3 Executive Involvement and Participation in Management of IT

8/12/2019 3 Executive Involvement and Participation in Management of IT

1/33

Executive Involvement in IT Manageme

Executive Involvementand Participation in

the Management ofInformationTechnology

By: Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa

Graduate School of BusinessUniversity of Texas at AustinAustin, Texas !"#$""%

Blake &ves

'd(in L. )ox School of Business

Southern *ethodist University

+allas, Texas %#%$,---

Abstract

Executive support is often prescribed as critical

or fully tapping the benefits of information

echnology IT!" #o$ever% fe$ investigations

ave attempted to determine $hat type of

xecutive support is li&ely or organi'ationally

ppropriate" This article puts for$ard alternative

models of ex ecutive support" The models are

ested by exam ining chief executive officers(

ehaviors in and perceptions of IT activities"

)E*s and informa tion systems executives are

urveyed and further data collected from

ndustry handboo&s and from chairmen(s annual

etters to shareholders" The results suggesthat executive involveent /apsychological

tate! is more strongly associated $ith the

rm(s progressive use of IT than ex ecutive

articipation actual behaviors! in IT ac tivities"

Executive involvement is influenced by a)E*(s participation% prevailing organi'ational

onditions% and the executive(s functional bac&

round" )E*(s perceptions about the

mportance of IT in their firms $ere

enerally positive% although they participated inT activities rather infre+uently"

Introduction6e( nostrus have 7een prescri7ed so

reli1ious ly and i1nored as re1ularly as executi

support in the developent andipleentation of ana1eent inforation

systes /*&S8. Since the advent of

ana1eent inforation systes, executive

support has 7een considered neces sary to

fully exploit the 7enefits of inforation

technolo1y /&T8 /e.1., 29Toole and 29Toole, "55

&n "5!, ;ock(ell ar1ued that


2/33

Executive Involvement in IT Management

hind the Sa7re reservation syste, Aerican

Airlines9 fre@uent flyer pro1ra, and the airline9s

use of yield ana1eent soft(are /3arrar,

"!58. 'xecutive support has also 7een

descri7ed for a?or systes ipleented at6rito$Lay /Linder,

"!58, Lockheed$Geor1ia /3oudeshel and >at

son, "!8, USAA /'la, "!!8, Buick /itale,

"!!8, and hillips 55 /Apple1ate and 2s7orn,

"!!8.

+espite the enthusiastic calls for executive sup

port and the intuitively copellin1 evidence in

the case study literature, little is kno(n a7out the

con cept, and its utility reains lar1ely

unproven. ;esearchers ust still deterine if,

(hen, ho( uch, and (hat type of executive

support is like ly or or1ani=ationally

appropriate. &n this re search, (e focus on the

chief executive officer /)'28$the leader of

the top ana1eent tea$and his or her

role in &T ana1eent. Al ternative odels of

executivesupport in facilitatin1 an or1ani=ation9s

pro1ressive, priarily strate 1ic,1 use of

inforation technolo1y are presented and

tested.

The Concept of Executive

SupportThe ters hich type of executive support is re@uired

facilitate pro1ressive uses of inforati

technolo1yC To study this issue, alternat

odels of executive support are proposed. T

initial t(o odels are constructed fro the plicit and explicit assuptions e7edded

previous studies on executive support *ost


3/33

Executive Involvement in IT Managemennvolveent.


4/33

Mode/-

'xecutive articipation ,,1 ro@ressivo Usc of &T in the 6ir I

he prescriptive literature, includin1 text 7ooks

n inforation technolo1y ana1eent /e.1.,

==o, "!D Spra1ue and *cEurlin, "!58, su1

ests that the )'29s proper role is to personally

articipate in &T ana1eent and that personal

articipation contri7utes to the eployent of in

oration technolo1y in a fir /Adas, "#D

ederer and *endelo(, "!!D ;ifkin, "!D

ock (ell, "5!8. Brandon /"8 ar1ues that

he top executive9s role is to esta7lish controls,

erfor lon1$ran1e plannin1, conduct post$

stallation audits, plan for e@uipent, and so

n. +inter /""8 proposes a lon1 list of

uties, includin1 vie(in1 plans and

ro1ras, onitorin1 schedules, and

ollo(in1 up on results. 'ery /"8

escri7es ho( a corporate president par

cipated in the developent of an iportant in

oration syste,

3e (as the priary insti1ator of the pro

?ect and (as responsi7le for the choice of

hard(are vendor and ipleentation tool

/(ith soe considera7le internal

opposition (ithin the fir8. 2ver the

course of the developent, the president

aintained close ta7s on pro1ress and(as @uite (ill in1 to step in (here

necessary to reove any or1ani=ational

7arriers /p.xi8.

0unde /"!8 proposes that the )'2 not 7e a

expert on the


5/33

Ta7le ", (e have indicated the ters used 7y

the studies9 authors for the independent

varia7le. Their use of the ter


6/33

strate1ic systes discussed in the literature,

such as 'conoost at *c0esson +ru1 )opany

e.1., )leons and ;o(, "!!8, cross 7usiness

units or functional areas. Such systes are often

claied to 7e only ipleenta7le fro the ex

ecutive office /orter and *illar, "!%8. Johnston

and )arrico /"!!8 cite an instance (here a )'2

ook it upon hiself to proote &T as a copetive (eaponD the )'2 persistently challen1ed his

ne executive cadre and &T people to


7/33

Executive Involvement in IT Managemen

&

&

here is soe liited epirical evidence

upport in1 a link 7et(een executive

nvolveent and the fir9s &T use. Ta7le # lists

our studies that ex aine this relationship to

oe extent althou1h any are concerned (ithop ana1eent in 1eneral, not (ith )'2s.

*oreover, in any of these studies, the

ependent varia7le (as the success of a sin1le

yste rather than the overall use of &T (ithin a

r. The studies are 1enerally ore ro7ust than

hose addressin1 *odel " /see Ta7le "8,

lthou1h several are (eakened 7y sall

aples and a lack of attention to easureent

elia7ility and construct validity.

anders and )ourtney /"!%8 found that the

vel of executive involveent /i.e.,


8/33

Executive Involvement in IT Management;eich andBen7asat,"

roactivereactivestance on corporatelevel

&ntervie(s 6irst overs in 7uildin1 andipleentin1 custoer$oriented strate1ic systes


9/33

forulation. >e (ill next discuss each of the

linka1es in *odel -.

'xecutive artlctpatlon$e 'xecutive

&nvolveent

&n studyin1 user involveent in inforation

systes, S(anson /"48 deonstrates that

ana1ers (ho en1a1e in syste developent

activities /i.e., a priori involveent8 7ecoe

ore appreciative of the syste.< That is,

participation influences appreciation. S(anson

descri7es the construct of appreciation as aana1ers9s


10/33


holds. 6or exaple, +ear7orn and Sion /"%!8

ound that, (hen a 1roup of executives (ith dif

erent functional 7ack1rounds (ere presented

(ith the sae case study and asked to consider

t fro a copany$(ide perspective, they vie(edhe pro7le lar1ely in ters of their 7ack1rounds.

3a7rick and *ason /"!48 aintain that ex

ecutives fro e 7elieve that youn1 )'2s,

'xecutive &nvolveent$ ro1ressive

Use of &T

But do positive )'2 vie(s a7out &T lead to p

1ressive use of &TC 2ur preise is that )'2s chief leaders ake a difference in their or1a

=ations9 activities. This preise is supported

the literature. 6or exaple, 3a7rick a

*ason /"!48 ar1ue, in their ateran /"!#8, in their 7ook

Search of Excellence% clai that the values a

7ehaviors of top an a1ers have a si1nifica

influence on the fortunes of their firs. 2the

are less supportive a7out the direct ipact

)'2s on or1ani=ational suc cess or failure, 7

ackno(led1e that )'2s cre ate iporta

variation in or1ani=ations /see Thoas, "!!

A nu7er of &S researchers have aintaine

that, as &T applications 7ecoe a si1nifica

eleent of industry structure and copetitio

the chief executive officer9s vie(s a7o

investent in &T 7ecoe considera7ly orelevant and instru ental in shapin1 &T use in

fir /Bakos and Treacy, "!5D Ben?ain, et a

"!4D )leons and ;o(, "!!D arson

"!48. 6or exaple, (ith their 7road perspecti

on the or1ani=ation, )'2s ay 7e sin1ula

positioned to reco1ni=e the value of lar1e$sca

&T$7ased inte1rations that cannot 7e ?ustifi

strictly 7y a return on in vestent calculation

the early sta1es. erhaps ore iportantly,

)'29s stron1 si1nals in sup port of &T usua

can 7e expected to 1et line ana1eepersonally active in proposin1 and developi

&T$related initiatives. Such si1nals ay coe

ver7al stateents in corporate plan ni

eetin1s, (ritten stateents in corpora

ne(sletters, or off$hand coents durin1 casu

contacts. As *arkus /"!"8 has deonstrate

(hile executive support is necessary, it is not

sufficient condition for pro1ressive use of &

Line and operational ana1eent support

also needed.


11/33

To test *odel -, the follo(in1 hypothesis is

studied:

3ypothesis -: A )'29s hi1h involveent in

&T, (hich is associated (ith a fir that ishi1hly pro1ressive &n &ts use of &T, &s deter

ined 7y a )'29s participation, an or1ani$.

=atlon9s industry conditions, and the )'29s

7ack1round.

The follo(in1 section reports on an investi1ation

intended to ascertain (hether executive involve

ent or participation 7etter accounts for the

variance in a fir9s &T use and (hether our for

ulation of antecedants of involveent have

any epirical support. 6or purposes of clarity,the three odels are vie(ed as alternatives

althou1h *odel - expands on *odels " and #.

A Preliminary Test ofAlternative ModelsThe hypotheses derived fro the three odels

(ere tested 7y surveyin1 )'2s and inforation

systes ana1ers and 7y collectin1independent data fro the chairen9s annual


12/33


o copetitors. The scales ran1ed over a five

point scale fro laggard to industry leader" The

sae @uestion (as asked of the &T ana1ers.

>here 7oth executives responded, the avera1e

of these responses constituted the easure ofpro1ressive use of &T (ithin a fir.

Additional easures(ere o7tained fro a

ailed @uestionnaire sent to the topost &T

ana1er at the !- firs. This instruent asked

he &T ana 1ers to assesstheir

espective)'29s involveent (ith &T and

participation in &T rnana@ernent.< 6or analysispurposes, all the ites on executive in

volveent and executive participation (ere

ransfored to confor to the follo(in1 rule: thehi1her the score on the ite, the 1reater the

)'29s involveent or participation in &T

ana1e ent as reported 7y the &T ana1er.

>here re spondents provided ultiple

esponses for the sae ite, the ore

conservative response /i.e., the lo(er score8

(as coded. The ites (ere

developed on the 7asis of the prescriptive

iterature and one of the author9s experiences

(orkin1 (ith senior &T ana1ers. The @uestionnaire (as purposefully short, re@uirin1 less than" inutes to coplete, to ensure a hi1h re

sponse rate and the coplete attention of the

espondent. The @uestionnaire is attached as

Ap pendix B /(ith the transfored scores8.

&nforation on the )'2s9 7ack1rounds /Le.,

a1e, tenure in a fir, tenure in a position,

nu7er of years in colle1e, and functional

7ack1round8 (as retrieved fro 4usiness 5ee&

/"!!8 and 5ho(s 5ho in 1inance and Industry/"!!8. A1e, tenure in the copany, and tenure

in the position (ere easured in years.

'ducation (as easured as years in colle1e.

6unctional 7ack1round (as cap tured 7y a

duy varia7le. The varia7le (as as si1ned "

f the executive9s 7ack1round (as in output or

a data processin1 function. 2utput func$

>e also sou1ht responses for the other varia7les fro the)'2. 3o(ever, only -! )'2s responded, (hich does not

allo( us to conduct a relia7le factor analysis. Also, a close

of &T.


