Development Framework for the Evaluation of Usability in E-Government: A Case Study of E-Finance Government of Malang
E-government is an effort to utilize information and communication technology especially internet to improve public service quality which generally implemented in a web based application. Usability is one of the important quality criteria for the success of a web. In this study we developed a framework for evaluation of usability in e-government consisting ofÂ eight stages: (1) determining the evaluation objectives, (2) determining the usability aspects, (3) determining the metrics usability, (4) selecting usability evaluation method candidates, (5) determining the required criteria of the method to be evaluated, (6) evaluating the method, (7) selecting and making the instrument, and (8) evaluate usability.. The results of the application of this framework in the case study of e-finance resulted in two methods used: user testing and questionnaires. The evaluation of usability in e-government for e-finance case studies using the proposed framework results in usability level of e-finance in terms of effectiveness, efficiency, and user satisfaction are 96%, 92%, and 70 respectively. Which can be identified to be grouped into 16 problems consisting of aspects of effectiveness and efficiency.
G. Yanqing, â€œE-government: Definition, goals, benefits and risks,â€ 2010 Int. Conf. Manag. Serv. Sci. MASS 2010, pp. 9â€“12, 2010.
M. A. Awan, â€œDubai e-Government: An Evaluation of G2B Websites,â€ J. Internet Commer., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 75â€“89, 2007.
V. Venkatesh, H. Hoehle, and R. Aljafari, â€œA usability evaluation of the Obamacare website,â€ Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 669â€“680, 2014.
â€œInstruksi Presiden Republik Indonesia Tentang Kebijakan dan Strategi Nasional Pengembangan E-Goverment,â€ 2003.
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, UN E-government survey 2016. E-Government in Support of Sustainable Development. New York, 2016.
KEMKONINFO, â€œPemeringkatan E-Government Indonesia (PeGI),â€ 2014. [Online]. Available: http://pegi.layanan.go.id/tabel-hasil-pegi-4/. [Accessed: 10-May-2017].
Departemen Komunikasi dan Informatika, â€œCetak Biru ( Blueprint) Sistem Aplikasi E-Government Bagi Lembaga Pemerintah Daerah,â€ Jakarta, 2004.
ISO 9241-11, Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs) - part 11: guidance on usability, no. 2. 1998.
J. Offutt, â€œQuality Attributes of Web Software Applications,â€ IEEE Softw., vol. 1, no. April, pp. 25â€“32, 2002.
Y. Ichsani, â€œPengembangan Framework Mengukur Usability dan Accessibility pada Situs-Situs Web E-Government Provinsi di Indonesia,â€ Institut Pertanian Bogor (IPB) Indonesia. Thesis. 2012.
K. Karunasena and H. Deng, â€œA Conceptual Framework for Evaluating the Public Value of e-Government : A Case Study from Sri Lanka,â€ Australas. Conf. Inf. Syst., 2009.
L. Hasan, A. Morris, and S. Probets, â€œE-commerce websites for developing countries â€“ a usability evaluation framework,â€ Online Inf. Rev., vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 231â€“251, 2013.
R. Van Der Merwe and J. Bekker, â€œA framework and methodology for evaluating e-commerce Web sites,â€ Internet Res. Electron. Netw. Appl. Policy, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 330â€“341, 2003.
A. Dix, J. Finlay, G. D. Abowd, and R. Beale, Human Computer Interaction, Third Edit., vol. 48, no. 5. England, 2004.
J. Nielsen, â€œUsability 101: Introduction to Usability,â€ Nielsen Norman Group, 2012. [Online]. Available: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/usability-101-introduction-to-usability/. [Accessed: 10-Apr-2017].
T. Tullis and B. Albert, Measuring the User Experience Collecting, Analyzing, and Presenting Usability Metrics. 2013.
A. Saleh, R. B. Isamil, and N. B. Fabil, â€œExtension Of Pacmad Model For Usability Evaluation Metrics Using Goal Question Metrics ( GQM ) Approach,â€ J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol., vol. 79, no. 1, pp. 90â€“100, 2015.
M. N. Mahrin, P. Strooper, and D. Carrington, â€œSelecting Usability Evaluation Methods for Software Process Descriptions,â€ Softw. Eng. Conf. 2009. APSEC â€™09. Asia-Pacific, pp. 523â€“529, 2009.
A. Fernandez, E. Insfran, and S. Abrahao, â€œUsability evaluation methods for the web: A systematic mapping study,â€ Inf. Softw. Technol., vol. 53, no. 8, pp. 789â€“817, 2011.
F. Paz and J. A. Pow-Sang, â€œCurrent Trends in Usability Evaluation Methods: A Systematic Review,â€ 2014 7th Int. Conf. Adv. Softw. Eng. Its Appl., pp. 11â€“15, 2014.
F. Paz and J. A. Pow-Sang, â€œA Systematic Mapping Review of Usability Evaluation Methods for Software Development Process,â€ Int. J. Softw. Eng. its Appl., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 165â€“178, 2016.
Jeff Sauro, â€œWhat is A Good Task Completion Rate?,â€ 2011. [Online]. Available: https://measuringu.com/task-completion/. [Accessed: 20-Apr-2017].
A. Bangor, P. Kortum, and J. Miller, â€œDetermining what individual SUS scores mean: Adding an adjective rating scale,â€ J. usability Stud., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 114â€“123, 2009.
How to Cite
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).