E-Government Implementation: Balancing Collaboration and Control in Stakeholder Management

As e-government becomes increasingly pervasive in modern public administrative management, its influence on organizations and individuals has become hard to ignore. It is therefore timely and relevant to examine e-governance—the fundamental mission of e-government. By adopting a stakeholder perspective and coming from the strategic orientation of control and collaboration management philosophy, this study approaches the topic of e-governance in e-government from the three critical aspects of stakeholder management: (1) identification of stakeholders, (2) recognition of differing interests among stakeholders, and (3) how an organization caters to and furthers these interests. Findings from the case study allow us to identify four important groups of stakeholders known as the Engineers, Dissidents, Seasoners, and Skeptics who possess vastly different characteristics and varying levels of acceptance of and commitment towards the e-filing paradigm. Accordingly, four corresponding management strategies with varying degrees of collaboration and control mechanisms are devised in the bid to align these stakeholder interests such that their participation in e-government can be leveraged by public organizations to achieve competitive advantage.

[1]  J S Elbaz,et al.  [The expert's opinion]. , 2000, Annales de chirurgie plastique et esthetique.

[2]  Gerry Stoker,et al.  Trends in Public Participation: Part 2 – Citizens' Perspectives , 2001 .

[3]  K. Eisenhardt Better Stories and Better Constructs: The Case for Rigor and Comparative Logic , 1991 .

[4]  M. Lynne Markus,et al.  Enterprise resource planning: multisite ERP implementations , 2000, CACM.

[5]  Fred D. Davis Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[6]  Ephraim R. McLean,et al.  Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable , 1992, Inf. Syst. Res..

[7]  M. Jae Moon,et al.  Municipal Reinvention: Managerial Values and Diffusion among Municipalities , 2001 .

[8]  Danny Samson,et al.  A Government Insurer Enters the Brave New World , 2008 .

[9]  Barry Bozeman,et al.  Risk Culture in Public and Private Organizations , 1998 .

[10]  G. Krogh Care in Knowledge Creation , 1998 .

[11]  Amrit Tiwana,et al.  Knowledge integration in virtual teams: The potential role of KMS , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[12]  M. J. Moon The Evolution of E-Government among Municipalities: Rhetoric or Reality? , 2002 .

[13]  Veronica Kisfalvi,et al.  The Threat of Failure, the Perils of Success and CEO Character: Sources of Strategic Persistence , 2000 .

[14]  Ronald K. Mitchell,et al.  Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of who and What Really Counts , 1997 .

[15]  M. J. Headd Voice Technologies in the Public Sector for E-Government Services , 2007 .

[16]  Marc Holzer,et al.  Public Administrators' Acceptance of the Practice of Digital Democracy: A Model Explaining the Utilization of Online Policy Forums in South Korea , 2006, Int. J. Electron. Gov. Res..

[17]  T. Webler,et al.  Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation , 2000 .

[18]  J. Boatright,et al.  Contractors as stakeholders: Reconciling stakeholder theory with the nexus-of-contracts firm , 2002 .

[19]  S. Haque,et al.  The Diminishing Publicness of Public Service under the Current Mode of Governance , 2001 .

[20]  Francesco Amoretti Electronic Constitution: Social, Cultural, and Political Implications , 2009 .

[21]  Geoff Walsham,et al.  Interpretive case studies in IS research: nature and method , 1995 .

[22]  M. Markus,et al.  Information technology and organizational change: causal structure in theory and research , 1988 .

[23]  Mehdi Khosrowpour,et al.  Cases on information technology and organizational politics & culture , 2006 .

[24]  Vicki R. Lane,et al.  A Stakeholder Approach to Organizational Identity , 2000 .

[25]  Philip Calvert,et al.  Encyclopedia of Digital Government , 2008 .

[26]  Michael L. Kent,et al.  Challenging Assumptions of International Public Relations: When Government Is the Most Important Public. , 1999 .

[27]  Gilles Paquet,et al.  E-Governance & government on-line in Canada: Partnerships, people & prospects , 2001, Gov. Inf. Q..

[28]  Stuart Bretschneider,et al.  Does the Perception of Red Tape Constrain IT Innovativeness in Organizations? Unexpected Results from a Simultaneous Equation Model and Implications , 2002 .

[29]  A. Ho Reinventing Local Governments and the E‐Government Initiative , 2002 .

[30]  C. Oliver SUSTAINABLE COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE: COMBINING INSTITUTIONAL AND RESOURCE- BASED VIEWS , 1997 .

[31]  Mary Lacity,et al.  Understanding Qualitative Data: A Framework of Text Analysis Methods , 1994, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[32]  James D. Westphal Collaboration in the Boardroom: Behavioral and Performance Consequences of CEO-Board Social Ties , 1999 .

[33]  Marianne W. Lewis,et al.  Control and Collaboration: Paradoxes of Governance , 2003 .

[34]  Luiz Antonio Joia A Heuristic Model to Implement Government-to-Government Projects , 2003, J. Electron. Commer. Organ..

[35]  K. Eisenhardt Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review , 1989 .

[36]  Chamu Sundaramurthy,et al.  Antitakeover Provisions and Shareholder Value Implications: A Review and a Contingency Framework , 2000 .

[37]  Charles A. Seavey Final thoughts on interesting times , 1996 .

[38]  Ari-Veikko Anttiroiko,et al.  Electronic Government: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools and Applications , 2008 .

[39]  Lex Donaldson,et al.  Boards and Company Performance ‐ Research Challenges the Conventional Wisdom , 1994 .

[40]  R. Gregory,et al.  Social Capital Theory and Administrative Reform: Maintaining Ethical Probity in Public Service , 1999 .

[41]  Jinjoo Lee,et al.  An exploratory contingency model of user participation and MIS use , 1986, Inf. Manag..

[42]  M. Hakikur Rahman Developing Successful Ict Strategies: Competitive Advantages in a Global Knowledge-driven Society , 2007 .

[43]  Gordon R. Foxall,et al.  External moderation of associations among stakeholder orientations and company performance , 1998 .

[44]  R. Peterson Integration Strategies and Tactics for Information Technology Governance , 2004 .

[45]  Bruno S. Frey,et al.  On the relationship between intrinsic and extrinsic work motivation 1 I am grateful for helpful comm , 1997 .

[46]  Niv Ahituv,et al.  A Systematic Approach Toward Assessing the Value of an Information System , 1980, MIS Q..

[47]  Shawn L. Berman,et al.  Does Stakeholder Orientation Matter? The Relationship Between Stakeholder Management Models and Firm Financial Performance , 1999 .

[48]  Ronald K. Mitchell,et al.  Who Matters to Ceos? An Investigation of Stakeholder Attributes and Salience, Corpate Performance, and Ceo Values , 1999 .

[49]  Jeff Frooman Stakeholder Influence Strategies , 1999 .

[50]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  CASE Tools as Organizational Change: Investigating Incremental and Radical Changes in Systems Development , 1993, MIS Q..

[51]  Lucy Siefert Wegner,et al.  USCInfo: a high volume, integrated online library resources automation project , 1997 .

[52]  Barry Bozeman,et al.  Decision Making in Public and Private Organizations: A Test of Alternative Concepts of "Publicness" , 1990 .

[53]  Daniel J. Brass,et al.  Efficacy-Performing Spirals: A Multilevel Perspective , 1995 .

[54]  J. H. Davis,et al.  TOWARD A STEWARDSHIP THEORY OF MANAGEMENT , 1997 .

[55]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  The Case Research Strategy in Studies of Information Systems , 1987, MIS Q..

[56]  Shan Ling Pan,et al.  Managing Stakeholder Interests in E-Government Implementation: Lessons Learned from a Singapore E-Government Project , 2005, Int. J. Electron. Gov. Res..

[57]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Bad for Practice: A Critique of the Transaction Cost Theory , 1996 .

[58]  Calvin Meng Lai Chan,et al.  Managing knowledge conflicts in an interorganizational project: A case study of the Infocomm Development Authority of Singapore , 2005, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[59]  A. Demb,et al.  The corporate board: confronting the paradoxes. , 1992, Long range planning.

[60]  Juri Stratford,et al.  Computerized and networked government information , 1997 .

[61]  Ikujiro Nonaka,et al.  The `ART' of knowledge:: Systems to capitalize on market knowledge , 1998 .

[62]  Robert W. Backoff,et al.  Comparing Public and Private Organizations , 1976 .

[63]  Edwin A. Locke,et al.  The Paradox of Success: An Archival and a Laboratory Study of Strategic Persistence Following Radical Environmental Change , 2000 .

[64]  Yining Chen,et al.  Electronic Government Implementation: A Comparison between Developed and Developing Countries , 2007, Int. J. Electron. Gov. Res..

[65]  M. Markus Electronic Mail as the Medium of Managerial Choice , 1994 .

[66]  Peter B. Seddon A Respecification and Extension of the DeLone and McLean Model of IS Success , 1997, Inf. Syst. Res..

[67]  Sammy W. Pearson,et al.  Development of a Tool for Measuring and Analyzing Computer User Satisfaction , 1983 .

[68]  L. Preston,et al.  The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications , 1995 .

[69]  M. C. Jensen,et al.  Harvard Business School; SSRN; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER); European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI); Harvard University - Accounting & Control Unit , 1976 .

[70]  Arvind Parkhe “Messy” Research, Methodological Predispositions, and Theory Development in International Joint Ventures , 1993 .

[71]  Hyun Joon Kim,et al.  Linking Local E-Government Development Stages to Collaboration Strategy , 2008, Int. J. Electron. Gov. Res..

[72]  Scott Hamilton,et al.  Evaluating Information Systems Effectiveness - Part I: Comparing Evaluation Approaches , 1981, MIS Q..

[73]  Geoffrey Sampson The myth of diminishing firms , 2003, CACM.

[74]  Matthias Finger,et al.  From e-government to e-governance , 2005 .