信息技术融合及其对组织绩效影响的实证研究
|
摘要
当前我国进入了信息化与工业化融合的新阶段,越来越多的企业纷纷开始应用信息技术(IT),然而很多企业的IT应用效果与预期相距甚远。许多研究证明,之所以产生“IT投资黑洞”,原因在于IT投资之后并没有被企业有效地融合,即在采纳与融合之间存在“吸收缺口”。如何促进企业组织与信息技术的有效融合已成为当前企业信息化建设一个亟需解决的重要课题。
围绕着信息技术融合与应用问题,学者们进行了大量的研究。但纵观国内外已有研究结果可知,信息技术融合的相关理论研究还处于起步阶段。很多学者在研究信息技术吸纳全过程时分析了企业信息技术应用后的融合阶段,但是他们更加关注IT实施前的采纳决策和实施中的安装过程,对实施后的信息技术融合过程关注非常少。仅有的专门研究信息技术融合的学者也大多站在信息技术吸纳前的角度分析如何促进信息技术有效融合,很少有人站在信息技术实施后、在既定的IS方案和实施效果下,研究组织如何进一步促进信息技术融合以发挥信息技术潜力。另一方面,由于研究目的和出发点不同,现有研究成果对融合的定义尚未统一,它们大都关注融合的某个侧面,未能抓住企业信息技术采纳后融合过程的复杂性和动态性,更无法对信息技术融合的影响因素及其对组织绩效的影响进行详细的探索和系统的分析。因此,有必要建立一个完整的理论框架对信息技术融合的含义、影响因素及其对组织绩效的影响进行深入探讨和考察。
本文从过程视角来探讨如何促进企业信息技术融合以提升组织绩效,主要研究以下四个方面的内容:(1)分析信息技术融合的内涵和维度结构,提出信息技术融合的多维结构模型;(2)剖析信息技术融合各层次间的作用关系,揭示信息技术融合各层次的内在联系;(3)探讨为什么一些企业的信息技术融合现状好于其他企业,即信息技术融合的影响因素;(4)揭示信息技术融合对组织绩效的作用机理。
具体来说,本文的创新点主要体现在以下几个方面:
(1)本文基于过程/层次视角对信息技术融合的概念内涵进行解析,建立信息技术融合的多维结构模型。该模型多视角、立体地描述了信息技术与组织的融合过程,抓住了企业信息技术融合的复杂性和多面性,有利于更好地理解企业信息技术融合过程,为深入分析信息技术融合与组织绩效的关系奠定了理论基础。
本文首先基于已有相关研究,探讨信息技术融合的含义,分析其定义视角,并提出本文信息技术融合的概念,指出信息技术融合的动态性、层次性和持续性。同时基于已有的相关研究,剖析信息技术融合过程,从融合的广度、深度和层次三个维度构建了信息技术融合的多维结构模型,使它抓住组织信息技术融合的复杂性和多面性,并对各维度的内涵进行了深入分析,指出三个维度相互独立又相互依赖。其中广度维主要体现了信息技术与组织融合在范围上的扩散,深度维主要体现了信息技术与组织融合在应用方式上的演变,而层次维则体现了信息技术与组织结构元素在各管理层次的相互渗透与调整。本研究多视角、立体地描述了信息技术与组织的融合过程,有利于更好地理解信息技术融合过程,为深入分析信息技术融合与组织绩效的关系奠定了理论基础。
(2)本文构建了一个比较完整的信息技术融合层次影响因素模型,揭示出信息技术融合各层次的关键影响因素及层次间的作用关系。本研究在一定程度上解释了造成企业信息技术融合差异的原因;在影响因素的考察上充分考虑到了信息技术融合不同层次的特征,为企业针对性地提高各层次信息技术融合现状提供理论依据。
本研究认为,由于信息技术融合各层次涉及的主体不同,因而会受到不同因素的影响。本文首先分析了信息技术融合各层次间的作用关系,并在综述信息技术融合影响因素的基础上,结合信息技术应用相关研究,从各层次涉及的主体出发,提出融合的影响因素,并深入分析了各影响因素的作用机理。本文的层次关系模型指出企业战略对应积极影响流程匹配;流程匹配积极影响员工接受;同时战略对应也积极影响员工接受。而本文的融合影响因素模型则指出了各层次融合的关键影响因素,其中企业高层领导对IT与业务关系的认识、IT战略地位、高层领导的IT战略能力、IT经理的业务战略能力、高层领导与IT经理的沟通对战略对应有正向影响作用;高层领导支持、业务流程再造、创新意识、组织沟通、员工参与对流程匹配有正向影响作用;期望确认度、感知有用性、满意度、任务技术匹配、主观规范、感知行为控制对员工接受有正向影响作用。本文的影响因素研究能够帮助企业发现各层次融合影响因素上的不足,为企业针对性地采取措施提高信息技术融合现状提供理论依据。
(3)本文揭示了信息技术融合对组织绩效的作用机理,详细地分析了信息技术融合三个层次对组织绩效四个维度的影响作用,构建了信息技术融合对组织绩效影响的概念模型。本研究首次从层次视角展开分析信息技术融合对平衡计分卡四个维度的不同影响作用,拓展了IT投资对组织绩效的研究思路,细化了信息技术融合对组织绩效影响的发力点和着力点,为企业针对性地利用信息技术融合提高组织绩效指明方向。
本研究指出,IT投资是通过有效的信息技术融合来提高组织绩效的。同时本文认为信息技术融合对组织绩效的影响不仅仅反应在财务绩效上,更大程度地体现在改善企业内部流程绩效,提高企业员工素质和客户满意度等组织内部相关的非财务绩效方面。因此选用兼顾战略与战术、长期和短期目标、财务和非财务评价的平衡计分卡来衡量组织绩效。同时根据信息技术融合层次模型,深入分析了战略对应、流程匹配和员工接受对平衡计分卡中财务绩效、客户绩效、内部流程绩效和学习与成长绩效的影响作用,指出三个层次的融合对平衡计分卡的四个维度均具有不同的正向影响作用。本研究结果拓展了IT投资对组织绩效的研究思路,细化了信息技术融合对组织绩效影响的发力点和着力点,为企业针对性地利用信息技术融合提高组织绩效指明方向。
(4)本文对构建的各研究模型进行实证,验证模型中相关假设的真实性。首先根据已有相关研究,构建了一套信息技术融合、影响因素及组织绩效的测度指标体系,并通过调研数据验证各模型及相关假设。检验结果表明本文所提大部分假设都成立,证明了本文所提模型的有效性,找出了各层次融合的关键影响因素,并指出战略对应是改善组织绩效的关键。
本研究首先对各模型中的相关变量进行量表设计,构建了一套信息技术融合、影响因素及组织绩效的测度指标体系,并通过问卷收集数据,验证了信息技术融合各层次的影响因素及其对组织绩效的影响作用,结果表明本文所提大部分假设均成立,证明了本文所提模型及相关假设的有效性。最后根据研究结果分析了信息技术融合各层次影响因素的总效应,找出了各层次融合的关键因素;并通过比较三个层次对组织绩效的总效应,发现从对组织绩效的整体影响来看,战略对应的影响作用最大,其次是流程匹配,最后是员工接受。本文结论说明:信息技术融合对组织绩效有显著影响,信息技术只有被接受并充分应用达到与组织融合才可能增强企业绩效。但是融合的不同层次对组织绩效的影响略有差异,其中战略对应的影响作用最为明显。同时各层次融合的影响因素也不同,企业要根据自身现状和条件来采取有效措施促进信息技术融合,提高相应的组织绩效。
We has entered a new stage of the infusion of informatization and industrialization and many firms have adopted Information technology (IT) in China, however the application performance of IT has usually been far from expectation. Many researches proved that the reason for“IT investment black hole”lies in that IT is actually not effectively fused by the firm after invested(adopted), which means an“assimilation gap”between adoption and infusion. How to promote the infusion of IT within the firm has become an urgent problem for the enterprise information construction.
Scholars have conducted a lot of research about the infusion and application of IT. Reviewing existing theory, the research of IT infusion is still in its beginning stage. Many scholars analyzed the IT infusion in the study of the entire process of IT absorption, but these studies focused on adoption or/and implementation stage, lacking analysis on the IT infusion process after adoption. Some scholars which researched IT infusion mostly focus on how to promote effective IT infusion before the adoption, rarely someone research the organizations how to further promote the IT infusion in order to play the potential of IT under the implementation, established IS solutions. On the other hand, the definition and meaning of IT infusion have not been a unified in the existing research, lacking the detailed and systematic analysis on the specific process of IT infusion and the factors, they thus can not conform to the complexity and dynamics of IT infusion process, and hard to reveal the IT infusion impact on the organizational performance. Therefore, it is necessary to establish more comprehensive theoretical framework and explore the mechanism of IT infusion.
This dissertation studied how to foster the deeper infusion of IT in order to improve organizational performance from process perspective, mainly focusing on the flowing four contents: first, the concept and dimension of IT infusion; second, analysis the relationships of the various levels of IT infusion, revealing the internal relations of the various levels of IT infusion; third, the influential factors of IT infusion; fourth, the impact mechanism of IT infusion on promoting organizational performance.
For details, the innovation points of this dissertation mainly are represented by the following aspects:
Firstly, this dissertation proposed the concept of IT infusion and its three-dimensional model from process perspective. The model conducted a comprehensive description of the infusion process of the IT and organization, reflected the complexity and multi-faceted of organizational IT infusion. It extended a new research perspective for IS field, resolved the problem of existing literature lacking in study on the IT infusion after implement, propitious to a better understanding of the enterprises IT infusion process , laid a theoretical foundation for the in-depth analysis of the relationship between the IT infusion and organizational performance.
This dissertation discussed IT infusion from the perspective of the dynamic process, analyzed the definition perspective of IT infusion, put forward the concept of IT infusion, pointing out its dynamics, hierarchy and continuity. At the same time, it analyzed of IT infusion process based on existing relevant research, and built the dynamic process model of IT infusion from the breadth, depth and level. The model reflected the complexity and multi-faceted of organizational IT infusion, then deeply discussed the three dimensions and suggested that the three dimensions were mutually independent as well as interaction with each other. The breadth dimension reflects the diffusion of IT infusion in organizational scope, the depth dimension primarily reflects the evolution of the way in the organizational IT infusion, and the level dimension reflects the adjustment and mutual penetration of the elements between information technology and organizational structure in the various levels. The study conducted a comprehensive and multi-faceted description of the infusion process of the IT and organization, propitious to a better understanding of the enterprises IT infusion process, laid a theoretical foundation for the in-depth analysis of the relationship between the IT infusion and organizational performance.
Secondly, this dissertation revealed which kind of factors would influence each level of IT infusion, and explained the reasons why IT infusion of firms would differ to some extent and the relationships of each level. It considered the different characteristics of different levels of IT infusion, effectively overcame the current researches which can not master the factor differences in the different levels of IT infusion.
This dissertation suggested that, due to the participants difference in each level of IT infusion, different factors would make effect. On the basis of reviewing the influential factors of IT infusion, combined with the relevant researches of IT infusion, from the personnel who the three levels of IT infusion refer to, it suggested the influential factors of each level and analyzed the mechanism of each factor. The level relational model pointed out that strategic alignment is positively related to business process fit; business process fit is positively to employee acceptance, strategic alignment is positively related to employee acceptance. The factor model of IT infusion pointed out that the top management’s knowledge of the relations of IT and business, IT strategic position, top management’s IT strategic capabilities, CIO’s business strategic capabilities, management communication of IT and business department of the firm are positively related to strategic alignment; the management support, business process reengineering, innovative, organization communication, employee involvement are positively related to business process fit; the confirmation, perceived usefulness, satisfaction, task technology fit, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control are positively related to s employee acceptance. The study on the influential factors of each level of IT infusion can help the firm find out the weakness of its factors, and thus adopt measures to make improvement aiming to these shortcomings.
Thirdly, this dissertation revealed the mechanism of IT infusion on organizational performance, built on the concept model of the impact of IT infusion on organizational performance. This study investigated the effects of three levels of IT infusion on different constructs of organizational performance, expanded the research ideas of IT investment on organizational performance, and looked for the working point of the IT infusion on organizational performance, pointed out the direction for enterprise to improve organizational performance.
This dissertation suggested that the IT investment improved organizational performance through the effective IT infusion. This paper argued that the impact of IT infusion on organizational performance was not only reflected in financial performance, also reflected in the improvement of internal process performance, and improving staff quality and customer satisfaction within the organization related non-financial performance. Therefore, it selected the balanced score card to evaluate of organizational performance. According the infusion level model, it analyzed in-depth the influences of the strategic alignment, business process fit and employee acceptance on the financial performance, customer performance, internal processes and learning and growth performance of the role of performance of the balanced score card. This study expanded the research ideas of IT investment on organizational performance, looked for the working point of the IT infusion on organizational performance, and pointed out the direction for enterprise to improve organizational performance.
Fourthly, this study constructed an empirical model to verify the authenticity of the model and assumptions. First, based on existing research to build the measurement system of IT infusion, factors and organizational performance, and verified the model by research data. The results show that most of the proposed assumptions in the models are effectiveness, it find out the key factors of each level of IT infusion and pointed out that strategic alignment is the key to improving organizational performance.
Based on existing research to build the measurement system of IT infusion, factors and organizational performance, and verified the model by research data.The results showed that most of the proposed assumptions were valid; it proved the validity of the proposed model and underlying assumptions. Based on the results, it analyzed the factors’total effect of each level of IT infusion, found out the key factors of each level of IT infusion; also compared three levels of the total effect on organizational performance, found that from the total impact on organizational performance, the total effect of strategic alignment is greatest, followed by the business process fit and employee acceptance. This conclusion showed that if there was just IT infusion influence positively and significantly on organizational performance, IT can only enhance firm performance when it is accepted and fully utilized and integrated with organization. But the three levels of IT infusion had different effects on the four dimensions of organizational performance. Strategic alignment is the key for improving the organizational performance. Firms should promote IT infusion in order to improve organizational performance according to their own situation and conditions.
围绕着信息技术融合与应用问题,学者们进行了大量的研究。但纵观国内外已有研究结果可知,信息技术融合的相关理论研究还处于起步阶段。很多学者在研究信息技术吸纳全过程时分析了企业信息技术应用后的融合阶段,但是他们更加关注IT实施前的采纳决策和实施中的安装过程,对实施后的信息技术融合过程关注非常少。仅有的专门研究信息技术融合的学者也大多站在信息技术吸纳前的角度分析如何促进信息技术有效融合,很少有人站在信息技术实施后、在既定的IS方案和实施效果下,研究组织如何进一步促进信息技术融合以发挥信息技术潜力。另一方面,由于研究目的和出发点不同,现有研究成果对融合的定义尚未统一,它们大都关注融合的某个侧面,未能抓住企业信息技术采纳后融合过程的复杂性和动态性,更无法对信息技术融合的影响因素及其对组织绩效的影响进行详细的探索和系统的分析。因此,有必要建立一个完整的理论框架对信息技术融合的含义、影响因素及其对组织绩效的影响进行深入探讨和考察。
本文从过程视角来探讨如何促进企业信息技术融合以提升组织绩效,主要研究以下四个方面的内容:(1)分析信息技术融合的内涵和维度结构,提出信息技术融合的多维结构模型;(2)剖析信息技术融合各层次间的作用关系,揭示信息技术融合各层次的内在联系;(3)探讨为什么一些企业的信息技术融合现状好于其他企业,即信息技术融合的影响因素;(4)揭示信息技术融合对组织绩效的作用机理。
具体来说,本文的创新点主要体现在以下几个方面:
(1)本文基于过程/层次视角对信息技术融合的概念内涵进行解析,建立信息技术融合的多维结构模型。该模型多视角、立体地描述了信息技术与组织的融合过程,抓住了企业信息技术融合的复杂性和多面性,有利于更好地理解企业信息技术融合过程,为深入分析信息技术融合与组织绩效的关系奠定了理论基础。
本文首先基于已有相关研究,探讨信息技术融合的含义,分析其定义视角,并提出本文信息技术融合的概念,指出信息技术融合的动态性、层次性和持续性。同时基于已有的相关研究,剖析信息技术融合过程,从融合的广度、深度和层次三个维度构建了信息技术融合的多维结构模型,使它抓住组织信息技术融合的复杂性和多面性,并对各维度的内涵进行了深入分析,指出三个维度相互独立又相互依赖。其中广度维主要体现了信息技术与组织融合在范围上的扩散,深度维主要体现了信息技术与组织融合在应用方式上的演变,而层次维则体现了信息技术与组织结构元素在各管理层次的相互渗透与调整。本研究多视角、立体地描述了信息技术与组织的融合过程,有利于更好地理解信息技术融合过程,为深入分析信息技术融合与组织绩效的关系奠定了理论基础。
(2)本文构建了一个比较完整的信息技术融合层次影响因素模型,揭示出信息技术融合各层次的关键影响因素及层次间的作用关系。本研究在一定程度上解释了造成企业信息技术融合差异的原因;在影响因素的考察上充分考虑到了信息技术融合不同层次的特征,为企业针对性地提高各层次信息技术融合现状提供理论依据。
本研究认为,由于信息技术融合各层次涉及的主体不同,因而会受到不同因素的影响。本文首先分析了信息技术融合各层次间的作用关系,并在综述信息技术融合影响因素的基础上,结合信息技术应用相关研究,从各层次涉及的主体出发,提出融合的影响因素,并深入分析了各影响因素的作用机理。本文的层次关系模型指出企业战略对应积极影响流程匹配;流程匹配积极影响员工接受;同时战略对应也积极影响员工接受。而本文的融合影响因素模型则指出了各层次融合的关键影响因素,其中企业高层领导对IT与业务关系的认识、IT战略地位、高层领导的IT战略能力、IT经理的业务战略能力、高层领导与IT经理的沟通对战略对应有正向影响作用;高层领导支持、业务流程再造、创新意识、组织沟通、员工参与对流程匹配有正向影响作用;期望确认度、感知有用性、满意度、任务技术匹配、主观规范、感知行为控制对员工接受有正向影响作用。本文的影响因素研究能够帮助企业发现各层次融合影响因素上的不足,为企业针对性地采取措施提高信息技术融合现状提供理论依据。
(3)本文揭示了信息技术融合对组织绩效的作用机理,详细地分析了信息技术融合三个层次对组织绩效四个维度的影响作用,构建了信息技术融合对组织绩效影响的概念模型。本研究首次从层次视角展开分析信息技术融合对平衡计分卡四个维度的不同影响作用,拓展了IT投资对组织绩效的研究思路,细化了信息技术融合对组织绩效影响的发力点和着力点,为企业针对性地利用信息技术融合提高组织绩效指明方向。
本研究指出,IT投资是通过有效的信息技术融合来提高组织绩效的。同时本文认为信息技术融合对组织绩效的影响不仅仅反应在财务绩效上,更大程度地体现在改善企业内部流程绩效,提高企业员工素质和客户满意度等组织内部相关的非财务绩效方面。因此选用兼顾战略与战术、长期和短期目标、财务和非财务评价的平衡计分卡来衡量组织绩效。同时根据信息技术融合层次模型,深入分析了战略对应、流程匹配和员工接受对平衡计分卡中财务绩效、客户绩效、内部流程绩效和学习与成长绩效的影响作用,指出三个层次的融合对平衡计分卡的四个维度均具有不同的正向影响作用。本研究结果拓展了IT投资对组织绩效的研究思路,细化了信息技术融合对组织绩效影响的发力点和着力点,为企业针对性地利用信息技术融合提高组织绩效指明方向。
(4)本文对构建的各研究模型进行实证,验证模型中相关假设的真实性。首先根据已有相关研究,构建了一套信息技术融合、影响因素及组织绩效的测度指标体系,并通过调研数据验证各模型及相关假设。检验结果表明本文所提大部分假设都成立,证明了本文所提模型的有效性,找出了各层次融合的关键影响因素,并指出战略对应是改善组织绩效的关键。
本研究首先对各模型中的相关变量进行量表设计,构建了一套信息技术融合、影响因素及组织绩效的测度指标体系,并通过问卷收集数据,验证了信息技术融合各层次的影响因素及其对组织绩效的影响作用,结果表明本文所提大部分假设均成立,证明了本文所提模型及相关假设的有效性。最后根据研究结果分析了信息技术融合各层次影响因素的总效应,找出了各层次融合的关键因素;并通过比较三个层次对组织绩效的总效应,发现从对组织绩效的整体影响来看,战略对应的影响作用最大,其次是流程匹配,最后是员工接受。本文结论说明:信息技术融合对组织绩效有显著影响,信息技术只有被接受并充分应用达到与组织融合才可能增强企业绩效。但是融合的不同层次对组织绩效的影响略有差异,其中战略对应的影响作用最为明显。同时各层次融合的影响因素也不同,企业要根据自身现状和条件来采取有效措施促进信息技术融合,提高相应的组织绩效。
We has entered a new stage of the infusion of informatization and industrialization and many firms have adopted Information technology (IT) in China, however the application performance of IT has usually been far from expectation. Many researches proved that the reason for“IT investment black hole”lies in that IT is actually not effectively fused by the firm after invested(adopted), which means an“assimilation gap”between adoption and infusion. How to promote the infusion of IT within the firm has become an urgent problem for the enterprise information construction.
Scholars have conducted a lot of research about the infusion and application of IT. Reviewing existing theory, the research of IT infusion is still in its beginning stage. Many scholars analyzed the IT infusion in the study of the entire process of IT absorption, but these studies focused on adoption or/and implementation stage, lacking analysis on the IT infusion process after adoption. Some scholars which researched IT infusion mostly focus on how to promote effective IT infusion before the adoption, rarely someone research the organizations how to further promote the IT infusion in order to play the potential of IT under the implementation, established IS solutions. On the other hand, the definition and meaning of IT infusion have not been a unified in the existing research, lacking the detailed and systematic analysis on the specific process of IT infusion and the factors, they thus can not conform to the complexity and dynamics of IT infusion process, and hard to reveal the IT infusion impact on the organizational performance. Therefore, it is necessary to establish more comprehensive theoretical framework and explore the mechanism of IT infusion.
This dissertation studied how to foster the deeper infusion of IT in order to improve organizational performance from process perspective, mainly focusing on the flowing four contents: first, the concept and dimension of IT infusion; second, analysis the relationships of the various levels of IT infusion, revealing the internal relations of the various levels of IT infusion; third, the influential factors of IT infusion; fourth, the impact mechanism of IT infusion on promoting organizational performance.
For details, the innovation points of this dissertation mainly are represented by the following aspects:
Firstly, this dissertation proposed the concept of IT infusion and its three-dimensional model from process perspective. The model conducted a comprehensive description of the infusion process of the IT and organization, reflected the complexity and multi-faceted of organizational IT infusion. It extended a new research perspective for IS field, resolved the problem of existing literature lacking in study on the IT infusion after implement, propitious to a better understanding of the enterprises IT infusion process , laid a theoretical foundation for the in-depth analysis of the relationship between the IT infusion and organizational performance.
This dissertation discussed IT infusion from the perspective of the dynamic process, analyzed the definition perspective of IT infusion, put forward the concept of IT infusion, pointing out its dynamics, hierarchy and continuity. At the same time, it analyzed of IT infusion process based on existing relevant research, and built the dynamic process model of IT infusion from the breadth, depth and level. The model reflected the complexity and multi-faceted of organizational IT infusion, then deeply discussed the three dimensions and suggested that the three dimensions were mutually independent as well as interaction with each other. The breadth dimension reflects the diffusion of IT infusion in organizational scope, the depth dimension primarily reflects the evolution of the way in the organizational IT infusion, and the level dimension reflects the adjustment and mutual penetration of the elements between information technology and organizational structure in the various levels. The study conducted a comprehensive and multi-faceted description of the infusion process of the IT and organization, propitious to a better understanding of the enterprises IT infusion process, laid a theoretical foundation for the in-depth analysis of the relationship between the IT infusion and organizational performance.
Secondly, this dissertation revealed which kind of factors would influence each level of IT infusion, and explained the reasons why IT infusion of firms would differ to some extent and the relationships of each level. It considered the different characteristics of different levels of IT infusion, effectively overcame the current researches which can not master the factor differences in the different levels of IT infusion.
This dissertation suggested that, due to the participants difference in each level of IT infusion, different factors would make effect. On the basis of reviewing the influential factors of IT infusion, combined with the relevant researches of IT infusion, from the personnel who the three levels of IT infusion refer to, it suggested the influential factors of each level and analyzed the mechanism of each factor. The level relational model pointed out that strategic alignment is positively related to business process fit; business process fit is positively to employee acceptance, strategic alignment is positively related to employee acceptance. The factor model of IT infusion pointed out that the top management’s knowledge of the relations of IT and business, IT strategic position, top management’s IT strategic capabilities, CIO’s business strategic capabilities, management communication of IT and business department of the firm are positively related to strategic alignment; the management support, business process reengineering, innovative, organization communication, employee involvement are positively related to business process fit; the confirmation, perceived usefulness, satisfaction, task technology fit, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control are positively related to s employee acceptance. The study on the influential factors of each level of IT infusion can help the firm find out the weakness of its factors, and thus adopt measures to make improvement aiming to these shortcomings.
Thirdly, this dissertation revealed the mechanism of IT infusion on organizational performance, built on the concept model of the impact of IT infusion on organizational performance. This study investigated the effects of three levels of IT infusion on different constructs of organizational performance, expanded the research ideas of IT investment on organizational performance, and looked for the working point of the IT infusion on organizational performance, pointed out the direction for enterprise to improve organizational performance.
This dissertation suggested that the IT investment improved organizational performance through the effective IT infusion. This paper argued that the impact of IT infusion on organizational performance was not only reflected in financial performance, also reflected in the improvement of internal process performance, and improving staff quality and customer satisfaction within the organization related non-financial performance. Therefore, it selected the balanced score card to evaluate of organizational performance. According the infusion level model, it analyzed in-depth the influences of the strategic alignment, business process fit and employee acceptance on the financial performance, customer performance, internal processes and learning and growth performance of the role of performance of the balanced score card. This study expanded the research ideas of IT investment on organizational performance, looked for the working point of the IT infusion on organizational performance, and pointed out the direction for enterprise to improve organizational performance.
Fourthly, this study constructed an empirical model to verify the authenticity of the model and assumptions. First, based on existing research to build the measurement system of IT infusion, factors and organizational performance, and verified the model by research data. The results show that most of the proposed assumptions in the models are effectiveness, it find out the key factors of each level of IT infusion and pointed out that strategic alignment is the key to improving organizational performance.
Based on existing research to build the measurement system of IT infusion, factors and organizational performance, and verified the model by research data.The results showed that most of the proposed assumptions were valid; it proved the validity of the proposed model and underlying assumptions. Based on the results, it analyzed the factors’total effect of each level of IT infusion, found out the key factors of each level of IT infusion; also compared three levels of the total effect on organizational performance, found that from the total impact on organizational performance, the total effect of strategic alignment is greatest, followed by the business process fit and employee acceptance. This conclusion showed that if there was just IT infusion influence positively and significantly on organizational performance, IT can only enhance firm performance when it is accepted and fully utilized and integrated with organization. But the three levels of IT infusion had different effects on the four dimensions of organizational performance. Strategic alignment is the key for improving the organizational performance. Firms should promote IT infusion in order to improve organizational performance according to their own situation and conditions.
引文
[1] Alavi A, Leidner D. Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues [J]. MIS Quarterly,2001, 25(1):107-136.
[2] Argvris C, Sehon D A. Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective [M]. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. 1978.
[3] Armstrong C P, Sambamurthy V. Information Technology Assimilation in Firms: The Influence of Senior Leadership and IT Infrastructures [J]. Information Systems Research, 1999, 10(4):304-327.
[4] Arthur J B. Effects of human resource systems on manufacturing performance and turnover [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1994, 37(3): 670-687.
[5] Attewell P. Technology diffusion and organizational learning: the case of business computing [J]. Organization Science, 1992, 3(1):1-19
[6] Bakos J Y, Treacy M E. Information Technology and Corporate Strategy: A Research Perspective [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1986, 10(2):107-119.
[7] Banker R D, KaufFman R J, Morey R C. Measuring gains in operational efficiency from information technology: A study of the position deployment at Hardee's Inc [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 1990, 7(2): 29-54.
[8] Banker R D, Kauffman R J. Strategic Contributions of Information Technology: An Empirical Study of ATM Networks [C]. Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Information Systems, J. I. DeGross and M. H. Olson (eds.), Minneapolis, MN, 1988, 141-150.
[9] Barua A, Kriebel C H, Mukhopadhyay T. Information technologies and business value: An analysis and empirical investigation [J]. Information Systems Research, 1995, 6(1):3-23.
[10] Benbasat R I, Zmud R. The identity crisis within the IS discipline: defining and communicating the discipline s core properties [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2003, 27(2): 183-194.
