Paper

Journal of Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management (2007) 14, 297–310. doi:10.1057/palgrave.dbm.3250057

A comparison of web use in marketing by local government in the United States and Australia

Stewart Adam1 and Michael D Featherstone2

Correspondence: Stewart Adam, Faculty of Business and Law Deakin University Melbourne VIC 3125, Australia. Tel: +61 3 9244 6054; Fax: +61 3 9251 7083; e-mails: stewart.adam@deakin.edu.au; feather@jsu.edu

1is Associate Professor in Electronic Marketing, Faculty of Business and Law, Deakin University. His PhD focussed on the link between web use and organizational performance. His research interests may be viewed at www.stewartadam.com.

2is Assistant Professor in Information Management, College of Commerce and Business Administration, Jacksonville State University. His DBA focussed on identification of new business models and generating link popularity on the web.

Received 23 July 2007; Revised 23 July 2007.

Top

Abstract

The study reported in this paper examines local government use of the web in marketing in Australia and the United States. An audit of local government websites is undertaken using a content analysis tool developed through academic and commercial use — the Marketing Readiness of Website Indicator (MRWI). By examining three elements of online marketing in this context, the authors identify similarly sophisticated use by local government in one Australian state (Victoria) and county government in the most populous state in the United States (California). The hypothesised more highly sophisticated web use by United States local government relative to Australian local government is not without some support. County-level government use in California and the Australian local government authorities sampled are, however, statistically different to use of the web in marketing made by Californian city government and Alabama county and city government use. It is suggested that further investigation is required to more fully understand the underlying reasons for such variance.

Keywords:

marketing readiness of websites indicator, online marketing communication, online marketing channels, online relationship management, local government, county government