Key Success Factors for the e-Governance Initiatives Through Common Service Centres in India: An Empirical Study with Special Reference to Akshaya e-Kendras in Kerala
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online March, 2023
Key Success Factors for the e-Governance Initiatives Through Common Service Centres in India: An Empirical Study with Special Reference to Akshaya e-Kendras in Kerala
The National e-Governance Plan formulated by the Government of India lays out the foundation for the long-term growth of e-governance in the country. The Common Service Centre (CSC) scheme is a cornerstone project under National e-Governance Plan, approved in the year 2006, and acts as the delivery point for government, private and social sector services such as G2C, B2C and G2B to the rural citizens of India at their doorsteps. In Kerala, the Kerala State IT Mission is the nodal agency to create and run a CSC network through Akshaya e-kendras. This study aims to provide empirical evidence about the major success factors for e-governance services through Akshaya e-kendras. Infrastructure, accessibility, transparency, system quality, service quality, convenience, trust, e-participation and interoperability were the variables used for the study. SPSS Amos 22 was used for developing confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modelling for the study. The study found that the key success factors for the success of CSCs are service quality followed by transparency and convenience. Other important factors are accessibility, system quality and interoperability. The least contributing factors are trust and infrastructure.
AlawnehA., Al-RefaiH., & BatihaK. (2013). Measuring user satisfaction from e-government services: Lessons from Jordan. Government Information Quarterly, 30(3), 277–288.
2.
Al-NaimatA.M., AbdullahM.S., & AhmadM.K. (2013). The critical success factors for e-government implementation in Jordan [Conference proceedings]. 4th International Conference on Computing and Informatics, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Malaysia.
3.
AwangZ. (2012). Research methodology and data analysis second edition. UiTM Press.
4.
BentlerP.M., & BonettD.G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588.
5.
ChanderS. (2012). E-governance: Interoperability issues. International Journal for Research in Economics and Social Science, 2(7), 22–32.
6.
ChandiramaniK., & KhemaniM. (2014). E-governance: Exploring citizen’s behavior in India. Clear International Journal of Research in Commerce & Management, 5(5).
7.
ClaesF., & LarckerD.F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobserved variable and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.
8.
DevasenaL.C., & BalrajP.L. (2014). E-governance in southern states of India – Towards whole-of-government (WoG). International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science, 3(2), 255–262.
9.
FieldA. (2005). Exploratory factor analysis. Discovering statistics using SPSS, 619–680.
10.
GanapathyV.B., & KumarK. (2014). Strategies for e-governance in India. International Journal Of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, 3(8).
11.
GilmoreA., & D’SouzaC. (2006). Service excellence in e-governance issues: An Indian case study. The Journal of Administration & Governance, 1(1), 1–14.
12.
GronierG., & LambertM. (2010). A model to measure the perceived quality of service in e-government [Conference proceedings]. 10th European Conference on e-Government, National Centre for Taxation Studies and University of Limerick, Ireland.
HairJ.F., RingleC.M., & SarstedtM. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–151.
15.
HaqueM.S. (2002). E-governance in India: Its impacts on relations among citizens, politicians and public servants. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 68(2), 231–250.
16.
HazlettS.A., & HillF. (2003). E-government: The realities of using IT to transform the public sector. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 13(6), 445–452.
17.
HeeksR. (2001). Understanding e-governance for development. Institute for Development Policy and Management.
18.
HolgerssonJ., & KarlssonF. (2014). Public e-service development: Understanding citizens’ conditions for participation. Government Information Quarterly, 31(3), 396–410.
19.
HuL.T., & BentlerP.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.
20.
JoiaL., & NetoA. (2004). Government-to-government enterprises in Brazil: Key success factors drawn from two case studies [Conference proceedings]. BLED 2004 Proceedings, 20.
21.
KaiserH.F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31–36.
22.
KuriyanR., & RayI. (2009). Outsourcing the state? Public-private partnerships and information technologies in India. World Development, 37(10), 1663–1673.
23.
MahalikD.K. (2015). Measuring and making e-services of e-governance effective: A case discussion using SERVQUAL and PARETO analysis. International Journal of Management Research and Business Strategy, 4(4), 35–44.
24.
MyeongS., KwonY., & SeoH. (2014). Sustainable e-governance: The relationship among trust, digital divide, and e-government. Sustainability, 6(9), 6049–6069.
25.
NapitupuluD., & SensuseD.I. (2014). The critical success factors study for e-government implementation. International Journal of Computer Application, 89(16), 23–32.
26.
NematiB., GazorH., MirashrafiS., & AmelehK. (2002). Analyzing e-service quality in service-based website by E-SERVQUAL. Management Science Letters, 2(2), 727–734.
27.
NunnallyJ.C., & BernsteinI.H. (1994). Psychometric theory (Vol. 3). McGraw-Hill.
28.
RajalekshmiK.G. (2007). E-governance services through telecenters: The role of human intermediary and issues of trust. Information Technologies & International Development, 4(1), 19–35.
29.
RamadhanA., MuladnoD.I.S., & ArymurthyA.M. (2013). Synthesizing success factors for e-government initiative. Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology, 6(9), 1685–1702.
30.
RazakR.A., & ZakariaM.S. (2014). The critical success factors for effective ICT governance in Malaysian public sector: A Delphi study. International Journal of Social, Management, Economics and Business Engineering, 8(1), 3512–3515.
31.
RileyC.G. (2004). The changing role of the citizen in the e-governance equation. National Library of Canada, Acquisitions and Bibliographic Services, 9, 395.
32.
SahaP., NathA.K., & Salehi-SangariE. (2012). Evaluation of government e-tax websites: An information quality and system quality approach. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 6(3), 300–321.
33.
SrivastavaN. (2015). E-governance in rural India. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Technologies, 6(1), 741–744.
34.
TanC.W., BenbasatI., & CenfetelliR.T. (2008). Building citizen trust towards e-government services: Do high-quality websites matter? In Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Proceedings of the 41st Annual (pp. 217–217).
35.
TanakaJ.S. (1993). Multifaceted conceptions of fit in structural equation models. Testing Structural Equation Models, 10–39.
36.
Van HaldenwangC. (2002). Electronic government and development: Approaches to modernizing public policy and administration.
37.
VoutiniotiA. (2013). Determinants of user adoption of e-government services in Greece and the role of citizen service centres. Procedia Technology, 8, 238–244.
38.
WestholmH. (2005). Models of improving e-governance by back office re-organisation and integration. Journal of Public Policy, 25(1), 99–132.
39.
WilloughbyM., GómezH.G., & LozanoM.Á.F. (2010). Making e-government attractive. Service Business, 4(1), 49–62.
40.
ZaidiS.F.H., & QteishatM.K. (2012). Assessing e-government service delivery (government to citizen). International Journal of e-Business and e-Government Studies, 4(1), 45–54.
