IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cir/cirpro/2018rp-04.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Mesure des bénéfices des projets en technologies de l’information

Author

Listed:
  • Simon Bourdeau
  • Pierre Hadaya
  • Philippe Marchildon

Abstract

De nos jours, la majorité des organisations, qu’elles soient petites ou grandes, privées ou publiques, dans un secteur manufacturier ou de services, se doivent d’investir dans les technologies de l’information (TI) pour développer et maintenir un avantage concurrentiel. Bien que ces investissements soient essentiels, les organisations sont confrontées au paradoxe TI. Effectivement, malgré la hausse importante des investissements en TI au cours des dernières décennies, la productivité des organisations semble avoir connu, de manière générale en Amérique, une diminution. Les organisations investissent donc dans des TI dont la puissance et la performance ne cessent de croître, tandis que l’augmentation de la productivité associée à leur utilisation sur les plans individuel, organisationnel et national est plutôt faible et difficile à évaluer. Ce paradoxe fait en sorte que les organisations sont souvent « condamnées » à continuellement investir dans des projets TI en espérant que les TI développées et implantées engendreront les bénéfices escomptés. En effet, la matérialisation de ces investissements s’effectue généralement par la réalisation de projets TI. Pour tirer profit de leurs investissements TI, les organisations se doivent donc de bien établir et mesurer les bénéfices engendrés par leurs investissements TI. L’objectif de ce rapport est d’aider les organisations à relever cet important défi.

Suggested Citation

  • Simon Bourdeau & Pierre Hadaya & Philippe Marchildon, 2018. "Mesure des bénéfices des projets en technologies de l’information," CIRANO Project Reports 2018rp-04, CIRANO.
    • Handle: RePEc:cir:cirpro:2018rp-04
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cirano.qc.ca/files/publications/2018RP-04.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephen Ward & Chris Chapman, 2008. "Stakeholders and uncertainty management in projects," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(6), pages 563-577.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pascal Frucquet & David Carassus & Didier Chabaud & Pierre Marin, 2021. "Influence of public policies of Smart Cities and Smart Territories on the renewal of local governance [L’influence des politiques publiques de Villes et Territoires Intelligents sur la rénovation d," Post-Print hal-03543436, HAL.

    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. Ali Aghazadeh Ardebili & Elio Padoano & Antonella Longo & Antonio Ficarella, 2022. "The Risky-Opportunity Analysis Method (ROAM) to Support Risk-Based Decisions in a Case-Study of Critical Infrastructure Digitization," Risks, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-22, February.
    2. Madduma Kaluge Chamitha Sanjani Wijewickrama & Nicholas Chileshe & Raufdeen Rameezdeen & Jose Jorge Ochoa, 2021. "Minimizing Macro-Level Uncertainties for Quality Assurance in Reverse Logistics Supply Chains of Demolition Waste," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-35, November.
    3. Kristina Galjanić & Ivan Marović & Tomaš Hanak, 2023. "Performance Measurement Framework for Prediction and Management of Construction Investments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-20, September.
    4. Aga, Deribe Assefa, 2016. "Factors affecting the success of development projects : A behavioral perspective," Other publications TiSEM 867ae95e-d53d-4a68-ad46-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Lauri Pulkka & Miro Ristimäki & Karoliina Rajakallio & Seppo Junnila, 2016. "Applicability and benefits of the ecosystem concept in the construction industry," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(2), pages 129-144, February.
    6. Melissa Garber & Shahram Sarkani & Thomas Mazzuchi, 2017. "A Framework for Multiobjective Decision Management with Diverse Stakeholders," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(4), pages 335-356, July.
    7. Öncü Hazir & Gündüz Ulusoy, 2020. "A classification and review of approaches and methods for modeling uncertainty in projects," Post-Print hal-02898162, HAL.
    8. Ceric Anita & Ivic Ivona, 2021. "Network analysis of interconnections between theoretical concepts associated with principal–agent theory concerning construction projects," Organization, Technology and Management in Construction, Sciendo, vol. 13(2), pages 2450-2464, January.
    9. Ling Jia & Queena K. Qian & Frits Meijer & Henk Visscher, 2020. "Stakeholders’ Risk Perception: A Perspective for Proactive Risk Management in Residential Building Energy Retrofits in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-25, April.
    10. Hazır, Öncü & Ulusoy, Gündüz, 2020. "A classification and review of approaches and methods for modeling uncertainty in projects," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    11. Maria Cerreta & Eleonora Giovene di Girasole & Giuliano Poli & Stefania Regalbuto, 2020. "Operationalizing the Circular City Model for Naples’ City-Port: A Hybrid Development Strategy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-26, April.
    12. Hamed Taherdoost, 2021. "A Review on Risk Management in Information Systems: Risk Policy, Control and Fraud Detection," Post-Print hal-03741848, HAL.
    13. Robert G. Boutilier & Kyle Bahr, 2020. "A Natural Language Processing Approach to Social License Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-12, October.
    14. Menoka Bal & David Bryde & Damian Fearon & Edward Ochieng, 2013. "Stakeholder Engagement: Achieving Sustainability in the Construction Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-16, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cir:cirpro:2018rp-04. 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: Webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ciranca.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.