A Suggested Framework for Assessing Electronic Government

Readiness in Egypt
Nahed Amin Azab1, Sherif Kamel2, and Georgios Dafoulas1
1
School of Computing Science, Middlesex University, UK
2
Department of Management, the American University in Cairo, Egypt
[email protected]

Abstract: Electronic Government (e-Government) is becoming a global phenomenon that is increasingly attracting the
attention of community citizens including politicians, economists, decision and policy makers amongst others. Once only
regarded as a means for modernizing the public sector and increasing government productivity and efficiency, e-
Government is presently recognized as a driver and a key enabler of citizen-centric, cooperative, and seamless modern
governance implying not only a profound transformation in the way government interacts with the governed but also the
reinvention of its internal processes and how organizations carry their business both internally as well as externally while
interacting with the other segments of the community. Based on the literature, it is frequently claimed that the availability
of an effective e-Government assessment framework is a necessary condition for advancing e-Government proper
implementation. The objective of this article is to develop an e-Government appraisal framework encompassing several
components such as people, technology, processes, and strategic planning. The article examines the relations and
interactions of these components in an emerging e-Government environment using a case study on an agency affiliated
to the government of Egypt as a primary step in the process of testing the framework presented.

Keywords: government; e-Government; e-Government readiness; e-readiness; internet; strategic planning; information
and communication technology; public sector; IT transfer; developing nations; Egypt

1. Introduction
e-Government is predicated on leveraging the power of information and communication technology (ICT) to
deliver services provided by governments at local, municipal, state and national levels; however, how these
benefits will be reached is still a matter of controversy (Krishnaswamy, 2005). The currently unacceptable
return on investment from e-Government (Collinge, 2003) dictates the need for defining measures of
success (Stowers, 2004) to raise awareness and to confirm the viability of application of e-Government
approaches (UNDESA, 2003a).

Available benchmarking e-Government initiatives do not provide a comprehensive framework for assessing,
classifying and comparing different e-Government programs (Hu et al., 2005; Grant and Chau, 2005). Most
appraisal models are more suitable for the appraisal of the overall development of e-Government in each
country; they are not directly focusing on the problems that exist in individual e-Government projects or on
the internal factors affecting transformation of a government organization due to ICT adoption. Moreover,
most of these approaches ignore the view of civil servants, even though they constitute the cornerstone in
the success of any e-Government project as the direct users.

This article reviews recent frameworks to modeling and assessing eReadiness and electronic government
readiness (EGR). The deficiencies of these frameworks are pointed out and by drawing on their merits, and
on the literature addressing information systems (IS) and eCommerce success; the article suggests an EGR
framework of e-Government project assessment focusing on electronic management, an aspect that should
not be ignored by governments (Dawes, 2002).

The article recommends that in order to reach success in applying e-Government, public agencies should
realize the importance of the integration and transformation between all e-Government building blocks: IT
strategy, processes, technology, and people. The suggested EGR framework is evaluated against feedback
from employees working in a one of the public sector organizations in Egypt. This constitutes a first step in
the process of verifying the viability of the framework. Subsequent studies are taking place on other cases.
Findings of all cases will be evaluated in the near future.

2. Theoretical background
This section highlights the main theoretical concepts in the literature related to EGR assessment. Emphasis
is given on several eReadiness and EGR models highlighting their limitations.

ISSN 1479-436-9X 11 ©Academic Conferences Ltd

Reference this paper as:
Azab, N. A., Kamel, S. and Dafoulas, G. “A Suggested Framework for Assessing Electronic Government Readiness in
Egypt.” Electronic Journal of e-Government Volume 7 Issue 1 2009, pp. 11 - 28, available online at www.ejeg.com
Electronic Journal of e-Government Volume 7 Issue 1 2009 (11-28)

2.1 eReadiness measurement tools

Assessing EGR leads to the investigation of a country’s overall eReadiness (Kovacic, 2005), defined as “the
degree in which a community is qualified to participate in the Networked World” (Budhiraja and Sachdeva,
2002). A thorough investigation of 18 eReadiness models identifies five key categories of assessment
criteria: IT infrastructure, human resources, policies and regulations, environment (economical, political,
cultural), and e-Government (addressing internal factors affecting it such as public websites and ICT usage
by government).

Table 1 shows a comparative analysis between selected eReadiness assessment models. The table
presents each model along with the entity that developed it, its focus, and the main components it measures
based on the classification presented above.
Table 1: Comparative analysis between eReadiness tools
Tool Focus IT HR Policies Environment e-Government
Infrastructure and Transformation
Regulations
1- Center for International e-society √ √ √ √ Government
Development – Harvard effectiveness in
University and IBM (CID) promoting the use of
ICT
Availability of online
government services
Extent of government
Websites
Business Internet
interactions with
government
2- Center for International e-society √ √ √ √
Development and Conflict
Management (CIDCM)
3- International e-society √
Telecommunication Union
(ITU)
4- World Bank (Knowledge e- √ √ √ Availability of e-
Assessment Methodology - economy Government services
KAM)
5- World Economic Forum, e- √ √ √ √ Government use of
Infodev & INSEAD economy ICT for its own
(Network Readiness Index services & processes
- NRI) Volume of
transactions that
businesses have with
governments
Presence of
government services
online
6- U.S. Agency for e-society √ √ √ √ ICT usage in
International Development government
(USAID) (hardware, software,
and networks in each
ministry)
7- The World Information e- √ √ √ √
Technology and Services economy
Alliance (WITSA)
Reference table 1, the findings indicate that some eReadiness tools, such as CIDCM, ITU, and WITSA do
not include e-Government in their assessments. The other tools (CID, KAM, NRI, and USAID) do not
consider all internal factors affecting EGR; they only assess availability and number of eServices, and
promotion and usage of ICT by the public sector. This can be applied on additional tools included in the
eReadiness literature such as, Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation - APEC (Luyt, 2006; Budhiraja, 2002;
Bui et al., 2003), The Computer System Policy Project – CSPP (Budhiraja, 2002; Bui et al., 2003), Computer

www.ejeg.com 12 ©Academic Conferences Ltd

 Nahed Amin Azab, Sherif Kamel, and Georgios Dafoulas

McConnell International-MI (Luyt, 2006; Bui et al., 2003), World Economic Forum-WEF (Budhiraja, 2002),
Mosaic-MQ, Metric-Net-E-Economy Index-M-N, Information Society Index-IDC, The Economist Intelligence
Unit-EIU, Crenshaw and Robinson-C&R, Center for International Development & Conflict Management-
CIDCM, Country Development Gateway-CDG (Bridges.org, 2005).

eReadiness assessment tools do not undertake in-depth research concerning e-Government, ignoring vital
elements, such as culture and technology acceptance of public officials (Dada, 2006), quality of ICT in
government, strategic alignment, etc. In addition, eReadiness indicators are over-simplified measurements
not reflecting a veritable e-Government status, omitting more relevant dimensions difficult to be measured
(Bannister, 2004). Altman (2002) concludes that there is no direct relation between eReadiness and e-
Government implementation in a country; this clarifies Jansen’s (2005) recommendation to focus on the most
particular factors to e-Government when attempting to measure it. Based on the analysis presented, the
study confirms the inadequacy of eReadiness tools for assessing EGR.

2.2 EGR frameworks

All developed EGR frameworks have several shortcomings: (i) being result-oriented, focusing mainly on
quantifiable factors of e-Government, (ii) emphasizing the promotion of eService quality through evaluating
the services offered by governmental Websites; but measuring only the public websites limits the way e-
Government should be perceived (Peters et al., 2004); it seems that there is less attention to the
streamlining of back office operations (Homburg and Bekkers, 2002), (iii) failing to restrict their research
boundaries to the internal factors directly related to e-Government; rather than investigating external factors
such as IT infrastructure, and human capital. (iv) for those who approach the back office or eAdministration
(Koh and Prybutok, 2003; Bertelsmann Foundation, 2002; WASEDA University, 2006); they limit their
assessments on developed countries without verifying their applicability on developing countries, (v)
approaching e-Government only at a nationwide level, rather than evaluating it at a micro level, i.e. over a
public organization (Hu et al., 2005). Finally, these models are assessed relying on one or more of three
methodologies: 1) secondary data; 2) citizens’ feedback; or 3) policy makers of e-Government projects.
Except for the model developed by Koh and Prybutok (2003), all other models do not evaluate EGR from the
perspective of government employees; how they perceive e-Government, and their degree of awareness
and belief in its viability. This group could be the best candidate to identify the most important factors
affecting EGR since they are one of the major project’s stakeholders. Additionally, it is very important to
investigate the extent of communication between government employees and e-Government policy makers.

The use of different sets of indicators with different assigned weights in all eReadiness and EGR models
lead to varying conclusions on the countries’ performance. Limiting surveying and ranking different nations
according to their scores on selected indexes removes the attention from more fundamental issues. As a
result, developed eReadiness and EGR models can serve only as a foundation for constructing an EGR
framework for a public organization.

3. A suggested framework for assessing EGR

The suggested framework derives its dimensions from previous research on IS and eCommerce success,
eReadiness, and EGR. The following lines present an explanation of the different dimensions of the
framework.

The proposed framework adopts the four-phase model of e-Government (Baum and Maio, 2000) that
classifies e-Government into four dimensions: strategy, processes, technology, and people. In addition, the
research suggests a number of constructs under each dimension in the framework. Aiming to overcome the
several shortcomings that exist in previous EGR assessment models, the framework covers all internal
factors that affect EGR (see figure 1). It acts as a prototype in the form of a checklist. A public organization
can verify the presence or absence of each construct under each dimension.

Although external factors such as environment, IT infrastructure, regulations, etc. are proved to be important
in assessing EGR, they are not investigated in this research. The emphasis is instead on the internal factors
that exist within a public organization because previous studies in eReadiness and EGR had already
addressed them. Also, it is preferable to develop an in-depth analysis of all internal factors, which contains a
rather large number of measures. Adding external factors leads to a cumbersome and complicated
framework shifting the attention from the internal factors that are the main concern of the study.

www.ejeg.com 13 ISSN 1479-436-9X

Electronic Journal of e-Government Volume 7 Issue 1 2009 (11-28)

Figure 1: e-Government Readiness (EGR) Framework

The following lines explain the theoretical background from which all constructs under each dimension are
derived.

3.1.1 Strategy
The need to set out a robust strategy for e-Government is a major factor in reaching a successful e-
Government adoption (Reffat, 2003; Fletcher, 1999). An efficient strategy should identify first the main
drivers for implementing e-Government (Working Group on e-Government in the Developing World, 2002).
Recognizing these drivers highlights their importance, and helps in setting an appropriate action plan. e-
Government strategy should also set a number of goals (Forman, 2002) -to justify its cost and to check the
extent to which these goals were achieved - and should identify potential challenges (Margetts and
Dunleavy, 2002): technological, administrative, legislative, economic, and political (Pilipovic et al., 2002).
Highlighting challenges at an early stage helps in setting appropriate solutions (Weerakody et al., 2005) with
the right priorities (Chen and Knepper, 2005). An e-Government strategy should also be aligned with the
organization’s business strategy, referred as strategic alignment, (Beaumaster, 2002; Baets, 1992; Bowman
et al., 1983; Das et al., 1991; Henderson and Venkatraman, 1993). Strategic alignment impacts overall
organization and business performance (Xia and King, 2002; Croteau et al., 2001), and helps in perceiving
higher payoffs from IT (Tallon et al., 2000).

In addition, an e-Government strategy should set an action plan (UNDESA, 2003a; WASEDA University,
2006) including accountability (Navarra and Cornford, 2003; Heeks, 2001), organization’s structure (Snellen,
2000; Baum and Maio, 2000), resource allocation (Fletcher, 2003), IT policies and procedures (Powell and
Dent-Micallef, 1999; Zahra and Covin, 1993), and leadership (WASEDA University, 2006; NSW, 2001).
Action plan should also investigate funding sources (WASEDA University, 2006; NSW, 2001), and identify e-
Government different stakeholders (Mitchell et al., 1997; Tennert and Schroeder, 1999) in order to determine
their roles (Frooman, 1999; Bryson and Alston, 1996) as well as the value to be reflected on each of them
(Aldrich et al., 2002; Traunmüller and Wimmer, 2003; Sprecher, 2000; West, 2000). Finally, an action plan
should develop means to promote e-Government to build awareness among all stakeholders (Hu et al.,

www.ejeg.com 14 ©Academic Conferences Ltd

 Nahed Amin Azab, Sherif Kamel, and Georgios Dafoulas

2005; WASEDA University, 2006). Table 2 presents the various suggested constructs of the e-Government
strategy dimension.
Table 2: Main constructs of “Strategy”
Strategy
Motives
Goals
Strategic Alignment
Identification of Challenges
Action Plan
Organization
(Accountability, Structure, Resource allocation, IT policies and procedures,
Leadership)
Funding resources
Stakeholders
(Identification, Role, Value on each one)
Promotion
Showing the value of e-Government strategy along with its different underlying items leads us to the
following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 1 (H1): e-Government strategy impacts EGR of the organization

3.1.2 Processes
Processes to be undertaken by an e-Government initiative are classified into two main categories: business
processes change and e-Government evaluation (see table 2). Several studies highlight the value of
business process change in e-Government success (Scholl, 2003; Kettinger et al., 1997; Pardo and Scholl,
2002; Heeks, 2001; Seybold, 1998). First, the motives for change should be determined (Scholl, 2005), and
the focal areas where these change should take place (Harkness et al., 1996; Kettinger and Grover, 1995;
Balutis, 2001). Business processes should also be defined, documented and streamlined (Rimmer, 2002;
Guo and Lu, 2005; Baum and Maio, 2000) to improve information flow within the organization.

Business processes should also be integrated internally, and with other public agencies as well (Accenture,
2005; Ho, 2002; Moon, 2002; Tapscott, 1995; Chen and Knepper, 2005; Rimmer, 2002; Layne and Lee,
2001).

Furthermore, the framework considers evaluation of e-Government performance as a systematic approach to

be performed periodically. Evaluation should always compare plans with real situations (Heeks, 2003); this
aids in rectifying deviations from the plans at an early stage. Evaluation should also take into account the
use of e-Government services by citizens (Gefen et al., 2002) and ICT usage by the employees in the
organization (CSPP, 2000; Liu, 2001; DeLone and McLean, 1992; Marchionini et al., 2003; Schedler and
Scharf, 2001). It is also essential to conduct periodic evaluations to understand how citizens perceive e-
Government from different perspectives such as usefulness and ease of use (Davis, 1985, 1989),
satisfaction (DeLone and McLean, 1992; Livari and Ervasi, 1994; Cyert and March, 1963; Downing, 1999;
Bailey and Pearson, 1983; Igbaria and Nachman, 1990), and trust (Adams, 1999; Edmiston, 2003; Chen and
Knepper, 2005; Gefen et al., 2002; Tassabehji, 2005). Periodic evaluations should also be extended to
investigate employees’ perceived usefulness and ease of use (Davis, 1985, 1989), and satisfaction (DeLone
and McLean, 1992; Bailey and Pearson, 1983; Davis, 1985, 1989; Igbaria and Nachman, 1990; Rai et al.,
2002; Seddon, 1997; Seddon and Kiew, 1996; Seddon et al., 1999; Wilkin and Castleman, 2003). Finally,
evaluations should be performed to assess the development of the impact of e-Government on all
stakeholders (DeLone and McLean, 1992; Seddon, 1997). Table 3 shows the main constructs of the
processes dimension.

www.ejeg.com 15 ISSN 1479-436-9X

Electronic Journal of e-Government Volume 7 Issue 1 2009 (11-28)

Table 3: Main constructs of “Processes”

