Brewer2006 PDF

DESIGNING AND IMPLEMENTING
E-GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS
Critical Implications for Public
Administration and Democracy
GENE A. BREWER
University of Georgia
BRUCE J. NEUBAUER
University of South Florida
KARIN GEISELHART
University of Canberra
This article explores the emerging challenges and opportunities of information technology in
government and argues that designing and implementing e-government systems involves
more than merely improving the instrumental processes of government. Democratic values
can serve as design elements and anchors for these systems. Thus, the authors argue that
public administrators should take an active role in designing and implementing e-government
systems to instill democratic values and ensure that democratic processes and outcomes
are realized. The resulting communications infrastructures can help government agencies
respond quickly and effectively to chaotic events while still retaining their essential democ-
ratic nature.
Keywords: e-government; democracy; public administration; information technology;

Web site design; design elements; chaos theory; complex adaptive systems
The Internet is the centerpiece of odern information and communica-

tions technology. Government helped to create this technology and was
responsible for many innovations and improvements in the early years.1
However, the role of government has changed from leading innovation to
regulating corporations that often have better equipment and more tech-
nical expertise.2 The Internet and related technologies have contributed to
globalization by increasing both the amount of information present in the
ADMINISTRATION & SOCIETY, Vol. 38 No. 4, September 2006 472-499

DOI: 10.1177/0095399706290638
© 2006 Sage Publications
472
Downloaded from aas.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on May 8, 2015

Brewer et al. / E-GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS 473
environment and the speed of information flow (Friedman, 2000). Many

government agencies now face the challenge of trying to process huge
amounts of information quickly enough to regulate corporations and per-
form other critical missions. Likewise, government agencies must serve
citizens whose expectations have been redefined by their experiences
with e-commerce.
The design of e-government information systems (both hardware
networks and software) is more than instrumental plumbing. Design
decisions are not merely technical or even merely administrative. They
are political acts that have important implications for the conduct of
public administration and democracy. These channels of communication
can significantly alter democratic processes and outcomes. Although it
may not be possible to force desired outcomes, public officials may be
able to facilitate their emergence by using democratic values as design
elements. Thus, in this age of increased contracting and outsourcing,
public administrators must remain actively involved in designing and
implementing e-government information systems. However, participa-
tion alone is not enough to ensure democratic processes and outcomes.
The desired result requires an understanding of how information system
design relates to democratic theory.
The prospective benefits are not limited to democratic values.
Expanded electronic government is one of five critical items on the
President’s Management Agenda (Executive Office of the President,
Office of Management and Budget, 2001). In 2001, an e-government task
force analyzed federal agencies to identify common business activities.
The study concluded that on average, each agency is involved in 17 lines
of business, and each line is performed by 19 federal agencies. In 2002,
the U.S. government spent $48 billion on information technology (IT) and
anticipated spending $52 billion in 2003 (Manes, 2003). The Office of
Management and Budget estimates that government can save more than
$1 billion annually by aligning redundant IT investments across federal
agencies (Manes, 2003).
In the following sections, we explain how the information revolution
and related developments are creating chaos in the public sector envi-
ronment. We then show how these developments are transforming public
agencies, policy processes, and democratic outcomes. Next, we argue
that the design of IT infrastructures may provide solutions for some
of these problems by both increasing the administrative capacity of
agencies and creating democratic dividends.3 Finally, we explain why
public administrators must be actively involved in the design of IT
infrastructures.

474 ADMINISTRATION & SOCIETY / September 2006
THE PARADOX OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Public administration is a mediator between existing political struc-

tures and the citizens they serve. As a result, the information revolution
and other developments are making public administration’s role in gover-
nance more difficult. Paradoxically, IT is both a major source of the
problem and a major part of the solution. Chaos theory helps us under-
stand this paradox better, and it underscores the need for public agencies
to embrace IT and try to develop the “requisite agility” (as explained
below) that is needed to be effective and survive in an increasingly chaotic
environment.
POLITICAL FRAGMENTATION AND THE ROLE

OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
In his John Gaus Lecture to members of the American Political Science

Association, Professor H. George Frederickson (1999) underscored the
role of public administration in these turbulent times. Although politics is
shaped by precise geographic boundaries and characterized by competing
interests, public administration is increasingly defined by efforts to create
coherent patterns of governance across political chasms. “In short, Public
Administration is the Political Science of making the fragmented and dis-
articulated political state work” (Frederickson, 1999). The institutional
state is being weakened by the declining salience of political jurisdictions,
the fuzziness of borders, the growing asymmetry in the relationship
between governors and the governed, the dissipation of sovereignty, and
the erosion of the capacity of traditional, fixed jurisdictions to manage
complex social, economic, and political issues.4
The challenge of designing and implementing new architectures of
governance is daunting. Most familiar touchstones, such as centralized
authority and rigid geographic boundaries, are absent in a virtual envi-
ronment. The world is rife with nationalism and overlapping ethnic and
religious affiliations. People may not know their next-door neighbors,
but they can establish and maintain meaningful online relationships with
others almost anywhere in the world. According to the Harvard Policy
Group on Network-Enabled Services and Government (2000), “We are
being forced to make choices that will ultimately refine the essence of
government institutions and governance itself. Government’s legitimacy
and our ability to govern ourselves are at stake.”
Entwined with the complexity of these challenges are two develop-
ments driving the information revolution: increased speed and storage

capacity (Friedman, 2000). Many people are familiar with Moore’s Law,
which posits that the data storage capacity of a microchip doubles every
12 to 18 months (G. E. Moore, 1965). George Gilder’s (2000) Law of
Telecosm adds that world bandwidth doubles about every 4 months (also
see Gleick, 1999). These and related factors increase the likelihood of
environmental turbulence and beg a point of stability. Public administra-
tion, grounded in democratic values, can provide this stability and con-
tinuity (Kiel, 1994; Wamsley & Wolf, 1996).
The paradox here is that IT is one of the major factors creating chaos
for government agencies, and it is one of the most promising solutions
as well. The information revolution is forcing government agencies to
utilize new technologies creatively to mediate the chasm between frag-
mented political structures and citizens’ needs. If public agencies lose
the ability to perform routine tasks efficiently and cope with crises, their
host governments may experience an erosion of legitimacy and sover-
eignty. Furthermore, there is a growing need for greater accessibility to
and coordination of government services at all levels. In short, institu-
tional theory is being strained by the emerging reality of a virtual state
that allows citizens to obtain information and access services electroni-
cally (Fountain, 2001).5
Government agencies can help smooth the transition between old and
new systems and boost the legitimacy of existing governments by incor-
porating some methods of electronic commerce into their operations.
The term we use for this capacity to innovate quickly in the face of rapid
technological change is requisite agility. We believe that public admin-
istrators should embrace the information revolution as a means for
improving governance and enhancing democratic values.6 Accordingly,
democratic values can become referents that provide context and mean-
ing to progressive governance.
THE CHASM BETWEEN ADMINISTRATORS AND INFORMATION

TECHNOLOGY PROFESSIONALS IN GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
In the United States, the design of e-government portals is often out-

sourced to corporations such as NIC, Accenture, and IBM or delegated
to internal IT operations that may have their own subcultures within an
agency. We believe that these practices tend to distance public adminis-
trators from the IT design decisions that have implications for democra-
tic governance. We believe public administrators have critically
important insights about the administrative and democratic implications
of technical design that IT professionals are not likely to possess.

It is not sufficient to remind programmers to be mindful of the political

implications of their decisions when they are designing and implementing
new systems. Many programmers may assume that the needs of the orga-
nization and their responsibilities to write programs to technical specifica-
tions are separate concerns.7 They may also fail to see the broader political
implications of their work, which can affect “who gets what, when and
how,” according to Harold D. Lasswell’s (1936) classic definition of poli-
tics. Programmers are usually not specialists in business process design,
much less democratic theory. Conversely, many public administrators have
little or no background in computer programming, networking, or data
communications. Even so, there is no substitute for their meaningful par-
ticipation in the design and implementation of information systems that
will be used by citizens to interact with government agencies.8
There is often a lack of respect for the competencies of individuals
across the chasm between generalist public administrators and techni-
cal specialists. Technicians too often get blamed for problems that are
beyond their control. Administrators and other end users are sometimes
judged to be uninformed by technical specialists. The fact that adminis-
trators and programmers often use the same words meaning different
things tends to exacerbate tension across the chasm. A greater inclusion
of IT-related instruction in public administration education is an impor-
tant step in the right direction. Knowledge facilitates communication
that makes it more feasible for generalist public administers to partici-
pate in joint application design sessions and otherwise contribute their
unique insights into the design and implementation of citizen-integrated
systems that align with democratic values.9
THE RISE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
The emerging literature suggests that IT can produce positive organiza-

tional, social, and political outcomes (Barrett & Greene, 2001; Garson,
2001; Kamarck & Nye, 2002; Norris, 2001; Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development, 1998a, 1998b). Yet these claims have not
been fully documented and cannot be verified with certainty because the
evidence is too scant (Abramson & Means, 2001; Abramson & Morin,
2003; Bloomfield, Coombs, Knights, & Littler, 2000; Fountain, 2001;
Garson, 2003a; Richards, Allenby, & Compton, 2001). Efforts are under
way to document progress on the ground (Garson, 1999, 2001, 2003a; La
Porte, Demchak, & De Jong, 2002; U.S. General Services Administration,
2001) and develop appropriate research agendas (Fountain, 2002a, 2002b;
Garson, 2003b). Overall, this research field is growing rapidly.

Some paradoxes are emerging. Digital technologies seem to increase

the fundamental tension between globalization and decentralization
(Kettl, 2000) and between government transparency and privacy con-
cerns (Kamarck & Nye, 2002). Observers report similar concerns about
equal access, security, and intellectual property rights (e.g., National
Research Council, 2000). Threats of hacking, identity theft, and cyber-
terrorism add yet another dimension to this potentially dark side of the
information revolution (Collin, 1996).
Nevertheless, the promise of IT is compelling. The immediate bene-
fits can include increased speed, accuracy, and transparency. IT can also
increase the administrative capacity of the state, empower citizens, and
reinvigorate democratic processes. In short, some observers contend that
the digital age is causing a “second renaissance” and “third industrial
revolution” that is radically changing government and society (Fountain,
2001; Kamarck & Nye, 2002; Organisation for Economic Co-operation
and Development, 1998a, 1998b). As we explain below, chaos theory
helps us understand this transformation, and it underscores the need for
public administration to adapt.
IMPENDING CHAOS AND THE NEED FOR REQUISITE AGILITY
Chaos theory was developed in the field of mathematics and has been
applied to the social sciences and public administration (Alligood,
Sauer, & Yorke, 1997; Elliott & Kiel, 1999; Gleick, 1987; Kiel, 1994;
Kiel & Elliott, 1996; also see Gaus, 1947, pp. 6-19). Its basic assump-
tion is that natural processes are nonlinear and involve multiple causes
and effects. Chaos theory suggests that there are variations in behaviors
and other types of outcomes that occur over time and possibly at multi-
ple scales. Although not predictable, these variations are within limits or
boundaries defined by “attractors.”
Attractor is a mathematical concept meaning the combination of effects
that define the boundaries of a chaotic system. For example, gravity is an
attractor that constrains the size of the solar system by influencing the
behavior of planets and other masses. Similarly, the shared values and
beliefs of an organization’s members can be thought of as attractors that
guide and constrain organizational behavior. Kiel (1994, p. 108) described
the way work is organized, the attitudes employees hold, and the tech-
nologies they use as attractors similar to those of physical systems operat-
ing under chaotic conditions. These patterns can be stable or unstable and
functional or dysfunctional. But they are ultimately linked to the values
and beliefs of people in the system. The behavior of government officials,

agency employees, citizens, and others swirls around such sets of values,
resulting in nonlinear sequences of events that are facilitated and possibly
accelerated by IT.
The usual introduction to chaos theory includes an explanation of the
“butterfly effect.” The idea is that something as insignificant as a butter-
fly flapping its wings in a distant land can result in a storm locally. In
today’s world, there are many salient examples of the butterfly effect.
Sudden acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) apparently originated in
Hong Kong. Several hotel guests acquired SARS and traveled by air to
distant nations such as Canada, Malaysia, and Taiwan. Soon afterward,
those nations experienced outbreaks of the virus that resulted in signifi-
cant public health and economic consequences. Another example is the
Blaster worm and related computer viruses planted on the Internet
recently. These seemingly innocuous bits of code almost instantly crip-
pled vulnerable government and business networks all over the world
and caused significant losses in productivity.
Globalization further creates complexity as communications technol-
ogy moves information around the globe at near the speed of light.
Before the advent of modern communications technology, news traveled
sequentially from location to location, and the amount of news received
from distant places was minimal. Today, the world reverberates with
news, and the causes and effects of distant events are tightly coupled.
The resulting combination of structural complexity and speed of infor-
mation flow makes the operating environments of most government
agencies near chaotic.
In his introduction to cybernetics, Ashby (1963) observed that the
ability to regulate or adapt to an environment is the key to survival for
both individuals and species. Furthermore, if the focal biological system
is attempting to regulate the behavior of others in a common environ-
ment, then the variety of its moves must equal or exceed theirs.
Otherwise, it cannot achieve or maintain equilibrium. Ashby termed this
capacity “requisite variety.”
Implications of Ashby’s law can be extended to public administra-
tion. If an agency is limited in its information-processing capacities, it
may lose the ability to adapt to or regulate other entities in its environ-
ment. Thus, Ashby’s law implies what we term requisite agility, which
is the capacity to respond quickly to cues in the environment. In other
words, it is not enough for an agency to have a sufficient variety of
moves. It must also be able to execute these moves quickly enough to be
effective. If an agency lacks requisite agility, it may be disintermediated
(i.e., bypassed or replaced) by other entities such as corporations and

Consequences of Lack of Requisite Agility
Stable environment
• general dissatisfaction with government agencies
(characterized by gradual and
• negative stereotypes of government employees
predictable changes)
Dynamic environment
• citizens challenge public employees
(characterized by rapid and
• citizens seek alternative service delivery systems
relatively predictable changes)
• lowered trust in government
Turbulent environment
• agencies increasingly disintermediated as citizens
(characterized by increasingly
find alternative service delivery systems
rapid and relatively
• agencies cannot adapt quickly enough to changing
unpredictable changes)
conditions to either regulate or meaningfully
participate in events of social consequence
• the legitimacy and/or sovereignty of the
government becomes an issue
Chaotic environment
(characterized by very rapid • agencies lose the ability to monitor and anticipate
and very unpredictable significant events in their environments
changes driven by complex • agency officials are overwhelmed and unable to
interrelationships mediated by influence citizens or other actors
modern information • agencies and governments lose relevance,
technology) legitimacy, and/or sovereignty
Figure 1: Summary of Consequences of Lack of Requisite Agility Within Government

Agencies
emerging forms of virtual associations founded on religious, ethnic,

ideological, or other core identities.10
This idea is not new. Scholars of public administration have long
recognized the need to increase the capacity, dexterity, and responsive-
ness of public agencies. Failure to do so can result in dire consequences
(see Figure 1).
Chaos theory tells us that public executives cannot realistically hope
to control a chaotic environment. However, if these officials can identify
patterns of behavior or events in the distant environment that may sud-
denly occur locally, they may be able to prepare for the unexpected. In
this context, leadership involves communicating core values and using
the potentials of influence. Attempts to solve problems directly may
cause unintended consequences because in a chaotic environment, no one
fully understands what is happening or why. Traditional explanations
based on perceptions of cause and effect are incomplete at best. This type

of situation calls for more participative styles of leadership at the very

time when human instincts tend to drive administrators toward authori-
tarian styles, direct intervention, and grasps for control. In these situa-
tions, effective leaders will recognize that heavy-handed control efforts
are futile and, instead, try to influence outcomes by affirming the core
values of the organization and utilizing the potentials of influence.
As we explain below, more than deft managerial skill is needed.
Organizations can also be designed to function more effectively in
chaotic environments. Unexpected events such as Hurricane Katrina and
the New Orleans flood debacle, and the clear possibility of an avian flu
pandemic that could claim more lives than the Black Death, underscore
the importance of careful planning and early intervention.
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS
Integrating new information systems into existing organizations can

have major administrative implications. Efforts to automate an organi-
zation’s existing workflows may reveal significantly more efficient alter-
natives. Thus, automation sometimes prompts business process
reengineering (Hammer & Champy, 1993; Tsai, 2003). The introduction
of IT systems can reduce external transaction costs and therefore
increase outsourcing. As a result, in the private sector, the long-term
effect of new information systems is to fragment large corporations into
shifting patterns of strategic alliances (Downes & Mui, 1998). The result
has been less dependence on authority and more autonomy and cooper-
ation (Follett, 1999). Thus, designing a new information system for an
organization is likely to have important implications for the design of
the organization itself. Clearly, information systems are integral parts of
the organization, and both the organization and its information systems
should be designed as a coherent whole (Allcorn, 1997). This type of
integrated design is referred to as convergent engineering or convergent
architecture (Hubert, 2001).
Convergent engineering is difficult to achieve in government because
many agencies are configured primarily for political reasons. These rea-
sons may involve federalism and the separation of powers, geographic
fragmentation, interest group demands, or issues related to the agency’s
longevity and survival. In the United States, federal agency structure is
mirrored in state and local governments, in the organization of congres-
sional, state, and local legislative committees, and in organized special
interests. Agency officials often resist efforts to integrate their information

systems with those of other government agencies in part because they

must compete with these agencies for budget dollars and want to protect
their respective turfs.11 Indeed, such failures have been spotlighted in the
wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks (e.g., U.S. Senate Select
Committee on Intelligence and U.S. House Permanent Select Committee
on Intelligence, 2002).
Designing IT systems to support e-government is likely to involve
convergent engineering because the needs of citizens are not neatly con-
figured to match the existing complex design of agencies. Convergent
engineering does not necessarily mean that existing agencies must be
substantially reorganized. However, designing Web portals to support
e-government involves identifying the existing workflows within agen-
cies and administrative processes involving multiple agencies.
LESSONS FROM E-COMMERCE
When designing IT systems, IT specialists refer to the “front-end,”

the “back-end,” and “middleware.” Employees and/or customers typi-
cally access the front-end. Making this part of the system user-friendly
is a major design intent. The addition of a “front-end bus” allows multi-
ple users to complete transactions simultaneously. To an IT specialist,
the back-end refers to the databases and other specialized servers that
run the programs necessary to implement business processes and
enforce business rules. The back-end is likely to include legacy hard-
ware and software components, meaning somewhat dated kinds of tech-
nology. (The front-end is likely to consist of more modern technologies,
such as programs written in the Java programming language or using
Microsoft’s .NET framework.) Two major considerations in managing
the back-end are security and maintaining the integrity of data.
Middleware connects the modern and legacy parts of an IT system
(Linthicum, 2004). It includes all of the hardware and software compo-
nents that perform the adaptations and translations necessary to make
the entire system functional. In most cases, middleware is complex and
costly to maintain. Organizations often invest in middleware because
they are unable or unwilling to replace the legacy parts of their IT infra-
structure. Modern software design techniques are intended to reduce the
need for middleware, although all large and evolving IT systems (read
government agencies) are likely to remain dependent on middleware.
A Web portal is a sophisticated Internet site that provides a unified
view into an organization. The creation of a successful portal is likely to

agency agency agency agency
back-end services bus
middleware integrating the front-end and

back-end infrastructures
front-end portals bus
portal portal portal
Figure 2: Prospective E-Government Technical Infrastructure
require workflow redesign and the application of principles of informa-

tion architecture in the design of the Web site (Rosenfeld & Morville,
1998). Organizations are often forced to rethink their work processes
while designing information systems and other technologies (Barry,
2003). An e-government portal can influence citizens’ perceptions of
government. To those citizens, the portal represents what the agency is,
what it does, and how it is configured. If hyperlinks are provided to the
related services of other agencies and governments, that pattern also
becomes part of the citizen’s mental map. Fountain (2001) has written
that e-government Web sites are manifestations of policy formulation
and implementation, emphasizing their huge practical significance.
As Figure 2 shows, there is not necessarily a one-to-one mapping
between government agencies and e-government Web portals. These
portals can be designed to provide different arrays of services for differ-
ent kinds of users, and they may involve the IT systems of multiple gov-
ernment agencies on the back-end. These portals may also be available
on multiple platforms including public kiosks, personal computers,
PDAs, and other wireless devices. The administrative challenges of sup-
porting portals that span multiple agencies are likely to be more difficult

than the technology challenges of using middleware to connect legacy

systems and support the front-end bus.
On the back-end, each agency makes some of its information and
services available electronically. The back-end services bus in Figure 2
refers to the hardware and software needed to facilitate making these
various services available in a secure way. The sheer complexity
and importance of this task suggests the need for some general policy
guidelines.
TOWARD AN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

POLICY
As this discussion implies, IT is a complex challenge in the public sec-

tor, and some well-constructed policy guidelines are needed for its design
and implementation. Janet Caldow (1999), director of the IBM Institute
for Electronic Government, outlines an overall technology strategy for
government consisting of leadership, policy, economic competitiveness,
citizen services, community, and digital democracy. Her strategy is
couched in the language of “competitive advantage” and suggests that
portals for citizens can be created one government or agency at a time.
She writes that citizens “don’t need to know, nor do they care, what
department actually processes the transaction.” This view of what is
needed fits nicely with the notion of a portal that provides the user a uni-
fied view. But it glosses over the necessary administrative structures and
work processes lying in the background, which result from the political
fragmentation described by Frederickson (1999) and others.
In the same way that agencies mediate between citizens and complex
political structures, e-government portals can mediate between citizens
and complex administrative structures, especially when one citizen’s
needs transcend the services provided by one agency. The point is that
the technical design of new e-government IT systems has significant
administrative implications even if only one agency is involved in sup-
porting the portal. If the services provided through the portal transcend
multiple agencies, the administrative implications are greater and the
challenge of IT fusion becomes more difficult.
This discussion underscores the need for government to act strategi-
cally. One major goal is to develop a set of government-wide policy
guidelines to encourage the adoption of new information technologies
and insure that these technologies are smoothly integrated into the exist-
ing administrative and political superstructure.

