An Empirical Study on Business-to- Government Data Exchange Strategies to Reduce the Administrative Costs for Businesses

  • Rex Arendsen
  • Tom. M. van Engers
  • Robbin te Velde
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 226)

Abstract

In recently developed policies the electronic exchange of data with governmental organisations is seen as a means to help reduce the administrative burden for businesses. Even laws have become active to enforce electronic data filing. However, we do not know whether these eGovemment applications do help reduce the administrative burden, so we do not know whether this new legislation is effective either, Although many business-to-government systems are currently being implemented, the adoption of these data interchange systems in a governmental context has not yet been studied extensively. In the study reported in this paper we investigate data exchange related adoption strategies in order to be able to address (in)effective strategies for the reduction of the administrative burden. We present an analysis of adoption factors that influence adoption decisions of SME companies in this context. Based on a representative survey we found some factors that seem to be relevant for the (non)adoption of business-to-government data exchange systems. We found that especially small companies tend to outsource eGovernment related data exchange processes. Therefore we conclude that it is very unlikely that the governments’ aims to reduce administrative burden are met using current implementation strategies. We suggest an adapted strategy.

Keywords

Small Business Organizational Size Administrative Cost Adoption Decision Administrative Burden 
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.
Download to read the full conference paper text

References

  1. 1.
    Allers, Administrative and Compliance Costs of Taxation and Public Transfers in the Netherlands, dissertation, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, June (1994).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Angeles, Revisiting the role of Internet-EDI in the current electronic commerce scene, Logistics Information Management, Volume 13(1), 2000, pp. 45–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. Arendsen, T.M. Engers, van, Reduction of the Administrative Burden; an e-government perspective, Third International Conference EGOV 2004, Springer, 2004.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    F.R. Bongers, R.A. Te Velde, C. Holland, Entrepreneurs on public electronic services, (Dialogic, Utrecht, February 2005).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    E. Brynjolfsson, L.M. Hitt, Beyond Computation, in: Inventing the Organisations of the 21 st Century, ed: Malone, T.W., (The MIT Press, Cambridge. Massachusetts, 2004).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P. Chwelos, I. Benbasat, A.S. Dexter, Research Report, Empirical Test of an EDI Adoption Model, (Information Systems Research, September 2001).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    EIPA, eEurope Awards for eGovernment 2005, (Winners, www.eipa.nl, 2005).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    W. Elgarah, J. Falaleeva, C.S. Saunders, Data Exchange in Inter organizational Relationships, (The Database for Advances in Information Systems, Vol.36, Winter 2005).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    R.T. Frambaeh, H. Schillewaert, Organizational innovation adoption: a multilevel framework of determinants, (Journal of Business Research, 55(2), 2002).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hart, P., Saunders, C., Power and Trust: Critical Factors in the Adoption and Use of Electronic Data Interchange, Organization Science, 8(1), 1997, 23–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    H.Z. Henriksen, Performance, Pressure and Politics, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Informatics, (Copenhagen Business School, March 2002).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    C.L. Iacovou, I. Benbasat, A.S. Dexter, Electronic Data Interchange and Small Organizations: Adoption and Impact of Technology, in (MIS Quarterly, December 1995).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    T.W. Malone, J. Yates, R.I. Benjamin, Electronic Markets and Electronic Hierarchies, (Communications of the ACM, Vol.30, Number 6, June 1987).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nijssen, Dansen met de octopus, English Summary,(Eburon, Delft, 2003).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    E.M. Rogers, (Diffusion of Innovations, Fifth edition, (Free Press, New York, 2003).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    L.G. Tornatzky, M. Fleicher, The Process of Technological Innovation, Lexington Young Books, 1990).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    K Zhu, K.L. Kraemer, S, Xu, A Crosss-Country Study of Electronic Business Adoption, (Twenty-Third International Conference on Information Systems, 2002).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Federation for Information Processing 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rex Arendsen
    • 1
  • Tom. M. van Engers
    • 1
  • Robbin te Velde
    • 2
  1. 1.Leibniz Center for Law, Faculty for LawUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamthe Netherlands
  2. 2.Dialogic Innovation & Interactionthe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations