The Evaluation of Risky Information Technology Investment Decisions

This research proposes that the risk preferences of decision evaluators and the decision “domain” systematically influence evaluations of decision makers' information technology (IT) investment decisions. Results of an experiment with 160 M.B.A. student participants indicate that risk‐seeking evaluators rate IT investment decisions higher than do risk‐averse evaluators. Further, decision evaluators are influenced by the gain and loss decision domains when evaluating a decision maker's risky information technology investment decisions. The findings indicate that providing decision domain information to decision evaluators leads to systematic differences in IT investment evaluations. A key contribution of this study is the discovery of the relevance of prospect theory to IT evaluation processes.

[1]  Leslie P. Willcocks,et al.  Information systems investments: evaluation at the feasibility stage of projects , 1991 .

[2]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect Theory : An Analysis of Decision under Risk Author ( s ) : , 2007 .

[3]  J. March,et al.  Variable risk preferences and the focus of attention , 1992 .

[4]  Hun-Tong Tan,et al.  Outcome effects: The impact of decision process and outcome controllability , 1997 .

[5]  W. Waller,et al.  Slack in participative budgeting: The joint effect of a truth-inducing pay scheme and risk preferences , 1988 .

[6]  Peter R. Dickson,et al.  How Believing in Ourselves Increases Risk Taking: Perceived Self‐Efficacy and Opportunity Recognition , 1994 .

[7]  P. Fishburn.  Mean-Risk Analysis with Risk Associated with Below-Target Returns , 1977 .

[8]  J. Mowen,et al.  An Empirical Analysis of Outcome Biases in Constituent Evaluations of Public Policy Decision Makers , 1992 .

[9]  Marlys Gascho Lipe,et al.  Analyzing the variance investigation decision: The effects of outcomes, mental accounting, and , 1993 .

[10]  Richard Blackburn,et al.  Citation analysis in the organizational sciences. , 1981 .

[11]  Dong Chull Kim.  Risk preferences in participative budgeting , 1989 .

[12]  Jonathan Baron,et al.  Judgment by outcomes: When is it justified? , 1992 .

[13]  M. Zuckerman,et al.  Attribution of success and failure revisited, or: The motivational bias is alive and well in attribution theory , 1979 .

[14]  Baruch Fischhoff,et al.  Decision analysis. Clinical art or Clinical Science , 1977 .

[15]  Raanan Lipshitz,et al.  Either a medal or a corporal: the effects of success and failure on the evaluation of decision making and decision makers , 1989 .

[16]  Carolyn Y. Woo,et al.  Entrepreneurs' perceived chances for success , 1988 .

[17]  T. Mitchell,et al.  Effects of outcome knowledge and outcome valence on supervisors' evaluations. , 1981 .

[18]  S. Young.  PARTICIPATIVE BUDGETING - THE EFFECTS OF RISK-AVERSION AND ASYMMETRIC INFORMATION ON BUDGETARY SLACK , 1985 .

[19]  Clifton E. Brown,et al.  An Experimental Investigation of Explanations for Outcome Effects on Appraisals of Capital‐Budgeting Decisions* , 1993 .

[20]  J. Baron,et al.  Outcome bias in decision evaluation. , 1988, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[21]  Eric K. Clemons,et al.  Strategic Information Technology Investments: Guidelines for Decision Making , 1990, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[22]  A. Tversky,et al.  The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. , 1981, Science.

[23]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: analysis of decision under risk , 1979 .

[24]  Scott E. Maxwell,et al.  Designing Experiments and Analyzing Data: A Model Comparison Perspective , 1990 .

[25]  Judgment by Outcomes: When Is It Warranted? , 1995 .

[26]  Robert A. Atkinson,et al.  Reshaping IS Strategic Planning , 1990 .

[27]  Peter C. Fishburn,et al.  Behavioral Models of Risk Taking in Business Decisions: A Survey and Evaluation , 1977 .