Design principles for improving the process of publishing open data

· Purpose: Governments create large amounts of data. However, the publication of open data is often cumbersome and there are no standard procedures and processes for opening data. This blocks the easy publication of government data. The purpose of this paper is to derive design principles for improving the open data publishing process of public organizations. · Design/methodology/approach: Action Design Research (ADR) was employed to derive design principles. The literature was used as a foundation, and discussion sessions with civil servants were used to evaluate the usefulness of the principles. · Findings: Barriers preventing easy and low-cost publication of open data were identified and connected to design principles, which can be used to guide the design of an open data publishing process. Five new principles are 1) start thinking about the opening of data at the beginning of the process, 2) develop guidelines, especially about privacy and policy sensitivity of data, 3) provide decision support by integrating insight in the activities of other actors involved in the publishing process, 4) make data publication an integral, well-defined and standardized part of daily procedures and routines, 5) monitor how the published data are reused. · Research limitations/implications: The principles are derived using ADR in a single case. A next step can be to investigate multiple comparative case studies and detail the principles further. We recommend using these principles to develop a reference architecture. · Practical implications: The design principles can be used by public organizations to improve their open data publishing processes. The design principles are derived from practice and discussed with practitioners. The discussions showed that the principles could improve the publication process. · Social implications: Decreasing the barriers for publishing open government data could result in the publication of more open data. These open data can then be used and stimulate various public values, such as transparency, accountability, innovation, economic growth and informed decision and policy-making. · Originality/value: Publishing data by public organizations is a complex and ill-understood activity. The lack of suitable business processes and the unclear division of responsibilities blocks publication of open data. This paper contributes to the literature by presenting design principles which can be used to improve the open data publishing process of public sector organizations.

[1]  Marijn Janssen,et al.  A Coordination Theory Perspective to Improve the Use of Open Data in Policy-Making , 2013, EGOV.

[2]  R. S. Choenni,et al.  On the Evaluation of Workflow Systems in Business Processes , 2003 .

[3]  Helmut Krcmar,et al.  A Review of Success Factors and Challenges of Public Sector BPR Implementations , 2012, 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[4]  Sue R. Faerman,et al.  Understanding Interorganizational Cooperation: Public-Private Collaboration in Regulating Financial Market Innovation , 2001 .

[5]  Robert Winter,et al.  Construction and Evaluation of a Meta-Model for Enterprise Architecture Design Principles , 2011, Wirtschaftsinformatik.

[6]  Jing Zhang,et al.  Exploring stakeholders' expectations of the benefits and barriers of e-government knowledge sharing , 2005, J. Enterp. Inf. Manag..

[7]  Paul T. Jaeger,et al.  User-centered e-government: Challenges and benefits for government Web sites , 2006, Gov. Inf. Q..

[8]  Sue R. Faerman,et al.  UNDERSTANDING INTERORGANIZATIONAL COOPERATION: PUBLIC-PRIVATE COLLABORATION IN REGULATING FINANCIAL MARKET INNOVATION. , 1999 .

[9]  Bram Klievink,et al.  Gaming and simulation for transforming and reengineering government. Towards a research agenda , 2010 .

[10]  Stijn Hoppenbrouwers,et al.  Giving Meaning to Enterprise Architectures: Architecture Principles with ORM and ORC , 2006, OTM Workshops.

[11]  Shirish C. Srivastava,et al.  Is e‐government providing the promised returns? , 2010 .

[12]  M. Hammer,et al.  REENGINEERING THE CORPORATION: A MANIFESTO FOR BUSINESS REVOLUTION , 1995 .

[13]  H. Winter,et al.  Wat niet weet, wat niet deert: Een evaluatieonderzoek naar de werking van de Wet bescherming persoonsgegevens in de praktijk , 2009 .

[14]  Sunil Choenni,et al.  Socio-technical Impediments of Open Data , 2012 .

[15]  Nitesh Bharosa,et al.  Deriving Principles for Guiding Service Encounters: A Participative Design Research Approach , 2013, Int. J. Inf. Syst. Serv. Sect..

[16]  Marijn Janssen,et al.  The potential of metadata for linked open data and its value for users and publishers , 2012 .

[17]  A. M. Evans,et al.  Open Government Initiatives: Challenges of Citizen Participation , 2013 .

