This study aims to analyze managerial determinants, identify key stakeholders, and redesign managerial mechanisms for the task of horizontal integration of Chinese municipal e-government. Data were collected from a nationwide survey administered in selected municipal cities in China. Based on the Structural Equation Model, our research identified multiple managerial factors necessary for horizontal integration in e-government. These factors were Experience in general management, Reforming authority, Experience in projects, and Legal regulation. After hypothesis testing, all four determinants were found to significantly affect two intervening variables, Data integration and Business & IT integration. Furthermore, the two variables significantly predicted the dependent variable, Horizontal Integration. We then employed stakeholder analysis to find candidate stakeholders from the managerial institutions in the Chinese context, and furthermore, used a score-based approach to identify the key stakeholders corresponding to each of the above four factors. Our findings suggest that managerial mechanisms should be redesigned for a successful horizontal integration initiative.
AzadBFarajS (2008) Making e-government systems workable: Exploring the evolution of frames. Journal of Strategic Information Systems17(2): 75–98.
2.
BassellierGBenbasatI (2004) Business competence of information technology professionals: conceptual development and influence on it-business partnerships. MIS Quarterly28(4): 673–69.
3.
BassellierGBenbasatIReichBH (2003) The influence of business managers’ IT competence on championing IT. Information Systems Research14(4):317–336.
BellamyCTaylorFJohnA (1998) Governing in the information age. Open University Press (Buckingham and Bristol, PA, USA).
6.
BrewerAGNeubauerBJ (2006) Designing and implementing e-government systems: Critical implications for public administration and democracy. Administration & Society38(4):472–499.
7.
ChangEKPrybutokVRZhangXN (2008) Measuring e-government readiness. Information & Management45: 540–546.
8.
ChenJAPanLS (2009) Managing e-government implementation in China: A process perspective. Information & Management46: 203–212.
9.
ChircuAM (2008) E-government evaluation: Towards a multi-dimensional framework. Electronic Government: An International Journal5(4): 345–363.
10.
CordellaAIannacciF (2010) Information systems in the public sector: The e-Government enactment framework. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems19(1): 52–66.
11.
CourseyDNorrisDF (2008) Models of e-government: Are they correct? An empirical assessment. Public Administration Review6(11): 523–536.
12.
ChunMMooneyJ (2009) CIO roles and responsibilities: Twenty–five years of evolution and change. Information & Management46(6):323–334.
13.
DawesSSPardoTA (2002) Building collaborative digital government systems systemic constraints and effective practices. The Kluwer International Series on Advances in Database Systems26:259–273.
14.
FanB (2008) The propelling system, mechanism and method of information sharing among different public sectors. Journal of Shanghai Jiaotong University (Social Science)2: 13–20.
15.
FlakLSRoseJ (2005) Stakeholder governance: Adapting stakeholder theory to the e-government field. Communication of the Association for Information Systems16(1): 662–664.
16.
HarmonP (2003) Business process change: a manager's guide to improving, redesigning, and automating processes. Morgan Kaufmann.
17.
HeeksRStanforthC (2007) Understanding e-government project trajectories from an actor-network perspective. European Journal of Information Systems16: 165–177.
18.
HillerJSBelangerF (2001) Privacy strategies for electronic government. In AbramsonM.A.MeansG.E. (Eds.) E-government 2001. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
19.
HoATK (2002) Reinventing local governments and the e-Government initiative. Public Administration Review62(4): 434–444.
20.
HosseinSBehrouzZ (2004) An adaptive approach for implementing e-government in I.R. Iran. Journal of Government Information30:600–619.
21.
IraniZThemistocleousMLovePD (2003) The impact of enterprise application integration on information system lifecycles. Information & Management41(2):177–187.
22.
JaegerTP (2002) Constitutional principles and e-government: an opinion about possible effects of Federalism and the separation of powers on e-government policies. Government Information Quarterly19(4): 357–368.
23.
LayneKLeeJW (2001) Developing fully functional e-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly18(2): 122–136.
24.
LeeJW (2010) 10 year retrospect on stage models of e-government: A qualitative meta-synthesis. Government Information Quarterly27(1): 220–223.
25.
LimJHTangSY (2008) Urban e-government initiatives and environmental decision performance in Korea. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory18(1): 109–138.
26.
MitchellRKAgleBRWoodDJ (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review22(4): 853–886.
27.
MontagnaMJ (2005) A framework for the assessment and analysis of electronic government proposals. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications4(3): 204–219.
28.
NuttPCBackoRW (1992) The strategic management of public and third sector organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
29.
PrybutokRVZhangXNRyanDS (2008) Evaluating leadership, IT quality, and net benefits in an e-government environment. Information & Management45: 143–152.
30.
McNealRSchmeidaMHaleK (2007) E-disclosure laws and electronic campaign finance reform: Lessons from the diffusion of e-government policies in the States. Government Information Quarterly24(2): 312–325.
31.
ReichBHBenbasatI (2000) Factors that influence the social dimension of alignment between business and information technology objectives, MIS Quarterly24(1): 81–111.
32.
RockartJFEarlMJRossJW (1996) Eight imperatives for the new IT organization, Sloan Management Review38(1): 43–55.
33.
StamoulisDGGeorgiadisPMarkatosD (2001) Revisiting public information management for effective e-government services. Information Management & Computer Security9(4):146–153.
34.
StevensJP (1996) Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Mahwah.
35.
StrejcekGTheilM (2003) Technology push, legislation pull? E-government in the European Union. Decision Support Systems34(3): 305–313.
36.
TanCWPanSLLimETK (2005) Managing stakeholder interests in e-government implementation: Lessons learned from a Singapore e-government project. Journal of Global Information Management (13)1: 31–53.
37.
TolbertCJMossbergerKMcNealR (2008). Institutions, policy innovation, and E-government in the American states. Public Administration Review68(3): 549–563.
38.
TompkinsELFewRBrownK (2008) Scenario-based stakeholder engagement: Incorporating stakeholders preferences into coastal planning for climate change. Journal of Environmental Management88(4): 1580–1592.
39.
ThemistocleousMIraniZ (2006) Towards a methodology for the development of integrated IT infrastructures. Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences1–9.
40.
ThemistocleousMIraniZLovePE (2004) Evaluating the integration of supply chain information systems: A case study. European Journal of Operational Research159(2): 393–405.
41.
ThompsonRLHigginsCAHowellJM (1994) Influence of experience on personal computer utilization: Testing a conceptual model. Journal of Management Information Systems11(1): 167–187.
42.
TurnbullS (1997) Stakeholder co-operation. Journal of Cooperative Studies29(3): 18–52.
43.
WixomBHToddPA (2005) A theoretical integration of user satisfaction and technology acceptance. Information Systems Research16(1): 85–102.
44.
ZhuKKraemerKL (2005) Post-adoption variations in usage and value of e-business by organization: Cross-country evidence from the retail industry. Information Systems Research16(1): 61–84.
