Measuring eGovernment Portal Management on the Local Level: Results from a Survey of Public Administration Officials

Abstract

Given the importance of eGovernment portals as an integral access interface of modern public service provision, this contribution concentrates on the issue of the dimensions and derived success factors of these information systems. Starting with the DeLone & McLean IS success model and the resource-based view as foundations, this article conceptualizes the important success factors of eGovernment portals and then integrates these into a research model. The empirical results show the importance of the different dimensions of eGovernment Portal Management as well as the development of eGovernment portals so far. For public service portals on the local level the key management dimensions are information, system, service and privacy management. The evaluation of these dimensions as well as perceived internal and external success in public administration institutions complement user-based quality assessments and highlight organizational strengths and weaknesses.

Full text

International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 1
IPMR
MEASURING EGOVERNMENT PORTAL MANAGEMENT ON THE
LOCAL LEVEL: RESULTS FROM A SURVEY OF PUBLIC
ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS
Bernd W. Wirtz, Linda Mory, Robert Piehler and Peter Daiser
ABSTRACT
Given the importance of eGovernment portals as an integral access interface of modern
public service provision, this contribution concentrates on the issue of the dimensions
and derived success factors of these information systems. Starting with the DeLone &
McLean IS success model and the resource-based view as foundations, this article con-
ceptualizes the important success factors of eGovernment portals and then integrates
these into a research model. The empirical results show the importance of the different
dimensions of eGovernment Portal Management as well as the development of eGov-
ernment portals so far. For public service portals on the local level the key management
dimensions are information, system, service and privacy management. The evaluation of
these dimensions as well as perceived internal and external success in public admin-
istration institutions complement user-based quality assessments and highlight organi-
zational strengths and weaknesses.
Keywords - DeLone & McLean IS Success Model, eGovernment Portal, Resource-
Based View, Structural Equation Modelling, Success Factors
INTRODUCTION
eGovernment applications are a vital interface between citizens and government
(Thomas and Streib, 2003; Charalabidis et al., 2006). They have the potential to trans-
form public service provision, to enhance the image of the public sector, to strengthen
trust in government or administration (Cf. Metaxiotis and Psarras, 2004; Parent et al.,
2005; Scholl, 2005b; Welch et al., 2005) and possess special relevance for advancing
the field of public service through citizen participation (Holzer et al., 2004, p. 7). The
expected eGovernment service potential and its related impacts on existing political
processes, as well as the advancements in information and communication technologies,
have improved research endeavours over the last few decades (Agranoff and McGuire,
2001; Seel and Thomas, 2007, 23; Welch, et al. 2005, 371; Chen, et al. 2006; Yang and
Rho, 2007, 1197; Dawes, 2009). But most research has concentrated on end-user per-
Copyright: © 2014 Bernd W. Wirtz, Linda Mory, Robert Piehler and Peter Daiser. Copyright for this
article is retained by the authors, with first publication rights granted to the International Public Man-
agement Review (IPMR). All journal content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Crea-
tive Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. By virtue of their ap-
pearance in this open-access journal, articles are free to use, with proper attribution, in educational
and other non-commercial settings.
Corresponding Author: ls-wirtz@uni-speyer.de

Measuring eGovernment Portal Management on the Local Level: Results from a Survey of Public Administration Officials
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 2
IPMR
ceptions and characteristics, technology-related factors regarding government websites
design, information access and quality and services offerings (Detlor et al., 2010), lack-
ing an adequate consideration of internal public management success factors of eGov-
ernment portals from a provider-perspective, as pursued in this study.
eGovernment portals
For this purpose, we start off with the following eGovernment definition of Grant and
Chau (2006) which states that eGovernment refers to facilitating the processes of public
will formation, decision-making and service provision in politics, government and ad-
ministration using information and communication technology, especially the Internet,
capable of increasing efficiency and effectiveness (Grant and Chau, 2006, p. 74). The
focus of this eGovernment study is on eGovernment portals, which are defined as “mul-
ti-functional information systems which provide a single point of access to relevant in-
formation and services via the Web-enabled interface” (eDevelopment, 2012). In other
words, eGovernment portals are bundled and integrated communication systems that
allow access to information, processes or applications that are located on different sys-
tems within the public administration but which are accessible to the public on one ded-
icated city website. These eGovernment solutions are particularly appropriate and im-
portant at the local level because municipalities encapsulate most of the procedures and
decision-making authority of the state sector in themselves as well as provide the tech-
nological infrastructure for networked relationships of governance (Lim and Tang,
2006, p. 110). In addition, eGovernment portals at the local level provide a central point
of contact for all citizens (Welch et al., 2005, p. 375). Today, local eGovernment claims
to be, in some cases, already quite user-oriented and interactive; however, uneven diffu-
sion of actual and planned systems and basic services characterizes the status quo in
local eGovernment (Jun and Weare, 2011, p. 497).
Research gap
The described situation fosters the importance of eGovernment portal management on
the local level since eGovernment may substantially improve public service provision
and strengthen public administration reputation (Cf. Holzer et al., 2004, p. 7; Metaxiotis
and Psarras, 2004; Parent et al., 2005; Scholl, 2005b; Welch et al., 2005). Moreover,
eGovernment portals fundamentally influence citizen-government-interaction (Thomas
and Streib 2003; Charalabidis et al. 2006). This matter gains special importance on a
local level since here, eGovernment is still in an emerging stage and has yet to achieve
its full potential (Coursey and Norris, 2008; Capgemini et al., 2009). Aggravating this
situation, the main factors that determine the success of local eGovernment portals from
the perspective of the institutions providing the services are not yet fully understood
(Hung, Chang, and Yu, 2006, 100; Coursey and Norris, 2008) and little knowledge on
what public managers need to undertake in order to further exploit eGovernment poten-
tial is available (Boynton et al., 1994; Zahra and George, 2002; Arduini 2011). What
makes things worse is that the technology and its technical implementation itself may
only show little complexity, while organizational, legal, political and social aspects pro-
vide the bigger challenge (Scholl, 2005a), further increasing the pressure on public
managers. From an investigative perspective, provider-based success models in particu-

Bernd W. Wirtz, Linda Mory, Robert Piehler and Peter Daiser
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 3
IPMR
lar are insufficiently taken into account. In most quantitative multivariate contributions,
the perceptions of users are the sole basis of measurement. But internal public admin-
istration factors cannot be addressed by user-centric studies. Furthermore, concerning
the few confirmatory multivariate provider-based studies, most of them focus on spe-
cialized topics, like tax filing, where the attitudes of administrative staff are analyzed
using models of user perception (Floropoulos et al., 2010; Mohamed et al., 2009) or
internal communication barriers (Sanchez et al., 2003). Therefore, the success dimen-
sions of eGovernment systems from the provider-perspective require further investiga-
tion (Ebrahim and Irani, 2005) and a great need for future eGovernment research pre-
vails (Dawes, 2008), especially regarding the key informant approach moving from a
user-centric to a provider-centric perspective. This is also in line with Rana et al.
(2011), who state that sophisticated attitudinal multivariate studies, which address suc-
cess factors of eGovernment usage, mainly focus on established models of information
system research to explain citizens’ eGovernment usage behavior and Morgeson et al.
(2011) claiming a lack of theory-based research and use of rigorous statistical proce-
dures in the field of eGovernment. Additional support is provided by Jaeger (2003),
Chatfield and Alhujran (2007) as well as Jiang (2011) who remark that - despite their
vital importance - eGovernment portals remain under-investigated. Apart from that, the
scientific environment mentions a shortfall on confirmatory empirical studies since
“[…] a recent review of the e-government literature found a general lack of statistical or
empirical rigor and of formal testing of theory or robust model building” (Morgeson et
al., 2011). Thus, a research gap concerning quantitative confirmatory approaches with
theory building or confirming character prevails, too. Against this background, we ap-
ply a multi-theoretical confirmatory empirical research approach. Given the scientific
and practical relevance of eGovernment portals on a local level, this assists from a sci-
entific and public management perspective by empirically contributing to the conceptu-
alization of eGovernment portal management. Furthermore, we directly address the
problem of a persisting lack of theoretical and practical knowledge on internal public
management success factors of local eGovernment portals from a provider-perspective
as well as the shortfall on confirmatory multivariate empirical studies by applying struc-
tural equation modeling. In this way, we intend to complement theoretic and empirical
knowledge on the factors contributing to the success of eGovernment portals and derive
real-life implications through empirically confirming the developed theory as well as
relevant management factors inside public administration organizations that drive
eGovernment portal success.
Research objectives and proceedings of the study
The design of successful management routines and action parameters on an organiza-
tional level is a phenomenon that should be evaluated using key informants in the or-
ganization. In this way a differentiated concept of success can be applied, which is not
merely limited to individual success measures like acceptance or usage intention. In-
stead, organizational success dimensions like effectiveness and efficiency of internal
processes are in focus. These provide a broadening perspective of potentially problemat-
ic aspects of current eGovernment systems and cannot be directly measured by user
surveys.

Measuring eGovernment Portal Management on the Local Level: Results from a Survey of Public Administration Officials
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 4
IPMR
The main factors that determine the success of local eGovernment portals from the per-
spective of the institutions providing the services are not yet fully understood. There-
fore, this article has two major goals. First, it seeks to develop a conceptual model for
the identification of the factors influencing the success of local eGovernment portals
from a provider-perspective and to analyse the causal relationship between the identi-
fied factors and the success of the eGovernment portal. Therefore, this study aims to
answer the following core research question: What are the management factors inside
public administration organizations that drive eGovernment portal success?
Following from this, the second goal of this article is to add to the empirical knowledge
on the factors contributing to the success of eGovernment portals from a provider-
perspective. Generally, studies on eGovernment portal success that examine complex
relationships tend to come from research showing a user-perspective. While there are a
few good examples of qualitative provider-based research, which is highlighted in the
following chapter, this study uses the quantitative approach of structural equation mod-
elling in order to evaluate whether the proposed theory is supported by the study sam-
ple.
For this purpose, the article is structured as follows: First, we summarize previous re-
search on the success factors behind eGovernment portals. Next, the explanation of the
theoretical framework used for conceptualization of the research model follows. Subse-
quently, the data and indicators as well as the employed method are explained before
reviewing the empirical results. Last, the outcomes are discussed and clear implications
as well as conclusions drawn.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Research investigating the relationships between government, society and technology
has soared over the last decades (Dawes, 2009). To a large degree, this can be attributed
to the development of information and communication technologies, which has radical-
ly transformed the way individuals, organizations, and governments used to work and
communicate (Alawneh et al., 2013). The rapid evolution from rudimentary use of in-
formation and communication technology to administering complex processes and es-
tablishing reliable and powerful tools and networks has changed the way governmental
services and processes are carried out (Clift, 2003; Chen et al., 2006; Dawes, 2008). In
this context, Karunasena and Deng (2012) argue that “[g]overnments around the world
continuously use e-government for transforming their public service delivery, promot-
ing greater interaction between their citizens and government, streamlining the two-way
communication between citizens and governments, improving the efficiency of public
organizations, and saving taxpayer money […]”. Thus, eGovernment services and sys-
tems have become an important agenda for all kinds of governmental organizations. A
cornerstone of this development is the desired cost reduction potential for the respective
organizations and institutions (Bertot et al., 2008). Even though there are good-practice
examples for cost reduction initiatives (Yang and Rho, 2007; Coursey and Norris,
2008), counteracting factors, such as investment costs, rigid staffing plans, inadequate

Bernd W. Wirtz, Linda Mory, Robert Piehler and Peter Daiser
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 5
IPMR
learning curve effects, complex administrative processes and parallel offline service
offerings (Miyata, 2011) as well as difficulties to quantify achieved benefits (Gupta and
Jana, 2003), are regularly identified. However, the expected value-add and the practical
implementation hindrances has led to increasing research interest (Warkentin et al.,
2002; Marche and McNiven, 2003).
So far, research on eGovernment has taken many directions. From an addressee and
technology deployment perspective eGovernment topics have been investigated regard-
ing private organizations, public authorities and the general public (Cf. Moon, 2002;
Wang, 2003; Chu et al., 2004; Moon and Norris, 2005; Huang, 2006). From a content
point of view, much research effort has been put on the following eGovernment topics:
information system and technology related (e.g. Wang, 2003; Fu et al., 2004; Carter and
Bélanger, 2005; Hu et al., 2009; Bertot et al., 2010; Jaeger and Bertot, 2010), citizen
satisfaction and trust (e.g. Parent et al., 2005; Chan et al., 2010), success factors and
barriers (e.g. Dawes, 2002; Gilbert et al., 2004; Angelopoulos et al., 2010; Janssen et
al., 2012), perceived impact (e.g. Norris and Moon, 2005) and benchmarking (Cf. Ben-
basat et al., 2007).
Apart from that, the main focus of eGovernment has been user- or citizen centric deal-
ing with diverse topics, such as cost savings, portal design, benefits, barriers, etc., di-
rectly concerning the user (e.g. Dawes, 2002; Reddick, 2005; Charalabisdis et al., 2006;
Chatfield and AlHujran, 2007; Bertot et al., 2008; Bertot et al., 2010; Luna-Reyes and
Gil-García, 2011; Janssen et al., 2012). Regarding user-centric research, a substantial
part of the investigations adopts the technology acceptance model (Davis, 1989) to
measure the influence of individuals’ intentions and behaviors (e.g. Warkentin et al.,
2002; Gilbert et al., 2004; Bélanger and Carter, 2005; Phang et al., 2005; Hung et al.,
2006; Conklin, 2007; Gefen et al., 2007; Lin et al., 2011). Although eGovernment re-
search in general offers a veritable cornucopia of subjects and findings, investigations
centering public administration officials dealing with eGovernment are generally sparse.
In this context, we would like to mention Gil-Garcia (2006), who applied a mixed-
method research approach to empirically explore the relationships between relative suc-
cess of US government websites and certain organizational and institutional factors. He
derived several success factors that may be summarized as follows: qualified IT staff,
adequate budget, specialized training of responsible officers, in-house development and
marketing measures. Apart from that, Detlor et al. (2010) studied six municipal portals
in Canada applying an empirical research approach focusing on developing and imple-
menting usable and functional government websites. Their recommendations are along
the same lines claiming a skilled and adequately sized IT workforce, clear strategic vi-
sion and direction for the government website, sound website governance and leader-
ship structures and to incorporate the needs of end-users and partners, to have efficient
back-office processes in place, to provide sustainable funding and to run marketing
campaigns to create end-user awareness. Zorlu (2011) empirically benchmarked eGov-
ernment performances of Turkish public institutions and organizations to determine the
effects of a strategic learning system and organizational structure on such a perfor-
mance. Dawes and Pardo (2002) applied an exploratory case study approach investigat-
ing 18 collaborative digital government initiatives. Their findings offer a list of success

Measuring eGovernment Portal Management on the Local Level: Results from a Survey of Public Administration Officials
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 6
IPMR
factors that should be considered to increase collaborative systems success: purpose,
stakeholders, partnership, leadership, managing complexity, skills, resources, communi-
cation, work processes, and explicit design methods. But the main considerations should
be put on accounting for the needs and capabilities of all stakeholders, understanding
the details of all work environments and managing the relationship complexity that
commonly underlie collaborative systems. Another thematically related exploratory
approach to our study was taken by Gil-García and Pardo (2005), who present an analy-
sis of resources that government practitioners use to guide their e-government efforts
(e.g. risk identification, understanding the information and data challenges, setting up a
business case and using contingency thinking in project planning and management). In
this regard, the empirical study of Nfuka and Rusu (2011), which refers to internal effi-
ciency and effectiveness, is also a good example. They say that although benchmarking
studies are usually routinely conducted from public management, these are generally
limited to simple descriptive measurement indicators and do not directly show a local
level focus. Luna-Reyes and Gil-García (2011), who used semi-structured interviews of
project leaders and participants of more than 15 digital government initiatives in Mexi-
co, propose the use of institutional theory and dynamic simulation as an integrated and
comprehensive approach to understand practical eGovernment phenomena. Finally, we
found five other research studies that focus on a provider perspective (e.g. Song et al.,
2004; Elizabeth and Ward, 2006; Angelopoulos, 2010; Cordella and Iannacci, 2010;
Luna et al., 2013) but mainly deal with website design and implementation or eGov-
ernment assessment and framework in general. Summing up, even though there are re-
lated provider-oriented studies available, a shortfall on confirmatory multivariate empir-
ical studies that shed light on the management factors inside public administration or-
ganizations that drive eGovernment portal success is present.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Although research on interactions between stakeholders and public administration via
electronic information and communication technologies is in its early stages (Wirtz et
al., 2012), there exist proper theories for measuring success factors. For this study, the
DeLone and McLean IS success model as well as the resource-based view are regarded
as appropriate underlying theories.
The information systems success model of DeLone and McLean is a framework for
measuring the complex dependent variable in information systems research. The model
contains three determinants: information quality refers to the content of the system; sys-
tem quality refers to the technical characteristics of the system and service quality refers
to the IT-support based offers to facilitate use of the system (DeLone and McLean,
1992). These three variables reflect the relevant resources for the successful implemen-
tation and maintenance of an information system. In the context of public administra-
tion, information quality refers to citizen-centric and service-oriented content offers that
facilitates and supports government in citizen interactions. System quality in the context
of electronic public service offerings is related to technology-induced trust and it there-
fore constitutes a necessity for all transactional offerings (Teo et al., 2008). Service

Bernd W. Wirtz, Linda Mory, Robert Piehler and Peter Daiser
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 7
IPMR
quality is primarily oriented towards technical support offers that enhance usability and
ease of use of public service offerings like a navigation structure on a portal website that
is based on citizen needs rather than the organisational structure of the service provider.
This factor includes qualitative aspects regarding user support in the use of the infor-
mation system (Tan et al., 2008). These aspects include compassion and encouragement
for the user during use. Within the overall IS model structure, the variables information
quality, system quality and service quality have a direct influence on the individual im-
pact variables intention to use and user satisfaction. Both variables in turn ultimately
determine perceived net benefits, which is the sum of positive and negative organiza-
tional impacts of system use (DeLone and McLean, 1992). Due to its clearly structured
specification of the basic hypotheses within the framework of success factor research
and its applicability to different areas, this theory provides a firm foundation for concep-
tualizing and operationalizing eGovernment portal success factors and the dimensions
of eGovernment portal management that lie behind that success. Thus, in the literature,
the model is seen as an important instrument for explaining the success of information
systems (Petter et al., 2008, p. 236). Since we focus on the evaluation and measurement
of local eGovernment portals, the DeLone and McLean IS success model thus shows to
be a perfect match for the research and presents the main theoretical basis of this study.
The second relevant theoretical foundation for this study is the resource-based view,
which is an established economic theory that explains organizational success through
specific input factors (Ireland et al., 2002, p. 427). It belongs to the most influential
management theories and aspires to explain how the internal resources of an organiza-
tion can be of a tangible or intangible nature, how their core characteristic is detecting
and responding to market opportunities or threats (Ireland et al., 2002) and how they
bring sustained competitive advantage. In order to achieve this, the organization needs
to possess and control valuable, rare, inimitable and non-substitutable resources and
capabilities (Cf. Barney, 1991; Barney, 1994; Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000; Kraaijen-
bring et al., 2010). The resource-based view can be considered an essential paradigm in
management science (Priem and Buttler, 2001; Kraaijenbring et al. 2010), which is reg-
ularly applied in empirical research to investigate organizational success (Priem and
Buttler, 2001; Ireland et al., 2002). In this context, the resource-based view’s focus on
resources and capabilities of an organization - being the primary constants for establish-
ing sustained competitive advantage (Grant, 1991) - provides considerable explanatory
power for organizational success. Dealing with internal resources related success fac-
tors, we thus applied the basic assumptions of the underlying theories in order to adapt
the conceptualization and operationalization from a user-based to a provider-based per-
spective. For this purpose, the wording of resource-based scales was used to match the
relevant management dimensions of public administration (Cf. Acedo et al., 2006).
Therefore, attitudes regarding the relevant resources in terms of information, system,
service and privacy management are applied.
Since the DeLone and McLean IS success model and the resource-based view are based
on similar assumptions and conditions, they complement each other well and can be
merged into an empirically meaningful explanatory model. This has often been shown
in other scientific eGovernment and public administration contributions in which both

Measuring eGovernment Portal Management on the Local Level: Results from a Survey of Public Administration Officials
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 8
IPMR
theories have been applied to the field (Lan and Anders, 2000; Llewellyn and Tappin,
2003; Chang et al., 2005; Pablo et al., 2007; Prybutok et al., 2008; Wang and Liao,
2008; Diefenbach, 2009; Chen, 2010). For these reasons, the DeLone and McLean IS
success model and the resource-based view are applied as underlying theories.
CONCEPTUALIZATION AND HYPOTHESES GENERATION
Having described the theoretical framework of the study, including identification of the
general model parameters of the DeLone and McLean IS success model as well as the
theoretical implications of the resource-based view, we now ascertain the determinants
or success factors, influencing eGovernment portal success.
Following an extended understanding of the resource-based view, from the perspective
of this article the most relevant resources of public institutions are seen as intangible
management attitudes and behavioral routines (Eisenhardt and Martin, 2003, p. 341).
These are conceptualized as the result of management performance. It is therefore a
specific set of intangible input factors that creates a resource in this context. The use of
these resources constitutes a success factor among comparable public institutions. The
term management is used to describe this resource-based conceptualization of eGov-
ernment portal success factors since most resources in the context of eGovernment por-
tals are complex integrated bundles of attitudes and behavioral routines. This is due to
the fact that most tangible resources, like server hardware or office equipment, do not
meet the necessary resource conditions of the resource-based view. In this context,
management refers to a set of process-related functional resource dimensions and thus,
is understood as the refined use of specific resources by chief executives of public ad-
ministration organizations.
Considering the theoretical framework, we identified four potentially relevant dimen-
sions that represent eGovernment portal management with regards to the study: infor-
mation management, system management, service management and privacy manage-
ment. The factor information quality from the DeLone and McLean IS success model is
an essential element for the assessment of a website (Welch and Pandey, 2007, p. 386)
as well as an important and strong success factor when investigating overall IS success
(Petter and McLean, 2009, p. 163). In the context of this study, information manage-
ment is deduced from information quality and describes the essential characteristics of
the information provided in an information system as well as the corresponding re-
sources that contribute to the success of the system (Teo et al., 2008, p. 106). Ap-
proaches to conceptualizing information management are provided in the theoretical
literature, especially on the DeLone and McLean IS success model. In the context of
eGovernment, there exist conceptualization approaches that can be consulted, such as
Benbasat et al. (2007), Teo et al. (2008), Prybutok et al. (2008) as well as Verdegem
and Verleye (2009). In addition, appropriate approaches can be drawn from the field of
eBusiness (Cf. DeLone and McLean, 2004; Wang, 2008).
System quality, which is another key component of the DeLone and McLean IS success
model, here referred to as system management, includes all the technological aspects of
an information system and the corresponding resources of eGovernment service provid-

Bernd W. Wirtz, Linda Mory, Robert Piehler and Peter Daiser
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 9
IPMR
ers that have a significant meaning for success. In this context, the use of automated
programs to monitor performance and the quality of the systems deserve special men-
tion. In addition, the factor system management also subsumes the fault tolerance of the
IT infrastructure and the performance capability of the servers as well as the regularity
of inspections of security procedures and systems to assess possible vulnerabilities. The
key management task for public administration officials in this domain is to generate
awareness for the external implications of these technology-centred aspects regarding
public service offerings. In addition to drawing from the criteria of the theoretical basis
from the relevant literature on eGovernment, the studies of Teo et al. (2008) and Pry-
butok et al. (2008) were identified as further starting points for conceptualization. Fur-
thermore, a review of studies in the context of eBusiness was conducted. Here, the study
of Ravichandran and Lertwongsatein (2005), which approached the subject from the
theoretical perspective of the resource-based view, is of special importance.
Another important domain for the evaluation of public administration resources is ser-
vice delivery and quality. For this analysis, aspects of the DeLone and McLean model
as well as relevant work from service-related marketing research were considered. Thus,
service management includes resource-related criteria to ensure the quality of support
services as well as IT support tasks. In addition, the factor focuses on public manage-
ment topics such as the availability of clear guidelines for prioritizing citizen requests,
the availability of sophisticated systems for mapping, recording and processing of citi-
zen requests, and also the existence of service level agreements with all user groups
within and outside the administration. Setting appropriate standards for IT service quali-
ty monitoring is a further component of the factor service management. In addition to
the conceptual approaches of eGovernment specific studies, such as those carried out by
Zeithaml et al. (2000), Kantsperger and Kunz (2005), Parent et al. (2005), Benbasat et
al. (2007), Teo et al. (2008), Prybutok et al. (2008) or Tan et al. (2008), the appropriate
marketing literature has been considered as well. In this regard, especially the study by
Ravichandran and Lertwongsatein (2005) was examined more closely, as it used the
resource-based view as its theoretical basis. Also based on the theoretical framework of
the resource-based view was the study of Ray et al. (2005), which examined the subject
from a service-related marketing perspective. Both studies provide useful starting points
for the conceptualization and operationalization of the relevant success.
In the literature, the importance of data security and privacy for the acceptance of
eGovernment is often emphasized (Conklin, 2007, p. 3; Gilbert et al., 2004, p. 293;
Sanchez et al., 2003, p. 836). In this context, the aspects of trust in the technology and
trust in the institution are of particular importance (Bélanger and Carter, 2008, p. 166).
Due to the high relevance of the factor privacy management it is considered a potential
determinant of the success of local eGovernment portals along with information man-
agement, system management and service management. Regarding the conceptualiza-
tion of the factor privacy management, the publications of Sanchez et al. (2003); Gilbert
et al. (2004); Bélanger and Carter (2008); Teo et al. (2008); and Verdegem and Verleye
(2009) are considered appropriate, as they refer to the safety aspects of eGovernment. In
addition, in the area of eBusiness the studies of Baker and Wallace (2007), Hong et al.

Measuring eGovernment Portal Management on the Local Level: Results from a Survey of Public Administration Officials
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 10
IPMR
(2003), Flavián and Guinalíu (2006) and Kritzinger and Smith (2008) are used for the
conceptualization of this factor.
Taken together, the following four dimensions information management, system man-
agement, service management and privacy management are the indicators representing
overall eGovernment portal management. Summing up, we formulate the following four
confirmatory-descriptive hypotheses:
Hypothesis 1: Information management is a key dimension of eGovernment
portal management
Hypothesis 2: System management is a key dimension of eGovernment portal
management
Hypothesis 3: Service management is a key dimension of eGovernment por-
tal management
Hypothesis 4: Privacy management is a key dimension of eGovernment por-
tal management
According to relevant eGovernment literature, conceptual or operational approaches
useful to conceptualize eGovernment portal success in terms of management resources
are not sufficient. Therefore, we broadened the research perspective and consulted the
relevant eBusiness literature. Furthermore, the applicable findings from this research
stream where discussed and verified through expert interviews with eGovernment pro-
fessionals. Based on the outcome of this approach, eGovernment portal success is con-
ceptualized as a construct of eGovernment success resulting in an additional hypothesis
that reflects the causal relationship between the eGovernment portal management and
the resulting eGovernment portal success. This is expressed in the following confirma-
tory-explicative hypothesis:
Hypothesis 5: The higher eGovernment portal management, the greater
eGovernment portal success
METHODS
These five hypotheses are empirically examined in the following sections. Wherever
possible, this study’s variables were measured using multiple item measures that have
been successfully tested in earlier studies.
Operationalization
The following table shows the key sources used for the operationalization of the derived
success factors within this research study. After consulting the suggested criteria for
distinguishing formative and reflective indicator models (Jarvis et al., 2003), we gained
a clear indication of applying a reflective conceptualization for the constructs.

Bernd W. Wirtz, Linda Mory, Robert Piehler and Peter Daiser
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 11
IPMR
Table 1: Structure and Sources of latent variables
Construct
Structure
Sources
Information Ma-
nagement
9 indicators
Reflective indicators
Management actions to ensure
information quality
Prybutok et al. (2008)
Teo et al. (2008)
System Management
8 indicators
Reflective indicators
Management actions to ensure
running systems
Ravichandran and Lertwongsatein (2005)
Prybutok et al. (2008)
Service Management
6 indicators
Reflective indicators
Management actions to assist the
user
Ravichandran and Lertwongsatein (2005)
Benbasat et al. (2007)
Privacy Manage-
ment
8 indicators
Reflective indicators
Management of data security
Suh and Han (2003)
Verdegeem and Verleye 2009
Expert interviews
eGovernment
Portal Success
5 indicators
Reflective indicators
Perceptions regarding number of
users
Achjari and Quaddus (2004)
Expert interviews
Concerning information management, aspects such as timeliness and accuracy or com-
pleteness are taken into account. Further relevant performance indicators are reliability
and clarity. For a manager of an electronic public service portal these aspects can be
primarily controlled by means of knowledge management and citizen feedback. Since
most of the studies used a reflective conceptualization of information quality, this sup-
ports our decision of adapting this approach for the factor information management. The
same holds true for system management, which in accordance with Bharadwaj et al.
(1999), Ravichandran and Lertwongsatein (2005), Prybutok et al. (2008) and Khaiata
and Zualkernan (2009) are conceptualized reflectively, too. The reflective coverage of
the factor service management has also been successfully used by other authors (Parent
et al., 2005; Benbasat et al., 2007; Prybutok et al., 2008; Teo et al., 2008; Wang, 2008).
Here, especially the measurement approaches of Ravichandran and Lertwongsatein
(2005) and Benbasat et al. (2007) provided helpful measurement sources. Concerning
privacy management, the level of data protection is measured as a form of resources and
the awareness of managerial staff in public administrations regarding the importance of
protecting users’ personal information. Moreover, management routines that focus on
the exclusive authorized use of user information, preventing unauthorized access to per-
sonal user data and the ability to delete personal information upon request of users were
also included in the operationalization. In addition, technological aspects of citizen in-
teraction are also relevant. These include, in terms of the privacy management factor,
resources regarding the safety of interaction, for example by encrypted connections,
and, related to this, the confidentiality of citizens’ usage behaviour. With respect to op-
erationalization of eGovernment portal success, the conducted expert interviews are

Measuring eGovernment Portal Management on the Local Level: Results from a Survey of Public Administration Officials
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 12
IPMR
major points of reference. These indicate that the most interesting thing to look at is the
number of unique visitors to the city portal in relation to the number of inhabitants in
the municipality. Within the relevant eBusiness literature, Achjari and Quaddus (2004)
are a reference for researching unique visitors. They developed an item regarding the
number of unique visitors visiting a site within their factor Electronic Commerce Suc-
cess. Another important aspect of the factor eGovernment portal success is the number
of visitors that visit the city portal frequently. To complete the operationalization, the
derived factors are displayed in the final research model presented in the following fig-
ure.
Figure 1: Final Research Model
According to methodical literature, the model and the constructs were - complementary
to the literature research - verified in qualitative interviews with 10 public administra-
tion experts from the target sample to optimize item verbalization and ensure their com-
prehensibility (Chang et al., 2011). Regarding privacy management the following item -
in addition to the literature results - “Overall, the city portal has a high level of data pro-
tection” was added. Concerning eGovernment portal success, the expert interviews fi-
nally led to the incorporation of three additional items: “The city portal has many regu-
larly recurring users”, “The city portal has many users” and “Overall, the number of
users of city portals can be regarded a success”. In summary, this approach led to a
well-coordinated survey operationalization reflecting theoretical and practical
knowledge.
Sample and data
The empirical examination was conducted in Germany through an online survey of
eGovernment portal managers of all cities exceeding 10,000 inhabitants. Due to the fed-
Information
Management
Privacy
Management
Service
Management
System
Management
eGovernment
Portal
Success
eGovernment
Portal
Management
Information
Management
Privacy
Management
Service
Management
System
Management
eGovernment
Portal
Success
eGovernment
Portal
Management

Bernd W. Wirtz, Linda Mory, Robert Piehler and Peter Daiser
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 13
IPMR
eral structure of Germany and corresponding differences regarding the strategic align-
ment of eGovernment initiatives, a multitude of disparate electronic public service por-
tal solutions on the local level have emerged (Schuppan, 2009). Therefore, the case of
Germany constitutes a very useful example to examine structure and effect of public
administration resources in this sector since a high level of variance can be assumed. An
online questionnaire was preferred to an oral survey because, above all, it facilitates
taking part in the survey and increases response rates (Zikmund et al., 2013; Christensen
et al., 2015). To counter any communication problems that might arise from ambiguous-
ly phrased indicators and rule out any kind of misunderstanding as far as possible, we
applied several tests when designing and conducting the survey. We started with an ex-
tensive literature review and expert interviews (Chang et al., 2011) and conducted pre-
tests including think-aloud and item-sorting test as well as a preliminary test-run with
selected participants (Anderson and Gerbing, 1991; Johnstone, Bottsford-Miller and
Thompson, 2006; Radermacher and Sattelberger, 2010) in November and December
2011.
For this study, the basic population was eGovernment portal chief officers of all cities
above 10,000 inhabitants in Germany. Following from this, a database of 1,986 contacts
(Statistisches Bundesamt, 2012) could be gathered. Between January and February
2012, we contacted all 1,986 identified contacts via email and asked them to participate
in the online survey. Overall, we collected 246 responses, from which 227 responses
could be included in the analysis. This equals a response rate of 12.4%.
After an initial data screening, we checked for non- or late-response bias, which indi-
cates that there may be differences between respondents and non-respondents (Ruxton,
2006; Fuller, 2009, p. 281; Zikmund et al., 2013, p. 220), comparing early- and late-
respondents (Fuller, 2009, p. 281; Johnson and Wislar, 2012). Non-response bias was
not found in the sample since late responses did not vary significantly from early ones.
Thus, non-response bias does not seem to be an issue (Armstrong and Overton, 1977).
However, non-response bias cannot be rejected completely because reasons for answer-
ing late may vary from reasons for not answering a survey at all (Flint and Mentzer,
1997). Apart from that, we tested for the presence of common method bias. Therefore,
Harman’s one-factor test, which tests if the majority of the variance can be explained by
a single factor, was conducted (Harman, 1976). A common method effect was not
found.
In general, the majority of responses come from medium sized municipalities. Approx-
imately 80% of the responses come from cities being smaller than 100,000 inhabitants.
Since roughly 70% of the population in Germany lives in cities smaller than 100,000
inhabitants (Cf. Statistisches Bundesamt, 2012), we are satisfied with this figure.

Measuring eGovernment Portal Management on the Local Level: Results from a Survey of Public Administration Officials
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 14
IPMR
Figure 2: Descriptive Variables of the Sample (Size)
In terms of state affiliation a balanced sample, with the exception of Hamburg as a sin-
gle-municipality state and a higher response rate from municipalities in the Southern
and Western states, could be reached.
27%
43%
9%
10%
7%
4%
<15,000
15,001-50,000
50,001-100,000
100,001-250,000
250,001-500,000
>500,000
Inhabitants

Bernd W. Wirtz, Linda Mory, Robert Piehler and Peter Daiser
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 15
IPMR
Figure 3: Descriptive Variables of the Sample (State)
For comparative reasons of the portals, the number of years the corresponding eGov-
ernment portal has been online was collected. 82% of the respective eGovernment por-
tals have been in place between 5 and 16 years, indicating the largest single group of
around 10 years with roughly 45% of the sample.
Figure 4: Descriptive Variables of the Sample (Years Online)
0%
1%
1%
2%
2%
2%
3%
3%
4%
5%
5%
9%
14%
14%
15%
20%
Hamburg
Bremen
Berlin
Thuringia
Schleswig-Holstein
Saarland
Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania
Rhineland-Palatinate
Saxony
Saxony-Anhalt
Brandenburg
Lower Saxony
Bavaria
Baden-Wuerttemberg
Hesse
North Rhine-Westphalia
State Affiliation of Municipalities
1%
13%
19%
45%
18%
4%
0
1-4
5-8
9-12
13-16
>16 years
eGov Portal Years Online

Measuring eGovernment Portal Management on the Local Level: Results from a Survey of Public Administration Officials
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 16
IPMR
Furthermore, the job title of the responding public management officials were collected
and analysed for the sample.
Figure 5: Descriptive Variables of the Sample (Job Title)
Since we did not locate significant descriptive irregularities in the data and the respons-
es seem well balanced, a statistical analysis of the sample is regarded viable.
Method of examination and test criteria
For the present analysis, covariance structure analysis was chosen, as it particularly
suits the research of latent variables and is of a strong hypotheses-testing nature. Hair et
al. (2010) argue that models up to seven constructs require a minimum sample size of
150. Chin and Newsted (1999) generally demand a sample larger than 200 if one is to
obtain statistically robust results (Chin and Newsted, 1999, p. 336). As both require-
ments are fulfilled for the present study, we decided to apply a covariance structure
analysis. Overall, the statistical tool AMOS 18.0 was used for the empirical analysis of
the research model.
In order to assess the quality of an operationalization, a large number of criteria have
been established in the literature. In this context, a distinction can be made between cri-
teria of the first and the second generation. Among the criteria of the first generation are
Cronbach’s alpha, the item-to-total correlation and the exploratory factor analysis, all of
which are considered within this research study. The criteria of the second generation
comprise indicator reliability, factor reliability and average variance extracted as well as
chi-squared value, goodness-of-fit index (GFI), adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI),
comparative-fit index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) and root-mean-squared-error-of-
3%
4%
5%
5%
10%
11%
12%
14%
37%
Editor
Office Assistant
Administrator
District Magistrate
Public Relations Worker
Head Official
Office Supervisor
IT Supervisor
Official
Respondent Job Title

Bernd W. Wirtz, Linda Mory, Robert Piehler and Peter Daiser
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 17
IPMR
approximation (RMSEA) (Hair et al., 2010, p. 664; Hu and Bentler, 1999, p. 27; Kline,
2011, p. 199). All of these are used in the following empirical analysis of the research
model. Furthermore, the common values for the criteria of good quality measurement
are employed in this study and validity and reliability are examined in a multi-level pro-
cess (Hair et al., 2010, p. 654).
EMPIRICAL RESULTS
The analysis of the individual measurement models shows that the used indicators are
highly reliable and valid. This was tested by conducting an exploratory factor analysis
(EFA) and a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The EFA revealed that all indicators of
one measure load only on one factor and explain at least 50 % of the variance. Moreo-
ver, the standard value of the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) criterion is met for all fac-
tors. The same is true for Cronbach’s alpha. With the help of the CFA the factor struc-
ture and convergence validity are successfully confirmed. Moreover, each construct
shows confirmatory factor reliability as well as average variance extracted clearly above
the suggested minimum values of 0.6 and 0.5 (Bagozzi and Yi 1988) respectively (for
further details please see measurement model tables in the appendix). Following the
verification of the measurement models, discriminant validity was tested with the For-
nell-Larcker criterion, which states that if the average variance extracted of a construct
is higher than any squared correlation with another construct then it may be assumed
that discriminant validity is met (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). As shown in the following
figure, this quality measure is met for all factors.
Figure 6: Fornell-Larcker-Criterion
With established validity, the entire model is examined in the next step. Figure 7 pre-
sents the results of the causal-analytical examination of the dimensions of eGovernment
portal management and the resulting eGovernment portal success in the cases examined.
1 2 3 4 5
Information Management (1) 0.662
System Management (2) 0.155 0.540
Service Management (3) 0.123 0.353 0.570
Privacy Management (4) 0.127 0.387 0.274 0.632
eGovernment Portal Success (5) 0.190 0.162 0.221 0.221 0.796

Measuring eGovernment Portal Management on the Local Level: Results from a Survey of Public Administration Officials
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 18
IPMR
Figure 7: Empirical Examination of the Research Model
The empirical results suggest that the theoretical model accurately captures the pattern
of the relationships found in the data. On the whole, the empirical model shows a good
fit. With a value of 0.930 of the TLI and a value of 0.937 of the CFI, both criteria are
above the minimum requirements of ≥ 0.9. The same can be stated for the CMIN/df,
which with a value of 1.916 is way under the minimum requirements of ≤ 5 and can be
considered as a good indicator for the overall model fit. It needs to be emphasized that,
as in the paper of Steiger (1990), for this study the GFI-HAT and the AGFI-HAT is
used, as the GFI and AGFI tend to be overestimated in complex models. The value of
the AGFI-HAT is 0.952 and thus, above the minimum requirements of ≥ 0.85. The val-
ue of the GFI-HAT shows good quality with 0.960 clearly exceeding the minimum re-
quirement of 0.9. The RMSEA - being important in complex models - shows a particu-
larly good value (0.064) and is well below the maximum limit of 0.08. Consistent with
the proposed hypotheses, eGovernment portal management consists of the four theoreti-
cal derived dimensions and has a substantial direct effect on the resulting eGovernment
portal success. The following will elaborate on the dimensions of eGovernment Portal
Management before presenting the results of the structural relationship between the fac-
tors eGovernment Portal Management and eGovernment portal success.
The results reveal that all four dimensions are highly significant for the factor eGov-
ernment portal management. In this regard, the factor system management, with a value
Information
Management
Privacy
Management
Service
Management
System
Management
.734***
.735***
.790***
.525***
.599***
CMIN/df = 1.916 GFI (HAT) = 0.960 TLI = 0.930 Significance level:
CFI = 0.937 AGFI (HAT) = 0.952 RMSEA = 0.064 * α ≤ 0.10; ** α ≤ 0.05; *** α ≤ 0.01
eGovernment
Portal
Success
eGovernment
Portal
Management

Bernd W. Wirtz, Linda Mory, Robert Piehler and Peter Daiser
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 19
IPMR
of 0.790, has to be highlighted, as it is the dimension that is most important for eGov-
ernment portal management. Furthermore, the dimensions service management and pri-
vacy management need to be emphasized, as they have high and similar values of 0.734
and 0.735 and, therefore, are relevant dimensions for eGovernment portal management
as well. Information management with 0.525 shows the smallest path coefficient but
nevertheless is still highly significant. All in all, hypotheses 1, 2, 3, and 4 cannot be
rejected.
Furthermore, the empirical study of the path relationship between eGovernment portal
management and eGovernment portal success reveals that hypothesis 5 cannot be re-
jected either. The highly significant path coefficient of 0.599 from eGovernment portal
management to eGovernment portal success indicates a clear effect on eGovernment
portal success.
DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS, IMPLICATIONS AND LIMITATIONS
This study constitutes a theory-driven contribution to the empirical identification and
measurement of the success factors behind eGovernment portals from a provider-
perspective since we developed a specific eGovernment portal success model based on
the DeLone and McLean IS success model and the resource-based view. Especially the
combination of the four portal management related constructs, information manage-
ment, system management, service management and privacy management, allows a
meaningful modelling approach. These four dimensions highly significantly manifest
eGovernment portal management, which again builds a highly significant relationship to
eGovernment portal success. Thus, all constructs could be empirically confirmed, which
enhances the understanding of relevant factors of eGovernment portal management and
success.
According to a broad common understanding in the scientific literature, our information
management findings also indicate the importance of relevant information to build up or
maintain a successful eGovernment portal (Cf. DeLone and McLean, 1992; Wu and
Chen, 2005; Bertot et al., 2008; Jaeger and Bertot, 2010). The lower coefficient may be
due to the situation that information management is not a key work task of providers of
the portal but is instead mainly a task for the public relations or communications de-
partment of the city. System management, which according to the DeLone and McLean
IS success model is another key success component (Cf. DeLone and McLean 1992;
2004), has been confirmed to possess a significant meaning for success in the context of
our study as well. Service management shows high coefficient paths to eGovernment
portal management. Here, we assume that this may be related to effective user support
and effective data protection on the administration portal. Privacy management shows -
in accordance with our previous findings from the literature review - highly significant
coefficient paths and thus, indicates considerable importance of data and privacy securi-
ty (Conklin, 2007; Gilbert et al., 2004; Sanchez et al., 2003) as well as trust in the tech-
nology and trust in the institution (Bélanger and Carter, 2008). Therefore, privacy is a
crucial factor that needs to be maintained and continually observed (Cf. Cavoukian
2010; van Lieshout et al. 2011). Moreover, public administration officers should take

Measuring eGovernment Portal Management on the Local Level: Results from a Survey of Public Administration Officials
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 20
IPMR
care that adequate guidelines are in place and communicated to the relevant citizens to
create awareness of security and privacy (Cf. Xu et al. 2008). Apart from these contex-
tual findings, the measurement scales employed proved to be valid and reliable and are
therefore suitable for future analyses in the field of success factor research in public
administration.
The obtained results indicate manifold public managerial implications. Regarding prac-
tical information management, the public officer in charge needs to ensure that the por-
tal is up-to-date and shows clear, precise and reliable user-oriented information. Thus,
in-house control over the website, a sound website governance and leadership structures
to incorporate end-user relevant information need to be ensured (Cf. Gil-Garcia, 2006;
Detlor et al., 2010). From a system management perspective the provider has to take
care to have automated performance monitoring applications and clear contingency
plans in place. Moreover, awareness and a common understanding of the potential im-
plications of portal down-time due to system crashes and failure should be present
throughout the group of responsible officers dealing with the eGovernment portal (Cf.
Prybutok et al., 2008; Lee, 2010; Lin et al., 2011). For service management, well-
defined service-level-agreements with the respective parties, clear guidelines, special-
ized training of responsible officers as well as back-office processes to efficiently han-
dle user service requests are of vital importance (Cf. Gil-Garcia, 2006; Bertot et al.,
2008; Prybutok et al., 2008; Detlor et al., 2010; Lee, 2010). Since privacy is a crucial
factor (Cf. Cavoukian 2010; van Lieshout et al. 2011), public administration officers
should also take care that adequate security guidelines are in place and communicated to
the relevant citizens to create privacy awareness (Cf. Xu et al. 2008).
Furthermore, we derived practical implications that explicitly address the area of re-
sponsibility of eGovernment portal administrators. On the one hand, the integrated na-
ture of the portal management process needs to be considered when planning and im-
plementing eGovernment portals since a one-sided approach may reduce the overall
success. Thus, awareness of all relevant management dimensions needs to be strength-
ened among administrative staff. On the other hand, the results highlight the importance
of specialized trainings for employees that manage eGovernment portals in order to en-
sure that they possess sufficient knowledge of all relevant task dimensions (Gil-Garcia,
2006; Detlor et al., 2010). In this context, specifically processes that are not technical,
like the provision of support services, need high attention. Furthermore, there needs to
be an adequate pool of technical resources to support the setup as well as service and
maintenance of stable systems (Cf. Gil-Garcia, 2006; Detlor et al., 2010) since unavail-
able tools limit the exploitation potential of eGovernment portals.
Irrespective of the theoretical and practical contributions, the results also have their lim-
itations. Since this study refers to a particular period and hence represents the range of
opinion within only a short time frame, it would be of interest to carry out a longitudinal
study and to compare those results with the present results. Moreover, this study has
been conducted on a national level in a single country. Thus, it would be interesting to
approach the research object from a cross-national perspective as well. In addition, the
integration of leadership based constructs (Prybutok et al., 2008) as possible determi-
nants could be fruitful. Also user acceptance-based concepts like perceived risk could

Bernd W. Wirtz, Linda Mory, Robert Piehler and Peter Daiser
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 21
IPMR
be adapted to the provider-perspective of eGovernment portals. A direct comparison
between the user- and provider-perspective using a multi-level methodology may be
another important research objective.
CONCLUSION
The results of this study highlight the relevance of eGovernment portal management
aspects of public administrations at the local level. Given the professionalism of the key
informants and their high degree of experience with eGovernment portals an important
perspective has been added to this research stream of public administration. With the
Delone and McLean IS success model an established framework of information system
research was successfully transferred to a provider-perspective. This transfer increases
the content validity of the measures. Furthermore, several conclusions relevant to pro-
viders of local eGovernment portals can be drawn from the analysis. First, the four di-
mensions information management, system management, service management and pri-
vacy management of eGovernment portal management are important to consider when
improving existing eGovernment portals, incorporating new functions or establishing a
new system. Second, the process of managing an eGovernment portal proves to be high-
ly integrated. However, from an operator perspective system management is a key con-
tributor to the success of the local portal and therefore, deserves special attention. Third,
provided information needs to be clear, precise, up-to-date, reliable and user-oriented.
Forth, a technical and resource environment to reduce portal down-time as much as pos-
sible should be in place. This also refers to suitable service-level-agreements and clear
guidelines and back-office processes to efficiently handle user service requests. Last,
privacy is of vital importance and needs to be maintained by all means.
Apart from the public management benefits, the study also contributes to the advance-
ment of the scientific discourse since additional insight into success factor research
could be achieved and the empirical scientific basis of the field of sustainability and
quality enhancement within public administration could be improved. Moreover, the
results complement the findings of user-based studies and broaden the field of eGov-
ernment research. Despite the limitations of this study, scientific and practical implica-
tions for public administration could be derived and suggestions for further research are
provided.
Bernd W. Wirtz holds the Chair for Information and Communication Management at the German
University of Administrative Sciences Speyer, Germany and is a member of the German Research
Institute for Public Administration Speyer, Germany. Email: ls-wirtz@uni-speyer.de
Robert Piehler works as a Requirements Engineer for electronic ticketing at DB Bahn in Frankfurt,
Germany. Formerly he analyzed electronic services as a Research Fellow at the German Research
Institute for Public Administration in Speyer, Germany. Email: admin@robert-piehler.de
Linda Mory works as a Project Consultant at SAP SE in Walldorf, Germany. Formerly she worked as
a Research Fellow at the German University in Speyer where she did her doctorate at the Chair for
Information and Communication Management. Email: linda.mory@gmx.de
Peter Daiser works as a Research Assistant and is a Ph.D. candidate at the Chair for Information and
Communication Management at the German University of Administrative Sciences Speyer, Germany.
Email: daiser@uni-speyer.de

Measuring eGovernment Portal Management on the Local Level: Results from a Survey of Public Administration Officials
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 22
IPMR
REFERENCES
Acedo, F. J., Barroso, C., & Galan, J. L. (2006). The resource‐based theory: dissemina-
tion and main trends. Strategic Management Journal, 27(7), 621–636.
Achjari, D., & Quaddus, M. A. (2004). Electronic commerce success model: A search
for multiple criteria. Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business, 6(2004).
Agranoff, R., & McGuire, M. (2001). Big questions in public network management re-
search. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11(3), 295–326.
Alawneh, A., Al-Refai, H., & Batiha, K. (2013). Measuring user satisfaction from e-
Government services: Lessons from Jordan. Government Information Quarterly,
30(3), 277–288.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1991). Predicting the performance of measures in a
confirmatory factor analysis with a pretest assessment of their substantive validi-
ties. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(5), 732.
Angelopoulos, S., Kitsios, F., & Papadopoulos, T. (2010). New service development in
e-government: identifying critical success factors. Transforming Government:
People, Process and Policy, 4(1), 95–118.
Arduini, D., Zanfei, A., Denni, M., & Giungato, G. (2011). The egovernment services
delivery of the Italian municipalities. In Electronic Government (pp. 144–158).
Springer.
Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977). Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys.
Journal of marketing research, 396–402.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Jour-
nal of the academy of marketing science, 16(1), 74–94.
Baker, W. H., & Wallace, L. (2007). Is information security under control?: Investigat-
ing quality in information security management. Security & Privacy, IEEE, 5(1),
36–44.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of
management, 17(1), 99–120.
Barney, J. B. (1994). Bringing managers back in: a resource-based analysis of the role
of managers in creating and sustaining competitive advantages for firms. Does
management matter, 3–36.
Bélanger, F., & Carter, L. (2008). Trust and risk in e-government adoption. The Journal
of Strategic Information Systems, 17(2), 165–176.
Benbasat, I., Cenfetelli, R., & Tan, C.-W. (2007). Understanding the antecedents and
consequences of e-government service quality: an empirical investigation.
Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2010). Using ICTs to create a culture of
transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption
tools for societies. Government Information Quarterly, 27(3), 264–271.

Bernd W. Wirtz, Linda Mory, Robert Piehler and Peter Daiser
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 23
IPMR
Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & McClure, C. R. (2008). Citizen-centered e-government
services: benefits, costs, and research needs. Proceedings of the 2008 internation-
al conference on Digital government research: Digital Government Society of
North America.
Bharadwaj, A. S., Sambamurthy, V., & Zmud, R. W. (1999). IT capabilities: theoretical
perspectives and empirical operationalization. Proceedings of the 20th interna-
tional conference on Information Systems: Association for Information Systems.
Boynton, A. C., Zmud, R. W., & Jacobs, G. C. (1994). The influence of IT management
practice on IT use in large organizations. Mis Quarterly, 299–318.
Capgemini, Rand Europe, IDC, Sogeti, and DTI. (2009). Smarter, Faster, Better eGov-
ernment: 8th eGovernment Benchmark Measurement (2009). Retrieved from
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/eeurope/i2010/docs/benchmarking/egov_
benchmark_2009.pdf
Carter, L., & Bélanger, F. (2005). The utilization of e‐government services: citizen trust,
innovation and acceptance factors Information Systems Journal, 15(1), 5–25.
Cavoukian, A. (2010). Privacy by design: the definitive workshop. A foreword by Ann
Cavoukian, Ph. D. Identity in the Information Society, 3(2), 247–251.
Chan, F. K. Y., Thong, J. Y. L., Venkatesh, V., Brown, S. A., Hu, P. J., & Tam, K. Y.
(2010). Modeling citizen satisfaction with mandatory adoption of an e-
government technology. Journal of the Association for Information Systems,
11(10), 519–549.
Chang, C.-C., Chen, C.-Y., & Chiang, Y.-H. (2011). How to Establish a Scale That Best
Fits Your Agenda: The Guidelines to Build a Web Service Quality Scale. Interna-
tional Journal of Electronic BusinessManagement, 9(4), 346.
Chang, I., Li, Y.-C., Hung, W.-F., & Hwang, H.-G. (2005). An empirical study on the
impact of quality antecedents on tax payers' acceptance of Internet tax-filing sys-
tems. Government Information Quarterly, 22(3), 389–410.
Charalabidis, Y., Askounis, D., Gionis, G., Lampathaki, F., & Metaxiotis, K. (2006).
Organising municipal e-government systems: a multi-facet taxonomy of e-
services for citizens and businesses. In Electronic Government (pp. 195–206).
Springer.
Chatfield, A. T., & AlHujran, O. (2007). E-government evaluation: a user-centric per-
spective for public value proposition.
Chen, C.-W. (2010). Impact of quality antecedents on taxpayer satisfaction with online
tax-filing systems—An empirical study. Information & Management, 47(5), 308–
315.
Chen, P., Gibson, R., & Geiselhart, K. (2006). Electronic democracy? The impact of
new communications technologies on Australian democracy: for the Democratic
Audit of Australia. Political Science Program.

Measuring eGovernment Portal Management on the Local Level: Results from a Survey of Public Administration Officials
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 24
IPMR
Chin, W. W., & Newsted, P. R. (1999). Structural equation modeling analysis with
small samples using partial least squares. Statistical strategies for small sample
research, 1(1), 307–341.
Christensen, L. B., Johnson, B., & Turner, L. A. (2015). Research methods, design, and
analysis (12th, global ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Chu, P.-Y., Hsiao, N., Lee, F.-W., & Chen, C.-W. (2004). Exploring success factors for
Taiwan's government electronic tendering system: behavioral perspectives from
end users. Government Information Quarterly, 21(2), 219–234.
Clift, S. (2003). E-democracy, e-governance and public net-work. Artículo en línea].
Publicus. net,
Conklin, W. A. (2007). Barriers to Adoption of e-Government. Proceedings of the 40th
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences: IEEE.
Cordella, A., & Iannacci, F. (2010). Information systems in the public sector: The e-
Government enactment framework. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems,
19(1), 52–66.
Coursey, D., & Norris, D. F. (2008). Models of e‐government: Are they correct? An
empirical assessment. Public Administration Review, 68(3), 523–536.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of
information technology. Mis Quarterly, 319–340.
Dawes, S. S. (2008). The evolution and continuing challenges of e‐governance. Public
Administration Review, 68(s1), S86-S102.
Dawes, S. S. (2009). Governance in the digital age: A research and action framework
for an uncertain future. Government Information Quarterly, 26(2), 257–264.
Dawes, S. S., & Pardo, T. A. (2002). Building collaborative digital government systems.
In Advances in digital government (pp. 259–273). Springer.
Delone, W. H., & Mclean, E. R. (1992). Information systems success: the quest for the
dependent variable. Information systems research, 3(1), 60–95.
Delone, W. H., & Mclean, E. R. (2004). Measuring e-commerce success: Applying the
DeLone & McLean information systems success model. International Journal of
Electronic Commerce, 9(1), 31–47.
Detlor, B., Hupfer, M. E., & Ruhi, U. (2010). Internal factors affecting the adoption and
use of government websites. Electronic Government, an International Journal,
7(2), 120–136.
Diefenbach, T. (2009). New public management in public sector organizations: the dark
sides of managerialistic ‘enlightenment’. Public administration, 87(4), 892–909.
Ebrahim, Z., & Irani, Z. (2005). E-government adoption: architecture and barriers.
Business Process Management Journal, 11(5), 589–611.
eDevelopment. (2012). National e-Government Portals. Retrieved from http://
web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTINFORMATIONAND

Bernd W. Wirtz, Linda Mory, Robert Piehler and Peter Daiser
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 25
IPMR
COMMUNICATIONANDTECHNOLO-
GIES/EXTEDEVELOPMENT/0,,contentMDK:21326015~pagePK:148956~piPK
:216618~theSitePK:559460,00.html
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strate-
gic Management Journal, 21(10-11), 1105–1121.
Flavián, C., & Guinalíu, M. (2006). Consumer trust, perceived security and privacy pol-
icy: three basic elements of loyalty to a web site. Industrial Management & Data
Systems, 106(5), 601–620.
Flint, D. J., & Mentzer, J. T. (1997). Validity in logistics research. Journal of Business
Logistics,
Floropoulos, J., Spathis, C., Halvatzis, D., & Tsipouridou, M. (2010). Measuring the
success of the Greek taxation information system. International Journal of Infor-
mation Management, 30(1), 47–56.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable var-
iables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of marketing re-
search, 382–388.
Fu, J.-R., Chao, W.-P., & Farn, C.-K. (2004). Determinants of taxpayers' adoption of
electronic filing methods in Taiwan: An exploratory study. Journal of Govern-
ment Information, 30(5), 658–683.
Fuller, W. A. (2011). Sampling statistics: John Wiley & Sons.
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.
Gil-García, J. R., & Pardo, T. A. (2005). E-government success factors: Mapping prac-
tical tools to theoretical foundations. Government Information Quarterly, 22(2),
187–216.
Grant, G., & Chau, D. (2006). Developing a generic framework for e-government. Ad-
vanced Topics in Information Management, 5, 72–94.
Gupta, M. P., & Jana, D. (2003). E-government evaluation: A framework and case
study. Government Information Quarterly, 20(4), 365–387.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data
analysis: A global perspective (7th). Upper Saddle River, N.J., London: Pearson
Education.
Harman, H. H. (1976). Modern factor analysis: University of Chicago Press.
Holzer, M., Melitskin, J., Rho, S.-Y., & Schwester, R. (2004). Restoring Trust in Gov-
ernment: The Potential of Digital Citizen Participaton. Frontiers of Public Admin-
istration, 6.

Measuring eGovernment Portal Management on the Local Level: Results from a Survey of Public Administration Officials
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 26
IPMR
Hong, K.-S., Chi, Y.-P., Chao, L. R., & Tang, J.-H. (2003). An integrated system theory
of information security management. Information Management & Computer Se-
curity, 11(5), 243–248.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure
analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Mod-
eling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.
Hu, P. J., Brown, S. A., Thong, J. Y. L., Chan, F. K. Y., & Tam, K. Y. (2009). Determi-
nants of service quality and continuance intention of online services: The case of
eTax. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
60(2), 292–306.
Huang, Z. (2006). E-government practices at local levels: an analysis of US counties’
websites. Issues in Information Systems, 7(2), 165–170.
Hung, S.-Y., Chang, C.-M., & Yu, T.-J. (2006). Determinants of user acceptance of the
e-Government services: The case of online tax filing and payment system. Gov-
ernment Information Quarterly, 23(1), 97–122.
Ireland, R. D., Hitt, M. A., & Vaidyanath, D. (2002). Alliance management as a source
of competitive advantage. Journal of management, 28(3), 413–446.
Jaeger, P. T. (2003). The endless wire: E-government as global phenomenon. Govern-
ment Information Quarterly, 20(4), 323–331.
Jaeger, P. T., & Bertot, J. C. (2010). Designing, implementing, and evaluating user-
centered and citizen-centered e-government. International Journal of Electronic
Government Research (IJEGR), 6(2), 1–17.
Janssen, M., Charalabidis, Y., & Zuiderwijk, A. (2012). Benefits, adoption barriers and
myths of open data and open government. Information Systems Management,
29(4), 258–268.
Jarvis, C. B., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2003). A critical review of con-
struct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and con-
sumer research. Journal of consumer research, 30(2), 199–218.
Jiang, X. (2011). Enhancing Users' Continuance Intention to E-Government Portals: An
Empirical Study. Management and Service Science (MASS): IEEE.
Johnson, T. P., & Wislar, J. S. (2012). Response rates and nonresponse errors in sur-
veys. JAMA, 307(17), 1805–1806.
Johnstone, C. J., Bottsford-Miller, N. A., & Thompson, S. J. (2006). Using the Think
Aloud Method (Cognitive Labs) to Evaluate Test Design for Students with Disa-
bilities and English Language Learners. Technical Report 44. National Center on
Educational Outcomes, University of Minnesota,
Jun, K.-N., & Weare, C. (2010). Institutional motivations in the adoption of innova-
tions: The case of e-government. Journal of Public Administration Research and
Theory, muq020.

Bernd W. Wirtz, Linda Mory, Robert Piehler and Peter Daiser
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 27
IPMR
Kantsperger, R., & Kunz, W. H. (2005). Managing overall service quality in customer
care centers: Empirical findings of a multi-perspective approach. International
Journal of Service Industry Management, 16(2), 135–151.
Karunasena, K., & Deng, H. (2012). Critical factors for evaluating the public value of e-
government in Sri Lanka. Government Information Quarterly, 29(1), 76–84.
Khaiata, M., & Zualkernan, I. A. (2009). A simple instrument to measure IT-business
alignment maturity. Information Systems Management, 26(2), 138–152.
Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling: Guilford
press.
Kraaijenbring, J., Spender, J.-C., & Groen, A. J. (2010). The resource-based view: a
review and assessment of its critiques. Journal of management, 36(1), 349–372.
Kritzinger, E., & Smith, E. (2008). Information security management: An information
security retrieval and awareness model for industry. Computers & Security, 27(5),
224–231.
Lan, Z., & Anders, K. K. (2000). A Paradigmatic View of Contemporary Public Admin-
istration Research An Empirical Test. Administration & society, 32(2), 138–165.
Lim, J. H., & Tang, S.-Y. (2008). Urban e-government initiatives and environmental
decision performance in Korea. Journal of Public Administration Research and
Theory, 18(1), 109–138.
Lin, F., Fofanah, S. S., & Liang, D. (2011). Assessing citizen adoption of e-Government
initiatives in Gambia: A validation of the technology acceptance model in infor-
mation systems success. Government Information Quarterly, 28(2), 271–279.
Llewellyn, S., & Tappin, E. (2003). Strategy in the public sector: management in the
wilderness. Journal of management studies, 40(4), 955–982.
Luna, D. E., Gil-Garcia, J. R., Luna-Reyes, L. F., Sandoval-Almazan, R., & Duarte-
Valle, A. (2013). Improving the performance assessment of government web por-
tals: A proposal using data envelopment analysis (DEA). Information Polity,
18(2), 169–187.
Luna-Reyes, L. F., & Gil-García, J. R. (2011). Using institutional theory and dynamic
simulation to understand complex e-Government phenomena. Government Infor-
mation Quarterly, 28(3), 329–345.
Marche, S., & McNiven, J. D. (2003). E‐Government and E‐Governance: The Future
Isn't What It Used To Be. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue
Canadienne des Sciences de l'Administration, 20(1), 74–86.
Metaxiotis, K., & Psarras, J. (2004). E-government: new concept, big challenge, success
stories. Electronic Government, an International Journal, 1(2), 141–151.
Miyata, M. (2011). Measuring impacts of e-government support in least developed
countries: a case study of the vehicle registration service in Bhutan. Information
Technology for Development, 17(2), 133–152.

Measuring eGovernment Portal Management on the Local Level: Results from a Survey of Public Administration Officials
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 28
IPMR
Mohamed, N., Hussin, H., & Hussein, R. (2009). Measuring users’ satisfaction with
Malaysia’s electronic government systems. Electronic Journal of e-Government,
7(3), 283–294.
Moon, M. J. (2002). The Evolution of E‐Government among Municipalities: Rhetoric or
Reality? Public Administration Review, 62(4), 424–433.
Moon, M. J., & Norris, D. F. (2005). Does managerial orientation matter? The adoption
of reinventing government and e‐government at the municipal level Information
Systems Journal, 15(1), 43–60.
Morgeson, F. V., VanAmburg, D., & Mithas, S. (2011). Misplaced trust? Exploring the
structure of the e-government-citizen trust relationship. Journal of Public Admin-
istration Research and Theory, 21(2), 257–283.
Nfuka, E. N., & Rusu, L. (2011). The effect of critical success factors on IT governance
performance. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 111(9), 1418–1448.
Norris, D. F., & Moon, M. J. (2005). Advancing E‐Government at the Grassroots: Tor-
toise or Hare? Public Administration Review, 65(1), 64–75.
Pablo, A. L., Reay, T., Dewald, J. R., & Casebeer, A. L. (2007). Identifying, enabling
and managing dynamic capabilities in the public sector Journal of management
studies, 44(5), 687–708.
Parent, M., Vandebeek, C. A., & Gemino, A. C. (2005). Building citizen trust through
e-government. Government Information Quarterly, 22(4), 720–736.
Petter, S., DeLone, W., & McLean, E. (2008). Measuring information systems success:
models, dimensions, measures, and interrelationships. European Journal of In-
formation Systems, 17(3), 236–263.
Petter, S., & Mclean, E. R. (2009). A meta-analytic assessment of the DeLone and
McLean IS success model: An examination of IS success at the individual level.
Information & Management, 46(3), 159–166.
Prybutok, V. R., Zhang, X., & Ryan, S. D. (2008). Evaluating leadership, IT quality,
and net benefits in an e-government environment. Information & Management,
45(3), 143–152.
Radermacher, W., & Sattelberger, S. (2010). Statistical Processes Under Change: En-
hancing Data Quality with Pretests. In Advances in Data Analysis, Data Handling
and Business Intelligence (pp. 67–79). Springer.
Rana, N. P., Williams, M. D., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Williams, J. (2011). Diversity and
diffusion of theories, models, and theoretical constructs in egovernment research.
In Electronic Government (pp. 1–12). Springer.
Ravichandran, T., & Lertwongsatien, C. (2005). Effect of information systems re-
sources and capabilities on firm performance: a resource-based perspective. Jour-
nal of management information systems, 21(4), 237–276.

Bernd W. Wirtz, Linda Mory, Robert Piehler and Peter Daiser
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 29
IPMR
Ray, G., Muhanna, W. A., & Barney, J. B. (2005). Information technology and the per-
formance of the customer service process: a resource-based analysis. Mis Quar-
terly, 625–652.
Reddick, C. G. (2005). Citizen interaction with e-government: From the streets to serv-
ers? Government Information Quarterly, 22(1), 38–57.
Ruxton, G. D. (2006). The unequal variance t-test is an underused alternative to Stu-
dent's t-test and the Mann–Whitney U test. Behavioral Ecology, 17(4), 688–690.
Sanchez, A., Koh, C., Kappelman, L., & Prybutok, V. (2003). The relationship between
IT for communication and e-government barriers. AMCIS 2003 Proceedings, 104.
Scholl, H. J. (2005a). Interoperability in e-Government: More than just smart middle-
ware. Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System
Sciences: IEEE.
Scholl, H. J. (2005b). Organizational transformation through e-government: myth or
reality? In Electronic Government (pp. 1–11). Springer.
Schuppan, T. (2009). Local Level Structural Change and E Government in Germany.
Handbook for research on strategies for local e-government adoption and imple-
mentation, 17–36.
Seel, C., & Thomas, O. (2007). Process Performance Measurement for E-Government:
A Case Scenario from the German Ministerial Administration. Systemic, Cyber-
netics and Informatics, 5(3), 23–29.
Song, Y. I., Rao, H. R., & Braynov, S. B. (2004). Bringing e-government into the class-
room: A Case of E-Commerce Education. Journal of Information Systems Educa-
tion, 15, 127–138.
Statistisches Bundesamt. (2012). Gemeindeverzeichnis-Informationssystem (GV-ISys).
Retrieved from
https://www.destatis.de/DE/ZahlenFakten/LaenderRegionen/Regionales/Gemeind
everzeichnis/Gemeindeverzeichnis.html
Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estima-
tion approach. Multivariate behavioral research, 25(2), 173–180.
Tan, C.-W., Benbasat, I., & Cenfetelli, R. T. (2008). Building citizen trust towards e-
government services: do high quality websites matter? Hawaii International Con-
ference on System Sciences, Proceedings of the 41st Annual: IEEE.
Teo, T. S. H., Srivastava, S. C., & Jiang, L. (2008). Trust and electronic government
success: an empirical study. Journal of management information systems, 25(3),
99–132.
Thomas, J. C., & Streib, G. (2003). The New Face of Government: Citizen‐Initiated
Contacts in the Era of E‐Government. Journal of Public Administration Research
and Theory, 13(1), 83–102.

Measuring eGovernment Portal Management on the Local Level: Results from a Survey of Public Administration Officials
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 30
IPMR
van Lieshout, M., Kool, L., van Schoonhoven, B., & Jonge, M. de. (2011). Privacy by
Design: an alternative to existing practice in safeguarding privacy. info, 13(6), 55–
68.
Verdegem, P., & Verleye, G. (2009). User-centered E-Government in practice: A com-
prehensive model for measuring user satisfaction. Government Information Quar-
terly, 26(3), 487–497.
Wang, Y.-S. (2003). The adoption of electronic tax filing systems: an empirical study.
Government Information Quarterly, 20(4), 333–352.
Wang, Y.-S., & Liao, Y.-W. (2008). Assessing eGovernment systems success: A valida-
tion of the DeLone and McLean model of information systems success. Govern-
ment Information Quarterly, 25(4), 717–733.
Wang, Y. (2008). Assessing e‐commerce systems success: a respecification and valida-
tion of the DeLone and McLean model of IS success. Information Systems Jour-
nal, 18(5), 529–557.
Warkentin, M., Gefen, D., Pavlou, P. A., & Rose, G. M. (2002). Encouraging citizen
adoption of e-government by building trust. Electronic markets, 12(3), 157–162.
Welch, E. W., Hinnant, C. C., & Moon, M. J. (2005). Linking citizen satisfaction with
e-government and trust in government. Journal of Public Administration Research
and Theory, 15(3), 371–391.
Welch, E. W., & Pandey, S. K. (2007). E-government and bureaucracy: Toward a better
understanding of intranet implementation and its effect on red tape. Journal of
Public Administration Research and Theory, 17(3), 379–404.
Wirtz, B. W., Mory, L., & Ullrich, S. (2012). eHealth in the Public Sector: An Empiri-
cal Analysis of the Acceptance of Germany's Electronic Health Card. Public ad-
ministration, 90(3), 642–663.
Xu, H., Dinev, T., Smith, H. J., & Hart, P. (2008). Examining the formation of individ-
ual's privacy concerns: toward an integrative view. ICIS 2008 Proceedings, 6.
Yang, K., & Rho, S.-Y. (2007). e-Government for better performance: Promises, reali-
ties, and challenges. International Journal of Public Administration, 30(11),
1197–1217.
Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization,
and extension. Academy of management review, 27(2), 185–203.
Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A., & Malhotra, A. (2000). Conceptual Framework for
understanding e-service quality: Implications for future research and managerial
practice.
Zikmund, W., Babin, B., Carr, J., & Griffin, M. (2013). Business research methods
(9th): Cengage Learning.
Zorlu, K. (2011). The Effect of Strategic Learning Systems and Organizational Struc-
ture on e-Government Performance: A Survey in the Public Sector by Means of

Bernd W. Wirtz, Linda Mory, Robert Piehler and Peter Daiser
International Public Management Review Vol. 15, Iss. 2, 2014
www.ipmr.net 31
IPMR
an Artificial Neural Network. Proceedings of the International Conference on In-
tellectual Capital.
About IPMR
IPMR The International Public Management Review (IPMR) is the electronic journal of the Inter-
national Public Management Network (IPMN). All work published in IPMR is double blind
reviewed according to standard academic journal procedures.
The purpose of the International Public Management Review is to publish manuscripts
reporting original, creative research in the field of public management. Theoretical, empiri-
cal and applied work including case studies of individual nations and governments, and
comparative studies are given equal weight for publication consideration.
IPMN The mission of the International Public Management Network is to provide a forum for
sharing ideas, concepts and results of research and practice in the field of public manage-
ment, and to stimulate critical thinking about alternative approaches to problem solving and
decision making in the public sector.
IPMN includes over 1300 members representing about one hundred different countries,
both practitioners and scholars, working in all aspects of public management. IPMN is a
voluntary non-profit network and membership is free.
ISSN 1662-1387