MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082075898 · doi:10.2308/isys-10125

A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of IT Investment on Firm Financial Performance

2011· article· en· W2082075898 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Information Systems · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIntellectual Capital and Performance Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInvestment (military)Return on investmentInvestment performanceAffect (linguistics)Process (computing)EconomicsInvestment strategyFinancial marketBusinessFinanceMicroeconomicsProduction (economics)PsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We use meta-analysis techniques to examine research choices that affect findings with respect to the return on IT investment. Recent research has established that IT investment is substantially related to firm financial performance. We find, however, that the relationship between IT investment and performance varies, depending on how both financial performance and IT investment are measured. Despite criticism of accounting measures as indicators of IT payoff, we find that the relationship is often stronger in studies that employ accounting measures rather than market measures of firm performance. This difference is driven by research that focuses on the process-level impacts of IT investment. Furthermore, the relationship is also stronger when IT investment is measured as IT strategy or spending, rather than IT capability. We discuss the practical implications of the results of our meta-analysis and suggest new directions for future theory development and 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.247

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.168 · 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