Characterizing, Explaining and Valuing the Effective Use of an IT Artefact: A Field Study of Performance Management Information Systems in SMEs

Calls have been made for IS research to shift from the study of the use of IT artefacts to the study of their effective use. In seeking to provide added validity and relevance to the concept of effective use, we apply Burton-Jones and Grange’s theoretical framework to study the dimensions, contextual drivers and benefits of effective use. This is done through a field study of performance management information systems (PMIS) as used in 16 small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). In characterizing, contextualizing and valuing the effective use of a mission-critical IT artefact such as a PMIS, our results provide further empirical grounding and understanding of this complex yet under researched concept.

[1]  Louis Raymond,et al.  Dimensions of small business performance from the owner-manager's perspective: a re-conceptualization and empirical validation , 2013 .

[2]  Rajiv Kohli,et al.  Performance Impacts of Information Technology: Is Actual Usage the Missing Link? , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[3]  R. Chenhall.  Integrative strategic performance measurement systems, strategic alignment of manufacturing, learning and strategic outcomes: an exploratory study , 2005 .

[4]  Steve Mason,et al.  Towards a definition of a business performance measurement system , 2007 .

[5]  Wei Wang,et al.  ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University , 2022 .

[6]  John B. Miner,et al.  Type of Entrepreneur, Type of Firm, and Managerial Motivation: Implications for Organizational Life Cycle Theory , 1983 .

[7]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Measuring System Usage: Implications for IS Theory Testing , 1995 .

[8]  Stefano Tonchia,et al.  Performance measurement systems - Models, characteristics and measures , 2001 .

[9]  Ute Dreher,et al.  Casting Nets And Testing Specimens Two Grand Methods Of Psychology , 2016 .

[10]  Robert W. Zmud,et al.  The Influence of IT Management Practice on IT Use in Large Organizations , 1994, MIS Q..

[11]  Moez Limayem,et al.  The Role of Habit in Information Systems Continuance: Examining the Evolving Relationship Between Intention and Usage , 2005, ICIS.

[12]  Diane M. Strong,et al.  Understanding Organization-Enterprise System Fit: A Path to Theorizing the Information Technology Artifact , 2010, MIS Q..

[13]  Umit Bititci,et al.  Performance Measurement: Challenges for Tomorrow , 2012 .

[14]  A. Sharif.  Benchmarking performance management systems , 2002 .

[15]  Paul A. Pavlou,et al.  Understanding the Elusive Black Box of Dynamic Capabilities , 2011, Decis. Sci..

[16]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Validation in Information Systems Research: A State-of-the-Art Assessment , 2001, MIS Q..

[17]  Sam Weerahandi,et al.  Exact Statistical Methods for Data Analysis , 1998, Journal of the American Statistical Association.

[18]  Ø. Moen,et al.  Small International Firms : Typology, Performance and Implications , 2005 .

[19]  Lorenzo Lucianetti,et al.  Contemporary Performance Measurement Systems: A Review of Their Consequences and a Framework for Research , 2012 .

[20]  Andreas Meier,et al.  Performance Measurement Systems Must Be Engineered , 2001, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[21]  Matteo Mura,et al.  Generating organisational performance , 2013 .

[22]  Andrew Burton-Jones,et al.  From Use to Effective Use: A Representation Theory Perspective , 2013, Inf. Syst. Res..

[23]  Yiannis E. Spanos,et al.  An examination into the causal logic of rent generation: contrasting Porter's competitive strategy framework and the resource-based perspective , 2001 .

[24]  James R. Evans.  An exploratory study of performance measurement systems and relationships with performance results , 2004 .

[25]  Varun Grover,et al.  NEW STATE OF PLAY IN INFORMATION SYSTEMS RESEARCH : THE PUSH TO THE EDGES 1 , 2015 .

[26]  Wynne W. Chin,et al.  The future of diffusion research , 2001, DATB.

[27]  R. Hoyle.  Statistical Strategies for Small Sample Research , 1999 .

[28]  Ephraim R. McLean,et al.  The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update , 2003, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[29]  Lior Fink,et al.  Gaining Agility through IT Personnel Capabilities: The Mediating Role of IT Infrastructure Capabilities , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[30]  Kenneth L. Kraemer,et al.  Executives’ Perceptions of the Business Value of Information Technology: A Process-Oriented Approach , 2000, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[31]  R. Scapens,et al.  Managing the tensions in integrating global organisations: The role of performance management systems , 2008 .

[32]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  The Identity Crisis Within the IS Discipline: Defining and Communicating the Discipline's Core Properties , 2003, MIS Q..

[33]  Vikas Jain,et al.  Beyond Perceptions and Usage: Impact of Nature of Information Systems Use on Information System-Enabled Productivity , 2005, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

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

[35]  Andy Neely,et al.  Designing, implementing and updating performance measurement systems , 2000 .

[36]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Research Commentary: Desperately Seeking the "IT" in IT Research - A Call to Theorizing the IT Artifact , 2001, Inf. Syst. Res..

[37]  Umit Bititci,et al.  Towards a contingency approach to performance measurement: an empirical study in Scottish SMEs , 2007 .

[38]  Subhash Sharma.  Applied multivariate techniques , 1995 .

[39]  Darshana Sedera,et al.  Re-conceptualizing Information System Success: The IS-Impact Measurement Model , 2008, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[40]  Ron Weber,et al.  Still desperately seeking the IT artifact , 2003 .

[41]  Henri Barki,et al.  Change, attitude to change, and decision support system success , 1985, Inf. Manag..

[42]  U. Bititci,et al.  Using Performance Measurement to drive Continuous Improvement , 2005 .

[43]  Paul Benjamin Lowry,et al.  Proposing the Multimotive Information Systems Continuance Model (MISC) to Better Explain End-User System Evaluations and Continuance Intentions , 2015, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[44]  Marie-Claude Boudreau,et al.  A Learning-Based Model of Quality of Use: Insights from a Case Study of ERP Implementation , 2003 .

[45]  Chung-Kuang Hou,et al.  Examining the effect of user satisfaction on system usage and individual performance with business intelligence systems: An empirical study of Taiwan's electronics industry , 2012, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[46]  Richard Baskerville,et al.  Generalizing Generalizability in Information Systems Research , 2003, Inf. Syst. Res..

[47]  H. Rex Hartson,et al.  Cognitive, physical, sensory, and functional affordances in interaction design , 2003, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[48]  Matthew B. Miles,et al.  Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook , 1994 .

[49]  Ron Weber,et al.  On the deep structure of information systems , 1995, Inf. Syst. J..

[50]  Louis Raymond,et al.  Researching performance measurement systems , 2008 .

[51]  Paul M. Leonardi,et al.  Activating the Informational Capabilities of Information Technology for Organizational Change , 2007, Organ. Sci..

[52]  P. Garengo,et al.  Performance Measurement Systems in SMEs: A Review for a Research Agenda , 2005 .

[53]  Elena Karahanna,et al.  Time Flies When You're Having Fun: Cognitive Absorption and Beliefs About Information Technology Usage , 2000, MIS Q..

[54]  Chaelynne M. Wolak.  Assessing User Competence: Conceptualization and Measurement , 2000 .

[55]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Reconceptualizing System Usage: An Approach and Empirical Test , 2006, Inf. Syst. Res..