Welcome to Academia

Sign up to get access to over 50 million papers

By continuing, you agree to our Terms of Use

Continue with Email

Sign up or log in to continue.

Welcome to Academia

Sign up to continue.

Hi,

Log in to continue.

Reset password

Password reset

Check your email for your reset link.

Your link was sent to

Please hold while we log you in

Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Revolutionization of Revenue Collection with Government E-Payment Gateway System in Tanzania: A Public Value Creation Perspective

2021, East African Journal of Science, Technology and Innovation

Abstract

Through the Ministry of Finance and Planning, the Government of Tanzania implemented the Government Electronic Payment Gateway (GePG) system to provide an e-payment gateway platform in order to improve government revenue collection in the country. As of July 2020, the system was implemented in 660 public institutions and is integrated into 28 commercial banks and 6 mobile money operators. While the system has been widely accepted, evaluation on its adequate and performance is necessary as many similar initiatives implemented in Africa have failed to deliver the desired outcomes. This study evaluated the performance of the system by drawing success measures based on public value: efficiency, effectiveness, and social value. The study adopted a concurrent mixed research design where the questionnaire was integrated within interviews in a single investigation involving 442 respondents from 271 public institutions in 11 regions in Tanzania. The study found that the use of the system increased revenue collection by 44.28% while reducing the cost associated with revenue collection by 27.10% between 2015/2016 and 2019/2020 in the surveyed institutions. Moreover, the use of the system enhanced the trust between citizens and government, increased transparency and traceability in the process of revenue collection. Nonetheless, the lack of integration of the GePG system with institutional billing systems and the lack of self-service facility in some institutions were found to the challenges. The findings from this study contribute to an understanding of the effectiveness of e-government systems based on public value.

