Academic Master


Information Technology As A Tool For The Accountability Of Government Agencies

Question 2

Information technology is the best tool for the accountability of government agencies, and it is a structure of connections, procedures and instruments used to raise, direct and control information technology techniques and asset designation to accomplish the objectives and goals of an organization. It is an arrangement of formal procedures for adjusting the risk and return of information technology ventures to reliably increase the value of the organization. Information technology governance is, at last, the obligation of senior official administration. Over the long haul, information technology governance structures help concentrate government agencies on their vital estimation and guarantee that abnormal state controls are set up to accomplish and support benefits (Lourenço, Piotrowski & Ingrams, 2015).

More nations are actualizing administrative measures to guarantee more noteworthy accountability from agencies, and more agencies are receiving formal governance forms that particularly address the governance of vital business resources, including information technology. Thus, information technology governance has turned into a fundamental piece of the corporate governance scene.

The development of online advances has fundamentally affected the government’s ability to give administrations. Nonetheless, while the Internet empowers online conveyance of a scope of administrations, it does not in itself enhance a government’s ability to perform. American investigations demonstrate this is particularly so in current public policy conditions described by authoritative disaggregation of political and managerial control from conventional public sector governance structures. In advertise-centred agencies, the board and senior administration are entrusted with the duty of executing governance structures that guarantee the viability of basic speculation leadership forms.

More Read: 3D Product Modeling Services

Nonetheless, for some public sector agencies, there is a more unpredictable arrangement of accountability connections that traverses the electorate, the public benefit, the government, and the parliament. At the government level in Australia, Federal Ministers are at last in charge of dealing with their specializations and directing assigned duties to secretaries (Lourenço, Piotrowski & Ingrams, 2015).

In the meantime, public sector agencies are going up against progressing basic changes, not really of their own decision, to how they capacity and identify with a nation’s economy and its citizenry. These progressions result in a reassessment of the propriety of governance structures, forms, and social components in the public sector.

The formation of new information systems is a fundamental segment in the production of accountability. Information about that choice and its results must stream to each one of those to whom the chief is accountable when a choice is taken. Without such an information stream and without the information system to convey that stream, there can be no accountability on the grounds that there can be no learning of the choice (Brown & Brudney, 2003).

Accountability information systems are administration information systems. They accommodate the observation of choice execution and are planned to aid in controlling that execution. In addition, additionally empowering new accountabilities, they can likewise enhance existing ones through arrangement of even more convenient, reliable and formal information about execution. At times, utilization of information technology shapes a relatively fundamental component of these new information systems (Lourenço, Piotrowski & Ingrams, 2015).

Those information systems with only an observing component just help reveal that beneficiaries have information on choices and results; however, they cannot pass judgment on them. Those with checking and correlation components simply bolster transparency: beneficiaries can judge whether choices and results meet worthy execution, norms however can do nothing with this information. Just those information systems that give checking, examination and control instruments can be said to really bolster accountability: enabling beneficiaries to take activities that influence the source leader. For instance, a paper-based public information system was created with the goal of enhancing accountability in country advancement ventures.

In any case, it just upheld transparency: natives could screen announced consumption on neighbourhood tasks and contrast it with genuine undertaking results, therefore recognizing inconsistencies in which public hirelings had stolen reserves. What the system did not do was give an instrument to hold leaders accountable. Information technology has had a tendency to be utilized, for the most part, to help make revealing or, to a lesser degree, receptive information systems. It is occasionally workable for information technology to be connected in a full accountability system that robotizes control. New information systems can extend the extent of accountability by conveying accountability information to new beneficiaries. Nevertheless, the impact, practically speaking, has been uneven. Those gatherings or organizations with the monetary and political energy to force new information systems on public sector agencies are those to whom more noteworthy accountability has been collected (Brown & Brudney, 2003).

For example, it helps to measure the effectiveness of management activities of civil servants in positions of responsibility; an operational accounting system with a single, daily-updated centralized database is required. This task is solved only by automating state activities and integrating them into a single information system in which every civil servant contributes data on his actions in real time. Such a system corresponds to the concept of “electronic government”, i.e. application of information technology in the public sector (Lourenço, Piotrowski & Ingrams, 2015).

The main goal of creating the Unified State Population Register is to solve this task. After all, it is aimed at creating a system of unified automated accounting of personal data of the population that can improve the quality of public administration and provide public services to the public. The automation of all registration procedures makes it possible to track each step of the employee. This measure will ensure transparency of the process and reduce the risks of shadow corruption schemes. In addition, the growth of corruption reduces the revenue side of the state budget since, on the one hand, corruption has been shown to have a disincentive effect on the economic activity of individuals, and on the other hand, high corruption in the fiscal bodies helps to reduce the collected tax payments.

The introduction of information technology in the public sector is costly and labor-intensive, and achieving the desired effect on the sustainable development requires very serious efforts, changes in the existing inefficient and corrupt management processes, methods and culture of the state apparatus and, most importantly, substantial amounts of financing. However, based on the above data, it can be noted that the introduction of information technology is also due to “high financial returns (Brown & Brudney, 2003).

Information technology is vital for the accountability of government agencies. As has been recognized by many governments, information technology has the potential to spur the growth of the national economy and expand the scope and effectiveness of government agencies for social and economic development. Information technology has a huge potential as a catalyst for social development. The universal, flexible nature of information technology means that they can be used to solve almost any development task, but they have already proved their effectiveness in a number of areas.


Brown, M. M., & Brudney, J. L. (2003). Learning Organizations in the Public Sector? A Study of Police Agencies Employing Information and Technology to Advance Knowledge. Public Administration Review, 63(1), 30–43.

Lourenço, R. P., Piotrowski, S., & Ingrams, A. (2015). Public accountability ICT support: A detailed account of public accountability process and tasks. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 9248, pp. 105–117).



Calculate Your Order

Standard price





Pop-up Message