The Importance Performance Analysis (IPA) method assists managers in making decisions, but service performance attributes from other institutions are often ignored. Furthermore, considering the competitor aspect, the analysis will be more comprehensive because it looks at internal and external factors. The IPA method was then improved by focusing on the competitor’s side of the competitor’s position to plan a management strategy, namely Simultaneous IPA (SIPA). The traditional SIPA does not discuss item weights between criteria, so the criteria for the most significant improvement often cannot be seen. Therefore, the adjusted SIPA calculates the weight of each indicator multiplied by performance and importance score to gain the perfect result. Based on the results, the adjusted SIPA model has been implemented on E-government problems in Indonesia. The importance of quadrant II requires local governments to improve the existing problems. Performance matrix items are neglected opportunities and competitive disadvantages. Inthe first quadrant, the importance and performance of both local governments are equally high, but it needs to maintain its performance in direct competition. The low priority quadrant III position has no opportunity and is full of false alarms. According to the experimental results, the item in the second quadrant is the part that the Meranti Islands Regency needs to improve mainly in the service domain, Q32-Q39, Q46, Q47, especially in the governance domain (Q13). These items are considerably harder than those of high importance but with low power. The gap analysis results show that the central government’s rating score is lower than the self-assessment rate. This phenomenon indicates that expectations are higher than performance, and governments need to improve performance to match their value with profits. The gap analysis results between the two districts show that the gap between the two municipalities is negative overall and that the Meranti Island needs to improve all aspects of the E-government maturity assessment. A comparison of the SIPA and adjusted SIPA methods using the Wilcoxon method shows that there is an effect between changes in the two approaches, or in other words, the SIPA method was successfully improved using adjusted SIPA.