Mostrar el registro sencillo del documento

Inter-organizational e-government services uptake: micro-businesses perspective

dc.rights.licenseAtribución-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional
dc.contributor.advisorDíaz Pinzón, Beatriz Helena
dc.contributor.authorCorrea Ospina, Martha Liliana
dc.date.accessioned2023-08-02T01:46:51Z
dc.date.available2023-08-02T01:46:51Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.unal.edu.co/handle/unal/84410
dc.descriptionilustraciones
dc.description.abstractGovernments have been undertaking digital transformation for many years to offer new ways of interaction to their constituents. However, they face different challenges to migrate users towards digital channels and electronic documents, which are believed to be more cost-efficient for all. Based on the literature review, it is identified that research has been mainly focused on exploring and validating factors influencing acceptance and adoption of e-government self-service applications, and in general it has been conceived it as static phenomenon. Consequently, there is still a lack of "holistic" understanding of the dynamics of the uptake of e-government services. This thesis presents the research process and the results of a longitudinal critical realist case study conducted in the field of e-government with the aim of understanding the uptake process of inter-organizational e-government services by micro-enterprises. This study moves beyond identifying a list of factors influencing adoption at specific point in time. It offers a mechanism-based explanation, and it captures the processual dynamics of e-government services uptake from microbusinesses perspective in a context of mandatory usage of electronic invoicing. The proposed explanatory theoretical framework for the uptake of inter-organizational e-government services by microbusinesses consists of four phases: information seeking, adoption decision and acquisition, implementation, and use and maintenance. Each stage suggests the presence of mechanisms that interact among them and explain the events that occurred during each phase, and the advance towards the next stage. Eight mechanisms were identified: experience, regulatory, market, intermediation, affordance, expectation, appropriation, and administrative literacy mechanism.
dc.description.abstractEl sector público ha venido transformándose digitalmente por varios años para ser más eficiente y ofrecer nuevas formas de interacción a sus usuarios. Sin embargo, los gobiernos afrontan retos para migrar a sus usuarios hacia el uso de canales digitales y de documentos electrónicos, lo cual se cree es más eficiente económicamente tanto para usuarios como para las entidades públicas. Con base en la revisión de la literatura, se identificó que la investigación sobre la adopción y uso de servicios de gobierno electrónico ha estado enfocada en la identificación de factores que favorecen la aceptación y adopción de estos servicios y que se ha considerado desde una perspectiva estática. Como consecuencia, existe una falta de entendimiento holístico sobre las dinámicas de adopción y uso de servicios de gobierno electrónico. Esta tesis, presenta el proceso de investigación y los resultados de un caso de estudio longitudinal bajo el paradigma del realismo crítico, el cual fue llevado a cabo en el área del gobierno electrónico con el fin de entender el proceso de adopción y uso de servicios inter-organizacionales de gobierno electrónico por microempresas. Este estudio va más allá de la identificación de factores que influencian la adopción de servicios electrónicos en un momento particular. Este estudio proporciona una explicación basada en mecanismos y captura las dinámicas del proceso de adopción y uso desde la perspectiva de las microempresas en un contexto de uso obligatorio de facturación electrónica. El modelo propuesto de adopción y uso de servicios inter-organizacionales de gobierno electrónico está formado por cuatro fases: búsqueda de información, decisión de adoptar y adquisición, implementación y uso y mantenimiento. Cada fase sugiere la presencia de mecanismos que interactúan entre ellos para explicar los eventos ocurridos en cada fase y el avance hacia la siguiente fase. Ocho mecanismos fueron identificados: mecanismo de expectative, mecanismo regulatorio, de mercado, de Intermediación, affordance, de expectativa, de apropiación y de conocimiento administrativo. (Texto tomado de la fuente).
dc.format.extentxxvi, 254 páginas
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherUniversidad Nacional de Colombia
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
dc.subject.ddc650 - Gerencia y servicios auxiliares::658 - Gerencia general
dc.titleInter-organizational e-government services uptake: micro-businesses perspective
dc.typeTrabajo de grado - Doctorado
dc.type.driverinfo:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion
dc.publisher.programBogotá - Ingeniería - Doctorado en Ingeniería - Industria y Organizaciones
dc.contributor.researchgroupGrupo de Investigación en Sistemas y Tecnologías de la Información y de la Comunicación en las Organizaciones Gistic
dc.description.degreelevelDoctorado
dc.description.degreenameDoctor en Ingeniería
dc.description.methodsOntological and epistemological perspectives of Critical Realism (CR) were assumed for this research and based on them methodological decisions were made. Multimethodology from Mingers (2006) served as a framework to guide the stages of a CR research. Due to the processual view taken in this research, which also implies to explain why of businesses actions. “Abductive approach”, allows to take into account previous research and also empirical data. Coding in combination with two levels of analysis (inner and outer context of the organization, and social and technical aspects) are used for the identification of mechanisms that would explain events of interest, such as decisions made during the uptake process of inter-organizational services by microbusinesses
dc.description.researchareaSistemas y Gestión de la Tecnología, la Información, el Conocimiento y la Innovación Tecnológica en la Industria y las Organizaciones
dc.identifier.instnameUniversidad Nacional de Colombia
dc.identifier.reponameRepositorio Institucional Universidad Nacional de Colombia
dc.identifier.repourlhttps://repositorio.unal.edu.co/
dc.publisher.facultyFacultad de Ingeniería
dc.publisher.placeBogotá, Colombia
dc.publisher.branchUniversidad Nacional de Colombia - Sede Bogotá
dc.relation.referencesAbdel-Fattah, M. A. (2015). Constructing a model for the adoptability of using e-government services in developing countries: the case of Egypt. International Journal of Electronic Governance, 7(4), 293. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEG.2015.074316
dc.relation.referencesAjzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Orgnizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
dc.relation.referencesAl-Hujran, O., Al-Debei, M. M., Chatfield, A., & Migdadi, M. (2015). The imperative of influencing citizen attitude toward e-government adoption and use. Computers in Human Behavior, 53(2015), 189–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.025
dc.relation.referencesAl-Shafi, S. H., & Weerakkody, V. (2010). Factors Affecting E-Government Implementation and Adoption in the State of Qatar. European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems 2010. https://doi.org/10.1179/2042644512Z.00000000030
dc.relation.referencesAl-Sobhi, F., Weerakkody, V., & Kamal, M. M. (2010). An exploratory study on the role of intermediaries in delivering public services in Madinah City: Case of Saudi Arabia. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 4(1), 14–36. https://doi.org/10.1108/17506161011028786
dc.relation.referencesAL Athmay, Al. A. A., Fantazy, K., & Kumar, V. (2016). E-government adoption and user’s satisfaction: an empirical investigation. EuroMed Journal of Business, 11(1), 57–83. https://doi.org/10.1108/EMJB-05-2014-0016
dc.relation.referencesAlAwadhi, S., & Morris, A. (2009). Factors influencing the adoption of e-government services. Journal of Software, 4(6), 584–590. https://doi.org/10.4304/jsw.4.6.584-590
dc.relation.referencesAlghamdi, S., & Beloff, N. (2016). Innovative Framework for e-Government adoption in Saudi Arabia: A Study from the business sector perspective. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.14569/ijacsa.2016.070189
dc.relation.referencesAlghamdi, S., & Beloff, N. (2015). Exploring Determinants of Adoption and Higher Utilisation for E-Government: A Study from Business Sector Perspective in Saudi Arabia. Proceedings of the Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems, 5(October 2014), 1469–1479. https://doi.org/10.15439/2015F257
dc.relation.referencesAlghamdi, S., & Beloff, N. (2014). Towards a Comprehensive Model for E-Government Adoption and Utilisation Analysis: The Case of Saudi Arabia. Proceedings of the 2014 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems, 1217–1225. https://doi.org/10.15439/2014F146
dc.relation.referencesAlmahamid, S., & Mcadams, A. C. (2010). Determinants of User Continuance Intention to use e-Government. Int. J. Electronic Governance, 3(4), 343–372
dc.relation.referencesAlomar, M. A., & de Visscher, C. (2017). Which Factors Can Affect e‑Public Procurement Adoption by Private Firms? The Case of Belgium. Electronic Journal of E-Government, 15(2), 103–115.
dc.relation.referencesAlruwaie, M., El-Haddadeh, R., & Weerakkody, V. (2012). A Framework for Evaluating Citizens’ Expectations and Satisfaction toward Continued Intention to Use E-Government Services. IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2012, 273–286.
dc.relation.referencesAnastasopoulou, K., & Kokolakis, S. (2013). Exploring citizens’ intention to use e-government services: the role of cultural bias. International Journal of Electronic Governance, 6(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEG.2013.053378
dc.relation.referencesArendsen, R., Peters, O., ter Hedde, M., & van Dijk, J. (2014). Does e-government reduce the administrative burden of businesses? An assessment of business-to-government systems usage in the Netherlands. Government Information Quarterly, 31(1), 160–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2013.09.002
dc.relation.referencesArendsen, R., & Ter Hedde, M. J. (2009). On the origin of intermediary e-government services. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 5693 LNCS, 270–281. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03516-6_23
dc.relation.referencesArendsen, R., & Van De Wijngaert, L. (2011). Government as a launching customer for eInvoicing. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 6846 LNCS, 122–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22878-0_11
dc.relation.referencesArendsen, R., & van Engers, T. M. (2004). Reduction of the Administrative Burden: An e-Government Perspective. In R. Traunmüller (Ed.), Electronic Government: Proceedings of the 3rd IFIP WG 8.5 International Conference, EGOV 2004 (Vol. 3183, pp. 200–206). http://www.springerlink.com/openurl.asp?genre=article&id=BHJ6V5EJU1DW8P1D
dc.relation.referencesArendsen, R., van Engers, T. M., & Schurink, W. (2008). Adoption of High Impact Governmental eServices: Seduce or Enforce? In M. A. Wimmer, H. J. Scholl, & E. Ferro (Eds.), Electronic Government: Proceedings of the 7th IFIP WG 8.5 International Conference, EGOV 2008 (Vol. 5184, pp. 73–84).
dc.relation.referencesArendsen, R., Van Engers, T. M., & Schurink, W. (2008). Adoption of high impact governmental eServices: Seduce or enforce? Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 5184, 73–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85204-9
dc.relation.referencesArendsen, R., Van Engers, T. M., & Velde, R. (2006). An Empirical Study on Business-to- Government Data Exchange Strategies to Reduce the Administrative Costs for Businesses. In R. Suomi, R. Cabral, J. F. Hampe, A. Heikkilä, J. Järveläinen, & E. Koskivaara (Eds.), Project E-Society: Building Bricks. IFIP International Federation for Information Processing (pp. 311–323). Springer, Boston, MA
dc.relation.referencesAvgerou, C. (2013). Journal of the Association for Information Systems Social Mechanisms for Causal Explanation in Social Theory Based IS Research. Jais, 14(August), 399–419
dc.relation.referencesBajwa, D. S., Garcia, J. E., & Mooney, T. (2004). An integrative framework for the assimilation of enterprise resource planning systems: Phases, antecedents, and outcomes. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 44(3), 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2004.11647585
dc.relation.referencesBandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.
dc.relation.referencesBansal, V., & Shukla, S. (2021). Exploring Big Data Analytics Adoption using Affordance Theory. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Enterprise Information System, 2: ICEIS, 131–138. https://doi.org/10.5220/0010509801310138
dc.relation.referencesBaskerville, R. L., & Myers, M. D. (2002). Information systems as a reference discipline. MIS Quarterly, 26(1), 1–14.
dc.relation.referencesBelanche, D., Casaló, L. V., Flavián, C., & Schepers, J. (2014). Trust transfer in the continued usage of public e-services. Information and Management, 51(6), 627–640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2014.05.016
dc.relation.referencesBélanger, F., & Carter, L. (2012). Digitizing Government Interactions with Constituents: An Historical Review of E-Government Research in Information Systems. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13, 363–394.
dc.relation.referencesBharosa, N., Hietbrink, F., Mosterd, L., & Van Oosterhout, R. (2018). Steering the adoption of Standard Business Reporting for cross domain information exchange. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series. https://doi.org/10.1145/3209281.3209325
dc.relation.referencesBharosa, N., Janssen, M., van Wijk, R., de Winne, N., van der Voort, H., Hulstijn, J., & Tan, Y. hua. (2013). Tapping into existing information flows: The transformation to compliance by design in business-to-government information exchange. Government Information Quarterly, 30(SUPPL. 1), S9–S18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2012.08.006
dc.relation.referencesBhattacherjee, A. (2001). Understanding Information Systems Continuance: An Expectation-Confirmation Model. MIS Quarterly, 25(3), 351–370.
dc.relation.referencesBostrom, R. P., & Heinen, J. S. (1977). MIS Problems and Failures: A Socio- Technical Perspective PART I: THE CAUSES. MIS Quarterly, 1(3), 17–32.
dc.relation.referencesBrown, S. A., Massey, A. P., Montoya-Weiss, M. M., & Burkman, J. R. (2002). Do I really have to? User acceptance of mandated technology. European Journal of Information Systems, 11(4), 283–295. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000438
dc.relation.referencesBygstad, B., & Munkvold, B. E. (2011). In search of mechanisms. Conducting a critical realist data analysis. International Conference on Information Systems 2011, ICIS 2011, 3, 1978–1992.
dc.relation.referencesByström, K., & Järvelin, K. (1995). Task complexity affects information seeking and use. Information Processing and Management, 31(2), 191–213. https://tutcris.tut.fi/portal/en/publications/task-complexity-affects-information-use(e9266504-71b0-4439-a772-89677cb4e5cf).htm
dc.relation.referencesCardona Madariaga, D. F. (2004). El gobierno electrónico. Una herramienta estratégica de toma de decisiones. Universidad & Empresa, 2((3,4,5)), 20–45. http://www.urosario.edu.co/urosario_files/48/48ff8a54-9e9c-4b9b-bec3-9274276efd6a.pdf
dc.relation.referencesCarroll, J., Howard, S., Peck, J., & Murphy, J. (2003). From adoption to use: the process of appropriating a mobile phone. Australiasian Journal of Information Systems, 10(2), 38–48. https://doi.org/10.3127/ajis.v10i2.151
dc.relation.referencesCarroll, J., Howard, S., Vetere, F., Peck, J., & Murphy, J. (2002). Just what do the youth of today want? Technology appropriation by young people. The 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a2d4/bda814f845ea32b985e3a9934d072c782249.pdf
dc.relation.referencesCarter, L., & Weerakkody, V. (2008). E-government adoption: A cultural comparison. Information Systems Frontiers, 10(4), 473–482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-008-9103-6
dc.relation.referencesCataldo, A., Almuna, S., Briones, R., Bustos, G., & Mcqueen, R. (2018). IT Diffusion , Implementation and Assimilation in Micro-Businesses – an Exploratory Study Based on a Process Approach. Systemic Practice and Action Research.
dc.relation.referencesCCIT, & Fedesarrollo. (2013). Coyuntura TIC: El papel de las TIC en el desarrollo de la pequeña empresa: reflexiones de política a la luz del caso colombiano (p. 35). http://ccit.org.co/content/uploads/El-papel-de-las-TIC-en-el-desarrollo-de-la-peque§a-empresa_reflexiones-de-pol°tica-a-la-luz-del-caso-colombiano-Diciembre-2013-Fedesarrollo.pdf
dc.relation.referencesCentro Latinoamericano de Administracion para el Desarrollo. (2007). Carta Iberoamericana de Gobierno Electrónico (p. 25). http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/clad/clad0056701.pdf
dc.relation.referencesCherns, A. (1987). Principles of Sociotechnical Design Revisted. Human Relations, 40(3), 153–162. http://hjb.sagepub.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/content/9/2/183.full.pdf+html
dc.relation.referencesChesbrough, H., & Spohrer, J. (2006). A RESEARCH MANIFESTO FOR SERVICES SCIENCE. Communications of the ACM, 49(7), 35–40. https://doi.org/10.1145/1139922.1139945
dc.relation.referencesChwelos, P., Benbasat, I., & Dexter, A. S. (2001). Research Report: Empirical Test of an EDI Adoption Model. Information Systems Research, 12(3), 304–321. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.12.3.304.9708
dc.relation.referencesCorrea Ospina, M. L., Saxena, D., & Díaz Pinzón, B. H. (2021). Mechanisms underpinning the usage of e-government services by businesses: A proposal based on previous empirical research. JeDEM - EJournal of EDemocracy and Open Government, 13(2), 154–183. https://doi.org/10.29379/jedem.v13i2.685
dc.relation.referencesCreswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in Qualitative Inquiry. Theory into Practice, 39(3)
dc.relation.referencesDaft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational Information Requirements , Media Richness and Structural Design. Mangement Science, 32(5), 554–571
dc.relation.referencesDavis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease Of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–339. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
dc.relation.referencesde Vaujany, F.-X. (2008). Strategic Alignment: What Else? A Practice Based View of IS Value. Icis. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1323867
dc.relation.referencesDeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (1992). Information systems success: the quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 60–95.
dc.relation.referencesDeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4), 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748
dc.relation.referencesDIAN. (2018). Factura electrónica. https://www.dian.gov.co/fizcalizacioncontrol/herramienconsulta/FacturaElectronica/Presentacion/Paginas/beneficiosyventajas.aspx
dc.relation.referencesDillon, A., & Morris, M. G. (1996). User Acceptance of Information Technology: Theories and Models. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 31, 3–32. https://www.ischool.utexas.edu/~adillon/BookChapters/User acceptance.htm
dc.relation.referencesDirección de Gobierno en Línea. (2015). Estudio de cultura de uso de TIC en los colombianos para relacionarse con el Estado - 2015. http://estrategia.gobiernoenlinea.gov.co/623/articles-7913_culturadigital_2015.pdf
dc.relation.referencesDobson, P. J. (2001). The Philosophy of Critical Realism--An Opportunity for Information Systems Research. Information Systems Frontiers, 3(2), 199. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011495424958
dc.relation.referencesDöring, M. (2018). How-to Bureaucracy: Administrative Literacy of Citizens. ECPR General Conference 2018, 1–18.
dc.relation.referencesDuarte, A. I. M., & Costa, C. J. (2012). Information systems: Life cycle and success. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, October 2018, 25–30. https://doi.org/10.1145/2311917.2311923
dc.relation.referencesDwivedi, Y. K., Shareef, M. A., Simintiras, A. C., Lal, B., & Weerakkody, V. (2016). A generalised adoption model for services: A cross-country comparison of mobile health (m-health). Government Information Quarterly, 33, 174–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.06.003
dc.relation.referencesDwivedi, Y., Rana, N. P., Janssen, M., Lal, B., Williams, M. D., & Clement, M. (2017). An empirical validation of a unified model of electronic government adoption (UMEGA). Government Information Quarterly, 34(2), 211–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.03.001
dc.relation.referencesElkheshin, S., & Saleeb, N. (2016). A Conceptual Model for E-government Adoption in Egypt. 11th International Conference on Computer Engineering & Systems (ICCES), 254–259.
dc.relation.referencesEze, S. C., Chinedu-Eze, V. C., & Bello, A. O. (2018). Determinants of dynamic process of emerging ICT adoption in SMEs – actor network theory perspective. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-02-2018-0019
dc.relation.referencesFang, Z. (2002). E-Government in Digital Era: Concept, Practice, and Development. International Journal of The Computer, The Internet and Management, 10(2), 1–22. http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/apcity/unpan016377.pdf
dc.relation.referencesFaraj, S., & Azad, B. (2012). The Materiality of Technology: An Affordance Perspective. In P. M. Leonardi, B. A. Nardi, & J. Kallinikos (Eds.), Material- ity and organizing: Social interaction in a technological world (pp. 237–258). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof
dc.relation.referencesFølstad, A., & Kvale, K. (2018). Customer journeys: a systematic literature review. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 28(2), 196–227. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTP-11-2014-0261
dc.relation.referencesGao, Y. (2013). The Influences of Cognitive Factors and Trust on E-Government Acceptance: Evidence from A Two-Stage Model. Review of Business Information Systems, 17(4), 153–158.
dc.relation.referencesGhazali, N., Mustapha, R. M. R., & Mozie, N. M. (2014). The adoption factors of using e-Government services (Study case in Malaysia). Technology, Informatics, Management, Engineering, and Environment (TIME-E), 2014 2nd International Conference On, 326–330. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIME-E.2014.7011640
dc.relation.referencesGonzalez Rubio, L. C. (2013). Technology Acceptance , Acceptability and Appropriation in Professional Bureaucracies : the Case of Rfid for Improving Mobile Assets Management in Hospitals (Issue April) [Université De Montréal]. https://publications.polymtl.ca/1119/1/2013_LindaCastro_Gonzalez_Rubio.pdf
dc.relation.referencesGoodhue, D., & Thompson, R. (1995). Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 213–236. https://doi.org/10.2307/249689
dc.relation.referencesGrönlund, A., Hatakka, M., & Ask, A. (2007). Inclusion in the E-Service Society – Investigating Administrative Literacy Requirements for Using E-Services. In M. A. Wimmer, J. Scholl, & A. Gronlund (Eds.), Electronic Government: 6th International Conference (EGOV 2007) (Vol. 9, Issue 3, pp. 216–227). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arr.2010.02.003
dc.relation.referencesGrönlund, Å., & Horan, T. A. (2004). Introducing e-Gov: History, Definitions, and Issues. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 15, 713–729. https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais.01539
dc.relation.referencesGunasekaran, A., McGaughey, R. E., Ngai, E. W. T., & Rai, B. K. (2009). E-Procurement adoption in the Southcoast SMEs. International Journal of Production Economics, 122(1), 161–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2009.05.013
dc.relation.referencesHaag, S., Born, F., Kreuzer, S., & Bernius, S. (2013). Organizational resistance to e-invoicing-results from an empirical investigation among smes. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 8074 LNCS, 286–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40358-3-24
dc.relation.referencesHedström, P., & Swedberg, R. (1998). Social Mechanisms: An analytical Approach to Social Theory. Cambrigde University Press.
dc.relation.referencesHeeks, R., & Wall, P. J. (2018). Critical realism and ICT4D research. Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 84(6), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1002/isd2.12051
dc.relation.referencesHirschheim, R., & Klein, H. K. (2012). A Glorious and Not-So-Short History of the Information Systems Field. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(4), 188–235.
dc.relation.referencesHoddy, E. T. (2019). Critical realism in empirical research: employing techniques from grounded theory methodology. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 22(1), 111–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2018.1503400
dc.relation.referencesHofmann, S., Räckers, M., & Becker, J. (2012). Identifying factors of e-Government acceptance - A literature review. International Conference on Information Systems.
dc.relation.referencesHuang, T., & Yasuda, K. (2014). ERP Life Cycle Models : An Annotated Bibliographic Review ERP. Proceedings of the Asia Pacific Industrial Engineering & Manaagement Systems Conference.
dc.relation.referencesHung, S.-Y., Chang, C.-M., Chen, K., Tang, K.-Z., & Chou, C.-H. (2012). Buyer acceptance of g2b e-government services. ACM SIGMIS Database: The DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems, 42(4), 81–97. https://doi.org/10.1145/2096140.2096146
dc.relation.referencesHung, S. Y., Chang, C. M., Chen, K., Tang, K. Z., & Chou, C. H. (2011). Buyer acceptance of G2B e-government services: An empirical study of inter-entity supply contracts. Data Base for Advances in Information Systems, 42(4), 81–97. https://doi.org/10.1145/2096140.2096146
dc.relation.referencesHussein, R., Mohamed, N., Ahlan, A. R., & Mahmud, M. (2011). E-government application: an integrated model on G2C adoption of online tax. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 5(3), 225–248. https://doi.org/10.1108/17506161111155388
dc.relation.referencesIacovou, C. L., Benbasat, I., & Dexter, A. S. (1995). Electronic Data Interchange and Small Organizations: Adoption and Impact of Technology. MIS Quarterly, 19(4), 465–485.
dc.relation.referencesIrani, Z., Al-sebie, M., Elliman, T., & Brunel, Z. I. (2006). Transaction Stage of e-Government Systems: Identification of its Location & Importance. Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 1–9.
dc.relation.referencesJanneck, M. (2009). Recontextualising Technology in Appropriation Processes. In Handbook of Research on Socio-Technical Design and Social Networking Systems. https://www.igi-global.com/chapter/recontextualising-technology-appropriation-processes/21404
dc.relation.referencesJansen, J., Wijngaert, L. van de, & Pieterson, W. (2010). Channel choice and source choice of entrepreneurs in a public organizational context: the dutch case. In M. A. Wimmer, J.-L. Chappelet, M. Janssen, & H. J. Scholl (Eds.), Electronic Government: Proceedings of the 9th IFIP WG 8.5 International Conference, EGOV 2010 (Vol. 6228, pp. 144–155).
dc.relation.referencesJoseph, B. K., & Du Plessis, T. (2015). Consumers’ awareness of the value of e-Government in Zambia: Empirical evidence. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 11(3), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJEGR.2015070101
dc.relation.referencesJoshi, P. R., & Islam, S. (2018). E-government maturity model for sustainable E-government services from the perspective of developing countries. Sustainability (Switzerland), 10(6). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10061882
dc.relation.referencesKassim, E. S., & Hussin, H. (2010). An Integrative Approach to Inter-Organizational System Implementation and Evaluation: the Case of Government-to -Business. Communications of the IBIMA, 2010. https://doi.org/10.5171/2010.694811
dc.relation.referencesKhan, G. F., Moon, J., Swar, B., Zo, H., & Rho, J. J. (2012). E-government service use intentions in Afghanistan: technology adoption and the digital divide in a war-torn country. Information Development, 28(4), 281–299. http://idv.sagepub.com/content/28/4/281
dc.relation.referencesKindel, K., Ritso, V., & Venesaar, U. (2014). Business satisfaction with E-government services in Baltic sea region. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, Databases, 217–230. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-458-9-217
dc.relation.referencesKindel, K., Venesaar, U., & Reidolf, M. (2013). Communication channel choice between enterprises and government. Databases and Information Systems VII (Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications), 218–231.
dc.relation.referencesKurnia, S., & Johnston, R. B. (2000). The need for a processual view of inter-organizational systems adoption. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9, 295–319.
dc.relation.referencesLai, C. S. K., & Pires, G. (2010). Testing of a Model Evaluating e-Government Portal Acceptance and Satisfaction. The Electronic Journal Information Systems Evaluation, 13(1), 35–46.
dc.relation.referencesLallmahomed, M. Z. I., Lallmahomed, N., & Lallmahomed, G. M. (2017). Factors influencing the adoption of e-Government services in Mauritius. Telematics and Informatics, 34(4), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.01.003
dc.relation.referencesLangley, A. (1999). Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691–710.
dc.relation.referencesLangley, A., Smallman, C., Tsoukas, H., & Van de Ven, A. (2013). Process Studies of Change in Organization and Management: Unveiling Temporality, Activity, and Flow. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 1–13.
dc.relation.referencesLarsen, K. R., & Eargle, D. (2015). Theories Used in IS Research Wiki.
dc.relation.referencesLee, J., Kim, H. J., & Ahn, M. J. (2011). The willingness of e-Government service adoption by business users: The role of offline service quality and trust in technology. Government Information Quarterly, 28(2), 222–230. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740624X10001346
dc.relation.referencesLeonardi, Paul M. (2011). When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: Affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 35(1), 147–167. https://doi.org/10.2307/23043493
dc.relation.referencesLian, J. W. (2015). Critical factors for cloud based e-invoice service adoption in Taiwan: An empirical study. International Journal of Information Management, 35(1), 98–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2014.10.005
dc.relation.referencesLindgren, I., & Jansson, G. (2013). Electronic services in the public sector: A conceptual framework. Government Information Quarterly, 30(2), 163–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2012.10.005
dc.relation.referencesLöbel, S., Paulowitsch, B., & Schuppan, T. (2016). Intermediaries in the public sector and the role of information technology. Information Polity, 21(4), 335–346. https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-160387
dc.relation.referencesMACGREGOR, R., BUNKER, D., & WAUGH, P. (1993). Design of Electronic Data Interchange Systems for Small/Medium Enterprises. In 1993 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (pp. 151–161). https://doi.org/10.1109/ipcc.1993.593854
dc.relation.referencesMadsen, C. Ø., Hofmann, S., & Pieterson, W. (2019). Channel Choice Complications. Exploring the multiplex nature of citizens’ channel choices. EGOV 2019, 139–151.
dc.relation.referencesMadsen, C. Ø., & Kræmmergaard, P. (2016a). How to Succeed with Multichannel Management: A Case Study of Cross-Organizational Collaboration Surrounding a Mandatory SelfService Application for Danish Single Parents. International Journal of Public Administration in the Digital Age, 3(4), 94–110. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJPADA.2016100107
dc.relation.referencesMadsen, C. Ø., & Kræmmergaard, P. (2016b). Warm Experts in the Age of Mandatory e‑Government: Interaction Among Danish Single Parents Regarding Online Application for Public Benefits. Electronic Journal of E-Government, 14(1), 87–98.
dc.relation.referencesMansoori, K. A. Al, Sarabdeen, J., & Tchantchane, A. L. (2018). Investigating Emirati citizens’ adoption of e-government services in Abu Dhabi using modified UTAUT model. Information Technology and People, 31(2), 455–481. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-12-2016-0290
dc.relation.referencesMassal, J., & Sandoval, C. G. (2010). Gobierno electrónico. ¿Estado, ciudadanía y democracia en Internet? Análisis Político, 23(68), 3–25. http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0121-47052010000100001&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=es
dc.relation.referencesMilosz, M., & Milosz, E. (2013). Efficiency analysis of electronic channels use to communicate between enterprises and administration. Actual Problems of Economics, 143(5), 409–415.
dc.relation.referencesMingers, J. (2001). Combining IS research methods: Toawards a pluralist methodology. MIS Quarterly, 12(3), 240–259. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.12.3.240.9709
dc.relation.referencesMingers, J. (2006). Realising Systems Thinking: Knowledge and Action in Management Science. Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-29841-X
dc.relation.referencesMingers, J., Mutch, A., & Willcocks, L. (2013). Critical Realism in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly, 37(3), 795–802. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=89477777&lang=fr&site=ehost-live%5Cnfiles/1863/Mingers-2013-Critical Realism in Information S.pdf
dc.relation.referencesDecreto 1151 de 2008, 4 (2008). http://www.mintic.gov.co/portal/604/articles-3643_documento.pdf
dc.relation.referencesMinisterio de Tecnologías de Información y las Comunicaciones. (2017). Primera Gran Encuesta TIC/2017 Estudio de acceso, uso y retos de las TIC en Colombia. http://colombiatic.mintic.gov.co/679/articles-74002_cartilla_resumen.pdf
dc.relation.referencesMinisterio de Tecnologías de Información y las Comunicaciones. (2018a). Manual de Gobierno Digital (p. 89).
dc.relation.referencesMinisterio de Tecnologías de Información y las Comunicaciones. (2018b). MiPyme Vive Digital. https://www.mintic.gov.co/portal/604/w3-propertyvalue-7235.html
dc.relation.referencesMohd Nawi, M. N., Roslan, S., Salleh, N. A., Zulhumadi, F., & Harun, A. N. (2016). The benefits and challenges of E-procurement implementation: A case study of Malaysian company. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 6(7Special Issue), 329–332.
dc.relation.referencesMolnár, S. (2007). eGovernment in the European Union. Network for Teaching Information Society, July, 58.
dc.relation.referencesMunyoka, W., & Maharaj, M. (2017). The effect of UTAUT2 moderator factors on citizens’ intention to adopt e-government: The case of two SADC countries. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 15(1), 115–123. https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.15(1).2017.12
dc.relation.referencesMyers, M. D., & Newman, M. (2007). The qualitative interview in IS research: Examining the craft. Information and Organization, 17, 2–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2006.11.001
dc.relation.referencesNaggi, R., & Agostini, P. L. (2011). Inter-organizational e-Services from a SME Perspective: A Case Study on e-Invoicing. Information Technology and Innovation Trends in Organizations. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-2632-6
dc.relation.referencesNguyen, H. T., Dang, T. V., Van Nguyen, V., & Nguyen, T. T. (2020). Determinants of e-government service adoption: an empirical study for business registration in Southeast Vietnam. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/17516234.2020.1805396
dc.relation.referencesOkoli, C. (2012). A Critical Realist Guide to Developing Theory with Systematic Literature Reviews. In SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2115818
dc.relation.referencesOkoli, C. (2015). The View from Giants’ Shoulders: Developing Theory with Theory-Mining Systematic Literature Reviews. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1–78. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2699362
dc.relation.referencesOlaleye, S. A., & Sanusi, I. T. (2017). Companies Resistance and Intention to use Electronic Invoicing in Nigeria. 2017 14th IEEE India Council International Conference (INDICON). https://doi.org/10.1109/INDICON.2017.8487863
dc.relation.referencesOliver, R. L., & Oliver, R. L. (1980). A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(4), 460–469.
dc.relation.referencesØlnes, S., & Jansen, A. (2015). What is this thing called e-Service? Interoperability challenges in e-Service modelling. EGOV 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 9248, 197–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22479-4_15
dc.relation.referencesOrihuela, L., & Toshio, O. (2007). E-Government and E-Governance: Towards a Clarification in the Usage of Both Concepts. In E-governance: A global perspective of a New Paradigm (pp. 26–30).
dc.relation.referencesOverdijk, M., & Van Diggelen, W. (2006). Technology appropriation in face-to-face collaborative learning. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 213, 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1.1.132.6390&rep=rep1&type=pdf#page=11
dc.relation.referencesOzkan, S., & Kanat, I. E. (2011). e-Government adoption model based on theory of planned behavior: Empirical validation. Government Information Quarterly, 28(4), 503–513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2010.10.007
dc.relation.referencesPanayiotou, N. A., & Stavrou, V. P. (2021). Government to business e-services – A systematic literature review. Government Information Quarterly, 38(2), 101576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101576
dc.relation.referencesPettigrew, A. M. (1997). What is a processual analysis? Pergamon, 13(4), 337–348.
dc.relation.referencesPiehler, R., Wirtz, B. W., & Daiser, P. (2016). An Analysis of Continuity Intentions of eGovernment Portal Users. Public Management Review, 18(2), 163–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2014.965270
dc.relation.referencesPieterson, W. (2009). Channel choice: citizens’ channel behavior and public service channel strategy. University of Twente.
dc.relation.referencesPinem, A. A., Immanuella, I. M., Hidayanto, A. N., Phusavat, K., & Meyliana. (2018). Trust and its impact towards continuance of use in government-to-business online service. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 12(3–4), 265–285. https://doi.org/10.1108/TG-02-2018-0008
dc.relation.referencesPorrúa, M. A. (2013). E-Government in Latin America: A Review of the Success in Colombia, Uruguay, and Panama. The Global Information Technology Report 2013, 127–136. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/GITR/2013/GITR_Chapter2.3_2013.pdf
dc.relation.referencesRammea, L., & Grobbelaar, S. S. (2017). The Evaluation of e-Government Implementation. IEEE Africon 2017 Proceedings.
dc.relation.referencesRana, N. P., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2015). Citizen’s adoption of an e-government system: Validating extended social cognitive theory (SCT). Government Information Quarterly, 32(2), 172–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.02.002
dc.relation.referencesRana, N. P., Dwivedi, Y. K., Lal, B., Williams, M. D., & Clement, M. (2015). Citizens’ adoption of an electronic government system: towards a unified view. Information Systems Frontiers, 549–568. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-015-9613-y
dc.relation.referencesRana, N. P., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Williams, M. D. (2013). Evaluating alternative theoretical models for examining citizen centric adoption of e-government. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 7(1), 27–49.
dc.relation.referencesRana, N. P., Dwivedi, Y. K., Williams, M. D., & Weerakkody, V. (2016). Adoption of online public grievance redressal system in India: Toward developing a unified view. Computers in Human Behavior, 59(2016), 265–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.019
dc.relation.referencesReddick, C., & Anthopoulos, L. (2014). Interactions with e-government, new digital media and traditional channel choices: Citizen-initiated factors. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 8(3), 398–419. https://doi.org/10.1108/TG-01-2014-0001
dc.relation.referencesReddick, C. G., & Roy, J. (2013). Business perceptions and satisfaction with e-government: Findings from a Canadian survey. Government Information Quarterly, 30(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2012.06.009
dc.relation.referencesRenaud, K., & van Biljon, J. (2008). Predicting technology acceptance and adoption by the elderly. Proceedings of the 2008 Annual Research Conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists on IT Research in Developing Countries Riding the Wave of Technology - SAICSIT ’08, October, 210–219. https://doi.org/10.1145/1456659.1456684
dc.relation.referencesRobey, D., Im, G., & Wareham, J. D. (2008). Theoretical foundations of empirical research on interorganizational systems: Assessing past contributions and guiding future directions. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 9(9), 497–518. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.0017
dc.relation.referencesRogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (3rd Editio). Free Press.
dc.relation.referencesRoseth, B., Reyes, A., & Santiso, C. (2018). wait no more citizens, red tape, and digital government. Inter-American Development Bank.
dc.relation.referencesRotchanakitumnuai, S. (2009). Electronic Government Service Acceptance: The E-GOV-SAM Aspect of the E-Revenue System. The 9th International Conference on Electronic Business.
dc.relation.referencesSalahshour Rad, M., Mehrbakhsh Nilashi, B., & Halina Mohamed Dahlan, B. (2017). Information technology adoption: a review of the literature and classification. Universal Access in the Information Society, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-017-0534-z
dc.relation.referencesSalahshour Rad, M., Mehrbakhsh Nilashi, B., & Halina Mohamed Dahlan, B. (2017). Information technology adoption: a review of the literature and classification. Universal Access in the Information Society, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-017-0534-z
dc.relation.referencesSambasivan, M., Wemyss, G. P., & Rose, R. C. (2010). User acceptance of a G2B system: A case of electronic procurement system in Malaysia. Internet Research, 20(2), 169–187. https://doi.org/10.1108/10662241011032236
dc.relation.referencesSandoval, C. G. (2011). El Estado en la configuración de la era de la información: Génesis del proceso en la región Andina. Folios, 26, 151–185.
dc.relation.referencesSanta, R., MacDonald, J. B., & Ferrer, M. (2019). The role of trust in e-Government effectiveness, operational effectiveness and user satisfaction: Lessons from Saudi Arabia in e-G2B. Government Information Quarterly, 36(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2018.10.007
dc.relation.referencesSaxena, D., & Mcdonagh, J. (2017a). A systematic literature review of the enterprise systems research in leading IS journals(2000-2015). Proceedings of the Twelfth Midwest Association for Information Systems Conference, Springfield, Illinois May 18-19, September, 7. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318116965
dc.relation.referencesSaxena, D., & Mcdonagh, J. (2017b). Yet Another “List” of Critical Success “Factors” for Enterprise Systems: Review of Empirical Evidence and Suggested Research Directions. UKAIS: 22nd Annual Conference: Ubiquitous Information Systems: Surviving and Thriving in a Connected Society. https://aisel.aisnet.org/ukais2017/66
dc.relation.referencesSayer, A. (2010). Method in social science: A realist approach (2nd ed.). Routledge.
dc.relation.referencesSchwarz, A., Chin, W. W., Hirschheim, R., & Schwarz, C. (2014). Toward a process-based view of information technology acceptance. Journal of Information Technology, 29(1), 73–96. https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2013.31
dc.relation.referencesSchwarz, A., & Schwarz, C. (2009). Incorporating Choice into Models of Technology Adoption. AMCIS 2009 Proceedings, 319.
dc.relation.referencesSeo, D. B., Tan, C. W., & Warman, G. (2018). Vendor satisfaction of E-government procurement systems in developing countries: an empirical research in Indonesia. Information Technology for Development, 24(3), 554–581. https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2018.1454878
dc.relation.referencesSERES. (2017). Estudio de facturación electrónica en Colombia.
dc.relation.referencesSERES. (2021). Colombia: la masificación de la factura electrónica alcanza casi el 80%. https://blog.groupseres.com/latam/colombia-la-masificación-de-la-factura-electrónica-alcanza-casi-el-80
dc.relation.referencesShao, B., Luo, X. (Robert), & Liao, Q. (2015). Factors influencing e-tax filing adoption intention by business users in China. Electronic Government, an International Journal, 11(4), 283–305. https://doi.org/10.1504/EG.2015.071408
dc.relation.referencesShareef, Mahmud Akhtar, Kumar, V., Kumar, U., & Dwivedi, Y. (2014). Factors affecting citizen adoption of transactional electronic government. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 27(4), 385–401. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-12-2012-0084
dc.relation.referencesShareef, Mahmud Akhter, Kumar, V., Kumar, U., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2011). e-Government Adoption Model (GAM): Differing service maturity levels. Government Information Quarterly, 28(2011), 17–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2010.05.006
dc.relation.referencesSoong, K. K., Ahmed, E. M., & Tan, K. S. (2020). Factors influencing Malaysian small and medium enterprises adoption of electronic government procurement. Journal of Public Procurement, 20(1), 38–61. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOPP-09-2019-0066
dc.relation.referencesSundström, J. (2006). Adoption of Electronic Invoicing in SMEs.
dc.relation.referencesSuomi, R. (1992). On the concept of inter-organizational information systems. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 1(2), 93–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/0963-8687(92)90006-I
dc.relation.referencesSwatman, P. M. C., & Swatman, P. A. (1992). EDI system integration: A definition and literature survey. Information Society, 8(3), 169–205. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.1992.9960119
dc.relation.referencesTang, H. L., Chung, S. H., & Se, C. W. (2009). Examining the impact of possible antecedents on service usage: An empirical study on Macao e-government. Electronic Government, an International Journal, 6(1), 97–109. https://doi.org/10.1504/EG.2009.022595
dc.relation.referencesTeerling, M. L., & Pieterson, W. (2011). How to improve e-government use: An empirical examination of multichannel marketing instruments. Information Polity: The International Journal of Government & Democracy in the Information Age, 16(2), 171–187. https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-2011-0213
dc.relation.referencesTeo, T. S. H., Srivastava, S. C., & Jiang, L. (2009). Trust and Electronic Government Success: An Empirical Study. Journal of Management Information Systems, 25(3), 99–132. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222250303
dc.relation.referencesThe Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2002). OECD Glossary of Statistical Terms - E-government Definition. https://stats.oecd.org/glossary/detail.asp?ID=4752
dc.relation.referencesThi, L., Lim, H., & Al-Zoubi, M. I. (2014). Estimating influence of TOE factors on E-Government usage: Evidence of Jordanian companies. International Journal of Business and Society, 15(3), 413–436.
dc.relation.referencesTrist, E. (1981). The evolution of socio-technical systems: a conceptual framework and an action research program. In Ontario Quality of Working Life Centre.
dc.relation.referencesTung, L. L., & Rieck, O. (2005). Adoption of electronic government services among business organizations in Singapore. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 14(4), 417–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2005.06.001
dc.relation.referencesTurner, J. (2002). H.R.2458 - 107th Congress (2001-2002): E-Government Act of 2002. https://www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/house-bill/02458
dc.relation.referencesUlman, M., Jarolímek, J., Vasilenko, A., & Kánská, E. (2012). The evaluation of use and quality of public e-services among enterprises. Agris On-Line Papers in Economics and Informatics, 4(2), 61–72.
dc.relation.referencesUnited Nations. (2021). E-Government. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/about/unegovdd-framework
dc.relation.referencesUnited Nations. (2022). Reports | Global Survey.
dc.relation.referencesUrciuoli, L., Hintsa, J., & Ahokas, J. (2013). Drivers and barriers affecting usage of e-Customs - A global survey with customs administrations using multivariate analysis techniques. Government Information Quarterly, 30(4), 473–485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2013.06.001
dc.relation.referencesDirectiva presidencial N° 10 del 2002, Pub. L. No. 10, 7 (2002). http://www.mintic.gov.co/portal/604/articles-3652_documento.pdf
dc.relation.referencesvan de Ven, A. H. (1992). SUGGESTIONS FOR STUDYING STRATEGY PROCESS: A RESEARCH NOTE. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 169–188. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250131013
dc.relation.referencesVan de Ven, A., & Poole, M. S. (1995). Explaining Development and Change in Organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 510–540.
dc.relation.referencesVan De Wijngaert, L. (2010). A multi-theory approach towards the adoption, use and effects of IT services: The case channel choice in an e-government setting. IEEE International Professional Communication Conference, 87–92. https://doi.org/10.1109/IPCC.2010.5529818
dc.relation.referencesvan den Boer, Y., Arendsen, R., & Pieterson, W. (2016). In search of information: Investigating source and channel choices in business-to-government service interactions. Government Information Quarterly, 33(1), 40–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.11.010
dc.relation.referencesvan den Boer, Y., Pieterson, W., Arendsen, R., & De Groot, M. (2014). Source and Channel Choices in Business-to-Government Service Interactions: A Vignette Study. IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2014, 8653 LNCS, 120–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44426-9
dc.relation.referencesvan den Boer, Y., Pieterson, W., Arendsen, R., & van Dijk, J. (2017). Towards a model of source and channel choices in business-to-government service interactions: A structural equation modeling approach. Government Information Quarterly, 34(3), 434–456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.07.002
dc.relation.referencesvan den Boer, Y., van de Wijngaert, L., Pieterson, W., & Arendsen, R. (2012). On the interaction of source and channel choice in the government-to- business context. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 7443 LNCS, 27–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33489-4_3
dc.relation.referencesvan Velsen, L., van der Geest, T., ter Hedde, M., & Derks, W. (2009). Requirements engineering for e-Government services: A citizen-centric approach and case study. Government Information Quarterly, 26(3), 477–486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2009.02.007
dc.relation.referencesVejačka, M. (2018). Acceptance of e-government services by business users: The case of Slovakia. Journal of Applied Economic Sciences, 13(5), 1409–1417.
dc.relation.referencesVelleman, E. M., Nahuis, I., & Van Der Geest, T. (2017). Factors explaining adoption and implementation processes for web accessibility standards within eGovernment systems and organizations. Universal Access in the Information Society, 173–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-015-0449-5
dc.relation.referencesVenkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
dc.relation.referencesVenkatesh, V., Thong, J., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and user of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00163.x
dc.relation.referencesVogl, S., Zartler, U., Schmidt, E. M., & Rieder, I. (2018). Developing an analytical framework for multiple perspective, qualitative longitudinal interviews (MPQLI). International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 21(2), 177–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2017.1345149
dc.relation.referencesWang, H., Doong, H.-S., & Lin, F. (2007). Determinants of E-Government Service Adoption: An Innovation Diffusion Perspective. International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing, WiCOM 2007, 3458–3461.
dc.relation.referencesWangpipatwong, S., Chutimaskul, W., & Papasratorn, B. (2008). Understanding Citizen’ s Continuance Intention to Use e-Government Website: a Composite View of Technology Acceptance Model and Computer Self-Efficacy. The Electronic Journal of E-Government, 6(1), 55–64.
dc.relation.referencesWangpipatwong, S., Chutimaskul, W., & Papasratorn, B. (2009). Quality Enhancing the Continued Use of E-Government Web Sites: Evidence from E-Citizens of Thailand. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 5(1), 19–35. https://doi.org/10.4018/jegr.2009092202
dc.relation.referencesWaseda University. (2021). Digital Government Ranking 2021 Survey.
dc.relation.referencesWebster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analyzing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a Literature Review. MIS Quarterly, 26(2), xiii–xxiii. https://doi.org/10.1.1.104.6570
dc.relation.referencesWeerakkody, V., El-Haddadeh, R., Al-Sobhi, F., Shareef, M. A., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2013). Examining the influence of intermediaries in facilitating e-government adoption: An empirical investigation. International Journal of Information Management, 33(5), 716–725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2013.05.001
dc.relation.referencesWeiss, A. M. (1994). The Effects of Expectations on Technology Adoption: Some Empirical Evidence. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 42(4), 341. https://doi.org/10.2307/2950442
dc.relation.referencesWhetten, D. A. (1989). What Constitutes a Theoretical Contribution? Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 490–495.
dc.relation.referencesWirtz, B. W., & Langer, P. F. (2017). Public Multichannel Management – an Integrated Framework of Off- and Online Multichannel Government Services. Public Organization Review, 17(4), 563–580. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-016-0356-0
dc.relation.referencesWirtz, B. W., Piehler, R., & Daiser, P. (2015). E-Government Portal Characteristics and Individual Appeal: An Examination of E-Government and Citizen Acceptance in the Context of Local Administration Portals. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 27(1), 70–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/10495142.2014.965082
dc.relation.referencesWitarsyah, D., Sjafrizal, T., MD Fudzee, M. F., & Salamat, M. A. (2017). The Critical Factors Affecting e-Government Adoption in Indonesia: A Conceptual Framework. International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology, 7(1), 160–167. https://doi.org/10.18517/ijaseit.7.1.1614
dc.relation.referencesWorld Economic Forum. (2016). Global Information Technology Report 2016 - Reports - World Economic Forum. http://reports.weforum.org/global-information-technology-report-2016/networked-readiness-index/
dc.relation.referencesWorld Economic Forum. (2022). Network Readinex Index. https://networkreadinessindex.org/country/colombia/
dc.relation.referencesWynn, J. D., & Williams, C. K. (2012). Principles for Conducting Critical Realist Case Study Research in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 36(3), 787–810.
dc.relation.referencesXie, Q., Song, W., Peng, X., & Shabbir, M. (2017). Predictors for e-government adoption: integrating TAM, TPB, trust, and perceived risk. The Electronic Library, 35(1), 2–20. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-07-2014-0077
dc.relation.referencesYin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Research. Design and Methods. In SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.1097/FCH.0b013e31822dda9e
dc.relation.referencesZammuto, R. F., Griffith, T. L., Majchrzak, A., Dougherty, D. J., & Faraj, S. (2007). Information technology and the changing fabric of organization. Organization Science, 18(5), 749–762. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1070.0307
dc.relation.referencesZhou, P., & Seah, S. (2015). Factor analysis for public adoption of Mobile Electronic government. In Z. Liu (Ed.), Control Engineering and Information Systems (pp. 487–492).
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subject.proposalIOS
dc.subject.proposalGobierno electrónico
dc.subject.proposalServicio electrónico
dc.subject.proposalSistemas inter-organizacionales
dc.subject.proposalFactura electrónica
dc.subject.proposalRealismo crítico
dc.subject.proposalMecanismos
dc.subject.proposalE-government
dc.subject.proposalE-invoicing
dc.subject.proposalE-services
dc.subject.proposalCritical realism
dc.subject.proposalMechanisms
dc.subject.unescoGobierno electrónico
dc.subject.unescoElectronic governance
dc.subject.unescoPequeña empresa
dc.subject.unescoSmall enterprises
dc.subject.unescoCambio tecnológico
dc.subject.unescoTechnological change
dc.title.translatedAdopción de servicios interorganizacionales de gobierno electrónico: perspectiva de la microempresa
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_db06
dc.type.coarversionhttp://purl.org/coar/version/c_ab4af688f83e57aa
dc.type.contentText
dc.type.redcolhttp://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/TD
oaire.accessrightshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
oaire.fundernameMinCiencias
dcterms.audience.professionaldevelopmentEstudiantes
dcterms.audience.professionaldevelopmentInvestigadores
dcterms.audience.professionaldevelopmentResponsables políticos
dc.contributor.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-0865-4431
dc.contributor.cvlachttps://scienti.minciencias.gov.co/cvlac/visualizador/generarCurriculoCv.do?cod_rh=0001484994
dc.contributor.researchgatehttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martha-Correa-O
dc.contributor.googlescholarhttps://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ZolsMX4AAAAJ&hl=en


Archivos en el documento

Thumbnail
Nombre:
1055917349.2023.pdf
Tamaño:
3.908Mb
Formato:
PDF
Descripción:
Tesis de Doctorado en Ingeniería ...
Descargar

Este documento aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del documento

Atribución-CompartirIgual 4.0 InternacionalEsta obra está bajo licencia internacional Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial 4.0.Este documento ha sido depositado por parte de el(los) autor(es) bajo la siguiente constancia de depósito