Without human touch: The organization of front line counseling in the age of e-government
Abstract
This paper explores the role of e-government in pension service deliverywith an eye to how the relationship between the front line staff and the citizens has been impacted by increased digitization and citizen self-service. The paper focuses on the organizational aspects of this relationship and based on empirical fieldwork in the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administrationit highlights three techniques through which the relationship has been governed and structured: technological disciplining, de- and reskilling, and standardization. These techniques illustrate various organizational responses to the conflicting demands of quality and efficiency in the service delivery. They also show the transitional forms of governance in light of digitization and citizen self-service, as well as key social and power implications of these developments.
Key words: E-government; governance; pension reform; public administration; information society; case study.
Introduction
Although modernization of public administration is nothing new, it has been subject to increased scholarly interest in recent years. A considerable part of this interest has been devoted to the management and organization of public sector reforms, for example in terms of distinctions between ‘traditional’ public administration and New Public Management (Pollitt and Bouckaert, 2011; Chandler et al., 2002; Christensen and Lægreid, 2007; Diefenbach, 2009). More specifically, given the massive diffusion of ICT systems in the public sector, much attention has also been devoted to the role of technology in the administration and production of welfare services (Bloomfield and Hayes, 2009; Dunleavy et al., 2006; Cordella, 2007; Brewer et al., 2006; Harris, 2008). This attention has often been based on the view that technology is an integrative part of organizations and of organizing (Latour, 1991; Eriksson-Zetterquist et al., 2009).
As part of these debates, the concept of electronic government (e-government) has been employed to conceptualize new, technology-driven ways for public agencies to interact with the citizens (Bloomfield and Hayes, 2009; Dunleavy et al., 2006; Jansen and Schartum, 2008; Reddick, 2005). The turn towards e-government has among others involved a gradual replacement of traditional forms of communication (e.g., formal letters, telephone contact and face-to-face interaction) with electronic ones, examples of which are web portals that make it possible for citizens to be fully or partially self-served (Grönlund, 2010; Fountain, 2001). More broadly, the e-government turn reflects a growing mentality of the welfare state to move away from direct control in its service production and rather encourage individual self-control(Rose, 1999; Rasmussen, 2011; Foucault, 1991). This is perhaps most notable in the emphasis on self service models and more broadly on citizens as “prosumers” (Ritzer and Jurgensen, 2010) or “citizen-consumers” (Forster and Gabe, 2008).
There has been considerable interest in the organizational processes through which electronic systems have been implemented in the public sector(Bloomfield and Hayes, 2009; Harris, 2008). Despite this attention, however, we know less about how these organizational and structural processes have impacted the relationship between the front line counselors and the citizens. Front line counselors are crucial actors in the implementation of public reforms because they not only execute and inform the public about the policies, but actively shape and reshape them in their meetings with the citizens (Lipsky, 1980; Meyers and Vorsanger, 2003; Bovens and Zouridis, 2002).
In this paper, we focus on the organizational aspects of the citizen-counselor relationship and explore how it has been structured and governed in the context of the implementation of an e-government system. Our case context is that of retirement pension information services in the Norwegian Labor and Welfare Administration (NAV). Following a major pension reform in 2011, NAV has implemented an electronic self service system which makes it possible for citizens to search for information, make decisions, and apply online without any physical interaction with the administration. At the same time, the new pension system is complex and difficult to understand for the citizens, given a range of new concepts and choices regarding time and type of pension withdrawal. In light of this complexity, the counseling in NAV has been structured within conflicting demands of efficiency/rationalization and quality/individualization in the service production.
This study explores and discusses three key governance techniques that have been employed by the NAV administration as means of navigating this efficiency/quality dilemma: technological disciplining, de- and reskilling, and standardization. Although this system is intended to be more rational and economically sustainable as it places more responsibility for obtaining relevant knowledge at the hands of the citizens, the techniques illustrate how the citizen-counselor relationship has been impacted and at times hampered in various ways. More broadly, the findings relate to issues of governmentality as well as the balance between the state and the citizens regarding the responsibility for giving/obtaining adequate knowledge about pensions. The findings also raise the question of to what extent such structural changes have contributed to improve the quality of information and guidance by the government to the citizens.
E-government and the organization of front line counseling
The increased focus on e-government can be seen as aninherent part of the modernization of the public sector. Whereas post-industrial theorists in the 1970s regarded the state and the traditional public bureaucracy as core elements in a technological society (Bell, 1974; Edwards, 1996), there were at the turn of the century a growing focus on neo-liberalism as the primary locus of technology, with the ideology of free markets, free flow of information, and the internet as a democratic utility (Sassen, 2000; Bellamy and Taylor, 1998). More recently, scholars have focused on the role of ICT systems in the governing of public administration, through terms such as “virtual state” or “digital government”(Fountain, 2001; Jupp, 2003). Specifically, Dunleavy et al. (2006) argue thatthere has been a shift towards a “digital era” in public administrations:
[F]or the first time, it now makes sense to characterize the broad sweep of current public management regime change in terms that refer to new information-handling potentialities, which make feasible a transition to fully digital modes of operating for many government sector agencies. The advent of the digital era is now the most general, pervasive, and structurally distinctive influence on how governance arrangements are changing in advanced industrial states. (Dunleavy et al., 2006: 478)
There is a considerable debate on the role and functions of ICT in public administrations, and not least on the impact it has on the service production. On the one hand, e-governance has been regarded by some as compatible with traditional models of bureaucracy because it does not represent any significant shift in how public administrations carry out their principal duties. The administrations are, for instance, still based on a hierarchical structure and operate according to a specific set of rules and a division of labor according to specific skills and tasks (e.g., Heckscher, 1994; Buchanan and Fitzgerald, 2011). For others, however, the electronic developments have been closely related to processes of New Public Management, and thus contrasted to the classic bureaucratic form (Harris, 2008; Reed and Courpasson, 2004; Castells, 2004). Still others regard e-government as representing new, hybrid organizational forms in contemporary public administrations that is able to coexist with professional bureaucracy in various ways (McNulty and Ferlie, 2002; Bloomfield and Hayes, 2009). For instance, Bloomfield and Hayes (2009) have shown how new hybrid configurations spurred by e-government were able to improve customer centered services while largely preserving their longstanding bureaucratic service departments (Bloomfield and Hayes, 2009).
Front line staff play a key role in the organization and implementation of service-oriented e-government systems. They are assigned to interpret the legislation and decode it into appropriate and understandable information to the citizens (Meyers and Vorsanger, 2003). In this sense, the front line staff are street-level bureaucrats in the sense that they “interact with and have wide discretion of the dispensation of benefits or the allocation of public sanctions” (Lipsky, 1980: xi). Front line staff thus have considerable local power in their interactions with the citizens. Because of this discretion, a considerable extent of the meaningsregardingpublic policies and regulations are created in the relationship between the citizens and the front line staff, rather than at the political-administrative level (Prottas, 1979; Czarniawska-Joerges, 1991).
From a public education point of view, the front line staff can be regarded as agents of governmentality, in the sense that they contribute to shape “the beliefs and conduct of others in desired directions by acting upon their will, their circumstances or their environment” (Rose and Miller, 1992: 175). What is central for the present paper is that power is not only centered on the citizen-subject, but also involves the organized practices through which the staff themselves are governed (du Gay, 2005; Ezzamel and Reed, 2008; Jackson and Carter, 1998). In this view, front line staff are not only agents of power but also subjected to power through the ways their work tasks and division of labor are structured and managed. This exertion of power may structure their behavior in various ways, for example in terms of reducing the level of discretions they make, and thus reproducing the political-administrative forms of control through the front line(Hvinden, 1994). Conversely, it may also lead to forms of resistance or self-governance, as bureaucratic rules are interpreted, bent, broken or ignored and tasks performed in ways that enable them to cope with the demands of the job (Ellis, 2011: 235).
The growing attention to e-governance has impacted the relations between the government, the front line staff and the citizens in various ways. A significant impact has come through the implementation of electronic self-service systems for citizens(Eriksson, 2012). These are systems wherein citizens can perform, at least in part, their social services themselves (e.g. filing applications, searching for information) and where the citizen-oriented interface is connected to fully or semi-automatized back-office functions. Thus, electronic self-service systems represent changing forms of governance towards increasing emphasis on co-production of welfare services as well as co-responsibility for the quality of these services. These shifts in governance have emerged interchangeably with new forms of citizenship involving citizens as “prosumers” (Ritzer and Jurgensen, 2010) or as “citizen-consumers” (Forster and Gabe, 2008).
To be sure, such new forms of governance and relationships may often be productive, especially if they contribute to serve citizens’ information and knowledge demands. For instance, interactive user interfaces, and automatized or semi-automatized case processing free up human resources for more complex tasks (Dunleavy et al., 2006; Eriksson, 2012). Conversely, the lack of human touch they entail have been regarded as a “hollowing out” of public services (Rhodes, 2004)because they foster new forms of control and surveillance and because they limit the space of action and discretion of the front line staff. In their study of an implementation of a CRM system in a UK public administration, Bloomfield and Hayes (2006) argued that it removed discretional power away from the front line and that it led the power to be “neither localized in the hands of contact centre staff nor in the software of the CRM system but arises relationally in the course of the interaction between staff, technology and citizens” (Bloomfield and Hayes, 2006: 480).
In this study we will examine the citizen-counselor relationship in light of the interaction between staff, technology and the citizen after introduction of an electronic self-service system. The study suggests that this structuring is exerted not through formal, bureaucratic lines of control but in the relationship between the new technology, rules, and frameworks/interfaces, through a structuring of the citizen-counselor interactions in various ways. This has involved a considerable improvement in terms of efficiency in the pension information system, but has also hampered the citizen-counselor relationship in various ways.
The case context
Our research focuses on the introduction and implementation of a new comprehensive retirement pension scheme in Norway. The reform was formally introduced on January 1, 2011. The background for the reform was a concern for the predicted growing costs of pensions in the years to come, and a fear that the current financing of the pension scheme would not be viable. The reform also aims at making a fair and sustainable pension system covering all citizens, encouraging people to stay longer in working life and to make a pension system simpler to understand by the users.This aim shares many similarities with recent pension reforms in other European countries(Casey and Dostal, 2012).
One of the most significant changes in the Norwegian pension system has implied a greater flexibility in the type of and time of pension withdrawal; in other words, a greater freedom of choice. At the same time, the flexibility also opens for speculation by individuals regarding their pension economy, since the profitability regarding different types and times of withdrawal will turn out differently for different individuals. Thishas called for increased information to the citizens regarding the different choices in order for them to make well-founded and ’rational’ decisions.
However, scholars have emphasized that the new pension legislation is too “vast and complicated” for the citizens(Kjønstad, 2012: 152). From a rule of law perspective this is problematic given that citizens are handed increased responsibility for understanding the legislation and to make proper use of the (electronic) system. The citizens’ knowledge about pensions is also generally limited, and this lack of knowledge negatively influences their choices and planning regarding their pensions (Lusardi, 2008). Furthermore, there also seems to be great variation when it comes to understanding and utilizing electronic tools such as pension portals and electronic calculators.
Such factors increase the responsibility of the governmentin disseminating understandable and reliable information to the citizens. Such dissemination of reliable information was also one of the key premises for the reform (Government, 2006-2007). Herein, NAV has played a key role. The NAV organization is the result of merger from 2006 between the National Insurance Administration (NIA) and the Directorate of Labour (DOL), combined with more formal collaboration with the local government social services administration (Alm Andreassen and Fossestøl, 2011; Askim et al., 2010). Key actions that NAV’s administration has taken include, in addition to mass-communication campaigns, a massive structural reorganization and the introduction of a system of electronic self service. This system comprises of interactive web portals, including a pension calculator where users can monitor their pension earnings, simulate alternative pension withdrawals, and apply for pension online. In all, these organizational and judicial changes imply a great deal of turbulence imposed on the front line staff in NAV, especially those that are working in the pension area.
Methodology
The analysis draws on a larger evaluation study1that has focused on the extent to which information on the retirement pension reform is relevant and understandable for the citizens, and how the information is conveyed by public agencies. In the analysis for this paper, we were especially interested in how the e-government and self-service system had affected NAV’s pension counseling services.
Field work was carried out inNAV in the period October 2011 to November 2012. Data from this work include 38 interviews with managers in the central administration and with managers, section managers and counselors at the NAV offices and the newly established call centers (see table 1). During the fieldwork, we had interviews and meetings with representatives of the NAV central administration. We also visited the three call centers, three (out of four) of the pension units across the country, and five NAV offices. In addition, our insights are partially drawn from interviews with case administrators and their managers in NAV’s specialized pension units, as well as interviews with managers and front line staff in the Norwegian Public Service Pension Fund and KommunalLandspensjonkasse(KLP), which are providers of occupational pensions.
------
Insert table 1 about here
------
In addition to these interviews, we also collected relevant documents that provided insight into how NAV and representatives of the political processes have given sense to the web portals. These documents included (self) evaluation reports, research documents, white papers, and NAVs allocation letters.
The selection of the call centers and pension units were more or less given at the outset because of the limited number of these. The selection of NAV offices, in turn, was based on suggestions from the central NAV administration. Our goal was to obtain at least some variation in geographical location and size of the office (i.e. size of the municipality). The interviews in NAV were mainly carried out as group interviews, with some additional individual interviews. They typically consisted of three to five representatives from different level of the local unit (counselors, supervisors and managers), and lasted approximately 1,5 to 2,5 hours each.