AZERBAIJAN NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
E-SERVİCES MULTİ-CRİTERİA EVALUATİON MODEL BASED ON CİTİZEN SATİSFACTİON
Farhad F. Yusifov, Aysen C. Farajova

The article is devoted to the issue of multi-criteria assessment of e-services based on citizen satisfaction. For this purpose, the existing practice is studied to identify the factors influencing citizen satisfaction. Citizen satisfaction is considered one of the most important factors in assessing the effectiveness of e-government implementation. Analysis of international experience shows that existing studies on citizen satisfaction with the use of e-government services are based more on the analysis of reports of a different nature at the individual level and subjective assessment of data from common sources. According to the research results, there is a direct relationship between the quality of public services delivered and the level of satisfaction of citizens. However, this attitude is not always confirmed, and the level of satisfaction varies depending on whether the delivered government service meets the user's expectations.The quality of public services is a set of characteristics that determine the ability to meet the needs of citizens for the intended public services. There are a number of approaches, criteria, and models for assessing the quality of delivered e-services.  This article examines the criteria for the quality of public services that affect citizen satisfaction. E-services were assessed on the basis of citizen satisfaction using a multi-criteria assessment method. In an empirical experiment, the selected e-services were ranked based on the opinions of citizens (pp.39-50). 

Keywords:e-government, e-service, citizen satisfaction, multi-criteria evaluation model, public services.
DOI : 10.25045/jpis.v11.i2.04
References
  • Ma L., Zheng Y. National e-government performance and citizen satisfaction: a multilevel analysis across European countries / International Review of Administrative Sciences, 2017, pp. 1-21.
  • West D.M. Digital Government: Technology and Public Sector Performance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005, 26
  • Obi T. The 14th Waseda – IAC International Digital Government Rankings 2018 report, http://e-gov.waseda.ac.jp/pdf/The_2018_Waseda-IAC_Digital_Government_Rankings_Report.pdf
  • Holzer M., Manoharan A. Digital Governance in MunicipalitiesWorldwide (2015–16). Newark, NJ: E-Governance Institute, National Center for Public Productivity, Rutgers University, 2016, researchgate.net/publication/281650902_Digital_Governance_­in_Municipalities_ Worldwide
  • UN 2018 E-Government Survey,
    https://publicadministration.un.org/en/Research/UN-e-Government-Surveys
  • Osman I.H., Anouze A.L., Irani Z., et al. Cobra framework to evaluate e-government services: A citizen-centric perspective // Government Information Quarterly, 31(2), 2014, pp. 243-256.
  • Park S., Choi Y.-T. and Bok. H.-S. Does better e-readiness induce more use of e-government? Evidence from the Korean central e-government // International Review of Administrative Sciences, 79(4), 2013, pp. 767-789.
  • Citizen satisfaction with public services, in Government at a Glance 2013, OECD Publishing, 2013, 198 p.
  • Bertot J.C., Jaeger P.T. and McClure C.R. Citizen-centered e-government services: Benefits, costs, and research needs / Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Digital Government Research. Montreal, Canada: Digital Government Society of North America, 2008, pp. 137-142.
  • Chan F.K.Y., Thong J.Y.L., Venkatesh V., et al. Modeling citizen satisfaction with mandatory adoption of an e-government technology // Journal of the Association for Information Systems, vol.11(10), 2010, pp. 519–549.
  • Morgeson F.V. and Petrescu C. Do they all perform alike? An examination of perceived performance, citizen satisfaction and trust with US federal agencies // International Review of Administrative Sciences, vol. 77(3), 2011, pp. 451–479.
  • Verdegem P. and Verleye G. User-centered e-government in practice: A comprehensive model for measuring user satisfaction // Government Information Quarterly, vol. 26(3), 2009, pp. 487–497.
  • Ming Ch., Chen T. An Empirical Study of E-Service Quality and User Satisfaction of Public Service Centers in China // International Journal of Public Administration in the Digital Age, vol. 5(3), 2018, pp. 43-59.
  • Weerakkody V., Irani Z., Lee H., Hindi N. & Osman I. Are U.K. Citizens Satisfied with E-Government Services? Identifying and Testing Antecedents of Satisfaction // Information Systems Management, vol. 33, 2016, pp. 331-343.
  • Rana N.P., Dwivedi Y.K. & Williams, M. D. Evaluating the validity of IS success models for the electronic government research: An empirical test and integrated model // International Journal of Electronic Government Research, vol. 9(3), 2013, pp. 1–22.
  • Rana N.P., Dwivedi Y.K., Williams M.D. & Lal B. Examining the success of the online public grievance redressal systems: An extension of the IS success model // Information Systems Management, 2014, pp. 39-59.
  • Rana N.P., Dwivedi Y.K., Williams M.D. & Weerakkody V. Investigating success of an e-government initiative: Validation of an integrated IS success model // Information Systems Frontiers, 2014, pp. 1–16.
  • Zaidi S.F.H., Siva S. & Marir F. Development and validation of a framework for assessing the performance and trust in e-government services // Development, vol. 7(4), 2014, pp. 28–37.
  • Malik B.H., Shuqin C. and et al. Evaluating Citizen e-Satisfaction from e-Government Services: A Case of Pakistan // European Scientific Journal, vol.12, No.5, 2016, pp. 346-370.
  • Yusifov F. Gurbanli A. E-services evaluation criteria: the case of Azerbaijan // Journal of Information Sciences (Informacijos mokslai), Vilnius University, Lithuania, vol. 81, 2018, pp. 18-26.
  • Цукарь С.С. Обеспечение доступности государственных услуг в рамках реализации концепции электронного государства // Вестник Поволжского института управления, № 2 (53), 2016, с. 141-147.
  • Зайковский В.Н. «Сервисное государство»: новая парадигма или современная технология государственного управления ? // Национальные интересы: приоритеты и безопасность, № 24, 2014, c. 18-28.
  • Саржин В.А. О мониторинге уровня удовлетворённости граждан качеством и доступностью оказания государственных услуг, 2016, 
    https://33.мвд.рф/ slujba/выступления-руководителей/5
  • Шоханова О.С. Цифровые платформы государственных услуг: проблемы и возможности // Научные записки молодых исследователей, № 4, 2018, с. 60-65.
  • Chandrupatla T.R. Quality and reliability in engineering, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2009, 309 p.
  • Кучеровой Е.Н. Современные подходы к определению содержания категории "качество", kycherova.ru/predmet_i_obl/sovremenue_podh_sod/index.html
  • Kazana H., Özçelik S., Hobikoğlu E.H. Election of deputy candidates for nomination with AHP-Promethee methods // Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 195, 2015, pp. 603-613.
  • Tuan N.A. Personnel Evaluation and Selection using a Generalized Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making // International Journal of Soft Computing, vol. 12 (4), 2017, pp. 263-269.
  • Afshari A.R., Nikolić M., Akbari Z. Personnel selection using group fuzzy AHP and SAW methods // Journal of engineering management and competitiveness, vol. 7(1), 2017, pp. 3-10.
  • Borissova D. A group decision making model considering experts competency: an application in personnel selection // Proceedings of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, vol. 71(11), 2018, pp. 1520-1527.
  • Alguliyev, R., Aliguliyev, R. & Yusifov, F. Modified Fuzzy TOPSIS + TFNs Ranking Model for Candidate Selection Using the Qualifying Criteria // Soft Computing, 24(1), 2020, pp. 681-695.
  • Saaty T.L. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process // International Journal of Services Sciences, vol.1(1), 2008, pp. 83–98.
  • Rotshtein A.P. Fuzzy multicriteria choice among alternatives: Worst-case approach // Journal of Computer and Systems Sciences International, vol. 48(3), 2009, pp. 379-383.