User acceptance of SMS-based e-government services: Differences between adopters and non-adopters

Tony Susanto, Robert Goodwin

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    76 Citations (Scopus)


    Delivering public services through the SMS channel is popular in developed and developing countries, and it has demonstrated its benefits. However, citizens' acceptance of the services is still an issue. This paper presents a study on user acceptance of SMS-based e-government services. Constructs of the proposed model were derived from a survey on citizens' motivations for using SMS-based e-government services (142 respondents from 25 countries), prominent theories on individual acceptance of technologies, and current studies on user acceptance of SMS and e-government services. The model was validated using data from 589 citizens in three cities in Indonesia, who are non-adopters. The relationships between the factors then were compared with data from 80 adopters of SMS-based e-government services in Australia. The proposed model explains what factors influence non-adopters to accept SMS-based e-government services, and the comparison explains the relative importance of the factors for the adopters. The findings are promising for governments who wish to evaluate a new SMS-based e-government system very early in its development in order to assess potential acceptability and for governments who would like to diagnose the reasons why an existing SMS-based e-government service is not fully acceptable to citizens and to take corrective action to increase the acceptability of the service.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)486-497
    Number of pages12
    Issue number4
    Publication statusPublished - Oct 2013

    Bibliographical note

    Copyright 2013 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.


    • Adopters
    • E-Government
    • Non-adopters
    • SMS
    • User acceptance


    Dive into the research topics of 'User acceptance of SMS-based e-government services: Differences between adopters and non-adopters'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this