Conceptual Model

  • Mohamed Mahmood
Part of the Springer Theses book series (Springer Theses)


Over the years, citizens’ trust and confidence in their governments has continued to decline and digital government is expected to reverse this trend. An enormous amount of money has been spent worldwide, on electronic government initiatives that are focused on improving performance, reducing costs and enhancing citizens' trust and confidence in their governments. Yet, of the many initiatives that have been implemented, very few have achieved real transformation of government (i.e. fundamental changes to the way core functions of government are performed to achieve noticeable gains in performance and efficiency). As such, there is a need to understand how transformation of government as a construct affects citizens’ trust and confidence in government in the presence of factors such as, government performance and citizen satisfaction. This research empirically investigates the influence of digital transformation of government on citizens’ trust and confidence in the context of the Kingdom of Bahrain. Bahrain is a top ranking country in terms of use of ICT in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) region. A conceptual model was developed and validated using an online survey targeting randomly citizens of the Kingdom of Bahrain. Based on 313 responses, the findings of this research suggest that citizens' trust and confidence in their government is positively influenced by transformation of government, mediated by government performance and citizens’ satisfaction. The study found that e-government and technology are not enough for achieving a real transformation of government, and therefore, in tackling the decline in citizens’ trust and confidence in government. Other factors were found to be important in this equation, including transparency and accountability of government functions and activities in meeting citizens' expectations. The research offer multiple policy implications and theoretical contributions, in addition to helping understand how digital transformation of government can enhance citizens' trust and confidence in government, improve government-to-citizen relationship, and increase the adoption of digital services offered by governments. From a policy perspective, this research offers a validated conceptual model that can be used as a frame of reference when planning ICT-enabled transformation projects in government. From a theoretical context, this study is the first to investigate the relationship between transformation of government and citizens' trust and confidence in government.


  1. Abramson Paul (1983) Political attitudes in America. Freeman, San Francisco, CAGoogle Scholar
  2. Al-Khouri AM (2012) eGovernment strategies the case of the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Eur J ePractice 17:126–150Google Scholar
  3. Al-Shafi S, Weerakkody V (2010) Factors affecting e-government adoption in the state of Qatar. In: Proceedings of the European and mediterranean conference on information systems, Abu Dhabi, UAE, 12–13 April 2010Google Scholar
  4. Amaliah Said I, Iaafar NH, Atan R (2015) Assessing accountability in government linked companies: an empirical evidence. Int Bus Manage 9(4):460–469Google Scholar
  5. Andersen KV, Henriksen HZ (2006) E-government maturity models: extension of the Layne and Lee model. Gov Inf Q 23(2):236–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bannister F, Connolly R (2011) Trust and transformational government: a proposed framework for research. Gov Inf Q 28(2):137–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baum C, Di Maio A (2000) Gartner’s four phases of e-government. Gartner Group, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Bekkers V, Meijer A (2012) A meta-theory of e-government. In: 34th EGPA conference proceedingsGoogle Scholar
  9. Bellamy C, Taylor J (1998) Governing in the information age. Open University Press, Buckingham, UK; Bristol, PAGoogle Scholar
  10. Bingham LB (2010) Online deliberation and the United States open government initiative. Online Deliberation, 53Google Scholar
  11. Bonham G, Seifert J, Thorson S (2001) The transformational potential of e-government: the role of political leadership. In: 4th Pan European international relations conference, 8–11 September, 2001. University of Kent, UKGoogle Scholar
  12. Bouckaert G, Van de Walle S, Kampen JK (2005) Potential for comparative public opinion research in public administration. Int Rev Admin Sci 71(2):229–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brown D (1999) Information systems for improved performance management: development approaches in US public agency. In: Heeks R (ed) Reinventing government in the information age. Routledge, New York, pp 321–330Google Scholar
  14. Chan CML, Shan-Ling P, Tan C-W (2003) Managing stakeholder relationships in an e-government project. In: Ninth Americas conference on information systems, FloridaGoogle Scholar
  15. Chatfield AT (2009) Public service reform through e-government: a case study of ‘e-Tax’ in Japan. Electron J E-Gov 7(2):135–146Google Scholar
  16. Chen KC, Wei KC, Chen Z (2003) Disclosure, corporate governance, and the cost of equity capital: evidence from Asia’s emerging markets. Corporate governance, and the cost of equity capital: evidence from Asia’s emerging markets. Retrieved from
  17. Coursey D, Norris DF (2008) Models of e-government: are they correct? An empirical assessment. Public Adm Rev 68(3):523–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dalton RJ (2005) The social transformation of trust in government. Int Rev Sociol 15(1):133–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Demchak CC, Friis C, La Porte TM (2000) Webbing governance: national differences in constructing the public face. In: Garson GD (ed) Handbook of public information systems. Marcel Dekker, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Fang Z (2002) E-government in digital era: concept, practice, and development. Int J Comput Internet and Manag 10(2):1–22Google Scholar
  21. Florini A (2000) Does the invisible hand need a transparent glove? The politics of transparency. World Bank Annual Conf Dev Econ 163–184Google Scholar
  22. Fornell C, Johnson MD, Anderson EW, Cha J, Bryant BE (1996) The American customer satisfaction index: nature, purpose and findings. J Mark 60(4):7–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fountain J (2001) Building the virtual state: information technology and institutional change. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC7Google Scholar
  24. Gilbert D, Balestrini P (2004) Barriers and benefits in the adoption of e-government. Int J Public Sect Manage 17(4):286–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Graham M, Avery EJ (2013) Government public relations and social media: an analysis of the perceptions and trends of social media use at the local government level. Public Relat J 7(4):1–21Google Scholar
  26. Heintzman R, Marson B (2005) People, service and trust: is there a public sector service value chain? Int Rev Admin Sci 71(4):549–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hiller JS, Belanger F (2001) Privacy strategies for electronic government. E-government series. The PricewaterhouseCoopers Endowment for the Business of Government. Available at
  28. Hirschman AO (1970) Exit, voice, and loyalty: responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states, vol 25. Harvard university pressGoogle Scholar
  29. Hudson J (2006) Institutional trust and subjective well-being across the EU. Kyklos 59(1):43–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Janssen M, Shu W (2008) Transformational government: basics and key issues: a workshop. In: Proceedings of ICEGOV 2008, December 1–4, Cairo, Egypt, pp 117–122Google Scholar
  31. Kampen JK, Maddens B, Vermunt JK, Salminen A (2003) Trust and satisfaction: a case study of the micro-performance. In: Salminen A (ed) Governing networks: networks: EGPA Yearbook. IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp 319–326Google Scholar
  32. Kampen JK, De Walle SV, Bouckaert G (2006) Assessing the relation between satisfaction with public service delivery and trust in government. the impact of the predisposition of citizens toward government on evaluations of its performance. Public Perform Manage Rev 29(4):387–404Google Scholar
  33. Kauvar G (1998) Electronic government: concepts, visions, and strategies. In: The KAPAs international symposium on electronic government: visions and strategies, Seoul, KoreaGoogle Scholar
  34. Kim S, Kim HJ, Lee H (2009) An institutional analysis of an e-government system for anti-corruption: the case of OPEN. Gov Inf Q 26(1):42–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Layne K, Lee J (2001) Developing fully functional e-government. Gov Inf Q 18(2):122–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Maddox William, Lilie Stuart (1984) Beyond liberal and conservative. Cato Institute, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  37. Mahmood, Weerakkody (2014) Digital government diffusion in Bahrain – the role of trust and its influence on adoption. In: Proceedings of the European, mediterranean & middle eastern conference on information systems, 2014Google Scholar
  38. Meijer AJ, Koops BJ, Pieterson W, Overman S, Tije S (2012) Government 2.0: key challenges to its realization. Electron J E-Gov 10(1):59–69Google Scholar
  39. Morgeson FV, Petrescu C (2011) Do they all perform alike? An examination of perceived performance, citizen satisfaction and trust with US federal agencies. Int Rev Admin Sci 77(3):451–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Morgeson FV, VanAmburg D, Mithas S (2011) Misplaced trust? Exploring the structure of the e-government-citizen trust relationship. J Public Adm Res Theor 21(2):257–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Nam T (2012) Citizens’ attitudes toward open government and government 2.0. Int Rev Admin Sci 78(2):346–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Norquist G (2007) Transparency: the new democracy. Financial Times. Retrieved from
  43. Northrup TA, Thorson SJ (2003) The web of governance and democratic accountability. In: Proceedings of the 36th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciencesGoogle Scholar
  44. Nye Joseph, Zelikow Philip, King David (1997) Why people don’t trust government. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  45. O’Neill R (2009) The transformative impact of e-government on public governance in New Zealand. Public Manag Rev 11(6):751–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Orlikowski WJ (1992) The duality of technology: rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organ Sci 3(3):398–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Orlikowski WJ (2000) Using technology and constituting structures: a practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organ Sci 11(4):404–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Orlikowski WJ, Yates J, Okamura K, Fujimoto M (1995) Shaping electronic communication: the metastructuring of technology in the context of use. Organ Sci 6(4):423–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Osman IH, Anouze A, Irani Z, Lee H, Balcı A, Medeni T, Weerakkody V (2011) A new cobras framework to evaluate e-government services: a citizen centric perspective. In Tgovernment workshopGoogle Scholar
  50. Parasuraman A, Zeithaml Valerie A, Berry Leonard L (1988) SERVQUAL: a multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. J Retail 64(1):12–40Google Scholar
  51. Pardo TA, Scholl HJ (2002) Walking atop the cliffs: avoiding failure and avoiding risk in large scale e-government projects. In: Hawai’i international conference on system sciencesGoogle Scholar
  52. Pina V, Torres L, Royo S (2009) E-government evolution in EU local governments: a comparative perspective. Online Inf Rev 33(6):1137–1168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Scholl HJ (2001) Applying stakeholder theory to e-government. In: Schmidt B, Stanoevska-Slabeva K, Tschammer V (eds) Towards the e-society: e-commerce, e-business and e-government. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MAGoogle Scholar
  54. Seifert JW, Petersen RE (2002) The promise of all things E? Expectations and challenges of emergent electronic government. Perspect Glob Dev Technol 1(2):193–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Song C, Lee J (2013) Can social media restore citizen trust in government? Public management research conference. Madison, WI, pp 20–22Google Scholar
  56. Tennert JR, Schroeder AD (1999) Stakeholder analysis. In: Paper presented at the 60th annual meeting of the American Society for Public Administration, Orlando, FloridaGoogle Scholar
  57. Teo TS, Srivastava SC, Jiang L (2008) Trust and electronic government success: an empirical study. J Manage Inf Syst 25(3):99–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Tolbert CJ, Mossberger K (2006) The effects of e-government on trust and confidence in government. Public Adm Rev 66(3):354–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Van de Walle S, Bouckaert G (2003) Public service performance and trust in government: the problem of causality. Int J Public Adm 26(8–9):891–913CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Van de Walle S, Van Roosbroek S, Bouckaert G (2008) Trust in the public sector: is there any evidence for a long-term decline? Int Rev Admin Sci 74(1):47–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Waller P, Weerakkody V (2016) Digital government: overcoming the systemic failure of transformation. Working Paper 2. Brunel University, LondonGoogle Scholar
  62. Weerakkody V, Janssen M, Dwivedi Y (eds) (2009) Handbook of research on ICT enabled transformational government: a global perspective. Inf Sci Ref, Hershey, PAGoogle Scholar
  63. Weerakkody V, Omar A, El-Haddadeh R (2016) Digitally-enabled service transformation in the public sector: the lure of institutional pressure and strategic response towards change. Gov Inf Q 33(4):658–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Welch EW, Hinnant CC, Moon MJ (2005) Linking citizen satisfaction with e-government and trust in government. J Public Adm Res Theor 15(3):371–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. West DM (2004) E-government and the transformation of service delivery and citizen attitudes. Public Adm Rev 64(1):15–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Zouridis S, Thaens M (2003) E-government: towards a public administration approach. Asian J Public Adm 25(2):159–183Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Brunel Business SchoolBrunel University LondonUxbridge, LondonUK

Personalised recommendations