Martin Mocker

Information systems strategy: reconceptualization, measurement, and implications

Information systems strategy is of central importance to IS practice and research. Our extensive review of the literature suggests that the concept of IS strategy is a term that is used readily; however, it is also a term that is not fully understood. In this study, we follow a perspective paradigm based on the strategic management literature to define IS strategy as an organizational perspective on the investment in, deployment, use, and management of IS. Through a systematic literature search, we identify the following three conceptions of IS strategy employed implicitly in 48 articles published in leading IS journals that focus on the construct of IS strategy: (1) IS strategy as the use of IS to support business strategy; (2) IS strategy as the master plan of the IS function; and (3) IS strategy as the shared view of the IS role within the organization. We find the third conception best fits our definition of IS strategy. As such, we consequently propose to operationalize IS strategy as the degree to which the organization has a shared perspective to seek innovation through IS. Specifically, our proposed IS strategic typology suggests an organizations IS strategy falls into one of the two defined categories (i.e., IS innovator or IS conservative) or is simply undefined. We also develop measures for this new typology. We argue that the proposed instrument, which was cross-validated across both chief information officers and senior business executives, has the potential to serve as a diagnostic tool through which the organization can directly assess its IS strategy. We contend that our reconceptualization and operationalization of IS strategy provides theoretical and practical implications that advance the current level of understanding of IS strategy from extant studies within three predominant literature streams: strategic IS planning, IS/business strategic alignment, and competitive use of IS.

What Is Complex About 273 Applications? Untangling Application Architecture Complexity in a Case of European Investment Banking

In this paper, we first derive propositions from the current literature addressing the causes and impacts of application architecture (AA) complexity. We then untangle AA complexity itself by differentiating four types of AA complexity that are mingled in extant literature: interdependency-, diversity-, deviation-, and overlap-related AA complexity. Based on this more differentiated view, we validate the propositions in the setting of a European Bank. Our findings suggest that only interdependency-related AA complexity behaves as currently assumed. Other types show partially opposite effects.

No Time to Waste: The Role of Timing and Complementarity of Alignment Practices in Creating Business Value in it Projects

Despite significant research progress, alignment-related issues are among the top concerns of executives. Previous studies mostly focus on a company-wide strategic level of alignment; while this ‘top-down’ view has benefits, it largely ignores the operational practices that help achieve alignment in IT projects as well as the impact that timing and complementarity of practices have on achieving alignment. In our research we apply four alignment practices – communication, shared understanding, management commitment and IT investment evaluation – to individual IT projects rather than at a company level; specifically, we look at the role of timing and complementarity for these alignment practices throughout different project phases. A detailed analysis of six IT projects carried out at three companies in the telecommunications industry reveals that IT projects creating higher business value employ all four alignment practices immediately from the start. No project was able to recover from failing to establish these four alignment practices in the first phase. While supporting the importance of complementarity of alignment practices, our findings also add the importance of the earliness of this complementarity.

Revisiting complexity in the digital age

This publication contains reprint articles for which IEEE does not hold copyright. Full text is not available on IEEE Xplore for these articles.

So You Want To Go Digital? How To Avoid The Next Legacy Platform Debacle

IT platforms as the foundation of digitized processes and products are vital in a digital economy. However, many companies’ platforms are liabilities, not strategic assets because of their complexity. Consequently, companies initiate IT complexity reduction programs. But these technology-centric programs at best provide temporary relief. Soon after, companies’ platforms become just as complex as before. Based on four case studies, we identify three non-technical drivers of platform complexity: (1) Lacking awareness of consequences business decisions have on platform complexity, (2) Lacking motivation to avoid platform complexity, (3) Lacking authority to protect platforms from complexity. We propose measures to address these drivers that can help achieve more sustainable impact on platform complexity: (1) Removing information asymmetries between those creating complexity and those dealing with complexity, (2) Redefining incentives to include long-term effects on platform complexity, (3) Redressing power imbalances between those who create complexity and those who have to manage it.

Designing an Agile Software Portfolio Architecture: The Impact of Coupling on Performance

The modern industrial firm increasingly relies on software to support its competitive position. However, the uncertain and dynamic nature of today’s global marketplace dictates that this software be continually evolved and adapted, to meet new business challenges. This ability – to rapidly update, improve, remove, replace, and reimagine the software applications that underpin a firm’s competitive position – is at the heart of what has been called IT agility. Unfortunately, we have little understanding of the antecedents of IT agility, specifically with respect to the choices that a firm makes when designing its portfolio of software applications. In this paper, we explore the relationship between software portfolio architecture and IT agility. In particular, we use modular systems theory to examine how different types of coupling impact the ability to maintain, retire and commission new software applications. We test our hypotheses with a unique longitudinal dataset from a large financial services firm. Our sample comprises information on over 2,000 software applications observed over a 4-year period. We find that applications with higher levels of coupling cost more to maintain, are less likely to be retired, and are less likely to be commissioned. However, we show specific types of coupling present greater challenges than others, in terms of their impact. In particular, applications that are cyclically coupled (i.e., mutually interdependent) are the most difficult to manage, in terms of maintaining and updating the software portfolio. Our results suggest that IT managers have a critical design role to play, in firms that seek enhanced digital agility.