Content uploaded by Cláudia Melati
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Cláudia Melati on Jun 17, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION | Rio d e Jan ei ro 54(3):400-415, May - June 2020
400
ISSN: 1982-3134
Smart government: analysis of dimensions from the
perspective of public managers
Claudia Melati ¹
Raquel Janissek-Muniz ¹
¹ Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul / School of Administration, Graduate Program in Administration, Porto Alegre /
RS – Brazil
Rece nt studies show that the concept of smart government and its respective dimensions are not yet consolidated.
e issue of the e ciency of public activity suggests that smart government should be recognized and better explored
in public management. is study brings an original contribution to the literature, presenting an analysis of the
recognition, importance, and application of the concept’s dimensions from the perspective of public managers.
Adopting a qualitative and exploratory approach, operationalized through interviews with public managers in the
South of Brazil, we sought to identify the dimensions of smart government that are recognized and applied by public
managers. e results show the concept’s importance and its application and bene ts in public administration.
e ndings point out the most in uencital dimensions and their importance in the process, with emphasis on
the organizational culture and the organization of data and public information.
Keywords: government intelligence; smart government; public management.
Governo inteligente: análise de dimensões sob a perspectiva de gestores públicos
Estudos recentes apontam que o conceito de governo inteligente e suas respectivas dimensões ainda não estão
consolidados. Considerando a importância do tema para a e ciência da atividade pública, seu entendimento e seu
reconhecimento para a gestão pública são questões que devem ser mais bem exploradas. Com tal intuito, este estudo
traz uma contribuição original ainda não abordada na literatura, apresentando uma análise do reconhecimento,
da importância e da aplicação das referidas dimensões sob a perspectiva de gestores públicos. A partir de uma
abordagem qualitativa e exploratória, operacionalizada por meio de entrevistas com gestores públicos do Sul do
Brasil, buscou-se identi car dimensões de governo inteligente reconhecidas e aplicadas na gestão pública. Os
resultados reconhecem a importância do conceito e sua aplicação e benefícios na administração pública e apontam
as dimensões com maior in uência e importância no processo, com destaque para a cultura organizacional e a
organização de dados e informações públicas.
Palavras-chave: inteligência em governo; smart government; gestão pública.
Inteligencia gubernamental: análisis de dimensiones desde la perspectiva de gestores públicos
Estudios recientes muestran que el concepto de gobierno inteligente y sus respectivas dimensiones aún no están
consolidados. Teniendo en cuenta la importancia del tema para la e ciencia de la actividad pública, su comprensión
y reconocimiento para la gestión pública son cuestiones que deberían explorarse mejor. Con ese n, este estudio
aporta una contribución original aún no abordada en la literatura, presentando un análisis del reconocimiento,
importancia y aplicación de dichas dimensiones desde la perspectiva de los gestores públicos. Desde un enfoque
cualitativo y exploratorio, operacionalizado a través de entrevistas con gestores públicos del sur de Brasil, se buscó
identi car dimensiones de gobierno inteligente reconocidas y aplicadas en la gestión pública. Los resultados
reconocen la importancia del concepto y su aplicación y los bene cios en la administración pública y señalan
las dimensiones con mayor in uencia e importancia en el proceso, con énfasis en la cultura organizacional y la
organización de datos e información pública.
Palabras clave: inteligencia gubernamental; smart government; gestión pública.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0034-761220190226
Article received on June 25, 2019 and accepted on February 03, 2020.
[Translated version] Note: All quotes in English translated by this article’s translator.
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION | Rio d e Jan ei ro 54(3):400-415, May - June 2020
RAP | Smart government: analysis of dimensions from the perspective of public managers
401
1. INTRODUCTION
e Brazilian federal government started a process of modernizing public administration at the
beginning of the 1990s, focusing on management eciency based on cost reduction and result-oriented
activities, as well as adopting more managerial and less bureaucratic assumptions (Abrucio, 2007;
Batista, 2012; Bresser-Pereira, 1996; De Paula, 2005; Klering, Porsse, & Guadagnin, 2010). By the
mid-2000s, e-government emerged to transform the government’s relationship with society, oering
interactivity with citizens, companies, and government agencies. E-government has contributed to the
delivery of public services in a dynamic way, promoting a more ecient administration, concerned
with the citizens’ quality of life, and with the quality of management (Guimarães & Medeiros, 2005;
Rezende, 2018).
For Ribeiro, Pereira, and Benedicto (2013), public administration reforms contributed to improving
political decision-making capabilities and to state’s decentralization, implementing horizontal
coordination, and updating the personnel’s managerial capacity. e trend observed in the past decade
showed the construction of a more participatory, ecient, and integrated public administration
(Capobiango, Nascimento, Silva, & Faroni, 2013; De Paula, 2005; Secchi, 2009), providing better
management in the provision of public services. Gil-Garcia, Helbig, and Ojo (2014) demonstrate
that dierent levels and branches of governments are adopting tools and applications to organize
the administration and operate in a rapidly changing environment, seeking to respond to society’s
demands for quality and eective services (Schaefer, Macadar, & Luciano, 2017).
