1. bookVolume 11 (2015): Issue 2 (December 2015)
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
1857-8462
First Published
01 Jul 2005
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
access type Open Access

Measuring e-Government Maturity: A meta-synthesis approach

Published Online: 04 Apr 2016
Volume & Issue: Volume 11 (2015) - Issue 2 (December 2015)
Page range: 51 - 67
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
1857-8462
First Published
01 Jul 2005
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
Abstract

Many governments in the world have created e-government initiatives including developed and developing countries. In order to better understand e-government evolution, different maturity models have been developed by many authors. In this paper the most cited e-government maturity models are analyzed using the meta-synthesis approach. As a result, five stages of e-government maturity are identified. The comparative results show the supported stages by each e-government initiative as important elements in the decision making process. This paper is attempting to show that although there are many models for measuring e-government maturity, they all converge on one common model. The contribution of this paper is in simplifying work for researchers when choosing the right maturity model.

Keywords

1. Alabau Muñoz, A. (2004). La Unión Europea y su política para el desarrollo de la administración electrónica: tras los objetivos de la Estrategia de Lisboa. Madrid: Fundación Vodafone España.Search in Google Scholar

2. Alhomod, S. M., & Shafi, M. M. (2012). Best Practices in E government: A review of Some Innovative Models Proposed in Different Countries. International Journal of Electrical & Computer Sciences, 12(1), 1–6.Search in Google Scholar

3. Almazan, R. S., & Gil-García, J. R. (2008). E-Government portals in Mexico.10.4018/978-1-59904-947-2.ch131Search in Google Scholar

4. Andersen, K. V., & Henriksen, H. Z. (2006). E-government maturity models: Extension of the Layne and Lee model. Government Information Quarterly, 23(2), 236–248. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2005.11.008Search in Google Scholar

5. Baum, C., & Di Maio, A. (2000). Gartner’s four phases of e-government model. Gartner Group.Search in Google Scholar

6. Carter, L., & Belanger, F. (2004). The influence of perceived characteristics of innovating on e-government adoption. Electronic Journal of E-Government, 2(1), 11–20.Search in Google Scholar

7. Chandler, S., & Emanuels, S. (2002). Transformation not automation. In Proceedings of 2nd European Conference on E-government (pp. 91–102).Search in Google Scholar

8. Chen, J., Yan, Y., & Mingins, C. (2011). A Three-Dimensional Model for E-Government Development with Cases in China’s Regional E-Government Practice and Experience. In Management of e-Commerce and e-Government (ICMeCG), 2011 Fifth International Conference on (pp. 113–120). IEEE.10.1109/ICMeCG.2011.49Search in Google Scholar

9. Davies, P. (2008). e-Government Best Practices learning from success, avoiding the pitfalls.Search in Google Scholar

10. Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., Callaghan, R., & Yared, H. (2002). Government on the Web II. National Audit Office. Retrieved from http://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2002/04/0102764.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

11. Ebrahim, Z., & Irani, Z. (2005). E-government adoption: architecture and barriers. Business Process Management Journal, 11(5), 589–611.10.1108/14637150510619902Search in Google Scholar

12. Fath-Allah, A., Cheikhi, L., Al-Qutaish, R. E., & Idri, A. (2014). eGovernment Maturity Models: A Comparative Study. International Journal of Software Engineering & Applications, 5(3).Search in Google Scholar

13. Hiller, J. S., & Belanger, F. (2001). Privacy strategies for electronic government. E-Government, 200, 162–198.Search in Google Scholar

14. Howard, M. (2001). E-government across the globe: how will“ e” change government? Government Finance Review, 17(4), 6–9.Search in Google Scholar

15. Jayashree, S., & Marthandan, G. (2010). Government to E-government to E-society. Journal of Applied Sciences, 10(19), 2205–2210. http://doi.org/10.3923/jas.2010.2205.2210Search in Google Scholar

16. Jensen, L. A., & Allen, M. N. (1996). Meta-synthesis of qualitative findings. Qualitative Health Research, 6(4), 553–560.10.1177/104973239600600407Search in Google Scholar

17. Jorgensen, D. J., & Cable, S. (2002). Facing the challenges of e-government: A case study of the city of Corpus Christi, Texas. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 67(3), 15–21.Search in Google Scholar

18. Kim, D.-Y., & Grant, G. (2010). E-government maturity model using the capability maturity model integration. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 12(3), 230–244.10.1108/13287261011070858Search in Google Scholar

19. Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional E-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly, 18(2), 122–136.10.1016/S0740-624X(01)00066-1Search in Google Scholar

20. Lee, G., & Kwak, Y. H. (2012). An Open Government Maturity Model for social media-based public engagement. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 492–503.10.1016/j.giq.2012.06.001Search in Google Scholar

21. Lee, J. (2010). 10 year retrospect on stage models of e-Government: A qualitative meta-synthesis. Government Information Quarterly, 27(3), 220–230.10.1016/j.giq.2009.12.009Search in Google Scholar

22. Lee, S. M., Tan, X., & Trimi, S. (2005). Current Practices of Leading e-Government Countries. Commun. ACM, 48(10), 99–104. http://doi.org/10.1145/1089107.1089112Search in Google Scholar

23. Löfstedt, U. (2008). E-services for and by citizens: towards e-participation and social systems design for development of local public e-services. Departement of Information Technology and Media, Mid Sweden University, Sundsvall.Search in Google Scholar

24. Maranny, E. A. (2011). Stage Maturity Model of m-Government (SMM m-Gov): Improving e-Government performance by utilizing m-Government features. University of Twente. Retrieved from http://essay.utwente.nl/62691/Search in Google Scholar

25. Moon, M. J. (2002). The Evolution of E-Government among Municipalities: Rhetoric or Reality? Public Administration Review, 62(4), 424–433.10.1111/0033-3352.00196Search in Google Scholar

26. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2003). The e-government imperative. Paris, France: OECD.Search in Google Scholar

27. Palvia, S. C. J., & Sharma, S. S. (2007). E-government and e-governance: definitions/domain framework and status around the world. In International Conference on E-governance.Search in Google Scholar

28. Reddick, C. G. (2004). A two-stage model of e-government growth: Theories and empirical evidence for US cities. Government Information Quarterly, 21(1), 51–64.10.1016/j.giq.2003.11.004Search in Google Scholar

29. Rohleder, S. J., & Jupp, V. (2003). e-government Leadership: Engaging the customer. Online Accenture.Search in Google Scholar

30. Ronaghan, S. A. (2002). Benchmarking E-government: A Global Perspective. New York: United Nations Division for Public Economics and Public Administration. Retrieved from http://unpan3.un.org/egovkb/Portals/egovkb/Documents/un/English.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

31. Sandieson, R. (2006). Pathfinding in the research forest: The pearl harvesting method for effective information retrieval. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 401–409.Search in Google Scholar

32. Sandieson, R. W., Kirkpatrick, L. C., Sandieson, R. M., & Zimmerman, W. (2010). Harnessing the power of education research databases with the pearl-harvesting methodological framework for information retrieval. The Journal of Special Education, 44(3), 161–175.10.1177/0022466909349144Search in Google Scholar

33. Shahkooh, K. A., Saghafi, F., & Abdollahi, A. (2008). A proposed model for e-Government maturity. In Information and Communication Technologies: From Theory to Applications, 2008. ICTTA 2008. 3rd International Conference on (pp. 1–5). IEEE.Search in Google Scholar

34. Siau, K., & Long, Y. (2005). Synthesizing e-government stage models–a meta-synthesis based on meta-ethnography approach. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 105(4), 443–458.10.1108/02635570510592352Search in Google Scholar

35. United Nations, & Department of Economic and Social Affairs. (2012). United Nations e-government survey 2012 e-government for the people. New York: United Nations. Retrieved from http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan048065.pdf.10.18356/b1052762-enSearch in Google Scholar

36. United Nations E-Government Development Database. (n.d.). Retrieved April 5, 2014, from http://unpan3.un.org/egovkb/egovernment_overview/ereadiness.htm.Search in Google Scholar

37. Valdés, G., Solar, M., Astudillo, H., Iribarren, M., Concha, G., & Visconti, M. (2011). Conception, development and implementation of an e-Government maturity model in public agencies. Government Information Quarterly, 28(2), 176–187. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2010.04.007Search in Google Scholar

38. Walsh, D., & Downe, S. (2005). Meta-synthesis method for qualitative research: a literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 50(2), 204–211. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03380.xSearch in Google Scholar

39. Wescott, C. G. (2001). E-Government in the Asia-pacific region. Asian Journal of Political Science, 9(2), 1–24.10.1080/02185370108434189Search in Google Scholar

40. West, D. M. (2004). E-Government and the Transformation of Service Delivery and Citizen Attitudes. Public Administration Review, 64(1), 15–27.10.1111/j.1540-6210.2004.00343.xSearch in Google Scholar

41. Windley, P. J. (2002). eGovernment maturity. USA: Windleys’ Technolometria, Available: Http://www.Windley.com/docs/eGovernment%20Maturity.Pdf. Retrieved from http://new.windley.com/docs/eGovernment%20Maturity.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

42. World Bank: e-Government. (n.d.). Retrieved April 5, 2014, from http://go.worldbank.org/6WT3UPVG80Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo