Information Systems Frontiers

, Volume 13, Issue 5, pp 681–692 | Cite as

Strategic choices of inter-organizational information systems: A network perspective

  • Daning Hu
  • Sherry X. Sun
  • J. Leon Zhao
  • Xinlei Zhao
Article

Abstract

As cooperation in a networked manner increases via various inter-organizational information systems (IOISs), it is important to choose appropriate IOISs for different types of organizations in the network environment. In this study, we analyzed customer-supplier relationships among organizations in five industries using social network analysis (SNA) methods and empirical data, aiming to help organizations strategically choose appropriate IOISs. Three types of customer-supplier networks were identified based on the network centralization comparison rate: customer-centric, supplier-centric and balanced networks. Based on the empirical findings in our analysis, we then propose strategies about how to choose appropriate IOISs for the firms in these networks and discuss the pros and cons of the choices. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first empirical research that applied SNA methods to study customer-supplier networks in the context of inter-organizational information systems.

Keywords

Social network analysis Inter-organizational information systems Customer-supplier networks 

References

  1. Arakji, R. Y., & Lang, K. R. (2007) Digital consumer networks and producer-consumer collaboration: Innovation and product development in the digital entertainment industry. Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.Google Scholar
  2. Bakos, J. Y. (1991). Information links and electronic marketplaces: the role of interorganizational information systems in vertical markets. Journal of Management Information System, 8(2), 31–52.Google Scholar
  3. Barabasi, A.-L., & Alert, R. (1999). Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science, 286(5439), 509–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barua, A., et al. (2004). An empirical investigation of net-enabled business value. MIS Quarterly, 28(4), 585–620.Google Scholar
  5. Beckman, C. M., Haunschild, P. R., & Phillips, D. J. (2004). Friends or strangers? Firm-specific uncertainty, market uncertainty, and network partner selection. Organization Science, 15(3), 259–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bensaou, M. (1997). Interorganizational cooperation: the role of information technology an empirical comparison of U.S. and Japanese supplier relations. Information Systems Research, 8(2), 107–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Buckner, K., & Cruickshank, P. (2008). Social network analysis as a tool to evaluate the effectiveness of EC funded networks of excellence: The case of DEMO-net. Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.Google Scholar
  8. Carley, K. M. (2002). Computational organization science: a new frontier. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 99(Suppl 3), 7257–7262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Choudhury, V. (1997). Strategic choices in the development of interorganizational information systems. Information Systems Research, 8(1), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cunningham, C., & Tynan, C. (1993). Electronic trading. Interorganizational systems and the nature of buyer seller relationships—the need for a network perspective. International Journal of Information Management, 13(1), 3–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. De, P., & Ferratt, T. W. (1998). An interorganizational information system in the health care arena: insights gained from a hierarchical analysis. In Proceedings of the 1998 ACM SIGCPR conference on Computer personnel research (pp. 214–223). ACM: Boston, Massachusetts, United States.Google Scholar
  12. Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks: conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1, 215–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Freeman, L. C. (2004). The development of social network analysis. Vancouver: Empirical Press.Google Scholar
  14. Irwin, M., & Hughes, H. (1992). Centrality and the structure of urban interaction: measures, concepts, and applications. Social Forces, 71, 17–51.Google Scholar
  15. Johnston, H. R., & Michael, R. V. (1988). Creating competitive advantage with interorganizational information systems. MIS Quarterly, 12(2), 153–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kang, S. M. (2007). Equicentrality and network centralization: a micro-macro linkage. Social Networks, 29(4), 585–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Keith, M., Demirkan, H., & Goul, M. (2008). How does collaborative group technology influence social network structure? Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.Google Scholar
  18. Laender, A. H. F., Liddle, S. W., & Storey, V. C.(2000). Conceptual modeling—ER 2000 : 19th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA, October 2000. Berlin; New York: Springer. xv, 588 p.Google Scholar
  19. McFadden, D. (1980). Econometric models for probabilistic choice among products. The Journal of Business, 53(3), S13–S29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McFadden, D., & Zarembka P. (1974). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In Frontiers in econometrics (pp. 105–142). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  21. Milgram, S. (1967). Small-world problem. Psychology Today, 1(1), 61–67.Google Scholar
  22. Moreno, J. L. (1934). Who shall survive? (Vol. 58). Washington D.C.: Nervous and Mental Disease Publ.Google Scholar
  23. Newman, M. E. J. (2001). Scientific collaboration networks. I. Network construction and fundamental results. Physical Review E, 64, 06131.Google Scholar
  24. Powell, W. W., Staw, B., & Cummings, L. L. (1990). Neither market nor hierarchy: network forms of organization. In Research in organizational behavior (pp. 295–336). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  25. Powell, W. W., et al. (2005). Network dynamics and field evolution: the growth of interorganizational collaboration in the life sciences. The American Journal of Sociology, 110(4), 1132–1205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Subramani, M. (2004). How do suppliers benefit from information technology use in supply chain relationships. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 45–73.Google Scholar
  27. Thomas, W. M., Joanne, Y., & Robert, I. B. (1987). Electronic markets and electronic hierarchies. Communications of the ACM, 30(6), 484–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Turk, H. (1977). Organizations in modern life: Cities and other large networks. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  29. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Watts, D. J., & Strogatz, S. H. (1998). Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature, 393, 440–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wellman, B., et al. (1996). Computer networks as social networks: collaborative work, telework, and virtual community. Annual Review of Sociology, 22(1), 213–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zack, M. H. (2000). Researching organizational systems using social network analysis. Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 7: p. 7043.Google Scholar
  33. Zhao, J., Wang, S., & Huang, W. V. (2008). A study of B2B e-market in China: E-commerce process perspective. Information & Management, 45(4), 242–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daning Hu
    • 1
  • Sherry X. Sun
    • 1
  • J. Leon Zhao
    • 1
  • Xinlei Zhao
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Information SystemsCity University of Hong KongKowloonHong Kong
  2. 2.Management Information Systems DepartmentUniversity of ArizonaTucsonUSA

Personalised recommendations