Article tools
 | Print this page | Download a pdf version of this article

 

Table of Contents
Features
E-Governance vs. E-Government
Thomas B. Riley
Implementation issues in e-Governance
Dr. V. N. Garg
Quantifying and assessing e-Governance
Prof. K. Subramanian, Sameer Sachdeva
Digital Opportunity Channel
WSIS: The civil society perspective
Interview: Subbiah Arunachalam
WSIS vignettets
Commentary: Media Step Child of WSIS
Columns
i4d Seminar at Kuala Lumpur, Book Review, Quiz, What's on, ET Cetra, In Fact
 

Insight

Quantifying and assessing e-Governance

 
Prof. K. Subramanian
Deputy Director General,
National Informatics Center,
Government of India
ksdir@hub.nic.in

Sameer Sachdeva
Freelance Consultant and Convenor,
e-Gov
sachdeva_sameer@hotmail.com
 

 

Any spending in a Government program without the measurement of results and impact cannot go on indefinitely. There will always be one stakeholder who will ask for the impact assessment of the investment.

Why e-Government assessment?
All elected Governments are accountable to people. The elected representatives are accountable to the Parliament and the Executive is accountable to the elected representatives. Any spending in a Government program without the measurement of results and impact cannot go on indefinitely. There will always be one stakeholder who will ask for the impact assessment of the investment. Therefore, the spending on IT and e-Governance in the Government has to be assessed. This is part of the e-governance initiative and audit also plays a pivotal role in this, as audit findings are submitted to the legislative or parliament.

Difficulty in assessment
The process to quantify the results of e-Governance is very difficult. It is difficult to demonstrate the benefits for a given e-Government program. The various factors that lead to the difficulty are:
  • multiple services, processes and benefits make it impossible to estimate all the benefits
  • intangible benefits are difficult to capture and quantify
  • all e-Government Projects are not often aligned to for increased revenue.
  • benefits evolve as a greater understanding is gained of the project
  • the evolving and changing technology widens the gap
  • lack of pressure or will to measure
  • kigh cost for developing a measurement performance system
  • no acknowledgements for failures; though successes to be publicized, more important is failure knowledge to be documented and shared.
  • lack of adaptation of national standards in measurement parameters and maturity assessment.

Interested? Read the complete article here.