Austria - Country Report - Das österreichische Dienstleistungsrichtlinien-Portal

Transcription

1 Austria - Country Report - Das österreichische Dienstleistungsrichtlinien-Portal Contents 1 Introduction Availability and quality of PSC services Provision of information on the types of administrative requirements applicable to both establishment and temporary cross-border scenarios Availability and quality of information Good practice: Most commonly used Types of Companies in the Autonomous Community or other EU Member States Electronic completion of procedures: coverage and level of sophistication Assistance to PSC users Overall quality of PSC services for users from other countries Language support Finding the relevant information on applicable procedures Completing procedures electronically Use and usability Task completion Identifying the right procedures and finding appropriate information Comparison of results between national focus group and other focus group General usability and user satisfaction Accessibility Take-up, positioning and promotion Administration, organisation and back office enablers Back office integration and cooperation with competent authorities Finance and resources Status of key technical enablers (eid, e-signatures, e-payments) Future Outlook Strengths, weaknesses and recommendations Availability and quality of PSC services

2 6.2 Summarising expert assessment Use and usability Administration, organisation and back office enablers

3 1 Introduction This country report provides an overview of existing Point of Single Contact (PSC) infrastructure and services offered in Austria. The report provides details about the availability and quality of services found during portal testing by egovernment experts, views obtained from end-users from Austria during focus group sessions 1 about usability of the portal and the views of portal staff and other egovernment experts about the development and functioning of the portal. For ease of cross-referencing the text in this document with the appropriate tables, the tables have been placed in a separate annex. Annex B provides the tables referred to in this document. Annex A provides details of six scenarios used during the study; these are referred to in Section 2. There are nine individual single point of contacts located at the national EAP portal ( in Austria. Each of the nine federal states sets up its unique portal and offers different levels of services to end users. Hence, the national EAP portal offers access to one out of nine available geographical locations which have to be selected by the end-users. The differentiation was considered necessary as different federal laws might make it difficult to deal with one single website for the end-user. Because of the similarity of the nine individual single points of contacts, it was decided to test only one, namely the Vienna portal. The Vienna portal was investigated and tested because almost 25 % of the total Austrian population is situated in Vienna. In addition, the national government as well as many big Austrian and international organizations do have their businesses located in Vienna. The Vienna portal is accessible under The Vienna portal is wrapped around an existing governmental website which is embedded in the Virtual Office for the city itself. Additionally, interaction with important Austrian internet portals is possible while clicking through the search process. Therefore, the Vienna Portal can be seen as a distribution centre where users get re-directed to relevant information and websites providing different levels of information. No initial differentiation is made between foreign and local businesses when entering the Vienna portal for the first time. Also it does not offer a clear distinction regarding information on permanent establishments or temporary provisioning of services. 1 End-user testing was undertaken by focus group participants and Deloitte experts in each country studied. Participants examined the PSC in their home country and one other country. Details of the scenarios and country pairings can be found in Annex A. 3

4 The EUGO logo is clearly visible on the start page but does not provide a direct hyperlink to the general Point of Single Contact website provided by the European Commission. There is a direct web link provided to the Unternehmensserviceportal which provides detailed information on the formation of an enterprise and can be entered from the national EAP portals start page. However, it is very difficult for non Austrian residents to identify the link as a potential source of high quality information. Overall, the initial information provided on the European Single point of contact project shown on the start page is clearly stated and well structured in order to give a quick overview for the users. There is only one thematic area covered by the portal (Table 1). More specific, starting up a business (advice on legal structures, company registrations, permits, insurance). The Vienna portal tested is administrated by the Magistratsabteilung 63 (service department for business and nutrition) of the City of Vienna. The Vienna portal provides information in German as well as English. Therefore, plans exist to further enhance the amount of information and services provided in English in the future. It was considered that providing information in another language was not explicitly defined by the Services Directive and that the cost factor has to be taken into consideration as well. The portal went live on the 19 th of December 2009 and functionality has been enhanced continuously over time. 4

