E-Government Implementation Challenges in Malaysia and South Korea: A Comparative Study Razlini Mohd Ramli

EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 1
E-GOVERNMENT IMPLEMENTATION CHALLENGES IN MALAYSIA AND

SOUTH KOREA: A COMPARATIVE STUDY
Razlini Mohd Ramli
Universiti Sains Malaysia,
Malaysia
razlini@usm.my
ABSTRACT
It is undeniable that the introduction of e-government has had a significant impact on
developing countries, like Malaysia. This paper seeks to explore empirically the
implementation of Malaysian e-government since the initiation of the policy in 1996.
Therefore, identifying the characteristic challenges that the Malaysian government faces,
which impede the progress of e-government is the overarching concern of this study. To gain
experience from a developed country, South Korea will be a benchmark for this study. By
using the Design-Reality Gap model introduced by Heeks, this study will be conducted to
identify and compare issues pertaining to implementation of e-government in Malaysia, a
developing country and South Korea, a developed country. The findings revealed six key
factors that are vital in e-government implementation. At the end of this study, these factors
will be encapsulated in a conceptual model for e-government implementation model.
Keywords: e-government; Malaysia; South Korea; Design-Reality Gap; challenges; issues
1. INTRODUCTION:
Since the explosion of Information Communication and Technology (ICT) in the last two
decades, we can see that many governments around the world have seen this phenomenon as a
great opportunity to enhance the quality of public service delivery. It can be achieved by
exploiting the use of technology in the public sector whereby government can rejuvenate its
management and services to be more efficient, fast and convenient to citizens (Weerakkody et
al. 2012, Cordella & Willcocks 2010, Gupta et al. 2008). Thus, e-government lies at the heart
of government’s agenda and operations including Malaysian government.
It has been almost twenty years since the launch of e-government flagship by
Malaysian government, so rationally the e-government performance should be up to a certain
standard. Therefore, expectations are high. In reality, Malaysian e-government has shown
some significant improvements in its online services (Abdullah et al., 2013, Siddique, 2008).
While government, citizens and business communities receive the widest array of benefits
from e-government, evaluation records reveal inconsistent and disappointingly lacklustre
performance (UN 2005, 2006, 2010, 2012, 2014). In other words, despites its positive
development, the implementation of Malaysian e-government is still inadequate and the
overall impact has remained limited. As a result, Malaysia has lagged behind other countries
and has yet to catch up with other Asian countries including Singapore, Japan, Kazakhstan
and South Korea.
To gain experience from a developed country, South Korea will be a benchmark in this
study. A comparative study between South Korea and Malaysia will be carried out by
employing Design-Reality Gap model (Heeks, 2001). Hence some lessons can be learnt from
good practice scenarios along with knowledge-sharing opportunities (Weerakkody et al.,
2012, Weerakkody et al. 2009). There are several reasons for selecting South Korea for this
research. First, South Korea has had an outstanding and high-ranking e-government
performance for a number of years (UN 2005, 2008, 2010, 2012) and is again the top
performer in 2014 ahead of many other developed nations (UN 2014). In fact, it also has
The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 2
consistently been the global leader in broadband deployment and internet penetration
surpassing other developed nations including United States, United Kingdom, Singapore and
Japan (Ovum, 2009). Second, the fact that South Korea is located in the same Asian region as
Malaysia was another primary factor in this preference. Third, the development of e-
government has been growing rapidly in South Korea since the Asian financial crisis in 1997.
This crises and other catastrophes such as Japanese colonisation, Korea War and poverty has
awakened South Korea to be the most advanced country in the IT industry, hence recovering
its overall economy successfully. Therefore, the South Korean experience, and its journey in
facing these great challenges, has been spectacular and astonishing, and this motivates
researcher to explore further.
This paper attempts to explore empirically the implementation of e-government in
Malaysia and also to identify and compare issues pertaining to implementation of e-
government in a developing country (Malaysia) and a developed country (South Korea).
Thus, lesson can be learnt and experiences can be shared proficiently. This study used a
qualitative approach by adopting the Heeks’s model as a theoretical framework. A multiple of
case study of e-government initiatives were employed for Malaysian government, whereas
due to time and financial constraints, only desk research was able to carried out through
comprehensive literature to get information on South Korea. The findings should make a
significant contribution towards the field of e-government that focus on the local and global
context.
This paper has been divided into six sections. The first section begins with the
introduction of this research. The next section outlines a brief literature of e-government
challenges in developed and developing countries. Heeks’s model of Design-Reality Gap and
its relevant to this research will be illustrated in this section too. Section 3 is concerned with
the methodology used for this research and Section 4 presents the findings of e-government
implementation in Malaysia and South Korea. This is followed by a comparative analysis of
the research findings in Section 5. A conceptual model for e-government implementation is
proposed in this section too. The final section draws upon the conclusion, limitations and
presents future directions of this research.
2. CHALLENGES AND ISSUES IN E-GOVERNMENT IMPLEMENTATION: A

LITERATURE PERSPECTIVE
E-government has become an international phenomenon that has given rise to many views
and opinions as to how it that makes citizen’s and government’s life easier. The advancement
of technology across the world has changed the way government works and raises citizens’
expectation of a better service from their governments. The explosion of technology has
changed people’s lives, work and business, and even more, can stimulate good governance.
But what exactly is e-government? Evans and Yen (2006) define e-government as means the
communication between the government and its citizens via computers and a web-enabled
presence. Meanwhile, Silcock (2001) states that “e- government is the use of technology to
enhance the access to and delivery of government services to benefit citizens, business
partners and employees.” Reddick and Frank (2007) define e-government “as the delivery of
government information and services through the internet 24 hours a day, seven days per
week.” In light of the above, as people have their own interpretation and understanding of the
e-government definition, the meaning of e-government is still debatable (Halchin, 2004, Hu et
al., 2009, Godse & Garg, 2007, Fang, 2002, Lim et al., 2007, Wimmer, 2002, Ndou, 2004).
Ndaou (2004) reveals that e-government means different things to different people. As
Wimmer (2002) states, “Everybody talks about e-government, but all have different

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 3
interpretations.” In spite of various definitions of e-government, this study concludes that the
majority of them produce similar themes and focus. E-government is defined as the utilisation
of technology to enhance the quality of public service delivery.
There is no doubt that e-government offers better services to citizens and businesses
and also can enhance government’s reputation by decreasing corruption and increasing
transparency (Whitson & Davis, 2001, Zhang & Hsieh, 2010, Homburg, 2008, Banerjee &
Chau, 2004). There are numerous challenges and issues that need to be faced by government
and e-government implementers in which will determine the success or failure of e-
government initiatives. Factors including technical infrastructure, financial, vision and
strategy, security and privacy, good coordination, leadership, skills and change management,
are amongst common factors for developing countries (Dada, 2006, Chen et al., 2006,
Pudjianto & Hangjung, 2009, Gichoya, 2005, Abdallah & Fan, 2012). In addition, legal issue,
human resources, lack of political will and social factor also associated with the development
of e-government (Almarabeh & AbuAli, 2010, Wang & Hou, 2010, Gilbert et al., 2004, Basu,
2004, Ndou, 2004, Ebrahim & Irani, 2005, Pudjianto & Hangjung, 2009, Banerjee & Chau,
2004, Gichoya, 2005, Jorgensen & Cable, 2002, Moulder, 2001, Abdelsalam et al., 2012,
Abdelsalam et al., 2010). Furthermore, research by Chen and his colleagues (2006) has
identified many issues and challenges facing e-government implementation in developed and
developing countries. Table 1 summarises the differences between both camps.
Developed Countries Developing Countries

History and  Government and economy  Government usually not
Culture developed early, immediately specifically defined; economy
after independence. not increasing productivity.
 Economy growing at a constant  Economy not growing or
rate, productivity increasing, high increasing productivity; low
standard of living. standard of living.
 Relatively long history of  Relatively short history of
democracy and more transparent democracy and less transparent
government policy and rule. government policy and rule.
Technical staff  Has a current staff, needs to  Does not have a staff, or has a
increase technical abilities and very limited in-house staff.
hire younger professionals.  Does not have local outsourcing
 Has outsourcing abilities and capabilities and rarely has the
financial resources to outsource; financial ability to outsource,
current staff would be able to current staff may be unable to
define requirements for define specific requirements.
development.
Infrastructure  Superior current infrastructure.  Inferior current infrastructure.
 High internet access for  Low internet access for
employees and citizens. employees and citizens.
Citizens  High internet access and  Low internet access and citizens
computer literacy; still has digital are reluctant to use online
divide and privacy issues. services; few citizens have
 Relatively more experienced in knowledge to operate
democratic system and actively computers.
involve in policy-making  Relatively less experienced in
process. democratic system and less
actively participates in

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 4
governmental policy-making
process.
Government  Decent computer literacy and  Low computer literacy and
officers dedication of resources; many do dedication of resources; many
not place electronic government do not place electronic
at a high priority. government at a high priority
due to lack of knowledge on the
issue.
Table 1: Challenges between Developed and Developing Countries (Chen et al., 2006)
One major criticism of much of the literature on the context of e-government in
developing countries is that it lacks strong empirical studies (e.g Almarabeh & AbuAli 2010,
Wang & Hou 2010, Chen et al. 2006, Harper et al. 2004, Wescott 2001, Dada 2006, Moulder
2001, Ahmad & Othman 2006, Raman et al. 2007). Besides that, it is important to note that
the literature surveyed on e-government implementation in developed countries is to pinpoint
good practices in e-government adoption and implementation (e.g Basu 2004, Chen et al.
2006, Gilbert et al. 2004, Jorgensen & Cable 2002, Tan & Leewongcharoen 2005, Heeks
2002a). Furthermore, according to Avgerou (2010), she emphasised the importance of the
theoretical aspect of IT and it’s relevant to socioeconomic development by discussing the four
discourses in the context of developing countries. In addition, the research highlighted that
there is no one size fits all mantra as the culture in developing countries are different than in
advanced or developed countries (Avgerou 2010).
It is questionable for ICT innovation whether poverty in developing countries can be
resolved, hence propositioning the significance of theoretical aspects for socioeconomic
improvement. For Avgerou’s point of views, she attempted to integrate theories on
contextualist ICT innovation and the theories on ICT-enabled development. In contrast,
Walsham and Sahay (2002) believed that with the ICT, it can combat poverty, inequality and
marginalisation.
From their experience, some practical lessons may be learnt in aiding developing
countries to manage and develop the suited e-government strategies, hence guiding them to
achieve their own visions. Therefore, this study will help Malaysian government to identify
good practices as well as problems and issues encountered during the implementation process
of e-government in developed countries like South Korea. It is important to understand the
issues and challenges from theoretical perspectives before boarding on practical
implementation.
2.1 Design-Reality Gap Model

To identify progress of Malaysian e-government implementation, the Design-Reality Gap
model, which introduced by Heeks (2003) will be exercised as a theoretical framework for
this study. It will help to assess and evaluate e-government implementation in Malaysia and
South Korea, despite its limitations. This can be done with the assistance of seven dimensions
called ITPOSMO (Information, technology, process, objectives and values, staffing and skills,
management and structures and outside world). These dimensions are beneficial to e-
government implementers and evaluators in identifying areas that need to be focused and
concentrated on. Thus, further changes will be required to close the gap. Figure 1 describes
Heeks’s model.

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 5
Reality Design
Information Information
Technology Technology
Processes Processes
Objectives and Values Objectives and Values
Staffing and Skills Staffing and Skills
Management Systems Management Systems
and Structures and Structures
Other Resources: Other Resources:
Time and Money Time and Money
Gap
Figure 1: Design-Reality Gap Model by Heeks (2003)

In addition, this model has most frequently been used in assessing and evaluating gaps
in developing countries’ e-government projects (Heeks 2002a 2002b, Hawari & Heeks 2010,
Bass & Heeks 2011, Syamsuddin 2011, Baqir et al. 2009) as failure rates in these countries
are usually higher than those in industrialised countries. Heeks (2002a) acknowledges this
situation as ‘stereotypical’, whereby problems and dilemmas amongst them are common. As
far as the model is concerned, it will measure expectation-perception gap that exists between
the reality and the design of the e-government initiatives. Hence, it will determine whether the
e-government projects are success, total failure or partial failure (Heeks 2003). However, this
study will not assess the extent of success and failure of the e-government projects, but aims
to identify any flaws and shortcomings in particular areas that require further change in the
future. As a result, it is able to reduce the expectation-perception gap and minimise e-
government failure in the projects.
As far as Heeks is concerned, his model is believed to be able to reduce risk in terms
of e-government failure in every e-government projects. It provides a sense of what makes the
project fail instead of the factors that may make the project succeed. Moreover, Heeks (2003)
conceded that his technique seems to be more practical and easier to implement, as it will
match with individual e-government projects, rather than enforcing a ‘one size fits all’
concept. This fact can be proved through many case studies.
There are a number or government projects employing this design-reality gap model in
their case studies, for instance, Jordanian and Indonesian governments. It has been proven by
the former government that this model has worked successfully in explaining the failure of
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) project implementation in Jordan (Hawari and Heeks
2010). In fact, the usage of this model has been recommended to use by other researchers and
practitioners as a channel to understand the root cause of difficulties in implementing ERP
system. In Asia countries like Indonesia, a case study on South Sulawesi also validates
Heeks’s model as a comprehensive approach in revealing gaps between the design of e-

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 6
government systems and its actual implementation of e-government initiatives (Hwang &
Syamsuddin, 2008).
Furthermore, this design-reality gap model is not only being used in manufacture firms
and government sectors, but also widely applied in the area of medical informatics. The
application of this model has demonstrably been useful to address and explain multiple cases
of health information systems success and failure via the ITPOSMO dimensions (Heeks
2006a). In general, it seems that the ITPOSMO dimensions provide a sufficient and better
understanding of the success or failure of information systems through this framework. The
dimensions look very comprehensive and systematic. As Heeks concludes, both factors on
technology and social approach along the evaluation process. In brief, a socio-technical
approach is embedded in this model to emphasize the importance of human and social
components of an information technology (Heeks, 2006b, 2006c; Kling & Lamb, 1999;
Sorrentino & Virili, 2003). This plainly balances those two crucial factors in evaluating and
assessing the gaps without concentrating merely on the technology and technical part in e-
government projects.
On the other hand, it has been understood that this model assumes to be more on
qualitative approach followed by a quantitative rating. The identification of factors and issues
that block the promises and benefits of e-government to citizens and users will show the size
of gaps between the designs and realities of e-government projects. This identification step of
identifying the factors represents the qualitative approach that comes from interviews,
documentary evidence and researcher analysis that has been structured according to the
ITPOSMO dimensions. Based on the analysis, rating scale will be given from 0 to 10. 0 will
represent no gap or difference between design and reality, 5 will stand for some degree of
difference and 10 will indicate complete and radical difference between design and reality.
Besides that, the gaps also can be assessed and rated in three different conditions, namely
large, medium and small. Large refers to a complete and radical difference between design
and reality, medium refers to some degree of difference between design and reality and small
indicates no difference between design and reality. By and large, it shows the degree of
mismatch between the design and reality of seven dimensions.
In addition, this model has most frequently been used in assessing and evaluating gaps
in developing countries’ e-government projects (Heeks 2002a 2002b, Hawari & Heeks 2010,
Bass & Heeks 2011, Syamsuddin 2011, Baqir et al. 2009, Hawari & Heeks 2010) as failure
rates in these countries are usually higher than those in industrialised countries. Heeks
(2002a) acknowledges this situation as ‘stereotypical’, whereby problems and dilemmas
amongst them are common. Therefore, it is questionable by the researcher whether the
adoption of this model can be generalised as a practical and workable idea or not to be applied
to developed countries.
Moreover, it is believed that Heeks’ idea of the Design and Reality Gap model is
based on the factoral analysis approach which was inspired by Flowers (1996). Flowers used
this factor-based approach to identify his set of critical failure factors through seven e-
government case studies in the United Kingdom. Taking the same diagnostic approach to
understand the failure of e-government project, Heeks (2002a, 2006) came out with his seven
dimensions of ITPOSMO acronym, to analyse and measure the gap that exists between
current reality and the design concept of e-government applications. According to Stanforth
(2010), this factor-based approach has commonly been used by researchers in project
management literature during the evaluation process, in order to identify the crucial failure
factors of e-government projects.

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 7
2.1.1 Previous Models for Assessing the Success or Failure of E-government Implementation
On the other hand, there are also other models of e-government that are considered to be
relevant in this research, including Delone & Mclean model (2003) and Moon (2002) in
assessing success and failure factors in implementing e-government. In Delone and McLean
model (2003), the success or failure of ICT implementation is determined by six dimensions:
system quality, information quality, service quality, usage, user satisfaction and net benefits.
This model points out that the quality of the three dimensions (system, information and
service) will determine and affect the “usage” and “user satisfaction”. As a consequence, the
“user satisfaction”, certain “net benefit” will occur. In contrast, if the system is of poor
quality, it may be associated with more dissatisfaction, people resistant and negative net
benefits.
A conceptual framework model by Moon (2002) is also another model that can be
considered in this study. In this model, it examined the effectiveness of e-government in
municipal governments based on comprehensive survey data. This model observed that the
evolution of municipal government in e-government implementation can be identified through
five stages; one way communication/ information dissemination, two-way communication,
service and financial transaction, integration and political participation. Next, Moon’s model
pinpointed some institutional and resource barriers to e-government, such as lack of
technology staff, security and privacy issues, lack of financial resources and lack of technical
upgrade. Last but not least, this model also indicated the effectiveness of e-government by
identifying benefits that e-government has offered.
Although the aforementioned models are commonly used in the e-government
research, they were found not to be inappropriate in addressing our research questions. The
Delone and McLean’s model (2003) is related and contribute to the theory of acceptance
model (TAM). This model is used to determine factors influencing intention to use and actual
usage behaviour at which technology is adopted. Nonetheless, the success or failure of e-
government implementation is not mainly shaped by technology acceptance, but also other
important factors, such as financial, legal, social and policy, and more factors as have been
stated in the literature review. Furthermore, this aspect of user acceptance and satisfaction
(user perspective) in the model has not become the main focus in this study.
Meanwhile, Moon’s model (2002) emphasized the e-government efforts of the local
authorities and measured its perceptual efficiency. To achieve this, a large sample size of
respondents was used through survey as the main instrument in the research. Since this study
has only focussed on the e-government projects at the federal level, and involved only a small
sample of respondent, therefore this model is not in line with the needs of this study.
Hence, due to these factors above, Heeks’s model on Design-Reality Gap model is
selected for use in this study, as it will help to investigate and explain some of the reasons
why implementation of e-government in Malaysia fails or successes. This will assist e-
government implementer and government in focusing on areas of weaknesses in Malaysian e-
government implementation.
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This study employs a qualitative research as one of the more practical ways of seeking and
exploring the current system of Malaysian e-government experience. In order to allow for a
deep exploration on the implementation of e-government in Malaysia, this study will
undertake the case study method. By choosing the case study as a strategy to conduct this
study, the researcher is able to investigate and study the phenomenon in its natural settings

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 8
(Cepeda & Martin 2005, Yin 1994). This approach may serve to provide richness, and assist
in generating a more substantive framework (Irani et al. 2005). As a result, the researcher will
understand the nature and complexity of the processes taking place.
In this research, however, multiple case studies are adopted instead of a single case
study to overcome this generalising problem. Besides that, the evidence from the multiple
case studies is more compelling and convincing, and thus can be regarded as more robust (Yin
2009, Herriot & Firestone 1983). In addition, the choice of multiple case studies avoids a
direct replication of study and illustrates different and contrasting experiences of e-
government implementation between three e-government projects, hence delivering a stronger
effect (Yin 2009). Three mini case studies have been chosen, and remain the core for data
collection for this study. The three case studies are:
1. E-land which is led by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment. It is an
online mechanism of land registration, management and administration offer for
public service delivery convenience.
2. E-syariah is initiated by Syariah Judiciary Department Malaysia. It assists Syariah
courts to manage their administration in a more sophisticated way by maximising the
use of ICT.
3. E-pemudah (e-business) is led by the PEMUDAH Secretariat Office under Ministry of
International Trade and Industry. Pemudah is responsible to address areas related to
the business environment and also to provide a catalyst for change in placing Malaysia
in the top 10 of the World Bank Ease of Doing Business (EoDB) (PEMUDAH 2010).
The criterion for selection the three case studies above are:
1. The case studies are implemented over the past five years. In addition, the e-land case
study is based in Penang as it was the first/pioneer state that implemented the
initiative.
2. Constitutes of a relevance to a broad range of stakeholders such as Government to
Citizens (e-land), Government to Government (E-syariah) and Government to
Business (E-pemudah).
3. Were considered as the most successful e-government projects such as e-syariah and
e-pemudah (Mohamed 2011, Tengku Mohammad 2007), therefore motivates the
researcher to further investigate their success, abilities, maturity and diversity of the
projects.
To gather information, in-depth interviews were conducted between 2012 to 2013
amongst 12 public officials from government agencies. These are Deputy Director of e-KL,
Deputy Director of EG Division, Senior Officer in MAMPU, Deputy Director (Technical) of
e-land Project Team, Technical Officer of e-land Project Team, Assistant Director of e-land
Project Team in Penang, Director of Information Technology and Communication (Technical)
in Syariah Judiciary Department Malaysia, Head Deputy Director of Information Technology
and Communication in Syariah Judiciary Department Malaysia, Deputy Director of
Information Technology and Communication in Syariah Judiciary Department Malaysia,
Assistant officer in Communication and Corporate Division in Syariah Judiciary Department
Malaysia, Principal Assistant Director of PEMUDAH Secretariat, Ministry of International
Trade and Industry and Senior Assistant Director PEEMUDAH Secretariat, Ministry of
International Trade and Industry.
These people represented from different government agencies, so it would reduce any
bias during data collection. The samples were selected on the basis of their integral

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 9
involvement and active participation in the aforementioned e-government projects. They had
a strong understanding of e-government policy in Malaysia and had a good and
knowledgeable view of the projects. They were asked questions based on the OPTIMISM
model in the interview session. The ratings will be classified into three different ratings (non-
numerical), admittedly somewhat subjective; 1) Large – A complete and radical difference
between design and reality; 2) Medium- Some degree of difference between design and
reality; 3) Small- No difference between design and reality (of which assisted by any
supportive factors). As Heeks (2003, p.3) states: “The larger this design-reality gap, the
greater the risk of e-government failure. Equally, the smaller the gap, the greater the chance of
success.” In addition, to have a clear picture and better understanding of the gap, the rates for
each individual dimension are also presented using a diagram at the end of each case study’s
findings. The diagram arranged to show the gaps from largest to smallest.
Access to the interviewees in the government agencies was gained through personal
contacts by email. Moreover, all the interviews were set up in their respected government
offices as requested by the personnel involved. However, two interviews had involved more
than one officer as requested by the interviewees. Whilst the advantage of this arrangement
was that the researcher could get various opinions and views at the same time, the time limits
had become a constraint in this interview.
Each interview was taped with the permission of the interviewees with the tape
recorder. Before the interviews were conducted, they were briefed about the nature and
objective of the study, the expectations of their involvement and also the duration of the
interview. Ultimately, they were reassured about issues of confidentiality. Moreover, it is
important to note that the interviewees were notified and informed of the matter above to
comply with ethical protocol during research. Since the sample size of the respondents is too
small, survey method was eliminated to be used in this study. Otherwise, a questionnaire
would have been used in the study as a data collection method, but the survey method is
appropriate for larger respondents.
Each of the interviews lasted approximately one to two hours. The only exception to
this was the interviewee from the Land Office in Penang who felt uncomfortable with the tape
recorder; hence the researcher used only hand written notes to capture all the views and
responses. Subsequently, there were some follow up interviews that were needed to clarify
any unclear information and to get further explanations and these were arranged through
email exchanges and telephone calls (Walsham 1995; Yin 2009). To reduce bias in the
interview process, the researcher minimised the intrusion by being neutral and open minded
while asking and listening to the interviewees’ responds. In addition, taking only the
interviewees’ responds combined with knowledge from literature review can also avoid bias
in this analysis section. Besides that, the respondents or the interviewees were not exposed to
the same part of the e-government projects and they had had experienced on different roles
and divisions, so this can minimise bias in this study too. Moreover, the interviews were
combined with some important documents such as government documentation on e-
government, blue print, policies and procedures, publications, budget report and other
documents as additional information to supplement this research (Irani et al. 2008).
Meanwhile, due to time and financial constraints, a desk research was carried out
through a comprehensive literature combined with a review of e-government documentation
for gathering South Korea’s data collection. Statistical data were collected from several
international reports and surveys. This was done for the purpose of comparative analysis with
Malaysian e-government and used to verify and validate the empirical findings in both

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 10
countries (Yin 2009, Miles & Huberman 1994, Saunders et al. 2000, Flick 2007). Finally, a
manual thematic analysis process was used in this research. A cross-case analysis was
conducted, in which data from all cases were looked at together in this analysis process, with
some common themes emerged and extrapolated from the case studies (Jones et al. 2006).
Following this, the analysis continued by comparing and contrasting with South Korea’s data,
to uncover whether there were any differences between cases.
4. FINDINGS: A CASE STUDY OF E-LAND, E-SYARIAH AND PEMUDAH & E-GOVERNMENT

IN SOUTH KOREA
The Malaysian government launched the Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC) in August 1996,
in which e-government became one of its flagships (Rais & Nazariah 2003, Abdul Karim &
Mohd Khalid 2003). This flagship includes another seven projects and initiatives lead by
different government agencies. To spearhead e-government initiatives, the Malaysian
Administrative Modernisation and Management Planning Unit (MAMPU) has been entrusted
to plan, implement and give guidelines on the e-government framework. In addition,
MAMPU will also monitor progress and coordination of each project under the responsibility
of the lead agencies, in order to ensure that the notion is executed in the most efficient manner
possible (MAMPU 1997 a,b,c).
4.1 E-land
E-land is one of the e-government flagship projects which were initiated by the Ministry of
Natural Resources and Environment (MAMPU 2009). It highlights the relations between
Government to Government (G2G) relationship. It aims to develop an integrated,
comprehensive and user-friendly land management and administration system to improve the
speed and quality of public service. Until a few years ago land dealings were still done in a
traditional manner which raised repetitive complaints and unhappiness from citizens, for
instance red tape, rigid procedures, corruption and too much official procedures (The Star
2007).
In this case, the incompetence of the land management and administration has
tarnished the government’s reputation amongst foreign investors, businesses communities and
the public (ibid). Therefore, in order to eradicate these problems, the government has moved
forward towards the application of ICT on land administration, hence e-land was initiated in
2005 (Mohd Ramli 2012). As the digital technology has been recognised by the law through
the introduction of the Sixteen Schedule of the National Land Code (NLC) 1965; the
Electronic Land Management System, e-land is believed can enhance transparency of the land
administration and modernise the administration and management of land offices throughout
Peninsular Malaysia (MAMPU 2011b).
4.1.1 Design-Reality Gap Model (E-land)

Here are some of the issues and challenges that influenced the implementation of e-
government in Malaysia which revealed from the interviews with government officials. The
finding reveals that e-land has major difficulties in the legal context due to each state has its
own acts and laws procedures, low-quality of IT infrastructure, public officials’ resistance,
and lack of expertise in land law. E-land also faces financial constraint that insufficient for the
agency to bear the maintenance costs of the project. One of the respondents stated that
“Internet connection in Malaysia is slow and there is low access. Malaysian Communications
and Multimedia Commission (SKMM) should be responsible for looking further at this aspect.
Even, Sabah and Sarawak is still lacking in basic amenities such as lack of electricity and
clean water. Therefore, how can the universal service and access can be achieved?”

