Managing e-Government: Stakeholder View from the Administration Service Developers

  • Tommi InkinenEmail author
  • Maria Merisalo
Part of the Public Administration and Information Technology book series (PAIT, volume 5)


Collaborative models for arranging electronic online services have become an important supplement to the traditional in-house provision within government. This chapter analyzes stakeholder view on e-government from the public sector management. The chapter applies target group interviews from 15 representatives working on the “electronic services and democracy” (SADe) program. Three main discourses are interpreted. They are efficiency and e-government, e-government as a tool for improving democracy and participation, and potentials for cross-sectional transforming government. There are a number of problems to be solved before the easily accessible single-platform service interfaces are realized. The main questions concern the role of private sector involvement, privacy and data security, and legislation. Additionally, the transformations in the working cultures of governmental organizations provide challenges for automation and management.


Public Sector Service Provision Intellectual Property Right Citizen Participation Administrative Process 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This research is part of the Academy of Finland project 127213. We also thank two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments for improving the chapter and all interviewed persons for their participation.


  1. Andersen K, Henriksen H (2006) E-government maturity models: Extension of the Layne & Lee model. Govern Inform Q 23(2):263–248Google Scholar
  2. Axelsson K, Melin U, Lindgren I (2010) Exploring the importance of citizen participation and involvement in e-government projects. Practice, incentives, and organization. Transf Gov: People Process Policy 4(4):299–321Google Scholar
  3. Axelsson K, Melin U, Lindgren I (2013) Public e-services for agency efficiency and citizen benefit—findings from a stakeholder centered analysis. Govern Inform Q 30(1):10–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boardman AE, Greenberg DH, Vining AR, Weimer DL (2006) Cost-benefit analysis, 3rd edn, Concepts and practice. Prentice Hall, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Carter L, Bélanger F (2005) The utilization of e-government services: citizen trust, innovation and acceptance factors. Inform Syst J 15(1):5–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Charmaz KC (2006) Constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Christensen T, Lægreid P (2007) The whole-of-government approach to public sector reform. Public Adm Rev 67(6):1059–1066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Coursey D, Norris DF (2008) Models of e-government: are they correct? An empirical assessment. Public Adm Rev 68(3):523–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. De Bruijn H (2007) Managing performance in the public sector, 2nd edn. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Evans-Cowley J, Conroy MM (2006) The growth of e-government in municipal planning. J Urban Technol 13(1):81–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fountain JE (2009) Bureaucratic reform and e-government in the United States: an institutional perspective. In: Chadwick A, Howard PN (eds) Routledge handbook on internet politics. Routledge, New York, pp 99–113Google Scholar
  12. Ghose R (2005) The complexities of citizen participation through collaborative governance. Space Polity 9(1):61–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Glaser B (2001) Grounded theory perspective: conceptualization contrasted with description. Sociology Press, Mill ValleyGoogle Scholar
  14. Gowan M, Seymour J, Ibarreche S, Lackey C (2001) Service quality in a public agency: same expectations but different perceptions by employees, managers, and customers. J Qual Manage 6(2):275–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gupta MP, Jana D (2003) E-government evaluation: a framework and case study. Govern Inform Q 20(4):365–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heeks R (2005) E-government as a carrier of context. J Public Policy 25(1):51–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Heeks R, Bailur S (2006) Analyzing e-government research: perspectives, philosophies, theories, methods, and practice. Govern Inform Q 24(2):243–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Irani Z, Love PED, Jones S (2008) Learning lessons from evaluating e-government: Reflective case experiences that support transformational government. J Strategic Inform Syst 17(2):155–164Google Scholar
  19. Jaeger PT, Bertot JC (2010) Transparency and technological change: ensuring equal and sustained public access to government information. Govern Inform Q 27(4):371–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kamal M, Weerakkody V, Jones S (2009) The case of EAI in facilitating e-government services in a Welsh authority. Int J Inf Manage 29(2):161–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Linders D (2012) From e-government to we-government: defining a typology for citizen coproduction in the age of social media. Govern Inform Q 29(4):446–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Margolis M, Resnick D (2000) Politics as usual: the “cyberspace revolution”. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  23. Ministry of Finance (2009) Final project report for SADe. Development plans and action plan for eServices and eAdministration between 2009–2012 [in Finnish]. Available 19 March 2013 at
  24. Reddick CG (ed) (2010) Comparative e-government. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Rethemeyer RK (2007) The empires strike back: is the Internet corporatizing rather than democratizing policy processes? Public Adm Rev 67(2):199–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rodríguez Bolívar MP, Alcaide Muñoz L, López Hernández AM (2012) Profiling e-participation research in Europe and North America: a bibliometric analysis about articles published. In: Weerakkody V, Reddick CG (eds) Public sector transformation through e-government. Experiences from Europe and North-America. Routledge, New York, pp 120–139Google Scholar
  27. Rogers E (2003) Diffusion of innovations, 5th edn. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Roy J (2006) E-service delivery and new governance capacities: ‘Service Canada’ as a case study. Int J Serv Technol Manage 7(3):253–271Google Scholar
  29. Sager T (2011) Neo-liberal urban planning policies: a literature survey 1990–2010. Progr Plann 76(4):147–199Google Scholar
  30. Schellong ARM (2010) Benchmarking EU e-government at the crossroads. A framework for e-government benchmark design and improvement. Transf Gov: People Process Policy 4(4):365–385Google Scholar
  31. Silverman D (2006) Interpreting qualitative data, 3rd edn. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. Snellen I (2002) Electronic governance: implications for citizens, politicians and public servants. Int Rev Admin Sci 68(2):183–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Warner ME, Hefetz A (2008) Managing markets for public service: the role of mixed public–private delivery of city services. Public Adm Rev 68(1):155–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Weerakkody V, Reddick CG (eds) (2012) Public sector transformation through e-government. Experiences from Europe and North-America. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. West D (2004) E-government and the transformation of service delivery and citizen attitudes. Public Adm Rev 64(1):15–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. West D (2005) Digital government: technology and public sector performance. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations