Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The influence of IT investment and IT governance on corporate performance of multibusiness firms

  • Published:
The Journal of Supercomputing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The concept of IT relatedness has explained a link between IT and corporate performance of multibusiness firms. Although IT relatedness provided a significant link between IT relatedness and corporate performance, there is limited understanding about antecedents of IT relatedness. Thus, this study is the first to investigate what factors influence IT relatedness, which ultimately leads to corporate performance. With a total of 324 responses from multibusiness firms, this study empirically investigates the two antecedents of IT relatedness–IT investment and IT governance structures. This study suggests strategic guides regarding IT relatedness to IT managers of multibusiness firms.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This study adopted Hypotheses 5 and 6 from Huesyin’s research model (2005). For more detail, please see Tanriverdi [90].

References

  1. Ahituv N, Neumann S, Zviran M (1989) Factors affecting the policy for distributing computing resources. MIS Q 13(4):389–401

    Google Scholar 

  2. Alavi M, Leidner DE (2001) Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: conceptual foundation and research issues. MIS Q 25(1):107–136

    Google Scholar 

  3. Applegate LM, Austin RD, McFarlan FW (2007) Corporate information strategy and management: text and cases. McGraw-Hill/Irwin, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  4. Argote L, Ingram P (2000) Knowledge transfer: a basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 82(1):150–169

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bagozzi RP, Yi Y (1998) On the evaluation of structural models. J Acad Market Sci 16(1):74–94

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bakos Y (1998) The productivity payoff of computers. Science 281(5373):52

    Google Scholar 

  7. Barclay D, Higgins C, Thompson R (1995) The partial least squares (PLS) approach to causal modeling: personal computer adoption and use as an illustration. Technol Stud 2(2):285–309

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bassellier G, Benbasat I (2004) Business competence of information technology professionals: conceptual development and influence on IT-business partnerships. MIS Q 28(4):673–694

  9. Beccalli E (2007) Does IT investment improve bank performance? Evidence from Europe. J Bank Finance 31(7):2205–2230

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bender DH (1986) Financial impact of information processing. J MIS 3(2):22–32

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bettis RA, Prahalad CK (1995) The dominant logic: retrospective and extension. Strateg Manag J 16(1):5–14

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bharadwaj AS, Bharadwaj SG, Konsynski BR (1999) Information technology effects on firm performance as measured by Tobin’s q. Manag Sci 45(7):1008–1024

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Broadbent M, Kitzis ES (2004) The new CIO leader: setting the agenda and delivering results. Harvard Business Press, Boston, MA

  14. Brown CV (1997) Examining the emergence of hybrid IS governance solutions: evidence from a single case site. Inf Syst Res 8(1):69–94

    Google Scholar 

  15. Brown CV (1999) Horizontal mechanisms under differing IS organization contexts. MIS Q 23(3):421–454

    Google Scholar 

  16. Brown CV, Magill SL (1994) Alignment of the IS functions with the enterprise: toward a model of antecedents. MIS Q 18(4):371–403

    Google Scholar 

  17. Brown CV, Magill SL (1998) Reconceptualizing the context-design issue for the information systems function. Organ Sci 9(2):176–194

    Google Scholar 

  18. Brown CV, Ross J (2003) Designing a process-based IT organization. Information Strategy: The Executive’s Journal 19(2):35–41

  19. Brynjolfsson E, Hitt LM (1993) Is information systems spending productive? New evidence and new results. In: The Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Information Systems, Orlando, FL

  20. Chan YE (2000) IT value: the great divide between qualitative and quantitative and individual and organizational measures. J Manag Inf Syst 16(4):225–261

    Google Scholar 

  21. Clark TD Jr (1992) Corporate systems management: an overview and research perspective. Commun ACM 35(2):61–75

    Google Scholar 

  22. Clark CE, Cavanaugh NC, Brown CV, Sambamurthy V (1997) Building change-readiness capabilities in the IS organization: insights from the Bell Atlantic experience. MIS Q 21(4): 425–455

  23. Cronbach LJ (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16(3):297–334

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Cross J, Earl MJ, Sampler JL (1997) Transformation of the IT function at british petroleum. MIS Q 24(1):401–423

    Google Scholar 

  25. Csaszar F, Clemons E (2006) Governance of the IT function: valuing agility and quality of training, cooperation and communications. In: Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference System Sciences, HICSS’06, p 167b

  26. Dudley L, Lasserre P (1989) Information as a substitute for inventories. Eur Econ Rev 33(1):67–88

    Google Scholar 

  27. Earl MJ (1989) Management strategies for information technology. Prentice-Hall Inc, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  28. Ein-Dor P, Segev E (1982) Organizational context and MIS structure: some empirical evidence. MIS Q 6(3): 55–68

  29. Fink L, Neumann S (2009) Exploring the perceived business value of the flexibility enabled by information technology infrastructure. Inf Manag 46(2):90–99

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  31. Gold AH, Malhotra A, Segars AH (2001) Knowledge management: an organizational capabilities perspective. J Manag Inf Syst 18(1):185–214

    Google Scholar 

  32. Grant RM (1988) On ’dominant logic’, relatedness and the link between diversity and performance. Strateg Manag J 9(6):639–642

    Google Scholar 

  33. Grant RM (1996a) Prospering in dynamically competitive environments: organizational capability as knowledge integration. Organ Sci 7(4):375–387

    Google Scholar 

  34. Grant RM (1996b) Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strateg Manag J 17:109–122

    Google Scholar 

  35. Grembergen WV, Haes SD, Guldentops E (2004) Structures, processes and relational mechanisms for IT governance. Strateg Inf Technol Gov 2(004):1–36

    Google Scholar 

  36. Grove HD, Selto FH, Hanbery G (1990) The effect of information system intangibles on the market value of the firm. J Inf Syst 4(3):36–47

    Google Scholar 

  37. Gu B, Xue L, Ray G (2008) IT governance and IT investment performance: an empirical analysis. Available at SSRN 1145102

  38. Gupta AK, Govindarajan V (2000) Knowledge flows within multinational corporations. Strateg Manag J 21(4):473–496

    Google Scholar 

  39. Hansen TM (1999) The search-transfer problem: the role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Adm Sci Q 44(1):82–111

    Google Scholar 

  40. Harrison JS, Hitt MA, Hoskisson RE, Ireland RD (2001) Resource complementarity in business combinations: extending the logic to organizational alliances. J Manag 27(6):679–690

    Google Scholar 

  41. Hill CWL, Hoskisson RE (1987) Strategy and structure in the multiproduct firm. Acad Manag Rev 12(2):331–341

    Google Scholar 

  42. Hu LT, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model Multidiscip J 6(1):1–55

    Google Scholar 

  43. Hulland J, Wade MR, Antia KD (2007) The impact of capabilities and prior investments on online channel commitment and performance. J Manag Inf Syst 23(4):109–142

    Google Scholar 

  44. Jeon IS, Kim HJ (2005) Return on customer satisfaction investment: is CSI financially accountable? J Mark 20(3):65–84

    Google Scholar 

  45. Kang SM, Chang GI (2005) A case study on the development of evaluation index and the management system for IT investment of organizations. Inf Syst Rev 7(1):220–224

    Google Scholar 

  46. Kim HK, Yoo JH, Lee HJ (2003) An empirical study on the integrated performance model for the effect of information technology investment. Asia Pac J Inf Syst 13(1):120–123

    Google Scholar 

  47. King JL (1983) Centralized versus decentralized computing: organizational considerations and management options. Comput Surv 15(4):320–349

    Google Scholar 

  48. Kogut B, Zander U (1992) Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organ Sci 3(3):383–397

    Google Scholar 

  49. Kogut B, Zander U (1995) Knowledge and the speed of the transfer and imitation of organizational capabilities: an empirical test. Organ Sci 6(1):76–92

    Google Scholar 

  50. Kohli R, Devaraj S (2003) Measuring information technology payoff: a meta-analysis of structural variables in firm-level empirical research. Inf Syst Res 14(2):127–145

    Google Scholar 

  51. Labelle A, Nyce H (1987) Whither the IT organization?. Sloan Manag Rev 28(4): 75–85

  52. Lapavitsas C, Dos Santos PL (2008) Globalization and contemporary banking: on the impact of new technology. Contrib Polit Econ 27(1):31–56

    Google Scholar 

  53. Laplante A (1991) Here come the hybrids. Computerworld 25(24): 57–61

  54. Lee B, Menon NM (2000) Information technology value through different normative lenses. J Manag Inf Syst 16(4):99–119

    Google Scholar 

  55. Li M, Ye LR (1999) Information technology and firm performance: linking with environmental, strategic and managerial contexts. Inf Manag 35:43–51

    Google Scholar 

  56. Markides CC, Williamson PJ (1994) Related diversification, core competences and corpor ate performance. Strateg Manag J 15(S2):149–165

    Google Scholar 

  57. Markides CC, Williamson PJ (1996) Corporate diversification and organizational structure: a resource-based view. Acad Manag J 39(2):340–367

    Google Scholar 

  58. McGahan AM, Porter ME (1999) The persistence of shocks to profitability. Rev Econ Stat 81(1):143–153

    Google Scholar 

  59. Menon A, Varadarajan PR (1992) A model of marketing knowledge use within firms. J Mark 56(4):53–71

    Google Scholar 

  60. Miller DJ (2006) Technological diversity, related diversification, and firm performance. Strateg Manag J 27(7):601–619

    Google Scholar 

  61. Monks RA, Minow N (2000) Corporate governance. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  62. Nayyar PR (1993) Performance effects of information asymmetry and economies of scope in diversified service firms. Acad Manag J 36(1):28–57

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  63. Nolan R (1994) Note on estimating the value of the IT asset. Harvard Business School, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  64. Nonaka I (1995) The knowledge-creating company: how Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation: how Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford university Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  65. Norton DP (1995) Managing benefits from information technology. Inf Manag Comput Secur 3(5):29–35

    Google Scholar 

  66. Palvia S (1992) MIS issues in india and a comparison with the United States. Int Inf Syst 1(2): 100–110

  67. Park MS, Moon HK (2001) Knowledge sharing within organization: research trends & challenges. J Knowl Manag 2(1):1–22

    Google Scholar 

  68. Porra J, Hirschheim R, Parks MS (2006) Forty years of the corporate information technology function at Texaco Inc.—a history. Inf Organ 16(1):82–107

    Google Scholar 

  69. Porter ME (1980) Competitive advantage. The Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  70. Prahalad CK, Bettis RA (1986) The dominant logic: a new linkage between diversity and performance. Strateg Manag J 7(6):485–501

    Google Scholar 

  71. Rai A, Patnayakuni R, Patnayakuni N (1997) Technology investment and business performance. Commun ACM 40:89–97

    Google Scholar 

  72. Ravichandran T, Liu Y, Han S, Hasan I (2009) Diversification and firm performance: exploring the moderating effects of information technology spending. J Manag Inf Syst 25(4):205–240

    Google Scholar 

  73. Robins JA, Wiersema MF (1995) A resource based approach to the multibusiness firm: empirical analysis of portfolio interrelationships and corporate financial performance. Strateg Manag J 16(4):277–299

    Google Scholar 

  74. Robins JA, Wiersema MF (2003) The measurement of corporate portfolio strategy: analysis of the content validity of related diversification indexes. Strateg Manag J 24(1):39–59

    Google Scholar 

  75. Rockart JF (1998) The line takes the leadership-IS management in a wired society. Slan Manag Rev 29:57–64

    Google Scholar 

  76. Rumelt RP (1974) Strategy, structure, and economic performance. Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University, Boston, MA

    Google Scholar 

  77. Sambamurthy V, Zmud RW (1999) Arrangements for information technology governance: a theory of multiple contingencies. MIS Q 23(2):261–290

    Google Scholar 

  78. Sambamurthy V, Zmud RW (2000) Research commentary: the organizing logic for an enterprise’s IT activities in the digital era—a prognosis of practice and a call for research. Inf Syst Res 11(2):105–114

    Google Scholar 

  79. Schultze U, Leidner DE (2002) Studying knowledge management in information systems research: discourses and theoretical as sumptions. MIS Q 26(3):213–242

    Google Scholar 

  80. Schulz M (2001) The uncertain relevance of newness: organizational learning and knowledge flows. Acad Manag J 44(4):661–681

    Google Scholar 

  81. Seo HJ, Lee JH, Oh BY (2006) IT ROI methodology development and application: a case study on financial company. Inf Syst Rev 8(2):189–209

    Google Scholar 

  82. Seo HJ, Yun SC, Kim MS (2003) Correlation analysis of impacting factors on the IT investment and performance: extended IS success model. Entrue J Inf Technol 2(2):101–114

    Google Scholar 

  83. Shin IS, Kim HK, Song JK (1998) The use of information technology and performance of firm. Korean Econ Assoc 46(3):253–278

    Google Scholar 

  84. Spender JC (1996) Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strateg Manag J 17:45–62

    Google Scholar 

  85. Strassmann PA (1985) Information payoff: the transformation of work in the electronic age. The Free Press, New York

  86. Strassmann PA (1990) The business value of computers: an executive’s guide. Information Economics Press, New Cannaan, CT

  87. Strassman PA (1997) The squandered computer. Information Economics Press, New Cannaan, CT

  88. Strassmann PA (2002) The persistence of the computer paradox: a critique of effort to disprove the computer paradox. The Information Economics Press, New Canaan

    Google Scholar 

  89. Szulanski G (1996) Exploring internal stickiness: impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strateg Manag J 17:27–43

    Google Scholar 

  90. Tanriverdi H (2005) Information technology relatedness, knowledge management capability, and performance of multibusiness firms. MIS Q 29(2):311–334

    Google Scholar 

  91. Tanriverdi H (2006) Performance effects of information technology synergies in multibusiness firms. MIS Q 30(1):57–77

    Google Scholar 

  92. Tanriverdi H, Lee CH (2008) Within-industry diversification and firm performance in the presence of network externalities: evidence from the software industry. Acad Manag J 51(2):381–397

    Google Scholar 

  93. Tanriverdi H, Venkatraman N (2005) Knowledge relatedness and the performance of multibusiness firms. Strateg Manag J 26(2):97–119

    Google Scholar 

  94. Van de Ven AH, Ferry DL (1980) Measuring and assessing organizations. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  95. Venkatraman N, Tanriverdi H (2004) Reflecting “knowledge” in strategy research: conceptual issues and methodological challenges. Res Methodol Strategy Manag 1:33–65

    Google Scholar 

  96. Von Simson E (1990) The ‘centrally’ decentralized IS organization. Harv Bus Rev 68(4):158–162

  97. Lee W, Leung Carson K-S, Lee JJ (2011) Mobile web navigation in digital ecosystems using rooted directed trees. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 58(6):2154–2162

    Google Scholar 

  98. Cho W, Song M (2012) Selecting information technology projects in non-linear risk/return relationships of IT investment. J Inf Technol Archit 9(1):21–31

    Google Scholar 

  99. Webb P, Pollard C, Ridley G (2006) Attempting to define IT governance: wisdom or folly? In: Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS’06, pp 194a

  100. Weil P, Ross JW (2004) IT-governance: how top performers manage IT decision rights for superior results. Harvard Business Press, Boston, MA

  101. Weill P (1992) The relationship between investment in information technology and firm performance: a study of the valve manufacturing sector. Inf Syst Res 3(4):307–333

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  102. Weill P (2004) Don’t just lead, govern: how top-performing firms govern IT. MIS Q Exec 3(1):1–17

    Google Scholar 

  103. Weill P, Broadbent M (1998) Leveraging the new infrastructure: how market leaders capitalize on information technology. Harvard Business Press, Boston, MA

  104. Woodruff RB (1997) Customer value: the next source for competitive advantage. J Acad Mark Sci 25(2):139–153

    Google Scholar 

  105. Xue L, Ray G, Gu B (2008) Environmental uncertainty and IT governance: a moral hazard perspective. Available at SSRN 1116009

  106. Yang JY (2007) The effects of the board’s participation in strategic IT decision making on business performance. Seoul National University PHD

  107. Yi YJ, Lee CL (2007) The role of customer loyalty variables in the effects of customer satisfaction on firm‘s performance. Korea Mark Rev 22(1):81–102

    Google Scholar 

  108. Zander U, Kogut B (1995) Knowledge and the speed of the transfer and imitation of organizational capabilities: an empirical test. Organ Sci 6(1):76–92

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by a grant from Kyung Hee University in 2012 (KHU-20121735)”.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Kyung Hee University, Dongdaemun-Gu, Seoul, 130-701, South Korea

    KyungSeok Ryu, JooSeok Park & JaeHong Park

Authors
  1. KyungSeok Ryu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. JooSeok Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. JaeHong Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to JaeHong Park.

Appendix

Appendix

figure a
figure b
figure c

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ryu, K., Park, J. & Park, J. The influence of IT investment and IT governance on corporate performance of multibusiness firms. J Supercomput 76, 7820–7846 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-017-1974-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-017-1974-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation