ABSTRACT

The paper compares the case of Jamaica, which despite a two-decade-long journey, has experienced unsatisfactory progress in implementing e-Government, with that of Singapore, which has achieved considerable success, despite being small island-states of similar-sized populations with British colonial histories, with both nations gaining their independence around the same time in the mid-1960s. Qualitative data gathered from interviews and documentation from supply-side stakeholders were analyzed to better understand the drivers for, and barriers to, the successful implementation of e-Government initiatives. Based on the existing literature, a novel conceptual framework was used to guide the data collection and analysis process. This enabled the presence of previously identified drivers and barriers for e-Government initiatives to be assessed in the context of both countries. The study was also able to surface new and additional factors influencing e-Government implementation, which have not been previously identified within the e-Government research literature, namely Administration/Leadership, e-Readiness, and Communication. The research findings enabled practical and actionable recommendations to those leading e-Government initiatives in Jamaica to improve implementation by overcoming forces that hinder progress. The findings from this study are limited as the research draws on data from limited sources in just two countries.

摘要

该文件比较了牙买加和新加坡的情况，牙买加尽管经历了长达二十年的历程，但在实施电子政务方面进展并不令人满意，而新加坡虽然是人口规模相似的小岛国，但取得了相当大的成功英国殖民历史，两国大约在 20 世纪 60 年代中期同时获得独立。对从供应方利益相关者的访谈和文件中收集的定性数据进行了分析，以更好地了解成功实施电子政务举措的驱动因素和障碍。基于现有文献，使用新颖的概念框架来指导数据收集和分析过程。这使得之前确定的电子政务举措的驱动因素和障碍的存在能够在两国的背景下进行评估。该研究还能够揭示影响电子政务实施的新的和额外的因素，这些因素以前在电子政务研究文献中尚未发现，即管理/领导力、电子准备度和沟通。研究结果为牙买加领先的电子政务举措提出了切实可行的建议，通过克服阻碍进展的力量来改进实施。这项研究的结果是有限的，因为该研究仅利用两个国家有限来源的数据。以前在电子政务研究文献中尚未发现的内容，即管理/领导力、电子准备度和沟通。研究结果为牙买加领先的电子政务举措提出了切实可行的建议，通过克服阻碍进展的力量来改进实施。这项研究的结果是有限的，因为该研究仅利用两个国家有限来源的数据。以前在电子政务研究文献中尚未发现的内容，即管理/领导力、电子准备度和沟通。研究结果为牙买加领先的电子政务举措提出了切实可行的建议，通过克服阻碍进展的力量来改进实施。这项研究的结果是有限的，因为该研究仅利用两个国家有限来源的数据。