Content uploaded by Richard T. Watson
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Richard T. Watson on Oct 13, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
Key Issues in Information Systems Management:
An International Perspective
Authors:
Richard T. Watson*
Department of Management
Terry College of Business
University of Georgia
Athens GA 30602-6256
(706) 542-3706
rwatson@uga.cc.uga.edu
Gigi G. Kelly
School of Business Administration
College of William and Mary
Williamsburg VA 23187
gigik@aol.com
Robert D. Galliers
Warwick Business School
Warwick University
Coventry CV4 7AL
United Kingdom
orsrg@wbs.warwick.ac.uk
and
James C. Brancheau
University of Colorado
Graduate School of Business
Campus Box 419
Boulder, Colorado 80309
(303) 492-5830
james.brancheau@colorado.edu
Citation: Watson, R. T., G. G. Kelly, R. D. Galliers, and J. C. Brancheau. 1997. Key
issues in information systems management: an international perspective. Journal of
Management Information Systems 13 (4):91-115.
* All correspondence to be addressed to this author
2
Key Issues in Information Systems Management:
An International Review
Abstract
This study compares and contrasts the findings of recent information systems (IS)
management studies in ten nations or regions as well as one US multinational study. It
examines the key concerns of IS executives in these areas, focusing on identifying and
explaining regional similarities and differences. Internationally, there are substantial
differences in key issues. Possible reasons for these differences—cultural, economic
development, political/legal environment, and technological status—are discussed. The
analysis suggests that national culture and economic development can explain
differences in key issues. The paper concludes by outlining a revised framework for key
issues studies that will more readily support comparison across time and nations.
Keywords: IS Management, Key Issues, Management Priorities, International.
Introduction
Information Systems (IS) departments face many challenges in today's rapidly
changing, highly competitive, global environment. One approach to understanding the
challenges faced by IS departments is to survey IS executives and managers in order to
elicit their key issues. This method of gathering and reporting IS issues initially started in
the United States (US) over a decade ago [14] and has been extended to several other
countries.
Watson and Brancheau [37] report the key issues studies conducted prior to 1991. After
analyzing the similarities and differences among these studies, they explicitly note the
importance of such studies and advocate additional key issues studies in other
countries. Furthermore, they suggest that the format and issues of the US Society for
3
Information Management (SIM) key issues study [14] be adopted as the baseline, given
its prevalent use by researchers. By using a similar method across studies, comparison
of results is enhanced.
Since the publication of Watson and Brancheau's paper [37], there has been
considerable research activity in this area. IS key issues studies have been conducted
in many countries (Estonia, the Gulf Cooperative Council, Hong Kong, India, Slovenia,
and Taiwan), while previously published key issues studies have been repeated
(Australia, Europe, United Kingdom, and United States), and an international key issues
study, based on the perceptions of IS managers of US-based multinationals, has been
reported. This paper replicates and extends Watson and Brancheau's [37] work by
analyzing and integrating the most recently reported key issues research. We confine
our attention to research that included a survey instrument similar to those used in the
SIM study. We do not deal with studies based on interviews (e.g., [33,8]) because of the
inherent problems and limitations of trying to compare interview and survey research
findings.
There are two major motivations for this research. The first motivation is to present the
key concerns of IS executives and managers worldwide and determine which concerns
are global and which are regional in nature. By assessing the similarities and
differences of regional issues, IS executives should be better prepared to manage their
increasingly global function. More importantly, however, there is a need to understand
the forces that shape key issues so that managers can predict and plan rather than
react. Thus, the second motivation is to present an explanation for differences in key
issues based on variables that differ among regions. While a regional study can attempt
to explain the causes of key issues in terms of organizational factors (e.g., [36]), a
comparative international analysis can consider other variables (e.g., national culture,
economic structure, political/legal environment, and technological status) as well.
4
After discussing the research methodology, the paper summarizes the findings of 11
recent key issues studies. Then, it presents a theoretical explanation for understanding
differences in key issues. This is followed by the use of correspondence analysis for
visually displaying regional similarities and differences, and a comparative analysis of
the key issues of each region. The conclusion of the paper discusses the implications of
the findings for practitioners and academics. Suggestions are offered for changing the
methodology of key issues research to improve the rigor of both individual and
comparative analyses.
Research Method
Our study employs a secondary data analysis [34] using the results of recent studies
conducted by other MIS scholars in various regions. Secondary data analysis,
permitting the researcher to work with existing data, avoids the costs of data collection,
builds on existing findings, and permits comparison of data across studies.
Nevertheless, it has a downside. The original data collection and reporting might have
had some flaws, the data might have been collected for a different purpose, the data
may be no longer current, and there are often problems in integrating data from different
sources [34, 23]. Despite its shortcoming, secondary data analysis is an appropriate
methodology for a comparison of existing key issues data given the high costs and
imposing logistics of administering such a study on a global scale
Key issues studies
The studies (Australia, Estonia, Europe, the Gulf Cooperative Council, Hong Kong,
India, Slovenia, Taiwan, UK, and US) selected for analysis represent the most current
and consistent data available. In the case of the US, where several studies are available
for analysis, two were selected. The most recent US SIM Delphi (hereafter referred to
as US SIM) study is chosen because of the strength of its approach, and because it was
5
used as a basis for many of the other studies reported here. Also, the US multinational
(US MNC) study is included because its international perspective aligns with the
purpose of this paper.
Rather than reproduce the major findings of each study, we elect to summarize briefly
each study (see Table 1) by indicating its region, the authors, and other pertinent
details. In addition, we established a World Wide Web site1
to report additional details of
each key issues study. This makes these data available for secondary analysis by other
researchers.
Table 1: Summary of key issues studies
Country Source US SIM
study as
basis
Number
of
rounds*
Year data
collected Sample
size Response
rate
(percent)
Australia Pervan [28] Yes 3 1991 88 29
Estonia Dexter, Janson, Kiudorf, and Laast-
Laas [13] Yes 3 1991 24 85
Europe CSC Index [9] Yes 1 1993 183 -
Gulf
Cooperation
Council
Badri [2] Yes 1 1990 96 80
Hong Kong Burn, Saxena, Ma, and Cheung [6] No 3 1991 - 92 46 40
India Palvia and Palvia [26] No 1 1990 - -
Slovenia Dekleva and Zupancic [12] Yes 4 1992 148 80
Taiwan Harrison and Farn [20] Yes 1 1989 94 39
United
Kingdom Galliers, Merali, and Spearing [17] Yes 1 1992 66 -
United States
SIM Niederman, Brancheau, and
Wetherbe [25] Yes 3 1989 104 59
United States
MNC Deans, Karwan, Goslar, Ricks and
Toyne [10] No 1 1988 121 31
* The original key issues study [14] used a four-round Delphi approach and many researchers continue to
follow the Delphi method [3].
1
http://www.cba.uga.edu/iris/kimain.html
6
Combining the studies for analysis
Following the work of Watson and Brancheau [37], the most current published US SIM
based issues [25] are used as the basis for a standardized (international) set of issues.
Mapping the national issues into a standard international set permits comparison of the
studies from Australia, Estonia, Gulf Cooperative Council, Hong Kong, Slovenia, UK,
and US with only minor reinterpretation. Although not explicitly stated, the wording of
the European results is very similar to the US SIM study and allows for easy mapping of
issues across studies. Hong Kong and India, although following the methods of the US
SIM study, developed unique issues for each country. Mapping these results into
international issues is more difficult due to differences in the wording used to describe
the issues. Nevertheless, careful review of these studies enables a reasonably accurate
mapping. The studies for Estonia, Gulf Cooperative Council, Hong Kong, India, and
Slovenia, include their authors' comparison to the US SIM results [5, 25], thus assisting
in the mapping of issues across studies. The US MNC study presents some problems
because it includes many issues that are not easily aligned with the US SIM base. Many
of these issues deal specifically with problems that multinationals might face (e.g.,
currency restrictions and exchange rate volatility). Nevertheless, after reading the
rationales for each issue and exercising judgment, it is possible to map most of the
more general issues.
Table 2 lists the international issues after they were mapped into a parsimonious set. A
total of 54 unique issues were identified across the 11 studies. Issues that were
included in only one survey are not shown. Most of these, 21 out of 27, are from the US
MNC study.
7
Table 2: International Issues in IS Management
Issue National
surveys
including issue
Surveys where
issue ranked in
the top 10
Origination
nation/year
1 Developing and Implementing an Information Architecture 5 5 US SIM (1986)
2 Making Effective Use of the Data Resource 8 7 US SIM (1983)
3 Improving IS Strategic Planning 9 6 US SIM (1983)
4 Using Information Systems for Competitive Advantage 8 7 US SIM (1986)
5 Aligning the IS Organization within the Enterprise 11 7 US SIM (1983)
6 Improving Information Security & Control 8 6 US SIM (1983)
7 Increasing Understanding of IS's Role & Contribution 7 4 US SIM (1983)
8 Recruiting and Developing IS Human Resources 11 6 US SIM (1983)
9 Facilitating Organizational Learning & Use of IT 8 4 US SIM (1983)
10 Improving the Effectiveness of Software Development 11 7 US SIM (1983)
11 Planning and Managing Telecommunications 8 4 US SIM (1983)
12 Developing and Managing Distributed Systems 5 0 US SIM (1989)
13 Managing the Existing Applications Portfolio 5 2 US SIM (1983)
14 Measuring IS Effectiveness and Productivity 7 2 US SIM (1983)
15 Implementing Decision and Executive Support Systems
(Expanded to ESS in 1989)
5 1 US SIM (1983)
16 Facilitating and Managing End-User Computing 8 2 US SIM (1983)
17 Building a Responsive IT Infrastructure 7 4 US SIM (1989)
18 Improving Disaster Recovery Capabilities 2 1 US SIM (1989)
19 Determining Appropriate IS Funding Level 5 1 US SIM (1983)
20 Implementing and Managing Office Automation 3 1 US SIM (1983)
21 Reengineering Business Processes through IT 2 2 Europe (1989)
and UK (1992)
22 Education of Senior Management 3 3 US MNC
(1988)
23 Improving Data Integrity and Quality Assurance 5 3 US SIM (1986)
24 Instituting Cross-Functional Information Systems 2 2 Europe (1989)
25 Changing technology platforms 2 1 Europe (1993)
26 Moving to open systems/standards 3 1 Europe (1993)
27 National communication infrastructure 2 - US MNC
(1988)
Table 3 presents the median ranking,2
in ascending order, of the international issues
from the results of the 11 studies presented above. In order to be considered an issue
2
Because rankings are ordinal data, the median was used to indicate the central tendency of each issue
across nations. An approximate 95% confidence interval for the median ranking was calculated using the
method described by Gibbons [17].
8
had to be included in at least 5 of the 11 studies. This requirement eliminated 35 of the
56 issues (63%); thus, indicating that more than half of the
9
Table 3: International Issues in IS Management
National/Regional Rankings
Overall
ranking International issue Australia
'91 Estonia
'91 Europe
'92
Gulf
Cooperative
Council
'91
Hong
Kong
'90 India
'91 Slovenia
'92 Taiwan
'89
United
Kingdom
'92
United
States
SIM
'90
United
States
MNC
'88 Median
ranking Confidenc
e
interval
1Strategic planning 1 19 12 1 2 18 3 - 2 3 - 3 1 -1 8
2IS organizational alignment 3 26 3 5 3 13 5 1 14 7 11 5 3 - 13
3Information architecture 6 8 4 - - - - - 7 1 - 6 1 - 8
3Competitive advantage 5 23 - 4 6 - - 2 6 8 7 6 4 - 8
3Data as a resource 4 10 7 14 5 - - - 3 2 8 6 3 - 10
3Human resources 17 16 6 13 1 2 2 4 15 4 13 6 2 - 15
3Security & control 19 4 - 2 - 9 - 8 4 19 2 6 2 -1 9
8Integrating technology 6 12 21 22 7 6 2 - - - - 7 2 - 22
9Software development 8 15 11 9 6 7 12 10 5 9 14 9 7 - 12
9IS's role and contribution 9 20 - 6 - 1 1 - 11 11 - 9 1 - 20
Note: This table covers only issues included in at least 5 of the 11 studies reviewed
1 0
issues were unique to a particular nation or region, with this inference being particularly
applicable to the US MNC study.
Inspection of Table 3 indicates some general agreement on the importance of issues,
however there is by no means consensus on what matters. Strategic planning, for
instance, the issue with the lowest median ranking, appears in the top three issues in
six studies, but it is not deemed important in either the Indian and Estonia studies. Since
seven of the median rankings are clustered around 5 and 7, it is not possible to
discriminate about the importance of these issues. Essentially, there are several issues
that are seen as important across the globe, and there is considerable diversity of
opinion as to the relative importance of these issues.
An earlier analysis [37] classified key issues along the dimensions of
management/technology, planning/control, and internal/external. This classification was
derived from Brancheau and Wetherbe's [5] and Hirschheim et al.’s [21] work. For
example, strategic planning is a managerial, planning, and external issue. Table 4
reports the classification for each issue with the 1991 and 1994 rankings.
1 1
Table 4: International issues in IS management: classification of Issues
1994
Ranking 1991
Ranking International Issue M/T P/C I/E
1 1 Strategic planning M P E
2 2 IS organization alignment M C E
3 5 Information architecture M P I
3 3 Competitive advantage M P E
3 8 Data as a resource M C E
3 6 Human resources M C I
3 14 Security & control T C I
8 12 Integrating technology T C E
9 10 Software development T C I
9 3 IS's role and contribution M P E
Note: Issues were classified as follows: "M/T" indicates management (M) or
technology (T) issue, "P/C" indicates planning (P) or control (C) issue, "I/E"
indicates internal (I) or external (E) issue.
Among the top ten issues identified in this comparative study, most are management-
related concerns. There is a pronounced strategic focus on how IS can support the
enterprise, which indicates that IS executives require leadership ability as well as
technical skills [1]. Furthermore, there is a split between issues of control and planning,
which may reflect the balance between these two perspectives that IS managers must
maintain. Also, there is division between external and internal issues. Clearly, IS
management is not a simple task as managers must be able to simultaneously operate
in a fluctuating nexus of planning/control and external/issues tensions.
Comparison with 1991 international key issues study
Although it is somewhat dangerous to compare the findings of this study with the 1991
study [37] due to differences in regional coverage, there is merit in at least viewing the
comparison at a high level. There is no association between the 1991 and 1994 ranks
(Spearman’s Rho = .54, p = .11). This could be due to the rapid changes since the prior
1 2
study or to the different mix of countries in each study. Observe, however, that the top
two issues have not changed, and competitive advantage is still tied for third. There are
two new issues, Security and control and Integrating technology, which displace End-
user computing and Organizational learning, respectively. Note the elevation of Security
and control (from 14 to 3) and the demotion of IS’s role and contribution (from 3 to 9).
End-User Computing may have lost importance in part because it has been integrated
into organizational computing [24].
Explaining difference in regional rankings
As we mentioned previously, we believe key issues research needs to move beyond
just listing and commenting on the top issues. It needs to advance understanding of
what makes an issue prominent. Several factors (see Figure 1) potentially influencing
information technology (IT) differences between regions are national culture, economic
structure, political/legal environment, and technological status [10]. These variables are
in accord with, but broader in scope than, those suggested by Ein Dor, Segev and
Orgad [15] in their framework for global IS research. Their framework proposes that
national culture, economic factors, and geographic factors influence the development of
IT in different countries. Due to their broader scope, we opted to follow Deans and
Ricks’[11] model. Although we present a macro view of the influences on these issues,
there may also be micro factors influencing key issues (e.g., personality of the CIO).
Furthermore, there is certain to be considerable debate over the interaction between the
factors depicted within the box. For example, the US, UK, and Australia favor private
enterprise (an economic structure) and democracy (a political/legal environment), and
both of these effects may be due to national culture. Nevertheless, we suggest this
model as a starting point for considering what influences key issues.
1 3
Key issues
National culture
Economic structure
Political/legal environment
Technological status
Figure 1: Dimensions influencing key IS issues
Source: Deans and Ricks [11]
National culture
Several authors (e.g., [11, 29]) have suggested that differences in national culture may
explain differences in IS effects. In one situation, two case studies from South-East Asia
are used to demonstrate how Hofstede’s [22] ideas can explain variations in systems in
different cultures [29].
Hofstede’s [22] revision of his seminal work identifies five dimensions of national
culture: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism, masculinity, and time
orientation (see Appendix A for a description of the dimensions). The values for these
dimensions are shown in Table 5, with Europe and Estonia excluded. Europe is many
cultures, and Estonia was not included in Hofstede’s analysis.
1 4
Table 5: Dimensions of culture
Source: Hofstede [22]
Country Power
Distance Uncertainty
Avoidance Individualism Masculinity Time
Orientation
Australia 36 51 90 61 31
Gulf
Cooperative
Council
80 68 38 53
Hong Kong 68 29 25 57 96
India 77 40 48 56 56
Slovenia 76 88 27 21
Taiwan 58 69 17 45 87
United
Kingdom 35 35 89 66 25
United States 40 46 91 62 29
Hofstede asserts that the interaction of power distance and uncertainty avoidance
results in four dominant organizational forms (see Figure 2). Based on Hofstede's
measures, the cultures of Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States are
similar and the difference in these studies should not necessarily be attributed to
cultural differences. We could make similar conclusions for other groups of countries
falling in the same quadrant of figure 2. In contrast, differences between countries falling
in different quadrants are possibly explained by cultural differences.
1 5
Uncertainty avoidance
Power
distance Well-Oiled machine
Pyramid of people
Village market
Family
Low
High
Low High
Australia
United Kingdom
United States
Gulf Cooperative
Slovenia
Hong Kong
India
Taiwan
Figure 2: National culture and organizational structure
Adapted from Hofstede [22]
Economic structure
Another factor to be considered is the economic development status of the country or
region. Key issues researchers [27] suggest that as a nation progresses through
different stages of economic and IT development, the relevant key issues should
change from infrastructure issues to operational issues, and finally to strategic issues.
Table 6 presents each of the countries’ Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and GDP per
capita. The stage of economic development is based on GDP.
1 6
Table 6: Economic Status for Countries/Regions
Source: 1995 CIA World Factbook [7]
Country/Region GDP Per Capita GDP Economy
Australia $375 billion $20,720 Developed
Estonia $10 billion $6,460 Developing
Europe - - Developed
Gulf Cooperative Council - - Developing
Hong Kong $136 billion $24,530 Developed
India $1,254 billion $1,360 Developing
Slovenia $16 billion $8,110 Developing
Taiwan $257 billion $12,070 Developing
United Kingdom $1,045 billion $17,980 Developed
United States $6,738 billion $25,800 Developed
On the basis of economic development, Australia, Europe, Hong Kong, the United
Kingdom, and the United States are developed economies. Strategic issues should be
of significant interest to this group because of the advanced nature of IS in these
economies. The GCC, India, Slovenia, and Taiwan are developing countries with issues
driven more by operational needs. Estonia appears to be a special case within our
sample because of its need to create a national IT infrastructure. Economic
development coupled with cultural differences may help explain some of the large scale
differences between the studies.
Political/Legal Environment
The political/legal environment can have a significant impact on which IS issues are
considered important as some examples clearly demonstrate. The political
transformation in Eastern Europe has had tremendous influence on many aspects of
business, including key IS issues such as telecommunications. In India, the government
has considerable influence over the deployment of technology. In Hong Kong, the
changes anticipated with the 1997 government handover are creating uncertainty. In the
US, the government’s policy to convert major elements of the Internet from public to
1 7
private ownership has made electronic commerce a key issue for many firms. The
political/legal dimension is a very prominent factor that can quickly alter which issues
are considered critical.
