Search results

The purpose of this paper is to present a multi‐faceted summary and classification of the existing literature in the field of quality of service for e‐government and outline the main components of a quality model for e‐government services.

Starting with fundamental quality principles the paper examines and analyzes 36 different quality approaches concerning public sector services, e‐services in general and more specifically e‐government services. Based on the dimensions measured by each approach the paper classifies the approaches and concludes on the basic factors needed for the development of a complete quality model of e‐government services.

Based on the classification of literature approaches, the paper provides information about the main components of a quality model that may be used for the continuous monitoring and measuring of public e‐services' quality. The classification forms the basis for answering questions that must be addressed by the quality model, such as: What to assess?; Who will perform the assessment? and How the assessment will be done?

This model can be used by the management of public organizations in order to measure and monitor the quality of e‐services delivered to citizens.

The results of the work presented in this paper form the basis for the development of a quality model for e‐government services.

This study aims to identify the similarities and differences between the perspectives of providers and customers regarding the important dimensions and attributes of e‐service quality (e‐SQ).

Ten criteria are proposed for assessment of e‐SQ in both business‐to‐business (B2B) and business‐to‐consumer (B2C) transactions. Confirmatory factor analysis confirms the validity of grouping these criteria into five proposed dimensions. The e‐SQ dimensions and criteria are then ranked in terms of their importance by a survey of respondents from small and medium‐sized enterprises with experience in conducting e‐business in Greece. The results are compared with selected surveys of customers' perceptions from the literature.

The results indicate that the providers' perceptions are in agreement with customers' perceptions with regard to e‐SQ dimensions, but not with regard to specific criteria (items) within those dimensions. The study also finds that providers have similar perceptions of the importance of the suggested e‐SQ criteria in B2B and B2C electronic transactions.

The findings should be generalised with care if extrapolated to other socio‐cultural settings and specific industries.

Managers should recognise that there might be differences between their views of e‐SQ and those of their customers.

This is one of the few studies to have focused on the perceptions of providers in assessing e‐SQ.