Impact of IT in the Public Sector Workplace

Digitalization of government and public sector has been not only a fad but a norm for decades. This paper extends the virtual state model developed by Jane Fountain by explicating the detail of impact using the frame developed and presented by Andersen and Danziger. This extended framework includes the outcome classifications in four areas of impacts - capabilities, interaction, orientation, and value/health, in addition to the original conception of organizational forms and institutionalization. Using this extended framework of virtual state institutionalization model, supporting cases are presented exemplifying the applicability of this framework for policy analysis. Stakeholder interviews have been conducted in South Korea and Denmark. Content of interviews along with publically available information and documents collected are analyzed and presented supporting the viability of the framework. In-depth analysis reveals different paths in institutionalizing IT indicating the importance of institutionalization. Despite high degree of overlap in impacts in two cases, some unique characteristic are identified. Also, our qualitative study also reveal two very different feedback processes from organizational form and institutional arrangements leading to shaping of the transformation of government and governance in general with further development of IT. Practical utility of this extended framework with outcome framing are discussed in detail with implications for policy making and execution.

[1]  Abbas Keramati,et al.  Assessing the impact of readiness factors on e-government outcomes , 2018 .

[2]  L. Bartlett,et al.  Comparative Case Studies: An Innovative Approach , 2017 .

[3]  B. Flyvbjerg Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research , 2006, 1304.1186.

[4]  Jane E. Fountain Prospects for the Virtual State , 2004 .

[5]  James N. Danziger,et al.  information technology and the political world: the impacts of it on capabilities, interactions, orientations and values , 1995 .

[6]  K. Eisenhardt Building theories from case study research , 1989, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[7]  Helle Zinner Henriksen,et al.  An analysis of business models in Public Service Platforms , 2016, Gov. Inf. Q..

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

[9]  Carsten Greve,et al.  Ideas in Public Management Reform for the 2010s. Digitalization, Value Creation and Involvement , 2015 .

[10]  Jungwoo Lee,et al.  10 year retrospect on stage models of e-Government: A qualitative meta-synthesis , 2010, Gov. Inf. Q..

[11]  Helle Zinner Henriksen,et al.  E-government maturity models: Extension of the Layne and Lee model , 2006, Gov. Inf. Q..

[12]  A. Manoharan,et al.  Stages and Determinants of E-Government Development: A Twelve-Year Longitudinal Study of Global Cities , 2018, International Public Management Journal.

[13]  Tom Christensen,et al.  Reforming the Norwegian police between structure and culture: Community police or emergency police , 2018 .

[14]  Helle Zinner Henriksen,et al.  Opportunities and challenges of digitized discretionary practices: a public service worker perspective , 2018, Gov. Inf. Q..