Managing e-Government system implementation: A resource enactment perspective

European Journal of Information Systems

Volumn 20, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 529-541

  Chan, Calvin M L ^a   Hackney, Ray ^b   Pan, Shan L ^c   Chou, Tzu Chuan ^d  

^a SINGAPORE UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES   (Singapore)

^b BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE   (Singapore)

^d NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

case study; e government; enactment; process model; resource enactment; resource based view

Indexed keywords

INFORMATION SYSTEMS;

DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATIONS; E-GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; ENACTMENT; PROCESS MODELING; RESOURCE ENACTMENT; RESOURCE-BASED VIEW; THEORETICAL DEVELOPMENT;

E-GOVERNMENT;

EID: 79961153025     PISSN: 0960085X     EISSN: 14769344     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1057/ejis.2011.19     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. AGERFALK PJ (2010) Getting pragmatic. European Journal of Information Systems 19(3), 251-256.
2. AUSTIN JR (2003) Transactive memory in organizational groups: the effects of content, consensus, specialization, and accuracy on group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology 88(5), 866-878. (Pubitemid 37239702)
3. BARNEY JB (1986) Strategic factor markets: expectations, luck, and business strategy. Management Science 32(10), 1231-1241.
4. BARNEY JB (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management 17(1), 99-120.
5. BARNEY JB (2001) Is the resource-based 'view' a useful perspective for strategic management research? Yes. Academy of Management Review 26(1), 41-56.
6. BASKERVILLE R and MYERS MD (2004) Special issue on action research in information systems: making IS research relevant to practice-foreword. MIS Quarterly 28(3), 329-335.
7. BAUMGARTEN J and CHUI M (2009) E-government 2.0. McKinsey Quarterly (2), 26-31.
8. BOUDREAU M-C and ROBEY D (2005) Enacting integrated information technology: a human agency perspective. Organization Science 16(1), 3-18. (Pubitemid 40366610)
9. BOWMAN C (2001) Value' in the resource-based view of the firm: a contribution to the debate. Academy of Management Review 26(4), 501-502.
10. BURT RS (1997) The contingent value of social capital. Administrative Science Quarterly 42(2), 339-365.
11. CARMELI A and TISHLER A (2004) The relationships between intangible organizational elements and organizational performance. Strategic Management Journal 25(13), 1257-1278.
12. CHAN CML, LAU YM and PAN SL (2008) E-government implementation: a macro analysis of Singapore's e-government initiatives. Government Information Quarterly 17(2), 124-139.
13. CHAN CML and PAN SL (2008) User engagement in e-government systems implementation: a comparative case study of two Singaporean e-government initiatives. Journal of Strategic Information Systems 17(2), 124-139.
14. COLLIS DJ (1994) Research note: how valuable are organizational capabilities? Strategic Management Journal 15(Winter Special Issue), 143-152.
15. COLLIS DJ and MONTGOMERY CA (1995) Competing on resources: strategy in the 1990s. Harvard Business Review 73(4), 118-128.
16. CORDELLA A and IANNACCI F (2010) Information systems in the public sector: the e-government enactment framework. Journal of Strategic Information Systems 19(1), 52-66.
17. DANEELS E (2003) Tight-loose coupling with customers: the enactment of customer orientation. Strategic Management Journal 24(6), 559-576.
18. DANZIGER JN (2004) Innovation in innovation? The technology enactment framework. Social Science Computer Review 22(1), 100-110. (Pubitemid 38191977)
19. DENRELL J and MARCH JG (2001) Adaptation as information restriction: the hot stove effect. Organization Science 12(5), 523-538.
20. DIEDRICKX I and COOL K (1989) Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Management Sciences 35(12), 1504-1511.
21. EISENHARDT KM (1989) Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review 14(4), 532-550.
22. EISENHARDT KM and MARTIN JA (2000) Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strategic Management Journal 21(10-11), 1105-1121.
23. FELDMAN MS (2004) Resources in emerging structures and processes of change. Organization Science 15(3), 295-309.
24. FOUCAULT M (1972) The Archaeology of Knowledge. Routledge, London, England.
25. FOUNTAIN J (2001) Building the Virtual State: Information Technology and Institutional Change. Brookings Institution, Washington, DC.
26. GARSON GD (2003) Symposium on the theory of technology enactment in Jane Fountain's (2001): building the virtual state. Social Science Computer Review 21(4), 409-410. (Pubitemid 37325148)
27. GRANT G and CHAU D (2005) Developing a generic framework for e-government. Journal of Global Information Management 13(1), 1-30.
28. GRANT RM (1991) The resource-based theory of competitive advantage. California Management Review 33(3), 114-135.
29. HEEKS R (2006) Implementing and Managing e-Government: An International Text. Sage, London, England.
30. HEEKS R and BAILUR S (2007) Analyzing e-government research: perspectives, philosophies, theories, methods, and practice. Government Information Quarterly 24(2), 243-265.
31. HITT MA, BIERMAN L, UHLENBRUCK K and SHIMIZU K (2006) The importance of resources in the internationalization of professional service firms: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Academy of Management Journal 49(6), 1137-1157.
32. HOWELL J and HIGGINS C (1990) Champions of technological innovations. Administrative Science Quarterly 35(2), 317-341.
33. HUANG R, ZMUD RW and PRICE RL (2010) Influencing the effectiveness of IT governance practices through steering committees and communication policies. European Journal of Information Systems 19(3), 288-302.
34. IRELAND RD and HITT MA (2005) Achieving and maintaining strategic competitiveness in the 21st century: the role of strategic leadership. Academy of Management Executive 19(4), 63-77. (Pubitemid 43198417)
35. JIANG JJ, KLEIN G and CHEN H-G (2006) The effects of user partnering and user non-support on project performance. Journal of AIS 7(2), 68-90.
36. LANGLEY A (1999) Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review 24(4), 691-710.
37. LEE AS (1994) Electronic mail as a medium for rich communication: an empirical investigation using hermeneutic interpretation. MIS Quarterly 18(2), 143-157.
38. LEE AS and BASKERVILLE RL (2003) Generalizing generalizability in information systems research. Information Systems Research 14(3), 221-243.
39. LEONARD D and SENSIPER S (1998) The role of tacit knowledge in group innovation. California Management Review 40(3), 112-132.
40. MELVILLE N, KRAEMER K and GURBAXANI V (2004) Review: information technology and organizational performance: an integrative model of it business value. MIS Quarterly 28(2), 283-322.
41. ORLIKOWSKI WJ (2000) Using technology and constituting structures: a practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization Science 11(4), 404-428.
42. ORLIKOWSKI WJ and BARLEY SR (2001) Technology and institutions: what can research on information technology and research on organizations learn from each other? MIS Quarterly 25(2), 145-165. (Pubitemid 33738442)
43. ORLIKOWSKI WJ and HOFMAN JD (1997) An improvisational model for change management: the case of groupware technologies. Sloan Management Review 38(2), 11-21.
44. ORLIKOWSKI WJ and YATES J (2002) It's about time: temporal structuring in organizations. Organization Science 13(6), 684-700. (Pubitemid 36058612)
45. PAWLOWSKI SD and ROBEY D (2004) Bridging user organizations: knowledge brokering and work the of information technology professionals. MIS Quarterly 28(4), 645-672.
46. PENROSE E (1959) The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. Basil Blackwell, London, England.
47. PEPPARD J and WARD J (2004) Beyond strategic information systems: towards an IS capability. Journal of Strategic Information Systems 13(2), 167-194.