[11] Benjamin R I, Levinson E. A Framework for Managing IT-Enabled Change [J]. Sloan Management Review, 1993, 34(4): 23-34.
[12] Benjamin R I, Rockart J F, Scott M, Wyman J. Information Technology: Strategic Opportunity [J]. Sloan Management Review, 1984, 25(3):3-9.
[13] Bergeron F, Raymond L, Rivard S. Ideal patterns of strategic alignment and business performance. Information and Management, 2004, 41(8): 1003–1020.
[14] Bharadwaj A S, Sambamurthy V, Zmud R W. IT Capabilities: Theoretical Perspectives and Empirical Operationalization [J]. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Information Systems, R. Hirschheim, M. Newman, and J. I. DeGross (eds.), Helsinki, Finland, 1998, 378-385.
[15] Bharadwaj A S. A Resource-Based Perspective on Information Technology Capability and Firm Performance: An Empirical Investigation [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2000, 24(1):169-196.
[16] Bhattacherjee A, Premkumar G. Understanding changes in belief and attitude toward information technology usage: a theoretical model and longitudinal test [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2004, 28(2): 229-254.
[17] Bhattacherjee A, Sanford C. Influence process for information technology acceptance: an elaboration likelihood model [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2006, 30(4): 805-825
[18] Bhattacherjee A. Understanding information systems continuance: an expectation-confirmation model [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2001, 25(3): 351-370.
[19] Black J A, Boal K B. Strategic Resources: Traits, Configurations and Paths to Sustainable Competitive Advantage [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1994, 15(Summer Special Issue):131-148.
[20] Boynton A C, Zmud R W, Jacobs G C. The influence of IT management practice on IT use in large organizations [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1994, 18(3): 299-319.
[21] Bresnahan T F, Brynjolfsson, Hitt L M. Information Technology, Workplace Organization, and the Demand for Skilled Labor: Firm-Level Evidence [J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2002, 117(1):339-376.
[22] Broadbent M, Weill P. Improving business and information strategy alignment: Learning from the banking industry [J]. IBM Systems Journal, 1993, 32(1):162-179.
[23] Bruc D, Vernon J R. Returns on Investments in Information Technology: A Research Synthesis [J]. Journal of Information Systems, 2002, 16(1):7-30.
[24] Brynjolfsson E, Hitt L. Paradox lost? Firm-level evidence on the returns to information systems spending [J]. Management Science, 1996, 42(4): 541-558.
[25] Brynjolfsson E. The Productivity Paradox of Information Technology: Review and Assessment [J]. Communications of the ACM, 1993, 36(12):66-77.
[26] Burn J M, Szeto C. A comparison of the business and II' management on success factors for strategic alignment [J].Information& Management, 2000, 37(4): 197-216
[27] Burrow F, Beradinelli P. Systematic performance provement-refining the space between learning and results [J]. Journal of Workplace Learning, 2003, 15(1):6-13.
[28] Butler B S. Membership Size, Communication Activity, Sustainability: A Resource-Based Model of Online Social Structures [J]. Information Systems Research, 2001, 12(4):346-362.
[29] Byrd T A. Technology, Core Competencies, and Sustained Competitive Advantage [J]. Information Resources Management Journal, 2001, 14(2): 41-52.
[30] Campbell J P. On the Natural of Organizational Effectiveness [M]. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1977.
[31] Carroll C, Larkin C. Executive Information Technology: A Strategic Necessity at Motorola Codex [J]. Information Systems Management, 1992, 9(3):21-29.
[32] Cash J I, Konsynski B. IS Redraws Competitive Boundaries [J]. Harvard BusinessReview, 1985, 63(2):134-142.
[33] Cash J I, McFarlan W F; McKenney J L, Applegate L M. Corporate information system management: Text and cases [M], Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1992
[34] Chan E Y, Huff S L, Barclay Donald W, et al. Business strategic orientation, information systems strategic orientation, and strategic alignment[J].Information systems Research, 1997, 8(2):125-150
[35] Chan E Y, Huff S L, Copeland D G. Assessing realized information systems strategy [J]. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 1998, 6(4): 273-298.
[36] Chan Y E. Why haven’t we mastered alignment: the importance of the informal organization structure [J]. MIS Quarterly Executive, 2002, 1(2):97-112.
[37] Chen J, Ching R. An empirical study of the relationship of IT intensity and organizational absorptive capacity on CRM performance [J]. Journal of Global Information Management [J] .2004, 12(1):1-17.
[38] Christianse E, Venkatraman N. Beyond Sabre: An Empirical Test of Expertise Exploitation in Electronic Channels [J]. MIS Quarterly,2002. 26(1):15-38.
[39] Churchill G A. A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1979, 16(3):64-73.
[40] Clemons E K, Reddi S P, Row M C. The impact of information technology on the organization of economic activity: The move to the middle hypothesis [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 1993, 10(2):9-20.
[41] Clemons E K, Row M C. Sustaining IT Advantage: The Role of Structural Differences [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1991, 15(3):275-292.
[42] Clemons E K. Information systems for sustainable competitive advantage [J]. Information and Management, 1986, 11(3): 131-136.
[43] Coakley J R, Fiegener M K, Leader B A, White D M. An approach to assess the degree of integration between an organization’s IS and business strategies[C]. Working paper, Oregon State University, 1992.
[44] Cohen W M, Levinthal D A. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1990, 35(1):128-152.
[45] Cooper R B, Zumd R W. Information technology implementation research: a technological diffusion approach [J]. Management Science, 1990, 36(2):123-139.
[46] Cragg P, King M, Hussin H. IT Alignment and Firm Performance in Small Manufacturing Firms[J].Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 2002, 11(2):109-132.
[47] Croteau A, Bergeron F. An information technology trilogy: Business strategy, technological deployment and organizational performance [J]. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 2000, 10(2):7-99.
[48] Croteau A, Solomon S, Raymond L, Bergeron F. Organizational and technological infrastructures alignment[C]. Proceedings of the Thirty-Fourth Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Maui, Hawaii, 2001:1-10.
[49] Cyert R M, March J G. A Behavioral Theory of the Firm [M]. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1963.
[50] Das S R, Zahra S A, Warkentin M E. Integration the content and process of strategic MIS planning with competitive strategy [J]. Decision Science, 1991, 22(1):953-984.
[51] Davenport T H, Eccles R C, Prusak L. Information politics [J]. Sloan Management Review, 1992, 34(1): 53-65.
[52] Davenport T H, Prusak L. Information Ecology: Mastering the Information and Knowledge Environment [J]. Oxford University Press: New York, 1997.
[53] Davidson W H. Beyond Re-engineering: the Three Phases of Business Transformation [J].IBM Systems journal, 1993, 32(1): 65-79.
[54] Davis F D, Bagozzi R P, Warshaw P R. User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two technology models [J]. Management Science, 1989, 35(8):982-1003.
[55] Davis F D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1989, 13(3):319-340.
[56] Day G. The capabilities of market-driven organizations [J]. Journal of Marketing, 1994, 58(4):37-52.
[57] Delaney J T, Huselid M A. The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Perceptions of Organizational Performance [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1996, 39(4): 949-969.
[58] Devaraj S, Kohli R. Information Technology Payoff in the Health-Care Industry: A Longitudinal Perspective [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 2000, 16(4):41-68.
[59] Dishaw M T, Strong D M. Extending the Technology Acceptance Model with Task- technology Fit Constructs [J]. Information & Management, 1999, 36(3): 9-21.
[60] Etzioni A. Modern Organizations [M].Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.,1964:88-96.
[61] Feeny D F, Willcocks L P. Redesigning the IS Around Core Capabilities [J]. Long Range Planning, 1998, 31(3):354-367.
[62] Fichman R G, Kemerer C F. The diffusion and assimilation of information technology innovations[R].Working Papers, Sloan School of Management, MIT, September 1999.
[63] Fichman R G, Kemerer C F. The illusory diffusion of innovations: An examination of assimilation gaps [J]. Information Systems Research, 1999, 10(3):255-275.
[64] Fichman R G. Going beyond the dominant paradigm for information technology innovation research: Emerging concepts and methods [J]. Journal of the association for information systems, 2004, 5(8):314-355
[65] Fichman R G. Information technology diffusion: A review of empirical research. In DeGross J I, Becker J D and Elam J J (Eds.) Proceedings of the 13th International on Information Systems, 1992:195-206.
[66] Fichman R G. Real Options and IT Platform Adoption: Implications for Theory andPractice [J]. Information Systems Research, 2004,15(2):132-154
[67] Fichman R G. The Assimilation of software process innovations: an organizational learning perspective [J]. Management Science, 1997, 43(10): 1345-1363.
[68] Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, Attitude, Intention, Behavior [M]. Reading, MA: Addision-Wesley, 1975.
[69] Floyd S W, Wooldridge B. Path Analysis of the Relationship between Competitive Strategy, Information Technology, and Financial Performance. Journal of Management Information Systems, 1990, 7(1):47-64.
[70] Ford J D, Schellenberg D A. Conceptual issues of linkage in Assessment of organizational performance [J]. Academy of Management Reviews, 1982, 7(1):49-58.
[71] Fornell C, Larcker D F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1981, 18(1): 39-50.
[72] Francalanci C, Galal H. Information Technology and Worker Composition: Determinants of Productivity in the Life Insurance Industry [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1998, 22(2):227-24.
[73] Gallivan M J. Organizational adoption and assimilation of complex technological innovations: Development and application of a new framework [J]. Database for Advances in Information Systems, 2001, 32(3):51-85.
[74] Galy E. The mediating role of organizational learning between absorptive capacity and performance in companies employing enterprise resource planning software [D]. University of Texas-Pan American, 2003.
[75] Glass G V. Primary, secondary and meta-analysis [J]. Educational Researcher, 1976, 5(10): 3-8.
[76] Goodhue D L, Thompson R L. Task-technology Fit and Individual Performance [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1995, 19(2):213-236.
[77] Greiner L. Evolution and revolution as organizations grow [J]. Harvard Business Review, 1972, 50(4):37-46.
[78] Haken H. Synergeties [M].Berlin: Springer, 1978.
[79] Hall G, Loucks S. A Developmental Model for Determining Whether the treatment is actually implemented [J], American Educational Research Journal , 1977, 14(3):263-276.
[80] Harrington S J, Guimaraes T. Corporate culture, absorptive capacity and IT success [J]. Information and Organization, 2005, 15(1):39-63.
[81] Hartwick J, Barki H. Explaining the Role of User Participation in Information System Use [J]. Management Science, 1994, 40(4): 440-465.
[82] Henderson J C, Sifonis J G. The value of strategic IS planning: Understanding consistency, validity, and IS markets [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1988, 12(2): 187-200.
[83] Henderson J C, Venkatraman N. Strategic alignment: a model for organizational transformation through information technology management. In transformingorganizations [M]. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.97-117.
[84] Henderson J C, Venkatraman N. Strategic alignment: leveraging information technology for transforming organizations [J]. IBM Systems Journal, 1993, 32(1):4-16.
[85] Henderson R D, Deane F P. User Expectations and Perceptions of a Patient Management Information System [J]. Computers in Nursing, 1996, 14(3): 188-193.
[86] Hidding G. Sustaining Strategic IT Advantage in the Information Age: How Strategy Paradigms Differ by Speed [J]. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 2001 10: 201-222.
[87] Hong S J, Thong J Y L, Tam K Y. Understanding continued information technology usage behavior: a comparison of three models in the context of mobile internet [J]. Decision Support Systems, 2006, 42(3):1819-1834.
[88] Horovitz J. New Perspectives on Strategic Management. Journal of Business Strategy, Winter 1984, PP 19-33.
[89] Hsu M H, Chiu C M, Ju T L. Determinants of continued use of the WWW: an integration of two theoretical models [J]. Industrial Management& Data Systems, 2004, 104 (9): 766-775.
[90] Hsu M H, Yen C H, Chiu C M, Chang C M. A longitudinal investigation of continued online shopping behavior: an extension of the theory of planned behavior [J]. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 2006, 64(9):889-904.
[91] Huselid M A. The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1995, 38(3): 635-672.
[92] Igbaria M, Chakrabarti A. Computer anxiety and attitudes towards microcomputer use [J]. Behavior and Information Technology, 1990,9(3):229-241.
[93] Igbaria M, Parasuraman S, Baroudi J. A motivational model of microcomputer usage [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 1996.13(1):3-8.
[94] Iivari J. An empirical test of the DeLone-McLean model of information system success [J]. ACM SIGMIS Database, 2005, 36(2): 8-27.
[95] Jarvenpaa S L, Ives B. Executive Involvement and Participation in Progressive Use of IT [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1991, 15(1): 33-49.
[96] Jarvenpaa S L, Leidner D E. An Information Company in Mexico: Extending the Resource-Based View of the Firm to a Developing Country Context [J]. Information Systems Research, 1998, 9(4): 342-361.
[97] Jarvenpaa S L, Ives B. Executive Involvement and Participation in the Management of Information Technology [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1991, 15(2): 205-227.
[98] Jones O, Craven M. Expanding capabilities in a mature manufacturing firm: Absorptive capacity and the TCS [J]. International Small Business Journal, 2001, 19(3):39-55.
[99] Jordan E, Tricker B. Information Strategic: Alignment with Organization Structure [J]. Journal of Strategic Information System, 1995, 4(4):357-382.
[100] Joyce W F. MegaChange: How Today’s Leading Companies Have Transformed Their Workforce, Free Press, New York. NY. 1999.
[101] Kaplan R S, Norton D P. Putting the Balanced Scorecard to Work [J]. Harvard Business Review, 1993, 71(5):134-149.
[102] Kaplan R S, Norton D P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance [J]. Harvard Business Review, 1992, 70(1): 71–91.
[103] Kaplan R S, Norton D P. Transforming the Balanced Scorecard from performance measurement to strategic management: Part I [J]. American Accounting Association, Accounting Horizons, 2001, 15(1): 87-104.
[104] Karahanna E. Information technology adoption across time: a cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1999, 23 (2).
[105] Karahanna E. Symbolic adoption of information technology [C]. Proceedings from the International Decision Sciences Institute Conference, Athens, Greece.1999.
[106] Kearns G S, Lederer A. A resource-based view of strategic IT alignment: How knowledge sharing creates competitive advantage [J]. Decision Sciences, 2003, 34(1):1-29.
[107] Keen P. Information technology and the management difference: A fusion map [J]. IBM Systems Journal, 1993, 32:17-39.
[108] Kettinger W J, Grover V, Segars A H. Do Strategic Systems Really Pay off? [J].Information Systems Management, 1995, 12(1): 35-43.
