Search

Key observation #1

The shifts in GovERP’s scope, changes in ownership, and limited stakeholder consistency (as evidenced by multiple changes to the entities identified for initial onboarding) have culminated in a program that has not delivered as originally intended. The volatility, and ambiguity in ownership and accountability, has resulted in an under-delivering project. The need for well-functioning ERP capabilities across government has not abated.

Recommendation(s)

a) As core underpinning capability of all government entities, ERP uplifts need clear ownership and accountability mechanisms established at both the COO Committee and Secretaries Data and Digital Committee (SDDC) levels, to ensure considered uplift sequencing and to promote common approaches with limited customisations.

b) To ensure equitable access to market resources across entities, overarching SDDC governance is needed to support successful ERP uplifts and implementation across government.  

Report reference - Section 2.3 GovERP project history

Key observation #2

GovERP has not achieved the aim of a standardised common transactional corporate service across the APS. 30 functional GovERP capabilities have been developed to date with 18 of these having completed functional testing, but none have progressed beyond functional testing into system integration testing, user acceptance testing or production.

The ERP solution in its current form is not suitable to meet whole of government or Services Australia’s operational requirements. The objective of a standardised, common transactional corporate service will not be achieved by GovERP, even if the remaining work to complete the MVP1.1 is progressed.

Recommendation

Given the objective of a standardised, common transactional corporate service will not be achieved by GovERP, further direct investment in GovERP for whole of government use is not recommended.

Report reference - Section 3.3 Remaining work to complete GovERP

Key observation #3

Considering the current state of ERP capabilities, Tier 1 reuse opportunities (use of what has already been built) are limited. 

Building on existing GovERP capabilities with a separate ERP instance (a Tier 2 reuse opportunity) may be desirable for larger entities with complex ERP requirements and substantial in-house functional and technical digital skills. In such a case, GovERP could serve as a potential accelerator as it can help minimise the effort and financial investment required to develop capabilities based on the current build and test status.

Recommendation

Any entity intending to progress ERP upgrades must have a robust business case for investment. The government needs to enforce, via policy, a strong incentive to ensure entities actively consider reuse of existing capabilities, as well as leveraging current arrangements with commercial vendors for licences and hosting costs where applicable.

Report reference - Section 4.1 Reusability by tier

Key observation #4

There is strong demand for GovERP’s business process maps, designs, patterns and related documentation to be made available for reuse by other government entities (a Tier 3 reuse opportunity). While the Digital Transformation Agency’s Australian Government Architecture (AGA) provides a centralised site to make reusable designs available, there may be merit in a secure sharing facility to disseminate sensitive materials that are not suitable for publication on the AGA website.

Recommendation

The Digital Transformation Agency to provide a centralised site to make confirmed reusable designs available, including secure sharing facility to disseminate sensitive materials that are not suitable for publication on the AGA website.

Report reference - Section 4.1 Reusability by tier

Key observation #5

GovERP was envisaged as a single, whole of government technology hub. Componentisation of each capability for potential reuse is possible, but has limited commercial effectiveness. Grouping of like entities may help to achieve economies of scale without the complexity of pursuing a whole of government, one-size-fits-all approach. Further, focussing on smaller-scale projects over shorter time limits may help minimise ERP uplift delivery risks.

The new ERP Category under the Software Marketplace Panel, coupled with the Department of Finance’s work to support a small-entity solution, may help to identify next steps for a collective or group-based approach.

Recommendation

Where possible, future ERP uplifts should group entities of similar complexity and scale (not necessarily aligned to portfolio, organisation, or other corporate service provision arrangements), to help achieve economies of scale and re-use without the challenge of pursuing a whole of government approach.

Report reference - Section 5 Alternate designs or delivery pathways

Conduct user research to understand how your target users access government services online.

Use methods and tools such as: 

• interviews, surveys, observation or analytics to gather data on your users' needs, goals, expectations, and behaviours
• existing research from other agencies or sources that are relevant to your service
• past research reports, journey maps or project summaries from historical internal documentation, internal databases, project archives or management systems 
• relevant studies or research papers, from academic and industry journals 
• professional networks and opportunities to engage with experts and practitioners across the APS to share research findings, reports and insights. 

Access points are digital entry points such as websites, portals, or apps. 

Identify the access points users are familiar with and analyse the strengths and weaknesses of these access points to determine how they fit with your users' needs, goals and expectations. 

Embed and apply user research into tools to simulate the current user experience.

Such as: 

• user personas
• journey maps 
• visualisations of user interactions with government services. 

Once you understand the current state and how your users access government services online, evaluate if any existing access points are suitable for your new service. 

Do this by: 

• considering factors such as user experience, context, cost, and feasibility 
• using the relevant decision-making framework (criterion 4) in the Digital Experience Toolkit to assess if you can reuse an existing access point or if you need to create a new one.

Document your findings and recommendations to apply criterion 1. To do this:

• provide evidence to support your decisions
• show how you have considered user needs, existing access points and whole-of-government objectives 
• use the Digital Investment Overview (DIO) Data Collection form to report on how you have met the criterion 
• use the Digital Capability Assessment Process (DCAP) template to report on how you have met the criterion.

Combining user research efforts across the DX Policy and its standards can help to reduce duplication and the cost of research.
 

• Digital NSW: Design Standards 
• NSW Government: State of the Customer reports
• NSW Government: Easy to access services
• NSW Government: Customers of NSW and customer categories
• Victorian Government: Conducting your research
• Victorian Government: Human-centred design playbook 
• Queensland Government: Human-centred design resources
• Victorian Government: Design and develop a digital presence – digital guide
• Digital NSW: Plan your user research approach
• Digital NSW: User research methods
• Digital NSW: Customer journey mapping
• Australian Government Digital Profession: Journey maps
• Observatory of Public Sector Innovation: Putting innovation theory into practice
• NSW Government: Activities and Templates 

Define the scope, purpose and desired outcomes of your service offering and how it aligns with government priorities and outcomes. 

Do this by identifying the outcome you seek and the value it will deliver to users and government. Document your service vision, goals and objectives concisely.

Use tools and methods such as: 

• service design
• business analysis
• stakeholder engagement 
• existing frameworks or strategies that are relevant to your service domain, such as the Digital Service Standard, or the Service Design and Delivery Process.

Describe the features and functions of your service offering and how they meet user needs and expectations. 

To specify the requirements and functionalities of your service use methods such as: 

• user stories
• scenarios/user journey maps
• value propositions.

Ensure that your service offering is accessible, inclusive, secure, and compliant with relevant policies and standards and prioritise the most important and essential features and functions based on:

• user research
• feedback
• testing.

Compare your service offering with existing or similar services across government and identify gaps, overlaps, or opportunities for collaboration or integration.

• use the Australian Government Architecture (AGA) (criterion 3) to find and analyse existing or planned services, platforms, and capabilities that are related to your service domain or target audience
• assess if any of these services, platforms, or capabilities can be reused, shared, or adapted for your service offering, or if your service offering can complement or enhance them
• engage with other agencies or delivery partners (criterion 5) that are responsible for or involved in these services, platforms, or capabilities to explore potential synergies or dependencies.

Document your findings and recommendations on how to apply criterion 2, to do this: 

• make sure your proposal supports your decisions and shows how you have defined and differentiated your service offering based on user needs, government priorities, and existing services
• use the Digital Investment Overview (DIO) Data Collection form to report on how you have met the criterion 
• use the Digital Capability Assessment Process (DCAP) template to report on how you have met the criterion.

• DTA: Digital and ICT Reuse Policy
• Data and Digital Government Strategy (DDGS)
• Australian Government Architecture (AGA)  
  • myGov (AGA)
• digital.gov.au: myGov Platform Capability and Functions Overview
• Digital Service Standard (DSS)
• Department of Finance: Commonwealth Procurement Rules
• Trusted Digital Identity Framework (TDIF)
• Digital NSW: Design Standards 
• Digital NSW: Beyond digital with strategic directions and objectives for customer-centric government
• Victorian Government: Design and develop a digital presence – digital guide
• business.gov.au: Develop your SWOT analysis
• gov.uk: About GOV.UK One Login
• NSW Government: Customers of NSW and customer categories
• NSW Government: State of the Customer reports
• NSW Government: Activities and Templates 
• Digital NSW: Plan your user research approach
• Digital NSW: User research methods