Skip to main content

Integrated long- and short- term valuation of IT innovation investments

Abstract

The growing need to innovate with IT requires well-founded analysis of IT innovation investments. However, the time lag between such investments and the realization of an uncertain long-term value contribution challenges companies because of a conflict between short-term corporate management and the desire to maximize the company’s long-term company value. Complexity, inexperience, and high outcome uncertainty also make IT innovation investments risky, particularly as the investments relate to existing hardware, software, and human resources, and can affect the processes, products, and services of nearly every business unit in a company. This paper proposes an integrated long- and short-term valuation approach that incorporates an IT innovation investment’s effect on the value of a company’s IT portfolio. The approach simultaneously accounts for risks and interdependencies, and uses sensitivity analysis in the context of an application example to provide research and practice recommendations.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  1. Arrow, K. J. (1971). The theory of risk aversion. In K. J. Arrow (Ed.), Essays in the theory of risk-bearing (1st ed., pp. 90–120). Chicago: Markham.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Asundi, J., & Kazman, R. (2001). A foundation for the economic analysis of software architectures. Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Economics-Driven Software Engineering Research, (EDSER-3 2001), Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

  3. Bamberg, G., & Spremann, K. (1981). Implications of constant risk aversion. Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, 25(7), 205–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bannister, F., & Remenyi, D. (2000). Acts of faith: Instinct, value and IT investment decisions. Journal of Information Technology, 15(3), 231–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bardhan, I., Bagchi, S., & Sougstad, R. (2004). Prioritizing a portfolio of information technology investment projects. Journal of Management Information Systems, 21(2), 33–60.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Beer, M., Fridgen, G., Müller, H., & Wolf, T. (2013). Benefits quantification in IT projects. Proceedings of the 11th Internationale Tagung Wirtschaftsinformatik, Leipzig. 707-720.

  7. Benaroch, M., Jeffery, M., Kauffman, R., & Shah, S. (2007). Option-based risk management: A field study of sequential information technology investment decisions. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(2), 103–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Betz, F. (2011). Managing technological innovation: Competitive advantage from change (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley-Interscience.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Buchta, D., Eul, M., & Schulte-Croonenberg, H. (2007). Strategic IT management - increase value, control performance, reduce costs (2nd ed.). Wiesbaden: Gabler.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Buhl, H. U., Röglinger, M., Stöckl, S., & Braunwarth, K. (2011). Value orientation in process management - research gap and contribution to economically well-founded decisions in process management. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 3(3), 163–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chan, Y. E. (2000). IT value: The great divide between qualitative and quantitative and individual and organizational measures. Journal of Management Information Systems, 16(4), 225–261.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Chau, P. Y. K., Kuan, K. K. Y., & Liang, T. P. (2007). Research on IT value: What we have done in Asia and Europe. European Journal of Information Systems, 16(3), 196–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chen, D. Q., Mocker, M., Preston, D. S., & Teubner, A. (2010). Information systems strategy: Reconceptualization, measurement, and implications. MIS Quarterly, 34(2), 233–259.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Copeland, T. E., Weston, J. F., & Shastri, K. (2008). Financial theory and corporate policy (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson/Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Daum, J. H. (2007). Innovation management and the role of controlling. Controller Magazine, 6(1), 19–58.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Dewan, S., & Ren, F. (2011). Information technology and firm boundaries: Impact on firm risk and return performance. Information Systems Research, 22(2), 369–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Dewan, S., Shi, C., & Gurbaxani, V. (2007). Investigating the risk-return relationship of information technology investment: Firm-level empirical analysis. Management Science, 53(12), 1829–1842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Dos Santos, B. L., & Peffers, K. (1995). Rewards to investors in innovative information technology applications: First movers and early followers in ATMs. Organization Science, 6(3), 241–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Fenn, J., & Raskino, M. (2008). Mastering the hype cycle: How to choose the right innovation at the right time. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Fichman, R. G. (1992). Information technology diffusion: A review of empirical research. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Dallas, Texas, 195–206.

  21. Fichman, R. G. (2004a). Real options and IT platform adoption: Implications for theory and practice. Information Systems Research, 15(2), 132–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Fichman, R. G. (2004b). Going beyond the dominant paradigm for information technology innovation research: Emerging concepts and methods. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 5(8), 314–355.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Fogelstrom, N. D., Numminen, E., & Barney, S. (2010). Using portfolio theory to support requirements selection decisions. Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Software Product Management (IWSPM) Sydney, NSW. 49–52.

