Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Interaction effects between supply chain capabilities and information technology on firm performance

  • Published:
Information Technology and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Information technology (IT) has been viewed as a source of strategic and tactic forces that improve supply chain management. Previous studies, however, do not necessarily agree on effects of IT-driven supply chain capabilities on firm performance. To better evaluate the contribution of supply chain and IT toward firm performance, we propose a research model that emphasizes the interaction effects between supply chain and IT on firm performance. It is because we conjecture the existence of the synergy effects between supply chain management and IT functions. The proposed model is tested with survey data collected from manufacturing firms’ supply chain managers. The results verify significant moderation effects of IT characteristics on the relationship between supply chain capabilities and firm performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ahuja MK, Galletta DF, Carley KM (2003) Individual centrality and performance in virtual R&D groups: an empirical study. Manag Sci 49(1):21–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Attaran M, Attaran S (2002) Collaborative computing technology: the hot new managing tool. J Manag Dev 21(8):598–609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Banker RD, Bardhan IR, Chang H, Lin S (2006) Plant information systems, manufacturing capabilities, and plant performance. MIS Q 30(2):315–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Baron JP, Shaw MJ, Bailey AD (2000) Web-based e-catalog systems in B2B procurement. Commun ACM 43(5):93–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bequai A (1996) Securing electronic commerce with digital signatures. Comput Audit Update 7:28–32

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bernardes ES, Hanna MD (2009) A theoretical review of flexibility, agility and responsiveness in the operations management literature: toward a conceptual definition of customer responsiveness. Int J Oper Prod Manag 29(1):30–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bharadwaj AS (2000) A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firm performance: an empirical investigation. MIS Q 24(1):169–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Blome C, Schoenherr T, Rexhausen D (2013) Antecedents and enablers of supply chain agility and its effect on performance: a dynamic capabilities perspective. Int J Prod Res 51(4):1295–1318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Booth CL, Harmer MP (1995) Agility, the future for ceramic manufacturing. In: Collection of papers presented at the 96th annual meeting and the 1994 fall meetings of the materials & equipment/whitewares/refractory ceramics/basic science: ceramic engineering and science proceedings, vol 16(1), pp 220–225

  10. Brynjolfsson E, Hitt LM (2000) Beyond computation: information technology, organizational transformation and business performance. J Econ Perspect 14(4):23–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chae HC, Koh CE, Prybutok VR (2014) Information technology capability and firm performance: contradictory findings and their possible causes. MIS Q 38(1):305–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chakravarty A, Grewal R, Sambamurthy V (2013) Information technology competencies, organizational agility, and firm performance: enabling and facilitating roles. Inf Syst Res 24(4):976–997

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chan YE, Huff SL, Barclay DW, Copeland DG (1997) Business strategic orientation, information systems strategic orientation, and strategic alignment. Inf Syst Res 8(2):125–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Chin WW, Marcolin BL, Newsted PR (2003) A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. Inf Syst Res 14(2):189–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Christiaanse E, Van Diepen T, Damsgaard J (2004) Proprietary versus internet technologies and the adoption and impact of electronic marketplaces. J Strateg Inf Syst 13(2):151–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Clark BH (1999) Marketing performance measures: history and interrelationships. J Mark Manag 15(8):711–732

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Da Silveira GJC, Cagliano R (2006) The relationship between interorganizational information systems and operations performance. Int J Oper Prod Manag 26(3):232–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Dai Q, Kauffman RJ (2002) Business models for Internet-based B2B electronic markets. Int J Electron Commer 6(4):41–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Dai Q, Kauffman RJ (2006) To be or not to B2B: evaluating management choices for e-procurement channel adoption. Inf Technol Manag 7(2):109–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. De Toni A (1999) Buyer–supplier operational practices, sourcing policies and plant performances: results of an empirical research. Int J Prod Res 37(3):597–619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Devaraj S, Krajewski L, Wei JC (2007) Impact of eBusiness technologies on operational performance: the role of production information integration in the supply chain. J Oper Manag 25(6):1199–1216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Devaraj S, Vaidyanathan G, Mishra AN (2012) Effect of purchase volume flexibility and purchase mix flexibility on e-procurement performance: an analysis of two perspectives. J Oper Manag 30(7):509–520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res 18(1):39–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gefen D, Straub D (2005) A practical guide to factorial validity using PLS-Graph: tutorial and annotated example. Commun Assoc Inf Syst 16(1):91–109