5 2 Availability and quality of PSC services Points of Single Contact are the most visible benefit of the Services Directive for businesses. They are meant to become fully fledged e-government portals allowing future entrepreneurs and existing businesses to easily obtain online all relevant information relating to their activities (applicable regulations, procedures to be completed, deadlines, etc.) and to complete electronically the relevant administrative procedures. The services offered by PSCs need to be available not only in the country of the administration but they must also be accessible for businesses from other countries, across borders. The degree of availability of services through the PSCs was analysed on the basis of six business scenarios. The six scenarios focused on concrete examples in three sample sectors architecture, restaurants/catering and tourism. One set of three scenarios focused on establishing a permanent business in the specific sector in Austria these are called the 'establishment' scenarios. Three other scenarios investigated the steps required if someone from another country wants to temporarily provide a service in the Austria these are called the 'temporary cross border' scenarios. These terms are used throughout the tables and text in this report. Details of the scenarios can be found in Annex A. For each scenario, eight groupings of administrative formalities (e.g. authorization schemes, licenses, other procedures etc) that businesses are most typically obliged to fulfil in order to provide their service activities were examined. For each grouping, the study analysed to what degree information was available through the PSC and to what extent a business was able to complete the relevant procedures electronically. The eight groupings (henceforth called 'types of administrative requirements') are: 1. Company registration 2. Obtaining a general business license 3. Procedures relating specifically to the service provider/ profession that they are exercising (recognition of professional qualifications, licenses to act as a travel agent, architect, sell alcohol etc.) 4. Tax and financial formalities 5. Social security formalities 6. Regulations relating to the premises of the provider, such as providing proof of the location and/or ownership of the premises. 7. Procedures relating to the way the service are carried out and the place the service is carried out, such as applying for authorization to make outdoor sales or serve food on a street. (called 'operations and location' in later tables) 8. Procedures applying only or specifically to cross border provision of services 5

6 These eight types of administrative requirements cover the most common procedures businesses usually need to comply with when starting their activities. The availability of most of these procedures is mandatory under the Services Directive, for others it is not (in particular social security and tax procedures). However, from a business perspective, it is strongly recommended to make available all these procedures through the PSCs as they are the main steps required to start a business or to provide cross-border services. The different supporting documents are referred to in the tables contained in the annex as "Procedural components that may be relevant to the preceding procedures". They include: Provide a translation of legal documents produced in another country; Provide details of the location of the business; Provide proof of the ownership of the business; Demonstrate proficiency in the local language; Demonstrate good repute or the lack of a criminal record; Prove accreditation from a financial organisation guaranteeing funds if the business should fail; Provide official proof of your experience or qualifications; Provide official proof of your identity; Provide proof that you are not bankrupt; Provide proof that you have sufficient financial resources / solvency; Provide evidence of relevant insurance; Provide proof that you have no outstanding tax payments. In this section the availability and quality of the three main tasks of the PSC are assessed: provision of information to businesses, completion of online procedures and assistance to PSC users. The content offered by the Vienna portal is large but not always easy to find as the search function does not provide detailed assistance to the user and the structure for the content included inside the portal is difficult to follow, especially for foreigners. Hence the portal acts as a gateway where the portal manager is responsible for the content provided and the interfaces established within the portal. The development of the PSC has also led to standardisation and simplification of processes. In the case of Austria this has resulted in the development of more than 100 new e-forms, which has led to administrative simplification for businesses. 6

7 2.1 Provision of information on the types of administrative requirements applicable to both establishment and temporary cross-border scenarios The obligation to set up PSCs means, in practice, that businesses must be able to complete the entire cycle of all procedures and formalities relating to the access to or the exercise of their activities without having to contact any institutional interlocutors other than the PSC. The first key requirement for the PSCs is to make available all relevant information concerning applicable procedures Availability and quality of information In a first exercise we looked at the number and coverage by the portal of requirements or process steps needed for permanent establishment or temporary services provision based on the business scenarios described above, see Table 3. Table 3 shows that the Austrian portal does not provide detailed access to comprehensive information and/or services to fulfil the requirements of all six establishment and temporary cross-border scenarios. In total, 92 regulatory requirements need to be undertaken to complete the six scenarios. Relevant information requested by the scenarios can be identified via multiple interfaces which direct the user to other e-government websites. However, the identification of the underlying interfaces is very difficult for third parties and following up these interfaces in a logical way as a general guidance or agenda is missing. From Table 3 it is clear that across the three different sectors (Architecture, Restaurants & Catering, Travel Agents and Tour Guides) few procedures are served on the portal (4%) whereas 51% is served on other websites and 45% is not served online. It is clear that overall the Travel Agents and Tour Guides sector is better served than other. Focus group participants commented positively on the business establishment scenario form which they considered as a very good online solution. This is provided via an online form which offers quick access and usability. Logically the establishment scenarios have significantly more regulatory requirements than the cross-border service provision scenarios without a new establishment as they are of higher complexity and usually involve formalities relating to premises, the environment, etc. In a second exercise the quality of the information provided by the portal for the eight types of administrative requirements mentioned previously was assessed. Table 4 shows that the portal is not that good in providing all the relevant information for the eight types of administrative requirements. For most procedures covered inside the portal (with the exception of the general business licence), no information is provided on how to submit applications, what documents are required and which deadlines apply. As an overall deficit the lack of guidance can be addressed. If users are not quite familiar with the tasks necessary for the scenario 7

