2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences
IT Resource and Competitive Advantage: Role of Knowledge Management
Capability and Resource Commitment
Hongyi Mao Shan Liu
Huazhong University of Science Economics and Management
and Technology School,Wuhan University
maojoey@gmail.com shan.l.china@gmail.com
Abstract
For decades, scholars have discussed the business
value of information technology (IT). The need to
examine the relationship between IT and
organizational competitive advantage calls for further
research on additional organizational variables. By
applying the contingency theory to the traditional
thinking about IT-based competitive advantages, this
study investigates the role of knowledge management
capability and resource commitment in the relationship
between IT and competitive advantage. Data from 168
organizations in China provides empirical evidence
that the positive effects of the three types of IT resource
positively affect knowledge management capability,
which positively influences competitive advantage. In
particular, the effects of IT infrastructure and IT
human resources on competitive advantage are
mediated by knowledge management capability. In
addition, this paper identifies the positive moderating
effect of resource commitment in the IT–knowledge
management capability relationship. We then discuss
the theoretical and practical implications of the
results.
1. Introduction
For decades, the role of information technology
(IT) in creating competitive advantage has been one of
the leading concerns of both managers and scholars.
The IT revolution has transformed the nature of
competition and affected every aspect in current
organizations. According to the resource-based view,
IT is a rare, valuable, and appropriable organizational
resource for achieving competitive advantage [1, 2].
Several studies have investigated the strategic value of
IT and its effect on organizational performance and
competitive advantage [3]. Organizations can improve
their organizational performance by reducing costs,
increasing revenue, facilitating processes, and driving
innovation by using IT [4, 5, and 6]. However, some
1530-1605/15 $31.00 © 2015 IEEE
DOI 10.1109/HICSS.2015.456
Jinlong Zhang
Huazhong University of Science
and Technology
jlzhang@hust.edu.cn
studies have failed to observe a positive and significant
connection between IT and organizational performance
[7]. Carr [8] argued that in the 2000s, organizations
with excellent IT may erode their competitive edge
because of continuous IT commoditization. Large
amounts of IT investment also increase cost more than
competitive advantage does. Similarly, Bhatt and
Grover [3] found that the quality of IT infrastructure
will not significantly and positively influence the
firm’s competitive advantage. Given that IT has
become more homogeneous and ubiquitous, imitating
the IT capabilities of competitors has become easier for
organizations [7]. Accumulated findings on IT and
competitive advantage in the literature are
contradictory. Thus, further examination of their
relationship is needed.
In addition to the resource-based view, recent
studies drew on another theory called “knowledge-
based view” and have suggested that knowledge
management capability has a significant role in
enhancing organizational capabilities [9] and
competitive advantage [10, 11]. Organizations have
increasingly relied on knowledge management to
survive and compete. Scholars in the information
system (IS) literature have found that the knowledge
management capability of organizations may benefit
from IT application [11, 12], particularly a knowledge
management system [13]. Cloud computing and online
social networking are useful approaches to assist
organizational knowledge management [14].
Moreover, Tippins and Sohi [15] reported that the
processes by which new knowledge are developed fill
the gap between IT competency and organizational
performance. Tanriverdi [12] also argued that the
causal link between IT relatedness and organizational
performance is long, and the role of intermediate
organizational capabilities, such as knowledge
management capability, can mediate the relationship
between IT relatedness and firm performance.
Compared with other factors, knowledge is regarded as
a valuable resource in an organization. Knowledge can
3791
cover technology and business domain and produce
competitive value. Thus, knowledge management
capability may fairly connect IT and organizational
competitive advantage. However, empirical evidence
on this issue is lacking. An intensive investigation of
this issue is significant because managers can
understand how to develop IT value and how to take
appropriate actions to improve organizational
competitiveness.
Contingency theory indicates that the effect of IT
on organizational performance is contingent on
organizational factors such as commitment [1, 16].
Wade and Hulland [1] proposed that organizational
factors, such as top management commitment to IT,
can serve as potential moderators to investigate the
effects of IT resources. Mcdermott [17] argued that IT
inspires knowledge management but cannot deliver it
because leveraging knowledge is difficult to achieve.
Malhotra [18] suggested to consider moderating and
intervening behavioral variables, such as attention and
commitment, in the design of a knowledge
management system. However, little research has
provided empirical evidence on how commitment
influences the effect of IT resources on knowledge
management. Thus, this study examines how one
significant organizational factor (i.e., resource
commitment) moderates the relationship between IT
resources and knowledge management capability. The
resource commitment to IT indicates the degree of
efforts spent on IS and reflects the extent to which
organizations believe that investment on organizational
resource can create valuable output [19].
Understanding the role of resource commitment
enables managers to develop knowledge management
capability based on IT resources.
This study aims to examine the correlation between
organization-wide IT resources to competitive
advantage by answering the following research
questions:
(1) Does knowledge management capability have a
mediating role in the relationship between IT resources
and competitive advantage?
(2) How does resource commitment moderate the
effect of IT resources on knowledge management
capability?
2. Theoretical background and hypotheses
In this study, we propose that IT resources, namely,
IT infrastructure, human, and relationship resources,
have significant effects on competitive advantage and
that knowledge management capability acts as a
mediator of their relationships. Furthermore, resource
commitment moderates the effects of IT resources on
3792
knowledge management capability. The research
model and hypotheses are presented in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Research model
2.1. IT resources and knowledge management
capability
According to the resource-based view, IT is a
potential resource for competitive advantage [1, 2].
Researchers that focused on IS identified sets of IT-
based resources. Ross et al. [20] proposes three types
of IT assets, namely, technology, human, and
relationship. Bharadwaj [2] regards IT resources as a
combination of IT infrastructure, human IT resource,
and IT-enabled intangibles. Similarly, Wade and
Hulland [1] offer a typology of IS resource,
categorizing IS resources into outside-in, spanning, and
inside-out resources.
Consistent with previous studies, the current paper
chooses three types of IT resource, namely, IT
infrastructure resource (i.e., technical foundation), IT
human resource (i.e., skills of the IT unit), and IT
relationship resource (i.e., risk and responsibility
sharing). The infrastructure resource is the
technological foundation of an organization. IT
infrastructure resource provides a sharable platform
and database, which guarantees accurate, real-time, and
comprehensive information for communication [20]. A
flexible IT infrastructure improves the generation and
dissemination of information [21]. Thus, through the
use of a well-designed platform, organizational
members can quickly and efficiently attain the right
amount of information and knowledge stored in the
system. Moreover, such a platform allows for efficient
communication and knowledge sharing, which
facilitates knowledge acquisition and transfer [22].
With a well-designed IS, especially knowledge
management system, organizations can transform tacit
knowledge into explicit knowledge [13]. Alavi and
Leidner [13] contend that knowledge management
systems can enhance knowledge integration and
application by embedding knowledge onto
organizational routines. Therefore, we propose our first
hypothesis as follows:
 H1: IT infrastructure resource positively influences
knowledge management capability.
The human resource refers to the technical and
managerial IT skills of the employees of an
organization [2]. With a valuable IT human resource,
the employees of an organization can address business
problems and maximize opportunities through IT
solutions [20]. Organizations with strong IT human
resource can work with business more efficiently as
compared with those with weak IT human resource [2].
Thus, such organizations can overcome obstacles in
knowledge management processes and speed up
related activities. IT human resource can integrate IT
and business strategies, thereby increasing the value of
IS. In this manner, IT human resources facilitate the
acquisition, transfer, and use of knowledge
management processes as well. Thus, our second
hypothesis is proposed as follows:
H2: IT human resource positively influences
knowledge management capability.
IT relationship, which defined as the relationship
between IT and business units, reflects the level of
trust and willingness to share risk and responsibility
[20]. A strong IT relationship indicates that the
members of the IT staff communicate, coordinate,
negotiate, and share with customers, suppliers, and
other business partners so that all the business units can
effectively use IT and develop new applications. Bhatt
and Grover [3] reported that the interaction between IT
groups and business units allows for knowledge flow
and diffusion throughout the organization. During
collaboration, organizations can easily generate, share,
and use knowledge from suppliers, customers, and
partners. With a high degree of trust, knowledge can
flow along the processes effectively, and thus,
knowledge can be shared and used easily.
Consequently, knowledge management capability can
be enhanced. Therefore, we posit the following:
H3: IT relationship resource positively influences
knowledge management capability.
2.2. Knowledge management capability and
competitive advantage
The literature on knowledge management has
focused on knowledge processes as drivers of
organizational performance [10, 12]. Thus, we define
knowledge management capability as an organization’s
process-based ability to mobilize and deploy
knowledge-based resources for competitive advantage.
In this paper, three major processes in knowledge
management capability are identified, namely,
knowledge capture, transfer, and use [10, 22].
Knowledge capture is the process by which
organizations accumulate knowledge from external
3793
sources or within the organization. Knowledge transfer
is the process by which knowledge is shared
throughout the organization and new understanding is
promoted. Knowledge use is the ability to use the
stored knowledge effectively.
The relationship between knowledge management
and organization performance is widely known [9, 12].
Among the key issues in strategy management,
knowledge management capability is found to have a
positive relationship with financial performance [23],
organizational effectiveness [10], and innovation [11],
all of which help organizations to achieve competitive
advantage. The effective management of knowledge
processes, including the acquisition, transfer, and use
of knowledge, effectively enhances the partners’
interaction with organizations, contributes to the
product or service quality and new product or service
development, and develops unique and valuable
capability. Useful knowledge can be absorbed, applied,
or even created well with a strong knowledge
management capability. Thus, we propose the
following hypothesis:
H4: Knowledge management capability positively
influences competitive advantage.
2.3. Mediating role of knowledge management
capability
Competitive position and organizational
performance can be affected indirectly by IT resources
through interactions with other resources or
capabilities [1]. Knowledge management capability,
which is a process-based organizational capability,
depends on IT relatedness; that is, the use of IT
resources for superior performance [12]. These
arguments suggest that knowledge management
capability mediates the relationship between IT
resources and competitive advantage. A high quality of
IT infrastructure, human, and relationship resources
enable organizations to enhance business process
capability, specifically knowledge management
process. A strengthened knowledge management
capability results in the effective management of
intellectual capital, allowing for the development of
valuable and inimitable resources. Thus, competitive
advantage is created. Without knowledge management
capability, organizations may experience negative
returns from investment in IT resources. Thus, we
expect that knowledge management capability will
function as a mediator of the relationship between IT
resources and competitive advantage. We posit the
following hypotheses:
H5a: Knowledge management capability mediates
the relationship between IT infrastructure resource
and competitive advantage.
 H5b: Knowledge management capability mediates
the relationship between IT human resource and
competitive advantage.
H5c: Knowledge management capability mediates
the relationship between IT relationship resource and
competitive advantage.
2.4. Moderating role of resource commitment
An important aspect of the literature on
organizational behaviors, commitment refers to the
state of mind that holds organizations in a line of
behavior [24]. In this study, resource commitment to
IT is defined as the effort committed by an
organization toward IT improvement, including budget,
equipment, and personnel [19]. Prior research has
shown that resource commitment has a crucial role in
improving productivity and attaining competitive
advantages [2]. The commitment to IT resources
indicates an enduring desire to maintain a valued IT
resource and implies the organizational perception of
importance about IT resources. When organizations
make commitment to IT resources, they are willing to
promote and support IS function [1]. In this way, the
effect of IT resources is perceived to be enhanced.
Moreover, the disadvantages of IT, such as becoming
an obstacle in an organization’s effort to compete [25],
can be offset if organizations commit bundles of
important IT resources to develop capabilities [26].
The lesson from the failure of knowledge management
also shows that without a true commitment to change
the practices of an organization, the initiative will fail
[27]. Thus, the implications of IT resources are
positively affected by an organization’s resource
commitment to IT.
Specifically, the technical infrastructure of IT
resource is critical in forming knowledge management
capability [10]. However, the lack of effort in keeping
up with technological advances can place an
organization in a disadvantageous position. A high
degree of resource commitment about continuously
improving IS can guarantee the implications of IT
infrastructure resource. For the human aspect, resource
commitment comprises the training of employees.
Dyer and Reeves [28] found that human resource
strategy moderates the relationships between human
resource and organizational outcomes, and that a
commitment strategy implies considerable productivity.
The same conditions may be achieved in the case of IT
application. When organizations commit to train the IT
skills of their staff, the skill base of IT human resource
increases, which ensures the ability to solve problems
in knowledge management activities. In terms of the
relationship aspect, Wu et al. [29] indicated that IT
alignment between partners, which serves as the basis
3794
for knowledge integration, requires resource
commitment and coordination. Thus, the effect of IT
relationship resource on knowledge management
capability is strong in an organization with a high level
of resource commitment. Based on this analysis, we
propose the following:
H6a: Resource commitment positively moderates
the relationship between IT infrastructure resource
and knowledge management capability.
H6b: Resource commitment positively moderates
the relationship between IT human resource and
knowledge management capability.
H6c: Resource commitment positively moderates
the relationship between IT relationship resource and
knowledge management capability.
2.5. Control variables
The control variables include the organization age
and size (i.e., the number of full-time employees), as
well as IS age (i.e., the number of years of organization
has been using an IS). Given that old and large
organizations have competed in the market for a
relatively long time, these organizations have invested
in resources and processes to gain competitive
advantage. The IS age is commonly used in research to
control for the expected effects [5]. Thus, IS age is
included in the model as a control variable.
3. Research methodology
3.1. Data collection
We selected 192 organizations from different
industries in the central and western regions of China
from a contact list in the Wuhan Information
Management Research Center to test our model and
hypotheses. These regions were selected because the
Chinese government has spent considerable efforts in
the development campaign of the central and western
regions for more than a decade. The development plan
of Central China has been in operation since 2004,
whereas that of Western China has begun in 2000.
Most organizations in both regions have experienced
rapid development, although some organizations have
remained with low level of competence. Therefore, our
dataset includes organizations with both high and low
level of IT resource, knowledge management
capability, and competitive advantage.
In December 2012, we received 168 usable
questionnaires from senior executives with IT
experience in these organizations, 44 of which were in
charge of the IS department. The respondents had an
average of 5.13 years of work experience in their
current organizations. The senior executives were The measurement items for all constructs are
asked to provide information on their organizations’ IT adopted from existing studies, in which the instrument
and knowledge practices, as well as their activities. is carefully tested (Table 2). In line with previous
Table 1 lists the characteristics of the research sample. studies, all the measurement items are measured as
reflective. We used a seven-point Likert-type scale,
Table 1. Sample profile which ranges from “strongly disagree” to “strongly
Industry Sector a Obs. (%) agree.” Each construct contained at least three items. In
Power 19 11.3 addition, we conducted a pre-testing among 11 MBA
Information technology 20 11.9 students to ensure the quality of the questionnaire.
Public sector 15 8.9 Small modifications are made.
Education 17 10.1
Finance 31 18.5
Manufacturing 52 31 4. Results
Othersa 14 8.3
Total 168 100
4.1. Measurement model
Ownership Obs. (%)
State-owned 77 45.8
Private 53 31.6 Partial least square (PLS) method maximizes the
Joint venture 20 11.9 variance observed in the dependent variable and
Foreign 18 10.7 requires a relatively small sample size. Therefore, we
Total 168 100 select PLS to test our research model. SmartPLS is
Organization Age (Years) Obs. (%) used for data analysis. The minimal item-to-construct
<5 18 10.71 loading of all items is 0.79, which is higher than 0.707.
6-10 45 26.79 The loadings of each item to its principal construct
11-20 45 26.79 are 0.1 higher compared to other constructs [31]. The
21-50 41 24.4
>50 19 11.31
Cronbach’s alpha of each construct is higher than 0.87,
Total 168 100 and composite reliabilities are all above 0.9. The
Organization Size minimum average variance extracted (AVE) of all
Obs. (%) constructs is 0.70, which is higher than 0.5; the square
(Number of employees)
<50 12 7.1 root of AVE is greater than the correlations between a
50-100 10 6 pair of variables [32]. These values provide reliable
100-200 23 13.7 evidence for our study’s good internal consistency,
200-500 22 13.1 convergent validity, and discriminant validity.
500-1000 19 11.3 Moreover, we test multicollinearity by calculating
>1000 82 48.8
variance inflation factors. All of the values are less
Total 168 100
than 3, thus showing that no multicollinearity exists.
a: other industries include agriculture, retail industry,
These results demonstrate the study’s good
hotel/restaurant, etc.
measurement properties. Considering the page limit,
we omit the tables for cross loading, statistical
We have taken various procedures with the help of
description, correlations, and reliability.
Wuhan Information Management Research Center to
ensure an acceptable response rate. The response rate is
87.5%. We conducted a wave test for non-response 4.2. Hypotheses testing
bias to compare the differences among key variables
between the early and late respondents. The late Following the procedure suggested by Sharma et al.
respondents pertain to the respondents who answered [33], we conduct hierarchical regression analysis to test
the second wave of questionnaires, which was mailed our hypotheses. Several models are developed in PLS
out one month after the initial survey. The t-test results starting with control variables to the main and
showed that no significant difference exists between moderation effects. Model 1 and 2 are developed to
the late and early respondents, thus indicating that our evaluate the effects of the control variables and the
research is free from possible non-response bias. Next, three IT resources on knowledge management
we conducted marker variable analysis in our study to capability, respectively. Model 3, 4, and 5 are
test the threat of common method bias [30]. The testing developed to test the hypotheses on mediating effect.
results show that the common method bias is not a Model 3 evaluates the effects of control variables on
threat in our study. competitive advantage. In the regression equation, IT
resources and knowledge management capability are
3.2. Construct measurement

3795
 Table 2. Constructs and measures
Variables Item Measurement Reference
ITI1 The data-management services and architectures are adequate in my organization.
ITI2 The network communication is sufficient with good connectivity, reliability, and availability.
IT
The quality of IT application and services (e.g., ERP and ASP) can meet the organization
infrastructure ITI3 [5, 20]
needs.
resource
IT management services can coordinate the physical infrastructure and manage the relationship
ITI4
with business units effectively and efficiently.
ITH1 My organization has an adequate IT skill base.
ITH2 My organization has skilled technical support staff.
IT human [3, 20, and
ITH3 The staff in my organization knows how to solve problems related to IT.
resource 34]
ITH4 The IT groups are knowledgeable in business strategies for IT planning.
ITH5 The staff in my organization can evaluate and control IT projects.
ITR1 My organization has technology-based links with customers.
IT
ITR2 My organization has technology-based links with suppliers. [3, 20, and
relationship
ITR3 We have a good line management sponsorship of IT initiatives. 35]
resource
ITR4 My organization has a good relationship between line management and IT service providers.
RC1 My organization puts effort in improving information systems.
Resource My organization puts effort in improving information technology and its application to
RC2 [19]
commitment business operations.
RC3 My organization puts effort in improving employee skills through training.
KMC1 My organization has processes to gain knowledge on our suppliers, customers, and partners.
KMC2 My organization can generate new knowledge from existing knowledge.
KMC3 My organization has processes to distribute knowledge throughout the organization.
Knowledge
KMC4 My organization holds periodic meetings to inform employees about the latest innovations.
management [25, 26]
My organization has formal processes to share the best practice among the different fields of
capability KMC5
activities.
KMC6 In my organization, knowledge is accessible to those who need it.
KMC7 My organization has processes for using knowledge to develop new products or services.
Relative performance with respect to the competitors for the past three years
COMP1 Customer retention
Competitive
COMP2 Sales growth [3, 34]
advantage
COMP3 Profitability
COMP4 Return on investment

Table 3. Results of regression analysis

Knowledge management Knowledge
Competitive advantage
capability management capability
M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7 M8 M9
Control variables
Organizational size 0.05 0.028 -0.035 -0.065 -0.074 0.046 0.035 0.05 0.053
Organizational age -0.045 0.034 0.039 0.087 0.072 0.005 -0.01 -0.012 -0.024
IS age 0.301** -0.04 0.220* 0.032 0.046 -0.019 -0.003 -0.026 -0.004
Independent variables
IT infrastructure resource 0.161* 0.180* 0.117 0.122* 0.114 0.095 0.102
IT human resource 0.492** 0.297** 0.106 0.431** 0.424** 0.441** 0.432**
IT relationship resource 0.182** 0.006 -0.062 0.128* 0.12 0.124 0.142*
Knowledge management 0.388**
capability
Resource commitment 0.188** 0.198** 0.205** 0.182**
Interaction
Resource commitment × IT infrastructure resource 0.095*
Resource commitment × IT human resource 0.141**
Resource commitment × IT relationship resource 0.140**
R2 0.09 0.549 0.054 0.223 0.292 0.567 0.572 0.582 0.582
R2 0.459 0.169 0.069 0.018 0.023 0.033 0.033
f2 0.504 0.179 0.089 0.040 0.051 0.073 0.073
F 81.208** 28.762** 14.208** 6.386* 8.109** 11.634** 11.634**
GoF 0.686 0.440 0.497 0.694 0.756 0.763 0.763
Notes: * p<.05; ** p<.01. One-tailed t-test was performed as the direction of differences was hypothesized.

3796
added to Model 4 and 5. Subsequently, four models
(i.e., Models 6-9) are developed to test the moderation
effects of resource commitment. We follow the
procedure to test moderation effects recommended by
previous studies [36, 37]. We evaluate each two-way
interaction to ensure that the interaction effect is not
suppressed by the shared terms, which may increase
multicollinearity. In the bootstrap analysis, the number
of real sample size is set as the size of bootstrap sample.
Table 3 lists the results of hierarchical regression
analysis that includes standardized path coefficients,
explained variances (R2), incremental changes in R2
(R2), goodness of fit (GoF), and effect sizes between
hierarchical models (f2).
The age of IS has a significant and positive effect
on knowledge management capability ( = 0.301, p <
0.01) in Model 1. In our research model, the
organization’s age and size has no significant
relationship. The results show that organizations can
easily build effective knowledge management
capability and competitive advantage with an old IS
department. In Model 2, all three types of IT resources
are found to have significant and positive effects on
knowledge management capability (IT infrastructure
resource  = 0.161, p < 0.05; IT human resource  =
0.492, p < 0.01; and IT relationship resource  = 0.182,
p < 0.05). The explained variances in knowledge
management capability are 0.549. Moreover, the value
of GoF is 0.686, which is higher than the suggested
threshold of 0.36 [38]. Therefore, H1, H2, and H3 are
supported.
In Models 3, 4 and 5, we followed Bardon and
Kenny [39] and performed regression analysis to test
the mediating effect. Model 3 indicates that the age of
IS positively influences the competitive advantage ( =
0.220, p < 0.05). In Model 4, both IT infrastructure
resource ( = 0.180, p < 0.05) and IT human resource
( = 0.297, p < 0.01) have positive and significant
effect on competitive advantage, but the effect of IT
relationship resource ( = 0.006, p > 0.05) is not
significant. However, in Model 5, the effects of IT
infrastructure ( = 0.117, p > 0.05) and human
resources ( = 0.106, p > 0.05) on competitive
advantage are positive but not significant, whereas the
effect of knowledge management capability is both
positive and significant ( = 0.338, p < 0.01). Hence,
knowledge management capability mediates the
relationship between IT infrastructure resource, IT
human resource, and competitive advantage.
Furthermore, the values of GoF in Models 4 and 5 are
higher than 0.36. Thus, H4, H5a, and H5b are
supported, although H5c is not.
Model 6 to 9 test the effects of the interaction
between different IT resources and resource
commitment on knowledge management capability.
3797
The interaction terms between IT resources and
resource commitment with positive and significant
coefficients (with IT infrastructure resource  = 0.095,
p < 0.05; with IT human resource  = 0.141, p < 0.01;
and with IT relationship resource  = 0.140, p < 0.01)
indicate significant effects on knowledge management
capability. GoF values are all above 0.36, showing
acceptable global fit of the PLS models. The three
interaction terms increase by 4.2%, 6.0%, and 6.0%,
respectively, of the explained variance in knowledge
management capability. The F values of all three
models in Table 3 indicate that changes in the
explained variance of knowledge management are
significant. Thus, H6a, H6b, and H6c are supported.
5. Discussions and implications
5.1. Theoretical implications
Previous studies have examined the relationship
between IT resources and competitive advantage based
on the traditional resource-based view. The present
study examines the indirect relationship between IT
resources and competitive advantage by investigating
the role of knowledge management capability and
resource commitment. As such, this study extends the
relationship between IT and knowledge management
capability. The theoretical contributions of this study
are fourfold.
