Examining LGU Technological Readiness for E-Governance

Implementation in the Philippines

GROUP 8 BPA 3-1

Morales, Ethan Mcrae
Pasion, Jan Michael
Turay, Adrian Roque
Villante, Stephen

Research Adviser:
FERDINAND LA PUEBLA, PhD
CHAPTER 1. The Problem and Its Setting

Introduction

Philippine society has been steadily adapting to the modern digital advancements of the
world. The Philippines is ranked fourth (4th) among ASEAN countries in the Technological
Competitiveness Index (Arco, R. et al., 2014). However, the general technological
competitiveness in the country might not be equal in the private and the public sector. It is
heavily advised to develop sustainable mechanisms for providing the private sector, including
small and medium-sized enterprises, with research and development support to foster
innovation and technology development a decade ago (Haydarov, 2011). In the public sector,
projects and initiatives aimed at enhancing e-governance were pursued as well. Yet the
absence of a top-level agency that is formally dedicated to control and oversight of ICT policies
and programs hindered not just the delivery of public services but also the continuation of
reforms (Magno, F., 2018) That is until the passage of Republic Act No. 10844, otherwise known
as the Department of Information and Communications Technology Act of 2015. The law
establishes an agency that will now perform the control and oversight of ICT policies in the
country.

Our educational, consumer, distribution, production, financial, legal, and governance

systems are already changing due to the transformational and disruptive character of present
and prospective technology (Dosso, 2020). In the local setting, through the Department of
Information and Communications Technology's (DICT) initiative, the Philippine government
published its eLGU project in 2014. This project aims to revolutionize local governance by
empowering Local Government Units (LGUs) to be electronically oriented, thereby enhancing
public service delivery, fostering transparency in government transactions, expanding public
access to government information services, and other goals. By 2019, the administration had
brought out a blueprint for a harmonized information system for the Philippine government
which is the E-Government Masterplan 2022 (EGMP 2022). EGMP 2022 intends to build upon
laid groundwork by EGMP 2013-2016 as well as new E-Government policies such as RA 10844
which establishes DICT. The EGMP has four main objectives: Optimize Government Operations
(G2G); Engage Citizens (G2C); Transform Services (G2B); and Empower Government
Employees (G2E).
 A form of assessment system used to determine the maturity level of a specific
technology is called a Technology Readiness Level (TRL). Each technology project is assessed
in relation to the requirements for each technology level, and a TRL rating is subsequently given
depending on the project's development (Tzinis, 2021 NASA). The TRL is a tool to be utilized in
determining the current levels of e-governance in the country. In project proposals for projects
with EU funding by 2014, the use of TRLs was common but not universal. TRLs are used in
several parts of the Horizon 2020 work program paperwork for 2014–15 to define limits for
supported projects on specific subjects. This study intends to use the Technology Readiness
Levels used by the EU Horizon 2020 to examine the current readiness of LGU E-Governance.

Technology Readiness
Level (TRL) Standard

TRL 1 basic principles observed

TRL 2 technology concept formulated

TRL 3 experimental proof of concept

TRL 4 technology validated in laboratory

TRL 5 technology validated in relevant environment

TRL 6 technology demonstrated in relevant environment

TRL 7 system prototype demonstration in operational environment

TRL 8 system complete and qualified

TRL 9 actual system proven in operational environment

Statement of the Problem
The current research is being carried out with the intention of comparing and analyzing
the levels of technological readiness held by three different local government units located in the
Philippines (Sto. Thomas, Batangas; Antipolo, Rizal; Manila, National Capital Region).

1. What are the concurrent E-Governance programs and policies implemented by the local
government units?

2. What are the similarities and differences among the approaches of the three local
government units?

3. What are the technological readiness level of the three different local government units based
on the EU HORIZON TRL 2020?

Technology Readiness
Level (TRL) Standard

TRL 1 basic principles observed

TRL 2 technology concept formulated

TRL 3 experimental proof of concept

TRL 4 technology validated in laboratory

TRL 5 technology validated in relevant environment

TRL 6 technology demonstrated in relevant environment

TRL 7 system prototype demonstration in operational environment

TRL 8 system complete and qualified

TRL 9 actual system proven in operational environment

(EU HORIZON 2020. Héder, 2014)

Theoretical Framework: Technological Readiness Level (TRL)
For e-government programs to be successful, adoption is crucial. Gilbert, Balestrini, and
Littleboy (2004) described the adoption challenges as involving "willingness," but Carter and
Belanger (2005) conceptualized the adoption and usage difficulties as involving "intention."
Furthermore, according to V. Kumar, Mukerji, Butt, and Persaud (2007), "a simple decision of
using, or not using, online services" constitutes the adoption of e-government. To understand
user acceptability and adoption of technology in an organizational setting, a variety of theories
and models have been created over time under diverse circumstances.
NASA developed the Technological Readiness Level (TRL) scale in the 1970s as a
scientific metric/measurement system that facilitates evaluations of a given technology's
maturity between various technology categories (Mankins, 2004). The TRL approach has been
used on-and-off in NASA space technology planning for many years and is currently a de facto
industry standard for technological review and oversight across numerous sectors, from
consumer electronics to power systems (Olechowski, Eppinger, & Joglekar, 2015).
The technological readiness concept was first applied within NASA in the 1970s and was
first published publicly as a 7-point scale in 1989. In 1995, NASA published a streamlined
9-point scale along with the first in-depth descriptions of each level. Olechowski, Eppinger, &
Joglekar (2015) noted that, the TRLs are described as being motivated by "the differing
perceptions of the researchers and the mission planners between the intended and actual proof
of readiness," with the assurance that "a properly planned, thoroughly executed technology
research and development program can provide substantive advances at acceptable risk
levels." TRLs were swiftly adopted as a result of the United States Department of Defense's
requirement for their usage in all new procurement initiatives beginning in 2001.
Defense, oil and gas, infrastructure, and aerospace are just a few of the industries that
have produced tailored standard guidelines for using TRLs in complex systems' development.
TRL principles are increasingly being applied to general system development processes of
organizations. This has resulted in expanded responsibilities for independent consultants and
accreditors as well as the creation of new standards.
 In the context of this research, the need to highlight a number of advantages associated
with the deployment and use of e-government, including transparency, efficiency, cost reduction,
improved service delivery, accountability, and a decrease in corruption is paramount in the
ever-changing South East Asia region where innovation and competition is on the rise with
governments as much as there exists cooperation among them.

Technology Readiness
Level (TRL) Standard

TRL 1 basic principles observed

TRL 2 technology concept formulated

TRL 3 experimental proof of concept

TRL 4 technology validated in laboratory

TRL 5 technology validated in relevant environment

TRL 6 technology demonstrated in relevant environment

TRL 7 system prototype demonstration in operational environment

TRL 8 system complete and qualified

TRL 9 actual system proven in operational environment

(EU HORIZON 2020. Héder, 2014)

Conceptual Framework

Scope and Limitations of the Study

The study aims to discover the current Technology Readiness Levels of E-Governance
programs in the setting of Philippine LGUs. The objectives of this study are the following:
1. Determine the current Technology Readiness Levels of E-Governance projects in
various LGUs.
2. Compare the Technology Readiness Levels between LGUs with different backgrounds.
3. Observe the elements that may or may not affect the Technology Readiness Levels of a
certain LGU.
The study focuses on the E-Governance projects of LGUs in Luzon. These projects
shall be those that try to achieve the objectives set by the EGMP 2022. The projects shall be
assessed in terms of their current Technological Readiness Levels. The LGUs would be the City
of Manila in the National Capital Region, the City of Antipolo in the Province of Rizal, and the
City of Sto. Tomas in the Province of Batangas. The City of Manila is considered to be an
established and highly urbanized city with high standards of governance as well as
technological advancement heralded by its very active private-sector; it is also the first city to be
chartered in the country in 1901. The City of Antipolo on the other hand is another 1st class
component city, chartered in 1998 and is the most populous city in the province of Rizal and the
whole Region 4-A; it has a mixture of highly urbanized areas and vast rural areas as well. The
City of Sto. Tomas is a newly converted 1st class component city from a municipality in 2018, it
is mostly made up of rural residential areas with a lot of farmland but with urbanizing districts as
well.

Significance of the Study

Local Government Units: This research will help local government units in evaluating
their technology readiness/index. It may be utilized as additional inputs to develop or strengthen
technological advancement, as well as to identify their deficiencies and adopt the plans,
initiatives, and approaches of various local government entities.

Researchers: The study will enable the researcher to explore new information, ideas,
and concepts on the comparison and analysis of the technological readiness level differences
between the following local government units: Sto. Thomas, Batangas;

Future Researchers: The research may be used by anyone who are interested in doing
a more extensive and in-depth investigation into the subject matter provided as a supplementary
source of information or reference.
CHAPTER 2: Review of Related Literatures
Synthesis of Literature

E-Governance had been well developed in the past decade or so. With the wave of technology
continuously innovating and improving, governance is also called upon to adjust and reshape
with the turning tides. Evidently, this process is not easy to implement and observe especially in
the context of Public Administration. Studies and articles well document the rapidly improving
course of E-Governance throughout the past decade. Additionally, the Technological Readiness
Level model has also been developing as a reliable scale for technological developments. The
researchers have curated a plethora of literature that establishes the adoption and
development of E-Governance throughout the world and the Philippines as well as the relevant
developments regarding TRL. Four main themes were found: readiness, implementation,
innovation and engagement.

Readiness
Hradecky, et al. (2021) highlighted that the adoption of new technologies could be
beneficial, with higher return on investment, lower total expenses, enhance decision-making,
and eliminate repetitive tasks for organizations. However, it can be seen that the great
complexity of some technologies creates a knowledge barrier for organizational adoption in
contrast to others that are "easy-to-deploy.” Readiness to a perceived change in an
organizational setting must be examined in all aspects. Landa, Elizabeth & Zhu, Chang &
Sesabo, Jennifer. (2021) gave emphasis on identifying the motivating and restraint forces in
which the latter is the main cause of the failure of adoption and implementation of many
innovations in the fields of education, governance and business settings. Hradecky, et al. (2021)
also identified that technical and non-technical variables such as the technology capabilities and
leadership of an organization influence the adoption and implementation of such innovation.
The interaction between service delivery stakeholders now often creates synergy
between service seekers, service providers, and service facilitators (Shouran, Rokhman, &
Priyambodo, 2019). Baeuo, Rahim, & Alaraibi (2016) and Shouran, Rokhman, & Priyambodo,
(2019) noted that because it seems economical, the implementation of e-governance seems the
go-to step on facilitating collaboration between people and the government. In spite of that,
e-governance in the context of the Philippines has several hurdles to resolve as pointed out by
Mwungu, (2007) and Shouran, Rokhman, & Priyambodo, (2019) such as (1) infrastructure, (2)
legislation and policy issues, and (3) socio-cultural obstacles. According to the study by Ismail,
H. A. (2008), many developing countries were facing difficulties in applying successful
e-government projects due to different electronic readiness (e-readiness) problems, such as
poor ICT infrastructure and a high percentage of digital illiteracy among Citizens that have led to
e-government projects abandoned by users. Despite the various efforts by developing countries
to overcome thèse problems, the factors that particularly affect Citizens and their use of
e-government have not been adequately identified and tested. Readiness factors are important
for citizens to use e-government services. However, e-readiness factors should be combined
with trust in technology and e-government in order to encourage citizens to use e-government
and for it to be successful (Ismail, H. A., 2008).
Although the success of e-governance in the country is heavily reliant on multifaceted
issues that must be dealt with, the status quo as rationalized by AlSaqqaf, A., & Ke, H. (2021),
is that the worldwide COVID-19 epidemic has strengthened the role of e-governance in nations
all over the world. This is because more governments have sought to integrate technology into
their operations in response to the economic and health catastrophe.