8 completion the Vienna portal does not provide a red thread needed as guidance through all steps. All focus group participants missed the red thread to follow up procedures necessary for completing their assigned tasks. The only reason why they could navigate through the portal was their own knowledge acquired during their entrepreneurial activities. In addition, there is no further information on company specific tasks e.g. business life cycle or employment law provided. Regarding professional qualifications, the column 'sector specific: person' in Table 4 refers to the procedures for individuals to get the recognition of their professional qualifications. 2 All three sectors outlined above are defined as restricted professions by Austrian trade law and require proof of sufficient qualification. As an additional support function, online forms are available through the Vienna Portal to test whether required qualifications are fulfilled by the applicant body. The expert interviews identified that the Vienna portal is designed to fulfil the mandatory requirements of the Services Directive as far as the provision of information is concerned but does not offer any structured information to the user. For the administrative tasks applicable to the cross border scenarios a subheading called Arbeiten über die Grenzen (working across borders) is available. This subheading can be identified as a starting point and offers basic information on cross border service provisions but it is difficult on that basis to fully understand what a business would have to do prior to offering his services on a temporary basis. In addition, a link to the department of economics, family and youth offers more inside and information for the cross boarder scenarios Good practice: Most commonly used Types of Companies in the Autonomous Community or other EU Member States The welcome page provides a very good overview regarding existing portal options within Austria. The user can enter the regional point of single contact by simply clicking on the specific region on the map (see picture below) he/she is interested in. In addition, there is a great amount of information on the project of the single point of contact set up by the European Commission. Interactive facilities like videos about the project led by the Commission are provided besides general information for consumers and users of the Austrian portals. The start page clearly depicts the EUGO logo and provides additional information regarding the Service Directive and its implementation within Austria. Therefore, the purpose of the Austrian single point 2 This is also the case in Tables 6B, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 18. 8

9 of contact is clearly outlined to the visitor of the website and the nine different single points of contact portals are graphically displayed. If available, the usability of online forms is very good and highly developed. Therefore it is possible to handle applications fully online e.g. business registration and upload relevant certificates and documents automatically. However, business registrations for architects are handled via the chamber for architects where an online-link is provided on the Vienna portal. The picture above visualises an online application form from the Vienna portal which provides a full online business registration. Before entering the form the service provider is provided with detailed information on documents required, costs included and pre-requirements necessary for the underlying specific task. It has to be stressed that a great part of information regarding the registration of a business is provided by an external e-governmental website called Unternehmensserviceportal ( This website offers a great amount of information for entrepreneurs as well as existing businesses beside the Vienna Portal. Therefore, information regarding company foundations, tax matters, environmental issues, IT matters, is available. The USP-website offers a great amount of information but is very hard to find from the Vienna PSC Portal. Nevertheless, users can find helpful information such as deadlines, costs involved, competent authorities involved and pre-requirements necessary on the Vienna Portal as well. 9

10 2.2 Electronic completion of procedures: coverage and level of sophistication The Services Directive establishes an obligation on Member States to make it possible for service providers to complete a number of key administrative formalities related to the establishment or cross-border provision of services online and across borders. This includes both the submission of an application (with supportive documents) as well as the receipt of the administrative decision from the responsible competent authority. If e-signatures are required in the context of e-procedures, Member States have to accept as a minimum advanced e-signatures supported by a qualified certificate and, if justified, also supported by a secure signature creation device (i.e. the qualified e- signatures) 3 Moreover, MS have to be able to technically process certain formats of advanced e-signatures (C/X/PAdES) 4. The sophistication of the PSC portals in terms of online completion of procedures is examined with a commonly adopted egovernment maturity model with a four-step scale. The four steps or stages of development are: 1. Information: only the information required to understand how to complete the procedure is available; 2. One-way interaction: forms concerning the procedure that can be downloaded and printed are available (these can then be returned by post, or taken directly to relevant competent authority offices); 3. Two-way interaction: forms concerning the procedure can be downloaded and uploaded, which enables the entrepreneur to start the procedure electronically. However, procedures are not fully online, some tasks need to be completed via alternative means (e.g. by post or visit to an office); 4. Full case handling: the whole procedure can be completed online (including the receipt of the administrative decision). Table 6 shows that for 55 per cent of all scenarios tested at least information is available on the Vienna portal or on an alternative platform accessible via the PSC. For 45 per cent of all scenarios tested no information is provided at all. In total 17 per cent of the tested scenarios provide full case handling and for 38 per cent only information is available. It is apparent that more full case handling is provided via third party government portals than it is provided via the Vienna portal which confirms the primary opinion that the portal is build up as an allocation platform. 3 Decision 2009/767/EC 4 Decision 2011/130/EU 10

11 However, the degree of online information is well balanced across the industry sectors investigated for the scenarios. All three sectors offer the same number of full case services and have an equally balanced amount of information available on third party websites with the architecture industry slightly ahead of the other two sectors tested. The Finanz-online portal is an e-government portal operated by the Austrian tax department and equally accessible by businesses organizations as well as private people. The platform supports tax related filings which can be filled fully online ( It is accessible via different hyperlinks. This Austrian tax platform is one of the most successful e-government platforms used in Austria where almost 50 per cent of all Austrian businesses and private persons will make use of these services provided by Table 6B shows that some of the eight types of administrative requirements can be undertaken online as full case handling (e.g. company registration, general business license, tax formalities). The completion of all administrative requirements referred the user to the web site of a competent authority. Often multiple websites had to be visited in order to complete the administrative procedures. Table 7 shows that for completion of procedures, identification is necessary in terms of personal details (name, surname, address...) but e-identification and e-signatures are not mandatory. An additional positive aspect is that online submission of forms and documents is possible via the portal where full case handling is provided. When compared to the overall results gained by the study the results found for the Vienna portal are in line with the general impressions gained in other countries participating in the study. Only 30 % of all portals investigated require e-signatures from their users. The analysis below gives a broad overview and some insight into which procedures can be fulfilled electronically in Austria. More details can be found in annex B. Overall, the electronic procedures provided by the Vienna portal are the same for permanent establishment of a business and for temporary provision of services, if any requirements are applied for the latter. Foreign online applications can be submitted through the same services offered for local businesses and applicants. Therefore, it can be said that there are no special obstacles that prevent a foreign business from completing those procedures that are available at the Vienna portal in the same manner as an Austrian one, provided he is capable of operating in German. Overall, the portal provides the following e-services: General business licence application is the single most advanced online form found on the Vienna portal for the scenarios applied in the testing of the 11

12 portal. The Vienna PSC redirects the user to the official homepage of the city of Vienna where a virtual administrative office provides information on the underlying procedure necessary for the application of an Austrian business licence. The content and requirements listed are well structured and offer a good overview of all procedures necessary. Hence, the presentation of this business case is well developed and could be a good starting point for the improvement of other services provided by the Vienna PSC. The picture at the right side shows the well-structured overview of different sections required for completing the application process. Information which might be interesting for the applicant is deposited with hyperlinks providing additional information on the topic introduced by the general overview. Also, application costs are clearly stated and the full case handling form is easily found at the bottom of the website. Concluding, the standardized formating increases the usability of the Vienna Portal and provides further information on specific fields of interest. Table 8 provides clear results in terms of provisioning of user e-identification and electronic signatures required taking the same application process as a basis. The Vienna PSC does not require the user to make use of any e-signatures or e- identification tools at all. However, some processes do require the user to provide their personal data and attach supporting documentation like copies of passports or birth certificates. Therefore, it is mandatory to state one s name and address details for all application processes. E-signatures are not requested for users of the PSC and the technology is considered by the Austrian PSC Managers as non standard for the Vienna portal. 12

13 The only exception that needs to be noted is related to the Tax formalities, where the user does need to make use of an electronic signature for completing three procedures (on Finanzonline). However, as this is an aspect which is not covered by the Services Directive, it raises no particular compliance issues. Table 9 shows that for company registration, general business licence and tax formalities, application or supportive forms can be downloaded and /or completed / submitted online. For the other eight main types of administrative requirements defined by the project outline, no information is available on the Vienna portal. There are different options offered for the transmission of documents. The most developed option is the full case online form which enables the user to upload individual documents in different format styles and transmit the request fully online. As an example, company registration provides a second option which comprises a downloadable form which has to be filled out and sent by post. The online form for a general business registration is the most developed form on the Vienna portal and offers full case handling because it is the one most used. The number of documents where a translation or certified copies are required depends on the underlying application. In more detail, an application for a new business requires certified copies whereas an application for serving drinks outside the bar area might not require certified copies at all. However, documents in a foreign language have to be provided in German by foreigners. This means that all documents which were issued in another language than German have to be translated into German. If translations have to be certified by officials or not depends on the underlying application process you make use of. For finalizing the application process, documents can be uploaded using FTP and web forms. They can also be sent to competent authorities by or by post. Table 10 shows that two of the eight types of administrative requirements to be fulfilled in Austria require payment (general business licence and licences related to the premises of the service provider). However, online payment is not possible as only tax services and services related to premises of the provider accept credit card payment (even though no fee is required for tax services). Fees can be paid via (international) bank transfer, payment forms or in cash. Table 11 shows that two of the eight types of administrative requirements to be undertaken in Austria provide tracking services so that users can monitor the progress of the services they require. These two are general business licenses and tax formalities. Tracking and delivery of decisions are provided via messages as well as the outcome of requests and administrative decisions. Furthermore company registration request outcomes and administrative decisions are provided via registered letters. 13

14 2.3 Assistance to PSC users Portals provide a variety of online and offline support to overcome problems and enhance users experience of Points of Single Contact. The portal provides a number of interactive tools to help users obtain information. When users encounter problems a number of sources of help are available. First, there is an interactive contact form available for users. You can state your query and a reply will be sent to your address as soon as the back office assistant from the Vienna Portal processes the users request. Secondly, a link to the virtual office of Vienna is provided for further assistance. Thirdly, an interactive table with areas of interest provides further linkages to third party websites with relevant information. This was of interest for the scenarios studied as information regarding architecture business cases is provided through a third party website. The online assistance provided by the Vienna portal is well in line with the overall results where 61 per cent of all portals studied provide online assistance to its users. On average only 28 per cent of online support is provided for the tools stated in table 12, whereas Vienna offers 50 per cent of all online tools asked for, which is above the average provision of services. Overall, the assistance provided by the Vienna portal to the end user is good and offers good sources of information where no initial registration is required for the user. The online services are well visualized and easy to use. Especially the online contact form is enrichment for the PSC and its users. The response time tested for a standard query regarding the establishment of an architecture business was very good and was received 80 hours after transmitting the request. The quality of the answer given is considered as average as the official PSC website was mentioned as a source of information and a second link was provided where information can be gathered. However, the link stated does not contain much helpful information for the scenarios tested. Therefore, it might be helpful if the Vienna PSC provides more information on the architecture business in order to increase usability for users. 2.4 Overall quality of PSC services for users from other countries Language support To enhance cross-border activities it is recommended that portals are available in the language(s) of neighbouring countries or in one of the most commonly used languages. Table 13 provides details about the availability of pages, services and forms in other languages. The Austrian portal does provide information in German and some general information is also provided in English. Hence, it is possible to switch the headlines of different topic areas from German to English. As the Services Directive does not contain an obligation for multilingual services, the Vienna portal prioritized the basic set-up of the portal in German. Inquiries submitted in English language can 14

15 also be processed by the Vienna Portal. As a second phase, the Vienna PSC is currently working on an English version of its portal which will cover both basic information and advanced-level information on the required procedures. In comparison, 61 per cent of other European portals offer other languages than the one spoken in the home country. General information is provided by 64 per cent of European portal in another language than their local language. It has to be considered rather difficult for service providers not familiar with German to get any useful information from the Vienna PSC. This is considered a major disadvantage for cross boarder scenarios Finding the relevant information on applicable procedures As Table 14 shows the portal does not provide a clear distinction for foreign businesses considering permanent (i.e. an establishment) and temporary provision of services. Moreover, information available does not provide a clear understanding of all requirements for foreign businesses. Without having a prior understanding of the Austrian legal and administrative environment, it would not be possible for a foreign business to understand the requirements to be fulfilled and to complete the tasks of the scenarios. This can be considered one of the major shortcomings of the Vienna portal Completing procedures electronically One of the positive aspects of the Vienna portal (and indeed of all Austrian portals) is the fact those procedures that are available for online completion, are accessible to users from abroad. Table 14B shows that the use of the PSC site for the online submission of forms and documents is possible for cross border users. The same methods and tools are applied for Austrian and foreign users. Also, documents which make use of electronic signatures, issued in other Member State, can be processed by the Vienna Portal. However as mentioned above, cross-border e- Identification is not a requirement for foreign users. 15

16 3 Use and usability Use and usability is examined through three criteria, which are considered separately below. The overall ease of use and usability of the portal was examined by focus group participants (from Austria and Hungary) and egovernment experts. The focus group participants were business people who are active in the three sectors covered by the study (architects, restaurants/catering, tourism). Usability was measured using the System Usability Scale (SUS) methodology, which uses an attitudinal scale where users are asked to respond to statements with a rating on a five-point (Lickert) scale of Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree. SUS examines the efficiency, effectiveness and ease of use of the portal. User satisfaction was also investigated using the Analysis of Web Application Requirements (AWARE) methodology. AWARE uses a similar Lickert based attitudinal scale to SUS. AWARE examines user satisfaction by examining users' views of various features of the portal; these include content, structure, navigation, presentation and user operation. In addition, this chapter also looks at portal positioning, promotion and take-up by business users so far. 3.1 Task completion Identifying the right procedures and finding appropriate information A key role for the portal is to enable users to find appropriate procedural and regulatory requirements prior to starting a business or starting cross-border trading. Tables 15, 16 and 17 examine the ability of focus group participants to find the procedural requirements necessary to complete the six business scenarios. Focus group participants had 15 minutes using the portal to find the regulatory requirements and procedures required to complete the establishment and crossborder scenarios they examined. Tables 15 to 19 show the results of the focus group testing described in Appendix A. Tables 15, 16 and 17 shows that users were generally successful in finding relevant procedures on the PSC website. The single task which was very well completed by participants was the application for a general business licence. Participants were well aware of procedures necessary for their particular business, but they could not find information on the requirements on the Vienna portal. One participant commented... I know which files and procedures I have to identify as requested by the outlined scenario but I cannot find my way through the Vienna portal. It would be way easier to use Google search than looking for relevant information on the Vienna portal. This is mainly due to the fact that there is not a step by step guide 16

17 provided where users can identify the steps and processes necessary for their individual business cases (e.g. providing cross border services in Austria). The tables indicated above create an equally balanced result in the home establishment scenarios where 68 per cent (on average) of all focus group participants gave a correct answer to the underlying questions. For the cross boarder scenarios the success rate was well below the home establishment rate and averaged 43 per cent for all participants who answered correctly. The lowest number of correct answers given was the cross border scenario for the travel industry where only 19 per cent of answers were given correctly. All focus group participants had the impression that completing the scenarios was either difficult or very difficult. Table 18 evaluates the focus groups impression on procedure completion for different tasks outlined in the scenarios. It was either difficult or very difficult for participants to complete procedures via the Vienna PSC with the exception of the general business licence application process. All participants had to make use of their own knowledge regarding aspects outlined in the scenarios addressed to them. Therefore, they tried to make use of the search function in order to find the relevant information. If portal users do not have any knowledge of business establishment processes required (in any form) it is almost impossible to set up a business via the Vienna portal. Overall focus group participants considered tasks to be difficult/very difficult to perform via the Vienna portal. They all considered that Austrian e-government services are well developed but that the presentation of information on the Vienna PSC is not provided in a userfriendly way. Easier access and guidance for users to the various service platforms provided by third parties would almost certainly increase successful identification of relevant procedures. Portal staff might consider making appropriate enhancements to signpost these more effectively for users and include step by step guidelines for procedures necessary in different business scenarios. If online forms are available the focus group participants considered the transmission of documents as straight forward and user-friendly. As Table 19 illustrates, there is a relatively low level of satisfaction regarding the information content and the ease of access to that information on the Austrian portal. Most focus group participants found a relatively low level of usability. There was little information provided in a not well structured way. Generally the format and quality of the information which was provided on the portal was considered as adequate. However, a small number of focus group participants suggested that there was so much information available that they could not always find precisely what was required for their scenarios; the use of high level sections and sub-headings was suggested during discussions. Therefore a tree-structure was considered as a good example to increase usability. The outcome of the testing of this section is that there was not one focus group participant who would use the Vienna portal to set up a business establishment like described in the different scenarios. Three of the 17

18 participants would look for consulting advice from third parties for the tasks described inside the scenarios. By doing so, they would make sure that all steps necessary will be completed and a long search process can be avoided. One participant summed it up... it is more like a puzzle to find all fitting parts together and it seems like parts are missing in order to create the big picture. Overall, the Vienna portal could not persuade focus group participants to make further use of the service for their own businesses Comparison of results between national focus group and other focus group Table 20 compares the usability of the Austrian portal as examined by a Hungarian group of potential end-users against the Austrian focus group perspective using the SUS mythology (described above). There is an agreement identified on the fact that the portal provides no clear distinction for foreign businesses considering permanent and temporary trading. The Austrian focus group participants considered that without knowing something about the country s administrative and legal system, a foreigner would not be able to fulfil all steps necessary for the completion of the scenarios. The comment from the Hungarian focus group was more neutral on this point. Table 21 highlights the perspectives from the Austrian focus group and the Austrian expert on the usability of the Vienna portal in comparison with the average of all portals tested. There is a high agreement across the groups mentioned above that it is easy to register with the portal. For the Vienna portal no registration is necessary which was considered as a great benefit by the Austrian focus group. Registration was considered as deterrence to future users and should not be considered as an option in the future. Many participants comment that... the Austrian portal is ok for a starting point to acquire general information. This was supported by the fact that the website as well as graphics is appropriately designed. Table 22 summarizes the overall satisfaction with the Vienna portal by the Austrian and Hungarian focus group. In addition, an overall satisfaction on all portals is provided. The level of satisfaction for all portals tested is considered as low whereas the satisfaction level for the Austrian portal can be described as below average. This fact is supported by the Hungarian test group, although Hungarian testers were slightly more positive. The results are inversely for the way content is provided on the portals. Again, the overall satisfaction level can be described as neutral which is not in line with neither the Austrian nor the Hungarian results. However, Austrian focus group participants were even less satisfied with the content organised than their Hungarian counterparts. This could be related to the high level of quality found on other Austrian e-government platforms. Therefore, participants are used to higher standard levels which cannot yet be provided by the Austrian PSC. Admittedly, it is a difficult task to centralize such a great amount of e-government platforms on one single platform. Also accessibility of content required by the scenarios was rated higher by the Hungarian participants than it was by the Austrian participants. The overall impression when visiting the different portals can 18

19 be described as no real pleasure for the users. Much time was needed to subtract little information from the Vienna portal. Hence, it would be good for future users to increase efficiency in terms of time spent and benefits received (high quality information). 3.2 General usability and user satisfaction Tables 23 and 24 examine usability using the SUS framework. It shows that users found the Vienna portal more difficult to use than their counterparts in other countries. The portal was found to be more difficult to use, equally complex and more cumbersome to use. In general user satisfaction at the Austrian portal was lower than in other countries. Against all the AWARE user satisfaction criteria, the portal received less favourable responses than counterparts in other countries. A particular noteworthy element was that the missing red line through all procedures made the task very difficult for users. There was much information to be searched for than information provided in a logical structure. 3.3 Accessibility Several evaluation tools were used to examine portal accessibility and the extent to which the portal was usable by people of all abilities and disabilities. Table 25 provides the number of errors preventing full accessibility found by two of the most commonly used accessibility tools. The lower the number of errors, the better. The average number of errors for all tested portals is shown in the right hand column. Overall Austria has a relatively high level of accessibility. The most important result in terms of usability and accessibility is the W3C Markup Validator 5. It assesses the html markup used in the web site and states whether any errors have occurred. In Austria there were only seven minor errors that do not usually cause problems for the user. Finally, accessibility was measured using the W3C CSS Validator 6, which measures the degree to which web-sites adhere to web standards as regards cascading style sheets (CSS). CSS errors mean that information does not display correctly, or at all. For a website to be considered of good accessibility, the maximum number of errors should be 100. This measure is considered as the only weak point in terms of technical accessibility for the Vienna portal. The W3C CSS Validator for Austrian produced 152 errors which is well above the limit stated above. Therefore, improvement steps can be taken in order to decrease the amount of errors found using the W3C CSS Validator measurement

20 3.4 Take-up, positioning and promotion The number of people using the Vienna PSC is below expectations. One reason could be that there are no marketing procedures and activities in place to promote the use of the portal. However, it is planned to start marketing activities in the future in order to increase usage. Key PSC related phrases were examined in two search engines. 7 Table 26 shows that almost no searches were ranked in the top 50th position in the search results when searching for the key words on the Austrian search engine websites. The only key word which produced an acceptable result was Point of Single Contact. All other key words were far back in the results list or not even found in it at all. These results are in line with the fact that so far no marketing measures were taken to promote the use of the Vienna portal. Table 27 describes the focus group's recognition and awareness of aspects of governmental portals such as its affiliation with the EUGO network. The Vienna portal was not known amongst the participants prior to the focus group, and recognition was perfectly in line with results found (on average) in all countries studied. Also business representatives interviewed in the course of the project were not aware of the existence of the PSC portal, which seems to be a call for enhanced communication in the future. The site was recognised as an official portal due to its style, the content of 'about us pages' and gv.at URL. The use of the EUGO logo was only found on the welcome page where the user has to select one out of nine available portals as well as on the Vienna portal tested. However, a direct link leading users to the EUGO web site would increase awareness and provide more information in terms of other portals set up by European countries. 7 These results are based on the search terms in local language. 20

21 4 Administration, organisation and back office enablers This section examines the operational aspects that impact on the practical functioning of the portal activities. This includes the degree of back-office integration (i.e. the interplay between competent authorities responsible for specific procedures handled through the PSC and the portal itself); it investigates the degree of resource availability and it includes the overall egovernment readiness of a country, in particular as regards key technical enablers such as the ability to handle electronic IDs, e-signatures or e-payment means. 4.1 Back office integration and cooperation with competent authorities For the portal to offer its services to business in an effective manner, it is vital that all competent authorities are closely connected to the portal. Without successful backoffice integration, it would be challenging to ensure up-to-date information and electronic application forms are available in a coherent manner across the board. Secondly, providing the means to complete a wide array of electronic procedures through a single portal can potentially offer serious efficiency gains through a push towards a standardization of relevant forms as well as the means to sign applications electronically and to submit application files. As Table 28 illustrates, the number of authorities dealing with the procedures offered through the portal cannot be identified in numerical terms. As mentioned in a previous section the Austrian solution offers nine different Portals where every federal state has its own Point of Single contact. Therefore, regional authorities can be embedded on an individual basis. In case, services are provided by a professional chamber only (e.g. architects) the Vienna portal offers a web link to the platform of relevant information (e.g. chamber for architects and engineers). Information is provided on a national level and delivered to the Austrian PSC to implement that information into the portal. For the process described all relevant parties are involved in the information gathering and publication process in order to provide a certain level of comfort for the users of the Vienna portal. In order to provide the current level of services the Vienna PSC employs two FTEs which is considered as sufficient in order to operate efficiently given that the Vienna PSC is considered as a gateway or signpost guiding users towards the websites of the authorities, leaving it out to each competent authority about how its procedures can be completed online. The processes established led to more standardisation and simplification of application processes because of the development of the PSC and created more than 100 new electronic forms available. However, there is no formal remit to seek the active cooperation of competent authorities. Nevertheless, all authorities considered as important are participating in the Austrian PSC. 21

22 The set up of the Austrian PSC is divided into two streams. The first stream is responsible for organisational tasks whereas the second stream is responsible for technical tasks. Close cooperation between both streams secured alignment and good data quality for the PSC. 4.2 Finance and resources Like mentioned in a previous section the total investment for the Vienna PSC alone can be summarized with approximately 2950 hours invested into the project in terms of personnel expenses. No material expenses accumulated for the Vienna project and only in-house staff was involved. Although currently resources are adequate, austerity cuts might have also an impact in the future. Also, as it is considered a public service no registration fees are applied for the use of the portal. 4.3 Status of key technical enablers (eid, e-signatures, e-payments) Within the context of the PSC, Austria does not see a need for advanced tools for electronic identification and signatures and these are not required for most procedures identified in the previous sections. The reason behind that information is that keep it simple is a key requirement set up by the Vienna Portal. Therefore, e- ID is considered as the opposite off keeping usability simple for end-users. 5 Future Outlook There is a strategic plan or roadmap to increase the usability of the Vienna portal in the future. First, a website in English will be provided in the future for users in order to bridge the language gap. Secondly, participation with additional projects started by the European Commission (e.g. SPOCS) will improve existing e-government tools on a wide basis. Thirdly, an even greater move towards standardisation is aspired by the Vienna PSC in terms of cooperation with other PSCs within Europe and internal alignments of services provided to the public. The overall goal is to simplify procedures and processes for the Vienna portal in order to create higher acceptance from the user side and more efficient processes inside the governmental organization. 22