Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
L. Torres, V. Pina, Basilio Acerete (2005)
E-government developments on delivering public services among EU citiesGov. Inf. Q., 22
C. Shannon (1948)
A mathematical theory of communicationBell Syst. Tech. J., 27
P. Devadoss, S. Pan, Jimmy Huang (2003)
Structurational analysis of e-government initiatives: a case study of SCODecis. Support Syst., 34
David Olson (1995)
Decision Aids for Selection ProblemsJournal of the Operational Research Society, 48
I. Akman, A. Yazici, A. Mishra, A. Arifoglu (2005)
E-Government: A global view and an empirical evaluation of some attributes of citizensGov. Inf. Q., 22
Irma Graafland-Essers, E. Ettedgui (2003)
Benchmarking e-government in Europe and the US
D. Aldrich, J. Bertot, C. McClure (2002)
E-Government: initiatives, developments, and issuesGov. Inf. Q., 19
K. Andersen, H. Henriksen (2006)
E-government maturity models: Extension of the Layne and Lee modelGov. Inf. Q., 23
P. Beynon-Davies (2007)
Models for e‐governmentTransforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 1
Patrick Wauters (2006)
Benchmarking e-government policy within the e-Europe programmeAslib Proc., 58
M. Shipley, A. Korvin, Riad Obid (1991)
A decision making model for multi-attribute problems incorporating uncertainty and bias measuresComput. Oper. Res., 18
S. Hazlett, Frances Hill (2003)
E‐government: the realities of using IT to transform the public sectorManaging Service Quality, 13
C. Shannon (1950)
The mathematical theory of communication
Joan Steyaert (2004)
Measuring the performance of electronic government servicesInformation & Management, 41
Susan Xue (2004)
Web usage statistics and Web site evaluation: a case study of a government publications library Web siteOnline Inf. Rev., 28
Hepu Deng (1999)
Multicriteria analysis with fuzzy pairwise comparisonFUZZ-IEEE'99. 1999 IEEE International Fuzzy Systems. Conference Proceedings (Cat. No.99CH36315), 2
Meenakshi Gupta, D. Jana (2003)
E-government evaluation: a framework and case studyGov. Inf. Q., 20
R. Mitra, M. Gupta (2008)
A contextual perspective of performance assessment in eGovernment: A study of Indian Police AdministrationGov. Inf. Q., 25
A. Hertz, D. Kobler (2000)
A framework for the description of evolutionary algorithmsEur. J. Oper. Res., 126
Brian Kenny, J. Meaton (2007)
Cross‐benchmarking international competitiveness and performance in human language technologiesBenchmarking: An International Journal, 14
B. Andersen, R. Camp (1995)
Current position and future development of benchmarkingThe Tqm Magazine, 7
P. Schoemaker, C. Waid (1982)
An Experimental Comparison of Different Approaches to Determining Weights in Additive Utility ModelsManagement Science, 28
P. Jaeger, K. Thompson (2003)
E-government around the world: lessons, challenges, and future directionsGov. Inf. Q., 20
E. Triantaphyllou, A. Sánchez (1997)
A Sensitivity Analysis Approach for Some Deterministic Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods*Decision Sciences, 28
Charles Kaylor, R. Deshazo, David Eck (2001)
Gauging e-government: A report on implementing services among American citiesGov. Inf. Q., 18
Zakareya Ebrahim, Z. Irani (2005)
E-government adoption: architecture and barriersBus. Process. Manag. J., 11
K.B.C. Saxena (2005)
Towards excellence in e‐governanceInternational Journal of Public Sector Management, 18
P. Love, Z. Irani, D. Edwards (2004)
Industry-centric benchmarking of information technology benefits, costs and risks for small-to-medium sized enterprises in constructionAutomation in Construction, 13
C. Yeh, R. Willis, Hepu Deng, Hongqi Pan (1999)
Task oriented weighting in multi-criteria analysisEur. J. Oper. Res., 119
C. Reddick (2004)
A two-stage model of e-government growth: Theories and empirical evidence for U.S. citiesGov. Inf. Q., 21
F. Barron, Bruce Barrett (1996)
Decision quality using ranked attribute weightsManagement Science, 42
Mete Yildiz (2007)
E-government research: Reviewing the literature, limitations, and ways forwardGov. Inf. Q., 24
B. Hobbs (1980)
A COMPARISON OF WEIGHTING METHODS IN POWER PLANT SITINGDecision Sciences, 11
Cheryl Brown (2002)
G-8 collaborative initiatives and the digital divide: readiness for e-governmentProceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences
R. Johare (2001)
Electronic records management in Malaysia: the need for an organisational and legal frameworkRecords Management Journal, 11
Shu-Jen Chen, C. Hwang (1992)
Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making - Methods and Applications, 375
Fadi Salem (2007)
Benchmarking the E-Government Bulldozer: Beyond Measuring the Tread MarksMeasuring Business Excellence, 11
P. Shackleton, J. Fisher, L. Dawson (2006)
E-government services in the local government context: an Australian case studyBus. Process. Manag. J., 12
P. Jaeger (2003)
The endless wire: e-government as global phenomenonGov. Inf. Q., 20
R. González, J. Gascó, Juan Llopis (2007)
E-government success: some principles from a Spanish case studyInd. Manag. Data Syst., 107
D. Diakoulaki, G. Mavrotas, L. Papayannakis (1995)
Determining objective weights in multiple criteria problems: The critic methodComput. Oper. Res., 22
J Byrne, H Deng, B Martin
Teleworkers: an Australian perspective
H. Scholl (2006)
Electronic government: information management capacity, organizational capabilities, and the sourcing mixGov. Inf. Q., 23
Z. Irani, Tony Elliman, P. Jackson (2007)
Electronic transformation of government in the U.K.: a research agendaEuropean Journal of Information Systems, 16
M. Al-Mashari (2007)
A benchmarking study of experiences with electronic governmentBenchmarking: An International Journal, 14
C. Yeh, Hepu Deng, Yu-Hern Chang (2000)
Fuzzy multicriteria analysis for performance evaluation of bus companiesEur. J. Oper. Res., 126
B. Mareschal (1988)
Weight stability intervals in multicriteria decision aidEuropean Journal of Operational Research, 33
G. Fischer (1995)
Range Sensitivity of Attribute Weights in Multiattribute Value ModelsOrganizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62
Hepu Deng, C. Yeh, R. Willis (2000)
Inter-company comparison using modified TOPSIS with objective weightsComput. Oper. Res., 27
Rita Ribeiro (1996)
Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making: A review and new preference elicitation techniquesFuzzy Sets Syst., 78
Donna Evans, D. Yen (2006)
E-Government: Evolving relationship of citizens and government, domestic, and international developmentGov. Inf. Q., 23
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to develop a methodology for evaluating the progress of individual countries worldwide in their adoption of electronic government (e‐government) with the rapid advance in information and communication technologies (ICTs). Recognising the multi‐dimensional nature of the progress evaluation and comparison process, this paper formulates the inter‐country performance evaluation process in e‐government adoption as a multi‐criteria analysis problem and presents an objective multi‐criteria approach for solving the problem in an effective and straightforward manner. Design/methodology/approach – Several indicators (criteria) for measuring the progress of individual countries for adopting e‐government have been reviewed, and existing approaches for carrying out inter‐country comparison on e‐government have been analysed. The need for the use of an objective approach for addressing the inter‐country comparison problem is discussed. This leads to the development of an objective multi‐criteria approach for effectively solving the problem in a straightforward and effective manner. The proposed objective approach is based on the concept of information entropy which is emitted from e‐government criteria used for determining the objective weights of the e‐government criteria. The principle of ideal solutions is used for effectively incorporating the objective criteria weights into the process of calculating the overall performance index for each country. As a result, an unbiased overall ranking of individual countries on e‐government can be obtained. Findings – With the use of an example in the paper, the proposed approach is proved to be of practical use for addressing the inter‐country comparison problem on the progress of individual countries in their adoption of e‐government. The proposed approach is not only able to provide an objective view of the relative progress of those countries concerned but also pinpoint the areas that these countries can further improve to lift their overall profile worldwide on the adoption of e‐government. Practical implications – The methodology developed can be used as a decision‐making tool to support various levels of government and consultancy organizations worldwide in their effort to evaluate the adoption of ICTs in the government sector so that effective decisions can be made for enhancing and improving the use of the technology for more efficient and effective government. Originality/value – The advantages of the proposed approach for addressing the inter‐country comparison problem on e‐government are the capacity of the proposed approach for adequately handling the multi‐dimensional nature of the inter‐country comparison problem and the provision of an objective view of the overall performance of those countries in the process of evaluating the progress of these countries in their adoption of e‐government. In addition the application of the approach can also help those countries pinpoint the areas that they can further invest their effort for further improvement.
Transforming Government People Process and Policy – Emerald Publishing
Published: Aug 1, 2008
Keywords: Internet; Government; Communication technologies; Benchmarking; National cultures; Information services
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.