Performance-indicator based policy-making in Austria

Performance-indicator based policy-making in Austria

Policy Making in the Digital Era

Johann HöchtlDepartment for E-GovernanceDanube University Krems, Austria

Track on Data Driven GovernmentJune 29, EDF 2016, Eindhoven

2

Agenda

1. Governance with Complexity at Speed2. Action Taking on Evidence3. Wirkungsorientierte Steuerung – The

Case of Austria4. The Big Data powered Policy Cycle5. Measures towards ePolicy Making29.06.2016 EDF2016 - Johann Höchtl Danube University Krems

© SFGate, 7. Oct. 2013,http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Absorbed-device-users-oblivious-to-danger-4876709.php

Speeding …

CC0 ed_davad https://pixabay.com/photo-388253/

… on 19th century infrastructure

Digitization

Connectivity Intelligence

The Digital Virtuous Forces

P. Parycek,G. Simonitsch, M. Fandler, P. Müller, 2014

MobilityBig Data Analytics

Cloud ComputingConnectivity Intelligence

Digitization

EDF2016 - Johann Höchtl Danube University Krems 6

Numbers at speed1920: National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER): one employee1929: The US in a Great Depression1932: President Hoover supposed to take decisions on three year old numbers1932: Russian immigrant professor Simon Kuznets invents what would become the GDP1945: NBER +5.000 employees

29.06.2016“Migrant Mother” (1936), Public Domain


The Complexity of NumbersComponent Amount (trillions) Percent Personal Consumption $11.21 69% Goods $3.87 24% Durable Goods $1.47 9% Non-durable Goods $2.43 15% Services $7.34 45%Business Investment $2.85 17% Fixed $2.74 17% Non-Residential $2.21 14% Commercial $.46 3% Capital Goods $1.06 6% Intellectual (Software) $.70 4% Residential $.53 3% Change in Inventories $.10 1%Net Exports ($.54) (3%) Exports $2.11 13% Imports $2.65 16%Government $2.86 17% Federal $1.11 7% Defense $.68 4% State and Local $1.74 11%TOTAL GDP $16.35 100%

29.06.2016http://useconomy.about.com/od/grossdomesticproduct/f/GDP_Components.htm

Valentino Piana, A Graph Representation Of A Basic Macroeconomic Scheme:The Is-Lm Model: Economics Web Institute, 2001


Action Taking on Evidence

29.06.2016

DecisionModel

Input

Policy Discussion

Policy Formation

Policy AcceptanceProvision ofmeans

Implementation

Evaluation

Agenda Setting

Nachmias, David, und Claire Felbinger. 1982. „Utilization in the Policy Cycle: Directions for Research“. Review of Policy Research 2 (2): 300–308. doi:10.1111/j.1541-338.1982.tb00676.x.


Action Taking on Evidence 2.0

29.06.2016

Decision

Decision Making Model 2.0


The Case of Austria – Challenges

• No long-term, legally binding budget management or long-term preview

• Old budget: important management-related information missing• Only input and no output orientation: Who gets how much,

instead of what has to be the outcome? • Lack of incentives for economic management of the budget• Small-sized, non flexible budget structure; lack of

transparency• Missing Bigger Picture: What do we want to achieve with the

budget?

29.06.2016


The Case of Austria – Set up

2013: Implementation of the Principle of Outcome Orientation (Wirkungsorientierung), Global Budgets, Establishment ofFederal Performance Management Office (FPMO)

• Managing public administration based on its contributions towards achieving outcome in society (performance management)

• Outcome statements, outputs and indicators per budgeting chapter

• Performance management cycle: plan, implement, evaluate• Outcome oriented impact assessment29.06.2016


The Case of Austria – Outcome Orientation

1. Political objectives relating to a desired2. societal outcome. It is the task of public administration to provide services =3. Output. However,4. external factors can play a role. Before services can be provided, the required

resources =5. Input must be ascertained. Finally, the6. activities to generate output are carried out.

29.06.2016

1. Model

efficiency effectiveness

Seiwald, Johann, Monika Geppl, and Andreas Thaller. 2016. Handbuch Wirkungsorientierte Steuerung - Unser Handeln erzeugt Wirkung.Wien: Bundeskanzleramt Österreich.


Implementation

29.06.2016

5 headings

32 budget chapters

global budgets

detail budgets

Budget structure Performance structure

mission, strategy, outcome statement

output statement

performance contracts

Annual Budget

Supplements to Annual Budget

MTEF, Strategy Report

Performance Management: Integrating performance oriented budgeting and indicator systems in Austria. Ursula Rosenbichler & Alexander Grünwald, 2016

EDF2016 - Johann Höchtl Danube University Krems

Implementation

14 |

Outcome 1:

Why this outcome?

What is being done to achieve this outcome?

What would success look like?

Mission:

Outcomes 1-5

29.06.2016


Outcome 1: Improving safety and security

Why this outcome?• Safety and security in public and private life is a human right

and essential to well-being. International comparisons show that Austria is one of the safest countries in the world. This high level of safety must be maintained and upgraded further.

29.06.2016



What is being done to achieve this outcome?• Extending preventive work and awareness training• Combating crime effectively and efficiently with new methods and

technologies• Special training programme on combating crime• Improving police response times (i.e. time between an emergency

call and arrival at the scene)• Evidence-based human resource allocation• Analysing road accident patterns and identifying traffic hot spots29.06.2016



What would success look like?• Crime rate: desired outcome 2013: <x%; starting level 2011: y%

[definition: total number of crime incidents per 100,000 inhabitants, source: Crime Statistics, Ministry of the Interior]

• Percentage of crimes solved: desired outcome 2013: >x%; starting level 2011: y% [definition: ratio of cases solved to total number of crimes, source: Crime Statistics, Ministry of the Interior]

• Number of road accidents with injuries: desired outcome 2013: <x; starting level 2011: y [definition: total number of persons killed in road accidents, source: Road Accidents Statistics, Statistik Austria]

29.06.2016


The Case of Austria –Monitoring & Controlling

29.06.2016

2. Governance,Controlling,Evaluation


The Case of Austria – Evaluation • Review of the achievement of

objectives• Evaluation along outcome and

output statements• Indicators: target/performance-

comparison, automated assessment of target attainment and verbal explanation of development

• Outcome targets: Overall assessment of outcome target and verbal explanation of its environment

29.06.2016

https://www.wirkungsmonitoring.gv.at/




EDF2016 - Johann Höchtl Danube University Krems

The Case of Austria - Annual Federal Performance Report

29.06.2016 20 |


The Case of Austria – Legal Framework• Federal Constitution Act

– §51(8): Federal Administration has to agree on Global Budgets according to Outcome Orientation

– §51(9): Further provisions in respect to Evidence based Policy Making, Controlling and Transparency

• Act on Federal Budgeting– Details on Global Budgets and Detailed Budgets– (Requirement to assess financial consequences of acts and

regulations)• Further detailed in Bylaws of Ministry of Finance (What to

Measure, How to Measure, Requirements for Indicators) and Austrian Chancellery (Controlling across ministries)

29.06.2016


The Case of Austria –Room for improvements• Lacking Integration of ICT-

Systems, therefore additional efforts to report plans and implementation performance metrics.

• Subjective & qualitative indicators• Reports on effectiveness arrive

comparatively late and leave little time for policy adjustments29.06.2016


The Big Data Powered Policy Cycle

29.06.2016

Volume

• Terrabytes• Petabytes

Variety

• structured• unstructured

(Documents, Emails, Audio, Video)

Velocity

• Sensors• Social Networks• Stream Orientation• Realtime Processing


N + 1

N

PeriodN - 1

• The cycle does not account for the possibilities of Big Data Analytics.

• Evaluation at period N+1 happens to late.

• Precious time to re-focus measures or drop measures is wasted.

29.06.2016

Policy Discussion

Policy Formation

Policy AcceptanceProvision ofmeans

Implementation

Evaluation

Agenda Setting


The traditional model of policy making is not apt for the 21st century

29.06.2016


The ePolicy Cycle

• Evaluation can happen at every stage of the cycle

• Enables swift and justified adaptions to policy making

29.06.2016

Policy Discussion

Policy Formation

Policy Acceptance

Agenda Setting

Implementation

Provision ofmeans

Höchtl Johann, Peter Parycek, und Ralph Schöllhammer. 2015.„Big Data in the Policy Cycle: Policy Decision Making in the Digital Era“.Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, Dezember, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10919392.2015.1125187

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10919392.2015.1125187

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10919392.2015.1125187


Big Data Analytics is an Enabler

• Access to evidence data through Integration of diverse data sources;

• Efficiency gains of traditional action taking through stream processing and real time analytics;

• Higher levels of effectiveness by identifying new fields of action taking through pattern mining.

29.06.2016


Measures towards ePolicy Making• Integrate ICT-Systems using EU Interoperability Building

Blocks– Core Components, EIF 3.0 (upcoming), eInvoicing, eProcurement

• Operate ICT-Systems using Cloud Infrastructure– FIWARE, Hybrid Cloud Models

• Evolve Systems using an agile implementation approach– Perpetual Beta, Design for Failure

• Monitor usage• Listen to your stakeholders• Design for Co-creation

29.06.2016

Johann HöchtlDepartment for E-Governance

[email protected]

@myprivate42github.com/the42

myprivate42.wordpress.com/at.linkedin.com/in/johannhoechtl

17-19 May 2017Danube University KremsCfP: http://tinyurl.com/cedem17cfp

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

http://tinyurl.com/cedem17cfp

http://tinyurl.com/cedem17cfp

Technology

Performance-indicator based policy-making in Austria