[109] Kettinger W J, Grover V, Guha S, et al. Strategic Information Systems Revisited: A Study in Sustainability and Performance [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1994, 18(1):31-58.
[110] Kim H W, Chan H C, Chan Y P. Balanced thinking-feelings model of information systems continuance [J]. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 2007, 65(6): 511-525.
[111] Kim S S, Malhotra N K. A longitudinal model of continued IS use: An integrative view of four mechanisms underlying postadoption phenomena [J]. Management Science, 2005, 51(5): 741-755.
[112] King W R, Teo T S H. Integration between business planning and information systems planning: Validating a stage hypothesis [J]. Decision Sciences, 1997, 28(2):279-308.
[113] Kling R, Iacono S. The Control of Information Systems Developments After Implementation [J]. Communication of the ACM, 1984, 27(12): 1218-1226.
[114] Ko D, Kirsch L J, King W R. Antecedents of knowledge transfer from consultants to clients in enterprise system implementations [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2005, 29(1):59-85.
[115] Konana P, Balasubramanian S. The social-economic-psychological model of technology adoption and usage: an application to online investing [J]. Decision Support Systems, 2005, 39 (3): 505-524.
[116] Kotter J P. Leading Change [M]. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press. 1996.
[117] Kwon T H, Zumd R W. Unifying the fragmented models of information systems implementation [M]. In: Boland R J and Hirscheim R A (eds). Critical Issues inInformation Systems Research. New York: John Wiley, 1987:227-252.
[118] Kwon T H. A Study of the Influence of Communication Networks on MIS Institutionalization [D]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States -- North Carolina.
[119] Lederer A L, Mendelow A L. Information Resource Planning: Overcoming Difficulties in Identifying Top Management's Objectives [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1987, 11(3):389-399.
[120] Leonard B D, Deschamps I. Managerial influence in the implementation of new technology [J]. Management Science, 1988, 34(10):1252-1265.
[121] Lewin K. Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers [M].New York: Hapers, 1951
[122] Li M, Ye L R. Information Technology and Firm Performance: Linking with Environmental, Strategic and Managerial Contexts [J]. Information & Management,1999, 35(1):3-51.
[123] Limayem M, Hirt S G, Cheung C M K. How habit limits the predictive power of intention: The case of information systems continuance [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2007, 31(4): 705-737.
[124] Lin C S, Wu S, Tsai R J. Integrating perceived playfulness into expectation–confirmation model for web portal context [J]. Information & Management, 2005, 42(5):683-693.
[125] Lopes A B, Galletta D. Resource-Based Theory and a Structural Perspective of Strategy Applied to the Provision of Internet Services [C]. Proceedings of the Third Americas Conference on Information Systems, Indianapolis, IN, 1997.
[126] Luftman J N, Brier T. Achieving and Sustaining Business-IT Alignment [J].California Management Review, 1999, 42(1):109-122.
[127] Luftman J N, Kempaiah R, Nash E. Key issues for IT executives [J]. MIS Quarterly Executive, 2006, 5(2):27-45.
[128] Luftman J N, Lewis P R, Oldach S H. Transforming the Enterprise: the Alignment of Business and Information Technology Strategies [J]. IBM Systems Journal, 1993, 32(1):198-221.
[129] Luftman J N, Oldach S H. Introduction. In competing in the information age: Strategic alignment in practice [M]. Oxford University Press, New York, 1996, 3-18.
[130] Luftman J N. Assessing IT/business alignment [J]. Information Systems Management, 2003, 20(4):9-15.
[131] Luftman J N. Managing in the Information Age: Practical Applications of the Strategic Alignment Model [M]. NewYork: Oxford University Press, 1996.
[132] Luftman J, Papp R, Brier T. Enablers and inhibitors of business-IT alignment[J]. Communications of the AIS, 1999, 1(3):1-32.
[133] Luftman J. http://infonnation week.com/700/luftman.htm [EB/OL]. Enablers and Inhibitors. Information Week,1998.
[134] Lwaernce P R.How to Deal with Resistance to Change[J].Harvard Business Review,1954,32(3):49-57.
[135] Madu C N, Kuei C H, Jaccob R A. An Empirical Assessment of the Influence of Quality Dimension on Organizational Performance [J]. Internal Journal of Production Research, 1996, 34(7): 1943-1962.
[136] Mahmood M A, Mann G J. Information investments and organizational productivity and performance: An empirical investigation [J]. Journal of Organizational Computing Electronic Commerce, 2005, 15(3):185-202.
[137] Makadok R. Toward a Synthesis of the Resource-Based and Dynamic-Capability Views of Rent Creation [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2001, 22(5):387-401.
[138] Marion J B, Wilkins A S, Stawski S K. The Component Alignment Model: A New Approach to Health Care Information Technology Strategic Planning [J].Topics in Health Information Management, 1998,19(1):1-10.
[139] Markus M L, Tanis C. The Enterprise System Experience—From Adoption to Success[M],in: R.W. Zmud (Ed.), Framing the Domains of IT Research: Glimpsing the Future Through the Past, Pinnaflex Educational Resources Inc., Cincinnati, OH, 2000, 173-207.
[140] Mata F J,Fuerst W L, Barney J B. Information Technology and Sustained Competitive advantage: A Resource-based Analysis [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1995, 19(4):487-505.
[141] McFarlan F W. Information Technology Changes the Way You Compete [J]. Harvard Business Review, 1984, 62(3):98-105.
[142] Melville N, Kraemer K, Gurbaxani V. Information Technology and Organizational Performance: An Integrative Model of IT Business Value [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2004, 28(2):283-322.
[143] Meyer A D, James B G. Organizational Assimilation of Innovations: A Multilevel Contextual Analysis [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1988, 31(4):897-923.
[144] Miles R H, Snow C C. Organizational strategy, structure and process [M]. NewYork: McGraw-Hill.
[145] Milgrom P, Roberts J. The economics of modern manufacturing: Technology, Strategy, and organization [J]. American Economic Review, 1990, 80(3):511-528.
[146] Miller S M. The strategic management of technological R&D-an ideal process for the 1990's [J]. International Journal of Technology Management, 1990, 5(2):63-153.
[147] Moore G C, Benbasat I. Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation [J]. Information Systems Research, 1991, 2(3):192-221.
[148] Nelson K M, Cooprider J G. The Contribution of Shared Knowledge to IS Group Performance [J].MIS Quarterly, 1996, 20(4):409-432.
[149] Nkomo S M. Human resource planning and organization performance: An exploratory analysis [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1987, 8(4):387-392.
[150] Nolan R L. Managing the crises in the data processing [J]. Harvard Business Review, 1979, 57(2):115-126.
[151] Orlikowski W J, Iacono C S. Desperately seeking the“IT”in IT research-call to theorizing the IT artifact [J]. Information Systems Research, 2001, 12(2): 121-134.
[152] Palmer J W, Markus M L. The performance impacts of quick response and strategic alignment in specialty retailing [J]. Information Systems Research, 2000, 11(3), 241-259.
[153] Periera R E. Resource View Theory Analysis of SAP as a Source of Competitive Advantage for Firms [J]. The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems, 1999, 30 (1): 38-46.
[154] Porter M E, Millar V E. How Information Gives You Competitive Advantage [J]. Harvard Business Review, 1985, 65(4):149-160.
[155] Powell T C, Dent M A. Information Technology as Competitive Advantage: "The Role of Human, Business, and Technology Resources [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1997, 18(5):375-405.
[156] Premkumar G, Bhattacherjee A. Explaining information technology usage: a test of competing models [J]. Omega the International Journal of Management Science, 2007, 36(1): 64-75.
[157] Premkumar G, Ramamurthy K, Nilakanta S. Implementation of electronic data interchange: An innovation diffusion perspective [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 1994, 11(2):157-186
[158] Prescott M B, Conger S A. Information Technology Innovations: A Classification by IT Locus of Impact and Research Approach [J]. Data Base, 1995, 26(2):20-40.
[159] Raghunathan B, Raghunathan T S, Tu Q. Dimensionality of the strategic grid framework: The construct and its measurement [J].Information Systems Research, 1999, 10(4):343-355.
[160] Ravichandran T, Lertwongsatien C. Impact of Information Systems Resources and Capabilities on Firm Performance: A Resource-Based Perspective[C]. Proceedings of 23 rd International Conference on Information Systems. Barcelona, 2002:577-582.
[161] Rawstorne P, Jayasuriya R, Caputi P. An integrative model of information systems use in mandatory environments [C]. Proceeding of the Twentieth International Conference on Information System, 1999, 325-330.
[162] Ray G, Muhanna W A, Barney J B. Information Technology and Competitive Advantage: A Process-Oriented Assessment. Working Paper, University of Texas at Austin, 2001.
[163] Ray G, Muhanna W A, Barney J B. Information Technology and the Performance of the Customer Service Process: A Resource-Based Analysis [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2005, 29(4):625-652.
[164] Reich B H, Benbasat I. Factors That Influence the Social Dimension of Alignment between Business and Information Technology Objectives. MIS Quarterly. 2000,24(1):81-113.
[165] Reich B H, Benbasat I. Measuring the Linkage between Business and Information Technology Objectives. MIS Quarterly,1996, 20(1):55-81.
[166] Roberts E B. Benchmarking the Strategic Management of Technology [J]. Research Technology Management, 1995, 38(1):44-56.
[167] Robey D, Ross J W, Boudreau M C. Learning to implement enterprise systems: an exploratory study of the dialectics of change [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems,2002,19(l):17-46.
[168] Roca J C, Chiu C M, Martinez F J. Understanding e-learning continuance intention: an extension of the technology acceptance model [J]. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 2006, 64(8): 683-696.
[169] Rochart J F, Bullen C V, Ball L. Future role of the information systems executives [J].MIS Quarterly, 1982,6(Special Issue): 1-14.
[170] Rogers D S, Daugherty P J, Stank T P. Enhancing Service Responsiveness: The Strategic Potential of EDI [J].International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 1992, 22(8):15-20.
[171] Rogers E M, Albritton M M. Interactive Communication Technologies in Business Organizations [J]. Journal of Business Communications, 1995, 32(2): 177-195.
[172] Rogers E M. Diffusion of innovations (3rd) [M]. New York: The Free Press, 1983
[173] Ross J W, Beath C M, Goodhue D L. Develop Long-term Competitiveness through IT Assets [J].S1oan Management Review, 1996, 38(1):31-45.
[174] Ruekert R W, Walker O C, Roering K J. The organization of marketing Activities: a contingency theory of structure and performance [J]. Journal of Marketing, 1985, 49(1):13-25.
[175] Sabherwal R, Chan Y E. Alignment between business and IS strategies: A study of prospectors, analyzers and defenders [J]. Information Systems Research, 2001, 12(1):11-33.
[176] Sabherwal R. The relationship between information system planning sophistication and information system success: An empirical assessment [J]. Decision Science, 1999, 30(1): 137-167
[177] Saga V, Zmud R W. The nature and determinants of IT acceptance, routinization and infusion [C]. Proceedings of the International Federation of Information Processing Working Group, 1994: 67-86.
[178] Sager M. Competitive Information Systems in Australian Retail Banking [J]. Information and Management, 1988, 15(1): 59-67.
[179] Santhanam R, Hartono E. Issues in linking information technology capability to firm performance [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2003, 27(1): 125-165
[180] Saunders C S, Jones J W. Measuring Performance of the Information Systems Function [J].Journal of Management Information Systems,1992,8(4): 63-82.
[181] Scupola A. Adoption of E-commerce in small and medium size enterprises in Australia [C]. Proceedings of the l0th America Conference on Information Systems, 2004:343-352
[182] Seashore S E, Ephraim Y. Factorial Analysis of Organizational Performance [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1967, 12(3):377-395.
[183] Segars A H, Grover V. Strategic information systems planning success: An investigation of the construct and its measurement [J].MIS Quarterly, 1998, (6): 140-163.
[184] Senge P M. The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization [M]. Doubleday/Currency, New York, 1990.
[185] Service R W, Maddux H S. Building Competitive Advantage through Information Systems: The Organizational Information Quotient [J]. Journal of Information Science, 1999, 25(1):51-65.
[186] Sircar S, Turnbow J L, Borodoli B. A Framework for Assessing the Relationship between Information Technology Investment and Firm Performance [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 2000, 16(4):42-69.
[187] Slevin D, Pinto J. Balancing stragegy and tactics in project implementation [J]. Sloan Management Review, 1987, 29(1):33-44.
[188] Soh C, Markus M. How IT Creates Business Valve: A Process Theory Synthesis [C]. Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Information Systems,1995.12
[189] Steers R M. Antecedents and Outcomes of Organizational Commitment [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1977, 3(1):46-56.
[190] Steers R M. Problem in the Measurement of Organizational Effectiveness [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1975, 20(4): 546-558.
[191] Strauss A L, Cothin J. Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques [M].California: Sage Publications, 1990
[192] Subramani M R, Henderson J C, Cooprider J. Linking IS-User Partnerships to IS Performance: A Socio-Cognitive Perspective [R]. MISRC Working Paper WP99-01, University of Minnesota, 1999.
[193] Szulanski G. Exploring internal stickiness: Implements to the transfer of best practice within the firm [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1996, 17(11):27-43.
[194] Tallon P P, Kraemer K L, Gurbaxani V. Executives' perceptions of the business value of information technology: a process-oriented approach [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 2000, 16(4): 145-173.
[195] Tallon P P. A process oriented assessment of the alignment of information systems and business strategy: implications for 1T business value, Dissertation proposal [M].Center for research on information technology and organizations, graduate school of management, university of California, Irvine, CA 92697- 4650.
[196] Taylor S, Todd P A. Understanding information technology usage: a test of competingmodels [J]. Information Systems Research, 1995, 6(2): 144-176.
[197] Teece D J. Firm Boundaries, Technological Innovation and Strategic Planning [J]. The Economics of Strategic Planning, G. L. Thomas (ed.), D. C. Heath, Lexington, MA, 1986:187-199.
[198] Teo T S H, Ang J S K. Critical Success Factors in the Alignment of IS Plans with Business Plans [J]. International Journal of Information Management, 1999, 19(2):173-185.
[199] Teo T S H, King W R. Assessing the impact of integrating business planning and IS planning [J].Information & Management, 1996, 30(6): 309 -321
[200] Teo T S H, King W R. Integration between business planning and information systems planning: An evolutionary contingency perspective [J].Journal of Management Systems, 1997, 14(1):185-214
[201] Thong J Y L, Hong S, Tam K Y. The effects of post-adoption beliefs on the expectation-confirmation model for information technology continuance [J]. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 2006, 64(9): 799-810.
[202] Thong J Y L. An integrated model of information systems adoption in small business [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 1999,15(4): 187-214
[203] Tornatzky L G, Fleischer M. The processes of technological innovation [M]. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1990.
[204] Tsang E W. Organizational learning and the learning organization: A dichotomy between descriptive and prescriptive research [J]. Human Relations, 1997, 50(1): 73-90.
[205] Tu Q, Vonderembse M A, Ragu-Nathan T S, et al. Absorptive capacity: Enhancing the assimilation of time-based manufacturing practices [J]. Journal of Operations Management, 2006, 24(5): 692-710.
[206] Tu Q. Achieving mass customi8zation through technology application and absorptive capacity: A customer-oriented framework [D]. University of Toledo, 1999.
[207] Van den Bosch F A J, Volberda H W, De Boer M. Coevolution of firm absorptive capacity and knowledge environment: Organizational forms and combinative capabilities [J]. Organization Science, 1999, 10(5): 551-568.
[208] Vargas A, Hernández M J, Bruque S. Determinants of information technology competitive value: Evidence from awestern European industry [J]. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 2003, 14(2): 245-268.
[209] Venkatraman N, Ramanujam V. Measurement of Business Performance in Strategy Research: A Comparison of Approaches [J]. Academy of Management Review, 1986, 11(4):801-814.
[210] Venkatraman N, Zaheer A. Electronic Integration and Strategic Advantage: Quasi-Experimental Study in the Insurance Industry [J]. Information Systems Research, 1990, 1(4): 377-393.
[211] Venkatraman N. the concept of fit in strategy research [J]. Academic ManagementReview, 1989, 14(3):423-444.
[212] Wade M, Gravill J. Diversification and Performance of Japanese IT Subsidiaries: A Resource-Based View [J]. Information and Management, 2003, 40(4):305-316.
[213] Walton R. Up and Running: Integrating Information Technology and the Organization [M]. Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, MA. 1989.
[214] Wang W, Hsieh J P. Beyond Routine: Symbolic Adoption, Extended Use and Emergent Use of Complex Information Systems in the Mandatory Organizational Context [C].Twenty-Seventh International Conference on Information Systems, Milwaukee, 2006:733-749.
[215] Ward J, Griffiths P. Strategic Planning for Information Systems [M]. 2nd ed. NewYork: John Wiley Sons, 1996.
[216] Warner T N. Information Technology as a Competitive Burden [J]. Sloan Management Review,1987, 29(1):55-61.
[217] Winston T L, Benjamin B. M. S. The business value of information technology and inputs substitution: The productivity paradox revisited [J]. Decision Support Systems. 2005,(12): 1-15.
[218] Wixom B H, Watson H J. An empirical investigation of the factors affecting data warehousing success [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2001, 25(1): 17-41.
[219] Wooldridge W, Floyd S W. Strategic process effects on consensus [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1989, 10(3):295-302.
[220] Yang H, Yoo Y. It s all about attitude: revisiting the technology acceptance model [J]. Decision Support Systems, 2004, 38(1): 19-31.
[221] Yuchtman E, Seashore S E. A system resource approach to organizational effectiveness [J]. Amer. Soc. Rev. 1967, 32(6): 891-903.
[222] Zaheer A, Zaheer S. Catching the Wave: Alertness, Responsiveness, and Market Influence in Global Electronic Networks [J]. Management Science, 1997, 43(11):1493-1509.
[223] Zahra S A, Covin J G. Business strategy, technology policy and firm performance [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1993, 14(6): 451-478.
[224] Zaltman G, Duncan R, Holbek J. Innovations and Organizations [M]. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1973.
[225] L.克拉克.改革[M] .北京:中信出版社,1999.
[226] IBM中国商业价值研究院.IBM中国商业价值报告:战略与管理[M].北京:东方出版社,2007(4).
[227]毕新华,齐晓云,余翠玲,于宝君.我国企业IT投资成长模式及中美比较研究.图书情报工作. 2010, 54(22):75-79.
[228]毕新华,齐晓云,段伟花.基于ECM模型的IT持续使用整合分析.图书情报工作. 2011,55(6):40-44.
[229]毕新华,于宝君,齐晓云.中国企业信息系统宏观成长过程及阶段分析.情报科学.2008.26(2):161-166.
[230]陈冬.信息技术创新的组织实施问题研究[D].天津:天津大学管理学院,2004.
[231]陈国权,马萌.组织学习的过程模型研究[J].管理科学学报,2000,3(3):15-23.
[232]陈蔚珠,陈禹.业务-IT战略匹配成熟度模型的框架与内容[J].商业研究,2006,(22):37-40.
[233]陈蔚珠.业务-IT战略匹配——ZARA案例分析[J].经济经纬,2009,(5):31-34.
[234]陈文波.基于知识视角的组织复杂信息技术吸收研究[D].上海:复旦大学管理学院,2006.
[235]陈莹.业务流程再造接受理论研究[D].上海:复旦大学管理学院,2005.
[236]迟嘉昱,孙翎.IT能力对企业绩效影响机制的实证研究[J].情报杂志,2010,29(4):58-61,45.
[237]杜维.人力资源、IT能力与组织绩效——知识管理战略的影响因素及实施后果研究[D].重庆:重庆大学经济与工商管理学院,2009.
[238]段桂敏.ERP条件下组织变革与组织绩效研究[D].成都:四川大学工商管理学院,2005.
[239]冯林.我国企业信息化投资绩效评价研究[D].武汉:武汉理工大学管理学院,2005.
[240]哈尔滨工业大学学校办公室.组织学习简介[EB/OL]. http://office.hit.edu.cn/News/Show.asp?id=645, 2006-6-26.
[241]韩维贺.知识管理过程、IT平台与企业绩效关系研究[D].大连:大连理工大学管理学院,2006.
[242]胡安安,黄丽华.基于文化视角的中国企业员工ERP系统接受模型[J].科技进步与对策,2009,26(3):92-96.
[243]胡毅.ERP环境下基于平衡计分卡的企业绩效评价系统的研究[D].武汉:武汉理工大学管理学院,2006.
[244]蒋春燕,赵曙明.人力资源管理实践与组织绩效的相关分析[J].经济管理·新管理,2005,4:72-79.
[245]邝孔武.“管理信息系统分析与设计”,西安电子科技大学出版社,1999.
[246]李丹.企业信息技术与管理融合的度量与模型分析[D].济南:山东大学管理学院,2007.3.
[247]李国鑫,王雅林.基于技术与组织适应性的信息技术绩效模型探讨[J].自然辩证法研究,2004,20(6):65-68.
[248]李浩,韩维贺.知识管理、信息技术与多元化绩效[J].预测,2007,26(3):26-32.
[249]李怀祖.管理研究方法[M].西安:西安交通大学出版社,2004.
[250]李怡文.组织在采纳信息技术前后的行为影响因素比较研究[D].上海:同济大学经济管理学院,2006.
[251]李永红.IT投资与企业绩效关系研究的国外文献综述[J],情报杂志, 2006,(8)26-30.
[252]李治堂,吴贵生.信息技术投资与公司绩效:基于中国上市公司的实证研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理, 2008,(11):144-150.
[253]李治堂.基于互补性理论的信息技术投资绩效研究[J].科研管理,2009,30(1):8-14,27.
[254]李治堂.上市公司信息化与企业绩效关系分析[[J].商业时代,2005(.2): 79-80.
[255]李治堂.信息技术投资“生产率悖论”研究及其最新进展[J].外国经济与管理,2004,26(9):2-7.
[256]李子袆.信息技术投资与企业战略一致性问题研究[D].天津:天津商业大学,2008.5.
[257]卢美月.企业文化、企业培训与组织绩效关系研究——以两岸企业为背景[D].上海:复旦大学管理学院,2009.
[258]卢纹岱.SPSS for Windows统计分析[M].北京:电子工业出版社,2002.
[259]吕亮.业务与信息技术融合及其对竞争优势的作用[D].济南:山东大学管理学院.2008.3
[260]马建,黄丽华,企业过程重组——概念、方法和技术[M].香港:三联出版社1998.
[261]马庆国,李艾.电子商务与企业信息化:组织学习效应实证研究[J].管理工程学报,2004,18(2):11-16.
[262]马庆国.管理统计[M].北京:科学出版社,2002:242
[263]马庆国.管理统计——数据获取、统计原理、SPSS工具与应用研究[M].北京:科学出版社,2007
[264]马勇.市场导向、营销创新与组织绩效关系研究:市场驱动还是驱动市场[D].上海:复旦大学管理学院,2008.
[265]闵庆飞.中国企业ERP系统实施关键成功因素的实证研究[D].大连:大连理工大学管理学院,2005.
[266]彭义兵,马辉民,张子刚.IT投资与业务流程及企业绩效关系实证研究[J].工业工程与管理,2008,(3): 95-103.
[267]彭义兵.IT投资与业务流程及企业绩效关系实证研究[J].工业工程与管理,2008, (03):95-103.
[268]齐晓云,毕新华,苏婉,王磊.吉林省中小企业信息化现状调查与对策研究.情报杂志. 2010,29(7):183-188.
[269]齐晓云,毕新华,于宝君,李川.信息系统成功影响因素的阶段差异研究.软科学. 2011,25(2):36-39,56.
[270]齐晓云,毕新华,余翠玲,苏婉.东北地区企业信息系统成长的规模差异分析.情报杂志. 2009, 28(8): 40-44.
[271]秦敏.信息系统采纳后行为研究述评[J].情报理论与实践,2009,32(11):125-128.
[272]石代伦,潘九朱.发挥IT的商业价值—一个业务与技术融合的观点[J].软科学,2006(5):9-15.
[273]孙晓琳,王刊良.信息技术对组织绩效影响研究的新视角[J].中国软科学,2009,3:76-83.
[274]孙晓琳,邢一亭,王刊良.信息技术投资与组织绩效关系的实证研究[J].科学学研究,2010,28(3):397-404.
[275]田野.企业资源计划(ERP)同化影响因素及其作用机制研究[D].杭州:浙江大学管理学院,2008.
[276]汪淼军,张维迎,周黎安.企业信息化投资的绩效及其影响因素:基于浙江企业的经验证据[J].中国社会科学,2007,(6):81-93,206.
[277]王大刚,席酉民.和谐一致性与组织绩效[J].管理科学学报,2008,11(4):1-12.
[278]王大刚,席酉民.战略一致性在中国公司绩效下的实证检验[J].系统工程理论与实践,2007,(7):52-63.
[279]王东清,罗新星.基于企业能力理论的IT投资绩效贡献研究[J].科研管理,2010,31(2):137-146,153.
[280]王慧明.ERP环境下企业信息平台与管理平台融合度测度研究[D].天津:天津大学,2004.
[281]王利政.企业持续营销能力及其与企业绩效关系的研究[D].长春:吉林大学管理学院,2007
[282]王念新,仲伟俊,梅姝娥.信息技术、核心能力和企业绩效的实证研究[J].管理科学,2010,23(1):52-64.
[283]王谦.ERP工程中信息平台与管理平台融合理论及能力评测研究[D].天津:天津大学,2004.
[284]王馨.文化、人格心理因素、高绩效人力资源管理实务与组织绩效[D].台南“:国立”成功大学,2003.
[285]王雅杰,郜中华,孙德鹏.一种研究经济学问题的新统计方法-Meta分析[A].第三届(2008)中国管理学年会论文集[C], 2008.
[286]吴海梅.影响业务流程变革彻底性的IT因素研究[D].杭州:浙江大学管理学院,2006.
[287]吴明隆.SPSS统计应用实务:问卷分析与应用统计[M].北京:科学出版社.2003
[288]吴明隆.结构方程模型——AMOS的操作与应用[J].重庆:重庆大学出版社,2009.
[289]吴增源,黄祖庆,伍蓓.信息技术能力对企业绩效影响机制的实证研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理, 2009,(8):151-156.
[290]谢康,张海波,黄林军.信息技术影响企业绩效的机制研究[J].价值工程,2005.3:62-66.
[291]信息化管理编室.不容忽视的IT价值评估[J].中国计算机用户,2002. (32):19.
[292]信息化管理编室.如何评价企业IT投资的效果和价值[J].中国计算机报,2002. 09
[293]许正良.管理研究方法[M].长春:吉林大学出版社,2004
[294]薛华成.管理信息系统[M].第3版.北京:清华大学出版社,1999.
[295]杨青,陈忠民,黄丽华.基于能力的公司规划与信息系统规划战略关系实证研究[J].管理工程学报,2007,21(3):141-145.
[296]余翠玲.信息技术吸纳能力理论模型与实证研究[D].长春:吉林大学管理学院,2010.
[297]张聪慧,郭伟,马可.信息技术投资对企业绩效的影响[J].工业工程,2008,11(6):107-112.
[298]张篙,黄立平.信息技术如何创造持续竞争优势——一种基于资源的观点[J].管理工程学报,2003, 17(3): 108-110.
[299]张鹤达,毕新华,马克强. IT能力对企业绩效影响的实证研究[J].情报科学,2008,26(10):1580-1583.
[300]张鹤达,毕新华.中国制造业企业IT能力与绩效关系的实证研究[J].科学学研究,2008.11:135-138.
[301]张鹤达.基于资源观的IT能力对企业绩效影响机制研究[D].长春:吉林大学管理学院,2008.
[302]张青,黄丽华.IT投资价值评价研究综述[J].外国经济与管理,2003, 25(6):35-40.
[303]赵海峰,万迪昉,王朝波.信息技术应用水平对企业绩效影响的实证研究[J].研究与发展管理,2002,14(4):20-23.
[304]中国社会科学院语言研究所词典编辑室.现代汉语辞典.2002增补版.北京:商务印书馆,2002:1072。
[305]钟红慧.安利公司人力资源管理系统实施中的变革管理分析[D].广州:暨南大学管理学院,2007.
[2] Argvris C, Sehon D A. Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective [M]. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. 1978.
[3] Armstrong C P, Sambamurthy V. Information Technology Assimilation in Firms: The Influence of Senior Leadership and IT Infrastructures [J]. Information Systems Research, 1999, 10(4):304-327.
[4] Arthur J B. Effects of human resource systems on manufacturing performance and turnover [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1994, 37(3): 670-687.
[5] Attewell P. Technology diffusion and organizational learning: the case of business computing [J]. Organization Science, 1992, 3(1):1-19
[6] Bakos J Y, Treacy M E. Information Technology and Corporate Strategy: A Research Perspective [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1986, 10(2):107-119.
[7] Banker R D, KaufFman R J, Morey R C. Measuring gains in operational efficiency from information technology: A study of the position deployment at Hardee's Inc [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 1990, 7(2): 29-54.
[8] Banker R D, Kauffman R J. Strategic Contributions of Information Technology: An Empirical Study of ATM Networks [C]. Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Information Systems, J. I. DeGross and M. H. Olson (eds.), Minneapolis, MN, 1988, 141-150.
[9] Barua A, Kriebel C H, Mukhopadhyay T. Information technologies and business value: An analysis and empirical investigation [J]. Information Systems Research, 1995, 6(1):3-23.
[10] Benbasat R I, Zmud R. The identity crisis within the IS discipline: defining and communicating the discipline s core properties [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2003, 27(2): 183-194.
[11] Benjamin R I, Levinson E. A Framework for Managing IT-Enabled Change [J]. Sloan Management Review, 1993, 34(4): 23-34.
[12] Benjamin R I, Rockart J F, Scott M, Wyman J. Information Technology: Strategic Opportunity [J]. Sloan Management Review, 1984, 25(3):3-9.
[13] Bergeron F, Raymond L, Rivard S. Ideal patterns of strategic alignment and business performance. Information and Management, 2004, 41(8): 1003–1020.
[14] Bharadwaj A S, Sambamurthy V, Zmud R W. IT Capabilities: Theoretical Perspectives and Empirical Operationalization [J]. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Information Systems, R. Hirschheim, M. Newman, and J. I. DeGross (eds.), Helsinki, Finland, 1998, 378-385.
[15] Bharadwaj A S. A Resource-Based Perspective on Information Technology Capability and Firm Performance: An Empirical Investigation [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2000, 24(1):169-196.
[16] Bhattacherjee A, Premkumar G. Understanding changes in belief and attitude toward information technology usage: a theoretical model and longitudinal test [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2004, 28(2): 229-254.
[17] Bhattacherjee A, Sanford C. Influence process for information technology acceptance: an elaboration likelihood model [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2006, 30(4): 805-825
[18] Bhattacherjee A. Understanding information systems continuance: an expectation-confirmation model [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2001, 25(3): 351-370.
[19] Black J A, Boal K B. Strategic Resources: Traits, Configurations and Paths to Sustainable Competitive Advantage [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1994, 15(Summer Special Issue):131-148.
[20] Boynton A C, Zmud R W, Jacobs G C. The influence of IT management practice on IT use in large organizations [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1994, 18(3): 299-319.
[21] Bresnahan T F, Brynjolfsson, Hitt L M. Information Technology, Workplace Organization, and the Demand for Skilled Labor: Firm-Level Evidence [J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2002, 117(1):339-376.
[22] Broadbent M, Weill P. Improving business and information strategy alignment: Learning from the banking industry [J]. IBM Systems Journal, 1993, 32(1):162-179.
[23] Bruc D, Vernon J R. Returns on Investments in Information Technology: A Research Synthesis [J]. Journal of Information Systems, 2002, 16(1):7-30.
[24] Brynjolfsson E, Hitt L. Paradox lost? Firm-level evidence on the returns to information systems spending [J]. Management Science, 1996, 42(4): 541-558.
[25] Brynjolfsson E. The Productivity Paradox of Information Technology: Review and Assessment [J]. Communications of the ACM, 1993, 36(12):66-77.
[26] Burn J M, Szeto C. A comparison of the business and II' management on success factors for strategic alignment [J].Information& Management, 2000, 37(4): 197-216
[27] Burrow F, Beradinelli P. Systematic performance provement-refining the space between learning and results [J]. Journal of Workplace Learning, 2003, 15(1):6-13.
[28] Butler B S. Membership Size, Communication Activity, Sustainability: A Resource-Based Model of Online Social Structures [J]. Information Systems Research, 2001, 12(4):346-362.
[29] Byrd T A. Technology, Core Competencies, and Sustained Competitive Advantage [J]. Information Resources Management Journal, 2001, 14(2): 41-52.
[30] Campbell J P. On the Natural of Organizational Effectiveness [M]. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1977.
[31] Carroll C, Larkin C. Executive Information Technology: A Strategic Necessity at Motorola Codex [J]. Information Systems Management, 1992, 9(3):21-29.
[32] Cash J I, Konsynski B. IS Redraws Competitive Boundaries [J]. Harvard BusinessReview, 1985, 63(2):134-142.
[33] Cash J I, McFarlan W F; McKenney J L, Applegate L M. Corporate information system management: Text and cases [M], Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1992
[34] Chan E Y, Huff S L, Barclay Donald W, et al. Business strategic orientation, information systems strategic orientation, and strategic alignment[J].Information systems Research, 1997, 8(2):125-150
[35] Chan E Y, Huff S L, Copeland D G. Assessing realized information systems strategy [J]. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 1998, 6(4): 273-298.
[36] Chan Y E. Why haven’t we mastered alignment: the importance of the informal organization structure [J]. MIS Quarterly Executive, 2002, 1(2):97-112.
[37] Chen J, Ching R. An empirical study of the relationship of IT intensity and organizational absorptive capacity on CRM performance [J]. Journal of Global Information Management [J] .2004, 12(1):1-17.
[38] Christianse E, Venkatraman N. Beyond Sabre: An Empirical Test of Expertise Exploitation in Electronic Channels [J]. MIS Quarterly,2002. 26(1):15-38.
[39] Churchill G A. A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1979, 16(3):64-73.
[40] Clemons E K, Reddi S P, Row M C. The impact of information technology on the organization of economic activity: The move to the middle hypothesis [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 1993, 10(2):9-20.
[41] Clemons E K, Row M C. Sustaining IT Advantage: The Role of Structural Differences [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1991, 15(3):275-292.
[42] Clemons E K. Information systems for sustainable competitive advantage [J]. Information and Management, 1986, 11(3): 131-136.
[43] Coakley J R, Fiegener M K, Leader B A, White D M. An approach to assess the degree of integration between an organization’s IS and business strategies[C]. Working paper, Oregon State University, 1992.
[44] Cohen W M, Levinthal D A. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1990, 35(1):128-152.
[45] Cooper R B, Zumd R W. Information technology implementation research: a technological diffusion approach [J]. Management Science, 1990, 36(2):123-139.
[46] Cragg P, King M, Hussin H. IT Alignment and Firm Performance in Small Manufacturing Firms[J].Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 2002, 11(2):109-132.
[47] Croteau A, Bergeron F. An information technology trilogy: Business strategy, technological deployment and organizational performance [J]. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 2000, 10(2):7-99.
[48] Croteau A, Solomon S, Raymond L, Bergeron F. Organizational and technological infrastructures alignment[C]. Proceedings of the Thirty-Fourth Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Maui, Hawaii, 2001:1-10.
[49] Cyert R M, March J G. A Behavioral Theory of the Firm [M]. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1963.
[50] Das S R, Zahra S A, Warkentin M E. Integration the content and process of strategic MIS planning with competitive strategy [J]. Decision Science, 1991, 22(1):953-984.
[51] Davenport T H, Eccles R C, Prusak L. Information politics [J]. Sloan Management Review, 1992, 34(1): 53-65.
[52] Davenport T H, Prusak L. Information Ecology: Mastering the Information and Knowledge Environment [J]. Oxford University Press: New York, 1997.
[53] Davidson W H. Beyond Re-engineering: the Three Phases of Business Transformation [J].IBM Systems journal, 1993, 32(1): 65-79.
[54] Davis F D, Bagozzi R P, Warshaw P R. User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two technology models [J]. Management Science, 1989, 35(8):982-1003.
[55] Davis F D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1989, 13(3):319-340.
[56] Day G. The capabilities of market-driven organizations [J]. Journal of Marketing, 1994, 58(4):37-52.
[57] Delaney J T, Huselid M A. The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Perceptions of Organizational Performance [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1996, 39(4): 949-969.
[58] Devaraj S, Kohli R. Information Technology Payoff in the Health-Care Industry: A Longitudinal Perspective [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 2000, 16(4):41-68.
[59] Dishaw M T, Strong D M. Extending the Technology Acceptance Model with Task- technology Fit Constructs [J]. Information & Management, 1999, 36(3): 9-21.
[60] Etzioni A. Modern Organizations [M].Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.,1964:88-96.
[61] Feeny D F, Willcocks L P. Redesigning the IS Around Core Capabilities [J]. Long Range Planning, 1998, 31(3):354-367.
[62] Fichman R G, Kemerer C F. The diffusion and assimilation of information technology innovations[R].Working Papers, Sloan School of Management, MIT, September 1999.
[63] Fichman R G, Kemerer C F. The illusory diffusion of innovations: An examination of assimilation gaps [J]. Information Systems Research, 1999, 10(3):255-275.
[64] Fichman R G. Going beyond the dominant paradigm for information technology innovation research: Emerging concepts and methods [J]. Journal of the association for information systems, 2004, 5(8):314-355
[65] Fichman R G. Information technology diffusion: A review of empirical research. In DeGross J I, Becker J D and Elam J J (Eds.) Proceedings of the 13th International on Information Systems, 1992:195-206.
[66] Fichman R G. Real Options and IT Platform Adoption: Implications for Theory andPractice [J]. Information Systems Research, 2004,15(2):132-154
[67] Fichman R G. The Assimilation of software process innovations: an organizational learning perspective [J]. Management Science, 1997, 43(10): 1345-1363.
[68] Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, Attitude, Intention, Behavior [M]. Reading, MA: Addision-Wesley, 1975.
[69] Floyd S W, Wooldridge B. Path Analysis of the Relationship between Competitive Strategy, Information Technology, and Financial Performance. Journal of Management Information Systems, 1990, 7(1):47-64.
[70] Ford J D, Schellenberg D A. Conceptual issues of linkage in Assessment of organizational performance [J]. Academy of Management Reviews, 1982, 7(1):49-58.
[71] Fornell C, Larcker D F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1981, 18(1): 39-50.
[72] Francalanci C, Galal H. Information Technology and Worker Composition: Determinants of Productivity in the Life Insurance Industry [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1998, 22(2):227-24.
[73] Gallivan M J. Organizational adoption and assimilation of complex technological innovations: Development and application of a new framework [J]. Database for Advances in Information Systems, 2001, 32(3):51-85.
[74] Galy E. The mediating role of organizational learning between absorptive capacity and performance in companies employing enterprise resource planning software [D]. University of Texas-Pan American, 2003.
[75] Glass G V. Primary, secondary and meta-analysis [J]. Educational Researcher, 1976, 5(10): 3-8.
[76] Goodhue D L, Thompson R L. Task-technology Fit and Individual Performance [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1995, 19(2):213-236.
[77] Greiner L. Evolution and revolution as organizations grow [J]. Harvard Business Review, 1972, 50(4):37-46.
[78] Haken H. Synergeties [M].Berlin: Springer, 1978.
[79] Hall G, Loucks S. A Developmental Model for Determining Whether the treatment is actually implemented [J], American Educational Research Journal , 1977, 14(3):263-276.
[80] Harrington S J, Guimaraes T. Corporate culture, absorptive capacity and IT success [J]. Information and Organization, 2005, 15(1):39-63.
[81] Hartwick J, Barki H. Explaining the Role of User Participation in Information System Use [J]. Management Science, 1994, 40(4): 440-465.
[82] Henderson J C, Sifonis J G. The value of strategic IS planning: Understanding consistency, validity, and IS markets [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1988, 12(2): 187-200.
[83] Henderson J C, Venkatraman N. Strategic alignment: a model for organizational transformation through information technology management. In transformingorganizations [M]. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.97-117.
[84] Henderson J C, Venkatraman N. Strategic alignment: leveraging information technology for transforming organizations [J]. IBM Systems Journal, 1993, 32(1):4-16.
[85] Henderson R D, Deane F P. User Expectations and Perceptions of a Patient Management Information System [J]. Computers in Nursing, 1996, 14(3): 188-193.
[86] Hidding G. Sustaining Strategic IT Advantage in the Information Age: How Strategy Paradigms Differ by Speed [J]. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 2001 10: 201-222.
[87] Hong S J, Thong J Y L, Tam K Y. Understanding continued information technology usage behavior: a comparison of three models in the context of mobile internet [J]. Decision Support Systems, 2006, 42(3):1819-1834.
[88] Horovitz J. New Perspectives on Strategic Management. Journal of Business Strategy, Winter 1984, PP 19-33.
[89] Hsu M H, Chiu C M, Ju T L. Determinants of continued use of the WWW: an integration of two theoretical models [J]. Industrial Management& Data Systems, 2004, 104 (9): 766-775.
[90] Hsu M H, Yen C H, Chiu C M, Chang C M. A longitudinal investigation of continued online shopping behavior: an extension of the theory of planned behavior [J]. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 2006, 64(9):889-904.
[91] Huselid M A. The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1995, 38(3): 635-672.
[92] Igbaria M, Chakrabarti A. Computer anxiety and attitudes towards microcomputer use [J]. Behavior and Information Technology, 1990,9(3):229-241.
[93] Igbaria M, Parasuraman S, Baroudi J. A motivational model of microcomputer usage [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 1996.13(1):3-8.
[94] Iivari J. An empirical test of the DeLone-McLean model of information system success [J]. ACM SIGMIS Database, 2005, 36(2): 8-27.
[95] Jarvenpaa S L, Ives B. Executive Involvement and Participation in Progressive Use of IT [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1991, 15(1): 33-49.
[96] Jarvenpaa S L, Leidner D E. An Information Company in Mexico: Extending the Resource-Based View of the Firm to a Developing Country Context [J]. Information Systems Research, 1998, 9(4): 342-361.
[97] Jarvenpaa S L, Ives B. Executive Involvement and Participation in the Management of Information Technology [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1991, 15(2): 205-227.
[98] Jones O, Craven M. Expanding capabilities in a mature manufacturing firm: Absorptive capacity and the TCS [J]. International Small Business Journal, 2001, 19(3):39-55.
[99] Jordan E, Tricker B. Information Strategic: Alignment with Organization Structure [J]. Journal of Strategic Information System, 1995, 4(4):357-382.
[100] Joyce W F. MegaChange: How Today’s Leading Companies Have Transformed Their Workforce, Free Press, New York. NY. 1999.
[101] Kaplan R S, Norton D P. Putting the Balanced Scorecard to Work [J]. Harvard Business Review, 1993, 71(5):134-149.
[102] Kaplan R S, Norton D P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance [J]. Harvard Business Review, 1992, 70(1): 71–91.
[103] Kaplan R S, Norton D P. Transforming the Balanced Scorecard from performance measurement to strategic management: Part I [J]. American Accounting Association, Accounting Horizons, 2001, 15(1): 87-104.
[104] Karahanna E. Information technology adoption across time: a cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1999, 23 (2).
[105] Karahanna E. Symbolic adoption of information technology [C]. Proceedings from the International Decision Sciences Institute Conference, Athens, Greece.1999.
[106] Kearns G S, Lederer A. A resource-based view of strategic IT alignment: How knowledge sharing creates competitive advantage [J]. Decision Sciences, 2003, 34(1):1-29.
[107] Keen P. Information technology and the management difference: A fusion map [J]. IBM Systems Journal, 1993, 32:17-39.
[108] Kettinger W J, Grover V, Segars A H. Do Strategic Systems Really Pay off? [J].Information Systems Management, 1995, 12(1): 35-43.
[109] Kettinger W J, Grover V, Guha S, et al. Strategic Information Systems Revisited: A Study in Sustainability and Performance [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1994, 18(1):31-58.
[110] Kim H W, Chan H C, Chan Y P. Balanced thinking-feelings model of information systems continuance [J]. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 2007, 65(6): 511-525.
[111] Kim S S, Malhotra N K. A longitudinal model of continued IS use: An integrative view of four mechanisms underlying postadoption phenomena [J]. Management Science, 2005, 51(5): 741-755.
[112] King W R, Teo T S H. Integration between business planning and information systems planning: Validating a stage hypothesis [J]. Decision Sciences, 1997, 28(2):279-308.
[113] Kling R, Iacono S. The Control of Information Systems Developments After Implementation [J]. Communication of the ACM, 1984, 27(12): 1218-1226.
[114] Ko D, Kirsch L J, King W R. Antecedents of knowledge transfer from consultants to clients in enterprise system implementations [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2005, 29(1):59-85.
[115] Konana P, Balasubramanian S. The social-economic-psychological model of technology adoption and usage: an application to online investing [J]. Decision Support Systems, 2005, 39 (3): 505-524.
[116] Kotter J P. Leading Change [M]. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press. 1996.
[117] Kwon T H, Zumd R W. Unifying the fragmented models of information systems implementation [M]. In: Boland R J and Hirscheim R A (eds). Critical Issues inInformation Systems Research. New York: John Wiley, 1987:227-252.
[118] Kwon T H. A Study of the Influence of Communication Networks on MIS Institutionalization [D]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States -- North Carolina.
[119] Lederer A L, Mendelow A L. Information Resource Planning: Overcoming Difficulties in Identifying Top Management's Objectives [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1987, 11(3):389-399.
[120] Leonard B D, Deschamps I. Managerial influence in the implementation of new technology [J]. Management Science, 1988, 34(10):1252-1265.
[121] Lewin K. Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers [M].New York: Hapers, 1951
[122] Li M, Ye L R. Information Technology and Firm Performance: Linking with Environmental, Strategic and Managerial Contexts [J]. Information & Management,1999, 35(1):3-51.
[123] Limayem M, Hirt S G, Cheung C M K. How habit limits the predictive power of intention: The case of information systems continuance [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2007, 31(4): 705-737.
[124] Lin C S, Wu S, Tsai R J. Integrating perceived playfulness into expectation–confirmation model for web portal context [J]. Information & Management, 2005, 42(5):683-693.
[125] Lopes A B, Galletta D. Resource-Based Theory and a Structural Perspective of Strategy Applied to the Provision of Internet Services [C]. Proceedings of the Third Americas Conference on Information Systems, Indianapolis, IN, 1997.
[126] Luftman J N, Brier T. Achieving and Sustaining Business-IT Alignment [J].California Management Review, 1999, 42(1):109-122.
[127] Luftman J N, Kempaiah R, Nash E. Key issues for IT executives [J]. MIS Quarterly Executive, 2006, 5(2):27-45.
[128] Luftman J N, Lewis P R, Oldach S H. Transforming the Enterprise: the Alignment of Business and Information Technology Strategies [J]. IBM Systems Journal, 1993, 32(1):198-221.
[129] Luftman J N, Oldach S H. Introduction. In competing in the information age: Strategic alignment in practice [M]. Oxford University Press, New York, 1996, 3-18.
[130] Luftman J N. Assessing IT/business alignment [J]. Information Systems Management, 2003, 20(4):9-15.
[131] Luftman J N. Managing in the Information Age: Practical Applications of the Strategic Alignment Model [M]. NewYork: Oxford University Press, 1996.
[132] Luftman J, Papp R, Brier T. Enablers and inhibitors of business-IT alignment[J]. Communications of the AIS, 1999, 1(3):1-32.
[133] Luftman J. http://infonnation week.com/700/luftman.htm [EB/OL]. Enablers and Inhibitors. Information Week,1998.
[134] Lwaernce P R.How to Deal with Resistance to Change[J].Harvard Business Review,1954,32(3):49-57.
[135] Madu C N, Kuei C H, Jaccob R A. An Empirical Assessment of the Influence of Quality Dimension on Organizational Performance [J]. Internal Journal of Production Research, 1996, 34(7): 1943-1962.
[136] Mahmood M A, Mann G J. Information investments and organizational productivity and performance: An empirical investigation [J]. Journal of Organizational Computing Electronic Commerce, 2005, 15(3):185-202.
[137] Makadok R. Toward a Synthesis of the Resource-Based and Dynamic-Capability Views of Rent Creation [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2001, 22(5):387-401.
[138] Marion J B, Wilkins A S, Stawski S K. The Component Alignment Model: A New Approach to Health Care Information Technology Strategic Planning [J].Topics in Health Information Management, 1998,19(1):1-10.
[139] Markus M L, Tanis C. The Enterprise System Experience—From Adoption to Success[M],in: R.W. Zmud (Ed.), Framing the Domains of IT Research: Glimpsing the Future Through the Past, Pinnaflex Educational Resources Inc., Cincinnati, OH, 2000, 173-207.
[140] Mata F J,Fuerst W L, Barney J B. Information Technology and Sustained Competitive advantage: A Resource-based Analysis [J]. MIS Quarterly, 1995, 19(4):487-505.
[141] McFarlan F W. Information Technology Changes the Way You Compete [J]. Harvard Business Review, 1984, 62(3):98-105.
[142] Melville N, Kraemer K, Gurbaxani V. Information Technology and Organizational Performance: An Integrative Model of IT Business Value [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2004, 28(2):283-322.
[143] Meyer A D, James B G. Organizational Assimilation of Innovations: A Multilevel Contextual Analysis [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1988, 31(4):897-923.
[144] Miles R H, Snow C C. Organizational strategy, structure and process [M]. NewYork: McGraw-Hill.
[145] Milgrom P, Roberts J. The economics of modern manufacturing: Technology, Strategy, and organization [J]. American Economic Review, 1990, 80(3):511-528.
[146] Miller S M. The strategic management of technological R&D-an ideal process for the 1990's [J]. International Journal of Technology Management, 1990, 5(2):63-153.
[147] Moore G C, Benbasat I. Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation [J]. Information Systems Research, 1991, 2(3):192-221.
[148] Nelson K M, Cooprider J G. The Contribution of Shared Knowledge to IS Group Performance [J].MIS Quarterly, 1996, 20(4):409-432.
[149] Nkomo S M. Human resource planning and organization performance: An exploratory analysis [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1987, 8(4):387-392.
[150] Nolan R L. Managing the crises in the data processing [J]. Harvard Business Review, 1979, 57(2):115-126.
[151] Orlikowski W J, Iacono C S. Desperately seeking the“IT”in IT research-call to theorizing the IT artifact [J]. Information Systems Research, 2001, 12(2): 121-134.
[152] Palmer J W, Markus M L. The performance impacts of quick response and strategic alignment in specialty retailing [J]. Information Systems Research, 2000, 11(3), 241-259.
[153] Periera R E. Resource View Theory Analysis of SAP as a Source of Competitive Advantage for Firms [J]. The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems, 1999, 30 (1): 38-46.
[154] Porter M E, Millar V E. How Information Gives You Competitive Advantage [J]. Harvard Business Review, 1985, 65(4):149-160.
[155] Powell T C, Dent M A. Information Technology as Competitive Advantage: "The Role of Human, Business, and Technology Resources [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1997, 18(5):375-405.
[156] Premkumar G, Bhattacherjee A. Explaining information technology usage: a test of competing models [J]. Omega the International Journal of Management Science, 2007, 36(1): 64-75.
[157] Premkumar G, Ramamurthy K, Nilakanta S. Implementation of electronic data interchange: An innovation diffusion perspective [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 1994, 11(2):157-186
[158] Prescott M B, Conger S A. Information Technology Innovations: A Classification by IT Locus of Impact and Research Approach [J]. Data Base, 1995, 26(2):20-40.
[159] Raghunathan B, Raghunathan T S, Tu Q. Dimensionality of the strategic grid framework: The construct and its measurement [J].Information Systems Research, 1999, 10(4):343-355.
[160] Ravichandran T, Lertwongsatien C. Impact of Information Systems Resources and Capabilities on Firm Performance: A Resource-Based Perspective[C]. Proceedings of 23 rd International Conference on Information Systems. Barcelona, 2002:577-582.
[161] Rawstorne P, Jayasuriya R, Caputi P. An integrative model of information systems use in mandatory environments [C]. Proceeding of the Twentieth International Conference on Information System, 1999, 325-330.
[162] Ray G, Muhanna W A, Barney J B. Information Technology and Competitive Advantage: A Process-Oriented Assessment. Working Paper, University of Texas at Austin, 2001.
[163] Ray G, Muhanna W A, Barney J B. Information Technology and the Performance of the Customer Service Process: A Resource-Based Analysis [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2005, 29(4):625-652.
[164] Reich B H, Benbasat I. Factors That Influence the Social Dimension of Alignment between Business and Information Technology Objectives. MIS Quarterly. 2000,24(1):81-113.
[165] Reich B H, Benbasat I. Measuring the Linkage between Business and Information Technology Objectives. MIS Quarterly,1996, 20(1):55-81.
[166] Roberts E B. Benchmarking the Strategic Management of Technology [J]. Research Technology Management, 1995, 38(1):44-56.
[167] Robey D, Ross J W, Boudreau M C. Learning to implement enterprise systems: an exploratory study of the dialectics of change [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems,2002,19(l):17-46.
[168] Roca J C, Chiu C M, Martinez F J. Understanding e-learning continuance intention: an extension of the technology acceptance model [J]. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 2006, 64(8): 683-696.
[169] Rochart J F, Bullen C V, Ball L. Future role of the information systems executives [J].MIS Quarterly, 1982,6(Special Issue): 1-14.
[170] Rogers D S, Daugherty P J, Stank T P. Enhancing Service Responsiveness: The Strategic Potential of EDI [J].International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 1992, 22(8):15-20.
[171] Rogers E M, Albritton M M. Interactive Communication Technologies in Business Organizations [J]. Journal of Business Communications, 1995, 32(2): 177-195.
[172] Rogers E M. Diffusion of innovations (3rd) [M]. New York: The Free Press, 1983
[173] Ross J W, Beath C M, Goodhue D L. Develop Long-term Competitiveness through IT Assets [J].S1oan Management Review, 1996, 38(1):31-45.
[174] Ruekert R W, Walker O C, Roering K J. The organization of marketing Activities: a contingency theory of structure and performance [J]. Journal of Marketing, 1985, 49(1):13-25.
[175] Sabherwal R, Chan Y E. Alignment between business and IS strategies: A study of prospectors, analyzers and defenders [J]. Information Systems Research, 2001, 12(1):11-33.
[176] Sabherwal R. The relationship between information system planning sophistication and information system success: An empirical assessment [J]. Decision Science, 1999, 30(1): 137-167
[177] Saga V, Zmud R W. The nature and determinants of IT acceptance, routinization and infusion [C]. Proceedings of the International Federation of Information Processing Working Group, 1994: 67-86.
[178] Sager M. Competitive Information Systems in Australian Retail Banking [J]. Information and Management, 1988, 15(1): 59-67.
[179] Santhanam R, Hartono E. Issues in linking information technology capability to firm performance [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2003, 27(1): 125-165
[180] Saunders C S, Jones J W. Measuring Performance of the Information Systems Function [J].Journal of Management Information Systems,1992,8(4): 63-82.
[181] Scupola A. Adoption of E-commerce in small and medium size enterprises in Australia [C]. Proceedings of the l0th America Conference on Information Systems, 2004:343-352
[182] Seashore S E, Ephraim Y. Factorial Analysis of Organizational Performance [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1967, 12(3):377-395.
[183] Segars A H, Grover V. Strategic information systems planning success: An investigation of the construct and its measurement [J].MIS Quarterly, 1998, (6): 140-163.
[184] Senge P M. The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization [M]. Doubleday/Currency, New York, 1990.
[185] Service R W, Maddux H S. Building Competitive Advantage through Information Systems: The Organizational Information Quotient [J]. Journal of Information Science, 1999, 25(1):51-65.
[186] Sircar S, Turnbow J L, Borodoli B. A Framework for Assessing the Relationship between Information Technology Investment and Firm Performance [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 2000, 16(4):42-69.
[187] Slevin D, Pinto J. Balancing stragegy and tactics in project implementation [J]. Sloan Management Review, 1987, 29(1):33-44.
[188] Soh C, Markus M. How IT Creates Business Valve: A Process Theory Synthesis [C]. Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Information Systems,1995.12
[189] Steers R M. Antecedents and Outcomes of Organizational Commitment [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1977, 3(1):46-56.
[190] Steers R M. Problem in the Measurement of Organizational Effectiveness [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1975, 20(4): 546-558.
[191] Strauss A L, Cothin J. Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques [M].California: Sage Publications, 1990
[192] Subramani M R, Henderson J C, Cooprider J. Linking IS-User Partnerships to IS Performance: A Socio-Cognitive Perspective [R]. MISRC Working Paper WP99-01, University of Minnesota, 1999.
[193] Szulanski G. Exploring internal stickiness: Implements to the transfer of best practice within the firm [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1996, 17(11):27-43.
[194] Tallon P P, Kraemer K L, Gurbaxani V. Executives' perceptions of the business value of information technology: a process-oriented approach [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 2000, 16(4): 145-173.
[195] Tallon P P. A process oriented assessment of the alignment of information systems and business strategy: implications for 1T business value, Dissertation proposal [M].Center for research on information technology and organizations, graduate school of management, university of California, Irvine, CA 92697- 4650.
[196] Taylor S, Todd P A. Understanding information technology usage: a test of competingmodels [J]. Information Systems Research, 1995, 6(2): 144-176.
[197] Teece D J. Firm Boundaries, Technological Innovation and Strategic Planning [J]. The Economics of Strategic Planning, G. L. Thomas (ed.), D. C. Heath, Lexington, MA, 1986:187-199.
[198] Teo T S H, Ang J S K. Critical Success Factors in the Alignment of IS Plans with Business Plans [J]. International Journal of Information Management, 1999, 19(2):173-185.
[199] Teo T S H, King W R. Assessing the impact of integrating business planning and IS planning [J].Information & Management, 1996, 30(6): 309 -321
[200] Teo T S H, King W R. Integration between business planning and information systems planning: An evolutionary contingency perspective [J].Journal of Management Systems, 1997, 14(1):185-214
[201] Thong J Y L, Hong S, Tam K Y. The effects of post-adoption beliefs on the expectation-confirmation model for information technology continuance [J]. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 2006, 64(9): 799-810.
[202] Thong J Y L. An integrated model of information systems adoption in small business [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 1999,15(4): 187-214
[203] Tornatzky L G, Fleischer M. The processes of technological innovation [M]. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1990.
[204] Tsang E W. Organizational learning and the learning organization: A dichotomy between descriptive and prescriptive research [J]. Human Relations, 1997, 50(1): 73-90.
[205] Tu Q, Vonderembse M A, Ragu-Nathan T S, et al. Absorptive capacity: Enhancing the assimilation of time-based manufacturing practices [J]. Journal of Operations Management, 2006, 24(5): 692-710.
[206] Tu Q. Achieving mass customi8zation through technology application and absorptive capacity: A customer-oriented framework [D]. University of Toledo, 1999.
[207] Van den Bosch F A J, Volberda H W, De Boer M. Coevolution of firm absorptive capacity and knowledge environment: Organizational forms and combinative capabilities [J]. Organization Science, 1999, 10(5): 551-568.
[208] Vargas A, Hernández M J, Bruque S. Determinants of information technology competitive value: Evidence from awestern European industry [J]. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 2003, 14(2): 245-268.
[209] Venkatraman N, Ramanujam V. Measurement of Business Performance in Strategy Research: A Comparison of Approaches [J]. Academy of Management Review, 1986, 11(4):801-814.
[210] Venkatraman N, Zaheer A. Electronic Integration and Strategic Advantage: Quasi-Experimental Study in the Insurance Industry [J]. Information Systems Research, 1990, 1(4): 377-393.
[211] Venkatraman N. the concept of fit in strategy research [J]. Academic ManagementReview, 1989, 14(3):423-444.
[212] Wade M, Gravill J. Diversification and Performance of Japanese IT Subsidiaries: A Resource-Based View [J]. Information and Management, 2003, 40(4):305-316.
[213] Walton R. Up and Running: Integrating Information Technology and the Organization [M]. Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, MA. 1989.
[214] Wang W, Hsieh J P. Beyond Routine: Symbolic Adoption, Extended Use and Emergent Use of Complex Information Systems in the Mandatory Organizational Context [C].Twenty-Seventh International Conference on Information Systems, Milwaukee, 2006:733-749.
[215] Ward J, Griffiths P. Strategic Planning for Information Systems [M]. 2nd ed. NewYork: John Wiley Sons, 1996.
[216] Warner T N. Information Technology as a Competitive Burden [J]. Sloan Management Review,1987, 29(1):55-61.
[217] Winston T L, Benjamin B. M. S. The business value of information technology and inputs substitution: The productivity paradox revisited [J]. Decision Support Systems. 2005,(12): 1-15.
[218] Wixom B H, Watson H J. An empirical investigation of the factors affecting data warehousing success [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2001, 25(1): 17-41.
[219] Wooldridge W, Floyd S W. Strategic process effects on consensus [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1989, 10(3):295-302.
[220] Yang H, Yoo Y. It s all about attitude: revisiting the technology acceptance model [J]. Decision Support Systems, 2004, 38(1): 19-31.
[221] Yuchtman E, Seashore S E. A system resource approach to organizational effectiveness [J]. Amer. Soc. Rev. 1967, 32(6): 891-903.
[222] Zaheer A, Zaheer S. Catching the Wave: Alertness, Responsiveness, and Market Influence in Global Electronic Networks [J]. Management Science, 1997, 43(11):1493-1509.
[223] Zahra S A, Covin J G. Business strategy, technology policy and firm performance [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1993, 14(6): 451-478.
[224] Zaltman G, Duncan R, Holbek J. Innovations and Organizations [M]. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1973.
[225] L.克拉克.改革[M] .北京:中信出版社,1999.
[226] IBM中国商业价值研究院.IBM中国商业价值报告:战略与管理[M].北京:东方出版社,2007(4).
[227]毕新华,齐晓云,余翠玲,于宝君.我国企业IT投资成长模式及中美比较研究.图书情报工作. 2010, 54(22):75-79.
[228]毕新华,齐晓云,段伟花.基于ECM模型的IT持续使用整合分析.图书情报工作. 2011,55(6):40-44.
[229]毕新华,于宝君,齐晓云.中国企业信息系统宏观成长过程及阶段分析.情报科学.2008.26(2):161-166.
[230]陈冬.信息技术创新的组织实施问题研究[D].天津:天津大学管理学院,2004.
[231]陈国权,马萌.组织学习的过程模型研究[J].管理科学学报,2000,3(3):15-23.
[232]陈蔚珠,陈禹.业务-IT战略匹配成熟度模型的框架与内容[J].商业研究,2006,(22):37-40.
[233]陈蔚珠.业务-IT战略匹配——ZARA案例分析[J].经济经纬,2009,(5):31-34.
[234]陈文波.基于知识视角的组织复杂信息技术吸收研究[D].上海:复旦大学管理学院,2006.
[235]陈莹.业务流程再造接受理论研究[D].上海:复旦大学管理学院,2005.
[236]迟嘉昱,孙翎.IT能力对企业绩效影响机制的实证研究[J].情报杂志,2010,29(4):58-61,45.
[237]杜维.人力资源、IT能力与组织绩效——知识管理战略的影响因素及实施后果研究[D].重庆:重庆大学经济与工商管理学院,2009.
[238]段桂敏.ERP条件下组织变革与组织绩效研究[D].成都:四川大学工商管理学院,2005.
[239]冯林.我国企业信息化投资绩效评价研究[D].武汉:武汉理工大学管理学院,2005.
[240]哈尔滨工业大学学校办公室.组织学习简介[EB/OL]. http://office.hit.edu.cn/News/Show.asp?id=645, 2006-6-26.
[241]韩维贺.知识管理过程、IT平台与企业绩效关系研究[D].大连:大连理工大学管理学院,2006.
[242]胡安安,黄丽华.基于文化视角的中国企业员工ERP系统接受模型[J].科技进步与对策,2009,26(3):92-96.
[243]胡毅.ERP环境下基于平衡计分卡的企业绩效评价系统的研究[D].武汉:武汉理工大学管理学院,2006.
[244]蒋春燕,赵曙明.人力资源管理实践与组织绩效的相关分析[J].经济管理·新管理,2005,4:72-79.
[245]邝孔武.“管理信息系统分析与设计”,西安电子科技大学出版社,1999.
[246]李丹.企业信息技术与管理融合的度量与模型分析[D].济南:山东大学管理学院,2007.3.
[247]李国鑫,王雅林.基于技术与组织适应性的信息技术绩效模型探讨[J].自然辩证法研究,2004,20(6):65-68.
[248]李浩,韩维贺.知识管理、信息技术与多元化绩效[J].预测,2007,26(3):26-32.
[249]李怀祖.管理研究方法[M].西安:西安交通大学出版社,2004.
[250]李怡文.组织在采纳信息技术前后的行为影响因素比较研究[D].上海:同济大学经济管理学院,2006.
[251]李永红.IT投资与企业绩效关系研究的国外文献综述[J],情报杂志, 2006,(8)26-30.
[252]李治堂,吴贵生.信息技术投资与公司绩效:基于中国上市公司的实证研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理, 2008,(11):144-150.
[253]李治堂.基于互补性理论的信息技术投资绩效研究[J].科研管理,2009,30(1):8-14,27.
[254]李治堂.上市公司信息化与企业绩效关系分析[[J].商业时代,2005(.2): 79-80.
[255]李治堂.信息技术投资“生产率悖论”研究及其最新进展[J].外国经济与管理,2004,26(9):2-7.
[256]李子袆.信息技术投资与企业战略一致性问题研究[D].天津:天津商业大学,2008.5.
[257]卢美月.企业文化、企业培训与组织绩效关系研究——以两岸企业为背景[D].上海:复旦大学管理学院,2009.
[258]卢纹岱.SPSS for Windows统计分析[M].北京:电子工业出版社,2002.
[259]吕亮.业务与信息技术融合及其对竞争优势的作用[D].济南:山东大学管理学院.2008.3
[260]马建,黄丽华,企业过程重组——概念、方法和技术[M].香港:三联出版社1998.
[261]马庆国,李艾.电子商务与企业信息化:组织学习效应实证研究[J].管理工程学报,2004,18(2):11-16.
[262]马庆国.管理统计[M].北京:科学出版社,2002:242
[263]马庆国.管理统计——数据获取、统计原理、SPSS工具与应用研究[M].北京:科学出版社,2007
[264]马勇.市场导向、营销创新与组织绩效关系研究:市场驱动还是驱动市场[D].上海:复旦大学管理学院,2008.
[265]闵庆飞.中国企业ERP系统实施关键成功因素的实证研究[D].大连:大连理工大学管理学院,2005.
[266]彭义兵,马辉民,张子刚.IT投资与业务流程及企业绩效关系实证研究[J].工业工程与管理,2008,(3): 95-103.
[267]彭义兵.IT投资与业务流程及企业绩效关系实证研究[J].工业工程与管理,2008, (03):95-103.
[268]齐晓云,毕新华,苏婉,王磊.吉林省中小企业信息化现状调查与对策研究.情报杂志. 2010,29(7):183-188.
[269]齐晓云,毕新华,于宝君,李川.信息系统成功影响因素的阶段差异研究.软科学. 2011,25(2):36-39,56.
[270]齐晓云,毕新华,余翠玲,苏婉.东北地区企业信息系统成长的规模差异分析.情报杂志. 2009, 28(8): 40-44.
[271]秦敏.信息系统采纳后行为研究述评[J].情报理论与实践,2009,32(11):125-128.
[272]石代伦,潘九朱.发挥IT的商业价值—一个业务与技术融合的观点[J].软科学,2006(5):9-15.
[273]孙晓琳,王刊良.信息技术对组织绩效影响研究的新视角[J].中国软科学,2009,3:76-83.
[274]孙晓琳,邢一亭,王刊良.信息技术投资与组织绩效关系的实证研究[J].科学学研究,2010,28(3):397-404.
[275]田野.企业资源计划(ERP)同化影响因素及其作用机制研究[D].杭州:浙江大学管理学院,2008.
[276]汪淼军,张维迎,周黎安.企业信息化投资的绩效及其影响因素:基于浙江企业的经验证据[J].中国社会科学,2007,(6):81-93,206.
[277]王大刚,席酉民.和谐一致性与组织绩效[J].管理科学学报,2008,11(4):1-12.
[278]王大刚,席酉民.战略一致性在中国公司绩效下的实证检验[J].系统工程理论与实践,2007,(7):52-63.
[279]王东清,罗新星.基于企业能力理论的IT投资绩效贡献研究[J].科研管理,2010,31(2):137-146,153.
[280]王慧明.ERP环境下企业信息平台与管理平台融合度测度研究[D].天津:天津大学,2004.
[281]王利政.企业持续营销能力及其与企业绩效关系的研究[D].长春:吉林大学管理学院,2007
[282]王念新,仲伟俊,梅姝娥.信息技术、核心能力和企业绩效的实证研究[J].管理科学,2010,23(1):52-64.
[283]王谦.ERP工程中信息平台与管理平台融合理论及能力评测研究[D].天津:天津大学,2004.
[284]王馨.文化、人格心理因素、高绩效人力资源管理实务与组织绩效[D].台南“:国立”成功大学,2003.
[285]王雅杰,郜中华,孙德鹏.一种研究经济学问题的新统计方法-Meta分析[A].第三届(2008)中国管理学年会论文集[C], 2008.
[286]吴海梅.影响业务流程变革彻底性的IT因素研究[D].杭州:浙江大学管理学院,2006.
[287]吴明隆.SPSS统计应用实务:问卷分析与应用统计[M].北京:科学出版社.2003
[288]吴明隆.结构方程模型——AMOS的操作与应用[J].重庆:重庆大学出版社,2009.
[289]吴增源,黄祖庆,伍蓓.信息技术能力对企业绩效影响机制的实证研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理, 2009,(8):151-156.
[290]谢康,张海波,黄林军.信息技术影响企业绩效的机制研究[J].价值工程,2005.3:62-66.
[291]信息化管理编室.不容忽视的IT价值评估[J].中国计算机用户,2002. (32):19.
[292]信息化管理编室.如何评价企业IT投资的效果和价值[J].中国计算机报,2002. 09
[293]许正良.管理研究方法[M].长春:吉林大学出版社,2004
[294]薛华成.管理信息系统[M].第3版.北京:清华大学出版社,1999.
[295]杨青,陈忠民,黄丽华.基于能力的公司规划与信息系统规划战略关系实证研究[J].管理工程学报,2007,21(3):141-145.
[296]余翠玲.信息技术吸纳能力理论模型与实证研究[D].长春:吉林大学管理学院,2010.
[297]张聪慧,郭伟,马可.信息技术投资对企业绩效的影响[J].工业工程,2008,11(6):107-112.
[298]张篙,黄立平.信息技术如何创造持续竞争优势——一种基于资源的观点[J].管理工程学报,2003, 17(3): 108-110.
[299]张鹤达,毕新华,马克强. IT能力对企业绩效影响的实证研究[J].情报科学,2008,26(10):1580-1583.
[300]张鹤达,毕新华.中国制造业企业IT能力与绩效关系的实证研究[J].科学学研究,2008.11:135-138.
[301]张鹤达.基于资源观的IT能力对企业绩效影响机制研究[D].长春:吉林大学管理学院,2008.
[302]张青,黄丽华.IT投资价值评价研究综述[J].外国经济与管理,2003, 25(6):35-40.
[303]赵海峰,万迪昉,王朝波.信息技术应用水平对企业绩效影响的实证研究[J].研究与发展管理,2002,14(4):20-23.
[304]中国社会科学院语言研究所词典编辑室.现代汉语辞典.2002增补版.北京:商务印书馆,2002:1072。
[305]钟红慧.安利公司人力资源管理系统实施中的变革管理分析[D].广州:暨南大学管理学院,2007.