3.3 Overview of motivational factors
Jeroen Meij and Jeroen Pastoor
In table 1 we provide an overview of the motivational factors we feel we have integrated into the framework at this moment.
Table 1: Motivational elements
Motivational factor |
How |
Functionality |
Purpose |
Insight into potential benefits |
i‐Spiegel |
Autonomy |
Offering actionable information, direct |
i‐Spiegel, Project progress sites |
|
feedback through progress bar, downloadable error files |
|
Mastery |
Information, mild comparison, guide status |
Centralised progress of all functions, interactive map and top 5 |
Build confidence and challenge |
Questionnaire – applicable information combination, Repeated data quality |
Project progress sites and project sites, i‐Spiegel |
|
measurements |
|
Social approval |
Mild comparison, helping out colleagues |
Central Views and top 5, matching through coach |
Get money out of the way |
E‐Government programme |
N / A |
3.4 Supporting functionality
3.4.1 Municipal reference architecture and software catalogue
The architectural web catalogue is a source for reference data about municipal processes, standards, suppliers and software products. The web catalogue acts as a mother table for many monitoring projects. The catalogue provides a standardised list of municipal processes and lists all suppliers for municipal software products including the standards compliancy of software releases.
3.4.2 National release planning
Linked to the e‐Government components, the responsible product managers are involved in maintaining the national release planning, which is a record of all products and product releases related to the twenty e‐ Government components. These releases may be versions of a software reference product, a standard or regulation, or a connecting service. Through the release planning, software vendors and municipalities know when new releases are due and are able to anticipate on this. Also dependencies between products and releases are made visible.
3.4.3 Knowledge infrastructure ontology
As a unifying data framework, an ontology has been put into place. The ontology is connected to all e‐ Government monitoring sites and offers features to query across the total collection. Through a standardised query interface apps or websites may collect data and show the data in the desired format for this specific application and audience.
Furthermore, the ontology offers limited reasoning capabilities over the total data set. An important aspect of the creation of the ontology has been the alignment of governance, management, municipal and technical domain concepts. Although all domains mentioned are involved in the e‐Government programme, often definitions and perceptions of concepts are totally different. The alignment of concepts makes it possible to connect different data sets in the ontology.
A difference between an ontology and a database is the explicit naming( and meaning) of relationships between concepts. This is illustrated below, where some relationships for the concept‘ customer’ in an insurance context are shown. More or less formal restrictions on the relationships may be imposed so reasoning becomes possible.
643