=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-3139/paper08
|storemode=property
|title=A Reference Framework for Agile Transformation in Public Administration
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3139/paper08.pdf
|volume=Vol-3139
|authors=Hanna Looks
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/caise/Looks22
}}
==A Reference Framework for Agile Transformation in Public Administration==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3139/paper08.pdf
A Reference Framework for Agile Transformation in Public
Administration
Hanna Looks 1
1
University of Seville, Department of Computer Languages and Systems, Sevilla, Spain
Abstract
Times of crisis increase the workload in public administrations due to the requirements of
citizens or short-term changes in legislation. Public administrations must have the ability to
react flexibly to changes. Furthermore, digitization projects are being implemented and these
are leading to an increasing focus on project work, which confronts public administration
employees with a different kind of working and corresponding challenges. The introduction of
agile process models and agile practices can reduce these problems. For an agile
transformation, public administrations need support based on agile values towards a targeted
implementation of agile methods. The designed artefact is a reference framework that supports
agile transformation in the context of public administration.
Keywords 1
reference framework, agile transformation, public administration, project work, dimensions of
agility, continuous improvement
1. Motivation
The past has shown that public administrations have to adapt their working methods in order to remain
capable of acting in crisis situations, such as the prevailing Covid-19 pandemic or refugee crises.
Digitalization is also increasingly becoming a focus in public administrations in order to maintain a
certain ability to act in these situations. The implementation of corresponding digitalization projects
means that public administration employees increasingly have to organize themselves in projects and a
different type of cooperation is emerging. The work of public administrations is often characterized by
strong hierarchies, a lack of communication and a lack of transparency [1]. In order to overcome the
prevailing challenges in public administrations, flexibility is needed, which can be achieved with the
introduction of a more agile way of working. Adopting agile practices promises improvements in skills,
such as handling changing priorities or increasing productivity [2]. Furthermore, agile values promote
a culture of continuous communication [3].
Agile process models, such as Scrum [4] or Kanban [5] are known from software development and
are increasingly being used (in an adapted way) in other areas, such as marketing, human resources,
and sales [2].
Agile transformation is seen as highly promising for the implementation of e-government projects
in public administration, as the paradigm shift from a plan-oriented to a human-oriented approach
enables a much more user-oriented development of digital products. Through a high level of
communication and a high affinity for change with regard to requirements, the agile paradigm could
reduce the risk of e-government project failure [6]. An introduction of agile working methods is thus
accompanied by a change in the value system within an organization. In a plan-oriented environment,
the focus is on processes and the success of a project is then measured on the basis of compliance with
a previously defined plan. This way of working is nowadays often found in public administrations. In
Proceedings of the Doctoral Consortium Papers Presented at the 34th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering
(CAiSE 2022), June 06–10, 2022, Leuven, Belgium
EMAIL: hanna.looks@iwt2.org (H. Looks)
ORCID: 0000-0001-8196-9603 (H. Looks)
© 2022 Copyright for this paper by its authors.
Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
CEUR Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS.org)
contrast to the plan-oriented approach, agile is a value-oriented way of working in which the focus is
on people. In this environment, cooperation takes place at eye level and hierarchies are less important;
rather, the focus is on common success.
This paper gives an overview of the research goals of my PhD thesis and presents the further steps
to develop a reference framework to support an agile transformation in public administration. The paper
is structured as follows: Section 2 presents the objective and research questions proposed for the thesis.
Section 3 deals with the preliminary research and Section 4 outlines the research methodology and the
associated individual steps in the research process.
2. Objective and Research Questions
The main research objective of the PhD thesis is to develop a reference framework for an agile
transformation of public administration. Based on the reference framework the public administrations
will receive support in the implementation of an agile transformation. The development of a reference
framework for public administration to support the agile transformation requires knowledge about the
work of public administrations, the current implementation of digitization projects and the challenges
public administrations face in project work. In previous research, we were already able to gain some
insights in this regard, which form a basis for further research.
For the development of a reference framework, different steps were defined, guided by the research
questions presented in the following:
RQ1 - What are the challenges in project work in public administration?
RQ2 - What factors do exist that support an agile team in public administration to be successful?
RQ3 - What dimensions do exist to capture the agility based on agile values?
RQ4 - What approaches do exist to support the agile transformation?
RQ5 - How can a reference framework be developed to support the agile transformation of public
administration?
RQ6 - How can the developed reference framework be applied in the real world?
3. Related Work and Preliminary Research
The analysis of related work reveals that there is a need for support in agile transformation. So far, we
have not been able to find any work that focuses on supporting the agile transformation of a public
administration in a targeted way and based on agile values.
In 2018, Mergel et al. [7] conducted a systematic literature review on agile management and
identified four areas of agile application (agile software development, agile project management, agile
acquisition, and agile evaluation) in public administration and identified that the category of agile
evaluation is widely unexplored.
Torrecilla et al. [8] were already able to present the successful use of agile methods by presenting
the experience of applying an agile framework based on Scrum [4] to software development in public
administration in Spain. Karaj and Little [9] also showed how the introduction of Lean and Kanban [10]
changed the way of working in a public administration in Canada.
In our preliminary research, we conducted surveys in Germany in 2018 [1] and 2021 (paper under
review) with employees of public administration to determine the project approach to digitalization
projects in public administrations. The survey results showed that there is currently a low level of user
participation in the implementation of e-government and digitization projects. In both surveys,
participants named “insufficient communication” and “unclear requirements” as reasons for the failure
of projects. Furthermore, we defined six dimensions of agility based on the agile values by comparing
the agile values with the traditional values. Based on the agile expression of the defined value pairs,
there were six dimensions: communicative, change-affinity, iterative, self-organized, product-driven
and improvement-oriented were developed [11]. We were already able to show that the challenges from
the survey [1] can be assigned to the six dimensions of agility [11], [6] and that an agile way of working
is suitable for this context to overcome the challenges [6].
Based on these dimensions, a questionnaire was developed to measure the current state of agile
transformation at the team level in these six dimensions and to take into account the user-specific
context of the participants [11].
Based on an expert survey in three iterations, we were already able to show that the questionnaire
can be adapted to the context of public administration (paper under review). Subsequently, in a first
case study, we used the questionnaire in three teams of a public administration and were able to show
that the six dimensions of agility we defined are measurable; but at the same time, dysfunctionalities
within the teams can be uncovered that have an influence on the agile transformation.
We have increasingly recognized in our preliminary research that public administrations need to be
supported for a cultural change based on agile values and a start to agile transformation. The agile
culture leads to a transformation of the traditional organizational principles of bureaucracy, as it values
individual team members and teams and requires responsible discretion and great flexibility in
organizational procedures and principles [12]. Therefore we have already developed a prototypical 7-
step process model to support the agile transformation in public administrations [13], [14].
4. Research Methodology and Progress
This PhD thesis is inspired by the Design Science (DS) research methodology of Peffers et al. [15]. The
Design Science method is suitable for the creation of the artefact “reference framework for an agile
transformation of public administration” due to its iterative approach. Figure 1 presents an overview of
the steps that are to be conducted within the PhD thesis.
Figure 1: Design science research methodology and progress
Step 1 identifies the problem by conducting a survey in three countries and clarifies the motivation.
Steps 2 to 4 are carried out iteratively, if appropriate. The four steps described above are discussed in
more detail below.
4.1. Identify Problem and Motivate (related to RQ1)
In the first step, project work in public administrations is to be analyzed internationally. In order to
define a reference framework for public administration, public administrations must be analyzed across
countries and the challenges that arise in the project work must be classified.
Based on the results, it can be determined which challenges public administrations in digitization
projects are faced with in their project work.
In the development of a reference framework to support public administration in e-government and
digitization projects, it is important to identify whether agility can resolve the challenges that arise and
represent a suitable approach for public administration, as has already been shown for Germany [6].
In order to be able to conduct such an analysis, an existing questionnaire, which has already been
developed for conducting two surveys in Germany in 2018 and 2021, will be optimized and used. The
application of the questionnaire showed the need for optimization to improve the wording of items.
First, the optimization should be carried out and then applied in the countries of Germany, Spain, and
Poland.
4.2. Define Objectives of a Solution (related to RQ2, RQ3 and RQ4)
The definition of objectives of a solution and the associated learning for the development of a reference
framework can be divided into three steps, where different research methods are to be applied. These
steps should also be iterative when appropriate.
Successful agile teams in public administrations (related to RQ2)
The research question RQ2 will be answered by conducting a Systematic Literature Review (SLR). For
the SLR, the guidelines according to Kitchenham and Charters [16] are adopted. The SLR was guided
by the following RQs:
RQ2.1 - What is a successful agile team?
RQ2.2 - What is a successful agile team in public administrations?
RQ2.3 - Do factors exist that prevent the public administration and the project team from working in
an agile way?
The first step is to determine what a successful agile team is, which factors contribute to this success,
and which factors are used to measure success (RQ 2.1). In order to specialize this further for the context
of public administration in this PhD thesis, we concentrate on the second step of answering the research
question RQ2.2.
In order to identify which factors have an influence on a project team and the organization, an
identification should already take place within the framework of the SLR to be carried out (RQ2.3).
The identified influencing factors contribute to the definition of patterns, which represent targeted
support in the agile transformation.
To determine the agile maturity of a successful project team, in the following step, the agile maturity
of a selected project team defined as successful can be measured within the defined dimensions of
agility with the help of our questionnaire. Based on the findings, target values in the dimensions can be
derived for other project teams. Furthermore, a prioritization of the dimensions for achieving a high
agile maturity within the transformation process can be derived based on the values achieved.
Derivation of the dimensions of agility and mapping with agile methods (related to RQ3)
In our research so far, we have identified that conveying an agile mindset is essential for value-oriented
project collaboration in public administration (paper under review). Agile values, such as trust,
transparency and cooperation at eye level are already recognized as important by the public
administration, but are not established within the project teams in the public administration yet (paper
under review). To achieve an understanding of agile values and prepare the way for a different way of
working, we have recognized that defining dimensions of agility is a useful approach (paper under
review). This value change as a particular challenge and influences all collaboration in the development
of digital products in public administration. The experience of the last few years of research shows that
the defined dimensions of agility are suitable for conveying an agile way of working and building an
agile mindset. The dimensions we have defined are initially based on a comparison of agile and
traditional values [11] and will be derived in the next step using a Delphi Study.
With the help of the dimensions of agility, a common understanding of agility can be created, and
they represent an important aspect for the further development of the questionnaire for measuring
agility. The division into dimensions can be used to provide more targeted support for the agile
transformation.
In a further step of the PhD thesis, these dimensions of agility could later be mapped with agile
methods, so that a targeted use of methods can also take place.
For the Delphi study, experts from the purely agile context should first be selected in order to focus
on agility and to develop a definition of the dimensions of agility based on agile values. Since the
reference framework to be developed is to be applied in the context of public administration, experts
from companies that carry out e-government and digitization projects with public administration,
executives from public administrations and employees from the digitization areas in public
administrations will be included in further steps. In a further step, the defined dimensions of agility
should then be assigned to corresponding methods in order to be able to achieve an improvement within
the respective dimension through the targeted use of agile methods.
Approaches to support an agile transformation (related to RQ4)
Based on RQ4, expert interviews will be conducted to analyze which approaches are already being used
to support the agile transformation of public administration. The aim is to analyze patterns as well as
best practices and methods that are already in use. Furthermore a team is influenced by the organization
and therefore it is important to examine how high the influence of the overall organization is on the
respective dimensions of agility.
The factors influencing a project team in a public administration result from the answer to research
question RQ2.3. The factors influencing a project team in a public administration in e-government and
digitization projects and the organization are to be identified as part of the SLR to be conducted. These
findings will be used to derive patterns to support the agile transformation process in the project teams.
The internationally occurring challenges within digitization projects identified from the inventories
conducted in different countries are to be assigned to the defined dimensions of agility in order to derive
corresponding patterns for a successful agile transformation process on the basis of this. Appropriate
patterns will represent a component within the reference framework.
4.3. Design and Development (related to RQ5)
In this phase, the artefact “reference framework for agile transformation in public administrations” will
be created. An agile transformation of public administration requires a targeted approach and support.
The findings from the defined research questions (RQ1-4) are used to derive the components of the
reference framework, which will support this agile transformation. The reference framework will be
designed, which is then evaluated iteratively through expert interviews.
4.4. Evaluation (related to RQ6)
The reference framework is to be established in the real world to support the agile transformation of a
public administration and thus enable an agile way of working.
We intend to conduct case studies to evaluate the reference framework. Prior to this, appropriate
metrics need to be defined in order to evaluate the successful application of the reference framework.
The case studies will be conducted in a European context. With this approach, both the methods
developed within this PhD thesis are evaluated and the reference framework itself is validated with the
individual methods as a whole.
5. Conclusion
This paper presents the approach of my PhD thesis. The main objective of this thesis is to develop a
reference framework to support the agile transformation in public administration.
Based on the defined research questions to be answered in the PhD thesis, this PhD thesis contributes
to advancing the digitalization of public administration with the help of an agile transformation and to
improving collaboration within project teams in digitization projects with a focus on agile values. The
reference framework is intended to be a kind of recommendation for action to support public
administrations in handling the challenges of project work. Both the targeted use of agile methods and
the communication of the agile mindset are central aspects of the transformation.
In an initial phase, the challenges of project work in public administrations, which the employees
face, will be identified in the European context. Furthermore, the implementation of an SLR will
identify when an agile team is successful in public administrations. In addition, an analysis of factors
influencing agile teams will be integrated into the SLR, which are an important aspect for the future
development of patterns. Furthermore, with the help of a Delphi study, dimensions of agility are derived
and mapping with suitable methods is carried out. Using the methods and an already developed
questionnaire to measure agility at the team level, the current level of maturity within a dimension can
be determined and the need for improvement can be identified.
