A Literature Review On Quality Models For Online E-Government Services

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287645907
A Literature Review on Quality Models for Online
E-Government Services
CHAPTER · JANUARY 2015
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-9803-1.ch008
READS
6
3 AUTHORS:
Filipe Alexandre Sá
Municipio de Penacova
9 PUBLICATIONS 19 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Álvaro Rocha
University of Coimbra
SEE PROFILE
Manuel Pérez Cota
University of Vigo
SEE PROFILE
All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate,
letting you access and read them immediately.
Available from: Álvaro Rocha
Retrieved on: 11 January 2016

154
Copyright © 2016, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
Chapter 8
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-9803-1.ch008
ABSTRACT
The study presented in this chapter will serve as a basis for the development of a suitable methodology
whose purpose is to evaluate the quality of Local e-Government online services. Citizens expect quality
public services, and their online dimension is no exception. The quality of these services should be ana-
lysed and accounted for, in order to maximize and develop strategies that improve the ofered services,
increasing the levels of satisfaction of their recipients. In this sense, this irst study puts forth a system-
atization of the relevant bibliography, focusing on the quality of two types of services: traditional and
e-Government. Each methodology was analysed in order to identify the main quality dimensions used.
Up to the present moment, the identiication of a service quality evaluation method particularly focused
on local online e-Government wasn’t achieved, and this justiies the development of an investigation
project whose main purpose is to create such methodology in this ield.
INTRODUCTION
An e-Service in the government context consists in the provision of transactions by the online channel.
For example, requesting and paying a licence for building.
The provision of services in governmental portals is a constant which as influenced the strategies
of electronic services offered by several Governments all over the World. More than offering services,
A Literature Review on
Quality Models for Online
E-Government Services
Filipe Sá
University of Vigo, Spain
Alvaro Rocha
University of Coimbra, Portugal
Manuel Pérez-Cota
University of Vigo, Spain

155
A Literature Review on Quality Models for Online E-Government Services
development related policies have tried to widen the scope of their actions, bringing together the nec-
essary aspects for an accurate alignment between the implementation of public services and the needs
of the population. Consequently, Local Public Administrations are nowadays faced with a challenge of
administrative modernization, which tries to draw citizens closer to their services and, concurrently, to
dematerialize their processes (Rocha & Sá, 2013; Sá & Rocha, 2012).
Over the last years, the quality of services in the public sector has given way to significant concerns.
Many organizations have started to self-assess and measure the quality of the services they provide
(Papadomichelaki, Magoutas, Halaris, Apostolou, & Mentzas, 2006).
The European Commission (2013), in a press release, declared that in the universe of EU Citizens,
46% use the Internet to look for a job, to use the public library, to submit tax declarations, to register
births, to request a passport or to use other public administration services. In the same document, it is
said that 80% of the citizens believe that the public services offered on the Internet allow them to save
time, 76% appreciate their flexibility and 62% claim to save money with them. Consequently, it is of
the utmost importance to create and study methodologies and concepts that measure, in the context of
local municipalities, the quality of online e-Government services, in order to improve both the services
and the satisfaction level.
In the course of this study, a bibliographic review was carried out and relevant methodologies that
are used to measure the quality of two types of services were analysed: traditional and e-Government
services. The present chapter is the first step in a path that will lead to the creation or adaptation of a
methodology that is capable of globally evaluating the quality of services in a local online e-Government
context, by focusing on the dimensions of several existing methodologies. The main purpose of this
chapter is, therefore, to put into context and prepare the way for a more in-depth study which adapts or
creates, if necessary, a comprehensive evaluation methodology for local online e-Governments.
Accordingly, in the following sections, the framework was set and quality was defined according to
two types of services - traditional and e-Government services - and relevant methodologies that were
validated in several studies were analysed, focusing particularly on the main dimensions used by the
authors to put into practice their service quality measurements. This being the first step in a long path,
the intention is that, by the end of this chapter, the reader understands the direction and the method that
will be followed in order to use, adapt or create a methodology that is capable of measuring the quality
of local online e-Government services.
SERVICE QUALITY
Ever since the dawn of civilization, human beings resort to others for the provision of services. These
services vary from their most traditional format to modern day electronic services.
According to Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1985), when the consumer purchases a good in the
traditional way, he evaluates that purchase according to several factors, such its style, texture, colour,
tags, package, etc. On the other hand, the purchase of services is often intangible.
Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Malhotra (2005) contend that the term ‘traditional service quality’
includes the quality of every interaction experienced by clients outside of the Internet, as well as their
personal experiences with companies. When a citizen resorts to an organization for the provision of a
service, whether the interaction follows the traditional or the electronic format, there is a constant need

156
to evaluate the quality of this interaction. The perspective of the client concerning the quality of the
service that was provided is fundamental to measure his satisfaction.
Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1988) had previously mentioned that the quality of the service is
determined by the difference between the expectations of the clients, the performance of the provider and
the assessment of the obtained service. Invariably, the perception of quality towards a provided service
involves two perspectives: that of the provider and that of the recipient of the service. This duality raises
several questions, and in order to be guaranteed, the quality of a service should be achieved through a
balance between expectations and actual satisfaction.
Client satisfaction is the main factor when determining the success of organizations in terms of
customer relationship (Siadat, 2008). The term ‘service quality’, independently of its environment, has
been recognized as one of the main factors behind the sustainability of a company, and also one of its
driving forces (Alanezi, Kamil, & Basri, 2010). The need to evaluate quality turned into a success factor
and service quality received a significant level of attention during the eighties, becoming a fundamental
strategic differentiation factor in terms of market share and profit growth (Al-Momani & Noor, 2009;
Philips, Chang, & Buzzell, 1983).
To Siadat (2008), satisfaction means obtaining what is wanted with the maximum possible satisfac-
tion of the client. If this is not achieved, the services and the products must be improved.
One of the first models that allowed to measure the quality of services was created in 1985 as a
conceptual model, in a study developed by Parasuraman et al. (1985). At the time, almost every service
provided followed the traditional method, and literature and public conscience were not yet aware of
the relevance of service quality, so, to develop this model, Parasuraman et al. (1985) had to carry out an
empirical study based on multiple interviews.
First, these interviews were divided in two groups: consumers and service providers. Within the two
groups, the interviews tried to encompass different fields, in order to obtain homogeneous results. With
the purpose of developing the model, and after studying the results of the interviews, Parasuraman et al.
(1985) identified five GAPS (Figure 1), divided in GAP 1 to GAP 4, on the part of the service provider,
and GAP 5, on the part of the consumer. These discrepancies emerged from the different perceptions
held by the companies providing the services towards their job and by the consumers towards the qual-
ity obtained.
The five identified gaps were:
Gap 1: The different perspective of the consumer expectation and the perception of these expectations
by the management/service provider, creates a gap and, consequently, a bad definition of service
quality;
Gap 2: The difficulty or inability to clearly evaluate the perception of the managers when they create
the specifications of the services;
Gap 3: The discrepancy between service quality specifications and the service that is actually delivered.
Human factors, and more specifically the performance of the service provider, may generate a
certain antipathy towards the defined standards;
Gap 4: The potential disparity between the provided and the communicated service. This disparity may
alter the expectations of clients. The service provider should not offer more or raise expectations
beyond the service that can actually be delivered.
Gap 5: The perception of quality that a consumer develops towards a service depends on the magnitude
and direction of the gap between the expected and the experienced service.

157
During their model creation process, Parasuraman et al. (2005) mentioned that the perception of
service quality follows the comparison between the expected and the experienced service (Figure 2).
The conceptual model developed by Parasuraman et al. (1985) comprises ten dimensions which
reflect the quality of a service, namely:
1. Access: The ability to and ease of access to the services;
2. Communication: The ability to clearly communicate with and listen to clients;
3. Competence: The technical ability and aptitude to correctly deliver the intended service;
4. Courtesy: Friendliness, respect, understanding and consideration shown to the client.
5. Credibility: Honesty and acknowledgement on the part of the service provider;
6. Reliability: The ability to deliver the offered service in the scheduled date and time, independently
of any problems that may arise;
7. Responsiveness: The ability to help every client in an unhesitating way and to effectively and
positively promote the service;
8. Security: The perception of safety during the provision of the services;
9. Tangibles: The physical appearance of equipment and staff involved in the provision of services;
Figure 1. Service Quality Model (Parasuraman et al., 1985)

