Shawren Singh
The lack of citizen‐orientation and internal inefficiencies are conveyed in these statements: � " E‐gov( e‐Government) applications being built to suit the needs of govt( government) rather than citizens( i. e. not citizen‐centric)"
� " Laziness " It appears that senior managers need to evaluate how the development process of e‐Government applications can be improved to deliver required measurable benefits.
Figure 5: Factors Affecting e‐Government Applications
9. Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to identify some challenges that are faced by e‐Government applications. This Delphi study has produced satisfactory results both in terms of the high scores obtained by the statements, indicating that they were important to the respondents, and the overall lowering of the standard deviations which showed a level of consensus of views.
When e‐Government systems appear to fail, it results in the loss of large amounts of money and considerable organisational trauma. The organisational trauma caused by the malfunctioning e‐Government systems can result in frustrated citizens, high turnover in staff and sometimes even disruptions to the country ' s economy.
Why such failures occur in the 21st century with more than 50 years’ experience behind the information systems community is difficult to understand. Research has not adequately delivered with regards to being able to identify e‐Government applications which have high risks of failure, nor has research provided insights as to how to manage such applications when they start to go wrong. This study has several implications for the field of e‐Government application development. Firstly, the findings can benefit the e‐Government research fraternity by providing some insight into the factors that affect the success of e‐Government applications. Secondly, the findings offer researchers a guide to structure future research projects around identified factors that affect e‐Government applications. Thirdly, the list of statements identified from the literature review and brainstorming session can be used by e‐Government project stakeholders to develop checklists for their e‐ Government project. Finally the comments from the open‐ended‐question provide some insight into the mindset of the domain experts. The author is in the process of further investigating the identified factors that affect e‐Government applications.
References
Abrahams, L.( 2009). E‐Governance Policy 1999‐2009: Paths And Limitations To Progress. Journal of Public Administration,
44( 41), 1011‐1026 Agarwal, A.( 2007). e‐Governance: Case Study. Hyderabad: Universities Press. Al‐Ahmad, W., Al‐Fagih, K., Khanfar, K., Alsamara, K., Abuleil, S., & Abu‐Salem, H.( 2009). A TAxonomy of an IT Project
Failure: Root Causes. International Management Review, 5( 1), 93‐104
Annttiroiko, A. ‐V.( 2008). A Brief Introduction to the Field of E‐Government. In M. Khosrow‐Pour( Ed.), Electronic Government: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications( Vol. 1, pp. xii‐lxxv). Hershey: InformatIon Science Reference.
Australian Public Service.( 2004). Connecting Government: Whole of Government Reponese to Australia ' s Priority Challenges( No. 0 97510151X). Canberra: Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts.
Avery, A. J., Savelyich, B. S. P., Sheikh, A., Cantrill, J., Morris, C. J., Fernando, B., et al.( 2005). Identifying and establishing consensus on the most important safety features of GP computer systems: e‐Delphi study. Informatics in Primary Care, 13, 3‐11
470