Jaromir Durkiewicz
ABSTRACT
Digital Government (DG) benchmarking is an academically vivid topic and, equally important, a tool with the potential to provide valuable insights to policymakers and public managers responsible for digital policies at the level of countries and international bodies. Alas, this potential remains largely untapped in the current DG benchmarking practice. In our study, we identify the reasons and propose a way of mitigating them. By referring to the managerial roots of benchmarking – to identify a unit's problems and help it find a way toward performance improvements, we postulate to: 1) extract information coming from various measurement projects, 2) apply a process perspective to DG measurement – DG follows a series of value-generating transitions comprising a value chain, and 3) map the results to particular managerial or policy problems. We argue that the outcome, a comprehensive framework for country-level DG benchmarking built upon existing DG measurement instruments, offers a much higher diagnostic value than if such instruments are applied individually.
- B. W. Wirtz and P. Daiser, E-Government: Strategy Process Instruments. Textbook for the Digital Society. 2nd edition, Speyer. Speyer, 2017.Google Scholar
- G. Hu, W. Pan, M. Lu, and J. Wang, “The widely shared definition of e‐Government,” Electron. Libr., vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 968–985, 2009, doi: 10.1108/02640470911004066.Google ScholarCross Ref
- United Nations, “E-Government Survey 2020: Digital Government in the Decade of Action for Sustainable Development,” 2020. [Online]. Available: https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-Government-Survey-2020.Google Scholar
- Capgemini, Sogeti, IDC, and Politecnico di Milano, “eGovernment Benchmark 2020: eGovernment that works for the people,” 2020. [Online]. Available: https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/egovernment-benchmark-2020-egovernment-works-people.Google Scholar
- T. Obi and N. Iwasaki, “The15th WASEDA International Digital Government Rankings Report,” 2020. [Online]. Available: https://idg-waseda.jp/pdf/WASEDA_Digital_Government_Ranking_2019_2020.pdf.Google Scholar
- T. Nam, “Determining the type of e-government use,” Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 211–220, 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2013.09.006.Google ScholarCross Ref
- C. Gallo, M. Giove, J. Millard, and R. Thaarup, “Study on eGovernment and the Reduction of Administrative Burden,” European Union, 2014. doi: 10.2759/42896.Google Scholar
- S. Haque, P. Pathrannarakul, and Boonan, “E-Government towards Good Governance: A Framework for Digital Governance.,” Int. J. Manag. Sci. Bus. Res., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 32–39, 2014.Google Scholar
- D. K. Basyal, N. Poudyal, and J. W. Seo, “Does E-government reduce corruption? Evidence from a heterogeneous panel data model,” Transform. Gov. People, Process Policy, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 134–154, 2018, doi: 10.1108/TG-12-2017-0073.Google Scholar
- G. Spirakis, C. Spiraki, and K. Nikolopoulos, “The impact of electronic government on democracy: e-democracy through e-participation,” Electron. Gov. an Int. J., vol. 7, no. 1, p. 75, 2010, doi: 10.1504/EG.2010.029892.Google ScholarCross Ref
- E. Estevez, T. Janowski, and Z. Dzhusupova, “Electronic Governance for Sustainable Development – How EGOV Solutions Contribute to SD Goals?,” in 14th Annual Conference on Digital Government Research, 2013, pp. 92–101, doi: 10.1145/2479724.2479741.Google ScholarDigital Library
- American Society for Quality, “What is Benchmarking?,” 2021. https://asq.org/quality-resources/benchmarking (accessed Aug. 24, 2021).Google Scholar
- R. S. Kaplan, “When Benchmarks Don't Work,” Harvard Business School. Working Knowledge, 2006. https://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/when-benchmarks-dont-work (accessed Aug. 25, 2021).Google Scholar
- M. Zairi, Measuring Performance for Business Results. New York: Springer, 1994.Google ScholarCross Ref
- A. Ojo, T. Janowski, and E. Estevez, “Building Theoretical Foundations for Electronic Governance Benchmarking,” in 10th IFIP EGOV Conference, Delft, Netherlands, 28 August – 2 September 2011, EGOV2011, 2011, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22878-0_2.Google ScholarCross Ref
- F. Skargren, “What is the point of benchmarking e-government? An integrative and critical literature review on the phenomenon of benchmarking e-government,” Inf. Polity, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 67–89, 2020, doi: 10.3233/IP-190131.Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Durkiewicz and T. Janowski, “Is digital government advancing sustainable governance? A study of oecd/eu countries,” Sustain., vol. 13, no. 24, 2021, doi: 10.3390/su132413603.Google Scholar
- J. Durkiewicz and T. Janowski, “Chain Action - How Do Countries Add Value Through Digital Government?,” in Proceedings of the 54th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2021, vol. 0, pp. 2327–2336, [Online]. Available: http://hdl.handle.net/10125/70897.Google ScholarCross Ref
- R. Heeks, “Benchmarking e-Government: Improving the national and international measurement, evaluation and comparison of e-Government,” in Evaluating Information Systems. Public and Private Sector, vol. 53, no. 9, Z. Irani and P. Love, Eds. London, New York: Routledge, 2008, pp. 257–301.Google Scholar
- J.-M. Huguenin, Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA). A pedagogical guide for decision makers in the public sector, vol. 41, no. 0. Lausanne: IDHEAP, 2012.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Benchmarking the Digital Government Value Chain
Recommendations
Digital Government Initiatives in Balochistan: a case study
ICTD '17: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and DevelopmentThis research study 1 aims to analyse the digital government initiatives in Balochistan. The study finds that there is a lack of e-readiness even if public sector officials are willing to use Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) to enhance ...
Digital government transformation: a case illustrating public e-service development as part of public sector transformation
dg.o '18: Proceedings of the 19th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: Governance in the Data AgeDigital government is often seen as an enabler or even driver of transformation of public administration, with the objective of creating public value. Such transformations are complex, requiring a long process of change; often, digitalization of public ...
Financing digital government in municipalities: An economic perspective
dg.o '16: Proceedings of the 17th International Digital Government Research Conference on Digital Government ResearchThe purpose of local governments is to facilitate the well-being of communities and regions. Through the provision of different public goods and services local governments have the mission to provide security and stable conditions for individuals and ...
Comments