Computerization of Public Sector Essay

Introduction In the midst of the Global Financial Crisis we found the Mediterranean states, Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy, being troubled by serious fiscal issues, great deficit on their balance sheets, characterized by low competitiveness and enormous public debt. Over the last year of the GFC the policies that had been followed for those countries are mainly focused around the creation of fiscal surpass by using horizontal and cross cutting methods. The results of those tactics after almost 4 years of austerity measures are far from favorable. One reason for that is that the IMF and EU were unable to look deep into the problem. Their primary target was to found a swift and superficial solution, mainly because of the pressure from the markets and political factors. On this research we will focus our interest deeper into the problem and attempt reaching the core of it. One very important aspect of the crisis that the mentioned organizations have not taken into account is the efficiency of the pu blic sector on the problematic countries. If the public sector lacks on efficiency then the results would be phenomenon like corruption, unorganized departments, tax evasion and absence of communication between agencies. One great factor that determines the efficiency of a state is the computerization of its public sector. And that is what our research will be focused on. Main literature used on the research To reach the needed results we have to find the proper literature, we have to use that as a base for our research and to help us on extracting our conclusions. We need to analyze the structure of the Public Sector Management on those countries and to learn how important the role of computerization is on an efficient government. That is exactly what (Dunleavy, 2006) tried to show us. How vital computerization is for the public administrator and its role on key factors like taxation, decentralization, bureaucracy and public corruption. Another aspect we have to use on our literature research is the quality on public sector. What is its relation with a computerized state how is affected by that. Quality is an important element of a successful computerization process, their bonds are strong, quality is considered fundamental for a public sector to become more efficient and to increase its performance (Pollitt and Bouckaert, 1995). Performance is another important factor that has a crucial role on a healthy public sector. It helps to increase its effectiveness, that leads to a more transparent and innovative system (Bruijn, 2006). After we successfully incorporate those components into the public administration we would be able to observe the impact of computerization on the economic stability of a country (Snellen et al., 1989). Advantages of a computerized public sector If we look into the literature we will see that the Mediterranean states that are deadlocked, actually apart from their deficit they have one more common thing, their corruption ratings (Transparency international, 2011; OECD, 2011). Therefore we observe a great proportion of tax evasion, and restrict bureaucracy (World Bank, 2012) and low competitiveness against other states (Klaus Schwab, 2012). The advantage of a computerized public sector, apart from the efficiency (Pollitt and Bouckaert, 1995), is the addition on effectiveness too (Willcocks and Harrow, 1992). Moreover we survey a great improvement on transparency (OECD, 2011) and on accessibility of the services as well as on productivity (Hayes, 1977). All the previews factors are on a sequence, first of all the immediate reaction of a computerized sector is to improve its quality (Pollitt and Bouckaert, 1995), that is conceivable through an â€Å"adaption† of new public management standards (Hood, 1998), next step is the improvement of performance (Margetts, 1999);(Dunleavy, 2006). Moreover after we succeed on adapting quality and performance into the public sector, the effectiveness (GAO,1991) and the efficiency occurs (Willcocks and Harrow, 1992). As a result an economic stability will commence (HMSO, 1983);(Klein, 1988). All the above have shown that will result on a better tax administrator (Snellen et al., 1989);(Naur, 1974) and have as an outcome the better taxation (Margetts, 1999). Still the most important thing that gets neutralized is the political interception (Herring, 1967). Arguments The main arguments about computerization of the public sector directs from the employees. A factor is the poverty of knowledge about the use of new technologies and their lack of interest on learning them. Another important factor is the political and union interests (Transparency international, 2011). On the above mentioned countries, unions and political parties have a â€Å"client† relationship. This suggests a major concern for an improvement effort of public sector’s administration. Managers lack the will to adapt innovative ideas into their departments. And the corrupted bureaucratic state’s roots are so deep that ought great effort to overcome those obstacles. (Jorma, 1988). Other arguments come from the cost of a computerization update (Dunleavy, 2006). Furthermore, arguments about the part that computerization had on the instability of the Mediterranean States are expressed from organizations like IMF, on their monthly reports they do not take into account the individuality and the complexity of the public sector on those countries (IMF, 2012). Methodology For the research to be conducted we have to use a combination of quantitative, by using the â€Å"N† data sets and qualitative methods by the use of enquiries. Because of the nature of the research some factors cannot be properly valued by quantitative methods (Weber et al., 1946) And some information are results from qualitative research (Ragin and Amoroso, 2011);(Ragin, 1987). Also we have to take into account the external factors that affect the computerization process. Thus the research will not be â€Å"immune† to external elements. Conclusion To conclude we have reached a point on introducing austerity measures on the Mediterranean Countries, where we should be very careful of our actions. Especially when the EU is on a dense position because of political rivalries, unwillingness and antagonism amongst union states. And portray a lack of focus to the core of the issue. If we do not act more carefully and if we do not try to find the right questions for the problem the situation will become irreversible. The question should not be how to stop the deficit, instead should be how those problematic countries can improve their public sector? And more specifically at what extend the computerization of public sector in Mediterranean Nations â€Å"affect† their economic stability? It should be appropriate to close with a quote from Simon H. A â€Å"is the resistance it evokes from those who refuse to see in it anything more than an enlarged desk calculator. Not since the Darwinian controversy of the past century we have seen such a passionate defense of the uniqueness of man [sic] against claims of kinship by systems that don’t belong to his species.† (Simon H.A, 1973: 503) References BRUIJN, J. A. D. 2006. Managing performance in the public sector, New York, NY, Routledge. DUNLEAVY, P. 2006. Digital era governance : IT corporations, the state, and E-government, Oxford, Oxford University Press. GAO. 1991a. SSA: Computers Long Rans Vision Needed to Guide future systems modernization efforts, GAO/IMTEC – P1- 44, Washington DC. HAYES, F. O. R. 1977. Productivity in local government, Lexington, Mass., Lexington Books. HERRING, P. 1967. Public administration and the public interest, New York,, Russell & Russell. HMSO. 1983a. Efficiency and Effectiveness in the Civil Service, HMSO, London HOOD, C. 1998. The art of the state : culture, rhetoric, and public management, Oxford ; New York, Clarendon Press. IMF. DECEMBER 2011. IMF Country Report No. 11/351, Greece: Fifth Review Under the Stand-By Arrangement, Rephasing and Request for Waivers of Nonobservance of Performance Criteria; Press Release on the Executive Board Discussion; and Statement by the Executive Director for Greece., Washington, D.C. IMF. JULY 2012. IMF Country Report No. 12/168, Italy: Selected Issues, Washington, D.C. IMF. JUNE 2012. IMF Country Report No. 12/137, Spain: Financial Stability Assessment, Washington, D.C. KLAUS SCHWAB. 2012. WEF: Global Competitiveness 2012-2013, Geneva, World Economic Forum. KLEIN, R & CARTER, N. 1988. Performance Measurement a review of concepts and issues. Discussion Paper No 18, Public Finance Foundation KUOPUS, JORMA. 1988. Hallinnon lainalaisuus ja automatisoitu verohalliuto, Jyuaskyla, Finnish Lawyers Publishing Company MARGETTS, H. 1999. Information technology in government : Britain and America, London ; New York, Routledge. NAUR, P. 1974. Concise survey of computer methods, New York, Petrocelli Books. OECD. 2011. OECD: Working on Bribery, Annual Report 2011 POLLITT, C. & BOUCKAERT, G. 1995. Quality improvement in European public services : concepts, cases and commentary, London ; Thousand Oaks, Calif., Sage. RAGIN, C. C. & AMOROSO, L. M. 2011. Constructing social research : the unity and diversity of method, Los Angeles, SAGE Publications. RAGIN, C. C. 1987. The comparative method : moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies, Berkeley, University of California Press. SIMON H,A . 1973. Applying Information technology to organization Design, Public Administration Review, 33: 268-78 SNELLEN, I. T. M., DONK, W. B. H. J. V. D. & BAQUIAST, J.-P. 1989. Expert systems in public administration : evolving practices and norms, Amsterdam ; New York, Elsevier Science Publishers. TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL. 2011. Corruption Perception Index 2011 WEBER, M., GERTH, H. H. & MILLS, C. W. 1946. From Max Weber: Essays in sociology, New York,, Oxford university press. WILLCOCKS, L. & HARROW, J. 1992. Rediscovering public services management, Lond on, McGraw-Hill. WORLD BANK. 2008. WORLD BANK: Doing Business 2012, http://www.doingbusiness.org/rankings, last checked 29/10/2012