Reference Model for E-Government Monitoring, Evaluation and Benchmarking

Abstract

The e-government as a result of innovations, emerging technology and internet expansion is a reality today and became a necessity for any country wishing to enter the 21st century as a competitive nation in the world arena. The processes are constantly changing and continue to drive and provide opportunities and open new possibilities for e-government development. The evolution of society requires public administrations to tackle many new challenges and changes. All these evolutionary changes demand the further development of government solutions to meet the challenges and new adequate requirements. After the solution is developed, it must be assessed whether those requirements have been met. As the e-government is constantly evolving all around the world this evolution is regularly measured and tracked by public institutions, private agencies and researchers. There are a number of published research papers on models that aim to evaluate e-government but most of them are focused on some particular purposes and objectives, types of evaluation perspectives. However, there is no evaluation model that could be directly adapted to e-government development in each country or each organization or each service in the country. In this paper, we aim to combine the analyzed models into a conceptual model that could provide a common framework for future research in the area of e-government assessment and a common point of reference in this area. For this purpose, a reference model for e-government monitoring, evaluation and benchmarking is proposed. The model is not associated with any particular e-government definition and/or model, evaluation purpose, dimension or criterion. It could be adapted to many specific cases in the process of design of specific models for monitoring, evaluation or benchmarking of e-government or e-government service.

Does e-readiness of citizens ensure better adoption of government’s digital initiatives? A case based study

“…Though several models are provided by the researchers, measuring e-government readiness is context specific context specific (Ayanso et al, 2011). That means no single model can fit for all the countries for evaluation of e-government (Ostasius and Laukaitis, 2015). This also supports the justification that the motivations for implementing egovernment is different for different governments and that will formulate the initial implementation strategies.…”

“…It also depicts the national capabilities of a country and helps in attracting foreign investments (Bannister, 2007). But the majority of the researches in this area focussed to e-readiness of the government agencies for delivery of services in the online platform (Bannister, 2007;Ostasius and Laukaitis, 2015;Liu Tucker, 2012;Ayanso et al, 2011). But as argued by the scholars, citizen orientation is not exploited much in the research (Tavana et al, 2013).…”

Efektivitas Sistem Electronic Monitoring Dan Evaluasi (E-Monev) Di Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Kota Surabaya

“…Sedangkan evaluasi, Fournier (Mthethwa & Jili, 2019) menyatakan bahwa evaluasi merupakan salah satu bentuk penerapan dalam pemeriksaan tahapan untuk mengumpulkan maupun menyusun bukti-bukti berdasarkan hal-hal yang penting disertai keefektifan, keefisienan, serta berbagai nilai dari bermacam-macam intervensi.Terkait dengan monitoring dan evaluasi tersebut salah satu instansi yang menerapkan sistem di bidang monitoring dan evaluasi dengan sistem aplikasi yang dikenal sebagai Electronic Monitoring dan Evaluasi (E-Monev) adalah Badan Perencanaan dan Pembangunan Kota Surabaya. Monitoring dan evaluasi berperan penting dalam peningkatan performa atau kinerja pegawai dan meminimalisir terjadinya penyelewengan tugas maupun wewenang (Ostasius & Laukaitis, 2015).…”

E‐government implementation and monitoring: The case of Rwanda's ‘one‐stop’ E‐government

“…Such successes and effectiveness can result from the routine tracking of progress (Mtshali, ) and keeping track of the project's conformity to plans and the quality of deliverables (Hatsu & Ngassam, ); this tracking is performed via monitoring. “Monitoring e‐government implementation” refers to the process of keeping track of and comparing the characteristics of implementation and improvement in different periods, in order to then measure improvements after the development of changes in e‐government solutions in a given setting (Ostasius & Laukaitis, ). Good monitoring provides hints on what to evaluate, and conversely, evaluation results can inform us of what to monitor in the future (Mtshali, ).…”