PELAPORAN SEMINAR i-IMATEC

Besides these, the service team profiling also showed that early and continuous

engagement of the teams are important in assessment of services. Early
engagement has been conducted on ad hoc bases, frequently and systematically.

Early engagement can help the teams pass assessment because it involve:

 dissemination of about digital academy, list of resources and reading material to
the teams;

 discovery of review;

 seeing the demo/prototype during a F2F visit;
 introducing the teams to more experience team;

 organising a person to observe an assessment;

 completion of content review; and
 sharing of pre-assessment checklist.


The speaker concluded this speech by revising Figure 8, which explains the overall

service assessment process.



















Figure 8: Overall service assessment process




Question & Answer


Question : How to handle silos between agencies?


Answer : A team should be build consisting officers from various agencies. The team

should identify objectives of implementing assurance in their services. With
this objectives, the team should get connected to build new initiatives and

maintain continuous communication.



36

3. SPEAKER SESSION PLENARY 3: “COGNITIVE TODAY, DIGITAL
TOMORROW: COGNITIVE ERGONOMICS APPLIED TO DIGITAL
GOVERNMENT” BY MS. HALIMAHTUN MOHD KHALID (PHD, CHFP, KMN),
DAMAI SCIENCES KUALA LUMPUR









































The speaker began her presentation by expressing that the current level of service

concepts that are applied especially in the web-based government services and digital
services have to be looked into to be digitally ready. She disagreed with an article

published in the MIT Sloan Management Review titled, “Digital Today Cognitive

Tomorrow,” as the people have not reach that level yet, but should instead be
“Cognitive Today, Digital Tomorrow.” In order to be digital today, everything will have

to be in digital form while cognitive systems are systems we will be relying on in the
future, will be used to translate and interpret the feedback and responses received

from the people. She challenged whether we are even at that level yet with the current
systems in place.


As we are not at that level yet, she highlighted that we should take a step back,

understand the cognitive level, and address the needs of the users who will be using

these services. According to the speaker, based on the Handbook of Human-


37

Computer Interaction written by Marting G. Helander, in 1988, most of the concepts

that are being implemented came about from this book. Singapore started out early by
implementing e-Citizen while Malaysia are not even there yet. The speaker prescribed

the possibility of interaction with virtual humans, and the designs implement on
accepting these virtual assistants. Some of the examples of virtual assistants are

Emma, from the Department of Homeland Security USA, and Siri in the iPhone.


The speaker highlighted that the acceptance of these virtual assistants in a system
highly depends on understanding the culture, the people and their background. Based

on a project undertaken by the speaker from the US Air Force Grant, known as

THRUST (Trusting Humanoid Robots Undertake Social Tasks), these virtual
assistants trying to mimic a human, were equipped with natural dialogue, and dressed-

up like the people that they are communicating with, together with expressions and
hand gestures. The success or the failure of it highly depends on the interactivity with

the people when it provides the services, which is known as cognitive technology.


There are two types of robot partnership:


a. Mixed human robot partnership
b. Multi human-avatar partnership


From here, the speaker ascertained that what the future needs is learning workers

instead of knowledge workers. Learning workers are people who can interpret, learn
things and use big data, which makes data scientist an important group compared to

programmers.


Based on the Seven Pillars of Digital Government, which ensure a successful
transformation, the speaker disagrees that the user centered design should be the last

pillar. In fact, she accentuated that it should be the first pillar in the blue print as to
better understand the users. She stressed that the fundamentals of building good

applications, these interactive technologies should have:


a. Cognitive Ergonomics
b. Human Factors Engineering

c. Affective Engineering


The speaker defined cognitive ergonomics as the ability of a person to interact with
the environment, reasoning, perception to perceive and filter things out in their

38

memory. She also stressed that a person’s attention’s resources are very limited. The

speaker then went on to explained in detail the cognitive workings in a person on how
they perceived and accept view the services presented in the website. From there, the

speaker zoomed in on the understanding of the three type of processors that a human
has which are perceptual processor, cognitive processor and motor processor which

plays a role in determining the acceptability of the person towards the web services

offered in a website. She also highlighted the positive and negative points commented
by the website users by citing examples from Malaysia Digital Economy Corporation

(MDEC) and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Some of the mental
issues raised for the website design are:


a. What mental model might you expect the user to have?

b. What mental model should they have?
c. How should you convey an appropriate mental model to the user?

d. How should you design the interface to reflect the mental model?
e. How do you represent the mental model?


In order to overcome these mental issues, the speaker recommended that web

services offered in the website be measured against Norman’s Action Cycle to
determine how wide is the gulf between the Gulf of Execution and the Gulf of

Evaluation. The wider the gulfs illustrate that the lower the achievability of the goals.
As a matter of fact, the amount of efficiency required by the user to achieve the goals,

and the satisfaction level that the user feels when they use the portal are the main

objectives that a website should have.


Besides that, the usability attributes in a website are best correlated with the LEEERS
Model, whose attributes are:


a. Learnability – Time and effort to reach proficiency
b. Effectiveness – Accomplishing goal-directed tasks to criterion performance

c. Efficiency – Level of performance relative to resources

d. Errors – Errors committed, and how to design for recovery
e. Retention – Memorizing a system for better performance next time

f. Satisfaction with the experience – User attitude during and after use

Furthermore, the user’s experience goals towards a website are satisfying,

entertaining, aesthetically pleasing, fun, helpful, rewarding, enjoyable, motivating and

39

support creativity. Meanwhile, from the services aspect in a website, the enhancement

can be increased with the Core Effect Circle (Russell, 2003), where the website should
be directed towards the positive affect of the circle like pleasant foreground, people

excited by the information instead of the negative affect which is dull and monotonous.
The Kano model of User Satisfaction can be used to garner the user’s satisfaction in

using the web services like an increase in personalization, visible search tools, good

error feedback, and a reduction in processing delay of the complex language and
image complexity.


In conclusion, every citizen interface, application and interactivity should have these

features:

a. Easy to understand and learn

b. Error tolerant

c. Flexible and adaptable
d. Appropriate and effective for the task

e. Powerful and efficient
f. Inexpensive

g. Portable

h. Compatible
i. Intelligent

j. Support social and group interactions
k. Trustworthy (secure, private, safe and reliable)

l. Information centered
m. Pleasant to use



























40

C. Roundtable Design Sprint



The Roundtable Design Sprint, led by Mr. Marcus Foth was held in the afternoon

session where the delegates were divided into respective groups to discuss thirteen
(13) themes of service delivery sectors. MDEC and INTAN facilitated the session and

the themes discussed were as follows:


1. Urban Policy & Regulatory Reform
2. Diversity & Innovation

3. Business & Entrepreneurship

4. Sustainability & Climate Change
5. Transport & Mobility

6. Housing Affordability
7. Safety & Security

8. Open Data
9. Social Inclusion & Welfare

10. Culture & Tourism

11. Health & Wellbeing
12. Finance & Taxes

13. Education & Training

Each group were given a template of the USE-CASE EXPLORATION CANVAS as

shown in Figure 9. It covers two main sections – the Problem Space and the Solution

Space with respective points of area discussions. Each group then do a five minutes
presentation of their output.


The output from this Roundtable Design Sprint will be explored and refined by the

MDEC team, led by head of facilitators, Dr. Idyawati binti Hussein.

Refer ATTACHMENT 4 for some outputs of the Use-Case Exploration Canvas.

















41

Figure 9: Use-Case Exploration Canvas (source: QUT Design Lab)



A. The Problem Space

i) Persona – The identified person/profile
ii) Goal – What is your persona trying to achieve?

iii) Pains – What are the problems and challenges they encounter?
iv) Gains – What would make it easier for them?



