The Challenges of e-government Evaluation

  • M. Sorrentino


This paper perceives e-government evaluation as a field of social research where interdisciplinary inputs can enlighten not only the results, but also the process of implementing the e-services. Drawing on contributions from organization theory, we propose an interpretive key that assigns a dual role to e-government evaluation: valuable cognitive resource and tool of accountability for the policymakers. The preliminary reflections offered here, based on an exploratory case study, aim to provide further insights for the academic e-government community as a whole and help better inform public management praxis.


Town Center Automate Teller Machine Cognitive Position Exploratory Case Study Electronic Payment System 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Chan, C.M.L., Y. Lau, and L. Pan (2008) E-government implementation: A macro analysis of Singapore’s e-government initiatives, Government Information Quarterly, 25: 239–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Heeks, R. and S. Bailur (2007) Analysing e-government research: Perspectives, philosophies, theories, methods and practice, Government Information Quarterly, 24: 243–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pressman, J. and A. Wildavsky (1973) Implementation, University of California Press, Berkeley (3rd edn.).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lippi, A. (2007) La valutazione delle politiche pubbliche, Bologna: il Mulino.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Weiss, C.H. (1998). Evaluation: methods for studying programs and policies, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rebora, G. (1999) La valutazione dei risultati nelle amministrazioni pubbliche, Guerini e Associati, Milano (in Italian).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yin, R.K. (2003) Case study research. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lindblom, C. (1964) The intelligence of democracy: decision making through mutual adjustment. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Regonini, G. (2001). Capire le politiche pubbliche, il Mulino, Bologna (in Italian).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Thompson, J.D. (1967) Organizations in action, McGraw Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Maggi, B. (1990) Razionalità e benessere. Studio interdisciplinare dell’organizzazione, Etaslibri, Milano, 3rd edn. (in Italian).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Maggi, B. (2003) De l’agir organisationnel. Un point de vue sur le travail, le bien-être, l’apprentissage, Octarès, Toulouse (in French).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Alter, S. (1996) Information Systems. A management perspective, Menlo Park: The Benjamin/Cummings.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Veryard, R. (1991) The Economics of Information Systems and Software, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sorrentino, M., and E. Ferro (2008) Does the Answer to eGovernment Lie in Intermunicipal Collaboration? An Exploratory Italian Case Study. In M. Wimmer J.H. Scholl, and E. Ferro (eds.) Electronic Government, Communication Proceedings of the Fifth International EGOV 2008 Conference, Turin (Italy), Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag: 1–12.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Physica-Verlag Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Università degli studi di MilanoMilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations