The psychological and structural determinants of technology integration in organizations: An empirical study

Management Research

Volumn 7, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 61-74

  Almeida, Filipe ^a   Sobral, Filipe ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COIMBRA   (Portugal)

^b FUNDAÇÃO GETÚLIO VARGAS   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Organizational structure; Psychology; Technology adoption; Technology integration

Indexed keywords

EID: 84875027847     PISSN: 15365433     EISSN: 15580946     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2753/JMR1536-5433070105     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Adams, D., Nelson, R., & Todd, P. 1992. Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and usage of information technology: A replication. MIS Quarterly, 16 (2): 227-247.
2. Ajzen, I. 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50 (2): 179-211.
3. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. 1980. Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
4. Amoako-Gyampah, K. 2007. Perceived usefulness, user involvement and behavioral intention: An empirical study of ERP implementation. Computers in Human Behavior, 23 (3): 1232-1248.
5. Andersen, J.C., & Gerbing, D.W. 1988. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103 (3): 411-423.
6. Barley, S. 1990. The alignment of technology and structure through roles and networks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35 (1): 61-103.
7. Benameur, K. 1999. The relationship between information technology and small and medium size firm performance in the manufacturing sector: Case of the Tunisian textile industry. Ph.D. dissertation, College of Business and Administration Drexel University, Philadelphia.
8. Bollen, D. 1989. Structural equations with latent variables. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
9. Browne, M.W., & Cudeck, R. 1993. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K.A. Bollen & L.S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models: 136-162. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
10. Burns, T., & Stalker, G. 1961. The management of innovation. London: Tavistock.
11. Byrne, B. 1998. Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12. Carrière, J.-B., & Julien, P. 1992. Profil Technologique de la PME Manufacturière Québécoise. Montréal: Association des manufacturiers du Québec.
13. Chau, P. 1996. An empirical assessment of a modified technology acceptance model. Journal of Management Information Systems, 13 (2): 185-204.
14. Child, J. 1972. Organizational structure, environment and performance: The role of strategic choice. Sociology, 6 (1): 1-22.
15. Coelho, A. 1999. El Management en un Entorno Dinámico: La certificación de la calidad como factor estructurante. Um estudio comparativo entre empresas Portuguesas y Catalanas. Ph.D. dissertation, Department d’Economia I Organització d’Empreses, Universidade de Barcelona, Barcelona.
16. Colvin, C., & Goh, A. 2005. Validation of the technology acceptance model for police. Journal of Criminal Justice, 33 (1): 89-95.
17. Cooper, R., & Zmud, R. 1990. Information technology implementation research: A technological diffusion approach. Management Science, 36 (2): 123-139.
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. DeSanctis, G. 1983. Expectancy theory as an explanation of voluntary use of a decision support system. Psychological Reports, 52 (1): 247-261.
20. Diamantopoulos, A., & Siguaw, J. 2000. Introducing LISREL. London: Sage.
21. Duncan, R. 1973. Multiple decision-making structures in adapting to environmental uncertainty: The impact on organizational effectiveness. Human Relations, 26 (3): 273-291.
22. Eagly, A., & Chaiken, S. 1993. The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College.
23. Egelhoff, W. 1982. Strategy and structure in multinational corporations: An information-processing approach. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27 (3): 435-458.
24. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. 1975. Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
25. Floyd, S., & Wooldridge, B. 1990. Path analysis of the relationship between competitive strategy, information technology, and financial performance. Journal of Management Information Systems, 7 (1): 47-64.
26. Galbraith, J. 1977. Organization design. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
27. Gibbons, S. 1999. Business experts ponder the past, present, and future. Journal for Quality and Participation, 22 (6): 18-23.
28. Gresov, C., Drazin, R., & Ven, A. 1989. Work-unit task uncertainty, design and morale. Organization Studies, 10 (1): 45-62.
29. Harrison, D., Mykytyn, P., & Riemenschneider, C. 1997. Executive decisions about adoption of information technology in small business: Theory and empirical tests. Information Systems Research, 8 (2): 171-195.
30. Harvey, E. 1968. Technology and the structure of organizations. American Sociological Review, 33 (2): 247-259.
31. Heintze, T., & Bretschneider, S. 2000. Information technology and restructuring in public organizations: Does adoption of information technology affect organizational structures, communications, and decision making? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10 (4): 801-830.
