Government Information Quarterly 28 (2011) 439–445

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Government Information Quarterly

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s ev i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / g ov i n f

The forgotten promise of e-government maturity: Assessing responsiveness in the

digital public sector
Kim Normann Andersen a, Rony Medaglia a,⁎, Ravi Vatrapu a, Helle Zinner Henriksen a, Robin Gauld b
a
Department of IT Management, Copenhagen Business School, Howitzvej 60, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark
b
Department of Preventive and Social Medicine, University of Otago, PO Box 913, Dunedin 9000, New Zealand

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Available online 15 August 2011 Assessing e-government responsiveness is one of the major gaps in the currently dominant e-government
maturity models. While we have a relatively large pool of models focusing on technological and
Keywords: organizational integration from a supply side perspective, measures of responsiveness of e-government
e-Government systems from a user perspective are still lacking. Replicating a study from New Zealand and Australia, this
Responsiveness study explores the response time and quality of e-mail response in Danish local and central governments
Maturity model
(N = 175). Despite that Denmark is high ranking in international benchmark studies, we find that one third of
Australia
Denmark
central government agencies did not respond at all, and close to 80% of the ministries provided none or
New Zealand incomplete answers. Local government responds faster and provides answers that are more complete and
accurate than those provided by central government. Implications for e-government are discussed.
© 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction selves and with each other and to carry out activities that support civic
life” (Robertson & Vatrapu, 2010, p. 319). Based on an analysis of several
The Scandinavian countries have a well-established record of top definitions of digital government, Robertson and Vatrapu (2010)
ranking in e-government service readiness in many international conclude that
studies and benchmarking reports (Economist Intelligence Unit, 2009;
United Nations Public Administration Network, 2010). High internet [T]he major stakeholders for digital government are citizens,
penetration rates, the development of an advanced private and public IT administrative bodies within government, and businesses. The aims
infrastructure, high digital literacy rates, and the extensive development are typical for ICT deployment: streamlining and simplifying
of digital services in the public sector make countries such as Denmark administrative processes, cost cutting, improving services, and
an ideal case for assessing the impact of information technology on the generally improving efficiency (Robertson & Vatrapu, 2010, p. 319).
changing relationship between public information systems and their
users, the citizens (Andersen, Bjørn-Andersen, & Dedrick, 2003). Despite the emergence of Web 2.0 and synchronous communica-
The digitalization of communication with citizens and businesses is tion technologies — such as chat and video conferencing — e-mail,
one of the cornerstones of the digitalization of the public sector which has been a frontrunner in citizen–government interaction
(Andersen, 2002). In the last decades, massive investments from before, and in parallel with, webpage-oriented online self-service, is
governments across the world have been directed for the design, still the dominant means of digital communication adopted in public
implementation, and management of information systems in public sector organizations. Facing time-consuming and costly communica-
agencies providing a window for online interaction with citizens and tion through ordinary postal services, e-mail provides a price
businesses. An increasing number of governments have now established competitive and more reliable channel for asynchronous communi-
a record of adopting national strategies for the adoption of e- cation for both the providers and users of e-government services.
government solutions, aimed at achieving objectives of increased e-Mail has been adopted by all government offices and became the
efficiency vis-à-vis businesses, citizens, and civil society organizations. preferred technology for transferring files from one office to another.
Digital government “encompasses the use of information and However, due to some of the inherent problems with it, governments
communication technologies (ICTs) to enable citizens, politicians, have recently tried to supplement the use of e-mail with self-service,
government agencies, and other organizations to work among them- using e-mail especially in relation to the unstructured information
that is often communicated through this channel. e-Mail communi-
cation is context-sensitive, and users can experience loss of meaning
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (K.N. Andersen), [email protected] (R. Medaglia),
or be provided with wrong information if the communication is
[email protected] (R. Vatrapu), [email protected] (H.Z. Henriksen), received out of its original context. e-Mail users also often experience
[email protected] (R. Gauld). information overload, e.g. when having to manage inboxes filled with

0740-624X/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.giq.2010.12.006
440 K.N. Andersen et al. / Government Information Quarterly 28 (2011) 439–445

irrelevant e-mails sent by mailing lists, unsolicited e-mails sent by responses, divided by country and institutional level. In the
spammers, and by unimportant e-mails cc'd to all recipients. conclusion we discuss the results and contributions of the study,
Furthermore, the use of asynchronous media such as e-mail often highlight limitations, and suggest directions for future research on IS
results in inconsistency in information content, since the frequency of responsiveness from a citizen point of view.
e-mail updates is not necessarily evenly distributed and synchronized
among the people working on a specific document. Yet, e-mail is 2. Responsiveness and e-government maturity models
widely spread in government and the most widely used medium of
information technology-enabled communication between citizens/ e-Government maturity models have gained popularity as a tool
companies and the public sector, whereas other technologies, such as for assessing, comparing, and benchmarking the progress and success
ftp, chat, social network services, are still marginal in use. of e-government implementation in public sector organizations. The
Information systems strategies in the public sector are now stage-based rationale behind e-government maturity models histor-
increasingly focused on shifting from a government-centered per- ically has drawn upon stage classifications in different academic
spective, to a user-centered one (OECD, 2009). In such a user-centered disciplines that revolved around the concept of “maturity” and
perspective, dimensions of citizen inclusion, participation, user “immaturity” to assess and compare progress. In the field of software
satisfaction and responsiveness gain crucial relevance (Scott, DeLone, process improvement, for instance, the Capability Maturity Model
& Golden, 2009). The measurement of e-government progress on the determines how structured the software development process is
supply-side (that is, the government-side) has progressed to a (Paulk, Curtis, Chrissis, & Weber, 1993), while in business economics
relevant extent, as testified by the growth of studies on issues such similar models can be found with regards to the Product Life Cycle
as public website sophistication, usability, etc., and the emergence of concept (Lancaster & Massingham, 1998; Robson, 1997), and in the
public and private initiatives of e-government performance ranking, field of Information Systems (IS) frequent references are made to the
benchmarking, and awards (Sørum, Medaglia, & Andersen, 2009). Stages of Growth Model (Galliers & Sutherland, 1991).
However, the demand-side (that is, the user/citizen-side) of e- The often cited article by Layne and Lee (2001) (861 citations on
government service measurement still remains underexplored. Google Scholar as of June 2011) published in Government Information
Critics argue that, despite large investments, e-government policy Quarterly in 2001, argues that progress on e-government data integration
makers are failing to achieve the objectives of increased efficiency, is a matter of technological and organizational complexity, and has
transparency, and responsiveness of the digital public services provided ground for a rich debate on how to design a maturity model that
(Goldfinch, 2007; Heeks & Bailur, 2007; Helbig, Ramón Gil-García, & would most usefully capture the real progress of e-government adoption
Ferro, 2009), but there is an absence of studies supporting these and its benefits (Grant & Chau, 2002; Reddick, 2004; Yang, 2003).
claims, and a lack of focus on the measurement of responsiveness of Andersen and Henriksen (2006) have attempted to extend the Layne
public information system-based services. As more and more citizens and Lee model by including a user perspective. They argue that Layne
are using public information systems to interact with government and and Lee “have done little more than replicated the stage models from
consume public services, the measurement of public information the e-commerce area focusing more on technological capabilities than
system success from a citizen perspective becomes one of the most on case handling and effectiveness in the public administration”
important aspects to focus on (Rosacker & Olson, 2008; Scott et al., (Andersen & Henriksen, 2006, p. 241). Andersen and Henriksen
2009; Wang & Liao, 2008). The responsiveness element of information propose to apply a user focus on one axis of the stage model, and
systems is particularly relevant in a public sector context, in which not on potential activities driven by digitalization on the other axis. The
only service efficiency, but also the very legitimacy of governmental focus shifts from capabilities of technologies within government, to
bodies is at stake. Further, for a modern welfare state such as activities for end users.
Denmark, responsiveness of public information system-based ser- The model opens a fundamental debate which Bannister (2007)
vices is even more relevant and important. continues. Bannister argues that indexes and rankings of nations,
This paper aims to assess the responsiveness of information which are often based on maturity models, tend to be meaningless
systems in the public sector by analyzing data on the e-mail response and serve the sole purpose of enhancing governments' chances of
time of public agencies in Denmark, compared to the public agencies achieving high international rankings. It is the “beauty contest”
in New Zealand and Australia, drawing on previous research by Gauld, (Sørum et al., 2009) of the nations rather than the benefits for the
Gray, and McComb (2009). In particular, we are interested in the citizens that drive e-government development. Because the maturity
efficiency and effectiveness of e-mail inquiries across the municipal, models hold the capacity to quantify e-government efforts and
regional and national levels of government in Denmark. We aim to to compare them across nations, they tend to be the driver for national
contribute to the development of a citizen-centered perspective in e- e-government policies and governance structures. In a recent review
government success measurement. of impacts of e-government initiatives, as they are presented in the
The design of this study on e-mail response times in the public literature, this tendency is confirmed (Andersen et al., 2010). Fifty-five
sector closely follows the approach of a study conducted in New percent of the reported studies referred to impact-related capabilities
Zealand and Australia (Gauld et al., 2009). Although there are other of e-government initiatives rather than to strengthened interaction
studies on e-mail responsiveness in the public sector (Dečman, 2005; with users of e-government services, improved work conditions for
Kunstelj & Dečman, 2005; West, 2004), we have chosen to follow the civil servants, or value distribution. The results of the review indicate
overall research design of the New Zealand/Australia study both to that measurable achievements in e-government are pursued rather
help with solving the general information systems (IS) challenge of a than more intangible initiatives.
lack of cumulative studies, and to provide comparability between One of the fundamental elements of adopting a user perspective is
cases that are perceived to be similarly high-ranking, according to the ability to assess responsiveness of e-government services. As stated
global e-government readiness studies. by West (2004): “While it is important to have e-mail addresses
The next section discusses responsiveness as a needed input for available on government websites, they serve no purpose unless
the further development of e-government maturity models. The someone actually reads and responds to the messages that are received”
following section presents the case of Denmark, compared to the (West, 2004, p. 22). e-Mail responsiveness is important from both the
cases of Australia and New Zealand, and their relevance against government and user/citizen perspectives. From the government
international rankings of e-government readiness. After a section that perspective, e-mail responsiveness is an important component in
provides information on data collection and data analysis, we discuss assessing public sector service efficiency, effectiveness, and transparency
comparative data on e-mail response times and content quality of the against internally stated service commitments and external benchmarks
 K.N. Andersen et al. / Government Information Quarterly 28 (2011) 439–445 441

