E-readiness evaluation modelling for monitoring the national e-government programme (by the example of Ukraine)


  • Tetiana Fesenko Odesa State Academy of Civil Engineering and Architecture Didrihsona str., 4, Odesa, Ukraine, 65029, Ukraine
  • Galyna Fesenko O. M. Beketov National University of Urban Economy in Kharkiv Marshala Bazhanova str., 17, Kharkiv, Ukraine, 61002, Ukraine




е-government, e-readiness, online service, stakeholders, programme management, management maturity


The study has produced a critical review of the current approaches to developing international indices on the e-maturity of a country and analysed their criteria system. The authors have identified the specific dynamics of the programme “Electronic Ukraine” on the basis of sub-indexes of international systems of e-governance assessment. Ukraine, with its consistently high rates of human capital and progress in the development of the telecommunications infrastructure index, has been found prone to regression in terms of its online services index (OSI). Therefore, it has been suggested to use a system of weighting coefficients instead of the average weight measurement system of e-development (the United Nations E-Government Development Index). The authors have revealed that online services in Ukraine are mostly narrow-focused on providing information, whereas the transaction and participatory forms remain underdeveloped. To achieve progress at all OSI stages, the study suggests extending the system of sub-indexes in terms of assessing the e-readiness management level (both the political and legal environment for implementing e-projects and the main stakeholders). The four stages of OSI development have been extrapolated onto the Project Management Maturity Model (PMMM), and dependence has been revealed between the development of transactional services and the achievement of the third level in the management system (“a singular methodology”). The study offers recommendations for effective management of e-government programmes as to the choice of criteria for monitoring e-projects. The authors suggest evaluating the implementation of the “Electronic Ukraine” programme by the following parameters: “conformity to the strategy”, “realistic programme feasibility achieved by the project team”, “stakeholders’ influence”, and “compliance with the beneficiaries’ needs”. Eventually, the study has developed a model of evaluating the Electronic Ukraine programme with regard to the problem of multi-criteria mathematical programming. The suggested system of evaluating progress in the implementation of e-programmes contains sub-indexes that attract the stakeholders’ attention not only to the individual values obtainable by achieving the objectives of a programme but also, in the case of Ukraine, to the possible progress of the country in improving its position according to global indexes.

Author Biographies

Tetiana Fesenko, Odesa State Academy of Civil Engineering and Architecture Didrihsona str., 4, Odesa, Ukraine, 65029

PhD, associate professor

Department of Management and Project Management


Galyna Fesenko, O. M. Beketov National University of Urban Economy in Kharkiv Marshala Bazhanova str., 17, Kharkiv, Ukraine, 61002

