Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Business Analytics Adoption and Technological Intensity: An Efficiency Analysis

  • Published:
Information Systems Frontiers Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Despite the overwhelming popularity of business analytics (BA) as an evidence-based decision support mechanism, the impact of its adoption on organizational performance has received scant attention from the research community. This study aims to unfold the adoption efficiencies of BA and its applications by proposing a data envelopment analysis (DEA) methodology to holistically assess the underlying factors with respect to the level of achievement regarding organizational performance, operational performance, and financial performance. Furthermore, the study unveils the firm-level and sectoral-level discrepancies in BA adoption efficiency in different industry settings. Relying on survey data obtained from 204 executives in various industries, this study provides empirical support for the cross-industry differences in BA adoption efficiencies. The results show that the firms in low-tech industries seem to achieve the highest efficiency from adopting BA regarding its influence on firm performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adler, N., & Golany, B. (2002). Including principal component weights to improve discrimination in data envelopment analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 53(9), 985–991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahmad, M. O., Ahmad, I., Rana, N. P., & Khan, I. S. (2022). An empirical investigation on business analytics in software and systems development projects. Information Systems Frontiers. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-022-10253-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akter, S., Wamba, S. F., Gunasekaran, A., Dubey, R., & Childe, S. J. (2016). How to improve firm performance using big data analytics capability and business strategy alignment? International Journal of Production Economics, 182, 113–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appelbaum, D., Kogan, A., Vasarhelyi, M., & Yan, Z. (2017). Impact of business analytics and enterprise systems on managerial accounting. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 25, 29–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977). Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14, 396–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Attili, V. P., Mathew, S. K., & Sugumaran, V. (2022). Information privacy assimilation in IT organizations. Information Systems Frontiers, 24(5), 1497–1513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aydiner, A. S., Tatoglu, E., Bayraktar, E., Zaim, S., & Delen, D. (2019a). Business analytics and firm performance: The mediating role of business process performance. Journal of Business Research, 96, 228–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aydiner, A. S., Tatoglu, E., Bayraktar, E., & Zaim, S. (2019b). Information system capabilities and firm performance: Opening the black box through decision-making performance and business-process performance. International Journal of Information Management, 47, 168–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Babakus, E., & Mangold, W. G. (1992). Adapting the SERVQUAL scale to hospital services: An empirical investigation. Health Services Research, 26(6), 767–786.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandara, F., Jayawickrama, U., Subasinghage, M., Olan, F., Alamoudi, H., & Alharthi, M. (2023). Enhancing ERP Responsiveness Through Big Data Technologies: An Empirical Investigation. Information Systems Frontiers. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-023-10374-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30(9), 1078–1092.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baum, J. R., & Wally, S. (2003). Strategic decision speed and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 24(11), 1107–1129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayraktar, E., Demirbag, M., Koh, S. C. L., Tatoglu, E., & Zaim, H. (2009). A causal analysis of the impact of information systems and supply chain management practices on operational performance: Evidence from manufacturing SMEs in Turkey. International Journal of Production Economics, 122(1), 133–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayraktar, E., Tatoglu, E., Turkyilmaz, A., Delen, D., & Zaim, S. (2012). Measuring the efficiency of customer satisfaction and loyalty for mobile phone brands: Evidence from an emerging market. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(1), 99–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayraktar, E., Tatoglu, E., & Zaim, S. (2013). Measuring the relative efficiency of quality management practices in Turkish public and private universities. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 64(12), 1810–1830.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bharadwaj, A. S. (2000). A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firm performance: An empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 169–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bisogno, S., Calabrese, A., Gastaldi, M., & Levialdi Ghiron, N. (2016). Combining modelling and simulation approaches: How to measure performance of business processes. Business Process Management Journal, 22(1), 56–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braganza, A., Brooks, L., Nepelski, D., Ali, M., & Moro, R. (2017). Resource management in big data initiatives: Processes and dynamic capabilities. Journal of Business Research, 70, 328–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brockett, P. L., & Golany, B. (1996). Using rank statistics for determining programmatic efficiency differences in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 42(3), 466–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, P., Pol, E., & Robertson, P. L. (2000). Classification of Industries by Level of Technology: An Appraisal and some Implications. Prometheus, 18(4), 417–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), 429–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatterjee, S., Chaudhuri, R., Kamble, S., Gupta, S., & Sivarajah, U. (2022). Adoption of artificial intelligence and cutting-edge technologies for production system sustainability: A moderator-mediation analysis. Information Systems Frontiers. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-022-10317-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collings, D. G., Demirbag, M., Mellahi, K., & Tatoglu, E. (2010). Strategic orientation, human resource management practices and organizational outcomes: Evidence from Turkey. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 21(14), 2589–2613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, W. D. (2004). Qualitative Data in DEA. In W. W. Cooper, L. M. Seiford, & J. Zhu (Eds.), Handbook on Data Envelopment Analysis, Norwell. MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, W. D., & Zhu, J. (2005). Modeling Performance Measurement: Applications and Implementation Issues of DEA. Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Tone, K. (2000). Data Envelopment Analysis: A Comprehensive Text with Models, Applications, References and DEA-Solver Software. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cosic, R., Shanks, G., & Maynard, S. (2015). A business analytics capability framework. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 19, S5–S19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, E. P. (1980). The optimal number of response alternatives for a scale: A review. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(4), 407–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T., & Harris, J. (2017). Competing on analytics: Updated, with a new introduction: The new science of winning. Harvard Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, G. A., & Woratschek, C. R. (2015). Evaluating business intelligence/business analytics software for use in the information systems curriculum. Information Systems Education Journal, 13(1), 23–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delen, D., & Zolbanin, H. M. (2018). The analytics paradigm in business research. Journal of Business Research, 90, 186–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deloitte Turkey (2022). TÜBİSAD Information and Communications Technology Sector Reports, 2021. Informatics Industry Association (TÜBİSAD). Available at: https://www.tubisad.org.tr/en/images/pdf/deloitte_tubisad_ict%20market%20report_en.pdf Accessed on 13.11.2022.

  • Demirbag, M., Tatoglu, E., Glaister, K. W., & Zaim, S. (2010). Measuring strategic decision making efficiency in different contexts: A comparison of British and Turkish firms. Omega, 38, 95–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devlin, S. J., Dong, H. K., & Brown, M. (1993). Selecting a scale for measuring quality. Marketing Research, 5(3), 12–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dighe, A. (2021). A blueprint for decision confidence during rapid change. Gartner Business Quarterly: Proven Guidance for C-Suite Action, 2nd Quarter, 2021:10–15. Available at: https://emtemp.gcom.cloud/ngw/globalassets/en/insights/gartner-business-quarterly/documents/gartner_business_journal_2q21.pdf. Accessed on 11.10.2022.

  • Dillman, D. A. (2007). Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design. John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duan, Y., Cao, G., & Edwards, J. S. (2020). Understanding the impact of business analytics on innovation. European Journal of Operational Research, 281(3), 673–686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duhan, S. (2007). A capabilities based toolkit for strategic information systems planning in SMEs. International Journal of Information Management, 27(5), 352–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elbashir, M. Z., Collier, P. A., & Davern, M. J. (2008). Measuring the effects of business intelligence systems: The relationship between business process and organizational performance. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 9(3), 135–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forker, L. B., & Mendez, D. (2001). An analytical method for benchmarking best peer suppliers. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 21(1/2), 195–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gable, S. L., & Poore, J. (2008). Which thoughts count? Algorithms for evaluating satisfaction in relationships. Psychological Science, 19(10), 1030–1036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galindo-Rueda, F. and Verger, F. (2016). OECD Taxonomy of Economic Activities Based on R&D Intensity. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, 2016/04. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/5jlv73sqqp8r-en

  • Geringer, M. J., & Hebert, L. (1991). Measuring performance of international joint ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 22(2), 249–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaister, K. W., Dincer, O., Tatoglu, E., Demirbag, M., & Zaim, S. (2008). A causal analysis of formal strategic planning and firm performance: Evidence from an emerging country. Management Decision, 46(3), 365–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groombridge, D. (2022). Top strategic technology trends for 2023. Gartner E-book: Available at: https://www.gartner.com/en/articles/gartner-top-10-strategic-technology-trends-for-2023. Accessed on 11.10.2022.

