A Literature Overview on Strategic Information Systems Planning

A review of the practical relevance of IS strategy scholarly research

“…To implement this multi-level view, we draw from the ISS mapping framework of Chen et al (2010, see p. 239) to identify four core ISS subtopics: ISS development process, ISS content which is "the shared view of IS role within the organization" (Chen et al, 2010, p. 239), strategic IS impact, and IS-business alignment, all of which are distinguished from business strategy. While we acknowledge the contributions of other ISS frameworks (Gable, 2010;Karpovsky, 2015;Merali et al, 2012;Renaud et al, 2016), we draw from Chen et al (2010) as it provides a balanced coverage and parsimony in identifying some core subtopics, which facilitates the organization of our review, and also because it has been used in other reviews of ISS relevance (Teubner and Mocker, 2008). To be inclusive of most scholarly papers on ISS, we use a pluralistic interpretation of the concepts in this framework.…”

“…However, there are two key gaps in our understanding of the state of relevance this area. First, ISS has been chiefly examined as a homogenous topic (e.g., Taylor et al, 2010) with only a few studies delving into comparing the state of relevance across core subtopics (e.g., planning vs. alignment) (e.g., Teubner and Mocker, 2008). Second, the practical relevance of ISS research has been mainly examined using the single dimension of topic fit (e.g., Srivastava and Teo, 2005).…”

“…Our contributions are twofold. First, we add to prior studies on the state of practical relevance in IS (e.g., Taylor et al, 2010) and ISS (Teubner and Mocker, 2008) by providing a more detailed and updated analysis. In particular, we find that while ISS research has been successful in selecting relevant topics, it can be further advanced in terms of creating relevant knowledge products and translating them for knowledge end users and disseminators.…”

Towards a Framework for Assessing IT Strategy Execution

“…Nevertheless, much less interest has been paid to IS strategy implementation, let alone the evaluation of the implementation process and results, which is the focus of this work [6,8,15,20,[32][33][34][35][36][37]. In 2008, Teubner and Mocker [6] reviewed a sample of 434 papers published in major MIS journals between 1977 and 2001. Of those, only 21 were related to implementation.…”

“…Strategy is now considered an ongoing social process, whereas the literature has drawn to "the realities of strategy formation" [5] (p. 372), with an increased focus on incremental planning, program implementation and organizational learning. However, along this evolution, not much attention has been paid to IS strategy implementation by itself, not to say the assessment of the implementation process and outcomes [6,7].…”