• Brillyanes Sanawiri Brawijaya University
  • Rosalita Rachma Agusti Brawijaya University




This paper address the problem and challenges of the smart city application in the field of tax service. The smart city application for local tax information and payment or namely the SAMPADE App is an innovative service provided by the city government of Malang, Indonesia. The four elements of value proposition and seven smart city framework dimensions were employed to evaluate the Smart City app of SAMPADE. A qualitative study was used by interviewing users and stakeholders of the mobile application. The study indicate that all four elements of the value proposition were currently perceived useful, however improving the performance and reliability of the apps requires further developments. The main contribution of this paper is the qualitative dimension of the concept of the value proposition and the smart city framework used to evaluate the smart city app. Future challenges and recommendation are also presented in this paper as part of the broader exercise for policymakers in developing the smart city app for local tax information and payment.Keywords: Value Proposition, Smart City, Local Tax, E-Government


Achmad, K.A., Nugroho, L.E., Djunaedi, A., and Wiyawan. (2018). Smart City Readiness based on Smart City Council’s Readiness Framework. International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering. Vol 8 (1). 271-279.

Ballantyne, D., Frow, P., Varey, R., and Payne, A., (2011) Value propositions as communication practice: taking a wider view. Industrial Marketing Management 40 (2), 202–210.

Berst J, (2014). Smart Cities Readiness Guide - The planning manual for building tomorrow’s cities today [Internet]. Enbysk L, editor. SMART CITIES COUNCIL, 1-291 p. Available from: http://smartcitiescouncil.com/system/files/premium_resources/SmartCitiesCou ncil- READINESSGUIDEV1.5-7.17.14.pdf?file=1&type=node&id=615

Buttle, F. (1999), “The SCOPE of customer relationship managementâ€, International Journal of Customer Relationship Management, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 327-36.

Chatfield, A. T. and Al Hujran, O. (2007). E-government evaluation: a user-centric perspective for public value proposition. In H. Arabnia & A. Bahrami (Eds.), International Conference on e-Learning, e-Business, Enterprise Information Systems, and e-Government (pp. 53-59). USA: CSREA Press.

Cooke, P., Laurentis, De., MacNeill, S., & Collinge, (Eds) (2010). innovation. In Dynamics of new industrial knowledge flows. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Gawer, A., & Cusumano, M. (2002). Platform leadership: How intel, microsoft and cisco drive industry innovation (p. 336). Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.

Gawer, A. (2010). Towards a general theory of technological platforms. Paper presented at the summer conference 2010 on opening up innovation: Strategy, organization and technology at Imperial College London Business School, June 16–18, 2010, 9 pp.

Greenfield, A. (2013). The city is here for you to use. Wired (5 February).

Holttinen, H. (2014). Contextualizing value propositions: Examining how consumers experience value propositions in their practices. Australasian Marketing Journal 22. 103–110.

Kadir, A., Kuswardani, R.A., and Isnaini, (2019). The determination on taxable income of land and building sectors in the implementation of autonomy and increasing income in North Sumatra, Medan, Indonesia. Journal of Transnational Management vo. 24 (1):40-63.

Kelly, G., Mulgan, G. and Muers, S. (2002), Creating public value: An analytical framework for public sector reform, September, http://www.strategy.gov.uk/ downloads/seminars /pv/ public_value.pdf.

Komninos, N., Bratsas, C., Kakderi, C., and Tsarchopoulos, P. (2015). Smart City Ontologies: Improving the effectiveness of smart city applications. Journal of Smart Cities, vol.1(1): 31–46.

Lanning, M. and Michaels, E. (1988), “A business is a value delivery systemâ€, McKinsey Staff Paper No. 41, July.

Maglio, P., and Spohrer, J., (2013). A service science perspective on business model innovation. Journal of Industrial Marketing Management. 42, 665-670.

Meijer, A.J., Gil-Garcia, J.R., and Bolivar, M.P.R. (2015). Smart City Research: Contextual Conditions, Governance Models and Public Value Assessment. Social Science Computer Review 1-10.

Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

OKFN (2012). What is open data? Open knowledge foundation, open data handbook. Available online: 〈http://opendatahandbook.org/en/what-is-open-data/ index.html〉.

Ostelwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business Model Generation. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Reddick, C. 2004, ‘A two-stage model of e-government growth: Theories and empirical evidence for U.S. cities’, Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 21, pp. 51-64.

Sanawiri, B., and Iqbal, M. (2018). Kewirausahaan. UB Press. Pp. 83-84

Seifert, J. 2003, A Primer on e- Government: Sectors, Stages, Opportunities, and Challenges of Online Governance, Report for Congress, Received through the CRS Web, Updated January 28, 2003.

Shepard, M., & Simeti, A. (2013). What's so smart about the smart citizen? In D. Hemment, & A. Townsend (Eds.), Smart Citizens (pp. 13–18). Manchester: Future Everything Publications.

Townsend, A. M. (2013). Smart cities: Big data, civic hackers, and the quest for a new utopia. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.

Venkatesh, A., Peñaloza, L., Firat, A.F., 2006. The market as a sign system and the logic of the market. In: Lusch, R.F., Vargo, S.L. (Eds.), The Service Dominant Logic of Marketing: Dialog, Debate and Directions. M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, New York, pp. 251–265.

Walravens, N. (2015). Qualitative indicators for smart city business models: The case of mobile services and applications. Telecommunications Policy. 218-240.




How to Cite

Sanawiri, B., & Agusti, R. R. (2019). A SMART CITY APPLICATION VALUE PROPOSITION REALITY CHECK AND CHALLENGES: THE CASE OF MOBILE APPLICATION FOR LOCAL TAX INFORMATION AND PAYMENT. The International Journal of Accounting and Business Society, 27(3), 12–27. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.ijabs.2019.27.3.2