e-Government Development and Government Effectiveness: A Reciprocal Relationship

ABSTRACT

To explain the positive reciprocal relationship found between e-Government Development and Government Effectiveness, a five-level model is constructed to track the paths that must be taken for public servants to be trusted to enact e-Government Development. A combination of reform, discretionary and adaptive contributions by public servants can lead to the establishment of public service bargains at the third level. ‘Post-New Public Management’ reforms and exceptional adaptive leadership are, however, required to move countries to the fourth level where public servants are trusted to act across the range of role identities required to enact e-Government.

KEYWORDS:

• e-government development
• government effectiveness
• public service bargains

Notes

¹ Policy leadership is thus not just the preserve of those political leaders who have constitutionally been given the final authority to make state policy decisions. It can also be exercised by other state actors such as senior officials in government departments as well as a range of “societal actors” (e.g., lobbyists for sectional and cause groups, trade union leaders, academics, political party activists, researchers within think tanks, journalists, etc.) with an interest in policy-making (Howlett, Ramesh, & Perl, 1995).

² This conception of policy leadership applies to the policy process two widely understood definitions of leadership as a social influence process directed toward shared purposes (Rost, 1991) and as a form of judgment making that is more concerned about “about doing the right thing” rather than “doing things right” (Nanus & Dobbs, 1999, p. 11).

³ The indicator is an index combining up to 15 different assessments and surveys, depending on availability, each of which receives a different weight, depending on its estimated precision and country coverage. The Government Effectiveness indicator draws on data, as applicable, from, inter alia, the Country Policy and Institutional Assessments of the World Bank, the African Development Bank and the Asian Development Bank, the Afrobarometer Survey, the World Bank’s Business Environment and Enterprise Performance Survey, and the Institute for Management and Development’s World Competitiveness Yearbook.