Benefits of Using an Information System
The Benefits of Using Information Systems
Information systems are vital to the operation and management of every organization. Managers investing in IS are interested in the benefit their organizations gain from this investment. However, neither managers nor researchers have found a way to justify investment in IS based on its contribution to an organization’s performance. Most studies examining the relationship between IS and performance level have found no positive relationship between the two variables [7]. But these studies have been holistic, relating the total IS investment—software, hardware, personnel—to the total profit of the organization. Our study now suggests that the analysis should be particulate, not holistic. An organization should not look for benefits by viewing the IS applications portfolio as one entity. Benefits should be found for each individual area of activity/IS application (such as suppliers and purchase orders, customers, and sales) as a function of the organization’s characteristics. Hence, IS managers should justify the investment in each IS application, not in the entire IS application portfolio. A 1985 study that examined service sector firms found no significant relationship between investment in IS and high performing firms [12]. A 1992 study found a “statistically significant negative relationship between productivity growth and the hightech intensity of the capital” [4]. However, it also pointed out that the negative results may have been due to measurement problems. In 1993, Brynjolfsson summarized this issue: “It is possible that the benefits of IT investment are quite large, but that a proper index of its true impact has yet to be analyzed,” adding that “The lack of good quantitative measures for the output and value created by IT has made the MIS manager’s job of justifying investments particularly difficult” [5]. We offer other measurements and a different approach to identifying and evaluating the benefits derived from IS
Information systems are vital to the operation and management of every organization. Managers investing in IS are interested in the benefit their organizations gain from this investment. However, neither managers nor researchers have found a way to justify investment in IS based on its contribution to an organization’s performance. Most studies examining the relationship between IS and performance level have found no positive relationship between the two variables [7]. But these studies have been holistic, relating the total IS investment—software, hardware, personnel—to the total profit of the organization. Our study now suggests that the analysis should be particulate, not holistic. An organization should not look for benefits by viewing the IS applications portfolio as one entity. Benefits should be found for each individual area of activity/IS application (such as suppliers and purchase orders, customers, and sales) as a function of the organization’s characteristics. Hence, IS managers should justify the investment in each IS application, not in the entire IS application portfolio. A 1985 study that examined service sector firms found no significant relationship between investment in IS and high performing firms [12]. A 1992 study found a “statistically significant negative relationship between productivity growth and the hightech intensity of the capital” [4]. However, it also pointed out that the negative results may have been due to measurement problems. In 1993, Brynjolfsson summarized this issue: “It is possible that the benefits of IT investment are quite large, but that a proper index of its true impact has yet to be analyzed,” adding that “The lack of good quantitative measures for the output and value created by IT has made the MIS manager’s job of justifying investments particularly difficult” [5]. We offer other measurements and a different approach to identifying and evaluating the benefits derived from IS
References: 1. Ahituv, N. Assessing the value of information: Problems and approaches. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Information Systems, Boston, 1989. 2. Ahituv, N., Neumann, S., and Riley, N. Principles of Information Systems for Management, 4E. Wm. C. Brown, Dubuque, Iowa, 1994. 3. Bartezzaghi, E. and Francesco, T. The impact of just-in-time on production system performance: An analytical framework. International Journal of Production Management 9, 8 (Mar. 1989), 40–62. 4. Berndt, E.R. and Morrison, C.J. High-tech capital formation and economic performance in U.S. manufacturing: An exploratory analysis. Economics, Finance and Accounting Working Paper #3419, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, April 1992. 5. Brynjolfsson, E. The productivity paradox of information technology. Commun. ACM 36, 12 (Dec. 1993), 67–77. 6. Gunn, T. The CIM connection. Datamation 32, 3 (Sept. 1986), 8–11. 7. Kauffman, R.J. and Weill, P. An evaluation framework for research on the performance effects of information technology investment. Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Information Systems, Boston, Dec. 1989. 1 It can be noted that, since all value in the firm must be derived from revenue outside of the firm, that it was expost logical to expect that the value of the support function (IS function) should be directly related to a value adding (cost reducing) activity. COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM 310 8. Markus, M.L. and Soh, C. Banking on information technology, in Banker, D.R., Kauffman, J.R., and Mahmood, M.A., Eds., Strategic Information Technology Management: Perspectives on Organizational Growth and Competitive Advantage, Idea Group Publishing, Harrisburg, PA, 1993. 9. Porter, E.M. Competitive Strategy. The Free Press, New York, 1985. 10. Ragowsky, A., Ahituv, N., and Neumann, S. A model for identifying the value and the importance of an information system application. Information & Management 31, 2, Nov. 1996, 89–102. 11. Schlack, M. IS has a new job in manufacturing. Datamation (Jan. 15, 1992), 38–40. 12. Strassmann, P. Information Payoff: The Transformation of Work in the Electronic Age. Collier Macmillan, London, 1985. COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM 311