Ibrahim Alfadli and Malcolm Munro
The results can be presented in term of Parallel Coordinates or Star Plots to allow a more in depth examination of the results.
For the purpose of measurement, a mixture of qualitative and quantitative indicators will be used as well as different well known scales such as Summative, 1‐10 Rating, Reality Gap and Comparative.
Evaluation Stage: This framework will then be evaluated using case study in Saudi Arabia to illustrate the evaluation of specific service or group of services.
5. Conclusions
This research will assess specific service of an e‐Government concerning its citizens. Focusing on assessing and evaluating services is a key factor for an e‐Government to be successful from citizens’ point of views. In this research, the first area taken into consideration is an exhaustive classification of e‐Government G2C( Government to Citizen) to be put forward in order to narrow down the criteria related to citizens. In other words a citizen centered approach. The second area of examination focuses on existing models or framework of e‐Government assessment methods adopted in information technology in different countries from different perspectives. The third area will be examining different assessment frameworks such as international standards as well as pervious studied in the area related to citizen. This will then be built on in order to arrive at a new model( IMGov) for a citizen centered e‐Government service assessment framework that enables the assessment of each e‐Government service and to better understand the need of citizens from a government perspective. It will also inform citizens about a particular service from their own perspectives. The new model is based on four attributes( Input, Processing, Quality Control and Output) each of which will have a number of factors and evaluation questions associated with them. This will result in helping governments to find their strengths, weaknesses and therefore satisfying their citizens.
Acknowledgements
This research is part of PhD research conducted in Durham University, UK and funded by Taibah University, Medina, Saudi Arabia.
References
Alshawi, S. and. Alalwany, H( 2009). E‐government evaluation: Citizen ' s perspective in developing countries, Information Technology for Development, 15( 3), 193 – 208.
Bartels, A.( 2002). E‐Government in 2002: Initiatives for Transforming Public Services Using Internet Technologies, Giga Information Group.
Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T and McClure, C. R.( 2008) Citizen‐centered e‐government services: benefits, costs, and research needs, Proceedings of the 2008 international conference on Digital government research. Montreal, Canada, Digital Government Society of North America, 137‐142.
Cook, M. E.( 2000). What Citizens Want from E‐Government, Retrieved 24 January 2012, from http:// www. ctg. albany. edu / publications / reports / what _ citizens _ want.
DOC. N3( 2007). Good Governance for Development in Arab Countries High Level Seminar on Measuring and Evaluating E‐ government 3 rd, Dubai, Dubai School of Government. egov4dev.( 2008). eGovernment for Development Information Exchange, Retrieved 6 March 2012, from http:// www. egov4dev. org.
Gupta, M. P. and Jana, D( 2003). E‐government evaluation: a framework and case study, Government Information Quarterly, 20( 4), 365‐387.
Gupta, M. P.( 2007). Challenges and Issues in e‐Government Project Assessment, ICEGOV International Conference Series on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance, ACM New York, 259‐262.
Horan, T. A and Abhichandani, T.( 2006). Evaluating user satisfaction in an e‐government initiative: results of structural equation modeling and focus group discussions, Journal of Information Technology Management XVII( 4).
Sakowicz, M.( 2003). How to Evaluate E‐Government? Different Methodologies and Methods, Eleventh NISPAcee Annual Conference, Bucharest, Romania.
WorldBank.( 2011). Definition of E‐Government, Retrieved 14 February 2012, from http:// go. worldbank. org / M1JHE0Z280.
577