[18]  Anne Fleur van Veenstra,et al.  Opening Moves - Drivers, Enablers and Barriers of Open Data in a Semi-public Organization , 2013, EGOV.

[19]  王靜詩 Open Government Declaration , 2010 .

[20]  Yannis Charalabidis,et al.  Issues and Guiding Principles for Opening Governmental Judicial Research Data , 2012, International Conference on Electronic Government.

[21]  Sunil Choenni,et al.  Exploring process barriers to release public sector information in local government , 2012, ICEGOV.

[22]  Bastiaan van Loenen,et al.  Brave New Open Data World? , 2012, Int. J. Spatial Data Infrastructures Res..

[23]  Stefan Huber,et al.  “Open”: the changing relation between citizens, public administration, and political authority , 2012 .

[24]  Ralf Klischewski,et al.  Identifying Informational Needs for Open Government: The Case of Egypt , 2012, 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[25]  Michael Hammer,et al.  Reengineering Work: Don’t Automate, Obliterate , 1990 .

[26]  Yogesh Kumar Dwivedi,et al.  Transformational change and business process reengineering (BPR): Lessons from the British and Dutch public sector , 2011, Gov. Inf. Q..

[27]  Yogesh Kumar Dwivedi,et al.  Analysing challenges, barriers and CSF of egov adoption , 2013 .

[28]  Efthimios Tambouris,et al.  Open Government Data: A Stage Model , 2011, EGOV.

[29]  Thomas J. Housel,et al.  SIM Competition Paper: Information Systems for Crisis Management: Lessons from Southern California Edison , 1986, MIS Q..

[30]  Katleen Janssen,et al.  The influence of the PSI directive on open government data: An overview of recent developments , 2011, Gov. Inf. Q..

[31]  R. Nugroho,et al.  A comparison of open data policies in different countries: Lessons learned for an open data policy in Indonesia , 2013 .

[32]  Theresa A. Pardo,et al.  Exploring the Motive for Data Publication in Open Data Initiative: Linking Intention to Action , 2012, 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[33]  Vishanth Weerakkody,et al.  Moving from E-Government to T-Government: A Study of Process Reengineering Challenges in a UK Local Authority Context , 2008, Int. J. Electron. Gov. Res..

[34]  Sunil Choenni,et al.  Crime statistics online: potentials and challenges , 2010, DG.O.

[35]  Van Haren,et al.  TOGAF Version 9.1 , 2011 .

[36]  Patrice McDermott,et al.  Building open government , 2010, Gov. Inf. Q..

[37]  Aline Klingenberg,et al.  Wat niet weet, wat niet deert , 2009 .

[38]  Peter Conradie,et al.  Bridging the contradictions of Open Data , 2013, ECEG 2013.

[39]  Albert Jacob Meijer,et al.  Publishing public performance results on the Internet: Do stakeholders use the Internet to hold Dutch public service organizations to account? , 2007, Gov. Inf. Q..

[40]  Sjaak Brinkkemper,et al.  Information Systems Engineering: State of the Art and Research Themes , 2000 .

[41]  Les Gasser,et al.  A Design Theory for Systems That Support Emergent Knowledge Processes , 2002, MIS Q..

[42]  E. Felten,et al.  Government Data and the Invisible Hand , 2009 .

[43]  Reinhard Riedl,et al.  Swiss Executive Authorities on Open Government Data -- Policy Making beyond Transparency and Participation , 2013, 2013 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[44]  Sandeep Purao,et al.  Action Design Research , 2011, MIS Q..

[45]  Paul T. Jaeger,et al.  Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies , 2010, Gov. Inf. Q..

[46]  M. Hammer,et al.  Reengineering the Corporation , 1993 .

[47]  S. Dawes Interagency information sharing: Expected benefits, manageable risks , 1996 .

[48]  Philip M. Napoli,et al.  On making public policy with publicly available data: The case of U.S. communications policymaking , 2010, Gov. Inf. Q..

[49]  Marijn Janssen,et al.  A comparison of open data policies and their implementation in two Dutch ministries , 2012, dg.o '12.

[50]  Soon Ae Chun,et al.  Proceedings of the 11th Annual International Digital Government Research Conference on Public Administration Online: Challenges and Opportunities , 2010 .

[51]  Gary W. Dickson,et al.  A Principles-Based Enterprise Architecture: Lessons from Texaco and Star Enterprise , 1990, MIS Q..