E-government theories and challenges: Findings from a plenary expert panel

ACM International Conference Proceeding Series

Volumn 27-30-May-2015, Issue , 2015, Pages 160-166

  Molnar, Andreea ^a   Janssen, Marijn ^b   Weerakkody, Vishanth ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PORTSMOUTH   (United Kingdom)

^b DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

^c BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Computer Science; E Government; Foundations; Policymaking; Public Administration; Social Science

Indexed keywords

CLIMATE CHANGE; COMPUTER SCIENCE; FOUNDATIONS; PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION; SOCIAL SCIENCES;

DIGITAL GOVERNMENT; E-GOVERNMENTS; EXPERT PANELS; FOSTER LEARNING; POLICY MAKING; SOCIOTECHNICAL; THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS;

GOVERNMENT DATA PROCESSING;

EID: 84957719217     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/2757401.2757419     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (31)

1. Bannister, F., and Connolly, R. (2015). The Great Theory Hunt: Does e-government Really Have a Problem?. . Government Information Quarterly, 32, 1, 1-11.
2. Bacharach, S. B. 1989. Organizational theories: Some criteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14, 4, 496-515.
3. Barzilai Nahon, K. 2009. Gatekeeping: A critical review. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 43, 1, 1-79.
4. Cofer, C. N., and Appley, M. H. 1964. Motivation: Theory and Research. Oxford, England John Wiley.
5. Crowston, K. 1997. A coordination theory approach to organizational process design, Organization Science, 8, 2, 157-175.
6. Deng, X., Chen, T., and Pan, D. 2008. Organizational coordination theory and its application in virtual enterprise. In Research and Practical Issues of Enterprise Information Systems II, 311-316. Springer US.
7. Dwivedi, Y. K. 2013. Through the eyes of the eGov scholarly community: Perceptions of the quality of journals publishing electronic government research. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 26, 3, 207-217.
8. Freeman, R. E. 2010. Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Cambridge University Press.
9. Giddens, A. 1984. The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Univ of California Press.
10. Grönlund, A. 2004. State of the art in e-Gov research-A survey. In Electronic Government, 178-185. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Chicago
11. Grönlund, A. 2010. Ten years of e-government: The end of history and new beginning. In Electronic Government, 13-24. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
12. Heeks, R., and Bailur, S. 2007. Analyzing e-government research: Perspectives, philosophies, theories, methods, and practice. Government Information Quarterly, 24, 2, 243-265.
13. Gallea, A., & Patalon, W. (1998). Contrarian Investing. New York Institute of Finance.
14. Guest, G., MacQueen, K. M., and Namey, E. E. 2011. Applied Thematic Analysis. Sage.
15. Gulati, R., Dialdin, D. A., and Wang, L. 2002. Organizational networks. The Blackwell Companion to Organizations, 281-303.
16. Gunnell, J. G. 2013. The reconstitution of political theory: David Easton, behavioralism, and the long road to system. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 49, 2, 190-210.
17. Janssen, M., and Weerakkody, V. 2012. Evaluating the multidisciplinary Characteristics of e-government: Finding the roots e-government. 13th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research (College Park, USA, June 407, 2012). D.GO12.
18. Lewin, K. 1943. Forces behind food habits and methods of change. Bulletin of the National Research Council, 108, 35-65.
19. Lindblom, C. E. 1959. The science of" muddling through". Public Administration Review, 19, 2, 79-88.
20. Malone, T. W., and Crowston, K. 1994. The interdisciplinary study of coordination. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 26, 1, 87-119.
21. Norris, D. F., and Lloyd, B. A. 2006. The scholarly literature on e-government: Characterizing a nascent field. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 2, 4, 40-56.
22. Rana, N. P., Williams, M. D., Dwivedi, Y. K., and Williams, J. 2011. Reflecting on e-government research: Toward a taxonomy of theories and theoretical constructs. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 7, 4, 64-88.
23. Rana, N. P., Williams, M. D., Dwivedi, Y. K., and Williams, J. 2012. Theories and theoretical models for examining the adoption of e-government services. e-Service Journal, 8, 2, 26-56.
24. Ritchie, J. and Spencer, L. 1994. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. Jane Ritchie and Liz Spencer in A. Bryman and R. G. Burgess [eds.] Analyzing qualitative data, 173-194.
25. Scholl, H.J. 2006. Is e-government research a flash in the pan or here for the long shot?, Electronic Government, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 4084, 13-24, SpringerLink.
26. Scholl, H. J. 2008. Discipline or interdisciplinary study domain? Challenges and Promises in Electronic Government Research. In Digital Government, 21-41. Springer US.
27. Scholl, H. J. 2013. Electronic government research: Topical directions and preferences. In Electronic Government, 1-13. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
28. Scholl, H. J. 2014. The EGOV research community: An update on where we stand. In Electronic Government, 1-16. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
29. Scholl, H. J. J., and Dwivedi, Y. K. 2014. Forums for electronic government scholars: Insights from a 2012/2013 study. Government Information Quarterly, 31, 2, 229-242.
30. Srivastava, A., and Thomson, S.B., 2009. Framework analysis: A qualitative methodology for applied policy research. J. Adm. Gov., 4 , 2, 72e79.
31. Trist, E., and Emery, F. 2005. Socio-Technical systems theory. Organizational Behavior 2: Essential Theories of Process and Structure, 169.