United Nations Public Service Awards Case Studies

There are many government agencies today that are directly or indirectly involved in Singapore’s economic development. Some are sector-specific while others focus on particular parts of the business infrastructure or value chain.

One unintended consequence of this situation is that an investor or enterprise may need to have touch-points with multiple agencies. In addition, due to lack of upfront co-ordination, unnecessary time and effort are spent to address concerns and reconcile rules imposed by different agencies.

Externally the pace of change is accelerating and competition among countries for the investment pie is intensifying. If each agency were to just focus on its own mission and chasing its own goals, the result will be sub-optimization on a whole of government basis. The group of economic agencies needs to better organize themselves to (a) present a united and consistent front to customers and clients (i.e. investors and enterprises); (b) leverage on each other’s strengths to fulfill their respective missions; and (c) reduce unnecessary overlap in roles and to do this without letting opportunities slip through the cracks.

There is a lack of (both formal and informal) information sharing on accounts which could lead to, (i) potential conflicts of programme outcomes from different agencies, (ii) overlap of client servicing, (iii) lack of overview of the engagements of enterprises by the various agencies, and (iv) potential incentive shopping by enterprises.

In view of the above situations, a new Enterprise Account Management model was proposed. To support this new model, the proposed solution was conceptualised.

What is the initiative about? (the solution)
The solution facilitates greater collaboration and information sharing amongst the participating economic development agencies’ account managers in the engagement of enterprises to facilitate their development and growth. Timely access to the shared information allows better servicing of each of the agencies’ key accounts and cross selling of agencies’ programmes. With the shared database of enterprise accounts information, the solution allows the participating agencies to present a Whole-of-Government approach in their engagement of enterprises, as well as reduce any potential conflicts of programme outcomes from different agencies and overlap of client servicing. The solution and the standard operating procedures (SOP) put in place to support the operations, also improves the current process of joint collaboration between agencies on Enterprise Account Management matters, whereby agencies account managers can easily contact their counterparts in other agencies for further coordination, when required.

Who proposed the solution, who implemented it and who were the stakeholders?
The business objective of having a system to facilitate data sharing without displacing agencies existing investment in their current Customer Management System was discussed by the Enterprise Account Management sub-team (chaired by Deputy Chief Executive of IE Singapore) and comprising representatives from SPRING Singapore and Economic Development Board (EDB). The initial idea was expanded into a concept paper which was submitted to the Economic Development Group Exco for endorsement in Dec 2007. Subsequently, a Project Steering Committee and Project Working Committee were formed to implement this system with representatives from senior management, business representatives and IT representatives of the participating agencies (EDB, IE Singapore, IDA and SPRING). SPRING chaired the Working Committee and provided secretariat support to the Steering Committee. An open tender was called in which the industry players were invited to tender for the project. The contract was finally awarded to a private sector organisation (CommerceOnline Pte Ltd) to develop the system and another operator (NCS Pte Ltd), managing the Knowledge Enterprise Network (KEN) platform.

Describe how and when the initiative was implemented by answering these questions
a. What were the strategies used to implement the initiative? In no more than 500 words, provide a summary of the main objectives and strategies of the initiative, how they were established and by whom.
During the conceptualization phase, a review of agencies’ existing Customer Management System was carried out to identify commonality in data captured by the agencies’ account managers and the type of information to be shared. Inputs from the agencies’ business representatives were taken into consideration when identifying the common information for sharing. Gaps in the information captured by agencies were also identified and were harmonized to ensure commonality of data is available. Surveys were also prepared and sent to the agencies’ account managers to poll them for their opinion of having such a system, the need for it as well as the type of information and features they would like to have in such a system. The results were positive and respondents were supportive and forthcoming in their inputs and comments. The Project Steering Committee also set guiding principles to build a system that would offer ease of use, minimal maintenance effort and disruption to the agency’s existing system and processes.

b. What were the key development and implementation steps and the chronology? No more than 500 words
Needs Analysis, Conceptualization and Approval (Jun 2007 – Dec 2007) - During this phase, clarifications of the business requirements were done with the Enterprise Account Management sub-team to define the scope and boundary of the system as well as review of options available to implement the solution. As part of the phase, surveys were also sent out to the various agencies’ account managers to gather their inputs and feedbacks. Data harmonisation across agencies for common shareable information (Oct 2007 – Nov 2007) - To achieve commonality of data for sharing, a review of agencies data items were also carried out and gaps identified were rectified via enhancement to the existing systems or by engaging temporary staff to ‘backfill’ the missing information. Requirements gathering with agencies (Jan 2008 – Mar 2008) - Based on the inputs and feedbacks gathered in earlier surveys, these were formulated into requirements statements. Review sessions with the agencies’ business representatives were conducted to walkthrough and confirm the business requirements and the finalised requirements were documented into a Requirements Specifications document for calling of tender. Tendering and Award (Apr 2008 – Jun 2008) - At the close of the tender exercise, the submitted proposals were reviewed and evaluated by the evaluation committees (comprising senior management from the participating agencies and the business and IT representatives of the agencies). The best value for money proposal was selected for award. Development (Jun 2008 – Oct 2008) - During this phase, a prototyping approach was adopted in which the developed system was shown to the business representatives of the agencies for their inputs and feedbacks. Updates to and engagement of Agencies’ Account Managers for feedbacks were also ongoing during entire development cycle. At the end of the development cycle and prior to the rollout (i.e. commissioning) of the system, Roadshows to Agencies’ Account Managers were conducted. Sessions were held at the agencies office to introduce the system to the account managers as well as briefing sessions for them to be familiarized with operating / using the system. The system was commissioned on 10 Nov 2008.

c. What were the main obstacles encountered? How were they overcome? No more than 500 words
Since this system allows enterprise engagements information (call report) to be readily accessible by any agencies’ account managers, the main challenges were related to confidentiality of data and harmonisation of data across the participating agencies. The key concern in confidentiality of data was that certain information was deemed sensitive (i.e. information which was shared in-confidence with agency’s account managers). The concerns were whether this will result in a breach of trust with the enterprise and fulfilling confidentiality agreements with enterprises. This issue was discussed extensively by the Steering Committee and a number of approaches were discussed. It was finally decided that agency will review through cases containing such sensitive information before releasing for sharing. Other features were also incorporated into the system to address agencies’ concern. There was also a need to harmonize data as each agency has different emphasis on the data items collected. After extensive consultations, a common set of data items were derived, with each agency deploying resources to patch / update their data to ensure consistency of data across agencies.

d. What resources were used for the initiative and what were its key benefits? In no more than 500 words, specify what were the financial, technical and human resources’ costs associated with this initiative. Describe how resources were mobilized
The Project HR resources comprised of the following: 1. Project Steering Committee (comprising of management representative from the participating agencies and chaired by the Deputy CE of one agency). 2. Project Working Committee (comprising a total of 12 representatives from the participating agencies with representation from the Business and IT groups, the representation profile consist of Head of departments, Senior Managers / Managers and Consultants). The project cost comprised of the following: 1. One time development cost of $116,900. 2. Yearly Recurrent cost of $ 73,252 for subscription services to the Knowledge Enterprise Network (KEN) platform, hosting services and system maintenance. The Project Steering Committee roles and responsibilities included: 1) Provided leadership and direction on the overall Project goals and policies. 2) Endorsed strategies and plans for the Project. 3) Obtained additional resources and budget when required. 4) Set priorities and resolved major conflicts / issues arising. 5) Reviewed project progress and provide strategic direction for the working committee. 6) Endorsed Recommendations put up by Working Committee. 7) Ensured active participation in the risk management process. The Project Working Committee roles and responsibilities included: 1) Provided user requirements for the implementation. 2) Participated in project meetings, including reviewing tender requirements, tender presentation, tender evaluation and award of project. 3) Participated in project implementation including requirements gathering, user acceptance testing, data verification, roadshows, etc. 4) Proposed recommendations to the steering committee on issues pertaining to changes on work processes, policies, etc. 5) Performed and/or coordinated testing.

Is the initiative sustainable and transferable?
The system was launched on 10 Nov 2008, for the 4 founding agencies. Usage rate will be monitored over a period of 6 months to assess the adoption of the system before inviting other agencies to participate. Other agencies have expressed interest to come on board. The steering committee decided then to limit to the initial 4 agencies until deployment.

What are the impact of your initiative and the lessons learned?
During the roadshows to promote awareness of this system, positive comments were received from the agencies’ account managers that the system allows them to better prepare themselves when engaging the enterprises as they have an up to date picture of government engagement with the enterprise. One of the factors contributing to this was engagement of the various business representatives from the agencies and regular updates at the respective agencies operational meetings. This help build acceptance of the system, also their inputs was incorporated into the system which gave a sense of ownership. The setting of clear objectives and direction by the Project Steering Committee and support from agencies top management also contributed to the success of this project. It facilitated coordination across agencies and allows the business and IT representatives to make quick decisions on agency specific issues relating to the project.


Institution Name:		SPRING Singapore
Institution Type:		Government Agency
Contact Person:		Kim Joo Chang
Title:		Director, IT Division
Telephone/ Fax:		62793771
Institution's / Project's Website:		62703804
E-mail:		chang_kim_joo@spring.gov.sg
Address:		2 Bukit Merah Central
Postal Code:		159835
City:		Singapore
State/Province:
Country:		Singapore

The Problem

Solution and Key Benefits

Actors and Stakeholders

(a) Strategies

(b) Implementation

(c) Overcoming Obstacles

(d) Use of Resources

Sustainability and Transferability

Lessons Learned

Contact Information