Johnston and Hansen (2011) advocate the need for smart government infrastructure to the
individuals’ collective capacities to organize, interact, and govern, overcoming complex social
challenges. For the authors, such infrastructure is more agile and ecient than the ones set under
the paradigms guiding the current government. Other studies point out key factors to establish
smart governments able to cope with complexity and uncertainty, such as coordination, continued
engagement, and access to open data and shared information (Gil-Garcia et al., 2014; H. J. Scholl &
M. C. Scholl, 2014).
Studies on government intelligence (Cepik, 1997; Desouza, 2005; Gil-Garcia, Pardo, & Aldama-
Nalda, 2013; Jiménez, Solanas, & Falcone, 2014; Johnston & Hansen, 2011; Linders, Liao, & Wang,
2015; Viorel & Radu, 2015) show that the public sector has specicities in comparison to the private
sector regarding intelligence activity, and emphasize the importance of the government’s continuous
environmental monitoring and analysis of data.
e research on intelligence and government shows that the terms ‘smart government’ or
‘government intelligence’ do not entirely relate to the concept of intelligence used to refer to monitoring
activities conducted to collect data that produce the information and knowledge to subsidize decision-
making. e terms incorporate the notion of the service delivered from data and information from
the context (Andriotti, Freitas, & Janissek-Muniz, 2008; Janissek-Muniz, Lesca, & Freitas, 2006).
However, there is no consensus regarding the concept and denition of smart government, which
suggests the need for further studies. Recent studies point to elements collaborating to the development
of a unied concept of smart and open government (Gil-Garcia et al., 2014; Gil-Garcia, Zhang, &
Puron-Cid, 2016; H. J. Scholl & M. C. Scholl, 2014).
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION | Rio d e Jan ei ro 54(3):400-415, May - June 2020
RAP | Smart government: analysis of dimensions from the perspective of public managers
402
In addition to unifying concepts, government professionals must understand how a more ecient,
eective, transparent, and collaborative management and provision of public services leads to a
smarter government, as well as using such understanding to develop strategies able to improve the
use of intelligence in government (Nam & Pardo, 2011).
Although there is no consensus on the limits of the term, this study considers, in a concise way,
that “smart government” is a government capable of feeling and reacting to the environment, through
collecting data to be transformed into information and knowledge to improve decision-making in the
public sector. e research aimed to identify the dimensions of smart government that are recognized
and adopted by public managers, contributing to the consolidation of the concept. In addition, the
analysis of the relevance and applicability of the dimensions of intelligence (smartness) can assist
the most diverse governmental spheres in the development of policies related to the qualication of
evidence-based decision-making.
Including this introduction, the article is organized in 5 sections. e second section below
presents the concept of intelligence in the context of public management and its evolution towards
the smart government. e third describes the method adopted, followed by a section showing the
results obtained. e h section presents the nal considerations.
2. GOVERNMENT INTELLIGENCE
According to Herman (1996, p. 1),
[...] Governments collect process and use information. […] But ‘intelligence’ in government
usually has a more restricted meaning than just information and information services. It has
particular associations with international relations, defence, national security and secrecy, and
with specialized institutions labelled ‘intelligence’.
For Herman (1996), several studies on intelligence and government emphasize national security
(Cepik, 2005; Desouza, 2005; Paula & Rover, 2012; Veronese, 2013), particularly analyzing the role of
intelligence agencies in each country. According to Paula and Rover (2012, p. 220, our translation),
e importance of activities of intelligence is also based on the need for societies’ protection and
development. e implementation of national intelligence systems and the ow of information
have been a practice in warfare, diplomacy, maintenance of internal order, and, more recently,
the control of internal order and the need for public security activities.
Desouza (2005) points out that data are traditionally collected from two or more sources (such as
satellite images; voice and data transmission; human informants) and are synthesized and evaluated
to become information, used aerward in decision-making. e information is used based on the
particular issues of each context, resulting in actions and services to the public.
Several studies on the importance of information as a driver of managerial decision making
(Andriotti et al., 2008; Choo, 2002; Davenport, 1998; Janissek-Muniz et al., 2006; Paula & Rover,
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION | Rio d e Jan ei ro 54(3):400-415, May - June 2020
RAP | Smart government: analysis of dimensions from the perspective of public managers
403
2012) show the need to monitor the organization’s external environment, in order to understand it
based on the selective interpretation of information. is process is considered the organizations’
intelligence activity.
Another issue oen present in the literature on intelligence in the public sector is the use of
information and communication technologies (ICT) in government (Gil-Garcia et al., 2013; Gil-
Garcia et al., 2016; H. J. Scholl & M. C. Scholl, 2014; Johnston & Hansen, 2011; Paula & Rover, 2012).
Governments use ICT for dierent purposes, such as collecting data to support decision-making
processes and improve services (Gil-Garcia et al., 2013). In addition, with the use of ICT, adequate
data and strategies may contribute to reduce social exclusion and promote social justice (Gil-Garcia
et al., 2016). e research by Linders et al. (2015) shows that studies are exploring the potential of
ICT to drive transformative change in government and governance.
For H. J. Scholl and M.C. Scholl (2014, p. 163),
[…] actionable and omnipresent information along with its underlying technologies are substantial
prerequisites and backbones for developing models of smart (democratic) governance, which
foster smart, open, and agile governmental institutions as well as stakeholder participation and
collaboration on all levels and in all branches of the governing process.
In the study by Liu and Zheng (2015), the authors connect smart government to the provision
of public service, eciency and eectiveness of the services, and address governmental and societal
issues through cross-departmental collaboration.
Smart government may be observed through multiple dimensions of intelligence, each of them
contributing individually or in an integrated way to the development of smart government (Gil-
Garcia et al., 2016). For the authors, ‘intelligence’ (‘smartness’) should be conceptualized in a broad
and multifaceted way.
Another issue to be highlighted regarding smart government is evidence-based decision making
since data-driven decisions and the increasing use of data collected through omnipresent sensory
devices, advanced assessment, and integrated applications, help to improve government’s decision-
making (Gil-Garcia et al., 2016).
erefore, it is possible to observe an original link of the intelligence process with the areas of
security and foreign aairs (Cepik, 1997, 2005; Herman, 1996). Over the years, however, studies have
expanded the scope of the concept of government intelligence, using information from the context to
address issues such as eciency in public activities and the delivery of quality public services, as well
as the increasing participation of civil society in the public sphere (Gil-Garcia et al., 2013; Gil-Garcia
et al., 2014; H. J. Scholl & M. C. Scholl, 2014; Johnston & Hansen, 2011).
From this evolutionary perspective, more recent studies (Eom, Choi, & Sung, 2016; Gil-Garcia
et al., 2014; Gil-Garcia et al., 2016; H. J. Scholl & M. C. Scholl, 2014; Johnston & Hansen, 2011) have
put forward the notion of smart government as a new concept to be explored in-depth.
e meaning and explanation of the idea of smart government listed in Box 1 indicate the relevance
of the concept for the development of public activities.
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION | Rio d e Jan ei ro 54(3):400-415, May - June 2020
RAP | Smart government: analysis of dimensions from the perspective of public managers
404
BOX 1 THE CONCEPT OF SMART GOVERNMENT
Author Year Smart Government
Johnston and Hansen 2011
Smart governance infrastructures increase society’s ability to organize, interact,
and govern to overcome complex social challenges. They make the government
more responsive and efficient than the traditional governance infrastructures.
Gil-Garcia et al. 2014
“Smart government is used to characterize activities that creatively invest in
emergent technologies coupled with innovative strategies to achieve more agile
and resilient government structures and governance infrastructures” (p. I1).
H. J. Scholl and M. C. Scholl 2014
Smart governmental institutions adopt practices of open and agile government
and incentive “stakeholder participation and collaboration on all levels and in all
branches of the governing process” (p.163).
Liu and Zheng 2015
Smart government may be related to the quality of service delivery to citizens, to
efficiency and efficacy of such services, and to addressing wicked problems by
adopting cross-departmental collaboration.
Eom et al. 2016
‘Smart’ emerges as a keyword in government reform strategies. Although there
are many different perspectives on smart government, it can be broadly considered
as the adoption of “a creative mix of emerging technologies and innovation in the
public sector” (Eom et al., 2016).
Source: Elaborated by the authors.
e concept of smart government is primarily related to agility and eciency in government due to
the use of ICT and the participation and collaboration of citizens, companies, and other stakeholders
such as nonprots.
Studies have shown a convergence to the concept of intelligence (or smartness) linked to the activity
of monitoring the environment to obtain data and transform it into information and knowledge to
support decision-making (Gil-Garcia et al., 2013; Gil-Garcia et al., 2016; H. J. Scholl & M. C. Scholl,
2014) since smart governments are able to feel and react to the environment based on data relevant
to their decision making (Gil-Garcia et al., 2016).
For Gil-Garcia, Zhang, and Puron-Cid (2016), the capacity for data management and information
processing and sharing through ICT are considered critical factors for partnerships and inter-
organizational communications among stakeholders of smart government initiatives. H. J. Scholl
and M. C. Scholl (2014, p. 166) also outlined elements characteristics of smart governments “such as
openness and transparency of government decision-making and actions, open information sharing,
stakeholder participation and collaboration, leveraging government operations and services via
intelligent and integrated technology use, as well as government’s role of facilitator of innovation,
sustainability, competitiveness, and livability.”
Other key points in the literature on smart government:
•According to Johnston and Hansen (2011, p. 9) “Smart governance infrastructures are needed to
eectively harness the unique skills and knowledge that too oen lie dormant in the crowd;”
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION | Rio d e Jan ei ro 54(3):400-415, May - June 2020
RAP | Smart government: analysis of dimensions from the perspective of public managers
405
•e government’s context of operation is complex and oers a lot of data and information on several
areas such as security, health, education (Cepik, 2005; Desouza, 2005);
•For Paula and Rover (2012, p. 225, our translation) ICTs “are devices and tools that assist in the
process of managing, organizing, treating, and disseminating information, as well as contributing
to building knowledge for organizations.” For Gil-Garcia et al. (2013), such tools enhance the
government’s decision-making and service delivery.
e literature review on smart government made it possible to identify signicant dimensions,
as shown in Box 2.
BOX 2 DIMENSIONS OF SMART GOVERNMENT
Dimension Meaning Authors
Use of external data
and information
Highlights the importance of the use of data and
information latent in the population, and that may
contribute to public management.
Gil-Garcia et al. (2013); Gil-Garcia et al.
(2016); H. J. Scholl and M. C. Scholl (2014)
Organizational culture
based on intelligence
Encourages a culture of awareness and information
sharing through networks; data collection and
external information; effective use of information to
develop the work and support the public manager’s
decision-making.
Lesca and Janissek-Muniz (2015);
Schoemaker and Day (2009); Xu (2007)
Management
efficiency and
effectiveness
Efficiency and effectiveness of public management,
proper use of ICT, data, and information, and society’s
participation.
H. J. Scholl and M. C. Scholl (2014); Liu and
Zheng (2015)
Effective use of
technologies (big data,
business intelligence)
The use of ICTs for different purposes within the
government, such as collection, processing, and
sharing of data and information that will support
decision-making and improve the delivery of public
services.
Gil-Garcia et al. (2013); Gil-Garcia et al.
(2016); H. J. Scholl and M. C. Scholl (2014);
Johnston and Hansen (2011); Linders et
al. (2015); Paula and Rover (2012); Wang,
Zhang, Li, and Ruan (2016)
Evidence-based
decision-making
Increasing data-driven decision making through
omnipresent use of sensory devices, advanced
assessment, and integrated applications allow
governments to make informed decisions.
Gil-Garcia et al. (2016); H. J. Scholl and M. C.
Scholl (2014)
Social engagement Society’s active participation in the development of
public management.
Eom et al. (2016); Gil-Garcia et al. (2014);
Gil-Garcia et al. (2013); H. J. Scholl and M. C.
Scholl (2014); Johnston and Hansen (2011)
Cross-departmental
and inter-
organizational
collaboration
Sharing data and information among several agencies
of the public sector, through collaboration and
development of unified public activities to improve
services.
Gil-Garcia et al. (2016); Liu and Zheng (2015)
Continue
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION | Rio d e Jan ei ro 54(3):400-415, May - June 2020
RAP | Smart government: analysis of dimensions from the perspective of public managers
406
Dimension Meaning Authors
Agile government
Improving the delivery of public service through
the massive use of ICT, data and information, and
society’s participation
H. J. Scholl and M. C. Scholl (2014); Johnston
and Hansen (2011)
Innovation, co-
creation, collective
intelligence
Refining processes; insights on new public policies;
new forms of communication between government
and society; sharing decision-making by using
collective intelligence.
Eom et al. (2016); Gil-Garcia et al. (2016);
Guenduez, Singler, Tomczak, Schedler, and
Oberli (2018); Juniawan, Sandhyaduhita,
Purwandari, Yudhoatmojo, and Dewi (2017);
Nam (2016)
Source: Elaborated by the authors.
3. METHODOLOGY
In order to identify the dimensions of smart government that managers recognize and apply in their
activity, the study adopted a qualitative and exploratory approach, considering that “one of the key
benets of qualitative research is that it allows a researcher to see and understand the context within
which decisions and actions take place” (Myers, 2013, p. 5). According to the author, qualitative
researchers argue that qualitative research is the appropriate choice if one wants to understand, in-
depth, people’s motivations, reasons, actions, beliefs, and their context. e research is an exploratory
study because it addresses a relatively new topic, where there is still not much work developed,
especially in Brazil.
e study used the Web of Science, SciELO, and SCOPUS databases, as well as the most prominent
journals recommended by the Association of Information Systems (AIS). e terms used as search
criteria were: “government or public administration” AND “intelligence or forecast or corporate
foresight or weak signal or environmental scanning or future studies or strategic foresight or scenario
planning or smart.” e search resulted in 164 articles, analyzed to identify dimensions of smart
government and elements that support it, oering subsidies to elaborate questions for interviews
with public managers.
According to Triviños (1987), semi-structured interviews are characterized by basic
questions that are supported by theories related to the subject studied. For the author, semi-
structured interviews favor the description of social phenomena and their explanation and broad
understanding, as well as recognizing the researcher’s conscious and active presence in the process
of collecting information.
Using the interview questions presented in Box 3, the study conducted ten interviews with public
managers working in two secretariats of one of the southern states of Brazil. e state secretariats
chosen have a cross-cutting characteristic, which means that they are linked to the other state agencies.
e interviews were conducted in May and June 2018 and lasted an average of 30 minutes.
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION | Rio d e Jan ei ro 54(3):400-415, May - June 2020
RAP | Smart government: analysis of dimensions from the perspective of public managers
407
BOX 3 INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
Name:
Sex:
Age:
Job position:
Length of time in civil service:
1. Based on the concept of smart government exposed, how do you think the process of government intelligence is
established?
2. Can you list some of the benefits of this process both from the perspective of internal management and the delivery of
public services?
3. Studies highlight specific dimensions regarding government intelligence. Can you comment on these dimensions?
– External data and information for decision-making
– Organizational Culture
– Management efficiency and effectiveness
– Use of big data and business intelligence systems
– Technology for developing intelligence processes
– Evidence-based decisions
– Social engagement in building efficient management
– Cross-departmental and interorganizational collaboration
– Government agility
– How do you understand the current situation in the government concerning issues such as innovation, interoperation,
creation, collective intelligence?
4. Do you think the government is effectively using the large amount of data and information that is latent in the
environment?
5. What institutional and structural dimensions do you consider essential for the further development of intelligence activity
in government?
6. What behavioral dimensions (organizational and individual), would you highlight?
7. Have you noticed considerable changes in relation to the subject (smart government/government intelligence) in public
administration? Since when?
8. Is there anything you would like to add or expand on?
Final thanks.
Source: Elaborated by the authors.
e interviewees were chosen based on ease of access and were recruited by the previous interviewee.
e recruited participant was selected to be interviewed as long as they met the requirement of being
a manager in a state agency or department. As for the prole of the ten interviewees, seven were men,
four had been working for more than 20 years in civil service, and ve were in executive positions
in the state agencies. e interviewees worked in dierent sectors, such as public procurement,
fundraising, government planning, and information systems.
e interviewees are not categorized according to their specic area of work since the public
administration has numerous areas of activity, from running the routine state apparatus, to the activities
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION | Rio d e Jan ei ro 54(3):400-415, May - June 2020
RAP | Smart government: analysis of dimensions from the perspective of public managers
408
of service provision, in direct contact with citizens. Interviewees were contacted via email or telephone
to check their availability. ey were informed of the objective of the research, the topic covered in
the interview, and its duration. During the interviews, the researcher observed and recorded aspects
considered relevant for the study (both content and impressions experienced during the interaction
with the participant). Finally, the interviews were transcribed.
e data obtained were submitted to content analysis. According to Bardin (2011, p. 48, our
translation), content analysis is
[...] a set of techniques to analyze communications using systematic and objective procedures
to describe the content of messages, seeking to obtain quantitative or qualitative indicators that
allow inferring knowledge on the condition of production/reception (inferred variables) of such
messages.
e data were collected, organized, categorized, and analyzed in text les and spreadsheets. e
analysis of interviews, based on the dimensions of smart government obtained from the literature,
was used to consolidate the results presented below and the research’s conclusions.
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
e literature review oered the following dimensions regarding the concept of smart government:
1. Use of external data and information;
2. Organizational culture based on intelligence;
3. Management eciency and eectiveness;
4. Eective use of Technologies (big data, business intelligence);
5. Evidence based decision-making;
6. Social engagement;
7. Cross-departmental and inter-organizational collaboration;
8. Agile government;
9. Innovation, co-creation, collective intelligence.
Based on the dimensions of smart government observed in the literature, the study sought to obtain
the interviewees’ understanding and perception regarding the phenomenon. e interviews started
with a presentation of the concept as portrayed in the literature, followed by questions seeking to
identify how the interviewees observe the applicability of the concept in their current administrative
practices. During the interview, the research presented the dimensions of smart government mapped
in the literature review, and the participants exposed their perceptions regarding the relevance of
each dimension to the development of smart government. Finally, the interviews sought to reveal the
applicability of each dimension, in addition to collecting insights on the evolution of smart government
based on the public managers’ practice.
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION | Rio d e Jan ei ro 54(3):400-415, May - June 2020
RAP | Smart government: analysis of dimensions from the perspective of public managers
409
e analysis of the interviews showed that only one interviewee did not know the concept and the
dimensions of smart government. is phenomenon caught attention considering that government
intelligence is a relatively new concept, restricted to issues of public security and foreign aairs until
the mid-2000s (Cepik, 1997; Desouza, 2005; Herman, 1996) and only more recent studies show a
broader orientation of the concept, applied to the public administration as a whole.
e public managers interviewed recognize the importance of structuring intelligence processes
in public administration, but emphasize that these measures are still incipient, requiring further
development and infrastructure. According to one interviewee:
We have plenty of data in the state. We do not have, however, information and knowledge. So,
this structure needs to be designed, and we have been working in this direction with several other
managers.
Participants mentioned the need for system interoperability and communication among the
dierent state agencies to process and transform data in relevant information and knowledge to
support decision-making in public management, which would characterize smart government.
For the interviewees, the concern and interest on the part of senior government management
about smart government is a recent phenomenon. It has been discussed during the past two years
through the creation of a smart government network, seeking to develop and systematize a process
of government intelligence in the state’s administration. In any case, all participants recognize the
relevance of structuring processes to develop a smarter government. Among the benets of such
processes for public administration and the society as a whole, the interviewees pointed out the
predictive power gained when using data and information in government; the quality and eectiveness
of informed and knowledge-based management; the construction and coordination of government’s
databases; and delivery of eective and high-quality public services.
e benets that public managers emphasized are in line with the benets identied in the
literature. e studies stress the importance of monitoring the environment in order to obtain data,
which becomes information and knowledge supporting the government’s decision-making process
(Gil-Garcia et al., 2013; Gil-Garcia et al., 2016; H. J. Scholl & M. C. Scholl, 2014). At the same time
as recognizing benets, most interviewees’ pointed out that one of the challenges to implementing
smart government is the need to develop and coordinate a single database providing information to
the dierent state agencies. For one of the interviewees, the state presents an institutional weakness
regarding data and information-driven operation.
