All-in-One: Improving Urban Service through Integration Kim Hunmin Professor, Dept. of Public Administration Ewha Womans University Seoul, Korea Email:

1

All-in-One: Improving Urban Service through Integration

Kim HunminProfessor, Dept. of Public Administration

Ewha Womans UniversitySeoul, Korea

Email: [email protected]

Paper presented at the International Conference on Good Governance for National Development,

United Nations Project Office on Governance, June 17, 2010

Millennium Seoul Hilton Hotel, Seoul, Korea

mailto:[email protected]

2

Content

1. Characteristics of all-in-one service

2. Two Korean cases

- 365 Service Center

- U-PASS

3. Issues and recommendations

3

All-in-one or Integrated Service System

• Most prominent strategy for government innovations in U.S., Canada, OECD countries

• Not frequently observed in LDC govern-ment innovations

• Observed in majority of UN Public Ser-vice Award winners

• In Korea initiatives for service integration are increasing

4

All-in-one Service: Definition

• More commonly known as one-stop service• Aggregates several related but separately

provided services spanning multiple jurisdictions into a comprehensive single delivery or processing system

• “one-stop service center is an umbrella organization that operates on top of existing functional departments and is intended to maximize the convenience and satisfaction of users through service integration” (Ho, 2002)

5

All-in-one Service: Paradigm

• All-in-one service system requires inter-departmental and/or inter-governmental coordination, collaboration with the private sector, and customer oriented service provision

• Very similar to the e-government paradigm of coordinated network building, external collaboration, and customer services

• Change from traditional bureaucratic paradigm of standardization and departmentalization

6

All-in-one: TypesPurpose:- First stop: information, referral service- Convenience store: diverse service but need 2nd, 3rd

stops for specialized service- True one-stop

Delivery channel:

- Internet based or not (difficult to distinguish one-stop service projects from e-government projects)

- Physical counter, Call center, Automatic kiosk, Web site/internet

7

Two Korean Cases

1. Business Support System

“365 Service Center & 365 Biznet”

(Seo-gu District Government in Gwangju Metropolis)

2. Citizen Requested Service System

“U-Prompt Administrative Service System (U-PASS)”

(Cheong-ju City Government in Chungbuk Province)

8

Local government innovations in Korea

In general,• Use of ICT• Service integration increasing• Place marketing (fairs, local product

promotions, tourism events)• Least observed are devolution, citizen

participation

9

365 Service Center & BiznetProblem: • Rapidly increasing demand for administrative services as

a result of booming business activities in its commercial area which was emerging as a business hub in the metropolitan region

• District employees overburdened by the sheer volume and wide range of service areas in demand - tax, property registration, permits, small business assistance, building management, banking, etc.

• Requests piled up, services delayed, complaints and dissatisfaction on the part of the citizens

• Need to deal with ever mounting demand for services particularly during evening hours and weekends

10

365 Service Center & Biznet

Searching for Solution:• Formed Task Force• Conducted user survey• Consulted experts• Secured budget• Built incentives for employees

11

Vision Best Business Hub in the Region

Goal 365 days, 24 hours Integrated Business Support System

StrategySatisfy and im-press customers

Create participa-tory

environment

Exercise open administra-

tion

Establish in-novative cul-

ture

Implementation Stage

Preparation(Oct’06~Mar’07)

Implementation (Mar’07~Jun’07)

Expansion(Jul’07~Dec’07)

Settlement(Jan’08 ~ )

TaskTask Force, bud-

getIntegration of

administrative & banking services

Multi-organiza-tional linkage

Upgraded sys-tem

<Figure 1>

Integrated Business Support System

12


Implementation:• Set up a joint Service Counter with Gwangju

Bank at a discount mall• Operate 9 am till 10pm • Offering banking service, all

kinds of certifying documents and licenses, employment and placement service, tourist information, and various business support services

13

365 Service Center & Biznet• Scope of the service expanded:• Central government agencies - National Labor

Office, Tax Office, Small and Medium Business Administration, and social security service

• Hospitals and clinics, pharmacies, convention centers, postal offices, etc.

• Extend hours of operation at these facilities • On-line portal, 365 Biznet, to facilitate

multiple accesses to integrated services

14

<Figure 2>

Collaborative Network of 365 Business Support System

BanksPostal Services

Cultural Facilities

Restaurants Tourist

Attractions

Shopping Malls

Medical Facilities

Convenience Stores

24 Hours Facilities

PublicAgencies

Mass Media

Accommodations

365 Service Center(Off-line One-stop)

365 Biznet(On-line portal)

15

16


Overcoming barriers:• Financial constraint – high rental cost of service

counter site provided free by discount mall• Employees’ resistance – flexibility and strong

incentives offered in terms of work• Conflict of interests among agencies – gained

trust with error prevention measures, emphasized joint gains from flourishing business

Years Daytime % Nighttime % Weekend % Total

2007 44,158 51 25,475 29 17,407 20 87,040

2008 85,026 50 58,965 34 27,242 16 171,233

2009 97,343 47 73,147 36 34,382 17 204,872

2010(Jan-Apr)

36,462 48 27,742 37 11,819 15 76,023

TOTAL 262,989 49 185,329 34 90,850 17 539,168

<Table 1> Increase in Services by Time at the 365 Service Center

Source: Seo-gu District Government

18

<Table 2>Increase in Services by Type at the 365 Service Center

Service Type 2007 2008 2009

Residence Registration 43,981 70,582 90,581 Personal Seal Registration 23,563 45,237 44,876

Family Relations Registration 8,677 23,217 27,310

Land Cadastre 1,225 1,715 2,795 Cartography 342 1,116 1,628

Zoning 762 2,136 3,231 Building Register 24 387 699

Property Registration 1,294 2,336 2,554 Vehicle Registration 272 1,342 2,160

Local Tax Documents 1,735 3,947 5,026 National Tax Documents 185 260 330

Education 361 590 688 Other 712 1,393 11,014

Automatic Service Machine 3,907 16,975 11,979 TOTAL 87,040 171,233 204,871

19


• Presidential Prize, Local Administration Innovation Award in 2007

• Top Ten Premium Brand of the Local Administration Innovation in 2008

• Best Prize, Manifesto Best Practice Contest for two consecutive years in 2008 and 2009

• Highest award as a Model Agency for Serving the Citizens in 2009

20

U-Prompt Administrative Service System

Problem:• Before 2007 citizens’ requests and complaints were

handled separately by different departments• Absence of a department or unit in charge of citizen

requested services - comprehensive analysis or systematic processing of citizens service not feasible

• Many similar and overlapping services were being handled repeatedly by different departments

• Lack of information sharing and coordination mechanism for services involving two or more departments

• As requests and complaints increased the biggest complaint by the citizens was that services were provided not promptly enough and often with errors

21

U-PASS

Searching for Solution:• Formed task force• Conducted user survey• Consulted experts• Adopted principle of customer orientation:

listen to citizens, provided fastest service, serve as citizens wish

22

U-PASS

Implementation:• Implementation team headed by the vice mayor,

consisted of 120 employees represented from 28 departments

• Service system characteristics

- diverse and numerous input channels for easy access

- computerized comprehensive management system

- supplemented by on-site mobile service system

- diverse delivery channels to match citizens’ needs

- close monitoring of citizens’ demand

23

1. Request filed2. Collected by inspector3. Draft & approve document4. Notified to relevant dept.5. Received by dept.6. Draft & approve document7. Assigned to staff8. Process9. Draft & approve document10. Inspector notified11. Draft & approve document12. Notify citizen

Before (12 steps) After (5 steps)

1. Request filed2. Collected by inspector3. Draft & approve document4. Notified to relevant dept.5. Received by dept.6. Draft & approve document7. Assigned to staff8. Process9. Draft & approve document10. Inspector notified11. Draft & approve document12. Notify citizen

<Figure 3> Simplified Process with U-PASS

Source: Information Communication Department, Cheong-ju City

Call Center

City Hall website

Site visiting staff

Mobile phone text & photo message

Night shift staff

process delay

big complexity

Before

Citizen

Visits & telephone calls

Website staff

Call Center staff

Visitors center staff

Other service staff

communication block

Departments

Architecture

Sanitation

Environment

Citizen Support..

Check result

<Figure 4> Service System Before and After U-PASS

Call Center

City Hall website

Site visiting staff

Mobile phone text & photo message

Night shift staff

After

Citizen

Visits & telephone calls

U- PASS

Automatic distribution

Departments

Sanitation

Architecture

Environment

Citizen Support

.

.On site staffResult notified by SMS


View filed requests View registries Post results

<Figure 5> Mobile Processing of Services Through PDA


27

Number of days

Same day 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total

2006<before>

(%) 270(10)

410(15)

343(13)

309(11)

298(11)

249(9)

286(10)

573(21)

4,171(100)

2007<after>

(%)

1,225(42)

344(12)

294(10)

301(10)

259(9)

183(6)

176(6)

137(5)

4,789(100)

<Table 3>

Service Processing Time Before and After U-PASS


28

Source of saving Basis of calculation Amount of saving (1,000 KRW)

Social overhead cost saving from reduction

in processing time

Average reduction time per service: 3 days;1 day labor cost: 71,000 KRW; Number of services per year: 11,676. 3 x 71,000 x 11,676

2,486,988

Cost saving from reduction in documents

production

Cost of document per service: 200.11,676 x 200 2,335

Total 2,489,323

<Table 4> Annual Cost Savings from U-PASS


29

Years Area

Before 2007

2007 2008 2009 2010 (Jan-Apr)

