Understanding e-government project management: A positivist case study of Singapore

Journal of Global Information Technology Management

Volumn 9, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 45-61

  Ke, Weiling ^a   Wei, Kwok Kee ^b  

^a CLARKSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b CITY UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Digital divide; E government; Project management; Project risk exposure

Indexed keywords

EID: 36549067792     PISSN: 1097198X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/1097198X.2006.10856420     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Barki, H., Rivard, S., & Talbot, J. (1993). Toward an assessment of software development risk. Journal of Management Information Systems, 10(2), 203-225.
2. Barki, H., Rivard, S., & Talbot, J. (2001). An integrative contingency model of software project risk management. Journal of Management Information Systems, 17(4), 37-69.
3. Bozeman, B. (1986). Public management information systems: Theory and prescription. Public Administration Review, 46(Special Issue), 475-487.
4. Cooper, R. B. (2000). Information technology development creativity: A case study of attempted radical change. MIS Quarterly, 24(2), 245-276.
5. Deephouse, C., Mukhopadhyay, T., Goldenson, D. R., & Kellner, M. I. (1995). Software processes and project performance. Journal of Management Information Systems, 12(3), 187.
6. Edmiston, K. D. (2003). State and local e-government: Prospects and challenges. American Review of Public Administration, 55(1), 20-45.
7. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building Theories From Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, 14(3), 532-550.
8. Harris, P. (1990). Foundations of Public Administration: a Comparative Approach. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
9. Hartwick, J., & Barki, H. (1994). Explaining the role of user participation in information system use. Management Science, 40(4), 440-465.
10. Heeks, R. (2001). Understanding e-Government for development. Unpublished manuscript, University of Manchester.
11. Hostede, G. (1993). Cultural constraints in management theories. Academy of Management Executive, 7(1), 81-94.
12. Ives, B., & Olson, M. H. (1984). User involvement and MIS success: a review of the research. Management Science, 30(5), 586-603.
13. Kirk, J., & Miller, M. L. (1986). Reliability and validity in qualitative research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
14. Layne, K, & Lee, J. W. (2001). Developing fully functional E-govemment: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly, 18(2), 122-136.
15. Lee, A. S. (1989). A Scientific Methodology For MIS Case Studies. MIS Quarterly, 13(1), 3350.
16. Lee, A. S. (1991). Integrating positivist and interpretivist approaches to organizational research. Organization Science, 2, 342-365.
17. Markus, M. L. (1997). The qualitative difference in information systems research and practice. In A. S. Lee, J. Liebenau & J. I. Gross (Eds.), Information Systems and Qualitative Research (pp. 11-27). London: Chapman and Hall.
18. McFarlan, F. W. (1981). Portfolio Approach to Information Systems. Harvard Business Review, 59(5), 142-150.
19. McNeal, R. S., Tolbert, C. J., Mossberger, K, & Dotterweich, L. J. (2003). Innovating in digital government in the American states. Social Science Quarterly, 84(1), 52-70.
20. Moon, M. J. (2002). The evolution of E-govemment among municipalities: Rhetoric or reality? Public Administration Review, 62(2), 424-433.
21. Nidumolu, S. (1995). The effect of coordination and uncertainty on software project performance: Residual performance risk as an intervening variable. Information Systems Research, 6(3), 191-219.
22. Orlikowski, W. J. (1992). The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organization Science, 3(3), 398-427.
23. Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1993). Reinventing government: how the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. New York, N.Y.: Plume.
24. Pare, G., & Elam, J. J. (1997). Using case study research to build theories of IT implementation. In A. S. Lee, J. Liebenau & J. I. Gross (Eds.), Information systems and qualitative research (pp. 542-568). London: Chapman and Hall.
25. Rainey, H. G., Pandey, S., & Bozeman, B. (1995). Research Note - Public and Private Managers Perceptions of Red Tape. Public Administration Review, 55(6), 567-574.
26. Rubin, B. M. (1986). Information Systems for Public Management: Design and Implementation. Public Administration Review, 46(Special Issue), 540-552.
27. Silcock, R. (2001, Jan). What is e-government? Parliamentary Affairs [H.W. Wilson - SSA], 54, 88-101.
28. Walsh, J. P., & Ungson, G. R. (1991). Organizational Memory. Academy of Management Review. 16(1), 57-91.
29. Walsham, G., & Sahay, S. (1999). GIS for district-level administration in India: Problems and opportunities. Paper presented at the MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 39-65.
30. Watson, R. T. & Mundy, B. (2001). A strategic perspective of electronic democracy. Communications of the ACM, 44(1), 27-30.
31. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
32. Zmud, R. W. (1980). Management of large software development efforts. MIS Quarterly, 4(2), 45-55