Technological Status
There is considerable diversity in the technological status of many regions. In Estonia,
for example, the availability of telephone lines is still very much an issue, and this in turn
has a direct impact on telecommunications. Also, the other dimensions (national culture,
economic development, and political environment) have an impact on the technological
status. For example, the GCC countries did not become economic powers until the late
1970’s, and it has only been in the last eight years that these countries have invested
heavily in technological infrastructure.
Comparing the regional views using correspondence analysis
Correspondence analysis [19], a visual data analysis method for contingency tables, is
an appropriate statistical technique for analyzing regional differences when there are
few observations (11 regions) and four independent variables. It is an exploratory
technique for displaying the rows (i.e., issues) and columns (i.e., regions) of a data
matrix as points in one- or two-dimensional space. It decomposes the Chi-square
measure of association of a table into components in a manner similar to that of
principal component analysis for continuous data. If two rows or columns have similar
profiles, their points appear close together in the perceptual map created by
correspondence analysis. Correspondence analysis was used by Watson and
Brancheau [37] to display the relationship between key issues and regions. The ranking
of issues was transformed into a form suitable for correspondence analysis (see [37]),
1 8
which was then used to create a perceptual map of the top ten issues and eleven
regions.3
The eigenvalues generated by correspondence analysis are similar to those obtained in
factor analysis. An eigenvalue indicates the amount of variance (inertia in
correspondence analysis terms) accounted for by a factor (see Table 7). Slightly more
than 65% of the variance is explained by the first two eigenvalues, suggesting a two
dimensional map captures a considerable proportion of the variance.
Table 7: Correspondence analysis eigenvalues
Dimension Eigenvalue Percent
1 (vertical) 0.37 36%
2 (horizontal) 0.33 29%
3 0.24 15%
4 0.18 8%
5 0.16 7%
6 0.09 2%
7 0.06 1%
8 0.05 1%
9 0.03 0%
Another statistic provided by correspondence analysis is the partial contributions to
variance for the rows (issues) and column (regions) points. Examination of the issues
(see Table 8) shows that the vertical dimension is mainly explained by Integrating
technology, Competitive advantage, and IS’s role and contribution, with respective
contributions of 31%, 21%, and 18%. These features represent 70% of the variance
explained by the vertical dimension (36%) or 25% (0.36 x 0.70) of the total variance.
3
The values reported by the correspondence analysis should be treated with due caution given the
mapping of similar, but not identical, issues to a common set for a cross-study comparison and missing
values in the data set.
1 9
The horizontal dimension is primarily explained by Information architecture (55%), or
16% of the total variance. Inspection of Table 3 explains why this is so. Information
architecture is ranked relatively highly when included in a study but is missing from
many studies.
Table 8: Partial contributions of issues
Issue Vertical
(dimension 1)
Horizontal
(dimension 2)
Strategic planning 0.06 0.04
IS organization
alignment 0.00 0.03
Information
architecture 0.02 0.55
Competitive
advantage 0.21 0.06
Data as a resource 0.08 0.14
Human resources 0.01 0.03
Security & control 0.13 0.12
Integrating technology 0.31 0.00
Software
development 0.00 0.01
IS's role and
contribution 0.18 0.01
Examination of the regions (see Table 9) shows that the vertical dimension is mainly
explained by Slovenia, US MNC, India, and Taiwan, with respective contributions of
40%, 22%, 17% and 13%. These features represent 92% of the variance explained by
the vertical dimension (36%) or 33% of the total variance. The horizontal dimension is
mainly explained by Taiwan and Europe, with respective contributions of 24% and 22%
respectively or 13% of the total variance
2 0
Table 9: Partial contributions of regions
Region Vertical
(dimension 1)
Horizontal
(dimension 2)
Australia 0.01 0.05
Estonia 0.00 0.05
Europe 0.00 0.22
GCC 0.00 0.06
Hong
Kong 0.01 0.00
India 0.17 0.11
Slovenia 0.40 0.03
Taiwan 0.13 0.24
UK 0.05 0.04
US 0.02 0.11
US MNC 0.22 0.08
One of the advantages of correspondence analysis is the representation of the
statistical analysis as a two dimensional perceptual map. The main purpose of the map
is to display graphically those issues that are ranked similarly and those regions in
which overall rankings are similar. No relevance can be attached to the particular
quadrant in which an issue or region appears. It is the relative vertical or horizontal
distance between points that is significant.
Because rankings are missing for some regions, we treat the results cautiously and only
point out major differences. Inspection of Figure 3 reveals that on the vertical axis,
Slovenia, India, Taiwan, and US MNC (the regions explaining 33% of the variance) are
quite distant from the remaining regions, which are clustered together in the middle,
both vertically and horizontally. As for the top ten key issues, horizontally issue 3
(Information architecture, which explains 16% of the variance) is quite apart from the
rest, possibly, as noted before, because six regions did not rank this issue. Vertically,
issues 8 and 10 (Integrating technology and IS’s role and contribution) are close to
Slovenia and India because they are relatively more important issues for these nations.
2 1
Similarly, issues 4 and 7 (Competitive advantage and Security & control) are clustered
near US MNC and Taiwan. It is worth observing that the two US studies are some
distance apart. This could be due to differences in the timing and focus of these studies.
Broadly, correspondence analysis suggests India, Slovenia, Taiwan, and US MNC differ
substantially from the common view because of their attitudes on four issues.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Australia
Estonia
Europe GCC
Hong Kong
India
Slovenia
Taiwan
UK
US
US MNC
Issue
Region
1 Strategic planning
2 IS organizational alignment
3 Information architecture
4 Competitive advantage
5 Data as a resource
6 Human resources
7 Security & control
8 Integrating technology
9 Software development
10 IS's role and contribution
Figure 3: Perceptual map of regions and key issues
It is useful to compare the perceptual map with a clustering of regions based on national
culture and economic development. It is not feasible to cluster on the four explanatory
variables of Figure 1 because we simply don’t have enough data points. Nevertheless, it
should be realized that are strong linkages between these four variables, and that
economic development captures elements of economic structure, the political/legal
system, and technological status. Thus Village market - developed (a description used
2 2
in Figure 4) describes nations that have market economies, democratic systems, and
have large investments in advanced technologies.
If we use the data from Figure 2 (national culture and organizational structure), Table 6
(stage of economic development), and keep the relative positioning of the perceptual
map (Figure 3) we arrive at four clusters (see Figure 4). We cannot say anything about
a single region cluster (i.e., family-developed) because we have no points of
comparison. A visual inspection indicates that the common culture and stage of
economic development explain the relative closeness of Australia, the UK, and the US
As mentioned previously, it is the relative vertical or horizontal distance between points
on a perceptual map that is significant. Observe that the relative horizontal distance
between India and Taiwan is quite small, and similarly for GCC and Slovenia.
Consequently, the perceptual map provides some graphic support for the notion that
national culture and economic development have a major bearing on key issues.
2 3
Village market-
developed
Australia
U.K.
U.S.
Family-
developing
India
Taiwan
Pyramid of people-
developing
GCC
Slovenia
Family-
developed
Hong Kong
Figure 4: Clustering by national culture and economic development based on the
perceptual map
If we examine the issues prominent in the village market-developed nations (see Table
3), we see they center around using Strategic planning and Data as a
resource—reflections of a mature IT economy. This mirrors the nature of these
societies, where competitive forces and advanced economies encourage the rapid
adoption of new technology. These countries adopted IT many years ago, indeed they
were pioneers in the development of the industry. In contrast, the pyramid of people-
developing regions, not exposed to the same pressure to compete because decision
making is centralized and because there are less funds for new technology, have less
mature IT economies. Thus we see many firms in these regions still wrestling with the
role of IS in the organization (e.g., IS organizational alignment or IS’s role and
contribution) and developing human resources.
Regional analysis
Additional insights are gained from examining how each region compares to the group.
A regional analysis also helps to highlight local differences that cannot be attributed to
2 4
the four dimensions discussed above. We review the regions based on the similarity
revealed by the prior analysis and using the categories of Figure 4.
Village market - developed
The advanced Western democracies category, in which markets are the dominant
economic form, embraces Australia, Estonia, Europe, the UK, and the US These
regions are very similar in terms of economic development, political environment, and
technological infrastructure. While there are cultural variations, the market economy is
well-established in nearly all countries comprising this group, though to differing
degrees. We have included Estonia in this category because though clearly the
economy and technological infrastructure are not as developed, it does have a
parliamentary democracy and market economy, and the correspondence analysis
places it in the vicinity of the member of this group. As a group, the dominant concern is
strategic planning and data as a resource. We also observe differences due to local
conditions (e.g., re-engineering in Europe possibly as a result of continuing economic
integration).
United States SIM
The US SIM results are not surprising given the international scope of our analysis. The
top issues are strategically oriented which is to be expected in an advanced economy.
Niederman et al. [25] note two important trends, the rising importance of technology
infrastructure and the resurgence of internal IS effectiveness issues. The accelerating
change in information technology means IS managers have to confront infrastructure
issues more frequently. At the same time, IS departments, along with many other
corporate functions, are being held to a higher-level of accountability. Downsizing and
outsourcing are symptomatic of a highly competitive environment and the requisite
greater attention given to organizational effectiveness and the close scrutiny of each
unit's organizational contribution.
2 5
United States MNC
The US MNC study illustrates some of the problems of running an international IS
operation. This is particularly evident in the top ranking key issues (data security,
integration of technologies, and the price and quality of telecommunications). The
prominence of one issue, end-user computing, is probably due to timing. The study was
conducted in 1988 when this was a hot issue. The top ranked issue, educating senior
personnel, is quite distinct. The authors suggest that too many US-based managers
assume that what works in the US will work elsewhere. This indicates both a degree of
cultural and technological ignorance that is alarming and has important implications for
management well beyond the realms of IS.
Australia
Strategic issues (strategic planning, responsive IT Infrastructure, aligning the IS
organization with the enterprise) are of top concern in Australia which is similar to the
other well-developed regions in this sample. However, responsive IT infrastructure was
ranked higher by Australia than any other country. The need for integrated technology
platforms is recognized as a key component in order to contend in the competitive
environment. Open systems have been vaunted as a reality for several years; however,
there are still gaps in fulfilling this promise. One reason why IT integration may be of
higher importance is that the Australian IS manager, because of trading and historical
links, often has more choice than in many other countries. Australia and Japan have
extensive trade with each other, and Australia has historically had strong business ties
with the UK and US Thus, the Australian computer market, as with many other
Australian markets, has strong representation from Japanese, UK, and US firms. The
additional choice and competition could make IT integration a more complex task.
An outlier issue, compared to the other studies, is recruiting and developing human
resources for IS. This issue was ranked the lowest by Australia. Furthermore, this issue
2 6
ranked 17th in the 1992 study, a very significant decrease from the 2nd place it held in
the 1988 Australian study [35]. One reason for this shift is possibly the current tight job
market in Australia resulting in a healthy pool of qualified applicants.
United Kingdom
As with the European results, BPR is the top issue in the United Kingdom. Similar to
other advanced regions, strategic issues dominate IS managers’ concerns. The low
ranking of human resources is similar to that of Australia, but the explanation is
different. The researchers suggest that this low ranking is a reflection of "a failure to
recognize the importance of staff development for stakeholders ('users' and
'developers') in order to empower them to become more effective actors in the utilization
of IT in shaping the outcomes of the IS development process" [17] Furthermore, it is
suggested that UK managers tend to hold a narrow focus regarding managing IS. UK
executives appear to have some frustration with information technology. Outsourcing is
considered an answer in many cases, but this only puts IT out of sight … for the time
being.
Technology infrastructure was ranked 21st, which is an outlier compared to Australia,
Europe, and US SIM (2, 7, and 6, respectively). In explaining the low ranking by UK
managers, Galliers et al. suggest that there is perhaps a naive expectation among UK
IS managers that open systems and international standards will limit the significance of
this issue.
Europe
The more recent European results indicate that BPR is the top issue for European IS
executives. This issue is missing from all other surveys except the United Kingdom,
which is also a more recent survey. Timing of a survey appears to be critical when a
new issue rapidly invades the IS and business communities. In addition, building
computer systems to support cross-departmental boundaries was a new issue that
2 7
surfaced in the European survey. This issue is clearly linked with the re-engineering
focus that is the top concern. Given the goals of the European Union, it is evident that
radical changes may be required to support new business alliances and procedures.
Organizations need to redesign standard operating procedures to operate in the context
of a European rather than domestic market. Thus, we have the confluence of the
current popularity of BPR in the IS press and the need to adapt to a new environment.
Estonia
The key IS issue in Estonia is the planning and implementing of telecommunications
systems. The existing telecommunication system is unreliable, resulting in data being
transported on disks. Although developed countries, such as the US, UK, and Hong
Kong, rated telecommunications as an issue (10-12-9, respectively), Estonia's concerns
are considerably more basic, because it is concerned with the lack of stable national
telecommunications networks. Such networks (taken for granted in developed nations)
provide a foundation for building organizational networks. It is currently impractical to
link intra- and inter-organizational sites. Estonia, like many Eastern European countries,
has recently experienced massive political and economic changes, which have a direct
impact on IS and will continue to do so. Strategic issues such as strategic planning, IS
for competitive advantage, and IS organizational alignment ranked 19th, 23rd, and 26th,
respectively, clearly and uniquely distinguish Estonia's IS issues from those of the other
countries and regions included in this analysis.
Family - developing
The developing Eastern nations of Taiwan and India, while falling into the same
cultural/economic grouping, are vastly different in terms of economic development. This
difference is reflected in the prominent key issues. Taiwan, like advanced Western
economies, shows greater concern for strategic issues, and India is wrestling with
understanding IS's contribution and human resource issues.
2 8
Taiwan
The Taiwanese survey differed the greatest in format from the US SIM survey. It is
believed that this departure did lead to some significant differences in the reported key
issues. However, it is interesting to note that two new issues were added: establishing
and/or maintaining effective communications with end users, and establishing and/or
maintaining effective communications with top management (3 and 5, respectively). The
emphasis on effective communications has not been explicitly identified in the US SIM
survey, although the concept is embedded in many of the issues. By listing this issue
separately, the significance of communication for Taiwanese IS managers is
highlighted. Would these issues receive as high a ranking if included in the other
surveys? This is one of many questions raised in this analysis that can only be
answered by further research.
India
India, along with Slovenia, ranked understanding the role and contribution of IS as its
top issue, with human resources and personnel for IS as the number two issue. In
developing countries, it is not uncommon that a lack of knowledge exists regarding the
potential uses of new technologies. It is understandable that human resources and
personnel would be a concern for developing countries given the relative newness of IT
for these nations. Education will be required to address these top two issues in both
India and Slovenia. A marked difference between India and Slovenia is the issue of
strategic planning (18th vs. 3rd). IS managers in India appear to more focused on
operational issues with little concern for longer term issues.
Pyramid of people - developing
Although these two countries fall into the same cultural/economic quadrant, they are
quite dissimilar in many respects. The GCC is an oil province steeped in Arabic culture.
2 9
Slovenia, an emerging democracy, is a former Yugoslavian republic. Not surprisingly
the key issues differ considerably and appear to be due to local conditions.
Gulf Cooperative Council
The key concerns of the GCC illustrate a mixture of issues. The top issue is improving
strategic planning followed by improving information security and control. This
combination correlates with the UK’s ranking of these issues (2nd and 4th). The data do
not provide any clear reasoning for this match. As the world's largest oil producing
region, the GCC is a rich area that is fully embracing information technology. Because
the GCC is still in the early stage of development, security and control are an important
issue. Furthermore organizational learning and the use of IS technologies are important
as IT revolutionizes the way firms operate. The issues for the GCC appear to be unique
with little similarities to the other studies.
Slovenia
The top issues of Slovenia were previously discussed in comparison with India.
Although MIS strategic planning was identified as a top issue, other supporting strategic
issues such as data as a resource, IS for competitive advantage, and IS portfolio and
organizational structure are absent from issues identified in Slovenia. Although it is
sensitive to MIS strategic planning, Slovenia as a developing county is primarily
concerned with operational issues.
Family - developed
The only region in this group is Hong Kong, and the issues reflect a very local
situation—forthcoming reabsorption into China.
Hong Kong
Retaining, recruiting, and training personnel is a greater issue in Hong Kong than in any
other region, ranking as the top issue. Justification for this position is given to the timing
3 0
of the survey and the political climate that existed in 1990 after the 1989 Beijing incident
and with the reintegration of the territory into mainland China in 1997. Unlike Australia
where there may be an oversupply of IS skills, Hong Kong suffers from an unskilled IS
work force. Furthermore, many of the skilled personnel have emigrated to other
countries. India and Slovenia also face the challenges of finding and retaining qualified
IS personnel. Given the international nature of IS and the ready transfer of skills to other
countries, it is not surprising to find that Hong Kong's IS professionals are highly mobile.
IS professionals, unlike accountants or lawyers, do not face local certification and
registration rules (e.g., CPA and bar exams) which impede their movement.
Limitations
Key issues studies, whose popularity has grown rapidly in the past several years,
provide insights into the management of IS when the findings for different regions are
compared and contrasted. However, any analysis must be done with the understanding
that there are several methodological concerns. First, although many studies are based
on the US SIM survey, most researchers make modifications when conducting their
specific research to take account of local concerns. Second, the period for each of
these studies varies from 1988 - 1992. Although there is only a maximum of four years'
difference, this can have an impact on the results. Because of the delay between
compilation of results and their publication, new and emerging issues may appear only
on the most recent regional surveys. For instance, BPR is a phenomenon that has
become a key IS issue for developed nations. Although this issue is missing from our
analysis, we would be remiss not to point out that it currently appears to be paramount
in many of IS executives' and managers' agendas throughout the Western world, as
indicated in the UK results. Consequently, timing differences contribute to the difficulty
of comparing studies because the lack of consideration of some issues results in
missing data, with subsequent problems for statistical analysis. Third, the composition
3 1
of the respondents to the survey can vary from IS executives to general business
managers. Finally, methods for analyzing the results of the surveys vary and are
reflected in the interpretations and conclusions reported in the regional studies. Despite
these limitations, we believe the data provide useful evidence for explaining why some
IS management concerns are global and others are regional in nature.
Implications and conclusions
Implications for practice
Our analysis demonstrates that the substantial differences in key concerns may be due
to national culture and economic development. This indicates that IS managers need to
be extremely cautious when moving to a culture or economy with which they are
unfamiliar. Their experience and expertise may be insufficiently developed for a region
whose problems are significantly different from their own. For example, IS managers
who have struggled to plan an information architecture in their home country may have
insufficient experience to undertake human resources issues in another culture in a
different phase of economic development. This suggests that organizations need to
assess carefully the particular skill requirements of a region before making an
appointment. Those who are successful in one region may not necessarily be best
equipped to tackle problems in other parts of the world because they lack relevant
exposure to its culture or economic status. Furthermore, the prominence of executive
education in the US MNC study implies that appropriate experience may not be enough.
Managers will also need education in the cultural, social, political, and economic system
of their assigned region before taking up an appointment.
Implications for research
As we have noted previously, some key issues appear to emerge quickly. The sudden
prominence of BPR is somewhat disconcerting because it suggests IS managers may
3 2
be too willing to respond to a current hot topic, and their attention may be too easily
diverted from fundamental, long-term issues. The IS profession is notable for its fashion
swings. In the last few years the hot topics have included outsourcing, business process
reengineering, and client/server. These terms describe fundamental issues that should
be of continuing concern to IS managers. Outsourcing can be viewed as a relabeling of
a rudimentary but somewhat complex management choice—make or buy. Client/server
can be seen as another possibility for minimizing data storage and processing costs.
Since these are major costs for any IS department, they should be a continuing issue
rather than subject to the vagaries of IS fashion. On the other hand, if the issues
become too broad, they may become meaningless to practitioners. Therefore, a careful
balance is required in developing an appropriate issue set.
One cause for the perceived rapid emergence of new key issues may be embedded in
the US SIM method. There is a large number of distinct issues in this list as well as
some indistinct and overlapping issues. Some issues refer to broad general problems,
others refer to more narrow and specific concerns. The inconsistent breadth and depth
of the issues is an artifact of the US SIM approach of simply asking IS executives what
is currently important. The approach has not changed significantly since its first use in
1983 by Dickson et al. [14]. Many researchers have fine tuned the method, but none
have thoroughly reviewed it. We suggest it may be time for rethinking the key issues
framework.
Revising or redesigning the key issues framework is not a trivial task. There are two
major avenues open for exploration. One approach is to begin with the international
issues listed in Table 1. The broad issues might be used to group the more narrow
issues in a two-tier framework. For example, improving the effectiveness of software
development (a broad issue) might subsume issues dealing with CASE and object-
oriented technology (more narrow issues dealing with software development). Aligning
the IS organization goals with those of the enterprise (a broad issue) might embrace
3 3
issues dealing with structural alignment, strategic planning and competitive advantage
(more narrow issues dealing with goal alignment). The two tier nature of the framework
would recognize that broad enduring issues are more stable in time, but that specific
aspects of each broad issue come and go. A sufficient number of broad issues would
need to be created to cover all the issues in Table 2. Advantages of the 'revise'
approach include grounding future research in past empirical work and maintaining a
reasonable degree of continuity with previous studies. Disadvantages include the lack of
a formal theoretical base and the difficulty of classifying 'hot new issues' which might cut
across several broad issues.
Another approach is to redesign the framework from the ground up. The general idea
would be to find a sufficiently relevant theoretical model on which to base a new key
issues framework. Several ideas are introduced here but other directions are also
possible. One direction is to build a framework around role theory through careful
examination of the roles that IS managers and executives play. There exists both an
applicable theoretical base (e.g., [16]) and some relevant empirical work with IS
executives (e.g., [30, 4, 1,]). A related direction is to examine Sambamurthy and Zmud's
[31, 32] empirical work on managerial IT competencies. This work is aimed at identifying
the basic capabilities and skills (common to all organizations) needed to effectively
leverage IT investments in support of business activities. This work would need to be
expanded to apply to smaller enterprises and international contexts, but it might serve
as a useful starting point. An additional direction would be to go back to the reference
literature in the organizational sciences in search of a suitable theoretical model dealing
with general management practices. Advantages of the 'redesign' approach include the
possibility that the framework be complete, consistent, parsimonious, and both
regionally and temporally stable. Disadvantages include the lack of continuity with
previous studies and the danger that the issues might become so abstract that they
3 4
would cease to have meaning to IS managers and executives, thus breaking an
important link to practice.
A fundamental issue that needs to be addressed is the trade-off between a study within
a region that attempts to address the particular concerns of that locality and the
objective of comparative studies across cultures. To maintain their relevance, local
studies need to reflect the issues of their region and focus on variables within that
society to explain the causes of key issues. Comparative studies, which need a
common base of issues so that variables between societies can be examined, may
neglect local concerns. One of the limitations of this study is that it relies on secondary
data collected from studies focusing on local issues, and this is reflected in missing
observations and a flexible interpretation of the wording of issues in different studies. A
possible solution is a research protocol with dual objectives—a focus on the specific
and the general. There is a core set of issues with common wording in all studies that is
augmented with additional issues to cover the local situation.
In discussing the limitations, we indicated that the timing of the various studies
complicated the problem of comparison. New issues can emerge quickly (e.g.,
electronic commerce) and are often missing from older key issues studies. The simple
solution is to remove the time variable from the equation. We need to establish a group
of scholars in different regions who agree to conduct simultaneously a key issues study
in each region.
We feel the time has come to carefully reconsider the key issues approach so that we
develop a methodology that is less susceptible to fluctuations in IS fashions because it
addresses the fundamentals of IS management. There should be less need for
adaptation to local conditions so that we then might have a single instrument that is
used for many regional studies. Obviously, the comparison of international key issues
will be simpler and more accurate if the same set of fundamental issues is addressed in
3 5
each region. In addition, such an instrument will also be valuable for the comparison of
key issues within a single country over a period.
Final remarks
This comparative study of key issues gives us some understanding of the regional
diversity of problems faced by IS managers. We have put forward several explanations
for this diversity. First, cultural, economic, political/legal, and technological factors may
influence regional key issues. . We offer some preliminary evidence that these factors
are viable causes of diversity. Second, we also suggest that because of the speed with
which new issues emerge, timing of data collection can explain differences. Finally, we
suggest the very nature of the methodology encourages diversity because it focuses on
current problems rather than fundamental issues. Consequently, we urge our
colleagues who conduct key issues studies to consider redesigning the methodology
before undertaking their next study. We would like to see a new approach that could
provide a firmer basis for comparative key issues studies.
References
1. Applegate, L. M., and Elam, J. J. New Information Systems Leaders: A Changing
Role in a Changing World. MIS Quarterly, 16, 4 (December 1992), 469-490.
2. Badri, M. A. Critical Issues in Information Systems Management: An International
Perspective. International Journal of Information Management, 12, (1992), 179-
191.
3. Bass, B. M. Organizational decision making. Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1983
4. Benjamin, R.I.; Dickinson, C.; and Rockart , J.F., The Changing Role of the
Corporate Information Systems Officer. MIS Quarterly, 9, 3 (September 1985),
177-188.
5. Brancheau, J. C., and Wetherbe, J. C. Key issues in information systems
management. MIS Quarterly, 11, 1 (March 1987), 23-45.
6. Burn, J.; Saxena, K. B. C.; Ma, L.; and Cheung, H. K. Critical Issues of IS
Management in Hong Kong: A Cultural Comparison. Journal of Global Information
Management, 1, 4 (September 1992), 28-37.
7. CIA. The World Fact Book. 1995.
http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/95fact/index.html
3 6
8. Clark, T. D. Corporate systems management: an overview and research
perspective. Communications of the ACM, 35, 2 (February 1992), 60-75.
9. Critical Issues of Information Systems Management for 1993: The Sixth Annual
Survey of I/S Management Issues. MA:CSC Index, 1993.
10. Deans, C. P.; Karwan, K. R.; Goslar, M. D.; Ricks, D. A.; and Toyne, B. Key
international IS issues in the U.S.-based multinational corporations. Journal of
Management Information Systems, 7, 4 (1991), 27-50.
11. Deans, C. P., and Ricks, D. A. MIS research: a model for incorporating the
international dimension. Journal of High Technology Management Review, 2, 1
(Spring, 1991), 57-81.
12. Dekleva, S., and Zupancic, J. Key Issues in Information Systems Management: A
Delphi Study in Slovenia. In J. I. DeGross; R. P. Bostrom; and D. Robey, eds.
Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Information Systems,
Orlando, Fl, Dec 5 1993, NY, NY:ACM, 1993, 301-314.
13. Dexter, A. S.; Janson, M. A.; Kiudorf, E.; and Laast-Laas, J. Key information
technology issues in Estonia. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 2, 2
(June 1993), 139-152.
14. Dickson, G. W.; Leitheiser, R. L.; Wetherbe, J. C.; and Nechis, M. Key information
systems issues for the 1980's. MIS Quarterly, 8, 3 (September 1984), 135-148.
15. Ein-Dor, P.; Segev, E.; and Orgad, M. The effect of national culture on IS:
implications for international information systems. Journal of Global Information
Management, 1, 1 (Winter, 1993), 33-44.
16. Galletta, D.F., and R.L. Heckman Jr. A Role Theory Perspective on End-User
Development. Information Systems Research, 1, 2 (1990), 168-187.
17. Galliers, R. D.; Merali, Y.; and Spearing, L. Coping with Information Technology?
How British Executives Perceive the Key Information Systems Management
Issues in the mid-1990s. Journal of Information Technology, 9, 3 (1994), 223-238.
18. Gibbons, J. D. Nonparametric statistics: an introduction. Newbury Park, CA:
SAGE, 1993.
19. Greenacre, M. J. Theory and applications of correspondence analysis. London:
Academic Press, 1984.
20. Harrison, W. L., and Farn, C. A comparison of Information Management Issues in
the United States of America and the Republic of China. Information &
Management, 18, 4 (April 1990), 177-188.
21. Hirschheim, R.; Earl, M; Feeny, D.; and Lockett M., An exploration into the
management of the information systems function: key issues and an evolutionary
model, Information Technology Management for Productivity and Competitive
Advantage: An IFIP TC-8 Open Conference, 1988, 4.15-4.38.
22. Hofstede, G. Cultures and Organizations: Software of the mind. New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill, 1991.
23. Hyman, H. H. Secondary analysis of sampling surveys: principles, procedures, and
potentialities. New York, NY: Wiley, 1972.
3 7
24. McLean, E. R.; Kappelman, L. A.; and Thompson, J. P. Converging end-user and
corporate computing. Communications of the ACM, 36, 12 (December 1993), 78-
89.
25. Niederman, F.; Brancheau, J. C.; and Wetherbe, J. C. Information Systems
Management Issues for the 1990s. MIS Quarterly, 7, 4 (December 1991), 475-500.
26. Palvia, P. C., and Palvia, S. MIS Issues in India and a comparison with the United
States. International Information Systems, (1992), 101-110.
27. Palvia, P. C.; Palvia, S.; and Zigli, R. M. Global Information Technology
Environment: Key MIS Issues in Advanced and Less-Developed Nations. In S.
Palvia, P. Palvia, and R. Zigli, eds., The Global Issues of Information Technology
Management, Harrisburg, PA: Idea Group Publishing, 1992, 2-34.
28. Pervan, G. P. Results from a study of key issues in Australian IS management. In
Proceedings of the 4th Australian Conference on Information Systems, University
of Queensland, St. Lucia, Brisbane, Queensland, Sep 28 1993, 113-120.
29. Raman, K. S., and Watson, R. T. National culture, IS, and organizational
implications. In P. C. Deans and K. R. Karwan, eds., Global information systems
and technology: focus on the organization and its functional areas, Harrisburg, PA:
Idea Group, 1994, 493-513.
30. Rockart, J.F.; Ball, L.; and Bullen, C.V. The Future Role of the Information
Systems Executive. MIS Quarterly, 6, special issue, (December 1982), 1-14.
31. Sambamurthy, V., and Zmud, R.W. Managing IT for Success: The Empowering
Business Relationship. Morristown, NJ: Financial Executives Research
Foundation, 1992.
32. Sambamurthy, V., and Zmud, R.W. Competency Assessment: A Self-Assessment
Tool for Creating Business Value Through IT. Morristown, NJ: Financial
Executives Research Foundation, 1994
33. Straub, D. W. Jr., and Wetherbe, J. C. Information technologies for the 1990s: an
organizational impact perspective. Communications of the ACM, 32, 11
(November 1989), 1328-1339.
34. Stewart, D. W., and Kamins, M. A. Secondary research: information sources and
methods, 2nd ed. Newbury Park, CA:Sage, 1993.
35. Watson, R. T. Key issues in information systems management: an Australian
perspective - 1988. Australian Computer Journal, 21, 3 (1989), 118-129.
36. Watson, R. T. Influences on information systems managers' perceptions of key
issues: information scanning and relationship with the CEO. MIS Quarterly, 14, 2
(June 1990), 217-231.
37. Watson, R. T., and Brancheau, J. C. Key issues in information systems
management: an international perspective. Information & Management, 20, 3
(1991), 213-223.
3 8
Appendix A
Dimensions of National Culture
Individualism
Societies differ in their emphasis on individual rights and obligation to society.
Individualism describes societies in which the ties between individuals are loose and
people are expected to look after themselves and their immediate families. Collectivism
describes societies in which people from birth are integrated into strong, cohesive
groups that continue to protect the individual throughout life.
Power Distance
Power distance describes a culture's social relationship between superiors and
subordinates. It is the extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and
organizations in a culture expect and accept that power is distributed unequally.
Uncertainty Avoidance
Uncertainty avoidance is the extent to which the members of a society feel threatened
by uncertain or unknown situations and some societies take considerable pain to avoid
uncertainty.
Masculinity
The masculinity dimension describes the extent to which social gender roles are
differentiated in a society. This is reflected in the way jobs are distributed in a society.
Very masculine societies tend to have few women in some occupations. High status
positions are usually reserved for men. Feminine societies have a more equal
distribution of social gender roles.
3 9
Time Orientation
Time orientation can be described by a continuum with long-term orientation at one pole
and short-term orientation at the other. Eastern and Western societies have different
perceptions of time and time orientation. Eastern nations and organizations are more
likely to invest in projects whose payoffs are quite distant. In contrast, American society
and its organizations have a short-term time orientation and are driven by short-term
goals.
