Skip to main content
Log in

Measuring Information Technology's Indirect Impact on Firm Performance

  • Published:
Information Technology and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

It has been recognized that the link between information technology (IT) investment and firm performance is indirect due to the effect of mediating and moderating variables. For example, in the banking industry, the IT-value added activity helps to effectively generate funds from the customer in the forms of deposits. Profits then are generated by using deposits as a source of investment funds. Traditional efficiency models, such as data envelopment analysis (DEA), can only measure the efficiency of one specific stage when a two-stage production process is present. We develop an efficiency model that identifies the efficient frontier of a two-stage production process linked by intermediate measures. A set of firms in the banking industry is used to illustrate how the new model can be utilized to (i) characterize the indirect impact of IT on firm performance, (ii) identify the efficient frontier of two principal value-added stages related to IT investment and profit generation, and (iii) highlight those firms that can be further analyzed for best practice benchmarking.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. J.Y. Bakos and C.F. Kemerer, Recent applications of economic theory in information technology research, Decision Support Systems 8 (1992) 365-386.

    Google Scholar 

  2. R.D. Banker, A. Charnes and W.W. Cooper, Some models for the estimation of technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis, Management Science 30 (1984) 1078-1092.

    Google Scholar 

  3. R.D. Banker, W.W. Cooper, L.M. Seiford, R.M. Thrall and J. Zhu, Returns to scale in different DEA models, European Journal of Operational Research (2002), to appear.

  4. R.D. Banker, R.J. Kauffman and R.C. Morey, Measuring gains in operational efficiency from information technology: A study of the positran deployment at Hardee's Inc., Journal of Management Information Systems 7 (1990) 29-54.

    Google Scholar 

  5. R.D. Banker and R.J. Kauffman, Case study of electronic banking at Meridian Cancorp, Information and Software Technology 33 (1991) 200-224.

    Google Scholar 

  6. E.R. Berndt and C.J. Morrison, High-tech capital formation and economic performance in US manufacturing industries: An exploratory analysis, Journal of Econometrics 33 (1995) 7-29.

    Google Scholar 

  7. T.F. Bresnahan, E. Brynjolfsson and L. Hitt, Information technology, workplace organization, and the demand for skilled labor: Firm-level evidence, Quarterly Journal of Economics 117 (2002) 339-377.

    Google Scholar 

  8. E. Brynjolfsson, The productivity paradox of information technology, Communications of the ACM 36 (1993) 67-77.

    Google Scholar 

  9. E. Brynjolfsson and L. Hitt, Paradox lost? Firm-level evidence on the returns to information systems spending, Management Science 42 (1996) 541-558.

    Google Scholar 

  10. E. Brynjolfsson and L. Hitt, Beyond the productivity paradox, Communications of the ACM 41 (1998) 49-56.

    Google Scholar 

  11. A. Charnes, W.W. Cooper, A.Y. Lewin and L.M. Seiford, Data Envelopment Analysis: Theory, Methodology and Applications (Kluwer Academic, Boston, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  12. A. Charnes, W.W. Cooper and E. Rhodes, Measuring the efficiency of decision making units, European Journal of Operational Research 2 (1978) 429-444.

    Google Scholar 

  13. C.M. Christensen, F.F. Suárez and J.M. Utterback, Strategies for survival in fast-changing industries, Management Science 44 (1998) S207-S221.

    Google Scholar 

  14. W. Cron and M. Sobol, The relationship between computerization and performance: A strategy for maximizing economic benefits of computerization, Information and Management 6 (1983) 171-181.

    Google Scholar 

  15. R. D'Aveni and R. Gunther, Hypercompetition: Managing the Dynamics of Strategic Maneuvering(The Free Press, New York, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  16. R. Färe, S. Grosskopf and C.A.K. Lovell, Production Frontiers(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  17. V. Grover, From business reengineering to business process change management: A longitudinal study of trends and practices, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 46 (1999) 36-46.

    Google Scholar 

  18. S.E. Harris and J.L. Katz, Organizational performance and information technology investment intensity in the insurance industry, Organization Science 2 (1991) 263-295.

    Google Scholar 

  19. L.M. Hitt and E. Brynjolfsson, Productivity, business profitability, and consumer surplus: Three different measures of information technology value, MIS Quarterly 20 (1996) 121-143.

    Google Scholar 

  20. R.J. Kauffman, J. McAndrews and Y.-M. Wang, Opening the 'black box' of network externalities in network adoption, Information Systems Research 11 (2000) 61-83.

    Google Scholar 

  21. R.J. Kauffman and P.Weill, An evaluative framework for research on the performance effects of information technology investment, in: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Information Systems, Boston, MA (December 1989) pp. 377-388.

  22. F.R. Lichtenberg, The output contributions of computer equipment and personnel: A firm-level analysis, Economic Innovations and New Technology 3 (1995) 201-217.

    Google Scholar 

  23. J.D. McKeen and H.A. Smith, The relationship between information technology use and organizational performance, in: Strategic Information Technology Management: Perspectives or Organizational Growth and Competitive Advantage, eds. R.D. Banker, R.J. Kauffman and M.A. Mahmood (Idea Group Publishing, London, England, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  24. L.M. Seiford and J. Zhu, Marketability and profitability of the top 55 US commercial banks, Management Science 45 (1999) 1270-1288.

    Google Scholar 

  25. L.M. Seiford and J. Zhu, An investigation of returns to scale in DEA, OMEGA 27 (1999) 1-11.

    Google Scholar 

  26. S.M. Shafer and T.A. Byrd, A framework for measuring the efficiency of organizational investments in information technology using data envelopment analysis, OMEGA 28 (2000) 125-141.

    Google Scholar 

  27. P. Tallon, K.L. Kraemer and V. Gurbaxani, Executives' perceptions of the business value of information technology: A process-oriented approach, Journal of Management Information Systems 16 (2000) 145-173.

    Google Scholar 

  28. C.H. Wang, R. Gopal and S. Zionts, Use of data envelopment analysis in assessing information technology impact on firm performance, Annals of Operations Research 73 (1997) 191-213.

    Google Scholar 

  29. P. Weill, Strategic investment in information technology: An empirical study, Information Age 12 (1990) 141-147.

    Google Scholar 

  30. J. Zhu, Multi-factor performance measure model with an application to fortune 500 companies, European Journal of Operational Research 123 (2000) 105-124.

    Google Scholar 

  31. J. Zhu, Super-efficiency and DEA sensitivity analysis, European Journal of Operational Research 129 (2001) 443-455.

    Google Scholar 

  32. J. Zhu, Quantitative Models for Performance Evaluation and Benchmarking: Data Envelopment Analysis with Spreadsheets (Kluwer Academic, Boston, 2002).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joe Zhu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chen, Y., Zhu, J. Measuring Information Technology's Indirect Impact on Firm Performance. Information Technology and Management 5, 9–22 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:ITEM.0000008075.43543.97

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:ITEM.0000008075.43543.97

Navigation