Journal of Computer Information Systems

ISSN: 0887-4417 (Print) 2380-2057 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ucis20

Factors Influencing The Success Of E-Government

Ewa Ziemba, Tomasz Papaj, RafaŁ Żelazny & Maria Jadamus-Hacura

To cite this article: Ewa Ziemba, Tomasz Papaj, RafaŁ Żelazny & Maria Jadamus-Hacura (2016)
Factors Influencing The Success Of E-Government, Journal of Computer Information Systems,
56:2, 156-167

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2016.1117378

Published online: 15 Jan 2016.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 36

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ucis20

Download by: [Penn State University] Date: 28 January 2016, At: 21:26
 FACTORS INFLUENCING THE SUCCESS OF
E-GOVERNMENT
EWA ZIEMBA TOMASZ PAPAJ
University of Economics, Katowice, Poland University of Economics, Katowice, Poland

RAFAŁ ŻELAZNY MARIA JADAMUS-HACURA

University of Economics, Katowice, Poland University of Economics, Katowice, Poland

ABSTRACT

This research focuses on the critical success factors (CSFs) of Due to emerging new demands, developing new technolo-
e-government. Its main purposes are to (1) explain the gies, and the new experiences of e-government, the efforts
development of the methodology of CSFs for e-government, (2) toward e-government adoption have been growing. Polish and
present the practical implementation of this methodology in Polish foreign researchers developed studies on various e-government
issues. Nevertheless, there are some questions that still need to
Downloaded by [Penn State University] at 21:26 28 January 2016

public administration, and (3) to assess the preliminary results of the

practical implementation. The article continues as follows. First, the be answered. The main ones are: What does e-government mean
article clarifies the concept of e-government and the CSFs for today? How to succeed in e-government? What are the factors
e-government. Second, the methodology of CSFs for e-government influencing the success of e-government?
is explained in detail. Third, the article presents the preliminary This paper looks at e-government in a comprehensive con-
results of the practical implementation of this methodology in text. A comprehensive view of e-government is that it relates to
Poland, at the local and state level of government. The article the entire range of government roles and activities, shaped by
concludes with a discussion on research findings, implications, and the use of ICTs combined with various management models.
avenues for further research. This work contributes to extant More concretely, e-government brings together four domains [5,
research by showing a holistic approach to the CSFs for 16, 31, 50]:
e-government. ● e-administration, i.e., improving government processes
Keywords: e-Government, critical success factors, CSFs, by using ICTs and government process management;
success, factors, research method, methodology ● e-government services, i.e., delivering government ser-
vices electronically to citizens, businesses, and govern-
INTRODUCTION ment employees;
● e-democracy, i.e., improving transparency and demo-
Studies aimed at e-government have been developing from cratic decision-making, as well as citizens’ participation
2000 [2, 10, 19, 21, 40, 43, 46]. At the same time, many in public decisions; and
governments across the world are renovating themselves into ● e-governance, i.e., developing cooperation, networking,
an e-government [1, 6, 13, 22, 44, 45]. and partnerships between government units, citizens,
Poland started its e-government efforts at the beginning of and the business.
the 2000s. These efforts accelerated in 2004, when the govern-
ment strategy was drawn in the document entitled Action plan e-Government is embedded in combinations of political con-
for the development of electronic government (e-government) for ditions as well as cultural, technological, and organizational
the years 2005–2006 [35]. The document described the legal changes designed to support and drive a profound transforma-
framework for e-government, evaluated the current level of tion in government units [45]. Therefore, the adoption of e-gov-
e-government development, set the strategic guidelines for ernment is not straightforward, and it requires rather a complex
developing e-government in the coming few years, and indicated technological, organizational, social, economic, and political
projects to be implemented by Polish government units. A clear framework approach (undertaking) [8, 11, 32–34]. It involves
reference to e-government was made in the Strategy of develop- rethinking government organization, culture, and processes;
ment of information society in Poland until 2013 [42]. The use introducing business management models; increasing involve-
of information and telecommunication technologies (ICTs) to ment of the public in the decision-making process; changing
rebuild government processes and to provide government ser- behavior; and using ICTs and information for the successful
vices electronically for all government stakeholders (govern- adoption of e-administration, e-government services, e-democ-
ment employees, citizens and enterprises) was indicated as one racy, and e-governance. In addition, it depends on the effective
of priorities for the future work. Currently, the framework of organization of e-government stakeholders, each of whom
e-government for 2013–2020 is outlined in the document brings their own ability, experience, knowledge, and skill toward
Program of integrated state computerization [36]. The strategic adopting e-government. It requires the coordination of many
goals of this program are to increase the supply of high-quality activities of government units and a close cooperation of
e-government services in Poland and to raise the level of e-gov- employees, managers, IT specialists, as well as citizens and
ernment usage by all government stakeholders. In order to do businesses [50].
this, appropriate competencies of e-government stakeholders are Success in e-government is very context dependent [7, 14,
needed. Furthermore, e-government adoption is investigated 26, 27, 41, 49]. To identify factors influencing the success of
annually in Poland. The Ministry of Administration and e-government, this study suggests the use of critical success
Digitization (MAiC) examines the impact of digitization on the factor (CSFs) approach [38, 39]. CSFs are becoming very
functioning of public administration in Poland [47, 48]. important as they help identify the cause of failure as well as
improve e-government. Although CSFs for e-government

156 Journal of Computer Information Systems Volume 56 Issue 2, Spring 2016

 remain a challenge for researchers and practitioners alike [3, 4, ● the section “Methodology of critical success factors for
15–17, 25, 33, 37], there has been relatively little research e-government” explores in detail the methodology of
exploring CSFs in countries of Eastern and Central Europe, CSFs for e-government;
including Poland. Moreover, these studies are dispersed and ● the section “Practical application of methodology and its
fragmentary; they focus on the surface level of e-government’s preliminary results” presents the employment of this
phenomena [20, 24, 28–30]. methodology for assessing sucess factors influencng e-
To address this gap, this study contributes to the development government in Poland; and
of the methodology of CSF analysis for e-government. The ● the article concludes with a discussion on research findings,
study is an extensive and enhanced version of the earlier study limitations, implications, and avenues for further research.
published in 2013 [50]. In this study, the conceptual framework
of CSFs for e-government adoption was proposed and described. METHODOLOGY OF CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS
In the proposed framework, the CSFs were considered holisti- FOR E-GOVERNMENT
cally as economic, sociocultural, technological, and organiza-
tional aspects (i.e., four dimensions). Moreover, the CSFs were A multistep approach was applied in our research methodol-
reflected in the three stages: ICT access, ICT competences and ogy. It is worth mentioning that every step has to be completed
awareness, and ICT use. before passing to the next one. Figure 1 presents a graphical
The main purposes of this study are to: representation of the research methodology.
● explain the development of the methodology of CSFs
for e-government; Step 1: Reviewing Literature
● present the practical implementation of this methodol-
Downloaded by [Penn State University] at 21:26 28 January 2016

ogy in Polish public administration; and A review of the literature was conducted to identify CSFs
● assess the preliminary results of the practical for the e-government presented there. The search for the
implementation. appropriate literature on e-government began with five biblio-
This research constitutes a very helpful basis for identifying graphic databases, that is: Ebsco, ProQuest, Emerald
CSFs for e-government adoption, especially in countries of Management Plus, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Scopus. This
Eastern and Central Europe. The list of 55 identified and exam- was achieved by developing a relevant set of keywords and
ined success factors for e-government (Table 5) can be treated as phrases such as “critical success factors,” “CSFs,” “e-govern-
a prototype list of CSFs in other countries. It is fundamentally ment,” “electronic government,” “success factors,” “success”
important for the Eastern and Central European countries, their in all possible permutations and combinations (taking into
researchers and practitioners, to have a framework of CSFs for consideration the logical AND, and OR as appropriate) and
e-government as quickly as possible. These countries are just conducting a corresponding search.
planning and undertaking many projects on e-government co- In addition, some journals dedicated to e-government
financed by the European Union. The knowledge about factors research were also explored, especially Government
influencing successful e-government adoption is particularly Information Quarterly (GIQ), Transforming Government:
needed to make e-government plans and receive funding from People, Process, and Policy (TGPPP), Electronic Government:
the European Union budget. an International Journal (EGIJ), Journal of Global Information
This article is divided as follows: Technology Management (JGITM), The Electronic Journal of
e-Government (EJEG), Journal of US-China Public
● the “Introduction” shows a brief introduction to Administration, Canadian Journal of Administrative Science,
e-government and CSFs for e-government; Business Process Management Journal, Business Strategy

Reviewing literature
Building the methodology and preliminary

Step 1

Step 2 Defining the prototype CSFs

Step 3 Verifying the prototype CSFs

research

Step 4 Evaluating the prototype CSFs

Step 5 Creating and testing the draft survey questionnaire

Step 6 Creating the final survey questionnaire

Step 7 Defining the sample and the sample size

Practical application
of the methodology

Collecting the data

Step 8

Analyzing the collected data

Step 9

The final CSFs for e-government

FIGURE 1. The Graphical Representation of the Steps in the Research

Volume 56 Issue 2, Spring 2016 Journal of Computer Information Systems 157

 Series (BSS), European Journal of Scientific Research, The researcher who gathered, organized, and gave every expert
Southern African Journal of Information and Communication, back an account of the standpoint of the whole group and the
Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Issues in expert’s own opinion. A summary of opinions expressed by
Information Systems (IIS), and Journal of Computer each expert made them aware of the range of positions and the
Information Systems (JCIS). reasons underlying those positions. In the last round, the
Moreover, open access papers and empirical studies were experts evaluated the strength of the influence of particular
examined. factors on e-government. The experts had to answer the ques-
tion: Using a scale of 1–5, state to what extent do you agree
Step 2: Defining the Prototype CSFs that the following factors influence the e-government adoption?
A 5-point Likert scale was used in the evaluation. The scale
This step required the combination of theoretical knowl- respectively represented: 1—disagree strongly, 2—disagree, 3
edge and practical experience. Only a theoretical knowledge —neither agree nor disagree, 4—agree, and 5—agree strongly.
based on literature review and practical experience based on The result of Delphi study was to reduce the number of
working in practice can provide insights to indicate mean- factors from 46 to 44 (Table 2). Changing the initial number
ingful factors influencing e-government. Therefore, CSFs for of 46 CSFs was the result of Delphi study experts’ opinions.
e-government in the Silesian Voivodeship (Poland) were indi- The two factors “Hardware awareness of managerial workers
cated on the basis of practical experience. The practical in government units” and “E-government service awareness of
experience means the very close longstanding collaboration managerial workers in government units” were replaced with
of the research team with the Silesian Centre for Information the factor X11—ICT awareness of managerial workers in
Society (SCSI) in Katowice. SCSI is responsible for e-gov- government units. The four factors concerning social exclu-
ernment in the Silesian Voivodeship, which is as a leader of sion of workers, citizens, and entrepreneurs due to age, edu-
Downloaded by [Penn State University] at 21:26 28 January 2016

e-government in Poland. cation, place of residence, and disability were replaced with
The research team took a constructive and practical approach the factor X17—Social exclusion of workers, citizens, entre-
to their work on defining the protype CSFs. The following preneurs due to age, education, place of residence, and dis-
methods and techniques were used: ability. Two factors were added to the set of CSFs, i.e., 38—
Competence of employees of government units in the field of
● practical experience to identify CSFs for e-government new management models and X39—Top management
in Poland, especially in the Silesian Voivodeship; support.
● logical deduction to compare CSFs identified based on The result of Delphi study was also to establish the final
literature and practical experience, and to indicate one assignment of all factors to the identified dimensions and stages.
set (framework) of all CSFs described in literature and This final set of the 44 prototype factors is presented in Table 2.
identified in the action research; The majority of the factors are explored by Ziemba et al. [50] in
● logical deduction to recognize a nature of indicated greater detail.
factors and to determine dimensions and stages of fac-
tors according to their nature;
● brainstorming sessions to establish the final set of CSFs; Step 4: Evaluating the Prototype CSFs
● creative thinking and logical deduction to assign each
factor to an appropriate dimension and an appropriate In order to gain greater and deeper verification of the prototype
stage. CSFs and to evaluate each of these factors, the collected data were
statistically analyzed. Statistical Package for Social Science
Finally, the result of a 4-month research team work was the (SPSS) for Windows and STATISTICA were utilized to show the
set of initial 46 CSFs for e-government. The CSFs were con- descriptive statistics of CSFs. The following statistical measures
sidered holistically as economic (E), sociocultural (S), techno- for data analysis were employed: minimum (Min), maximum
logical (T), and organizational (O) aspects (i.e., four (Max), mean, standard deviation (SD), and coefficient of variation
dimensions). Moreover, the CSFs were reflected in the three (CV). To conduct reliability analysis, Cronbach’s coefficient alpha
stages: ICT access (A) demonstrating technical and economic (α) was used [12, 18, 23]. The conducted statistical analyses could
accessibilities of ICTs, ICT competences and awareness (C) be performed on a small sample size. Those prototype factors and
demonstrating competences and awareness related to the use of their descriptive statistics by individual dimensions and stages are
ICTs, and ICT use demonstrating (U) the actual usage of ICTs in shown in Table 2.
the government units. The calculated means for 44 factors (items) are in the range
from 2.95 to 4.82, using the 5-point Likert scale. There are
Step 3: Verifying the Prototype CSFs differences in the variability of the factors, but they all have
enough variation to be useful. The coefficient of variation stays
46 prototype CSFs were examined and verified through the in the range from 8.75% to 37.85%. Only two items—X1
means of the Delphi study. At this step, thanks to the Delphi (Public and private outlay on hardware, networks, and telecom-
study the prototype CSFs were examined and verified. 22 munications) and X27 (Maturity of e-government services)—are
experts participated in the Delphi study. The experts were smaller than 10%. These findings have shown that all factors
selected to combine knowledge and experience of scholars, affect e-government.
researchers, and practitioners. The group of experts was com- Having decided which items are worth including in the final
posed of: (a) 16 employees of the local and state government, set of factors, the overall scale and the subscale of internal
who are responsible for e-government in Poland and (b) 6 consistency were estimated using the test for reliability.
professors of Polish universities, who conduct studies and Cronbach’s coefficient values were chosen to examine the inter-
empirical research on e-government (Table 1). The Delphi nal consistency among items on a scale. The original alpha score
process was viewed as a series of rounds. In the early rounds, with all 44 items shows a strong internal consistency (0.873).
four experts participated, in the last round all 22 experts took The values of Cronbach’s alpha for each item with the assump-
part in the Delphi research. In each round, every expert dealt tion that a given item Xi (i = 1, 2,. . . 44) was deleted are
with and filled in a questionnaire which was delivered to a presented in Figure 2. The results showed that deleting any

158 Journal of Computer Information Systems Volume 56 Issue 2, Spring 2016

 TABLE 1. The Delphi Study Experts
No. Title Government sector Government unit
1. Minister Counselor State government The Ministry of Administration and Digitization
2. Deputy Director for European Affairs State government Centre for Health Information Systems
3. Director State government Central Statistical Office, Szczecin
4. IT Team Manager Local government Marshal’s Office Silesian Voivodeship
5. SEKAP Project Coordinator Local government Marshal’s Office Silesian Voivodeship
6. Deputy Director Local government Silesian Centre for Information Society
7. Design and Development of E-government Services Local government Silesian Centre for Information Society
Specialist
8. Head of IT Department Local government Dąbrowa Górnicza City Hall
9. Head of IT Department Local government Jaworzno City Hall
10. Junior Inspector of IT Department Local government Jaworzno City Hall
11. Chief Specialist—coordinator of office IT services Local government Kalisz City Hall
12. Head of IT Department Local government Katowice City Hall
13. Representative of the President for the Promotion of Local government Katowice City Hall
Innovativeness
14. IT Team Manager Local government Mysłowice City Hall
Downloaded by [Penn State University] at 21:26 28 January 2016

15. Head of IT Department Local government Zawiercie District Office

16. Inspector of Information Technology and Local government Żywiec City Hall
Telecommunications
17. Professor University Warsaw School of Economics
18. Professor University Warsaw School of Economics
19. Professor University Poznan University of Economics
20. Professor University University of Economics in Katowice
21. Professor University University of Economics in Katowice
22. Professor University University of Economics in Katowice

item does not seem to make a large difference and Cronbach’s every expert to eliminate possible unfairness that might arise
alpha coefficient still belongs to the high range. The original due to the positions held and experience acquired. As a result
alpha score for all 44 items still shows a strong internal of this step, the final set of CSFs was expanded to 55 factors.
consistency. The last round of the Delphi study also allowed us to correct
In the identified four dimensions and three stages, the draft survey questionnaire, especially in confusing or
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient values are between 0.511 (moder- incomprehensible statements. The final proposed CSFs are
ate) and 0.804 (high) (Table 3). presented in Table 5.
The variability and reliability analyses proved the internal The changes of the set of 44 prototype CSFs were related to
consistency of factors and underpinned the reasoning behind that the following factors:
decision to conduct further study of those 44 CSFs, in the
indicated dimensions and stages. 1. Factor X1—Public and private outlay on hardware, net-
works, and telecommunications have been divided into
two factors: X1—Public outlay on hardware, networks,
Step 5: Creating and Testing the Draft Survey Questionnaire and telecommunications and X2—Private outlay on hard-
ware, networks, and telecommunications.
At this step, a draft survey questionnaire was prepared to be 2. The following factors have been added to the final CSFs:
applied in the last round of the Delphi study. In this survey, 44
statistically evaluated factors (at step 4) were listed. Each of ● X12—Differentiation of e-government service charges
those factors required an evaluation of the strength of influence due to ways of processing—electronic or paper;
on e-government point of view. Likert scale was used in the ● X14—Citizens’ and enterprises’ awareness of e-gov-
evaluation: 1—disagree strongly, 2—disagree, 3—neither agree ernment services;
nor disagree, 4—agree, and 5—agree strongly. The survey was ● X19—Citizens’ and enterprises’ competences to use
prepared in Microsoft Word. The electronic versions of the e-government services;
questionnaire were sent via e-mail to 16 Polish government ● X30—Interoperability of information systems in gov-
units at the local and state levels. The same experts who ernment units;
participated in the third step of this study were the experts at ● X32—Information security in government units;
this step. Eight completed questionnaires were sent to us via ● X37—Coordination of ICT projects in government
e-mail. The experts marked the influence strength of each units;
factor and some of them proposed some changes in the proto- ● X42—Corruption in the implementation of ICT pro-
type factors. jects in government units;
In order to make a decision about adding new factors to the ● X45—State standardization of solutions for
set of 44 prototype CSFs, for the Delphi study, the research e-government;
team acted as moderators to transfer the opinions of each ● X47—Mandatory usage of electronic documents in
expert to the others. By doing this, we ensured anonymity for government units; and

Volume 56 Issue 2, Spring 2016 Journal of Computer Information Systems 159

 TABLE 2. 44 Prototype CSFs for e-Government and their Descriptive Statistics
Dimension/ Number of
Number and name of critical success factor Stage responses Min Max Mean SD CV (%)
X1 Public and private outlay on hardware, networks and E/a 22 4 5 4.77 0.43 8.99
telecommunications
X2 Competition on ICT market E/a 22 2 5 4.00 0.87 21.82
X3 Public outlay on back-office and front-office information systems, E/a 22 2 5 4.55 0.86 18.87
especially e-government services
X4 Financial situation of government units E/a 22 2 5 4.36 1.00 22.97
X5 Public and private outlay on ICT education for government managers E/c 22 4 5 4.41 0.50 11.41
X6 Public and private outlay on ICT education for government E/c 22 3 5 4.23 0.53 12.50
employees
X7 Public and private outlay on creating ICT competence centre for E/c 22 2 5 4.00 1.07 26.73
government units
X8 Economic benefits coming from ICT usage in government units E/u 22 2 5 3.91 1.11 28.36
X9 Economic risk of ICT implementation in government units E/u 20 1 5 2.95 1.00 33.85
X10 Public outlay on ICT promotion in government units E/u 21 2 5 3.76 1.04 27.76
X11 ICT awareness of managerial workers in government units S/a 21 3 5 4.67 0.58 12.37
Downloaded by [Penn State University] at 21:26 28 January 2016

X12 Public e-services absorption by stakeholders of government units S/a 21 3 5 4.48 0.60 13.44
X13 Incentive system promoting competence improvement of S/c 21 1 5 3.86 1.24 32.05
government employees (especially in ICT)
X14 ICT external expert consultancy for government units in the field S/c 22 1 5 3.64 1.14 31.23
of ICTs
X15 New social and cultural competences of government employees S.c 22 2 5 4.00 0.87 21.82
X16 Information culture in government units conducive to the use of ICTs S/u 22 4 5 4.64 0.49 10.62
X17 Social exclusion of workers, citizens, entrepreneurs due to age, to S/u 22 2 5 3.73 0.98 26.42
education, to place of residence, to disability
X18 Innovative hardware and networks in government units T/a 22 2 5 4.27 0.99 23.05
X19 Innovative e-government services T/a 22 2 5 4.64 0.85 18.28
X20 Open source software licenses T/a 22 3 5 3.86 0.83 21.57
X21 Standardized ICTs for government units T/a 21 2 5 4.29 0.78 18.29
X22 Dedicated (personalized) ICTs for government units T/a 21 2 5 4.29 0.85 19.72
X23 ICT leaderships and visionaries in government units T/c 22 3 5 4.50 0.67 14.95
X24 ICT competences of government employees T/c 22 2 5 4.55 0.74 16.25
X25 Integration of front-office and back-office information systems T/u 22 3 5 4.64 0.58 12.53
X26 Quality of e-government services T/u 22 2 5 4.82 0.66 13.79
X27 Maturity of e-government services 19 4 5 4.79 0.42 8.75
X28 E-government services enabling e-voting T/u 21 1 5 3.81 1.17 30.63
X29 E-government services enabling public consultation and T/u 21 2 5 4.14 0.79 19.14
participating in public decision making
X30 Coordination of public ICT investments O/a 21 2 5 4.29 1.06 24.63
X31 Public-private partnership in the field of ICTs O/a 22 1 5 3.36 0.85 25.20
X32 Rule of law O/a 21 2 5 4.10 1.00 24.30
X33 Institutional support for the development of ICT infrastructure O/a 22 2 5 3.95 1.00 25.26
X34 Access for employees of government units to their network resources O/a 20 1 5 3.35 1.27 37.85
X35 Coopetition on ICT market O/a 20 2 5 3.25 0.97 29.74
X36 ICT benchmarking for local and state government O/a 21 1 5 3.48 0.98 28.21
X37 Approved e-government strategy O/a 22 2 5 4.00 0.93 23.15
X38 Competence of employees of government units in the field of new O/c 22 2 5 4.00 0.87 21.82
management models
X39 Top management support O/u 21 2 5 4.29 1.06 24.63
X40 Internal regulations of government units on access to e- O/u 21 2 5 4.14 0.85 20.60
government services
X41 Adaptation of new management models in government units O/u 21 3 5 4.38 0.59 13.46
X42 Participation of employees of government units in organizational O/u 21 1 5 3.57 1.21 33.80
changes
X43 Electronic communication between government units O/u 22 4 5 4.64 0.49 10.62
X44 New ways of providing work by employees of government units O/u 21 2 5 3.62 0.80 22.24

160 Journal of Computer Information Systems Volume 56 Issue 2, Spring 2016

 0,880

0,875

0,870

0,865

0,860

0,855
X1
X2
X3
X4
X5
X6
X7
X8
X9

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
X1
X1
X1
X1
X1
X1
X1
X1
X1
X1
X2
X2
X2
X2
X2
X2
X2
X2
X2
X2
X3
X3
X3
X3
X3
X3
X3
X3
X3
X3
X4
X4
X4
X4
X4
Downloaded by [Penn State University] at 21:26 28 January 2016

Cronbach's alpha when item deleted Cronbach alpha for all items

FIGURE 2. The Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient Values for 44 Prototype CSFs

TABLE 3. Reliability Analysis—Dimensions and Stages TABLE 4. Reliability Analysis—Dimensions and Stages
Analysis for 44 Prototype CSFs Analysis for 55 Proposed CSFs
Number of Cronbach’s alpha Number of Cronbach’s Alpha
Dimensions/Stages items coefficient Dimensions/Stages items coefficient
Economic 10 0.589 Economic 12 0.791
Sociocultural 7 0.511 Sociocultural 9 0.801
Technological 12 0.804 Technological 14 0.824
Organizational 15 0.790 Organizational 20 0.876
ICT access (supply) 19 0.783 ICTs access (supply) 23 0.853
ICT competences 9 0.720 ICTs competences 10 0.823
ICT use (demand) 16 0.577 ICTs use (demand) 22 0.886
Total 44 0.873 Total 55 0.941

● X55—Citizens’ and enterprises’ satisfaction with respondents to ask questions, clear up some ambiguities
using e-government services. about the questionnaire and its questions, and obtain assis-
tance in completion of the questionnaire.
3. The factor X34—Access for employees of government
2. In the second section, definitions and explanations of the
units to their network resources (mobile workstation) has
main terms used in the questionnaire were provided, e.g.,
been replaced with the number X54.
e-government, e-government services, ICT, hardware, net-
works and telecommunications.
Step 6: Creating the Final Survey Questionnaire 3. The third section requested non-personal characteristics of
government unit. The characteristics comprised a kind of a
After updating the set of CSFs, we were able to work out the government unit, a geographical location of the govern-
final version of the survey questionnaire. The survey question- ment unit, and staff members of government unit. At the
naire contained six sections: end of this section, respondents could provide their e-mail
1. The first section was designed to clarify who is in the addresses to receive the findings of the study.
study sample and who is not. It requested non-personal 4. The mission of fourth section was to examine 55 factors
participation in this study. It comprised information about and to show a couple of factors, primarily influencing a
the research team, the goals of the survey, the reason for successful adoption of e-government. Each of the 55 fac-
the survey, voluntary participation, and willingness to tors was listed and a question about the importance of
provide a copy of the study results for respondents if each factor for e-government was posted. This section was
desired. Moreover, confidentiality was assured to elimi- designed by using the 5-point Likert scale. It is important
nate potential bias and fears. In addition, an e-mail address to stress that each factor was explained by using a balloon.
and a phone number of a research team member were It is a small pop-up window that informed respondents of
shown. The contact information was useful for a factor and its nature in detail.

Volume 56 Issue 2, Spring 2016 Journal of Computer Information Systems 161

 TABLE 5. 55 CSFs for e-Government and their Descriptive Statistics
Dimension/ Number of
Number and name of critical success factor Stage responses Min Max Mean Median SD CV (%)
X1 Public outlay on hardware, networks and E/a 635 1 5 4.5 5 0.70 15.46
telecommunications
X2 Private outlay on hardware, networks and E/a 631 1 5 3.4 3 1.08 31.94
telecommunications
X3 Competition on ICT market E/a 629 1 5 3.8 4 0.96 24.96
X4 Public outlay on back-office and front-office information E/a 633 1 5 4.2 4 0.84 20.12
systems, especially e-government services
X5 Financial situation of government units E/a 634 2 5 4.5 5 0.72 15.88
X6 Public and private outlay on ICT education for government E/c 634 1 5 4.0 4 0.81 20.06
managers
X7 Public and private outlay on ICT education for government E/c 634 1 5 4.0 4 0.82 20.69
employees
X8 Outlay on creating ICT competence centre for government E/c 632 1 5 3.7 4 0.87 23.63
units
X9 Potential economic benefits coming from ICT usage in E/u 633 2 5 3.8 4 0.83 21.67
Downloaded by [Penn State University] at 21:26 28 January 2016

government units
X10 Economic risk of ICT implementation in government units E/u 631 1 5 3.3 3 0.87 26.27
X11 Public outlay on ICT promotion in government units E/u 630 1 5 3.7 4 0.91 24.61
X12 Differentiation of e-government services charges due to E/u 632 1 5 3.8 4 1.01 26.74
ways of processing – electronic or paper
X13 ICT awareness of managerial workers in government units S/a 634 1 5 4.3 4 0.87 20.41
X14 Citizens’ and enterprises’ awareness of egovernment S/a 635 1 5 4.2 4 0.84 20.04
services
X15 Public e-services absorption by stakeholders of S/a 635 2 5 4.0 4 0.80 19.92
government units
X16 Incentive system promoting permanent competence S/c 636 1 5 4.0 4 0.86 21.32
improvement of government employees (especially in ICT)
X17 External ICT expert consultancy for government units in S/c 633 1 5 3.7 4 0.91 24.44
the field of ICT
X18 New social and cultural competences of government S/c 633 2 5 3.9 4 0.82 20.86
employees
X19 Citizens’ and enterprises’ competences to use e- S/c 634 1 5 4.1 4 0.79 19.57
government services
X20 Information culture in government units conducive to the S/u 634 2 5 4.2 4 0.73 17.37
use of ICT
X21 Social exclusion of workers, citizens, entrepreneurs due to S/u 635 1 5 4.1 4 0.88 21.60
age, to education, to place of residence, to disability
X22 Innovative hardware and networks in government units T/a 634 1 5 4.1 4 0.83 20.18
X23 Innovative e-government services T/a 634 1 5 4.1 4 0.84 20.59
X24 Open source software licenses T/a 634 1 5 4.0 4 1.00 24.71
X25 Standardized ICTs for government units T/a 630 1 5 4.1 4 0.87 21.55
X26 Dedicated (personalized) ICTs for government units T/a 635 1 5 3.7 4 1.02 27.57
X27 ICT leaderships and visionaries in government units T/c 635 1 5 3.8 4 0.93 24.32
X28 ICT competences of government employees T/c 633 2 5 4.4 5 0.67 15.28
X29 Integration of front-office and back-office information T/u 633 2 5 4.5 5 0.68 15.24
systems
X30 Interoperability of information systems in government T/u 630 1 5 4.2 4 0.79 18.71
units
X31 Quality of e-government services T/u 634 1 5 4.3 4 0.79 18.45
X32 Information security in government units T/u 634 1 5 4.3 5 0.79 18.09
X33 Maturity of e-government services T/u 633 2 5 4.2 4 0.75 17.86
X34 E-government services enabling e-voting T/u 635 1 5 3.6 4 1.05 28.82
X35 E-government services enabling public consultation and T/u 635 1 5 3.7 4 0.92 24.82
participating in public decision making
X36 Coordination of public ICT investments O/a 636 1 5 4.0 4 0.87 21.94
X37 Coordination of ICT projects in government units O/a 631 1 5 4.0 4 0.81 20.06
(Continued )

162 Journal of Computer Information Systems Volume 56 Issue 2, Spring 2016

 TABLE 5. (Continued)
Dimension/ Number of
Number and name of critical success factor Stage responses Min Max Mean Median SD CV (%)
X38 Public-private partnership in the field of ICTs O/a 632 1 5 3.3 3 0.87 26.09
X39 Rule of law O/a 635 1 5 4.1 4 0.82 19.96
X40 Institutional support for the development of ICT O/a 634 1 5 4.1 4 0.81 20.04
infrastructure
X41 Coopetition in the ICT market O/a 633 1 5 3.3 3 0.86 25.65
X42 Corruption in the implementation of ICT projects in O/a 632 1 5 3.3 3 1.16 35.01
government units
X43 ICT benchmarking for local and state government O/a 633 1 5 3.6 4 0.83 23.24
X44 Approved e-government strategy O/a 630 1 5 3.6 4 0.92 25.39
X45 State standardization of solutions for e-government O/a 634 1 5 4.4 5 0.81 18.69
X46 Competences of employees of government units in the O/c 631 1 5 4.1 4 0.78 18.95
field of new management models
X47 Mandatory usage of electronic documents in government O/u 634 1 5 4.2 4 0.82 19.60
units
X48 Top management support O/u 633 1 5 4.4 5 0.77 17.54
Downloaded by [Penn State University] at 21:26 28 January 2016

X49 Internal regulations of government units on access to e- O/u 630 1 5 4.0 4 0.81 20.22
government services
X50 Adaptation of new management models in government O/u 627 1 5 3.9 4 0.79 20.06
units
X51 Participation of employees of government units in O/u 629 1 5 3.8 4 0.82 21.45
organizational changes
X52 Electronic communication between government units O/u 628 1 5 4.4 5 0.70 16.00
X53 New ways of providing work by employees of government O/u 629 1 5 3.7 4 0.91 24.40
units
X54 Access for employees of government units to their network O/u 627 1 5 3.6 4 1.01 28.01
resources (mobile workstation)
X55 Citizens’ and enterprises’ satisfaction with using O/u 624 1 5 4.2 4 0.81 19.38
egovernment services

5. The fifth section collected the data about the level of Poland (MAiC) and the Chancellery of the Prime Minister of
e-government development in a government unit. The Poland (CPM). As a result of this cooperation, a suitable address
questions of the sections were closely related to CSFs database of Polish local and state government units was drawn by
listed in the fourth section. This part of the survey will the application of Microsoft Excel software for this purpose.
be a subject of other papers. The actual research sample was composed of 2711 govern-
6. At the end of the survey questionnaire, an acknowledg- ment units, comprising 2268 local government units and 443
ment of respondents for taking part of the study was set. state government units, which respectively referred to 81% of
Additionally, a re-request for e-mail was listed to receive the whole local government and 82% of purposive sampling of
the findings of the study. government units at the state level.
Applying the CAWI (computer-assisted web interview)
method and employing the Survey Monkey platform, the survey PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF METHODOLOGY AND
questionnaire was uploaded to the website. Then, the pilot study THE PRELIMINARY RESULTS
was conducted to verify the web survey questionnaire. In the
pilot study, some respondents participated in the fifth step of the Step 8: Collecting the Data
examined web survey questionnaire. The finishing touches were
put into it, especially formal and technical. No substantive Having finalized the methodology development, the metho-
amendments were required. dology of the actual sample was applied and the results were
evaluated. At this step, the research team worked very closely
Step 7: Defining the Sample and the Sample Size with MAiC and CPM.
The Deputy Minister of MAiC personally signed an official
After creating the final survey questionnaire, the next step was letter supporting and promoting the conducted research. The offi-
to decide about the respondents’ group who will participate in the cial letter with a hyperlink to the web survey questionnaire was
study sample. The sample group should consist of internal stake- sent to the prepared e-mail database listings. The government
holders of e-government, that is government employees working electronic inboxes were used for this purpose. In addition, on the
in the selected government units at the state and the local level of website of CPM, information on the conducted research was
government. In order to reach the biggest group of respondents posted. Additionally, the bulletin of CPM [9] extended the invita-
and to obtain representative results, the research team cooperated tion to the state government units to participate in the research.
fully with the Ministry of Administration and Digitization of The bulletin was electronically sent to the respondents by CPM.

Volume 56 Issue 2, Spring 2016 Journal of Computer Information Systems 163

 As a result of the above activities, the information about the Additionally, the variability of items was examined (Table 5).
study was sent to 2268 local government units and 443 state The coefficient of variation stays in the range from 15.24% to
government units. In case of any doubts, the respondents asked 35.01%, and all factors have enough variability to be useful
questions via e-mail or mobile. The explanation was provided on (above 10%).
the ongoing basis by an appointed person whose contact data After examination of the internal consistency among items
were included in the first section of the survey questionnaire. on a scale and the variability of items, the mean, median,
Data collection occurred between the December 22, 2013, standard deviation, and coefficient of variation were used to
and April 15, 2014. The number of completed questionnaires demonstrate the construct validity of 55 factors (Table 5).
was systematically controlled. In case of lack of feedback, The calculated means for 55 items are in the range from 3.32
reminder notices were sent to appropriate respondents. to 4.53, using the 5-point Likert scale. 30 items have values
Over a 4-month period of intense work, we obtained a set of exceeding 4. For eight factors, the medians exceed the highest
636 correct and complete responses in digital format (response value, namely 5. The means for those factors are higher than the
rate—23.45%). 542 of the responses were collected from the means for the other factors. The means are in the range from
local government (response rate—23.89%) and 94 of them were 4.34 to 4.53. There are the following factors: X1, X5, X28, X29,
from state government (response rate—21.21%). The data were X32, X45, X48, and X52. The means and medians for all 55
stored in two data formats: Statistical Package for Social factors are presented in Figure 4. Table 6 shows the rank of
Science (SPSS) and Microsoft Excel software. factors with the highest means and medians.
The results of statistical analyses allow us to recommend the
eight CSFs for e-government in Poland. These are:
Step 9: Analyzing the Collected Data
● X5: Financial situation of government units (economic
Downloaded by [Penn State University] at 21:26 28 January 2016

As the process of collecting data was completed and before factor);

passing to detailed statistical analyses, our next step was to ● X1: Public outlay on hardware, networks, and telecom-
calculate the reliability to examine the internal consistency munications (economic factor);
among items on a scale. Look at the fourth step of the metho- ● X29: Integration of front-office and back-office informa-
dology, we used Cronbach’s coefficient values. tion systems (technological factor);
The results of Cronbach’s alpha values for all the research ● X52: Electronic communication between government
items, research dimensions, and stages have values no lower units (organizational factor).
than 0.800. Generally, the removal of some items would not ● X48: Top management support (organizational factor);
lead to the improvement of internal consistency among items on ● X28: ICT competencies of government employees (tech-
a scale. Only the removal of four items would lead to a minimal nological factor);
improvement in Cronbach’s alpha (X2—changes of 0.00008; ● X45: State standardization of solutions for e-govern-
X24—changes of 0.00001; X26—changes of 0.00048, and ment (organizational factor);
X42—changes of 0.00086). Overall, the original alpha scores ● X32: Information security in government units (techno-
with all 55 items, four dimensions, and three stages show a logical factor);
strong internal consistency and reliability. The results of relia- It is worth noticing that there are no sociocultural factors in
bility analysis are presented in Figure 3 and Table 4. the set of the eight key success factors. There seems to be little

0,943

0,942

0,942

0,941

0,941

0,940

0,940

0,939

0,939

0,938
x1
x2
x3
x4
x5
x6
x7
x8
x9

x10
x11
x12
x13
x14
x15
x16
x17
x18
x29
x20
x21
x22
x23
x 24
x 25
x 26
x 27
x 28
x 39
x 30
x 31
x 32
x 33
x 34
x 35
x 36
x 37
x 38
x 49
x 40
x 41
x 42
x 43
x 44
x 45
x 46
x 47
x 48
x 59
x 50
x51
x52
x53
x54
5
x1

Cronbach's alpha when item deleted Cronbach alpha for all items

FIGURE 3. The Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient Values for 55 Proposed Factors

164 Journal of Computer Information Systems Volume 56 Issue 2, Spring 2016

 5,5

5,0

4,5

4,0

3,5

3,0

2,5
x1
x2
x3
x4
x5
x6
x7
x8
x9
x10
x11
x12
x13
x14
x15
x16
x17
x18
x19
x20
x21
x22
x23
x24
x25
x26
x27
x28
x29
x30
x31
x32
x33
x34
x35
x36
x37
x38
x39
x40
x41
x42
x43
x44
x45
x46
x47
x48
x49
x50
x51
x52
x53
x54
x55
mean median
Downloaded by [Penn State University] at 21:26 28 January 2016

FIGURE 4. Median and Mean for All 55 Factors

appreciation amongst government units of the increased influ- This study contributes to e-government research in two ways.
ence of sociocultural factors on e-government. In their opinion, First, it made an attempt at developing a methodology of CSFs for
economic, technological, and organizational factors are the most e-government. Second, it showed practical application of this pro-
important ones. The sociocultural factors are accorded less posed methodology and indicated CSFs for e-government in Poland.
importance than other factors. However, three sociocultural fac- The proposed methodology of CSFs for e-government con-
tors were identified amongst the first 20 factors (Table 5). These sists of nine steps:
are: X13—ICT awareness of managerial workers in government
units, X20—Information culture in government units conducive 1. Reviewing literature;
to the use of ICT; X14—Citizens’ and enterprises’ awareness of 2. Defining the prototype CSFs;
e-government services. The mean, median, standard deviation, 3. Verifying the prototype CSFs;
and coefficient of variation of those factors are slightly inferior 4. Evaluating the prototype CSFs;
compared to the values of the eight CSFs listed in Table 6. 5. Creating and testing the draft survey questionnaire;
6. Creating the final survey questionnaire;
DISCUSSION AND FUTURE WORKS 7. Defining the sample and the sample size;
8. Collecting data; and
In the recent past, few academic studies have concentrated on 9. Analyzing the collected data.
e-government and various potential factors influencing success
in e-government. The concept of CSFs gives a good basis for At each step, different methods and techniques were used
stating which determinants should be followed and which bar- and different goals were achieved. The key tools of this meth-
riers removed during the implementation of e-government pro- odology were the Delphi study and a survey. They provided a
jects and e-government successful adoption. CSFs show the way of collecting comparable quantitative data from different
limited number of areas in which satisfactory results will ensure local and state government units in Poland. Each step had to be
successful e-government. completed before passing to the next one. As a result of employ-
ing this methodology, the factors for successful e-government
were indicated and the critical factors among them.
TABLE 6. Ranking of Final CSFs according to Mean Scores The practical implementation of this methodology in Polish
local and state public administration led to the identification of
No. Critical success factor Mean Median various factors influencing e-government in Poland and the
X5 Financial situation of government units 4.53 5 examination of the strengths of their impact on e-government.
The eight critical factors were indicated, i.e.:
X1 Public outlay on hardware, networks, 4.51 5
and telecommunications ● public outlay on hardware, networks, and
X29 Integration of front-office and back- 4.45 5 telecommunications;
office information systems ● financial situation of government units;
X52 Electronic communication between 4.40 5 ● ICT competences of government employees;
government units ● integration of front-office and back-office information
X48 Top management support 4.38 5 systems;
● information security in government units;
X28 ICT competences of government 4.37 5
● state standardization of solutions for e-government;
employees
● top management support; and
X45 State standardization of solutions for 4.35 5 ● electronic communication between government units.
e-government
X32 Information security in government 4.34 5 Although the developed methodology and its practical imple-
units mentation are generic and comprehensive ones, there is a

Volume 56 Issue 2, Spring 2016 Journal of Computer Information Systems 165

 limitation of this study. It lies in the fact that this study only FUNDING
examines the data of Polish government units.
This article attempts to provide a new line of thinking and This research has been supported by a grant entitled
further scope for researchers in areas of CSFs for e-government. “Designing a system approach to sustainable development of
Such a comprehensive study has not been performed earlier. It the information society – on the example of Poland” from the
should be developed and applied to other settings. First, there National Science Centre in Poland, 2011/01/B/HS4/00974,
are some reasons to suppose the CSFs for e-government at the 2011–2014.
local levels of government will be different than at the state level
of government. Moreover, the empirical observations show that
REFERENCES
the CSFs vary depending on the size of government units or
geographical location. All those conjectures will be examined in
[1] A Digital Agenda for Europe. Communication from the
a future study. Second, the proposed methodology and its prac-
Commission of 19 May 2010 to the European Parliament,
tical implementation constitute a very comprehensive basis for
the Council, the European Economic and Social
identifying CSFs for e-government adoption, but researchers
Committee and the Committee of the Regions, COM
may develop, verify, and improve this methodology and its
2010. 245. 2012. Available from: http://europa.eu/legisla-
implementation. Third, interested researchers may use this pro-
tion_summaries/information_society/strategies/index_en.
posed methodology and do similar analyses with different sam-
htm
ple groups in Poland and other countries. Many comparisons
[2] Almarabeh T, AbuAli A. 2010. A general framework for
between different countries can be made. There are reasons to
e-government: definition maturity challenges, opportu-
think that this methodology, its implementation, and results can
nities, and success. Eur J Sci Res. 39:32–34.
be useful for the countries of Central and Eastern Europe in
Downloaded by [Penn State University] at 21:26 28 January 2016

[3] Altameem T, Zairi M, Alshawi S. 2006. Critical success

particular. This is because the countries are similar and they
factors of e-government: a proposed model for e-govern-
have to resolve the same problems. They are similar not only
ment implementation. Proceedings Conference:
through their common neighborhood and analogous geopolitical
Innovations in Information Technology Conference;
situation, but also through their joint history, traditions, culture,
Dubai; p. 501–505.
and values. There is also a similarity in the field of building
[4] Angelopoulos S, Kitsios F, Papadopoulos T. 2010. New
democratic state structures and a free-market economy as well
service development in e-government: identifying critical
as participating in the European integration process. The quality
success factors. Transform Govern People Process Policy.
of ICT and telecommunications infrastructure in the countries is
4:95–118.
at the same level. The maturity levels of e-government in these
[5] Anttiroiko AV. 2008. A brief introduction to the field of
countries are similar. In addition, it would be interesting to
e-government. In: Anttiroiko AV, editor. Electronic gov-
compare e-government CSFs for the Central and Eastern
ernment: concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications.
European countries and European (world) leader countries.
New York, NY: Hershey; p. xli–lxxv.
Fourth, government units and government authorities could
[6] Assembly of European Regions, AER. 2012. Available
find answers to important contemporary questions, in particular:
from: http://www.aer.eu/main-issues/economic-develop-
Which areas and operations of government units should be
ment/aer-innovation-award.html
primarily focused on in order to achieve the most satisfying
[7] Atkinson R. 1999. Project management: cost, time and
results of transition from a government to e-government?
quality, two best guesses and a phenomenon, its time to
In any case, the research methodology elaborated in this
accept other success criteria. Int J Project Manage.
study will supply researchers who would like to conduct similar
17:337–342.
or alternative tests with the same or altered sample groups with
[8] Beynon-Davies P. 2007. Models for e-government.
an initial point and a solid base for their analyses.
Transform Govern People Process Policy. 1:7–28.
[9] Biuletyn Służby Cywilnej [Bulletin of Civil Service].
CONCLUSION 2013. 13:2.
[10] Brainard LA, McNutt JG. 2010. Virtual government-citi-
The overall mission of this article is to provide a compre- zen relations: informational, transactional or collaborative?
hensive understanding and coverage of the CSF theory used in Admin Soc. 42:836–858.
information system research. It deals with the ICT adoption to [11] Choudrie J, Weerakkody V, Jones S. 2005. Realising
support the government and the transition from a traditional e-government in the UK: rural and urban challenges. J
government to e-government. It refers not only to use ICTs in Enterp Inf Manage. 18:568–585.
government units, but also to the way in which successful [12] Cronbach LJ. 1951. Coefficient alpha and the internal
adoption of ICTs can be achieved. Specifically, it aims to structure of tests. Psychometrika. 16:296–334.
focus on the following key objectives: (1) to provide the meth- [13] European Public Sector Award, EPSA. 2012. Available
odology of CSFs for e-government and (2) to deploy this meth- from: http://www.epsa2011.eu/en/content/show/&tid=143
odology to identify CSFs for a successful adoption of [14] Fonseca-Lind S, Ramaswamy M. 2013. E-governance in
e-government. Puerto Rico: perspectives for the next decade. Issues Inf
This research contributes to understanding how CSF theory Syst. 14:207–214.
should be employed to identify factors for successful e-govern- [15] Garcia-Sanchez IM, Cuadrado-Ballesteros B, Frías-Aceituno
ment adoption. The theoretical contribution of this research is JV. 2012. Determinants of e-government development: some
that it analyzes and synthesizes CSFs for e-government in order methodological issues. J Manage Strategy. 3:11–20.
to enhance knowledge of them from various perspectives. The [16] Gil-García JR, Helbig N. 2007. Exploring E-government
methodological contribution of this research is that the metho- benefits and success factors. In: Anttiroiko AV, Mälkiä M,
dology of CSFs is developed and described to enhance knowl- editors. Encyclopedia of digital government. Hershey: Idea
edge and skills of using CSFs. The practical contribution of this Group Inc., p. 803–811.
research is employing this proposed methodology to identify [17] Gil-Garcia JR, Pardo TA. 2005. E-government success
CSFs for e-government in Poland and show areas in which factors: mapping practical tools to theoretical foundations.
satisfactory results will ensure successful e-government. Govern Inf Quart. 22:187–216.

166 Journal of Computer Information Systems Volume 56 Issue 2, Spring 2016

 [18] Gliem JA, Gliem RR. 2003. Calculating, interpreting, and [36] Program zintegrowanej informatyzacji państwa [Program
reporting Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for of integrated state computerization]. 2013. Warszawa:
Likert-type scales. Proceedings of 2003 Midwest Ministerstwo Administracji i Cyfryzacji. Available from:
Research to Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, https://mac.gov.pl/projekty/program-zintegrowanej-infor-
and Community Education. Columbus: The Ohio State matyzacji-panstwa-do-2020-r
University; p. 82–88. [37] Rana NP, Dwivedi YK, Williams MD. 2013. Analysing
[19] Hanna NK. 2010. Transforming government and building challenges, barriers and CSF of egov adoption. Transform
the information society: challenges and opportunities for Govern People Process Policy. 7:177–198.
the developing world. New York, NY: Springer. [38] Rockart JF. 1979. Chief executives define their own data
[20] Harindranath G. 2008. ICT in a transition economy: the needs. Harv Bus Rev. 57:57–81.
case of Hungary. J Glob Inf Technol Manage. 11:33–55. [39] Rockart J, Bullen C. 1981. A primer on critical success
[21] Heeks R, Bailur S. 2007. Analyzing e-government factors. Center for Information Systems Research Working
research: perspectives, philosophies, theories, methods Paper No 69. Cambridge: Sloan School of Management,
and practice. Govern Inf Quart. 24:243–265. MIT.
[22] Heichlinger A, editor. 2011. EPSA trends in practice. [40] Serrano-Cinca C, Rueda-Tomás M, Portillo-Tarragona P.
Driving public sector excellence to shape Europe for 2009. Determinants of e-government extension. Online Inf
2020. Maastricht: EIPA. Rev. 33:476–498.
[23] Hinton PR, Brownlow C, McMurvay I, Cozens B. 2004. [41] Shareef MA, Yogesh NA, Dwivedi K. 2012. Examining
SPSS explained. London: Routledge. adoption behavior of mobile government. J Comput Inf
[24] Ifinedo P, Singh M. 2011. Determinants of eGovernment Syst. 53:39–49.
maturity in the transition economies of Central and Eastern [42] Strategia rozwoju społeczeństwa informacyjnego w Polsce
Downloaded by [Penn State University] at 21:26 28 January 2016

Europe. Electron J e-Govern. 9:166–182. do roku 2013 [Strategy of development of information

[25] Iskender G, Ozkan S. 2013. E-government transformation society in Poland until 2013]. 2008. Warszawa:
success. An assessment methodology and the preliminary Ministerstwo Spraw Wewnętrznych i Administracji.
results. Transform Govern People Process Policy. 7:364– Available from: http://www.mswia.gov.pl/strategia/
392. [43] Sultan A, AlArfaj, KA, AlKutbi GA. 2012. Analytic hier-
[26] Joosten D, Basten D, Mellis W. Measurement of informa- archy process for the success of e-government. Bus
tion system project success in organizations – what Strategy Ser. 13:295–306.
researchers can learn from practice. ECIS 2011 [44] The European eGovernment Action Plan 2011–2015.
Proceedings, paper 177. 2011. Available from: http:// 2012. Communication from the Commission to the
aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2011/177 European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and
[27] Jugdev K, Müller R. 2005. A retrospective look at our Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions of
evolving understanding of project success. Project Manage 15 December 2010, Harnessing ICT to promote smart,
J. 36:19–31. sustainable and innovative government, Brussels,
[28] Kopackova H, Michalek K, Cejna K. 2007. Accessibility 15.12.2010, COM 2010. 743 final 2012. Available from:
and findability of local e-government websites in the http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/information_soci-
Czech Republic. Universal Access Inf Soc. 9:51–61. ety/strategies/index_en.htm
[29] Krisztina C, Aniko V. 2007. A survey on mass perception [45] The Role of eGovernment for Europe’s Future. 2012.
of e-government services in Hungary. Inf Tarsadalom. Communication of 26 September 2003 from the
7:86–96. Commission to the Council, the European Parliament,
[30] Laszlo G. 2008. Enhancement of the performance of the European Economic and Social Committee and the
administrative systems and e-government services in Committee of the Regions, COM 2003. 567.
Hungary in correlation with EU funding. Proceedings of Available from: http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/
the 4th International Conference on e-Government; information_society/strategies/index_en.htm
Melbourne, RMIT University; p. 263–273. [46] Tolbert CJ, Mossberger K. 2006. The effects of e-govern-
[31] Michel H. 2005. e-Administration, e-government, e-gov- ment on trust and confidence in government. Public Admin
ernance and the learning city: a typology of citizenship Rev. 66:354–369.
management using ICTs. Electron J e-Govern. 3:213–218. [47] Wpływ cyfryzacji na działania urzędów administracji pub-
[32] Moon MJ, Norris DF. 2005. Does managerial orientation licznej w Polsce w 2013 [The impact of digitization on the
matter? The adoption of reinventing government and functioning of public administration in Poland]. 2013.
e-government at the municipal level. Inf Syst J. 15:43–60. Warszawa: Ministerstwo Administracji i Cyfryzacji.
[33] Nfuka EN, Rusu L. 2013. Critical success framework for Available from: https://mac.gov.pl/files/pbs_mac_cyfry-
implementing effective IT governance in Tanzanian public zacja_11122013.pdf
sector organizations. J Glob Inf Technol Manage. 16:53–77. [48] Wpływ cyfryzacji na działania urzędów administracji pub-
[34] Pina V., Torres L, Royo S. 2009. E-government evolution licznej w Polsce w 2012 [The impact of digitization on the
in EU local governments: a comparative perspective. functioning of public administration in Poland]. 2012.
Online Inf Rev. 33:1137–1168. Warszawa: Ministerstwo Administracji i Cyfryzacji.
[35] Plan działań na rzecz rozwoju elektronicznej administracji Available from: https://mac.gov.pl/files/wp-content/uploads/
(eGovernment) na lata 2005–2006 [Action plan for the 2011/12/PBS_MAC_Cyfryzacja_full_PL-2012.pdf
development of electronic government (e-government) [49] Xu X, Zhang W, Barkhi R. 2010. IT infrastructure cap-
for the years 2005–2006]. 2004. Warszawa: Ministerstwo abilities and IT project success: a development team per-
Nauki i Informatyzacji. Available from: http://archiwum- spective. Inf Technol Manage. 11:123–142.
ukie.polskawue.gov.pl/HLP/files.nsf/0/ [50] Ziemba E, Papaj T, Żelazny R. 2013. A model of success
B686F3119ECD01A1C125721F003BA1CF/$file/ factors for e-government adoption – the case of Poland.
Plan_dzialan_na_rzecz_rozwoju_elektronicznej_administ- Issues Inf Syst. 14:87–100.
racji_na_lata_2005_-_2006.pdf

Volume 56 Issue 2, Spring 2016 Journal of Computer Information Systems 167