4

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier.
The attached
copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research
and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution
and sharing with colleagues.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elseviers archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:
http://www.elsevier.com/copyright
Author's personal copy

Government Information Quarterly 28 (2011) 1735
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Government Information Quarterly

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s e v i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / g o v i n f
e-Government Adoption Model (GAM): Differing service maturity levels

Mahmud Akhter Shareef a, Vinod Kumar b, Uma Kumar b, Yogesh K. Dwivedi c,
a
b
c
DeGroote School of Business, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4M4, Canada
Sprott School of Business, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6, Canada
School of Business and Economics, Swansea University, Singleton Park, Swansea, SA2 8PP, UK
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Available online 20 October 2010

Keywords:
e-Government (e-Gov)
Information and communication technology
(ICT)
Adoption
Citizens
Service maturity levels
a b s t r a c t
This research has as its objective the discovery of the critical factors that enable citizens to adopt eGovernment (e-Gov) at different stages of service maturity. To accomplish the objective, this research has
explained the related concepts and theories and developed a research framework grounded on a strong
theoretical and literature review background. The empirical study was conducted in Canada, which is a leader
in providing mature e-Gov services. From our results, we have observed two ontological differences from the
present literature in the adoption behavior of e-Gov where organizational and nancial perspectives have
distinct implications over parsimonious technology adoption behavior. First, technology adoption model
(TAM), diffusion of innovation theory (DOI), and theory of planned behavior (TPB) cannot capture and specify
the complete essence of e-Gov adoption behavior of citizens. Second, e-Gov adoption behavior also differs
based on service maturity levels, i.e., when functional characteristics of organizational, technological,
economical, and social perspectives of e-Gov differ. Our ndings indicate the critical factors that enable
citizens to adopt e-Gov at different stages of service maturity. Public administrators and policy-makers have
potential implications from the ndings of the adoption behavior of e-Gov at different maturity levels.
Crown Copyright 2010 Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
As a new and rapidly growing eld, the concepts and theories of eGovernment (e-Gov) are still in a premature stage. Researchers from
different disciplines address this phenomenal theme from their
respective speculations and conceptualize it in a scattered fashion
(Heeks & Bailur, 2007). e-Gov has several aspects, including social,
technical, economic, political, and public administrative. However,
most dominating concepts of e-Gov arise from the technical
perspective and a combination of the socio-economic and public
administrative perspectives. Nevertheless, all the denitions are
headed towards a single notion and encompass a generic and unique
mission of e-Govpresenting government systems using information
and communication technology (ICT) to serve citizens better (AlMashari, 2007; Evans & Yen, 2006; Gil-Garcia & Martinez-Moyano,
2007; Reddick, 2006; Shareef, Kumar, Kumar, & Dwivedi, 2009;
Sprecher, 2000).
Though different countries' e-Gov implementations extensively differ
in setting common missions and objectives, all of them contain the
similar fundamental essence of e-Gov value: it should be citizen focused.
Corresponding author. Fax: + 44 1792 295626.

E-mail addresses: mahmud_akh@yahoo.com (M.A. Shareef), ykdwivedi@gmail.com
(Y.K. Dwivedi).
Therefore, it may be signicant to observe that the most important tool

for implementation of e-Gov is the willingness of citizens to adopt it
(Evans & Yen, 2006; Shareef et al., 2009). While there is evidence for
substantial growth, development, and diffusion of e-Gov universally, it is
not clear whether citizens of all developed and developing countries are
ready to embrace those services (Carter & Blanger, 2005). The
acceptance, diffusion, and success of e-Gov initiatives are contingent
upon citizens' willingness to adopt these services.
Reviewing the existing literature on e-Gov adoption by citizens
and business organizations (Al-Adawi, Yousafzai, & Pallister, 2005;
Chen & Thurmaier, 2005; Ebrahim & Irani, 2005; Gilbert, Balestrini, &
Littleboy, 2004; Klievink & Janssen, 2009; Kumar, Mukerji, Butt, &
Persaud, 2007; Phang, Sutanto, Li, & Kankanhalli, 2005; Reddick, 2004;
Sakowicz, 2007; Schedler & Summermatter, 2007; Shareef et al., 2009;
Tung & Rieck, 2005; Wang & Liao, 2008), we can infer that the
adoption models offered so far in the academic literature are mainly
conceptual. Extensive empirical studies among the actual users to
validate and generalize the models are absent. Most of those who
have attempted to validate their models did not rigorously review the
literature and integrate discourses from technical, social, organizational, political, and cultural perspectives to develop their ontological
and epistemological paradigms of model validation doctrine. As
identied by Heeks and Bailur (2007) through an extensive literature
review of e-Gov, methodologically these models are not grounded on
a strong theoretical framework. While developing those models of
adoption, the generalization aspect is heavily ignored (Heeks & Bailur,
2007).
0740-624X/$ see front matter. Crown Copyright 2010 Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.giq.2010.05.006

18
M.A. Shareef et al. / Government Information Quarterly 28 (2011) 1735
Despite the potentially signicant impacts of e-Gov systems on

public administrations, organizations, individuals, and society, so far
only a few systematic and thorough studies have been undertaken on
the subject to comprehensively integrate overall factors related to the
successful implementation of e-Gov (Jaeger, 2003; Kraemer & King,
2003). However, citizens' behavior in terms of adopting a new
technology-driven system is a very complex and robust subject. It is
expected that extensive research will focus on criteria necessary for
citizens to adopt technology that will enable successful implementation of e-Gov. Understanding and estimating the effect of citizens'
adopting criteria, which leads to successful implementation of e-Gov,
would have important managerial implications. Therefore, this
research attempts to investigate the users' requirements for the
adoption of e-Gov and sets the rst objective:
1. To identify and conceptualize the critical factors that affect citizens
to adopt e-Government.
stages of e-Gov sequentially, i.e., rst static level and then interact
level. They can simply skip any beginning level and start adopting eGov from the next matured level. It can be predicted that the various
development levels of e-Gov might differ in pursuing the intention to
adopt e-Gov for its successful implementation. Static and interaction
levels especially offer different modes of service with different levels
of association of technology. As a result, adoption criteria for different
stages by citizens might have signicant implications. However, no
literature so far has investigated these criteria while exploring
adoption models for e-Gov. To investigate the users' requirements
for the adoption of e-Gov at different levels of service maturity (not
like Layne and Lee, 2001 who look at organizational growth), this
research paper sets its second objective as:
2. Are these critical factors that affect citizens' adoption of e-Government
different at different levels of service maturity?
2. Design perspective
Implementation and successive upgrading of the e-Gov system

follow certain paths, levels of maturity, stages, or phases. Different
countries implementing e-Gov in their ICT framework certainly have
different missions and objectives; however, the gradual development
of an e-Gov system in any country follows some unique levels of
service maturity for evolution. Each of the service levels represents a
different service pattern, different levels of technological sophistication, different stakeholder orientation, different types of interaction,
different security requirements, and different reengineering processes
(Holden, Norris, & Fletcher, 2003; Moon, 2002; Dorner, 2009). It can
also be inferred that these levels describe the development of
maturity of service in a sequential manner.
Based on the conceptualization of service development stages of eGov by different researchers (Accenture, 2003; Andersen & Henriksen,
2006; Evans & Yen, 2006; Fang, 2002; Klievink & Janssen, 2009; Layne
& Lee, 2001), we dene levels of service maturity of e-Gov as the
pattern of service that a government develops, successively enhances
interactivity, and delivers for stakeholders' acceptance and usage with
upgrading of technological sophistication and functional characteristics.
Since this research is engaged in developing adoption concepts of
e-Gov by citizens at different levels of service maturity, we will put
more attention into the rst two functionally different levels of
maturity of service development of e-Gov: the static stage and the
interaction stage (Blanger & Carter, 2005; Chandler & Emanuels,
2002; Howard, 2001). The reason behind this is that these two levels
are widely developed in most of the countries. The third level is
described as transaction stage. However, most of the countries are still
struggling to attain this e-Gov service level, so this stage is not
considered for developing any comprehensive model. The next stages
of service maturity, such as vertical integration and horizontal
integration, are also not very important for this research, as these
stages are not fully achieved by most of the countries so far. Most
countries have failed to realize horizontal stage of e-Gov universally
across all public services in their countries.
From the end users' perspectives, the two stages of services have
signicant differences in characteristics and functionality (Gottschalk,
2009). In the publishing or static stage, stakeholders can only view and
collect government information or download some forms and publications. This is one-way communication. Here the user cannot communicate with the government service system through this interface and
the government authority does not respond to the user electronically
(Accenture, 2005). In the next maturity level of servicethe interaction
phasetwo-way communication is established. Through the government web page, at this stage, stakeholders can contact service providers
to resolve any issues in different electronic ways, such as sending emails, using chat-room, etc. (Accenture, 2005).
However, differentiating and dening these two stages as gradual
service maturity of e-Gov do not mean that citizens use or adopt these
While investigating and revealing the theoretical perspectives of

independent variables of e-Gov adoption, this research explores two
major elds as theoretical background. The rst attempt is engaged in
reviewing the surrounding areas of literature addressing e-Gov
adoption, implementation, characteristics, and related issues. The
second attempt is the extensive cultivation of theories related to
technology adoption, public administration and organization, psychology, sociology, political science, culture, and marketing. Several
researchers who have done a comprehensive literature synthesis on
different e-Gov issuesincluding e-Gov adoption by end users
asserted that e-Gov implementation and adoption concepts have a
signicant lack of theoretical synopsis (Heeks & Bailur, 2007; Titah &
Barki, 2005; Wang & Liao, 2008).
Different researchers (Al-Shehry, Rogerson, Fairweather, & Prior,
2006; Chen & Thurmaier, 2005; Kumar et al., 2007) emphasized that
e-Gov adoption is more than a technological matter as it is inuenced
by many factors, including organizational, human, economic, social,
and cultural issues. These perspectives provide important speculations for analyzing the e-Gov structure that reects government
nature and its responsibility in society (Carter & Blanger, 2004; Moon
& Norris, 2005). In addition, the adoption of e-Gov systems requires
analyzing the changes in social values over time (Ebrahim & Irani,
2005). Steyaert (2004) adopted a marketing perspective to analyze eGov performance. He proposed an e-Commerce (EC)-based performance model to evaluate e-Gov performance in terms of citizen
satisfaction. Parent, Vandebeek, and Gemino (2005) and Warkentin,
Gefen, Pavlou, and Rose (2002) investigated the effect of trust on the
adoption of e-Gov. Gilbert et al. (2004) proposed the integration of the
service quality, technology, and behavioral aspects of the e-Gov
adoption framework. Shareef, Kumar, and Kumar (2007) and Shareef
et al. (2009) investigated technological, behavioral, economic, and
service quality aspects of e-Gov adoption criteria in formulating and
validating a framework of e-Gov adoption. Titah and Barki (2005) and
Phang et al. (2005) reviewed the adoption literature of e-Gov
extensively and they suggested that technological, organizational,
social, cultural, behavioral, and economic aspects should be considered in a comprehensive framework of e-Gov adoption. Therefore,
from our literature review, we perceive that technological, behavioral,
social, cultural, organizational, economic, political, and marketing
aspects might provide important insights while investigating explanatory variables for e-Gov adoption.
To delineate the theoretical paradigms, this research looks at the
core characteristics of e-Gov. We nd that e-Gov is affected by several
issues like, organizational reformation, cultural revolution, habitual
change, technology adoption, information and service modication,
speed of service, accessibility, availability, more participation, transparency, cost effectiveness, democratization, and globalization (Evans

& Yen, 2006; Kim, Kim, & Lee, 2009; Robin, Andrew, & Sasha, 2009;
Titah & Barki, 2005; Turner & Desloges, 2002; Wang & Liao, 2008).
Since e-Gov is a revolutionary reformation of organizational structure
and characteristics, its adoption might have close ties with organizational attributes. e-Gov offers enormous benets to its end users,
which include economic incentives and service improvement.
Therefore, marketing and economic behavior reects citizens'
preferences in adopting e-Gov. Transaction cost analysis (TCA) also
sheds light on these perspectives of e-Gov adoption criteria. From the
core principle of TCA, the motivation for behavioral intention to
interact with different organizational structures is signicantly
inuenced by economic parameters (Shelanski & Klein, 1995).
According to the theory of planned behavior (TPB) (Ajzen, 1991)
and the theory of reasoned action (TRA) (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980),
social and cultural values affect beliefs and attitudes and the adoption
of e-Gov operated through ICT. Beliefs and attitudes about e-Gov lead
to formation of behavioral intention to learn, accept, and use e-Gov
systems. Therefore, behavioral or attitudinal aspects of citizens are
very important in stimulating an adoption framework of e-Gov. If we
translate the core doctrine of socio-technical theory, which explains
the effect of social and technological aspects on a system, we get
thorough insights into integrating the social, organizational, and
technological aspects of the e-Gov adoption (Damodaran, Nicholls, &
Henney, 2005).
However, these perspectives, where we have concentrated our
investigation of critical factors for the adoption framework of e-Gov,
are not mutually exclusive phenomena. These are interrelated issues.
Adoption perspectives of e-Gov by different stakeholders at different
levels of service maturity of e-Gov are intertwined with different
explanatory variables. Therefore, our investigation for identifying
critical factors of e-Gov will not track those perspectives of e-Gov
adoption factors separately; rather, we will look for interdependent
and comprehensive effects. We will connect technological, behavioral,
social, cultural, organizational, economic, political, and marketing
aspects of consumers to develop a comprehensive e-Gov adoption
model.
3. Theoretical framework
As we mentioned in the Introduction section, the existing
literature on e-Gov has failed to present a comprehensive framework
of e-Gov adoption and performance at different phases of service
maturity of e-Gov implementation. Therefore, although, we are
attempting to identify all of the constructs from our detailed literature
review in conjunction with the insight from different theories related
to technology adoption, diffusion, and behavioral, social, and cultural
characteristics, the adoption behavior of e-Gov is in a very premature
stage (Heeks & Bailur, 2007). Consequently, this study has potentially
an exploratory nature. It means, we are conducting this research not
to test any specied theory of e-Gov adoption, rather we are
conducting this research in the hope of developing a theory of the
adoption of e-Gov at different service maturity levels. So, as we are
advancing from theory development to statistical analysis, we should
continue to rene our exogenous variables and also hypotheses to
develop our nal paradigms of adopting e-Gov at different service
maturity levels. For an exploratory study, this renement of variables
and hypotheses is typical and also a part of the theory development
process (Stevens, 1996).
3.1. Explanatory variables
According to information management principles for open
government adoption, a prime factor for adoption is creating
awareness among the stakeholders. This means informing the
citizens about the transformation of public administration, implementation of innovation, basic paradigms of the new system,
19
application of ICT, objectives and mission of e-Gov development,

