Applying the technology acceptance model to a Spanish City Hall

Abstract This paper examines the relative importance and significance of the four technology enablers introduced by Davis (1989) in the technology acceptance model (TAM) (perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, attitude towards using and behavioural intention) for use on four different levels of citizen engagement in e-government (null, publish, interact and transact). An extended technology acceptance model (TAM) is developed to test citizen engagement towards online e-government services from a sample of 307 citizens who used the benefits advisor tool within a Spanish City Hall. Although the proposed model follows TAM and explains the intention towards the actual use of e-government by postulating four direct determinants, “A, PU, PEOU and BI” have been considered as parallel processes, meaning that each can have separate influence in different levels of citizen engagement. To achieve this goal, a multinomial logistic regression is developed and tested to confirm the explanatory power of the four technology enablers on the four different levels of e-government. Our findings further suggest that in order to implement e-government, some of the enablers matter more than others to move from one level of citizen engagement to another. The main contribution of the paper is to question the use of existing models which seek to represent the relationship between technology enablers and the adoption of e-government services without considering their impacts on citizens’ engagement. The implications of the findings are discussed and useful insights are provided in relation to policy recommendations geared to create appropriate conditions to build citizens’ engagement intent of use of e-government services.

[1]  Paul T. Jaeger,et al.  Public Libraries and the Internet: Roles, Perspectives, and Implications , 2010 .

[2]  Thurasamy Ramayah,et al.  Internet shopping acceptance , 2008 .

[3]  Robert D. Putnam,et al.  Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community , 2000, CSCW '00.

[4]  Richard Heeks,et al.  Implementing And Managing Egovernment: An International Text , 2005 .

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

[6]  Michael Grimsley,et al.  e-Government information systems: Evaluation-led design for public value and client trust , 2007, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[7]  Vicente Pina,et al.  E-government developments on delivering public services among EU cities , 2005, Gov. Inf. Q..

[8]  Peter M. Bentler,et al.  Scaling Corrections for Statistics in Covariance Structure Analysis , 1988 .

[9]  Rachel Gibson,et al.  Parties and the Internet:an overview , 2003 .

[10]  Juan José Tarí,et al.  E-government maturity at Spanish local levels , 2008 .

[11]  Donald F. Norris,et al.  Does managerial orientation matter? The adoption of reinventing government and e‐government at the municipal level * , 2005, Inf. Syst. J..

[12]  R. Hays,et al.  Community Activists’ Perceptions of Citizenship Roles in an Urban Community: A Case Study of Attitudes That Affect Community Engagement , 2007 .

[13]  Vincent S. Lai,et al.  An Empirical Investigation of the Determinants of User Acceptance of Internet Banking , 2003, J. Organ. Comput. Electron. Commer..

[14]  Yannis Caloghirou,et al.  Internal capabilities and external knowledge sources: complements or substitutes for innovative performance? , 2004 .

[15]  J. Córdoba-Pachón,et al.  Three patterns to understand e‐government: the case of Colombia , 2009 .

[16]  Thurasamy Ramayah,et al.  Modelling Customer's Attitude Towards E-Government Services , 2011 .

[17]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Predicting Different Conceptualizations of System Use: The Competing Roles of Behavioral Intention, Facilitating Conditions, and Behavioral Expectation , 2008, MIS Q..

[18]  Yi-Shun Wang,et al.  The adoption of electronic tax filing systems: an empirical study , 2003, Gov. Inf. Q..

[19]  T. Andreassen,et al.  Electronic healthcare: a study of people's readiness and attitude toward performing self‐diagnosis , 2007 .

[20]  J. Ignacio Criado,et al.  E‐government in practice , 2003 .

[21]  M. Conner,et al.  The Theory of Planned Behaviour , 2004 .

[22]  Yudi Fernando,et al.  Factors influencing intention to use e-government services among citizens in Malaysia , 2009, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[23]  C. Fornell,et al.  Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. , 1981 .

[24]  D. Hosmer,et al.  Applied Logistic Regression , 1991 .

[25]  France Bélanger,et al.  Digitizing Government Interactions with Constituents: An Historical Review of E-Government Research in Information Systems , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[26]  Patrick Dunleavy,et al.  Digital Era Governance: IT Corporations, the State, and e-Government , 2007 .

[27]  William R. Darden,et al.  Causal Models in Marketing , 1980 .

[28]  William R. King,et al.  A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model , 2006, Inf. Manag..

[29]  Joon Hyoung Lim,et al.  EMPOWERING CITIZENS’ VOICES IN THE ERA OF E-GOVERNMENT: IMPLICATIONS FROM SOUTH KOREAN CASES , 2010 .

[30]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Designing E-Government Services: Key Service Attributes and Citizens’ Preference Structures , 2012 .

[31]  J. Hair.  Multivariate data analysis , 1972 .

[32]  Jungwoo Lee,et al.  Developing fully functional E-government: A four stage model , 2001, Gov. Inf. Q..

[33]  Tron Foss,et al.  The Performance of ML, GLS, and WLS Estimation in Structural Equation Modeling Under Conditions of Misspecification and Nonnormality , 2000 .

[34]  Peter M. Bentler,et al.  Practical Issues in Structural Modeling , 1987 .

[35]  Albert L. Lederer,et al.  The technology acceptance model and the World Wide Web , 2000, Decis. Support Syst..

[36]  Fethi Calisir,et al.  Predicting the behavioral intention to use enterprise resource planning systems , 2009 .

[37]  D. West.  E‐Government and the Transformation of Service Delivery and Citizen Attitudes , 2004 .

[38]  M. J. Moon,et al.  Linking Citizen Satisfaction with E-Government and Trust in Government , 2004 .

[39]  Henri Barki,et al.  Explaining the Role of User Participation in Information System Use , 1994 .

[40]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Quo vadis TAM? , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[41]  Gilbert A. Churchill.  A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs , 1979 .

[42]  Fay Durrant.  e-Government and the Internet in the Caribbean: An Initial Assessment , 2002, EGOV.

[43]  M. Jennings,et al.  Internet Use and Civic Engagement: A Longitudinal Analysis , 2003 .

[44]  Peter Nijkamp,et al.  City, ICT and Policy , 2004 .

[45]  R. Bagozzi,et al.  On the evaluation of structural equation models , 1988 .

[46]  Khaled A. Alshare,et al.  A path analytic model and measurement of the business value of e-government: An international perspective , 2008, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[47]  J. Scott Armstrong,et al.  Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. , 1977 .

[48]  Cheng-Kiang Farn,et al.  Acceptance of electronic tax filing: A study of taxpayer intentions , 2006, Inf. Manag..

[49]  E. Carmines,et al.  Analyzing models with unobserved variables: analysis of covariance structures , 1981 .

[50]  John Ingham,et al.  Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model , 2003, Inf. Manag..

[51]  J. Fountain.  Building the Virtual State: Information Technology and Institutional Change , 2001 .

[52]  D. Gilbert,et al.  Barriers and benefits in the adoption of e‐government , 2004 .

[53]  W. Bennett.  Civic Life Online : Learning How Digital Media Can Engage Youth , 2007 .

[54]  Juan L. Gandía,et al.  Determinants of web site information by Spanish city councils , 2008, Online Inf. Rev..

[55]  Fabian Hungerland,et al.  The Digital Economy , 2021, Introduction to Digital Economics.

[56]  Paul Henman.  Governing Electronically: E-Government and the Reconfiguration of Public Administration, Policy and Power , 2010 .

[57]  C. Ciborra,et al.  Good governance, development theory, and aid policy: Risks and challenges of e-government in Jordan , 2005 .

[58]  N. Kang,et al.  Book Review: Corporate Governance and Development: Reform, Financial Systems, and Legal Frameworks (eds.) T.G. Arun and J. Turner , 2009 .

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

[60]  France Bélanger,et al.  The utilization of e‐government services: citizen trust, innovation and acceptance factors * , 2005, Inf. Syst. J..

[61]  Douglas Holmes,et al.  eGov: E-Business Strategies for Government , 2001 .

[62]  Dohoon Kim,et al.  Key functional characteristics in designing and operating health information websites for user satisfaction: An application of the extended technology acceptance model , 2007, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[63]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Trust and TAM in Online Shopping: An Integrated Model , 2003, MIS Q..

[64]  I. Ajzen.  The theory of planned behavior , 1991 .