  24. Freund, R. J. (1956). The introduction of risk into a programming model. Econometrica, 24(3), 253–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Fridgen, G., & Müller, H. (2009). Risk/Cost valuation of fixed price IT outsourcing in a portfolio context. Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Phoenix, Arizona.

  26. Garcia, R., & Calantone, R. (2002). A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: A literature review. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19(2), 110–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gartner. (2012). Gartner’s 2012 hype cycle special report evaluates the maturity of 1,900 technologies., Retrieved 08/2012, from http://www.gartner.com/technology/research/hype-cycles/

  28. Gottschalk, P. (1999). Strategic information systems planning: The IT strategy implementation matrix. European Journal of Information Systems, 8(2), 107–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Graves, S. B., & Ringuest, J. L. (2003). Models & methods for project selection: Concepts from management science, finance and information technology. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  30. Gregor, S., & Hevner, A. R. (2013). Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact. MIS Quarterly, 37(2), 337–355.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Grover, V., Fiedler, K., & Teng, J. (1997). Empirical evidence on Swanson’s tri-core model of information systems innovation. Information Systems Research, 8(3), 273–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Hanink, D. M. (1985). A mean-variance model of MNF location strategy. Journal of International Business Studies, 16(1), 165–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75–105.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hurwicz, L. (1951). Optimality criteria for decision making under ignorance. Cowles Commission Papers, 370.

  35. Irani, Z. (2010). Investment evaluation within project management: An information systems perspective. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 61(6), 917–928.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Irani, Z., & Love, P. E. D. (2002). Developing a frame of reference for ex-ante IT/IS investment evaluation. European Journal of Information Systems, 11(1), 74–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Jeffery, M., & Leliveld, I. (2004). Best practices in IT portfolio management. MIT Sloan Management Review, 45(3), 41–49.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Kauffman, R. J., & Weill, P. (1989). An evaluative framework for research on the performance effects of information technology investment. Boston, M.A.

  39. Kiessling, M., Wilke, H., & Kolbe, L. M. (2011). An organizational model for managing IT innovations in non-IT companies. Proceedings of the 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICCS), Maui, Hawaii.

  40. Kim, K., Lim, D., Park, H., & Kim, T. (2009). A sensitivity analysis on the impact of uncertainties of the supply and demand of a workforce on a recruiting strategy in an IT service company. Proceedings of the 15th Americas Conference on Information Sytems (AMCIS), San Francisco, USA.

  41. Kivijärvi, H., & Saarinen, T. (1995). Investment in information systems and the financial performance of the firm. Information & Management, 28(2), 143–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Kohli, R., & Grover, V. (2008). Business value of IT: An essay on expanding research directions to keep up with the times. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 9(1), 23–39.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Kundisch, D., Meier, C. (2011). A new perspective on Resource Interactions in IT/IS Project Portfolio Selection. Proceedings of the 19th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Helsinki, Finland, paper 171.

  44. Lee, G., & Kim, Y. (1998). Implementing an interrelated IT innovation in the Korean industry. System Sciences, 1998., Proceedings of the 31st Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences (HICCS),Kohala Coast, Hawaii, 261–271.

  45. Lim, J., & Stratopoulos, T. C. (2008). IT innovation capability and returns on IT innovation persistence. Proceedings of the 14th Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), Toronto, ON, Canada. 1–15.

  46. Lind, M. R., & Zmud, R. W. (1991). The influence of a convergence in understanding between technology providers and users on information technology innovativeness. Organization Science, 2(2), 195–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Lyytinen, K., & Rose, G. M. (2003). The disruptive nature of information technology innovations: The case of internet computing in systems development organizations. MIS Quarterly, 27(4), 557–595.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Maizlish, B., & Handler, R. (2005). IT (information technology) portfolio management step-by-step: Unlocking the business value of technology (1st ed.). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  49. McAfee, A., & Brynjolfsson, E. (2008). Investing in the IT that makes a competitive difference. Harvard Business Review, 86(7), 98–107.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Merton, R. C., & Perold, A. (1993). Theory of risk capital in financial firms. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 6(3), 16–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Miller, L., & Miller, R. (2012). Classifying innovation. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 9(1), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  52. O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2008). Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator’s dilemma. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28(1), 185–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Pannell, D. J. (1997). Sensitivity analysis of normative economic models: Theoretical framework and practical strategies. Agricultural Economics, 16(2), 139–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Primrose, P. (1990). Selecting and evaluating cost-effective MRP and MRPII. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 10(1), 51–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Probst, F., & Buhl, H. U. (2012). Supplier portfolio management for IT services considering diversification effects. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 4(2), 71–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Renkema, T. J. W., & Berghout, E. W. (1997). Methodologies for information systems investment evaluation at the proposal stage: A comparative review. Information and Software Technology, 39(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Reyck, B. D., Grushka-Cockayne, Y., Lockett, M., Calderini, S. R., Moura, M., & Sloper, A. (2005). The impact of project portfolio management on information technology projects. International Journal of Project Management, 23(7), 524–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Robert, R., & Sikes, J. (2010). How IT is managing new demands. The McKinsey Quarterly, (November 2010).

