Parallel to the structure of this section of the ITMP, the recommendations fall into the three main management domains where the state must perform well if the ITMP is to succeed: Organisation of Service Delivery, Performance Monitoring, and Technology Acquisition.
 
 

Organisation of IT Service Delivery

The state should establish carefully focused centres of IT service excellence (see Table 15).

State Computer Services Department

• Full responsibility for institutional applications, shared data: Type A mission
• Managing state-wide data administration and shareable data resources
• Assessing and introducing new data management technologies such as data mining
• Supporting shared institutional applications (budget, payroll, accounting, etc.)
• Assisting agencies to adapt standard solutions whenever possible
• Competence-building as required to support activities outlined above

• Managing the state data services network: Type B mission
• Assessing and introducing new network technologies such as Fax-on-demand, etc.
• Integrating data and voice communications technologies and services
• Competence-building as required to support activities outlined above

• Acquiring, managing, providing, and managing access to information resources of value to the public: Type C mission
• Publishing public information through the Internet
• Assisting members of the public in gaining access to state information and services
• Assessing and introducing new multimedia technologies such as Virtual Reality
• Competence-building as required to support activities outlined above

Performance Monitoring of IT Service Delivery

The following recommendations establish a path toward the use of this important management tool to achieve the benefits set forth earlier.
 

1.  As a matter of policy, the Chief Minister should direct officials at all levels to assume responsibility and accountability for IT performance management.
2. The state should establish a performance framework for information technology management which includes
1. identification of linkages among information services and programme goals and priorities at all organisational levels
2. selection, control, and evaluation of performance measures against an established baseline
3. integration of performance measures into the state’s primary management control processes

1. The state should ensure that the fundamental focus of performance measures for state information management is to gauge programme results in terms of mission performance, customer satisfaction, business value, and innovation and learning.
2. The state should upgrade and strengthen its existing management controls to incorporate performance measures. Specifically:

1. The state should emphasise the establishment and use of outcome-oriented performance measures as major criteria in LCM decisions while streamlining procedural and reporting requirements.
2. Performance measurement of information management activities be addressed by agencies in their annual budget submissions. Specifically, performance should be expressed in terms of programme outcomes, e.g., increased effectiveness and/or cost reductions, resulting from IT use.
3. The State Treasurer should emphasise the identification and accountability for performance measurement data as a priority in the redesign of financial systems. Two initial suggestions are:

1. The State Treasurer should modify budget justification documents to collect information on the projected outcomes of proposals for major IT programmes
2. The State Treasurer should assign programme element codes to IT expenditures in budgeting and accounting with the aim of improving IT budget formulation and facilitating the tracking of IT expenditures through the accounting system.

1. The various Ministers should ensure that performance measurement of IT management projects is included as a major theme of new policies.

1. The state should develop a performance framework for IT. Specifically:

1. The state should design a performance management strategy and action plan that demonstrates top management commitment, provides progress on selected existing performance measures, and begins the implementation of a set of strategic, outcome-oriented performance measures starting as early as 1997. This plan should link these new performance measures to management control processes and include plans for pilot tests of the new measures.
2. The state should initiate development of a new IT performance framework, to be applied to its current IT service delivery units. Two key elements of the framework are the refinement of strategic information management goals related to performance and results and the selection of three to five areas to pilot test performance measures and the application of management controls

1. Following the refinement of the goals and the completion of the pilot tests, the state should extend the fully developed IT performance framework to encompass the rest of its information management area, including outsourcing contractors.
2. The state should strive to link the mature IT performance framework to state-wide actions needed to meet the Vision 2020 challenge and the OPPS initiative.

Technology Acquisition

    Generally, the acquisition of technology must be viewed as a "package" consisting of hardware, software, individual skills, and organisational abilities, rather than individual items or components. This means that the state must acquire hardware and software and the supporting services from a systems perspective, and focus on the life cycle of the technology in the context of the currently installed and planned base.

    In terms of specific recommendations, this implies the formation of two kinds of relationships: strategic partnerships between the state and a few selected technology leaders, and low-price relationships with sources of commodity goods and services.

The methods of acquisition could be a combination of outright purchase, licensing, leasing and/or renting. Table indicates some of the methods for consideration.