Processes
Business Process Change (BPC)
Motives of BPC
Focal areas of BPC
Definition, documentation and streamlining of Business processes
Vertical integration
Horizontal integration
Evaluation
Design/reality gap
Usage
(Citizens, Employees)
Citizens’ feedback
(Perceived usefulness, Perceived ease of use, Satisfaction, Trust)
Employees’ feedback
(Perceived usefulness, Perceived ease of use, Satisfaction)
Impact on stakeholders
Highlighting the importance of processes as an integral factor in affecting e-Government enables us to set
the second hypothesis:
Hypothesis 2 (H2): Organizational processes impacts EGR

3.1.3 Technology
Evidently, technology constitutes an important factor influencing e-Government success (NSW, 2001).
Technology comprises IS structure, hardware, and service quality (see table 4). Information systems
structure covers information quality (DeLone and McLean, 1992; Bailey and Pearson, 1983; Ahituv, 1980),
system quality (DeLone and McLean, 1992; Bailey and Pearson, 1983; Bhimani, 1996), Web presence
quality (UNDESA, 2005; West, 2000, 2006; WASEDA University, 2006; Accenture, 2002, 2005; Turban et
al., 2002; Liu and Arnett, 2000; DeConti, 1998; Eschenfelder et al., 1997; Burgess and Cooper, 1990; Smith,
2001; Boon et al., 2000; Farquhar et al., 1998; Fogg, 2002; Fogg, et al., 2002; Hamilton and Chervany,
1981; Ho and Wu, 1999; Kossak et al., 2001; Swanson, 1986; Wan, 2000), and security measures (NSW,
2001; Ben Abd Allah et al., 2002; Conklin and White, 2006; Boudriga, 2002). Technological dimension
should also consider the quality of the hardware (Victoria, 2002), and the technical support and development
provided by the IT department to the entire organization referred as service quality (CSPP, 2000; Woodroof
and Burg, 2003; Pitt et al., 1995; Li, 1997; Wilkin and Hewett, 1999; Wilkin and Castleman, 2003).
Table 4: Main constructs of “Technology”
Technology
Information Systems Structure
Information quality
(Content, Availability, Accuracy, Timeliness, Convenience, integration [vertical, horizontal, Internet])
System quality
(Reliability, Ease of Use, Accessibility, Usefulness, Flexibility, integration [vertical, horizontal,
Internet]
Web presence quality
(Usability, Layout, Navigation, Consistency, Content, Number of services, Stage [presence,
interaction, transaction, transformation])
Security measures
(Data and software protection, data transfer over networks, Safety of electronic payment)
Hardware
(Quality, Integration [vertical, horizontal])
Technical Support and Development
(Reliability, Competence, Responsiveness, Timeliness, Communications, Commitment, Access)
The effect of technology on EGR presented in the literature directs us to the third hypothesis:
Hypothesis 3 (H3): Technology in the organization impacts EGR

www.ejeg.com 16 ©Academic Conferences Ltd

 Nahed Amin Azab, Sherif Kamel, and Georgios Dafoulas

3.1.4 People
People are one of the main factors in the success of e-Government (NSW, 2001). Several constructs exist in
this dimension such as, user satisfaction (DeLone and McLean, 1992; Bailey and Pearson, 1983; Davis,
1985, 1989; Igbaria and Nachman, 1990; Rai et al., 2002; Seddon, 1997; Seddon, and Kiew, 1996; Seddon
et al., 1999; Wilkin and Castleman, 2003), assessing satisfaction of e-Government from the part of
employees using IT. Also, it is vital to detect the impact of e-Government on them (DeLone and McLean,
1992; Seddon, 1997). Also, employees’ skills should be taken into account such as, adaptation to change
(Bertelsmann Foundation, 2002), proficiency in using IT (ICMA, 2002); ability to communicate with other
employees within and outside the organization (Powell and Dent-Micallef, 1999), and providing an adequate
service to citizens (Accenture, 2002, 2005). Finally, there should be a special focus on the training to be
provided to the employees in order to develop their various skills (Baum and Maio, 2000). Table 5 presents
the various suggested constructs under the people dimension.
Table 5: Main constructs of “People”
People
User Satisfaction
Impact on employees
Skills
(Adaptation to change, Use of technology, Integration, Customer service)
HR Training and Development
Recognizing the value of people in e-Government readiness guides us to the fourth hypothesis:
Hypothesis 4 (H4): People in the organization impact EGR

3.1.5 Relation between strategy, and Processes, Technology, People

The study argues that all three factors: processes, technology, and people, are affected by e-Government
strategy since this strategy comprises a number of aspects that cause major changes in the mentioned three
factors. An efficient e-Government strategy, if followed, should have a direct impact on them, which leads to
the following three hypotheses:
Hypothesis 5 (H5): e-Government strategy impacts processes in the organization
Hypothesis 6 (H6): e-Government strategy impacts technology in the organization
Hypothesis 7 (H7): e-Government strategy impacts people in the organization

4. Country profile
Egypt has taken an e-Government initiative since the introduction of the Ministry of Communication and
Information Technology (MCIT) in 1999, as part of its plan to turn Egypt into an information-based society.
To reach such objective, Kamel et al. (2002) believe that Egypt IT strategy should be based on the following
building blocks: people, training, information, technology and the partnership between the public and private
sector. The vision of e-Government initiative in Egypt is “delivering high quality government services to the
public in the format that suits them”. Such mission relies mainly on three principles that include: 1) citizen
centric service delivery; 2) community participation; and 3) efficient allocation of government resources. With
the new cabinet announced in Egypt in July 2004, a confirmation and commitment of Egypt to capitalize on
the evolution of ICT for the purpose of government services and processes improvements were re-enhanced
(Darwish et al, 2003). The official inauguration of the Egyptian e-Government portal (www.egypt.gov.eg)
took place in 25 January 2004 and was attended by Bill Gates during his first visit to Egypt, as Microsoft was
chosen to be in charge of the project’s implementation. Some services were placed in the portal to pilot test
the project such as telephone e-billing, birth certificate issuing, etc.

Egypt’s e-Government program has identified a number of objectives to realize a successful implementation
of e-Government and that includes (but not limited to): 1) tailoring government services to meet citizens
expectations; 2) creating a conducive environment to investors (local and international); 3) availing accurate
and updated government information; 4) increasing government efficiency through modern management
techniques and new working models; 5) reducing government expenditure; and 6) fostering local
competitiveness and increasing globalization readiness.

Egypt e-Government program is in continuous progress; this can be deduced by monitoring its rank in
several studies conducted regularly to evaluate EGR worldwide. For example, in the global e-Government
nd th
readiness by Darrell West, Brown University (2006), Egypt ranks 62 over 196 countries compared to 69 in

www.ejeg.com 17 ISSN 1479-436-9X

Electronic Journal of e-Government Volume 7 Issue 1 2009 (11-28)

2005. Similarly, in UNDESA e-Government readiness report (2005), Egypt ranks 99th over 193 countries
while it ranked 136th in 2004.

It is expected that citizens will rely more on online services due to the growing number of: Internet users
(increased from 300,000 in October 1999 to 9.29 million in April 2008), fixed telephone lines (increased from
4.9 million in October 1999 to 11.28 million in December 2006), and mobile users (increased from 654
thousands million in October 1999 to 33.285 million in December 2006) (MCIT, 2008).

5. Case study
The focus of the study is on the internal factors affecting EGR in a public organization. It is a contextually
specific single-site empirical study in cooperation with Montaza District (MD), Alexandria. Further studies are
already taking place on additional cases in other contexts to produce results that can be compared with
those obtained from this study.

5.1 Description
Montaza district (MD) is located in Alexandria (one of Egypt’s 29 governorates located in North Egypt on the
Mediterranean). In general, metropolitan governorates, such as Alexandria are divided into districts. Decision
making in each district, concerning financial and administrative affairs, is performed across various levels
reflecting different levels of responsibilities. For example, detailed responsibilities such as executing the
governorate strategy, dealing with the district’s citizens, and limited investment allocation are managed by
the District Executive Committee headed by the District Head. Higher level decisions are carried out by each
Governorate Executive Committee meeting that is held monthly and headed by the Governor. Districts
Heads are key members of this committee along with representatives from 14 different service sectors such
as health, education, etc. and other entities representing other authorities in the governorate. Governors
submit periodical reports to the Minister of Local Development who heads the Governors’ Committee
composed of the Minister himself and the 29 Governors every three month. It is important to note that the
Minister reports directly to the Prime Minister (Mold, 2008; Ahmed and Hassan, 2007; interviews with
consultant of the Minister of Local Development and with MD Head).

MD’s area is 92 squared kilometers; it has a population of 1.023 million, which is the highest population
among the other five districts of Alexandria, constituting around 25% of the total population of Alexandria
(4.110 million). MD offers a total of 69 services to citizens such as, issuance and renovation of permits
(stores, buildings, digging), issuance and re-issuance of certificates, etc.

The district started its e-Government program since 2003 focusing on using ICT to reach two main
objectives: simplify and speed-up the procedure in providing services to the citizens in case of physical
interaction, and enable citizens to get the services remotely. The first objective was realized to a great extent
by placing public kiosks, in several convenient locations, doing any service with MD on behalf of the citizen;
and by making 38 services (around 55% of total services offered) instant ones, i.e. to be completed in 30
minutes only or less. More services are to be transferred to instant ones. The second objective was attained
by launching a Web site for MD (www.montazaonline.com). Most services are offered online, but electronic
payment is still not implemented, which means that for services requiring fees, payment could be upon
delivery, or citizens have to go to MD for payment. Also, citizens cannot submit documents electronically, but
they can see the documents required for each service to be prepared before visiting MD. Other important
services are provided through the website such as, check the status of a property, track the status of the
services applied for, apply and follow-up services from other public entities making MD play an intermediary
role. The website gives also its visitors insight on most issues related to the district: events, and attraction
places.

5.2 Methodology
A conceptual framework is proposed to investigate the factors affecting EGR. In order to validate it, a case
study research strategy is selected since it is a well known approach for exploratory, theory-building research
(Eisenhardt, 1989) allowing in depth investigation (Yin, 1993; Walsham, 1993; Pettigrew, 1990). Both
qualitative and quantitative data were combined. Qualitative data was collected through in-depth
unstructured and semi-structured interviews (Yin, 1994) with top management (head of district), key people
(IT manager and webmaster of the district’s official website), and with a number of employees. Interviews
were combined with observations and a review of MD documentation and archival records to enable
validation of the questionnaire findings through triangulation (Yin, 1994; Saunders et al., 2000; Ragin, 1987).

www.ejeg.com 18 ©Academic Conferences Ltd

 Nahed Amin Azab, Sherif Kamel, and Georgios Dafoulas

Quantitative data was collected through distributing a questionnaire on a sample representing employees
working in administrative positions.

Based on the interviews conducted with e-Government responsibles, and on observation of the work
environment, it was concluded that the number of employees suitable to participate in the study would not
exceed 140 (computer users, senior management, IT specialists, and administrators), because the rest of
the employees are computer illiterate which makes them unable to respond to the different parts of the
questionnaire. The small number of respondents enabled a direct contact with the employees when
answering the questionnaire.

5.2.1 Questionnaire structure

The questionnaire used in this research is adopted from three previous studies: Koh and Prybutok (2003)
and Liu (2001), developed to measure EGR in City of Denton, Texas, and UNDESA (2003a), addressed to
public agencies in any country to assess EGR. Several questions were modified and others are added to
reflect all the measuring constructs that exist in the suggested EGR framework.

The questionnaire consists of six sections: the first four sections measure employees’ perceptions toward the
four suggested dimensions of the model: strategy, processes, technology, and people. Each question in
each section reflects a measurement construct under each dimension. The research variables are measured
in a 7-point Likert’s scale, with 1 as strongly disagree, and 7 as strongly agree (appendix A shows the first
part of the questionnaire containing first an introduction explaining some terms and definitions included in the
questionnaire, and second, questions of the first section concerning the strategy dimension). The fifth section
contains only one question requesting employees to express their view regarding the extent to which their
organization is ready for e-Government. Finally, the sixth section contains personal questions about each
subject (e.g. age range, gender, experience with IT, etc.). The questionnaire was translated to the Arabic
language because the majority of the employees do not have adequate proficiency in the English language.

The number of respondents was 81 employees, and the number of invalid responses was 10, which
constitutes a response rate of 87.6%. Invalid responses were discarded because they were incomplete
because of three reasons: The first section concerning the strategy dimension was hard for the employees to
reply to because most of them do not have a complete idea about all the issues stated under it. Some of
them left this section because they could not perceive its relevancy to them; the second reason was due to
the length of the questionnaire (consisting of 11 pages). Some of them completed 4 or 5 pages and were not
interested in terminating it; the third reason is due to their fear to express any negative perception towards
any item raised in the questionnaire.

5.3 Study findings

5.3.1 Demographics
The number of females surpasses the number of males (60 vs. 11) constituting 84.5% of the total sample),
and 45% of the participants fall in the age range 20 to 30. The number of participants having a four-year
college degree is almost equal to those with a two-year high/technical institute degree, having an average IT
experience of 6 years, and around 18% of them hold managerial positions. The average employment period
of the sample taken is 9.6 years, with an average of 8 years staying in their current positions. Among the
employees who have been working for four or more years in DM, 46.5% remain in their current position. On
average, they work 35.6 hours per week (around 7 hours per day), and use IT 28.7 hours per week (around
5 hours and 40 minutes per day).

Participants rated their skills in using PC in general as average, and below average in using email and the
Internet. Most respondents do not have access to email (an average of only 11.3%), or to the Internet (an
average of only 18.3%); but a large number have a PC access (81.7%). 88.7% of participants use MS Word,
and 52.1% use MS Excel. Participants revealed also that the software they mostly needed training on is MS
Power Point (94.4%), then MS Excel (83.1%). Regarding the training courses they attended, MS Word is the
most offered course (for 70.4% of the respondents), followed by MS Excel (43.7%), and MS Power Point
(19.7%).

www.ejeg.com 19 ISSN 1479-436-9X

Electronic Journal of e-Government Volume 7 Issue 1 2009 (11-28)

5.3.2 Testing research model

When investigating employees’ knowledge about the four dimensions of the proposed research model:
strategy, processes, technology, and people, many employees where unaware of many issues related to IT
strategy at MD. The study findings show that the average score of all strategy constructs is 5.9, and all
processes constructs is 5.32 on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The average score
of technology is 5.11 on a scale from 1 (far short of expectations) to 7 (greatly exceeds expectations). The
fourth dimension, people, is divided into two main sections: the first on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7
(strongly agree) comprises user satisfaction (average = 5.58), impact on employees (average = 5.88), and
skills of employees (average = 5.86); the second section is about the quality of IT training provided to the
employees (average = 5.08) on a scale from 1 (far short of expectations) to 7 (greatly exceeds expectations).
Finally, the average score of EGR is 5.95 on a scale from 1 (extremely unready) to 7 (extremely ready).

Testing the research model is performed following the four following steps adapted from the study of Liu
(2001): 1) carry out a factor analysis to extract and group dimensions in each construct, 2) test multi-
collinearity among these dimensions to determine the strength of the relationship between them, 3) check
reliability and validity of the model, and 4) test the partial models.

5.3.3 Factor analysis

Using SPSS version 13.0, a factor analysis was performed, and resulted in an elimination of a number of
constructs extracted under each construct. Using Varimax with Kaiser Normalization rotation method, items
with a loading number greater than 0.5 on one factor, and less than 0.5 on all others were retained. Table 6
shows the extracted constructs corresponding to each dimension after final factor analysis.
Table 6: Final factor analysis for each construct
Construct Dimension No. of Questions No. of Iterations
Strategy Leadership 4 7
Funding 3
IT Objectives and Accountability (ITObject) 3
Strategic Alignment (StrAlign) 1
IT Strategy (ITStrat) 1
Processes Evaluation of Citizen Feedback (CitFeed) 4 5
Evaluation of Citizen Feedback (EmplFeed) 4
Business Process Change (BPC) 3
Technology Web Quality (WebQual) 11 7
Information and System Quality (InfoSysQ) 11
Technical Support (TechSupp) 9
User experience with Technology (UserExp) 4
Security 4
People HR Training and Development (HRTD) 7 5
Personal and Customer Service Improvement (P&CS) 2
Personal Flexibility (PersFlex) 2

5.3.4 Degree of multi-collinearity

Presence of a high degree of multi-collinearity among constructs in each dimension results in several
problems (Dielman, 1996); this dictates the need to investigate the strength of relationships between them.
Correlation tests show that all construct pairs are not highly correlated (all pair correlation is less than 0.5),
proving the absence of multi-collinearity since many researchers suggest that multi-collinearity exist if
correlation between each determinant pair is greater than 0.75 (Liu, 2001).

5.3.5 Reliability and validity

To assess the reliability of the model, a Cronbach’s alpha is used since it is the most common method of
estimating the reliability of an instrument (Zmud and Boynton, 1991). Results obtained show that all alpha
coefficients exceed 0.80 (Nunnally, 1978), indicating a high level of internal consistency or homogeneity
among the constructs under each dimension (Straub, 1989) (see table 7).

www.ejeg.com 20 ©Academic Conferences Ltd

 Nahed Amin Azab, Sherif Kamel, and Georgios Dafoulas

Table 7: Cronbach’s Alpha Scores for the research model

Constructs Cronbach’s Alpha Dimensions Cronbach’s Alpha
Strategy 0.9658 Leadership 0.9733
Funding 0.9899
ITObject 0.9112
StrAlign 0.9777
ITStrat 0.9556
Processes 0.9649 CitFeed 0.9334
EmplFeed 0.9800
BPC 0.9865
Technology 0.9887 WebQual 0.9986
InfoSysQ 0.9856
TechSupp 0.9905
UserExp 0.9136
Security 0.8993
People 0.8976 HRTD 0.9378
P&CS 0.9865
PersFlex 0.9342
EGR 0.9785 EGR 0.9785
Convergent validity is also checked to ensure the extent to which all group of constructs indicate the same
dimension as well as the degree of compatibility of multiple measures within the same dimension (Kerlinger,
1986). Table 8 shows that all correlations between these constructs are higher than 0.568, ranging from
0,568 to 0.996 proving the existence of convergent validity.
Table 8: Significant level of correlations in the research model
Construct Dimension Correlations range Significant level
Strategy Leadership (0.578, 0.886) 0.01 (2-tailed)
Funding (0.656, 0.906) 0.01 (2-tailed)
ITObject (0.745, 0.996) 0.01 (2-tailed)
StrAlign (0.568, 0.784) 0.01 (2-tailed)
ITStrat (0.731, 0.915) 0.05 (2-tailed)
Processes CitFeed (0.664, 0.894) 0.01 (2-tailed)
EmplFeed (0.568, 0.919) 0.01 (2-tailed)
BPC (0.710, 0.899) 0.01 (2-tailed)
Technology WebQual (0.711, 0.857) 0.01 (2-tailed)
InfoSysQ (0.597, 0.923) 0.01 (2-tailed)
TechSupp (0.665, 0.978) 0.05 (2-tailed)
UserExp (0.776, 0.853) 0.05 (2-tailed)
Security (0.634, 0.952) 0.01 (2-tailed)
People HRTD (0.701, 0.875) 0.01 (2-tailed)
P&CS (0.832, 0.975) 0.05 (2-tailed)
PersFlex (0.774, 0.933) 0.01 (2-tailed)

5.3.6 Partial models

Testing research hypotheses was performed using LISREL version 8.72 due to its powerful ability in
identifying relations among dimensions (or latent variables), each comprising several measurable constructs
(or observed variables). Findings are presented in table 9.

www.ejeg.com 21 ISSN 1479-436-9X

Electronic Journal of e-Government Volume 7 Issue 1 2009 (11-28)

Table 9: Partial research model results

Hypothesis Chi-Square df P-Value Significance Result
H1 18.53 14 0.17969 Weak impact Accepted
StrategyÆEGR
H2 5.26 10 0.87330 High impact Accepted
ProcessesÆEGR
H3 11.36 14 0.65767 High impact Accepted
TechnologyÆEGR
H4 0.00 0 1.00000 Very high Accepted
PeopleÆEGR impact
H5 25.67 19 0.13960 Weak impact Accepted
StrategyÆProcesses
H6 33.43 43 0.49542 Modest impact Accepted
StrategyÆTechnology
H7 13.8 17 0.79496 High impact Accepted
StrategyÆPeople

5.4 Discussion
The average score of each of the four research dimensions is relatively high, ranging from 5.08 to 5.95,
contradicting some of the data collected from the interviews that reveal employees’ negative impressions
towards IT and integration of processes. This high average score could be attributed to a cultural aspect that
characterizes Egyptians when responding to surveys; feeling uncomfortable in expressing negative
impressions towards a person or even a concept (Manawy, 2006) especially in case of surveys related to
their work environment.

Comparing the results obtained with the research hypotheses shows that findings confirm all research
hypotheses but with varying strength; for example, looking at the weights of the factors affecting EGR, the
study findings reveal that IT strategy does not have a strong impact on EGR (H1). This could be due to the
unperceived value of IT strategy and to the lack of vision and long term planning especially in the public
sector due to political, economical, and social inconsistencies. This could also be related to the fact that
employees do not perceive the high effect of IT strategy on EGR because most of them not only are not
involved in IT strategy formulation, but are not even aware of its existence (as revealed by the interviews
conducted with them). This ascertains the direction of the research in choosing the employees as the sample
to reply to the questionnaire because their feedback and participation are rarely investigated.

The strong effect of processes on EGR (H2) is easily perceived, since improvements in services and in
government internal relationships could not be realized without an attempt to examine and simplify all
business processes, and to monitor continuously IT progress and impact. Also, the impact of technology on
EGR (H3) proves to be high because the technology value is easily apparent to the employees; evidently e-
Government could never exist without applying ICT. Finally, the effect of people on EGR (H4) has the
highest weight (P-value = 1.00), ensuring that people is the major factor in the success of any information
system.

Looking at the impact of IT strategy on processes (H5), on technology (H6), and on people (H7), reveals that
processes are the least one affected. Interviews conducted with employees show that IT strategy does not
put high value on changing business processes or on considering the evaluating IT performance as a regular
process. IT strategy has a modest effect on technology because first, there is always a common
understanding that IT strategy is not a business issue, and second, since employees are not involved during
development phases, they cannot perceive a high impact of strategy in affecting ICT. Having the strongest
effect on people means that IT strategy, when formulated, considers people as a major part in its
components, attempting to improve their skills (interviews with employees confirm that training courses are
easily provided especially in IT). In addition, IT strategy has a strong impact on employees’ behaviors due to
the hierarchical structure of the public sector which drives people to respond to changes approved by top
management.

5.5 Limitations
The study investigates a single case only, with a small sample size (71) restricting the generalization of the
findings over all public organizations in Egypt. Further studies should be performed on one (or more) cases.

www.ejeg.com 22 ©Academic Conferences Ltd

 Nahed Amin Azab, Sherif Kamel, and Georgios Dafoulas

Moreover, the data collected depends on the opinions of the employees, without considering other
stakeholders, such as citizens and business partners. Additionally, employees feedback could be incorrect
due to several reasons: 1) culture: Egyptians are always reluctant to reveal any negative attitude when
responding to surveys, and especially towards issues related to their work environment despite assuring
them of the anonymous nature of the questionnaire; 2) skills and awareness: participants have different
levels of expertise and familiarity with the research topic; 3) questionnaire’s length: which could lead to less
valid answers due to fatigue or unwillingness of participants to seriously answer a large number of questions.

6. Conclusion
In order to reap e-Government benefits, policy makers should conduct regular evaluation on electronic
government readiness (EGR) to pinpoint weaknesses and provide appropriate solutions. This article aims to
develop an instrument assessing EGR in a public organization. First, it reviewed previous appraisal models
of electronic readiness and EGR, highlighting their shortcomings. These models - along with other models of
IS and eCommerce success – were then used as theoretical foundations for the proposed framework.

The suggested framework assessed EGR in a public organization covering all internal factors affecting EGR.
It classified these factors into four main dimensions: strategy, processes, technology, and people. A number
of measurement constructs were proposed under each dimension. The first stage of testing the framework
was performed through conducting a case study on a public organization in Egypt by getting its employees’
perception on ICT and EGR in their organization. The study examined the weight of each of the four
dimensions on impacting EGR and the relationships between them. Further studies on additional cases are
taking place. Comparing all findings could lead to the development of a generic framework.

The study findings confirmed the research hypotheses indicating that all four dimensions affect EGR but with
different weights. Results obtained revealed an under estimation of the value of e-Government strategy on
EGR compared with the great effect of people on EGR. This necessitates the need to look at e-Government
from a strategic perspective. Moreover, results showed that e-Government strategy had a great impact on
people. This means that although e-Government strategy does not have a major direct effect on EGR, it has
an indirect effect through the people dimension. Due to the high impact of people in affecting EGR, the study
recommends that more awareness should be provided to employees about e-Government strategy in the
organization stressing on their involvement during its formulation. This would ensure their support and
willingness leading to the success of the overall e-Government project.

Results also showed that e-Government strategy does not have a high impact on processes; which dictates
the need to integrate e-Government processes with the organization’s business processes, and to consider
e-Government evaluation a regular processor to monitor its efficiency and effect on all stakeholders.

As a conclusion, the research recommends that in studying various e-Government efforts and initiatives, one
should take into consideration all internal e-Government building blocks: strategy, processes, technology,
and people.

References
Accenture (2002) “e-Government Leadership: Realizing the Vision”, [Online], Available: http://www.gol-
ged.gc.calpub/pub_e.asp, [July 2003]
Accenture (2005) “Leadership in Customer Service: New Expectations, New Experiences”, [Online], Available:
http://www.accenture.com/xdoc/ca/locations/canada/insights/studies/leadership_cust.pdf, [June 2005]
Adams, A. (1999) “The Implications of Users’ Privacy Perception on Communication and Information Privacy Policies”,
Conference Proceedings, Telecommunications Policy Research Conference, Washington DC
Ahituv, N. (1980) “A Systematic Approach toward Assessing the Value of an Information System”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 4,
No. 4, pp. 61-75
Ahmed, F, A., and Hassan, H. A. (2007) Local administration Regulatory Law, Number 43 of Year 1979, Amiriya
Publications, Cairo, Egypt
Aldrich, D., Bertot, J. C. and McClure, C. R. (2002) “e-Government: Initiatives, Developments, and Issues”, Government
Information Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 349-355
Altman, D. (2002) “Prospects for e-Government in Latin America: Satisfaction with Democracy, Social Accountability, and
Direct Democracy”, International Review of Public Administration, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 201-219
Baets, W. (1992) “Aligning Information Systems with Business Strategy", Journal of Strategic Information Systems, Vol.
1, No. 4, pp. 205-213
Bailey, J. E., and Pearson, S. W. (1983) “Development of a Tool for Measuring and Analyzing Computer User
Satisfaction”, Management Science, Vol. 29, No. 5, pp. 530-545

www.ejeg.com 23 ISSN 1479-436-9X

Electronic Journal of e-Government Volume 7 Issue 1 2009 (11-28)

Balutis, A. P. (2001) “e-Government 2001 – Part 1: Understanding the Challenge and Evolving Strategies”, The Public
Manager, pp. 33-37
Bannister, F. (2004) “Deep e-Government”, Conference Proceedings, EGPA 2004 Annual Conference, Ljubljana,
Slovenia
Baum, C., and Maio, A. D. (2000) "Gartner's Four Phases of e-Government Model", e-Government Strategies-State and
Local
Beaumaster, S. (2002) “Local Government IT Implementation Issues: A Challenge for Public Administration”, Conference
th
Proceedings, 35 Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii
Ben Abd Allah, S., Gueniara El Fatmi, S., and Oudriga, N. B. (2002) “Security Issues in e-Government Models: What
Governments Should Do”, Conference Proceedings, IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and
Cybermatics, Hammamet, Tunisia
Bertelsmann Foundation (2002), “Balanced e-Government: e-Government – Connecting Efficient Administration and
Responsive Democracy”, [online], Available: http://www-it.fmi.uni-sofia.bg/eg/res/balancede-gov.pdf, [December
2007]
Bhimani, A. (1996) “Securing the Commercial Internet”, Communications of ACM, Vol. 39, No. 6, pp. 29-35
Boon, O., Hewett, W. G., and Parker, C. M. (2000) “Evaluating the adoption of the Internet: A Study of an Australian
Experience in Local Government”, Conference Proceedings, 13th International Bled Electronic Commerce
Conference, Bled, Slovenia
Boudriga, N. (2002) “Technical Issues in Securing e-Government”, Conference Proceedings, IEEE International
Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybermatics, Hammamet, Tunisia
Bowman, B. J., Davis, G. B., and Wetherbe, J. C. (1983) "Three Stage Model of MIS Planning”, Information and
Management, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 11-25
Bridges.org (2005), “Comparison of e-readiness assessment models and tools (updated)”, [Online], Available:
http://www.bridges.org/files/active/0/ereadiness_tools_bridges_10Mar05.pdf , [June 2005]
Bryson, J. M., and Alston, F. K. (1996) Creating and Implementing your Strategic Plan: A Workbook for Public and Non-
Profit Organizations, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, CA
Budhiraja, R., and Sachdeva, S. (2002) “eReadiness Assessment”, Conference Proceedings, International Conference
on Building Effective eGovernance, Chandigarh, India
Burgess, L., and Cooper, J. (1990) “A Model for Classification of Business Adoption of Internet Commerce Solutions”,
Conference Proceedings, 12th International Bled Electronic Commerce Conference, Bled, Slovenia
Chen, Y. C., and Knepper, R. (2005) “Digital Government Development Strategies: Lessons for Policy Makers from a
Comparative Perspective”, Chapter in Electronic Government Strategies and Implementation, Idea Group Publishing
Collinge, A. (2003) “How and Where is Local e-Government Delivering Value to the Citizens?”, Local e-Government:
Sustaining the Momentum, Briefing on SOCITIM and IDeA Report, APSE (2003), Briefing 30/03, [Online], Available:
www.apse.org.uk, [July 2003]
Conklin, A., and White, G. B. (2006) “e-Government and Cyber Security: The Role of Cyber Security Exercises”,
th
Conference Proceedings, 39 Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii
Croteau, A., Solomon, S., Raymond, L., and Bergeron, F. (2001) “Organizational and Technological Infrastructures
Alignment”, Conference Proceedings, 34th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii
Cyert, R., and March, J. (1963) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs
Dada, D. (2006) “eReadiness for Developing Countries: Moving the Focus from the Environment to the Users”, The
Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries (EJISDC), Vol. 27, No. 6, pp. 1-14
Das, S. R., Zahra, S. A., and Warkentin, M. E. (1991) "Integrating the Content and Process of Strategic MIS Planning
With Competitive Strategy", Decision Sciences, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 953-984
Davis, F. D. (1985) "A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New End-User Information Systems:
Theory and Results”. Doctoral Dissertation, MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, MA
Davis, F. D. (1989) "Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use and User Acceptance of Information Technology”,
MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 319-339
Dawes, S. (2002), “The Future of e-Government”, Center for Technology in Government, [Online], Available:
http://www.ctg.albany.edu/publications/reports/future_of_egov/future_of_egov.pdf, [March 2007]
DeConti, L. (1998) “Planning and Creating a Government Website: Learning for the Experience of US States”, [Online],
Available: http://www.amn.ac.uk/idpm, [June 2002]
DeLone, W. H., and McLean, E. R. (1992) “Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable”,
Information Systems Research, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 60-95
Dielman, T. E. (1996) Applied Regression Analysis for Business and Economics (2nd Edition), Belmont, CA, Wadsworth
Publishing Company
Downing, C. E. (1999) “System Usage Behavior as a Proxy for User Satisfaction: An Empirical Investigation”, Information
and Management, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 203-216
Edmiston, K. (2003) “State and Local e-Government: Prospects and Challenges”, American Review of Public
Administration, Vol. 33, No.1, pp. 20-45
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989) “Building Theories from Case Study Research”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14, pp.
532-50
Eschenfelder, K. R., Beachboard, J. C., McClure, C. R., and Wyman, S. K. (1997) “Assessing US Federal Government
Websites”, Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 173-189
Farquhar, B., Langmann, G., and Balfour, A. (1998) “Consumer Needs in Global Electronic Commerce”, Electronic
Markets, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 9-12

