=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-3049/paper26
|storemode=property
|title=Identifying Measurable Targets for a City’s Social and Welfare Sector Management
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3049/Paper26.pdf
|volume=Vol-3049
|authors=Pasi Hellsten,Kristiina Lumme
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/egov/HellstenL21
}}
==Identifying Measurable Targets for a City’s Social and Welfare Sector Management==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3049/Paper26.pdf
Identifying Measurable Targets for a City’s Social
and Welfare Sector Management
Pasi Hellsten*, Kristiina Lumme**
*PO Box 541, FI-33014 Tampere Finland, pasi.hellsten@tuni.fi, kristiina.lumme@tampere.fi
**PO Box 541, FI-33014 Tampere Finland, kristiina.lumme@tampere.fi
Abstract: Today’s organizations face constantly challenges as the newer ways of working set
newer requirements for the management. Management is required to monitor the operation like
always, but now there are newer angles to the operation. The need for more holistic approach
means that management is expected to use multiple sources for information from various parts
of the operation. To improve the processes the management needs to have a wide big picture.
The financial numbers are not enough alone. What do we know about the other measurable areas?
Our findings show that potential measurables are multifaceted and numerous. This has further
implications to the further development of the operation and the possible digitalization
initiatives.
Keywords: Social and welfare sector, Public sector, Measuring, Management
1. Introduction
Service provision is a task characterizing the operations in public sector (De Vries et al., 2016;
Higgins, 2017). This interprets to the having multiple angles to the phenomena under scrutiny.
Taxpayers and other funding sources form only one of these angles and stakeholders. Other factors,
such as reducing resources, citizens’ expectations, and public pressure resulted in the development
need of operations are other constant concerns (Hellsten and Pekkola, 2019). Measuring these may
prove to be more difficult. Public sector organizations have launched various digitalization
initiatives, e.g. smart city initiatives (smarttampere.fi/en/home/), in order to meet the challenges
presented by stakeholders, e.g. flexibility and easier reachability (Bakıcı et al., 2013; Hellsten and
Pekkola, 2019; Taylor Buck and While, 2017). All these measures need exactly that, measures. How
to measure the operation in order to meet the right decisions?
Public sector organizations are not always very savvy when it comes to utilizing the information
and communication technologies (ICT) (Karagoz et al., 2020; Lecomber and Tatnall, 2014; Tatnall
Victoria and Davey, 2013). Not all the members of the organization are necessarily prepared for
using overarching and holistic technologies, such as info-searching, social networks, and
communicating in the services they are to offer (Lindgren and Jansson, 2013). It is not uncommon
that the services are ‘siloed’, targeted only to a single audience and purpose rather than being broad,
Copyright ©2021 for this paper by its authors. Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
272 Reflections & Viewpoints
linking several sections or crossing organizational boundaries. The risk in this approach is that
services may be disintegrated and isolated from one another thus giving the management hard time
to fathom the big picture and to make the right decisions. Should this be the case, the impacts these
individual parts perform on the organizational processes becomes minimal. At least when compared
to the situation where the management has the transparent process to deal with. This may result in
the whole digitalization phenomena being judged unsuccessful or even not useful at all.
The city of Tampere is continuously developing the reporting aiming to improve the productivity
of the public services in all the service areas. The objectives are set in the city strategy. This paper is
focuses on the social and welfare (SoWe) sector. The sector has decided to set six pilots for
productivity observations and development: home care for the elderly, child protection services,
living arrangement services, health centres, services for the disabled, and a welfare centre. The pilots
aim to find out how the reporting in various levels of management could be improved to optimally
support the managerial function. The visualization is to be developed and included in the
observation at a later stage. Similarly, the need, the choice, and the use of tools is to be discussed.
Identifying and assessing the various angles to be included in the decision-making process is not
necessarily easy (Ylinen and Pekkola, 2018). The branches need their own approach and the right
measures observed in their context, according to the individual objectives. There may also be other
types of implications caused by e.g. the changes in the political climate, citizens’ expectations, or the
process improvements. These developments may affect the impact evaluation of a digitalization tool
or initiative. There is thinking to be done when the measures and their visualization is considered.
This motivates our paper. We answer the question: “What are the measures the management
needs to have data of in order to manage?” by studying a mid-size city in Finland, and in particular
the SoWe sector. The aim is to learn so that the possible expansion of measures is managerially, but
also financially, feasible and justified. A number of key stakeholders were interviewed for their
perceptions about the facts related to this issue. The results of a qualitative study show impacts, with
a need for explicitly articulated goals. Section 2 presents our theoretical background. Sections 3 and
4 present the research setting and methods, and our findings. Section 5 discusses the results.
