A Conceptual Framework for Citizen Adoption of E-Government

1. A Conceptual Framework for Citizen
Adoption of E-Government
Kriti Priya Gupta
Preeti Bhaskar
Swati Singh
Symbiosis Centre for Management Studies-NOIDA
Faculty of Management Studies
Symbiosis International University, Pune, India

2. Background
• E-government??
• Delivery models: G2C, G2B, G2G, G2E
• Challenge: Adoption/Acceptance by citizens
– Technological challenges
– Infrastructural problems

3. Objective of the Study
• The paper presents a conceptual model of
factors that could influence citizen
adoption of e-government services in India.
• To test the proposed model, the study has
selected e-government services offered by
New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC)

4. Review of factors influencing e-
government adoption by citizens
Model Studies Study Location (Country)
UTAUT
(Unified Theory of
Acceptance and Use of
Technology)
Alawadhi and Morris (2008) Australia
Alawadhi and Morris (2009) Australia
Azam et al. (2013) Pakistan
Alryalat et al. (2013) Jordan
Khalil and Nasrallah (2011) Kuwait
Taiwo et al. (2011) Malaysia
Alzharani and Goodwin (2012) Southi Arabia
Voutinioti (2013) Greece
TAM
(Technology Acceptance
Model)
Carter and Belanger (2005) U.S.A.
Al Hujran et al. (2013) Jordan
Al-Hujran et al. (2011) Jordan
Mwangakala and Mvungi (2011) Tanzania
Dimitrova and Chen (2006) U.S.A.
Sahu and Gupta (2007) India
Padhi et al. (2010) India
Singh and Punia (2011) India
Maiga and Asianzu (2013) Uganda

5. Cont.
Model Studies Study Location
(Country)
DOI
(Diffusion of Innovation )
Carter and Belanger (2003) U.S.A.
Phang et al. (2005) South Asia
Carter and Bélanger (2005) U.S.A.
Dimitrova and Chen (2006) U.S.A.
Patel and Jacobson (2008) India
Rokhman (2011) Indomesia
PCI
(Perceived Characteristics of
Innovating )
Carter and Belanger (2004) U.S.A.
Carter and Belanger (2005) U.S.A.
Trust
Warkentin et al. (2002) U.S.A
Carter & Belanger (2005) U.S.A.
Belanger & Carter (2008) U.S.A.
Alsaghier and Ford (2009) Australia
Mwangakala and Mvungi (2011) Tanzania
Voutinioti (2013) Greece
Chiang (2009) Taiwan
Kumar et al. (2007) Canada

6. Proposed Model and Research Hypotheses
Performance
Expectancy
Effort
Expectancy
Social Influence
Facilitating
Conditions
Citizen
Satisfaction
Trust in
government
Trust in
technology/internet
E-government
Adoption
UTAUT
Trust

7. Model Constructs
Construct Definition
Performance
expectancy
degree to which an individual believes that using a particular system
would improve his or her job performance (Venkatesh et al., 2003)
Effort
expectancy
degree of simplicity associated with the use of a particular system
(Venkatesh et al., 2003)
Social
influence
degree to which an individual perceives that others believe he or she
should use a particular system (Venkatesh et al., 2003)
Facilitating
conditions
degree to which an individual believes that an organizational and
technical infrastructure exists to support the use of a particular system
(Venkatesh et al., 2003)
Trust in
technology
belief that a specific technology has the attributes necessary to perform
as expected in a given situation in which negative consequences are
possible (Mayer et al. 1995)
Trust in
government
citizen’s belief or expectation that the government will perform a
particular action important to him/her in the absence of his/her control
over the government’s performance (Alsaghier and Ford, 2009)
Citizen
satisfaction
perception of pleasurable fulfillment of e-government services (Oliver,
1999)

8. Methodology
• Research Design and Research Method
– Exploratory Factor Analysis
– Primary data collection using structured questionnaire
• Survey Location
– New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) region of Delhi
• Target Respondents
– Individuals above 18 years of age (both males and females) who have used at
least one of the e- government services provided by NDMC through NDMC’s
website (https://www.ndmc.gov.in/) during previous 3 months
• Sampling: Proportionate Quota Sampling
• Sample Size: 350

9. Proposed Items

10. Construct Proposed Items
Performance
Expectancy (PE)
PE1: This e-government website is useful for me
PE2: This e-government website enables me to accomplish tasks more quickly
PE3: This e-government website increases my efficiency
Effort
expectancy
EE1: This e-government website is clear and understandable
EE2: This e-government website is easy to use
EE3: This website is flexible (in terms of easy navigation and easy reading).
EE4: This e-government website is complicated
Social influence
SI1: I use this website because my friends, colleagues & relatives use it
SI2: Using this website enhances my status in the society
People who are important to me think that I should use this e-government website.*
Using this e-government website is a status symbol for me *
SI3: I feel very proud in using this e-government website
Facilitating conditions
FC1: I have the necessary resources (Internet facility) to use this e-government website
FC2: I have the necessary knowledge (knowledge of Internet) to use this e-government website.
FC3: This e-government website is compatible with all other systems I use (e.g. Internet
browser/ Mobile phones etc.)**
FC4: The necessary assistance (e.g. instructions, helpline phone numbers, FAQs) is available for
using this e-government website.
FC5: The necessary assistance for using the e-government website is available at CSCs
Trust in government
TG1: This e-government website is trustworthy
TG2: This e-government website is capable of providing governments services
TG3: This e-government website works for my benefits
Trust in technology (Internet)
TT1: This e-government website is reliable
TT2: This e-government website is safe and secure
Citizen satisfaction
CS1: I am satisfied with the technical quality (e.g. download capacity, speed etc.) of this e-
government website
CS2: I am satisfied with the information available on this e-government website
CS3: I am satisfied with the quality of the service offered by this e-government website
Overall, I am satisfied with the services offered by this e-government website*
E-government adoption
(Intention to use e-
government services)
EA1: I have the intention to continue using the services through this website
EA2: I have the intention to recommend others about the services offered through this website

