Technology as a major driver forimproving public administration
Hans D’Hondt
Federal Public Service FINANCES
2
Operations Support
Tax Department
Recovery
Special Tax Inspection
Real Estate Documentation
Customs and Excises
Treasury
HR and Organisation
Budget and Management Control & Logistic Services
Expertise and support
ICT
Others
2
ValuesIntegrity
Correctness
Drive, motivation
Service
3225630703
28860
26862
2381322237
21121
2902227913
2614024276
2150220151
19257
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
2002 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017
Persons FTE
208 196 190
124 109 95 90
574
456
389
232205
184 173
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
2004 2010 2012 2015 2016 2017 2018
Cities Sites
Context– Evolution 2002-2019
-35% PERSONS-34% FTE
-70% SITES-57% CITIES
3
Technology
• It is not the first time that new technology leads to drastic changes of oureconomy
• Major difference : the speed of changes has never been so high
• Immediate communication - more people involved.
• For public administrations technology is an opportunity and a challenge
4
Technology as a driver for reforms• REORGANISATION
Organizational structure
Focusing on target groups
Redesigning work processes
• PROFESSIONALISATIONImplementing management instruments
Enhancing performance management: do more with less
Values & integrity policy
5
Technology to do things differentlyQuarterly Business Reviews: Monitoring what is happening
Strategic projects: monitoring & portfolio management
Day to day: management control
Process & risk management
Using data in systems for reporting: reducing response burden
From administrative follow-up to a flexible result-orientedorganisation: culture of accountability
6
Culture of Accountability
Flexibility
> 30 days telework
70%: no recording of working time
Managing absenteeism
Trust
Leadership training
2686225898
2514123813
22786 22237 2191221121
0 231 796
89039650
10757
13674 13984
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Employees Telecommuting
5,34%5,43%
5,62%
5,80%
5,60% 5,59% 5,55% 5,60%
5,78% 5,83%
4,86%
5,28%
5,60% 5,57%5,45%
5,54%
6,15%
6,36%6,46%
6,80%
4,50%
5,00%
5,50%
6,00%
6,50%
7,00%
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
FPS Fin Federal (without Fin)
7
Monitor Better : Business Review
PROCESS ORIENTED
Modelling processes (BPM)
Ownership of processes
Performance and Risk management based andmodeled on business processes
INNOVATION
Project management
Portfolio management
8
Organizational Impact
EFFICIENCY
Digitalisation & simplification
Collaboration with clients & partners
Monitoring
EFFECTIVENESS
Active process management
Workload measurement
Lean management
9
CRM
Digital: MyMinfin
Simplified tax declaration
Debt Relationship Management
Collaboration with stakeholders AGILITY & INNOVATION
Data driven
Nudging
Datamining
Internet research (Cybersquad & BISC)
Hackathons
Technology is a gamechanger - examples• Better risk assessment: Predictive analysis allows better targeted
control initiatives. Reduction number of staff members vs/ technologyfor better risk assessment
• Exchange of information: internal, external, international
• Compliance control and payment risks: Advanced data analytics topredict debt non payment risks
• Cooperative compliance
10
Predictive risk analysis / exchange of information / cooperative compliance• Predictive analysis allows better targeted control initiatives.
• Reduction number of staff members vs/ technology for better risk assessment
• Exchange of information: internal, external, international.• Internal between administrations of the FPS Finance
• External: with other Belgian partners i.e. Social Security Agency
• TNA-initiative: transactional network analysis. European (27 countries) initiative to share information to combat international VAT-fraud (carroussel)
• Cooperative compliance
• Compliance control and payment risks: Advanced data analytics topredict debt non payment risks
11
Advanced analytics for compliance control : Data analytics to predict non-payment risks
12
6 Predictive models
DELPHI: Predicts insolvency risk (3 models – companies, self-employed, individuals). 5 categories of “solvency risk: very high, high, medium, low, very low)HERMES: Predicts payment behaviour for Delphi red scoringIRIS: Predicts payment behaviour from callsPEGASUS: Future payment resulting from sending a debtor to the bailiffARANEO: Social network analysis (drawing a network between companies and administratorscreating debts putting companies in insolvency)PEITHO: Predicting instalment payment duration
Advantages and results of the models (1)
e.g. Delphi results: % of companies bankrupt after 1 or 2 years and their initial ‘DELPHI’ scoring. 61,19% of the companies that got the highest scoring, eventually go bankrupt after 2 years. By knowing this in advance, we increase the amount of recovered debt substantially.
Advantages and results of the models (2)Predictive models increase the efficiency by better determining thepriorities -> Decrease in staff but increased recovered debts!
Efficiency = Intervening in the right way (depending on the profile of thedebtor) with the right means (what will do the trick?) at the right moment (before bankruptcy) will increase the amount of payed debt while avoidingextra costs (e.g. bailiff).
16
Advantages and results of the models (3)e.g. IRIS (predicting which taxpayer will pay after a phone call): increase in efficiency by targetting those that will actually respond: Result: 51% pays their debts completely (only 26% for those whodidn’t get the phone call).
17
Cooperative Tax Compliance Programme
• System based approach: tax control framework
• Agreement between tax authority and company based on transparency and trust.
• Providing or giving access to information, managing fiscal risks,
• Corporate governance and internal control
• Partnership between authorities and legitimate economic operators
• Advantages: reduced cost of control (tax administration) versus predictability – possibility of exchange of information system tosystem
18
Cooperative Tax Compliance Programme (2)• Inspired by a.o. AEO-system for customs (measure administrative burden)
• Big companies: individual agreements
• SME’s: sectoral agreements
• No ruling: it is about the system and practice. Not about theinterpretation of law.
• Cooperative vs/ conflict model
19
COVID 19 - Stay in business • 2019: 1/5 days in telework (average). Telework by 70% of staff
• System allows to work at home: 15.000 VPN-lines for applications
• “non-applications-linked”: access to files/data,… via Cloud
• Control activities (company visits, …) impacted due to lockdown
• Comparison between performance for activities not requiring externalcontacts via management control system: no loss in performance.
20
Risks and barriers to adopt technology more quickly• Transforming the administration and convincing the non-believers
Sceptics: “We have been doing this the same way since …”• Privacy issues
GDPR• Resources
Recruit special profiles (data analysts, …)• Time necessary for development, historical data is needed, unique
identifier for the debtor in all databases to link data between different sources
• A lot of research and development necessary…
21
The road ahead
• Management contract 2019-2021: Digitalization and Citizen RelationshipManagement (“op maat, samenwerken, slim, performant”).
• It is not about digitalizing back-office but about interfacing with a digital society
• A matter of competitiveness
• Challenge : make sure that our co-workers are ready - Training and Coaching
22
• Updating the current models (it’s an ongoing business) • Update existing applications (legacy)• New developments integrating new technology in existing
workflows in order to improve effectiveness and to make them more user-friendly
• Reduce gradually the old paper-based workflows • Scanning system to include all paper documents into the digital
workflows• Target: mandatory use of digital workflow (i.e. VAT) without
paper or scanned documents
The road ahead (2)
23
24
Thank You