Egovernment Services In Developing Countries

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

The developments in information and Communication Technology are increasing influencing the way governments and businesses organization operate. Many innovative technologies such as e-Government have immerged. e-Government covers a full range of government activities such as internal processes, the development of policy and services to citizens available electronically. The electronic interactions have rapidly shown astonishing potential for transforming the internal activities of all kinds of organizations and dramatically altering the relationships between organizations and those who use them – in particular, governments, firms and their citizen, the customers.

Despite these developments, governments and citizens in most developing countries ineffectively and inadequately use e-Government services. Literature suggests that among the constraints of e-Government services usability are limited access and sometimes no access to the Internet. In the Uganda for example, only 6.4% of the population has access to the Internet (Internet World Stats, 2008). Owing to this, citizens frequently visit government offices to seek services. Information based services such as admission lists, scholarship notices, tenders and circulars are pinned on notice boards in Ministries and published in Local Newspapers a method which is expensive and has low rural coverage.

Despite government’s efforts to formulate and implement the ICT policy, and to increase penetration of ICT skills among their citizens, with development partners, the rate of e-Government service usability is still low (Kaaya,2003). In this paper, we examine the problems governments and/citizens face in accessing and using e-Government services in developing countries, while taking Uganda as a case study.

e-Government service usability

According to Bury and Oud (2004) usability of services encompasses the extent to which satisfaction of using a certain service. Usability is also defined as "the extent to which the IT affords an effective and satisfying interaction to the intended users, performing the intended tasks within the intended environment at an acceptable cost" (Sweeney et al, 1993). Bury and Oud (2004) argue that measuring usability is all the time more becoming a matter of concern where services are being offered using technologically enhanced platforms such as the Internet.

The developments in e-Government have enabled governments world-over to offer a set of services such as production, certification, control and authorization with ease (Peristeras and Tarabanis, 2004). Through Certification Services, governments issue various kinds of declaration to applicants -citizens, business, visitors, etc. Examples of certification services include issuance of personal documents like passports, marriage certificates or criminal-record clearance. Authorization Services include granting licenses and permits as well as approving requests, say for welfare support, by the applicants. Production Services include infrastructural and utility services, such as electricity, water or telecommunication services. The transformation of public services into Electronic Public Services is a common type of initiative carried out by governments as part of their E-Government and Public Sector Modernization programs.

E-Government Service Delivery

The ISO 9004 highlighted that a good quality service leads to improvements in market share, cost reduction, improved productivity and efficiency and customer satisfaction (McColl et al. 1998). The delivery of services through ICT tools like Internet has been found to be cost effective and efficient.

The delivery of E-Government services should be service-oriented, customer-centric, and results driven; it should be supported by modular, interoperable and re-usable ICT components and should leverage multiple access channels. It should be facilitated by an adequate mix of ownership.

Caldow (1999) notes that the Internet is an effective way for governments to communicate with citizens about programs and services and it simplifies access to government programs, services, and offers opportunities for their application through a single site (EKOS, 2000). Also considerable efforts to offer services through a variety of electronic channels, including interactive voice response telephony (IVR), the Web, and electronic kiosks have been made (Machling and Vincent, 2001). In an E-Gov, Citizens expect efficient services delivered when and where they want them with a perception of convenience, speed, and time saving as the primary benefits of Electronic Service Delivery (Momentum Research Group, 2000). Despite these developments, e-Government projects in developing countries are not flourishing.

Criteria for e-Government Usability

By synthesizing and analyzing the different criteria models from literature, the criteria for E-Government usability are derived which are navigation, accessibility, screen design, media use, consistency, interactivity and content usefulness.

Navigation

Navigation takes into consideration the "hyper movements" between pages and between websites. Parker (1999) states that good navigation in a website is a comparable to a good road map. With good navigation, users know where they are, have been, and want to go from current position. Hassan and Li (2001) argue that navigation is the key to making the experience enjoyable and efficient. However the applicability of navigation depends on user environment, user experience, technology platform, and culture.

Accessibility

Web accessibility refers the ability to access the web site from different browser platforms, either software or hardware related. This is done by ensuring that the system/website is accessible to the target users. The higher the degree of accessibility, the higher the level of usability and the reverse is true. Benjamin (1996) suggests consideration of different personal computer platforms, networks, browsers and versions. However, to achieve a high degree of accessibility, loading time, browser compatibility, and search facility are important.

Screen Design

Screen appearance indicates the design of the website in terms of the on-screen information. Shirley (1999) divides screen appearance or layout or design into space provision, choice of color, and readability.

Media use

Media use refers to the use of multimedia i.e., text, graphics, video, animations aimed at keeping users attention and finally enhance usability. However improper use of these elements may distract users and affect usability. The main multimedia elements include sound, graphics, images, audio and video.

Interactivity

Interactivity refers to the level of communication of the website in the form of contact information, enquiries, and forum. The features that facilitate a two way communication between users and site owners include emails, guest books, online forms, and net conference for enhancing web site worthiness.

Consistency

Consistency refers to the uniformity of design, taking into considerations graphics, placement and observable schemes and patterns. Yale (1999) suggests uniformity of title layout, subtitle, page footers, background, links and icons during the design.

Content usefulness

Content refers to the information and general gist of the website. This largely depends on the goals of the online service. Lynch and Horton (1999) outline the four basic elements of a document which are not complicated and have almost nothing to do with internet technology such as who, what, when and where because the ensure web usefulness.

Sample Population

The research used a sample of 20 Government ministries under the National Backbone Project directory. This provided a total of 20 Heads of IT from all Ministries and 20 other staff that were randomly selected from the IT department of each ministry. 5 Extra questionnaires were randomly included to cater for any circumstances that could affect the number of questionnaires brought back. This brought a total of 45 respondents that made up the population of this study.

Sampling method

Random sampling was used to select 20 respondents who were not Heads of IT sections in the ministries. To identify the second respondent, the question "how many employees do you have in the department?" to the head of the IT department. The response was then used to identify the respondent from using random numbers in the random number table as seen in table 1. The random number table was formulated in Microsoft Excel using the Random function; randbetween (a, b) where a and b is the range of random numbers i.e. from a to b e.g. for a=1000, b= 9999, the function randbetween (1000,9999) returns random numbers within 1000-9999 range.

Table 1: 500 Random Numbers

228 188 840 619 015 829 651 918 117 786 780 534 537 060 224 466 006 384 985 448 793 025 797 748 630 983 925 363 049 256 370 295 519 846 865 278 306 487 942 577 143 444 071 192 562 718 515 124 032 043 011 107 818 683 822 406 921 641 950 021 075 914 395 953 545 239 156 936 331 145 968 235 434 103 096 850 587 111 541 782 057 701 036 765 844 342 113 064 946 299 241 679 100 573 686 611 836 897 181 594 622 804 993 893 459 761 121 509 878 769 566 175 348 359 327 423 135 000 139 722 972 957 267 338 391 231 711 004 861 555 207 252 647 196 284 551 750 153 412 167 904 427 857 833 374 017 352 081 160 658 164 380 263 615 558 996 416 889 737 662 886 213 498 910 673 854 310 209 776 812 438 825 929 085 882 491 665 675 643 739 185 316 455 039 288 274 583 654 707 547 028 320 177 872 523 569 964 513 601 868 801 470 729 218 220 744 908 149 690 068 669 132 476 974 481 697 579 932 609 047 733 940 053 978 203 530 814 961 989 171 626 526 092 128 754 876 246 402 199 808 716 726 694 790 502 633 772 089 605 590 900 705 758 598 079 637 571 941 831 628 237 411 421 389 485 197 062 201 784 034 019 329 400 453 293 774 066 923 618 269 314 710 258 347 614 216 475 229 966 489 919 895 436 415 144 222 720 226 443 325 678 620 058 479 951 799 724 949 276 560 973 735 917 372 272 838 874 500 887 991 148 945 554 727 738 706 802 248 379 517 101 351 336 646 770 610 090 383 240 934 586 631 026 575 663 930 863 532 791 280 282 806 970 212 752 130 731 194 539 037 543 759 642 994 671 109 795 002 116 041 265 592 877 023 051 233 688 588 154 190 817 938 308 464 261 870 778 789 756 853 564 695 834 152 667 652 962 767 821 660 141 699 291 250 902 682 077 891 714 981 180 849 842 596 599 122 286 528 069 447 511 855 088 859 810 692 045 987 425 112 319 432 357 582 909 927 340 368 549 005 639 205 507 133 254 624 186 094 105 073 169 881 746 885 468 703 013 084 137 977 457 607 301 998 393 208 030 297 496 165 158 913 650 173 603 845 120 763 098 827 906 404 176 126 009 361 304 742 162 635 674 898 959 244 656 684 866 056 955 521

* This table of 500 random numbers was produced according to the following specifications: Numbers were randomly selected from within the range of 0 to 999. Duplicate numbers were not allowed.

The total number of returned responses to the survey was 42, of which 39 were usable and representative of the intended population. Some institutions could not respond due to the limitations enshrined in their ICT policies. The sample size was enough and the intended audience was reached.

Validity and reliability and data analysis methods

A pilot surveywas conducted on all staff in the Department of Management Information System in Makerere University Business School to validate the research instrument. A 5 point likert scale was used to analyze experts’ views on the validity of each question. These included Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Not Sure, Agree, and Strongly Agree. The likert scale was recommended by experts since this provides standardized response categorizes in survey questionnaires. Finally, the respondents were asked, whether there were any other issues that they thought should be included in the survey instrument. Results of the responses and questions were collected and analyzed. At first, the questionnaire was too big and included the factors that affect e-Government usability, although they were not well phrased. Following the responses, a number of questions were rephrased and some factors were dropped. The final questionnaire was also reviewed and approved by the research department of Makerere University and the study supervisor, Professor Irina Zlotnikova. These procedures ensured the questionnaire used in this study was valid.

Critical dimensions that measure the requirements functionality, cost friendliness, flexibility, usability and accessibility were tested. This was done by comparing the CronbachAlpha Coefficientobtained against 0.6 set. The item/factors with CACless than 0.6 were deleted.This continued until all items had an acceptable CAC. The items that passed the Cronbach’sAlpha test, were subjected to Factor analysis on the items of functionality, cost friendliness, flexibility, usability and accessibility had a high factor loading greater than 0.5.

On the other hand, reliability of the research instrument achieved through following Kirakowski (2000) reliability guidelines. In particular, the questions were presented in simple and precise terminology, without assuming anyresponses. In addition, double-barreled questions were eliminatedduring questionnaire pretesting.

Lastly data was analyzed with descriptive statistics for frequencies by following the steps in SPSS software. The items that were above 50% were considered to be significant responses.

Description of the Background Variables

Usable data were collected from a total of 39 respondents from the different institutions. 74% were males and 26% were females as shown below in table 2. This is an indication that there are more males in the IT field than females.

Gender

Frequency

Percentage

Male

29

74

Female

10

26

Total

39

100

Table 2: Responses According to Gender

Table 3 shows that of those who responded to the study, 39% were between 20 and 29 years, 54% were between 30 and 39 years, 5% were between 40 and 49 years and 3% were above 49 years. While only 18% had experience in this study, less than 1 year, 28% had 2 to 3 years experience, 33% had 4 to 5 years, 13% had 6 to 7 years, and 8% had above 8 years of experience in this study. So according to the findings, most people in the IT field are young, i.e. below 40 years.

Age

Frequency

Percent

20-29

15

39

30-39

21

54

40-49

2

5

50 and Above

1

3

Total

39

100

Experience

Frequency

Percent

Less than one year

7

18

2-3 years

11

28

4-5 years

13

33

6-7 years

5

13

8 and above

3

8

Total

39

100

Table 3: Responses According to Age and Experience

Issues related to E-Government Usability Requirements for Public Service Delivery

The study investigated the issues related to E-Government Usability Requirements for public service delivery. The requirements were identified in the literature and classified under four main classes such as functionality, cost friendliness, flexibility, Usability and accessibility.

Functionality Requirement. Table 4 shows how the respondents rate the different dimensions of functionality in relation to usability of E-Government programs.

Percentage Ranking

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Not Sure

Agree

Service Delivery Mission/Vision

-

5.1

5.1

23.1

Accepted web development Standards

2.6

2.6

17.9

25.6

Flexible and Compatible users numbers

5.1

15.4

15.4

Table 4: Responses According to Functionality dimensions

In the delivery of E-Government services, trends are towards increasing functionality (Bertelsmann Foundation, 2001). In this study, functionality included issues like Service Delivery Mission/Vision, bridging gaps of traditional methods, Accepted web development Standards, motivation and rewarding systems, and flexibility and Compatible user numbers of E-Government service delivery systems. Grant et al. (2005) argues that the success of e-Government is having a clear vision. However findings indicate that like service delivery mission/vision, accepted web development standards, flexibility and compatible user numbers are highly significant requirements in the success of e-Government.

Cost Requirement. Table 5 shows how the respondents rate the different dimensions of cost requirement in relation to usability of E-Government programs.

Percentage Ranking

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Not Sure

Agree

Investments Costs

-

15.4

10.3

25.6

Administration and Maintenance costs

-

5.1

20.5

15.4

Online services Access cost

-

10.3

5.1

10.3

Table 5: Responses according to cost dimensions

Sweeney et al (1993) define costs in terms of tasks being performed within an environment at unacceptable cost. Manning et al. (1998) reveal that costs can relate to wasted time, reduced productivity, increased frustration, and loss of repeat visits and revenue, increased training and increased support costs and so on. In this study, the cost requirement included; initial investment, administration and maintenance, training, access, clarity, and awareness. Findings (table 5), indicate that cost dimensions such as online services Access costs and administration and maintenance costs are highly significant cost requirements for the development of E-Government usability framework. These costs should be very low so that E-Government services are easily and cheaply accessed. This could also be attributed to the fact that the delivery of services through ICT tools like Internet is cost effective and efficient (McColl et al. 1998).

Flexibility Requirement.Table 6 shows how the respondents rate the different dimensions of flexibility requirement in relation to usability of E-Government programs.

Percentage Ranking

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Not Sure

Agree

Capturing new data/ information about new developments

-

5.1

12.8

28.2

Multilingual systems

-

-

17.9

20.5

Short time Feedback

-

5.1

28.2

10.3

Table 6: Responses according to flexibility dimensions

For a usable and easily navigable system, a user has the capability to perform different actions, as compared to a limited navigable system where the IT designer may choose a proper way according to the user and/or the task (Rostlinger and Cronholm, 2009). Flexibility is also highlighted in the studies of Shackel (1986) and Nielsen (2000). In this study, flexibility included requirements such as capturing new data about developments, review and control, multilingual, and Short time feedback. Findings (table 6) indicate that only capturing new data about developments, multilingual, and Short time feedback as flexibility requirements are highly significant requirements for the development of an E-Government Usability framework.

Usability dimensions. Table 7 shows how the respondents rate the different dimensions of usability in relation to usability of E-Government programs.

Percentage Ranking

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Not Sure

Agree

Reliability and Error Tolerance

2.6

7.7

17.9

23.1

Productive system / Efficiency

-

7.7

10.3

23.1

Consistency of user interfaces

2.6

7.7

17.9

10.3

Table 7: Responses According to usability dimensions

Usability becomes increasingly important as more and more information, products, and services become available through electronic means (Bury and Oud, 2004). Many models of usability evaluations proposed Nielsen, 1993), (Shneiderman, 1998), (Kärkkäinen & Laarni, 2002), (Muller et al, 1998) and Nielsen (2000) involve the employment of usability dimensions to focus on user perceptions, their interactions with the system, and user's interaction with a resource by monitoring the number of error (Hert, 2001). In this study, usability involved ease to learn, error tolerance, satisfaction, efficiency, and consistency of user interfaces (memorability). Findings indicate that only efficiency and consistency of user interfaces are highly significant usability dimensions for the development of E-Government usability framework.

Accessibility Requirement Table 8 shows how the respondents rate the different dimensions of flexibility requirement in relation to usability of E-Government programs.

Percentage Ranking

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Not Sure

Agree

Navigation time

-

10.3

7.7

25.6

Access for all (no discrimination)

2.6

10.3

12.8

12.8

Table 8: Responses According to Age and Experience

West, (2003) found out that it is not sufficient to place information and services online if there are barriers to their usage and luck alternative delivery channels. These alternative delivery channels can also benefit all users who are temporarily unable to use the main E-Government channels (for instance due to power failures or system breakdown, or due to a user's temporary impairment) (Arch & Hardy, 2005). In this study, the accessibility requirements included; Alternative service delivery channels, navigation, and indiscriminate access. Findings (table 8) indicate that only navigation time and access for all are significant requirements for the development an E-Government usability framework.

Conclusion

This study has been vital in putting forward the salient factors influencinge-Government usability in public service delivery. Findings indicated that functionality, flexibility, cost usability and accessibility are major requirements in the usability of E-Government. The criteria identified in this research that are used for E-Government Usability, include; accessibility, screen design, media use, consistency, interactivity and content usefulness. A simple, easy to use and systematic framework for E-Government usability has been formulated. The support has been based E-Government and usability theory, and ideas of Vaki (2005), Nielsen (2000) Nielsen (2003), Calimera procedure for building usable web applications. The research was limited to E-Government usability and could not look at other factors that affect E-Government implantation in developing countries, their strength and weaknesses. The study because of the limited nature of the survey could not cover a larger population, and even the questions were only limited to usability requirements, many variables were not looked into for example problems associated with E-Government usability