    Google Scholar 

  25. Goodhue D, Lewis W, Thompson R (2007) Research note-statistical power in analyzing interaction effects: questioning the advantage of PLS with product indicators. Inf Syst Res 18(2):211–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Gosain S, Malhotra A, El Sawy OA (2004) Coordinating for flexibility in e-business supply chains. J Manag Inf Syst 21(3):7–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hair JF, Hult GTM, Ringle C, Sarstedt M (2014) A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage, Los Angeles

    Google Scholar 

  28. Handfield RB, Bechtel C (2002) The role of trust and relationship structure in improving supply chain responsiveness. Ind Mark Manage 31(4):367–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Henseler J, Chin WW (2010) A comparison of approaches for the analysis of interaction effects between latent variables using partial least squares path modeling. Struct Equ Model Multidiscip J 17(1):82–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hsu CC, Kannan VR, Tan KC, Keong Leong G (2008) Information sharing, buyer–supplier relationships, and firm performance: a multi-region analysis. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 38(4):296–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Iyer KN, Germain R, Claycomb C (2009) B2B e-commerce supply chain integration and performance: a contingency fit perspective on the role of environment. Inf Manag 46(6):313–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Jeffers PI, Muhanna WA, Nault BR (2008) Information technology and process performance: an empirical investigation of the interaction between it and non-it resources. Decis Sci 39(4):703–735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Johnson M (2009) Barriers to innovation adoption: a study of e-markets. Ind Manag Data Syst 110(2):157–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Kaplan S, Sawhney M (2000) E-hubs: the new B2B marketplaces. Harv Bus Rev 78(3):97–106

    Google Scholar 

  35. Kathawala Y, Abdou K, Von Franck C (2002) Supply chain/electronic hubs: a comparative analysis. Benchmarking Int J 9(5):450–470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Kauffman RJ, Mohtadi H (2004) Proprietary and open systems adoption in e-procurement: a risk-augmented transaction cost perspective. J Manag Inf Syst 21(1):137–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kauffman RJ, Mohtadi H (2002) Information technology in B2B e-procurement: open vs. proprietary systems. In: Proceedings of the 35th annual hawaii international conference on system sciences, pp 2129–2138

  38. Kent JL, Mentzer JT (2003) The effect of investment in interorganizational information technology in a retail supply chain. J Bus Logist 24(2):155–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Khouja M, Kumar RL (2002) Information technology investments and volume-flexibility in production systems. Int J Prod Res 40(1):205–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Kim D, Lee RP (2010) Systems collaboration and strategic collaboration: their impacts on supply chain responsiveness and market performance. Decis Sci 41(4):955–981

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Kim JI, Shunk DL (2004) Matching indirect procurement process with different B2B e-procurement systems. Comput Ind 53(2):153–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Kotabe M, Martin X, Domoto H (2003) Gaining from vertical partnerships: knowledge transfer, relationship duration, and supplier performance improvement in the U.S. and Japanese automotive industries. Strateg Manag J 24(4):293–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Kumar K (2001) Technology for supporting supply chain management: introduction. Commun ACM 44(6):58–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Lai KH, Wong CW, Cheng TE (2008) A coordination-theoretic investigation of the impact of electronic integration on logistics performance. Inf Manag 45(1):10–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Lee HL (2002) Aligning supply chain strategies with product uncertainties. Calif Manag Rev 44(3):105–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Li G, Yang H, Sun L, Sohal AS (2009) The impact of IT implementation on supply chain integration and performance. Int J Prod Econ 120(1):125–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Liang H, Saraf N, Hu Q, Xue Y (2007) Assimilation of enterprise systems: the effect of institutional pressures and the mediating role of top management. MIS Q 31(1):59–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Luftman J, Brier T (1999) Achieving and sustaining business-IT alignment. Calif Manag Rev 42(1):109–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. McGinnis MA, Kohn JW (1993) Logistics strategy, organizational environment, and time competitiveness. J Bus Logist 14(2):1–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Monczka R, Morgan JP (2000) Competitive supply strategies for the 21st century. Purchasing January 13:48–59