Implementation
Upon establishing an acceptable readiness level, implementation comes next in
eGovernance as with other projects and programs. Readiness factors such as IT infrastructure
is absolutely necessary for the successful deployment and adoption of digital technologies. In
order to ultimately gain value from digital innovation, it is necessary to plan and implement a
suitable combined IT and a strategy depending on the environment, as well as to establish a
digital organization and IT capabilities (Corro & Volpé, 2020). Readiness in technology by
having new and upcoming ICT does not ensure great results. Assessment of existing problems
and alternative plans of actions are essential steps in implementation of eGovernance as well.
Some of the most significant technical issues examined in eGovernment implementation seem
to be providing funds for citizens and qualified enterprises to purchase critical IT infrastructure;
establishing regulations and laws for penalizing those who in any way misuse eGovernment
services; and supporting eGovernment-related periodicals and publications, as well as IT
infrastructure procurement and implementation in government enterprises (Shouran et al.,
2019).
Global eGovernance has adopted five stage models: emerging presence; enhanced
presence; interactive presence; transactional presence; and networked (or fully integrated)
presence (Abdulmutallib & Alhassan, 2021). However some developing countries get stuck at
the first two stages due to the lack of well-developed legislation. Governments have not
prioritized amending or implementing new legislation to address the difficulties faced by
eGovernment. (Mwungu & Colins, 2007). Locally, Philippine eGovernance legislations are only
starting to take shape in the past several years. There was an absence of a systematic
eGovernance legislation in the country in its early forms. Some LGUs and agencies were ahead
and some were taking no steps at all. The creation of the DICT by law in 2016 fills this
systematic void. (Magno, 2018) It comes with the creation of a pool of CIOs to offer the
leadership required to manage E-Government activities at both the national and sub-national
levels. The implementation of Philippine eGovernance is ultimately guided by EGMP 2022.

Innovation
Technology has interconnected people throughout the globe and made information more
accessible to individuals of different backgrounds and locations. Every country should consider
the following when executing plans for e-government innovations to promote social
development by improving government responsiveness, efficiency, and transparency by
adopting e-government visions and strategies to lead computerization projects and programs. In
stages, plan databases, LANs, data transmission backbones, Internet connection, and
database-driven websites. To raise public officials' and people' understanding of the nature,
needs, and advantages of e-government services, a few agencies must trial e-government
systems and services. (Tiamiyu & Ogumsola, 2013)
To support effective e-government adoption in developing countries, governments should
encourage more and diverse publications on frameworks, obstacles, failures, dangers, and
recommended cures. Collaboration will reduce failures, foster new government solutions, and
improve empirical learning.(Mkude & Wimmer, 2013). “The biggest gap right now is between
economics, and science and technology. Both sides need to understand what’s going on with
the other side, and this divide needs to be closed,” (Liu, 2016).
There is a key role of ICT in implementing E-governance by using the internet as the
most innovative way to reach the citizens (Gajendra e al., 2012). Since then, academics have
addressed virtual services via developed nations' e-readiness. In contrast, judging e-readiness
in poor nations is restricted. Strategic planning and execution should follow when government
entities adopt e-government. It's significant because it shows timely e-readiness, which helps fix
flaws rapidly. Based on the literature, the tool or model comprises strategy, procedures,
technology, and people. According to UNESCO (www.unesco.org), e-governance improves
information and service delivery, encourages citizen engagement in decision-making, and
makes government more responsible, transparent, and effective. It is probable that an
organisation will suffer if the company does not innovate and does not adopt new technology.
This is troublesome when considering the aggressive and competitive business climate.

Engagement
The phenomenon of e-government is derived from the desire for efficient service
delivery. E-government services have become a significant and active means for interaction
among government, citizens and businesses. (Joseph, 2014). This expunded on the idea that
ICT must be utilized by the government to establish an E-government where their citizens could
better interact with the government. Lallana (2002) said that ICT is a tool for enhancing citizen’s
access to government services and that the website/internet should contribute to citizen
empowerment by “allowing information sharing among people and organizations, between
citizens and the civil service”. In addition, it is made sure that there is transparency and that the
people should not only have access to e-governance, but that they must be able to actively play
a part in it as well. According to Mollah et al. (2012), and UNESCO defined e-government as
“the public sector’s use of ICT to improve delivery of information and service, encourage
participation of citizens in the decision-making process and provide increased transparency and
effectiveness of government”. Transparency is not just about placing documents online, but also
responding to citizen demands for information that matters. Otherwise, the data disclosed
simply depends on the choice of current officials (Mangahas 2013).
As e-governance is established, it is imperative that as the citizens are now engaged in
e-governance, they must also know about the programs or features that come with
e-governance. As stated by Saxena (2001) and UNDES A (2003), e-governance could be
achieved by having e-democracy that allows citizens to participate in their community in more
efficient ways by having virtual meetings and cyber campaigns, public surveys and community
forums, in addition to e-voting. Under the program “The E-Participation through the National
Government Portal '', a set of online tools will give citizens access to government information,
space for consultation, and a platform for collaboration. It has three main components. The first
is E-Information which equips citizens with open data and public information. The second is
E-Consultation which solicits inputs from citizens on public deliberations on policy issues. The
third is E-Decision Making which encourages citizens to co-design and co-produce public goods
and services. Online services are provided through the Integration of business processes,
policies, procedures, tools, technologies and human resources to support both assisted and
unassisted customer services using ICT networks. (Magno, 2018).
CHAPTER 3: Methodology
This chapter provides information on the method that has been used in this research.
This chapter includes the research method, data gathering procedures, locale of the study, and
the instruments used and data collection procedures

