電子化政府是近年各國推動改革的各項政策中，少數能享受價值爭議少、好消息多，且民眾持續抱著正面期待的領域，這樣的政策特質也讓各國政府在這個場域中不斷投注心力，以滿足社會的期望；然而，這種夢幻式的變革環境，可能也反映人類社會普遍存在「科技變革樂觀論」的集體心理狀態，與各國政府推動電子化政策所產生行政改革的實際成效存在落差。
據此，本文主要的目的，是首先釐清前述「科技變革樂觀論」現象，以美國學者Fountain（2001）的科技制定模型（technology enactment model）為藍圖，討論可以帶來政府體制真正變革的電子化政府政策思維，提醒電子化政府的研究者與實務者，這個領域需要更適當的理論框架，來導引並落實虛擬國家的發展，不能單靠科技追新的衝動而已。
再者，本文站在臺灣電子化政府多年研究的基礎上，針對科技樂觀論下的電子化政府改革，提出五項問題進行反思，包括：一、政府電子化的需求面有確實顧及嗎？二、政府電子化變革的組織成本效益划算嗎？三、政府電子化人力資源管理與支援足夠嗎？四、政府建構虛擬國度相關的法令變革有跟上嗎？五、政府的資通科技推動方案都有完整的評估嗎？
最後，本文結合了「數位成熟度」的概念，提出臺灣電子化政府轉變政府結構與組織應當聚焦的三個關鍵：其一，數位時代政府流程改造必須納入數位知能；其二，流程的進化必須以服務對象為核心；其三，流程改造的推動策略必須與數位成熟度的轉換相結合，期待臺灣電子化政府的政策推動，在未來能夠真正創造出一個具有全觀式顧客導向治理、能發揮資料潛能的流程、以及主動積極的工作團隊的新世代政府組織。

In most of the nations, e-government policy is one of the rare policy domains where there are few value conflicts but many positive reports as people have a high expectation of it. This almost dream-like environment has been driving government to invest more resources into e-government but also reveals a collective mentality of “Technological Optimism” where there might be gap between expectation and reality.
The purpose of this paper is first to clarify the concept of technological optimism regarding e-government policy. Then, following a technology enactment model created by Jane E. Fountain to theoretically bridge the possible gap between the optimistic expectation and enacting reality, the author claims that those designing and implementing e-government policies should not focus only on pursuing new technologies.
Secondly, the author is presenting five-point reflections for both researchers and practitioners in the e-government circle to increase the possibilities of technology-enacted changes. They are: (1) Is the e-government policy demand-driven? (2) Is the e-government policy cost-effective? (3) Is the support of human resources sufficient for the e-government transformation? (4) Are the e-government-related rules and regulations changed as well? (5) Is program evaluation of the e-government plan comprehensive?
Lastly, the author is introducing a concept of “digital maturity” to make the final point that the digital reengineering in e-government policies should include three strategic focuses: (1) they should be incorporated with digital intelligence; (2) the reform progress should be centered upon the users; (3) changes should be effected in step with the degree of digital maturity in government organizations. Hopefully, the efforts of e-government policy can bring about an agency-wide change of governance by focusing on the customers, tapping into the potential of data, and arousing a passionate work spirit.