  59. Rose, G., & Lyytinen, K. (2001). The quad-core model of information systems innovation: Identifying and confirming the role of novel technological frames as a supra-innovation core - the case of internet induced IT innovation. Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), New Orleans, USA. 419–424.

  60. Ross, J. W., & Beath, C. M. (2002). Beyond the business case: New approaches to IT investment. MIT Sloan Management Review, 43(2), 51–59.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Saltelli, A., Ratto, M., Andres, T., Campolongo, F., Cariboni, J., Gatelli, D., et al. (2008). Global sensitivity Analysis (1st ed.). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Santhanam, R., & Kyparisis, G. J. (1996). A decision model for interdependent information system project selection. European Journal of Operational Research, 89(2), 380–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Schober, F., & Gebauer, J. (2011). How much to spend on flexibility? Determining the value of information system flexibility. Decision Support Systems, 51(3), 638–647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Schryen, G. (2010). Preserving knowledge on IS business value - what literature reviews have done. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 52(4), 233–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Stratopoulos, T. C., & Lim, J. (2010). IT innovation persistence: An oxymoron? Communications of the ACM, 53(5), 142–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Swanson, E. B. (1994). Information systems innovation among organizations. Management Science, 40(9), 1069–1092.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Swanson, E. B., & Ramiller, N. C. (2004). Innovating mindfully with information technology. MIS Quarterly, 28(4), 553–583.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Sylla, C., & Wen, H. J. (2002). A conceptual framework for evaluation of information technology investments. International Journal of Technology Management, 24(2), 236–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Tarafdar, M., & Gordon, S. R. (2007). Understanding the influence of information systems competencies on process innovation: A resource-based view. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 16(4), 353–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Triantaphyllou, E., & Sánchez, A. (1997). A sensitivity analysis approach for some deterministic multi-criteria decision-making methods. Decision Sciences, 28(1), 151–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Ullrich, C. (2013). Valuation of IT investments using real options theory. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 5(5), 331–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Verhoef, C. (2002). Quantitative IT portfolio management. Science of Computer Programming, 45(1), 1–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Verhoef, C. (2005). Quantifying the value of IT-investments. Science of Computer Programming, 56(3), 315–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Walter, S. G., & Spitta, T. (2004). Approaches to the ex-ante evaluation of investments into information systems. Wirtschaftsinformatik, 46(3), 171–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Wang, P. (2010). Chasing the hottest IT: Effects of information technology fashion on organizations. MIS Quarterly, 34(1), 63–85.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Wehrmann, A., & Zimmermann, S. (2005). Integrierte Ex-ante-Rendite/Risikobewertung von IT Investitionen. Wirtschaftsinformatik, 47(4), 247–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Weill, P., & Broadbent, M. (1998). Leveraging the new infrastructure: How market leaders capitalize on information technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Weill, P., & Ross, J. W. (2004). IT governance: How top performers manage IT decision rights for superior results. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Zimmermann, S., Katzmarzik, A., & Kundisch, D. (2008). IT sourcing portfolio management for IT service providers - A Risk/Cost perspective. Proceedings of the 29th Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Paris, France.

  80. Zimmermann, S., Katzmarzik, A., & Kundisch, D. (2012). IT sourcing portfolio management for IT services providers–an approach for using modern portfolio theory to allocate software development projects to available sites. ACM SIGMIS Database, 43(1), 24–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Florian Moser.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Judith Gebauer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Häckel, B., Isakovic, V. & Moser, F. Integrated long- and short- term valuation of IT innovation investments. Electron Markets 25, 73–85 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-014-0171-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • IT innovation investment (valuation)
  • IT portfolio (valuation)
  • Decision support
  • Long- and short-term integrated valuation
  • Risk

JEL Classification

  • D81
  • G11
  • M15
  • O31