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 11
In addition, another respondents stated that, “We need to change almost 85% of the
National Land Code if we want everything to be implemented online.” As land and religion
matters are considered as state matters, each state enacts is own acts and rules. As one of the
government officer said, “It is hard for people to understand. It is not easy to use and apply
other state’s application to another state, because it binds with the law. Therefore, this task is
not as simple as that.”
A senior officer mentioned that, “The Malaysian government lacks expertise, so we
need to outsource to other foreign and private companies.”
Furthermore, resistance and reluctance to adopt and adapt to the new digital
management among public officials was also another main problem. According to a senior
officer who involved directly in the project, most of them felt threatened with the new system
that had reengineered element that might jeopardize their professions and careers because of
‘no function’ worries. He said that, “It is hard using the e-land, because my role would not be
so important anymore”.
There was also no change management course provided by the government before
adopting the system. As time goes by, the public officials started to accept and embrace the
technology which makes them productive but at the same time they are still not happy yet due
to the perceived threats and they also want more improvement in the system. The senior
officer stated that, “….they prefer with the manual system and in Penang, the change
management was done after the implementation, not at the early stage of e-land
implementation”
Lack of expertise and skills in ICT and ignorance in land law amongst the contractor
were the underlying problems for the government to manage them. According to the senior
officer, “…in e-land, we lack of people who involve in the system who understanding and
have knowledge about land law, and this becomes a huge problem when we want to
implement it”
Dimensions Rating Comments

Information Medium An integrated system of data flows but some
problems exist due to different work culture.
Technology Large Particularly in technical infrastructure and network
speed.
Process Small Huge changes of services and procedures to ease
the activities of users and citizens.
Objectives/Values Large Public officials felt threaten about their jobs and
consultants being so selfish.
Staffing and skills Large Mainly around public officials and consultants
who do not have expertise in land law.
Management and Structures Medium Better coordination but have some power issues
between federal and state governments.
Other resources Large Insufficient budget for maintenance and license
renewal.
Outside World Large Legal context appears to be challenging to change.
4.2 E-syariah

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 12
E-syariah was introduced in March 2002 as another flagship e-government initiative which
aims to improve Malaysian Syariah Court’s image and quality of its services by maximising
the use of ICT (MAMPU 2009).In addition, it constitutes a relation Government to Citizen
(G2C).
In the past, the Syariah court was well-known as an out-dated institution bogged with
red-tape and inefficient services to the public. The delay in disposition of Syariah court cases
involving divorce and child custody caused the number of redundant/similar cases filed every
year. In addition, the amount of time to receive the court's ground of judgment on any given
case impedes the filing and case management process of the services. As a result, to uphold
the Syariah court’s status and reputation, e-syariah is identified as an answer to all the
problems.
4.2.1 Design-Reality Gap Model (e-syariah)
Dimensions Rating Comment

Information Small Database in every state has been standardised.
Technology Large Particularly in terms of access due to slow speed.
Process Medium Some changes to users’ activities but there is a
slight problem regarding online payment.
Objectives/Values Small Most of the stakeholders are largely supportive to
e-syariah. Leadership presence in the system.
Staffing and skills Small Mainly around public officials who competent at
their work.
Management and Structures Medium Some changes in management and structures but
uneven on a federal-state’s power issues.
Other resources Small Not much but sufficient.
Outside World Small Politics and legal context appear largely
supportive.
In e-syariah, email has been a further new mechanism to communicate between the
government and the citizens. However, the speed of the internet connection is slow, thus
demonstrate a huge gap in technology dimension. According to e-government officer “The
most challenging task in implementing e-syariah is to standardise and systematise work
practices. This is due to the various and different work practices being implemented in every
state. Public officials feel very comfortable in their comfort zones, thus resisting change in
order to retain their own identity and working culture.”
Public officials are now more positive and confident in the system. Notwithstanding in
the early implementation phase there was some resistance amongst them towards the system,
but after providing them with adequate skills and training, ICT courses and awareness
programmes they seem to be convinced and receptive with the new system.
Despite the limitations, e-syariah has been considered as a fruitful project that has
improved the Syariah court’s image and reputation from outmoded working practices to a
modern way of working that has had beneficial effects on the public service delivery (Ahmad
& Othman 2006, The Star 2007). For example, the registration process has successfully
reduced waiting time from 8 minutes to 3 minutes. The current challenge Syariah Judiciary
Department Malaysia (JKSM) is facing now is online payment where they need to deal with a
third party which is bank on management charges issue.

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 13
Overall, it is noted that e-syariah has had remarkable success in its implementation,
albeit there were some difficulties in the early phase of its operation. As far as the system is
concerned, the efficacy of e-syariah as an e-government application is hinged on several
aspects, for instance leadership and environment factors. Most civil servants in the syariah
court administration really agreed that the Chief Justice at that time was very committed and
positive on the proposition of ICT development in the syariah court although there was some
opposition to the proposed changes. Having a strong and determined leader has assisted the
Malaysian government’s mission on reforming and revamping the syariah court
administration and management in order to enhance the quality of public service delivery.
Besides that, the idea of technology advancement was booming globally with governments
adopting and embracing the idea of e-government.
4.3 Pemudah
While e-land and e-syariah are a Government to Government (G2G) and Government to
Citizen (G2C) projects respectively, Pemudah highlights the relations with Government to
Business (G2B). The Special Task Force to Facilitate Business or known as PEMUDAH
comprises of representatives from both the public and private sector. The goal of PEMUDAH
which was launched on 17 February 2007 aims to support Malaysia’s transition towards a
knowledge driven economy (PEMUDAH 2008).
Pemudah is responsible to address areas related to the business environment and
provide a catalyst for change towards placing Malaysia in the top 10 of the World Bank Ease
of Doing Business (EoDB) (PEMUDAH 2010, New Straits Times 2008). To achieve its
target, government agencies or departments were challenged to improve processes and
procedures to become faster, easier and at the same time cheaper. Initiatives like Business
Licensing Electronic Support System (BLESS), Malaysia Corporate Identity Number
(MyCoID), One Stop Centre (OSC) Online for Building Plans and e-Payment facilities
(PEMUDAH 2008, 2009) are amongst online services initiated by PEMUDAH.
4.3.1 Design-Reality Gap Model (Pemudah)

Information Medium Some changes to data stores and flows but uneven
work practices.
Technology Large Particularly lies on the technological infrastructure,
the speed and the expensive software.
Process Small Many online applications are created and
beneficial to the users.
Objectives/Values Large Resistant mainly caused by business community
and public officials.
Staffing and skills Medium Training is provided to enhance skills, confidence
and knowledge.
Management and Medium Some changes in management structures and
Structures advocates public-private partnership, but problem
lie in federal-state’s power.
Other resources Large Not adequate enough.
Outside World Large Legal context appears late in the implementation.
As for Pemudah, technology infrastructure becomes one of the main hurdles in

implementing the project as well as resistance from the business community stakeholders and
www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 14
low commitment from the public officials. As one of the senior officers commented that,
“There is limited integration in implementing e-business in Pemudah, as there are still
certain agencies that feel comfortable with their old system.” As one of the government
officers stated that, “There is some resistance amongst public servants in the early phase of
implementation. They feel threatened that the technology will replace their jobs and
functions.” Additionally, a senior officer said, “It is really frustrating when we need to key in
the data twice. This regards the negative mind-set of public servants who are very cynical
with the technology”
In addition, the budget is also an issue in this project as well as a slow adoption of the
Electronic Government Activities Act (EGAA), which hampered the process. Other public
officials were candid saying “In Pemudah, we do not have any specific budget because it
depends on the ministry’s budget, thus it constrains us.”
4.4 E-government in South Korea

The South Korean government has emphasised that technological deployment may transform
and modernise its public sector in meeting citizens and businesses’ needs without the
limitation of time and space (Sprano & Zakak 2000). Its remarkable performance on e-
government has been acknowledged and recognised around the world, through its success in
harnessing ICTs for boosting its economic growth and building social transformation
(Chadwick 2005). In other words, South Korea is one of the countries that maximises and
emphasises the importance of Information Communication Technology (ICT) as an economic
stimulus (Lau et al. 2005). This trend began when the 1997 financial crisis attacked South
Korea and other Asian countries that make their economy downturn. Since then, the Korean
government identified information technology as a potential resolution and field that worked
to recover its economy (Lau et al. 2005, Lee 2003).
Given South Korea’s level of passion concerning technology, the government set up
its own national vision to make South Korea into an advanced and leading country (Ministry
of Security and Public Administration 2012). Meanwhile, the informatization vision is to
achieve an advanced knowledge information society based on creativity and trust (NIA 2008).
In supporting national vision of informatization, the South Korean government drew up five
goals, which are (NIA 2008); (1)‘Efficient Knowledge Government’ to serve the people,
(2)‘People Prospering through Digitalisation’ to support a facilitated market economy,
(3)‘Trusted Information Society’ to actively support welfare system, (4) ‘Creative Soft
Power’ to become a brain power nation, (5) ‘Cutting-Edge Infrastructure for Digital
Convergence’ to become a mature country. Based on the comprehensive literature and a
review of e-government documentation, the findings of e-government in South Korea can be
illustrated below:
4.4.1 Design-Reality Gap Model (South Korea)

Information Medium An integrated system of data flows and database,
but with some hiccups in the system.
Technology Small Provide a good and high-quality information
infrastructure.
Process Small Many online services and applications are created
to ease the activities of users and citizens.
Objectives/Values Medium Majority of the public officials are happy with e-
government but have some concern on security

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 15
and privacy issues.

Staffing and skills Small They are fast learners and very technic savvy.
Management and Structures Medium Better coordination and integration but have some
jurisdictional conflicts between ministries.
Other resources Small Sufficient budget to fund the e-government
projects.
Outside World Small Legal context appears to be supportive in ensuring
success and efficiency in executing e-government
policy.
As for South Korea, the size of gap is relatively small and medium. It has a high-
quality ICT infrastructure through Korea Information Infrastructure (KII) (Lee 2009) which
provides a high-speed communication network (Lee 2003, Menon 2011, Kim et al. 2007).
Furthermore, the Korean government keep upgrading its telecommunication infrastructure
over time to ensure it can cope with the technology innovation.
Furthermore, the government initiated the National Basic Information System (NBIS)
project as a foundation for e-government (Kim 2006). It functioned to compile database from
other government sections including finances, vehicles registration and other data by using
information system and technology. While there were some issues in using the database,
owing to demand-pull in enterprise based (Jeong 2006) and the recognition of database and
information technology was lowered (Kim 2006) at that time, the information system
managed to support and increase the efficiency of the administrative processes.
South Korea creates a number of online applications (Kim et al. 2007), and there are
many benefits for citizens, businesses and the government: for instance, e-Customs, Korean
Online e-Procurement System, Home Tax Service and many more. All these services are
selected as best practice, and have received many recognitions and awards from the United
Nations, OECD and the rest of the world (National Information Society Agency 2010).
Overall, the deployment of technology assists the government in boosting the productivity of
its administration and meeting citizens’ needs by simplifying application procedures,
especially for the registry documents.
In addition, the vision and objectives are shared amongst stakeholders, including the
Korean presidents, senior public officials and senior managers (Shin 2007). Korean president
Dae-Jung Kim put the Information Promotion Committee under the Presidential Commission
on Government Innovation, and this has demonstrated a strong commitment from the
President in implementing e-government across the country (Im & Seo 2005). As for the
senior public officials and managers, they are happy with the new system, except for some
concerns about privacy and security issues. For public officials, although they had mixed
perceptions toward e-government in the early stage of its implementation (Hwang et al 1999),
they believe that e-government is valuable in improving government. The government
provides training courses and workshops to equip them with necessary operational skills.
Furthermore, the government promotes the practice of organisational learning to enhance
stakeholders’ acceptance of the new system (Kim et al. 2007). As a result, they are well
equipped with skills, and can be classified as fast learners and become more adaptive and
accept the change to a modern form of government.
However, the coordination and collaboration among government ministries and
agencies seemed to be a big hurdle in the early process of e-government implementation

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 16
(Choi 2003). A jurisdictional conflict between ministries was a hindrance of this collaboration
and information sharing. To overcome this problem, the South Korean government introduced
a team system of ministries, for instance for economic team. The members will be ministry of
finance and economy and ministry of budgeting and planning led by the Vice Prime Minister
(Kim 2006). As a result, inter-governmental sharing and cooperation ease the public officials
and citizens to access information through a single window e-government. This can be proven
through residential registration, vehicle administration and real estate management, where
information systems are now interconnected throughout the nation (National Computerization
Agency 2002). As a result, data is made available for other functional departments. In
addition, putting the special committee under the Presidential Commission on Government
Innovation reveals a highly centralised government, with an overwhelming presidential power
(Im & Seo 2005). This seems to be seen as fruitful, since as government will gain
administrative, political and managerial cooperation across ministry agencies.
Meanwhile, there is sufficient financial resources to realise the idea of e-government
throughout the nation. This includes the budget to develop a robust Korean information
infrastructure. The government launched the Informatization Promotion Fund, which is a
separate account from the annual government’s budget to fund the e-government projects
(Suh 2006, Im & Seo 2005). In addition, the fibre optic backbone network between major
cities is funded by the government, whereas the access networks linking users to the backbone
network are funded by the private sector (Hwang et al 1999). In fact, the government also
provided financial support for small IT business to set up and join in with the implementation
of e-government (Kim et al 2004) and also sufficient funding are prepared for research and
development (Frieden 2005).
To continue support for effective e-government, the South Korean government
enacted several major acts, including the Management of Digital Contents Act, the Closing
the Digital Divide Act, the Online Digital Contents Industry Promotion Act and so forth
(NCA 2002). Furthermore, the government plans to undertake law enactment on protection of
personal information owing to the security and privacy issues surrounding the e-government
implementation process. It also expands the regulated targets from public organisations, and
some providers to all legislative organisations and all providers, including non-profit
organisations, provides along a stronger punishment and penalised schemes (National
Information Society Agency (NIA) 2010, Frieden 2005). In short, a range of comprehensive
legal frameworks that accommodate issues on public IT investment, security, market
liberalisation, privatization, incentive regulation, digital signature and so forth are adopted to
ease the e-government implementation.
Although the data from Korea is discussed at national level, the researcher believed that it
is the epitome of state and local government’s good performance on e-government. In
addition, due to financial and time constraints, the researcher was not able to do research in
Korea. However, by doing a comprehensive literature review and document analysis it
showed that Korean e-government has performed superbly, leaving UK and USA behind.
5. DISCUSSIONS: COMPARISON OF RESEARCH FINDINGS

The prime focus on deploying Heeks’s framework in this research is to analyse and identify
issues and challenges in e-government implementation in Malaysia and South Korea.
Following the results of both countries’ experiences, there are large gaps between the two
countries in implementing e-government. There are six key factors that contribute to the
success or failure in implementing e-government. Table 2 summarises the six factors
identified by Malaysian e-government and South Korean e-government.

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 17
Challenges Malaysian Government South Korean Government
Technical Lack of a quality technical have a robust high-speed internet

infrastructure infrastructure, slow speed infrastructure, high speed
connection, unstable connection, ICT literacy is
connectivity, lack of internet relatively high among South
access in rural areas Korean
Legislative Structure Out-dated regulations, restrictive comprehensive legal framework,
laws and regulations, redundant privacy and security concern
act, privacy and security concern
Financial Constraints insufficient fund, need to adequate financial resources,
improve public-private initiated some capital for IT
partnership investment in the early phase of
implementation, symbiotic
relationship between government
and private sectors (Chaebols, ),
open market policy
Government’s role great leader with a great vision good leadership and political
but a lack of political will, support, clear policy and strategy,
Vague policy and strategy, strong enforcement from
government’s role as an indirect government, government’s role as
facilitator (strategist) a direct intervener (regulator) and
indirect facilitator (integrator)
Human Infrastructure individualistic culture, public fast leaners (pali-pali) and technic
officials and citizens slowed to savvy, collectivistic culture,
adapt, public officials reluctant public officials and citizens
to change in the early phase of willing to change, social issues
implementation, lack of skills
and expertise, lack of motivation
and change management training
Conditions of lack of coordination and Better coordination and
Organisations integration, federal-state power integration but have some
issues slowing down the pace of jurisdictional conflicts between
implementation ministries
Table 2: E-government Issues and Challenges in Malaysia and South Korea
It is apparent that the South Korean e-government is more advanced in its e-

government development and has achieved tremendous accomplishments in its e-government
performance. The success of South Korea provides a great chance for Malaysia to learn
lessons in implementing e-government. As presented in Table 2, lacks of technical
infrastructure and access in rural areas have been identified as a key issue hampering the
progress in Malaysia owing to insufficient funding by the government. In contrast, South
Korea invested heavily on building a robust technical infrastructure, so that any e-government
application can easily be operated.
Legislative structure becomes the second factor that crucial to the implementation of
e-government. South Korea provided a comprehensive legal framework that covers all related
areas including business, whereas Malaysia needs to review all regulations, rules and policies
to make them up-to-date, relevant and also attuned to the changing technologies and online

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 18
policies. Both countries also concern to the privacy and security issues that need to be a top
priority and a prime component in implementing e-government.
Technical infrastructure issue pertaining to e-government in Malaysia are very much
related and influenced by financial limitations in Malaysia. On the contrary, e-government
efforts were made less problematic at South Korea through an adequate budget from the
government and also private sector collaboration in the early phase of the implementation.
Malaysia and South Korea both have great leaders who champion the idea of e-
government. Unfortunately, Malaysia lacks of political support which counts as a vital factor
along the e-government journey (Signore et al. 2005, Bhatnagar 2004, Kim & Mauborgne
2003). While the vague policy has slowed down the implementation in Malaysia, a clear and
unambiguous policy has speed the South Korean e-government.
Meanwhile, unwillingness to change amongst public officials and citizens was
acknowledged as a human infrastructure problem in Malaysia. They scared that their jobs will
be supplanted by the technology. Moreover, lack of motivation and no change management
course have exacerbated the situation. Therefore, Malaysian government has identified that
this issue will be addressed through a proper series of training in ICT, change management
course and exposure. It was the opposite in the South Korea where the public officials and
citizens were fast leaners and adapted very easily to new environment. Their acceptance of the
new technology is related to the cultural and social factors which represent their mentality of
‘pali-pali’, a term that illustrates their predisposition not to waste any second or not to left
further behind (Lau et al. 2005). However, anti-social and internet addicts (Hwang & Park
2009) were downsides of e-government in South Korea.
The lack of coordination amongst government agencies was identified as a key factor
that needs to be tackled in Malaysia. In South Korea, although there were some jurisdictional
issues between ministries, they managed to streamline and integrate administration process
and services across government agencies. For this reason, Malaysia can learn from South
Korea’s strategy in resolving coordination issue.
5.1 A Conceptual Model for E-government Implementation

As a result of the findings of this study, there are six key factors that play a pivotal role in e-
government implementation. Therefore, a conceptual model for understanding the six factors
in e-government implementation is proposed in this study as Figure 2. This model is adapted
from Heeks’s model on Design Reality gap that was taken from the empirical study in
exploring e-government implementation in Malaysia and South Korea.
The conceptual model outlines the failure and success factors for e-government
implementation which is categorised to six factors including technical infrastructure,
legislative structure, financial condition, government’s role, human infrastructure and
conditions of organisations. The aforementioned factors are related and similar with Heeks’s
ITPOSMO dimensions but with some improvisation derived from the context of Malaysian e-
government case studies. The direction of the arrows shows a positive and negative impact of
each factor that plays significant roles in implementing e-government.

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 19
E-government Failure E-government Success
Technical Infrastructure
 Inadequate infrastructure  Sufficient infrastructure
 Slow speed connection  Speed and fast connection
 Technology incompatibilities
Legislative structure
 Out-dated regulations  reviewing existing legal
 Restrictive laws and regulations framework
 Privacy concerns  legislative support
Financial conditions
 Adequate and innovative funding
 Lack of funding/ insufficient
 Private-public Partnership
fund
 Refocus budgetary framework
 Lack of private involvement
Government’s role
 Vague policy and strategy  Clear policy and strategy.

 Poor leadership  Realistic goals
 Federal-state power issues  Good leadership & political support
 Lack of evaluation  Strong enforcement from federal level
 Consistent evaluation
Human infrastructure
 Lack of skills and expertise  Training course
 Lack of motivation
Figure  Effective change management
 Negatives attitudes  Positive attitudes
 Resistance to change  Broader training courses(technical/
 Lack of communication management/law)
 Good communication
Figure 1: A Conceptual Model for E-government Implementation (bottom
(Adapted from up
Heeks’
and top bottom
Conditions ofmodel)
Organisations
 Lack of coordination  Better coordination

 Homogenous information
Figure 2: A Conceptual Model for E-government Implementation (Adapted from

Heeks’s Model)

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 20
Moreover, from the model, it demonstrates that those factors are related and affect one
another, thus influencing the success or failure of the e-government implementation. For
example, if there is a lack of funding in technical infrastructure establishment, it will affect
the smoothness and easiness of e-government implementation. As a result of inadequate
technical infrastructure, it will cause slow speed connection and lag behind with the
advancement of technology which resulted in technology incompatibilities. Furthermore, the
success of e-government implementation needs legal support to ease the implementation
process so that it can resolve any issues pertaining to the e-government. By and large, success
or failure may result from the consequences of one factor affecting another.
Overall, this research presents a number of technical infrastructures, legislative
structure, financial condition, government’s role, human infrastructure and conditions of
organisations of factors that are synthesised into the conceptual model in Figure 2. All these
six factors are also identified as challenges in e-government planning and execution. The
model can be used as a guidance to assist e-government implementers and improve the
effectiveness of e-government implementation as well.
6. CONCLUSION, RESEARCH LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS

This research aims to assess the progress of Malaysian e-government implementation as
compared to South Korean e-government and also to identify factors that inhibit and hold
back the development of e-government implementation in Malaysia. This research has shown
that there are a number of factors that determine the success or failure in e-government
implementation in Malaysia. In general, these factors are considered to be a pillar of e-
government. One of the more significant findings to emerge from this study is that factors,
such as inadequate technical infrastructure, lack of skills, insufficient financial resources,
unclear ICT policy, poor leadership and lack of integration will fail the mission of e-
government. Taken together, these results suggest that the factors will have a greater impact
on one another. This research suggests that the Malaysian government should take a more
proactive role in tackling some of the problems immediately. Prioritisation is a key means of
doing this.
Although the Design-Reality Gap model is beneficial in identifying the challenges
along the e-government initiatives in Malaysia, it has certain weaknesses. Although the model
is quite straightforward and simple, the researcher found it was very challenging to allocate
issues into certain particular dimensions as some issues can be categorised more than two
dimensions. It would cram a lot of issues into one single dimension; therefore some confusion
over the matter was generated during the evaluation process. Moreover, the rating scale (non-
numerical) to measure the gap between design and reality was somewhat subjective. Despite
its limitations, this research successfully presented interesting findings concerning a number
of factors and principles in e-government. In the future, more cross-national comparative
studies involving other Asian countries (developed) and less-developed countries can be of
useful to developing countries in sharing experiences and challenges in e-government
implementation. Finally, further research regarding the role of citizen would be useful in
getting their experiences and perceptions towards e-government policy.
7. REFERENCES
Abdallah, S., & Fan, I.-S. (2012). Framework for E-government Assessment in Developing
Countries: Case Study from Sudan. Electronic Government, 9, 2, 158–177.

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 21
Abdelsalam, H. M., ElKadi, H. A., & Gamal, S., (2010). Setback and Remedy of Local e-
Governmen Projects: A Case Study from Egypt. In T. Janowski , & J. Davies (Ed.), the
4th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance
(ICEGOV2010) (66-71). ACM Press.
Abdelsalam, H., Reddick, C., & ElKadi, H. (2012). Success and Failure of Local E-
Government Projects : Lessons Learned from Egypt, Digital Democracy: Concepts,
Methodologies, Tools, and Applications,183,1–21
Abdul Karim, M. R., & Mohd Khalid, N. (2003). E-Government in Malaysia: Improving
Responsiveness and Capacity to Serve. Selangor: Pelanduk Publications.
Abdullah, N. R. W., Mansor, N. B., & Hamzah, A. (2013). Keeping Ahead of the Game:
Innovations and Challenges in E-government in Malaysia, The Economic and Labour
Relations Review, 24, 4, 549-567.
Ahmad, M., & Othman, R. (2006). Implementation of Electronic Government in Malaysia:
The Status and Potential for Better Service to the Public. Public Sector ICT
Management Review, 1,1, 2–10.
Almarabeh, T., & AbuAli, A. (2010). A General Framework for E-government: Definition
Maturity Challenges, Opportunities, and Success. European Journal of Scientific
Research, 39, 1, 29-42.
Avgerou, C. (2010). Discourses on ICT and Development. Information Technologies &
International Development, 6, 3, 1.
Banerjee, P., & Chau, P.Y. (2004). An Evaluative Framework for Analysing E-government
Convergence Capability in Developing Countries. Electronic Government, an
International Journal, 1, 1, 29-48.
Baqir, M.N., Palvia, P., & Nemati, H. (2009). Evaluating Government ICT Policies : An
Extended Design-Actuality Gaps Framework. In Proceedings of Second Annual SIG
GlobDev Workshop, Phoneix, USA December.
Bass, J M., & Heeks, R. (2011). Changing Computing Curricula in African Universities:
Evaluating Progress and Challenges via Design-Reality Gap Analysis. The Electronic
Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 48, 5, 1–39.
Basu, S. (2004). E‐government and Developing Countries: An Overview. International
Review of Law, Computers & Technology, 18, 1, 109–132.
Bhatnagar, S. (2004). E-government: From Vision to Implementation. New Delhi: Sage.
Cepeda, G., & Martin, D. (2005). A Review of Case Studies Publishing in Management
Decision: Guides and Criteria for Achieving Quality in Qualitative Research.
Management Decision, 43, 6, 851-876.
Chadwick, B.P. (2005). Information Technology Revolution in the Republic of Korea: Socio-
economic Development Issues and Policymaking Challenges. In Mansourov, A. Y.
(Ed.), Bytes and Bullets: Information Technology Revolution and National Security on
the Korean Peninsula. Asia-Pacific Center for Strategic Studies.
Chen, Y. N., Chen, M., Huang, W., & Ching, R. K. H. (2006). E-Government Strategies in
Developed and Developing Countries : An Implementation Framework and Case
Study. Journal of Global Information Management, 14, 1, 23–46.
Choi, H. (2003). Reforming Government with Information Technology in South Korea. Asian
Journal of Political Science, 11, 1, 40–56.
Cordella, A., & Willcocks, L. P. (2010). Outsourcing, Bureaucracy and Public Value:
Reappraising the Notion of the “Contract State”. Government Information Quarterly,
27, 1, 82–88.
Dada, D. (2006). The Failure of E-Government in Developing Countries: A Literature
Review. The Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries, 26,
1, 1–10.

