Compare methods

	E-Government Maturity Model	New Public Management Assessment
Field	Public Administration	Public Administration
Family	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Year of origin	2001	1991
Originator	Karen Layne & Jungwoo Lee	Christopher Hood
Type	Staged maturity / capability model	Analytical assessment framework
Seminal source	Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional E-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly, 18(2), 122–136.	Hood, C. (1991). A Public Management for All Seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3–19.
Aliases	E-Government Stage Model, Digital Government Maturity Model, E-Gov Development Stages, Layne-Lee Maturity Model	NPM Assessment, Managerialism Assessment, Public Management Reform Analysis, Hood NPM Doctrine Analysis
Related	4	4
Summary	An e-government maturity model is a staged framework that describes how public administrations evolve their digital service delivery from simple online information toward fully integrated, transaction-capable government. The most influential formulation, proposed by Karen Layne and Jungwoo Lee in 2001, sets out four stages — cataloguing, transaction, vertical integration and horizontal integration — through which agencies are expected to progress. Maturity models translate a diffuse modernisation agenda into an ordered ladder of capabilities that can be assessed, compared and benchmarked across agencies and countries. They underpin international instruments such as the UN E-Government Survey and its Online Service Index.	New Public Management (NPM) assessment evaluates how far a public organisation or system has adopted the cluster of managerial reform doctrines that swept the public sector from the 1980s — and with what effects. Christopher Hood's 1991 article A Public Management for All Seasons? gave NPM its name and identified its core doctrines: hands-on professional management, explicit performance standards, output controls, disaggregation into units, competition, private-sector management styles, and discipline in resource use. The assessment scores adoption of these doctrines, evaluates their effects, and appraises the trade-offs against enduring public-service values such as equity and accountability.