Centre for Digital Transformation – CeDiT – is a social science research centre conducting advanced social science on the impact of digital transformation on societies, organisations and individuals.
CeDiT aims to:
Professional digital competence for students and educators in primary school education.
Project owner: University of Agder
Funded by: Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research and Norgesuniversitetet.
Felles telemedisinsk løsning på Agder (Telma) 2016-2018
Funded by Norwegian Research council.
Project owner: Kristiansand municipality.
Telma is a joint telemedical solution for the region of Agder in Norway. The ambition is to establish a joint solution for all 30 municipalities in Agder county. 6 partners: Kristiansand, Farsund and Risør municipalities, South Norway Hospital (SSHF), Siemens HealthCare and Centre for ehealth at University of Agder.
GOV30: Scientific Foundations Training & Entrepreneurship Activities in the Domain of ICT-enabled Governance
The Gov 3.0 project aims at establishing ICT-enabled Governance as a vivid research domain, by providing universities, private firms and government agencies with cutting-edge knowledge on emerging technologies and policy support methods and tools. The core consortium will engage a network of affiliate partners and experts from all over the world.
Frank Danielsen - Public organizations and their ability to cope with change
I am a PhD research fellow at the Department of Information Systems and my research area is eGovernment. I am studying public organizations and their ability to cope with changes. I especially want to look at how digitalization projects affect these abilities. Using mixed methods like qualitative case studies and quantitative surveys, I will be able to explore this in depth while verifying my findings. I will finish my PhD in 2022. My supervisors are Øystein Sæbø and Maung Kyaw Sein.
Peter André Busch - Digital Discretion Acceptance and Impact in Street-Level Bureaucracy
Abstract: Street-level bureaucracies are public organizations responsible for turning policy intentions into actions experienced by clients. They occupy street-level bureaucrats such as judges, social workers, and teachers who have extensive ability to exercise discretion. Whereas clients ideally should experience public policy implementation equally within a jurisdiction, policies are often found to be implemented differently in different contexts. Policy discrepancies have led to the criticism of discretionary practices, introducing technology as a remedy to reduce the street-level footprint in policy implementation. Whereas street-level bureaucrats may have become powerful actors, a technological impact on discretionary practices can disclose too much algorithmic imprint. This is potentially problematic since there is a fundamental difference between professional street-level work and digital work practices. Whereas street-level bureaucrats base their decisions on professional knowledge and skill sets, acquired through years of training and experience, digital tools are designed by non-professionals without any first-hand experience of street-level work. Using a mixed methods approach, I have investigated how the characteristics of street-level work can explain the acceptance and impact of digital discretion.
Supervisor: Professor Øystein Sæbø