The International Technology Management Review, Vol. 7 (2018), No.

1, 125-143
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

A study on the factors affect to technological adoption of e-Government Information System

interoperability in Vietnam

Nguyen Van Thanh

Ph.D Candidate in International IT Policy Program, College of Engineering, Seoul National University, Seoul, South
Korea
Email: [email protected]

Hyenyoung Yoon
Professor of International IT Policy Program, College of Engineering, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea

Junseok Hwang

Professor of International IT Policy Program, College of Engineering, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea

Abstract
Information system interoperability has an important role for e- Government development, specially in term of Public
management information system. Each country has its own strategy in ensuring interoperability in information
system. Nowadays, archiving interoperability among information system is very complex task. In developing
countries, the building information system ensuring interoperability in public organizations is limited and ineffective.
Moreover, without deeply understanding and determinance on interoperability dimensions, it will become a
challenge for interoperability and E- Government implementation. Therefore, this study aims to investigate and
analyze the interoperability factors which affect the adoption of Vietnam e-Government Information Systems
interoperability. Moreover, data was gathered using survey through distributing questionnaires to the employees of
IT departments in Vietnam public organizations. The data was analyzed through the technique of Structural
equation modeling (SEM). The result shows that Risk Management, Collaboration and Coordination, Technical
Expertise have significantly influence on Interoperability adoption in Government Information System in Vietnam.
Keywords: Information system, Public management information system, Interoperability, e- Government, Vietnam

1. Introduction In E-Government ecosystem, Public Management

Information System promotes strategic goals based on
Nowadays, the purpose of Industry 4.0 to touch a high effectiveness, efficiency, and economy, includes social
level of operational efficiency, productivity, and objectives, political and like as trust in governments,
automatization throughout promoting emerging social inclusions, community well-being, community
technologies, especially interoperability and integration
regeneration, and sustainability 3.
1
.
In case of E-Government, the transferring of 1.1. E-Government ecosystems
technology knowledge in the organizations and can
There are several E-Government ecosystems to use.
increase the competency can be helped by more accurate
First, it is Public Management Information System.
of technology to adopt innovative E-Government
Regarding on Bozeman and Bretschneider, 1986, it is
in developing countries 2.
defined as Information system used in public

Copyright © 2018, the Authors. Published by Atlantis Press.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).
125
 The International Technology Management Review, Vol. 7 (2018), No. 1, 125-143
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Nguyen Van Thanh, Hyenyoung Yoon, Junseok Hwang

management by public organizations. This ecosystem is About interoperability dimensions, previous

important in public administration and public literature have lacking of concentrate view, only focus on
management sector 5. four technical factors: IT security, ICT infrastructure, IT
Second is E-Government Information System. Based standards and technical expertise affect the current
on definition of Chen, S. C., Li, S. H., Li, C. Y., it is the adoption of E-Government inventiveness in
systems to change the operations of government in public seven government organizations in Oman 4, 17.
administration scope, setting up the relationships with About interoperability perceived, existing literature
citizen in country and make collaboration with different only focus on Perceived factors on electronic
organizations. 21 Government services, disconnect to the information
Third is Open government information system. Open sharing and interconnection in E-Government 10, 11.
Government is the decisive system for connecting and About interoperability intention to use, previous
sharing information between the various components of literature are too emphasis on Intention to use and adopt
the system: from national leadership, research and e-service provision, E-Government overview, miss
development institutions, and the law and policy system; concern to the method how to connect and link among
to the cohesion of the resident community.6 This system different elements in E-Government ecosystem 12, 13, 14.
is the next generation of current ecosystems. Next step we will show the research objective,
research questions and hypotheses as well.
1.2. Interoperability issues Research objective
In the center position of E- Government ecosystem, - This work aims to examine and analyze the
Interoperability is defined like a set of multidimension, interoperability factors which affect the adoption of
complementariment, and dynamic capability which are Vietnam e-Government Information Systems
specified to defined networks of organization so that to interoperability.
achieve successful Interoperability 28, 29. Research questions
Moreover, the lacking of Interoperability has been a What are the interoperability factors affect to
main challenger to E-Government maturity 7, 8, 9. interoperability adoption in E-Government Information
In Vietnam, the Government is taking important steps Systems Interoperability ?
towards e-Government. There are many work being done
in the legal field to support the operation of e-commerces. 2. Literature Review
One of them is the E-Transaction Law, the basis for all
2.1. Interoperability
electronic transactions in the private and public sectors.
An Information Technology (IT) law is also being drafted Interoperability among Governments associations has
by the Ministry of Posts and Telematics to serve the been recognized as a focal issue and a basic essential for
development of Information Technology Industry and the viable working of contemporary associations
Information Technology Management for Agencies, frameworks 15, 16, 17, 18. To accomplish the interoperability
including the functions of the Chief Information Officer governments, the joining of government data assets and
(CIO). 33 procedures, and along these lines the interoperation of
However, we face to challenges with data lost and free data frameworks, are fundamental.
fulladequate system. So we need to have Risk Economy advantages of interoperability result in
Management to solve this issue. We also have strong lower exchange costs normally using institutionalized
support and determinant from Vietnam government, so procedures. However, most coordination and
the Collaboration and Coordination is important in interoperation endeavors confront genuine difficulties as
Interoperability adoption. Moreover, we have essential well as limitation. Trades of data and administrations
demand about high quality human resources, so we need service are divided and complex, tormented by
to have many Technical expertise, especially in IT technological and organization issues 19, 20.
Interoperability.30, 31, 32 Interoperation in e-Government happens at whatever
Relate to research problem in this study, below is the point free or heterogeneous data frameworks or their
literature overview about each research issue in the segments controlled by various purviews, organizations,
detail. or outside accomplices cooperate (proficiently and

126
 The International Technology Management Review, Vol. 7 (2018), No. 1, 125-143
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

viably) in a predefined pattern. With e-Government of India. Moreover, these factors narrowed into
interoperation, E-Government interoperability is organization factors which have strong relationship and
one kind of technical ability 22, 23, 24. interconnect with each other based on cause loop diagram
This study purpose is identify the main factors affect display.34
to the adoption of Interoperability in E- Government In the other side, Sulehat, N. A., & Taib, C. A.
Information Systems in case of Vietnam. investigate the factors impact to E- Government
The most common models within the field of Information Systems Interoperability in Jordan case
Interoperability adoption and data systems success, and study.12, 13 This paper also show key successful factors as
like the technology acceptance model and data system well as the barrier and challenger factors affect to
success models focus on the technology factor of the implementation of E- Government development. By
successful implementations of data system. comparing and make matching with E- Government
development strategy of Jordan, the paper also summary
2.2. Theories in applying the research results from various sources of literature
The theoretical grounding for this model primarily review. Then the results of paper show three main stages
comes from Technological- Organizational- of interoperability to achieve successful implementation
Environmental theory (TOE), and technology acceptance of E- Government Information Systems. 35, 36 The main
model (TAM). This model focuses on organizational stages are also three layers of Interoperability aspect
factors (Collaboration and Coordination, Risk which discovered by European Interoperability
Management) and Technical factor (Technical Framework: technical, semantic and organization. To
Expertise). Moreover, this model focuses on the achieve e-transformation in case of Jordan, the study also
Perceived factors (Perceived Easy of Use, Perceived suggests the working process and strategy should be
Usefulness and Perceived Trust). This study developed aligned, and the standards and the knowledge should be
integrated model for prosperous adoption of E- shared with all citizens as well as public sector in
Government information systems Interoperability that developing country.
link three factors (Interoperability dimensions, By another approach, Othman, M. H. B., & Razali, R.
Perceived factors, and Intention to adopt through scan and review as well as using content analysis
Interoperability). some key e- Government Interoperability Frameworks in
Organization interoperability: how organization different countries and different contexts.15, 16 By that
collaborate to archive their objectives. Organization way, this paper identify the main factors which ensure
interoperability is archived through integration of successfulness for e- Government Information systems
exchanged information and various business processes 26. interoperability. These factors were grouped and divided
Technical interoperability: concern both of Software into two different groups: people and process. Based on
and Hardware issues, focus on technical aspects, such as these key successful factors, the study propose the
connecting or linking Information systems 27. holistic framework for E-Government systems
E- Government need to exchange data and interoperability.
information with other systems. So it need to have In the scope of technical side, Al-Rahbi, Y., Al-
Interoperability. However, we don’t know about what Harrasi, S., & Al-Wahaibi, S. described some technical
elements we need to achieve Interoperability when factors which affect to the adoption of e- Government in
implementing E- Government. So this study will solve term of e- Government project development, to enhance
this challenge. the e- Government services. These technical factors are
also the technical interoperability factors. Focus on e-
Tripathi, R. P., Gupta, M. P., & Bhattacharya, J. Government cases in Oman country combine with
proposed a new framework which identify a group of investigate in six government organizations, this paper
interoperability to achieve adoption of interoperability found the results that four main technical factors are: IT
based on three dimensions of integration.11 They are Infrastructure, IT security, IT standards and technical
communication integration, process integration, , and expertise. Moreover, these factors can be affected in term
data integration. This framework focus on the factors in of management by external pressures like: government
context of the portal of government departments in case

127
 The International Technology Management Review, Vol. 7 (2018), No. 1, 125-143
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Nguyen Van Thanh, Hyenyoung Yoon, Junseok Hwang

regulations, internet facilities, private sector attraction Besides that, perceived easy use describes the user’s
and citizen’s awareness. 4, 17 perception of the quantity of effort needed to utilize the
By using Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), system or the extent to that a user believes that employing
Colesca, S. E., & Dobrica, L. provides the factors affect a explicit technology are easy.20
to adoption and implementation of e- Government Based on several scholars, easy of use may be a live
Interoperability services in case of Romania.8, 9 Most of of the system quality. Hence, a number of researcher
the factors are demographic factors like: Age, Gender, include easy use as a live of the system quality. 39, 40, 41, 42
Income, Education level, and IT infrastructure. In conclusion, Technology Acceptance Model
(TAM) suggested that once a replacement technology is
conferred to the users, the users decide once and the way
2.3. Technology acceptance model they're going to use the technology supported variety of
The most popular technology acceptance model factors: perceived usefulness and perceived ease-of-use.
which is reviewed by previous researchers is TAM. In Look that use or acceptance of the technology in some
general, Technology Acceptance Model is one among the cases desires another issue such as: Risk management,
most common analysis models to predict intention to use Collaboration and coordination, Technical expertise ...
and acceptance of knowledge systems and technology by Moreover, previous analysis had used system usages
individual users.37 Moreover, Technology Acceptance and user satisfactions to live system success as well as
Model is one amongst the foremost potent models wide also the TAM variables to predict usage of information
utilized in the studies of the determinant of Information systems interoperability.43 However, researchers
System and Technology acceptance. 38 afterward instructed that TAM variable may be scant
Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R. P. Warshaw, P. R. predictors of system interoperability usage and success.
developed the Technology Acceptance Model. Within What's necessary is that they used user performance or
the Technology Acceptance Model, there are two factors what's generally referred to as individual impacts as
together with perceived ease of use and perceived indicators to system success or system effectiveness.
usefulness.20 The below Figure depicts the Technology Risk management might enhance the employee’s
Acceptance Model. intention to use or adopt the interoperability once they
see it's helpful.44 Consistent with another research for IS
interoperability acceptance, collaboration and
coordination ought to specialize in providing
comfortable support. Moreover, collaboration and
coordination offers important impacts on the data
systems interoperability performances.45 In addition,
Technical expertise is that the most essential factor
associated with Information system interoperability
usage.46 Hence, there are many aspects to encourage
the end-user to simply accept or use the Interoperability.
Figure 1. Technology Acceptance Model (Davis et In e-Government ecosystems, all of them consider e-
al., 1989) Government like the most important technology to make
effectiveness and successfulness of ecosystem
development. With the role of core component in
Perceived usefulness was outlined by Davis as "the ecosystems, e-Government is adapt well to fit with
degree to that a person believes that employing a explicit Technology Acceptance Model. This model investigates
system would enhance his or her job performance". and examines the acceptance of emerging technologies
Individuals tend to use or to not use the applications to like e-Government. Therefore, Technology Acceptance
the extents they believe which it'll facilitate them to Model is totally suitable for E-Government
perform their job higher. Perceived usefulness explained ecosystems.
the user’s perception to the extent which the technology
can improve the user’s work performance.

128
 The International Technology Management Review, Vol. 7 (2018), No. 1, 125-143
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2.4. Technology, Organization, and Environment infrastructures and government rule). However these
Framework factors aren't consistent with the opposite scholars. A
In 1990, Technology, Organization and Environment theoretical framework for acceptance of education
(TOE) Framework was proposed. This framework management system was established in Asian country.48
identified three dimensions of an organization’s context This framework offers a complete have a look at the vital
which effect to stream by which it adopted and factors. These vital factors are associated with the trainer,
implemented a technology innovation: Technological organization and technology. Technology factors may be
dimension, Organizational dimension and Environmental related to the system qualities, information qualities and
dimension. As originally presented, and later adapted in service support qualities. Organization factors may be
IT adoption studies, the Technology, Organization and associated with motivation, technology arrangement,
Environment (TOE) provided a usefully analytic organization supports, technical supports and coaching.
framework which could be used for learning the adoption educator factors may be associated with self-efficacy,
and consideration of different kinds of Information attitude toward systems, experience, teaching vogue and
Technology innovative.47 The below figure describes the private originality. User characteristics may be
theory. associated with age, education, IS expertise, user
involvement and participation and coaching. structure
characteristics may be associated with high management
support, structure culture and business method
reengineering. Moreover, humans, organizations and
technologies are the important elements of
Information System; the impacts of human are
assessed within the web advantages. 49Technology
factors may be related to the system qualities, info
qualities and repair support qualities. Human factors
may be associated with system uses and users
Figure 3: Technology, Organization, and satisfaction. Organization factors may be related to
Environment Framework (Tornatzky & Fleischer, 1990) structure and atmosphere.

2.5. Limitation of previous research

Based on Tornatzky & Fleischer, the technological
perspective contains the external and internal Most studies focus only on systematic links in the
technologies that are related to the organization. field of public administration. Scholars focused on how
Technologies could include each instrumentation further to identify the major acting forces in Information system
as processes. The structure perspective mentions to the interoperability in Public Administration.20
characteristics and resources of the organization as well There have been few studies on the problem of
as the organization size, degree of concentration, degree integrating data in public management information
of righteousness, social control structure, human systems.
resources, quantity of loose capitals and connections There is separate research about Technical factors,
amongst workers. The environmental perspective organization factors, perceived factors. No concentrate
contains the scale and structure of the business, the study include all of these factors in E-Government
organization competitors, the economic science Interoperability.
perspective and the regulative atmosphere. 3. Research Model
In instant, TOE framework is concentrated
organization (informal and formal link structure, Research design:
communication process, size and loose), technology Questionnaire design
(accessibility and features), , and atmosphere (industrial We assumed an concentrated research of literature of
features and market structures, technology supporting interest to character current measure for related construct.

129
 The International Technology Management Review, Vol. 7 (2018), No. 1, 125-143
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Nguyen Van Thanh, Hyenyoung Yoon, Junseok Hwang

The questionnaires was pilot tested with fourteen H2. Risk management has positively influence on
industry experts. Then we showed face to face debates Perceived Usefulness.
with those experts after they finished the questionnaires. Collaboration and Coordination
We changed, additional and delete question to improve Among various and different organizations, they have
the survey based on their feedbacks. shared vision and collaboration through coordination to
Likert Scale is adopted in this research as it is the achieve their purpose.51 Collaboration and Coordination
most usually adopted measures in scale design, with the can effect to interoperability attitude to use and
3-point and 5-point Likert scales generally liking the usefulness 11, 12.
largest popularities. Nevertheless, Berdie addressed this Therefore, I hypothesize the factor as:
questionnaires design in his work and protects the 6-point H3. Collaboration and Coordination has positively
Likert scale for the following three reasons. Firstly, in influence on Perceived Easy of Use.
most use cases, a 6-point Likert Scale is the most H4. Collaboration and Coordination has positively
consistent measure methodology. Once the question are influence on Perceived Usefulness.
over seven, it is hard for human to differentiate the right Technical expertise
fact. Second, a 3-point Likert Scale reduces people's It is defined as skilled people with strong IT skills with
strongest and mildest view, while a 6-point Likert Scale experience in develop and implement E-Government
can definite it preferably. Third, a 6-point Likert Scale Information Systems. Technical expertise can effect to
reasons misunderstanding for those human with poor interoperability attitude to use and usefulness of E-
differentiate capability. Therefore, the research used the Government.52
6-point Likert Scale, with the responses rated as follows: Therefore, I hypothesize the factor as:
1 as strongly disagree, 2 as disagree, 3 as slightly H5. Technical expertise has positively influence on
disagree, 4 as slightly agree, 5 as agree, and 6 as strongly Perceived Easy of Use.
agree. H6. Technical expertise has positively influence on
Survey questionnaires (sent to 397 people, 205 Perceived Usefulness.
received, response rate of 51.6 percent) Perceived Easy of Use (PEOU)
In TAM model, there are two factors together with
Figure 4: Research model perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness. 53
Besides that, perceived easy use describes the user’s
perception of the quantity of effort needed to utilize the
system or the extent to that a user believes that employing
a explicit technology are easy. 20
Therefore, I hypothesize the factor as:
H7. Perceived Easy of Use has positively influence on
Perceived Usefulness.
H9. Perceived Easy of Use has positively influence on
Intention to adopt.
Perceived Usefulness (PU)
Perceived usefulness is definite as the grade to which a
person believes that using the new technology will
4. Hypotheses development improve his/her task performance.52 Moreover, perceived
usefulness is the grade to which an individual believes
Risk Management that using the system improves his or her job
It is defined as formal continuous process to avoid the performance. Perceived usefulness is definite as the
failure of E-Government Information Systems.50 Risk prospective user’s subjective possibility which adopting
Management could impact to interoperability attitude to a specific application system would rise his or her job
use and usefulness based on launch cost and operating performance within an organizational perspective. 20
cost.11, 12 Therefore, I hypothesize the factor as: In addition, the items to measure the perceived usefulness
H1. Risk management has positively influence on are productivity, make things easier, and overall useful.
Perceived Easy of Use.

130
 The International Technology Management Review, Vol. 7 (2018), No. 1, 125-143
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Moreover, the items to measure the perceived usefulness H8. Perceived Trust has positively influence on
are the system enabled me to accomplish tasks more Perceived Usefulness.
quickly, improved the quality of my tasks, and as a H11. Perceived Trust has positively influence on
whole, useful to me. Hence, the items to measure the Intention to adopt. 54
perceived usefulness are improves the quality, makes it
easier to do my job and useful in my job.18 5. Research Methodology
In this research, three items were adopted to quantity
perceived usefulness construct. Those items are adopting
the system in my work allows me to achieve tasks more Variable measurements
rapidly, using the systems make it easier to do my work,
• Risk
and general I found the system useful to my work.20
committee
There are six items to measure perceived usefulness
• Full adequate
construct. Those items are: using the systems in my work
Risk system
allows me to achieve tasks more rapidly, adopting the
management • Frequency of
systems improved my work performance, adopting the
backup
systems in my work rises my productivity, adopting the
• Quality of
systems improve my effectiveness on the work, adopting
backup
the systems make it easier to do my work, and general, I
found the systems useful to my work. Moreover, • IT staff
effectiveness, productivity and performance of the job meeting
Interoperability
are measures for individual performance impact. For that, • Make
dimensions
in this study only three items were used to measure Collaboration agreement
perceived usefulness construct.20 The rest of the items and together
(adopting the systems improve my work performance, Coordination • Shared IT
adopting the systems in my work rises my productivity, project
adopting the systems enhanced my effectiveness on the • Knowledge
work) will use to measure the individual performance sharing
impact as mentioned. • Number of IT
Perceived usefulness was described as "the degree to that Technical experts
a person believes that employing a explicit system would expertise • Quality of IT
enhance his or her job performance". Individuals tend to experts
use or to not use the applications to the extents they • Usability
believe which it'll facilitate them to perform their job Perceived • Navigation
higher. Perceived usefulness explained the user’s Easy of Use • Accessibility
perception to the extent which the technology can • Helpfulness
improve the user’s work performance. • Content
Therefore, I hypothesize the factor as: • Timeliness
Perceived
H10. Perceived Usefulness has positively influence on Perceived • Transparency
Usefulness
Intention to adopt. factors • Pricing
Perceived Trust • Accountability
It is defined as perceive of user about trustworthiness, • Trustworthines
privacy, security and risk of e-Government Information s
Perceived
Systems Interoperability. Some scholars mentioned that • Privacy
Trust
Perceived Trust can has effect to Perceived Usefulness • Security
when users use new technology. In another way, • Risk
Perceived Trust also has impact on Intention to use e-
Government interoperability.21, 22, 23
Therefore, I hypothesize the factor as:

131
 The International Technology Management Review, Vol. 7 (2018), No. 1, 125-143
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Nguyen Van Thanh, Hyenyoung Yoon, Junseok Hwang

• Willingness to Shared IT project: It is the level of organization’s

use participation in working with IT staff from other public
Intention to
Intention • Intention to use organizations for shared IT projects. It is one of
adopt
• Frequency of measurements of Collaboration and Coordination which
use stands for Organizational Interoperability dimension in e-
Government ecosystems.
Table 1. Variable specification Knowledge sharing: It is the level of organization to
share IT knowledge with IT staff from other public
Risk committee: It is visible committee for ensure risk organizations. It is one of measurements of Collaboration
management in organizations. It is one of measurements and Coordination which stands for Organizational
of Risk management which stands for Organizational Interoperability dimension in e-Government ecosystems.
Interoperability dimension in e-Government ecosystems.
Full adequate system: It is the system with full functions Number of IT experts: It is the number of technical
to register, monitor and report risks for E-government experts in each organization who deal with E-
ecosystem. It is one of measurements of Risk government information system. It is one of
management which stands for Organizational measurements of Technical expertise which stands for
Interoperability dimension in e-Government ecosystems. Technological Interoperability dimension in e-
Government ecosystems.
Frequency of backup: It is the frequency of
organizations to perform backup for E-government
information system in a regular. It is one of Quality of IT experts: It is the experience level of
measurements of Risk management which stands for technical experts in each organization who deal with E-
Organizational Interoperability dimension in e- government information system. It is one of
Government ecosystems. measurements of Technical expertise which stands for
Technological Interoperability dimension in e-
Quality of backup: It is the quality of E-government sites Government ecosystems.
backup to ready for disaster recovery. It is one of
measurements of Risk management which stands for Usability: It is the perceive level about easiness of use of
Organizational Interoperability dimension in e- an e-government service. It is one of measurements of
Government ecosystems. Perceived Easy of Use which is one of the key Perceived
factors in e-Government ecosystems.

IT staff meeting: It is the level of regular meetings with Navigation: It is the easy level of navigation capability
IT staff from different public organizations. It is one of around an e-Government website. It is one of
measurements of Collaboration and Coordination which measurements of Perceived Easy of Use which is one of
stands for Organizational Interoperability dimension in e- the key Perceived factors in e-Government ecosystems.
Government ecosystems.
Accessibility: It is the capability of e-Government
services to provide access for everyone. It is one of
Make agreement together: It is the level of measurements of Perceived Easy of Use which is one of
organization’s participation in formulating the the key Perceived factors in e-Government ecosystems.
agreements related to information systems with IT staff
from other public organizations. It is one of Helpfulness: It is the benefit of e-Government systems
measurements of Collaboration and Coordination which to provide expected assistance to the users. It is one of
stands for Organizational Interoperability dimension in e- measurements of Perceived Easy of Use which is one of
Government ecosystems. the key Perceived factors in e-Government ecosystems.

132
 The International Technology Management Review, Vol. 7 (2018), No. 1, 125-143
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Content: It is the precise information which e- Willingness to use: It is the positive attitude of
Government systems provide to the user. It is one of organizations toward using e-Government systems. It is
measurements of Perceived Usefulness which is one of one of measurements of Intention to adopt which stands
the key Perceived factors in e-Government ecosystems. for Intention factor in e-Government ecosystems.

Timeliness: It is the up-to-date information which e- Intention to use: It is the intention level to use e-
Government systems provide to the user. It is one of Government systems of organizations. It is one of
measurements of Perceived Usefulness which is one of measurements of Intention to adopt which stands for
the key Perceived factors in e-Government ecosystems. Intention factor in e-Government ecosystems.

Transparency: It is the benefit of e-Government systems Frequency of use: It is how often the organizations use
to actively give the user’s opinion to the government. It e-Government systems. It is one of measurements of
is one of measurements of Perceived Usefulness which is Intention to adopt which stands for Intention factor in e-
one of the key Perceived factors in e-Government Government ecosystems.
ecosystems.
For testing the hypotheses which are proposed in this
Pricing: It is the time saving, money saving when using study, the dataset was analyzed using Structural Equation
e-Government systems. It is one of measurements of Modeling (SEM).
Perceived Usefulness which is one of the key Perceived We use SEM model to identify how determinant factors
factors in e-Government ecosystems. influence on intention to adopt Interoperability.
Research question: What are the interoperability factors
Accountability: It is the cability to communicate with affect to interoperability adoption in e-Government
government officials through e-Government systems. It Information Systems ?
is one of measurements of Perceived Usefulness which is
one of the key Perceived factors in e-Government The projected analysis model was analyzed exploitation
ecosystems. the structural equation modeling (SEM) supported by
Analysis of Moment Structures (AMOS) and also the
Trustworthiness: It is the feeling of user that the e- SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences)
Government services providers are trustworthy. It is one software package program. AMOS may be a SEM
of measurements of Perceived Trust which is one of the package supported with SPSS. AMOS (Analysis of
key Perceived factors in e-Government ecosystems. Moments Structures) is one in all the latest software
package developed and offered within the market which
Privacy: It is the feeling level of users about their privacy allowed scholars to model and analyze the inter
protection when using e-Government services. It is one relationships amongst construct having multiple
of measurements of Perceived Trust which is one of the indicators efficiently, exactly and expeditiously.
key Perceived factors in e-Government ecosystems. From literature, scholars used the structural equation
modeling technique rather than different techniques
Security: It is the secure level of users’ data transfering because some reasons: the previous techniques like
when using e-Government services. It is one of multivariate analysis, correlational analysis, statistical
measurements of Perceived Trust which is one of the key procedure of variance and discriminant analysis can only
Perceived factors in e-Government ecosystems. examine one relationship at a time. It doesn't let to check
the researcher’s entire theory. For this reason, we used
Risk: It is some negative consequences from using e- structural equation modeling (SEM). Structural equation
Government services. It is one of measurements of modeling will inspect a series of dependence
Perceived Trust which is one of the key Perceived factors relationships at the same time.
in e-Government ecosystems.
Table 2, 3, 4 show the sample characteristics of the data
Table 2. Responder’s position - frequency

133
 The International Technology Management Review, Vol. 7 (2018), No. 1, 125-143
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Nguyen Van Thanh, Hyenyoung Yoon, Junseok Hwang

Table 4. Gender

Table 3. Type of organization – frequency

Table 5. Education level

6. Results and Discussion

202 observations were available for the study.
Cronbach’s Alpha showed that all the variables were
under acceptable limits with all scores above 0.7

134
 The International Technology Management Review, Vol. 7 (2018), No. 1, 125-143
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

135
 The International Technology Management Review, Vol. 7 (2018), No. 1, 125-143
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Nguyen Van Thanh, Hyenyoung Yoon, Junseok Hwang

Table 6: Descriptive statistics and Cronbach’s

alpha

Model validity measures: Discriminant validity

was checked as evidenced by AVE where all
values were above 0.5

Table 7: AVE and CR

Cronbach’s Alpha Number of

constructs

0.734 5

Table 8. Reliability Statistics

EFA: the pattern matrix of each individual

factor with all values above 0.5 was obtained
which showed the consistency of the data

136
 The International Technology Management Review, Vol. 7 (2018), No. 1, 125-143
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 9. Pattern Matrix

The model fit for the proposal was checked and

the measures obtained which indicated that the
model fulfilled the thresholds considered
acceptable.

Table 10. Model fit measures – SEM

We found that 6/11 hypotheses are accepted,

5/11 hypotheses are rejected.

Figure 5. Results of the path analysis

137
 The International Technology Management Review, Vol. 7 (2018), No. 1, 125-143
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Nguyen Van Thanh, Hyenyoung Yoon, Junseok Hwang

Perceived value = ***

Easy of Use. →Supported
Table 11. Results of Hypothesis test
H6. Technical Estimate
Hypothesis Results
expertise has value =
H1. Risk Estimate
positively 0.349; p-
management value = -
influence on value = 0.158
has positively 0.097; p-
Perceived →Not
influence on value = ***
Usefulness. Supported
Perceived → Supported
H7. Perceived Estimate
Easy of Use.
Easy of Use value =
has positively 0.638; p-
H2. Risk Estimate
influence on value = ***
management value = -
Perceived →Supported
has positively 0.051; p-
Usefulness.
influence on value = 0.325
H8. Perceived Estimate
Perceived → Not
Trust has value = -
Usefulness. Supported
positively 0.104; p-
H3. Estimate
influence on value = 0.394
Collaboration value =
Perceived →Not
and 0.201; p-
Usefulness. Supported
Coordination value = *
H9. Perceived Estimate
has positively →Supported
Easy of Use value =
influence on
has positively 0.623; p-
Perceived
influence on value = ***
Easy of Use.
Intention to →Supported
H4. Estimate
adopt.
Collaboration value = -
H10. Estimate
and 0.043; p-
Perceived value =
Coordination value = 0.752
Usefulness has 0.236; p-
has positively →Not
positively value = *
influence on Supported
influence on →Supported
Perceived
Intention to
Usefulness.
adopt.
H5. Technical Estimate
H11. Estimate
expertise has value =
Perceived value =
positively 0.582; p-
Trust has 0.069; p-
influence on

138
 The International Technology Management Review, Vol. 7 (2018), No. 1, 125-143
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

positively value = 0.485 8.1. Theoretical contribution

influence on →Not The first contribution of this study is about
Intention to Supported theoretical. This research first attempts to investigate the
determinant factors in E-Government interoperability
adopt.
adoption through combining information system success
theory and T-O-E theory. Organization factors is new
point in E-Government adoption model. We find that
7. Discussion and Implications Organization and Technical factors only impact on
From the results, we can see this study addressed the Perceived Easy of Use.
research question that evaluate the relationship between
8.2. Practical contribution
interoperability dimension factors, and perceived factors.
Moreover, analysis the relationship between In practical contribution, this study’s results help
interoperability dimension factors, and perceived factors Government, policy makers and researchers consider the
and Intention to adopt. Moreover, evaluate the way and elements to implementing E-Government
relationship between perceived usefulness and perceived Information systems in Vietnam case, especially in term
easy of use with Intention to adopt. Data was collected of Interoperability.
using the survey questionnaires. The result 202 effective
cases were evaluated with the SEM technique to validate 8.3. Limitations
the theoretical models and test the hypotheses, then However, we still have some limitations:
address the research questions. First, the results of this study can not be generalized
Organization factors and Technical factors such as: to another country because using survey questionnaires
Risk management, Collaboration and Coordination, in Vietnam.
Technical Expertise did not show a significant influence Second, the profile of responders to the survey is
on Perceived Usefulness. This can be explained as mainly in network administration experts who have
Interoperability in Vietnam is new with Organization, experience with Public Management Information
especially for Public Organization such as Government System, so did not cover another areas in IT sector.
agencies. So they did not have chance to use
Interoperability applications yet. 9. Conclusion and Future work
Perceived Easy of Use and Perceived Usefulness
In this paper, we made a survey on adoption
show significant influence on Intention to Adopt. This
promoting interoperability within the public sector and
can be explained as the Public organization Information
identify the main factors of Interoperability for public
System consider characteristic of using and Usefulness
management information system interoperability.
more than Trust Perceive.
Due to the necessity for public sector modernization, the
There is no significant influence from Perceived Trust
ability challenge is turning into bit by bit additional
on Intention to Adopt. The reason is Interoperability
necessary. As each technical and non-technical factors
ability in Vietnam is not stable compared to developed
are necessary towards winning implementation of E-
countries. The inefficient information system
Government systems interoperability; additional holistic
infrastructure and poor investment are a handicap to
framework should be introduced. This paper has detected
government efforts related to E-Government launch. In
the wants and key factors for implementing ability. The
Vietnam, Interoperability is not user-friendly. As a
results of this paper may be used for coming up with a
result, the majority of Vietnamese may prefer traditional
additional holistic e-Government ability framework
government procedures rather than using e-Government
within the future.
services. Therefore, perceived usefulness does not have a
strong impact on intentions to use.54

8. Contributions and Limitations

139
 The International Technology Management Review, Vol. 7 (2018), No. 1, 125-143
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Nguyen Van Thanh, Hyenyoung Yoon, Junseok Hwang

References 14 Saekow, A., & Boonmee, C. (2010). A Practical

Method of Reducing the Gaps in e-Government Interoperability
Implementation: Case of Patient Referral Information
1 Alavi, M., and Carlson, P. (1992) “A Review of MIS
Exchange. AISS, 2(2), 93-106.
Research and Disciplinary Development,” Journal of
15 Othman, M. H., & Razali, R. (2017). Electronic
Management Information Systems, 8:4, pp. 45-62.
Government Systems Interoperability Model. Journal of
2 Alter, S. (2002) Information Systems: Foundations of
Telecommunication, Electronic and Computer Engineering
E-Business, Prentice-Hall, Upper
(JTEC), 9(3-4), 1-9.
Saddle River, NJ.
16 Othman, M. H. B., & Razali, R. (2013, November).
3 Ally Lee, Yair Levy, (2014) "The effect of
Key contributing factors towards successful Electronic
information quality on trust in e-government systems
Government systems interoperability. In Research and
'transformation", Transforming Government: People, Process
Innovation in Information Systems (ICRIIS), 2013 International
and Policy, Vol. 8 Issue: 1, pp.76-100,
Conference on(pp. 302-307). IEEE.
https://doi.org/10.1108/TG-10-2012-0011
17 Al-Rahbi, Y., Al-Harrasi, S., & Al-Wahaibi, S.
4 Al-Rahbi, Y., Al-Harrasi, S., & Al-Wahaibi, S.
(2012). Technical factors affecting the adoption of e-
(2012). Technical factors affecting the adoption of e-
government.
government.
18 van der Veer, H., & Wiles, A. (2008). Achieving
5 Barry Bozeman and Stuart Bretschneider (1986)
technical interoperability. European telecommunications
Public Management Information Systems:
standards institute.
Theory and Prescription
19 Yan, Z., Sun, B., & Wang, T. (2009, November). A
6 Bakos, J. Y., and Brynjofsson, E. (1993)
study on information sharing of e-government. In Grey Systems
“Information Technology, Incentives, and the
and Intelligent Services, 2009. GSIS 2009. IEEE International
Optimal Number of Suppliers,” Journal of Management
Conference on (pp. 1331-1335). IEEE.
Information Systems, 10:2,
20 Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R. P. Warshaw, P. R. (1989).
pp. 37-53.
User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two
7 Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D., and Mead, M. (1987)
theoretical models. Management Science, 35 (8) 982–1003.
“The Case Research Strategy in Studies
21 Chen, S. C., Li, S. H., Li, C. Y. (2011). Recent related
of Information Systems,” MIS Quarterly, 11:3, pp. 369-386.
research in technology acceptance model: A literature review.
8 Colesca, S. E., & Liliana, D. (2009). E-government
Australian Journal of Business and Management Research, 1
Adoption in Romania. International Journal of Human and
(9) 124-127.
Social Sciences, 4(14), 1040-1044.
22 Andrew Vaz, 2014, Expanding the Role of Public
9 Colesca, S. E., & Dobrica, L. (2008). Adoption and
Management: From Citizen Participation to Open
use of e-government services: The case of Romania. Journal of
Government, PA Times online
applied research and technology, 6(3), 204-217.
23 Bensauo, M., and Venkatraman, N. (1996)
10 Gottschalk, P., & Solli-Sæther, H. (2009). Stages of
“Interorganizational Relationships and Information
e-government interoperability. In E-Government
Technology: A Conceptual Synthesis and a Research
Interoperability and Information Resource integration:
Framework,” European Journal of Information Systems, 5, pp.
Frameworks for Aligned Development (pp. 108-123). IGI
84-91.
Global.
24 Bingham, R.D. (1976) The Adoption of Innovation by
11 Tripathi, R. P., Gupta, M. P., & Bhattacharya, J.
Local Government, Lexington Books, D.C. Heath and
(2011). Identifying factors of integration for an interoperable
Company, Lexington.
government portal: a study in Indian context. International
25 Brudney, J.L., and Selden, S.C. (1995) “The
Journal of Electronic Government Research (IJEGR), 7(1), 64-
Adoption of Innovation by Smaller Local Governments: the
88.
Case of Computer Technology,” American Review of Public
12 Sulehat, N. A., & Taib, C. A. (2016). e-Government
Administration, 25:1, pp. 71-85.
Information Systems Interoperability in developing countries:
26 Benoît Otjacques , Patrik Hitzelberger & Fernand
The case of Jordan. Journal of Business and Social Review in
Feltz (2007) Interoperability of E-Government Information
Emerging Economies, 2(1), 39-49.
Systems: Issues of Identification and Data Sharing, Journal of
13 Sulehat, N., Taib, C. A., & Ishak, K. A. (2017). The
Management Information Systems, 23:4, 29-51
Moderating Effect of IT Knowledge on the relationship
27 Chau, P.Y.K., and Jim, C.C.F. (2002) “Adoption of
between Organizational Factors and Information
Electronic Data Interchange in Small and Medium-Sized
Systems... Australian Journal of Basic and Applied
Sciences, 11(10), 118-127.

140
 The International Technology Management Review, Vol. 7 (2018), No. 1, 125-143
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Enterprises,” Journal of Global Information Management, 40 Kraemer, K. L., & Perry, J. L. (1979). The federal
10:4, pp. 61-85. push to bring computer applications to local
28 Dawes, S.S., Pardo, T.A., Green, D.E., McInerney, governments. Public administration review, 260-270.
C.R., Connelly, D.R., and DiCaterino, 41 Karahannas, M.V., and Jones, M. (1999)
A. (1997a) “Tying a Sensible Knot: A Practical Guide to State- “Interorganizational Systems and Trust in Strategic Alliances”
Local Information Systems,” Center for Technology in in the Proceedings of the Twentieth International Conference
Government, University at Albany/SUNNY, available at on Information Systems, Charlotte, North Carolina, pp. 346-
http://www.ctg.albany.edu/resources/pdfrpwp/iis1.pdf, 357.
accessed on 09/18/02. 42 Rachel Martin, 'CIA Tracks Public Information for
29 Dawes, S.S., Pardo, T.A., Connelly, D.R., Green, the Private Eye', In: National Public Radio. 2012).
D.E., and McInerney, C.R., (1997b) “Partners in State-Local 43 David R. Lankes, 'Credibility on the Internet: Shifting
Information Systems: Lessons from the Field,” Center for from Authority to Reliability', Journal of Documentation, Vol.
Technology in Government, University at Albany/SUNNY, 64, no. 5, 2008, pp. 667-86.
available at 44 Sonja Spiranec and Mihaela Banek Zorica,
http://www.ctg.albany.edu/resources/pdfrpwp/iisfnlrp.pdf, 'Information Literacy 2.0: Hype or Discourse Refinement?',
accessed on 09/18/02. Journal of Documentation, Vol. 66, no. 1, 2010, pp. 140-53.
30 A. Bandura, Social Foundations of Thought and 45 Sharon Markless and David Streatfield, 'Three
Action: A Social Cognitive Theory (Prentice-Hall; NJ, 1986). decades of information literacy: redefining the parameters', In:
31 de Ven, A.H. (1976) “On the Nature, Formation and Change and Challenge: Information Literacy for the 21st
Maintenance of Relationships among Organizations,” Academy Century. Susie Andretta (ed.) (Auslib Press; Adelaide, SA,
of Management Review, 1:4, pp. 24-36. 2007).
32 A. Cabrera, W. C. Collins and J. F. Salgado, 46 Landsbergen Jr, D., & Wolken Jr, G. (2001).
'Determinants of Individual Engagement in Knowledge Realizing the promise: Government information systems and
Sharing', International Journal of Human Resource the fourth generation of information technology. Public
Management, Vol. 17, no. 2, 2006, pp. 245-64. administration review, 61(2), 206-220.
33 Hoang, Trung & Tran, Kim Hieu, 2015: “AN 47 Marc Novakouski, 2012: “Interoperability in the e-
APPROACH TOWARDS THE INTEGRATION OF BUS Government Context” European Communities 2008, p.34.
INFORMATION SYSTEMS IN VIETNAM” 48 Newcomer, K. E., & Caudle, S. L. (1991). Evaluating
34 ODNI, 'Intelligence Community Directive Number public sector information systems: More than meets the
301: National Open Source Enterprise', Office of the Director eye. Public Administration Review, 377-384.
of National Intelligence (ed.) (Office of the Director of National 49 Norris, D. F., & Moon, M. J. (2005). Advancing e‐
Intelligence; Washington DC, 2006). government at the grassroots: Tortoise or hare?. Public
35 Jarvenpaa, S.L., and Staples D.S. (2000) “The Use of administration review, 65(1), 64-75.
Collaborative Electronic Media for Information Sharing: An 50 Benoît Otjacques , Patrik Hitzelberger & Fernand
exploratory Study of Determinants,” Journal of Strategic Feltz (2007) Interoperability of E-Government Information
Information Systems, 9, pp. 129-154. Systems: Issues of Identification and Data Sharing, Journal of
36 Attorney-General’s Department, 'Information Management Information Systems, 23:4, 29-51
security management guidelines: Australian Government 51 Lukas BA, Hult GTM, Ferrell OC. A theoretical
security classification system', Attorney-General’s Department perspective of the antecedents and consequences of
(ed.) (Australian Government; Canberra, ACT, 2011). organizational learning in marketing channels. J Bus Res
37 Richard A. Best and Alfred Cumming, 'Open Source 1996;36(3):233 – 44.
Intelligence (OSINT): Issues for Congress', Congressional 52 Premkumar, G., & Ramamurthy, K. (1995). The role
Research Service (ed.) (Congressional Research Service; of interorganizational and organizational factors on the decision
Washington DC, 2007), p. 24. mode for adoption of interorganizational systems. Decision
38 Robert Cornall and Rufus Black, 'Independent sciences, 26(3), 303-336.
Review of the Intelligence Community Report 2011', 53 Pudjianto, B., Jo, H., Ciganek, P.A. & Rho, J.J., 2011.
Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (ed.) (Australian Determinants of E-government assimilation in Indonesia: An
Government; Canberra, ACT, 2011). empirical investigation using TOE framework. Asia Pacific
39 Philip Flood, 'Report of the inquiry into Australian Journal of Information Systems, 21(1).
Intelligence Agencies', Department of the Prime Minister and 54 Sinkula JM. Market information processing and
Cabinet (ed.) (Australian Government; Canberra, ACT, 2004). organizational learning. J Mark 1994;58:35 – 45.

141
 The International Technology Management Review, Vol. 7 (2018), No. 1, 125-143
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Nguyen Van Thanh, Hyenyoung Yoon, Junseok Hwang

Appendix. Questionnaires Strongly Slightly Slightly Strongly

Disagree Agree
Direction: disagree disagree agree Agree
The following describe statements about the factors 1 2 3 4 5 6
of public organization’s e-Government Information
System Interoperability. Please indicate the extent to
Statements Level of Agreement
which you agree or disagree with the statements
based on the scale provided.
the agreements related to
Strongly Slightly Slightly Strongly information systems with
Disagree Agree
disagree disagree agree Agree IT staff from other public
1 2 3 4 5 6 organizations.)
COC3. Shared IT project
(Your organization
Statements Level of Agreement
participate effective in
working with IT staff from
Risk management. It is defined as formal continuous other public organizations
process to avoid the failure of EGISI for shared IT projects.)
RM1. Visible committee COC4. Knowledge
(Your organization has a sharing (Your
visible risk management organization share IT
committee for EGISI.) knowledge frequently with
RM2. Fulladequate system IT staff from other public
(Your organization has an organizations.)
fulladequate information
system to register, monitor
and report risks for
Technical Expertise. It is defined as skilled people
EGISI.)
with strong IT skills with experience in develop and
RM3. Frequency of check
implement EGIS (1 = very low to 6 =very high)
(Your organization repeats
the process of risk TE1. We have the
assessment regularly ) technical expertise to use 1
IT
RM4. Frequency of
backup (Your organization TE2. Our internal experts
1
performs backup for the advise us to adopt IT
EGIS in a regular bases is TE3. When you are
necessary.) seeking advise on eGIS,
how important are the
RM5. Quality of backup 1
following sources of
(Your organization’s
information to your
disaster recovery site
organization ?
works well.)
TE4. Do you agree that
your organization has
Collaboration and Coordination.. 1
enough technical expertise
to use the eGISI adoption ?
COC1. IT staff meeting
(You are attending regular
meetings with IT staff
from other public Intention to adopt (ITA).
organizations.) It is willing, intention
COC2. Make agreement and frequency of user to
together (Your use eGISI
organization participate ITA1. Willingness to use
1
frequently in formulating (Your organization has a

142
 The International Technology Management Review, Vol. 7 (2018), No. 1, 125-143
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Strongly Slightly Slightly Strongly Strongly Slightly Slightly Strongly

Disagree Agree Disagree Agree
disagree disagree agree Agree disagree disagree agree Agree
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Statements Level of Agreement Statements Level of Agreement

positive attitude towards PEU2. Navigation (How

using eGISI). easily navigate around an 1
ITA2. Intent to use (Does e-Government website?)
your organization 1 PEU3. Accessibility (Does
use/intent to use eGISI ?) e-Government services
1
ITA3. Frequency of use provide access for
(How often does your 1 everybody?)
organization use eGISI ?) PEU4. Helpfulness (Do
1 you receive the expected
1
assistance when you need
1
it?)
Perceived Trust (PT). It is defined as perceive of user
about trustworthiness, Privacy, Security and Risk of
EGISI Perceived Usefulness
PT1. Trustworthiness (Do (PU). It is defined as
you feel that the e- perceive of user if EGISI
government services 1 is content, timeliness,
providers are transparency, pricing,
trustworthy?) accountability
PT2. Privacy (Do you feel PU1. Content (Does
confident about your EGISI provide the precise 1
privacy protection when 1 information you need?)
using an e-government PU2. Timeliness (Usually
service?) the eGISI provide up-to- 1
PT3. Security (Do you feel date information?)
your data transfering is PU3. Transparency (Does
1 eGISI enable you to
secure when using an e- 1
government service?) actively give youropinion
PT4. Risk (Do you believe to the government?)
that there could be PU4. Pricing (Are there
negative consequences 1 any savings (time, money) 1
from using e-government using eGISI?)
services?) PU5. Accountability (Are
1 5 you able to communicate
with government officials 1
1 5 through
Perceived Easy of Use eGISI?)
(PEU). It is defined as
perceive of user if the
using EGISI is usability,
navigation, accessibility,
helpfulness
PEU1. Usability (How do
you perceive the easiness
1
of use of an e-government
service?)

143