This paper explores the relationship between Knowledge Work and IT outsourcing which gained visibility during the 2004 US Presidential election campaign. The outsourcing phenomenon is maturing and companies have learned what is appropriate to outsource and for what reasons. That is causing some tasks to return to the US. Understanding Knowledge Work will help companies make decisions regarding effective outsourcing

McAdams, Arthur C.

Tellis, Winston

English

Arthur McAdams

Winston Tellis

Directory of Open Access Journals

 Volume VII, No. 2, 2006  280  Issues in Information Systems KNOWLEDGE WORK AND IT OUTSOURCING:  IS SOME WORK RETURNING TO THE UNITED STATES?  Arthur C. McAdams, Fairfield University, amcadams@mail.fairfield.edu Winston Tellis, Fairfield University, winston@mail.fairfield.edu   ABSTRACT  This  paper  explores  the  relationship  between Knowledge Work and IT outsourcing which gained visibility  during  the  2004  US  Presidential  election campaign. The outsourcing phenomenon is maturing and companies have learned what is appropriate to outsource and for what reasons. That is causing some tasks to return to the US. Understanding Knowledge Work will help companies make decisions regarding effective outsourcing.  Keywords: Knowledge Work, Outsourcing, IT Value Proposition, IT Skill Sets  INTRODUCTION  It has been almost fifty years since Peter Drucker and Fritz  Machlup  independently  coined  the  term knowledge  worker.  Since  then,  the  concept  of  the knowledge  worker  and  managing  knowledge  has been  studied  and  developed  by  academics  and practitioners.  As  the  new  economy  matures  and businesses move into several geographical locations, organizations  find  themselves  struggling  for  an integrated  and  managed  organizational  knowledge solution.  Knowledge is a continuously evolving collection of explicit information and tacit insight that provides a framework  for  decision  making  [7].  The  need  for improved  customer  service,  collaboration  between employees and partners, and decreased cycle times as a competitive edge (even across countries) has driven the need for knowledge management [26]. Research has indicated that rapid knowledge transfer is critical for  organizational  excellence,  especially  in disciplines that rely on intellect, in the new economy [11]. Organizations that deliver services, such as IT departments, may need to adopt similar programs in the near future as a technique to address employee turnover and retirement.   Employees may withhold sharing information based on the fear of losing an individual competitive edge within the organization, especially during  trends of downsizing  and  rightsizing  [9].  Technology  has enabled organizations to produce goods in disparate geographical areas with fewer employees. Concepts such  as  learning  curves,  experience  curves,  and manufacturing  progress  functions  have  existed  for many years and are built from a belief that something must  be  measured  before  it  can  be  improved  [22]. These lessons may be applied to an organization to bolster many areas of production but it is not yet an effective tool for measuring qualitative factors such as customer service.   Unfortunately,  many  of  the  benefits  of  knowledge management  are  difficult  to  quantify.  Liam  Fahey and  Laurence  Prusak  [12]  recommend  focusing  on the outcomes of a knowledge management program rather than force a set of meaningless metrics. Fahey and Prusak warn that placing erroneous quantifiable metrics  may  undermine  knowledge  management because the metrics may minimize the critical human element. Demonstrating cause-and-effect may be the most  effective  way  to  measure  knowledge  capital. For  instance,  performance  metrics  could  include measuring the response time to customer queries and measuring customer and user satisfaction [26].  IT EFFECTIVENESS  Thornton  May  [18]  stated  that  the  crisis  facing  IT departments  was  the  result  of  inadequate communication skills among senior IT managers that subsequently leads to ambiguous expectations and an unclear purpose of IT within the organization. This assertion  aligns  with  other  experts  who  have indicated  that  engineers  need  to  acquire  certain competencies,  primarily  communication  and  non-technical,  to  function  successfully  as  productive business  associates  [13].  Information  technology departments  offer  services  to  other  departments within  the  organization  as  well  as  the  entire organization  and  that  introduces  many  different relationships [2]. The role of a CIO needs to evolve from a technologist to a business consultant with a technology background [23]. In this way, knowledge management,  IT  effectiveness,  and  outsourcing  are related.  Researchers  and  practitioners  have  consistently identified the discomfort and dissatisfaction between business professionals and IT professionals [15]. As a Knowledge Work and IT Outsourcing: Is Some Work Returning to the U.S.? Volume VII, No. 2, 2006  281  Issues in Information Systems   group, IT professionals often resist influences from outside the technology profession, thus leading to a perception of IT professionals as social outcasts [16]. The  perceptual  and  cultural  gap  between  business professionals and IT professionals has been described as a cultural war [25]. The resulting frustration within the IT profession, caused by a seemingly perpetual lack  of  understanding  and  communication  with  the business community, has led to a growing cynicism within experienced IT managers [5].   Measuring the effectiveness of IT and assessing gains in  productivity  are  much  different  than  simply counting  the  number  of  application  systems  in  the organization [3]. An IT department that simply places software packages on servers and desktops, without regard for the skills of the end-users or the workflow processes,  will  run  the  risk  of  layering  additional costs on the organization without adding value [14]. Often IT managers fail to identify many of the costs beyond the initial hardware and software costs such as implementation effort, maintenance, and training that  can  all  lead  to  additional  costs  or  reduced benefits from a new system [1].   NEW ROLES WITHIN IT  AND SOME RETURNING WORK  While  openness  to  outsourcing  is  important,  it  is probably  not  the  most  important  issue  facing executives  as  organizations  need  to  adopt  new thinking to compete in the current and future highly competitive  environment.  Experts  have recommended  that  IT  professionals,  especially  IT managers,  should  stop  speaking  in  technological terms  (jargon),  which  often  confuses  and  alienates business  professionals,  and  start  actively  playing  a role  in  communicating  the  purpose  and  role  of technology  with  business  executives  [18].  This misconception  of  the  purpose  and  role  that technology plays in the economy is primarily a result of  a  communication  breakdown  between  business managers  and  technologists  as  there  is  a  profound difference  between  building  a  workforce  that  is computer  literate  versus  information  literate  [10]. Systems engineers often force business professionals to become computer literate by designing computer-friendly but user-unfriendly interfaces that confound and annoy business professionals [5].   The image of IT is closely linked to the success rate of  projects,  and  the  success  rate  of  projects  is significantly affected by organizational dynamics and structure  [24].  Delivering  projects  that  meet  cost parameters, align with time estimates, and match the agreed-upon  features  is  vitally  important  to  the success  of  business  ventures  [21].  Information technology departments that fail to deliver solutions that  meet  the  needs  of  the  business  will  further exacerbate the relationship problem.   The  image  of  IT  is  further  tarnished  by  financial management  issues.  In  many  organizations  IT  is viewed  as  uncontrolled  discretionary  administrative overhead  [8].  Often  these  measures  are  incomplete because  less  tangible  benefits  such  as  intellectual property  and  organizational  processes  are  omitted [27].  Unfortunately,  in  most  organizations  IT  is measured  using  traditional  quantitative  (mostly financial) metrics such as return on investment (ROI) that  are  often  dysfunctional  and  misleading  [19]. These  financial  issues  continue  to  erode  the relationship  between  IT  and  business  professionals [18].   In some cases the perceived outcome of IT initiatives may be driven by the way business professionals feel they were treated during the implementation [17]. For instance, business professionals may perceive that the implementation  of  a  new  IT  system  was  a  failure based on administrative issues [17]. Moreover, many of the perceptions of whether a system is successful or not can be driven by social relationships within the organization  [6].  Employees  have  informal  beliefs about other employees through organizational social networks  that  that  introduce  unseen  variables  to perceived  success  [6].  Thus  it  is  often  the  lack  of consistent  communication  within  the  various  levels of  management  and  the  employees  of  the organization that cause the systems projects to fail. In many  cases,  the  confluence  of  two  or  more  of  the above factors could result in the senior management actively seeking to outsource some or all of the IT operations.   CONCLUSION  Initially, companies in the U.S. and Europe reviewed cost  figures,  particularly  in  times  of  financial challenge, and saw what appeared to be an obvious candidate for cost reduction. CIOs must in the future identify with the company rather than the technology [26]. Failure to do so, could cause IT to be viewed as not integral to the core business, and hence could be assigned to an external organization with little or no loss  of  functionality.  Not  all  outsourced  operations are  successful;  following  the  lead  of  corporations such  as  Microsoft,  Intel,  IBM  and  others,  Dell carefully  examined  the  financial  benefit  of  sending some work to India. Comparing the salaries of Indian employees at a Call Center, Dell could improve its profit  margin  by  significantly  reducing  the  cost  of Knowledge Work and IT Outsourcing: Is Some Work Returning to the U.S.? Volume VII, No. 2, 2006  282  Issues in Information Systems providing  support  to  customers.  However,  in  2003 Dell was forced to stop using a Call Center in India for  corporate  customers  after  “an  onslaught  of complaints…  due  to  thick  accents  and  scripted answers...” [4]. Again in 2004 Dell dropped a Call Center  in  Bangalore,  India  because  according  Dell CEO  Mott  “…the  Bangalore  Center  was  unable  to deal satisfactorily with the volume of calls…” [20].  It is now clearer that merely cost reduction may not be  the  optimal  reason  for  considering  outsourcing. Further,  firms  need  to  arrive  at  the  decision  to outsource  after  a  systematic  development methodology.  Such  a  methodology  would  uncover the users’ true needs with active participation by the IT  department  in  the  decision  to  seek  an  external source.  Experience  has  shown  that  well  developed specifications  are  imperative  to  successful outsourcing  projects.  Programmers  in  India,  while both competent and cost effective at coding, may not fulfill  all  the  valuable  attributes—such  as consultative  services—provided  by  the  U.S. employees. Therefore, while the mechanical aspects of  a  project  may  be  met  by  outsourcing,  the customer’s  broader  requirements  may  not  be satisfied.  Looking  forward,  business  and  IT executives may want to broaden their perception of the IT value proposition.  REFERENCES  1.  Barreau,  D.  (2001).  The  hidden  costs  of implementing  and  maintaining  information systems. The Bottom Line, 14(4), 207-212. 2.  Brancheau,  J.,  Janz,  B.,  Wetherbe,  J.  (1996, June).  Key  issues  in  information  systems management: 1994-95 SIM Delphi results. MIS Quarterly, 20(2), 225-242. 3.  Cardinali,  R.  (1998).  Assessing  technological productivity gains: Benson and Parker revisited. Logistics  Information  Management,  11(2),  89-92. 4.  CNN.Com  (2003,  November  26).  Dell  cancels Indian  tech  support.  Retrieved  June  12,  2006, from http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/biztech/11/24/dell.call.centers.ap/. 5.  Cooper, A. (2004). The Inmates are running the Asylum. Indianapolis, IN: Sams Publishing. 6.  Cross, R., Davenport, T., Cantrell, S. (2003). The social  side  of  performance.  MIT  Sloan Management Review, 45(1), 20-22. 7.  Davenport,  T.,  Prusak,  L.  (2000).  Working Knowledge:  How  Organizations  Know  What They Know. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press. 8.  Day,  J.  (1996).  An  executive’s  guide  to measuring I/S. Strategy and Leadership, 24(5), 39-41. 9.  Desouza,  K.,  Awazu,  Y.  (2003).  Knowledge management: HR management systems can help track and distribute information throughout the organization. HR Magazine, 48(11), 107-111. 10.  Drucker, P. (2002). Managing the Next Society, New York: St. Martin’s Press. 11.  English, M., Baker, W. (2006). Rapid knowledge transfer: The key to success. Quality Progress, 39(2), 41-48. 12.  Fahey,  L.,  Prusak,  L.  (1998).  The  Eleven Deadliest  Sins  of  Knowledge  Management. California Management Review, 40, 265-275 13.  Garvin,  D.  (1993).  Building  a  learning organization.  In  Harvard  Business  Review  on Knowledge  Management,  47-80.  Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing. 14.  Hammer, M., Champy, J. (2003). Reengineering the  Corporation:  A  Manifesto  for  Business Revolution. New York: HarperCollins Publishers Inc. 15.  Kwak, M. (2001). Technical skills, people skills: It’s  not  either/or.  MIT  Sloan  Management Review, 42(3), 16. 16.  Kwantes,  C.,  Boglarsky,  C.  (2004).  Do occupational  groups  vary  in  expressed organizational culture preferences? International Journal  of  Cross  Cultural  Management,  4(3), 335-354. 17.  Marble,  R.  (2003).  A  system  implementation study:  Management  commitment  to  project management. Information Management, 4, 111-123. 18.  May, T. (1995). Chief information officer ABCs. Information  Management  Computer  Security, 3(5), 23-25. 19.  May, T. (1997). The death of ROI: Re-thinking IT value measurement. Information Management & Computer Security, 5(3), 90-94. 20.  McCue, A. (2004, March 31). Dell admits it has “learned  its  lesson.”  Retrieved  June  12,  2006, from  http://news.com.com/2100-1001_3-5182611.html. 21.  Milosevic,  D.,  Inman,  L.,  Ozbay,  A.  (2001). Impact  of  project  management  standardization on  project  effectiveness.  Engineering Management Journal, 13(4), 9-16. 22.  Odom,  C.,  Starns,  J.  (2003,  August).  How  do you measure success? KMWorld, 12. Retrieved March  15,  2006,  from http://www.kmworld.com/publications/magazine/index.cfm?action=readarticleArticle_I... 23.  Overby,  S.  (2003,  October).  The  incredible shrinking  CIO.  CXO  Media  Inc.  Retrieved Knowledge Work and IT Outsourcing: Is Some Work Returning to the U.S.? Volume VII, No. 2, 2006  283  Issues in Information Systems   March  15,  2006,  from http://www.cio.com/archive/101503/shrinking.html 24.  Rivard, S., Raymond, L., Bergeron,  Aubin, M. (1999). Project manager’s influence tactics and authority:  A  comparison  across  project structures. ACM Press, 19/20(4/1), 6-20. 25.  Tai,  L.,  Phelps,  R.  (2000).  CEO  and  CIO perceptions  of  information  systems  strategy: Evidence from Hong Kong. European Journal of Information Systems, 9, 163-172. 26.  Turban,  E.,  King,  D.,  Lee,  J.,  Warkentin  M., Chung,  H.  (2002).  Electronic  Commerce:  A Management  Perspective.  Upper  Saddle  Ridge NJ: Prentice-Hall. 27.  Utunen,  P.  (2003).  Identify,  measure,  visualize your  technology  assets.  Research  Technology Management, 46(3), 31-39.    