EISSN: 2707-0425 East African Journal of Science, Technology and Innovation, Vol. 2 (3): June 2021 This article is licensed under a Creative Commons license, Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Revolutionization of Revenue Collection with Government E-Payment Gateway System in Tanzania: A Public Value Creation Perspective 1*SAUSI J M., 1MTEBE J S 1University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania *Corresponding author: macsausi@yahoo.co.uk Abstract Through the Ministry of Finance and Planning, the Government of Tanzania implemented the Government Electronic Payment Gateway (GePG) system to provide an e-payment gateway platform in order to improve government revenue collection in the country. As of July 2020, the system was implemented in 660 public institutions and is integrated into 28 commercial banks and 6 mobile money operators. While the system has been widely accepted, evaluation on its adequate and performance is necessary as many similar initiatives implemented in Africa have failed to deliver the desired outcomes. This study evaluated the performance of the system by drawing success measures based on public value: efficiency, effectiveness, and social value. The study adopted a concurrent mixed research design where the questionnaire was integrated within interviews in a single investigation involving 442 respondents from 271 public institutions in 11 regions in Tanzania. The study found that the use of the system increased revenue collection by 44.28% while reducing the cost associated with revenue collection by 27.10% between 2015/2016 and 2019/2020 in the surveyed institutions. Moreover, the use of the system enhanced the trust between citizens and government, increased transparency and traceability in the process of revenue collection. Nonetheless, the lack of integration of the GePG system with institutional billing systems and the lack of self-service facility in some institutions were found to the challenges. The findings from this study contribute to an understanding of the effectiveness of e-government systems based on public value. Keywords: Electronic government; E- Government; GePG; public value; revenue collection Cite as: Sausi and Mtebe, (2021). Revolutionization of Revenue Collection with Received: 04/11/20 Government E-Payment Gateway System in Tanzania: A Public Value Creation Accepted: 12/04/21 Perspective. East African Journal of Science, Technology and Innovation 2(3). Published: 25/06/21 Introduction In the last few years, many developing countries allow the government to interact with its citizens have been taking advantage of the development via the Internet and lower operation costs of ICT infrastructure and the proliferation of (Kondoro & Mtebe, 2018). mobile telephone to implement various e- government initiatives in order to improve the Given these benefits, developing countries have quality of public services. The e-government been investing heavily in e-government initiatives can reduce cost, improve data access, initiatives despite their limited budget (Lessa, increase accountability, and improve decision 2019). The government of Tanzania, for instance, processes (Goh & Arenas, 2020). They can also has been investing heavily in improving Information and Communication Technologies 1 (ICT) infrastructure and increasing the speed of stakeholders that direct funds to government the Internet as part of creating conducive accounts. In this case, citizens all over the country environment for implementing e-government can pay for government services through a single initiatives. As of 2015, the country had a high point given they are provided with the control capacity broadband connection to the rest of the number with the amount of bill need to be paid. world through the Eastern Africa Submarine On the other hand, the GePG system is connected Cable System (EASSy), with 4.72Tbps, SEACOM to institutional billing systems enabling with a capacity of 1.28 Tbps, and National ICT institutions to generate invoices, reports, and Broadband Backbone Optic Fibre Cable with a viewing collected revenue in real-time. As of July capacity of 4.8Tbps (MWTC, 2016). The National 2020, the system was implemented in 660 public ICT Broadband Backbone and submarine cables institutions and integrated into 28 commercial have reduced backhaul transport bandwidth cost banks and 6 mobile money operators. by 99%. These initiatives formed a backbone necessary for speeding up implementing various Since the adoption of the system, few studies e-government initiatives across the country have evaluated its effectiveness in meeting the (Lupilya & Jung, 2015). expected benefits. It should be noted that many e-government initiatives implemented in Africa Against this backdrop, many institutions have have failed to deliver the desired outcomes been implementing e-government initiatives to (Gichoya, 2005; Gunawong & Gao, 2017; Hughes enhance various public services. The most et al., 2016; Kamau & Wausi, 2015; Mukoya, 2009). notable successful e-government initiatives In Tanzania, for instance, the e-government include the National Payment System, Electronic initiatives such as Dodoma Urban Water Supply Clearing House, Integrated Financial and Sanitation Authority, and the UTUMISHI Management System, and Retail Payment System portal failed to meet the expected benefits (MWTC, 2016; Sæbø, 2012). Other notable (Ishengoma et al., 2019). Worldwide, 80% of the systems include an integrated Human Resource government transformation efforts do not and Payroll system, Land Management System, translate to value for citizens (Allas et al., 2018). Geographical Information System, and the adoption of a Government web portal. For Previous studies have described low Internet instance, the prepaid metering system used by connectivity, shortage of computers, the Tanzania Electricity Supply Company has technological capabilities of end-users, and lack enabled citizens to pay electricity bills through of electricity as challenges that hinder the success mobile phones (Ishengoma et al., 2019). The land of e-government systems (Frost & Lal, 2019). The ownership system has allowed citizens to obtain majority of these challenges have been addressed necessary information about their surveyed plots due to the continued development and online and avoid multiple allocations of plots and improvement of ICT infrastructure and reduce citizens’ complaints about plot allocations proliferation of mobile phones in Africa. Yet, (Lupilya & Jung, 2015). many e-government initiatives implemented in Africa have failed to deliver the desired Recently, through the Ministry of Finance and outcomes. Therefore, evaluating the performance Planning, the government implemented the of GePG system after years of use was not only Government Electronic Payment Gateway necessary but essential. (GePG) system to provide an e-payment gateway platform to improve government revenue This study aimed to measure the success of the collection and ensure that revenue information is GePG system by drawing together a visible in real-time. The system connects all comprehensive set of Net Benefits measures stakeholders involved in revenue collection to based on Public Value theory. The public value provide a single gateway to increase efficiency, was assessed in terms of system efficiency, transparency, and visibility of the revenue effectiveness, and social value. The study collection process. The system is integrated with adopted a concurrent triangulation design electronic payment channels such as commercial whereby quantitative and qualitative data were banks, mobile financial services, and other collected and analyzed at the same time. Specifically, in a single investigation, closed- 2 ended question was supplemented by an open- in performing reconciliations, poor records ended question to provide a more keeping, and the low quality of reports. comprehensive understanding of the users’ view on the performance of the GePG system. A total These challenges signified the need for an of 442 respondents from 271 public institutions in electronic payment solution that would 11 regions completed the data collection streamline the revenue collection processes, instrument. The findings from this study guarantee transaction visibility, and ensure contribute towards an understanding of accountability and modest government revenue evaluating the performance of information collection costs. The development of GePG systems implemented in the public sector by started in June 2016 and was completed in June drawing success measures based on public value. 2017 and was put into use during the 2017/2018 fiscal year with 7 government institutions. As of The Government Electronic Payment Gateway July 2020, more than 660 government institutions System (Service Providers) were using the GePG system. The Government of Tanzania, through the Ministry of Finance and Planning (MoFP) in The GePG system has centralized payment of collaboration with Tanzania e-government government dues by using a control number that Authority and other Government institutions, is centrally generated. The control number is implemented the Government Electronic issued to a payer of government dues who need Payment Gateway (GePG) in order to facilitate to make payment to the government. GePG the collection of government revenue. The system takes advantage of number integrations development of the system was driven by the done from the central bank, commercial bank, Public Financial Act 2001 statutory requirements aggregators, and mobile money operators and recommendations from two studies enabling control numbers to be settled in a wide conducted by Price Waterhouse Coopers (PWC) range of payment outlets. Once payment in 2009 and by Tanscott Associates (T) Limited in transaction is completed, GePG system generates 2014, which observed various weaknesses in an electronic receipt sent to the taxpayer via Short revenue policy and the collection systems. The Message Service (SMS). To ensure an easy amendment of the Financial Act 2017 included collection of revenue by institutions, the system the provisions that direct accounting officers to has been integrated with the institution's billing ensure public funds collected through the GePG systems. On the other hand, the generic billing system as per the regulations developed under system was developed as a temporary solution the Act. for institutions without proper billing systems. The GePG system consists of various loosely This e-government initiative was driven by the coupled components that work collectively to previous practices where there were no standard connect Payment Service Providers, Ministry of procedures for revenue collection. As a result, Finance and Planning, and institutions. Some of some institutions had information systems to GePG system use cases include the secure facilitate revenue collection, while other exchange of payment information between institutions used agents, and some institutions government, payers, and payment service collected revenue through physical cash. During providers or institutions. The exchange of this time, there were several challenges in information is done in real-time to increase collecting revenues, including high costs control, monitoring, and revenue flow visibility. associated with service offered by revenue Other use cases are generating revenue reports, collection agents, complicated procedures for performing reconciliation, and the timely transfer paying for government services, limited payment of the collection to the central government options, and lack of real-time visibility of the collection accounts at the Bank of Tanzania. revenue. Other challenges included the difficulty Figure 1 shows the description of the implementation of the GePG system. 3 Figure 1. Description of implementation of GePG system Measuring public value of the public interest in the form of efficiency, Measuring e-government systems success is a effectiveness, and social value (Bryson et al., difficult task (DeLone & McLean, 2016) as it 2014). In the context of this study, e-government involves multiple perspectives while difficulties systems can provide improved efficiency, in quantifying the benefits (Alshawi & Alalwany, services, and social values (e.g., democracy, 2009). Studies exist that provide some insight on transparency, and participation) (Twizeyimana metrics and dimensions that can be used to & Andersson, 2019). Therefore, the public value measure the performance of e-government is an essential measure for e-government systems in various contexts. The majority of performance in any context (Scott et al., 2016). studies have called for a broadening and deepening of scholarly perspectives on e- Despite the adoption and use of public value as a government success and mainly focusing performance measurement of e-government on “Public Value” as a theoretical framework in systems, dimensions and metrics are still diverse, understanding e-government success (DeLone & and some are not empirically examined. For McLean, 2016). instance, Agbabiaka (2018) integrated updated DeLone and McLean Information systems Public value can be defined as citizens' collective success model and public value to propose expectations concerning government and public democracy, reflexivity, and productivity as the services (Moore, 1995). It helps connect what three dimensions for measuring e-government citizen belief is valuable and requires public systems. Karunasena et al., (2011) evaluated the resources, with an improved understanding of public value of e-government initiative in Sri what ‘publics’ value and how we connect to them Lanka using four major dimensions: delivery of (Lessa & Tsegaye, 2019). Public value provides a public services, the achievement of outcomes, the new way of thinking about the evaluation of development of trust, and the effectiveness of government activity and a new conceptualization public organizations. 4 Chen, Hu, Tseng, Juang, and Chang (2019) drew Consequently, assessing these benefits also from the fields of e-government, collaborative varies according to the stakeholders' different public management, and information system perspectives on these benefits (Alshawi & success to develop a conceptual framework for Alalwany, 2009; DeLone & McLean, 2016). evaluating the performance of the e-government system. This framework consists of efficiency, Dimensions for measuring public value of GEPG effectiveness, and accountability as key system performance dimensions. Similarly, Suri and DeLone & McLean (2016) indicated that the Sushil (2017) proposed efficiency, transparency, choice of the impact measures depends on the systems to be evaluated and their purposes. This interactivity, and decision support as dimensions study focused on the success of the GePG system of measuring the performance of the e- government system. Scott et al., (2016) proposed from employees' perspective through adopting efficiency, effectiveness, and improved efficiency, effectiveness, and social value as democracy as dimensions for measuring e- critical dimensions for measuring the public value. The efficiency was measured on the extent government success through redefining the Net to which the use of the system has reduced the Benefits in the DeLone & McLean information system success model. The authors cost associated with revenue collection, simplified payment procedures, and reduced the extended these dimensions to include: cost, time, time required for processing invoices and convenience, personalization, communication, revenue collection. At the same time, the information retrieval, trust, well-Informed, and effectiveness was measured on how the system participation. has increased revenue collection while enabling Twizeyimana & Andersson (2019) described users to personalize payment process and improved public services, administrative revenue collection based on their own needs and efficiency, ethical behavior and professionalism, institutional requirements. social value and well-being, and open government capabilities as dimensions of The social value was measured to the extent to measuring the public value of e-government which the system increased transparency, trust, initiatives. Finally, Deng et al., (2018) described traceability, and clarity in revenue sources. The the delivery of quality public services, quality of dimensions of each factor have been extracted information, functionalities of the electronic from various studies, as shown in Table 1, and services, and user orientation as public value they are shown in Figure 2. measurements. The diverse nature of dimensions of public value as a measure of e-government performance shows that these are dimensions are still at the infant stage, and more work need to be done (Mellouli et al., 2020). In addition, what is publicly valued depends on the needs and desires of the public and on the social and environmental in which the system is implemented (Alshawi & Alalwany, 2009). 5 Table 1. Dimensions and Items Adopted for Measuring the Public Value of GePG System Dimension Items Source Efficiency Cost reduction (Gilbert et al., 2004; Karunasena et al., 2011; Scott et al., 2016; Suri & Sushil, 2017; Tan & Pan, 2003) Saving time (Gilbert et al., 2004; Kolsaker & Lee- Kelley, 2008; Scott et al., 2016; Tan & Pan, 2003) Simplification of procedures (Karunasena et al., 2011; Scott et al., 2016; Suri & Sushil, 2017) Effectiveness Self-service (Chan et al., 2010; Gilbert et al., 2004; Scott et al., 2016) Enhanced core service (Scott et al., 2016) (Chan et al., 2010; Gilbert et al., 2004; Convivence Scott et al., 2016) Personalization (Gilbert et al., 2004; Kolsaker & Lee- Kelley, 2008; Scott et al., 2016; Tan & Pan, 2003) Social value Increased Trust (Karunasena et al., 2011; Lessa & Tsegaye, 2019; Scott et al., 2016) Perceived usefulness (Lessa & Tsegaye, 2019). Transparency (Karunasena et al., 2011; Scott et al., 2016; Suri & Sushil, 2017) Traceability (Karunasena et al., 2011; Lessa & Tsegaye, 2019) Figure 2. Representation of dimensions and items for measuring public value for the GePG syste 6 Materials and Methods Using the Yamane’s formula, the minimum number of institutions required for the In concurrent triangulation designs whereby evaluation study is 247. Therefore, a sample of quantitative and qualitative data were collected 306 institutions was selected for evaluation and analyzed at the same time. Specifically, in a purposes. To ensure that the sample is single investigation, closed-ended question was representative of the institutions in the whole supplemented by an open-ended question to country, the regions were divided into 7 zones. provide a more comprehensive understanding of These zones were East Zone, Northern the users’ view on the performance of the GePG Highlands Zone, Lake Zone, Western Zone, system. In this design, priority is usually equal Central Zone, Southern Highlands, and Southern and given to both forms of data while data Zone. In each zone, at least two regions were analysis is usually separate, and integration included in the study. In cases where there were usually occurs at the data interpretation stage only two regions in the zone, one region was (Hanson et al., 2005). The adoption of mixed selected. In each of the selected regions, one reseach design provides better understanding of district from a rural area and one district research problem when compared with single representing urban areas was selected. A total of approach (Creswell & Plano, 2007). 