This research offers a limited empirical study of online service in federal government agencies. The authors are interested in the evolution of online governance and what factors influence the adoption and elaboration of online services. Information about online agency services was gathered primarily from online U.S. General Accounting Office reports and testimony offered between 1993 and 2000. The authors examine online activities that carry out three governmental functions: providing services, collecting information, and soliciting stakeholder comment. Four principal cases were selected: the Social Security Administration’s Online PEBES, the Department of Education’s National Student Loan Data System, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The analysis of these cases identifies a partial sequence of steps or stages in development of online services. It appears that this sequence is a result of both learning and the imposition of certain standards of performance based on best practices and legislative mandates.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abramson, J. B.
, Arterton, F. C., & Orren, G. R. (1988). The electronic commonwealth: The impact of new media technologies on democratic politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
2.
Argyris, C.
(1991). The use of knowledge as a test for theory: The case of public administration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 1(3), 337-354.
3.
Argyris, C.
, & Schoen, D. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
4.
Atkinson, R. D.
, & Ulevich, J. (2000, March). Digital government: The next step to reengineering the federal government [Electronic version]. Washington, DC: Progressive Policy Institute, Technology and New Economy Project. Retrieved March 30, 2000, from www/dlcppi.org/texts/tech/digitalgovernment.htm
5.
Barzelay, M.
(1992). Breaking through bureaucracy. Berkeley: University of California Press.
6.
Bimber, B.
(1998). The Internet and political transformation: Populism, community, and accelerated pluralism. Polity, 31(1), 133-160.
7.
Birdsell, D. S.
, & Muzzio, D. A. (1999, February). Government programs involving citizen access to Internet services [Electronic version]. Washington, DC: Markle Foundation. Retrieved March 30, 2000, from www.markle.org
8.
Brown, D.
(2000, March 28). Uncle Sam is digitally clueless. Retrieved March 30, 2000, from Interactive Week’s Web site, www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2487027,00.html?chkpt=zdnn033000
9.
Browning, G.
(1996). Electronic democracy: Using the Internet to influence politics. Wilton, CT: Online, Inc.
10.
Clinton, W. J.
, & Gore, A. (1997). A framework for global electronic commerce. Retrieved from www.iitf.nist.gov/eleccomm/ecomm.htm
11.
Daft, R.
, & Huber, G. (1987). How organizations learn: A communications framework. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 5, 1-36.
12.
Dawes, S. S.
, Pardo, T. A., & Dicaterino, A. (1999). Crossing the threshold: Practical foundations for government services on the World Wide Web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(4), 346-353.
13.
EDGAR face-lift will ease filing strains. (1999, November 22). Government Computer News. Retrieved from www.gcn.com/vol118_no37?interview/979-1.html
14.
Fletcher, P. D.
, & Westerback, L. (1999). Catching a ride on the NII: The federal policy vehicles paving the information highway. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(4), 299-304.
15.
Gray, V.
, & Lowery, D. (2000). Where do policy ideas come from?Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(3), 573-597.
16.
Grossman, L. K.
(1995). The electronic republic: Reshaping democracy in America. New York: Viking.
17.
Huber, G.
(1991). Organization learning: The contributing processes and the literatures. Organizational Science, 2(1), 88-115.
18.
Jones, J.
(2001). Federal IT exec Mark Forman shares his plans for morphing national Web initiatives into a cohesive effort. Info World. Retrieved from www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/01/08/03/010803hnforman.xml
Korten, D.
(1980). Community organization and rural development. Public Administration Review, 40, 480-511.
21.
Layne, D.
, & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional e-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly, 18(2), 122-136.
22.
Lebovic, J.
(1995). How organizations learn: U.S. government estimates of foreign military spending. American Journal of Political Science, 39(4), 835-863.
23.
Levitt, B.
, & March, J. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 319-340.
24.
Mahler, J.
(1997). Influences of organizational culture on learning in public agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 7(4), 519-540.
25.
March, J.
, Sproull, L., & Tamuz, M. (1996). Learning from samples of one or fewer. In M. Cohen & L. Sproull (Eds.), Organizational learning (pp. 1-19). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
26.
McClure, D.
(2000). Electronic government: Federal initiatives are evolving rapidly but they face significant challenges (Publication No. GAO/T-AIMD/GGD-00-179, Testimony before the Subcommittee on Government Management, Information and Technology, Committee on Government Reform, House of Representatives).
27.
Nutt, P.
(1984). Types of organization decision processes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 414-450.
28.
Rheingold, H.
(1993). The virtual community: Homesteading on the electronic frontier. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
29.
Social Security Administration
. (1997, September). Social Security: Privacy and customer service in the electronic age (SSA Publication No. 03-012). Retrieved from www.ssa.gov
30.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1991). U.S. Department of Agriculture: Strengthening management systems to support secretarial goals (Publication No. GAO/RCED-91-49). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
31.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1994a). Executive guide: Improving mission performance through strategic information management and technology—learning from leading organizations (Publication No. GAO/AIMD-94-115). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
32.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1994b). Management reform: Implementation of the NPR’s recommendations (Publication No. GAO/OCG-95-1, Letter Report). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
33.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1994c). Securities markets: Actions needed to better protect investors against unscrupulous brokers (Publication No. GAO/GGD-94-208, Letter Report). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
34.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1995). Student financial aid: Data not fully utilized to identify inappropriately awarded loans and grants (Publication No. GAO/HEHS-95-89, Letter Report). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
35.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1996a). Department of Education: Status of actions to improve the management of student financial aid (Publication No. GAO/HEHS-96-143, Letter Report). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
36.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1996b). Information technology: Best practices can improve performance and produce results (Publication No. GAO/T-AIMD-96-46, Testimony). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
37.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1996c). NASD telephone hotline: Enhancements could help investors be better informed about brokers’disciplinary records (Publication No. GAO/GGD-96-171, Letter Report). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
38.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1997a). Department of Education: Challenges in promoting access and excellence in education (Publication No. GAO/T-HEHS-97-99, Testimony). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
39.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1997b). High-risk series: Student financial aid (Publication No. GAO/HR-97-11, Letter Report). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
40.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1997c). Internet and electronic dial-up bulletin boards: Information reported by federal organizations (Publication No. GAO/GGD-97-86, Letter Report). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
41.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1997d). Regulatory burden: Measurement challenges and concerns raised by selected companies (Publication No. GAO/GGD-97-2, Chapter Report). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
42.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1997e). The Results Act: Observations on the Social Security Administration’s June 1997 draft strategic plan (Publication No. GAO/HEHS-97-179R, Correspondence). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
43.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1997f). Social Security Administration: Internet access to personal earnings and benefits information (Publication No. GAO/T-AIMD/HEHS-97-123, Testimony). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
44.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1997g). Social Security Administration: More cost-effective approaches exist to further improve 800-number service (Publication No. GAO/HEHS-97-79, Chapter Report). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
45.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1997h). Social Security Administration: Significant challenges await new commissioner (Publication No. GAO/HEHS-97-53, Letter Report). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
46.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1997i). SSA benefit estimate statements: Additional data needed to improve workload management (Publication No. GAO/HEHS-97-101, Letter Report). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
47.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1997j). SSA benefit statements: Well received by the public but difficult to comprehend (Publication No. GAO/HEHS-97-19, Letter Report). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
48.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1997k). Student financial aid information: Systems architecture needed to improve programs’ efficiency (Publication No. GAO/AIMD-97-122, Letter Report). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
49.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1997l). USDA information management: Extensive improvements needed in managing information technology investments (Publication No. GAO/T-AIMD-97-90, Testimony). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
50.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1998a). Chief information officers: Ensuring strong leadership and an effective council (Publication No. GAO/T-AIMD-98-22, Testimony). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
51.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1998b). Information security: Serious weaknesses place critical federal operations and assets at risk (Publication No. GAO/AIMD-98-92, Chapter Report). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
52.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1998c). Regulatory reform: Changes made to agencies’rules are not always clearly documented (Publication No. GAO/GGD-98-31, Letter Report). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
53.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1998d). SEC enforcement: Responses to GAO and SEC recommendations related to microcap stock fraud (Publication No. GAO/GGD-98-204, Letter Report). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
54.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1998e). Social Security Administration: Information technology challenges facing the commissioner (Publication No. GAO/T-AIMD-98-109, Testimony). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
55.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1998f). Student financial aid: Schools’experiences using the national student loan data system (Publication No. GAO/HEHS-98-192, Letter Report). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
56.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1999). Securities fraud: The Internet poses challenges to regulators and investors (Publication No. GAO/T-GGD-99-34, Testimony). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
57.
Walsh, J.
, & Ungson, G. (1991). Organizational memory. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 57-91.
58.
Wilson, J.
(1989). Bureaucracy. New York: Basic Books.
