Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Measuring e-Government Efficiency from the Perspective of Implementers: The Case of e-Budgeting in Mexico

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Measuring E-government Efficiency

Part of the book series: Public Administration and Information Technology ((PAIT,volume 5))

Abstract

Several studies on e-government have found that from different stakeholders’ standpoints, the nature of efficiency is complex and multidimensional. This study explores the multiple dimensions of e-government efficiency as a goal for e-government adoption, but from the perspective of those inside of government responsible to implement and adopt it. A confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to uncover the multiple dimensions of e-government efficiency from the perspective of implementers inside of government. The data come from a questionnaire applied over government officials who participated in a contemporary case of e-budgeting. The questionnaire includes inquiries about different dimensions of e-government efficiency found in two bodies of literature: information systems and budgeting. The results indicate a more complete structure of e-government efficiency than only the technical and economical aspects of this type of projects. The main motivation of this study is to extend our understanding of multiple dimensions of efficiency in e-government as possible outcomes during e-government adoption from the public administrators’ view. Derived from the analysis, some practical advice is suggested.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Andersen DF, Dawes SS (1991) Government information management. A primer and casebook. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakos JY, Treacy ME (1986) Information technology and corporate strategy. A research perspective. MIS Quarterly 10(2):107–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin RI, Rockart JF, Morton MS, Wyman J (1984) Information technology: a strategic opportunity. Sloan Manage Rev 25(3):3–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryman A (2004) Social research methods. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Cattell RB (1966) The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behav Res 1(2):245–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan CML, Lau YM, Pan SL (2008) E-government implementation: a macro analysis of Singapore’s e-government initiatives. Gov Inf Q 25(2):239–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatterjee D, Ravichandran T (2004) Inter-organizational information systems research: a critical review and an integrative framework. In: Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii international conference on system sciences, IEEE, 5–8 Jan 2004

    Google Scholar 

  • Clemons EK, Reddi SP, Row MC (1993) The impact of information technology on the organization of economic activity: the ‘Move to the Middle’ hypothesis. J Manag Inf Syst 10(2):9–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Congressional Budget Office (CBO) (1993) Using performance measures in the federal budget process. Author, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Danziger JN, Kraemer KL (1985) Computerized data-based systems and productivity among professional workers: the case of detectives. Public Adm Rev 45(1):196–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis S, Elin L, Reeher G (2002) Click on democracy: the internet’s power to change political apathy into civic action. Westview Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawes SS, Pardo TA (2002) Building collaborative digital government systems. Systematic constraints and effective practices. In: McIver WJ, Elmagarmid AK (eds) Advances in digital government. Technology, human factors, and policy. Kluwer, Norwell, MA, pp 259–273

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dawes SS, Pardo T, DiCaterino A (1999) Crossing the threshold: practical foundations for government services on the world wide web. J Am Soc Inf Sci 50(4):346–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elgarah W, Falaleeva N, Saunders CS, Ilie V, Shim JT, Courtney JF (2005) Data exchange in interorganizational relationships: review through multiple conceptual lenses. In: The DATA BASE for advances in information systems—winter, vol 36(1)

    Google Scholar 

  • Gant JP (2004) Digital government and geographic information systems. In: Pavlichev A, Garson GD (eds) Digital government: principles and best practices. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA

    Google Scholar 

  • Gant DB, Gant JP, Johnson CL (2002) State web portals: delivering and financing eservice. The Pricewaterhousecoopers Endowment for the Business of Government, Arlington, VA

    Google Scholar 

  • GAO (1993) Performance budgeting: state experiences and implications for the Federal Government. AFMD-93-41, February 17

    Google Scholar 

  • Garson GD (2004) The promise of digital government. In: Pavlichev A, Garson GD (eds) Digital government: principles and best practices. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA, pp 2–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Gartner (2000) Gartner says U.S. E-government spending to surpass $6.2 billion by 2005. Available from http://www.gartner.com/5_about/press_room/pr20000411c.html. Accessed 6 April 2005

  • Gil-Garcia JR (2005) Enacting state websites: a mixed method study exploring e-government success in multi-organizational settings. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University at Albany, State University of New York, Albany, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Gil-Garcia JR, Pardo TA (2005) E-government success factors: mapping practical tools to theoretical foundations. Gov Inf Q 22(2):187–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grizzle GA, Pettijohn CD (2002) Implementing performance-based program budgeting: a system-dynamics perspective. Public Adm Rev 62(1):51–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gurbaxani V, Whang S (1991) The impact of organizations system on organizations and markets. Commun ACM 34(1):59–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall H, Andrews M (2005) Reforming budget ritual and budget practice: the case of performance management implementation in Virginia. Int J Public Adm 28:255–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heeks R (2006) Implementing and managing e-government. An international text. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Henadon C (1999) Performance budgeting in Florida—half way there. J Public Budgeting Account Financial Manag Winter, 672

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingraham PW (ed) (2007) In pursuit of performance management systems in state and local government. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenster PV (1987) Firm performance and monitoring of critical success factors in different strategic contexts. J Manag Inf Syst 3(3):17–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Joreskog K, Moustaki I (2001) Factor analysis for ordinal variables: a comparison of three approaches. Multivariate Behav Res 36:347–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joyce PG (1993) Using performance measures for federal budgeting: proposals and prospects. Public Budgeting Finance 14(1):3–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joyce PG (2007) Linking performance and budgeting under the separation of powers: the three greatest obstacles instantiated by independent legislatures. In: Robinson M (ed) Performance budgeting: linking results and funding. Palgrave-Macmillan, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyce PG, Lee RD, Johnson RW (2004) Public budgeting systems, 7th edn. Jones and Bartlett, Sudbary

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser HF, Hunka S, Bianchini JC (1971) Relating factors between studies based upon different individuals. Multivariate Behav Res 6(4):409–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kettl DF (1998) The transformation of governance: globalization, devolution, and the role of government. Public Adm Rev 60(6):488–497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuan KKY, Chau PYK (2001) A perception-based model for EDI adoption in small businesses using a technology-organization-environment framework. Inf Manag 38:507–521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liner EB, Hatry HP, Vinson E, Allen R, Dusenbury P, Bryant S, Snell R (2001) Making results-based government work. The Urban Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Luna-Reyes LF, Andersen DF, Richardson GP, Pardo TA, Cresswell AM (2007) Emergence of the governance structure for information integration across governmental agencies: a system dynamics approach. In: Proceedings of the eighth annual international conference on digital government research: bridging disciplines and domains (dg.o 2007), 25 May 2007, pp 47–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Macintosh A, Malina A, Farrell S (2002) Digital democracy through electronic petitioning. In: McIver WJ, Elmagarmid AK (eds) Advances in digital government technology, human factors, and policy. Kluwer, Norwell, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Malone TW, Yates J, Benjamin RI (1987) Electronic markets and electronic hierarchies. Commun ACM 30(6):484–497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melkers JE, Willoughby KG (2001) Budgeters’ views of state performance-budgeting systems: distinctions across branches. Public Adm Rev 61(1):54–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melkers JE, Willoughby KG (2004) Staying the course: the use of performance measurement in state governments. IBM Center for the Business of Government, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Moustaki I, Joreskog K, Mavridis D (2004) Factor models for ordinal variables with covariate effects on the manifest and latent variables: a comparison of LISREL and IRT approaches. Struct Equ Model J 11(4):487–513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2003) The e-government imperative. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2007) Performance budgeting in OECD countries. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France

    Google Scholar 

  • Puron-Cid G (2010) Extending structuration theory: a study of an e-budgeting in Mexico. Ph.D., University at Albany, State University of New York, Albany, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Puron-Cid G (2012) Interdisciplinary application of structuration theory for e-government: a case study of an e-budgeting. Gov Inf Q 30(S1). doi:10.1016/j.giq.2012.07.010

  • Rasmussen N, Eichorn CJ (2000) Budgeting. Technology, trends, software selection, and implementation. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Rocheleau B (2003) Politics, accountability, and governmental information systems. In: Garson GD (ed) Public information technology: policy and management issues. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA

    Google Scholar 

  • Roldan JL, Leal A (2003) A validation test of an adaptation of the DeLone and McLean’s model in the Spanish EIS field. In: Cano JJ (ed) Critical reflections on information systems: a systemic approach. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin IS (1990) Budget theory and budget practice: how good the fit? Public Adm Rev 50:179–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin IS (1994) Early budget reformers: democracy, efficiency, and budget reforms. Am Rev Public Adm 24(3):229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholl HJ (2009) Electronic government: a study domain past its infancy. In: Scholl HJ (ed) Electronic government: information, technology and transformation. M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Soonhee K, Jooho L (2012) E-participation, transparency, and trust in local government. Public Adm Rev 72(6):819–828. doi:10.111/j.1540-6210.2012.02593.x

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Reeth W (2002) The bearable lightness of budgeting. An explorative research on the uneven implementation of performance oriented budget reform. Ph.D. Doctoral degree thesis, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  • VanLandingham G, Wellman M, Andrews M (2005) Useful, but not a panacea: performance-based program budgeting in Florida. Int J Public Adm 28:233–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Bank (2008) Performance-informed budgeting in Latin America experiences and opportunities. World Bank Public Sector and Governance Unit, Latin America and the Caribbean Region, International Conference on Performance Budgeting Mexico City, 9–10 June 2009

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas (CIDE), Circuito Tecnopolo Norte s/n, Col. Hacienda Nueva, Aguascalientes, 20313, Mexico

    Gabriel Purón-Cid

Authors
  1. Gabriel Purón-Cid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gabriel Purón-Cid .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Accounting and Finance, University of Granada, Granada, Granada, Spain

    Manuel Pedro Rodríguez-Bolívar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Purón-Cid, G. (2014). Measuring e-Government Efficiency from the Perspective of Implementers: The Case of e-Budgeting in Mexico. In: Rodríguez-Bolívar, M. (eds) Measuring E-government Efficiency. Public Administration and Information Technology, vol 5. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-9982-4_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation