Scholars and practitioners have trumpeted business intelligence (BI) capability as a game-changer due to its significant impact on firm performance. Despite these claims, the amplifying and underlying mechanisms governing the relationship between BI capability and organizational performance are still in their infancy. This research examines the nexus between BI capability, decision-making speed, comprehensiveness, and organizational performance. This study, drawing on knowledge-based theory, proposes a conceptual model to explain how BI capability influences organizational performance through decision-making speed and comprehensiveness and the moderating role of firm size. The proposed moderated-mediated model was tested using survey data from 236 respondents occupying leadership positions in various Jordanian industries. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) was used to diagnose the proposed model. BI capability indirectly affects firm performance through decision-making speed and comprehensiveness. These mediating effects do not vary by company size. This paper contributed theoretically and practically to the BI framework considering decision-making, firm performance, and firm size. Implications for theory-building and practice are described.
AbubakarAMElrehailHAlatailatMA, et al. (2019) Knowledge management, decision-making style and organizational performance. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge4(2): 104–114.
2.
AgeronBGunasekaranASpalanzaniA (2012) Sustainable supply chain management. An empirical study. International Journal of Production Economics140: 168–182.
3.
Al-TalMJYEmeagwaliOL (2019) Knowledge-based HR practices and innovation in SMEs. Organizacija52(1): 6–21.
4.
AlaviMLeidnerDE (2001) Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS quarterly25(1): 107–136.
5.
AlzghoulA (2017) The role of leadership style on employee outcome: An overview. American Academic & Scholarly Research Journal9(5.
6.
AwanUShamimSKhanZ, et al. (2021) Big data analytics capability and decision-making: The role of data-driven insight on circular economy performance. Technological Forecasting and Social Change168: 120766.
7.
BlomeCSchoenherrTEcksteinD (2014) The impact of knowledge transfer and complexity on supply chain flexibility: A knowledge-based view. International Journal of Production Economics147: 307–316.
8.
BožičKDimovskiV (2019a) Business intelligence and analytics for value creation: The role of absorptive capacity. International Journal of Information Management46: 93–103.
9.
BožičKDimovskiV (2019b) Business intelligence and analytics use, innovation ambidexterity, and firm performance: A dynamic capabilities perspective. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems28(4): 101578.
10.
CaseiroNCoelhoA (2019) The influence of business intelligence capacity, network learning and innovativeness on startups performance. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge4(3): 139–145.
11.
ChenHChiangRHStoreyVC (2012) Business intelligence and analytics: From big data to big impact. MIS quarterly1165–1188.
12.
ChenLNathR (2018) Business analytics maturity of firms: An examination of the relationships between managerial perception of IT, business analytics maturity and success. Information Systems Management35(1): 62–77.
13.
ChenYLinZ (2021) Business intelligence capabilities and firm performance: A study in China. International Journal of Information Management57: 102232.
14.
ChenYWangYNevoS, et al. (2014) IT Capability and organizational performance: The roles of business process agility and environmental factors. European Journal of Information Systems23(3): 326–342.
15.
ChengCZhongHCaoL (2020) Facilitating speed of internationalization: The roles of business intelligence and organizational agility. Journal of Business Research110: 95–103.
16.
CohenJ (2013) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: Academic press.
17.
CuradoCBontisN (2006) The knowledge-based view of the firm and its theoretical precursor. International Journal of Learning and Intellectual Capital3(4): 367–381.
18.
DashGPaulJ (2021) CB-SEM vs PLS-SEM methods for research in social sciences and technology forecasting. Technological Forecasting and Social Change173: 121092.
19.
DimitratosPThanosICPetrouA, et al. (2011) Chapter 3 The Effects of Formalisation, Hierarchical Decentralisation and Lateral Communication: Strategic Decision-Making Processes on SME International Performance. In: AVerbekeATTavares-LehmannRVan Tulder (eds) Entrepreneurship in the Global Firm (Progress in International Business Research, Vol. 6, pp. 51–75) Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
20.
DongJQYangCH (2020) Business value of big data analytics: A systems-theoretic approach and empirical testInformation & Management57(1): 103124.
21.
DykesBJHughes-MorganMKolevKD, et al. (2019) Organizational speed as a dynamic capability: Toward a holistic perspective. Strategic Organization17(2): 266–278.
22.
ElbashirMZCollierPASuttonSG (2011) The role of organizational absorptive capacity in strategic use of business intelligence to support integrated management control systems. The Accounting Review86(1): 155–184.
23.
FerrarisAMazzoleniADevalleA, et al. (2019) Big data analytics capabilities and knowledge management: Impact on firm performance. Management Decision57(8): 1923–1936.
24.
FitzpatrickWMBurkeDR (2003) Competitive intelligence, corporate security and the virtual organization. Advances in Competitiveness Research11(1): 20–46.
25.
FoleyÉGuillemetteMG (2010) What is business intelligence?International Journal of Business Intelligence Research (IJBIR)1(4): 1–28.
26.
FornellCLarckerDF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research18(1): 39–50.
27.
FosterKSmithGAriyachandraT, et al. (2015) Business intelligence competency center: Improving data and decisions. Information Systems Management32(3): 229–233.
28.
FrancioniBClarkKD (2020) The mediating role of speed in the global sourcing decision process. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management 26(2): 100609.
29.
GrantRM (1996) Toward a knowledge–based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal17(S2): 109–122.
30.
HagenBZucchellaA (2014) Born global or born to run? The long-term growth of born global firms. Management International Review54(4): 497–525.
31.
HairJFHultGTMRingleC, et al. (2016) A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (Pls-Sem). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
32.
HairJFRingleCMSarstedtM (2011) PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice19(2): 139–152.
33.
HairJFRisherJJSarstedtM, et al. (2019) When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review31(1): 2–24.
34.
HassiniESurtiCSearcyC (2012) A literature review and a case study of sustainable supply chains with a focus on metrics. International Journal of Production Economics140: 69–82.
35.
HayajnehJAMElayanMBHAbdellatifMAM, et al. (2022) Impact of business analytics and π-shaped skills on innovative performance: Findings from PLS-SEM and fsQCA. Technology in Society68: 101914.
36.
HenselerJRingleCMSarstedtM (2015) A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science43(1): 115–135.
37.
HenselerJRingleCMSinkovicsRR (2009) The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. In: RRSinkovicsPNGhauri (eds) New Challenges to International Marketing (Vol. 20, pp. 277–319). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1474-7979(2009)0000020014
38.
JahmaniKFadiyaSOAbubakarAM, et al. (2018) Knowledge content quality, perceived usefulness, KMS use for sharing and retrieval: A flock leadership application. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems48(4): 470–490.
39.
JordanJEllenC (2009) Business need, data and business intelligence. Journal of Digital Asset Management5(1): 10–20.
40.
KalasinK (2020) Strategic change: The impact of senior foreign managers, firm size, and uncertainty avoidance. Review of International Business and Strategy31(1): 38–61.
41.
KanadlıSBBankewitzMZhangP (2018) Job-related diversity: The comprehensiveness and speed of board decision-making processes—an upper echelons approach. Journal of Management and Governance22(2): 427–456.
42.
KhaddamAAAlzghoulAAbusweilemMA, et al. (2021) Business intelligence and firm performance: A moderated-mediated model. The Service Industries Journal: 1–17. 10.1080/02642069.2021.1969367.
43.
McCarthyIPRuckmanK (2017) Licensing speed: Its determinants and payoffs. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management46: 52–66.
44.
MertİSSenCAlzghoulA (2021) Organizational justice, life satisfaction, and happiness: The mediating role of workplace social courage. Kybernetes51(7): 2215–2232.
45.
MikalefPBouraMLekakosG, et al. (2019) Big data analytics and firm performance: Findings from a mixed-method approach. Journal of Business Research98: 261–276.
46.
MikalefPGuptaM (2021) Artificial intelligence capability: Conceptualization, measurement calibration, and empirical study on its impact on organizational creativity and firm performance. Information & Management58(3): 103434.
47.
MillerCC (2008) Decisional comprehensiveness and firm performance: Towards a more complete understanding. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making21(5): 598–620.
48.
MüllerJMBuligaOVoigtKI (2021) The role of absorptive capacity and innovation strategy in the design of industry 4.0 business Models-A comparison between SMEs and large enterprises. European Management Journal39(3): 333–343.
49.
OcampoL (2018) A probabilistic fuzzy analytic network process approach (PROFUZANP) in formulating sustainable manufacturing strategy infrastructural decisions under firm size influence. International Journal of Management Science and Engineering Management13(3): 158–174.
50.
PetrouAPHadjieliasEThanosIC, et al. (2020) Strategic decision-making processes, international environmental munificence and the accelerated internationalization of SMEs. International Business Review29(5): 101735.
51.
PodsakoffPMMacKenzieSBPodsakoffNP (2012) Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology63: 539–569.
52.
RaguseoEVitariCPigniF (2020) Profiting from big data analytics: The moderating roles of industry concentration and firm size. International Journal of Production Economics229: 107758.
53.
RahimniaFMolaviH (2021) A model for examining the effects of communication on innovation performance: Emphasis on the intermediary role of strategic decision-making speed. European Journal of Innovation Management24(3): 1035–1056.
54.
RigdonEE (2012) Rethinking partial least squares path modeling: In praise of simple methods. Long Range Planning45(5-6): 341–358.
55.
SambaCTabeshPThanosIC, et al. (2020) Method in the madness? A meta-analysis on the strategic implications of decision comprehensiveness. Strategic Organization 19(3): 414–440.
56.
SarstedtMHenselerJRingleCM (2011) Multi-group analysis in Partial Least Squares (PLS) path modeling: Alternative methods and empirical results. Advances in International Marketing22: 195–218.
57.
ShamoutMD (2020) Supply chain data analytics and supply chain agility: A fuzzy sets (fsQCA) approach. International Journal of Organizational Analysis28(5): 1055–1067.
58.
ShamoutMD (2021) The nexus between supply chain analytic, innovation and robustness capability: Does firm age matter?VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems51(1): 163–176.
59.
ShepherdNGMooiEAElbannaS, et al. (2020) Deciding fast: Examining the relationship between strategic decision speed and decision quality across multiple environmental contexts. European Management Review18(2): 119–140.
60.
Suša-VugecDBosilj-VukšićVPejić BachM, et al. (2020) Business intelligence and organizational performance: The role of alignment with business process management. Business Process Management Journal26(6): 1709–1730.
61.
TalaulicarTGrundeiJWerderAV (2005) Strategic decision making in start-ups: The effect of top management team organization and processes on speed and comprehensiveness. Journal of Business Venturing20(4): 519–541.
62.
TorresRSidorovaAJonesMC (2018) Enabling firm performance through business intelligence and analytics: A dynamic capabilities perspective. Information & Management55(7): 822–839.
63.
TreffersTKlarnerPHuyQN (2020) Emotions, time, and strategy: The effects of happiness and sadness on strategic decision-making under time constraints. Long Range Planning53(5): 101954.
64.
TrieuVH (2017) Getting value from business intelligence systems: A review and research agenda. Decision Support Systems93: 111–124.
65.
VerhoefPKoogeEWalkN (2016) Creating value with big data analytics: Making smarter marketing decisions. New York: Routledge.
66.
Vicente-LorenteJDSuárez-GonzálezI (2007) Ownership traits and downsizing behaviour: Evidence for the largest Spanish firms, 1990—1998. Organization Studies28(11): 1613–1638.
67.
VugecDSVukšićVBBachMP, et al. (2020) Business intelligence and organizational performance: The role of alignment with business process management. Business Process Management Journal26(6): 1709–1730.
68.
WallySBaumJR (1994) Personal and structural determinants of the pace of strategic decision making. Academy of Management Journal37(4): 932–956.
69.
WambaSFAkterSEdwardsA, et al. (2015) How ‘big data’ can make big impact: Findings from a systematic review and a longitudinal case study. International Journal of Production Economics165: 234–246.
70.
WambaSFGunasekaranAAkterS, et al. (2017) Big data analytics and firm performance: Effects of dynamic capabilities. Journal of Business Research70: 356–365.
71.
WandaPStianS (2015) The secret of my success: An exploratory study of business intelligence management in the Norwegian industry. Procedia Computer Science64: 240–247.
72.
WangYByrdTA (2017) Business analytics-enabled decision-making effectiveness through knowledge absorptive capacity in health care. Journal of Knowledge Management21(3): 517–539.
73.
YakubuMNDasukiSIAbubakarAM, et al. (2020) Determinants of learning management systems adoption in Nigeria: A hybrid SEM and artificial neural network approach. Education and Information Technologies25(5): 1–25.
74.
YiuLMDYeungACLJongAPL (2020) Business intelligence systems and operational capability: An empirical analysis of high-tech sectors. Industrial Management & Data Systems120(6): 1195–1215.
75.
ZahraSAGeorgeG (2002) Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review27(2): 185–203.
76.
ZahraSALarranetaBGalánJL (2015) Absorptive capacity and technological innovation. Wiley Encyclopedia of Management13: 1–5.
77.
ZhaoXLynchJGChenQ (2010) Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research37(2): 197–206.
78.
ZhengZFaderPPadmanabhanB (2012) From business intelligence to competitive intelligence: Inferring competitive measures using augmented site-centric data. Information Systems Research23(3-part-1): 698–720.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
