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

Discussion and evaluation
can satisfy RQ3 already starts at the point of having partial answers to RQ1 and RQ2. It
is thereby possible that RQ2 is biased by RQ3. Work related to RQ3 did however not
commence until after the scenarios constructed for RQ2 were completed. On the other
hand: Even though C4 satisfies C3, there are possibilities for an alternative C4 that
satisfy C3, or an alternative C3 that can be satisfied by an implementation of C4. This is
a natural consequence of the research approach and the nature of the design artefact.
iii) A suggested limitation of the approach in light of knowledge about C1 is based on
the fact that C2 and C3 are proposed based on knowledge about current technology,
from which the e-service infrastructure (C4) is suggested. But as C4 is made available
as a new technology affordance in C1, the possibility of additional requirements are not
taken into account. Additional iterations of this phase could be suggested to address
this.
7.3.2 Use of case studies
The initial expectations for the study involved developing a prototype based on the
conceptual model. The study was however at a crossroads after establishing its first
version, and prior to deciding which elements of the model would be incorporated into
an initial prototype. At this point, the conceptual work was not accepted for publication
and there were signals pointing in the direction of a demand for case studies. There was
further a risk of bringing the research out of the e-government research domain and
focus on the development of prototypes based on parts of the conceptual model. A
decision was then made to use case studies as input to a realisation design and to
possibly test or improve the design artefact. Accordingly, the consequence for the
design artefact was that it remained conceptual.
The research work following the case study approach is presented in P5-P8. It is
conducted at the sector (P5), cross-sector (P8), national (P6) and cross-national (P7)
level. For P5-P7 there is a certain triangulation of the observed phenomenon, being a
structure analysis of system functions, governance mechanisms, and stakeholders
involved the provisioning of public services. P5-P7 are used in confirming a theory that
the design artefact will provide a generic solution to the investigated cases, and that the
approaches taken for the cases represent type-wise configurations or preliminary
solutions towards what should be satisfied by the design artefact. P8 is used for the
purpose of evaluation, and to demonstrate the design artefact through investigating if
the design artefact could be used to support the case as observed. P8 additionally cover
aspects of the design artefact related to citizen-centricity, the role of a contributor, and
the virtual organisation as a whole. These are aspects of the conceptual design that were
not particularly prominent in the other cases. P5 and P8 are single observations of the
current situation, while P6 and P7 consider historical aspect as the collected data both
previous, current, and expected configurations. None of the case studies are based on
interfering with the observed phenomenon. As C1 covers concepts important to the
design artefact, an understanding of the model has guided the investigation of P5, P6,
and P8, and no formal framework for conducting the case studies were established in
addition to using C1 and the preliminary design artefact as a reference. As the
comparative case study reported in P7 was conducted as a collaborative exercise, a
supporting framework for investigating the phenomenon was established. The case
study approach has a high degree of discoverability, making it easier to follow up on
83