Volume 6, Issue 1 (Spring 2023)
Iranian Journal of Educational Sociology 2023, 6(1): 130-140 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Barazideh M, Taghvaee Yazdi M, Niazazari K. (2023). The Relationship between Electronic-governance Foresight and Managers' Organizational Transparency in Order to Present a Model (Case Study: Saderat Banks of Tehran province). Iranian Journal of Educational Sociology. 6(1), 130-140. doi:10.61186/ijes.6.1.130
URL: http://iase-idje.ir/article-1-1260-en.html
URL: http://iase-idje.ir/article-1-1260-en.html
1- PhD student, Department of Educational Management, Sari Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sari, Iran.
2- Associate Professor, Department of Educational Management, Sari Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sari, Iran.
3- Professor, Department of Educational Management, Sari Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sari, Iran.
2- Associate Professor, Department of Educational Management, Sari Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sari, Iran.
3- Professor, Department of Educational Management, Sari Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sari, Iran.
Abstract: (1197 Views)
Purpose: Organizational transparency plays an important role in improving the performance of various organizations, especially service organizations. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between e-governance foresight and the organizational transparency of managers in order to present a model.
Methodology: This research was applied in terms of purpose and mixed (qualitative and quantitative) in terms of implementation method. The qualitative part of the community was experts related to the field of research, 12 people were selected as a sample according to the principle of theoretical saturation with non-random sampling and snowball methods. In 2017, there were 7170 people in the quantitative sector of managers of export banks in Tehran province, of which 365 people were selected as a sample according to the table of Karjesi and Morgan by simple random sampling. The research tool was semi-structured interview in the qualitative part and researcher-made questionnaires in the quantitative part, whose psychometric indicators were confirmed. Qualitative part data were analyzed with open, axial and selective coding method in MAXQDA software and quantitative part data were analyzed with exploratory factor analysis and structural equation modeling methods in SPSS and Smart PLS software.
Findings: The findings of the qualitative section showed that the e-governance foresight has 75 indicators and 17 components in 6 dimensions: organizational, technical, information and data, marketing, resources and perspective and organizational transparency, 60 indicators and 15 components in 6 dimensions: information transparency, economic transparency, transparency The client had management transparency, organizational transparency and human resources transparency. Also, the findings of the quantitative section showed that the factor load and average variance extracted of all dimensions and components were higher than 0.70 and 0.50, respectively, and their reliability was calculated higher than 0.60 with Cronbach's alpha and combined methods. In addition, the relationship model of e-governance foresight with managers' organizational transparency had a good fit, and e-governance foresight and all its 6 dimensions including organizational, technical, information and data, marketing, resources and perspective had a positive and meaningful effect on managers' organizational transparency (05 /0P<).
Conclusion: According to the results of this study, e-governance foresight had a positive effect on the organizational transparency of managers. Therefore, to improve organizational transparency, it is possible to improve the foresight of e-governance and its components including organizational, technical, information and data, marketing, resources and perspective.
Methodology: This research was applied in terms of purpose and mixed (qualitative and quantitative) in terms of implementation method. The qualitative part of the community was experts related to the field of research, 12 people were selected as a sample according to the principle of theoretical saturation with non-random sampling and snowball methods. In 2017, there were 7170 people in the quantitative sector of managers of export banks in Tehran province, of which 365 people were selected as a sample according to the table of Karjesi and Morgan by simple random sampling. The research tool was semi-structured interview in the qualitative part and researcher-made questionnaires in the quantitative part, whose psychometric indicators were confirmed. Qualitative part data were analyzed with open, axial and selective coding method in MAXQDA software and quantitative part data were analyzed with exploratory factor analysis and structural equation modeling methods in SPSS and Smart PLS software.
Findings: The findings of the qualitative section showed that the e-governance foresight has 75 indicators and 17 components in 6 dimensions: organizational, technical, information and data, marketing, resources and perspective and organizational transparency, 60 indicators and 15 components in 6 dimensions: information transparency, economic transparency, transparency The client had management transparency, organizational transparency and human resources transparency. Also, the findings of the quantitative section showed that the factor load and average variance extracted of all dimensions and components were higher than 0.70 and 0.50, respectively, and their reliability was calculated higher than 0.60 with Cronbach's alpha and combined methods. In addition, the relationship model of e-governance foresight with managers' organizational transparency had a good fit, and e-governance foresight and all its 6 dimensions including organizational, technical, information and data, marketing, resources and perspective had a positive and meaningful effect on managers' organizational transparency (05 /0P<).
Conclusion: According to the results of this study, e-governance foresight had a positive effect on the organizational transparency of managers. Therefore, to improve organizational transparency, it is possible to improve the foresight of e-governance and its components including organizational, technical, information and data, marketing, resources and perspective.
Type of Study: Research Article |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2022/12/15 | Accepted: 2023/02/28 | Published: 2023/05/31
Received: 2022/12/15 | Accepted: 2023/02/28 | Published: 2023/05/31
References
1. Akimov A, Kadysheva K. (2023). E-government as a tool for communication with young people: legal aspects. Journal of Law and Sustainable Development. 11(1): e0272: 1-11. [DOI:10.37497/sdgs.v11i1.272]
2. Cabugwang KAF, Enriquez RCK, Villabroza BE, Pulmano CE. (2023). Towards the development of a Blockchain system for Philippine government processes for enhanced transparency and verifiability. Procedia Computer Science. 219: 107-114. [DOI:10.1016/j.procs.2023.01.270]
3. Cheng LTW, Wang JW. (2021). Equity ownership and corporate transparency: International evidence. International Review of Economics & Finance. 76: 143-165. [DOI:10.1016/j.iref.2021.03.005]
4. Choi HM, Yoon PS, Lim B. (2023). Corporate governance and price differences between dual-class shares in Korea. International Review of Economics & Finance. 86: 304-319. [DOI:10.1016/j.iref.2023.03.023]
5. Choi S, Jung H. (2021). Does early-life war exposure of a CEO enhance corporate information transparency? Journal of Business Research. 136: 198-208. [DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.07.019]
6. Derakhshan M, Ganbari S, Zandi Kh. (2018). Factorial structure and internal consistency of organizational transparency questionnaire. Quarterly Journal of Career & Organizational Counseling. 10(37): 147-164. [Persian]
7. Ghanbari S, Moradi A. (2018). Analysis of the relationship between organizational transparency and organizational silence of employees. Managing Education in Organizations. 7(1): 205-230. [Persian]
8. Grosman A, Leiponen A. (2018). Organizational transparency and power in firm ownership networks. Journal of Comparative Economics. 46(4): 1158-1177. [DOI:10.1016/j.jce.2018.07.001]
9. Heimstadt M. (2017). Openwashing: A decoupling perspective on organizational transparency. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 125: 77-86. [DOI:10.1016/j.techfore.2017.03.037]
10. Holland D, Krause A, Provencher J, Seltzer T. (2018). Transparency tested: The influence of message features on public perceptions of organizational transparency. Public Relations Review. 44(2): 256-264. [DOI:10.1016/j.pubrev.2017.12.002]
11. Liu N, Laing E, Cao Y, Zhang X. (2018). Institutional ownership and corporate transparency in China. Finance Research Letters. 24: 328-336. [DOI:10.1016/j.frl.2017.12.001]
12. Manoharan AP, Melitski J, Holzer M. (2023). Digital governance: An assessment of performance and best practices. Public Organization Review. 23: 265-283. [DOI:10.1007/s11115-021-00584-8] []
13. Moein Z, Hashemiannejad F, Ghorbani M. (2021). Designing an organizational transparency model with the approach of promoting organizational health in Zahedan University of Medical Sciences. Journal of Islamic Life Style Centered on Health. 5(2): 152-171. [Persian]
14. Nair R, Muttakin M, Khan A, Subramaniam N, Somanath VS. (2019). Corporate social responsibility disclosure and financial transparency: Evidence from India. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal. 56: 330-351. [DOI:10.1016/j.pacfin.2019.06.015]
15. Oxelheim L. (2019). Optimal vs satisfactory transparency: The impact of global macroeconomic fluctuations on corporate competitiveness. International Business Review. 28(1): 190-206. [DOI:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2018.05.011]
16. Peng B, Tu Y, Wei G. (2018). Governance of electronic waste recycling based on social capital embeddedness theory. Journal of Cleaner Production. 187: 29-36. [DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.265]
17. Rahnavard F, Seihoon AR, Mortazavi M, Taherpour H. (2019). Designing an e-governance framework for export development policy formulation. Journal of Public Administration Perspective. 10(3): 101-125. [Persian]
18. Ronaghi MH, Farhadi P, Kheradmand S. (2018). Evaluating information technology governance by grey theory. Case study (Faculty of Electronic Education, Shiraz University). Roshd-e-Fanavari. 14(51): 9-16. [Persian]
19. Saghafi F, Yaghoobi N, Ansari S. (2018). Comparative study of e-government foresight projects in the world in order to opt as the benchmark for Iran. Journal of Public Administration. 10(2): 187-208. [Persian]
20. Sendlhofer T, Tplstoy D. (2022). How employees shape CSR transparency: A sensemaking perspective. Journal of Business Research. 150: 268-278. [DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.05.074]
21. Shojaan A, Taghavifard SMT, Elyasi M, Mohammadi M. (2019). The realization of electronic governance in Iran: A step to the intelligent government. Journal of Emergency Management. 8(17): 49-59. [Persian]
22. Shojaan A, Taghavifard SMT. (2018). A model for the implementation of electronic governance in Iran. Iranian Journal of Information Processing and Management. 33(4): 1545-1570. [Persian]
23. Ulitsky M, Dreizen M, Serbian O, Mashkin A, Sokolova N. (2023). Study of opportunities to increase financial transparency of railway transport. Transportation Research Procedia. 68: 70-80. [DOI:10.1016/j.trpro.2023.02.009]
24. Zalik A, Osuoka IA. (2020). Beyond transparency: A consideration of extraction's full costs. The Extractive Industries and Society. 7(3): 781-785. [DOI:10.1016/j.exis.2020.07.015] [PMID] []
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
.jpg)
