Strategic aspirations for net-enabled business

The net-enabled business innovation cycle (NEBIC) model describes a path by which firms employ dynamic capabilities to leverage net-enablement. Some firms strategically aspire to follow this path in a more gradual fashion striving for business process improvements (incremental strategy) while others aspire to exploit rapidly net-enablement to achieve business innovation (leapfrogging strategy) that offers completely new market opportunities. Study results suggest that firms adopt accelerated leapfrogging strategies when faced with more severe external competitive pressures. This combined with strong leadership, a propensity to embrace internal user involvement, IT maturity, and an accommodating firm structure, as indicated by path accelerators, result in higher aspirations for business innovation. Firms shying away from leapfrogging strategies tend to protect existing customers and employees from more radical changes. These firms sometimes lacked the internal capability to enact more aggressive strategies and thus had to acquire the necessary capabilities before aspiring for business innovation.

[1]  Suresh Kotha,et al.  Continuous “Morphing”: Competing Through Dynamic Capabilities, Form, and Function , 2001 .

[2]  P. Bate,et al.  Towards A Culturally Sensitive Approach To Organization Structuring: Where Organization Design Meets Organization Development , 2000 .

[3]  A. Scheer,et al.  Making ERP a Success. , 2000 .

[4]  Maurizio Zollo,et al.  Deliberate Learning and the Evolution of Dynamic Capabilities , 2002 .

[5]  M. Porter.  Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance , 1985 .

[6]  B. E. Partridge,et al.  The Nature of Managerial Work , 1974 .

[7]  Varun Grover,et al.  Shaping Agility through Digital Options: Reconceptualizing the Role of Information Technology in Contemporary Firms , 2003, MIS Q..

[8]  Michael L. Williams,et al.  Identifying the Organizational Routines in NEBIC Theory's Choosing Capability , 2002 .

[9]  H. Russell Johnston,et al.  Developing Capabilities to Use Information Strategically , 1988, MIS Q..

[10]  Fariborz Damanpour,et al.  The Adoption of Technological, Administrative, and Ancillary Innovations: Impact of Organizational Factors , 1987 .

[11]  Kathleen M. Eisenhardt,et al.  DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES, WHAT ARE THEY? , 2000 .

[12]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Research Commentary: Transformational Issues in Researching IS and Net-Enabled Organizations , 2001, Inf. Syst. Res..

[13]  D. Teece,et al.  DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES AND STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT , 1997 .

[14]  Bradley C. Wheeler,et al.  NEBIC: A Dynamic Capabilities Theory for Assessing Net-Enablement , 2002, Inf. Syst. Res..

[15]  M. Venkatraman.  It-enabled business transformation: from automation to business scope redefinition , 1994 .

[16]  David J. Collis,et al.  Research Note: How Valuable are Organizational Capabilities? , 1994 .

[17]  John M. Ward,et al.  Using resource-based theory to interpret the successful adoption and use of information systems and technology in manufacturing small and medium-sized enterprises , 2003, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[18]  Robert L. Dipboye,et al.  Perceptions of Organizational Politics: An Investigation of Antecedents and Consequences , 1995 .

[19]  Varun Grover,et al.  Special Section: Toward a Theory of Business Process Change Management , 1995, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[20]  Donna B. Stoddard,et al.  Reengineering: Business Change of Mythic Proportions? , 1994, MIS Q..

[21]  William J. Kettinger,et al.  Business Process Change: A Study of Methodologies, Techniques, and Tools , 1997, MIS Q..

[22]  Erwin Danneels.  The dynamics of product innovation and firm competences , 2002 .

[23]  Kenneth L. Kraemer,et al.  Electronic business adoption by European firms: a cross-country assessment of the facilitators and inhibitors , 2003, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[24]  Arno Scharl,et al.  Between Flexibility and Automation: An Evaluation of Web Technology from a Business Process Perspective , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[25]  Rainer Alt,et al.  Electronic Commerce and Reduced Transaction Costs Firms ’ Migration into Highly Interconnected Electronic Markets , 2000 .

[26]  Vallabh Sambamurthy,et al.  Shaping UP for E-Commerce: Institutional Enablers of the Organizational Assimliation of Web Technologies , 2002, MIS Q..

[27]  Onno Lint,et al.  Finance and Strategy: time to wait or time to market? , 1999 .

[28]  Omar A. Ei Sawy,et al.  Implementation by cultural infusion: an approach for managing the introduction of information technologies , 1985 .

[29]  David Targett,et al.  A taxonomy of information systems applications: the benefits' evaluation ladder , 1995 .

[30]  Varun Grover,et al.  The relationship between technology and performance: a meta-analysis of technology models , 2003 .

[31]  Alfred D. Chandler.  The functions of the HQ unit in the multibusiness firm , 1991 .

[32]  HackbarthGary,et al.  Strategic aspirations for net-enabled business , 2004 .

[33]  D. Fink,et al.  Guidelines for the Successful Adoption of Information Technology in Small and Medium Enterprises , 1998 .

[34]  Shaker A. Zahra,et al.  The Net-Enabled Business Innovation Cycle and the Evolution of Dynamic Capabilities , 2002, Inf. Syst. Res..

[35]  Philip Yetton,et al.  Computer-aided architects: A case study of IT and strategic change , 1994 .

[36]  Elizabeth M. Daniel,et al.  The role of dynamic capabilities in e-business transformation , 2003, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[37]  S. Winter.  Understanding dynamic capabilities , 2003 .

[38]  August-Wilhelm Scheer,et al.  Enterprise resource planning: making ERP a success , 2000, CACM.

[39]  Janice M. Burn,et al.  Assessing the benefits from e-business transformation through effective enterprise management , 2003, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[40]  Peter Gyngell,et al.  Process Innovation: Reengineering Work through Information Technology , 1994 .

[41]  Christoph Zott,et al.  DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES AND THE EMERGENCE OF INTRAINDUSTRY DIFFERENTIAL FIRM PERFORMANCE: INSIGHTS FROM A SIMULATION STUDY , 2003 .

[42]  Thomas H. Davenport,et al.  Process Innovation: Reengineering Work Through Information Technology , 1992 .

[43]  Rolf T. Wigand,et al.  Electronic Commerce and Reduced Transaction Costs , 1995, Electronic Markets.

[44]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Predicting Intention to Adopt Interorganizational Linkages: An Institutional Perspective , 2003, MIS Q..

[45]  M. Porter.  The Competitive Advantage Of Nations , 1990 .

[46]  M DanielElizabeth,et al.  The role of dynamic capabilities in e-business transformation , 2003 .

[47]  Dong-Sung Cho,et al.  Latecomer Strategies: Evidence From the Semiconductor Industry in Japan and Korea , 1998 .

[48]  William J. Kettinger,et al.  Aligning BPR to Strategy: A Framework for Analysis , 1998 .

[49]  BoonstraAlbert.  Structure and analysis of IS decision-making processes , 2003 .

[50]  Erja Mustonen-Ollila,et al.  How organizations adopt information system process innovations: a longitudinal analysis , 2004, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[51]  Constance E. Helfat,et al.  The dynamic resource-based view: capability lifecycles , 2003 .

[52]  S. Zahra,et al.  Absorptive Capacity: A Review, Reconceptualization, and Extension , 2002 .