IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eur/ejisjr/287.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Formulation and Validation of a Conceptual Framework for the Transition from E-government to M-government

Author

Listed:
  • Badir Yousif Rafee Alharmoodi

    (Faculty of Management and Economics, Sultan Idris Education University, Malaysia)

  • Muhammad Modi Lakulu

Abstract

The proliferation of mobile devices has spurred many nations across the globe to make the necessary transition from e-government to m-government to provide better services to their citizens more flexibly, transcending temporal and geographical barriers. However, making such transitions is fraught with numerous challenges that may impede a smooth transition of these services. To make matters worse, there is a lack of conceptual frameworks to which relevant stakeholders can refer. Against this backdrop, this study was carried out to formulate and validate a conceptual framework to guide the transition of services from e-government to m-government in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). This study was based on qualitative approach involving a survey in which 15 academicians from reputable universities in the UAE were selected to seek their opinions on the conceptual framework of the study. The research instrument used in this study constituted a survey questionnaire consisting of two parts. The first part sought to gather personal information of the participating experts, namely gender, age, educational level, working experience, and fields of expertise. The second part aimed to elicit their opinions regarding the appropriateness of five constructs and their components used for the formulation of the conceptual framework of the study, namely IT Infrastructure, IT Skills, Security and Privacy, Knowledge of Operating Standard and Protocols, and Operating Frameworks, each of which was rated along a spectrum of agreement based on 4-point Likert-type scales, ranging from ‘1’ (Strongly Disagree) to ‘4’ (Strongly Agree). This part consisted of 25 items, with each construct being rated by five items. The survey questionnaire was pilot-tested involving four experts in the field of mobile communication. The analysis of experts’ opinions were analyzed based on the Fuzzy Delphi Method, showing that IT Infrastructure and Security and Privacy were deemed highly valid, closely followed by the remaining constructs, namely IT skills, Operational Frameworks, and Knowledge of Standards and Protocols. Likewise, all of their components were also deemed highly valid. The above findings strongly suggest that all the five constructs as well as their components are crucial aspects that may have significant impacts on the transition of services from e-government to m-government in the UAE. From the practical standpoint, the validated conceptual framework help provide a greater insight into the understanding of potential challenges that relevant stakeholders have to face as they embark on making such an ambitious transition. However, more studies are required to examine the usability of the proposed conceptual framework for the transition of services from e-government to m-government from the perspective of practitioners working in the related fields.

Suggested Citation

  • Badir Yousif Rafee Alharmoodi & Muhammad Modi Lakulu, 2022. "The Formulation and Validation of a Conceptual Framework for the Transition from E-government to M-government," European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies Articles, Revistia Research and Publishing, vol. 8, January -.
    • Handle: RePEc:eur:ejisjr:287
    DOI: 10.26417/502cxc20
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://revistia.org/index.php/ejis/article/view/5895
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://revistia.org/files/articles/ejis_v8_i1_22/Alharmoodi.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.26417/502cxc20?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Foroogh Ghasemi & Mohammad Hossein Mahmoudi Sari & Vahidreza Yousefi & Reza Falsafi & Jolanta Tamošaitienė, 2018. "Project Portfolio Risk Identification and Analysis, Considering Project Risk Interactions and Using Bayesian Networks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-23, May.
    2. Ungureanu Anca & Braicu Cezar & Adrian Ungureanu, 2015. "Risk Identification in Project Management," International Conference on Economic Sciences and Business Administration, Spiru Haret University, vol. 2(1), pages 259-266, December.
    3. R. A. Aliev & O. H. Huseynov & R. Serdaroglu, 2016. "Ranking of Z-Numbers and Its Application in Decision Making," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(06), pages 1503-1519, November.
    4. Aven, Terje, 2016. "Risk assessment and risk management: Review of recent advances on their foundation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(1), pages 1-13.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:eur:ejfejr:45 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Aven, Terje & Renn, Ortwin, 2018. "Improving government policy on risk: Eight key principles," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 230-241.
    3. repec:arp:tjssrr:2019:p:69-75 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Mussard, Stéphane & Pi Alperin, María Noel, 2021. "Accounting for risk factors on health outcomes: The case of Luxembourg," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(3), pages 1180-1197.
    5. Zio, E., 2018. "The future of risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 176-190.
    6. Tasneem Bani-Mustafa & Nicola Pedroni & Enrico Zio & Dominique Vasseur & Francois Beaudouin, 2020. "A hierarchical tree-based decision-making approach for assessing the relative trustworthiness of risk assessment models," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 234(6), pages 748-763, December.
    7. Aigner, Philipp & Schlütter, Sebastian, 2023. "Enhancing gradient capital allocation with orthogonal convexity scenarios," ICIR Working Paper Series 47/23, Goethe University Frankfurt, International Center for Insurance Regulation (ICIR).
    8. Mangirdas Morkunas & Gintaras Cernius & Gintare Giriuniene, 2019. "Assessing Business Risks of Natural Gas Trading Companies: Evidence from GET Baltic," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-14, July.
    9. Scholz, Roland W. & Czichos, Reiner & Parycek, Peter & Lampoltshammer, Thomas J., 2020. "Organizational vulnerability of digital threats: A first validation of an assessment method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 282(2), pages 627-643.
    10. Dr Jason Mwanza & Nothando Tshuma, 2023. "Mitigating Business Risk in Manufacturing SMEs: A nexus between informal and formal business risk management: A case of Bulawayo, Zimbabwe," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 7(1), pages 1107-1138, January.
    11. Don Pagach & Monika Wieczorek-Kosmala, 2020. "The Challenges and Opportunities for ERM Post-COVID-19: Agendas for Future Research," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-10, December.
    12. KeumJi Kim & SeongHwan Yoon, 2018. "Assessment of Building Damage Risk by Natural Disasters in South Korea Using Decision Tree Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-22, April.
    13. Aven, Terje, 2020. "Three influential risk foundation papers from the 80s and 90s: Are they still state-of-the-art?," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    14. Tatiana Yu. Kudryavtseva & Angi E. Skhvediani & Maiia S. Leukhina & Alexandra O. Schneider, 2023. "A Fuzzy Model for Personnel Risk Analysis: Case of Russian-Finnish Export-Import Operations of Small and Medium Enterprises," Journal of Applied Economic Research, Graduate School of Economics and Management, Ural Federal University, vol. 22(3), pages 683-709.
    15. Marcin Nowak & Rafał Mierzwiak & Marcin Butlewski, 2020. "Occupational risk assessment with grey system theory," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 28(2), pages 717-732, June.
    16. Kjell Hausken, 2019. "Principal–Agent Theory, Game Theory, and the Precautionary Principle," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 105-127, June.
    17. Kayode Ajewole & Elliott Dennis & Ted C. Schroeder & Jason Bergtold, 2021. "Relative valuation of food and non‐food risks with a comparison to actuarial values: A best–worst approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(6), pages 927-943, November.
    18. Simon Ashby & Trevor Buck & Stephanie Nöth-Zahn & Thomas Peisl, 2018. "Emerging IT Risks: Insights from German Banking," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 43(2), pages 180-207, April.
    19. Tosoni, E. & Salo, A. & Govaerts, J. & Zio, E., 2019. "Comprehensiveness of scenarios in the safety assessment of nuclear waste repositories," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 561-573.
    20. Wu, Di & Yan, Xiangbin & Peng, Rui & Wu, Shaomin, 2020. "Risk-attitude-based defense strategy considering proactive strike, preventive strike and imperfect false targets," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    21. Hasibuan, Abdul Muis & Gregg, Daniel & Stringer, Randy, 2020. "Accounting for diverse risk attitudes in measures of risk perceptions: A case study of climate change risk for small-scale citrus farmers in Indonesia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    22. Gianluca Pescaroli & David Alexander, 2018. "Understanding Compound, Interconnected, Interacting, and Cascading Risks: A Holistic Framework," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(11), pages 2245-2257, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    e-government; m-government framework;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eur:ejisjr:287. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Revistia Research and Publishing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://revistia.org/index.php/ejis .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.