The question of how an IT investment can impact public value can be answered initially in terms of three impact mechanisms. These three, alone or in combination, describe the general ways IT investments can connect with the public, as revealed in our research. Identifying these linking mechanisms is an important step in the analysis process because it leads to a more detailed examination of impact pathways than might otherwise occur. IT investment can enhance public value in many ways, some of which are only indirectly related to the performance of a particular IT system. Attention to these indirect and more complex mechanisms can help ensure a full picture of public value results is developed.

Direct service impacts (Figure 7) occur when IT is embedded directly in a service delivery process, generating service changes that enhance value to the citizen or official involved in the service process. The net public value is just the difference between the value of the new and the old. Value in this sense, and in the other mechanisms as well, is assessed from the point of view of the public participant in the transaction, not the government. The total value may be a composite of several separate measures, such as lower cost to the citizen, plus increased satisfaction with quality of service, plus enhanced trust in government. The specific kinds of value involved are described in more detail in a later section.

Figure 7. Type 1: Direct Service

The e-government investments in our case studies and much of the literature on e- government provide many examples of this kind of investment. These include systems for fee and tax payments, license application and renewals, obtaining information, filing forms, etc. The public value propositions for these investements go beyond the important but obvious cost and time savings to include attention to service quality, access, equity, and the full range of values described below.

Indirect service impacts (Figure 8) occur when back office or infrastructure investments produces changes in a government business process. As in Type 1 mechanisms, the value to the public is reflected in the changed interaction or transaction with a government business process. However, the process change results from an IT investment at least one step removed from interaction with the public. Because of this indirect route, it may be more difficult in Type 2 cases to trace the links from the IT investment clearly and unambiguously to the public. Risks to the effectiveness of the investment are higher as well, due to dependence on business process changes that are independent of the IT itself. The IT investment may have potential results spread over many business process and may interact with other technologies, further obscuring the impact linkages.

Figure 8. Type 2: Indirect Service or Impact

The ERP system implementations in Austria, Israel, and Pennsylvania that were examined in our case studies are excellent examples of this kind of investment. The primary impact of these systems is on the internal, back office operations of the government. How to identify and describe these linked back office operations is discussed in a later section of the framework in terms of business reference models (see Figure 10). The impacts on these internal operations may be very positive and extensive, and still remain hard to trace to many kinds of value gains for individual citizens or organizations. This is an important part of the public value problem dealt with in detail in the value types discussion to follow. ERP systems also contribute to public value generation through the Type 3 mechanism discussed below.

In this third type of impact mechanism (Figure 9 below), the links to public value are more complex. The direct value mechanism shown here as Vd, is the same as a Type 1 or Type 2 mechanism, producing a value increment for a citizen, official, or group (shown in a simplified way). In this type of system, the new IT is also linked to changes in the environment and relationships between the direct beneficiary and other entities (persons, groups, organizations) in the public arena. This indirect mechanism can result in additional public value flowing from interactions outside the government, between other persons or organizations. The changes in the environment may also produce direct value beyond the direct transactions.

Figure 9. Type 3: Mixed Direct, Indirect Service & Environmental Impact

There are many examples of this type of value mechanism in our cases and in other settings. In the Washington State Digital Archives case at least two such impacts occurred. The ability of the county auditors to shift responsibility for preserving digital records to the state archive produced savings in cost and workload at the county level (Vd). This allowed county auditors to improve services to their citizens in other areas (Vi). In addition, the accessibility of the government records online increases the overall environment of transparency for the government, benefiting all citizens. In the Service New Brunswick case, Web access to company registrations provided direct value to citizens such as accountants, lawyers, financial institutions, and the general public searching for such business information (Vd). In addition, the decision by CGI to locate its Global E-Government Headquarters in Fredericton, New Brunswick, due in large part to its strong partnership with Service New Brunswick, benefits the economic development of the city of Fredericton and surrounding areas in the province (Vi). In a different way, putting some forms of information online, such as the Toxic Release Inventory in the US, enable citizens to obtain benefits from other transactions, such as lawsuits against polluters (Vi).(5)