A critical analysis of e-government evaluation models at national and local municipal levels

Abstract: The importance of e-government models lies in their offering a basis to measure and guide e-government. There is still no agreement on how to assess a government online. Most of the e-government models are not based on research, nor are they validated. In most countries, e-government has not reached higher stages of growth. Several scholars have shown a confusing picture of e-government. What is lacking is an in-depth analysis of e-government models. Responding to the need for such an analysis, this study identifies the strengths and weaknesses of major national and local e-government evaluation models. The common limitations of most models are focusing on the government and not the citizen, missing qualitative measures, constructing the e-equivalent of a bureaucratic administration, and defining general criteria without sufficient validations. In addition, this study has found that the metrics defined for national e-government are not suitable for municipalities, and most of the existing studies have focused on national e-governments even though local ones are closer to citizens. There is a need for developing a good theoretical model for both national and local municipal e-government.

Design thinking - a critical analysis.

The latest buzz phrase to enter the world of design research is “Design Thinking”. But is this anything new and does it really have any practical or theoretical relevance to the design world? Many sceptics believe the term has more to do with business strategy and little to do with the complex process of designing products, services and systems. Moreover, many view the term as misleading and a cheap attempt to piggyback the world of business management onto design. This paper seeks to ask is design thinking anything new? Several authors have explicitly or implicitly articulated the term “Design Thinking” before, such as Peter Rowe’s seminal book “Design Thinking” [1] first published in 1987 and Herbert Simon’s “The Sciences of the Artificial” [2] first published in 1969. In Tim Brown’s “Change by Design” [3], design thinking is thought of as a system of three overlapping spaces rather than a sequence of orderly steps namely inspiration – the problem or opportunity that motivates the search for solutions; ideation – the process of generating, developing and testing ideas; and implementation – the path that leads from the design studio, lab and factory to the market. This paper seeks to examine and critically analyse the tenets of this new design thinking manifesto set against three case studies of modern design practice. As such, the paper will compare design thinking theory with the reality of design in practice.