Advertisement

Capability Maturity Framework for eGovernment: A Multi-dimensional Model and Assessing Tool

  • Marcelo Iribarren
  • Gastón Concha
  • Gonzalo Valdes
  • Mauricio Solar
  • María T. Villarroel
  • Patricio Gutiérrez
  • Álvaro Vásquez
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5184)

Abstract

This article describes an IT-based, eGov-centered and capability-driven model for assessing e-government capabilities and maturity of public agencies. It is the result of an initiative of the Chilean government to reinforce its e-government strategy. The proposed model, called eGov-MM (e-Government Maturity Model), has three dimensions (a cube) supporting business processes: information criteria, IT resources, and leverage domains. Changing the traditional and exclusive focus on IT, four Leverage Domains are defined: e-Strategy, IT Governance, Process Management, and People and Organization Capabilities. The Leverage Domains generate a hierarchical structure with a second level named Key Domain Areas. These areas should be measurable and controllable, so they are related to a third hierarchical level, called Critical Variables, allowing the model’s elements to be assessed qualitatively and quantitatively. The capability and maturity of these variables associated with the intersection with the other two axes of the cube establish five levels of capability. The proposed model is strongly supported by the international experience and best practices for IT management and has already been field tested.

Keywords

e-government capability maturity model 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Layne, K., Lee, J.: Developing Fully Functional e-Government: A Four Stage Model. Government Information Quarterly 18, 122–136 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Esteves, J., Joseph, R.: A Comprehensive Framework for the Assessment of e-Government Projects. Government Information Quarterly 25, 118–132 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cresswell, A., Pardo, T., Canestraro, D.: Digital Capability Assessment for e-Government: A Multidimensional Approach. In: Wimmer, M.A., Scholl, H.J., Grönlund, Å., Andersen, K.V. (eds.) EGOV 2006. LNCS, vol. 4084, pp. 293–304. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Andersen, K.V., Henriksen, Z.H.: E-government Maturity Models: Extension of the Layne and Lee Model. Government Information Quarterly 23, 236–248 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wimmer, M.A., Tambouris, E.: Online One-Stop Government: A Working Framework and Requirements. In: Proceedings of the 17th IFIP World Computer Congress, pp. 117–130. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Valdes, G., et al.: Identifying Relevant National e-Government Implementations for an Emergent Country: A Selective Survey. In: Proceedings of the 7th Int. Conf. on Electronic Government, EGOV 2008, Torino, Italy, Trauner Druck (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    e-Government Unit: e-Government Interoperability Framework v6.1. Cabinet Office, United Kingdom (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    e-Government Unit: Technical Standards Catalogue v6.2, e-Government Unit. Cabinet Office, United Kingdom (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    C4ISR Interoperability Working Group: Levels of Information Systems Interoperability (LISI). Department of Defense, USA (1998)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    National Association of State Chief Information Officers: Enterprise Architecture Maturity Model (EAMM) v3.1. USA (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Office of Management and Budget: FEA Consolidated Reference Model v2.2. USA (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Australian Government Information Management Office: Delivering Australian Government Services, Access and Distribution Strategy. Australia (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Australian Government Information Management Office: Australian Government Business Process Interoperability Framework. Australia (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Australian Government Information Management Office: Service Delivery Capability Model. Australia (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Government of Canada (Developed by KPMG): e-Government Capacity Check - Criteria. Canada (2000)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Statskontoret: Framework for Assessing the Performance of e-Government in Sweden. Sweden (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lee, S.: Korea e-Government and Interoperability Efforts. In: Presentation at the OASIS e-Gov TC Meeting 27, July 2004, Washington DC, USA (2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Software Engineering Institute: CMMI for Development v1.2, USA (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    ISO/IEC: ISO/IEC TR 15504: Information Technology - Software Process Assessment (1998)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    IT Governance Institute: COBIT 4.1, Framework, Control Objectives, Management Guidelines, Maturity Models (2007) Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Weill, P., Ross, J.: IT Governance in One Page. CISR Working Paper num. 349 (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marcelo Iribarren
    • 1
  • Gastón Concha
    • 1
  • Gonzalo Valdes
    • 1
  • Mauricio Solar
    • 1
  • María T. Villarroel
    • 2
  • Patricio Gutiérrez
    • 2
  • Álvaro Vásquez
    • 2
  1. 1.Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María (UTFSM)Santiago de Chile
  2. 2.Ministerio de Economía,Secretaría Ejecutiva de Estrategia DigitalGobierno de Chile

Personalised recommendations