2. Theoretical Background
A city operation is a multifaceted entity with a large number of tasks. To make a city administration
run smoothly, one needs to consider development schemes emerging from different sources with
different aspirations (Aichholzer and Schmutzer, 2000). The general management is advised to
consider a number of areas, such as the community and the environment, economical viewpoint,
education and culture issues, social and healthcare areas (Finnish association for municipalities,
“Kuntaliitto.fi” 2018). Each administrative area has its own practices, processes, and personnel.
Similarly, the management, even if they do have similar features, the information and process
beneath the surface is different in each area. The requirement of the digital innovation is present in
today’s public sector and its management (Bason, 2018; Demirkan et al., 2016). This presents
requirements for the management. The knowledge needs should be well thought of and justified.
Finding unified rules and solutions may prove to be difficult, case-specific to say the least.
Reflections & Viewpoints 273
Digital transformation refers often to the renewal of the business model. This includes different
ways of executing the daily operation. Digital transformation deals with the actual operation and
also later resource allocation (Agutter et al., 2017). Changing the logic in the operation influences
not only operational activities and functions but also the very processes. This manifests itself also in
the organizational culture (Wirtz, 2016). The change into bottom-up thinking may prove to be
advisable (Lönn and Uppström, 2013; McDermott et al., 2015). While the process is developed,
simultaneously the commitment of the employees may be developed (Agutter et al., 2017). The
extent of digitalization and the success of its implementation depends largely on the attitude
towards renewals and the organization’s readiness to promote and participate in developing itself
(Ding et al., 2014). Organizations with such features are prone to gain benefits from novel
experiences.
Merely maintaining the level of services may prove to be difficult when the resources are
scrutinized (Arnaboldi et al., 2015). The many departments need attention and development, while
the resources are decreasing. At the same time, however, the service offering should be improved,
developed (ibid). Moe et al. (2014) shows the importance of personnel and their readiness to use new
services. There has been also arguments for need for better allocation of resources in providing
public services (Fox, 2002). Both mentioned perspectives aim at increased productivity and
improvement of the services in the public sector.
When developing organizations, the management need their employees to continue to be active
and productive in their everyday routines. This stresses the significance of managerial skills, the
need for understanding of the workplace dynamics (Beck and Cowan, 2014; Hellsten and Pekkola,
2019). To commit the employees and ensure their support to the novel way of operating is assured
to lower potential resistance (Fernandez and Rainey, 2006). In best case scenarios, this results in
beneficial outcomes and improved operation (Huitt, 2003; Zhou and George, 2001). The openings in
implementing new technological solutions are made to improve the services, to streamline the
organizational processes (Bongiorno et al., 2018). This surely includes equally the management.
Managing digitalization initiative is not easy, the organizational transparency and full use of
more holistic approach necessitates a different management approach (Goldfinch, 2007). To develop
measures for assessing the impacts and comparing the results is equally challenging (Baily et al.,
2008; Srai and Lorentz, 2019). Differences in perspectives, actions, and cultures make this
management task difficult and needing qualitative, often subjective measures.?
3. Research Setting
This paper covers a case study (Yin, 2008) of a city with some 240 000 inhabitants, a third largest in
Finland. A hub in the area that attracts new inhabitants by its schools and university and vivid
industry. Tampere employs some 14000 people, of which a little over 10 000 are employees in the
service area of wellbeing (e.g. nurses, nannies, doctors, teachers, support personnel, etc.). The area
of wellbeing is divided further into social and welfare (SoWe) sector and education and culture
services. This paper scrutinizes the SoWe sector. That particular service area, the two sectors
together, is responsible for 66% of the city’s personnel costs. (www.tampere.fi) The SoWe sector
274 Reflections & Viewpoints
together with education and cultural services covers e.g. services for the elderly, pre-schools,
grammar schools, health services, housing services, and various supportive services mandated by
the national legislation. Not only the technological developments but also the legislation presents
the public sector with new requirements regarding the services offered (A statement from the
Finnish government, “Hallituksen esitys sote-uudistukseksi ja uudistusta koskeva lainsäädäntö
etenee eduskuntaan -,” n.d.). The operation, and indeed the management, is required to comply to
these.
The stakeholders have varying needs and capabilities regarding the technologies they use and
the reports the systems may produce. The complexity of the sector presents the management with a
multitude of sources for the empirical material for the decision making. The organization gathers
data, but not necessarily uses it. The newer way of operating resembles more the ‘bottom-up’
approach based on the pilots that were undertaken in the areas. This work is ongoing. Another
feature that emerged, is the wish for automatization also in other areas of operation besides just the
financial data. The pilots aim to develop the managerial reporting, i.e. digital services to ease the
everyday life and the development of the operation. For the inhabitants of the city indirectly increase
wellbeing and security by enabling better flow of data and improved management.
The researcher 1, being a member of the case organization, is working currently in planning
function of the city’s SoWe sector. She is well informed over the situation and the needs of the
decision makers as well as the possibilities of the information systems and their users. She is well
acquainted with the existing plans and documentation. The basis of the study is formed by thorough
knowledge of the city’s documentation regarding the SoWe sector and the plans therein. To better
understand the bigger picture and to fully fathom the needs of the decision makers, a set of 24
interviews was conducted twice to collect qualitative data from the city’s SoWe sector. The themes
emerged from the area and the objective of the activity; what is needed for a transparent and wide-
scoped reporting. The interviewees covered also the city’s financial sector experts in addition to the
personnel from the SoWe sector. The key personnel of the city administration were interviewed to
illuminate the financial reporting and to shed light on the city administration’s overarching
viewpoint.
The SoWe sector is divided into five service areas introduced in the next chapter. Four of these
were covered in the interviews. The fifth is formed only from the beginning of 2021. The interviewees
ranged from the director via the service managers to the operative level. The interviews concentrated
on the management of the function, its resources and effectiveness.
The data analysis was performed following the interpretive research approach (Walsham, 2006).
The first researcher went through the material to gain an overview of the topic. She acquainted
herself with the issues related to potential impacts and formed an overall picture of the proceedings.
Process diagrams and stakeholder maps were drawn and iterated with the city representatives of
the relevant offices. The second author supported the compilation of the study. In the final stage the
findings were collectively discussed.
Reflections & Viewpoints 275
4. Findings
Successful management of the whole social and welfare (SoWe) sector requires data flow from
various sources. This may be drilled down to a case-specific level. In order to gain benefits from the
various systems, the measures needed to be re-thought. The productivity was divided into three
categories: the main indicators, the complimentary indicators and the explanatory indicators. The
indicators are used differently at this point; some are used in the sub-levels of the city administration
and some are on the highest, city-level. Some are still being developed. These indicators are partly
developed by the city’s main financial office and partly in the individual sector, in which case the
financial office was in an advisory role to oversee the proceedings.
The main indicators include various monetary measures; the operating costs, employment costs,
service acquisition costs, net costs. All the four are calculated to euros per inhabitant, which is easy
to follow. A fifth indicator, productivity of service, is still being developed. This is meant to be
calculated by finding out the output/input, or return on investment. The centric observation point
being economical approach and the cost-efficiency of the operation.
The complimentary indicators aim to measure the quality of services and their effectivity. The
measurables in this category are the customer experience, the satisfaction towards the digital
operating channels and the cost efficiency. The measures in this category are still being developed
as their qualitative nature is more novel and merits closer scrutinizing and more thorough planning.
Similarly, the way these measures could be used in order to support the management function
optimally, needs further thinking.
The explanatory indicators are both qualitative and quantitative by nature. There are the digital
operating channels, efficiency of procurement, procurement know-how, the use of premis-
es/spaces, absence due to illness -%, employee experience (net promoter score, NPS), employer
experience (eNPS), and productivity improving projects and initiatives. The measures are followed
case-specifically in dedicated meters.
Not to make the case overly simple, one needs to consider the many areas and aspects there are
to the SoWe sector. The knowledge-based management is executed in areas of which the pilots were.
The services for elderly, divided further into home care and living arrangement services. The
services for children, youth and young families, of which the child protection services were
mentioned before as one focal feature in this area. In this area there are both social and health-related
services under observation. Psycho-social services is another area of which the pilot area is the
services for the disabled. Housing services and living arrangements are in this area too. The health
area covers the health centres, which has a pilot, as well as dental health services. The hospital
services are as their own category. Considering this list, it becomes evident that the management in
this broad field needs to have tools well thought of and then equally carefully executed.
The ultimate goal of digitalization is to offer improved services for the inhabitants of the city and
the city employees (Flak and Solli-Saether, 2013; Paivarinta et al., 2007). In our case, the measures
touched this by enabling better managerial practices as an instant benefit. Broader understanding
from different perspectives supports this. This, in turn, helped to comprehend the role of each area
276 Reflections & Viewpoints
among others. Development of the thinking patterns includes the managerial function and the
subordinate issues. Individual tasks are to be reflected through the understanding of the operations
and the city strategy. The areas rethink their processes to meet the needs for the management.
5. Conclusion
One major outcome of the development scheme this paper is based on is the city’s realization of
needing to observe the proceedings more broadly than before. To rethink the indicators and their
meanings gives wider perspective on the proceedings. The initiative is seen as individual parts
combining into one. The progress and the attitude towards the innovations at large were perceived
as a positive development. The sector is now more transparent for management and the
management can rely on the data they have for the decision-making.
The model being used in this undertaking resembles roughly the information management pro-
cess model (Choo, 2002). The model entails information needs as a basis for further development.
The following step of defining the storage issue, the various systems and data-warehousing was
dealt with as some changes needed to be made in the existing systems. The refinement of the data
flow is the next step based on a well justified definition of the information needs. This step starts to
bring content to the data repository from the previous step. Knowledge products and their
dissemination are in the midst of the process. The next step, partly simultaneous with the previous
one, visualizing the information content is the point that is the next undertaking within the city’s
SoWe sector. After this phase the use of the information products is something that the management
does. They make decisions based on the best possible information and changes these decisions into
actions. The question is, how good can the information be?
The current toolset, information systems, for information handling and the possibilities it pro-
vides are not yet quite final. This is indeed the next step the city’s SoWe sector is taking. To consider
and plan, how the information could be visualized into even more useful form. There is a need for
drilling down to the data, more useful visualizations etc. To accomplish this, a need emerges for
both knowledge of the operation and technical skills and understanding of the tools in use.
The measures need to communicate but also implement the city’s strategy, and also to formulate
a mission for the departments. The goalsetting and defining the objectives for any digitalization
undertakings is important. This needs to be done simultaneously with the planning. The objectives
need to be defined individually for different parts of the sector. The needed actions may not be easily
compared with one another; thus, the same metrics are not necessarily possible to be used in all the
targets.
The contribution is two-fold. Firstly, we show areas of interest for the management of social and
welfare sector and also measures to be considered. The transparency improved and the under-
standing about the operations was clearer. Secondly, we point out the next important step for the
smart city and/or digitalization initiatives. We argue that planning and executing the initiatives is
difficult since they all require different goals, actions, and measures.
Reflections & Viewpoints 277
There are limitations to this presentation: this is just one case of SoWe sector, and this is made in
its environment in Finland. This needs to be taken into account when considering whether any major
generalizations are to be made based on this paper. Moreover, the transparency and wide scope are
needed to understand a working environment. This in turn may be seen as a prerequisite for a
successful development scheme. Further and deeper research is needed to verify the findings and
take stand on the actual measuring of the operation, which was here left out. Having said that, we
argue that it is plausible to assume that similar starting point will provide comparable results.
References
Agutter, C., van Hove, S., Steinberg, R., England, R., 2017. VeriSM-A service management approach for the
digital age. Van Haren.
Aichholzer, G., Schmutzer, R., 2000. Organizational challenges to the development of electronic government,
in: Proceedings 11th International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications. Presented
at the Proceedings 11th International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications, pp.
379–383. https://doi.org/10.1109/DEXA.2000.875054
Arnaboldi, M., Lapsley, I., Steccolini, I., 2015. Performance management in the public sector: The ultimate
challenge. Financ. Account. Manag. 31, 1–22.
Baily, P., Farmer, D., Crocker, B., Jessop, D., Jones, D., 2008. Procurement principles and management.
Pearson Education.
Bakıcı, T., Almirall, E., Wareham, J., 2013. A smart city initiative: the case of Barcelona. J. Knowl. Econ. 4,
135–148.
Bason, C., 2018. Leading public sector innovation: Co-creating for a better society. Policy Press.
Beck, D.E., Cowan, C., 2014. Spiral dynamics: Mastering values, leadership and change. John Wiley & Sons.
Borins, S., 2002. Leadership and innovation in the public sector. Leadersh. Organ. Dev. J.
