Introduction

Old and New Channels: Traditional Communications Practices and the Development of E-Government

Elena Larsen

Pew Internet and American Life Project

Abstract

One of the goals of e-government is to provide “seamless” services. Such services would pull together the resources of all levels and agencies of government, allowing citizens to address their problem with one contact. The daunting task of determining what government agencies take care of the issue would be removed.

Seamless services are often discussed in content of e-government exclusively, with little discussion given to whether people will actually use the Internet for all of their government dealings. Some people simply do not have access. Some people may prefer to use other methods for communicating with the government.

We surveyed American adults to assess their experiences and expectations of the government based on their last contact with the government (apart from mailing in a tax return). We learned that there is definitely a value added in providing seamless services – 23% of Americans said they had contacted the wrong level of government in the past, and 30% said they had contacted the wrong agency. We also learned that people like using the Internet for many information-gathering purposes, and that are more likely than they were two years ago to say that the government web sites have improved the way they interact with the government. However, for the most complex and urgent problems, Americans want to be able to use the telephone to seek resolution.

Introduction

E-government is the touchstone of modern administrations. Promising to improve citizens’ lives though better delivery of services and to create efficiencies that lighten fiscal burdens, it is pursued at all levels of government throughout the world.

The United Nations has grasped the importance of e-government and published a report benchmarking the progress made by its member nations in developing e-government.[1] This report creates five levels of e-government adoption, ranging from mere online presence to the full and seamless integration of e-services across administrative boundaries. While the United States is the acknowledged global leader in e-government, it does not yet approach the full “seamless” level of services.

Although it may be easier to attain only, that there is nothing about seamless government services per se that relegates it exclusively to the domain of e-government. Yet it is often touted there, as if seamless government referred only to the Internet, and not to other communication channels. Being able to take care of federal, state, and local tax requirements on one web site is great, but if that service is not available to people without web service, then seamless government has not been provided. As one example, a Penn State researcher found that black churches, which generally lack Internet access, would be left “out of contention for the $65 billion of funding opportunities associated with the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. The majority of those programs require Internet skills to access information and applications.”[2] Similarly, the State Department recently announced that all applicants to the Diversity Visa lottery program would now have to apply online.[3] This decision was explained as an effort to promote security and reduce fraud. But no mention was made of how people without access to the Internet would be accommodated.

U.S. policy on universal service ensures that nearly every household in the country has a telephone. There is no such policy for the Internet access, and household access has hovered at about 60% for the past year and a half.[4] Even if it does start to ascend again, it is unlikely to reach the levels attained by phone service. Over half of those not currently online believe that they never will be.[5] Thus, the service goals of e-government must be examined in a context that goes beyond the Internet.

This study presents the results of a survey of American adults who have contacted any level of government in the United States within the past year, including those whose contact is limited to visiting government web sites. It compares their preferences, experiences, and expectations across various levels of communication. We find that the service expectations of e-government must extend to phone service. While citizens appreciate the information available to them online, they make it clear that in many instances, nothing compares to dealing with a human voice.

Who is contacting the government

Over half (56%) of Americans contacted the government within the past year. They used a variety of channels, including the Internet, telephone, email, letters, and personal visits. Their last contact was more often with the Federal (35%) or state (37%) governments than with local (23%).

Some 23% of Americans also note that they have contacted the wrong level of government at some point, and 30% have contacted the wrong agency. Only about 5%, however, say this is a regular problem.

Whites are more likely than non-whites to have contacted in the government in the past year, 58%-48%. Higher levels of education also lead to more government contact.

Education and Likelihood of Contacting the Government
Level of Education	% who have contacted the government in the past year
Less than high school	25%
High school graduate	44%
Some college	69%
College graduate +	80%
Source: Pew Internet and American Life Project July 2003 Survey. N=2,925. Margin of error ± 2%.

Why they contact the Government

Personal reasons trump business

We asked people to provide detailed information about the last time they contacted the government. Almost three-quarters, 71%, of Americans contacted the government for personal reasons. One in five (20%) had business reasons, while 7% had both.

Conducting transactions – 30% of last contacts

For a plurality of Americans, conducting transactions was the most common purpose of contact with the government. This could include anything from paying a fine to getting a driver’s license. There was no clearly preferred channel for handling transactions – 37% used the phone, 35% used the Internet, 30% visited a government agency, and 20% used a combination of methods.

Getting information – 25% of last contacts

People sought information from the government more for business than for personal reasons, 37%-23%. Again, those getting information had no single preferred channel, although the Internet did edge out the telephone somewhat.

Express an opinion – 19% of last contacts

Expressing an opinion is unique among the activities we surveyed in that it requires no action on the part of the government. Those expressing an opinion may feel that they have completed their action once they submit their message, or they may feel action is not complete until their opinion is acted upon. Almost one in three of those who say that their last interaction with the government is still ongoing or else has failed to accomplish its purpose were expressing an opinion.

Seniors are particularly active in submitting opinions to the government; 33% did that in their last contact. Expressing an opinion is the most common use of email among all age groups. Almost half (48%) of those who emailed the government in their last contact were expressing an opinion. However, email was not the only conduit for American opinion. One quarter (25%) of opinions sent to the government were sent through letters, 24% through email, and 20% via the telephone.

Get help solving a problem – 11% of last contacts

Those who brought specific problems to the government for resolution were the most harried of people contacting the government. They were almost twice as likely as average to describe their situations as “very complicated”[6] (16% vs. 9%), and over twice as likely to describe them as “very urgent”[7] (25% vs. 11%).

A separate look at channels

Telephone

One in four (26%) Americans used the telephone exclusively for their last government contact, and 42% used it in combination with some other channel.

It is most popular among non-Internet users, 36%-25% and infrequent Internet users (43% for those who go online less than “several times per week”, compared to 22% for daily users and 27% for almost daily users). Telephone contact is also most used among those with less than a high-school education (36%) and household incomes under $30,000 (33%).

The telephone was the preferred channel for people in a hurry. Over one in three (36%) of those with a “very urgent” goal used the phone, compared to 26% of people with less urgent goals. Some 62% of people seeking problem resolution used the telephone. For an inverse picture, 11% of those who used the phone last time said they had a “very complicated” issue, compared to only 2% of web users and 5% of email users.

The most commonly used sources for finding phone numbers were the telephone directory (27%), knowledge of a number from having used it before (20%), and government publications (19%). Less-used sources were the Internet (15%), other people (9%), and a government information number (3%).

Internet

Nearly one in five (18%) Americans used the Internet exclusively for their last government contact, and 29% used it in combination with some other channel. The Internet is least popular among seniors, only 7% of whom used it in their last government contact. It becomes more popular among Internet users the longer they have been online. Seventy-eight percent of those with 6 or more years of Internet experience visited a government web site in the past year, compared to just 42% of those with one year or less.

The Internet, along with the telephone, is a popular resource among those seeking information (43% of those who used the Internet at all in the last contact; 44% used the phone.) Unlike the telephone, however, it was also the go-to place for people dealing with non-complex issues (31%, compared to 14% with very complex issues) and non-urgent issues (34%, compared to 14% of those with very urgent issues). Given the more simple issues and leisure time frames available to those who used the Internet to contact the government, it is not surprising that Internet users are some of the happiest government customers.

The most common means of finding government web sites were through a search engine like Google or Yahoo (37%), referral from family or friends (19%), having used the site before (17%), and government publications (14%). The least common source cited were general government portal sites such as FirstGov and AOL’s Government Guide (8%).

Email

Ten percent of government visitors used email exclusively for their last contact, and 18% used it in combination with some other communication channel.

Email is popularly used for expressing opinions. About one in two (48%) email contacts were for this purpose.

It is least popular among seniors (7%), who prefer writing letters when they want to express their opinions. It becomes more popular with more years of Internet experience; 33% of those with six or more years on the Internet have used email to contact the government, compared with just 9% of those with a year or less.

People most commonly find email addresses by looking them up on the Internet (34%), having them already in their address books (19%) or checking a government publication (18%).

Personal visits (12%) and letter writing (10%)

Some 12% of Americans who made contact with the government last year visited a government office in person, and 35% did so in combination with some other method of communication. One in ten Americans wrote letters, and 34% did so in combination with some other method of communication.

With the Internet and telephone available, it is expected that people would try to reduce the more time-consuming methods of personal visits and letter writing to communicate with the government. But personal visits turned out particularly prominent among those who were conducting transactions (21%). Letter-writing was particular common among seniors (27%), many of whom do not use the Internet or email. Letter writing was used particularly to express opinion, 24%.

Combination of methods

More than one in five people (22%) used multiple communication channels during their last government interaction. These were most likely to happen in cases where people had very urgent (33%) or complex (34%) issues needing attention. While multi-channelers were equally likely to start with the Internet (34%) or the telephone (32%), 46% of those with urgent cases started with the telephone.

The telephone was the common denominator among these multi-channelers. 71% used the phone at one point or another while dealing with the government. It was particularly important to people with no Internet access (93%) and people with disabilities that prevent them from using computers (100%).

The most common reason given for switching communications channels was not finding the information needed through the first means (40%). 60% of those with less than a high school education cited this reason. The second most common reason given was being referred to another resource (22%). Fewer than one in ten (8%) said they switched after deciding they needed to speak to a live person.

End results

A firm majority (63%) of those who contacted the government successfully accomplished what they set out to do. One in four (25%) said their actions are still ongoing. Only 10% said that they could not accomplish what they wanted, and have given up.

Success could be associated with a few social factors. College graduates (68%) reported success rates higher than high school graduates (59%) or those who had not finished high school (48%). Whites reported success more frequently than did minorities, 66%-53%. And those who used the Internet reported success more frequently (79%) than those who used the phone (62%) or email (50%). However, contacts that involved the telephone were more complex and urgent than those that did not, and cases with high levels of complexity and urgency had lower success rates. When looking at the most urgent cases, telephoners and Web surfers reported more similar success rates. For the least urgent cases, surfers reported greater levels of success than those using the phone.

Success Rates for Internet and Telephone Contacts based on Urgency of Purpose
	Internet	Telephone
Very Urgent	64%	64%
Somewhat Urgent	69%	59%
Not at All Urgent	81%	66%
Source: Pew Internet and American Life Project July 2003 Survey. N=1,657. Margin of error ± 3%.

Evaluation

Overall, three in four (76%) Americans were satisfied with the outcome of their last government contact; 22% were dissatisfied. Satisfaction was, of course, related to successful completion of one’s purpose. 93% of successful completions were satisfied, 70% of failures were dissatisfied. Minorities were more likely than whites to have been very or somewhat dissatisfied, 32%-19%. Dissatisfaction was also more prevalent among the least educated (33%) and lowest income (27%).

Those who used the web for at least part of their last government interaction were more likely to express satisfaction (86%) than those who used email (78%) or phone (74%). As noted before, the Internet was used for less complex, less urgent tasks than the phone, and less urgent tasks had higher success rates, and success is directly related to satisfaction.

Telephone

When asked how they prefer to deal with the government in general, a plurality (38%) reports preference for the telephone. And the most common reason given for ANY channel is that people want to deal with a live person (24%). Internet users actually outstrip non-users, 41%-23%, in their preference for dealing with a live person. Only 3% of people who use the phone say they do so because they don’t have access to other methods, including the Internet. Dealing with a live person was one of the most helpful experiences cited among all government dealings, with 7 in 8 people saying it was helpful. Furthermore, the phone is specifically cited (51%) as the channel to use for handling a personal tax issue.

Problems cited in dealing with the telephone included not having time to stay on the phone or make repeated calls (36%), not being able to get through to the right person (35%), being put on hold for long periods of time (31%), getting transferred to several difference people (30%) and having no one return the call (24%).

Internet

Trailing far behind the telephone, 17% of Americans would prefer to use the Internet for dealing with the government in general. It is particularly favored among people under the age of 30, with 29% citing it as their preferred channel. As already noted, it is a preferred source for getting information. It is also the preferred means for handling certain tasks, such as doing research for school or work (57%), finding out what programs government agencies offer (53%), researching tourist or recreational activities (49%) or exploring what government benefits are available for oneself or someone else (39%).

The most commonly cited reasons for preferring the Internet are convenience (38%) and ease of use (34%). Internet users are not trying to avoid talking to people; only 5% cite that as a reason.

Among government Internet users, FAQ sections were used more commonly (44%) than on-site search engines (32%), and both were found to be helpful.

Still, one third of Internet users reported having trouble finding the information they needed. That number was particularly high among Hispanics, 57%, though was not related to having a language other than English spoken at home. One in five found government sites difficult to navigate, and length of experience with the Internet made no difference in this regard. One in six had problems finding the correct site to visit.

Less frequent problems include coming across bad links (13%) or difficulty downloading forms (12%).

Overall, the percentage of Americans who say that the Internet improves the way they interact with the government “a lot” has increased since we asked people about e-government in 2001.

Percent of Americans who say the Internet has Improved “a lot” the way they Interact with…
	2001	2003
Federal Government	20%	27%
State Government	18%	25%
Local Government	11%	18%
Source: Pew Internet and American Life Project July 2003 Survey. N=1,899. Margin of error ± 3%. Also, Pew Internet Life Project Government Web Sites Survey, September 2001. N=815. Margin of error ± 4%.

Email

Fewer than one in ten (9%) cite email as a preferred means of dealing with the government, although 23% cite its usefulness for expressing opinion. Two thirds of those who sent an email mentioned that they expected to get a response, and about 4 in 5 of them did. Eighty-six percent of those who said their contacts were urgent wanted a response, and again, about 4 of 5 of them got one.

Reasons for preferring email include saving time (34%) and ease of use (29%). Least compelling reasons for using email included not wanting to talk to people (4%) and wanting to have a record in writing (3%).

Letters and Personal Visits

About one-sixth (15%) of the population prefers letters for dealing with the government, particularly for expressing opinion (22%). Personal visits also rank at 15%, particularly among those who prefer contact with a live person. About one in six (16%) say personal visits are the best way to ensure getting a response to a query.

Policy Implications

The telephone still plays a unique and irreplaceable role for people without Internet access and for anyone, wired or not, who has certain goals.

40% of adults in America do not have Internet access. And while writing letters or making office visits remain options available to them for communicating with the government, both are time-consuming and used rather infrequently. The telephone is an option that is available to almost everyone.

As already shown, the desire to deal with a live person is still a powerful incentive for using the phone. The phone is overwhelmingly popular with people trying to solve a problem, particularly one that they consider complex and urgent.

Given the ubiquity of the telephone and its use for tackling complicated problems, goals of e-government must not focus solely on getting the answers available online. Americans want to talk to a live person when their problems are pressing, and those individuals must be well-trained so they know both how to direct callers to the offices and agencies best able to resolve their problems.

E-government initiatives should consider appropriate outreach to people who do not know how to contact the government.

While it is hardly cause for alarm that 44% of American adults had no contact with the government last year, it is worthwhile finding out if these people might have legitimate need to do so, but do not for reasons that can be rectified.

Of those who did not contact the government, 60% were unaware that the government has 800-numbers and web sites available to provide assistance. This lack of knowledge is particularly high (70%) among minorities. It is worth considering whether some sort of outreach efforts to minority groups would be fruitful.

Service to people with disabilities

About 20% of Americans have some sort of disability, and based on our findings, about 15-20% of them, or one in 25 adults, have difficulty using a computer. The goals of e-government must transcend the Internet in order to serve this group.

People with disabilities appear to have more at stake in their dealings with the government. They are more likely to see their goals as very complex, 16%, compared to 8% of non-disabled. One in four (26%) also said their issues were very urgent, compared to 10% of non-disabled. Relatedly, those with disabilities are less likely (49%) to have successfully completed what they set out to do than are those without (65%).

27% of those whose disability interferes with computer use visited a government office for their last contact, compared to just 12% of non-disabled. Nearly one in four (24%) say this is the means they prefer to use in general when dealing with the government, compared to just 14% of the non-disabled. Part of this is preference for dealing with a live person (63%), but the disabled are also more likely to say this is the only way to get a response – 26% vs. 14% for non-disabled.

As with the rest of the population, the plurality of people with disabilities prefer using the phone to deal with the government. The phone is so popular that people who cannot use computers do not vary significantly from the population at large in this regard. However, those with disabilities that interfere with computer use are far more likely to use the phone for generic research tasks. While a plurality of the population as a whole prefers the Internet for looking up benefits (39%) and government programs (53%), people with disabilities prefer to do this on the phone (39% and 47%, respectively). Furthermore, people with disabilities are more likely (70%) than those without (50%) to find dealing with a live person on the phone “very helpful”.

These findings add extra weight to the importance of maintaining expert assistance on the telephone for those who cannot use the Internet to benefit from e-government goals.

Does good service improve citizen-government relations?

Our survey data shows a strong relationship between the quality of service experienced while dealing with the government and attitudes toward government. Those with good experiences held the government in greater esteem than did those with bad experiences. For example, 29% of people who believe the government is wasteful and inefficient found government web sites difficult to navigate, compared to only 20% of government site users in general. On the flip side of the coin, 24% of people who dealt with the government on the phone reported that no one returned their call, but this was a problem for only 7% of those who put high levels of trust in the government.

We did not have any counterintuitive findings – people with favorable and trusting attitudes toward government never expressed less satisfaction with any process than did those with unfavorable, untrusting attitudes.

But we cannot conclude from that that good customer service leads to better assessment of government. While the former is possible, it is also possible that one’s attitude toward the government can color recollections of government dealings.

We have findings that support both of these possibilities.

On the side of good service leading to good assessments, we found that those who trust government the most accomplished their intended goal the last time they contacted the government far more often than those who trust government the least, 79%-57%. Also, those who believe that the government does a better job than it is given credit for succeeded more often than those who were more inclined to believe that government is wasteful and inefficient, 71%-54%. It is more plausible that positive experiences contributed to favorable assessments than that Pollyanna dispositions delude people into falsely believing they had accomplished their purpose.

We also found that pre-existing attitudes probably do color one’s recollection of experiences dealing with the government. There is a logical connection between bad experiences and negative assessments of government in general. However, it is more of a stretch to draw connection between one’s opinion of the President and, say, how long one was left on hold when calling a government number, or whether one had trouble navigating a government web site. Though the effects were small, we did find some evidence of this type of correlation.

· Those who disapprove of the President expressed greater dissatisfaction with their last government contact, 28%-17%.

· Those who disapprove of the President were more likely to report running out of time on the phone (41%-33%), being put on hold for long periods of time (39%-27%), having to make more than one phone call (58%-49%) saying that no one returned their call (31%-19%).

· Those who disapprove of the President were more likely to have encountered but found unhelpful automated voice trees (26%-18%), voicemail (19%-10%), and speaking to a live person (13%-6%).

· Those who approve of the President are more likely to believe that their emails reached the appropriate office than are those who disapprove, 83%-73%.

In short, improving government service is a worthy goal of the civil sector. However, success should not be measured in terms of the approval ratings of political administrations.

Methodology

The E-Government Survey ~~Survey~~, sponsored by The Pew Internet and American Life Project (PIAL), obtained telephone interviews with a nationally representative sample of 2,925 adults living in continental United States telephone households. The interviews were conducted in English by Princeton Data Source, LLC from June 25 to August 3, 2003. Statistical results are weighted to correct known demographic discrepancies. The margin of sampling error for the complete set of weighted data is ±2%.

[1] “Benchmarking E-Government: A Global Perspective – Assess the Progress of UN Member States.” The United Nations Division for Public Economics and Administration and the American Society for Public Administration.

[5] “The ever-shifting Internet population: a new look at Internet access and the digital divide.” The Pew Internet and American Life Project, http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=88.

[6] We asked respondents to rate the complexity of their last request of the government. A very complicated problem was one that would require “substantial effort and a lot of help from government sources.” A somewhat complicated problem would require “moderate effort and some help from government sources.” A not very complicated request was one that would require minimal effort.

[7] “Very urgent” meant that the individual needed a response or resolution within 24 hours.