KNOWLEDGE WORK AND IT OUTSOURCING: IS SOME WORK RETURNING TO THE UNITED STATES?

Fairfield University: DigitalCommons@Fairfield

Fairfield University DigitalCommons@Fairfield Business Faculty Publications Charles F. Dolan School of Business 2006 Knowledge Work and IT Outsourcing: Is Some Work Returning to the United States? Arthur C. McAdams Winston Tellis Fairfield University, winston@fairfield.edu Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.fairfield.edu/business-facultypubs This article, published by the International Association for Computer Information Systems, is freely available at http://iacis.org/iis/2006/McAdams_Tellis.pdf Peer Reviewed Repository Citation McAdams, Arthur C. and Tellis, Winston, "Knowledge Work and IT Outsourcing: Is Some Work Returning to the United States?" (2006). Business Faculty Publications. 35. https://digitalcommons.fairfield.edu/business-facultypubs/35 Published Citation McAdams, Arthur C.; Tellis, Winston M.. ‘Knowledge Work and IT Outsourcing: Is Some Work Returning to the United States?.' Issues in Information Systems v.7, 2 (2006): 280-283. This item has been accepted for inclusion in DigitalCommons@Fairfield by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Fairfield. It is brought to you by DigitalCommons@Fairfield with permission from the rights-holder(s) and is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/or on the work itself. For more information, please contact digitalcommons@fairfield.edu.  Volume VII, No. 2, 2006 280 Issues in Information Systems KNOWLEDGE WORK AND IT OUTSOURCING:  IS SOME WORK RETURNING TO THE UNITED STATES?  Arthur C. McAdams, Fairfield University, amcadams@mail.fairfield.edu Winston Tellis, Fairfield University, winston@mail.fairfield.edu   ABSTRACT  This paper explores the relationship between Knowledge Work and IT outsourcing which gained visibility during the 2004 US Presidential election campaign. The outsourcing phenomenon is maturing and companies have learned what is appropriate to outsource and for what reasons. That is causing some tasks to return to the US. Understanding Knowledge Work will help companies make decisions regarding effective outsourcing.  Keywords: Knowledge Work, Outsourcing, IT Value Proposition, IT Skill Sets  INTRODUCTION  It has been almost fifty years since Peter Drucker and Fritz Machlup independently coined the term knowledge worker. Since then, the concept of the knowledge worker and managing knowledge has been studied and developed by academics and practitioners. As the new economy matures and businesses move into several geographical locations, organizations find themselves struggling for an integrated and managed organizational knowledge solution.  Knowledge is a continuously evolving collection of explicit information and tacit insight that provides a framework for decision making [7]. The need for improved customer service, collaboration between employees and partners, and decreased cycle times as a competitive edge (even across countries) has driven the need for knowledge management [26]. Research has indicated that rapid knowledge transfer is critical for organizational excellence, especially in disciplines that rely on intellect, in the new economy [11]. Organizations that deliver services, such as IT departments, may need to adopt similar programs in the near future as a technique to address employee turnover and retirement.   Employees may withhold sharing information based on the fear of losing an individual competitive edge within the organization, especially during trends of downsizing and rightsizing [9]. Technology has enabled organizations to produce goods in disparate geographical areas with fewer employees. Concepts such as learning curves, experience curves, and manufacturing progress functions have existed for many years and are built from a belief that something must be measured before it can be improved [22]. These lessons may be applied to an organization to bolster many areas of production but it is not yet an effective tool for measuring qualitative factors such as customer service.   Unfortunately, many of the benefits of knowledge management are difficult to quantify. Liam Fahey and Laurence Prusak [12] recommend focusing on the outcomes of a knowledge management program rather than force a set of meaningless metrics. Fahey and Prusak warn that placing erroneous quantifiable metrics may undermine knowledge management because the metrics may minimize the critical human element. Demonstrating cause-and-effect may be the most effective way to measure knowledge capital. For instance, performance metrics could include measuring the response time to customer queries and measuring customer and user satisfaction [26].  IT EFFECTIVENESS  Thornton May [18] stated that the crisis facing IT departments was the result of inadequate communication skills among senior IT managers that subsequently leads to ambiguous expectations and an unclear purpose of IT within the organization. This assertion aligns with other experts who have indicated that engineers need to acquire certain competencies, primarily communication and non-technical, to function successfully as productive business associates [13]. Information technology departments offer services to other departments within the organization as well as the entire organization and that introduces many different relationships [2]. The role of a CIO needs to evolve from a technologist to a business consultant with a technology background [23]. In this way, knowledge management, IT effectiveness, and outsourcing are related.  Researchers and practitioners have consistently identified the discomfort and dissatisfaction between business professionals and IT professionals [15]. As a Knowledge Work and IT Outsourcing: Is Some Work Returning to the U.S.? Volume VII, No. 2, 2006 281 Issues in Information Systems  group, IT professionals often resist influences from outside the technology profession, thus leading to a perception of IT professionals as social outcasts [16]. The perceptual and cultural gap between business professionals and IT professionals has been described as a cultural war [25]. The resulting frustration within the IT profession, caused by a seemingly perpetual lack of understanding and communication with the business community, has led to a growing cynicism within experienced IT managers [5].   Measuring the effectiveness of IT and assessing gains in productivity are much different than simply counting the number of application systems in the organization [3]. An IT department that simply places software packages on servers and desktops, without regard for the skills of the end-users or the workflow processes, will run the risk of layering additional costs on the organization without adding value [14]. Often IT managers fail to identify many of the costs beyond the initial hardware and software costs such as implementation effort, maintenance, and training that can all lead to additional costs or reduced benefits from a new system [1].   NEW ROLES WITHIN IT  AND SOME RETURNING WORK  While openness to outsourcing is important, it is probably not the most important issue facing executives as organizations need to adopt new thinking to compete in the current and future highly competitive environment. Experts have recommended that IT professionals, especially IT managers, should stop speaking in technological terms (jargon), which often confuses and alienates business professionals, and start actively playing a role in communicating the purpose and role of technology with business executives [18]. This misconception of the purpose and role that technology plays in the economy is primarily a result of a communication breakdown between business managers and technologists as there is a profound difference between building a workforce that is computer literate versus information literate [10]. Systems engineers often force business professionals to become computer literate by designing computer-friendly but user-unfriendly interfaces that confound and annoy business professionals [5].   The image of IT is closely linked to the success rate of projects, and the success rate of projects is significantly affected by organizational dynamics and structure [24]. Delivering projects that meet cost parameters, align with time estimates, and match the agreed-upon features is vitally important to the success of business ventures [21]. Information technology departments that fail to deliver solutions that meet the needs of the business will further exacerbate the relationship problem.   The image of IT is further tarnished by financial management issues. In many organizations IT is viewed as uncontrolled discretionary administrative overhead [8]. Often these measures are incomplete because less tangible benefits such as intellectual property and organizational processes are omitted [27]. Unfortunately, in most organizations IT is measured using traditional quantitative (mostly financial) metrics such as return on investment (ROI) that are often dysfunctional and misleading [19]. These financial issues continue to erode the relationship between IT and business professionals [18].   In some cases the perceived outcome of IT initiatives may be driven by the way business professionals feel they were treated during the implementation [17]. For instance, business professionals may perceive that the implementation of a new IT system was a failure based on administrative issues [17]. Moreover, many of the perceptions of whether a system is successful or not can be driven by social relationships within the organization [6]. Employees have informal beliefs about other employees through organizational social networks that that introduce unseen variables to perceived success [6]. Thus it is often the lack of consistent communication within the various levels of management and the employees of the organization that cause the systems projects to fail. In many cases, the confluence of two or more of the above factors could result in the senior management actively seeking to outsource some or all of the IT operations.   CONCLUSION  Initially, companies in the U.S. and Europe reviewed cost figures, particularly in times of financial challenge, and saw what appeared to be an obvious candidate for cost reduction. CIOs must in the future identify with the company rather than the technology [26]. Failure to do so, could cause IT to be viewed as not integral to the core business, and hence could be assigned to an external organization with little or no loss of functionality. Not all outsourced operations are successful; following the lead of corporations such as Microsoft, Intel, IBM and others, Dell carefully examined the financial benefit of sending some work to India. Comparing the salaries of Indian employees at a Call Center, Dell could improve its profit margin by significantly reducing the cost of Knowledge Work and IT Outsourcing: Is Some Work Returning to the U.S.? Volume VII, No. 2, 2006 282 Issues in Information Systems providing support to customers. However, in 2003 Dell was forced to stop using a Call Center in India for corporate customers after “an onslaught of complaints… due to thick accents and scripted answers...” [4]. Again in 2004 Dell dropped a Call Center in Bangalore, India because according Dell CEO Mott “…the Bangalore Center was unable to deal satisfactorily with the volume of calls…” [20].  It is now clearer that merely cost reduction may not be the optimal reason for considering outsourcing. Further, firms need to arrive at the decision to outsource after a systematic development methodology. Such a methodology would uncover the users’ true needs with active participation by the IT department in the decision to seek an external source. Experience has shown that well developed specifications are imperative to successful outsourcing projects. Programmers in India, while both competent and cost effective at coding, may not fulfill all the valuable attributes—such as consultative services—provided by the U.S. employees. Therefore, while the mechanical aspects of a project may be met by outsourcing, the customer’s broader requirements may not be satisfied. Looking forward, business and IT executives may want to broaden their perception of the IT value proposition.  REFERENCES  1. Barreau, D. (2001). The hidden costs of implementing and maintaining information systems. The Bottom Line, 14(4), 207-212. 2. Brancheau, J., Janz, B., Wetherbe, J. (1996, June). Key issues in information systems management: 1994-95 SIM Delphi results. MIS Quarterly, 20(2), 225-242. 3. Cardinali, R. (1998). Assessing technological productivity gains: Benson and Parker revisited. Logistics Information Management, 11(2), 89-92. 4. CNN.Com (2003, November 26). Dell cancels Indian tech support. Retrieved June 12, 2006, from http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/biztech/11/24/dell.call.centers.ap/. 5. Cooper, A. (2004). The Inmates are running the Asylum. Indianapolis, IN: Sams Publishing. 6. Cross, R., Davenport, T., Cantrell, S. (2003). The social side of performance. MIT Sloan Management Review, 45(1), 20-22. 7. Davenport, T., Prusak, L. (2000). Working Knowledge: How Organizations Know What They Know. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press. 8. Day, J. (1996). An executive’s guide to measuring I/S. Strategy and Leadership, 24(5), 39-41. 9. Desouza, K., Awazu, Y. (2003). Knowledge management: HR management systems can help track and distribute information throughout the organization. HR Magazine, 48(11), 107-111. 10. Drucker, P. (2002). Managing the Next Society, New York: St. Martin’s Press. 11. English, M., Baker, W. (2006). Rapid knowledge transfer: The key to success. Quality Progress, 39(2), 41-48. 12. Fahey, L., Prusak, L. (1998). The Eleven Deadliest Sins of Knowledge Management. California Management Review, 40, 265-275 13. Garvin, D. (1993). Building a learning organization. In Harvard Business Review on Knowledge Management, 47-80. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing. 14. Hammer, M., Champy, J. (2003). Reengineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution. New York: HarperCollins Publishers Inc. 15. Kwak, M. (2001). Technical skills, people skills: It’s not either/or. MIT Sloan Management Review, 42(3), 16. 16. Kwantes, C., Boglarsky, C. (2004). Do occupational groups vary in expressed organizational culture preferences? International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 4(3), 335-354. 17. Marble, R. (2003). A system implementation study: Management commitment to project management. Information Management, 4, 111-123. 18. May, T. (1995). Chief information officer ABCs. Information Management Computer Security, 3(5), 23-25. 19. May, T. (1997). The death of ROI: Re-thinking IT value measurement. Information Management & Computer Security, 5(3), 90-94. 20. McCue, A. (2004, March 31). Dell admits it has “learned its lesson.” Retrieved June 12, 2006, from http://news.com.com/2100-1001_3-5182611.html. 21. Milosevic, D., Inman, L., Ozbay, A. (2001). Impact of project management standardization on project effectiveness. Engineering Management Journal, 13(4), 9-16. 22. Odom, C., Starns, J. (2003, August). How do you measure success? KMWorld, 12. Retrieved March 15, 2006, from http://www.kmworld.com/publications/magazine/index.cfm?action=readarticleArticle_I... 23. Overby, S. (2003, October). The incredible shrinking CIO. CXO Media Inc. Retrieved Knowledge Work and IT Outsourcing: Is Some Work Returning to the U.S.? Volume VII, No. 2, 2006 283 Issues in Information Systems  March 15, 2006, from http://www.cio.com/archive/101503/shrinking.html 24. Rivard, S., Raymond, L., Bergeron, Aubin, M. (1999). Project manager’s influence tactics and authority: A comparison across project structures. ACM Press, 19/20(4/1), 6-20. 25. Tai, L., Phelps, R. (2000). CEO and CIO perceptions of information systems strategy: Evidence from Hong Kong. European Journal of Information Systems, 9, 163-172. 26. Turban, E., King, D., Lee, J., Warkentin M., Chung, H. (2002). Electronic Commerce: A Management Perspective. Upper Saddle Ridge NJ: Prentice-Hall. 27. Utunen, P. (2003). Identify, measure, visualize your technology assets. Research Technology Management, 46(3), 31-39.    

Knowledge Work and IT Outsourcing: Is Some Work Returning to the United States?

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Directory of Open Access Journals

Fairfield University: DigitalCommons@Fairfield