Modeling the Antecedents of Inter-Orgnanizational Collaboration Ecosystem Formation to Provide Integrated E-Government Services

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 information technology department, faculty of technology and industrial management, university of tehran, tehran, iran

2 Faculty of entrepreneurship, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Purpose: Providing high-quality and efficient public services remains a fundamental challenge for modern governments. Many inefficiencies in public sector management stem from the misalignment between governance structures and the needs and lifestyles of citizens. Key challenges include bureaucratic complexities, unnecessary administrative processes, prolonged service delivery times, the dispersion of services across multiple government agencies, and insufficient financial resources for large-scale public projects.
In this context, inter-organizational collaboration has emerged as a crucial enabler for achieving an integrated e-government. Such collaboration can help address inefficiencies and transform the public sector into a more responsive and integrated entity. Information Technology (IT) plays a pivotal role in this process by enhancing coordination among organizations and facilitating the seamless integration of services.
The objective of this study is to develop a comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing the formation of an inter-organizational collaboration ecosystem and to model their interrelationships in the delivery of IT-driven e-government services. By identifying and structuring these antecedent factors, this research contributes to the theoretical and practical advancement of collaborative e-government ecosystems and offers strategies to optimize such collaborations.
Design/ methodology/ approach: This study adopts a fundamental-applied research approach. In the first phase, a systematic literature review was conducted using the meta-synthesis method to identify the antecedents of inter-organizational collaboration in the period 1990–2023. This method is a qualitative research method aimed at systematically reviewing, integrating, and synthesizing findings from multiple qualitative studies to develop new insights. Subsequently, the relationships among these antecedents were analyzed using the Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) and MICMAC (Cross-Impact Matrix Multiplication Applied to Classification) approach.
Research Findings: A total of 22 antecedents of IT-enabled inter-organizational collaboration ecosystem formation were identified and classified into four categories: intra-organizational capabilities, inter-organizational capabilities, external motivation, and internal motivation. The ISM-based modeling classified these antecedents into four hierarchical levels of influence. Legitimacy acquisition and prior experience and knowledge were identified as the most fundamental antecedents at the first level. Legitimacy acquisition serves as a prerequisite for organizations to enter the collaboration ecosystem, which can be achieved through legal endorsements, governmental support, and public trust. Likewise, prior experience and knowledge in collaboration and new technologies were recognized as crucial enablers, which can be gained through past projects, research, and training initiatives. Cluster analysis further categorized these two factors as driving forces, indicating their high level of influence on other antecedents. The remaining factors were classified as linking factors, suggesting their moderate influence and dependency within the ecosystem.
Limitations & Consequences: The study identifies the antecedents of inter-organizational collaboration based on a review of leading e-government and information systems journals. Consequently, the findings may not be directly generalizable to other academic domains. Moreover, the research focuses on public service delivery in Iran, which may limit its applicability to other geographical contexts. Future studies could validate and extend these findings in different national and organizational settings to enhance generalizability.
Practical Consequences: In Iran, government organizations invest significantly in developing internal IT capabilities. However, few organizations possess the necessary interoperability and network readiness to participate in an inter-organizational collaboration ecosystem using inter-organizational information systems (IOSs). The study identifies legitimacy acquisition and prior experience and knowledge as the most influential antecedents. Establishing a robust collaboration ecosystem for public service delivery requires enhancing inter-organizational system interoperability, strengthening organizational commitment, improving interpersonal relationships, fostering inter-organizational trust, creating competitive advantages, and ensuring strategic alignment, ultimately leading to integrated e-government services.
Innovation or value of the Article: While the inter-organizational collaboration ecosystem has been extensively explored in the business and entrepreneurial domains, this study uniquely examines its formation in the public sector. Additionally, the research incorporates hierarchical modeling of antecedents, capturing their interdependencies and dynamic relationships, which adds to its novelty and theoretical contribution.
Paper Type: Original Paper
 

Keywords

  1. Aarikka-stenroos, L., & Ritala, P. (2017). Network management in the era of ecosystems : Systematic review and management framework. April 2016.
  2. Auliciema, I. (2022). System of systems approach for investigating public service system. 23rd International Scientific Conference. “Economic Science for Rural Development 2022” No 56 Circular Economy: Climate Change, Environmental Aspect, Cooperation, Supply Chains, Efficiency of Production Process and Competitive of Companies, Integrated And, 56(56), 277–286. https://doi.org/10.22616/esrd.2022.56.027
  3. Best, B., Moffett, S., & McAdam, R. (2019). Stakeholder Salience in Public Sector Value Co-Creation. Public Management Review, 21(11), 1707–1732. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1619809 .
  4. Brass, D. J., Galaskiewicz, J., Greve, H. R., & Tsai, W. (2004). Taking Stock of Networks and Organizations: A Multilevel Perspective. In Source: The Academy of Management Journal (Vol. 47, Issue 6). https://www.jstor.org/stable/20159624?seq=1&cid=pdf-
  5. Cavalli, N., Guarino, N., & Panizza, R. (2021). Building trust in public organizations through digital ecosystems. Journal of Digital Government: Research and Practice, 2(3), 1–14.
  6. Chen, J., Dyball, M. C., & Harrison, G. (2020). Stakeholder Salience and Accountability Mechanisms in Not‐For‐Profit Service Delivery Organizations. Financial Accountability & Management, 36(1). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12217 .
  7. Cheng, A. S., Gerlak, A. K., Dale, L., & Mattor, K. (2015). Examining the adaptability of collaborative governance associated with publicly managed ecosystems over time: insights from the Front Range Roundtable, Colorado, USA. February. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-07187-200135
  8. Dawes, S. S., Gharawi, M. A., & Burke, G. B. (2012). Transnational public sector knowledge networks: Knowledge and information sharing in a multi-dimensional context. Government Information Quarterly, 29(SUPPL. 1), S112–S120. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GIQ.2011.08.002
  9. Deghati, A., Yaghoubi, N., Kamalian, A. R., & Dehghani, M. (2019). Presenting a Phased Development Pattern of Network Governance Using a Meta-synthesis Approach. Journal of Public Administration, 11(2), 203–230. https://doi.org/10.22059/jipa.2019.277187.2501
  10. Dudau, A., Stirbu, D., Petrescu, M., & Bocioaga, A. (2023). Enabling PSL and Value Co-Creation Through Public Engagement: A Study of Municipal Service Regeneration. Public Management Review, Online fir, 1–28. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2023.2203148 .
  11. Elena, V., Alla, Gromova., Evgeniy, Zaramenskih., Andrey, KOShKIN., Mihail, Petrov., & Boris, Slavin. (2023). Digital platforms and ecosystems in public administration. In Handbook of Research on Smart Management for Digital Transformation. https://doi.org/10.12737/2021353
  12. Emerson, K., & Gerlak, A. K. (2014). Adaptation in Collaborative Governance Regimes. Environmental Management, 54(4), 768–781. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-014-0334-7
  13. Esteve, M., Boyne, G., Sierra, V., & Ysa, T. (2013). Organizational collaboration in the public sector: Do chief executives make a difference? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(4), 927–952. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mus035
  14. Fadaei, mohammad javad, Attardi, M. reza, & Javan Jafari Bojnordi, A. (2023). The Transition from Modern Government to Platform Government: A signification_research Study Based on the Concepts of Sharing Economy. Public Administration Perspective, 14(3), 183–210. https://doi.org/10.52547/jpap.2023.229576.1234
  15. Hamish, Simmonds. (2022). An Ecosystem Governance Lens for Public Sector Digital Transformation. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-9008-9.ch018
  16. Ihsanudin, I., & Rahayu, A. Y. S. (2019). Collaborative Innovation in Digital Ecosystem. 10–14. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.7-12-2018.2281772
  17. Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018). Towards a Theory of Ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal, 39(8), 2255–2276. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2904 .
  18. Janssen, M., & Helbig, N. (2018). Innovating and changing the policy-cycle: Policy-makers be prepared! Government Information Quarterly, 35(4), S99–S105. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GIQ.2015.11.009
  19. Johan, L., & Per, R. (2020). Collaboration in Open Government Data Ecosystems: Open Cross-sector Sharing and Co-development of Data and Software. In Electronic Government (pp. 290–303). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57599-1_22
  20. Juell-Skielse, G., Hjalmarsson, A., Johannesson, P., & Rudmark, D. (2017). Public sector innovation and collaboration: Understanding the role of organizational culture and technology. Journal of Public Administration and Policy Research, 10(4), 67–81. https://doi.org/10.5897/JPAPR2018.0438
  21. Khashoggi, S. (2024). Governance Challenges in Implementing Disruptive Technologies for Sustainability in Urban Areas. International Journal of Green Skills and Disruptive Technology, 1(2), 88–100. https://www.researchcorridor.org/index.php/ijgsdt/article/view/220
  22. Lebec, L., & Dudau, A. (2023a). From the inside looking out : towards an ecosystem paradigm of third sector organizational performance measurement. Public Management Review, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2023.2238724
  23. Lebec, L., & Dudau, A. (2023b). From the inside looking out : towards an ecosystem paradigm of third sector organizational performance measurement. Public Management Review, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2023.2238724
  24. Linåker, J., & Runeson, P. (2020). Public Sector Platforms going Open: Creating and Growing an Ecosystem with Open Collaborative Development. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series. https://doi.org/10.1145/3412569.3412572
  25. Liu, X., & Merritt, J. (2020). Shaping the Future of the Internet of Bodies : New challenges of technology governance. World Economic Forum - Shaping the Future of the Internet of Bodies, 1–28.
  26. Liu, Y., Tan, X., & Hsieh, J. P. A. (2020). Collaboration in public sector: Understanding the role of technology and organizational culture. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 30(2), 240–256.
  27. Mohammadian, A., & Hedayatfar, M. (2024). Mapping the scientific map and analyzing the co-occurence of the concept of the digital ecosystem with management approach on the Web of Science. Scientometrics Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.22070/rsci.2024.18929.1724
  28. Mohammadian, A., & Khodadad Beromy, M. (2020). Explaining the Process of Forming a Network Capability in Governmental Organizations in the Case of Iran Single Window for Trade Using Grounded Theory. Journal of Public Administration, 12(1), 88–119. https://doi.org/10.22059/jipa.2019.291013.2646
  29. Nurmi, J., Seppänen, V., & Valtonen, M. (2019). Ecosystem Architecture Management in the Public Sector – From Problems to Solutions. Complex Systems Informatics and Modeling Quarterly (CSIMQ, 01(19), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.7250/csimq.2019-19.01
  30. Ofe, H. A., & Sandberg, J. (2023). The emergence of digital ecosystem governance : An investigation of responses to disrupted resource control in the Swedish public transport sector. September 2021, 350–384. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12404
  31. Osborne, S., Powell, M., Cui, T., & Strokosch, K. (2021). New development : ‘ Appreciate – Engage – Facilitate ’— The role of public managers in value creation in public service ecosystems. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2021.1916189
  32. Osborne, S., Powell, M. G. H., T. Cui, & Strokosch, K. (2022). Value Creation in the Public Service Ecosystem: An Integrative Framework. Public Administration Review, 82(4), 634–645. https://doi.org/https://doi. org/10.1111/puar.13474 .
  33. Pardo, T. A., & Tayi, G. K. (2007). Interorganizational information integration: A key enabler for digital government. Government Information Quarterly, 24(4), 691–715. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GIQ.2007.08.004
  34. Petrescu, M. (2019a). From Marketing to Public Value: Towards a Theory of Public Service Ecosystems.”. Public Management Review, 21(11), 1733–1752. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037. 2019.1619811 .
  35. Petrescu, M. (2019b). From marketing to public value: towards a theory of public service ecosystems. Public Management Review, 21(11), 1733–1752. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1619811
  36. Picazo-Vela, S., Fernandez-Haddad, M., & Luna-Reyes, L. F. (2018). Opening the black box: Developing strategies to use social media in government. Government Information Quarterly, 35(3), 493–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2018.07.002
  37. Prachumrasee, K., Laochankam, S., & Kamnuansilpa, P. (2022). Digital Ecosystem in Public Services of the Northeastern Local Administrative Organizations : Initial Findings. August. https://doi.org/10.1109/DGTi-CON53875.2022.9849193
  38. Qaedi Aqsa, & Nugroho, B. Y. (2023). A Literature Review: Cross-Sector Collaboration Arrangements to Deliver Public Services and Goods. Technium Social Sciences Journal, 40, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.47577/TSSJ.V40I1.8342
  39. Raei, B., & Baradaran, V. (2023). A Staged Capability Maturity Model for E-Governance Based on Classification of the Evaluation Components. Public Administration Perspective, 14(2), 93–137. https://doi.org/10.48308/jpap.2023.103567
  40. Rai, A., & Tang, X. (2010). Leveraging IT capabilities and competitive process capabilities for the management of interorganizational relationship portfolios. Information Systems Research, 21(3), 516–542. https://doi.org/10.1287/ISRE.1100.0299
  41. Robey, D., Boudreau, M. C., & Rose, G. M. (2000). Information technology and organizational learning: A review and assessment of research. In Accounting, Management and Information Technologies (Vol. 10, Issue 2, pp. 125–155). Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-8022(99)00017-X
  42. Scholl, H. J. J., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2014). Forums for electronic government scholars: Insights from a 2012/2013 study. Government Information Quarterly, 31(2), 229–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2013.10.008
  43. Shipilov, A., & Gawer, A. (2020). Integrating Research on Interorganizational Networks and Ecosystems. Https://Doi.Org/10.5465/Annals.2018.0121, 14(1), 92–121. https://doi.org/10.5465/ANNALS.2018.0121
  44. Trischler, J., Røhnebæk, M., Edvardsson, B., & Tronvoll, B. (2023). Advancing Public Service Logic: moving towards an ecosystemic framework for value creation in the public service context. Public Management Review, 00(00), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2023.2229836
  45. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2016). Institutions and axioms: an extension and update of service-dominant logic. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(1), 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-015-0456-3
  46. Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x
  47. Wang, H., Ran, B., & Wang, H. (2023). Network governance and collaborative governance : a thematic analysis on their similarities , differences , and entanglements. Public Management Review, 25(6), 1187–1211. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2021.2011389
  48. Yakhchali, M., Tahmasebi, R., Latifi, M., & Faraji Mollaie, A. (2020). Investigating Government as a Platform Characteristics: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Synthesis. Journal of Public Administration, 12(2), 204–237. https://doi.org/10.22059/jipa.2020.303652.2755
  49. Ysa, T., Schedler, K., & Cristòfol, P. C. (2022). Ecosystems in a government context. In Elgar Encyclopedia of Public Management (pp. 330–334). Elgar Encyclopedia of Public Management. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800375499.ecosystems
  50. Zyrianov, A. V. (2020). the Idea of Self-Organization in the System of Public Administration. RUDN Journal of Law, 24(1), 60–81. https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2337-2020-24-1-60-81