The Journal of Bigdata (한국빅데이터학회지)

Korea Bigdata Society (한국빅데이터학회)
권호 표지

A study on the effect of SME IT resource on performance

중소기업의 IT자원이 업무성과에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구

  • Received : 2019.12.02
  • Accepted : 2019.12.31
  • Published : 2019.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Based on RBV(Resource Based View), IT of SMEs classified into IT resource and capabilities. And We confirmed that capabilities and resources affected each performance. In other words, based on the questionnaire of SMEs and IT professionals, divides capability from the overall IT resource that are possessed by SMEs. Among the four attributes (value, rare, non-substitutability, imperfect imitability) presented by Barney (1991), this study targeted at value and imperfect imitability and investigated how SMEs recognize IT resource and capability. Furthermore, this study tests how IT resource and capability influence corporate performance. The result of this study finds that resources that are needed on "Knowledge-based" are classified into IT capability, otherwise classified into IT resource. Analysis shows that server, DB(database), system administrators, programmers, CIO, BA were capabilities, Desktop PC, PC software, software for salary and accounting management, e-commerce, Homepage, and network inside th enterprise were resources. Secondly, this study reveals that both IT resource and IT capability affected company performance (employee satisfaction, CEO satisfaction). IT is certainly having an impact on corporate performance. In conclusion, resource can be either IT resource or IT capability based on they way of utilization. And both IT resource and IT capability have an influence on corporate performance (employee job satisfaction, CEO satisfaction). Therefore, when considering IT investment, a company can purchase necessary IT resource and actively utilize it to be IT capability, which can have an influence on corporate performance in return.

자원기반이론(Barney, 1991)에 근거하여 중소기업의 IT를 자원과 역량으로 구분하였으며, IT자원과 역량이 성과에 영향을 미치는지 확인하였다. 즉, 중소기업 대상의 설문조사와 IT전문가를 대상으로 설문조사를 실시하여 중소기업이 보유하고 있는 IT자원을 역량과 자원으로 구분하였다. Barney(1991)가 제안한 자원의 4가지 특성(가치, 희귀성, 비대체성, 비모방성)중에서 가치와 비모방성을 대상으로 중소기업의 IT자원과 역량을 구분하였으며 구분된 IT자원과 역량은 기업의 성과에는 어떻게 영향을 미치는지 연구하였다. 연구결과 IT의 자원과 역량은 "Knowledge-based"의 필요여부에 따라서 구분되었다. 분석결과, 서버, DB(database), 시스템 관리자, 프로그래머, CIO, BA는 역량으로, 데스크탑 PC, 소프트웨어, 급여 및 회계관련 프로그램, 이커머스, 홈페이지 그리고 네트워크는 자원으로 분류되었다. 그리고, 분류된 중소기업의 IT자원과 IT역량은 기업의 성과(종업원 만족도, CEO 만족도)에 모두 영향을 미쳤다. IT는 분명히 기업의 성과에 영향을 미치고 있다. 결론적으로 자원은 기업이 어떻게 활용하는가에 따라서 IT자원 또는 IT역량이 될 수 있으며, 자원, 역량 구분없이 모두 중소기업의 성과에는 영향을 미친다는 것을 알 수 있었다. 따라서 IT투자를 고려할 때 기업은 필요한 IT 자원을 구입하여 활용하게 되면 기업의 성과로 연결된다는 것이다.

Keywords

References

  1. 구일섭, 김태성, 대중소기업 상생협력의 성과제고 요인에 관한 연구, 한국경영공학회지, 제22권, 제4호, 2017. pp.75-85.
  2. 구입섭, 박종갑, 수정IPA를 활용한 중소기업 생산성향산활동 성과제고 요인 연구, 한국경영공학회지, 제23권 제3호, 2018, pp.97-110.
  3. 권기환, 현대적 자원준거관점에 관한 이론적 고찰: 개념적 진화를 중심으로, 경영교육연구, 제9권, 제2호, 2006, pp.215-244.
  4. 김경묵, "생산네트워크에서의 하청기업의 참여에 관한 연구", 연세대학교 경영학 박사학위논문, 1996.
  5. 김진한, 이윤석, 백종현, 민재형, "정보화 사업의 정부투자 효과분석: 소기업네트워크화 사업을 중심으로", 경영과학, 제21권, 제2호, 2004, pp. 253-272.
  6. 김태성, 구일섭, 중소기업 품질혁신 지원사업 성공요 인에 대한 실증연구, 한국경영공학회지, 제22권, 제1호, 2017, pp.139-150.
  7. 김효근, 서지현, 서현주, "IT 환경자원이 IT성과와 지속적인 경쟁우위에 미치는 영향에 관한 실증연구", 경영정보학연구, 제10권 제1호, 2000, pp.107-122.
  8. 문성배, 정부연, 이은민, "국내 IT 투자의 변화 요인분석", 정보통신정책연구원, 수탁연구 07-08, 2008.
  9. 심수진, "정보기술 자원이 전략적 공급망 능력과 기업 성과에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구", 2010, 영남대학교 박사학위논문.
  10. 이국희, 김성근, 이주헌, 김용재, 이호준, "MIS 커리큘럼 현황 및 발전모델", Information System Review, 제9권, 제3호, 2007, pp.1-32.
  11. 이동만, 정기억, "기업성과에 대한 정보기술수준 측 정요인의 상호작용효과", 경영정보학연구, 제9권, 제2호, 1999, pp.39-58.
  12. 조세형, "대.중.소규모 기업 간 정보기술 활용 수준이 조직성과에 미치는 영향의 차이", 한국산업정 보학회논문지, 제14권, 제4호, 2009, pp.183-197.
  13. 중소기업청, 2008년도 중소기업 정보화 수준평가, 2008.
  14. 중소기업정보화경영원, "2009 중소기업 정보화 수준평가 보고서", 2010.
  15. 한국정보화진흥원, "IT가 기업의 생산에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구", 2010.
  16. Amit R., Schoemaker P. J. H., Strategic assets and organizational rent, Strategic Management Review, Vol. 14, Issue 1, 1993, pp.33-46, https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250140105.
  17. Bakos J. Y., Treacy M. E., Information Technology and Corporate Strategy: A Research Perspective, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 10, No. 2, 1986, pp.109-119, DOI: 10.2307/249029.
  18. Barney J. B., Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: A ten-year retrospective on the resource-based view, Journal of Management, Vol. 27, Issue 6, 2001, pp.643-650, https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630102700602.
  19. Barney J. B., Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage, Journal of Management, Vol. 17, No. 1, 1991, pp.99-120, https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108.
  20. Barney J. B., Strategic factor markets: Expectations, luck, and business strategy, Management Science, Vol. 32, No. 10, 1986, pp.2131-1241, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.10.1231.
  21. Barua A., Kriebel C. H., Mukhopadhyay T., Information technology and business value: an analytic and empirical investigation, Information Systems Research, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1995, pp.3-23, https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.6.1.3.
  22. Bhatt G. D., Grover V., Types of information technology capabilities and their role in competitive advantage: an empirical study, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2005, pp.253-277, https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2005.11045844.
  23. Bharadwaj A. S., A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firm performance: an empirical investigation, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 24, No. 1, 2000, pp.169-196, DOI:10.2307/3250983.
  24. Borthick A. F., Scheiner J. H., Selection of small business computer systems: Structuring a Multi-Criteria Approach, Journal of Information Systems, Vol. 3, No. 2, 1988, pp.10-29, doi not found.
  25. Bresnahan T. F., Trajtenberg M., General purpose technologies 'Engines of growth'?, Journal of Econometrics, Volume 65, Issue 1, 1995, pp.83-108, https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01598-T.
  26. Brynjolfsson E., Hitt L., Paradox lost? Firm-level evidence on the returns to information systems spending, Management Science, Vol. 42, No. 4, 1996, pp.541-558, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.42.4.541.
  27. Brynjolfsson E., Hitt L., Computing productivity: firm-level evidence, Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 85, Issue 4, 2003, pp.793-808, https://doi.org/10.1162/003465303772815736.
  28. Davis F. D., Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 3, 1989, pp.319-340, DOI: 10.2307/249008.
  29. DeLone W. H., Determinants of success for computer usage in small business, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 12, No. 1, 1988, pp.51-61, DOI: 10.2307/248803.
  30. DeLone W. H., McLean, E. R., Information system success: the quest for the dependent variable, Information Systems Research, Vol. 3, No. 1, 1992, pp.60-95, https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.3.1.60.
  31. Dierickx I.. Cool K., Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage, Management Science, Vol. 35, No. 2, 1989, pp.1504-1511, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.12.1504.
  32. Ein-Dor P., Segev E., Organizational context and success of management information Systems, Management Science, Vol. 24, No. 10, 1978, pp.1064-1077, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.24.10.1064.
  33. Feeny D. F., Willcocks L. P., Core IS capabilities for exploring Information Technology, Sloan Management Review, 1998, pp.9-21, doi not found.
  34. Govindarajan V., Decentralization, Strategy and Effectiveness of Strategic Business Units in Multibusiness Organizations, The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 1, No. 4, 1986, pp.844-856, https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1986.4284099.
  35. Gul F. A., Chia Y. M., The effects of management accounting systems, perceived environmental uncertainty and decentralization on managerial performance: A test of three-way interaction, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 19, Issue 4-5, 1994, pp.413-426, https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(94)90005-1.
  36. Grant R. M., The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy formulation, California Management Review, Vol. 33, Issue 3, 1991, pp.114-135, https://doi.org/10.2307/41166664
  37. Hitt M. A.. Ireland R. D., Corporate distinctive competence, strategy, Industry and performance, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 6, Issue 3, 1985, pp.273-293, https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250060307.
  38. Hitt M. A., Ireland R. D., Camp S. M., Sexton D. L., Strategic entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial strategies for wealth creation, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 22, Issue 6-7, 2001, pp.479-491, https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.196.
  39. Kivijarvi H., Saarinen, T., Investment in information systems and the financial performance of the firm, Information & Management, Vol. 28, Issue 2, 1995, pp.143-163, https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-7206(95)94022-5.
  40. Kohli R., Devaraj S., Measuring information technology payoff: A meta-analysis of structural variables in firm-level empirical research, Information System Research, Vol. 14, No. 2, 2003, pp.127-145, https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.14.2.127.16019.
  41. Mahoney J. T., Pandian J. R., The resource based view within the conversation of strategic management, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 3, Issue 5, 1992, pp.363-380, https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250130505.
  42. Mata F. J., Fuerst W. F., Barney J. B., Information technology and competitive advantage: A resource-based analysis, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 4, 1995, pp.487-505, https://www.jstor.org/stable/249630. https://doi.org/10.2307/249630
  43. McFarlan F. W., Information technology changes the way you compete, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 66, No. 3, 1984, pp.98-103, doi not found.
  44. Melville N, Kraemer K, Gurbaxani V., Information technology and organizational performance: An integrative model of IT business, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 28 No. 2, 2004, pp.283-322, doi not found. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148636
  45. Miller D., Shamsie J, The Resource-Based View of the Firm in two Environments: The Hollywood film studios from 1936 to 1965, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 39, No. 3, 1996, https://doi.org/10.5465/256654.
  46. Moore G. C., Benbasat I., Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation, Information System Research, Vol. 2, No. 3, 1991, pp.173-239, https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2.3.192.
  47. Morgan, N. A., Kaleka A, Katsikeas C. S., Antecedents of export venture performance: A theoretical model and empirical assessment, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 68, Issue 1, 2004, pp.90-108, https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.68.1.90.24028.
  48. Naver J. C., Slater S. F., The effect of a market orientation on business profitability, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, No. 4, 1990, pp.20-35, https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299005400403.
  49. Peng M. W., York A. S., Behind intermediary performance in export trade: Transactions, agents and resources, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 32, Issue 2, 2001, pp.327-346, https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490955.
  50. Ray G., Muhanna, W. A., Barney J. B., Information technology and the performance of the customer service process: A resource based analysis, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. 4. 2005, pp.625-652, DOI:10.2307/25148703.
  51. Santhanam R., Hartonon E, Issue in linking information technology capability to firm performance, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 1, 2003, pp.125-153, DOI: 10.2307/30036521.
  52. Seddon P. B., A respecification and extension of the DeLone and McLean model of IS success, Information Systems Research, Vol. 8, No. 3, 1997, pp.240-253, https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.8.3.240.
  53. Seddon, P. B. , Kiew, M. Y.. A partial test and development of the DeLone and McLean model of IS success. In J. I. DeGross, S. L. Huff, & M. C. Munro (Eds.), Proceedings of the international conference on information systems. GA: Association for Information Systems, 1994, pp.99-100, doi not found.
  54. Tallon P. P., Kraemer, K. L., Gurbaxani V., Executives' Perceptions of the Business Value of Information Technology: A process-oriented approach, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 16, Issue 4, 2000, pp.145-173, https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2000.11518269.
  55. Tarn J. M., Wen, H. J., Exploring organizational expansion modes and their associated communication system requirements: consolidation and complementation, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 22, Issue 1, 2002, pp.3-26, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0268-4012(01)00039-1.
  56. Teece D. J., Pisano G., Shuen A., Dynamic capabilities and strategic management, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18, Issue 7, 1997, pp.509-533, https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z.
  57. Tippins M. J., Sohi R. S., IT competency and firm performance: is organizational learning a missing link?, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 24, Issue 8, 2003, pp.745-761, https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.337.
  58. Wernerfelt B., A resource-based view of the firm, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 5, Issue 2, 1984, pp.171-180, https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250050207.
  59. Wu F., Yeniyurt S., Kim D., Cavusgil S. T., The impact of information technology on supply chain capabilities and firm performance: A resourcebased view, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 35, Issue 4, 2006, pp.493-504, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2005.05.003.