Understanding strategic use of it in small & medium-sized businesses: examining push factors and user characteristics.

Ndubisi, Nelson Oly

ABSTRACT

Globalization and competitive pressures have heightened the impetus for strategic use of IT. There is a common belief that if IT is strategically used, it will enable organizations (large or small) to meet their objectives, be competitive, and achieve a favorable business performance for long-term survival. This has led to a growing research interest in the use of IT as a strategic weapon by organizations in recent years. The current research examines the different concept of strategic use of IT, provides a synthesis of various ideas, and empirically investigates the characteristics of Malaysia small and medium-sized businesses that are strategizing with IT. Important theoretical and practical implications of the study are discussed.

INTRODUCTION

The term strategic use of IT has been inconsistently used by academicians and practitioners, thereby rendering understanding imprecise (King et al., 1989) and often misleading (Sutherland, 1991). Prahalad and Hamel (1990) and Williams (1992) have suggested that a truly strategic application must be assessed from the time-based sustainability, which is linked to core competence of the organization. Pederson (1990) stresses that strategic use of IT must result in observable competitive advantage, while Emery (1990) suggests that strategic information system can be deliberately planned and implemented to meet strategic objectives. As the number of criteria used grows, the concept of strategic use of IT becomes more complicated. In view of this, the current research reviews the various definitions of the term in an attempt to answer the question of what is strategic use of IT? The study also unveils the characteristics of SMBs that are strategizing with IT as well as discusses the strategies and action plans that will further enhance and promote greater strategic use of IT in SMBs

LITERATURE

To understand the term strategic use of IT, a review of the concepts of strategy will be helpful.

Strategy

Strategy has been defined by Chandler (1962) as the determination of the basic long-term goals and objectives of an enterprise, and the adoption of courses of action and the allocation of resources necessary for carrying out these goals. Andrews (1971) sees strategy as the pattern of objectives, purposes and goals, and major policies and plans for achieving these goals. Mintzberg (1979) defined the term as a plan, a set of intended action made in advance and consciously developed, aimed at achieving a purpose; a ploy which seeks to maneuver or deceive an opponent; a pattern of streams of important actions taken consistently by an organization over time regardless of whether that action has been intended or not; a position--a match between organization and environment; and a perspective which is embedded in the minds of decision makers and reflected in their intentions or actions. Strategy is a fundamental means an organization uses to achieve its objective (Hofer & Schendel, 1978). Strategy is also seen as a coherent pattern of decisions a firm makes to select the firm's present and future businesses (Hax, 1990).

Moreover, Porter's (1980 & 1985) definitions focus on a firm's ability to influence the collective effect of five competitive forces; the rivalry among industry competitors, the bargaining power of buyers, and suppliers, the threat of new entrants, and the pressure from companies offering substitute products or services. In his view, the concept of strategy lies in the way a company finds the best defensive position against these forces, or influences them in its favour.

Strategic Use of IT

The term strategic use of IT has evolved over the last decade and has been often associated with organizational competitiveness. Strategic use of IT is a system that is used to support or shape an organisation's competitive strategy, its plan for gaining and maintaining competitive advantage (Wiseman, 1988; Rackoff et al., 1985). It is a use that directly supports the creation, modification and implementation of an organisation's implicitly and explicitly stated plans (Huff & Beattie, 1985).

An application is strategic if it fundamentally changes the way the firm competes in its industry and ultimately improves the business performance (McNurlin, 1986). According to McNurlin, strategic IT application is outward looking, has close interface with the outside world, and aims at providing new services to customers and suppliers. Clemons (1986) examines strategic use of IT from sustainability of advantage viewpoint. To be strategic, application must be able to withstand its duplication by competitors. Clemons further observed that an application might be 'interesting' but unlikely to be strategic if it is not supported by firm's core competencies.

In turn, Ashmore (1988) sees an application as strategic if it adds significantly to company's bottom line, while Wiseman (1988) reasons that strategic use of IT must consider three key targets for IT applications: customers, suppliers, and competitors. If strategies designed to address these targets are supported by IT applications, then these applications are strategic in nature. Besides, the idea of strategic use of IT according to King et al. (1989) is that an application plays a direct role in the implementation of the business strategy and the achievement of comparative advantage.

Another definition of strategic use of IT is from Sabherwal and King (1991). They defined the term as 'the outcome or effect an application has on a company's success and destiny, either by influencing or shaping the company's strategy, or by playing a direct role in the implementation of the strategy. According to them, an application is strategic if it either provides the company with a competitive advantage or reduces the competitive advantage of a competitor.

Besides, Bergeron et al., (1991) sees strategic use of IT as a means used to secure gains over competitors, while Fripp, (1991) says it is a system, which companies developed that has either given it competitive advantage or has significantly affected the overall conduct and success of their organizations. Alter (1991) insists that only if an organisation's production, sales, and services functions are dependent on the systems can the applications be considered strategic.

Another view of strategic use of IT emanates from Schutzer's (1991), which describes strategic use of IT as an application that helps to maintain competitive parity over the long term. He explains that strategic system may not be necessarily competitive but suffices if it can create an environment conducive to the continued generation of innovative solutions and if it can create an environment that supports the production of continuous, small improvements.

Some writers have also considered what is not strategic IT application. It is clear that an IT application is not strategic by virtue of its sophistication and complexity. In fact there is even the tendency for very highly sophisticated systems to be resented. An application cannot be strategic if it only provides organizational support for greater internal efficiency and fails to produce results that support the company strategy and long term profitability (Zain, 1998), or if an IT investment serves merely to keep up to actions of competitors (King et al., 1989).

In this paper, the working definitions of strategic use of IT were taken from Zain (1998) and Ndubisi and Jantan (2001). Zain asserts that a common view of strategic use of IT often reflects the use of IT to support planning and management control and operations i.e. tactical and transactional considerations (Zain, 1998). Ndubisi and Jantan (2001) view the concept of strategic use of IT as the application of IT in critical areas of the business functions of the organization, in order to enhance job effectiveness, improve job performance, and increase productivity above competition. The implication of this definition is that employment of IT resources in critical areas of the business function must result in achievement of goals and objectives (operational effectiveness) competently (operational efficiency).

The views are similar to leveraging IT in the value chain (see Laudon & Laudon, 1997, p48). Laudon and Laudon identified the various examples of strategic information systems and the activities of the value chain where they can be applied.

METHOD

Participants & Procedure

The Northern Malaysia-based Malay, Chinese and Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry as well as the national association of women entrepreneurs in Malaysia were contacted for the list of the members. The lists serve as the study's sampling frame. A set of questionnaire was sent to all the members of these associations, out of which 177 usable responses were received. The CEO represented the firms, as they are in a position to furnish reliable information about their firms since they are in charge of the day-to-day management of the business. Primary business activities of the firms range from manufacturing, to sales, education, interior decoration, fashion designing, etc.

Data were collected using structured questionnaire made up of three parts. Part 1 measures the actual system usage with two indicators of the number of job tasks where systems are applied such as for planning and control purposes. These indicators were taken from Rahmah and Arfah (1999). Part 2 measures strategically targeted benefits of the application such as: enhancement of job effectiveness (B1), improvement in job performance (B2), and increase in productivity (B3) taken from Ndubisi et al., (2001); Davis et al., (1989). Part 3 of the questionnaire measures demographic factors. Reliability analysis of the items measuring IT usage and strategically targeted benefits were performed to evaluate the Cronbach's Alpha value, which shows a value of .87 for usage and .91 for target benefits. The reliability test results in this study show alpha values exceeding .60 to .70 recommended by Hairs (1998) as the lower limit of acceptability. This ensures that the items grouping are reliable under the conditions of the local survey. Test of mean differences and the regression analysis were mainly used in the study.

RESULTS

Key Respondents' Profile

Table 2 shows key organization and CEO characteristics.

The majority (68.4%) of the firms have been established for more than five years. Approximately 15% are considered medium size having between 100-200 employees, 60% are small sized (5-100 employees), and 25% are very small in size (below 5 employees). Many of the firms (75%) operate in the service sector, while the rest (25%) are manufacturing outfits. Close to 55% of the respondents are universities graduates, 56% have over five years of computing general experience, and 58% are male.

Target Benefits

Respondents have the following perception of systems' strategic benefits: 84.8% of respondents either agree or strongly agree that the system improves their job performance (B1), 84.2% agree or strongly agree that systems help increase their productivity (B2), and 85.3% at least agree that system enhances their job effectiveness (B3). The means for B1, B2, and B3 are respectively 4.21, 4.10, and 4.17 (min. = 1, max. = 5), showing that on the whole, respondents find the systems to improve their job performance, increase their productivity, and enhance their job effectiveness

IT Usage

Table 3 shows the IT usage characteristics of respondents.

The results show that approximately ninety-two and seventy-eight percents of the respondents are respectively using word processing and electronic mail. Only approximately, twenty-six and twenty-five percents of the entrepreneurs are using programming languages and statistical analysis tools respectively. Among the job tasks where systems are used, letters and memos top the list, followed by producing reports, and communication with others, with approximately eighty-six percent, seventy-five percent, and seventy-three percent respectively, of the respondents using an application for these job tasks. It was further observed that 59.88% are using 4 (one-half) out of the 8 varieties of systems presented, and that 53.11% use a system to do 5 (one-half) out of the 10 job tasks listed.

IT Usage Pattern

Specific job tasks were grouped into those for administrative purposes (e.g. producing reports, letters and memos, data storage/retrieval, & communication with others), planning purposes (e.g. analyzing trends, planning/forecasting, analyzing problems/alternatives, & making decisions), and control purposes (e.g. budgeting, controlling & guiding activities). All respondents use a computer system for at least one administrative task, 59.9% of respondents are using a system for a minimum of one planning task, and 54.8% of respondents are using a system for at least one control task. Tabulated results are shown in Table 4.

Usage Pattern and Strategic Benefits

Each of the strategic benefits was recoded into two levels--low and high and the planning and control purposes reported in Tables 5. Low signifies that firms have a low perception of the system's benefits in terms of improvement in job performance, increase in productivity, or enhancement of job effectiveness. High means the reverse.

Tables 5 shows that systems' usage for planning and control purposes is very low among respondents with low perceptions of the systems' benefits, and much greater for those with high perceptions, suggesting the salience of perceived benefits in inspiring greater strategic IT usage.

Tests of Differences

Using multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) the study examined differences in strategic use of IT based on demography. MANOVA is an extension of ANOVA to accommodate more than one dependent variable. Multivariate differences across groups were assessed using the Wilks' Lambda criterion (also known as the U statistics). This is because Wilks' Lambda examines whether groups are somehow different without being concerned with whether they differ on at least one linear combination of the dependent variable, and also because it is highly immune to violations of the MANOVA assumptions (Hair et al. 1998, p. 362). Table 6 shows the MANOVA results.

As reported in table 7, the multivariate F-ratio of MANOVA is significant at five percent level for years of company establishment, computing experience, number of employees, educational qualification, and sex, suggesting that strategic use of IT differ with respect to the business experience of the firms, firm size, user computing experience, education level, and sex.

Prior research on gender differences in the salience of instrumentality in decision-making processes about a new system provides a basis to expect that male CEOs will differ significantly from the female in strategizing with IT. Hennig and Jardim state that men adopt strategies focused on bottom-line results, while women tend to focus on the methods used to accomplish a task--suggesting a greater process orientation (Hennig & Jardim, 1977; Rotter & Portugal, 1969). Other plausible explanations for the greater strategic use of IT by male CEOs as compared to the female are computer anxiety and computer aptitude. Bozionelos (1996) and Morrow et al. (1986) suggest that women display somewhat higher levels of computer anxiety; and lower computer aptitude (Felter, 1985) compared to men (Chen, 1985).

Both general and computer-based learning are positively associated with strategic use of IT among SMB CEOs. A number of studies (e.g. Igbaria et al., 1997; Ndubisi et al., 2001) have shown that the more training users received, the greater usage of systems they make. In fact, Ndubisi et al., show that graduate users of technologies often make greater usage of applications than non-graduates. Moreover, that users with more computer-based education make greater use of advanced or sophisticated technologies than those with less computer-based training. This research observes a similar trend in the strategic use of IT.

In the context of technology adoption and usage in the workplace, there is evidence to suggest that the availability of support staff is an organizational response to help users overcome barriers and hurdles to technology use, especially during the early stages of learning and use (e.g. Bergeron, Rivard, & De Serre, 1990). Ndubisi and Ndubisi (2003) have shown that usage of technology in the workplace is positively associated with firm's size. Since larger organizations are more likely to engage more IT support staff, it is therefore logical that such organizations make greater strategic use of IT than smaller organizations do.

An innumerable body of IS research has related computing experience with adoption and sustained usage of technologies. Taylor and Todd (1995) found a stronger link between behavioral intention and technology acceptance behavior for more experienced users. Others, (e.g. Bagozzi 1981; Ndubisi et al; 2001) have found prior experience to be an important determinant of behavior. Experience may make low probability events more salient, thereby ensuring that they are accounted for in the formation of attitude (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980), thus, possibly explaining why CEOs with more computing experienced make greater strategic use of IT than less experienced users.

Mean Differences in Usage Pattern Based on Strategic Benefits

Mean differences in usage pattern were examined in the light of perceived system benefits (i.e. improvement in job performance, increase in productivity, and enhancement of job effectiveness) using t-tests. The results are as follows:

i. Usage of systems for planning and control tasks is respectively higher (t-value = -13.176; p-value = .000) and (t-value = -13.451; p-value = .000) for firms with high perception of the system's ability to improve job performance than for those with low perception. There is no significant difference in usage of systems for mundane administrative tasks between the two groups.

ii. Usage of systems for planning and control tasks is respectively higher (t-value = -4.032; p-value = .001) and (t-value = -7.511; p-value = .000) for executives with high perception of the system's ability to increase their job productivity than for those with low perception. There is no significant difference in usage of systems for mundane administrative tasks between the two groups.

iii. Again usage of systems for planning and control tasks is respectively higher (t-value = -13.176; p-value = .000) and (t-value = -13.451; p-value = .000) for firms with high perception of the system's ability to enhance job effectiveness than for those with low perception. There is no significant difference in usage of systems for mundane administrative tasks between the two groups.

With respect to systems usage for planning and control purposes, usage is higher when the applications improved job performance, increased productivity, or enhanced job effectiveness (see Ndubisi & Richardson 2002 for more on these benefits). In line with the study's working definitions, this finding supports the opinion of Zain (1998) that strategic use of IT often reflects the use of IT to support planning and management control, and that of Ndubisi and Jantan (2001) which argues that for IT to be strategically used, it should lead to improvement in job performance, increase in productivity, and enhancement in job effectiveness.

Multivariate Analysis

Some authors (Zain 1998) have argued that strategic use of IT reflects system's deployment for planning and control tasks. Using multiple regression analysis, the study examined the impact of CEO characteristics on the strategic use of IT based on the above definition. The results are shown in Table 6.

The results of the regression analysis show that user's characteristics such as innovativeness, risk-taking propensity, perseverance, and flexibility contribute significantly (F = 20.42; p < .001); (F = 13.96; p < .001) and predict approximately 32% and 25% variations in usage for planning and control purposes respectively. The results also show that innovativeness has a significant relationship with usage for planning (t = 4.10; p = .000) and control (t = 4.69; p = .000). There is no significant relationship between risk-taking propensity, perseverance, and flexibility in one hand and usage for planning (p = .828; .351; .872) and control purposes (p = .418; .482; .324). Therefore, innovativeness is the only users' characteristic that is robust in determining strategic use of IT.

Other factors that push for strategic use of IT investigated in this study include outcome and process orientations, training, staff support, vendors' technical support, and computing experience. Table 7 shows the results of the analysis.

The results of the second regression analysis show that usefulness, ease of use, training, computing experience, staff, and vendor's support contribute significantly (F = 13.90; p < .001); (F = 6.97; p < .001) and predict approximately 33% and 17% variations in usage for planning and control purposes respectively. The results also show that usefulness, vendor's support, and computing experience are important determinants of usage for planning purposes, while usefulness and computing experience determines usage for control purposes. In other words, system's usefulness and user's computing experience are strong determinants of both job tasks. Vendor's support determines usage for planning purposes but not for control tasks. Ease of use, staff support, and training neither determines usage for planning nor for control task.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

This research has assessed the extent and pattern of IT usage by Malaysian SMBs, in response to the need for more empirical research on this sector. It was found that more than half of respondents (approximately sixty percent) are using four out of the eight varieties of systems presented. Five out of the ten job tasks listed were done using a computer technology by slightly over fifty-three percent of the firms.

Additionally, all of the firms are using a computer system for a minimum of one administrative task. Only approximately sixty and fifty-five percent of the firms are respectively using computer systems for planning and control tasks. System usage for planning and control purposes is lagging behind; as high as forty percent and forty-five percent of the firms respectively are not yet using any system for their planning or control tasks.

Looking back at the common view of strategic use of IT, which often reflects the use of IT to support planning and management control (see Zain, 1998), one can safely argue that only about half of the firms included in the study are strategically using IT. Except for the basic systems employed for mundane administrative purposes such as communication with others, data storage and retrieval, letters and memos, etc, by all the respondents, IT usage for other purposes is yet to reach full level. The non-usage of systems for planning and control purposes by nearly half of the respondents informs the conclusion of this research that not too many of the firms are strategizing with IT.

Based on the study's second working definition of strategic use of IT, which argues that applications must be directed at the critical business functions and should result in enhanced job effectiveness, improved performance in the job, and increased productivity, it is observed that strategic use of IT differ in terms of the years of company establishment, firm size, computer experience, educational qualification, and sex of users. It is also noted that in instances where the applications improved job performance, enhanced job effectiveness, or increased job productivity, usage of advanced systems, and usage in critical business functions (e.g. planning and control tasks) increased.

Strategic use of IT is important to SMBs. Information technology has become increasingly vital for creating and delivering products and services in most nations (Lohr 1997), since IT has a strategic significance in an information rich economy to reduce cost, upgrade quality, improve customer service, and enhance integration with vendors to increase the economic power of the firm (Jantan & Kannan, 1997). This not withstanding, SMBs still suffer the problem of under utilization despite increasing investment in information technologies and their benefits (Moore, 1991; Weiner, 1993; Johansen & Swigart, 1996), especially when strategically deployed (Ndubisi et al., 2001). Landauer, (1995) and Sichel, (1997), have suggested that such low usage of installed systems has been a possible key explanation for the 'productivity paradox'. This could also explain the Malaysian SMBs' inability to make its full impact yet on the economic development of the nation. It is needful to use systems strategically, and to enjoy strategic benefits of these systems. According to Sabherwal and King (1991), these systems can fundamentally change the firm's goals, products, services, or internal and external relationships to help the organization gain a competitive advantage. They are able to alter the way the firm conducts its business or the very business of the firm itself.

Besides its significance to the Malaysian SMBs, this research has obvious implications for systems designers and vendors. They should commit to creating awareness on the gains of using technologies strategically and also provide expert guide on 'how'. Repositioning of systems targeted at SMBs to expound their strategic benefits is very vital as this will lead to greater usage of systems for planning and control purposes as shown earlier. Rather than promoting the administrative uses of future designs, emphasis should be on their planning and control capabilities. Above this, system designers and vendors may wish to address the latent demand for strategic information systems in SMBs by targeting this sector with such systems. With the growing number of enterprises today, selling strategic information systems, and training on the systems to small and medium-sized businesses may create a viable niche market for systems designers and vendors. In addition, if backed by technical support (see Ndubisi et al., 2001), strategic information systems providers can count on the acceptance and patronage of SMBs.

FUTURE RESEARCH

As noted in the literature that there are a number of criteria suggested by other scholars for measuring strategic use of IT, these differences must be taken into account by future research assessing strategic use of IT. Future research could replicate this study in SMBs in other nations for comparative purposes, as well as in larger firms before any generalization could be made.

CONCLUSION

Various viewpoints on the definition of strategic use of IT were reviewed. IT usage pattern of the firms were examined, and the results (based on the working definitions) show that in slightly over half of the firms, IT is being used strategically but not in the rest. The characteristics of firms and CEOs using IT strategically were noted. Length of business experience, firm's size, user computing experience, level of education, and gender are important consideration in strategizing with IT. Push factors for strategic use of IT are usefulness (e.g. improvement in job performance, enhancement of job effectiveness, and increase in productivity), computing experience, vendor's technical support. Important user characteristic is innovativeness.

Strategic IT is that which brings about improved performance, enhanced effectiveness, and increased productivity at the critical business functions where they are applied such as in planning and control situations.

REFERENCES

Ajzen, I & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding Attitudes and PredITing Social Behaviour, Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall Inc.

Alter, I (1991). Information Systems: A Managerial Perspective, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Andrews, K.R. (1971). The Concept of Corporate Strategy, Homewood, IL.: Irwin.

Ashmore, G.M. (1988). Putting information technology to work, The Journal of Business Strategy, 9(5), 52-54.

Bagozzi, R.P. (1981). Attitudes, intentions, and behaviour: A test of some key hypotheses, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 607-627.

Bergeron, F., Rivard, S. & DeSerre, L. (1990). Investigating the support role of the information centre, MIS Quarterly 14(1), 247-260.

Bergeron, F., Buteau, C. & Raymond, L. (1991). Identification of strategic information systems opportunities: Applying and comparing two methodologies, MIS Quarterly, March, 89-101.

Bozionelos, N. (1996). Psychology of computer use: XXXIX. prevalence of computer anxiety in British managers and professionals, Psychological Reports, 78(3), 995-1002.

Chandler, A.D. (1962). Strategy and Structure--Chapters in the History of American Industrial Enterprise, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Chen, M. (1985). Gender differences in adolescent's uses of and attitudes toward computers. In M. McLaughlan (Ed.) Communication Yearbook, 10, 200-216, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

Clemons, E.K. (1986). Information systems for sustainable competitive advantage, Information and Management, 11, 131-136.

Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R. & Warshaw, P.R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models, Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.

Emery, J.C. (1990). Misconceptions about strategic information systems--Editor's comments, MIS Quarterly, June, vii-viii.

Felter, M. (1985). Sex differences on the California statewide assessment of computer literacy, Sex Roles, 13, 181-192.

Fripp, J. (1991). Examples and implications of strategic information systems in business strategy and information technology, 111-130, edited by E. Sutherland & Y. Morieux, London: Rutledge.

Hair, J.F., Jr., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. & Black, W.C. (1998) Multivariate Data Analysis, (5th Ed.), Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Hax, A.C. (1990). Redefining the concept of strategy and the strategy formation process, Planning Review, 18(3), 34-40.

Hennig, M. & Jardim, A. (1977). The Managerial Woman, Garden City, NY: Anchor Press.

Hofer, C.W. & Schendel, D. (1978). Strategy Formulation: Analytical Concepts, New York: West Publishing Company.

Huff, S.L. & Beattie, S.E. (1985). Strategy versus competitive information systems, Business Quarterly, Winter, 97-102.

Igbaria, M., Zinatelli, N., Cragg, P. & Cavaye, A.L.M. (1997). Personal computing acceptance factors in small firms: A structural equation model, MIS Quarterly, 21(3), 279-305.

King, W.R., Grover, V. & Hufnagel, E. (1989). Using information and information technology for sustainable competitive advantage: Some empirical evidence, Information and Management, 17, 87-93.

International Coalition of Library Consortia (ICOLC), (1998). Guidelines For Statistical Measures of Usage Of Web-Based Indexed, November, [online] Available at: http://www.library.yale.edu/consortia/webstats.html

Jantan, M. & Kannan, S. (1997). Information technology deployment and competitive advantage of organisations in Penang, Malaysia. International Conference on Business Development Strategies in Asia Pacific Proceeding, Brunei Darussalam, 371-386.

Johansen, R. & Swigart, R. (1996). Upsizing the Individual in the Downsized Organisation: Managing in the Wake of Reengineering, Globalisation, and Overwhelming Technological Change, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Landauer, T.K. (1995). The Trouble with Computers: Usefulness, Usability, and Productivity, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Laudon, C.K. & Laudon Jane P. (1997), Essentials of Management Information Systems Organisation and Technology, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall Inc.

Lincoln, D. J. & Warberg W. B. (1987). The role of micro computers in small business marketing, Journal of Small Business Management, April, 25(2), 8-17.

Lohr S. (1997). Information technology field is rated largest U.S. industry, New York Times, November 18. From a study based on commerce department data titled, Cybernation: The Importance of the High Technology Industry to the American Economy," sponsored by the American Electronics Association and the NASDAQ stock exchange.

McNurlin, B.C. (Ed.) (1986). Uncovering strategic systems, EDP Analyzer, 24(10), 1-11.

Mintzberg, H. (1979). The Structuring of Organisations, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

Moore, G.A. (1991). Crossing the Chasm: Marketing and Selling Technology Products to Mainstream Customers, New York: HarperCollings Publishers.

Morrow, P.C. Presll, E.R.& McElroy, J.C. (1986). Attitudinal and behavioral correlates of computer anxiety, Psychological Reports, 59, 1199-1204.

Ndubisi, N.O., Jantan, M. & Richardson, S. (2001). Is the technology acceptance model valid for entrepreneurs? Model testing and examining usage determinants, The Asian Academy of Management Journal, 6(2), 31-54.

Ndubisi, N.O. & Jantan, M. (2001). Information technology usage pattern among Malaysian entrepreneurs, Asian Academy of Management Conference Proceedings, Johor Bahru, 10th-13th November, 312-322.

Ndubisi, N.O. & Richardson, S. (2002). The entrepreneurs' technology acceptance model, Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal, 8(2), 95-114.

Ndubisi, N.O. & Ndubisi, C.M. (2003). Malaysia women business owners and information and communication technologies: Some marketing implications, International Conference on Operations and Quantitative Management Proceedings, Tainan, Taiwan, 2nd-5th January, 140-146.

Pedersen, K.M. (1990). Strategic information systems in manufacturing industries, in J.I. DeGross, M. Alavi & H. Oppelland (Eds.) Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Information Systems, Copenhagen, Denmark, Dec 16-19, 193-203.

Porter, M.E. (1985). Competitive Advantage--Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, New York: Free Press.

Porter, M.E. (1980). Competitive Strategy--Techniques for Analysing Industries and Competitors, New York: Free Press.

Porter, M.E. & Miller, V.E. (1985). How information gives you competitive advantage, Harvard Business Review (July-Aug.), 63(4).

Prahalad, C.K. & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation, Harvard Business Review, May-June, 79-91.

Rackoff, N., Wiseman, C. & Ullrich, W.A. (1985). Information systems for competitive advantage: Implementation of a planning process, MIS Quarterly, 9(4), 402-415.

Rahmah H. & Arfah Y.I. (1999). Diffusion of internet: Preliminary findings in Malaysia, Paper presented at the workshop "Internet in Vietnam", Hanoi, 29th September--2nd October, [online] Available at: http://www.interasia.org/malaysia/preliminary.html

Rotter, G.S. & Portugal, S.M. (1969). Group and individual effects in problem solving, Journal of Applied Psychology, 53, 338-341.

Sabherwal, R. & King, W.R. (1991). Towards a theory of strategic use of information resources: An inductive approach, Information and Management, 20(3), 191-212.

Schutzer, D. (1991). Business Decision with Computers: New Trend in Technology, New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Sichel, D.E. (1997). The Computer Revolution: An Economic Perspective, Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

Sjazna, B. (1994). Software evaluation and choice predictive validation of the technology acceptance instrument, MIS Quarterly, 18, 319-324.

Sutherland, E. (1991). The meaning of strategic information technology--An analysis of the literature, in E. Sutherland & Y. Morieux, (eds), Business Strategy and Information Technology, London: Rutledge.

Taylor, S. & Todd, P. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models, Information Systems Research, 6(2) 144-176.

The STAR Newspaper, (August 23, 2001). Minister: Science, technology knowledge stays poor, 4.

Weiner, M. (1993). Some computer science issues in ubiquitous computing, Communications of the ACM, 36(7), (July).

Williams, J.R. (1992). How sustainable is your competitive advantage, California Management Review, Spring, 29-50.

Wiseman, C. (1988). Strategic Information Systems, Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.

Zain, N.M. (1998), Strategic use of information technology: A conceptual approach, Asian Academy of Management Journal, 3(2), 83-96.

Nelson Oly Ndubisi, University Malaysia Sabah

Key Respondents' Profile
Table 2: Profiles of the Firms

Table shows key organization and CEO characteristics.

 Percent (%)

1. Industry Type
 Manufacturing 24.9
 Service 75.1

2. Years of Establishment
 5 years or less 31.6
 More than 5 years 68.4

3. Number of Employees
 101 or more 14.6
 Below 5 25.5
 5-100 59.9

4. Respondent's Education
 University graduate 45.2
 Non-University graduate 54.8

5. Computing Experience
 11 years or more 11.3
 1-5 years 44.1
 6-10 years 44.6

6. Age
 41 years or more 44.0
 40 years or less 56.0

7. Sex
 Male 58.2
 Female 41.8

Table 3: IT Usage

System Variety Usage (%)

Word processing 91.5
Electronic mail 78.0
Spreadsheets 55.9
Application packages 53.6
Graphics 44.6
Database 37.3
Programming languages 26.0
Statistical analysis 25.4

Specific Job Tasks Usage (%)

Letters and memos 85.9
Producing report 75.1
Communication with others 73.4
Data storage/retrieval 59.9
Planning/Forecasting 46.3
Budgeting 44.1
Controlling & guiding activities 38.4
Analyzing trends 34.5
Making decisions 34.5
Analyzing problems/alternatives 23.2

Table 4: Usage Pattern and Percentage of Respondents

Job Tasks where systems are used Percentage of respondents using

Administration 100
Planning 59.9
Control 54.8

Table 5: Job Tasks

 Planning Control
 Benefits
Strategic Benefits Level Mean SD Mean SD

Improvement in job Low 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
performance High 1.46 1.44 0.87 0.07

Increase in Low 0.33 0.89 0.08 0.29
productivity High 1.46 1.44 0.88 0.84

Enhancement of job Low 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
effectiveness High 1.46 1.43 0.87 0.84

Table 6: MANOVA Results of Test of Differences

Demography F-ratio Sig. Level Job tasks

Primary activity: .87 .500
 Manufacturing 5.71
 Service 4.97
Years of Establishment: 2.64 .025
 5 years or less 4.71
 More than 5 yrs 5.36
Computer experience: 5.98 .000
 5 years or below 3.60
 6-10 years 6.22
 11 years or more 7.00
No. of employees: 5.4 .000
 Below 5 4.13
 5-100 4.93
 101 or more 7.81
Education qualification: 10.26 .000
 Non graduate 3.68
 Graduate 6.14
Age: 1.67 .144
 40 years or below 5.66
 41 years or more 4.51
Sex: 5.28 .000
 Male 4.95
 Female 5.43

 Group Mean
Demography Performance Productivity Effectiveness

Primary activity:
 Manufacturing 4.07 4.11 4.14
 Service 4.11 4.19 4.23
Years of Establishment:
 5 years or less 3.98 3.88 4.05
 More than 5 yrs 4.15 4.31 4.28
Computer experience:
 5 years or below 3.83 3.92 3.95
 6-10 years 4.33 4.39 4.44
 11 years or more 4.20 4.25 4.30
No. of employees:
 Below 5 4.27 4.44 4.33
 5-100 3.98 4.01 4.09
 101 or more 4.27 4.35 4.46
Education qualification:
 Non graduate 3.80 3.99 3.93
 Graduate 4.29 4.29 4.40
Age:
 40 years or below 4.13 4.21 4.24
 41 years or more 4.05 4.12 4.17
Sex:
 Male 3.97 3.93 4.04
 Female 4.27 4.50 4.45

Table 6: User Characteristics and Usage for Planning

 Planning
User Characteristics Beta Coefficient

Innovativeness .457 ***
Risk-taking propensity .018
Perseverance .107
Flexibility .017

 [R.sup.2] = .322 A[R.sup.2] = .306
 F = 20.249 Sig. = .000

 Control
User Characteristics Beta Coefficient

Innovativeness .551 ***
Risk-taking propensity -.072
Perseverance .085
Flexibility -.112

 [R.sup.2] = .245 A[R.sup.2] = .227
 F = 13.958 Sig. = .000

*** p < .001

Table 7

 Planning
User Characteristics Beta Coefficient

Usefulness .227 *
Use Ease -.064
Computing Experience .342
Vendor's Technical Support .210 *
Training .102
Staff Support -.059

 [R.sup.2] = .329 A[R.sup.2] = .305
 F = 13.90 Sig. = .000

 Control
User Characteristics Beta Coefficient

Usefulness .357 **
Use Ease .022
Computing Experience .168 **
Vendor's Technical Support -.017
Training -.015
Staff Support .014

 [R.sup.2] = .245 A[R.sup.2] = .227
 F = 13.958 Sig. = .000

* p < .05 ** p < .01 *** p < .001