A Contextual Perspective of Performance Assessment in EGovernment A Study of Indian Police Administration 2008 Government Information Quarterly

Available online at www.sciencedirect.
com
Government Information Quarterly 25 (2008) 278 302
A contextual perspective of performance assessment in

eGovernment: A study of Indian Police Administration
R.K. Mitra, M.P. Gupta
Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, Vishwakarma Bhavan,
Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, New Delhi, Delhi 110016, India
Available online 29 January 2007
Abstract
There is considerable research work on the performance assessment of eGovernment projects,

especially on performance assessment measures per se. The point that the authors in this paper make is
that while a variety of performance assessment measures are important for evaluation of eGovernment
projects, performance itself is intended to relate governance with eGovernment applications. Thus,
while developing performance assessment measures, there is a need to be conscious of governance as
the ultimate purpose. Taking the Indian Police Administration as its domain, this paper demonstrates
how performance assessment can be so conceived as to help capture the impact of eGovernment in
regard to implications for governance in the given domain.
2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Keywords: eGovernment; Performance; Assessment; Police administration; India
1. Introduction
Researchers note (Gupta, Kumar, & Bhattacharya, 2004; Hwang, Choi, & Myeong, 1999)
that eGovernment is something which one understands best when observed in the field.
Authors and researchers use a wide range of precise terms to articulate eGovernment because
they attempt to project a complex perspective to a diverse audience in a newly emerging field.
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: mpgupta@dms.iitd.ernet.in (M.P. Gupta).
0740-624X/$ - see front matter 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.giq.2006.03.008
R.K. Mitra, M.P. Gupta / Government Information Quarterly 25 (2008) 278302 279
Researchers who concentrate on eGovernment as technology-led solutions (eAdministration)

often miss out the context and nuances of governance which make eGovernment meaningful in
the final analysis. The proponents of eDemocracy, yet another perspective, believe that
eGovernment is a movement towards perfect governmenta means to facilitate transparency
in government operations, to enhance the exchange of information between institutions
involved in policy making, to provide greater access to government information, etc. The
World Bank is a pioneer in propagating this perspective of eGovernment. There is yet another
perspective, namely, the developmental perspective popularized by Sen (1999). He talks about
five types of freedom (political, economic facilities, social opportunities, transparency
guarantees, and protective security) which, in addition to its empowering citizens to better
participate in government, eGovernment helps to insure.
Perspectives aside, there are distinct trends in research, though the emphasis is always on
some specific dimension per sebe it technological, managerial, performance assessment
measures, change management, specific case illustration, etc. However, there is a distinct gap
in literature emphasizing the use of performance assessment measures to relate eGovernment
applications with governancethe very context that makes eGovernment meaningful.
This paper describes the findings of a research work with respect to the impact of
eGovernment on the performance of service delivery apparatus of a government institution,
specifically police administration in India. The basic concern guiding the development of
performance assessment measures in this paper is to determine how performance
assessment can best relate the two: governance (the context) and eGovernment (the
applications).
Before considering this, it is relevant to present a brief review of studies on performance
assessment. Researchers (Mitra, 2004) have found three distinct but not necessarily mutually
exclusive trends (see Fig. 1). Early literature centers on a variety of issues, including those of
performance assessment, relating to Information Resource Management (IRM). Government
Information Quarterly brought out two exclusive issues on the subject in 1996 and 1997 that
touched upon issues of Federal Information Management (Beachboard, 1997; Beachboard &
McClure, 1996; Holden, 1996) and Information Resource Management (Bertot, 1997; Bertot
& McClure, 1997; Fletcher, 1997; Lewin & Sprehe, 1996; Plocher, 1996). In one of the early
works, Caudle (1996) outlined an IRM strategy as a strong medicine for many of government's
service delivery ills. Bertot (1997) and Bertot and McClure (1997) provide a comprehensive
insight as to how IRM in the USA became increasingly tied to performance yardsticks in
analysis. Further, giving a reference to adoption of best practices of leading private and public
organizations under legislation entitled the Information Management Reform Act (ITMRA),
McClure (1997) demonstrates how concrete performance measures can be built under the
ambit of a legislation to make the accountability of public organizations more transparent and
focused. The best practices traced in three functional contexts: decide to change (initiate,
mandate, and facilitate major changes in information management to improve organizational
performance), direct change (establish an outcome-oriented integrated strategic information
management process), and support change (build organization-wide information management
capabilities to address mission needs). Westerbuck (2000), while discussing Strategic
Information Management (SIM) practices in the United States, had argued as to how
280 R.K. Mitra, M.P. Gupta / Government Information Quarterly 25 (2008) 278302
Fig. 1. Growth of literature on eGovernment.
legislative support, such as the Information Technology Management Reform Act (ITMRA;
later renamed the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996), could have a direct impact on IT management
in government organizations.
Besides a wide variety of issues related to the management of the World Wide Web, the
advent of the internet gave rise to a new public information model. Lan and Falcone (1997)
outlined a policy model for public information provision in an internet age. This model
illustrates four categories of factors that interact to influence widespread internet adoption.
These include the technical characteristics of information technologies; user preferences for
information resources; the institutional arrangements which define, govern, and constrain
provider/user relationships; and psychological factors affecting information processing.
Contrary to predictions of widespread revolutionary changes in the workplace, the information
age has been characterized primarily by the controlled increase in accessibility to specific types
and amounts of data; the flow of information in and out of the information reservoirs of public,
private, and non-profit institutions. Stowers (1999) discovered a paradigm shift in government
moving onto the WWW. Governments have become cyberactive but are cautious in wide-
scale adoption. Current emphasis is on information and services for business and other
economic development activities. The next phase could focus on dissemination of policy
information, encouraging policy discussions, or delivering public services.
Issues relating to the development of websites have drawn the substantive attention of
researchers. Giuidice and Goodman (1999) recommended stages for creating a user-friendly
website. Closely linked to the issue of Web development is the question of evaluation and
assessment of website from the standpoint of usability as an important Web management
strategy. Rosenfield and Morville (1998) argued that a high level of user-centered awareness
distinguishes successful Web designs. Seven reasons have been cited why most people dislike
a website:
1. Difficulty of finding the needed information

2. Poor graphic designing and layout
3. Gratuitous use of animations and other Web technologies
4. Inappropriate tone
5. Designer centeredness
6. Under construction
7. Lack of attention to detail
Hwang and Chao (2001) provided a useful framework for evaluating websites by
suggesting specific indicators under three broad headings: Defining, Designing, and
Producing. Eschenfelder, Beachboard, Wyman, & McClure (2001) was. provided yet another
framework of assessing government websites. Citing the phenomenal growth in the number of
federal Web sites in the USA, he relied upon orientation, content, currency, accuracy, services
provided, quality of links, feedback mechanism, etc., as parameters of performance evaluation.
Stowers (1999) used yet another methodology of assessment: content analysis (as opposed to
user statistics such as log files, documents, downloads, etc.). Cullen and Houghton (2000)
conducted a study to assess the effectiveness of New Zealand government websites in
providing equitable access to government information. After evaluation of 52 government
websites, the following problems were identified:
Lack of clear purpose and failure to communicate the purpose to users

Lack of good contacts for feedback and for the update of information
Lack of good meta-data
The crux of these findings is that users have a clear understanding of good Web design and
what they expect of government agencies and officials. Users were found to have a well-
developed sense of their rights to access government information through this medium, and of
the accountability of government to meet their information needs. Hernon (1998) suggested
eleven How's relating to user expectations, priorities, information-seeking behavior, and
satisfaction with agency or program services. The questions are as follows:
1. How much? (total cost)

2. How many?
3. How economical? (Thrift is the focus, but can be applied to resources used such as the www.)
4. How prompt? (One example is turnaround time.)
5. How accurate?
6. How responsive? (Anticipation of customer expectations and demand, helpfulness, or
empathy.)
7. How well?
8. How valuable? (Value, as value-in-use of a service or willingness to pay.)
9. How reliable? (Dependability and consistency of the service which customers receive.)
10. How courteous?
11. How satisfied?
How much? includes what businesses refer to as market penetration, and How satisfied?
is linked to the concept of service quality, which focuses on the gap between customer
expectations and the service delivered.
Taken together, these measures, while indicating a general trend on concerns for evaluation,
do not provide any significant insight about current status of implementation of specific
functions. Noticing this limitation, Kaylor, Deshazo, and Eck (2001) suggested benchmark
implementation using a broad range of functional dimensions and assigning e-scores (as
opposed to metric benchmarking, which provides measures of performance like IT expenses as
a percentage of total revenue, percentage of downtime, CPU usage, etc.). E-scores suggest best
practice benchmarking where the focus is on performances rather than numerical measures of
performance. Hence, instead of evaluating matters such as the design or organization of small
city sites, they focused on the functions and services that cities typically provide with an eye
towards performance. Using these criteria, they assessed the degree to which functions and
services were Web-enabled using a 4-point scale.
Researchers have also talked about hard and soft measures. Costbenefit analysis and
benchmarking are some of the prominent hard measures, while identifying stages of
eGovernment and sociological parameters are cited as soft measures. Mingers (1997) dealt
quite at length about the underlying assumptions of hard measures like Operational Research
(OR) and Management Science (MS) methods. Wolstenholme (1999), however, felt that no
model is ever complete, and there is still need for further investigation. This research ought to
consider both quantitative and the relatively flexible qualitative methods of inquiry. Thus,
researchers Munro and Mingers (2002) suggested what is known as multimethodology-a
pluralistic approach of combining research methods.
Attempts have been made to examine the information technology (IT) capital investment
and capital stock to see how these investments are justified. The ratio of marginal benefits to
investment made is taken as a quantitative measure. In eGovernment, capital investment is
made mainly to improve the quality of services. Unlike the manufacturing sector where
payback period or return-to-investment can be easily calculated, in eGovernment projects, it
is quite difficult to make any straightforward calculation of return-on-investment. How does
one calculate the increased quality of services, faster decision making, better citizen
services, etc.?
Gupta and Jana (2003) have suggested a hierarchy of measures in which no single
measure is complete. First, there are values of information network (communication
network/data management/IS architecture). Then there are applications implemented to
produce results. And finally, there is the measure of use of IT-based applications at the
level of the individual user(s) in the organization. Through a case study of a municipality
corporation in India, it was demonstrated how a hierarchy of six levels can capture a
functional view of a government organization and develop a measure of performance of
eGovernment applications. Taking return-on-investment as measure for eGovernment
projects, it has been shown as to how a hierarchy of measures may capture the impact of
eGovernment applications.
The key trends and focuses emerging from research on performance assessment
measures of eGovernment as discussed above can be summarized in tabular form in
Table 1.
As may be seen from Table 1, each of the approaches seeks to measure performancebe it
of information systems in general or the management of Web or IT programs. Each approach is
embedded in certain specific rationale and perspective. The only commonality is that none of
Table 1
Key trends in and focus of research on performance assessment measures in eGovernment
Issue Authors Focus Comments
Information resource Caudle (1996), Beachboard Performance yardsticks Legislation as a key driver
management (IRM) and McClure (1996), Holden to relate performance with
(1996), Lewin and Sprehe, IRM strategy
(1996), Plocher (1996), Bertot Best practices Comparative performance
(1997), Beachboard (1997), analysis between private
Bertot and McClure (1997), sectors and federal agencies
McClure (1997), Fletcher Market penetration Robust framework to
(1997), Hernon(1998), and service quality capture vital aspects of IT
Westerbuck (2000) programs
Performance concerns Legislation as a key driver
Management of www Rosenfield and Marville (1998), Evaluation of websites Design aspect
Stowers (1999), Giuidice and Stages of Web Content more important
Goodman (1999), Cullen and development than statistics
Houghton (2000), Eschenfelder Parameters to develop a
(2001) website by stages
Under-sharing and
expectations of users as
key factors
Criteria of evaluation:
orientation, context,
currency, accuracy, quality,
navigability, and design
Bench-marking Spearman, Welch & Associates Numeric ratios Quantitative measures

Inc. (2000), Kaylor et al. (2001)
Cost benefit analysis Shinjo and Zhang (2003) Return on investment Difficult to measure
Hard and soft Wolstenholme (1999), Multi-methodology Can combine multiple

measures Munro and Mingers (2002), hierarchy of measures perspectives for performance
Gupta and Jana (2003) assessment but not being
specific, open to diverse
applications and aggregation
is difficult
them takes the domain of application as the essential context in its attempt to assess
performance. All the approaches seek to build certain criteria or areas of focus in broad terms,
but without any reference to the specific domain of applications.
Absence of domain context in performance assessment can lead to misinterpretation or to
misleading results. Any IT-enabled service must have a targeted domain in which to operate.
Without a reasonable interface with that domain, any evaluation, however sound its
methodology, may prove inadequate. Whatever hard, soft, or multi-methodology approach one
uses, the underlying rigor or methodological nuances ipso facto cannot always make the
research relevant. eGovernance applications by themselves do not constitute the essence of
governance. The basic context which makes eGovernment applications meaningful and
relevant is governance in the given domainthe penultimate contextand eGovernment
applications should be evaluated in this context.
From this perspective, performance assessment in eGovernment, should evaluated as a loop
relating the impact of eGovernment applications to their implications for governance. This
paper seeks to demonstrate as to how domain-specific parameters can guide towards more
meaningful evaluation as an indicator of performance of eGovernment applications. From a
brief but concise review of literature on performance assessment of eGovernment programs, it
is clear that there is a research gap in advocating a domain-centric or context-oriented approach
to evaluate eGovernment programs. The basic research concern of this paper is thus to attempt
to integrate domain-centric concerns with the parameters of evaluation of eGovernment
applications and thereby try to fill an evident research gap. The thesis of this research is that
context-centered performance assessment can better serve to relate eGovernment applications
in a given domain with their impact on the performance at ground level. A government service
provider must be able to substantiate in terms of certain context-specific parameters as to how
much or to what extent or in which way its eGovernment endeavors have helped it to
better serve both external and internal customers. A context view of performance assessment
has additional benefit from the standpoint of policy implications. By delineating the precise
impact of eGovernment programs on various facets of performance, it can guide policy makers
in the right direction to re-design the programs and re-assess their impact on performance.
From the above, it will be evident that the domain and context are central to eGovernment
performance assessment. The context being inexorably imbedded in the domain, it is the domain
and its mandated duties and responsibilities, which will determine the exact nature of performance
indicators. If, for example, the domain has no mandated role to provide direct services to the
citizens, an internal focus will yield more successful performance parameters. On the other hand,
if the domain has mandated responsibility to provide direct services to the citizens, a focus on
external factors will better determine performance parameters. If the mandated responsibilities
call for both external and internal focus, performance parameters will be of both types.
2. The Indian Police Administration: The domain
For the purpose of this study, the domain chosen is the Indian Police Administration and
performance indicators will be developed from its activities. The following section deliberates
upon the chosen domain, its structure, mandated responsibilities, and evolving role. The
discussion here serves two clear purposes. First, to familiarize the readers with the Indian
Police as a specific domain of governance, its origin and evolution over time, and various
issues relevant for understanding performance aspects of this domain. The second objective is
somewhat subtle in the sense that one must have an adequate feel as to the purpose, objectives,
obligations of the specific domain of governance so that the context with its myriad nuances
hard and soft are quite evident. This kind of knowledge of domain of governance will help
the reader to appreciate the impact eGovernment applications have in regard to their ultimate
context of governance.
The Indian Police were originally created out of colonial interests. India was under the
British Rule when, in 1861, the Indian Police Act was enacted. The British were yet to
recuperate from the injuries inflicted by the episode in the struggle for freedom known as the
Sepoy Mutiny. Their purpose was to create police administration as a punitive arm of the state.
One hundred and forty-three years later, the Indian Police are still struggling to change their
colonial image.
There is no national police force in India. The constitution establishes the individual state
governments as superintendent over state police forces. The head of the police force in the state
is the Director General of Police (DGP), who is responsible to the state government for the
administration of the police force in the state and for advising the government on police
matters.
States are divided territorially into administrative districts. 1 An officer of the rank of Senior
Superintendent of Police (SSP) or Superintendent of Police (SP) heads the district police force
(District Police Chiefs). He or she is assisted by the Additional Superintendent of Police
(ASP). A group of districts form a range, which is looked after by a Deputy Inspector General
of Police (DIGP). Some States have zones comprising two or more ranges, under the charge of
an Inspector General of Police (IGP).
Every district is divided into subdivisions. A subdivision is under the charge of an
Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) or Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP). Every
subdivision is further divided into a number of police stations, the number depending on the
geographic size of the subdivision, the population, and the volume of crime. In some states,
there are police circles between the police station and the subdivisioneach circle headed
generally by the Inspector of Police. The State Police structure can generally be portrayed as
Fig. 2.
Police stations are the windows for public interface and for the delivery of services, and
therefore the most important aspect of the Indian Police forces from both organizational and
functional standpoints. These are the police organizational units closest to the citizens. A
common citizen cannot approach the district police chief with ordinary complaints, but must
approach through the local connection. Therefore, the public expects more from and relies
heavily upon the neighborhood police station. At times, their needs are extremely demanding.
Police stations are at the hub of all policing activities. All important operational duties be it
1
A district is a geographical unit. District Police Forces usually have an average strength of 1000 officers and
men.
Fig. 2. State police structure [hereafter these levels will be referred for identification].
duties to the state or services to other government departments or citizens are executed and
coordinated through police stations.
Police researchers in India (Krishnamorthy, 2003) have discovered an expanding role of
police globally as well as in India. This can be best portrayed as following:
Existing police goals
1. Prevention and detection of crime

2. Maintenance of law and order
3. Help prosecution strengthen the criminal justice system
4. Implementation of social justice legislation
5. Enforcement of non-criminal codes including

5.1 Background checks
5.2 Verifications
5.3 Fire and rescue activities
5.4 Traffic control
5.5 Conflict Resolution
Emerging police goals
Police goals are being redefined to meet changing needs. New (or newly emphasized) goals
include community counseling, senior citizen security, juvenile crime prevention, prevention
of crimes against women, drug abuse and trafficking, cyber crime, and emergency and rescue
services. Other key areas include:
Countering challenges posed by criminals using modern technology

Anti-terrorism measures (both at home and abroad)
Improving intelligence collection
Provide an equitable administration of law
Special security details for heads-of-state and VIPs
Response time
This is best understood through the phrase, Justice delayed is justice denied. Timely
response with preventative or proactive measures and prompt investigation and apprehension
of criminals builds public confidence. While the pressure to perform in a timely manner may
add to the level of stress police officers experience, timely response is almost as critical to
police work as successful performance. Public trust is especially important if we take into
account the low ratio of police to general population. In light of these circumstances, the
following recommendations should be considered:
That a continuous and reliable visible presence is effective

That man-hours may need to be shifted in response to changing crime patterns
That the public should be made aware of the substantial-but-less visible time commitment
police make
Traditional anti-crime activities are relatively confidential in nature and often have internal
security connotations associated with them. For these reasons, there is necessarily much less
citizen interface with the police concerning these activities. The concept of proactive policing,
however, is gaining popularity around the globe. This includes specific emphasis on problem-
solving activities (Chaudhary, 2003) including the systematic application of analysis to calls
for police service. It anticipates that there are underlying circumstances and situations which
may increase crime, and that by modifying these conditions crime may be correspondingly
reduced. The challenge is to conceive of effective responses by venturing beyond traditional
police practices. Community policing is thus based on the concept that working partnerships
between the police and community can effectively contribute to reducing crime and promoting
security. The goals go beyond basic apprehension of criminals and reaches out to the needs of
the community, attacking the root causes of crime and making police integration into the
community an end, rather than a means, of effective policing.
Indian Police are also experiencing changes associated with technological advancements,
and the increasing sophistication in criminal activity has shaken the otherwise conventional
way of policing in India. Researchers (Amarnathan, 2003; Krishnamorthy, 2003) have
described a new phenomenon called criminal cosmopolitanism, which is largely attributed to
the access criminals now have to modern technology. It becomes therefore imperative that
police remain ahead law-breakers in the race to acquire and master modern technologies. The
evolving role is also identified as growing along the lines of police as service provider (Jha,
2002). In light of these developments, the transition of the Indian Police can be portrayed as in
Table 2.
Table 2
Service provider model of police
Previous Current
Punitive Arm of the StateBrute Force A key organ of public administration coexisting with human
(control of rallies and demonstrations, rights activists and increasing public awareness and demands
political vendetta, violent and/or for accountability.
physically or psychologically New role includes:
coercive interrogation methods Emphasis on the use of scientific tools and methods
employed in criminal investigations (lie detector, narco,a and psychological analysis)
Upholding and respecting rule of law
Protection of the weak
Prevention of public abuses
Reactive policing Pro-active policing:

(response to reported incidents) Use of intelligence gathering
Prevention of crime
Community policing (availability of police liaisons)
Trained and dedicated police services for tourists
Assistance to senior citizens and persons with disabilities
Background verifications
Disaster and rescue preparedness
Duties to the state (government first) Duties to the citizen:

Individual (example: passport verification)
Community (example: Deployment for Events/Religious
Places/Cultural Functions; police community liaisons;
services to seniors, tourists, and persons with disabilities)
Other government departments
(example: Character verification)
Rescue operations
a
Drugs are administered to the suspect to lower his or her ability to lie or evade questions.
India is a vast country of 3.29 million square kilometers (about 1/3 the landmass of the US)
but with a population of one billion (about 1/6 of the world's population). It has a police force
of about 1.5 million. The past 20 years has seen an enormous increase in crime. Traditional
anti-crime police activity has become has become increasingly difficult and less effective.
Police outreach and involvement in the community can exert a kind of influence which may
result in crime prevention as the community realizes the value of such interventions. This,
then, makes police work easier. For the police, such proactive activities are less rigorous and
more satisfying. Thus community policing activities create a larger citizen interface than
traditional crime-related activities.
3. Performance assessment in the Indian Police
At present, Indian Police still follow the age-old practice of performance review through
inspections and meetings. The format of these methods has not changed much. Some of the
major heads of inspection, the indicators they rely on, the performance they purportedly check,
and their inherent limitations and deficiencies are listed in Table 3.
Table 3
Existing performance indicators
Heads Indicators Performance Limitations
Parade Turn out and drill Morale, discipline, and Ritualistic
knowledge of weapons
Kit (uniform and Quality and availability Efficiency of district line Procedural
equipment) office and maintenance of
government property by the
individual officers
Interview Complaints (including Professional standard and
Habitual
hours and areas of morale
assignment)
Duty roster Equality in assignments Manpower utilization Habitual
and working conditions
Station diary and other Maintenance Adherence to legal procedure Habitual, open to
registers manipulation
Malkhana (secure storage Maintenance Handling of government Format oriented
for seized items) property and adherence
to procedure
Records of seized items Observation The general environment Habitual
of the police station
Inspection reports Number of inspections Prevention of crime Lack of transparency,
lack of credibility
Bad character reports Number of checks Prevention of crime Useful but no scientific
data management
Crime registers Number and type Incidence and detection Statistical results; subject
of crimes, their of crime to error, deception,
detection rate and manipulation
(continued on next page)
Table 3 (continued)
Heads Indicators Performance Limitations
Unnatural death Inquest reports Seriousness with which they Useful but often routine
have been dealt and detection
of foul play, if any
Process register Types of summons Sincerity and efforts in Habitual, bad management
and warrants and process of court orders
their service
Various crime registers Ratios Prevention and detection Statistical, open to
of crime manipulation
Constable notebooks Type of entries made Collection of intelligence and Sporadic
dissemination of information
Missing person register Efforts made and persons Detection of crime and Routine procedural
traced expectation of society
Petition register Number of petitions Level of public grievance Statistical, lacks credibility
received and their and their disposal
disposal
Verification register Number of intimations Promptness, prevention Statistical, open to
received and their of crime manipulation
disposal
Pending investigations Length of time in process Promptness in investigation Emphasis is on number
not quality of disposal
Final reports Number of first Failure in detection Tendency to downplay
information report
(first information report)
Criminal penal code cases Number of cases Preventive action Statistical
Summons and warrants Number, type, and Promptness in producing Unsystematic, ad hoc
disposal accused and witnesses
Source: Bureau of Police Research and Development, New Delhi (2002).
A scrutiny of these areas of performance makes clear that these indicators are procedural in
nature; that the primary focus is on format, statistics, and routines which have a tendency to
become habitual or ritualistic. There is hardly any measure of effectiveness. There is hardly
any evaluation of the handling a crime, disaster, or public complaints. There is a total absence
of measure of public satisfaction or public accountability by the police. There is no indicator of
time or cost management.
Police research organizations in India, like the Bureau of Police Research and Development
(BPR&D), are engaged with identifying broad areas of primary tasks performed by the police
which can help develop performance indices in more precise terms and more relevant for
understanding police performance. Some of these areas and corresponding parameters are
discussed in the following paragraphs (BPR&D 2002).
1. Call Management may include reaction time, response, visibility, and accessibility to all
sections of public. Possible indicators could be number of incidents per 100 police officers,
number of 100/101 (Police Control Room or Helpline) calls received, time allowed for
answering 100/101 calls, percentage of 100/101 calls answered within that target, number
of such incidents, time for responding to such incidents, percentage of responses to such
incidents within the target time, percentage of public satisfaction with police action in
response to 100/101 calls, percentage of people satisfied with service received at the police
station. All these indicators tend to represent both internal efficiency and public satisfaction
and combine hard and soft measures.
2. Public Order Management may include number of incidents, types of incidents, number of
complaints or protests against police, public property saved, and satisfactory review of the
way the incidents were handled. These measures again represent internal efficiency more
explicitly and public satisfaction indirectly.
3. Crime Management may include detection and prevention of crime and may represent
promptness in investigation, conviction rate, reduction in preventable crimes like house
breaking, assault, trafficking in drug and liquor, other vice crime, drunken driving,
crime by domestic help, and accidents. Possible indicators could be number of searches
per 1000 population, percentage of Final Reports versus charge-sheets filed, percentage
of charge-sheets sent within time limits, number of persons arrested for cognizable
offences per 100 police officers (i.e., a cognizable offense is one in which the perpetrator
may be arrested without a warrant), percentage of charge-sheeted persons who were
arrested, percentage of persons arrested for cognizable offences charge-sheeted, number
of recorded crimes, total crimes per 1000 population, percentage of victims satisfied with
police service at the time of initial response to report of violent crime, etc. All these
measures have direct bearing on internal efficiency as well as public satisfaction.
4. Traffic Management may include prevention of accidents, amount of fines levied, public
educational activities, enforcing traffic rules, and ensuring the orderly flow of traffic.
Illustrative example of indicators in this area could be number of traffic offences per 100 police
officers/traffic wardens, percentage of traffic offences dealt with by compounding, number of
breath tests administered, number of road traffic accidents involving death or personal injury,
percentage of such accidents in which at least one driver tested positive for alcohol, percentage
of satisfaction expressed by victims of road accidents with police service at the scene.
5. Handling of Arrested Persons (Custody Management), particularly cases involving women
and children, needs to be included in the areas of police performance evaluated. Possible
indications could be number of complaints recorded from or on behalf of persons in
custody, number of such complaints substantiated, number of such complaints resolved to
mutual satisfaction, number of private cases against police officers, percentage personnel
held guilty by the courts, number of offenses committed against those held in custody and
the details of their accusations, etc.
6. Human Resource Management includes physical and emotional health of personnel, morale
of the men, pride in uniform, training, professionalism and gender equality.
7. Cost Management may include evaluation of the cost of each component of policing such as
investigation, public order management, traffic management, etc. Illustrative indicators
could be number of working days lost through sickness per police officer, number of police
officers available for ordinary duty per 1000 population, net expenditure on police per head
of population, other costs, etc. These are essentially hard measures of service and not
measures of public satisfaction.
8. Complaints Management includes the types of complaints lodged against police, accessibility
for complaint to all sections of society, response to complaints, and transparency in handling
complaints. Possible indicators could be number of complaints recorded, number of such
complaints substantiated, number of such complaints resolved to mutual satisfaction.
9. Public Satisfaction may include victimization-survey and image of police in public.
Community relations can be an important area, as well, including volume of community
participation in police work, education of the public, and public appreciation of police activity.
The points discussed above provide a broad range of perspectives on police governance which
through eGovernment applications might be measured in a more relevant and meaningful
fashion. These trends suggest the following as areas of concern in police governance:
Internal Efficiency as indicated by parameters under Call Management, Crime Manage-

ment, Complaint Management, etc.
Public Satisfaction as indicated by parameters under Public Order Management, Custody
Management, Public Satisfaction, etc.
Employee Satisfaction as indicated by parameters under Human Resources, etc.
eGovernance as an intervention strategy will have high stake in terms of its acceptability to
policemen at all levels. Employees' satisfaction is perceived to be a key driver enabling
eGovernance to penetrate and progress in a domain which is generally accepted as not
embracing change enthusiastically.
3.1. Derivation of performance indicators
We now propose to derive specific indicators of performance under each of the above three
categories. In identifying these parameters, we rely primarily on emerging trends and on input
from senior police officers having field experience at the levels of Senior Superintendent of
Police and Superintendent of Police. Input was obtained from these officers by means of a
questionnaire. The first version of the questionnaire identifying performance parameters was
circulated to a limited number of respondents as a pilot seeking specific response as to whether
the questionnaire was capable of eliciting the intended information. Respondents' suggestions
for amendments were carefully evaluated and, where useful, were incorporated in later versions
of the questionnaire. Thus, the following parameters were identified:
Internal efficiency
1. Police time commitment measured as time per job. Shorter time per job means relatively
higher efficiency in completing tasks
2. Ratio of number of the policemen per crime registered, solved, or prevented (this could be
used as an indicator of internal efficiency and public satisfaction)
3. Time spent completing formalities such as collection of evidence and filing prosecution
documents
4. Number of cases prosecuted successfully (and/or ratio of successful to unsuccessful

prosecution) in court
5. Number of complaints of inaction lodged against police per total units of time
Public satisfaction
1. Better cooperation from and interaction with the public

2. Accessibility and transparency of operations
3. Number of adverse media reports about police action (or inaction)
Employee satisfaction
1. Number of police and staff reporting sick

2. Number of police and staff applying for leave
3. Number of police and staff filing grievances
4. Number of disciplinary cases reported
5. Number of innovative suggestions coming from police personnel
The final performance indicators as used in the questionnaire are summarized in Table 4.
3.2. Tying of performance indicators to eGovernment
There are two broad effects of eGovernment reported in current research (Hwang et al.,
1999). Although not a matter of either/or, internal effects generally refer to organizational work
processes and flows. These effects include networking, horizontalization (integration across
subunits), molecularization (empowerment of subunits), electronic data interchange, the
paperless office, process redesign, one-stop/non-stop operation, etc. External effects, on the
other hand, include accessibility, transparency, electronic service delivery, greater customer
satisfaction, community empowerment, etc.
It is prudent to consider yet another aspect of eGovernment, in the absence of which neither
internal nor external effect can manifest in full. This third aspect may be called acceptance
effects and refers to acceptance of eGovernment applications within the organization (Mitra,
2004). They might be described as change management issues and could include employee
willingness to change, overall effort, and rate of progress in developing IT skill within the
organization, openness, etc.
These three eGovernment windows may be related to three dimensions of police
performance. Fig. 3 illustrates which eGovernment window will drive which dimension of
performance.
More eGovernment applications leading to enhanced internal effects of eGovernment
would drive internal efficiency, impacting those measures bearing on internal efficiency.
Similarly, more external effects would lead to higher public satisfaction impacting those
measures bearing on public satisfaction. Lastly, higher acceptance effects would lead to
higher employees' satisfaction impacting on measures relevant for employees' satisfaction.
Table 4
Performance indicators of police governance
Dimensions of Indices
performance
Internal Efficiency The extent of police time commitment in crime jobs
Difference in police time per case
Difference in manpower requirements
Change in time commitment for non-crime jobs
Rates of crime recorded per policeman
The rate of crime solved per policeman
The rate of crime prevented per policeman
Time taken for arresting the criminals
Time taken in collecting evidences
Time taken in filing prosecution documents
The type and rate of disposal of criminal cases in courts
The number of public complaints against non-action by the police
Employee Satisfaction Number of police personnel reporting sick

Number of police personnel applying for leave on one ground or other
Number of police personnel reporting to orderly room with their grievance
Number of police personnel filing for redress of grievance
Number of disciplinary cases initiated against police personnel
Number of police personnel seeking transfer from one place to other
Extent of co-ordination and cooperation in peer groups
Number of innovative suggestions coming from subordinate staff on all aspects of
policing
Public Satisfaction Greater interaction with the people

Better responses from the people
Improved community policing
Greater accessibility to the police by the weaker or marginalized segments of society
Reduction in adverse media reports against the police
Improvement in police image
3.3. Administering the questionnaire
The respondents were requested to indicate by means of a 5-point scale (five being high and
one meaning none) the impact of eGovernment applications on performance as explained in
Fig. 3. Performance measures and corresponding eGovernment windows.

Table 5
Crime and non-crime functions
Crime applications Non-crime applications
Registration of complaint status of a Addresses of police stations and senior police officers
complaint
Crime analysis Police updates
Criminal detection Response to a query
Maintaining law and order Background and character verification for domestic help, tenants,
employees, etc.
Public security Police clearance
Crime prevention Educating programs about offences, offenders, modus operandi of
criminals, etc.
Police control room Help line
Disposal of case properties Facilitation centers
Preparation of evidence
Collection of intelligence
Testimony in court
Table 4. The respondents were District Police Chiefs at the rank of Senior Superintendent of
Police or Superintendent of Police (P5 and P6 in Fig. 1). The choice of District Police Chiefs
was made because of their important positions in the police hierarchy and because they are the
main functionaries through which all police projects are executed. As such, Senior
Superintendents and Superintendents of Police were considered most likely to have access
to or experience with relevant information.
To better connect performance indicators and windows of eGovernance, it was imperative
that major police functions be clearly defined. Two broad categories of police functions were
first delineated, namely, crime and non-crime police functions. The internal work processes for
criminal investigation and related activities, being confidential in nature, have little or no
public interface and as such will have primary bearing on internal efficiency. Non-criminally
related activities have higher public interface and as such will have bearing on external effects,
thereby contribution to public satisfaction. The objective behind separating two categories was
to see the impact of eGovernment applications in both categories of police functions on all
three dimensions and to see if there is a differential impact. Table 5 gives detailed classification
of two types of police functions.
Respondents' assessment on impact of eGovernment applications both in crime and non-
crime functions on each of the measures of performance was captures in a 5-point scale
(5 = very high (VH); 4 = high (H); 3 = low (L); 2 = very low (VL); 1 = none).
4. Results and discussion
Pearson correlation coefficients were computed to establish the relationship between the
impact of eGovernment applications in crime, non-crime, and total applications on all three
dimensions of performance as represented by a set of indicators for each. The results are
depicted in Table 6.
On the 5-point scale, the respondents rated the impact of eGovernment applications on
internal efficiency as very little, and there was no significant correlation found between
internal efficiency and eGovernment applications in either of the three facets of police
administration investigated. These findings themselves, however, have important implications.
They may represent that eGovernment applications (and their effects) are not well understood
at the command level of the police force. Or they may indicate that existing eGovernment
applications are not adequate for improving internal efficiency. Yet another reason could be
that eGovernment applications alone cannot improve internal efficiency. And there might be
many more factors that, in conjunction with eGovernment applications, could improve internal
efficiency.
Correlations between eGovernment's impact on employees satisfaction in all areas were
found to be positive and statistically significant. This finding, too, has important implications.
eGovernment applications have not created any adverse impact on employees' satisfaction.
Rather, a positive significant correlation indicates that even greater use of eGovernment
applications would lead to greater satisfaction among the work force.
The correlation between the impact on public satisfaction and eGovernment applications
was also found to be positive and significant. An interesting finding is that the correlation
coefficient between impact on public satisfaction and crime applications is higher than that
between public satisfaction and non-crime application. This appears paradoxical and
surprising, as the non-crime applications have higher citizen services contents than crime
application, and therefore it was logical to presume that the higher the eGovernment
application in non-crime functions of police, the higher would be the positive degree of
association in crime functions, as well. The statistical findings, on the other hand, show
higher correlation between public satisfaction and eGovernment applications in crime
functions. A probable interpretation could be that between the two areas of applications,
extent of non-crime functions of police is still lower than that of crime application and not
as well known to the public, which continues to associate police performance primarily with
crime and crime-related issues. An important implication of this is that crime applications
areas are of greater importance when it comes to public satisfaction. Police performance is
still evaluated by its ability to contain and prevent crime and if eGovernment applications
enhance police performance in prevention and solving crimes, it should impact public
satisfaction significantly. For example, if eGovernment applications enable the police to
Table 6
Correlation between impact on performance and eGovernment applications (N = 156)
Indicators of impact on performance Crime applications Non-crime applications Total applications
Internal Efficiency 0.04 0.02 0.03
Employees Satisfaction 0.17 0.18 0.18
Public Satisfaction 0.22 0.16 0.20
Significant at 0.05 level.
arrest criminals quickly, it would certainly bring higher public appreciation. A mobile police
control room reaching the crime spot quickly makes the public happy. Notwithstanding
these facts, the significant positive correlation between eGovernment applications in non-
crime areas and public satisfaction highlights the need for incorporating more citizen
services (non-crime functions) in eGovernment endeavors.
It is now relevant to see if eGovernment applications have tended to contribute to the impact
on performance. This is accomplished by way of a regression analysis. The results are depicted
in Tables 7 and 8.
eGovernment applications have not been found to contribute significantly to internal
efficiency. This finding, coupled with earlier finding of insignificant correlation between
the two, conclusively proves that, in reality, internal efficiency has hardly been impacted by
police eGovernance. This has far-reaching implications. At present, Indian Police make
little use of existing technology. This minimal use of eGovernment applications in key
organizational units (such as police stations), the limited scope of available software,
and the low IT skill of policemen at the field level are some of the issues which need
to be addressed if policymakers are serious about enhancing internal efficiency through
eGovernment.
eGovernment applications in non-crime functions have been found to contribute to
employee satisfaction, but not those of crime functions. The reason for applications in non-
crime functions alone contributing to employees' satisfaction could be that non-crime jobs, by
definition, have greater direct citizen interface and services connotations than crime functions.
eGovernment applications in those areas generate a sense of directly providing citizen
services. For employees, these kinds of service-oriented functions and contributions are more
gratifying than engaging in crime detection, investigation, or analysis. It can be inferred that by
Table 7
Determinant of employee satisfaction by eGovernment applications in crime and non-crime areas (N = 156)
Independent variable Dependent variable: impact on employees satisfaction
Beta Simpler t value
Application areas: Non-crime 0.18 0.18 2.85
Multiple R = 0.18
R square = 0.03
Table 8
Determinant of public satisfaction by eGovernment applications in crime and non-crime areas (N = 156)
Independent variable Dependent variable: impact on public satisfaction
Beta Simple r t value
Application areas: Crime 0.22 0.22 2.84
Multiple R = 0.22
R square = 0.05
greater eGovernment applications in non-crime areas, the police administration can bring
higher level of employees' satisfaction.
eGovernment applications in crime function services appear to contribute to public
satisfaction. Earlier, public satisfaction was found to be positively correlated (significant) with
eGovernment applications in both crime and non-crime police functions. But the findings of
regression do not establish the importance of eGovernment applications in non-crime
functions as a determinant public satisfaction. A plausible explanation is that non-crime role of
police is not very well understood by the general public. People in India generally associate
police presence with a crime or criminal situation. A routine visit of a beat constable is
suspected to be a crime-related inquiry. A murder receives much more public attention than an
on-line police clearance scheme.
5. Synthesis and recommendations
These findings can lead us to infer a number of important guiding anchors for policy
formulations. Although the research does not establish any significant correlation between
police eGovernance in India and internal efficiency, the most plausible explanation could be
that the limited range of eGovernment applications and consequent limited use by police
personnel combine to suppress any significant impact eGovernment applications might have
on internal efficiency. Despite the advent of eGovernance (mostly in areas of internal focus,
such as crime applications, office management, etc.), the inability of these applications to
create any significant impact on internal efficiency is a matter of serious policy implications.
The probable policy thrust would be to expedite the extent of penetration of eGovernance
applications in all police functionsspecifically in major police internal work processes.
Since police stations are key organizational units for all kinds of police activities and public
service, top priority should be accorded to these institutions in providing hardware,
software, networking, training, etc. While these IT infrastructural aspects enhance the
capability to overhaul the service delivery apparatus, its effective use is possible only by
those policemen who are trained to have adequate IT skills. In another study by the authors
(Mitra & Gupta, 2007), it was found that there is a significant correlation between the IT
skills of police personnel and the successful employment of eGovernment applications.
Since crime investigations are performed mostly by Inspectors, Subinspectors, and Assistant
Subinspectors, the IT skills of these officers in particular will have a direct bearing on
eGovernment applications in crime areas.
Better crime management (which is more an internal focus for the domain of inquiry)
would add to public satisfaction, as statistical findings have substantiated. Although
statistical findings did not establish any causal relation between eGovernance applications
and internal efficiency, statistical findings did prove that eGovernance applications as
existing in present form differ significantly when it comes to eGovernance application areas
in crime and non-crime functions (paired t test). The mean value of crime applications areas
of eGovernance was found to be higher than that of non-crime applications areas. The higher
mean value of crime application areas of eGovernance with t value (significant at 0.01 level)
proved that crime applications areas of eGovernance are more dominant than those in non-
crime functions. Thus, despite a higher stress on eGovernance application in crime functions
(in the existing applications scenario), lack of any significant relations between eGovernance
applications in crime functions and internal efficiency call for serious policy deliberations
including a review of the adequacy of existing crime software. The Crime Criminal
Information System (CCIS), the flagship police crime software used across India, is basically
aimed at creating computerized storage, analysis, and retrieval of criminal records. Though
the CCIS brought internet technology to police stations for the first time, certain limitations,
like heavy emphasis on data thresholding (data-centric modules), the lack of analytical
capability (such as a Decision Support System), the absence of vernacular interface (local
language interface), and being essentially a top-down system, it could not be very useful at
the ground level.
There are other factors needing consideration, as well. Policing, by definition, is a highly
networked activity. Policemen, in the course of investigation, need to interact with a vide range
of sources. A secure electronic network connection could enhance police efficiency in both
crime and non-crime functions. Research findings (Mitra, 2004) have shown that IT skill of
policemen, system security, network interconnectivity, and organizational acceptability of IT-
based work processes all contribute significantly to proliferation of eGovernance police
activities both in crime and non-crime functions. The following factors emerged as most
important for developing widespread police eGovernance applications:
Computer training
Availability of customized software
Departmental-level support and encouragement in computer use
Availability of computers and peripheral
Court acceptance of IT work processes
Use of vernacular language in computer related work
System security
Clear delineation of areas of application
Authorization by senior officers for specific work processes
The above findings can provide sound policy anchors in laying a road map to push the
momentum of police eGovernance to have significant impact on performance. The policy
anchors can be broadly defined as
A. Penetration of hardware up to police stations-the key police organizations

B. Delineation of application areas which have immediate significant for police functions and
customization of softwares with Decision Support System (DSS) backup to best serve these
purposes
C. To create a supportive environment which would include IT skill formation, acceptability
of IT across the organization, technological support by way of network connectivity,
system security, etc.
While enhanced eGovernance applications in crime functions would likely impact internal
efficiency in positive sense, it could contribute to public satisfaction as well. In non-crime
applications, although the extent of domain is less than that of crime applications, the statistical
findings confirm that eGovernance can contribute significantly to employee satisfaction. This
finding is interesting in that it is generally believed that policemen, by virtue of their
preoccupation with crime, often prefer methods which conceal their operations and methods,
and hence are unlikely to opt for technologies which have larger citizen interface (and
accountability). This supposition is nullified by the findings that, to policemen, non-crime
functions (which by definition have larger interface with the people) are more satisfying. Thus,
for policymakers, it is a matter of leveraging the situation by enhancing the spectrum of non-
crime services. Community Policing as an alternative intervention strategy can be expanded
and technologically enhanced. The change-management process in such situation should
ideally be leadership driven.
6. Concluding remarks
As mentioned at the beginning, performance assessment of eGovernment applications must

be such that they can bring out an in-depth insight on the implications of eGovernment
applications for governance. These must be able to serve the underlying purpose, that is, on
how eGovernment applications are capable of impacting governance, the penultimate context
which makes eGovernment applications more meaningful. The basic proposition of this paper
was that performance is more of a loop to relate eGovernment with governance. Each domain
of governance, having regards to its origin; evolution; structural; and functional arrangements,
objectives, and obligations would have some indicators and measures which would represent
some dimension of governance in that domain. Researchers need to delineate those measures
carefully and then identify the specific eGovernment window which would drive the specified
performance. Once an appropriate fit between the two is achieved, it would serve not merely a
performance assessment of eGovernment, but to relate the two in much more meaningful way.
In the present analysis, where performance of eGovernance applications is sought to be
measured in terms of certain domain-centric parameters, it is evident that such an approach to
performance measurement is capable of bringing out myriad implications of eGovernance
applications for the given domain of governance and thus can tie the twoeGovernance and
governance, in much more meaningful ways, thereby, aiding policy makers to decide the
precise direction of efforts needed.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to Bureau of Police and Research Development (BPRD) and the
State Police Administrations of India for all assistance received for the study. They also
acknowledge the support of Melvin Sterne (Associate Editor at Government Information
Quarterly) and Amitabh Ojha (Research Scholar at IT Delhi) in correcting errors and stylish
aspects of the paper.
References
Amarnathan, L. C. (2003, April-June). Technological advancement: Implications for crime. The Indian Police Journal.
Beachboard, J. C. (1997). Assessing the information technology management reform act from a bureau's
perspective. Government Information Quarterly, 14(3), 291311.
Beachboard, J. C., & McClure, C. R. (1996). Managing federal information technology: Conflicting policies and
competing philosophies. Government Information Quarterly, 13(1), 1533.
Bertot, J. C. (1997). The impact of federal IRM on agency missions: Findings, issues, and recommendations.
Government Information Quarterly, 14(3), 221334.
Bertot, J. C., & McClure, C. R. (1997). Key issues affecting the development of federal IRM: A view from the
trenches. Government Information Quarterly, 14(3), 271290.
Caudle, S. L. (1996). Strategic information resource management: Best practices. Government Information
Quarterly, 13(1), 8397.
Chaudhary, J. N. (2003, JulySeptember). Police in United States: Contemporary issues. The Indian Police
Journal, 173179.
Cullen, R., & Houghton, C. (2000). Democracy on-line: An assessment of New Zealand government websites.
Eschenfelder, K. R., Beachboard, J. C., Wyman, S. K., & McClure, C. R. (2001). A social analysis of web content
management. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and
Technology. Washington DC: ASIST.
Fletcher, P. D. (1997). Local governments and IRM: Policy emerging from practice. Government Information
Quarterly, 14(3), 313324.
Giuidice, M., & Goodman, S. (1999). Where the front and backend meet: Collaborations between designers and
engineers presentation at CNET Builder. Com Live Conference, December 711, 1999.
Gupta, M. P., & Jana, D. (2003). E-government evaluation: A framework and case study. Government Information
Quarterly, 20(4), 365387.
Gupta, M. P., Kumar, P., & Bhattacharya, J. (2004). Government online: Opportunities & challenges. New Delhi:
Tata McGraw-Hill.
Hernon, P. (1998). Government of the Web: A Comparison between the United States and New Zealand.
Holden, S. H. (1996). Managing information technology in the federal government: Assessing the development and
application of agency-wide policies. Government Information Quarterly, 13(1), 6582.
Hwang, C. J., & Chao, Mei-Hui (2001). Managing WWW in public administration: Uses and misuses. Government
Information Quarterly, 18(4), 357373.
Hwang, Sung-Don, Choi, Y., & Myeong, Seung-Hwan (1999). Electronic Governance in South Korea, Conceptual
Problems. Government Information Quarterly, 16(3), 277285.
Jha, S. K. (2002). Delivery of services by the police: Quality and cost (pp. 2742). A paper presentation at XXXIV
Indian Police Congress, the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, November 21st to 23rd.
Kaylor, C., Deshazo, R., & Eck, D. V. (2001). Gauging e-government: A report on implementing Service among
American cities. Government Information Quarterly, 18(4), 293307.
Krishnamorthy, S. (2003). Preparing the Indian Police for 21st Century. Bangalore, India: Puliani and Puliani.
Lan, Z., & Falcone, S. (1997). Factors influencing Internet USP-A policy model for electronic government
information provisions. Journal of Government Information, 24(4), 251257.
Lewin, K., & Sprehe, J. T. (1996). Information management in federal agencies: The neglected piece of the IRM
puzzle. Government Information Quarterly, 13(1), 5163.
McClure, C. L. (1997). Improving federal performance in the information era: The Information Technology
Management Reforms Act of 1996. Government Information Quarterly, 14(3), 255269.
Mingers, J. (1997). Towards critical pluralism. In J. Mingers, & A. Gill (Eds.), Multimethodology: Theory and
practice of combining management science methodologies (pp. 407440). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Mitra, R. K. (2004). Issues and challenges of E-governance in Indian Police: A study. PhD thesis, Indian Institute
of Technology, Delhi.
Mitra, R. K., & Gupta, M. P. (2007). Analysis of issues of e-government in Indian Police. Electronic Government,
an International Journal, 4, 97125.
Munro, I., & Mingers, J. (2002). The use of Multimethodology in practice-results of a survey of practitioners.
Journal of Operations Research Society, 50, 422428.
Plocher, D. (1996). The paperwork reduction act of 1995: A second chance for information resources management.
Rosenfield, L., & Marville, P. (1998). Information architecture for the World Wide Web. Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly.
Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Shinjo, K., & Zhang, X. (2003). Productivity analysis of capital stock: The USAJapan comparison. Journal of
Japanese International Economics, 17(1), 81100.
Stowers, G. N. L. (1999). Becoming cyberactive: State and governments on the World Wide Web. Government
Westerbuck, L. K. (2000). Towards best practices for strategic information technology management. Government
Wolstenholme, E. F. (1999). Qualitative versus quantitative modeling: The evolving balance. Journal of the
Operation Research Society, 50, 422428.

A Contextual Perspective of Performance Assessment in EGovernment A Study of Indian Police Administration 2008 Government Information Quarterly

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Contextual Perspective of Performance Assessment in EGovernment A Study of Indian Police Administration 2008 Government Information Quarterly

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Available online at www.sciencedirect.

Government Information Quarterly 25 (2008) 278 302

A contextual perspective of performance assessment in

There is considerable research work on the performance assessment of eGovernment projects,

Keywords: eGovernment; Performance; Assessment; Police administration; India

Researchers who concentrate on eGovernment as technology-led solutions (eAdministration)

Fig. 1. Growth of literature on eGovernment.

1. Difficulty of finding the needed information

Lack of clear purpose and failure to communicate the purpose to users

1. How much? (total cost)

Bench-marking Spearman, Welch & Associates Numeric ratios Quantitative measures

Hard and soft Wolstenholme (1999), Multi-methodology Can combine multiple

2. The Indian Police Administration: The domain

Existing police goals

1. Prevention and detection of crime

5. Enforcement of non-criminal codes including

Emerging police goals

Countering challenges posed by criminals using modern technology

That a continuous and reliable visible presence is effective

Reactive policing Pro-active policing:

Duties to the state (government first) Duties to the citizen:

3. Performance assessment in the Indian Police

Internal Efficiency as indicated by parameters under Call Management, Crime Manage-

3.1. Derivation of performance indicators

4. Number of cases prosecuted successfully (and/or ratio of successful to unsuccessful

1. Better cooperation from and interaction with the public

1. Number of police and staff reporting sick

3.2. Tying of performance indicators to eGovernment

Employee Satisfaction Number of police personnel reporting sick

Public Satisfaction Greater interaction with the people

3.3. Administering the questionnaire

Fig. 3. Performance measures and corresponding eGovernment windows.

4. Results and discussion

5. Synthesis and recommendations

A. Penetration of hardware up to police stations-the key police organizations

As mentioned at the beginning, performance assessment of eGovernment applications must

You might also like