Asia pacific journal of information systems

The Korea Society of Management Information Systems (한국경영정보학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Effect of Cloud-based IT Architecture on IT Exploration and Exploitation: Enabling Role of Modularity and Virtuality

  • Insoo Son (department of global business administration, Sangmyung University) ;
  • Dongwon Lee (Business School, Korea University) ;
  • Gwanhoo Lee (information technology, Kogod School of Business, American University) ;
  • Youngjin Yoo (entrepreneurship and information systems, Weatherhead School of Management, Case Western Reserve University)
  • Received : 2018.04.09
  • Accepted : 2018.09.03
  • Published : 2018.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In today's turbulent business landscape, a firm's ability to explore new IT capabilities and exploit current ones is essential for enabling organizational agility and achieving high organizational performance. We propose IT exploration and exploitation as two critical organizational learning processes that are essential for gaining and sustaining competitive advantages. However, it remains unclear how the emerging cloud-based IT architecture affects an organization's ability to explore and exploit its IT capabilities. We conceptualize modularity and virtuality as two critical dimensions of emerging cloud-based IT architecture and investigate how they affect IT exploration and exploitation. We test our hypotheses using data obtained from our field survey of IT managers. We find that modularity is positively associated with both exploration and exploitation whereas virtuality is positively associated with exploration, but not with exploitation. We also find that the effect of modularity on exploitation is stronger than its effect on exploration.

