Digital Governance Capability as a Dynamic Strategic Capability in Public Sector Digital Transformation Under Institutional and Technological Uncertainty
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47941/ajss.3889Keywords:
Digital governance, Dynamic capabilities, Public sector, Digital transformation, Institutional theoryAbstract
Purpose: This paper repositions digital governance capability as a dynamic strategic capability enabling public institutions to govern emerging technologies effectively and sustain adaptability, resilience, and public service innovation under institutional and technological uncertainty.
Methodology: The study employed a conceptual analytical literature review informed by an interpretivist-constructivist orientation. Evidence was purposively collected from seven scholarly databases (Google Scholar, JSTOR, Scopus, ScienceDirect, SSRN, IEEE Xplore, and ProQuest) and five institutional repositories (OECD, UNESCO, World Bank, African Development Bank, and Smart Africa). Sources published mainly between 2000 and 2024, together with seminal pre-2000 theoretical works, were screened for relevance, methodological quality, geographic diversity, and alignment with the objectives. The evidence was analyzed through a three-stage thematic synthesis comprising initial coding, development of descriptive themes, and analytical interpretation across global, African, and Kenyan public-sector contexts.
Findings: Digital governance capability comprises six dimensions: digital oversight mechanisms, ethical and regulatory governance, data governance, cybersecurity governance, strategic digital alignment, and accountability and transparency mechanisms. Institutional pressures drive capability adoption while technological uncertainty demands adaptive governance responses. Governance capability mediates the relationship between environmental drivers and three outcomes, strategic adaptability, organizational resilience, and public service innovation moderated by leadership support, organizational learning culture, and digital readiness. Kenyan evidence from eCitizen, IFMIS, and KRA illustrates a progression from digital government through digital governance toward AI-enabled governance.
Unique Contribution to Theory, Practice, and Policy: The study advances an integrative framework bridging three governance theories within public sector digital transformation discourse. The six-dimension model offers public leaders an actionable governance diagnostic. For policy, it provides emerging economy governments, particularly Kenya a contextually grounded framework for designing national digital governance policies under institutional complexity.
Downloads
References
Ansell, C., and Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543-571.
Argote, L., and Miron-Spektor, E. (2011). Organizational learning: From experience to knowledge. Organization Science, 22(5), 1123-1137.
Asongu, S. A., and Nwachukwu, J. C. (2018). Comparative human development thresholds for absolute and relative pro-poor mobile banking in developing countries. Information Technology and People, 31(2), 520-539.
Buhigiro, J., and Nzeyimana, B. (2021). Smart governance and digital transformation in Rwanda: Policy lessons for emerging digital economies. African Journal of Public Administration, 7(1), 45-62.
Cain, P. (2019). Singapore's Smart Nation initiative: A model for AI governance integration in public administration. Journal of Digital Government, 2(3), 112-128.
Chatterjee, S., and Bhattacharjee, K. K. (2020). Adoption of artificial intelligence in higher education: A quantitative analysis using structural equation modelling. Education and Information Technologies, 25(5), 3443-3463.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
Diakopoulos, N. (2016). Accountability in algorithmic decision making. Communications of the ACM, 59(2), 56-62.
DiMaggio, P. J., and Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160.
Eisenhardt, K. M., and Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10-11), 1105-1121.
European Union. (2021). Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act). European Commission.
Folke, C., Hahn, T., Olsson, P., and Norberg, J. (2005). Adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 30(1), 441-473.
Fountain, J. E. (2001). Building the virtual state: Information technology and institutional change. Brookings Institution Press.
Janssen, M., Sharifi, H., Alexopoulos, C., and Klievink, B. (2020). Unravelling the complexities and risks of AI. Government Information Quarterly, 37(3), 101441.
Kenya Revenue Authority. (2022). Digital modernization and tax compliance analytics report. Nairobi: KRA.
Kwon, J., and Lee, H. (2019). Dynamic capability development in public AI governance: Evidence from South Korea. International Journal of Public Administration in the Digital Age, 6(4), 1-18.
Mergel, I., Edelmann, N., and Haug, N. (2019). Defining digital transformation: Results from expert interviews. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 101385.
Mikalef, P., Conboy, K., Lundstrom, J. E., and Popovic, A. (2022). Artificial intelligence as an enabler of B2B marketing: A dynamic capabilities micro-foundations approach. Industrial Marketing Management, 104, 80-92.
Mistry, V., and Misener, D. (2021). Digital governance capability gaps in South African public institutions. African Journal of Information and Communication, 28, 1-22.
Muriu, A. R. (2018). Public financial management reforms in Kenya: The experience of IFMIS implementation. International Journal of Public Administration, 41(3), 224-235.
Mwangi, P., Kariuki, S., and Gitau, M. (2019). Digital transformation and compliance analytics at Kenya Revenue Authority. Journal of African Business, 20(3), 320-339.
Ndung'u, N., and Signé, L. (2020). The fourth industrial revolution and digitalization will transform Africa into a global powerhouse. Brookings Institution.
NIST. (2023). AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0). National Institute of Standards and Technology.
OECD. (2019). Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
OECD. (2021). State of implementation of the OECD AI Principles: Insights from national AI policies. OECD Digital Economy Papers, No. 311.
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press.
Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and organizations (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571-610.
Sun, T. Q., and Medaglia, R. (2019). Mapping the challenges of artificial intelligence in the public sector: Evidence from public healthcare. Government Information Quarterly, 36(2), 368-383.
Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., and Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533.
Thomas, J., and Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8(1), 45-55.
Torraco, R. J. (2005). Writing integrative literature reviews: Guidelines and examples. Human Resource Development Review, 4(3), 356-367.
UK Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation. (2020). Interim report: Review into bias in algorithmic decision-making. CDEI.
UNESCO. (2021). Recommendation on the ethics of artificial intelligence. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
Waema, T. M., and Adera, E. O. (2011). Local governance and ICT in Africa. Pambazuka Press.
Webster, J., and Watson, R. T. (2002). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS Quarterly, 26(2), xiii-xxiii.
Wirtz, B. W., Weyerer, J. C., and Geyer, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence and the public sector: Applications and challenges. International Journal of Public Administration, 42(7), 596-615.
World Bank. (2020). World development report 2021: Data for better lives. World Bank Group.
World Economic Forum. (2020). AI governance: A holistic approach to implement ethics into AI. White Paper. WEF.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Dr. Doreen Muriu
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
