«Researchers have endeavored to increase understanding of the relationships between investments in information systems (IS), competitive advantage, ...»
9.3. Limitations While the process model in Study I and depicted in Figure 1 is likely consistent with empirical observation (Eisenhardt, 1989), empirical validation of its concepts and categories in other settings is needed. As suggested by Fairbank et al. (2006), the goal in this study was depth of understanding rather than generality. However, similar studies can aid in understanding this very complex phenomenon. The particular events under study in this dissertation were within one dominant firm within the manufacturing industry. This firm is dominant in its industry and the role of information systems in the process of conceiving-enacting-executing competitive actions might not be indicative of every organization. Given that extant research provides no answer to how and why information system impact firm performance (Sambamurthy et al., 2003), it is not currently known whether the findings of this dissertation are applicable across variations in firm size, non-dominant firms, or across industry settings. However, the insights gained through this dissertation suggest that true understanding of the underlying reasons that information systems impact firm performance can be achieved through rich and interpretive studies. However, such examinations are complex, time-consuming, and
internal phenomena. Nevertheless, until researchers undertake the task of delving into the processes and practices of organizations such complex issues may never be understood.
Data collection in this dissertation did not include particularities about all managers in the focal firm, FCI, such as their educational and functional backgrounds.
Ferrier (2001) points out those characteristics inherent in the individual participants of management teams may influence decision outcomes. This is an important element that should be included in future theorizing.
The utilization of Grounded Theory in Study I was able to provide a rich and indepth perspective on the categories and concepts that explain the role of information systems in conceiving, enacting, and executing competitive actions toward firm performance. By building upon the findings in Study I and creating a synthesis of two research methods, Social Network Analysis and Centering Resonance Analysis, Study II was able to provide a fine grained view of the informal managerial social networks that formed at each stage of the competitive dynamics process (Rogers, 1986; Granovetter, 1973; Burt, 1976; 1992) as well as an observation of the embeddedness of IT concepts within managers‘ aggregate cognitive map at each stage (Corman et al., 2002). However, as IT Mediation Intensity increases, or through the increasing role of technology in the social network infrastructure, informal social network structures become increasingly fluid, changing as the competitive landscape changes.
Study I of this dissertation showed a presence of moderating factors in the Enacting stage of competitive activity on the ultimate choice of whether to proceed with a competitive action. A future study will seek to examine the presence of moderating factors on other stages of competitive activity. For example, organizational culture may affect other stages of the competitive dynamics process, such as the initial conception of competitive action or response. Extant research has investigated the role of organizational culture in bringing sustained competitive advantage to firms (Barney, 1986), however, the role of information systems and competitive dynamics in that context has not been addressed.
Study II of this dissertation used the competitive action, new product development upon which to investigate the role of social computing and computing technologies in competitive activity. A future study will look at two additional competitive actions, new customer acquisition and price changes. By looking across three competitive actions, this research will endeavor to examine whether competitive action type drives social network configuration and the central concepts in managerial cognition, or conversely, does social network configuration sometimes drive competitive activity? Additionally, does competitive action type drive the concepts managers interpret as central to the competitive dynamics process?
An important contribution of this dissertation is the foundation for a research approach that may be adopted by researchers and practitioners in organizational settings.
Furthermore, as a better understanding is gained of the manner in which information
organizations and industries. Thus, a future goal of this research stream is to use the findings of this dissertation to develop testable hypotheses and a survey that can be administered on a broad scale.
As stated earlier in this dissertation, the methodology employed makes a significant contribution to research in its own right. Future research will include a study that places emphasis upon the methodology used across the two studies in this dissertation.
Alavi, M., D. Leidner. 2001. Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues. MIS Quarterly 25(1) 107-136.
Anand, V., C. Manz, W. Glick. 1998. An Organizational Memory Approach to Information Management. Academy of Management Review 23(4) 796-809.
Anandarajan, M., B. Arinze. 1998. Matching Client/Server Processing Architectures with Information Processing Requirements: A Contingency Study. Information & Management 34 265-274.
Andres, H., R. Zmud. 2001–2002. A Contingency Approach to Software Project Coordination. Journal of Management Information Systems 18 (3) 41–70.
Aranda, J., S. Easterbrook. 2006. Distributed Cognition in Software Engineering Research: Can It Be Made to Work? First Workshop on Supporting the Social Side of Large Scale Software Development.
Argyres, N. 1999. The Impact of Information Technology on Coordination: Evidence of the B2 Stealth Bomber. Organization Science 10 (2) 162-213.
Baker, K. 2002. Chapter 13 Organizational Communication.
Banbury, C., W. Mitchell. 1995. The Effect of Introducing Important Incremental Innovations on Market Share and Business Survival. Strategic Management Journal 16 161-182.
Barley, S. 1986. Technology as an Occasion for Structuring: Observations on CT Scanners and the Social Order of Radiology Departments. Administrative Science Quarterly 31 78-108.
Barnes, J. 1984. Cognitive Biases and Their Impact on Strategic Planning. Strategic Management Journal 5 129-137.
Barney, J. 1991. Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management 17(1) 99-120.
Barney, J. 1986. Organizational Culture: Can It Be a Source of Sustained Competitive Advantage? Academy of Management Journal 11(3) 656-665.
Barua, A., P. Konana, A. Whinston. 2004. An Empirical Investigation of Net-Enabled Business Value. MIS Quarterly 28(4) 585-620.
Barr, P. 1998. Adapting to Unfamiliar Environmental Events: A Look at the Evolution of Interpretation and its Role in Strategic Change. Organization Science 9 644–669.
Barr, P., J. Stimpert, A. Huff. 1992. Cognitive Change, Strategic Action, and Organizational Renewal. Strategic Management Journal 13 15–36.
Barton, A. 1968. Bringing Society Back In: Survey Research and Macro-methodology.
American Behavioral Scientist 12(2) 1–9.
Baum, J., H. Korn. 1996. Competitive Dynamics of Interfirm Rivalry. Academy of Management Journal 39 255–291.
Bernard, H., P. Killworth, L. Sailer. 1982. Informant Accuracy in Social Network Data:
An Experimental Attempt to Predict Actual Communication from Recall Data.
Social Science Research 11 30–66.
Bento, A., R. Bento. 2006. Factors Affecting the Outcomes of Performance Management Systems. Journal of Information Technology Management 17(2) 23-32.
Bettis, R., C. Prahalad. 1995. The Dominant Logic: Retrospective and Extension.
Strategic Management Journal 16(1) 5-14.
Bettis, R., D. Weeks. 1987. Financial Returns and Strategic Interaction: The Case of Instant Photography. Strategic Management Journal 8 549-563.
Berthon, P., L. Pitt, M. Ewing. 2001. Corollaries of the Collective: The Influence of Culture and Organizational Memory Development on Perceived Decision-making Context. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 29 (2) 135-150.
Bharadwaj, A. 2000. A Resource-Based Perspective on Information Technology Capability and Firm Performance: An Empirical Investigation. MIS Quarterly 24(1)159-196.
Billings, R., T. Milburn, M. Schaalman. 1980. A Model of Crisis Perception: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly 25 300Blaize, H., M. Kaarst-Brown. 1999. Seeding the Line: Understanding the Transition from IT to Non-IT Careers. MIS Quarterly 23(3) 337-364.
Boland, R., V. Ramakrishnan, D. Te‘eni. l994. Designing Information Technology to Support Distributed Cognition. Organization Science 5(3) 456-475.
Borgatti, S. 2002. NetDraw: Network Visualization Software. Harvard: Analytic Technologies.
Borgatti, S., M. Everette. 1997. Network Analysis of 2-mode Data. Social Networks 19(3) 243-269.
Borgatti, S., R. Cross. 2003. A Relational View of Information Seeking and Learning in Social Networks. Management Science 49(4) 432-445.
______. 2003. A Social Network View of Organizational Learning. Management Science. 49(4) 432-445.
Bougon, M. 1992. Congregate Cognitive Maps: A Unified Dynamic Theory of Organization and Strategy. Journal of Management Studies 29(3) 369-389.
Brandes, U., S. Corman. 2003. Visual Unrolling of Network Evolution and the Analysis of Dynamic Discourse. Information Visualization 2 40-50.
Breiger, R. 2004. The Analysis of Social Networks. M. Hardy, A. Bryman, eds.
Handbook of Data Analysis. Sage Publications, London.
Brown, C. 1999. Horizontal Mechanisms Under Differing IS Organization Contexts. MIS Quarterly 23(3) 421-454.
Brown, C. 1997. Examining the Emergence of Hybrid IS Governance Solutions:
Evidence from a Single Case Site. Information Systems Research 8(1) 69-94.
Browning, L., J. Beyer. 1998. The Structuring of Shared Voluntary Standards in the U.S.
Semiconductor Industry: Communicating to Reach Agreement. Communication Monographs 64 1-25.
Brynjolfsson, E., L. Hitt. 1998. Beyond the Productivity Paradox. Communications of the ACM 41(8) 49-55.
Burrell, G., G. Morgan. 1979. Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis.
Burt, R, 1992. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Burt, R. 1976. Positions in Networks. Social Forces 55(1) 93-122.
Canary, H., M. Jennings. 2008. Principles and Influence in Codes of Ethics: A Centering Resonance Analysis Comparing Pre- and Post-Sarbanes-Oxley Codes of Ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 80 263-278.
Carr, N. 2003. IT Doesn‘t Matter. Harvard Business Review 81(5) 41-49.
Cartwright, D., F. Harary. 1956. Structural balance: A generalization of Heider's theory.
Psychological Review 63 277-293.
Caves, R., P. Ghemawat. 1992. Identifying Mobility Barriers. Strategic Management Journal 13 1–12.
Caves, R., M Fortunato, P. Ghemawat. 1984. The Decline of Dominant Firms, 1905Quarterly Journal of Economics 99(3) 523-46.
Caves, R., M. Porter. 1977. From Entry Barriers to Mobility Barriers. Quarterly Journal of Economics 91 241-261.
Chen, M.-J., K. Su, W. Tsai. 2007. Competitive Tension: The Awareness-MotivationCapability Perspective. Academy of Management Journal 50(1) 101–118.
Chen, M.-J., S. Venkataraman, S. Sloan Black, I. MacMillan. 2002. The Role of Irreversibilities in Competitive Interaction: Behavioral Considerations from Organization Theory. Managerial and Decision Economics 23(4/5) 187-207.
Chen, M.-J. 1996. Competitor Analysis and Interfirm Rivalry: Toward a Theoretical Integration. Academy of Management Review 21(1) 100-134.
Chen, M.-J., D. Miller. 1994. Competitive Attack, Retaliation and Performance: An Expectancy-Valence Framework. Strategic Management Journal 15(2) 85-102.
Chen M.-J., J. Farh, I. MacMillan.1993. An Exploration of the Expertness of Outside Informants. Academy of Management Journal 36 1614–1632.
Chen, M.-J., I. MacMillan. 1992. Nonresponse and Delayed Response to Competitive Moves: The Roles of Competitor Dependence and Action Irreversibility. Academy of Management Journal 35(3) 359-370.
Chen, M.-J., K. Smith, C. Grimm. 1992. Action Characteristics as Predictors of Responses. Management Science 38 439-455.
Chen, J., R. Ching. 2004. An Empirical Study of the Relationship of IT Intensity and Organizational Absorptive Capacity on CRM Performance. Journal of Global Information Management 12(1) 1-17.
Chen, Y., J. Zhu. 2004. Measuring Information Technology‘s Indirect Impact on Firm Performance. Information Technology and Management 5 9–22.
Chi, L., C. Holsapple, C. Srinivasan. 2007a. Competitive Dynamics in Electronic Networks: A Model and the Case of Interorganizational Systems. International Journal of Electronic Commerce 11(3) 7-49.
______. 2007b. The Linkage between IOS Use and Competitive action: A Competitive Dynamics Perspective. Information Systems and e-Business Management 5(4) 319-356.
Cho, T., D. Hambrick. 2006. Attention as the Mediator Between Top Management Team Characteristics and Strategic Change: The Case of Airline Deregulation.
Organization Science 17 453–469.
Clapham, S., C. Schwenk. 1991. Self-Serving Attributions, Managerial Cognition, and Company Performance. Strategic Management Journal 12(3) 219-229.
Clark, T., M. Jones, C. Armstrong. 2007. The Dynamic Structure of Management Support Systems: Theory Development, Research Focus, and Direction. MIS Quarterly 31(3) 579-615.
Corman, S., T. Kuhn, R. McPhee, K. Dooley. 2002. Studying Complex Discursive Systems. Human Communication Research 28(2) 157-206.