measuring online service quality: the case of local e-government

Measuring Online Service

Quality: The Case of Local

E-Government

Research Seminar MMTC, JIBS, Jönköping

Robert Piehler, April 2nd 2012

2

1. Definition of Online Service Quality

2. Status Quo of Online Service Quality Research

3. The Case of E-Government

Outline

4. My Current Research Model

5. Summary & Outlook

Definition of Online Service Quality

3

• Quantitative evaluation of user perceptions regarding the quality of a website or an

online-based service

• Individual perspective based on the psychological concept of attitudes (Ajzen /

Fishbein 1975)

1. Hofacker et al. (2007). 2. Grönroos (1982). 3. Berry et al. (1985). 4. Zeithaml et al. (2000).

Consumer

Perceptions

Online Service Quality

Functional Quality2

(How?)

Outcome Quality3

(What?)

Definition: The

„extent to which a

Web site facilitates

efficient and effective

shopping, purchasing,

and delivery of

products and

services“.4

Includes pre- and

post-website service

aspects

Online Services

Definition: An „act or performance that creates value and provides benefits for customers through a process that is stored as an algorithm and typically implemented by networked software“.1

Includes service production and service outcome

Definition of Online Service Quality

4

Nature of E-Services & Industry Specifics

Dimensions & Hierarchy

Relationship to Offline Service Quality

Effects & Consequences


• Most research conducted in the field may be attributed to the following key

perspectives:

• There is a strong emphasis on quantitative measures in this research area,

especially regarding the development und validation of scales

Online ServQual

Item 1

Item 2

Item 3 (...)

The service provided by the website fulfilled my needs.

O 1 O 2 O 3 O 4 O 5

Strongly

disagree

Strongly

agree

1 2

3 4

5




Outline



Online Services1

Stand-Alone Services

Pure Service

Offerings

Content Offerings

Support Services

Status Quo of Online Service Quality Research – 1. Nature of E-Services

6 1. Fassnacht / Koese (2006). 2. Hofacker (2007).

Online Services2

Complements to Offline Services

Substitutes for Offline

Services

New Core Services

• Definitions of E-Services differ, reflecting the

corresponding research streams:

• Industry Specifics, e.g.: E-Tailing-Focus

• Artifact (Website) vs. Process, e.g.:

Technology-Focus

• Definitions also differ in terms of consideration

of offline services

• Stand-Alone vs. Support Service

Examples of

E-Service-

Taxonomies

Status Quo of Online Service Quality Research – 2. Dimensions

Dimension Used by

Reliability /

Fulfillment

O‘Neill et al. (2001); Francis / White (2002); Yang / Jun

(2002); Cai / Jun (2003); Wolfinbarger / Gilly (2003);

Jun et al. (2004); Long / McMellon (2004); Yang et al.

(2004); Lee / Lin (2005); Parasuraman et al. (2005);

Bauer (2006); Fassnacht / Koese (2006); Ibrahim et al.

(2006); Sohn / Tadisina (2008)

Respon-

siveness

O‘Neill et al. (2001); Li et al. (2001); Yang / Jun (2002);

Jun et al. (2004); ; Long / McMellon (2004); Yang et al.

(2004); Lee / Lin (2005); Bauer (2006); Ho / Lee (2007)

Ease of

Use /

Usability

Yoo / Donthu (2001); Barnes / Vidgen (2002); Yang /

Jun (2002); Jun et al. (2004); Yang et al. (2004); Yang

et al. (2005); Collier / Bienenstock (2006); Fassnacht /

Koese (2006); Sohn / Tadisina (2008)

Privacy /

Security

Yoo / Donthu (2001); Francis / White (2002); Janda et

al. (2002); Ranganathan / Ganapathy (2002); Yang /

Jun (2002); Wolfinbarger / Gilly (2003); Jun et al.

(2004); Yang et al. (2004); Parasuraman et al. (2005);

Collier / Bienenstock (2006); Ho / Lee (2007)

Web (Site)

Design

Yoo / Donthu (2001); Aldwani / Palvia (2002); Barnes /

Vidgen (2002); Loiacono et al. (2002); Ranganathan /

Ganapathy (2002); Cai / Jun (2003); Wolfinbarger / Gilly

(2003); Lee / Lin (2005); Bauer (2006); Fassnacht /

Koese (2006); Christobal et al. (2007)

Information

Quality /

Benefit

Aldwani / Palvia (2002); Barnes / Vidgen (2002); Janda

et al. (2002); Li et al. (2001); Ranganathan / Ganapathy

(2002); Gounaris / Dimitradis (2003); Yang et al. (2005);

Collier / Bienenstock (2006); Fassnacht / Koese (2006);

Ho / Lee (2007); Sohn / Tadisina (2008)

Methods applied for...

Item Generation Model testing

Literature

Reviews

Overall Level

In-depth-

interviews

Exploratory Factor Analysis

Content analysis

of consumer

reviews

Confirmatory Factor

Analysis

Focus groups Scale Level

Cronbach‘s α

Average Variance Extracted

AVE > (Correlations

between that construct &

other constructs)2

1-Factor vs. 2-Factor Model

Different sets of online service quality dimensions are derived from a variety of research

methods. No consensus on number and nature (Ladhari 2010, p. 473) Only few

hierarchical approaches Strong focus on functional dimensions and e-tailing 7

Status Quo of Online Service Quality Research – 2. Dimensions

8

Loiacono et al. (2002) Webqual Parasuraman et al. (2005) ES-Qual

Bresolles (2006) Netqual Fassnacht / Koese (2006) Hierarchical Model

ES-Qual

Efficiency Privacy

System

Availability Fulfillment

Online

Service

Quality

Ease of

Use

Privacy /

Security

Design Reliability

Status Quo of Online Service Quality Research – 3. Relationship to Offline

9

• Some scholars have tried to adapt existing scales of offline service quality to an

online context Several dimensions (like ‘reliability‘ or ‘responsiveness‘) can be

found in both domains, but they are NOT completely identical

• Expectations of customers about Online Service Quality are not as well formed as in

offline Service Quality4

• Links of Online Service Quality to offline phenomenon and behaviour could be

shown, e.g.: Value & Joy5, Loyalty6, Relationship Quality7

1. Kang (2006). 2. Long / McNellon (2004). 3. Hofacker et al. 2007. 4. Zeithaml et al. (2000). 5. Semeijn et al. (2005).

6. Shankar et al. (2003); Semeijn et al. (2005). 7. Walsh et al. (2010)

Responsiveness

Customer Perceptions

Service Website2

Offline Online

• Had tech support online

• Answered every

question you had about

their service

• Willing to help

customers

Process-related scales differ more in content than outcome-related scales.3

Service Personnel1

• Prompt service to

customers

• Willingness to help

customers

• Readiness to respond to

customer‘s requests

10

Status Quo of Online Service Quality Research – 4. Effects & Consequences

Key Question: What is the causal structure (effect chain) of

a successful online service process?

Perceived

Value

Satisfaction

Net Benefits

Loyalty


Intention to

Use

Continuity

Intentions Trust

1. Bressolles / Durrieu (2007); Fassnacht / Kose (2007); Loiacono et al. (2007); Shamdasani et al. (2008); Chao / Lee (2009); Yoon / Kim (2009);

Baskar / Ramesh (2010); Marimon et al. (2010); Wells et al. (2011)

D&

M IS

Success M

odel

Other Effects: Online shop

image, Willingness to pay

more, Site commitment

1

Other Effects: Perceived

playfulness, Perceived

product quality

11

Status Quo of Online Service Quality Research – 4. Effects & Consequences

Key Question: What is the causal structure (effect chain) of

a successful online service process?

1. Collier / Bienenstock (2009). 2. Chang et al. 2009. 3. Chao / Lee (2009) 4. Chao / Lee (2009) 5. Yoon / Kim (2009) 6. Liao et al. (2011).

7. Luo / Lee (2011). 8. Stone et al. (2007)

Perceived

Value

Satisfaction

Net Benefits

Loyalty


Intention to

Use

Continuity

Intentions Trust

2

4

5

Word of

Mouth

5

1

6

7

8

12




Outline



13

The Case of E-Government – Introduction

What is E-Government?: • Registering your car‘s licence plate online (C2G)

• Transfering company tax data online (B2G)

• Online archives and central registers (G2G)

• Public tendering for social projects (N2G)

Government

Business Citizen

NPO / NGO

Country-Level State-Level Local Level

Supranational Level

B2G C2G

G2G G2G

N2G

Subject-

related

Aspects

• Provider- vs. User-based focus

• Inclusion and differentiation for different actor groups

(Government/Citizen vs. Government/Administration vs.

Politics/Nation/Administration/Citizen/Business)

Purpose-

related

Aspects

• Level of purpose analysis (Access to Services vs. Processes vs.

Service Quality)

• Inclusion of the support function of E-Government-Services

• Inclusion of organisational change

Functional

Aspects

• Broad (modern Information and Communication Media) vs. narrow

(Internet, WWW) technology perspective

• Differentiation of the processes according to the level of value

creation (Information, Communication, Transaction, Partizipation,

Integration)

14

The Case of E-Government – Definition

Preliminary Definition E-Government

The term Electronic Government covers the electronic execution of administrative and

democratic processes in the context of government acts by using information

technology. The purpose is to provide or support public service.

15 1. Morgesson / Mithas (2009). 2. Gisler (2001), p. 14, ff.; Mehlich (2005), p. 2, ff.; Lucke (2009), p 7, ff.

Market / Organizational

Comparison with simplified

extreme values2

Private Sector Public Sector

Market Principle Competition Monopoly

Market Adjustment By Demand By Law

Range of Products / Services Homogenous Heterogenous

Customer Segments Homogenous Heterogenous

Internal Process Management Flexible Static

Ability to react fast High Low

Influence of Managerial Staff High Low

The Case of E-Government – Private vs. Public Sector

• Despite the common application of research models from an electronic business

context E-Government cannot be equated with it

• Differences regarding the implementation level of functional online service quality

dimensions and user-based expectations towards the service can be shown

empirically1

• Based on a market / organizational perspective certain differences between private

and public sector have to be considered:

The Case of E-Government – Examples of Research Models

16

Papadomichelaki / Mentzas (2012) Benbasat et al. (2007)

Sung et al. (2009) Morgeson et al. (2010)

Efficiency

Trust

Reliability

Citizen

Support

17




Outline



18

My Current Research Model – Theoretical Basis

Expectation Confirmation Theory (ECT, Oliver 1977)

Expectations Disconfir-

mation Satisfaction

Perceived

Performance

• The central argument of this theory is, that the link between Perceived Performance

and Satisfaction is mediated by a confirmation / disconfirmation of expectations

• ECT originated from consumer behaviour research and is often used in IS research

regarding continuity intentions1

Positive

Disconfirmation

Negative

Disconfirmation Zone of Tolerance

• Expectations are met

• No Disconfirmation Expectations are

fallen short of

Dissatisfaction

Expectations are

exceeded

Satisfaction

• The phenomenon of Disconfirmation can be divided into positive and negative

Disconfirmation:

1. Bhattacherjee (2001); Lin et al. (2003); Thong et al. (2006); Liao et al. (2007); Liao et al. (2009).

19

Summary: A study on the moderating

effect of functional and outcome-related

online service quality dimensions

concerning the relation between

Expectations and Perceived Performance

/ Disconfirmation

My Current Research Model

Empirical

Contribution:

Theoretical Contribution: Focus on

Antecedents dimensions of Expectation-

Disconfirmation-Theory

•Applying Expectation-

Disconfirmation-Theory to

an E-Government context

•Applying a hierarchical

online service quality

concept to an E-

Government context

Expectations Disconfir-

mation Satisfaction

Perceived

Performance

Perform-

ance Ex-

pectancy

Website

Design /

Ease of Use

Effort

Expectancy

Privacy /

Security

Trust in

Internet

Outcome

Quality

Trust in

Government

Need for

Personal

Interaction

Respon-

siveness

Reliability

Functional Dimension Outcome-Dimension

Mo

de

rato

rs

De

term

ina

nts

20




Outline



21

Summary & Outlook

• Online Service Quality is a quite blurry scientific field (in terms of what

quantitative researchers are used to)

• The specifics of public service make an argument for customized models

• Little attention has been paid to expectation disconfirmation and hierarchical

models so far

Summary:

• Operationalize functional and outcome online service quality dimensions

• In-depth-interviews with public service IT managers and E-government scholars

• Anderson-Gerbing-Item-Presorting-Test

• Pretest of the finalized model

• Data Gathering

• Statistic Analysis

• Writing, writing, writing

Next Steps:

22

Summary & Outlook

• What could be other potential antecedents determinants of ‘Expectations‘?

• Can the model be further specialized to the context of E-Government?

• Should ‘Outcome-Quality‘ also be conceptionalized as a multi-dimensional

construct?

• Does the model pass a ‘Mothers & Managers-Test‘ or is it just common

sense?

Discussion:

Thank you

23

Backup

24 Vgl. Stowers (2004), S. 173; Wirtz (2010), S. 100.

Entwicklungsstufe 1:

Pr ä sentation / Information

• Statischer Inhalt

• Keine Personalisierung

• Elektronische Bereitstellung von Informationen

• Z.B. Interseiten von Beh ö rden


Kommunikation

• Elektronische Kommunikation

• Versand von Informationen

• B ü rgeranfragen, z.B. ü ber E - Mail


Transaktion

• Online - Transaktionen, z.B. Online Reservierung des Wunschkennzeichens

• Integration des Back - Office


Partizipation

• Aktive elektronische Partizipation durch den B ü rger

• „ Mitmach “ - Internet , z.B. Online - Vorschlagswesen und Abstimmung bei einer Namensgebung

Value

Creation Entwicklungsstufe 5:

Integration

• Ü bergreifende elektro - nische Integration in die Verwaltungs - prozesse (z.B. Verarbeitung einer Umzugsmeldung)

• H ö chste Stufe der Interaktivit ä t


Pr ä sentation / Information

Development Stage 1:

Pr e sentation / Information


Communication


Transaktion

• Online - Transaktionen, z.B. Online Reservierung des Wunschkennzeichens

• Integration des Back - Office


Transaction


Participation

Complexity


Integration

The Case of E-Government

• Static content

• No personalisation

• Electronic provision

of information

• E.g.: Static websites

• Electronic

Communication

• Transmission of

information

• E.g.: citizen service

inquiries by e-mail

• Online-transactions

• Back-office

integration

• E.g.: Online

reservation of licence

plate

• Electronic

participation by

citizens

• Social-Web

• E.g.: Online

participatory budget

• Comprehensive

electronic integration

of administrative

tasks

• E.g.: Automatic

processing of a

removal note

25


• „Therefore, despite extensive debate on the importance of e-government service

quality as a predictor of citizens’ receptivity towards public e-services, both the

academic and practitioner communities know little more than they do with regards to

this topic.”1

• „In fact, a recent review of the e-government literature found a general lack of

statistical or empirical rigor and of formal testing of theory or robust model

building.”2

• „While important issues from conceptual framework, technological innovation, services

measurement, and management support of e-Government services have been studied

extensively, determinants of user acceptance have not been well understood.”3

• „Benchmarking studies of e-government are undertaken regularly (…). Unfortunately,

most of this literature focuses on central and federal governments in terms of

examining trends in digital government. These are frequently little more than simplistic

‘bean-counting’ exercises that measure the number of services provided online.”4

In the sector of complex multivariate analysis concerning local E-Government a high

demand of further research can be stated.

1. Benbasat/Tan/Centefelli (2007), S. 15. 2. Morgeson/VanAmburg/Mithas (2010), S. 2. 3. Hung et al. (2006), S. 100. 4. Pina/Torres/Royo (2007), S. 451.

Scientific Relevance of the Subject

26


In international comparative benchmark-studies Germany fails to achieve top rankings.

Hence the potential of E-Government and modern information and commnication media

has not been fully exploited yet.

1. Vgl. Capgemini (2009), S. 98.

Practical Relevance of the Subject

Benchmark Ranking GER

EU eGovernment benchmark 2009 (Avail.)

EU eGovernment benchmark 2009 (Soph.)

15/31

12/31

UN eGovernment Readiness Index 2008

22/189

WEF Global Competitiveness Index 2009-2010

7/133

WEF Networked Readiness Index 2008-2009

20/134

EIU eReadiness Ranking 2009

17/70

E-Government Research

OSQ

Current Research Model – Conceptualization of functional OSQ dimensionns

E-Business Research

OSQ

Website Design

/ Ease of Use Yoo / Donthu (2001); Barnes /

Vidgen (2002); Wolfinbarger /

Gilly (2003); Bressolles

(2006); Fassnacht / Koese

(2006)

Chang et al. (2005); Barnes /

Vidgen (2006); Horan /

Abhichandani (2006);

Mohamed et al. (2009); Sung

et al. (2009); Jiang (2011)

Reliability

Responsive-

ness

Security /

Privacy

Tan et al. (2008);

Papadomichelaki / Mentzas

(2009); Sung et al. (2009);

Chen (2010); Jiang (2011)

Tan et al. (2008); Sung et al.

(2009); Chen (2010)

Barnes / Vidgen (2006);

Papadomichelaki / Mentzas

(2009); Verdegeem / Verleye

(2009); Jiang (2011)

Wolfinbarger / Gilly (2003);

Long / McMellon (2004);

Parasuraman et al. (2005);

Bressolles (2006); Fassnacht

/ Koese (2006)

Long / McMellon (2004); Lee

/ Lin (2005); Bauer (2006);

Ho / Lee (2007)

Yoo / Donthu (2001); ;

Wolfinbarger / Gilly (2003);

Parasuraman et al. (2005);

Bressolles (2006); Collier /

Bienenstock (2006); Ho / Lee

(2007) 27


OSQ

28

Current Research Model – Conceptualization of Outcome OSQ dimensions

E-Business Research

OSQ

Outcome

Quality Collier / Bienenstock (2006);

Fasstnacht (2006); Lu et al.