TOTAL

Street1,192(21.5)

1,884(16.5)

4,221(23.9)

7,086(27.1)

2,577(34,1)

16,960(24.8)

Transportation701

(12.6)1,990(17.4)

2,515(14.2)

3,545(13.6)

1,152(15.3)

9,903(14.5)

Architecture & Construction

740(13.3)

1,840(16.1)

2,623(14.8)

3,825(14.7)

833(11.0)

9,861(14.4)

Street & Security Light

732(13.2)

1,873(16.4)

2,258(12.8)

2,859(11,0)

887(11.7)

8,609(12.6)

Street Cleaning &

Environment

478(8.6)

1,099(9.6)

2,130(12,0)

3,227(12.4)

723(9.6)

7,657(11.2)

<Table 5> Increase in Service Requests by Service Area

( % )

30

Parks and Green Space

254(4.6)

573(5,0)

961(5.4)

1,637(6.3)

303(4.0)

3,728(5.5)

Water & Sewerage

217(3.9)

544(4.8)

671(3.8)

933(3.6)

288(3.8)

2,653(3.9)

Health & Welfare

163(2.9)

320(2.8)

320(1.8)

415(1.6)

107(1.4)

1,325(1.9)

Culture & Tourism

90(1.6)

196(1.7)

137(0.8)

185(0.7)

67(0.9)

675(1.0)

Industry & Economy

52(0.9)

160(1.4)

114(0.6)

208(0.8)

51(0.7)

585(0.9)

Local Taxes23

(0.4)52

(0,5)58

(0.3)38

(0.1)7

(0.1)178(0.3)

Other908

(16.4)890(7,8)

1,672(9.5)

2,150(8.2)

555(7.4)

6,175(9.0)

TOTAL5,550(100)

11,421(100)

17,680(100)

26,108(100)

7,550(100)

68,309(100)


Years Area

Before 2007 2007 2008 2009

2010 (Jan-Apr) TOTAL

31

U-PASS

Overcoming Barriers:• As service became speedier more and more citizens

made requests for services, input opinions about city administration, and reported conditions in various parts of the city that needed immediate attention

• The city employees overwhelmed with the burden to respond promptly and accurately to rapidly rising citizens’ requests and inputs

• Mounting complaints by the city employees was the biggest obstacle to smooth operation of the U-PASS

32

U-PASS

• Manual developed to make the work easier and simpler to the city employees

• Incentives to improve performance through U-PASS - best employee citations, foreign travel awards, and performance evaluations include employee’s role in making service more efficient, friendly, and innovative

33

Common Factors in Both Cases

• Formal planning activities -problem diagnosis, goal setting, designing strategies , defining stages of implementation

• Set up task force taking charge of addressing the problem and making plans for developing a new system

• Customer oriented system of service delivery emphasized - user surveys, customer satisfaction indices and other means to understand the users’ needs

34

Common Factors in Both Cases

• Shift away from the traditional bureaucratic style of service provision based on departmentalized suppliers’ perspectives and conditions

• Strong and effective incentives in the personnel system to make extra hours and volumes of work acceptable

• Most noteworthy aspect - multiple accesses to the system in terms of extended hours and/or diversified input points and/or channels of contact

35

Issues in All-in-One Service System

• Lack of formal evaluations of service integration in the public management literature

• Can be one long, convoluted, and complex maze

- customers get lost while making a choice among multitudes of options given at every step

• Manned by generalists

- must consult specialists to properly handle a customer’s service request or inquiries

- disenable direct access to specialists

- longer waiting time even with higher manpower costs

36

Issues

• Diminished access points or channels of contact

- integration mainly for efficiency purposes but at the cost of greater inconvenience to citizens to whom service accessibility has declined

- if internet based service integration replaces off-line service counters citizens without access to computers or knowledge to use them lose service accessibility

- eg: Integration of police stations, community centers, tax service, etc

37

Issues

• Ambiguous structure of authority, accountability, and responsibility

- power struggle, tendency of participating agencies to pass responsibility to each other,

- issues and challenges of inter-agency coordination and collaboration

• Failing to take a customer oriented perspective

- designing delivery systems based on supplying agencies’ needs and perspectives

- that is, from being supply oriented rather than demand oriented

38

Recommendations

• Meet challenges of inter-agency coordination & collaboration

- overcome resistance, power struggle,

- specify and clarify responsibility, accountability, budget sharing among collaborating agencies

• Internet based system should not simply replace off-line service with on-line service

- make service available to people unfamiliar with computers

39

Recommendations

• Should be designed with a very clear and strong customer orientation, user friendly & simple

• Should not result in reduction of access points and channels

• Effective all-in-one system should be not ONE one-stop but composed of MANY one-stops

40

Thank you