شناسایی و تبیین پیشایندها و پسایندهای حکمرانی هوشمند با استفاده از روش دلفی فازی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت، گروه مدیریت دولتی، دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان، زاهدان، ایران

2 گروه مدیریت دولتی، دانشکده مدیریت و اقتصاد، دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان، زاهدان، ایران

10.52547/jpap.2021.222712.1081

چکیده

هدف: پژوهش حاضر به­‌منظور شناسایی پیشایندها و پسایندهای حکمرانی هوشمند از طریق رویکرد دلفی فازی انجام  شده است.
طراحی/روش‌شناسی/رویکرد­: پژوهش در زمره پژوهش‌­های آمیخته در رهیافت قیاسی - استقرایی است؛ که از حیث هدف، کاربردی و از نظر ماهیت و روش، توصیفی -پیمایشی است. جامعه آماری پژوهش را کلیه فعالان حوزه حکمرانی تشکیل می‌­دهند که 26 نفر از خبرگان آن­ها بر اساس اصل کفایت نظری و با استفاده از روش نمونه­‌گیری هدفمند انتخاب شده‌­اند. در بخش کیفی پژوهش برای گردآوری اطلاعات از مصاحبه نیمه ساختاریافته استفاده شد. علاوه بر این در بخش کمی برای گردآوری اطلاعات از  پرسشنامه مقایسه زوجی استفاده شد که روایی و پایایی آن با استفاده از روایی محتوا و آزمون مجدد تأیید شد. در بخش کیفی، داده‌­های به دست آمده از مصاحبه با استفاده از نرم افزار Atlas.ti و روش شناسه‌گذاری تحلیل شد. همچنین در بخش کمی پژوهش، با استفاده از فن دلفی فازی اولویت­‌بندی پیشایندها و پسایندها انجام پذیرفت.
یافته­‌های پژوهش: نتایج پژوهش حاکی از آن است که از میان پیشایندها به ترتیب زیرساخت هوشمند، تعامل هوشمند، دولت و حکمرانی الکترونیک، حاکمیت قانون، افراد و سازمان هوشمند، مدیریت هوشمند، هوشمندسازی مبتنی بر اطلاعات، جامعه دانشی، امنیت هوشمند و چابک‌سازی، گشودگی و تصمیم‌گیری و ارشاد عمومی، خردگرایی و خلاق‌گرایی و مهندسی مجدد فرآیندها بالاترین اولویت را داشتند. و در میان پسایندها کارایی و اثربخشی، توسعه پایدار، کاهش هزینه‌ها، کاهش فساد، افزایش شفافیت، عدالت فراگیر و اخلاق‌گرایی، صیانت از حقوق شهروندی، ایجاد دموکراسی الکترونیک، همکاری و تبادل داده، سیستم‌های اطلاعاتی جامع و تسهیم اطلاعات، بازنگری قوانین، پاسخ لحظه‌ای / آنی به چالش‌ها، تحقق وحدت و ارتقاء کیفیت زندگی به ترتیب دارای بالاترین الویت بودند.
محدودیت‌ها و پیامدها: عدم دسترسی آسان به خبرگان و کم بودن ادبیات پژوهش و تعداد معدود پژوهش‌های صورت گرفته در ارتباط با مفهوم حکمرانی هوشمند.
پیامدهای عملی:  کمک به ارائه مدل حکمرانی هوشمند و تلاش جهت استقرار آن در کشور.
ابتکار یا ارزش مقاله: از آنجا که مقاله حاضر به مفهوم حکمرانی هوشمند و شناسایی و اولویت‌بندی پیشایندها و پسایندهای آن پرداخته است، به فهم عمیق­تر این مفهوم کمک می­کند و ایده­هایی را جهت عملیاتی کردن آن در فضای کشور فراهم می‌­آورد.
نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Exploring the antecedents and consequences of smart governance using the fuzzy Delphi method (FDM)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Seyed Abdolrasoul Hosseini 1
  • Mohammad Ghasemi 2
  • Nourmohammad Yaghoubi 2
  • Habibollah Salarzehi 2
1 Ph.D. candidate in Management, Department of Public Management, Sistan and Baluchestan University, Zahedan, Iran
2 Department of Public Management, Faculty of Management and Economics, Sistan and Baluchestan University, Zahedan, Iran
چکیده [English]

Purpose: The present study aimed to identify the antecedents and consequences of smart governance using the fuzzy Delphi method.
Design/Methodology/Approach: The present study is a mixed-method one that was conducted using a deductive-inductive approach. It is also an applied study in terms of its objective and a descriptive survey study in terms of the design and methodology. The research population included all experts in the field of governance. Accordingly, 26 experts were selected based on the principle of theoretical adequacy and using purposive sampling. In the qualitative part of the study, semi-structured interviews were conducted to collect data. In addition, in the quantitative part, a pairwise comparison questionnaire was used to collect data. The validity and reliability of the questionnaire were confirmed via content validity and test-retest method. In the qualitative part, the data collected from the interviews were analyzed using ATLAS.ti software and the indexing method. Besides, in the quantitative part of the study, the antecedents and consequences of smart governance were ranked using the fuzzy Delphi method.
Research Findings: A comparison of the precedents of smart governance showed that smart infrastructure, smart interaction, e-government and e-governance, rule of law, smart people and organization, smart management, information-based smartening, knowledge society, smart security, creating agility, openness, decision-making, public guidance, rationalism, creativity, and re-engineering of processes were ranked as the most important factors, respectively. It was also shown that efficiency and effectiveness, sustainable development, cost reduction, reducing corruption, increasing transparency, inclusive justice and ethics, protection of civil rights, building e-democracy, cooperation and data exchange, comprehensive information systems and information sharing, revision of rules, instant/immediate response to challenges, achieving unity, and improving quality of life were the most important consequences of smart government, respectively. The insights from this study can contribute to establishing smart governance.
Limitations & Consequences: This study was conducted with some shortcomings including the difficulty in accessing the experts, and lack of similar studies in the literature, and limited research on the concept of smart governance.
Practical Consequences: The findings of this study can contribute to developing a model of smart governance and implementing it in Iran.
Innovation or value of the Article: Since the present article deals with the concept of smart governance and identifies and ranks its precedents and consequences, it helps to understand this concept more deeply and provides ideas for its implementation in the country.
Paper Type: Research Article

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Precedents
  • Consequences
  • Governance
  • Somatization
  • Smart Governance
  1. Adyani, S. Y. (2017). Governance techniques: The Art of human development. Office of Fundamental Government Studies: Tehran, Research Center of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, First Edition, 1-114 (In Persian).
  2. Alawadhi, S., Aldama-Nalda, A., Chourabi, H., Gil-Garcia, J. R., Leung, S., Mellouli, S., & Walker, S. (2012). Building understanding of smart city initiatives. In Electronic government (pp. 40-53). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
  3. Anindra Firman, Suhono H. Supangkat, Suhono H. Supangkat (2018). Smart Governance as Smart City Critical Success Factor (Case in 15 Cities in Indonesia). International Conference on ICT for Smart Society (ICISS).
  4. Anthopoulos, L. G. & Reddick, C. G. (2016). Smart City and Smart Government: Synonymous or Complementary? Proceedings of the 25th International Conference Companion on World Wide Web, 351-355.
  5. Anthopoulos, L., Reddick, C. G., Giannakidou, I., & Mavridis, N. (2015). Why e-government projects fail? An analysis of the Healthcare. gov website.Government Information Quarterly.
  6. Azab Daftar, A., Rajabi Farjad, H . (2019).Effect of good governance on organizational health according to the mediating role of political behavior. Journal of Public Administration Perspective, 10(1), 141-169. (In Persian)
  7. Azari Jahromi, M. J. (2021). Somatization of governance based on new technologies. Etemad Newspaper, Monday, January 12, 2021(In Persian).
  8. Bank, M. (2014). Somatization; The main tool for achieving a wise government, Shahr-e-Ara Technology Journal, 9 (14) (In Persian).
  9. Batagan, L. (2011). Smart cities and sustainability models. Informatica Economica˘, 15, 80–87.
  10. Bevir, M. (2013) "Governance: A Very Short Introduction," Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
  11. Bingham L.B., Nabatchi T., O'Leary R. (2005) "The new governance: Practices and processes for stakeholder and citizen participation in the work of government", Public Administration Review, 65(5), pp. 547–558.
  12. Cellary, W. (2013). Smart governance for smart industries. InProceedings of the 7th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance. 91-93.
  13. Creswell JW. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research.Boston: PearsonPublication.
  14. Deghati, A., Yaghoubi, N.M., Kamalian, A.R., Dehghani, M. & Moradi, E. (2019). Presenting a Phased Development Pattern of Electronic Governance Using Meta-synthesis Approach. Journal of Public Administration Perspective, 10(4), 89-120. (In Persian)
  15. Dewi Mutiara, Siti Yuniarti and Bambang Pratama (2018). Smart governance for smart city. Earth and Environmental Science 126 (2018) 012073.
  16. Ebadi, N. & Pirannejad, A. (2014). E-governance in municipalities: A study of the Iranian municipalities’ portal. Government Management, 2, 228-265 (In Persian).
  17. Fukuyama, F. (2013). What is governance? Governance, 26(3), 347–368.
  18. Giffinger, R., & Gudrun, H. (2010). Smart cities ranking: an effective instrument for the positioning of the cities?. ACE: Architecture, City and Environment, 4(12), 7-26 .
  19. Gil-Garcia, J. R., & Aldama-Nalda, A. (2013). Smart city initiatives and the policy context: the case of the rapid business opening office in Mexico City. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance. 234-237. ACM .
  20. Gil-Garcia, J. R., Helbig, N., & Ojo, A. (2014). Being smart: Emerging technologies and innovation in the public sector. Government Information Quarterly, 31, 11-18.
  21. Hassan, I. M., Mahdi, A. A., & Al-Khafaji, N. J. (2014). THEORETICAL STUDY TO HIGHLIGHT THE SMART GOVERNMENT COMPONENTS IN 21 st CENTURY. International Journal of Computer Science and Mobile Computing, 3(12), 333-347.
  22. Hoshino, H., & Zhong, N. (2007). Dynamic Hybrid Type Mining in an Intelligent e-Government Model. In Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conferences on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology-Workshops. 26-30. IEEE Computer Society.
  23. Hufty, M. (2011) "Investigating Policy Processes: The Governance Analytical Framework (GAF)," in Research for Sustainable Development: Foundations, Experiences, and Perspectives.
  24. Information and Communication Technology Study and Policy Group (2014). Statistics management, technology, and information analysis. The 36th Smart City Symposium, Mashhad Municipality, Department of Planning and Development, 1-55 (In Persian).
  25. Jiménez C.E. (2013) "Smart Governance: An approach to smart governance", Perspective Journal.
  26. Kamandari, M. & Rahnama, M. R. (2017). Evaluation of smart city indicators in the four regions of Kerman. Quarterly Journal of Geographical Space, 17(58), 209-226 (In Persian).
  27. Kaufmann, Danial (2010), "The World Wide Governance Indicators: Methodology and Analytical Issues", The World Bank Development Ressarch Group Macro economics and Growth Team September.
  28. Key, T. and We, C. (2009). Smart IT. IEEE IT Pro, 20–23.
  29. Kumar, T. V. (2015). E-governance for smart cities. In E-governance for smart cities (pp. 1-43). Springer, Singapore.
  30. Mardani, M. R. & Mansoori, E. (2016). Identifying key indicators of summarization of governance institutions (Case Study: Ministry of Interior), Social Development Quarterly (Former Journal of Human Development), 10(4), 171-196 (In Persian).
  31. McAfee, A., Brynjolfsson, E., Davenport, T. H., Patil, D. J., & Barton, D. (2012). Big data: the management revolution. Harvard business review, 90(10), 60-68.
  32. Micera, R., Presenza, A., Splendiani, S., & Del Chiappa, G. (2013). SMART Destinations. New strategies to manage tourism industry. In International Forum on Knowledge Asset Dynamics IFKAD (2013)(págs. 1405-1422). Zagreb: IFKAD. Recuperado el (Vol. 19).
  33. Montazeri, M., Bahmani, A., & Fathizadeh, A. (2018). The model of good governance from the perspective of Nahj al-Balaghah: A step towards explaining the Iranian Islamic model of progress. Studies of the Iranian Islamic Progress Model, 6 (11), 133-155 (In Persian).
  34. Pereira, G. V., Parycek, P., Falco, E., & Kleinhans, R. (2018). Smart governance in the context of smart cities: A literature review. Information Polity, 23(2), 143-162. https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-170067.
  35. Pourezat, A. A. (2008). Fundamentals of knowledge of government and governance. Tehran: SAMT Press (In Persian).
  36. Saldena, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Translate by Guywan, A., Scientific and Cultural Publishing Company.
  37. Sapru, R.K. (2006), Administration Theories and Management Thought, Delhi, Pubihshed by Prentice Hall of India.
  38. Savoldelli, A., Codagnone, C., & Misuraca, G. (2014). “Understanding the e-government paradox: Learning from literature and practice on barriers to adoption”, Government Information Quarterly, 31, S63-S71.
  39. Scholl H.J., Scholl, M.C. (2014) Smart governance: A road map for research and practice. In iConference 2014 Proceedings, pp.163–176, http:// dx. doi. org/ 10.9776/14060.
  40. Shahpari, A. & Kalantari, N. (2015). Developing a framework for establishing a smart government in Iran. Quarterly Journal of Organizational Resource Management Research, 5 (4), 115-156 (In Persian).
  41. Sharma, Sujeet Kumar (2015). Adoption of e-government Services:The role of service quality dimensions and demographic variables.Transforming Government:People,Process and Policy,Vol.9,No.2,pp: 207-222.
  42. Smith, D. & Politowski, D. (2008). Good Governance as Risk-Based Management Systems Approach to Internal Control. Second Edition, London, Published BSI.
  43. Soltaninejad, A. & Goodarzi, S. (2017). Information technology and transformation in the concept of good governance, Politics Quarterly, Journal of the Faculty of Law and Political Science, 1, 79-97 (In Persian).
  44. Un-Habitat. (2006). “The Global Campaign on Urban Governance”. www.un habitat.org.
  45. Valle-Cruz, D., & Sandoval-Almazán, R. (2014). E-gov 4.0: a literature review towards the new government. In Proceedings of the 15th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research. 333-334. ACM.
  46. Zaheer Allam and Peter Newman (2018). Redefining the Smart City: Culture, Metabolism and Governance. Smart Cities 2018, 1, 4–25.
  47. Zahiri Mohd N. (2013) "Getting to the next level of smart government", MAMPU (The Malaysian Administrative Modernization and Management Planning Unit).