Public Services Reengineering Through Cost Analysis and Simulation: The eGOVSIM II Platform

  • Yannis CharalabidisEmail author
  • Petros Stamoulis
  • Aggeliki Androutsopoulou
Part of the Public Administration and Information Technology book series (PAIT, volume 25)


Formal methods for measuring the impact of transformation of public services to digital transactions is an important research challenge in the non-bureaucratic government. The eGOVSIM II toolset is a prototype Web-based application aiming to provide administrations with a methodology and an information system to calculate the gains from automating and delivering interoperable services for citizens and businesses. The chapter presents the eGOVSIM II platform, which has been developed on the basis of the eGOVSIM analytical cost calculation and simulation model. It is based on the SCM and ABC methods and has extensive capabilities in capturing and measuring the various cost elements of governmental services, calculating both the cost for the administrations and the citizens or enterprises, in different levels and scenarios of automation. The eGOVSIM II platform facilitates the definition of several service provision scenarios, allowing the calculation of time, effort, and cost elements of each scenario. The chapter provides a full view of the publicly available system and its functionalities, by showcasing an application scenario testing the reengineering of public services in a Greek Public Sector organization. Results from this application and different scenarios executed in the past are showcased to provide a view on the applicability and overall value of the approach. Finally, lessons learned and future research directions for cost estimation are described.


Public service Electronic government Cost analysis Service transformation Activity-based costing Standard Cost Model Simulation tool Business process modeling 


  1. Alabanos, N., Theodoropoulos, S. (2016) A key-point comparison & the new challenges for the existent Administrative Burden Models (ABM’s). SPOUDAI-Journal of Economics and Business 66(1–2):32–45.Google Scholar
  2. Anthopoulos, L. G., Siozos, P., Tsoukalas, I. A. (2007) Applying participatory design and collaboration in digital public services for discovering and re-designing e-Government services. Government Information Quarterly 24(2):353–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Askarany, D., Yazdifar, H. (2007) “Why ABC is not widely implemented?”, International Journal of Business Research VII(1):93–98.Google Scholar
  4. Audrey, J., Irvine, L. (2003) The diffusion of accounting practices in the new “managerial” public sector. International Journal of Public Sector Management 16(5):359–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bartels, K. P. R. (2009) The Disregard for Weber’s Herrschaft. Administrative Theory & Praxis 31(4): 447–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Becker J., Bergener P., Kleist S., Pfeiffer, D., Raeckers, M. (2008) Business Process Model-Based Evaluation of ICT Investments in Public Administrations. In: AMCIS 2008 Proceedings, Paper 353.Google Scholar
  7. Brown, R. E., Myring, M., Gard, C. G. (1999) Activity-Based Costing in Government: Possibilities and Pitfalls. Public Budgeting & Finance 19(3–21).Google Scholar
  8. Charalabidis, Y., Askounis, D. (2010) eGOVSIM: A Model for Calculating the Financial Gains of Governmental Services Transformation, for Administration and Citizens. Paper presented at the 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Hawaii, 5–8 January 2010.Google Scholar
  9. Charalabidis Y., Lampathaki F., Psarras J. (2009) Combination of Interoperability Registries with Process and Data Management Tools for Governmental Services Transformation. Paper presented at 42nd Hawaiian International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Hawaii, 3–5 January 2009.Google Scholar
  10. Chung, H. M., Khan, M. B. (2007) An Analysis of Activity-Based Costing (ABC) Project Implementations. Baltimore, Maryland, 39th Annual Meeting of the Decision Sciences Institute 4381–4386.Google Scholar
  11. The Chartered Institute of Management Accountants - CIMA (2001) Activity based management – An overview. Technical briefing. Accessed 27 August 2016.
  12. Cooper, R. J., Kaplan, R.S. (1992)Activity-based systems: measuring the costs of resource usage. Accounting Horizons 6(3):1.Google Scholar
  13. Downs, A., Rand Corporation. (1967) Inside bureaucracy. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  14. European Commission (2006) DG INFSO, Modinis Programme: “The eGovernment Economics Project – eGEP. Measurement Framework”. media/media1299.pdf. Accessed 27 August 2016.
  15. European Commission (2007). Action programme for reducing administrative burdens in the European Union. Accessed 27 August 2016.
  16. European Commission (2008) Value Proposition for Enterprise Interoperability. Accessed 27 August 2016.
  17. European Commission (2010) European Interoperability Framework (EIF) for European Public Services. Accessed 28 August 2016.
  18. European Commission (2012) Action Programme for Reducing Administrative Burdens in the EU Final Report. Accessed 28 August 2016.
  19. European Commission (2015) ISA2 - Developing and sharing IT solutions for less bureaucracy. 28 August 2016.
  20. European Union (2014) Final Report: Study on e-Government and the Reduction of Administrative Burden. gle-market/en/news/final-report-study-egovernment-and-reduction-administrative-burden-smart-20120061.Accessed 28 August 2016.
  21. Fogelholm, J., Bescherer, F. (2006) Productivity and performance improvement in paper mills: Procedural framework of actual implementations. Performance Improvement, 45(10):15–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Government Finance Officers Accosiation (2002) Measuring the Full Cost of Government Service. Best Practice. Accessed 25 August 2016.
  23. Guijarro, L. (2007) Interoperability Frameworks and Enterprise Architectures in E-Government Initiatives in Europe and the United States, Government Information Quarterly 24(1).Google Scholar
  24. Hadzilias, E. (2005) A Methodology Framework for Calculating the Cost of e-Government Services. In Böhlen M. et al. (eds. TCGOV 2005, LNAI 3416 p 247–256.Google Scholar
  25. HM Treasury (2014) Supporting public service transformation: cost benefit analysis guidance for local partnerships. Accessed 26 August 2016.
  26. IDABC (2009) European Interoperability Framework (EIF). Accessed 25 August 2016.
  27. International working group on Administrative Burdens (2004) The Standard Cost Model. A framework for defining and quantifying administrative burdens for businesses. Accessed 29 August 2016.
  28. Jackson, A., Lapsley, I. (2003) The diffusion of accounting practices in the new “managerial” public sector. International Journal of Public Sector Management 16(5): 359 – 372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kaplan, R.S., Cooper, R.J. (1997) Cost & Effect: Using Integrated Cost Systems to Drive Profitability and Performance, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  30. Kehoe, J., Dodson, W., Reeve, R., Plato, G. (1995). Activity-Based Management in Government, Coopers and Lybrand, Arlington, VA. Khan, A.Google Scholar
  31. Keller, J. (1997) Activity-based costing and management tools in government and the privateGoogle Scholar
  32. Lu, J., Zhang, G. (2003) Cost benefit factor analysis in e-services. International Journal of Service Industry Management 14(5): 570–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. OECD (2007) Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development: “From Red Tape to Smart Tape. Administrative Simplification in OECD Countries”, OECD publications.Google Scholar
  34. OECD (2011) “Presentation: The SCM – main issues, advantages and challenges of quantification of administrative costs”, Regulatory Policy Division, Directorate for Public Governance and Territorial Development – OECD.Google Scholar
  35. OMG (2006) Business Process Modelling Notation (BPMN) Specification, Available at:
  36. Paulin, A. (2014). Through liquid democracy to sustainable non-bureaucratic government. In Proc. Int. Conf. for E-Democracy and Open Government (pp. 205–217).Google Scholar
  37. Riegg C.ellini, S., & Edwin KeeK., J. (2015). Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Benefit Analysis Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation (pp. 636–672): John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
  38. Rong‐Ruey, D., Thomas, W. L., Wen‐Ying, W., Chao‐Hsin, H. (2009) The design and implementation of activity‐based costing: A case study of a Taiwanese textile company. International Journal of Accounting & Information Management 17(1): 27–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Scholl, H. J. (2005) Interoperability in e-government: More than just smart middleware. In: Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-38), Big Island, Hawaii, 3–6 January 2005.Google Scholar
  40. Schrage, M. (2009) Interoperability: The Great Enabler, in Financial Times, Friday 6th February 2009.Google Scholar
  41. SCM Network (2006) The Standard International Cost Model Network Manual, Measuring and reducing administrative burdens for businesses. Accessed 27 August 2016.
  42. Scottish Government Social Research (2010) Using the Standard Cost Model to Measure Administrative Burden: a Pilot Using Scotland’s Environmental and Rural Services (SEARS) as a Case Study. Halcrow Group Limited.Google Scholar
  43. Searcy, D. L. (2004) Using Activity-Based Costing to Assess Channel/customer Profitability. Management Accounting Quarterly 5(2):51.Google Scholar
  44. Weiss, B. (1997) Activity-based costing and management: Issues and practices in local government. Chicago, Ill: Government Finance Officers Association.Google Scholar
  45. Young, R. D. (2005) On Cost Analysis Comparisons: Government In-house Provision versus Contracting Out. USC, Institute for Public Service and Policy Research.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yannis Charalabidis
    • 1
    Email author
  • Petros Stamoulis
    • 1
  • Aggeliki Androutsopoulou
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Information and Communication Systems EngineeringUniversity of the AegeanSamosGreece

Personalised recommendations