E-government success factors: Mapping practical tools to theoretical foundations
By José Ramón Gil-García, Theresa A. Pardo. Government Information Quarterly, 2005
975 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Communication, Political Science and International Relations, Sociology and Political Science
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/55f4da386f8c6470108bcaf753006e2fe6c63b85
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Communication
- Taewoo Nam
- Antonio Cordella
- José Ramón Gil-García
- Theresa A. Pardo
- Terrence A. Maxwell
- Tung-Mou Yang
- I. Martinez-Moyano
- Carla Marisa Bonina
In Political Science and International Relations
- Taewoo Nam
- José Ramón Gil-García
- Antonio Cordella
- Theresa A. Pardo
- Niccoló Tempini
- Terrence A. Maxwell
- Tung-Mou Yang
- InduShobha N. Chengalur-Smith
In Sociology and Political Science
- Taewoo Nam
- Antonio Cordella
- José Ramón Gil-García
- Theresa A. Pardo
- Carla Marisa Bonina
- Suha A. AlAwadhi
- Karine Nahon
Citations in the corpus
- Information-sharing in public organizations: A literature review of interpersonal, intra-organizational and inter-organizational success factors (2011, background): “…risk reduction, and trust development in inter-organizational information sharing projects when specific guidance such as how to utilize information is proposed (Gil-Garcia & Pardo, 2005; Gil-Garcia et al., 2007a; Lam, 2005; Otjacques et al., 2007; Perri, Bellamy, Raab, Warren, & Heeney, 2007).”
- Understanding the evolution of e-government: The influence of systems of rules on public sector dynamics (2007, background): “…has increased in recent years and researchers are developing theoretical and conceptual models to understand different aspects of e-government (see for example Cresswell & Pardo, 2001; Dawes, Pardo, & Cresswell, 2004; Fountain, 2001; Gil-García & Pardo, 2005; Gupta & Jana, 2003; Moon, 2002).”
- What makes a city smart? Identifying core components and proposing an integrative and comprehensive conceptualization (2015, positive): “The latter type of governance indicates intergovernmental, interagency, and also inter-sectoral networks and partnerships or collaboration among multiple actors, including government agencies [80,92,117,122,126,151,152,164,173,194,199].”
- Understanding Smart Cities: An Integrative Framework (2012, background): “For instance, Gil-Garcia and Pardo [26] suggested a list of success factors and challenges for egovernment initiatives (see Table 2).”
- Building Understanding of Smart City Initiatives (2012, background): “Gil-Garcia and Pardo’s [14] research is worthy of attention.”
- A public value perspective for ICT enabled public sector reforms: A theoretical reflection (2012, background): “…investments in public sector information systems have generally been directed towards enhancing efficiency and policy effectiveness as well as achieving broader democratic values (Bellamy & Taylor, 1998; Fountain, 2001a; Gil-Garcia & Pardo, 2005; Gronlund & Horan, 2004; Heeks, 1999; Kamarck, 2007).”
- Information systems in the public sector: The e-Government enactment framework (2010, background): “…studies that have looked at the social, political and institutional dimensions of e-Government projects (Bozeman and Bretschneider, 1986; Brewer et al., 2006; Dunleavy et al., 2006; Fedorowicz et al., 2007; Fountain, 2001; Gil-Garcia and Pardo, 2005; Irani et al., 2008; Luna-Reyes et al., 2005).”
- E-government and organizational change: Reappraising the role of ICT and bureaucracy in public service delivery (2015, background): “Governments' investments in public sector information systems are generally associated with organizational transformations designed to enhance efficiency and policy effectiveness (Bellamy & Taylor, 1998; Fountain, 2001; Gil-Garcia & Pardo, 2005; Gronlund & Horan, 2004; Kamarck, 2007).”
- Collaborative e-Government: impediments and benefits of information-sharing projects in the public sector (2007, background): “…project activities; limited (or no) access to implementation models and/or guidelines; aggressive time frames for the implementation; and lengthy time frame for manifestation of organizational benefits (Best, 1997; Caffrey, 1998; Umble et al ., 2003; Gil-Garcia & Pardo, 2005; Moon & Norris, 2005).”