Communication between government and business entities and challenges of creation of “digital government”

The present paper consists of two parts. In the first part, the issues of communication between government and business entities have been considered. The role of the communication for the modern society development has been assessed. Implementation of concepts of open government, public participation and corporate governance are the requirements to the governments who would like to “keep in touch” with business entities. In many countries, cooperation, awareness and continuous interaction not only with citizens, but also with business entities became important factors of changes in the system of management, especially in the government information policy. In such countries, a shift is observed of regulatory function toward more open and more interactive interaction. Business entities have a real chance now to influence the improvement and development of public policy and management system. The publications on this subject mainly those published abroad, have been analysed. A particular emphasis is on the characteristics of communication channels: reliability, speed and effectiveness (efficiency). In the second part of the paper, the issues of creation of “digital government”, as well as special aspects of creation of “digital government” in developing countries have been considered, although in many ways the processes of “digitalization” of government organs are characteristic for the developed countries as well. It has been noted, that the implementation of digital information technologies and digital communications in the public sector organization would have a favorable impact on the way the public services are provided. With proper implementation, the digital government may decrease the cost of provision of public services and establish conditions for better contacts with citizens, especially in distant and less populated regions. Digital government can also influence the creation of better transparency and accountability of the decisions made, stimulate the development of local digital culture and promote the development of democracy. To determine the efficiency of any particular act of communication the concept of “communicative result” is introduced. The cultural dependence of the communication result has been noticed.

1. Arendsen R., Peters O., TerHedde M.J. and Van Dijk J. (2014), “Does e-government reduce the administrative burden on businesses? An assessment of government and business systems usage in the Netherlands”, Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 160– 169. DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2013.09.002.

2. Ballard D.I. Roe R.A., Waller M.J. and Clegg S.R. [Eds] (2008), “Organizational temporality over time: Activity cycles as sources of entrainment”, Time in Organizational Research, Routledge, London, pp. 204–219.

3. Bevir M., Rhodes R. and Weller P. (2003), “Traditions of governance: Interpreting the changing role of the public sector, Public Adm.”, vol. 81, no. 1, pp. 1–17. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9299.00334.

4. Bharosa N., Janssen M., Van Wijk R. [et al] (2013), “Tapping into existing information flows: The transformation to compliance by design in government and business information exchange”, Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 9–18. DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2012.08.006.

5. Boczkowsky P., Orlikowski W., Grant D., Hardy C., Oswick C. and Putnam L. [Eds] (2004), “Organizational discourse and new media: A practice perspective”, The SAGE handbook of organizational discourse, Sage Publications, London, pp. 359–378.

6. Burstein P. (2003), “The impact of public opinion on public policy: A review and an agenda”, Polit. Res. Q., vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 29–40. DOI: 10.1177/106591290305600103.

7. Castells M. (2002), The Internet galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, business, and society, Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford.

8. Dennis W.J. (2003), “Raising response rates in mail surveys of small business owners: Results of an experiment”, J. Small Bus. Manag, vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 278–295. DOI: 10.1111/1540-627X.00082.

9. Dutta-Bergman M.J. (2006), “Community participation and internet use after September 11: Complementarity in channel consumption”, J. Comput-Mediat. Comm., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 469–484. DOI: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00022.x.

10. Dutta-Bergman M.J. (2004), “Complementarity in consumption of news types across traditional and new media”, J. Broadcast. Electron. Media, vol. 48, pp. 41–60. DOI: 10.1207/s15506878jobem4801_3.

11. Evans A.M. and Campos A. (2013), “Open government initiatives: Challenges of citizen participation”, J. Policy Anal. Manag., vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 172–185.

12. Fakhoury R. (2018), “Digital government isn’t working in the developing world. Here’s why”. Available at: https://theconversation.com/digital-government-isnt-working-in-the-developing-world-heres-why-94737 (accessed 11.02.2020).

13. Fulk J. and De Sanctis G. (1995), “Electronic communication and changing organizational forms”, Organ Sci., vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 337–349. DOI: 10.1287/orsc.6.4.337.

14. Karjaluoto H., Mustonen N. and Ulkuniemi P. (2015), “The role of digital channels in industrial marketing communications”, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 703˗710. DOI: 10.1108/JBIM-04-2013-0092.

15. Lapidoth A. and Narayan P. (1998), “Reliable communication under channel uncertainty”, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 2148–2177.

16. Leonard K.M, Van Scotter J.R, Pakdil F., Chamseddine N.J., Esatoglu E. and Gumus M. [et al] (2011), “Examining media effectiveness across cultures and national borders: A review and multilevel framework”, International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 83–103. DOI: 10.1177/1470595810389790.

17. Liddicoat A.J. (2009), “Communication as culturally contexted practice: A view from intercultural communication”, Australian Journal of Linguistics, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 115–133. DOI: 10.1080/07268600802516400.

18. Macintosh A. (2004), “Characterizing e-participation in policy-making”, Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. DOI: 10.1109/HICSS.2004.1265300.

19. March J.G. and Simon H. (1993), Organizations, 2nd ed. Blackwell, Cambridge, MA.

20. Monge P.R., Kalman M., Watt J. and Van Lear A. [Eds] (1996), “Sequentiality, simultaneity, and synchronicity in human communication”, Cycles and dynamicpatterns in communication processes, Ablex, New York, pp. 71–92.

21. Moon J. (2002), “The social responsibility of business and new governance”, Government and Opposition, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 385–408. DOI: 10.1111/1477-7053.00106.

22. Morris A. (2000), “The problem of information overload in business organisations: A review of the literature”, Int J. Inf. Manage, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 17–28. DOI: 10.1016/S0268-4012(99)00051-1.

23. O’Neill P.B. and Harsell D.M. (2014), “How do business and government interact? Combining perspectives from economics, political science, public administration, and practitioners”, American Journal of Business Education, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 161– 168. DOI: 10.19030/ajbe.v8i2.9138.

24. Ramirez J.A., Dimmick J., Feaster J. and Shu-Fang L. (2008), “Revisiting interpersonal media competition. The gratification niches of instant messaging, e-mail, and the telephone”, Communic. Res., vol. 5(4), pp. 529–547. DOI: 10.1177/0093650208315979.

25. Reinsch N.L., Jr. and Lewis P.H. (1984), “Communication apprehension as a determinant of channel preferences”, J. Bus. Commun., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 53–61. DOI: 10.1177/002194368402100307.

26. Ruppel E.K. and Burke T.J. (2014), “Complementary channel use and the role of social competence”, J. Comput. Media Commun., no. 20, pp. 37–51. DOI: 10.1111/jcc4.12091.

27. Sanina А. [et al.] (2017), “The effectiveness of communication channels in government and business communication”, Information Polity, no. 22, pp. 251–266. DOI: 10.3233/IP-170415.

28. Shrivastava S. (2012), “Comprehensive modeling of communication barriers: A conceptual framework”, IUP J. Soft Ski., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 7–19.

29. Stephens K.K., Cho J.K. and Ballard D.I. (2012), “Simultaneity, sequentiality, and speed: Organizational messages about multiple-task completion”, Hum. Commun. Res., vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 23–47. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2011.01420.x.

30. Van den Boer, Y., Arendsen R. and Pieterson W. (2016), “In search of information: Investigating source and channel choices in government and business service interactions”, Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 33, pp. 40–52.

31. Veldeman C., Van Praet E. and Mechant P. (2017), “Social media adoption in business-to-business: IT and industrial companies compared”, Int. J. Bus. Commun., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 1–23. DOI: 10.1177/2329488415572785.

32. Westmyer S.A., Di Cioccio R.L. and Rubin R.B. (1998), “Appropriateness and effectiveness of communication channels in competent interpersonal communication”, J. Commun., vol. 48(3), pp. 27–48. DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.1998.tb02758.x.