De Vries, H., Bekkers, V., Tummers, L., 2016. Innovation in the public sector: A systematic review and future
research agenda. Public Adm. 94, 146–166.
Demirkan, H., Spohrer, J.C., Welser, J.J., 2016. Digital innovation and strategic transformation. IT Prof. 18,
14–18.
Ding, F., Li, D., George, J.F., 2014. Investigating the effects of IS strategic leadership on organizational
benefits from the perspective of CIO strategic roles. Inf. Manage. 51, 865–879.
Fernandez, S., Rainey, H.G., 2006. Managing successful organizational change in the public sector. Public
Adm. Rev. 66, 168–176.
Fox, K.J., 2002. Efficiency in the Public Sector - Google-kirjat. Springer Science+Business Medi, LLC, New
York.
Goldfinch, S., 2007. Pessimism, computer failure, and information systems development in the public sector.
Public Adm. Rev. 67, 917–929.
278 Reflections & Viewpoints
Hallituksen esitys sote-uudistukseksi ja uudistusta koskeva lainsäädäntö etenee eduskuntaan - [WWW
Document], n.d. . Soteuudistus. URL https://soteuudistus.fi/-/1271139/hallituksen-esitys-sote-
uudistukseksi-ja-uudistusta-koskeva-lainsaadanto-etenee-eduskuntaan (accessed 3.16.21).
Hellsten, P., Pekkola, S., 2019. The Impact Levels of Digitalization Initiatives. EGOV-CeDEM-EPart 2019 109.
Higgins, B., 2017. Reinventing human services: Community-and family-centered practice. Routledge.
Huitt, W., 2003. A systems model of human behavior. Educ. Psychol. Interact.
Karagoz, Y., Whiteside, N., Korthaus, A., 2020. Context matters: enablers and barriers to knowledge sharing
in Australian public sector ICT projects. J. Knowl. Manag.
Lecomber, A., Tatnall, A., 2014. Project management for IT professionals: Education and training issues, in:
IFIP Conference on Information Technology in Educational Management. Springer, pp. 12–24.
Lindgren, I., Jansson, G., 2013. Electronic services in the public sector: A conceptual framework. Gov. Inf. Q.
30, 163–172.
Lönn, C.-M., Uppström, E., 2013. Process management challenges in Swedish public sector: a bottom up
initiative, in: International Conference on Electronic Government. Springer, pp. 212–223.
McDermott, A.M., Hamel, L.M., Steel, D., Flood, P.C., Mkee, L., 2015. Hybrid healthcare governance for
improvement? Combining top-down and bottom-up approaches to public sector regulation. Public
Adm. 93, 324–344.
Moe, C.E., 2014. Research on Public Procurement of Information Systems: The Need for a Process Approach.
Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 34, 78.
Srai, J.S., Lorentz, H., 2019. Developing design principles for the digitalisation of purchasing and supply
management. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 25, 78–98.
Tatnall Victoria, A., Davey, B., 2013. Major eGovernment Projects in Health, Education and Transport in
Victoria.
Taylor Buck, N., While, A., 2017. Competitive urbanism and the limits to smart city innovation: The UK
Future Cities initiative. Urban Stud. 54, 501–519.
Wirtz, B.W., 2016. Business model management, 2nd ed. German University of Administrative Sciences
Speyer, Speyr.
Zhou, J., George, J.M., 2001. When job dissatisfaction leads to creativity: Encouraging the expression of voice.
Acad. Manage. J. 44, 682–696.
About the Authors
Pasi Hellsten
Pasi Hellsten, PhD. Holds a position of a university lecturer at the Tampere University, Finland. Dr. Hellsten
is currently head of degree programs and a team leader, and also a researcher in the NOVI Knowledge
research group. Dr. Hellsten’s research interests lie with information systems and their renewal. He is also
interested in change management, business intelligence and tools thereof, knowledge management and
Reflections & Viewpoints 279
processes. Dr. Hellsten has supervised numerous master’s and bachelor’s thesis and is currently supervising
two post-grad students.
Kristiina Lumme
Kristiina Lumme, Master of Science in Economics and Business Administration, holds a position of a Planning
Manager and head of team concentrating on knowledge management in the social and health services in the
City of Tampere, Finland. She has strong interest in developing measuring especially managerial accounting,
productivity and effectiveness. Mrs. Lumme also currently works at the Finland’s health and social services
reform in the Pirkanmaa region. There her main task is to develop knowledge management as well as create
new knowledge products on a regional level.