Effects of the implementation of information technologies on the productivity of service companies in Ecuador
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.23(1).2025.02
-
Article InfoVolume 23 2025, Issue #1, pp. 23-37
- 72 Views
-
27 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Information technologies (IT) have become a fundamental pillar for contemporary organizations, driving not only operational efficiency and automation, but also improving decision-making processes. The objective of this study was to measure the influence of the three dimensions of IT (devices, functionalities, and potentialities) on the two dimensions of productivity (service performance and performance of business processes) in service sector companies in Ecuador. Primary data were collected from 375 Ecuadorian companies at a single moment in the service sector, a sector chosen for being the one that contributes the most to the country’s economy, using a non-experimental research design. Data analysis was performed using SPSS statistical software, with binary logistic regressions and the Nagelkerke pseudo-R² test to evaluate the explanatory power of the variables. The results indicate that IT, evaluated through its three dimensions (devices, functionalities, and potentialities), positively influences service performance by 44.80%. Similarly, these three dimensions positively influence 39.15% of the performance of business processes, empirically demonstrating that implementing IT allows achieving higher productivity levels in service companies in developing countries.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)O32, O14, L23, M11
-
References52
-
Tables6
-
Figures2
-
- Figure 1. Conceptual model
- Figure 2. Final model
-
- Table 1. Descriptive statistics of continuous variables by city
- Table 2. Data normality analysis
- Table 3. Unit root tests for the individual variables of the model
- Table 4. Dependent variable (service performance) as a function of IT devices, functions, and potentialities
- Table 5. Dependent variable (business process performance) depending on the devices, functions, and potentials of IT
- Table 6. Summary of results for control variables
-
- Afflerbach, P. (2015). The business value of IT in light of prospect theory: A new explanation for IT paradoxes. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 57(5), 299-310.
- Arvanitis, S., & Loukis, E. (2015). Employee education, information and communication technologies, workplace organization, and trade: A comparative analysis of Greek and Swiss firms. Industrial and Corporate Change, 24(6), 1417-1442.
- Ballestar, M. T., García-Lazaro, A., Sainz, J., & Sanz, I. (2022). Why is your company not robotic? The technology and human capital needed by firms to become robotic. Journal of Business Research, 142, 328-343.
- Bansal, A., Panchal, T., Jabeen, F., Kumar Mangla, S., & Singh, G. (2023). A study of human resource digital transformation (HRDT): A phenomenon of innovation capability led by digital and individual factors. Journal of Business Research, 157, Article 113611.
- Becchetti, L., Bedoya, D., & Paganetto, L. (2003). ICT investment, productivity and efficiency: Evidence at firm level using a stochastic frontier approach. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 143-167.
- Bertschek, I., Cerquera, D., & Klein, G. (2013). More Bits – More Bucks? Measuring the Impact of Broadband Internet On Firm Performance. Information Economics and Policy, 25, 190-203.
- Brynjolfsson, E., & Hitt, L. (1996). Paradox lost? Firm-level evidence on the returns to information systems spending. Management Science, 42(4), 541-558.
- Brynjolfsson, E., & Hitt, L. M. (2003). Computing productivity: Firm-level evidence. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(4), 793-808.
- Cao, Q., & Hoffman, J. J. (2011). Alignment of virtual enterprise, information technology, and performance; An empirical study. International Journal of Production Research, 49(4), 1127-1149.
- Chege, S. M., Wang, D., & Suntu, S. L. (2020). Impact of information technology innovation on firm performance in Kenya. Information Technology for Development, 26(2), 316-345.
- Chión, S., & Vincent, C. (2016). Analítica de datos para la modelación estructural [Data analytics for structural modeling]. Lima: Pearson. (In Spanish).
- Cirillo, V., Fanti, L., Mina, A., & Ricci, A. (2023). The adoption of digital technologies: Investment, skills, work organisation. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 66, 89-105.
- De Araujo, V., & Christoforo, A. (2023). The global cross-laminated timber (CLT) industry: A systematic review and a sectoral survey of its main developers. Sustainability, 15(10), Article 7827.
- Dedrick, J., & Kraemer, K. (2001). The productivity paradox: Is it resolved? Is there a new one? What does it all mean for managers? Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations.
- Dedrick, J., Kraemer, K., & Shih, E. (2011). IT and productivity in developed and developing countries. Personal Computing Industry Center.
- Elf, P., Werner, A., & Black, S. (2022). Advancing the circular economy through dynamic capabilities and extended customer engagement: Insights from small sustainable fashion enterprises in the UK. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(6), 2682-2699.
- Fagerland, M. W., & Hosmer, D. W. (2016). Tests for goodness of fit in ordinal logistic regression models. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 86(17), 3398-3418.
- Fuhrer, M., Jutai, J., Scherer, M., & DeRuyter, F. (2003). A framework for the conceptual modelling of assistive technology device outcomes. Disability and Rehabilitation, 25(22), 1243-1251.
- Ghobakhloo, M., Hong, T. S., Sabouri, M. S., & Zulkifli, N. (2012). Strategies for successful information technology adoption in small and medium sized enterprise. Information, 3(1), 36-67.
- Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall.
- Hernández, R., Fernández, C., & Baptista, P. (2010). Metodología de la investigación científica [Methodology of scientific research]. México: McGraw-Hill. (In Spanish).
- Hitt, L., & Brynjolfsson, E. (1996). Productivity, business profitability and consumer surplus: Three different measures of information technology value. MIS Quarterly, 20(2), 121-142.
- Hsieh, Y. Y., & Vergne, J. P. (2023). The future of the web? The coordination and early-stage growth of decentralized platforms. Strategic Management Journal, 44(3), 829-857.
- Hwang, J.-S., Kim, S., & Lee, H. (2015). Breaking the myths of the IT productivity. KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems, 9(1), 466-482.
- Kjaer, T. (2005). A review of the discrete choice experiment – With emphasis on its application in health care. Denmark: Syddansk Universitet.
- Kleis, L., Chwelos, P., Ramirez, R., & Cockburn, I. (2012). Information technology and intangible output: The impact of IT investment on innovation productivity. Information Systems Research, 23(1), 42-59.
- Kraemer, K. L., & Dedrick, J. (2001). Information technology and productivity: Results and policy implications of cross-country studies. Pohjola: Oxford University Press.
- Kruiniger, H. (2013). Quasi ML estimation of the panel AR(1) model with arbitrary initial conditions. Journal of Econometrics, 173(2), 175-188.
- Kumar, R. (2004). A framework for assessing the business value of information technology infraestructure. Journal of Management Information System, 21(2), 11-32.
- Lantz, B., Andersson, R., & Manfredsson, P. (2016). Preliminary tests of normality when comparing three independent samples. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 15(2), 135-148.
- Liu, H., Ke, W., Wei, K. K., & Hua, Z. (2013). The impact of IT capabilities on firm performance: The mediating roles of absorptive capacity and supply chain agility. Decision Support Systems, 54(3), 1452-1462.
- Liu, Q., Hofmann Trevisan, A., Yang, M., & Mascarenhas, J. (2022). A framework of digital technologies for the circular economy: Digital functions and mechanisms. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(5), 2171-2192.
- Liu, Y., Du, J., Wang, Y., Cui, X., Dong, J., Gu, P., Hao, Y., Xue, K., Duan, H., Xia, A., Hu, Y., Dong, Z., Wu, B., Kropp, J. P., & Fu, B. (2024). Overlooked uneven progress across sustainable development goals at the global scale: Challenges and opportunities. Innovation, 5(2), Article 100573.
- Liu, Y., Yang, Y., Li, H., & Zhong, K. (2022). Digital economy development, industrial structure upgrading and green total factor productivity: Empirical evidence from China’s cities. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(4), Article 2414.
- Louviere, J., Hensher, D., & Swait, J. (2004). Stated choice methods. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
- Marmolejo-Ramos, F., & González-Burgos, J. (2013). A power comparison of various tests of univariate normality on ex-Gaussian distributions. Methodology, 9(4), 137-149.
- Mlynář, J., & Arminen, I. (2023). Respecifying social change: The obsolescence of practices and the transience of technology. Frontiers in Sociology, 8.
- Ochinanwata, C., Igwe, P. A., & Radicic, D. (2024). The institutional impact on the digital platform ecosystem and innovation. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 30(2/3), 687-708.
- Oliner, S., & Daniel, S. (2000). The Resurgence of Growth in the Late 1990s: Is Information Technology the Story? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14(4), 3-22.
- Orlikowski, W. J., & Iacono, C. S. (2001). Desperately seeking the “IT” in IT research – A call to theorizing the IT artifact. Information Systems Research, 12(2), 121-134.
- Othman, A. R., Keselman, H. J., & Wilcox, R. R. (2015). Assessing normality: Applications in multi-group designs. Malaysian Journal of Mathematical Sciences, 9(1), 53-65.
- Patel, V., Chesmore, A., Legner, Ch., & Pandey, S. (2021). Trends in workplace wearable technologies and connected-worker solutions for next-generation occupational safety, health, and productivity. Advanced Intelligent Systems, 4(1), Article 2100099.
- Paulraj, A., Lado, A., & Chen, I. (2008). Inter-organizational communication as a relational competency: Antecedents and performance outcomes in collaborative buyer-supplier relationships. Journal of Operations Management, 26(1), 45-64.
- Prokopenko, J. (1987). Productivity management: A practical handbook. Ginebra, Switzerland: International Labor Organization.
- Rennings, M., Burgsmüller, A. P. F., & Bröring, S. (2023). Convergence towards a digitalized bioeconomy – Exploring cross-industry merger and acquisition activities between the bioeconomy and the digital economy. Business Strategy and Development, 6(1), 53-74.
- Sabherwal, R., & Jeyaraj, A. (2015). Information technology impacts on firm performance: An extension of Kohli and Devaraj (2003). MIS Quarterly, 39(4), 809-836.
- Szymkowiak, A., Melović, B., Dabić, M., Jeganathan, K., & Singh Kundi, G. (2021). Information technology and Gen Z: The role of teachers, the Internet, and technology in the education of young people. Technology in Society, 65, Article 101565.
- Tallon, P., Kraemer, K., & Gurbaxani, V. (2000). Executives’ perceptions of the business value of information technology: A process-oriented approach. Journal of Management Information Systems, 16(4), 145-173.
- Tu, W., Zhang, L., Sun, D., & Mao, W. (2023). Evaluating high-tech industries’ technological innovation capability and spatial pattern evolution characteristics: Evidence from China. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 8(1), Article 100287.
- Turyadi, I., Zulkifli, Tawil, M. R., Ali, H., & Sadikin, A. (2023). The role of digital leadership in organizations to improve employee performance and business success. Jurnal Ekonomi, 12(02).
- Wang, Z., Lin, S., Chen, Y., Lyulyov, O., & Pimonenko, T. (2023). Digitalization effect on business performance: Role of business model innovation. Sustainability, 15(11), Article 9020.
- World Economic Forum. (2014). The Global Competitiveness Report 2014–2015. Ginebra: World Economic Forum.