Content uploaded by Anna Sigwejo
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Anna Sigwejo
Content may be subject to copyright.
E-government services in developing countries: Factors that influence
citizens’ utilisation of service
Annastellah Sigwejo
annasigwejo8@gmail
.com
Andy Bytheway
andy.bytheway@gmail.
com
Shaun Pather
pathers@cput.ac.za
Abstract
In recent years, developing countries have witnessed an increase in availability of e-
government services. This is good news for all stakeholders, especially citizens, as it
ensures that services delivered by governments and interaction between
governments and citizens can be facilitated, and then evaluated for efficient and
effective delivery. However, despite this positive trend, a low citizen uptake and
adoption of e-government services is apparent. E-government services are
implemented as technical projects and with implicit assumptions that citizens will use
these services. As a result, citizens’ expectations of such services are not met.
However, to measure citizen’s satisfaction in such situations, there is the need to
have sound information systems management practices, inter alia, effective
strategies for the evaluation of implemented systems. Given this background, new
research is required to investigate and develop a citizen centric evaluation framework
for e-government services. The aims of the research are to identify evaluation criteria
and to develop an effective and adaptable means to assess e-government services.
Using content analysis, this paper reports on the first stage of the research: the
identification and understanding of the factors that influence citizens’ adoption and
utilisation of e-government services. The evidence at hand confirms that e-
government services are underutilised, and the case for developing sound e-
government evaluation is thus made.
Key words: E-government, e-government service evaluation, evaluation factor,
citizen and evaluation framework
2"
1. Introduction
In this era of constantly evolving information and communication technologies (ICTs)
governmental institutions are under continuous pressure. Since the 1990s, when e-
government initiatives were emerging globally, governments worldwide have been
working hard to deliver information and services electronically. E-government
services are becoming more and more important because individual organisations
and businesses need the efficiency and effectiveness benefits. For example, the
availability of 24/7 services reduces time and cost to the government and to its
constituent partners as well. This becomes attractive for all stakeholders, but it
demands that services delivered by governments and the interactions between
governments and citizens are evaluated for efficient and effective delivery, otherwise
the benefits might be just an illusion. Evaluation of Information Systems (IS) projects,
which has been prominent on the IS research agenda since the 1980s has posed
some difficulties for practitioners (Pather & Usabuwera, 2010). These authors argue
that notwithstanding the difficulty involved in developing measures of effectiveness,
businesses [and other organisations] still need to have suitable indicators of the
success of their IS investment.
Although e-government services are high on the agenda and many resources are set
aside for it, the success of electronic services delivery is not always clear. Most of
the services are implemented as technical projects (Verdegem & Verleye, 2009) that
do not properly address the citizens’ expectations, and it is implicitly assumed that
citizens will use the services. One of the consequences of this is there is only a low
uptake of the e-government services. The low uptake becomes a challenge as
greater efficiency and other benefits that justify the investment are only possible with
wide use of e-government services (Verdegem & Verleye, 2009). In such situations,
sound information system management practices are required, which include, inter
alia, strategies for the effective evaluation of implemented systems.
An information system (IS) is usually part of a human social structure (Irani et al.,
2005), and therefore the implementation of systems can have cascading negative
effects throughout an entire organisation, if the users’ expectations and needs
(including cultural and structural issues) are not adequately addressed. Therefore,
there is a need to develop a user oriented or citizen-centric e-government evaluation
approach. One of the key issues in this regard is the identification of the factors that
influence citizens to adopt and utilise e-government services.
3"
Therefore, this research focuses on the development of an evaluation framework for
e-government service. Such a framework should be based on providing e-
government practitioners with an indication of IS success from the citizen’s
perspective. The aims of the research thus are to identify evaluation factors and to
develop these into an effective and adaptable means to assess e-government
services. Gomez & Pather, (2012) in arguing that the evaluation field may be too
narrowly focused on measuring the tangible and quantifiable economic benefits,
suggest that intangible impacts of ICTs have been neglected. Based on the
foregoing, the investigation into e-government evaluation must take into account both
tangible and intangible benefits of e-government. Dimensions of the latter would
include social, economical and technical aspects, amongst others. Such a framework
will provide valuable feedback for future planning and implementation of e-
government programmes.
2. Research Background
2.1. The literature
Existing literature highlights the revolutionary nature of e-government in
governments, and provides a basis to investigate the evaluation of this phenomenon
from a perspective of citizen derived value and benefits (Jones, Iran, & Amir Sharif,
2007; Grimsely & Meehan, 2007; Lee et al., 2008). However some scholars suggest
that the evaluation of e-government is neglected, underdeveloped and under-
managed (Jones et al., 2007; Curie, 2008). This is not the result of exclusion, but it
shows the extent of complexity that is fundamental to deriving an appropriate
evaluation criteria (Grimsley & Meehan, 2007). According to Grimsley and Meehan,
the most frequently designated reasons for deficiency of in evaluation are problems
of identifying and quantifying benefits and opportunity costs, lack of evaluation
methods and techniques, and difficulty in interpreting results.
Some studies do take on traditional evaluation approach to evaluate e-government
services. However, for accurate evaluations of e-government services consideration
of multiple perspectives of stakeholders is essential, (Sarmad et al., 2007).The focus
here is to take a broader perspective, acknowledging that e-government not only
permeates government agencies and their operational practices but also society,
citizens and their social activities. Lee et al., (2008), argue that the relationship
between citizens and government services can be successfully transformed only if
the citizens’ perspectives of government services are objectively measured and the
4"
areas of improvement are correctly identified. This implies that the precise evaluation
of e-government service needs to include not only all stakeholders’ perspectives and
the social and technical context of use but also consider inclusion of the specific
needs of several groups of citizens which are using a specific e-government service
such student, professional, and so forth (Sarmad et al., 2007). Generally, to precisely
determine the benefits that associated with e-government evaluation are required
though is difficult. E-government initiatives goals and objectives in practice are very
varied as a result the gained benefits also vary, and the evaluations of the initiatives
obviously will vary according to the different stakeholders’ perspectives on the value
of these benefits Beynon-Davies, (2005).
2.2. Analysis of e-government services evaluation approaches
A number of e-government service evaluation approaches have been proposed and
investigated worldwide in developed countries, but relatively few studies have
investigated projects in developing countries. Generally these approaches were
designed to address either tangible or intangible benefits. Tangible benefits are
generally concerned with accounting and financial outcomes while intangible benefits
are concerned with the organisational, social, political or cultural impact of the
system. According to Orange et al., (2007) there are only few evaluation frameworks
approaches that combine both hard and soft aspects.
The different e-government service evaluation approaches that have been endorsed
in developed countries are based on different theoretical foundations or models, and
are mostly focused on a particular aspect of e-government evaluation such cost
analysis. For developing countries, very few evaluation studies have been done and
there is no guarantee that the theoretical foundations or models are applicable in a
developing country due to the differences in economic, social and structural factors,
and people’s attitudes (Chen, Chen, Huang, & Ching, 2006). In developing countries
the citizens’ influence on the use of e-government services might differ, and the
evaluation approach as well. This paper proposes a set of factors which influence the
citizens not to utilise e-government services in a typical developing country-
Tanzania.
2.3. Tanzania as a developing country
The United Republic of Tanzania (URT) has a territorial area of 945,000 km
2
and is
classified as a developing country in East Africa. The majority of its citizens live in the
rural areas, where typically there is low ICT readiness, low ICT literacy, low
5"
household Internet penetration and poor information (Bjørn & Stein, 2007). The URT
government has put in place a national ICT policy (URT, 2003) that emphasises an
e-government strategy. The national ICT policy intends to provide a more
coordinated and citizen-driven focus to Tanzanian’s e-government initiatives, and
thus ensure the delivery of services in a citizen-centred manner through an
organised adoption of technologies (URT, 2008).
E-government in Tanzania is still in its nascent stages (Yonazi, 2010), however,
substantial progress has been made in implementing e-government initiatives. These
include the establishment of:
• e-Government Agency (e-GA) that is charged with the mandate of providing
coordination, oversight of e-government initiatives and enforcement of e-
government standards in the country.
• A customs transit network connecting all Tanzania Revenue Authority (TRA)
offices for enhanced efficiency in revenue collection.
• The Central Admission System (CAS) for admission of students in higher
learning institutions in a more efficient manner.
• Land Management System (LMS) for application, tracing and obtaining land
related document in a more efficient manner.
• Tanzania Parliament online, for Tanzanian citizens to access information or to
comment about the Tanzanian parliament.
These initiatives aim to enhance work efficiency and improve services delivery to
meet the needs of the citizens in a responsive and transparent manner, (URT, 2008).
Despite this significant progress that Tanzania has made using information and
communication technology, the utilization of e-government services by the citizens
remains a challenge. The government recognises the potential value of e-
government in promoting and improving efficiency in public service delivery and
strengthening citizen’s participation and engagement. However, the low uptake of the
services by the citizens becomes an issue and for the government needs to realise
greater e-government investment and wider use of the service is required.
Having provided an overview of the Tanzanian e-government initiatives, the
remainder of the paper is organised as follows: a summary of factors identified in the
literature are discussed; then through the analysis of qualitative data obtained in
6"
interviews and focus groups, the general list of factors is critically reviewed and
adapted to the perceived needs of citizens in Tanzania.
3. General factors obtained from the literature
In the literature discussion in the previous section, the importance of e-government
service evaluation was highlighted. In addition, the important issue of ensuring that
all e-government stakeholder perspectives are considered was also emphasised.
The factors that influence the utilisation of e-government service were synthesised
from the literature discussed and summarised as indicated in the table 1.
Table 1: Summarised factors deduced from the literature review
Factors
Description
Sources
Awareness
E-government services awareness among
users
(Choudrie & Dwivedi,
2005);(Al-jaghoub, Al-
yaseen, & Al-hourani, 2010),
Performance
The degree to which it can enable citizens
to personalise information and services
according to their own need and
circumstances, and by how fast it can
facilitate
(Wang, Bretschneider, &
Gant, 2005);(Carter &
Bélanger, 2005); (Corradini,
Polzonetti, Re, & Tesei,
2008)
Political Desire
Lack of political desire can lead to slow or
low uptake of e-service
(Schwester, 2009)
Trust
Lack of trust between end user (citizens)
and government. Citizens’ trust requires
maintaining security in handling of
information, protecting the privacy of
citizens, and assuring them that their
personal information will be treated
confidentially.
Without this assurance it will be difficult to
promote the use of e-government services
(Belanger, Hiller, & Smith,
2002); (Aichholzer, 2004)
(Carter & Bélanger, 2005);
(Papadomichelaki &
Mentzas, 2009); (Godwin
Kaisara & Pather, 2011)
(Al-adawi, Yousafzai, &
Pallister, 2005)
Openness
Value of information in terms of quality and
transparency that government agencies
provide to the citizens
(Eschenfelder & Miller,
2005); (Sarmad, Alahmary, &
Alalwany, 2007)
Skills
Right technical skills is important to use e-
government services
Esteves and Joseph, 2008
Information
The ease of understanding (what?) and
information that is interpretable. Up to date
information completeness, accuracy,
conciseness and relevance
(Papadomichelaki &
Mentzas, 2009) (Kaisara &
Pather, 2011)
Accessibility
An effective and efficient user interface
(Terry & Zaphiris, 2003);
(Abanumy, Al-badi, &
Mayhew,
2005)(Papadomichelaki &
Mentzas, 2009)
Ability/willingness
Knowing how to do it.
Stakeholders willingness and ability to use
e-government services is important and
lead to successfulness
(Gilbert, Balestrini, &
Littleboy, 2004); (Goings,
Young, & Hendry, 2003)
Reliability
Sufficient hardware and software and
communications capacity to meet peak
demand. Develop a system that can be
displayed and used independently of the
(Papadomichelaki &
Mentzas, 2009); (M. Kumar &
Charles, 2010); (Iwaarden,
Wiele, Ball, & Millen, 2003)
7"
web browser used.
Quality of Service
The uptake will rise only if e-government
services will offer a service level that is at
least equal or superior to the basic service.
This includes ease-of-use, minimal down
time of IT (for maintenance or error
correction).
(Singgih & Ardhiyani, 2010);
(Zhao, Lu, Zhang, & Chau,
2012); (Halaris, Magoutas, &
Papadomichelaki, 2007)(G
Kaisara & Pather, 2009)
Security/Privacy
Citizens will only use e-government
services when they can be reasonably
confident that there will be no risks involved
with using e-services. Protection of
personal data is key, as well as easy-to-use
security function e.g. via smart card ID.
(Lam, 2005), Altameem et
al., (2006), (Goings et al.,
2003) Schwester, (2009)
Fund/Cost
No budget no project
(Lam, 2005), (Esteves &
Joseph, 2008) (Goings et al.,
2003) (Al-adawi et al., 2005)
As explained in section 2.2 most of the e-government services evaluation
approaches have been undertaken in developed countries. Therefore the literature
on this issue is based mainly on factors, which are related to developed countries.
Therefore the factors that are empirically developed in developed countries’ contexts
may or may not be applicable in developing countries. Thus the factors drawn from
the current literature provide a useful starting point for the research.
4. Research Approach
In order to carry out this research, it was necessary to select an appropriate research
approach that would effectively and reliably investigate the citizens’ perspective of e-
government services and to identify the key factors which influence citizens’
utilisation of e-government services. The use of content analysis as a research
method was chosen as a way of analysing data that will bring out issues of general
factors for adoption of e-government services. This was done for the purposes of
developing an evaluation framework in Tanzania. The research design and strategy
were based on a critical review and analysis of a number of articles and published
empirical case studies. In addition empirical evidence drawn from focus groups and
semi-structured interviews were applied in determining the findings. The articles and
the sources of empirical data were carefully selected, specifically looking at those
that intended to evaluate the e-government services from a citizens' perspective.
Because of the current and rapidly evolving nature of the e-government field, the
need to support literature analysis with empirical data was important. The research
strategy considered the multidisciplinary nature of the research domain dealing with
the wide range of data required. This covered all aspects of evaluation, including the
tangible and intangible benefits that influence citizens’ utilisation of e-government
services. This strategy also considers the social and technical context of use. The
8"
data obtained in this progress research will be used as a basis in future research
studies.
The data collections for this paper was underpinned by interpretivism approach whilst
the documentation and focus group interviews were the methods applied for
collection of data. These were done with the focus on exploring the factors that
influence the citizen to utilise e-government services in Tanzania. The examinations
registration system service that is provided by National Examination Council of
Tanzania (NECTA) was selected as one of e-government services that are online
delivered national wide. Two focus group interviews of forty citizens who are using e-
government services (examination registration system) were conducted. Each of the
focus groups was conducted using the same moderator guide with a set of common
group questions and in each focus group session participants were split into four
sub-groups. Participants were encouraged to reflect on both their personal
experiences with the e-government services as well as their experience during the
focus group task. The moderator facilitates the discussion and the data were
recorded on digital media.
The qualitative data from the document and focus group was subjected to content
analysis techniques as described by Corbin & Strauss, (2008). Analysis entailed
coding and categories that developed from synthesising data collected from the
different documentation and focus groups. These categories were labelled based on
the meanings evoked during analysis (see Appendix I). Eleven e-governments
service evaluation factors were derived from the analysis: Awareness, IT Skill, Mind-
set, Preference for face to face, Inadequate infrastructure, Perceived
unpreparedness, Service quality, Perceived benefits, Trust, Inadequate access
technologies, Inadequate infrastructure (see Appendix 1). Through an iterative
process of the analysis of underlying and refinement thereof, some of the factors that
give inherent similarities were merge and the influencing factors were further
interpreted and organised within four categories: User Characteristic, Government
Readiness, Service and e-Government infrastructure (figure 1). Each category is
described based on the understanding gleaned from the evidence.
9"
Figure 1: Summary of proposed factors that influence citizen utilisation of e-
government services
5. Result from the analysis
Hence, based on the analysis described in the forgoing section, four e-government
service evaluation factors were proposed. Based on the understanding gleaned from
the evidence each of the factor are describe below.
User Characteristic
User characteristics such as awareness, IT skill, mind-set, and preference for face-
to-face can have a direct impact on utilization of e-government services. The user
characteristics also differ between different groups of users; different users from
different situations have different user characteristics. The literature present
approaches to determine user characteristics (Kumar, Mukerji, Butt, & Persaud,
2007; Pilling & Heike Boeltzig, 2007) and accordingly, the understanding the
characteristic of users and deliver the service that citizen demand most is proposed.
Service
Service issue related to various aspects of the service intended to be used by the
citizens, this include service quality, perceived benefits and trust. These issues have
direct impact on utilisation of e-government services. For e-government service to be
utilised, it needs to have characteristics that meet and exceed citizens’ expectations.
Infrastructure
10"
Infrastructure issues such as inadequate access technology and inadequate
infrastructure are very important for the citizen to utilise the e-government services. It
points out the multichannel accessibility (such as mobile phone, Internet kiosk,
telecentres), a wider distribution of services of e-government services. These very
important issues to be address for the government services to be utilised and realise
the returns from e-government investment.
Government readiness
Government readiness issues such as perceived unpreparedness and inadequate
can have impact on the usage of e-government services. As indicated in the
literature, the progress of the e-government can be measured by assessing the
preparedness of the government towards delivering services in an electronic
environment (UN, 2008). Hence a proper designed communications must be
employed to guarantee that a government is prepared to deliver services online
6. Conclusion
The work presented in this paper describes an effort to provide a clear and adaptable
set of e-government service evaluation factors. This can be applied in Tanzania, a
prime example of a developing country, to help achieve better citizen uptake of e-
government services. The authors’ critical analysis of e-government services
evaluation approaches revealed that few evaluation approaches covered the citizens’
perspectives, and this is even lesser in the developing countries and absent in
Tanzania. Hence, evaluation factors were proposed that covers the user
characteristic, service, infrastructure and government relationship affecting the
citizen uptake of the e-government services.
The empirical validation and examination of the proposed factors are the limitation of
this paper, as they have not been applied in the fieldwork. Therefore, the authors in
the next stage, will perform an empirical validation of the proposed factors. Applying
a case study strategy, which will form the basis for further research, will do this. It is
hope the resulting outcome will help identify the real factors that will measure
citizens’ satisfaction in e-government services.
11"
Reference
Abanumy, A., Al-badi, A., & Mayhew, P. (2005). e-Government Website Accessibility: In-
Depth Evaluation of Saudi Arabia and Oman. The Electronic Journal of e-Government,
3(3), 99–106.
Aichholzer, G. (2004). Scenarios of e-Government in 2010 and implications for strategy
design. Electronic Jounal of E-Government, 2(1), 1–10.
Al-adawi, Z., Yousafzai, S., & Pallister, J. (2005). Conceptual Model of Citizen adoption of E-
government. The Second International Conference on Innovatios in Information
Technology (IIT’05) (pp. 1–10).
Al-jaghoub, S., Al-yaseen, H., & Al-hourani, M. (2010). Evaluation of Awareness and
Acceptability of Using e-Government Services in Developing Countries: the Case of
Jordan. The Electronic Journal Information Systems Evaluation, 13(1), 1 – 8.
Belanger, F., Hiller, J. S., & Smith, W. J. (2002). Trustworthiness in electronic commerce: the
role of privacy, security, and site attributes. Journal of Strategic Information Systems,
11, 245–270.
Beynon-Davies. (2005). Constructing electronic government!: the case of the UK inland
revenue. International Journal of Information Management, 25, 3–20.
doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2004.08.002
Bjørn, F., & Stein, K. (2007). A Rural-Urban Digital Divide? Regional aspects of internet use
in Tanzania. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Social Implications of
Computers in Developing Countries. Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Chen, Y. N., Chen, H. M., Huang, W., & Ching, R. K. H. (2006). E-Government Strategies in
Developed and Developing Countries: An Implementation Framework and Case Study.
Journal of Global Information Management, 14(1), 23–46.
Choudrie, J., & Dwivedi, Y. (2005). A SURVEY OF CITIZENS’ AWARENESS AND
ADOPTION OF E-GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES, THE “GOVENMENT GATEWAY”: A
UNITED KINGDOM PERSPECTIVE. eGovernment Workshop (eGOV05).
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of Qualitative Researc:Techniques and Procedures
for Developing Grounded Theory 3e (3rd Editio.). United States of America: SAGE
Publications, Inc.
12"
Corradini, F., Polzonetti, A., Re, B., & Tesei, L. (2008). Quality of service in e-government
underlines the role of information usability. International Journal Information Quality,
2(2), 133–151.
Eschenfelder, K. R., & Miller, C. (2005). The Openness of Government Websites: Toward a
Socio-Technical Government Website Evaluation Toolkit. MacArthur Foundation Internet
Credibility and the User Symposium. Seattle, Washington, 1–12.
Esteves, J., & Joseph, R. C. (2008). A comprehensive framework for the assessment of
eGovernment projects. Government Information Quarterly, 25(1), 118–132.
doi:10.1016/j.giq.2007.04.009
Gilbert, D., Balestrini, P., & Littleboy, D. (2004). Barriers and benefits in the adoption of e-
government. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 17(4), 286–301.
doi:10.1108/09513550410539794
Goings, D. A., Young, D., & Hendry, S. H. (2003). Critical Factors in the Delivery of e-
Government Services!: Perceptions of Technology Executives. communication of the
International Management Association, 3(3), 1–15.
Gomez, R., & Pather, S. (2012). ICT Evaluation: Are We Asking the Right Questions? The
Electronic Journal on Information System in Developing Countries, 50(5), 1–14.
Grimsley, M., & Meehan, A. (2007). e-Government information systems: Evaluation-led
design for public value and client trust. European Journal of Information Systems, 16,
134–148. doi:10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000674
Halaris, C., Magoutas, B., & Papadomichelaki, X. (2007). Classification and synthesis of
quality approaches in e-government services. Internet Research, 17(4), 378–401.
doi:10.1108/10662240710828058
Irani, Z., Love, P. E. D., Elliman, T., Jones, S., & Themistocleous, M. (2005). Evaluating e-
government: learning from the experiences of two UK local authorities. Information
Systems Journal, 15, 61–82.
Iwaarden, J. van, Wiele, T. van der, Ball, L., & Millen, R. (2003). Applying SERVQUAL to Web
sites: an exploratory study. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management,,
20(8), 919–935.
Jones, S., Iran, Z., & Amir Sharif. (2007). E-GOVERNMENT EVALUATION: REFLECTIONS
ON THREE ORGANISATIONAL CASE STUDIES. Proceeding of the 40th Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences.
13"
Kaisara, G, & Pather, S. (2009). e-Government in South Africa!: e-service quality access and
adoption factors. Proceedings of the 11th Annual Conference On World Wide Web
Applications.
Kaisara, Godwin, & Pather, S. (2011). The e-Government evaluation challenge: A South
African Batho Pele-aligned service quality approach. Government Information Quarterly,
28, 211–221. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2010.07.008
Kumar, M., & Charles, V. (2010). Comparative evaluation of critical factors in delivering
service quality of banks An application of dominance analysis in. International Journal of
Quality & Reliability Management, 27(3), 352–378. doi:10.1108/02656711011023320
Kumar, V., Mukerji, B., Butt, I., & Persaud, A. (2007). Factors for Successful e-Government
Adoption: a Conceptual Framework. The Electronic Journal of E-Government, 5(1), 63 –
76.
Lam, W. (2005). Barriers to e-government integration. The Journal of Enterprise Information
Management, 18(5), 511–530. doi:10.1108/17410390510623981
Lee, H., Irani, Z., Osman, I. H., Balci, A., Ozkan, S., & Medeni, T. D. (2008). Research note
Toward a reference process model for citizen-oriented evaluation of e-Government
services. Transforming Government People Process and Policy, 2(4), 297–310.
doi:10.1108/17506160810917972
Marie Curie. (2008). Deliverable D11: Literature Review Citizen oriented Evaluation of E-
Government Systems (CEES).
Papadomichelaki, X., & Mentzas, G. (2009). A Multiple-Item Scale for Assessing E-
Government Service Quality. Quality, 163–175.
Pather, S., & Usabuwera, S. (2010). Implications of e-Service Quality Dimensions for the
Information Systems Function. Proceedings of the 43rd Hawaii International Conference
on System Sciences (Vol. 0, pp. 2–11).
Pilling, D., & Heike Boeltzig. (2007). Moving Toward E-Government – Effective Strategies for
Increasing Access and Use of the Internet Among Non- Internet Users in the U.S. and
U.K. The Proceedings of the 8th Annual International Digital Government Research
Conference (pp. 35–46).
Sarmad, A., Alahmary, A., & Alalwany, H. (2007). E-government evaluation factors: citizen’s
perspective. Proceedings of European and Mediterranean Conference on Information
Systems (Vol. 2007).
14"
Schwester, R. (2009). Examining the Barriers to e-Government Adoption. Electronic Journal
of e-Government, 7(1), 113–122.
Singgih, M. L., & Ardhiyani, N. (2010). Integrating SERVQUAL with KANO into Quality
Function Deployment (QFD) for Better Quality of Services Case Study: PT Pos
Indonesia, Branch Office of Sidoarjo. 2010 INFORMS Service Science Conference (pp.
419–425). National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei, Taiwan.
Terry, H.-Y., & Zaphiris, P. (2003). The Usability and Content Accessibility of the E-
government in the UK. In C. Stephanidis(Ed.), Universal Access in HCI (pp. 760–764).
UN. (2008). United Nations e-Government Survey 2008: From e-Government to Connected
Governance. New York. NewYork.
URT National Information and Communications Technologies Policy (2003). Dar es Salaam,
Tanzania.
URT Draft Tanzania e-Government Strategy. , President’s Office Public Service
Management. (2008). Dar es Salaam: President’s Office Public Service Management.
Verdegem, P., & Verleye, G. (2009). User-centered E-Government in practice: A
comprehensive model for measuring user satisfaction. Government Information
Quarterly, 26(3), 487–497. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2009.03.005
Wang, L., Bretschneider, S., & Gant, J. (2005). Evaluating Web-based e-government services
with a citizen-centric approach. Proceeding of the 38th Hawaii International Conference
on System Sciences (Vol. 00).
Ward, J., & Daniel, E. (2006). Benefits Management: Delivering Value from IS&IT
Investments. (B. Richard & H. Rudy, Eds.). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Yonazi, J. J. (2010). Enhancing adoption of e-Government initiatives in Tanzania. Groningen:
University of Groningen,.
Zhao, L., Lu, Y., Zhang, L., & Chau, P. Y. K. (2012). Assessing the effects of service quality
and justice on customer satisfaction and the continuance intention of mobile value-
added services: An empirical test of a multidimensional model. Decision Support
Systems, 52, 645–656. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2011.10.022
15"
Appendix 1.
Factors that influence citizen utilisation of e-government services derived from
focus group
Code
No
Open cording
Axial coding (Factors)
Categories
USE1
Awareness {15}
Awareness
User Characteristic
USE2
Education {20}
USE3
Knowledge on ICT{21}
ICT Skill
USE4
User exposure (AWARENESS) {19}
USE5
Mindset {19}
Mindset
USE6
Trust on the Government {16}
USE7
Face to face preference {17
Preference for face to face
GOV1
Poor user Identification system {7-0}
Inadequate infrastructure
Government
readiness
GOV2
Guarantee {21-0}
Perceived unpreparedness
GOV3
Manual Practice in e-Services {19-0}
GOV4
Poor Government practices in service provision {20-0}
GOV5
Slow innovativeness of the Government {12-0}
GOV6
Political Will {22-0}
GOV7
Trust on the Government {19-0}
GOV8
Unethical government employees {1-0}
GOV9
Marketing {2-0}
GOV10
Unsupportive practices for e-Government {25-0}
SER1
Accessibility {2-0}
Service quality
Services issues
SER2
Affordability {3-0}
SER3
Availability {1-0}
SER4
Service Reliability {19-0}
SER5
Easy to Access {19-0}
SER6
Poor Quality Service {19-0}
SER7
Easy to use {25-0}
SER8
Kiswahili {13-0}
SER9
Multilingual {10-0}
SER10
Multichannel {10-0}
SER11
Benefits {17-0} }
Perceived benefits
SER12
Incentive {11-0
SER13
Cost {24-0}
SER14
Timeliness {21-0}
SER15
Usefulness/Relevance {19-0}
SER16
User Friendliness {20-0}
SER17
Security of service {12-0}
Trust
SER18
Trust {14-0}
SER19
Trust on the Government {15-0}
INF1
Availability {19-0}
Inadequate Access technologies
Infrastructure
issues
INF2
ICT Penetration {2-0}
INF3
Lack of Access equipment {19-0}
INF4
Availability {19-0}
INF5
ICT Penetration {21-0}
INF6
Lack of Access equipment {18-0}
INF7
Coverage of Network {29-0}
Inadequate infrastructure
INF8
Lack of e-payment systems {11-0}
INF9
Lack of electricity {32-0}
INF10
Multichannel {16-0}
INF11
Poor infrastructure {18-0}
INF12
Poor user Identification system {19-0}
