A model of public sector e-services development efficiency as a sustainable competitive advantage

Valackiene, Asta; Giedraitiene, Jovita Article A model of public sector e-services development efficiency as a sustainable competitive advantage Administrative Sciences Provided in Cooperation with: MDPI – Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, Basel Suggested Citation: Valackiene, Asta; Giedraitiene, Jovita (2024) : A model of public sector e-services development efficiency as a sustainable competitive advantage, Administrative Sciences, ISSN 2076-3387, MDPI, Basel, Vol. 14, Iss. 9, pp. 1-20, https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci14090215 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/321029 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Citation: Valackiene, Asta, and Jovita Giedraitiene. 2024. A Model of Public Sector E-Services Development Efficiency as a Sustainable Competitive Advantage. Administrative Sciences 14: 215. https://doi.org/10.3390/ admsci14090215 Received: 9 August 2024 Revised: 3 September 2024 Accepted: 4 September 2024 Published: 11 September 2024 Copyright: © 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). administrative sciences Article A Model of Public Sector E-Services Development Efficiency as a Sustainable Competitive Advantage Asta Valackiene * and Jovita Giedraitiene Faculty of Public Governance and Business, Mykolas Romeris University, Ateities St. 20, LT-08303 Vilnius, Lithuania; [email protected] *Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: This study aims to explore the links between the efficiency of public sector e-services and sustainable competitive advantage. In line with the emerging approach, the instrumental case study design and the mixed research strategy were used as the most appropriate methodology to answer the general research question that was raised for this study. In this context, we present the positive experience that we have discovered via the Lithuanian case study. A unified model of evaluation of the e-services development system in the public sector was developed. The model explains the application of various e-services development systems methodologies and methods in the public sector and underpins the platform for the interaction of efficiency and sustainable competitive advantage processes. The model developed helps to make the assessment of e-services more effective and demonstrates a personalised outcome that can be applied by other public sector organisations. The paper discusses the efficiency trends in the development of e-services in the public sector in order to achieve Sustainable Development Goals, as well as distinguishes and highlights procedural steps that help to improve the development of e-services and sustainable competitive advantage. Keywords: efficiency of e-service; public sector; sustainable competitive; advantage; model; Lithuania 1. Introduction As the public sector increasingly transitions to the digital age and makes effective use of information technology innovations, a systematic conceptual approach and assessment is necessary to discuss in order to realise its potential at the strategic level of the sector. Introduction should briefly place the study in a broad context and highlight why it is important. It should define the purpose of the work and its significance. E-services in the public sector are becoming the most important lever to create value for the organisation’s interaction with its ecosystem (Sklyar et al. 2019), which in turn increases the efficiency of the organisation’s activities in a sustainable way and in operational processes and permanent changes (Alotaibi 2020;Khanra and Joseph 2019;Yadav et al. 2019;Alkheyi et al. 2020). Thus, how to improve the capacity for e-service efficiency in the public sector in such an unpredictable environment has become a focus for the sector (Khalifa 2020;Myo et al. 2019;Khanra and Joseph 2020;Dhaoui 2019), and the application of best-practice principles on the design and delivery of public services in the digital age is becoming of paramount importance (EU Public Governance Directorate, 2022/OECD Public Governance Policy Papers, No. 23). The document sets out nine Principles of Good Practice under three pillars of “Build accessible, ethical and equitable public services that prioritise user needs, rather than government needs”; “Deliver with impact, at scale and with pace”; and “Be accountable and transparent in the design and delivery of public services to reinforce and strengthen public trust” (p. 3). The global crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic has further highlighted the significance of this social phenomenon. The pandemic has shown that a well-functioning public sector and making the management system more efficient are essential prerequisites for a Adm. Sci. 2024,14, 215. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci14090215 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/admsci Adm. Sci. 2024,14, 215 2 of 20 proper response to such a crisis. Moreover, the pandemic has highlighted the importance of strong public institutions and effective partnerships between governments and other key actors, which are also essential for achieving sustainable performance goals. As a result, the leaders of the public sector are concentrating on the development of e-services to help the community with the rapidly changing environment and create competitive advantages (Adnan et al. 2022;Alvarenga et al. 2020). When discussing the area of public sector efficiency and competitiveness (Lozano and Garcia 2020;Meuleman 2021;Dhaoui 2021;Droege et al. 2021;Kretschmer and Khashabi 2020;Coreynen et al. 2020;Gebauer et al. 2020;Sjödin et al. 2020), significant deficiencies in effective management and administration are noted. According to Abubakar et al. (2019), the administration of a sustainable public sector requires that public sector managers have sufficient knowledge based on experience and formal training to make knowledge-based decisions. However, knowledge of how to improve e-services in the public sector to achieve the interplay between efficiency and sustainable competitive advantages is still limited. The focus is on the implementation of sustainability as a public policy or policy area rather than the level of operational efficiency and performance of the institution(s). It is also worth agreeing with Harald and Norman (2021), who point out that the sustainability of public administration at national and subnational levels has rarely been addressed. Thus, there is a lack of knowledge on how to initiate, implement and institutionalise sustainability-related organisational change in digital practice. The resource-based approach emphasises the need for the public sector to acquire differentiated managerial resources in order to maintain a competitive advantage. In summary, digital capabilities have become an important way for public sector organisations to maintain competitive advantage and increase resilience. However, there is a lack of applied research on public sector e-services to assess how to enable digital technologies and effective governance via innovative solutions in the context of a country’s sustainable development strategy. On the other hand, at a theoretical level, there is a lack of knowledge in modelling how to integrate sustainable development objectives into an organisation’s strategy that supports investments in sustainable public administration and human skills, sustainable society and governance. The most effective way of filling this gap could be via the application of a unified e-services model. Our study seeks to explore how to enable the public sector to use digital capabilities to increase the sector’s efficiency, competitive advantage and resilience in order to propose a model. For this reason, the study investigates the following research question (RQ), that is: How should public sector organisations in e-services reflect the goals of sustainable development in implementing the sector’s sustainability strategy, which allows to increase the efficiency and competitive advantage of the public sector in order to build a model? To address this question, this study focuses on the following objectives and analytical positions: (1) to reveal the development and benefits of e-services in the public sector; (2) to discuss the most effective e-services, which ensure the quality of this sector; (3) to point out the weaknesses in the efficiency of e-services; (4) to identify the areas of improvement in the system of e-services and to suggest the new opportunities. The paper is structured as follows: Section 1is the introduction; Section 2examines the conceptual framework and presents theoretical approaches to e-services phenomena in the public sector; Section 3introduces the methodology and research design; Section 4 presents empirical results and main findings: a unified e-service model application. This is followed by a discussion and conclusions. 2. Theoretical Foundations for the Effective Integration of Electronic Services in the Public Sector 2.1. Prerequisites for the Development of Electronic Services The issue of the concept of e-services has been addressed in the scientific literature for more than a decade, but in a dynamic environment, the phenomenon of e-services is being discovered in a new way and its conception is changing. As stated by Afarjanc (2019), it is Adm. Sci. 2024,14, 215 3 of 20 important to consider the fact that the e-service is an object of management that manifests itself in a multi-disciplinary environment and is influenced both by the rapid advancement and radical innovation that emerges in the technological environment, as well as by new management challenges and theories. The concept of e-service is closely linked to the original term of the service itself, except that it is used very widely and is often applied to any electronic communication in the field of public e-services, in particular between government and society (Jansen and Olnes 2016). Authors (Chaffey 2007;Cruz et al. 2020) associate the use of IT with the development of customer relationships and their satisfaction with the services provided. The rapid development of IT is changing the social, cultural and political features of society. This creates a new market for e-business and e-services. While the concept of e-services is multi-faceted, different scientists make a general statement that e-services are associated with the use, accessibility and user-friendliness of information and communication technologies for both citizens and organisations, in order to improve the efficiency and development of e-services and the content of the service itself (Prati et al. 2003;De Ruyter et al. 2001;Featherman and Pavlou 2003;Garson 2006;Rowley 2006;Jansen and Olnes 2016). Some scholars have suggested various aspects of e-services: the main advantages of e-services (Shpak et al. 2022;Thanh et al. 2019), increasing the involvement of citizens and economic actors in specific administrative activities and processes; cutting red tape (Revyakin 2019;Barabashev 2016) and its costs (Shevyakova et al. 2023). Considering the concept e-services provided by public organisations are called public services. Jansen and Olnes (2016) argue that public e-services can be understood as digital interaction between government and end-user, which gives a certain value to the general public. Public sector services are a very important area in which local self-government solutions are active, requiring consumer confidence and satisfaction. Therefore, the main role of e-government can be highlighted: to distribute government services and information to citizens (Malodia et al. 2021;Bannister and Connolly 2020); to increase the efficiency of the distribution of services in the public sector (Singh and Sahu 2021). According to Dwivedi et al. (2021), e-Government is the use of communication technologies and information in power to deliver public services, increase administrative efficiency, as well as to validate the value of democracy. Moreover, researchers have investigated the impact of digital capabilities on innovation processes (Duan et al. 2019;Choi and Chandler 2020). It can be stated that digital capability is the key element with which organisations can obtain sustainable competitive advantages in the digital age, it is extremely important for the survival and development of new ventures and the transformation and development of traditional organisations (Jean et al. 2020). It should be stressed that one of the conditions for the sustainable development of the public e-services sector is adequate and effective regulation of the sector and a comprehensive legal framework. Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the European Council of 9 September 2015 lays down the procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical regulations and rules on Information Society Services and sets out the features specific to the service (see Figure 1). While expanding the discussion, it should be noted, that the widespread, rapid and extensive development of digital service platforms, as well as debates on public data spaces and new technologies such as artificial intelligence, affect all areas of society. It should be noted that the main legal challenge is to make public services accessible, understandable, functional and reliable. The European digital agenda (Digital Agenda for Europe|Fact Sheets on the European Union|European Parliament (europa.eu)) for the decade 2020–2030 addresses these issues by focusing on creating secure digital spaces and services, creating a level playing field in digital markets with large platforms and strengthening Europe’s digital sovereignty while contributing to the European goal of climate neutrality by 2050. The Digital Europe programme established by Regulation (EU) 2021/694, is a new EU funding programme for digital technology with a planned overall budget of EUR 7.5 billion for the 2021–2027 period that will provide strategic funding to support projects. The digital education action plan (2021–2027) is a renewed EU Adm. Sci. 2024,14, 215 4 of 20 policy initiative to support the sustainable and effective adaptation of the educational and training systems of EU Member States to the digital age. To achieve these objectives, the action plan sets out two priority areas: fostering the development of a high-performing digital education ecosystem and enhancing digital skills and competences for digital transformation. On 9 March 2021, the EU proposed a digital compass (COM(2021)0118) with four digital targets to be achieved by 2030, with a key focus on public e-services, requiring that all basic public services should be available online; and all citizens would have access to their electronic medical records and 80% of citizens would use an electronic identity solution. The document, “Public Administration Reform in Europe: Conclusions, lessons learned and recommendations for future EU policy” (2018), sets out the main recommendations. It is important to know, that the long-term strategic goals and objectives for the planning and development of e-services in the Lithuanian public sector, as outlined in the National Progress Programme (2021–2030) and Guidelines for 2050. It can be stated the legal documents reflect the challenges facing the public sector. Adm. Sci. 2024, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 21 Figure 1. Features specific to the e-service. Source: created by the authors on the basis of the Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and the European Council. It should be noted that the main legal challenge is to make public services accessible, understandable, functional and reliable. The European digital agenda (Digital Agenda for Europe|Fact Sheets on the European Union|European Parliament (europa.eu)) for the decade 2020–2030 addresses these issues by focusing on creating secure digital spaces and services, creating a level playing field in digital markets with large platforms and strengthening Europe’s digital sovereignty while contributing to the European goal of climate neutrality by 2050. The Digital Europe programme established by Regulation (EU) 2021/694, is a new EU funding programme for digital technology with a planned overall budget of EUR 7.5 billion for the 2021–2027 period that will provide strategic funding to support projects. The digital education action plan (2021–2027) is a renewed EU policy initiative to support the sustainable and effective adaptation of the educational and training systems of EU Member States to the digital age. To achieve these objectives, the action plan sets out two priority areas: fostering the development of a high-performing digital education ecosystem and enhancing digital skills and competences for digital transformation. On 9 March 2021, the EU proposed a digital compass (COM(2021)0118) with four digital targets to be achieved by 2030, with a key focus on public e-services, requiring that all basic public services should be available online; and all citizens would have access to their electronic medical records and 80% of citizens would use an electronic identity solution. The document, “Public Administration Reform in Europe: Conclusions, lessons learned and recommendations for future EU policy” (2018), sets out the main recommendations. It is important to know, that the long-term strategic goals and objectives for the planning and development of e-services in the Lithuanian public sector, as outlined in the National Progress Programme (2021–2030) and Guidelines for 2050. It can be stated the legal documents reflect the challenges facing the public sector. Some researchers (Agger and Sorensen 2016; McNab 2009; Pollitt and Bouckaert 2011) note that the lack of flexibility and creativity in public sector systems and bureaucratic organisational culture leads to resistance to the implementation of change strategies. It should be stressed that the success dimension of e-services depends on organisational structure, decision-making, and perception of the quality of the system. Some scholars discussed various dimensions of e-services in the public sector, such as links between innovation and organisational performance (Bowen et al. 2010; Ryan and Tipu 2013; Laita and Belaissaoui 2017; Lopes and Farias 2022; Androniceanu and Georgescu 2021; Rosário and Dias 2022), technological innovation in enabling digital platform openness for modern information societies: drivers, dimensions and outcomes (Ochara and Mawela 2015; Broekhuizen et al. 2021; Nasser et al. 2022), technology-based leadership as an integral part of public sector organisations (Contreras et al. 2020; Sundberg 2019; Reascos et al. 2019), talent management and performance in the public sector (EU Public Governance Directorate, 2021/OECD, 2021, “The OECD Framework for digital talent and skills in the public sector”, No. 45; Kravariti et al. 2023). Attention should be paid to other assumptions for the development of e-services in the public sector: new human resources competencies and skills (Ranzatti et al. 2019); value delivery process (Kassen 2019; Lewandowsky et al. 2020), artificial intelligence and big data in e-Government services (Anshari and Lim 2017; Hasnat 2018; Desouza and Jacob 2017; Gillingham and Graham 2016; Pencheva et al. 2018; Figure 1. Features specific to the e-service. Source: created by the authors on the basis of the Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and the European Council. Some researchers (Agger and Sorensen 2016;McNab 2009;Pollitt and Bouckaert 2011) note that the lack of flexibility and creativity in public sector systems and bureaucratic organisational culture leads to resistance to the implementation of change strategies. It should be stressed that the success dimension of e-services depends on organisational structure, decision-making, and perception of the quality of the system. Some scholars discussed various dimensions of e-services in the public sector, such as links between innovation and organisational performance (Bowen et al. 2010;Ryan and Tipu 2013;Laita and Belaissaoui 2017;Lopes and Farias 2022;Androniceanu and Georgescu 2021;Rosário and Dias 2022), technological innovation in enabling digital platform openness for modern information societies: drivers, dimensions and outcomes (Ochara and Mawela 2015;Broekhuizen et al. 2021;Nasser et al. 2022), technology-based leadership as an integral part of public sector organisations (Contreras et al. 2020;Sundberg 2019;Reascos et al. 2019), talent management and performance in the public sector (EU Public Governance Directorate, 2021/OECD, 2021, “The OECD Framework for digital talent and skills in the public sector”, No. 45; Kravariti et al. 2023). Attention should be paid to other assumptions for the development of e-services in the public sector: new human resources competencies and skills (Ranzatti et al. 2019); value delivery process (Kassen 2019;Lewandowsky et al. 2020), artificial intelligence and big data in e-Government services (Anshari and Lim 2017;Hasnat 2018;Desouza and Jacob 2017;Gillingham and Graham 2016;Pencheva et al. 2020;Santiago and Smith 2019; Berryhill et al. 2019;Androutsopoulou et al. 2019;Rakšnys et al. 2021), digital literacy and cybersecurity (Hallstedt et al. 2020;Bailey and Osei-Bryson 2018;Ziemba 2020), quality of satisfaction of e-services (Bhuvana and Vasantha 2020;Terziu 2020;Dobrolyubova et al. 2019), trust as an important factor influencing the success of the development of e-services (Andronie et al. 2021;Pinem et al. 2018;Abu-Shanab 2019;), transparency of public management activities (Misuraca et al. 2020) and responsibility (Canning 2020;Lobschata et al. 2021), and involvement of citizens in governance (Dobrolyubova et al. 2019). Adm. Sci. 2024,14, 215 5 of 20 2.2. Factors Affecting Competitive Advantage in the Context of Sustainable Development The elements of the new public governance are directly linked to public e-services efficiency: innovative, sustainable and targeted use of digital tools in public sector organisations. Digital transformation of the public sector is beneficial because these processes increase cost-effectiveness (Hallstedt et al. 2020). In addition, the use of digital technologies also opens perspectives for better monitoring of service delivery activities and optimisation of service use (Ren et al. 2018). Digitisation improves the quality of e-services provided to citizens and increases the openness, transparency and efficiency of public institutions. Digital inclusion and societal needs are characterised by close synergies: public organisations strive to respond to uncertainty and complexity in today’s global environment (Borg and Smith 2018;Holgersson et al. 2019;Collings et al. 2019); actors in the innovation ecosystem and digital inclusion (Granstrand and Holgersson 2020;Manžuch and Maceviˇci ¯ ut ˙ e 2020); and the relationship between organisational resilience and organisational learning (Evenseth et al. 2022). According to Marques et al. (2021), public administration is based on meeting two needs: society requires a creative, flexible approach to innovation, and economic tensions and budget cuts force the use of models geared towards efficiency, competitiveness and cost savings. It can be stated that the new organisational framework for public management integrates creativity, innovation and flexibility to achieve sustainability and create value for society. Other researchers (Lozano et al. 2021) pointed out that the “Organisational Sustainable Collaboration” framework depends on the drivers, benefits and challenges of collaboration, which can help organisations to understand and better collaborate in order to maximise the benefits and reduce the challenges. This is the basis for ensuring synergies between citizens and the state in the pursuit of the public sector’s sustainable development goals (Meuleman 2021;Eggers 2020): four priority areas for e-government have been identified: the quality of the public sector (quality plans and strategies; resources, skills and competences; mobility and mindset; organisational culture); a mission-oriented public sector; and governance reform, involving both horizontal and vertical coordination and cooperation. Another important factor affecting competitive advantage in the context of sustainable development is expectations for the quality of public e-services are raised in order to establish a user-centred model in service provision by instinctively exploiting the potential created by technology throughout the public management cycle and processes (Kern et al. 2019;Tarnovskaya 2023). The competitiveness of the country can be achieved by building the strategic competitiveness of each public organisation (Pangarso et al. 2020a;2020b; Global Competitiveness Report Special Edition 2020 World Economic Forum 2020). According to Safiullin and Akhmetshin (2019), digital transformation improves the efficiency of the organisation and reduces costs by providing more flexible services. Finally, it provides a strategy that aims to create and enrich competitive value and create a sustainable innovation culture (Norton et al. 2020;Mahlow and Hediger 2019;Marti et al. 2023). It can be noted there is a direct link between competitive advantage and sustainable development. As Jacob et al. (2021) argue, in order to make this link, public administrations need to be prepared to implement transformational policies, organisational learning and sustainable development education, i.e., to enable transformational literacy. To strengthen this reflection, Domingues et al. (2017) discuss reporting in public sector organisations: exploring the links between the reporting process and organisational change management with sustainability. As noted by various authors (Hughes et al. 2021), three interrelated and sustainable environments are highlighted: (1) people (sustainable thinking), (2) environments (developing strategic plans, integrating different cultures) and (3) tools (applying methods, processes, systems and procedures to increase efficiency, quality, safety and overall satisfaction). These environments are important for the implementation of efficient operation from a strategic point of view; to achieve competitive advantages; increasing quality, efficiency and overall satisfaction by enabling sustainable thinking. Bellandi et al. (2021) describe sustainability as integrating economic viability, environmental strength and social justice to build resilient, diverse and prosperous communities, present and Adm. Sci. 2024,14, 215 6 of 20 future. Sustainable practices should ensure satisfactory results for the environment and the world’s population while promoting the economic and social needs of current and future generations (Avila-Gutierrez et al. 2020). The ability to respond to today’s needs and to adapt to new challenges is becoming a permanent feature of the public sector. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (20 has identified the essential characteristics of a professional, strategic and innovative public sector. Based on these considerations, a Logical matrix for sustainable development policy in the public sector has been developed (illustrated in Figure 2). Adm. Sci. 2024, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 21 organisations: exploring the links between the reporting process and organisational change management with sustainability. As noted by various authors (Hughes et al. 2021), three interrelated and sustainable environments are highlighted: (1) people (sustainable thinking), (2) environments (developing strategic plans, integrating different cultures) and (3) tools (applying methods, processes, systems and procedures to increase efficiency, quality, safety and overall satisfaction). These environments are important for the implementation of efficient operation from a strategic point of view; to achieve competitive advantages; increasing quality, efficiency and overall satisfaction by enabling sustainable thinking. Bellandi et al. (2021) describe sustainability as integrating economic viability, environmental strength and social justice to build resilient, diverse and prosperous communities, present and future. Sustainable practices should ensure satisfactory results for the environment and the world’s population while promoting the economic and social needs of current and future generations (Avila-Gutierrez et al. 2020). The ability to respond to today’s needs and to adapt to new challenges is becoming a permanent feature of the public sector. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (20 has identified the essential characteristics of a professional, strategic and innovative public sector. Based on these considerations, a Logical matrix for sustainable development policy in the public sector has been developed (illustrated in Figure 2). Figure 2. Logical matrix for sustainable development policy in the public sector. Source: Authors representation. The logic matrix shows that capacity building and evidence-based decision-making for public sector staff is the basis for effective leadership and sound policy-making in the future. Moreover, in cooperation with public authorities and citizens, the improvement in the e-services efficiency model can lead to a unified e-services efficiency model that meets the characteristics of all services and meets the standards of this set of services when implementing the principle of e-services as a one-stop shop (Ansell and Trondal 2018). Figure 2. Logical matrix for sustainable development policy in the public sector. Source: Authors representation. The logic matrix shows that capacity building and evidence-based decision-making for public sector staff is the basis for effective leadership and sound policy-making in the future. Moreover, in cooperation with public authorities and citizens, the improvement in the e-services efficiency model can lead to a unified e-services efficiency model that meets the characteristics of all services and meets the standards of this set of services when implementing the principle of e-services as a one-stop shop (Ansell and Trondal 2018). Therefore, e-Government gateways should not only be a set of links to different e-public services but should be a single, standardised system capable of integrating the services provided by public authorities into the electronic space. On the other hand, a lack of technical competence among public sector leaders can inhibit leaders’ ability to make effective and innovative solutions. The emergence of sustainable public sector administration requires that public sector managers have sufficient knowledge based on experience and formal training (Abubakar et al. 2019;Banks et al. 2021) to make expertbased decisions and correct inappropriate decisions (Krpálek et al. 2021). Organisational Adm. Sci. 2024,14, 215 7 of 20 culture is an important factor that influences sustainability and effectiveness which is a key driver of innovation. It has been found that proper, timely, innovative, sustainable and conscious implementation of e-services in public institutions correlates with an increase in the efficiency of public administration. It highlights that for traditional public sector organisations, digital reinvention means a fundamental rethinking of strategy, operations, technology and human resource management, and for successful organisations, it means a search for a new strategic orientation, the development of digital competences, a holistic approach to services, processes, redefining the experience of customers and users, and the creation of new ways of delivering services. Also, should be noted that the service design models presented in the academic literature highlight the important role of effective service in the development of sustainable and secure e-services: they discuss the sequence of e-services delivery and suggest appropriate plans for strategy implementation and responsiveness to change. The sustainable e-service quality model developed by Stamenkov and Dika (2015) explains effective prerequisites for the development of e-services in the public sector in order to avoid unrealised expectations of both the user and the service provider. Aslanova and Kulichina (2020) discuss digital business strategy and construct a digital maturity model, which identifies 5 maturity levels. Other researchers (Matarazzo et al. 2021) conclude that the highestlevel covers most of the attributes of smart public governance that can be achieved via the use of IT in all processes. This has a positive impact on the acquisition of sustainable competitive advantage, which provides theoretical support for the development of cross-border behaviour along with practical decision-making. With the help of an ISO Quality Model, the role of satisfaction mediation/modification in service quality and loyalty relationships is confirmed, but, according to Matarazzo et al. (2021), is to be considered the ISO 9001 certificate does not seem to affect customers’ perception of the quality of e-services. The SPRINT model can be applied in the public sector and its application is directly linked to the ability to ensure the efficiency of the e-services provided (Verhoef et al. 2021). Malodia et al. (2021) propose the use of a Digital Inclusion Model to explain the effectiveness of e-services in the public sector. This model covers all stakeholders: governmental, municipal and public sector organisations; business organisations; institutions of higher education and scientific research; community organisations, non-governmental organisations (referred to as “NGOs”) and individual members where the collaboration of all stakeholders would be considered as a key factor in promoting digital inclusion. In sum, the proposed models do not reflect individual and organisational responsibility, and knowledge of how to improve e-services in the public sector in order to achieve synergies for efficiency and sustainable competitive advantage is still limited. A new model should be constructed in order to make open innovation an integral part of public sector value creation rather than service delivery. For this reason, an empirical study is being carried out to highlight the new conceptual framework; and to develop a unified model explaining the links between the effectiveness of public e-services and sustainable competitive advantage. 3. Methodology—Research Design—Methods 3.1. Justification of the Expediency of the Research Analysis of scientific literature (Safiullin and Akhmetshin 2019;Norton et al. 2020; Mahlow and Hediger 2019;Dobrolyubova et al. 2019;Misuraca et al. 2020;Hallstedt et al. 2020;Ren et al. 2018;Avila-Gutierrez et al. 2020) revealed that proper, timely, innovative, sustainable and conscious implementation of e-services in public institutions correlates with the increase in the efficiency of public administration. Authors (Solechan 2021;Moonti 2019;Ansell and Trondal 2018;Herasymiuk et al. 2020) support the idea that the public sector’s main determinants of the ability to change management and working styles are people and their competences, processes and internal procedures, organisational structure and leadership. Also, it should be noted, that for traditional public sector organisations, Adm. Sci. 2024,14, 215 8 of 20 a digital invention involves a fundamental rethink of strategy, operations, technology, and human resource management, and to be successful, organisations should seek a new strategic focus, develop digital competencies with a holistic approach to services, processes, redefine customer and user experiences, and create new ways of working (identify, retain, and develop the right talents to create and sustain a digital organisation). The theoretical framework presented above formed the conceptual basis of our research. The area of the research problem and main research question allows us to analyse, how should e-services public sector organisations reflect on the objectives of sustainable development by implementing a sustainability strategy for the sector, which would make it possible to increase the efficiency and competitive advantage of the public sector? Reflecting on the main research question, the aim of the research is to investigate the implementation of e-services and development possibilities at the Environmental Project Management Agency of the Ministry of Environment of the Republic of Lithuania and to provide possible directions for the improvement in the development of e-services in the public sector by constructing a systemic model. Following the emergent approach, for empirical justification of the social phenomenon analysed, a mixed research was conducted using a quantitative research strategy (analysis of secondary statistical data; t to illustrate the current situation and main stages of development of e-services in the public sector in Lithuania and to outline trends in efficiency; and a qualitative research strategy using an instrumental case study (Stake 2005) as an illustrative problem field (Creswell 2007) of the Environmental Project Management Agency under the Ministry of the Environment of the Republic of Lithuania; and content analysis of strategic documents and reports of the Agency, even social media sources relevant to the topic at hand were also analysed to highlight the situation of e-services development; and semi-structured interviews on the options of experts on e-services development in public sector and their attitudes towards effectiveness in this process. Purposive sampling as a non-probability sampling strategy was applied to find a public sector organisation that can serve as an example that contributes to the creation of a responsible innovation policy in the ecosystem; effectively delivers e-services and demonstrates sustainable competitive advantage in the sector according to three qualitative criteria: is currently the strongest in terms of sustainability in the following areas; has twenty years of experience in the administration of EU environmental projects, has many years of experience in the management of Lithuanian environmental investments; demonstrates successful administration of new tools and has an impeccable reputation. Content analysis of the strategic documents of the Agency highlighted the main strategic goals of the activities for 2023–2030. The first—respond to the quality of public administration and governance; the second—create a motivating work environment in order to achieve higher value for customers, attract new funding sources and spread the good experience of Lithuania. The Environmental Project Management Agency of the Ministry of Environment of the Republic of Lithuania (known as the APVA) is a state budgetary institution established by Order No 579 of the Minister for the Environment on 6 December 2001. The rights and duties of the owner of the Environmental Project Management Agency shall be implemented by the Ministry of Environment of the Republic of Lithuania. A one-stopshop centre of excellence was set up a few years ago, bringing together two bodies under the Ministry and performing essentially the same functions, the Environmental Project Management Agency and the Housing Energy Savings Agency, which currently employs 176 staff. The operational objective of the Agency shall be to: coordinate and manage financial support measures for both energy efficiency and climate change mitigation, to exploit all existing and expected benefits of the future IT and e-sector, and to quickly and efficiently organise the administration of new measures so that citizens have access to all services and information via the Internet. The Agency cooperates with other agencies in order to create innovative future environmental initiatives for companies and customers throughout Lithuania. Adm. Sci. 2024,14, 215 15 of 20 advantage in the public sector, explain the conditions under which digital capabilities affect the public sector, and enrich the concepts with new theoretical insights, constructing a model. The model developed focuses on value creation in public sector services at four levels: internal–conceptual; internal–technological; internal–personal management; internal and external—to ensure a sustainable competitive environment. In contrast to the existing models discussed in the theoretical part, our model allows modelling the effectiveness of e-services at all four levels of public sector development in order to enable competitive advantage in an ecosystem where cyclically interacting structural components— are identified at each level. In managerial implication, the authors provide public sector managers with a new perspective on increasing organisational responsibility in the development of e-services to ensure sustainable competitive advantage and resilience. In this context, the positive experiences discovered via the case study are important. In terms of practical implications, this study can help policy-makers to embed the principles of responsible innovation in the professional discourse across the public sector and to develop forward-looking strategic thinking, further mitigate the negative impact of collaboration and maintain a competitive edge. Limitations and directions for future research. In future research projects, the authors should carry out a longitudinal study, expanding the geography of the research in order to obtain a broader picture of this social phenomenon and to learn from experiences and new perspectives from different countries. Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.V. and J.G.; methodology, A.V. and J.G.; software, A.V. and J.G.; validation, A.V. and J.G.; formal analysis, A.V. and J.G.; investigation, A.V. and J.G. resources, A.V. and J.G.; data curation, A.V. and J.G.; writing—original draft preparation, A.V. and J.G.; writing—review and editing, A.V.; visualization, A.V.; supervision, A.V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This research received no external funding. Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable. Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable. Data Availability Statement: Data is unavailable due to privacy or ethical restrictions. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest. References Abubakar, Abubakar Mohammed, Hamzah Elrehail, Maher Ahmad Alatailat, and Alev Elçi. 2019. Knowledge management, decisionmaking style and organizational performance. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge 4: 104–14. [CrossRef] Abu-Shanab, Emad. 2019. Predicting Trust in E-government: Two Competing Models. Electronic Government an International Journal 1: 29–143. [CrossRef] Adnan, Mohammed, Masitah Ghazali, and Nur Zuraifah Syazrah Othman. 