The list of things you can do now is growing all the time and a lot of us take it all for granted. Of course, that is as it should be. But it has always been a concern that the people who most need to have quick and easy access to services are very often the very ones who don't have the access or the know-how to get on-line services.

While access in public libraries is making it more possible for everybody to get low-cost Internet access, the increasing possibilities around mobile phone technology should open up even more opportunities to get services to those who most need them. Mobile phones are now so commonplace that it makes a lot of sense for pubic service agencies to purpose their information and transactional services for delivery using SMS technologies by simplifying processes and using the features of the technology to delivery services in a different way. For many who work in the context of forms that can be a challenge, because forms have been at the heart of service administration since the very beginning. But by using communications and computing technologies and mobile phones it is now possible to operate without forms (at least as we knew them before) and to ask users to verify or change information already given and easily recalled or to simply agree to the renewal of a annual charge, like car tax etc.

Another interesting aspect of egovernment is that with all of the improvements in service delivery and the deployment of technology throughout the public service, the structure of the public service has remained the same. This contrasts with the private sector where the increasing use of and reliance on technology has meant changes in the operational models of firms as they are influenced by the technology choices that help them operate.

The use of technology has changed from the early days of accounts and payroll systems to help parts of the organisation operate better, to a situation today where technology is everywhere and where the emphasis has shifted to more standardisation of data and processes and far greater levels of integration, using technology to improve agility in responding to changing demands.

Indeed, some organisations wouldn't exist at all were it not for the Internet.

But changing the operational model is not something that is approached lightly, especially if the consequences of a radical change are extensive. Government is complex with many layers and has a lot of autonomous organisations within those layers. While 'joined-up government' is a very fashionable concept these days, it is not that simple to bring about. The 'unjoined' nature of the pubic service is in many instances quite deliberate and often serves to protect the interests of the citizen. Having said that, of course, there are obvious areas where joining up can benefit the citizen. Indeed, the current Social Partnership Agreement, 'Towards 2016', sets out how services are to be delivered around lifecycles to promote greater social inclusion. This implies a far greater degree of joining up than existed before. On the inside of government too there is a good case for more joining up in the policy processes as we move towards more evidence-supported policy making in terms of reliable and accurate data that needs to be collatable and comparable to make sense.

All of this implies a need for the standardisation of information items and the greater integration of the many processes involved. Technology makes it possible to build more and more physical connections. But just deploying technology without setting the operational context limits its effectiveness and can in fact be disastrous. Technology supports processes and stores data and information in a manner in which the owners of the data can use it effectively. But the IT managers are not the owners of the processes or the data. The business managers are.

So it is for the business managers to define the process model and the data requirements to support those processes in the first place. Defining the model at a high level is not that difficult because it should be kept as simple and clear as possible, focussing on the key processes and the essential data element. But it needs to be done by and owned by the business leaders themselves.

To get the maximum by way of return on investment in technology, commercial organisations are continually pushing for re-usability of software modules by minimising the degree to which software has to be specifically developed for niche processes. That in turn means that they are pushing for process standardisation and integration. Together, these make it possible for corporations to merge and expand with relative ease and with a good degree of agility.

While in the ideal world, the perfect organisational scenario for maximising the considerable investments that organisations make in technology is for a totally centralised and integrated organisation, the public service does not lend it self to such a major transformation for a whole variety of reasons.

And making a move in that direction takes a lot of time and learning as the IT experts bring the organisation through the various stages of IT maturity . . . a process that requires a lot of education on the part of the business managers as well. So even if e wanted to make a sudden leap, it would be a very dangerous adventure indeed.

But the tension between the desire to optimise IT efficiency and the ability of the organisation to move in a compatible direction is good in that it forces people to think and to be creative in seeking ways to move in that more integrated direction. Managing the tension requires dialogue between the business owners and managers and the IT specialists who should be in a position to inform them of the options, possibilities and the opportunities for making improvements. As technology in government evolves, I think this is the area where most attention needs to be focussed.