Central research questions in e‐government, or which trajectory should the study domain take?

Scholl, H.

doi:10.1108/17506160710733715

Cited by 26 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The multidisciplinary nature of the field strengthens the e-government research in many ways (Scholl, 2007), but can make conceptual discussions difficult. This possibility to perceive and interpret the phenomenon that the concept e-service refers to in several different ways might be an influencing factor to why the concept (public) e-service is used synonymously with several other concepts.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electronic services in the public sector: A conceptual framework

Lindgren

Jansson

2013

Government Information Quarterly

180

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electronic services provided by governmental organizations, here referred to as public eservices, are frequently discussed in the e-government literature. There is, however, little consensus on the meaning of the concepts used to describe and discuss these e-services, and hence, the literature is full of synonymous terms and concepts. This paper is conceptual and presents efforts to understand e-services in the public sector domain by unpacking the public e-service concept into three dimensions; as being (1) a service, (2) electronic, and (3) public (as contrasted to being private). Based on a hermeneutic analysis, these dimensions are discussed in a number of combinations, illustrating that a multi-dimensional take on public eservices must be adopted in order to capture the complexity of governmentally supplied eservices and contribute to theory development, as well as practical utility.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electronic services in the public sector: A conceptual framework

Lindgren

Jansson

2013

Government Information Quarterly

180

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…c. ANT has a rich vocabulary to especially deal with socio-technical reality and power redistribution that always become the main theme for e-government development and its leadership role. It is especially important as Scholl (2007) has identified that since 2002 e-government research has broadened its perspective beyond the role of information systems in order to incorporate the "complex socio-technical work reality" in public administration.…”

Section: The Role Of Leadershipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Opening the Black Box of Leadership in the Successful Development of Local E-Government Initiative in a Developing Country

Priyatma

Mohamed

2011

International Journal of Actor-Network Theory and Technological Innovation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Leadership has been identified as one of the critical factors in the successful development of e-governmentmore fundamental problems that include the lack of appropriate technological infrastructure, limited financial and human resources, and the incompatibility to their political, social and cultural environments (Nguyen & Schauder, 2007;Imran & Gregor;. These might explain why 85% of e-government initiative in developing countries failed (Heeks, 2003 suggested instead to spend money for "bread" rather than for "broad-band."However, there are some reports of successful e-government initiatives in developing countries. Gudea (2007) reported a successful cooperative approach and innovative strategy to develop home grown internet in Romania. In Ecuador, Karanasios (2007) gave evidence how small tourism enterprise successfully copes with digital divide. In Asia, two studies were documented. In India, Misra (2007) described how a self-reliance approach contributed to successful e-government implementation, while in Indonesia the success of e-government project at municipal level was reported by Furuholt and Wahid (2008).Because of the differences in technological readiness and other factors, the implementation and development of e-government in developing countries need to adapt the strategies and approaches that have been applied in developed countries, or even develop totally new ones (Chen et al., 2006). Some researchers (Stanforth, 2006; Akhter et al., 2007;Imran & Gregor, 2007) proposed that focus should be given more to the social and political factors surrounding the e-government projects (rather than the technological factors) as these are not only dominant but are also quite diverse. Amongst these, leadership seems to be very important and crucial as reported in several occasions. Accenture (2001) reported that leadership was the more important factor (such as political will, commitment, and accountability) than others. Studies supporting such stand were also reported by Ebrahim and Irani (2005), as they found that strong government leadership to support the organizational and procedural changes during the development of e-government was needed. Torres et al. (2005) and Kim et al. (2009) also found that strong leadership was considered as the most outstanding drivers to e-government success. Imran and Gregor (2007) further observed that leaders' vision and their willingness to initiate changes within the government sector as significant strategies to succeed in implementing an e-government project.Although it has been convinced that leadership does play important roles in egovernment development but the number of empirical studies are rather limited (Prybutok et al., 2008). Moreover, the few that could be traced focused only on outlining some important features of an effective leadership that are related to the vision, commitment assurance or political will. They failed to describe how such features were exercised in government work setting that was much influenced by political negotiation and con...

show abstract

“…Second, it focuses on the two variables of government operations and government services put forth as important (Scholl, 2007). Thus, government operations are exemplified by the covered eID introductions, and government services are related to the role of the eID as a public sector digital service enabler described below.…”

Section: Egovernment Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although Scholl (2007) acknowledges a move away from a historical, technological bias in order to address the complex reality of eGovernment efforts, the field is also described as "[A] conglomeration of partially intersecting and mostly juxtaposed studies from various disciplines." (Scholl, 2007, p. 68).…”

Section: Egovernment Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(Scholl, 2007, p. 68). The following six variables are put forth to play a vital role in the forming of eGovernment research questions in order to minimize the risks of the field becoming too mono-disciplinary: (1) information use, (2) technology use, (3) public policy, (4) government operations, (5) government services and (6) citizen engagement (Scholl, 2007). Hence, this can be seen as an effort to try and operationalize the aim of eGovernment research on a slightly more detailed level than described above.…”

Section: Egovernment Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Introducing public sector eIDs: The power of actors’ translations and institutional barriers

Söderström¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Central research questions in e‐government, or which trajectory should the study domain take?

Cited by 26 publications

References 53 publications

Electronic services in the public sector: A conceptual framework

Electronic services in the public sector: A conceptual framework

Opening the Black Box of Leadership in the Successful Development of Local E-Government Initiative in a Developing Country

Introducing public sector eIDs: The power of actors’ translations and institutional barriers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About