Measuring Information Technology Payoff: A Meta - Analysis of Structural Variables in Firm - Level Empirical Research

By Rajiv Kohli, Sarv Devaraj. Information systems research, 2003

784 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5c9dc3ebaa6bf9777227d2a2a96128170fe8a971

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

Strength in Numbers: How Does Data-Driven Decisionmaking Affect Firm Performance? (2011, background): “Since the mid 90s, many researchers have reported that IT investments indeed increase productivity (e.g. Brynjolfsson and Hitt, 1993; Oliner and Sichel, 2000; Jorgensen and Stiroh, 2000; Kohli and Devaraj, 2003; Aral, Brynjolfsson and Wu, 2006; Barua et al., 1995).”
Information Technology and Firm Profitability: Mechanisms and Empirical Evidence (2012, background): “Annual Averages ($ millions per employee) 1 lists some representative studies and is not meant to be exhaustive (for more detailed review of the literature on business value of IT, see Dedrick et al. 2003; Kohli and Devaraj 2003; Kohli and Grover 2008; Melville et al. 2004).”
Effectiveness of technology investment: Impact of internal technological capability, networking and investment's strategic importance (2012, background): “The investigation of technology investment value is often muddled by confusion over what is the value created (Hitt and Brynjolfsson, 1996; Kohli and Devaraj, 2003).”
Plant Information Systems, Manufacturing Capabilities, and Plant Performance (2006, background): “1993), and several have found that IT spending has a positive impact (Barua et al. 1995; Brynjolfsson and Hitt 1996; Kohli and Devaraj 2003; Menon et al. 2000).”
Does Knowledge Management really matter? Linking knowledge management practices, competitiveness and economic performance (2012, background): “…work on performance impact of ICT has been done in the information technology payoff literature (e.g. Barua et al., 1995; Brynjolfsson and Hitt, 1996; Devaraj and Kohli, 2003; Kohli and Devaraj, 2003; Dedrick et al., 2003) which examines the financial impact of information technology investments.”
A firm-level analysis of determinants of ICT adoption in Spain (2007, background): “Provided that the positive impact of ICT on productivity has been largely demonstrated (Dedrick et al., 2003; Kohli and Devaraj, 2003), one of the main lines of government action in search of improvement of the competitiveness of their economies has been the promotion of these technologies among fir”
ICT Adoption in Small and Medium Enterprises: an Empirical Evidence of Service Sectors in Malaysia (2009, background): “Some empirical studies by Bartelsman and Doms (2000), Brynjolfsson and Yang (1996), Dedrick et al. (2003), Kohli and Devaraj (2003) and Melville et al. (2004) confirms the positive effect of information and communication”
Measuring the effects of business intelligence systems: The relationship between business process and organizational performance (2008, background): “Measuring the bottom-line contribution of information technology (IT) has long been seen as a major challenge for researchers and professionals (Kohli and Devaraj, 2003; Chan, 2000; Barua and : +61 7 3365 6988.”
Measuring the Performance of Information Systems: A Functional Scorecard (2005, background): “Although a positive relationship between IS effectiveness and business performance has been suggested, the evidence of such an effect has proved to be elusive [58].”
Fueling Innovation through Information Technology in SMEs* (2008, neutral): “IT can be used to influence a firm’s ability to gain a competitive advantage (e.g., Kohli and Devaraj 2003; Ravichandran and Lertwongsatien 2005) through the linkage of IT with a firm’s strategy and industry.”
A Process-Oriented Perspective on the Alignment of Information Technology and Business Strategy (2007, background): “Although literature reviews have identified a wide variety of firm-level metrics of IT impacts [22, 36, 45], the relative absence of objective process-level measures has complicated the task of evaluating IT impacts at this level [2, 74].”
IT Assets, Organizational Capabilities, and Firm Performance: How Resource Allocations and Organizational Differences Explain Performance Variation (2007, positive): “Different assessments of IT value have different theoretical foundations, and empirical results depend heavily on what questions are asked and how data are modeled (Hitt and Brynjolfsson 1996, Kohli and Devaraj 2003 ).”