States, known as the laboratories of democracy, also happen to be labs of experimentation for e-government. These somewhat unsurprising findings are the result of a report prepared for the Congressional Research Service by the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Policy at the University of Texas at Austin.

(CRS is the research arm of Congress and does not make its reports available directly to the public. In response, the Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) has cataloged and made accessible as many CRS reports as possible, including this one. For more information, visit the CRS Web site.)

The report identifies what it considers several critical factors that influence state e-government programs:

• Strategies are essential to e-government formulation because they provide objectives for state agencies and governments. The report identifies and analyzes numerous types of strategies.
• Outsourcing is a controversial issue in many states. The students' research revealed that state governments develop a spectrum of outsourcing policies from balancing in-house projects with outsourced projects, to prohibiting outsourcing, to promoting outsourcing.
• Funding is an important e-government issue because IT projects are costly and their success is uncertain. Legislatures must choose between multiple programs during the budget process and, in many cases, e-government competes with other needs for funding.
• State politics and culture can impede or support e-government development. Public agencies are often averse to IT changes because they can alter employee and agency functions. However, IT enhancements do not typically cause agencies to be eliminated.
• Strong leadership can support e-government programs and drive IT improvements by encouraging and promoting new projects among civil servants and citizens.
• The degree of centralization or decentralization is a key component in e-government management because it determines the level of interaction between administrative agencies involved in IT projects. Web portal centralization is a common trend among many states, and it is often separate from agency organization and decision making. E-government performance measures are essential in evaluating the success of programs, identifying challenges and addressing specific formulation and implementation challenges.

 This is how the report describes the role of leadership in terms of e-government success:

"States that are leaders in e-government show strong support at all levels of government or, at minimum, from one publicly popular leader such as the governor. Strong leadership with an evident priority for the advancement of e-government can provide for broader acceptance, support and faster growth of e-government programs.

Those states that exhibit steadfast leadership and solid working relationships between those responsible for decision-making and those responsible for e-government implementation tend to be leaders in e-government strategy and implementation. Therefore, it appears that leadership is a critical element to the advancement of e-government in a state.

Strong and competent leadership by CIOs or their equivalents can also influence the success or failure of e-government. State CIO positions should be filled by professionals with relevant credentials. They should have similar authority in comparison to other Cabinet-level positions. It should be noted that many states experience frequent turnover in the CIO position, which may make consistent strategizing and implementation difficult throughout numerous transitions."

Researchers sent out