Advertisement

Information Technology Benefits: A Framework

  • Piercarlo Maggiolini
Chapter

Abstract

Why, since the first applications of ICT, was and still is so difficult – if not quite impossible – to evaluate the productivity of ICT? In our opinion, mainly because – before any quantification – we need a clear and systematic view of the different economic benefits of the different applications of ICT. We present here a realistic and powerful framework by considering the different benefits resulting from the applications of ICT. In this approach, a categorization of benefits is presented as a useful guide for anyone who has to decide on investments in ICT.

Keywords

Transaction Cost Enterprise Resource Planning Work Tool Enterprise Resource Planning System Coordination Cost 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Maggiolini, P. (1981) Costi e benefici di un sistema, informativo, Etas Libri, MilanGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Francalanci, C. and Maggiolini, P. (1994) Measuring the impact of investments in information technologies on business performance. Proceedings of the 27th Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences (HICSS), Wailea, Hawaii, JanuaryGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Glucksmann, R., Maggiolini, P. and Pagani, D. (2004) Gestione e strategie dei sistemi informativi, Clup, MilanGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brynjolfsson, E. (1993) The productivity paradox of information technology. Communications of the ACM, 36 (12), 66–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brynjolfsson, E. and Hitt, L. (1998) Beyond the Productivity Paradox: Computers are theCatalyst for Bigger Changes.Communications of the ACM, 41 (8), 49 – 55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brynjolfsson, E. and Yang, S., (1999) The Intangible Costs and Benefits of Computer Investments: Evidence from the Financial Markets, MIT Sloan School of Management, December. http://digital.mit.edu/ERIK/ITQ00-11-25.pdf
  7. 7.
    Brynjolfsson, E. and Hitt, L. (2003) Computing Productivity: Firm Level Evidence. MIT Sloan Working Paper No. 4210-01. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id= 290325
  8. 8.
    Dedrick, J., Gurbaxani, V. and Kraemer, K. (2003) Information technology and economic performance: A critical review of the empirical evidence. ACM Computing Surveys, 35 (1),1 – 28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dos Santos, B. and Sussman, L. (2000) Improving the return on IT investment: the productivity paradox. International Journal of Information Management, 20 (6), 429-440 10. Melville, N., Kraemer, K. and Gurbaxani, V. (2004) Information Technology and Organizational Performance: An Integrative Model of IT Business Value. MIS Quarterly, 28 (2), 283-322Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Oz, E. (2005) Information technology productivity: in search of a definite observation. Information & Management, 42 (6), 789-798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pilat, D. (2004) The ICT Productivity Paradox: Insights from Micro Data, OECD Economic Studies, 38(1), ParisGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Saunders, A. and Brynjolfsson, E. (2007) Information Technology, Productivity and Innovation: Where Are We and Where Do We Go From Here? Center for Digital Business MIT Sloan School WP 231, http://www.iii-.org/research/IT%20Lit%20Review%20final %202007-03-30.pdf.
  13. 13.
    Thatcher,M.E and Pingry, D.E. (2007) Modeling the IT value paradox. Communications of the ACM, 50 (8), 41 – 45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Triplett, J. E. (1999) The Solow productivity paradox: what do computers do to productivity. Canadian Journal of Economics, 32 (2),309–334. http://www.csls.ca/journals/sisspp/v32n2_04.pdf.
  15. 15.
    Yorukoglu, M. (1998) The Information Technology Productivity Paradox. Review of Economic Dynamics, 1(2), 551-592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Willcocks, L.P. and Lester, S. (1997) In search of information technology productivity: Assessment issues. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 48 (11), 1082-1094 3rd cycle: ELECTRONIC COMMUN1CATION TECHNOLOGY Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    • “transactional” systems (e.g. e- mail, web based services) • ICT as mediating technology (particularly on the market)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    • added value: computerizing communication • benefits: reduction of “transaction” costsGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Willcocks, L.P. and Lester, S. (1999) Beyond the IT Productivity Paradox, Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Aral, S., Brynjolfsson, E. and Van Alstyne, M.W. (2007) Information, Technology and Information Worker Productivity: Task level Evidence. NBER Working Paper No. W13172Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bartel, A., Ichniowski, C., and Shaw,K. (2007) How Does Information Technology Affect Productivity? Plant-Level Comparisons of Product Innovation, Process Improvement, and Worker Skills. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122 (4), 1721-1758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Brynjolfsson, E. and Hitt, L. (1995) Information Technology as a Factor of Production: the Role of Differences Among Firms. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 3 (3–4), 183 – 200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dewan, S. and Min, C. (1997) The Substitution of Information Technology for Other Factors of Production: A Firm Level Analysis. Management Science, 43 (12)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Valenduc,G. (2010) Il ruolo delle tecnologie dell’informazione nell’intensificazione del lavoro, in Di Guardo, S., Maggiolini, P. and Patrignani, N. (ed.s) Etica e responsabilità sociale delle tecnologie dell'informazione (vol.2), Franco Angeli, MilanGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Maggiolini, P. (2010). Informatica, organizzazione e lavoro, In Di Guardo S., Maggiolini P. and Patrignani, N. (ed.s) Etica e responsabilità sociale delle tecnologie dell'informazione (vol.2), Franco Angeli, MilanGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Simon, H.A. (1976) The new science of management decision, Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Galbraith, J.R. (1973) Designing complex organizations, Addison Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Williamson, O.E. (1975) Markets and hierarchies: analysis and antitrust implications, Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ouchi, W.G. (1979) A conceptual framework for the design of organizational control mechanisms. Management Science, 25 (9), 833 – 848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ouchi, W.G. (1980) Markets, bureaucracies and clans. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25 (1), 129 – 141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Radner, R. (1968) Competitive equilibrium under uncertainty. Econometrica, 6 (1), 31-58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Chandler, A.D. (1977) The Visible Hand. The Managerial Revolution in American Business, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Chandler, A.D. and Daems, H. (1979) Administrative coordination, allocation and monitoring: a comparative analysis of then emergence of accounting and organization in the USA and Europe, Accounting, Organization and Society, 4 (1-2), 2 – 20Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Arrow, K.J. (1974) The limits of organization. W.W. Norton & Co., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Coase, R.H. (1937) The nature o the firm. Economica N.S., 4 (16), 386-405Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Coase, R.H. (1960) The problem of social cost. Journal of law and economics, 3, 1-44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ciborra, C. (1981) Information systems and transactions architecture. Journal of Policy Analysis and Information Systems, 5 (4),305 – 324Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Williamson, O.E. (1973) Markets and hierarchies – Some elementary considerations. American Economic Review, 63 (2),316 325Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ciborra, C. (1987) Reframing the role of computers in organizations — the transaction costs approach. Office, Technology and People, 3 (1), 17 – 38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Clemons E.K., Reddi S. P. and Row M.C. (1993). The impact of information technology on the organization of economic activity: the “Move to the middle” hypothesis, Journal of Management Information Systems, 10 (2): 9 – 35Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bakos Y. (1998). The Emerging Role of Electronic Marketplaces on the Internet, Communications of the ACM, 41 (8)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Francalanci,C. and Maggiolini, P.(1999) Measuring the Financial Benefits of IT Investments on Coordination. Information Resource Management Journal, JanuaryGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Maggiolini, P. and Salvador Vallés, R. (2002) Évaluation des bénéfices de l’EDI: proposition d’un modèle fondé sur les coûts de transaction. Proceedings of 7th AIM Conference “Affaire Electronique et Société de Savoir: opportunités et défis”, Tunis, MayGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Gybson, C. and Nolan, R.L. (1974) Managing the four stages of Edp growth. Harvard Business Review, Jan.-Feb.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Nolan, R.L. (1979) Managing crises in data processing. Harvard Business Review, 57 (3), 115-126Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Nolan, R. L. (1984) Managing the advanced stages of computer technology: Key research issues. In McFarlan, F.W. (ed.) The Information Systems Research Challenge, Harvard University Press, Boston, Mass., 195-215.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Nolan, R.L., Croson, D.C. and Seger, K.N. (1993). The Stages Theory: A Framework for IT Adoption and Organizational Learning. Harvard Business School Note, No. 9-93-141, Harvard Business School Publishing. BostonGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Nolan, R.L. (2001) Information Technology Management from 1960-2000. Harvard Business School Note, No. 9, 301-147, Harvard Business School Publishing. BostonGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Lee J-H, Kim Y-G., Yu S-H (2001) Stage Model for Knowledge Management. Proceedings of the 34th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Damsgaard J. and Scheepers R. (2000) Managing the crises in intranet implementation: a stage model”, Information Systems Journal,,10, 2, 131–150.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Layne K. And J. Lee J. (2001) Developing fully functional E-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly 18, 122–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Solli-Sæther H. and Gottschalk P. (2010) The Modeling Process for Stage Models. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 20, 279–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Holland C.P., Light B. (2001) A Stage Maturity Model for Enterprise Resource Planning Systems Use. The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems, Spring (Vol. 32, No. 2)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Chan C. and Swatman P.M.C. (2004), B2B e-Commerce Stages of Growth: the Strategic Imperatives. Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Earl M.J. (2000) Evolving the E-Business. Business Strategy Review, 11, 2, 33–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Raymond L. (2001), “Determinants of Web Site Implementation in Small Business”, Internet Research: Electronic Network Applications and Policy. 11, 5, pp. 411–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Maggiolini,P. (1984) La dimensione economica dell’automazione d’ufficio, in Bracchi G (ed.), L'automazione del lavoro d'ufficio, Etas Libri, Milan, 56-111Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Maggiolini, P. (1986) Office Technology Benefits: a Framework. Information & Management, 10 (2),75-81CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Politecnico di MilanoMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations