Investigating the Impact of Digital Data Genesis Dynamic Capability on Data Quality and Data Accessibility

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation book series (LNISO, volume 13)

Abstract

A huge amount of data is created recently in digital forms. Due to the frequent technological changes and developments that are happening, organisations need to constantly match with market changes. Therefore they need to develop dynamic capabilities based on digital data, in order to reach valuable outputs. Specifically, this study examines whether the development of the Digital Data Genesis dynamic capability in firms leads to valuable outputs: data quality and data accessibility. We empirically test our model using a questionnaire-based survey answered by 125 sales managers. Results suggest that firms able to develop dynamic capabilities based on digital data obtain higher outputs in terms of data quality and accessibility. Managerial implications of our results are finally offered.

Keywords

Digital data genesis Dynamic capabilities Data quality Data accessibility 

References

  1. 1.
    McAfee, A., Brynjolfsson, E., Davenport, T.H., Patil, D.J., Barton, D.: Big data. The management revolution. Harv. Bus. Rev. 90(10), 61–67 (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Drnevich, P.L., Kriauciunas, A.P.: Clarifying the conditions and limits of the contributions of ordinary and dynamic capabilities to relative firm performance. Strateg. Manag. J. 32(3), 254–279 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Raguseo, E., Vitari, C.: The development of the DDG-capability: an evaluation of its impact on firm financial performance. Smart organizations need smart artifacts: fostering interactions between people, technologies, and processes. Springer series, Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation (LNISO), vol. 7, pp. 97–104 (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nelson, R.R., Todd, P.A., Wixom, B.H.: Antecedents of information and system quality: an empirical examination within the context of data warehousing. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 21(4), 199–235 (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zimmer, J.C., Henry, R.M., Butler, B.S.: Determinants of the use of relational and non-relational information sources. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 24(3), 297–331 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dale Stoel, M., Muhanna, W.A.: IT capabilities and firm performance: a contingency analysis of the role of industry and IT capability type. Inf. Manag. 46(3), 181–189 (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Li, M., Ye, L.R.: Information technology and firm performance: linking with environmental, strategic and managerial contexts. Inf. Manag. 35(1), 43–51 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhou, K.Z., Wu, F.: Technological capability, strategic flexibility, and product innovation. Strateg. Manag. J. 31(5), 547–561 (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang, E.T., Hu, H.F., Hu, P.J.H.: Examining the role of information technology in cultivating firms’ dynamic marketing capabilities. Inf. Manag. 50(6), 336–343 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Galy, E., Sauceda, M.J.: Post-implementation practices of ERP systems and their relationship to financial performance. Inf. Manag. 51(3), 310–319 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Culnan, M.J.: Environmental scanning: the effects of task complexity and source accessibility on information gathering behavior. Decis. Sci. 14(2), 194–206 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    O’Reilly, C.A.: Variations in decision makers’ use of information sources: the impact of quality and accessibility of information. Acad. Manag. J. 25(4), 756–771 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hirsh, S., Dinkelacker, J.: Seeking information in order to produce information: an empirical study at Hewlett Packard Labs. J. Am. Soc. Inform. Sci. Technol. 55(9), 807–817 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Piccinini, G., Scarantino, A.: Computation vs. information processing: why their difference matters to cognitive science. Stud. Hist. Philos. Sci. Part A 41(3), 237–246 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Davenport, T.H., Harris, J.G.: Competing on Analytics: The New Science of Winning. Harvard Business Press, Boston (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    DeLone, W.H., McLean, E.R.: Information systems success: the quest for the dependent variable. Inf. Syst. Res. 3(1), 60–95 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Piccoli, G., Watson, R.T.: Profit from customer data by identifying strategic opportunities and adopting the ‘Born digital’ approach. MIS Q. Executive 7, 113–122 (2008)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Li, T., van Heck, E., Vervest, P.: Information capability and value creation strategy: advancing revenue management through mobile ticketing technologies. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 18, 38–51 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Williams, M.L.: Identifying the Organizational Routines in NEBIC Theory’s Choosing Capability. HICCS, Hawaii (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cycyota, C.S., Harrison, D.A.: What (not) to expect when surveying executives a meta-analysis of top manager response rates and techniques over time. Organ. Res. Methods 9(2), 133–160 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bharadwaj, A., Sambamurthy, V., Zmud, R.: IT Capabilities: Theoretical Perspectives and Empirical Operationalization. ICIS (1999)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Marchand, D.A., Kettinger, W.J., Rollins, J.D.: Information Orientation: The Link to Business Performance. Oxford University Press, New York (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pavlou, P.A., El Sawy, O.A.: From IT leveraging competence to competitive advantage in turbulent environments: the case of new product development. Inf. Syst. Res. 17(3), 198–227 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gruber, M., Heinemann, G., Brettel, M., Hungeling, S.: Configurations of resources and capabilities and their performance implications: an exploratory study on technology ventures. Strateg. Manag. J. 31(12), 1337–1356 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ringle, C.M., Wende, S., Will, A.: SmartPLS release: 2.0 (beta). SmartPLS, Hamburg, Germany (2005)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chin, W.W., Marcolin, B.L., Newsted, P.R.: A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. Inf. Syst. Res. 14(2), 189–217 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Diamantopoulos, A., Riefler, P., Roth, K.P.: Advancing formative measurement models. J. Bus. Res. 61(12), 1203–1218 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nunnally, J.C.: Psychometric Theory, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York (1978)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Churchill, G.A.: A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. J. Mark. Res. 16(February), 64–73 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bagozzi, R.P., Yi, Y.: On the use of structural equation models in experimental designs. J. Mark. Res. 271–284 (1988)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F.: Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: algebra and statistics. J. Mark. Res. 382–388 (1981)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elisabetta Raguseo
    • 1
  • Claudio Vitari
    • 1
  • Giulia Pozzi
    • 2
  1. 1.Grenoble Ecole de ManagementGrenobleFrance
  2. 2.LIUC - Università CattaneoCastellanzaItaly

Personalised recommendations