AA

Ma

b

a

A

KeIIPSBPU

1

mvl22

f

0d

International Journal of Information Management 28 (2008) 524–535

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Information Management

journa l homepage: www.e lsev ier .com/ locate / i j in fomgt

path analytic model and measurement of the business value of e-government:n international perspective

asood Abdulla Badria,∗, Khaled Alshareb,1

Department of Business Administration, College of Business and Economics, United Arab Emirates University, United Arab EmiratesAccounting and CIS Department, Emporia State University, 1200 Commercial Street, Emporia, KS 66801, USA

r t i c l e i n f o

rticle history:

eywords:-Governmentnformation searchnformation transactionath analysistructural equations modelingusiness valuerofitabilityAE

a b s t r a c t

The paper tests a model of measuring the business value of e-government. It provides results of its appli-cation to business firms operating in Dubai and using its government electronic services (e-government).The dimensions of the e-government business value model include information technology (IT) capability,search and transaction-oriented uses of e-government, intelligence generation, new business develop-ment, time savings, and firm profitability. The dimensions of e-government use and e-government benefitson firms’ profitability are tested. The study uses self-reported data and is based on a sample of 1859 firmsoperating in Dubai. Using LISREL, we employed confirmatory factor analysis to assess the factor structureof each of our latent constructs. Path analysis with composite variables is used to test the hypothesizedrelationships among the constructs. Several rival path models are tested by comparing the goodness-of-fitof each. The results confirm that firm’s IT capabilities are positively and directly associated with the useof e-government services, enhanced firm intelligence generation, and firm profitability. IT capabilities arealso associated indirectly with the firm’s time savings from e-government use. Other results show thatthe use of e-government, search or transaction-oriented, is positively related to enhanced intelligencegeneration, new business development, and time savings. The paper provides empirical evidence aboutthe positive effect of use of e-government services on the performance of firms. Results also supportthe positive effect of new business generated from e-government use and time savings. The relation-ship between use of e-government and profitability is also mediated by other variables. In general, meanscores show that the average level of use of e-government in our sample was still low. The study stronglyimplies that firms in Dubai should use e-government as an information source to enhance their marketintelligence and build revenues. In addition, IT suppliers should emphasize e-government services thatlink firms to customers and collaborators, and facilitate access to key information resources. Governmentagencies should enhance their e-government information services to improve business performance. Thestudy provides some preliminary evidence about the criteria that businesses use to evaluate their adop-

tion of e-government services. This could be valuable for governments in designing and implementingtheir e-government services. The findings might have policy implications for the implementation of Dubai

idn(

e-government services.

. Introduction

The considerable success achieved with information and com-unications technologies within the private sector has influenced

arious stakeholders (including the government) to link up pub-ic sector services with the internet revolution (Barca & Cordella,004; Choudrie, Weerakkody, & Jones, 2005; Heeks, 2004; Kenway,004; Susman, 2001). E-government refers to government’s use of

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +9710.16500.166430434;ax: +9710.1630.167624384.1 Tel.: +10.166200.163410.165649.

eoc2bahvH

268-4012/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.oi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2006.10.004

© 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

nformation technology (IT) applications to enhance the access andelivery of government information and service to citizens, busi-ess partners, employees, other agencies, and government entitiesMcClure, 2000; Symonds, 2000; West, 2004). Governments havevolved from their first tentative steps publishing informationnline to developing sophisticated interactive and transactionalapabilities across a broad range of services (Davison, Wagner, & Ma,005; Reddick, 2005). Most state governments today have moved

eyond the static informational and bulletin-type web sites to offerwide range of interactive services. A majority of local governmentsave also established a web presence and are on their way to pro-iding interactive service delivery capabilities (Norris, Fletcher, &olden, 2001).

l of Inf

cB2tttpM&otav&2w(Tvoi

babMaoHta(2r

(2gaheCodAntM

scaaeicatcimhip

aiml

stooecCvtlagti

mfossbfiwn

ocRwbteca

2h

afotozoeImmigmw

M.A. Badri, K. Alshare / International Journa

E-government is now a permanent agenda item of local coun-ils in the developed world (Davison et al., 2005; Medjahed, Rezgui,ouguettaya, & Ouzzani, 2003; Thompson, 2002; Tian & Tianfield,003). Most have developed an e-government policy, includinghe delivery of services electronically. Decision-makers recognizehe need to focus on cost reduction and efficiency by analyzinghe real needs of citizens and businesses and computerizing sim-le and frequently used services (Accenture, 2004; Akman, Yazici,ishra, & Arifoglu, 2005; Chadwick & May, 2003; Foley, 2005; TungRieck, 2005). In general, the move towards the development

f an e-government infrastructure highlights the scope for long-erm savings and improved service quality levels, which could bechieved by the public sector through electronic delivery of ser-ices to its citizenry (Carter & Belanger, 2005; Gilbert, Balestrini,

Littleboy, 2004; Irani, Love, Elliman, Jones, & Themistocleous,005). Many policymakers and managers realize the potential ofhat e-government solutions can provide in terms of cost-cutting

Montagna, 2005; Ni & Ho, 2005; Zhang, Dawes, & Sarkis, 2005).he state and local markets for e-government products and ser-ices are expected to expand with a compound annual growth ratef 8% through 2009 and will amount to spending of US$64 billionn 2009 (Ericson, 2004).

E-government technologies can serve a variety of different ends:etter delivery of government services to citizens (Choudrie etl., 2005; Navarra & Cornford, 2003), improved interactions withusiness and industry (Davison et al., 2005; Riemenschneider &ykytyn, 2000; Scavo & Shi, 1999), citizen empowerment through

ccess to information (Marche & McNiven, 2003; Susman, 2001),r more efficient government management (Burn & Robins, 2001;oliday & Yep, 2005). The resulting benefits can be less corrup-

ion (Wong & Welch, 2004), increased transparency (Davison etl., 2005; Slevin, 2000; Wong & Welch, 2004), greater convenienceCarter & Belanger, 2005; Ho, 2002; Morris & Moon, 2005; West,004), revenue growth (Irani et al., 2005; Moon, 2002), and/or costeductions (Carter & Belanger, 2005; Moon & Norris, 2005).

It is important to examine the global scope of e-governmentBertot, McClure, & Owens, 1999; Evans & Yen, 2005; Haldenwang,004; Jaeger, 2003). The relative development of these technolo-ies in various countries will have a significant impact on thebility of these governments to function well. Some countriesave used their technological and educational abilities to create-government structures (UNPAN, 2001; World Market Researchenter, 2001; Zhang, 2002), while development has been slow inther countries that have the same resources because the citizenso not trust e-government structures (Pollard, 2003; Torres, Pina, &cerate, 2005). Other developing countries are creating their tech-ology, communication, and education base and will be movingowards an e-government system (Harris, 2001; Ke & Wei, 2004;

argetts & Dunleavy, 2002; Tung & Rieck, 2005).An example of the potential impact of government electronic

ervices on businesses is Dubai e-government portals, which allowitizens and businesses to access most government services fromsingle worldwide web site. Through the services, firms handlevariety of transactions, such as permits, licenses, registrations,

tc. Additionally, companies and governmental agencies exchangenformation on many different issues, from employment to finan-ial to trade data. Dubai is using IT to drive efforts both toccelerate decentralized public administration and at the sameime to enhance government’s ability to oversee key activities. Theoncurrent pursuit of these two seemingly paradoxical objectives

s, in turn, motivated by an explicit desire to modernize and make

ore competitive the Dubai economy. As a result, it is enjoying aealthy level of political and financial support. Dubai e-government

nitiatives can be best understood as vehicles intended to sup-ort economic development through an increasingly transparent

a2n(t

ormation Management 28 (2008) 524–535 525

nd decentralized administration while at the same time provid-ng the central government the information and ability to efficiently

onitor and potentially steer economic activity at a more abstractevel.

Many of these business-to-government interactions involveearching for information, conducting several, if not all, stages ofhese interactions online. Some of the potential advantages of suchnline interactions are time savings and, consequently, reducedpportunity costs for firms complying with government. Dubai-government has reached the fourth stage in the project lifecy-le of e-governance, according to the United Nations Internationallassification. Its ultimate objective is to offer fully integrated ser-ices through a single portal. Dubai e-government had reached theransactional stage of the project and is pushing towards the seam-ess integration stage which signifies total amalgamation betweenll government departments through the single portal. Dubai e-overnment went online with just 14 services in October 2001 andoday there are close to 600 online services available. Its functions to standardize its contents and link them to the single portal.

Because e-government is still relatively underdeveloped inany Gulf State countries, and other Emirates in the UAE (except

or Abu Dhabi), we explore the impact of electronic governmentn Dubai which currently offers a wide array of governmental e-ervices to the business public. Our research attempts to explore thetrategic impact of e-government on business, particularly smallusiness. We try to empirically address two basic issues: how arerms affected by the development of electronic government? Andhat is the strategic impact of e-government services on busi-esses?

Among all the constituencies that are affected by the devel-pment of electronic government, businesses represent oneonstituency that may experience significant benefits (Thompson,ust, & Rhoda, 2005). In this study, we specifically examineeb-based e-government services designed to interface with theusiness public. The paper is organized as follows: first, we presenthe conceptual framework of our model about the business value of-government. Next, we discuss our research method and empiri-al results. We conclude with a discussion of our results, limitationsnd implications of our research.

. Literature review, conceptual foundation, andypotheses

The importance of e-government practices cannot be overstated,s it focuses the direction of government technology funding foruture years (Evans & Yen, 2005). To that end, the goals the Presidentf the United States has set forth for e-government are to increasehe ease of access for citizens; to increase efficiency/effectivenessf government; and to increase government responsiveness to citi-ens (US Government Report, 2002). The United States Governmentrganizes the opportunity categories to serve its citizens in a web-nabled manner into four groups. First is government to citizens.t focuses on the ability of the government and citizen to com-

unicate information to each other in an efficient and electronicanner. Second is government to business. It focuses on the abil-

ty to reduce cost and gather better information and allows theovernment to purchase, pay invoices, and conduct business in aore cost-effective manner. Third is government to government,hich strives to improve the efficiency of delivery when trans-

cting information within itself or with other governments (West,004). Fourth is intra-government internal efficiency and effective-ess which focuses on delivery systems within the e-governmentMarchionini, Samet, & Brandt, 2003; Moon, 2002). The focus inhis paper is on search-oriented and transaction-oriented uses

5 l of Inf

og

tcgelcatewt2

wEwf(fltibdobssroGb

wficgp

2

crca

ftwacmIIte1t(iIpfdt

Hfi

Htv

2

btTeesiTgcthomI

26 M.A. Badri, K. Alshare / International Journa

f e-government—the two most meaningful applications of e-overnment to businesses (Reddick, 2004, 2005; Torres et al., 2005).

E-government is said, at the minimum, to expand and extendhe ability of government organizations to serve their constituen-ies and to promote a host of other, mainly positive, benefits to bothovernment and its citizens (Norris et al., 2001). A more enlight-ned view has begun in the ranks of government to treat the citizenike a consumer whose transaction satisfaction is important. Thishange in attitude is actually more efficient for the government,s well as for the citizen, as it allows the government to deal withhe citizen one time instead of multiple times and allows the gov-rnment to process information more efficiently and collect datahile doing so. An important byproduct of this efficient transac-

ion is customer/citizen satisfaction (Evans & Yen, 2005; Reddick,005).

All of the stated studies on e-government (and the studies thatill be referenced in the following sections) are either US, EU, or

ast Asian based and may not be applicable to other parts of theorld due to the existence of social, cultural, and economical dif-

erences (Akman et al., 2005; Bertot et al., 1999). Thompson et al.2005) highlighted that their study was based on a sample of firmsrom three states of the United States; therefore, their results wereimited by the specificity of this geographic context. They suggestedhat future research should consider the value of e-governmentn different settings. They proposed and tested a model about theusiness value of e-government to small firms. They measured twoimensions of e-government use (search-oriented and transaction-riented), and they tested the effects of three types of e-governmentenefits on small firms’ profitability. Against this backdrop, ourtudy is thus undertaken in Dubai to test an e-government modeluggested by Thompson et al. (2005) and to provide importantesults about its practice in a different setting, an emerging econ-my (Fig. 1). This research is also pertinent and timely as Dubaiovernment is aiming to become fully e-enabled by 2007 andeyond (Dubai e-government Report, 2005).

In this section, we find it best if we state study hypotheses ase review most literature and empirical findings on the effect ofrm’s use of e-government on the four dimensions of firm’s ITapability, revenue expansion (intelligence generation and revenueeneration), cost reduction (time savings from e-government), androfitability.

.1. Information technology capability and e-government use

Many studies exist that suggest a direct relationship between IT

apability and firms’ ability to acquire, deploy and leverage their ITesources to shape and support their business strategies and valuehain activities (Choudrie et al., 2005; Reffat, 2003). Thompson etl. (2005) point out that IT capability is an important foundation

Fig. 1. The full model of e-government tested.

t

Hoen

2

ri&ARtstoee

ormation Management 28 (2008) 524–535

or e-government use to search for information and conduct elec-ronic transactions. They also add that IT capability provides firmsith know-how to redesign their relationship with government

nd to envision benefits from this change. Studies also suggest thatomputer experience, company-supported training, and manage-ent knowledge improve the effectiveness of computer use and

T applications in small firms (Cragg & King, 1993; DeLone, 1988).n addition, firms’ technological readiness (i.e. the level of sophis-ication of IT use and IT management) has been used to predictlectronic data interchange adoption (Iacovou, Benbasat, & Dexter,995), and owners’ knowledge of IT has been positively related tohe extent of use of e-services (Pollard, 2003). Thomas and Streib2003) conclude that experienced Internet users will have a positivempact on citizen adoption of e-government. Others point out thatT capability is an important antecedent of organizational partici-ation in business-to-business electronic markets and a significant

actor on firms’ substantive and procedural knowledge of how too business online (Grewal, Comer, & Mehta, 2001). As a result ofhese studies, it is appropriate to state the first two hypotheses.

1. There is a positive relationship between the IT capability of therm and the firm’s use of search-oriented e-government services.

2. There is a positive relationship between the IT capability ofhe firm and the firm’s use transaction-oriented e-government ser-ices.

.2. E-government use and firm’s revenue expansion

Ho (2002) indicates that there is a potential relationshipetween e-government initiatives and local managerial innova-ions. In their empirical study of business value of e-government,hompson et al. (2005) conclude that search-oriented use of-government is positively related to enhanced intelligence gen-ration, new business development, and time savings. Studieshow that the use of e-government services should enhance (pos-tive relationship) the firm’s intelligence generation related issues.homas and Streib (2003) conclude that citizens who are able toet information they want over the Internet, have a positive out-ome from using the Internet, often use government web sites, feelhat interaction has been improved as a result of e-government willave a positive impact on Internet adoption. They also add that onef the most important variables is interaction. It results in improve-ents in citizen interaction with government because of the IT and

nternet. As a result of these studies, it is appropriate to test thehird hypothesis.

3. There is a positive relationship between the firm’s usef e-government-services (search and transaction) and revenuexpansion (intelligence generation and the amount of new busi-esses generated due to information in governmental web sites).

.3. E-government use and cost reduction

Many empirical studies of e-government users surveyedeported cost savings from using e-government services due toncreased access and convenience (Ancarani, 2005; Rust, Moorman,

Dickson, 2002; Slater & Narver, 2000; Strader & Shaw, 2000).study by the Australian government (Australian Government

eport, 2005) suggests that some firms are also achieving a reduc-ion in the direct cost of the service and the benefits from enhanced

ervice levels represented by improved service quality, reducedurnaround times, and improved access to services and availabilityf new services. The study found that at least 45% of respondentsstimated some level of actual cost savings per interaction using-government compared to traditional channels. It is suggested

l of Inf

tmcaTsseaWt21obtJsaes

Hg(

2g

Ieeipmcae

Ht

2

fit2Cs(inoIltfi

Ht

2

grea&Sesprietdiitopswrfi

Hee

2

eitfe

Heeu

2

Fr(2Sfii

Hsp

M.A. Badri, K. Alshare / International Journa

hat searching for new business leads on governmental web sitesay also lead to time savings because e-government web sites

ollapse information from many different sources (e.g. differentgencies and contractors) into one site, facilitating sales generation.hompson et al. (2005) suggest that the benefits of e-governmentervices to the business public seem particularly relevant given theignificant impact of government on firms’ cost structure. Manympirical studies suggest that electronic commerce in general hasdirect effect on cost-related factors faced by the firm (de Ruyter,etzels, & Kleijnen, 2000; Hazlett & Hill, 2003). These effects relate

o decreasing intermediation costs (Fraser, Fraser, & McDonald,000), procurement costs (Litan & Rivlin, 2001), search costs (Bakos,997), labor and overhead costs (Strader & Shaw, 2000), and firm’sverall cost (Thompson et al., 2005). Some stated that the mainenefit of e-government use, for both governmental agencies andhe public in general is cost efficiency (Edmiston, 2003; Ho, 2002;aeger, 2003). Thompson et al. (2005) found that e-governmentearch-oriented use is positively associated with time savings thatccrue from interacting with government online. The next hypoth-sis is related to testing the effect of e-government use and timeavings.

4. There is a positive relationship between the firm’s use of e-overnment-services (search and transaction) and cost reductionsthe amount of time savings from e-government).

.4. Information technology capability and firm’s intelligenceeneration

Many studies/reports exist that suggest a relationship betweenT capability and firms’ intelligence generation. Some argue that-government could change the paradigm of public service deliv-ry at the local level (Akman et al., 2005; Council for Excellencen Government, 2003; Ho, 2002; Koh & Nam, 2005), indicating aotential relationship between e-government initiatives and localanagerial innovations. More specifically, Thompson et al. (2005)

onclude that there is a positive direct link between IT capabilitynd firms’ intelligence generation. The next hypothesis tests theffect of IT capability and intelligence generation.

5. There is a positive relationship between the IT capability ofhe firm and the firm’s generation of intelligence.

.5. Information technology capability and profitability

There are conflicting results on the effect of IT capability andrm’s profitability. Many studies/reports suggest a direct rela-ionship between IT capability and firms’ profitability (Bharadwaj,000; Bharadwaj, Sambamurthy, & Zmud, 2003; Hussin, King, &ragg, 2002; Lang, 2002; Small Business Association, 2000). Othertudies (Tippins & Sohi, 2003) show that organizational learningi.e. the ability to acquire, disseminate and interpret information)s a missing link in the relationship between IT capability and orga-izational performance. They suggest that the positive impact of ITn firms’ performance cannot be measured directly; firms use theirT capabilities to leverage organizational learning, which, in turn,eads to superior performance. Thompson et al. (2005) support

hese findings by observing a negative direct link between IT andrms’ profitability. We will test this effect in the next hypothesis.

6. There is a positive relationship between the IT capability ofhe firm and the firm’s profitability.

sttlfi

ormation Management 28 (2008) 524–535 527

.6. Firm’s revenue expansion and profitability

Empirical evidence has shown the influence of intelligenceeneration on organizational performance through several paths:elative product quality, new product success, sales growth,nhanced customer value, improvements in strategy consistencynd workability, and ultimately, on superior profitability (Jaworski

Kohli, 1993; Pelham & Wilson, 1996; Slater & Narver, 2000).tudies also suggest that there might be indirect effects of use of-government and intelligence generation. Thompson et al. (2005)uggest that the association between e-government use and firms’rofitability occurs through intelligence generation. However, theelationship between new business development and firms’ prof-tability was not significant. Electronic environments can help firmsxpand and develop new markets through intelligence genera-ion (Fraser et al., 2000). Slater and Narver (2000) examine fourimensions of business intelligence (market-focused intelligence,

ntelligence obtained through inter-organizational collaboration,ntelligence from experimentation, and intelligence from repeti-ive experience). They report a positive effect of these dimensionsn the performance measures (sales growth, customer satisfaction,roduct quality, and new product success). Tippins and Sohi (2003)how that organizational learning improves firms’ ability to dealith customers and competitors and is positively related to supe-

ior profitability. The next hypothesis will attempt to test thesendings.

7. There is a positive relationship between the firm’s revenuexpansion (business intelligence generation and new business from-government) and the firm’s profitability.

.7. Firm’s revenue expansion and cost reduction

In their empirical study, Thompson et al. (2005) do not find anyvidence to suggest any effect of intelligence generation on reduc-ng cost due to time savings. However, they find enough supporto suggest a direct relationship between new businesses generatedrom using e-government and firm’s time savings. The next hypoth-sis will test this effect of revenue expansion on cost reduction.

8. There is a positive relationship between the firm’s revenuexpansion (business intelligence generation and new business from-government) and the firm’s cost reduction (time savings due tosing e-government).

.8. Firm’s cost reduction and profitability

Time savings for using e-government come in different forms.or example, transaction usage of e-government might lead toeduction of time at government counters and organizationsJanssen, Rotthier, & Snijkers, 2004; Kunstelj & Vintar, 2004; Zhang,002). Empirical study of business value of e-government in thetates could not find any support for a direct relationship betweenrm’s time savings and its profitability (Thompson et al., 2005). It

s appropriate to test such relationship.

9. There is a positive relationship between the amount of timeavings in the firm’s interactions with government and the firm’srofitability.

On the other hand, many suggest that the use of e-government

ervices may improve business profitability directly or indirectlyhrough either revenue expansion or cost reduction. As a result,he business value of e-government services is linked to intel-igence generation, new business development and reduction inrms’ compliance and opportunity costs (Thompson et al., 2005).

5 l of Inf

2

gftgaaslhan

3

3

fi2tDd4enowpioanwco7btictetmtmi

3

ctm(1a

a

3

attd

3

(sFgid(sswfirWfipt

3

m(siui

3

sbrss

3

fteg

3

srFr

28 M.A. Badri, K. Alshare / International Journa

.9. Business firms in Dubai and the effect of e-government

Since this study is the first empirical study of Dubai e-overnment, we will also report the means and standard deviationsor each construct and item. Identification of the magnitude ofhe arithmetic means will have direct implications for Dubai e-overnment authorities, business firms in Dubai using the service,nd foreign firms (potential businesses) that are considering Dubais their future home, and who would like to utilize e-governmentervices. As a word of caution, it should be kept in mind thatow arithmetic means (close to 1) are positive (preferable), whileigh scores (close to 5) are negative (not preferable). We alsosked respondents other simple questions to better understand theature of their use of Dubai e-government.

. Study methods

.1. Sampling and data collection procedures

We (a team of student assistant researchers) acquired a list ofrms from a commercial database (the Dubai Commercial Directory004–2005, issued by the Dubai Chambers of Commerce and Indus-ry). The database contains all business establishments registered inubai. We called by phone a total of 19,467 companies selected ran-omly across all industrial classifications (this process took aboutmonths). We needed to know first weather they have used the

-government features available in Dubai. From the list of compa-ies called, a total of 4774 companies responded positively (24.53%f companies contacted). Another call was made few days laterhere we requested to talk to the person in charge to solicit his/herarticipation in the study. A total of 4110 companies accepted our

nvitation (86.09% of the companies who responded positively tour call). We sent to these companies questionnaires personallyddressed to the top executive (by post or by e-mail). The question-aire asked respondents to focus on their firms’ online interactionsith Dubai government in the last 12 months. We received 1859

omplete questionnaires (45.23% of those companies that acceptedur invitation). Characteristics of respondents show that about6% of firms employed less than 20 employees, 17% employedetween 21 and 50 employees, while only 7% employed morehan 50 employees. Participants belonged to different business andndustrial categories (more than 85 categories). The major businessategories were machinery and equipment, software, food indus-ry, petroleum, clothing, consumer brands, technology industries,nergy and utilities, telecommunications, automotive, healthcare,ransport and logistics, retail and distribution, metal and mining,

edia, real estate, and banks. The average total annual sales of par-icipating firms were US$345,000 and ranged from US$100,000 to

ore than US$12,000,000. The mean number of years of firms beingn business was 6.9 years and ranged from 1 to 25 years.

.2. Development of measures

For each scale, we computed its psychometric properties {�2,omparative fit index (CFI), root mean square error of approxima-ion (RMSEA), and Cronbach �}. These properties are suggested by

any scholars to evaluate and test how good a scale construct isBentler & Wu, 1993; Bollen, 1989; Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black,998).2 For each construct, items, means, and standard deviationsre provided in Appendix.

2 The detailed psychometric properties for each construct are available from theuthors upon request.

waPsmsrT

ormation Management 28 (2008) 524–535

.2.1. IT capabilityIT capability scale is taken from previous research (Grewal et

l., 2001; Thompson et al., 2005). The questions asked respondentso rate the degree to which they agree with each statements aboutheir own firm, using a five-point Likert scale (ranging from stronglyisagree (5) to strongly agree (1).

.2.2. E-government useDirect measure of e-government use scales were borrowed from

Thompson et al., 2005). The scales were slightly modified for thistudy to be more appropriate for the environment of the study.or example, there are no taxes in Dubai; but instead there areovernment duties, fees, and customs. In addition, we deleted onetem dealing with leases since it is not available in Dubai. We con-ucted an extensive interview with some e-government authoritiesdevelopers) in Dubai and some business firm executives using theervices and some personnel in leading IT companies in Dubai. Thecales were also used by others (Thompson et al., 2005). As a result,e identified eight categories of transaction-oriented use, in whichrms interact with government to comply with regulations, submitequested information, or apply for specific governmental services.

e also obtained nine categories of search-oriented use, in whichrms use governmental web sites to search for information. A five-oint Likert scale, ranging from never (5) to very often (1) is usedo assess frequency of use.

.2.3. Intelligence generationThe intelligence generation factor of the revenue expansion

odel is measured using the scale developed by Slater and Narver2000) and used by Thompson et al. (2005) in their empiricaltudy. A total of 10 items are used. A five-point Likert scale, rang-ng from never (5) to consistently (1) is used to assess frequencysing e-government services to perform some activities related to

ntelligence generation.

.2.4. New business developmentNew business development from use of e-government was mea-

ured using a scale developed by (Thompson et al., 2005) and usedy others (Thompson et al., 2005). The four-item Likert scale askedespondents to rate the degree to which they agree with eachtatement. A five-point scale ranging from strongly disagree (5) totrongly agree (1) is used.

.2.5. Cost reduction (time savings)A scale developed by Thompson et al. (2005), time savings

rom use of e-government was measured by asking respondentso rate the extent to which their firms have saved time by using-government services in five dimensions of interactions withovernment-strongly disagree (5) to strongly agree (1).

.2.6. Firm’s profitabilityMany authors reported significant positive correlations between

ubjective assessments of sales, ROA and return on sales and theirespective objective values (Harris, 2001; Robinson & Pearce, 1988).irms’ profitability was measured as the average of three itemselative to firms’ stated objectives (five-point scale, ranging fromorse (5) to better (1)): return on investments (ROI), return on

ssets (ROA) and cash flow from operations (Moorman & Rust, 1999;elham & Wilson, 1996; Thompson et al., 2005). In addition to

ubjective monetary measures, we also included some other non-onetary subjective measures. Many empirical quality-related

tudies have included other subjective items to measure businessesults (Badri et al., 2006; Baldrige National Quality Program, 2005).hese items include customer satisfaction, overall performance

l of Inf

cb

3

tatmfitmmnototo(dteLis

3

atnficeooksor

tOiwcOlTetge

TR

ˇtp

mmoog

3

(UaIsw(iB

sctaTitoo

4

vuISTr

4

c((hfa

4

M.A. Badri, K. Alshare / International Journa

ompared to competition, and performance compared to the timeefore the introduction of Dubai e-government.

.3. Effect of variables outside the structural model

We measured several control variables related to firms’ charac-eristics (e.g. size, age, relative selling prices, and operating costs)nd market-level factors (Thompson et al., 2005). It is necessaryo do so to investigate the effect of variables outside the structural

odel (Thompson et al., 2005). As a result, a linear regression ofrms’ profitability on a set of control variables will be performedo investigate the effect of these variables outside the structural

odel. The market-level control variables used in this study arearket dynamism, competitive intensity, service orientation, and

umber of employees. Market dynamism is modeled as the averagef four variables (seven-point Likert scale): velocity (pace of oppor-unity flow in a given market); complexity (difficulty of capturingpportunities); ambiguity (the degree to which the key features ofhe environment are difficult to understand); and entropy (degreef unpredictability in the features of opportunity flow over time)Davis & Eisenhardt, 2004). Competitive intensity refers to theegree of competition in the industry as perceived by competitorshemselves (seven-point Likert scale) (Barnett, 1997). Service ori-ntation is modeled as the average of three variables (seven-pointikert scale): “listening to and understanding the customer”, “antic-pating customer needs”, and “giving high priority to customeratisfaction” (Humborg, Hoyer, & Fassnacht, 2002).

.4. Analysis

A linear regression of firms’ profitability on a set of control vari-bles was performed to investigate the effect of variables outsidehe structural model (service orientation, competitive intensity,umber of employees, and market dynamism) that might affectrms’ profitability. The effects of these four variables were statisti-ally partialled from the data to remove their influence from thentire system of variables. Table 1 provides some initial resultsbtained by our study. We note that all four variables, servicerientation, competitive intensity, number of employees, and mar-et dynamism have significant relationships with profitability (ithould be noted that in Thompson et al.’s (2005) study, numberf employees and market dynamism had a marginally significantelationship with profitability).

Path analysis (McDonald, 1996) is utilized to test of causal rela-ionships hypothesized using LISREL (Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1989).ur objective was to form composites for each construct by reduc-

ng the total number of parameters to be estimated. As a result,e captured the essence of the underlying meaning of each

onstruct (Bagozzi & Heatherton, 1994; Thompson et al., 2005).ther researchers tested several models with different construct

inks (Bharadwaj, 2000; Bharadwaj, Bharadwaj, & Konsynsk,1999;

hompson et al., 2005; Tippins & Sohi, 2003). We also tested sev-ral models in which we used several scenarios with regard tohe nature of links between the dimensions of IT capability, e-overnment use (transaction and search-oriented use), revenuexpansion (intelligence generation and new business develop-

able 1egression analysis where the dependent variable is firm’s profitability

Serviceorientation

Competitiveintensity

No. ofemployees

Marketdynamism

0.455 −0.426 0.495 −0.4814.79 −3.88 3.83 −3.860.001 0.003 0.006 0.004

aeefee

4

grp

ormation Management 28 (2008) 524–535 529

ent), cost reduction (time savings), and firms’ profitability. Someodels were fully restrictive while others were less restrictive

n the nature of direct and indirect effects of constructs on eachther. We used the maximum likelihood method to compute theoodness-of-fit of models tested.

.5. Confirmatory factor analysis

We used LISREL and employed confirmatory factor analysisCFA) to assess the factor structure of each of our latent constructs.nlike the study of Thompson et al. (2005), our results indicateddequate levels of fit for all constructs used in the model. Analysis ofT capability, e-government use, new business development, timeavings, and intelligence generation provided acceptable resultsith regard to goodness-of-fit indices. Cronbach ˛ ranged from 0.82

e-government transaction-oriented use) to 0.94 (firm’s profitabil-ty) which are above the minimum of 70 suggested by Nunnally andernstein (1994).

It should be noted that Thompson et al. (2005) used three itemsubjective monetary measures for profitability; as a result, theyould not estimate CFA indices. The convergent validity of thewo dimensions of e-government use was assessed by the over-ll goodness-of-fit and variable loadings of a two-factor model.he scale seems to capture the latent factor well since the load-ngs of the items were high. The final results from the CFA for thewo-factor e-government use model indicated adequate goodness-f-fit. Correlations among the constructs did not suggest problemsf discriminant validity.

. Results

Compared to all models tested, the model shown in Fig. 2 pro-ides the best representation of the effects of Dubai e-governmentse (Chi-square or �2=10.27; p=0.056; CFI=0.98; and RMSE=0.049).

t meets joint cut off criteria suggested by Hu and Bentler (1999).ince our model of e-government use is a slight modification of thehompson et al. (2005) model, it is appropriate to point out theelated results for each hypothesis of their study too.

.1. IT capability and e-government use

As seen in Fig. 2, firms’ IT capability has a positive and signifi-ant association with both the search-oriented use of e-governmentˇ=0.428, p=0.000) and the transaction-oriented e-governmentˇ=0.314, p=0.009) as hypothesized by the first and secondypotheses. Thus, H1 and H2 are supported. Thompson et al. (2005)ailed to realize significant association between firm’s IT capabilitynd its transaction-oriented use of e-government.

.2. E-government use and revenue expansion

The search-oriented use dimension of e-government use haspositive significant relationship with both intelligence gen-

ration (ˇ=0.493, p=0.000) and new business generated from-government (ˇ=0.542, p=0.000). However, there is no evidenceor significant effect of the transaction-oriented dimension of-government on either of the two factors comprising revenuexpansion. Therefore, H3 is partially supported.

.3. E-government use and cost reduction

Both the search-oriented use and the transaction-use of e-overnment have positive and significant relationships with costeduction due to time savings realized by such uses (ˇ=0.607,=0.000 and ˇ=0.303, p=0.037, respectively). Thus, H4 is fully

530 M.A. Badri, K. Alshare / International Journal of Information Management 28 (2008) 524–535

rtial m

sct

4g

cg

4

cts

4

peiasi

4

ba(b

4

ofi

4e

rtaEeebga4tu“otDdhoidpuco“3assst

Fig. 2. Significant parameters in the pa

upported. Thompson et al. (2005) failed to realize significant asso-iation between the transactions-oriented use of e-government andime savings.

.4. Information technology capability and firm’s intelligenceeneration

Consistent with Thompson et al. (2005) findings, the firm’s ITapability has positive and significant association with intelligenceeneration (ˇ=0.446, p=0.000). Thus, H5 is supported.

.5. Information technology capability and firm’s profitability

Unlike Thompson et al.’s (2005) findings, we found that ITapabilities of the firm do have some positive and significant rela-ionship with firm’s profitability (ˇ=0.251, p=0.028). Thus, H6 isupported.

.6. Revenue expansion and profitability

Intelligence generation has positive and significant effect onrofitability (ˇ=0.406, p=0.000). Similarly, new business from-government also has a positive significant relationship with prof-tability (ˇ=0.404, p=0.000). Therefore, H7 is supported. Our resultslso support the indirect effect of e-government use (weatherearch and the transaction) through revenue expansion on prof-tability.

.7. Revenue expansion and cost reduction

As shown in Fig. 2, our analysis realized significant relationshipsetween intelligence generation and new business development,nd time savings. As a result, H8 is supported. Thompson et al.2005) also found positive and significant association between newusiness development and time savings.

.8. Time savings from e-government and profitability

Unlike the findings of Thompson et al. (2005), we show evidencef a relationship between time savings from e-government use andrms’ profitability (ˇ=0.262, p=0.047). Hence, H9 is supported.

5

tg

odel (∗p<0.05; ∗∗p<0.01; ∗∗∗p<0.001).

.9. Descriptive findings of business results of Dubai-government

Descriptive statistics (means and standard deviations) ofespondents’ opinions are provided in Appendix. Results showhat on average, firms that use Dubai e-government services enjoycceptable levels of IT readiness and capability (average of 2.14).ven though, most items related to the search-oriented use of Dubai-government are popular amongst firms in Dubai, there are sev-ral items that respondent’s felt were not adequately addressedy Dubai e-government, “online courses/classes”, “financing pro-rams”, “labor market information”, “marketing opportunities”,nd “business mentoring/coaching” with averages of 4.36, 4.17,.03, 3.95, and 3.88, respectively. In addition, firms in Dubai feelhat two specific items related to transaction-oriented are also nottilized, “requesting government loans” with mean of 4.66, andbiding on contracting opportunities” with mean of 3.89. Averagesf items on both revenue expansion factors of intelligence genera-ion and new business development are indicative of the fact thatubai e-government is in its infancy and more efforts are needed toevelop it. All items on the new business development dimensionave high average scores (above 4.0), which is indicative of the factf they need to be taken seriously in the efforts for fully develop-ng the Dubai e-government system. On the intelligence generationimension, many important aspects have scores above the midoint of 2.5 (8 out of 10 items). The four items that are mostly nottilized are “developing information-sharing relationships”, “allo-ating resources to identifying and understanding new marketingpportunities”, “tracking and analyzing competitors’ actions”, andentering into joint ventures and alliances” with averages of 3.51,.27, 3.22, and 2.99, respectively. The items related to time savingss a result of using Dubai e-government enjoy acceptable averagecores (all below 2.5). However, items of the profitability dimensionhow unfavorable results (with the best being only 2.82). These highcores reflect that firms do not feel that e-government is helpinghem realize their full profitability potential.

. Discussion

The model posed allows us to analyze and better understandhe dimensions and determinants of the business value of e-overnment for firms using it, and how they contribute to its

l of Inf

pre

sbsdghtb

inbted

padiirtme

gnts

ariftlewa

fiighAdi

6

itgmti

c

nttraajbiaFtct

abaene

Dtiaiai

asfbs(Jbhbta(2atih

mpiaoa

gYoe

M.A. Badri, K. Alshare / International Journa

rofitability. In general terms, the results indicate support for theelationship between firm’s IT capability, e-government use, rev-nue expansion, cost reduction, and profitability.

Our findings confirm previous studies that firm’s IT capabilityupport business activities (Thompson et al., 2005). Firms’ IT capa-ility provide basic infrastructure where firms use e-governmentervices to search for information or to perform transactionsepend on. Positive relationships between IT capability and e-overnment use mean that firms with higher IT capability have aigher usage of e-government services. Our study provides addi-ional support that the foundation of all e-government readiness isased on IT capability.

Results also indicate that IT capability has positive effect onntelligence generation. Firms with better knowledge and tech-ological capabilities could present key opportunities for firms toe more innovative in capitalizing on this service, and improvingheir organizational learning. Results also reflect the fact that gov-rnments face greater pressure to provide higher quality servicesirectly to citizens in innovative ways (Hazlett & Hill, 2003).

We also found a positive link between IT capability and firmrofitability. We provide evidence that IT capability positivelyffects profitability directly and indirectly (through other variables)epending on how IT is utilized to leverage organizational learn-

ng. Our result does not support other findings that the effect isndirect only (Thompson et al., 2005; Tippins & Sohi, 2003). Oneeason for this variation might be that previous studies concen-rated only on small firms in developed countries. This variation

ight provide additional incentive to replicate such studies in othernvironmental settings.

Our findings indicate that only search-oriented use of e-overnment is positively associated with intelligence generation,ew business development, and time savings. This finding reflectshat firms using e-government services effectively could gain sometrategic benefits.

Fig. 2 also shows that search-oriented use of e-government alsoffects profitability indirectly through intelligence generation. Thisesult supports other findings that improvements in the firm’s abil-ty to generate market-focused intelligence by searching effectivelyor information about customers, competitors and industry, poten-ial business partners, external leveraging, and inter-organizationalearning (Thompson et al., 2005). Our results also confirm thatffective search-oriented uses of e-government could provide firmsith the opportunity of gaining more time savings which is an

spect of cost reduction.Unlike the study conducted by Thompson et al. (2005), our

ndings show significant effects of time savings on firms’ profitabil-ty. Results demonstrate that both revenue expansion (intelligenceeneration and new businesses) and cost reduction (time savings)ave strong positive effects on firm performance and profitability.gain, the reason of such variation might be due to our sample, andue to using both subjective financial and non-financial measures

n the profitability scale.

. Implications and conclusions

The differences between some of our findings and other empir-cal studies with regard to the effects of IT on the e-governmentransaction-oriented uses and on the firms’ profitability might sug-est the need for more empirical research that would focus on small,

edium, and large organizations. Future research should also try

o focus on other categorization of business (i.e., business type orndustry).

Our results suggest, the strategic value of IT is related to howompanies use their IT capabilities to generate knowledge, develop

ttegn

ormation Management 28 (2008) 524–535 531

ew businesses, and save time. New empirical evidence is neededo test these relationships and test other indirect effects. In addi-ion, the future research might attempt to use “performance oresults” rather than “profitability” as an outcome. Such consider-tion might allow researchers to model “performance or results”s multi-factored construct containing both quantitative and sub-ective data. As Thompson et al. (2005) suggest, the relationshipetween IT capability and profitability might be better explained

f the measures of actual use of IT, rather than investments in ITre used. Our study used self-reported data to test our hypotheses.uture research might assess the impact of e-government on objec-ive performance indicators. It will be also helpful if future studiesould test and refine the model framework to better understandhe business value of e-government projects.

Our study contributes to e-government research by modifyingnd testing a previously proposed model of government-to-usiness relationships. The study supports the call made by theuthors of the original model and other authors that additionalmpirical researches in different settings and environments areeeded to better understand and measure the business value of-government services.

In summary, results show that strategic advancements ofubai e-government are helping firms to conduct more elec-

ronic business to government interactions and obtain significantmprovements in performance through both revenue expansionnd cost reduction. An implication for Dubai e-government author-ties should be to develop their system to result in shorterdministrative turnaround times for administrative processes andnquiries.

A key finding in this study is the support that IT capability is anbility driver for firms to effectively use and utilize e-governmentervices. It might be worthwhile for Dubai e-government to per-orm its own survey to better understand the IT readiness ofusiness and industry firms in Dubai. An important issue to be con-idered is firm’s willingness to use technology, which Parasuraman2000) terms “technology readiness”. For e-government readiness,utla, Bodorik, and Dhaliwal (2002) suggest six categories of e-usiness readiness metrics and measures to be used for assessingow a country is performing in terms of providing a positive e-usiness readiness climate. Education and training are essentialo ensure that citizens have the necessary digital literacy to beble to take full advantage of the services offered by e-governmentDeloitte Research, 2003; Gil-Garcia & Pardo, 2005; Moon & Norris,005; Norris & Moon, 2005; Reddick, 2004). Dubai e-governmentuthorities should realize that one of the main purposes behindhe introduction of e-government services is to facilitate firms toncrease their IT sophistication; and hence, to provide them with aigher level of convenience in their interaction with government.

Our results reflect the role of government in general, in pro-oting organizational learning in the business community. They

lay an active role on making firms well educated in their abil-ty to improve their performance and sustain their competitivedvantage. Dubai e-government could play a vital role to inducerganizational learning by providing total and integrative search-nd transaction-oriented services.

Even though, there are many studies that suggest how e-overnment reduces cost for governmental agencies (Evans &en, 2005; Input, 2002; Lee, Tan, & Trimi, 2005; West, 2002),ur research also relates to the issue of the direct impact of-government use on firms’ cost reductions strategies. In addi-

ion, search-oriented uses affect cost reductions indirectly alsohrough developing new business. In addition to reducing costs,-government use could expand revenue also through intelligenceeneration and new business development. Business firms shouldot overlook the impact of e-government use on revenue and cost.

5 l of Inf

TrtRnso

(tgedg(aga

sndofie22

ipue

fpirpwfofcsssbpm(

aubrafebcetbM

qsiFofwtigiwdtDts

aepsbTmpseri

Aa

C

IHHHHIG

EOOOPFBSR

ETaeBaAriBexpanding the business, training, and counseling in

32 M.A. Badri, K. Alshare / International Journa

hus, the Dubai e-government authorities are in the position toigorously campaign the perceived benefits (and cost savings) fromhe adoption of e-government services to potential firms in Dubai.eceptivity towards e-government services comes about when theew system is perceived as more beneficial than the paper-basedystem it supersedes, hence offering relative advantage to potentialrganizations.

Our study investigated the robustness of Thompson et al.’s2005) finding that e-government services were linked to bet-er profitability primarily through revenue gains, via intelligenceeneration only. Our results of larger business firms suggest that-government services were also linked to better profitability viaeveloping new business too. As a result, the benefits from e-overnment services result from firm’s ability to expand businessThompson et al., 2005), and its ability to increase efficiency. Hence,n important implication arises for business users in Dubai of e-overnment services. They should consider e-government servicess a revenue expansion tool as well as a cost reduction opportunity.

An implication for Dubai e-government suppliers is that theyhould develop their web sites in an integrative way to help busi-ess firms compete in the market based on revenue and cost. Vitaleterminants of e-government uses include business perceptionsf response times, navigability of the web site, download time, ful-llment of service promised, timely updating of information; siteffectiveness and functionality (Al-Kibsi, Boer, Mourshed, & Rea,001; Layne & Lee, 2001; Ma, Chung, & Thorson, 2005; Saxena,005; Stowers, 1999).

If the strategic plan of Dubai e-government calls for enhanc-ng the economic performance of the private sector, then it shouldrovide business-centered services that collect information reg-larly on business expectations and perceptions with regard to-government services.

For Dubai e-government, future research might compare the dif-erences in perceptions of citizens who use government web sites torivate sector web site users. Are there public perceptions of qual-

ty differences between these two sectors? Another area of futureesearch would be to conduct a focus group asking e-citizens if aarticular government has supplied what they were demanding,hich would allude to connections between supply and demand

or e-government. In addition, Zemke and Connellan (2001) pointut that “e-service masters” in the private sector not only learnrom their customers, they also synthesize their understanding ofustomers’ wants, needs, and expectations into unique, clever, andometimes highly innovative solutions. Therefore, those respon-ible for creating and providing e-government services in Dubaihould be familiar with best practice in the private sector, not leastecause this will inform the citizen’s expectations of electronicublic services. In this context, developing e-government servicesay function as an indirect way to improve business performance

Thompson et al., 2005).More specifically for Dubai e-government authorities, the aver-

ge level of use of e-government in our sample was still low. Suchnfavorable mean scores of many items in our model lead us toelieve that it is essential for Dubai e-government authorities toegularly investigate what kinds of factors influence consumerttitudes and behaviors towards e-services they provide. Theyace several other challenges in their transition towards total-government services. These challenges include security, accessi-ility, coordination and collaboration, and citizen awareness andonfidence. Many authors suggest that educating citizens about

-government and raising their confidence about the quality ofhese services is a challenge that should be addressed seriouslyefore designing and planning e-government services (Fang, 2002;argetts & Dunleavy, 2002; Reffat, 2003; West, 2004).

bFTf

ormation Management 28 (2008) 524–535

To better address issues, we asked respondents several otheruestions. Overall, users think e-government makes it easier totay informed. Not as many agree that it makes transactions eas-er, but this might be partially due to current experience levels.ewer businesses have used transactional services search orientednes; and thus, more efforts are needed on developing more user-riendly transactional services. Interestingly though, satisfactionith e-government is higher among users who have used it for

ransactional purposes than among those who have used it fornformation alone. The point here might be that exposure to e-overnment is very important. Dubai Government has a job to don educating its citizens about their offerings. As an example, when

e first contacted the firms to participate in our study about theevelopment of e-government in Dubai, about (73%) of those con-acted declined to participate as they did not feel qualified to discussubai e-government services. Thus, Dubai e-government authori-

ies have to promote its services aggressively. It has to invest moretrongly in building its marketing competency.

Nevertheless, for Dubai e-government, our findings are encour-ging, as they support the governments’ motives for introducing-government services and provide a good reason for increasing therovision of additional and improved e-government services. Thetudy provides some preliminary evidence about the criteria thatusinesses use to evaluate their adoption of e-government services.his could be valuable for governments in designing and imple-enting their e-government services. The findings might have

olicy implications for the implementation of Dubai e-governmentervices. Understanding adoption factors can extend their knowl-dge of users’ decision-making and lead to better strategies. Ouresearch provides a starting point for government seeking ways tomprove citizens’ acceptance of e-government services.

ppendix. Constructs, items, and the corresponding meansnd standard deviations

onstructs and items Mean Standarddeviation

T capability construct 2.14 1.13as strong IT planning capabilities 2.15 1.15as strong technical support staff 2.11 1.12as an understanding of possible benefits of IT applications 2.12 1.23as adequate knowledge about information technology 2.17 1.21

s experienced with IT 2.12 1.16ives high importance to strategic use of IT 2.14 1.17

-government transaction-oriented use 2.41 1.11btain/renew professional licenses 2.15 1.16btain/renew business licenses 2.15 1.07btain/renew permits and registrations 2.13 1.09ay fines 1.13 0.95ile and pay government fees/customs/duties 2.22 1.21id on contracting opportunities 3.89 1.35ubmit required government reports 2.16 1.14equest a government loan 4.66 1.21

-government search-oriented use 3.20 1.22rade publications, statistics, taxes, online libraries, lawsnd regulations, international trade andconomic/industry reports

2.07 1.11

usiness location (infrastructure and other resourcesvailable in a specific region)

2.43 1.14

ssistance on complying with local, state and federalegulations (licenses, permits and registrations,nternational trade, etc.)

1.47 0.08

usiness mentoring/coaching (assistance in starting and 3.88 1.13

usiness matters)inancing programs 4.17 1.32echnological assistance and training programs (searchingor technology/product development partnerships, etc.)

2.45 1.13

l of Inf

A

C

OMnbLsitIBsTAmAtSSbBAiED

NWfwWsWiWiTsSroLuFtCoPrRRCCOOD

R

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

BB

C

C

C

C

C

D

D

D

D

d

D

E

E

E

F

F

F

G

G

G

M.A. Badri, K. Alshare / International Journa

ppendix. (Continued)

onstructs and items Mean Standarddeviation

nline classes/courses 4.36 1.36arketing opportunities such as business online

etworks/contractors lists (networks that bring togetheruyers, suppliers and service providers) and trade shows

3.95 1.21

abor market information (submitting job orders,earching for qualified applicants, obtaining wage data byndustry and occupation, current and future employmentrends, etc.)

4.03 1.24

ntelligent generation 2.89 1.15enchmarks key processes for improving customeratisfaction

2.64 1.14

racks and analyzes competitor actions 3.22 1.12llocates resources to identifying and understanding newarket opportunities

2.99 1.25

ttempts to develop new ways of looking at customers andheir needs

2.61 1.21

ystematically collects information about customer needs 2.94 1.22ends employees to seminars or short courses to bringack new ideas to the organization

2.14 1.24

enchmarks key operating processes 2.63 1.16rranges seminars and classes to educate employees about

mportant concepts and processes2.12 1.11

nters into joint ventures and alliances 3.27 1.07evelops information-sharing relationships 3.51 1.03

ew business development 4.28 1.15e have sold to customers whose contact information was

ound through buyer-supplier lists posted in governmentaleb sites

4.22 1.23

e have closed business contracts whose leads were foundearching governmental web sites

4.35 1.25

e have developed sales that were initiated throughnformation available in governmental web sites

4.16 1.22

e have identified new business partners throughnformation in government web sites

4.40 1.26

ime savings resulting from using Dubai e-governmentervices

1.15 0.77

earching for general business information (laws andegulations, financial, market, and technology information)n governmental web sites

2.45 1.06

ocating governmental agencies, forms, and applicationssing governmental web sites

1.33 1.13

illing out forms and submitting information onlinehrough governmental web sites

1.18 0.08

onducting the actual transactions with governmentnline

1.23 0.09

rofitability measures—how the firm is performingelative to its stated objectives

3.32 1.21

eturn on investments 3.84 1.14eturn on assets 3.66 1.12ash flow from operations 3.82 1.22ustomer satisfaction 2.78 1.15verall performance compared to competition 2.82 1.15verall performance compared to the time before usingubai e-government

2.99 1.23

eferences

ccenture. (2004). E-Government leadership: High performance, maximum value. NewYork, Accenture. Administration: Issues and trends. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Pub-lishing., pp. 246–266.

kman, I., Yazici, A., Mishra, A., & Arifoglu, A. (2005). E-Government: A global viewand an empirical evaluation of some attributes of citizens. Government Informa-tion Quarterly, 22, 239–257.

l-Kibsi, G., Boer, K., Mourshed, M., & Rea, N. (2001). Putting citizens online, not inline. The McKinsey Quarterly, 2, 65–73.

ncarani, A. (2005). Towards quality e-services in the public sector: The evolutionof web sites in the local public services sector. Managing Service Quality, 15(1),6–23.

ustralian Government Report. (2005). Available at: 〈www.agimo.gov.au/ data/assets/file/16032/benifits.pdf〉.

adri, M., Selim, H., Alshare, K., Grandon, E., Hassan, Y., & Abdulla, M. (2006). TheBaldrige education criteria for performance excellence framework: Empiricaltest and validation. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management,23(9), 1118–1157.

H

H

ormation Management 28 (2008) 524–535 533

agozzi, R., & Heatherton, T. (1994). A general approach to representing multifacetedpersonality constructs: Application to state self-esteem? Structural EquationModeling, 1(1), 35–67.

akos, J. Y. (1997). Reducing buyer search costs: Implications for electronic market-places. Management Science, 43(12), 1676–1692.

aldrige National Quality Program: Criteria for performance excellence. Available at:〈www.quality.nist.gov/PDF files/2005 Business Criteria.pdf〉.

arca, C., & Cordella, A. (2004). Seconds out, round two: Contextualizing e-government projects within their institutional milieu—A London local authoritycase study. In Proceedings of the 12th European conference of information systems.

arnett, W. (1997). The dynamism of competitive intensity. Administrative ScienceQuarterly, 42(1), 128–160.

entler, P., & Wu, E. (1993). EQS/Windows user’s guide. Los Angeles, CA: BMDP Statis-tical Software.

ertot, J., McClure, C., & Owens, K. (1999). Universal service in a global networkedenvironment: Selected issues and possible approaches. Government InformationQuarterly, 16(4), 309–327.

haradwaj, A. (2000). A resource-based perspective on information technologycapability and firm performance: An empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly,24(1), 169–196.

haradwaj, A., Bharadwaj, S., & Konsynsk, B. (1999). Information technology effectson firm performance as measured by Tobin’s q. Management Science, 45(7),1008–1024.

haradwaj, A., Sambamurthy, V., & Zmud, R. (2003). Firm-wide IT capability: An empir-ical examination of the construct and its links to performance. Working paper. EastLansing, MI: Michigan State University.

ollen, K. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: Wiley.urn, J., & Robins, G. (2001). E-government: An Australian case study. Paper pre-

sented at the 2nd working with e-Business (We-B) conference, November.arter, L., & Belanger, F. (2005). The utilization of e-government services: Citi-

zen trust, innovation and acceptance factors. Information System Journal, 15, 5–25.

hadwick, A., & May, C. (2003). Interaction between states and citizens in the ageof the internet: E-government in the United States, Britain, and the EuropeanUnion. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institu-tions, 16(2), 271–300.

houdrie, J., Weerakkody, V., & Jones, S. (2005). Realizing e-government in the UK:Rural and urban challenges. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 18(5),568–585.

ouncil for Excellence in Government. (2003). The new E-government equation: Ease,engagement, privacy and protection. Washington, DC: Prepared by Hart-Teeter forthe Council for Excellence in Government.

ragg, P., & King, M. (1993). Small-firm computing: Motivators and inhibitors. MISQuarterly, 17(1), 47–60.

avis, J., & Eisenhardt, K. (2004). Complexity, market dynamism, and strategy of simplerules. Working paper, October.

avison, R., Wagner, C., & Ma, L. (2005). From government to e-government: Atransition model. Information Technology and People, 18(3), 280–299.

eloitte Research. (2003). Citizen advantage: Enhancing economic competitivenessthrough e-government. Deloitte Consulting report, September. Available at:〈www.deloitte.comovernment〉.

eLone, W. (1988). Determinants of success for computer usage in small businesses.MIS Quarterly, 12(1), 51–61.

e Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M., & Kleijnen, M. (2000). Customer adoption of e-service: Anexperimental study. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 12(2),184–207.

ubai E-Government Report. (2005). Available at: 〈egov.dubai.ae/opt/CMSContent/Active/CORP/en/Documents/Library/DEG Strategic Implementation Agenda2004 - 2007- MSWord.pdf〉.

dmiston, K. (2003). State and local e-government: Prospects and challenges. Amer-ican Review of Public Administration, 33(1), 20–45.

ricson, J. (2004). State IT spending cycle returning. E-Business News. Available at:〈www.line56.com/articles/default.asp?ArticleID=5332〉.

vans, D., & Yen, V. (2005). E-government: An analysis forimplementation—Framework for understanding cultural and social impact.Government Information Quarterly, 22, 354–373.

ang, Z. (2002). E-government in digital era: Concept, practice and development.International Journal of the Computer, the Internet and Information, 20, 193–213.

oley, P. (2005). The real benefits, beneficiaries and value of e-government. PublicMoney & Management, January, pp. 4–6.

raser, J., Fraser, N., & McDonald, F. (2000). The strategic challenge of electroniccommerce. Supply Chain Management, 5(1), 7–12.

ilbert, D., Balestrini, P., & Littleboy, D. (2004). Barriers and benefits in the adoptionof e-government. The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 17(4),286–301.

il-Garcia, J., & Pardo, T. (2005). E-government success factors: Mapping practi-cal tools to theoretical foundations. Government Information Quarterly, 22, 187–216.

rewal, R., Comer, J., & Mehta, R. (2001). An investigation into the antecedents of

organizational participation in business-to-business electronic markets. Journalof Marketing, 65, 17–33.

air, Jr., J., Anderson, R., Tatham, R., & Black, W. (1998). Multivariate data analysiswith readings (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

aldenwang, C. (2004). Electronic government (e-government) and development.The European Journal of Development Research, 16(2), 417–432.

5 l of Inf

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

I

I

I

J

J

J

J

J

K

K

K

K

L

L

L

L

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

N

N

N

N

NP

P

P

R

R

R

R

R

R

S

S

S

SS

S

S

S

S

T

T

T

T

T

T

T

U

U

34 M.A. Badri, K. Alshare / International Journa

arris, L. (2001). Market orientation and performance: Objective and subjectiveempirical evidence from UK companies. Journal of Management Studies, 38(1),17–43.

azlett, S., & Hill, F. (2003). E-government: The realities of using IT to transform thepublic sector. Managing Service Quality, 13(6), 445–452.

eeks, R. (2004). E-government for development: Basic definitions page. IDPM, Uni-versity of Manchester. Available at: 〈www.egov4dev.org/egovdefn.htm〉.

o, A. (2002). Reinventing local governments and the e-government initiative. PublicAdministration Review, 62(4), 434–444.

oliday, I., & Yep, R. (2005). E-government in China. Public Administration and Devel-opment, 25, 239–249.

u, L., & Bentler, P. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structureanalysis: Conventional versus new alternatives? Structural Equation Modeling,6, 1–55.

umborg, C., Hoyer, W., & Fassnacht, M. (2002). Service orientation of retailer’s busi-ness strategy: Dimensions, antecedents and performance outcomes. Journal ofMarketing, 66, 86–101.

ussin, H., King, M., & Cragg, P. (2002). IT alignment in small firms. European Journalof Information Systems, 11, 108–127.

acovou, C., Benbasat, I., & Dexter, A. (1995). Electronic data interchange andsmall organizations: Adoption and impact of technology. MIS Quarterly, 19(4),465–485.

nput. (2002). Report on Federal Government spending on electronic government sys-tems, December. Available at: 〈www.input.com〉.

rani, Z., Love, P., Elliman, T., Jones, S., & Themistocleous, M. (2005). Evaluatinge-government: Learning from the experiences of two UK local authorities. Infor-mation Systems Journal, 15, 61–82.

aeger, P. T. (2003). The endless wire: E-government as global phenomenon. Govern-ment Information Quarterly, 20, 323–331.

anssen, D., Rotthier, S., & Snijkers, K. (2004). If you measure it they will score: Anassessment of international e-Government benchmarking. Information Polity, 9,121–130.

aworski, B., & Kohli, A. (1993). Market orientation: Antecedents and consequences.Journal of Marketing, 57, 53–70.

öreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (1989). LISREL 7: A guide to the program and applications.Chicago, IL: SPSS, Inc.

utla, D., Bodorik, P., & Dhaliwal, J. (2002). Supporting the e-business readiness ofsmall and medium-sized enterprises: Approaches and metrics. Internet Research:Electronic Networking Application and Policy, 12(2), 139–164.

e, W., & Wei, K. (2004). Successful e-government in Singapore. Communication ofthe ACM, 47(6), 95–99.

enway, I. (2004). Only connect-broadband provision and social inclusion. Availableat: 〈www.ccels.cardiff.ac.uk/pubs/kenwaypaper.htlm〉.

oh, C., & Nam, K. (2005). Business use of the internet: A longitudinal study froma value chain perspective. Industrial Management and Data System, 105(1), 82–95.

unstelj, M., & Vintar, M. (2004). Evaluating the progress of e-government develop-ment: A critical analysis. Information Polity, 9, 131–148.

ang, M. (2002). Beyond traditional boundaries: Government in the information age.Australian Journal of Public Administration, 61(1), 3–12.

ayne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional e-government: A four-stagemodel. Government Information Quarterly, 18, 122–136.

ee, S., Tan, X., & Trimi, S. (2005). Current practices of leading e-government coun-tries. Communication of the ACM, 48(10), 99–104.

itan, R., & Rivlin, A. (2001). The economic pay-off from the Internet Revolution. Wash-ington, DC: Institution Press.

a, L., Chung, J., & Thorson, S. (2005). E-government in China: Bringing economicdevelopment through administrative reform. Government Information Quarterly,22, 20–37.

arche, S., & McNiven, J. D. (2003). E-government and e-governance: The futureisn’t what it used to be. Canadian Journal of Administrative Science, 20(1), 74–86.

archionini, G., Samet, H., & Brandt, L. (2003). Digital government. Communicationsof the ACM, 46(1), 25–27.

argetts, H., & Dunleavy, P. (2002). Cultural barriers to e-government. Working paper.London: University College London and London School of Economics for NationalAudit Office.

cClure, D. (2000). Statement of David L. McClure, US General Accounting Office,before the Subcommittee on Government Reform, House of Representatives.Available at: 〈www.gao.gov〉.

cDonald, R. (1996). Path analysis with composite variables? Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 31(2), 239–270.

edjahed, B., Rezgui, A., Bouguettaya, A., & Ouzzani, M. (2003). Infrastructure fore-government web services. Internet Computing, IEEE, 7(1), 58–65.

ontagna, J. (2005). A framework for the assessment and analysis of electronicgovernment proposals. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 4, 204–219.

oon, M. (2002). The evolution of e-government among municipalities: Rhetoric orreality? Public Administration Review, 62(4), 424–433.

oon, M., & Norris, D. (2005). Does managerial orientation matter? The adoption of

reinventing government and e-government at the municipal level. InformationSystems Journal, 15, 43–60.

oorman, C., & Rust, R. (1999). The role of marketing. Journal of Marketing, 63,180–197.

orris, D., & Moon, M. (2005). Advancing e-government at the grassroots: Tortoiseor hare? Public Administration Review, 65(1), 64–75.

W

W

ormation Management 28 (2008) 524–535

avarra, D. D., & Cornford, T. (2003). A policy making view of e-government inno-vations in public governance. In Proceedings of the ninth Americas conference oninformation systems, Tampa, FL.

i, A., & Ho, A. (2005). Challenges in e-government development: Lessons fromtwo information kiosk projects. Government Information Quarterly, 22, 58–74.

orris, D., Fletcher, P., & Holden, S. (2001). Is your local government plugged in?Highlights of the 2000 electronic government survey. Baltimore: University ofMaryland, Baltimore County.

orris, D., & Moon, M. (2005). Advancing E-government at the grassroots: Tortoiseor hare? Public Administration Review, 65(1), 45–89.

unnally, J., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.arasuraman, A. (2000). Technology readiness index. Journal of Service Research, 2(4),

307–320.elham, A., & Wilson, D. (1996). A longitudinal study of the impact of market struc-

ture, firm structure, strategy and market orientation culture on dimensionsof small-firm performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 24(1),27–43.

ollard, C. (2003). E-service adoption and use in small firms in Australia: Lessonslearned from a government-sponsored program. Journal of Global InformationTechnology Management, 6(2), 45–63.

eddick, C. (2004). A two-stage model of e-government growth: Theories and empir-ical evidence for US cities. Government Information Quarterly, 21, 51–64.

eddick, C. (2005). Citizen interaction with e-government: From the streets toservers? Government Information Quarterly, 22, 38–57.

effat, R. (2003). Developing a successful e-government. Working paper. Sydney:School of Architecture, Design Science and Planning, University of Sydney.

iemenschneider, C., & Mykytyn, P., Jr. (2000). What small business executives havelearned about managing information technology. Information and Management,37, 257–269.

obinson, R., Jr., & Pearce, J., II. (1988). Planned patterns of strategic behavior andtheir relationship to business-unit performance. Strategic Management Journal,9, 43–60.

ust, R., Moorman, C., & Dickson, P. (2002). Getting return on quality: Revenueexpansion, cost reduction or both? Journal of Marketing, 66, 7–24.

axena, K. (2005). Towards excellence in e-government. International Journal of PublicSector Management, 18(6), 498–513.

cavo, C., & Shi, Y. (1999). Word wide web site design and use in public manage-ment. In G. D. Garson (Ed.), Information technology and computer applications inpublic administration: Issues and trends (pp. 246–266). Hershey, PA: Idea GroupPublishing.

later, S., & Narver, J. (2000). Intelligence generation and superior customer value.Journal of the Academy of Marketing Research, 28(1), 120–127.

levin, J. (2000). The Internet and society. Cambridge: Polity Press.mall Business Administration. (2000). Small business expansions in electronic com-

merce: A look at how small firms are helping to share the fastest-growing segmentsof e-commerce. June. Available at: 〈www.sba.gov/advo/stats/e comm2.pdf〉.

towers, G. (1999). Becoming cyberactive: States and local governments on theWorld Wide Web. Government Information Quarterly, 16(2), 111–127.

trader, T., & Shaw, M. (2000). Electronic markets: Impact and implications. In M.Shaw, R. Blanning, T. Strader, & A. Whinston (Eds.), Handbook on electronic com-merce. New York, NY: Springer.

usman, T. (2001). The good, the bad and the ugly: E-government and the peo-ple’s right to know. Paper presented at Annual conference of the American LibraryAssociation, San Francisco, CA, June.

ymonds, M. (2000). Government and the internet: Quick fixes. The Economist, 355,13.

homas, J., & Streib, G. (2003). The new face of government: Citizen-initiated con-tacts in the era of e-government. Journal of Public Administration Research andTheory, 13(1), 83–102.

hompson, C. S. (2002). Enlisting on-line residents: Expanding the boundaries ofe-government in a Japanese rural township. Government Information Quarterly,19(2), 173–188.

hompson, D., Rust, R., & Rhoda, J. (2005). The business value of e-government forsmall firms. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 16(4), 385–407.

ian, J., & Tianfield, H. (2003). Some perspectives of e-government. In Proceedings of3rd European conference on E-government, MCIL.

ippins, M., & Sohi, R. (2003). IT competency and firm performance: Is organizationallearning a missing link? Strategic Management Journal, 24, 745–761.

orres, L., Pina, V., & Acerate, B. (2005). E-government developments on deliveringpublic services among EU cities. Government Information Quarterly, 22, 217–238.

ung, L., & Rieck, O. (2005). Adoption of electronic government services among busi-ness organizations in Singapore. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 14(4),417–440.

NPAN. (2001). Benchmarking E-government: A global perspective—Assessing theprogress of the UN Member States: Vol. 7 (p. 2003). A joint report of the UnitedNations Division for Public Economics and Public Administration. Available at:〈www.unpan.org/e-government/Benchmarking%20E-gov%2020001.pdf〉.

S Government. (2002, February 27). E-government strategy: Implementing the Pres-

ident’s management agenda for e-government—Simplified delivery of services tocitizens. 〈http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg/egovstrategy.pdf〉.

est, D. (2004). E-government and the transformation of service delivery and citizenattitudes. Public Administration Review, 64(1), 15–27.

est, D. M. (2002). State and Federal E-Government in the United States. Brown Uni-versity, Providence, RI. Available at: 〈www.insidepolitics.org/egovt02us.PDF〉.

l of Inf

W

W

ZZ

Z

MUnJM

tIam&rsim

KU

M.A. Badri, K. Alshare / International Journa

ong, W., & Welch, E. (2004). Does e-government promote accountability? Acomparative analysis of website openness and government accountability. Gov-ernance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 17(2),275–297.

orld Market Research Center—Global E-government report. (2001). Available at:〈www.worldmarketsanalysis.com/pdf/e-govreport.pdf〉.

emke, R., & Connellan, T. (2001). Online customers. Executive Excellence, 18(8), 3–6.hang, J. (2002). A critical review of the development of Chinese e-

government. Perspectives, 3(8). Available: 〈http://www.oycf.org/Perspectives/19 123102/eGovernment.htm〉.

hang, J., Dawes, S., & Sarkis, J. (2005). Exploring stakeholders’ expectations of thebenefits and barriers of e-government knowledge sharing. The Journal of Enter-prise Information Management, 18(5), 548–567.

asood A. Badri is a Professor of Production and Operations Management, UAEniversity. He has published more than 100 articles in major international jour-als such as European Journal of Operational Research, OMEGA, the International

ournal of Management Science, International Journal of Operations & Productionanagement, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Interna-

psobic

ormation Management 28 (2008) 524–535 535

ional Journal of Project Management, International Journal of Applied Management,nternational Journal of Educational Management, International Journal of Businessnd Public Administration, Journal of Simulation, International Journal of Manage-ent and Systems, International Journal of Information Management, ComputersOperations Research, Computers and Industrial Engineering, Energy, etc. His cur-

ent research interests include public quality management and satisfaction studies,trategic planning and policy, developing customer-based indexes, E-governmentndexes, forecasting planning and multivariate statistics, and structural equations

odeling.

haled A. Alshare is an associate professor of information systems at Emporia Stateniversity, USA. His teaching interests include systems analysis and design, MIS, and

roject management. His research interests include technology acceptance models,ystems development, end-user computing, distance education, and data envel-pment analysis (DEA). His work appeared in various academic journals. He haseen involved in professional organizations (e.g., DSI, SWDSI, AMCIS, and CCSC-CP)

n many capacities such as treasurer, papers chair, board member, and mini-trackhair.