سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی دانشگاه شهید بهشتی

قصاب زاده لنگری, زینب, کمالیان, امین رضا, یعقوبی, نورمحمد, دوست محمدیان, حمید, آرامش, حامد. (1402). بررسی تاثیر حکمرانی الکترونیک بر پایداری سازمانی با نقش میانجی حکمرانی خوب. , 14(2), 139-161. doi: 10.48308/jpap.2023.103568
زینب قصاب زاده لنگری; امین رضا کمالیان; نورمحمد یعقوبی; حمید دوست محمدیان; حامد آرامش. "بررسی تاثیر حکمرانی الکترونیک بر پایداری سازمانی با نقش میانجی حکمرانی خوب". , 14, 2, 1402, 139-161. doi: 10.48308/jpap.2023.103568
قصاب زاده لنگری, زینب, کمالیان, امین رضا, یعقوبی, نورمحمد, دوست محمدیان, حمید, آرامش, حامد. (1402). 'بررسی تاثیر حکمرانی الکترونیک بر پایداری سازمانی با نقش میانجی حکمرانی خوب', , 14(2), pp. 139-161. doi: 10.48308/jpap.2023.103568
قصاب زاده لنگری, زینب, کمالیان, امین رضا, یعقوبی, نورمحمد, دوست محمدیان, حمید, آرامش, حامد. بررسی تاثیر حکمرانی الکترونیک بر پایداری سازمانی با نقش میانجی حکمرانی خوب. , 1402; 14(2): 139-161. doi: 10.48308/jpap.2023.103568

بررسی تاثیر حکمرانی الکترونیک بر پایداری سازمانی با نقش میانجی حکمرانی خوب

چشم انداز مدیریت دولتی
دوره 14، شماره 2 - شماره پیاپی 54، 1402، صفحه 139-161    اصل مقاله (618.17 K)
نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.48308/jpap.2023.103568
نویسندگان
زینب قصاب زاده لنگری1؛ امین رضا کمالیان* 2؛ نورمحمد یعقوبی3؛ حمید دوست محمدیان4؛ حامد آرامش3
1دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت دولتی، دانشکده مدیریت، دانشگاه سیستان وبلوچستان، زاهدان، ایران
2گروه مدیریت ، دانشکده مدیریت، دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان، زاهدان، ایران.
3گروه مدیریت، دانشکده مدیریت ، دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان، زاهدان، ایران.
4گروه مدیریت، دانشگاه علوم کاربردی (FHM) ، بیله فلد، آلمان
چکیده
هدف: پژوهش حاضر با هدف بررسی اثر حکمرانی­ الکترونیک بر پایداری سازمانی با میانجی‌­گری حکمرانی­ خوب و در سازمان‌­های دولتی شهرستان کرمان انجام پذیرفت.
طراحی/ روش‌­شناسی/ رویکرد : پژوهش حاضر از حیث هدف، کاربردی و از لحاظ روش و ماهیت جز تحقیقات توصیفی-پیمایشی است. ابزار اصلی گردآوری داده‌ها، پرسشنامه‌های استانداردی بود که روایی و پایایی آن­ها با استفاده از روش روایی صوری و هم­گرا و آلفای کرونباخ تایید شد. هم‌چنین برای اطمینان از روایی سازه پژوهش مورد نظر، روایی واگرا نیز، مورد ارزیابی قرار گرفت. داده‌­ها به روش مدلسازی معادلات ساختاری با استفاده از نرم­افزار LISREL وSPSS تحلیل شدند.
یافته­‌های پژوهش: یافته­‌های پژوهش حاکی از این است که با اطمینان 95 درصد متغیرهای حکمرانی الکترونیک و حکمرانی خوب بر پایداری سازمانی دارای تاثیر­ مثبت و معناداری م‌ی­باشند. همچنین یافته­‌ها، گویای نقش میانجی حکمرانی خوب در تاثیر حکمرانی الکترونیک بر پایداری سازمانی است.با توجه به خروجی نرم‌افزار لیزرل برای حکمرانی الکترونیک­ بعد پاسخ‌گویی الکترونیک از بالاترین اهمیت برخوردار است و برای پایداری سازمانی و حکمرانی خوب، به ترتیب ابعاد تعهد به انعطاف‌­پذیری و ارتقاء ارزش­‌ها بالاترین اهمیت را دارند.
محدودیت­‌ها و پیامدها: مغفول ماندن پایداری سازمانی و فناوری اطلاعات و ارتباطات در سازمان­‌های دولتی، به این دلیل که، شرکت‌های دولتی از دولت برای خدمات عمومی استفاده می‌کنند و اغلب نیازی به رقابت با سازمان‌های دیگر در زمان ارائه مجموعه‌ای مشابه از خدمات به مردم را ندارند.
پیامدهای عملی: اهمیت و ضرورت نقش حکمرانی الکترونیک و حکمرانی خوب که می‌توانند راهبردهایی کاربردی برای ارتقا پایداری سازمان‌های دولتی، ارائه دهند.
ابتکار یا ارزش مقاله: پژوهشی که توأمان به بررسی حکمرانی الکترونیک بر پایداری سازمانی با توجه به نقش میانجی حکمرانی خوب پرداخته باشد، یافت نشد.
نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی
 
 
کلیدواژه‌ها
حکمرانی خوب؛ پایداری سازمانی؛ حکمرانی الکترونیک
عنوان مقاله [English]
Investigating the Effect of e-governance on Organizational Sustainability with Mediating Role of Good Governance
نویسندگان [English]
zeinab ghasabzadeh langari1؛ Amin Reza Kamalian2؛ Nour mohammad Yaghoubi3؛ Hamid Doost Mohammadian4؛ Hamed Aramesh3
1Ph.D. Candidate of Public Administration, Department of Management, Faculty of Management, University of Sistan and; Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran
2Department of Management , University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran
3, Department of Management , University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran
4Professor, Management Department, University of Applied Sciences for SMEs (FHM), Bielefeld, Germany
چکیده [English]
Purpose: The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of e-governance on organizational sustainability mediated by good governance in governmental organizations in Kerman city.
Design/Methodology/Approach: The present study is an applied research and descriptive-survey research. The data was analyzed using structural equation modeling within LISREL and SPSS software. Data collection tools in this study were standard questionnaires. The validity and reliability of the questionnaire were confirmed using the content validity method and Cronbach's alpha. Also, to ensure the construct validity of the research, divergent validity was evaluated.
Research Findings The findings showed that e-governance and good governance have a positive, significant effect on the organizational sustainability at 95% confidence interval. The findings also indicate the mediating role of good governance in the relationship between e-governance and organizational sustainability. According to the output of LISREL software, e-responsiveness is the most important feature for e-governance in governmental organizations. Furthermore, the Commitment to Resilience and promote values are the most important features that affect organizational sustainability and good governance in governmental organizations.
Limitations & Consequences: The neglect of organizational sustainability and ICT in governmental organizations is due to the fact that state-owned companies use government for public services and often do not need to compete with other organizations when providing a similar set of services to the public.
Practical Consequences: Importance and necessity of the role of e-governance and good governance that can provide practical strategies to promote organizational sustainability.
Innovation or value of the Article: No research has been found to simultaneously examines the effect of e-governance on organizational sustainability with respect to the mediating role of good governance.
Paper Type: Research Article
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
Good Governance, Organizational Sustainability, Electronic Governance (E-Governance)
مراجع
  1. Aeini, S., Delavari, M., & Goldust, Y. (2022). Identifying and Ranking Criteria of Good Governance in Project-Based Organizations. Journal of Engineering, Project & Production Management, 12(1), 70-86 ‏
  2. Afrazeh, A., Mohammadnabi, S., & Mohammadnabi, S. (2010). The model of measuring and improving the degree of organizational sustainability with the approach of knowledge management. Management Studies (Improvement and Transformation), 20(61), 37-63. (In Persian).
  3. Al Shebli, A. (2016). A strategic framework for managing transformational change towards sustainability in the Abu Dhabi public sector organization.
  4. Bastami, R.; Manzari Tavakoli, H., & Salajeghe, S. (2017) Review of ICT and Its Relation to Organizational Productivity Effects Based on Sustainable Development Social Approach, Urban and Rural Management. 16 (47): 201-218. (In Persian).
  5. Beddewela, E., & Herzig, C. (2013). Corporate social reporting by MNCs’ subsidiaries in Sri Lanka, In Accounting Forum, 37 (2), 135-149.
  6. Better, B. B. (2020). Covid-19 on the arab region an opportunity to build back better.
  7. Chehrazi Madrasah, S., & Jalai, S. A. M. (2015). investigating the effect of good governance on the productivity of the total factors of production in Iran, the second international conference on management, economy and development, Tehran, https://civilica.com/doc/512055, (In Persian).
  8. Colbert, B. A., & Kurucz, E. C. (2007). Three conceptions of triple bottom line business sustainability and the role for HRM, People and Strategy, 30(1), 21-29.
  9. Cormier, D., Magnan, M., & Van Velthoven, B. (2005). Environmental disclosure quality in large German companies: economic incentives, public pressures or institutional conditions? European Accounting Review, 14(1), 3-39.
  10. Craig, D. A., & Porter, D. (2006). Development beyond neoliberalism? Governance, poverty reduction and political economy. Routledge.
  11. Deghati, A., Yaghoubi, N.M., Kamalian, A.R., Dehghani, M. & Moradi, E. (2019). Presenting a Phased Development Pattern of Electronic Governance Using Meta-Synthesis Approach. Journal of Public Administration Perspective, 10(4), 89-120. (In Persian).
  12. Dhaoui, I. (2019). Good governance for sustainable development, Munich Personal RePEc Archive.
  13. Dhaoui, I. (2021). E-Government for Sustainable Development: Evidence from MENA Countries, Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1-30.
  14. Doost Mohammadian, H., & Rezaie, F. (2020). i-sustainability plus theory as an innovative path towards sustainable world founded on blue-green ubiquitous cities (case studies: Denmark and South Korea). Inventions, 5(2), 14, 1-21.
  15. Doost Mohammadian, H., Wittberg, V., Castro, M., & Bolandian, G. (2020, September). The 5 th Wave and i-Sustainability Plus Theories as Solutions for SocioEdu Consequences of Covid-19. In 2020 IEEE Learning with MOOCS (LWMOOCS), 118-123. IEEE.
  16. D'Souza, C., McCormack, S., Taghian, M., Chu, M. T., Mort, G. S., & Ahmed, T. (2020). An empirical examination of sustainability for multinational firms in China: Implications for cleaner production. Journal of Cleaner Production, 242, 118446.
  17. Dzhengiz, T. (2020). A literature review of inter-organizational sustainability learning. Sustainability, 12(12), 4876. ‏
  18. Ebrahimpour, H & Oleiki, F. (2016). The examining role of good governance in government efficiency, International Conference of Management Elites, Tehran. (In Persian).
  19. Emam Jumazadeh, S.J., Shahramnia, A, M.& Safariani, R. (2015). Model of good governance; Collaborative society and efficient government in development management. Specialized Quarterly Journal of Political ScienceArticle ,12(36), 7-40, (In Persian).
  20. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error, Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
  21. Ghiyasi, F.; Darvishpour, H.; Tohidfam, M., & Amini, A. A. (2021). Investigating the role of information and communication technology in the developments of good governance (Emphasis on the technology of the 11th government in e-business), Journal of Business Management, 13 (49), 467-489. (In Persian).
  22. Ghorbanizadeh, V., & Elyasi, F. (2016). The effect of cultural and technical factors on e-governance, Organizational Culture Management, 14 (2), 521-540. (In Persian).
  23. Glass, L. M., & Newig, J. (2019). Governance for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals: How important are participation, policy coherence, reflexivity, adaptation and democratic institutions? Earth System Governance, 2, 100031.
  24. Hanclova, J.; Doucek, P.; Fischer, J., & Vltavska, K. (2015). Does ICT capital affect economic growth in the EU-15 and EU-12 countries? Journal of Business Economics and Management, 16(2), 387-40.
  25. Hasan, I., & Rizvi, S. (2022). Knowledge Management Framework for Sustainability and Resilience in Next-Gen e-Governance. In Data Engineering for Smart Systems (pp. 191-203). Springer, Singapore.
  26. ‏Heeks, R. (2001). Understanding e-governance for development.
  27. Janowski, T. (2016). Implementing sustainable development goals with digital government–Aspiration-capacity gap, Government Information Quarterly, 603-613.
  28. Jinah, H. H. K. (2021). Reflection of The Use of Intranet to Improve the Performance of Electronic Governance an Exploratory Study of the Ministry of Higher Education and Al-Karkh Education Directorate. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 12(4), 1182-1193. ‏
  29. Judiciary Research Institute, (2017) Report of the International Conference "Legal Aspects of Information and Communication Technology" available at http://www.ijri.ir/showcontent.html?i=RlN 2SkVhdWRvSms9. (In Persian).
  30. Juknevičienė, V., & Kareivaitė, R. (2012). Good governance as the instrument for the implementation ofthe sustainable development's conception, Socialiniai Tyrimai, (3), 28-42.
  31. Kerr, J.; Rouse, P., & de Villiers, C. (2015). Sustainability reporting integrated into management control system, Pacific Accounting Review.27(2).
  32. Mahmoodi, R. K., & Nojedeh, S. H. (2016). Investigating the Effectiveness of E-government Establishment in Government Organizations. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 230, 136-141. ‏
  33. McDermott, C. L.; Acheampong, E.; Arora-Jonsson, S.; Asare, R.; de Jong, W.; Hirons, M.; ... & Setyowati, A. (2019). SDG 16: Peace, justice and strong institutions–a political ecology perspective.
  34. Memarzadeh-Tehran, Gh; Erfanian-Khanzadeh, H, & Taghvaei, R. (2010). Good governance; The New Model of Development, National Conference on Sovereignty and Competent Government in Iran 1404, Ray. (In Persian)
  35. Millar, C., Hind, P. and Magala, S. (2012), Sustainability and the need for change: organisational change and transformational vision. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 25(4).