13/33

Executive Involvement in IT Managementons (ere arketin1 or retailin1 for retailin1

'2sD 7ankin1 or lendin1 for 7ankin1 )'2SD

di torial for pu7lishin1 )'2sD and exploration,

stri7ution, or ;F+ for petroleu )'2s. The

r ia7le (as assi1ned if the executive9s

ack 1round (as in throu1hput or a staff

nction. The throu1hput and staff functions

ere production, en1ineerin1, anufacturin1,ccountin1, ad inistration, and le1al.

fty$seven of the !- &T ana1ers contacted

sponded /5 percent8. T(o responses (ere

ot used 7ecause it (as apparent that the

xecutive had not personally copleted the

rvey. Eo sta tistical differences (ere found in

e 7ack1round characteristics of )'2s /Le.,

1e, functional 7ack1round, education, tenure

a copany and in a position8 aon1

spondents and non$re spondents (ithinarticular industries, thus pro vidin1 soe

pport for the representativeness of the

ple aon1 1ortune 2 firs (ithin the

ur industries.

n avera1e, )'2s (ere %! years of a1e, had

! years of or1ani=ational tenure, and had

rved ei1ht years in the office of the )'2.

(enty$four of the %% )'2s had a

ack1round in


14/33

variax rotated principal coponent factor

analysis (as perfored on " ites in the

@ues tionnaire. The factor loadin1s for the t(o$

factor solution are sho(n in Ta7le -.

The first factor appeared to tap aspects of the

)'29s participation in &T$related atters in the

fir as reported 7y the &S ana1ers. &ncluded

(ithin this factor (ere ites concernin1 a )'29s

role in corporate &T steerin1 coittees, the fre

@uency of a )'29s personal participation in is

sues related to the fir9s use of &T, and a )'29s

failiarity (ith a fir9s and its copetitors9 &T

use. This factor (as la7eled as 'xecutive ar

ticipation. &tes related to )'2 perceptions of

&T, includin1 a )'29s prevailin1 thinkin1 a7out

&T spendin1, a )'29s perceived iportance of

&T for a fir, vision for &T, and endorseent of

applications not eetin1 traditional criteria all

oaded on a coon factor that (e called 'x

ecutive &nvolveent.

The factor analysis and relia7ility calculations for

the &T ana1er responses su11est that the six

ite executive participation and the four$ite

executive involveent scales are oderately relia7le and deonstrate initial evidence of validi

ty. )ron7ach alpha relia7ility for Executive

,articipation /factor "8 (as .!- and for

Executive Involvement /factor #8 (as. %."

6uture research on executive support should

conduct further validation studies usin1 ulti$

traitlulti$ethod procedures /see 0erlin1er,

"!58. The scores used for hypothesis testin1

(ere the siple avera1e of respondents9

responses for the ites that loaded on their

associated factor 7eyond .%.

The firm(s progressive use of IT (as the depen

dent easure in all three odels of executive

support. This easure appeared on the &T

ana1er and the )'2 @uestionnaires as a

sin1le$ite su7?ective perforance ite. The

easure asked the respondents to rate their

copany9s relative &T use (ithin their industry,

ran1in1 fro industry leader to la11ard. +ess

and ;o7inson /"!48 have ar1ued that

su7?ective per forance easures exainin1 a

fir9s relative perforance (ithin an industry

easures. Jarvenpaa and &ves /"8 propo

and provide support that countin1 &T$rela

phrases in the chairan9s letter can 7e an a

native (ay to easure the state of &T use in

fir, particularly strate1ic &T use. &n this sapthe &T ana1er ratin1s of the fir9s pro1ress

use of &T correlated .4" /p$c .-8(ith

nu7er of &T$related phrases in the chaira

Letter to the Shareholders in the fir9s "

annual report. The co7ined &T and )

responses on the pro 1ressive use of &T /(he

a )'2 response exist ed8 correlated .4- /p.

#8 (ith the nu7er of &T$related phrases

the "!! chairan9s letter. These si1nific

correlations su11est that the easure of fir9s pro1ressive use of &T has so

conver1ent validity (ith at least one o7?ec t

easure. Also, the ite analysis of @u

tionnaire data indicate that individual ite

easurin1 executive involveent and execut

participation (ere ore hi1hly correlated (

their o(n theoretical constructs fro the fac

analysis /correlations fro .54 to .!8 than (

the pro1ressive use of &T /correlations fro

to .%"8. 3ence, the varia7le appears to hasoe construct validity.

Results and DiscussionThe correlations aon1 study varia7les, sho

in Ta7le 4, su11est that executive involvee

executive participation, executive a1e, and fu

tional 7ack1round are si1nificantly associat

(ith the criterion varia7le$pro1ressive use of(ithin the fir. 'xecutive involveent is co

lated (ith executive participation and or1an

tional conditions, and (eakly associated (ith

executive9s functional 7ack1round. 'xecut

participation is associated (ith a )'29s a1e a

tenure in a copany.

Testing of alternative models

Ta7le % displays the results of step(ise re1

sion analyses desi1ned to test the stud


15/33

Ta7le -. )oposition of the 6actors$&T 'xecutive ;esponses

6actor

6actor

Loadin1

6actor 1: 'xecutive articipation

". )'29s personal participation in fir9s use of &T

"P less than once a year" " " % P daily"#. )'29s role in corporate &T steerin1 coittee

"=no committee% # =no )E* input% - =)E* amember%

4 =)E* a chair% % =)E* a defacto committee"-. )'29s kno(led1e of copetitors9 use of &T

"=$ea&ly informed" " " % =extremely &no$ledgeable"4. )'29s inforal contacts (ith &T ana1eent

"P less than once a year" " " % P daily"%. )'29s kno(led1e of &T opportunities in the fir

1P $ea&ly informed" " " 5 Pextremely &no$ledgeable"5. Eu7er of levels 7et(een &T head and )'2

1P one level from the )E*% 2 P t$o levels% etc"

.0

.7!

.70

.5

.!7

".!7

1actor 2: Executive Involvement

". )'29s prevailin1 thinkin1 a7out &T spendin1 .!"

1P expense to be controlled8 3 P resource to be allocated fairly85P strategic investment"

#. )'29s perception of &T9s iportance to the fir .

1P no concern for IT" " " ! P IT is Single most critical factor for firm"-. )'29s vision for &T .4

"Pno vision% # = technical vision% - =functional vision% 4 =strong%generic vision"

4. )'29s endorseent of applications not eetin1 traditional criteria .5

"Prarely% - Poccasionally% % P fre+uently"

Ta7le 4. )orrelations Aon1 the Study arla7lest

)riterion varia7le

". ro1ressive use of

/#8 /-8 /48 /%8 /58 /8 /!8 /8

&T (ithin the fir .%QQ Q .-Q QQ . $.#!QQ $ ."" $."# $.- .#Q

redictor varia7les

#. 'xecutive involveent .-4Q Q .#Q $ ."" $.4 $."5 . .#4Q-. 'xecutive participation ." $.#%Q $.5 $ .#QQ $.4 ."

4 2r1ani=ational conditions $ "4 #5Q $ "5 $ ! "


16/33


Ta7le %. Step(ise ;e1ression ;esults

BetaS 6

*odel "

ro1ressive Use of &T

'xecutive participation

*odel #

ro1ressive Use of &T

'xecutive involveent

*odel -

a. ro1ressive Use of &T

.4 ".%4QQ ."5

.45 ##.#QQQ .-#

"-."4Q Q Q .4'xecutive involveent .-! #%."QQQ .-5

A1e $.4 5.#5Q Q .!'xecutive participation .#% -.4-Q .%

7. 'xecutive &nvolveent %.##Q N .#%

'xecutive participation .%# .5RR ."4

6unctional 7ack1round .%# -.55R .52r1ani=ational conditions .# -.#Q .%

Q."D NR.%D NNR.".

*odel "

*oderate support (as found for 3ypothesis ",

(hich predicted that a )'29s personal participa

tion in &T ana1eent is associated (ith a fir9s

pro1ressive use of &T. The predictor explained

"5 percent of the variance in the criterion

varia7le.

2verall, the current pool of )'2s, ho(ever, participated relatively little in &T$related activities.

Ac cordin1 to the &T ana1ers, )'2s in

7ankin1, pu7lishin1, and retailin1 (ere

involved only on a onthly 7asis in ana1in1

&T. &n petroleu firs, )'2s apparently concern

theselves (ith &T atters only a fe( ties a

year. 'ven infor al &T$related eetin1s (ere

likely to occur only onthly, except in 7ankin1

(here (eekly eet in1s (ere coon. *ost

)'2s (ere reported to 7e


17/33


elatively little over and


18/33

a7ove that explained 7y executive involveent.

A )'29s a1e (as also found to 7e a si1nificant

redictor of the pro1ressive use of &T. The ex

stence of a


19/33

ured 7y the &T ana1ers and )'2s positionin1

their firs9 &T use relative to other firs in the

industry. As an additional validation, three alter

native odels of executive support (ere also

tested usin1 a surro1ate easure for a fir9spro1ressive use of &T, that is, the nu7er of &T

related phrases in a chairan9s letter to share

holders in the fir9s "!! annual report.

An &T$related phrase in a chairan9s letter (as

defined as an instance of a (ord or a set of

(ords that discussed


20/33

Q ."D Q Q .%D Q Q Q .".


21/33

elin1 that )'2s headin1 lar1e or1ani=ations

eed not personally 7e very participative in &T

ana1eent. &nstead, if the fir is to 7e pro

essive in its use of &T, the )'2 ust send the

1ht supportive si1nals re1ardin1 &T to his or her1ani=ation. )'2s9 personal participation tends

7e short and hi1hly teporal. 6or exaple, one

'2 of a lar1e insurance copany told us that

e participated in a ulti$hundred illion dollar

o?ect only throu1h attendance at @uarterly pro

ess eetin1s. &n another fir, fre@uently cited

s an industry leader in the use of &T, the )'2

peaks (ith the &T ana1er for a7out - inutes

onth, often a7out issues unrelated to &T.

oe )'2s consider theselves un@ualified toarticipate directly in decisions re1ardin1 &T.

hey express personal frustration at 7ein1 una7le

effectively evaluate &T proposals. 2ne in

urance )'2 descri7ed his participation in a

a?or &T investent decision:

2ur &T people (ere hirin1 consultants (ho

(ere in turn hirin1 their o(n consultants.

)onsultants and the coputer vendors re

inforced each other (hile diffusin1 respon

si7ility for the decision. & kno( nothin1

a7out &T. & didn9t kno( (hat @uestions to

ask or (hat options (ere availa7le.

ur findin1s are consistent (ith the picture Gupta

!!8 recently painted of )'2s in lar1e firs.

upta aintains that chief executives have

either the tie nor the expertise to deeply par

cipate in sales, purchasin1, ;F+, and other

ecisions throu1h (hich corporate strate1ies are

ali=ed. )'2s ainly set 7road 1uidelines (ithin

hich the fir operates. This does not, ho(ever,

ean that )'2s do not considera7ly influence

r1ani=ational decisions indirectly 7y shapin1 the

ontext (ithin (hich they are ade. After all,hey

re responsi7le for selectin1, appointin1,

e(ard in1, and reovin1 key executives (ho

re di rectly involved in ipleentin1 strate1y.

or exaple, the )'2 of a lar1e financial

stitution had hired a ne( &T ana1er "!

onths 7efore (e intervie(ed hi. The )'2ter prooted hi to the 7ank9s 7oard of

rectors and as descri7ed 7elo( relied on hi

uture Research

Generally, (e 7elieve that this study and it

predecessor /Jarvenpaa and &ves, "

deon strate that executive support is a fruitfuresearch area. 6uture research needs to te

the 1ener ali=a7ility of our findin1s and seek

7etter understandin1 of the conditions an

echaniss 1overnin1 the effects o

participation and involve ent on th

pro1ressive use of &T in a fir. Because ou

easures (ere developed partly 7y explorator

data analysis, psychoetric (eak nesses a

exist in the current results. )ausal linka1e

7et(een participation, involveent, anpro1ressive &T use reain unexained an

tan1led. Additional theoretical constructs, suc

as decision$akin1 style or leadership style

ay 7e profita7ly 7rou1ht into su7se@ue

analysis. *ore po(erful easures of th

pro1ressive use of &T in a copany also nee

to 7e developed since su7?ective and indirec

easures do not provide the sae stren1th a

direct o7?ective easures could. Also, in th

study, or1ani=a tional conditions (ere easurecrudely and on an industry level. 6utur

easures of this varia7le should focus at th

fir level and i1ht take in to account suc

factors as the a?or constituen cies /e.1

suppliers, custoers, and distri7utors8 use of &T

the a?or copetitors9 use of &T, th

inforation intensity in the fir9s a?or service

and products and in the production process, th

de1ree of predicta7ility in the fir9s environen

and so on.

This study focuses on lar1e or1ani=ations, ofte

(ith diversified 7usiness units. 6uture researc

ers need to study the differences that exist

executive support 7et(een diverse, hi1h

decen trali=ed or1ani=ations and sin1

7usiness, hi1hly centrali=ed or1ani=ations.

the latter case, (here contact (ith

ana1eent can 7e fre @uent and direct,

)'29s vie(s and visions for &T can 7

perhaps tied to specific 7usiness needs. 6

the hi1hly decentrali=ed, ulti 7usines

operation, the )'29s perspective i1ht 7e les


22/33

es.


23/33


2r1ani=ational si=e ay also influence the role

of executive support. 6or exaple, +elone

/"!!8, studyin1 sall 7usinesses (ith less

than

- eployees, found a stron1 relationship 7et(een the )'29s personal participation and the

fir9s successful use of &T. 3ands$on ana1e

ent in &T i1ht 7e uch ore iportant in a

sall fir or 7usiness unit (here a )'2 co

only akes ost key decisions and is perhaps

the only one (ho can harness &T to corporate

o7 ?ectives and strate1y.

6urther studies need to exaine the factors that

influence the participation of )'2s in &T

ana1e ent. 2ur study found that )'2sappear to par ticipate infre@uently in &T$

related activities. erhaps )'2 participation in

&T is of liited utili ty. Alternatively, this findin1

ay reflect a lack of exposure to, experience

(ith, or cofort in coputers and inforation

technolo1y aon1 the current cadre of )'2s

aon1 the sapled firs. )'2s9 participation

i1ht increase as ana1ers (ho have

7ecoe accustoed to us in1 coputers as

(e< as chapionin1 and initiatin1 innovativeuses of inforation technolo1y in their line

ana1eent roles reach the top of the fir.A

siilar speculation re1ardin1 the ac tual hands$

on use of coputers aon1 future )'2s has

7een proposed 7y Jones and *cleod /"!58.

>e suspect, ho(ever, that participation of the

)'2 in &T plannin1, developent, and

ipleen tation$related activities (ill reain

rather liited and coonly dele1ated toothers. Eeverthe less, certain types of

participation appear to offer po(erful otivatin1

opportunities for the )'2s to chan1e the

7ehavior of others re1ardin1 &T. 6or instance,

(hen )'2 *ichael Jordan /"!8 unexpectedly

used 6rito$lay9s sophisticated ne( executive

inforation syste to @ui= a arketin1 ana1er

a7out the unhappy status of


24/33

atisfactory or1ani=ational perforance /i.e.,

@uili7riu8, the core task of leadership is to

us tain coitent to esta7lished patterns of

c tivity. +urin1 periods (hen the environent

chan1in1 rapidly or the fir is perforin1oorly /i.e., dise@uili7riu8, the leaders9 priary

sk is to interrupt the esta7lished patterns and

redirect the or1ani=ation to(ard activities that

re responsive to chan1es in the environent.

ur initial intervie(s (ith several )'2s

ntatively su11est that )'2s in lar1e firs are

ost likely to participate in &T (hen the

r1ani=ation has a pro7le, and the )'2

erceives &T as a (ay to reorient or chan1e the

r1ani=ation.

Ac&no$ledgements

>e (ant to thank )hino ;ao and 'd(ard )hiu

or providin1 assistance on the pro?ect, and

andra +e(it= (ho provided detailed coents

n an earlier version of this article.

:eferences

das, >. .J.


25/33


26/33

Executive Involvement in IT ManagemeEor7urn, +. and Birley, S.


27/33

ent Tea and )orporate erforance,ashin1ton ost


30/33


oastal )orp.

ro(n )entral

iaond Sharock

xxon

err *cGee

*apco

Sun

Tenneco

Texaco

Tosco

US

>itco

Retailing

lliederican Stores

*ay +epartent Stores*elville

est roducts Safe(ay Storesarter$3a(ley Service *erchandiseayton$3udson Southlandederated +epartent Stores

Stop and Shop.(. >ool(orth Toys 9;9 UsGreat Atlantic F acific Tea >al1reen

). enney >al*art Stores*art >inn$+ixie Storesucky Stores ayre

*arriotts

Appendix 'IT Manager +uestionnaire

Eu7er .. .. V

his @uestionnaire &s &ntended for the ost senior &nforation systes executive (ithin

our fir. && you are not that &ndividual please for(ard the entire packet to hi or her.

lease provide the &&l&e of the person you report to:

3o( any levels are you fro the )hief 'xecullve 23lcer of the corporationC

2 3 ( 5 !