(2009)

Lee / Gim / Yoo (2009)

Furthermore an integration of

newly develloped items on

the basis of outcome-

specifics of public

adminsitration is possible.

Market / Organizational

Comparison with simplified

extreme values1 Private Sector Public Sector

Market Principle Competition Monopoly

Market Adjustment By Demand By Law

Range of Products / Services Homogenous Heterogenous

Customer Segments Homogenous Heterogenous

Internal Process Management Flexible Static

Ability to react fast High Low

Influence of Managerial Staff High Low

1. Gisler

(2001), p. 14,

ff.; Mehlich

(2005), p. 2, ff.;

Lucke (2009),

p 7, ff. Example:

•The Online-Service

provided comes up to

the responsibility of

public administration.


Barriers / IS Adoption

Current Research Model – Conceptualization of Determinants

E-Business Research

OSQ Technology

Readiness /

Trust in Internet

Parasuraman / Colby

1997; Parasuraman

(2000); Parasuraman /

Colby (2001)

Belanger / Carter (2008); Dijk et

al. (2008); Al-Sobhi et al. 2011;

Chang (2011); Ozkan / Kanat

(2011); Styvén et al. (2011)

Need for

Personal

Interaction

Experience /

Performance

Expectancy

Effort

Expectancy

Gilbert et al. (2004); Chang

(2011)

Horst et al. (2007); AlAwadhi /

Morris (2008); Dijk et al. (2008);

Wang / Shih (2009); Al-Sobhi et

al. 2011

AlAwadhi / Morris (2008); Dijk et

al. (2008); Wang / Shih (2009);

Al-Sobhi et al. 2011

-

-

-

29

Trust in

Government Horst et al. (2007); Belanger /

Carter (2008); Morgesson et al.

(2010); Al-Sobhi et al. 2011;

Ozkan / Kanat (2011); Styvén et

al. (2011)

-

30

Current Research Model – Conceptualization of central theoretical constructs

Expectation Confirmation

Theory Research

Expectations

Bhattacherjee (2001);

McKinney et al. 2002; Lin et

al. (2003); Ryzin 2004; Thong

et al. (2006); Liao et al.

(2007); Sorebo/Eikebrokk

(2008); Liao et al. (2009)

Perceived

Performance

Disconfirmation

Satisfaction

Endogenous

Variables of the

Theory

Exogenous Variable

of the Theory Theoretical concept regarding

emergence of satisfaction

Central causal structure

(effect chain) of the model

31


Business

Studies

•Business Value

•New Business

Processes

•Technology- &

Process

Management

•Infrastructure

Computer

Sciences

Administrative

Sciences

•New Public

Management

•Customer

Orientation

•New kind of

interaction

•Participation

Media and Com-

munication Studies

32

Solution:

• Identification of indicators which can be measured

explicitly to measure the latent variables indirectly

• Calculation of the correlations between the

indicators

• Decomposition of the indicator correlations to the

correlations of the latent variables

• Calculation of the correlations between the latent

variables by solving a multidimensional linear

system of equations

Empirical validation of latent construct, which was deduced from theory, and its relations to

other constructs.

Point of Departure Examples Problem

• A system of relations which

has been deduced from theory

needs to be tested by

empirical analysis

• The acceptance of E-Government

is determined by reduced costs

of action.

• The interaction configuration

between the stakeholders is

relevant for the acceptance of E-

Government.

• Regression analysis can be

employed for the 1st

example since all variables

can be measured directly.

However, in the 2nd

example the variables

cannot be measured directly.

They are latent.

x 1

x 1

x 2

h 1

y 1

y 2

Measurement model

of the latent exogenous

variables Structural model

e 2

e 1

h 2

y 3

y 4 e 4

e 3

l 11

l 21

l 11

l 12

l 24

l 23

z 1

z 2

g 11

g 12

b 12

Measurement model

of the latent endogenous

variables

d 1

d 2

Methodology: Structural Equation Modelling

My Current Research Model

measuring online service quality: the case of local e-government

Science

service production

support service examples

online services2 complements

offline services standalone

case of e

research area

offline services substitutes

nature of e