An Efficiency Measurement of E-Government Performance for Network Readiness: Non-Parametric Frontier Approach
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper addresses a notorious issue in current times, that of enhancing the effectiveness in e-government. Indeed, the ROI of ICT for governments should overcome the strictly financial aspects, looking to serve the public. Therefore, any research that intends to find out about how to make the most of e-government policies is necessary, especially if it is done in a innovative way.
That being said, the authors should take into account the following suggestions:
- The research objectives should be more explicit.
- Likewise, the authors should emphasize more why this research is innovative. After all, the special issue is "open innovation".
- There are no hypothesis or research questions. It is an exploratory research, but when you describe the variables the authors could state how they expect them to behave in a clear manner.
- Human indicators (such as human capital index or political regimes) could also be of interest.
- Same goes for the conclusions. Considering the practical implications of the research, the authors should express the conclusions in a more concise manner. Also, there are no references to the e-government business model.
- Please justify why the description of the methodological approach is under the literature section.
- Regarding the tables, Table 1 is not a comparative, it is a list. From the text it is difficult to assess the differences, advantages and disadvantages of each index. Table 2 has an entry "index" that I fail to see the meaning of. Table 3 has a mistake (Mix for Min). Tables 4 and 5 are difficult to read and interpret.
- Regarding the style, the authors should employ the services of a language editor, because there are some basic mistakes like not explaining acronyms until the third time it shows up, mixing caps and regular letters, or too long sentence that are hard to understand. In general, language issues make the paper difficult to read and understand (e.g. lines 106 and 107 make no sense whatsoever, misuse of terms like "status", etc. ).
Author Response
Please refer to the attached file.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The study is developed at a acceptable level, the structure of the study is also clear.
Before publishing, I recommend that you consider incorporating the following notes:
-In the abstract, in my opinion, there is need for better evaluation of the results of the study.
-I would also suggest to avoid using abbreviations without a previous definition in the abstract.
-The methodological part would benefit if it used the standard form, which would state the aim, the research problem specified from it, followed by a research question / hypothesis ...
-The analysis section should explicitly include a chapter called discussion, where the authors would discuss the findings.
-Conclusion would benefit from a comparison of results with reference studies.
General recommendations:
-Do not start a sentence with a numbered reference in parentheses.
-Visualize the results in order to increase the citation potential of the study.
Author Response
Please refer to the attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Generally speaking, this is a good topic of research. The authors did conduct an inclusive literature review, which made this research paper fruitful. Also, the research method "DEA" has been well applied, together with other related analysis, so dose the evaluation factors setting and the empirical findings. Together, these elements make the article valuable, especially the conclusion. However, it's highly recommended that the logical nexus between sentences and/or phrases (occasionally, the grammar) need be strengthen so that the readers may better and/or easier catch the points of this article.
Author Response
Please refer to the attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Most of the comments have been sufficiently addressed. Please do not forget to engage in English language editing services.