In addition to the relevance and benets of smart government observed by interviewees, the
research identied which dimensions of smart government are recognized and applied (as well as their
importance) for public managers. Table 1 presents a summary of the analysis, based on the response
of interviewees about recognizing the dimensions and their application in public administration. e
cells marked with “x” represent that the interviewee recognizes the dimension, and its application is
highlighted in gray. e importance participants attributed to the dimensions are discussed below,
also based on their responses during the interview.
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION | Rio d e Jan ei ro 54(3):400-415, May - June 2020
RAP | Smart government: analysis of dimensions from the perspective of public managers
410
TABLE 1 ANALYSIS OF DIMENSIONS ACCORDING TO PUBLIC MANAGERS
Dimensions of smart government
Recognition and application of the dimensions of smart government
Interviewees
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Use of external data and information x x x x x x x x x x
Organizational culture based on intelligence x x x x x x x x x x
Management efficiency and effectiveness x x x x x x x x x x
Effective use of Technologies (big data, business
intelligence) x x x x x x x x x x
Evidence based decision-making x x x x x x x x x x
Social engagement x x x x x x
Cross-departmental and inter-organizational
collaboration x x x x x x x x x x
Agile government x x x x x x x x x x
Innovation, co-creation, collective intelligence x x x x x x x x x
Coordination and unification of databases x x x x x x x x x x
Source: Elaborated by the authors.
Table 1 shows that public managers recognize most of the dimensions of smart government
retrieved from the literature. Among them, the less recognized was social engagement to develop
government intelligence, which may be explained by the opinion of most interviewees that the
government rst needs to organize and structure internal processes before establishing a connection
with society as a whole. ree public managers interviewed mentioned the need to disseminate
information and the dimensions of smart government throughout the public administration, so that
civil servants are aware and engage in such an approach.
Against this backdrop, the question regarding the dimension of organizational culture based on
intelligence is unanimously recognized by the interviewees, but none of them considers this dimension
as being applied in their practice in public administration. For one of the interviewees,
[...] it is necessary to recognize that we work towards a single objective: serving society. Serving society
depends on the participation and cooperation of all government agencies; they need to include in the
organizational culture the importance of using data and transforming these data into information
and knowledge to improve public management.
For four interviewees, the process should start with the dissemination of the concept of smart
government or government intelligence, demonstrating the importance of connectivity and
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION | Rio d e Jan ei ro 54(3):400-415, May - June 2020
RAP | Smart government: analysis of dimensions from the perspective of public managers
411
collaboration among the several governmental actors, so that decision-making is coherent and based
on dierent views and assumptions.
According to Table 1, the use of technology through several intelligence systems and tools already
developed (big data, business intelligence, and others) is well recognized and applied in public
administration. For the managers interviewed, technological tools aimed at government intelligence
have been implemented in the state in the last two years. ey are facilitating the process of capturing
data and converting them into information and knowledge necessary to improve the eectiveness
of public management. However, managers emphasize the need for sta development and training
in order to use such tools properly. e interviewees indicate this aspect as one of the state’s current
challenges.
It is worth mentioning that, during the interviews and the analyses, a new dimension emerged,
dierent from those identied in the literature. It is listed in Table 1 as “coordination and unication
of databases.” According to the interviewees, this new dimension poses a signicant challenge to be
overcome, and it contributes to the application and development of the other dimensions of smart
government. For the public managers, the lack of a coordinated and unied database serving all state
agencies reduces data reliability, jeopardizing the quality of the information used in decision-making.
Respondents pointed out that smart government is only possible with an organized and reliable
database. ey argue that the government has made little progress in unifying the databases, which
restricts the capability to conduct process based on intelligence. e next section observes the results
and discussion provided here, oering the nal considerations of the study.
5. FINAL CONSIDERATIONS
is study contributes to the eld by presenting an analysis of the recognition, importance, and
application of the dimensions of smart government from the perspective of managers of public
agencies of one of the southern states of Brazil.
A literature review was carried out to identify dimensions of smart government that are recognized
and applied by public managers. Next, interviews with public managers were conducted and analyzed
to conrm the dimensions identied in the literature review. e ndings indicate that public
managers recognize the dimensions of smart government. ey also point out the importance and
benets of smartness in building more eective public administration. e main challenges for the
public administration are the issues of organizational culture and the coordination and unication of
the government’s database. Overcoming these challenges will allow the state to implement a smarter
government from the interviewees’ point of view.
e fact that public managers recognize the dimensions of smart government is an essential
contribution of this research, allowing future studies to advance and uncover the diculties of
developing and implementing such dimensions in government, considering that their applicability
is still weak.
e need for a stronger organizational culture toward intelligence appeared prominently in the
analysis of the interviews. erefore, future research could include interviews with public servants
who do not hold management positions in order to verify their understanding of smart government.
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION | Rio d e Jan ei ro 54(3):400-415, May - June 2020
RAP | Smart government: analysis of dimensions from the perspective of public managers
412
In addition, further studies on smart government should address the coordination and unication
of the government’s database. ese eorts would allow understanding which organizational theories
prove useful in the process of moving toward smart government, and a comparative study with
other Brazilian states would be helpful to verify whether the problem is localized or systemic in the
Brazilian context. Finally, research linking administrative practices to each of the dimensions studied
are suggested to contribute to improving public management.
In conclusion, there is still a long way to go to implement small government in all its dimensions.
However, the public administration already has some initiatives adopting elements suggested by the
literature on the subject. is study provides subsidies for the conceptual consolidation of smart
government and to improve public management, encouraging the application and development of
conceptual dimensions in managerial practices.
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION | Rio d e Jan ei ro 54(3):400-415, May - June 2020
RAP | Smart government: analysis of dimensions from the perspective of public managers
413
REFERENCES
Abrucio, F. L. (2007). Recent trajectory of the
Brazilian public management: a critical assessment
and the renewal of the reform agenda.Revista de
Administração Pública,41(Esp.), 67-86.
Andriotti, F. K., Freitas, H., & Janissek-Muniz, R.
(2008). Informação informal e a monitoração do
ambiente organizacional: reflexões e sugestões
para a área de TI.In Anais do 3° Congresso Ibero
Americano de Gestão do Conhecimento e Inteligência
Competitiva, Brasília, DF, Brasil.
Bardin, L. (2011). Análise de conteúdo. Lisboa,
Portugal: Ed. 70.
Batista, F. F. (2012). Modelo de gestão do conhecimento
para a administração pública brasileira: como
implementar a gestão do conhecimento para produzir
resultados em benefício do cidadão. Brasília, DF:
Ipea, 2012.
Bresser-Pereira, L. C. (1996). Da administração
pública burocrática à gerencial. Revista do Serviço
Público, 47(1), 7-40.
Capobiango, R. P., Nascimento, A. D. L., Silva, E. A.,
& Faroni, W. (2013). Reformas administrativas no
Brasil: uma abordagem teórica e crítica. Revista de
Gestão,20(1), 61-78.
Cepik, M. A. (1997). Inteligência, política e poder
no Estado contemporâneo.Revista de Sociologia e
Política, 9, 193-196.
Cepik, M. A. (2005). Regime político e sistema de
inteligência no Brasil: legitimidade e efetividade
como desaos institucionais.Dados, 48(1), 67-113.
Choo, C. W. (2002).Information management for
the intelligent organization: the art of scanning
the environment (3 ed.). Medford, New Jersey:
Information Today Inc.
Davenport, T. H. (1998). Ecologia da informação:
porque só a tecnologia não basta para o sucesso na era
da informação (3 ed). São Paulo, SP: Futura.
Desouza, K. C. (2005). Restructuring
government intelligence programs: a few
good suggestions. Government Information
Quarterly,22(3), 342-353.
Eom, S. J., Choi, N., & Sung, W. (2016). e use
of smart work in government: empirical analysis
of Korean experiences.Government Information
Quarterly,33(3), 562-571.
Gil-Garcia, J. R., Helbig, N., & Ojo, A. (2014). Being
smart: emerging technologies and innovation in the
public sector.Government Information Quarterly,31,
I1-I8.
Gil-Garcia, J. R., Pardo, T. A., & Aldama-Nalda, A.
(2013, June). Smart cities and smart governments:
using information technologies to address urban
challenges. InProceedings of the 14th Annual
International Conference on Digital Government
Research(pp. 296-297), Quebec City, QC, Canada.
Gil-Garcia, J. R., Zhang, J., & Puron-Cid, G. (2016).
Conceptualizing smartness in government: an
integrative and multi-dimensional view.Government
Information Quarterly,33(3), 524-534.
Guenduez, A. A., Singler, S., Tomczak, T., Schedler,
K., & Oberli, M. (2018). Smart government success
factors. Yearbook of Swiss Administrative Sciences,
9(1), 96-110.
Guimarães, T. D. A., & Medeiros, P. H. R. (2005).
A relação entre governo eletrônico e governança
eletrônica no governo federal brasileiro.Cadernos
EBAPE.BR,3(4), 1-18.
Herman, M. (1996).Intelligence power in peace and
war. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Janissek-Muniz, R., Lesca, H., & Freitas, H. (2006).
Inteligência estratégica antecipativa e coletiva
para tomada de decisão.Revista Organizações em
Contexto,2(4), 92-118.
Jimenez, C. E., Solanas, A., & Falcone, F. (2014).
E-government interoperability: linking open and
smart government.Computer,47(10), 22-24.
Johnston, E. W., & Hansen, D. L. (2011). Design lessons
for smart governance infrastructures.Transforming
American governance: Rebooting the public square
(Cap. 13, pp. 197-212). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
Juniawan, M. A., Sandhyaduhita, P., Purwandari,
B., Yudhoatmojo, S. B., & Dewi, M. A. A. (2017).
Smart government assessment using Scottish Smart
City Maturity Model: a case study of Depok city. In
Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on
Advanced Computer Science and Information Systems
(ICACSIS), Bali, Indonésia.
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION | Rio d e Jan ei ro 54(3):400-415, May - June 2020
RAP | Smart government: analysis of dimensions from the perspective of public managers
414
Klering, L. R., Porsse, M. C. S., & Guadagnin, L. A.
(2010). Novos caminhos da administração pública
brasileira.Análise,21(1), 4-17.
Lesca, H., & Janissek-Muniz, R. (2015). Inteligência
Estratégica Antecipativa e Coletiva: o Método LE
SCAnning.Porto Alegre, RS: Pallotti.
Linders, D., Liao, C. Z. P., & Wang, C. M. (2015).
Proactive e-governance: ipping the service delivery
model from pull to push in Taiwan. Government
Information Quarterly, 35(4), S68-S76.
Liu, X., & Zheng, L. (2015). Cross-departmental
collaboration in one-stop service center for smart
governance in China: factors, strategies and
eectiveness.Government Information Quarterly,
35(4), S54-S60.
Myers, M. D. (2013).Qualitative research in business
and management. London, UK: SAGE.
Nam, T. (2016). Government-driven participation
and collective intelligence: a case of the Government
3.0 Initiative in Korea. Information, 7(4), 55.
Nam, T., & Pardo, T. A. (2011). Smart city as urban
innovation. In Proceedings of the 5th International
Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic
Governance, New York, NY, US.
Paes de Paula, A. P. (2005). Administração pública
brasileira entre o gerencialismo e a gestão social.
Revista de Administração de Empresas,45(1), 36-49.
Paula, G. D., & Rover, A. J. (2012). O governo
eletrônico e a atividade de inteligência. Revista
Democracia Digital e Governo Eletrônico, 6, 216-236.
Rezende, D. A. (2018). Strategic digital city: concept
and model. In Proceedings of the 15th International
Conference on Information Systems
&
Techn o l o g y
Management, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Ribeiro, L. M. D. P., Pereira, J. R., & Benedicto, G.
C. D. (2013). As reformas da administração pública
brasileira: uma contextualização do seu cenário, dos
entraves e das novas perspectivas. In Anais do 37º
Encontro da Associação Nacional dos Programas de
Pós-Graduação em Administração, Rio de Janeiro,
RJ, Brasil.
Schaefer, E. D., Macadar, M. A., & Luciano, E. M.
(2017). Governança de tecnologia da informação
interinstitucional em organizações públicas:
reexões iniciais. In Proceedings of the International
Conference on Information Resources Management,
Santiago de Chile, Chile.
Schoemaker, P. J., & Day, G. S. (2009). How to make
sense of weak signals.In G. R. Hickman (Ed.),
Leading Organizations: Perspectives for a New Era
(2 Ed., Cap. 4, pp. 37-47).ousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Scholl, H. J., & Scholl, M. C. (2014). Smart
governance: a roadmap for research and practice.
In Proceedings of theiConference 2014 (pp. 163-176),
Berlin, German.
Secchi, L. (2009). Modelos organizacionais e
reformas da administração pública. Revista de
Administração Pública, 43(2), 347-369.
Triviños, A. N. S. (1987). Introdução à pesquisa em
ciências sociais: a pesquisa qualitativa em educação.
São Paulo, SP: Atlas.
Veronese, J. E. (2013). Lei de Acesso à Informação
e os reexos sobre a produção de inteligência na
Polícia Federal.Revista Brasileira de Inteligência,
8, 47-57.
Viorel, B., & Radu, I. (2015). Transformation of
public management process due to competitive
intelligence implementation.Procedia Economics
and Finance,32, 694-701.
Wang, L. J., Zhang, Y., Li, Q., & Ruan, P. N. (2016).
Under the background of smart city development
of e-government performance evaluation: study in
every districts of Beijing. In Proceedings of the 6th
International Conference on Information Technology
for Manufacturing Systems. Prague, Czech Republic.
Xu, M. (2007). Managing strategic intelligence:
techniques and technologies. Hershey, New York:
IGI Global.
BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION | Rio d e Jan ei ro 54(3):400-415, May - June 2020
RAP | Smart government: analysis of dimensions from the perspective of public managers
415
Claudia Melati
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9369-0113
PhD student, master’s in administration from the Graduate Program in Administration of the Federal University
of Rio Grande do Sul (PPGA/UFRGS); Researcher at IEA Future Lab. E-mail: cmelati@yahoo.com.br
Raquel Janissek-Muniz
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0657-6559
PhD in management from the Université de Grenoble (France); Professor and Researcher at the Graduate
Program in Administration of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (PPGA/UFRGS); Founder and
Coordinator of the IEA Future Lab Research Group. E-mail: rjmuniz@ufrgs.br