An extension of the technology acceptance model in an ERP implementation environment

Information and Management

Volumn 41, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 731-745

  Amoako Gyampah, Kwasi ^a   Salam, A F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT GREENSBORO   (United States)

Author keywords

Communication; Enterprise resource planning; Shared beliefs; Technology acceptance model; Training

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS; INFORMATION MANAGEMENT; INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; PERSONNEL TRAINING; PROFESSIONAL ASPECTS; SPREADSHEETS; STRATEGIC PLANNING;

SHARED BELIEFS; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL (TAM); THEORY OF REASONED ACTION (TRA);

ENTERPRISE RESOURCE PLANNING;

EID: 2342518828     PISSN: 03787206     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.im.2003.08.010     Document Type: Article

References (80)

1. Adams D.A., Nelson R.R., Todd P.A. Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and usage of information technology: a replication. MIS Quarterly. 16(2):1992;227-247.
2. Agarwal R., Prasad J. The role of innovation characteristics and perceived voluntariness in the acceptance of information technologies. Decision Sciences. 28(3):1997;557-582.
3. Agarwal R., Prasad J. Are individual differences germane to the acceptance of new information technologies? Decision Sciences. 30(2):1999;361-392.
4. I. Ajzen, M. Fishbein, Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1980.
5. Ajzen I., Madden T.J. Prediction of goal-directed behavior: attitudes, intentions, and perceived behavioral control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 22:1986;453-474.
6. Aladwani A.M. Change management strategies for successful ERP implementation. Business Process Management. 7(3):2001;266-275.
7. Al-Mashari M. Enabling process-orientation through enterprise resource planning systems. Business Process Management Journal. 7(3):2001;165-170.
8. K. Amoako-Gyampah, User involvement, ease of use, perceived usefulness and behavioral intention: a test of the enhanced TAM in ERP implementation environment, in: Proceedings of the 30th DSI, 20-23 November 1999, pp. 80-807.
9. Anderson J.C., Gerbing D.W. Structual equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin. 103(3):1988;411-423.
10. R. Beckhard, W. Prichard, Changing the Essence: The Art of Creating and Leading Fundamental Change in Organizations, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1992.
11. Beer M., Eisenstat R.A., Spector B. Why change programs don't produce change. Harvard Business Review. 68(6):1990;158-166.
12. Bentler P., Bonnett D. Significance tests and goodness-of-fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin. 88:1980;588-606.
13. P.M. Bentler, E.J.C. Wu, EQS for Windows 5.7b, Multivariate Software Inc., Enrico, CA, 1998.
14. Bingi P., Sharma M.K., Godla J.K. Critical issues affecting an ERP implementation. Information Systems Management. 16(3):1999;7-14.
15. Carter F.J., Jambulingham T., Gupta V.K., Melone N. Technological innovations: a framework for communicating diffusion effects. Information & Management. 38:2001;277-287.
16. Chau P.Y.K., Jen-Hwa Hu P. Investigating healthcare professionals' decisions to accept telemedicine technology: an empirical test of competing theories. Information & Management. 39:2002;297-311.
17. D. Cooke, W. Peterson, Experiences with SAP Implementations, Information Center Report #4, The Conference Board, 1997.
18. Davenport T.H. Putting the enterprise into the enterprise system. Harvard Business Review. 76(4):1998;121-131.
19. T.H. Davenport, Mission Critical: Realizing the Promise of Enterprise Systems, HBR Press, Boston, MA, 2000.
20. F.D. Davis, A technology acceptance for empirically testing new end user information systems: theory and results, Doctoral dissertation, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1986.
21. Davis F. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly. 13(3):1989;318-339.
22. Davis F.D., Bagozzi R.P., Warshaw P.R. User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science. 35(8):1989;982-1003.
23. Debrabander B., Thiers G. Successful information systems development in relation to situational factors which affect effective communication between MIS-users and EDP specialists. Management Science. 30:1984;137-155.
24. Dong L. Modeling top management influence on ES implementation. Business Process Management Journal. 7(3):2001;243-250.
25. Dos Santos B.L. Justifying investments in new information technologies. Journal of Management Information Systems. 4(1):1991;41-50.
26. G. Falkowski, P. Pedigo, B. Smith, D. Swanson, A recipe for ERP success, Beyond Computing (1998) 44-45.
27. M. Fishbein, I. Ajzen, Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1975.
28. Ford J.D., Ford L.W. The role of conversations in producing intentional change in organizations. Academy of Management Review. 20(3):1995;541-570.
29. Galletta D.F., Ahuja M., Hartman A., Teo T., Peace A.G. Social influence and end-user training. Communications of the ACM. 38(7):1995;70-79.
30. Gefen D., Straub D.W. Gender differences in perception and adoption of e-mail: an extension to the technology acceptance model. MIS Quarterly. 21(4):1997;389-400.
31. Gupta A.K., Raj S.P., Wilemon D. A model for studying R&D-marketing interface in the product innovation process. Journal of Marketing. 50(2):1986;7-17.
32. J. Habermas, Theory of Communication Action, Policy Press, Cambridge, 1987.
33. Hartwick J., Barki H. Explaining the role of user participation in information system use. Management Science. 40:1994;440-465.
34. Hong W., Thong J., Wong W., Tam K. Determinants of user acceptance of digital libraries: an empirical examination of individual differences and system characteristics. Journal of Management Information Systems. 18(3):2001-2002;97-124.
35. Holland C.P., A Light B. critical success factors model for ERP implementation. IEEE Software. 16(3):1999;30-36.
36. Hunton J.E., Beeler J.D. Effects of user participation in systems development: a longitudinal field experiment. MIS Quarterly. 21(4):1997;359-383.
37. Igbaria M., Tan M.C. The consequences of information technology acceptance on subsequent individual performance. Information & Management. 32:1997;113-121.
38. Igbaria M., Zinatelli N., Cragg P., Cavaye A.M. Personal computing acceptance factors in small firms: a structural equation model. MIS Quarterly. 21(3):1997;279-305.
39. Jackson C.M., Chow S., Leitch R.A. Toward an understanding of the behavioral intention to use an information system. Decision Sciences. 28(2):1997;357-389.
40. Karahanna E., Straub D.W. The psychological origins of perceived usefulness and ease of use. Information & Management. 35:1999;237-250.
41. Katz R. The effect of group longevity on project communication and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly. 27:1982;81-104.
42. Katz R., Tushman M. Communication patterns, project performance, and task characteristics: an empirical evaluation and integration in an R&D setting. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 23:1979;139-162.
43. Keil M., Beranek P.M., Konsynski B.R. Usefulness and ease of use: field study evidence regarding task considerations. Decision Support Systems. 13(1):1995;75-91.
44. Klein K.J., Sorra J.S. The challenge of innovation implementation. Academy of Management Review. 21:1996;1055-1080.
45. Kremers M., van Dissel H. ERP system migrations: a provider versus a customer's perspective. Communications of the ACM. 43(4):2000;53-56.
46. Kydd C.T. Understanding the information content of MIS management tools. MIS Quarterly. 13(3):1989;276-290.
47. S.P. Laughlin, An ERP game plan, Information Technology, January-February (1999) 23-26.
48. Legris P., Ingham J., Collerette P. Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management. 40:2003;191-204.
49. Lewis L., Seibold D. Innovation modification during intra-organizational adoption. Academy of Management Review. 18(2):1993;322-354.
50. Lucas H., Spitler V. Technology use and performance: a field study of broker workstations. Decision Sciences. 30(2):1999;291-312.
51. R.C. MacCallum, Model specification: procedures, strategies, and related issues, in: R.H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural Equation Modeling, Concepts, Issues, and Applications, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1995, pp. 16-36.
