{"id":6561,"date":"2026-07-05T15:51:31","date_gmt":"2026-07-05T13:51:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/verwaltungsgestaltung.de\/notizen\/?p=6561"},"modified":"2026-07-05T16:53:57","modified_gmt":"2026-07-05T14:53:57","slug":"week-218-at-the-digital-service-notes-for-29-june-2-july","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/verwaltungsgestaltung.de\/notizen\/2026\/07\/05\/week-218-at-the-digital-service-notes-for-29-june-2-july\/","title":{"rendered":"Week #218 at the Digital Service: Notes for 29 June\u20132 July"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

It was close to a goosebump moment. On Wednesday morning, colleagues from the City of Wiesbaden, DigitalAgentur Brandenburg, Digital Service, and PD shared their study data on the practical use of Germany\u2019s digital identity systems. For months, they and others have collaborated on a paper that brings together existing qualitative and quantitative data on digital identity implementation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Their findings aren\u2019t too cheerful. But they aren\u2019t novel either. There is a 70 to 90 per cent dropout rate among users of digital government services when they reach the common digital identity component. It feels like an open secret, but it isn\u2019t one. Digital teams have been discussing this for years. I see the occasional LinkedIn post about it, too. But no one more senior seems to be discussing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So maybe the summary jointly put together by the cross-government working group can shift the debate a bit. Data from 7 previously unpublished studies were included in the paper. Colleagues from 7 public organisations worked on it, at the city, state, and federal levels. It\u2019s a kind of user research cooperation we haven\u2019t seen before.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The findings of the report summarise the shortcomings of the current implementation of digital identity in government services:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. Limited prior knowledge and a lack of guidance cause uncertainty: <\/strong>Users are taken by surprise by the requirement to identify themselves during the process. Texts that are too long and confusing administrative jargon are overwhelming.

    <\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. Systems disruptions in the user journey cause confusion and overwhelm users:<\/strong> The process requires too many switches between web pages, devices and apps. Often, after logging in, the automatic redirection to the actual service fails.

    <\/li>\n\n\n\n
  3. Lacking transparency in security requirements undermines trust in the application: <\/strong>The varying assurance levels applied across administrative services are not clear to users. Missing or lost ID card PINs require a visit to a government office.

    <\/li>\n\n\n\n
  4. Technical faults and a lack of fault tolerance lead users to abandon the process:<\/strong> The system is prone to errors. NFC scanning on smartphones frequently fails, and various browsers display error messages without clear instructions for resolving them.

    <\/li>\n\n\n\n
  5. Information overload and a lack of support cause users to abandon the process:<\/strong> There are too many contradictory instructions and videos, but no genuine first-level support when problems arise. Neither the 115 citizen helpline nor the individual government departments can help with app errors.

    <\/li>\n\n\n\n
  6. A lack of everyday experience with government-provided identity services leads users to prefer private-sector alternatives:<\/strong> Because government-issued identities are not part of everyday life, users often opt for the familiar, private-sector solution when given a choice.

    <\/li>\n\n\n\n
  7. Technical and formal access requirements lead to structural exclusion: <\/strong>The system systematically excludes people. Anyone without an NFC-enabled smartphone, with outdated software, or \u2013 as a third-country national \u2013 without a valid EU identity document, is completely cut off from essential digital government services.
    <\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    Those are a few areas to work on. It\u2019s nothing one entity can address alone. Just as the insights into the problems, the fixes need to involve collaboration and further research equally. It needs a clear target for a significantly lower dropout rate, along with considerable flexibility and experimentation to find ways to achieve it. For that, it demands senior attention and sponsorship.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The recommendations from the report are described along 4 layers, borrowed from an international PwC study on digital identity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n