IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jdataj/v7y2021i1p2-d711645.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Business Intelligence for IT Governance of a Technology Company

Author

Listed:
  • Vittoria Biagi

    (Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Sapienza University of Rome, Via Eudossiana 18, 00184 Rome, Italy
    FSTechnology, Piazza della Croce Rossa 1, 00161 Rome, Italy)

  • Riccardo Patriarca

    (Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Sapienza University of Rome, Via Eudossiana 18, 00184 Rome, Italy)

  • Giulio Di Gravio

    (Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Sapienza University of Rome, Via Eudossiana 18, 00184 Rome, Italy)

Abstract

Managers are required to make fast, reliable, and fact-based decisions to encompass the dynamicity of modern business environments. Data visualization and reporting are thus crucial activities to ensure a systematic organizational intelligence especially for technological companies operating in a fast-moving context. As such, this paper presents case-study research for the definition of a business intelligence model and related Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to support risk-related decision making. The study firstly comprises a literature review on approaches for governance management, which confirm a disconnection between theory and practice. It then progresses to mapping the main business areas and suggesting exemplary KPIs to fill this gap. Finally, it documents the design and usage of a BI dashboard, as emerged via a validation with four managers. This early application shows the advantages of BI for both business operators and governance managers.

Suggested Citation

  • Vittoria Biagi & Riccardo Patriarca & Giulio Di Gravio, 2021. "Business Intelligence for IT Governance of a Technology Company," Data, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-14, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jdataj:v:7:y:2021:i:1:p:2-:d:711645
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5729/7/1/2/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5729/7/1/2/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Volden, Gro Holst, 2018. "Public project success as seen in a broad perspective," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 109-117.
    2. Killen, Catherine P. & Geraldi, Joana & Kock, Alexander, 2020. "The Role of Decision Makers' Use of Visualizations in Project Portfolio Decision Making," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 124839, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    3. Tolonen, Arto & Shahmarichatghieh, Marzieh & Harkonen, Janne & Haapasalo, Harri, 2015. "Product portfolio management – Targets and key performance indicators for product portfolio renewal over life cycle," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(PB), pages 468-477.
    4. Aydiner, Arafat Salih & Tatoglu, Ekrem & Bayraktar, Erkan & Zaim, Selim & Delen, Dursun, 2019. "Business analytics and firm performance: The mediating role of business process performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 228-237.
    5. Fiorenzo Franceschini & Maurizio Galetto & Domenico Maisano, 2007. "Management by Measurement," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-540-73212-9, December.
    6. Morteza Alaeddini & Seyed Alireza Hashemi, 2019. "Evaluating the Performance of IT Governance in Service-Oriented Enterprises," Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organization, in: Youcef Baghdadi & Antoine Harfouche (ed.), ICT for a Better Life and a Better World, pages 323-333, Springer.
    7. Campbell, Donald T., 1979. "Assessing the impact of planned social change," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 67-90, January.
    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. Jesse Rothstein, 2015. "Teacher Quality Policy When Supply Matters," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(1), pages 100-130, January.
    2. Franceschini, Fiorenzo & Maisano, Domenico, 2015. "Checking the consistency of the solution in ordinal semi-democratic decision-making problems," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 57(PB), pages 188-195.
    3. Fiorenzo Franceschini & Maurizio Galetto & Domenico Maisano & Luca Mastrogiacomo, 2012. "The success-index: an alternative approach to the h-index for evaluating an individual’s research output," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(3), pages 621-641, September.
    4. Daniel O. Gilligan & Naureen Karachiwalla & Ibrahim Kasirye & Adrienne M. Lucas & Derek Neal, 2022. "Educator Incentives and Educational Triage in Rural Primary Schools," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 57(1), pages 79-111.
    5. Brian Gill, 2022. "What Should The Future Of Educational Accountability Look Like?," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(4), pages 1232-1239, September.
    6. Yue-Yi Hwa & Clare Leaver, 2021. "Management in education systems," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 37(2), pages 367-391.
    7. Vlachos, Jonas, 2018. "Trust based evaluation in a market oriented school system," Research Papers in Economics 2018:1, Stockholm University, Department of Economics.
    8. Audrey Amrein‐Beardsley, 2022. "Using Standardized Tests For Educational Accountability: The Bad Idea That Keeps On Giving Nothing In Return," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(4), pages 1226-1232, September.
    9. Trinidad, Jose Eos, 2022. "Meaning-Making, Negotiation, and Change: Reviewing the Organization and Ecology of School Accountability," SocArXiv ywm8b, Center for Open Science.
    10. Milichovsky, Frantisek, 2015. "Measuring Indicators for Marketing Effectiveness in Czech Companies || Indicadores para medir la eficacia del marketing en las empresas checas," Revista de Métodos Cuantitativos para la Economía y la Empresa = Journal of Quantitative Methods for Economics and Business Administration, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Quantitative Methods for Economics and Business Administration, vol. 20(1), pages 3-24, December.
    11. Oesterreich, Thuy Duong & Anton, Eduard & Teuteberg, Frank & Dwivedi, Yogesh K, 2022. "The role of the social and technical factors in creating business value from big data analytics: A meta-analysis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 128-149.
    12. Nasir, Muhammad Ali & Morgan, Jamie, 2023. "Paradox of stationarity? A policy target dilemma for policymakers," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 142-145.
    13. Carolyn J. Heinrich & Huiping Cheng, 2022. "Does Online Credit Recovery in High School Support or Stymie Later Labor Market Success?," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(4), pages 984-1011, September.
    14. Fiorenzo Franceschini & Domenico Maisano, 2012. "Publication and patent analysis of European researchers in the field of production technology and manufacturing systems," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(1), pages 89-100, October.
    15. Manheim, David, 2018. "Building Less Flawed Metrics," MPRA Paper 90649, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Fiorenzo Franceschini & Domenico Maisano, 2011. "Criticism on the hg-index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(2), pages 339-346, February.
    17. Gazi Islam, 2022. "Business Ethics and Quantification: Towards an Ethics of Numbers," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 176(2), pages 195-211, March.
    18. Mladen Djuric & Marina Dobrota & Jovan Filipovic, 2020. "Complexity-based quality indicators for human and social capital in science and research: the case of Serbian Homeland versus Diaspora," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 303-328, July.
    19. Maris Kalinka & Sanda Geipele & Edgars Pudzis & Andrejs Lazdins & Una Krutova & Jurijs Holms, 2020. "Indicators for the Smart Development of Villages and Neighbourhoods in Baltic Sea Coastal Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-13, June.
    20. Oliver Braganza, 2020. "A simple model suggesting economically rational sample-size choice drives irreproducibility," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-19, March.

    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:gam:jdataj:v:7:y:2021:i:1:p:2-:d:711645. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.