Candidate of Philosophy, associate professor

Department of History and Cultural Studies


  1. Dutta, S., Geiger, T., Lanvin, B. (2015). The Global Information technology report 2015. ICTs for inclusive growth. Geneva: World Economic Forum, INSEAD, 381.
  2. United Nations E-Government Survey 2012. Chapter 1.Word E-Government Rankings. (2012). New York: UN, 9–35.
  3. United Nations E-Government Survey 2014: E-Government for the future we want (2014). New York: UN, 264.
  4. Choucri, N., Maugis, V., Madnick, S., Siegel, M. (2003). Global e-Readiness – for WHAT. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 177.
  5. eGovernment in Slovenia (2015). European Union: ISA Editorial Team, Kurt Salmon S.A., 44.
  6. Alghamdi, I. A., Goodwin, R., Rampersad, G. (2014). Organizational E-Government Readiness: An Investigation in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Business and Management, 9 (5), 14–24. doi: 10.5539/ijbm.v9n5p14
  7. European eGovernment action plan 2016-2020 (2016). Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/european-egovernment-action-plan-2016-2020
  8. Ukraine. EGOV – Country selector United Nations E-Government Survey (2003). Available at: https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Data/Country-Information/id/180-Ukraine/dataYear/2003
  9. Koteswara, R., & Shubhamoy, D. (2011). Decision Support for E-Governance: A Text Mining Approach. International Journal of Managing Information Technology, 3 (3), 73–91. doi: 10.5121/ijmit.2011.3307
  10. Drigas, A., Koukianakis, L. (2013). E-Government applications for the information society. International journal of computer science issues, 10 (1), 753–758.
  11. Kunstelj, M., Vintar, M. (2004). Evaluating the progress of E-Government development: A critical analysis. Information polity, 9, 131–148.
  12. Chmelyova, O., Zolotar, N. (2014). Doslidzennya problem formuvannya realizatsii kontsepcii elektronnogo uryaduvannya v Ukraini ta strategichni napryamu ih vurishennya. Visnuk NTY «KhPI», 34 (1077), 189–196.
  13. Kondratenko, O. (2011). Informatsiine zabezpechennya vushuh organiv derzavnoi vladu ta elektronne uryaduvannya. Naukovuy visnuk Instutytu miznarodnuh vidnosin NAY. Ser.: ekonomika, pravo, politologia, tyrusm, 1 (3), 66–73.
  14. Novosad, V. P., Seliverstov, R. G., Yurynets, R. V. (2011). Ocinuyvannya efektuvnosti elektronnogo uryaduvannya. Kyiv: NADU, 32.
  15. Kovačić, Z. (2005). The impact of national culture on worldwide eGovernment readiness. Informing Science Journal, 8, 143–158.
  16. Zahran, D., Al-Nuaim, H., Rutter, M., Benyon, D. (2015). A critical analysis of e-government evaluation models at national and local municipal levels Electronic Journal of eGovernment, 13 (1), 28–42. Available at: http://www.ejeg.com/volume13/issue1
  17. Danish, D. (2006). E-Readiness for developing countries: moving the focus from the environment to the users. EJISDC: The Electronic Journal of Information System in Developing Countries, 27, 1–14. Available at: http://www.ejisdc.org/ojs2/index.php/ejisdc/article/viewFile/219/184
  18. Monitoring progresu reform. Zvit za 2015; Nacionalna rada reform. Proektnuy ofis (2015). Available at: http://reforms.in.ua/sites/default/files/upload/broshura_a4_ukr.pdf
  19. Dopovid pro stan informatuzacii ta informaciinogo suspilstva v Ukraini za 2014 (Chastuna 1): proekt (2014). Available at: http://dknii.gov.ua/content/shchorichna-dopovid-pro-rozvytok-informaciynogo-suspilstva
  20. Elektronnuy control: dobirka poslug organiv vladu ta derzkompaniy, yakumy mozna korustuvatusya on-line (2015). Tuzden. Available at: http://tyzhden.ua/News/142217/PrintView/
  21. Sheremeta, B. (2015). E-government frees Ukraine of paper. Available at: http://www.unpan.org/PublicAdministrationNews/tabid/651/mctl/ArticleView/ModuleID/1555/articleId/44956/default.aspx/
  22. Kerzner, H. (2001). Strategic planning for proect management using a proect management maturity model. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 256.
  23. Fesenko, T. (2012). Upravlinnya proektamu: teoria ta praktuka vukonannya proektnuh diy. Kharkiv, 181.
  24. Elektronne uryaduvannya v Ukraini – efektuvna vllada dlya meshkanciv (2011). Кyiv: РRООN/МPVSR, 20.
  25. Fesenko, G., Fesenko, T. (2011). «Е-government Program» v Ukraine: upravlenie faktorom v arhitekure preobrazovaniy. Upravlinnya proektamu stan ta perspektuvu, 331–333. Available at: http://eprints.kname.edu.ua/39768/1/45-Фесенко.pdf
  26. Programa informatuzacii Kharkivskoi oblasti «Elektronna Harkivshuna» na 2014–2016 roku (2014). Kharkiv. Available at: http://old.kharkivoda.gov.ua/documents/4274/pi%202014-2016.pdf




How to Cite

Fesenko, T., & Fesenko, G. (2016). E-readiness evaluation modelling for monitoring the national e-government programme (by the example of Ukraine). Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 3(3(81), 28–35. https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2016.71606



Control processes