This article aims to identify barriers for the adoption of strategic goals related to social participation in the Brazilian Public Administration present in the recently launched Brazilian Digital Governance Policy.

1. Promoting social participation through Digital Governance: identifying
barriers in the Brazilian Public Administration
Edimara M. Luciano - Presenting Author
Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil
Guilherme C. Wiedenhöft
Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil
Fábio P. dos Santos
Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil
Business
School

2. Motivation 1/2
• The underlying principle of the use of ICTs to promote citizen engagement is the idea that it
is not technology alone that will determine the success of these initiatives but rather how
the ICT artifacts will be employed to achieve government strategic objectives
• The emergence of digital technologies along with the changes in citizens’ profiles and the
opening of governments led to digital governance (d-governance)
• d-Governance is the use of ICTs by the public sector aiming to:
• Improve information and service delivery
• Attenuate the excessive dependence on the government intermediation between
services and citizens
• Encourage citizen participation in the decision-making process
• Make governments more responsible, transparent and effective
Greenberg and Newell (2012); Panagiotopoulos et al. (2012); Tassabehji et al. (2016)

3. Motivation 2/2
• The Brazilian Federal Government launched its Digital Governance Policy (DGP) in 2016
which aims to guide all initiatives related to the use of ICT in the relationship between the
federal government and citizens
• This Policy seeks to be a way to increase initiatives effectiveness and the generation of
benefits for the whole society by expanding access to government information, improving
public services and increasing social participation
Brazil (2016)

4. Brazilian Federal Government Digital Governance Policy
• Three of the 10 listed strategic objectives referred to social participation.
Axis Strategic goals
Information access
To foster availability and use of open data
To broaden ICT use to promote transparency and publicize the public resources use
To guarantee information security and State communication as well as the citizens’ data confidentiality
Delivery of services
To expand and innovate digital services delivery
To improve governance and management through ICT use
To facilitate and universalize the use and access to digital services
To share and integrate data, processes, systems, services and infrastructure
Social participation
To foster the collaboration in the public policies cycle
To increase and stimulate the social participation in public services creation and improvement
To improve direct and indirect interaction between government and society

5. Brazilian Federal Government Digital Governance Policy
Social participation
To foster the collaboration in the public policies cycle
To increase and stimulate the social participation in public services creation and improvement
To improve direct and indirect interaction between government and society
It involves allowing the direct interaction of citizens with government to express their demands, as well as to
monitor policy implementation and impact. It also encourages the active participation of society in the
creation and improvement of accessible public services, taking into account regional diversities and needs.
This strategy is focused on the continuous improvement of the interaction between the government and the
society through digital, social and other technological means, considering, in all the instruments used,
accessibility for all people, regardless of their physical-motor and perceptive, cultural and social capacities.
The focus is to foster the active participation of the society in the creation and improvement of accessible
public services, considering regional diversities and necessities, allowing direct citizen-government interaction
to express citizens necessities as well as to suggest improvements.

6. Research Problem
• Digital governance initiatives are arising in several countries as a sign of a more citizen-
centered government instead of a service-centered one or even narrower views such as
process-centered or civil-servant-centered ones
• Conversely, some of these initiatives have not yet achieved the planned benefits because they
focus on technology, rather than governance, and citizens' needs are not their main focus.
• The research gap that drives this study is the necessity to understand the barriers to d-
governance adoption in public organizations, which can hinder the DGP results and also its
continuity
Which are the barriers for the adoption of the GDP Social Participation axis?
Meijer (2015); Saxena (2005)

7. Research Goal
To identify barriers for the adoption of strategic goals related to social participation in
the Brazilian Public Administration present in the recently launched Brazilian Digital
Governance Policy.

8. Theoretical Background: Digital Governance Definitions
Digital Governance Definition Author
Use of ICT to create public value through the collaboration of society. Chen
Use of ICT to support public services, government administration,
democratic processes and relations among citizens, civil society, the private
sector and the state.
Bannister and Dawes
Use of ICTs to provide convenient information, government services and
citizen participation.
Kalsi and Kiran
Use of ICTs by public managers to carry out their activities of supervision,
planning, organization and coordination on various government levels.
Nawafleh
Use of ICTs by the government to promote improvements in service delivery,
transparency and public accountability in order to guarantee the quality of
life of citizens.
Zamora, Barahona
and Palaco
Use of ICTs by the public sector aiming to improve information and service
delivery, encouraging citizen participation in the decision-making process
and making governments more responsible, transparent and effective.
UNESCO

9. Theoretical Background: barriers to e-Governance
Barrier Government Citizens
Structural Legal restrictions, lack of funding, lack of staff and
technical skills, lack of support from managers and
top management and technological constraints.
Lack of technological facilities,
limited knowledge and skills, lack
of time and lack of integration
with innovation in daily routines.
Cultural Resistance to change, fear that innovation will
weaken the robustness of government and
attachment to bureaucracy.
Lack of interest, little confidence
and negative image of the
government, with no perceived
utility, and resistance to
technologies.
Source: Meijer, 2015

10. Theoretical Background: barriers to Digital Governance
Individual Organizational Strategic
Lack of training
Personnel without proper
qualification; and
Lack of a proper number of
government employees
Lack of support from
managers;
Lack of planning
Lack of internal
communication plan; and
High complexity of projects
Lack of political support;
Exaggerated submission to
the defined goals; and
Lack of necessary
infrastructure.
Source: Melitski, 2011
Table 3 - Individual, organizational, and strategic barriers

11. • Strategy: Exploratory
• Focus: Qualitative
• Data collection
techniques: document
analysis and semi-
structured interviews
• Analysis: categorial
content analysis through
NVIVO®
Research Method
• This study is a cross-sectional exploratory research, which has a qualitative focus due to
its data collection and analysis techniques
• Document analysis was used to understand the Digital Governance Policy and to identify
the expectations and strategies towards the DGP goals
• The results of the document analysis were the basis for the elaboration of the interview
scripts
• Semi-structured interviews with 11 civil servants (identified as R1 to R11) in charge of IT
Management in several Brazilian government offices or state-run companies were
performed

12. Results Highlights
Fostering the collaboration in the public policies cycle 1/2
A set of 25 barriers was identified from the data collected and can be grouped into four
categories:
a) (12 evidences) Lack of citizens’ involvement by government (R1, R3, R6, R7, R10, R11);
b) (6 evidences) Lack of participation initiatives by government and lack of interest in participation
by citizens (R2, R3, R4, R5, R9, R10);
c) (3 evidences) Lack of proper disclosure of information (R4, R7, R11); and
d) (4 evidences) Government focused on itself (R5, R9, R11).
Social participation
To foster the collaboration in the public policies cycle
To increase and stimulate the social participation in public services creation and improvement
To improve direct and indirect interaction between government and society

13. Results Highlights
Fostering the collaboration in the public policies cycle 2/2
• Lack of citizens’ involvement by government was the barrier with the highest number of
evidences in the whole research. This barrier is of great concern because it shows that
governments are not involving citizens enough when dealing with services to citizens
• Respondent 6 summarized this aspect: “The state has to be a hand that goes to the citizen and
not the contrary (R6). Without efforts from part-to-part, digital governance is not going to
happen”.
• According to Respondent 3, “citizens do not feel part of the government” (R3)
Social participation
To foster the collaboration in the public policies cycle
To increase and stimulate the social participation in public services creation and improvement
To improve direct and indirect interaction between government and society

14. Results Highlights
Increasing and stimulating the social participation in public services creation and improvement
Social participation
To foster the collaboration in the public policies cycle
To increase and stimulate the social participation in public services creation and improvement
To improve direct and indirect interaction between government and society
A set of 11 barriers was identified from the data collected and can be grouped into four
categories:
a) (3 evidences) Lack of government responses to society (R5, R1, R10);
b) (3 evidences) Government-citizen relationship issues (R10, R2, R3);
c) (3 evidences) Lack of perception of the value in the interaction with citizens (R2, R9, R6); and
d) (2 evidences) Government limited capacity to listen to citizens (R3, R11).

15. Results Highlights
Improving the direct and indirect interaction between government and society 1/2
A set of 18 barriers was identified and assigned to the following four groups:
a) (7 evidences) Lack of citizens’ involvement by government (R1, R2, R3, R5, R10, R11);
b) (4 evidences) Lack of proper understanding of the state functions and responsibilities (R2, R8,
R9, R10);
c) (3 evidences) Lack of proper number of civil servants and their limitations to deal with the
digital world (R4, R7, R11);
d) (4 evidences) Inadequate government–citizen communication (R4, R7).
Social participation
To foster the collaboration in the public policies cycle
To increase and stimulate the social participation in public services creation and improvement
To improve direct and indirect interaction between government and society

16. Results Highlights
Improving the direct and indirect interaction between government and society 2/2
• Lack of citizens’ involvement by government was again an important barrier, according to the
respondents. It is connected with the lack of proper understanding of the state functions and
responsibilities.
• Respondents 4 and 7 pointed out that “[…] the lack of disclosure of government information is a
motivation for government–citizen detachment”. As stated by Respondent 7, "If the citizen knows that
he/she can participate in government easily, he/she will" (R7).
• In support of Meijer's [20] findings, the image of the government amongst citizens can be an important
barrier, especially if they do not trust government, as well as great cultural barriers because of citizens’
lack of interest. Respondent 2 states that there is a lack of culture in popular participation and discredit
in public institutions.
Social participation
To foster the collaboration in the public policies cycle
To increase and stimulate the social participation in public services creation and improvement
To improve direct and indirect interaction between government and society

17. Synthesis of Results – some quotes 1/2
“Public administration is far from the citizen, not giving space for the manifestation of citizens needs,
what they effectively need and what they effectively expect from the government” (R9)
“We need to open up space to citizens in several ways: surveys, ombudsman, forums, panels, and so on.
We have to listen to them, show our ideas and ask for feedback in order to verify if we are reaching the
goal, which is the citizens’ needs.” (R1)
“[…] I believe that society would participate if government asked for that, if the government went to the
streets to understand the other end.” (R6)
“[…] Government is so focused internally [related to data] and the biggest barrier is to change the point
of view from internal to external, which is the citizens, the reason for the existence of a government.”
(R1)
“We never ask to citizens at the other end what he/she needs to make things easier or faster, in short,
what he/she is looking for.” (R6)

18. Synthesis of Results – some quotes 2/2
“People have lost their confidence in any level of government in Brazil. It is not possible for just one
organization to solve this lack of trust, which hinders participation.” (R2)
“Citizens don’t feel they are heard by the governments. Governments do not have an easy and agile way
to talk with citizens, and this turns things a lot more difficult…” (R10)
“In a digital world, citizens feel they are not part of a digital government because governments are not
properly present in the digital world.” (R4)
“Government is a lot more bureaucratic in the eyes of those who are present in the digital world and use
digital technology to do everything.” (R3)
“We need to find effective ways of discussion that reach the majority of the citizens so they can show
what they are interested in and express their opinions, therefore they can feel part of the society.” (R3)

19. Final remarks 1/2
The codes identified through content analyses were categorized following the kind of
barriers proposed by Meijer (2015), namely structural and cultural, and also to the
dimensions proposed by Melitski et al. (2011), namely individual, organizational e strategic
Dimensions
Total
Kind of Barriers Individual Organizational Strategic
Structural 7 3 9 19
Cultural 25 10 - 35
Total 32 13 9 54

20. Final remarks 2/3
• Without efforts from both government and society, Digital Governance Policy goals are not
going to be properly achieved – but government needs to create practical mechanisms to start
the process
• Interviewees believe that citizens need to be part of the government or they agree with this
idea. However, in several moments their discourse did not match this idea, which could be
perceived through their word choices, e.g. they used “we, the government” and “they, the
citizens” or they did not mention citizens at the center of the discussion, but government and
citizens at opposite ends of the rope
• Lack of trust is an important barrier, as claimed by Janssen (2017), especially provided Brazilian
citizens most of time focus on negative aspects of the government
• But not everything is bad… there are several advancements in the field in Brazil. This paper
focused on barriers, but we are already working on strategies for DGP implementation

21. Final Remarks 3/3
• The main academic contribution of this study is the identification of the barriers that might
hinder a digital governance policy adoption and the adoption of d-governance related to social
participation
• The main contribution to practitioners is that the results can bring better understanding of the
aspects that involve the adoption of d-governance as well as serve as a reference for the
definition of strategies that can mitigate the effects of structural and cultural barriers
• An empirical model related to the influences of the categories of barriers on the d-governance
strategies is under development
• Data were collected in Brazil, so different organizational and cultural contexts may be
considered
• Studies that deepen the comprehension of the strategies identified as enabling the adoption of
d-governance in public administration are also suggested as further research, as well as the
impact of Web 2.0 and 3.0 on governments, citizens and on d-governance.

22. Promoting social participation through Digital Governance: identifying barriers
in the Brazilian Public Administration
Edimara M. Luciano - Presenting Author
Full Professor, Graduate Program in Management
Guilherme C. Wiedenhöft
Assistant Professor, Scholl of Technology
Fábio P. dos Santos
Master’s Student, Graduate Program in Management
Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil
Business
School
Obrigada!