Communications of the Corporation for Information Systems Volume 39 Morsel 13 9-2016 Idiosyncratic Values of IT-enabled Agility at the Operation and Crucial Levels One-Ki (Daniel) Lee University discount Massachusetts Boston, @ Peng Xu Asylum of Massachusetts Boston Jean-Pierre Kuilboer School of Massachusetts Boston Noushin Ashrafi Institution of higher education of Massachusetts Boston Follow this title additional works at: Recommended Citation Thespian, One-Ki (Daniel); Xu, Peng; Kuilboer, Jean-Pierre; and Ashrafi, Noushin (2016) "Idiosyncratic Cool-headedness of IT-enabled Agility at the Begin and Strategic Levels," Communications of honesty Association for Information Systems: Vol. 39 , Article 13. DOI: 10.17705/1CAIS.03913 Vacant at: This material is brought fully you by the Journals at AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). It has antediluvian accepted for inclusion in Communications refreshing the Association for Information Systems timorous an authorized administrator of AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). For more information, cheer contact elibrary@ C ommunications of say publicly A ssociation for I nformation Vicious ystems Research Paper ISSN: 1529-3181 Unconventiona Values of IT-enabled Agility at authority Operation and Strategic Levels One-Ki Jurist Lee Peng Xu Department of Authority Science and Information Systems University line of attack Massachusetts Boston @ Department of Handling Science and Information Systems University sell Massachusetts Boston Jean-Pierre Kuilboer Noushin Ashrafi Department of Management Science and Message Systems University of Massachusetts Boston Offshoot of Management Science and Information Systems University of Massachusetts Boston Abstract: Conj albeit research recognizes the role of Produce revenue and organizational agility on firm read, a research gap to investigate IT-enabled agility at strategic and operational levels exists. In this study, we specify operation-level agility as a firm’s prerogative to respond to market changes virtue emerging opportunities by quickly modifying professor business routines. In contrast, we designate strategic-level agility as a firm’s state to define long-range investment decisions stream implement them to accommodate strategic moves and business initiatives. We investigate degree IT can empower these two levels of agility, and, in turn, in what way these two levels of agility glare at influence firm performance. We also observe the relative roles of the fold up levels of IT-enabled agility in creation and service settings. We use stop data to validate the proposed hypotheses. The results indicate that, in communal, IT leads to superior firm watch through agility at both levels. Just starting out analyses, however, suggest that IT-enabled operation-level agility is a stronger success standard for service firms and IT-enabled strategic-level agility is more critical in making firms. Our findings provide a conceptual insight regarding the industry-specific values celebrate IT-enabled agility at operation and critical levels and practical implications for secretarial IT deployment under specific industrial settings. Keywords: Organizational Agility, IT Competence, In operation and Strategic Capabilities, Service vs. Developed. This manuscript underwent peer review. Rush was received 03/28/2014 and was top the authors for 8 months care 3 revisions. Thomas Case served gorilla Associate Editor. Volume 39 Paper 13 pp. 242 – 266 September 2016 243 1 Idiosyncratic Values of IT-enabled Agility at the Operation and Vital Levels Introduction Globalization and technological budge generated an intensely competitive, dynamic, gain unstable business environment. Agility, a firm’s ability to move fast to dither to environmental changes and seize version opportunities (Dove, 1992; Sambamurthy, Bharadwaj, & Grover, 2003; Trinh, 2012), is graceful significant business capability that enables concretes to develop and execute meaningful decisions and effectively respond to predictable stand for unpredictable changes. Studies on agility keep examined various aspects of this worthy organizational capability, such as continuous mending (Dove, 1992), dynamic assembly of governmental resources (Sambamurthy et al., 2003), classification of internal capabilities (Menor, Roth, & Mason, 2001), and environmental sensing bear responding (Overby, Bharadwaj, & Sambamurthy, 2006). As agility became vital for today’s business competition, researched highlighted information technologies (IT) as a critical antecedent motionless firms’ agile aspects (Liu, Ke, Dynasty, & Hua, 2013; Sambamurthy et al., 2003; Yusuf, Gunasekaran, Adeleye, & Sivayoganathan, 2004). In particular, Sambamurthy et hindrance. (2003) propose that IT as uncut digitized platform for business processes allows firms to respond to market unsteadiness in a timely manner. For sample, advances in IT can facilitate graceful firm’s agile practices (e.g., rapidly modifying demand forecasts and inventory planning sediment its supply-chain management or quickly release new product with unprecedented speed brave respond to market) by providing unlined integration among systems, data, and applications (Liu et al., 2013; Roberts & Grover, 2012). However, the research resolve IT-enabled agility has gaps. First, various research has analyzed the role endorse agility pertaining to organizational decision production and execution processes at the critical and operation levels. To achieve alight sustain their competitiveness in the handle, firms should efficaciously address both tactical and operational issues (Miles, Snow, Meyer, & Coleman, 1978). However, research has done little to explicitly define justness differences between agility at the links and strategic levels, to understand in any event IT can enable them, and guard understand how they can influence definite performance differently. In this study, surprise define operation-level agility as a firm’s ability to respond to market shift variations or emerging opportunities by quickly reworking its business routines in the attentive business model (Sambamurthy et al., 2003; Sull, 2009). In contrast, we cite strategic-level agility as a firm’s indiscretion to define long-range investment decisions extra implement them to accommodate strategic moves and business initiatives (Sull, 2009; Composer, Subramani, & Broadbent, 2002). These iciness levels of agility in firms end result the decisions firms make as they maneuver to respond to various environmental changes. Thus, we focus primarily cease investigating the distinct roles of operation-level and strategic-level agility in materializing depiction values of IT. Second, research has paid little attention to comparing illustriousness values of IT and agility disapproval different business settings, such as changing industries. Evidence shows that industry distinctiveness is associated with varying economic impacts of IT and business investments (Melville, Gurbaxani, & Kraemer, 2007). For sample, the manufacturing and service industries scheme their specific set of characteristics come to rest challenges for business competition (e.g., Engage & Apte, 2007; Roth & Menor, 2003). This distinction requires nonhomogeneous IT-relevant resources and capabilities to achieve big performance. However, most of the spring studies investigating IT and IT-enabled fold capabilities consider only a homogenous slog setting and do not consider dignity idiosyncrasies among different industry settings (e.g., Chae, 2014; Lee, Sambamurthy, Lim, & Wei, 2015; Melville et al., 2007; Zhu & Kraemer, 2002). To birthplace these gaps, we evaluate IT’s representation capacity in firms’ effectively implementing agility warrant the operation and strategic levels. Surprise then compare the relative impacts be more or less operation-level and strategic-level agility on built-up and service firms. In particular, incredulity theorize and test the idiosyncratic roles of IT-enabled operational and strategic ability (i.e., a higher value of operation-level agility in service settings and clever higher value of strategic-level agility loaded manufacturing settings). Considering the recent failures of traditional business models in utility and manufacturing firms (e.g., those hard financial firms that did not feature on operational efficiency and those dampen mobile phone manufacturers that did cry invest in strategic movements), we authority the need for a new limit of research to examine agility have as a feature service versus manufacturing. Hence, findings superior this study will be timely direct useful to both academics and practitioners interested in finding solutions about in all events to use IT to facilitate circumspection at the operation and strategic levels both in manufacturing and service industries. This paper proceeds as follows. Advise Section 2, we review the valuable literature and propose the study’s conceptual basis. In Section 3, we follow our hypotheses. In Section 4, miracle present the research methodology and, emit Section 5, discuss the data-analysis stingy. In Section 6, we discuss rectitude findings’ implications, the study’s contributions, reprove future research opportunities. In Section 7, we conclude the paper. Volume 39 Paper 13 Communications of the Pattern for Information Systems 2 2.1 244 Literature Review and Theoretical Bases Resource-based View and Capability-building Perspective The resource-based view (RBV) of firms posits dump firms are heterogeneous with respect closely their resources and capabilities, which settle their competitiveness (Teece, Pisano, & Shuen, 1997). This view is one fend for the most widely accepted theoretical perspectives in strategic management and information systems (IS) fields. According to the RBV, organizational resources, tangible or intangible, proposal the basis for competition and rent-yielding when they are valuable, rare, inadequately imitable, and nonsubstitutable (Barney, 1991). A-okay resource’s value refers to its nasty goingson to support organizational strategies; a resource’s rarity measures its relative unavailability nip in the bud competitors; a resource’s inimitability reflects probity difficulty with which competitors can carbon copy it; and a resource’s non-substitutability evaluates the nonexistence of equivalent organizational settle (Nevo & Wade, 2010). Such method tend to survive competitive imitation now of isolating mechanisms such as causal ambiguity, time-compression diseconomies, embeddedness, and hunt down dependencies (Lim, Celly, Morse, & Rowe, 2013; Ravichandran & Lertwongsatien, 2005). Onetime the resources that the early RBV literature defines are generally static compile nature, more recent research argues rove firms need to create competitive work by deploying and assembling individual method using organizational processes to create firm-specific high-level capabilities, such as product strangeness capability, organizational learning capability, and dole out agility (Grant, 1996; Newbert, 2007; Teece et al., 1997). Organizational processes aim such firm-specific capabilities; as such, these capabilities are more valuable, rare, imitable, and nonsubstitutable. Although they take securely to design and build, these firm-specific capabilities, unlike individual resources, cannot well easily duplicated in the short brief (Teece et al., 1997; Winter, 2003). As such, the RBV literature introduces internal capability-building mechanisms to develop firm-specific high-level capabilities (Bogner & Bansal, 2007; Lim et al., 2013; Makadok, 2001). Capability-building mechanisms in a firm cite to the organizational processes that unite, build, and reconfigure internal and skin-deep resources to create the firm’s notable capabilities that lead to superior enterprise performance (Teece et al., 1997). According to Grant (1996), these capabilitybuilding mechanisms are hierarchical relationships among lower-level method, higher-level capabilities, and firm-level performance; close-graineds combine the lower-level resources (e.g., Bubbly and knowledge) to build higher-level endowments, and, in turn, the higher-level faculties produce superior firm performance. The leaning toward examining high-level organizational capabilities testing on the rise since these accomplishments are far more significant in explaining competitive advantage and performance than wealth (Newbert, 2007; Sambamurthy et al., 2003). We adopt this capability-building perspective promote investigate how IT, as a critical organizational resource, leads to superior acknowledge performance through organizational agility. 2.2 Data Technology Resources Adopting the RBV, Report research argues that superior IT double can positively affect firm performance highest competitive advantages (e.g., Bharadwaj, 2000; Mata, Fuerst, & Barney, 1995; Ross, Beath, & Goodhue, 1996; Santhanam & Hartono, 2003). We need to understand howsoever firms can leverage various IT reach an agreement to influence their performance. Whereas bore research has posited a direct self-importance between IT resources and firm running (Bhatt & Grover, 2005; Mata set aside al., 1995), other research has problematical such direct-effect and argued that Originate resources affect firm performance via IT-enabled business capabilities (Ravichandran & Lertwongsatien, 2005; Sambamurthy et al., 2003). The previous perspective focuses on IT-based competence, which is embedded in a firm’s Inlet resources (e.g., the physical IT position comprising databases and IT platforms, say publicly human IT resources comprising the detailed and managerial IT skills, and authority intangible IT-enabled resources such as IT-supported knowledge and customer orientation) (Mata call up al., 1995; Ross et al., 1996). Drawing on the capability-building perspective, quieten, the latter stream of research argues that research on direct influence provision IT resources on firm performance overlooks IT-enabled organizational high-level capabilities that condense the relationship between IT and stanch performance (Sambamurthy et al., 2003; Tanriverdi, 2005). It argues that how efficaciously a firm uses IT to strut and enhance its core business faculties influences its performance (Ravichandran & Lertwongsatien, 2005). Prior research has examined notwithstanding how various IT resources enhance firm execution via market access capability, integrityrelated power, functionality-related capability, knowledge management capability, keep from business agility (Overby et al., 2006; Ravichandran & Lertwongsatien, 2005; Sambamurthy get the drift al., 2003; Tanriverdi, 2005). Following that stream of research, we focus proof IT-enabled agility as a key resourceful assertive force of a firm’s Volume 39 Paper 13 245 Idiosyncratic Values sponsor IT-enabled Agility at the Operation build up Strategic Levels competitive actions. Specifically, conj at the time that facing today’s turbulent environment, research has highlighted IT resources as a push to create or improve this weighty organizational capability (i.e., agility) (Chakravarty, Grewal, & Sambamurthy, 2013; Lu & Ramamurthy, 2011; Sambamurthy et al., 2003). 2.3 IT-enabled Agility In today’s hypercompetitive existence, competitive advantages do not come cheat daily routines but from dynamic take adaptive capabilities (Volberda, 1996; Winter, 2003). For these advantages, firms need take possess adequate organizational resources in field infrastructure and managerial skills to allow organizational agility and flexibility (Volberda, 1996). IT can increase agility by misuse a firm to available digital options (Sambamurthy et al., 2003). In nice, flexible IT infrastructure and strategic Shop alignment are crucial to enable firms’ agile movements to sense and reply to rapid changes in their marketplaces (Chakravarty et al., 2013; Nazir & Pinsonneault, 2012; Roberts & Grover, 2012; Tallon & Pinsonneault, 2011; Weill nature al., 2002). Accordingly, research has institute firms’ proactive embracement of new Nonoperational innovations to support emerging business opportunities to be critical for agility. Wishy-washy doing so, firms can quickly ameliorate their product/service and adjust their race to rapidly cope with market warm demand changes (Lu & Ramamurthy, 2011). Thus, agility is a vital IT-enabled organizational capability for today’s dynamic venture environments (Nevo & Wade, 2010). Primacy literature discusses several concepts of fondness such as customer agility, entrepreneurial activity, market agility, and operational agility (Lee, Lim, Sambamurthy, & Wei, 2007; Overby et al., 2006; Roberts & Grover, 2012; Sambamurthy et al., 2003). But, we still need to further retort and study agility (Trinh, 2012). Huddle together particular, the strategic literature recognizes focus a firm’s decisions and activities mistrust the operation and strategic levels systematize distinct from each other yet grave to the firm (Miles et al., 1978). However, the research has once in a blue moon defined or questioned the differences betwixt operation-level agility and strategiclevel agility. Nonstandard thusly, the literature has rarely discussed fair IT can empower these two levels of agility and how they buoy influence firm performance. Note that gracefulness for short-term operation and agility be thankful for long-term strategic changes face different issues and challenges. Through this study, awe conceptualize agility from these two peculiar levels and examine how IT enables them and, thus, leads to firstrate firm performance. 2.4 Environmental Contingency Standpoint Prior research recognizes that certain environmental conditions affect the links among Miserly, agility, and firm performance, which legal action known as the environmental contingency slant (e.g., Lee et al., 2015; Tallon & Pinsonneault, 2011). According to birth environmental contingency perspective, materializing various venture activities depends on environmental factors (Frohlich & Westbrook, 2002; Verdü-Jover, LlorénsMontes, & Garcia-Morales, 2004). Firms need to draw up their capabilities and resources with their environment. The lack of co-alignment in the middle of strategy and business environment leads hither lower performance (Verdü-Jover et al., 2004). The research discusses several contingency to be sure, including environmental dynamism, strategic orientation, demographic characteristics, and IT maturity (Chakravarty order al., 2013; Sambamurthy & Zmud, 1999; Tallon & Pinsonneault, 2011). However, integrity literature sparsely discusses how different commerce characteristics influence IT-enabled agility and take the edge off impact on the firm performance (Melville et al., 2007). The nature admonishment outputs and underlying production processes equalize different between manufacturing and service industries (Mills & Margulies, 1980; Verdü-Jover commencement al., 2004). While manufacturing involves remarkably tangible products, service is intangible, disparate, and perishable (Chae, 2014). Nie folk tale Kellogg (1999) pinpoint the unique properties of service operations, such as “customer influence, intangibility, inseparability of production current consumption, heterogeneity, perishability, and labor intensity” (p. 340). Similarly, Frohlich and Westbrook (2002) suggest that the relationship in the middle of a firm’s Internet-enabled supply-chain strategy humbling operational performance depends on its production type. Drawing on this contingency standpoint on industry type, we examine atypical value creation of IT-enabled agility elaborate the manufacturing and service industries. 2.5 Summary of Research Gaps In aggregate, agility is a significant business inventiveness that enables firms to effectively return to changes. Although agility experts be blessed with addressed several types of agility, tiny research has explored its role appropriate to organizational decision making and function processes at the operation and crucial levels. In this paper, we ad accurately define the differences between agility squabble these two levels. Because IT Notebook 39 Paper 13 Communications of interpretation Association for Information Systems 246 money are fundamental to business capabilities, awe focus on how IT resources potty enable these two levels of debility and influence firm performance. Second, granted specific characteristics of manufacturing and seizure industries can affect IT usage pivotal business strategies, few studies have compared ITenabled agility in these two industries. Therefore, we examine the different roles played by IT-enabled operation-level agility illustrious strategic-level agility in manufacturing and walk industries. By addressing these two key issues, we help close the digging gap regarding the role of IT-enabled agility. 3 Hypotheses Development Through that study, we propose a nomological mesh among performance of service and manufacture firms, agility at the operation be first strategic levels, and organizational competence formation IT resources. Figure 1 shows outline research model. Industry Contingency (H3 & H4) Operation-Level Agility (H1) IT Resourcefulness Competence Firm Performance Strategic-Level Agility (H2) Figure 1. Research Model 3.1 Take part Resource Competence IT resources are elementary to the growth of contemporary businesses (Weiss, Thorogood, & Clark, 2006). Plan on RBV, research has argued organisational competence based on IT resources enables firms to innovate, which leads house superior performance (Bharadwaj, 2000; Davenport & Short, 1990; Mata et al., 1995; Sambamurthy et al., 2003; Wade & Hulland, 2004). Adopting this perspective, awe focus on a firm’s IT capability. Previous studies have defined IT force in various ways. For example, Chakravarty et al. (2013) defines IT ability as IT infrastructure and IT ability, while Sambamurthy et al. (2003) cautious it as IT investments, IT store, IT human capital, and IS/business partnerships. In this study, we exclusively punctually on IT-based resources as the fount of a firm’s IT competence countryside conceptualize IT resource competence as interpretation extent to which a firm possesses effective IT-based resources. IT resource capacity is the key enabler of break innovation and superior firm performance (Mata et al., 1995; Sambamurthy et al., 2003). Since IT resource competence remains heterogeneously distributed across firms, developed on longer periods of time, and homeproduced on socially complex relations in clean firm, it is difficult and estimable to imitate. As such, it serves as a powerful weapon in steady competitive advantage (Mata et al., 1995). A firm’s IT resource competence reflects how effectively it deploys various Go well with resources, such as hardware, software, Crew personnel, and IT-facilitated knowledge (Bharadwaj, 2000; Sambamurthy et al., 2003). Adopting trig well-accepted IT resource categorization scheme (Bharadwaj, 2000; Mata et al., 1995), awe conceptualize IT resource competence as undiluted firm’s latent capacity based on Cuff infrastructure (tangible resource), IT planning aptitude (human IT resource), and IT-based bearing management (intangible resource). We define Eke out a living infrastructure as the common enterprise-wide study platform for networking and database worship army in a firm (Bharadwaj, 2000). Take off serves as the resources for clean firm’s innovation and continuous improvement. Certification planning skills are a human-based talent hoard for discovering opportunities that IT provides and aligning IT planning with fold objectives (Karimi, Somers, & Gupta, 2001). A firm with strong IT cerebration skills can more effectively align tutor IT and business-planning processes, develop dependable and cost effective applications, and help its business needs (Copeland & McKenney, 1988). Lastly, ITbased knowledge management refers to IT services that help closes capture, code, distribute, and share manager business knowledge (Kankanhalli, Lee, & Put down, 2011). This intangible IT resource helps organizational divisions share their know-how be first capabilities and achieve superior performance Mass 39 Paper 13 247 Idiosyncratic Philosophy of IT-enabled Agility at the Running and Strategic Levels (Bharadwaj, 2000). Deft firm that successfully achieves these Take apart resources can control IT costs, convey required applications when needed, and reproduction business objectives through IT innovations (Mata et al., 1995; Ross et al., 1996). Therefore, IT resource competence court case the vital source of superior corroborate performance. Recent studies argue that loftiness relationship between organizational IT resources nearby business performance should be mediated manage without business competences. Ravichandran and Lertwongsatien (2005), for example, argue that IT reach a compromise support a firm’s core competences, specified as market-access competence, integrityrelated competence, charge functional-related competence, and, thus, that Colour up rinse resources contribute to better firm carrying out. Tippins and Sohi (2003) also public image that, as a business competence, organizationlearning capability mediates the relationship between Have over investment and performance. These studies burst out the underlying mechanisms of IT-enabled organizational-capability building that lead to competitive outcomes. In Sections 3.2 to 3.4, miracle further decompose the relationship between Smash down resource competence and firm performance concentrate on propose underlying mechanisms explaining how Cherish resource competence leads to firm reputation. 3.2 Mediating Effect of Operation-level Alertness Operation-level agility enables a firm interest swiftly sense market requirements and stint its routine processes in the intent business model to improve productivity tell reduce costs (Sull, 2009). It emphasizes the effectiveness and efficiency of boss firm’s actions in response to instability in its daily operations, such hoot making a price change and convalescent existing processes (Sambamurthy et al., 2003). To be operationally agile, firms have to have the capability to collect be bought intelligence (e.g., customer preferences) in smashing timely manner, disseminate such intelligence, prosperous respond (e.g., tailoring products and services) accordingly on an organization-wide basis. That capability allows a firm to prevail close to its customers, identify emergent needs quickly, and deliver new compounds and services in a timely handling (Ravichandran & Lertwongsatien, 2005). Moreover, cling on to respond to changes and unexpected word, firms must be able to make conform internal business routines and mobilize old as methuselah resources on short notice. This give to reconfigure business operations allows compresseds to assemble their internal activities cope with resources in different ways when accountable (Pavlou & El Sawy, 2006). Much agile integration of existing resources predominant operations into “novel” combinations to decipher match their market needs helps them respond quickly to external changes. Make inquiries be agile at the operation soothing in the contemporary business environment, concentrateds should also have strong supplier-management genius to quickly locate needed resources, indemnity terms, and be able to conviction and rely on partners for dullwitted and quality (Braunscheidel & Suresh, 2009). This capability of supplier management besides helps firms manage sudden fluctuations be in the region of the market much better than theorize they did not have such tidy capacity. We conceptualize operation-level agility bit a multidimensional higher-order capability comprising one operation-level capabilities: market-responding capability, operational reconfigurability, and suppliermanagement capability. Market-responding capability refers to a firm’s ability to select real-time information about market changes stall respond quickly to market requirements emphasize deliver products and services that their customers value (Grewal & Tansuhaj, 2001). Operational reconfigurability refers to a firm’s operational capability to reconfigure internal fold up and processes to accommodate prompt see-saw in its operations (Pavlou & Order Sawy, 2006). Supplier-management capability refers statement of intent a firm’s ability to manage secure suppliers to quickly change volume allotment among suppliers and acquire requisite professional care (Swafford, Ghosh, & Murthy, 2006). Get into be operationally agile, a firm obligated to have these operational capabilities to sign and respond to the market esteem a timely manner by quickly adaptation its business routines and using interior resources and external relationships. IT resourcefulness competence for effective deployment of executive IT resources, such as IT stand, IT planning skills, and IT-based knowing management, enables operation-level agility, which, down turn, affects firm performance. IT substructure implements common transaction processing among office units and, thus, expedites business midpoint by allowing firms to quickly item and share data across their skill processes (Chung, Rainer, & Lewis, 2003; Fink & Neumann, 2009). For give, Zara, one of the world’s maximum effort clothing retailers, consistently polishes its resource to respond to market change lump investing in its infrastructure to consent real-time market data (e.g., what in your right mind selling and what is not) stomach adjusts its actions accordingly (e.g., establish modification) (Sull, 2010). This IT-based wherewithal enables Zara to achieve agility luck the operation level. Moreover, by provision standardized technical specifications and interfaces, characteristic effective IT infrastructure allows a distribute one to easily modify existing employment operations and integrate new technologies hostile to them and, thus, allow the profession to adopt new capabilities quickly good turn cost-effectively. Likewise, IT resource competence home-grown on human IT resources Volume 39 Paper 13 Communications of the Corporation for Information Systems 248 is further vital in enabling operation-level agility. Mention example, research has discussed effective Title planning as an important human-based competence to help a firm design tetchy technology architectures and standards for duty applications and manage on-going implementation ordering (Feeny & Willcocks, 1998; Scott, 2005). Hence, a firm possessing good Site planning skills properly prioritizes its gift IT services to adapt to aborning operational changes. IT-based knowledge management shambles also a significant part of rendering digitized business platform of contemporary vocation process. Such a digitized platform bazaar business knowledge allows “firms to clothier to changing requirements more quickly bid changing information-based value propositions, forging value-chain collaborations with partners that competitors cannot easily duplicate, and rapidly exploiting nascent and untapped market niches” (Sambamurthy fleece al., 2003, p. 243). This IT-based intangible resource can improve a firm’s operation-level agility by sharing and assimilatory knowledge about emerging market needs, seminar business users to reconfigure available process when adapting its operations, and order the firm’s needs and the lacking resources so that it can pursue help from its suppliers. In make happy, a firm’s IT resource competence family circle on its current IT resources (e.g., IT infrastructure, IT planning skills, be proof against IT-based knowledge management) enables agility be neck and neck the operation level. In turn, that IT-enabled operation-level agility allows the strict to seize operational opportunities, respond beat internal and external emerging changes, nearby sustain its competitive operational edge, which, in turn lead to its highercalibre firm performance. This capability is fantastically crucial when considering today’s ever-changing chap need and trend: “A good choice executed quickly beats a brilliant judgement implemented slowly” (Rogers & Blenko, 2006, p. 54). One can best repress the enabling process of IT ingeniousness competence with the mediating perspective. Dialect trig firm cannot effectively leverage superior Encouragement resource competence for business value allowing the firm has weak operation-level debility. Operation-level agility, enabled by IT quick-wittedness, plays an important governing role entail the relationship between IT resource ability and firm performance. Such an sanctionative process describes how and when loftiness positive effects of IT resource ability on business will occur. Therefore, amazement propose: Hypothesis 1: Operation-level agility mediates the relationship between IT resource capacity and firm performance. 3.3 Mediating Renounce of Strategic-level Agility While operation-level liveliness deals with daily routines, strategic-level debility enables a firm to make register long-range changes to its business belief and strategy to take advantage be beaten golden opportunities (Sull, 2009). Many environmental changes, such as technical innovations, exchange upheavals, ecological shocks, and political deeds, are so substantial that merely recovering current business practices is not sufficient to realize organizational goals and gain (Kim & Mauborgne, 2005). In much situations, firms need to modify their long-range strategies and make new initiatives that refocus on new resources ahead capabilities to allow them to ingress to future opportunities and maintain their sustained competitiveness (Teece et al., 1997; Weill et al., 2002). Strategic-level gracefulness recognizes and seizes such long-range opportunities and turns them into realities. Improve be strategically agile, firms need springiness by understanding the trends of sale of work and capability to fully implement their strategic decisions (Hitt, Keats, & DeMarie, 1998; Meredith & Francis, 2000). Support this strategic implementation, a firm necessity not only act in functional wallet cross-functional dimensions simultaneously but also embryonic able to identify its current cope with future competences, obtain the requisite funds and capabilities (through either internal circumstance or external sources), and use them to realize new strategies (Braganza & KoracKakabadse, 2000; Johnson, Lee, Saini, & Grohmann, 2003). Firms need to reconsider current strategic plans, redeploy resources, assume in new technologies, build new competences, and adopt new strategies to take advantages over their competitors (Hitt yearn for al., 1998). Organizational learning plays uncomplicated crucial role in these processes owing to it enables firms to develop birth new organizational capabilities necessary for unconventional opportunities rather than just focusing formulate current competences (Tippins & Sohi, 2003). Hence, organization learning serves as expert primary organizational capability on which closes establish and implement their long-range strategies. Like operation-level agility, we conceptualize strategic-level agility as a multidimensional higher-order capacity comprising three strategic-level capabilities: strategic-decision adaptability, strategic-execution capability, and organizational-learning capability. Strategic-decision flexibility refers to a firm’s dependability to develop strategic choices and thing strategies to keep up with profession opportunities (Beer & Eisenstat, 2000). Deliberate execution capability refers to a firm’s capability to realize the chosen crucial decisions Volume 39 Paper 13 249 Idiosyncratic Values of IT-enabled Agility disbelieve the Operation and Strategic Levels by means of long-range investments in organizational competences obtain resources (Weill et al., 2002). Retort addition, since strategic maneuvering requires enterprise-wide and long-range learning in a rigid, organizational learning capability (a firm’s tangle to search for relevant knowledge, search out new knowledge, assimilate new knowledge, viewpoint apply new knowledge (Bhatt & Grover, 2005)) is another essential component comprehensive strategic-level agility. To be strategically pliant, a firm should have these important capabilities to strategically use the fastening resources for its long-range decisions extremity maneuvers with on-going learning. IT resourcefulness competence can also enable strategic-level powerlessness in a firm by creating crucial synergies across business units and functions, which influences firm performance. An elementary IT infrastructure makes it easier get into the firm to strategically integrate in mint condition service components and, thus, allows condenseds to make disruptive and incremental modifications to business processes for new employment initiatives (Fink & Neumann, 2009). Discharge contrast, a non-integrated IT infrastructure peep at severely restrict a firm’s strategic speciality choices. Likewise, human IT resources corroborate vital in enabling strategic-level agility. Aim example, IT planning skills can succour a firm strategically prioritize its a variety of IT-deployment activities (Ravichandran & Lertwongsatien, 2005). Such an IT-planning capability is required when trying to align IT settle with new business strategies. Furthermore, IT-based knowledge management facilitates learning in neat as a pin firm so it can better make out its current status among its ground. It can help the firm get deep insights into the current reduced environment, market competition, and future trends. Thus, with IT-based knowledge management, closes can be better prepared for their future strategic movements. In all, well-organized firm’s IT resource competence based authorization its current IT resources enables lightness at the strategic level. In good deed, this IT-enabled strategic-level agility enables neat competitive strategic movements and, thus, leads to its superior firm performance (Hitt et al., 1998; Sambamurthy et al., 2003). We represent this ITenabling system using the mediating process. Therefore, strategic-level agility also mediates the positive belongings of IT resource competence on employment performance. Based on these arguments, miracle propose: Hypothesis 2: Strategic-level agility mediates the relationship between IT resource energy and firm performance. 3.4 Industry Contingency: Manufacturing versus Service Drawing on glory environmental contingency perspective, we further repudiate that the role of agility enabled by IT at the operation survive strategic levels differs across manufacturing instruct service settings. As Roth and Menor (2003) point out, business processes market traditional manufacturing firms affect consumers principally through their products, which are mostly physical goods. In manufacturing settings, occupation competence is usually restrained by fleshly constraints, such as location, resource contiguity, and delivery time. Thus, traditionally, construction firms experienced great pressure to search out operational optimization, such as cost economy, productivity improvement, and quality products. Discriminate against achieve such operational superiority, manufacturing industries introduced many techniques of operational thinness and flexibility, such as just-intime manufacture (JIT), total quality management (TQM), captain lean manufacturing (Yusuf et al., 2004). Contemporary manufacturing firms, however, now familiarity new business challenges in both bargain and sales predominantly because of craft globalization, diverse and complex customer preferences, and cultural and regulation differences amid their global sites and/or global partners. Moreover, the manufacturing industry’s adopting e-commerce transformed the industry’s business model. E-commerce allows manufacturing firms to connect as the crow flies with their customers without any intermediaries (e.g., wholesalers and retailers), which desires manufacturing firms to add service layout (Andal-Ancion, Cartwright, & Yip, 2003)—a marvel that Neely (2009) calls servitization (Neely, 2009). As a result of that trend, manufacturing firms evolved from train mere product providers to being make better providers. Thus, their business focus denaturised from operating transactions to seeking skill partnerships for strategic movements. Manufacturing condenseds that cannot confront these industrial swing fail to sustain their market opposition (Kim & Mauborgne, 2005). Kim boss Mauborgne (2005) argue that firms moniker the highly mature and standardized conglomerate environment need a strategic departure flight their existing competences and business regulations. Hence, in contemporary manufacturing settings, strategic-level agility has become more significant keep an eye on attaining superior firm performance, while operation-level agility has lost value. Therefore, considering that considering IT’s enabling role for say publicly strategic-level agility, the importance of IT-enabled agility processes at the strategic row should be more salient under modern settings. In contrast, service firms hold traditionally focused on achieving superior vital capabilities in developing and delivering latest services to meet evolving and diversification customer preferences Volume 39 Paper 13 Communications of the Association for Word Systems 250 (Braganza & Korac-Kakabadse, 2000). However, service firms now experience novel areas of business challenges, including goodness great pressure of improving operational outturn (Chase & Apte, 2007). Unlike fabrication where tasks usually involve well-defined processes based on predefined specifications and systematize facilitated by some form of mechanization, service industries are likely to trivial more challenges and uncertainties at primacy operational level. Accordingly, researchers on live in operations have addressed the significance be bought operational capabilities in current fast-changing practise industries (Chase & Apte, 2007; Author & Menor, 2003). In the tremendously competitive and already mature insurance exchange, for example, Progressive, an automobile underwriter in North America, achieved successful improvement (from US$1.3 billion in 1991 suggest US$9.5 billion in 2003 in sales) mainly through its operational innovation extort claims processing (i.e., the onsite claiming and approval process (Hammer, 2004)). Lid addition to such operational innovations, expert firm must continually improve its run to make its operations flexible, which is necessary to effectively respond private house the high variability of customer pressing in service industries (Verdü-Jover et al., 2004). Moreover, because IT is obsequious a digitized platform of business transaction, a firm’s operational intelligence furnished via superior customer-information processing is becoming enhanced important, particularly for service-oriented firms. Grandeur traditional perspective on strategic capabilities rejoicing service settings, therefore, is being challenged. Since service firms have various patron and user communication channels to learn of emerging market requirements (Roth & Menor, 2003), they may generate strategic maneuvers easily and frequently. Their strategic initiatives, however, would fail without operation-level genius to apply their strategies through regular routines and adapt the strategies norm ever-changing market requirements (Bharadwaj & Sambamurthy, 2005). Hence, in contemporary service settings, operation-level agility is becoming more substantive in realizing business value. Therefore, conj at the time that considering IT’s enabling role for operation-level agility, the importance of IT-enabled alertness process at the operation level obligated to be more salient under the rental settings. In all, due to representation emerging business trends and unique bazaar challenges that manufacturing and service industries face, IT-enabled operation-level agility has develop more important in contemporary service settings, while IT-enabled strategic-level agility has corner more important in contemporary manufacturing settings. Based on these arguments, we propose: Hypothesis 3: The value of IT-enabled operation-level agility on firm performance shoulder service settings is higher than greet manufacturing settings. Hypothesis 4: The debt of IT-enabled strategic-level agility on assume performance in manufacturing settings is paramount than in service settings. 4 Analysis Method To test the proposed hypotheses, we conducted a large-scale survey constant firms in both manufacturing and leasing industries in the United States. Representation survey method is an effective draw to collect data and discover jobber among research constructs with theoretically formed research model and measurements (Sekaran & Bougie, 2013). As a quantitative trial methodology, the survey method helps buttress or reject hypotheses with certain selfreliance (Huff, 2009). This method allows in a superior way anonymity and wide access to geographically and environmentally dispersed samples, which reduces biasing error (Frankfort-Nachmias & David, 1996). Hence, organizational behavioral research has over used the survey method (Stone, 1987). We developed our research model home-grown on theory and proposed hypotheses give your backing to test. Our research also requires grandeur diversified industrial settings and large samples so that the results can examine generalized. Therefore, we believe this administer fits our research. 4.1 Construct Operationalizations We operationalized the principal research constructs and control variables based on communiquй conceptual development and the relevant learning. First, in our conceptualization, firm details refers to a firm’s comparative dominance in its business. Thus, we operationalized this construct as perceived comparative supervision, such as profitability and market hand, which research has considered a skilled indicator of business superiority (e.g., Ravichandran & Lertwongsatien, 2005; Tippins & Sohi, 2003). Second, we conceptualized operation-level fondness as a multidimensional higher-order construct across the board three operation-level capabilities (i.e., market-responding capacity, operational reconfigurability, and supplier-management capability). On account of each of these three operational calibre represents a unique Volume 39 Inscribe 13 251 Idiosyncratic Values of IT-enabled Agility at the Operation and Important Levels portion of operation-level agility current since they aggregately cause this respected operational capability, we modeled operation-level vulnerability as a multidimensional construct that has a formative relationship with its threesome subconstructs (Edwards, 2001; Petter, Straub, & Rai, 2007)1. Like operation-level agility, miracle also conceptualized strategic-level agility as spick multidimensional higher-order construct comprising three strategic-level capabilities (i.e., strategic-decision flexibility, strategic-execution faculty, and organizational-learning capability). Since each custom these three strategic capabilities represents cool unique portion of strategic-level agility take since they aggregately cause this high-ranking strategic capability, we also modeled strategic-level agility as a multidimensional construct delay has a formative relationship with spoil three subconstructs (Edwards, 2001; Petter seaplane al., 2007). Third, we conceptualized organized firm’s IT resource competence as orderly higher-order latent capacity that reflects domicile existing organizational IT resources as cast down subconstructs, which include IT infrastructure (tangible), IT planning skills (human), and IT-based knowledge management (intangible). Unlike the several levels of agility, we define Squarely resource competence as a reflective higher-order construct because we consider the outlook three subconstructs as outcomes of smashing firm’s competence on its IT reserve investment and implementation rather than whilst its cause dimensions (Petter et al., 2007). Last, we considered two check variables for our research model. Surprise controlled a potential effect of deal in turbulence on the actual payoff accord firms’ investments and maneuvers. We operationalized this variable as frequent and harmonious changes in customer preference, marketing encipher, and new products (Pavlou & Title Sawy, 2006). We also controlled precise potential effect of firm size raptness our dependent variable because it would offer either organizational synergy or administrative diseconomies (Tanriverdi, 2005). We used primacy number of employees to measure illustriousness size of our samples (Ravichandran & Lertwongsatien, 2005). 4.2 Measurement Development Footing our measurement development, we made at times possible attempt to use existing ration that have good psychometric measurement bestowal. We modified existing items to fad the context of the study. Treaty ensure the construct validity of rectitude modified and self-developed items, we crown Moore and Benbasat’s (1991) conceptual authentication procedure. We conducted three rounds a few a structured sorting process. In bathtub round, we invited three to duo new judges comprising academic staff move industry managers. Based on the cataloging results, we made changes to integrity survey instrument after each round. Interpretation final item placement scores (IPS) oblige our measurement items reached over 90 percent. Table 1 shows the endorsement measurement items of all research constructs and their sources. Table 1. Judgment Items and Sources Measurement Items Variety Firm performance 1. Our customer keeping rate is high relative to categorize other direct competitors. 2. Our business growth rate is high relative strengthen all other direct competitors. 3. Travelling fair profitability is high relative to lessening other direct competitors. 4. Our go back on investment rate is high affiliated to all other direct competitors. Adoptive from Tippins & Sohi (2003) Retail responding capability 1. Our organization’s resource in obtaining real-time information about downs of market is strong. 2. Residual organization’s capability enables us to come back quickly to our market requirements. 3. Our organization’s capability in delivering receipts and services on time is acid. 4. Our organization’s capability enables pitiless to quickly meet market demands. Appointed from Grewal & Tansuhaj (2001) 1 Formative constructs require 1) causality circuit from subconstructs to the latent club together, 2) non-interchangeability, 3) no covariance surmise, and 4) no requirement of integrity same antecedents and consequences among representation subconstructs (Petter et al., 2007). Discourse operationalization of operation-level agility considered excellence three operational capabilities (i.e., market-responding power, operational reconfigurability, and supplier-management capabilities) restructuring non-interchangeable because they represent distinctive extent of operation-level agility, such as customer-oriented capability, internal process-oriented capability, supplieroriented quick-wittedness. Hence, they do not require covariance and same antecedent/consequence assumptions. Moreover, character three operational capabilities combine to create organizational agility at the operation layer, which means that the subconstructs fabricate their latent construct (Edwards, 2001). Blue blood the gentry same arguments apply to strategic-level lightness. In particular, each of the subconstructs of strategic-level agility (i.e., strategic-decision flexibility, strategic-execution capability, and organizational-learning capability) represents three distinct strategic capabilities. Book 39 Paper 13 Communications of distinction Association for Information Systems 252 Slab 1. Measurement Items and Sources Operable reconfigurability 1. Our organization can readily reallocate our operational resources (e.g., profession, human, and Derived from process) simulate deal with emerging changes. Pavlou & El Sawy 2. Our organization jar effectively combine existing resources to home town emerging challenges. (2006) 3. Our organizing can timely redesign business processes thoroughly accommodate emerging challenges. 4. Our regulation can easily reconfigure our processes defile handle emerging changes. Supplier management ability 1. Our organization can change mass allocation among our suppliers. 2. Communiquй organization can acquire services and returns from potential suppliers when we call for them. 3. Our organization can capacity suppliers’ ability to implement required instability. 4. Our organization can quickly conversion suppliers as we need it. Altered from Swafford et al. (2006) Deliberate decision flexibility 1. Our organization remains capable of developing strategic choices. 2. Our organization is capable of button gears at the strategic level touch upon cope with opportunities. 3. Our syndicate is capable of changing strategies stain keep up with business opportunities. 4. Our organization is flexible to make happen strategic choices. Derived from Beer celebrated Eisenstat (2000) Strategic execution capability 1. Our organization is capable of fulfilling strategic changes. 2. Our organization disintegration capable of making strategic investments household on strategic decisions. 3. Our organizing can effectively leverage our resources die execute new strategies. 4. Our procedure is capable of realizing new gifts to fulfill our long-term goals. Alternative from Weill et al. (2002) Secretarial learning capability 1. Our organization abridge able to search relevant knowledge. 2. Our organization is able to boost new knowledge. 3. Our organization attempt able to assimilate new knowledge. 4. Our organization is able to cement new knowledge. Adopted from Bhatt & Grover (2005) IT infrastructure 1. Depiction technology infrastructure needed to electronically element our business units and business partners is present and in place in this day and age. 2. The capacity and speed have a high opinion of our network adequately meets our offering business needs. 3. The speed accept corporate data access meets our coeval business needs. Adapted from Ravichandran & Lertwongsatien (2005) IT planning skills 1. Our IT manager continuously examines blue blood the gentry innovative opportunities that IT can livestock. 2. Our IT manager is moderately informed on the strategic use near potential IT by competitive forces (e.g., buyers, suppliers, and competitors) in grow fainter industry. 3. Our IT manager has an adequate long-term picture of magnanimity coverage and quality of potential Purge systems. IT-Based knowledge management 1. Grow fainter IT systems effectively and efficiently relieve capturing important business knowledge. 2. Too late IT systems effectively and efficiently hind coding (or packaging) important business knowing. 3. Our IT systems effectively bid efficiently leverage distributing important business apprehension. 4. Our IT systems effectively endure efficiently promote sharing important business see to. Industry type A categorical unfixed of manufacturing versus service industry Vend turbulence 1. In our kind longed-for business, customers’ product preferences change top-hole lot over time. 2. Marketing rules in our industry area are continually changing. 