A methodology of constructing a decision path for IT investment

Abstract Information Technology (IT) may be used for organizational efficiency, but should also be flexible to adapt to the rapidly changing competitive business environment. In competitive business circumstances, management continually asks: (1) How flexible must the firm be in investing in IT in order to meet unknown business needs in the future? At the same time, how efficient must the firm be in order to meet current business needs?; (2) How well must the firm align its business strategy with IT investment in order for it to support its strategic goals?; (3) how to construct a decision path for IT investments with respect to flexibility, efficiency and alignment between business strategy and IT investments? Although many researchers have struggled to answer these questions, they generally provide no means for incorporating these factors into the IT investment decision process. This paper suggests a method that identifies the degree of flexibility required (α-value), and accounts for and incorporates the α-value in making IT investments. The proposed method is based on a product development method called Quality Function Deployment (QFD). It will be applied to a real case of the “H-company” in Korea to validate and evaluate the proposed methodology.

[1]  Charles H. Kriebel,et al.  Information Technologies and Business Value: An Analytic and Empirical Investigation , 1995, Inf. Syst. Res..

[2]  C. James Bacon,et al.  The Use of Decision Criteria in Selecting Information Systems/Technology Investments , 1992, MIS Q..

[3]  Richard Lee.  An Enterprise Decision Framework for Information System Selection , 1998, Inf. Syst. Manag..

[4]  M. Porter.  What is strategy , 2000 .

[5]  Herbert Moskowitz,et al.  QFD optimizer: a novice friendly quality function deployment decision support system for optimizing product designs , 1997 .

[6]  C. Prahalad,et al.  Competing for the Future , 1994 .

[7]  Nancy Bogucki Duncan,et al.  Capturing Flexibility of Information Technology Infrastructure: A Study of Resource Characteristics and their Measure , 1995, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[8]  C. Poirier,et al.  Supply Chain Optimization: Building the Strongest Total Business Network , 1996 .

[9]  Ritu Agarwal,et al.  MIS planning: A methodology for systems prioritization , 1994, Inf. Manag..

[10]  Richard Dué.  A Strategic Approach to IT Investments , 1997, Inf. Syst. Manag..

[11]  Andrew C. Boynton,et al.  Information Architecture: In Search of Efficient Flexibility , 1991, MIS Q..

[12]  Kweku Ewusi-Mensah,et al.  Critical issues in abandoned information systems development projects , 1997, CACM.

[13]  Henry Mintzberg.  Musings on management. Ten ideas designed to rile everyone who cares about management. , 1996, Harvard business review.

[14]  James C. Wetherbe,et al.  Key Issues in Information Systems Management: 1994-95 SIM Delphi Results , 1996, MIS Q..

[15]  Andrew C. Boynton,et al.  Beyond Flexibility: Building and Managing the Dynamically Stable Organization , 1991 .

[16]  Larry Downes,et al.  Unleashing the Killer App: Digital Strategies for Market Dominance , 1998 .

[17]  J. Hauser,et al.  The House of Quality , 1988 .

[18]  Ephraim R. McLean,et al.  Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable , 1992, Inf. Syst. Res..

[19]  Djoen S. Tan,et al.  Information Infrastructure Managementa - New Role for IS Managers , 1997, Inf. Syst. Manag..

[20]  Yoji Akao,et al.  Quality Function Deployment : Integrating Customer Requirements into Product Design , 1990 .

[21]  Carol V. Brown,et al.  Alignment of the IS Functions With the Enterprise: Toward a Model of Antecedents , 1994, MIS Q..

[22]  John G. Mooney.  The productivity and business value impacts of information technology : economic and organizational analyses , 1996 .

[23]  Yolande E. Chan,et al.  Business Strategic Orientation, Information Systems Strategic Orientation, and Strategic Alignment , 1997, Inf. Syst. Res..