IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/binfse/v57y2015i5p299-310.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Business Value of IT in Light of Prospect Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Patrick Afflerbach

Abstract

A key problem with IT decision-making is that the real value contributions of IT projects are unknown ex-ante to their executions. Thus, an organization has to rely on the expectations and perceptions of its decision makers. Moreover, these perceptions are prone to biases and display only a transfigured or irrational image of reality. This paper examines how these biases are related to the business value of IT (BVIT) and how IT decision-making can be rationalized. To this aim, a model is set up based on prospect theory, which is a frequently cited theory from behavioral economics used to descriptively analyze human value perception under risk. Applying the results found via prospect theory to IT decisions, the “perceived” BVIT is quantified and analyzed. Based on the model, the paper shows that the irrationalities rooted in human value perception provide explanations for two central paradoxes of IT. First, it reveals that they cause a disparity between the anticipated value-adding effects of IT and the actual measured outcomes, reflecting a famous observation within BVIT research known as the “productivity paradox of IT.” Second, recent studies show that IT increases the operational efficiency and competitiveness of organizations. However, only the operational effects are perceived in practice. In the paper, this one-sided perception is referred to as the “perception paradox of IT”. It is ultimately concluded that a rethinking of the position of IT within modern organizations and the establishment of suitable corporate governance mechanisms can resolve these issues, avoid irrationalities, and positively influence the performance impacts of IT. Copyright Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Patrick Afflerbach, 2015. "The Business Value of IT in Light of Prospect Theory," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 57(5), pages 299-310, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:binfse:v:57:y:2015:i:5:p:299-310
    DOI: 10.1007/s12599-015-0400-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s12599-015-0400-6
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s12599-015-0400-6?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sarv Devaraj & Rajiv Kohli, 2003. "Performance Impacts of Information Technology: Is Actual Usage the Missing Link?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(3), pages 273-289, March.
    2. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    4. Fleischmann, Marvin & Amirpur, Miglena & Benlian, Alexander & Hess, Thomas, 2014. "Cognitive Biases in Information Systems Research: A Scientometric Analysis," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 65163, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    5. Philip Bromiley, 2009. "A Prospect Theory Model of Resource Allocation," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 124-138, September.
    6. Sanjeev Dewan & Charles Shi & Vijay Gurbaxani, 2007. "Investigating the Risk-Return Relationship of Information Technology Investment: Firm-Level Empirical Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(12), pages 1829-1842, December.
    7. Enrico Giorgi & Thorsten Hens, 2006. "Making prospect theory fit for finance," Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, Springer;Swiss Society for Financial Market Research, vol. 20(3), pages 339-360, September.
    8. Mehmet Yorukoglu, 1998. "The Information Technology Productivity Paradox," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 1(2), pages 551-592, April.
    9. Stephan Kudyba & Romesh Diwan, 2002. "Research Report: Increasing Returns to Information Technology," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(1), pages 104-111, March.
    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. Stefan Schweikl & Robert Obermaier, 2020. "Lessons from three decades of IT productivity research: towards a better understanding of IT-induced productivity effects," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 70(4), pages 461-507, November.
    2. Bernard, Carole & Chen, Jit Seng & Vanduffel, Steven, 2015. "Rationalizing investors’ choices," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 10-23.
    3. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten & Meyer, Steffen & Hackethal, Andreas, 2019. "Taming models of prospect theory in the wild? Estimation of Vlcek and Hens (2011)," SAFE Working Paper Series 146, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2019.
    4. Roy Thurik, 2014. "Entrepreneurship and the business cycle," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 1-90, October.
    5. Massimiliano Kaucic & Filippo Piccotto & Gabriele Sbaiz & Giorgio Valentinuz, 2023. "Optimal Portfolio with Sustainable Attitudes under Cumulative Prospect Theory," Journal of Applied Finance & Banking, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 13(4), pages 1-4.
    6. Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua & Gomes, Luiz Flavio Autran Monteiro, 2021. "Modeling multicriteria group decision making as games from enhanced pairwise comparisons," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 8(C).
    7. Guo, Jing & He, Xue Dong, 2017. "Equilibrium asset pricing with Epstein-Zin and loss-averse investors," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 86-108.
    8. Brünner, Tobias & Reiner, Jochen & Natter, Martin & Skiera, Bernd, 2019. "Prospect theory in a dynamic game: Theory and evidence from online pay-per-bid auctions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 215-234.
    9. Azevedo, Eduardo M. & Gottlieb, Daniel, 2012. "Risk-neutral firms can extract unbounded profits from consumers with prospect theory preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(3), pages 1291-1299.
    10. Kremena Bachmann & Thorsten Hens, 2010. "Behavioral Finance and Investment Advice," Chapters, in: Brian Bruce (ed.), Handbook of Behavioral Finance, chapter 15, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Fortin, Ines & Hlouskova, Jaroslava, 2011. "Optimal asset allocation under linear loss aversion," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 2974-2990, November.
    12. Geoffrey P. Martin & Robert M. Wiseman & Luis R. Gomez-Mejia, 2020. "The Ethical Dimension of Equity Incentives: A Behavioral Agency Examination of Executive Compensation and Pension Funding," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 595-610, October.
    13. Liu, Shuangzhe & Ma, Tiefeng & Polasek, Wolfgang, 2014. "Spatial system estimators for panel models: A sensitivity and simulation study," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 78-102.
    14. Sebastian Ebert & Philipp Strack, 2015. "Until the Bitter End: On Prospect Theory in a Dynamic Context," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(4), pages 1618-1633, April.
    15. L. Robin Keller, 2009. "From the Editor..," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 121-123, September.
    16. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten, 2017. "On the applicability of maximum likelihood methods: From experimental to financial data," SAFE Working Paper Series 148, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2017.
    17. Häckel, Björn & Pfosser, Stefan & Tränkler, Timm, 2017. "Explaining the energy efficiency gap - Expected Utility Theory versus Cumulative Prospect Theory," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 414-426.
    18. Fulga, Cristinca, 2016. "Portfolio optimization with disutility-based risk measure," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(2), pages 541-553.
    19. David Peel & David Law, 2007. "Betting on odds on Favorites as an Optimal Choice in Cumulative Prospect Theory," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 4(26), pages 1-10.
    20. Marie Pfiffelmann, 2011. "Solving the St. Petersburg Paradox in cumulative prospect theory: the right amount of probability weighting," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(3), pages 325-341, September.

    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:spr:binfse:v:57:y:2015:i:5:p:299-310. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.