Understanding the dynamics in e-Participation initiatives: Looking through the genre and stakeholder lenses

Government Information Quarterly

Volumn 28, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 416-425

  Sæbø, Øystein ^a   Flak, Leif Skiftenes ^a   Sein, Maung K ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AGDER   (Norway)

Author keywords

Analytic framework; E Government; Genre theory; Stakeholder theory

Indexed keywords

EID: 79959274162     PISSN: 0740624X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2010.10.005     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Bhatia V.K. Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings 1993, Longman, London.
2. Carter L., Belanger F. The utilization of e-Government services: Citizen trust, innovation and acceptance factors. Information Systems Journal 2005, 15(1):5-25.
3. Donaldson T., Preston L.E. The stakeholder theory of the corporation - Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review 1995, 20(1):65-91.
4. Esteves J., Joseph R.C. A comprehensive framework for the assessment of e-Government projects. Government Information Quarterly 2008, 25(1):118-132.
5. Flak L.S., Nordheim S. Developing commitment for horizontal g2g integration: A stakeholder governance approach. Proceedings of the 6th European Conference of Electronic Government - ECEG 06, Marburg, Germany 2006.
6. Flak L.S., Nordheim S., Munkvold B.E. Analyzing stakeholder diversity in G2G efforts: Combining descriptive stakeholder theory and dialectic process theory. E-Service Journal 2008, 6(2):3-23.
7. Flak L.S., Rose J. Stakeholder governance: Adapting stakeholder theory to e-Government domain. Communications of AIS 2005, 16:642-664.
8. Flak L.S., Sein M.K., Sæbø Ø. Towards a cumulative tradition in e-Government research: Going beyond the Gs and Cs. Electronic government 2007, 13-22. Springer, Berlin and Heidelberg. M.A. Wimmer, J. Scholl, Å. Grönlund (Eds.).
9. Freeman R.E. Strategic management: A stakeholder approach 1984, Pitman, Boston.
10. Haraldsen M., Päivärinta T., Sein M., Stray T.D. Generating information requirements for e-Government portals through life-events and genres. Electronic government - Workshop and poster proceedings of the Fourth International EGOV Conference 2005, August 22-26, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 2005, 35-43. Trauner Verlag, Linzer, Austria. M.A. Wimmer, J. Scholl, Å. Grönlund (Eds.).
11. Heeks, R. (2000). Government data: Understanding the barriers to citizen access and use. iGovernment Working Paper Series, wp 10. Retrieved, June 03, 2009, from http://www.sed.manchester.ac.uk/idpm/research/publications/wp/igovernment/documents/igov_wp10.pdf.
12. Heeks R., Stanforth C. Understanding e-Government project trajectories from an actor-network perspective. European Journal of Information Systems 2007, 16:165-177.
13. Hendry J. Missing the target: Normative stakeholder theory and the corporate governance debate. Business Ethics Quarterly 2001, 11(1):159-176.
14. Irani I.Z., Elliman T., Jackson P. Electronic transformation of government in the UK: A research agenda. European Journal of Information Systems 2007, 16:327-335.
15. Klein H., Myers M. A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems. MIS Quarterly 1999, 23(1):67-93.
16. Klischewski R., Scholl H.J. Information quality as a common ground for key players in e-Government integration and interoperability. Proceedings of HICSS '06. 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, US 2006.
17. Mahrer H., Krimmer R. Towards the enhancement of e-Democracy: Identifying the notion of the 'Middleman paradox'. Information Systems Journal 2005, 15(1):27-42.
18. Mitchell R.K., Agle B.R., Wood D.J. Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review 1997, 22(4):853-886.
19. Moon M.J., Norris D.F. Does managerial orientation matter? The adoption of reinventing government and e-Government at the municipal level. Information Systems Journal 2005, 15(1):43-60.
20. Olphert W., Damodaran L. Citizen participation and engagement in the design of e-Government services: The missing link in effective ICT design and delivery. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 2007, 8(9):491-507.
21. Otjacques B., Hitzelberger P., Feltz F. Interoperability of e-Government systems information systems: Issues of identification and data sharing. Journal of Management Information Systems 2007, 23(4):29-51.
22. Päivärinta T. The concept of genre within the critical approach to information systems development. Information & Organization 2001, 11(3):207-234.
23. Päivärinta T., Sæbø Ø. The genre system lens on e-Democracy. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 2008, 20(2):51-82.
24. Päivärinta T., Shepherd M., Svensson L., Rossi M. Genre lens on information systems. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 2008, 20(1):3-5.
25. Rose J., Sæbø Ø. Democracy squared: Designing on-line political communities to accommodate conflicting interests. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, e-Government Special Issue 2005, 17(2):133-168.
26. Sæbø Ø. How to identify objectives and genres in e-Democracy projects: Learning from an action case study. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Information Systems Development - ISD, Budapest, Hungary 2006.
27. Sæbø Ø. A process for identifying objectives and technological forms in e-Democracy projects. Proceedings of the 12th Americas Conference of Information Systems, AMCIS 2006, Acapulco, Mexico 2006.
28. Sæbø Ø., Rose J., Flak L.S. The shape of e-Participation: Characterizing an emerging research area. Government Information Quarterly 2008, 25(3):400-428.
29. Salancik G.R., Pfeffer J. The bases and use of power in organizational decision-making: The case of universities. Administrative Science Quarterly 1974, 19(4):453-473.
30. Scholl H.J. Applying stakeholder theory to e-Government: Benefits and limits. Proceedings of the 1st IFIP Conference on e-Commerce, e-Business, and e-Government (I3E 2001), Zurich, Switzerland 2001.
31. Scholl H.J. Involving salient stakeholders: Beyond the technocratic view on change. Action Research (AR) 2004, 2(3):281-308.
32. Sein M.K., Henfridsson O., Purao S., Rossi M., Lindgren R. Action design research. MIS Quarterly 2011, 35(1):37-56.
33. Shankar V., Urban G.L., Sultan F. Online trust: A stakeholder perspective, concepts, implications, and future directions. Journal of Strategic Information Systems 2002, 11(3-4):325-344.
34. Strejcek G., Theil M. Technology push, legislation pull? e-Government in the European Union. Decision Support Systems 2003, 34(3):305-313.
35. Suchman M.C. Managing legitimacy. Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review 1995, 20(3):571-610.
36. Yates J., Orlikowski W.J. Genres of organizational communication: A structurational approach to studying communication and media. Academy of Management Review 1992, 17(2):299-326.
37. Yates J., Orlikowski W. Genre systems: Structuring interaction through communicative norms. Journal of Business Communication 2002, 39(1):13-35.