First, this study contributes to the literature on IS
by introducing knowledge management capability as a
crucial factor in the relationship between IT resources
and competitive advantage. Specifically, knowledge
management capability mediates the effects of IT
infrastructure and human resources on competitive
advantage. No direct significant relationship has been
previously found between IT relationship resource and
competitive advantage. With a high quality of IT
infrastructure and human resources, organizations can
manage their knowledge processes, which are a type of
business process, to attain business value. This view is
consistent with an IT–business value framework [4],
which indicates that IT resources influence
organizational performance via intermediate business
processes. By integrating resource and knowledge-
based view, we explain how IT resources are combined
with other resources and capabilities, such as
knowledge management capability, to achieve
competitive advantage [1, 4].
Second, this study contributes to the literature on
knowledge management by empirically demonstrating
that knowledge management capability can enhance
competitive advantage more than IT resources can.
Knowledge management capability enables the
knowledge flow with both explicit and tacit knowledge
within organizations. Therefore, knowledge
management capability supports innovation behavior,
business activities, and decision making. Knowledge
processes through the acquisition, transfer, and use of
technological and business knowledge both internally
and externally help organizations to gain competitive
advantage. By contrast, IT resources are often
generated inside organizations. IT resources also
primarily contribute to competitive advantage in terms
of technology. Therefore, knowledge management
capability plays more significant role than IT resources
in attaining competitive advantage. However, the
results show that IT resource is a basis of knowledge
management capability. A common IT infrastructure is
necessary but insufficient for knowledge management
capability [12]. Other dimensions of IT resources, such
as IT human and relationship resources are required as
well.
Third, in our case, the mediating effect of IT
relationship resource is found to be insignificant as it
fails to show a direct, significant, and positive
relationship with competitive advantage. This
dimension of IT resources indicates not only
technology-based linkages between the organization
and business partners but also the partnerships between
IT groups and business units [35]. Chatterjee and
Ravichandran [40] argued that the lack of ownership
and control may result in inter-organizational system
failure. Thus, the technology-based linkages require
formal processes, such as knowledge management
processes, to effectively generate competitive
advantage. Therefore, other organizational capabilities
that can increase the ownership and control of
technology-based linkages may transform IT
relationship into a competitive resource. Likewise, this
finding demonstrates the social complexity of the
partnerships between IT groups and business units. As
friendship and trust take years to develop [3],
developing a competitive IT business relationship can
be difficult for organizations. Therefore, other
procedures to promote friendship and trust within IT
business partnerships should also be considered.
Fourth, our study extends the research on the
relationship of IT and knowledge management
capability by investigating the moderating role of
resource commitment based on contingency. Existing
studies have suggested examining the moderating
effects of internal and external factors in the
relationship between IT and organizational
performance [1]. Considering that keeping focus on
investing in IT resources is an organizational strategy,
a few studies have investigated the commitment to IT
resources and its moderating role in the relationship
between IT and knowledge management capability.
3798
This result offers an explanation of the inconsistent
findings about the implications of IT [5, 25] and the
relationship between IT and knowledge management
capability. The positive moderating effect of resource
commitment shows that IT resources perform well in
the high level of IT behaviors. When organizations
believe that IT resource investment can produce a
valuable output, the function of IT resources on
knowledge management capability is strengthened.
This finding is consistent with Newman and Sabherwal
[24], who reported that escalating commitment to IS
development is important in the success of the IS.
5.2. Practical implications
This study has several implications for business
practice. First, IT resources have a fundamental role in
gaining competitive advantage. IT infrastructure and
human resources have both direct and indirect effects
on competitive advantage, whereas IT relationship has
an indirect influence. Organizations should invest in
technical foundation, staff training, and relationship
building in the IT area to enhance the value of IT
resources and to develop such as an inimitable resource
for developing competitive advantage. However, IT
includes a broad range of applications, such as data
mining, artificial intelligence, cloud computing,
collaborative technology, and online social networking.
The realization of the competitive value of IT with
different forms may rely on different aspects of IT
resources. For example, the advantage of cloud
computing may lie in strong network infrastructure. By
contrast, the value of collaborative technology may
require a high investment of IT relationship resource.
Second, our results demonstrate the significance of
knowledge management capability in IT business
value. The synergy of IT resource and knowledge
management capability has to be considered to attain
efficient IT resources. Organizations should emphasize
the development of knowledge management processes
to make IT resources valuable for competitive
advantage. The age of IS has a positive and significant
effect on both knowledge management capability and
competitive advantage. Thus, organizations should
continue to use IT in business operations to achieve a
mature knowledge management process and a
substitute competitive advantage. The IT infrastructure
and staff have to be implemented and trained aligned
with knowledge processes, respectively. Employees
whose functions are related to knowledge processes
should share the reliability and responsibilities with the
IT staff.
Finally, our results demonstrate the importance of
resource commitment. In particular, the level of
organizational IT behavior should be considered in
building knowledge management capability with IT
resources. Significant and continuous IT investment
often implies a good quality of knowledge
management capability and competitive advantage. As
organizations continue focus on the development of
their IT resources, they develop sustainable
competitive advantage through the strength of
knowledge management capability.
6. Conclusion and future research
This study contributes to the literature by exploring
the mediating role of knowledge management
capability in the relationship between IT resources and
competitive advantage. Specifically, we examine the
indirect influence of IT resources through the effect of
knowledge management capability. Knowledge
management capability functions as a mediator
between the effects of IT infrastructure and human
resources on competitive advantage. Moreover, based
on contingency theory, this study expands existing
research on the relationship between IT and knowledge
management capability by providing empirical
evidence about the moderating effect of resource
commitment in such a relationship. In particular, the
higher the degree of resource commitment, the stronger
the effects of IT infrastructure, human, and relationship
resources on knowledge management capability are.
Our study provides a few directions for future
research. First, the moderating effects of external
factors, such as environmental factors, on the
relationship between IT and knowledge management
capability, can be examined. Second, other
intermediate variables (e.g., agility and business
process management) can be examined to explain other
variances in competitive advantage. Third, the type of
competitive advantage may be specified when
examining the value of IT. Fourth, the complimentary
effects among the three IT resources may be explored.
7. References
[1] M. Wade, and J. Hulland, "Review: The Resource-Based
View and Information Systems Research: Review, Extension,
and Suggestions for Future Research", MIS Quarterly, 28 (1),
2004, pp. 107-142.
[2] A.S. Bharadwaj, "A Resource-Based Perspective on
Information Technology Capability and Firm Performance:
An Empirical Investigation", MIS Quarterly, 24 (1), 2000, pp.
169-196.
[3] G.D. Bhatt, and V. Grover, "Types of Information
Technology Capabilities and their Role in Competitive
Advantage: An Empirical Study", Journal of Management
3799
Information Systems, 22 (2), 2005, pp. 253-277.
[4] N. Melville, K. Kraemer, and V. Gurbaxani, "Review:
Information Technology and Organizational Performance:
An Integrative Model of IT Business Value", MIS Quarterly,
28 (2), 2004, pp. 283-322.
[5] Y. Lu, and K. Ramamurthy, "Understanding the Link
between Information Technology Capability and
Organizational Agility: An Empirical Examination", MIS
Quarterly, 35 (4), 2011, pp. 931-954.
[6] S. Mithas, A. Tafti, I. Bardhan, and J.M. Goh,
"Information Technology and Firm Profitability:
Mechanisms and Empirical Evidence", MIS Quarterly, 36 (1),
2012, pp. 205-224.
[7] H. Chae, C.E. Koh, and V.R. Prybutok, "Information
Technology Capability and Firm Performance: Contradictory
Findings and their Possible Causes", MIS Quarterly, 38 (1),
2014, pp. 305-326.
[8] N.G. Carr, "IT Doesn’T Matter", Harvard Business
Review, 81 (5), 2003, pp. 41-49.
[9] S. Tseng, "The Impact of Knowledge Management
Capabilities and Supplier Relationship Management on
Corporate Performance", International Journal of Production
Economics, 154, 2014, pp. 39-47.
[10] A.H. Gold, A. Malhotra, and A.H. Segars, "Knowledge
Management: An Organizational Capabilities Perspective",
Journal of Management Information Systems, 18 (1), 2001,
pp. 185-214.
[11] K.D. Joshi, L. Chi, A. Datta, and S. Han, "Changing the
Competitive Landscape: Continuous Innovation through IT-
Enabled Knowledge Capabilities", Information Systems
Research, 21 (3), 2010, pp. 472-495.
[12] H. Tanriverdi, "Information Technology Relatedness,
Knowledge Management Capability, and Performance of
Multibusiness Firms", MIS Quarterly, 29 (2), 2005, pp. 311-
334.
[13] M. Alavi, and D.E. Leidner, "Review: Knowledge
Management and Knowledge Management Systems:
Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues", MIS
Quarterly, 25 (1), 2001, pp. 107-136.
[14] N. Sultan, "Knowledge Management in the Age of
Cloud Computing and Web 2.0: Experiencing the Power of
Disruptive Innovations", International Journal of Information
Management, 33 (1), 2013, pp. 160-165.
[15] M.J. Tippins, and R.S. Sohi, "IT Competency and Firm
Performance: Is Organizational Learning a Missing Link?",
Strategic Management Journal, 24 (8), 2003, pp. 745-761.
[16] T.S.H. Teo, and W.R. King, "Integration between
Business Planning and Information Systems Planning: An
Evolutionary-Contingency Perspective", Journal of
Management Information Systems, 14 (1), 1997, pp. 185-214.
[17] R. Mcdermott, "Why Information Technology Inspired
but Cannot Deliver Knowledge Management", California
Management Review, 41 (4), 1999, pp. 103-117.
[18] Y. Malhotra, "Why Knowledge Management Systems
Fail: Enablers and Constraints of Knowledge Management in
Human Enterprises": Handbook on Knowledge Management
1, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2004, pp. 577-599.
[19] F. Lai, D. Li, Q. Wang, and X. Zhao, "The Information
Technology Capability of Third-Party Logistics Providers: A
Resource-Based View and Empirical Evidence from China",
Journal of Supply Chain Management, 44 (3), 2008, pp. 22-
38.
[20] J.W. Ross, C.M. Beath, and D.L. Goodhue, "Develop
Long-Term Competitiveness through IT Assets", Mit Sloan
Management Review, 38 (1), 1996, pp. 31-42.
[21] G. Bhatt, A. Emdad, N. Roberts, and V. Grover,
"Building and Leveraging Information in Dynamic
Environments: The Role of IT Infrastructure Flexibility as
Enabler of Organizational Responsiveness and Competitive
Advantage", Information & Management, 47 (7-8), 2010, pp.
341-349.
[22] S. Pérez-López, and J. Alegre, "Information Technology
Competency, Knowledge Processes and Firm Performance",
Industrial Management & Data Systems, 112 (4), 2012, pp.
644-662.
[23] C.W. Holsapple, and J. Wu, "An Elusive Antecedent of
Superior Firm Performance: The Knowledge Management
Factor", Decision Support Systems, 52 (1), 2011, pp. 271-
283.
[24] M. Newman, and R. Sabherwal, "Determinants of
Commitment to Information Systems Development: A
Longitudinal Investigation", MIS Quarterly, 20 (1), 1996, pp.
23-54.
[25] M. Van Oosterhout, E. Waarts, and J. Van Hillegersberg,
"Change Factors Requiring Agility and Implications for IT",
European Journal of Information Systems, 15 (2), 2006, pp.
132-145.
[26] Y. Luo, "Building a Strong Foothold in an Emerging
Market: A Link between Resource Commitment and
Environment Conditions", Journal of Management Studies,
41 (5), 2004, pp. 749-773.
[27] J. Storey, and E. Barnett, "Knowledge Management
Initiatives: Learning from Failure", Journal of Knowledge
Management, 4 (2), 2000, pp. 145-156.
[28] L. Dyer, and T. Reeves, "Human Resource Strategies
and Firm Performance: What do We Know and Where do
We Need to Go?", The International Journal of Human
3800
Resource Management, 6 (3), 1995, pp. 656-670.
[29] F. Wu, S. Yeniyurt, D. Kim, and S.T. Cavusgil, "The
Impact of Information Technology on Supply Chain
Capabilities and Firm Performance: A Resource-Based
View", Industrial Marketing Management, 35 (4), 2006, pp.
493-504.
[30] N.K. Malhotra, S.S. Kim, and A. Patil, "Common
Method Variance in is Research: A Comparison of
Alternative Approaches and a Reanalysis of Past Research",
Management Science, 52 (12), 2006, pp. 1865-1883.
[31] D. Gefen, and D. Straub, "A Practical Guide to Factorial
Validity Using PLS-Graph: Tutorial and Annotated
Example", Communications of the Association for
Information Systems, 16 (1), 2005, pp. 91-109.
[32] J.F. Hair, R.E. Anderson, R.L. Tatham, and C. William,
Multivariate Data Analysis, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle
River, NJ, 1998.
[33] S. Sharma, R.M. Durand, and O. Gur-Arie,
"Identification and Analysis of Moderator Variables", Journal
of Marketing Research, 18 (3), 1981, pp. 291-300.
[34] M. Zhang, Information Technology Capability,
Organizational Culture, and Export Performance,
Washington State University, 2005.
[35] Y. Chen, Y. Wang, S. Nevo, J. Jin, L. Wang, and W.S.
Chow, "IT Capability and Organizational Performance: The
Roles of Business Process Agility and Environmental
Factors", European Journal of Information Systems, 23 (3),
2013, pp. 326-342.
[36] R. Klein, and A. Rai, "Interfirm Strategic Information
Flows in Logistics Supply Chain Relationships", MIS
Quarterly, 33 (4), 2009, pp. 735-762.
[37] M. Keil, A. Rai, and S. Liu, "How User Risk and
Requirements Risk Moderate the Effects of Formal and
Informal Control on the Process Performance of IT Projects",
European Journal of Information Systems, 22 (6), 2013, pp.
650-672.
[38] M. Wetzels, G. Odekerken-Schroder, and C. van Oppen,
"Using PLS Path Modeling for Assessing Hierarchical
Construct Models: Guidelines and Empirical Illustration",
MIS Quarterly, 33 (1), 2009, pp. 177-195.
[39] R. Bardon, and D. Kenny, "The Moderator-Mediator
Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research:
Conceptual, Strategic and Statistical Consideration", Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (6), 1986, pp. 1173-
1182.
[40] D. Chatterjee, and T. Ravichandran, "Governance of
Interorganizational Information Systems: A Resource
Dependence Perspective", Information Systems Research, 24
(2), 2013, pp. 261-278.