Excellence in Public Sector Content

ExPUB Proposal
B1
Title page
EXPUB
EXCELLENCE IN PUBLIC SECTOR CONTENT
e-Content Programme 1
ExPUB Proposal
B2 Table of Contents
B3 Rationale and Objectives .................................................................................................................................... 3
B4 Baseline and Results .......................................................................................................................................... 5
B3.1 Scope .......................................................................................................................................................... 6
B3.2 Results ........................................................................................................................................................ 6
B5 Contribution to Programme Objectives .............................................................................................................. 7
B6 Project Workplan ............................................................................................................................................... 7
B6.1 Project Objective ......................................................................................................................................... 8
B6.2 Geographical Coverage ............................................................................................................................... 8
B6.3 Survey Participants ...................................................................................................................................... 8
B6.4 Target Groups ............................................................................................................................................. 8
B6.5 Methodology ............................................................................................................................................... 9
B6.6 Research approach....................................................................................................................................... 9
B6.7 Desk Research ............................................................................................................................................. 9
B6.8 Determination of e-Content Strategy (Qualitative interview-based research)................................................ 9
B6.8.1 Interview & Observation Programme ................................................................................................. 10
B6.9 Web Site Analysis and Heuristic Evaluation – Internal (Quantitative usability research) ........................... 10
B6.10 End User Formal Usability Analysis (quantitative usability research) ...................................................... 11
B6.11 Online Post-Test Questionnaire ............................................................................................................... 11
B6.12 Recommendations ................................................................................................................................... 11
B6.13 Dissemination.......................................................................................................................................... 11
GANTT CHART ............................................................................................................................................... 12
WORKPACKAGE OVERVIEW ....................................................................................................................... 13
DELIVERABLES LIST .................................................................................................................................... 14
WORKPACKAGE DESCRIPTIONS ................................................................................................................ 15
ExPUB Proposal
B3 Rationale and Objectives
E-government refers to the delivery of information and services over the Internet. The development of e-
government is seen as a critical objective of governments worldwide.
However, numerous studies show that practical government uptake of the Internet has been slower than
expected. Even countries that are leading the way in Internet development, such as the United States and
the UK, still have much work to do. A study published in 2001 by Brown University, USA, found that,
"e-government is falling short of its true potential." A major study of American government websites in
2000 found that the “e-government revolution has fallen short of its potential.” Another 2000 report on
British government websites found that many of them failed the test.
A reason stated in these reports why governments are not making more practical use of the Internet is
because they are focusing too much on large, time-consuming and expensive e-commerce initiatives, and
not getting the basics right. On the Web, the basics involve getting the right content to the right person at
the right time. This is what content management is about, and this is where many governments are now
focusing.
All governments:
1. Produce very significant quantities of content every year (legislation, white papers, reports,
guidelines, etc.)
2. Have an increasing need to distribute this content to the wider public and business
3. Require comprehensive publishing processes to ensure that content is always published professionally
A UK government report summarises the situation well when it states that, “At present, there are
relatively few government e-commerce sites but very many (probably over a thousand) sites used for
electronic publishing.”
The Web was invented as a publishing medium, and every website is a de-facto publication. It may be
more interactive, more action and transaction-oriented, but it‟s still a publication. Every quality
publication begins with defining the reader. Government websites should be designed with their readers
in mind. The content should be written for the reader. The classification and organization of the content
should be easy for the reader to understand.
Using traditional print processes, quality content has become very expensive to publish. The Web can
allow for much more efficient publishing processes. The Web has already had a major impact in reducing
costs within academic publishing, where it is estimated that a professional Web publishing process can
reduce “first copy” costs by up to 50 percent. A report on Canadian government publishing found that
“significant financial savings” had been made from moving from print to the Web.
There are a number of unique characteristics that government publishing exhibits:

 Government content must be absolutely reliable
 It must be comprehensive
 It must have the widest possible accessibility
 It must preserve its content in perpetuity
One of the most critical problems that the Web and information society faces is information overload.
There are 6 billion documents on the Web, growing at 7 million a day. The Web is like a library with all
the books on the floor and the lights turned out. There is a pressing need for greater organization and for
common standards with regard to how content is created, edited and published on the Web. Government
should be at the forefront of leading and promoting such a common standards initiative.
Proper content standards will ensure that:

 Quality content is being created
 Content is being organized and classified properly which makes it much easier to find
 Content is being presented professionally thus making it easier to read
ExPUB Proposal
 Content is being published on time
 Out-of-date content is being removed and properly archived
 A common look and feel is implemented which insures that all websites within government achieve a
coherent standard
 Government content will be accessible by people with disabilities
To address these pressing content management issues, governments need to focus on:
 The development of professional web-based publishing processes

 The development of metadata standards for the organization of content. This involves the
examination of such standards as XML, Dublin Core, etc.
 The use of meta-data to facilitate the multilingual production of the same information content.
 The development of an overall standards-based based approach to how government websites are
developed and managed.
In summary, while governments around the world are embracing the vision of what the Internet can do,
on a day-to-day basis their use of the Web is not yet matching that vision. Rather than focusing too much
on expensive and time-consuming e-commerce projects, governments need to get the basics right first.
The basics on the Web are about professional publishing, so that the right reader (citizen) gets the right
content on time.
Governments create huge quantities of content every year, and a freedom of information culture means
that they need to publish increasing quantities of this content. The Web is an efficient and cost-effective
way to do this publishing.
However, on the Web everyone is a publisher with the result that information overload is becoming one
of the most critical problems facing the information society. To overcome information overload, there is a
great and pressing need for professional publishing processes and common standards with regard to how
content is created, edited and published. Government can be a driver for these standards. Equally,
government needs to make all its citizens more information literate if the widening digital divide is to be
bridged.
An information society is fuelled by information. Publishing is the art of getting the right content to the
right person at the right time. Government is a central source of critical content and it needs to embrace
the Web so as to fuel the growth of the information society and economy.
Since publishing is a primary function of e-government there is a need to better understand how
governments are approaching the management of content on their websites. Best practice can be observed
and communicated. Pressing problems relating to the management of web content can be isolated and
addressed.
It is also true that the content management problems faced by governments are also replicated within
many other organizations. Therefore, best practice in how e-government manages its content can also
become best practice for how many other organizations manage their content and vice versa.
The objectives of the study therefore include the following:

1. To ascertain the web content management strategies being used by EU governments
2. How these content management strategies are being implemented
3. The public opinion of government websites from a content perspective
4. To develop basic guidelines for best practice of e-government content
5. To develop more general guidelines for content management which will be applicable to other
organizations
It is proposed to achieve these objectives by carrying out a study that uses both qualitative and
quantitative research techniques. The qualitative studies would involve intensive interview programmes
with key players within the public and private sectors in a representative sample of EU member states.
ExPUB Proposal
The quantitative approach would involve a detailed analysis of a select number of government websites
and a survey of those who use e-government websites.
B4 Baseline and Results

