Empowering IT Organizations Through a Confluence of Knowledge for Value Integration into the IT Services Firm’s Business Model

  • Nabil Georges BadrEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 976)


Challenges in operationalizing business innovation based on information technology (i.e. advancing new technology from the lab to the business operations) affect the ability of IT organizations to implement and effectively exploit these technologies. In IT services firms, these challenges are often linked to conflicting priorities, integration issues, inadequate infrastructure capabilities and the availability of the required knowledge/skills. Sometimes insurmountable these challenges leave the firm incapable to incorporate emerging information technologies into their business model. At the intersection of knowledge-based theory of the firm and the theory of dynamic capabilities, the study draws insight from the two cases in IT services companies. We seek to understand mechanism required to manage the flow knowledge assets for successful integration of innovation, while assimilating the tacit knowledge of the customer as a major component in the value integration. The study has far‐reaching implications for practice and produces interesting opportunities for further research.


Knowledge transfer Knowledge acquisition Technology innovation integration IT organizational learning 


  1. 1.
    Johnson, M.W., Christensen, C.M., Kagermann, H.: Reinventing your business model (cover story). Harvard Bus. Rev. 86(12), 50–59 (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Weill, P., Woerner, S.L.: Optimizing your digital business model. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 54(3), 71–78 (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bayer, J., Melone, N.: A critique of diffusion theory as a managerial framework for understanding adoption of software engineering innovations. J. Syst. Softw. 9(2), 161–166 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chesbrough, H.: Open Services Innovation: Rethinking Your Business to Grow and Compete in a New Era, 1st edn. Jossey-Bass, Hoboken (2011). ISBN 978-0-470-90574-6Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bassellier, G., Reich, B.H., Benbasat, I.: Information technology competence of business managers. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 17(4), 159–182 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Galliers, R.D., Leidner, D.E. (eds.): Strategic Information Management: Challenges and Strategies in Managing Information Systems. Routledge, Abingdon (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cash, J.I., Earl, M.J., Morison, R.: Teaming up to crack innovation and enterprise integration. Harvard Bus. Rev. 86(11), 90–100 (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Duncan, N.B.: Capturing flexibility of information technology infrastructure: a study of resource characteristics and their measure. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 12(2), 37–57 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jansen, J.J., Van den Bosch, F.A.J., Volberda, H.W.: Managing potential and realized absorptive capacity: how do organizational antecedents matter? AOM J. 48(6), 999–1015 (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cooper, R.B., Zmud, R.W.: Information technology implementation research: a technological diffusion approach. Manag. Sci. 36(2), 123–139 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Badr, N.: Integration of IT based business model innovation: potential challenges in integrating emerging technologies. Business Leadership Review DBA Special Issue: Impact & Practice: Making the DBA Count. Issue 12: Vol. 1 (DBA) 1 June 2014Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hacklin, F., Björkdahl, J., Wallin, M.W.: Strategies for business model innovation: how firms reel in migrating value. Long Range Plan. 51(1), 82–110 (2018). ISSN 0024-6301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mocker, M., Teubner, A.: Towards a comprehensive model of information strategy. In: Proceedings of ECIS 2005. Paper 62 (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Keel, A.J., Orr, M.A., Hernandez, R.R., Patrocinio, E.A., Bouchard, J.: From a technology-oriented to a service-oriented approach to IT management. IBM Syst. J. 46(3), 549–564 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Berthon, P., Hulbert, J.M., Pitt, L.F.: To serve or create? Strategic orientations toward customers and innovation. Calif. Manag. Rev. 42(1), 37–58 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Edwards, C., Peppard, J.: Operationalizing strategy through process. Long Range Plan. 30, 753–767 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lane, P.J., Lubatkin, M.: Relative absorptive capacity and inter-organizational learning. Strat. Manag. J. 19, 461–477 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Barney, J.B.: Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Manag. 17(1), 99–120 (1991)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Grant, R.M.: The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: implications for strategy formulation. Calif. Manag. Rev. 33(3), 114–135 (1991)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rau, K.: Effective governance of IT: design, objectives roles and relationships. Comput. J. Inf. Syst. Manag. 21(2), 21–40 (2004)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Esteva, J., Smith-Sharp, W., Gangeddula, S.: A formal technology introduction process. J. Am. Acad. Bus. Camb. 9(1), 40–46 (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Byrd, T.A., Turner, E.D.: An exploratory analysis of the information technology infrastructure flexibility construct. J. MIS 17(1), 167–208 (2000)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mulligan, P.: Specification of a capability-based it classification framework. Inf. Manag. 39(8), 647–658 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Blanchard, S.B.: Maintainability: A Key to Effective Serviceability and Maintenance Management. Wiley, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lim, J., Stratopoulos, T.C., Wirjanto, T. S.: Path dependence of dynamic information technology capability: an empirical investigation. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 28(3), 45–84. Winter (2011–2012)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Teece, D.J., Pisano, G., Shuen, A.: Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strat. Manag. J. 18(7), 509–533 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lavie, D., Stettner, U., Tushman, M.L.: Exploration and exploitation within and across organizations. Acad. Manag. Ann. 4, 109–155 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Collis, D.J.: Research note: how valuable are organizational capabilities? Strat. Manag. J. 15, 143–152 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gibson, C., Birkinshaw, J.: The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Acad. Manag. J. 47(2), 209–226 (2004)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    He, Z.L., Wong, P.K.: Exploration vs exploitation: an empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organ. Sci. 15, 481–494 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    March, J.G.: Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ. Sci. 2, 71–87 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Grant, R.M.: Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strat. Manag. J. 17(S2), 109–122 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Nonaka, I.: A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organ. Sci. 5(1), 14–37 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Nonaka, L., Takeuchi, H., Umemoto, K.: A theory of organizational knowledge creation. Int. J. Technol. Manag. 11(7–8), 833–845 (1996)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Nonaka, I., Takeuchi, H.: The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1995)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gourlay, S.: The SECI model of knowledge creation: some empirical shortcomings, pp. 377–385 (2003)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Roberts, N., Galluch, P.S., Dinger, M., Grover, V.: Absorptive capacity and information systems research: review synthesis, and direction for future research. MIS Q. 36(2), 625–648 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kranz, J.J., Hanelt, A., Kolbe, L.M.: Understanding the influence of absorptive capacity and ambidexterity on the process of business model change–the case of on-premise and cloud-computing software. Inf. Syst. J. 26, 477–517 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Cohen, W.M., Levinthal, D.: Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Adm. Sci. Q. 35, 128–152 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Varis, M., Littunen, H.: Types of innovation, sources of information and performance in entrepreneurial SMEs. Eur. J. Innov. Manag. 13(2), 128–154 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Mat, A., Razak, R.: The influence of organizational learning capability on success of technological innovation (product) implementation with moderating effect of knowledge complexity. Int. J. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2(17), 217–225 (2011)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Forés, B., Camisón, C.: Does incremental and radical innovation performance depend on different types of knowledge accumulation capabilities and organizational size? J. Bus. Res. 69(2), 831–848 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Zahra, S.A., George, G.: The net-enabled business innovation cycle and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Inf. Syst. Res. 13(2), 147–150 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Zahra, S.A., George, G.: Absorptive capacity: a review, reconceptualization, and extension. Acad. Manag. Rev. 27, 185–203 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Lane, P.J., Koka, B.R., Pathak, S.: The reification of absorptive capacity: a critical review and rejuvenation of the construct. Acad. Manag. Rev. 31(4), 833–863 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Tsai, W.: Knowledge transfer in intra-organizational networks: effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business-unit innovation and performance. AOM J. 44, 996–1004 (2001)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Legris, P., Collerette, P.: A roadmap for IT project implementation: integrating stakeholders and change management issues. Proj. Manag. J. 37(5), 64–75 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Alavi, M., Leidner, D.: Review: knowledge management systems: conceptual foundation and research issues. MIS Q. 25(1), 107–136 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Frank, A.G., Ribeiro, J.L.D.: An integrative model for knowledge transfer between new product development project teams. Knowl. Manag. Res. Pract. 