158
10. Knowing the Customer: The ability to identify the existing clients and their respective needs.
After their study, Parasuraman et al. (1988) refined their service quality evaluation method and cre-
ated SERVQUAL. Thus, carrying out new studies, with new data collections and analysis, they were
able to improve their scale, reducing the initial ten dimensions to seven: 1) Tangibles; 2) Reliability;
3) Responsiveness; 4) Communication, Credibility, Safety, Competence; 5) Courtesy; 6) Knowing the
customer; and 7) Access.
In a second stage, which entailed another improvement of the study, SERVQUAL was reduced to
five dimensions:
1. Tangibles: the physical appearance of equipment’s and staff involved in the provision of services;
2. Reliability: The ability to deliver the offered service in the scheduled date and time, independently
of any problems that may arise;
3. Responsiveness: The ability to help every client in an unhesitating way and to effectively and
positively promote the service;
4. Assurance: The ability to inspire trust, security and technical quality on the part of the staff when
delivering a service;
5. Empathy: The available and unhesitating assistance provided to the client, individualized and
focused on his main interests.
With the evolution of the Internet, electronic services spread and increased all over the world. Avail-
able methodologies need to be capable of measuring services not only in their traditional format but
also in their electronic dimension. Bearing this in mind, the following section will analyse the quality
of electronic government services, based in relevant methodologies in the field.
Figure 2. Perception of Service Quality (Parasuraman et al., 1985)

159
QUALITY OF E-GOVERNMENT SERVICES
Due to the ever-growing technological evolution and the daily access to public services by the population,
governments worldwide face a permanent challenge of transformation and reinvention, in order to deliver
services in an efficient, efficacious and cost effective way. Citizens, who are mere service users, are the
ones who evaluate this provision, and they are increasingly informed and demanding. Considering the
scope of this chapter, it is therefore fundamental to define what is understood by e-Government and to
analyse the available methodologies that evaluate the quality of services in this field.
To Rocha, Silva, Lamas, Castro and Silva (2005), an e-Government, in its broader meaning, con-
sists of a suitable and beneficial use of information and communication technologies by governmental
bodies – whether these are central, regional or local – both in their internal and external relations and,
particularly, in the relation they establish with the citizens
According to the report prepared by Unidade Missão Inovação and Conhecimento (2003), in its Ac-
tion Plan for Electronic Government, an e-Government is a “process supported by the development of
information technologies, which places citizens and companies in the center of attention, improves the
quality and the convenience of services and reinforces an active participation in the exercise of citizen-
ship. Simultaneously, it increases efficiency, reduces expenditures and contributes to the modernization
of the State”.
Thus, an e-Government can be defined as the use of information and communication technologies
by governments with the purpose of improving the quality of the services and the information provided
to citizens, and other interested parties, efficiently and profitably (Zaidi & Qteishat, 2012).
Al-Jaghoub, Al-Yaseen and Al-Hourani (2010) define an e-Government as the use of any type of
information and communication technology to improve the services and operations provided to multiple
users, namely citizens, companies and other governmental bodies.
In their turn, Alshehri, Drew, Alhussain and Alghamdi (2012) contend that an e-Government is un-
derstood as a “means to deliver government related information and services “. Similarly, Isaac (2007)
refers that the use of an e-Government, particularly in its Web based dimension, serves to improve the
access to governmental information and services by citizens, business partners, staff and other govern-
mental bodies.
In the e-Government context, according to the activities and the type of relationships, Al-Jaghoub et
al. (2010) consider the following: Government-to-Citizens or Government-to-Clients, Government-to-
Business/Companies, Government-to-Employees, Government-to-Government and Citizen-to-Citizen.
Zaidi and Qteishat (2012), on the other hand, define only three: Government-to-Citizen, Government-
to-Business/Companies and Government-to-Government.
PapadomichelakiandMentzas(2009)contendthatoneofthemaincriticalfactorsinthee-Government
evolution is the development of Websites that better serve the needs of citizens. However, we face a chal-
lenge: the implementation of the idea that an e-Government is not a technology but, on the contrary, the
use of technologies in the service of governmental institutions, whose purpose is to improve the quality of
life of their citizens by redefining the relationship they establish with their government (Kumar, Mukerji,
Butt, & Persaud, 2007). According to Gautrin (2004), the existence of online services in the govern-
mental field can significantly increase accessibility, as well as save the time and the money of citizens.
The general conclusion that emerges from the report prepared and presented by the United Nations
(2012) within the United Nation E-Government Survey is that, despite the current global recession cli-

160
mate and considering the continual need to provide services, governments need to start rethinking their
e-Government strategies, in order to create synergies and reach a sustainable development.
Therefore, governments need to work concertedly in order to explore the potential of social media in
its entirety, conveying objective messages and offering efficient information services, and also promoting
and raising the awareness of citizens in order to obtain a greater take-up service, an improved feedback
and suggestions to optimize (United Nations, 2012).
Accordingly,thee-Governmentsphereneedstobeanalysedandrethought,inordertofindthebestway
to satisfy the real needs of citizens. The perception that the mere automation of services and publication
of information constitutes an e-Government is incorrect. E-Governments must entail the configuration
and use of technologies, information systems and the media, with the purpose of changing or adapting
their administrative processes, maximizing the quality of the interaction (by promoting their services
and information) with their citizens, companies or other government bodies.
From the provision of services in its traditional format to current e-Government services, the need
to measure the quality of services is a fact (Rocha, 2012). To that end, several methodologies have been
developed according to the specificities of different services, or even adapted, revising and adding di-
mensions for different types of services.
In 2009, Papadomichelaki and Mentzas created and contextualized the e-GovQual as a model devel-
oped to measure the quality of e-Government services.
In an early stage, after a bibliographical review, six dimensions were defined:
1. Ease of Use: How easily citizens interact with the Website;
2. Trust (Privacy/Security): Like Alanezi et al. (2010), Papadomichelaki and Mentzas (2009) men-
tion the level of security and personal user data protection offered by Governmental Websites, as
well as the trust that the citizen has towards a service that is free from risk, doubt or danger, during
the entire electronic process;
3. Functionality of the Interaction Environment: The quality of the interaction between the citizen
and the service delivered by an e-Government portal. Online forms should include help to aid the
citizens when they are filling out the fields in any given moment, as well as alternative choices as
to what a citizen may or can do with the form (i.e.: print, save, etc.);
4. Reliability: The service that is offered and promised must be delivered accurately, consistently
and in a timely manner. This dimension concerns the correct technical running of the operation
and accuracy of service delivery. A relationship of trust must be created between the citizen and
the electronic government Website;
5. Content and Appearance of Information: The quality of the information provided, as well as
its presentation. This information must be complete, accurate, concise and relevant. Li and Suomi
(2009) and Alanezi et al. (2010) had already mentioned some of these information quality related
attributes. It is also important to note that Papadomichelaki and Mentzas (2009) state that this
dimension should bear in consideration the layout, which should include a number of specific
characteristics, namely: suitable colours, correct graphics and a proper Website size;
6. Citizen Support (Interactivity): The help provided by the organization, with the purpose of
supporting the citizens in their information queries concerning the organization or the assistance
provided during transactions. This help can merely consist of user guidelines, help pages, frequently
asked questions or improved communication methods.

161
The simultaneous use of these six dimensions (Figure 3), with their respective items, enables the
measurement of e-Government related services.
In order to validate and confirm this methodology, the authors prepared a questionnaire, whose data
analysis allowed them to examine and verify the reliability of the six initial dimensions, as well as their
respective items. Consequently, they redefined the methodology reducing the dimensions to four: 1) Reli-
ability;2)Efficiency;3)CitizenSupport;and4)Trust.Thesefourdimensionscomprisetwentyfiveitems.
In 2010, Alanezi, Kamil and Basri, elaborated a proposal to measure the quality of e-Government
services. This proposal was developed based on the analysis of several scientific and academic studies
in the field of electronic services. From this analysis, Alanezi et al. (2010) developed a proposal with
seven dimensions, based on the SERVQUAL methodology of Parasuraman et al. (2005). Alanezi et al.
(2010) adapted the five dimensions of SERVQUAL, and added two new ones:
1. Website Design: Technical operation and appearance of the e-Government Website;
2. Reliability: The satisfaction towards a timely delivery of the service. For instance, the action of
emailing or contacting the customer by phone, increasing the trust in the delivery of the right
products with appropriate charges;
3. Responsiveness: If the delivered service was truly useful and was not delayed. If the service actu-
ally answers questions in a useful and timely manner;
4. Security/Privacy: Level of security and personal user data protection offered by government
Websites. Li and Suomi (2009) refer to this dimension as the perception that the clients have of
being free from danger and safe during all the processes pertaining to the service provision;
Figure 3. e-Government Services Quality (Papadomichelaki & Mentzas, 2009)

162
5. Customization: The will to provide services with special care and an individualized attention to
consumers. In the SERVQUAL methodology this dimension is referred to as empathy, but it is not
focused on electronic services. According to Alanezi et al. (2010), this change takes place because
online services do not entail a direct contact between the client and the staff;
6. Information: Information provided by the e-Government service. It must be accurate, current
and easy to understand. Li and Suomi (2009) mention that quality information must contain some
attributes, such as: currency, timeliness, accuracy, relevancy and ease of understanding;
7. Ease of Use: The ease of use level of e-Government Websites. Any Website should be user friendly,
in order to guarantee his satisfaction.
Alanezi et al. (2010), in their proposal, also mentioned which items should be applied to each dimen-
sions.
In 2012, Zaidi and Qteishat developed the e-GSQA Framework. The purpose of their study was to
determine the quality of services from the point of view of citizens. It is important to notice that these
authors perceive e-Commerce and e-Government as belonging to the same field in practical terms, to
the extent that the service delivery channel is the same. By carrying out a review of the available lit-
erature and several studies, the authors developed this Framework, modifying and joining the E-S-Qual
(Parasuraman et al., 2005) and E-GovQual (Papadomichelaki & Mentzas, 2009) models and the norm
ISO/IEC 9126 (ISO/IEC, 2001). This study adapted, created and validated the following dimensions: 1)
WebSite Quality; 2) Design; 3) Reliability; 4) Responsiveness; 5) Security; 6) Privacy; 7) Efficiency; 8)
Ease of Use; and 9) Citizen Confidence.
Zaidi and Qteishat (2012) structured their proposal according to the following scheme (Figure 4).
After designing and developing the framework, Zaidi and Qteishat (2012) carried out its validation,
interviewing electronic tax service users (e-tax) from India.
Recently, Hien (2014) took upon himself the task of reviewing, defining and gathering concepts and
dimensions about the quality concerning e-services and e-Government. This chapter reveals the first
step of an ambitious and rather useful plan, to develop both a new scale for measuring the quality of
e-Government and identify the key points to bear in mind along the way.
According to the author, the existing studies regarding electronic services despite being scarce, they
also fail because:
1. They approach quality concerning mainly the organization and the public service;
2. All the research has been done through a global and integrated approach, as to explore the quality
of services, regarding electronic Government.
Hien (2014) states that according to several studies he himself analysed, the quality of electronic
services has been assumed only according to two points of view: the quality of service and the quality
of information. The author thus offers a new vision focused on the internal process of organizations,
also known as “quality organization perspective”.
Starting by the service quality perspective, Hien (2014) bases his analysis upon the relevance of self-
service technology and marketing to identify and work on three key-dimensions:
1. Reliability: the capacity for the organization to provide the services in a precise and trustful way;

