Abstract:

E-government usually studies focus on outcomes or user opinion. Our attempt is to see this also from the point of view of IT professionals that work in public institutions. Big cities will always be on the forefront of using new technologies in their day-to-day work and, because of that, they are usually the subject of researchers wanting to study this field. But most Romanians live in small cities, towns and villages. We are also interested in the pace of e-government development in these municipalities. After the 2017 study that focused on big Romanian cities, this year we follow up with a more comprehensive research, which aims to find out how e-government is implemented in small urban municipalities in Romania. Our research aims to learn how successful the implementation of e-government services in Romanian local government is in the eyes of those tasked with rolling out these services. E-government is no longer a new development in the public institutions’ continuing search for better service. The interaction between citizens and companies, as well as the government, are constantly evolving, and new ways of doing things are regularly tested and adopted or discarded.

References:

[1] AL-BUSAIDY, M., & WEERAKKODY, V. (2010) E-Government Implementation in Oman: A Comparative Study of Three Public Agencies. AMCIS. [2] ANTHES, G. (2015) Estonia: a model for e-government. Communications of the ACM 58(6), 18-20. [3] BIASIOTTI, M. A., & NANNUCCI, R. (2004) Teaching e-Government in Italy. Electronic Government: Third International Conference. Zaragoza. [4] COURSEY, D., & NORRIS, D. F. (2008) Models of e-government: Are they correct? An empirical assesement. Public Administration Review 68(3), 523-536. [5] DUKIC, D., DUKIC, G., and BERTOVIC, N. (2017) Public administration employees’ readiness and acceptance of e-government: Findings from a Croatian survey. Information Development 33(5), 525-539. [6] EVANS, D. & YEN, D.C. (2006) E-Government: Evolving relationship of citizens and government, domestic, and international development. Government Information Quarterly 23(2), 207-235. [7] HOLDEN, S. H., NORRIS, D.F & FLETCHER, P.D. (2003) Electronic Government at the Local Level. Public Performance & Management Review, 325-344. [8] KATSONIS, M. (2015) Digital Government: A Primer and Professional Perspectives. Australian Journal of Public Administration 74(1), 42-52. [9] KUMAR, V., BHASKER, M., BUTT, I. & PERSAUD, A. (2007) Factors for Successful e-Government Adoption: a Conceptual Framework. The Electronic Journal of E-Government, 63-76. [10] LIU, Y., CHEN, X. & WANG, X. (2010) Evaluating Government Portal Websites in China. PACIS 2010 Proceedings. [11] NORRIS, D. F. & REDDICK, C.G. (2012) Local E-Government in the United States: Transformation. Public Administration Review 73(1), 165-175. [12] REDDICK, G. (2004) Empirical models of e-government growth in local governments. E-Service Journal 3(2), 59-84. [13] ȘANDOR, S. D. (2012) ICT and Public Administration. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 155-164. [14] United Nations. United Nations E-government Survey. 2016. (2018, January 5). Retreived from http://workspace.unpan.org/sites/Internet/Documents/UNPAN97453.pdf. [15] URS, N. (2016) Online Services and Social Media Use in Romanian Cities: Can We See a Pattern? 24th NISPAcee Annual Conference, Spreading Standards, Building Capacities: European Administrative Space in Progress. Zagreb. [16] WANG, F. (2014) Explaining the low utilization of government websites: using a grounded theory approach. Government Information Quarterly 31(4), 610-621.