MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032902864 · doi:10.5539/cis.v4n3p3

E-Government Readiness Assessment for Government Organizations in Developing Countries

2011· article· en· W2032902864 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ibrahim A. Alghamdi, Robert Goodwin, Giselle Rampersad

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer and Information Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicE-Government and Public Services
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation and Communications TechnologyKnowledge managementGovernment (linguistics)BusinessSoftware deploymentProcess (computing)E-GovernmentPublic sectorProcess managementPublic relationsComputer sciencePolitical scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ICT has become an increasingly important factor in the development process of nations. Major barriers can be met in the adoption and diffusion of e-government services depending on the readiness of a country in terms of ICT infrastructure and deployment. This study aims to define organizational requirements that will be necessary for the adoption of e-government to resolve the delay of ICT readiness in public sector organizations in developing countries. Thus, this study contributes an integrated e-government framework for assessing the ICT readiness of government agencies. Unlike the existing e-government literature that focuses predominantly on technical issues and relies on generic e-readiness tools, this study contributes a comprehensive understanding of the main factors in the assessment of e-government organizational ICT readiness. The proposed e-government framework comprises seven dimensions of ICT readiness assessment for government organizations including e-government organizational ICT strategy, user access, e-government program, ICT architecture, business process and information systems, ICT infrastructure, and human resource. This study is critical to management in assessing organizational ICT readiness to improve the effectiveness of e-government initiatives.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations101
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer and Information ScienceSame topicE-Government and Public ServicesFrench-language works237,207