IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/infotm/v21y2020i2d10.1007_s10799-019-00305-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating COBIT with a hybrid group decision-making approach for a business-aligned IT roadmap formulation

Author

Listed:
  • Morteza Alaeddini

    (Amirkabir University of Technology)

  • Masoud Mir-Amini

    (Islamic Azad University E-Campus)

Abstract

An IT roadmap is a critical investment that can significantly affect future competitiveness and performance of a firm. This study presents a comprehensive framework for determining the predecessors and successors of each activity of a roadmap to manage and govern the IT. This paper discusses the result of integrating the COBIT as a well-known IT standard with a hybrid group decision-making method, which has not been yet extensively studied to prioritize the potential actions of an IT roadmap, in a real-world case in Iran to demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed framework. The proposed framework can systematically construct the objectives of IT portfolio building to support business goals and strategies of a firm, identify the proper attributes, and set up a consistent evaluation standard for facilitating a group decision process.The study findings will be interesting for academics, chief information officers, and IT planning practitioners and consultants.

Suggested Citation

  • Morteza Alaeddini & Masoud Mir-Amini, 2020. "Integrating COBIT with a hybrid group decision-making approach for a business-aligned IT roadmap formulation," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 63-94, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:infotm:v:21:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s10799-019-00305-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s10799-019-00305-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10799-019-00305-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10799-019-00305-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dimitris K. Despotis & Dimitris Derpanis, 2008. "A Min–Max Goal Programming Approach To Priority Derivation In Ahp With Interval Judgements," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(01), pages 175-182.
    2. Hannu Kivijärvi & Petri Hallikainen & Esko Penttinen, 2012. "SUPPORTING IT IMPLEMENTATION DECISIONS WITH ANP — SUPPLIER SCHEDULING FORe-INVOICING," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(03), pages 525-550.
    3. Thomas L. Saaty & Luis G. Vargas, 2012. "The Seven Pillars of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Models, Methods, Concepts & Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, edition 2, chapter 0, pages 23-40, Springer.
    4. Banerji, A. & Dutta, Bhaskar, 2009. "Local network externalities and market segmentation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 605-614, September.
    5. Keeney,Ralph L. & Raiffa,Howard, 1993. "Decisions with Multiple Objectives," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521438834.
    6. Wolfgang Ossadnik & Stefanie Schinke & Ralf H. Kaspar, 2016. "Group Aggregation Techniques for Analytic Hierarchy Process and Analytic Network Process: A Comparative Analysis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 421-457, March.
    7. Thomas L. Saaty, 2005. "The Analytic Hierarchy and Analytic Network Processes for the Measurement of Intangible Criteria and for Decision-Making," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, chapter 0, pages 345-405, Springer.
    8. JosÉ Figueira & Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrogott, 2005. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-0-387-23081-8, September.
    9. Norita Ahmad & Daniel Berg & Gene R. Simons, 2006. "The Integration Of Analytical Hierarchy Process And Data Envelopment Analysis In A Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Problem," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(02), pages 263-276.
    10. Thomas L. Saaty & Luis G. Vargas, 2013. "The Analytic Network Process," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Decision Making with the Analytic Network Process, edition 2, chapter 0, pages 1-40, Springer.
    11. Thomas L. Saaty & Luis G. Vargas, 1998. "Diagnosis with Dependent Symptoms: Bayes Theorem and the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 46(4), pages 491-502, August.
    12. Thomas L. Saaty & Luis G. Vargas, 2013. "Decision Making with the Analytic Network Process," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, edition 2, number 978-1-4614-7279-7, September.
    13. Chou, Tzy-Yuan & Chou, Seng-cho T. & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2006. "Evaluating IT/IS investments: A fuzzy multi-criteria decision model approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 173(3), pages 1026-1046, September.
    14. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    15. Thomas L. Saaty & Luis G. Vargas, 2012. "Models, Methods, Concepts & Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, edition 2, number 978-1-4614-3597-6, September.
    16. Khorramshahgol, Reza & Moustakis, Vassilis S., 1988. "Delphic hierarchy process (DHP): A methodology for priority setting derived from the Delphi method and analytical hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 347-354, December.
    17. Zanakis, Stelios H. & Solomon, Anthony & Wishart, Nicole & Dublish, Sandipa, 1998. "Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 507-529, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fu-Hsiang Chen & Ming-Fu Hsu & Kuang-Hua Hu, 2022. "Enterprise’s internal control for knowledge discovery in a big data environment by an integrated hybrid model," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 213-231, September.

    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. Hocine, Amine & Kouaissah, Noureddine, 2020. "XOR analytic hierarchy process and its application in the renewable energy sector," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    2. Rachele Corticelli & Margherita Pazzini & Cecilia Mazzoli & Claudio Lantieri & Annarita Ferrante & Valeria Vignali, 2022. "Urban Regeneration and Soft Mobility: The Case Study of the Rimini Canal Port in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-27, November.
    3. Clara Moreira Senne & Josiane Palma Lima & Fábio Favaretto, 2021. "An Index for the Sustainability of Integrated Urban Transport and Logistics: The Case Study of São Paulo," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-18, November.
    4. Tasneem Bani-Mustafa & Nicola Pedroni & Enrico Zio & Dominique Vasseur & Francois Beaudouin, 2020. "A hierarchical tree-based decision-making approach for assessing the relative trustworthiness of risk assessment models," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 234(6), pages 748-763, December.
    5. Toly Chen, 2021. "A diversified AHP-tree approach for multiple-criteria supplier selection," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 431-453, October.
    6. Angilella, Silvia & Giarlotta, Alfio, 2009. "Implementations of PACMAN," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(2), pages 474-495, April.
    7. Angilella, Silvia & Greco, Salvatore & Matarazzo, Benedetto, 2010. "Non-additive robust ordinal regression: A multiple criteria decision model based on the Choquet integral," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 201(1), pages 277-288, February.
    8. Hassan, Mohammad Nurul & Hawas, Yaser E. & Ahmed, Kamran, 2013. "A multi-dimensional framework for evaluating the transit service performance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 47-61.
    9. Mumtaz Karatas, 2017. "Multiattribute Decision Making Using Multiperiod Probabilistic Weighted Fuzzy Axiomatic Design," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(4), pages 318-334, July.
    10. Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio, 2016. "Combining analytical hierarchy process and Choquet integral within non-additive robust ordinal regression," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 2-18.
    11. József Temesi, 2011. "Pairwise comparison matrices and the error-free property of the decision maker," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 19(2), pages 239-249, June.
    12. Tamer F. Abdelmaguid & Waleed Elrashidy, 2019. "Halting decisions for gas pipeline construction projects using AHP: a case study," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 179-199, March.
    13. Katie Steele & Yohay Carmel & Jean Cross & Chris Wilcox, 2009. "Uses and Misuses of Multicriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) in Environmental Decision Making," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(1), pages 26-33, January.
    14. Thomas L. Saaty & Daji Ergu, 2015. "When is a Decision-Making Method Trustworthy? Criteria for Evaluating Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(06), pages 1171-1187, November.
    15. Abrahamsen, Eirik Bjorheim & Milazzo, Maria Francesca & Selvik, Jon T. & Asche, Frank & Abrahamsen, HÃ¥kon Bjorheim, 2020. "Prioritising investments in safety measures in the chemical industry by using the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    16. Daniel R. Georgiadis & Thomas A. Mazzuchi & Shahram Sarkani, 2013. "Using multi criteria decision making in analysis of alternatives for selection of enabling technology," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(3), pages 287-303, September.
    17. Hatami-Marbini, Adel & Tavana, Madjid, 2011. "An extension of the Electre I method for group decision-making under a fuzzy environment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 373-386, August.
    18. Anna Maria Kowalczyk & Szymon Czyża, 2022. "Optimising Photovoltaic Farm Location Using a Capabilities Matrix and GIS," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-32, September.
    19. Salvatore Corrente & Michael Doumpos & Salvatore Greco & Roman Słowiński & Constantin Zopounidis, 2017. "Multiple criteria hierarchy process for sorting problems based on ordinal regression with additive value functions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 251(1), pages 117-139, April.
    20. Schneider, Frank, 2008. "Multiple criteria decision making in application layer networks," Bayreuth Reports on Information Systems Management 36, University of Bayreuth, Chair of Information Systems Management.

    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:spr:infotm:v:21:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s10799-019-00305-0. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.