Module 4: TIB, E-Government On A Budget

E-government activities are usually separated into one of two activities, providing information to the public regarding government operations/services or providing a mechanism for communication between government and citizens Wohlers (2007). The former activity is the aim of the Transportation Improvement Board’s (TIB) Dashboard--an e-government initiative in Washington State. This dashboard has won numerous awards for its novelty in being both an internal monitoring mechanism and accountability system for the public. 

Internal Benefits

The internal monitoring benefits of this dashboard have resulted in:

-          Reduction in payment time for projects (reduced from 5 months to 17 days)

-          Increased projects delivered on time (delayed projects dropped by 70%)

-          Cost savings

-          Safety improved (Grant projects from TIB's safety program averaged 19 percent fewer accidents and 30 percent less injuries two years after construction)

-          Better allocation resources (benefiting rural communities)

This dashboard has led to numerous service delivery improvement within the transportation department of Washington State.

External Benefits

The external benefits for the dashboard data availability can only be assumed since there was no direct mention of the public impact beyond anecdotal data provided by Steve Gorchester, Director of the Washington State Transportation Improvement Board in a presentation of the TIB Dashboard to the Washington State Legislature. Although Steve noted that he was able to respond to constituents more quickly, he did not mention that citizens are actively utilizing the site for monitoring the timeliness, efficiency or value of projects. This is one area where the TIB Dashboard could potentially improve. However, a prospective byproduct of making available such rich data on transportation projects (program costs, evaluations, current status, location, etc.) is increased citizen trust as suggested by Wohlers (2007) while citing Nugent (2001).

Gorchester stated that one of the reasons for the success of the dashboard was the dashboard design that was performed by department. The TIB targeted an off-the-shelf solution which allowed for customization and thus a custom solution. Meeks (2003) states that customization should be the default choice when creating e-government architecture in order to address the unique values and goals of the agency under consideration. Furthermore, Gorchester was able to leverage his internal resources in developing the performance metrics and designing and implementing the dashboard with only one IT staff member. Meeks would agree with such an approach as it lessens the likelihood of gaps developing between the technical experts and operational government staff.

E-Democracy

Though this site and dashboard do not achieve what is categorized as e-democracy, they do lay the groundwork for providing information necessary to empower citizenry to more fully participate in informed debates due to the availability of high quality, plain-term, interactive and relevant data. The dialogue that is idealized in an e-democratic exchange is only possible when citizens are held as equals in terms of power. Though this gap is decreased through increasing access to information (power), the extent to which the power of collective action can be manifested by a adding an e-democracy medium to this dashboard is unknown.  

Comparison with IT.GOV

The TIB Dashboard is similar to the U.S. Federal Government’s IT Dashboard. While the elegance of the aesthetic design of the federal governments far outweighs that of TIB, the substance of the data is not significantly different. Both sites provide revenue allocations, multi-depth data, project descriptions and a graphical interface.

Shared Strengths of the TIB Dashboard and site:

-          The depth of data available through drill-down hyperlinks

-          Multi-year data available

-          Department revenue data

-          Project timelines and current status

Unique Strengths of the TIB Dashboard and site:

-          GIS Mapping through Google Maps with custom annotations

Potential areas for improvement for the TIB Dashboard and site could include:

-          Citizen rating of project

-          Citizen satisfaction rate

-          Inter-departmental rating

Regarding the foremost difference between the two dashboards and sites is the federal IT dashboard receives significantly more resources in people and total investment dollars in comparison to the TIB Dashboard. Secondly, the IT Dashboard is designed to promote data sharing with the public through open source code, data feeds in multi formats, export data availability and more directly requests feedback in order to improve services. Moreover, help menus and tutorials to are provided to guide individuals through the site who may have less computer fluency or computer technology experience. This emphasizes the focus of the federal government’s IT dashboard on e-democracy. Lastly, the presentation of the data within the IT.gov demonstrates greater use of proportional values (with group differences) rather than solely presenting  between group comparisons. For example, the Department of Education projects receive .74% of the total federal IT budget, while the Department of Defense projects receive 47.47% of the total share L

Overall, the depth, timeliness, thoroughness, and variety (visually and thematically) of information in the TIB Dashboard afford both citizens and government staff the opportunity to closely monitor the resources and service delivery of transporation services in the State of Washington. The efficiency of the TIB Dashboard and proactive stance to providing internal and external transparency is highly commendable. There remain opportunities for the TIB to engage citizen feedback and venture into the e-democracy field. With their increased exposure as an innovative e-government iniative to transportation planning and management, this will hopefully result in increased funding to expand citizen responsiveness.