Multi-channel provisioning of public services - Department of ...

List of figures
Figure 1 Relationships between key variables in e-government and select disciplinary
interests (Scholl, 2007)..............................................................................................4
Figure 2: Studies and research publications within the study .........................................12
Figure 3 IS success model (DeLone and McLean, 2003) ...............................................16
Figure 4 Design science research framework (Hevner, 2007) ........................................17
Figure 5 Nominal DSRM process model adapted from Peffers et al. (2006) .................18
Figure 6 Overview of the EKD multi-model approach (Bubenko, 2007).......................26
Figure 7 Relationship between WfMC terms (Carlsen, 1997)........................................30
Figure 8 CPI cycle adapted from Lillehagen and Krogstie (2008) .................................31
Figure 9 Five-stage model for e-government maturity (European Commission, 2010) .39
Figure 10 Sector-wise view of municipal tasks and ICT systems (FAD, 2011).............40
Figure 11 Dynamics of public service provisioning .......................................................58
Figure 12 Simplified service interaction .........................................................................60
Figure 13 Citizen-centric process view service layer conceptual model ........................66
Figure 14 BPM service decomposition ...........................................................................67
Figure 15 Example configuration of distributed network layer model for CCPV ..........68
Figure 16 Conceptual e-service governance model ........................................................70
List of tables
Table 1 Collaboration arrangements as basis for service integration..............................42
Table 2 Mapping between research questions and publications .....................................71
Table 3 Mapping between contributions and publications..............................................74
Table 4 Mapping between contributions and research questions....................................74
Table 5 Artefact evaluation classified according to Cleven et al. (2009) .......................81
Table 6 Possible hypothetical directions for development..............................................85