位置決定腦袋？政府部門系統使用者角色差異下的資料協力意向

Where You Stand Depends on Where You Sit? A Close Look at the Government Data Collaboration among System Users with Different Information Roles

10.30409/JPA.201909_(57).0002

曾冠球(Kuan-Chiu Tseng)；胡龍騰(Lung-Teng Hu)；莊文忠(Wen-Jong Juang)；張鐙文(Teng-Wen Chang)；張智凱(Chih-Kai Chang)

政府資料協力 ； 跨機關電子資料交換 ； 電子化跨域治理 ； 「免書證、免謄本」系統 ； 科技執行架構 ； government data collaboration ； cross-agency information sharing ； electronic cross-boundary governance ； the no-certificate and no-transcript system ； the technology enactment framework

公共行政學報

57期（2019 / 09 / 01）

39 - 82

繁體中文

當前諸多資訊分享的文獻，都在指認公部門推動這類計畫可能面臨的執行障礙。儘管資通科技接受的文獻已汗牛充棟，公部門跨機關電子資料交換也日益普及，但迄今為止，鮮有針對影響機關間資料協力意向進行調查之研究。縱使有的話，研究者也傾向採取「單一組織觀點」（unitary organizational perspective）來看待政府資料協力。在上述背景下，作者試圖透過次級資料的分析，針對先前五都的「免書證、免謄本」應用服務系統之機關使用者進行系統性探究。申言之，運用來自於該系統中兩組緊密相關的「資訊角色」（即資訊貢獻者與資訊受益者）所呈現之統計資料，作者試圖探究上述應用服務系統的使用者，究竟是基於何種評估與考量，而表現在政府資料協力的意向。這些受測者指出影響渠等知覺上接受上述系統的決定因素，彼此之間的知覺歧異，以及資訊角色對於協力意向所產生之差異。倘若「位置決定腦袋」，則受測者的資訊角色的確可能影響其協力意向，亦即，作為資訊貢獻者和受益者考量之因素有別。整體而言，本研究的主要貢獻在於凸顯不同機關同仁的資訊角色差異，對於協力意向所造成之影響。作者期望透過此一調查分析，而有助於增進學術與實務工作者的知識。

Current literature and studies on information sharing are used to identify key factors in information-sharing relationships to outline the challenges faced in the public sector. Despite the abundance of IT innovation acceptance literature and the growing popularity of cross-agency information sharing in the public sector, few studies have yet investigated system users' intention toward government data collaboration. In addition, most researchers have generally taken ＂a unitary organizational perspective＂ on government data collaboration. Against this research background, this paper samples the institutional users of ＂the no-certificate and no-transcript system＂ in five metropolitan areas. Using survey data from two closely related roles (i.e. information providers and information receivers), the authors explore the way they perceive IT adoption pertaining to collaborative governance. These respondents identified the determinants of IT acceptance perceptions, variation in these perceptions, and the informational roles with stronger divergent views of adoption in data collaboration. Specifically, if ＂where you stand depends on where you sit,＂ then the difference between the two related roles could account for variances in their intention toward data collaboration. The contribution of this paper is to shed light on the data collaboration perceptions of users, with two closely related roles, in different interacting organizations responding to the same system mentioned above. Overall, this paper intends to share its findings with academics and practitioners.

1. Amirkhanyan, A. A.,Kim, H. J.,Lambright, K. T.(2014).The performance puzzle: Understanding the factors influencing alternative dimensions and views of performance.Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,24(1),1-34.
2. Amsler, L. B.(2016).Collaborative governance: integrating management, politics, and law.Public Administration Review,76(5),700-711.
3. Ansell, C.,Gash, A.(2008).Collaborative governance in theory and practice.Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,18(4),543-571.
4. Babbie, E.(2015).The Practice of Social Research.Boston, MA:Cengage Learning.
5. Baron, R. A.,Byrne, D.(1991).Social psychology: Understanding human interaction.Boston, MA:Allyn and Bacon.
6. Bigdelia, A. Z.,Kamal, M. M.,Cesare, S. d.(2013).Electronic information sharing in local government authorities: Factors influencing the decision-making process.International Journal of Information Management,33(5),816-830.
7. Boonstra, A.,de Vries, J.(2005).Analyzing inter-organizational systems from a power and interest perspective.International Journal of Information Management,25(6),485-501.
8. Bryman, A.(2012).Social Research Methods.New York, NY:Oxford University Press.
9. Carter, L.,Bélanger, F.(2005).The influence of perceived characteristics of innovating on e-government adoption.Electronic Journal of e-Government,2(1),11-20.
10. Chen, Y. C.,Lee, J.(2018).Collaborative data networks for public service: Governance, management, and performance.Public Management Review,20(5),672-690.
11. Cuganesan, S.,Hart, A.,Steele, C.(2017).Managing information sharing and stewardship for public-sector collaboration: a management control approach.Public Management Review,19(6),862-879.
12. Davis, F.(1989).Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology.MIS Quarterly,13,319-340.
13. Dawes, S. S.(1996).Interagency information sharing: expected benefits, manageable risks.Journal of Policy Analysis and Management,15(3),377-394.
14. Dawes, S. S.,Pardo, T. A.,Gresswell, A. M.(2004).Designing electronic government information access programs: A holistic approach.Government Information Quarterly,21(1),13-23.
15. Dawes, S.,Cresswell, A.,Pardo, T.(2009).From need to know to need to share tangled problems, information boundaries, and the building of public sector knowledge networks.Public Administration Review,69(3),392-402.
16. DeLone, W. H.,McLean, E. R.(2003).The delone and mclean model of information system success: A ten-year update.Journal of Management Information Systems,19(4),9-30.
17. Dixon, N.(2002).The neglected receiver of knowledge sharing.Ivey Business Journal,66(4),35-40.
18. Drake, D. B.,Steckler, N. A.,Koch, M. J.(2004).Information sharing in and across government agencies: The role and influence of scientist, politician, and bureaucrat subcultures.Social Science Computer Review,22(1),67-84.
19. Ebrahim, Z.,Irani, Z.(2005).E-government adoption: architecture and barriers.Business Process Management Journal,11(5),589-611.
20. Experian (2019). 2019 Global data management research report. Retrieved April 10, 2019, from https://www.edq.com/resources/data-management-whitepapers/2019-global-data-management-research/.
21. Eynon, R.,Dutton, W. H.(2007).Barriers to networked governments: Evidence from Europe.Prometheus,25(3),225-242.
22. Ezz, I.,Papazafeiropoulou, A.,Serrano, A.(2009).Challenges of interorganizational collaboration for information technology adoption: Insights from a governmental financial decision-making process in Egypt.Information Technology for Development,15(3),209-223.
23. Fedorowicz, J.(2014).Design observations for interagency collaboration.Government Information Quarterly,31(2),302-316.
24. Fedorowicz, J.,Gelinas, U. J., Jr.,Gogan, J. L.,Williams, C. B.(2009).Strategic alignment of participant motivations in e-government collaborations: The intenet payment platform pilot.Government Information Quarterly,26(1),51-59.
25. Fedorowicz, J.,Gogan, J. L.,Williams, C. B.(2007).A collaborative network for first responders: Lessions from the CapWIN case.Government Information Quarterly,24(4),785-807.
26. Feeney, M. K.,Bozeman, B.(2009).Stakeholder red tape: Comparing perceptions of public managers and their private consultants.Public Administration Review,69(4),710-726.
27. Fishbein, M.,Ajzen, I.(1975).Beliefs, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research.Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley.
28. Flak, L. S.,Nordheim, S.,Munkvold, B. E.(2008).Analyzing stakeholder diversity in G2G efforts: Combining descriptive stakeholder theory and dialectic process theory.E-Service Journal,6(2),3-23.
29. Fountain, J. E.(2001).Building the virtual state: information technology and institutional change.Washington, DC:Brookings Institution Press.
30. Gil-Garcia, J. R.,Chengalur-Smith, I.,Duchessi, P.(2007).Collaborative e-government: Impediments and benefits of information-sharing projects in the public sector.European Journal of Information Systems,16(2),121-133.
31. Goh, S. C.(2002).Managing effective knowledge transfer: An integrative framework and some practice implications.Journal of Knowledge Management,6(1),23-30.
32. Hair, J. F.,Black, W. C.,Babin, B. J.,Anderson, R. E.,Tatham, R. L.(2006).Multivariate Data Analysis.Upper Saddle River, NJ:Pearson Prentice Hall.
33. Heeks, R.,Santos, R.(2009).Understanding adoption of e-government: Principals, agents and institutional dualism.
34. Hellberg, A.,Grönlund, A.(2013).Conflicts in implementing interoperability: Reoperationalizing basic values.Government Information Quarterly,30(2),154-162.
35. Ho, A.,Ni, A.(2004).Explaining the adoption of e-government features: A case study of lowa county treasurers’ offices.The American Review of Public Administration,34(2),164-180.
36. Jiang, J. J.,Klein, G.,Discenza, R.(2002).Perception differences of software success: provider and user views of system metrics.The Journal of Systems and Software,63(1),17-27.
37. Joia, L. A.(2007).Sources of resistance to G2G endeavors: Evidence from a case study in the Brazilian context.Information Technology for Development,13(3),233-251.
38. Jun, K. N.,Weare, C.(2011).Institutional motivations in the adoption of innovations: The case of e-government.Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,21(3),495-519.
39. Kamal, M. M.(2006).IT innovation adoption in the government sector: Identifying the critical success factors.Journal of Enterprise Information Management,19(2),192-222.
40. Khosrow-Pour, M.(Ed.)(2005).Practicing E-Government: A Global Perspective.Hershey, PA:Ideas Group.
41. Korteland, E.,Bekkers, V.(2007).Diffusion of e-government innovations in the Dutch public sector: The case of digital community policing.Information Polity,12(3),139-150.
42. Lee, Y. W.,Pipino, L. L.,Funk, J. D.,Wang, R. Y.(2006).Journey to data quality.Cambridge, UK:MIT Press.
43. Leech, N. L.,Barrett, K. C.,Morgan, G. A.(2005).SPSS for intermediate statistics: Use and Interpretation.Mahwah, NJ:LEA Publishers.
44. Luna-Reyes, L. F.,Gil-Garcia, J. R.,Cruz, C. B.(2007).Collaborative digital government in Mexico: Some lesions from federal web-based interorganizational information integration initiatives.Government Information Quarterly,24(4),808-826.
45. Merton, R. K. (1940). Bureaucratic structure and personality. Social Forces, 18(4), 560-568.
46. Miles, R. E., Jr.(1978).The origin and meaning of miles’ law.Public Administration Review,38(5),399-403.
47. Morey, D.(Ed.),Maybury, M.(Ed.),Thuraisingham, B.(Ed.)(2001).Knowledge Management: Classic and Contemporary Works.Cambridge, UK:The MIT Press.
48. Pandey, S. K.,Bretschneider, S. I.(1997).The impact of red tape's administrative delay on public organizations’ interest in new information technologies.Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,7(1),113-130.
49. Pardo, T. A., J. R. Gil-Garcia, G. B. Burke, & A. Guler (2009). Factors influencing government cross-boundary information sharing: Preliminary analysis of a national survey. Retrieved October 18, 2015, from http://www.ctg.albany.edu/publications/reports/factors_inf_gov_cbi.
50. Picazo-Vela, S.,Gutiérrez-Martínez, I.,Duhamel, F.,Luna, D. E.,Luna-Reyes, L. F.(2018).Value of inter-organizational collaboration in digital government projects.Public Management Review,20(5),691-708.
51. Robbins, S. P.,Judge, T. A.(2014).Organizational Behavior.Upper Saddle River, NJ:Pearson Education.
52. Robert, N. C.(2011).Beyond smokestacks and silos: Open-source, web-enabled coordination in organizations and networks.Public Administration Review,71(5),677-693.
53. Robey, 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.
54. Rogers, E. M.(1995).Diffusion of Innovations.New York, NY:Free Press.
55. Sayogo, D. S.,Pardo, T. A.(2013).Exploring the determinants of scientific data sharing: Understanding the motivation to publish research data.Government Information Quarterly,30,19-31.
56. Sayogo, D. S.,Pardo, T. A.,Bloniarz, P.(2014).Information flows and smart disclosure of financial data: A framework for identifying challenges of cross boundary information sharing.Government Information Quarterly,31,S72-S83.
57. Schneider, A. L.,Ingram, H.(1997).Policy design for democracy.Lawrence, KS:University Press of Kansas.
58. Scholl, H. J.,Klischewski, R.(2007).E-government integration and interoperability: Framing the research agenda.International Journal of Public Administration,30(8-9),889-920.
59. Schooley, B. L.,Horan, T. A.(2007).Towards end-to-end government performance management: Case study of interorganizational information integration in emergency medical services(EMS).Government Information Quarterly,24(4),755-784.
60. Tornatzky, L.,Klein, K.(1982).Innovation characteristics and innovation adoption implementation: A meta-analysis of findings.IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management,29(1),28-45.
61. UN. (2008). UN e-government survey 2008: From e-government to connected governance. Retrieved August 19, 2014, from http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan028607.pdf.
62. Wilson, J. Q.(1989).Bureaucracy: What government agencies do and why they do it.New York, NY:Basic Books.
63. Wimmer, M. A.(2002).A European perspective towards online one-stop government: The eGOV project.Electronic Commerce Research and Applications,1(1),92-103.
64. Yang, T. M.,Maxwell, T. A.(2011).Information-sharing in public organizations: A literature review of interpersonal, intra-organizational and inter-organizational success factors.Government Information Quarterly,28(2),164-175.
65. Zhang, J.,Dawes, S. S.,Sarkis, J.(2005).Exploring stakeholders’ expectations of the benefits and barriers of e-government knowledge sharing.The Journal of Enterprise Information Management,18(5),548-567.
66. 行政院研究發展考核委員會, Development, and Evaluation Commission, Executive Yuan(2012)。桃園市政府「免書證、免謄本便民（含謄本書證）系統」服務介紹。政府機關資訊通報，299，3-6。
67. 吳統雄, Tong-Xiong(1985)。態度與行為研究的信度與效度：理論、應用、反省。民意學術專刊，夏季號=summer，29-53。
68. 宋餘俠, Yu-Xia,徐嘉臨, Jia-Lin(2010)。電子化政府與綠能科技。研考雙月刊，34(4)，9-19。
69. 邱皓政, Hao-Zheng(2005).量化研究法（二）：統計原理與分析技術.臺北=Taipei:雙葉書廊=Yeh Yeh Book Gallery.
70. 曾冠球, Guan-Qiu,胡龍騰, Long-Teng,莊文忠, Wen-Zhong(2011)。行政院研究發展考核委員會委託研究計畫行政院研究發展考核委員會委託研究計畫,臺北=Taipei:行政院研究發展考核委員會=Research, Development, and Evaluation Commission, Executive Yuan。
71. 黃紀（編）, Ji.(Ed.)(2013).臺灣選舉與民主化調查（TEDS）方法論之回顧與前瞻.臺北=Taipei:五南=Wu-Nan Book.