Slide 1

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 20081 Gaining the World and Losing the Soul? Trust Change and Electronic Government Mike Grimsley & Anthony Meehan

Slide 2

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 20082 Outline Context: public services and e-government Moving the focus of attention beyond realising the efficiencies promised by investment in technology Importance of Trust in Social Value of the technology Describing and explaining loss of trust by users of e-government

Slide 3

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 20083 Public Services Context Goals of e-government include: efficiency (cost:benefit, RoI) effectiveness (primary service-related outcomes) realising democratically expressed values and aspirations - the soul of a community: regeneration, sustainability, well-being. The focus remains on realising efficiency (in the UK, at least). But there is a need to better understand how to realise effectiveness and community sustainability. We focus on Trust as an expression of these forms of Social Value.

Slide 4

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 20084 political, social and economic institutions vertical trust community family, friends, neighbours horizontal trust Trust How will e-government impact the relationship between citizen and public service provider? ICT

Slide 5

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 20085 A clients psychological state arising from their experience of vulnerability in the light of their expectations of the intentions and behaviour of the service provider (c.f. Dirks and Ferrin, 2002). Constructed from expectations and experiences of behaviours underpinned by institutional rules, laws, and customs (Calnan and Rowe, 2006); in this case, peoples experience of the relationship between themselves (people in need of or entitled to a public service) and a local council, its officers and elected representatives. Trust in Public Services

Slide 6

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 20086 Connection between experience of vulnerability and trust as a psychological state articulated by Luhmann (1994) who sees trust as arising in situations of risk, where one must accept the possibility of future loss as a consequence of ones own action or omission. People whose experience is one of not taking the right action at the right time are likely to enter the vicious circle of not risking trust, losing possibilities of rational action, losing confidence in the system, and being that much less prepared to risk trust at all. Thus, Luhmann points towards a link between corrosion of trust, anxiety, alienation and social exclusion. Trust and Social Exclusion

Slide 7

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 20087 Engagement with services (effectiveness) The level of trust in an organisation affects levels of use and engagement with services. Some [people] avoid contact with services they do not trust unless it is absolutely essential. This can have a direct impact on how well services meet the wider community's needs. (MORI, Trust in Public Institutions: A Report for the UK Audit Commission, 2003) Community sustainability and well-being Trust is an expression of a communitys capacity to co-operate to achieve a better quality of life. Role of Trust in Social Value

Slide 8

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 20088 Case: Choice-based Letting Significant change in approach to allocation of public housing: Available properties advertised. People registered as being in need may apply for properties. Allocation determined according to priority and other policy considerations. Encourages out of borough and non public sector alternatives. Encourages a multi-agency approach to needs. ICT-mediated route complemented by Local Estate and Central Housing Officers. Many characteristics of CBL systems (and level of analysis used here) are comparable to those in other (UK) public services such as education, health care, social services, etc..

Slide 9

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 20089 Survey 2315 CBL IT-Users 244 responses (11%) 3625 CBL non-IT-Users 427 responses (12%) 6 months post-launch

Slide 10

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 200810 Changes in Trust (+/-)

Slide 11

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 200811 Experience driving trust change Trust in housing officers is principally driven by: 1.Clients appreciation of why they themselves are unsuccessful in an application. 2.Ease of contacting a housing officer when needed. Being better informed about housing in general. Sense of empowerment. Being more able to influence/negotiate. Ability of a housing officer to answer queries in a reasonable length of time. Trust in the council is principally driven by: 1.Clients appreciation of why they are unsuccessful in an application. 2.Sense of empowerment. Being more able to influence/negotiate. Ease of contacting a housing officer when needed. Being better informed about housing in general. Ability of housing officer to answer queries in a reasonable length of time. Trust in elected councillors is principally driven by: 1.Being better informed about housing in general. 2.Clients appreciation of why they are unsuccessful in an application. 3.Being helped to consider alternatives to their accommodation needs.

Slide 12

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 200812 Explanations (1) Context: Enhanced understanding of housing in general, especially amongst ICT-users. Prominence of: Clients appreciation of why they are unsuccessful in an application when others are successful. Ability to speak to a Housing Officer. Explanation?: Fairness and equity are fundamental expectations in respect of the rules, norms and customs of councils and public services. In the absence of an explanation as to why you are treated differently to the successful applicant it is very difficult to resolve doubts about the fairness or equity of a decision. Feedback from HO enables them to model rationally their situation in relation to others and to understand the response in light of their choices/actions. Lack of appropriate feedback makes it difficult to strategise (i.e. consider alternative courses of action to improve ones chances).

Slide 13

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 200813 Tentative explanations (2) Context: The meaning of Choice - relative transfer of power/control. Enhanced sense of control. Prominence of: Empowerment Explanation: Having a sense of Influence is one of the drivers of trust (Grimsley and Meehan, 2007). Sense of Contingency derives from ability to identify a (rational) relationship between ones actions and a perceived response. Allows one to adapt behaviour in pursuit of some desired goal. Loss of sense of contingency may be associated with uncertainty and unpredictability and it is associated with feelings of powerlessness, helplessness, alienation, or even mental illness (Skinner, 1996). People whose experience is one of not taking the right action at the right time are likely to enter the vicious circle of not risking trust, losing possibilities of rational action, losing confidence in the system, and being that much less prepared to risk trust at all (Luhmann)

Slide 14

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 200814 How might this arise? (1) A. Simple oversight? B. Deployment of a model for e-commerce into e-government? We identify three types of e-government service interaction: 1. Information seeking (what, where, when) 2. Transactional (taxes, fines, etc) 3. Complex problem solving (social services, school allocation, public housing, justice, etc) e-commerce model may suit 1 and 2, but not 3.

Slide 15

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 200815 C. Challenge of Co-production? 3 strategic modes of interaction: Information seeking (e.g. looking for the what, where, when, and why). Transactional (e.g. reporting, paying taxes, parking-fines, applying for planning permission, etc.) Complex problem solving (e.g. interacting with social services, school allocation, public housing, justice, etc. and possibly more than one agency). CBL at the forefront of strategic capability in e-government. Challenge of equipping people to contribute effectively to the solution of often intractable personal and social problems. Responsibilisation without Emancipation (Clarke et al 2007)? How might this arise? (2)

Slide 16

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 200816 Going further? D. Deliberate Strategy? Gaining the world? - New Public Management (1980s-90s): an inappropriate emphasis on narrow concepts of cost-efficiency and a downplaying of non-functional objectives that were difficult to measurereduction of goals to simplistic targets that lend themselves to manipulation and contrivance in their attainment. (Kelly, Mulgan, Muers, 2002; Moore, 1995) Losing the Soul? - Casting Citizens as Consumers/Customers (late 1990s - ): Ideological images of the citizen-consumer harvesting information, making informed choices in the market, walking away from public services which do not command their confidence (Milburn, 2002)

Slide 17

Mike Grimsley & Anthony Meehan

Slide 18

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 200818 Supplementary Slides For possible use in discussion.

Slide 19

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 200819 Changes in Trust (+/-) Trust Staff User respondents (N=244) Non-User respondents (N=427) No.% % More 2299723 Same 1435813131 Worse 53226615 Missing 261113331 Trust Council User respondents (N=244) Non-User respondents (N=427) No.% % More241011928 Same1375612730 Worse57235412 Missing261112730 Trust Councillors User respondents (N=244) Non-User respondents (N=427) No.% % More1357217 Same1375615135 Worse59246415 Missing351514033

Slide 20

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 200820 Service Experience 1 Explanatory variables CategoriesN (max) Trust level: Housing staff (ref: Less 20.3%) Trust level: Local council (ref: Less 19.0%) Trust level: Elected councillors (ref: Less 21.1%) More (17.5%) Unchange d (62.2%) More (20.7%) Unchanged (60.3%) More (12.5%) Unchanged (66.4%) ICT userYes2060.331.100.260.830.240.94 No (ref)3151.00 Housing Officer: ease contact Easy25917.653.5811.053.203.622.13 Unsure1965.752.653.833.002.202.11 Difficult (ref)661.00 Housing Officer: competence High2045.593.365.914.352.533.13 Unsure2122.103.712.042.900.742.10 Low (ref)1051.00 Multinomial Models Adjusted* Odds Ratios (OR) Adjusted for age and years looking for property (apart from base models)

Slide 21

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 200821 Service Experience 2 Explanatory variables CategoriesN (max) Trust level: Housing staff (ref: Less 20.3%) Trust level: Local council (ref: Less 19.0%) Trust level: Elected councillors (ref: Less 21.1%) More (17.5%) Unchanged (62.2%) More (20.7%) Unchanged (60.3%) More (12.5%) Unchanged (66.4%) TCH userYes2060.39 0.311.340.281.46 No (ref)3151.00 Appreciate why others allocated Usually13440.63 50.3412.6213.029.10 Unsure2184.20 5.104.242.213.10 Rarely1691.00 Helped consider alternatives Usually1212.38 2.171.165.071.09 Unsure1822.32 1.962.366.113.62 Rarely2181.00 Multinomial Models Adjusted* Odds Ratios (OR) Adjusted for age and years looking for property (apart from base models)

Slide 22

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 200822 Service Experience 3 Explanatory variables CategoriesN (max) Trust level: Housing staff (ref: Less 20.3%) Trust level: Local council (ref: Less 19.0%) Trust level: Elected councillors (ref: Less 21.1%) More (17.5%) Unchanged (62.2%) More (20.7%) Unchanged (60.3%) More (12.5%) Unchanged (66.4%) TCH userYes2060.221.570.181.270.161.08 No (ref)315 1.00 Better informed on housing Usually175 11.56 2.107.971.46 15.41 2.73 Unsure200 3.48 2.327.012.37 10.86 2.54 Rarely (ref)146 1.00 Influence HOs/ advisors Usually130 7.55 2.1714.913.96 4.59 2.07 Unsure231 3.80 2.846.613.191.482.51 Rarely (ref)160 1.00 Feel more empowered Usually120 8.78 1.6116.705.27 3.18 3.20 Unsure238 5.29 2.061.812.900.661.55 Rarely (ref)163 1.00 * Multinomial Models Adjusted* Odds Ratios (OR) Adjusted for age and years looking for property (apart from base models)

Slide 23

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 200823 Trust in Public Services Drivers: Well-informedness Personal Control in Life Influence/Contingency vertical trust horizontal trust Grimsley, Meehan, Green and Stafford, 2003

Slide 24

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 200824 Willingness to recommend IT-Users are more willing to recommend TCH.

Slide 25

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 200825 Elements of Empowerment Well- informedness Personal control Influence Informed choice of action Informed participation Efficacy (contingency) Empowerment

Slide 26

Grimsley & Meehan ECIS 200826 Exclusion Trust Alienation exclusion Anxiety exclusion Acting in the World Confidence Note: Confidence and Trust are not necessarily linearly additive not voting? mental ill-health? ontological insecurity? after Luhmann, 2001