E-government and the reality gap: Analysis of user perceptions of the SIMANTAP application at BKPP Bojonegoro using the TAM 3 approach
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31849/e1hxa662Keywords:
e-government, technology acceptance, TAM 3, SIMANTAP, digital governance, public sector innovation.Abstract
Rapid digital transformation has encouraged local governments to adopt e-government systems to improve efficiency, transparency, and accountability. However, many digital public service applications still face a design–reality gap that affects user acceptance and long-term adoption. This study analyzes the acceptance of the SIMANTAP (Integrated Apparatus Management Information System) application implemented by the Civil Service, Education, and Training Agency (BKPP) of Bojonegoro Regency, East Java. The research integrates the Technology Acceptance Model 3 (TAM 3), Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT), and Digital Era Governance (DEG) to provide a comprehensive understanding of factors influencing civil servants’ behavioral intentions. Using a quantitative approach, data were collected from 324 civil servants who had used SIMANTAP for at least three months and analyzed using Partial Least Squares–Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). The results indicate that perceived usefulness significantly influences behavioral intention, while perceived ease of use significantly affects perceived usefulness but not behavioral intention, reflecting the mandatory nature of system use. The findings also reveal several design–reality gaps related to system complexity, digital literacy, data integration, and organizational culture. This study contributes to e-government literature by offering an integrative analytical framework and provides practical recommendations for improving digital personnel management systems in the public sector.
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
Al-Hujran, O., Al-Debei, M. M., Chatfield, A., & Migdadi, M. (2018). The imperative of influencing citizen attitude toward e-government adoption and use. Computers in Human Behavior, 88, 581–592.
Almarabeh, T., & AbuAli, A. (2010). A general framework for e-government: Definition, maturity challenges, opportunities, and success. European Journal of Scientific Research, 39(1), 29–42.
Carter, L., & Belanger, F. (2005). The utilization of e-government services: Citizen trust, innovation, and acceptance factors. Information Systems Journal, 15(1), 5–25.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(14), 1111–1132.
Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler, J. (2006). Digital Era Governance: IT Corporations, the State, and e-Government. Oxford University Press.
Dwivedi, Y. K., 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.
Dwivedi, Y. K., Weerakkody, V., & Janssen, M. (2012). Moving towards maturity: Challenges to successful e-government implementation and diffusion. ACM SIGMIS Database, 42(4), 11–22.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Addison-Wesley.
Gefen, D., & Straub, D. W. (2000). The relative importance of perceived ease of use in IS adoption: A study of e-commerce adoption. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 1(1), 1–30.
Heeks, R. (2006). Implementing and Managing eGovernment: An International Text. SAGE Publications.
Ismail, N. A., Abdullah, M. S., & Zailani, S. (2019). Adoption of innovation in public sector organizations: A case of e-government in Malaysia. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 12(3), 299–315.
Kettunen, P., & Kallio, J. (2021). Digital transformation of local government: Drivers and outcomes. Government Information Quarterly, 38(4), 101–115.
Kim, S., & Lee, H. (2006). The impact of e-government on public sector performance: The case of Seoul Metropolitan Government. Public Administration Review, 66(3), 370–385.
Lean, O. K., Zailani, S., Ramayah, T., & Fernando, Y. (2009). Factors influencing intention to use e-government services among citizens in Malaysia. International Journal of Information Management, 29(6), 458–475.
Mafrudhoh, S., & Bisma, R. (2021). Analisis penerimaan aplikasi layanan publik berbasis teknologi dengan pendekatan TAM. Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Publik, 9(2), 101–112.
Moon, J. W., & Kim, Y.-G. (2001). Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context. Information & Management, 38(4), 217–230.
Ndou, V. (2004). E-government for developing countries: Opportunities and challenges. The Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries, 18(1), 1–24.
Ndou, V., & Passiante, G. (2005). E-government and organizational change in public administration: The Italian case. Electronic Journal of E-Government, 3(1), 15–22.
Oliveira, T., & Martins, M. F. (2011). Literature review of information technology adoption models at firm level. Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation, 14(1), 110–121.
Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 7(3), 101–134.
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations (5th ed.). Free Press.
Schaupp, L. C., & Carter, L. (2010). The impact of trust, risk, and optimism bias on e-file adoption. Information Systems Frontiers, 12(3), 299–309.
Shareef, M. A., Kumar, V., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2011). E-government adoption model (GAM): Differing service maturity levels. Government Information Quarterly, 28(1), 17–35.
Suryaningtyas, D., & Putra, P. A. (2022). Analisis faktor penerimaan sistem informasi ASN berbasis digital di lingkungan pemerintahan daerah. Jurnal Administrasi Publik Indonesia, 8(1), 45–58.
Susanto, T. D., & Aljoza, M. (2015). Individual acceptance of e-government services in a developing country: Dimensions of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. Procedia Computer Science, 72, 622–629.
Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273–315.
Venkatesh, V., Bala, H., Davis, F. D., Rogers, E. M., Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., Tinkler, J., Al-Hujran, E.-G. ;, Al-Debei, O., Chatfield, M. M., Migdadi, A., Almarabeh, M., Abuali, T., Mafrudhoh, A., & Bisma, N. L. (2008). Literature review of information technology adoption models at firm level. The Electronic Journal Information Systems Evaluation. In International Journal of Public Administration (Vol. 39, Issue 2). Oxford University Press.
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.
Wibowo, A., & Tambotoh, J. (2015). Pengaruh persepsi kemudahan dan kemanfaatan terhadap minat penggunaan sistem informasi keuangan daerah. Jurnal Akuntansi Dan Keuangan, 17(2), 98–108.