B. The Solution Space
v) Product/Service–What kind of product or service can we create that would

facilitate the gains?
vi) Resources–What kind of information, data, infrastructure, technology, etc.

could Government provide to allow us to deliver this product or service (in

a better way)?
vii) Role–What would be our role as a government team or as individual citizens

in delivering this product or service together with others?
viii) Stakeholders – Who are the stakeholders of our project? Who else should

be involved and for which purpose?






42

IV. Program Feedback




The feedback received from 88 delegates who were mostly from the managerial level,
that on average gave “good” rating on the program, a score range 4.2 to 4.5 out of

5 based on Likert Scale, for program’s effectiveness, content, learning method,
usefulness, increase in knowledge and skill, as well as the secretariat role in

organising the event, as shown in Chart 1.






Overall Program Rating


4.5
4.5
4.5
4.4
4.4
Likert Scale:
4.4 4.3
5 - Excellent
4 - Good 4.3
3 - Regular 4.3 4.3
2 - Poor
4.3 4.2
1 - Very Poor
4.2


4.2

4.1
Effectiveness Content Methodology Usefulness Knowledge Secretariat
and Skills

Chart 1: Overall Program Rating

























43

It is noted that “good” rating, a score range of 4.1 to 4.3, is in reference to the

speakers, for their clear deliverables about knowledge and skills, create engaging
learning environment and interaction capabilities, as shown in Chart 2.







Overall Speakers' Rating

4.4
4.3
4.3

4.3 4.2
Likert Scale:
5 - Excellent
4.2
4 - Good
3 - Regular 4.2 4.1
2 - Poor
1 - Very poor
4.1

4.1

4.0
Deliverables Engaging Interaction

Chart 2: Overall Speakers' Rating










































44

On speaker’s delivery style, content and topic connection to the program’s

theme, the delegates’ average rating for Speaker 1: Prof. Foth is 4.3, Speaker 2:
Mr. Bond is 4.0 and Speaker 3: Dr. Halimahtun is 4.5. Meanwhile for the

Roundtable Design Sprint led by Prof. Foth, the average score is 3.6. More
information on Speaker’s Session Rating is shown in Chart 3.





Speaker's Session Rating


4.8
4.6
4.6 4.5
4.5
4.4
4.3 4.3 4.3
4.2
Likert Scale:
5 - Excellent 4.0 4.1
4.0
4 - Good
3.9 Delivery Style
3 - Regular 3.8
2 - Poor 3.7 Content
3.7
1 - Very poor 3.6 3.6 Connection

3.4
Avg = 4.3 Avg = 4.0 Avg = 4.5 Avg = 3.6
3.2
3.0
Prof. Foth Mr. Bond Dr. Halimahtun Roundtable
Design Sprint
(Prof. Foth)


Chart 3: Speaker's Session Rating






Refer ATTACHMENT 5 for Program’s Evaluation Form.




















45

V. Conclusion




The Digital Leadership Experience (DLE) 2017 received positive feedback from the
stakeholders. DLE2017 represented INTAN’s, MDEC’s and MAMPU’s diligent effort

to provide awareness to the public sector regarding the need to enhance efficiency
and productivity through the adoption of innovative technology towards becoming

more citizen centric in government service delivery to achieve better quality of living

for citizens in accordance with the 11th Malaysia Plan.


LIST OF ATTACHMENTS




ATTACHMENT 1: PROGRAM BROCHURE

ATTACHMENT 2: WELCOMING REMARKS SENIOR DEPUTY DIRECTOR INTAN

ATTACHMENT 3: IAP2’s PUBLIC PARTICIPATION SPECTRUM


ATTACHMENT 4: USE-CASE EXPLORATION CANVAS DISCUSSION OUTPUTS

ATTACHMENT 5: PROGRAM EVALUATION FORM

ATTACHMENT 6: PHOTO GALLERY



Report Prepared by:


Rapporteur Working Committee
Digital Leadership Exchange (DLE2017)
Cluster for Innovative Management Technology (i-IMATEC)
National Institute of Public Administration (INTAN)
October 2017










____________________________________________________________________










46