BENCHMARKING AS A STRATEGY FOR MANAGING CONFLICTING STAKEHOLDER PERCEPTIONS OF INFORMATION-SYSTEMS
The paper describes how failures to align information systems (IS) strategies in 18 US companies required IS managers to constantly justify their cost/service compromises to various stakeholders - senior executives, business unit managers, and end-users. IS managers tried to influence stakeholder perceptions with 'soft' evidence such as successful application projects, user endorsements, and other IS anecdotes. In addition, IS managers used benchmarks to provide more 'objective' evidence. Given the hostile environment caused by misalignment, some IS managers used a variety of tactics to manipulate the benchmarks to obtain a 'good report card', such as picking a reference group of only mediocre performers and undermining the integrity of the data collection process. We present a framework to understand the context of misalignment which can help stakeholders flush out their differences to arrive at a common strategy for the portfolio of IS activities. In the context of a shared strategy, benchmarks targeted at a performance improvement - rather than turf-protection - can be achieved.
benchmarks information systems business strategy