Exploring determinants of adoption intentions towards Enterprise 2.0 applications: An empirical study

Behaviour and Information Technology

Volumn 33, Issue 10, 2014, Pages 1048-1064

  Wang, Tao ^a   Jung, Chul Ho ^b   Kang, Ming Hui ^c   Chung, Young Soo ^c  

^a SOUTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY OF FINANCE AND ECONOMICS   (China)

^b Mokwon University   (South Korea)

^c Chungnam National University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Behavioural intention; Enterprise 2.0 applications; Individual characteristics; Knowledge sharing; Web 2.0

Indexed keywords

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT;

BEHAVIOURAL INTENTIONS; ENTERPRISE 2.0; INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERISTICS; KNOWLEDGE-SHARING; WEB 2.0;

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT;

EID: 84926091416     PISSN: 0144929X     EISSN: 13623001     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2013.781221     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Agarwal, R. and Karahanna, E., 2000. Time flies when you're having fun: cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly, 24 (4), 665-694.
2. Agarwal, R. and Prasad, J., 1998. A conceptual and operational definition of personal innovativeness in the domain of information technology. Information Systems Research, 9 (2), 204-215.
3. Ajjan, H. and Hartshorne, R., 2008. Investigating faculty decisions to adopt Web 2.0 technologies: theory and empirical tests. Internet and Higher Education, 11 (2), 71-80.
4. Amichai, H.Y., 2002. Internet and personality. Computers in Human Behavior, 18 (1), 1-10.
5. Armstrong, J.S. and Overton, T.S., 1977. Estimating non-response bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14 (3), 396-402.
6. Bandura, A., 1997. Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.
7. Baron, R.M. and Kenny, D.A., 1986. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (6), 1173-1182.
8. Bock, G.W., et al., 2005. Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing: examining the role of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological forces, and organizational climate. MIS Quarterly, 29 (1), 87-111.
9. Cheng,T.C.E., Lam, D.Y.C. andYeung, A.C.L., 2006. Adoption of Internet banking: an empirical study in Hong Kong. Decision Support Systems, 42 (3), 1558-1572.
10. Chua, A.Y.K. and Goh, D.H., 2010. A study of Web 2.0 applications in library websites. Library & Information Science Research, 32 (3), 203-211.
11. Cole, M., 2009. UsingWiki technology to support student engagement: lessons from the trenches. Computers & Education, 52 (1), 141-146.
12. Compeau, D.R. and Higgins, C.A., 1995. Computer self-efficacy: development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19 (2), 189-211.
13. Davis, F.D., 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13 (3), 319-340.
14. Dawson, R., 2009. Implementing Enterprise 2.0: a practical guide to creating business value inside organizations with web technologies. 1st ed. San Francisco: Advanced Human Technologies.
15. Dearstyne, B.W., 2007. Blogs, mashups, and wikis: oh my! Information Management Journal, 41 (4), 24-33.
16. Fong, A.C., Hui, S.C. and Lau, C.T., 2001. Toward an open protocol for secure online presence notification. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 23 (4), 311-324.
17. Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F., 1981. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (1), 39-50.
18. Forrester, 2008. Global EnterpriseWeb 2.0 market forecast: 2007 To 2013 [online]. Forrester Research, 1-5. Available from: www.forrester.com/research [Accessed 13 January 2011].
19. Forrester, 2011. The Enterprise 2.0 user profile: 2011 [online]. Forrester Research, 2-10.Available from:www.forrester.com/ research [Accessed 24 January 2011].
20. Gary, M., 2007. Enterprise 2.0: fad or future? The business role for social software platforms [online]. Global KPMG International, 5-8. Available from: www.kpmg.de/media [Accessed 17 March 2011].
21. Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C., 1998. Multivariate data analysis, 5th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
22. Hasan, B., 2003. The influence of specific computer experiences on computer self-efficacy beliefs. Computer in Human Behavior, 19 (4), 443-450.
23. Hsu, C.L. and Lin, J.C., 2008. Acceptance of blog usage: the roles of technology acceptance, social influence and knowledge sharing motivation. Information & Management, 45 (1), 65-74.
24. Hsu, C. and Lu, H., 2004. Why do people play on-line games? An extended TAM with social effects and flow experience. Information and Management, 41 (7), 853-868.
25. Hsu, M.H., et al., 2007. Knowledge sharing behavior in virtual communities: the relationship between trust, self-efficacy, and outcome expectations. International Journal of Human- Computer Studies, 65 (2), 153-169.
26. Huang, D., Rau, P.P. and Salvendy, G., 2010. Perception of information security. Behaviour & Information Technology, 29 (3), 221-232.
27. Hung, S., Lai, H. and Chang,W., 2011. Knowledge-sharing motivations affecting R&D employees' acceptance of electronic knowledge repository. Behaviour&Information Technology, 30 (2), 213-230.
28. Im, I., Kim,Y.B., and Han, H.J., 2008. The effects of perceived risk and technology type on users' acceptance of technologies. Information & Management, 45 (1), 1-9.
29. Kuo, R.Z. and Lee, G.G., 2011. Knowledge management system adoption: exploring the effects of empowering leadership, task-technology fit and compatibility. Behaviour & Information Technology, 30 (1), 113-129.
30. Kwon, O. and Wen, Y., 2010. An empirical study of the factors affecting social network service use. Computers in Human Behavior, 26 (2), 254-263.
31. Kwon, O., Choi, K. and Kim, M., 2007. User acceptance of context-aware services: self-efficacy, user innovativeness and perceived sensitivity on contextual pressure. Behaviour & Information Technology, 26 (6), 483-498.
32. Levy, M., 2009.Web 2.0 implications on knowledge management. Journal of Knowledge Management, 13 (1), 120-134.
33. McAfee, A.P., 2006. Enterprise 2.0: the dawn of emergent collaboration. MIT Sloan Management Review, 47(3), 22-28.
34. McAfee, A.P., 2009. Enterprise 2.0: new collaborative tools for your organization's toughest challenges. 1st ed. Watertown: Harvard Business School Press.
35. McKinsey, 2008. Building the Web 2.0 enterprise: McKinsey global survey results [online], 40-42. Available from: www.mckinseyquarterly.com [Accessed 9 March 2011].
36. McKinsey, 2009. How companies are benefiting from Web 2.0: McKinsey global survey results [online], 2-9. Available from: www.mckinseyquarterly.com [Accessed 11 February 2011].
37. Mike, G., 2007. Enterprise 2.0: collaboration and knowledge management renaissance. Collaboration and content strategies in-depth research report, 1st ed. Midvale, UT: Burton Group.
38. Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B. and Podsakoff, N.P., 2003. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88 (5), 879-903.
39. Rogers, E., 2003. Diffusion of innovation. 2nd ed. New York: Free Press.
40. Shin, D.H., 2009. Towards an understanding of the consumer acceptance of mobile wallet. Computers in Human Behavior, 25 (6), 1343-1354.
41. Shin, D.H., 2010. The effects of trust, security and privacy in social networking: a security-based approach to understand the pattern of adoption. Interacting with Computers, 22 (5), 428-438.
42. Taylor, S. and Todd, P.A. 1995. Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6 (2), 144-176.
43. To, P.L., et al., 2008. An empirical investigation of the factors affecting the adoption of instant messaging in organizations. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 30 (3), 148-156.
44. Usluela, Y.K. and Mazman, S.G., 2009. Adoption of Web 2.0 tools in distance education. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1 (1), 818-823.
45. Venkatesh,V. and Davis, F.D., 2000.Atheoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46 (2), 186-208.
46. Venkatesh,V. and Morris, M.G., 2000.Whydon'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.
47. Venkatesh, V., et al., 2003. User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27 (3), 425-478.
48. Wu, J.,Wang, S. and Lin, L., 2007. Mobile computing acceptance factors in the healthcare industry: a structural equation model. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 76 (1), 66-77.
49. Yang, H. and Lai, C., 2011. Understanding knowledge-sharing behaviour in Wikipedia. Behaviour & Information Technology, 30 (1), 131-142.