    Google Scholar 

  51. Mukhopadhyay T, Kekre S (2002) Strategic and operational benefits of electronic integration in B2B procurement processes. Manag Sci 48(10):1301–1313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH (1994) Psychometric theory, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  53. Paulraj A, Lado AA, Chen IJ (2008) Inter-organizational communication as a relational competency: antecedents and performance outcomes in collaborative buyer–supplier relationships. J Oper Manag 26(1):45–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Peleg B, Lee HL, Hausman WH (2002) Short-term e-procurement strategies versus long-term contracts. Prod Oper Manag 11(4):458–479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Peng DX, Lai F (2012) Using partial least squares in operations management research: a practical guideline and summary of past research. J Oper Manag 30(6):467–480

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Podsakoff PM, Organ DW (1986) Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects. J Manag 12(4):531–544

    Google Scholar 

  57. Qrunfleh S, Tarafdar M (2014) Supply chain information systems strategy: impacts on supply chain performance and firm performance. Int J Prod Econ 147:340–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Reichhart A, Holweg M (2007) Creating the customer-responsive supply chain: a reconciliation of concepts. Int J Oper Prod Manag 27(11):1144–1172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Rosenzweig ED, Roth AV, Dean JW (2003) The influence of an integration strategy on competitive capabilities and business performance: an exploratory study of consumer products manufacturers. J Oper Manag 21(4):437–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Sabherwal R, Chan YE (2001) Alignment between business and IS strategies: a study of prospectors, analyzers, and defenders. Inf Syst Res 12(1):11–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Saeed KA, Malhotra MK, Grover V (2005) Examining the impact of interorganizational systems on process efficiency and sourcing leverage in buyer–supplier dyads. Decis Sci 36(3):365–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Sahin F, Robinson EP (2005) Information sharing and coordination in make-to-order supply chains. J Oper Manag 23(6):579–598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Sambamurthy V, Bharadwaj A, Grover V (2003) Shaping agility through digital options: reconceptualizing the role of information technology in contemporary firms. MIS Q 27(2):237–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Sanchez AM, Perez PM (2001) Lean indicators and manufacturing strategies. Int J Oper Prod Man 21(11):1433–1451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Sanders NR (2007) An empirical study of the impact of e-business technologies on organizational collaboration and performance. J Oper Manag 25(6):1332–1347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Sanders NR, Premus R (2002) IT applications in supply chain organizations: a link between competitive priorities and organizational benefits. J Bus Logist 23(1):65–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Santhanam R, Hartono E (2003) Issues in linking information technology capabilities to firm performance. MIS Q 27(1):125–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Schlosser F, Beimborn D, Weitzel T, Wagner HT (2015) Achieving social alignment between business and IT—an empirical evaluation of the efficacy of IT governance mechanisms. J Inf Technol 30(2):119–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Schmenner RW, Tatikonda MV (2005) Manufacturing process flexibility revisited. Int J Oper Prod Man 25(12):1183–1189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Sorrow RM (1987) We’d Better Watch Out: Review of “Manufacturing Matters: The Myth of the Post- Industrial Economy, by S. Cohen and J. Zysman.” New York Times. July 12, 1987, p 36. Available at http://www.standupeconomist.com/pdf/misc/solow-computer-productivity.pdf

  71. Stevenson M, Spring M (2007) Flexibility from a supply chain perspective: definition and review. Int J Oper Prod Manag 27(7):685–713

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Stevenson M, Spring M (2009) Supply chain flexibility: an inter-firm empirical study. Int J Oper Prod Manag 29(9):946–971

