Performance Paradox : Information Technology Investments and Administrative Performance in the Case of the 50 U.S. State Governments

This study introduces the terminology of performance paradox in the context of IT (information technology) investment and use. Although it is somewhat related to the concept of productivity paradox, in the case of performance paradox, the dependent variable (i.e., the measure of performance) is not productivity, but some other measure of performance. This paper presents the results of a study that examined the relationship between IT investments by the 50 state governments of the United States and the administrative performance of these state governments. There are two parts to this study. In the first part, IT investments by state governments were related to multiple measures of state government performance, namely performance in financial management, human resource management, information technology management, capital management, and managing for results. In the second part of the study, IT investments by state governments were related to projected state government budget deficits. State budget deficits are used as a performance measure because they are an indicator of state government planning performance. Structural equation modeling was performed to analyze the data. The results indicate incidence of performance paradox. It appears as though the more U.S. state governments invest in IT, the worse they perform. However, there are also indications that with the passage of time, the relationship between IT investment and performance shows improvement. Thus, over time, the performance paradox becomes less pronounced. In some cases, it appears that past investments in IT actually help future performance.

[1]  Marion G. Sobol,et al.  The relationship between computerization and performance: A strategy for maximizing the economic benefits of computerization , 1983, Inf. Manag..

[2]  P. Osterman The Impact of Computers on the Employment of Clerks and Managers , 1986 .

[3]  Richard H. Franke,et al.  Technological revolution and productivity decline: Computer introduction in the financial industry , 1987 .

[4]  Emin Babakus,et al.  The Sensitivity of Confirmatory Maximum Likelihood Factor Analysis to Violations of Measurement Scale and Distributional Assumptions , 1987 .

[5]  S. E. Harris,et al.  Predicting organizational performance using information technology managerial control ratios , 1989, [1989] Proceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Volume IV: Emerging Technologies and Applications Track.

[6]  Raymond R. Panko,et al.  Is Office Productivity Stagnant? , 1991, MIS Q..

[7]  P. Alpar,et al.  A comparison of approaches to the measurement of IT value , 1990, Twenty-Third Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[8]  Weill Do Computers Pay Off , 1990 .

[9]  Clive Holtham,et al.  The Business Value of Computers , 1991, J. Inf. Technol..

[10]  Zvi Griliches,et al.  Purchased Services, Outsourcing, Computers, and Productivity in Manufacturing , 1991 .

[11]  T. Noyelle Skills, Wages, and Productivity in the Service Sector , 1991 .

[12]  T. Noyelle,et al.  Skills, Wages, and Productivity in the Service Sector. , 1992 .

[13]  E. Berndt,et al.  High-tech capital formation and economic performance in U.S. manufacturing industries : an exploratory analysis , 1992 .

[14]  Frank Land,et al.  How to Assess Your It Investment: A Study of Methods and Practice , 1993 .

[15]  Heather A. Smith,et al.  The relationship between information technology use and organizational performance , 1993 .

[16]  C. Gotlieb,et al.  Productivity and computers in Canadian banking , 1993 .

[17]  R. Dué,et al.  The Productivity Paradox , 2018, The Productivity-Inclusiveness Nexus.

[18]  Richard T. Watson,et al.  Service Quality: A Measure of Information System Effectiveness , 1995, MIS Q..

[19]  S. West,et al.  The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. , 1996 .

[20]  James L. Arbuckle,et al.  Full Information Estimation in the Presence of Incomplete Data , 1996 .

[21]  Lorin M. Hitt,et al.  Productivity, Business Profitability, and Consumer Surplus: Three Different Measures of Information Technology Value , 1996, MIS Q..

[22]  E. Brynjolfsson,et al.  Paradox Lost? Firm-Level Evidence on the Returns to Information Systems Spending , 1996 .

[23]  C. Morrison Assessing the Productivity of Information Technology Equipment in U.S. Manufacturing Industries , 1991, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[24]  William J. Kettinger,et al.  Pragmatic Perspectives on the Measurement of Information Systems Service Quality Analysis with LISREL : An Appendix to Pragmatic Perspectives on the Measurement of Information Systems Service Quality , 2002 .

[25]  Richard T. Watson,et al.  Measuring Information Systems Service Quality: Concerns for a Complete Canvas , 1997, MIS Q..

[26]  Lorin M. Hitt,et al.  Beyond the Productivity Paradox: Computers are the Catalyst for Bigger Changes , 1998 .

[27]  Harlow B. Cohen The performance paradox , 1998 .

[28]  R. Hirschheim,et al.  Evaluation of information systems: a critical assessment , 1998 .

[29]  Rex B. Kline,et al.  Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling , 1998 .

[30]  B. Thompson,et al.  EFFECTS OF SAMPLE SIZE, ESTIMATION METHODS, AND MODEL SPECIFICATION ON STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING FIT INDEXES , 1999 .

[31]  Tron Foss,et al.  The Performance of ML, GLS, and WLS Estimation in Structural Equation Modeling Under Conditions of Misspecification and Nonnormality , 2000 .

[32]  Dale W. Jorgenson,et al.  U.S. Economic Growth at the Industry Level , 2000 .

[33]  E. Brynjolfsson,et al.  Beyond Computation: Information Technology, Organizational Transformation and Business Performance , 2000 .

[34]  Mo Adam Mahmood,et al.  Special Issue: Impacts of Information Technology Investment on Organizational Performance , 2000, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[35]  Stephen D. Oliner,et al.  The Resurgence of Growth in the Late 1990s: Is Information Technology the Story? , 2000 .

[36]  D. Jorgenson Information Technology and the U.S. Economy , 2001 .

[37]  J. Bartle BUDGETING, POLICY, AND ADMINISTRATION: PATTERNS AND DYNAMICS IN THE UNITED STATES , 2001 .

[38]  Zahir Irani,et al.  The Propagation of Technology Management Taxonomies for Evaluating Investments in Information Systems , 2000, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[39]  Rajiv Kohli,et al.  Measuring Payoff of Information Technology Investments: Research Issues and Guidelines , 2002, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..