The Eloquence of Line that the Dutch Symbolists learned from Egypt
Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
-
Upload
putu-indra-dewi -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
0
Transcript of Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
1/22
1
Book Chapter Accepted
To Appear in
Managing E-Government Projects: Concepts, Issues and Best Practices
Editor(s):
Stephen K. Aikins
Publisher:IGI Global
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
2/22
2
Success and Failure of Local E
Government Projects: Lessons Learned
from Egypt
Hisham Abdelsalam
Associate Professor and Director, Decision Support and Future Studies Center, Faculty of
Computers and Information, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.
Christopher G. ReddickAssociate Professor, Department of Public Administration, University of Texas at San Antonio,
USA.
Hatem ElKadi
Assistant Professor, Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.
ABSTRACT
This chapter examines the information systems success model in the Egyptian context. Much of the
existing literature on information system success focuses primarily on the private sector. There are
fewer studies that examine success in the context of the development of egovernment. This studyfocusesspecificallyonlocalegovernmentdevelopmentofprojectsinEgypt.Asurveyisadministeredin
threelocalgovernmentsonactualusersofinformationsystems.Theresultsofthisstudyconfirmmuch
oftheexistingresearchoninformationsystemsuccess,buthighlighttheimportanceofnetbenefitasa
success factor which examines the organizational and managerial context of egovernment
development. The importance of this research indicates that managerial functions matter for the
successofegovernmentprojects.
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
TheadvancementofegovernmentprojectsiscriticalforthedevelopmentofcountriesinAfrica(Heeks,2002a). This chapter examines the success and failure of egovernment projects in Egyptian local
governments.Thischapterapplies theDeloneandMclean (1992;2003)modelof informationsystem
success to the Egyptian context, something that has not been done in prior research. This chapter
examinesboththereasonsforsuccessandfailureofegovernmentprojectsandappliesaninformation
systemsframeworkusingsurveydataofactualusersofalocalegovernmentinvestmentproject.
EGovernment in Africa shows significant promise according to the United Nations egovernment
surveys.DespitethefactthatAfricafallsbelowtheworldaverageintermsofrankings,therehasbeen
significant improvement in the region,withNorthernAfricancountries leading thecontinent.Thetop
rankedcountries inAfricawereTunisia,Mauritius,andEgypt (UnitedNations,2010).TheWorldBank
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
3/22
3
hasrecognizedtheimportanceofegovernmentforAfricaandcalledforaneTransformation,orusing
InformationandCommunicationTechnology(ICT)topromotethelivesandwellbeingofcitizens(World
Bank,2010).
Thischapterfirstexaminesthereasonsforsuccessandfailureofegovernmentprojects.Thisisfollowed
byadiscussionof the information systems successmodelandhow thismodelcanbe translated into
testablehypothesisexaminingegovernmentprojectsinEgypt.Italsoincludesbackgroundinformation
providedona localegovernment investmentserviceprojectEgypt.Finally, it involvesatestingofthe
modelofinformationsystemssuccessonactualusersofthisegovernmentproject.
SUCCESS AND FAILURE OF E-GOVERNMENT PROJECTS
It is critical to know the unique challenges and opportunities facing an African country in order to
determine the best way to align egovernment with national development goals (Maumbe, Owei, &
Alexander, 2008; Schuppan, 2009). For instance, there is a lot of hype about egovernmentimplementation in Africa and in its ability to transform service delivery. However, these extremely
advancedsystemsmaynotworkinthecontextofadevelopingcountryandshouldbemodifiedtofitthe
contextofthecountry(Chen,Chen,Ching,&Huang,2007).
Withtheadvancementofegovernmentindevelopedcountries,itisincreasinglyimportanttoknowthe
reasons for successesand failuresofegovernmentprojects (Heeks,2002a). Research shows that the
success rates of African information systems projects have been low, compared to many Western
industrial societies (Berman & Tettey, 2001). However, being progressively dependent upon IT
development,thereformofAfricangovernmentissignificanttostudy.(Peterson,1998)
Oncomparingthesuccessratesofinformationsystemsinthepublictotheprivatesector,governmentsgenerally lagbehind(Goldfinch,2007).This isespeciallyapparent indevelopingcountrieswherethere
are many factors beyond the control of the project, most notably lack of bureaucratic inertia that
preventswholesalechange fromanewegovernmentsystem (Peterson,1998). Inaddition,the larger
thescaleand scopeof the ITproject, themore likely for failureof the system (Pardo&Scholl,2002;
Heeks,2002b;Goldfinch,2007).There isalsothe issueofcomplexityofthesystem,andthis increases
theriskof failureofthesystem in its implementation (Melin&Axelsson,2009).Besidesthe issuesof
bureaucratic culture that prevents the implementation of egovernment projects in developing
countries,someothercommonbarriersarepoorinfrastructure,lackoffinances,poordatasystemsand
capability,lackofskilledpersonnel,andleadershipstyles(Gichoya,2005).
DrawingonWilson&Howcroft(2002),Goldfinch(2007)summarizesthreetypesof ITprojectfailures:
(1)Project failure: theproject doesnotmeet the specificationagreedupon, including the functional
requirements,budget,orcompletiondeadline; (2)System failure:thesystemdoesnotworkproperly,
includingexpected performance,notbeingusedinthewayintended,orusedasintendedbutdoesnot
delivertheexpectedbenefits,or(3)Userfailure:thesystem isnotused inthe faceofuserresistance
becauseofsuchthingsaslackoftraining,abilityofstaff,andthecomplexityofthenewsystem (Wilson
&Howcroft,2002).Often indevelopingcountries, the implementationof informationsystems fails to
meettheobjectivesoftheoriginallysetgoals(system failure),which isahighprice forcountriesthat
lackresourcesforthesesystems(Heeks,2002b;Krishna&Walsham,2005).
Informationsystemsingeneralandegovernmentprojectsinparticular,havemanydiverseandcomplex
challenges that are not easy to overcome (GilGarcia & Pardo, 2005). The fact that systems are
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
4/22
4
interconnected in egovernment poses a unique challenge for implementation because it stretches
acrossdifferentorganizationsandthroughexistingdepartmentsoragencies.Indeed,successfulproject
management is seen as the larger effort to transform government through egovernment efforts
(Furlong&AlKaraghouli,2010).
It is important to study project success and failure in the public sector bearing in mind six unique
differencestotheprivatesector(Sarantis,Smithson,Charalabidis,&Askounis,2010).First,thegoalsof
public sector organizations are usually vague compared to the private sector. Second, the project
dimensionshavemuchmore complex interactions thanmostprivate sector initiatives.Third, for the
publicsectortheplanninghorizon,duetobudgetrestrictionsandelectoralprocesses,makesthislonger
thantheprivatesector.Fourth,thelegalandregulatoryissuesaremuchmorepronouncedinthepublic
sector.Fifth,thepoliticalnatureofdecisionmaking inthepublicsectormakesprojectmanagementof
egovernmentmuchmoredifficult.Finally,sincethepublicsectordoesnotmakeaprofit,thereturnon
investment ismuchmoredifficulttodeterminethan intheprivatesectorcounterparts(Gupta&Jana,
2003).Therefore, it iscriticaltostudy ITprojectmanagement in thecontextof thepublicsector,andthisisdonethroughacommonlyusedinformationsystemssuccessmodel.
INFORMATION SYSTEMS SUCCESS MODEL
Oneofthemostcommonlyused informationsystemsuccessmodel isthatoftheDeloneandMclean
(1992;2003)andextensionsofthismodel(Seddon,1997).However,twoalternativemodelsthatcould
havebeenappliedtothiscasestudyofegovernmentprojectmanagement inEgyptshouldbebriefly
mentioned. The oldest theory is thediffusion of innovations. According toRogers (2003) theorye
governmentwouldbeaninnovationwithdifferenttypesofadopters,witheachofthemhavingunique
characteristics. While the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) has been used in the study of
management informationsystems, there issomesimilarity to thediffusionof innovationsmodel,but
there ismoreemphasison socialpsychological influenceson innovation (Davis,1986).The important
componentoftheTAM istheperceivedusefulnessofthenewtechnology,thehigher themore likely
there will be adoption (Dimitrova & Chen, 2006). The TAM model has been used to explain e
government in developing countries, through the perceived usefulness of technology enhancingjob
performance (Hamner & Qazi, 2009). Research has integrated the TAM and diffusion of innovations
theory and found significant evidence of bothhaving an impact onegovernment services (Carter &
Belanger,2005;Dimitrova&Chen,2006).
FollowingarethesixattributesofsuccessfulinformationsystemsaccordingtothePetter,DeLone,and
McLeanmodel(2008):
System
Quality:This is thedesirable characteristicsofan information system suchas itseaseofusesystemflexibility,systemreliability,andeaseoflearning.
InformationQuality:Thedesirablecharacteristicsofsystemoutputssuchasrelevanceof information,
understandability,accuracy,completeness,andusabilityofinformation.
Service Quality: The quality of system support that users get from the IT department such as
responsiveness,accuracy,andtechnicalcompetencefrompersonnelstaff.
SystemUse:Themanner inwhich staffand customersuse the capabilitiesofan information system
suchastheamountofuse,frequencyofuse,extentofuse,andpurposeofuse.
User Satisfaction: The users level of satisfaction with the information system such as the reports it
generates,andsupportservicesprovided.
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
5/22
5
NetBenefits:This is theextent inwhich theegovernment information system iscontributing to the
success of the individuals that are using the system such as improved decision making, improved
productivity,andgreaterefficiency.
This model has been applied to the development of information system success in egovernment
taxationsystems(Hu,Brown,Thong,etal.,2009;Floropoulos,Spathis,Halvatzis,&Tsipouridou,2010)
and inegovernment inTaiwan(Wang&Liao,2008).Therearealsodifferentapplicationsofthemodel
to collaborative egovernment (GilGarcia, ChengalurSmith, & Duchessi, 2007), IT leadership and e
government (Prybutok, Zhang, & Ryan, 2008), and examining technological factors of egovernment
development(Hussein,Shahriza,Karim,&Selamat,2007).TheDeloneandMclean(1992;2003)model
hasbeensuccessfullyappliedtoinformationsystemsintheprivatesector,andtoselectedcountriesand
egovernmentsystems.However,ithasnotbeenappliedtoegovernmentprojectmanagementinEgypt
beforeasthischapterwillexplore.
RESEARCH MODEL AND HYPOTHESESThisstudybuildsonthecomprehensivemultidimensionalmodel(Figure1)ofanegovernmentsystems
successmodelproposedbyWang&Liao(2008).TheirmodelwasdevelopedinaccordancewithDeLone
& McLean (2003), and suggested six success variables inegovernment systems: informationquality,
systemquality,servicequality,use,usersatisfaction,andperceivednetbenefit.Toenhanceworkdone
byWang&Liao(2008),thisresearchteststhefollowingninehypotheses:
H1.Informationqualitywillpositivelyaffectuseintheegovernmentcontext.
H2.Systemqualitywillpositivelyaffectuseintheegovernmentcontext.
H3.Servicequalitywillpositivelyaffectuseintheegovernmentcontext.
H4.Informationqualitywillpositivelyaffectusersatisfactionintheegovernmentcontext.
H5.Systemqualitywillpositivelyaffectusersatisfactionintheegovernmentcontext.H6.Servicequalitywillpositivelyaffectusersatisfactionintheegovernmentcontext.
H7.Usewillpositivelyaffectusersatisfactionintheegovernmentcontext.
H8.Usewillpositivelyaffectperceivednetbenefitintheegovernmentcontext.
H9.Usersatisfactionwillpositivelyaffectperceivednetbenefitintheegovernmentcontext.
Information
Quality
System
Quality
Service
Quality
Use
User
Satisfaction
Perceived
NetBenefit
H1
H2H8
H9
H7
H3
H4H5
H6
Figure1. Theoretical Research Model
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
6/22
6
Similar toWang& Liao (2008), this study considers theuseofegovernment system.However, the
challengefortheresearcheristodefineclearlyandcarefullythestakeholdersandcontextinwhichnet
benefitaretobemeasured(DeLone&McLean,2003,p.23).Differentstakeholdersmayhavedifferent
opinionsastowhatconstitutesabenefittothem(Seddon,Staples,Patnayakuni,&Bowtell,1999).Thus,giventhenatureoftheprojectbeinginvestigated,thefocusofthisstudy isonthemeasurementofe
governmentsystemssuccessfromtheperspectiveofemployeeswhoaretheusersofthe information
system. This chapter will examine users and evaluate the system and its net benefit for the e
governmentprojectintheEgyptiancontext.
CONTEXT
Egypt
Egyptisconsideredtobeoneoftheoldeststatesinhistory(Daly&Petry,1998),andithasalwaysbeen
aunitarycountrythatevolvedaroundthewateroftheriverNile.Currently,thecountryisdividedinto29 administrative sections called governorates of varying natures, their sizes, populations, and
resources.Governoratesare,inturnadministrativelydividedintocitiesanddistricts.Localgovernments
governoratesabidebyregulationscreatedbythecentralgovernment.Theyonlyhavealimitedlevel
of autonomy in the way they provide their services to citizens and the way they manage their
administrative processes. Consequently, as reflected in their organizational structure, different
governoratesmightbeadministrativelyorganizedslightlydifferentthanothers.Ingeneral,departments
withinagovernoratedealdirectly tocitizensand canbe logically categorized in fourmajor sections:
internalservices,externalservices,administrativedepartments,andtopmanagement.
Internal services departments provide services pertinent to the municipalities, covering housing,
constructionpermits,commercial licenses,andthataredirectlymanagedbythemayor/districtcouncildirector.Externalservicesdepartmentsprovidethespecializedservicessuchaseducation,health,social
security,agriculturalservices,andreportadministrativelytothemayor,andtechnicallytotherelevant
ministries.Thecity/districtcouncilsexerttheirauthorityoverthesedepartmentsthroughcommitteesin
which all these departments are members and not through direct management. Administrative
departmentsarethesupportingdepartmentsthatperformthenecessaryadministrativetasksrequired
forthecouncil,suchashumanresources,accounting,transportation,andtheydonotprovideservices
tothepublic.Finally,thetopmanagementdirectsandmonitorstheprogressofservicesandoperation
inthedifferentdepartmentsaswellassetthetargetsandplansforthecommunity.
Theinvestmentdepartmentisoneofthedepartmentsthatexistsonlyatthegovernoratelevel(i.e.does
not exist in cities and districts). Its functions are preparing studies to promote investment in the
governorate,ensuring thealignmentof investmentsprojectswith thecommunitydevelopment track,
theapprovalof investmentprojectsproposedby investors,allocationof the required lands to these
projects,andtrackingtheconformityofongoingprojectswiththeiroriginallysetobjectivesandrules.
Duetothecriticalnatureofitsfunctions,thisdepartmenthasbeenoneofthefocusingareasofEgypt
governmentadministrativereforminitiativesexaminedinthisstudy.
Local E-Government Program
Egypt InformationandCommunicationTechnology (ICT)strategywasestablished in2001 inwhatwas
calledtheEgyptianInformationSocietyInitiative(EISI).EISIwasdividedintoseventracks;oneofwhich
is egovernment. The egovernment program in Egypt started in 2001 within the Ministry of
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
7/22
7
Communication and Information Technology (MCIT). In 2004, the program was transferred to the
MinistryofStateforAdministrativeDevelopment(MSAD),wheretheappointedministerwastheformer
egovernment Program Director (Dr. Ahmed Darwish). This reflects the Egyptian perception of e
governmentasanelementofadministrative reformanddevelopment. In fact, theothermandateofMSADistheinstitutionalreformofpublicadministration.
Initially, the egovernment program consisted of four major tracks: (1) egovernment legislative and
technicalstandards infrastructure;(2)egovernmentservicesdelivery;(3)enterpriseresourceplanning
(Accounting, Stock Control, and Personnel); and (4) integration of national databases. Later, each of
thesetrackswastransformedintoprogramswithintheegovernmentframework.Theservicesprogram
was later renamed as Egyptian Government Services Development Program; part of which is the
EgyptianLocalGovernmentDevelopmentProject(ELGDP):asuperprojectwiththreemainprojects.The
first focusesonserviceenhancement inmunicipalities throughtheautomationofcitizenservicesand
theestablishmentof the socalledSmartCitizenServiceCenters.The second is concernedwith the
developmentofwebportalsforthegovernoratesandthethirdisthecitizenrelationshipmanagement(CRM)systems.Thepresentcaseisconcernedwiththefirstproject.
ELGDP uses IT and modern management systems to enhance both the quality and efficiency of
government systems, reduce service delivery time, and overcome corruption within public
administration.ELGDPprojectsdonotaimtofullyautomatetheservices,butrathertoprovidebetter
transparency and equity through enhanced operations, reduced delivery time using a rigorous
monitoringandcontrolsystem.
This chapter examines the critical success or failure factors derived from the deployment of an
integratedManagement InformationSystemandGeographical InformationSystem(MISGIS)asapart
ofthegovernorate investmentservicesenhancementprojectthatwascarriedout inthreedifferent
sites(governorates)inEgypt.Thefollowingsubsectionwillbrieflyintroduceandcomparethethreesites
tofamiliarizethereaderwiththecontext.
Three Sites
Figure2 shows the locationsof thegovernorates inEgyptwhere thisprojecthasbeen implemented.
Projectsitesarethecapitalcitiesofthethreegovernorates:Matrouh(governorateofMatrouh),AlTor
(governorateofSouthSinai),andPortSaid(governorateofPortSaid).
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
8/22
8
Figure 2. Location of project sites.
MatrouhisabordergovernorateandoneofthevastestgovernoratesinEgypt;itstretchesover450km
alongtheMediterraneanSeawitha largeareathatforms16.6%ofthetotalareaofEgypt.Matrouh is
mainlyadesertwithlimitedeconomicactivitiesinthefieldsoftourism,olivecultivationandprocessing,
aswellasotherhandicraftactivities.ThemajorityofinvestmentprojectinMatrouhisintourism.
Incontrast,SouthSinaiismuchsmallerthanMatrouhwitharearepresenting3.1%ofthetotalareaof
Egypt.SouthSinai isoneof themost touristic governorates inEgypt; itcontainshistoricalplaces like
MountSinaiandSt.Catherine'sMonastery,inadditiontorecreationalareaswithitsdivingparadiseand
itsreserves. Itattractstheinvestorstoestablishtouristicprojectslikehotelsandresorts,anditcontains
14.7%ofthetotalnumberofhotelsinEgypt.
PortSaiddiffers fromthetwoabovegovernorates inthe factthat it isbasicallyanurbangovernorate
withthecityofPortSaidatitscenter.ThecityofPortSaidisaFreeZonePortontheMediterranean,at
theentranceoftheSuezCanal.Itseconomicactivitiesarebasicallytrade,commerce,maritimeserviceandindustriesaswellasnationaltourism.Itisquitelimitedinareaandpopulation.Thecityhadseveral
institutes thatwerepartof theSuezCanalUniversities,outofwhichemerged theUniversityofPort
Said.ThegovernorateofPortSaidmainlyconsistsofthecityofPortSaiddividedintofivedistrictsand
thecityofPortFouad.
MatrouhandSouthSinaigovernoratesaresimilar inmanyaspects:theyarebothsparsegovernorates
withvastunuseddesert landsandextendedcoasts.Themain investments inbothgovernoratesare in
tourism, local and international. Land allocation for projects is usually faced by the informal land
appropriationbylocalBedouins,whotendtoobstructtheestablishmentofprojectsontheselands.
In addition to being urban in nature, Port Said differs from both governorates in the nature of
investmentwhichconcentratesoncommerceandtrade.
Table 1 compares the three governorates with respect to some key indicators. As the table depicts,
telecommunication infrastructure in the three governorates is rather primitive, and it is the main
concernofgovernorstodevelopthebasicregioninfrastructure,includingroads,water,sewage,aswell
as health and educational services. This is quite difficult in vast sparse regions, with limited active
resources.
Table 1. Key numbers of the three governorates.
Matrouh SouthSinaiPortsaid
Population(thousands) 323,381 150,088 570,603
(%ofEgyptspopulation) 2.21 0.21 1.25
Area(1000km2) 166,563 31,272 1.3511
(%ofEgyptsArea) 16.6 3.1 0.13
No.of phonecentrals 20 20 9
No.ofpostoffices 37 94 36
Illiteracyasa% 26.2 10.1 13.5
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
9/22
9
Project Description
Thissectionprovidesabriefdescriptionofthesystem.Themainobjectiveoftheprojectistoassistthelocalauthoritiestoproperlyplan,assign,andmanagedifferentinvestmentprojectsonthegovernorate
level.Thisistobeachievedthroughanintegrationof,MIS,GIS,andworkflowsoftwareapplicationused
by the relevant departments, connected over a Local Area Network. Figure 3 shows the conceptual
relationsstructureofthesystem.TheGISspatiallymaintainstheavailableandusedlandsandongoing
projects,whiletheworkflowmaintainstherelatedadministrativeprocessesandtherelatedarchives.
Work performed in this project supports the view as the fundamental transition and redefinition of
informationmanagement ingovernmentwitha strong institutional impact (Fountain,2001).Without
ICT,the localauthoritieswouldpoorlyplanandmanageitsdevelopmentalprojects.Thesystemcovers
all the service related procedure bypassing the cumbersome paperbased activities. Most of the
investmentdepartmentactivitiesrequirehuman interventionand insight.Thus,the integratedsystem
doesnot completely replace themanual system,but rather complements it sinceoriginal supporting
documentsarerequiredbylaw.
Figure 3. Conceptual System Relations
TheGISimplementedinthisproject(Figure4)containslayersrepresentingthelandtopology,usage,the
availableutilitiesandservices, thecurrentandcontractedprojectsand their typesaswellassatellite
image of the region. The GIS represents a central component in enhancing decision making. While
spatial information ismanaged through theGISunit, this information isavailed tootherdepartments
and the public. The system simplifies the identification of vacant parcels of land both for staff and
decision makers. A query builder, assisted by GIS features, allows the easy identification of all land
parcels answering theproject requirements. Administrative and Spatialdata are consolidated inone
systemtobejointlyanalyzedandsupportthedecisionmakingwithinthegovernorate.
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
10/22
10
Figure 4. Integrated MIS-GIS
Current Project Status
Thefirst implementationoftheprojectwas inMatrouhin2006.Backthen,thesystemwasbroughtto
operationwithanoticeablysuccessful implementationthat ledtoplan for itsrollout inseveralother
sites (Abdelsalam & ElKadi, 2007). However, by the end of 2007, the system began to face some
difficulties that led to the complete cancellation of the system early 2008. These troubles were
discussedinAbdelsalam,ElKadi,&Gamal(2010).Currently,thesystemisworkingonlyinthelattertwo
sitesofSouthSinaiandPortSaid.
Matrouhprojectstartedandremainedfunctionalforseveralmonths;afterwhichthesystemwentout
ofoperationuntil revivedwith thenewMatrouhmanagement.The case, thus, canbe classifiedasa
userfailure(asdiscussedpreviously)demonstratingthattechnologyisnottheimmediatereasonofthe
setback.Aswillbeshowninthefollowingdiscussion,thestaffandmanagementcanbethemaincause
ofthesetback.Onthecontrary,theimplementationinAlTorissuccessfulasitis,aftermorethanone
year,stillrunningunderthesamemanagement,maintainingthedrivingforcebehindthesystem.Thisis
whatdrivesthestafftoproperlymanagethesystem,andpromptlyremedyproblemstoavoidfailures.
As this chapter is being prepared, Port Said implementation is still at start up with few months of
operation,andenjoys thestrong supportof the topmanagement,and thus seems tobeapromising
success.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHOD
Data collection procedure
As indicatedearlier, the focusof thisstudy ison themeasurementofegovernment systems success
from theperspectiveofemployeeswhoare theusersof the systemunder consideration.Therefore,
they represent the targetedpopulation of this research. Given that the system was implemented in
threegovernorates,all the48employees in the investmentdepartments in thesegovernorateswere
asked toparticipate in the survey.Thedataused to test the researchmodelwereobtained from48
employeesrepresentinga100%sampleofusersofthesystem.
Data collection was done onsite via a group of student researchers. Employees who are using the
system (or have used it in the case of Matrouh) were asked to fill in the questionnaire. The
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
11/22
11
questionnaire requested the respondents to relate to their experience in using the system and to
answer the questions in view of that experience. The respondents were instructed to answer the
questionsbyassessingthesystemas isnotbasedontheirexpectationsofan idealsystem.Foreach
question,respondentswereaskedtocircletheresponsewhichbestdescribedtheirlevelofagreement.Thestudentresearchersproctoredtheprocessoffillinginthequestionnairestomakesureallquestions
wereclear.Atotalof48usableresponseswereobtained.
Detaileddescriptivestatisticsrelatedtotherespondents'characteristicsareshowninTable2.Themale
andfemalerespondentswereequalinnumber.Furthermore,theyoungerrespondentsintheagerange
of2030yearsoutnumbered theother respondents (35.6%).Mostof theusersof the systemshada
universitydegree(79.2%).Therewasanevenmixofrespondentsfromeachofthethreegovernorates.
Table2.Samplecharacteristics
ValidPercentageNumberCharacteristic
Gender50.024Female
50.024Male
Age
35.6162030
20.093140
20.094150
24.411>51
Education
20.810HighSchool/diploma
79.238University
0.00Master
0.00Ph.D.
Governorate
35.417SouthSinai
31.315Matrouh
33.316PortSaid
Measures of the constructs, validity and reliability
The validation process for the survey instrument has gone through three steps: content validity;
construct validity,and reliability.The literature reviewand indepth interviews conductedwith Smalland MediumSized Enterprises (SMEs) established the basis of content validity for the survey
instrument.AsinWang&Liao(2008),toensurethecontentvalidityofthescalesusedinthestudy,this
chaptertriestoadapt,asmuchaspossible, items fortheconstructsfrompriorstudies.However,the
targetedsample/stakeholderisdifferentfromDeLoneandMcLean(2003),sincenewitemsdrawnfrom
Heeks&Bhatnagar(1999)areincluded. Fortheinformationqualityconstruct,twoitems(IQ2andIQ3)
areadaptedfromDoll&Torkzadeh(1988)tocapturethetwoattributesofinformationqualityofane
governmentsystemofthecontentandtimeliness.
Additionally,one item (SQ6) fromDoll&Torkzadeh (1988)asadaptedbyWang&Liao (2008) is
selectedtomeasuresystemqualityinanegovernmentsystem.Oneitem(SV4),selectedfromWang&
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
12/22
12
Tang(2003)ECSERVQUALscale,isusedintheservicequalityconstruct.Useismeasuredbyatwoitem
scale adapted by DeLone and McLean (2003) from previous studies (Heo & Han, 2003; Rai, Lang, &
Welker,2002)).Twoitems(US1andUS3)aretakenfromWang&Liao(2008)andincludedtomeasure
usersatisfaction.Finally,twoitems(NB5andNB7)adaptedbyWang&Liao(2008)fromEtezadiAmoli& Farhoomand (1996)userperformance scale,are included tomeasureperceivednetbenefit. Items
used in this study are listed in Appendix A. The measurement in this study relies on Likertscales
measurementwiththe5pointscale:StronglyAgree,Agree,Neutral,Disagree,StronglyDisagree,ona
numericalscalefrom1to5.AsummaryofthesurveystatisticsisshowninTable3.
The purposeof construct validity is to show that the items measurewhat they purport to measure.
Unidimensionality isestablishedwithexploratoryfactoranalysis,where0.30isgenerallyconsideredto
bethelowestsignificantfactorloadingtodefinetheconstruct(Hair,Tatham,&Anderson,1998).Table
4 shows that all factor loadings meet the criterion of larger than 0.3 and all constructs satisfy the
unidimensionalityrequirement.TheKaiserMeyerOlkin(KMO)measureofsamplingadequacyrevealed
values of at least 0.5 which is appropriate. Taken together with the Bartlett's Test of Sphericity thefactoranalysiscouldbeconducted.
Reliability is theextent towhicha variableor setof variables is consistent inwhat it is intended to
measure.Ifmultiplemeasurementsaretaken,thereliablemeasureswillallbeveryconsistent intheir
values(Hair,Tatham,&Anderson,1998).ThisresearchusesCronbachsalpha,asitisthemostpopular
technique and most suitable for the study. The Cronbach alpha (Cronbach, 1951) is a reliability
coefficientthat indicateshowwellthe item ispositivelycorrelated tooneanother. It iscomputed in
termsof theaverage intercorrelationsamong the itemmeasuring the concept.The closerCronbach
alphaisto1thehighertheinternalconsistencyreliability(Sekaran,2003).
Thewidelyacceptedsocialsciencecutoff isthatalphashouldbe0.7orhigherforasetofitemstobe
consideredascale,butsomeuse0.75or0.8whileothersareaslenientas0.5 (Garson,2008;Schraga,
Morleyb,Quinnb,&Jahanshahib,2004;Bullinger,Power,Aaronson,Cella,&Anderson,1996).Cuieford
(1965)alsothoughtthattheCronbachsvaluehigherthan0.7indicateshighvalidity,thevaluebetween
0.7and0.35meansacceptablevalidity,andthevalue lowerthan0.35meansrejectedvalidity.Hence,
due to the fact that a number of the items were not tested before with regards to egovernment
systems,wecanconsideralpha>0.5reliable.WithexceptionoftheServiceQualityscale,thereported
CronbachsAlphaforalltheanalyzeddataindicatesahighdegreeofconsistencyandstabilityamongthe
respondentsrepliestothequestionnaire.Table5providesa listofallthealphavaluesobtainedatthe
factorlevel.
Table3.Questionnairesummarystatistics
StandarddeviationMeanQuestionInformationQuality
1.412.04IQ1
1.321.96IQ 2
1.412.06IQ 3
1.292.04IQ 4
0.412.13IQ 5
SystemQuality
1.523.31SQ1
1.653.21SQ2
1.892.69SQ3
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
13/22
13
1.492.17SQ 4
1.351.75SQ 5
1.271.85SQ6
ServiceQuality1.522.44SV1
1.52.13SV2
0.430.77SV3
1.532.33SV4
Use
1.442.19U1
1.422.38U2
UserSatisfaction
1.332.27US1
1.381.94US2
1.282.4US31.431.69US4
PerceivedNetBenefit
1.792.19NB1
1.612.13NB2
1.913.08NB3
1.352.21NB4
1.420.4NB5
1.872.35NB6
1.312.02NB7
Table4.FactorAnalysis
Scale KMO Barletts Factors Questions Factorloading
InformationQuality 0.88 0.000 1 5
IQ1 0.744
IQ2 0.938
IQ3 0.876
IQ4 0.947
IQ5 0.902
SystemQuality 0.68 0.000 1 6
SQ1 0.551
SQ2 0.462
SQ3 0.592SQ4 0.874
SQ5 0.830
SQ6 0.658
ServiceQuality 0.55 0.000 1 4
SV1 0.814
SV2 0.899
SV3 0.305
SV4 0.591
Use 0.50 0.000 1 2
U1 0.906
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
14/22
14
U2 0.906
UserSatisfaction 0.81 0.000 1 4
US1 0.906
US2 0.871US3 0.787
US4 0.828
PerceivedNetBenefit 0.81 0.000 1 7
NB1 0.745
NB2 0.864
NB3 0.622
NB4 0.666
NB5 0.909
NB6 0.458
NB7 0.909
Table5.ReportedValuesofCronbachsAlpha
Scale Items Reliabilityalpha
InformationQuality 5 0.927
SystemQuality 6 0.732
ServiceQuality 4 0.575
Use 2 0.781
UserSatisfaction 4 0.870
PerceivedNetBenefit 7 0.849
RESULTS
Measurement model
Sincedataiscollectedfromthreegroups(representingthreegovernorates)ANOVAtestisperformedto
thehypothesis (Ha:employeesdidnotdiffer intheirperceptionofsystemsuccess factors inSouthSinai,
Matrouh,andPortSaid).AstheresultsinTable6show,thestudyisabletorejectthenullhypothesis.Thus,
data from all respondents can be grouped and analyzed as one group. Table7presents the correlation
amongdifferentmodelfactors.Asshown,significantcorrelations(p
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
15/22
15
WithinGroups 44.390 45 .986
Total 47.000 47
Use BetweenGroups 6.096 2 3.048 3.353 .044
WithinGroups 40.904 45 .0909Total 47.000 47
UserSatisfaction BetweenGroups 3.416 2 1.708 1.764 .183
WithinGroups 43.584 45 .969
Total 47.000 47
PerceivedNetBenefit BetweenGroups 2.727 2 1.364 1.386 .261
WithinGroups 44.274 45 .984
Total 47.000 47
Table7.Correlationbetweendifferentfactors
PerceivedNet
Benefit
UserSatisfaction
UseServiceQuality
SystemQuality
InformationQuality
1InformationQuality
10.943 SystemQuality
10.6380.644 ServiceQuality
10.541**
0.686**
0.650**Use
10.7590.4350.8070.733 UserSatisfaction
10.8650.8260.4570.7960.688 PerceivedNetBenefit
**Correlationissignificantatthe0.01level(2tailed)
Structural model
StructuralEquationModeling(SEM)isapowerfulmethodofmodelingtheinteractionsamongdifferent
variables. It has the benefit over multiple regressions in that it has the ability to construct latent
variables, or variables which are not measured directly, but are estimated in the model which is
predicted to influence the other variables. TETRAD is used to examine the path coefficients of the
structuralmodel.Propertiesofthecausalpaths,includingstandardizedpathcoefficients,pvalues,and
varianceexplainedforeachequationinthehypothesizedmodelarepresentedinFigure5.
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
16/22
16
Information
Quality
System
Quality
Service
Quality
Use
User
Satisfaction
Perceived
NetBenefit
0.05
0.62***
0.18*
0.19
0.81***
0.20
0.43***
0.40***
0.56***
R2=0.4895
R2=0.7603
R2=0.8583
Figure5.Hypothesestestingresults.
Asthefiguresdepicts,systemqualityhasasignificantinfluenceonbothuseandusersatisfaction.
Thus, hypotheses H2 and H5 are supported (=0.62 and =0.81, respectively). The influences of
informationqualityonbothuseandusersatisfactionwerenotsignificantatp
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
17/22
17
CONCLUSION
This chapterapplies theDelone andMclean (1992;2003) information systems successmodel to the
developmentofanEgyptianinvestmentprojectsinlocalgovernments.Theresultsofthisstudyconfirm
thatfactorsfoundintheinformationsystemssuccessmodelwereapplicabletoEgyptianegovernment
projectmanagement.Therehasbeenanespeciallystrongindicationthatinformationsuccessisrelated
to thenetbenefit to theorganizationandusersatisfaction.Therefore,management iscritical forthe
developmentofegovernmentprojects inEgypt.Management shouldspendmore timeonexplaining
howtheiregovernmentproject impactstheorganization,sothatusershaveabroaderunderstanding
ofthesystem.Inaddition,increasedusersatisfactionexplainsegovernmentprojectsuccess;something
thatcanbeeasilyaddressedbyeducationandtrainingintheworkplace.
Based on the results presented in this study, there are three management concerns that can be
addressed. First, institutinga systemofbeta testing the softwarebefore implementationbya select
groupofusersmakessense.Sinceinformationsystemsuccessisrelatedtosystemsqualitymakingsure
that this isadequatelyaddressed through testing is imperative.A second recommendation forpublicmanagers is to have an adequate training program for users of the system. Since use and user
satisfaction is related to theperceivednetbenefits, it is logical tohavea systemwhereexperienced
userstrainmorenoviceusersonthesystems.
FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS
Future researchshouldexaminethe informationsuccessmodel in thecontextofaccounting formore
political and managerial factors that might influence egovernment projects. These issues have
traditionallybeenunderrepresentedinthesemodels.However,theyneedtocometotheforegiventhe
uniquedifferences inpublicandprivate sector information systems.This studywasalso limited toa
smallsamplesize,andtherefore,futureresearchcouldexaminemultipleprojectsandthe informationsystemsuccessmodel.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work is part of the research project Local egovernment in Egypt: Integrating Lessons into
Planning,financedbyagrantfromtheInternationalDevelopmentResearchCenter(IDRCCanada).The
authors would also like to express their gratitude to H.E. Dr. Ahmed Darwish, Minister of State for
AdministrativeDevelopmentforhissupportoftheresearchteam.
APPENDIX A. SURVEY ITEMS USED IN THIS STUDYInformationquality
IQ1.
Dataneededforsystemoperationsisavailable
IQ2. TheSystemprovidesthepreciseinformationthatIneed (Doll&Torkzadeh,1988)
IQ3. Thesystemprovidesuptodateinformation (Doll&Torkzadeh,1988)
IQ4. Dataresultingfromthesystemissuitableandmatchesbusinessneeds
IQ5.
Thesystempresentsoutputdatainrepresentativeandsuitableway
IQ6. Systemquality
Systemquality
SQ1.
Thesystemcrashedseveraltimes
SQ2.
Thereisperiodicalmaintenanceofthehardwareandsoftware
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
18/22
18
SQ3. Thereisobviousandcompleteintegrationofdatacomingfromdifferentdepartments
SQ4.
Thesystemmakestheprocessoflandallocationmoreaccurate
SQ5. Thesysteminstantaneouslyinformsmeaboutthestatusoftheinvestmentprojects
SQ6.
Thesystemiseasytouse (Doll&Torkzadeh,1988)Servicequality
SV1. Theemployeesarequalifiedenoughtousethesystem
SV2. Employeestransfertheirexperienceaboutthesystemtoeachother
SV3. Ineedmoretrainingtoefficientlyusethesystem
SV4. Ifeelsafeinmytransactionswiththesystem (Wang&Tang,2003)
Use(Heo&Han,2003;Rai,Lang,&Welker,2002)
U1. Idependonthesysteminperformingmywork
U2. ThefrequencyIusewiththesystemishigh
Usersatisfaction
US1.
Iamsatisfiedwiththissystem (Wang&Liao,2008)
US2.
ThesystemsatisfiesuserrequirementsUS3. Thesystemhasmetmyexpectations(Wang&Liao,2008)
US4. Irecommendusingthesysteminothergovernments
Perceivednetbenefit
NB1. Thesystemfacilitatesthemanagerialprocess
NB2. Thesystemfacilitatestheprocessofdecisionmaking
NB3. Thesystemmakesthelandallocationprocessfaster
NB4.
Theemployeeshadtakensufficienttrainingtodealwiththesystemprofessionally
NB5.
Thesystemsavesmetime (EtezadiAmoli&Farhoomand,1996)
NB6. Thesystemprovidesbetterwayofcontrol
NB7. Thesystemmakesmyjobeasier(EtezadiAmoli&Farhoomand,1996)
Note:AllquestionswerescaledwithStronglyAgree(1),Agree(2),Neutral(3),Disagree(4),andStrongly
Disagree(5).
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
19/22
19
REFERENCES
Abdelsalam,H.M.,&ElKadi,H.A.(2007).ICTtoEnhanceAdministrativePerformance:ACaseStudyfromEgypt.InT.Janowski,&T.A.Pardo(Ed.),1stInternationalConferenceonTheoryand
PracticeofElectronicGovernance(ICEGOV2007)(pp.129132).ACMPress.
Abdelsalam,H.M.,ElKadi,H.A.,&Gamal,S.(2010).SetbackandRemedyofLocaleGovernment
Projects:ACaseStudyfromEgypt.InT.Janowski,&J.Davies(Ed.),the4thInternational
ConferenceonTheoryandPracticeofElectronicGovernance(ICEGOV2010)(pp.6671).ACM
Press.
Berman,B.J.,&Tettey,W.J.(2001)Africanstates,bureaucraticcultureandcomputerfixes,Public
AdministrationandDevelopment,21(1),113.
Bullinger,M.,Power,M.J.,M.,Aaronson,N.,Cella,D.,&Anderson,R.(1996).CreatingandEvaluating
CrossCulturalInstruments.InB.Spilker,Qualityof
Life
and
Pharmacoeconomics
in
Clinical
Trials
(2nded.,pp.659668).Philadelphia:LippincottRaven.
Carter,L.,&Belanger,F.(2005).TheUtilizationofEGovernmentServices:CitizenTrust,Innovationand
AcceptanceFactors.InformationSystemsJournal,15(1),525.
Chen,Y.,Chen,H.M.,Cling,R.,&Huang,W.W.(2007).Electronicgovernmentimplementation:A
comparisonbetweendevelopedanddevelopingcountries.InternationalJournalofElectronic
GovernmentResearch,3(2),4561.
Cronbach,L.(1951).Coefficientalphaandtheinternalstructureoftests.Psychometrika,16,297334.
Cuieford,J.(1965).Fundamentalstatisticsinpsychologyandeducation(4thed.).NewYork:McGraw
Hill.
Daly,M.W.,&Petry,C.(1998).TheCambridgeHistoryofEgypt.CambridgeUniversityPress.
Davis,F.D.(1986).Atechnologyacceptancemodelforempiricallytestingnewenduserinformation
systems:Theoryandresults.Unpublisheddoctoraldissertation.MassachusettsInstituteof
Technology,Cambridge.MA.
DeLone,W.H.,&McLean,E.R.(1992).InformationSystemsSuccess:TheQuestfortheDependent
Variable.InformationSystemsResearch,3(1),6095.
DeLone,W.H.,&McLean,E.R.(2003).TheDeLoneandMcLeanmodelofinformationsystemssuccess:A
tenyearupdate.JournalofManagementInformationSystems,19(4),930.
Dimitrova,D.V.,&Chen,Y.(2006).Profilingtheadoptersofegovernmentinformationandservices:The
influenceofpsychologicalcharacteristics,civicmindedness,andinformationchannels.Social
ScienceComputerReview,24(2),172188.
Doll,W.,&Torkzadeh,G.(1988).Themeasurementofendusercomputingsatisfaction.MISQuarterly,
12(2),259274.
EtezadiAmoli,J.,&Farhoomand,A.(1996).Astructuralmodelofendusercomputingsatisfactionand
userperformance.InformationandManagement,30(2),6573.
Floropoulos,J.,Spathis,C.,Halvatzis,D.,&Tsipouridou,M.(2010).MeasuringthesuccessoftheGreek
TaxationInformationSystem.InternationalJournalofInformationManagement,30(1),4756.
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
20/22
20
Fountain,J.E.(2001).Buildingthevirtualstate:Informationtechnologyandinstitutionalchange.
Washington,DC:BrookingsInstitutionPress.
Furlong,S.,&AlKaraghouli,W. (2010).Deliveringprofessionalprojects:Theeffectivenessofprojectmanagementintransformationalegovernmentinitiatives.TransformingGovernment:People,
ProcessandPolicy,4(1),7394.
Garson,G.(2008).ScalesadStandardMeasures.Retrieved2008,from
http://www2.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/pa765/standard.htm
Gichoya,D.(2005).FactorsAffectingtheSuccessfulImplementationofICTProjectsinGovernment.The
ElectronicJournalofeGovernment,3(4),175184.
GilGarcia,J.R.,ChengalurSmith,I.,&Duchessi,P.(2007).CollaborativeeGovernment:impediments
andbenefitsofinformationsharingprojectsinthepublicsector.EuropeanJournalof
InformationSystems,16(2),121133.
GilGarca,J.R.,&Pardo,T.A.(2005).Egovernmentsuccessfactors:Mappingpracticaltoolstotheoreticalfoundations.GovernmentInformationQuarterly,22(2),187216.
Goldfinch,S.(2007).Pessimism,ComputerFailure,andInformationSystemsDevelopmentinthePublic
Sector.PublicAdministrationReview,67(5),917929.
Gupta,M.P.,&Jana,D.(2003).Egovernmentevaluation:Aframeworkandcasestudy.Government
InformationQuarterly,20,365387.
Hair,J.,Tatham,R.,&Anderson,R.(1998).MultivariateDataAnalysis(5thed.).NewJersey:Prentice
Hall.
Hamner,M.,&Qazi,R.(2009).Explandingthetechnologyacceptancemodeltoexaminepersonal
computingtechnologyutilizationingovernmentagenciesindevelopingcountries,Government
InformationQuarterly,26(1),128136.
Heeks,R.(2002a).eGovernmentinAfrica:PromiseandPractice.InformationPolity,7,97114.
Heeks,R.(2002b).InformationSystemsandDevelopingCountries:Failure,Success,andLocal
Improvisations.TheInformationSociety,18,101112.
Heeks,R.,&Bhatnagar,S.(1999).Understandingsuccessandfailureininformationagereform.InR.
Heeks,Reinventinggovernmentintheinformationage:Internationalpracticeinitenabled
publicsectorreform(pp.4974).London,UK:Routledge.
Heo,J.,&Han,I.(2003).Performancemeasureofinformationsystems(IS)inevolvingcomputing
environments:Anempiricalinvestigation.InformationandManagement,40(4),243256.
Hu,P.,Brown,S.A.,Thong,J.,Chan,F.,&Tam,K.Y.(2009).Determinantsofservicequalityand
continuanceintentionofonlineservices:ThecaseofeTax.JournaloftheAmericanSocietyof
InformationScienceandTechnology,60(2),292306.
