Local e-government Benchlearning
Impact analysis and applicability to smart cities benchmarking
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6149080 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Joan Batlle-Montserrat (corresponding author), Josep Blat (0000-0002-5308-475X, Universitat Pompeu Fabra), Ernest Abadal (0000-0002-9151-6437, Universitat de Barcelona) |
| Year | 2016 |
| Volume | 21 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 43-59 |
| Publication date | 2016-02-15 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Information Polity (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1875-8754 • E-ISSN: 1570-1255 |
| Publisher | IOS Press (PUBLISHER • NL) |
| DOI | 10.3233/ip-150366 |
| OpenAlex | W2293463803 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 20 |
We claim that local e-services benchmarking studies summarized in indexes do little to enhance city managers' and academics' understanding of actual e-government performance, or to improve the e-services offered by cities. We undertook a different benchmarking approach, focused on learning best pra ctices among cities, in late 2008 and early 2009. A benchlearning methodology (BLM) was developed, and a pilot study with 15 European cities was carried out. In this paper, we present the actual impact of the benchmarking study with respect to improvements in services, as the effectiveness of e-government benchmarking has rarely been evaluated. We discuss and analyse the results of a survey carried out in the same 15 cities four years after the pilot study. This paper presents evidence that BLM helped cities to identify good practices that they could learn from, and that some e-services were subsequently improved. The survey reveals that some changes are needed in the benchmarking methodology. The main one is the updating of the BLM bottom-up e-services catalogue, which is deeply discussed within the changing context of Smart Cities, especially the enlargement of the ecosystem of e-services to include citizens, the third sector, entrepreneurs, companies and other actors. A second one is the measurement of the adoption of e-services by citizens, also rarely assessed
Benchmarking · Best practice · Business · Context (archaeology · E-Government · Economics · Geography · Government (linguistics · Information and Communications Technology · Local government · Management · Political science · Smart city · World Wide Web · Computer Science · E-Government and Public Services · Public Administration · Public Policy and Administration Research · Smart Cities and Technologies · Marketing
Governance Matters VIII
Understanding Smart Cities
Interaction design gone wild
Smart Cities in Europe
Benchmarking Del e-Gobierno Local
E-Government Adoption Model (GAM)
Gauging e-government
The e-Government evaluation challenge
Developing fully functional E-government
Year retrospect on stage models of e-Government
The Contextual Benchmark Method
Are determining factors of municipal E-government common to a worldwide municipal view? An intra-country comparison
Benchmarking e-Government
International Review of Administrative Sciences
Information Systems and Developing Countries
The curse of the benchmark
A Proper Mentality for Benchmarking
Evaluating the progress of e-government development
Will the real smart city please stand up
| Unique citing works | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,2 |
| Citation span | 2016 - 2020 (5) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |