The great theory hunt: Does e-government really have a problem?

Government Information Quarterly

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 1-11

  Bannister, Frank ^a   Connolly, Regina ^b  

^a TRINITY COLLEGE DUBLIN   (Ireland)

^b DUBLIN CITY UNIVERSITY   (Ireland)

Author keywords

e Government; Frameworks; Models; Public administration; Theory

Indexed keywords

EID: 84922275527     PISSN: 0740624X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2014.10.003     Document Type: Article

References (113)

1. Abend G. The meaning of 'theory'. Sociological Theory 2008, 26(2):173-199.
2. Åkessan M., Skalén P., Edvardsson B. E-government and service orientation: Gaps between theory and practice. International Journal of Public Sector Management 2008, 21(1):74-92.
3. AlAwadhi S., Morris A. The USe of the UTAUT model in the adoption of e-government services in Kuwait. Proceedings of the 41st annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences 2008, 219-229.
4. Altameem T., Zairi M., Alshawi S. Critical success factors of e-government: A proposed model for e-government implementation. Proceedings of innovations in information technology 2006, November, 1-5.
5. Andersen K.V., Henriksen H.Z. The first leg of e-government research: Domains and application areas 1998-2003. International Journal of Electronic Government Research 2005, 1(4):26-44.
6. Andersen K.V., Henriksen H.Z. e-Government maturity models; Extension of the Layne and Less model. Government Information Quarterly 2006, 23(2):236-248.
7. Aristotle The politics and the constitution of Athens. Cambridge texts in the history of political thought 1993 original 350 BCE, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (UK). S. Everson (Ed.).
8. World Bank The eGovernment handbook for developing countries 2002, Centre for Democracy and Technology, (Available at: http://www.infodev.org/en/Publication.16.html).
9. Bannister F. Introduction, to case studies in e-government in case studies in eGovernment 2012, Academic Publishing International, Reading, UK. F. Bannister (Ed.).
10. Bannister F., Connolly R. Research e-government: A review of ECEG in its 10th year. Proceedings of the 10th European conference on e-government, Limerick, Ireland, 17-19th June, 2010 2010, 53-62. ACI, Reading UK. D. O'Donnell (Ed.).
11. Baum C.A., Di Maio A. Gartner's four phases of e-government model 2000, Gartner Group.
12. Becker J., Niehaves B., Poeppelbuss J., Simons A. Maturity models in IS research. Paper 42 2010.
13. Bekkers V. Why does e-government looks as it does? Looking beyond the explanatory emptiness of the e-government concept. Information Polity 2012, 17(3):329-342.
14. Bélanger F., Carter L. Trust and risk in e-government adoption. Journal of Strategic Information Systems 2008, 17(2):165-176.
15. Bolici F., Cantoni F., Sorrentino M., Virili F. Cooperating strategy in e-government. Electronic government, lecture notes in computer science 2003, 1069-1070. Springer.
16. Box R.C. Dialogue and administrative theory & praxis: Twenty-five years of public administration theory. Administrative Theory & Praxis 2005, 27(3):438-466.
17. Brans M. Theories of local government reorganization: An empirical evaluation. Public Administration 1992, 70(3):429-451.
18. Carter L., Weerakkody V. E-government adoption: A cultural comparison. Information Systems Frontiers 2008, 10(4):473-482.
19. Chadwick A., May C. Interaction between states and citizens in the age of the internet: "e-government" in the United States, Britain, and the European Union. Governance 2003, 16(2):271-300.
20. Ciborra C., Navarra D.D. Good governance, development theory, and aid policy: Risks and challenges of e-government in Jordan. Information Technology for Development 2005, 11(2):141-159.
21. Connolly R., Bannister F. The revenue online tax system in Ireland: The importance of trust, eGOV 2008, Turin. Trauner Schriftenreihe Informatik 2008, 213-220.
22. Coursey D., Norris D. Models of e-government: Are they correct? An empirical assessment. Public Administration Review 2008, 68(3):523-536.
23. de Brí F. An e-government stages of growth model based on research within the Irish revenue offices. Electronic Journal of e-Government 2009, 7(4):339-348.
24. Delcambre L., Giuliano G. Digital research in academia. Computer IEEE 2005, December, 33-39.
25. Deloitte Research At the dawn of e-government; The citizen as customer 2000, Deloitte and Touche.
26. Devadoss P.R., Pan S.L., Huang J.C. Structurational analysis of e-government initiatives: a case study of SCO. Decision support systems 2003, 34(3):253-269.
