Contextualising E-government

The journey that focuses on the deployment of information technology to enhance government
services is often referred to as e-government. On one hand, it is often seen as the extension of
government digitisation whereby paper-based information is being replaced with digital media and
communicated through the use of Internet technology. On the other hand, e-government is
considered as a drive to transform operations and provide better services to the constituents/citizens
by having virtual counters that operate beyond 8am to 5pm constraint.

Historically, many of the developed nations began to embark aggressively on e-government at the
turn of the 21st century. The change was driven partially by the impetus leftover from the urgent
Information System/Technology (IS/IT) upgrade to counter Y2K bugs that might have caused havoc
to the major computing functions. No big chaos was actually happening on 1/1/2000. But the
importance of IT in government and society was tactically raised as a result of the Y2K scare. For
example in Ireland, the government rolled out the first Information Society Action Plan (1999-2002)
that aimed at implementing three major online services namely the e-procurement system, land
registry and driving test registration. Subsequently in the second Information Society Action Plan
(2002-2005) it focussed on another 12 critical online services that are collectively termed as Online
Access to Services, Information and Support (OASIS).

Similarly some of the emerging economies in the Asia Pacific were also implementing e-
government in the form of setting up citizen portal, online applications systems, and e-learning.
Leading the pack are Canada, Australia and the Asia dragons- Korea, Japan, Hong Kong and
Singapore. The expected changes in the journey were focused on the growth of ICT industry in their
nations, and the pervasive use of ICT in public sector organisations. High acceptance of e-
government in Canada and Australia was due primarily to their high digital literacy among the
citizens and the geographical conditions that make online transactions more acceptable.

The Internet penetrations in all the Asian countries except Korea, Japan, Singapore, and Hong Kong
were relatively low, and ensuring compulsory on-line transactions would certainly back fire.
Nevertheless the understanding of e-government projects among the policy makers and civil
servants is somewhat low and inconsistent. Many of them tend to relate their experience about the
more familiar infrastructure or IS/IT projects. But this experience can be slightly misleading. The
table bellows illustrates the major differences among the three types of projects.

Table 1: Differences Between the Three Types of Projects

These subtle differences can cause some hiccups such as publicity and acceptance. For example, a
new flyover bridge project will surely create a strong visibility and help many commuters to save
time and cost in their trips without the need of any training of using the new route. Consider an
online permit application system that has just been installed, many applicants are not likely to adopt
it without some form of change management initiative. More significantly, the backend government
processes must be modified to make better use of the online system otherwise there will be more
confusion, delay and costs.

In between the infrastructure development projects and the strategically driven projects are the
operationally centred IS/IT projects. Traditional IS/IT project implementation tends to leave out the
change management aspect, just focussing on the hardware and software installation together with
simple training for the key IT personnel in the department. Again the utilisation of the installed
system is defined properly within a limited number of staff and the improvement in the
automation/digitization can be detected easily. Comparing these projects with e-government projects
in terms of usage, the persons using the system are from the public at large and hence adoption and
acceptance of e-government system is less certain.

E-government project often requires a number of prerequisites and coordination with other
departments/ministries in order to become successful. Typically, there is a need to provide sufficient
infrastructure (bandwidth and access to computers) and a secure repository of database before
obligating citizens or business communities to take up the services. Besides, some means of public
key infrastructure (defining who the user really is) and a payment gateway (enabling payment to be
made over the Internet) are required before online transactions can be completed.

The next wave of e-government development would need to reach out more to wider community
including students and parents. Some of the fundamental issues related to project initiation,
planning, tendering, procurement, installation and maintenance were highlighted in the previous
implementation may need to be standardized and managed systematically. The next lap ideally takes
a cue from the initial objective of using e-government to transform government processes.
Wherever possible, processes that are redundant and obsolescent will be reviewed and updated as
already being highlighted by His Majesty the Sultan of Brunei Darussalam. The principles of e-
government initiative remain relevant. The backend processes of government operations are
established among others to facilitate business development, to narrow digital divide and to develop
a sophisticated society. The interactions between the “people”, “process”, and “technology” must be
changed to match the culture, conditions and capability of the nation.

Administratively, all stakeholders should be properly informed about the blueprint (design) of e-
government and the ‘reality’ of the development. Failure to understand the objectives of the e-
government project by all stakeholders will create inaccurate assessment of the success. Noises due
to misinterpretation of objectives can negatively influence the final outcome of project. The overall
change must also tie into the allocation of resources, manpower, and incentive to sustain process
improvement and measurement within the organisation.

Primarily, managing e-government projects requires a shift from merely implementing a technology
solution to the development and adoption of an acceptable project management methodology, and
the improvement in public sector organisations, business community and citizens. This may sound a
tall order for e-government project implementation, but the reality is that e-government is a good
catalyst for bringing about the transformation process and capacity building. Changes at the
government processes are timely and appropriate. For example, the Ministry of Communications has
recently revised its vision that focuses on sophisticated society, excellence in communications and
competitive advantages. The inter alignment among the ministerial, national and societal goals is a
positive ramification of global/knowledge based economy that recognises the important roles of
ICT. On a more promising note, the national physical and infrastructure development is being
matched closely with the socio-economic growth.

The author is a senior lecturer teaching MBA program at Universiti Brunei Darussalam. He can be
contacted at cheetuan.yong@.ubd.edu.bn