DEMOCRATIC IMPLICATIONS
Matthew Symonds (2000) describes four growth stages of e-government

that have potential implications for public policy and democracy.12 The
first stage is one-way information provision via a Web page. The second
stage allows citizens to update information, such as changing an address.
The third stage is more sophisticated and allows actual transactions
such as renewing a license or paying taxes. The final stage is an inte-
grated portal that theoretically allows all government services to be
accessed online, ideally with 24-7 interactivity. As government agencies
progress through these stages, they are adding variety to their virtual
presence in society. If the IT processing systems necessary in the third
and fourth stages are well designed and reside on modern equipment of
adequate capacity, these governments are also adding to their requisite
agility and increasing their ability to function effectively in a chaotic
environment.
To explore the implications of using democratic values as
e-government design elements, we rely on Robert A. Dahl’s (1989)
general set of criteria for evaluating democratic processes. We have
chosen Dahl’s criteria because his work is broadly representative of
classic and contemporary scholarship in democratic theory. Dahl’s cri-
teria include effective participation, voting equality at the decisive
stage, enlightened understanding, and control of the policy agenda.
These criteria are supported by freedom of expression, access to alter-
native information, and rights of association. These principles help
flesh out what Caldow’s (1999) complete technology strategy for
government means in practical terms, building on and extending the
potential of e-commerce for e-government.
ACCESS TO INFORMATION
At Symonds’s (2000) Stage 1, the provision of information on static

Web pages can make government more efficient and accessible by pro-
viding information that is easily updated by the agency. This step alone
can increase transparency and improve citizens’ perceptions of account-
ability. The creation of a static Web site can force an organization to exam-
ine itself, question its mission, evaluate its processes, and think about how
it is perceived by clients and citizens. Relatively minor things, such as the
agency’s moniker and accoutrements, and more important things, such as
its mission and impact, will likely receive scrutiny during this stage.

AVAILABILITY OF TRANSACTIONS
At Stage 2, citizens may provide personal information and submit

questions and comments to agency officials. This can reduce paper and fax
transfer and eliminate the reentry errors and staff time required for inten-
sive paper handling that characterizes most government bureaucracies. At
this level of sophistication, citizens can pose questions and receive replies
in a timely manner. The result is an increased perception of government
responsiveness. The provision for citizen input has applications for pol-
icy development as well. Posting discussion papers and eliciting com-
ments has become common. Less common is the full transparency of
posting all comments. Pushing the policy development stage further
into the public arena at earlier stages, where the agenda is still being set,
would clearly move government systems in the direction of Dahl’s
(1989) criteria for democratic process.
At Stage 3, the electronic interface becomes transactional, allowing
for payments and a range of legally binding exchanges through integrated
information exchange systems. At this point, the efficiencies of Stage 2
accelerate and substantial cost savings are possible. The data stream
created can also provide feedback about how to fine tune, expand, or
improve online services. These sources of user data are expensive to
obtain through traditional research methods. For governments involved in
the expensive and often unrewarding area of social marketing, the poten-
tial to gather data electronically has great appeal. Here, the necessary
back-end includes the technical provisions for data security to protect cit-
izens. The result can be increased governmental capacity.
Stage 4 in Symonds’s (2000) hierarchy of electronic government
involves the integrated service portal, where a variety of diverse back-end
and legacy systems are elegantly integrated into a unified and user-
friendly front-end (also see Fountain, 2001). Unfortunately, such achieve-
ments are difficult and highlight the similarities and differences between
government and the private sector. In the United States, the award-
winning www.firstgov.gov Web site may be a Stage 4 effort, and the Web
site of the town of Blacksburg, Virginia (www.blacksburg.gov), may also
qualify. The fact that it has taken several years to reach this point of inte-
gration is an indication of the difficulties. The results can be well worth
the effort, however. Well-designed and implemented systems can produce
public value and democratic dividends (M. H. Moore, 1997).
At Stages 3 and 4, Web-based access to the information resources of
government becomes greater and the synergies of e-government

PUBLIC SERVICE RIGHTS POLICY PARTICIPATION RIGHTS
Access to Availability of Association and Participation in

Information Transactions Expression Public Policy
• Symonds’s • Symonds’s • Symonds’s • Dahl’s Voting
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 4 Equity
• Symonds’s • Dahl’s Effective • Dahl’s
Stage 3 Participation Enlightened
• Symonds’s Understanding
Stage 4 • Dahl’s Control
of Agenda
Figure 3: Progression of Rights Potentially Facilitated by E-Government
increase. Thus, the potential for democratic participation in policy

processes also increases (Dryzek, 1990). Policy exchanges become
richer at higher levels of interactivity. There are several ways to
approach this. One follows the broadcast model that might place a hear-
ing or meeting on the Internet. Another model is to make all contribu-
tions available for mining at the site where the public proceedings are
posted, thus creating a public participation portal.
ASSOCIATION AND EXPRESSION
As Figure 3 shows, Symonds’s (2000) four stages focus primarily on

the interaction between citizens and government agencies via the
Internet. Dahl’s first criterion for democracy is effective participation,
which involves constructive exercise of the rights of association and
expression. Agencies may choose to facilitate electronic communication
among citizens and may well prefer to interact one on one rather than
collectively. Agencies may also prefer to avoid becoming unnecessarily
political in their provision of services via e-government to not raise the
ire of elected officials. However, modern technology does create the
opportunity for political activism in cyberspace (Rheingold, 2002). It
may be in the agency’s best interest to provide the means for citizens to
collaborate electronically as a way to preempt interest groups and others
who would otherwise exploit the opportunity by creating cyber interest
groups that are biased toward their own ends. Thus, creating open,
democratic forums may be a powerful corrective for both fanaticism and
“interest group liberalism”—the dominance of policy elites such as iron
triangles and issue networks (Heclo, 1978; Lowi, 1969).

For example, a city government might facilitate electronic communi-

cations among home owners regarding property tax assessments (and
other issues of common interest such as utilities, garbage collection, and
police and fire protection). Doing so may cause city clerks and adminis-
trators some headaches as citizens discuss the fairness of property
assessments. But at least the government-provided electronic forum can
be designed to encourage citizens to confront the trade-offs between tax
rates and quality of services provided by the government, thus leading to
a more informed and productive dialogue. An electronic forum hosted
by an interest group would likely limit the information made available
and channel the discussion toward its desired outcome.
PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC POLICY
As Figure 3 shows, the higher order democratic rights of citizens

described by Dahl include voting equality in significant decision processes,
enlightened understanding, and control of the policy agenda. Some impli-
cations of direct democracy are already emerging in the form of public ini-
tiatives and referenda and can result in significant changes (as California’s
recent gubernatorial recall shows). Technology is already being used to
facilitate such processes. However, technology cannot ensure that citizens
will be enlightened when they take control of policy agendas and partici-
pate in decision making. Regardless, public administrators should favor
communications systems that facilitate participation, channel the flow of
ideas, and possibly constrain the range of outcomes in ways that will pro-
tect the common good and further the public interest broadly conceived.
DEMOCRATIC VALUES AS DESIGN ELEMENTS
Several design elements are introduced and discussed below (see

Figure 4 for a summary). We endorse these elements. Readers may
choose to think of them as illustrative only. The list should be expanded
and refined as it, too, is shaped by the democratic process over time.
DESIGN ELEMENT: ACCESS TO INFORMATION
A Web portal is an effective way to make information available to

citizens who have access to the Internet. Government Web sites must be
made as accessible as possible to citizens who have disabilities that limit
their ability to gain information on the Web. Public administrators

PUBLIC SERVICE RIGHTS POLICY PARTICIPATION RIGHTS
Access to Availability of Association and Participation in

Information Transactions Expression Public Policy
• Static Web • Web Forms • E-mail • Online
Pages • Digital Signatures • Web Blogs Meetings/Web
• FAQ • Live-help Online • Discussion Boards Conferencing
• Site Search • Chat Rooms • Push Technology
• Web Services • Virtual • Smart Mobs
Environments
Figure 4: Technologies and Social Innovations Relevant to E-Government
should also strive to achieve social equity by ensuring that online

services are made available to all eligible users and, furthermore, that
patterns of usage reflect fair and equitable service provision.
The management of a large Web site or portal is not easy. The diffi-
culty is in keeping the site up to date and removing obsolete resources
without breaking existing hyperlinks. The administrative review and
approval process for doing this can be challenging and includes consid-
eration of privacy rights. Static Web pages are files on a Web server that
can be viewed using presentation software such as Internet Explorer or
Netscape. Webmasters frequently include a page of frequently asked
questions (FAQs). A site search engine can also be made available to
help citizens find documents available on the site—or elsewhere—with
information relevant to their specific interests.
Web services are another way for agencies to share their information
and make their services available (Hagel, 2002; Kaye, 2003). Web services
allow one agency’s Web site to incorporate a specific service provided by
another agency’s computer system. For example, a weather bureau agency
may provide a Web service to support portals provided by other agencies,
including one for tourism. When visiting the tourism agency’s portal, citi-
zens can access a 5-day weather forecast. The weather forecast is provided
by the weather bureau, but it is accessed through the tourism agency’s Web
site. The same Web service might also be utilized by many other Web sites
that want to make weather forecasts available to their users.
DESIGN ELEMENT: AVAILABILITY OF TRANSACTIONS
Online transactions are possible through a technology called

Web forms. Web forms are being made available using open-source

technologies rather than proprietary sources such as EDI (electronic data

interchange). A Web form is interactive, whereas a static Web page is
not. A Web form enables a citizen to enter information and submit it
electronically. The information may be automatically entered into a
database, or it may trigger a work process within the host agency.
Digital signatures help ensure the correct identities of parties to an
online transaction in the absence of traditional means of verification
(Ford & Baum, 2000). These signatures rely on algorithms that imple-
ment cryptography using public and private keys. The intent is not only
to identify others online but also to detect if the message has been altered
during transmission. Just as traditional means of self-verification can be
forged, digital signatures are problematic in terms of their authenticity,
integrity, and nonrepudiation. Such signatures can be generated auto-
matically, possibly without the knowledge of the person represented.
Developing a failsafe way to verify identities online is very complicated,
owing both to complex technology and the extensive requirements of
law—which protect individual privacy. Improvements in technology,
possibly involving biometrics and the global time stamping of events,
will facilitate legal verification of online transactions. Whether citizens
are purchasing items from an online vendor or transacting business with
a public agency, government is responsible for balancing the competing
demands of identity and privacy.
Live help is another way to facilitate citizen-initiated transactions
online. Through this technology, citizens can communicate with govern-
ment officials one on one and ask questions, obtain assistance, and apply
for permits and other types of public programs. Like other online services,
live help has advantages and disadvantages. However, its growing use in
the business sector—particularly in sales and service industries—suggests
that it can augment government’s repertoire as well.
DESIGN ELEMENTS: ASSOCIATION, EXPRESSION,

AND PERSISTENT IDENTITY
Agencies can facilitate citizens’ exercise of rights of association and

expression using a variety of online technologies. A simple e-mail link
on a Web page makes it easy for citizens to send comments directly to
public officials. Citizens can also subscribe to e-mail lists read by other
like-minded citizens, which may facilitate freedom of association and
create social capital (Putnam, 1995). Such lists can be moderated if
desired. Moderation helps ensure that communications are appropriate

to the purpose of the list and does not necessarily mean that an agency
official is censoring what is being communicated.
A Web blog is an online diary that can be updated from any location
with an Internet connection. Web blogs can facilitate small group com-
munication, and they are simpler and easier to follow than e-mail or dis-
cussion forums. A blog can promote cohesiveness and group culture and
can serve to represent the beliefs or preferences of the group to outsiders.13
Using a technology called RSS (an acronym with multiple meanings,
including Rich Site Summary), content can be syndicated across multiple
Web blogs automatically (Hammersley, 2003).
Chat rooms and virtual environments (sometimes called cyberspaces)
enable people to interact with others in real time, somewhat like a con-
ference telephone call. At present, most online virtual environments are
not used for serious discussions of social or political consequence. But
this technology can be used for serious purposes.
Enabling citizens to have persistent identities across multiple cyber-
spaces can enhance their ability to express themselves and participate in
policy making (Jordan, Hauser, & Foster, 2003). Identity is prerequisite to
both association and expression and qualifies as a democratic design ele-
ment. If a person cannot be recognized and authenticated across multiple
cyberspaces, his or her ability to participate fully as a citizen in matters
with policy consequence may be compromised. Of course, with persistent
identity comes issues regarding privacy and possible identity theft.
DESIGN ELEMENT: PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC POLICY
The Internet and mobile communication devices can facilitate direct

citizen participation in public policy making, but this capacity is not well
developed. Although public meetings are often televised, citizens rarely
participate in live webcasts of them. On one occasion, a Clinton admin-
istration nominee for attorney general was being questioned by a Senate
committee, and the hearing was being televised on C-Span. A question
was asked about the nominee’s failure to pay Social Security taxes for
child care services. Citizens spontaneously began sending e-mail mes-
sages to the offices of the senators holding the hearing. These messages
were relayed to the senators, who confronted the nominee with the gen-
erally negative responses they were receiving. In addition to sponta-
neous citizen participation, optional push technologies might be used to
alert citizens to submit comments or participate in public meetings,
depending on their previously expressed interests.

There is a relatively new phenomenon with potential political and

administrative consequences known as smart- or flash-mobs (Rheingold,
2002).14 At present, this appears to be primarily a form of entertainment.
Interested people use the Internet to learn of an event to be staged at a par-
ticular time and location. The event usually lasts only a few minutes and
is usually silly and inconsequential, such as a horde of shoppers crowding
into a quiet bookstore and dispersing within minutes. However, it is not a
stretch to believe that modern mobile communications technologies may
be used to stage acts of civil disobedience. Participants in large public
demonstrations have already used mobile communication devices to coor-
dinate their activities. In times of crisis, such use of technology can enable
citizens to move to specified locations, either to escape danger or mobilize
some form of collective effort. For example, in the recent Paris riots, dis-
contented youth apparently used cell phone text messages to coordinate
their destructive activities, which included staging brawls with police and
torching thousands of automobiles and buses (Dickey, 2005). In another
example, on September 11, 2001, the passengers on American Airlines
Flight 93 learned about contemporaneous terrorist attacks on the World
Trade Centers and Pentagon via their cell phones. The passengers then
took collective action and apparently thwarted a fourth attack. Their deci-
sion to resist the hijackers ended tragically, but it may have prevented the
destruction of the White House or the nation’s capitol.
DISCUSSION
The major themes in this article are that government agencies face
increasingly chaotic environments that require them to use IT systems to
become more agile, and public administrators must be involved in the
design and implementation of these systems to help ensure that democ-
ratic values are preserved and democratic outcomes are realized. Public
administration, grounded in democratic values, can provide the needed
continuity and stability to make the increasingly fragmented and disar-
ticulated political state work (Brewer, 2003; Frederickson, 1999; Kiel,
1994; Wamsley & Wolf, 1996). If IT experts are allowed to design e-
government systems without understanding the important role of demo-
cratic values in public administration, these values may be compromised
and the public interest may be jeopardized.
Some proponents of chaos theory may believe that democratic values
and practices will naturally emerge from the use of new technologies

