Dimensions for Scoping e-Government Enterprise Architecture Development Efforts

  • Agnes NakakawaEmail author
  • Flavia Namagembe
  • Erik H. A. Proper
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11229)


Inspired by developed economies, many developing economies are adopting an enterprise architecture approach to e-government implementation in order to overcome challenges of e-government interoperability. However, when developing an enterprise architecture for a complex enterprise such as the e-government enterprise, there is need to rationally specify scope dimensions. Addressing this requires guidance from e-government maturity models that provide insights into phasing e-government implementations; and enterprise architecture approaches that provide general insight into key dimensions for scoping enterprise architecture efforts. Although such insights exist, there is hardly detailed guidance on scoping initiatives associated with developing an e-government enterprise architecture. Yet the success of such business-IT alignment initiatives is often affected by scope issues. Thus, this paper presents an intertwined procedure that draws insights from e-government maturity models and enterprise architecture frameworks to specify critical aspects in scoping e-government enterprise architecture development efforts. The procedure was validated using a field demo conducted in a Uganda public entity.


e-Government maturity e-Government enterprise architectures 



Authors appreciate the Systems manager at KCCA for participating in the field demo and anonymous reviewers of this paper.


  1. 1.
    Bwalya, K.J., Mutula, S.: A conceptual framework for e-government development in resource-constrained countries. Inf. Dev. J. 32(4), 1183–1198 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alshehri, M., Drew, S.: Challenges of e-government services adoption in Saudi Arabia from an e-ready citizen perspective. World Acad. Sci. Eng. Technol. 66, 1053–1059 (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Her Majesty’s UK Government.: UK government reference architecture Government ICT Strategy, version 1.0 (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ask, A.: The Role of Enterprise Architecture in Local e-Government Adoption. (Ph.D. thesis), Örebro University, Sweden. (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Janssen, M., Kuk, G.: A complex adaptive system perspective of enterprise architecture in electronic government. In: 39th HICSS, 4–7 January, Kauai, Hawaii (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lankhorst, M., et al.: Enterprise Architecture at Work: Modelling, Communication, and Analysis. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lauvrak, S., Michaelsen, V.M. Olsen, D.H.: Benefits and challenges with enterprise architecture: a case study of the Norwegian labour and welfare administration. In: NOKOBIT, vol. 25, no. 1 (2017). Bibsys Open Journal SystemsGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Banaeianjahromi, N., Smolander, K.: Understanding obstacles in enterprise architecture development. In: ECIS 2016 Proceedings at Association of Information Systems Electronic Library (AISeL). Research Papers 7 (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Buckl, S., Schweda, C.M.: On the State-of-the-Art in Enterprise Architecture Management Literature. Technical report. Technische Unversität München (2011).
  10. 10.
    Lucke, C., Krell, S., Lechner, U.: Critical issues in enterprise architecting – a literature review. In: 16th AMCIS, Lima, Peru, 12–15 August (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    The Open Group Architecture Forum.: The Open Group Architecture Framework Version 9. Van Haren Publishing, Zaltbommel (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Van’t Wout, J., Waage, M., Hartman, H., Stahlecker, M., Hofman, A.: The Integrated Architecture Framework Explained: Why, What, How. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). ISBN 978-3-642-11517-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zachman, J.A.: Excerpted from the zachman framework: a primer for enterprise engineering and manufacturing (2003).
  14. 14.
    United Nations Division for Public Economics and Public Administration, American Society for Public Administration.: Benchmarking e-Government: A Global Perspective – Assessing the Progress of the UN Member States (2002). Accessed 15 Jan 2018
  15. 15.
    Moon, M.: The evolution of e-government among municipalities: rhetoric or reality. Public Adm. Rev. 62, 424–433 (2002). Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hiller, J.S., Belanger, F.: Privacy Strategies for Electronic Government. PricewaterhouseCoopers, Arlington (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Layne, K., Lee, J.: Developing fully functional e-government: a four stage model. Gov. Inf. Q. 18, 122–136 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Deloitte & Touche: The citizen as customer, CMA Management, Electronic Government: Third International Conference, vol. 74, no. 10, pp. 58 (2001)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Baum, C., Maio, D.: Gartner’s Four phases of e-Government model, Gartner’s group (2000).
  20. 20.
    Coursey, D., Norris, F.D.: Models of e-Government: are they correct? An empirical assessment. Public Adm. Rev. 68(3), 523–536 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Siau, K., Long, Y.: Synthesizing e-government stage models – a meta-synthesis based on meta-ethnography approach. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 105(4), 443–458 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hevner, A.R.: A three cycle view of design science research. Scand. J. Inf. Syst. 19(2), 87–92 (2007)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Op’t Land, M., Proper, E., Waage, M., Cloo, J., Steghuis, C.: Enterprise Architecture: Creating Value by informed Governance. Springer, Berlin (2008). Scholar
  24. 24.
    OECD: Challenges for E-Government Development, 5th Global Forum on Reinventing Government, Mexico City (2003).
  25. 25.
    Saha, P.: Advances in Government Enterprise Architecture. IGI Global Information Science Reference, Hershey (2008)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wieringa, R.: Design Science Research Methodology: Principles and Practice. Tutorial/Masterclass on Design Science methodology. SIKS, Netherlands (2010)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Government of Uganda: Uganda Ministries (2016). Accessed 24 Feb 2018
  28. 28.
    Kampala City Council Authority. Accessed 25 Feb 2018
  29. 29.
    Nakakawa, A., Namagembe, F.: Requirements for developing interoperable e-government systems in developing countries – a case of Uganda. Electron. Gov. Int. J. (2018, in press)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Heeks, R.B.: Success and failure in egovernment projects page, egovernment for development project. University of Manchester, UK (2008). Accessed 20 June 2018
  31. 31.
    Heeks, R.B.: Understanding and measuring e-government: international benchmarking studies. In: UNDESA Workshop on Understanding the Present and Creating the Future for E-Participation and E-Government, Budapest, Hungary (2006)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Heeks, R.B.: E-Government in Africa: Promise and Practice, I-Government Working Paper Series Paper No. 13, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. (2002)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design science in information systems research. MIS Q. 28(1), 75–105 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Agnes Nakakawa
    • 1
    Email author
  • Flavia Namagembe
    • 1
  • Erik H. A. Proper
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Makerere UniversityKampalaUganda
  2. 2.Public Research Centre Henri TudorLuxembourg-KirchbergLuxembourg
  3. 3.Radboud University NijmegenNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations