Layanan elektronik: Perbedaan antara revisi
Konten dihapus Konten ditambahkan
Tidak ada ringkasan suntingan |
Tidak ada ringkasan suntingan |
||
Baris 125:
Kemampuan pengguna untuk mengakses ke layanan elektronik adalah tema penting dalam literatur sebelumnya. Sebagai contoh, Huang (2003)<ref>Huang, C.J. (2003). Usability of E-Government Web Sites for People with Disabilities, In Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’03), IEEE Computer Society, 2003</ref> menemukan bahwa sebagian besar situs pada umumnya gagal untuk melayani pengguna. Rekomendasi untuk meningkatkan aksesibilitas jelas dalam literatur sebelumnya termasuk Jaeger (2006) Jaeger <ref>Jaeger, P.T. Assessing Section 508 compliance on federal e-government Web sites: A multi-method, user-centered evaluation of accessibility for persons with disabilities. Government Information Quarterly 23 (2006) 169–190</ref> yang menyarankan berikut untuk meningkatkan aksesibilitas layanan elektronik seperti: desain untuk aksesibilitas dari awal pengembangan situs, Libatkan pengguna dalam pengujian situs ... Fokus pada manfaat dari sebuah situs web diakses oleh semua pengguna.
===Keaksaraan administrasi===
<!--▼
▲According to Grönlund et al. (2007),<ref>Grönlund, Å., Hatakka, M. and Ask, A. (2007) ‘ Inclusion in the E-Service Society – Investigating Administrative Literacy Requirements for Using E-Services’. 6th International Conference (EGOV 2007, Regensburg, Germany), 4656</ref> for a simple e-service, the needs for knowledge and skills, content and procedures are considerably less. However, in complicated services there are needed to change some prevailed skills, such as replacing verbal skills with skill in searching for information online.
▲<!--
===Benchmarking===
This theme is concerned with establishing standards for measuring e-services or the best practices within the field. This theme also includes the international benchmarking of e-government services (UN reports, EU reports); much critic has been targeting these reports being incomprehensive and useless. According Bannister (2007)<ref>Bannister F. (2007). The curse of the benchmark: an assessment of the validity and value of e-government comparisons, International Review of Administrative Sciences, 73 (2), 171-188</ref> “… benchmarks are not a reliable tool for measuring real e-government progress. Furthermore, if they are poorly designed, they risk distorting government policies as countries may chase the benchmark rather than looking at real local and national needs”
| |||