Alignment Between Internal and External IT Governance and Its Effects on Distinctive Firm Performance: An Extended Resource-Based View

Only a few firms possess all of the information technology (IT) resources required to compete effectively in today's dynamic business environment. Consequently, firms face critical challenges in developing their IT governance by integrating, building, and reconfiguring IT resources available internally and externally to achieve a competitive advantage. However, prior studies have mostly examined IT governance only from an internal (e.g., IT organization design) or external (e.g., IT outsourcing) perspective. Therefore, how the internal and external IT governance of firms simultaneously lead to firm performance remains unclear. To address this research gap, we conceptualize internal and external IT governance from the extended resource-based view, propose three alignments between both types of governance, and hypothesize their effects on distinctive firm performance. We then empirically test these hypotheses using 213 Korean firms that have implemented IT outsourcing. Results show that a hierarchy-based alignment (i.e., between internal and external hierarchy governance) optimizes the operational efficiency of firms, a market-based alignment (i.e., between internal and external market governance) offers the greatest advantage in terms of market growth, and a network-based alignment (i.e., between internal and external network governance) leads to the best innovation performance. Furthermore, our post hoc test also reveals some unexpected alignments (e.g., between internal market and external hierarchy governance) that positively influence firm performance, which call for new areas of discussion with alternative theoretical perspectives. This study guides practitioners in choosing outsourcing alignments by comprehensively analyzing the effects of various alignments on distinctive outcomes.

[1]  P. Adler Market, Hierarchy, and Trust: The Knowledge Economy and the Future of Capitalism , 2001 .

[2]  Thiagarajan Ravichandran,et al.  Effect of Information Systems Resources and Capabilities on Firm Performance: A Resource-Based Perspective , 2005, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[3]  Dovev Lavie The Competitive Advantage of Interconnected Firms: An Extension of the Resource-Based View , 2006 .

[4]  P. M. Podsakoff,et al.  Self-Reports in Organizational Research: Problems and Prospects , 1986 .

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

[6]  C. Bruce Kavan,et al.  Moments of governance in IS outsourcing: conceptualizing effects of contracts on value capture and creation , 2005, J. Inf. Technol..

[7]  Robert W. Zmud,et al.  Arrangements for Information Technology Governance: A Theory of Multiple Contingencies , 1999, MIS Q..

[8]  L. Diamond IT Governance : How Top Performers Manage IT Decision Rights for Superior Results , 2005 .

[9]  Keith D. Brouthers,et al.  Institutional, cultural and transaction cost influences on entry mode choice and performance , 2002 .

[10]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  How Information Technology Governance Mechanisms and Strategic Alignment Influence Organizational Performance: Insights from a Matched Survey of Business and IT Managers , 2015, MIS Q..

[11]  Constantin Blome,et al.  Ambidextrous Governance in Supply Chains: The Impact on Innovation and Cost Performance , 2013 .

[12]  Carol V. Brown,et al.  Reconceptualizing the Context-Design Issue for the Information Systems Function , 1998 .

[13]  R. Sohi,et al.  IT competency and firm performance: is organizational learning a missing link? , 2003 .

[14]  R. Nolan,et al.  Information technology and the board of directors. , 2005, Harvard business review.

[15]  S. Park,et al.  The Effect of National Culture, Organizational Complementarity, and Economic Motivation on Joint Venture Dissolution , 1997 .

[16]  Joseph F. Porac,et al.  Are more resources always better for growth? Resource stickiness in market and product expansion , 2004 .

[17]  Antonio Capaldo Network Structure and Innovation: The Leveraging of a Dual Network as a Distinctive Relational Capability , 2006 .

[18]  Steven De Haes,et al.  An Exploratory Study into IT Governance Implementations and its Impact on Business/IT Alignment , 2009, Inf. Syst. Manag..

[19]  Carol V. Brown Examining the Emergence of Hybrid IS Governance Solutions: Evidence From a Single Case Site , 1997, Inf. Syst. Res..

[20]  Ahmet H. Kirca,et al.  Firm Innovativeness and Its Performance Outcomes: A Meta-Analytic Review and Theoretical Integration , 2012 .

[21]  O. Williamson,et al.  The mechanisms of governance , 1996 .

[22]  James Derbyshire The impact of ambidexterity on enterprise performance: Evidence from 15 countries and 14 sectors , 2014 .

[23]  Jeffrey H. Dyer,et al.  The Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage , 1998 .

[24]  Glenn B. Voss,et al.  The Effects of Slack Resources and Environmentalthreat on Product Exploration and Exploitation , 2008 .

[25]  J. Barney Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage , 1991 .

[26]  Anandasivam Gopal,et al.  The Asymmetric Benefits of Relational Flexibility: Evidence from Software Development Outsourcing , 2012, MIS Q..

[27]  Mark Keil,et al.  Hybrid Relational-Contractual Governance for Business Process Outsourcing , 2012, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[28]  Sinan Aral,et al.  I.T. Assets, Organizational Capabilities and Firm Performance: Do Resource Allocations and Organizational Differences Explain Performance Variation? , 2007 .

[29]  Jae-Nam Lee,et al.  IT Outsourcing Strategies: Universalistic, Contingency, and Configurational Explanations of Success , 2004, Inf. Syst. Res..

[30]  Amalya L. Oliver,et al.  Social Networks, Learning, and Flexibility: Sourcing Scientific Knowledge in New Biotechnology Firms , 1994 .

[31]  V. G. Ouchi,et al.  A conceptual framework for the design and organizational control mechanisms , 1979 .

[32]  Michael J. Leiblein,et al.  The Choice of Organizational Governance Form and Performance: Predictions from Transaction Cost, Resource-based, and Real Options Theories , 2003 .

[33]  Hamid Tavakolian,et al.  Linking the Information Technology Structure with Organizational Competitive Strategy: A Survey , 1989, MIS Q..

[34]  Carol V. Brown Horizontal Mechanisms Under Differing IS Organization Contexts , 1999, MIS Q..

[35]  R. Rumelt Theory, Strategy, and Entrepreneurship , 2005 .

[36]  Robert E. Hoskisson,et al.  Synergies and Post-Acquisition Performance: Differences versus Similarities in Resource Allocations , 1991 .

[37]  Jeffrey L. Bradach,et al.  Price, Authority, and Trust: From Ideal Types to Plural Forms , 1989 .

[38]  J. R. Moore,et al.  The theory of the growth of the firm twenty-five years after , 1960 .

[39]  Elena Karahanna,et al.  Causal Explanation in the Coordinating Process: A Critical Realist Case Study of Federated IT Governance Structures , 2013, MIS Q..

[40]  Jagdip Singh,et al.  Measurement Issues in Cross-National Research , 1995 .

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

[42]  Eric M. Olson,et al.  The Performance Implications of Fit among Business Strategy, Marketing Organization Structure, and Strategic Behavior , 2005 .

[43]  K. Ramaswamy The performance impact of strategic similarity in horizontal mergers: Evidence from the U.S. banking industry , 1997 .

[44]  Jürgen Beyer,et al.  Jeffrey Pfeffer and Gerald R. Salancik: The External Control of Organizations : A Resource Dependence Perspective , 2000 .

[45]  J. Steenkamp,et al.  Make, buy, or ally: A transaction cost theory meta-analysis , 2006 .

[46]  R. Coff,et al.  Both Market and Hierarchy: An Incentive-System Theory of Hybrid Governance Forms , 2009 .