AIS Electronic Library (AISeL)

Borman, Mark

Association for Information SystemsAIS Electronic Library (AISeL)AMCIS 2006 Proceedings Americas Conference on Information Systems(AMCIS)December 2006Understanding the Cosourcing Decision: A CaseStudy of Credit Unions in AustraliaMark BormanUniversity of SydneyFollow this and additional works at: http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2006This material is brought to you by the Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS) at AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). It has been acceptedfor inclusion in AMCIS 2006 Proceedings by an authorized administrator of AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). For more information, please contactelibrary@aisnet.org.Recommended CitationBorman, Mark, "Understanding the Cosourcing Decision: A Case Study of Credit Unions in Australia" (2006). AMCIS 2006Proceedings. 383.http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2006/383Borman Understanding the cosourcing decisionProceedings of the Twelfth Americas Conference on Information Systems, Acapulco, Mexico August 04th-06th 2006Understanding the Cosourcing Decision:A Case Study of Credit Unions in AustraliaMark BormanUniversity of Sydneym.borman@econ.usyd.edu.auABSTRACTIn a variation on outsourcing, organisations are increasingly seeking opportunities where services can be provided jointly.This paper outlines an approach that combines resource based and resource dependency theories to assist in assessing andstructuring such cosourcing initiatives.  Based on a case study of credit unions in Australia, it is concluded that the approachmay provide organisations with an improved understanding of the cosourcing decision. The case study also suggests that oneof the most difficult requirements is to balance the differing needs of participants and reveals the complexity of anoutsourcing milieu which is both layered and modular.KeywordsCosourcing, economies of scale, core capability, resource dependencyINTRODUCTIONOrganisations are increasingly seeking opportunities where services can be provided jointly. In the UK, for example, threebanks and Unisys formed a joint cheque processing venture  (Roberts, 2004).  While Gallivan and Oh (1999) recognise aclass of outsourcing – cosourcing – where a group of organisations come together to obtain a common service,  a review ofthe literature suggests that little research has been conducted on the phenomenon. It is likely though that not all cosourcinginitiatives will be appropriate and it would be useful for organisations to have an understanding of the factors that willcontribute to a successful initiative. Seddon (2001) for example provides an account of the Australian Federal Government’sfailed attempt to introduce IT outsourcing by “grouping government agencies (mainly departments) into clusters” (p5).In focusing on cosourcing, this paper reflects the starting point of much of the research in IT outsourcing by seeking toaddress the question of what activities should be cosourced. While research examining the motivation for outsourcing drawsfrom many theoretical perspectives, two are particularly relevant with regard to determining what to outsource from astrategic perspective: resource based theory and resource dependency theory (Dibbern et al, 2004) and form the core of thecurrent research.The remainder of the paper comprises two sections, The first outlines the proposed approach to understanding the cosourcingdecision. The second assesses that approach through an empirical study of credit unions in Australia.THE COSOURCING DECISIONThe resource based and resource dependency theories both view a firm’s resources as being the foundation for its strategyand do not inherently conflict with each other but rather can be seen as complementary (Duncan, 2002).  Here they aresynthesised so that the decision regarding what areas to enter into cosourcing arrangements for takes into account both thestrategic contribution of an activity to an organisation and the relationship with the ultimate supplier. Transfer of the field ofinvestigation from organisations outsourcing individually to cosourcing also requires the addition of an additionalconsideration – that cosourcing offers advantages over acting individually. As Figure 1 illustrates it is proposed thateconomies of scale can provide such an advantage.Economies of scaleEconomies of scale refer to production and distribution efficiencies which come with larger size (Chandler, 1990), and it haslong been recognised that they can be a motivation for outsourcing (Venkatesan, 1992). However from the perspective of thispaper it is not just the existence of economies of scale that are of importance but also the extent to which the benefits can beappropriated by customers rather than be retained by the supplier. The literature suggests that one successful approach 3155Borman Understanding the cosourcing decisionProceedings of the Twelfth Americas Conference on Information Systems, Acapulco, Mexico August 04th-06th 2006adopted has been for organisations to form cooperative agreements to achieve the necessary bargaining power (Scherer andRoss, 1990).ResourcebasedResourcedependency ConstraintsCosourcingMotivationEconomies ofScaleConstraintsMotivationFigure 1. Shapers of the cosourcing decisionResource based theoryResource based theory suggests that firms secure success by utilising their unique resources comprised of intangible andtangible assets that are tied semi-permanently to the firm (Wernerfelt, 1984).  However such resources provide a sustainedcompetitive advantage only when competitors are unable to acquire and deploy similar resources (Mata et al., 1995).Furthermore, according to Coyne (1986), to provide an advantage the resources must contribute to “a consistent difference inimportant attributes between the producer’s product and those of his competitors” (p51). From the resource basedperspective, success is maximised where organisations focus their attention on those areas where their distinctive capabilitieslie (Hagel and Seely Brown, 2001) and rely on others for the provision of ancillary activities.Resource dependency theoryResource dependency theory states that organisations are dependent upon their environment and are faced with choicesregarding how they manage that dependency (Thompson, 1967).  Kotter (1979) suggests that organisations need to adoptstrategies to manage their dependency on external parties and ensure access to the resources they supply is stable and secure.There appears to be limited research in an outsourcing context though regarding the management of dependency. Forexample, Ang and Cummings (1997) considered the influence of the number of potential suppliers but did not considerwhether and how that number could be modified.Combining the three theories leads to the perspective of organizations outsourcing non-core activities jointly to realiseeconomies of scale while ensuring that they, not the supplier, are the beneficiaries.METHODOLOGYThe empirical focus was on credit unions which are non-bank financial institutions, owned and operated by the people whosave and borrow with them. Around 180 credit union brands operate in Australia with more than $29 billion in assets and 3.6million members. The specific area of interest was the IT services used to support a credit unions core banking system. Thesewere typically outsourced to computer bureaus known as Independent Data Processing Centres (IDPCs)The case study method was employed as it is seen as particularly appropriate where research and theory are at a formativestage and a phenomenon is not well understood (Benbasat et al., 1987). The case work presented here is primarilyexplanatory and draws upon the work of Dubé and Paré (2003) with regard to the approach followed. A multi-case researchdesign, was adopted with a purposeful selection of cases was purposeful (Miles and Huberman, 1994) to cover the full rangeof credit unions. The primary unit of analysis was the set of activities outsourced to an IDPC. A degree of triangulation wasachieved by interviewing credit unions that shared the same IDPC and reinforced by reviewing documentation and reports foreach credit union.A total of 14 interviews were conducted. Interviews were between one and two hours in duration and a semi-structuredinterview protocol was followed with questions across two principal themes: What influenced the decision to cosource andhow was the resultant initiative structured. While the underlying rationale was purposeful, to collect data pertinent to theunderlying research themes it was deliberately non-directive so as not to preclude the emergence of concepts not previouslyconsidered (Patton, 2002). As such it is in line with the methodology presented by Eisenhardt (1989). With regard to analysis,data was first reviewed and coded in line with the principal dimensions of each theoretical lens. Descriptive codes were used 3156Borman Understanding the cosourcing decisionProceedings of the Twelfth Americas Conference on Information Systems, Acapulco, Mexico August 04th-06th 2006and interview transcripts coded in sentence or multi-sentence chunks. Such an approach is in accord with therecommendations of Miles and Huberman (1994) who suggest that the level of coding detail should be aligned with theobjectives of the research.  Where interview data did not code to the concepts identified a priori as of interest it was furtherassessed to determine if additional concepts could be formed.RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONThe interviews suggest that in this case economies of scale were the principal motivator for cosourcing and that credit unionsdo not see the use of IDPCs as impinging upon their core capabilities. While attempts have also been made to activelymanage and mitigate dependency it is possible that they have not always been entirely successful.  In addition to starting toconfirm that adopting a multi-perspective approach to the decision may be useful the cases also revealed the complexityassociated both with managing cosourcing and of the outsourcing milieu per se.MotivationIn terms of the motivation for cosourcing the primary driver was seen to be economies of scale.“If I was to negotiate Australia wide with whoever head up [Company1], number one they’d say well whoare you? How big are you.. and they’d basically put me on the bottom of the pile. Or they would chargesome astronomical fee for our members to transact” CU6In addition there were seen to be benefits in being aligned with larger credit unions in that with new innovations they wouldtend to go first enabling the other credit unions to learn from their experiences.  It was recognised though that cosourcing isnot a perfect substute to having scale in your own right. “you can get a lot of the benefits by doing things as a group .. but we're still never going to have the fullflow on like the larger institutions” CU1ConstraintsResource basedCredit unions identified a variety of core competences ranging from personal service to having the best savings and loansproducts available in the market. While IT was seen as an important contributor to the business, in no cases was use of anIDPC seen as inhibiting a credit union’s ability to differentiate itself.“What we basically said is, as an organisation, we didn’t have the competencies to bring it in house nor did we wantto bring it in house because it was not part of our core direction” CU13“Our core we develop internally ourselves, which is our deposit and loan products “ CU14Resource dependencyPrima facie dependency is managed as there are a number of different IDPCs and core banking systems are available forcredit unions providing alternatives“they’re negotiating agreements and if we don’t like it we can find another bureau” CU14“because of the relative ease of this migration, if we had to do it again in five years it wouldn’t bother me” CU12Furthermore the IDPCs are actually owned by the credit unions. However dependency – on the IDPC or other credit unions –can be reintroduced as a result of the nature of the contracts struck or the membership structure. “[IDPC1 has] the largest credit union on Australia and from what we understand 40% of their transactions will go[if that credit union leaves].  