The public sector is a non-traditional publisher, which means that its primary activity is not publishing. A
number of organisations such as those in the public sector do not publish for direct profit. Non-traditional
publishers publish content on their public websites so as to help support their products and services. They
also publish content on Intranets in order to inform staff better, so that they will be more productive. Yet a
great many public websites have poor or out of date content. A great many Intranets are poorly managed
and essentially out of control. By developing a better understanding of the cost and value of content,
organisations can more efficiently plan for and manage their Internet publishing activities. It is ironic that
organisations including those in the public sector have always understood the value of crucial
commodities such as oil yet have a poor understanding of content, the key commodity of the knowledge
economy.
Other research suggests that between 15 and 25% of total data requirements in e-commerce trading is
based on public sector information. The quantitative nature of targets set by the European Commission
and by national governments mean that initial achievements in e-content have tended to be measured by
volume. Yet sustainable e-content services must be based on the quality of information and the way in
which it is prepared and delivered. Therefore the focus of this study will be on the quality and not the
quantity of content. Before public sector content becomes truly ubiquitous, available in a multiplicity of
services and languages and accessible by citizens and businesses everywhere, basic ground rules have to
be put in place to ensure that public sector e-content adheres to commonly accepted quality standards
across Europe.
The race to publish public sector content online is well and truly on, driven by European directives and a
genuine desire by European member state governments to provide added value to their customers and
enhance the democratic experience for their citizens. There has already been a huge investment in the
infrastructure and in the organisational changes that are necessary to do this. Up to now what this has
largely resulted in is large amounts of brochure ware, the systematic publishing of static content on public
sector web sites. While it is reasonable to expect that the arrival of truly innovative, transactional services
based on wireless Internet will take some time, relatively little of the huge investment that has been made
in e-government so far has found its way into ensuring the quality of the content. If this is not addressed
while content is still essentially monolingual, the quality problems in a multilingual scenario will increase
exponentially as new languages are added.
Non-traditional publishing is a phenomenon whereby the World Wide Web has turned many traditional
organisations including those in the public sector into publishers. Many of these organisations apply
stringent quality procedures to their core business processes but seem happy to publish material on the
Web in unregulated ways that they would never have dreamed of before: unregulated both in the way it is
published and in terms of the audience it is reaching. The reasons for this can be traced back to the origins
of the Web. Many accidental publishers took their first step onto the Internet through an employee
experimenting online. Early attempts at e-business and network publishing were usually led by the IT
department. Many webmasters therefore had an IT background but their lack of experience in editing and
managing content became exposed as the web sites grew bigger in significance. It followed that
subsequent cries for help from the webmaster led back to the IT department. Hence a technical solution
was often prescribed rather than a procedural one.
The problem has been exacerbated in three ways. Firstly, decision-makers in organisations tend to view
content management as a technical issue not a strategic one. The reality is that it is both. Often the
resources allocated to a content management solution allow only for the purchase of a system, not for its
further implementation or for the resources to properly manage the content function.
Secondly, the content management specialists and consultants from whom the decision-makers have been
getting their advice are not truly objective and invariably have an affiliation with at least one system
ExPUB Proposal
provider. Advice on how to implement true content management solutions that are part technical and part
procedural is very hard to find. This frequently means that a content management system that will solve
today‟s problems will generate new and unanticipated problems tomorrow.
Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly for this study, staff that were trained years ago in traditional
document management skills such as filing and who are now expected to work extensively with e-content
have not been retrained for managing or publishing electronic documents and have no background in
publishing. Standards are harder to implement in an unregulated environment such as that characterised
by the Internet and this makes managing large quantities of content and ensuring that quality levels are
adhered to much more difficult.
B3.1 Scope
In developing the terms of reference of the study, it is necessary to define what is meant by e-content in
the public sector and what aspects the study will address. E-content is defined as data that exists in digital
form and can be published or broadcast on physical digital media or over networks. It includes such data
types as:
 legal/administrative/institutional data
 arts, cultural heritage, archives, libraries
 financial and economic data
 information relating to laws, regulations, government acts, etc.
 geographic data (including land and property, environmental data, meteo and oceanographic data),
 traffic and tourism information
 location-based services at the local level (education, health, local services, etc.)
 data relating to health, safety and consumer protection, including transnational emergency services
 scientific and technical information, standards.
This study is not going to specifically address any particular functions within the public sector. However,
it will focus on those that are more likely to be of relevance to the private sector. The study will be
mindful of the fact that best practice in e-content can be encountered at government level, local authority
level, semi-state level or in services that are out-sourced to the private sector. The study is focusing on
public-private sector comparisons and the supply of public sector content to the private sector and will not
specifically examine consumer services (e.g. those concerned with passports, drivers' licences, water,
cable TV etc.) unless they are nominated by those consulted as being exemplars of best practice. The
provision of professional information such as legal, administrative, employment, fiscal, planning and
environmental information will be a major focus.
The main target groups will include government departments, public authorities, administrations
collecting or holding data and information intermediaries such as libraries.
B3.2 Results
The results of the study will be to define best practice in e-government content and provide practical
guidelines for its implementation. These results will be based on qualified input from key players in e-
government and in the private sector from a majority of EU member states. User groups will also be
involved in producing results that will be based on both quantitative and qualitative analysis. The study
will recommend:
 Ways of valuing content.

 Ways of measuring its impact on productivity.
 Steps for raising awareness of the benefits of valuing content.
ExPUB Proposal
The implementation of the study recommendations will lead to more consistent standards being applied to
the publishing and management of public sector content and will drive increased private-public
interaction around the issue of e-content. Milestones will include:
 Completion of the desk research phase in month 3,

 Completion of the personal interview programme, website analysis and user group tests in month 9
 Completion of the analysis phase and submission of the final report in month 12
 Presentation of the results at an ExPUB conference in month 12
The project will support the other projects in action lines 1 and 2 of the e-Content programme by
providing quality guidelines on e-content that can be applied uniformly across the public sector and will
therefore be of use to them in their work.
Dissemination of the findings will be widespread, via a conference, published papers, workshops and
online mechanisms so that others can learn from the study findings.
The results will contribute to a better understanding of the need to adopt e-content best practice in the
public sector. They will constitute a body of knowledge that will not only inform the project participants
in this action line but will also furnish content managers and publishers within the public sector with
valuable information which may yield productivity benefits and add value to public sector e-content.
B5 Contribution to Programme Objectives

According to the communication COM 2001 (607), eEurope 2002: Creating a EU Framework for the
Exploitation of Public Sector Information, comparative case studies are to be recommended and will
contribute to an improved framework for the exploitation of public sector information across Europe.
Using the best practice guidelines provided by the study, public sector e-content can be produced in a
consistent way across Europe, meeting certain quality thresholds (in support of action line 2). This will
increase the content‟s exploitation potential particularly in multilingual form, as the basic quality
principle will be similar in all languages (in support of action line 2). The comparative nature of the study,
across the public and private sector, will also be of benefit in creating public-private sector partnerships
(in support of action line 1).
The project will contribute to the objectives of the eContent programme by suggesting measures that will
lead to an improvement in the quality of public sector content subsequently increasing its exploitation
possibilities. These measures will also facilitate the production of multilingual services. The project will
also showcase best practice in the management and publishing of e-content in the public sector in a way
that will stimulate the production of added-value services and products.
The culture of information in public sector organisations will be addressed by ensuring that content is
treated as a strategic element of the e-government offering alongside infrastructure and access. It will also
address the culture of information in public sector organisations by suggesting training measures that will
equip staff to cope with new responsibilities such as the publishing, archiving and management of e-
content and dealing with customer transactions via the networks.
The project will highlight examples of good practice in e-content in the public and private sector.
It will inform fellow e-Content projects about best practice in the public sector and will disseminate its
findings widely so that best practice can be deployed in different areas of the public sector in different
countries. Establishing common standards for content management and publishing will promote an open
system for public sector e-content that will in turn facilitate access via multiple devices as well as
multilingual access.
B6 Project Workplan
This section describes how the work will be scheduled, managed and delivered and describes the
methodology and approach that will be used to carry out the study.
ExPUB Proposal
B6.1 Project Objective
To prove that the introduction of a higher quality threshold into the production, publishing and
management of public sector e-content can lead to a tangible increase in its value and to its European
exploitation potential.
B6.2 Geographical Coverage

The work will consist of two studies covering nine EU member states: Ireland, UK, Finland, Sweden,
Denmark, Luxembourg, Belgium, Germany and France. To try to cover all 15 EU Member States has
been deemed impractical by the consortium. The objective of this study is to produce guidelines on best
practice based on a majority sample of EU Member States, rather than a 15-country inventory. A valid
consensus can be achieved by studying the characteristics of access to public sector information in the
nine selected countries because greater depth of research is possible. There would also be additional costs
in extending the study to Southern European states and in modifying the quantitative aspects of the study
for the Greek alphabet. A wider study would also necessitate a bigger and more fragmented consortium
that is not ideal for support measures. A separate action encompassing the remaining 6 EU Member States
is anticipated as part of the exploitation activities.
B6.3 Survey Participants
The following table is an indicative list of organisations who will be interviewed in the nine participating
countries.
Finland Sweden Ireland/UK

The Department of Health and The Department of Health and Social Care Department of Enterprise, Trade &
Social Care The Department of Finance Employment
The Department of Finance The Department of Trade and Industry Department of Public Enterprise
The Department of Trade and The City of Stockholm  health care sector Department of Family, Social and
Industry Nordisk Industrifond Community Affairs
The Bank of Finland Framnäs (rehabilitation clinic) Dept Regional Development
The city of Turku M-real Dept Culture Arts & Leisure
Nordisk Industrifond Stora Enso (forestry) Dept Agriculture & Rural
Pulssi (private hospital and ABB (automation technologies) Development
clinic) Partek (mobile logistical solutions) Momentum
UPM-Kymmene (forestry) British Telecomm
M-real (paper) Ulster Television
Ålandsbanken (bank) Belfast Telegraph Newspapers
Denmark Belgium/France/Germany/
The Department of Health and Luxembourg
Social Care The City of Luxembourg
The Department of Finance Luxembourg Ministry of Media and
The Department of Trade and Communication
Industry, especially concerning Union des Villes et Communes Belges
the SME sector Belgian Ministry of Justice
The city of Copenhagen French Foreign Ministry
Nordisk Industrifond Préfecture de Metz
Uponor (plastic pipe systems) Ville de Besançon
Tuborg/Carlsberg (brewing) German Transport Ministry
SAS (airline) German Telecommunications and Postal
Copenhagen School of Regulatory Authority
Economics and Business Lander Authorities for Saar and Rheinland-
Administration. Pfalz
B6.4 Target Groups
27 Government organisations within the specified EU States (from selection above)

Within these organisations - three levels of enquiry
18 private sector organisations (from selection above)
ExPUB Proposal
Strategic level - those who make decisions about the design of the site architecture & the editorial
decisions about the site content
Operational level - those who are charged with the ongoing operation and maintenance of the site and its
content (content producers)
User level - those who use the Government web sites
Internal government usage
Commercial / private sector usage
Public usage
The role of the private sector in the project will be to help benchmark the study by providing comparative
data that can be used to determine how best practice in the management and publishing of e-content in the
private sector compares with that of the public sector. This will enable the consortium to gather opinion
from private sector users as to what type of public sector content they consider to be of value, what
services are currently below par and how they would like to be able to access public sector content,
including consideration of wireless Internet. It is the intention of the consortium that detailed analysis of
content practice in the public sector accompanied by comparative analysis of content practice in the
private sector will provide a better mutual understanding between the sectors. This will lead to increased
private-public sector co-operation on e-content projects, ensuring the creation of better quality e-content
services that provide added value to the private sector.
B6.5 Methodology
The methodology will involve the collection of both qualitative and quantitative information using both
observation and personal interview methods. Using this methodology, the study will examine publishing
practices in the public sector across a range of government departments, local authorities and public
sector organisations. For comparative purposes it will also examine publishing practices in the private
sector with a view to identifying how these differ from the public sector and how best practice can be
exchanged between the two. It will also examine what the private sector expects from public sector
content in terms of what it should contain and how it should be delivered and will take account of new
delivery channels including mobile. Personnel from at least three public sector agencies and two private
sector organisations from each of the nine Member States will participate in the study. Usability test
groups will be based in Ireland, Finland and Luxembourg. Web surveys aimed at gathering the opinions
of users of public sector e-content will also be included.
B6.6 Research approach

There will be four types of research carried out:
 Desk research
 Qualitative interview-based research
 Quantitative usability research
 Quantitative survey research
B6.7 Desk Research

To provide orientation at the start of the project, a period of desk research will be carried out in order to
align the project with current trends and to specifically determine and secure the co-operation of the
organisations and individuals that will participate in the surveys.
B6.8 Determination of e-Content Strategy (Qualitative interview-based research)

The objective of this phase of the research is to ascertain the present and future e-government content
strategy within the study group. It will also focus on how it is felt the strategy is being implemented.
It will include an in-depth personal interview programme with key staff responsible for e-government in
each study country. It is felt that a programme of personal interviews is required so as to get a broad range
of views needed.
These interviews should be face-to-face, and will have the following objectives:
ExPUB Proposal
 To assess the current overall approach to content management
 To assess how web content is created, edited and published
 To find out who is accessing e-government websites
 To assess what standards, if any, are being employed (XML, metadata, Dublin Core.)
 To assess what future plans there are for content management
 To isolate key issues and challenges
The outcome of this phase will detail the e-content strategy used by organisations within the study.
B6.8.1 Interview & Observation Programme

The interview programme will seek to generate relevant information at the three levels of enquiry.
Strategic Level: In-depth interviews with a number of senior respondents within each organisation who
have responsibility for the specification and design of the web site strategy for the organisation
Operational Level: In-depth interviews with a number of respondents whose responsibility is to develop
and maintain the content of the site, and ensure its continual fit with user requirements.
User Level: This stage will involve two levels of enquiry:
An observation and task study involving users being brought to a test location and invited to undertake a
series of pre-specified tasks replicating the normal usage of the web site.
An in-depth interview with each respondent subsequent to the observation and task study to debrief on
their experience in using the site.
B6.9 Web Site Analysis and Heuristic Evaluation – Internal (Quantitative usability
research)
The purpose of the website content analysis is to develop concrete measures of how e-government
websites are performing from a content management perspective. The expert Heuristic evaluation will
assess the level of compliance of the site with usability design guidelines. Three websites will be selected
in each study country for analysis, making a total of 27. The website content analysis will be based on the
website content analysis questionnaire (see Appendix 1).
This will be a detailed content analysis covering such issues as:
 The type and format of content that is being published

 The languages being used
 How legal issues, such as privacy and copyright, are being dealt with
 What sort of metadata and classification is being employed
 How navigation and search are designed
 How content is laid out and how pages are designed
The expert heuristic evaluation will assess the site against the following design criteria:
 Navigation systems
 User control and flexibility
 Consistency
 Error prevention and correction
 Language
 Supporting Information
 Visual Clarity
 Recognition rather then recall
 Visibility of system status
 Match between system and the real world
This phase will also involve a programme of in depth interviews with the communication manager for
each of the e-Government web sites in the target countries.
ExPUB Proposal
B6.10 End User Formal Usability Analysis (quantitative usability research)
The objective of the usability research is to ascertain how e-Government web sites are meeting the actual
needs of web site users from a content and usability perspective. A second objective is to gauge the
opinion of those who use e-Government sites in the study sample across nine EU countries. In Ireland,
Finland and Luxembourg, a representative group of users will be selected and brought to a test centre.
Here the group will be asked to carry out a number of task scenarios on government web sites. Such tasks
might include:
 Finding a set of documents/pages on a selection of government websites

 Carrying out a set of processes, such as paying for some government service online
 Reading a quantity of content online
The groups will be observed as they are carrying out these tasks. Quantitative performance metrics will be
gathered during the tests. The metrics will include the following:
 Number of tasks completed correctly

 Number of errors
 Time to corrects
 Request for help
B6.11 Online Post-Test Questionnaire

The purpose of this area of the research is to gauge the opinion of those who use e-government websites
in the study sample. The questionnaire will be online and will take no more than 3-5 minutes to complete.
A post-test online questionnaire will be used involving a series of questions designed to uncover the
following type of information. The following is a sample of the type of questions that will be asked:
Have you ever used this type of site previously?

Did you find the information you were looking for?
How easy / difficult was it to find the information you were looking for
What aspects of the system did you find difficult to use?
What aspects of the system made it easy to use?
Was it presented in a way that made it easy to read?
In general, how satisfied are you with the quantity and quality of information found on this website?
If there were one single improvement you would like to see made on this website, what would it be?
The online questionnaire will be translated into the relevant languages for the study members. It will be
placed on as many e-government websites as possible within this member group.
B6.12 Recommendations
The study will make recommendations on the quality of the content and site architecture used by a
number of EU Member State Government Organisations and will also make best practice
recommendations and guidelines for their future implementation. Following the research phases there will
be a period of comparative analysis and refining of the data in order to identify the lessons learned. The
recommendations will be included in the final report, the aim of which is to lead to the wider deployment
and dissemination of e-content best practice in the public sector. These recommendations when
implemented will have the potential to improve publishing practices in the public sector, allowing it to
deliver higher value content to its customers.
B6.13 Dissemination
The results of the study will be disseminated to the widest possible audience in a number of different
ways. Target audiences will include the other projects in the e-Content programme in particular those
dealing with public sector information. The results will also be presented to the participating
organisations that provided the qualitative input to the study. Finally, the results will be of value to those
in the public sector who are concerned with e-content and e-government initiatives and to those in the
private sector who are already working in private-public partnerships in the content area or who are
ExPUB Proposal
interested in doing so. The study will culminate in a public conference at which the results of the study
will be presented to participants from the above categories and to other actors and interested parties.
GANTT CHART
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
WP1 Project management
WP2 Desk research
WP3 Determination of e-content strategy
WP4 Website analysis & end user usability analysis
WP5 Online questionnaire
WP6 Consolidated
analysis and
recommendations
WP7 Dissemination and awareness

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
D1.1 D2.1 D1.2 D1.3 D1.5 D3.1 D1.6 D1.7
D7.1 D7.2 D1.4 D4.1 D1.8
D4.2 D7.3
D5.1 D6.1
ExPUB Proposal
B1 Workpackage Overview
Work- Workpackage title Lead Person- Start End Deliv-

package contractor months 3 month4 month5 erable
No1 No2 No6
1 Project management 1 8.0 0 11 1.1-1.8
2 Desk research 1 3.6 0 2 2.1
3 Determination of e-content strategy 1 9.2 3 8 3.1
4 Website analysis & end user 2 8.2 3 8 4.1-4.2

usability analysis
5 Online questionnaire 2 1.6 3 8 5.1
6 Consolidated analysis and 1 9.1 9 11 6.1

recommendations
7 Dissemination and awareness 1 4.7 0 11 7.1-7.3
TOTAL 44.3
1
Workpackage number: WP 1 – WP n.
2
Number of the contractor leading the work in this workpackage.
3
The total number of person-months allocated to each workpackage.
4
Relative start date for the work in the specific workpackages, month 0 marking the start of the project, and all
other start dates being relative to this start date.
5
Relative end date, month 0 marking the start of the project, and all ends dates being relative to this start date.
6
Deliverable number: Number for the deliverable(s)/result(s) mentioned in the workpackage: D1 - Dn.
Deliverable numbers must indicate which workpackage they relate to, e.g. D2.1 for the first deliverable from
workpackage 2).
ExPUB Proposal
B2 Deliverables List
Deliverable Deliverable title Delivery Nature3 Dissemination

No1 date2 level4
1.1 Management report 1 1 R PP
2.1 List of organisations participating in interviews 2 R PP
7.1 Dissemination plan 2 R PP
7.2 Project web pages 3 D PU
1.3 Progress report 5 R PP
1.4 Cost statement 5 R PP
3.1 Interview reports 1 8 R PP
4.1 Summary of web analysis and usability analysis 8 R PP
4.2 Interview reports 2 8 R PP
5.1 Questionnaire responses 8 R PP
1.7 Final progress report 11 R PP
1.8 Final cost statement 11 R PP
7.3 Study conference 11 O PU
6.1 Study final report 11 R PP
1
Deliverable numbers in order of delivery dates: D1 – Dn. Deliverable numbers must indicate which workpackage
they relate to, e.g. D2.1 for the first deliverable from workpackage 2).
2
Month in which the deliverables will be available. Month 0 marking the start of the project, and all delivery dates
being relative to this start date.
3
Please indicate the nature of the deliverable using one of the following codes:
R = Report
D = Demonstrator/Prototype
O = Other
4
Please indicate the dissemination level using one of the following codes:
PU = Public
PP = Restricted to other programme participants (including Commission services and project reviewers).
CO = Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including Commission services and project
reviewers).
ExPUB Proposal
B3 Workpackage Description
Workpackage number : 1 Start date: 0 End date: 11

Workpackage title: Project Management
Participants involved: 1 2 3 4 5
Person-months per participant: 4.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
Objectives
This workpackage will ensure that the project is run according to the terms of the technical annex, that
the deliverables are of a high quality and are delivered on time and that there is an appropriate level of
communication with the team members and with the European Commission.
Description of work
The work to be carried out will include

 the effective establishment of the project;
 interaction with key constituents;
 organisation of project events at suitable venues and to suitably high standards;
 organisation of travel and accommodation;
 gaining consensus on agendas;
 recording and publishing of results and feedback;
 maintenance of the communication channels and reporting to the European Commission.
(Inter-) Dependencies, milestones1 and expected result
Dependencies – none
Milestones – annual review
Expected results – effective management of the project to a successful conclusion
Deliverables
D1.1, 1.2, 1.5, 1.6: 2-monthly management reports

D: 1.3, 1.4, 1.7, 1.8: 6-monthly cost statements and progress reports
1
Milestones are control points at which decisions are needed, for example concerning which of several technologies
will be adopted as the basis for the next phase of the project.
ExPUB Proposal

Workpackage title: Desk Research
Objectives
To provide orientation at the start of the project, in order to align the project with current trends and to
specifically determine and secure the co-operation of the organisations and individuals who will
participate in the surveys.
Description of work
 Carry out research to establish any benchmarking factors that will have a bearing on the study.
These will include existing studies and surveys, public sector websites, European programmes, projects
and directives.
 Identify, from those known to the consortium, organisations that should be made the primary target
of the study. Reasons for choosing these organisations will be recorded.
 Furthermore, identify specific departments and subsequently specific personnel who are associated
with the e-content activities within the organisations.
Interdependencies – none
Milestones – none
Expected result – validated list of organisations and personnel to be interviewed together with raw
material for survey questionnaire. Study ready to move to interview phase.
Deliverables
D2.1: Validated list of organisations and personnel to be interviewed.
1
ExPUB Proposal

Workpackage title: Determination of e-content strategy
Objectives
The purpose of this research is to ascertain the present and future e-government content management
strategy within the study group. It will also focus on how it is felt the strategy is being implemented.
Description of work
The qualitative research will involve a series of three interviews with key staff responsible for e-
government in each study country. Two interviews with private sector representatives will also be
carried out. It is felt that a number of interviews are required so as to get a broad range of views. These
interviews should be face-to-face, and will have the following objectives:
 To assess to current overall approach to content management
 To assess how web content is created, edited and published
 To find out who is accessing e-government websites
 To assess what standards, if any, are being employed (XML, metadata, Dublin Core.)
 To assess what future plans there are for content management
 To isolate key issues and challenges
Dependencies – agreement of candidates to participate in interview

Milestones – none
Expected result – gathering of sufficient valid data to proceed to analysis phase. The outcome will detail
the e-content strategy used by organisations within the study.
Deliverables
D3.1: Edited transcripts of the interview reports
1
ExPUB Proposal

Workpackage title: Website analysis & end user usability analysis
Objectives
 To develop concrete measures of how e-government websites are performing from a content
management perspective.
 To ascertain how e-government websites are meeting the actual needs of website visitors from a
content perspective.
Description of work
i) website content analysis
Three websites will be selected for analysis in each study member state, making a total of 27. The
website content analysis will be based on the website content analysis questionnaire (see Appendix 1).
ii) visitor usability analysis

In Ireland, Finland and Germany, a representative group of citizens will be selected and brought to a
text centre. Here the group will be asked to carry out a number of tasks, including:
 Finding a set of documents/pages on a selection of government websites
 Carrying out a set of processes, such as paying for some government service online
 Reading a quantity of content online
The groups will be observed as they are carrying out these tasks, as well as being asked a series of
questions after they have carried them out.
This phase will also involve a programme of in depth interviews with the communication manager for
each of the e-Government web sites in the target countries.
Deliverables
D4.1 Summary of the web analysis and usability experiments

D4.2 Edited transcripts of interviews with the communication managers
1
ExPUB Proposal

Workpackage title: Online questionnaire
Participants involved: 1 2
Person-months per participant: 0.8 0.8
Objectives
The purpose of this area of the research is to gauge the opinion of those who use e-government websites
in the study sample.
Description of work
The questionnaire will be online and will take no more than 3-5 minutes to carry out. The following
type of questions will be asked:
 Did you find the information you were looking for?
 How quickly did you find it?
 Was it presented in a way that made it easy to read?
 In general, are you satisfied with the quantity and quality of information found on this
website?
 If there were one single improvement you would like to see made on this website, what
would it be?
The online questionnaire will be translated into the relevant languages for the study members. It will be
placed on as many e-government websites as possible within this member group.
None
Deliverables
D5.1: Compilation of responses to the online questionnaire.
1
ExPUB Proposal

Workpackage title: Consolidated Analysis and Best Practice Recommendations
Objectives
To carry out a period of comparative analysis and refining of the data in order to identify the lessons
learned during the research phases.
Description of work
The results from the quantitative and qualitative phases, namely the interviews, website analysis,
usability analysis and online questionnaire will be synthesised and analysed in order to determine trends
and patterns in the publishing and management of e-content in the public and private sector. A
comparative analysis between the public and private sector will be carried out. From the analysis of the
findings of the research phases, a series of recommendations for best practice will be defined together
with guidelines for their future implementation. The results of this work package, i.e. the study
recommendations, will be presented as part of the final report.
Dependencies – None
Milestones – completion of study report
Deliverables
D6.1: Final study report
1
ExPUB Proposal

Workpackage title: Dissemination and Awareness
Objectives
Objectives
To reach and engage with the target community through a variety of channels such as the Internet, press
and seminars, leveraging the consortium‟s knowledge of the eContent sector as well as its knowledge of
European dissemination channels.
Description of work
The work to be carried out will include

 Writing a dissemination plan that identifies the target audience, the message to be communicated
and the channels to be used
 Publicising the project‟s objectives and progress via the e-Content website and the partner‟s
websites
 Targeted dissemination aimed at the e-Content projects via fact sheets and concertation meetings
 Publishing of the final study report on the e-Content website
 Extensive use of constituency list server to disseminate information bulletins and PDF versions of
project fact sheets and final study report
 Involve all partners and study participants in the dissemination programme
 Organise conference to launch results of study
Milestones – Launch of project web pages, project conference
Expected results – increased awareness among project participants and throughout the public sector as
to the merits of basing e-content strategy on principles of best practice
Deliverables
D7.1: Dissemination plan

