An Integrated STOPE Framework for E-readiness

8/13/2019 An Integrated STOPE Framework for E-readiness

1/11

1

An integrated STOPE framework for e-readinessassessments

K a A -Osa m , A u mo sen A era s an Saa Ha Ba ryCollege of Engineering, King Saud University, Riyadh S udi Arabia

eywor s e- ea iness assessments, , organizations, ramewor

stracte-Readiness assessments, for countries and organizations, are becoming of increasing importance, as they spec-

i y t e current states rom w ic p anning or in ormation an communication tec no ogy towar supporting sus-

tainable development, should start. This paper is concerned with providing an approach, based on the STOPE strategy,

tec no ogy, organization, peop e, an environment ramewor or con ucting e-rea iness assessments. e approac

views t e previous iterature on e-rea iness assessment t roug t e eye o t e omains, provi ing an integrate

framework of the factors that has been taken into account in such assessments. In the mean time, the approach also keeps

t e ig t on or a ing an integrating ot er potentia actors. n a ition, t e approac intro uces an ana ytica met o

for the assessment of the various factors considered, both individually and collectively, according to the STOPE domains.

The paper also gives an example illustrating the results that can be obtained from using the approach. Finally, the paper

ca s or t e use o t e approac or practica cases to pro uce, ase , rea i e e-rea iness assessment resu tsaccording to a standard approach that supports sound relative evaluations and comparisons

IntroductionUs ng ICT an networ ng t e wor are ecom ng o ncreas ng mportance or susta na edevelopment, thanks to the many resulting benefits including: saving time and cost, exploring newdevelopment opportunities, and paving the way toward building the digital economy and developingt e now e ge soc ety Ba ry, 2006 . A recent stu y y t e Center or Internat ona Deve opment(CID) at Harvard University defined the term e-readiness as the preparedness for the networkedworld (Geoffery, 2002).

According to the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), e-readiness assessments aremeant to guide development efforts by providing benchmarks for comparison and gauging progressSergey, 2004 . T ey e p agnos ng ICT pro ems, a vocat ng requ re ICT c anges, an

developing sound ICT plans. Although most e-readiness assessment studies were performed at thecountry level, for different countries, it has been emphasized that the e-readiness of organizations,n a country, s an ntegra part o t e overa e-rea ness o t at country Lea ng Growt F rms

Series, 2001 and Dawn, 2002).

T e tren towar en anc ng e-rea ness as een emp as ze y t e UN summ t meet ng oSeptember 2000, which issued the widely known UN Millennium Development Goals (MDG)(UN, 2000). It has also been stressed by the Lisbon European summit, held in March 2000 (EC,2000 , an y t e European Commun ty n ts r ve towar t e now e ge soc ety EC wesite). In addition two World Summits on the Information Society were initiated by the InternationalTelecommunications Union (ITU) during the last two years: the first in Geneva, in December 2003;an t e secon n Tun s a, n Novem er 2005 Wor n ormat on summ t we s te .

Although many studies have introduced various e-readiness assessments, as mentioned above,t ese stu es were ase on erent assumpt ons, an nc u e erent actors. T s paper sconcerned with providing a comprehensive framework, for e-readiness assessments, that integratesthe various factors considered in previous studies. For this purpose the paper uses Bakrys STOPE,strategy, tec no ogy, organ zat on, peop e, an env ronment ramewor ; an n t e mean t me,it keeps the light on for adding and integrating other potential factors. The STOPE framework has

been developed and used for the evaluation of different ICT problems, including e-business ande-government p ann ng Ba ry, 2001 an Ba ry, 2004 , n ormat on secur ty management Ba ry,2003), and the emerging enterprise resource planning tools (Bakry, 2005).

T e paper ntro uces an approac concerne w t us ng STOPE or e-rea ness assessments.The approach addresses the integration of e-readiness factors using STOPE, and provides amathematical model illustrating how STOPE based assessments can be evaluated at different levelso eta . App y ng t e approac , t e paper er ves an ntegrate STOPE ramewor or e-rea nessassessments, and provides an illustrative example showing how assessment results can be evaluated.Finally, the paper calls for using the work in the future, as a standard approach, for practical real-lifee-rea ness assessment stu es, as t s wou support soun re at ve eva uat ons an compar sons.

t at ona

omputer

Conference

Saudi Computer

oc ety

An nte-

grated

STOPE

framework


2/11

he STOPE Approache STOPE approac ntro uce e ow s concerne w t t e ntegrat on o t e e-rea ness assessment

actors, t e eva uat on o t e ntegrate actors, an t e pract ca app cat on o t e approac .

STOPE Integration of Assessment Factors

e ntegrat on o e-rea ness assessment actors s cons ere to e o t ree eve s. The first is the level of the main STOPE domains, that is the e-readiness strategy, technology,organ zat on, peop e, an env ronment.

T e secon s t e eve o t e su - oma ns, w c are t e ma n ssues ranc ng rom eac o t eain STOPE domains; and

T e t r s t e eve o su -su - oma ns, w c nc u es t e ssues assoc ate w t eac o t esu - oma ns o t e ma n oma ns.

e actors o prev ous stu es on e-rea ness assessments can e mappe upon t ese eve s topro uce an ntegrate STOPE ramewor . In a t on, ot er actors assoc ate w t comp mentaryor emerging new issues can also be mapped and integrated on the framework. This would enable thedevelopment of more comprehensive and more flexible e-readiness assessments on the one hand,an t wou a so contr ute to t e eve opment o t e nee e agree po cy stan ar s or sucassessments on the other. Comprehensiveness and flexibility for such assessments would provide

better results; and policy standards for these assessment to follow would help relative evaluationsan compar sons.

STOPE Evaluation Modele ntegrate actors o t e STOPE ramewor wou nee to e eva uate n v ua y an

collectively. For this evaluation, a mathematical model has been developed, considering the threegeneral levels given above. Each factor, at any level, would be evaluated according to a scale of fivegra es as s own n Ta e 1. T e pract ca resu t ng va ues or t e var ous actors, at erent eve s,would not necessarily be discreet, as they may range between different grades.

Evaluation Grades

0 1 2 3 4

None Poor Average Good Excellent

able 2 introduces the evaluation at the level of the main domains. Each of the five STOPE domainsis indexed, and is associated with a measure and with a weight. Each main domain can beeva uate n epen ent y us ng t e su - oma ns assoc ate w t t. In v ua resu ts or t e ma ndomains can be graphically integrated together by a radar graph of five dimensions representing

STOPE. Collectively, the results of the main domains can be represented by a single value forSTOPE accor ng to t e equat on o Ta e 2. T s s ustrate y t e examp e g ven e ow.

Table 1.T e ve gra esconsidered for

the evaluation

of e-readiness

actors

MEASURES: MAIN DOMAIN LEVEL: STOPE

MAIN DOMAIN Strategy Technology Organization People Environment

SYMBOL S T O P E

INDEX i = 1 i = 2 i = 3 i = 4 i = 5

MEASURE M[1] M[2] M[3] M[4] M[5]

WEIGHT w[1] w[2] w[3] w[4] w[5]

STOPE

MEASURE

5

1

i

i

iMiwSTOPE ][].[

Individualevaluation

One radar graph for STOPE main domainsGRAPHICAL

RESULTS Collective

evaluationOne value for STOPE using equation

Table .Eva uat on

o t e ma n

domains

(STOPE)


3/11

Table 3 presents the evaluation at the level of the sub-domains. Each of the five STOPE domains iscons ere to ave a num er o su - oma ns, an eac o t ese su - oma ns s n exe , an sassoc ate w t a measure an w t a we g t. Eac su - oma n can e eva uate n epen ent yusing the lower sub-sub-domains associated with it. Individual results for the sub-domains of acerta n ma n oma n can e grap ca y ntegrate toget er y a ra ar grap o a num er o

mens ons equ va ent to t e num er o su - oma ns assoc ate w t t at ma n oma n. In t sway, each main domain would have its own radar graph. Collectively, the results of each mainoma ns can e represente y one va ue us ng t e equat ons o Ta e 3. T s s s own n t eustrat ve examp e g ven e ow.

Table 4 gives the evaluation at the level of the sub-sub-domains. Each of the five STOPE domainss cons ere to ave a num er o su - oma ns, an eac o t ese su - oma ns s a so cons ere

to have a number of sub-sub-domains, with each of the sub-sub-domains indexed and associatedwith a measure and with a weight. Each sub-sub-domain can be evaluated independently usingower measura e ent t es. In a s m ar manner to t e a ove, n v ua resu ts or t e su -su -

domains of a certain sub-domain of a main domain can be graphically integrated together by a radargraph of a number of dimensions equivalent to the number of sub-sub-domains associated witht at su - oma n. In t s way, eac su - oma n wou ave ts own ra ar grap . Co ect ve y, t eresults of each sub-domains can be represented by a single value using the equations of Table 4.

T e eva uat ons presente n Ta es 1 t roug 4 are o ntegrate nature start ng w t eva uat ongrades, and moving on toward the evaluation of the factors at the various levels, from the STOPEmain domains to the sub-sub-domains. The suggested graphical representation at each level would

ustrate grap ca y t e strengt s an t e wea nesses o t e var ous actors cons ere .

MEASURES: SUB-DOMAIN LEVEL: S / T / O / P / E

MAIN DOMAIN Strategy Tech. Org. People Env.

INDEX j1 j2 j3 j4 j5SUB-

DOMAINS NUMBER J1 J2 J3 J4 J5

MEASURE M[1, j1] M[1, j2] M[1, j3] M[1, j4] M[1, j5]

WEIGHT w[1, j1] w[1, j2] w[1, j3] w[1, j4] w[1, j5]

STRATEGY

MEASURE:S

11

11

1111

Jj

j

jMjwS ],[].,[

TECHNOLOGY

MEASURE: T

21

12

2222

Jj

j

jMjwT ],[].,[

ORGANIZATION

MEASURE: O

33

13

3333

Jj

j

jMjwO ],[].,[

PEOPLE

MEASURE:P

44

144444

Jj

j jMjwP ],[].,[

ENVIRONMENT

MEASURE:E

55

15

5555

Jj

j

jMjwE ],[].,[

Individual evaluationOne radar graph per main

domain: S / T / O / P / EGRAPHICAL

RESULTSCollective evaluation

One value per main domain

using equations

able .Evaluations

of the sub-

oma ns

An nte-

grated

STOPE

framework

3


4/11

sing the STOPE ApproachFollowing the above, the STOPE approach enables the development of a generic STOPE frameworkt at can e use or erent e-rea ness assessments. T s s cons ere n t e o ow ng parts o t e

paper, together with an illustrative example.

For pract ca assessments, t e actors o t e su -su - oma ns wou nee to e re ne urt er ntomeasurable entities. These entities may differ according to the target assessment, that is the case

study considered, as explained in the following.

The assessment may be for a country, or it may be for an organization.

I or an organ zat on, t e type o t e organ zat on wou e mportant; s t an ng, e ucat on,or related to other different fields.

e re ne measura e ent t es wou represent t e core o t e pract ca assessment. T ey wou epart of a practical evaluation sheet for the practical case study considered. The sheet may take theform of a fixed questionnaire to be answered independently by the ICT experts concerned, a dynamicquest onna re to e answere t roug nterv ews, or a y r quest onna re t at may nvo ve ot .

STOPE Frameworke eve opment o t e ramewor accor ng to t e a ove approac s a resse ere. F gure 1

illustrates the framework in its basic form, which is explained in the following.

MEASURES: SUB-SUB-DOMAIN LEVEL: S [j1] / T [j2] / O [j3] / P [j4] / E [j5]

MAIN DOMAIN Strategy Tech. Org. People Env.

INDEX k j1 k j2 k j3 k j4 k j5SUB-SUB-DOMAINS

NUMBE

RK j1 K j2 K j3 K j4 K j5

MEASUREM

[1, j1, k j1]

M

[1, j2, k j2]

M

[1, j3, k j3]

M

[1, j4, k j4]

M

[1, j5, k j5]

WEIGHTw

[1, j1, k j1]

w

[1, j2, k j2]

w

[1, j3, k j3]

w

[1, j4, k j4]

w

[1, j5, k j5]

STRATEGY

MEASURE: S [j1]

(J1)

Measures

11

11

1111111

KJkj

kj

kjjMkjjwjS ],,[].,,[][

TECHNOLOGY

MEASURE: T [j2]

(J2)

Measures

22

12

2222212

KJkj

kj

kjjMkjjwjT ],,[].,,[][

ORGANIZATION

MEASURE: O [j3]

(J3)

Measures

33

13

3333333

KJkj

kj

kjjMkjjwjO ],,[].,,[][

PEOPLE

MEASURE:P [j4]

(J4)

Measures

44

14

4444444

KJkj

kj

kjjMkjjwjP ],,[].,,[][

ENVIRONMENT

MEASURE:E [j5]

(J5)

Measures

55

15

5555555

KJkj

kj

kjjMkjjwjE ],,[].,,[][

Individual

evaluation

One radar graph per sub-domain: S [j1] /

T [j2] / O [j3] / P [j4] / E [j5]GRAPHICAL

REPRESENTATIONCollectiveevaluation One value per sub-domain usingequations

Table .Evaluations of

the sub-sub-

domains.


5/11

Developing the FrameworkFor eve op ng t e ramewor , t e actors o ten se ecte prev ous e-rea ness assessment stu eshave been considered, together with other complimentary factors.

T ree stu es were assoc ate w t aca em c centers: one n t e USA Geo ery, 2002 , t e ot erin Russia (Sergey, 2004), and the third in the UK (Al-Solbi, 2004); Three studies were supported by international organizations: one was supported by the UNDPUNDP, 2004 , anot er y t e ITU ITU, 2003 , an t e t r y n o ev o t e Wor an

(Mohsen, 2003); Two studies were given by specialized firms: one by McConnell International (McConnellnternat ona , 2002 , an t e ot er y Br ges Br ges, 2002 ;

Two studies were concerned with e-readiness assessments in firms, with each supported by thegovernment concerned (Leading Growth Firms Series, 2001 and Dawn, 2002).

Framework DescriptionThe resulted framework is explained in the following according to the five STOPE domains. Thesu - oma ns an t e su -su - oma ns o eac oma n are a resse .

Leadershi

Plans

TRATEGYS

ICT Basic

Infrastructure

ICT e-ServicesP

rovisionin

Support

ICT:ECHNOLOGYT

Knowled e

General

InfrastructureOrganization

Economy

NVIRONMENTE

Awareness

EducationJobs

ManagementEOPLEP

Cooperation

Management

NRGANIZATIOO

Regulations

Figure 1.T e STOPE

ramewor or

e-readiness

assessment

An nte-

grated

STOPE

framework

5


6/11

T e strategy oma n ntegrates t e actors concerne w t uture rect ons, comm tments anplans toward ICT development and utilization. Two sub-domains are considered to be associatedwith this domain: leadership and future development plans. Table 5 provides an account of thisma n oma n, present ng t e su -su - oma ns o eac su - oma n w t exp anat ons towar urt erre nement to ena e t e er vat on o measura e ent t es.

T e tec no ogy oma n ntegrates t e actors concerne w t t e current state o ssues concernew t ICT ac t es. Four su - oma ns are cons ere to e assoc ate w t t s oma n: ICT as cinformation infrastructure, ICT e-services infrastructure, ICT provisioning, and ICT support.In a s m ar manner to t e strategy oma n, Ta e 6 prov es an account o t e tec no ogyoma n, present ng t e su -su - oma ns o eac o ts su - oma ns, w t exp anat ons or urt er

refinement toward obtaining measurable entities.

T e organ zat on oma n ntegrates t e actors re ate to t e current state o ssues concernewith ICT regulations and management. Three sub-domains are considered to be associated witht s oma n: ICT government regu at ons, ICT cooperat on among organ zat ons, an ICT

management. In a s m ar manner to t e a ove oma ns, Ta e 7 escr es t e organ zat ondomain in terms of its sub-domains and sub-sub-domains, with explanations given to the sub-sub-oma ns or urt er re nement towar spec y ng measura e ent t es.

The people domain integrates the factors associated with the current state of issues concerned withICT users an s s. T e oma n s cons ere to cons st o our su - oma ns: ICT awareness,ICT e ucat on an tra n ng, ICT qua cat ons an o s, an management o ICT s s.Table 8 describes the people domain in terms of its sub-domains and sub-sub-domains, with extraexp anat ons g ven to t e su -su - oma ns or urt er re nement towar t e measura e ent t es.

The environment domain integrates the factors associated with the current state of the basicnon-ICT ssues surroun ng an a ect ng t e current state o ICT. T e oma n as our su -oma ns: now e ge, resources an t e economy, organ zat on nc u ng genera regu at ons,

cooperation and management, and the basic non-ICT infrastructure. Table 9 describes theenv ronment oma n n terms o ts su - oma ns an su -su - oma ns, w t extra exp anat ons ot e su -su - oma ns or urt er re nement.

STRATEGY

Directions, commitments and plans toward ICT development and utilization

ISSUE FACTOR EXPLANATION

Priority: e-Business / Knowledge societyVision

Directions / Initiatives

Government

supportPlans / Projects / Funds / Other support

President involvement

Position of ICT managers:CIOsCommitment

E-Business team:Members from all departments /

Reporting to the president

ICT Leadership

ICT Managers /

ResponsibilitiesQualifications / Position (Influence)

Technology (ICT)

Plan

Basic ICT communication & information

infrastructure / ICT e-services infrastructure / ICTprovisioning / ICT support

Organization ICT

Plan

ICT government regulations / ICT cooperation / ICT

management

ICT HR PlanICT awareness / ICT education and training / ICT

qualifications and jobs / Management of ICT skills

Future

Development

Plans

Related Non-ICT

Plans: Environment

Knowledge / Resources and the economy /

Organization / Basic services infrastructure

Table .e-readiness

strategy

issues


7/11

TECHNOLOGY

Current state of issues concerned with ICT facilities

ISSUES FACTORS EXPLANATION

Availability

Computers / Fixed telephones / Cellular phones /

High speed lines / Internet / Intranet (fororganizations)

ICT BasicCommunication &

Information

Infrastructure PerformanceInstallation delay / Failures / Speed (Rate)/

Congestion / Delay:Measures

Portals & Webs / G2G services / G2B services /

G2C services: e-TransactionsGovernment

Utilization / Performance:Measures

Portals & Webs / B2G Services /

B2B Services / B2C Services: e-Transactions

ICT e-Services

InfrastructureBusiness /

OrganizationsUtilization / Performance:Measures

Communications / Hardware / Software:Market

size (purchasing)/Imports / Local production(Exports) /

Security products

Products / Market

National language productsICT Provisioning

PerformanceContracts: Utilization / Delivery of products /

Updating and upgrading

StandardsAvailability and use of standards:Local /

National / International

Availability of operation and maintenance

sources: Local / National / International

ICT SupportOperation &

MaintenancePerformance:Measures

Table 6.e-rea ness

technology

issues

ORGANIZATION

Current state of issues concerned with ICT regulations and management

ISSUE FACTOR DESCRPTION

Legal framework for ICT business

Adaptation of ICT technical standards:National /

International

Basic ICT

Regulations

Computer Crimes / Software Piracy

Foreign investment / CompetitionICT Business

Regulation Pricing / Tariffs

Domain name (DN)registrationInternet Services

Regulations Authorization of Internet services providers (ISPs)

Digital Signature / Public key infrastructure (PKI)

ICT Government

Regulations

E-Business

ServicesRegulations

Business transactions / e-Taxation

Knowledge

Sharing for

Innovation

Cooperation: Industrial and professional sector / Education

and research sector (Innovation / Development)ICT Cooperation

Partnerships /

Services

e-Business: Customers / Suppliers / Outsourcing (Value chain

/ Value system):Local / National / International

Measures Evaluation measures

Change Flexibility and adaptation to emerging requirements

Timely service/ Quality Service / Impact of CompetitionQuality

Use of modern management techniques

ICT Management

Cost /

Affordability

Cost of ICT facilities / Cost of access, use and maintenance:

Relative to income.

Table 7.e-Rea ness

organization

issues

An nte-

grated

STOPE

framework

7


8/11

PEOPLE

Current state of issues concerned with ICT users and skills

ISSUE FACTOR DESCRPTION

Understanding ICT advantages

Resistance / Adaptability to ICT changeICT literacyICT / Internet use

ICT in general education and trainingEducation System

Support ICT and Internet access in education and traininginstitutions / e-Learning

ICT Awareness

Media Support ICT in the public media

Programs and graduates: School level / University level /

Professional level / TrainingICT Qualifications

Support: ICT facilitiesICT Education &

Training

e-Education /

e-LearningOn-line courses at all levels

JobsICT skills in ICT jobs / ICT skills in non-ICT jobs /

Non-ICT skills in ICT jobsICT Qualifications

& JobsSkills Availability of ICT skills / Need for ICT skills:Matching

Performance Productivity of ICT skillsManagement of

ICT Skills Satisfaction Retaining ICT skills

Table .e-Readiness

people

issues

ENVIRONMENT

Current non-ICT issues surrounding and affecting the current state of ICT

ISSUE FACTOR DESCRPTIONIdentity and profile

Literacy: Technology / ICTCulture

Knowledge of English

Quality of the education system

Science and technology: Schools / Universities

Knowledge

Education &Training

Research and development: Technology parks &incubators

Natural Resources Availability / Value

Revenues /Profitability

Productivity / Profitability

Trade Import / Export

Resources &

EconomyIncome

Income per capita / Income relative to cost of living:Standard of living

Rule of lawGovernmentRegulations Business opportunities

Cooperation Local / National / International

Impact of culture on work:Positive / Negative

Technological development and change:Acceptance /Response

Use of modern management techniques

Organization

Management

Retaining Skills

Infrastructure Basic services:Electricity / Transportation / Postal System / Health care

Table9.e-Rea ness

environment

issues


9/11

An Illustrative ExampleAn illustrative example on the use of the above framework for practical e-readiness assessments isg ven ere. T e examp e cons ers t e ve ma n STOPE oma ns an t e su - oma ns assoc atewith each main domain. Table 10 illustrates the domains and the sub-domains considered. Eachsub-domain is assigned a value representing its measure according to the grades of Table

1, an anot er va ue g v ng ts we g t, t at s ts re at ve mportance. In a t on, or everymain domain, values are concluded from the values and weights of the sub-domains, using theequations of Table 3. Weights are also assigned to the main domains, and a value representing thestate o t e STOPE ramewor , s conc u e us ng t e equat on o Ta e 2. T e su -su - oma nsare not considered in the example, as these can be related to their sub-domains in the same waysub-domains are related, in the example, to the main domains. igures 2-a through 2-f illustratet e resu ts o t e examp e us ng t e ra ar grap . T e g t ne n t e grap s represents t e eareference state, while the heavy line gives the assessment.

F gures 2-a t roug 2- ustrate t e resu ts o t e examp e us ng t e ra ar grap . T e g t ne nthe graphs represents the ideal reference state, while the heavy line gives the assessment.

F gure 2-a prov es t e overa e-rea ness assessment o t e ve STOPE oma ns. Figure 2-b gives the assessment of the strategy domain according to its two sub-domains: the

ICT leadership and the ICT development plans. F gure 2-c s ows t e assessment o t e tec no ogy oma n cons er ng ts our su - oma ns:ICT basic infrastructure, ICT e-services infrastructure, ICT provisioning, and ICT support. Figure 2-d presents the assessment of the organization domain considering its three sub-domains:ICT regu at ons, ICT cooperat on, an ICT management. Figure 2-e provides the assessment of the people domain considering its four sub-domains: ICTawareness, ICT education and training, ICT qualifications and jobs, and the management of ICTs s. Figure 2-f shows the assessment of the environment domain considering its four sub-domains:knowledge, resources and the economy, organization, and the general infrastructure.

The differences between the light lines and the heavy lines in the graphs illustrate the relativestrengths and weaknesses of the various domains and sub-domains.

Conclusions and Future WorkThe STOPE framework for e-readiness assessment introduced in this paper has been built accordingto a multi-level integrated approach based on five main distinct domains. The framework enjoyst e eature o compre ens veness n ntegrat ng t e var ous re ate actors o suc assessmentsover the main domains of STOPE. The framework is also flexible in allowing modifications of

e-Readiness Illustrative Example

SUB-DOMAIN DOMAINDOMAIN

M w M w

ICT leadership 2 0.5Strategy

ICT future development plans 3 0.52.5 0.25

ICT basic infrastructure 3 0.30

ICT e-services infrastructure 1 0.30

ICT provisioning 3 0.20Technology

ICT support 2 0.20

2.2 0.2

ICT regulations:government 2 0.4

ICT cooperation 1 0.35Organization

ICT management 1 0.25

1.4 0.2

ICT awareness 1 0.25

ICT education and training 2 0.35

ICT qualifications and jobs 2 0.2People

Management of ICT skilled 2 0.2

1.75 0.2

Knowledge 2 0.25

Resources and economy 4 0.4

Organization 2 0.2Environment

General Infrastructure 3 0.2

3.1 0.15

OVERALL GRADE 2.16 / 4

Table 10.e-Readiness

evaluation

resu ts: an

ustrat ve

exampleconsidering

domains

an su -

oma ns,

w t equa

weights

An nte-

grated

STOPE

framework

9


10/11

0

t e actors un er STOPE to matc w t t e requ rements o t e case-stu y cons ere , w et era country or an organization associated with a specific field, such as banking, education or other

erent e s. It s a so ex e w t regar s to respon ng to c ange, t at s to emerg ng newactors t at nee to e ncorporate w t n t e ramewor n t e uture. In a t on, t e ramewor

is also distinguished for its measurability, as it provides interrelated measures for the factors

cons ere at erent eve s, w t we g ts t at re ect t e r re at ve mportance.

Because of its distinct features, the framework represents a potential standard for e-readinessassessments ot or countr es, an or organ zat ons n erent e s. T e use o t e rameworwou not on y prov e e-rea ness assessments ase on soun eatures, ut t wou a so e pfair comparisons between different studies. The framework is recommended for considerationy organ zat ons concerne w t ICT stan ar s t at support sustaina e eve opment t roug

enhancing preparedness for the networked world.

References

Al-Solbi A (2004), Evaluating and improving e-readiness assessment methods and tools: Questionnaire will be distributed in the

ng om o au ra a , n vers ty o ast ng a, orw c , .

a ry . ., a ry . . , strateg c v ew or t e eve opment o e- us ness , nternat ona ourna o etwor anagement,

ol.11, pp.103-112.

a ry . . , eve opment o secur ty po c es or pr vate networ s , nternat ona ourna o etwor anagement, vo . pp.

203-210.

0

1

2

3

4

ICT education &

ICT awareness

ICT ICTobs

Figure 2-e. People

0

1

2

3

4

Leadershi

ICT Plans

Figure 2-b. Strategy

0

1

2

3

4

ICT re ulations:

ICTMana eme

ICT

Coo erati

Figure 2-d. Organization

0

1

2

3

4

ICT basic

ICT e-services

ICTProvisioni

ICTSu or

Figure 2-c. Technology

0

1

2

3

4

Resources &

General infrastructure

Knowled e Or anizati

Figure 2-f. Environment

0

1

2

3

4

Strate

Environme Technolo

Figure 2-a. STOPE

Or anizatioPeo l

Figure 2.e-Readiness

assessment

results: an

examp e at t e

su - oma n

eve


11/11

a ry . . , eve opment o e-government: v ew , nternat ona ourna o etwor anagement, vo . o. pp.

- .

Bakry S. H. , Bakry A. H. (2005), Enterprise resource planning: a review and a STOPE view, International Journal of Network

anagement, vo . pp. - .

a ry . . , rans ormat on to t e now e ge oc ety , ng u az z u c rary, ya , au ra a, n ra c .

r ges , e- ea ness assessment: w o s o ng w at an w ere: an open content report , ttp: www. r ges.org.

Dawn J, Peter B, and Jasbir D. (2002), Government support for e-readiness of small and medium sized enterprises(SMEs), Proceedings

t e t awa nternat ona on erence on ystem c ences, omputer oc ety.

arc , uropean summ t n s on, ortuga .

uropean commun ty, ttp: www.europa.eu. nt.

Geoffery S, Carlos A, and Jeffrey D. (2002), The networked readiness index: measuring of nations for the networked world, Center for

nternat ona eve opment at arvar n vers ty; assac usetts, .

nternat ona e ecommun cat on n on , or te ecommun cat on eve opment report , eneva, w tzer an .

ea ng rowt rms er es , e w s om exc ange e- us ness rea ness assessment , ueen s r nter or ntar o, ntar o,

anada, http://www.ontariocanada.com.

c onne nternat ona , ea y net go: partners ps ea ng t e g o a economy , ttp: www.mcconne nternat ona .com.

o sen , c ae , runo , ve . , : - ea ness ssessment eport , ompson ress, n o ev, or an ,

http://www.infodiv.org.

Sergey S. (2004), Russia e-readiness assessment, Institute of Information Society, Moscow, Russia, http://www.russia-gateway.ru/

n ex.p p.

The United Nations Development Program (2004), ICT for Development, http://www.undp.org.

UN (September 2000), UN MDG: Millennium Development Goals, http://www.developmentgoals.org / http://www.unmillenniumproject.

.

or n ormat on summ t, ttp: www. tu.org.

An nte-

grated

STOPE

framework

1

Documents

An Integrated STOPE Framework for E-readiness