Implementation of the digital government public policy in Colombia: Lessons learned from public entities

Introduction

The digital government policy is conceptualized as “the use of digital technologies as an integral part of government modernization strategies to create public value”.¹ The goal of this policy is to improve the efficiency, transparency, and quality of services offered by the State through the public entities that comprise it.^2–5 There has been a growing interest in the study of this public policy from social actors and the academic community (see Refs. 6–8). Thus, most of the research that has been carried out analyses digital government public policy from the perspective of the interaction between the state and each of the actors in society, especially citizens (G2C), companies (G2B) and the state itself (G2G). In the context of these interactions, there has been a tendency to study which variables explain the implementation of the digital government policy from the perspectives of citizen value perceptions (e.g., Refs. 9, 10) and business owners (e.g., Ref. 11).

This policy brief approaches digital government policy from a perspective centred on the use of technologies, considering both the interaction of the state with society’s actors and the central role of public entities in the implementation of this policy.¹² While previous research has examined governmental actions for the implementation of the digital government policy (e.g., Refs. 13–15), the approach adopted here highlights the importance of understanding the strategies and efforts implemented by public entities to achieve effective implementation of the digital government policy. This allows decision-makers and public entities to have stronger evidence and recommendations on the variables they should intervene in to achieve successful implementation of this policy.

Due to the heterogeneity of digital government policy worldwide, this policy brief is framed within the Colombian public policy. The selection of the country is based on its performance in this policy compared to other OECD countries. According to the OECD (2019), Colombia had a 75% progress in the implementation of this policy, being surpassed only by Korea and the United Kingdom with 76% and 78%, respectively, and surpassing countries such as Denmark, Japan, Canada, Spain, and Israel, as well as the OECD average, which was 50%. Therefore, the study on public entities in Colombia provides feedback on the variables that public entities should intervene to achieve the implementation of the digital government policy, especially in developing countries.

Contextualization of the digital government policy in Colombia

In 2009, the Colombian government enacted the “Gobierno en Línea” (Online Government) as a policy to adopt the use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) in public entities, with the aim of providing efficient services to different interest groups of the state (citizens, businesses, employees, and public entities). Subsequently, Law 1712 of 2014 regulated the application of the online government policy in all sectors.¹⁶ In 2015, “Gobierno en Línea” became the digital government policy through Decree 1078, becoming one of the policies for institutional planning and performance of public entities. Decree 1078 of 2015 regulated the digital government policy, where governance is one of its elements based on the relationship between national and territorial entities, central and decentralized level, under the leadership of the Ministry of Information and Communications Technology.¹⁷ Currently, Decree 767 of 2022 established guidelines articulated with Decree 1263 of 2022, orienting them towards the integration of the digital government policy with digital transformation.

Regarding the evaluation of the implementation of the digital government policy, the state developed the “Formulario Único de Reporte de Avances de la Gestión” (Single Management Progress Report Form – FURAG in Spanish), it consists of 54 questions, of which 27 are single selection (50%). In these questions, entities are asked about their level of progress in the development of documents such as the Information Technology Strategic Plan (PETI in Spanish), the implementation of topics such as privacy and information security, information systems, data analytics, among others. Similarly, of the 20 multiple-choice questions (37%), entities can select one or several options associated with web access or usability, information technology topics such as management performed, PETI content, projects, purchases, IPV6 adoption, use and appropriation, process automation, implementation of emerging technologies, and information contained in the Electronic Headquarters for transparency and access to public information. Finally, the remaining 17 questions (13%) are numerical selection and are associated with amounts of open data, services on the interoperability platform, exchange of information, and the status of IT projects in each entity.

The measurement methodology, as well as its periodicity and other guidelines for the application of FURAG, are carried out by the Administrative Department of Public Function in coordination with the Council for Institutional Management and Performance. The latter is composed of the leading policy entities, including the Ministry of Information and Communication Technologies. In the first measurement, a baseline was established for each entity to report its progress in the implementation and development of the digital government policy. Based on the annual results, a self-diagnosis of strengths and weaknesses is conducted, along with the proposal of an action plan that establishes concrete actions to improve performance in areas where lower scores were obtained.

Finally, the calculation of the level of implementation of the public digital government policy is the result of a polytomous model that describes the probability that an entity i with a performance θi responds to an item j in category k or any higher category, compared to responding in a category lower than k. The probability Pxj(θi) is calculated using the following formula:

Where:

Methods

To fulfill the objective of the policy brief, which is to provide evidence to decision-makers and public entities on which variables should intervene to effectively implement the digital government policy, a model based on multiple linear regression was proposed using data obtained from the FURAG of the 147 national public entities that make up the executive branch of the State. The multiple linear regression model is mathematically defined as:

In the case of the policy brief, the dependent variable (y) was the level of implementation of the digital government policy, which is evaluated on a scale of 0 to 100. For each of the independent variables, they were quantified as the total number of requirements that each entity complies with regarding the FURAG evaluation model. The independent variables are described in Table 1.

The operationalization of the model was performed in version 29 of the SPSS software¹⁸ using the multiple linear regression technique INTRO, For the replicability of the results in case they do not have SPSS, they can use R Studio.¹⁹ To evaluate the quality of the model, various statistics were used, including R², adjusted R², ANOVA test, and VIF collinearity test. The R² coefficient represents the proportion of the total variability in the dependent variable explained by the multiple linear regression model, where values close to 1 indicate that the model explains the variability in the data well. The adjusted R² coefficient, which takes into account the number of predictor variables in the model, represents a better fit of the model when values close to 1 are obtained. The ANOVA test evaluates the overall significance of the multiple linear regression model, with a p-value less than 0.05 indicating that the model is significant and at least one of the predictor variables is important in explaining the variability in the dependent variable.

The Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) collinearity test measures how much the variance of the regression coefficient of a predictor variable is inflated due to the presence of other predictor variables in the model. In this case, the presence of collinearity problems in the model was discarded if the VIF result for each variable was less than 4. Finally, the statistical significance of the predictive variables in the final model was analyzed, with those having a p-value less than 0.05 considered statistically significant.

Performance of public entities in the implementation of digital government public policy in Colombia

In Colombia, there are 147 national-level public entities distributed across 24 sectors, where 17.7% are affiliated with the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit, 11.6% with the Ministry of Defense, 7.5% with the Ministry of Health and Social Protection, 6.1% with the Ministry of Education, and 57.1% with other administrative departments. Based on the results obtained from the FURAG for the year 2021, last measurement, the average level of implementation of the digital government policy was 85.67% with a deviation of 9.95%. As shown in Figure 1, the results obtained by the “Corporación De Alta Tecnología Para La Defensa” (Defence High Technology Corporation) with an implementation level of 44.02%, “Sociedad De Televisión De Las Islas LTDA” (Society Of Television Of The Islands LTDA) with 52.81%, “Centro De Diagnostico Automotor De Caldas LTDA” (Centre For Automotive Diagnostics Of Caldas LTDA) with 58.96%, and “La Imprenta Nacional De Colombia” (The National Printing Office of Colombia) with 59.22% are considered outliers.

Figure 1. Box diagram of the level of implementation of digital government policy in Colombian national public entities.

Variables that affect the implementation of digital government policy in Colombia

Based on the results of the FURAG for the 2021 period and using a linear regression model, it was possible to establish which variables influence the level of implementation of the digital government policy in Colombia. The developed model showed an R² of 0.819 and an adjusted R² of 0.79. Table 2 shows that the regression model was statistically significant overall (F = 29.20, p-value < 0.001), indicating that the predictors were collectively related to the dependent variable.

With that being said, the model did not present any problems of collinearity (see Table 3) since the VIF statistic values were less than 4. Thus, it was considered that the variables that affect the implementation of the digital government policy were PAW, PUW, PAIPV, PEAUTIC, PTE, and PTAIP (See the meaning of the acronyms in Table 3), as they presented p-values less than 0.05. Finally, Figure 2 presents the model’s predictions contrasted with the actual data obtained in FURAG, where the dependent variable was the level of implementation of the digital government policy.

Figure 2. Scatter plot of actual value versus predicted value of the level of implementation of the digital government policy.