D7.2: Project web pages
D7.3: Project conference
1
ExPUB Proposal
C1
Title page
EXPUB
EXCELLENCE IN PUBLIC SECTOR CONTENT
ExPUB
C2 Table of Contents
C3 Community Added Value and Contribution to Relevant Policy ............................................... 24
C4 Contribution to Economic Development and Social Objectives ............................................... 24
C5 Management ........................................................................................................................... 25
C5.1 Decision process .................................................................................................................. 26
C5.2 Quality assurance ................................................................................................................. 26
C5.3 Information flow .................................................................................................................. 26
C5.4 Deliverables handling ........................................................................................................... 26
C6 Description of Consortium ...................................................................................................... 27
C6.1 Participant Profiles ............................................................................................................... 27
C6.1.1 The Edward de Bono non-Profit Foundation (Ireland) ....................................................... 27
C6.1.2 Luxconsult (Luxembourg) ................................................................................................. 28
C6.1.3 Vision Consulting (Northern Ireland) ................................................................................ 28
C6.1.4 IAMSR - Institute for Advanced Management Systems Research (Finland) ...................... 29
C6.1.5 Ennis Information Age Town (Ireland) .............................................................................. 29
C6.2 Description of key personnel ................................................................................................ 30
C6.2.1 Kieran O‟Hea (The Edward de Bono non-Profit Foundation) ............................................ 30
C6.2.2 Gerry McGovern (The Edward de Bono non-Profit Foundation) ....................................... 30
C6.2.3 Barry Hagan (Vision Consulting) ...................................................................................... 31
C6.2.4 Frank Metcalf (Vision Consulting) .................................................................................... 31
C6.2.5 Brian Lamb (Vision Consulting) ....................................................................................... 31
C6.2.6 Roland Streber (Luxconsult).............................................................................................. 31
C6.2.10 Bertrand Parisot (Luxconsult) .......................................................................................... 32
C6.2.11 Prof Christer Carlsson (IAMSR)...................................................................................... 32
C6.2.12 Pär Landor (IAMSR) ....................................................................................................... 32
C6.2.13 Pat Fehin (Ennis Information Age Town) ........................................................................ 33
C6.2.14 Martina Neylon (Ennis Information Age Town) .............................................................. 33
C6.2.15 Sharon Meaney (Ennis Information Age Town) .............................................................. 33
C6.2.16 Gillian Davis (Ennis Information Age Town) .................................................................. 33
ExPUB
C3 Community Added Value and Contribution to Relevant Policy

Differences in national government strategies on e-content and differing legislation regarding how
content is published have led to variations from country to country in the amount of public sector
information available online.
There are also variances in publishing policy, so that some public sector departments publish and manage
their own content while others outsource. Procedures for creating and publishing content also differ
causing variations in quality.
The result is fragmentation in the European public sector that is inhibiting the availability of quality
content in digital form. The proposed study must therefore be done at the European level in order to
produce a representative data sample that will allow best practice to be identified. Establishing a
European standard for the publishing of high quality e-content will make it easier for citizens and
businesses to access the content they need in a recognisable format both structurally and linguistically.
The consortium also adds value at the European level by bringing together organisations from three
countries that can provide coverage of nine Member States and have experience of private and public
sector projects. Members of the consortium have significant experience and international renown in
research and standards development in the area of web publishing and in mobile commerce, which they
can collectively deploy to significant advantage in Europe‟s quest to increase the exploitation potential of
its public sector content.
C4 Contribution to Economic Development and Social Objectives
It has been shown that with easier access to public sector information, US firms have a competitive
advantage over their European counterparts. In order to overcome this, the economic challenge for the
EU is to create better condition for the exploitation of public sector content. The study will contribute to
this objective by compiling best practice in public sector content and by identifying ways in which the
private and public sector can work together to produce e-content that is of a higher quality and more
accessible. It will widely disseminate this best practice inventory together with its production guidelines
with the objective of increasing public sector e-content‟s exploitation potential across borders, in
different languages and across wireless platforms.
The consortium posits that there is a direct relationship between content quality and productivity, leading
to better service levels in the public sector and increased profitability in the private sector. During the
study, it is intended to establish this relationship. Subsequently, there will be a need to extend the
findings of the study beyond the original representative sample, to include all public sector practices in
all EU member states. This will require additional resources but must be carried out quickly so that the
benefits of the quality content model that the study will propose can be adapted as widely as possible. It
is only by doing this that a more homogenous European market for public sector content will be able to
emerge.
Information overload is one of the most critical problems facing the information society. Consider the
following:
 Every issue of the New York Times contains more information that a 17th century individual would
have read in a lifetime.
 There is enough scientific information written every year to keep a person busy reading day and
night for 460 years
 In the last 30 years we have produced more information than in the previous 5,000
 The amount of recorded scientific knowledge is doubling approximately every fifteen to twenty years
 Over 1,000 books are published around the world every day
ExPUB
 Every day there are 7 million new documents published on the Web, where there are already over
550 billion.
 The world produces between one and two exabytes of unique content per year, which is roughly 250
megabytes for every man, woman, and child on earth.
In previous societies, the problem was getting access to important content. But the information society
suffers from information glut. The Web is the Trojan Horse of information overload. It promised
information nirvana and delivered overload hell. Someone once said that searching for information on the
Web was like drinking water from a fire hose. Not surprisingly, a 2000 survey by Roper Starch
Worldwide found that 71% of people using the Internet get frustrated when searching.
According to a 2000 study by the University of California, Berkeley, printed content represents 0.003
percent of all content published annually in the world. Think about all those bookstores. Think about all
those books, magazines and newspapers. All that massive, massive quantity of print still only represents
0.003 of total content.
Where is all the rest of it published? The vast majority of content in the world can be found on computer
disks. In comparison to computers, print publishing is a miser. Print is simply not at the races. You see,
the real problem we face today is not what is being published in print, it‟s what is being „published‟ to
disk.
To ensure that European citizens don't simply drown in information overload, two fundamental steps
needs to be taken:
1. A quality rather than a quantity content approach needs to be taken - this is what the essence of
what good publishing is about.
2. Sophisticated information architectures need to be design that will organise content in a manner
that will make it easiest to find. This is what XML and metadata is about.
It is a key objective of this study to draw up best practice guidelines for the above to points. The study
will also try and isolate whether there are commonalities of content management processes and
information architecture designs between e-government websites. In the same way that the Euro has
helped standardise how Europe trades financially, this study will seek to isolate key ways by which
Europe can begin to standardise how it creates, edits and publishes content, so that the citizen can easily
navigate through European content.
The study will also look at how government websites are performing from an accessibility point of view.
Accessibility is a critical issue for people with disabilities and there is much still to be done to ensure that
websites are compliant to key content accessibility standards.
C5 Management
The management function is intended to act as a catalyst and focus for the project participants, making
their participation as smooth and effective as possible. Management will ensure the effective
establishment of the project, interaction with the key players, organisation of project events at suitable
venues and to suitably high standards, organisation of travel and accommodation, gaining consensus on
agendas, recording and publishing of results and feedback, maintenance of the communication channels
and reporting to the European Commission.
The project co-ordinator will be responsible for liasing with the EC project officer, for the timely
submission of deliverables and for the financial management of the project. The project co-ordinator will
ensure consistency across the workpackages so that all activities will be of an equally high standard and
will oversee the effective dissemination of results. To provide quality assurance and effective
communication across the project, it will appoint a project manager and a project management team
comprising the different partners and workpackage leaders.
ExPUB
The project manager will ensure plans, reports, papers etc., produced for and by the consortium, are kept
to schedule and within budget. The project manager will be the financial administrator of the funds used
to finance the project activities.
The objective of the project management team, comprising the project co-ordination team, the project
manager, and representatives of lead partner organisations, is twofold:
1. To ensure that the consortium fulfils its contractual obligations.
2. To ensure that there is effective communication between the partners in the project, between the
project and other participants in the e-Content programme and between the project and the
Commission.
The management team will meet at the start of the project (on the occasion of the project kick-off
meeting) and then no less than once every six months for the duration of the project. They will also meet
prior to the annual reviews and the submission of the final report. For a project of 12 months duration,
this implies the following schedule of management meetings:
Consortium Meeting 1 Project kick-off Month t+0

Consortium Meeting 2 Project half-way point Month t+5
Consortium Meeting 3 Prior to report submission Month t+10
Consortium Meeting 4 Annual review Month to be advised
Extraordinary meetings may be convened, with at least 2 weeks notice provided to partners. The normal
method of communication outside of the management meetings will be e-mail via list server. The project
co-ordinator and the directors of the lead partner organisations will make day-to-day management
decisions on the work package activities that they are responsible for.
Decisions in the management team will ideally be made on the basis of consensus. However, if this is
not possible, they will be made on the basis of a majority vote with the project co-ordinator having the
casting vote. The management team will ensure that each participant has access to a copy of the technical
annex of the contract and will ensure that mechanisms for self-assessment and progress tracking are
implemented.
C5.1 Decision process
The Project Manager will approve the content of all reports and deliverables to the Commission. The
project Work-packages will be delegated to the project team, but final approval will rest with the Project
Manager.
C5.2 Quality assurance
The Project Manager will monitor the delivery and reporting of deliverables according to schedule.
C5.3 Information flow
E-mail will ensure the seamless exchange of views and documents. Deliverables and other official
documents will have a standard layout and numbering, following the rules of the EC. The designated
reports will strictly follow EC recommendations and will be distributed in electronic form by the Project
Manager.
C5.4 Deliverables handling
The Project Manager is responsible for the submission of deliverables to the Commission.
ExPUB
C6 Description of Consortium
The consortium has been constructed in order to provide the optimum combination of geographical
coverage and expertise necessary to execute the study. Certain partners have particular strengths in the
public sector, others in content and others provide excellent administrative, multilingual and territorial
coverage. There are two academic organisations, two consulting companies and a non-profit organisation
in the consortium. In each of the participating organisations there is a wide range of experienced
individuals and expertise. The project will be led from Dublin, where the government has recently
launched a €130 million digital media district and its e-government services are recognised as being
among the best in Europe.
Organisation name Country Role Territory

The Edward de Bono non- IE Co-ordinator Ireland
Profit Foundation
Luxconsult LU Partner Luxembourg, Germany,
Belgium, France
Vision Consulting UK Partner Ireland and UK
Institute for Advanced FI Partner Finland, Sweden and
Management Systems Denmark
Research/ Abö Akademi
University
Ennis Information Age Town IE Partner Ireland
C6.1 Participant Profiles
C6.1.1 The Edward de Bono non-Profit Foundation (Ireland)

The Edward de Bono non-Profit Foundation will be the project co-ordinator, providing the administration
and project management expertise. They will also provide extensive expertise in e-content strategy and
best practice. The Edward de Bono Non-Profit Foundation was established in Ireland in March 1984 for
the following purposes:
(a) The teaching and training of constructive thinking at all levels. To encourage and assist in the
teaching of thinking as a curriculum subject in schools and all other educational establishments
together with the teaching of creative and conceptual thinking at all levels of business and
organisation.
(b) The promotion of the education of thinking and its development as a skill.
(c) Research into and analysis of thinking and research designed to devise new methods for the analysis
of thinking as used in different situations.
(d) The development and teaching of methods, techniques, notations and technology for the application
of thinking and further research in education into technological thinking.
With the emergence of the Internet, the Foundation has diversified into areas of knowledge management
represented by best practice in web publishing, writing for the web, content strategy and innovation. It
has assembled a team of experts who have been pioneers in these areas since the advent of the web.
While continuing to provide leadership and training in traditional areas of thinking and knowledge
management, the Foundation is now in a position to help its clients to integrate the web as a thinking tool
into their business.
ExPUB
C6.1.2 Luxconsult (Luxembourg)

Luxconsult is a firm of multi-discipline Consulting Engineers. An Information and Communications
Technology (ICT) team was set up in 1996 to address the requirements of corporate and public sector
clients. With a current headcount of 9, the ICT team provides guidance to its clients in domains as varied
as international IP Virtual Private Networks and customer satisfaction surveys for telecommunications
operators. Its client base includes the Central Bank of Luxembourg, Dexia Bank, Fortis Bank and the
Luxembourg State Savings Bank. Luxconsult also provides services to telecommunications operators and
includes among its clients such names as KPN, Mannesmann, Tele 2 and Mobistar.
Although based in Luxembourg, Luxconsult‟s activities overflow into the neighbouring Saar, Lorraine
and Belgian regions and its staff reflect this regionalism in their multilingualism notably in the French
and German languages. Also, due to the international environment of Luxembourg the English language
is widely used.
Luxconsult is a registered limited company with some 40 staff and is totally independent from any
manufacturer or service provider. The firm is capitalised at € 1,000,000 and had revenues of over €
6,000,000 in 2000.
The primary role of Luxconsult in this project is to provide the necessary research in Belgium,
Luxembourg, France and Germany. Part of their task will be to research how prepared eContent
providers are for the introduction of wireless technology (WAP, GPRS, UMTS).
The secondary role of Luxconsult will be to assess any technical factor at the level of
telecommunications that promotes or hinders user access to eContent.
C6.1.3 Vision Consulting (Northern Ireland)

Vision Consulting will be responsible for carrying out the qualitative research in the public and private
sector in Ireland and in the United Kingdom
VISION is an innovative Business Design, e-business consultancy, software development and IT services
company with a track record of success.
VISION delivers bottom line business results, in developing the new style of business - which is flexible,
fast moving and global - using the Internet to create an environment that generates innovation,
entrepreneurship and most importantly, action. Our record shows we have made a significant difference
in the re-shaping of our clients' businesses allowing them to gain and sustain competitive advantages in
their chosen markets.
VISION provides consultancy on business effectiveness. Our consultants not only have an in-depth
knowledge of business processes but also a thorough understanding of technology and market forces.
This combined with excellent people skills helps design and deliver business solutions for our clients that
are not only relevant, but which consistently add value and a return for their investment.
We work in partnership with our clients, listening to their needs and those of their customers, to develop
with them solutions that will deliver immediate benefits in terms of cost reduction, increased efficiency;
superior customer value, increased sales, as well as underpinning the development of completely new
market opportunities.
VISION employ more than 400 business and technology professionals out of offices in Belfast, Dublin,
Edinburgh, New York, San Francisco, Detroit and Mexico. Our clients include for example the Industrial
Development Board for N. Ireland, Driver & Vehicle Testing Agency, DARD, Golden Pages, IRFU,
Intelligent Finance (IF.com), Warner Music Group, Ulster Bank, Bank of Ireland, JP Morgan Chase,
Goldman Sachs, BNP Paribas, British Airways and AIG.
ExPUB
C6.1.4 IAMSR - Institute for Advanced Management Systems Research (Finland)

IAMSR will be responsible for the quantitative and qualitative research on the central topics of the
project in Finland, Sweden, and Denmark.
The fields of expertise of IAMSR, which are relevant to ExPUB, are information systems, software
agents, soft computing applications for imprecise and incomplete data, mobility and quality of content in
general and the quality of mobile content in particular. IAMSR will be able to contribute studies of how a
mobile access to government web sites and government targeting of mobile subscribers can be carried
out. It is quite possible that smart software agents can dramatically improve the quality, accessibility,
format and speed of both governmental and corporate digital dialogue and information.
Finland is one of the EU-countries with the highest penetration of mobile devices. The UMTS network
will be up and running 2002-2003, which means that Finland is a good testing laboratory for advanced
mobility including mobile content quality. We propose to carry out the empirical research as described in
the draft proposal and to work on finding value adding mobile solutions and to carry out tests of good
solution alternatives. We propose that the project plan as well as the project budget should allow us to
explore and test the mobile idea in the project. We strongly believe that the mobile medium will be one
of the most important focus areas also for governmental communication in the next few years.
The Institute for Advanced Management Systems Research / Abo Akademi University in Abo (Turku),
Finland is a research institute and a member of the TUCS graduate school, which is running an
international doctoral program with more than 60 doctoral students. Of these 27 are presently enrolled in
the doctoral program run by IAMSR, which is focused on advanced management systems research.
IAMSR is carrying out its research programs in co-operation with major Finnish companies, normally as
several-year research contracts, which makes the research relevant and verifiable as to both the
theoretical foundations and the usefulness of the systems technology developed.
IAMSR was a contractor in the Imagine21 E28732 (ESPRIT) project and is also a contractor in the
starting CHIMER 32695 (IST) project. IAMSR was a member of the ERUDIT (an ESPRIT network of
excellence) and is a member of the EUNITE (an IST network of excellence on smart adaptive systems).
Presently IAMSR is involved in several major research programs. These include Incubation
Development (Ministry of Industry and Trade), GILTA (TEKES), Countess (Academy of Finland),
Waeno (TEKES, 40470/00), Mobile Commerce (TEKES, 40438/01), Metal IT (TEKES), KESTY and
TIDE (Ministry of Education). Previously run major TEKES or EU financed programs: Bullwhip
40965/98, and, Smarter 40045/99 and 40180/00, Arvotek 40602/99, Woodstrat 201/480/92 and Valentine
ESR990919.All these research programs are externally funded, several of them have funding plans for 2-
3 years.
IAMSR/Abo Akademi University is currently running a research program on Mobile Commerce [Tekes
40438/01] with a network of research partners, which include City University of Hong Kong, ENPC
(Paris), Handelshochschule Leipzig and North Carolina State University (Raleigh). Corporate partners
include Agentum, Nokia Mobile Phones, Sampo, Sonera Industrial e-Services, Turku TV Operations and
Ålandsbanken.
C6.1.5 Ennis Information Age Town (Ireland)
Ennis, a town of 20,000 people on the west coast of Ireland, became Ireland‟s Information Age Town
after a national competition in 1997. Eircom (the Irish National Public Network Operator) committed an
investment of £15M to provide infrastructure, end user equipment, training and technical support. The
project has become the largest community technology project in the world.
Ennis Information Age Town Ltd. was established to implement the project. Initially the company had
two shareholders, Eircom and Ennis Task Force Ltd. with 51% and 49% shareholdings respectively.
Ennis Task Force Ltd. bought the interests of eircom in Ennis Information Age Town Ltd. in May of
2002, and Ennis Task Force Ltd now owns the company 100%. Ennis Task Force Ltd. is itself a
ExPUB
company limited by guarantee, and the subscribers are representatives of the local community, including
the local agencies, Shannon Development, Ennis Town Council, and Ennis Chamber of Commerce.
The work of Ennis Information Age Town Ltd. has been with five sectors within the community to
promote the adoption of Information and Communication Technologies. The five sectors are:
 Residential
 Education
 Business
 Community and voluntary
 Public Sector
The project has also developed a local portal web site for the town, www.ennis.ie, and has implemented
broadband trials employing DSL technology. The project facilitated a large Smart Card trial with Visa
and two major Irish banks. The company has participated in EU fifth framework projects, ODIN and
COINE.
Ennis Information Age Town Ltd. will now build on the experience and skills developed over the period
of the project in community involvement and promotion of use. It will be a service provider to local
authorities, government departments, non-profit agencies, corporates and EU consortia. It will offer
services to these groups in user-testing technology based service offerings to make them more user-
relevant, in implementing awareness campaigns among the target markets as well as designing and
executing programmes to accelerate the adoption of the technology solutions. Ennis Information Age
Town Ltd. will therefore be instrumental in broadening the range of people proactively interacting with
technology on a daily basis.
C6.2 Description of key personnel
C6.2.1 Kieran O’Hea (The Edward de Bono non-Profit Foundation)

He advises on strategy development in the area of digital content and has provided input into a number of
strategic studies including:
 THE FUTURE OF CONTENT, for the European Commission, which included a wide-reaching
consultation carried out to inform the development of a digital content action in the IST programme;
 THE STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT OF THE IRISH FILM AND TELEVISION INDUSTRY,
2000-2010, in his role as digital advisor to the think-tank set up by the Irish Government;
 THE ITS 2007 STRATEGY PLAN, adopted by the Irish Government, where he contributed ideas
that have now become part of the implementation of Dublin‟s €130 million Digital Media District.
Kieran previously worked for many years in Luxembourg as an expert on EC programmes such as
IMPACT, INFORMATION ENGINEERING and MULTIMEDIA CONTENT & TOOLS:
INTERACTIVE PUBLISHING.
C6.2.2 Gerry McGovern (The Edward de Bono non-Profit Foundation)

He has spoken, written and consulted extensively on Web content management issues. In October 2001,
he published two books with Financial Times Prentice Hall, entitled: Content Critical and The Web
Content Style Guide. Gerry is editor of the e-business section of the BOSS business reference
encyclopedia (Bloomsbury). He is a member of Financial Times Knowledge Dialogue, a select group of
'thought leaders' who advise senior executives. Previously, Gerry was founder and CEO of Nua, a
developer of content management software and solutions. In 1996, Nua received the Best Overall World
Wide Web Business Achievement award from the European Union. In 1999, Gerry published The
Caring Economy (Blackhall Publishing), which was voted 25th out of the top 50 new economy books by
Middleton/Capstone. Gerry McGovern holds a BSc Man. (2:1) from Trinity College, Dublin.
ExPUB
C6.2.3 Barry Hagan (Vision Consulting)

Barry joined VISION in June 2001 to grow a professional services practice focussed on e-business. Barry
has previously been Marketing & Business Development Director ICL Ireland, Director of Synergy
(Multimedia and Internet ICL JV business) and Managing Director ICL Microsoft Solution Centre.
Barry‟s business experience includes Managing Director Unibol (software products business with export
focus), acting CEO ICS Computing Group (diverse IT group including Unibol), and business
development and strategic planning consultant (working at board level with a range of IT and non-IT
companies). His experience includes spells working internationally in consulting, business development
and marketing activities. Barry is a former Chairman, presently director, of Momentum (formerly the
Software Industry Federation), is a council member of the CBI in N. I. and is a past Chairman of the
CSSA in N. I. Barry has served as a member of the IRTU IT Directorate and the IRTU IT e-commerce
committee. Barry holds a 1st Class Honours BSc and PhD in Electrical & Electronic Engineering from
QUB and a Diploma in Company Direction from IOD.
C6.2.4 Frank Metcalf (Vision Consulting)

Frank has worked in the software industry in a variety of roles since 1970. In ICS Frank worked in a
variety of roles Programmer, Systems Analyst and Project Manager. Projects were in both public and
private sector. Frank was responsible for the development of the company‟s payroll package that was
used by a substantial number of local companies. Frank moved to Unibol at its inception and was
responsible for all software development activities again for a range of customers in both the private and
public sectors. Customers were in GB, NI and the ROI. Frank was responsible for projects for customers
such as DANI, Home Office, Treasury and English Heritage in the public sector and local companies
such as the Ulster Bank. As Unibol became a product and export focused company Frank was
responsible for Support and Services for customers throughout Europe and the USA. Frank also had
account responsibility for Major customers such as DHL. As a Director of Unibol Frank had a number of
organisational and budget responsibilities.
C6.2.5 Brian Lamb (Vision Consulting)

Brian is knowledge manager at Vision Belfast. His experience spans business and IT consultancy and
government services. He has specific expertise in knowledge management, e-learning and training and
development.
C6.2.6 Roland Streber (Luxconsult)

Roland Streber: Graduate of the Technical University of Vienna, Roland started his professional career
within the telecommunications department of Philips. He subsequently moved to Luxconsult to create a
new telecommunications consultancy business. Among the various Internet related projects are Internet
and Voice over IP for the Luxembourg scholastic community, studies for ISP providers, and is actively
concerned with the provision of e-Government services in both the city and country of Luxembourg.
Strategic research studies already accomplished by Roland include customer satisfaction surveys on the
incumbent operator in Luxembourg and bespoke studies for the Luxembourg Telecommunications
Regulatory Authority.
C6.2.7 Eric Connolly (Luxconsult)
Attended the City Colleges of Chicago and the University of Maryland and was subsequently employed
by the US Department of State in a telecommunications capacity for some 12 years. He moved to Wang
Labs to lead the marketing support function in West and Central Africa and left to take up a position as
Senior Consultant with the Reinsurance and Insurance Network where he was instrumental in the take up
of EDI and Web based browser facilities in the field of e-Commerce. After 5 years, Eric moved to the
network services provider Equant where he cooperated in the design of global IP networks and the
provision of Web based facilities in the field of eTravel. With Luxconsult since March 2001, he has
significantly contributed to the technological aspects of the European Commission TACIS Border
Crossing programme.
ExPUB
C6.2.8 Maurice Wagner (Luxconsult)
Graduate in telecommunications at the University of Aachen, Maurice gained experience in positions

with various telecommunication providers before moving to Luxconsult in 1998. Since that time Maurice
has contributed to the implementation of the first alternate telecommunications operator in Luxembourg
and has undertaken missions outside of the country notably with the Belgian GSM operator Mobistar. He
has subsequently performed confidential studies for the Central Bank of Luxembourg and other leading
Luxembourg banks and has actively participated in the European Commission TACIS Border Crossing
programme.
C6.2.9 Souad Peixoto (Luxconsult)
Graduate Telecommunications Engineer of the University of Versailles, Souad has performed missions
for Bouygues Telecom, Vivendi Telecom International, Cegetel-SFR, Nokia and SOFRER. She joined
Luxconsult in October 2000 and has designed IP based local and wide area networks for major clients
such as Dexia and the City of Luxembourg. Souad has also performed studies for Tango (alternate GSM
provider in Luxembourg) and is primarily dedicated, within Luxconsult, to wireless IP applications
(WAP, GPRS, UMTS) which allow wireless access to the Internet. She was also implicated in the
eProcurement project for the City of Luxembourg.
C6.2.10 Bertrand Parisot (Luxconsult)
Graduate Telecommunications Engineer of the University of Versailles, Bertrand has held positions at
SFR, Bouygues and France Telecom in the field of radio transmission and Alcatel Business Networks in
the area of voice communications. He joined Luxconsult in June 2001 and has actively participated in
studies for the Luxembourg Telecommunications Regulatory Authority. Bertrand has also undertaken
studies on Web site and Business Portal usage and is familiar with site construction, maintenance,
content, archiving and Web Page design (Java, HTML) and is familiar with Web design software. The
linking of wireless access to the Internet is also part of Bertrand‟s remit within Luxconsult.
C6.2.11 Prof Christer Carlsson (IAMSR)
Director of the IAMSR, and a professor of management science, is a member of the Steering Committee
of EUNITE, an EU/IST Network of Excellence, and chairman of the UC Berkeley BISC-SIG on Soft
Decision Analysis. Professor Carlsson got his DSc (BA) in 1977, and has lectured extensively at various
universities in Europe, in the U.S., in Asia and in Australia. Professor Carlsson has organised and
managed several research programs in industry in knowledge based systems, decision support systems,
fuzzy real options valuation and software agents, and has done research work also in multiple criteria
optimisation and decision making, and fuzzy sets and fuzzy logic. He is on the editorial board of (among
others) the EJOR, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, ITOR, Cybernetics and Systems, Group Decision and
Negotiation and Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Business. He is the author of 3 books, and
an editor or co-editor of 5 special issues of major journals and 12 books, and has published more than
200 papers.
C6.2.12 Pär Landor (IAMSR)
M.Sc., researcher and PhD student at IAMSR. PhD topic: Quality Aspects of Mobile Content. Pär Landor
works within the large international research project Mobile Commerce. Pär Landor‟s Master‟s thesis had
the title More for Less  A Comparison of Productivity and Efficiency Thinking in the Public and Private
Sectors, which included organisational theory, decision making theory and in-depth studies of the public
and private sector. Pär Landor has also seen the public sector from the inside while working as the deputy
vice mayor in an 11,000-inhabitant town in Finland and as a journalist for 20 years, of which over 11
years as deputy editor-in-chief and editor-in-chief. At the moment Pär Landor also works as a senior
lecturer in Journalistics in the Department of Journalism at the University of Tampere. Pär Landor has
given numerous lectures and talks about the quality of journalistic content.
ExPUB
C6.2.13 Pat Fehin – Head of Usability Services, Ennis Information Age Town Ltd.
Pat Fehin has an MA in Applied Psychology from University College Cork. He is also a member of the
Human Factors Society and Usability Professional‟s Association. Pat has over 15 years experience
working in the Usability Engineering field. He has worked with IONA Technologies, Marconi UK and
Intel among other organisations. He worked with Compaq as a Usability Engineering consultant gaining
considerable experience in HCI design, and defining usability strategies and specifications for software
projects. He facilitated development team workshops on, requirements elicitation, design and usability
issues. He has managed usability assessment strategies for several EU projects, such as, MAPPA,
EMMUS and WEBLING. He has also participated as external evaluator on EU R&D projects. He
developed and regularly runs public courses on Requirements Engineering, Usability Engineering,
Contextual Interviewing and Web Design . He is a visiting lecturer in HCI in National University of
Ireland Galway and the Dun Laoghaire Institute of Design and Technology.
C6.2.14 Martina Neylon – Projects Manager, Ennis Information Age Town Ltd.
Martina has a B.Sc. in Applied Industrial and Managerial Mathematical Science from the University of
Limerick. Martina has over 15 years experience of the business sector and has worked with SMEs and
Multi Nationals specialising in analysis and process improvement. She began her career as a Statistician
in the Process Department of IMED, a U.S. medical device manufacturer. She then spent 10 years
working in process automation. She concentrated on the design and application of automated statistical
process control systems as well as sourcing equipment on the international market. Since joining Ennis
Information Age Town, Martina has been driving the use of technology among Residents, Business,
Schools and Community Groups as well as the Public Sector. In conjunction with Shannon Development,
she currently leads an innovative Online Marketing Project, which explores the needs of SMEs in relation
to the development of their Online Presence. Martina has managed the company‟s eGovernment projects
and was instrumental in setting up the companies Usability business.
C6.2.15 Sharon Meaney – Web Development Manager, Ennis Information Age Town Ltd.
Sharon has a B.A. from Southampton University and a Graduate Diploma in Computing from the
University of Limerick. Sharon has been responsible for spearheading the development and expansion of
www.ennis.ie from a project based site to one of the most dynamic and popular community sites in
Europe. Her background in content development, community based projects, database design and
programming along with experience in the IT sector enables her to guarantee that all web development is
carried out by her team to the highest standards.
C6.2.16 Gillian Davis – Usability Consultant, Ennis Information Age Town Ltd.
Gillian has a Bachelors degree in Social Science from University College Cork. She also has a Higher
Diploma in Computer Science and a Diploma in Marketing. Gillian has over 5 years experience of the
business sector and has worked for large Multinationals as well as SMEs specialising in the area of
Information Technology. She began her career as a Telecommunications Software Engineer for Ericsson
System Expertise, Dublin. During this time, she worked in Germany upgrading and installing AXE 10
Switches. She worked for two years as Sales and Service Engineer, for Teles, concentrating on the
International Sales and Marketing of large scale Telecommunications Products. She also spent 2 years
working in the Recruitment Industry handling large IT Recruitment Accounts both at home and abroad.
Since joining Ennis Information Age Town, Gillian has been responsible for the Marketing of Products
and Services across the Residential, Business and Community programmes of the project. Gillian
currently works in the Usability department, with specialist expertise in user profiling and testing.

Excellence in Public Sector Content

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Excellence in Public Sector Content

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ExPUB Proposal

EXCELLENCE IN PUBLIC SECTOR CONTENT

There are a number of unique characteristics that government publishing exhibits:

Proper content standards will ensure that:

 The development of professional web-based publishing processes

The objectives of the study therefore include the following:

B4 Baseline and Results

 Ways of valuing content.

 Completion of the desk research phase in month 3,

B5 Contribution to Programme Objectives

B6.2 Geographical Coverage

B6.3 Survey Participants

Finland Sweden Ireland/UK

B6.4 Target Groups

27 Government organisations within the specified EU States (from selection above)

B6.6 Research approach

B6.7 Desk Research

B6.8 Determination of e-Content Strategy (Qualitative interview-based research)

B6.8.1 Interview & Observation Programme

This will be a detailed content analysis covering such issues as:

 The type and format of content that is being published

 Finding a set of documents/pages on a selection of government websites

 Number of tasks completed correctly

B6.11 Online Post-Test Questionnaire

Have you ever used this type of site previously?

WP2 Desk research

WP3 Determination of e-content strategy

WP4 Website analysis & end user usability analysis

WP5 Online questionnaire

WP7 Dissemination and awareness

Work- Workpackage title Lead Person- Start End Deliv-

1 Project management 1 8.0 0 11 1.1-1.8

2 Desk research 1 3.6 0 2 2.1

3 Determination of e-content strategy 1 9.2 3 8 3.1

4 Website analysis & end user 2 8.2 3 8 4.1-4.2

5 Online questionnaire 2 1.6 3 8 5.1

6 Consolidated analysis and 1 9.1 9 11 6.1

7 Dissemination and awareness 1 4.7 0 11 7.1-7.3

Deliverable Deliverable title Delivery Nature3 Dissemination

1.1 Management report 1 1 R PP

2.1 List of organisations participating in interviews 2 R PP

7.1 Dissemination plan 2 R PP

1.2 Management report 2 3 R PP

7.2 Project web pages 3 D PU

1.3 Progress report 5 R PP

1.4 Cost statement 5 R PP

1.5 Management report 3 7 R PP

3.1 Interview reports 1 8 R PP

4.1 Summary of web analysis and usability analysis 8 R PP

4.2 Interview reports 2 8 R PP

5.1 Questionnaire responses 8 R PP

1.6 Management report 4 9 R PP

1.7 Final progress report 11 R PP

1.8 Final cost statement 11 R PP

7.3 Study conference 11 O PU

6.1 Study final report 11 R PP

Workpackage number : 1 Start date: 0 End date: 11

The work to be carried out will include

(Inter-) Dependencies, milestones1 and expected result

D1.1, 1.2, 1.5, 1.6: 2-monthly management reports

Workpackage number : 2 Start date: 0 End date: 2

(Inter-) Dependencies, milestones1 and expected result

D2.1: Validated list of organisations and personnel to be interviewed.

Workpackage number : 3 Start date: 3 End date: 8