European InitiativesSome observations from across the pond…

Peter F BrownPensive.eu

www.pensive.eu/uid/0139

All content © 2007, Pensive.eu.

Check URI in header for most recent and/or authentic version.

This file may be copied on condition that it remains complete and intact, including this page.

Overview►“Stone Soup” – a parable►The “eGovernment resources Network”►Points of comparison►Steps forward

Stone SoupA Parable

A Collaboration Model for sharing information about eGovernment

Resources

4

The Parable

Once upon a time…

There was a great famine in which people jealously hoarded whatever food they could find…

One day a wandering soldier came into a village asking for help to make a meal…

“There's nothing to eat here,” he was told. “Better keep moving on.”

5

The Parable

The soldier replied: “I have all that I need but I was thinking of making stone soup to share with you all.” He brought out an ordinary-looking stone from a bag. “All I ask from you is a pot and some water”, he added.

When this was brought to him by a curious villager, he added the stone, lit a fire under the pot and started to heat his “soup”.

“Ahh,” said the soldier, “Very good but it could still do with something extra, if there is to be enough for everyone. A pity there’s nothing more…”

6

The Parable

Other villagers had started to gather round out of hunger and curiosity…and some started to respond.

One villager came forward cautiously with a bit of meat that he had been hiding, and added it to the pot.

Another followed, with a potato…

And so it continued, with other vegetables, herbs and spices until, indeed, there was a delicious meal for everyone.

7

The Collaboration Model

The main lesson is:Resource sharing is often more about a willingness to cooperate and collaborate, than it is about the availability of actual resources to be shared.

The main question is:Can we apply this model to the vast area of eGovernment resource sharing?

8

The Collaboration Model

Applying this model to eGovernment resource sharing:

– How can we encourage “a reflex for collaboration”?

– What are functional requisites?– Where/how would we start?

More fundamentally:– What is the case for such collaboration?

9

The Case for collaboration

Main objective is to make better visibility for and better use of existing eGovernment resources and solutions

We need to demonstrate that this will,•provide added value for administrations•respond to eGovernment objectives•be done within existing or foreseen projects•be managed and sustained

10

The Case against collaboration

Main objective is to protect administrations and their contractors from potential competition and embarrassment:

•challenges status quo and “domestic” budgets•questions own eGovernment objectives•Highlights facts that some work already done within existing or foreseen projects•Exposes proprietary dependences

11

A new initiative? - Dangers•“Yet another project”

– dispersion– complexity– “and another one bites the dust…”

•Doesn’t actually solve the problem, but might add to it

– Already plenty of resources “out there”, and already difficult enough to find

– EU-level should take “relevant initiatives and provide useful instruments”* rather than operational services

*IDABC TWG, 16 Feb 2006

12

A “CoP” / Network - Advantages•No new project

– just a “new frame of mind”: a “reflex of collaboration”

– “label” and identify existing resources– “anything” can go under the common banner

•Doesn’t solve all the problems itself, but makes them

– move visible– easier to identify and manage– more likely to be solved coherently

•Provides high-level oversight

13

Political:– a recognition of the need for and role of cross-

border and pan-European services;

Organisational:– “collaborative by design”: ensuring that

services and systems are able to interoperate from the outset, at design stage

Cultural:– building a collaborative mentality into the

organising principles of eService project management

A reflex of collaboration

14

Using existing resources

Many of the initial “ingredients” for a collaborative model of eGovernment resource sharing already exist but:

– are “locked” into specific projects;– were not designed with other, future, use in mind– are missing the “soldier”, the “stone”, the “pot”…

StoneSoup►A European eGovernment Resource Network – eGRN►Highlighting the “problem” – establishing the value proposition

►easier on a national level►less so on a cross-border or pan-European level

►“Political” support►Bootstrapping

►Practical constraints►No initial or substantial funding, so►Concentrate initially on the “meta level” – information about existing eGovernment resources

16

Starting the Stone Soup

We have a “soldier” :– a clear call for collaboration;– high-level of appreciation of the core message– Some (inevitable) hesitation about its direction

17

Starting the Stone Soup

We can easily find a pot:– somewhere to manage the (information about)

resources made available for sharing– although attention should be paid to the tools for

the job– use results from an existing project?

CEN eGovernment Resource Navigator (demo)?

Start with a “virtual pot”:– concentrate on “mapping” the main types of

“ingredient”– link up existing resources– no ‘overheads’ for existing projects

18

First ingredients

Results from existing (national or sub-national) eGovernment projects

Results from Commission funded projects

Common model for “description” of “ingredients” (an “ontology”?)

Common collaboration methodology

19

Enriching the Soup•what could/should go in the pot (“scope”)?•how to bring the ingredients “out of hiding” (“will”)?•how we describe them (“information/data model”)?

– language considerations– MoU UN/CEFACT, ISO, OASIS on eGov Metadata– requirement for future projects

•how do we add things (“process”)?•Where next?

– how do we work together?– where do we host StoneSoup?– how to promote StoneSoup?– eTEN? IDABC? other?

20

Sustainability

Key to sustainability is that it is driven by use and by users, responds to a need rather than an obligation

– “Communities of Practice”: regular virtual meetings (online, conference-calls, etc) on specific topics of common interest and concern

– Wikis (many have in-built multi-lingualism)– Specific project requirements (need for a

collaboration platform or re-use of eGovernment resources)

Points of Comparison►Economies of scale►Governance, Custody, Ownership►Legal and Organisational Responsibility

and of divergence?►USA seems much further ahead in:►degree of cross-agency collaboration►scale of information territory captured►leverage of existing/emergent technologies►cooperation between research and operational domains

►EU seems more focussed on:►principles of and approaches to collaboration►multi-lingualism

►legal principle of linguistic equivalence►semantics ;-)

►building functional services whilst respecting responsibility boundaries

© Pensive.eu, All Rights Reserved22

Steps forward►Starting a dialogue►It’s not priority #1 but it should be there on the back burner

►Recognising each community’s contribution…►many are doing “eGov networking” – OASIS, W3C, OECD, UN/CEFACT, OMG, LibertyAlliance…

►Breaking the centripetal collaboration paradigm►From “Yes, anyone is welcome to collaborate with me”►to “I can put this on the table” – where’s the table?

European InitiativesSome observations from across the pond

peter@pensive.euhttp://public.xdi.org/=Peter.Brownwww.pensive.eu/uid/0139