it-business strategic alignment

353 Pages·2016·3.8 MB·English

Clemson University
TigerPrints
All Dissertations Dissertations
12-2011
IT-BUSINESS STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT:
ESSAYS EXAMINING TYPES OF
ALIGNMENT AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP
WITH FIRM PERFORMANCE
Jennifer Gerow
Clemson University, [email protected]
Follow this and additional works at:https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_dissertations
Part of theManagement Sciences and Quantitative Methods Commons
Recommended Citation
Gerow, Jennifer, "IT-BUSINESS STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT: ESSAYS EXAMINING TYPES OF ALIGNMENT AND THEIR
RELATIONSHIP WITH FIRM PERFORMANCE" (2011).All Dissertations. 851.
https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_dissertations/851
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Dissertations at TigerPrints. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Dissertations by
an authorized administrator of TigerPrints. For more information, please [email protected].
IT-BUSINESS STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT: ESSAYS
EXAMINING TYPES OF ALIGNMENT AND THEIR
RELATIONSHIP WITH FIRM PERFORMANCE

A Thesis
Presented to
the Graduate School of
Clemson University

In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Management

by
Jennifer E. Gerow
November 18, 2011

Accepted by:
Dr. Varun Grover, Committee Co-Chair
Dr. Jason Thatcher, Committee Co-Chair
Dr. Richard Klein
Dr. Philip Roth
ABSTRACT
While Information-Technology (IT)-Business Strategic Alignment (hereafter
referred to as alignment) continues to be a topic of great concern to both researchers and
practitioners alike, it is often misunderstood and, as such, many organizations find
alignment difficult to achieve. In particular, alignment is often defined in many different
ways, its operational measures are used inconsistently, and it is unclear how it can be
attained. In this dissertation, we assert that researchers should include explicit references
to the type of alignment under study, that adequate and consistent operational measures
of each alignment type are necessary, and that we need a better understanding of the CIO
attributes that may facilitate alignment. Each of these points is addressed in three separate
essays, as discussed in the following paragraphs.
In our first essay, we conducted a review and meta-analysis of the alignment
literature to gain a better understanding of the types of alignment that have been
examined. In particular, we probed the inter-relationships between alignment, the
context, and firm performance. We found distinct relationships between three types of
alignment and three measures of firm performance. We also found social alignment is a
precursor to alignment within firms. Furthermore, a moderator analysis suggested
sampling and measurement are an additional source of conflicting findings in the
alignment literature. Through this essay, we contribute to the literature by developing
clear definitions of alignment’s dimensions, clarifying the relationship between alignment
and types of performance outcomes, and offering insight into sources of inconsistencies
ii
in alignment research. We believe this first essay offers a basis for more consistent
treatment of alignment concepts in future IT research.
In our second essay, we report on the development of operational measures
designed to capture six different types of alignment. These instruments are intended to be
a tool for studying the alignment between IT and business strategies (i.e. intellectual
alignment), between IT and business infrastructures and processes (i.e. operational
alignment), and across these two domains such that strategies are linked with
infrastructures and processes (i.e. 4 types of cross-domain alignment). As such, this essay
proposes definitions for each type of alignment and develops operational measures for
each construct, each possessing desirable psychometric properties.
Finally, we apply the Power-Dependence and Political Perspectives in our third
essay to explain the relationship between power, political skill, and the CIO's influence
over the executive team's commitment to strategic and technical IT initiatives. Our results
suggest structural power (i.e. the CIO's formal position in the firm), expert power (i.e. the
CIO's business and technical knowledge), and prestige power (i.e. the important
connections the CIO has established) relate to the CIO's influence over the executive
team's commitment to IT initiatives. We also found political skill positively moderates
the relationship between the CIO's power and influence over the executive team's
commitment to IT initiatives.
Taken together, our literature review provides conceptual clarity about the nature
of alignment. In our construct development essay, we gained operational clarity such that
researchers can study the different types of alignment and their relationships with other
iii
constructs like performance. Finally, our CIO study improves our understanding of the
manifestation of alignment through CIO influence on major IT-business initiatives.
Key Words: IT-business strategic alignment, alignment paradox, power, political skill

iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First, I thank my best friend and Savior, Jesus Christ, for giving me this awesome
opportunity to earn a PhD. Without you, I wouldn't have been able to complete this
extremely difficult task. You have shown me the true meaning of both grace and power:
Your grace is sufficient for me, for Your power is made perfect in weakness (2
Corinthians 12:9).
Second, thank you to my husband, Charles Gerow, for his prayers and emotional
support. You endured many tears throughout this process, and I am forever grateful to
you for standing firm through it all. I couldn't have done this without the support you
gave me and the sacrifices you made.
Third, I thank my advisors, Dr. Varun Grover and Dr. Jason Thatcher, for reading
thousands of pages and providing feedback that made me into a better academic and
researcher. Without your dedication to the IS field and your students, this dissertation
would not have been possible.
I also thank my committee members, Dr. Phil Roth and Dr. Rich Klein, for taking
the time to read my dissertation and provide constructive feedback so I could further
improve my work. Thank you also to Dr. Russ Purvis for encouraging me to apply for
the PhD program; you changed my life.
Finally, I thank my family and friends for all your prayers, support, and love.
Specifically, a big "Thank You!" to my parents, Dwight and Lori Vicars; my sister,
Melissa Vicars; my grandma and uncle, Helen and Bob Kolski; my in-laws, Vick and
Stella Messier; and my friends: Kristen Fleming, Cheryl LaGrone, Jason and Andi
v
Czepiga, Kevin and Maria Kithcart, and Jane Motsinger and all our Bible study groups. I
couldn't have done this without you.

vi
DEDICATION
For all his support and love through this process, I dedicate this dissertation to my
husband, Charles E. Gerow. You have earned this PhD too. Thank you.

vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................ v
DEDICATION .................................................................................................................. vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................. viii
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... xiii
LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... xv
PROLOGUE ....................................................................................................................... 1
ESSAY 1 - ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................... 8
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 9
NARRATIVE REVIEW ................................................................................................... 13
Alignment and Its Dimensions...................................................................................... 13
Defining Firm Performance .......................................................................................... 16
Theoretical Perspectives ............................................................................................... 18
The Contingency Perspective ................................................................................... 19
Resource-Based View of the Firm ............................................................................ 21
A Model of Alignment: Antecedents and Outcomes .................................................... 24
Intellectual Alignment with Firm Performance ........................................................ 24
Operational Alignment with Firm Performance ....................................................... 27
Cross-Domain Alignment with Firm Performance ................................................... 29
Social Alignment ...................................................................................................... 30
Correlates of Alignment ............................................................................................ 32
Methodological Moderators ...................................................................................... 38
META-ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................... 41
Method .......................................................................................................................... 42
Sources of Data ......................................................................................................... 42
Inclusion Criteria ...................................................................................................... 44
Coding Procedure...................................................................................................... 46
Meta-Analytic Approach .......................................................................................... 48
Results ........................................................................................................................... 52
Detailed Explanation of the Columns in the Meta-Analysis Tables ......................... 52
Meta-Analyzed Relationships ................................................................................... 53
viii
Moderator Analysis: Intellectual Alignment ............................................................ 56
DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................... 59
Research Question 1: How should we represent or conceptualize alignment? ............ 59
Research Question 2: What is the effect of alignment on firm performance? .............. 62
Research Question 3: Do other factors confound the relationship between alignment
and firm performance? ........................................................................................... 63
Research Question 4: Do methodological issues obscure our understanding of the
relationship between alignment and firm performance? ........................................ 67
Limitations .................................................................................................................... 71
Implications for Practice ............................................................................................... 71
CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................. 73
ESSAY 2 - ABSTRACT ................................................................................................... 76
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 77
DEFINING ALIGNMENT ............................................................................................... 81
Intellectual Alignment .................................................................................................. 82
Operational Alignment.................................................................................................. 83
Cross-Domain Alignment ............................................................................................. 85
Using SAM as a Framework ......................................................................................... 87
INSTRUMENT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS ................................................................ 88
Creating the Item Pool .................................................................................................. 89
Q-Sorting Rounds ......................................................................................................... 94
Pre-Test, Purification, and Pilot Test .......................................................................... 102
Pilot Study Reliability, Convergent Validity, and Discriminant Validity Analyses ... 106
Further Instrument Development, Testing, and Purification ...................................... 112
Financial Performance ................................................................................................ 120
Control Variables ........................................................................................................ 121
SURVEY ADMINISTRATION ..................................................................................... 122
Research Design.......................................................................................................... 123
Reliability, Convergent Validity, and Discriminant Validity Analyses ..................... 127
Predictive Validity Analyses....................................................................................... 132
Sobel Test for Mediation ............................................................................................ 140
Control Variable Results ............................................................................................. 141
Assessment of Common Method Bias Threat ............................................................ 141
ix