Hussein,R.,Karim,A.,&Selamat,M.H.(2007).Theimpactoftechnologicalfactorsoninformation
systemssuccessintheelectronicgovernmentcontext.BusinessProcessManagement,13(5),
613627.
Krishna,S.,&Walsham,G.(2005).ImplementingPublicInformationSystemsinDevelopingCountries:
LearningfromaSuccessStory.InformationTechnologyforDevelopment,11(2),123140.
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
21/22
21
Maumbe,B.,Owei,V.,&Alexander,H.(2008).Questioningthepaceandpathwayofegovernment
developmentinAfrica:AcasestudyofSouthAfricasCapegatewayproject.Government
InformationQuarterly,25(4),757777.
Melin,U.,&Axelsson,K.(2009).Managingeservicedevelopment comparingtwoegovernmentcase
studies.TransformingGovernment:People,ProcessandPolicy,3(3),248270.
Pardo,T.A.,&Scholl,H.J.(2002).WalkingAtoptheCliffs:AvoidingFailureandReducingRiskinLarge
ScaleEGovernmentProjects.Proceedingsofthe35thHawaiiInternationalConferenceon
SystemSciencesRetrievedfrom
http://www.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/doi/10.1109/HICSS.2002.994076
Peterson,S.B.(1998).Saints,demons,wizardsandsystems:whyinformationtechnologyreformsfailor
underperforminpublicbureaucraciesinAfrica.PublicAdministrationandDevelopment,18(1),
3760.
Petter,S.,DeLone,W.,&McLean,E.(2008).Measuringinformationsystemssuccess:models,dimensions,measures,andinterrelationships.EuropeanJournalofInformationSystems,17,
236263.
Prybutok,V.R.,Zhang,X.,&Ryan,S.D.(2008).Evaluatingleadership,ITquality,andnetbenefitsinane
governmentenvironment.Information&Management,45,143152.
Rai,A.,Lang,S.,&Welker,R.(2002).AssessingthevalidityofISsuccessmodels:Anempiricaltestand
theoreticalanalysis.InformationSystemsResearch,13(1),5069.
Rogers,E.(2003).DiffusionofInnovations(5thedition).NewYork:FreePress.
Sarantis,D.,Smithson,S.,Charalabidis,Y.,&DimitrisAskounis,D.(2010).ACriticalAssessmentof
ProjectManagementMethodswithRespecttoElectronicGovernmentImplementation
Challenges.SystemicPractice
and
Action
Research,23(4),301321.
Schraga,A.,Morleyb,D.,Quinnb,N.,&Jahanshahib,M.(2004).Developmentofameasureofthe
impactofchronicparentalillnessonadolescentandadultchildren.TheParentalIllnessImpact
Scale(Parkinsonsdisease).ParkinsonismandRelatedDisorders,10,399405.
Schuppan,T.(2009).EGovernmentindevelopingcountries:ExperiencesfromsubSaharanAfrica.
GovernmentInformationQuarterly,26,118127.
Seddon,P.,Staples,D.S.,Patnayakuni,R.,&Bowtell,M.(1999).Thedimensionsofinformationsystems
success.CommunicationsoftheAssociationforInformationSystems,2(20).
Seddon,P.B.(1997).ARespecificationandExtensionoftheDeLoneandMcLeanModelofISSuccess.
InformationSystemsResearch,8(3),240253.
Sekaran,U.(2003).ResearchMethodsforBusiness.Askillbuildingapproach(4thed.).NewYork:Wiley.
TETRAD.(n.d.).Retrieved2010,fromTETRADProject:http://www.phil.cmu.edu/projects/tetrad/
UnitedNations.(2010).UnitedNationsEGovernmentSurvey2010.Retrievedfrom
http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan038851.pdf
Wang,Y.S.,&Liao,Y.W.(2008).Assessingegovernmentsystemssuccess:AvalidationoftheDeLone
andMcLeanmodelofinformationsystemssuccess.GovernmentInformationQuarterly,25,
717733.
-
8/11/2019 Success and Failure of Local E-Government Projects Lessons Learned From Egypt
22/22
22
Wang,Y.S.,&Tang,T.I.(2003).AssessingcustomerperceptionsofWebsitesservicequalityindigital
marketingenvironments.JournalofEndUserComputing,15(3),1431.
Wilson,M.,&Howcroft,D.(2002).ReconceptualisingFailure:SocialShapingMeetsISResearch.EuropeanJournalofInformationSystems,11(4),236250.
WorldBank.(2010).HarnessingthetransformationalpowerofICTsfordevelopmentinAfrica.Retrieved
from
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/AFRICAEXT/0,,contentMDK:2255596
9~menuPK:258657~pagePK:2865106~piPK:2865128~theSitePK:258644,00.html
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
InformationSystemSuccess:Theexaminationofsixcriteriaofsuccessofinformationsystemsas
developedbyDeloneandMclean(1992;2003).
SystemQuality:Thisisthedesirablecharacteristicsofaninformationsystemsuchasitseaseofuse
systemflexibility,systemreliability,andeaseoflearning.
InformationQuality:Thedesirablecharacteristicsofsystemoutputssuchasrelevanceofinformation,
understandability,accuracy,completeness,andusabilityofinformation.
ServiceQuality:ThequalityofsystemsupportthatusersgetfromtheITdepartmentsuchas
responsiveness,accuracy,andtechnicalcompetencefrompersonnelstaff.
SystemUse:Themannerinwhichstaffandcustomersusethecapabilitiesofaninformationsystem
suchastheamountofuse,frequencyofuse,extentofuse,andpurposeofuse.
UserSatisfaction:Theuserslevelofsatisfactionwiththeinformationsystemsuchasthereportsit
generates,andsupportservicesprovided.
NetBenefits:Thisistheextentinwhichtheegovernmentinformationsystemiscontributingtothe
successoftheindividualsthatareusingthesystemsuchasimproveddecisionmaking,improved
productivity,andgreaterefficiency.
Project
Failure:Theprojectdoesnotmeetthespecificationagreedupon,includingthefunctionalrequirements,budget,orcompletiondeadline.
SystemFailure:Thesystemdoesnotworkproperly,includingexpected performance,notbeingusedin
thewayintended,orusedasintendedbutdoesnotdelivertheexpectedbenefits.
UserFailure:Thesystemisnotusedinthefaceofuserresistancebecauseofsuchthingsas
recalcitrance,lackoftrainingandabilityofstaff,andthecomplexityofthenewsystem.