163
2. Communication: the ability to provide easy access to all services, relying on several communica-
tion channels, to keep costumers updated;
3. Response: the organization’s ability to support its customers by providing and managing a fast and
efficient service.
As far as the information quality is concerned, based on Technology Acceptance Model and Infor-
mation Systems Model, this study explores some dimensions that, when related, influence the adoption
and the vision upon electronic Government significantly. Out of these dimensions, the author selected
and defined three:
Figure 4. e-Government Services Quality (Zaidi & Qteishat, 2012)

164
1. Easy to Use: understanding the content and the layout of websites. To the authors, this dimension
includes the information, as well as a clear description of a product or service;
2. Content: this involves quantity, quality, accuracy and personalization of information;
3. Trust and Security: as to do with data and information protection, as well as to ensure security
throughout the transaction process.
According to Hien (2014), in the context of e-services quality, the term “organization” is used to refer
also to the management and all the actions taken to support the organization itself. This should include
all the internal processes in the sense that it must provide the citizens the necessary electronic services.
So, the study focused on the research according to two dimensions:
1. E-Governance:Informationandserviceimprovementbytheuseofcomputertechnologies,toencour-
age citizens to get involved in decision taking. This measure is supposed to make the Government’s
actions more responsible, transparent and effective. This is strictly related to management, reason
why general information and services provided must be even more effective.
2. CIO (Executive Position in an Organization): The effects and actions an CIO can undertake as
key-variable in the services within an organization. As far as e-Government is concerned, it refers
to the role of those responsible for information systems.
Hien (2014) based upon previous research papers regarding electronic services, and e-Government
presents his theoretical model as shown below (see figure 5).
The model to evaluate service quality thus includes eight dimensions, grouped according to three
different perspectives:
• Quality of service;
• Quality of information;
• Quality of organization.
Being this an initial study, Hien (2014) states that, in order to verify all the dimensions, to test all
the hypothesis possible and check all the aspects involved, a questionnaire will be handed to specialists
related to electronic services, as to assess the study. The author also claims that, apart from the neces-
sary state of the art revision, the research will undertake a quantitative approach, so it can validate and
verify the quality of the empirical study, as well as to apply the PLS (Partial Least Squares), to test all
the hypothesis and connections pointed out.
CONCLUSION
The maingoal ofthepresent chapter wasthebibliographicalsystematizationofmethodologiesdeveloped
to evaluate the quality of traditional and e-Government services. Accordingly, a definition of what was
perceived as traditional and e-Government services was made, presenting the relevant methodologies
in the fields.
In terms of traditional service quality, first an analysis of several models and methodologies was car-
ried out, initiating the study with the conceptual model developed by Parasuraman et al. (1985), which

165
comprises ten dimensions. This conceptual model served as a base for the SERVQUAL methodology,
with five dimensions, (Tangibles, Reliability, Sensibility, Responsiveness, Security, Empathy), devel-
oped by Parasuraman et al. (1988). Both methodologies served as a base for several new methodologies/
frameworks and multiple studies.
Finally, in the e-Governnent context, the E-GovQual methodologies developed by Papadomichelaki
and Mentzas (2009) were analyzed, with six dimensions, and the model proposed by Alanezi et al. (2010),
with seven dimensions, which, according to the authors, adapts the five SERVQUAL dimensions and
adds two new. The next methodology analysed was the GSQA from (Zaidi and Qteishat (2012)), whose
definition joins the E-S-Qual and E-GovQual models and the norm ISO/IEC 9126. The last model ana-
lysed was the one stated by Hien (2014), in which he offers a new perspective on the subject, a vision
focused on the internal process of organizations, also known as “Quality Organization Perspective”.
This is the reason why this model includes eight dimensions grouped according to three perspectives
on quality: Service, Information and, finally, Organization.
Despite being different, these models comprise common dimensions, such as security/reliability,
information, tangibles, system availability, amongst others. Thus, this investigation work allowed the
identification and definition, with the necessary adaptation to the context of local electronic services, of a
listcomprisedbytwentythreedimensions(Table1)basedontheliteraturereviewandauthorsperception.
Figure 5. Hien framework Hien (2014)

166
FUTURE WORK
The present chapter belongs to the first stage (see Figure 6) of a process that will allow the conception/
adaptation or usage of a methodology that is capable of evaluating an online e-Government in the con-
text of local municipalities. Being a preliminary study by nature, it needs to be redefined and improved,
further developing new methodologies and/or frameworks to be used in the context of electronic services
evaluation, namely in the e-Government field.
With the purpose of identifying, validating and thus complementing the list of dimensions defined
in literature review, a conclusion was made that it would be useful and effective to additionally carry
out a number of interviews to experts in the Local Government field, namely large scale (Coimbra and
Figueira da Foz), medium scale Portuguese municipalities (Condeixa-a-Nova, Cantanhede, Penela,
Mealhada, Penacova and Arganil), and small scale (Pampilhosa da Serra and Vila Nova de Poiares), an
Inter-municipal Community (CIM Região de Coimbra), one of the main software providers for local
municipalities (Associação Informática da Região Centro) and members of a consultancy company in
Table 1. Dimensions of Local e-Government based on the literature review and authors perception
Provenance Name
e-Government Services E- Governance
Politicians Role
Customization
Technical Quality of the Website
Transparency of Actions
Electronic Services Emotional Appeal
Service Availability
Website Innovation
On-line Integrity
Advantage of On-line Services
Performance
Processing Speed
Electronic and e-Government Services Customer Support
Alternative Channels
Reliability
Delivery and Deadlines
Task Information
Information Quality
Complaints
Privacy
Safety
Usability
Website Design

167
the e-Government field, Deloitte. In this stage of the investigation, sixteen out of twenty four initial
questionnaires were already carried out.
In a later stage, the necessary dimensions to initiate the development of a methodology that will be
capable of evaluating online e-Governments in a local context will be defined, using a Delphi method.
After their validation, the definition and creation of specific items for each dimension will be necessary.
Finally, a methodology will be validated in a real context. In the course of this process, the end of each
stage (Figure 6) will entail its validation or redefinition.
REFERENCES
Al-Jaghoub, S., Al-Yaseen, H., & Al-Hourani, M. (2010). Evaluation of awareness and acceptability
of using e-Government services in developing countries: The case of Jordan. The Electronic Journal
Information Systems Evaluation, 13(1), 1-8.
Al-Momani, K., & Noor, N. A. M. (2009). E- Service quality, ease of use, usability and enjoyment as
antecedents of E-CRM performance: An empirical investigation in Jordan mobile phone services. The
Asian Journal of Technology Management, 2(2), 50-63.
Alanezi, M. A., Kamil, A., & Basri, S. (2010). A proposed instrument dimensions for measuring e-gov-
ernment service quality. International Journal of u- and e-Service, Science and Technology, 3(4), 1-18.
Alshehri, M., Drew, S., Alhussain, T., & Alghamdi, R. (2012). The effects of website quality on adop-
tion of e-Government service: An empirical study applying UTAUT model using SEM. Paper presented
at the 23rd Australian conference on information systems, Geelong, Australia.
EuropeanCommission.(2013).eGovernmentimproving butcitizensaskformore [Press release].Author.
Gautrin, H.-F. (2004). Connecting Québec to its citizens. Report on e-Government - Québec, 1-34.
Hien, N. M. (2014). A study on evaluation of e-Government service quality. International Journal of
Social, Management, Economics and Business Engineering, 8(1),16-19.
Isaac, W. C. (2007). Performance measurement for the e-Government initiatives: A comparative study.
Nova Southeastern University.
Figure 6. Stages of the Study

168
ISO/IEC. (2001). ISO/IEC 9126-1:2001(E): Software engineering - Product quality – Part 1: Quality
model: International organization for standardization. Author.
Kumar, V., Mukerji, B., Butt, I., & Persaud, A. (2007). Factors for successful e-Government adoption:
A conceptual framework. The Electronic Journal of e-Government, 5(1), 63-76.
Li, H., & Suomi, R. (2009). A proposed scale for measuring e-Service quality. International Journal of
u- and e-Service, Science and Technology, 2(1), 1-10.
Papadomichelaki, X., Magoutas, B., Halaris, C., Apostolou, D., & Mentzas, G. (2006). A review of
quality dimensions in e-Government services. In EGOV 2006 (vol. 4048, pp. 128-138). Springer.
Papadomichelaki, X., & Mentzas, G. (2009). A multiple-item scale for assessing e-Government service
Quality. In EGOV 2009 (vol. 5693, pp. 163-175). Springer.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its
implications for future research. Journal of Marketing, 49(4), 41–50. doi:10.2307/1251430
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for mea-
suring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of retailing (Spring), 64(1), 12–40.
Parasuraman,A.,Zeithaml,V.A.,&Malhotra,A.(2005).E-S-QUAL-Amultiple-itemscaleforassessing
electronic service quality. Journal of Service Research, 7(10), 1-21. doi: 10.1177/1094670504271156
Philips, L. W., Chang, D. R., & Buzzell, R. D. (1983). Product quality, cost position and business perfor-
mance:Atestofsomekeyhypotheses.Journalofmarketing(Spring),47(2),26–43.doi:10.2307/1251491
Rocha, Á. (2012). Framework for a global quality evaluation of a website. Online Information Review,
36(3), 374–382. doi:10.1108/14684521211241404
Rocha, Á., & Sá, F. (2013). Planning the information architecture in a local public administration orga-
nization. Information Development, 9, 1-14. doi: 10.1177/0266666913489841
Rocha, Á., Silva, C., Lamas, M., Castro, R., & Silva, S. (2005). Governo electrónico nas juntas de freg-
uesia: Situação na região do minho. Paper presented at the 5ª Conferência da associação portuguesa de
sistemas de informação, 26-28 de Outubro, Bragança.
Sá, F., & Rocha, Á. (2012). Definição da arquitetura de informação em organismo da administração
pública local. RISTI - Revista Ibérica de Sistemas e Tecnologias de Informação, 10, 51-64. doi: 10.4304/
risti.10.51-64
Siadat, S. H. (2008). Measuring Service Quality Using SERVQUAL Model: A case study of e-Retailing
in Iran. Universiti Teknologi Malayasia.
Unidade Missão Inovação e Conhecimento. (2003). Qualidade e eficiência dos serviços Públicos. Plano
de acção para o governo eletrónico.
United Nations. (2012). E-Government Survey 2012 - E-Government for the people. UN.
Zaidi, S. F. H., & Qteishat, M. K. (2012). Assessing e-Government service delivery (Government to
citizen). International Journal of eBusiness and eGovernment Studies, 4(1), 45-54.

169
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
e-Government: It comprises the adequate and beneficial use of tecnologies and information systems
by governmental organisms in order to provide their services in a electronic manner. There are several
definitions of eGovernment, meaning almost the same but having a slighty different view on it.
e-Participation: Electronic participation on behalf of citizens in an effective and satisfactory way,
recoursing to opinions, suggestions and other contributes about all valences of services and decision-
making provided by the government.
e-Services: Represents one prominent application of the use of information and communication
technologies (ICTs) in different areas.
Local e-Democracy: Usage of technology and information systems in order to provide the means
for citizens to carry out their democratic duties, in accordance to legislations and constitutions that reign
the Local Government.
Local e-Government Services: Represents the provision of specific services in the range of local
government, conceived in an electronic manner for a specific territory and target citizens, through dis-
tinct delivery electronic channels.
Quality Dimensions: Quality attributes (dimensions) represent specific criteria for the evaluation of
a service. Some examples are: Usability, quality of information, Transparency, etc.
Quality Models: Models for the evaluation of the quality of provided services, either in their tra-
ditional or electronic form. It represents tools for measuring the quality of all interactions between a
company/organization and their clients based on the perception of their experiences.

A Literature Review On Quality Models For Online E-Government Services

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to A Literature Review On Quality Models For Online E-Government Services

Similar to A Literature Review On Quality Models For Online E-Government Services (20)

More from Kate Campbell

More from Kate Campbell (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

A Literature Review On Quality Models For Online E-Government Services