Does fit matter? The impact of task-technology fit and appropriation on team performance in repeated tasks

Information Systems Research

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 2-17

  Fuller, Robert M ^a   Dennis, Alan R ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE   (United States)

^b INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Fit appropriation model; Repeated tasks; Team performance; Time

Indexed keywords

INFORMATION SYSTEMS;

APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGIES; CURRENT THEORETICAL MODELS; IMPROVING PERFORMANCE; PREDICTED PERFORMANCE; REPEATED TASKS; TASK TECHNOLOGY FIT; TEAM PERFORMANCE; TIME;

HARDWARE;

EID: 67649529416     PISSN: 10477047     EISSN: 15265536     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1287/isre.1070.0167     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Ancona, D. G., P. S. Goodman, B. S. Lawrence, M. L. Tushman. 2001. Time: A new research lens. Acad. Management Rev. 26(4) 645-663.
2. Barkhi, R. 2001. The effects of decision guidance and problem modelling on group decision making. J. Management Inform. Systems 18(3) 259-282.
3. Bleise, P. 2000. Within group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analyses. K. Klein, J. Kozlowski, eds. Multilevel Theory, Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions and New Directions. Josey-Bass, San Francisco, 349-381.
4. Bobko, P., E. Stone-Romero. 1998. Meta-analysis is another useful research tool but it is not a Panacea. G. Ferris, ed. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, Vol. 16. JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, 359-397.
5. Brown, S. A., R. M. Fuller, C. Vician. 2004. Who's afraid of the virtual world? Anxiety and computer-mediated communication. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 5(3) 79-107.
6. Carlson, J. R., R. W. Zmud. 1999. Channel expansion theory and the experiential nature of media richness perceptions. Acad. Management J. 42(2) 153-170.
7. Chidambaram, L., B. Jones. 1993. Impact of communication medium and computer support on group perceptions and performance: A comparison of face-to-face and dispersed meetings. MIS Quart. 17(4, December) 465-491.
8. Chudoba, K. M. 1999. Appropriations and patterns in the use of group support systems. Database Adv. Inform. Systems 30(3) 131-148.
9. Connolly, T., B. K. Thorn. 1987. Predecisional information acquisition-Effects of task variables on suboptimal search strategies. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 39(3) 397-416.
10. Daft, R. L., R. H. Lengel, L. K. Trevino. 1987. Message equivocality, media selection, and manager performance-Implications for information-systems. MIS Quart. 11(3) 355-366.
11. Dennis, A. R. 1996. Information exchange and use in small group decision making. Small Group Res. 27(4) 532-550.
12. Dennis, A. R., M. J. Garfield. 2003. The adoption and use of GSS in project teams: Toward more participative processes and outcomes. MIS Quart. 27(2) 167-193.
13. Dennis, A. R., S. T. Kinney. 1998. Testing media richness theory in the new media: The effects of cues, feedback and task equivocality. Inform. Systems Res. 9(3, September) 256-274.
14. Dennis, A. R., J. S. Valacich. 1999. Rethinking media richness: Towards a theory of media synchronicity. Proc. 32nd Hawaii Internat. Conf. System Sci., Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, 1-10.
15. Dennis, A. R., B. H. Wixom, R. J. Vandenberg. 2001. Understanding fit and appropriation effects in group support systems via meta-analysis. MIS Quart. 25 167-193.
16. Dennis, A. R., C. K. Tyran, D. R. Vogel, J. F. Nunamaker. 1997. An evaluation of group support systems for strategic planning. J. Management Inform. Systems 14(1) 155-184.
17. DeSanctis, G., M. S. Poole. 1994. Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use-Adaptive structuration theory. Organ. Sci. 5(2) 121-147.
18. George, J. M., G. R. Jones. 2000. The role of time in theory and theory building. J. Management 26(4) 657-684.
