The impact of institutions on interorganizational IT projects in the Mexican federal government

International Journal of Electronic Government Research

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 27-42

  Luna Reyes, Luis Felipe ^a   Gil Garcia, J Ramon ^b,c   Estrada Marroquín, Mireya ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD DE LAS AMÉRICAS PUEBLA   (Mexico)

^b CENTRO DE INVESTIGACIÓN Y DOCENCIA ECONÓMICAS   (Mexico)

^c STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

Electronic government; Inter organizational systems; IS success model; IT in developing countries; IT in public administration; Public sector; Strategic IT management

Indexed keywords

DEVELOPING COUNTRIES; GOVERNMENT DATA PROCESSING; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS;

ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT; INTER-ORGANIZATIONAL SYSTEMS; IS SUCCESS MODEL; IT IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES; PUBLIC SECTOR; STRATEGIC IT MANAGEMENTS;

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION;

EID: 47649131461     PISSN: 15483886     EISSN: 15483894     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4018/jegr.2008040103     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. 6, P. (2001). E-governance. Do digital aids make a difference in policy making? In J. E. J. Prins (Ed.), Designing e-government. On the crossroads of technological innovation and institutional change (pp. 7-27). The Hague, Netherlands: Kluwer Law International.
2. Bansal, P. (2005). Evolving sustainably: a longitudinal study of corporate sustainable development. Strategic Management Journal, 26(3), 197-218.
3. Barley, S. R., & Tolbert, P. S. (1997). Institutionalization and structuration: studying the links between action and institution. Organization Studies, 18(1), 93-117.
4. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
5. Bennett, M., Bouma, J. J., & Ciccozzi, E. (2004). An institutional perspective on the transfer of accounting knowledge: a case study. Accounting Educacion, 13(3), 329-346.
6. Brinton, M. C., & Nee, V. (1998). The new institutionalism in sociology. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
7. Carbo, T., & Williams, J. G. (2004). Models and metrics for evaluating local electronic government systems and services. Electronic Journal of e-Government, 2(2), 95-104.
8. Dawes, S. (2002). Government and technology: User, not regulator. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 12(4), 627-631.
9. Fountain, J. E. (1995). Enacting technology: An institutional perspective. Cambridge, MA: John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
10. Fountain, J. E. (2001). Building the virtual state. Information technology and institutional change. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
11. Fountain, J. E. (2004). Prospects for the virtual state. Retrieved May, 2006, from http://www.j.u-tokyo. ac,jp/coeps/pdf/040710.pdf
12. Fountain, J. E., McKinnon, R., & Park, E. (2003). E-government cross-agency and intergovernmental initiatives research project: Web survey results. Boston, MA: Working Papers Series, National Center for Digital Government, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
13. Garson, G. D. (2003). Technological telelogy and the theory of technology enactment. Social Science and Computer Review, 21(4), 425-431.
14. Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory. Action, structure and contradiction in social analysis. Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
15. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society. Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
16. Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2005, September 1-4). Do citizens' expectations matter for e-government? Exploring the determinants of the functionality of state Web sites. Paper presented at the 2005 APSA Annual Meeting, Washington, DC.
17. Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2006, January 4-7,2006). Enacting state Rebsites: A mixed method study exploring e-government success in multi-organizational settings. Paper presented at the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS).
18. Gil-Garcia, J. R., & Helbig, N. (2006). Exploring e-government benefits and success factors. In A.-V. Anttiroiko & M. Malkia (Eds.), Encyclopedia of digital government (pp. 803-811). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
19. Gil-Garcia, J. R., & Luna-Reyes, L. F. (2006). Integrating conceptual approaches to e-government. In M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed.), Encyclopedia od e-commerce, e-government, and mobile commerce (pp. 636-643). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Reference.
20. Hiller, J. S., & Bélanger, F. (2001). Privacy strategies for electronic government. In M. A. Abramson & G. E. Means (Eds.), E-government 2001 (pp. 162-198). Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
21. Holmes, D. (2001). e.gov. e-business strategies for government. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
22. Khadaroo, M. I. (2005). An institutional theory perspective on the UK's private finance initiative (PFI) accounting standard setting process. Public Management Review, 7(1), 69-94.
23. Kraemer, K. L., King, J. L., Dunkle, D. E., & Lane, J. P. (1989). Managing information systems. Change and control in organizational computing. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
24. Luna-Reyes, L. F., Gil-Garcia, J. R., & Cruz, C. B. (2006, August 4-6). Collaborative digital government in Mexico: Some lessons from federal Web-based inter-organizational information integration initiatives. Paper presented at the 12th Americas Conference on Information Systems, Acapulco, Mexico.
25. North, D. C. (1999). Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance. New York: Cambridge University Press.
26. OECD. (2003). OECD e-government studies: The e-government imperative. Paris: OECD Publishing.
27. OECD. (2005). OECD e-government studies: Mexico. Paris: OECD Publishing.
28. Orlikowski, W. (2000). Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization Science, 11(4), 404-428.
29. Peters, B. G. (2001). Institutional theory in political science. The 'new'institutionalism. London: Continuum.
30. Poder Ejecutivo (2002). Ley Federal de Transparencia y Acceso a la Información Pública Gubernamental. RetrievedSeptember,2006,fromhttp://www.elaw.org/resources/text.asp?id= 1544
31. Powell, W. W., & DiMaggio, P. J. (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
32. Puron Cid, G., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2004). Enacting e-budgeting in Mexico. Public Finance and Management, 4(2), 182-217.
33. Rocheleau, B. (2003). Politics, accountability, and governmental information systems. In G. D. Garson (Ed.), Publicinformation technology: Policy and management issues (pp. 20-52). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
34. Rutherford, M. (1999). Institutions in economics. The old and the new institutionalism. New York: Cambridge University Press.
35. Scheela, W., & Van Dinh, N. (2004). Venture capital in atransition economy: the case of Vietnam. Venture Capital - An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 6(4), 333-350.
36. Schelin, S. H. (2003). E-government: An overview. In G. D. Garson (Ed.), Public information technology: Policy and management issues (pp. 120-137). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
37. Scholl, H. J. (2002). Executive briefing on electronic government and business process change. Albany, NY: Center for Technology in Government.
38. Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and organizations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39. Yang, K. (2003). Neoinstitutionalism and e-government. Social Science and Computer Review, 21(4), 432-442.