Beyond perceptions and usage: Impact of nature of information systems use on information system-enabled productivity

International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 113-136

  Jain, Vikas ^a   Kanungo, Shivraj ^a  

^a GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INDIVIDUAL LEVELS; INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE IMPACTS; INFORMATION SYSTEMS USE; MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS; PERFORMANCE EFFECT; PRIMARY OBJECTIVE; PRODUCTIVITY GAIN; RESEARCH MODELS;

PRODUCTIVITY; RESEARCH;

INFORMATION SYSTEMS;

EID: 27644488126     PISSN: 10447318     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15327590ijhc1901_8     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Adams, D. A., Nelson, R. R., & Todd, P. A. (1992). Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and usage of information technology: A replication. MIS Quarterly, 16, 227-247.
2. Agarwal, R. (2000). Individual acceptance of information technologies. In R. W. Zmud (Ed.), Framing the domains of IT management: Projecting the future through the past (pp. 85-104), Cincinnati, OH: Pinnaflex Press.
3. Agarwal, R., & Prasad, J. A. (1998). Conceptual and operational definition of personal innovativeness in the domain of information technology. Information Systems Research, 9, 204-215.
4. Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606.
5. Boudreau, M.-C., & Seligman, L. (2003, December 14). A learning-based model of quality of use: Insights from a case study of ERP implementation. Diffusion Interest Group in Information Technology (DIGIT) Workshop, Seattle, WA.
6. Burton-Jones, A., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Re-conceptualizing system usage (Working paper CIS03-1). Atlanta, GA: Georgia State University.
7. Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
8. Chin, W. W. (1996). The measurement and meaning of IT usage: Reconciling recent discrepancies between self-reported and computer recorded usage. In B. A. Aubert & W. W. Chin (Eds.), Administrative Sciences Association of Canada - 24th Conference, IS Division proceedings (pp. 65-74) Montreal, Quebec: ASAC. Retrieved April 18, 2005, from http://disc-nt.cba.uh.edu/chin/asac96.pdf
9. Chin, W. W., Gopal, A., & Salisbury, W. D. (1997). Advancing the theory of adaptive structuration: The development of a scale to measure faithfulness of appropriation. Information Systems Research, 8, 342-367.
10. Chin, W. W., & Todd, P. A. (1995). On the use, usefulness, and ease of use of structural equation modeling in MIS research: A note of caution. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 237-246.
11. Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19, 189-211.
12. Crawford, A. (1982). Corporate electronic mail: A communication intensive application of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 6(3), 1-13.
13. Crowston, K. (2000). Process as theory in information systems research. Paper presented at IFIP WG 8.2 International Conference: The Social and Organizational Perspective on Research and Practice in Information Technology, Aalborg, Denmark. Retrieved April 18, 2005, from http://crowston.syr.edu/papers/ ifip2000.pdf
14. Curley, K. F. (1984). Are there any real benefits from office automation? Business Horizons, 4(July/August 1984), 37-42.
15. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319-339.
16. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models, Management Science, 35, 982-1003.
17. Davis, T. R. V. (1991). Information technology and white-collar productivity. Academy of Management Executive, 5, 55-67.
18. DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2002). Information systems success revisited. In Proceedings of 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (7-10 January, 2002; Big Island, HI). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.
19. Edelman, F. (1981). Managers, computer systems, and productivity, MIS Quarterly, 5(3), 1-19.
20. Fichman, R. G. (2000). The diffusion and assimilation of information technology innovations. In R. W. Zmud (Ed.), Framing the domains of IT management research: Glimpsing the future through the past (pp. 105-127). Cincinnati, OH: Pinnaflex Education Resources.
21. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1987). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50.
22. Gefen, D., & Straub, D. W. (1997). Gender differences in the perception and use of e-mail: An extension to the technology acceptance model. MIS Quarterly, 21, 389-400.
23. Goodhue, D. L., & Thompson, R. L. (1995). Task-technology fit and individual performance. MIS Quarterly, 19, 213-236.
24. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis with readings (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
25. Harvey, J., Lefebvre, E., & Lefebvre, L. (1993). Technology and the creation of value in services: A conceptual model. Technovation, 13, 481-495.
26. Hayduk, L. A. (1987). Structural equation modeling with LISREL. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
27. Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1989). LISREL7: A guide to the program and applications. (2nd ed.). Chicago: SPSS Inc.
28. Kanungo, S. (2003). Using systems dynamics to operationalize process theory in information systems research. Proceedings of the Twenty Fourth International Conference on Information Systems, Seattle, WA.
29. Karahanna, E., & Limayem, M. (2000). E-mail and v-mail usage: Generalizing across technologies. Journal of Organizational Computing & Electronic Commerce, 10, 49-66.
30. Kling, R., & Iacono, S. (1984). The control of information systems developments after implementation. Communications of the ACM, 27, 1218-1226.
31. Kraemer, K. L., & Danziger, J. N. (1990). The impacts of computer technology on the work life of information workers. Social Science Computer Review, 8, 592-613.
32. Lucas, H. C. (1993). The business value of information technology: A historical perspective and thoughts for future research. In R. D. Banker, R. J. Kauffman, & M. A. Mahmood (Eds.), Strategic Information Technology Management: Perspectives on Organizational Growth and Competitive Advantage (pp. 359-374). Harrisburg, PA: Idea Group.
33. Lucas, H. C., Jr., & Spitler, V. K. (1999). Technology use and performance: A field study of broker workstations. Decision Sciences, 30, 291-311.
34. Marcolin, B. L., Compeau, D. R., Munro, M. C., & Huff, S. L. (2000). Assessing user competence: Conceptualization and measurement. Information Systems Research, 11, 37-60.
35. Mathieson, K. (1991). Predicting user intentions: Comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behavior. Information Systems Research, 2, 173-222.
36. Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research, 2, 192-222.
37. Nambisan, S., Agarwal, R., & Tanniru, M. (1999). Organizational mechanisms for enhancing user innovation in information technology. MIS Quarterly, 23, 365-395.
38. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
39. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
40. Pentland, B. T. (1989). Use and productivity in personal computing. In Proceedings of International Conference on Information Systems (pp. 211-222). Boston: Association of Information Systems
41. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P (2003). Common method bias in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879-903.
42. Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12, 531-544.
43. Repenning, N., & J. Sterman. (2001). Nobody ever gets credit for fixing problems that never happened: Creating and sustaining process improvement. California Management Review, 43, 64-88.
44. Roberts, N., Andersen, D. F., Deal, R. M., & Shaffer, W. A. (1983). Introduction to computer simulation: A system dynamics modeling approach. Portland, OR: Productivity Press.
45. Robey, D. (1979). User attitudes and management information systems use. Academy of Management Journal, 22, 527-538.
46. Rosenthal, B. E. (1990). Managing end user computing. Banking Software Review, 15(5), 28-33.
47. Saga, V., & Zmud, R. W. (1994). The nature and determinants of IT acceptance, routinization, and infusion. In L. Levine (Ed.), Diffusion, transfer, and implementation of information technology (pp. 67-86). New York: North-Holland.
48. Segars, A. H., & Grover, V. (1993). Re-examining perceived ease of use and usefulness: A confirmatory factor analysis. MIS Quarterly, 17, 517-525.
49. Sharda, R., Barr, S. H., & McDonnell, J. C. (1988). Decision support system effectiveness: A review and empirical test. Management Science, 34, 139-159.
50. Soh, C., & Markus, M. L. (1995). How IT creates business value: A process theory synthesis. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Information Systems (pp. 29-41). Amsterdam: Association of Information Systems.
51. Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business dynamics: Systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. Boston: Irwin/McGraw-Hill, USA.
52. Stewart, T. (1997). Intellectual capital. New York: Doubleday.
53. Straub, D. W., Limyem, M., & Karahanna, E. (1995). Measuring system usage: Implications for IS theory testing. Management Science, 41, 1328-1342.
54. Sulek, J. M., & Marucheck, A. S. (1992). A study of the impact of an integrated information technology on the time utilization of information workers. Decision Sciences, 23(11), 74-91.
55. Szajna, B. (1996). Empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Management Science, 42, 85-92.
56. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). Assessing IT usage: The role of prior experience. MIS Quarterly, 19, 561-570.
57. Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., & Howell, J. M. (1991). Personal computing: Toward a conceptual model of utilization. MIS Quarterly, 15, 125-143.
58. Torkzadeh, G., & Doll, W. J. (1999). The development of a tool for measuring the perceived impact of information technology on work. Omega, 27, 327-339.
59. Tornatzky, L., Eveland, J. D., & Fleischer, M. (1990). Technological innovation: Definitions and perspectives. The process of technological innovation (pp. 2-25). Lanham, MD: Lexington.
60. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46, 186-205.
61. Venkatesh, V., & Morris, M. G. (2000). Why don't men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS Quarterly, 24, 115-139.
62. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.
63. Zumd, R. W., & Apple, L. E. (1992). Measuring technology incorporation/infusion. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 9, 148-155.