Author List: Chan, Yolande E.; Huff, Sid L.; Barclay, Donald W.; Copeland, Duncan G.;
Information Systems Research, 1997, Volume 8, Issue 2, Page 125.
Information systems strategic alignment--the fit between business strategic orientation and information systems (IS) strategic orientation--is an important concept. This study measured business strategic orientation, IS strategic orientation, and IS strategic alignment, and investigated their implications for perceived IS effectiveness and business performance. Analyses of data gathered in a mail survey of North American financial services and manufacturing firms indicated that 1) business strategic orientation, IS strategic orientation, and IS strategic alignment are modeled best by utilizing holistic, 'systems' approaches instead of dimension-specific, 'bivariate' approaches, 2) three generic IS strategic orientations can be detected, 3) user information satisfaction does not capture important strategic aspects of IS effectiveness, 4) IS strategic alignment is a better predictor of IS effectiveness than is strategic orientation, and 5) business strategic orientation, IS strategic alignment, and IS effectiveness have positive impacts on business performance.
Keywords: Business Performance; Fit; Information Systems Strategy; Strategic Alignment; Strategic Orientation; Systems / Technology Effectiveness
Algorithm:

List of Topics

#229 0.530 alignment strategic business strategy performance technology value organizational orientation relationship information misalignment matched goals perspective fit firms executives argue need
#276 0.138 satisfaction information systems study characteristics data results using user related field survey empirical quality hypotheses important success various indicate tested
#77 0.096 information systems paper use design case important used context provide presented authors concepts order number various underlying implementation framework nature
#275 0.072 perceptions attitudes research study impacts importance perceived theory results perceptual perceive perception impact relationships basis significant positive reported common individuals
#51 0.053 results study research experiment experiments influence implications conducted laboratory field different indicate impact effectiveness future participants evidence test controlled involving