  • Gupta, S., Drave, V. A., Bag, S., & Luo, Z. (2019). Leveraging smart supply chain and information system agility for supply chain flexibility. Information Systems Frontiers, 21, 547–564. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-019-09901-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Money, A., Samouel, P., & Page, M. (2007). Research Methods for Business. John Wiley and Sons.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hindle, G. A., & Vidgen, R. (2018). Developing a business analytics methodology: A case study in the foodbank sector. European Journal of Operational Research, 268(3), 836–851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hindle, G., Kunc, M., Mortensen, M., Oztekin, A., & Vidgen, R. (2020). Business analytics: Defining the field and identifying a research agenda. European Journal of Operational Research, 281(3), 483–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holsapple, C., Lee-Post, A., & Pakath, R. (2014). A unified foundation for business analytics. Decision Support Systems, 64, 130–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, S. C., McIntosh, S., Sobolevsky, S., & Hung, P. C. (2017). Big data analytics and business intelligence in industry. Information Systems Frontiers, 19(6), 1229–1232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, G. P. (1990). A theory of the effects of advanced information technologies on organizational design, intelligence, and decision making. Academy of Management Review, 15(1), 47–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Izmen, U., Kilicaslan, Y., & Gurel, Y.U. (2021). TÜBİSAD Turkey’s Digital Transformation Index, 2021. Informatics Industry Association (TÜBİSAD). Available at: https://www.tubisad.org.tr/en/images/pdf/tubisad_tdti2021_report.pdf. Accessed on 13.11.2022.

  • Ji-fan Ren, S., Fosso Wamba, S., Akter, S., Dubey, R., & Childe, S. J. (2017). Modelling quality dynamics, business value and firm performance in a big data analytics environment. International Journal of Production Research, 55(17), 5011–5026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karaboga, T., Zehir, C., Tatoglu, E., Karaboga, H. A., & Bouguerra, A. (2022). Big data analytics management capability and firm performance: The mediating role of data-driven culture. Review of Managerial Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-022-00596-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinnunen, K. (2021). Impose constraints to make better decisions faster. Gartner Business Quarterly: Proven Guidance for C-Suite Action, 2nd Quarter, 2021:48–52. Available at: https://emtemp.gcom.cloud/ngw/globalassets/en/insights/gartner-business-quarterly/documents/gartner_business_journal_2q21.pdf. Accessed on 11.10.2022.

  • Klatt, T., Schlaefke, M., & Moeller, K. (2011). Integrating business analytics into strategic planning for better performance. Journal of Business Strategy, 32(6), 30–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohavi, R., Rothleder, N. J., & Simoudis, E. (2002). Emerging trends in business analytics. Communications of the ACM, 45(8), 45–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korpela, J., Lehmusvaara, A., & Nisonen, J. (2007). Warehouse operator selection by combining AHP and DEA methodologies. International Journal of Production Economics, 108(1–2), 135–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kunc, M., & O’brien, F. A. (2019). The role of business analytics in supporting strategy processes: Opportunities and limitations. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 70(6), 974–985.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson, D., & Chang, V. (2016). A review and future direction of agile, business intelligence, analytics and data science. International Journal of Information Management, 36(5), 700–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laudon, K., & Laudon, J. P. (2013). Management Information Systems. Pearson Education: Global Edition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, F. F., & Wang, P. (2008). DEA Malmquist productivity measure: Taiwanese semiconductor companies. International Journal of Production Economics, 112(1), 367–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, J., Fan, M., & Zhang, H. (2012). Information technology and organizational capabilities: A longitudinal study of the apparel industry. Decision Support Systems, 53(1), 186–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lupu, O. (2021). The cutting edge: 2Q21. Gartner Business Quarterly: Proven Guidance for C-Suite Action, 2nd Quarter, 2021. Available at: https://emtemp.gcom.cloud/ngw/globalassets/en/insights/gartner-business-quarterly/documents/gartner_business_journal_2q21.pdf. Accessed on 11.10.2022.

  • Mahmood, M. A., & Soon, S. K. (1991). A comprehensive model for measuring the potential impact of information technology on organizational strategic variables. Decision Sciences, 22(4), 869–897.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLaren, T. S., Head, M. M., Yufe, Y., & Chan, Y. E. (2011). A multilevel model for measuring fit between a firm’s competitive strategies and information system capabilities. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 909–929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mithas, S., Ramasubbu, N., & Sambamurthy, V. (2011). How information management capability influences firm performance. MIS Quarterly, 35(1), 237–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ordanini, A., & Rubera, G. (2009). How does the application of an IT service innovation affect firm performance? A theoretical framework and empirical analysis on e-commerce. Information & Management, 47(1), 60–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pape, T. (2015). Prioritizing data items for business analytics: Framework and application to human resources. European Journal of Operational Research, 252, 687–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peppard, J., & Ward, J. (2016). The Strategic Management of Information Systems: Building a Digital Strategy. John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popovič, A., Hackney, R., Tassabehji, R., & Castelli, M. (2018). The impact of big data analytics on firms’ high value business performance. Information Systems Frontiers, 20(2), 209–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radhika, S., & Hartono, E. (2003). Issues in linking information technology capability to firm performance. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 125–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramanathan, R. (2003). An introduction to data envelopment analysis: A tool for performance measurement. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramanathan, R., Philpott, E., Duan, Y., & Cao, G. (2017). Adoption of business analytics and impact on performance: A qualitative study in retail. Production Planning and Control, 28(11–12), 985–998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarrico, C. S., & Dyson, R. G. (2000). Using DEA for planning in UK universities – An institutional perspective. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 51, 789–800.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharda, R., Delen, D., & Turban, E. (2014). Business Intelligence: A Managerial Perspective on Analytics–3rd Edition. Saddle River, NJ: Pearson-Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shmueli, G., & Koppius, O. R. (2011). Predictive analytics in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 35(3), 553–572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sivarajah, U., Kamal, M. M., Irani, Z., & Weerakkody, V. (2017). Critical analysis of big data challenges and analytical methods. Journal of Business Research, 70, 263–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sueyoshi, T., & Aoki, S. (2001). A use of a nonparametric statistic for DEA frontier shift: The Kruskal and Wallis rank test. Omega, 29, 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun, Z., Strang, K., & Firmin, S. (2017). Business analytics-based enterprise information systems. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 57(2), 169–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, F. T. C., Guo, Z., Cahalane, M., & Cheng, D. (2016). Developing business analytic capabilities for combating e-commerce identity fraud: A study of Trustev’s digital verification solution. Information and Management, 53(7), 878–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tenenhaus, M., Vinzi, V. E., Chatelin, Y. M., & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS path modeling. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 48(1), 159–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tippins, M. J., & Sohi, R. S. (2003). IT competency and firm performance: Is organizational learning a missing link? Strategic Management Journal, 24(8), 745–761.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Troilo, M., Bouchet, A., Urban, T. L., & Sutton, W. A. (2016). Perception, reality, and the adoption of business analytics: Evidence from North American professional sport organizations. Omega, 59, 72–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatraman, N., & Ramanujam, V. (1986). The measurement of business performance in strategy research: A comparison of approaches. The Academy of Management Review, 11, 801–814.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vidgen, R., Shaw, S., & Grant, D. B. (2017). Management challenges in creating value from business analytics. European Journal of Operational Research, 261(2), 626–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wójcik, P. (2015). Exploring links between dynamic capabilities perspective and resource-based view: A literature overview. International Journal of Management and Economics, 45, 83–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, P.-J.S., Straub, W. D., & Liang, T.-P. (2015). How information technology governance mechanisms and strategic alignment influence organizational performance: Insights from a matched survey of business and IT managers. MIS Quarterly, 39(2), 497–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, J., Li, H., Liu, L., & Zheng, H. (2017). Adoption of big data and analytics in mobile healthcare market: An economic perspective. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 22, 24–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, J. (2003). Imprecise data envelopment analysis (IDEA): A review and improvement with an application. European Journal of Operational Research, 144(3), 513–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zwass, V. (1998). Structure and macro-level impacts of electronic commerce: from technological infrastructure to electronic marketplaces. In K. E. Kendall (Ed.), Emerging Information Technologies: Improving Decision, Cooperation, and Infrastructure, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks. CA.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Engineering and Architecture, Gulf University for Science & Technology, W. Mishref, Kuwait

    Erkan Bayraktar

  2. College of Business Administration, Gulf University for Science & Technology, W. Mishref, Kuwait

    Ekrem Tatoglu

  3. Ibn Haldun University, School of Business, Basaksehir, 34480, Istanbul, Turkey

    Ekrem Tatoglu

  4. Faculty of Political Sciences, Istanbul Medeniyet University, Kadikoy, Istanbul, 34000, Turkey

    Arafat Salih Aydiner

  5. Spears School of Busainess, Oklahoma State University, Stuillwater, OK, 74078, USA

    Dursun Delen

  6. Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Department of Industrial Engineering, Istinye University, 34396, Sarıyer, Istanbul, Turkey

    Dursun Delen

Authors
  1. Erkan Bayraktar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ekrem Tatoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Arafat Salih Aydiner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dursun Delen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dursun Delen.

Ethics declarations

Competing Interests

☒ The authors declare that they have no known competing or financial interests, or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

☐ The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests:

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 10

Table 10 Measurement of survey-based constructs
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bayraktar, E., Tatoglu, E., Aydiner, A.S. et al. Business Analytics Adoption and Technological Intensity: An Efficiency Analysis. Inf Syst Front (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-023-10424-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-023-10424-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation