An economic model of product quality and IT value

Information Systems Research

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 268-286

  Thatcher, Matt E ^a   Pingry, David E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

Author keywords

Consumer welfare; Economic modeling; Economic value; IT investments; IT value; Productivity; Quality

Indexed keywords

ECONOMICS; INVESTMENTS; PERFORMANCE; PRODUCTIVITY; QUALITY CONTROL; SOCIAL ASPECTS;

ECONOMIC MODEL; ECONOMIC VALUE; IT INVESTMENTS; PRODUCT QUALITY;

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY;

EID: 9144254551     PISSN: 10477047     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1287/isre.1040.0029     Document Type: Review

References (63)

1. Anderson, M., R. Banker, S. Ravindran. 2003. The new productivity paradox. Association Comput. Machinery, Comm. ACM 46(3) 91-94.
2. Baily, M. 1986. What has happened to productivity growth? Science 234 443-451.
3. Banker, R., R. Kauffman. 1991. Case study of electronic banking at Meridian Bancorp. Inform. Software Tech. 33(3) 200-204.
4. Bannan, K. 2003. Plastics firm learns CRM makes it more flexible. B to B 88(10) 13.
5. Barua, A., B. Lee. 1997. The information technology productivity paradox revisited: A theoretical and empirical investigation in the manufacturing sector. Internat. J. Flexible Manufacturing Systems 9(2) 145-166.
6. Barua, A., C. Kriebel, T. Mukhopadhyay. 1991. An economic analysis of strategic information technology investments. M/S Quart. 15(3) 312-330.
7. Bharadwaj, A. 2000. A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firm performance: An empirical investigation. MIS Quart. 24(1) 169-195.
8. Brynjolfsson, E. 1993. The productivity paradox of information technology. Association Comput. Machinery, Comm. ACM 36(12) 67-77.
9. Brynjolfsson, E. 1994. Technology's true payoff. Information Week (October 10) 34-36.
10. Brynjolfsson, E. 1996. The contribution of information technology to consumer welfare. Inform. Systems Res. 7(3) 281-300.
11. Brynjolfsson, E., L. Hitt. 1996. Paradox lost? Firm-level evidence on the returns to information systems spending. Management Sci. 42(4) 541-558.
12. Cremer, H., J.-F. Thisee. 1994. Commodity taxation in a differentiated oligopoly. Internat. Econom. Rev. 35(3) 613-633.
13. David, J., S. Grabski, M. Kasavana. 1996. The productivity paradox of hotel-industry technology. Cornell Hotel Restaurant Administration Quart. 37(2) 64-70.
14. Dedrick, J., V. Gurbaxani, K. Kraemer. 2003. Information technology and economic performance: A critical review of the empirical evidence. ACM Comput. Surveys 35(1) 1-28.
15. Devaraj, S., R. Kohli. 2000. Information technology payoff in the health-care industry: A longitudinal study. J. Management Inform. Systems 16(4) 41-68.
16. Dos Santos, B., K. Peffers, D. Mauer. 1993. The impact of information technology investment announcements on the market value of the firm. Inform. Systems Res. 4(1) 1-23.
17. Gal-Or, E. 1987. Strategic and non-strategic differentiation. Canadian J. Econom. 20(2) 340-356.
18. Garvin, D. 1984. What does "product quality" really mean? Sloan Management Rev. 26(1) 25-43.
19. Grant, P. 2003. Telecommunications (a special report); You have broadband; now what? There's plenty of free content available; and if you want to pay, there's even better stuff. Wall Street J. (October 13) R8.
20. Green, J. 2003. A rehab for Microsoft's Office. BusinessWeek 31(2) 106-108.
21. Hackett, G. 1990. Investments in technology - The service sector sinkhole? Sloan Management Rev. 31(2) 97-103.
22. Higgins, K. 2003. If you rebuild it, they will come. Network Comput. 14(16) 67.
23. Hitt, L., E. Brynjolfsson. 1996. Productivity, business profitability, and consumer surplus: Three different measures of information technology value. MIS Quart. 20(2) 121-142.
24. Jorgenson, D., K. Stiroh. 1995. Computers and growth. Econom. Innovation New Tech. 3 295-316.
25. Klassen, K., R. Russell, J. Chrisman. 1998. Efficiency and productivity measures for high contact services. Services Indust. J. 18(4) 1-18.
26. Lambertini, L. 1996. Choosing roles in a duopoly for endogenously differentiated products. Australian Econom. Papers 35(67) 205-224.
27. Lambertini, L., R. Orsini. 2002. Vertically differentiated model with a positional good. Australian Econom. Papers 41(2) 151-163.
28. Landers, P. 2004. Drug industry's big push into technology falls short. Wall Street J. (February 24) A1.
29. Lee, B., A. Barua. 1999. An integrated assessment of productivity and efficiency impacts of information technology investments: Old data, new analysis and evidence. J. Productivity Anal. 12(1) 21-13.
30. Lehr, B., F. Lichtenberg. 1999. Information technology and its impact on productivity: Firm-level evidence from government and private data sources, 1977-1993. Canadian J. Econom. 32(2) 335-062.
31. Lehr, W., F. Lichtenberg. 1998. Computer use and productivity growth in U.S. federal government agencies, 1987-92. J. Indust. Econom. 46(2) 257-279.
32. Lichtenberg, F. 1995. The output contributions of computer equipment and personnel: A firm level analysis. Econom. Innovation New Tech. 3(4) 201-217.
33. Lilien, G., P. Kotler, K. Moorthy. 1992. Marketing Models. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
34. Loveman, G. 1991. Cash drain, no gain. Computerworld 25(47) 69-71.
35. Lyon, D. 2001. Making it good at Buick: A talk with designer David Lyon. Automotive Design Production 133(12) 36-38.
36. Mandel, M. 1998. Financial services: The silent engine. BusinessWeek (Indust./Tech. Edition) 3609 76.
37. Marsden, J., D. Pingry. 1993. Theory of decision supports systems portfolio evaluation. Decision Support Systems 9 183-199.
38. McCrune, J. 1998. The productivity paradox. Management Rev. 87(3) 38-40.
39. McGee, M., C. Wilder. 2000. It's official: IT adds up. Information Week 782 42-51.
40. Metcalfe, B. 1992. Economists and the productivity paradox. InfoWorld 14(46) 72.
41. Metheny, B. 1994. Relying solely on productivity to measure the impact of info. J. Systems Management 45(3) 24.
42. Moorthy, K. 1988. Product and price competition in a duopoly model. Marketing Sci. 7 141-168.
43. Moorthy, K., I. Png. 1992. Market segmentation, cannibalization, and the timing of product introductions. Management Sci. 38(3) 345-359.
44. Mukhopadhyay, T., S. Rajiv, K. Srinivasan. 1997. Information technology impact on process output and quality. Management Sci. 43(12) 1645-1659.
45. Panko, R. 1991. Is office productivity stagnant? MIS Quart. 15(2) 191-203.
46. Port, O. 2003. Design tools move into the fast lane: New software turns ideas into reality in record time. BusinessWeek (June 2) 84B.
47. Quan, J., Q. Hu, P. Hart. 2003. IT investments and firms' performance - A duopoly perspective. J. Management Inform. Systems 20(3) 121-158.
48. Rai, A. 1997. Technology investment and business performance. Association Comput. Machinery, Comm. ACM 40(7) 89-97.
49. Rai, A., R. Patnayakuni, N. Patnayakuni. 1996. Refocusing where and how IT value is realized: An empirical investigation. Omega 24(4) 399-407.
50. Roach, S. 1991. Services under siege - The restructuring imperative. Harvard Bus. Rev. 69(5) 82-91.
51. Schmitt, P. 2002. The impact of a marginal cost increase on price and quality: Theory and evidence from airline market strikes. Australian Econom. Papers 41(3) 282-304.
52. Shin, N. 2001. The impact of information technology on financial performance: The importance of strategic choice. Eur. J. Inform. Systems 10(4) 227.
53. Spence, A. 1975. Monoploy, quality and regulation. Bell J. Econom. 6(2) 417-429.
54. Strassmann, P. 1990. The Business Value of Computers. Information Economics Press, New Canaan, CT.
55. Strassmann, P. 1997. The Squandered Computer. Information Economics Press, New Haven, CT.
56. Strassmann, P. 2001. Fighting McKinsey. ComputerWorld 35(49) 27.
57. Thatcher, M., J. Oliver. 2001a. The impact of information technology on quality improvement, productivity, and profits: An analytical model of a monopolist. Proc. 34th Hawaii Internat. Conf. System Sci., (CD/ROM), January 3-6, 2001, Computer Society Press, Maui, HI.
58. Thatcher, M., J. Oliver. 2001b. The impact of technology investments on a firm's production efficiency, product quality, and productivity. J. Management Inform. Systems 18(2) 17-43.
59. Thatcher, M., D. Pingry. 2004. Understanding the business value of information technology investments: Theoretical evidence from alternative market and cost structures. J. Management Inform. Systems 21(2) 61-85.
60. Vasilash, G. 2001. Designing with digits. Automotive Manufacturing Production 113(4) 50-51.
61. Waurzyniak, P. 1999. Automotive manufacturing's technology evolution. Manufacturing Engrg. 123(2) 54-60.
62. Weill, P. 1990. Do Computers Pay Off? ICIT Press, Washington, D.C.
63. Whitford, M. 2000. Driving demand. Hotel Motel Management 215(5) 48-49.