Performance measurement and management systems as IT artefacts

Purpose Considering performance measurement and management systems (PMMS) to be “mission-critical” information systems for many business organisations, calls have been made for researchers to shift from studying the use of such systems to studying their “effective” use, and in so doing to focus on their characterisation as information technology (IT) artefacts. The paper aims to discuss this issue. Design/methodology/approach In seeking to answer these calls, the authors apply Burton-Jones and Grange’s theoretical framework to study the dimensions, contextual drivers and benefits of the effective use of PMMS. This is done through a field study of 16 PMMS artefacts as used in small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Findings In characterising, contextualising and valuing the effective use of PMMS, this study provides answers to the following questions: What constitutes the effective use of PMMS? What are the user, artefactual and task-related drivers of such use? And what are the benefits for SMEs of using performance measurement and management (PMM) systems effectively? Practical implications With regard to the design of a PMMS artefact, the findings imply that one should concentrate on those artefactual attributes that most enable informed action on the part of owner-managers, as it is these actions have the greater consequences for the realisation of IT business value in SMEs. Moreover, the nomological network resulting from this research provides the theoretical and methodological underpinnings of a diagnostic tool meant to develop the PMM function in SMEs. Originality/value This study provides further empirical grounding and understanding. This study provides further empirical grounding and understanding of the concept of effective use, as well as further applicability and actionability to this concept and to the nomological network of its dimensions, contextual drivers and benefits in the case of PMMS and in the context of SMEs.

[1]  Philippe Lorino,et al.  Goffman's theory of frames and situated meaning-making in performance reviews. The case of a category management approach in the French retail sector , 2017 .

[2]  C. Pappalardo,et al.  Internationalization choices and Italian firm performance during the crisis , 2017 .

[3]  P. Kotnik,et al.  ICT as facilitator of internationalisation in small- and medium-sized firms , 2017 .

[4]  Kevin Baird,et al.  The effectiveness of strategic performance measurement systems , 2017 .

[5]  Irene Eleonora Lisi,et al.  Translating environmental motivations into performance: The role of environmental performance measurement systems , 2015 .

[6]  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..

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

[8]  R. Silvi,et al.  The practice of strategic performance measurement systems: Models, drivers and information effectiveness , 2015 .

[9]  Louis Raymond,et al.  Risk of adopting mission-critical OSS applications: an interpretive case study , 2014 .

[10]  Umit Bititci,et al.  Is performance measurement and management fit for the future? , 2014 .

[11]  Luca Mari,et al.  The theory and practice of performance measurement , 2014 .

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

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

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

[15]  H. Dekker,et al.  A Balancing Act? The Implications of Mixed Strategies for Performance Measurement System Design , 2012 .

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

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

[18]  Luiz Felipe Scavarda,et al.  Reviewing and improving performance measurement systems: An action research , 2011 .

[19]  Matthew D. Hall,et al.  Do comprehensive performance measurement systems help or hinder managers' mental model development? , 2011 .

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

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

[22]  Louis Raymond,et al.  Exploring an alternative method of evaluating the effects of ERP: a multiple case study , 2009, J. Inf. Technol..

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

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

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

[26]  Michael J. Gallivan,et al.  ORGANIZATIONS: A MULTILEVEL PERSPECTIVE , 2007 .

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

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

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

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

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

[32]  Ryad Titah,et al.  Information System Use - Related Activity: An Expanded Behavioral Conceptualization of Individual-Level Information System Use , 2007, Inf. Syst. Res..

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

[34]  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..

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

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

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

[38]  Louis Raymond,et al.  Short‐term effects of benchmarking on the manufacturing practices and performance of SMEs , 2004 .

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

[40]  Jean Hartley,et al.  Case study research , 2004 .

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

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

[43]  Luca Mari,et al.  Epistemology of measurement , 2003 .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[51]  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 .

[52]  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..

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

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

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

[56]  Yoris A. Au Design Science I: The Role of Design Science in Electronic Commerce Research , 2001, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

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

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

[59]  Malcolm Munro,et al.  Assessing User Competence: Conceptualization and Measurement , 2000, Inf. Syst. Res..

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

[61]  Peter Kueng,et al.  Process performance measurement system: A tool to support process-based organizations , 2000 .

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

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

[64]  Subhash Sharma Applied multivariate techniques , 1995 .

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

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

[67]  Dale Goodhue,et al.  Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance , 1995, MIS Q..

[68]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory , 1994 .

[69]  Ron Weber,et al.  On the ontological expressiveness of information systems analysis and design grammars , 1993, Inf. Syst. J..

[70]  P. J. Runkel,et al.  Casting Nets and Testing Specimens: Two Grand Methods of Psychology , 1990 .

[71]  Fred D. Davis Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[72]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Psychology of everyday things , 1990 .

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

[74]  J. Gibson The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception , 1979 .