19. Gersick, C. J. G. 1991. Revolutionary change theories: A multilevel exploration of the punctuated equilibrium paradigm. Acad. Management Rev. 16(1) 10-36.
20. Gersick, C. J. G., J. R. Hackman. 1990. Habitual routines in task-performing groups. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 47(1) 65-97.
21. Goodhue, D. L. 1995. Understanding user evaluations of information systems. Management Sci. 41(12) 1827-1844.
22. Goodhue, D. L. 1998. Development and measurement validity of a task-technology fit instrument for user evaluations of information systems. Decision Sci. 29(1) 105-138.
23. Goodhue, D., R. Thompson. 1995. Task-technology fit and individual-performance. MIS Quart. 19(2) 213-236.
24. Leonard-Barton, D. 1988. Implementation as mutual adaptation of technology and organization. Res. Policy 17 251-267.
25. Lipnack, J., J. Stamps. 1997. Virtual Teams: Reaching Across Space, Time, and Organizations with Technology. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
26. Majchrzak, A., R. E. Rice, A. Malhotra, N. King, S. Ba. 2000. Technology adaptation: The case of a computer-supported inter-organizational virtual team. MIS Quart. 24(4) 569-600.
27. March, J., H. A. Simon. 1958. Organizations. Wiley, New York.
28. Maruping, L., R. Agarwal. 2004. Managing team interpersonal processes through technology: A task-technology fit perspective. J. Appl. Psych. 89(6) 975-990.
29. Massey, A. P., M. Montoya-Weiss, C. Hung, V. Ramesh. 2001. Cultural perceptions of task-technology fit. Comm. ACM 44(12) 83-84.
30. Maznevski, M. L., K. M. Chudoba. 2000. Bridging space over time: Global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness. Organ. Sci. 11(5) 473-492.
31. McGrath, J. E. 1984. Groups: Interaction, and Performance. Prentice Hall, Englewood, NJ.
32. McGrath, J. E. 1991. Time, interaction, and performance (TIP)-A theory of groups. Small Group Res. 22(2) 147-174.
33. McGrath, J. E., A. B. Hollingshead. 1994. Groups Interacting with Technology. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
34. Orlikowski, W. J. 1996. Improvising organizational transformation over time: A situated change perspective. Inform. Systems Res. 7(1) 63-92.
35. Orlikowski, W. J. 2000. Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organ. Sci. 11(4) 404-428.
36. Poole, M. S., D. R. Siebold, R. D. McPhee. 1985. Group decision making as a structurational process. Quart. J. Speech 71(1) 74-102.
37. Postmes, T., R. Spears, M. Lea. 2000. The formation of group norms in computer-mediated communication. Human Comm. Res. 26(3) 341-371.
38. Straus, S. G. 1999. Testing a typology of tasks-An empirical validation of McGrath's (1984) group task circumplex. Small Group Res. 30(2) 166-187.
39. Tesluk, P. E., J. E. Mathieu. 1999. Overcoming roadblocks to effectiveness: Incorporating management of performance barriers into models of work group effectiveness. J. Appl. Psych. 84(2) 200-217.
40. Trevino, L., R. L. Daft, R. H. Lengel. 1990. Understanding managers' media choices: A symbolic interactionist perspective. J. Fulk, C. Steinfield, eds. Organizations and Communication Technology. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA, 71-95.
41. Tyre, M. J., W. J. Orlikowski. 1994. Windows of opportunity-Temporal patterns of technological adaptation in organizations. Organ. Sci. 5(1) 98-118.
42. Walczuch, R. M., R. T. Watson. 2001. Analyzing group data in MIS research: Including the effect of the group. Group Decisionand Negotiation 10 83-94.
43. Wheeler, B. C., J. S. Valacich. 1996. Facilitation, GSS and training as sources of process restrictiveness and guidance for structured group decision making: An empirical assessment. Inform. Systems Res. 7(4) 429-450.
44. Yates, J., W. J. Orlikowski. 1992. Genres of organizational communication: A structurational approach to studying communication and media. Acad. Management Rev. 17 299-326.
45. Zigurs, I., B. K. Buckland. 1998. A theory of task/technology fit and group support systems effectiveness. MIS Quart. 22(3) 313-334.