INVESTIGATING DIFFERENT USER PROFILES OF E-GOVERNMENT SERVICES FOR TURKEY

Year 2013, Volume: 5 Issue: 1, 12 - 22, 01.06.2013

Abdulkadir Hızıroğlu Hala Alkhatip Emel Aktaş Tunç D. Medeni Habin Lee Özkan Dalbay

Abstract

Development of successful e-government services partially depends on to what
extent these services meet the requirements, expectations and satisfaction of
the users of the system. Tackling with this problem requires a systematic
classification of users based on their expectations and satisfaction so that a
detailed examination of different user profiles can be accomplished. That
would be of great importance especially for the countries where information
and communication (IT) literacy of the users varies and the usage of egovernment
applications is low at the current state but has a potential to soar.
The aim of this study is to classify the users of e-government services for
Turkey according to their expectations and satisfaction levels for existing
services and to suggest actions for future e-government services based on the
profiles of these users. Benefiting from a rigorous quantitative research
methodology, different user groups of e-government services are investigated
in detail. The policy makers in Turkey can utilise the findings and
recommendations of the study for developing new e-government services.

Keywords

e-government, e-government users, expectation and satisfaction of e-government services, user profiling and segmentation

References

• Affisco, J. F., & Soliman, K. S. (2006). E-government: a strategic operations management framework for service delivery. Business Process Management Journal, 12(1), 13-21.
• Ahn, M. J., & Bretschneider, S. (2011). Politics of E‐Government:
• E‐Government and the Political Control of Bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 71(3), 414-424. Bertot, J. C., & Jaeger, P. T. (2006). User-centered e-government: Challenges and benefits for government Web sites. Quarterly,23(2),163-168.
• Government Information Ciborra, C. (2005). Interpreting e-government and development: Efficiency, transparency or governance at a distance?. Information Technology & People,18(3), 260-279.
• Dwivedi, Y. K., & Williams, M. D. (2008). Demographic influence on UK citizens'e-government adoption. Electronic Government, an International Journal, 5(3),261-274.
• Kim, T. H., Im, K. H., & Park, S. C. (2005). Intelligent measuring and improving model for customer satisfaction level in e-government. In Electronic
• Government(pp. 38-48). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Margetts,H.,& Dunleavy,P.(2002). Cultural barriers to e-government.Academic article in support of better public services through e-government. National
• Audit Office, Ordered by the House of Commons, London. Minhas, R. S., & Jacobs, E. M. (1996). Benefit segmentation by factor analysis: an improved method of targeting customers for financial services.
• International Journal of Bank Marketing, 14(3), 3-13. Moon, M. J. (2002). The Evolution of E‐Government among Municipalities:
• Rhetoric or Reality?. Public administration review, 62(4), 424-433. Pan, S. L., Tan, C.W., & Lim, E.T. (2006). Customer relationship management
• (CRM) in e-government: a relational perspective. Systems, 42(1), 237-250. Decision Support Punj, G., & Stewart, D.W.(1983). Cluster analysis in marketing research: review and suggestions for application.Journal of marketing research,134-148.
• Rice, R. E., & Katz, J. E. (2003). Comparing internet and mobile phone usage: digital divides of usage, adoption, and dropouts. Policy,27(8), 597-623. Telecommunications
• Rogers, E.M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovation. Free Press, New York.
• Smith, W. R. (1956). Product differentiation and market segmentation as alternative marketing strategies. The Journal of Marketing, 21(1), 3-8.
• Venkatesh, V., Chan, F. K., & Thong, J. Y. (2012). Designing e-government services: Key service attributes and citizens’ preference structures. Journal of
• Operations Management, 30(1), 116-133.