M- GOVERNMENT SERVICE ADOPTION CHALLENNGES IN TANZANIA . 131
6.3.2 Provisioning Practices’ Effect on Citizens Perceived Factors
This section presents findings on provisioning practices that either support or hinder the accomplishment of factors discussed in section 6.3.1, to be significant in influencing citizens’
adoption of m-government services. While the quantitative results confirm the factors, the qualitative findings establish the practices to facilitate identification of possible challenges on citizens' adoption intentions. Quantitative findings indicate four factors, FI, SN, TI and AI, as significant predictors of Tanzanians’ behavioural intention to adopt m-government services.
Correspondingly, qualitative findings indicate there are provisioning practices that either positively (support) or negatively (hinders) affect the adoption factors. Relevant provisioning practices affecting the achievement of the identified factors, as noted in section 5.5, include those themed under service development practices, service delivery practices, service positioning, awareness creation management, and lastly, collaboration practices and management.
6.3.2.1 Practices Affecting Financial Influences
Considering financial influence (FI), statistical evidence shows it significantly affects citizens’ intention to adopt; several practices under the service positioning themes were identified to affect its attainment. All the four government organisations interviewed indicated their service prices are set based on the cost incurred in provisioning; statements
140
such as “meet the operational costs incurred”, “we incur costs that must be met” and “at least cover operational costs” were prominent responses from participating government organisations, as indicated in section 5.5.2.3. Therefore, the findings indicate the use of utility pricing strategy. The utility pricing strategy that uses costs for pricing has proven a challenge to most governments. This finding is associated with difficulties in determining the balance between sustainability in service provisioning while at the same time adhering to principles of public service provision. While organisations rely on the cost of operation to establish m-government service prices, this approach is contested.
For instance, Bertrand (2015) challenged Coase’s (1970) utility pricing strategy arguing that it ignores the effects of structure and thus it fails to account for resource misallocations resulting from additional taxation for subsidizing public services. Bertrand (2015) is for the redistribution of income mostly in favour of citizen; arguing that if m‐government services are charged based on full costs coverage, they become costly, which implies the social exclusion of individuals who cannot afford to cover access costs. However, relying on marginal costs for pricing as well requires a government subsidy to compensate for any additional costs, compromising the sustainability of quality service provision. Consequently, the government is urged to ensure m-government services benefits are known, and they outweigh costs, for citizens to derive value for money services (Susanto & Goodwin, 2011;
Al-Hujran, 2012; Isagah & Wimmer 2018). Also, it is essential for government organisations to note the diversity of users in relation to costs; while some are concerned with money spent, others are more concerned with the benefits realized, such as effort and time, to determine m-government service value (Wang, 2014).
Additionally, findings in section 5.5.2.3 indicate citizens are either totally excluded, or if included in m-government service pricing processes, it is through a proxy agency. Three of the four interviewed organisations indicated there are no consultations with any citizens on prices charged for m-government services. Consultation and negotiations are only carried out among provisioning partners. Some responses to this effect were, “we deliberate with our partners to determine the price to charge” and “two other parties apart from ourselves are crucial in the process, that is, the mobile phone operators and the service application hosting organisation” (section 5.5.2.3). Citizens’ inclusion in public service provisioning is a critical factor in defining public service value, which consequently influences citizens’ acceptance
141
and use (Bertot, Jaeger, Munson, & Glaisyer, 2010). Government organisations need to rethink the role of citizens in public value creation and change the role of citizens from value recipient to value co-creators (Linders, 2012; Grönroos & Voima, 2013). According to Turki, Foster & Rahim (2018), citizens are critical for deriving public value. Moreover, with finance being verified as significant in citizens’ adoption decisions for m-government services, the government organisations providing m-government services need to devise mechanisms and forums for citizens’ inclusion, especially in service costs negotiations and price setting.
6.3.2.2 Practices Affecting Subjective Norms
Subjective norms (SN) account for the implications of other people’s opinions, experiences within a context of self-reflection, and societal reflections of the experience, with m- government services (Dwivedi et al., 2016). In section 5.4.3.5, SN is quantitatively evidenced to have significant predictive power on citizens' behaviour intention to adopt m-government services in Tanzania. Furthermore, findings established that despite a direct effect on behaviour intention, SN also significantly influences people’s attitudes (Table 5.17). This result implies attitude, that is, a formed opinion, is a result of the experiences and the evaluation thereof of an individual or of people in the society whose opinion matters.
Practices that affect one's level of understanding, ability or skills affect both their attitudes and their perceptions of opinions of others who matter (Venkatesh, Thong & Xu, 2012;
Dwivedi et al. 2016). In line with this attestation, awareness creation practices affect both societal opinion and judgment of m-government services as well as individual’s attitudes.
This finding implies that where there is a lack of awareness, society and individual citizens are likely to develop negative opinions of m-government services, resulting in low adoption.
Section 5.5.2.1 exemplifies the limited awareness campaigns on m-government services whereby limited funding, competing priorities and non-citizen focused programs are noted among the reasons. Also, qualitative findings establish that it is a common practice among interviewed organisations to exclude citizens in m-government service provisioning processes, including price determination and m-government service knowledge development and dissemination. Then the noted low adoption is thus explained by the limited and ineffective m-government service awareness practices that trigger negative attitudes to both individuals and the society. Consequently, embarking on knowledge building campaigns that empower citizens with the right information, necessary skills and ability to use m-
142
government services is essential towards adoption. While awareness stimulates initial intention, knowledge and capability building need to progress before, during and after service provision.
6.3.2.3 Practices Affecting Attitudinal Influence
Literature shows that practices related to service delivery have an effect on peoples’ attitudes as well as on societal opinion (Hung, Chang & Kuo, 2013; Ham, Jeger & Ivković, 2015).
Qualitative findings in section 5.5.1.3 present two main themes under m-government service delivery practices, namely, the service quality descriptors and citizen support systems.
Regarding service quality descriptors, qualitative findings indicate that m-government service providing organisations are more concerned with service factors that ensure achievement of service functionality. For example, "ensuring network availability, service accessibility, equipment performance and that our servers are secured and operational”,
“satisfactorily completed when payment is reflected on our systems and the token is sent via SMS back to the user” and “we strive to ensure our network, servers and service application databases are accessible and secured” (Section 5.5.1.3). This finding confirms Wanjau, Wangari & Ayodo’s (2012) findings that most governments, especially in developing countries, dwell much on completing electronic transactions grounded within the e-business concept, that is, technical requirements, while ignoring socio-technical requirements which are critical for adoption. However, the focus on only technical factors for service quality is contested in the literature (Robert & Lesage, 2010; Ogunleye, 2017; Wanjau, Wangari &
Ayodo, 2012). Robert & Lesage (2010) affirm that functional factors alone do not adequately predict adoption. Thus, a broader view of service quality descriptors that include emotional, cognitive and functional factors will enhance citizens’ adoption of m-government services. Additionally, findings in section 5.5.1.3 indicate there is no centralized service support system for m-government service users. User support is carried out at different levels, from the respective government organisation hosting the service, the infrastructure access point (for example, eGA), or at the mobile phone operators' level. For instance, the respondents noted that when citizens’ face challenges, they notify the service providing organisation or the mobile company for assistance (Section 5.5.1.3). Moreover, citizen support for m- government services and m-government knowledge transfer within government structures is noted to be among the challenges affecting adoption. Consistent with Mawela, Ocharab &
143
Twinomurinzi’s (2017) argument, the limited ICT experts within government structures contribute to the limited support for m-government service provision thus further affecting citizens’ adoption of m-government services. This finding is a consequence that has been commonly related to the limited budget for ICT departments in the public sector (Capgemini, 2010; Henningsson & van Veenstra, 2010). Thus Alshehri & Drew (2010) acknowledge the need to expand budgets of ICT departments and invest in recruitment, retention and training to build ICT capabilities within government organisations for service provision and user support.
6.3.2.4 Practices Affecting Technology Influences
Quantitative findings also demonstrated that the effect of technology in predicting citizens’
adoption behaviour is significant. Technology influences, such as time efficiency, location independence and movement ability while interacting with m-government services, were assessed (Appendix A). Correspondingly, several provisioning practices were noted to affect technology influences, including service development practices and collaborative practices and management. Reliance on existing service requirements, service re-engineering, and user exclusion in the design and development of m-government services coupled with limited skilled personnel within government structures typical of m-government services development practice (Section 5.5.1.1), affects the quality of the resulting m-government services offered to citizens.
Additionally, section 5.5.1.2 indicates three main partners, the government organisation hosting the service (service provider), the mobile infrastructure access provider (example eGA) and the telecommunication operators for Internet and mobile services. The noted multi-stakeholder structure implies a high level of synchronisation and coordination in provisioning processes is required. Moreover, section 5.5.2.1 notes conflicting roles, and lack of strategy and guidelines for coordinating stakeholders’ activities are part of the collaboration management practices in Tanzania hindering smooth coordination and cooperation among stakeholders. However, OECD/ITU (2011) identifies several other partners in the m-government service value chain, such as regulatory, funders and hardware vendors. Consistent with Cable (2011) and Alshehri & Drew (2010), it thus necessary to recognize a broader spectrum of strategic partners critical and advantageous in achieving an integrated end-to-end solution. Likewise, cultivation of collaborative working relations with
144
various stakeholders, both public and private, is essential to facilitate access to resources and assure technological aspects necessary to citizens, like network speed, availability and security.