  36. Moghimi, M., & Alaei Ardakani, M. (Fall 2011). Indicators to measare good gorernance and its role promoting e-government it, Journal of Information Technology Management, 3 (8), 171-188. (In Persian).
  37. Mostafa, N., & Negm, A. (2018). Promoting organizational sustainability and innovation: An exploratory case study from the Egyptian chemical industry. Procedia Manufacturing, 22, 1007-1014. ‏
  38. Nations, U. (2014). United Nations E-Government Survey 2014: E-government for the future we want.
  39. Obike, C. A. (2022). E-Governance and Fight Against Corruption in Nigeria: The Issues and Challenges. ‏
  40. OECD (2017), Benchmarking digital government strategies in MENA countries, OECD digital government studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264268012-en.
  41. OPM, C. (2004). Good Governance Standard for Public Services. The independent commission on good governance in public services, office for public management Ltd & the chartered institutes of public finance and accountancy. Printed by Hackney Ltd.
  42. Owusu-Ansah, S. (2014). Human factor issues in the use of e-government services among Ghanaian middle age population: Improving usability of existing and future government virtual interactive systems design.
  43. Pahlavan Sadegh, A. (2019). Validating the Indicators and Dimensions of Organizational Reliability in Management Faculties of Public Universities in Tehran, Transformation Management Journal,11 (2), 81-110. (In Persian)
  44. Ray, S. (2012). Reinforcing accountability in public services: an ICT enabled framework. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy.
  45. Renukappa, S., Akintoye, A., Egbu, C. and Suresh, S. (2016) ‘Sustainable procurement strategies for competitive advantage: an empirical study’, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers -Management, Procurement and Law, Vol. 169, No. 1, pp.17–25.
  46. Shahrestani, R. (2015). Investigating the role of information and communication technology in achieving good urban governance (Case Study of Tehran Region 6), The Second Annual Conference on Architectural, Urban Planning and Urban Management Research, Tehran. (In Persian).
  47. Sheng, Y. K. (2010). Good urban governance in Southeast Asia, Environment and Urbanization Asia, 1(2), 131-147.
  48. Shylendra, H. S., & Bhirdikar, K. (2005). ‘Good Governance’and Poverty Alleviation Programmes: A Critical Analysis of the Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana, International Journal of Rural Management, 1(2), 203-221
  49. Singh, D. P. (2022). Good Governance-A Perspective from Sri Guru Granth Sahib. The Sikh Bulletin, USA, 24(1). ‏
  50. Soltani Nejad, A., & Goodarzi, S. (2017). The impact of information technology on the evolution of the concept of good governance. Political Quarterly, 47(1), 79-97. (In Persian)
  51. Suleiman, M. M., Tsakuwa, A. B. U., ABDULLAHI, A. M., & EL-TAHIR, Y. M. (2017). A Review of Improving Good Governance through ICT Revitalization. In The 1st National Conference Organized by Research & Academic Development Committee. ‏
  52. Taghva, M. R.; Zohrabi, M., & DEHDASHTI, S. Z. (2019). A Structural Model for Green Information Technology and Organizational Sustainability, Scientific Information Database, 7 (27), 5-28. (In Persian)
  53. United Nations Department of economic and social affairs.NCA. (2005). Essential of good governance, The Netherlands Court of Audit, Essentials. December.
  54. Webb, P.; Pollard, C., & Ridley, G. (2006). Attempting to define IT governance: Wisdom or folly? In Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'06), Vol. 8, 1-10 IEEE.
  55. Weick, K. E. (2012). Errors in organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 57(1), 159- 165.
  56. Weick, K. E., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2001). Managing the unexpected: assuring high performance in an age of complexity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  57. Weick, K. E., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2008). Managing the unexpected: resilient performance in an age of (Second Edition). By John Wiley & Sons, Inc. San Francisco.
  58. Williams, B. R. (2015). Reporting on sustainability by Australian councils–a communication perspective. Asian Review of Accounting, 23, (2), 186-203.
  59. World Bank Group. (2016). World development report 2016: digital dividends, World Bank Publications.
  60. Zambrano, R., & Seward, R. K. (2013). From connectivity to service delivery: case studies in e-governance. New York.
  61. Zare Dizaj, A., Ramezani, M., Sangi Noorpour, A., Bohloli, N., & Eskandari, K. (2021). Strategic management of green human resources A tool to support the establishment of sustainable Development. Public Administration Perspectives (PAP), 12 (4), 124-152. (In Persian).
  62. Zawawi, N. F. M., & Abd Wahab, S. (2019). Organizational sustainability: a redefinition? Journal of Strategy and Management
  63. Ziaee, M., & Asadian Ardakani, F. (2021). A Framework for Leveling Good Governance Factors in the Sustainable Development of Tourism Destinations (Case Study: Maybod City). Spatial Planning, 11(1), 1-26. (In Persian).
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 3,739
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 1,418