3o( any years have you held your current positionC

# 3 ( 5 orethan %

To the 7est of your kno(led1e, ho( any years has your &&r9s )hief 'xecutive 2ltlcer

7een &n his or her current positionC

# 3 ( 5 ! 7 9 " ore than "

>hich of the follo(in1 stateents 7est descri7es the &portance that your )'2

perceives &T to 7e for your firC


31/33


Appendix ' " cont,5. 3o( often does the )'2 1et personally involved in ailers related to the use of &T (ithin the

firC

5daily

4

(eekly

3

onthly

#

fe( ties

a year

less than once

1 ayear

2ptional )oent V

7. 3o( fre@uent are inforal contacts 7et(een the )'2 and the fir9s senior &T ana1eentC

5

daily(

(eekly

3

onthly

2 fe(

ties ayear

less than once

a year

2ptional )oent. V

. 3o( kno(led1ea7le is the )'2 a7out &T opportunities and possi7ilities for your firC

% 4 - # "

extreely

kno(led1ea7levery

infored

(ell

inforrred

soe(hat

infored

(eakly

infored

2ptional )oent V

9. 3o( kno(led1ea7le &s the )'2 a7out &T innovations that have 7een developed 7y

a?or copetitorsC

% 4 - #extreely

kno(led1ea7levery

infored

(ell

infored

soe(hat

infored

(eakly

infored

2ptional )oent. V

10. 3o( (ould you deecrl7e your fir9s use of &nforation technolo1yC

5

industry

leader

4 close

follo(er

3

iddle

of the pack

#

soe(hat

7ehind

la11ard

2ptional )oent V

11. &s there a research and developent )- F 8 7ud1et for &nvestents &n &TC

" # - 4

no yes. 7ut

inade@uate

for our needs

es, (e have a

odest 7ud1et for

pilotin1

ne( technolo1ies.

yes, (e are pro7a7ly an

industry leader in

discretionary fundin1 for

investents in

eer1in1 inforation technolo1ies.2ptional )oentM V

"#. >hich of the follo(in1 7est descri7es the )'29s prevailin1 thinkln1 a7out funds

the fir spend on &TC1 3 5

ie(s &T as ie(s &T as a resource ie(s &Tasa


32/33


Appendix ' " cont,

4. >hich of the follo(in1 7est descri7es the )'29s role in the corporate &T steerin1 coitteeC

% 4 - #&s the defacto

steerin1 coitteechairs an &T coittee

and actively participates

in eetin1s.

isae7er

of the &T

steerin1 coittee.

&T coittee exists,

7ut (ith inial )'2

input or a(areness

no steerin1

coittee

exists.

2ptional )oent V

%. >hat is the )'29s vision for &TC

( 3 2a>o1, 7utMvision,

($e $ill be the industry

leader in the use ofadvanced iinformation

technology"0*

a M vision of ho(

the fir (ill use &T ($e $ill

install a $orld$idecommuB% nicationsnet$or&C

a M vision of ho(

the fir (ill use &T /9%K

of customer calls $illbe

handled $ith no call

bac&"0)

no stated

vision expressed

for &T.

5. +oes the )'2 personaliy use inforation technolo1yC

()'2 akes heavy useof &T via electronic ail,

personal coputer,executive inforation

syste.

3

)'2 akes sy

7olic use of &Te"g"% / in the

office% but onlyoccasional use"!

#

)'2 is not a user of&T 7ut insists that hisor her office akeuse of &T.

")'2 has nopersonal involveent (ithcoputers.

, >hat fir do you consider to 7e the inforation technolo1y leader in your industryC

>ould you like a copy of the paper (e referred to in the cover letterC

Eo es I&f ne( address please specify Thankyou very uch for your assistance.


33/33

)opyri1ht of *&S uarterly is the property of *&S uarterly F The Society for

&nforation *ana1eent. The copyri1ht in an individual article ay 7e aintained 7y

the author in certain cases. )ontent ay not 7e copied or eailed to ultiple sites or

posted to a listserv (ithout the copyri1ht holder9s express (ritten perission.

3o(ever, users ay print, do(nload, or eail articles for individual use.

Documents

3 Executive Involvement and Participation in Management of IT