The Evaluation of IS Investment Returns: The RFI Case

  • Alessio Maria Braccini
  • Angela Perego
  • Marco De Marco


Today CIOs and IS departments in general are struggling to find a framework to evaluate the performance and the return of their IS investments. Notwithstanding a long-term research tradition on the topic of the business value impact of IS, so far the identification of the returns of the investments of IS is still an open issue. Even though a consistent body of literature has examined the problem over a time frame of more than 20 years, the IS business value research has produced so far a plethora of theoretical contributions with few practical applications. Starting from the assumption that real-world experiences differ from theoretical explications, and with the intent to contribute in the IS business value research field bringing evidences and witnesses from the reality, this paper presents a case of an IS Performance Management System used to assess the value delivered by IT in RFI (Rete Ferroviaria Italiana), the manager of the Italian railroad infrastructure.


Data Envelopment Analysis Information System Focal Firm Performance Measurement System Investment Return 


  1. 1.
    Solow R.S. (1987) We’d better watch out, New York Times Book Review.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Carr N. (2003). IT doesn’t matter, Harvard Business Review, 81(5): 41–49.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gartner (2009). EXP Worldwide Survey of More than 1,500 CIOs Shows IT Spending to Be Flat in 2009. Online at =855612, Accessed 4.21.2010.
  4. 4.
    Oh W, and Pinsonneault, A. (2007). On the assessment of the strategic value of information technologies: conceptual and analytical approaches. MIS Quarterly, 31(2): 239–265.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tallon P.P. (2007) Does IT pay to focus? An analysis of IT Business Value under single and multi-focused business strategies, Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 16(3): 278–300.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    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
  7. 7.
    Scheepers H, Scheepers R. (2008). A process-focused decision framework for analyzing the Business Value potential of IT investments, Information Systems Frontiers, 10(3): 321–330.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brynjolfsson E. (1993). The Productivity Paradox of IT, Communications of the ACM, 36(12): 66–77.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Melville N., Kraemer K.L., and Gurbaxani, V. (2004). Review – Information Technology and organizational performance: an integrative model of IT Business Value. MIS Quarterly, 28(2): 283–322.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brynjolfsson E., Hitt L. (1995). Information Technology as a Factor of Production: The Role of Differences Among Firms, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 3(4): 183–200.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brynjolfsson E., Hitt L. (2003). Computing Productivity: Firm-Level Evidence, Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(4): 793–808.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brynjolfsson E. (1996) The Contribution of Information Technology to Consumer Welfare, Information Systems Research, 7(3): 281–300.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hitt L., Brynjolfsson E. (1996). Paradox Lost? Firm-Level Evidence on the Returns to Informa tion Systems Spending, Management Science, 42(4): 541–558.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lee B., Barua A. (1999). An Integrated Assessment of Productivity and Efficiency Impacts of Information Technology Investments: Old Data, New Analysis and Evidence, Journal of Productivity Analysis, 12(1): 21–43.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Weill P. (1992). The relationship between investment in information technology and firm performance: A study of the valve manufacturing sector, Information Systems Research, 3(4): 307–333.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Soh C., Markus M.L. (1995). How IT creates business value: a process theory synthesis, In Ariav G., Beath C., DeGross J.I., Hoyer R., Kemerer, C.F. (Eds), Proceedings of the 16 th International Conference on Information Systems, ACM, Amsterdam, pp. 29–42.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kohli R., Devaraj S. (2003). Measuring information technology payoff: A meta-analysis of structural variables in firm-level empirical research. Information Systems Research, 17(3): 198–227.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Roach, S. (1987). America’s technology dilemma: A profile of the information economy. Special Economic Study, Morgan Stanley, New York.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Morrison C., E. Berndt. (1991). Assessing the productivity of information technology equipment in U.S. manufacturing industries. National Bureau of Economic Research working paper no. 3582, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kelley M. (1994). Productivity and information technology: The elusive connection. Management Science, 40(11): 1406–1425.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Siegel D.Z. Griliches. (1992). Purchased services, outsourcing, computers, and productivity in manufacturing. In Griliches Z. (eds.) Output Measurement in the Service Sectors. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 429–458.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Berndt, E., Morrison C. (1995). High-Tech Capital Formation and Economic Performance in U.S. Manufacturing Industries: An Exploratory Analysis, Journal of Econometrics 65: 9–43.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Koski H. 1999. The implications of network use, production network externalities and public networking programmes for firm’s productivity. Research Policy, 28(4): 423–439.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Diewert E.W., Smith A.M. (1994). Productivity measurement for a distribution firm. National Bureau of Economic Research working paper no. 4812, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hitt L., Brynjolfsson E. (1995). Productivity, business profitability, and consumer surplus: Three different measures of information technology value. MIS Quarterly, 20(2): 121–142.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dewan S., Min C. (1997). The Substitution of Information Technology for Other Factors of Production: A Firm Level Analysis, Management Science, 43(12): 1660–1675.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Menon N.M, Lee B., Eldenburg L. (2000). Productivity of information systems in the healthcare industry. Information Systems Research, 11(1): 83–92.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Devaraj S., Kohli R. (2000). Information technology payoff in the healthcare industry: A longitudinal study. Journal Management Information Systems, 16(4): 41–67.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lee H., Choi B. (2003) Knowledge Management Enablers, Processes, and Organizational Performance: An Integrative View and Empirical Examination, Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(1): 179–228.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Aral S., Brynjolfsson E., Wu D.J. (2006). Which Came First, IT or Productivity? The Virtuous Cycle of Investment and Use in Enterprise Systems, Twenty-Seventh International Conference on Information Systems, 1819–1840.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Leem C.S.m Yoon C.Y., Park S.K. (2004). A process-centered IT ROI analysis with a case study, Information Systems Frontiers, 6(4): 369–383.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alessio Maria Braccini
    • 1
  • Angela Perego
    • 2
  • Marco De Marco
    • 3
  1. 1.Università LUISS Guido CarliRomeItaly
  2. 2.SDA BocconiMilanItaly
  3. 3.Università Cattolica del Sacro CuoreMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations