State strategic information system plans

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine US state strategic plans for e-government (or information technology), identify their strengths and weaknesses, and presents best practices for both practitioners and scholars interested in improving state strategic plans for information technology. Design/methodology/approach – The research analyzes the e-government strategic plans, based on a content analysis using a rubric consisting of 15 questions. Findings – The findings suggest that of the state information system plans reviewed – Michigan, Virginia, and Massachusetts are the most comprehensive. Overall, the state plans were effective in developing strategies and core beliefs, and assessing their strengths and opportunities, while less successful in recognizing weakness and threats. Research limitations/implications – This study builds on existing research examining strategic information systems plans in US states and assesses the extent to which each plan addresses established criteria for developing strategic plans. This study also attempts to fill the need for more data and empirical evidence in the development of literature in strategic planning and performance measurement. Practical implications – The research employs a public sector approach to strategic planning, and while the process is not specific to information systems it is comprehensive in its approach, grounded in literature, and offers guidance to public sector leaders in planning for investments in information systems and technology. Originality/value – The conclusion offers suggestions for both public administration practitioners and scholars interested in improving state strategic plans for information technology.

Critical success factors of strategic information systems planning: a Delphi approach

“…Based on the review of related work, several authors found varying and sometimes similar critical factors of SISP success (as summarized in Table 1). For example, whereas Kamariotou and discussed the top management' understanding of the role of IS in supporting business strategy, Manoharan et al (2015) emphasized the need for the existence of internal and external resources (typically expenditures or employee time) to deliver IS services. But, according to Alamri et al (2016), the critical factors required for SISP should include the organization's understanding of its internal operations (important procedures and processes) and IS.…”

The change in environmental perception in strategic plans: the case of local governments in Turkey

“…Finally, Mitchell et al (2018) explore that context has an impact on the success of implementation best practices and strategic planning should be developed considering contextual factors in order to improve government effectiveness. Similarly, Manoharan et al (2015) investigated the US state strategic plans for e-government by employing a content analysis using a rubric based on Bryson's (2011) ten-step strategic planning process and assessed the extent to which each The change in environmental perception plan addresses established criteria for developing strategic plans. None of these, however, have examined the phenomenon of change in successive strategic plans.…”

“…Very few studies focus on strategic plans as a result of planning (e.g. Mazzara, 2010;Lega et al, 2013;Manoharan et al, 2015). Though there are few theoretical and conceptual studies revealing that strategic planning contributes to change (e.g.…”

Practicing and Factors Infuencing the Effective Implementation of Strategic Information Systems Planning in Public Agency

“…An organisation must develop SISP to realise its business vision and mision through strategic direction and information communication and technology (ICT) action plan; the latter serves to increase organisational performance and competitiveness by maximising ICT (Al-Ammary et al 2019;Ali, Crump & Sudin 2014;Haron, Sabri & Zolkarnain 2013). However, SISP's main problems include management team's non compliance and low prioritisation of the planning process (Kelvin, Oghenetega & Jackson 2012); overfocus on certain ICT aspect and neglecting others; exclusion of uncertain environmental changes during planning; and low involvement of top and middle management owing to conflicting commitments (Bermejo & Zambalde 2014;Manoharan, Melitski & Bromberg 2015;Zubovic, Pita & Khan 2014). These problems can affect the input quality of the planning process that can subsequently affect the effectiveness of SISP implementation.…”

“…These problems can affect the input quality of the planning process that can subsequently affect the effectiveness of SISP implementation. Moreover, limited analysis of organisational environment can also increase the failure rate of SISP implementation (Manoharan et al 2015). The effectiveness of SISP implementation requires assessment by measuring the achievement level of organisational objective and how an organisation identifies and addresses its weaknesses.…”