Actionable recommendations

Based on the level of implementation of digital government policy in Colombia, there are several actionable recommendations that can be given to decision makers and government entities to achieve the implementation of this policy in various contexts. In relation to web accessibility (PAW), the State should establish standardized criteria so that the portals of public entities allow all people, including those with disabilities or limitations, to access the information and services available to them. This is materialized in the case of Colombia in Resolution 1519 of 2020 from the Ministry of Information and Communication Technologies, where 23 criteria that public entities must comply with in relation to web accessibility are established.²⁰

For web usability (PUW), public entities must design a clear and organized structure of content so that portal users can find the information they are looking for. Similarly, usability testing should be performed to confirm the clarity and organization of the contents. Furthermore, it is necessary for web pages and platforms used for service provision to be compatible with various devices. The processes related to the services provided by the entity should also be simplified so that all stakeholder groups can access them from the same application.

Furthermore, the adoption of IPV6 (PAIPV) is essential for the sustainability of digital government and its implications, since the IPV4 protocol has reached the limit of the number of IP addresses it can support. Therefore, if public entities do not migrate, they may have difficulties in expanding their networks and providing services. This results in the limitation of users’ ability to access certain resources of the public entity. Given the relevance of the adoption of IPV6, the transition should be planned carefully, considering the difficulties in accessing information and service provision that may arise from not executing it correctly. In addition, the variety of platforms to be linked within and outside the public entity should be recognized, and the transition should have sufficient budget and time for its implementation.

Due to the role of ICTs in digital government policy, a strategic component for their use and appropriation should be developed (PEAUTIC). In this sense, public entities should plan for the long term, train employees and stakeholders, promote collaboration and citizen participation, ensure the security and privacy of information, ensure universal access and digital inclusion, and evaluate and measure the impact of the strategy.

On the other hand, as public entities become familiar with emerging technologies (PTE) (e.g., blockchain, big data, artificial intelligence, robotics, etc.), it is important that they are prepared to integrate them effectively into their operations, especially in the provision of services. In this context, the implementation and use of emerging technologies by entities should be based on an analysis of how they can be used. Thus, the use of partnerships with the private sector and academia to take advantage of specialized knowledge and technical experience, especially in cases where public entities have no experience in the implementation and use of such ICTs, should be evaluated. Finally, it is not enough to have emerging technologies; the entity’s staff, as well as the social actors who will use them, must be trained.

Finally, transparency and access to public information (PTAIP) are fundamental in digital government policy, as they allow stakeholders to be informed and participate actively in decision-making. In this sense, the use of digital technologies facilitates the dissemination of public information and promotes accountability by public entities. Thus, entities should implement tables of retention of documentary evidence, complaint and claim forms, access to reports and open data, public transition reports, directories of information on public servers and employees, and budget execution, among others.

Conclusions

The implementation of digital government policy in countries such as Colombia is a crucial step towards the transformation of the state, allowing for the improvement of efficiency, transparency, and quality of services. In this context, it is recognized that the implementation of digital government policy is not an easy task. Therefore, from the particular case of Colombia, public entities require the adoption of standardized criteria regarding web accessibility and usability, the transition to IPV6, and the integration of emerging technologies, as well as a clear and effective strategy for the appropriation of ICTs by employees and citizens. Additionally, it is important to highlight the relevance of transparency and access to public information as a fundamental tool for accountability and the participation of stakeholder groups in the entities.

In this regard, it is important to reflect on the challenges and opportunities presented by the implementation of digital government policy in developing countries. First, it is necessary to consider the importance of investment in technology and training of employees and stakeholders for the success of these policies. Similarly, the need for adequate strategic planning that allows public entities to effectively adapt to changes and technological advances in the long term is highlighted. Second, the need for effective collaboration between the public sector, the private sector, and academia to leverage specialized knowledge and technical expertise in the implementation and use of ICTs should be considered. In this sense, the construction of strategic alliances can be a useful tool for the success of digital government policy. Finally, it is important to highlight the importance of the participation of stakeholder groups in the implementation and evaluation of these policies. Inclusion and universal access to digital information and services are essential to ensure a more just and equitable society.

With the actionable recommendations outlined in this guidance document, as well as the documentation of the Colombian case through modelling, new tools are provided for decision-makers and public entities to implement digital government policy. Furthermore, this policy brief strengthens the literature on the implementation of digital government policies from the perspectives of public entities.