IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jftint/v15y2023i2p66-d1058416.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Disruptive Technologies for Parliaments: A Literature Review

Author

Listed:
  • Dimitris Koryzis

    (Department of Management Science and Technology, University of the Peloponnese, 22131 Tripoli, Greece)

  • Dionisis Margaris

    (Department of Digital Systems, University of the Peloponnese, Kladas, 23100 Sparta, Greece)

  • Costas Vassilakis

    (Department of Informatics and Telecommunications, University of the Peloponnese, 22131 Tripoli, Greece)

  • Konstantinos Kotis

    (Intelligent Systems Laboratory, Department of Cultural Technology and Communication, University of the Aegean, University Hill, 81100 Mytilene, Greece)

  • Dimitris Spiliotopoulos

    (Department of Management Science and Technology, University of the Peloponnese, 22131 Tripoli, Greece)

Abstract

Exploitation and use of disruptive technologies, such as the Internet of Things, recommender systems, and artificial intelligence, with an ambidextrous balance, are a challenge, nowadays. Users of the technologies, and stakeholders, could be part of a new organisational model that affects business procedures and processes. Additionally, the use of inclusive participatory organisational models is essential for the effective adoption of these technologies. Such models aim to transform organisational structures, as well. Public organisations, such as the parliament, could utilise information systems’ personalisation techniques. As there are a lot of efforts to define the framework, the methodology, the techniques, the platforms, and the suitable models for digital technologies adoption in public organisations, this paper aims to provide a literature review for disruptive technology inclusive use in parliaments. The review emphasises the assessment of the applicability of the technologies, their maturity and usefulness, user acceptance, their performance, and their correlation to the adoption of relevant innovative, inclusive organisational models. It is argued that the efficient digital transformation of democratic institutions, such as parliaments, with the use of advanced e-governance tools and disruptive technologies, requires strategic approaches for adoption, acceptance, and inclusive service adaptation.

Suggested Citation

  • Dimitris Koryzis & Dionisis Margaris & Costas Vassilakis & Konstantinos Kotis & Dimitris Spiliotopoulos, 2023. "Disruptive Technologies for Parliaments: A Literature Review," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-21, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jftint:v:15:y:2023:i:2:p:66-:d:1058416
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/15/2/66/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/15/2/66/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Snyder, Hannah, 2019. "Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 333-339.
    2. Pauget, Bertrand & Dammak, Ahmed, 2019. "The implementation of the Internet of Things: What impact on organizations?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 140-146.
    3. Mortazavi, Sina & Eslami, Mohammad H. & Hajikhani, Arash & Väätänen, Juha, 2021. "Mapping inclusive innovation: A bibliometric study and literature review," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 736-750.
    4. Marian STOICA & Bogdan GHILIC-MICU & Marinela MIRCEA, 2019. "Restarting the Information Society Based on Blockchain Technology," Informatica Economica, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 23(3), pages 39-48.
    5. Hopster, Jeroen, 2021. "What are socially disruptive technologies?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    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. Dabić, Marina & Obradović, Tena & Vlačić, Božidar & Sahasranamam, Sreevas & Paul, Justin, 2022. "Frugal innovations: A multidisciplinary review & agenda for future research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 914-929.
    2. Kalpokiene, Julija & Kalpokas, Ignas, 2023. "Creative encounters of a posthuman kind – anthropocentric law, artificial intelligence, and art," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    3. Ali Zackery & Joseph Amankwah-Amoah & Zahra Heidari Darani & Shiva Ghasemi, 2022. "COVID-19 Research in Business and Management: A Review and Future Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-32, August.
    4. Eusebius Pantja Pramudya & Lukas Rumboko Wibowo & Fitri Nurfatriani & Iman Kasiman Nawireja & Dewi Ratna Kurniasari & Sakti Hutabarat & Yohanes Berenika Kadarusman & Ananda Oemi Iswardhani & Rukaiyah , 2022. "Incentives for Palm Oil Smallholders in Mandatory Certification in Indonesia," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-28, April.
    5. Peter Schnell & Phillip Haag & Hans Christian Jünger, 2022. "Implementation of Digital Technologies in Construction Companies: Establishing a Holistic Process which Addresses Current Barriers," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-18, December.
    6. Chen, Yanyan & Mandler, Timo & Meyer-Waarden, Lars, 2021. "Three decades of research on loyalty programs: A literature review and future research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 179-197.
    7. Hongxia Jin & Lu Lu & Haojun Fan, 2022. "Global Trends and Research Hotspots in Long COVID: A Bibliometric Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-14, March.
    8. Prince Donkor Ameyaw & Walter Timo de Vries, 2020. "Transparency of Land Administration and the Role of Blockchain Technology, a Four-Dimensional Framework Analysis from the Ghanaian Land Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-25, December.
    9. Amal Almansour & Reem Alotaibi & Hajar Alharbi, 2022. "Text-rating review discrepancy (TRRD): an integrative review and implications for research," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 1-15, December.
    10. Švarc, Jadranka & Dabić, Marina, 2021. "Transformative innovation policy or how to escape peripheral policy paradox in European research peripheral countries," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    11. So, Hau Wing & Lafortezza, Raffaele, 2022. "Reviewing the impacts of eco-labelling of forest products on different dimensions of sustainability in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    12. Mónica de Castro-Pardo & Pascual Fernández Martínez & Amelia Pérez Zabaleta & João C. Azevedo, 2021. "Dealing with Water Conflicts: A Comprehensive Review of MCDM Approaches to Manage Freshwater Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-32, April.
    13. Mackey, Jeremy D., 2022. "The effect of cultural values on the strength of the relationship between interpersonal and organizational workplace deviance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 760-771.
    14. Alexander Salmen, 2021. "New Product Launch Success: A Literature Review," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 69(1), pages 151-176.
    15. Halim Lee & Jaewon Son & Dayoon Joo & Jinhyeok Ha & Seongreal Yun & Chul-Hee Lim & Woo-Kyun Lee, 2020. "Sustainable Water Security Based on the SDG Framework: A Case Study of the 2019 Metro Manila Water Crisis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-19, August.
    16. Rachel Greer & Timo Wirth & Derk Loorbach, 2023. "The Circular Decision-Making Tree: an Operational Framework," Circular Economy and Sustainability,, Springer.
    17. Del Vecchio, Pasquale & Secundo, Giustina & Garzoni, Antonello, 2023. "Phygital technologies and environments for breakthrough innovation in customers' and citizens' journey. A critical literature review and future agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    18. Pina Puntillo & Carmela Gulluscio & Donald Huisingh & Stefania Veltri, 2021. "Reevaluating waste as a resource under a circular economy approach from a system perspective: Findings from a case study," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 968-984, February.
    19. Heleen Dreyer & Nadine Sonnenberg & Daleen Van der Merwe, 2022. "Transcending Linearity in Understanding Green Consumer Behaviour: A Social–Cognitive Framework for Behaviour Changes in an Emerging Economy Context," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-27, November.
    20. Sultan Çetin & Catherine De Wolf & Nancy Bocken, 2021. "Circular Digital Built Environment: An Emerging Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-34, June.

    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:gam:jftint:v:15:y:2023:i:2:p:66-:d:1058416. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.