27. Donnellan B., Sheridan C., Curry E. A capability maturity framework for sustainable information and communication technology. IT Professional 2011, 13(1):33-40. (Available at: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=5708282&tag=1).
28. Doty D.H., Glick W.H. Typologies as a unique form of theory building: Towards improved understanding and modeling. Academy of Management Review 1994, 19(2):230-251.
29. Farbey B., Targett D., Land F. The great IT benefit hunt. European Management Journal 1994, 12(3):270-290.
30. Flak L.S., Sein M., Saebø Ø. Toward a cumulative tradition in e-government research: Going beyond the Gs and Cs. Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2007, 13-22. M. Wimmer, H. Scholl, A. Grönlund (Eds.).
31. Frederickson H.G., Smith K., Larimer C.W., Licari M.J. The public administration theory primer 2012, Westview Press, Philadelphia, PA. 2nd ed.
32. Giddens A. The constitution of society 1984, University of California Press, CA.
33. Golembiewski R.T. Shortfalls of public administration as empirical science. Public Administration Quarterly 1999, 3-17.
34. Gray A., Jenkins B. From public administration to public management: Reassessing a revolution. Public Administration 1995, Spring, 73:75-99.
35. Gregor S. The nature of theory in information systems. MIS Quarterly 2006, 30(3):611-642.
36. Grönlund A. State of the art in e-gov research - A survey electronic government. Electronic Government, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2004, 3183:178-185.
37. Grönlund A. Ten years of e-government: The 'end of history' and new beginning. Electronic Government, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2010, 6228:13-24.
38. Grönlund A., Andersson A. E-government research 2003-2006: Improvements and issues. Current issues and trends in e-government research 2006, 247-268. Idea Group, Hershey, PA. D. Norris (Ed.).
39. Guijarro L. 'Interoperability frameworks and enterprise architectures in e-government initiatives in Europe and the United States'. Government Information Quarterly 2007, 24(1):89-101.
40. Hall C.M., Jenkins J. Tourism and public policy. A companion to tourism 2004, 525-540.
41. Harmon M. Public administration's final exam: A pragmatist restructuring of the profession and the discipline 2006, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.
42. Heeks R., Bailur S. Analysing E-government research: Perspectives, philosophies, theories methods and practice. Government Information Quarterly 2007, 24(2):417-432.
43. Hiller J.D., Bélanger F. Privacy strategies for electronic government. E-government 2004 2001, 162-189. Rowman and Littlefieldaccenture, Lanham MD. M.A. Abramson, G.E. Mean (Eds.).
44. Homberg V., Bekkers V. E-government and NPM: A perfect marriage?. The information ecology of e-government 2005, 155-171. IOS Press, Amsterdam. V. Bekkers, V. Homburg (Eds.).
45. Hung S.-Y., Chang C.-M., Uy T.-J. Determinants of user acceptance of the e-government services: The case of online tax filing and payment system. Government Information Quarterly 2006, 23(1):97-122.
46. Hussein R., Shahriza N., Karim A., Selamat M.H. The impact of technological factors on information systems success in the electronic-government context. Business Process Management Journal 2007, 13(5):613-627.
47. Jain A. Using the lens of Max Weber's theory of bureaucracy to examine e-government research. Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii international conference on system sciences 2004, 1-10.
48. Janssen M., van Veenstra A.F. Stages of growth in e-government: An architectural approach. The Electronic Journal of e-Government 2005, 3(4):193-200.
49. Kanat I.E., Ozkan S. Exploring citizens' perception of government to citizen services: A model based on theory of planned behaviour (TBP). Transforming government: People, process and policy 2007, 3(4):406-419.
50. Kim D.Y., Grant G. E-government maturity models using the capability maturity model integration. Journal of Systems and Information Technology 2010, 12(3):230-244.
51. Klein D.M., Jurich J.A. Metatheory and family studies. Sourcebook of family theories and methods 1993, 31-67. Springer, USA. P. Boss, W.J. Doherty, R. LaRossa, W.R. Schumm, S.K. Steinmetz (Eds.).
52. Klievink B., Janssen M. Realizing joined-up government - Dynamic capabilities and stage models. Government Information Quarterly 2009, 26:275-284.
53. Kramer K., Dutton W., Northrop A. The management of information systems 1981, Columbia University Press, New York.
54. Lalor, S. (2000). The General Theory of Public Administration, or, Paradigm Regained, Unpublished.
55. Layne K., Lee J. Developing fully functional e-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly 2001, 18(2):122-136.
56. Lee J., Rao H.R. Perceived risks, counter-beliefs, and intentions to use anti-/counter-terrorism websites: an exploratory study of government-citizens online interactions in a turbulent environment. Decision Support Systems 2007, 43(4):1431-1449.
57. Lee J. 10year retrospect of stage models of e-government; A qualitative metasynthesis. Government Information Quarterly 2010, 27(3):220-230.
58. Lee J., Kim J. Grounded theory analysis of e-government initiatives: Exploring perceptions of government authorities. Government Information Quarterly 2007, 24(1):135-147.
59. Luna-Reyes L.F., Gil-Garcia J.R. Using institutional theory and dynamic simulation to understand complex e-government phenomena. Government Information Quarterly 2011, 28(3):329-345.
60. MacRoberts M.H., Mac Roberts B.R. Another test of the normative theory of citing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 1987, 38(4):305-306.
61. Mainzer L. Public administration in search of a theory: The interdisciplinary illusion. Administration and Society 1994, 26(3):359-394.
62. Margretts H. Public management change and e-government: The emergence of digital era governance. Routledge handbook of internet politics 2009, 114-128. Routledge, New York. A. Chadwick, P. Howard (Eds.).
63. Moon M.J. The evolution of e-government amongst municipalities: Rhetoric or reality?. Public Administration Review 2002, 62(4):424-433.
64. Mosse B., Whitley E. Critically classifying: UK e-government website benchmarking and the recasting of the citizen as customer. Information Systems Journal 2008, 19(2):149-173.
65. Netchaeva I. E-government and e-democracy. A comparison of opportunities in the north and south. International Communication Gazette 2002, 64(5):467-477.
66. Niehaves B., Ortbach K. Towards an agenda for e-government research and demographic change: A Delphi study approach. dg.o '10 Proceedings of the 11th annual international digital government research conference on public administration online: Challenges and opportunities 2010, 227-228.
67. Nolan R.L. Managing the computer resource: A stage hypothesis. Communications of the ACM 1973, 16(7):399-405.
68. Nolan Richard L. Managing the crises in data processing. Harvard Business Review 1979, 57(2):115-126.
69. Norris D., Lloyd B.A. The scholarly literature on e-government characterizing a nascent field. International Journal of Electronic Government Research 2006, 2(4):40-57.
70. Norris D., Moon M.J. Advancing e-government at the grassroots: Tortoise or hare?. Public Administration Review 2005, 65(1):64-75.
71. Pilalis J. 'The integration of theory and practice': A re-examination of a paradoxical expectation. British Journal of Social Work 1986, 16(1):79-96.
72. Popper K. The logic of scientific discovery 1959, Basic Books, New York.
73. Rao S.S., Metts G., Monge C. Electronic commerce development in small and medium sized enterprises: A stage model and its implications. Business Process Management 2003, 9(1):11-32.
74. Rocheleau B. Whither e-government?. Public Administration Review 2007, 67(3):584-588.
75. Rodríguez Bolívar M.P., Alcaide Muñoz L., López Hernández A.M. Trends of e-government research: Contextualization and research opportunities. The International Journal of Digital Accounting Research 2010, 10:6.
76. Rudner R.S. Philosophy of social science 1966, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs NJ.
77. Sahay S., Walsham G. Information technology in developing countries: A need for theory building. Information Technology for Development 1995, 6(3/4):111-124.
78. Schelin S.H. E-government: An overview 2003, IGI Publishing, Hershey PA.
79. Scholl H.J. Towards the e-society: Benefits and limits. IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2003, 74/2002:735-747.
80. Scholl H.J. Is e-government research a flash in the pan or here for the long shot?. Electronic government, lecture notes in computer science 2006, 4084:13-24. SpringerLink.
81. Scholl H.J. Five trends that matter: Challenges to 21st century electronic government. Information Polity 2012, 17(3):317-327.
82. Scholl H.J. Electronic government research: Topical directions and preferences. Electronic Government 2013, 1-13. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg.
83. Scott C.G. E-government in the Asia-Pacific region: Progress and challenges, Manila, Asian Development Bank 2001, (Available on-line at: http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/egovernment-asia-pacific.pdf).
84. SEI (Software Engineering Institute) Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPI) A, Version 1.3: Method definition document 2011, Carnegie Mellon, (Available at: http://repository.cmu.edu/sei/661/).
85. Seifert J.E. A primer on e-government: Sectors, stages opportunities and challenges of online governance. Congressional Research Series 2003, (Library of Congress Washington DC. Congressional Research Service, Washington DC).
86. Seng W.M., Jackson S., Philip G. Cultural issues in developing E-government in Malaysia. Behaviour and Information Technology 2010, 29(4):423-432.
87. Shields P.M. Pragmatism exploring public administration's policy imprint. Administration & Society 1996, 28(3):390-411.
88. Siau K., Long Y. Synthesising e-government stage models: A meta-synthesis based on meta ethnographic approach. Industry Management & Data Systems 2005, 150(4):443-458.
89. Simon H. Administrative behaviour: A study of decision making processing in administrative organisations 1954, McMillan, New York.
90. Sørgaard P. Co-ordination of E-government: Between politics and pragmatics. Networked Information Technology, IFIP 2004, 138:53-77.
91. Stanforth C. Using actor-network theory to analyze e-government implementation in developing countries. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Information Technologies and International Development 2006, 3(3):35-60.
92. Sutherland J.W. Systems: Analysis, administration, and architecture 1975, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
93. Taylor J., Williams H. Public administration and the information polity. Public Administration 1991, 69(2):171-190.
94. Titah R., Barki H. E-government adoption and acceptance: A literature review. International Journal of e-Government Research 2006, 2(3):23-57. (Available at: http://biblos.hec.ca/biblio/theses/2010NO12.PDF).
95. Titah R., Barki H. E-government adoption and acceptance: A literature review e-government research: Policy and management. Advances in electronic government research series 2008, Vol. 2:42-97. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA, (Available at: http://biblos.hec.ca/biblio/theses/2010NO12.PDF). D.F. Norris (Ed.).
96. Tresch R.W. Public finance: A normative theory 2002, Elsevier Academic Press, San Diego.
97. Valdés G., Solar M., Astudillo H., Iribarren M., Concha G., Visconti M. Conception, development and implementation of an e-government maturity model in public agencies. Government Information Quarterly 2011, 28:176-187.
98. van de Donk W.B.H.J., Snellen I.Th.M. Towards a theory of public administration in an information age. Public administration in and information age 1998, 3-19. IOS Press, Amsterdam. I. Snellen, W. van de Donk (Eds.).
99. Van Dijk J.A., Peters O., Ebbers W. Explaining the acceptance and use of government Internet services: A multivariate analysis of 2006 survey data in the Netherlands. Government Information Quarterly 2008, 25(3):379-399.
100. van Veenstra A.F. IT induced public sector transformation, 's-Hertogenbosch (NL) 2012, Uitveverij BOXpress.
101. Wacker J.G. A definition of theory: Research guidelines for different theory-building research methods in operations management. Journal of Operations Management 1998, 16:361-385.
102. Wacker J.G. Tragic conceptual flaws of theory-building empirical research, Decision Line, October 2008, (Available at http://www.decisionsciences.org/decisionline/Vol39/39_5/dsi-dl39_5pom.pdf Accessed 29th July 2012).
103. Walmsley G.L. Academic public administration flunks final exam. Public Administration Review 2011, 72(1):143-151.
104. Walsham G. Are we making a better world with ICTs? Reflections on a future agenda for the IS field. Journal of Information Technology 2012, 27(2):87-93.
105. Weber R. The information systems discipline: The need for and nature of a foundational core, pendidikansisteminformasi 2011, (Available at: http://pendidikansisteminformasi.wordpress.com/).
106. Wee T.C., Benbasat I., Cenfetelli R.T. Building citizen trust towards e-government services: Do high quality websites matter?. Proceedings of the 41st Hawaii international conference on system sciences 2008, 217-227.
107. Weick K.E. The social psychology of organizing 1979, MA, Addison-Wesley, Reading.
108. Weis D.L. The use of theory in sexuality research. Journal of Sex Research 1998, 35(1):1-9.
109. West D.M. E-government and the transformation of service delivery and citizen attitudes. Public Administration Review 2004, 64(1):15-27.
110. Yildiz M. Big questions of e-government research. Information Polity 2012, 17(3):343-355.
111. Yildiz M., Saylam A. E-government discourses: An inductive analysis. Government Information Quarterly 2013, 30(2):141-153.
112. Yildz M. E-government research: Reviewing the literature, limitations, and way forward. Government Information Quarterly 2007, 24:646-665.
113. Zuurmond A. From bureaucracy to infocracy: Are democratic institutions lagging behind. Public administration in an information age; A handbook 1998, 259-272. IOS Press, Amsterdam. I.T.M. Snellen, W. van de Donk (Eds.).