Measuring e-government impact: existing practices and shortcomings
ICEC '04 Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Electronic commerce
Evaluating the progress of e-government development: A critical analysis
Information Polity
System and actor perspectives on sociotechnical systems
IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part A: Systems and Humans
The use of importance-performance analysis (IPA) in evaluating Japan's e-government services
Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research
Building theoretical foundations for electronic governance benchmarking
EGOV'11 Proceedings of the 10th IFIP WG 8.5 international conference on Electronic government
KPI-spported PDCA model for innovation policy management in local government
EGOV'11 Proceedings of the 10th IFIP WG 8.5 international conference on Electronic government
Measure to improve: a study of eParticipation in frontrunner dutch municipalities
ePart'11 Proceedings of the Third IFIP WG 8.5 international conference on Electronic participation
Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance
| Hi-index | 0.01 |
Measuring e-government has traditionally been focused on measuring and benchmarking websites and their use. This provides useful information from a user-perspective, but does not provide any information how well the back-end of e-government is organized and what can be learnt from others. In this paper a self-assessment instrument for organizational and technology infrastructure aspects is developed and tested. This model has been used to benchmark 15 initiates in the Netherlands in a group session. This helped them to identify opportunities for improvement and to share their experiences and practices. The benchmark results shows that only a disappointingly few investigated back-ends (20%) fall in the highest quadrant. Measuring the back-end should capture both organizational and technical elements. A crucial element for gaining in-depth insight with limited resources is the utilizing of a participative, self-assessment approach. Such an approach ensures an emphasis on learning, avoids the adverse aspects of benchmarking and dispute over the outcomes.