This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been

fully edited. Content

may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 1

Drivers of Big Data Analytics’ Adoption and Implications of Management

Decision-Making on Big Data Adoption and Firms’ Financial and Non-Financial
Performance: Evidence from Nigeria’s Manufacturing and Service Industries

Abstract

Despite advances in Big Data Analytics, its utilitarian discourse is yet to move beyond early
capture to focus on its post adtoption impacts on firms’ financial and non-financial
performance, especially in Nigeria’s. This study advances BDA beyond organizational
readiness for change by empirically and analytically focusing on the reality of 261 Nigerian
professionals by drawing on business-to-business marketing, dynamic capabilities, and
Technology-Organization-Environment theoretical frameworks to contribute a conceptual
model (Figure 1) on factors which really impact on organizations' readiness to adopt BDA.
Consequently, our study’s findings were used to develop Figure 2, showing the direct and
moderating nature of interactions between BDA and TOE variables on BDA adoption.
However, whereas hypotheses three and four confirm top management’s support and overall
organizational readiness, paradoxically, this study’s hypotheses five and seven contribute to
existing BDA discourse by highlight that environmental, competitive pressure, including
regulation do not support the adoption of BDA. Additionally, while external support (H6)
was found conduisive for BDA adoption, interestingly, hypotheses eight, nine and 10a were
also found supportive of not only financial but also non-financial performance. However,
contrary to current theorisation, hypotheses 10b was not supportive of non-financial
performance. Our results contribute to BDA’s business competitiveness and regulation.

Keywords: Big data adoption, dynamic capabilities, management, technology-organization-

environment, manufacturing and service industries, Nigeria

Introduction

While big data analytics (BDA) is witnessing an academic spike [14], and the

technological, organizational and environmental (TOE) framework appears to be favourite

when most organizations' managers decide whether to adopt BDA or not [57; 58; 59; 60; 61;

135; 28; 1], its extension beyond the dominant utilititarian value [i.e., the impacts of

management decision on BDA adoption] has lagged particularly in the way it facilitates

organizations’ readiness for BD adoption and the post-decision making impacts on firms'

financial and non-financial performance. While this lacuna highlights the significant need for

more in-depth investigations into organizations’ BDA adoption to understand how impacts

not only on management decision making capabilities but also on organizations’ financial and
Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 2

non-financial performance opportunities [88], studying how digitalized business operations

have revolutionized the volume, variety, and velocity of structured and unstructured

information mechanisms through what is now known as "Big Data" [15] cannot be timelier for

businesses and their partners [39;115], particularly in non western contexts. Therefore, the

discourse of adopting these new western-based BDA techniques and capabilities and the

reality of organizations’ managers’ readiness in revolutionizing business strategies, product

and service development, human resources (HR), operations, and other essential processes

[22] to meet the BDA of financial and non-financial performance from a non-western context

are yet to be empirically studied and contributed to.

BDA is defined as the examination of extensive data, via modern technology to help

reveal important information and facilitate more informed and better business decision-

making [85]. Despite these benefits/successes, it is also opined that most businesses are yet to

capitalize on what the utilitarian benefits-discourse of BDA [88]. While such a lapse may be

attributable to organizations’ general lack of the full understanding of the anticipated benefits

of a range of information technology (IT) types and the analytical capabilities required to

address a range of threats to BDA adoption [45], the scholarship also evinces [87] the lack of

organizations’ management and leadership’s understanding of the factors driving BDA

adoption [87]. This additional lacuna provides further justification to focus on the

fundamental drivers why organizations’ management adopting BDA and the practical

impacts of their decisions on Nigerian firms’ readiness to adopt BD and to perform.

Previous studies on BDA [29;42] have focused on individual-level adoption

behaviours while organizational level BD adoption and its impacts on organizations’

readiness to perform financially and non-financially outside western contexts remains

relatively scarce [112;139;27]. The very few studies focusing on the organizational-level BDA

adoption mainly align with the BDA readiness discourse [115;114] at the expense of how post

adoption impacts on management and staff’s behaviours (i.e., usage and benefits) [144;23] and

significantly how the BDA drivers inform management’s decision-making capabilities and the

post decision making impacts on organizations’ readiness and constraints to perform

financially and non-financially. Previous studies have demonstrated how BDA’s application

have popularized its utilitarian value discourse in organizational operations - including

business intelligence, customer relationship management, and marketing [74] while the

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must
be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/
become-an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 3

required management capabilities in BD’s adoption for the required firm-level financial and

non-financial performance in developing economies is sorely missing. To address the afore

gaps, this paper focuses on the following research question:

‘What are the TOE characteristics driving Nigerian management’s BDA adoption and the real

post-decision making impacts on organizational level financial and non-financial performance?’

The authors analyze survey data from 261 management respondents from Nigeria's

manufacturing and service sectors to address the key research question and nine testable

hypotheses. By drawing from business-to-business (B2B) marketing to examine how western-

based BD logics impact on firm-level performance outcomes [115], the authors examined a

range of technological, organizational and environmental factors, information flows and

management learning capability and BDA adoption propensity [56;129]. By combining

capabilities with the TOE framework, we seek to develop understanding on the western

discourse on the benefits of BDA adoption and the practical impacts of managements’ post-

decision making on organizational-level performance [56;129]. Secondly, by drawing from

Dynamic Capabilities theory [35], the authors examine the extent to which BDA applications

in B2B marketing situations not only provide substantial dynamic information and

management’s decision-processing power in resource configurations and reconfigurations

[116;119] to help explore what its real impacts on an organization readiness to perform

financially and non-financially. By drawing on the Technology-Organization-Environment

framework (TOE – [124], the authors examine the multidimensional range of factors that the

western discourse on BD suggests could lead to and its practical and theoretical impact in a

Nigerian manufacturing and service industry setting [8].

The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: the following section will explore the

process and drivers of BD adoption, followed by the study’s theoretical framework and its

methodology. Findings on management’s decision to adopt BDA and practical impacts on

firm financial and non-financial performance are highlighted and the study’s contributions to

BDA are discussed. Finally, the implications and future research are presented.

Understanding Big Data (BD)

There is no universally agreed definition of BD, However, for this study, the authors

opted to draw on the generally adopted working definition from the IT adoption literature,

which defines BD as high-volume (big scale), high-velocity (moving/ streaming), and high-

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must
be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/
become-an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 4

variety (e.g., numerical, text, video, etc.) information assets that enhance cost-effective,

creative information processing for improved insight and decision-making [41]. BD has been

shown to significantly impact on outcomes particularly when sophisticated analytical

approaches (e.g., BDA) is applied to vast data sets [23] to help automate extremely

complicated choices that were previously (primarily or exclusively) based on human

judgement and intuition [37;41]. However, research shows that organizations are still hesitant

to adopt BDA as previous initiatives involving business intelligence gathering (often from

terabytes of data) have failed [110]. While firms may wonder if BD and the accompanying

analyses are merely repackaged versions of old business intelligence and data mining, the

extent to which they enhance new management decision-making capabilities and whether

these practically make firms effectively performing entities is not only limited [23] but

poignantly underdeveloped in Nigeria.

To address this issue, there are distinctions between BDA and traditional business

intelligence technologies. According to a June 2011 International Data Corporation (IDC)

research, the amount of globally available data has increased more than 50% each year since

2005, and it was predicted to approach 8,000 exabytes by 2015. Unstructured data, such as

online material, news feeds, social media postings, video clips, and other data that cannot be

easily categorized into repeating fields, have been driving such developments. BD is,

therefore, an umbrella phrase for the collection of data sets that are so large and complicated

that they are challenging to gather, analyze, and manage through available data management

tools and standard data processing programmes [109]. While BDA has been used in a range

of scientific disciplines including e-commerce, market intelligence, e-government, health care,

and security [22] and its contextual applications vary [23;114; 74], it is often seen as a dramatic

departure from typical business intelligence gathering tools [41] as its utilitarian impact on

management decision-making and organizational-level performance readiness dominates

current BD and BDA discourse [23]. To ascertain the nature and impact of the anticipated

utilitarian value of BDA adoption, the authros examine how such a crucial resource capacity

is utilized by businesses to help resolve the organizational need for readiness to perform

financially and non-financially in Nigeria [43]. This warrants the examination of Dynamic

Capacities theory [62].

Dynamic capabilities

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must
be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 5

One of the most important management theories of the last decade is "dynamic

capabilities" [105], which explains how a company can maintain competitive advantage in

ever-changing environments [94;119;62]. Inspired by "Schumpeterian's gale of creative

destruction," [119, 1997, p. 12], dynamic capabilities was perceived to help businesses adapt

to ever-evolving market demands by integrating, creating, and reconfiguring their resources

[119] through a collection of "identified and specified procedures" [35, 2000, p. 47]. Prior

research has looked at how IT-based technology cab build the internal capacities to enhance

operational procedures [81;82;91;133]. However, combining such a resource-focused and

adaptability theory to enhance management’s BDA adoption and firm-level organizational

financial and non-financial performance in a non-western context is missing.

BDA Adoption as a Resource Dynamic Capability

Researchers have used "dynamic capabilities" to highlight how businesses adapt to

unpredictable situations and competencies needed to do so [35;116;119]. Competences range

from integrating, reconfiguring, acquiring, and releasing resources, as a combined set of

distinctive internal initiatives [119;62]. These are expected to enhance an organization’s

strategic resource capability especially when markets form, collide, divide, change or even

expire [23]. Based on these western-dominated logics, we define the application of BDA inside

organizations as the development of nimble capacities to help businesses establish and

analyze routines and capacities [35;62] to generate and utilize knowledge in highly dynamic

markets [116]. BDA is also sometimes perceived as an internal, organizational information

processing capability [36], which decreases external and internal uncertainty by increasing the

generation of new insights and management’s organizational knowledge and strategic

decision making [116;119]. Although there have emerged "best-practice" recommendations on

how to generically apply BDA [22;23], a uniform usage of BDA tools across businesses and

contexts is missing [23], partly because enterprise-level technology [116] and management’s

use of marketing information (such as social media marketing, e-commerce, customer

relationship management, innovation, customer services) varies from one context/market to

another [23;119]. Consequently, while perceiving and examining management’s BDA

adoption, via BDA, as a dynamic capability makes sense in western logic/discourse on the

effective utilization of resources, knowledge on how management’s capability development

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 6

and decision-making practically facilitate organizations’ financial value creation in non-

western contexts, especially Nigeria, is lagging.

Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses Development

This study combines Dynamic Capabilities (DC) [9] to examine how specific

businesses’ unique pasts [119] create competitiveness [116] and the TOE framework [135; 28;

1; 57; 58; 59; 60; 61] to ascertain the extent to which technological, organizational and

environmental factors influence management decision to adopt BDA and its impacts. In terms

of DC, the literature highlights route dependence as one of the factors shaping an

organization's capacities and management’s decision making capabilities [35]. Although these

aspects vary from context to context[119] and technical issues and an organization’s external

fitness are also variant [48], the authors have used the TOE framework [126;1] fromthe IT

management discourse to identify specific factors why management are more likely to adopt

BDA in a manufacturing and service industry in Nigeria. As a framework, TOE proposes

technical, organizational, and environmental aspects, as fundamental determinants for

management’s BD adoption[8], both of which were combined to develop the study’s

conceptual model[1] (see Fig. 1). Measurable hypotheses, were initially developed using the

extant literature on Dynamic Capabilities and TOE, and the extent to which the western based

organizational readiness discourse on BD adoption agrees or disagrees with the reality of the

impact of management’s decision to adopt BDA and their financial and non-

financial performance implications on businesses were assessed. From the extant, seminal

research, the authors examined a range of technological (anticipated value and technology

compatibility), organizational (top management support and organizational readiness), and

environmental (competitive pressure, external support from vendors, and government

regulation) factors that influence management’s BDA adoption. We also investigated the

moderating effects of environmental dynamism on the relationship between financial and

non-financial performance, two essential components of the utilitarian business

value/benefits of BDA adoption especially in marketing contexts. The development and

justifications of the 9 selected hypotheses are provided below.

Technological factors
Anticipated value: The existing BDA literature focus on anticipated value, which

indicates the anticipated operational and strategic advantages when companies adopt new

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes,
creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in other works by
sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-an-ieee-journal-
author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 7

technology similar to BDA [128]. Additionally, while such BDA discourse highlights direct

advantages such as lower organizational operating costs, improved internal, resource

efficiency and lower mistake rates [79] on novel products and services[18] owing to the

utilitarian value of BDA, there are some additional indirect advantages for such adoption [14]

such as enhanced customer service, process reengineering [24;122], increased collaboration

and inter-organizational information exchange[128]. However, such utilitarian value

contrcuts (see Figure 1) have not been tested outside of traditional, western BDA discourse

settings, particularly in Nigeria.

Insert Figure 1 about here

Consequently, based on the BDA adoption discourse focusing on utilitarianism, and

management having a high opinion of such utilitarian value, organizations are logically

expected to adopt full usage of BDA to meet crucial financial requirements [23]. Hence, it is

hypothesized that:

Hypothesis 1: The anticipated organizational, utilitarian value of BDA adoption positively

influences management’s decision making capability and propensity to adopt BDA.

Technological competence: According to BDA discourse [124], using contemporary

technologies effectively enhances innovation capability because “the degree to which the

innovation is perceived as consistent with the existing [organizational] values, past

experiences [path dependence], and needs of the potential adopter” [97, 1983, p. 223;35;119].

It would be logical to evince that applying BDA discourse, as a definitional and utilitarian

construct, will facilitate organizations’ desire to adopt BDA. To this end, the existing literature

evince that “compatibility of an innovation may refer to its congruence with (1) the value

systems (e.g., organizational culture), and (2) the business’s [BD] practices” [23, p. 17]. It has

also been outlined by [119], and validated in recent studies [52], that cognitive and operational

compatibility are facilitated if organizations adopt BDA. However, applying such logics in all

situations could be contextually problematic [128], particularly in contexts where they were

not originally designed for, even in instances where BDA techniques are evinced to be

consistently, utilitarianly aligned with company values, standard operating procedures and

marketisation mechanisms. Thus, it is hypothesized that:

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 8

Hypothesis 2: Technological compatibility with an organization’s values and standard

operating practices (SOPs) positively influence management’s decision to adopt BDA.

Organizational factors

Top management support: As part of the organizational factors, existing literature evince

that top management support is crucial for orgnanizations to adopt modern IT-based systems

(e.g., BDA). The current literature further recognizes variable capabilities and data creation

potential as key success indicators [103]. While such western influenced, utilitarian discourse

on BDA adoption also highlights that when senior managers have optimistic expectations of

IT system's potential benefits, they are more likely to adopt BDA [67] and to propel as a driver

for changes in organizational norms, values, and cultures, the adoption of new technologies

[53;55;69] and the development of network-based benefits [6;20;67], such utilitarian assertions

have not been tested in the Nigerian manufacturing and service industry contexts. Thus, it is

hypothesized that:

Hypothesis 3: As part of critical organizational factors, top management-level support

enhances change in organizational culture thereby positively leading to management’s propensity to

adopt BDA.

Organizational readiness: Existing BDA literature highlight organizational readiness as

a significant factor for firm-level capacity and propensity to embrace technological change

[37]. It is a measure of the company's technical IT capacity and experience, showing its

propensity to invest and manage new technology [118;138]. BDA scholarship contends that

an organization's readiness is key for BD adoption and implementation [37;98]. According to

[7] and [40], as an instance within the Marketing discipline, organizational readiness is key

for such organizational level adoption. Thus, it is hypothesized that:

Hypothesis 4: Organizational readiness positively influences a firm’s propensity to adopt

technological changes positively leading to management’s BDA adoption.

Environmental factors

Competitive pressures: While the afore technological and organizational (TO) factors

seem to highlight the positivity of such aspects in influencing firm level BDA adoption,

competitive pressure" focuses on the environmental threat posed by a company's rivals in the

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes,
creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in other works by
sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-an-ieee-journal-
author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 9

same market [83]. Such a challenge may force firms to embrace new technology as a way to

gain advantage [86], although according to [86], rival firms can use more sophisticated BD

tactics to win over customers from other firms, by incorporating cutting-edge, not-easily-

affordable technological advancements [144]. Such competitive pressures may force smaller

firms to mimic market leaders’ practices particularly during volatility [69]. Others opine [2]

that the fear of being seen as unique within the same sector may be a motivating factor in

adopting newer technologies, although doing so may come at a financial cost. This not only

acts as a driving force [86;97] but may slow down new business starts and the spread of

innovative technologies in the same industry. Thus, it is hypothesized that:

Hypothesis 5. Competitive pressure, including the adoption of cutting edge technologies,

amongst businesses operating in the same sector could either positively or negatively influence

management’s BDA adoption.

External support: The exostomg literature define external support as extended support

from a vendor or third party to encourage enterprises to technologically innovate and

implement a new strategy [12;37]. It is a critical driver of technological innovation adoption

and successful resource utilization [40;101]. Access to vendor support is crucial for

management’s technological, innovative capacity and BDA adoption since it enables learning

from suppliers and open-source platforms [37]. As [23] noted, outsourcing to external parties

and suppliers may work effectively for an organization, especially in new start-ups without

sufficient BDA expertise. Thus, on the basis of existing literature, it is hypothesized that:

Hypothesis 6: External support enhances technological innovation adoption through successful

resource utilization thereby positively influencing management’s BDA adoption.

Regulatory environment: Existing BDA literature highlight the significance of a

favourable regulatory environment, whereby a government promotes entrepreneurial

utilization of BD technologies. The literature evinces a suitable infrastructure, legal

framework, regulatory directives, and assistance to do so [144]. For instance, with government

support, legal steps can be taken to address people's worries about information leakage and

illegal data trading as a way to address BD adoption constraints [58;135]. Thus, following the

literature, it is hypothesized that:

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must
be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/
become-an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management
10

Hypothesis 7: A favorable regulatory environment, including adequate infrastructure, legal

framework, regulatory directives, and assistance, provides the legal infrastructure leading to

management’s BDA adoption

BDA adoption and financial and non-financial performance

Western-dominated empirical research suggests that the benefits of management’s

BDA adoption also has substantial impacts on firm-level financial performance [4;46;131].

With the use of BDA techniques, organizations may boost their sales and revenue by

increasing their ROI [4] or facilitate the completion of e-commerce purchasing [51]. [48]

argued that businesses would benefit financially from adopting BDA solutions whilst [97]

highlighted that BD adoption has a positive relationship with a firm's financial performance

even when high levels of market turbulence and environmental changes abound and threaten.

Although investing in BDA may come at a financial price, existing research suggests

that it increases business productivity [80]. [84], [83], and [65] and beneficially impacts on

innovative capabilities through a financial performance boost [101;97;131]. [136] studies have

all revealed that BDA's predictive capabilities allow firms to provide business models that

increase profits. [131] found a positive effect of BDA use on essential determinants of financial

performance, including market performance, organizational performance and operational

performance [10;51]. [137] went further to state that BDA improves a firm’s financial

performance rather its market share.. Thus, on the basis of existing BDA literature, it is

hypothesized that:

Hypothesis 8a: Management’s adoption of BDA positively influences organizational level

financial performance, increases business profitability and productivity despite market turbulence and

environmental changes.

Hypothesis 8b: Management’s adoption of BDA positively influences an organization’s non-

financial performance even when markets and external environments are turbulent and changing.

The Moderating Role of Environmental Dynamism

This study went beyond a critical appraisal of the TOE framework in the context of

BDA, by examining environmental dynamism to ascertain whether other (external) factors

could influence management’s decision to adopt BDA. This is critical because existing BDA

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must
be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 11

studies limit themselves only to the TOE framework despite current studies highlighting that

an examination of environmental dynamism to reveal how its unpredictability/external

environmental changes could impact on BDA adoption is fundamental [142;35]. It is also a

critical situational component in Dynamic Capabilities theory, in studying the variance of

competitive advantage (e.g., financial sustainability) on an organization’s/management’s

capability in interacting with and addressing environmental dynamism threats. Earlier

studies argued that the effects of dynamic capabilities in a volatile market are uncertain and

threatening [77:79]. In a moderately dynamic market, according to [35], organizations often

thread linear and predictable paths given the stable industry structures and defined market

boundaries that characterize such markets, thereby warranting dependence on usage of prior

information [79]. On the other hand, high-velocity markets are characterized by non-linear,

less predictable and volatile industry structures and such developments threaten traditional,

organizational path dependeces [76].

However, while existing western-dominated scholarship expresses concerns about the

unexpected and disruptive nature of environmental dynamism, particularly on

organizational outcomes (e.g., positive results from BDA adoption) [3;79], it could also be

argued that such types of environments present opportunities for organizations if

management make good use of BDA techniques. [3] study uncovered that a volatile external

environment may either boost management’s valuable BDA skills but could also degrade

them particularly in high-velocity markets, see [77;46]. Additionally, although existing

research supports the logic that information sharing may lead to increased variation in

financial performance results, especially in dynamic circumstances [72], environmental

dynamism also pressurizes organizations to use additional management knowledge to drive

BDA actions [31;54;113]. This is partly because key organizational decision-makers

(management) are increasingly required to analyze events and information quickly and act

effectively [17]. Despite the propounded benefits of such utilitarian discourse, market

volatility could increase management stress and cognitive demands, potentially hindering

their ability to make sense of events and execute critical BDA ideas to ward off the

environmental threats to BDA adoption and their firms’ financial viability [17]. This

undermines management confidence and their strategic decision-making capability [19].

Thus, when faced with such a volatile environment, the necessity for BDA becomes critical

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 12

for corporate decision-makers (management) as the required dynamic capabilities depend

less on existing information rather than on swift innovation and situation-specific new

knowledge [35;119].

Following the western argument that BDA’s enhancement of an organization's new

knowledge and insight in highly dynamic contexts [22], such claims are especially pertinent

not only in marketing, as enormous volumes of data are routinely gathered from many

departments and locations across an organization’s infrastructure (e.g., advertising, social

media marketing, content marketing etc. – [35] but increasingly in other disciplines such as

Human Resource Management. The need for management to holistically process, integrate,

analyze and understand tonnes of data enhances managers’ propensity to make effective

strategic decisions [72] and deal with the psychological challenges of uncertainty [46] by

swiftly recognizing and responding to the changing nature of threatening situations is

therefore real [72]. Thus, it is hypothesized that:

Hypothesis 9a: Environmental dynamism, including the unpredictability and changing nature

of the external environment positively moderates the impact of management’s BDA adoption

to enhance on organizations’ financial performance.

Hypothesis 9b: Environmental dynamism including the unpredictability and changing nature

of the external environment positively moderates the impact of management’s BDA adoption

to enhance on organizations’ non-financial performance.

Methodology
Our research investigates the factors that influence the adoption of BDA by
management and the subsequent effects on financial and non-financial performance. We
employed a quantitative approach to explore the relationships between the different
components of our theoretically derived conceptual model and empirically validate our
hypotheses. A survey was designed as the quantitative method to assess and verify the
model’s ensuing hypotheses.

Instrument Development
To create the survey items, we initiated the process by conducting a thorough review
of the relevant BDA and TOE literatures. We crafted the construct items using pre-existing
items from previous studies, aiming to maximize the reliability and validity of our survey
items. We measured the construct items using a seven-point Likert scale with anchors ranging
from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) except for financial and non-financial
performance. Moreover, the two performance constructs were measured using a seven-point

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must
be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/
become-an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management
13

Likert scale ranging from 1 (‘worse than major competitors’) to 7 (‘much worse than major
competitors’). The respondents were also asked to provide demographic data about
themselves and their organizations.
Before (survey) the data collection phase, the survey questions were pilot tested
(across Nigeria's manufacturing and service sectors) with ten management experts in August
2021. This was done because existing literature purport that pilot studies enhance survey
quality by offering input from various viewpoints to prevent problems that may develop
during the actual data-gathering process [104]. According to [104] the construct questions
were deemed appropriate for inclusion in the final survey after undergoing several proposed
modifications based on the pilot study's results and respondents' comments (see construct
items and their symbols in Appendix A).

Data collection: Inclusion/exclusion criteria and sampling procedures

To be eligible for inclusion, participants must have at least 7 years of experience
working with big data systems and at least 11 months of employment within their current
organization. We excluded participants that did not meet these criteria. We reduced the
minimum requirement for years of experience with the current employer to 11 months
because some participants joined the organization within a year of us conducting the study
but had acquired ample experience in big data systems elswewhere. These characteristics
were considered by the research team as invaluable in the context of Nigeria, where such
experiences are rare. The selected participants include those who have worked with their
current employer between less than a year to 4 years. Such participants had between 7 and 10
years of big data system experience, having worked with a range of other employers (see
Table 1).
After the inclusion-exclusion process, we randomly sent out approximately 870 survey
questionnaires to professionals from various organizations in Nigeria between September and
November of 2021. This respondent sample was selected as the most knowledgeable about
big data systems in the firms, given that not all organizations employ big data analytics
specialists. The survey was sent in both paper and electronic forms. The hard copies were
distributed directly to the professionals in different organizations for completion. The soft
copies were designed using Google Forms and distributed by sending invitations, including
a link to the Google Form via LinkedIn and WhatsApp. A total of 286 responses were received,
representing a decent 32.8% response rate. [38] stated that the appropriate minimum sample
size for structural equation modelling in management information systems research is about
200 participants when developing moderately complex models. Moreover, a sample size of
200 gives an acceptable error rate of less than 10% within the available time, effort, and
resources [47]. Accordingly, a sufficient sample size of more than 200 was chosen, and the
final sample size was an impressive 261 usable management responses.
Of the 261 respondents, 55.1% were male, and 44.8% were female. The participants
belonged to different age groups, with the most significant percentage being (34-41 years) age
group (see the respondents' profile in Table 1). The different education levels, sector types,

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must
be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/
become-an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 14

number of employees, company positions and working experience (including the number of
years the respondent had worked in their previous big data organization and the current) are
also provided in Table 1.

Insert Table 1 about here…

Analysis
Given the model's complexity, consisting of 11 constructs, including a second-order
factor (BDA) with 4 dimensions, we employed Covariance-Based Structural Equation
Modelling (CB-SEM) in IBM AMOS version 22 as the statistical tool for analyzing the
measurement and structural models. Following the approach outlined by [47], we conducted
a two-step assessment of the model: first, evaluating the measurement model and then
examining the structural model for reliability and validity.
5.1. Measurement model
Our study examined the convergent and discriminant validity of the measurement
items and constructs. Table 2 presents the results of the reliability and convergent validity
tests. To assess reliability, we utilized composite reliability, with values above 0.7 considered
satisfactory, according to [47]. Convergent validity evaluates the extent to which the items
align with the theoretical conceptualization of the construct and can be assessed by analyzing
the item loadings and average variance extracted (AVE) for each construct, as [47] suggested.
In our analysis, all item loadings exceeded 0.7, and AVE values exceeded 0.5 for all constructs,
indicating satisfactory convergent validity of the measurement model. Additionally, for the
second-order factor BDA, consisting of 4 lower-order dimensions, all 4 dimensions
successfully passed the convergent validity test.

Insert Table 2 about here…

Discriminant validity was evaluated using the heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio of

correlations method, as suggested by [48]. The detailed methodology and results can be found
in Table 3. According to [48, HTMT values exceeding 0.85 indicate potential issues with
discriminant validity, while smaller values indicate good discriminant validity. In our
analysis, all HTMT values, as presented in Table 3, were below 0.85 [130] confirming good
discriminant validity. Both assessments relating to convergent and discriminant validity,
provided robust evidence supporting the validity and reliability of the study’s measured
items. Consequently, these items can be utilized to test the formulated hypotheses reliably
and validly.

Structural model
Our analysis commenced with an evaluation of the goodness-of-fit of the structural
model. The R2 value for BDA adoption was determined to be 0.787, indicating a substantial
proportion of the variance explained by the model. However, the model chi-square test

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 15

yielded a statistically significant result (χ2 (511) = 989.673, p < .001), leading us to reject the
hypothesis of an exact fit. On the other hand, the χ2/df value of 2.079 suggests a good fit for
the model. This ratio signifies that the discrepancy between the observed and expected
covariance matrices is relatively small, further supporting the overall adequacy of the model
fit. However, as this test is susceptible [100], we also examined other measures of goodness-
of-fit by using a combination of one of the relative fit indexes and root mean square error of
approximation (RMSEA) [49]. This revealed a comparative fit index (CFI) of 0.902 and an
incremental fit index (IFI) of 0.903, with both exceeding the cut-off value of 0.80 (Byrne, 2001).
The RMSEA is 0.060 [16], further indicating that our data adequately fit the measurement
model. Variance inflation factors (VIFs) for the independent variables were also checked for
evidence of multicollinearity concern [92]. The results ranged from 1.299 to 2.218. None of the
VIFs exceeds 5, indicating that multicollinearity is not an issue in our study.

Insert Table 3 about here…

Hypotheses testing (direct effects)

The first two hypotheses state that the elements of technology factors, namely
anticipated value and technological competence, will all positively influence BDA adoption.
As shown in Table 3, the paths from anticipated value (β = 0.172, p <.003) and technological
competence (β = 0.374, p < .005) to management's BDA adoption are all significant. Thus, our
results support these hypotheses. Hypotheses 3 and 4 state that top management support and
organizational readiness will positively influence BDA adoption. As demonstrated below, the
path from top management support to BDA adoption is significant (β = 0.406, p < .000), and
the path from organizational skills to BDA adoption is also significant (β = 0.342, p < .005).
Thus, hypotheses 3 and 4 were supported. Hypotheses 5, 6 and 7 state that in the
environmental context, factors such as competitive pressure, external support, and regulatory
environment all positively influence BDA adoption. Although our results found support for
external support (β = 0.271, p <.002), the paths between competitive pressure (β = 0.172, p <
.213) and regulatory environment (β = 0.005, p < .783) to BDA adoption were both not
significant. Hence, the findings support hypotheses 6 but not hypotheses 5 and 7.
Furthermore, the results demonstrated that management's BDA adoption positively
influenced financial performance (β = 0.096, p < .031) and non-financial performance (β = 0.095,
β < 0.018).

Insert Figure 2 about here…

Test of moderation (indirect effects)

In addition to the direct relationship of our model, we examined two moderating
effects: H10a and H10b, respectively, and posit that environmental dynamism positively
moderates the degree to which management's decision to use BDA influences financial and
non-financial performance. Testing moderating effects involves a comparison of a main effect

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must
be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/
become-an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 16

model with a moderating effect model; we conducted our analyses by creating interaction
variables directly within the CB-SEM. Interaction terms were computed using the
standardized scores, thus limiting potential multicollinearity between the main and
interaction variables. In each interaction model, the interaction terms are significant with the
addition of each interaction variable. We observe that, as hypothesized, the path coefficient
for H10a is positive (0.312, significant at 0.003). However, the moderation effect of H10b was
not statistically significant, with a path coefficient of –0.122 (significant at 0.415).
Concentrating on the significant path, our findings imply that when management uses BDA,
it substantially influences the organization's financial performance, especially in a dynamic
environment. See Table 3 for a summary of the moderation test results.

Discussion

In the discussion, the authors address the extent to which the organizational readiness

discourse in western-based Dynamic Capabilities and TOE frameworks varies from and/or is

corroborated by the reality of management’s decision to adopt BDA. To do so we start with

the study’s research question which states: ‘What are the TOE characteristics driving Nigerian

management’s BDA adoption and the real post-decision making impacts on organizational level

financial and non-financial performance?’ First, while the TOE framework’s technological

(anticipated value and technological competence), organizational (top management support

and organizational readiness), and most of the environmental apsects (completive pressure,

external support, and regulatory environment) were found to have a significant positive

influence on BDA adoption, the impacts of one environmental aspect, namely external

support, were not supported by this study’s findings. Therefore, external support is taken not

to have any significant impact on firm performance, despite existing studies’ affirmation.

Additionally, by going a step further to examine whether an organization’s BDA adoption

impacts on financial performance, as enunciated in the extant Dynamic Capabilities and TOE

frameworks, these relationships were supported as shown in testing the moderating effect of

environmental dynamism on BDA adoption. Additionally, the results also found support for

the moderating impact of environmental dynamism on financial performance. However, the

moderating impact of environmental dynamism (ED) on non-financial performance of

organizations and their propensity to adopt BDA was not supported. These findings are

discussed further to evince additional contributions made by this study on the dominant TOE

framework, particulary regarding organizational readiness for BDA adoption and its impacts.

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must
be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/
become-an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 17

Technological factors

In line with the TOE framework, the analysis of this study’s results show that

technological components in our model (anticipated value and technological compatibility)

directly influence management’s propensity for BDA adoption. Additionally, what these

results demonstrate is a new insight into how BDA's implementation could ultimately pay

dividends not only for organizations’ benefits, as evinced in the BDA uitilatarian perspective,

but also the need to enhance management’s capability for BDA adoption and implementation.

Particularly, since it was found that it is not the technical components in themselves but rather

in how the actual use of the technologies of BDA bore significant impacts on an organization’s

performance, it is therefore logical to evince that the ultimate impact of big data on

organizational outcomes is therefore mediated by BDA adoption and management capability

to use it. As such, while the results highlight the importance of the TOE variables, as

significant antecedents in the promotion of management’s propensity to adopt BDA,

contributing to enhancing a business’s ability to perform financially should also be

simultaneously complemented with enhancing management’s technical capacity.

Organizational factors

Both organizational factors (top management support and organizational readiness)

were shown to have an impact on management’s BDA adoption of various forms of

technology, such as ICT, cloud computing, e-commerce, CRM, and ERP [5;7;28;40]. Top

management vision impacts the extent of support received at organizational level for BDA

implementation by fostering a favourable environment for enterprises’ propensity to embrace

new technology (7;106]. This is partly owing to top-level management being perceived as key

drivers for organizational transformation by conveying and fostering a clear and coherent set

of values and a clear organizational vision for BDA adoption [28]. While top-level

management assistance may help by speeding up learning in facilitating the spread of

technology across organizations [7], as opined in previous and existing BDA discourse

[37;28;58;64], it is also worthy to note that without enough technical, financial, and qualified

human resources, organizations’ and management’s propensity to implement BDA

meaningfully (i.e., to impact on organizational level performance outcomes) doing so

becomes problematic. An organization is unlikely to implement BDA if it does not have the

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must
be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/
become-an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 18

necessary technological and human resources and competencies. While previous and existing

BDA scholarship note that outsourcing BDA could address an organization’s financial and

technology resource constraints, and thereby forestall threats from environmental dynamism,

these aspects should be dealt with at both the internal and external organizational levels

respectively for BDA adoption to meaningfully happen [37].

Environmental factors

Among the three environmental factors (competitive pressure, external support, and

government regulation), while only external support was found to have played any

substantial role in BDA adoption, the insignificant impact of competitive pressure contradicts

earlier and existing results [40]. This disconnect between western-centric discourse on

organizational readiness and local competitors’ pressures to meaningfully affect an

environmental impact in Nigeria’s manufacturing and service industries' BDA adoption is

interesting on a number of levels. First, our finding demonstrates that Nigerian institutions

are less impacted by globalization in comparison to their counterparts in western countries.

This is partly explicable in the sense that successive years of sanctions have prevented major

investments by international corporations in the Nigerian manufacturing and service markets,

thereby minimizing organizational readiness to engage in competitive behavior emanating

from a highly presurrized BDA market environment. Third, as competitive pressure is

reduced, local businesses are slower to embrace BDA, thereby accounting for the apparent

negligibility of business owners and managers to decide to implement BDA [23]. Fourth, the

study’s results highlight a significant relationship between external support and

organizational BDA adoption in line with the current BDA discourse to technically train

management toward a utilitarian logic of BDA discourse [40;37], the resultant organizational-

level shortage of knowledge not only drives management to rely heavily on external

assistance for decision-making but it also questions the extent to which management and

organizations may be ready for BD adoption and implementation readiness. Fifth, our results

highlight a distinctinctive contrast with existing studies’ results [64;40], by showing that

government regulations do not influence organization’s and management’s readiness for

BDA adoption. Such an unusual but interesting insignificance of this correlation is that

Nigerian organizations see BDA adoption as a substantial investment and that government

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 19

incentives are inadequate to justify expenditure and uptake. Additionally, rapid changes in

government regulations in Nigeria negatively impact the degree to which managers' actions

become dependent on government regulations, thereby limiting organizations' decision

making capacity to invest in BDA adoption. This is at variance with current BDA

organizational readiness and utilitarian discourse.

While our study’s results align with Dynamic Capabilities and the organizational

readiness discourse within the TOE framework, [77;82;97] that BDA adoption is financially

beneficial for enterprises as it BDA favours enterprises' marketing success [83], helps in goods

and services’ creation, thereby enhancing higher value, customer retentiion and profitability

against rivals [101; 97], these purported competitive advantages and reputation enhancements

[91] are threatened when organizations lack the necessary competence to do so. By going a

step further to examine the moderating effects of environmental dynamism on the

relationship between management’s BDA adoption and financial and non-financial

performance, it was additionally interesting to note that the existing literature’s affirmation

of management’s information processing skill as critically impactful on organizational level

financial and non-financial performance. Although these results partially support the existing

literature [132;18] on information processing as a dynamic competence for an organization’s

readiness for BDA adoption and competitiveness [35], this study’s addition of the moderating

effects of environmental dynamism to examine the interaction between management’s

decision to adopt BDA and its impacts on both financial and non-financial performance has

not been previously conducted in the Sub-Saharan, African context and the TOE framework.

Contributions, Implications, limitations, and future research direction

This research is filled with unique contributions. First, based on existing BDA

literature, the authors have used a large-scale field questionnaire and its results to produce an

integrated conceptual model on the factors influencing and leading to management’s decision

to adopt BDA. It is the first of its kind to examine the disconnect between the organizational

readiness discourse as evinced in western-centric Dynamic Capabilities and TOE frameworks

and the real impacts/post-decision making effects of BDA adoptiOn and implementation

within manufacturing and service environments in Nigeria. The findings extend the Dynamic

Capabilities framework by highlighting the need for environmental dynamism to take into

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 20

account a range of externally changing competitive pressures on businesses’ readiness to

adopt BDA, including the propensity to invest additional resources on BDA. Secondly, the

findings extend the TOE framework by highlighting that the fluctuating and unrealiable

nature of government’s propensity to initiate, monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of

regulatory mechanisms is a major determinant and has impactful bearing on organizations’

and management’s propensity to adopt BDA in Nigeria.

Third, while previous and existing TOE studies highlight technological,

organizational and environmental aspects that could either facilitate or hinder BDA adoption,

their limited focus on which types of managerial/organizational level competences need to be

developed to dynamically match a range of threatening environmental aspects (from

regulatory changes, financial to competitive pressures) has been surfaced through this study’s

tested hypotheses (see Table 3) and additionally by showing the impact of the direct and

moderating effects of the theory and empirically based variable on the study’s results (see

Figure 2). Such double-edge contributions highlight the practical usefulness of developing

management’s capability via a more dynamic and multi-level management - organizational

information processing system than what the current financial utilization model that the TOE

framework has developed thus far [119].

Fourth, this study also extends the TOE framework [8;1] by adding a range of other

types of anticipated value (other than financial aspects) to the original triple-helix factoral

dimension whose focus was mainly on building organizational readiness for BDA adoption

and financial gain. This study added technological competence, top management’s internal

and external support to show how the reality of adopting as well as implementing BDA

should be complemented with the understanding of the western-centric underpinnings of the

organizational readiness discourse if management and organizations are to directly and

indirectly impact on BDA adoption choice and application. Future research should investigate

the impact of firm-level use of BDA (or other knowledge systems) on other dimensions of

organizational performance.

Fifth, this study’s results contribute to earlier TOE research that found competitive

pressure and government regulation to be key drivers of management’s BDA adoption

[37;40;64]. This study’s clearly shows that there were no significant testable associations

between these concepts in Nigeria partly due to the volatility of the regulatory environment

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must
be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/
become-an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 21

in Nigeria. Despite earlier TOE studies’ concerns, our research shows that management’s

choice to adopt BDA significantly impacts organizational level financial as well as non-

financial performance [80] and that environmental dynamism is crucial. It is also shown how

management’s values-based choices in adopting BDA [131] are not only crucial in deepening

understanding about the extent to which organizations are realistically ready to adopt BDA

as paradoxically opposed the Dynamic Capabilities and TOE frameworks whose discourse

evinces a natural progressions towards BDA adoption. Therefore, this study has shown the

disconnect between TOE’s financializatioin, utilitarian discourse and the reality of non-

signifcant impact of environmental dynamism on BDA adoption in Nigeria. Additionally, this

study has added to Dynamic Capabilities theory by evincing the types of environmental

aspects (technological and socio-cultural) that management need to develop capabilities on if

they are to adopt BDA and meaningfully impact on their firms’ financial and non-financial

performance. Future research can include other complimentary theoretical viewpoints into

our framework .

Sixth, the outcomes of this research also have significant management practice

contributions and implications. The study has shown evidence of how management’s BDA

adoption has a direct practical impact on the financial and non-financial performance of an

organization although previous research has only hinted at the potential benefits of big data

analytics based on the organizational readiness discourse [62]. As many businesses are still

hesitant to make such commitments, the study extend [119] potential returns on investment

by deepening management and overall organizational level understanding of how to make

informed judgements on where to and where not to invest for efficient BDA outcomes. Our

research also helps managers better understand how to weigh the risks associated with

external variables like volatility in their decision-making about resource identification,

prioritization and allocation. Therefore, decision-makers in organizations need to realize that

the extent to which BDA adoption influences specific organizational performance outcomes

should be done by critically understanding their organization's setting and their resource

availability and scale. Additionally, the present research reveals the significant managerial

levers to do so. Therefore, our study dispels earlier myths that labelledbusinesses as ‘big data

laggards’ because of management’s lack of understanding of which choices optimize business

success [62].

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 22

Although a combination of TOE factors could impact on management’s choices

regarding BDA adoption, this study additionally found that management decision to

implement BDA in Nigeria is primarily organizational and environmental rather than simply

technological as earlier attested to if success is to be maximized [28]. Therefore, governments

in developing economies should develop initiatives to enhance management’s support and

optimization capacity.

While this study has demonstrated significant strengths, we also acknowledge

numerous possible limitations. First, the theories we used are based on causal concepts to

characterize the interactions in the study’s model. Second, the cross-sectional research

approach we used does not entirely allow for definite findings of correlation. Longitudinal

research could be conducted in future to give more evidence for causal interactions. A

longitudinal study might give more insight into the varying nature of how management’s

BDA adoption affects not only organizational performance but other aspects such as cultural

nuances and staff’s potential resistance to BDA adoption. Longitudinal research would also

give a more detailed knowledge of how the TOE variables could impact on the various

interacting internal and external factors impacting on the process and outcomes of managerial

decision-making potentials. Third, the research concentrated on Nigeria, a developing

country with little infrastructural and institutional development. Nigeria's weak

infrastructures and institutions have a substantial influence on the competitive character of

the markets in which the selected organizations were located and the government's ability to

encourage enterprises' and their management’s adoption of BDA. More research is needed to

put the conceptual framework to the test in both developing and developed nations beyond

manufacturing, service and marketing contexts to ascertain the extent to which management,

organizational and interorganizational readiness for BDA adoption, implementation,

evaluation and impact across continents is feasilbe. Furthermore, future research might

benefit from the study's conceptual framework by examining other elements including

organizational and individual culture, market pressure, and technological infrastructures

[14;32] and interorganizational and cross management value sets.

References:

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must
be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/
become-an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 23

1. Aboelmaged, M. G. (2014). Predicting e-readiness at firm-level: An analysis of technological,

organizational and environmental (TOE) effects on e-maintenance readiness in

manufacturing firms. International Journal of Information Management, 34(5), 639–651.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2014.05.002

2. Abrahamson, E., & Rosenkopf, L. (1993). Institutional and Competitive Badwagons: Using

Mathematical Modelling as a Tool to Explore Innovation Diffusion. Academy of

Management Review, 18(3), 487–517. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1993.9309035148

3. Afuah, A. (2001). Dynamic Boundaries of The Firm : Are Firms Better Off Being Vertically

Integrated in The Face of a Technological Change? Academy of Management Journal,

44(6), 1211–1228. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069397

4. Akter, S., Wamba, S. F., Gunasekaran, A., Dubey, R., & Childe, S. J. (2016). How to improve

firm performance using big data analytics capability and business strategy alignment?

International Journal of Production Economics, 182, 113–131.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.08.018

5. Alshamaila, Y., Papagiannidis, S., & Li, F. (2013). Cloud computing adoption by SMEs in

the north east of England. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 26(3), 250–275.

https://doi.org/10.1108/17410391311325225

6. Armstrong, C. P., & Sambamurthy, V. (1999). Information Technology Assimilation in

Firms: The Influence of Senior Leadership and IT Infrastructures. Information Systems

Research, 10(4), 304–327. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.10.4.304

7. Asiaei, A., & Ab. Rahim, N. Z. (2019). A multifaceted framework for adoption of cloud

computing in Malaysian SMEs. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management,

10(3), 708–750. https://doi.org/10.1108/jstpm-05-2018-0053

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 24

8. Baker, J. (2011). The Technology–Organization–Environment Framework. Information

Systems Theory, 231–245. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6108-2_12

9. Barney, J. (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of

Management, 17(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108

10. Bendickson, J. S., & Chandler, T. D. (2019). Operational performance: The mediator

between human capital developmental programs and financial performance. Journal

of Business Research, 94, 162–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.10.049

11. Berraies, S., & Hamouda, M. (2018). Customer empowerment and firms’ performance.

International Journal of Bank Marketing, 36(2), 336–356. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijbm-10-

2016-0150

12. Biney, I. K. (2019). Unearthing entrepreneurial opportunities among youth vendors and

hawkers: challenges and strategies. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 8(1).

https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-018-0099-y

13. Bollen, K., & Lennox, R. (1991). Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural

equation perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 110(2), 305–314.

https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.110.2.305

14 Buhl, H. U., Röglinger, M., Moser, F., & Heidemann, J. (2013a). Big Data. Business &Amp;

Information Systems Engineering, 5(2), 65–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-013-0249-5

15. Buhl, H. U., Röglinger, M., Moser, F., & Heidemann, J. (2013b). Big Data. Business &Amp;

Information Systems Engineering, 5(2), 65–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-013-0249-5

16. Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural Equation Modeling With AMOS, EQS, and LISREL:

Comparative Approaches to Testing for the Factorial Validity of a Measuring

Instrument. International Journal of Testing, 1(1), 55–86.

https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327574ijt0101_4

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 25

17. Cannella, A. A., Park, J. H., & Lee, H. U. (2008). Top Management Team Functional

Background Diversity and Firm Performance: Examining The Roles of Team Member

Colocation and Environmental Uncertainty. Academy of Management Journal, 51(4),

768–784. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2008.33665310

18. Cao, Q., Jones, D. R., & Sheng, H. (2014). Contained nomadic information environments:

Technology, organization, and environment influences on adoption of hospital RFID

patient tracking. Information &Amp; Management, 51(2), 225–239.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2013.11.007

19. Carmeli, A., Schaubroeck, J., & Tishler, A. (2011). How CEO empowering leadership

shapes top management team processes: Implications for firm performance. The

Leadership Quarterly, 22(2), 399–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.02.013

20. Chatterjee, D., Grewal, R., & Sambamurthy, V. (2002a). Shaping up for E-Commerce:

Institutional Enablers of the Organizational Assimilation of Web Technologies. MIS

Quarterly, 26(2), 65. https://doi.org/10.2307/4132321

21. Chatterjee, D., Grewal, R., & Sambamurthy, V. (2002b). Shaping up for E-Commerce:

Institutional Enablers of the Organizational Assimilation of Web Technologies.

Management Information Systems Quarterly, 26(2), 65. https://doi.org/10.2307/4132321

22. Chen, Chiang, & Storey. (2012). Business Intelligence and Analytics: From Big Data to Big

Impact. MIS Quarterly, 36(4), 1165. https://doi.org/10.2307/41703503

23. Chen, D. Q., Preston, D. S., & Swink, M. (2015). How the Use of Big Data Analytics Affects

Value Creation in Supply Chain Management. Journal of Management Information

Systems, 32(4), 4–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2015.1138364

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 26

24. Chwelos, P., Benbasat, I., & Dexter, A. S. (2001a). Research Report: Empirical Test of an

EDI Adoption Model. Information Systems Research, 12(3), 304–321.

https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.12.3.304.9708

25. Chwelos, P., Benbasat, I., & Dexter, A. S. (2001b). Research Report: Empirical Test of an

EDI Adoption Model. Information Systems Research, 12(3), 304–321.

https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.12.3.304.9708

26. Chwelos, P., Benbasat, I., & Dexter, A. S. (2001c). Research Report: Empirical Test of an

EDI Adoption Model. Information Systems Research, 12(3), 304–321.

https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.12.3.304.9708

27. Clarke, R. (2015). Big data, big risks. Information Systems Journal, 26(1), 77–90.

https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12088

28. Cruz-Jesus, F., Pinheiro, A., & Oliveira, T. (2019). Understanding CRM adoption stages:

empirical analysis building on the TOE framework. Computers in Industry, 109, 1–13.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2019.03.007

29. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of

Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

30. Diffusion of Innovations. (1983). In Rogers, E.M. New York: Free Press.

31. Droge, C., Jayaram, J., & Vickery, S. K. (2004). The effects of internal versus external

integration practices on time-based performance and overall firm performance. Journal

of Operations Management, 22(6), 557–573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2004.08.001

32. Dwivedi, Y. K., Kapoor, K. K., Williams, M. D., & Williams, J. (2013). RFID systems in

libraries: An empirical examination of factors affecting system use and user

satisfaction. International Journal of Information Management, 33(2), 367–377.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2012.10.008

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 27

33. Dwivedi, Y. K., Wade, M. R., & Schneberger, S. L. (2011). Information Systems Theory:

Explaining and Predicting Our Digital Society, Vol. 2. Springer Publishing Company,

Incorporated EBooks, 470.

34. Dynamic Capabilities: Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations. (2007). In Helfat

et al., 2007 Helfat, C.; Finkelstein, S.; Mitchell, W.; Peteraf, M.A.; Singh, H.; Teece, D.J.; and

Winter, S.G. Oxford: Blackwell.

35. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strategic

Management Journal, 21(10–11), 1105–1121. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-

0266(200010/11)21:10/11

36. Galbraith, J. R. (1973). Designing Complex Organizations (0 ed.). Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.

37. Gangwar, H. (2018). Understanding the Determinants of Big Data Adoption in India.

Information Resources Management Journal, 31(4), 1–22.

https://doi.org/10.4018/irmj.2018100101

38. Gefen, Rigdon, & Straub. (2011). Editor’s Comments: An Update and Extension to SEM

Guidelines for Administrative and Social Science Research. MIS Quarterly, 35(2), iii.

https://doi.org/10.2307/23044042

39. George, G., Osinga, E. C., Lavie, D., & Scott, B. A. (2016). Big Data and Data Science

Methods for Management Research. Academy of Management Journal, 59(5), 1493–1507.

https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.4005

40. Ghobakhloo, M., Arias‐Aranda, D., & Benitez‐Amado, J. (2011). Adoption of e‐commerce

applications in SMEs. Industrial Management &Amp; Data Systems, 111(8), 1238–1269.

https://doi.org/10.1108/02635571111170785

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 28

41. Gillon, K., Aral, S., Lin, C. Y., Mithas, S., & Zozulia, M. (2014). Business Analytics: Radical

Shift or Incremental Change? Communications of the Association for Information Systems,

34. https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais.03413

42. Goodhue, D. L., & Thompson, R. L. (1995). Task-Technology Fit and Individual

Performance. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 213. https://doi.org/10.2307/249689

43. Grant, R. M. (1996). Prospering in Dynamically Competitive Environments:

Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration. Organization Science, 7(4), 375–

387. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.7.4.375

44. Greene, C. N., & Organ, D. W. (1973). An Evaluation of Causal Models Linking the

Received Role with Job Satisfaction. Administrative Science Quarterly, 18(1), 95.

https://doi.org/10.2307/2391931

45. Günther, W. A., Rezazade Mehrizi, M. H., Huysman, M., & Feldberg, F. (2017). Debating

big data: A literature review on realizing value from big data. The Journal of Strategic

Information Systems, 26(3), 191–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2017.07.003

46. Gupta, S., Drave, V. A., Dwivedi, Y. K., Baabdullah, A. M., & Ismagilova, E. (2020).

Achieving superior organizational performance via big data predictive analytics: A

dynamic capability view. Industrial Marketing Management, 90, 581–592.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.11.009

47. Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report

the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24.

https://doi.org/10.1108/ebr-11-2018-0203

48. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant

validity in variance-based structural equation modelling. Journal of the Academy of

Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. doi:10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 29

49. Hofmann, E. (2015). Big data and supply chain decisions: the impact of volume, variety

and velocity properties on the bullwhip effect. International Journal of Production

Research, 55(17), 5108–5126. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2015.1061222

50. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure

analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling:

A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

51. Iacovou, C. L., Benbasat, I., & Dexter, A. S. (1995). Electronic Data Interchange and Small

Organizations: Adoption and Impact of Technology. MIS Quarterly, 19(4), 465.

https://doi.org/10.2307/249629

52. Jayanand, M., Kumar, M. A., Srinivasa, K. G., & Siddesh, G. M. (2015). Big Data Computing

Strategies. Handbook of Research on Securing Cloud-Based Databases With Biometric

Applications, 72–90. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-6559-0.ch004

53. Ji-fan Ren, S., Fosso Wamba, S., Akter, S., Dubey, R., & Childe, S. J. (2016). Modelling

quality dynamics, business value and firm performance in a big data analytics

environment. International Journal of Production Research, 55(17), 5011–5026.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2016.1154209

54. Karahanna, E., & Preston, D. S. (2013). The Effect of Social Capital of the Relationship

Between the CIO and Top Management Team on Firm Performance. Journal of

Management Information Systems, 30(1), 15–56. https://doi.org/10.2753/mis0742-

1222300101

55. Karimi, J., & Walter, Z. (2015). The Role of Dynamic Capabilities in Responding to Digital

Disruption: A Factor-Based Study of the Newspaper Industry. Journal of Management

Information Systems, 32(1), 39–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2015.1029380

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must
be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 30

56. Kearns, G. S., & Sabherwal, R. (2006). Strategic Alignment Between Business and

Information Technology: A Knowledge-Based View of Behaviors, Outcome, and

Consequences. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23(3), 129–162.

https://doi.org/10.2753/mis0742-1222230306

57. Kohli, A. K., & Jaworski, B. J. (1990). Market Orientation: The Construct, Research

Propositions, and Managerial Implications. Journal of Marketing, 54(2), 1–18.

https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299005400201

58. Kuan, K. K., & Chau, P. Y. (2001a). A perception-based model for EDI adoption in small

businesses using a technology–organization–environment framework. Information

&Amp; Management, 38(8), 507–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-7206(01)00073-8

59. Kuan, K. K., & Chau, P. Y. (2001b). A perception-based model for EDI adoption in small

businesses using a technology–organization–environment framework. Information

&Amp; Management, 38(8), 507–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-7206(01)00073-8

60. Kuan, K. K., & Chau, P. Y. (2001c). A perception-based model for EDI adoption in small

businesses using a technology–organization–environment framework. Information

&Amp; Management, 38(8), 507–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-7206(01)00073-8

61. Kuan, K. K., & Chau, P. Y. (2001d). A perception-based model for EDI adoption in small

businesses using a technology–organization–environment framework. Information

&Amp; Management, 38(8), 507–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-7206(01)00073-8

62. Kuan, K. K. Y., & Chau, P. Y. K. (2001). A perception-based model for EDI adoption in

small businesses using a technology–organization–environment framework.

Information & Management, 38(8), 507–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-

7206(01)00073-8

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 31

63. Laaksonen, O., & Peltoniemi, M. (2016). The Essence of Dynamic Capabilities and their

Measurement. International Journal of Management Reviews, 20(2), 184–205.

https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12122

64. Laaksonen, O., & Peltoniemi, M. (2018). The Essence of Dynamic Capabilities and their

Measurement. International Journal of Management Reviews, 20(2), 184–205.

https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12122

65. Lai, Y., Sun, H., & Ren, J. (2018). Understanding the determinants of big data analytics

(BDA) adoption in logistics and supply chain management. The International Journal of

Logistics Management, 29(2), 676–703. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijlm-06-2017-0153

66. Lehrer, C., Wieneke, A., vom Brocke, J., Jung, R., & Seidel, S. (2018). How Big Data

Analytics Enables Service Innovation: Materiality, Affordance, and the

Individualization of Service. Journal of Management Information Systems, 35(2), 424–460.

https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2018.1451953

67. Lei, Y., Jia, F., Lin, J., Xing, S., & Ding, S. X. (2016). An Intelligent Fault Diagnosis Method

Using Unsupervised Feature Learning Towards Mechanical Big Data. IEEE

Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 63(5), 3137–3147.

https://doi.org/10.1109/tie.2016.2519325

68. Liang, Saraf, Hu, & Xue. (2007a). Assimilation of Enterprise Systems: The Effect of

Institutional Pressures and the Mediating Role of Top Management. MIS Quarterly,

31(1), 59. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148781

69. Liang, Saraf, Hu, & Xue. (2007b). Assimilation of Enterprise Systems: The Effect of

Institutional Pressures and the Mediating Role of Top Management. MIS Quarterly,

31(1), 59. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148781

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 32

70. Lim, J. H., Stratopoulos, T. C., & Wirjanto, T. S. (2013). Sustainability of a Firm’s Reputation

for Information Technology Capability: The Role of Senior IT Executives. Journal of

Management Information Systems, 30(1), 57–96. https://doi.org/10.2753/mis0742-

1222300102

71. Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2001). Accounting for common method variance in cross-

sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 114–121.

https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.114

72. Little, G. L., & Robinson, K. D. (1987). One-Day Dropouts from Correctional Drug

Treatment II. Psychological Reports, 60(2), 454–454.

https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1987.60.2.454

73. Mandal, S. (2018). An examination of the importance of big data analytics in supply chain

agility development. Management Research Review, 41(10), 1201–1219.

https://doi.org/10.1108/mrr-11-2017-0400

74. Maroufkhani, P., Iranmanesh, M., & Ghobakhloo, M. (2022). Determinants of big data

analytics adoption in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Industrial

Management &Amp; Data Systems. https://doi.org/10.1108/imds-11-2021-0695

75. Maroufkhani, P., Tseng, M. L., Iranmanesh, M., Ismail, W. K. W., & Khalid, H. (2020a). Big

data analytics adoption: Determinants and performances among small to medium-

sized enterprises. International Journal of Information Management, 54, 102190.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102190

76. Maroufkhani, P., Tseng, M. L., Iranmanesh, M., Ismail, W. K. W., & Khalid, H. (2020b). Big

data analytics adoption: Determinants and performances among small to medium-

sized enterprises. International Journal of Information Management, 54, 102190.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102190

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 33

77. McCarthy, I. P., Lawrence, T. B., Wixted, B., & Gordon, B. R. (2010). A Multidimensional

Conceptualization of Environmental Velocity. Academy of Management Review, 35(4),

604–626. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2010.53503029

78. Mikalef, P., Boura, M., Lekakos, G., & Krogstie, J. (2019a). Big Data Analytics Capabilities

and Innovation: The Mediating Role of Dynamic Capabilities and Moderating Effect

of the Environment. British Journal of Management, 30(2), 272–298.

https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12343

79. Mikalef, P., Boura, M., Lekakos, G., & Krogstie, J. (2019b). Big data analytics and firm

performance: Findings from a mixed-method approach. Journal of Business Research, 98,

261–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.044

80. Mikalef, P., & Gupta, M. (2021). Artificial intelligence capability: Conceptualization,

measurement calibration, and empirical study on its impact on organizational

creativity and firm performance. Information &Amp; Management, 58(3), 103434.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2021.103434

81. Mikalef, P., & Krogstie, J. (2020). Examining the interplay between big data analytics and

contextual factors in driving process innovation capabilities. European Journal of

Information Systems, 29(3), 260–287. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085x.2020.1740618

82. Mikalef, P., & Pateli, A. (2017). Information technology-enabled dynamic capabilities and

their indirect effect on competitive performance: Findings from PLS-SEM and fsQCA.

Journal of Business Research, 70, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.09.004

83. Mikalef, P., Pateli, A. G., & Van De Wetering, R. (2016). IT Flexibility and Competitive

Performance: The Mediating Role of IT-Enabled Dynamic Capabilities. European

Conference on Information Systems.

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 34

84. Müller, O., Fay, M., & vom Brocke, J. (2018a). The Effect of Big Data and Analytics on Firm

Performance: An Econometric Analysis Considering Industry Characteristics. Journal

of Management Information Systems, 35(2), 488–509.

https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2018.1451955

85. Müller, O., Fay, M., & vom Brocke, J. (2018b). The Effect of Big Data and Analytics on Firm

Performance: An Econometric Analysis Considering Industry Characteristics. Journal

of Management Information Systems, 35(2), 488–509.

https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2018.1451955

86. Müller, O., Fay, M., & vom Brocke, J. (2018c). The Effect of Big Data and Analytics on Firm

Performance: An Econometric Analysis Considering Industry Characteristics. Journal

of Management Information Systems, 35(2), 488–509.

https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2018.1451955

87. Obal, M. (2017). What drives post-adoption usage? Investigating the negative and positive

antecedents of disruptive technology continuous adoption intentions. Industrial

Marketing Management, 63, 42–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.01.003

88. Olivera, P., Danese, S., Jay, N., Natoli, G., & Peyrin-Biroulet, L. (2019). Big data in IBD: a

look into the future. Nature Reviews Gastroenterology &Amp; Hepatology, 16(5), 312–321.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41575-019-0102-5

89. Oussous, A., Benjelloun, F. Z., Ait Lahcen, A., & Belfkih, S. (2018). Big Data technologies:

A survey. Journal of King Saud University - Computer and Information Sciences, 30(4), 431–

448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksuci.2017.06.001

90. Park, S. Y., & Pan, B. (2018a). Identifying the next non-stop flying market with a big data

approach. Tourism Management, 66, 411–421.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.12.008

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 35

91. Park, S. Y., & Pan, B. (2018b). Identifying the next non-stop flying market with a big data

approach. Tourism Management, 66, 411–421.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.12.008

92. Pavlou, P. A., & El Sawy, O. A. (2006). From IT Leveraging Competence to Competitive

Advantage in Turbulent Environments: The Case of New Product Development.

Information Systems Research, 17(3), 198–227. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1060.0094

93. Petter, Straub, & Rai. (2007). Specifying Formative Constructs in Information Systems

Research. MIS Quarterly, 31(4), 623. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148814

94. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method

biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended

remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-

9010.88.5.879

95. Priem, R. L., & Butler, J. E. (2001). Is the Resource-Based “View” a Useful Perspective for

Strategic Management Research? Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 22–40.

https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2001.4011928

96. Priyadarshinee, P., Raut, R. D., Jha, M. K., & Gardas, B. B. (2017). Understanding and

predicting the determinants of cloud computing adoption: A two staged hybrid SEM

- Neural networks approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 76, 341–362.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.07.027

97. Qian, C., Cao, Q., & Takeuchi, R. (2012). Top management team functional diversity and

organizational innovation in China: The moderating effects of environment. Strategic

Management Journal, 34(1), 110–120. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.1993

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 36

98. Raguseo, E., & Vitari, C. (2018). Investments in big data analytics and firm performance:

an empirical investigation of direct and mediating effects. International Journal of

Production Research, 56(15), 5206–5221. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1427900

99. Ramanathan, R., Philpott, E., Duan, Y., & Cao, G. (2017). Adoption of business analytics

and impact on performance: a qualitative study in retail. Production Planning &Amp;

Control, 28(11–12), 985–998. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2017.1336800

100. Ramdani, B., Chevers, D., & Williams, D. A. (2013). SMEs’ adoption of enterprise

applications. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 20(4), 735–753.

https://doi.org/10.1108/jsbed-12-2011-0035

101. Raykov, T., Tomer, A., & Nesselroade, J. R. (1991). Reporting structural equation

modeling results in Psychology and Aging: Some proposed guidelines. Psychology and

Aging, 6(4), 499–503. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.6.4.499

102. Ren, S. J. F., Ngai, E., & Cho, V. (2009). Examining the determinants of outsourcing

partnership quality in Chinese small- and medium-sized enterprises. International

Journal of Production Research, 48(2), 453–475.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00207540903174965

103. Roemer, E., Schuberth, F., & Henseler, J. (2021). HTMT2-An improved criterion for

assessing discriminant validity in structural equation modelling. Industrial

Management & Data Systems. doi:10.1108/IMDS-02-2021-0082

104. Salarzadeh Jenatabadi, H., Babashamsi, P., Khajeheian, D., & Seyyed Amiri, N. (2016).

Airline Sustainability Modeling: A New Framework with Application of Bayesian

Structural Equation Modeling. Sustainability, 8(11), 1204.

https://doi.org/10.3390/su8111204

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management
37

105. Sanders, N. R. (2007). Pattern of information technology use: The impact on buyer-

suppler coordination and performance. Journal of Operations Management, 26(3), 349–

367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2007.07.003

106. Saunders, M. N., & Bezzina, F. (2015). Reflections on conceptions of research

methodology among management academics. European Management Journal, 33(5),

297–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2015.06.002

107. Schilke, O. (2013). On the contingent value of dynamic capabilities for competitive

advantage: The nonlinear moderating effect of environmental dynamism. Strategic

Management Journal, 35(2), 179–203. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2099

108. Scupola, A. (2009). SMEs’ e‐commerce adoption: perspectives from Denmark and

Australia. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 22(1/2), 152–166.

https://doi.org/10.1108/17410390910932803

109. Shareef, M. A., Dwivedi, Y. K., Kumar, V., & Kumar, U. (2017). Content design of

advertisement for consumer exposure: Mobile marketing through short messaging

service. International Journal of Information Management, 37(4), 257–268.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.02.003

110. Sharma, S. K., & Sharma, M. (2019). Examining the role of trust and quality dimensions

in the actual usage of mobile banking services: An empirical investigation. International

Journal of Information Management, 44, 65–75.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.09.013

111. Snijders, C., Matzat, U., & Reips, U. (2012). “Big Data” : big gaps of knowledge in the field

of internet science. International Journal of Internet Science, 7(1), 1–5.

112. So, are the geeks inheriting the earth? (2013). Strategic Direction, 29(9), 12–15.

https://doi.org/10.1108/sd-08-2013-0051

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes,
creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in other works by
sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-an-ieee-journal-
author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 38

113. Son, J. Y., & Benbasat, I. (2007). Organizational Buyers’ Adoption and Use of B2B

Electronic Marketplaces: Efficiency- and Legitimacy-Oriented Perspectives. Journal of

Management Information Systems, 24(1), 55–99. https://doi.org/10.2753/mis0742-

1222240102

114. Song, M., Droge, C., Hanvanich, S., & Calantone, R. (2005). Marketing and technology

resource complementarity: an analysis of their interaction effect in two environmental

contexts. Strategic Management Journal, 26(3), 259–276. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.450

115. Sun, S., Cegielski, C. G., Jia, L., & Hall, D. J. (2016). Understanding the Factors Affecting

the Organizational Adoption of Big Data. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 58(3),

193–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2016.1222891

116. Sun, S., Hall, D. J., & Cegielski, C. G. (2020). Organizational intention to adopt big data in

the B2B context: An integrated view. Industrial Marketing Management, 86, 109–121.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.09.003

117. Tallon, P. P. (2007a). A Process-Oriented Perspective on the Alignment of Information

Technology and Business Strategy. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(3),

227–268. https://doi.org/10.2753/mis0742-1222240308

118. Tallon, P. P. (2007b). A Process-Oriented Perspective on the Alignment of Information

Technology and Business Strategy. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(3),

227–268. https://doi.org/10.2753/mis0742-1222240308

119. Taxman, F. S., Henderson, C., Young, D., & Farrell, J. (2012). The Impact of Training

Interventions on Organizational Readiness to Support Innovations in Juvenile Justice

Offices. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research,

41(2), 177–188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-012-0445-5

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must
be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/
become-an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 39

120. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G. P., & Shuen, A. (1997a). Dynamic capabilities and strategic

management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.

https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199708)18:7

121. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G. P., & Shuen, A. (1997b). Dynamic capabilities and strategic

management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.

https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199708)18:7

122. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G. P., & Shuen, A. (1997c). Dynamic capabilities and strategic

management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.

https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199708)18:7

123. Thong, J. Y. (1999). An Integrated Model of Information Systems Adoption in Small

Businesses. Journal of Management Information Systems, 15(4), 187–214.

https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.1999.11518227

124. To, M. L., & Ngai, E. (2006). Predicting the organisational adoption of B2C e‐commerce:

an empirical study. Industrial Management &Amp; Data Systems, 106(8), 1133–1147.

https://doi.org/10.1108/02635570610710791

125. Tornatzky, L. G., & Klein, K. J. (1982a). Innovation characteristics and innovation

adoption-implementation: A meta-analysis of findings. IEEE Transactions on

Engineering Management, EM–29(1), 28–45. https://doi.org/10.1109/tem.1982.6447463

126. Tornatzky, L. G., & Klein, K. J. (1982b). Innovation characteristics and innovation

adoption-implementation: A meta-analysis of findings. IEEE Transactions on

Engineering Management, EM–29(1), 28–45. https://doi.org/10.1109/tem.1982.6447463

127. Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis. (2003). User Acceptance of Information Technology:

Toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 40

128. Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2012a). Adoption and Impacts of Interorganizational Business

Process Standards: Role of Partnering Synergy. Information Systems Research, 23(4),

1131–1157. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1110.0404

129. Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2012b). Adoption and Impacts of Interorganizational Business

Process Standards: Role of Partnering Synergy. Information Systems Research, 23(4),

1131–1157. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1110.0404

130. Voorhees, C. M., Brady, M. K., Calantone, R., & Ramirez, E. (2016). Discriminant validity

testing in marketing: An analysis, causes for concern, and proposed remedies. Journal

of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(1), 119–134. doi:10.1007/s11747-015-0455-4

131. Waller, M. A., & Fawcett, S. E. (2013a). Data Science, Predictive Analytics, and Big Data:

A Revolution That Will Transform Supply Chain Design and Management. Journal of

Business Logistics, 34(2), 77–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12010

132. Waller, M. A., & Fawcett, S. E. (2013b). Data Science, Predictive Analytics, and Big Data:

A Revolution That Will Transform Supply Chain Design and Management. Journal of

Business Logistics, 34(2), 77–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12010

133. Wamba, S. F., Gunasekaran, A., Akter, S., Ren, S. J. F., Dubey, R., & Childe, S. J. (2017).

Big data analytics and firm performance: Effects of dynamic capabilities. Journal of

Business Research, 70, 356–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.009

134. Wang, G., Gunasekaran, A., Ngai, E. W., & Papadopoulos, T. (2016). Big data analytics in

logistics and supply chain management: Certain investigations for research and

applications. International Journal of Production Economics, 176, 98–110.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.03.014

135. Wang, N., Liang, H., Zhong, W., Xue, Y., & Xiao, J. (2012). Resource Structuring or

Capability Building? An Empirical Study of the Business Value of Information

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes,
creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in other works by
sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-an-ieee-journal-
author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 41

Technology. Journal of Management Information Systems, 29(2), 325–367.

https://doi.org/10.2753/mis0742-1222290211

136. Wang, Y., Kung, L., Wang, W. Y. C., & Cegielski, C. G. (2018). An integrated big data

analytics-enabled transformation model: Application to health care. Information

&Amp; Management, 55(1), 64–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2017.04.001

137. Wen, K. W., & Chen, Y. (2010). E-business value creation in Small and Medium

Enterprises: a US study using the TOE framework. International Journal of Electronic

Business, 8(1), 80. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijeb.2010.030717

138. Yang, Y., See-To, E. W., & Papagiannidis, S. (2020). You have not been archiving emails

for no reason! Using big data analytics to cluster B2B interest in products and services

and link clusters to financial performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 86, 16–29.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.01.016

139. Yasmin, M., Tatoglu, E., Kilic, H. S., Zaim, S., & Delen, D. (2020). Big data analytics

capabilities and firm performance: An integrated MCDM approach. Journal of Business

Research, 114, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.03.028

140. Yoon, T. E., & George, J. F. (2013). Why aren’t organizations adopting virtual worlds?

Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 772–790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.003

141. Yu, C. S., & Tao, Y. H. (2009a). Understanding business-level innovation technology

adoption. Technovation, 29(2), 92–109.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2008.07.007

142. Yu, C. S., & Tao, Y. H. (2009b). Understanding business-level innovation technology

adoption. Technovation, 29(2), 92–109.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2008.07.007

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content
may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 42

143. Yu, C. S., & Tao, Y. H. (2009c). Understanding business-level innovation technology

adoption. Technovation, 29(2), 92–109.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2008.07.007

144. Yu, S. (2016). Big Privacy: Challenges and Opportunities of Privacy Study in the Age of

Big Data. IEEE Access, 4, 2751–2763. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2016.2577036

145. Zailani, S., Govindan, K., Iranmanesh, M., Shaharudin, M. R., & Sia Chong, Y. (2015).

Green innovation adoption in automotive supply chain: the Malaysian case. Journal of

Cleaner Production, 108, 1115–1122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.039

146. Zhu, K., & Kraemer, K. L. (2005a). Post-Adoption Variations in Usage and Value of E-

Business by Organizations: Cross-Country Evidence from the Retail Industry.

Information Systems Research, 16(1), 61–84. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1050.0045

147. Zhu, K., & Kraemer, K. L. (2005b). Post-Adoption Variations in Usage and Value of E-

Business by Organizations: Cross-Country Evidence from the Retail Industry.

Information Systems Research, 16(1), 61–84. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1050.0045

148. Zhu, K., Kraemer, K. L., & Xu, S. (2006a). The Process of Innovation Assimilation by Firms

in Different Countries: A Technology Diffusion Perspective on E-Business.

Management Science, 52(10), 1557–1576. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1050.0487

149. Zhu, K., Kraemer, K. L., & Xu, S. (2006b). The Process of Innovation Assimilation by Firms

in Different Countries: A Technology Diffusion Perspective on E-Business.

Management Science, 52(10), 1557–1576. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1050.0487.

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be
obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional
purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in
other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-
an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information:
DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management
43

Appendix A
Construct Scales and Items
First-order constructs
Anticipated value Chen et al., 2015; Ghobakhloo, Arias‐Aranda et al., 2011; Premkumar & Roberts, 1999)
1. Data Analytics improves the quality of work
2. Big Data Analytics makes work more efficient
3. Big Data Analytics lowers costs
4. Big Data Analytics improves customer service
5. Big Data Analytics attracts new sales to new customers or new markets
6. Big Data Analytics adoption identifies new product/service opportunities
Technological competence Chen et al., 2015; Ghobakhloo, Arias‐Aranda et al., 2011; Thong, 1999; Tornatzky & Klein, 1982)
1. Using Big Data Analytics is consistent with our business practices
2. Using Big Data Analytics fits our organizational culture
3. Overall, it is easy to incorporate Big Data Analytics into our organization
Top management support (Chen et al., 2015; Lai et al., 2018; Priyadarshinee et al., 2017)
1. Our top management promotes the use of Big Data Analytics in the organization
2. Our top management creates support for Big Data Analytics initiatives within the organization
3. Our top management promotes Big Data Analytics as a strategic priority within the organization
4. Our top Management is interested in the news about using Big Data Analytics adoption
Organisational readiness (Chen et al., 2015)
1. lacking capital/financial resources has prevented my company from fully exploit Big Data
Analytics
2. lacking needed IT infrastructure has prevented my company from exploiting Big Data Analytics
3. lacking analytics capability prevent the business fully exploit Big Data Analytics
4. lacking skilled resources prevent the business fully exploit Big Data Analytics

Competitive pressure (Lai et al., 2018)

1. Our choice to adopt Big Data Analytics would be strongly influenced by what competitors in the industry are doing
2. Our firm is under pressure from competitors to adopt Big Data Analytics

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future
media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted
component of this work in other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-an-ieee-journal-author/
publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information:
DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management
44

3. Our firm would adopt Big Data Analytics in response to what competitors are doing
External Support (Ghobakhloo, Arias‐Aranda et al., 2011, 2011b; Li, 2008)
1. Community agencies/vendors can provide required training for Big Data Analytics adoption
2. Community agencies/vendors can provide effective technical support for Big Data Analytics
adoption
3. Vendors actively market Big Data Analytics adoption
Government Regulation (Agrawal, 2015; Gupta and Barua, 2016; Lai et al., 2018; Li, 2008)
1. The governmental policies encourage us to adopt new information technology (e.g., big data
analytics)
2. The government provides incentives for using big data analytics in government procurements and
contracts such as offering technical support, training, and funding for big data analytics
3. There are some business laws to deal with the security and privacy concerns over the Big Data
Analytics technology
Big Data Analytics Adoption (Raguseo & Vitari, 2018)

In terms of Strategic Benefits

1. My company has used Big Data Analytics to……….
Respond more quickly to change
Create competitive advantage. Improve customer relations.

In terms of Transactional Benefits

2. My company has used Big Data Analytics to……….
Enhance savings in supply chain management.
Reduce operating costs.
Reduce communication costs. Enhance employee productivity.

In terms of Transformational Benefits

3. My company has used Big Data Analytics to……….
Improve employees’ skill level.

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future
media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted
component of this work in other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-an-ieee-journal-author/
publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information:
DOI10.1109/TEM.2023.3321426, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management
45

Develop new business opportunities.

Expand capabilities. Improve organizational structure and processes.

In terms of Informational Benefits

4. My company has used Big Data Analytics to……….
Enable faster access to data.
Improve management data. Improve data accuracy.
Financial Performance (Ren et al., 2017; Raguseo & Vitari, 2018)
Compared with your major competitors, how do you rate your firm's performance in the following areas over the past 3 years
1. Improving customer retention
2. Improving sale growths
3. Improving profitability
Non-financial Performance (Ren et al., 2017; Raguseo & Vitari, 2018)
Compared with your major competitors, how do you rate your firm's performance in the following areas over the past 3 years.
Entering new markets quickly.
1. Introducing new products or services to the market quickly.
2. Success rate of new products or services.
3. Market share.
Environmental Dynamism
1. The rate at which your customers’ product/service needs change.
2. The rate at which your suppliers’ skills/capabilities change.
3. The rate at which your competitors’ products/services change.
4. The rate at which your firm’s products/services change.

Copyright © 2023 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future
media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted
component of this work in other works by sending a request to [email protected]. For more information, see https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-an-ieee-journal-author/
publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/