The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Arrangements for Information Technology Governance: A Theory of Multiple Contingencies1
Abstract
IT governance arrangements refers to the patterns of authority for key IT activities in business firms, including IT infrastructure, IT use, and project management. During the last 20 years, three primary modes of IT governance have become prevalent: centralized, decentralized, and the federal mode. These modes vary in the extent to which corporate IS, divisional IS, and line management are vested with authority for the key IT activities. While a significant volume of research has examined the influence of contingency factors on the choice of a specific mode of IT governance, most of this research has examined the singular effects of the contingency factors. The assumption underlying these studies is as though the organizational contingencies act in isolation in influencing the mode of IT governance. However, in reality, business firms are subject to the pulls and pressures of multiple, rather than singular, contingency forces. Therefore, to acknowledge this reality, this study applies the theory of multiple contingencies to examine how contingency forces influence the mode of IT governance. The theory argues that contingency forces interact with each other by either amplifying, dampening, or overriding their mutual influences on the IT governance mode. Three scenarios of multiple, interacting contingencies are identified: reinforcing, conflicting, and dominating. Each of these scenarios of multiple contingencies is hypothesized to influence a particular mode of IT governance. Utilizing rich data from case studies of eight firms, empirical evidence is presented to support these hypotheses. Implications of the multiple contingencies theory for research and for practice are presented.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Building Theories from Case Study Research
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258557 · Cited by 17,455
Cited by
Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., & Newsted, P. R. (2003) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.14.2.189.16018 · Cited by 6,479
Wade, M., & Hulland, J. (2004) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148626 · Cited by 2,822
Tiwana, A., Konsynski, B., & Bush, A. A. (2010) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1100.0323 · Cited by 1,514
Dubé, L., & Paré, G. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036550 · Cited by 976
Big data analytics capabilities: A systematic literature review and research agenda
Mikalef, P., Pappas, I. O., Krogstie, J., & Giannakos, M. (2018) · Information Systems and e-Business Management · doi:10.1007/s10257-017-0362-y · Cited by 888
Governance in the Blockchain Economy: A Framework and Research Agenda
IT University of Copenhagen, Beck, R., Müller-Bloch, C., IT University of Copenhagen, King, J. L., & University of Michigan (2018) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1jais.00518 · Cited by 688
Kearns, G. S., & Sabherwal, R. (2006) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.2753/mis0742-1222230306 · Cited by 573
Sarker, S., Sarker, S., Sahaym, A., & Bjørn-Andersen, N. (2012) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/41410419 · Cited by 367
Mikalef, P., & Krogstie, J. (2020) · European Journal of Information Systems · doi:10.1080/0960085x.2020.1740618 · Cited by 331
De Haes, S., Van Grembergen, W., & Debreceny, R. S. (2013) · Journal of Information Systems · doi:10.2308/isys-50422 · Cited by 303
Park, Y., Fiss, P. C., & El Sawy, O. A. (2020) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2020/13879 · Cited by 300
Song, P., Xue, L., Rai, A., & Zhang, C. (2018) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2018/13737 · Cited by 273
Ashaari, M. A., Singh, K. S. D., Abbasi, G. A., Amran, A., & Liebana-Cabanillas, F. J. (2021) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121119 · Cited by 175
van den Broek, T., & van Veenstra, A. F. (2018) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2017.09.040 · Cited by 157
Liberating HR through technology
Shrivastava, S., & Shaw, J. B. (2003) · Human Resource Management · doi:10.1002/hrm.10081 · Cited by 152
Otto, B. (2011) · Communications of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1cais.02903 · Cited by 144
Shaikh, F. A., & Siponen, M. (2023) · Computers & Security · doi:10.1016/j.cose.2022.102974 · Cited by 135
Zhang, C., Issa, H., Rozario, A., & Soegaard, J. S. (2023) · Accounting Horizons · doi:10.2308/horizons-2021-084 · Cited by 82
Nyberg, A. J., Schleicher, D. J., Bell, B. S., Boon, C., Cappelli, P., Collings, D. G., Dalle Molle, J. E., Feuerriegel, S., Gerhart, B., Jeong, Y., et al. (2025) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/01492063251325188 · Cited by 47
Tribal Governance: The Business of Blockchain Authentication
Miscione, G., Ziolkowski, R., Zavolokina, L., & Schwabe, G. (2018) · Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences · doi:10.24251/hicss.2018.566 · Cited by 38
“The term IT Governance has been used since the early 1990s [8, 9] and became more prominent later in the decade [10], [11], [12].”
BackgroundTo govern or be governed: an integrated framework for AI governance in the public sector
Choi, H., & Park, M. J. (2023) · Science and Public Policy · doi:10.1093/scipol/scad045 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- Sambamurthy, V., & Zmud, R. W.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 1999-06-01
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 261-289
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W1539089137
- Cited by
- 1,052
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 21.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
