Do Business Intelligence Systems Enforce Organizational Coordination Mechanisms?
Please Coordination is intended as managing dependencies between activities such as, in particular, decision-making support, decisional decentralization and reduced centralization of information power, internal communication and collaboration and sharing and divulgation of knowledge. By improving all these activities, enterprises are able to create efficient and effective coordination mechanisms and consequently reduce costs and organizational complexity. The research question of this study aims at verifying if Business Intelligence Systems (BISs) are actually able to strengthen the existing coordination mechanisms, i.e., make them more efficient and less costly. The research method is an empirical research of 30 cases of enterprises with a large number of users of a BIS. Early findings reveal that BISs are mainly considered as technological tools, with little relevance being attributed to their potential in terms of facilitators of coordination mechanisms between actors.
KeywordsInternal Communication Knowledge Sharing Coordination Mechanism Business Intelligence Competitive Intelligence
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Barnard, C.I. (1964) The Functions of Executive. Harvard University, Cambridge.Google Scholar
- 2.Thompson, J. (1967) Organization in Action. Mc Graw Hill, New York.Google Scholar
- 3.Galbraith, J.R. (1977) Organization Design. Addison Wesley, Reading, Mass.Google Scholar
- 4.Williamson, O.E. (1975) Markets and Hierarchies. McMillan, New York, USA.Google Scholar
- 5.Williamson, O.E. (1985) The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. The Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
- 6.Ciborra, C., Avgerou, C., and Land, F. (2004) The Social Study of Information and Communication Technology. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
- 8.Mintzberg, H. (1979) The Structuring of Organizations. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google Scholar
- 10.Zubov, S. (1988) In the Age of the Smart Machine. Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
- 11.Rockart, J.F. and Short, J.E. (1989) IT and the networked organizations: Toward more effective management of interdependence Iin Management in the 1990s Research Program Final Report. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MA.Google Scholar
- 13.Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995) The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. New York, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- 16.Hartono, E. and Holsapple, C. (2004) Theoretical foundations for collaborative commerce research and practice. Information Systems and E-business Management, Springer-Verlag, Vol 2, pp 1–30.Google Scholar
- 17.Tsui, E, (2003) Tracking the role and evolution of commercial knowledge management. software In Holsapple CW (ed) Handbook on Knowledge Management: Volume 2 Berlin: Springer, 2003 pp 5–27.Google Scholar
- 18.Leidner, D.E. and Kayworth, T. (2006) A review of culture in information system research: toward a theory of information technology culture conflict. MIS Quarterly, 30 (2):357–399.Google Scholar
- 19.Kemper, H. and Baars, H. (2006) Business Intelligence und Competitive Intelligence – IT – basierte Managementunterst tzung und markt-/wettbewerbsorientierte Anwendungen In: Kemper, H., Heilmann, H. and Baars, H. (2006) Business and Competitive Intelligence, Dpunkt, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
- 20.Negas, S. and Gray, P. (2003) Business Intelligence. Proceedings of the Ninth American Conference on Information Systems. Tampa, Florida.Google Scholar
- 21.Eckerson, W.W. (2006) Performance Dashboards. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.Google Scholar
- 22.Davenport, T. D. (2006) Competing on Analytics. Harward Business Review.Google Scholar
- 24.Thomsen, E. (2003) BI’s Promised Land. Intelligent Enterprise, Vol 6 4:21–25.Google Scholar
- 25.Moss, L.T. and Atre, S. (2003) Business Intelligence Roadmap: The Complete Project Lifecycle for Decision-Support Applications. Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA.Google Scholar