2022. E-participation within the context of e-government initiatives: A comprehensive systematic review. Telematics and Informatics Reports 8: 100015. [CrossRef] Afarjanc, Edgaras. 2019. The Model of Factors Influencing the Quality of E-Service Improvement Process. Ph.D. dissertation, Vilnius University Publishing House, Vilnius, Lithuania. Agger, Annika, and Eva Sorensen. 2016. Managing collaborative innovation in public bureaucracies. Planning Theory 17: 53–73. [CrossRef] Alkheyi, Ali Saif Ali Alkheyi, Gamal S. A. Khalifa, Ali Ameen, Md Sazzad Hossain, M. M. Hewedi, and Nor Saidi Mohamed Nasir. 2020. Strategic Leadership Practices on Team Effectiveness: The Mediating Effect of Knowledge Sharing in the UAE Municipalities. The Academic Leadership Journal 21: 99–112. Alotaibi, Youseef A. 2020. A New Secured E-Government Efficiency Model for Sustainable Services Provision. Journal of Information Security and Cybercrimes Research 3: 75–96. [CrossRef] Alvarenga, Ana, Florinda Matos, Radu Godina, and João C. O. Matias. 2020. Digital Transformation and Knowledge Management in the Public Sector. Sustainability 12: 5824. [CrossRef] Androniceanu, Armenia, and Irina Georgescu. 2021. E-Government in European Countries, a Comparative Approach Using the Principal Components Analysis. The NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy 14: 65–86. [CrossRef] Adm. Sci. 2024,14, 215 16 of 20 Andronie, Mihai, George Lăzăroiu, Mariana Iatagan, Iulian Hurloiu, and Irina Dijmărescu. 2021. Sustainable Cyber-Physical Production Systems in Big Data-Driven Smart Urban Economy: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability 13: 751. [CrossRef] Androutsopoulou, Aggeliki, Euripidis Loukis, Nikos Karacapilidis, and Yannis Charalabidis. 2019. Transforming the communication between citizens and government through AI-guided chatbots. Government Information Quarterly 36: 358–67. [CrossRef] Ansell, Christopher, and Jarle Trondal. 2018. Governing Turbulence: An Organizational-Institutional Agenda. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance 1: 43–57. [CrossRef] Anshari, Muhammad, and Syamimi Ariff Lim. 2017. E-Government with Big Data Enabled through Smartphone for Public Services: Possibilities and Challenges. International Journal of Public Administration 40: 1143–58. [CrossRef] Aslanova, Irina, and Aleksandra Kulichina. 2020. Digital Maturity: Definition and Model. Paper presented at the 2nd International Scientific and Practical Conference “Modern Management Trends and the Digital Economy: From Regional Development to Global Economic Growth” (MTDE 2020), Yekaterinburg, Russia, April 16–17; pp. 443–49. [CrossRef] Avila-Gutierrez, Maria Jesus, Alejandro Martin-Gomez, Francisco Aguayo-Gonzalez, and Juan Ramon Lama-Ruiz. 2020. Eco-holonic 4.0 circular business model to conceptualize sustainable value chain towards digital transition. Sustainability 12: 1889. [CrossRef] Bailey, Arlene, and Kweku-Muata Osei-Bryson. 2018. Contextual reflections on innovations in an interconnected world: Theoretical lenses and practical considerations in ICT4D. Information Technology for Development 24: 423–28. [CrossRef] Banks, George C., Thomas Fischer, Janaki Gooty, and George Stock. 2021. Ethical leadership: Mapping the terrain for concept cleanup and a future research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly 32: 101471. [CrossRef] Bannister, Frank, and Regina Connolly. 2020. The future ain’t what it used to be: Forecasting the impact of ICT on the public sphere. Government Information Quarterly 37: 101410. [CrossRef] Barabashev, Alexey G. 2016. Crisis of State Governance and its Influence on Basic Administrative Paradigms of State and Bureaucracy. Political Science 3: 163–94. Bellandi, Marco, Lisa De Propris, and Erica Santin. 2021. A Place-Based View on Industry 4.0 in Local Productive Systems. Business, 51–69. [CrossRef] Berryhill, Jamie, Kevin Kok Heang, Rob Clogher, and Keegan McBride. 2019. Hello, World: Artificial Intelligence and Its Use in the Public Sector. OECD Working Papers on Public Governance, No. 36. Paris: OECD Publishing. [CrossRef] Bhuvana, Manoharan, and Shanmugam Vasantha. 2020. Determinants of Behavioral Intention to Access E-Governance Services by Rural People with the Mediating Effect of Information and Communication (ICT) Literacy. Journal of Advanced Research in Dynamical & Control Systems 12: 176–87. [CrossRef] Borg, Kim, and Liam Smith. 2018. Digital inclusion and online behaviour: Five typologies of Australian internet users. Behaviour & Information Technology 37: 367–80. [CrossRef] Bowen, Frances E., Mahdi Rostami, and Piers Steel. 2010. Timing is everything: A meta-analysis of the relationships between organizational performance and innovation. Journal of Business Research 63: 1179–85. [CrossRef] Broekhuizen, Thijs Gijsenberg, Oliver Emrich, Broekhuis Maarten, Donkers Bas, and Laurens Manda Sloot. 2021. Digital platform openness: Drivers, dimensions and outcomes. Journal of Business Research 122: 902–14. [CrossRef] Canning, Victoria. 2020. Corrosive Control: State-Corporate and Gendered Harm in Bordered Britain. Critical Criminology: An International Journal 28: 259–75. [CrossRef] Chaffey, Dave. 2007. E-Business and E-Commerce Management—Strategy, Implementation and Practice. London: Pearson Education Limited. Choi, Taehyon, and Susan Meyers Chandler. 2020. Knowledge vacuum: An organizational learning dynamic of how e-government innovations fail. Government Information Quarterly 37: 101416. [CrossRef] Collings, David G., Hugh Scullion, and Paula Caliguiri, eds. 2019. Global Talent Management, 2nd ed. London: Routledge. Contreras, Francoise, Elif Baykal, and Ghulam Abid. 2020. E-Leadership and Teleworking in Times of COVID-19 and Beyond: What We Know and Where Do We Go. Frontiers in Psychology 11: 590271. [CrossRef] Coreynen, Wim, Paul Matthyssens, Johanna Vanderstraeten, and Arjen van Witteloostuijn. 2020. Unravelling the internal and external drivers of digital servitization: A dynamic capabilities and contingency perspective on firm strategy. Industrial Marketing Management 89: 265–77. [CrossRef] Creswell, John W. 2007. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches, 2nd ed. New York: Sage Publications, Inc. Cruz, David Valle, J. Ignacio Criado, Rodrigo Sandoval-Almazán, and Edgar A. Ruvalcaba-Gomez. 2020. Assessing the public policy-cycle framework in the age of artificial intelligence: From agenda-setting to policy evaluation. Government Information Quarterly 37: 101509. [CrossRef] De Ruyter, Ko, Luci Moorman, and Jos Lemmink. 2001. Antecedents of Commitment and Trust in Customer–Supplier Relationships in High Technology Markets. Industrial Marketing Management 30: 271–86. [CrossRef] Desouza, Kevin C., and Benoy Jacob. 2017. Big Data in the Public Sector: Lessons for Practitioners and Scholars. Administration & Society 49: 1043–64. [CrossRef] Dhaoui, Iyad. 2019. Good Governance for Sustainable Development. MPRA Munich Personal RePEc Archive. January. No. 92544. Available online: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/92544/ (accessed on 25 November 2023). Dhaoui, Iyad. 2021. E-Government for Sustainable Development: Evidence from MENA Countries. Journal of the Knowledge Economy 13: 2070–99. [CrossRef] Adm. Sci. 2024,14, 215 17 of 20 Dobrolyubova, Elena, Elena Klochkova, and Oleg Alexandrov. 2019. Digitalization and Effective Government: What Is the Cause and What Is the Effect? In Digital Transformation and Global Society. Edited by Daniel A. Alexandrov, Alexander V. Boukhanovsky, Andrei V. Chugunov, Yury Kabanov, Olessia Koltsova and Ilya Musabirov. DTGS 2019. Communications in Computer and Information Science, 1038. Cham: Springer. [CrossRef] Domingues, Ana Rita, Rodrigo Lozano, Kim Ceulemans, and Tomás B. Ramos. 2017. Sustainability reporting in public sector organisations: Exploring the relation between the reporting process and organisational change management for sustainability. Journal of Environmental Management 192: 292–301. [CrossRef] [PubMed] Droege, Hinrika, Andrea Raggi, and Tomás B. Ramos. 2021. Overcoming Current Challenges for Circular Economy Assessment Implementation in Public Sector Organisations. Sustainability 13: 1182. [CrossRef] Duan, Yanqing, John S. Edwards, and Yogesh K. Dwivedi. 2019. Artificial intelligence for decision making in the era of Big Data– evolution, challenges and research agenda. International Journal of Information Management 48: 63–71. [CrossRef] Dwivedi, Yogesh K., Elvira Ismagilova, D. Laurie Hughes, Jamie Carlson, Raffaele Filieri, Jenna Jacobson, Varsha Jain, Heikki Karjaluoto, Hajer Kefi, Anjala S. Krishen, and et al. 2021. Setting the future of digital and social media marketing research: Perspectives and research propositions. International Journal of Information Management 59: 102168. [CrossRef] Eggers, Fabian. 2020. Masters of Disasters? Challenges and Opportunities for SMEs in Times of Crisis. Journal of Business Research 116: 199–208. [CrossRef] [PubMed] Evenseth, Lise L., Maria Sydnes, and Anne H. Gausdal. 2022. Building Organizational Resilience through Organizational Learning: A Systematic Review. Frontiers in Communication 7: 837386. [CrossRef] Featherman, Mauricio S., and Paul A. Pavlou. 2003. Predicting e-Services Adoption: A Perceived Risk Facets Perspective. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 59: 451–74. [CrossRef] Garson, G. David. 2006. Public Information Technology and E-Governance: Managing the Virtual State. Burlington: Jones and Bartlett Publishers. Gebauer, Heiko, Elgar Fleisch, Claudio Lamprecht, and Felix Wortmann. 2020. Growth paths for overcoming the digitalization paradox. Business Horizons 63: 313–23. [CrossRef] Gillingham, Philip, and Timothy Graham. 2016. Big Data in Social Welfare: The Development of a Critical Perspective on Social Work’s Latest “Electronic Turn”. Australia Social Work 70: 21. [CrossRef] Granstrand, Ove, and Marcus Holgersson. 2020. Innovation ecosystems: A conceptual review and a new definition. Technovation, 90–91. [CrossRef] Hallstedt, Sophie I., Ola Isaksson, and Anna Öhrwall Rönnbäck. 2020. The Need for New Product Development Capabilities from Digitalization, Sustainability, and Servitization Trends. Sustainability 12: 10222. [CrossRef] Hasnat, Baban. 2018. Big Data: An Institutional Perspective on Opportunities and Challenges. Journal of Economic Issues 52: 580–88. [CrossRef] Harald, Heinrichs, and Laws Norman. 2021. Sustainable public administration. Sustainability 13: 6382. [CrossRef] Herasymiuk, Kostiantyn, Oleg V. Martselyak, Yuliya N. Kirichenko, Nataliya V. Zhmur, and Iuliia I. Shmalenko. 2020. Principles of Integrity and Good Governance in Public Administration. International Journal of Management 11: 545–55. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3601652 (accessed on 15 May 2020). Holgersson, Jesper, Eva Söderström, and Jeremy Rose. 2019. Digital inclusion for elderly citizens for a sustainable society Research-inProgress Papers. Paper presented at the Twenty-Seventh European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS2019), StockholmUppsala, Sweden, June 8–14; Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333264596_DIGITAL_INCLUSION_ OF_ELDERLY_CITIZENS_FOR_A_SUSTAINABLE_SOCIETY#fullTextFileContent (accessed on 25 November 2023). Hughes, Jeffrey, Martin Kornberger, Brad MacKay, Phillips O’brien, and Sneha Reddy. 2021. Organizational strategy and its implications for strategic studies: A review essay. Journal of Strategic Studies 46: 427–50. [CrossRef] Jacob, Klaus, Caroline Paulick-Thiel, Julia Teebken, Sylvia Veit, and Mandy Singer-Brodowski. 2021. Change from Within: Exploring Transformative Literacy in Public Administrations to Foster Sustainability Transitions. Sustainability 13: 4698. [CrossRef] Jansen, Arild, and Svein Olnes. 2016. The nature of public e-services and their quality dimensions Government. Government Information Quarterly 33: 647–57. [CrossRef] Jean, Ruey-Jer “Bryan”, Daekwan Kim, and Erin Cavusgil. 2020. Antecedents and outcomes of digital platform risk for international new ventures’ internationalization. Journal of World Business 55: 101021. [CrossRef] Kassen, Maxat. 2019. Open data and e-government—Related or competing ecosystems: A paradox of open government and promise of civic engagement in Estonia. Information Technology for Development 25: 552–78. [CrossRef] Kern, Florian, Karoline S. Rogge, and Michael Howlett. 2019. Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: New approaches and insights through bridging innovation and policy studies. Research Policy 48: 103832. [CrossRef] Khalifa, Gamal. 2020. Intervening role of supervisor trust and leader-member exchange: An investigation into the role of supervisor support on employee innovative behaviour. Journal of Association of Arab Universities for Tourism and Hospitality 17: 46–76. [CrossRef] Khanra, Sayantan, and Rojers P. Joseph. 2019. Governance Maturity Models: A Meta-ethnographic Study. The International Technology Management Review 8: 1–9. [CrossRef] Adm. Sci. 2024,14, 215 18 of 20 Khanra, Sayantan, and Rojers P. Joseph. 2020. Development and Validation of an Assessment Framework for E-Government Services. In Electronic Governance and Open Society: Challenges in Eurasia. Edited by Andrei Chugunov, Igor Khodachek, Yuri Misnikov and Dmitrii Trutnev. EGOSE 2020. Communications in Computer and Information Science. Cham: Springer, vol. 1349, pp. 27–41. [CrossRef] Kravariti, Foteini, Konstantinos Tasoulis, Hugh Scullion, and Manar Khaled Alali. 2023. Talent management and performance in the public sector: The role of organisational and line managerial support for development. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 34: 1782–807. [CrossRef] Kretschmer, Tobias, and Pooyan Khashabi. 2020. Digital Transformation and Organization Design: An Integrated Approach. California Management Review 62: 86–104. [CrossRef] Krpálek, Pavel, Kateˇrina Berková, Andrea Kubišová, Katarína KrpálkováKrelová, Dagmar Frendlovská, and Daniela Spiesová. 2021. Formation of Professional Competences and Soft Skills of Public Administration Employees for Sustainable Professional Development. Sustainability 13: 5533. [CrossRef] Laita, Amine, and Mustapha Belaissaoui. 2017. Information Technology Governance in Public Sector Organizations. In Europe and MENA Cooperation Advances in Information and Communication Technologies. Edited by Álvaro Rocha, Mohammed Serrhini and Carlos Felgueiras. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. Cham: Springer, vol. 520, pp. 331–40. [CrossRef] Lewandowsky, Stephan, Laura Smillie, David Hertwing Garcia, Weatherall Ralph, Egidy Jim, Ronald StefanieRobertson, Cailin O’connor, Anastasia Kozyreva, and Philipp Lorenz-Spreen. 2020. Technology and Democracy—Understanding the Influence of Online Technologies on Political Behaviour and Decision-Making. Publications Office, European Commission, Joint Research Centre. Available online: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2760/709177 (accessed on 25 November 2023). Lobschata, Lara, Benjamin Muellerb, Felix Eggersd, Laura Brandimartee, Sarah Diefenbach, Mirja Kroschke, and Jochen Wirtz. 2021. Corporate Digital Responsibility. Journal of Business Research 122: 875–88. [CrossRef] Lopes, AndréVaz, and Josivania Silva Farias. 2022. How can governance support collaborative innovation in the public sector? A systematic review of the literature. International Review of Administrative Sciences 88: 114–30. [CrossRef] Lozano, Rodrigo, and Iciar Garcia. 2020. Scrutinizing sustainability change and its institutionalization in organizations. Frontiers in Sustainability 1: 1. [CrossRef] Lozano, Rodrigo, Maria Barreiro-Gen, and Afnan Zafar. 2021. Collaboration for organizational sustainability limits to growth: Developing a factors, benefits, and challenges framework. Sustainable Development 29: 728–37. [CrossRef] Mahlow, Cerstin, and Andreas Hediger. 2019. Digital Transformation in Higher Education—Buzzword or Opportunity? Available online: https://dl.acm.org/doi/fullHtml/10.1145/3329488/3331171 (accessed on 25 November 2023). Malodia, Suresh, Amandeep Dhir, Mahima Mishra, and Zeeshan Ahmed Bhatti. 2021. Future of e-Government: An integrated conceptual framework. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 173: 121102. [CrossRef] Manžuch, Zinaida, and Elena Maceviˇci ¯ ut ˙ e. 2020. Getting ready to reduce the digital divide: Scenarios of Lithuanian public libraries. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 71: 1205–17. [CrossRef] Marques, Isabel, João Leitão, Alba Carvalho, and Dina Pereira. 2021. Public Administration and Values Oriented to Sustainability: A Systematic Approach to the Literature. Sustainability 13: 2566. [CrossRef] Marti, Emilio, Martin Fuchs, Mark DesJardine, Rieneke Slager, and Jean-Pascal Gond. 2023. A More Impactful Strategy for Sustainable Investing. Finance and Investing. Harward Business Review. Matarazzo, Michiela, Lara Penco, Giorgia Profumo, and Roberto Quaglia. 2021. Digital transformation and customer value creation in Made in Italy SMES: A dynamic capabilities perspective. Journal of Business Research 123: 642–56. [CrossRef] McNab, Christine. 2009. What social media offers to health professionals and citizens? Bulletin of the World Health Organization 87: 566. [CrossRef] Meuleman, Louis. 2021. Public Administration and Governance for the SDGs: Navigating between Change and Stability. Sustainability 13: 5914. [CrossRef] Misuraca, Gianluca, Egidijus Barceviˇcius, and Cristiano Codagnone, eds. 2020. Exploring Digital Government Transformation in the EU—Understanding Public Sector Innovation in a Data-Driven Society. EUR 30333. Luxembourg: EN, Publications Office of the European Union. ISBN 978-92-76-21326-0. [CrossRef] Moonti, Roy Marthen. 2019. Regional Autonomy in Realising Good Governance. Substantive Justice International Journal of Law 1: 43–53. [CrossRef] Myo, Yan Naing, Gamal S. A. Khalifa, and Thin Thin Aye. 2019. The Impact of Service Quality on Customer Loyalty of Myanmar Hospitality Industry: The Mediating Role of Customer Satisfaction. International Journal of Management and Human Science 3: 1–11. Nasser, Basem, Derar Eleyan, and Maan Alkhateeb. 2022. E-Government Sustainability & Governance: A General Framework. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research 11: 139–44. Norton, Andriew, Surendra Shroff, and Nick Edwards. 2020. Digital Transformation—An Enterprise Architecture Perspective. London: PublishNation Limited. Ochara, Nixon Muganda, and Tendani Mawela. 2015. Enabling social sustainability of e-participation through mobile technology. Information Technology for Development 21: 205–28. [CrossRef] Pangarso, Astadi, Endang Siti Astuti, Kusdi Raharjo, and Tri Wulida Afrianty. 2020a. A New Theoretical Framework of Organizational Effectiveness from Knowledge and Ambidexterity Perspectives. GATR Journal Management and Marketing Review 5: 213–25. [CrossRef] [PubMed] Adm. Sci. 2024,14, 215 19 of 20 Pangarso, Astadi, Endang Siti Astuti, Kusdi Raharjo, and Tri Wulida Afrianty. 2020b. Data of innovation ambidexterity as a mediator in the absorptive capacity effect on sustainable competitive advantage. Data in Brief 29: 105200. [CrossRef] Pencheva, Irina, Marc Esteve, and Slava Jankin Mikhaylov. 2020. Big Data and AI—A transformational shift for government: So, what next for research? Public Policy and Administration 35: 24–44. [CrossRef] Pinem, Ave, Immanuella Adriana, Margi Ivone, Achmad Hidayanto, Phusavat Nizar, and Meyliana Kongkiti. 2018. Trust and its impact towards continuance of use in government-to-business online service. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy 12: 265–85. [CrossRef] Pollitt, Christopher, and Geert Bouckaert. 2011. Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis—New Public Management, Governance, and the Neo-Weberian State, 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Prati, L. Melita, Ceasar Douglas, Gerald R. Ferris, Anthony P. Ammeter, and M. Ronald Buckley. 2003. Emotional intelligence, leadership effectiveness, and team outcomes. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis 11: 21–40. [CrossRef] Rakšnys, Adomas Vincas, Dangis Gudelis, and Arvydas Guogis. 2021. The Analysis of Opportunities of the Application of Big Data and Artificial Intelligence Technologies in Public Governance and Social Policy. Socialin ˙ e Teorija, Empirija, Politika ir Praktika 22: 88–100. [CrossRef] Ranzatti, Mario Augusto, Alessandro Marco Rosini, Orlando Roque Da Silva, Angelo Palmisano, and Arnoldo J H Guevara. 2019. Quantitative Perspective of the Implementation of Best Practices on Itil: Information Technology Infrastructure Library in a Brazilian Public Company under People and Processes Overview. Journal on Innovation and Sustainability 10: 3–11. [CrossRef] Reascos, Irving, JoãoÁlvaro Carvalho, and Sonia Bossano. 2019. Implanting IT Applications in Government Institutions: A Process Model Emerging from a Case Study in a Medium-Sized Municipality. Paper presented at the 12th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (ICEGOV2019), Melbourne, VIC, Australia, April 3–5; pp. 80–85. [CrossRef] Ren, Z. J., R. S. Tao, and Z. H. Hu. 2018. Impact of organization career management on career growth of knowledge employee: Mediation effect of perceived organizational support. Journal of Hubei University of Arts and Science 39: 48–52. Revyakin, Sergey. 2019. Functionality of e-participation platforms: Why social networks? Public Administration Issues 3: 88–106. Rosário, Albérico Travassos, and Joana Carmo Dias. 2022. Sustainability and the Digital Transition: A Literature Review. Sustainability 14: 4072. [CrossRef] Rowley, Jennifer. 2006. An analysis of the e-service literature: Towards a research agenda. Internet Research 16: 339–59. [CrossRef] Ryan, James C., and Syed A. A. Tipu. 2013. Leadership effects on innovation propensity: A two-factor full range leadership model. Journal of Business Research 66: 2116–29. [CrossRef] Safiullin, Marat R., and Elvir M. Akhmetshin. 2019. Digital Transformation of a University as a Factor of Ensuring Its Competitivenes. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology 9: 7387–90. [CrossRef] Santiago, Anna Maria, and Richard John Smith. 2019. What can “Big data” methods offer human services research on organizations and communities? Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance 43: 344–356. Shevyakova, Anna, Yelena Petrenko, Natalia Fomenko, Eleonora Munsch, and Nazgul Daribekova. 2023. Building Competencies for Industry 4.0: Suggestions from Kazakhstan Experience. Communications of International Proceedings 2023: 4136223. [CrossRef] Shpak, Nestor, Yuliya Bondarenko, Włodzimierz Sroka, Ihor Kulyniak, Nataliia Tsymbalista, and Olha Prosovych. 2022. Strategic planning of the recreational and tourist industry development: The Ukrainian evidence. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Knowledge 10: 100–22. [CrossRef] Singh, Monika, and Ganesh P. Sahu. 2021. Key Factors for GreenIS Acceptancein Banking Segment: Pragmatic Analysis. International Journal of Electronic Government Research 17: 48–67. [CrossRef] Sjödin, David, Vinit Parida, Marin Jovanovic, and Ivanka Visnjic. 2020. Value Creation and Value Capture Alignment in Business Model Innovation: A Process View on Outcome-Based Business Models. Journal of Product Innovation Management 37: 158–83. [CrossRef] Sklyar, Alexey, Christian Kowalkowski, Bård Tronvoll, and David Sörhammar. 2019. Organizing for Digital Servitization: A Service Ecosystem Perspective. Journal of Business Research 104: 450–60. [CrossRef] Stake, Robert E. 2005. Qualitative Case Studies. In The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, 3rd ed. Edited by Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Stamenkov, Gjoko, and Zamir Dika. 2015. A sustainable e-service quality model. Journal of Service Theory and Practice 25: 414–42. [CrossRef] Solechan, Solechan. 2021. Government Efforts in Disaster Emergency Capacity. Administrative Law and Governance Journal 4: 126–43. Sundberg, Leif. 2019. If Digitalization is the Solution, What is the Problem? Paper presented at the 19th European Conference on Digital Government, Northern Nicosia, Cyprus, October 24–25. [CrossRef] Tarnovskaya, Veronika. 2023. Sustainability as the Source of Competitive Advantage. How Sustainable is it? In Creating a Sustainable Competitive Position: Ethical Challenges for International Firms (International Business and Management). Edited by Pervez N. Ghauri, Ulf Elg and Sara Melén Hånell. Leeds: Emerald Publishing Limited, vol. 37, pp. 75–89. [CrossRef] Terziu, Hysni. 2020. The Role of the Internet in the Development of Marketing and Electronic Services in Business. European Journal of Economics and Business Studies 6: 1–12. [CrossRef] Thanh, Nguyen Van, Hye-Young Yoon, and Junseok Hwang. 2019. A Cross—Country Study on E—Government Interoperability Capability and E-Government Services. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences 13: 36–44. [CrossRef] Adm. Sci. 2024,14, 215 20 of 20 Verhoef, Peter C., Thijs Broekhuizen, Yakov Bart, Abhi Bhattacharya, John Qi Dong, Nicolai Fabian, and Michael Haenlein. 2021. Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. Journal of Business Research 122: 889–901. [CrossRef] Yadav, Jyoti, A. K. Saini, and Amit Kumar Yadav. 2019. Measuring citizens engagement in e-Government projects: Indian perspective. Journal of Statistics and Management Systems 22: 327–46. [CrossRef] Ziemba, Paweł. 2020. Multi-criteria stochastic selection of electric vehicles for the sustainable development of local government and state administration units in Poland. Energies 13: 6299. [CrossRef] Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.