Over the past two years Accenture’s Institute for Public Service Value has been conducting the Accenture Global Cities Forum in cities around the world to explore people’s perspectives on the role of government. This Global Cities Forum is part of an ongoing study into how members of the public define “public value” and what they expect of government. This year Toronto was included in the study with 70 residents of the GTA, randomly selected to represent the city’s demographics, participating in a day-long deliberative session. We found that while participants viewed Toronto as an excellent place to live, describing it as “friendly,” “clean,” “vibrant,” “exciting” and “diverse.”, they also told us that government is falling short of their expectations in a number of key areas. Among their top concerns: health, public safety, employment and ease of transport.

Toronto Forum participants provided clear “to-do’s” for government:

• Ensure quick, convenient and fair access to health care for all Toronto residents regardless of where they live or the treatment they need; increase system capacity; focus on preventing ill health; and improve efficiency, reduce bureaucracy and increase resources on the front line in health care organizations.
• Improve the accessibility and reliability of the transport system, adopt goals and plans for the city’s long-term growth, and make sure organizations are held accountable for offering taxpayer value for money.
• Invest in initiatives to prevent crime, rehabilitate criminals and address the root causes of crime, improve police effectiveness in enforcing the law, introduce stricter sentences for violent crime and ensure that all of Toronto’s residents are equally well served.

During the Forum we also asked participants to think and talk about public value from three different points of view: that of service user, taxpayer and citizen. In their discussions and role-playing activities, they acknowledged the tensions among those perspectives. But through deliberations, they were able to agree on the general principles of public value that they believe should guide government in improving quality of life for all Toronto residents. Those principles are a long-term outlook; coordination and communication; transparency and accountability; equality and fairness; and efficiency and value for money.

Accenture’s Public Service Value Governance Framework reflects all Global Cities Forum participants’ principles of public value and their desire to be more engaged citizens. It illustrates how to strengthen the relationship between people and their government through:

• Outcomes—Focusing on improved social and economic outcomes.
• Balance—Balancing choice and flexibility with fairness and common good.
• Engagement—Engaging, educating and enrolling the public as co-producers of public value.
• Accountability—Clarifying accountability and facilitating public recourse.

While all four components of the governance framework are important to citizens, we found that they warrant very different emphases depending on the issues with which citizens are concerned and the values that they hold in relation to each of the issues in the different cities. We asked Toronto Forum participants to think about the framework components as they relate to health, learning and education, and public safety:

• When thinking about health, participants indicated that government’s primary focus should be accountability, which is linked closely with outcomes. Participants believe government should address balance by offering equality of access and care. And they view engagement as another means of improving accountability.
• When thinking about learning and education, participants argued that government should focus on outcomes, followed by accountability and then engagement and finally accountability.
• When thinking about public safety, participants asserted that government should emphasize both accountability and outcomes, followed by engagement and then balance.

To learn more into citizens’ perception of the role of government, please visit Accenture’s Institute for Public Service Value homepage.

A performance measurement framework created specifically for your website shifts the focus from simply reporting last month’s site traffic, to obtaining actionable insights that can help you make informed decisions. Not convinced? Consider 10 reasons that make the case for adding a framework to your web strategy.

1. Define what success for your organization looks like – You may know why you need a website, but do you understand if it’s delivering results? You can only manage what you can measure.

2. Align your site with organizational objectives – Your Program Activity Architecture spells out the strategic objectives and associated activities for your department or agency. Determine how your current Web presence can support those objectives, and then frame any future content, information architecture or technological changes in terms of how they support your organization’s goals.

3. Identify the ROT and get rid of it – Measurement of site performance includes casting a bright light on underperforming content, or “Redundant, Outdated and Trivial” pages. This content is best archived in accordance with your IM policies, or backed up to portable media.

4. Monitor campaign effectiveness – For high-profile, public outreach programs, having an established method for monitoring traffic to special landing pages via site, e-mail or printed links will tell you if the chosen messages are working, or not.

5. Validate previous site design choices – Web metrics highlight which links on the home page or key landing pages received the most traffic. If traffic is flowing to your most important content and users aren’t abandoning your site, then the existing design is helping to meet both your goals and, hopefully, theirs!

6. Inform future redesigns – If you are contemplating a significant change to the site architecture, your measurement tools will help focus the design direction on research-based patterns of behaviour and further define user tasks and goals.

7. Identify performance benchmarks – If the core site functionality involves a particular online service, then comparing performance against successful organizations with similar mandates offers further insight into how your site measures up against industry leaders.

8. Define key performance indicators (KPIs) –. Ideally, KPIs are directly relevant to a business outcome (e.g., increasing the number of people who complete transactions on the web), or user outcome (e.g., successfully finding a specific piece of information).

9. Maintain evidence of key decisions – A framework document captures the decisions the management team has adopted, providing sustainability of the measurement program.

10. Adopt a research-driven approach to the web – Basing decisions on a continual analysis of evolving business outcomes, web statistical trends and regular user feedback affords management the ability to stay strategic and avoid tactical approaches to the Web.

In our last blog, we discussed four ‘enabling practices’ that can help governments share responsibility for outcomes with their citizens, build more productive relationships between citizens and governments, and bridge the gap between expectations and reality.

Here are some examples of how Canadian governments align their policies and programs with these four principles. 

The principles, and supporting examples, are as follows:

1) Leverage insight into customers’ needs to improve equality of outcomes

To achieve the balance between equality of outcomes on one hand and choice and flexibility of service delivery on the other, public service providers should undertake detailed customer segmentation studies to understand their customer base better and use this understanding to inform all aspects of their services, including resource allocation, service design, channel strategy, and communications and engagement strategies.

For example, the Ministry of Labour and Citizens’ Services in British Columbia recently conducted extensive, needs-based segmentation among its large and growing new immigrant population, to understand better and respond to this population’s needs.   It then worked extensively with immigrant support organizations and community groups to develop the WelcomeBC portal (welcomebc.ca).  This portal is organized by broad customer segment (temporary workers, international students, etc.) and according to specific needs (for instance, ChooseBC; Come to BC; Settle in BC; Enjoy BC; Diversity in BC; and Regions in BC) with services in several languages.

2) Engage citizens, service users and other stakeholders to define outcomes and design services

At the federal level, Canada has also taken steps to improve and enhance the level of feedback and input it receives from citizens.  Its service charter outlines the government’s commitment to its citizens and describes the services offered to them.  Nine service standards establish the level of service to be provided, as well as the protocol for an annual performance scoreboard.

The federal government has also created an Office of Client Satisfaction, a neutral and autonomous body that receives, reviews, and implements suggestions.  The government also conducts feedback studies including a Public Awareness Baseline Study, which examines the service delivery expectations of Canadians.  In addition, the government conducts a Client Satisfaction Survey, which assesses clients’ level of satisfaction with services delivered.

3) Coordinate resources across and beyond government to deliver outcomes

In 2006, the Ontario government created ServiceOntario as a means of giving Ontario’s citizens and businesses an easier, more cost-effective way to access government services.  ServiceOntario acts as a one-stop shop for government services and information.  Everything from birth, marriage and death certificates to health card registrations and driver and vehicle licensing is now delivered through this one organization.

Coordination of resources is essential to ServiceOntario’s success.  ServiceOntario provides unique and integrated services, enhanced by the migration of services from different parts of the government.   Responsibilities were transferred, for instance, from the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care to the Ministry of Government and Consumer Services, which oversees ServiceOntario.  The migration plan deliberately started with the highest-volume services first, moving on to lower-volume services over time. 

The integration yields greater efficiency, but also provides opportunity for outreach and interaction.  Now, customers who go in person or online to register a birth will also be asked if they wish to apply for a Social Insurance Number at the same time.

4) Focus on improving transparency and accessibility of information, so that customers can hold governments accountable, and provide mechanisms for public recourse.

Service Canada demonstrates its commitment to excellence in customer service through its approach to managing complaints via a highly transparent, three-step public recourse procedure.  All Service Canada offices have client feedback cards (both physical cards and web-based forms) which customers can fill out to pay a compliment, make a recommendation or register a complaint.  If the customer does in fact have a complaint, it is the responsibility of the office manager to handle and resolve the issue, or to bring it to a level at which it can be addressed. 

Customers who feel that they are not getting redress at the local level can make their complaint or recommendation to the Office for Client Satisfaction (OCS) which has a commitment to respond to all complaints within 24 hours and resolve them within seven working days.  To date, both of these targets have been met 100 percent of the time.

In our previous blog posting we discussed the Canadian research findings of Accenture’s latest Leadership in Customer Service study and how Canadians want to increase the dialogue with their governments – to explain to politicians and policy makers what they want and need. This week, we want to provide some insight on how government can share responsibility for outcomes with their citizens, build more productive relationships between citizens and governments, and bridge the gap between expectations and reality.

People who participated in our research told us that they want more opportunities to be involved in the process of setting government priorities, defining desired outcomes and planning public services that help improve their quality of life. They do not accept the idea that politicians and civil servants can effectively shape public services simply on the basis of their own assumptions of what is best for citizens. Instead, they want access to channels that will offer them the chance to engage with politicians and public managers, influencing public policy and shaping public services in ways that meet their personal needs and the needs of their communities.

In our research, we have identified four ‘enabling practices’ that can help governments share responsibility for outcomes with their citizens, build more productive relationships between citizens and governments, and bridge the gap between expectations and reality.

These four enabling practices are:

1) Leverage insight into customers’ needs to improve equality of outcomes

2) Engage citizens, service users and other stakeholders to define outcomes and design services

3) Coordinate resources across and beyond government to deliver outcomes

4) Focus on improving transparency and accessibility of information, so that customers can hold governments accountable, and provide mechanisms for public recourse.

In our next blog, we will examine examples of how Canadian governments align their policies and programs with these four principles.

In our last blog entry we discussed how Accenture’s research in government service delivery revealed that service excellence and a greater impact on societal outcomes can be achieved when services are constructed and delivered in a way that makes the most sense for the citizen—irrespective
of agency boundaries, in the manner of citizens’ own choosing and with the backing of considerable communication and readily available support. We said that we would expand on the results of the 2008 study in more detail.

In this year’s Leadership in Customer Service research – conducted in 21 countries in 2008 – Accenture found that citizens in most countries are highly critical of the extent to which government seeks their opinions. In 15 of the 21 countries we surveyed, less than a third of respondents thought their governments did a good job of seeking the opinions of its citizens.

Only in three countries – Canada, Singapore and Ireland – did more than 50 percent of respondents rate their government as “doing a good job in delivering a better quality of life for themselves and their families.”

In fact, our research showed Canada to be one of the more high-performing governments when it comes to understanding that stakeholders are more than just “customers.” In fact, Canadian citizens were more likely to have positive attitudes about the job their government is doing in building trust in seven of the eight areas we surveyed, including

• Government being accountable for what it achieves
• Informing citizens about policies and services
• Targeting resources to people who need them
• Providing equal access to government services for all citizens
• Seeking the opinions of its citizens
• Tailoring services to meet individual needs, and
• Delivering a better quality of life overall

“Providing equal access to government services for all citizens” topped this list – citizens were three times more likely to express positive opinions (60 percent positive versus 20 percent negative) – followed by “government delivering a better quality of life,” where citizens were two-and-a-half times more likely to feel positive (53 percent) than negative (21 percent).

The only area where Canadian citizens were more likely to feel negative about the job the government is doing is in its openness and transparency in making policy decisions. In this area, only 36 percent of Canadians had a positive attitude, while 43 percent had a negative attitude. It is becoming clearer than ever that Canadians want to talk to their governments – to explain to politicians and policy makers what they want and need, and to know that their government is listening and responding.

In the next weeks I’ll discuss how government can share responsibility for outcomes with their citizens, build more productive relationships between citizens and governments, and bridge the gap between expectations and reality.