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Suarez FF, Cusumano MA, Fine CH (1996) An empirical study of manufacturing flexibility in printed circuit board assembly. Oper Res 44(1):232–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Subramani M (2004) How do suppliers benefit from information technology use in supply chain relationships? MIS Q 28(1):45–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Swafford PM, Ghosh S, Murthy N (2008) Achieving supply chain agility through IT integration and flexibility. Int J Prod Econ 116(2):288–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Swafford PM, Ghosh S, Murthy NN (2006) A framework for assessing value chain agility. Int J Oper Prod Manag 26(2):118–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Swink M, Narasimhan R, Kim SW (2005) Manufacturing practices and strategy integration: effects on cost efficiency, flexibility, and market-based performance. Decis Sci 36(3):427–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Tai YM, Ho CF, Wu WH (2010) The performance impact of implementing web-based e-procurement systems. Int J Prod Res 48(18):5397–5414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Tao YH, Chen CP, Chang CR (2007) Unmet adoption expectation as the key to e-marketplace failure: a case of Taiwan’s steel industry. Ind Mark Manag 36(8):1057–1067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Van Der Vaart T, Van Donk DP (2004) Buyer focus: evaluation of a new concept for supply chain integration. Int J Prod Econ 92(1):21–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Vickery S, Calantone R, Droge C (1999) Supply chain flexibility: an empirical study. J Supply Chain Manag 35(2):16–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Vickery SK, Droge C, Setia P, Sambamurthy V (2010) Supply chain information technologies and organizational initiatives: complementary versus independent effects on agility and firm performance. Int J Prod Res 48(23):7025–7042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Vickery SK, Jayaram J, Droge C, Calantone R (2003) The effects of an integrative supply chain strategy on customer service and financial performance: an analysis of direct versus indirect relationships. J Oper Manag 21(5):523–539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Wang ET, Wei HL (2007) Interorganizational governance value creation: coordinating for information visibility and flexibility in supply chains. Decis Sci 38(4):647–674

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. White A, Daniel EM, Mohdzain M (2005) The role of emergent information technologies and systems in enabling supply chain agility. Int J Inform Manage 25(5):396–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Wu F, Yeniyurt S, Kim D, Cavusgil ST (2006) The impact of information technology on supply chain capabilities and firm performance: a resource-based view. Ind Mark Manage 35(4):493–504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Zacharia ZG, Nix NW, Lusch RF (2011) Capabilities that enhance outcomes of an episodic supply chain collaboration. J Oper Manag 29(6):591–603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Zhang Q, Vonderembse MA, Lim JS (2003) Manufacturing flexibility: defining and analyzing relationships among competence, capability, and customer satisfaction. J Oper Manag 21(2):173–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Zhang X, Van Donk DP, Van Der Vaart T (2011) Does ICT influence supply chain management and performance? A review of survey-based research. Int J Oper Prod Manag 31(11):1215–1247

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Institute of Management Research at Seoul National University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Queen Mary University of London, London, UK

    Soojung Oh

  2. School of Management, University of Texas at Dallas, 800 W. Campbell Road, SM 33, Richardson, TX, 75080, USA

    Young U. Ryu

  3. College of Business Administration, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea

    Hongsuk Yang

Authors
  1. Soojung Oh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Young U. Ryu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hongsuk Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Young U. Ryu.

Appendix: survey questions

Appendix: survey questions

figure a

E-procurement system type

Definition

Open type

Many potential business partners can join the system

Close type

Only pre-selected business partner can join the system

Low information sharing

Only transaction information is shared (not strategic information) through the system

High information sharing

Transaction information and strategic information are all shared through the system

Low implementation cost

The cost of adding a new participant to the system is low

High implementation cost

The cost of adding a new participant to the system is high

Strong market-making function

Easily explore and access potential pool of partners through the system

Weak market-making function

Exploring and accessing to potential partners through the system are limited

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Oh, S., Ryu, Y.U. & Yang, H. Interaction effects between supply chain capabilities and information technology on firm performance. Inf Technol Manag 20, 91–106 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10799-018-0294-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10799-018-0294-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation