Towards a Design for IT Performance Management

This paper provides a report on the first iteration of a design-driven research project for delivering an IT performancemanagement (ITPM) solution. This research is situated in the context of existing IT performance related studies. Designscience research (DSR) is the underpinning research approach for crafting the ensuing ITPM solution. Three challenges in theITPM area are identified and a design to meet the challenges is proposed. This is followed with a recapitulation of what theresearch covered in order to develop and evaluate the design. The evaluation results show that the totality of the design isacceptable. Contrary to the mainstream IS literature, this research takes a design approach to create a solution which goesbeyond only the technical and which is based on commonly neglected stakeholder-oriented theories in ITPM. Implications oftaking the design approach are discussed. (Less)

[1]  Erik Brynjolfsson,et al.  The productivity paradox of information technology , 1993, CACM.

[2]  Robert J. Kauffman,et al.  An Interdisciplinary Perspective on IT Services Management and Service Science , 2010, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[3]  Leslie P. Willcocks,et al.  Measuring organizational IS effectiveness: an overview and update of senior management perspectives , 2002, DATB.

[4]  Allen S. Lee.  Retrospect and prospect: information systems research in the last and next 25 years , 2010, J. Inf. Technol..

[5]  Andrew Jack,et al.  VALUE MAPPING – A SECOND GENERATION PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT AND PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SOLUTION , 2004 .

[6]  L. Willcocks,et al.  Beyond the It Productivity Paradox , 1999 .

[7]  Graham Bradley,et al.  Measuring the performance of IT services: An assessment of SERVQUAL , 2002, Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst..

[8]  Andrew Kakabadse,et al.  IS/IT governance: need for an integrated model , 2001 .

[9]  Shirley Gregor,et al.  The Nature of Theory in Information Systems , 2006, MIS Q..

[10]  Andy Neely,et al.  Performance measurement system design: developing and testing a process‐based approach , 2000 .

[11]  Alan R. Hevner,et al.  Design Research in Information Systems , 2010 .

[12]  Peter E.D. Love,et al.  Evaluating Information Systems: Public and Private Sector , 2008 .

[13]  Zahir Irani,et al.  Investment evaluation within project management: an information systems perspective , 2010, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[14]  Alan R. Hevner,et al.  Design Science in Information Systems Research , 2004, MIS Q..

[15]  N. Venkatraman.  Beyond Outsourcing: Managing IT Resources as a Value Center , 1997 .

[16]  Allen S. Lee.  Action is an Artifact , 2007 .

[17]  Andrew N. Green,et al.  Creating stakeholder value by consistently aligning the support environment with stakeholder needs , 2004 .

[18]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[19]  Gerald G. Grant,et al.  Framing the Frameworks: A Review of IT Governance Research , 2005, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[20]  M. Parker,et al.  Information Economics: Linking Business Performance to Information Technology , 1988 .

[21]  A. Neely,et al.  The performance prism in practice , 2001 .

[22]  Ronald K. Mitchell,et al.  Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of who and What Really Counts , 1997 .

[23]  J. Bryson.  What to do when Stakeholders matter , 2004 .

[24]  Robert W. Zmud,et al.  Influencing the effectiveness of IT governance practices through steering committees and communication policies , 2010, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[25]  Peter Weill,et al.  Don't Just Lead, Govern: How Top-Performing Firms Govern IT , 2004, MIS Q. Executive.

[26]  Wim Van Grembergen,et al.  Linking the IT balanced scorecard to business objectives at a major Canadian financial group , 2004 .

[27]  Mollie E. Krehnke,et al.  IT Governance Institute (ITGI) , 2011, Encyclopedia of Information Assurance.

[28]  Carla L. Wilkin,et al.  A Review of IT Governance: A Taxonomy to Inform Accounting Information Systems , 2010, J. Inf. Syst..

[29]  Qing Hu,et al.  The Use of Formal IT Investment Evaluation Methods in Organizations: A Survey of European Countries , 2006, AMCIS.

[30]  Lorin M. Hitt,et al.  Productivity, Business Profitability, and Consumer Surplus: Three Different Measures of Information Technology Value , 1996, MIS Q..

[31]  Ip-Shing Fan,et al.  A framework to review performance measurement systems , 2005, Bus. Process. Manag. J..

[32]  Yolande E. Chan.  IT Value: The Great Divide Between Qualitative and Quantitative and Individual and Organizational Measures , 2000, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[33]  Peter Checkland,et al.  Systems Thinking, Systems Practice: Includes a 30-Year Retrospective , 1999 .

[34]  Leslie P. Willcocks,et al.  Beyond the IT productivity paradox: assessment issues , 1999 .