IRMA-International.org: Creator of Knowledge
Information Resources Management Association
Advancing the Concepts & Practices of Information Resources Management in Modern Organizations

Systems Thinking to Improve E-Government Evaluation

Systems Thinking to Improve E-Government Evaluation
View Sample PDF
Author(s): José-Rodrigo Córdoba-Pachón (Royal Holloway, University of London, UK)
Copyright: 2017
Pages: 17
Source title: Decision Management: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications
Source Author(s)/Editor(s): Information Resources Management Association (USA)
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-1837-2.ch034

Purchase

View Systems Thinking to Improve E-Government Evaluation on the publisher's website for pricing and purchasing information.

Abstract

Worldwide there is increasing interest in both academic and government sectors to evaluate the different impacts of electronic government (e-government) systems. A number of predictive, cause-effect, linearly and functionally oriented models of evaluation have been proposed and applied. The focus of these models is to identify and quantify costs and benefits derived from successful e-government systems implementation and adoption. However the inclusion of different stakeholders in e-government evaluation remains marginal and limited to input information for the above models. This paper criticises existing evaluation models in two particular aspects: 1) the uncritical identification and quantification of different evaluation elements (aspects, costs, benefits or impacts, people to be involved in evaluation); and 2) the lack of reflection in relation to how evaluation information is used in managerial decision making. Criticisms regarding these aspects are drawn with the help of systems thinking, a body of knowledge which includes theories, ideas and methodologies for complex problem solving and whose use could enable critical surface and review of evaluation stakeholders' concerns about e-government. Strategies to make e-government evaluation practice more inclusive and critical in relation to stakeholders' concerns in their evaluation context are proposed and discussed.

Related Content

Okure Udo Obot, Kingsley Friday Attai, Gregory O. Onwodi. © 2023. 28 pages.
Thomas M. Connolly, Mario Soflano, Petros Papadopoulos. © 2023. 29 pages.
Dmytro Dosyn. © 2023. 26 pages.
Jan Kalina. © 2023. 21 pages.
Avishek Choudhury, Mostaan Lotfalian Saremi, Estfania Urena. © 2023. 20 pages.
Yuanying Qu, Xingheng Wang, Limin Yu, Xu Zhu, Wenwu Wang, Zhi Wang. © 2023. 26 pages.
Yousra Kherabi, Damien Ming, Timothy Miles Rawson, Nathan Peiffer-Smadja. © 2023. 10 pages.
Body Bottom