Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Two E-Governance Projects Sweden and the United States The INTOSAI Working Group on IT Audit (WGITA) May 2008.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Two E-Governance Projects Sweden and the United States The INTOSAI Working Group on IT Audit (WGITA) May 2008."— Presentation transcript:

1 Two E-Governance Projects Sweden and the United States The INTOSAI Working Group on IT Audit (WGITA) May 2008

2 2 What is e-governance (e-gov)? The governments use of information technology to communicate with citizens, businesses, and different parts of government

3 3 What are e-gov projects? Include systems, applications, processes, and infrastructure

4 4 Two E-Gov Projects Approved by WGITA Project 1: E-Gov Risks Project 2: Performance Auditing E-Gov

5 5 Project 1: E-Gov Risks Introduction E-gov projects have a number of risks that need to be managed (similar to the risks for IT projects, which have been extensively researched) Unless the risks of e-gov projects are managed effectively, the projects may not provide the intended benefits

6 6 Project 1: Current Set of Risks Budgetary barriers limit how much can be allocated to a delivery Lack of collaboration between government agencies leads to fragmented solutions Lack of common technical infrastructure including tools, methods, and processes causes inefficiencies

7 7 Project 1: Current Set of Risks (continued) Little management of user expectations results in user disappointment Lack of privacy and security weakens value of e-gov Rapid technological change causes use of outdated design, interfaces, or solutions

8 8 Project 1: Current Set of Risks (continued) Designing for everybodynot having specific users in mindresults in inefficiencies Lack of downsizing for traditional processes means efficiency effects are not realized Lack of vision means no clear focus on such factors as what will be delivered, maintained, and supported Lack of linking of performance measures to objectives causes inefficient monitoring and evaluation

9 9 Project 1: Methods, Analysis, and Results Methods: Review the published literature and use the most common risks (partially completed) Use other sets of risks recommended by WGITA members

10 10 Project 1: Methods, Analysis, and Results (continued) Analysis: Analyze identified risks Sort into risk categories

11 11 Project 1: Methods, Analysis, and Results (continued) Results: A reasonable set of mitigation strategies A template or some other type of risk identification and analysis (so that in future audits, information on the types of risks and suitable management can be requested)

12 12 Project 1: Schedule By the 2009 WGITA meeting, provide a set of e-gov risks and mitigation strategies

13 13 Project 2: Performance Auditing E-Gov Provide auditors with a set of measures that are typically used to measure the success of e-gov projects after implementation

14 14 Project 2: Schedule By the 2009 WGITA meeting, provide a set of measures to measure the success of e-gov projects

15 15 Contacts Sweden Björn Unndall The United States Madhav Panwar


Download ppt "Two E-Governance Projects Sweden and the United States The INTOSAI Working Group on IT Audit (WGITA) May 2008."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google