System characteristics, perceived benefits, individual differences and use intentions: A survey of decision support tools of ERP systems

Information Resources Management Journal

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 66-83

  Kamhawi, Emad M ^a  

^a ZAGAZIG UNIVERSITY   (Egypt)

Author keywords

Decision support tools; Erp implementation; Is use in bahrain; Technology acceptance

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; ENTERPRISE RESOURCE PLANNING;

COMPUTER SELF-EFFICACY; DECISION MAKING SUPPORT; DECISION SUPPORT TOOLS; ERP IMPLEMENTATION; INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES; IS USE IN BAHRAIN; SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE;

DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS;

EID: 70249124281     PISSN: 10401628     EISSN: 15337979     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4018/irmj.2008100104     Document Type: Article

References (83)

1. Agarwal, R., & Prasad, J. (1999). Are individual differences germane to the acceptance of new information technologies? Decision Sciences, 30(2), 361-391.
2. Agarwal, R., Sambamurthy, V., & Stair, R. (2000). Research report: The evolving relationship between general and specific computer self-efficacy-An empirical assessment. Information Systems Research, 11(4), 418-430.
3. Akkermans, H., & Van Helden, K. (2002). Vicious and virtuous cycles in ERP implantation: A case study of interrelations between critical success factors. European Journal of Operational Research, 11(1), 12-29.
4. Al-Mashari, M., Al-Mudimigh, A., & Zairi, M. (2003). Enterprise resource planning: A taxonomy of critical factors. European Journal of Operational Research, 14(6), 352-364.
5. Amoako-Gympah, K. (2005). Perceived usefulness, user involvement and behavioral intention: An empirical study of ERP implementation. Computers in Human Behavior. Retrieved January 11, 2005, from http://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/journal/ 07475632
6. Amoako-Gympah, K., & Salam, A. M. (2004). An extension of the technology acceptance model in an ERP implementation environment. Information & Management, 41(6), 731-745.
7. Benbasat, I., Dexter, A., & Todd, P. (1986). An experimental program investigating color-enhanced and graphical information presentation: An integration of the findings. Communications of the ACM, 29(11), 1094-1105.
8. Bhatt, G. (2000). Exploring the relationship between information technology, infrastructure and business process re-engineering. Business Process Management, 6(2), 139-163.
9. Bingi, P., Sharma, M., & Golda, J. (1999). Critical issues affecting an ERP implementation. Information Systems Management, 16(3), 7-14.
10. Bradford, M., & Florin, J. (2003). Examining the role of innovation diffusion factors on the implementation success of enterprise resource planning systems. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 4(3), 205-225.
11. Bruggen, G., & Wierenga, B. (2001). Matching management support systems and managerial problemsolving modes: The key to effective decision support. European Management Journal, 19(3), 228-238.
12. Calisir, F., & Calisir, F. (2004). The relation of interface usability characteristics, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of use to end-user satisfaction with enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(3), 505-515.
13. Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/ correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbuam.
14. Compeau, D., & Higgins, C. (1995). Computer selfefficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 189-211.
15. D'Ambra, J., & Wilson, C. (2004). Explaining perceived performance of the World Wide Web: Uncertainty and the task-technology fit model. Internet Research, 14(4), 294-310.
16. Davies, C. (1997). Organizational influences on the university electronic library. Information Processing and Management, 33(3), 377-392.
17. Davis, F. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
18. Davis, F., Bagozzi, R., & Warshaw, P. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.
19. Davis, L., & Davis, D. (1990). The effect of training techniques & personal characteristics on training end users of information systems. Journal of Management Information systems, 7(1), 93-110.
20. Dillon, A., & Watson, C. (1996). User analysis in HCI-The historical lessons from individual difference research. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45(6), 619-637.
21. Field, A. (2000). Discovering statistics: Using SPSS for Windows. London: Sage.
22. Gable, G. (1998). Large package software: A neglected technology. Journal of Global Information Management, 6(3), 3-4.
23. Guteck, B., & Bikson, T. (1985). Differntial experiences of men and women in computerized offices. Sex roles, 13(3-4), 123-136.
24. Hair, J., Anderson, R., Tatham, R., & Black, W. (1995). Multivariate data analysis with readings. NJ: Prentice Hall.
25. Harrison, A., & Rainer, R. (1992). The influence of individual differences in skill in end-user computing. Journal of Management Information Systems, 9(1), 93-111.
26. Holsapple, C., & Sena, M. (2005). ERP plans and decision support benefits. Decision Support Systems, 38(4), 575-590.
27. Hong, K. K., & Kim, Y. G. (2002). The critical success factors for ERP implementation: an organizational fit perspective. Information & Management, 40(1), 25-40.
28. Hong, W, Thong, J., Wong, W., & Tam, K. (2001). Determinants of user acceptance of digital libraries: An empirical examination of individual differences and system characteristics. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18 (3), 97-124.
29. Hu, P., Chau, P., Sheng, O., & Tam, K. (1999). Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology. Journal of Management Information Systems, 16(2), 91-112.
30. Igbaria, M., Gumaraes, T., & Davis, G. (1995). Testing the determinants of microcomputer usage via a structural equation model. Journal of Management Information Systems, 11(4), 87-114.
31. Igbaria, M., & Iivari, J. (1995). The effects of self-efficacy on computer usage. Omega, 23(6), 587-605.
32. Klenke, K. (2003). Gender influences in decisionmaking processes in top management teams. Management Decision, 41(10), 1024-1034.
33. Bhatt, G. (2000). Exploring the relationship between information technology, infrastructure and business process re-engineering. Business Process Management, 6(2), 139-163.
34. Bingi, P., Sharma, M., & Golda, J. (1999). Critical issues affecting an ERP implementation. Information Systems Management, 16(3), 7-14.
35. Bradford, M., & Florin, J. (2003). Examining the role of innovation diffusion factors on the implementation success of enterprise resource planning systems. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 4(3), 205-225.
36. Bruggen, G., & Wierenga, B. (2001). Matching management support systems and managerial problemsolving modes: The key to effective decision support. European Management Journal, 19(3), 228-238.
37. Calisir, F., & Calisir, F. (2004). The relation of interface usability characteristics, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of use to end-user satisfaction with enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(3), 505-515.
38. Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/ correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbuam.
39. Compeau, D., & Higgins, C. (1995). Computer selfefficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 189-211.
40. D'Ambra, J., & Wilson, C. (2004). Explaining perceived performance of the World Wide Web: Uncertainty and the task-technology fit model. Internet Research, 14(4), 294-310.
41. Davies, C. (1997). Organizational influences on the university electronic library. Information Processing and Management, 33(3), 377-392.
42. Davis, F. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
43. Davis, F., Bagozzi, R., & Warshaw, P. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.
44. Davis, L., & Davis, D. (1990). The effect of training techniques & personal characteristics on training end users of information systems. Journal of Management Information systems, 7(1), 93-110.
45. Dillon, A., & Watson, C. (1996). User analysis in HCI-The historical lessons from individual difference research. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45(6), 619-637.
46. Field, A. (2000). Discovering statistics: Using SPSS for Windows. London: Sage.
47. Gable, G. (1998). Large package software: A neglected technology. Journal of Global Information Management, 6(3), 3-4.
48. Guteck, B., & Bikson, T. (1985). Differntial experiences of men and women in computerized offices. Sex roles, 13(3-4), 123-136.
49. Hair, J., Anderson, R., Tatham, R., & Black, W. (1995). Multivariate data analysis with readings. NJ: Prentice Hall.
50. Harrison, A., & Rainer, R. (1992). The influence of individual differences in skill in end-user computing. Journal of Management Information Systems, 9(1), 93-111.
51. Holsapple, C., & Sena, M. (2005). ERP plans and decision support benefits. Decision Support Systems, 38(4), 575-590.
52. Hong, K. K., & Kim, Y. G. (2002). The critical success factors for ERP implementation: an organizational fit perspective. Information & Management, 40(1), 25-40.
53. Hong, W, Thong, J., Wong, W., & Tam, K. (2001). Determinants of user acceptance of digital libraries: An empirical examination of individual differences and system characteristics. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18 (3), 97-124.
54. Hu, P., Chau, P., Sheng, O., & Tam, K. (1999). Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology. Journal of Management Information Systems, 16(2), 91-112.
55. Igbaria, M., Gumaraes, T., & Davis, G. (1995). Testing the determinants of microcomputer usage via a structural equation model. Journal of Management Information Systems, 11(4), 87-114.
56. Igbaria, M., & Iivari, J. (1995). The effects of self-efficacy on computer usage. Omega, 23(6), 587-605.
57. Klenke, K. (2003). Gender influences in decisionmaking processes in top management teams. Management Decision, 41(10), 1024-1034.
58. Kotey, B., & Anderson, P. (2006). Performance of distance learning students in a small business management course. Education + Training, 48(8/9), 642-653.
59. Lai, V., & Li, H. (2005). Technology acceptance model for Internet banking: An invariance analysis. Information & Management, 42(2), 373-386.
60. Legris, P., Ingham, J., & Collerette, P. (2003). Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 40, 191-204.
61. Levin, T., & Gordon, C. (1989). Effect of gender and computer experience on attitudes toward computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5(1), 69-88.
62. Lu, H., Yu, H., & Lu, S. (2001). The effect of cognitive style and model type on DSS acceptance: An empirical study. European Journal of Operational Research, 131(3), 649-663.
63. Lu, J., Yu, C., Liu, C., & Yao, J. (2003). Technology acceptance model for wireless Internet. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, 13(3), 206-222.
64. Lucas, H., & Spitler, V. (1999). Technology use and performance: A field study of broker workstations. Decision Sciences, 30(2), 291-312.
65. Mafe, C., & Blas, S. (2006). Explaining Internet dependency: An exploratory study of future purchase intention of Spanish Internet users. Internet Research, 16(4), 380-397.
66. Markus, M. L., Tanis, C., & Van Fenema, P. C. (2000). Multisite ERP implementations. Communications of the ACM, 43(4), 42-46.
67. Nemati, H., & Barko, C. (2001). Issues in organizational data mining: A survey of current practices. Journal of data warehousing, 6(1), 14-38.
68. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
69. Olson, J., & Boyer, K. (2003). Factors influencing the utilization of Internet purchasing in small organizations. Journal of Operations Management, 21(2), 225-245.
70. Palaniswamy, R., & Frank, T. (2000). Enhancing manufacturing performance with ERP systems. Information Systems Management, 17(2), 43-55.
71. Rajagopal, P. (2002). An innovation-diffusion view of implementation of enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems and development of research model. Information & Management, 40(2), 87-114.
72. Sandoe, K., Corbitt, G., & Boykin, R. (2001). Enterprise integration. New York: Wiley.
73. Shafiei, F., & Sundaram, D. (2004). Multi-enterprise collaborative enterprise resource planning and decision support systems. Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS '04), Hawaii.
74. Smith, M. (1999). Gender, cognitive style, personality and management decision making. Management Accounting-London, 77(7), 493-513.
75. Straub, D. (1989). Validating instruments in MIS research. MIS Quarterly, 13(2), 147-169.
76. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 144-174.
77. Turban, E., Aronson, J., & Liang, T. (2005). Decision support systems & intelligent systems. NJ: Prentice Hall.
78. Umble, E., & Umble, M. (2002). Avoiding ERP implementation failure. Industrial Management, 44(1), 6-25.
79. Venkatesh, V. (1999). Creation of favorable user perceptions: Exploring the role of intrinsic motivation. MIS Quarterly, 23(2), 239-260.
80. Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Research, 11(4), 342-365.
81. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204.
82. 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(1), 115-139.
83. Vlahos, G., Ferratt, T., & Knoepfle, G. (2004). The use of computer-based information systems by German managers to support decision making. Information and Management, 41(6), 763-779.