No abstract

Purpose The business intelligence (BI) research witnessed a proliferation of contributions during the past three decades, yet the knowledge about the interdependencies between the BI process and organizational context is scant. This has resulted in a proliferation of fragmented literature duplicating identical endeavors. Although such pluralism expands the understanding of the idiosyncrasies of BI conceptualizations, attributes and characteristics, it cannot cumulate existing contributions to better advance the BI body of knowledge. In response, this study aims to provide an integrative framework that integrates the interrelationships across the BI process and its organizational context and outlines the covered research areas and the underexplored ones. Design/methodology/approach This paper reviews 120 articles spanning the course of 35 years of research on BI process, antecedents and outcomes published in top tier ABS ranked journals. Findings Building on a process framework, this review identifies major patterns and contradictions across eight dimensions, namely, environmental antecedents; organizational antecedents; managerial and individual antecedents; BI process; strategic outcomes; firm performance outcomes; decision-making; and organizational intelligence. Finally, the review pinpoints to gaps in linkages across the BI process, its antecedents and outcomes for future researchers to build upon. Practical implications This review carries some implications for practitioners and particularly the role they ought to play should they seek actionable intelligence as an outcome of the BI process. Across the studies this review examined, managerial reluctance to open their intelligence practices to close examination was omnipresent. Although their apathy is understandable, due to their frustration regarding the lack of measurability of intelligence constructs, managers manifestly share a significant amount of responsibility in turning out explorative and descriptive studies partly due to their defensive managerial participation. Interestingly, managers would rather keep an ineffective BI unit confidential than open it for assessment in fear of competition or bad publicity. Therefore, this review highlights the value open participation of managers in longitudinal studies could bring to the BI research and by extent the new open intelligence culture across their organizations where knowledge is overt, intelligence is participative, not selective and where double loop learning alongside scholars is continuous. Their commitment to open participation and longitudinal studies will help generate new research that better integrates the BI process within its context and fosters new measures for intelligence performance. Originality/value This study provides an integrative framework that integrates the interrelationships across the BI process and its organizational context and outlines the covered research areas and the underexplored ones. By so doing, the developed framework sets the ground for scholars to further develop insights within each dimension and across their interrelationships.

Purpose The business intelligence (BI) literature is in a flux, yet the knowledge about its varying theoretical roots remains elusive. This state of affairs draws from two different scientific communities (informatics and business) that have generated multiple research streams, which duplicate research, neglect each other’s contributions and overlook important research gaps. In response, the authors structure the BI scientific landscape and map its evolution to offer scholars a clear view of where research on BI stands and the way forward. For this endeavor, the authors systematically review articles published in top-tier ABS journals and identify 120 articles covering 35 years of scientific research on BI. The authors then run a co-citation analysis of selected articles and their reference lists. This yields the structuring of BI scholarly community around six research clusters: environmental scanning (ES), competitive intelligence (CI), market intelligence (MI), decision support (DS), analytical technologies (AT) and analytical capabilities (AC). The co-citation network exposed overlapping and divergent theoretical roots across the six clusters and permitted mapping the evolution of BI research following two pendulum swings. This study aims to contribute by structuring the theoretical landscape of BI research, deciphering the theoretical roots of BI literature, mapping the evolution of BI scholarly community and suggesting an agenda for future research. Design/methodology/approach This paper follows a systematic methodology to isolate peer-reviewed papers on BI published in top-tier ABS journals. Findings The authors present the structuring of BI scholarly community around six research clusters: ES, CI, MI, DS, AT and AC. The authors also expose overlapping and divergent theoretical roots across the six clusters and map the evolution of BI following two pendulum swings. In light of the structure and evolution of the BI research, the authors offer a future research agenda for BI research. Originality/value This study contributes by elucidating the theoretical underpinnings of the BI literature and shedding light upon the evolution, the contributions, and the research gaps for each of the six clusters composing the BI body of knowledge.

No abstract

No abstract