IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v42y1996i4p541-558.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Paradox Lost? Firm-Level Evidence on the Returns to Information Systems Spending

Author

Listed:
  • Erik Brynjolfsson

    (Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139)

  • Lorin Hitt

    (Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139)

Abstract

The "productivity paradox" of information systems (IS) is that, despite enormous improvements in the underlying technology, the benefits of IS spending have not been found in aggregate output statistics. One explanation is that IS spending may lead to increases in product quality or variety which tend to be overlooked in the aggregate statistics, even if they increase output at the firm-level. Furthermore, the restructuring and cost-cutting that are often necessary to realize the potential benefits of IS have only recently been undertaken in many firms. Our study uses new firm-level data on several components of IS spending for 1987--1991. The dataset includes 367 large firms which generated approximately 1.8 trillion dollars in output in 1991. We supplemented the IS data with data on other inputs, output, and price deflators from other sources. As a result, we could assess several econometric models of the contribution of IS to firm-level productivity. Our results indicate that IS spending has made a substantial and statistically significant contribution to firm output. We find that the gross marginal product (MP) for computer capital averaged 81% for the firms in our sample. We find that the MP for computer capital is at least as large as the marginal product of other types of capital investment and that, dollar for dollar, IS labor spending generates at least as much output as spending on non-IS labor and expenses. Because the models we applied were similar to those that have been previously used to assess the contribution of IS and other factors of production, we attribute the different results to the fact that our data set is more current and larger than others explored. We conclude that the productivity paradox disappeared by 1991, at least in our sample of firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Erik Brynjolfsson & Lorin Hitt, 1996. "Paradox Lost? Firm-Level Evidence on the Returns to Information Systems Spending," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(4), pages 541-558, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:42:y:1996:i:4:p:541-558
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.42.4.541
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.42.4.541
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.42.4.541?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin Neil Baily & Robert J. Gordon, 1988. "The Productivity Slowdown, Measurement Issues, and the Explosion of Computer Power," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 19(2), pages 347-432.
    2. Barua, A. & Kriebel, C.H., 1991. "Information Technologies and Business Value: An Analytic and Empirical Investigation," GSIA Working Papers 1991-5, Carnegie Mellon University, Tepper School of Business.
    3. Erik Brynjolfsson & Thomas W. Malone & Vijay Gurbaxani & Ajit Kambil, 1994. "Does Information Technology Lead to Smaller Firms?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(12), pages 1628-1644, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Scott, Susan V. & Van Reenen, John & Zachariadis, Markos, 2017. "The long-term effect of digital innovation on bank performance: An empirical study of SWIFT adoption in financial services," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 984-1004.
    2. L. Becchetti & David Bedoya & L. Paganetto, 2003. "ICT Investment, Productivity and Efficiency: Evidence at Firm Level Using a Stochastic Frontier Approach," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 143-167, September.
    3. Radhakrishnan, Abirami & Zu, Xingxing & Grover, Varun, 2008. "A process-oriented perspective on differential business value creation by information technology: An empirical investigation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 1105-1125, December.
    4. Erik Brynjolfsson & Lorin M. Hitt, 2000. "Beyond Computation: Information Technology, Organizational Transformation and Business Performance," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 23-48, Fall.
    5. Gamal Atallah, 2002. "Production Technology, Information Technology, and Vertical Integration Under Asymmetric Information," Working Papers 0203EClassification-JEL: , University of Ottawa, Department of Economics.
    6. Charles R. Hulten, 1992. "Growth Accounting When Technical Change is Embodied in Capital," NBER Working Papers 3971, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Dale W. Jorgenson & Mun S. Ho & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2008. "A Retrospective Look at the U.S. Productivity Growth Resurgence," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 3-24, Winter.
    8. Hilal Atasoy & Rajiv D. Banker & Paul A. Pavlou, 2016. "On the Longitudinal Effects of IT Use on Firm-Level Employment," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 6-26, March.
    9. Elizabeth J. Altman & Frank Nagle & Michael L. Tushman, 2013. "Innovating Without Information Constraints: Organizations, Communities, and Innovation When Information Costs Approach Zero," Harvard Business School Working Papers 14-043, Harvard Business School, revised Sep 2014.
    10. Susan Helper & Mari Sako, 2010. "Management innovation in supply chain: appreciating Chandler in the twenty-first century," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(2), pages 399-429, April.
    11. Subramanian Rangan & Metin Sengul, 2009. "Information technology and transnational integration: Theory and evidence on the evolution of the modern multinational enterprise," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 40(9), pages 1496-1514, December.
    12. Boyan Jovanovic, 1993. "The Diversification of Production," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 24(1 Microec), pages 197-247.
    13. Zand, Fardad & Van Beers, Cees & Van Leeuwen, George, 2011. "Information technology, organizational change and firm productivity: A panel study of complementarity effects and clustering patterns in Manufacturing and Services," MPRA Paper 46469, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Nurmilaakso, Juha-Miikka, 2008. "Adoption of e-business functions and migration from EDI-based to XML-based e-business frameworks in supply chain integration," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 721-733, June.
    15. Robert C. Feenstra & Gordon H. Hanson, "undated". "Productivity Measurement And The Impact Of Trade And Technology On Wages: Estimates For The U.S., 1972-1990," Department of Economics 97-17, California Davis - Department of Economics.
    16. Trajtenberg, Manuel, 1989. "Product Innovations, Price Indices and the (Mis)Measurement of Economic Performance," Foerder Institute for Economic Research Working Papers 275471, Tel-Aviv University > Foerder Institute for Economic Research.
    17. Vandenbroucke, Guillaume, 2021. "The baby boomers and the productivity slowdown," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    18. Patrizio Pagano & Massimo Sbracia, 2014. "The secular stagnation hypothesis: a review of the debate and some insights," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 231, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    19. Markus Menz & Sven Kunisch & Julian Birkinshaw & David J. Collis & Nicolai J. Foss & Robert E. Hoskisson & John E. Prescott, 2021. "Corporate Strategy and the Theory of the Firm in the Digital Age," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(7), pages 1695-1720, November.
    20. Corrado Carol & Lengermann Paul & Beaulieu J. Joseph & Bartelsman Eric J., 2007. "Sectoral Productivity in the United States: Recent Developments and the Role of IT," German Economic Review, De Gruyter, vol. 8(2), pages 188-210, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:42:y:1996:i:4:p:541-558. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.