A meta-analysis of the effects of IT investment on firm financial performance

Journal of Information Systems

Volumn 25, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 145-169

  Lim, Jee Hae ^a   Dehning, Bruce ^b   Richardson, Vernon J ^c   Smith, Rodney E ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO   (Canada)

^b CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS   (United States)

^d CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Firm financial performance; IT investments; Meta analysis

Indexed keywords

EID: 83455260056     PISSN: 08887985     EISSN: 15587959     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/isys-10125     Document Type: Article

References (81)

1. Ahituv, N., S. Lipovetsky, and A. Tishler. 1999. The relationship between firms' information systems policy and business performance: A multivariate analysis. In Measuring Information Technology Payoff: Contemporary Approaches, edited by Mahmood, M. A., and E. J. Szewczak, 62-82. Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
2. Alpar, P., and M. Kim. 1990. A microeconomic approach to the measurement of information technology value. Journal of Management Information Systems 7 (2): 55-69.
3. Anderson, M. C., R. D. Banker, and S. Ravindran. 2006. Value implications of relative investments in information technology. Management Science 52 (9): 1359-1376.
4. Bangert-Drowns, R. L. 1986. Review of development in meta-analytic method. Psychology Bulletin 99 (3): 388-399.
5. Bardhan, I., J. Whitaker, and S. Mithas. 2006. Information technology, production process outsourcing, and manufacturing plant performance. Journal of Management Information Systems 23 (2): 13-40.
6. Barney, J. B. 1991. Is the resource-based "view" a useful perspective for strategic management research? Yes. The Academy of Management Review 26 (1): 41-56
7. Barua, A., F. Yin, and A. B. Whinston. 2000. Not All Dot Coms Are Created Equal: A Study of the Productivity of Internet Based Companies. Working paper, The University of Texas at Austin.
8. Benbasat, I., and L. Lim. 1993. The effects of group, task, context, and technology variables on the usefulness of group support systems. Small Group Research 24 (4): 430-462.
9. Bharadwaj, A. S. 2000. A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firm performance: An empirical investigation. Management Information Systems Quarterly 24 (1): 169- 196.
10. Bharadwaj, A. S., S. G. Bharadwaj, and E. Bendoly. 2007. The performance effects of complementarities between information systems, marketing, manufacturing, and supply chain process. Information Systems Research 18 (4): 437-453.
11. Bharadwaj, A. S., S. G. Bharadwaj, and B. R. Konsynski. 1999. Information technology effects on firm performance as measured by Tobin's q. Management Science 45 (7): 1008-1024.
12. Brynjolfsson, E. 1993. The productivity paradox of information technology: Review and assessment. Communications of the ACM 36 (12): 67-77.
13. Brynjolfsson, E., and L. M. Hitt. 1995. Information technology as a factor of production: The role of differences among firms. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 3: 183-199.
14. Brynjolfsson, E., and L. M. Hitt. 1996. Paradox lost? Firm-level evidence on the returns to information systems spending. Management Science 42 (4): 541-558.
15. Brynjolfsson, E., and S. Yang. 1996. Information technology and productivity: A review of literature. Advances in Computers 43: 179-214.
16. Byrd, T. A., and T. E. Marshall. 1997. Relating information technology investment to organizational performance: A causal model analysis. Omega International Journal of Management Science 25 (1): 43-56.
17. Chari, M. D. R., S. Devaraj, and P. David. 2008. The impact of information technology investments and diversification strategies on firm performance. Management Science 54 (1): 224-234.
18. Chatterjee, D. C., V. J. Richardson, and R. W. Zmud. 2001. Examining the shareholder wealth effects of new CIO position announcements. Management Information Systems Quarterly 25 (1): 43-70.
19. Clemons, E., and M. Row. 1991. Sustaining IT advantage: The role of structural differences. Management Information Systems Quarterly 15 (3): 275-292.
20. Dedrick, J., V. Gurbaxani, and K. L. Kraemer. 2003. Information technology and economic performance: A critical review of the empirical evidence. ACM Computing Surveys 35 (1): 1-28.
21. Dehning, B., G. M. Pfeiffer, and V. J. Richardson. 2006. Analysts' forecasts and investments in information technology. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 7: 238-250.
22. Dehning, B., and V. J. Richardson. 2002. Return on investments in information technology: A research synthesis. Journal of Information Systems 16 (1): 7-30.
23. Dehning, B., V. J. Richardson, R. E. Smith, and R. W. Zmud. 2007. Using accounting-based performance measures to assess the business value of information technologies and systems. In Economics, Information Systems and Electronic Commerce Research II: Advanced Empirical Methodologies, edited by Kauffman, R. J., and P. P. Tallon. Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe.
24. Dehning, B., V. J. Richardson, and R. W. Zmud. 2003. The value relevance of transformational information technology investments. Management Information Systems Quarterly 27 (4): 637-656.
25. Dehning, B., and T. Stratopoulos. 2000. Does successful investment in information technology solve the productivity paradox? Information and Management 38 (2): 103-117.
26. Dewan, S., and F. Ren. 2009. Information technology and firm boundaries: Impact on firm risk and return performance. Information Systems Research 22 (2): 369-388.
27. Dos Santos, B. L., K. Peffers, and D. Mauer. 1993. The impact of information technology investment announcements on the market value of the firm. Information Systems Research 4 (1): 1-23.
28. Floyd, S. W., and B. Wooldridge. 1990. Path analysis of the relationship between competitive strategy, information technology, and financial performance. Journal of Management Information Systems 7 (1): 48-64.
29. Francalanci, C., and H. Galal. 1998. Information technology and worker composition: Determinants of productivity in the life insurance industry. Management Information Systems Quarterly 22 (2): 227-241.
30. Glass, G. V., B. McGraw, and M. L. Smith. 1981. Meta-Analysis in Social Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
31. Hayes, D. C., J. E. Hunton, and J. L. Reck. 2000. Information systems outsourcing announcements: Investigating the impact on the market value of contract-granting firms. Journal of Information Systems 14 (2): 109-125.
32. Hayes, D. C., J. E. Hunton, and J. L. Reck. 2001. Market reaction to ERP implementation announcements. Journal of Information Systems 15 (1): 3-18.
33. Hedges, L. V., and I. Olkin. 1985. Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
34. Henderson, B. C., K. Kobelsky, V. Richardson, and R. E. Smith. 2010. The relevance of information technology expenditures. Journal of Information Systems 24 (2): 39-77.
35. Hitt, L. M., and E. Brynjolfsson. 1996. Productivity, business profitability, and consumer surplus: Three different measures of information technology value. Management Information Systems Quarterly 20 (2): 121-142.
36. Hunter, J. E., and F. L. Schmidt. 1995. Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
37. Hunter, J. E., and F. L. Schmidt. 2004. Methods of Meta-Analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
38. Hwang, M. I. 1996. The use of meta-analysis in MIS research: Promises and problems. Data Base for Advanced Information Systems 27 (3): 35-48.
39. Im, K. S., K. E. Dow, and V. Grover. 2001. A reexamination of IT investment and the market value of the firm-An event study methodology. Information Systems Research 2 (1): 103-117.
40. Kivijarvi, H., and T. Saarinen. 1995. Investment in information systems and the financial performance of the firm. Information and Management 28 (2): 143-163.
41. Kobelsky, K., V. J. Richardson, R. E. Smith, and R. W. Zmud. 2008. Determinants and consequences of firm information technology budgets. The Accounting Review 83 (4): 957-995.
42. Kohli, R., and S. Devaraj. 2003. Measuring information technology payoff. Information Systems Research 14 (2): 127-144.
43. Krishnan, G. V., and R. S. Sriram. 2000. An examination of the effect of IT investments on firm value: The case of Y2K-compliance costs. Journal of Information Systems 14 (2): 95-108.
44. Kudyba, S., and R. Diwan. 2002. Research report: Increasing returns to information technology. Information Systems Research 13 (1): 104-111.
45. Li, M. F., and L. R. Ye. 1999. Information technology and firm performance: Linking with environmental, strategic and managerial contexts. Information and Management 35 (1): 43-51.
46. Light, R. J., J. D. Singer, and J. B. Willett. 1994. The visual presentation and interpretation of meta-analysis. In Handbook of Research Synthesis, edited by Cooper, H., and L. V. Hedges, 439-453. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
47. Lipsey, M. W., and D. B. Wilson. 1991. Practical Meta-Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
48. Lipsey, M. W., and D. B. Wilson. 2001. Practical Meta-Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
49. Markus, M. L., and C. Soh. 1993. Banking on information technology: Converting IT spending into firm performance. In Strategic Information Technology Management, edited by Banker, R., R. Kauffman, and M. A. Mahmood, 375-404. Harrisburg, PA: Idea Group.
50. Melville, N., K. Kraemer, and V. Gurbaxani. 2004. Information technology and organizational performance: An integrative model of IT business value. Management Information Systems Quarterly 28 (2): 283-322.
51. Mukhopadhyay, T., F. J. Lerch, and V. Mangal. 1997. Assessing the impact of information technology on labor productivity: A field study. Decision Support Systems 19 (2): 109-122.
52. Mukhopadhyay, T., S. Rajiv, and K. Srinivasan. 1997. Information technology impact on process output and quality. Management Science 43 (12): 1645-1659.
53. Oh, W. S., J. W. Kim, and V. J. Richardson. 2006. The effects of firm characteristics on investor reaction to IT investment announcements. Journal of Information Systems 20 (1): 19-44.
54. Prasad, A., and J. Heales. 2010. On IT and business value in developing countries: A complementaries-based approach. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 11 (4): 314-335.
55. Prattipati, S. N., and M. O. Mensah. 1997. Information systems variables and management productivity. Information and Management 33 (1): 33-43.
56. Rai, A., R. Arun, and N. Patnayakuni. 1996. Refocusing where and how IT value is realized: An empirical investigation. Omega International Journal of Management Science 24 (4): 399-412.
57. Rai, A., R. Arun, and N. Patnayakuni. 1997. Technology investment and business performance. Communications of the ACM 40 (7): 89-97.
58. Ranganathan, C., and C. V. Brown. 2006. ERP investments and the market value of firms: Toward an understanding of influential ERP project variables. Information Systems Research 17 (2): 145-161.
59. Rao, H. R., C. C. Pegels, A. F. Salam, K. T. Hwang, and V. Seth. 1995. The impact of EDI implementation commitment and implementation success on competitive advantage and firm performance. Information Systems Journal 5 (3): 185-202.
60. Ravichandran, T., Y. Liu, S. Han, and I. Hasan. 2009. Diversification and firm performance: Exploring the moderating effects of information technology spending. Journal of Management Information Systems 25 (4): 205-240.
61. Richardson, V. J., V. Sambamurthy, and R. W. Zmud. 2003. Wealth Effects Accompanying Appointments of outside Directors to the Boards of Internet Companies. Working paper, University of Waterloo.
62. Robey, D., M. C. Boudreau, and G. M. Rose. 2000. Information technology and organizational learning: A review and assessment of research. Accounting, Management and Information Technologies 10 (2):125-155.
63. Rosenthal, R. 1991. Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
64. Sambamurthy, V., A. Bharadwaj, and V. Grover. 2003. Shaping agility through digital options: Reconceptualizing the role of information technology in contemporary firms. Management Information Systems Quarterly 27 (2): 237-263.
65. Santhanam, R., and E. Hartono. 2003. Issues in linking information technology capability to firm performance. Management Information Systems Quarterly 27 (1): 125-153.
66. Schein, E. H. 1992. The role of the CEO in the management of change: The case of information technology. In Transforming Organizations, edited by Kochan, T. A., and M. Useem, 345-352. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
67. Shin, N. 1997. The impact of information technology on coordination costs: Implications for firm productivity. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Information Systems, 133-146. (Atlanta, GA)
68. Siegel, D. 1997. The impact of computers on manufacturing productivity growth: A multiple-indicators, multiple-causes approach. The Review of Economics and Statistics 79 (1): 68-78.
69. Sircar, S., J. L. Turnbow, and B. Bordoloi. 1998. The impact of information technology investments and firm performance. Journal of Management Information Systems 16 (4): 69-97.
70. Sircar, S., J. L. Turnbow, and B. Bordoloi. 2000. A framework for assessing the relationship between information technology investments and firm performance. Journal of Management Information Systems 16 (4): 69-97.
71. Strassman, P. A. 1997. Will big spending on computers guarantee profitability? Datamation 43 (2): 75-82.
72. Subramani, M., and E. Walden. 2001. The impact of e-commerce announcements on the market value of the firm. Information Systems Research 12 (2): 135-154.
73. Tam, K. 1998. Analysis of firm-level computer investments: A comparative study of three Pacific Rim economies. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 45 (3): 276-286.
74. Tam, K. 1998. The impact of information technology investments on firm performance and evaluation: Evidence from newly industrialized economics. Information Systems Research 9 (1): 85-98.
75. Tanriverdi, H. 2006. Performance effects of information technology synergies in multibusiness firms. Management Information Systems Quarterly 30 (1): 57-77.
76. Teo, T., and P. Wong. 1998. An empirical study of the performance impact of computerization in the retail industry. Omega International Journal of Management Science 26 (5): 611-621.
77. Wang, L., and P. Alam. 2007. Information technology capability: Firm valuation, earnings uncertainty, and forecast accuracy. Journal of Information Systems 21 (2): 27-48.
78. Wang, L. K., L. Gwebu, J. Wang, and D. X. Zhu. 2008. The aftermath of information technology outsourcing: An empirical study of firm performance following outsourcing decisions. Journal of Information Systems 22 (1): 125-159.
79. 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.
80. Williams, C. R., and L. Livingstone. 1994. Another look at the relationship between performance and voluntary turnover. Academy Management Journal 37: 269-298.
81. Zhu, K., K. L. Kraemer, S. Xu, and J. Dedrick. 2004. Information technology payoff in e-business environments: An international perspective on value creation of e-business in the financial services industry. Journal of Management Information Systems 21 (1): 17-52.