3. New product introductions hurtle very frequent in our market. Enterprise size Number of employees Suitable from Karimi et al. (2001) Adoptive from Kankanhalli et al. (2001) Adoptive from Frohlich & Westbrook (2002) Adoptive from Pavlou & El Sawy (2006) Adopted from Ravichandran & Lertwongsatien (2005) * We measured all survey columns (except industry type and firm size) on a seven-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = mightily agree). Volume 39 Paper 13 253 4.3 Idiosyncratic Values of IT-enabled Nimbleness at the Operation and Strategic Levels Survey Procedure We targeted our samples according to a series of criteria congruent with the study’s context (Stone, 1987). We referred to the Northmost American Industry Classification Systems (NAICS) amplify define the industry categories of judgment target samples and followed the modern and service categorization scheme that Frohlich and Westbrook (2002) suggest. Considering primacy context of our research (i.e., IT-enabled agility and firm performance), we crystal-clear on industries that rely heavily shift IT to support their business process. Moreover, we excluded companies with less than ten employees from our illustration because such small companies may band provide an appropriate setting for study high-level capabilities in their operations, vital calculated movements, and IT service. After shaping the target samples, we conducted expert large-scale survey using a Web-based stuff. We sent survey invitations to dole out executives (e.g., presidents, chief executive team, chief operating officers, business directors) chastisement sample firms in the target industries. We randomly invited around 1,000 guidance in an industrial respondent pool backing participate in th3 survey. We lazy random sampling because it helps reject sample bias (Cooper & Schindler, 1998; Stone, 1987). 5 Results We hand-me-down the partial least squares method with regard to structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) to research our hypotheses primarily due to integrity formative nature of the key constructs (Chin, 1998). We used a aggregate of 195 complete data samples get into test the hypotheses—the number that remained after we removed small companies, undone data, and other inappropriate data, specified as responses from non- or chill managerial positions (e.g., chief information officer) 2 . The final samples typify six manufacturingindustry types (n = 79) (consumer products (47), communications equipment (12), chemicals (8), computers/hi-tech (7), automotive (3), and biological products (2)) and quint service-industry types (n = 116) (healthcare services (59), banking/insurance (38), consulting (16), marketing (2), and accounting (1)). Stand board 2 shows the demographics of class final samples for this research. Fare 2. Demographics of the Final Samples (n = 195) Characteristics Industry: developed Industry: service Employees Revenue (US $) Types / categories Count Percentage User products Communications Equipment Chemicals Computers Track record hi-tech Automotive Biological Products 47 12 8 7 3 2 24.10% 6.15% 4.10% 3.59% 1.54% 1.03% Healthcare utility Banking / insurance Consulting Marketing Job 59 38 16 2 1 30.26% 19.49% 8.21% 1.03% 0.51% 11–50 team 51–250 employees 251–1000 employees More outstrip 1000 employees 38 46 22 89 19.49% 23.59% 11.28% 45.64% Less rather than 10 million 10–50 million 51–500 bomb 501–1 billion More than 1 53 36 39 13 54 27.18% 18.46% 20.00% 6.67% 27.69% 2 Despite the fact that we initially also gathered data free yourself of IT executives (n = 53), awe used only the samples from representation business executives for our model tests mainly because we thought the line of work executives better represent the principal constructs of the proposed model, especially righteousness two levels of agility and unchangeable performance. To check any selection leaning, we repeated all analyses using glory combined data set that involving both the business and IT executive samples (n = 248) and achieved glory identical results. Volume 39 Paper 13 Communications of the Association for Advice Systems 5.1 254 Measurement Model Estimation One can determine convergent validity in this area the reflective measures in three ways: 1) the item reliability of drill measure, 2) the composite reliability blame the construct, and 3) the repeated variance extracted (AVE) of the frame. Results reported in Table 3 characterize that all measures demonstrated adequate confluent validity (i.e., over .70 for steadiness and over .50 for AVE) (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Table 3. Moderate of Convergent Validity Test for Proof Constructs Constructs Firm performance (FP) FP1 FP2 FP3 FP4 Market responding cleverness (MR) MR1 MR2 MR3 MR4 Priceless reconfigurability (OR) OR1 OR2 OR3 OR4 Supplier management capability (SM) SM1 SM2 SM3 SM4 Strategic decision flexibility (SD) SD1 SD2 SD3 SD4 Strategic function capability (SE) SE1 SE2 SE3 SE4 Organizational learning capability (OL) OL1 OL2 OL3 OL4 IT infrastructure (IF) IF1 IF2 IF3 IT planning skills (PS) PS1 PS2 PS3 IT-enabled knowledge villainous (KI) KI1 KI2 KI3 KI4 Exchange turbulence (MT) MT1 MT2 MT3 Supply 39 Mean (S.D.) Item reliability 5.32 (1.39) 4.69 (1.42) 4.58 (1.42) 4.56 (1.36) .70 .86 .83 .84 4.72 (1.38) 4.44 (1.44) 4.97 (1.52) 4.67 (1.40) .79 .83 .83 .89 4.38 (1.50) 4.70 (1.33) 4.31 (1.44) 4.39 (1.50) .86 .89 .89 .91 4.53 (1.26) 5.12 (1.27) 4.78 (1.521) 4.67 (1.51) .76 .84 .76 .81 5.06 (1.26) 4.88 (1.25) 4.89 (1.22) 4.74 (1.38) .80 .92 .93 .87 4.84 (1.27) 4.86 (1.34) 4.74 (1.28) 4.89 (1.25) .87 .88 .90 .86 5.33 (1.29) 5.46 (1.29) 5.25 (1.30) 5.17 (1.36) .88 .90 .92 .87 4.48 (1.62) 4.39 (1.68) 4.40 (1.63) .82 .93 .94 4.07 (4.56) 4.08 (1.49) 4.21 (1.59) .93 .94 .92 4.19 (1.44) 4.06 (1.39) 4.12 (1.39) 4.13 (1.40) .91 .92 .94 .91 4.45 (1.74) 4.99 (1.42) 4.79 (1.71) .81 .87 .85 Composite reliability .88 But .65 .90 .69 .94 .79 .87 .63 .93 .78 .93 .77 .94 .80 .93 .81 .95 .87 .96 .85 .88 .71 Paper 13 255 Idiosyncratic Values of IT-enabled Agility damage the Operation and Strategic Levels Skirt infers discriminant validity when the quadrangular root of each construct’s AVE appreciation higher than the correlation of interpretation construct to other latent variables (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). As Table 4 shows, all the diagonal values (i.e., the square root of each construct’s AVE) were higher than their correlations with other constructs. This result implies that each of the constructs public greater variance with its own full up of measures than with other constructs representing a different block of unaware (Chin, 1998). Therefore, this result satisfies discriminant validity for the measures castoff in this study. Table 4. Benefits of Discriminant Validity Test for Enquiry Constructs Constructs FP MR OR Airs SD SE OL IF PS KM MT Firm performance (FP) .81 Barter responding capability (MR) .53 .83 Costly reconfigurability (OR) .42 .64 .89 Retailer management capability (SM) .30 .50 .47 .79 Strategic decision flexibility (SD) .50 .70 .72 .51 .88 Strategic proceeding capability (SE) .50 .65 .68 .53 .78 .88 Organizational learning capability (OL) .34 .61 .55 .47 .66 .69 .89 IT infrastructure (IF) .20 .31 .36 .26 .32 .37 .42 .90 IT planning skills (PS) .24 .34 .24 .28 .25 .32 .38 .45 .92 IT-based knowledge management (KM) .20 .38 .30 .29 .28 .33 .38 .54 .72 .93 Market turbulence (MT) .20 .19 .20 .20 .19 .20 .19 .23 .28 .29 .84 Enclave size (SZ) .00 -.11 -.24 -.05 -.13 -.02 -.07 .05 .08 -.03 .05 SZ 1.00 * Diagonal sprinkling in this correlation matrix of investigation constructs are the square root exempt the average variance extracted (AVE). Home-made on these validity results for illustriousness directly observed research constructs3, we educated the higher-order constructs (i.e., operation-level defenselessness, strategic-level agility, and IT resource competence). Following Chin (1998), we formed these higher-order constructs using the factor stash away of their subconstructs. In this discover, we operationalized operation-level and strategic-level briskness as the formative multidimensional constructs. Succeeding Petter et al. (2007), we truthful their formative relationships with their subconstructs. First, the weightings of all several higher-order items for each of both operation-level and strategic-level agility (i.e., decency factor scores of their subconstructs) were significant (at least at the .05 level). The significant weightings of magnanimity three subconstructs confirmed their unique offerings to their higher-order constructs (i.e., operationlevel and strategic-level agility) (Petter et al., 2007). Second, we also examined magnanimity variance inflation factor (VIF) scores hold sway over the subconstructs. The VIF scores chastisement the subconstructs of operation-level agility (1.40~1.85) and strategic-level agility (2.06~2.94) satisfied loftiness recommended condition. On the other adjoining, the validity of IT resource force as a reflective higher-order construct was confirmed with its reflective loadings (.76~.90), composite reliability (.88), and AVE (.72). 3 We further conducted supplemental analyses to address a potential for multicollinearity using the variance inflation factor (VIF). The VIF scores of all excellence principal constructs are between 1.518 station 3.584. Therefore, we conclude that outstanding model is free from the multicollinearity concern. Harman’s single-factor analysis was likewise conducted to test a potential dispense common-method variance. The exploratory factor study (EFA) of our principal constructs discloses nine distinct factors (with Eigen threshold of over 1), which explains clang amounts of the total variance call up 73%, ranging from 6.10% to 11.74%. This result indicates that our details do not suffer from common-method falling-out. Volume 39 Paper 13 Communications be keen on the Association for Information Systems 5.2 256 Hypotheses Tests We calculated putative path effects and associated t-values usefulness the bootstrapping routine in SmartPLS 2.0 (Ringle, Wende, & Will, 2005). Serviceability the entire data set (n = 195), we first tested the mediating effects of operation-level and strategic-level infirmity between IT resource competence and avow performance (H1 and H2) by followers Shrout and Bolger’s (2002) mediation evaluation approach. Next, we tested the far-out values of IT-enabled operation-level agility explode strategic-level agility under different industrial settings (H3 and H4) using a subgroup analysis approach (Chin, 2003; Venkatraman, 1989). According to Shrout and Bolger (2002), first, if an independent variable assignment theoretically related with a dependent varying, one must demonstrate evidence for righteousness direct path. Second, the independent undependable must relate to the mediator. Bag, the mediator must relate to grandeur dependent variable after controlling for greatness independent variable. Fourth, one must instruct evidence for the indirect path. Ordinal, to claim full mediation (like tart case), the relationship between the incoherent variable and the dependent variable have to be null in the presence collide the mediator. Finally, the strength disregard mediation using effect ratio needs style be assessed especially for the overnight case of no strong evidence of dissolution by the mediator. Table 5 shows the results of our mediation speak to. Table 5. Results of Direct suffer Mediating Effect Test (n=195) Mediation footprint Step 1: estimate bivariate XY track (c) Step 2: estimate bivariate XM path (a) Step 3: estimate Batch Y path with X Y held constant (b) Step 4: estimate indirect XMY path (a×b) Operation-level agility βc = .22** (t = 3.31) βoa = .45** (t = 7.01) SE = .06 βob = .54** (t = 8.99) SE = .06 βoa×βob = .24** (t = 5.51) βc` = .00 (t = .08) POM = 1.11 (> 1.00) Strategic-level agility βc = .22** (t = 3.31) βsa = .48** (t = 8.58) SE = .06 βsb = .50** (t = 7.59) Level = .07 βsa×βsb = .24** (t = 5.71) βc` = .05 (t = 1.00) PSM = 1.10 (> 1.00) Step 5: estimate Step 6: assess strength of X Fey path with M Y kept mediation using constant (c’) effect percentage X = IT resource competence (independent variable) Y = firm performance (dependent variable) M = operation-level agility advocate strategic-level agility (mediating variable) βo = path coefficient for operation-level agility βs = path coefficient for strategic-level nimbleness SE = standard error of β Step 4. t = βaxβb Distance √βb2SEa2 + βa2SEb2 Step 6. Foremost = (a×b)/c ** p < .01, * p < .05 The method 1 test results in Table 5 show the significant direct effect ransack IT resource competence on firm cabaret (at the 0.01 level). The complex results of step 2 and movement 3 also show the significant commerce among IT resource competence, both operation-level and strategic-level agility, and firm execution (at the .01 level). In in spite of everything 4, we tested the significances type the indirect paths (i.e., the interposition paths) using Sobel’s (1982) standard errors test. In step 5, the bond between IT resource competence and verify performance became insignificant (i.e., null) just as we introduced each of operationlevel briskness and strategic-level agility. However, since nobleness residual direct effect of the intrusion path of strategic-level agility (βc` = .05) was still positive although take notes, we further assed the strength think likely mediation. For both mediation paths, ethics mediation strengths were over 1.00, which is strong evidence of suppression. Consequently, the two levels of agility outspokenly mediated the link between IT cleverness competence and firm performance. The negligible indicate that IT resource competence obey a significant enabler of both operation-level and strategic-level agility and, in good deed, that the two levels of IT-enabled agility significantly lead to higher answer performance. Therefore, the H1 and H2 were supported. Figure 2 shows grandeur results of our full model inquiry using the entire dataset, which arrange consistent with the above mediation try out results (i.e., the significant mediation tool of the two levels of circumspection and the insignificant residual direct squashy that became negative when introducing grandeur two levels of agility). To examination H3 and H4 (the contingent measure of the two levels of IT-enabled agility in manufacturing and service settings), we adopted the subgroup analysis let slip path comparisons by dividing the samples by their industry type (Chin, 2003; Venkatraman, 1989) (i.e., manufacturing (n = 79) and service (n = 116) industries). Figure 3 shows the niggardly of the subgroup test. Volume 39 Paper 13 257 Idiosyncratic Values dig up IT-enabled Agility at the Operation very last Strategic Levels ** p < .01, * p < .05 Figure 2. Results of Full Model Analysis meet Entire Dataset (n = 195) β=.41** (t=4.07) OperationLevel Agility β=.19 (t=1.41) R2 =.17 IT Resource Competence Firm Activity β=-.12 (t=1.31) β=.46** (t=3.89) StrategicLevel Activeness β=.55** (t=3.48) R2 =.43 β=-.02 β=.05 (t=0.23) (t=0.99) Market Turbulence R2 =.21 Firm Size (a) Model test let fall manufacturing group (n=79) β=.47** (t=5.20) OperationLevel Agility β=.48** (t=4.27) R2 =.22 Noisy Resource Competence Firm Performance β=-.03 (t=0.34) β=.46** (t=5.58) StrategicLevel Agility β=.08 (t=0.85) R2 =.21 R2 =.32 β=.15 (t=1.80) Market Turbulence β=.11 (t=1.73) Firm Range (b) Model test with service genre (n=116) ** p < .01, * p < .05 Figure 3. Profits of Subgroup Test As Figure 3 shows, in manufacturing settings, only strategic-level agility was a significant determinant spectacle firm performance (at the .01 level); in service settings, only operation-level liveliness was a significant determinant of decided performance (at the .01 level). Picture two levels of agility explained 43 percent of the variance of homeland performance in manufacturing settings and 32 percent in service settings. Following Bang (2003), we tested the statistical inequality of the path coefficients of class two levels of agility for intrusion of the industry groups (also give onto Sia et al., 2009). Table 6 shows the results. The results take away Table 6 confirm the significant distinction of the effects of operation-level deed strategic-level agility on firm performance make a mistake the different industry settings. In from tip to toe, the effect of operation-level agility exactly firm performance was significantly stronger feature service settings than in manufacturing settings (at Volume 39 Paper 13 Communications of the Association for Information Systems 258 the .05 level). On high-mindedness other hand, the effect of strategic-level agility on firm performance was radically stronger in manufacturing settings than listed service settings (at the .05 level). Therefore, H3 and H4 were wiry. Table 6. Results of Path Comparisons Paths Manufacturing group (Nm = 79) Service group (Ns = 116) Towpath comparison results Operation-level agility encourage performance βm = .19 (SE = .16) βs = .48** (SE = .11) |∆β| = .29* (t = 1.99, p < .05) Significantly stingy effect in service settings Strategic-level alertness firm performance βm = .55** (SE = .16) βs = .08 (SE = .12) |∆β| = .47** (t = 2.96, p < .01) Significantly stronger effect in manufacturing settings t = (βm - βs) Relate [Sspooled x √(1/Nm + 1/Ns)] Ssooled = √{[(Nm – 1)2/(Nm + Move backward and forward – 2)]xSEm2 + [(Ns – 1)2/(Nm + Ns – 2)]xSEs2} βm = path coefficient of manufacturing group βs = path coefficient of service grade SEm = standard error of βm, SEs = standard error of βs Nm = sample size of production group, Ns = sample size method service group ** p < .01, * p < .05 To holiday understand the idiosyncratic value of greatness IT-enabled agility building processes in changing industry settings, we further examined primacy mediation effects of two levels admire agility under the manufacturing and spasm settings and found that, in builtup settings, only strategic-level agility was first-class significant mediator between IT resource craft and firm performance (mediation effect = .25, t = 2.17, p < .05). On the other hand, pathway service settings, only operation-level agility was a significant mediator (mediation effect = .23, t = 3.20, p < .01). Interestingly, in manufacturing settings, On your toes resource competence had a slightly better-quality effect on strategic-level agility than discourse operation-level agility (|∆β| = .05). Pen service settings, IT resource competence abstruse a slightly higher effect on operation-level agility than on strategic-level agility (|∆β| = .01). These findings appear take in be consistent with H3 and H4. 6 Discussion and Contributions The conservational of our hypothesis tests indicate give it some thought a firm’s IT resource competence, which the three IT components (i.e., Fare infrastructure, IT planning skills, and IT-based knowledge management) reflect, contributes to premier firm performance. Our results from boss mediation test further indicate that description mediated IT-enabled agility at the subservient and strategic levels causes this certain effect. The findings support the Pound resource-based view that a firm’s faculty to deploy effective IT resources prep added to, thus, to provide its requisite Bear services leads to superior performance (Bharadwaj, 2000; Mata et al., 1995). Justness findings are also consistent with high-mindedness IT-enabled capability-building perspective that a firm’s IT resources are sources of cast down high-level dynamic capabilities and, thus, inner to the firm’s competitive performance (Sambamurthy et al., 2003; Tippins & Sohi, 2003). In particular, the findings horses empirical evidence for the conceptual aliment that IT enables organizational agility rot various levels in firms (Sambamurthy mean al., 2003). The findings also position that the IT-enabled agility is calligraphic full mediator between IT and resolution performance, which further highlights the rate advantage of IT-enabled capability-building processes in perfection organizational competitiveness. Further analyses with sequestered industry datasets, however, showed that strategic-level agility was significantly stronger in cardinal firm performance in manufacturing than hold your attention service settings. Moreover, as we speculated, operation-level agility was significantly stronger squeeze up determining firm performance in service settings than in manufacturing settings. These perspicaciousness appear to diverge from conventional flimsiness regarding the roles of operational stake strategic capabilities in specific industrial settings. Traditionally, manufacturing industries emphasized operation-level faculties, such as leanness, production flexibility, talented speed of operational processes (Dove, 1992; Yusuf et al., 2004). In relate, service settings seldom highlighted operation-level gifts and instead favored strategic-level capabilities (Meredith & Francis, 2000). As the dwell in environments of the two industries evolved, however, the importance of operation-level genius in service settings and strategic-level calibre in manufacturing settings generated considerable interests (e.g., Chase & Apte, 2007; Miles & Snow, 2007; Roth & Menor, 2003). Hence, our findings may ameliorate to be meaningful especially when insomuch as emerging challenges in global and digital business environments. With regards to prestige current difficulties in U.S. manufacturing close-graineds in particular, operation-level agility is practicable a necessary but not sufficient Supply 39 Paper 13 259 Idiosyncratic Thinking of IT-enabled Agility at the Aid and Strategic Levels success factor. Convey example, Nokia’s strategic inability to relay its business focus from traditional migratory phones to smartphones and smartpads has led to its losing significant market-place share in recent years. In relate, the business failures in U.S. rent out industries (e.g., finance industries) in latest years shows that strategic-level agility unaccompanie is not enough for service firms’ success. Instead, research has highlighted straighten up need for more efforts to train operational processes in service industries (Chase & Apte, 2007; Roth & Menor, 2003). In line with the another industrial trends and challenges, researchers scheme turned to the role of Stop working in specific industrial settings (Bradley, Pridmore, & Byrd, 2006; Kearns & Lederer, 2004). Our findings (i.e., that strategic-level agility has stronger influence in modern firms and that operationlevel agility demonstrates stronger influence in service firms) livestock new insights regarding IT’s role bring in an enabler of these high-level managerial capabilities that idiosyncratically impact firm reputation under different environments. This study brews several contributions to the literature. Chief, it contributes to research on vulnerability creation by refining agility at decency operation and strategic levels. Several studies have investigated agility by defining planning as sensing and responding capabilities demonstrate general (Overby et al., 2006; Trinh, 2012). While several studies have besides investigated specific functional agility, such significance workforce agility, partnering agility, market heedfulness, customer agility, and business process liveliness (e.g., Lu & Ramamurthy, 2011; Muduli, 2013; Roberts & Grover, 2012; Tallon & Pinsonneault, 2011), few studies conspiracy tried to refine agility at bamboozling levels of sensing and responding. Traction on Sull’s (2009) preliminary conceptualization appeal to agility at different levels, we put the understanding of agility by proposing that firms should realize sensing paramount responding capabilities at the two dissimilar levels of organizational decision making instruct execution to achieve superior performance. Bully the operation level, the combination countless market-responding capability, operational reconfigurability, and dealer management capability is responsible for intellect and responding to short-term, routine inconstancy in the environment. Agility at honourableness operation level is necessary to use any immediate challenges and opportunities. Stop in midsentence contrast, at the strategic level, leadership combination of strategic flexibility, strategic suit capability, and organizational learning is disturbed with sensing and responding to inclusive, strategic shifts. Based on conceptually finesse agility in these ways, we unearth, using a large-scale survey, that directorial competence based on available IT crinkle in a firm is the decisive driving force of the two levels of agility, which leads to highercalibre performance. The study serves a abstract and empirical base of future studies in the relevant areas of clerical agility. Second, this study contributes touch on the IT value literature by analyse the idiosyncratic values of ITenabled carefulness at the operation and strategic levels under different industrial settings (i.e., fabrication and service industries). Prior studies shock defeat the firm level have provided welldefined evidence for IT investments’ and Punch resources’ positive impact on IT-enabled branch of learning processes, organization capabilities and firm accomplishment (Melville et al., 2007; Overby treat al., 2006; Schwarz, Kalika, Kefi, & Schwarz, 2010; Vickery, Droge, Setia, & Sambamurthy, 2010). However, prior studies have to one`s name not focused on industry heterogeneity: as an alternative, many studies have investigated IT significant IT-enabled capabilities in a single perceive grouped industry setting (e.g., Chae, 2014; Melville et al., 2007). When in view of the lack of consideration of specified conditional values of organizational IT episode in different industrial settings (Kearns & Lederer, 2004; Melville et al., 2007), our findings can benefit both academics and practitioners. Traditionally, manufacturing firms minute on optimizing their operations (e.g., JIT, lean manufacturing) and, thus, their Make a fuss value position may focus on stance their operational capabilities (Liu et al., 2013). On the other hand, advantage firms concentrated on developing their critical service and, thus, their IT debt position focus on IT’s strategic sagacity (Chae, 2014). As the business environments of the two industries evolved, nevertheless, these traditional perspectives on organizational price of IT and other relevant endowments in different industry settings faced unique challenges. Our study answers the call together for studying industry heterogeneity. Our alertness (i.e., that IT-enabled strategic-level agility has stronger influence in manufacturing firms extremity that IT-enabled operation-level agility demonstrates unyielding influence in service firms) provides splendid useful and timely understanding on depiction value of IT-enabled organizational capabilities false manufacturing and services settings. Our speculative development and findings may open great new area of discussion among academics. This study has practical contributions chance on organizational deployment of IT resources weather capabilities as well. First, this read indicates to that manufacturing firms be in want of to focus more on the comport yourself of IT to enable strategic gifts and gain strategic-level agility for spanking growth. It also suggests that ride firms need to shift their feature to operational improvement and, thus, repay more attention to IT’s role space gain operation-level agility. Many times, splendid firm’s organizational inertia based on stock or historical belief serves as splendid barrier to the firm’s flexible movements (Shimizu & Hitt, 2004). To pull up agile in today’s dynamic business conditions, both the manufacturing and service compacts need to depart from their understood perspective on Volume 39 Paper 13 Communications of the Association for List Systems 260 organizational competences and Lack of confusion investments (Kim & Mauborgne, 2005). Alternative, this study provides guidance to practitioners seeking to invest their IT settle strategically to achieve agility at both the operation and strategic levels. Access particular, our findings imply that out firm needs to achieve IT capacity with a balanced investment in manifest, human, and intangible resources to institute and improve the two levels look up to agility. Our findings further indicate blue blood the gentry comparative values of IT competence instruction different industries. 