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 22
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, 9−30.
Ebrahim, Z., & Irani, Z. (2005). E-government Adoption: Architecture and Barriers. Business
Process Management Journal, 11,5, 589–611.
Evans, D., & Yen, D. C. (2006). E-Government: Evolving Relationship of Citizens and
Government, Domestic, and International Development. Government Information
Quarterly, 23, 2, 207-235.
Fang, Z. (2002). E-Government in Digital Era: Concept, Practice, and Development’,
International Journal of The Computer, The Internet and Management. 10, 2, 1-22.
Flick, U. (2007). Managing Quality in Qualitative Research. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Flowers, S. (1996). Software Failure! Management Failure: Amazing Stories and Cautionary
Tales. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
Frieden, R. (2005). Lessons from Broadband Development in Canada, Japan, Korea and the
United States. Telecommunications Policy, 29, 8, 595-613.
Gichoya, D. (2005). Factors Affecting the Successful Implementation of ICT Projects in
Government. Electronic Journal of E-government. 3, 4, 175-184.
Gilbert, D., Balestrini, P., & Littleboy, D. (2004). Barriers and Benefits in the Adoption of E-
government. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 17, 4/5, 286-301.
Godse, V., & Garg, A. (2007). From E-government to E-governance. Foundation of E-
government. Computer Society of India: http://www.csi-sigegov.org/1/2_313.pdf
Gupta, B., Dasgupta, S., & Gupta, A. (2008). Adoption of ICT in a Government Organization
in a Developing Country: An Empirical Study. The Journal of Strategic Information
Systems, 17, 2, 140–154.
Halchin, L. E. (2004). Electronic Government: Government Capability and Terrorist
Resource. Government Information Quarterly, 21, 406−419.
Harper, T. W., Ibrahim, O., & Ithnin, N. (2004). An Interconnected Success Factor Approach
for Service Functional in Malaysian Electronic Government, in: Janssen, M, Sol, H, G
& Wagenaar, R, W (eds), Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on
Electronic Commerce, Vol. 60, ACM International Conference Proceeding Series,
Delft, The Netherlands, October 25-27.
Hawari, A., & Heeks, R. (2010). Explaining ERP Failure in a Developing Country: a
Jordanian Case Study, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 23, 2, 135-
160.
Heeks, R. (2001). Understanding E-governance for Development, The University of
Manchester, Institute for Development, Policy and Management Information,
Systems, Technology and Government: Working Papers Series, Number 11/2001.
Heeks, R. (2002a). Information Systems and Developing Countries: Failure, Success, and
Local Improvisations. The Information Society, 18, 2, 101–112.
Heeks, R. (2002b). e-Government in Africa : Promise and Practice. Information Polity, 7, 2,
97–114.
Heeks, R. (2003). Most E-government for Development Projects Fail :How Can Risks be
Reduced? iGovernment Working Paper Series, Institute for Development Policy and
Management: Manchester, UK.
Heeks, R. (2006a). Health Information Systems: Failure, Success and Improvisation.
International Journal of Medical Informatics, 75, 2, 125–137.
Heeks, R. (2006b). Understanding and Measuring e-Government: International Benchmarking
Studies’, Paper prepared for UNDESA workshop, E-Participation and E-Government:
Understanding the Present and Creating the Future, Budapest, Hungary, 27-28 July
2006.

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 23
Heeks, R. (2006c). Implementing and Managing eGovernment: An International Text.

London, Sage Publications.
Herriot, R. E., & Firestone, W. A. (1983). Multisite Qualitative Policy Research: Optimising
Description and Generalizability. Educational Researcher,12, 14-19.
Homburg, V. (2008). Understanding E-government: Information Systems in Public
Administration, USA: Routledge.
Hu, G, Pan., W, Lu. M., & Wang, J. (2009). The Widely Shared Definition of e-Government.
The Electronic Library, 27, 6, 968-985.
Hwang, S. D., Choi, Y., & Myeong, S-H. (1999). Electronic Government in South Korea:
Conceptual Problems, Government, 16, 2, 227-285.
Hwang, J, S & Park, S, H (2009). Korea, Republic of in Digital Review of Asia Pacific 2009-
2010, Sage Publications India Pvt Ltd, India.
Hwang, J., & Syamsuddin, I. (2008). Failure of E-Government Implementation: A Case Study
of South Sulawesi. 2008 Third International Conference on Convergence and Hybrid
Information Technology, 952–960.
Im, J. H., & Seo, J. W. (2005). E-government in South Korea: Planning and Implementation.
Electronic Government: An International Journal, 2, 2, 188- 204.
Irani, Z., Love, P. E. D., Elliman, T., Jones, S., & Themistocleous, M. (2005). Evaluating E-
government: Learning from the Experiences of Two UK Local Authorities.
Information Systems Journal, 15, 61–82.
Irani, Z., Love, P. E. D., & Jones, S. (2008). Learning Lessons from Evaluating E-Govern-
ment: Reflective Case Experiences that Support Transformational Government.
Journal of Strategic Information Systems. 17, 2, 155-164.
Jeong, K. H. (2006). E-Government: Principles and Experiences in Korea, Gil-Job-E Media.
Jones S, Irani Z, Sharif A.M and Themistocleous M. (2006). E-Government Evaluation:
Reflections on Two Organizational. Thirty-Ninth Annual Hawaii International
conference on System Science (HICSS-39), [CD Proceedings], January 5-7, Island of
Kauai, Hawaii, USA.
Jorgensen, D. J., & Cable, S. (2002). Facing the Challenges of E-government: A Case Study
of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 67,15–21.
Kim, H. H., Moon, J. Y., & Yang, S. (2004). Broadband Penetration and Participatory
Politics: South Korea Case. In System Sciences, 2004. Proceedings of the 37th
Annual Hawaii International Conference on (10). IEEE.
Kim, H. J., Pan, G., & Pan, S. H. (2007). Managing IT-enabled Transformation in the Public
Sector: A Case Study on e-government in South Korea, Government Information
Quarterly, 24, 338-352.
Kim, S. T., (2006). Converging E-democracy and E-government Model Toward an
Evolutionary Model of E-governance: The case of South Korea. Asia-Pacific
Development Information Programme.
Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. (2003). Tipping Point Leadership. Harvard Business Review.
https://hbr.org/2003/04/tipping-point-leadership
Kling, R., & Lamb, R. (1999). IT and Organizational Change in Digital Economies: A Socio-
technical Approach. ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society, 29, 3, 17-25.
Lau, T. Y., Kim, S. W., & Atkin, D. (2005). An Examination of Factors Contributing to South
Korea’s Global Leadership in Broadband Adoption, Telematics and Informatics, 22,
349–359.
Lee, S. M. (2003). South Korea: From the Land of Morning Calm to ICT Hotbed, Academy of
Management Executive, 17, 2, 7-18.

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 24
Lee, K. S. (2009). A final Flowering of the Developmental State: The IT Policy Experiment
of the Korean Information Infrastructure 1995–2005, Government Information
Quarterly, 26, 567–576.
Lee, S. M. (2003). South Korea: From the Land of Morning Calm to ICT Hotbed, Academy of
Management Executive, 17, 2, 7-18.
Lim, E. T. K., Tan, C, W., & Pan, S. L. (2007). E-government Implementation: Balancing
Collaboration and Control in Stakeholder Management. International Journal of
Electronic Government Research, 3, 2, 1-28.
MAMPU. (1997a). Electronic Government Blueprint for Implementation. Kuala Lumpur:
Malaysian Administrative Modernisation and Management Planning Unit.
MAMPU. (1997b). Electronic Government Information Technology Policy and Standards
(EGIT). Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian Administrative Modernisation and Management
Planning Unit.
MAMPU. (1997c). Towards a Vision for a New Electronic Government. Kuala Lumpur:
Malaysian Administrative Modernisation and Management Planning Unit.
MAMPU. (2009). E-government: Transforming Lifestyle. Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian
Administrative Modernisation and Management Planning Unit, Prime Minister’s
Department, Government of Malaysia.
MAMPU. (2011a). The Malaysian Public Sector ICT Strategic Plan: Powering Public Sector
Digital Transformation 2011-2015. Putrajaya: MAMPU.
MAMPU. (2011b). Buku EG Tahunan. Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian Administrative
Modernisation and Management Planning Unit, Prime Minister’s Department,
Government of Malaysia, Malaysia.
Menon, S. (2011). Policy Agendas for South Korea’s Broadband Convergence Network
Infrastructure Project. Review of Policy Research, 28, 4, 347–364.
Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications.
Ministry of Security and Public Administration. (2012). Smart E-government.
http://www.mospa.go.kr/gpms/view/english/national/national02.jsp.
Mohamed, D. (2011). Electronic Court System (E-Court):Development and Implementation
in the Malaysian Courts and other Jurisdictions, The Law Review, 476-489.
Mohd Ramli, R. (2012), The Experience of Malaysian e-government, International
Proceedings of Economics Development & Research, 45, 39-43.
Moon, M. J. (2002). The Evolution of E‐ government among Municipalities: Rhetoric or
reality?. Public Administration Review, 62, 4, 424-433.
Moon, J., & Kim, Y. (2001). Extending the TAM for a Worldwide- Web Context, Information
and Management, 38, 4, 217–230.
Moulder, E. (2001). E-Government... If You Build It, Will They Come?, Public Management,
83, 8, 10–14.
National Computerization Agency (NCA). (2002). Korea Internet White Paper, Seoul:
Ministry of Information and Communication (MIC) and National Computerization
Agency (NCA).
National Information Society Agency (NIA). (2008). Informatization White Paper 2008
Republic of Korea. Seoul: NIA.
National Information Society Agency (NIA). (2010). Informatization White Paper 2010
Republic of Korea. Seoul: NIA.
Ndou, V. (2004). E-government for Developing Countries: Opportunities and Challenges. The
Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries, 18, 1, 1–24.
New Straits Times. (2008). PM: Pemudah Can Help Put Malaysia in Top 10.
http://www.pemudah.gov.my/web/guest/b4.

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 25
Ovum. (2009). Broadband Policy Development in the Republic of Korea, A Report for the
Global Information and Communications Technologies Department of the World
Bank, Ovum Consulting.
PEMUDAH. (2008). Annual Report: Public-Private Sector Collaboration towards a Globally
Competitive Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: Pemudah Secretariat.
Pudjianto, B., & Hangjung, Z. (2009). Factors Affecting E-government Assimilation in
Developing Countries. In 4th Communication Policy Research, South Conference,
Negombo, Sri Lanka.
Rais, A. K., & Nazariah, M.K. (2003). E-Government in Malaysia: Improving Responsiveness
and Capacity to Serve. Kuala Lumpur: Pelanduk Publications.
Raman, M., Kalianna, M., & Ming Yu, C. (2007). E-business and E-government: Issues and
Challenges in Malaysia. Information Technology Journal, 6, 3, 428–434.
Reddick, C. G., & Frank, H. A. (2007). E-government and its Influence on Managerial
Effectiveness: A Survey of Florida and Texas City Managers. Financial
Accountability & Management, 23, 1, 1-26.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2000). Research Methods for Business Students (2nd
ed). London: Prentice-Hall.
Shin, D. H. (2007). A Critique of Korean National Information Strategy: Case of National
Information Infrastructures. Government Information Quarterly, 24, 624-645.
Siddiquee, N. A. (2008). E-Government and Innovations in Service Delivery: The Malaysian
Experience, International Journal of Public Administration, 31, 7, 797-815.
Signore, O., Chesi, F., & Pallotti, M. (2005). E-government: Challenges and Opportunities,
CGM Italy, XIX Annual Conference, Florence, Italy.
Silcock, R. (2001). What is e-Government?. Parliamentary Affairs, 54, 1, 88-101.
Sorrentino, M., & Virili, F. (2003). Socio-Technical Perspectives on eGovernment Initiatives.
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2739, 91–94.
Sprano, E., & Zakak, A. (2000). E-commerce Capable: Competitive Advantage for Countries
in the New World E-commerce, Competitive Review, 10, 2, 114–121.
Stanforth, C. (2010). Analysing e-Government Project Failure: Comparing Factoral, Systems
and Interpretive Approaches, iGovernment Working Paper 20. Manchester Centre for
Development Informatics.
Suh, J. (2006). Overview of Korea’s Development Process Until 1997’, in Suh, J & Aubert J,
E (Eds), Korea As a Knowledge Economy: Evolutionary Process and Lessons
Learned. Washington DC: The International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development / The World Bank, 14-46.
Syamsuddin, I. (2011). Evaluation of E-government Initiatives In Developing Countries: An
ITPOSMO Approach. International Research Journal of Applied and Basic
Sciences, 2, 12, 439–446.
Tan, F. B., & Leewongcharoen, K. (2005). Factors Contributing to IT Industry Success in
Developing Countries: The Case of Thailand. Information Technology for
Development, 11, 2, 161–194.
Tengku Mohammad, T.N. (2007), AKICT 2007 Title E-Syariah.
http://www.esyariah.gov.my/portal/page/portal/Portal%20E-Syariah%20BI/E-
Syariah%20Portal%20Archive%20English/E-
Syariah%20Portal%20Archive%202007/November/Portal%20E-
Syariah%20News%2030112007

www.ejisdc.org
EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 26
The Star. (2007). E-tanah System Lets Many Down, 22 December 2007.
http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/bar_news/berita_badan_peguam/e_tanah_system_let
s_many_down.html?date=2015-06-01
United Nations. (2005). UN Global E-government Readiness Report 2005: From E-
government to E-inclusion. New York: Department of Economic and Social Affairs,
Division for Public Administration and Development Management.
United Nations. (2008). UN e-Government Survey 2008: From e-Government to Connected
Governance, UN Global e-Government Survey 2003. New York: Department of
Economic and Social Affairs, Division for Public Administration and Development
Management.
United Nations. (2010). UN E-Government Survey 2010: Leveraging E-government at a Time
of Financial and Economic Crisis. New York: Department of Economic and Social
Affairs, Division for Public Administration and Development Management.
United Nations. (2012). UN E-Government Survey 2012: E-government for The People. New
York: Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Division for Public Administration
and Development Management, UN.
United Nations. (2014). UN E-Government Survey 2014: E-government for the Future We
Want, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Division for Public Administration
and Development Management, UN.
Walsham, G. (1995). The Emergence of Interpretivism in IS research, Information Systems
Research, 6, 376–394.
Walsham, G., & Sahay, S. (2006). Research on Information Systems in Developing
Countries: Current Landscape and Future Prospects. Information Technology for
Development, 12, 1, 7–24.
Wang, H., & Hou, J. (2010). The External and Internal Barriers to E-government
Implementation. In Management and Service Science (MASS), 2010 International
Conference on (1-4). IEEE.
Weerakkody, V., Dwivedi, Y., K., & Kurunanda., A. (2009). Implementing e-Government in
Sri Lanka: Lessons form the UK, Information Technology for Development, 15, 3,
171-192.
Weerakkody, V., El-Haddadeh, R., Sabol, T., Ghoneim, A., & Dzupka, P. (2012). E-
Government Implementation Strategies in Developed and Transition Economies: A
Comparative Study. International Journal of Information Management, 32, 1, 66–74.
Wescott, C. (2001). E-Government in the Asia Paciﬁc Region. Asian Journal of Political
Science, 9, 2, 1 – 24.
Whitson, T. L., & Davis, L. (2001). Best Practices in Electronic Government: Comprehensive
Electronic Information Dissemination for Science and Technology, Government
Information Quarterly, 18, 2, 79-91.
Wimmer, M. A. (2002). Integrated Service Modeling for Online One-Stop Government,
Electronic Markets, 12, 3, 149-156.
Yin, R. K. (1994), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, (2nd edn). Thousand Oaks:
Sage.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (4th edn). Los Angeles,
California: Sage Publications.
Zhang, Y. J., & Hsieh, C.-T. (2010). Chinese Citizens’ Opinions on E-government Benefits,
Issues and Critical Success Factors. Electronic Government, an International Journal,
7, 2, 137–147.

www.ejisdc.org

E-Government Implementation Challenges in Malaysia and South Korea: A Comparative Study Razlini Mohd Ramli

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

E-Government Implementation Challenges in Malaysia and South Korea: A Comparative Study Razlini Mohd Ramli

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EJISDC (2017), 80, 7, 1-26 1

E-GOVERNMENT IMPLEMENTATION CHALLENGES IN MALAYSIA AND

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

2. CHALLENGES AND ISSUES IN E-GOVERNMENT IMPLEMENTATION: A

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

Developed Countries Developing Countries

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

2.1 Design-Reality Gap Model

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

Figure 1: Design-Reality Gap Model by Heeks (2003)

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

4. FINDINGS: A CASE STUDY OF E-LAND, E-SYARIAH AND PEMUDAH & E-GOVERNMENT

4.1.1 Design-Reality Gap Model (E-land)

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

Dimensions Rating Comments

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

4.2.1 Design-Reality Gap Model (e-syariah)

Dimensions Rating Comment

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

4.3.1 Design-Reality Gap Model (Pemudah)

Dimensions Rating Comment

As for Pemudah, technology infrastructure becomes one of the main hurdles in

4.4 E-government in South Korea

4.4.1 Design-Reality Gap Model (South Korea)

Dimensions Rating Comment

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

and privacy issues.

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

5. DISCUSSIONS: COMPARISON OF RESEARCH FINDINGS

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

Challenges Malaysian Government South Korean Government

Technical Lack of a quality technical have a robust high-speed internet

It is apparent that the South Korean e-government is more advanced in its e-

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

5.1 A Conceptual Model for E-government Implementation

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

E-government Failure E-government Success

 Vague policy and strategy  Clear policy and strategy.

 Lack of coordination  Better coordination

Figure 2: A Conceptual Model for E-government Implementation (Adapted from

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

6. CONCLUSION, RESEARCH LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

Heeks, R. (2006c). Implementing and Managing eGovernment: An International Text.

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries

You might also like