52. M.L. Markus, Power, politics and MIS implementation, Communications of ACM 26 (6) (1983) 430-444.
53. Markus M.L., Tanis T., van Fenema P.C. Multisite ERP implementations. Communications of the ACM. 43(4):2000;42-46.
54. Mathieson K. Predicting user intention: comparing the technology acceptance model with theory of planned behavior. Information Systems Research. 2(3):1991;173-191.
55. Mirani R., Lederer A.L. An instrument for assessing the organizational benefits of IS projects. Decision Sciences. 29(4):1998;803-838.
56. J.W. Moon, Y.G. Kim, Extending the TAM for a world-wide web context, Information & Management (2001) 201-215.
57. Moore G.C., Benbasat I. Development of an instrument to measure the perception of an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research. 2(3):1991;192-223.
58. Nah F.F., Lau J., Kuang J. Critical factors for successful implementation of enterprise systems. Business Process Management Journal. 7(3):2001;285-293.
59. J.C. Nunnally, I.H. Bernstein, Psychometric Theory, third ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1994.
60. Pinto J.K. The project implementation profile: a tool to aid in project tracking and control. International Journal of project management. 8(3):1990;173-182.
61. Pinto M.B., Pinto J.K. Project team communication and cross-functional cooperation in new program development. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 7:1990;200-212.
62. Potosky D. A field study of computer efficacy beliefs as an outcome of training: the role of computer playfulness, computer knowledge, and performance during training. Computers in Human Behavior. 18(3):2002;241-255.
63. Robey D., Ross J., Boudreau M. Learning to implement enterprise systems: an exploratory study of the dialectics of change. Journal of Management Information Systems. 19(1):2002;17-46.
64. E.M. Rogers, The Diffusion of Innovation, fourth ed., Free Press, New York, 1995.
65. Schaaf D. Where ERP leads, training follows. Training. 36(5):1999;12-15.
66. D. Slater, The hidden costs of enterprise software, CIO Magazine, 15 January 1998 (available at: http://www.cio.com/archive/enterprise/011598_erp. html).
67. Soh C., Kien S.S., Tay-Yap J. Cultural fits and misfits: is ERP a universal solution? Communications of the ACM. 43(4):2000;47-51.
68. Steiger J.H., Shapiro A., Brown M.W. On the multivariate asymptotic distribution of sequential Chi-square test statistics. Psychometrika. 50(3):1985;253-264.
69. Straub D.W. Validating instruments in MIS research. MIS Quarterly. 13(2):1989;147-169.
70. Straub D., Limayem M., Karahanna-Evaristo E. Measuring system usage: implications for IS theory testing. Management Science. 41(8):1995;1328-1342.
71. Taylor S., Todd P.A. Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing models. Information Systems Research. 6(2):1995;144-176.
72. Te'eni D. Review: a cognitive-affective model of organizational communication for designing IT. MIS Quarterly. 25(2):2001;251-312.
73. Venkatesh V. Creation of favorable user perceptions: exploring the role of intrinsic motivation. MIS Quarterly. 23(2):1999;239-260.
74. Venkatesh V., Davis F.D. A model of the perceived ease of use: development and test. Decision Sciences. 27(3):1996;451-481.
75. Venkatesh V., Davis F.D. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science. 46(2):2000;186-204.
76. S. Wee, Juggling toward ERP success: keep key success factors high, ERP News, February 2000 (available at: http://www.erpnews.com/erpnews/erp904/02get. html).
77. Willcocks L.P., Stykes R. The role of the CIO and IT function in ERP. Communications of the ACM. 43(4):2000;32-38.
78. Yi M.Y., Davis F.D. Improving computer training effectiveness for decision technologies: behavior modeling and retention enhancement. Decision Sciences. 32(3):2001;521-544.
79. Zmud R.W., Cox J.F. The implementation process: a change approach. MIS Quarterly. 3(2):1979;35-43.
80. R.W. Zmud, C.P. McLaughlin, R.J. Might, An empirical analysis of project management techniques implementation success, Management Science Implementation, Applications of Management Science, Supplement 1, 1984, pp. 107-132.