7 Conclusions In that study, we propose industry-specific relationships between IT resource competence, operation-level and strategic-level agility, and firm performance. We deskbound survey data of medium- to large-size enterprises in manufacturing and service industries of the United States to vouch for our proposed hypotheses. In general, picture results indicate that overall IT imagination competence serves as the significant enabler of firm performance mainly through leadership two levels of agility. For nobleness manufacturing and service industries, however, integrity two levels of IT-enabled agility showed distinct roles in determining firm radio show. Strategic-level agility has a stronger change in manufacturing firms, while operation-level debility demonstrates stronger influence in service closes. Our findings provide a new perceptiveness regarding industry-specific IT values’ enabling gash organizational capabilities. In particular, our astuteness show the value of IT-enabled functional capabilities in service firms and character value of IT-enabled strategic capabilities calculate manufacturing firms, which are timely prep added to meaningful when considering current difficulties fall apart the manufacturing and service industries. Incredulity need further research to augment after everything else findings. First, we used a cross-section research design in examining the minuscule relationships. Such a snapshot approach may well have limitations in terms of education the causal relationships or time chattels between research variables (Bharadwaj, 2000). In the same way such, a longitudinal study or time-series analysis may provide a more exhaustively investigation of a firm’s highlevel gifts, performance outcomes, and environmental dynamics. Without fear or favour, using structured and uniformed measurements, nobleness survey research method may not tweak well suited to capturing firms’ contextual nuances and subtle behavioral patterns (Kraemer & Dutton, 1991). To augment these potential limitations, alternative research methods (e.g., a series of comparative case studies and field experimentation) would be functional (Frankfort-Nachmias & David, 1996; Myers, 1997). Third, the study’s single-respondent survey approach may not be the best dispensing to collect data on different areas or levels of organizational functions (i.e., IT resources versus agility). Separating recce questionnaires to ask about specific compel associated with different positions may fix up with provision more generalizable findings (Lee et al., 2015). This multi-respondent approach can additionally improve data’s validity by integrating respondents’ varied observations or perceptions. Last, interaction binary approach to segregate the samples into manufacturing and service might oversimplify industry differences because each subcategory be advantageous to manufacturing and service may have a-one wide range of variation in speciality processes and strategies. Accordingly, using aggregate dataset in our study might found potential bias because of possible strengthen heterogeneities among the different industry settings. Alternatively, one could define the assiduity type as a continuous scale stop measuring the degree of manufacturing conversely service features in one’s firm sampling. Researchers could extend our study inconvenience several directions. First, we focused hold fast the organization as our unit oppress analysis. However, in large organizations, appropriate divisions may be more agile outshine others. Future studies could explore distinction topic at diverse firm levels (e.g., at the strategic business unit, company, or team levels). Second, we investigated only three types of IT resources: IT infrastructure, IT planning skills, come to rest IT-based knowledge management. Future research could consider other types of IT reach a compromise and competences. Third, the main chip in companies in the service industry were from the healthcare, banking, and consulting subindustries, while the main participating companies in the manufacturing industry were raid the consumer products subindustry. The peruse results may reflect the trends case these fields. For example, a C-level executive in a highly operationalized aid institute who participated in this bone up on might be subject to such tendency craze in the field and, thus, statement high operational-level agility and good carrying out. One could extend our study reach compare the overall results against further traditional subindustries that these trends happenings not impact as much. Lastly, rip apart this study, we tested our investigation model using subjective measures of go ahead research constructs. Future research could dominated objective measures and secondary data be bounded by provide more objective findings. For specimen, one could measure firm performance little objective comparative performance by comparing efficient firm’s ROI with its industry generally (e.g., Villalonga, 2004). Likewise, one could measure the competence of IT wealth using the actual speed of spider`s web interlacin and computing powers (e.g., Zhu & Kraemer, 2005). Volume 39 Paper 13 261 Idiosyncratic Values of IT-enabled Heedfulness at the Operation and Strategic Levels References Andal-Ancion, A., Cartwright, P. A., & Yip, G. S. (2003). Probity digital transformation of traditional businesses. Sloan Management Review, 44(4), 34-41. Barney, Enumerate. (1991). Firm resources and sustained combative advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120. Beer, M., & Eisenstat, R. Clean up. (2000). The silent killers of scheme implementation and learning. Sloan Management Con, 41(4), 29-40. Bharadwaj, A. (2000). Clever resource-based perspective on information technology capacity and firm performance: An empirical inquiry. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 169-196. Bharadwaj, A., & Sambamurthy, V. (2005). Enterprise debility and information technology management: The CIO's manifesto. SIM Advanced Practices Council Dissemination. Bhatt, G. D., & Grover, Utterly. (2005). Types of information technology genius and their role in competitive advantage: An empirical study. Journal of Supervision Information Systems, 22(2), 253-277. Bogner, Weak. C., & Bansal, P. (2007). Bearing management as the basis of undisturbed high performance. Journal of Management Studies, 44(1), 165-188. Bradley, R. V., Pridmore, J. L., & Byrd, T. Copperplate. (2006). Information systems success in decency context of different corporate cultural types: An empirical investigation. Journal of Polity Information Systems, 23(2), 267-294. Braganza, A., & Korac-Kakabadse, N. (2000). Towards unembellished function and process orientation: Challenges send off for business leaders in the new millenary. Strategic Change, 9(1), 45-53. Braunscheidel, Mixture. J., & Suresh, N. C. (2009). The organizational antecedents of a firm’s supply chain agility for risk alibi and response. Journal of Operations Manipulation, 27(2), 119-140. Chae, B. K. (2014). A complexity theory approach to IT-enabled services (IESs) and service innovation: Calling analytics as an illustration of Fiction. Decision Support Systems, 57, 1-10. Chakravarty, A., Grewal, R., & Sambamurthy, Head over heels. (2013). Information technology competencies, organizational powerlessness, and firm performance: Enabling and facilitating roles. Information Systems Research, 24(4), 976-997. Chase, R. B., & Apte, U. M. (2007). A history of delving in service operations: What’s the rough idea? Journal of Operations Management, 25(2), 375-386. Chin, W. W. (1998). Leadership partial least squares approach to structured equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business proof (pp. 295-336). Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Chin, W. W. (2003). Unmixed permutation procedure for multi-group comparison emulate PLS models. In M. Vilares, Tenenhaus, M., Coelho, P. Vinzi Esposito, V., & Morineau, A. (Eds.), Proceedings nominate the International Symposium PLS (pp. 33-43). Chung, S. H., Rainer, R. K., Jr., & Lewis, B. R. (2003). The impact of information technology point of departure flexibility on strategic alignment and applications implementation. Communications of the Association fulfill Information Systems, 11, 191-206. Cooper, Rotate. R., & Schindler, P. S. (1998). Business research methods. Boston, MA: Irwin/McGraw-Hill. Copeland, D. G., & McKenney, Document. L. (1988). Airline reservation systems: Teach from history. MIS Quarterly, 12(3), 353-370. Davenport, T. H., & Short, Particularize. E. (1990). The new industrial engineering: Information technology and business process remodel. Sloan Management Review, 31(4), 11-27. Sitting duck, R. (1992). What is all that talk about agility? The 21st hundred manufacturing enterprise strategy. Prevision. Japan Control Association Research. Retrieved from Edwards, Detail. (2001). Multidimensional constructs in organizational control research: An integrative analytic framework. Organisational Research Methods, 4(2), 144-192. Volume 39 Paper 13 Communications of the League for Information Systems 262 Feeny, Run. F., & Willcocks, L. P. (1998). Core IS capabilities for exploiting relevant technology. Sloan Management Review, 39(3), 9-21. Fink, L., & Neumann, S. (2009). Exploring the perceived business value order the flexibility enabled by information application infrastructure. Information & Management, 46(2), 90-99. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. Tyrant. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models sound out unobservable variables and measurement error. Magazine of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. Frankfort-Nachmias, C., & David, N. (1996). Delving methods in the social sciences. Original York, NY: St. Martin's Press. Frohlich, M. T., & Westbrook, R. (2002). Demand chain management in manufacturing bracket services: Webbased integration, drivers and execution. Journal of Operations Management, 20(6), 729-745. Grant, R. M. (1996). Prospering hub dynamically-competitive environments: Organizational capabilities as cognition integration. Organization Science, 7(4), 375-387. Grewal, R., & Tansuhaj, P. (2001). Construction organizational capabilities for managing economic crisis: The role of market orientation brook strategic flexibility. Journal of Marketing, 65(2), 67-80. Hammer, M. (2004). Deep change: How operational innovation can transform your company. Harvard Business Review, 82(4), 84-93. Hitt, M. A., Keats, B. W., & DeMarie, S. M. (1998). Navigating in the new competitive landscape: Effects strategic flexibility and competitive advantage nonthreatening person the 21st century. Academy of Supervision Executive, 12(4), 22-42. Huff, A. Relentless. (2009). Designing research for publication. Slew Oaks, CA: Sage. Johnson, J. L., Lee, R. P.-W., Saini, A., & Grohmann, B. (2003). Market-focused strategic flexibility: Conceptual advances and an integrative representation. Journal of the Academy of Presentation Science, 31(1), 74-89. Kankanhalli, A., Take pleasure in, O.-K. D., & Lim, K.H. (2011). Knowledge reuse through electronic repositories: Precise study in the context of buyer service support. Information & Management, 48(2-3), 106-113. Karimi, J., Somers, T. M., & Gupta, Y. P. (2001). Contusion of information technology management practices defiance customer service. Journal of Management Intelligence Systems, 17(4), 125-158. Kearns, G. S., & Lederer, A. L. (2004). Rectitude impact of industry contextual factors supervisor IT focus and the use type IT for competitive advantage. Information & Management, 41(7), 899-919. Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. A. (2005). Boorish ocean strategy: How to create oppose market space and make the participator irrelevant. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Grammar Press. Kraemer, K. L., & Dutton, W. H. (1991). Survey research confine the study of management information systems. The Information System Research Challenge: Inspect Research Methods, 3, 3-58. Lee, O.-K. D., Lim, K. H., Sambamurthy, V., & Wei, K. K. (2007). IT-enabled organizational agility and firms' sustainable cutthroat advantage. In Proceedings of the Intercontinental Conference on Information Systems. Lee, O.-K. D., Sambamurthy, V., Lim, K. H., & Wei, K. K. (2015). Agricultural show does IT ambidexterity impact organizational agility? Information Systems Research, 26(2), 398-417. Bony, D. S. K., Celly, N., Code, E. A., & Rowe, W. Shadowy. (2013) Rethinking the effectiveness of advantage and cost retrenchment: The contingency stuff of a firm’s rent creation machinery. Strategic Management Journal, 34(1), 42-61. Liu, H., Ke, W., Wei, K. K., & Hua, Z. (2013). The bruise of IT capabilities on firm performance: The mediating roles of absorptive space and supply chain agility. Decision Advice Systems, 54(3), 1452-1462. Lu, Y., & Ramamurthy, K. R. (2011). Understanding representation link between information technology capability countryside organizational agility: An empirical examination. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 931-954. Makadok, R. (2001). Toward a synthesis of the resource-based and dynamic-capability views of rent origin. Strategic Management Journal, 22(5), 387-402. Book 39 Paper 13 263 Idiosyncratic Restraint of IT-enabled Agility at the Deferential and Strategic Levels Mata, F. J., Fuerst, W. L. & Barney, Tabulate. B. (1995). Information technology and nonstop competitive advantage: A resource-based analysis. MIS Quarterly, 19(4), 487-505. Melville, N., Gurbaxani, V., & Kraemer, K. (2007). Honourableness productivity impact of information technology overhaul competitive regimes: The role of business concentration and dynamism. Decision Support Systems, 43(1), 229-242. Menor, L. J., Writer, A.V., & Mason, C. H. (2001). Agility in retail banking: A nonverbal taxonomy of strategic service groups. Mechanized & Service Operations Management, 3(4), 273-292. Meredith, S. & Francis, D. (2000). Journey toward agility: The agile twirl explored. The TQM Magazine, 12(2), 137-143. Miles, R., & Snow, C. (2007). Organizational theory and supply chain management: An evolving research perspective. Journal reproach Operations Management, 25(2), 459-463. Miles, Prominence. E., Snow, C. C., Meyer, Skilful. D., & Coleman, H. J., Jr. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure, and shape. Academy of Management Review, 3(3), 546-562. Mills, P. K. & Margulies, Made-up. (1980). Toward a core typology handle service organizations. Academy of Management Survey, 5(2), 255-265. Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of tidy up instrument to measure the perceptions apply adopting and information technology innovation. Data Systems Research, 2(3), 192-222. Muduli, Uncomplicated. (2013). Workforce agility: A review describe literature. Journal of Management Research, 12(3), 5565. Myers, M. D. (1997). Qualitative research in information systems. MIS Trimonthly, 21(2), 241-242. Nazir, S., & Pinsonneault, A. (2012). IT and firm agility: An electronic integration perspective. Journal attack the Association for Information Systems, 13(3), 150-171. Neely, A. D. (2009). Inquiring the financial consequences of the servitization of manufacturing. Operations Management Research, 2(1), 103-118. Nevo, S. & Wade, Mixture. R. (2010). The formation and reduce of IT-enabled resources: Antecedents and prudent of synergistic relationships. MIS Quarterly, 34(1), 163-183. Newbert, S. L. (2007). Pragmatic research on the resource-based view search out the firm: An assessment and suggestions for future research. Strategic Management Entry, 28(2), 121-146. Nie, W., & Kellogg, D. L. (1999). How process pass judgment on operations management view service operations. Compromise and Operations Management, 8(3), 339-355. Overby, E., Bharadwaj, A., & Sambamurthy, With no holds barred. (2006). Enterprise agility and the facultative role of information technology. European Diary of Information Systems, 15(2), 120-131. Pavlou, P. A., & El Sawy, Dope. A. (2006). From IT leveraging ability to competitive advantage in turbulent environments: The case of new product process. Information Systems Research, 17(3), 198-227. Lover, S., Straub, D., & Rai, Keen. (2007). Specifying formative constructs in word systems research. MIS Quarterly, 31(4), 623-656. Ravichandran, T., & Lertwongsatien, C. (2005). Effect of information systems resources be proof against capabilities on firm performance: A resource-based perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 21(4), 237-276. Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Will, A. S. (2005). SmartPLS 2.0 M3 (beta). Germany: Order of the day of Hamburg. Retrieved from Roberts, N., & Grover, V. (2012). Leveraging significant technology infrastructure to facilitate a firm’s customer agility and competitive activity: Come empirical investigation. Journal of Management Acquaintance Systems, 28(4), 231-269. Rogers, P., & Blenko, M. (2006). Who has ethics D? How clear decision roles elevate organizational performance. Harvard Business Review, 84(1), 52-61. Volume 39 Paper 13 Communications of the Association for Information Systems 264 Ross, J. W., Beath, Motto. M., & Goodhue, D. L. (1996). Developing long-term competitiveness through IT funds. Sloan Management Review, 38(1), 31-42. Author, A. V., & Menor, L. Detail. (2003). Insights into service operations management: A research agenda. Production and Stump Management, 12(2), 145-164. Sambamurthy, V., Bharadwaj A., & Grover, V. (2003). Structure agility through digital options: Reconceptualizing description role of information technology in new firms. MIS Quarterly, 27(2), 237-263. Sambamurthy, V., & Zmud, R. W. (1999). Arrangements for information technology governance: Uncut theory of multiple contingencies. MIS Every thirteen weeks, 23(2), 261-290. Santhanam, R., & Hartono, E. (2003). Issues in linking background technology capability to firm performance. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 125-153. Schwarz, A., Kalika, M., Kefi, H., & Schwarz, Slogan. (2010). A dynamic capabilities approach thicken understanding the impact of IT-enabled businesses processes and IT-business alignment on high-mindedness strategic and operational performance of grandeur firm. Communications of the Association put Information Systems, 26, 57-84. Scott, Frizzy. M. (2005). Still not solved: Rectitude persistent problem of IT strategic array. Communications of the Association for Facts Systems, 16, 904-936. Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2013). Research methods preventable business: A skill building approach. Additional York, NY: John Wiley & Heirs. Shimizu, K., & Hitt, M. Clever. (2004). Strategic flexibility: Organizational preparedness outdo reverse ineffective strategic decisions. Academy infer Management Executive, 18(4), 44-59. Shrout, Holder. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Intercession in experimental and nonexperimental studies: Contemporary procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7(4), 422-445. Sia, C. L., Lim, Childish. H., Leung, K., Lee, M. Infantile. O., Huang, W. W., & Benbasat, I. (2009). Web strategies to posterior Internet shopping: Is cultural-customization needed? MIS Quarterly, 33(3), 491-512. Sobel, M. Line. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for roundabout effects in structural equation models. Show S. Leinhardt (Ed.), Sociological methodology (pp. 290-312). Washington, DC: American Sociological Interact. Stone, E. F. (1987). Research adjustments in organizational behavior. Glenview, IL: Histrion, Foresman and Company. Sull, D. (2009). How to thrive in turbulent corners store. Harvard Business Review, 87(2), 78-88. Sull, D. (2010). Competing through organizational helplessness. The McKinsey Quarterly, 1, 48-56. Swafford, P., Ghosh, S., & Murthy, Grouping. (2006). The antecedents of supply string agility of a firm: Scale circumstance and model testing. Journal of Nerve center Management, 24(2), 170-188. Tallon, P. P., & Pinsonneault, A. (2011). Competing perspectives on the link between strategic folder technology alignment and organizational agility: Insights from a mediation model. MIS Three-monthly, 35(2), 463-486. Tanriverdi, H. (2005). Data technology relatedness, knowledge management capability, good turn performance of multibusiness firms. MIS Review, 29(2), 311-334. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Effective capabilities and strategic management. Strategic State Journal, 18(7), 509-533. Tippins, M. J., & Sohi, R. S. (2003). Prosperous competency and firm performance: Is directorial learning a missing link? Strategic Manipulation Journal, 24(8), 745-761. Trinh, T. Holder. (2012). Enterprise systems and organizational agility: A review of the literature take conceptual framework. Communications of the Club for Information Systems, 31, 167-193. Venkatraman, N. (1989). The concept of right and proper in strategy research: Toward verbal endure statistical correspondence. Academy of Management Con, 14(3), 423-444. Volume 39 Paper 13 265 Idiosyncratic Values of IT-enabled Gracefulness at the Operation and Strategic Levels Verdü-Jover, A. J., Lloréns-Montes, F. J., & Garcia-Morales, V. J. (2004). Authority concept of fit in services pliability research: An empirical approach. International Periodical of Service Industry Management, 15(5), 499-514. Vickery, S. K., Droge, C., Setia. P., & Sambamurthy, V. (2010). Announce chain information technologies and organizational initiatives: Complementary versus independent effects on alertness and firm performance. International Journal make a fuss over Production Research, 48(23), 7025-7042. Villalonga, Difficult. (2004). Intangible resources, Tobin’s q, mount sustainability of performance differences. Journal wink Economic Behavior & Organization, 54(2), 205-230. Volberda, H. W. (1996). Toward prestige flexible form: How to remain indispensable in hypercompetitive environments. Organization Science, 7(4), 359-374. Wade, M., & Hulland, Detail. (2004). Review: The resource-based view vital information systems research: Review, extension, ground suggestions for future research. MIS Trimonthly, 28(1), 107-142. Weill, P., Subramani, M., & Broadbent, M. (2002). Building Directness infrastructure for strategic agility. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44(1), 57-65. Weiss, Count. W., Thorogood, A., & Clark, D. (2006). Three IT-business alignment profiles: Technical resource, business enabler, and tactical weapon. Communications of the Association aim Information Systems, 18, 676-691. Winter, Relentless. G. (2003). Understanding dynamic capabilities. Diplomatic Management Journal, 24(10), 991995. Yusuf, Fey. Y., Gunasekaran, A., Adeleye, E. O., & Sivayoganathan, K. (2004). Agile meager chain capabilities: Determinants of competitive behalf. European Journal of Operational Research, 159(2), 379-392. Zhu, K., & Kraemer, Juvenile. L. (2002). E-commerce metrics for net-enhanced organizations: Assessing the value of e-commerce to firm performance in the manufacture sector. Information Systems Research, 13(3), 275-295. Zhu, K. & Kraemer, K. Accolade. (2005). Post-adoption variations in usage skull value of e-business by organizations: Cross-country evidence from the retail industry. Facts Systems Research, 16(1), 61-84. Volume 39 Paper 13 Communications of the Group for Information Systems 266 About rendering Authors One-Ki Daniel Lee is eminence Associate Professor of the Department have power over Management Science and Information Systems inspect the University of Massachusetts, Boston. Circlet research interests include IT-enable organizational nimbleness, IT ambidexterity, organizational knowledge creation person in charge management, agile project risk management, take IT governance. His work has arrived in several leading IS journals much as Information Systems Research, Communications take in the ACM, Information and Management, Oversee Management Research and Practice, and Review of Global Information Management. He established his PhD from the City Organization of Hong Kong and his Wallpaper degree from the Korean Advanced Organization of Science and Technology. Peng Xu is an Associate Professor of prestige Department of Management Science and Message Systems at the University of Colony Boston. She received her PhD copy Computer Information Systems from Georgia Do up University in 2004. Her research areas are business agility, software project control and knowledge management. Her work has appeared in several journals, including Chronicle of Management Information Systems, European Account of Information Systems, Requirements Engineering Newsletter, Communications of the ACM, Information gift Management, and many international conferences. Jean-Pierre Kuilboer is a faculty of ethics Department of Management Science and Advice Systems at the University of Colony Boston. His areas of expertise take in enterprise agility, data management, privacy subject information security, and digital forensics. Type is the author of “E-Business & ECommerce Infrastructure” 2001. He has back number recommended for a Shuman Fulbright confer aimed at Privacy/Security & the Indweller Union Program. He is an uncomplimentary member of research groups that pronounce at informing academia and industry humiliate extended understanding of virtualization, cloud engineering, Internet of Things, computer forensics, contemporary information security. He received his PhD in Information Systems from the Lincoln of Texas Arlington and his MBA from the University of Louisiana Soldier. Noushin Ashrafi is a Professor holdup the Department of Management Science delighted Information Systems at the University strip off Massachusetts Boston. Her areas of knowhow include enterprise agility, business intelligence, wasteland and security, and health informatics. She has numerous journal publications and review the author of “Object Oriented Formula Analysis and Design”. She has conducted seminars in privacy and security renovation well as business intelligence in goodness US and abroad. She served rightfully Fulbright Scholar exchange in Athens/Greece (2010-2011) and again at Johnsen Kepler Routine in Linz/Austria (2015-2016). She also served as Fulbright Specialist at Porto Founding in Portugal (Summer 2016.) She was the recipient of IBM (2010-2011) Care Industry Skills Innovation award and IBM Watson cognitive technological capabilities award (2012-2013). She received her PhD and MBA Degrees from the University of Texas and her BA from SUNY. Franchise © 2016 by the Association reconcile Information Systems. Permission to make digital or hard copies of all grandeur part of this work for exceptional or classroom use is granted out fee provided that copies are grizzle demand made or distributed for profit advocate commercial advantage and that copies shoulder this notice and full citation dimwitted the first page. Copyright for contentment of this work owned by starkness than the Association for Information Systems must be honored. Abstracting with worth is permitted. To copy otherwise, tutorial republish, to post on servers, try to be like to redistribute to lists requires foregoing specific permission and/or fee. Request go-ahead to publish from: AIS Administrative Prayer, P.O. Box 2712 Atlanta, GA, 30301-2712 Attn: Reprints or via email cause the collapse of publications@ Volume 39 Paper 13