Now that’s a lot.  One of the beauties of IDPC2 is that all of our institutions arerelatively small, so we don’t carry bulk risk as such” CU1A further dependency risk identified was that the ownership structure of the IDPCs inhibited the development of effectiveservice level agreements  “The unique thing though about our own cooperative entities is that we never sue each other ..[and we’ve]  allagreed that if a service level agreement is all about penalties and suing, then the cost goes back to the companywhich we all share in” CU4 3157Borman Understanding the cosourcing decisionProceedings of the Twelfth Americas Conference on Information Systems, Acapulco, Mexico August 04th-06th 2006“Sometimes I think that familiarity breeds contempt is one way of putting it.  The funny thing is that because of that Ithink we take liberties that you wouldn’t want a pure commercial basis” CU14Achieving and maintaining balanceIn structuring cosourcing arrangements interviewees suggested that one of the most difficult tasks was managing the balancebetween the individual credit union and the group as a whole.“There is inherent compromise in all of these systems…  “CU4Such factors are likely to limit the membership of any particular IDPC“[Issues with a previous credit union sector wide initiative] one being it was cooperatively owned and it was slow tomove and while we compromise a bit in IDPC1, there’s only ten of us, when it was 250 users you got rooted.” CU4“we see extra customers of IDPC3 as being good, it reduces costs but not necessarily extra shareholders. What wehave works well” CU5Rebalancing appears also to be constantly required as a result of changes in the competitive environment, the resourcesrequired and changes both in the capabilities of IT and its contribution to a credit union. “With the cost of technology I know some institutions, credit unions, that have been using IDPCs and because of thecost of IT they’re bringing it back in-house” CU1“we actually created our own switching company, which we ended up selling to First Data .. so the reason it wassold to First Data, like everything, the resources and investment that would be required in the worldwide network,which is becoming a significant number” CU4The complex milieu of outsourcingWith regard to the IDPCs themselves, a variety of options have been taken with regard, for example, to whether the IDPCand the core banking system constitute an inseparable bundle, whether other activities will be provided and even whether thetechnical operations themselves will be further outsourced out.  However what was also made clear from the interviews wasthat the IDPC is only one component of a complex outsourcing milieu that, even within the domain of transactional services,is both layered and modular (see Figure 2).PhoneSwitchCore bankingsystemBrancheBankingCardIDPCIT providerInternetATMEFTPOSCentral bankProcessing,clearing & settlingCashChequeScheduledpaymentsBPAY Core bankingsysteCreditPhoneInternetFigure 2. Simplified map of transaction processing – all elements of which may be outsourced 3158Borman Understanding the cosourcing decisionProceedings of the Twelfth Americas Conference on Information Systems, Acapulco, Mexico August 04th-06th 2006REFERENCES1. Ang, S. and Cummings, L.L. (1997) Strategic responses to institutional influences on information systems outsourcing,Organization Science, 8, 3, 235-256.2. Chandler, A.D. (1990) Scale and scope: The dynamics of industrial capitalism, HarvardUniversity Press, Cambridge3. Coyne, K.P. (1986) The anatomy of sustainable competitive advantage, The McKinsey Quarterly, Spring, 50-65.4. Dibbern, J., Goles, T., Hirschheim, R., and Jayatilaka, B. “Information Systems Outsourcing: A Survey and Analysis ofthe Literature”, DATABASE, 35, 4, 2004, 6-102.5. Dubé,  L.  and  Paré,  G.  (2003).  Rigor  in  information  systems  positivist  case  research:  current  practices,  trends,  andrecommendations, MIS Quarterly, 27, 4, 597-635.6. Duncan, N.B. (2002). IS Integration in the Internet Age. in Information Systems Outsourcing, R. Hirschheim, A Heinzland J. Dibbern (Eds.), Springer, Berlin, 395-414.7. Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989) Building theories form case study research, Academy of Management Review, 14, 4, 532-550.8. Gallivan M.J. and Oh W. (1999). Analysing IT outsourcing relationships as alliances among multiple clients andvendors. Proceedings of the 32nd HICSS9. Hagel, J.III. and Seely Brown, J. (2001) Your next IT strategy, Harvard Business Review,79,9,105-113.10. Kotter, J.P. (1979) Managing external dependence, Academy of Management Review, 4, 1, 87-92.11. Mata, F.J., Fuerst, W.L. and Barney, J.B. (1995) Information technology and sustained competitive advantage, MISQuarterly, 19, 4, 487-505.12. Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994) Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook, 2nd edition, Sage,Thousand Oaks.13. Patton, M.Q. (2002) Qualitative research and evaluation methods, 3rd edition, Sage, Thousand Oaks.14. Roberts, C. (2004) Back-office central, Business Review Weekly, Jan 22-28, 18.15. Scherer, F.M. and Ross, D. (1990) Industrial market structure and economic performance, Houghton Mifflin, Boston.16. Seddon, P.B. (2001) The Australian Federal Government’s clustered-agency IT outsourcing experiment,Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 5, 13, 17.17. Thompson, R.L. (1967) Organizations in action, McGraw-Hill, New York.18. Venkatesan, R. (1992) Strategic sourcing – To make or not to make, Harvard Business Review, 70, 6, 98-10719. Wernerfelt, B. (1984) A resource-based view of the firm, Strategic Management Journal,5, 171-180. 3159

English

Understanding the Cosourcing Decision: A Case Study of Credit Unions in Australia

Olson, David

Carlisle, Judith

Hermeneutics in Information Systems

Southwick, Richard

REENGINEERING IDENTITIES: EXAMINING THE CULTURAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS PROCESS REDESIGN IN A UNIVERSITY ERP IMPLEMENTATION

Johnson, Alice

Lederer, Albert

AN EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION OF
CEO/CIO COMMUNICATION

Gribbins, Michele

King, Ruth

E-COMMERCE RETAILING STRATEGIES FOR SMALL
BUSINESSES: IT BARRIERS AND
STRATEGIC DELIBERATION

Schachner, Werner

Sattler, Wolfgang

DYNAMIC VALUE-LOGIC-MAPPING: A METHOD FOR
MAKING CHANGES DUE TO DIGITAL ECONOMY
VISIBLE IN A BUSINESS MODEL

Sathish, S.

Pan, Shan

Raman, Krishnamurthy

CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP MANAGEMENT (CRM)
NETWORK: A NEW APPROACH TO STUDYING CRM

Sledgianowski, Deb

Luftman, Jerry

Association for Information SystemsAIS Electronic Library (AISeL)AMCIS 2001 Proceedings Americas Conference on Information Systems(AMCIS)December 2001Assessing Strategic Alignment Maturity and ItsEffect on Organizational Performance and MutualUnderstanding of ObjectivesDeb SledgianowskiStevens Institute of TechnologyJerry LuftmanStevens Institute of TechnologyFollow this and additional works at: http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2001This material is brought to you by the Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS) at AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). It has been acceptedfor inclusion in AMCIS 2001 Proceedings by an authorized administrator of AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). For more information, please contactelibrary@aisnet.org.Recommended CitationSledgianowski, Deb and Luftman, Jerry, "Assessing Strategic Alignment Maturity and Its Effect on Organizational Performance andMutual Understanding of Objectives" (2001). AMCIS 2001 Proceedings. 331.http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2001/3312001  Seventh Americas Conference on Information Systems 1729ASSESSING STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT MATURITY AND ITSEFFECT ON ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE ANDMUTUAL UNDERSTANDING OF OBJECTIVESDeb SledgianowskiStevens Institute of Technologydsledgia@stevens-tech.eduJerry LuftmanStevens Institute of Technologyjluftman@stevens-tech.eduAbstractThis paper outlines our research-in-progress to develop and validate an instrument to measure strategicalignment maturity. Strategic alignment is defined as the deployment of IT in an appropriate and timely way,in conjunction  with business strategies, objectives, and needs. Strategic alignment maturity (SAM) assessesthe management practices and strategic choices in place to evolve and maintain alignment. The strategicalignment maturity framework developed by Luftman (2000) is used as a basis for this research.  This studyproposes further validation of  the usefulness  of strategic alignment maturity by examining its relationship toorganizational performance and the mutual understanding of IT and business objectives. Knowing the maturityof its alignment management practices and strategic choices may enable an organization to see where it standsand how it can evolve to a more mature level whereby it can more effectively implement its IT strategies.Research Problem/QuestionThe key purpose of this research is to further develop an understanding of the process of strategic alignment by testing atheoretical framework of the maturity of the management decisions and strategic choices in place which influence alignment. TheStrategic Alignment Maturity model is developed with two major objectives. First, it should provide a theoretical basis forassessing strategic alignment maturity. Second, it should improve our understanding of the nature of the factors which comprisestrategic alignment maturity, providing new insights into its successful management. Another important objective of this studyis to examine the relationship between strategic alignment maturity and the mutual understanding of business and IT objectivesbetween business and IT executives. Additionally, this study examines the relationship between strategic alignment maturity andorganizational performance. This work should be useful to business and IT executives as they direct their management practicesand strategic choices in managing their organizational resources. Building on these research objectives, the key research questionsof this study are:1. “What are the relevant management practices and strategic choices within the factors of strategic alignment maturity?”2. “What is the nature of the relationship between the factors of strategic alignment maturity and the mutual understanding ofIT and business objectives?”3. “What is the nature of the relationship between the factors of strategic alignment maturity and the performance of theorganization?”4. “Does strategic alignment maturity differ based on industry sector, size, IT budget, and revenues?”These questions are addressed by developing a conceptual model consisting of strategic alignment maturity, short-term linkage,and organizational performance (see Figure 1).IT Management1730 2001  Seventh Americas Conference on Information SystemsCommunications          (IV)Competency/      Value       (IV)Governance     (IV)Partnership     (IV)     Scope/Architecture       (IV)Skills (IV)Organizational  Performance       (DV)   Short-term     Linkage       (DV)Figure 1.  Conceptual Model of Maturity, Linkage, and PerformanceRelevant TheoriesThe conceptual model of maturity, linkage, and performance is based on the SAM framework (Luftman 2000), research on theenablers and inhibitors of alignment (Papp, Luftman, & Brier 1996), Henderson and Venkatraman’s  (1993) Strategic AlignmentModel, stages of growth (Nolan 1979; Galliers & Sutherland 1991), Software Engineering Institute’s Capability Maturity Model(Humphrey 1988), short-term linkage (Reich & Benbasat 1996), organizational performance (Brynjolfsson & Hitt 1993; Papp,1999) and the relationship between alignment and performance (Chan, Huff, Barclay & Copeland 1997; Tallon, Kraemer,Gurbaxani 2000).The six factors of the SAM framework are comprised of multiple attributes with multiple levels pertaining to possible managementchoices and strategic decisions within an organization, each of which has the potential to promote strategic alignment betweenthe IT and business functions. The literature suggests that enablers of strategic alignment include management practices andstrategic choices which facilitate (1) communication and understanding between business and IT (Papp et al. 1996; Reich &Benbasat 1996), (2) competency and value measurement (Praire 1996; Van Der Zee & De Jong 1999), (3) IT governance(Venkatraman, Henderson, Oldach 1993; Teo & King, 1997), (4) partnership (Henderson, Thomas, & Venkatraman, 1992; (5)IT infrastructure scope (Weill & Broadbent 1998), and (6) human resource skills (Reich & Kaarst-Brown 1998; Roepke, Agarwal,& Feratt 2000).Our research will also examine the relationship between SAM and short-term linkage. In case study research, Reich and Benbasat(1996) found that practices promoting communications between IT and business executives and mutual IT and business planningwere associated with higher levels of short-term linkage. One measure of short-term linkage they suggested as applicable to largesample investigations was self-reporting of the level of understanding that IT executives had about current business objectivesand the level of understanding business executives had about current IT objectives.  We will also examine the relationship between SAM and organizational performance. Recent empirical research has shown thatthere is a relationship between strategic alignment and perceived business performance (Chan et al. 1997) and between businessvalue of IT (Tallon et al. 2000).  Tallon et al. (2000) found a relationship between strategic alignment and management practicessuch as IT-business participation in (a) resolving IT and business issues, (b) strategy development, and (c) championing IT. Papp(1999) used financial measurements to determine the moderating effects of alignment perspective (the distinct interrelationshipof business strategy, IT strategy, organizational and IT infrastructure and processes) on performance. He found that earnings pershare, return on investment, and pre-tax income all effect firm performance when moderated by the alignment perspective. Wepropose that more mature systems of strategic alignment practices can provide a quantitative contribution to firm performance,the presumption being that these practices help to implement a firm’s competitive strategy, and are thus a source of sustainedcompetitive advantage.Sledgianowski & Luftman/Assessing Strategic Alignment Maturity2001  Seventh Americas Conference on Information Systems 1731Planned MethodologyA SAM assessment scale, based on Luftman’s SAM framework and review of existing literature, has been developed and is beingvalidated. The scale includes multiple items for each of the six factors. Most of the survey questions have five different responsechoices, each representing an increasing degree of maturity for the respective item it measures. Three items and their responsechoices from the survey are shown below:To what extent does IT understand the organization’s business environment (e.g. its customers, competitors, processes,partners/alliances):a) (   ) Senior and mid-level IT managers do not understand the business.b) (   ) Senior and mid-level IT managers have a limited understanding of the business.c) (   ) Senior and mid-level IT managers have a good understanding of the business.d) (   ) Understanding of the business by all IT members is encouraged and promoted by senior managers.e) (   ) Understanding of the business is required (e.g. tied to performance appraisals) throughout the IT function.f) (   ) N/A or don’t knowThe following statements pertain to how IT projects are prioritized.  Our IT project prioritization process is usually:a) (   ) In reaction to a business or IT need.b) (   ) Determined by the IT function.c) (   ) Determined by the business function.d) (   ) Mutually determined between senior and mid-level IT and business management.e) (   ) Mutually determined between senior and mid-level IT and business management and with consideration of the prioritiesof our business partners/alliances.f) (   ) N/A or don’t knowThe following statements pertain to the scope of your IT systems. Our primary systems are: a) (   ) Traditional (e.g. e-mail, accounting, word processing, “off-the-shelf”, legacy).b) (   ) Transaction-oriented (e.g. back office support, office automation systems).c) (   ) Business process enablers (IT supports business process change).d) (   ) Business process drivers (IT is a catalyst for business process change). e) (   ) Business strategy enabler/drivers (IT is a catalyst to changes in the business strategy).f) (   ) N/A or don’t know.Short-term linkage will be measured using items taken from Reich and Benbasat (1996) to measure mutual understanding of ITand business objectives between IT and business executives. Organizational performance will be measured using quantitativefinancial indicators from secondary data sources such as Compustat.     Several case studies will be performed to extend our understanding of management practices used to facilitate alignment.Semi-structured interviews of both business and IT executives will be conducted. A pre-test of the SAM instrument will beadministered to IT and business professionals in an organizational or academic setting. Survey data will be collected from bothIT and business executives from organizations which are members of The Conference Board and/or the Society of InformationManagement. Data analysis will consist of confirmatory factor analysis of the SAM criteria.  Descriptive statistics will be usedto determine maturity by industry sector,  size, IT budget, etc. Discriminant analysis will be used to determine the relationshipbetween maturity and the mutual understanding of IT and business objectives. Regression analysis will be used to determine therelationship between maturity and organizational performance. Structural equation modeling will be used to test the conceptualmodel of maturity, linkage, and performance used in this study to determine if causality exists between strategic alignmentmaturity, short-term linkage, and organizational performance.ReferencesReferences are available upon request from the first author (dsledgia@stevens-tech.edu).

Assessing Strategic Alignment Maturity and Its Effect on Organizational Performance and Mutual Understanding of Objectives

Zhou, Lina

Zhuang, Ziming

Recovering Punctuations in Instant Messages - Towards the prosody norm in IM

Wang, Haibo

Alidaee, Bahram

Kochenberger, Gary

Evaluating a Clique Partitioning Problem Model for Clustering High-Dimensional Data Mining