically provided formats are characteristically of a xed size and structure.81 System hosts usually employ editors as well. 4. The documentation type systems contain detailed information about the solutions. Generally, these do not constrain the size of the materials regardless if they are read only, downloads or pay per item. Best practice service systems do not necessarily contain all the required materials; sometimes these can be directly obtained from the reference organizations. This depends on the service organization in question and also on nancial and cooperative issues. There is generally a demand for detailed materials on those functioning solutions that can be adapted and implemented elsewhere successfully. In such a case, it is an advantage when the required
29

information is available from the same service systemone-stop shoppingwithout requiring too much additional research.
Figure 6.1 The pyramid of provided information in best practice systems

1. Title
1-2 lines of information

2. Abstract
5-10 lines of information

3. One-pager
1-2 pages of well-structured information

4. Documentation
Documentation in electronic and in traditional forms, which are accessible electronically or through a best practice client service (not xed volume)

30

7. Information sources and selection

The signicance of selection
The source, the collection and the selection of information determine the purpose for which the information is received and used. There are a number of solutions applied in the operating systems. The more heterogeneous and precise the selection is, the more heterogeneous services (see the next section) can be created from the available materials. Poorly ltered, nonevaluated solutions simplify the operation of the system, reducing the responsibility of providing and mediating information. They also limit the usefulness of the system for the users, which undermines sustainability (subscription, purchase of information). In most of the cases, selection is done in accordance with determined and stringent criteria in order to enhance the value of information. The source of information is also of importance, primarily from the viewpoint of reliability. Two extreme examples are: (1) press monitoring is very efcient but hardly reliable. Its content is incoherent and not unied, but it is excellent as the rst step in collecting information. (2) Information provided by the network or the member is reliable. It can be regulated, formatted and the maintenance of information can be guaranteed. There are a number of interim solutions offering combined methods (see below). The choice of methods also has a decisive impact on the value of the received and provided information.

Principles of collection and selection

The rst and most important principle arises from the adopted interpretation and denition of best practice (see Chapter 1). Every system establishes and generally declares what kind of information it collects. This is the primary criterion of selection.

31

The choice is between the passive (secondary) and the active (primary) methods of collection. In the former, existing information is used which is generally produced for a different purpose (such as specialized literature and conference materials). In the latter, innovators are called upon to provide information in order to achieve the goals of the best practice system. The use of active methods helps in the collection and preparation of materials with a xed format, which simplies subsequent evaluation and selection (e.g., evaluation of tenders). It is important to establish if there is a need for selection and evaluation. If there is a need, then how strict should it be and what should be its basic criteria? In this case, the following typical solutions can be found: There is no evaluation. All information is accepted and not reviewed (e.g., application stories, case studies, ideas). There are only very minimal formal requirements (e.g., volume, actual application). Information can come from a large variety of sources (see below). Subsequent evaluation may be a factor. This type of evaluation was found only in the form of user feedback, asking for opinions about particular solutions. This is a relatively simple method, usually including some form of voting according to a single criterion or more.82 Simple evaluation and comparison is a relatively exible evaluation system. It can be used with few criteria, which directly arise from the denition of best practice (see Chapter 1). These criteria are based upon the analysis of the standard of conformity with similar cases (e.g., cases can be rated from unsatisfactory to extremely satisfactory on a scale of one to ten) or comparison to similar cases (if a rank is also required). Selection according to quality criteria decided in advance. This means the examination, evaluation and comparison of the generalized results (output such as performance criteria, savings) and the conditions of the given solutions (input such as costs, process, time taken, participants and appropriateness).83
32

 Using indicators84 and benchmarks (see below) is the most complex and most thorough solution for evaluation and selection. This method aims to determine the extent of excellence in the given area. This corresponds to a specied range within the given phenomenon, problem or activity, etc. (e.g., internationally, nationally, regionally, professionally or organizationally). Other criteria can also arise in collection and selection. If the information received is paid for (e.g., support is given or the reports are purchased), then not only the provision of nancial incentives can be calculated, but also stringent requirements concerning content, format and maintenance (e.g., business opportunities, mutual information, possibility of recognition, possibility of advertising). The principle of single or multi-step selection offers a choice. The search can be more target-oriented and requires less work from the partners. It is particularly expedient if an evaluation procedure is also linked to selection. This involves demanding more thoroughly developed materials in a xed format.

Sources and methods of selection

Practicing experts, advisors working in the eld and mentors who have direct experiences about innovations and good solutions are frequently participants in such development programs. They tend to collect eld experience from their clients and from varied professional sources with a view to their own successful operation. The systems based on this type of knowledge are organized generally by work teams consisting of managers or consultants who work in specialized areas. Press monitoring is a comprehensive and very effective method of collecting information on best practices. Generally, it is applied as a preparatory technique, because press reports contain materials with varying content, depth of detail and accuracy, which cannot always be fully relied on. This procedure needs to be supplemented with other, more accurate methods.85
33

Internet source research provides similar information to press monitoring. It provides somewhat better quality but, at the time of the survey, yields a smaller quantity. More and more organizations, particularly those in the vanguardthe creative onesthat are producing information on best practices, appear on the Internet with their own home pages. This sometimes occurs in the form of an electronic paper, professional forum or database. This source is particularly signicant if a good solution is found and is subsequently included in a system. Its reference can be easily supplemented with a link to the source. Target-oriented research projects can be organized in a way to obtain information about state-of-the-art practices. This method offers good opportunities for the evaluation and comparison of innovations and practices according to specic criteria. These projects also draw general conclusions concerning problems and experiences in relation to individual solutions. Public opinion polls, which are conducted among interested parties (citizens, clients and users), are unusual versions of eld studies. These are particularly useful to obtain evaluations directly from the users of given solutions. On this basis a reliable decision can be made concerning what is really regarded best practice and what is not. On-site meetings and interviews are suitable for the exploration of good practices in particular organizations. It is useful in controlling and maintaining the information provided by those who developed the given solution. One-sided presentations and evaluations can be avoided with this method. Objective control is particularly important if some kind of recognitionprizes or grants (see below)and other benets or forms of support are linked to evaluation. A frequently applied procedure for collection and selection is to issue a call for tenders in the categories of creating good solutions, documenting existing innovations and writing case studies. An advantage of this technique is that materials can be requested and evaluated according to the requirements of form and content of the best practice system. The applicants who meet the requirements of the tender can be awarded with support in advance.86
34

Purchasing descriptions of good examples as a specic way of solving problems is a theoretical possibility not found in practice. If this method is made known and advertised, the collection of reports about innovations turns into a commercial undertaking. In view of the nancial considerations, compliance with certain criteria and formal requirements can be demanded. A call for tender is a competition awarding a prize. Out of the submitted applications a certain number of winners are selected, which have met the specic criteria. The solutions are compared to one another and ranked. In most cases, substantial nancial rewards are linked to the prizes.87 Conferences, professional experience exchange forums and information exchanges provide excellent opportunities to present good solutions. The presentation of innovations and their results, the documentation of the presentations and the subsequent publishing and distribution thereof are also widespread practices. The solutions can be compared in the course of the debates that follow such presentations. Such events can be excellently combined with evaluation and the awarding of prizes.88 There is a tremendous amount of literature on benchmark analysis.89 The databases of some organizations offer such services, which are excellent information sources for best practice systems. The evaluation itself may become instrumental in establishing who is the best in doing what. Such a method can be used for selecting the best solution and is also suitable for rating solutions that do not achieve best status. Benchmarking and learning from others presuppose one another. As discussed earlier (see Chapter 1), this procedure assumes the breakdown of the given area or organizational operation into services or work processes. It also requires that the means be standardized when comparing solutions.90 Associations, unions and other organizations based on membership can collect best practice information within the framework of a so-called innovation network. In this instance it is easier to guarantee uniformity and maintenance, because membership entails the observation of specic conditions. Generally, best practice systems collect information and eventually evaluate it in an interactive manner through electronic correspondence.
35

This is a continuous process in most cases, but special events are sometimes organized (competitive applications, competitions, forums and debates). A two-phase solution is typical: the rst step is a short report, while the second is the transfer of more detailed information about the solution from the system host.91 Some of the best practice systems have two levels. The rst is the knowledge base, including innovation, benchmarking92 database, etc., which serves as a background to other services as well. This is where the best practice services obtain their information. This is narrowed down and managed as a specied system of subjects on which they base their special services. It means that there are lters in operation between the two systems according to varying objectives. Best practice service systems characteristically entail a method of collection and selection which combines several solutions. The typical combination is a relatively exible rst procedure providing a wide base,93 and a second procedure reaching a preselected smaller circle working with more specic criteria.94

Monitoring
Functioning systems tend to pay relatively little attention to the maintenance of information and the continuous observance of good solutions. There is little to tell about these systems. It would be interesting to revisit certain best practices after months or years to see whether they still retain their position. For the majority of innovative practices, long-term results can be assessed only if their impact is reevaluated from time to time. Similarly, only by the help of a properly functioning monitoring system can one assess long-term sustainability. This issue is one of the central problems in the development of todays functioning systems. Systems, particularly the ones based on public electronic databases and the Internet, are relatively young. HABITAT (22) has announced an open program (the Habitat Watch), with a view to widen the
36

dissemination of best practices and to continuously monitor and evaluate their success. It provides an opportunity for any interested organization to join the program. An integral part of this program will be to monitor the current value and effects of the innovations. Publicity and authenticity can establish similar interests between the users of the best practice systems and the system hosts who keep the information up-to-date. This can be the basis for monitoring the system and it can be organized to easily follow up changes. Mutual obligations need to be specied concerning data supply, its entry into the system and the consequences of problems (e.g., being deleted from the system). Computer communication simplies the management of data exchange procedures. It is important that the organization of the system be managed as an informal or formal innovation network. The system maintains a regular correspondent relationship with its members. With the help of a background organization, the monitoring of best practices cannot conict with principles.95 System updates are improved by requiring mandatory notices within the text indicating the date of the rst version of case descriptions, the frequency of reviews and the date of the last revision. Such itemized references are found infrequently in operating systems.96 Absolutely no information was found about reviewing procedures or about the frequency of them. The most appropriate general solution is to display the date of the records last update.

37

8. Services
Best practices knowledge base
The very foundation of any best practices system is the knowledge base, which describes and explores innovative initiatives and practices. Best practice services are directly built on this base. One organization collects the information, while another provides it to the users; the same knowledge base may be used by several organizations in many ways (information, research, education and publication). The content and structure of the knowledge base in these cases is often much broader than that provided by different systems. Because information comes from several countries, different programs, competitive applications, etc., it is essential to build up the primary knowledge base. It is necessary to standardize data of varying structures (e.g., translation, systemization of subject matter, structural standardization) or to select these according to their subject (see the denitions under Chapter 1). The initial and continuous monitoring of information is also fundamental. The practice of the United Nations Center for Human Settlements, HABITAT (22), which is similar to the practice of other major international organizations and partnerships, supports the accuracy of such two-tier solutions. Regional and national systems (for example, best practices partnerships, regional resource centers, national and local best practices competitions and exhibitions, corporate best practices) are the sources for unied international best practices databases. These databases can be used in many ways in various service systems. The database of the Together Foundation is used by several other best practices service systems, like UNESCOs Management of Social Transformation Best Practice System (63). A similar example of a more complex cooperation is the Local Government Management Board, LGMB (34) in Britain. Its Local Agenda 21 case studies also appear in the service system of the European Good
38

Practice Information Service (EURONET/ICLEI Consortium) Local Sustainability (62). This latter system also relies on the materials and information available in the best practice database of the Together Foundation (22). The fundamental goal of The Inter-Agency Benchmarking and Best Practices Council (23) knowledge base is to serve best practice systems. They collect and evaluate good examples, relying on the benchmark analysis of governmental processes.

Services built on the knowledge base

If professionals recognize and appreciate the available services, then information about good initiatives and practices can be submitted as addenda. It is understood that this information is evaluated correctly and will be disclosed to the public. In this way the managers of the systems and reference organizations become accessible and their names become known among international experts. Essentially, a knowledge base enables interactive contact and the transfer of material directly by e-mail as attached les. In general, personal contact can be established with the system hosts through electronic correspondence. This method allows for a more individual approach to problems, and therefore the most varied information related to good solutions can be requested (e.g., question and answer, contacts, partner search, asking for opinions, fund-raising, development of cooperative arrangements). The client services of best practice systems are generally prepared for managing direct requests.97 Free electronic information services provided through the Internet are essential. These services contain the rst three levels (titles, paragraphs, and 1-2-page descriptions) presented in Figure 6.1. In 50% of the cases, materials (documents) of larger volume can be downloaded only for a fee or only by members and subscribers. Elsewhere, the downloading of materials is a free service (see below). The information provided usually covers the following content areas:
39

descriptions of best practices in various depth and detail, literature addressing best practices, sources of additional information on the given subject, links to the references or to other best practice information systems and organizations dealing with similar subjects, other useful information related to the given solutions. All four levels of materials in the pyramid can be accessed and read by downloading, i.e., assisted by software, a signicant aid in the case of multimedia materials (Figure 6.1). For users who do not yet have access to computers, some system hosts are distributing documents in the traditional way as well. This latter solution will presumably have greater signicance in best practice systems in Central and Eastern Europe. The home pages of best practice systemsparticularly the international ones98are generally multilingual. Typically, it is possible to choose only between English and the national language; however, English is unquestionably the common language of electronic communication. The systems provide diverse search support, which greatly eases the burden on users. Some of the general search services go beyond the search facilities by using keywords and additional browsing functions, for example:99 materials available according to some kind of generally accepted subject arrangement, places of interest (continent, state, region and settlement) marked on a map and characteristically belonging to the geographical location of the reference,100 materials accessible by a keyword index or through freely chosen words or terms,101 searches by the success of solutions (prize winners) or by their popularity index (wherever such evaluation applies), search facility by chronological order of the implementation of solutions or the arrival of materials (chronological order, newer materials, older materials, archive materials),
40

 complex search facilities,102 search engine programs for a given server or a larger circle of sources,103 links to search facilities in other systems.104 The accumulated information in the best practice systemswhich is archived according to topics, electronic and traditional newsletters, publications focusing on given subjects, summaries and manualscan be published, thus taking noncomputer users into account.105 This is a basic service for media-based systems (see Figure 3.1). Frequently asked questions (FAQ) arise mainly in relation to competitions and calls for applications related to solutions, programs, actions and services. With their help, the user can obtain immediate answers to the most important questions; thus he/she need not send a letter and wait for an answer. A widely spread service type is the discussion forum. It provides an opportunity for users to discuss individual solutions and cases. Understandably, views tend to differ on individual initiatives and innovations. An exchange of opinions is useful for the objective evaluation of genuinely good and original innovations. Through the discussion forum and similar lists of services, a wide range of potential partners can be addressed concerning any given issue, which may also be the rst step towards taking up direct contact (partner search).106 The information trading services of best practice systems provide opportunities for buying materials related to good solutions.107 Many different kinds of products are offered (through links) for electronic purchase or ordering: documents,108 books,109 training programs, presentation video materials, CD-ROMs,110 software,111 computer hardware and subscriptions (Internet, specialized press). Best practice systems can also be used as a valuable advertising media. Some of the system hosts need this source of funding (see Chapter 9 for more detail). Users can easily reach the business organizations that are
41

behind individual solutions by looking through the advertisements related to the subject. These advertisements generally contain links as well. This solution could be of particular importance in Central and Eastern Europe, where central and local governmental agencies tend to devote less effort in the search for such services (if at all). The voluntary sector is not yet nancially strong enough to be able to nance these sites in other ways. The presentation of sponsors is another important service that should be mentioned.112 The ability to access funding assists the development and implementation of good, new solutions and is very closely linked to innovation. Best practice system services frequently include direct support through competitive applications, i.e., awarding prizes to the best applicants. It includes reimbursement of costs related to case descriptions, information and direct access to other funding facilities which support innovations. System hosts and their partners usually present practical experiences by organizing various events, either periodically or on a regular basis. Conferences supported by traditional and modern technology (videoconferences), model presentations, experience exchanges and workshops provide valuable opportunities for personal contact and exchanges of experiences. If these events are properly prepared, they can also provide good opportunities for the exploration and collection of new cases.113 A less common service is that of interactive self-analysis. Through various testssuch as benchmarkingusers determine to what extent they can approach the most favorable best practices. This is a suitable method for the preselection of good solutions.114 Advice, tailored to the needs and the problems of the user, can also be provided on issues related to solutions. This service can be based on the self-analysis obtained from the user and on information disclosed in other ways. Tailored services presuppose that the system host is appropriately prepared; that there is the available service capacity, that partner service providers are linked and that there is a service provider network in operation (see Figure 3.2, fourth organizational function). In the
42

case of organizations based on membership, the advisory service is evident where direct contact to users is given. A frequent topic of the advisory services is preparation for successful participation in competitive applications.115 The link between distributing best practices and organizational learning services is natural. Familiarization with innovations and the acquisition of new knowledge and skills are important aspects of both these areas. These two constitute organic parts of the learning process. Having recognized this, more and more system hosts are expanding their services through various best-practice-based training programs for individuals, teams or entire organizations.116 The organization and management of research and developmental programs, and the resulting good solutions thereof, are also among the interactive cooperation-based services. It is easy to nd organizations and individuals who wish to participate in such programs.117 The most advanced solution, which incorporates the widest combination of services, is the building and operation of innovative communities. In these mainly membership-based systems with highly rated references, services provide everything from passive information through individual consulting to mutual assistance and joint actions as described above. In addition to these, the innovative community can provide many opportunities for member initiatives.118

Public and/or private services?

Best practice systems tend to use both public and private solutions, most of the time supplementing one another. The recruitment of new members or subscribers requires that each system have a fully and freely accessible branch, which is separate from those which are open to the public. In virtually all cases, visitors can obtain valuable information here, such as: list of contents, services, examples, additional contacts, upper levels of information (see Figure 6.1).
43

A characteristic situation is that the visitor is convinced by the public services to also use the private or subscription-based services of the system, or to apply for membership in the organization (provided that the appropriate criteria are satised). Users from the public system are usually phased into the private system. The following are examples: passive, anonymous use, electronic correspondence, offering follow up contacts, possibility of expressing opinions, involvement in the collection of best practices and source information,119 an entry in the guestbook of the system allows one to write news about ones own organization, request free self-registration for using certain services (e.g., search in the best practices database),120 limited time entry for a specic period to the private sections of the system (e.g., with a temporary password), possibility of sending ones own solution (entering the system),121 registration of members, partners free of charge,122 registration of subscribers, including notication of the intention to enter or admission after the appropriate procedure and payment of the membership fee,123 participation in certain private programs (e.g., through winning competitive applications, use of on-line projects and related services by password).124

44

9. How can the systems be sustained?

A few introductory thoughts
The basic economic consideration behind running best practice systems is that it is cheaper to gather and spread the experiences of the best solutions than to invent and implement new ones. Practically, it is taking the earlier expenditures of pioneers and using it for the benet of smaller and more diverse communities. The results of previous research and development are made available for the benet of all. Financial efforts, made to that end, can be correctly evaluated only when their protability and the possibility of using fund-saving solutions are examined. Dozens of best practice systems and services are functioning in advanced countries. Some of them have histories going back many years. There is no doubt, therefore, that they can be sustained. It has to be taken into account that methods of nancing differ in different parts of the world, depending on the various stages of social transformation. Creating nancial foundations may need different approaches in each country, depending on: how central and local governmental agencies are deliberately participating in the strategic development of society and what they are willing to devote to this, how strong the voluntary sector is, and how strong and deep institutional partnerships are operating among the central and local governmental agencies and among the voluntary organizations, how the private sector is participating in the development of society, what the sector is willing and able to devote to the establishment of balanced economic social relations and their maintenance, whether the mechanisms of cooperation between the voluntary and the public sectors have already been established and institutionalized and whether they are reliable.

45

The stakeholders map outlined earlier (see Chapter 2) demonstrated that many organizations, including some of substantial nancial strength, can support and be direct or indirect nanciers of best practice systems. The true question of sustainability is the extent to which we can organize the enforcement of the interests of potential contributors and, through this, mobilize their contributions. If it is successful, then system hosts can rely on a number of sources in the vast majority of cases. This study was unable to collect concrete data on the expenditures and revenues of the systems and services. Despite this, the facts and arguments below will try to support the conclusion that best practice systems can be established and operated under the most heterogeneous economic and social conditions. The calculation of expenditures and costs adheres to nancial and other conditions similar to any other research or service development project, including the application of modern information technology.

Expenditures to be taken into account

Calculations should be made for basic services and for the establishment of related activities. This is in the interest of the partner service providers and they are usually willing to invest in it. The following expenditures should be calculated with when organizing and operating basic activities: The cost of the collection and selection of information, which depends on the composition and diversity of the established partnership (see Chapter 3). These costs cannot be avoided and include expert work required for the evaluation of solutions. In certain cases, additional expenditures may also arise, such as awarding prizes. If the system host runs the systems own database, an inevitable cost is editing the information, feeding it to the system and updating it continuously. There is also a great deal of editing work if the system adopts nished materials from a regional international system or from a national system.
46

 The establishment and continuous structural and functional maintenance of the computer system, which is an average IT development task. Keeping the information continuously on-line and conveying it. This could be done through using ones own technical base, but it can also be achievedand this is more rationalthrough using an appropriate Internet provider. The continuous maintenance of client relations, including updating and servicing data. The organization of related events and program management is closely related to the operation of the best practices system. With respect to general tasks of management and organization, one could stress the maintenance of partnership relations, which includes the direction of its departments, the strategic development of the system, its services and its PR, and participation in competitive applications. In summary, the minimum expenditure includes the cost of running a small ofce with four to ve staff members. It is also includes a non-recurrent data collection program, and the cost of the development, maintenance and technical operation of an IT system. Sometimes it means temporary employment of some six to seven external experts.

Sources of revenue
Figure 9.1 summarizes the potential sources of revenue. The table furthermore indicates the frequency of the sources and in relation to this assesses their signicance according to the ndings of this study. A signies the most frequent sources, B those of medium frequency and C the rare sources. Their magnitude is dependent on the position and internal relations of the individual country or organization, hence their weight, in general, cannot be estimated in any other way, nor would it be expedient. It is quite rare for a functioning system to operate based on a single source of funding. In general, we need to calculate with the combination of various potential revenues given by the local conditions.
47

Figure 9.1 Potential sources of revenue

Description 1. The operation of the system is an organic part of the maintenance costs (general overheads) of the given institution 2. Subscribers maintain the services and only they have access to them. 3. Contributors pay a membership fee while exercising control over the system and services. 4. Under partnerships, sponsors provide substantial support for the operation of the system. 5. Partners take over certain costs of establishment and operation in return for partner services. 6. Central government subsidy for the establishment and maintenance under partnership of programs 7. Local government support or participation with a view to the development of the given region. 8. Information trade and the sale of other related services. 9. Placing advertisements on home pages and on traditionally distributed materials. 10. Business brokerage contacts to the appropriate Internet and traditional sources of acquisition. 11. Participation of national and international program supports in the development and operation of the systems. ABC Notes Primarily the upgrading of the already operational systems of organizations with a suitable past. This is a solution characteristic primarily of the media-based systems and certain additional services. Operating the system is generally just one of the functions of the organization which has membership. The direct participation of sponsors is not general practice. This can be deducted from the extensive partnerships and depends on the nature of the partners. Participation is largely related to the solutions of public tasks. Local regional governments rarely take part alone in nancing, more frequently as members of a partnership. A fundamental source of revenue. One can forecast, that this source of revenue will have a major role in Central and Eastern European systems. At the time of the survey, a relatively under-utilized opportunity expected to be expanded through electronic shopping. One can forecast that this source of revenue will have a major role in Central and Eastern European systems.

48

Notes
1. This is the Kzigkonzult system mentioned above. 2. Best Practices and Local Leadership Program (BLP), Criteria for a Best Practice (22). The number in parentheses indicates the number of the system analyzed during the research project listed in Appendix 2. 3. Rural Europe (2), in addition to providing an accurate denition of the term, also gives a methodology for the analysis and evaluation of innovative actions (Methodology Guide for the Analysis of Innovative Actions). 4. A typical system: The Book of Visions, Encyclopaedia of Social Inventions (28). 5. The Society for Organizational Learning system (57) is based on the exchange of ideas. 6. The Government Process Classication Scheme (23), the Center for Technology in Government (16) and the Council of State Community Development Agencies State Model Programs (13) apply such an approach. Models and indicators for the systematic analysis and evaluation of good solutions also exist in other systems: Community Development Society, Guide to Sustainable Community Indicators (12); Habitat, Indicators Program (22); Rural Europe, Community Measures (2); ICLEI Local Agenda 21 Model Communities Program, MCP (26); United Way, Resource Network on Outcome Measurement (53). 7. Such prototypes are gathered, for instance, by the Center for Technology in Government (16). 8. An interesting example of this is the Secchia Commission Report, Michigan State Government (58). 9. Proof: The U.S. General Services Administration Ofce of Governmental Policy runs a committeeBest Practices Ad-hoc Committeefor the general dissemination of innovation within the governmental system. Through this, the collection and dissemination of best practices was turned into a high-priority strategic element of public service development by the governments public administration development policy (innovation policy based on the distribution of best practices). There are American states in which local statutes prescribe the best practices review in regards to the protability and efciency audit of public services. The given service practice is compared to best practices using benchmark tests: e.g., Minnesota Best Practices Review Law (1995), Wisconsin Best Practices Review Law (1994). 10. Bureau of Primary Health Care, Models That Work (7), National Civic League (41), Sustainable Communities Network (45). 11. Examples: Rural Europe (2), Habitat (22), Civic Practices Network (14), Coalition for Healthier Cities and Communities (15) apply this technique. USAID (48), the World Bank (51), ICMA (25), OECD / SIGMA / PUMA (43) do as well. 12. An example of this is Arthur Andersen, which addresses precisely this topic and extends to all three sectors (market, civil and public) (1). 13. Some examples of such metasystems are: Bureau of Governmental Research (5), LOGOV Best Practices, Capacity Building (36), Municipal Best Practices (59) Taubman Center for State and Local Government, JFK School of Government, Harvard University (8).

49

14. A few examples of result evaluation from Australia, Canada and the United States: National Award for Innovation in Local Government (39), Community Futures Development Cooperation (10), The Council for Excellence in Government (8). 15. Frequently, these basic requirements are summarized in the guidelines to the systems. For instance: U.S. General Services Administration Ofce of Government-wide Policy, What is Best Practice? (21); Implementing the Habitat Agenda, Monitoring Progress with Best Practices, Guide (22); USAID Innovative Practices Guide (48); Rural Europe, Innovative Action Guide (2). 16. This is how they formulated their mission: Our mission is to understand what practices organizations use to achieve operational excellence and competitive advantage. We believe that collecting and sharing best practices information will itself be an important source of competitive advantage for all organizations as we enter the 21st century. 17. A good example of this is: The service system of the Inter-Agency Benchmarking and Best Practices Council Best Practice Knowledge Base (23), the US Department of Defense, the Innovation System of the Electronic College of Process (17) or the US Department of the Navy, Total Quality Leadership Ofce, Implementation Stories System (18). 18. The table does not contain all the systems or organizations listed under Appendix 2. This is partly because not all of them run best practices systems and partly because additional information continues to become available. This circumstance does not inuence the essential conclusions. 19. Also includes the federal state and its states. 20. Also includes the county level. 21. E.g., Massachusetts Municipal Association (37), Australian Local Government Association (3), the American National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (38). 22. E.g., Harvard University, JFK School of Government, Innovations in American Government (8); University at Albany, State University of New York, Center for Technology in Government (16); Marquette University, Local Government Innovation Research Center, Wisconsin (50). 23. Government agencies responsible for health, welfare, environmental protection, agriculture, international affairs, regional and town development, economic development, tourism and interestingly enough defense issues tend to be the most interested in collecting and spreading best practices. 24. E.g., USAID, World Bank, EU, EC, UN, IULA, OECD, SIGMA, PUMA, HABITAT, Soros Foundation, Ford Foundation, Together Foundation, Bertelsmann Foundation. 25. E.g., Civic Practices Networkcommitted to bring practical methods for problem solving into every community and institutional setting in America, supported by the Surdna Foundation (14). 26. E.g., New York, New Orleans Area, Wisconsin, (USA), Brent (UK), Greater Triangle Council (Canada). 27. Systems based on the specialized press include the program of the Australian Local Government Focus Best Practice (30) and the Innovation Groups Active Electronic Bulletin Board (27). 28. UNESCO, for instance, runs its program under the name: Management of Social Transformation (63).

50

29. LAG - Local Action Groups, LEADER groups (2) , Community Futures Development Corporations (Canada) 30. Learning groups (34). 31. Such endeavors can be observed, for instance, in the system of Rural Europe run by EU AIDL (European Association for Information on Local Development), or in the Community Futures Development Corporations, of which there are 88 Western Canada (10). 32. The Bureau of Governmental Research (member of Governmental Research Association) is a nonprot organization supported by citizens (5), which is active in the New Orleans Metropolitan Area) with 550 members. (5) Others include the Council for Excellence in Government (750 members), the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the International Community Development Society and the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (26). In the operation of all of them, the collection and dissemination of best practices are the decisive elements. 33. The Brent Council (6) in England systematically explores best practices and thereby creates a competitive situation for itself, its executing agencies and partners. 34. The Newcastle City Enhancement Plan (1993) Best Practice program supports the collection and dissemination of best practices in Australia (65). 35. So-called innovation source centers of local development agencies function in several countries (for instance, in Hungary, Canada and the United States). 36. HABITAT (22) systematically and publicly looks for organizations cooperating in providing network services (e.g., for the organization of best practice presentations, the preparation of media materials, the adaptation of best practices from the private sector, the assessment and monitoring of best practices (Habitat Watch). 37. Expressions of thanks to organizations providing such support can frequently be found in the best practices home pages. 38. A few examples from the eld of local government: International City/County Management Association (USA), Local Government Management Board (UK), Institute of Municipal Management (Australia). 39. There are action teams in the system of the Coalition for Healthier Cities and Communities (15) each of which has its independent web-forum and e-mail address. 40. In the system of the Coalition for Healthier Cities and Communities, CCHC (15) for instance, these staff members are referred to as area editors. 41. E.g., in the system of HABITAT (22) a Technical Advisory Committee consisting of area experts puts forward recommendations and an independent international jury makes the decision; in the Australian system, the National Awards for Innovation in Local Government (NAILG) are awarded by a National Judging Panel consisting of the representatives of partner organizations (39). 42. The partnership system of the Center for Technology in Government (16) is characteristic. It presently consists of 40 companies, 30 government agencies and a dozen academic institutions. Another typical example is CHCC (15), which runs an open partnership program in order to involve new members in their coalition. This solution exists also in the case of the HABITAT (22), the National Civil League, Alliance for National Renewal (41) and in the operation of a number of other system host organizations.

51

43. For example, the National Ofce of Local Government (NOLG) Local Government Development Program (LGDP) provides a background for collecting best practices and benchmark based analyses in Australia under the Local Government Focus (30) system. The UNESCOs research program is the Management of Social Transformation, which in partnership (ICLEI, Together Foundation, and HABITAT) runs a best practices clearing house (MOST Clearinghouse Best Practices (63). 44. In the case of CHCC, this is the Coalitions Coordinating Council (15). 45. CHCC is also a typical example of this (15). 46. The Book of Visions (28) is, for instance, one of the fullest international systems of gathering social innovation; it has partners in America, Spain, Austria, Australia, Denmark, Germany and Russia. HABITAT (22) runs an international system relying on national systems and assists the development of the latter (Decentralized Partnership Program). Subentries organizing and running best practice systems in operation in October, 1997 were for instance in Nairobi, Kenya; Bangkok, Thailand; Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; Dubai, United Arabic Emirates; Dakar, Senegal; Canberra, Australia; Cairo, Egypt; London, UK; Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Cambridge, USA; Toronto, Canada; Nebraska, USA; Pratt Institute, USA; Together Foundation, USA; Paris, France; Pretoria, Republic of South Africa. 47. E.g., ask the users opinion; catch his attention with advertising. 48. A similar relationship exists in each, or in the decisive majority of the systems. A highly interesting solution consists of the continuous request for user opinions, the evaluation of the good practices presented by the users and the presentation of such accumulated evaluations as the standard against which a good practice can be measured. This solution is applied by, for instance, Sustainable Communities Network (45), Kzigkonzult (29) and The Book of Visions (28). 49. A good example of this is the Hungarian telecottages movement, through which anyone can have Internet access even in the smallest villages. 50. Telecomputer, the IT supplement to Magyar Nemzet, April 6, 1998. 51. Ethnic Conicts, Multicultural Politics and Local Governance Best Practices, LGI (54) 52. Acquisition Best Practices (56), a metasystem which creates links to 24 acquisition best practice information systems. 53. The Society for Organizational Learning (57)organizational learning through the exchange of ideas and proven solutions. 54. Reinventing Government, Performance Based Organizations (44). 55. World Wide Web Federal Consortium, Guidelines and Best Practices (60). 56. The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, ICLEI (26). 57. Coalition for Healthier Cities and Communities (15), Models That Work (7). 58. Council of State Community Development Agencies, COSCDA (13). 59. Welfare Policy Innovation Data Base, Hungary (55). 60. Arthur Andersen Global Best Practices (1). 61. See, e.g., the systems of the Department of Defense (17), Department of the Navy (17), Government Service Administration (21). 62. The vast majority of the systems under study belong to this category (see the addresses in Appendix 2).

52

63. Community Development Ofce (11), Community Development Society (12), The Book of Visions (28), Sustainable Communities Network (45). 64. In the case of federal states, only the systems restricted to member states are mentioned here. 65. Michigan State Government, The Secchia Commission Report (58) 66. E.g., New York, New Orleans Area, Wisconsin, (USA), Brent (UK), Greater Triangle Council (Canada). 67. Center for Technology in Government (16). 68. World Wide Web Federal Consortium, Guidelines and Best Practices (60). 69. A good example of this is the Rural Europe Image Bank (2). 70. National System of Innovation (61). 71. E.g. Municipia (59), LOGOV (36). 72. The World Bank Participation Sourcebook (51), OECD, SIGMA Country Reports (43), The U.S. Conference of Mayors, Best Practices of City Governments, nonstructured stories (47) LGI (54), Kzigkonzult (29). 73. USAID Local Government Center Innovative Practices (48). 74. The health care oriented Coalition for Healthier Cities and Communities (15) for instance, contains nonxed descriptions when collecting stories of program successes, and so does the UNESCOs MOST, Best Practice Clearing System (63). 75. Such as the list of the 37 Best Value Pilot Authorities of the Local Government Information Unit (UK). 76. Together Foundation, Best Practices Database (22). 77. An example of a more detailed report format is that of HABITAT, the Best Practices Reporting Format. A good example is also the description structure employed by Rural Europe (2). 78. The Together Foundation, Best Practices Database asks for a password and account number after the single-page description (22). 79. Such an application is the Book of Visions (28), the system of Kzigkonzult presently under development (29) and the Sustainable Communities Network, SCN (45). 80. The fullest use of this solution is found in the BRENT Examples of Good Practice (6) or the Civic Practices Network (14). 81. E.g., Government Online, Government Solution (20), HABITAT, Unied Reporting Format for Documenting Experiences (22) and Shared Information and Good Practice, SIGN and LGMB (UK) (34)(3), also employ a unied format of description. 82. Such an application is The Book of Visions (28), the Kzigkonzult system under development (29) and the Sustainable Communities Network, SCN (45). 83. The exemplary criteria of evaluation given in advance by Rural Europe can be referred to at this point: six key questions for the analysis of the innovative actions and a methodology is also provided for application (2). The Models That Work sets seven general quality requirements (7). LGI prescribes only three important content requirements or evaluation criteria beyond the formal ones. HABITAT species six preliminary criteria in its Best Practices in Improving the Living Environment program for 1998 (Partnership, Impact, Sustainability, Leadership, Community Empowerment, Gender and Social Inclusion) (22). Carl Bertelsmanns Prize specied seven basic criteria of democratic and effec-

53

tive local administration as the selection criteria: 1) Performance under democratic control, 2) Citizen and customer orientation, 3) Cooperation between politicians and the administration, 4) Decentralized management, 5) Controlling and reporting, 6) Employee potential, 7) Capacity for innovation and evolution secured by competition (40). 84. Community Development Society, Guide to Sustainable Community Indicators (12), Habitat, Indicators Program (22), Rural Europe, Community Measures (2). 85. The Kzigkonzult system (29) uses the Hungarian Center for Civic and Municipal Innovation press monitoring service which is supported by USAID (9). 86. LGI applies this solution (54). 87. Some of the many systems which are using such solutions include: Governmental Research Association (5); Models That Work (7); Council for Excellence in Local Government (which awards prizes of USD 20,000 and 100,000); Innovations in American Government program, with the support and collaboration of the Ford Foundation and the Kennedy School of Government and Harvard University (8); Department of the Navy, Quality Award Programs (18). HABITAT runs the most comprehensive international best practices competition program: the Best Practices and Local Leadership Program (22). In 1998 every winner received a reward of USD 30,000. The Massachusetts Municipal Association Kenneth E. Pickard Memorial Innovation Award programs. (37); the National Award for Innovation in Local Government (39) which rewards winners with 10-20,000 Australian dollars; the Carl Bertelsmann Prize (1993) with prizes totaling DM 300,000 to which certain European countries are invited (Denmark, Germany, Finland, Great Britain, the Netherlands and Switzerland). Results are put into the database of the Alliance for Redesigning Government, Reinvention Case Studies, accessible through the Internet (40) and the National Civic League All America City Awards Program (41). 88. Models That Work (7) and ICMA (25) regularly organize such forums and presentations. 89. A source which introduces one to this area is: Anne Evans, Benchmarking: Taking Your Organization Towards Best Practice, The Business Library, Australia, 1994. 90. Examples include the Government Process Classication Scheme (23). Such an approach is used by the Center for Technology in Government (16) and the Council of State Community Development Agencies State Model Programs (13). Models and indicators for the systematic analysis and evaluation of best practices can also be found in other systems: Community Development Society, Guide to Sustainable Community Indicators (12), Habitat, Urban Indicators Program (22), Rural Europe, Community Measures (2). There were attempts to use the so-called list of municipal services also in Hungary (Kzigkonzult), the results of which can be used for the comparison of best practices. Benchmark tests are used in many places to select good solutions in American defense administration and space research within the Department of Defense (DLA, DMN, GAO, NSIAD, and NASA). A great wealth of information on the sources of administrative benchmark applications exists, such as The Benchmarking Exchange, The Benchmarking Network, International Benchmarking Clearinghouse etc. (17). LGIU selected 37 municipalities as examples using the benchmark test. The Governments key Best Value pilot authorities (33) and OECD-PUMA(6) runs the International Benchmarking Network system, the objective of which is to spread the method over a wide range of the public sector (43). The best sources of 10 countries

54

in the world (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden, the UK and the USA) can be accessed in the network. Good examples of benchmark evaluation of best practices can also be found on the Toward Best Practice system (64) of the Local Government and Shires Associations (Australia) (64). 91. Similarly to the other systems, the Community Development Society, following contact data, asks via e-mail for a maximum 250-word presentation on the recommended practice. If a specialized committee accepts the proposal by simple majority, then additional information is requested and compared to a standard set of indicators (Sustainable Community Indicators)(12). Best of Practice Government Solutions Interactive System of Government On-line, after having received data on the contact and organization, demands that the problem, the solution and the result be described in three parts consisting of no more than 75 words each. 92. Arthur Andersen, for instance, (1) refers to the International Benchmarking Clearinghouse as a background, run by the American Productivity and Quality Center. 93. Innovation Zone (3) for instance, rst asks for an expression of interest together with the basic data (subject matter, short presentation of the solution, why is the given practice excellent, and contact data). 94. The Arthur Andersen Global Best Practices (1) uses this combined procedure. 95. This principle and practice is followed by HABITAT (22). 96. In this respect, the best example was found in the Towards Best Practice System of the Local Government and Shires Associations (Australia) (64), which indicates the date of the last update of every best practice description. 97. The Community Development Society (12) seeks out the appropriate reference place or practicing expert capable of helping in accordance with the content of the request. LGMB (34) and several other prestigious institutions running best practices systems have highly advanced client service activities. 98. Rural Europe (2) for example has communities in German, English, Spanish, French, Italian and Portuguese; the Coalition for Healthier Cities and Communities (15) publishes its materials in Spanish, Chinese and other languages; USAID publishes in 10 languages (48). 99. HABITAT and the Together Foundation Best Practices Database (22) have one of the most complete search systems offering six facilities of those listed. 100. Many systems provide facilities for the geographical search of innovation, such as the Model Location Service of the Models That Work (7), another typical example is the Civic Maps service of the Civic Practices Network (14) or Government On-line (20), SCN Case Study Map (45). 101. In the Brent Pages Search Facility (6) and the Kzigkonzult (29) systems, for instance, the entire material can be searched based on any word or term. 102. Rural Europe (2) enables search by 11 criteria in order to nd the necessary innovative actions. 103. For instance Rural Europe (2) of the Council for Excellence in Government (8) and ICLEI (26) offer such facilities. 104. Rural Europe (2) offers the possibility of taking up contact with 820 Local Action Groups of the European Union, and the Coalition for Healthier Cities and Communities (15) also offers facilities for partner search.

55

105. The practices of ICMA (25), LGMB (34), LGI (54) and The Greater Triangle Regional Council (46), COSCDA Publications (13), Civic Practices network, (Community Manuals and Guides) (14), ICLEI (26) are examples. 106. Example: Coalition for Healthier Cities and Communities (15), SCN Listserv presently under development (45). 107. Similar to others, in the system of Models That Work it is possible to lodge an order for the needed product. The ordering system of the Innovation Group is a typical solution, here, having obtained appropriate information on the materials, the innovation products(27) can be ordered in an interactive manner; all material of The Public Innovator on-line magazine (40) can be downloaded for USD 6. The Local Government Institute (31) runs a small Internet-based innovation shopping center. 108. The password protected materials of HABITAT and Together Foundation Best Practices Database (22) can be accessed upon payment. 109. Example: National Civic League Publication Price List (41), SIGMA, PUMA, OECD Governance and Public Management Publications (43), some of which are free, for others you have to pay. 110. For instance, HABITAT distributes best practices by CD-ROM (22); the new Best Practices Database will be published on the Internet and CD-ROM at the same time to commemorate the World Habitat Day on October 5, 1998. 111. The Center for Technology in Government (16) is an example of software downloading facilities. 112. For instance, the Models That Work (7) presents 39 partners. The Council for Excellence in Government (8) has links to 27 sponsors, the Civic Practices Network (14) to 50 partners, including such great rms as IBM, Xerox, Lockheed, Johnson and Johnson and Chrysler. 113. For example, ICMA organized the Local Government Best Practice conference in Phoenix in April 1998. Under a USAID nanced program, a local government best practice symposium was organized for Central and Eastern Europe in Soa in December 1996. On the basis of which, a collection was compiled and edited using traditional means by Robert Dubinsky (Local Government Innovative Practices Guide). This compilation is most probably the rst in the region. ALGA (Australian Local Government Association) presents good practical examples at its Innovation Zone Sessions. Models That Work (7) regularly organizes model presentation sessions and campaigns for this purpose. The Center for Technology in Government also organizes conferences, seminars, and best practice presentations (16). HABITAT (22) arranges international seminars under the title Lessons Learned from Best Practices. The U.S. Conference of Mayors regularly organizes conferences under the title Best Practice Sessions and publishes their results through the Internet (47). 114. For instance, the system of Arthur Andersen (1) offers such opportunities; Rural Europe (2) provides an excellent self-analyzing tool for the independent group evaluation of innovative action. The Center for Technology in Government (16) also offers a useful analytical system for the self-evaluation of the home pages and web services of the organizations. 115. Rural Europe (2), the ICLEI (26), the LGMB (34), the ICMA (25) and a number of other institutions provide such services and support.

