Kraemer et al. (1993) present data gathered from 260 public managers to assess general perspectives of the potential of information technology and the value of computer-based information (CBI). The two perspectives are the knowledge executive and consumers of computer-based information. The results of the analysis indicated that public managers believe that CBI is important and heavily relied upon. The findings also showed that information is more valuable in supporting control of financial resources than in the management of operations. Four sets of factors were identified that might account for variability in the usefulness to public managers of computer-based information. Quality and accessibility of information were found to be particularly important as were the manager’s style of use. The authors also indicate that the managers who found CBI the most useful were those that used support staff to mediate their CBI environment. They conclude therefore, that IT design efforts should include mediating support staff as well as executives. Danziger et al. (1993) present the results of a survey of 1,869 end users in 46 U.S. cities. The survey results identify three major factors that can be controlled to influence the quality of computing services: the structure of service provision, the level of technological problems, and the service orientation of computing service specialists. The authors indicate that the survey results do not support the argument that the degree of centralization of computing services is the most important factor in quality of computing systems. They conclude that service improvement strategies that focus on the socio-technical interface between users and computing service providers should be stressed.

Kraemer et al. (1994b) compare the government computing implementations in the US with those in Scandinavia. They indicate that in the US, individual units of government have implemented information technology to support their own needs while those in Scandinavia have been designed and developed via communal data processing agencies serving an entire level of government. Additionally, systems implemented in the US have tended to be small scale, following narrow functional lines, implemented incrementally, evolved slowly over time, and have essentially automated existing operations. As compared to Scandinavian efforts, US efforts have focused little attention on automation effects, have responded to situations in an ad hoc fashion, and have been reactive rather than proactive. Scandinavian efforts, in particular those in Sweden, have done more to address the reorganization of work processes along with automation and the potential effects on government workers are more substantial.

Henze and Lenk (1988) describe a high level of intergovernmental coordination and cooperation as a salient feature of information technology as used in the German public administration. They indicate that large automated data processing centers at the federal, Laendar (states), and municipal levels play a coordinating role in bringing together major government users of information technology. They indicate that the prevailing information technology application and coordination structures have resulted from a stage of information technology development that was reached by the end of the 1960’s and that the future application of IT in the federal administration will focus on performance improvement, communications, and quality of service. Dawes (1996) also argues that the sharing of program information among government agencies can aid in the achievement of important benefits such as increased productivity, improved integration of services, and more informed policy making. Technical, organizational, and political barriers however, often limit government agencies’ ability and willingness to share information. Results from a study of state government managers are presented and a theoretical model for understanding the interactions among policy, practice, and attitudes is proposed. Stewardship and usefulness are suggested as two policy principles to enhance the benefits and mitigate the risks associated with information sharing.