In the next step, patterns are defined on the basis of the findings in order to support the agile
transformation in a targeted manner and to develop a suitable reference framework on this basis. The
development of the reference framework will be followed by case studies in different countries for
evaluation purposes.
The creation of a reference framework to support the agile transformation in public administrations
contributes to overcoming the challenges in the implementation of digitalization projects and to
establishing a different type of cooperation based on agile values.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my supervisors María José Escalona and Eva-Maria Schön for their collaboration
and their valuable feedback. This research is partially supported by NICO (Nuevas Iniciativas para el
Aseguramiento Temprano de la Calidad Funcional y no Funcional en Procesos y Productos Software
Orientados al Usuario) (PID2019-105455GB-C31), which is funded by Spanish Ministry of Science,
Innovation and Universities.
References
[1] H. Looks, E.-M. Schön & J. Thomaschewski, Agile Projekte in öffentlichen Verwaltungen - Eine
Bestandsaufnahme. In: Hess, S. & Fischer, H. (Hrsg.), Mensch und Computer 2018 - Usability
Professionals. Bonn: Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. und German UPA e.V., pp. 415-426,
(2018), doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.18420/muc2018-up-0156.
[2] Version One Inc.: 14th Annual State of Agile Report, (2020).
[3] K. Beck, M. Beedle, A. Van Bennekum, A. Cockburn, W. Cunningham, M. Fowler, J. Grenning,
J. Highsmith, A. Hunt, R. Jeffries, J. Kern, B. Marick, R. C. Martin, S. Mellor, K. Schwaber, J.
Sutherland, D. Thomas, Manifesto for Agile Software Development, (2001), URL:
https://agilemanifesto.org/iso/de/manifesto.html.
[4] K. Schwaber, J. Sutherland, The Scrum Guide, (2020).
[5] D. J. Anderson, Kanban - Successful Evolutionary Change for your Technology Business, Sequim,
Washington: Blue Hole Press., (2010).
[6] H. Looks, J. Fangmann, J. Thomaschewski, E.-M. Schön, Agilität und Nutzerzentrierung in der
öffentlichen Verwaltung. In: Fischer, H. & Hess, S. (Hrsg.), Mensch und Computer 2019 -
Usability Professionals. Bonn: Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. und German UPA e.V., (2019),
doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.18420/muc2019-up-0301.
[7] I. Mergel, Y. Gong, J. Bertot, Agile government: Systematic literature review and future research,
Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 291–298, (2018).
[8] C. J. Torrecilla-Salinas, J. Sedeño, M. J. Escalona, M. Mejías, Agile in Public Administration:
Oxymoron or reality? An experience report, in Conference on Advanced Information Systems
Engineering (CAiSE 2013), vol. 1017, pp. 1–8, (2013).
[9] A. Karaj, J. Little, Transforming a Public Sector Organization From Stone Age to Agile, (2013),
doi: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/AGILE.2013.30.
[10] D. J. Anderson, Kanban - Successful Evolutionary Change for your Technology Business, Sequim,
Washington: Blue Hole Press., (2010).
[11] H. Looks, J. Fangmann, J. Thomaschewski, MJ. Escalona, E.-M. Schön, Towards a Standardized
Questionnaire for Measuring Agility at Team Level. In: Gregory P., Lassenius C., Wang X.,
Kruchten P. (eds) Agile Processes in Software Engineering and Extreme Programming. XP 2021.
Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 419. Springer, Cham., (2021), doi:
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78098-2_5.
[12] I. Mergel, S. Ganapati, AB Whitford, Agile: a new way of governing, Public Admin Rev 81:161–
165, (2020).
[13] J. Fangmann, H. Looks, J. Thomaschewski, E.-M. Schön, Agile transformation in e-government
projects, in 15th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI’2020), no.
June, 24-27, pp. 1–4, (2020), doi: https://doi.org/10.23919%2FCISTI49556.2020.9141094.
[14] H. Looks, J. Fangmann, J. Thomaschewski, E.-M. Schön, Towards a process model for agile
transformation in e-government projects. J. Inf. Syst. Eng. Manage, (2021).
[15] K. Peffers, T. Tuunanen, MA Rothenberger, S. Chatterjee, A design science research methodology
for information systems research, Journal of Management Information Systems. 24, 45–77, (2008).
[16] B. Kitchenham, S. Charters: Guidelines for performing Systematic Literature Reviews in Software
Engineering, (2007).