《专题资料（2021-2022年）北大MBA原文案例库(1).doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《专题资料（2021-2022年）北大MBA原文案例库(1).doc（11页珍藏版）》请在taowenge.com淘文阁网|工程机械CAD图纸|机械工程制图|CAD装配图下载|SolidWorks_CaTia_CAD_UG_PROE_设计图分享下载上搜索。
1、How Financial Firms Decide on Technology，介绍国际大银行在决定对信息技术投资时的考虑要点和介绍国际大银行在决定对信息技术投资时的考虑要点和他们具体的实施过程。他们具体的实施过程。How Financial Firms Decide on Technology(Abstract)The financial services industry is the major investor in information technology(IT)in the U.S.economy;the typical bank spends as much as 15%o
2、f non-intereste expenses on IT.A persistentfinding of research into the performance of financial institutions is that performance andefficiency vary widely across institutions.Nowhere is this variability more visible than in theoutcomes of the IT investment decisions in these institutions.This paper
3、 presents the results of anempirical investigation of IT investment decision processes in the banking industry.The purposeof this investigation is to uncover what,if anything,can be learned from the IT investmentpractices of banks that would help in understanding the cause of this variability in per
4、formancealong with pointing toward management practices that lead to better investment decisions.UsingPC banking and the development of corporate Internet sites as the case studies for thisinvestigation,the paper reports on detailed field-based surveys of investment practices in severalleading insti
5、tutionsHow Financial Firms Decide on Technology(Part One)信息技术对金融服务业的影响正在增加，不仅仅表现在银行的 15%无息开支上，而且对金融服务业的运做和战略也有很强的影响。一个对金融机构的长期研究表明，不同的机构的效率和表现也不同。其决定的因素有以下一些其中的一个因素就是对投资的决定和管理。SBS 是一个失败的例子，但是成功的公司也不少。本文注重解答以下的问题：.银行对投资的评估和管理过程？.在对的管理过程中，理论和实际操作的结合如何？.投资的管理和银行性能的关系如何？1.0 IntroductionInformation techn
6、ology(IT)is increasingly critical to the operations of financialservices firms.Today banks spend as much as 15%of non-interest expense oninformation technology.It is estimated that the industry will spend at least$21.1billion on IT in 1998,and financial institutions collectively account for the majo
7、rity ofIT investment in the U.S.economy.In additon to being a large component of the coststructure,information technology has a strong influence on financial firms operatonsand strategy.Few financial products and services exist that do not utilize computers atsome point in the delivery process,and a
8、 firmsinformation systems place strongconstraints on the type of products offered,the degree of customization possible andthe speed at which firms can respond to competitive opportunities or threats.A persistent finding of research into the performance of financial institutions isthat performance an
9、d efficiency varies widely across institutions,even aftercontrolling for factors such as size(scale),product breadth(scope),branching behaviorand organizational form(e.g.stock versus mutual for insurers;banks versus saving&loans).Given the central role that technology plays in these institutions,at
10、least someof this variation is likely to be due to variations in the use and effectiveness of ITinvestments.While some authors have argued that the value of IT investment hasbeen insignificant,particularly in services,recent empirical work has suggested thatIT investment,on average,is a productive i
11、nvestment.Perhaps more importantly,there appears to be substantial variation across firms;some firms have very highinvestments but are poor performers,while otheres invest less but appear to be muchmore successful.Brynjolfsson and Hitt found that as much as half the returns to ITinvestment are due t
12、o firm specific factors.One potentially important driver of differences in IT value,and of firmperformance more broadly,is likely to be the decision and management peocessed forIT investments.Horror stories of bad IT investment decisions abound.Consider theexample of the new strategic banking system
13、(SBS)at Banc One(American Banker1997).Banc One Corp.and Electronic Data Systems Corp.agreed last year to endtheir joint development of this retail banking system after spending an estimated$175million on it.As stated in the American Banker article,SBSwas just sooverwhelming and so complete that by t
14、he time they were getting to market,it wasgoing to take too long to install the whole thing,said Alan Riegler,principal in Ernst&Youngs financial services management consulting division.However,not all thestories are negative.New IT systems are playing a vital role in reshaping the deliveryof financ
15、ial services.For example,new computer-telephony integration(CTI)technologies are transforming call center operations in financial institutions.Byinvesting in technology,more and more institutions are moving operations fromhigh-cost branch operations to the telephone channel,where the cost per transa
16、ction isone-tenth the cost of a teller interaction.This IT investment not only reduces the costof serving existing customers,but also extends the reach of the institution beyond itstraditional geographic boundaries.In this paper,we utilize detailed case studies of six retail banks to investigateseve
17、ral interrelated questions:.What processes do banks utilize to evaluate and manage IT investments?.How well do actual practices align with theoretical arguments about how IT investmentsshouldbe managed?.What impact does that management of IT investments have on performance?How Financial Firms Decide
18、 on Technology(Part Two)For the first question,we develop a structured framework for cataloging IT investment practicesand then populate this framework using a combination of surveys and semi-structured interviews.We then compare the results of this exercise with a synthesis of the literature on IT
19、decisionmaking to understanding how practices vary across firms and the extent to which this is consistentwith best practices as described in previous literature.Finally,we will compare these processesto internal and external performance metrics to better understand which sets of practices appear to
20、be most effective.To make these comparisons concrete,we examine both the general decision process as wellas the specific processes used for two recent IT investment decisions:the adoption ofcomputer-based home banking(PC banking),and the development of the corporate web site.These decisions were cho
21、sen because they were recent and are related but provide some contrast;in particular,PC banking is a fairly well defined product innovation,while the corporate webpresence is more of an infrastructure investment which is less well-defined in terms of objectivesand business ownership.Overall,we find
22、that while some aspects of the decision process are fairly similar acrossinstitutions and often conform to best practice as defined by previous literature,there are severalareas where there is large variation in practice among the banks and between actual and theoreticalbest practice.Most banks have
23、 a strong and standardized project management for ongoing systemsprojects,and formal structures for insuring that line-managers and systems people are in contact atthe initiation of technology projects.At the same time,many banks have relatively weakprocesses(both formal and informal)for identifying
24、 new IT investment opportunities,allocatingresources across organizational lines,and funding exploratory or infrastructure projects with longterm or uncertain payoffs.The reminder of this paper is organized as follows.Section 2 describes the previous literatureon performance of financial institution
25、s and the effects of IT on performance.Section 3 describesthe methods and data.Section 4 describes the current academic thinking on various components ofthe decision process and compares that to actual practices at the banks we visited.Section 5describes the results of our in-depth study of PC banki
26、ng projects and the summary,Section 6contains a similar analysis for the Corporate Web Site and discussion and conclusion appear inSection 7.How Financial Firms Decide on Technology(Part Three)2.0Previous Literature2.1Performance of Financial InstitutionsThere have been a number of studies that have
27、 examined the efficiency of the bankingindustry andthe role of various factors such as corporate control structure(type of board,directors,insider stock holdings,etc.),economies of scale(size),economies of scope(productbreadth),and branching strategy;see Berger,Kashyup and Scalise(1995)and Harker an
28、d Zenios(forthcoming)for a review of the banking efficiency literature.While there is substantial debate asto the role of these various factors,there is one unambiguous result:that most of the(in)efficiencyof banks is not explained by the factors that have been considered in prior work.For example,B
29、erger and Mester(1997)estimate that as much as 65-90%of the x-inefficiency remainsunexplained after controlling for known drivers of performance.A similar story also appears ininsurance where x-efficiency varies substantially across firms when size,scope,product mix,distribution strategy and other s
30、trategic variables are considered.It has been argued that one mustget inside the black box of the bank ot consider the role of organizational,strategic andtechnological factors that may be missed in studies that rely heavily on public financial data.2.2Information Technology and Business ValueEarly
31、studies of the relationship between IT and productivity or other measures ofperformance were generally unable to determine the value of IT conclusively.Loveman(1994)and Strassmann(1990),using different data and analytical methods both found that theperformance effects of computers were not statistic
32、ally significant.Barus,Kriebel andMukadopadhyay(1995),using the same data as Loveman,found evidence that IT improved someinternal performance metrics such as inventory trunover,but could not tie these benefits toimprovements in bottom line productivity.Although these studies had a number of disadvan
33、tages(small samples,noisy data)which yielded imprecise measures of IT effects,this lack of evidencecombined with equally equivocal macroeconomic ananlyses by Steven Roach(1987)implicitlyformed the basis for the productivity paradox.As Robert Solow(1987)once remarked,you cansee teh computer age every
34、where except in the productivity statistics.More recent work has found that IT investment is a substantial contributor to firmproductivity,productivity growth and stock market valuation in a sample that contains a widerange of industries.Brynjolfsson and Hitt(1994,1996)and Lichtenberg(1995)found tha
35、t ITinvestment had a positive and statistically significant contribution to firm output.Brynjolfssonand Yang(1997)found that the market valuation of IT capital was several times that of ordinarycapital.Brynjolfsson and Hitt also found a strong relationship between IT and productivity growthand taht
36、this relationship grows stronger as longer time periods are considered.Collectively,thesestudies suggest that there is no productivity paradox,at least when the analysis is performed acrossindustries using firm-level data.The differences between these results and earlier studies isprobably due to th
37、e use of data taht was recent,more comprehensice,and more disaggregated(firm level rather than industry or economy level).Most previous sutdies have considered the effects of technology across firms in multipleindustries,although a few studies have considered the role of technology in specifically i
38、n thebanking industry.Steiner and Teixiera surveyed the banking industry and argued that while largeinvestments in technology clearly had value,little of this value was being captured by the banksthemselves;most of the benefits were being passed on to customers as a result of intensecompetition.Alpa
39、r and Kim examined the cost efficiency of banks overall and found that ITinvestment was associatied with greater cost efficiency although the effects were less evidentwhen financial ratios were used as the outcome measure.Prasad and Harkere examined therelationship between technology investment and
40、performance for 47 retail banks and foundpositive benefits of investments in IT staff.While these studies show a strong positive contribution of IT investment on average,theydo not consider how this contribution(or level of investment)varies across firms.Brynjolfssonand Hitt found that firm effects
41、can account for as much as half the contribution of IT found inthese earlier studies.Recent results suggest that at least part of these differences can be explainedby differences in organizational and strategic factors.Brynjolfsson and Hitt found that firms thatuse greater overall IT benefits.Bresne
42、han,Brynjolfsson and Hitt found a similar result for firmsthat have greater levels of skills and those that make greater investments in training andpre-employment screening for human capital.In addition,strategic factors also appear to affectthe value of IT.Firms that invest in IT to create customer
43、 value(e.g.improve service,timeliness,convenience,variety)have greater performance than firms that invest in IT to reduce costs.While these studies are begining to explore how the performance of IT investment variesacross firm,particularly due to organizational and strategic factors,little attention
44、 has been paid tothe technology decision making process.How Financial Firms Decide on Technology(Part Four)2.3IT Investment DecisionsWhile there is no concise definition of best practice in IT investment decisions,there are anumber of consistent arguments advanced in the IT management literature tha
45、t can be synthesizedinto an understanding of the conventional wisdom.For the pruposes of discussion it is useful to subdivide the process of IT management intoseven discrete,but interrelated processes.The first six processes are oriented around the proposal,development and management of IT projects,
46、while the last process is about maintaining thecapabilities of the IT function and its interrelationships with the rest of the business:1.Identification of IT opportunities2.Evaluating opportunities3.Approving IT projects4.The make-buy decision5.Managing IT projects6.Evaluating IT projects7.Manage a
47、nd Develop the IT FunctionThis subdivision loosely corresponds to many of the major issues in IT management such asoutsourcing,line management-IT alignment,software project management,and evaluating ITinvestments.In addition,this list loosely corresponds to frameworks for the management of IT.Thepri
48、mary difference is that this list views the IT management process as managing a stream ofprojects rather than focusing on the function of the IT department overall or the role of the CIO,the typical perspective in the previous literature.For example,a common framework used to alignIT to business sta
49、rategy,the critical success factors(CSF)method,include three workshops:thefirst to identify and focus objectives,the second to decide and prioritize on systems investment,and the third to develop,deploy and reevaluate prototype systems.Boynton,Jacobs andZmud(1992)identify five critical IT management
50、 processes:setting strategic direction,establishing infrastructure systems,scanning technology,transferring technology and developingsystems.Rockart,Earl and Ross(1996)propose eight imperatives for the IT organization whichcan be grouped into managing the IT-business relationship,building and managi