Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.22937/IJCSNS.2021.21.8.19

Information Systems in Project Management of The Public Sphere  

Mamatova, Tetiana (Dnipropetrovsk regional institute for public administration)
Chykarenko, Iryna (Dnipropetrovsk regional institute for public administration)
Chykarenko, Oleksii (Dnipropetrovsk regional institute for public administration)
Kravtsova, Тetiana (Dnipropetrovsk regional institute for public administration)
Kravtsov, Olеg (Dnipropetrovsk regional institute for public administration)
Publication Information
International Journal of Computer Science & Network Security / v.21, no.8, 2021 , pp. 141-148 More about this Journal
Abstract
Project management is a current trend of management in the public sphere, based on different principles, methods and tools. The tools include information technologies providing control over time, cost, quality and planning process in order to ensure accountability to interested parties. The goal of the research was to examine the impact of the integration of information systems in project management of the public sphere on the quality of public governance and administration using the example of infrastructure projects involving the private sector in developing countries. The methodology of the research is based on the concepts of "digital-era governance" (DEG), "Information governance" and "project governance" to determine the effectiveness of information systems and technologies in the management of infrastructure projects in the public sphere. The data from the countries with Lower middle income (India, Indonesia, Philippines, Ukraine, Vietnam) and Upper middle income (Argentina, Brazil, China, Colombia, Mexico, Peru, Romania, Russian Federation, Thailand, Turkey) for 1996-2020 were used to study the effects of DEG. The results show two main trends in the countries with Lower middle income and Upper middle income. The first trend is the development of digital governance, the concept of "digital-era governance" through information systems and performance measurement of the governance system, forecasting of investment flows of infrastructure projects, measurement of payback and effectiveness parameters for investment management in the public sector, decision support. The second trend is the existence of systemic challenges related to corruption, social and institutional factors through the development of democracy in developing countries and the integration of NPM similar to developed countries. The confidence of interested parties, especially private investors, in public authorities is determined by other factors - the level of return on investment, risks and assignment of responsibility, probability of successful completion of the project. These data still remain limited for a wide range of project participants, including citizens.
Keywords
Information systems of the public sector; public sector project management; "digital-era governance" (DEG); "information governance"; "project governance";
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Too, E. G., & Weaver, P. (2014). The management of project management: A conceptual framework for project governance. International Journal of Project Management, 32(8), 1382-1394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.07.006   DOI
2 Meyer, R., & Hammerschmid, G. (2006). Public management reform: An identity project. Public policy and administration, 21(1), 99-115. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F095207670602100107   DOI
3 Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler, J. (2006). New public management is dead-long live digital-era governance. Journal of public administration research and theory, 16(3), 467-494. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui057   DOI
4 ERCAS European Research Centre for Anti-Corruption and State-Building (2020). Index of Public Integrity. https://integrity-index.org/data-download/
5 Olander, S. (2007). Stakeholder impact analysis in construction project management. Construction management and economics, 25(3), 277-287. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190600879125   DOI
6 Salvia, M., Simoes, S. G., Herrando, M., Cavar, M., Cosmi, C., Pietrapertosa, F., ... & Di Leo, S. (2021). Improving policy making and strategic planning competencies of public authorities in the energy management of municipal public buildings: The PrioritEE toolbox and its application in five mediterranean areas. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 135, 110106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110106   DOI
7 Santos, V., & Varajao, J. (2015). PMO as a key ingredient of public sector projects' success-position paper. Procedia computer science, 64, 1190-1199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.08.546   DOI
8 United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs Division for Public Institutions and Digital Government (2020). E-Government Index. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/data-center
9 Amann, M., & Essig, M. (2015). Public procurement of innovation: empirical evidence from EU public authorities on barriers for the promotion of innovation. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 28(3), 282-292.   DOI
10 Bartosikova, R., Pitrova, K., & Taraba, P. (2013). Application of Project Management in Public Administration. UNIVERSITY OF DEFENCE/CZECH REPUBLIC, 15.
11 Ke, Y., Wang, S., Chan, A. P., & Lam, P. T. (2010). Preferred risk allocation in China's public-private partnership (PPP) projects. International Journal of Project Management, 28(5), 482-492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.08.007   DOI
12 Gauld, R. (2007). Public sector information system project failures: Lessons from a New Zealand hospital organization. Government information quarterly, 24(1), 102-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2006.02.010   DOI
13 Hall, M., Holt, R., & Purchase, D. (2003). Project sponsors under New Public Management: lessons from the frontline. International Journal of Project Management, 21(7), 495-502. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(02)00054-6   DOI
14 Jaafari, A., & Manivong, K. (1998). Towards a smart project management information system. International journal of project management, 16(4), 249-265. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(97)00037-9   DOI
15 Rosacker, K. M., & Rosacker, R. E. (2010). Information technology project management within public sector organizations. Journal of Enterprise Information Management. 23 (5), 587-594. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410391011083047   DOI
16 Landow, P., & Ebdon, C. (2012). Public-private partnerships, public authorities, and democratic governance. Public Performance & Management Review, 35(4), 727-752. https://doi.org/10.2753/PMR1530-9576350408   DOI
17 Lee, S. K., & Yu, J. H. (2012). Success model of project management information system in construction. Automation in construction, 25, 82-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.04.015   DOI
18 Munns, A. K., & Bjeirmi, B. F. (1996). The role of project management in achieving project success. International journal of project management, 14(2), 81-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/0263-7863(95)00057-7   DOI
19 Shepherd, E., Stevenson, A., & Flinn, A. (2010). Information governance, records management, and freedom of information: A study of local government authorities in England. Government Information Quarterly, 27(4), 337-345. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2010.02.008   DOI
20 World Bank (2020). https://ppi.worldbank.org/en/customquery
21 Zhang, X. S., & Cui, J. C. (1999). A project evaluation system in the state economic information system of china an operations research practice in public sectors. International Transactions in Operational Research, 6(5), 441-452. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-3995.1999.tb00166.x   DOI
22 Koppenjan, J., Veeneman, W., Van der Voort, H., Ten Heuvelhof, E., & Leijten, M. (2011). Competing management approaches in large engineering projects: The Dutch RandstadRail project. International Journal of Project Management, 29(6), 740-750. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.07.003   DOI
23 Young, R., Young, M., Jordan, E., & O'Connor, P. (2012). Is strategy being implemented through projects? Contrary evidence from a leader in New Public Management. International Journal of Project Management, 30(8), 887-900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.03.003   DOI