Description
Strategic information systems planning (SISP) refers to the process of determining an organization’s information systems strategy. We examine how national cultural differences between China and the U.S. influence firms’ choices for SISP process. Using the conceptualization of Hofstede’s national culture taxonomy, we proposed six hypotheses to examine the impacts of power distance, individualism, and long-term orientation on the six dimensions of SISP process. Empirical data from 38 organizations in the U.S. and 47 in China were collected and analyzed. Results show that organizations in long-term orientation countries are more likely to have more control and less creativity focus; organizations in high level power distance and collectivism countries are more likely to have top-down flow; and organizations in low level power distance and collectivism countries are more likely to have wider participation. Interestingly, the U.S. society’s short-term orientation does not necessarily lead to low comprehensiveness in planning.
Recommended Citation
Huang, Ziyue and Palvia, Prashant C., "How Firms’ National Culture Influences the Strategic IS Planning Process" (2017). AMCIS 2017 Proceedings. 2.
https://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2017/Global/Presentations/2
How Firms’ National Culture Influences the Strategic IS Planning Process
Strategic information systems planning (SISP) refers to the process of determining an organization’s information systems strategy. We examine how national cultural differences between China and the U.S. influence firms’ choices for SISP process. Using the conceptualization of Hofstede’s national culture taxonomy, we proposed six hypotheses to examine the impacts of power distance, individualism, and long-term orientation on the six dimensions of SISP process. Empirical data from 38 organizations in the U.S. and 47 in China were collected and analyzed. Results show that organizations in long-term orientation countries are more likely to have more control and less creativity focus; organizations in high level power distance and collectivism countries are more likely to have top-down flow; and organizations in low level power distance and collectivism countries are more likely to have wider participation. Interestingly, the U.S. society’s short-term orientation does not necessarily lead to low comprehensiveness in planning.