Success and Failure in eGovernment Projects

Evaluation

Causes of eGovernment Success and Failure: Factor Model

Why do some e-government projects in developing/transitional countries succeed and others fail?  This page offers some answers, based on a survey plus case study analysis.

A Factor Model for eGovernment Success and Failure

This model summarises the reasons behind success and failure of e-government projects.  Left-pointing items encourage failure; right-pointing items encourage success.  The factors are explained in more detail in the tables below.

Critical Success Factors: Why eGovernment Projects Succeed

The table lists and explains some of the main factors that help support success of e-government in developing/transitional countries.  Cases in which these factors have been identified are cited in the right-hand column.

Factor

Explanation

Examples

External pressure

Drive for reform from outside government, e.g. from civil society

Brazil eProcurement

Douala Port

Internal political desire

Drive from key government officials for reform and for achievement of e-government goals

Trust Automation

Brazil eProcurement

Douala Port

Mexico eProcurement

Citizen Centre

Overall vision and strategy

Overall vision and master plan for good governance and for e-government, identifying 'where we want to get to', seeing IT as the means not the end, and integrating IT with broader reform objectives

Cameroon Tax

Effective project management

Including clear responsibilities, good planning and consideration of risk, good monitoring and control, good organisation of resources, and well-managed partnerships between public agencies, and public-private

Pensions System

Citizen Centre

Effective change management

Including leadership with a project champion, use of incentives to create commitment to and ownership of e-gov project, and stakeholder involvement to build support and minimise resistance

Supporting Democracy

Birth Registration

FRIENDS Centres

Pensions System

Effective design

An incremental/piloting approach with feasible objectives and quick, scalable outcomes; participatory involvement of all stakeholders, leading to designs that meet real user needs and match real user contexts

Social Investment Fund

Balochistan MIS

Douala Port

Mexico eProcurement

Birth Registration

FRIENDS Centres

Pensions System

Requisite competencies

Presence of the necessary skills and knowledge, especially within government itself; need both management and IT skills and knowledge

Supporting Democracy

Trust Automation

Citizen Centre

Adequate technological infrastructure

For example, encouraged through appropriate telecoms policies

 

Other critical success factors identified include: luck, perseverance, and adequate funding.

Critical Failure Factors: Why eGovernment Projects Fail

The table lists and explains some of the main factors underlie failure of e-government in developing/transitional countries.  Cases in which these factors have been identified are cited in the right-hand column.

Factor

Explanation

Examples

Lack of internal drivers

Pressures only from IT vendors, with no internal ownership (or understanding of e-gov)

 

Lack of vision and strategy

Lack of any long-term view, lack of guidance, and lack of link between ends and means; may be caused by ever-shifting senior staff and/or ever-changing policy and political environment

National Databank

Universities MIS

Poor project management

Dispersed responsibilities due to multiple ownership of project; absence or weakness of controls; ineffective procurement

Social Investment Fund

Poor change management

Lack of support from senior officials (causing lack of resource allocation, and negative message to other groups); lack of stakeholder involvement (causing lack of ownership)

Warana Kiosks

Natural Resource IS

Durban Council

Universities MIS

Dominance of politics and self-interest

Focus of key players on personal needs and goals, often related to 'playing politics', with symptoms like infighting, resistance where loss of power is feared, 'me too' copying of e-gov solutions for image purposes, obsession with electoral impacts and short-term kudos, and corruption

Social Investment Fund

Douala Port

Beira City

Citizen Centre

Uganda Voters

Foreign Affairs Ministry

National Databank

Poor/unrealistic design

Caused particularly by lack of inputs from key local stakeholders, leading to designs that are over-technical, over-ambitious, or mismatched to local environment (culture, values) and needs; occurs particularly where foreign donors, firms and consultants are involved.  Other design problems: lack of piloting, lack of fit to organisational structure

Warana Kiosks

Golaganang

Lack of requisite competencies

Lack of IT knowledge and skills among developers, officials and users/operators; lack of local knowledge among developers

Durban Council

Inadequate technological infrastructure

Lack of sufficient computers or networks

Cameroon Tax

Foreign Affairs Ministry

Technological incompatibilities

Inability of computerised systems to interchange data

 

Taking Action on Success/Failure Factors

Follow this link for further details about actions to take to reduce the risk of e-government failure.

Basis for analysis of factors: synthesis of a) online survey of "e-gov in developing/transitional countries" practitioners and commentators in October 2002 (c.40 responses for failure, c.40 for success); and b) 26 case studies of e-government in developing/transitional economies submitted during September-November 2002 to the eGovernment for Development Information Exchange.  Cross-checked with a) categorisation of success/failure factors from study of global e-gov cases in Heeks, R. (2001) Reinventing Government in the Information Age, Routledge, London; and b) summary of e-gov risk factors in Al-Wohaibi, M.A. et al (2002) Fundamental risk factors in deploying IT/IS projects in Omani government organizations, Journal of Global Information Management, 10(4), 1-22.

 

Page Author: Richard Heeks. Last updated on 19 October, 2008.
Please contact richard.heeks@manchester.ac.uk with comments and suggestions.