Journal of Strategic Information Systems最新文献

The specifics of why and how network relationships influence digital transformations have not yet been fully understood. We address this gap by drawing on the relational view of organisations to conceptualise network relationships as the source of requisite external non-generic complementarities for the development of dynamic capabilities (absorptive capacity, integration effort and big data analytics) essential for effective digital transformation outcomes. We follow a positivist research design to test the proposed hypotheses by collecting survey responses from informants from 183 Australian healthcare organisations. The statistical findings indicate that social capital affects the digital transformation outcomes through full individual mediations of absorptive capacity (0.13*), integration effort (0.13*) and big data analytics capability (0.05*) and a full serial mediation (0.01*). This empirical evidence provides two significant advancements to both theory and practice: a) by linking development of dynamic capabilities required for digital transformations to external non-generic complementarities embedded in network relationships; and b) by delineating specific pathways through which the dynamic capabilities of absorptive capacity, integration effort and big data analytics influence digital transformation outcomes.

The micro-entrepreneurship sector, as the second-largest employment generator in rural areas, plays a crucial role in alleviating poverty. This study explores how social enterprises can assist rural micro-entrepreneurs in mobilizing and leveraging indigenous knowledge to align production with demand. We propose technoficing as a strategic approach to rural micro-entrepreneurship. We conducted a case study of CommunityLink, a social enterprise implementing ICT-enabled practices to facilitate the growth of rural micro-entrepreneurship in India. Our findings reveal knowledge disconnections impeding the development of rural micro-entrepreneurship. Importantly, we propose a four-phase approach of technoficing – basic, internal, external, and offline-online – that can effectively mobilize and leverage indigenous knowledge for rural micro-entrepreneurs with minimal resource investment. We synthesize our findings into a comprehensive process model. Our research contributes to the discourse on ICT for development and the emerging academic dialogue on decoloniality by highlighting the significance of empowering local institutions and practices through the strategic use of off-the-shelf technologies. Practitioners and policymakers can leverage our findings to propel indigenous efforts toward rural development and improve rural livelihoods.

Responding to recent calls, this essay offers a commentary on the framing and definition of organizational digital transformation. We focus on the unique ontology of digital transformation and delineate it from neighboring concepts. Our contention is that, despite its volume, current research remains unclear about how the digital transformation of organizations differs from their IT-enabled transformation. We advocate definitional precision to foster knowledge accumulation and to enable scholars to pursue important research questions that are unique to digital transformation.

Our perspective, grounded in the notion of digital resources, defines digital transformation as the metamorphosis of an IT-enabled organization into a digital organization – one with a specific digital architecture and design principles. A key departure from previous conceptualization is that we characterize digital transformation as a change in digital technology architecture rather than a change from digital technology use. Our paper achieves the following: describes the constructs underpinning this formulation, digital resources and digital organization; justifies their use; and describes what research directions the new perspective promotes. With sound definitions of key constructs, Information Systems scholars have the unprecedented opportunity to lead the way in digital “x” research, making our discipline the reference point for the burgeoning “digital research” literature in related business fields.

This paper discusses two opposing narratives of digitalization. Both these narratives are found in existing literature, and the paper understands them as the utopic and dystopic narratives of digitalization. The former expresses unbridled enthusiasm about the bright side of digitalization, while the latter is predominantly pessimistic, and primarily focuses on the undesirable aspects of digitalization. Observing that scholars tend to subscribe to either one or the other narrative, this paper proposes a more middle ground where these competing narratives can be balanced to usher in a better digital future.

Literature reviews serve diverse purposes, including description, understanding, explanation, and testing. Traditionally – before online databases, full-text search availability, and AI-based search tools – identifying relevant sources might have been considered a valuable contribution. However, top-tier information systems (IS) journals now demand more than descriptive reviews; they require authors to move beyond summarizing existing knowledge toward proposing innovative research directions, important research questions, new concepts, and interesting linkages among concepts. Despite adhering to rigorous methodological guidelines, many authors struggle to make conceptual leaps, that is, to elevate their literature reviews beyond description, to achieve a profound understanding, to provide explanations, or to develop a model. Authors may mistakenly prioritize hard work – like thorough literature search, analysis, and organization – over hard thinking, which is crucial for advancing theoretical contributions. With this in mind, I adopt the view that the literature is indeed qualitative data. I suggest that approaches that help make conceptual leaps in qualitative research can benefit literature review authors searching for inconsistencies in the extant literature and developing new questions, concepts, and linkages. Drawing upon qualitative research (Klag, M., and Langley, A., 2013. Approaching the conceptual leap in qualitative research. International Journal of Management Reviews. 15 (2), 149–166.), I unpack the process of conceptual leaping in the conduct of literature reviews. This process involves navigating dialectic tensions between knowing and not knowing, engagement and detachment, deliberation and serendipity, and self-expression and social connection. Effectively managing these tensions can help authors increase the impact and innovativeness of their literature reviews.

Triggered by events such as the murder of George Floyd, the last few years have witnessed the revival of the Black Lives Matter movement, the #metoo movement and other collective initiatives that support LGBTQ + communities and other historically disadvantaged groups. At the same time, the widespread and still growing capabilities of automated systems for decision-making – such as artificial intelligence (AI) and the more recent generative AI (GAI) – have surfaced a multitude of DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) issues in various organizational and social settings. In this editorial, we lay out ideas on how the IS community can react, make an important difference, and offer substantial theoretical and practical contributions to social justice. We also provide guidance to prospective JSIS authors whose research concerns the consideration of DEI issues in the strategic design, deployment and use in practice of information systems with embedded emerging, automated, algorithmic-based technologies.

The field of Information Systems continues to change rapidly. The business landscape is being altered by rapid technology development, innovative business models, and a sustained business interest in digital transformation (Marr 2023). This offers an amazing terrain for researchers. We looked back at what was published 20 years ago in JSIS and compared it to current publications. The following pages provide two snapshots of JSIS content during these periods, as well as some reflections on the evolution of research published in JSIS.

Software patents have been shown to have a positive effect on the patenting firm’s market value. Although there is anecdotal evidence that software patents of a focal firm can adversely affect its rival firms, there is a paucity of empirical research on such competitive impacts of software patents. In order to advance our understanding of the competitive impact of software patents, we investigate the impact of a firm’s software patents on rivals’ market value using data from the US IT industries. Importantly, we consider heterogeneity across firms, in terms of their ability to successfully commercialize their patented invention, which has not been studied. Drawing upon resource-based view (RBV) and dynamic capability perspective, we examine how rival firm’s R&D capabilities might moderate such a competitive relationship. Furthermore, we theorize that firms must have supportive marketing and operations capabilities if they are to commercialize software patents and generate significant value. Specifically, our analysis of a large unique panel dataset of 563 IT firms in the United States during the period 2003–2012 indicates evidence of negative impacts of a focal firm’s software patent stock on its rivals’ market value. However, if rivals have sufficient R&D capabilities, they can mitigate the negative impacts of the focal firm’s software patents. Moreover, we find that marketing and operations capabilities indeed ensure that software patent stock has strong positive impacts on the forcal firm’s market value. Implications for research and practice are discussed.