Keywords

References

  1. Ahmed, F. S., Aslam, A., Ahmed, S., and Bilal, M. A. Q. (2011). Comparative study of scalability and availability in cloud and utility computing. Journal of Emerging Trends in Computing and Information Sciences, 2(12), 705-713.
  2. Arthur, W. B. (2009). The nature of technology: What it is and how it evolves. New York, NY: Free Press.
  3. Baldwin, C. Y., and Clark, K. B. (1997). Managing in the age of modularity. Harvard Business Review, 75(5), 84-93.
  4. Baldwin, C. Y., and Clark, K. B. (2000). Design rules: The power of modularity (1st ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  5. Bharadwaj, A. S. (2000). A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firm performance: An empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 169-196.
  6. Cafaro, M., and Aloisio, G. (2011). Grids, clouds, and virtualization. London, UK: Springer.
  7. Chakravarthy, A., Grewal, R., and Sambamurthy, V. (2013). Information technology competencies, organizational agility, and firm performance: Enabling and facilitating roles. Information Systems Research, 24(4), 976-997.
  8. Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In Marcoulides, G. A. (Eds.), Modern Methods for Business Research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 295-336.
  9. Diamantopoulos, A., and Siguaw, J. A. (2006). Formative versus reflective indicators in organizational measure development: A comparison and empirical illustration. British Journal of Management, 17(4), 263-282.
  10. Etro, F. (2009). The economic impact of cloud computing on business creation, employment and output in Europe. Review of Business and Economics, 54(2), 179-208.
  11. Feeny, D. F., and Willcocks, L. P. (1998). Core IS capabilities for exploiting information technology. Sloan Management Review, 39(3), 9-21.
  12. Figueiredo, R., Dinda, P. A., and Fortes, J. (2005). Resource virtualization renaissance. Computer, 38(5), 28-31.
  13. Garud, R., Kumaraswamy, A., and Langlois, R. (2003). Managing in the modular age:Architecture, networks, and organizations. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
  14. Gefen, D., Straub, D. W., and Boudreau, M.-C. (2000). Structural equation modeling and regression: Guidelines for research practice. Communications of the AIS, 4(7), 1-77.
  15. Iyer, B., Freedman, J., Gaynor, M., and Wyner, G. (2003). Web Services: Enabing dynamic business networks. Communications of Association for Information Systems, 11, 525-554.
  16. Kim, K., and Kim, J. W. (2015). A case study of collaboration in cloud service ecosystem: Focus on cloud service brokerage. Information Systems Review, 17(1), 1-18.
  17. Lee, G., and Xia, W. (2010). Towards Agile: An Integrated Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Field Data on Software Development Agility. MIS Quarterly, 34(1), 87-114.
  18. Lee, G., Espinosa, J. A., and DeLone, W. H. (2013). Task Environment Complexity, Software Process Capabilities, and Coordination in Global Software Development. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 39(12), 1753-1771.
  19. Lee, J. U., Seo, K. J., and Kim, H.-W. (2014). An exploratory study on the cloud computing services: Issues and suggestion for the success. Asia pacific Journal of Information Systems, 24(4), 473-491.
  20. Lee, O.-KD., Lim, K. H., Sambamurthy, V., and Wei, K. K. (2007). IT-enabled organizational agility and firms' sustainable competitive advantage. In Proceedings of Twenty-Eighth International Conference on Information Systems.
  21. Lee, O.-K., Sambamurthy, V., Lim, K. H., and Wei, K. K. (2015). How does IT ambidexterity impact organizational agility? Information Systems Research, 26(2), 398-417.
  22. Lim, J. S., and Oh, J. I. (2017). The effect of the introduction characteristics of cloud computing services on the performance expectancy of firms: Setting up innovativeness as the moderator. Information Systems Review, 19(1), 75-100.
  23. Loch, K. D., Straub, D. W., and Kamel, S. (2003). Diffusing the Internet in the Arab world: The role of social norms and technological culturation. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 50(1), 45-63.
  24. Lohmoller, J. B. (1989). The PLS program system: Latent variables path analysis with partial least squares estimation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 23, 125-127.
  25. Low, C., Chen, Y., and Wu, M. (2011). Understanding the determinants of cloud computing adoption. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 111(7), 1006-1023.
  26. Lu, Y., and Ramamurthy, K. R. (2011). Understanding the link between information technology capability and organizational agility: An empirical examination. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 931-954.
  27. Nambisan, S. (2002). Complementary product integration by high technology new ventures: The role of initial technology strategy. Management Science, 48(3), 382-398.
  28. Pang, M., Lee, G., and DeLone, W. H. (2014). IT resources, organizational capabilities, and value creation in public sector organizations: A public-value management perspective. Journal of Information Technology, 29(3), 187-205
  29. Pearce, M., Zeadally, S., and Hunt, R. (2013). Virtualization: Issues, security threats, and solutions. ACM Computer Survey, 45(2), 17-56.
  30. Petter, S., Straub, D., and Rai, A. (2007). Specifying formative constructs in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 31(4), 623-656.
  31. Raisch, S., and Birkinshaw, J. (2008). Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of Management, 34(3), 375-409.
  32. Ross, J. (2003). Creating a strategic IT architecture competency: Learning in stages. MIT Sloan Management School, Working Paper No. 4314-03, 1-18.
  33. Saga, V. L., and Zmud, R. W. (1993). The nature and determinants of IT acceptance, routinization, and infusion. In proceedings of the IFIP TC8 working conference on diffusion, transfer, and implementation of information technology, 67-88.
  34. Sambamurthy, V., Bharadwaj, A., and Grover, V. (2003). Shaping agility through digital options: Reconceptualizing the role of information technology in contemporary firms. MIS Quarterly, 27(2), 237-263.
  35. Schilling, M. (2000). Toward a general modular systems theory and its application to interfirm product modularity. Academy of Management Review, 25(2), 312-334.
  36. Seo, D. B, La Paz, A. I., and Miranda, J. (2014). Information systems for organizational agility: Action research on resource scheduling at the Universidad de Chile. Asia Pacific Journal of Information Systems, 24(4), 417-441.
  37. Simon, H. A. (1962). The architecture of complexity. In Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 106, 467-482.
  38. Tallon, P. P., and Pinsonneault, A. (2011). Competing perspectives on the link between strategic information technology alignment and organizational agility: Insights from a mediation model. MIS Quarterly, 35(2), 436-486.
  39. Teo, H. H., Wei, K. K., and Benbasat, I. (2003). Predicting intention to adopt interorganizational linkages: An institutional perspective. MS Quarterly, 27(1), 19-49.
  40. Tiwana, A., and Konsynski, B. (2010). Complementarities between organizational IT architecture and governance structure. Information Systems Research, 21(2), 288-304.
  41. Tushman, M. L., and O'Reilly, C. A. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4), 8-30.
  42. Weick, K. R., and Orton, J. D. (1990). Loosely coupled systems: A reconceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 203-223.
  43. Weill, P., and Ross, J. W. (2005). A matrix approach to designing IT governance. Sloan Management Review, 46(2), 26-34.
  44. Xia, W., and Lee, G. (2005). Complexity of Information Systems Development Projects: Conceptualization and Measurement Development. Journal of Management Information Systems, 22(1), 45-83.
  45. Yoo, C. S. (2011). Cloud computing: Architectural and policy implications. Review of Industrial Organization, 38(4), 405-421.
  46. Yoo, Y. (2013). The tables have turned: How can the information systems field contribute to technology and innovation management research. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 14, 227-236.
  47. Zweben, S. H., Edwards, S. H., Weide, B. W., and Hollingsworth, J. E. (1995). The effects of layering and encapsulation on software development cost and quality. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 21(3), 200-208.