comprehensive information about relative advantages and disadvantages of e-Gov, and the overall credibility of the system. A long
history of government service shows that citizens and business
organizations are traditionally habituated to use brick and mortar
government services for information collection, interaction, and all
types of transactions that are basically operated ofine. The history of
e-Gov evolution is very new. Basically, most of the countries are just
at the beginning efforts of implementing e-Gov. Therefore, stakeholders are still not very aware of this new innovation of the
government system. As we learned from the TPB and TRA, beliefs
about a system turn to the attitude of using the system. However,
awareness of the system is important at the beginning to develop
beliefs (Limayem, Hirt, & Cheung, 2007).
Before developing an attitude to adopt e-Gov, stakeholders need to
be aware of its complete characteristics, including the background of
the system, functional behavior, strategic benets, the safety and legal
environment, etc. Awareness of e-Gov has several different aspects:
political, marketing, behavioral, and social. When citizens are aware of
the political agenda of e-Gov, social values related to the strategic
implementation of e-Gov, service quality, and the competitive
advantages of e-Govi.e., the marketing paradigm and attitudinal or
behavioral motivation of the EG systemthey might then have an
intention to adopt the e-Gov system. Several researchers asserted
awareness as the signicant independent variable to create the
attitude to use an e-Gov system (Eggers, 2004; Parent et al., 2005). So
we categorize this predicted variable for adoption as the Attitude to
use, since awareness is the primary stimulus of creating attitude.
Depending on the previous arguments, this research proposes:
H1. Perceived awareness (PA) has a positive relation with the
Adoption of e-Gov.
From TPB, diffusion of innovation theory (DOI), and TCA, a user will
not arrive at an intention to use an EG system, which requires computer
knowledge to get a competitive advantage, unless the user has
competence from experience in the use of modern ICT. From
technological, behavioral, economic, and organizational perspectives,
it is anticipated that failing to get hands-on experience of technology
will not create in the user an attitude favorable to adopting the system.
Also, in the absence of computer knowledge, a user cannot perceive the
economic advantages of e-Gov. The organizational structure of e-Gov is
computer- and internet-based, while from the viewpoint of end users,
traditional government services do not require computer knowledge.
Therefore, from organizational perspectives, computer self-efcacy is an
important predictor of whether a user will adopt an e-Gov system
instead of using traditional government services.
Several researchers exploring the barriers of adoption of eCommerce and e-Gov revealed that users' computer self-efcacy
and experience of the internet, ICT, and computers create a perception
of security in the users' attitude toward using online systems (Moon &
Norris, 2005; Tung & Rieck, 2005; van Dijk, Peters, & Ebbers, 2008)
that affects their intention to use. Wang (2002) investigated the
relation of technology availability and computer self-efcacy with
behavioral intention to adopt an online tax ling system and observed
a positive relation. Computer self-efcacy is concerned not with the
skills one has but with judgments of what one can do with whatever
skills one possesses. Therefore, we categorize this explanatory
variable of e-Gov adoption as the Attitude to use.
Including others, the most important and dominating barriers for
adopting e-Gov, particularly in developing countries are scarcity of
electricity, telephones, computers, the internet, and related accessories, and government supports like call-center, resource-center, and
cyber-cafs. If we examine the capability theory (Nussbaum & Sen,
1993), it highlights that citizens' use of e-Gov systems is limited
unless they have the freedom of utility required to use modern ICT-

20
based e-Gov. If a country cannot make the skills and resources

required for using e-Gov available to all citizens equally, the country
cannot expect the same capability from all citizens to adopt that
system. Therefore, without reducing the digital divide, promoting
equality in resources of using e-Gov and making available all
components of an e-Gov system and knowledge, the adoption of
e-Gov will not be successful. The availability of resources required for
the use of e-Gov has behavioral, economic, cultural, social, and
technological aspects. Generally, where computers, internet, and
modern ICT are not available, the citizens are economically poor, less
educated, unaware of modern technology, socially and culturally
unfamiliar with modern technology, and lack the necessary skills to
use technology. As a result, they also do not believe that they will
receive benets by using an e-Gov system. Therefore, there is an
obvious relation between availability of resources and the adoption of
e-Gov (van Dijk et al., 2008). We argue that AOR creates a belief in
using an e-Gov system operated through ICT, which, in turn, creates
an attitude to use e-Gov. Therefore, we categorize the construct AOR
as the Attitude to use e-Gov. Drawing a conclusion from the above
arguments, we propose here:
H2. Computer-self efcacy (CSE) has a positive relation with
Adoption of EG.
H3. Availability of resources (AOR) has a positive relation with
Adoption Of EG.
The technology acceptance model (TAM) proposes that perceived
ease of use (PEOU) and perceived usefulness (PU) determine the
attitude toward adoption of ICT. This behavioral attitude, in turn, leads
to the intention to use ICT and the nal acceptance of the system
(Bhattacherjee, 2001; Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989; Lucas &
Spitler, 1999; Moon, 2002; Venkatesh, 2000). e-Gov fails if the users
do not have the ability to use the technology to access useful
information and services, and eventually do not perceive e-Gov as
useful. This would lead to a non-acceptance of the system by citizens
(Shareef et al., 2007). Numerous scholarly articles (Evans & Yen, 2006;
Gil-Garcia & Martinez-Moyano, 2007; Shareef et al., 2009) revealed
that PEOU and PU are potential indicators of user acceptance,
adoption, and motivation to use web services. However, some
researchers (Carter & Blanger, 2004) did not nd any signicant
relation between the adoption of e-Gov and PU. A plausible
explanation lies in the logic that inclusion of relative advantage as a
predicted variable in the adoption model explains enough of PU in the
adoption construct. So, at this stage, we will provide further insight
into PU and relative advantage for inclusion in the adoption model as
the predictor variables.
According to the DOI theory (Rogers, 1995), the rate of diffusion is
affected by an innovation's relative advantage, complexity, compatibility, trialability, and observability. Literature reviews suggest that
among those ve constructs, relative advantage, compatibility, and
complexity are the most relevant constructs to determine the adoption
characteristics of technology innovation (Gilbert et al., 2004; Moore &
Benbasat, 1991; Rogers, 1995; Tornatzky & Klein, 1982). These authors,
especially Tornatzky and Klein (1982) in their meta-analysis of research
on the adoption of innovations, argue that trialability and observability
are not related constructs for technology adoption. Therefore, in this
study we are not considering these two constructs.
Complexity, comparable to TAM's PEOU construct, captures the
perception of some pre-use complexities that seem to have very close
relation to the perceptions of complexities in using modern ICT,
internet, and computers. Therefore, we comprehend the generic
essence of the construct complexity with PEOU and introduce
perceived ability to use (PATU) as the predictor of adoption to reect
other aspects of e-Gov above and beyond technology. The construct
PATU has technological and organizational perspectives. Due to
revolutionary reengineering of the traditional government system,

the perception of online organizational structure, which is apparently
new, is an important aspect of the perceived ability to use the system.
Technology is a very predictable aspect to get insight into PATU. We
argue that PATU reects the ability of citizens to use an e-Gov system
and categorize it as the Ability to use for e-Gov adoption.
Compatibility construct has cultural, behavioral, and social aspects. It
is dependent both on individual characteristics such as avoiding
personal interaction, and social inuence. Several researchers indicated
that specic characteristic of e-Gov that allow citizens to avoid personal
interaction might create the perception of compatibility among citizens
to adopt an e-Gov system (Gilbert et al., 2004). Shedding light on the
TPB, TRA, and capability theory, the compatibility of an e-Gov system
with adopters' beliefs, values, and attitudes reects the behavioral
aspect. From the socio-technical and complementary theories, beliefs
and attitudes of adopters of a new technology system also have social
and cultural aspects. Several researchers use this construct as a
signicant predictor of EG adoption (Carter & Blanger, 2004; Chen &
Thurmaier, 2005; Shareef et al., 2007). This research argues that PC
creates citizens' attitudes to use an e-Gov system and thus we categorize
this construct as the Attitude to use.
Relative advantage captures the gain from receiving services and
information through e-Gov systems in comparison with that from
traditional government ofces. This denition expands the limited
concept of PU of the TAM, which captures only the absolute benets
from job performance. However, by adopting e-Gov systems, a user
can gain a lot of relative and absolute benets ranging from
effectiveness, efciency, availability, accessibility from anywhere,
comfort in use, time savings, cost savings, and convenience. The
combined effects of the two constructs, therefore, basically capture
the essence of absolute and comparable functional benets of the eGov system. If we integrate both views of PU and relative advantage,
we can introduce perceived functional benet (PFB) as the predicted
variable of e-Gov adoption. This construct has economic, organizational, marketing, behavioral, and social perspectives. If we look at the
TCA, we can understand that PFB also captures the essence of time
efciency and price savings. Several researchers assumed that this
time constraint characteristic is also typical in EG because it is rational
to assume that citizens might adopt e-Gov systems as they save time
to perform tasks relative to the functions of a traditional paper-based
government ofce (Carter & Blanger, 2005; Gilbert et al., 2004;
Wagner, Cheung, Lee, & Ip, 2003). Another construct, price savings,
which is a measure of e-Gov efciency in terms of reduction in service
rendering cost, is also an overlapping concept of PFB (Tung & Rieck,
2005). This analysis shows that PFB captures the essences of the
behavioral, economic, and marketing aspects of adoption. It also has
an organizational aspect, because institutional theory asserts that
actors will accept organizational change as long as they perceive it to
be benecial to them (Lawrence & Suddaby, 2006). We argue that PFB
imparts reasons to use an e-Gov system, instead of using a traditional
government system, and, thus, it is categorized in this research as the
Adherence to adopt the use of e-Gov. We investigate the three
dimensions PATU, PC, and PFB here since we assume that these might
affect EG adoption. Therefore, we propose:
H4. Perceived ability to use (PATU) has a positive relation with the
Adoption of e-Gov.
H5. Perceived compatibility (PC) has a positive relation with the
Adoption of e-Gov.
H6. Perceived functional benet (PFB) has a positive relation with the
Adoption of e-Gov.
In addition, we also include a new construct, Image, as proposed
by Moore and Benbasat (1991). According to the DOI, Image

inuences the acceptance and use of an innovation. Image refers to

citizens' perceptions that adopting e-Gov makes them superior to
others in the society. Interaction with e-Gov systems, instead of
using traditional government ofces, is perceived to give these
citizens superior status. Several researchers have, therefore, included this construct in their proposed model of EG adoption (Gilbert et
al., 2004; Phang et al., 2005; Tung & Rieck, 2005). Since the adoption
of e-Gov might reect the adopters familiarity with modern
technology, higher level of education, competence in using computers and the internet, and perception of modernism, these phenomena impart some degree of social values and prestige to adopters.
Therefore, this research argues that Image has social, behavioral, and
also cultural aspects and depends on an individual's personal
behavioral ideology. We also argue that the construct perception of
Image is a proponent of reasoning to use e-Gov and, thus, it is
categorized in this research as the Adherence to use for e-Gov
adoption. Therefore, we propose:
H7. Perceived image (PI) of using e-Gov has a positive relation with
the Adoption of e-Gov.
Content, organization, and presentation of informationi.e., information quality, which includes accuracy, current information, relevancy, fulllment, linkage, completeness, integration, organization,
timelinesare potential contributors to creating a perception of
reliability that inuences citizens to accept e-Gov (Collier & Bienstock,
2006; Kim, Kim, & Lennon, 2006; Kumar et al., 2007; Parasuraman,
Zeithaml, & Malhotra, 2005; Sebastianelli, Tamimi, & Rajan, 2006). The
assurance and condence in using e-Gov that information quality gives
citizens is characterized in this research as the Assurance to use for eGov adoption. Gilbert et al. (2004) conducted a survey in the UK among
users of e-Gov that showed that information quality is a strong predictor
of EG adoption. Another extensive empirical study conducted in
Australia (AGIMO, 2003) revealed that there is an obvious expectation
that information from government will be provided in accordance to
fullling citizen needs rather than serving the convenience of
government agencies. In order to ensure the success of an IS, Delone
and McLean (1992, 2003) proposed the Information System Success
Model (IS Model). The model asserted that information quality is the
determinant of system use and user satisfaction that eventually leads to
regular adoption (Wang & Liao, 2008; Wangpipatwong, Chutimaskul, &
Papasratorn, 2005). Information quality asserts service requirements of
consumers and the economic benets of viewing and collecting
information from a website in lieu of verbal interaction from traditional
government ofces. Therefore, information quality has a marketing
aspect. Lin and Lu (2000) asserted the conjecture that the features and
accuracy of information posted on a website signicantly affect users'
behavioral attitude. Grounded on the aforementioned arguments, we
propose:
H8. Perceived information quality (PIQ) has a positive relation with
Adoption of EG.
Several e-Gov researchers address customer service as one of the
important explanatory variables to satisfy customers and, thus, to
ensure a recurring use of e-Gov (Lee & Rao, 2003; Shareef et al., 2007;
Wangpipatwong et al., 2005). Service quality is a strong predictor to
differentiate performance of different organizations. From the
behavioral point of view, recurring users of e-Gov will achieve beliefs
and thus attitudes to adopt e-Gov if they perceive higher customer
service in e-Gov. Traditional government service has a different
approach than e-Gov. If citizens perceive a higher level of customer
service in e-Gov than that offered in a traditional government ofce,
they will purse the adoption of e-Gov. Kumar et al. (2007) proposed
that service quality leads to satisfaction that ensures regular use of eGov. Service quality can be considered from different dimensions, like
21
technical or output quality, functional or process quality (Czepiel,

Solomon, Surprenant & Gutman, 1985; Grnroos, 1984; Lehtinen &
Lehtinen, 1982), and direct customer service from employees
(Shareef, Kumar, & Kumar, 2008). Since technical or output quality
is already being assessed in PATU and PIQ and functional quality of the
system is incorporated in PFB, we will only discuss here the customer
service response to service quality. The reliability and assurance of
servicewhich are intertwined with trust, security, privacy, and risk
concepts of customer servicewill also be discussed in a different
section.
Due to the absence of any physical presentation, the service
response of e-Gov has different aspects and properties. In e-Gov, the
service response is generally assumed to be a recovery quality item.
When there are problems or concerns, stakeholders always expect
that customer service will resolve the problem promptly with
complete sympathy. If citizens feel that they do not nd any customer
service in e-Gov when they require it, that they are being treated
unfairly, or that the customer-oriented service policy of government
websites is not credible, they are less likely to adopt e-Gov; rather
they will go to a physical government ofce to seek services. A study
in a developing country conducted by Shareef et al. (2009) also found
that service response has a signicant effect on citizens' adoption of eGov. We argue that perceived service response (PSR) stimulates
citizens' adaptability and satisfaction in using e-Gov and thus ensures
recurring use. Therefore, this research categorizes the PSR construct as
the Adaptability to use for e-Gov adoption. Based on the above
arguments, we propose here:
H9. Perceived service response (PSR) has a positive relation with
Adoption of EG.
In an online transaction, since different physical cues are absent,
virtual transaction requires some extra facilities to perform transactions for individuals with different ethnic backgrounds. This criterion
is especially very important for a country that comprises multicultural and multilingual groups. Additionally, e-Gov also has a global
aspect. Considering these aspects, the multilingual option of e-Gov
might enhance the adoption of e-Gov. The service quality research of
EC also nds this factor to be an important cause for consumers to
adopt a certain e-retailer's website (Collier & Bienstock, 2006; Kim et
al., 2006; Parasuraman et al., 2005; Wolnbarger & Gilly, 2003).
Nantel, Sncal, and Mekki-Berrada (2005) conducted an empirical
study to determine critical factors of online purchase. Their research
captured a denite relation between the use of native language of a
user in a website as the medium of instruction and information and
adoption of the website by that user. If an individual can interact with
a website using his/her primary language, he/she might feel more
cultural connection and have a more positive attitude to use of that
website. Through an extensive content analysis of 93 websites from
local companies in China, India, Japan, and the USA, Singh, Zhao, and
Hu (2005) conrmed this statement. For citizens with less education,
a single language option other than mother tongue for viewing,
collecting, interacting, and transacting with e-Gov websites might
create a signicant barrier. This is an important cultural aspect
(Michon & Chebat, 2004). If we borrow the speculations from the
TAM and DOI, the relative advantage of e-Gov will trigger inclusion of
a multilingual option in e-Gov web pages. However, beliefs in
competence with an e-Gov interactionwhich further promotes
attitude towards the adoption of e-Gov according to the TPBcan be
exaggerated if a known language option prevails in e-Gov websites.
Therefore, the multilingual option has behavioral aspects (Foo, Hui,
Leong, & Liu, 2000). If we look at the capability theory, the
multilingual option in e-Gov might create equal and competitive
capability, which ultimately enhances the economic power of
minority stakeholders. Therefore, from an economic perspective, a
multilingual option in e-Gov can create a level playing eld for major

22
stakeholder groups with a multilingual background. From the

marketing, technological, behavioral, and cultural perspectives, this
research argues that a multilingual option in e-Gov might enhance
the processing and understanding capability of e-Gov. Therefore,
since this criterion promotes the ability to use e-Gov by improving
service quality, we categorize this plausible explanatory variable of
e-Gov adoption as the Ability of stakeholders. This research thus
proposes:
H10. Multilingual option (MLO) has a positive relation with the
Adoption of e-Gov.
Many scholarly articles conducting research in e-Gov adoption
have shown that security, privacy, uncertainty, and risk are predominant factors for adoption (Al-Adawi et al., 2005; Parent et al., 2005;
Shareef et al., 2007, 2008; Welch & Pandey, 2005). Blanger, Hiller,
and Smith (2002) found that pleasure, privacy, security, and web
features are matters related to the perceived trustworthiness of a
website. Research in e-Commerce and e-Gov found that uncertainty,
security, privacy, and risk are all antecedents of perceived trust (AlAdawi et al., 2005; Balasubramanian, Konana, & Menon, 2003; Parent
et al., 2005; Soat, 2003).
Perceived security is crucial to users' condence regarding the
safety of a website. Based on previous research on security in eCommerce (Blanger & Carter, 2005; Schaupp & Blanger, 2005), this
current study visualizes perceived security as the protection of
customers from any type of nancial or non-nancial risk during
transactions on websites, such as any type of identity thefts including
abuse of credit card, overcharging, non-payment, etc. These security
factors are potential contributors in developing trust among citizens
as the authentication of e-Gov nancial transaction and protection of
disposed information in e-Gov. Therefore, we conjecture that
perceived security (PS) has a causal effect on perceived trust (PT).
Since transactions in e-Gov are basically virtual, no actual physical
transaction takes place during interaction and payment by the clients,
and the uncertainty construct of TCA can be a potential factor of nonaccepting virtual environment of e-Gov. This, in turn, is related to
perceived trust in e-Gov (Al-Adawi et al., 2005). In the virtual
environment in particular, being able to place trust in a website is
critical to consumers' successful interaction with the system (Gefen,
Karahanna, & Straub, 2003). Cox and Rich (1964) delineate perceived
risk as the perception of uncertainty in a particular interaction
situation that has a close relation to trust. Therefore, PT is dependent
on PU (uncertainty).
In e-Gov, citizens provide written information in technology
interface while interacting or receiving/paying through e-Gov websites. As a result, users of e-Gov always feel a lack of privacy. Several
researchers (Angst & Agarwal, 2009; Shareef et al., 2008; Yoo
& Donthu, 2001), who conducted empirical studies regarding the
acceptance of the online environmente.g., e-Commerce and e-Gov
observed that perceived privacy is a major concern for internet
customers during interaction with websites. Customers are afraid that
websites can disclose, share, or misuse their personal information or
that hackers can intercept their secret information (Brown & Muchira,
2004; Ranganathan & Ganapathy, 2002). During interaction with
websites, customers may perceive there to be a privacy risk
(Parasuraman et al., 2005). So, perceived privacy (PP) is also related
to the condence of users on the web, which nally indicates
trustworthiness. Trusting the web can enhance the perceived
privacy feeling of the customers during interaction in e-Gov (Kemp,
2000).
Warkentin et al. (2002) extensively discussed the impact of trust in
e-Gov adoption, and consequently proposed that institutional-based
trust, characteristics-based trust, and process-based trustwhich all
together capture the essence of perceived security, privacy, and less
uncertainty in e-Govwill lead to the intention to adopt e-Gov. Thomas
(1998) outlined the three aspects by which trust in the government is

produced. The rst aspect is related to behavioral attitude that is
supported by TPB. The second aspect of trust derives from institutional
credibility. The third component captures the trusting attitude on
typical outcomes of a process where the seller sells goods to buyers and
buyers in return will pay for that. Nye and Zelikow (1997) classied
these causal factors as social, cultural, economic, and political. From the
marketing aspect, if a customer does not have trust in the institution and
process, he/she might not embrace that organization for interaction. So,
we can conclude that PT in e-Gov has political, behavioral, social,
organizational, technological, marketing, and cultural perspectives.
Trust is an important factor in analyzing the adoption behavior of
consumers in virtual environment, because citizens have few tangible
and veriable cues regarding the service provider's credibility and
performance (Urban, Sultan, & Qualls, 2000). In light of the above
discussion, we argue that PT creates condence in the overall e-Gov
performance and, thus, categorize this construct as the Assurance to
use e-Gov. Thus, we propose:
H11. Perceived trust (PT) has a positive relation with the Adoption of
e-Gov.
H11a. Perceived uncertainty (PU) (uncertainty) has a negative
relation with Trust in e-Gov.
H11b. Perceived security (PS) has a positive relation with Trust in
e-Gov.
H11c. Perceived privacy (PP) has a positive relation with Trust in
e-Gov.
The measuring scale items for all the exogenous constructs of the
proposed model, developed and operationalized based on existing
literature on e-Gov, e-Commerce, IS, marketing, and expert opinions,
are shown in Appendix A. The questionnaire was pretested by a group
of people comprised of two scholarly researchers from Sprott School
of Business, Carleton University, Canada who have expertise in
analyzing the online adoption behavior, and eight PhD students
from the social science and natural science departments of Carleton
University who have extensive knowledge in using Canadian e-Gov to
verify the structure, constructs, and respective measurement items of
the questionnaire. For any exploratory research, if the surveyor
happens to organize a group comprised of a couple of people, the
participating pretesting method is better (Converse & Presser, 1986).
In our pretesting procedure, we followed the participating method. A
structured questionnaire was used to measure the independent and
dependent variables of the study with a 5-point Likert scale ranging
from 1 (strongly disagree/never) to 5 (strongly agree/always). The 5point Likert scale is used to increase the response rate and response
quality along with reducing the respondent's frustration level
(Babakus & Mangold, 1992).
3.2. Dependent variables
According to the marketing theory, adoption of a new product
begins with consumer awareness, leads to an attitude toward that
product, then further advances to an intention to use as a trial basis,
and nally ends as full acceptance and regular use with satisfaction
(Pavlou & Fygenson, 2006). A new system can replace an old system.
So, if an individual using traditional government systems perceives eGov to be more advantageous from any perspectives, he or she might
adopt the online government systemse-Gov. This research encompasses the adoption of e-Gov as a continuous process starting from
awareness of the system, beliefs of the system benets, attitude
toward using it, intention to use, actual use, satisfaction, and recurring
use. Some researchers (Al-Shehry et al., 2006; Chen & Thurmaier,

2005; Kumar et al., 2007; Moon & Norris, 2005; Schedler &
Summermatter, 2007; Shareef et al., 2007, 2009; Wangpipatwong
et al., 2005) have developed their adoption models and measuring
items for the adoption construct by considering complete acceptance
of the process.
Depending on the paradigms of the e-Gov adoption process, we
nd logical underpinnings on the premise that the adoption process of
e-Gov involves the frequent and recurrent use of online services by
citizens not only for obtaining information but also for interaction
with government. Adoption construct has behavioral, organizational,
economic, technological, political, marketing, social, and cultural
perspectives. We have mentioned that this research is concerned to
explore the objective by investigating adoption criteria into two
different levels of service maturity: Static or Publishing stage and
Interaction stage. Therefore, we have differentiated the dependent
variable Adoption into two sub-groups:
Adoption 1: Decision to accept and use an EG system to view, collect
information, and/or download forms for different government
services as the user requires with the positive perception of
receiving a competitive advantage.
Adoption 2: Decision to accept and use an EG system to interact
with, and seek government services, and/or search for queries for
different government services as the user requires with the positive
perception of receiving a competitive advantage.
The endogenous/dependent variable Adoption was operationalized in a way that ensures measurement of the causal effects of the
exogenous variables on the two levels of service maturity of e-Gov
and increases response rate. It is obvious that citizens can view and
interact with e-Gov for many tasks. Dening any specic task for
adoption in the proposed questionnaire might reduce the response
rate in terms of adoption. Therefore, this study formulates the
instruments of Adoption not for any specic tasks but for general
tasks to keep the questionnaire general for all respondents. A total of
six scale items were selected to measure those two dimensions of the
adoption construct (AGIMO, 2003; Gil-Garcia & Martinez-Moyano,
2007; Murru, 2003; Sakowicz, 2007; Turner & Desloges, 2002) (scale
items are shown in Appendix B). Based on these arguments and
identication, a model of e-Gov adoption (GAM) to investigate the
plausible relations is proposed in Appendix C.
4. Methodology
The research methodologies we use in this research are those
typically used in empirical business research. Based on the suggestions of Heeks and Bailur (2007) about e-Gov research, and theories of
Campbell and Fiske (1959) and Bagozzi, Yi, and Philips (1991) about
reliability and validity of research, we designed our research
methodology. In this research, the respondents are the users of the
Canadian e-Gov system; anyone who has experience using Canadian
e-Gov system could participate in the survey. This study was
conducted in four large cities in Ontario, Canada. We selected the
venue for the following purposes:
1. Canada is one of the leading countries in terms of offering e-Gov
services. Canada's e-Gov implementation and offered services are
very mature, and have different services in the static, interaction,
and transaction stages. Therefore, in terms of the development
stage of e-Gov and mission, vision, and objectives, Canada can be
viewed as one the most focused countries for e-Gov development
(Cardin, Holmes, Leganza, Hanson, & McEnroe, 2006).
2. The adoption rate (29.8%) and maturity of services of EG in Ontario is
the highest in Canada according to the study by Parent et al. (2005).
Since this research has set its objectives in detecting adoption criteria
of citizens at different maturity levels of services offered by e-Gov,
Ontario is assumed to fulll the research objectives.
23
3. The selected four cities are the most populated and largest cities in
the respective regions of Ontario. These cities are also located
strategically in important position and are prominent in multicultural assembly. Therefore, it is assumed that the sample should
have enough variability.
To test the model in the most realistic way possible, the study was
conducted through a survey (a self-administered questionnaire) of a
broad diversity of citizens at several communities. From our previous
experience, we assumed that the study would receive around a 10%
response rate. Since there are 11 primary exogenous variables/
constructs, the number of response should be at least 220 (20 samples
per independent variable) for regression and factor analysis (Stevens,
1996, p. 143). However, a sample size of a minimum of 200 is good for
structural equation modeling (SEM) (Kline, 2005, p. 110). Therefore,
the questionnaire was distributed among 2200 citizens (or residents)
in the previously mentioned four cities in Ontario, Canada, to meet the
target and fulll the statistical specications. The specic way we used
to distribute the questionnaire was:
1. We maintained roughly the population ratio of the four cities,
distributing 100 questionnaires in Sudbury, 200 in London, 500 in
Ottawa, and 1400 in Toronto.
2. We divided all the cities into ve regions: east, west, north, south,
and center.
3. We then collected addresses from the Telephone White Pages of
each city; we included houses, condominiums, and apartments
located in the ve regions we identied. We also collected the
addresses of the residents living in the suburban areas in the east,
west, north, and south regions immediately outside the city.
4. We distributed the questionnaires by mail throughout the
suburban areas in the east, west, north, and south regions outside
each city. One half of the total questionnaires allocated for each city
were distributed in this way. The other half was distributed
physically to the houses, condominiums, and apartments in
different areas in the ve zones.
5. We distributed 50% of the questionnaires in houses and condominiums and 50% in apartments.
6. The survey was conducted over a three-month period.
We received a total of 241 questionnaires from the respondents.
Two returned questionnaires were blank. Therefore, the eligible
response number is 239. The response rate is around 11%. This is quite
satisfactory based on our previous knowledge and also considering
the length of the questionnaireeight pages, including a one-page
cover letter.
5. Statistical analysis
Several interrelated procedures were performed to organize, rearrange, and summarize the raw data and make it amenable for
analysis to get justied output. This section sequentially describes
data preparation and analysis techniques for statistical analysis of this
research.
5.1. Data reduction
Before performing any causeeffect relation, reliability, validity,
and normality tests, we rst conducted exploratory factor analyses
(EFA) on the preliminary 57 scale items measuring the latent
variables having direct causal relations to the adoption of e-Gov
excluding the measuring items of the constructs perceived uncertainty (PU), perceived privacy (PP), and perceived security (PS),
which are not hypothesized to have direct relation with adoption in
our model. These three constructs are hypothesized to have causal
relations with perceived trust (PT), which is an exogenous variable

24
for the adoption model. We have also done EFA on the 10 measuring
items of PU, PP, and PS separately because these three constructs are
widely used as the exogenous variables for PT (Shareef et al., 2008).
For EFA, we have used principal component analysis as the
extraction method and varimax rotation as the rotation method.
We used both the breaks-in-eigenvalues criterion (N1) and scree
plot to determine the number of factors to retain (Stevens, 1996,
pp. 389390).
After conducting a series of EFA of those 57 measuring items, of the
11 exogenous variables and also examining the correlation matrix we
found that nine constructs with 37 measuring items can be retained.
However, to support this renement in measuring items, we also
looked at the correlation matrix, analyzed convergence through CFA,
and thoroughly investigated theoretical aspects of those modications. For PA, AOR, CSE, PI, PIQ, MLO, and PFB constructs,
corresponding measuring items were loaded consistently (though
some items were removed because of low loading or cross loading).
Three PC items, three PATU items, and one PIQ item were loaded on a
single factor. Though the items loaded under this factor are the
measuring items from different hypothesized exogenous variables,
after close examination of those seven items loaded under a single
factor, we observed that all these items reect certain personal beliefs
and perceptions of ability of using e-Gov systems. This personal belief
denotes both physical and psychological perception (resembles to PC)
of ability to use e-Gov systems. Therefore, these seven items have very
close functional alignment. We veried the correlation between these
items and found moderate to strong correlations. This also justies the
convergence of these items under a single factor. We also veried the
convergence of those seven measuring items in CFA by testing the
appropriateness of a single factor or two factor model (Appendix D).
Based on the functional meaning, we argued that PATU can still cause
those seven scale items and thus can be named PATU. However, the
denition of PATU should be edited adding new psychological
dimension. We have done that in Appendix E where all the
explanatory variables are dened. Four items of PT and ve items of
PSR loaded under a single factor in EFA. We can explain this behavior
getting insight from the measuring items. On the one hand, perceived
trust of citizens is related to the credibility of e-Gov; on the other
hand, customer service of e-Gov also helps to enhance the perception
of trust and credibility, particularly in the virtual environment, among
the users of e-Gov. Therefore, we retained the name perceived trust
(PT) for the combined measuring items loaded under a single factor.
We also veried the correlation between these items and found
moderate to strong correlations. This also justies the convergence of
these items under a single factor. However, we also veried the
convergence of those nine measuring items in CFA by testing the
appropriateness of a single factor or two factor model (Appendix D).
We also veried all nine factors with the measuring items individually
by CFA and observed conrmation of EFA results (Appendix D).
However, since 1 item of the construct AOR (AOR3) was loaded in CFA
with a loading factor of less than 0.50, we removed that item. In
addition, since we could retain only two items for CSE with high
internal correlations (more than 0.90) and two items for MLO with
high correlations (more than 0.95) from EFA, we could not perform
CFA for these two variables (since negative degree of freedom exists).
So, we took the average scores of the respective measuring items for
CSE and MLO respectively. Therefore, we retained a total of 34
measuring items with the nine exogenous variables (Appendix E). We
also retained two factors with nine indicators from the EFA of the 10
measuring items of PU, PS, and PP. However, four items of PS and two
items of PP were loaded under the same factor. Although as an
exploratory study we have hypothesized PS and PP as two different
exogenous variables for PT, several researchers used PS and PP as a
single construct by the name PS, because both the constructs are
related to security of nancial transactions, identity, and personal information (Gummerus, Liljander, Pura, & van Riel, 2004; Wolnbarger
& Gilly, 2003). Therefore, we have provided the name of this construct
as PS, however, its denition was revised (Appendix E). We also
veried the correlation between these items and found moderate to
strong correlations. This also justies the convergence of these items
under a single factor. However, we also veried the convergence of
those six measuring items in CFA by testing the appropriateness of
a single factor or two factor model (Appendix D). So, for PT as
endogenous variable, we have retained two exogenous variables
namely, PU (uncertainty) and PS.
The reliability scores for the constructs were measured by a
coefcient alpha, which justied the reliability of the items in each
dimension and thus internal consistency among the items in each
dimension. The reliability scores for all the nal exogenous and
endogenous variables are ranged from 0.706 to 0.974, which suggest
an acceptable internal consistency among the items in each
dimension (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). The CFA results suggest
that the scale items are reective indicators of their corresponding
latent constructs, which indicates construct validity (Chau, 1997;
Segars & Grover, 1993). In this data analysis, the average variances
extracted (AVE) for each factor and its measures all exceeded 0.50;
thus, convergent validity is achieved (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). We
also veried the correlation matrix of the items under each factor. All
the items individually under each factor have moderate to strong
correlation coefcients. This result also justied convergent validity.
We also examined multicolinearity, normality, and outliers.
5.2. Model testing: causal relationship by path analysis
We have used LISREL for path analysis, a family of structural
equation modeling (SEM), to test the causal relationships (the
hypotheses) of the model. Since we have measured all of the
exogenous and endogenous variables through Likert scale 15, data
gathered from this empirical study is not perfectly continuous.
Therefore, structural measurement through SEM by maximum
likelihood (ML) is not appropriate for this type of data (Kline, 2005,
p. 219). For structural measurement through SEM, one of the
fundamental requirements is that latent variables should be continuous (Kline, 2005). Therefore, we took the average of the indicators of
each of the latent variables individually for 239 cases and conducted a
path analysis (Kline, 2005) to nd out causeeffect relationships
between exogenous and endogenous variables. In path analysis, all of
the latent variables are treated as observed variables and their scores
represent the average of the scores of their respective indicators. We
have used the maximum likelihood procedure of LISREL for the
purpose of analysis. Since, the measuring items of PC and PATU were
integrated in a single construct and the measuring items of PT and PSR
were also integrated in a single item, we have now nine hypotheses to
test (with certain modications in the composition and denition of
PATU and PT constructs related to two hypotheses) from our
proposed 11 hypotheses having direct relations with adoption. Only
two hypotheses having direct relations with adoption were removed
during statistical renement in the previous section. For path analysis,
we have used the correlation matrix as the input data for all the 11
exogenous variables (nine exogenous variables having direct relations
with adoption, i.e., PA, AOR, CSE, PATU, PFB, PI, MLO, PIQ, and PT and
two exogenous variables having indirect relations with adoption
through PT, i.e., PU and PS) and one endogenous variable (for example
ADOP1). Here PT is both an exogenous variable and endogenous
variable (like a mediator variable for adoption). Therefore, for two
models, i.e., GAM-S and GAM-I we have inputted two different
12 12-correlation matrices. Final Path models and t indices are
shown in Appendices F and G. For path analysis we have tested 11
hypotheses, through path analysis for our research questions of this
research.
After conducting path analysis for the adoption of e-Gov at static
level, we nd that PA and PATU have signicant causal relations with

ADOP1 with t values of 3.98 and 7.01 respectively. Therefore, these

two factors are signicant at the 0.05 level (z score for the 0.05 level is
1.96). Even these two factors are signicant at the 0.01 level (z score
for the 0.01 level is 2.576). PFB is signicant at the 0.1 level which has
a t value of 1.76 (z score for the 0.1 level is 1.645). PATU, PU, and PS
are signicant predictors on PT (Appendix F, Fig. 1). However, since PT
is not a signicant predictor on ADOP1, subsequently PT and its
predictors are not related to adoption of EG. Apart from any issues
related to the adoption of e-Gov, separate causal relations of PT with
other exogenous variables are beyond the scope of this research. From
path analysis for adoption of EG at the interaction level, we nd that
PA, PI, PT, PIQ, and PATU have signicant causal relations with
ADOP2 at the 0.05 level. PATU, PU, and PS are signicant predictors on
PT (Appendix F, Fig. 2). The nal accepted hypotheses for the adoption
of e-Gov at the static and interaction levels are listed in Appendix H.
Numerical formulation of the Path models for the static and
interaction levels are shown in Appendix I.
6. Discussion
As was previously mentioned, e-Gov implementation passes
through different phases of evolution as the services offered mature.
Though these phases are mutually exclusive and not distinctive,
however, as the services provided by e-Gov mature, its levels of
interaction improve from the static level to the interaction,
transaction, and integration levels. Especially in terms of technology,
organizational structure, service quality, reliability, security, and
privacy, the potential characteristics of the interaction level and
static level might be signicantly different. From the end users'
perspectives, the two stages of services have signicant differences in
characteristics and functionality. ADOP1 indicates the adoption of EG
at the static stage. This is the rst stage of government service and
information presence online. Consequently, ADOP1 has a higher
mean between ADOP1 (3.673) and ADOP2 (3.2164). We found that
PA, PATU, and PFB are signicant predictors for the adoption of e-Gov
at the static phase. Therefore, our hypotheses that PA, PATU, and PFB
have positive effects on the adoption of e-Gov at the static stage are
supported.
When citizens are aware that there is an alternative source of brick
and mortar government service and information, for example e-Gov,
they might be interested in looking for this. After that, if they nd that
they have sufcient technological and psychological ability to use it
and also perceive that it provides absolute and relative advantages
they will most likely adopt it.
Since this is only the static stage of e-Gov, at this stage citizens can
only view, read, and collect government information relating to
government policies, services, rules and regulations, and different
other issues. Citizens do not adopt this stage to interact with
government agencies; rather they do that only to be informed of
government services that, instead, they could collect by physically
going to different government ofces. At this stage, availability
of resources (AOR), perceived information quality (PIQ), perceived
trust (PT), computer self-efcacy (CSE), multilingual option (MLO),
and perceived image (PI) are not important for citizens to adopt
e-Gov. These constructs basically contribute very little to the
variances explained on ADOP1. Therefore, these hypotheses are not
signicant.
As Canada is a developed country and also advanced in modern
ICT, AOR might not be an important predictor for the adoption of
e-Gov. To adopt e-Gov, resources are mostly available. Here the
internet adoption rate is around 84% (Internet World Stats, 2008).
PIQ could be a potential predictor. However, since PFB is a signicant
predictor of e-Gov adoption, when citizens perceive that using e-Gov
static webpage provides them with absolute and relative benets,
they are not concerned about PIQ. Same argument can be drawn for
CSE. From our demographic analysis, since more than 80% of the
25
respondents have at least undergraduate education and at least 80%

have online experiences for more than 3 years, CSE is not an issue for
citizens to adopt e-Gov. And, moreover, since PATU, which shared
some essence of CSE, has already contributed enough in ADOP1, CSE
is not a signicant predictor. Since adoption of the static stage of eGov is very private, not an exposed matter to any other (as there are
no communications anywhere), perceived image (PI) is expected not
to be a predictor of e-Gov at the static stage. At the static stage,
citizens are not interacting with government by any means, so they
are not disclosing any personal or nancial information in the virtual
environment. So, PT has no signicant causal effect on the adoption of
e-Gov at this stage. MLO could be an important issue for citizens
whose mother tongue is not English when they need to collect
government information from published information in web pages.
However, from demographic analysis, we found that around 83% of
the respondents have mother tongue of English/French. Since
Canadian government web pages are written in English and French,
MLO cannot be an issue for use for respondents who speak both
English and French. Respondents who have a mother tongue other
than English or French are mostly new immigrants. Since the
Canadian immigration policy is highly dependent on level of
education, we found from cross tab analysis that around 90% of the
respondents whose mother tongues are not English or French have at
least an undergraduate education level. As we expected, language is
not a barrier for them to collect information from government web
pages that are written in English/French.
Now if we look at TAM (Davis, 1986) and DOI (Rogers, 1995), we
can get support for our analysis that PATU, which captures the
integrated view of PEOU of TAM and the complexity and compatibility
of DOI, and PFB, which captures the overlapping essences of PU
(perceived usefulness) of TAM and the relative advantage of DOI, are
the critical factors for the adoption of e-Gov, a system driven by
modern ICT. Since, government simply cannot abandon traditional
government ofces after launching e-Gov and since citizens have been
concerned about the traditional service system for decades, citizens
need to be aware of the alternative outlet of government service
system that is offered in e-Gov. Therefore, PA is also an important
predictor of e-Gov adoption that is not reected in simple technology
adoption as discovered by Davis (1986). From TPB (Ajzen & Fishbein,
1980), we know that a person's behavior is determined by the
person's intention to perform the behavior and that this intention is,
in turn, a function of the person's attitude and belief toward the
behavior. Therefore, adopting e-Gov at the static stage, which we can
view as the outcome of behavioral intention, is inuenced by the
beliefs of that person about the outcome of that behavior. We can
clearly see that PATU and PFB are those beliefs of positive attitude
toward adopting e-Gov, which in turn affect intention to use and,
nally, the adoption of e-Gov at the static stage. However, also
applicable in this theory that, for a system which has multidimensional aspects (including technological, social, cultural, behavioral,
economic, organizational, and political) and which has an alternative
outlet reecting different behavioral outcomes (e.g., adopting
traditional government services), for developing beliefs of the attitude
and intention to adopt the system, perceived awareness (PA) is an
important aspect to impart that beliefs.
From statistical analysis (see Appendices F and I), we observed
that at both stages of service maturity of e-Gov, in the adoption model,
perceived trust on e-Gov (PT) is affected by the causal effects of PATU,
PU, and PS. While in our model development, we have conjectured
that PU and PS have causal effects on PT; we did not make the
hypothesis that PATU also has a causal effect on PT. Our path analysis
has provided the result. However, since PT is not a potential factor for
the adoption of e-Gov at the static stage, we do not pay attention to
the causal relationships of PATU, PU, and PS with PT in this paragraph.
Rather, in the next section, we will do that while explaining the
signicance of our ndings for the adoption of e-Gov at the interaction

26
stage where PT is also a signicant predictor of adopting e-Gov at the

interaction stage. We also conducted multiple regression analyses to
verify our path analyses and got concrete support for the results
(Appendix J).
For the adoption of the interaction phase, we found that PA, PATU,
PI, PT, and PIQ are the signicant predictors. Therefore, our
hypotheses that PA, PATU, PI, and PT have positive effects on the
adoption of e-Gov at the interaction stage are supported. When
citizens are aware that instead of going to brick and mortar
government departments for seeking service and information, they
can alternatively communicate with the respective departments
through e-mail, chat rooms, etc., which are integrated with e-Gov
websites, they develop an intention to use it. After that, if they nd
that they have the technological and psychological ability to use it and
also perceive that this electronic communication is trustworthy, they
will most likely adopt it. Since, in the interaction stage, citizens have
some communication with others through modern ICT, they feel it to
be prestigious. Citizens feel that instead of going to a physical
government ofce, online communication with government departments can enhance their social status. As a result, PI was hypothesized
to have a positive relation to the adoption of e-Gov at the interaction
stage, and our ndings support that hypothesis.
PIQ is also a signicant predictor of e-Gov adoption at the
interaction phase. However, it has a surprisingly negative relation to
ADOP2, although our primary hypothesis predicted the causal relation
to be positive. Although regression analysis (Appendix J) supports this
nding, the correlation matrix shows a positive relation between
ADOP2 and PIQ. Basically PIQ has the lowest correlation coefcient
among the other signicant predictors of ADOP2 (0.239). From our
literature review of EC, we have found that PIQ has positive relation
with the use of EC. However, we should notice and consider some
subtle issues in this respect. For EC or general adoption criteria of eGov (irrespective to service maturity level), better information quality
encourages consumers or users to use that online system. However,
the interaction stage of e-Gov has certain specic attributes. At this
stage, citizens generally do some queries to get specic information
that they do not nd on the e-Gov websites, or to provide some
information to the service providers. Therefore, if they nd that
information on the e-Gov websites is systematic, sequential, up-todate, effective, complete, and also provide sufcient links to
supplement information shortage, if any, citizens do not feel any
urge to contact or interact with government agencies through
electronic media. As a result, perceived information quality (PIQ) of
e-Gov automatically reduces the interaction of citizens with government agencies through e-Gov websites. This argument justies the
ndings of the statistical analysis, which depicts negative causeeffect
relations between ADOP2 and PIQ.
Other exogenous variablesavailability of resources (AOR), computer self-efcacy (CSE), multilingual option (MLO), and perceived
functional benets (PFB)are not important for citizens to adopt eGov. These constructs, basically contribute very little to the variances
explained on ADOP2. Therefore, these hypotheses are not signicant.
We have already explained the plausible reasons for the hypotheses
formed by the exogenous variables AOR, CSE, and MLO to be nonsignicant on the adoption of e-Gov for Canadian users in the previous
section. However, PFB was found signicant for ADOP1 while it is nonsignicant for ADOP2. The hypothesis revealing a positive relation
between PFB and ADOP2 was not proven from the statistical analysis.
This is an interesting phenomenon. As we already explained, the
interaction stage of e-Gov has certain characteristics. This stage is
generally used to seek further information related to government
services, policies, and rules and regulations; to provide government
agencies with certain personal information; and to interact to ask
some queries. Citizens typically perform these interactions through email, chat rooms, etc. In the interaction stage, government agencies
might not communicate with citizens. Therefore, in this stage, citizens
are concerned mostly with the trustworthiness of e-Gov websites, not

PFB. Contacting through e-mail is so common in this era that doing
something (e-mail) through e-Gov websites does not create any
perceptions of functional benets among citizens as the plausible
reasons of using e-Gov websites at the interaction stage (Ong & Wang,
2009). Reasonably, after PATU, PT is the second inuential predictor,
and PFB is a non-signicant cause of the adoption of e-Gov at the
interaction stage.
Based on TAM (Davis, 1986) and DOI (Rogers, 1995) we cannot
exactly explain the adoption criteria of e-Gov at the interaction stage.
The construct PATU, which captures the integrated view of PEOU of
TAM and complexity and compatibility of DOI, is the most contributing construct of EG adoption at the interaction stage. We also nd
that perceived image (PI) inuences the acceptance and use of e-Gov
at the interaction stage. This nding is supported by DOI proposed by
Moore and Benbasat (1991). Image refers to citizens' perceptions of
adopting e-Gov to present themselves as superior to others in the
society. Interaction with e-Gov systems, instead of using traditional
government ofces, reects a perception by citizens of superior status.
PI exactly captures this superior status perception. In this phase, PA is
also a signicant predictor, like ADOP1 which is an addition to TAM
and DOI specic to e-Gov. Static and interaction stages of e-Gov are
the primary stages when a country rst launches e-Gov projects
(Accenture, 2005). Since these two phases are the rst introduction to
online service of government and are the alternative of traditional
government service systems, at these two levels of service of e-Gov,
citizens' awareness is presumably an important critical factor for
attitude and behavioral intention to use those systems. However, eGov, particularly at the interaction stage, has more aspects than
simply adopting an innovation. Citizens' perceptions and expectations
differ remarkably at this stage from simply viewing government
information through static websites of e-Gov. Therefore, in this phase,
PT and PIQ are also additions to traditional TAM and DOI constructs,
which are introduced to capture the specic interaction characteristics of e-Gov services. We have already explained the reason for the
negative impact of PIQ on ADOP2.
If we look at the sources of trust that citizens have while
interacting with the government, based on Easton (1965), we see
that the trust that develops the satisfaction of citizens with
governments due to their credible performance is very signicant.
This institutional-based trust is an important component while
interacting in e-Gov web pages (Parent et al., 2005). Thomas
(1998) also supported that citizens required trust while interacting
with e-Gov, a trust that derives from institutional credibility. If
actors of e-Gov do not feel institutional trust, according to the
institutional theory, they might not follow the institutional norms
of e-Gov. Therefore, PT is a reasonable addition to TAM and DOI in
predicting the adoption behavior of e-Gov at the interaction stage,
which is not reected in simple technology adoption as discovered
by Davis (1986). From TPB (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980), we can clearly
see that PATU, PT, and PIQ are beliefs of attitude toward adopting eGov, which in turn affect intention to use and, nally, the adoption
of e-Gov at the interaction stage. However, also related to this
theory is that for a system which has multidimensional aspects
(including technological, social, cultural, behavioral, economic,
organizational, and political) and which has alternative outlets
reecting different behavioral outcomes (e.g., adopting traditional
government services), PA and PI are important aspects for
developing beliefs of attitude and intention of adopting this
modern ICT-intense system.
From Appendix F we can see that at both stages of service
maturity of e-Gov, in adoption modelperceived trust on e-Gov
(PT)is affected by the causal effects of PATU, PU, and PS. We nd
that PS is the strongest predictor of PT. In all phases of e-Gov,
citizens have trust in e-Gov if they perceive that the e-Gov websites
ensure security of nancial and personal information. Although we

did not conjecture any relation between PATU and PT in our

hypothesis development process, we nd a strong causal relation of
PATU on PT. The perceived technological and psychological ability
to use e-Gov increases trust in e-Gov. This relation is suggested by
path analysis for better tness of the model and we nd several
logical aspects for this relation. Warkentin et al. (2002) and Parent
et al. (2005) both discovered that an important component of trust
is characteristic and process-based. If citizens perceive that they are
sufciently capable of handling online systems, their characteristic
and process-based trust also increase (Warkentin et al., 2002). In
light of TPB, we also see that if a user believes that he/she is capable
of using an online system, he/she feels attitude and intention to use
that system, which implies his/her development of characteristicbased trust. Therefore, the causal relation of PATU with PT has a
strong theoretical base. We conjectured that perceived uncertainty
(PU) has a negative relation to PT; however, surprisingly, we nd
that PU has a positive relation to PT (loading factor 0.25, signicant
at the 0.01 level). That is, the perception of uncertainty basically
increases the perception of trust in EG. Apparently, this result is
confusing. Therefore, we looked at the result from different
statistical and conceptual perspectives. The correlation matrix
shows that PU has a very weak positive correlation with PT
(0.109). PU has weak negative correlations with PATU and PS. We
have also done regression analysis of PU, PS, and PATU (independent variables) with PT (dependent variable) (Appendix J). We see
that all these variables are signicant positive predictors of PT.
However, in stepwise regression, while only PU is inputted, we see
that PU has a negative non-signicant effect on PT. While inputting
PU, PS, and PATUeither in path analysis or in regression analysis
PU has the least positive effect on PT with very weak correlation
with PT. This simply signies that, while measuring the combined
effect of PATU, PU, and PS, PU has a positive effect on PT. In our
sample, more than 80% of the respondents are at least undergraduates; have had online experience for more than three years;
and are working in the government, private services, and other
services, or are university students. This demographic property of
the respondents simply indicates that they are very familiar,
comfortable, and experienced with online behavior. More than
84% of the citizens in Canada have internet experience. Therefore,
uncertainty in virtual environment is a known psychological
phenomenon for them. In addition, basically, Canadian citizens
enjoy this uncertain virtual environment and perceive it prestigious
for them. (We nd that PI is signicant for e-Gov adoption at the
interaction stage.) When users of e-Gov believe that they have
sufcient ability to handle this uncertain environment of e-Gov,
and security in e-Gov is ensured by the government, the virtual
environment of e-Gov does not hamper their trust in e-Gov. Rather,
in the presence of PATU and PS, they enjoy the apparently uncertain
environment of e-Gov, and the proper virtual characteristics of
online system positively affect their perceived trustworthiness
behavior. Consequently, PU has a positive relation with PT;
however, this condition is applicable in the combined presence of
PATU and PS.
Therefore, nally, we propose that 1) Attitude to use (measured
by PA), 2) Ability to use (measured by PATU), and 3) Adherence
(Reasoning) to use (measured by PFB) are the critical factors for the
adoption of e-Gov at the static stage (GAM-S). Furthermore, we also
nd that 1) Attitude to use (measured by PA), 2) Ability to use
(measured by PATU), 3) Assurance to use (measured by PT and PIQ),
and 4) Adherence (Reasoning) to use (measured by PI) are the
critical factors for the adoption of e-Gov at the interaction stage
(GAM-I).
Finally, we can conclude that e-Gov functional characteristics are
not only different at different levels of service maturity, but adoption
factors at different levels of service maturity are also potentially
different. From static to interaction phase, citizens perceive different
27
factors to be important for creating the behavioral attitude and

intention to accept the e-Gov system and to use it. Static and
interaction levels especially offer different modes of service with
different levels of association of technology. As a result, adoption
criteria for different stages by citizens have signicant implications for
the policy-makers.
7. Implications and recommendations
To accomplish the objectives, this research explained the related
concepts and theories and developed a research framework grounded
on a strong theoretical and literature review background. After
conducting an empirical study in Ontario, Canada, we have performed
rigorous statistical analysis to validate our models of e-Gov adoption
at different levels of service maturity. It is clearly observed from the
ndings that the viewpoint of the prime stakeholder, i.e., citizens, is
crucial in selecting the critical factors for the adoption model and also
identifying the effect of different levels of service maturity in the
critical factors of adoption. The contextual setting, i.e., the level of
service maturity of respective e-Gov websites, is important for
exploring critical factors. Academicians, practitioners, researchers,
and policy-makers can be beneted from this research and from
successive ndings.
Without addressing the requirements and the fundamental
demands of citizens to accept an e-Gov system, e-Gov will fail to
replace the traditional brick and mortar government system. This
paper has validated two separate adoption models GAM-S and GAM-I
which can be deeply investigated, addressed, and used for developing
and designing the citizen-centric e-Gov framework. No researchers
have attempted to address and identify the adoption framework for eGov at different levels of service maturity, which is the primary source
of success for both government agencies and citizens (Carter &
Blanger, 2005). While implementing e-Gov and setting strategic
initiatives to develop e-Gov services by incorporating different
functions, public administrators and policy-makers should understand that perceived awareness (PA) and perceived ability to use
(PATU) are the two potential contributors for adopting e-Gov.
Therefore, all of the countries, particularly developing countries,
should be very conscious to make citizens, especially those who are
living in rural areas, aware and familiar with e-Gov. Not attending
to these issues is likely to create a severe digital divide, thereby
jeopardizing the mission of e-Gov.
Taking insufcient measures to familiarize under-privileged
populations with ICT, different countries, particularly developing
countries, are implementing e-Gov projects frequently; this is a
classic mistake of policy-makers. Before implementing e-Gov,
different programs should be initiated to make less educated
citizens aware, familiar with, and capable of using e-Gov. It is
worthy to note here that any e-Gov readiness index prepared by
United Nations is sometimes very misleading since these are
prepared based on average country readiness (which do not reect
rural populations' readiness).
Another potential implication of this study for the policy-makers
who are associated with e-Gov development stages is that if
information quality is very good, interaction stage does not bear
potential value to the users. They can simply use static stage.
Therefore, designers of e-Gov should be keen in organizing and
formatting information in the e-Gov website. Since the e-Gov
environment is virtual, unlike traditional government services, in eGov, public administrators should be very careful in developing
institutional-based trust, characteristics-based trust, and processbased trust among citizens. For many potential customers, this
raises real concerns about the trustworthiness of the service
providers and guarantees of satisfaction. If e-Gov fails to develop
perception of trust among citizens, it will not attain its full
potential. Perceived functional benet (PFB) is a signicant factor

28
for citizens to adopt it at the static stage. Policy-makers may think

to provide some incentives for adopting e-Gov services instead of
paper-base government services. Policy-makers can learn it from
private e-Commerce (EC) organizations. Citizens still believe that
using e-Gov might upgrade their social status. Governments can
promote this concept among unprivileged populations to motivate
them to adopt it. Policy-makers of any government, while
developing e-Gov, should clearly understand that upgrading eGov services from the static to the interaction stage is not only
different from their perspective, but that the requirements of
citizens are also different for different levels of service of e-Gov.
Therefore, while upgrading service patterns, functions, and features
of e-Gov, citizens' requirements should be considered and incorporated. In this way, the static stage of e-Gov in any country has
been adopted by citizens signicantly. From this experience,
governments have been encouraged to develop further interaction
stage. But this stage can be abruptly failed if citizens' different
perceptions for this stage are not properly reected while designing
this next service maturity stage.
From 2005, around 175 national governments were using the
internet to provide government information and services to their
stakeholders. A survey of chief administrative ofcers at government agencies in the US reveals that 74.2% of government agencies
have a website, but that 90.5% of them have never conducted a
survey to capture the users' requirements (ICMA, 2002).Therefore,
based on the ndings from this research about citizens' requirements, we recommend some essential points to service providers of
Canadian e-Gov as well as other governments and policy-makers of
e-Gov:
1. Since functional characteristics and technological sophistication
of different levels of service offeringssuch as static and
interactionare quite different, the government should understand that the requirements of citizens for using those different
service levels are different. Therefore, governments can focus on
xing their e-Gov and fullling citizens' needs separately, based
on service patterns.
2. Citizens perceive their technological and psychological ability as
one of the most important factors to develop beliefs, attitude,
intention, and nal acceptance of e-Gov with recurring use at any
level of service patterns, functions, and maturity. Since, this
factor is always a signicant issue for citizens in making a
decision as to whether they will use e-Gov or not, the
government should pay close attention to this issue and focus
on the ancillary factors to enhance citizens' technological and
psychological capability to use online government service. Online
service should be exible, easy to navigate and download, and
fully available. At the same time, citizens should get technological tips regarding the handling of technological interfaces
associated with e-Gov and the mental motivation to use the
system.
3. Government departments/agencies should focus on how they can
make citizens familiar with their online presence. Citizens have
asserted that awareness is an important aspect of using e-Gov
systems at both phases. In addition, every year a signicant
number of immigrants come to Canada, particularly Ontario. They
should be made aware that e-Gov is an alternative for obtaining
government services.
4. Since the static presence of government services is the initial and
premature stage, at this period citizens should be made aware of
the benets of using this system. In this way, citizens would
increase their usage of e-Gov and government could signicantly
decrease their cost for physical ofce maintenance.
5. In the interaction stage, citizens are concerned about the
trustworthiness of the system. At this stage, citizens communicate or contact government agencies to provide personal
information or to seek information. However, they might be

afraid whether their information will reach and be stored in the
proper location on time. To develop the trust of citizens,
governments can look to create instant acknowledgement
procedures, so that users would be assured that the system is
effective.
6. To develop citizens' trust in e-Gov systems, a virtual environment that is sometimes termed as uncertain is not a problem.
Citizens do not perceive uncertainty as having a negative impact
on trust development in e-Gov. However, their ability to use eGov and security are important contributors in developing trust
in e-Gov.
7. Security is a vital issue to develop trust on e-Gov. So, there should
be a denite tradeoff between the complexity of the security and
the user-friendliness of the software. In our survey, several
respondents expressed their concern about the security policy of
governments. Governments should continuously update their
security system. However, the most important thing in this aspect
is to explicitly publish their security, safety, and privacy policies on
the web pages, so that users can be completely assured that in any
devastating situation the government has the nal responsibility to
resolve the problem.
8. For general adoption of e-Gov, other than resolving any specic
problems, citizens do not perceive customer service as an
important aspect for them. Therefore, in the virtual environment,
if e-Gov service providers can develop the e-Gov systems in such a
way that they will automatically enhance user ability to use the
system, they do not need to pay as much attention to providing
regular customer service.
8. Limitations and future research directions

This research is at an exploratory level as not enough empirically
supported research is available. So the limitations of exploratory
research are applicable in this study. We have also chosen respondents of this empirical study considering, to some degree, the
convenience of the sampling process. Though Ontario, Canada is a
good place to study the adoption behavior, the generalization of this
study and proper validity of the theory can only be achieved if this
study can be replicated in several other countries. We have developed
our theoretical framework considering the general aspect. As a result,
we have predicted some exogenous variables, which might not be
signicant for developed countries. However, these might have
enormous value for developing countries. They include availability
of resources (AOR) and computer self-efcacy (CSE). Therefore, for
generalizing the model, this study should be conducted in some
developing countries.
Citizens are the prime users of e-Gov. However, business
organizations are also an important stakeholder of e-Gov. We did
not include business organizations in our study, because individual
behavior and organizational behavior should be analyzed considering different aspects. Therefore, future research could separately
explore the adoption criteria of business organizations for different
levels of service maturity. The device which is used to gain access to
the internet might be wired (computers as end user devices) or
wireless (mobile phones or computers connecting via wireless
ports). Mobile applications are beginning to be implemented in eGov systems. In this interaction technology, the device is a mobile
phone or any handheld mobile device. Therefore, mobile-government (m-government) is a dynamic sub-classication of e-Gov.
This is a new trend in e-Gov which is now widely used by
consumers, especially in European and Asian countries. However, it
is not clear whether this new trend can explicitly affect our study
ndings. This new trend of e-Gov should be investigated
thoroughly.

29
Appendix A. Measuring items for exogenous/explanatory variables
Construct
Items
Source
Perceived awareness
(PA)
1. I am aware of e-Government websites of Canada.

2. I know the benets of using e-Government websites.
3. I have gone through educational/training programs about the overall
features of e-Government websites.
4. I have come across government campaigns/advertisements
for using e-Government websites of Canada.
5. I have adequate computer technology at home.
6. I have adequate computer technology at workplace/institution.
4. I always have access to a high-speed internet connection at home.
8. I always have access to a high-speed internet connection at
workplace/institution.
9. The internet connection I use is costly.
10. I have qualications to use and operate a computer.
11. I have qualications to use and operate the internet.
12. I have skills in using e-Government websites.
13. I am condent of using e-Government websites.
14. The website ts well with the way that I like to
gather information.
15. The website is appropriate for my needs.
16. I like virtual interaction with websites better
than personal interaction with physical ofces.
17. The website ts well with the way that I like to interact.
18. Using the website would t into my lifestyle.
19. People/business organizations who use e-Government websites
to receive government service have a high prole.
20. People/business organizations who use e-Government websites to
receive government service have more prestige than those who do not.
21. Interacting with e-Government websites to receive government
service enhances a person's/business organization's social status.
22. Learning to interact with the website is easy for me.
23. The website is exible to interact with.
24. It is easy to navigate the website.
25. Interactions with the website are clear and understandable.
26. I can easily do my tasks while using the website.
27. It is easy to download required documents from the website.
28. Information provided at the website is up-to-date.
29. Information provided at the website is easy to understand.
30. The website provides all relevant information necessary to fulll my needs.
31. The website provides accurate information about the
services it provides.
32. The website provides information sequentially and systematically.
33. The website clearly provides the policies of the
government related to the functions of the site.
34. The website provides sources of related additional information.
35. The website provides necessary links to other websites.
36. Availability of native language (mother tongue) option on
the website could help to perform tasks better.
37. Availability of native language (mother tongue) option on
the website could make performing tasks easier.
38. Without getting the native language option (mother tongue),
I cannot perform my tasks on the website.
39. It is important to use the website from anywhere convenient for me.
40. It is important to use the website at any time convenient for me.
41. Using the website is more costly in terms of the service it provides
than using physical government ofce.
42. The website gives a wider choice of interactions with different functions
compared to interactions with the physical government ofce.
43. The website helps accomplish tasks more quickly.
44. It does not take too much time to seek service from the website, as
compared to traditional government service.
45. Using the website enhances overall efciency.
46. Using the website makes it easier to perform tasks.
47. Using the website improves the quality of decision-making.
48. Interaction with the website is unmanageable
due to the absence of direct personnel.
49. Interaction in the virtual environment is uncomfortable.
50. Outcome from the interaction with the website is
uncertain due to the absence of direct personnel.
51. The website is safe to interact with for nancial purposes.
52. The website has adequate security features.
53. The website protects information about my credit card.
54. The security policy at the website is clearly stated.
AGIMO (2003), Murru (2003), Anthopoulos et al. (2007),

Shareef et al. (2009), authors self-developed
Availability of
resources (AOR)
Computer-self
efcacy (CSE)
Perceived
compatibility (PC)
Perceived image (PI)
Perceived ability
to use (PATU)
Perceived information
quality (PIQ)
Multilingual option
(MLO)
Perceived functional
benet (PFB)
Perceived
uncertainty (PU)
Perceived security
(PS)
Murru (2003), authors self-developed
Wang (2002), AGIMO (2003), Tung and Rieck (2005),

Anthopoulos et al. (2007), Kumar et al. (2007),
authors self-developed
Carter and Blanger (2005), Chen and Thurmaier (2005),
Anthopoulos et al. (2007), Shareef et al. (2007),
Carter and Blanger (2005), Shareef et al. (2007),

Wang (2002), AGIMO (2003), Murru (2003),

Wolnbarger and Gilly (2003), Carter and Blanger (2005),
Parasuraman et al. (2005), Wangpipatwong et al. (2005),
Collier and Bienstock (2006), Kumar et al. (2007),
Loiacono et al. (2002), Accenture (2003), AGIMO (2003),
Murru (2003), Chen and Thurmaier (2005),
Parasuraman et al. (2005), Tung and Rieck (2005),
Wangpipatwong et al. (2005), Collier and Bienstock (2006),
Fassnacht and Koese (2006), authors self-developed
Murru (2003), authors self-developed
Yoo and Donthu (2001), Devaraj et al. (2002), Janda et al.

(2002), Wang (2002), Wolnbarger and Gilly (2003),
Carter and Blanger (2005),
Chen and Thurmaier (2005), Parasuraman et al. (2005),
Tung and Rieck, 2005; Wangpipatwong et al. (2005),
Collier and Bienstock (2006),
Fassnacht and Koese (2006), Kumar et al. (2007),
AGIMO (2003), Kumar et al. (2007), Shareef et al. (2007),


(2002), AGIMO (2003), Murru (2003), Wolnbarger and
Gilly (2003), Chen and Thurmaier (2005), Parasuraman et al.
(2005), Wangpipatwong et al. (2005), Collier and
Bienstock (2006), Anthopoulos et al. (2007), Kumar et al.
(2007), Shareef et al. (2007), authors self-developed
(continued on next page)

30
Appendix
(continued)
A (continued)
Construct
Items
Source
Perceived privacy
(PP)
55. I would hesitate to provide information to the website.

56. The website protects my disclosed information.
57. The website does not share my personal information with other sites.
Perceived trust
(PT)
58. The website is, overall, reliable.

59. What I do through this website is guaranteed.
60. The website is more reliable than physical government ofces.
61. The government takes full responsibility for any type of insecurity
during interaction/transaction at the website.
62. Legal and technological policies of the site adequately protect
me from problems on the internet.
63. The website remembers/recognizes me as a valuable customer.
64. The customer service of the website addresses my specic needs.
65. The website takes prompt action when I encounter problems
performing my tasks.
66. Online customer service is available at all times.
67. The customer service of the website responds very quickly.

(2002), AGIMO (2003), Wolnbarger
and Gilly (2003), Chen and Thurmaier (2005),
Parasuraman et al. (2005), Collier and Bienstock
(2006), Kumar et al. (2007), Shareef et al. (2007),
Loiacono et al. (2002), Balasubramanian et al. (2003),
Wangpipatwong et al. (2005), Collier and Bienstock
(2006), Fassnacht and Koese (2006), Kumar et al.
(2007), Shareef et al. (2009), authors self-developed
Perceived service
response (PSR)
Janda et al. (2002), Wolnbarger and Gilly (2003),

Parasuraman et al. (2005), Wangpipatwong et al.
(2005), Collier and Bienstock (2006), Kumar et al.
(2007), authors self-developed
Appendix B. Measuring items for endogenous/dependent variables
Construct
Items
Source
Adoption 1
68. To view/search information and download forms, I use e-Government websites.

69. To view/search information and download forms, I like to use e-Government websites in future.
70. To view/search information and download forms, I recommend that my friends/relatives
use e-Government websites.
71. To contact/make query/e-mail, I use e-Government websites.
72. To contact/make query/e-mail, I like to use e-Government websites in future.
73. To contact/make query/e-mail, I recommend that my friends/relatives use e-Government websites.
Turner and Desloges (2002), AGIMO (2003),

Murru (2003), Sakowicz (2007), Shareef et al. (2009),
Adoption 2
Appendix C. EG Adoption Model (GAM)
Attitude to Use
Perceived Compatibility
Perceived Awareness
Availability of
Resources
Computer-Self Efficacy
Ability to Use
Perceived Ability to Use
Multilingual Option
E-Government
Adoption
Assurance to Use
Perceived Uncertainty
Perceived Security
Perceived Information
Quality
Perceived Trust
Perceived Privacy
Adherence to Use
Perceived Functional
Benefit
Perceived Image
Adaptability to Use
Perceived Service
Response

31
Appendix D. Model t indices of latent constructs
Variable RMSEA Recommended RMSEA

PT
PIQ
PFB
0.00
0.00
0.048
PATU
0.080
AOR
PI
PA
MLO
CSE
PU
PS
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.059
ADOP1
ADOP2
0.00
0.00
CFI
Recommended CFI
NFI
Recommended NFI
GFI
Recommended GFI
Comment
Fitted
1.00 0.90 (Churchill, 1979;
0.94 0.90 (Churchill, 1979;
b0.06 (Browne and Cudeck, 1.00 0.90 (Churchill, 1979;
Segars and Grover, 1993; Saturated model. Perfect t

Segars and Grover, 1993;
Segars and Grover, 1993;
1993, Hu and Bentler,
1.00 Chau, 1997; Kline, 2005) 1.00 Chau, 1997; Kline, 2005) 1.00 Chau, 1997; Kline, 2005) Added 1 error covariance
1999; Kline, 2005)
between PFB6 and PFB7
0.99
0.99
0.97
Added error covariance between
PC3 and PC4; PATU3 and PATU4,
PC4 and PC5, PATU4 and PC5,
and PC5 and PC3
Saturated model. Perfect t
No CFA
No CFA

0.99
0.99
0.98
Added error covariance between
PP3 and PS4; PS1 and PS4;
PP2 and PS3
Appendix E. Revised hypotheses and conceptual denitions of the exogenous variables based on EFA and CFA
Exogenous variable
Conceptual denition
Hypothesis
Measuring items
Perceived awareness
(PA)
Gaining and acquiring knowledge, education, and consciousness

as much as users perceive to be sufcient to learn the characteristics
of a system, use it with skill, and realize its strategic functionality
and competitive advantages and disadvantages
The availability and freedom of using electricity,
telephones, computers, internet, and ICT with competitive
features like access, speed, and cost
The judgment of users technological capability to use,
interact, and transact in an EG system based on prior knowledge,
experience, and skill as they perceive it is required to do so
The degree to which a user of EG perceives his/her competence
in and comfortable ability for using an EG system technologically,
organizationally, and psychologically that match with individual's
values, social needs, and overall attitudes
Inclusion of different prime languages in EG websites to facilitate
stakeholders in viewing, selecting, downloading, interacting,
and transacting with their native language in the absence of
human interaction
Information quality covers the extent to which complete,
accurate, organized, understandable, up-to-date, and timely
information is provided in the website for the customers to
obtain information about any of their intended objectives
The degree to which users of EG have attitudinal condence for
reliability, credibility, safety, and integrity of EG from the technical,
organizational, social, and political standpoints and also from the
effective, efcient, prompt, and sympathetic customer service response
The degree to which users of EG perceive risk in transactions due
to uncontrollable and unknown situations in the virtual
environment associated with EG
The degree to which users of EG perceive that it is safe to disclose
personal and nancial information during interaction and
transaction with websites, and users are also assured that EG systems
do not disclose or share their information with others or misuse
for any purpose
The degree to which citizens perceive the overall functional benets,
both absolute and relativeincluding cost, time, efciency, and
effectiveness of using an EG systeminstead of using traditional
government physical ofce functions.
The degree to which citizens behaviorally and culturally perceive
that adoption of EG enhances and improves social status and prestige
Perceived awareness (PA) has a positive

relation with Adoption of EG
PA1, PA2, PA4
Availability of resources (AOR) has a

positive relation with Adoption of EG
AOR1, AOR2, AOR4
Computer-self efcacy (CSE) has a

CSE1
Perceived ability to use (PATU) has a

PATU3, PATU4, PATU5,

PC3, PC4, PC5, PIQ3
Multilingual option (MLO) has a positive

MLO1
Perceived information quality (PIQ) has

a positive relation with Adoption of EG
PIQ1, PIQ4, PIQ5
Perceived trust (PT) has a positive

PT2, PT3, PT4, PT5, PSR1,

PSR2, PSR3, PSR4, PSR5
Perceived uncertainty (PU) has a negative

relation with Trust of EG
PU1, PU2, PU3
Perceived security (PS) has a positive

relation with Trust of EG
PS1, PS2, PS3, PS4,

PP2, PP3
Perceived functional benet (PFB) has a

PFB5, PFB6, PFB7, PFB8
Perceived image (PI) has a positive relation

with Adoption of EG
PI1, PI2, PI3
Availability of resources
(AOR)
Computer-self efcacy
(CSE)
Perceived ability to use
(PATU)
Multilingual option
(MLO)
Perceived information
quality (PIQ)
Perceived trust (PT)
Perceived uncertainty
(PU)
Perceived security
(PS)
Perceived functional
benet (PFB)

32
Appendix F. Path models
Fig. 1. Adoption Model of EG at Static Level (GAM-S).
Fig. 2. Adoption Model of EG at Interaction Level (GAM-I).
Appendix G. Fit measures from path analyses
Fit measures
Chi-square (2)
Degree of Freedom
2/Degree of freedom (DF)
Root mean square residual (RMR)
Comparative t index (CFI)
Goodness of t index (GFI)
Adjusted goodness of t index (AGFI)
RMSEA
Normed t index (NFI)
Recommended values
p 0.05
3.0
0.05
0.90
0.90
0.80
b 0.06
0.90
Adoption model
Adoption 1
Adoption 2
6.68 (0.15358)
4
1.68
0.026
0.99
0.99
0.95
0.054
0.98
13.66 (0.01794)
5
2.774
0.025
0.99
0.99
0.90
0.086
0.98

33
Appendix H. Final validated hypotheses from path analysis
Name of exogenous variable
Model
Endogenous variable
Accepted hypothesis from path analysis
Perceived awareness (PA)

Perceived ability to use (PATU)
Perceived functional benet (PFB)
Perceived uncertainty (PU)
Perceived security (PS)
Perceived awareness (PA)
Perceived trust (PT)
Perceived information quality (PIQ)
Perceived uncertainty (PU)
Perceived security (PS)
Adoption of EG
at static level
Adoption (ADOP1)
Perceived awareness (PA) has a positive relation with Adoption of EG at static level
Perceived ability to use (PATU) has a positive relation with Adoption of EG at static level
Perceived functional benet (PFB) has a positive relation with Adoption of EG at static level
Perceived uncertainty (PU) has a positive relation with Trust in EG at static level
Perceived security (PS) has a positive relation with Trust in EG at static level
Perceived ability to use (PATU) has a positive relation with Trust in EG at static level
Perceived awareness (PA) has a positive relation with Adoption of EG at interaction level
Perceived trust (PT) has a positive relation with Adoption of EG at interaction level
Perceived ability to use (PATU) has a positive relation with Adoption of EG at interaction level
Perceived information quality (PIQ) has a negative relation with Adoption of EG at interaction level
Perceived image (PI) of using EG has a positive relation with Adoption of EG at interaction level
Perceived uncertainty (PU) has a positive relation with Trust in EG at interaction level
Perceived security (PS) has a positive relation with Trust in EG at interaction level
Perceived ability to use (PATU) has a positive relation with Trust in EG at interaction level
PT
Adoption of EG at
Interaction Level
Adoption (ADOP2)
PT
Appendix I. Numerical formation of Adoption of EG
ADOP2 regression summary (GAM-I).

Model summary
Static level (GAM-S).

ADOP1 = 0.23 PA + 0.41 PATU
(0.059)
3.98
2
R = 0.29
PT = 0.38 PATU + 0.25 PU + 0.43 PS
(0.055)
(0.050)
6.93
5.12
R2 = 0.46
(0.059)
7.01
Errorvar. = 0.71
(0.065)
10.82
(0.053)
8.17
Errorvar. = 0.54
(0.050)
10.82
Model
R2
Adjusted R2
Std. error of the estimate
0.590a
0.348
0.332
0.91787
Predictors: (Constant), PIQ, PI, PA, PT, PATU.
ADOP2 regression coefcients.

Coefcientsa
Model
Interaction level (GAM-I).

ADOP2 = 0.28 PT + 0.20 PA + 0.18 PI + 0.34 PATU
0.23 PIQ
(0.063)
(0.058)
(0.057)
(0.075)
(0.071)
4.41
3.46
3.12
4.57
3.16
2
R = 0.35
PT = 0.38 PATU + 0.25 PU + 0.43 PS
(0.055)
(0.050)
(0.053)
6.91
5.10
8.14
R2 = 0.46
Errorvar. = 0.65
1
(0.061)
10.77
Errorvar. = 0.54
(0.050)
10.77
(Constant)
PA
PATU
PI
PT
PIQ
Unstandardized
coefcients
Standardized
coefcients
Std. error
Beta
0.338
0.297
0.469
0.193
0.439
0.333
0.423
0.091
0.108
0.067
0.109
0.114
0.200
0.343
0.175
0.278
0.225
Sig.
0.798
3.268
4.326
2.857
4.015
2.925
0.426
0.001
0.000
0.005
0.000
0.004
Dependent variable: ADOP2.
Appendix J. Regression result
PT regression summary.
Model summary
ADOP1 regression summary (GAM-S).
Model
R2
Adjusted R2
Std. error of
the estimate
0.681a
0.464
0.455
0.53727
Model summary
Model
R2
0.552
0.304
Adjusted R2
0.295
Std. error of the estimate

a
Predictors: (Constant), PU, PS, PATU.
0.8304
Predictors: (Constant), PATU, PA, PFB.
PT regression coefcients.
ADOP1 regression coefcients.

Coefcients
Model
Coefcientsa
(Constant)
PA
PFB
PATU
Unstandardized
Coefcients
Standardized Coefcients
Std. error
Beta
0.341
0.291
0.174
0.425
0.384
0.082
0.101
0.087
0.219
0.122
0.348
Dependent variable: ADOP1.
0.889
3.548
1.734
4.877
Model
Sig.
0.375
0.000
0.084
0.000
a
(Constant)
PATU
PS
PU
Unstandardized
coefcients
Standardized
coefcients
Std. error
Beta
0.058
0.329
0.384
0.173
0.242
0.052
0.051
0.037
0.380
0.433
0.254
Dependent variable: PT.
Sig.
0.239
6.379
7.514
4.700
0.812
0.000
0.000
0.000

34
References
Accenture (2003). E-government leadership: Realizing the vision. The Government
Executive Series. E-Government Report.
Accenture (2005). Leadership in customer service: New expectations, new experiences.
E-Government Report.
AGIMO (Australian Government Information Management Ofce) (2003). E-government
benets study: Demand for E-government. Department of Finance and Administration,
Australian Government. .
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 50(2), 179221.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc..
Al-Adawi, Z., Yousafzai, S., & Pallister, J. (2005). Conceptual model of citizen adoption of
e-government. The Second International Conference on Innovations in Information
Technology (IIT'05) (pp. 110).
Al-Mashari, M. (2007). A benchmarking study of experiences with electronic-government.
Benchmarking: An International Journal, 14(2), 172185.
Al-Shehry, A., Rogerson, S., Fairweather, N. B., & Prior, M. (2006, Sept. 11). The motivations for
change towards e-government adoption: Case studies from Saudi Arabia. eGovernment
Workshop 06 (eGOV06), London: Brunel University.
Andersen, K. V., & Henriksen, H. Z. (2006). E-government maturity models: Extension of
the Layne and Lee model. Government Information Quarterly, 23(2), 236248.
Angst, C. M., & Agarwal, R. (2009). adoption of electronic health records in the presence
of privacy concerns: The elaboration likelihood model and individual persuasion.
MIS Quarterly, 33(2), 339370.
Anthopoulos, L. G., Siozos, P., & Tsoukalas, L. A. (2007). Applying Participatory Design
and Collaboration in Digital Public Services for Discovering and Re-designing
E-government Services. Government Information Quarterly, 24(2), 353376.
Babakus, E., & Mangold, W. G. (1992). Adapting the SERVQUAL scale to hospital services:
An empirical investigation. Health Services Research, 26(6), 767786.
Balasubramanian, S., Konana, P., & Menon, N. M. (2003,Julyy). Customer satisfaction
in virtual environments: A study of online investing. Management Science, 7, 871889.
Blanger, F., & Carter, L. (2005). Trust and risk in e-government adoption. Proceedings of
the 11th Americas Conference on Information Systems, Omaha, NE, USA, 1954-1964.
Blanger, F., Hiller, J., & Smith, W. (2002). Trustworthiness in electronic commerce: The
role of privacy, security, and site attributes. Journal of Strategic Information Systems,
11, 245270.
Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-conrmation model. MIS Quarterly, 25(3), 351370.
Brown, M., & Muchira, R. (2004). Investigating the relationship between internet privacy
concerns and online purchase behavior. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 5(1),
6270.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit, Testing
Structural Equation Models. Chapter 6 Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y., & Philips, L. W. (1991). Assessing construct validity in organizational
research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 421458.
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959, Marchh). Convergent and discriminant validation
by the multitraitmultimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81105.
Cardin, L., Holmes, B. J., Leganza, G., Hanson, J., & McEnroe, W. (2006). Who are Canada's
e-government consumers? Canadian Demographics, Tech Attitudes, and Purchasing
Power, Forrester Research.
Carter, L., & Blanger, F. (2004). Citizen adoption of electronic government initiatives.
Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 5
(pp. 50119c).
Carter, L., & Blanger, F. (2005). The utilization of e-government services: Citizen trust,
innovation and acceptance factors. Information Systems Journal, 15, 525.
Chandler, S., & Emanuels, S. (2002). Transformation not automation. Proceedings of 2nd
European Conference on E-government (pp. 91102). UK: St Catherine's College
Oxford.
Chau, P. Y. K. (1997). Reexamining a model for evaluating information center success:
Using a structural equation modeling approach. Decision Sciences, 28(2), 309334.
Chen, Y. -C., & Thurmaier, K. (2005). Government-to-citizen electronic services:
Understanding and driving adoption of online transactions. The Association for
Public Policy & Management (APPAM) conference, Washington, D.C., November 36.
Churchill, G. A. (1979). A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing
Constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16(February), 6473.
Collier, J. E., & Bienstock, C. C. (2006). Measuring service quality in e-retailing. Journal of
Service Research, 8(3), 260275.
Converse, J. M., & Presser, S. (1986). Survey questions: Handcrafting the standardized
questionnaire. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Cox, D. F., & Rich, S. U. (1964). Perceived risk and consumer decision makingThe case
of telephone shopping. Journal of Marketing Research, 1(4), 3239.
Czepiel, J. A., Solomon, M. R., Surprenant, C., & Gutman, E. G. (1985). Service encounters:
An overview. In J. A. Czepiel, M. R. Solomon, & C. F. Surprenant (Eds.), The service
encounter (pp. 243254). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Damodaran, L., Nicholls, J., & Henney, A. (2005). The contribution of sociotechnical
systems thinking to the effective adoption of e-government and the enhancement
of democracy. The Electronic Journal of e-Government, 3(1), 112.
Davis, F. D. (1986). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new enduser information systems: Theory and results, doctoral dissertation. Sloan School of
Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer
technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8),
9821003.
DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (1992). Information systems success: The quest for the
dependent variable. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 6095.
DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean Model of information
systems success: A ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems,
19(4), 930.
Devaraj, S., Fan, M., & Kohli, R. (2002). Antecedents of B2C Channel Satisfaction and
Preference: Validating E-commerce Metrics. Information Systems Research, 13(3),
316333.
Dorner, D. G. (2009). Public sector readiness for digital preservation in New Zealand: The
rate of adoption of an innovation in records management practices. Government
Information Quarterly, 26(2), 341348.
Easton, D. (1965). A systems analysis of political life. New York: Wiley.
Ebrahim, Z., & Irani, Z. (2005). E-government adoption: Architecture and barriers. Business
Process Management Journal, 11(5), 589611.
Eggers, W. D. (2004). Boosting e-government adoption. Deloitte research-public sector,
Canada, FTA Annual Conference.
Evans, D., & Yen, D. C. (2006). E-Government: Evolving relationship of citizens and
government, domestic, and international development. Government Information
Quarterly, 23(2), 207235.
Fang, Z. (2002). E-Government in digital era: Concept, practice and development.
International Journal of the Computer, The Internet, and Information, 20, 193213.
Fassnacht, M., & Koese, I. (2006). Quality of Electronic Services: Conceptualizing and
Testing a Hierarchical Model. Journal of Service Research, 9(1), 1937.
Foo, S., Hui, S. C., Leong, P. C., & Liu, S. (2000). An integrated help desk support for
customer services over the world wide webA case study. Computers in Industry,
41(2), 129145.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 3950.
Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: An
integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27, 5190.
Gilbert, D., Balestrini, P., & Littleboy, D. (2004). Barriers and benets in the adoption of
e-government. The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 14(4), 286301.
Gil-Garcia, J. R., & Martinez-Moyano, I. J. (2007). Understanding the evolution of
e-government: The inuence of systems of rules on public sector dynamics.
Government Information Quarterly, 24(2), 266290.
Gottschalk, P. (2009). Maturity levels for interoperability in digital government. Government
Grnroos, C. (1984). A service quality model and its marketing implications. European
Journal of Marketing, 18(4), 3644.
Gummerus, J., Liljander, V., Pura, M., & van Riel, A. (2004). Customer loyalty to contentbased websites: The case of an online health-care service. Journal of Services Marketing,
18(3), 175186.
Heeks, R. B., & Bailur, S. (2007). Analyzing e-government research: Perspectives,
philosophies, theories, methods, and practice. Government Information Quarterly,
24(2), 243265.
Holden, S. H., Norris, D. F., & Fletcher, P. D. (2003). Electronic government at the local
level, progress to date and future issues. Public Performance and Management
Review, 26(4), 325344.
Howard, M. (2001). E-government across the globe: How will E change government?
Government Finance Review, 17(4), 69.
Hu, Li-tze, & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure
Analysis: Conventional Criteria versus New Alternatives. Structural Equation
Modeling, 6(1), 155.
ICMA (2002). Electronic government survey ndings. Retrieved from http://egov.e21corp.
com/site/html/eNewsletter/oct2002/survey.html.
Internet World Stats (2008). Retrieved from http://www.allaboutmarketresearch.com/
internet.htm.
Jaeger, P. T. (2003). The endless wire: E-government as global phenomenon.
Janda, S., Trocchia, P. J., & Gwinner, K. P. (2002). Consumer Perceptions of Internet Retail
Service Quality. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 13(5),
412431.
Kemp, T. (2000). A matter of trust: B-2-Cs seek credibility. September: Internet Week.
Kim, M., Kim, J. -H., & Lennon, S. J. (2006). Online service attributes available on apparel
retail website: An E-S-QUAL approach. Managing Service Quality, 16(1), 5177.
Kim, S., Kim, H. J., & Lee, H. (2009). An institutional analysis of an e-government
system for anti-corruption: The case of OPEN. Government Information Quarterly,
26(1), 4250.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The
Guilford Press.
Klievink, B., & Janssen, M. (2009). Realizing joined-up government dynamic capabilities and
stage models for transformation. Government Information Quarterly, 26(2), 275284.
Kraemer, K. L., & King, J. L. (2003). Information technology and administrative reform:
Will the time after e-government be different? CRITO, Center for Research on
Information Technology and Organizations http://www.crito.uci.edu.
Kumar, V., Mukerji, B., Butt, I., & Persaud, A. (2007). Factors for successful e-government
adoption: A conceptual framework. The Electronic Journal of e-Government, 5(1),
6376.
Lawrence, T. B., & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutions and institutional work. In S. R. Clegg,
C. Hardy, T. B. Lawrence, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies
(pp. 215254)., 2nd ed. London: Sage.
Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional e-government: A four stage
model. Government Information Quarterly, 18(2), 122136.
Lee, J. K., & Rao, H. R. (2003). A study of customers' trusting beliefs in government-tocustomer online services. AMCIS 2003 Proceedings. Paper 102 http://aisel.aisnet.org/
amcis2003/102.

Lehtinen, U., & Lehtinen, J. R. (1982). Service quality: A study of quality dimensions.
Service Management Institute, Helsinki, Working Paper.
Limayem, M., Hirt, S. G., & Cheung, C. M. K. (2007). How habit limits the predictive
power of intention: The case of information systems continuance. MIS Quarterly,
31(4), 705737.
Lin, C. J., & Lu, H. (2000). Towards An Understanding Of The Behavioral Intention To Use
A Website. International Journal of Information Management, 20(3), 197198.
Loiacono, E. T., Watson, R. T., & Goodhue, D. L. (2002). WEBQUAL: A Measure of Website
Quality. In K. Evans, & L. Scheer (Eds.), Marketing educators conference: Marketing
Theory And Applications, 13 (pp. 432437).
Lucas, H. C., & Spitler, V. K. (1999). Technology use and performance: A eld study of
broker workstations. Decision Science, 30(2), 291311.
Michon, R., & Chebat, J. -C. (2004). Cross-cultural mall shopping values and habitats: A
comparison between English- and French-speaking Canadians. Journal of Business
Research, 57(8), 883892.
Moon, M. J. (2002). The evolution of e-government among municipalities: Rhetoric or
reality? Public Administration Review, 62(4), 424433.
Moon, M. J., & Norris, D. F. (2005). Does managerial orientation matter? The adoption
of reinventing government and e-government at the municipal level. Information
Systems Journal, 15, 4360.
Moore, G., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the
perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems
Research, 2, 173191.
Murru, M. L. (2003). E-Government: From real to virtual democracy (pp. 5). Brussels:
Boston University.
Nantel, J., Sncal, S., & Mekki-Berrada, A. (2005). The inuence of dead-ends on
perceived website usability. Journal of E-Business, 5(1), 112.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Nussbaum, M., & Sen, A. (Eds.). (1993). The quality of life. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Nye, J. S., Jr., & Zelikow, P. D. (1997). Conclusions: Reections, conjectures, and puzzles.
In J. S. Nye (Ed.), Why people don't trust government (pp. 253281). Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
Ong, C. -S., & Wang, S. -W. (2009). Managing citizen-initiated email contacts. Government
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Malhotra, A. (2005). E-S-QUAL a multiple-item scale
for assessing electronic service quality. Journal of Service Research, 7(3), 213233.
Parent, M., Vandebeek, C. A., & Gemino, A. C. (2005). Building citizen trust through
e-government. Government Information Quarterly, 22(4), 720736.
Pavlou, P. A., & Fygenson, M. (2006). Understanding and prediction electronic commerce
adoption: An extension of the theory of planned behavior. MIS Quarterly, 30(1),
115143.
Phang, C. W., Sutanto, J., Li, Y., & Kankanhalli, A. (2005). Senior citizens' adoption of
e-government: In quest of the antecedents of perceived usefulness. Proceedings
of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 5 (pp. 130a).
Ranganathan, C., & Ganapathy, S. (2002). Key dimensions of business to consumer
websites. Information and Management, 39, 457465.
Reddick, C. G. (2004). Public-sector e-commerce and state nancial management:
Capacity versus wealth. Social Science Computer Review, 22(3), 293306.
Reddick, C. G. (2006). Information resource managers and e-government effectiveness: A survey of Texas state agencies. Government Information Quarterly, 23,
249266.
Robin, G., Andrew, G., & Sasha, M. (2009). How responsive is e-government? Evidence
from Australia and New Zealand. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 6974.
Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. New York: The Free Press.
Sakowicz, M. (2007). How to evaluate e-government? Different methodologies and
methods http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/NISPAcee/
UNPAN009486.pdf.
Schaupp, L. C., & Blanger, F. (2005). A conjoint analysis of online consumer satisfaction.
Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 6(2), 95111.
Schedler, K., & Summermatter, L. (2007). Customer orientation in electronic government: Motives and effects. Government Information Quarterly, 24, 291311.
Sebastianelli, R., Tamimi, N., & Rajan, M. (2006). Perceived quality of internet retailers:
Does shopping frequency and product type make a difference? Siena, Italy: EABR &
ETLC.
Segars, A., & Grover, V. (1993). Re-examining perceived ease of use and usefulness: A
conrmatory factor analysis. MIS Quarterly, 17(4), 517527.
Shareef, M. A., Kumar, U., & Kumar, V. (2007). Developing fundamental capabilities for
successful e-government implementation. Proceedings of ASAC Conference, Ottawa.
Shareef, M. A., Kumar, U., & Kumar, V. (2008). Role of different electronic-commerce
(EC) quality factors on purchase decision: A developing country perspective.
Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 9(2), 92113.
Shareef, M. A., Kumar, U., Kumar, V., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2009). Identifying critical factors
for adoption of e-government. Electronic Government: An International Journal, 6(1),
7096.
Shelanski, H. A., & Klein, P. G. (1995). Empirical research in transaction cost economics
A review and assessment. Law Economics Organization, 11(2), 335361.
Singh, N., Zhao, H., & Hu, X. Z. (2005). Analyzing the cultural content of web sites. A
cross-cultural comparison of China, India, Japan, and US. International Marketing
Review, 22(2), 129146.
Soat, J. (2003). Privacy, security, identity still matter. InformationWeek, 936, 75.
Sprecher, M. H. (2000). Racing to e-government: Using the internet for citizen service
delivery. Government Finance Review, 16(5), 2122.
Stevens, J. (1996). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Steyaert, J. C. (2004). Measuring the performance of electronic government services.
Information & Management, 41(3), 369375.
35
Thomas, C. W. (1998). Maintaining and restoring public trust in government agencies

and their employees. Administration and Society, 30(2), 166193.
Titah, R., & Barki, H. (2005). E-government adoption and acceptance: A literature review.
HEC Montral.
Tornatzky, L. G., & Klein, K. J. (1982). Innovation characteristics and innovation adoptionimplementation: A meta-analysis of ndings. IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management, EM-29(1).
Tung, L. L., & Rieck, O. (2005). Adoption of electronic government services among business
organizations in Singapore. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 14, 417440.
Turner, M., & Desloges, C. (2002). Strategies and framework for government on-line:
A Canadian experience. World Bank E-Government Learning Workshop, Washington
D.C., June 18.
Urban, G. L., Sultan, F., & Qualls, W. J. (2000). Placing trust at the center of your internet
strategy. Sloan Management Review, 42(1), 3948.
Van Dijk, Jan A. G. M., Peters, O., & Ebbers, W. (2008). Explaining the acceptance and use
of government internet services: A multivariate analysis of 2006 survey data in the
Netherlands. Government Information Quarterly, 25(3), 379399.
Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating control,
intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Research, 11(4), 342365.
Wagner, C., Cheung, K., Lee, F., & Ip, R. (2003). Enhancing e-government in developing
countries: Managing knowledge through virtual communities. The Electronic Journal
on Information Systems in Developing Countries, 14(4), 120.
Wang, Y. -S. (2002). The Adoption of electronic tax ling systems: An empirical study.
Wang, Y. -S., & Liao, Y. -W. (2008). Assessing e-Government systems success: A validation of
the Delone and Mclean model of information systems success. Government Information
Quarterly, 25(4), 717733.
Wangpipatwong, S., Chutimaskul, W., & Papasratorn, B. (2005). Factors inuencing the
adoption of Thai e-government websites: Information quality and system quality
approach. Proceedings of the 4thInternational Conference on eBusiness, November 19
20, Bangkok, Thailand.
Warkentin, M., Gefen, D., Pavlou, P., & Rose, G. (2002). Encouraging citizen adoption of
e-government by building trust. Electronic Markets, 12(3), 157162.
Welch, E. W., & Pandey, S. (2005). E-Government and network technologies: Does
bureaucratic red tape inhibit, promote or fall victim to intranet technology
implementation? Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System
Sciences, 5 (pp. 122.3).
Wolnbarger, M., & Gilly, M. C. (2003). eTailQ: Dimensionalizing, measuring, and
predicting etail quality. Journal of Retailing, 79(3), 183198.
Yoo, B., & Donthu, N. (2001). Developing a scale to measure the perceived quality of an
internet shopping site (sitequal). Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce, 2(1), 3146.
Mahmud A. Shareef is currently working as a researcher at DeGroote School of
Business McMaster University. Previously, he was a PhD candidate in Management of
the Sprott School of Business, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada. He received his
graduate degree from the Institute of Business Administration, Dhaka, Bangladesh in
Business Administration and Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada in Civil Engineering.
His research interest is focused on quality management of e-Commerce and eGovernment. He has published more than 30 papers addressing adoption and quality
issues of e-Commerce and e-Government in different refereed conference proceedings
and international journals. He has also published 2 reputed books on quality
management issues. He was the recipient of more than 10 academic awards including
2 Best Research Paper Awards in the UK and Canada.
Vinod Kumar is a Professor of Technology and Operations Management of the Sprott
School of Business (Director of School, 19952005), Carleton University. He received his
graduate education from the University of California, Berkeley and the University of
Manitoba. Vinod is a well-known expert sought in the eld of technology and operations
management. He has published over 150 papers in refereed journals and proceedings.
He has won several Best Paper Awards in prestigious conferences, Scholarly
Achievement Award of Carleton University for the academic years 19851986 and
19871988, and Research Achievement Award for the year 1993 and 2001.
Uma Kumar is a Full Professor of Management Science and Technology Management
and Director of the Research Centre for Technology Management at Carleton University.
She has published over 120 papers in journals and refereed proceedings. Ten papers
have won best paper awards at prestigious conferences. She has won Carleton's
prestigious Research Achievement Award and, twice, the Scholarly Achievement Award.
Recently, she won the teaching excellence award at the Carleton University.
Yogesh K. Dwivedi is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Business and Economics at
Swansea University in the UK. He was awarded his MSc and PhD by Brunel University
in the UK, receiving a Highly Commended award for his doctoral work by the European
Foundation for Management and Development. His research focuses on the adoption
and diffusion of ICT in organizations and in addition to authoring a book and numerous
conference papers, has co-authored papers accepted for publication by journals such
as Communications of the ACM, the Information Systems Journal, the European Journal of
Information Systems, and the Journal of the Operational Research Society. He is Senior
Editor of DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems, Assistant Editor of
Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy and a member of the editorial
board/review board of a number of other journals, and is a member of the Association
of Information Systems, IFIP WG8.6 and the Global Institute of Flexible Systems
Management, New Delhi. He can be reached at ykdwivedi@gmail.com.

4

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

4

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier.

Author's personal copy

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Government Information Quarterly

e-Government Adoption Model (GAM): Differing service maturity levels

Available online 20 October 2010

Corresponding author. Fax: + 44 1792 295626.

Therefore, it may be signicant to observe that the most important tool

Author's personal copy

M.A. Shareef et al. / Government Information Quarterly 28 (2011) 1735

Despite the potentially signicant impacts of e-Gov systems on

Implementation and successive upgrading of the e-Gov system

While investigating and revealing the theoretical perspectives of

Author's personal copy

application of ICT, objectives and mission of e-Gov development,

Author's personal copy

M.A. Shareef et al. / Government Information Quarterly 28 (2011) 1735

based e-Gov. If a country cannot make the skills and resources

revolutionary reengineering of the traditional government system,

Author's personal copy

inuences the acceptance and use of an innovation. Image refers to

technical or output quality, functional or process quality (Czepiel,

Author's personal copy

M.A. Shareef et al. / Government Information Quarterly 28 (2011) 1735

stakeholder groups with a multilingual background. From the

(1998) outlined the three aspects by which trust in the government is

Author's personal copy

Author's personal copy

M.A. Shareef et al. / Government Information Quarterly 28 (2011) 1735

Author's personal copy

ADOP1 with t values of 3.98 and 7.01 respectively. Therefore, these

respondents have at least undergraduate education and at least 80%

Author's personal copy

M.A. Shareef et al. / Government Information Quarterly 28 (2011) 1735

stage where PT is also a signicant predictor of adopting e-Gov at the

are concerned mostly with the trustworthiness of e-Gov websites, not

Author's personal copy

did not conjecture any relation between PATU and PT in our

factors to be important for creating the behavioral attitude and

Author's personal copy

M.A. Shareef et al. / Government Information Quarterly 28 (2011) 1735

for citizens to adopt it at the static stage. Policy-makers may think

information or to seek information. However, they might be

8. Limitations and future research directions

Author's personal copy

Appendix A. Measuring items for exogenous/explanatory variables

1. I am aware of e-Government websites of Canada.

AGIMO (2003), Murru (2003), Anthopoulos et al. (2007),

Perceived image (PI)

Murru (2003), authors self-developed

Wang (2002), AGIMO (2003), Tung and Rieck (2005),

Carter and Blanger (2005), Shareef et al. (2007),

Wang (2002), AGIMO (2003), Murru (2003),

Murru (2003), authors self-developed

Yoo and Donthu (2001), Devaraj et al. (2002), Janda et al.

AGIMO (2003), Kumar et al. (2007), Shareef et al. (2007),

Yoo and Donthu (2001), Devaraj et al. (2002), Janda et al.

Author's personal copy

M.A. Shareef et al. / Government Information Quarterly 28 (2011) 1735

55. I would hesitate to provide information to the website.

58. The website is, overall, reliable.

Yoo and Donthu (2001), Devaraj et al. (2002), Janda et al.

Janda et al. (2002), Wolnbarger and Gilly (2003),

Appendix B. Measuring items for endogenous/dependent variables