1 / 25

The Problem

Gauging e-Government A Report on Implementing Services Among Small American Cities Charles Kaylor, Randy Deshazo University of Michigan & David Van Eck, City of Ann Arbor The Problem Began as practical problem for a city government:

RexAlvis
Download Presentation

The Problem

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Gauging e-GovernmentA Report on Implementing Services Among Small American CitiesCharles Kaylor, Randy DeshazoUniversity of Michigan & David Van Eck, City of Ann Arbor

  2. The Problem • Began as practical problem for a city government: • How should Ann Arbor, Michigan invest in web-enabled government? • What technologies are cost-effective? Necessary? Gauging eGovernment

  3. The Problem Process Led to Need for Comparison: • What are other similar cities doing? • How does Ann Arbor stack up? Gauging eGovernment

  4. The Solution • Compare implementation of egovernment functions in Ann Arbor to cities nationwide. • Needs: • An instrument for measuring degree of implementation of various functions • An index that allows broad evaluations and comparisons Gauging eGovernment

  5. Defining eGovernment eGovernment : Visitors to the site can communicate and/or interact with the city in any way more sophisticated than a simple email letter to the generic city (or webmaster) email address provided at the site. Gauging eGovernment

  6. Measuring eGovernment Using our broad definition, only 38 of the 132 cities with populations between 100-200,000 had egovernment at all! Gauging eGovernment

  7. The Matrix Gauging eGovernment

  8. The Matrix—Performance Dimensions Gauging eGovernment

  9. The Matrix—Scoring SCORING KEY: 1- Information about given topic exists at website 2- Link to relevant contact via email 3- Downloadable/viewable forms at website 4- Information exchange takes place on-line Gauging eGovernment

  10. The eScores Total escores for the 38 egovernment cities Gauging eGovernment

  11. Comparing Cities(100-200,000) Mean 34 Median 37 Mode 37 Gauging eGovernment

  12. Comparing Cities(200-499,000) Mean 39 Median 41 Mode 47 Gauging eGovernment

  13. Comparing Cities(Over 500,000) Mean: 53 Median: 50 Mode: 52

  14. Comparing Cities—Top 25 eGovernment Cities Gauging eGovernment

  15. Geographic Distribution of eScores Does not include Anchorage and Honolulu Gauging eGovernment

  16. eGovernment Services • eCommerce • Registrations and Permits • Customer Service • Communication, Documents and Information • Participation Gauging eGovernment

  17. eCommerce Gauging eGovernment

  18. Registration and Permits Gauging eGovernment

  19. Customer Service Gauging eGovernment

  20. Communication, Documents & Information Online GIS Gauging eGovernment

  21. Communication, Documents & Information Audio/Video Gauging eGovernment

  22. Communication, Documents & Information Documents Gauging eGovernment

  23. Participation Gauging eGovernment

  24. Emergent Technologies VIS: Simulation Models Gauging eGovernment

  25. Contact: Charles Kaylor University of Michigan ckaylor@umich.edu (734) 763-1502 Randy Deshazo University of Michigan rdeshazo@umich.edu (734) 763-1502 David Van Eck City of Ann Arbor dvaneck@ci.ann-arbor.mi.us (734) 997-1040 Gauging eGovernment

More Related