Drivers and Outcomes of Digital Transformation: The Case of Public Sector Services
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Background
2.1. Digital Transformation in the Public Sector
2.2. Digital Transformation and Organizational Structure
3. Methodology
- Reasons: What are the driving forces behind the transformation of public administrations?
- Dimensions: What exactly will be changed?
- Processes: What are the different ways that public administrations are evolving?
- Output, outcome, and impact: What is the output, the outcome, and the impact of the transformation that public administrations are undergoing?
4. Results
4.1. Reasons
“There are many reasons that lead us on the path of digital transformation. The main reasons refer to the citizens. Today, many people choose digital services because they save time and money. Therefore, we should increase the effectiveness of public services using new technologies. Another reason is the policies implemented by each government. Digitization in Greece may be in its infancy. However, it is something that is coming, so we cannot stand still. Finally, internal factors have a great influence. Changing the physical file to a digital one may not be something imperative yet, but it can only bring benefits and it may cause changes to public processes”.Interviewee 1, CEO in the public sector
4.2. Dimensions
“With the digital signature and circulation through an electronic protocol, the time for the production of a document has been reduced so that it fulfills its purpose immediately. Furthermore, our main concern is the redesign of certain processes and their optimization”.Interviewee 2, CFO in the public sector
“The relationships we have with the citizens, as well as with other organizations, play an important role in optimizing the existing situation, as well as the services we provide to the public. The increase in service quality helps us redesign processes and the development of services in our organizations. The availability, ease of use and understanding by all interested parties result in more efficient development of public services”.Interviewees 3 and 12, CEO in the public sector
“Business models are influenced by many factors, and it is not clear how they should be transformed. Regarding technology, it needs specialized knowledge and alignment with external factors for this type of change. More specifically, such changes are not easily applicable to our organization due to the external factors that are directly related to public services”.Interviewee 4, CFO in the public sector
4.3. Processes
“As a result of the digital transformation, we primarily expect more efficient services for citizens. This is the concept of the public sector. Forming some services or processes, time-consuming and complex digital transformation and shrinking or even eliminating them makes our work easier and more targeted”.Interviewee 5, CEO in the public sector
“We live in a digital society with demanding citizens and we must follow their dictates. Security, immediacy, and ease of use of the provided services should be a primary goal for public services. The public administration must focus on efficiency in terms of its benefits to society, and this happens because of the external pressures it receives from citizens and external factors. This is in contrast to the relations between public services among themselves, which are mainly influenced by internal factors”.Interviewees 6, 7 and 13, CIO in the public sector
4.4. Results (Output and Impact)
“The change cannot be seen immediately. Old tactics cannot be transformed by the use of new technologies. The new skills that will arise during this transformation will be able to give long-term benefits”.Interviewees 8 and 14, CEO in the public sector
“Regarding transparency, a typical example is the development of an e-Procurement platform, where all tenders for public sector projects or assignments appear on a common platform. Anyone who is included in this platform can submit the most economically advantageous offer for any project, tender, or assignment. Through this platform, each prospective contractor can compete on equal terms with others. We have to evaluate if they meet the technical specifications and if they offer the most advantageous offer on behalf of the public. Therefore, it is difficult to be flexible with third parties known to us”.Interviewee 9, CFO in the public sector
“Another example is the platform called Diavgeia. On this platform, the results of announcements, tenders, as well as financial transactions of the public with the respective contractor or citizen are posted. The development of this platform and its connection with ERP for public services makes it immediate and therefore provides accurate data. As a result, or any, anyone who makes a financial transaction and believes that his or her interest is affected can file an objection”.Interviewee 10, CFO in the public sector
“We primarily expect more efficient services for citizens. This is the mission of the public sector. Redesigning some complex services or processes through digital transformation and shrinking or even eliminating them makes our work easier and more targeted”.Interviewee 11, CEO in the public sector
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
6.1. Contribution
6.2. Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Mergel, I.; Edelmann, N.; Haug, N. Defining digital transformation: Results from expert interviews. Gov. Inf. Q. 2019, 36, 101385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weerakkody, V.; Janssen, M.; Dwivedi, Y.K. Transformational change and business process reengineering (BPR): Lessons from the British and Dutch public sector. Gov. Inf. Q. 2011, 28, 320–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shao, D.; Mwangakala, H.; Ishengoma, F.; Mongi, H.; Mambile, C.; Chali, F. Sustenance of the digital transformations induced by the COVID-19 pandemic response: Lessons from Tanzanian public sector. Glob. Knowl. Mem. Commun. 2022, in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simmonds, H.; Gazley, A.; Kaartemo, V.; Renton, M.; Hooper, V. Mechanisms of service ecosystem emergence: Exploring the case of public sector digital transformation. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 137, 100–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faro, B.; Abedin, B.; Cetindamar, D. Hybrid organizational forms in public sector’s digital transformation: A technology enactment approach. J. Enterp. Inf. Manag. 2021, in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alvarenga, A.; Matos, F.; Godina, R.; CO Matias, J. Digital transformation and knowledge management in the public sector. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hyytinen, A.; Tuimala, J.; Hammar, M. Enhancing the adoption of digital public services: Evidence from a large-scale field experiment. Gov. Inf. Q. 2022, 39, 101687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kamariotou, M.; Kitsios, F. Critical Factors of Strategic Information Systems Planning Phases in SMEs. In Information Systems; EMCIS 2018; Springer LNBIP 341; Themistocleous, M., Rupino da Cunha, P., Eds.; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 503–517. [Google Scholar]
- Kitsios, F.; Mitsopoulou, E.; Moustaka, E.; Kamariotou, M. User-Generated Content behavior and digital tourism services: A SEM-neural network model for information trust in social networking sites. Int. J. Inf. Manag. Data Insights 2022, 2, 100056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kitsios, F.; Kamariotou, M.; Karanikolas, P.; Grigoroudis, E. Digital Marketing Platforms and Customer Satisfaction: Identifying eWOM Using Big Data and Text Mining. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 8032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kitsios, F.; Kamariotou, M. Information Systems Strategy and Strategy-as-Practice: Planning Evaluation in SMEs. In Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS2019), Cancun, Mexico, 15–17 August 2019; pp. 1–10. [Google Scholar]
- Kitsios, F.; Kamariotou, M. Decision Support Systems and Strategic Information Systems Planning for Strategy Implementation. In Strategic Innovative Marketing; Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics; Kavoura, A., Sakas, D., Tomaras, P., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 327–332. [Google Scholar]
- Battisti, D. The Digital Transformation of Italy’s Public Sector: Government Cannot Be Left Behind! JeDEM-Ejournal Edemocracy Open Gov. 2020, 12, 25–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morte-Nadal, T.; Esteban-Navarro, M.A. Digital Competences for Improving Digital Inclusion in E-Government Services: A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review Protocol. Int. J. Qual. Methods 2022, 21, 16094069211070935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trček, D. E-government 4.0: Managing APIs as facilitators for digital transformation. Acad. J. Interdiscip. Stud. 2022, 11, 1–14. [Google Scholar]
- Meijer, A.; Bekkers, V. A metatheory of e-government: Creating some order in a fragmented research field. Gov. Inf. Q. 2015, 32, 237–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rooks, G.; Matzat, U.; Sadowski, B. An empirical test of stage models of e-government development: Evidence from Dutch municipalities. Inf. Soc. 2017, 33, 215–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kontogeorgis, G.; Varotsis, N. Reinstating Greek E-Governance: A Framework For E-Government Benchmarking, Improvement And Government Policies. Public Adm. Issues 2021, 6, 103–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chung, C.S.; Kim, S.B. A comparative study of digital government policies, focusing on E-government acts in Korea and the United States. Electronics 2019, 8, 1362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Guandalini, I. Sustainability through digital transformation: A systematic literature review for research guidance. J. Bus. Res. 2022, 148, 456–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peng, Y.; Tao, C. Can digital transformation promote enterprise performance?—From the perspective of public policy and innovation. J. Innov. Knowl. 2022, 7, 100198. [Google Scholar]
- Srisathan, W.A.; Naruetharadhol, P. A COVID-19 disruption: The great acceleration of digitally planned and transformed behaviors in Thailand. Technol. Soc. 2022, 68, 101912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McCarthy, P.; Sammon, D.; Alhassan, I. ‘Doing’ digital transformation: Theorising the practitioner voice. J. Decis. Syst. 2022, in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Janowski, T. Digital government evolution: From transformation to contextualization. Gov. Inf. Q. 2015, 32, 221–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tassabehji, R.; Hackney, R.; Popovic, A. Emergent digital era governance: Enacting the role of the ‘institutional entrepreneur’ in transformational change. Gov. Inf. Q. 2016, 33, 223–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- deBem Machado, A.; Secinaro, S.; Calandra, D.; Lanzalonga, F. Knowledge management and digital transformation for Industry 4.0: A structured literature review. Knowl. Manag. Res. Pract. 2022, 20, 320–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, G.; Chohan, S.R.; Liu, J. Does IoT service orchestration in public services enrich the citizens’ perceived value of digital society? Asian J. Technol. Innov. 2022, 30, 217–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barrutia, J.M.; Echebarria, C. Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on public managers’ attitudes toward digital transformation. Technol. Soc. 2021, 67, 101776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tangi, L.; Janssen, M.; Benedetti, M.; Noci, G. Digital government transformation: A structural equation modelling analysis of driving and impeding factors. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2021, 60, 102356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luna-Reyes, L.F. Opportunities and challenges for digital governance in a world of digital participation. Inf. Polity 2017, 22, 197–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sobrino-García, I. Artificial intelligence risks and challenges in the Spanish public administration: An exploratory analysis through expert judgements. Adm. Sci. 2021, 11, 102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gong, C.; Ribiere, V. Developing a unified definition of digital transformation. Technovation 2021, 102, 102217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hafseld, K.H.J.; Hussein, B.; Rauzy, A.B. An attempt to understand complexity in a government digital transformation project. Int. J. Inf. Syst. Proj. Manag. 2021, 9, 70–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eisenhardt, K.M. Building theories from case study research. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1989, 14, 532–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eisenhardt, K.M.; Graebner, M.E. Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Acad. Manag. J. 2007, 50, 25–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, A.S. Case studies as natural experiments. Hum. Relat. 1989, 42, 117–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Braun, V.; Clarke, V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 2006, 3, 77–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tham, A.; Mair, J.; Croy, G. Social media influence on tourists’ destination choice: Importance of context. Tour. Recreat. Res. 2020, 45, 161–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, S.; Yan, Q.; Yan, M.; Shen, C. Tourists’ emotional changes and eWOM behavior on social media and integrated tourism websites. Int. J. Tour. Res. 2020, 22, 336–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hsieh, H.F.; Shannon, S.E. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual. Health Res. 2005, 15, 1277–1288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dunleavy, P.; Margetts, H.; Bastow, S.; Tinkler, J. New public management is dead—Long live digital-era governance. J. Public Adm. Res. Theory 2006, 16, 467–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vassilakopoulou, P.; Haug, A.; Salvesen, L.M.; Pappas, I.O. Developing human/AI interactions for chat-based customer services: Lessons learned from the Norwegian government. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 2022, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilson, H.J.; Daugherty, P.R. Collaborative intelligence: Humans and AI are joining forces. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2018, 96, 114–123. [Google Scholar]
- Kane, G. The technology fallacy: People are the real key to digital transformation. Res. Technol. Manag. 2019, 62, 44–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schneider, S.; Kokshagina, O. Digital transformation: What we have learned (thus far) and what is next. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2021, 30, 384–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chanias, S.; Myers, M.D.; Hess, T. Digital transformation strategy making in pre-digital organizations: The case of a financial services provider. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 2019, 28, 17–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jnr, B.A.; Petersen, S.A.; Helfert, M.; Ahlers, D.; Krogstie, J. Modeling pervasive platforms and digital services for smart urban transformation using an enterprise architecture framework. Inf. Technol. People 2021, 34, 1285–1312. [Google Scholar]
- Scupola, A.; Mergel, I. Co-production in digital transformation of public administration and public value creation: The case of Denmark. Gov. Inf. Q. 2022, 39, 101650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Twizeyimana, J.D.; Andersson, A. The public value of E-Government–A literature review. Gov. Inf. Q. 2019, 36, 167–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cottafava, D.; Corazza, L. Co-design of a stakeholders’ ecosystem: An assessment methodology by linking social network analysis, stakeholder theory and participatory mapping. Kybernetes 2021, 50, 836–858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
External | |
Technology | 71.4% |
Businesses, citizens, policies | 64.2% |
Internal | |
Physical files | 50.0% |
Management | 21.4% |
Processes | 42.8% |
Services | 28.5% |
Relationships | 14.2% |
Technology | 7.14% |
Business model | 7.14% |
Processes | 28.57% |
Technology | 28.57% |
Documents | 14.28% |
Relationships | 14.28% |
New skills | 7.16% |
Services | 7.14% |
Output | |
New services | 21.42% |
New processes | 14.28% |
Policies | 3% |
Relationships | 2% |
Impact | |
Re-engineering | 14.28% |
Transparency | 14.28% |
Digital society | 7.14% |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Kitsios, F.; Kamariotou, M.; Mavromatis, A. Drivers and Outcomes of Digital Transformation: The Case of Public Sector Services. Information 2023, 14, 43. https://doi.org/10.3390/info14010043
Kitsios F, Kamariotou M, Mavromatis A. Drivers and Outcomes of Digital Transformation: The Case of Public Sector Services. Information. 2023; 14(1):43. https://doi.org/10.3390/info14010043
Chicago/Turabian StyleKitsios, Fotis, Maria Kamariotou, and Archelaos Mavromatis. 2023. "Drivers and Outcomes of Digital Transformation: The Case of Public Sector Services" Information 14, no. 1: 43. https://doi.org/10.3390/info14010043
APA StyleKitsios, F., Kamariotou, M., & Mavromatis, A. (2023). Drivers and Outcomes of Digital Transformation: The Case of Public Sector Services. Information, 14(1), 43. https://doi.org/10.3390/info14010043