32. Hendrickson, A., Glorfeld, K., & Cronan, T. 1994. On the repeated test-retest reliability of the end-user computing satisfaction instrument: A comment. Decision Sciences, 25 (4): 655-667.
33. Hill, T., Smith, N., & Mann, M. 1987. Role of efficacy expectations in predicting the decision to use advanced technologies: A case of computers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72 (2): 307-318.
34. Hrebiniak, L., & Snow, C. 1980. Industry differences in environmental uncertainty and organizational characteristics related to uncertainty. Academy of Management Journal, 23 (4): 750-759.
35. Igbaria, M. 1990. End-user computing effectiveness: A structural equation model. OMEGA-International Journal of Management Science, 18 (6): 637-652.
36. Igbaria, M. 1993. User acceptance of microcomputer technology: An empirical test. OMEGA-International Journal of Management Sciences, 21 (1): 73-90.
37. Kalika, M. 1988. Structures d’Entreprise: Reálités, determinants, performances. Paris: Economica.
38. Karahanna, E., Straub, D., & Chervany, N. 1999. Information technology adoption across time: A cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs. MIS Quarterly, 23 (2): 183-213.
39. Khandwalla, P. 1974. Mass-output orientation of operations technology and organizational structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 19 (1): 74-97.
40. Kidder, L., Judd, C., & Smith, E. 1986. Research methods in social relations. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
41. Kline, P. 1994. An easy guide to factor analysis. London: Routledge.
42. Lippert, S. 2007. Investigating postadoption utilization: An examination into the role of interorganizational and technology trust. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 54 (3): 468-483.
43. Louadi, M. 1998. The relationship among organization structure, information technology and information processing in small Canadian firms. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 15 (2): 180-199.
44. Lyne, G., Casey, C., Hodges, A., & Rahmani, M. 1995. Conservation technology adoption decisions and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology, 16 (4): 581-598.
45. March, J., & Simon, H. 1958. Organizations. New York: John Wiley.
46. March, J., & Sproull, L. 1990. Technology, management, and competitive advantage. In P. Goodman & L. Sproull (Eds.), Organizations and technology: 144-173. Oxford: Jossey-Bass.
47. Marsh, R., & Mannari, H. 1981. Technology size as determinants of the organizational structure of Japanese factories. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26 (March): 33-57.
48. Mathieson, K. 1991. Predicting user intentions: Comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behavior. Information Systems Research, 2 (3): 173-191.
49. Mesquita, L.F., & Lazzarini, S. 2008. Horizontal and vertical relationships in developing economies: Implications for SMEs’ access to global markets. Academy of Management Journal, 51 (2): 359-380.
50. Mintzberg, H. 1993. Structure in fives: Designing effective organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
51. Morris, M., & Venkatesh, V. 2000. Age differences in technology adoption decisions: Implications for a changing work force. Personnel Psychology, 53 (2): 375-403.
52. Negandhi, A. 1979. Convergence in organizational practices: An empirical study of industrial enterprises in developing countries. In C. Lammers & D. Hickson (Eds.), Organizations alike and unlike: International and inter-institutional studies in the sociology of organizations: 323-345. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
53. Pagani, M. 2006. Determinants of adoption of high speed data services in the business market: Evidence for a combined technology acceptance model with task technology fit model. Information & Management, 43 (7): 847-860.
54. Randolph, W., & Dess, G. 1984. The congruence perspective of organization design: A conceptual model and multivariate research approach. Academy of Management Review, 9 (1): 114-127.
55. Saga, V., & Zmud, R. 1994. The nature and determinants of IT acceptance, routinization, and infusion. In L. Levine (Ed.), Diffusion, Transfer and Implementation of Information Technology: 67-86. New York: North-Holland.
56. Schepers, J., & Wetzels, M. 2007. A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model: Investigating subjective norm and moderation effects. Information & Management, 44 (1): 90-103.
57. Tapscott, D. 1996. Digital economy: Promise and peril in the age of networked intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.
58. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. 1995. Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing methods. Information Systems Research, 6 (2): 144-176.
59. Thomas, L. 1999. Adoption order of new technologies in evolving markets. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 38 (4): 453-482.
60. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. 2000. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46 (2): 186-204.
61. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M., & Ackerman, P. 2000. A longitudinal field investigation on gender differences in individual technology adoption decision-making processes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 83 (1): 33-60.
62. Zhang, W., & Gutierrez, O. 2007. Information technology acceptance in the social services sector context: An exploration. Social Work, 52 (3): 221-231.