Unveiling the drivers of digital governance adoption in public administration
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.21(4).2023.35
-
Article InfoVolume 21 2023, Issue #4, pp. 454-467
- Cited by
- 574 Views
-
138 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the factors, both internal and external, that impact the adoption of digital governance in public administration. The quantitative data were collected through online questionnaires from 556 public servants, all of whom were enrolled in a Master of Public Administration program, representing a variety of public organizations, in a non-random way. The study draws from a comprehensive literature review and leverages structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis to derive empirical insights. The empirical analysis revealed positive relationships between digital governance, service quality, safety, trust, and transparency within public services. Contrary to previous results, internal factors such as leadership, organizational culture, and skillsets do not exhibit significant impacts. Overall, the study supports the idea that improving the quality of digital services and embracing innovative technologies are key drivers of digital governance in public administration, leading to increased transparency and public trust. These findings can guide policymakers and administrators in implementing effective digital governance strategies tailored to the specific context of each public organization.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)H83, D73, O33, Q55
-
References63
-
Tables6
-
Figures2
-
- Figure 1. Conceptual model
- Figure 2. Results of the structural equation modeling showing statistically significant paths
-
- Table 1. Research hypotheses
- Table 2. Sample demographics (n = 556)
- Table 3. Factor loadings, reliability, and convergent validity
- Table 4. Evaluation of model’s goodness-of-fit
- Table 5. Square roots of AVE and correlations
- Table 6. Path coefficients (standardized regression coefficients)
-
- Addison, S. (2021). Impact of advancement of technology, competitive pressure, user expectation on continuous digital disruption: Mediating role of perceive ease of use. Open Journal of Business and Management, 9(4), 2013-1079.
- AlHussainan, O. N., AlFayyadh, M. A., Al-Saber, A., & Alkandari, A. M. (2022). The factors of e-government service quality in Kuwait during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. International Journal of Electronic Government Research (IJEGR), 18(1), 1-19.
- Al-Tkhayneh, K., Kot, S., & Shestak, V. (2019). Motivation and demotivation factors affecting productivity in public sector. Revista Administratie si Management Public, 33, 77-102.
- Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (2012). Specification, evaluation, and interpretation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40, 8-34.
- Bannister, F., & Connolly, R. (2011). Trust and transformational government: A proposed framework for research. Government Information Quarterly, 28(2), 137-147.
- Basyal, D. K., & Seo, J.-W. (2017). Employees’ resistance to change and technology acceptance in Nepal. South Asian Studies, 32(2), 349-362.
- Bilal, A., Ahmad, H. M., & Majid, F. (2018). How formalization impedes employee creativity and organizational innovation: A case of advertising agencies in Pakistan.иNUML International Journal of Business & Management, 13(1), 66-78.
- Bodó, B., & Janssen, H. (2022). Maintaining trust in a technologized public sector [Machine bias]. Policy and Society, 41(3), 414-429.
- Bousdekis, A., & Kardaras, D. (2020). Digital transformation of local government: A case study from Greece. 22nd Conference on Business Informatics (CBI) (pp. 131-140). Antwerp, Belgium.
- Brunetti, F., Matt, D. T., Bonfanti, A., De Longhi, A., Pedrini, G., & Orzes, G. (2020). Digital transformation challenges: Strategies emerging from a multi-stakeholder approach. The TQM Journal, 32(4), 697-724.
- Chen, L., & Aklikokou, A. K. (2020). Determinants of e-government adoption: Testing the mediating effects of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. International Journal of Public Administration, 43(10), 850-865.
- Clavel, P. (1999). The progressive city: Planning and participation, 1969–1984. Rutgers University Press.
- Crosby, M., Nachiappan, Pattanayak, P., Verma, S., & Kalyanaraman, V. (2016). Blockchain technology: Beyond bitcoin. Applied Innovation Review, 2.
- Das, A., Singh, H., & Joseph, D. (2017). A longitudinal study of e-government maturity. Information & Management, 54(4), 415-426.
- Dehkordi, L. F., Rasouli R., & Rasouli, Z. Z. (2011). The development of e-government services in Iran: A comparison of adoption constructs. Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business, 1(2).
- Demir, F. (2022). Innovation in the public sector: Smarter states, services and citizens (39th vol.). Springer Nature.
- Dias, G. P. (2020). Global e-government development: Besides the relative wealth of countries, do policies matter? Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 14(3), 381-400.
- Edmonson, C., & Weberg, D. (2019). Leadership styles that promote innovation: Supporting innovation requires commitment and thoughtful actions. American Nurse Today, 14(7), 21-24.
- Effah, J., & Nuhu, H. (2017). Institutional barriers to digitalization of government budgeting in developing countries: A case study of Ghana. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 82(1), 1-17.
- Escobar, F., Santos, H., & Pereira, T. (2023). Blockchain in the public sector: An umbrella review of literature. In J. Prieto, F. L. Benítez Martínez, S. Ferretti, D. Arroyo Guardeño, & P. Tomás Nevado-Batalla (Eds.), Blockchain and Applications, 4th International Congress (pp. 142-152). Springer.
- Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1-4.
- European Commision. (2018). Public administration characteristics and performance in EU28. Publications Office of the EU.
- Filgueiras, F., Flávio, C., & Palotti, P. (2019). Digital transformation and public service delivery in Brazil. Latin American Policy, 10(2), 195-219.
- Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382-388.
- Gil-Garcia, J. R., Dawes, S. S., & Pardo, T. A. (2018). Digital government and public management research: Finding the crossroads. Public Management Review, 20(5), 633-646.
- Green, J., & Daniels, S. (2019). Digital governance: Leading and thriving in a world of fast-changing technologies. Routledge.
- Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J. A. (2012). An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(3), 414-433.
- He, A. J., & Ma, L. (2021). Citizen participation, perceived public service performance, and trust in government: Evidence from health policy reforms in Hong Kong. Public Performance & Management Review, 44(3), 471-493.
- Hoai, T. T., Hung, B. Q., & Nguyen, N. P. (2022). The impact of internal control systems on the intensity of innovation and organizational performance of public sector organizations in Vietnam: The moderating role of transformational leadership. Heliyon, 8(2), e08954.
- Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
- Karpenko, O., & Osmak, A. (2018). The use of blockchain systems by public authorities: Ukrainian and foreign experience. Actual Problems of Public Administration, 1(1), 57-62. (In Ukrainian).
- Khan, S., Umer, R., Uddin, N., Muhammad, J., & Ahmed, N. (2023). Identifying the factors affecting individuals’ trust to use social media for e-government services: A conceptual model. Mehran University Research Journal of Engineering & Technology, 42(1), 109-119.
- Kuziemski, M., & Misuraca, G. (2020). AI governance in the public sector: Three tales from the frontiers of automated decision-making in democratic settings. Telecommunications Policy, 44(6), 101976.
- Laforet, S. (2014). Effects of organisational culture on brand portfolio performance. Journal of Marketing Communications, 23(1), 92-110.
- Laforet, L., & Bilek, G. (2021). Blockchain: An inter-organisational innovation likely to transform the supply chain. Supply Chain Forum: An International Journal, 22(3), 240-249.
- Laukyte, M. (2023). Blockchain and the right to good administration: Adding blocks to or blocking of the globalization of good administration? Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 30(1), 195-225.
- Li, Y., & Shang, H. (2020). Service quality, perceived value, and citizens’ continuous-use intention regarding e-government: Empirical evidence from China. Information & Management, 57(3), 103197.
- Lokuge, S., Sedera, D., Grover, V., & Xu, D. (2019). Organizational readiness for digital innovation: Development and empirical calibration of a construct. Information & Management, 56(3), 445-461.
- Lorentz, H., Aminoff, A., Kaipia, R., & Srai, J. S. (2021). Structuring the phenomenon of procurement digitalisation: Contexts, interventions and mechanisms. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 41(2), 157-192.
- Martínez-Córdoba, P. J., Benito, B., & García-Sánchez, I. M. (2021). Efficiency in the governance of the Covid-19 pandemic: Political and territorial factors. Globalization and Health, 17(1), 113.
- Meijer, A., & Bekkers, V. (2015). A metatheory of e-government: Creating some order in a fragmented research field. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 237-245.
- Mingaine, L. (2013). Leadership challenges in the implementation of ICT in public secondary schools, Kenya. Journal of Education and Learning, 2(1), 32-43.
- Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2002). How to use a Monte Carlo study to decide on sample size and determine power. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9(4), 599-620.
- Mylona, E., & Mihail, D. (2020). Exploring public employees’ motivation to learn and develop in turbulent times. The role of perceived support and organizational commitment. International Journal of Public Administration, 43(16), 1366-1375.
- Naranjo-Valencia, J. C., & Calderon-Hernández, G. (2018). Model of culture for innovation. Organizational Culture, 1(1), 13-34.
- Nardi, P. M. (2018). Doing survey research: A guide to quantitative methods. Routledge.
- Nguyen, T. D., Banh, U. U., Nguyen, T. M., & Nguyen, T. T. (2023). E-service quality: A literature review and research trends. In A. K. Nagar, D. Singh Jat, D. K. Mishra, & A. Joshi (Eds.), Intelligent Sustainable Systems (pp. 47-62). Spriner.
- Ølnes, S., & Jansen, A. (2021). Blockchain technology as information infrastructure in public sector: An analytical framework. Proceedings of the 19th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: Governance in the Data Age. Delft, The Netherlands.
- Ølnes, S., Ubacht, J., & Janssen, M. (2017). Blockchain in government: Benefits and implications of distributed ledger technology for information sharing. Government Information Quarterly, 34(3), 355-364.
- Onyango, G., & Ondiek, J. O. (2021). Digitalization and integration of sustainable development goals (SDGs) in public organizations in Kenya. Public Organization Review, 21(3), 511-526.
- Orji, I. J., Kusi-Sarpong, S., Huang, S., & Vazquez-Brust, D. (2020). Evaluating the factors that influence blockchain adoption in the freight logistics industry. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 141, 102025.
- Panarello, A., Tapas, N., Merlino, G., Longo, F., & Puliafito, A. (2018). Blockchain and IoT integration: A systematic survey. Sensors, 18(8), 2575.
- Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12-40.
- Robinson, S. C. (2020). Trust, transparency, and openness: How inclusion of cultural values shapes Nordic national public policy strategies for artificial intelligence (AI). Technology in Society, 63, 101421.
- Sabani, A., Thai, V., & Hossain, M. A. (2023). Factors affecting citizen adoption of e-government in developing countries: An exploratory case study from Indonesia. Journal of Global Information Management (JGIM), 31(1), 1-23.
- Sahinidis, A., & Kanellopoulos, C. (2010). The effects of strong culture on organizational innovation. A cultural model of innovation.
- Tangi, L., Janssen, M., Benedetti, M., & Noci, G. (2021). Digital government transformation: A structural equation modelling analysis of driving and impeding factors. International Journal of Information Management, 60, 102356.
- Teo, T. S., Srivastava, S. C., & Jiang, L. (2008). Trust and electronic government success: An empirical study. Journal of Management Information Systems, 25(3), 99-132.
- Turner, M., Kim, J., & Kwon, S. H. (2022). The political economy of e-government innovation and success in Korea. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(3), 145.
- Wang, C., & Teo, T. S. (2020). Online service quality and perceived value in mobile government success: An empirical study of mobile police in China. International Journal of Information Management, 52, 102076.
- Wu, S. R., Shirkey, G., Celik, I., Shao, C., & Chen, J. (2022). A review on the adoption of AI, BC, and IoT in sustainability research. Sustainability, 14(13), 7851.
- Xanthopoulou, P., & Plimakis, I. (2021). From new public management to public sector management reforms during the pandemic. The effects of Covid-19 on public management reforms and effectiveness. Technium Social Sciences Journal, 26, 576-596.
- Xanthopoulou, P., Sahinidis, A., & Bakaki, Z. (2022). The impact of strong cultures on organisational performance in public organisations: The case of the Greek public administration. Social Sciences, 11(10), 486.