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.

中文翻译：

---

35年的商业智能流程研究：零散的文献综述

目的

商业智能（BI）的研究在过去的三十年中见证了贡献的激增，但是关于BI流程与组织环境之间的相互依赖关系的知识很少。这导致了重复研究重复的零散的文学作品。尽管这种多元化扩展了对BI概念，特性和特征的特质的理解，但它不能累积现有的贡献来更好地推动BI知识体系的发展。作为回应，本研究旨在提供一个整合框架，该框架整合了BI流程及其组织环境之间的相互关系，并概述了涵盖的研究领域和未充分研究的领域。

设计/方法/方法

本文回顾了35年来关于BI流程，前因和结果的研究的120篇文章，这些文章发表在顶级的ABS期刊上。

发现

在过程框架的基础上，本次审查确定了八个方面的主要模式和矛盾，即环境前因；组织前因；管理和个人先行条件；BI流程；战略成果；坚定的业绩成果；做决定; 和组织智能。最后，该审查指出了BI流程，其先行条件和成果之间的差距，以供将来的研究人员使用。

实际影响

这篇评论对从业者有一些启示，特别是如果他们作为BI流程的结果寻求可行的情报，他们应该扮演的角色。在本评价所研究的所有研究中，管理人员不愿开放自己的情报实践以进行严格的检查。尽管他们的冷漠是可以理解的，但由于他们对缺乏智能结构的可测量性感到沮丧，经理显然在承担探索性和描述性研究方面承担着重大责任，部分原因是他们的防御性管理参与。有趣的是，管理人员宁愿对无效的BI部门保密，也不愿对它开放进行评估，以免受到竞争或宣传的影响。所以，这篇评论强调了管理者开放参与纵向研究的价值，这可以带给BI研究，并在一定程度上扩展其组织中新的开放式智力文化，在这些组织中知识是公开的，智力是参与性的，而不是选择性的，并且与学者一起进行双环学习是连续的。他们对开放参与和纵向研究的承诺将有助于开展新的研究，从而更好地将BI流程整合到其上下文中，并为情报绩效制定新的衡量标准。

创意/价值

这项研究提供了一个整合框架，该框架整合了BI流程及其组织环境中的相互关系，并概述了涵盖的研究领域和未充分研究的领域。通过这样做，已开发的框架为学者们在每个维度以及他们之间的相互关系中进一步发展见解奠定了基础。