MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Strategic Use of<scp>IT</scp>

2015· other· en· W1599627207 on OpenAlexaff
Ryad Titah, Ana Ortíz de Guinea

Bibliographic record

VenueWiley Encyclopedia of Management · 2015
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Resource (disambiguation)BusinessResource-based viewCompetitive advantageValue (mathematics)Industrial organizationStrategic managementStrategic planningStrategic thinkingKnowledge managementMarketingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The strategic use of information technology (IT) is critical in linking the use of IT to organizational benefits. The objective of this article is to provide a succinct overview of the research investigating the strategic use of IT in organizations. To do so, this article defines the concept of strategic use of IT and summarizes the three main theoretical perspectives from which strategic IT use has been investigated. First, the traditional microeconomic perspective, which analyzes the strategic use of IT according to five industry forces and the value chain activities of a given firm. Second, the resource‐based view of the firm, which emphasizes that the use of IT can only lead to competitive advantage when complemented with other critical resources to create rare, valuable, and inimitable resources. Third, the dynamic capability perspective, grounded in Schumpeterian economics, which highlights that the strategic use of IT should serve to enhance the capability of a firm to reconfigure its competencies to rapidly respond to changing business conditions. The article ends with a brief discussion on future avenues for research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWiley Encyclopedia of ManagementSame topicInnovation and Knowledge ManagementFrench-language works237,207