1. Sotiris Koussouris (National Technical University of Athens)
Panagiotis Kokkinakos (National Technical University of Athens)
Dimitrios Panopoulos (National Technical University of Athens)
Dimitrios Askounis (National Technical University of Athens)
Anshu Jain (IBM India)
Alan Hartman (IBM India)
Christian Zirpins (Karlsruhe Institute of Technology)
Christos Georgousopoulos (INTRASOFT Int.)

2. ‣ A more citizen oriented and transparent government, improved
public sector performance etc. are necessary
‣ Public unrest within EU shows that citizens want to get their voices
considered by decision makers and demand more transparency
‣ ICT and Web2.0 can constitute the pillars of innovation and
reformation
‣ The value of public services can only be identified and assessed
through a process of democratic engagement between service
providers and service recipients
METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 2

3. ✗
✗
✔
✔
Citizens
METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 3

4. ‣ Engaging Citizens in the Decision Making process, using push and
pull based methods
‣ Supporting Decision Makers towards serving the citizens in a more
efficient way
o Transparency
o Trust
o Undestand the Citizens’ Perspective & Perception of Services
‣ Not only for re-engineering or automation purposes, but most
importantly for the composition of new service concepts
METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 4

5. ‣ Relies on the experiences of the current model by introducing Web
2.0 aspects capturing the whole life cycle of a service
‣ Taking into account citizens’ opinions through Opinion Mining
‣ Introducing Cost/Value Modelling Mechanisms
‣ Offering real time Simulation and Visualisation interfaces for
increasing transparency and letting citizens know the expected
impact/costs
‣ Gives a high level description of how public services should be
designed and deployed in the Web2.0 era
METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 5

6. ✔
✔
✔
✔
METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 6

7. } Selection of a set of public services that should be examined
and prioritised in order to be used for the use case exercise is
necessary in every similar effort
} Need for a methodological framework for selecting and
prioritising public services for reform purposes
} Initial Requirements Identification and Services Description
for rapid process modelling towards simulation
METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 7

8. A template which aims to capture important aspects of a service, in
order to thoroughly describe a service in many facets:
‣ General Data
‣ Service Concept
‣ Stakeholders
‣ Service Requirements
‣ Processes and Tasks
‣ Service Online Availability Data
‣ Individual Resources
‣ Cost of Service Delivery
‣ Opinion Mining Sources
METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 8

9. METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 9

10. Based on the Analytic Network Process (ANP)
‣ Multi Criteria Method
‣ Relies on pair wise comparisons
o of clusters
o of elements
METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 10

11. Service Flow Service Complexity Service Importance Service Load Data
Legal Framework Based on European
Public (Final) Service Total Service Duration
Implication Policies
Level of Compliance with
Self-appointed Call of Existence of a Pan-
National Interoperability Frequency
Service European Dimension
Frameworks
Requirement for Personal Potential to deliver Value
Re-usability by other
Presence at the Submission within the time frame of No of Inputs
Services
of the Application the Project
Requirement for Personal
Internal Service Execution Importance for the Service
Presence at the Delivery of
Domain Provider Organization
the Service
External Service Execution Level of Support by IT
Domain Systems
METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 11

12. Service Alternatives
Alternatives - YPES Services Alternatives - Tilburg Services Alternatives - Venice Services
Access extracts of insurance record in Building-commercial activities
Virtual Tilburg participation toolkit
Social Security Organization permissions
Authorization and charging for the
Certificates for various civil acts City info on an iPhone
occupation of public services
Monitoring compensation procedures
Contribution for the purchase of the
of Hellenic Organization of Living-care service zone
first home
Agricultural Insurances
Transferring Citizen’s rights to another
WABO combined building permission Integration between Iris and GeoLP
Municipality
Monitoring an application submitted
Werkplein Job intermediation Nomadic work
through eGov procedures
METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 12

13. Structure of the Model
METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 13

14. Pair Wise Comparisons and Priority Matrix
Intensity of
Definition Explanation
importance
1 equal importance the two elements contribute equally to the objective
2 weak
3 moderate importance experience and judgment slightly favour one element over another
4 moderate plus
5 strong importance experience and judgments strongly favour one element over another
6 strong plus
very strong or demonstrated an element is favoured very strongly over another; its dominance is
7
importance demonstrated in practice
8 very, very strong
the evidence favouring one element over another is of the highest
9 extreme importance
possible order of affirmation
If the element i has one of the above nonzero
Reciprocals numbers assigned to it when compared with
a reasonable assumption
of above the element j, then j has the reciprocal value
when compared with the element i
METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 14

15. METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 15

16. ‣ A methodology for supporting decision makers in:
o recording in detail the workflow of the services, a key factor in order to
gain thorough insight to the methods that public service providers and
policy makers intuitively follow
o Evaluating/ranking the importance and the readiness of already working
to services to be re-engineered for a specific cause
‣ The method is capable of handling even more alternatives and can
be easily tailored to any re-engineering needs
‣ Successful application of the described methodology during
COCKPIT project
METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 16

17. ‣ The selected service scenarios
will be the initial pilots and
evaluators of the New
Governance Model proposed by
COCKPIT Project
http://www.cockpit-project.eu
‣ Supported by COCKPIT toolkit
(opinion mining, public
deliberations, cost and value
modelling, simulation,
visualisation)
METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 17

18.
Thank you for your attention!
Dr. Sotiris Koussouris
skous@epu.ntua.gr
www.cockpit-project.eu
METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy