The emergence of digital government (or e-government) has sparked debates on its consequences. Despite a certain rhetoric on the changes envisioned, it is not yet clear to what extent this kind of initiative can help provide solutions to problems of public import. In this chapter, we adopt a theoretical approach to analyze why it is so difficult and complex to evaluate the effects of e-government. Specifically, we maintain that the e-government evaluation puzzle needs to be addressed by first focusing on the conceptual aspects before identifying the tools and methods. We also believe that because e-government requires the joint use of intervention and support actions, the assessment must take into account not one, but a combination of the methods offered by the different disciplinary areas. From among the various contributions we can draw on for this purpose, we will seek to demonstrate how organization theory can provide a core reference point. In particular, the studies that perceive the organization as a process of bounded rational actions and decisions not only enrich the evaluation framework with a new analytical dimension but also can provide a point of convergence for the different branches of knowledge needed to analyze and evaluate such complex social phenomena as those connected to digital government. It is our hope that the view proposed here contributes to the discussion for other interested scholars and better informs public management praxis

Evaluating E-government implementation : opening the interdisciplinary door / M. Sorrentino, M. De Marco - In: E-Government : information technology and transformation / [a cura di] H.J. Scholl. - Armonk : Sharpe, 2010. - ISBN 978-0-7656-1989-1. - pp. 72-88

Evaluating E-government implementation : opening the interdisciplinary door

M. Sorrentino
Primo
;
2010

Abstract

The emergence of digital government (or e-government) has sparked debates on its consequences. Despite a certain rhetoric on the changes envisioned, it is not yet clear to what extent this kind of initiative can help provide solutions to problems of public import. In this chapter, we adopt a theoretical approach to analyze why it is so difficult and complex to evaluate the effects of e-government. Specifically, we maintain that the e-government evaluation puzzle needs to be addressed by first focusing on the conceptual aspects before identifying the tools and methods. We also believe that because e-government requires the joint use of intervention and support actions, the assessment must take into account not one, but a combination of the methods offered by the different disciplinary areas. From among the various contributions we can draw on for this purpose, we will seek to demonstrate how organization theory can provide a core reference point. In particular, the studies that perceive the organization as a process of bounded rational actions and decisions not only enrich the evaluation framework with a new analytical dimension but also can provide a point of convergence for the different branches of knowledge needed to analyze and evaluate such complex social phenomena as those connected to digital government. It is our hope that the view proposed here contributes to the discussion for other interested scholars and better informs public management praxis
E-government ; E-government implementation ; E-government evaluation ; Interdisciplinary approach ; Organizational change ; Technological change ; Process-based perspective ; Bounded rationality ; Public organizations
Settore SECS-P/10 - Organizzazione Aziendale
2010
Book Part (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Sorrentino-DeMarco-AMIS2010.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Pre-print (manoscritto inviato all'editore)
Dimensione 164.94 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
164.94 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/147336
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact