Sharon S. Dawes CTG

1
Generic Structures that Guide the Implementation
of IT-Based Innovationsin the Public Sector

• Sharon S. Dawes - CTG
• Anthony M. Cresswell - CTG
• Laura Black - MIT
• David F. Andersen - RC
• George P. Richardson - RC
• Luis F. Luna - RC
• Ignacio J. Martinez - RC

2
Agenda

• The opportunnity
• How the idea was depeloped
• The group modelling session
• Pre-meeting activities
• Meeting activities
• Post-meeting activities
• What is next

3
The Opportunity

• Past fall, MIT students visit to Albany Laura
  Black presented to us her work with technology
  and Cross-Boundary Collaboration
• The Center for Technology in Government at the
  University at Albany,
• worked since 1993 to study just this process
  through implementation of Technology-Based
  Innovations in the Public Sector
• Gateways to the Past, Present, and Future
  Practical Guidelines to the Secondary Uses of
  Electronic Records

4
How The Idea Was Developed
5
Modelling Session
6
Pre-meeting Activities

• Create Script (Richardson and Andersen, 1995)
• Roles
• Facilitator DA
• Modeler/Reflector GR
• Process Coach GR
• Recorder LL / IM
• Gatekeeper AC
• Get CTG approval
• Create Concept Model
• Complete logistics

7
Meeting Activities

• 830 Review Agenda for the day
• Purpose, discussion and clarification
• Concept Model a fast overview of final
  product
• Boundary Clarification stakeholders, actors,
  sectors in the model, key variable (especially
  stocks) elicitation, key variables and the
  reference mode
•  
• 1020 BREAK
•  
• 1030 Stock mapping
• Feedback loop mapping
• Modeler Feedback
• Next steps and future tasks

8
The Modelling Group

• David Andersen Rockefeller College
• Donna Canestraro Center for Technology in
  Government
• Meghan Cook Center for Technology in Government
• Anthony Cresswell Center for Technology in
  Government
• Mark LaVigne Center for Technology in Government
• Ignacio Martinez Rockefeller College
• Theresa Pardo Center for Technology in Government
• George Richardson Rockefeller College
• Fiona Thompson Center for Technology in
  Government
• Luis Luna Rockefeller College

9
Concept Model
10
Concept Model
11
Concept Model
12
Concept Model
13
Concept Model
14
Concept Model
15
Key Variables Elicitation

• Feedback from work (evidence of listening)
• Percent of HIMS developed
• Level of engagement (at meetings) Ownership
• Level of leadership
• CTG involvement amount and role
• Providers appreciation about the value of HIMS to
  themselves

• Number of interactions or meetings
• Level of the people involved
• Trust
• Providers role to the state
• Providers trust to Bob and CTG
• Providers trust among them
• Individual trust

16
Boundary Clarification
17
Structure Elicitation
18
Structure Elicitation
19
Structure Elicitation
20
Structure Elicitation
21
Structure Elicitation
22
Reflector Feedback
23
Reflector Feedback
24
Reflector Feedback
25
Reflector Feedback
26
Reflector Feedback
27
What Is Next

• Formulate the Model
• Second Meeting on May, 8th
• Poster in Atlanta Meeting
• Paper in SD Review or other Journal
• Obtaining funding to model other CTG projects
• Dissertation