306 institutions from 11 regions were included in the study. Of the selected 306 institutions, a total Selection of Institutions of 271 institutions participated in the study. The GePG system was implemented in 643 Selection of Respondents institutions across the country when the study In each of 271 institutions, at least 3 users of the was conducted. Therefore, it was important to system were expected to complete the data determine the representative sample that will be collection instrument. This is to say, a total of 813 used for evaluating the performance of the respondents were expected to complete the data system. In this case, Yamane's’ s approach was collection instrument. However, of 900 adopted because this is a finite population whose distributed questionnaires, 442 of respondents size is known. Yamane provides a simplified returned completed usable questionnaires. This formula to calculate sample size with an is equivalent to 49% response rate. assumption of 95% confidence level (P=0.5) (Yamane, 1967). The formula is presented below: Questionnaire 𝑁 The questionnaire was made simple with 𝑛= questions using a 5-Likert scale ranging from 1 𝐾 + 𝑁(𝑒)2 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree) with a Where follow-up question for each answer. The questions were adapted from previous studies N = Population of study (Chan et al., 2010; Gilbert et al., 2004; Scott et al., K = Constant (1) 2016) then modified in the context of this study. The items in the instrument are presented in e = degree of error expected Table 2. n = sample size 7 Table 2. The Items for Each Dimension Used in the Questionnaire Dimension Code Item Efficiency EF1 The use of GePG has simplified payment procedures to clients at your organization. Please explain with examples EF2 The GePG system has reduced time for completion of invoice processing and revenue collection. Please explain with examples EF3 The GePG system has reduced the cost associated with the processing of payments and revenue collection. Please explain with examples Effectiveness ES1 The use of the GePG system has increased revenue collection in your organization. Please explain with examples ES2 GePG system enables me to process payment and collect revenue from home, from the office, or at other locations while using various devices. Please explain with examples ES3 I can fully personalize the reports generated from the GePG system relevant to the reports required by my institution. Please explain with examples ES4 GePG system enables me to process payment and collect revenue for various services from citizens without interacting with anyone. Please explain with examples Social value SV1 The use of the GePG system has improved the transparency of the collected revenue information. Please explain with examples SV2 The GePG system has increased trust amongst your customers about the services you offer. Please explain with examples SV3 I find the GePG system useful in the process of revenue collection. Please explain with examples SV4 The GePG system has improved the traceability of collected revenue as well as the payment process. Please explain with examples Note. Scale labels: 1 – strongly disagree, 2 – disagree, 3 – neither agree nor disagree, 4 – agree, 5 – strongly agree. 8 required for processing the invoices and Results collecting revenue. Of 442 respondents completed the questionnaire, more than 82% Efficiency agreed to this question (46% strongly agreed, and Simplification of the revenue collection process 37% agreed). One of the benefits of introducing government The respondents' reasons were that paying using initiative is to reduce the procedures citizens control numbers via mobile money or banks follow when acquiring the public service. In this eliminated the need to prepare an invoice for study, we were interested in evaluating the clients. In this case, staff no longer waste time extent to which the GePG system has simplified dealing with a huge number of customers. On the the process of collecting revenue. More than 80% other hand, staff were no longer required to of respondents (53% strongly agreed, and 34% collect cheques from clients’ offices physically. agreed) indicated that the system simplified the Respondents repeated this view in many process of collecting revenue compared to the institutions, for instance, from Law School, manual system. Some of the reasons that Arusha International Conference Centre, and attributed to this were the use of mobile money Tanzania Institute of Education. The time payments where clients were no longer required required for institutions to perform reconciliation to visit physically at the officer to pay for services. from various banks and several accounts has A good example was respondents from been reduced. This was explicitly reported by the Vocational Education and Training Authority Tanzania Bureau of Standards, Musoma District and Kariakoo Market Corporation. They Council, Tropical Pesticides Research Institute, reported that customers no longer need to Contractors Registration Board, and National physically visit their offices for payment-related Council for Technical Education. issues since they can make payments using various payment channels (via bank, mobile, or Finally, the use of the system shortened the time agents) given they have price lists and control required for clients to wait for government numbers. services in different organizations. For instance, respondents at Judiciary Fund pointed out that Despite the reported benefits, 5% of respondents the system reduced assessment to payment of indicated that the use of the GePG system has court services and received payment from 38 resulted in additional work and administrative days to 1 day while reducing the time to issue work for their staff. These claims were made in license from 14 days to 3 days in the Ministry of institutions where the system was not integrated Natural Resources and Tourism. with the institutional billing system. For instance, respondents at the College of African Wildlife Management, Tanzania Gemological Centre, Mineral Resources Institute, Arusha Cost reduction International Conference Centre, and Dar es Cost savings include savings to both the Salaam Institute of Technology claimed that the individual and the organization, have been system had increased administrative work for identified as one of the strongest predictors of their staff as they must generate control numbers willingness to use the e-government system for every individual student separately. (Gilbert et al., 2004). Consequently, it was Previously, they could pay straight to the account essential to assess whether or not the use of the number obtained from joining instructions. GePG system reduced the cost associated with revenue collection. Respondents were also asked Saving time to indicate the extent to which the GePG system Users' perceptions that the time is saved due to reduced the cost associated with revenue using the e-government system compared to the collection. More than 70% of respondents who manual system is an important indicator that the responded to this question agreed (36% strongly system positively impacts (Tan & Pan, 2003). agreed, and 42% agreed). Therefore, it was important to assess whether the use of GePG system enabled users to save time 9 Data from the interview revealed that the system Effectiveness reduced the costs of paying agents, printing Increased revenue collection Estimated Recovery Value (ERV) receipts, One of the objectives of the GePG system's cashbooks, and aggregators during revenue introduction was to improve the revenue collection. For instance, at Kasulu Water Supply collection process's effectiveness, which in turn, and Sanitation Authority, the cost to distribute increase the revenue collection in each of the bills using motorcycles could go as high as Tsh. Institutions involved. Therefore, it was essential 1,000,000-1,500,000 per month. TANESCO was to evaluate if the system has facilitated the spending around 38 Billion per year on increase in revenue collection. To do so, first, a facilitating its business in revenue collection. At Table was prepared for each of the 271 Mount Meru, Regional Referral Hospital institutions to indicate the revenue collected in respondents claimed that they reduced the cost the last five years from 2015/16 to 2019/20. Data incurred for using the payment card due to the show that revenue collection increased by 44.28% GePG system. Many institutions were no longer between 2015/2016 and 2019/2020, as shown in paying these costs as customers paid directly to Figure 3. the institutions via existing payment channels. Figure 3. Revenue collected between 2015/2016 and 2019/2020 Giving some examples for specific institutions, Many respondents echoed the increase in Mbeya City Council witnessed an increase in revenue due to making it easier for customers to revenue collection from 92% in 2018 to 102.6% in pay for services, which motivated them to pay. 2019. Ubungo Municipal Council claimed that Moreover, the use of the system reduced leakages the revenue collection increased from 48% in of collected revenue as customers were paying 2018/19 to 95% in June 2020. When respondents directly to the institution via various payment were asked to rate their perceptions on whether channels. For instance, respondents at the the use of the system increased the collection of Tanzania Civil Aviation Authority indicated an revenue in their organizations. Out of 442 increase in revenue collection at a rate of 5.8% respondents, more than two-thirds of every year because of making it easier for respondents agreed (41% Strongly Agreed, and customers to pay for services using control 36% Agreed), while 6% of respondents disagreed, numbers. Respondents at the Copyright Society and 16% of respondents were neutral. of Tanzania, Ministry of Education, Science and 10 Technology, Tanzania Rural and Urban Roads Self-service Agency, and Musoma District Council pointed The presence of self-service facility that allows out that the use of the system increased revenue users to receive public services without having to because all payments go directly to their banks, interact with staff is a key indicator of the and unfaithful accountants cannot steal the effectiveness of the system (Gilbert et al., 2004). In money. this study, it was found that 64% of 271 surveyed institutions had implemented the self-service Of the 442 respondents, 16% were neutral, while facility that allowed customers to pay for the 6% disagreed that the use of the GePG system has service without the need to interact with staff or increased revenue collection in various physically visit offices. In these institutions, organizations. Data from the interview revealed customers could generate bills and control that most of these institutions were those not numbers using institutional portals, which have responsible for collecting revenue directly from been integrated with the GePG system. In turn, customers. For instance, Tanzania Education the institutions could collect revenue in real-time receives funds from the government, loan as customers continued to use various repayments, and cooperate with social government services. responsibility funds to distribute to schools and universities. Therefore, they do not directly collect revenue from customers. Similarly, Personalization respondents at the Finance of Tanzania Food and The provision of user-centric functionalities to Nutrition Centre indicated that a lot of their cater to users’ service expectations has been collections are from donors, and therefore they advocated for e-government services (Tan et al., are cannot be categorized as revenue. 2013). The system should allow users to customize services to fit their specific needs or Convenience preferences (Chan et al., 2020). In this study, it The ability of the e-government system to enable was evaluated by asking users to rate the extent users to receive the service how and when the to which the GePG system enabled them to users want is one of the crucial measurements of personalize data and information relevant to the e-government performance (Gilbert et al., 2004). reports required by institutions. Of 442 In this case, the ability of the GePG system to respondents who responded to this question, enable users to process payment and collect 52% indicated that the data and information revenue from home, from the office, or at other obtained from the system did not help prepare locations while using various devices was institutional reports. The majority of respondents evaluated. Of 442 respondents, nearly 80% of who disagreed with this question were those respondents answered this question agreed (42% whose institution have not integrated their Strongly Agreed, and 40% Agreed), while 11% billing systems with the GePG system. were neutral, and 7% disagreed. Using the Respondents from State Mining Corporation generic portal, users can generate invoices and pointed out that the system does not show the collect revenue anywhere and anytime without amount collected from each revenue source, e.g., necessarily being in the office. Respondents at loyalty from gold, building material, and other Tanzania Engineering and Manufacturing minerals. Simultaneously, respondents at Design Organization, Public Service Social Mwanza Urban Water and Sewage Authority Security Fund Voluntary Scheme, Moshi Urban indicated that the system does not provide a Water Supply and Sewage Authority, and report summary for some items/aspects such as Songea District Council indicated they could water, new water connection, and sewage. login into the system and conduct all activities related to revenue collection such as Social Value reconciliation, processing invoices, and Transparency generating control numbers without being Transparency of an e-government system refers required to be at their offices physically. to the level of which an organization reveals its activities, processes, and procedures (Lessa & Tsegaye, 2019) and provide the ability for users 11 to follow a process (e.g., service request) through requested Financial Act before donating. With its entire life cycle (Chan et al., 2020). We asked the GePG system, donors no longer ask for users to rate the extent to which the use of the Financial Act as they are confident that their GePG system has improved the transparency of donations go to the proper place. the collected revenue information. More than 90% of respondents agreed (71% strongly agreed, Second, respondents reported that the GePG and 26% agreed. Data from the interview system increased trust amongst institutions as it indicated that the availability of the dashboard is now impossible for clients to forge receipts or enabled users to view and track the collected bank cheques. Respondents at Water Institute revenue in real-time, which was not possible and Adult Education pointed out that some before. For instance, respondents from Arusha students used to bring forged bank receipts Urban Water Supply and Sanitation Authority before introducing the system. The same views and Higher Education Loans Board also noted were echoed in the Centre for Education that before the GePG system, it was impossible to Development in Health. know the amount of revenue collected in real- Traceability time time unless there is a follow-up. The system One of the objectives of introducing the GePG also enabled users to determine the amount of system was to improve the traceability of revenue collected from each source compared to payment and the revenue collection process. To the situation before. For instance, at Malya do so, users were asked to rate the extent to College of Sports and Development, users which the system enhanced revenue collection indicated that the system helped understand traceability compared to the manual system. In daily and weekly collections without necessarily this question, more than 90% agreed (60% going to the bank to ask for bank statements. strongly agreed, and 32% agreed), while 8% disagreed. Data from the interview indicated that Trust the system made it easier for institutions to Establishing and stimulating high-trust relations manage and trace collected revenue from various between citizens and the government and the sources. For instance, at the National Museum of society is considered one of the strategic goals of Tanzania, users could easily control and record e-government initiative (Agbabiaka, 2018) and transactions from seven centers scattered all over has a major impact on the success of the system Tanzania. They pointed out further that before (Karunasena et al., 2011; Rose et al., 2015). In the joining the GePG system, each center had its bank same way, users were asked to indicate the extent account. Therefore, customers were paying to which the use of the GePG system has services into different bank accounts, making it increased trust amongst customers about the difficult to trace the payments when ones have services they offer. The study found that 93% of claimed to have paid. Likewise, respondents at respondents agreed (71% Strongly Agreed, and Small Industries Development Organization 22% Agreed), while 7% of them were neural. indicated that when there is a drop in collected revenue, it is easy to trace and make follow-up Data from the interview indicates that there were and identify specific revenue sources that have two ways the trust in the collected revenue was caused the decline of revenue collection. increased. First, the system has increased the trust in accountants' office, whereby customers Finally, it was revealed that after the introduction now are confident that the money they are of the GePG system, the revenue streams paying for services is paid directly to the originating from various sources and/or units government, especially when they receive a could easily be identified in the GePG system. It notification message from the system. was revealed in Tanzania Trade Development Respondents reported this in Mbeya University Authority that revenue that comes from gate of Science and Technology, Mount Meru entrance fees, exhibition fees, and other services Regional Referral Hospital, and Dar es Salaam are now easily identified with the GePG system. City Council. Moreover, respondents from Before the GePG system, all revenue sources Tanzania Food and Nutrition Centre, whereby were grouped as fees. Similarly, respondents at before the GePG system, donors always the Tanzania Global Learning Agency and 12 Baraza la Kiswahili Tanzania pointed out that room for improvement. The government should revenue from training and facilities hiring is now revisit the business process of services grouped per Government Finance Statistics traditionally take a long time to be delivered in (GFS) codes based on the institutional needs, the shortest time possible. making it clear to clients. It was also found that the system was effective on Discussion its core function, i.e., increasing the collection of revenue, whether direct or indirect, in many surveyed institutions. Overall, revenue collection This study aimed to evaluate the performance of increased by 44.28% between 2015/2016 and the GePG system by drawing success measures 2019/2020. Nonetheless, the lack of functionality based on public value. The efficiency, to prepare institutions reports was found to be a effectiveness, and social value were adopted as challenge in some institutions. While the data dimensions of measuring the public value obtained from the system was accurate, relevant, through a concurrent mixed research design and update, the preparation of institutional where quantitative and qualitative data were reports required the GePG system to be integrated within a single investigation. A total integrated with institutional billing systems. of 442 respondents from 271 public institutions in Therefore, institutions whose billing systems 11 regions completed the data collection were not integrated with the GePG system could instrument. The study found that the adoption not generate these reports. and use of the GePG system reduced the cost associated with collecting revenue, such as those The government should also integrate the self- related to paying agents, printing estimated service facility to enable users to pay for services recovery value (ERV) receipts, and paying third without interacting with staff at a given parties in many institutions where the system institution. The facility was missing in some was implemented. Cost savings have been institutions causing citizens to visit offices to identified as one of the strongest predictors of e- obtain and/or pay for the service. The self- government systems success in developing service facility, accompanied by the availability countries (Gilbert et al., 2004). The cost saving of of multiple payment channels (i.e., banks, mobile e-government relates to the amount of money phones, or agents), will simplify the payment that users can save through e-government service process while helping users save time and effort compared to traditional government services required for paying for public services. The (Karunasena et al., 2011). While the system has availability of self-service facility was a managed to reduce the cost associated with determinant of e-government system success in revenue collection, the government should several studies (Chan et al., 2010, 2020; Gilbert et continue adding new features and services that al., 2004; Scott et al., 2016). will enable the continued reduction of the costs incurred by institutions during the process of The study also found that the use of the system revenue collection. increased the trust between citizens and the government. Many citizens were confident that The use of the system also shortened the time to the money they are paying for services was paid deliver the required services to citizens in many directly to the government due to the use of institutions. Time saved due to using the e- control numbers. At the same time, forged government system was an essential early receipts or bank cheques were no longer possible. promise of the benefits of using e-government Such trust between citizens and the government services in several studies such as those in (Scott increases the public value of the system et al., 2016; Tan & Pan, 2003). In many institutions, (Karunasena et al., 2011; Rose et al., 2015). the system reduced the time required for citizens to wait for the services. For instance, the time Finally, the availability of the dashboard has needed to obtain the service was reduced from 38 enabled users to trace and monitor the collected days to 1 at the Judiciary Fund and 14 days to 3 revenue in real-time. This functionality enhanced days in the Ministry of Natural Resources and the transparency of the revenue collection Tourism. Despite these benefits, there is still a process as the institutions' staff could view the 13 revenue collection in real-time while determining implementing various e-government systems to how much have been collected per day, per week, provide better services to citizens. Although or per year. The dashboard helped institutions there is no specific figure, with investment in ICT assess revenue sources that contribute less than infrastructure, human resource development, others and, therefore, plan for strategies to ensure information system acquisitions, and other those sources contribute as per set targets. resources that support the implementation of e- Providing users the ability to track the revenue government initiatives, it is clear that thousands collection process saves time in removing the of dollars are being spent. need to follow up to the client's offices (Gilbert et al., 2004). On the other hand, enabling users to This study evaluated the success of the GePG follow the payment process results in confidence system by drawing success measures based on in using the e-government system (Chan et al., public value: efficiency, effectiveness, and social 2020). value. The study adopted a concurrent mixed research design where the questionnaire was Despite these contributions, some limitations integrated within interviews in a single were noted. First, this study was based on a investigation involving 442 respondents from 271 single e-government system, namely the GePG public institutions in 11 regions. The study found system, in a particular context. This choice may that the use of the system increased revenue limit the generalizability of the findings to other collection by 44.28% while reducing the cost e-government systems implemented in Tanzania associated with revenue collection by 27.10% and beyond. This is because different e- between 2015/2016 and 2019/2020 in surveyed government systems have different attributes institutions. and can vary between contexts and expected public values. Second, e-government develops in Moreover, the use of the system enhanced the parallel with government development and the trust between citizens and government, digitalization of society in general increased transparency and traceability in the (Mukamurenzi et al., 2019). These results process of revenue collection. Nonetheless, the represent a snapshot in time, whereas many lack of integration of the GePG system with dimensions of public value may not be static. institutional billing systems in some institutions Future studies are needed to examine the hindered them from preparing institutional causality and interrelationships between pubic reports. Moreover, the lack of self-service facility value variables as e-government systems success. in some institutions was a challenge. The findings from this study contribute to understanding the Despite these limitations, this study contributes effectiveness of e-government systems based on to reducing research gaps regarding e- the public value. government success from government employees' perspectives in developing countries. Acknowledgment Additionally, an investigation of the factors that This work would not have been possible without best measure the success of e-government support of the Ministry of Finance and Planning. systems by taking dimensions from public value We would also like to show our gratitude to Mr. was needed. Doto James, former Permanent Secretary and Conclusion Paymaster General, for his guidance during the course of this research and the overall In many developing countries, governments are implementation of the GePG system in Tanzania. spending a significant amount of resources References Agbabiaka, O. (2018). The public value creation of Governance, 143–153. eGovernment: An empirical study from https://doi.org/10.1145/3209415.3209416 citizen perspective. 11th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Allas, T., Checinski, M., Dillon, R., & Dobbs, R., 14 Hieronimus, S., & Singh, N. (2018). Government in Developing Countries: A Delivering for citizens: How to triple the success Public Value Perspective. Internet Research, rate of government transformations. 28(4), 169–190. https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/p https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-10-2016- ublic-and-social-sector/our- 0296 insights/delivering-for-citizens-how-to- triple-the-success-rate-of-government- Frost, D., & Lal, B. (2019). E-government project transformations# design in developing countries. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Alshawi, S., & Alalwany, H. (2009). E-Government Technology, 533(December), 155–176. Evaluation: Citizen’s Perspective in https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04315- Developing Countries. Information 5_12 Technology for Development, 15(1), 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1002/itdj.20125 Gichoya, D. (2005). Successful implementation of ICT projects in government. Proceedings of Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Bloomberg, L. (2014). the European Conference on E-Government, Public value governance: Moving beyond ECEG, 3(4), 171–182. traditional public administration and the new public management. Public Gilbert, D., Balestrini, P., & Littleboy, D. (2004). Administration Review, 74(4), 445–456. Barriers and benefits in the adoption of e- government. International Journal of Public https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12238 Sector Management, 17(4), 286–301. Chan, F. K. Y., Thong, J. Y. L., Brown, S. A., & https://doi.org/10.1108/095135504105397 Venkatesh, V. (2020). Service Design and 94 Citizen Satisfaction with E-Government Services: A Multidimensional Perspective. Goh, J. M., & Arenas, A. E. (2020). IT value creation Public Administration Review. in public sector: how IT-enabled capabilities mitigate tradeoffs in public organisations. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13308 European Journal of Information Systems, Chan, F. K. Y., Thong, J. Y. L., Venkatesh, V., Brown, 29(1), 25–43. S. A., Hu, P. J. H., & Tam, K. Y. (2010). https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2019.17 Modeling citizen satisfaction with 08821 mandatory adoption of an E-Government technology. Journal of the Association for Gunawong, P., & Gao, P. (2017). Understanding e- Information Systems, 11(10), 519–549. government failure in the developing https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00239 country context: a process-oriented study. Information Technology for Development, Chen, Y. C., Hu, L. T., Tseng, K. C., Juang, W. J., & 23(1), 153–178. Chang, C. K. (2019). Cross-boundary e- https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2016.12 government systems: Determinants of 69713 performance. Government Information Quarterly, 36(3), 449–459. Hanson, W. E., Creswell, J. W., Clark, V. L. P., Petska, K. S., & Creswell, J. D. (2005). Mixed https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.02.001 Methods Research Designs in Counseling Creswell, J. W., & Plano, C. (2007). Designing and Psychology Mixed Methods Research conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Designs in Counseling Psychology. Mixed Oaks, CA: Sage. Methods Research Designs in Counseling Psychology, 373. DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2016). Information https://doi.org/10.1037/0022- systems success measurement. Foundations 0167.52.2.224 and Trends in Information Systems, 2(1), 1– 116. https://doi.org/10.1561/2900000005 Hughes, D. L., Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., & Simintiras, A. C. (2016). Information Deng, H., Karunasena, K., & Xu, W. (2018). systems project failure – analysis of causal Evaluating the Performance of e- 15 links using interpretive structural Ethiopia. Proceedings of the 12th International modelling. Production Planning and Control, Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic 27(16), 1313–1333. Governance - ICEGOV2019, 21–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2016.12 https://doi.org/10.1145/3326365.3326369 17571 Luna, D. E., Duarte-Valle, A., Picazo-Vela, S., & Ishengoma, F., Mselle, L., & Mongi, H. (2019). Luna-Reyes, L. F. (2014). Assessing the Critical success factors for m-Government impacts of digital government in the adoption in Tanzania: A conceptual creation of public value. ACM International framework. Electronic Journal of Information Conference Proceeding Series, 61–68. Systems in Developing Countries, 85(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/2612733.2612743 https://doi.org/10.1002/isd2.12064 Lupilya, E. C., & Jung, K. (2015). E-Government Kamau, G., & Wausi, A. (2015). Evaluating the Transformation in Tanzania: Status, public value of egovernment services. 2015 Opportunities, and Challenges. The Korean IST-Africa Conference, IST-Africa 2015, 1–9. Journal of Policy Studies, 30(1), 147–184. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISTAFRICA.2015. 7190554 Mellouli, M., Bouaziz, F., & Bentahar, O. (2020). E- government success assessment from a Karunasena, K., Deng, H., & Singh, M. (2011). public value perspective. International Measuring the public value of e- Review of Public Administration, 25(3), 153– government: A case study from Sri Lanka. 174. Transforming Government: People, Process and https://doi.org/10.1080/12294659.2020.17 Policy, 5(1), 81–99. 99517 https://doi.org/10.1108/175061611111146 Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating public value: Strategic 71 management in government. Harvard Kolsaker, A., & Lee-Kelley, L. (2008). Citizens’ University Press. attitudes towards e-government and e- governance: A UK study. International Mukamurenzi, S., Grönlund, Å., & Islam, S. M. Journal of Public Sector Management, 21(7), (2019). Improving qualities of e- 723–738. government services in Rwanda: A service https://doi.org/10.1108/095135508109045 provider perspective. Electronic Journal of 32 Information Systems in Developing Countries, 85(5), 1–16. Kondoro, A., & Mtebe, J. (2018). Investigating https://doi.org/10.1002/isd2.12089 Secure Implementation of Government Web based Systems in Tanzania. In Paul Mukoya, E. A. (2009). School of Computing & Cunningham and Miriam Cunningham Informatics Title : Information System Failure (Eds) (Ed.), IST-Africa 2018 Conference Causes-an Investigation in Kenyan. October. Proceedings (Vol. 182, Issue 10, pp. 6–14). MWTC. (2016). National Information and IIMC International Information Communication Technology (ICT) Policy. Management Corporation. https://tanzict.files.wordpress.com/2016/ http://www.ist- 05/national-ict-policy-proofed-final-nic- africa.org/home/outbox/ISTAfrica_Paper review-2.pdf _ref_51_10127.pdf Rose, J., Persson, J. S., & Heeager, L. T. (2015). How Lessa, L. (2019). Sustainability framework for e- e-Government managers prioritise rival government success: Feasibility assessment. value positions: The efficiency imperative. ICEGOV2019, 231–239. Information Polity, 20(1), 35–59. https://doi.org/10.1145/3326365.3326396 https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-150349 Lessa, L., & Tsegaye, A. (2019). Evaluation of the Sæbø, Ø. (2012). E-government in Tanzania: Current Public Value of E-Government Services in Status and Future Challenges. IFIP 16 International Federation for Information of Service Quality. MIS Quarterly, 31(1), 77– Processing, 198–209. 109. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33489- https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2013/37. 4_17 1.04 Scott, M., Delone, W., & Golden, W. (2016). Tan, C.-W., & Pan, S. L. (2003). Managing e- Measuring eGovernment success: A public transformation in the public sector: An e- value approach. European Journal of government study of the inland revenue Information Systems, 25(3), 187–208. authority of Singapore (IRAS). European https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2015.11 Journal of Information Systems, 12(4), 269– 281. Suri, P. K., & Sushil. (2017). Strategic Planning and https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000 Implementation of E-Governance. Springer 479 Science+Business Media Singapore Pte Ltd, December 2018, 297. Twizeyimana, J. D., & Andersson, A. (2019). The https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2176- public value of E-Government – A literature 3 review. Government Information Quarterly, 36(2), 167–178. Tan, C.-W., Benbasat, I., & Cenfetelli, R. T. (2013). IT- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.01.001 Mediated Customer Service Content and Delivery in Electronic Governments: An Yamane, T. (1967). Statistics, An Introductory Analysis Empirical Investigation of the Antecedents (Harper and Row (ed.); 2nd Edition). 17

References (38)

  1. Agbabiaka, O. (2018). The public value creation of eGovernment: An empirical study from citizen perspective. 11th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance, 143-153. https://doi.org/10.1145/3209415.3209416
  2. Allas, T., Checinski, M., Dillon, R., & Dobbs, R., Hieronimus, S., & Singh, N. (2018). Delivering for citizens: How to triple the success rate of government transformations. https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/p ublic-and-social-sector/our- insights/delivering-for-citizens-how-to- triple-the-success-rate-of-government- transformations#
  3. Alshawi, S., & Alalwany, H. (2009). E-Government Evaluation: Citizen's Perspective in Developing Countries. Information Technology for Development, 15(1), 43-51. https://doi.org/10.1002/itdj.20125
  4. Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Bloomberg, L. (2014). Public value governance: Moving beyond traditional public administration and the new public management. Public Administration Review, 74(4), 445-456. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12238
  5. Chan, F. K. Y., Thong, J. Y. L., Brown, S. A., & Venkatesh, V. (2020). Service Design and Citizen Satisfaction with E-Government Services: A Multidimensional Perspective. Public Administration Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13308
  6. Chan, F. K. Y., Thong, J. Y. L., Venkatesh, V., Brown, S. A., Hu, P. J. H., & Tam, K. Y. (2010). Modeling citizen satisfaction with mandatory adoption of an E-Government technology. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 11(10), 519-549. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00239
  7. Chen, Y. C., Hu, L. T., Tseng, K. C., Juang, W. J., & Chang, C. K. (2019). Cross-boundary e- government systems: Determinants of performance. Government Information Quarterly, 36(3), 449-459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.02.001
  8. Creswell, J. W., & Plano, C. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  9. DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2016). Information systems success measurement. Foundations and Trends in Information Systems, 2(1), 1- 116. https://doi.org/10.1561/2900000005
  10. Deng, H., Karunasena, K., & Xu, W. (2018). Evaluating the Performance of e- Government in Developing Countries: A Public Value Perspective. Internet Research, 28(4), 169-190. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-10-2016- 0296
  11. Frost, D., & Lal, B. (2019). E-government project design in developing countries. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, 533(December), 155-176. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04315- 5_12
  12. Gichoya, D. (2005). Successful implementation of ICT projects in government. Proceedings of the European Conference on E-Government, ECEG, 3(4), 171-182.
  13. Gilbert, D., Balestrini, P., & Littleboy, D. (2004). Barriers and benefits in the adoption of e- government. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 17(4), 286-301. https://doi.org/10.1108/095135504105397
  14. Goh, J. M., & Arenas, A. E. (2020). IT value creation in public sector: how IT-enabled capabilities mitigate tradeoffs in public organisations. European Journal of Information Systems, 29(1), 25-43. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2019.17
  15. Gunawong, P., & Gao, P. (2017). Understanding e- government failure in the developing country context: a process-oriented study. Information Technology for Development, 23(1), 153-178. https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2016.12
  16. Hanson, W. E., Creswell, J. W., Clark, V. L. P., Petska, K. S., & Creswell, J. D. (2005). Mixed Methods Research Designs in Counseling Psychology Mixed Methods Research Designs in Counseling Psychology. Mixed Methods Research Designs in Counseling Psychology, 373. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022- 0167.52.2.224
  17. Hughes, D. L., Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., & Simintiras, A. C. (2016). Information systems project failure -analysis of causal
  18. Ishengoma, F., Mselle, L., & Mongi, H. (2019). Critical success factors for m-Government adoption in Tanzania: A conceptual framework. Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 85(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1002/isd2.12064
  19. Kamau, G., & Wausi, A. (2015). Evaluating the public value of egovernment services. 2015 IST-Africa Conference, IST-Africa 2015, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISTAFRICA.2015. 7190554
  20. Karunasena, K., Deng, H., & Singh, M. (2011). Measuring the public value of e- government: A case study from Sri Lanka. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 5(1), 81-99. https://doi.org/10.1108/175061611111146
  21. Kolsaker, A., & Lee-Kelley, L. (2008). Citizens' attitudes towards e-government and e- governance: A UK study. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 21(7), 723-738. https://doi.org/10.1108/095135508109045
  22. Kondoro, A., & Mtebe, J. (2018). Investigating Secure Implementation of Government Web based Systems in Tanzania. In Paul Cunningham and Miriam Cunningham (Eds) (Ed.), IST-Africa 2018 Conference Proceedings (Vol. 182, Issue 10, pp. 6-14). IIMC International Information Management Corporation. http://www.ist- africa.org/home/outbox/ISTAfrica_Paper _ref_51_10127.pdf
  23. Lessa, L. (2019). Sustainability framework for e- government success: Feasibility assessment. ICEGOV2019, 231-239. https://doi.org/10.1145/3326365.3326396
  24. Lessa, L., & Tsegaye, A. (2019). Evaluation of the Public Value of E-Government Services in Ethiopia. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance - ICEGOV2019, 21-26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3326365.3326369
  25. Luna, D. E., Duarte-Valle, A., Picazo-Vela, S., & Luna-Reyes, L. F. (2014). Assessing the impacts of digital government in the creation of public value. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 61-68. https://doi.org/10.1145/2612733.2612743
  26. Lupilya, E. C., & Jung, K. (2015). E-Government Transformation in Tanzania: Status, Opportunities, and Challenges. The Korean Journal of Policy Studies, 30(1), 147-184.
  27. Mellouli, M., Bouaziz, F., & Bentahar, O. (2020). E- government success assessment from a public value perspective. International Review of Public Administration, 25(3), 153- 174. https://doi.org/10.1080/12294659.2020.17 99517
  28. Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating public value: Strategic management in government. Harvard University Press.
  29. Mukamurenzi, S., Grönlund, Å., & Islam, S. M. (2019). Improving qualities of e- government services in Rwanda: A service provider perspective. Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 85(5), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1002/isd2.12089
  30. Mukoya, E. A. (2009). School of Computing & Informatics Title : Information System Failure Causes-an Investigation in Kenyan. October. MWTC. (2016). National Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Policy. https://tanzict.files.wordpress.com/2016/ 05/national-ict-policy-proofed-final-nic- review-2.pdf
  31. Rose, J., Persson, J. S., & Heeager, L. T. (2015). How e-Government managers prioritise rival value positions: The efficiency imperative. Information Polity, 20(1), 35-59. https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-150349
  32. Saebø, Ø. (2012). E-government in Tanzania: Current Status and Future Challenges. IFIP International Federation for Information Processing, 198-209. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33489- 4_17
  33. Scott, M., Delone, W., & Golden, W. (2016). Measuring eGovernment success: A public value approach. European Journal of Information Systems, 25(3), 187-208. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2015.11
  34. Suri, P. K., & Sushil. (2017). Strategic Planning and Implementation of E-Governance. Springer Science+Business Media Singapore Pte Ltd, December 2018, 297. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2176-
  35. Tan, C.-W., Benbasat, I., & Cenfetelli, R. T. (2013). IT- Mediated Customer Service Content and Delivery in Electronic Governments: An Empirical Investigation of the Antecedents of Service Quality. MIS Quarterly, 31(1), 77- 109. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2013/37. 1.04
  36. Tan, C.-W., & Pan, S. L. (2003). Managing e- transformation in the public sector: An e- government study of the inland revenue authority of Singapore (IRAS). European Journal of Information Systems, 12(4), 269- 281. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000
  37. Twizeyimana, J. D., & Andersson, A. (2019). The public value of E-Government -A literature review. Government Information Quarterly, 36(2), 167-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.01.001
  38. Yamane, T. (1967). Statistics, An Introductory Analysis (Harper and Row (ed.); 2 nd Edition).

Welcome to Academia

Sign up to get access to over 50 million papers

By continuing, you agree to our Terms of Use

Continue with Email

Sign up or log in to continue.

Welcome to Academia

Sign up to continue.

Hi,

Log in to continue.

Reset password

Password reset

Check your email for your reset link.

Your link was sent to

Please hold while we log you in