Skip to main content

The productivity payoff of information technology in multimarket SMEs

Small Business Economics volume 39, pages 99–117 (2012)Cite this article

Abstract

This paper examines the effects of information technology (IT) adoption on the productivity of multimarket small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The main hypothesis is that IT usage increases efficiency to a higher degree in diversified and internationalized firms compared with single-market SMEs. This hypothesis is tested using a large sample of more than 2,000 Spanish SMEs. Overall, intensive use of IT in operations processes is found to be associated with substantial increases in productivity of firms following both related and unrelated diversification. Also, exporting firms with more intensive use of IT have higher productivity. These results are consistent with previous theoretical arguments on the relationship between IT and efficiency of firms and open future research directions related to the role played by IT in the management control systems of both diversified and exporting firms.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Notes

  1. The variable Efficiency lies in the interval [0, 1] and is left-skewed. By reflecting it (i.e., taking −Efficiency) we obtain a right-skewed variable which lies in [−1, 0]. We translate it to [1, 2] (taking 2 − Efficiency), and then the skewness is corrected with a logarithmic transformation [log(2 − Efficiency)]. Finally, the result is reflected again [−log(2 − Efficiency)] and translated to the interval [0, 1] [1 − log(2 − Efficiency)], so that the transformed efficiency lies in the original interval and with the right orientation.

  2. Results available from authors upon request.

References

  • Aldrich, H. E. (1979). Organizations and environments. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aral, S., Brynjolfsson, E., & Wu, D. J. (2006). Which came first, it or productivity? Virtuous cycle of investment and use in enterprise systems. In International conference on information systems, Milwaukee, WI. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=942291.

  • Arcelus, F. J., & Arozena, P. (1999). Measuring sectoral productivity across time and across countries. European Journal of Operational Research, 119, 254–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aw, B. Y., Chen, X., & Roberts, M. J. (2001). Firm-level evidence on productivity differentials. Turnover, and exports in taiwanese manufacturing. Journal of Development Economics, 66, 51–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aw, B. Y., Roberts, M. J., & Winston, T. (2005). The complementary role of exports and R&D investments as sources of productivity growth. NBER Working Papers 11774. National Bureau of Economic Research.

  • Beck, R., Wigand, R. T., & König, W. (2005). Integration of E-commerce by SMEs in the manufacturing sector: A data envelopment analysis approach. Journal of Global Information Management, 13(3), 20–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bello, D. C., & Gilliland, D. I. (1997). The effect of output controls, process controls, and flexibility on export channel performance. Journal of Marketing, 61, 22–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belu, C. (2009). Ranking corporation based on sustainable and socially responsible practices. A DEA Approach. Sustainable Development, 17(4), 257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernard, A. B., & Jensen, J. B. (1999). Exceptional exporter performance: Cause, effect or both? Journal of International Economics, 47, 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bresnahan, T. F., Brynjolfsson, E., & Hitt, L. M. (2002). Information technology, workplace organization, and the demand for skilled labor: Firm-level evidence. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117, 339–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cadogan, J., Sunkqvist, S., Salminen, R. T., & Pumalainen, K. (2005). Export marketing, interventional interactions, and performance consequences. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 33(4), 520–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassiman, B., & Golovko, E. (2007). Innovation and the export-productivity link. CEPR Discussion Papers 6411. CEPR Discussion Papers

  • Chari, M. D. R., Sarv, D., & Parthiban, D. (2008). The impact of information technology investments and diversification strategies on firm performance. Management Science, 54(1), 224–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chilingerian, J. A. (1995). Evaluating physician efficiency in hospitals: A multivariate analysis of best practices. European Journal of Operational Research, 80, 548–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clerides, B., Lach, S., & Tybout, J. R. (1998). Is learning by exporting important? Micro-dynamic evidence from Colombia, Mexico and Morocco. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(3), 903–947.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coelli, T. J., Rao, D. S. P., O’Donnell, C. J., & Battese, G. E. (2005). An introduction to efficiency and productivity analysis. New York: Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Tone, K. (2007). Data envelopment analysis. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dedrick, J., Gurbaxani, V., & Kraemer, K. L. (2003). Information technology and economic performance: A critical review of the empirical evidence. ACM Computing Surveys, 35(1), 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delgado, M. A., Fariñas, J. C., & Ruano, S. (2002). Firm productivity and export markets: A non-parametric approach. Journal of International Economics, 57(2), 397–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desmond, W. N. (2007). A modern resource based approach to unrelated diversification. Journal of Management Studies, 44(8), 1481–1502.

    Google Scholar 

  • Devaraj, S., & Kohli, R. (2003). Performance impacts of information technology: Is actual usage the missing link? Management Science, 49(3), 273–289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewan, S., Michael, S. C., & Min, C. (1998). Firm characteristics and investments in information technology: Scale and scope effects. Information Systems Research, 9(3), 219–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diaz, M. A., & Sanchez, R. (2008). Firm size and productivity in Spain: A stochastic frontier analysis. Small Business Economics, 30(3), 315–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmonds, B. (1996). What is Complexity? In F. Heylighen & D. Aerts (Eds.), The evolution of complexity. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

  • Emms, E., & Kale, J. (2006). Efficiency implications of corporate diversification: Evidence from micro data, CES Working Papers 06-26. Center for Economic Studies Discussion.

  • Faraway, J. J. (2005). Linear models with R. Boca Raton, Florida: Chapman & Hall/CRC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., & Lovell, C. A. K. (1994). Production frontiers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, J. (2008). Applied regression analysis and generalized linear models (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geishecker, I., Gorg, H., & Taglioni, D. (2009). Characterising euro area multinationals. World Economy, 32(1), 49–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giuri, P., Torrisi, S., & Zinovyeva, N. (2008). ICT, skills, and organizational change: Evidence from Italian manufacturing firms. Industrial & Corporate Change, 17, 29–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. J., & Tzokas, N. (1999). The impact of marketing research activity on SME export performance: Evidence from the UK. Journal of Small Business Management, 18(5), 63–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hitt, L. M. (1999). Information technology and firm boundaries: Evidence from panel data. Information Systems Research, 10(2), 134–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoff, A. (2007). Second stage DEA: Comparison of approaches for modelling the DEA score. European Journal of Operational Research, 181(1), 425–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoskisson, R. E., & Hitt, M. A. (1988). Strategic control and relative R&D investment in multiproduct firms. Strategic Management Journal, 9(6), 605–621.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoskisson, R. E., Hitt, M. A., Johnson, R. A., & Moesel, D. D. (1993). Construct-validity of an objective (entropy) categorical measure of diversification strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 215–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleiber, C., & Zeilis, A. (2008). Applied econometrics with R. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lal, K. (1999). Determinants of the adoption of Information Technology: A case study of electrical and electronic goods manufacturing firms in India. Research Policy, 28(7), 667–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leleu, H., & Briec, W. (2009). A DEA estimation of a lower bound firms’ allocative efficiency without information on price data. International Journal of Production Economics, 121(1), 203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenberg, F. R. (1992). Industrial de-diversification and its consequences for productivity. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 18, 427–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Y., & Ravichandran, T. (2008). A comprehensive investigation on the relationship between information technology investments and firm diversification. Information Technology and Management, 9(3), 169–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucchetti, R., & Sterlacchini, A. (2004). The adoption of ICT among SMEs: Evidence from an Italian Survey. Small Business Economics, 23(2), 151–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, L. M. (2007). The adoption and diffusion of organizational innovation: Evidence for the U.S. economy. CES Working Papers 07-18. Center for Economic Studies Discussion.

  • Maksimovic, V., & Phillips, G. (2001). The market for corporate assets: Who engages in mergers and asset sales and are there efficiency gains? Journal of Finance, 56, 2019–2065.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malone, T. W., Yates, J., & Benjamin, R. I. (1987). Electronic markets and electronic hierarchies. Communications of the ACM, 30(6), 484–497.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michael, S. C. (2007). Can information technology enable profitable diversification? An empirical examination. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 24(3), 167–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, C. A. (1994). Corporate diversification. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(3), 163–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mooney, J., Gurbaxani, K., & Kraemer, K. (1996). A process oriented framework for assessing the business value of information technology. Database, 27(2), 68–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, R. E., & Katsikeas, C. S. (1998). Exporting problems of industrial manufacturers. Industrial Marketing Management, 27, 161–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nassimbeni, G. (2001). Technology, innovation capacity, and the export attitude of small manufacturing firms: A logit/tobit model. Research Policy, 30, 245–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelder, J. A. (1977). A reformulation of linear models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, 140(1), 49–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piesse, J., & Townsend, R. (1995). The measurement of productive efficiency in UK Building Societies. Applied Financial Economics, 5(6), 397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravichandran, T., Liu, Y., Han, S., & Hasan, I. (2009). Diversification and firm performance: Exploring the moderating effects of information technology spending. Journal of Management Information Systems, 25(4), 205–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruggiero, J., & Vitaliano, D. F. (1999). Assessing the efficiency of public schools using data envelopment analysis and frontier regression. Contemporary Economic Policy, 17(3), 321–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoar, A. (2002). Effects of corporate diversification on productivity. Journal of Finance, 57, 2379–2403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shao, B. B. M., & Lin, W. T. (2002). Technical efficiency analysis of information technology investments: A two-stage empirical investigation. Information and Management, 39(5), 391–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shin, N. (2006a). The impact of information technology on the financial performance of diversified firms. Decision Support Systems, 41(4), 698–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shin, I. (2006b). Adoption of enterprise application software and firm performance. Small Business Economics, 26, 241–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strassman, P. A. (1997). The squandered computer; evaluating the business alignment of information technologies. New Canaan: Information Economic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tallon, P. P., Kraemer, K. L., & Gurbaxani, V. (2000). Executive’s perceptions of the business value of information technology: A process-oriented approach. Journal of Management Information Systems, 16(4), 145–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanriverdi, H. (2006). Performance effects of information technology synergies in multibusiness firms. MIS Quarterly, 30(1), 57–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villalonga, B. (2004). Diversification discount or premium? New evidence from the Business Information Tracking Series. Journal of Finance, 59, 479–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. (1975). Markets and hierarchies. New York: Free.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wooldridge, J. M. (2002). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. Massachusetts, Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, J. C. (2006). The efficiency of SMEs in the global market: Measuring the Korean performance. Journal of Policy Modelling, 28(8), 861.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, C., & Chen, K. (2009). Are small firms less efficient? Small Business Economics, 32(4), 375–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, C., Hu, Z., & Gu, F. F. (2008a). Intra- and interfirm coordination of export manufacturers: A cluster analysis of indigenous Chinese exporters. Journal of International Marketing, 16(3), 108–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, M., Sarker, S., & Sarker, S. (2008b). Unpacking the effect of IT capability on the performance of export-focused SMEs: A report from China. Information Systems Journal, 18(4), 357–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departamento de Organización de Empresas, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Universidad Complutense de Madrid , Campus de Somosaguas, Pozuelo de Alarcón, 28223, Madrid, Spain

    Francesco D. Sandulli, José Fernández-Menéndez, Antonio Rodríguez-Duarte & José Ignacio López-Sánchez

Authors
  1. Francesco D. Sandulli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. José Fernández-Menéndez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Antonio Rodríguez-Duarte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. José Ignacio López-Sánchez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francesco D. Sandulli.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sandulli, F.D., Fernández-Menéndez, J., Rodríguez-Duarte, A. et al. The productivity payoff of information technology in multimarket SMEs. Small Bus Econ 39, 99–117 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-010-9297-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-010-9297-0

Keywords

  • Productivity paradox
  • Performance
  • Diversification
  • Internationalization
  • Small and medium-sized enterprises
  • Information technology

JEL Classifications

  • O30
  • M15
  • L25
  • L26