How to fully exploit the results of e-government user surveys
The case of Slovenia
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9960950 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Mateja Kunstelj (Faculty of Administration, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia, corresponding author), Tina Jukić (0000-0003-3544-5491, Faculty of Administration, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia), Mirko Vintar (Faculty of Administration, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia) |
| Year | 2009 |
| Volume | 75 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 117-149 |
| Publication date | 2009-03-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Review of Administrative Sciences (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0020-8523 • E-ISSN: 1461-7226 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/0020852308099509 |
| OpenAlex | W2129503424 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 37 |
The article presents users' views on the development of e-government, addressing two interrelated questions that have not been sufficiently answered thus far: (1) How to increase the current low level of e-government use, and (2) How to advance the current practice of analyzing data from e-government satisfaction surveys in order to arrive at guidelines for decision-makers when shaping future actions of e-government development. For this purpose, a cause-and-effect model was developed and operationalized by a set of indicators observed by a citizen satisfaction survey carried out in Slovenia between 2005 and 2006. The model was then estimated using the PLS (Partial Least Squares) regression method. Finally, an improvement-priority matrix was applied to prioritize significant factors. The proposed manner of analyzing data from user surveys offers a universal tool for analyzing drivers and consequences of user satisfaction and the use of e-government, and prioritizing them in order to assist decision-makers in preparing future strategies, action plans, or guidelines for further developments. Points for practitioners 1. Methodological implications: • guidelines on how to conduct e-government user satisfaction surveys; • guidelines on how to analyze user survey data in order to formulate guidelines for future development of e-government. 2. Empirical implications: • results of e-government user satisfaction survey in Slovenia and other countries; • guidelines for future development of e-government services in Slovenia and beyond
Business · Computer security · E-Government · Exploit · Government (linguistics · Information and Communications Technology · Knowledge management · Management science · Operationalization · Order (exchange · Political science · Process management · Public relations · Set (abstract data type · Statistics · Survey data collection · World Wide Web · Computer Science · E-Government and Public Services · Engineering · ICT Impact and Policies · Mathematics · Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
Explaining non-adoption of electronic government services by citizens
Derived importance-performance analysis and diagonal model in a Spanish municipality
An analysis of foreign residents’ perceptions and behaviors regarding digital government portal services in the Republic of South Korea
Does better e-readiness induce more use of e-government? Evidence from the Korean central e-government
Whence Consumer Loyalty?
The asymmetric relationship between attribute-level performance and overall customer satisfaction
An empirical analysis of the antecedents of electronic commerce service continuance
Importance-Performance Analysis
PLS path modeling
Measuring Service Quality
Service Quality Delivery through Web Sites
Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context
A Practical Guide To Factorial Validity Using PLS-Graph
Understanding Information Systems Continuance
User Acceptance of Information Technology
The adoption of electronic tax filing systems
The evolution and future of national customer satisfaction index models
Drivers and Consequences of Citizen Satisfaction
Accessing e-government
Evaluating the progress of e-government development
River Magic
| Unique citing works | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,31 |
| Citation span | 2013 - 2022 (10) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 4 |