Digital platforms provide organizations with new ways to conduct sourcing activities. Crowdsourcing has emerged as one potential method of sourcing various kinds of information technology (IT) services. Notwithstanding the benefits of IT crowdsourcing services (ITCSs), there is a lack of clarity about why some firms procure services through ITCS, whereas others do not. Drawing on the organizational capabilities perspective, we hypothesize that in-house IT administration capability and IT flexibility jointly enhance a firm’s ITCS Platform Suitability Assessment, which, in turn, leads to higher ITCS Service Procurement. We also posit that ITCS Platform Suitability Assessment mediates the relationship between IT Administration Capability and ITCS Service Procurement. Our empirical analysis of survey data from 308 firms in the United States supports our hypotheses. Our results suggest that firms that develop IT administrative capabilities and IT flexibility assess ITCS platform characteristics as more suitable for ITCS-related activities. ITCS Platform Suitability Assessment, in turn, drives firms to procure operational services (e.g., setting up automatic payments) and strategic services (e.g., project management) from the loose configuration of workers in the gig economy. Our results contribute to theory by positing and testing a theoretical model that expands the theoretical base used to explain ITCS sourcing. We discuss the implications for the business value of IT platforms, organizational structure, and capabilities in regard to future sourcing strategies.
ÅgerfalkPJConboyKMyersMD (2020) Information systems in the age of pandemics: Covid-19 and beyond. European Journal of Information Systems29: 203–207.
2.
AlaghehbandFKRivardSWuS, et al. (2011) An assessment of the use of transaction cost theory in information technology outsourcing. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems20(2): 125–138.
3.
AngSSlaughterSA (2001) Work outcomes and job design for contract versus permanent information systems professionals on software development teams. MIS Quarterly25: 321–350.
4.
AngSStraubDW (1998) Production and transaction economies and is outsourcing. A study of the US banking industry. MIS Quarterly22(4): 535–552.
5.
AralSWeillP (2007) It assets, organizational capabilities, and firm performance: how resource allocations and organizational differences explain performance variation. Organization Science18(5): 763–780.
AugierMTeeceDJ (2008) Strategy as evolution with design: the foundations of dynamic capabilities and the role of managers in the economic system. Organization Studies29(8–9): 1187–1208.
8.
BapnaRBaruaAManiD, et al. (2010) Research commentary—cooperation, coordination, and governance in multisourcing: an agenda for analytical and empirical research. Information Systems Research21(4): 785–795.
9.
BarretoI (2010) Dynamic capabilities: a review of past research and an agenda for the future. Journal of management36(1): 256–280.
10.
BenarochMLichtensteinYFinkL (2016) Contract design choices and the balance of ex-ante and ex-post transaction costs in software development outsourcing. MIS Quarterly40(1): 57–82.
11.
BenitezJRayGHenselerJ (2018) Impact of information technology infrastructure flexibility on mergers and acquisitions. MIS Quarterly42(1): 25–43.
12.
BentlerPM (1990) Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin107(2): 238–246.
13.
BerenteNVandenboschBAubertB (2009) Information flows and business process integration. Business Process Management Journal15(1): 119–141.
14.
BhandariRChatterjeeSGuptaK, et al. (2018) How to avoid the pitfalls of it crowdsourcing to boost speed, find talent, and reduce costs. In: McKinsey Digital. New York, NY: McKinsey.
15.
BharadwajAS (2000) A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firm performance: an empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly24: 169–196.
16.
BhattGDGroverVGroverV (2005) Types of information technology capabilities and their role in competitive advantage: an empirical study. Journal of Management Information Systems22(2): 253–277.
17.
BlohmILeimeisterJMKrcmarH (2013) Crowdsourcing: how to benefit from (too) many great ideas. MIS Quarterly Executive12(4).
18.
BollenKANobleMD (2011) Structural equation models and the quantification of behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(supplement_3), 15639-15646.
19.
BrahmFTarzijánJ (2014) Transactional hazards, institutional change, and capabilities: integrating the theories of the firm. Strategic Management Journal35(2): 224–245.
20.
BrynjolfssonEMcAfeeA (2011) Race against the Machine: How the Digital Revolution Is Accelerating Innovation, Driving Productivity, and Irreversibly Transforming Employment and the Economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Center for Digital Business.
21.
BurtchGCarnahanSGreenwoodBN (2018) Can you gig it? An empirical examination of the gig economy and entrepreneurial activity. Management Science64(12): 5497–5520.
22.
ByrdTTurnerD (2000) Measuring the flexibility of information technology infrastructure: exploratory analysis of a construct. Journal of Management Information Systems17(1): 167–208.
23.
CarsonSJMadhokAWuT (2006) Uncertainty, opportunism, and governance: the effects of volatility and ambiguity on formal and relational contracting. Academy of Management Journal49(5): 1058–1077.
24.
ChangYBGurbaxaniVRavindranK (2017) Information technology outsourcing: asset transfer and the role of contract. MIS Quarterly41(3): 959–973.
25.
ChatterjeeDDSegarsAHWatsonRT (2006) Realizing the promise of E-business: developing and leveraging electronic partnering options. California Management Review48(4): 60–83.
26.
ChiuHHPalupiGSZhuYQ (2022) Workers’ affective commitment in the gig economy: the role of IS quality, organizational support, and fairness. Pacific Asia Journal of the Association for Information Systems14(3): 3.
27.
ChoDHChoiYJ (2012) Building up it flexibility with outsourcing expansion: a case study of distribution company. Information Systems Review14(3): 1–23.
28.
CommitteeCS (2007) Cobit 4.1. Rolling Meadow: IT Governance Institute.
29.
DamianidesM (2005) Sarbanes-oxley and it governance: new guidance on it control and compliance. Information Systems Management22(1): 77–85.
30.
DengXNJoshiK (2016) Why individuals participate in micro-task crowdsourcing work environment: revealing crowdworkers’ perceptions. Journal of the Association for Information Systems17(10): 648–673.
31.
DengXJoshiKGalliersRD (2016) The duality of empowerment and marginalization in microtask crowdsourcing: giving voice to the less powerful through value sensitive design. MIS Quarterly40(2): 279–302.
32.
DibbernJHirschheimR (2020) Introduction: riding the waves of outsourcing change in the era of digital transformation. In: Information Systems Outsourcing. Berlin: Springer, 1–20.
33.
DibbernJChinWWHeinzlA (2012) Systemic determinants of the information systems outsourcing decision: a comparative study of German and United States firms.
34.
DibbernJGolesTHirschheimR, et al. (2004) Information systems outsourcing: a survey and analysis of the literature. ACM SIGMIS - Data Base: The DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems35(4): 6–102.
35.
DibbernJWinklerJHeinzlA (2008) Explaining variations in client extra costs between software projects offshored to India. MIS Quarterly32(2): 333–366.
36.
DosiGNelsonRRWinterSG (2000) The Nature and Dynamics of Organizational Capabilities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
37.
ElbannaAIdowuA (2022) Crowdwork, digital liminality and the enactment of culturally recognised alternatives to Western precarity: beyond epistemological terra nullius. European Journal of Information Systems31(1): 128–144.
38.
GantmanSFedorowiczJ (2016) Communication and control in outsourced is development projects: mapping to cobit domains. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems21(21): 63–83.
39.
GaricanoLWuY (2012) Knowledge, communication, and organizational capabilities. Organization Science23(5): 1382–1397.
GawerA (2021) Digital platforms’ boundaries: the interplay of firm scope, platform sides, and digital interfaces. Long Range Planning54(5): 102045.
42.
Shafiei GolESteinM-KAvitalM (2019) Crowdwork platform governance toward organizational value creation. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems28(2): 175–195.
43.
GoldAHMalhotraASegarsAH (2001) Knowledge management: an organizational capabilities perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems18(1): 185–214.
44.
GonzalezRGascoJLlopisJ (2006) Information systems outsourcing: a literature analysis. Information & Management43(7): 821–834.
45.
GooJHuangCD (2008) Facilitating relational governance through service level agreements in IT outsourcing: an application of the commitment–trust theory. Decision Support Systems46(1): 216–232.
46.
GooJKishoreRRaoHR, et al. (2009) The role of service level agreements in relational management of information technology outsourcing: an empirical study. MIS Quarterly33: 119–145.
47.
GopalAKokaBR (2012) The asymmetric benefits of relational flexibility: evidence from software development outsourcing. MIS Quarterly36(2): 553–576.
48.
GosainSMalhotraAEl SawyOA (2004) Coordinating for flexibility in E-business supply chains. Journal of Management Information Systems21(3): 7–45.
49.
GregoryRWBeckRKeilM (2013) Control balancing in information systems development offshoring projects. MIS Quarterly37(4), 1211–1232.
50.
GroverVTengJTFiedlerKD (2002) Investigating the role of information technology in building buyer-supplier relationships. Journal of the Association for Information Systems3(1): 217–245.
51.
GuthS (2007) The Vendor Management Office: Unleashing the Power of Strategic Sourcing. Morrisville, NC: Lulu. com.
52.
HahnEDDohJPBunyaratavejK (2009) The evolution of risk in information systems offshoring: the impact of home country risk, firm learning, and competitive dynamics. MIS quarterly33(3): 597–616.
53.
HanKMithasS (2013) Information technology outsourcing and non-it operating costs: an empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly37(1): 315–331.
54.
HartPJSaundersCS (1998) Emerging electronic partnerships: antecedents and dimensions of edi use from the supplier’s perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems14(4): 87–111.
55.
HelfatCEPeterafMA (2015) Managerial cognitive capabilities and the microfoundations of dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal36(6): 831–850.
56.
HoltTPLoraasTM (2019) Using qualtrics panels to source external auditors: a replication study. Journal of Information Systems33(1): 29–41.
57.
IqbalNAhmadMAllenMM, et al. (2018) Does E-hrm improve labour productivity? A study of commercial bank workplaces in Pakistan. Employee Relations40(2): 281–297.
58.
JarvisCBMacKenzieSBPodsakoffPM (2003) A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research30(2): 199–218.
59.
JoshiKChiLDattaA, et al. (2010) Changing the competitive landscape: continuous innovation through it-enabled knowledge capabilities. Information Systems Research21(3): 472–495.
60.
JoshiKTaylorJDengX (2022) Accounting for digital variability in crowd work: three research considerations. ACM SIGMIS - Data Base: The DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems53(3): 7–9.
61.
KaganerECarmelEHirschheimR, et al. (2013) Managing the human cloud. MIT Sloan Management Review54(2): 23.
62.
Karimi-AlaghehbandFRivardS (2019) Information technology outsourcing and architecture dynamic capabilities as enablers of organizational agility. Journal of Information Technology34(2): 129–159.
63.
Karimi-AlaghehbandFRivardS (2020) It outsourcing success: a dynamic capability-based model. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems29(1): 101599.
64.
KathuriaASaldanhaTKhuntiaJ, et al. (2015) Strategic Intent, Contract Duration, and Performance: Evidence from Micro-outsourcing. Ft. Worth, TX, USA: International Conference of Information Systems.
65.
Karimi-AlaghehbandFRivardS (2020) IT outsourcing success: a dynamic capability-based model. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems29(1): 101599.
66.
KathuriaAMannAKhuntiaJ, et al. (2018) A strategic value appropriation path for cloud computing. Journal of Management Information Systems35(3): 740–775.
KhuntiaJKathuriaASaldanhaTJ, et al. (2019) Benefits of it-enabled flexibilities for foreign versus local firms in emerging economies. Journal of Management Information Systems36(3): 855–892.
LangloisRN (1998) Capabilities and the Theory of the Firm. Economic Organization, Capabilities and Co-ordination, Essays in Honor of GB Richardson, 183–203.
71.
LeeJ-NMirandaSMKimY-M (2004) It outsourcing strategies: universalistic, contingency, and configurational explanations of success. Information Systems Research15(2): 110–131.
72.
LeeJ-NParkYStraubDW, et al. (2019) Holistic archetypes of it outsourcing strategy: a contingency fit and configurational approach. MIS Quarterly43(4).
73.
LeimeisterJMHuberMBretschneiderU, et al. (2009) Leveraging crowdsourcing: activation-supporting components for it-based ideas competition. Journal of Management Information Systems26(1): 197–224.
74.
LeonardiPM (2011) When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies. MIS Quarterly35(1), 147–167.
75.
LiangCPengJHongY, et al. (2023) The hidden costs and benefits of monitoring in the gig economy. Information Systems Research34(1): 297–318.
76.
LinTHDaytonCM (1997) Model selection information criteria for non-nested latent class models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics22(3): 249–264.
77.
LuYRamamurthyK (2011) Understanding the link between information technology capability and organizational agility: an empirical examination. MIS Quarterly35(4): 931–954.
78.
MacCallumRCBrowneMWSugawaraHM (1996) Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods1(2): 130–149.
79.
MacDonaldRGiazitzogluA (2019) Youth, enterprise and precarity: or, what is, and what is wrong with, the ‘gig economy. Journal of Sociology55(2): 1440783319837604.
80.
MacKenzieSBPodsakoffPMPodsakoffNP (2011) Construct measurement and validation procedures in Mis and behavioral research: integrating new and existing techniques. MIS Quarterly35(2), 293–334.
81.
MajchrzakAMalhotraA (2013) Towards an information systems perspective and research agenda on crowdsourcing for innovation. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems22(4): 257–268.
82.
MajchrzakAMarkusML (2012) Technology Affordances and Constraints in Management Information Systems (Mis). Encyclopedia of Management Theory. Sage Publications.
83.
ManiDBaruaAWhinstonA (2010) An empirical analysis of the impact of information capabilities design on business process outsourcing performance. MIS Quarterly34: 39–62.
84.
McIntyreDSrinivasanAAfuahA, et al. (2021) Multisided platforms as new organizational forms. Academy of Management Perspectives35(4): 566–583.
85.
MirandaSMKavanCB (2005) Moments of governance in is outsourcing: conceptualizing effects of contracts on value capture and creation. Journal of Information Technology20(3): 152–169.
86.
MishraANAgarwalR (2010) Technological frames, organizational capabilities, and it use: an empirical investigation of electronic procurement. Information Systems Research21(2): 249–270.
87.
MoJSarkarSMenonS (2018) Know when to run: recommendations in crowdsourcing contests. MIS Quarterly42(3): 919–944.
88.
MoJSarkarSMenonS (2021) Competing tasks and task quality: an empirical study of crowdsourcing contests. MIS Quarterly45(4).
89.
MöhlmannMZalmansonLHenfridssonO, et al. (2021) Algorithmic management of work on online labor platforms: when matching meets control. MIS Quarterly45(4).
90.
MorseA (2015) Peer-to-Peer crowdfunding: information and the potential for disruption in consumer lending. Annual Review of Financial Economics7(1): 463–482.
91.
MuthénBMuthénL (2019) Mplus: a general latent variable modeling program.
92.
NambisanSWrightMFeldmanM (2019) The digital transformation of innovation and entrepreneurship: progress, challenges and key themes. Research Policy48(8): 103773.
93.
NevoDKotlarskyJ (2014) Primary vendor capabilities in a mediated outsourcing model: can it service providers leverage crowdsourcing?Decision Support Systems65: 17–27.
94.
NevoDKotlarskyJ (2020a) Crowdsourcing as a strategic is sourcing phenomenon: critical review and insights for future research. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems29(4): 101593.
95.
NevoDKotlarskyJ (2020) Scoping review of crowdsourcing literature: insights for IS research. Information Systems Outsourcing: The Era of Digital Transformation361–386.
96.
NunnallyJC (1975) Psychometric theory—25 years ago and now. Educational Researcher4(10): 7–21.
97.
OlssonHHConchuirEOÅgerfalkPJ, et al. (2008) Two-stage offshoring: an investigation of the Irish bridge. MIS Quarterly32: 257–279.
98.
OverbyEBharadwajASambamurthyV (2006) Enterprise agility and the enabling role of information technology. European Journal of Information Systems15(2): 120–131.
99.
PatelCBudhwarPWitzemannA, et al. (2019) Hr outsourcing: the impact on hr’s strategic role and remaining in-house hr function. Journal of Business Research103: 397–406.
100.
PavlouPAEl SawyOA (2006) From it leveraging competence to competitive advantage in turbulent environments: the case of new product development. Information Systems Research17(3): 198–227.
101.
PavlouPAEl SawyOA (2010) The “third hand”: it-enabled competitive advantage in turbulence through improvisational capabilities. Information Systems Research21(3): 443–471.
102.
PodsakoffPMMacKenzieSBLeeJ-Y, et al. (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology88(5): 879–903.
103.
PostonRSKettingerWJSimonJC (2009) Managing the vendor set: achieving best pricing and quality service in it outsourcing. MIS Quarterly Executive8(2).
104.
RaiATangX (2010) Leveraging it capabilities and competitive process capabilities for the management of interorganizational relationship portfolios. Information Systems Research21(3): 516–542.
105.
RamasubbuNMithasSKrishnanMS, et al. (2008) Work dispersion, process-based learning, and offshore software development performance. MIS Quarterly32: 437–458.
106.
RayAWRayJJ (2006) Strategic benefits to smes from third party web services: an action research analysis. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems15(4): 273–291.
107.
RigdonEE (1996) Cfi versus rmsea: a comparison of two fit indexes for structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal3(4): 369–379.
108.
RobertsNGroverV (2012) Leveraging information technology infrastructure to facilitate a firm's customer agility and competitive activity: an empirical investigation. Journal of Management Information Systems28(4): 231–270.
109.
RustagiSKingWRKirschLJ (2008) Predictors of formal control usage in it outsourcing partnerships. Information Systems Research19(2): 126–143.
110.
SabherwalR (2020) Synthesis: outsourcing of information services: where are we? In: Information Systems Outsourcing. Berlin: Springer, 469–481.
111.
SahaymASteensmaHKSchillingMA (2007) The influence of information technology on the use of loosely coupled organizational forms: an industry-level analysis. Organization Science18(5): 865–880.
112.
SegarsAH (1997) Assessing the unidimensionality of measurement: a paradigm and illustration within the context of information systems research. Omega25(1): 107–121.
113.
SiaSKNeoBS (1997) Reengineering effectiveness and the redesign of organizational control: a case study of the inland revenue authority of Singapore. Journal of Management Information Systems14(1): 69–92.
114.
SimonJCPostonRSKettingerB (2009) Creating better governance of offshore services. Information Systems Management26(2): 110–122.
115.
SimonssonMJohnsonPEkstedtM (2010) The effect of it governance maturity on it governance performance. Information Systems Management27(1): 10–24.
116.
StraubDW (1989) Validating instruments in mis research. MIS quarterly13(2): 147–169.
117.
TaftiAMithasSKrishnanMS (2013) The effect of information technology–enabled flexibility on formation and market value of alliances. Management Science59(1): 207–225.
118.
TallonPPPinsonneaultA (2011) Competing perspectives on the link between strategic information technology alignment and organizational agility: insights from a mediation model. MIS Quarterly35: 463–486.
119.
TanCSiaSK (2006) Managing flexibility in outsourcing. Journal of the Association for Information Systems7(1): 179–206.
120.
TanriverdiHVenkatramanN (2005) Knowledge relatedness and the performance of multibusiness firms. Strategic Management Journal26(2): 97–119.
121.
TaylorJ (2015) Crowdsourcing it work: a three-fold perspective from the workers, buyers, and platform providers. In: Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGMIS Conference on Computers and People Research,Newport Beach, CA, 15June 2015, pp. 1–2: ACM.
122.
TaylorJ (2017) Going public: using the cloud to improve project delivery. Information Systems Management34(2): 105–116.
123.
TaylorJJoshiK (2018) How it leaders can benefit from the digital crowdsourcing workforce. MIS Quarterly Executive2018(4).
124.
TaylorJJoshiK (2019) Joining the crowd: the career anchors of information technology workers participating in crowdsourcing. Information Systems Journal29(3): 641–673.
125.
TippinsMJSohiRS (2003) It competency and firm performance: is organizational learning a missing link?Strategic Management Journal24(8): 745–761.
126.
TiwanaAKonsynskiBBushAA (2010) Research commentary—platform evolution: coevolution of platform architecture, governance, and environmental dynamics. Information Systems Research21(4): 675–687.
127.
VeigaADEloffJH (2007) An information security governance framework. Information Systems Management24(4): 361–372.
128.
VenkatramanN (1990) Performance implications of strategic coalignment: a methodological perspective. Journal of Management studies27(1): 19–41.
129.
VithayathilJ (2017) Will cloud computing make the information technology (it) department obsolete?Information Systems Journal28: 634–649.
130.
WangNLiangHZhongW, et al. (2012) Resource structuring or capability building? An empirical study of the business value of information technology. Journal of Management Information Systems29(2): 325–367.
131.
WeigeltC (2013) Leveraging supplier capabilities: the role of locus of capability deployment. Strategic Management Journal34(1): 1–21.
132.
WienerMCramWABenlianA (2020a) Technology-mediated control legitimacy in the gig economy: conceptualization and nomological network. In: Information Systems Outsourcing. Berlin: Springer, 387–410.
133.
WienerMSaundersCMarabelliM (2020b) Big-data business models: a critical literature review and multiperspective research framework. Journal of Information Technology35(1): 66–91.
134.
WillcocksLGriffithsC (2010) The crucial role of middle management in outsourcing. MIS Quarterly Executive9(3): 177–193.
135.
WinterSBerenteNHowisonJ, et al. (2014) Beyond the organizational ‘container’: conceptualizing 21st century sociotechnical work. Information and Organization24(4): 250–269.
136.
YangKZhangKRenJ, et al. (2015) Security and privacy in mobile crowdsourcing networks: challenges and opportunities. IEEE Communications Magazine53(8): 75–81.
137.
YeHJKankanhalliA (2015) Investigating the antecedents of organizational task crowdsourcing. Information & Management52(1): 98–110.
138.
ZahraSAGeorgeG (2002) The net-enabled business innovation cycle and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Information Systems Research13(2): 147–150.
139.
ZhangPZhaoKKumarRL (2016) Impact of it governance and it capability on firm performance. Information Systems Management33(4): 357–373.
140.
ZolloMWinterSG (2002) Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science13(3): 339–351.
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.
