Quality and impact monitoring for local eGovernment services

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to introduce a layered, comprehensive model of quality of service (QoS) for local eGovernment, and discuss its feasibility on a regional eGovernment case study. The eGovernment online services are becoming a key infrastructure for advanced countries. They allow significant efficiency gains in different sectors of society, offering benefits for individual citizens and for the community as a whole. The deployment of online services alone is not sufficient in order to qualify an eGovernment strategy. The intrinsic and perceived quality of services offered, as well as the actual impact of new functionalities, should be properly measured and taken into account.Design/methodology/approach – This paper presents an applied research study for a quality‐focused evolution of a service‐oriented architecture for local eGovernment portals. This investigation was based on three main layers: the perceived quality and effective impact of services (G2C layer), the effectiveness of the...

[1]  Agostino Cortesi,et al.  Advanced Quality Tools for eGovernment Services , 2009 .

[2]  Gorka Benguria,et al.  Business Process Definition Languages Versus Traditional Methods Towards Interoperability , 2005, ICCBSS.

[3]  A. Parasuraman,et al.  A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future Research , 1985 .

[4]  Gregoris Mentzas,et al.  A Review of Quality Dimensions in e-Government Services , 2006, EGOV.

[5]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Integration of heterogeneous BPM Schemas: The Case of XPDL and BPEL , 2006, CAiSE Forum.

[6]  Hans Wiklund,et al.  A Habermasian analysis of the deliberative democratic potential of ICT-enabled services in Swedish municipalities , 2005, New Media Soc..

[7]  Luis E. Anido-Rifón,et al.  A Proposal for a Semantic-Driven eGovernment Service Architecture , 2005, EGOV.

[8]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Inheritance of Business Processes: A Journey Visiting Four Notorious Problems , 2003, Petri Net Technology for Communication-Based Systems.

[9]  Michael Schrenk,et al.  Webbots, Spiders, and Screen Scrapers: A Guide to Developing Internet Agents with PHP/CURL , 2007 .

[10]  Helmut Drüke.  Local electronic government : a comparative study , 2005 .

[11]  M. Bochicchio,et al.  Smarter, Faster, Better e-Government , 2012 .

[12]  Francesco Venturini,et al.  The long-run impact of ICT , 2009 .

[13]  Y. Lacasse,et al.  From the authors , 2005, European Respiratory Journal.

[14]  David Osimo.  Web 2.0 in Government: Why and How? , 2008 .

[15]  Björn Niehaves,et al.  Democratizing Process Innovation? On Citizen Involvement in Public Sector BPM , 2009, EGOV.

[16]  Maddalena Sorrentino,et al.  Does the Answer to eGovernment Lie in Intermunicipal Collaboration? An Exploratory Italian Case Study , 2008, EGOV.

[17]  B. Anderson,et al.  The impact of local ICT initiatives on social capital and quality of life , 2006 .

[18]  Agostino Cortesi,et al.  An Ontology-based Inquiry Framework , 2008, SWAP.

[19]  Roberta Rabellotti,et al.  ICTs in Industrial Districts: An Empirical Analysis on Adoption, Use and Impact in the Biella Textile District , 2004 .

[20]  Jan Mendling,et al.  A Discourse on Complexity of Process Models , 2006, Business Process Management Workshops.

[21]  Tarantola Stefano,et al.  European Innovation Scoreboard 2006 - Comparative Analysis of Innovation Performance , 2007 .

[22]  Vassilios Peristeras,et al.  Model-driven eGovernment interoperability: A review of the state of the art , 2009, Comput. Stand. Interfaces.

[23]  V.A. Danciu.  Formalisms for IT Management Process Representation , 2006, 2006 IEEE/IFIP Business Driven IT Management.

[24]  G. Grisetti,et al.  Further Reading , 1984, IEEE Spectrum.

[25]  Agostino Cortesi,et al.  Three-layered QoS for eGovernment web services , 2010, DG.O.