Understanding e-Government project trajectories from an actor-network perspective

A number of models have been offered to help explain the trajectories of e-Government projects: their frequent failures and their rarer successes. Most, though, lack a sense of the political interaction of stakeholders that is fundamental to understanding the public sector. This paper draws on actor-network theory to provide a perspective that is used to explain the trajectory of an e-Government case study. This perspective is found to provide a valuable insight into the local and global actor-networks that surround e-Government projects. The mobilisation, interaction and disintegration of these networks underpins the course of such projects, and can itself be understood in relation to network actor power: not through a static conception of ‘power over’ others but through the dynamic-enacted concept of ‘power to’. As well as providing a research tool for analysis of e-Government project trajectories, the local/global networks approach also offers insights into e-Government leadership as a process of network formation and maintenance; and into the tensions between network stabilisation and design stabilisation.

[1]  Richard Heeks,et al.  e-Government as a Carrier of Context , 2005, Journal of Public Policy.

[2]  Paul Beynon-Davies,et al.  Personal identity management in the information polity: The case of the UK national identity card , 2006, Inf. Polity.

[3]  Richard Heeks,et al.  Implementing And Managing Egovernment , 2005 .

[4]  Richard Heeks,et al.  Analyzing e-government research: Perspectives, philosophies, theories, methods, and practice , 2007, Gov. Inf. Q..

[5]  Bruno Latour,et al.  The Powers of Association , 1984 .

[6]  Alon Peled,et al.  The politics of outsourcing: bureaucrats, vendors, and public information technology (IT) projects , 2000 .

[7]  Agneta Ranerup,et al.  Consumerism revisited: The emergent roles of new electronic intermediaries between citizens and the public sector , 2003, Inf. Polity.

[8]  Agnieszka Pawlowska Failures in large systems projects in Poland: Mission [im]possible? , 2004, Inf. Polity.

[9]  Frances M. Hill,et al.  E‐government: the realities of using IT to transform the public sector , 2003 .

[10]  G. Walsham Actor-network theory and IS research: current status and future prospects , 1997 .

[11]  Anna Sidorova,et al.  Understanding Business Process Change Failure: An Actor-Network Perspective , 2006, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[12]  M. Callon Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St Brieuc Bay , 1984 .

[13]  R. S. Meyers Managing With Power: Politics and Influence in Organizations , 1992 .

[14]  Henk Akkermans,et al.  Vicious and virtuous cycles in ERP implementation: a case study of interrelations between critical success factors , 2002, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[15]  Sundeep Sahay,et al.  Implementing property tax reforms in Bangalore: an actor-network perspective , 2004, Inf. Organ..

[16]  Ramiro Montealegre,et al.  Trojan actor-networks and swift translation: Bringing actor-network theory to IT project escalation studies , 2004, Inf. Technol. People.

[17]  Ole Hanseth,et al.  Reflexive Standardization: Side Effects and Complexity in Standard Making , 2006, MIS Q..

[18]  Stefan Soeparman,et al.  Coping with the dilemma of common pool information resourcing: Integrating information domains in the Dutch Police , 2004, Inf. Polity.

[19]  Neil C. Ramiller,et al.  Applying the Social of Translation to a System Project in a Lagging Enterprise , 2005 .

[20]  J. Law After Ant: Complexity, Naming and Topology , 1999 .

[21]  Paul Beynon-Davies,et al.  Constructing electronic government: the case of the UK inland revenue , 2005, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[22]  Hugh Preston,et al.  Information Systems and Global Diversity , 2002, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[23]  Christopher J. Atkinson,et al.  The ‘Soft Information Systems and Technologies Methodology’ (SISTeM): an actor network contingency approach to integrated development , 2000, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[24]  D Pels WE HAVE NEVER BEEN MODERN - LATOUR,B , 1995 .

[25]  Richard Heeks e-Government as a Carrier of Context , 2005, Journal of Public Policy.

[26]  M. Callon Actor-Network Theory—The Market Test , 1999 .

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

[28]  Susan Gasson,et al.  A genealogical study of boundary-spanning IS design , 2006, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[29]  Chris Bateman,et al.  Rendering unto Caesar? , 2004, South African medical journal = Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir geneeskunde.

[30]  K. Mcgrath,et al.  The Golden Circle: a way of arguing and acting about technology in the London Ambulance Service , 2002, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[31]  Robert M. Davison,et al.  Implementing and managing eGovernment , 2007, Electron. J. Inf. Syst. Dev. Ctries..