without facilitation by government agencies. For example, www

.E-thePeople.com is one of many Web sites that provide feedback to the
government, and it was initiated without government’s help. Such sites
may be healthy indicators of democratic pluralism, but they do not relieve
government from being responsible and accountable to the people.
Government played a seminal role in the advent of the Internet, and it has
many continuing responsibilities. These responsibilities include utilizing
IT and related innovations to improve governmental performance and
ensuring that these technologies ultimately serve the common good and
further the public interest.
Public administrators must not eschew their responsibilities to foster
and encourage the forms of information flow and discussion that under-
pin Dahl’s (1989) criteria for democratic process. Proponents of chaos
theory say that order can emerge naturally from chaos. Yet in terms of
democratic theory, public administrators have a responsibility to help
shape the order that emerges because democratic values do not perme-
ate all societies. These values must be planted in fertile seedbeds and
nurtured to fruition. In this spirit, public administrators who participate
actively in the design and implementation of e-government systems can
help shape the order that emerges from the chaos being fueled by the
information revolution.
This is not a plea for an “Oprah Winfrey model” of electronic
democracy, where pushing buttons on public issues takes on infotain-
ment value (Calabrese & Borchert, 1996; Nieuwenhuizen, 1997). Nor
is it an appeal to supercharge direct democracy by going online with
public initiatives and referendums. Paying a property tax online and
participating in budget deliberations that are ultimately related to the
amount of property taxes and the government services that they support
are fundamentally different matters. Communication creates responsibil-
ities among participants and the potential for holding others accountable.
The design of e-government systems helps shape patterns of communi-
cation, influence social values, and ultimately affect the common good
and public weal.
Technology itself is neither good nor bad. One strategy is for govern-
ments to gain competitive advantage by becoming brokers of services and
promoting the creation of many small e-commerce start-ups within polit-
ical jurisdictions (Caldow, 1999). This “let a million Web sites bloom”
vision of the future is certainly attractive to the companies that supply the
services and technologies for the virtual infrastructure. However, others
see a different future—a world of power and wealth concentrated in the
hands of an “information elite.” Thus, optimistic portrayals (Gates, 1995;

Negroponte, 1996) are dampened by concerns about the growing “digital

divide,” the creation of an underclass of “information poor,” and the
prospect of “gated gardens” on the Internet (Haywood, 1995; Servon,
2002). These problems can only be resolved by a steady government hand
in the design and implementation of e-government systems to ensure that
democratic values and processes are fundamentally integrated into the
emerging virtual state.
CONCLUSION
IT is a major cause of the rising information flows and citizen expec-

tations that are threatening to overwhelm government agencies, but it
can also be a major part of the solution. Chaotic conditions greatly strain
the capacity of any organization. If an agency can automate its informa-
tion systems and can give citizens direct electronic access to those
resources, the capacity and agility of the agency is increased. When
automation goes beyond rote transactions and transforms the ways and
means of governance, democratic dividends may be realized.
This article argues that IT systems can be designed to increase the
agility of public agencies and promote democratic processes. The major
values that can be used to guide the design of IT infrastructures include
access to information, support for transactions and persistent identities,
freedom of expression and association in cyberspace, and opportunities
to participate in the formulation of public policy. Underlying these val-
ues is the value of accessibility to minimize the possibility of a digital
divide. In this sense, IT offers a promising set of policy tools for public
administrators with austere budgets. If utilized properly, these tools can
improve service to citizens, smooth administrative processes, and
enhance democracy. Utilizing democratic values as design elements for
IT systems can also foster good governance. Systems can be designed to
strengthen the agility of existing government agencies and increase the
prospect of democratic dividends as citizens gain the capacity to be more
directly involved in policy formulation and implementation. The “wired
agency” can be a step toward the virtual state, however defined.
The design of modern information systems to promote and facilitate
democratic processes requires thought, deliberation, and experimenta-
tion. The creation of any complex system involves needs analysis,
modeling, and technical design. Implementation is likely to be an itera-
tive, incremental process. If the design and implementation of govern-
ment IT infrastructures are outsourced or delegated to technical

professionals, democratic values, processes, and outcomes may be in jeop-

ardy. It is imperative that public administrators, who have solid grounding
in democratic values and concern for the public interest, be involved in these
steps to help achieve administrative efficiencies and improved democratic
governance.
NOTES
1. During the cold war, the Advanced Research Projects Agency of the U.S. Department
of Defense sought to create a communications network that would be immune to nuclear
attack. The project—called ARPANET—connected mainframe computers at four western
universities: University of California, Los Angeles, Stanford Research Institute, University
of California, Santa Barbara, and University of Utah. The number of nodes grew from 4 in
1969 to 15 in 1971 and to 37 by 1972.
2. In addition, government is a large end user of hardware and software, and it per-
forms other missions that are heavily reliant on information technology.
3. We acknowledge that democratic participation can work a hardship on public admin-
istration by limiting administrative discretion and creating operational inefficiencies.
Although some view this as the price of democracy, we think of it as part of the challenge.
Our goal is to design and implement information systems that further the aims of both
administration and democracy.
4. Traditionally designed organizations cannot cope with some policy problems, which
are sprawling, multijurisdictional, and prone to change over time. Scholars of policy imple-
mentation have observed that interorganizational or intergovernmental networks—chunks of
organizations or governments that work together on a particular policy problem—more accu-
rately describe the implementation structures that exist today (Hjern & Porter, 1981; O’Toole
& Hanf, 2002).
5. Some view the virtual state as the electronic extension of the policy networks
Frederickson (2003) and others have described. Just as policy networks facilitate citizen
access to government, the virtual state can integrate most aspects of policy networks and
help citizens interact with their governments more effectively.
6. Several years ago, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
(OECD; 1998a) assessed information technology’s potential for transforming the democratic
process in eight member countries: Canada, Denmark, Italy, Norway, Spain, Switzerland, the
United Kingdom, and the United States. The study found that the forces in play are very
complex: Technology is evolving rapidly, but institutions and processes seem rooted in tra-
ditional modes of thought. Thus, the overall impact has been modest. The report concluded
that government officials must try harder to link the public to the decision-making process in
a substantive way; officials must try to contain their propensity toward secretiveness and their
instinct to “ration democracy” (OECD, 1998b, pp. 7-10).
7. With the advent of Web services and service-oriented architecture, programmers
may become more involved in understanding organizational needs. The fact is that
the principles of object-oriented programming are influencing the design of organizations.
Computer science departments are being more frequently housed in university depart-
ments of business administration, and programs that combine information systems and
computer science are common.

8. The distinction between analysis and design in software engineering is not clear-
cut. Analysis involves understanding and documenting the needs of the organization that
the new software is intended to resolve. Design involves technical decisions about how the
code for the new software will be written. It may be helpful for generalist public adminis-
trators to have some understanding of object-oriented programming, software develop-
ment life cycles, and software project management. But at some point, generalist public
administrators are unlikely to understand what programmers are doing or need to be in the
room. Nevertheless, just as analysis and design overlap, so do the respective abilities and
concerns of generalist public administrators and programmers.
9. A joint application design session is a meeting in which sponsors, business
analysts, programmers, end users, and other stakeholders meet to discuss their needs and
write specifications and other documentation for the system to be built. Having everyone
in the same room at the same time can help facilitate communication.
10. Disintermediation refers to bypassing a person or organization because they are no
longer necessary for accomplishing a process or achieving a goal.
11. Often, parts of the same agency or department will lack compatible information sys-
tems. Such problems have been documented in the U.S. Departments of Agriculture,
Defense, and Homeland Security, for example.
12. Symonds’s (2000) typology is used here because it aligns well with Dahl’s (1989)
criteria regarding democracy and is representative of other typologies and related efforts
to describe the developmental stages of e-government.
13. Discussion boards are a similar but older technology that is more difficult for citi-
zens to follow because they can involve many threads of conversation.
14. At the present time, the following URL describes flash-mobs: http://abcnews
.go.com/sections/scitech/US/cybershake030718.html
REFERENCES
Abramson, M. A., & Means, G. E. (Eds.). (2001). E-government 2001. Lanham, MD:
Rowan and Littlefield.
Abramson, M. A., & Morin, T. L. (Eds.). (2003). E-government 2003. Lanham, MD:
Rowan and Littlefield.
Allcorn, S. (1997). Parallel virtual organizations. Administration & Society, 29, 412-439.
Alligood, K. T., Sauer, T. D., & Yorke, J. A. (1997). Chaos: An introduction to dynamical
systems. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Ashby, W. R. (1963). Introduction to cybernetics. New York: John Wiley.
Barrett, K., & Greene, R. (2001). Powering up: How public managers can take control of
information technology. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
Barry, D. K. (2003). Web services and service-oriented architectures. San Francisco:
Morgan Kaufmann.
Bloomfield, B. P., Coombs, R., Knights, D., & Littler, D. (Eds.). (2000). Information tech-
nology and organizations: Strategies, networks, and integration. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Brewer, G. A. (2003). Building social capital: Civic attitudes and behavior of public ser-
vants. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13, 5-26.
Calabrese, A., & Borchert, M. (1996). Prospects for electronic democracy in the United
States: Rethinking communication and social policy. Media, Culture and Society, 18,
249-268.

Caldow, J. (1999). The quest for electronic government: A defining vision. Institute for
Electronic Government, IBM Corporation. Retrieved December 1, 2005, from
http://www-1.ibm.com/industries/government/ieg/pdf/egovvision.pdf
Collin, B. C. (1996). The future of cyber terrorism. Proceedings of 11th annual interna-
tional symposium on criminal justice issues, University of Illinois at Chicago.
Retrieved December 1, 2005, from http://afgen.com/terrorism1.html
Dahl, R. A. (1989). Democracy and its critics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Dickey, C. (2005, November 14). Rage on rue Picasso. Newsweek, p. 37.
Downes, L., & Mui, C. (1998). Unleashing the killer app, digital strategies for market
dominance. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Dryzek, J. (1990). Discursive democracy: Politics, policy, and political science. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Elliott, E., & Kiel, L. D. (Eds.). (1999). Nonlinear dynamics, complexity and public pol-
icy. Commack, NY: Nova Science.
Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget. (2001). The presi-
dent’s management agenda, FY 2002. Retrieved December 1, 2005, from http://www
.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2002/mgmt.pdf
Follett, M. P. (1999). The new state: Group organization and the solution of popular
government. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
Ford, W., & Baum, M. S. (2000). Secure electronic commerce: Building the infrastructure
for digital signatures and encryption. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Fountain, J. E. (2001). Building the virtual state: Information technology and institutional
change. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
Fountain, J. E. (2002a). Information, institutions and governance: Advancing a basic social
science research program for digital government. National Center for Digital
Government, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. Retrieved December
1, 2005, from http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/digitalcenter/reports/Workshop%20Report%
201-08-03.pdf
Fountain, J. E. (2002b). Toward a theory of federal bureaucracy for the twenty-first
century. In E. C. Kamarck & J. S. Nye, Jr. (Eds.), Governance.com: Democracy in the
information age (pp. 117-140). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
Frederickson, H. G. (1999). The repositioning of American public administration. John
Gaus lecture to the American Political Science Association. Retrieved December 1,
2005, from http://www.apsanet.org/PS/dec99/frederickson.cfm
Frederickson, H. G. (2003). Public administration, governance and the concept of univer-
sal jurisdiction. PA Times, 26(7), 11. Retrieved December 1, 2005, from http://www
.aspanet.org/patimes/archives/2003/07/frederickson.html
Friedman, T. (2000). The lexus and the olive tree. New York: Anchor.
Garson, G. D. (Ed.). (1999). Information technology and computer applications in public
administration: Issues and trends. Harrisburg, PA: Idea Group.
Garson, G. D. (Ed.). (2001). Social dimensions of information technology: Issues for the
new millennium. Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
Garson, G. D. (Ed.). (2003a). Public information technology: Policy and management
issues. Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
Garson, G. D. (2003b). Toward an information technology research agenda for public
administration. In G. D. Garson (Ed.), Public information technology: Policy and
management issues (pp. 331-357). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
Gates, B. (1995). The road ahead. London: Viking.
Gaus, J. M. (1947). Reflections on public administration. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama
Press.

Gilder, G. (2000). The twenty laws of the telecosm. New York: Free Press/Simon &
Schuster.
Gleick, J. (1987). Chaos: Making a new science. New York: Viking.
Gleick, J. (1999). Faster: The acceleration of just about everything. New York: Pantheon.
Hagel, J. III. (2002). Out of the box: Strategies for achieving profits today and growth
tomorrow through web services. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Hammer, M., & Champy, J. (1993). Reengineering the corporation: A manifesto for
business revolution. New York: HarperBusiness.
Hammersley, B. (2003). Content syndication with RSS. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly &
Associates.
Harvard Policy Group on Network-Enabled Services and Government. (2000). Eight
imperatives for leaders in a networked world: Guidelines for the 2000 election and
beyond. Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government and IBM Institute for
Electronic Governance. Available from Kennedy School of Government’s Web site,
http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/exec_ed/3e/eight_imperatives.htm
Haywood, T. (1995). Info-rich Info-poor: Access and exchange in the global information
society. London: Bowker-Saur.
Heclo, H. (1978). Issue networks and the executive establishment. In A. King (Ed.), The
new American political system (pp. 87-124). Washington, DC: American Enterprise
Institute.
Hjern, B., & Porter, D. (1981). Implementation structures: A new unit of administrative
analysis. Organizational Studies, 2, 211-227.
Hubert, R. (2001). Convergent architecture: Building model driven J2EE systems with
UML. New York: John Wiley.
Jordan, K., Hauser, J., & Foster, S. (2003). The augmented social network: Building iden-
tity and trust into the next-generation internet. First Monday 8(8). Retrieved December
1, 2005, from http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue8_8/jordan/index.html
Kamarck, E. C., & Nye, J. S., Jr. (Eds.). (2002). Governance.com: Democracy in the infor-
mation age. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
Kaye, D. (2003). Loosely coupled: The missing pieces of web services. Marin County, CA:
RDS Press.
Kettl, D. F. (2000). The global public management revolution: A report on the transfor-
mation of governance. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
Kiel, L. D. (1994). Managing chaos and complexity in government. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Kiel, L. D., & Elliott, E. (Eds.). (1996). Chaos theory in the social sciences: Foundations
and applications. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
La Porte, T. M., Demchak, C. C., & De Jong, M. (2002). Democracy and bureaucracy in
the age of the web: Empirical findings and theoretical speculations. Administration &
Society, 34, 411-446.
Lasswell, H. D. (1936). Politics: Who gets what, when, how. New York: McGraw-Hill/
Peter Smith.
Linthicum, D. S. (2004). Next generation application integration: From simple informa-
tion to web services. Boston: Addison-Wesley.
Lowi, T. J. (1969). The end of liberalism. New York: Norton.
Manes, A. T. (2003). Web services: A manager’s guide. Boston: Addison-Wesley.
Moore, G. E. (1965). Cramming more components onto integrated circuits. Electronics,
8. Retrieved December 1, 2005, from ftp://download.intel.com/research/silicon/
moorepaper.pdf

Moore, M. H. (1997). Creating public value: Strategic management in government.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
National Research Council. (Ed.). (2000). The digital dilemma: Intellectual property in the
information age. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Negroponte, N. (1996). Being digital. New York: Vintage.
Nieuwenhuizen, J. (1997). Asleep at the wheel—Australia on the superhighway. Sydney:
ABC Books.
Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty, and the internet
worldwide. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (1998a). Impact of the emerg-
ing information society on the policy development process and democratic quality.
PUMA, 98(15). Paris: Author.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (1998b). Information technol-
ogy as an instrument of public management reform: A study of five OECD countries.
PUMA, 98(14). Paris: Author.
O’Toole, L. J., Jr., & Hanf, K. I. (2002). American public administration and impacts of
international governance. Public Administration Review, 62, 158-169.
Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of
Democracy, 6(1), 65-78.
Rheingold, H. (2002). Smart mobs, the next social revolution. Cambridge, MA: Perseus.
Richards, D. J., Allenby, B. R., & Compton, W. D. (Eds.). (2001). Information systems and
the environment. National Academy of Engineering. Retrieved December 1, 2005,
from http://www.nap.edu/books/0309062438/html/
Rosenfeld, L., & Morville, P. (1998). Information architecture for the World Wide Web.
Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly & Associates.
Servon, L. J. (2002). Bridging the digital divide: Technology, community, and public pol-
icy. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Symonds, M. (2000, June 24). A survey of government and the internet: The next revolu-
tion. The Economist, 355(8176), 36 page insert.
Tsai, H. L. (2003). Information technology and business process reengineering: New
perspectives and strategies. Westport, CT: Praeger.
U.S. General Services Administration. (2001). An inventory of federal e-government
initiatives: A baseline documenting the status of e-government initiatives. Retrieved
December 1, 2005, from http://www.gsa.gov/attachments/GSA_PUBLICATIONS/
extpub/Initiatives.pdf
U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and U.S. House Permanent Select Committee
on Intelligence. (2002). Report of the joint inquiry into the terrorist attacks of September
11, 2000 (Senate Report 107-351, House Report 107-792). Retrieved December 1, 2005,
from http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/24jul20031400/www.gpoaccess.gov/
serialset/creports/pdf/fullreport_errata.pdf
Wamsley, G. L., & Wolf, J. F. (Eds.). (1996). Refounding democratic public administra-
tion: Modern paradoxes, postmodern challenges. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gene A. Brewer is an associate professor of public administration and policy at the

University of Georgia School of Public and International Affairs. He is an inter-
nationally recognized public management scholar and publishes in some of
the top-ranked journals in the field. His current research interests include public

sector reform, governmental performance, and bureaucratic accountability in

democratic government.
Bruce J. Neubauer teaches in the Public Administration Program in the Government

and International Affairs Department at the University of South Florida. His
research interests include global information systems, knowledge management,
service-oriented architecture, and the convergent design of organizations and their
information systems.
Karin Geiselhart holds a PhD in communications and has previously been a public
sector journalist and teacher. She was a postdoctoral research fellow in electronic
commerce at RMIT University and taught e-marketing at the Australian National
University. She is currently an adjunct research fellow at the University of Canberra.
Her major research interest is the application of complex systems analysis to elec-
tronic democracy and issues of global governance.

Brewer2006 PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Brewer2006 PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

DESIGNING AND IMPLEMENTING

Keywords: e-government; democracy; public administration; information technology;

The Internet is the centerpiece of odern information and communica-

ADMINISTRATION & SOCIETY, Vol. 38 No. 4, September 2006 472-499

Downloaded from aas.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on May 8, 2015

environment and the speed of information flow (Friedman, 2000). Many

Downloaded from aas.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on May 8, 2015

THE PARADOX OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

Public administration is a mediator between existing political struc-

POLITICAL FRAGMENTATION AND THE ROLE

In his John Gaus Lecture to members of the American Political Science

Downloaded from aas.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on May 8, 2015

THE CHASM BETWEEN ADMINISTRATORS AND INFORMATION

In the United States, the design of e-government portals is often out-

Downloaded from aas.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on May 8, 2015

It is not sufficient to remind programmers to be mindful of the political

THE RISE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

The emerging literature suggests that IT can produce positive organiza-

Downloaded from aas.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on May 8, 2015

Some paradoxes are emerging. Digital technologies seem to increase

IMPENDING CHAOS AND THE NEED FOR REQUISITE AGILITY

Downloaded from aas.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on May 8, 2015

Downloaded from aas.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on May 8, 2015

Consequences of Lack of Requisite Agility

Figure 1: Summary of Consequences of Lack of Requisite Agility Within Government

emerging forms of virtual associations founded on religious, ethnic,

Downloaded from aas.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on May 8, 2015

of situation calls for more participative styles of leadership at the very

Integrating new information systems into existing organizations can

Downloaded from aas.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on May 8, 2015

systems with those of other government agencies in part because they

LESSONS FROM E-COMMERCE

When designing IT systems, IT specialists refer to the “front-end,”

Downloaded from aas.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on May 8, 2015

agency agency agency agency

back-end services bus

middleware integrating the front-end and

front-end portals bus

portal portal portal

Figure 2: Prospective E-Government Technical Infrastructure

require workflow redesign and the application of principles of informa-

Downloaded from aas.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on May 8, 2015

than the technology challenges of using middleware to connect legacy

TOWARD AN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

As this discussion implies, IT is a complex challenge in the public sec-

Downloaded from aas.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on May 8, 2015

Matthew Symonds (2000) describes four growth stages of e-government

At Symonds’s (2000) Stage 1, the provision of information on static

Downloaded from aas.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on May 8, 2015

At Stage 2, citizens may provide personal information and submit

Downloaded from aas.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on May 8, 2015

PUBLIC SERVICE RIGHTS POLICY PARTICIPATION RIGHTS

Access to Availability of Association and Participation in

Figure 3: Progression of Rights Potentially Facilitated by E-Government

increase. Thus, the potential for democratic participation in policy

ASSOCIATION AND EXPRESSION

As Figure 3 shows, Symonds’s (2000) four stages focus primarily on

Downloaded from aas.sagepub.com at FUDAN UNIV LIB on May 8, 2015

For example, a city government might facilitate electronic communi-

PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC POLICY

As Figure 3 shows, the higher order democratic rights of citizens

DEMOCRATIC VALUES AS DESIGN ELEMENTS

Several design elements are introduced and discussed below (see