www.ejeg.com 24 ©Academic Conferences Ltd

 Nahed Amin Azab, Sherif Kamel, and Georgios Dafoulas

Fletcher, P.D. (1999) “Strategic Planning for Information Technology Management in State Government”, Information
Technology and Computer Applications in Public Administration: Issues and Trends, pp. 81-89, Idea Group
Publishing, Hershey, PA
Fletcher, P.D. (2003) “The Realities of the Paper work Reduction Act of 1995: A Government-Wide Strategy for
Information Resources Management”, Public Information Technology: Policy and Management Issues, pp. 74-93.
Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA
Fogg, B. J. (2002) “Stanford Guidelines for Web Credibility”, A Research Summary from the Stanford Persuasive
Technology Lab, Stanford University. [Online], Available: www.webcredibility.org/guidelines, [August 2003]
Fogg, B. J., Marable, L., Stanford, J., and Tauber, E. R. (2002) “How do People Evaluate a Website’s Credibility? Results
from a Large Study”, Consumer Webwatch News, [Online], Available:
http://www.consumerwebwatch.org/news/report3_credibilityresearch/stanfordPTL_TOC.htm, [October 2006]
Forman, F. (2002) “e-Government Strategy”, Executive Office of the President Office of Management and Budget
Frooman, J. (1999) “Stakeholder Influence Strategies”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 115-191
th
Gefen, D., Pavlou, P. A., Warkentin, M., and Rose, G. M. (2002) “e-Government Adoption”, Conference Proceedings, 8
Americas Conference on Information systems, pp. 569-576
Grant, G., and Chau, D. (2005) “Developing a Generic Framework for e-Government”, Journal of Global Information
Management, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 1-30
Guo, X., and Lu, J. (2005) “Effectiveness of e-Government Online Services in Australia”, Chapter in Electronic
Government Strategies and Implementation. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA
Hamilton, S., and Chervany, N. L. (1981) “Evaluating Information System Effectiveness: Comparing Evaluation
Approaches”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 55-69
Harkness, W. L., Kettinger, W. J., and Segars, A. H. (1996) “Sustaining Process Improvement and Innovation in the
Information Service Function: Lessons Learned from Bose Corporation”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 349-367
Heeks, R. (2001) “Building eGovernance for Development: a Framework for National Donor Action”, e-Government
Working Paper, No. 12. IDPM, University of Manchester, UK
Heeks, R. (2003) “Most e-Government-for-Development Projects Fail”, iGovernment Working Paper, No. 14. IDPM,
University of Manchester, UK
Henderson, J. C., and Venkatraman, N. (1993) “Strategic Alignment: Leveraging Information Technology for
Transforming Organizations”, IBM Systems Journal, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 4-16
Ho, A. T. K. (2002) “Reinventing Local Governments and the e-Government Initiative”, Public Administration Review, Vol.
62, No. 4, pp. 434-444
Ho, C. F., and Wu, W. H. (1999) “Antecedents of Customer Satisfaction on the Internet: An Empirical Study of On-Line
Shopping”, Conference Proceedings, 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Science, Hawaii
Homburg, V., and Bekkers, V. (2002) “The Back-Office of e-Government (Managing Information Domains as Political
Economies)”. Conference Proceedings, 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii
Hu, Y., Xiao, J., Pang, J., and Xie, K. (2005) “A Research on the Appraisal Framework of e-Government Project
Success”, Conference Proceedings, ICEC’05, Copyright 2005 ACM, 1-59593-112-0/05/08
Igbaria, M., and Nachman, S. A. (1990) “Correlates of User Satisfaction with End User Computing”, Information and
Management, Vol. 19, pp. 73-82
ICMA (International City/County Management Association) (2002) 2002 Electronic Government Survey Dataset,
Washington D.C.
Jansen, A. (2005) “Assessing e-Government Progress – Why and What”, Department of e-Government Studies,
University of Oslo, [Online], Available: http://www.afin.uio.no/forskning/notater/7_05.pdf, [March 2007]
Kamel, S., Ghoneim, A., and Ghoneim, S. (2002) “The Role of the State in Developing the eCommerce in Egypt”,
Conference Proceedings, Role of the State in a Changing World Conference, Cairo, Egypt, 21-22 October
Kerlinger, F. N. (1986) Foundations of Behavioral Research, (3rd Edition). New York, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College
Publishers
Kettinger, W. J., and Grover, V. (1995) “Toward a Theory of Business Process Change Management”, Journal of
Management Information Systems, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 9-30
Kettinger, W. J., Teng, J. T. C., and Guha, S. (1997) “Business Process Change: A study of Methodologies, Techniques,
and Tools”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 55-80
Koh, C. E., and Prybutok, V. R. (2003) “The Three Ring Model and Development of an Instrument for Measuring
Dimensions of e-Government Functions”, Journal of Computer Information Systems, Vol. 33. No. 3, pp. 34-39
Kossak, F., Essmayr, W., and Winiwarter, W. (2001). “Applicability of HCI Research to e-Government Applications”,
th
Conference Proceedings, 9 European Conference on Information Systems, Bled, Slovenia
Kovacic, Z. J. (2005) “The Impact of National Culture on Worldwide e-Government Readiness”, Informing Science
Journal, Vol. 8, pp. 143-158
Krishnaswamy, G. (2005) “eServices in Government: Why We Need Strategies for Capacity Building and Capacity
Utilization?”, Conference Proceedings, Internet and Information Technology in Modern Organizations: Challenges
and Answers (IBIMA 2005)
Layne, K., and Lee, J. (2001) “Developing Fully Functional e-Government: A Four-Stage Model”, Government
Information Quarterly, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 122-136
Li, E. Y. (1997) “Perceived Importance of Information System Success Factors: A Meta Analysis of Group Differences”,
Information and Management, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 15-28
Liu, C., and Arnett, K. P. (2000) “Exploring the Factors Associated with Website Success in the Context of Electronic
Commerce”, Information and Management, Vol. 38, pp. 23-33

www.ejeg.com 25 ISSN 1479-436-9X

Electronic Journal of e-Government Volume 7 Issue 1 2009 (11-28)

Liu, S. (2001) “An e-Government Readiness Model”. Dissertation Prepared for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy,
University of North Texas
Livari, J., and Ervasi, I. (1994) “User Information Satisfaction: IS Implementability and Effectiveness”, Information and
Management, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 205-220
Manawy A. (2006) “For Everything not to be Fine”, Al Ahram, 14 October, 2006
Marchionini, G., Samet, H., and Brandt, L. (2003) “Digital Government”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 46, No. 1, pp.
25-27
Margetts, H., and Dunleavy, P. (2002) “Cultural Barriers to e-Government”, Working Paper, University Collage London
and London School of Economics for National Audit Office
Ministry of Communication and Information Technology (MCIT) (2008) [Online], Available: www.mcit.gov.eg, [June 2008]
Ministry of Local Development (MOLD) (2008) [Online], Available: www.mold.gov.eg, [June 2008]
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., and Wood, D. J. (1997) “Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: defining
the Principle of Who and What Really Counts”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 853:866
Moon, J. M. (2002) “The Evolution of e-Government Among Municipalities: Rhetoric or Reality?”, Public Administration
Review, Vol. 62, No. 4, pp. 424-433
Navarra, D. D., and Cornford, T. (2003) “A Policy Making View of e-Government Innovations in Public Governance”,
Conference Proceedings, 9th Americas Conference on Information Systems, Tampa, Florida
NSW (New South Wales) Audit Office (2001) “eReady, eSteady, e-Government”, State Library of New South Wales
Cataloguing-in Publication Data
Nunnally, J. (1978) Psychometric Theory, (2nd Edition). New York, McGraw Hill
Pardo, T. A., and Scholl, H. J. J. (2002) “Walking Atop the Cliffs: Avoiding Failure and Reducing Risks in Large-Scale e-
th
Government Projects”, Conference Proceedings, 35 Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii
Peters, R. M., Janssen, M., and Engers, T. M. V. (2004) “Measuring e-Government Impact”, Conference Proceedings, 6th
International Conference on Electronic Commerce (ICEC’2004)
Pettigrew, A. M. (1990) “Longitudinal Field Research on Change: Theory and Practice”, Organization Science, Vol. 1, No.
3, pp. 267-92
Pilipovic, J., Ivkovic, M., Domazet, D., and Milutinovic, V. (2002) “e-Government”, eBusiness and eChallenges,
Amsterdam, IOS Press
Pitt, L. F., Watson, R. T., and Kavan, C. B. (1995) “Service Quality: A Measure of Information Systems Effectiveness”,
MIS Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 173-187
Powell, T. C., and Dent-Micallef, A. (1999) “Information Technology as Competitive Advantage: The Role of Human,
Business, and Technology Resources”, Strategic Management Journals, Vol. 18, No. 5, pp. 375-405
Ragin, C. C. (1987) The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies, Berkeley, Los
Angeles and London, University of California Press
Rai, A., Lang, S. S., and Welker, R. B. (2002) “Assessing the Validity of IS Success Models: An Empirical Test and
Theoretical Analysis”, Information Systems Research, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 50-69
Reffat, R. (2003) “Developing a Successful e-Government”, Working Paper, School of Architecture, Design Science and
Planning, University of Sydney, Australia
Rimmer, J. (2002) “e-Government – Better Government”, [Online], Available:
http://www.noie.gov.au/publications/speeches/Rimmer/Breakfast/egov_sep18.htm, [May 2003]
nd
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., and Thornhill, A. (2000) Research Methods for Business Students, (2 Edition), Prentice-Hall,
London
Schedler, K., and Scharf, M. C. (2001) “Exploring the Interrelations between Electronic Government and the New Public
Management: A Managerial Framework for Electronic Government”, Conference Proceedings, APPAM 2002
Conference
Scholl, H. J. J. (2003) “e-Government: A Special Case of ICT-Enabled Business Process Change”, Conference
th
Proceedings, 36 Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii
Scholl, H. J. J. (2005) “The Dimensions of Business Process Change in Electronic Government”. Chapter in Electronic
Government Strategies and Implementation, Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA
Seddon, P. B., and Kiew, M. Y. (1996) “A Partial Test and Development of the DeLone and McLean Model of IS
Success”, Australian Journal of Information Systems, Vol. 2, pp. 1-61
Seddon, P. (1997) “A Respecification and Extension of the DeLone and McLean Model of IS Success”, Information
Systems Research, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 240-253
Seddon, P. B., Staples, S., Patnayakuni, R., and Bowtell, M. (1999) “Dimensions of Information Systems Success”,
Communications of the AIS, Vol. 1, No. 20, pp. 1-39
Seybold (1998) Customer.com, New York, Random House
Smith, A. G. (2001) “Applying Evaluation Criteria to New Zealand Government Website”, International Journal of
Information Management, Vol. 21, pp. 137-149
Snellen, I. (2000) “Public Service in an Information Society”, Governance in the 21st Century: Revitalizing the Public
Service, Canadian Centre for Management Development, Montreal and Kingston
Sprecher, M. (2000) “Racing to e-Government: Using the Internet for Citizen Service Delivery”, Government Finance
Review, Vol. 16, pp. 21-22
Stowers, G. N. L. (2004) “Measuring the Performance of e-Government”, IBM Centre for the Business of e-Government,
[Online], Available: http://www.businessofgovernment.org/pdfs/8493_Stowers_Report.pdf, [March 2007]
Straub, D.W. (1989) "Validating Instruments in MIS Research", MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 147-69
Swanson, E. B. (1986) “A Note of Informatics”, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 86-91

www.ejeg.com 26 ©Academic Conferences Ltd

 Nahed Amin Azab, Sherif Kamel, and Georgios Dafoulas

Tallon, P. P., Kraemer, K. L., and Gurbaxani, V. (2000) “Executives' Perceptions of the Business Value of Information
Technology: A process-Oriented Approach”, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 145-
173
Tapscott, D. (1995) Digital Economy: Promise and Peril in the Age of Networked Intelligence, McGraw-Hill, New York
Tassabehji, R. (2005) “Inclusion in e-Government: A Security Perspective”, e-Government Workshop ’05 (eGOV05),
Brunel University
Tennert, J. R., and Schroeder, A. D. (1999) “Stakeholder Analysis”, Conference Proceedings, 60th Annual Meeting of the
American Society for Public Administration, Orlando, Fl
The Computer System Policy Project (CSPP) (2000) “Living in the Networked World Readiness Guide”, [Online],
Available: http://www.cspp.org/documents/NW_Readiness_Guide.pdf, [March 2006]
Traunmüller, R., and Wimmer, M. (2003) “e-Government at a Decisive Moment: Sketching a Roadmap to Excellence”,
Conference Proceedings, 2nd International Conference, EGOV 2003, pp. 1-14
Turban, E., King, D., Lee, J., Warkentin, M., and Chung, H. M. (2002) Electronic Commerce 2002: A Managerial
Perspective, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ
UNDESA (United Nations Department for Economic and Social Affairs) (2003a) “e-Government Readiness Assessment
Survey”, Division for Public Administration and Development Management (DPADM)
UNDESA (United Nations Department for Economic and Social Affairs) (2005) “Global e-Government Readiness Report
2005: From e-Government to eInclusion”. Division for Public Administration and Development Management (DPADM)
Victoria, M. (2002) “Putting People at the Centre: Government Innovation Working for Victorians”, [Online], Available:
http://www.mmv.vic.gov.au/egov, [March 2003]
Walsham, G. (1993) Interpreting Information Systems in Organizations, Wiley, Chicester
Wan, H. A. (2000) “Opportunities to Enhance a Commercial Website”, Information and Management, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp.
15-21
WASEDA University (2006) The 2006 WASEDA University e-Government Ranking, Tokyo
Weerakody, V., Sarikas, O. D., and Patel, R. (2005) “Exploring the Process and Information Systems Integration Aspects
of e-Government”, e-Government Workshop ’05 (eGOV05), Brunel University
West, D. M. (2000) “Assessing e-Government: The Internet, Democracy, and Service Delivery by State and Federal
Government”, [Online], Available: http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovtreport00.html, [June 2002]
West, D. M. (2006) “Global e-Government, 2006”, [Online], Available: www.InsidePolitics.org, [July 2006]
Wilkin, C., and Hewett, B. (1999) “Quality in a Respecification of DeLone and McLean’s IS Success Model”, Conference
Proceedings, 1999 IRMA International Conference, pp. 663-672
Wilkin, C., and Castleman, T. (2003) “Development of an Instrument to Evaluate the Quality of Delivered Information
Systems”, Conference Proceedings, 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Science, Hawaii
Woodroof, J., and Burg, W. (2003) “Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction: Are Users Predisposed?”, Information and Management,
Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 317:324
Working Group on e-Government in the Developing World (2002) “Roadmap for e-Government in the Developing World”.
Pacific Council on International Policy
Xia, W., and King, W. R. (2002) “Determinants of Organizational IT Infrastructure Capabilities”, MIS Research Center
Working Papers, University of Minnesota
Yin, R. K. (1993) Applications of Case Study Research, Sage Publications, London
Yin, R. K. (1994) Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA
Zahra, S. A., and , J. G. Covin (1993) “Business Strategy, Technology Policy and Firm Performance”, Strategic
Management Journal, Vol. 14, No. 6, pp. 451-478
Zmud, R. W., and Boynton, A. C. (1991) "Survey Measures and Instruments in MIS: Inventory and Appraisal", HBS
Research Colloquium, Vol. 3, pp. 149-80

www.ejeg.com 27 ISSN 1479-436-9X

Electronic Journal of e-Government Volume 7 Issue 1 2009 (11-28)

www.ejeg.com 28 ©Academic Conferences Ltd