台灣企業實施策略性資訊系統規劃的群組互動因素之研究

行政院國家科學委員會補助專題研究計畫成果報告

※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※

※

※

※

※

※

※

※ ※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※

計畫類別：█個別型計畫　　□整合型計畫 計畫編號：NSC　89－2416－H－011－030－SSS 執行期間：89 年 8 月 1 日至　90 年 7 月 31 日

計畫主持人：李國光

計畫參與人員：白榮吉、賴明豐

本成果報告包括以下應繳交之附件：

□赴國外出差或研習心得報告一份

□赴大陸地區出差或研習心得報告一份

□出席國際學術會議心得報告及發表之論文各一份

□國際合作研究計畫國外研究報告書一份

執行單位：國立台灣科技大學資訊管理系

中　華　民　國　　九十　年　八　月　一　日

行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告

計畫編號：NSC89-2416-H-11-030-SSS 執行期間：89 年 8 月 1 日至　90 年 7 月 31 日 主持人：李國光, 國立台灣科技大學資訊管理系 計畫參與人員：白榮吉、賴明豐

國立台灣科技大學資訊管理研究所研究生

摘要

資訊系統策略規劃一直是資訊管理實務 界與學術界所關切的重要課題之一，從一些 相關文獻可以得知已經有許多資訊系統策 略規劃論文被提出，然而，卻很少有實證性 研究針對資訊系統策略規劃群組互動之影 響因素加以探討。本研究的主要目的即在於 檢視群組互動因素對資訊系統策略規劃流 程品質之影響。本研究採用問卷調查方式並 以台灣 1000 大企業為研究對象，共計發出 827 份問卷，回收有效樣本為 239 份，回收 率為 28.9%。統計分析結果顯示資訊系統策 略規劃之成效受到一些與組織相關的互動 因素響，包括高階主管認知、高階主管和資 訊部門主管之關係、任務協調性、資訊系統 成熟度與專家權力。本研究的研究發現與結 論可提供台灣企業實施資訊系統策略規劃 之重要參考。

關鍵詞: 資訊系統策略規劃、組織情境、

資訊系統成熟度 Abstr act

Much research has been conducted in the area of strategic information systems planning.

However, little empirical research has been devoted to group interaction aspects of strategic information systems planning. The objective of this study is to examine the effects of factors relating to group interaction on the success of strategic information systems planning. A survey was conducted in Taiwan of 239 respondents, with a response rate of 28.9%. The result of data analyses indicate that the success of strategic information systems planning process was positively influenced by certain factors relating to group interaction, including CEO perceptions, the relationships between

CEOs and CIOs, task coordination, IS maturity and expert power. The implications of this finding for practice and future research are also examined herein.

Keywor ds: Strategic information systems planning; Group interaction

1. Introduction

Strategic information systems planning (SISP) was consistently identified as one of the most critical issues facing IS executives and academic researchers (Lederer et al., 1996;

Segars and Grover, 1999; Teo and Ang, 2000).

According to surveys of information systems management issues in the recent decade, SISP remains among the major issues facing IT/IS executives and corporate general managers (Brancheau et al., 1996; Watson et al., 1997;

Gottschalk, 2001). SISP has been defined as

‘the process of identifying a portfolio of computer-based applications that will assist an organization in executing its business plans and realizing its business goals’ (Lederer and Sethi, 1988). Many researchers have examined various SISP issues during the recent decade, for example evaluating effectiveness of IS planning, assessing the usefulness of strategic IS plans, identifying SISP prescriptions and profiles, implementing predictors of IS plans, determining factors of alignment between business planning and IS planning, and improving planning approaches. Although extensive research has been conducted in the area of strategic IS planning, there is little empirical research focused on examining the relationship between group interaction and SISP success. This objective of this study is to examine the factors of group interaction that affect the success of strategic IS planning through an empirical investigation.

SISP Success

•Planning Alignment

•Planning Analysis

•Planning Cooperation

•Planning Capabilities SISP Success

•Planning Alignment

•Planning Analysis

•Planning Cooperation

•Planning Capabilities Organizational Context

•CEO’s Perceptions

•CEO/CIO Relationship

•Organizational Centralization

•IS Maturity

•Stakeholder Participation Organizational Context

•CEO’s Perceptions

•CEO/CIO Relationship

•Organizational Centralization

•IS Maturity

•Stakeholder Participation

Interactive Behaviour

•Communication Effectiveness

•Task Coordination

•Conflict among Stakeholders

•Power

Interactive Behaviour

•Communication Effectiveness

•Task Coordination

•Conflict among Stakeholders

•Power

Figure 1 Research model

2. Resear ch model and research hypotheses In order to examine these two questions in above section, a research model was first built, using organizational, behavioural, and IS planning theory as reference disciplines. The initial research model is presented in Figure 1, and each of the constructs in the model and research hypotheses is described and rationalized below.

Hypothesis 1:CEO’s perception of the importance of IT/IS is positively correlated with the success of strategic IS planning.

Hypothesis 2: CEO/CIO relationship is positively correlated with the success of strategic IS planning.

Hypothesis 3:Organizational centralization is negatively correlated with the success of strategic IS planning.

Hypothesis 4:IS maturity is positively correlated with the success of strategic IS planning.

Hypothesis 6:Communication effectiveness is positively correlated with the success of strategic IS planning.

Hypothesis 7:Task coordination is positively correlated with the success of strategic IS planning.

Hypothesis 8:Cconflict among stakeholders is negatively correlated with from

Hypothesis 9a:Expert power is positively correlated with the success of strategic IS planning.

Hypothesis 9b:Positional power is positively correlated with the success of strategic IS planning.

Hypothesis 9c:External power is positively correlated with the success of strategic IS planning.

3. Resear ch methodology

A field survey was determined to the most appropriate research methodology for this study.

The sampling frame adopted is the Top Corporate 1000 published by Tien-Sha Magazine in 2000. Only those companies with formal IS departments qualified as participants.

We generated a sample of 827 firms from various industries. The decision to use the IS executives as informants herein is supported by previous research conducted by Sabherwal and King (1995), Teo and King (1997), and Gottschalk (1999). To maximize the reliability and validity of the research instrument, and to strongly embed the research within the existing literature, the questions used were adapted from published research where possible. Two rounds of pre-testing were conducted using personal interviews, with participants being invited to critique the questions and wordings, and suggest the addition of deletion of questions.

During the first round of pre-testing, five MIS doctoral students and three MIS professors were interviewed. The comments of these eight individuals resulted in revisions to the construct measures. During the second round of pre- testing, a revised questionnaire were pre-tested by fourteen senior IS executives from five different industries (including manufacturing, banking, hospital, retail and insurance). Each of these managers was actively involved in SISP and had significant experience in IS management. The managers were given the questionnaire and asked to examine it for meaningfulness, relevance, and clarity. After revising the questionnaire a second time according to the results of this test, questionnaires were mailed to the 827 IS executives. A cover letter explaining the objective of the study and a stamped return envelope were enclosed. Follow-up letters were sent about three weeks after the initial mailings.

The content validity of questionnaire was established through a series of personal interviews with multiple IS executives. Since a single item might not fully tap a construct or might be subject to misinterpretation by the

respondents, multiple items were used for each construct. Construct validity was determined using factor analysis of the multiple items comprising each construct. Specifically, principal component analysis with varimax (orthogonal) rotation was used to determine if all items measuring a construct cluster together, that is, all items measuring a construct should load onto a single factor. Items with loadings of less than 0.5 on any factor or with loadings greater than 0.5 on more than one factor were dropped from subsequent analyses. The eigenvalue of all factors are greater than one.

The results of the factor analyses confirm that each construct is distinct from other constructs.

Internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) was calculated in order to assess the reliability of all constructs. The results in our study indicate that all the constructs have sufficiently high alpha values and therefore considered to exhibit adequate reliability.

4. Data analysis and results

Of the 827 questionnaires distributed, 239 completed usable questionnaires were returned, for a response rate of 28.9%. The respondents are all IS executives, and had worked in the information systems field for an average of 14.7 years. The hypotheses were tested using multiple regression analyses. For each research hypothesis, regression models were run separately for each of the dependent variables:

SISP success and its components. We then tested each hypothesis to determine which factors were more important for the success of strategic IS planning. The overall regression model is significant (F=39.227, p<0.001). The value of R² (0.64) suggests that 64 percent of the variance is explained by eleven variables.

In each regression equation, the adjusted R² was high enough to suggest a meaningful relationship between the independent variables and the success of SISP. A separate t-test was conducted for each factors in the model to determine which organizational and behavioural factors contributed significantly to the success of strategic IS planning. These results are discussed below.

CEO’s perceptions had a significantly positive effect on the success of SISP, supporting H1 (t=4.279, p<0.1). As proposed in

H2, the CEO/CIO relationship shows a strong positive relationship with the success of SISP (t=1.655, p<0.001). Organizational centralization had no effect on the success of SISP, indicating a lack of support for H3. IS maturity was positively correlated with the success of SISP, so H4 is supported (t=-0.745, p<0.001). Stakeholder participation was not positively associated with the success of SISP, contradicting H5. Communication effectiveness was not significantly related to the success of SISP; thus, H6 was not supported. The result was contrary to our expectation. Task coordination was significantly related to the success of SISP (t=2.922, p<0.05), which supports H7. Conflict had no negative effect on the success of SISP, indicating a lack of support for H8. Expert power was significantly related to the success of SISP, supporting H9a (t=2.103, p<0.1). However, positional power and external power were not significantly related to the success of SISP.

5. Discussion

5.1. The effects of the CEO’s percepeions The findings of this study reveal that CEO’s perceptions are significantly related to the success of strategic IS planning. CEO’s perceptions of IT/IS importance are a key prerequisite in securing top management participation in and support for IS planning.

Insufficient commitment and support results creates problems in the analysis, design, and implementation of the selected IS projects (Salmela et al., 2000). Prekumar and King (1994) indicate that, top management in many organizations lack a clear perception of the role of IS in their business operations and still consider it a staff support function that does not require their involvement or guidance.

Insufficient CEO knowledge of IT is often a major problem. By being knowledgeable about IT, CEOs will be better able to evaluate payoffs from IT investments and have more realistic expectations of IT investments (Teo and Ang, 1999).

Given that CEO’s perceptions are a key predictor of SISP success, how to improve perceptions becomes a key issue. According to Earl (1989) ‘Information Management Education (IME)’ is necessary in parallel with

SISP activities to enable communication and interpretation of new SISP concepts. Education events such as seminars, introductory lectures, workshops and in-depth interviews between CEO and CIO are commonly used methods of supporting SISP. Furthermore, self-learning approach and group learning approaches are considered to be two educational means of improving CEO’s perceptions of the importance of IT/IS (Lee and Gough, 1993).

Self-learning is a process in which a manager learns about selected topics regarding the strategic potential of IS by using an interactive computer-based learning system. Meanwhile, group learning is a process in which a small group of top managers discuss and learn about selected topics under the guidance of a facilitator.

5.2. The effects of the CEO/CIO relationships The findings herein indicate that the CEO/CIO relationship is significantly related to the success of strategic IS planning and its four constructs of SISP success. That is, the CEO/CIO relationship is a good predictor for alignment, analysis, cooperation and capability.

The need to align IS plans with business plans has been emphasized in previous studies (Teo and Ang, 1999; Kearns and Lederer, 2000).

Alignment requires business and IS executives to assume joint responsibility for achieving benefits through IS investments. Such a collaborative and symmetric approach to planning can yield significant IS-based competitive advantages (Kearns and Lederer, 2000). According to a study by Tai and Phelps (2000), the CEO/CIO relationship is worsening:

58% of managers said that ‘talking to there IS department is a source of regular anxiety’. If the relationship between CEO and CIO is poor, then the alignment is impossible. The CEO/CIO relationship may be influenced by CEO attributes such as background, experienced IT project success and leadership style (Fenny et al., 1992). Jones et al. (1995) suggested that the CEO/CIO relationship can be improved by increasing the amount of time the CIO spends communicating with the CEO, educating the CEO about IS opportunities and threats, and having the CIO learn about the business.

5.3. The effects of IS maturity

Results in this study demonstrate that IS maturity is significantly correlated with SISP success. As the IS function gains experience with developing important information systems, and as the CEO and users recognize the strategic potential of IT, a shift may be expected from internally oriented toward applications that enhance business competitiveness (King and Sabherwal, 1992).

Most of the respondents in this study were come from the banking, computers, communication and manufacturing. The utilization of IS functions by these industries is very high in Taiwan, and in these industries IT/IS always supports numerous business functions (such as human resources, marketing, accounting/finance, production and R&D).

Numerous large businesses have well established IT architectures and infrastructures.

Recently, owing to the increasing importance of the Internet, most of these industries have established their own web sites to implement electronic commerce strategies. Consequently, we can understand that the utilization of IT/IS is a major concern for the business operation and competitiveness of Taiwanese organizations.

5.4. The effects of task coordination

SISP is a complex (Ruohonen, 1991), ongoing (Lee and Gough, 1993) and iterative process that cannot be handled by just one person in an organization. An improved coordinative mechanism can help the planning team to achieve their IS decision-making goals, for example in IS investment policy-making, priority-setting for IS projects and human resource planning. How can the effectiveness of task coordination among stakeholder groups be improved? Two organizational mechanisms are meant to facilitate planning, ‘steering committees’ and ‘strategic IT/IS planning team’. Steering committees can provide guidance, interpret input information, and translate this information into a more useful form during planning (King, 1995), which are comprised of high-level managers, IT managers, unit managers, financial managers, and so on.

Furthermore, Earl (1993) suggests that an organizational approach is the most effective means of implementing SISP. This approach

stresses the importance of teamwork in IS strategy making. The strategic IT/IS planning team was comprised of business managers IS managers, user managers, and unit managers to achieve a consensus view through effective communication and interaction.

5.5. The effects of expert power

Different stakeholder groups have different knowledge and expertise. For example, the CIO has IT knowledge and experience, the CFO (Chief Financial Officer) has organization- specific knowledge concerning finance and accounting, and CEO possesses business executive knowledge and experience, all accumulating their SISP knowledge over time through interactive learning. Different kinds of knowledge exist in the minds of different interest groups, each of whom have their own expertise, positions, perceptions, and power.

Therefore, these differences may be result in difficulty in cooperation. If power relations are not taken into consideration during planning then this may affect the effectiveness of SISP.

The testing results herein provide practitioners with a set of considerations that may deserve special attention. Specifically, if the expert power of IT managers surpasses that of top management, then the output of the planning process, the IS plan, will toward the development of technology aspects. Meanwhile, if the expert power of top management surpasses that of IT executives, then the IS plan will toward the development of business aspects. Consequently, expert power must be integrated during the SISP process to achieve the goals of BP-ISP integration. To achieve the goals of IS planning, effective management of power structures during planning and the right power balance is required.

計畫成果自評

本研究主要採問卷調查方式，在研究時 程與內容方面均依照所提研究計畫進行，問 卷調查方法最困難之處在於獲取適當的問卷 回收率，本研究預先以電話詢問填答者之姓 名並確認郵寄地址，因此在回收率方面達 28.9% ， 高 出 於 一 般 學 術 論 文 所 接 受 之 20~25%。在問卷前測方面，經過三位 MIS

教授與 14 位高階資訊主管的修正，在信度與 效度方面均呈現良好的結果。研究結果顯示 多個因素與資訊系統策略規劃成效呈現相當 大的關聯存在，這些因素可以提供給企業實 務界做為資訊系統策略規劃之重要參考。特 別是資訊主管或企業策略規劃者應針對本研 究提出之因素加以審視並發展相關策略以因 應所面臨之挑戰，另外，資訊系統策略規劃 本身為變革的過程，資訊系統導入會對組織 造成巨大變革包括行為、工作風革、信念、

社會與政治層面，這些變革主要是著重於人 性因素，傳統的資訊系統策略規劃均忽略了 這些因素的重要性，本研究所提出的群組互 動因素可提供企業從事規劃時的重要參考。

在學術應用價值方面，本研究所探討的議題 在以往的文獻中均很少見，研究成果可做為 未來學術研究者建立理論架構之參考。本研 究的調查對象為大型企業，未來研究者也可 進一步將本研究應用到中小企業，並調查更 廣泛的互動因素。本研究的部份成果已發表 於 2001 年 7 月在新加坡大學所舉辦的第六屆 亞太決策科學國際學術會議，並準備彙整研 究成果投稿至國際學術期刊，期使國內、外 學者對本項研究能有所關注。

參考文獻(部份)

1. Auer, T. and Reponen, T. 1997,

“Information systems strategy formulation embedded into a continuous organizational learning process”, Information Resources Management Journal, 10(2), pp.32-43.

2. Baker, B. 1995, “The role of feedback in assessing information systems planning effectiveness, Journal of Strategic Information Systems”, 4(1), pp.61-80.

3. Brancheau, J.C., Janz, B.D. and WETHERBE, J.C. 1996, “Key issues in information systems management: 1994- 95 SIM delphi results”, MIS Quarterly, 20(2), pp.225-242.

4. Cerpa, N. and Verner, J.M. 1998, “Case study: the effect of IS maturity on information systems strategic planning”, Information and Management, 34, pp.199-208.

5. Earl, M.J. (1993), “Experiences in information systems strategic planning”,

MIS Quarterly, March, pp.1-24.

6. Galliers, R.D. (1992), “Information systems strategic planning ： concept, methods and critical success factors”, AIS 92, March, pp.17-19.

7. Gottschalk, P. (1999), “Implementation predictors of strategic information systems plans”, Information and Management, 36, pp.77-91.

8. Hackney, R. and Little, S. (1999),

“Opportunistic strategy formulation for IS/IT planning”, European Journal of Information Systems, 8, pp.119-126.

9. Huysman, M.H, Fischer, S.J and Heng, M.S. (1994), “An Organizational Learning Perspective on Information Systems Planning”, Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 3, pp.165-177.

10. King, W.R. (2000), “Assessing the efficacy of IS strategic planning”, Information Systems Management, 17(1), pp.81-83.

11. Lederer, A.L., Salmela, H. (1996),

“Toward a theory of strategic information systems planning”, Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 5, pp.237-253.

12. Lee, G.G and Gough, T. (1993), “An integrated framework for information systems planning and its initial application”, Journal of Information Technology, August, pp.227-240.

13. Levy, M., Powell, P. and Galliers, R.

(1999), “Assessing information systems strategy development frameworks in SMEs”, Information and Management, 36, pp.247-261.

14. Mentzas, G. (1997), “Implementing an IS strategy -- a team approach”, Long Range Planning, 30(1), pp.84-95.

15. Premkumar, G. and King, W.R. (1994a),

“The evaluation of strategic information systems planning”, Information and Management, 26, pp.327-340.

16. Robbins, S.P. (1992), Organizational behavior, Prentice Hall, New York.

17. Ruohonen, M. (1991), “Stakeholders of information systems strategic planning：

theoretical concepts and empirical examples”, Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 1(1), pp.15-28.

18. Sabherwal, R. (1999), “The relationship between information system planning

sophistication and information system success: an empirical assessment”, Decision Sciences, 30(1), pp.137-167.

19. Salmela, H., Lederer, A.L. and Repoen, T.

(2000), “Information systems planning in a turbulent environment”, European Journal of Information Systems, 9, pp.3- 15.

20. Segars, A.H. and Grover, V. “Strategic information systems planning success: an investigation of the construct and its measurement”, MIS Quarterly, June, 1998, pp.139-163.

21. Teo, T.S.H. and Ang, J.S.K. (2000),

“How useful are strategic plans for information systems”, Behaviour and Information Technology, 19(4), pp.275- 282.