IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cje/issued/v32y1999i2p363-383.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Innovationa and information technology in services

Author

Listed:
  • Georg Licht
  • Dietmar Moch

Abstract

The missing effect of investments of firms in information and communication technologies on productivity is studied by various recent papers (e.g. Oliner and Sichels 1994, Landauer 1995, Brynjolfsson and Hitt 1996). Several explanations are given for this missing link. Our paper deals with two of them, using two newly available data sets for the German service sector. Using data from a survey of innovative activities in services we show that investment in information technology (IT) has a stronger effect on the quality of services than on the productivity of the IT-using firm. IT investment seems to be especially effective when innovations enhance the delivery speed and the spatial or temporal availability of service. Moreover, data of the German IT survey point towards the need to differentiate between types of IT investment. It is shown that especially the most recent generation of IT as indicated by the number of PCs used is the source of productivity growth whereas traditional IT like mainframes exhibit only minor productivity effects. We conclude from our results that mismeasurement of the quality of new products and processes is one important reason for our inability to uncover the productivity effect of IT. Moreover, dividing IT-investment by the type of IT clarifies that the kind of IT a firm uses is more important for productivity growth what than its quantity. In any case we expect that the bulk of the IT-related productivity growth is still to come. In order to realize the benefits from IT investment entirely, firms have to undergo a large restructuring of business functions.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Georg Licht & Dietmar Moch, 1999. "Innovationa and information technology in services," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 32(2), pages 363-383, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:cje:issued:v:32:y:1999:i:2:p:363-383
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0008-4085%28199904%2932%3A2%3C363%3AIAITIS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-3
    Download Restriction: only available to JSTOR subscribers
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William Lehr & Frank R. Lichtenberg, 1996. "Computer Use and Productivity Growth in Federal Government Agencies, 1987 to 1992," NBER Working Papers 5616, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Sandra E. Black & Lisa M. Lynch, 2001. "How To Compete: The Impact Of Workplace Practices And Information Technology On Productivity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(3), pages 434-445, August.
    3. Nelson, Randy A & Tanguay, Tim L & Patterson, Christopher D, 1994. "A Quality-Adjusted Price Index for Personal Computers," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 12(1), pages 23-31, January.
    4. Lichtenberg, F.R. & Lehr, B., 1996. "Computer Use and Productivity Growth in federal Government Agencies," Papers 96-10, Columbia - Graduate School of Business.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Addison, John T. & Belfield, Clive R., 2004. "Unions, Training, and Firm Performance: Evidence from the British Workplace Employee Relations Survey," IZA Discussion Papers 1264, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Daron Acemoglu & Philippe Aghion & Claire Lelarge & John Van Reenen & Fabrizio Zilibotti, 2007. "Technology, Information, and the Decentralization of the Firm," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 122(4), pages 1759-1799.
    3. Martin Carree & Boris Lokshin & René Belderbos, 2011. "A note on testing for complementarity and substitutability in the case of multiple practices," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 263-269, June.
    4. Laura Hospido & Eva Moreno-Galbis, 2015. "The Spanish productivity puzzle in the Great Recession," Working Papers 1501, Banco de España.
    5. Paul Chwelos, 2003. "Approaches to performance measurement in hedonic analysis: Price indexes for laptop computers in the 1990's," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 199-224.
    6. Andrea Vaona & Mario Pianta, 2008. "Firm Size and Innovation in European Manufacturing," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 283-299, March.
    7. Dale W. Jorgenson & Mun S. Ho & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2008. "A Retrospective Look at the U.S. Productivity Growth Resurgence," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 3-24, Winter.
    8. Alex Bryson & Lucy Stokes & David Wilkinson, 2023. "Is pupil attainment higher in well-managed schools?," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(1), pages 129-144, January.
    9. Nicholas Bloom & Luis Garicano & Raffaella Sadun & John Van Reenen, 2014. "The Distinct Effects of Information Technology and Communication Technology on Firm Organization," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(12), pages 2859-2885, December.
    10. Surendra Gera & Wulong Gu, 2004. "The Effect of Organizational Innovation and Information and Communications Technology on Firm Performance," International Productivity Monitor, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, vol. 9, pages 37-51, Fall.
    11. Philippe Askenazy & Eve Caroli, 2006. "Innovative work practices, information technologies and working conditions: evidence for France," EconomiX Working Papers 2006-2, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    12. Edward P. Lazear, 1995. "Personnel Economics," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262121883, December.
    13. Zand, Fardad & Van Beers, Cees & Van Leeuwen, George, 2011. "Information technology, organizational change and firm productivity: A panel study of complementarity effects and clustering patterns in Manufacturing and Services," MPRA Paper 46469, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Nurmilaakso, Juha-Miikka, 2008. "Adoption of e-business functions and migration from EDI-based to XML-based e-business frameworks in supply chain integration," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 721-733, June.
    15. Spyros Arvanitis & Florian Seliger & Tobias Stucki, 2013. "The Relative Importance of Human Resource Management Practices for a Firm's Innovation Performance," KOF Working papers 13-341, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    16. K. Sudhir & Debabrata Talukdar, 2015. "The "Peter Pan Syndrome" in Emerging Markets: The Productivity-Transparency Tradeoff in IT Adoption," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1980, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    17. Joel Cutcher-Gershenfeld & Thomas Kochan, 2004. "Taking Stock: Collective Bargaining at the Turn of the Century," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 58(1), pages 3-26, October.
    18. Bronwyn H. Hall & Francesca Lotti & Jacques Mairesse, 2013. "Evidence on the impact of R&D and ICT investments on innovation and productivity in Italian firms," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(3), pages 300-328, April.
    19. Stefan Bender & Nicholas Bloom & David Card & John Van Reenen & Stefanie Wolter, 2018. "Management Practices, Workforce Selection, and Productivity," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(S1), pages 371-409.
    20. Pope, Nolan G., 2019. "The effect of teacher ratings on teacher performance," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 84-110.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • D24 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Production; Cost; Capital; Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity; Capacity
    • L80 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cje:issued:v:32:y:1999:i:2:p:363-383. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Prof. Werner Antweiler (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ceaaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.