applies to the entire public sector. It is expected to save the public some 120
million Euros annually, in addition to savings in internal administrative
processes. (Trias telematica, 2007a). As this case illustrates, the harmoniza-
tion of transaction processing systems has a potential to bring tangible ben-
efi
fits to collaborating agencies, customers, and the society as a whole. The
idea is to replace agency-based solutions by a standardized system, which
contributes to the transition of the entire government structure towards
collaborative government or joined-up government.
5.3 Crossroads Bank of Belgium
An interesting simplifi
fication case from Belgium is Crossroads Bank, which
facilitates the sharing of information between government agencies to
rationalize information exchanges. A major business process reengineer-
ing and computerization was carried out during the past 15 years by about
2,000 Belgian public and private actors in the social sector from local to
national levels, under the coordination of the Crossroads Bank for Social
Security (CBSS). This collaboration led to the implementation of a network
for joint electronic service delivery. All actors connected to the network
can consult their databases and exchange up to 180 diff
fferent types of elec-
tronic standard messages within the system framework in a secure way. In
2004, 380 million messages were exchanged, which reduced the printing
of documents by roughly the same number. The reciprocal data exchange
guarantees unique collection of data from the citizens and their employ-
ers by the social sector as a whole, and enables the automatic granting of
social benefi
fits. (Trias telematica, 2008; Cabinet Offi
ffice 2009, p. 41). This
case reveals how important agenda data-sharing is in government process
redesign. This kind of change has similar kind of systemic dimension as in
harmonizing transaction processing systems.
5.4 Pre-completed Tax Return in Finland
A classic example of redesign is the pre-completed tax return. In the Finnish
system every individual with taxable income needs to submit a tax return.
Taxpayers receive pre-completed tax return forms in an envelope in spring.
They include a set of data on income, such as wages, pensions, and receipts
of dividends, which are collected by the tax authority from employers. Such
a procedure is possible due to a comprehensive system of basic registers. If
a taxpayer fi
finds that the facts are correct, he/she need not take any further
176 Ari-Veikko
Anttiroiko
action. If there are errors or omissions, the individual is expected to complete
the form for corrections and return the documents to the tax offi
c
ffi e for repro-
cessing. (Nordisk eTax, n/a). In the latter case, a user may sign in to a secure
online tax return site. The pre-completed tax returns is also a case for how IT
can be incorporated in the radical process reengineering. Instead of just pro-
viding e-forms which can be used to fi
fill in a tax return, the idea is to dispense
with unnecessary forms, reduce unnecessary work, coordinate information
processes and streamline the whole process with a special view to reducing the
administrative burden of citizens and businesses. In this case the effi
c
ffi ient col-
lection of information and back-offi
c
ffi e data sharing serve as a building block
of an entire society, as it guarantees transparency, coherence, and effi
c
ffi iency in
taxation. It also provides benefi ts
fi to ordinary citizens, as their obligations in
taxation are reduced to a minimum.
5.5 Virtual Customs Offi
ce of Sweden
ffi
Simplific
fi ation of protection and control functions performed by government
have a lot of potential due to the volume and importance of these functions in
society. One example of the rethinking and redesigning of such services is the
customs in Sweden, which, through the application of process management,
has come to the conclusion that the customs process does not start or even end
with the customs itself. This has increased discussion with other public stake-
holders in the foreign trade process. The result was the creation of a Virtual
Customs Office, through which Swedish Customs on behalf of other public
entities performs a number of integrated, interdepartmental e-services adding
value to the overall foreign trade process for the Swedish business commu-
nity. Besides the traditional Single Window solutions, the virtual customs col-
lect value added taxes on imports on behalf of the taxation authorities, trade
statistics on behalf of Statistics Sweden, and facilitate foreign trade regard-
ing licenses through innovative e-services in partnership with the Board of
Trade and the Board of Agriculture. This means that a customer can apply
for, monitor and compute given license quantities and/or values by using My
Customs Offi
c
ffi e through the Virtual Customs Offi
c
ffi e, hence creating an inte-
grated front-offi
c
ffi e solution. The long-term objective for the Virtual Customs
Offi
c
ffi e is to enable seamless electronic processes covering the full value chain
through the use of sophisticated e-services. (Trias telematica, 2007b). The
previous cases were ‘systemic’ in the truest sense of the word, whereas this
Virtual Customs Offi
c
ffi e represents the case of action-oriented interagency ser-
vice collaboration.
5.6 TYVI Model of Finland
Another actor-based case to be discussed here is the TYVI Model (t
l he Finnish
name of the system is Tietovirrat Yritysten ja Viranomaisten välillä, literally Information Flows between Companies and Public Authorities) set up by the
Collaborative Government 177
Ministry of Finance in 1997. It is a standardized data collection and exchange
system used by several authorities, which aims at improving data reporting
from companies to public authorities. TYVI started as a small pilot project
with the option of scaling up. From the beginning it was planned to become
fi
financially self-supporting and to rely on private providers as brokers. (Val-
tioneuvoston kanslia, 2005). The TYVI Model has been expanding steadily
since its inception. For example, in 1998 monthly and quarterly reporting
from companies included some 2000 companies, the number tripled in the
following year and has increased yearly since then. Yet in Finland a large part
of taxation related information is still transmitted from companies to the tax
authority conventionally on paper. This last case, the TYVI Model, is another
example of basically voluntary interagency collaboration and also of broker-
age, which brings an action-oriented dimension into the picture of govern-
ment process redesign. This, j
ust like the previously discussed Swedish case, is
essentially a case in which some agency acts on behalf of others, which brings
effi
c
ffi iency gains through coordinated actions.
Key aspects of government process redesign together with abovemen-
tioned examples are presented in Figure 13.2.
The most critical aspect of interagency collaboration in various types of
redesign processes seems to be the governance of the service redesign with
regard to its systemic nature. Yet, we may also hypothesize that there are
nuances and diff
fferences which refl
flect the varying aspects of collabora-
tion: framing requires more than anything strong political leadership and
Type of
Examples
Efficiency
intervention
gains
Framing
Policy, leadership,
Regulatory reform and
Structural
regulation and
the set-up of ACTAL
efficiency:
institutional design
(the Netherlands)
better regulatory
environment
Systemic
Harmonizing Standardization
efficiency:
eInvoice (Denmark)
Supply-side
and back-office
standardized
rationalization
systems
simplification
and redesign
measures
Informational
Shared databases
CBSS (Belgium)
Sharing
efficiency:
and information
Pre-completed tax
sharing of
return (Finland)
information
Interactional
Collaboration and
Virtual Customs
Acting
efficiency:
coordinated actions
Office (Sweden)
collaborative
TYVI Model (Finland)
arrangements
Figure 13.2 Benefi ting from e-enabled administrative simplifi
fi
cation and redesign.
fi
178 Ari-Veikko
Anttiroiko
fi
firm organization of coordinated policy measures, harmonizing requires
power over agencies operating within the system, sharing requires trust
and tangible benefi
fits in order to look persuasive to potential collabo-
rators, and acting requires clear benefi
fits and arrangements in order to
guarantee smooth operations. As systemic nature is a kind of determining
factor at the threshold of strategic or radical change, we may assume that
“systemization” is a critical strategy-level design activity. Such “system-
ization” is needed to attune the components of services—such as service
provider, value-adding core and support services, service setting, service
process and delivery channel, and service user—within the public sec-
tor context so that jurisdictional and sectoral boundaries do not impede
the creation of integrated value-adding services. This implies that such
an approach is not only an application of some ready-made model but a
learning process, marked by tensions and contradictions (cf. Warmington
et al., 2004). Such a policy paves the way to radically new collaborative
arrangements and to joined-up or seamless production models (see, e.g.,
Drüke & Klinger, 2011).
6 FUTURE
TRENDS
The future of e-enabled interagency collaboration as a means for govern-
ment process redesign is a political issue that is shaped according to the
key characteristics and challenges of each national context. However,
it is obvious that administrative simplifi
fication and redesign will con-
tinue to be important elements in the public sector reform throughout
the developed world.
Impetus from research and the private sector is directing public sector
reforms from supply-side approaches toward a user-centered approach,
even though at the practical level this development is gaining ground
only slowly. Anyhow, when customers are involved in the process not
only in the design phase but also in implementation, we will enter a truly
new phase in the development of public service provision, which can
be called the co-creation model of public service (cf. Bailey, 2011). To
simplify, the current trend of e-enabled interagency collaboration within
systemic context may transform into e-enabled co-creation taking place
on platforms that enable open innovation and seamless composition of
tailored service packages.
It goes without saying that emerging technological trends will affect
the future of public administration, including interagency collabora-
tion. The current approach emphasizes interoperability and standard-
ized solutions, but it is highly likely that new opportunities will arise
from the utilization of ubiquitous technologies, augmented reality and
social media by revolutionizing the user-centered redesign of public ser-
vices. All this will strengthen the transition from supply-side oriented
Collaborative Government 179
e-government toward collaborative, joined-up, ubiquitous, or seamless
government, depending on what features are emphasized or will domi-
nate the future development.
7 CONCLUSION
Administrative simplifi ca
fi tion and redesign form an important part of the
reshaping of the way public organizations operate and interact with each
other and with their stakeholders. Cutting red tape is usually an incre-
mental change but may also be a part of a radical reform with the aim of
reengineering government processes and reconsidering the scope of gov-
ernment activities.
In this chapter we have systematized the potential of e-enabled inter-
agency collaboration as a means of government process redesign by cat-
egorizing both degrees of the radical nature of change and the modes of
collaboration, which are combined in framing–harmonizing–sharing–act-
ing framework. The conventional approach to redesign is action-oriented
interagency collaboration, which through the changing roles and division
of labor paves the way for rationalization, simplification, and incremental
redesign. Yet this chapter points out to a more radical redesign as well,
which opens a vision for truly collaborative government.
Simplifi
fication and redesign are challenging processes, as they relate
to collective actions that are associated with structural change, which
naturally increases ambiguity, inertia, and tensions. In addition, they
are embedded in cultural, political, and administrative contexts, which
condition the agenda-setting and implementation of related processes.
Such observations boil down to a systemic nature of most of the service
redesign and innovation processes, especially the radical ones, which in
turn entails paying special attention to the governance of “systemiza-
tion” process, which is needed in translating public policies into prac-
tices of integrate
d service systems.
Our perspective on simplifi
fication and redesign may need to be much
more radical in the future than it is today, for after major simplifica-
tion measures have been accomplished within existing political-admin-
istrative systems and their underlying rationalities, there will be—under
the pressure of global competitiveness, fi
financial distress, and a legiti-
mation crisis—an urgent need to rethink the entire role of government
in society.
REFERENCES
Andersen, K.V. (2006). Reengineering public sector organisations using infor-
mation technology. Research in Public Policy Analysis and Management, 15, 615–634.
180 Ari-Veikko Anttiroiko
Anttiroiko, A.-V., Bailey, S., & Valkama, P. (Eds.). (2011). Innovations in public governance. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
Argyriades, D. (2002). Governance and public administration in the 21st century:
New trends and new techniques. In General Report. Twenty-fi f
fi th International
Congress of Administrative Sciences: Governance and Public Administration
in the 21st Century: New Trends and New Techniques, Athens, July 2001.
Proceedings (pp. 31–64). Brussels: IIAS.
Bailey, S. J. (2011). The evolving governance of public services in England: Extend-
ing competition, choice, co-design and co-production. In A.-V. Anttiroiko, S. J.
Bailey, & P. Valkama (Eds.), Innovations in public governance (pp. 140–157).
Amsterdam: IOS Press.
Cabinet Offi
c
ffi e. (2009). Power in people’s hands: Learning from the world’s best
public services. London: Cabinet Offi
c
ffi e.
Chaba, A. (n/a). Government process reengineering in context of e-governance.
Ppt presentation. National Informatics Centre, New Delhi. Retrieved September
20, 2011, from http://elearning.nic.in/training-section/government-trainings/
workshop-on-e-governance/presentation/l5-government-processes-re-engineer-
ing-doc.ppt/
Consoli, D. (2007). Services and systemic innovation: A cross-sectoral analysis.
Journal of Institutional Economics, 3, 71–89.
da Cunha, A. M., & Costa, P. M. (2004). Towards key business process for e-gov-
ernment. In W. Lamersdort, V. Tschammer, & S. Amarger (Eds.), Building the
e-service society. E-commerce, e-business, and e-government (
t pp. 3–21). Bos-
ton: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Djankov, S., & Ladegaard, P. (n/a). Review of the Dutch administrative sim-
plifi ca
Public Sector Transformation Through E-Government Page 31