Digitalization by Means of a Prototyping Process: The Case of a Brazilian Public Service
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Background
2.2. Digital Transformation of Brazilian Public Services
- To question aims to make a diagnosis of the services currently provided. This is focused on (i) prioritizing the most feasible services to become available in digital media, providing any necessary and desirable improvements in the process itself and (ii) analyzing the cost of these services and making a cost projection of the same services provided in digital media.
- To personalize aims to collect users’ expectations about the digital services and to verify if the solutions designed are simple and user-understandable after services have been chosen and analyzed in the to question phase.
- To reinvent evaluates alternatives to implement the solutions proposed in order to encourage creativity in the implementation process and improve the digital service. This phase requires various tests to assess the potential of the solutions proposed.
- To facilitate aims to provide digitalization and automation tools in order to simplify the digitalization of services.
- To integrate aims to integrate the solution developed with the existing databases of digital services already provided. This integration aims (i) to save the user from making registrations in different digitalized services and (ii) to unify the data avoiding inconsistencies between the digital services provided.
- To communicate has two main goals: (i) to publish the service after DT and to align information among managers, operators and users inside different sectors of the government and (ii) to advertise the new service to the target users.
- Agreement with the SGD for the transformation of the agency’s services is the cooperation agreement to implement DT;
- Survey of requirements to understand the service: the SGD team elicits requirements to understand the service, the needs of the agency provider, and the information necessary to deliver the service;
- Automation and prototype construction: a preliminary version of the service prototype is developed;
- Presentation and approval of the service prototype with the agency: the service provider evaluates the prototype and checks if it meets the needs for delivering the service, defining any correction if needed;
- Automation and final construction of the digital service: taking into account the corrections raised in the previous step, the final version of the prototype is released and the service is digitalized;
- Presentation and final approval of the digital service;
- Training for agency users: the SGD team trains users to navigate in gov.br portal and to use the tools made available by ME;
- Making the digital service available to the society on the gov.br portal;
2.3. Business Process Management
3. Research Design and Methods
- Functional selection: elicitation of the service’s functional requirements. These requirements are the basis for the future prototype;
- Building: development of the prototype;
- Evaluation: feedback about the prototype.
- the researchers, that supported the prototyping process, which we denominated prototype team;
- the representatives of a central mediator agency;
- the representatives of the agency that delivered the service to be digitalized, which we denominated partner; and
- the representatives of a third-part company that offered a full BPM solution for digitalization.
- Document analysis: Araujo et al. [62] highlights documentary analysis as an important elicitation technique. We employed this technique by elaborating two templates that must be filled in by the mediator and delivered to the prototype team:
- Interview: the interview is one of the most used and effective techniques for requirements elicitation [63,64]. We considered a mixed and open approach to the interview, with predefined initial questions. The template for the interview is presented in Table 3. The idea was to build an interview script composed by questions raised after the analysis of the integration plan, the diagnostic plan and the survey done about the service being digitalized.
- JAD: this technique consists in an intensive structured workshop where different participants are present, such as facilitator, end users, developers, observers, mediators, and experts [65,66]. The meeting focuses on the customer and user business needs, disregarding the technical details of the solutions.
- Prototyping: the appearance and the functionality of the digitalized service are simulated from preliminary specifications, promoting clearer requirements and reducing gaps in understanding [29,44,45,46]. Many organizations consider the Business Process Management (BPM) as a baseline for digital transformation [29,46]. In this work, we are following the Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN).
- BPMN: see Section 2.3. Fischer et al. [29] emphasize that BPMN is a modeling notation and ISO/IEC standard is used to model, simulate, or execute business processes. The modeling elements of BPMN are designed to somehow express the process semantic and used primarily by business analysts, scientists, and tool vendors.
4. The Prototyping Process
4.1. Step 1: Diagnose the Service
4.2. Step 2: Analyze the Service
4.3. Step 3: Identify the Requirements
- Business workflow—describes the digitalized service workflow in the format of a BPMN diagram;
- Automation flow—describes the same process outlined by the workflow, but completely adapted to an automation tool;
- Requirements report—contains all the information about the service requirements, extracted from the interview and the ‘identify the requirements’ process;
- Data dictionary—includes information about the metadata from the fields of the form that will be used in the digitalized version of the service.
4.4. Step 4: Elaborate the Prototype
- choosing an automation tool to build a prototype of the electronic form that would be the digital form of the service (this tool may have been provided by the third-part); and
- building a prototype using the chosen automation tool and the four artifacts produced in the previous step.
4.5. Step 5: Verify the Prototype
- Do the fields’ features match with the data dictionary?
- Is the diagram flow of the service routes arranged correctly?
- Are the service actors arranged correctly with their corresponding responsibilities?
- Are the business rules properly documented in the Automation flow and precisely implemented in the automation tool?
4.6. Step 6: Validate the Prototype
5. Case Description
- receiving request information about the license,
- manual processing of demands (i.e., acceptance or rejection of the request), and
- visualizing of the reports with the licensed establishments.
5.1. Step 1: Diagnose the Service
- its activities;
- its business workflow;
- its target audience;
- the average number of users;
- the data requested for the user to demand the service;
- the legislation about the service; and
- its digitalization requirements.
5.2. Step 2: Analyze the Service
- What are the necessary informations in the electronic form? Which of them are mandatory?
- Will the requester receive any certificate?
- Can the request be rejected at any phase of the evaluation process?
- Is it necessary to include a field to justify rejections?
5.3. Step 3: Identify the Requirements
- Service business workflow. There were four actors in this flow: the citizen, the regional, the auditor, and the uhara. The complete flow is illustrated in Figure 5. First, the citizen required the license and the request form was sent to the regional, who made a previous evaluation, possibly (i) rejecting the request, (ii) finalizing the process, (iii) asking for complementary information, or (iv) forwarding the request, appointing an auditor to proceed with the analysis. The auditor, in turn, could (i) reject, (ii) ask for complementary information, or (iii) accept the request, forwarding the process to the uhara which, in turn, could take the same positions. If accepted, the request returned to the citizen to print the record and finalize. A detailed explanation on each activity is on Table 4.
- Service automation flow. This was very similar to the business workflow, but it was suitable for the automation tool Lecom BPM and brings remarks of each activity of the business workflow, for instance:
- the citizen had 30 days to answer the complementary information requested by the regional. If no answer was obtained in this period, the process was finalized. On the other hand, the deadline was undetermined to answer to the complementary information request from the auditor.
- in the previous evaluation, the regional has 30 days to fill the evaluation form. In the 15th day, a notification e-mail was sent to the regional. If the regional did not fill the evaluation form until the 30th day, another e-mail was sent.
- Data dictionary. The data dictionary was divided into four topics, one for each actor. The citizen electronic form was organized in six sections: (1) information about the place to be licensed, (2) information about the customs type where the place was inserted, (3) information about the intended operations and the category of products to be moved, (4) documents attachment, (5) complementary information, and (6) commitment term. The regional form had an opinion field, an auditor indication field and an additional observations field. The auditor form had four parts: (1) general requirements, (2) specific requirements, (3) additional information, and (4) conclusion. Finally, the uhara form was very similar to the regional one.
5.4. Step 4: Elaborate the Prototype
- Some properties of the prototype were described, namely: the title, the subtitle, the situation, the category, the owner, and the table name.
- The functionalities in automation flow were included in the prototype.
- The actors responsible for each part of the prototype were defined, as well as the possible paths a request can take, namely the acceptance, the rejection and the solicitation of complementary information.
- The fields of the prototype were created. Based on the data dictionary, 375 fields were created, and the following properties were defined for each one: position, type, name, and label. Depending on the type, some further properties were also defined, like font size, background color, font color, alignment, field size, mask, tip, document attachment mode, number of lines, and number of columns.
- A table, which is a high-fidelity interface of the electronic form, was generated.
- The initial values of the fields were defined, as well as the setting of the read-only, blocked, mandatory and hidden fields.
- Some scripts were created to:
- turn fields visible and invisible depending on choices made in previous fields;
- change the content of a field according to choices made in previous fields;
- change the “finalize” button label of a screen according to the opinion given by the actor (accept, reject or ask for complementary information).
5.5. Step 5: Verify the Prototype
5.6. Step 6: Validate the Prototype
6. Discussion
7. Final Remarks
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Vial, G. Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 2019, 28, 118–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mergel, I.; Edelmann, N.; Haug, N. Defining digital transformation: Results from expert interviews. Gov. Inf. Q. 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leão, H.A.T.; Canedo, E.D. Digitization of Public Services: A Systematic Literature Review. In Proceedings of the 17th Brazilian Symposium on Software Quality, Curitiba, Brazil, 17–19 October 2018; pp. 91–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boscarioli, C.; Araujo, R.M.; Maciel, R.S.P. I GranDSI-BR—Grand Research Challenges in Information Systems in Brazil 2016–2026; Special Committee on Information Systems (CE-SI); Brazilian Computer Society (SBC): Porto Alegre, Brazil, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development. Recommendation of the Council on Digital Government Strategies; Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development: Paris, France, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. Digital Government. In Broadband Policies for Latin America and the Caribbean: A Digital Economy Toolkit; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2016; Chapter 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kane, G.C.; Palmer, D.; Phillips, A.N.; Kiron, D.; Buckley, N. Strategy, Not Technology, Drives Digital Transformation; Deloitte University Press: London, UK, 2015; Available online: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/cn/Documents/technology-media-telecommunications/deloitte-cn-tmt-strategy-not-technologydrive-digital-transformation-en-150930.pdf (accessed on 6 August 2020).
- Janowski, T. Digital government evolution: From transformation to contextualization. Gov. Inf. Q. 2015, 32, 221–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Accenture Consulting. Digital Government: “Good Enough for Government” Is Not Good Enough; Accenture Consulting: Dublin, Ireland, 2016; Available online: https://www.accenture.com/t20160912t095949__w__/us-en/_acnmedia/pdf-30/accenture-digital-citizen-experience-pulse-survey-pov.pdf (accessed on 6 August 2020).
- Chanias, S.; Myers, M.D.; Hess, T. Digital transformation strategy making in pre-digital organizations: The case of a financial services provider. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 2019, 28, 17–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Archer, G. Government Portals Are Evolving to Enable Digital Government; Gartner Inc.: Stamford, CT, USA, 2015; Available online: https://www.gartner.com/en/documents/2995021/government-portals-are-evolving-to-enable-digital-govern (accessed on 6 August 2020).
- Marolt, M.; Pucihar, A.; Lenart, G.; Vidmar, D. Digital transformation scoreboard—Case of Slovenia and Croatia. In Proceedings of the 2019 42nd International Convention on Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO), Opatija, Croatia, 20–24 May 2019; pp. 1380–1385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parra, D.T.; Angulo, L.; Sandoval, J.; Guerrero, C.D. Digital Transformation in Colombia: An Exploratory Study on ICT Adoption in Organizations. In Proceedings of the 2019 14th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI), Coimbra, Portugal, 19–22 June 2019; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yeow, A.; Soh, C.; Hansen, R. Aligning with new digital strategy: A dynamic capabilities approach. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 2018, 27, 43–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaliannan, M.; Awang, H. Adoption and Use of E-Government Services: A Case Study on E-Procurement in Malaysia. WSEAS Trans. Bus. Econ. 2010, 7, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
- Anand, D.; Khemchandani, V. Study of e-governance in India: A survey. Int. J. Electron. Secur. Digit. Forensics 2019, 11, 119–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Larsson, A.; Teigland, R. Digital Transformation and Public Services: Societal Impacts in Sweden and Beyond; Taylor & Francis: London, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Parra, R.D. The influence of digital transformation of government on peruvian citizen trust. In Proceedings of the Twenty-fifth Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), Cancún, Mexico, 15–17 August 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Roy, J.P. Service, Openness and Engagement as Digitally-Based Enablers of Public Value: A Critical Examination of Digital Government in Canada. Int. J. Public Adm. Digit. Age 2019, 6, 23–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sánchez, M.A.; Zuntini, J.I. Digital readiness in government: The case of Bahía Blanca municipal government. Int. J. Electron. Gov. 2019, 11, 155–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shin, S.; Rakhmatullayev, Z.M. Digital Transformation of the Public Service Delivery System in Uzbekistan. In Proceedings of the 2019 21st International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology (ICACT), Pyeongchang, Korea, 17–20 February 2019; pp. 703–709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lindgren, I.; van Veenstra, A.F. Digital Government Transformation: A Case Illustrating Public e-Service Development as Part of Public Sector Transformation. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: Governance in the Data Age, Delft, The Netherlands, 30 May–1 June 2018; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Brazil. Decreto n. 8.638, de 15 de janeiro de 2016. Política de Governança Digital. 2016. Available online: http://www.planalto.gov.br/CCIVIL_03/_Ato2015-2018/2016/Decreto/D8638.htm (accessed on 6 August 2020).
- Brazil. Decreto n. 8.936, de 19 de dezembro de 2016. Plataforma de Cidadania Digital. 2016. Available online: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2015-2018/2016/decreto/D8936.htm (accessed on 6 August 2020).
- Brazil, Ministry of Economy. Estratégia de Governo Digital 2020–2022. 2020. Available online: https://www.gov.br/governodigital/pt-br/EGD2020 (accessed on 27 July 2020).
- Luna-Reyes, L.F.; Gil-Garcia, J.R. Digital government transformation and internet portals: The co-evolution of technology, organizations, and institutions. Gov. Inf. Q. 2014, 31, 545–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moncayo, M.B.; Anticona, M.T. A systematic review based on Kitchengam’s criteria about use of specific models to implement e-government solutions. In Proceedings of the 2016 Third International Conference on eDemocracy eGovernment (ICEDEG), Sangolquí, Ecuador, 30 March–1 April 2016; pp. 75–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Datta, P. Digital Transformation of the Italian Public Administration: A Case Study. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2020, 46, 252–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fischer, M.; Imgrund, F.; Janiesch, C.; Winkelmann, A. Strategy archetypes for digital transformation: Defining meta objectives using business process management. Inf. Manag. 2020, 57, 103262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Datta, P.; Walker, L.; Amarilli, F. Digital transformation: Learning from Italy’s public administration. J. Inf. Technol. Teach. Cases 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gong, Y.; Yang, J.; Shi, X. Towards a comprehensive understanding of digital transformation in government: Analysis of flexibility and enterprise architecture. Gov. Inf. Q. 2020, 37, 101487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leavitt, H.J. Applied organizational change in industry: Structural, technological and humanistic approaches. In Handbook of Organizations; March, J.G., Ed.; Rand McNally & Co.: Chicago, IL, USA, 1965; pp. 1144–1170. [Google Scholar]
- Fountain, J.E. Building the Virtual State: Information Technology and Institutional Change; Brookings Institution Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Kitsios, F.; Kamariotou, M. Business strategy modelling based on enterprise architecture: A state of the art review. Bus. Process Manag. J. 2019, 25, 606–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jonathan, G.M. Digital Transformation in the Public Sector: Identifying Critical Success Factors. In Information Systems; Themistocleous, M., Papadaki, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 223–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martynov, V.V.; Shavaleeva, D.N.; Zaytseva, A.A. Information Technology as the Basis for Transformation into a Digital Society and Industry 5.0. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference Quality Management, Transport and Information Security, Information Technologies (IT QM IS), Sochi, Russia, 23–27 September 2019. pp. 539–543. [CrossRef]
- Kitsios, F.; Kamariotou, M. Service innovation process digitization: Areas for exploitation and exploration. J. Hosp. Tour. Technol. 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nielsen, M.M. Governance Lessons from Denmark’s Digital Transformation. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, Dubai, UAE, 18–20 June 2019; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 456–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nielsen, M.M.; Jordanoski, Z. Digital Transformation, Governance and Coordination Models: A Comparative Study of Australia, Denmark and the Republic of Korea. In The 21st Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2020; pp. 285–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Irawati, I.; Munajat, E. Electronic government assessment in West Java province, Indonesia. J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol. 2018, 96, 365–381. [Google Scholar]
- Majaliwa, A.; Simba, F. Development of Extension Procedures to Enhance web-based e-Government System with SMS Mobile Based Service. In Proceedings of the 2019 IST-Africa Week Conference (IST-Africa), Nairobi, Kenya, 8–10 May 2019; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Axelsson, K.; Melin, U. Citizen Participation and Involvement in eGovernment Projects: An Emergent Framework. In Electronic Government; Wimmer, M.A., Scholl, H.J., Ferro, E., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2008; pp. 207–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Van Velsen, L.; van der Geest, T.; ter Hedde, M.; Derks, W. Requirements engineering for e-Government services: A citizen-centric approach and case study. Gov. Inf. Q. 2009, 26, 477–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Djeddi, A.; Djilali, I. A User Centered Ubiquitous Government Design Framework. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Information Processing, Security and Advanced Communication. Association for Computing Machinery, IPAC ’15, Batna, Algeria, 23–25 November 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Legner, C.; Eymann, T.; Hess, T.; Matt, C.; Böhmann, T.; Drews, P.; Mädche, A.; Urbach, N.; Ahlemann, F. Digitalization: Opportunity and Challenge for the Business and Information Systems Engineering Community. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 2017, 59, 301–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barreto, S.; Silva, J.; Lopes, N.; Ribeiro, O.; Mariz, C. Technical assistance to school network using BPM. In Proceedings of the 2018 13th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI), Caceres, Spain, 13–16 June 2018; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leão, H.; Canedo, E. Best Practices and Methodologies to Promote the Digitization of Public Services Citizen-Driven: A Systematic Literature Review. Information 2018, 9, 197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Figueiredo, R.M.C.; Soares, V.A.; Martins, L.B.; Almeida, M.L.F.A.; Melo, L.S.; Ramos, C.S. Governo Digital Brasileiro: Relatório Técnico; Technical Report; Faculty UnB Gama, University of Brasilia: Brasília, Brazil, 2019; Available online: https://repositorio.unb.br/handle/10482/34787 (accessed on 6 August 2020).
- Brazil, Ministry of Economy. Automação de Serviços. 2019. Available online: https://www.gov.br/governodigital/pt-br/transformacao-digital/ferramentas/automacao-de-servicos (accessed on 27 July 2020).
- Recker, J.; Indulska, M.; Michael; Green, P. How good is BPMN really? Insights from theory and practice. In Proceedings of the ECIS 2006 Proceedings, Göteborg, Sweden, 12–14 June 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Rosemann, M.; vom Brocke, J. The Six Core Elements of Business Process Management. In Handbook on Business Process Management 1: Introduction, Methods, and Information Systems; vom Brocke, J., Rosemann, M., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; pp. 105–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fischer, L. Digital Transformation with Business Process Management; Future Strategies: Lighthouse Point, FL, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Baiyere, A.; Salmela, H.; Tapanainen, T. Digital transformation and the new logics of business process management. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 2020, 29, 238–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santos, H.; Valença, G.; Alves, C. Strategies for Managing Critical Success Factors of BPM Initiatives in Brazilian Public Organizations: A Qualitative Empirical Study. iSys Rev. Brasil. Sistemas Inform. 2015, 8, 42–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vom Brocke, J.; Mendling, J. Business Process Management Cases: Digital Innovation and Business Transformation in Practice; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Object Management Group, Inc. Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) Version 2.0.2; Object Management Group, Inc.: Needham, MA, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Aagesen, G.; Krogstie, J. BPMN 2.0 for Modeling Business Processes. In Handbook on Business Process Management 1: Introduction, Methods, and Information Systems; vom Brocke, J., Rosemann, M., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; pp. 219–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chinosi, M.; Trombetta, A. BPMN: An introduction to the standard. Comput. Stand. Interfaces 2012, 34, 124–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Floyd, C. A Systematic Look at Prototyping. In Approaches to Prototyping; Budde, R., Kuhlenkamp, K., Mathiassen, L., Züllighoven, H., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1984; pp. 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mishra, D.; Mishra, A.; Yazici, A. Successful requirement elicitation by combining requirement engineering techniques. In Proceedings of the 2008 First International Conference on the Applications of Digital Information and Web Technologies (ICADIWT), Ostrava, Czech Republic, 4–6 August 2008; pp. 258–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pacheco, C.; García, I.; Reyes, M. Requirements elicitation techniques: A systematic literature review based on the maturity of the techniques. IET Softw. 2018, 12, 365–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Araujo, A.F.; Oliveira, J.L.; Silva, A.F.; Machado, B.N.; Louzada, J.A.; Soares, P.M. An Approach to Requirements Engineering Applied to Information Systems. In Proceedings of the XII Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems on Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems: Information Systems in the Cloud Computing Era—Volume 1, Florianópolis, Brazil, 17–22 May 2016; Brazilian Computer Society: Porto Alegre, Brazil, 2016; pp. 184–191. [Google Scholar]
- Aurum, A.; Wohlin, C. Engineering and Managing Software Requirements; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Davis, A.; Dieste, O.; Hickey, A.; Juristo, N.; Moreno, A.M. Effectiveness of Requirements Elicitation Techniques: Empirical Results Derived from a Systematic Review. In Proceedings of the 14th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE’06), St. Paul, MN, USA, 11–15 September 2006; pp. 179–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- August, J. Joint Application Design: The Group Session Approach to System Design; Prentice Hall, Inc.: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 1991. [Google Scholar]
- Liou, Y.I.; Chen, M. Using Group Support Systems and Joint Application Development for Requirements Specification. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 1993, 10, 25–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agruss, C.; Johnson, B. Ad Hoc Software Testing: A Perspective on Exploration And Improvisation; Florida Institute of Technology: Melbourne, FL, USA, 2000; pp. 68–69. [Google Scholar]
- Chhabra, N. Introduction To Adhoc Testing. Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res. 2012, 1, 66–67. [Google Scholar]
- Lecom. BPM Studio. 2019. Available online: https://www.lecom.com.br/plataforma-lecom/bpm/ (accessed on 6 August 2020).
- Di Martino, B.; Esposito, A.; Nacchia, S.; Maisto, S.A. Semantic Annotation of BPMN: Current Approaches and New Methodologies. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Information Integration and Web-Based Applications & Services, Brussels, Belgium, 11–13 December 2015; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gomes, S.B.; Santoro, F.M.; Mira da Silva, M. An Ontology for BPM in Digital Transformation and Innovation. Int. J. Inf. Syst. Model. Des. 2020, 11, 52–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Document Section | Description |
---|---|
Coordinators within the partner | Defines the representatives and their respective roles related to the coordination of the transformed service. |
Responsible for the service within the partner | Defines the main responsible for presenting the characteristics of the service so that the prototype team can mediate meetings between the stakeholders, monitor the progress of the digitalization process and seek validation of the digitalized service with the partner. |
Information about the selected service | Contains all the information about the service to be transformed, such as name, audience, responsible agency, and a brief description of how the service is currently delivered (i.e., without digitalization) and how the partner expects it will be after digitalization. When possible, it is recommended to add a flowchart in order to make the understanding clear. |
Actions/schedule | Outlines a schedule, containing the tasks necessary to implement the digitalization, the responsible and due date for each task. |
Release date of the transformed service | Defines the expected release date of the digitalized service. |
Document Section | Description |
---|---|
Focal point | Identifies representatives of the business and information technology areas related to the service. |
Actors involved in providing the service within the partner | Defines which departments in the partner are responsible for the service. |
Service phases | Defines the vision of the partner related to the user of the service, highlighting the main points of interaction between the user and the partner. |
Steps of service delivery | Describes the steps of interaction with the user of the service, focused on the internal actions of the service provider. |
Information systems and databases used in service delivery | Describes the systems and databases related to service delivery. |
Main problems in the current process of service delivery | Identifies the main problems in the current service flow, if there is any. Digitalization offers an opportunity to correct this flow. |
Legislation or rule that regulates the provision of the service | Identifies any legislation or rule related to the service provision and its flow. |
Guiding Questions | Description of the Necessary Information |
---|---|
What is the purpose of the service? | Questions about the specific purpose of the service. |
Summarize the service. | Brief summary of the characteristics of the service. |
Which is the audience? | Questions about the audience or about the relevant actors in the service. |
How does the service currently work? | Definition of the steps and relationship with the actors and possible related issues. |
How is the service expected to be after DT? | Questions about fields in the electronic form that will represent the digitalized service. |
Present actors and their obligations in the flowchart | Clarifications about the actors and their obligations. |
What can be changed on the original form provided by the partner? | Elicitation of changes that can be made in the original form provided in the service delivery. |
How does the integration of this service take place? | Questions about integration with other systems, if relevant. |
Activity | Description |
---|---|
Audit | The Auditor has up to 30 days to complete the audit form. As a notice, on the 15th day an e-mail is sent advising of the pendency. If it exceeds 30 days, another e-mail is sent. If possible, the color of the process is changed to the Auditor. |
Print license | At this stage, all forms should be visible and must include the option to extract the Certification of Registration in PDF format. The PDF must have the request completion date and may also contain the following disclaimer: “This certificate is effective until further publication”. |
Prior evaluation | Regional has up to 30 days to fill in the Prior Evaluation form. As a notice, at the 15th day, an e-mail must be sent advising of the pendency. If it exceeds 30 days, another e-mail is sent. If possible, the color of the process is changed to the Regional. |
Provide additional information | The citizen has up to 30 days to respond to the request for additional information asked by the Regional. After this period, the process is automatically closed. However, if the request for additional information is made by the Auditor, the citizen has indefinite time to respond. |
Provide feedback | The Decentralized Unit has up to 30 days to fill in the Completion Form. As a notice, on the 15th day an e-mail is sent advising of the pendency. If it exceeds 30 days, another e-mail notifying the pendency is sent. If possible, the color of the process is changed to the Decentralized Unit. |
Request license | At this stage, the citizen does not have access to the conclusions. The citizen only has access to the audit form and additional information if required by the auditor. |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Gardenghi, J.L.; Pereira, L.G.; Alcantara, S.M.; Figueiredo, R.M.C.; Ramos, C.S.; Ribeiro, L.C.M., Jr. Digitalization by Means of a Prototyping Process: The Case of a Brazilian Public Service. Information 2020, 11, 413. https://doi.org/10.3390/info11090413
Gardenghi JL, Pereira LG, Alcantara SM, Figueiredo RMC, Ramos CS, Ribeiro LCM Jr. Digitalization by Means of a Prototyping Process: The Case of a Brazilian Public Service. Information. 2020; 11(9):413. https://doi.org/10.3390/info11090413
Chicago/Turabian StyleGardenghi, John L., Lucas G. Pereira, Shayane M. Alcantara, Rejane M. C. Figueiredo, Cristiane S. Ramos, and Luiz C. M. Ribeiro, Jr. 2020. "Digitalization by Means of a Prototyping Process: The Case of a Brazilian Public Service" Information 11, no. 9: 413. https://doi.org/10.3390/info11090413