Interdisciplinary Application of Structuration Theory for E-Government: A Case Study of an IT-Enabled Budget Reform

e-Government projects might fail when neglecting their multidisciplinary, complex and unstructured reality. Interdisciplinary interaction of actors and integration of multiple structures during e-government adoption have made difficult for both practitioners in practice and scholars in theory. Different structuration theory (ST) models have contributed to understand this phenomenon. This article proposed an interdisciplinary structuration theory (IST) by integrating relevant structures based on a better understanding of the interacting disciplines of the e-government initiative. The IST has advantages over other models because it provides a detailed description of the case; integrates relevant structures and multiple actors' views; incorporates an alternative methodological bracketing of practices; and operationalizes the discursive consciousness. This study examines the model by using the case of an IT-enabled budget reform in Mexico as a contemporary case of e-government. An embedded case study design was employed using interviews of actors and analysis of official documents. Results show a broader set of interacting structures not just technology that were possible to identify and examine by considering other disciplines. Only a subset of formal practices prescribed for systems and policy was effectively adopted while new informal practices were enacted. Among all, practices of collaboration, knowledge and trust were the most critical practices in the case. Several outcomes of interaction were identified. From these findings, practical recommendations are advised in the modalities of communication, power, and sanction.

[1]  Klaus G. Lüder.  A CONTINGENCY MODEL OF GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING INNOVATIONS IN THE POLITICAL- ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENT , 2007 .

[2]  G. Cid.  Extending structuration theory: A study of an IT-enabled budget reform in Mexico , 2010 .

[3]  R. Yin.  Yin, Robert K., Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 2nd ed. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1994. , 1994 .

[4]  W. Seal,et al.  Modernity, Modernization and the Deinstitutionalization of Incremental Budgeting in Local Government , 2003 .

[5]  Hee-Woong Kim,et al.  Structural Analysis of e-Government in India , 2010 .

[6]  Richard T. Watson,et al.  Information systems leadership , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

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

[8]  J. Melkers,et al.  Budgeters' Views of State Performance-Budgeting Systems: Distinctions across Branches , 2001 .

[9]  Jing Zhang,et al.  Knowledge sharing in cross-boundary information system development in the public sector , 2006, Inf. Technol. Manag..

[10]  Geoff Walsham,et al.  Information systems strategy formation and implementation: The case of a central government agency , 1993 .

[11]  A. Giddens.  The Constitution of Society , 1985 .

[12]  Robert W. Scapens,et al.  STRUCTURATION THEORY IN MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING. , 1990 .

[13]  J. Ramon Gil-Garcia,et al.  Building Response Capacity through Cross-boundary Information Sharing: , 2006 .

[14]  Isabelle Bouty.  Interpersonal and Interaction Influences on Informal Resource Exchanges Between R&D Researchers Across Organizational Boundaries , 2000 .

[15]  G. Garson,et al.  The promise of digital government , 2004 .

[16]  W. Orlikowski.  The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations , 2014 .

[17]  Robert W. Scapens,et al.  Structure and agency in management accounting research: a response to Boland's interpretive act , 1996 .

[18]  Jon Gant,et al.  Digital government and geographic information systems , 2004 .

[19]  G. Grizzle,et al.  Implementing Performance‐Based Program Budgeting: A System‐Dynamics Perspective , 2002 .

[20]  Theresa A. Pardo,et al.  Informal Leadership and Networks: Lessons from the Response to the West Nile Virus Outbreak , 2007 .

[21]  Wouter van Reeth.  The bearable lightness of budgeting: an explorative research on the uneven implementation of performance oriented budget reform , 2002 .

[22]  A. Giddens.  Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure and Contradiction in Social Analysis , 1979 .

[23]  Eric K. Clemons,et al.  The Impact of Information Technology on the Organization of Economic Activity: The "Move to the Middle" Hypothesis , 1993, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

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

[25]  Theresa A. Pardo,et al.  E-government success factors: Mapping practical tools to theoretical foundations , 2005, Gov. Inf. Q..

[26]  P. Julnes,et al.  Promoting the Utilization of Performance Measures in Public Organizations: An Empirical Study of Factors Affecting Adoption and Implementation , 2001 .

[27]  P. Burger.  Embedded Case Study Methods: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Knowledge , 2001 .

[28]  Gohar Feroz Khan,et al.  E-government Skills Identification and Development: Toward a Staged-Based User-Centric Approach for Developing Countries , 2010 .

[29]  Anthony M. Cresswell,et al.  Modeling the social & technical processes of interorganizational information integration , 2004, 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004. Proceedings of the.

[30]  P. Ingraham.  In Pursuit of Performance: Management Systems in State and Local Government , 2007 .

[31]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory , 1994 .

[32]  M. Laclavik,et al.  Expanding the Knowledge Economy : Issues , Applications , Case Studies , 2007 .

[33]  José Ramón Gil-García,et al.  Exploring the Feasibility of a Digital Government Journal , 2004, DG.O.

[34]  José Ramón Gil-García,et al.  Enacting State Websites: A Mixed Method Study Exploring E-Government Success in Multi-Organizational Settings , 2006, Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'06).

[35]  A. Weale.  Embedded Case Study Methods: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Knowledge , 2003 .

[36]  A. Kellerman,et al.  The Constitution of Society : Outline of the Theory of Structuration , 2015 .

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

[38]  Sharon S. Dawes,et al.  1 New models of collaboration for delivering government services : A dynamic model drawn from multi-national research , 2004 .

[39]  Matthew R. Jones,et al.  Giddens's Structuration Theory and Information Systems Research , 2008, MIS Q..

[40]  S. Dawes,et al.  Authority and Leadership Patterns in Public Sector Knowledge Networks , 2007 .

[41]  Marijn Janssen,et al.  Towards an Understanding of E-Government Induced Change - Drawing on Organization and Structuration Theories , 2010, EGOV.

[42]  Sharon S. Dawes,et al.  Understanding new models of collaboration for delivering government services , 2004, CACM.

[43]  E. Shils.  The Constitution Of Society , 1982 .

[44]  Carol Stoak Saunders,et al.  Data exchange in interorganizational relationships: review through multiple conceptual lenses , 2005, DATB.

[45]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying Technology in Organizations , 2000, Theory in CSCW.