56

116. The Fellows Program of the Council for Excellence in Government (8) is designed for individuals and teams. The Listen and Learn program of Community Development (11) is available through the web (Community Capacity Building and Asset mapping). The Coalition for Healthier Cities and Communities (15) manages its system as an Interactive Learning Bank with the intention to maintain continuous contact with its partners (see innovative comminutes) ICLEI (26). The coalition also organizes training courses based on best practices (Local Agenda 21 Guidance and Training Program). The Transforming Local Government Research Packet of the Innovation Groups offers a comprehensive training and development strategy for organizational change (costing USD 35 for members and USD 70 for nonmembers). The Center for Technology in Government (16) also organizes training projects and the prestigious institutions (ICMA, LGMB) all organize best practice based training programs. The interactive Organizational Learning Project of LGMB (34) is a particularly interesting and novel program. The Civic Assistance Program of the National Civic League is based on the experiences of the best community initiatives (Successful Community Initiatives) (41). 117. Beside many others, the Civic Practices Network (14) and the Healthy Communities Program (41) provide typical examples of this. 118. The Local Action Group of Rural Europe (2) is a European innovation community of 820 members; the Coalition for Healthier Cities and Communities (15) also runs a network of this kind. HABITAT is building an international network (Network of Best Practices Research and Capacity-Building Institutions) under the Habitat Agenda. 119. For instance, the Examples of Good Practice, Brent (6) invites the user to expand the database and Icels request to add a link (26) is also similar. 120. The Community Development Society (12) offers assistance to nd reference partners or practicing experts for which it asks for the data of the user (registration) and a short description of his problems. 121. One of many examples is the Community Development Society (12). 122. The Coalition for Healthier Cities and Communities (15) offers an excellent example of this when it provides a free e-mail address facility simultaneously with registration. 123. A years subscription to the Innovation Group Electronic Bulletin Board (3 passwords for access) costs USD 150 for the year with interactive registration. 124. For instance the private service system of the Rural Europe Team Project.

57

Appendix 1
Thanks to the Contributors
Adrian Ionescu (LGI, director, consultant on the survey) Arpad Zaghi (Romania, country report) Bob Dubinsky (US, ICMA, consultant on the survey) Bojan Pecek (Slovenia, country report) Boris Guseletov (Russia, country report) Chris Cardy (UK, LGMB, deputy director, consultant on the survey) Daniela Mihovska (Bulgaria, country report) Eszter Psztor (Hungary, translator, assistant on the survey) Evzen Sykora (Czech Republic, country report) Ferenc Petrczi (Hungary, Database of Social Policy, system report) Gbor Pteri (LGI, board member, consultant on the survey) Glen Wright (US, Washington Univ. professor, consultant on the survey) Martin Kwapinski (US, GSA, best practice program manager, system report) Megan Kiernan (US, CTG, information coordinator, system report) Monica Radulescu (Romania, country report) Nicholas You (HABITAT, BLP coordinator, system report) Petra Kovcs (LGI, project manager, system report) Sulev Maettsemees (Estonia, country report) Susan Roberts (Canada, Community Development, manager, system report) Theresa Noll (US, GSA, best practice program manager, system report) Timur Adjiev (Ukraine, country report) Vida Balek (Slovenia, country report) Volodymyr Vokulenko (Ukraine, country report) Zoltn Farsang (Hungary, survey IT assistance)

58

Appendix 2
I. Analyzed Best Practice Systems and Organizations
The systems marked in the rst column provided information on the basis of our system questionnaire. 1. Arthur Andersen Global Best Practices, Bob Hiebeler www.arthurandersen.com/GBP 2. AEIDL/LEADER, Rural Europe www.rural-europe.aeidl.be/rural-eu 3. Australian Local Government Association (ALGA), Innovation Zone www.alga.com.au/innvzone 4. Institution of Municipal Management in Australia, ALGIS/AFMD/IPRS www.parklane.com.au/trainet/afmd/65038000 5. Bureau of Governmental Research (BGR) www.bgr.org/good_govt_links 6. BRENT Council, Examples of Good Practice www.brent.gov.uk/other/uklg/uklgcat 7. Bureau of Primary Health Care, Models That Work, MTW www.bphc.hrsa.dhhs.gov/mtw/mtw 8. The Council for Excellence in Government, J.F.K. School of Government, Harvard University www.excelgov.org, kgswww.harvard.edu.innovat 9. Center for Civic and Municipal Innovation, The Urban Institution, USAID hungmun.interware.hu 10. Community Futures Development Corporations, CFDC www.deo.gc.ca/eng/content/network/gaining/in-com 11. Community Development Ofce, CHA www.cha.ab.ca/commdev/capphil2 12. Community Development Society comm-dev.org/mainpage 13. The Council of State Community Development Agencies, COSCDA sso.org/coscda/overview 14. Civic Practices Network, CPN www.cpn.org/index

59

15. Coalition for Healthier Cities and Communities www.healthycities.org 16. Center for Technology in Government, CTG www.ctg.albany.edu/projects/lg/lgrelated 17. Department of Defense, Defense Technical Information, The Electronic College of Process Innovation www.dtic.mil/c3i/bprcd/3209 18. Department of the Navy Total Quality Leadership Ofce, Implementation StoriesTQL tql-navy.org 19. Enterprise for Economic Excellence, EEE www.eee.org/eee 20. Government Online www.gol.org/bestof 21. U.S. General Services Administration, GSA, Ofce of Government-wide Policy, Best Practices Ad-Hoc Committee www.gsa.gov/irms/ka/mkm/gsaepp/wbp2.htm 22. HABITAT/UNCHS/Together Foundation www.unhabitat.org/practice www.oboe.symgrp.com/habitat www.unchs.org/unon/unchs/habrdd/traincap www.hsd.ait.ac.th/bestprac/bpllp www.infohabitat.org www.bestpractices.org habitat.aq.upm.es www.sustainabledevelopment.org/ias/ssd/blp 23. The Inter-Agency Benchmarking & Best Practices Council www.va.gov/fedsbest 24. Brazilian Institute for Municipal Administration, Local Government Management and Leadership Best Practices in Brazil, IBAM 25. ICMA, Resource Cities Program www.icma.org/symposium/sympusium www.icma.org/international/rsrc-city 26. The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, ICLEI www.magic.ca/iclei/ 27. The Innovation Groups, IG www.ig.org/bb/board
60

28. Institution for Social Inventions, The Book of Visions www.newciv.org/GIB/BOV/BOVTOP 29. Kzigkonzult www.kutfo.savaria.hu 30. Best Practice and the Local Government Development Program, LG FOCUS www.loc-gov-focus.aus.net/1997/june/besprac 31. Local Government Institute, LGI www.lgi.org 32. Localgov Listserv Archive archive.wln.com/localgov (listserv) 33. The Local Government Information Unit, LGIU, The Education Network, TEN www.lgiu.gov.uk/home 34. Local Government Management Board, LGMB Organization Learning, Tramis, Shared Information & Good Practice Network SIGN www.netsquared.com/lgmb-complex www.lgmb.gov.uk 35. Local Government: Service Excellence (listserv) www.sun.ac.za/local/academic/arts/oob/bbs/messages/11.html 36. LOGOV, The University of Birmingham, Best Practices, Capacity Building www.bham.ac.uk/l.montiel/logov/best 37. Massachusetts municipal Association, MMA www.mma.org/mma/annualmeeting/innovation_awards 38. National Governors Association, NGA Center for Best Practices www.nga.org 39. National Award for Innovation in Local Government, NAILG www.erin.gov.au/environment/portfolio/olg/nailg97 40. National Academy of Public Administration, Alliance for Redesigning Government, Public Innovator, Learning Network and Reinvention Case Studies www.alliance.napawash.org/alliance/picases 41. National Civic League, NCL, Alliance for National Renewal, ANR, All America City Awards www.ncl.org 42. Network of Institutes and Schools of Public Administration in Central and Eastern Europe, NISPAcee www.nispa.sk

61

43. SIGMA/PUMA/ OECD, Public Management Initiatives in OECD Member Countries www.oecd.org/puma/sigmaweb 44. Reinventing Government, National Performance Review, NPR www.npr.gov 45. Sustainable Communities Network, SCN www.sustainable.org 46. The Greater Triangle Regional Council, Regional Development Choices Project, Regional Case Study Series P .O. Box 12276, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 Tel: (919) 558-9320 47. The U.S. Conference of Mayors Best Practices of City Governments www.usmayors.org/best_practices 48. USAID, LG Innovative Practices Guide www.info.usaid.gov/regions/eni/local_gov/practice www.info.usaid.gov/regions/eni/local_gov/local_gov/brascii 49. U.S. Department of Agriculture, USDA, Rural Development, Development Ideas That Work www.rudev.usda.gov (www.usda.gov/mission/rd) 50. Wisconsin Local Government Innovation Center, WLGIC www.busadm.mu.edu/~lgirc/index 51. WORLD BANK, World Bank Participation Sourcebook www.worldbank.org/html/edi/sourcebook 52. Board of Government Innovation and Cooperation www.angelre.com/mn/govtinnovation 53. United Way, Resource Network on Outcome Measurement www.unitedway.org/outcomes 54. Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative, LGI, Ethnic Conict, Multicultural Politics and Local Governance Project www.osi.hu/lgi 55. Development Center of Social Politics, Hungary, Innovation Database of Social Politics (partnership with Kzigkonzult under negotiation, see 29.) www.kutfo.savaria.hu 56. Acquisition Best Practices www-far.npr.gov/BestP/AcqBestP 57. The Society for Organizational Learning learning.mit.edu
62

58. Michigan State Government, The Secchia Commission Report www.migov.state.mi.us/secchia 59. MUNICIPIA www.municipia.org/muni2/int/links/bestpr/bestpr-list 60. World Wide Web Federal Consortium, Guidelines and Best Practices skydive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/cyrary/2/guidelines 61. National System of Innovation www.inasec.ca/redo/publication/public_carty/sld003 62. European Good Practice Information Service, Local Sustainability, EURONET Environmental Planning Department, ICLEI (see 26) www.iclei.org/europractice 63. UNESCO, Management of Social Transformations, MOST, Clearing House, Best Practices www.unesco.org/most/homemost 64. Local Government and Shires Association, LGSA, Toward Best Practice www.lgsa.org.au/tbp/main 65. Newcastle City Enhancement Plan (1993) Newcastle.infohunt.nsw.gov.au/council/enhance

63

II. Best Practice Survey Partners in Central and Eastern Europe

Bulgaria- best practice system is being designed Foundation for Local Government Reform Ms. Daniela Mihovska Projects and Programs Team Leader 22 A, San Stefano Str. 2nd oor 1504 Soa Tel: (359-2) 442-350 Fax: (359-2) 442-350 E-mail: gr@lgi-bg.org Czech Republic best practice system in operation Institute for Local Administration Ing. Evsen. Sykora, CSc. director Prof. PhD Karel. Lacina DrCs., Dlzden 6. P .O. Box 597 111 21 Prague 1 Tel: (420-2) 269-362 Fax: (420-2) 2422-9025 Estonia best practice system is being designed Institute of Public Administration of Tallinn Association of Estonian Cities Prof. Sulev Maettsemees Vana-Viru 12 Tallinn Tel: (372) 620-2654 Fax: (372) 252-8767

64

Hungary best practice system in operation Kzigkonzult Public Administration Consulting Company Mtys Gspr, director 47 Istvn u. H-8073 Cskberny Tel: (36-22) 424-085 Fax: (36-22) 424-085 E-mail: manyo@mail.alba.hu Lithuania Association of Local Authorities Edvardas Javinskas, director Gedimino 24 2800 Vilnius Tel: (370-2) 616-063 Fax: (370-2) 615-366 Romania best practice system is being designed Foundation for Local Development and Public Services Zaghi Arpad, vice president Ms. Monica Radulescu, director, member Str. Academiei 18-20, sector 1 70 109 Bucuresti Tel: (40-1) 311-0091 Fax: (40-1) 311-0092 E-mail: fdlsp@mail.sfos.ro Russia some best practice system development initiative exists The Urals Academy of Public Administration Boris Guseletov, vice-rector in charge of international relationships 8. March str. 66 Ekaterinburg 620148 Tel: (7-3432) 224-567 Fax: (7-3432) 224-567 E-mail: boris@envdev.e-burg.su

65

Slovenia - best practice system need is accepted Ministry of Interior, Public Administration Reform in Slovenia Project Implementation Unit Vida Balek, program secretary Slovenska cesta 27/5 1000 Ljubljana Tel: (386-61) 178-2526 Fax: (386-61) 178-2533 E-mail: slobodan.dusic@paris.atr.si University of Ljubjana School of Public Administration Bojan Pecek, M.Sc. assistant Kardeljeva pl. 5. 61000 Ljubljana Tel: (386-61) 168-6374 Fax: (386-61) 168-6374 E-mail: bojan.pecek@uni-lj-si Ukraine best practicesystem is being designed Ukrainian Academy of Public Administration Vakulenko Volodymyr, chief of Urban Management Department 20 Eugene Pottier str. 252057 Kiev Tel: (380-44) 441-7692 Fax: (380-44) 446-9436 E-mail: vakulenko@IPA.freenet.kiev.ua Investcon Consulting Co. Timur Adjiev, director 4 B Shevchenko Blvd, 252004 Kiev Tel: (380-44) 224-6586 Fax: (380-44) 224-4530 E-mail: uvecon@gu.kiev.ua

66