260 likes | 364 Views
Process-Technology Fit: Extending Task-Technology Fit to Assess Enterprise Information Technologies. Presentation Outline. Introduction Motivation Research Objectives Related Literature Process-Technology Fit (PTF) Model Approach to Determine PTF Conclusion Academic Contributions
E N D
Process-Technology Fit:Extending Task-Technology Fit to Assess Enterprise Information Technologies Dec. 13, 2006
Presentation Outline • Introduction • Motivation • Research Objectives • Related Literature • Process-Technology Fit (PTF) Model • Approach to Determine PTF • Conclusion • Academic Contributions • Implications for Practitioners Dec. 13, 2006
Introduction • Definition of Enterprise IT • Unite data across functions, business units, and companies • Support users with multiple functionalities, infrastructures & applications • Support internal & external process integration (Barki & Pinsonneault 2005) • Potential Advantages (Davenport 1998) • Reduce costs • Improve productivity & performance • Increase user satisfaction • improve communication & coordination Dec. 13, 2006
Ordering Sales Marketing Introduction ? ? Production Scheduling Financial Reporting Dec. 13, 2006
Ordering Sales Marketing Introduction Production Scheduling Financial Reporting Dec. 13, 2006
Research Objective • Evaluate the role of the fit between processes and IT in understand IT use and process performance • Identify key variables • Propose a PTF model • Develop a methodology to measure PTF Dec. 13, 2006
Process Characteristics FIT 1 Process-Technology Fit (PTF) PROCESS PERFORMANCE IT Characteristics FIT 2 IT/Use Context Fit IT Use Context PTF Model • Framework from ongoing theoretical work in PTF (Shaw et al. 2006) P1-9 P13 P10-P12 Dec. 13, 2006
Process-Technology Fit • IT’s ability to support a process in reaching process goals • Fit 1 - the appropriateness of IT features in supporting process features (PTF) • Fit 2 - the appropriateness between IT features & IT use context • Considers organizational contingencies in which the IT is implemented Dec. 13, 2006
Process Routineness • The level of repetitiveness, structure, programmability, and analyzability • The ideal IT support likely changes based on level of routineness Dec. 13, 2006
Process Complexity • The overall sophistication of tasks & resources; the additional efforts required • Processes benefit differently from specific IT features depending on their complexity Dec. 13, 2006
Process Interdependency • Extent to which successful process completion is dependent on the successful completion of process activities • Varies based on resources required for & generated from various activities Dec. 13, 2006
IT Functionalities • The capabilities and tools of IT software (Gebauer et al. 2004) • Process characteristics determine needed IT support • Classifications: • Type of system used (Goodhue & Thompson 1995) • Type of support provided (Zigurs and Buckland 1998) • Our classification: information accessing, data processing, communication & coordination support Dec. 13, 2006
System Performance (Reliability) • The likelihood that a system will remain operational (Somani & Vaidya 1997) • Reliability leads to utilization & usage compliance (Goodhue & Thompson 1995; Croom & Johnston 2003) • Measured: • User evaluations • System-generated metrics Dec. 13, 2006
IT Support • The availability of assistance to aid users with system. • Processes having high support provide adequate means for actors to overcome difficulties with using system Dec. 13, 2006
Fit 1 (PTF) • P1a: Processes having high routineness have greater fit with information accessing and data processing functionalities • P1b: Processes having low routineness have greater fit with communication and coordination support functionalities • P2a: Processes having high complexity have greater fit with information accessing and communication and coordination support functionalities • P2b: Processes having low complexity have greater fit with data processing support functionalities Dec. 13, 2006
Fit 1 (PTF) • P3a: Processes having high interdependency have greater fit with information accessing and communication and coordination support functionality • P3b: Processes having low interdependency have greater fit with data processing functionality • P4: Processes with higher routineness have greater fit with system performance • P5: Processes with higher complexity have greater fit with system performance Dec. 13, 2006
Fit 1 (PTF) • P6: Processes with higher interdependency have greater fit with system performance • P7: Processes with lower routineness require more IT support • P8: Processes with higher complexity require more IT support • P9: Processes with higher interdependency require more IT support Dec. 13, 2006
IT Use Context • Need to consider the process context of IT use to better understand: (Heine et al. 2003) • the impacts of enterprise IT • the determinants that drive its use • Gebauer et al. (2006) incorporate IT use context in TTF model for mobile IS • Other elements of the IT use context used in understanding fit • Frequency/Volume of Like Process Occurrences • Process Actors’ IT Experience • Flexibility in Achieving Desired Outcome Dec. 13, 2006
Process Characteristics FIT 1 Process-Technology Fit (PTF) PROCESS PERFORMANCE IT Characteristics FIT 2 IT/Use Context Fit IT Use Context PTF Model • Framework from ongoing theoretical work in PTF (Shaw et al. 2006) P1-9 P13 P10-P12 Dec. 13, 2006
Process Performance • The ability to reach stated process goals • To be operationalized in greater detail for specific process situations • P13a: Fit 1 is positively associated with process performance • P13b: Fit 2 is positively associated with process performance Dec. 13, 2006
ITFs(j) ITFs(j) PFs(i) PFs(i) FIT1 = [f1(i,j)] FIT1 = [f1(i,j)] Determining Fit 1 • Fit 1 - the extent IT supports process attributes • Define attributes of process & technology • Develop profiles using a metric Dec. 13, 2006
n [Fl(i,j)] FIT1= l=1 n Determining Fit 1 • Determine cells’ predicted fit values from previous research & estimation • Average the fit for each pair Dec. 13, 2006
ITFs(j) ITUC(k) FIT2 = [f1(j,k)] n [Fl(j,k)] FIT2= l=1 n Determining Fit 2 • Fit 2 – the extent to which IT supports various use contexts • Determine cells’ predicted fit values • Average the fit for each pair Dec. 13, 2006
Next Steps • Further develop the PTF metric to identify fit estimates • Test effectiveness of framework & metric • Metric-computed fit will be tested against survey of user perceptions of fit • Metric-computed fit will be tested in its ability to predict process performance Dec. 13, 2006
Contributions • Development of a PTF model and procedure to compute fit • Emphasize the influence of the IT use context on fit • Identify IT characteristics that maximize Fit 1 (PTF) & Fit 2 (IT/Use Context) • Aid in the development of more effective IT strategies Dec. 13, 2006
Thank You! Dec. 13, 2006