11. Data Analysis

12. Sample Profile
Gender
Male 57%
Female 43%
Age Group
18-25 32%
26-35 28%
36-45 20%
46-60 18%
61 and above 7%
E-government services used
Paying electricity/water bills 93%
Filing complaints 76%
Submitting application forms 63%
Welfare services 23%
Viewing NDMC reports 9%
Recruitment notices 8%
Public notices 8%

13. Factor Analysis

14. Factor Item
Factor Loading
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Performance Expectancy
(PE)
PE1 .856
PE2 .824
PE3 .833
Effort Expectancy (EE)
EE1 .620
EE2 .862
EE3 .841
EE4 .789
Social Influence (SI)
SI1 .738
SI2 .829
SI3 .864
Available Facilitating
Conditions (AFC)
FC1 .879
FC2 .772
FC3 .471*
Provided Facilitating
Conditions (PFC)
FC4 .849
FC5 .866
Trust in Government (TG)
TG1 .630
TG2 .896
TG3 .857
Trust in Technology (TT)
TT1 .868
TT2 .840
Citizen Satisfaction (CS)
CS1 .775
CS2 .818
CS3 .783
Facilitating
Conditions
KMO = .757
8 Factors extracted, Cumulative % of variance explained = 72.68
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis; Rotation Method: Varimax with
Kaiser Normalization; Rotation converged in 6 iterations
*The item FC3 was dropped because of weak factor loading

15. Reliability Analysis
Construct No. of Items Cronbach’s alpha
Performance Expectancy (PE) 3 .835
Effort Expectancy (EE) 4 .853
Social Influence (SI) 3 .765
Available Facilitating Conditions (AFC) 2* .710
Provided Facilitating Conditions (PFC) 2 .712
Trust in Government (TG) 3 .783
Trust in Technology (TT) 2 .789
Citizen Satisfaction (CS) 3 .785
*Originally measured with 3 items. The item (FC3) with weak factor loading was dropped

16. Discussion
• Effort expectancy and performance expectancy have the most significant
impact on citizen adoption of e-government services
– Citizens’ intentions to use e-government services will increase if
• their effort and performance expectancies are met
• they find the e- government services simple to use
• they believe that using the e- government services will increase their efficiency
– This indicates that
• A government website should be clear, understandable and easy to navigate
• Information in the government website should be organized and presented based on
citizens’ needs, allowing users to quickly accomplish their tasks

17. Discussion (…cont.)
• Higher levels of trust are also positively related to citizens’ intentions to
use e-government services
– Trust in technology/internet
• citizens who perceive the safety, security and reliability of the internet to be low are less
likely to adopt e-government services
– Trust in government
• citizens who perceive the government to be more trustworthy and capable of providing e-
government services are more likely to adopt e-government
• Citizen satisfaction also influences the adoption of e-government
– Citizens who are satisfied with the technical quality of the government website
and the quality of services offered by the website are more likely to use the same
– Satisfied citizens are likely to continue using the website in future also

18. Discussion (…contd)
• Facilitating conditions
– ‘available facilitating conditions’ has a greater influence on e-government adoption
as compared to ‘provided facilitating conditions’
– This indicates that
• Citizens who have the necessary resources for using e-government website (internet
facility, knowledge of internet) are more likely to use the e-government services
• But, their intentions to use e-government services are not affected by the facilitating
conditions provided by the government (assistance provided through website and call
centers) to a great extent
• The citizens are not much dependent on the government support for utilizing the e-
government services

19. Discussion (…contd)
• Social influence does not directly affect citizen adoption of e-government services
• This result is not consistent with previous researches done in other developing
countries viz., Qatar (Al-Shafi and Weerakkody, 2010), Pakistan (Azam et al., 2013)
and Greece (Voutinioti, 2013)
• However, the result is consistent with work done in the United States (Cater and
Belanger, 2005), which indicates that image (a construct similar to social influence)
doesn’t influence citizens’ intentions to use e-government services
• This is an interesting finding, as it shows that
– Unlike in other developing countries, citizens in India are more conversant with Internet and
don’t view its use as a matter of proud
– For them, the use of e-government is very normal and it has nothing to do with their status in
the society

20. Implications for Practice
• The government agencies should provide such features in their websites, so that the
users can quickly and effortlessly find relevant information and make their
transactions
– Online tutorials
– Citizen feedback system
• Government should increase the citizens’ trust in technology as well as trust in
government
– Privacy statements
– Accurate, timely and dependable services
• Government agencies should provide facilitating conditions to citizens for encouraging
the use of e-government services
– The government call centres should be responsive
– Government can implement service centres with internet facilities and trained professionals,
where citizens beyond the educated class of society can go and avail e-government services

21. Limitations & Future Scope of
Research
• Quota sampling has been used to select the respondents and the study is based on a
sample of 350 users only, which make the findings of this study probabilistic
– Future research needs to use more diversified random samples in order to check the
generalizability of research findings
• We have selected only those e- government services which are provided by NDMC (The
responses were influenced by the nature of the e- government services selected)
– Future studies should include a broader set of e-government services to validate these results
• We have not considered the moderating impact of any demographic variable such as
gender, age, education etc., which may influence the adoption of e-government
– Future studies need to investigate the effect of some potential moderators on the citizens’
intention to use e-government services

22. Thank you