Information technology evaluation: classifying indirect costs using the structured case method

Many companies are increasing their expenditure on information technology and information systems (IT/IS) to obtain or even sustain a competitive advantage in their respective marketplaces. Many managers, however, are often left with the quandary of how to evaluate their investments in technologies. Reasons of this difficulty have been suggested in the normative literature as centring on the socio‐technical (human, organisational and technical) dimensions associated with the adoption of IT/IS. The inability of managers to determine the true costs of deploying IT/IS is considered attributable to a lack of knowledge and understanding of IT/IS related costs. In developing a broader picture of such cost dimensions and their respective taxonomies, the research presented in this paper uses a structured case method to gain an understanding of how a construction firm embraced the IT evaluation process. A review of the IT cost literature is presented and a conceptual IT evaluation framework that focuses on indirect costs is proposed.

[1]  Edward Toomer,et al.  Qualitative Methods in Management Research , 1989 .

[2]  H Rivard.  A Survey of information technology in the Canadian construction industry , 1999 .

[3]  Kevin J. Stiroh,et al.  Investing in Information Technology: Productivity Payoffs for U.S. Industries , 2005 .

[4]  A. Gunasekaran,et al.  Process reengineering: A review of enablers , 1997 .

[5]  J. Ballantine,et al.  Information systems and other capital investments: evaluation practices compared , 1999 .

[6]  Egon Berghout,et al.  Methodologies for information systems investment evaluation at the proposal stage: a comparative review , 1997, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[7]  K. Milis,et al.  The use of the balanced scorecard for the evaluation of Information and Communication Technology projects , 2004 .

[8]  Paul A. Swatman,et al.  Structured-case: a methodological framework for building theory in information systems research , 2000, ECIS.

[9]  Leslie Willcocks,et al.  Introduction: of capital importance , 1994 .

[10]  B. Hochstrasser.  Justifying IT investments , 1994 .

[11]  Geoff Hogbin,et al.  Investing in Information Technology; Managing the Decision-Making Process , 1994 .

[12]  M. H. Small,et al.  Investment justification of advanced manufacturing technology: An empirical analysis , 1995 .

[13]  T. Jick.  Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action. , 1979 .

[14]  David Silverman,et al.  Qualitative research: meanings or practices? , 1998, Inf. Syst. J..

[15]  Egon Berghout,et al.  Methodologies for investment evaluation: a review and assessment , 2001 .

[16]  Peter J. Frost,et al.  Organizational Reality: Reports from the Firing Line , 1986 .

[17]  W. Neuman,et al.  Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches , 2002 .

[18]  H. Wen,et al.  Evaluation of information technology investment , 1999 .

[19]  Z. Irani,et al.  Integrating the costs of a manufacturing IT/IS infrastructure into the investment decision-making process , 1997 .

[20]  P. David.  The Dynamo and the Computer: An Historical Perspective on the Modern Productivity Paradox , 1990 .

[21]  R. Yin.  Case Study Research: Design and Methods , 1984 .

[22]  Zahir Irani,et al.  Novel Cluster Performance Matrix: A Decision Aid for Evaluating Computing Hardware , 2000 .

[23]  E. Brynjolfsson,et al.  Paradox Lost? Firm-Level Evidence on the Returns to Information Systems Spending , 1996 .

[24]  Zahir Irani,et al.  Developing a frame of reference for ex-ante IT/IS investment evaluation , 2002, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[25]  Zahir Irani,et al.  Supporting Investment Evaluation and Project Management: Toward A Framework of IT/IS Costs , 2000, ICSTM.

[26]  Hubert Österle,et al.  Evaluating existing information systems from a business process perspective , 1994, SIGCPR '94.

[27]  Zahir Irani,et al.  A review of indirect cost taxonomies for information systems projects , 2003 .

[28]  F. Lefley.  Capital investment appraisal of advanced manufacturing technology , 1994 .

[29]  David Schuff,et al.  Managing your total IT cost of ownership , 2002, CACM.

[30]  Sherry D. Ryan,et al.  Considering Social Subsystem Costs and Benefits in Information Technology Investment Decisions: A View from the Field on Anticipated Payoffs , 2000, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[31]  Peter L. Primrose,et al.  Investment in Manufacturing Technology , 1992 .

[32]  J. Sarkis,et al.  Short-termism and the appraisal of AMT capital projects inthe US and UK , 1997 .

[33]  Zahir Irani,et al.  Transforming failure into success through organisational learning: an analysis of a manufacturing information system , 2001, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[34]  E. B. Zechmeister,et al.  Research Methods in Psychology. , 1990 .

[35]  Theophanis C. Stratopoulos,et al.  Does successful investment in information technology solve the productivity paradox? , 2000, Inf. Manag..

[36]  Peter E.D. Love,et al.  Putting an engine into re‐engineering: toward a process‐oriented organisation , 1998 .

[37]  Steven L. Alter,et al.  Information Systems: A Management Perspective , 1991 .