Executive information systems without executives

Executive information systems (EIS) are the most-recent computer-based information systems to have emerged with the intention of providing executives with the information they require to run their businesses. Some advocates of these systems see them as a panaceathe long-awaited moment when computing will provide meaningful and significant assistance to top management. However, others have questioned the extent to which these systems are suited to executive work, and see them as yet another passing fad in a field that has had more than its share of the same. This paper discusses some of the potential benefits to executives that have been identified in the literature as arising from the use of EIS. The results of a field study which investigated the extent to which EIS are actually used by executives are reported. The findings corroborate the now widespread finding that executives are not the main users of EIS. Some reasons for this are identified and possible remedies are suggested. 1. The Emergence of EIS and the Potential Benefits of EIS for Executives While there are many differing definitions of EIS, there is broad agreement on the characteristics of EIS. They are easy to use, invariably making use of a graphical user interface; they can capture both external and internal information of relevance to executives (Watson, Rainer and Koh, 1991); they can also cater for soft, non-quantitative information, and can provide highly-aggregated information, while still allowing selective 'drill-down' to the underlying detail if required. Trends can be monitored and represented graphically, and various office support functions such as electronic mail, diary and calendaring facilities are often provided (Rockart and De Long, 1988). The concept of providing information to executive management is not something newonly its computerisation is new. Given that top management have up to now succeeded in acquiring the information they need to run their business without direct access to computerbased information systems, the question arises as to why EIS are achieving prominence. The literature suggests a number of broad factors as relevant: firstly, there is a ‘pull’ factor in that executives are suggested to be more computer-literate and willing to become direct users of computer systems (cf. Houdeshel and Watson, 1987; Paller and Laska, 1990; Rockart and Crescenzi, 1984; Rockart and De Long, 1988; Rockart and Treacy, 1982; Watson et al., 1991). For example, one survey suggests that more than twenty percent of senior executives have computers on their desks (Paller and Laska, 1990), although there are wide variations in the estimates as to how many executives are direct users of computersfrom as low as one percent of executives (Rae, 1986) to a figure of ten percent (Rockart and De Long, 1988). A number of arguments have been put forward to explain this increased use of computers at executive level. For example, it has been suggested that middle managers who have been making direct use of computers in their daily work are being promoted to executive level (Paller and Laska, 1990). This new breed of executives do not exhibit the fear of computer technology that has characterised executive management up to now and are quite willing to be direct users of computer technology. Also, executives have heretofore managed to remain relatively untouched by the computer, seeing it as a tool appropriate to others of lower staturea position reinforced by some influential researchers (Dearden, 1983; Salerno, 1985). However, researchers have argued that there may be feelings of guilt among executives, due to having missed "the wave of end user computing that has swept through the rest of their organisations" (Harvey and Meiklejohn, 1989 p.124). Complementing this suggestion of executive demand for EIS, a number of ‘push’ factors have been identified as motivating the development of EIS, most notably the highly competitive nature of today's business environment which requires executives to act more quickly and effectively if an organisation is to remain competitive (cf. Burkan, 1988; Friend, 1991; Fireworker and Zirkel, 1990; Rockart and De Long, 1988; Rockart and Treacy, 1982; Watson et al., 1991; Wetherbe, 1991). Another ‘push’ factor is the fact that technology has evolved to the stage where computer-based support for top management may be feasible (cf. Paller and Laska, 1990; Rockart and De Long, 1988; Rockart and Treacy, 1982; Whymark, 1991). These technological advances have seen the replacement of character-based user interfaces with "user-seductive" graphical interfaces that allow painless access to computerbased information. The literature also identifies a number of significant benefits which EIS could provide for executives, including easing of information overload; improved efficiency in certain aspects of their work; increased span of control; direct access to information rather than having to rely on intermediaries; and improved mental models of the business. These are briefly summarised here. 1.1 Easing Information Overload Several researchers have identified the information overload problem as one of the most serious problems confronting top management today (Kotter, 1982; Mintzberg, 1975; Naisbitt, 1982; Zuboff, 1988). The executive may be monitoring several projects, and for each one has to track a vast amount of information because it is not possible to predict where problems are going to occur. This leads him to play safe and request all the information he can get, but this bewildering choice and quantity of information may cause him to miss the wheat for the chaff (Mintzberg, 1975). Drucker (1988) suggests that many highlycomputerised companies continue to operate under the simplistic belief that more data equals more information. Thus, executive management, despite being already inundated with data, exhibit an insatiable appetite for more. Compounding the problem of the executive's need to monitor such a vast amount of information is the fact that so much of the information generated is of little benefit in helping to run the organisation. Indeed, a US survey reports that 96 per cent of pages in management reports are never read (Harvey & Meiklejohn, 1989). Also, Mintzberg (1975), in his seminal empirical study of the nature of executive work, concludes that most computer-generated reports are just skimmed ritualistically, if read at all. Researchers have estimated that an executive may spend up to half his time getting the information he requires (Wetherbe, 1991). However, it has been argued that EIS can help greatly by streamlining this process, highlighting essential information and discarding the irrelevant. Problems of timeliness and relevance which have plagued traditional reporting systems can be addressed (Harvey and Meiklejohn, 1989). 1.2 Improved Efficiency Much of the work of executivestheir use of intuition and the interpersonal and verbal aspects of their workcannot be well-supported by computer systems. However, while not underplaying the importance of these aspects of executive work, researchers have made a case for executive use of computer support in attainment of corporate goals. Isenberg (1984), for example, suggests that if managers fully trusted their intuition, there wouldn't be any need for rigorous and systematic analysis, but, in practice, they try to achieve a match between "gut" and "head". Rockart and De Long (1988) use Isenberg's findings to support their argument that office support applications be included as part of EIS. Applications such as calendaring facilities, diary facilities, electronic mail, for example, have the potential to make the executive more efficient, rationalising the aspects of executive work that lend themselves to computer support, thus freeing up the executive to spend more time on complex unstructured tasks, which is more properly the remit of the executive. 1.3 Increased Span of Control Researchers have reported the need to increase the span of control in modern organisations. Drucker, for example, calls for "skimming management's midriff", stating that middle management is "overstaffed to the point of obesity". These extra layers of management cause rigidity and inertia whereas flexibility and responsiveness are needed. However, the electronic mail capability of EIS can contribute significantly to increasing the span of control, allowing the executive to keep in close contact with subordinates. Also, EIS can help to motivate and focus the organisation towards top management's goals and, because executives are perceived to be more readily able to access this information through the use of EIS, it extends their psychological presence throughout the organisation (Rockart and De Long, 1988). 1.4 Direct Access to Information Traditionally, executives have relied on intermediaries to perform the information gathering function for them. However, this practice has a number of negative implications. Mintzberg (1975) refers to what he terms the "dilemma of delegation". The executive is the best person to scan the information since he has all the intuition locked in his brain, but he has to leverage his scarce time and must delegate some information scanning responsibilities to his subordinates who may have less well-developed business intuition. A similar argument has also been made by El Sawy (1985). The basic problem is that subordinates filter out unnecessary information, but this is a subjective process as subordinates will shape the data according to their ideals and interests. At best, this filtering causes the unintentional loss of information that might be valuable if available to the executive. At worst, executives are presented with a sanitised version of the information, as subordinates, unwilling to allow greater visibility into their areas of responsibility, suppress important information. Thus, there may be great advantages in the executive "dirtying his