Research Commentary: Introducing a Third Dimension in Information Systems Design—The Case for Incentive Alignment

References

  • Adler P. Market, hierarchy, and trust: The knowledge economy and the future of capitalism. Organ. Sci. (2001) 12(2):214–234LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Arrow K. Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. The Rate and Direction of Incentive Activity: Economic and Social Factors (1962) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ) 609–625CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Arrow K.Social Choice and Individual Values (1963) 2nd ed.(Wiley, New York) Google Scholar
  • Ba S., Stallaert J., Whinston A. B. Optimal investment in knowledge within a firm using a market mechanism. Management Sci. (2001) 47(9). ForthcomingLinkGoogle Scholar
  • Banker R., Kauffman R. Reuse and productivity in integrated computer-aided software. MIS Quart. (1991) 15(3):375–401CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Bayers C. The bot.com future: Capitalist constructions. Wired (2000) 8 (March):210–219Google Scholar
  • Benbasat I., Dexter A. S., Todd P. An experimental program investigating color-enhanced and graphical information presentation: An integration of the findings. Comm. ACM (1986) 29(11):1094–1105CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Benbasat I., Lim L. H. The effects of group, task, context, and technology variables on the usefulness of group support systems: A meta-analysis of experimental studies. Small Group Res. (1993) 24(4):430–462CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Brief A. P., Motowidlo S. J. Prosocial organizational behaviors. Acad. Management Rev. (1986) 10:710–725CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Briggs R., Nunamaker J., Sprague R. 1001 unanswered research questions in GSS. J. Management Inform. Systems (1998) 14(3):3–21CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Burk K., Aytes K. A longitudinal analysis of the effects of media richness on cohesion development and process satisfaction in computer-supported workgroups. Proc. Thirty-First Hawaii Internat. Conf. Systems Sci. (1998) 1:135–144CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Buxton J. N., Randell B. Software engineering techniques. Rep. Conf. (1969) (NATO Brussels, Belgium). (sponsored by the NATO Science Committee) Rome, Italy, and 1970. Scientific Affairs DivisionGoogle Scholar
  • Byrd T. A. Implementation and use of expert systems in organizations: Perception of knowledge engineers. J. Management Inform. Systems (1992) 8(4):97–116CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Chen H., Hsu P., Orwig R., Hoopes L., Nunamaker J. Automatic concept classification of text from electronic meetings. Comm. ACM (1994) 37(10):56–72CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Clarke E. H. Multipart pricing of public goods. Public Choice (1971) 11(1):17–33CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Condorcet Marquis de. Essai sur l'application de l'analyse à la probabilité des decisions rendues à la pluralité des voix. (1785) (Paris, France)Google Scholar
  • Constant D., Kiesler S., Sproull L. What's mine is ours, or is it? A study of attitudes about information sharing. Inform. Systems Res. (1994) 5(4):400–421LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Cross G. How e-business is transforming supply chain management. J. Bus. Strategy (2000) 21(2):36–39March–AprilCrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Dasgupta P., Hammond P., Maskin E. The implementation of social choice rules: Some results on incentive compatibility. Rev. Econom. Stud. (1979) 46(2):185–216CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Davenport T. H., Prusak L. Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know. (1998) (Harvard Bus. School Press, Boston, MA) Google Scholar
  • Davey A., Olson D. Multiple criteria decision making models in group decision support. Group Decision and Negotiation (1998) 7(1):55–75CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Davis F. D., Bagozzi R. P., Warshaw P. R. User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Sci. (1989) 35(8):982–1003LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Deckmyn D. Most enterprise computing efforts fail. Computerworld (2000) March 21Google Scholar
  • Dekleva S., Drehmer D. Measuring software engineering evolution: A Rasch calibration. Inform. Systems Res. (1997) 8(1):95–104MarchLinkGoogle Scholar
  • Dennis A. R., Valacich J. S. Group, subgroup, and nominal group idea generation: New rules for a new media? J. Management (1994) 20(4):723–736CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • DeSanctis G. L., Poole M. S. Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory. Organ. Sci. (1994) 5(2):121–147LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Ellis C. A., Rein G. L., Jarvenpaa S. L. Nick experimentation: Selected results concerning effectiveness of meeting support technology. J. Management Inform. Systems (1990) 6(3):7–24CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Fan M., Stallaert J., Whinston A. B. The design and development of a financial cybermarket with a bundle trading mechanism. Internat. J. Electronic Commerce (1999) 4(1):5–23CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Fan M., Stallaert J., Whinston A. B. Decentralized mechanism design for supply chain organizations using an auction market. Inform. Systems Res. (2001) . ForthcomingGoogle Scholar
  • Fjermestad J., Hiltz S. R. An assessment of group support systems experiment research: Methodology and results. J. Management Inform. Systems (1998) 15(3):7–149CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Fjermestad J., Hiltz S. R. Group support systems: A descriptive evaluation of case and field studies. J. Management Inform. Systems (2000) 17(3):115–159CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Gallupe R. B., DeSanctis G., Dickson G. W. Computer-based support for group problem-finding: An experimental investigation. MIS Quart. (1988) 12(2):277–296CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Garvin D. A note on knowledge management. Harvard Business School article. (1997) . Product Number: 9-398-031Google Scholar
  • Gavish B., Gerdes J. H. Voting mechanisms and their implications in a GDSS environment. Ann. Oper. Res. (1997) 71:41–74CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Goodhue D. L. Task-technology fit and individual performance. MIS Quart. (1995) 19(2):213–236CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Groves T. Incentives in teams. Econometrica (1973) 41:617–631CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Hansen M., Nohria N., Tierney T. What's your strategy for managing knowledge? Harvard Bus. Rev. (1999) March–April):106–116Google Scholar
  • Henson K. L., Hughes C. A two-dimensional approach to systems development. J. Inform. Systems Management (1991) 8(1). WinterCrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Hightower L. Private communication. (1998) Google Scholar
  • Hightower L., Sogomonian A. G., Stallaert J. Banking on Monte Carlo. Energy and Power Risk Management (1997) 12–14Google Scholar
  • Holmstrom B. Moral hazard in teams. Bell J. Econom. (1982) 13:324–340CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Jensen M. C. Foundations of Organizational Strategy. (1998) (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
  • Kollock P., Smith M., Kollock P. The economies of on-line cooperation. Communities in Cyberspace (1999) (Routledge, London, U.K.) 221Google Scholar
  • Ledyard J., Eatwell J., Milgate M., Newman P. Incentive compatibility. Allocation, Information and Markets (1989) (Norton, New York)141–151CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Mas-Colell A., Whinston M. D., Green J. R.Microeconomic Theory (1995) (Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York) Google Scholar
  • Myerson R. Incentive compatibility and the bargaining problem. Econometrica (1979) 47:61–74CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • McGrath J. E., Arrow H. Introduction: The JEMCO 2 study of time, technology and groups. Comput. Supported Cooperative Work (1996) 4(2):107–126CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Myerson R. B., Eatwell J., Milgate M., Newman P. Mechanism design. Allocation Information, and Markets (1989) (Norton, New York)191–206CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Narayanan V. G., Raman A. Aligning incentives for supply chain efficiency. (2000) . Harvard Business School article. Product number: 600-110Google Scholar
  • Naur P., Randell B. Software engineering. (1968) . Rep. Conf.(sponsored by the NATO Science Committee) Garmisch, Germany, and 1969. Scientific Affairs Division, NATO Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  • O'Reilly C., Chatman J. Organizational commitment and psychological attachment: The effects of compliance, identification, and internalization on prosocial behavior. J. Appl. Psych (1986) 71(3):492–499CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Organ D. W. Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. (1988) (Lexington Books, Lexington, MA) Google Scholar
  • Orlikowski W. Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organ. Sci. (2000) 11(4):404–428LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Orlikowski W., Hoffman D. An improvisational model for change management: The case of groupware technologies. Sloan Management Rev. (1997) 38(2):11–21Google Scholar
  • Palfrey T., Prisbrey J. Anomalous behavior in public goods experiments: How much and why? Amer. Econom. Rev. (1997) 87(5):829–846Google Scholar
  • Pressman R. S. Software Engineering: A Practitioner's Approach. (2000) (McGraw-Hill College Division 806, Boston, MA) Google Scholar
  • Radner R. The internal economy of large firms. Econom. J. (1986) 96:1–22Supplement: Conf. papersGoogle Scholar
  • Samuelson P. The pure theory of public expenditure. Rev. Econom. Statistics (1954) 36(4):387–389CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Souza E. Strategies for software engineering implementation. J. Inform. Systems Management (1990) 7(3):33–37CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Subramanian G. H., Zarnich G. An examination of some software development effort and productivity determinants in ICASE tool projects. J. Management Inform. Systems (1996) 12(4CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Swanson K., McComb D., Smith J., McCubbrey D. The application software factory: Applying total quality techniques to systems development. MIS Quart. (1991) 15(4):566–579CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Szulanski G. Exploring internal stickiness: impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management J. (1996) 17(Winter):27–43CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Tapscott D., Ticoll D., Lowy A. Digital Capital: Harnessing the Power of Business Webs. (1999) (Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA) 272Google Scholar
  • Todd P., Benbasat I. Evaluating the impact of DSS, cognitive effort and incentives on strategy selection. Inform. Systems Res. (1999) 10(4):356–374LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Turban E., Rainer R. K., Potter R.E. Introduction to information technology. (2001) (John Wiley & Sons, New York) 550Google Scholar
  • Vessey I., Galletta D. F. Cognitive fit: An empirical study of information acquisition. Inform. Systems Res. (1991) 2(1):63–84LinkGoogle Scholar
INFORMS site uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some are essential to make our site work; Others help us improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Please read our Privacy Statement to learn more.