Research Methods
In conducting this thesis, the researchers will conduct data gathering of relevant
information through materials such as articles, journals, published research/thesis and the
E-Governance Master Plan 2022. Qualitative Research is primarily exploratory research which
will be the main focus of the researchers in doing the study. It is used to gain an understanding
of underlying reasons, opinions, and motivations. It provides insights into the problem or helps
to develop ideas or hypotheses for potential quantitative research. Qualitative Research is also
used to uncover trends in thought and opinions, and dive deeper into the problem (Franzo,
2011). Qualitative research seeks to understand a given research problem or topic from the
perspectives of the local population it involves. It is especially effective in obtaining culturally
specific information about the values, opinions, behaviors, and social contexts of particular
populations. The strength of qualitative research is its ability to provide complex textual
descriptions of how people experience a given research issue. It provides information about the
“human” side of an issue – that is, the often contradictory behaviors, beliefs, opinions, emotions,
and relationships of individuals. Qualitative methods are also effective in identifying intangible
factors, such as social norms, socioeconomic status, gender roles, ethnicity, and religion, whose
role in the research issue may not be readily apparent. (N. Mack, C. Woodsong, K. Macqueen,
G. Guest, E. Namey, 2005).
The researchers will also utilize interviews with respective LGUs under the Qualitative
Research Method. A structured interview technique will be used with a common set of questions
- a method where the interviewer gives out a list of prepared, closed-ended questions in the
style of an interview schedule (McLeod, 2014). Structured interviews are simple to conduct,
allowing for the execution of numerous interviews in a short period of time. They are also simple
to repeat because a predefined set of closed questions will be asked. This implies that a sizable
sample may be gathered, making the results reliable and able to be expanded to a sizable
population (McLeod, 2014). The researchers believe that this will be beneficial for the utilization
of descriptive comparative approach among the three chosen LGUs in the Philippines.
Descriptive comparative approach will be employed in conducting this research for the
reason that comparison provides a basis for analyzing and interpreting cases in perspective of
substantive and theoretical standards, as well as for making claims regarding empirical
regularities. This approach can be viewed as a term that includes both quantitative and
qualitative comparison (Mills et al, 2006). Comparison is essential to empirical social science in
its broadest sense as it is used (Ragin, 2014). Comparative analysis includes the description
and analysis of similarities and differences in conditions or outcomes between social entities,
such as regions, countries, societies, and cultures (Smelser, 1973). In which, the researchers
will then analyze the data and group them to determine their points of differentiation and
similarity of LGU Technological Readiness for E-Governance Implementation in the Philippines.

Data Gathering Procedures

The researcher gathered data through articles, journals, published research/thesis and
the E-Governance Master Plan 2022, and used them as the basis of the data gathering
procedure. The researchers aim to reach out to the respective LGUs to conduct a structured
interview to answer the queries of the researchers.

Locale of the Study

The main objective of this paper is to compare the Technology Readiness Levels of three
LGUs in the country namely; Manila, Antipolo, and Sto. Tomas and examine their projects if it
aligns with the objectives of E-Government Master Plan (EGMP) 2022 and ultimately, the
transition of the Philippines towards adopting E-Governance.

Instruments used and Data Collection Procedures

The instruments used by the researchers to collect the data will be: articles, journals,
published research/thesis and structured interviews. It provides reliable and comparable
qualitative data that will allow the researchers to develop a keen understanding of the topic.
The researchers will also use the comparative approach between the three LGUs -
Manila, Antipolo, and Sto. Tomas - as the approach of each LGUs will differ from one another.
The aim is to search for their commonalities as well as their differences and to have an
understanding on what avenue there might be for improvement (if any).