12(2), 215–225 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Teo, T.S., Bhattacherjee, A.: Knowledge transfer and utilization in IT outsourcing partnerships: a preliminary model of antecedents and outcomes. Inf. Manag. 51(2), 177–186 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Willcocks, L., Feeny, D., Olson, N.: Implementing core IS capabilities: Feeny-Willcocks IT governance and management framework revisited. Eur. Manag. J. 24(1), 28–37 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Naghavi, A., Ottaviano, I.P.G.: Outsourcing, complementary innovations, and growth. Ind. Corp. Change 19(4), 1009–1035 (2010). Advance Access Published 21 JanuaryCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Palmer, J.W., Markus, M.L.: The performance impacts of quick response and strategic alignment in specialty retailing. Inf. Syst. Res. 11(3), 241–259 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Easterby-Smith, M., Prieto, I.M.: Dynamic capabilities and knowledge management: an integrative role for learning? Br. J. Manag. 19(3), 235–249 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Yin, R.K.: Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 4th edn. Sage, Newbury Park (2009). ISBN: 978-1-4129-6099-1Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Chugh R.: Do Australian Universities encourage tacit knowledge transfer? In: Proceedings of the 7th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management - Volume 1: KMIS, (IC3K 2015), pp. 128–135 (2015). ISBN 978-989-758-158-8Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Rottman, J.W.: Successful knowledge transfer within offshore supplier networks: a case study exploring social capital in strategic alliances. J. Inf. Technol. 23(1), 31–43 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Lee, Z., Lee, J.: An ERP implementation case study from a knowledge transfer perspective. J. Inf. Technol. 15(4), 281–288 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Patton, M.Q.: Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2002)Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Glaser, B.G., Strauss, A.: The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine Publishing Co., Chicago (1967). The seminal work in grounded theoryGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Maxwell, J.A.: Understanding and validity in qualitative research. Harvard Educ. Rev. 62(3), 279–300 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Lincoln, Y.S., Guba, E.G.: Naturalistic Inquiry, pp. 313–316. Sage, Newbury Park (1985)Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Eisenhardt, K.M.: Building theories from case study research. Acad. Manag. Rev. 14(4), 532–550 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Eisenhardt, K.M., Graebner, M.E.: Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges. Acad. Manag. J. 50(1), 25–32 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M.: Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Source Book, 2nd edn. Sage Publications Inc., California (1994)Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Denzin, N.K.: The art and politics of interpretation. In: Denzin, N.K., Lincoln, Y.S. (eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research, pp. 500–515. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1994)Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    King, N., Horrocks, C.: Interviews in Qualitative Research. Sage, Hokoben (2010)Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Neuman, W.L.: Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, 4th edn. Allyn and Bacon, Boston (2000)Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Moustakas, C.: Phenomenological Research Methods. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Creswell, J.W., Miller, D.L.: Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Pract. 39(3), 124 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Lincoln, Y.S., Guba, E.G.: Judging the quality of case study reports. Int. J. Qual. Stud. Educ. 3(1), 53–59 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Lincoln, Y.S., Guba, E.G.: Paradigmatic Controversies, Contradictions, and Emerging Confluences. In: Denzin, N.K., Lincoln, Y.S. (eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research, pp. 163–188. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2000)Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Denzin, N.: The Research Act. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1984)Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Patton, M.Q.: Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods, 2nd edn. Sage, Newbury Park, CA (1990)Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Miles, R.E., Snow, C.C., Miles, G.: Long Range Plan. 33(3), 300–321 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Lyytinen, K., Damsgaard, J.: What’s wrong with the diffusion of innovation theory? In: Ardis, M.A., Marcolin, B.L. (eds.) Working Conference on Diffusing Software Product and Process Innovations. IFIP — The International Federation for Information Processing, vol. 59, pp. 173–190. Springer, Boston (2001). Scholar
  77. 77.
    Zmud, R.W.: Diffusion of modern software practices: influence of centralization and formalization. Manag. Sci. 28(12), 1421–1431 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Damanpour, F.: Organizational innovation: a meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. AOM J. 34(3), 555–590 (1991)Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Rogers, E.M.: Diffusion of Innovations. Free Press, New York (1962)Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Kwon, T.H.A.: Diffusion of innovation approach to MIS infusion: conceptualization, methodology, and management strategies. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on IS, Copenhagen, Denmark, pp. 139–146 (1990)Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Fichman, R.G., Kemerer, C.F.: The assimilation of software process innovations: an organizational learning perspective. Manag. Sci. 43(10), 1345–1363 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Grover, V., Goslar, M.D.: The initiation, adoption, and implementation of telecommunications technologies in U.S. organizations. J. MIS 10(1), 141–163 (1993)Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Hargadon, A.B., Sutton, R.I.: Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Adm. Sci. Q. 42, 716–749 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Stewart, D.W., Shamdasani, P.N., Rook, D.W.: Focus Groups: Theory and Practice. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Creswell, J.W.: Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Traditions. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1998)Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Miles, M., Huberman, A.M.: Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods. Sage Publications, Newbury Park (1991)Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Strauss, A., Corbin, J.: Basics of Qualitative Research. Sage Publications, Newbury Park (1990)Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Allan, G.: A critique of using grounded theory as a research method. Electron. J. Bus. Res. Methods 2(1), 1–10 (2003)Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Douglas, D.: Inductive theory generation: a grounded approach to business inquiry. Electron. J. Bus. Res. Methods 2(1), 47–54 (2003). Article 4, Academic Conferences International LimitedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Badr, N.: Empowering capability for innovation in IT organizations - a confluence of knowledge for continual organizational learning. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (IC3K 2017) - Volume 3: KMIS, pp. 17–28. ISBN: 978-989-758-273-8 (2017)Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Pugh, K., Prusak, L.: Designing effective knowledge networks. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 55(1), 79–88 (2013)Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Gatewood, B.: Clouds on the information Horizon: how to avoid the storm. Inf. Manag. J. 43(4), 32–36 (2009)Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Xue, Y., Huigang, L., Bolton, W.R.: Information technology governance in information technology investment decision processes: the impact of investment characteristics, external environment, and internal context. MIS Q. 32(1), 67–96 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Lai, J., Lui, S.S., Tsang, E.W.: Intrafirm knowledge transfer and employee innovative behavior: the role of total and balanced knowledge flows. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 33(1), 90–103 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Lumpkin, G.T., Lichtenstein, B.B.: The role of organizational learning in the opportunity-recognition process. Entrep. Theory Pract. 29(4), 451–472 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Morgan, T., Obal, M., Anokhin, S.: Customer participation and new product performance: towards the understanding of the mechanisms and key contingencies. Res. Policy 47(2), 498–510 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Kavusan, K., Noorderhaven, N.G., Duysters, G.M.: Knowledge acquisition and complementary specialization in alliances: the impact of technological overlap and alliance experience. Res. Policy 45(10), 2153–2165 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Badr, N.G.: Empowering IT organizations’ capabilities of emerging technology integration through user participation in innovations based on IT. In: Caporarello, L., Cesaroni, F., Giesecke, R., Missikoff, M. (eds.) Digitally Supported Innovation. LNISO, vol. 18, pp. 11–33. Springer, Cham (2016). Scholar
  99. 99.
    Badr, N.G.: Integrating emerging technologies in IT services companies: the “Driver” CIO. In: 22nd Americas Conference on Information Systems, San Diego. Manuscript ID AMCIS-0127-2016. R2 (2016)Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Al-Ammary, J.: The strategic alignment between knowledge management and information systems strategy: the impact of contextual and cultural factors. J. Inf. Knowl. Manag. 13(01), 1450006 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Rosemann, M., Vessey, I.: Linking theory and practice: performing a reality check on a model of is success. In: Bartmann, D., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Information Systems, 26–28 May, Regensburg, Germany (2005)Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Rosemann, M., Vessey, I.: Toward improving the relevance of information systems research to practice: the role of applicability checks. MIS Q. 32(1), 1–22 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Grenoble Graduate School of BusinessGrenobleFrance

Personalised recommendations