Call for Paper - November 2022 Edition
IJCA solicits original research papers for the November 2022 Edition. Last date of manuscript submission is October 20, 2022. Read More

Proposed Framework for Quality Assessment of E-government Portals in Saudi Arabia

International Journal of Computer Applications
Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA
Year of Publication: 2019
Awatif Almurayziq, Shaimaa Salama

Awatif Almurayziq and Shaimaa Salama. Proposed Framework for Quality Assessment of E-government Portals in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Computer Applications 177(20):13-24, November 2019. BibTeX

	author = {Awatif Almurayziq and Shaimaa Salama},
	title = {Proposed Framework for Quality Assessment of E-government Portals in Saudi Arabia},
	journal = {International Journal of Computer Applications},
	issue_date = {November 2019},
	volume = {177},
	number = {20},
	month = {Nov},
	year = {2019},
	issn = {0975-8887},
	pages = {13-24},
	numpages = {12},
	url = {},
	doi = {10.5120/ijca2019919633},
	publisher = {Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA},
	address = {New York, USA}


Governments in many countries are adopting information technology as a mean to deliver their services. Governments are encouraged to serve their citizens anytime and anywhere in an efficient way. Therefore, measuring the quality of these serving portals became a necessity. This study examines the quality of e-government portals in Saudi Arabia through introducing USR framework that contains three dimensions (usability, security and responsiveness),each dimention is associated with a set of sub dimensions. The framework is based on set of standards and theories for assessing the quality of e-government portals. In addition, the empirical data were gathered and collected by using self-administrated questionnaires distributed via social networking platforms to test the hypothesis indicated in the research and the data analysis was based on 3423 respondents in KSA. Using multivariate statistical techniques, the results indicated how each proposed dimention has effected e-government portals quality.


  1. Fang, Z. (2002). E-Government in Digital Era: Concept, Practice, and Development, Thailand.
  2. Jaeger, P. T., &Bertot, J. C. (2010). Transparency and technological change: Ensuring equal and sustained public access to government information. Government Information Quarterly, 27(4), 371-376.
  3. Bretschneider, S., Gant, J., & Wang, Lili. (2005). Evaluating Web-Based E-Government Services with a Citizen-Centric Approach. Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
  4. Dhillon, G. S., Weerakkody, V., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2008). Realising transformational stage e-government: a UK local authority perspective. Electronic Government, An International Journal, 5(2), 162-180
  5. Luburić. R. (2014) “Total quality management as a paradigm of business success,” Journal of Central Banking Theory and Practice, vol. 3, no.1, pp. 59-80.
  6. Halaris C., Magoutas B., Papadomichelaki X., Mentzas X. (2007), "Classification and synthesis of quality approaches in e-government services", Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Internet Research, Vol. 17 Iss: 4, pp.378 – 401.
  7. Parasuraman, A. (2002), “Technology readiness and e-service quality: insights for effective e-commerce”, E-Commerce Seminar Series North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, 17 April.
  8. Bhattacharya D., Gulla U., Gupta M.P. (2012), "E-service quality model for Indian government portals: citizens' perspective", Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 25 Iss: 3, pp.246 – 271.
  9. ISO (2005), Quality management systems – Fundamentals and vocabulary – ISO 9000:2005.
  10. Venkatesh, V., & Ramesh, V. (2006). Web and wireless site usability: Understanding differences and modeling use. MIS Quarterly, 30(1), 181–206.
  11. Pedley, M. (2007). Web Usability.
  12. Layton, T. (2007). Information Security: Design, Implementation, Measurement, and Compliance. Boca Raton, FL: Auerbach publications.
  13. Basu, S. (2004). E-government and Developing Countries: an Overview. International Review of Law Computers andTechnology, 18, (1), 109-133.
  14. Yang, Z. And Jun, M. (2002), “Consumer perception of e-service quality: From Internet purchaser and non purchaser perspectives”, Journal of Business Strategies, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 19-41.
  15. Al-Khalifa, H. S. (2010). Heuristic evaluation of the usability of e-government websites: a case from Saudi Arabia. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance.
  16. Alanezi, M.A., Kamil, A., & Basri, S. (2010). A proposed instrument dimensions for measuring e-government service quality. International Journal of U- & E-Service, Science & Technology, 3(4), 1-18.
  17. Papadomichelaki, X &Mentzas, G (2012), “e-GovQual: A multiple item scale for assessing e-government service quality”, Government Information Quarterly, n.29, pp. 98-109.
  18. Almalki, O., Duan, Y. and Frommholz, I. (2013). “Developing a conceptual framework to evaluate e-government portals’ success,” in Proceedings of the 13 European Conference on e-Government, E. Ferrari, W. Castelnovo, Eds. University of Insubria, 13-14 June 2013, 1, pp. 19-26.
  19. Ziemba, E. Papaj,T. and Descours, D. (2014). Assessing the quality of e-government portals – the Polish experience, Proceedings of the 2014 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems, Vol.2, pp. 1259–1267.
  20. Yahya, H., & Razali, R. (2015). A usability-based framework for electronic government systems development. ARPN J. Eng. Appl. Sci, 10(20), 9414-9423.
  21. Al-Khalifa, H. S., Baazeem, I., & Alamer, R. (2017). Revisiting the accessibility of Saudi Arabia government websites. Universal Access in the Information Society, 16(4), 1027-1039.
  22. Al-Hawary, S. I. S., & Al-Menhaly, S. M. (2017). The Quality of E-Government Services and its Role on Achieving Beneficiaries Satisfaction. Global Journal of Management And Business Research.
  23. Sterrenberg, G, (2017). A Conceptual Framework for Evaluating E-Government Systems Success: A Service Ecosystem Approach, Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2017.
  24. Heeks R, (2001) Building E-Governance for development: A framework for National and Donor Actions, working paper, NO.12, ISDPM, university of Manchester, Manchester.
  26. Fernandez, A., Insfran, E., & Abrahão, S. (2011). Usability evaluation methods for the web: A systematic mapping study. Information and Software Technology, 53(8), 789–817.
  27. Marsico, M. De, &Levialdi, S. (2004). Evaluating web sites: exploiting user’s expectations. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 60(3), 381–416.
  28. Aziz. N, and Kamaludin. A, (2015) development of instrument for evaluating website usability focusing on university website, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Computing and Informatics, ICOCI 201511-13 August, 2015 Istanbul, Turkey. Universiti Utara Malaysia.
  29. Wang, J., &Senecal, S. (2008). Measuring Perceived Website Usability. Journal of Internet Commerce, 6(4), 97–112.
  30. Palmer, J. W. (2002). Web site usability, design , and performance metrics.
  31. Macleod M and Rengger R. (1993) The Development of DRUM: A Software Tool for Video-assisted Usability Evaluation. In: People and Computers VIII, Proceedings of the HCI’93 Conference (Loughborough, UK, Sept 1993), CUP.
  32. Anjoga. H, Nyeko. S, and Kituyi. M (2017) A Framework for Usability of e-Government service in developing countries, Journal of Accounting and Auditing: Research & Practice.
  33. Nielsen, J. (1994). Enhancing the explanatory power of usability heuristics. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 152-158.
  34. IT Project Center (2013). Analysis of Good Practice in the Area of E-government (Analiza Dobrych Praktyk w Obszarze E-administracji), Warsaw, 2013.
  35. Stowers, G. (2002). The State of Federal Websites: The Pursuit of Excellence, August 2002.
  36. Venkatesh. V, Hoehle. H, and Aljafari. R, (2014), A usability evaluation of the Obamacare website, Government Information Quarterly, 33, pp. 669-680.
  37. ISO/IEC (2011), Systems and software engineering. Systems andSoftware quality. Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE). Systemand software quality models. ISO/IEC 25010:2011(E), InternationalOrganisation for Standardisation, Geneva, 2011.
  38. Caldwell, B., Chisholm, W., Vanderheiden, G. & White, J. (2004). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0. W3C Working Draft 19 November 2004.
  39. Aziz. N. and Kamaludin. A, (2014), Assessing Website Usability Attributes Using Partial Least Squares, International Journal of Information and Electronics Engineering, 4(2).
  40. West, D. (2002). Global E-Government. Retrieved from http://www.insidepolit
  41. Accenture, (2005). Leadership in Customer Service: New Expectations, New Experiences. The Government Executive Series, April 2005.
  42. Criado, J.I. and Ramilo. M.C, (2003). E-Government in practice: an analysis of website orientation to citizens in Spanish municipalities. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 18(3), 191-218.
  43. Loiacono, E., Watson, R., & Goodhue, D. (2007). WebQual: An Instrument for Consumer Evaluation of Web Sites. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 11(3), 51–87.
  44. Sharifia, M. and A. Manian,(2010). The study of the success indicators for pre-implementation activities of Iran's E-government development projects. Gov. Inform. Q., 27: 63-69.
  45. Lee, Y., &Kozar, K. a. (2012). Understanding of website usability: Specifying and measuring constructs and their relationships. Decision Support Systems, 52(2), 450–463. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2011.10.004.
  46. Cyr, D. (2013). Website design, trust and culture: An eight country investigation. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 12(6), 373–385.
  47. Agarwal, R., & Venkatesh, V. (2002). Assessing a firm's web presence: A heuristic evaluation procedure for the measurement of usability. Information Systems Research, 13(2),168–186.
  48. Kalakota, R., &Whinston, A. (1996). Frontiers of Electronic Commerce. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
  49. Zhang, P., & von Dran, G. (2001). User Expectations and Rankings of Quality Factors in Different Web Site Domains. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 6(2), 9-33.
  50. Anil Saldhana, (2007) “secure e-government portals", W3C Workshop on e-Government and the Web, National Academy of Sciences, Washington.
  51. Kelsey. J, Stefan. L, Schneier. B, Stay. M, Wagner. D, and Whiting. D, (2000) "Improved Cryptanalysis of Rijndael".
  52. Teeter, R., & Hart, p., (2003). The new e-government equation: ease, engagement, privacy and protection. The council for Excellence in Government.
  53. Shanshan. Sh. (2014), Assessment of E-government Service Quality under User Satisfaction Orientation: The Establishment of E-Govqual Model, Asian Journal of Business Management 6(2): 111-117, 2014.
  55. Mason, S. J. and Graham, N. E. 1999. Conditional probabilities, relative operating characteristics, and relative operating levels. Wea. Forecasting 14, 713–725.
  56. Hair. Jr, Black, B., and Anderson, 2010. Multivariate data analysis, 7th edition, Pearson Prentice Hall.
  57. Dinev, T. and Hart, P. (2002) Internet Privacy Concern and Trade-Off Factors: Empirical Study and Business Implications. Working paper, Florida Atlantic University.
  58. Hair, J.F.J, Bush, R.P., and Ortinau, D.J. (2000) Marketing Research: A Practical Approach for the New Millennium. Sydney: Irwin McGraw-Hill.
  59. Nunnally, J.C. (1978) Psychometric theory, 2nd ed. New York: Mc Graw-Hill.


E-government portals, On-line Service Quality, Measurement Model, Assessing quality, e-Services.