and standards. From a user/citizen perspective, e-mail responsiveness is digitalize internal and external processes with the objective of accom-
a critical component of satisfaction. Given the near instantaneous and plishing more with fewer resources.
simultaneous multimedia communicative capabilities of the New Media, The case of Denmark is captivating for two reasons: the long time span
such as instant messaging environments, social networking sites, and of adoption and exploitation of IT prior to the current e-government
social sharing sites, users bring expectations from their personal, social wave, and the strategic commitment to face challenges and formulate
and professional experiences with information and communications explicit milestones for the success of e-government strategies (Henriksen
technologies (ICT) into their digital interactions with the government. & Andersen, 2004).
Recently, Scott et al. (2009) have attempted to identify net benefits The high degree of computerization of Danish government did
of e-government, highlighting the role of time as an important not happen overnight or by adding instant doses of technology
indicator of responsiveness. Time as a net benefit can be conceptu- and organizational transformation. On the contrary, the Danish
alized in five generic forms. story is the evidence of the value of building on top of solid ground
work. e-Government in Denmark is in what can be considered as the
1) First, time savings for retrieving information can be a relative variable
next stage in a 30 year long trend in which digital exchange of messages,
construct measuring, for example, how long it would take to retrieve
issues of interoperability, and semantic challenges have been addressed
a certain piece of information from one communication channel as
long before the era of e-government. With 60–70% of the Danish Gross
compared to another (i.e., personal contact versus web browsing).
Domestic Product (GDP) being reallocated through government, and
2) Second, time savings can denote reconfigured process-initiated time
about one third of the workforce employed in the public sector, it is hard
savings achieved through better integrated information systems that
to find another case where the public sector plays such an equally critical
enable the user to reuse data and/or e.g. auto-completed fields that
role in an economy that has, at the same time, managed to stay efficient
the users can skip during their use of the web-based self-service.
in the global economy.
3) Third, time savings can be measured directly or indirectly, the
The second reason to pay attention to the Danish case is the unique
former measuring the direct and observable time spent retrieving
strategic commitment to ensure that the use of IT must create value for
and processing information, and the latter calculating the direct
citizens and companies, directly via online services and equally directly
and indirect impacts of the more timely information retrieved. For
via a more efficient public sector (Andersen, Henriksen, & Rasmussen,
example, a web-based health portal can lead to direct time savings
2007). The policy commitment to use IT to transform the public sector
in retrieving information on diabetes for the patient searching for
is backed by explicitly defined criteria for successful implementation of
information on injection adjustments. Using this information can
e-government solutions. Facing challenges in reaching the strategic
lead to indirect time savings at a general practitioner's office and in
objectives, e-government implementation policies have shifted from a
hospitals.
knowledge transfer and standard setting perspective, towards direct
4) Fourth, in many e-government settings we can identify a reciprocal
enforcement which forces companies to deliver invoices in digital format
time savings problem, or a time paradox, with government viewing
and abandon physical salary transfer notices for public employees.
time savings as a variable that can lead to monetary savings
In Table 1 we list the latest global e-government rankings for
(time× salary), and citizens viewing time savings as a mean or as
Denmark, Australia, and New Zealand, as reported by the United
integrated part of the service isolated from monetary variables. In the
Nations, the OECD, the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), and Waseda
context of the study we present in this paper, however, we explore
University. In all four reports the three countries rank in the top
business use of e-mail to retrieve information from the public sector.
twenty positions. Looking at the average ranking between the four
In this case we assume that both government and business would
international rankings, Denmark leads by being ranked number 6,
view time as positively correlated with cost: the more time spent, the
Australia number 9, and New Zealand number 14.
more costly the delivery/retrieval of information.
A common denominator of global e-government rankings is that
5) Lastly, the time variable can be perceived as the time it takes before
they have central government as their main focus, and fall short of
information becomes meaningless or of no value if the information is
providing detailed data on the levels of government other than the
not delivered within a certain time frame. For example, a delivering
national one. This can be considered a shortcoming when dimensions
company that needs to deliver a parcel to a public agency office has
such as responsiveness need to be investigated, as it is to be expected
more use of information on office opening hours and location if the
that different levels of government (local, regional, national) have
information is delivered promptly and less, if any, use of the
different mission statements as far as service provision is concerned,
information if the information is delivered after three days.
and therefore may practice very diverse response behavior.
The quality of information can be considered as a fundamental The global e-government ranking studies vary greatly in the number
indicator for understanding the success of public information systems, and types of indicators they use to assess e-government progress. Some
especially with regards to the overall component of citizen responsive- of them tend to consider responsiveness within a wider range of
ness. Keeping the example of the delivering company interacting with a indicators, while others do not include it at all. The Waseda rankings
public agency via e-mail, we should then consider the relevance of (Waseda University Institute of e-Government, 2010), for instance,
content quality of a public agency's response. When asked for a simple focus on areas such as network preparedness, interface applications
piece of information, such as office location and opening hours, there required for robust e-government, the management of e-government,
was a substantial difference in terms of e-government responsiveness homepage development, the existence of Chief Information Officers, and
success results when the agency replies with complete or incomplete the promotion of e-government, without including the responsiveness
information, wrong information, or exceeds user expectations by
providing extra information via the digital channel.
Table 1
3. Case presentation International rankings of e-government: Denmark, Australia, and New Zealand (2009,
2010).

Countries across the world pursuing strategies to leverage technology Denmark Australia New Zealand
to offer better and more efficient services to citizens, companies, and United Nations (2010) 7 8 14
other parts of government, are now facing severe budgetary constraints, OECD (2009) 3 18 15
also as a result of the global financial crisis. The expectation that the Economist Intelligence Unit (2009) 1 6 11
implementation of IT can lead to cost savings has driven e-government Waseda University (2010) 13 5 15
Average ranking 6 9 14
frontrunners, such as the high-ranking Scandinavian countries, to
442 K.N. Andersen et al. / Government Information Quarterly 28 (2011) 439–445

dimension. On the other hand, the UN index, which assesses response analysis. A study that included several governmental councils
government websites for providing online information and participa- and boards could therefore have had a different outcome than this
tory tools and services to the people, includes the dimension of the study.
provision of participatory tool to citizens by governments. To reduce the risk of being delayed or rejected by spam filters, we
It has to be noted that most of these global rankings tend to not sent out individual e-mails to each respondent. Using mailing lists, cc,
include the actual usage of e-government services within their pool of or any automated distribution would be likely to create noise in the
indicators, and only recently have started doing so. The report by process of getting the e-mails to the respondents at the same time.
the Economist Intelligence Unit (Economist Intelligence Unit, 2009) Consequently, we did not receive any rejected mails or errors in mail
includes data on the use of internet by consumers, the use of online addresses.
public services by citizens and the use of online public services by The responses of each respondent were exported from a Gmail
businesses, while the OECD 2009 report adopts a user-centered account to Microsoft Excel 2007 TM for quantitative and qualitative
approach by benchmarking data on online sophistication for citizens coding and analysis of the empirical data. We included response
with statistics of e-government usage (OECD, 2009). time of auto-reply and proper responses, and coded the responses
Although there is some variance, the overall message from the according to how complete each answer was with respect to the two
rankings is that all three countries are leading the transformation of aspects of the question (office location and office working hours).
society by applying IT and are seated comfortably in their progress The messages were categorized in four groups: (a) responses that
toward the information society. As shown later in this paper, data answer both questions (opening hours and office location) and provided
from the survey in Denmark and the data collected in New Zealand additional information, such as attached maps and GPS coordinates of
and Australia challenge the glorified view of the three countries. the office location; (b) responses that contain information about office
hours and location; (c) partially incomplete responses that provide
4. Data collection information about office hours or location and (d) responses that
contain incomplete or no content. We did not validate whether the
In March 2010 we sent an e-mail message to all Danish municipal- information received corresponds to the actual office location or office
ities (98), regions (5), ministries (19) and a range of national agencies hours.
and governmental institutions (53). The e-mail message was entitled
(in the subject heading) “Removal of transit” and presented the 5. Findings
following content in the body: “I have to pick up a consignment from
your municipality. Could you provide me with your address and opening In the Danish survey, 88.3% of the respondents provided an answer
hours? Yours sincerely, Jens Pedersen, JP Freight”. The word “munici- by e-mail. The corresponding response rate in New Zealand was 89.3%
pality” was replaced with the agency or ministry or regional office, and in Australia 67.5%. There are few populations in which survey data
depending on who was receiving the e-mail. The subject header differed can demonstrate a 100% response rate. For the Danish municipalities,
from the Australian and New Zealand study, since they wrote “location there was a 100% response rate and a high number (17%) that delivered
and hours”. There is no reason to believe that this difference had any an auto-reply acknowledging that the e-mail had been received.
impact of completion rate or delays caught by spam filters. The message Also, Australia is trailing Denmark and New Zealand with regards
was sent from a Gmail account created for the purpose, with the firm to the percentage that responds within the first 24 h and the median
“JPFragt” as the sender. response time. In Australia, only 62% of the respondents provided an
The e-mail was sent after regular working hours to the official e-mail answer within the first 24 working hours and had a median response
addresses shown on each public institution's website. Sending the time of 4.43 h. In New Zealand, the median response time was 1.41 h
e-mail after regular working hours was done to make sure that and in Denmark 2.72 h.
respondents could have the message in their inboxes by the beginning Considering the context of the e-mail, a swift reply appears
of the following working day, and also enabled us to track the number of important for maximizing the net benefits of the response. For the
auto-reply messages. We registered all receipts of auto-reply messages, JPFragt parcel company that had to pick up the package at the office,
and the time of each response. knowing the location and opening hours as early as possible may be
The list of respondents in municipalities, regions and ministries was correlated with the usefulness of the information. Following this
a clearly defined population, whereas the governing and governmental proposition, the median for elapsed working hours since the mail was
monetary financial institutions are a large and heterogeneous group. It sent indicates a significant difference in net benefit between
must be noted that we did not make a stratified selection or carry out a Denmark, New Zealand, and Australia. In Table 2 we have summarized

Table 2
Overview of e-mails sent, response rates, time in Denmark, New Zealand, and Australia.

Municipalities Regions/state Ministries/federal Agencies and other Total

governmental institutions

No. of e-mails sent Denmark 98 5 19 51 175

New Zealand 81 n.a. 35 n.a. 113
Australia n.a. 145 15 n.a. 160
Replied to e-mails sent (% is out of e-mails sent) Denmark 100% 100% 78.9% 74.5% 88.3%
New Zealand 91.3% n.a. 84.3% n.a. 89.3%
Australia n.a. 68.2% 60% n.a. 67.5%
Had auto response Denmark 17.3% 0% 5.2% 11.8% 13.7%
New Zealand 11.1% n.a. 6.2% n.a. 9.7%
Australia n.a. 7.5% 0% n.a. 6.8%
Replies within 24 h (% out of e-mails sent) Denmark 93.8% 100% 78.9% 72.5% 86.3%
New Zealanda 90.1% n.a. 84.3% n.a. 88.5%
Australiaa n.a. 63.4% 46.6% n.a. 61.8%
Median time to reply (hours) Denmark 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.72
New Zealand 1.25 n.a. 2.06 n.a. 1.41
Australia n.a. 4.69 2.46 n.a. 4.43
a
Note: In the Australian and New Zealand study the % refers to 45 workings hours elapsed, while in Denmark it refers to 24 working hours.
 K.N. Andersen et al. / Government Information Quarterly 28 (2011) 439–445 443

data on e-mails sent, response rates, and response time in Denmark,

New Zealand, and Australia.
All municipalities and regions in Denmark responded largely
within the first 24 h after the e-mail requests were sent. At the Danish
central state level the picture was less positive, as after three working
days 20–30% of the agencies had not answered but, overall, public
agencies in Denmark perform the best, followed by New Zealand and
Australia. Missing responses from the Danish central state level
included: the Ministry of Culture, the Ministry of Social Affairs, the
National Board of Industrial Injuries, the Emergency Management
Agency, the Environmental Appeal Board, the Agency for Spatial and
Environmental Planning, the Forest and Nature Agency, the Agency
for Science, Technology and Innovation, the Enterprise and Construc-
tion Authority, the University and Property Agency, the Danish Arts
Foundation, the Patent and Trademark Office, and the Palaces and
Properties Agency. In Fig. 1 we have mapped the response times of
Danish municipalities, regions, and national agencies and ministries.
The horizontal axis indicates the number of working hours elapsed
after the e-mails were sent, starting from 7:30 in the morning, to
4:30 pm. A number of municipalities have responded outside this
period of time, while the state agencies all answered only within the
official opening time. This further confirms the image of municipal- Fig. 2. e-Mail response time of Denmark, Australia, and New Zealand.
Note: Fig. 2 does not include data for responses that were received after more than
ities and regions as frontrunners in quick and rich responses. As
24 working hours for New Zealand. As for Denmark, no responses were recorded
previously mentioned, the design of the study was identical to the one between 24 and 48 working hours, whereas in Australia five more responses came
carried out in New Zealand and Australia. In Fig. 2 we compare the in during this second 24 working hour leg.
average response times from Denmark, to New Zealand and Australia.
Although attempts at comparing data must be done with caution,
it is striking that Danish municipalities are performing significantly “C” answers include responses to either office hours or location. Lastly,
better than the Australian and New Zealand counterparts, who have Type “D” indicates missing answers.
received an identical e-mail. While New Zealand performs better than As far as content and quality of responses is concerned, the Danish
Australia, as far as response time is concerned, the Danish munici- municipalities performed better than the Australian ones, but the New
palities show a better outcome. It has to be noted that data included in Zealand counterparts had a higher percentage responding to both issues
Fig. 2 refers to all administrative levels of the two countries (Australia (opening hours and location). It is striking that almost all Danish
and New Zealand), but in our background data analysis we also have municipalities and regions provide adequate responses, and that more
data for the municipal level. This data will be included in future than half of the Ministries delivered deficient responses. Moreover,
analytical work. One of the remarkable tendencies is that for the first 23.8% of the New Zealand municipalities gave more information than
third of the responses, Denmark and New Zealand are on a par in their asked for, whereas only 3% of the Danish municipalities did so.
response times, whereas the Australian e-government responses are Overall, it is striking to notice that in all three countries the ministries
lagging behind. are the level of government that performs the worst, compared to
In Table 3 we provide a detailed overview of the quality of the regions and municipalities. This is the case both in regards to the
answers by respondents in the three countries. Type “A” answers quantity of answers, and the quality of the responses given.
correspond to adequate responses – i.e. the indication of opening Reasons for such a difference in responsiveness are likely to be
hours and office location, together with more extensive information, found in different aspects of the institutional arrangements of the
such as e.g. attached maps, GPS coordinates. Type “B” answers three countries. While this study does not focus on institutional
indicate responses that include both office hours and location. Type variables that could explain responsiveness performances, it can be
hypothesized that local authorities, being usually smaller and more
agile organizations, are therefore more able to respond to interactions
initiated by external users. Moreover, it can be argued that the local
institutional milieu is, in fact, the one in which the relationship
between public sector and citizenry takes place most intensely: local
governments are usually the natural environments for the develop-
ment of new forms of citizen involvement (Rose & Sæbø, 2005). The
established tradition of participatory practices at the local level, such
as the ones of participatory budgeting, townhall meetings, delibera-
tive polls etc., is linked to the deep intertwining that exists between
the local tier of government and participatory policies. Lastly, in
national e-government strategies local authorities are often given the
natural role of being front-end of the national system of ICT-enabled
citizen services (OECD, 2003).

6. Conclusion and avenues for advancing the knowledge on

e-government success

According to the International Standards Organization's standard

Fig. 1. e-Mail response time of Danish municipalities, regions, ministries and agencies/ ISO 9241–11, usability is the extent to which a product can be used by
governmental institutions. specified users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and
444 K.N. Andersen et al. / Government Information Quarterly 28 (2011) 439–445

Table 3
Overview of the content of answers by respondents in Denmark, New Zealand, and Australia.

Municipalities Regions Ministries Agencies and other Total

governmental institutions

Answered both questions (% out of e-mails sent) Denmark 74.4% 100% 21.1% 58.8% 63.5%
New Zealand 81.5% n.a. 56.2% n.a. 74.3%
Australia n.a. 35.8% 20% n.a 34.3%
Overall quality of response Denmark A = 3.0% A = 0% A = 0% A = 0% A = 0.7%
B = 71.4% B = 100% B = 21.0% B = 58.8% B = 62.8%
C = 28.5% C = 0% C = 57.8% C = 15.6% C = 25.5%
D = 0% D = 0% D = 21.0% D = 25.4% D = 11.6%
New Zealand A = 23.8% n.a. A = 8.5% n.a. A = 13.1%
B = 55.9% B = 42.8% B = 33.4%
C = 8.3% C = 22.8% C = 21.6%
D = 11.9% D = 25.7% D = 31.8%
Australia n.a. A = 9.7% A = 4.7% n.a. A = 9.1%
B = 23% B = 9.5% B = 21.5%
C = 27.2% C = 28.5% C = 27.4%
D = 40% D = 57.1% D = 41.9%

Note: The gap between some of the figures in the row “answered both questions” and the sum of figures of “A” and “B” type responses is to be explained by the presence of wrong
answers by respondents.

satisfaction in a specified context of use. In the realm of e-government, the We aimed at filling a gap in understanding net benefits of
“specified users” are the major stakeholders (citizens, public sector e-government from an information systems (IS) perspective, by
employees, businesses). The “specified context of use” could be as analyzing data on responsiveness in using e-mail communication,
mundane as sending an e-mail inquiring about the office location and which is the dominant information system in the public sector. Although
opening hours, or as complex as filling out online tax forms. The “specified we are witnessing the beginning of a growth of studies on the benefits of
goals” are the immediate goals of the citizen users of the e-government the use of IS in the public sector interaction with citizens and companies,
information systems, as well as the systemic goals set by the government research on the topic area is still largely dominated by approaches that
(such as efficiency, cost savings, transparency, accountability etc.). In focus on the diffusion and adoption of e-government services from a
this study we have measured effectiveness and efficiency of one particular supply-side perspective.
e-government information system (e-mail) from a (fictive) user One of the limitations of this study is that we have not conducted
perspective. Clearly, there is room for replicating the study from a citizen an analysis of the institutional reality of these different governmental
point of view to determine subjective notions of efficiency, effectiveness levels from an information systems perspective. That is, in this paper
and satisfaction. we did not inquire into the organizational structures, information
The swift and accurate response by Danish municipalities is technology policies, and managerial practices for handling citizen
contrasted by the slow and incomplete responses by central govern- inquiries. This was highlighted one decade ago by Jane Fountain
ment offices. Similar contrasts were found in the Australian and New (Fountain, 2001). She argued that the organizational change plays a
Zealand studies. In Denmark, nearly one-third of national authorities central role when establishing a virtual government. In one of her
have not responded after three full working days. Moreover, munici- reported case studies Fountain observed that especially responses
palities respond with richer information, for example by attaching a to e-mail can be a problem in larger agencies because responsibility of
map and/or indicating GPS coordinates. e-mail handling has never been properly delegated to a particular
Interpreting the data from the e-mail survey as an indicator of digital person (Fountain, 2001, p. 158).
skeletons and a horror cabinet, rather than a glorifying image as leader Data collection was carried out using the internet to distribute the
of the information society, is not likely to be popular among policy survey instrument. However, given its audience it is questionable if the
makers and advocates for more e-government. Yet, the data from caveats normally raised in relation to internet research were challenged.
central government in Denmark clearly indicates that the patterns of Buchanan (2009) highlights the problem of anonymity of the sender of a
sending e-mails and not receiving complete and timely response do not survey instrument in internet-based data collection, and in particular
correspond to the international high rankings. Comparing data from the issue of the informants not being aware of their participation in
Australia, New Zealand, and Denmark reveals not only the skeletons of studies (for example, when Facebook behavior is observed). In our case,
central government, it also allows for formulating the interpretation the fictive sender of the e-mail responded to the official e-mail entry of
that the international rankings require some revision. In the interna- the organization asking a harmless question. However, there was one
tional rankings New Zealand is trailing the two other countries, but in problem: the recipients of the e-mail did not get any direct information
the e-mail response time and content quality, New Zealand is either on a about their participation in the experiment. This problem represents an
par with or, in some instances, ahead of Denmark. Australia is in all ethical issue which should be dealt with in a more careful manner in
variables lagging behind Denmark and New Zealand. future studies.
Though the results should be interpreted with care due to the limited Moreover, a valid methodological concern was whether the e-mails
scope of the study which, after all, only focused on a single semi- we sent in this survey could have been perceived as unserious, as
automated service (e-mail), the study has highlighted the weakness of senders usually are expected to be able to find information on physical
maturity models as an instrument for national rankings. The three addresses and office opening hours on the website by themselves. While
countries included in the e-mail study are all ranked highly in various this theoretically could be the case, the high response rate in the
indexes. Nonetheless, when it comes to actual service of citizens and municipalities made this assumption unlikely to be valid. Assuming that
businesses, e-government services fail to deliver. This indicates that the difference in response from local and central government can be
rankings only tell half the story. One recommendation that is in line with explained by some recipients perceiving that the mails were irrelevant,
the aforementioned Andersen and Henriksen (2006) maturity model is we could nonetheless not explain why the data in Denmark as well as in
to include other indicators in the maturity model. Such indicators need New Zealand and Australia clearly show a difference in how fast they
to focus on servicing end-users rather than the public administration. respond, in the response rate, and in the content/quality of the response.
 K.N. Andersen et al. / Government Information Quarterly 28 (2011) 439–445 445

An issue that will be worth considering in further research concerns Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional e-government: A four-stage
model. Government Information Quarterly, 18(2), 122–136.
the use of fictive users in assessing responsiveness. While simulating a OECD (2003). The e-government imperative: Main findings. Paris: OECD.
fictive user for collecting data on the interaction processes between OECD (2009). Rethinking e-government services: User-centred approaches. Paris: OECD.
citizens and e-government systems has obvious advantages of saving Paulk, M. C., Curtis, B., Chrissis, M. B., & Weber, C. V. (1993). Capability maturity model,
version 1.1. Software, IEEE, 10(4), 18–27.
time and resources and replicability, there are strong arguments in favor Reddick, C. G. (2004). A two-stage model of e-government growth: Theories and
of alternative strategies, such as real user experiments, “proxy users”, and empirical evidence for U.S. cities. Government Information Quarterly, 21(1), 51–64.
so forth. Robertson, S., & Vatrapu, R. (2010). Digital government. Annual Review of Information
Science and Technology, 44, 317–364.
The research model we have used in this study clearly does not allow Robson, W. (1997). Strategic management and information systems. Harlow, NY: Prentice
us to give explanations of the findings and we therefore encourage Hall.
further research. One thing that would be valuable to investigate is if Rosacker, K. M., & Olson, D. L. (2008). Public sector information system critical success
factors. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 2(1), 60–70.
there is a difference in explicit e-mail policy, with more direct and
Rose, J., & Sæbø, Ø. (2005). Democracy squared: Designing on-line political communities to
instrumental e-mail policies in local government compared to central accommodate conflicting interests. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 17(2),
government. Another avenue of follow-up research is to investigate if 133–168.
there is a systematic difference in staffing with one person in charge in Scott, M., DeLone, W., & Golden, W. (2009). Understanding net benefits: A citizen-based
perspective on e-government success. ICIS 2009 proceedings Retrieved from. http://aisel.
municipalities and several in charge of answering the e-mails sent to the aisnet.org/icis2009/86
official e-mail address in central government. Following this proposi- Sørum, H., Medaglia, R., & Andersen, K. (2009). Assessment of website quality:
tion, it could be that the incoming e-mails in central government fall Scandinavian web awards right on track? Electronic Government, 5693. (pp. 198–209).
United Nations Public Administration Network (2010). e-Government survey 2010:
between the cracks. Future research could also examine the presence Leveraging e-government at a time of financial and economic crisis. New York: United
and responsiveness of government agencies on social networking sites Nations.
such as Facebook (http://www.facebook.com) and micro-blogging sites Wang, Y., & Liao, Y. (2008). Assessing e-government systems success: A validation of the
DeLone and McLean model of information systems success. Government Information
such as Twitter (http://www.twitter.com). Instead of waiting for Quarterly, 25(4), 717–733.
citizens to contact the government at the touchpoints of government Waseda University Institute of e-Government (2010). 2010 Waseda University e-
websites and e-mail systems, it could be that the government goes to the government ranking: Author.
West, D. M. (2004). e-Government and the transformation of service delivery and
new media “virtual publics” to deliver services in-situ. citizen attitudes. Public Administration Review, 64(1), 15–27.
Yang, K. (2003). Neoinstitutionalism and e-government: Beyond Jane Fountain. Social
Science Computer Review, 21(4), 432–442.
References
Andersen, K. (2002). Public sector process rebuilding using information systems. Kim Normann Andersen is Professor in the Department of IT Management at
Proceedings of electronic government: First international conference, EGOV 2002 Copenhagen Business School (CBS), and study manager for the e-business program at
(pp. 37–44). Springer. the IT University of Copenhagen. He has been visiting professor at School of
Andersen, K. V., & Henriksen, H. Z. (2006). e-Government maturity models: Extension Information Systems, Deakin University, Australia (2004), the Department of
of the Layne and Lee model. Government Information Quarterly, 23(2), 236–248. Economics, Statistics, and Information Systems (ESI), Örebro University, Sweden
Andersen, K. V., Henriksen, H. Z., & Rasmussen, E. B. (2007). Re-organizing government (2003), part-time visiting professor, Aalborg University, Denmark (Fall 2005), visiting
using IT: The Danish model. In P. G. Nixon, & V. N. Koutrakou (Eds.), e-Government researcher at Tokyo University (1996–1997), and visiting scholar at the University of
in Europe: Re-booting the state (pp. 103–118). London: Routledge. California at Irvine, Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations
Andersen, K. N., Henriksen, H. Z., Medaglia, R., Danziger, J. N., Sannarnes, M. K., & (1991-92 + 1993). He has authored more than 200 titles, among these, journal papers
Enemærke, M. (2010). Fads and facts of e-government: A review of impacts of e- and books on IT in government.
government (2003–2009). International Journal of Public Administration, 33(11),
564–579.
Rony Medaglia is Assistant Professor in the Department of IT Management at Copenhagen
Andersen, K., Bjørn-Andersen, N., & Dedrick, J. (2003). Governance initiatives creating a
Business School (CBS). His research focus is on IT in the public sector, and he has authored
demand-driven e-commerce approach: The case of Denmark. The Information
publications in international journals and conferences, including Communications of the
Society: An International Journal, 19(1), 95–105.
Association for Information Systems, Information Polity, the International Journal of Public
Bannister, F. (2007). The curse of the benchmark: An assessment of the validity and
Administration, the International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), the Mediterra-
value of e-government comparisons. International Review of Administrative Sciences,
nean Conference on Information Systems (MCIS), and the International Conference on
73(2), 171–188.
Database and Expert Systems Applications (DEXA). He has taken part in DEMO_net and the
Buchanan, E. A. (2009). Internet research ethics: Past, present, and future. In R. Burnett,
eGovMoNet projects, both funded by the European Commission.
M. Consalvo, & C. Ess (Eds.), The handbook of internet studies (pp. 83–107). West
Sussex, UK: Blackwell.
Dečman, M. (2005). Responsiveness of e-government and the case of Slovenia. Ravi Vatrapu is Associate Professor in the Department of IT Management at Copenhagen
Proceedings of the 5th European conference on e-government (pp. 127–136). Business School (CBS). His research focus is on Computer Supported Intercultural
Economist Intelligence Unit (2009). e-Readiness rankings 2009. The usage imperative. Collaboration (CSIC), Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL), and e-Politics.
Retrieved from. graphics.eiu.com/pdf/E-readiness%20rankings.pdf He has authored publications in international journals and conferences, including
Fountain, J. E. (2001). Building the virtual state — Information technology and institutional Information Polity, Journal of Information Technology & Politics, International Journal of
change. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution. Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, Hawai'i International Conference on the System
Galliers, R. D., & Sutherland, A. R. (1991). Information systems management and Sciences (HICSS), International Conference on Digital Government Research (dg.o).
strategy formulation: the ‘stages of growth’ model revisited. Information Systems
Journal, 1(2), 89–114.
Helle Zinner Henriksen holds a position as Associate Professor in digital government
Gauld, R., Gray, A., & McComb, S. (2009). How responsive is e-government? Evidence
in the Department of IT Management at Copenhagen Business School. She has a degree
from Australia and New Zealand. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 69–74.
in Law from University of Copenhagen and a PhD in MIS from Department of
Goldfinch, S. (2007). Pessimism, computer failure, and information systems develop-
Informatics at Copenhagen Business School. Her research interests include eGovern-
ment in the public sector. Public Administration Review, 67(5), 917–929.
ment with particular focus on adoption and diffusion of IT innovations in the public
Grant, G., & Chau, D. (2002). Developing a generic framework for e-government.
sector including the understanding of institutional instruments which can stimulate
Advanced Topics in Global Information Management, 5, 72–101.
adoption and diffusion of IT. Most recently she has worked on inclusive eGovernment
Heeks, R., & Bailur, S. (2007). Analyzing e-government research: Perspectives,
and IT investments in the public sector. Helle Zinner Henriksen has published in some
philosophies, theories, methods, and practice. Government Information Quarterly,
of the leading eGovernment journals such as Government Information Quarterly, The
24(2), 243–265.
Electronic Journal of e-Government and International Journal of Electronic Govern-
Helbig, N., Ramón Gil-García, J., & Ferro, E. (2009). Understanding the complexity of
ment Research and in IS journals such as the European Journal of Information Systems,
electronic government: Implications from the digital divide literature. Government
Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, Journal of Information Technology and
Information Quarterly, 26(1), 89–97.
Knowledge, Technology, and Policy, and has presented her work at leading
Henriksen, H. Z., & Andersen, K. V. (2004). Diffusion of e-commerce in Denmark: An
eGovernment and IS conferences. Helle Zinner Henriksen can be contacted at, hzh.
analysis of institutional intervention. Knowledge, Technology, and Policy (KTP), 17(2),
[email protected]. For more information see http://www.HelleZinnerHenriksen.info.
63–81.
Kunstelj, M., & Dečman, M. (2005). Current state of e-government in Slovenian
municipalities. The Electronic Journal of e-Government, 3(3), 117–128. Robin Gauld is Associate Professor of Health Policy, Department of Preventive and
Lancaster, G., & Massingham, L. (1998). Marketing management: McGraw-Hill. Social Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.