How can Canada learn from the digital experiences of international governments?

“WE’RE #1!”

With respect to digital government, this not a statement Canada has been able to claim in over a decade, since Accenture’s global eGovernment ranking identified Canada as the world leader in 2004, thanks to programs such as Government On-Line (2001–2006).

When you’re #1, it’s hard to stay on top. Since that 2004 ranking, Canada has slipped down the rankings year after year, while other international governments have made significant strides in the digital age.

Embracing digital as a transformation platform is commonplace with governments abroad. In fact, the UN has been conducting the Global e-Government Survey to compare relative digital government development of countries since 2003. Topping the list in 2014 were the Republic of Korea, Australia, Singapore, France and the Netherlands. Canada slotted in at #11, a drop from our #6 slot in 2003 within this same survey.

The term “drop” in this case is a misnomer. Canada isn’t performing worse; instead, we haven’t made progress at the same pace as our peers. The occurrence of which has also been captured in the Digital Evolution Index, in which the 2014 data shows Canada is slipping from being a “Stand Out” country to a “Stall Out” country.

It would appear that other countries who have maintained a position within the top 10, like Australia, Denmark, the UK and the USA have found a formula that enables them to continue to transform. The questions we’d like to answer are:

1. Which government has the best digital transformation approach?

2. Could this same approach work for us in Canada?

Apart from using comprehensive surveys, like that of the UN, it can be a challenge to evaluate and compare countries in order to find a role model for Canada. A few of the reasons include:

· Population: Countries do not lend themselves to an apples-to-apples comparison. For example, is it fair to compare the success of Singapore with a population of 5.4M to a country like the USA with a population of 319M?

· Culture: There are cultural considerations as described in the Geert Hofstede model. Uncertainty avoidance, long term orientation and individualism are a few characteristics of a national culture that could help or hinder a country’s ability to undergo a digital transformation. Countries like the UK, the USA and Australia are culturally similar to Canada; whereas, the Republic of Korea is drastically different. We should strive to identify a successful model from abroad that will work within our context.

· Timing: Some countries began their digital transformation earlier than others. Take, for example, the Republic of Korea’s digital government journey with inception dating back to 1978 versus Estonia’s digital government journey that began in the 1990s. Like the industrial revolution, some countries went through the full transition while others who came later had the opportunity to leapfrog the experience. In the same vein, examples like that of Estonia may be even more relevant to Canada. We need to understand which are the critical transformation steps and which can be omitted as technology has marched on.

· Vocabulary: Comparing initiatives is further complicated by the lack of a universal vocabulary. Terms used to describe digital government initiatives vary across territories and time. Internet government, e-government, online government, connected government and digital government have all been bandied around, the latter most being the term favoured today.

· Government Model: Next there are structural differences. Not all countries have a federated model with three tiers of government that could potentially be supported with an overarching Digital Government Strategy and Roadmap to enable comparison. The EU has a Digital Agenda and each country within the EU has their own e-government strategy. In the USA there is a Digital Government Strategy accompanied by a digital playbook. In Singapore there is an eGov Masterplan and Australia appears to have very active stakeholders with provincial-level digital strategies. When conducting research, strategic documents needs to be read and understood relative to the structural context of the country.

· Interactions and Impact: Finally there is the impact to consider. Digital Government is intended to support digital interactions of government with governments, with public servants, with citizens, with businesses, and perhaps even with machines. One would expect a correlation between countries with high e-government ranks by the UN to also have high scores in the Global Innovation Index, particularly for specific indicators, like government effectiveness, the ease of starting a business, access to ICT. When comparing Canada’s score for the “ease of starting a business” with the UK, the USA, France or even the Republic o Korea, or other top-rated e-government countries, Canada rates higher. Clearly choosing a successful digital government model needs to be based on outcomes and not satisfying a ranking criteria.

Given these and other considerations, we believe Canada can learn from the experiences of international governments. As a starting point, we are particularly interested in approaches by Australia, Denmark, Estonia, France, Singapore, the UK and the USA. Intensive research and interviews are needed to truly understand the interplay between stakeholders and effectiveness of the strategies and plans on outcomes.

Below is a taste of the research to come.

Denmark: Their new digital strategy (2016–2020) is a joint effort between Danish Regions, Local Government Denmark and the Agency for Digitisation. In Canada, this would be the equivalent of an inter-jurisdictional Digital Government Strategy. Initiatives include mandatory digital self-service, Digital Post and Digital Welfare. More information can be found at http://www.digst.dk/Servicemenu/English/Policy-and-Strategy/New-Digital-Strategy.

Singapore: eGov2015 Masterplan has three key tenets: Co-Creating for greater value, connecting for active participation and catalysing whole-of-government transformation. It is concerned with “building an interactive environment where the Government, the private sector and the people work together seamlessly, through the enabling power of infocomm technologies”. More information can be found at http://www.egov.gov.sg/egov-masterplans/egov-2015/vision-strategic-thrusts;jsessionid=37E62B6CE763DD5877AB4424E527DC3F.

United Kingdom: The UK’s Cabinet Office is responsible for their Digital Government Strategy and the office is supported by “Government Digital Service”, a team focused on controlling the overall user experience across digital channels. Other groups are in place to support implementation efforts, to provide oversight and advisory functions. The UK’s model has been internationally recognized, and countries, like Australia, have named the UK as a role model. Meanwhile, from the UK’s perspective, a 2014 review commissioned by the UK’s Chi Onwurah MP — the Labour Shadow Minister for Digital Government, Cybersecurity and Social Enterprise has identified opportunities for improvements, such as more ownership by departments to lead in their areas, to focus efforts on services with the highest value to society, to build inclusion through a digital skills programme, and to release performance data. More information on the UK’s digital government strategy, departmental digital strategies, actions taken and case studies can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/government-digital-strategy-reports-and-research

USA: It is widely known that the US has created its Digital Playbook as a reference and call to action for its departments and agencies. However there is a Digital Government strategy whose goal is to build a “21st Century Platform to Better Serve the American People”. The four key strategy principles include an “Information Centric” approach, a “Shared Platform”, a “Customer-Centric” approach, and a platform of “Security and Privacy”. More information can be found at https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/egov/digital-government/digital-government.html.

The Pan-Canadian Digital Government conversation has begun. For more details on the current state of Canada’s Digital Government approach, read The Road to a Pan-Canadian Digital Government Strategy.

We encourage you to add your views to the growing number of comments to help inform this pivotal time in our country’s history. Keep up-to-date with our research and the ongoing discussion by joining our Digital Government Canada LinkedIn Group.

This blog was co-authored by
– Marj Akerley, Chief Information Officer within the Government of Canada
– Stephen Karam, Partner at Systemscope