48. PICCOLI G and IVES B (2005) Review: IT-dependent strategic initiatives and sustained competitive advantage: a review and synthesis of the literature. MIS Quarterly 29(4), 747-776. (Pubitemid 44841803)
49. PINSONNEAULT A and KRAEMER KL (2002) Exploring the role of information technology in organizational downsizing: a tale of two American cities. Organization Science 13(2), 191-208.
50. PRIEM RL and BUTLER JE (2001) Is the resource-based 'view' a useful perspective for strategic management research? Academy of Management Review 26(1), 22-40.
51. QUINN JB, ANDERSON P and FINKELSTEIN S (2005) Leveraging intellect. Academy of Management Executive 19(4), 78-94. (Pubitemid 43198418)
52. REED MI (1997) In praise of duality and dualism: rethinking agency and structure in organizational analysis. Organization Studies 18(1), 21-42.
53. RINDOVA VP, BECERRA M and CONTARDO I (2004) Enacting competitive wars: competitive activity, language games and market consequences. Academy of Management Review 29(4), 670-686. (Pubitemid 39483354)
54. RUTGERS (2010) Rutgers global e-governance survey. [WWW document] http://news.rutgers.edu/medrel/news-releases/2010/07/seoul-and-prague-ach- 20100713.
55. SANTHANAM R and HARTONO E (2003) Issues in linking information technology capability to firm performance. MIS Quarterly 27(1), 125-153.
56. SCOTT M and ROBBINS G (2010) Understanding e-government implementation from an NPM strategic reform perspective. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 27(26), 493-516.
57. SMIRCICH L and STUBBART C (1985) Strategic management in an enacted world. Academy of Management Review 10(4), 724-736.
58. STRAUSS A and CORBIN J (1998) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
59. TANRIVERDI H (2005) Information technology relatedness, knowledge management capability, and performance of multibusiness firms. MIS Quarterly 29(2), 311-334. (Pubitemid 46063148)
60. TEECE DJ, PISANO G and SHUEN A (1997) Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal 18(7), 509-533. (Pubitemid 127467809)
61. UN AND ASPA (2002) Benchmarking e-Government: A Global Perspective. United Nations and American Society for Public Administration, New York.
62. WADE M and HULLAND J (2004) Review: the resource-based view and information systems research: review, extension, and suggestions for future research. MIS Quarterly 28(1), 107-142.
63. WALSHAM G (1993) Interpreting Information Systems in Organizations. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, England.
64. WALSHAM G (1995) Interpretive case studies in is research: nature and method. European Journal of Information Systems 4(2), 74-81.
65. WASEDA (2010) The 2010 Waseda University world e-government ranking. [WWW document] http://www.obi.giti.waseda.ac.jp/e-gov/World-e-Gov-Ranking10-en.pdf.
66. WEICK KE (1979) The Social Psychology of Organizing, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
67. WEICK KE (1988) Enacted sensemaking in crisis situations. Journal of Management Studies 25(4), 305-317.
68. WEICK KE (2001) Making Sense of the Organization. Blackwell, Malden, MA.
69. WEICK KE, SUTCLIFFE KM and OBSTFELD D (2005) Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science 16(4), 409-421. (Pubitemid 43057590)
70. WERNERFELT B (1984) A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal 5(2), 171-180.
71. WEST DM (2004) E-government and the transformation of service delivery and citizen attitudes. Public Administrative Review 64(1), 15-27. (Pubitemid 38059187)
72. WHEELER B (2002) The net-enabled business innovation cycle: a dynamic capabilities theory for harnessing it to create customer value. Information Systems Research 13(2), 147-150.
73. WINTER SG (2003) Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal 24(10), 991-995.
74. YANG K (2003) Neoinstitutionalism and e-government: beyond Jane Fountain. Social Science Computer Review 21(4), 432-442. (Pubitemid 37325152)
75. YILDIZ M (2007) E-government research: reviewing the literature, limitation, and ways forward. Government Information Quarterly 24(3), 646-665.
76. YIN RK (1994) Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.