BuffatA. (2015). Street-level bureaucracy and e-government.Public Management Review, 17(1), 149–161.
2.
HoodC.MargettsH. (2010). Cyber-bureaucracy: If information technology is so central to public administration, why is it so ghetto-ized? In PierreJ.IngrahamP. W., Comparative administrative change and reform (pp. 114–135). Montreal, QC: McGill-Queens University Press.
3.
KraemerK.BerginT.BretschneiderS.DuncanG.FossT.GorrW.et al. (1986). Curriculum recommendations for public management education in computing: The final report of the NASPAA Ad Hoc Committee on Computers in Public Management Education.Social Science Computer Review, 4(1), 1–37.
4.
MoonM. J.LeeJ.RohC-Y. (2014). The evolution of internal IT applications and e-government studies in public administration: Research themes and methods.Administration and Society, 46(1), 3–36.
5.
NavarroP. (2008). The MBA core curricula of topranked U. S. business schools: A study in failure?Academy of Management Learning and Education, 7(1), 108–123.
6.
Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and Administration (NASPAA), Commission on Peer Review and Accreditation. (2014). NASPAA standards: Accreditation standards for master’s degree programs. Retrieved from https://naspaaaccreditation.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/naspaa-accreditation-standards.pdf.
7.
PollittC. (2011). Mainstreaming technological change in the study of public management.Public Policy and Administration, 26(4), 377–397.
8.
RobertsA. (2014). Large forces: What’s missing in public administration. Boston, MA: Alasdair Roberts.
9.
U. S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). (2015). High-risk series: An update (Report No. GAO-15-290). Retrieved from http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/668415.pdf.