Factors Influencing Acceptance and Use of ICT Innovations by Agribusinesses

Factors Influencing Acceptance and Use of ICT Innovations by Agribusinesses

Adamkolo Mohammed Ibrahim (University of Maiduguri, Maiduguri, Nigeria & Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia), Md Salleh Hassan (Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia) and Ahmed Lawal Gusau (Talata Mafara, Zamfara State, Nigeria &Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia)
Copyright: © 2018 |Pages: 22
DOI: 10.4018/JGIM.2018100107

Abstract

This article describes how because of the rapid expansion of digital and online ‘bizscapes,' and ‘bizapps' resulting in small and medium-scale agribusinesses adopting and using online entrepreneurial technology innovations, information and communication technology has great potential to enhance the performance and efficiency of agribusinesses. The urge to understand factors that affect information technology innovations adoption and use by small and medium agribusinesses prompted this study, which involves the designing of a modified research model based on UTAUT perspective to determine the influence of cognitive, management characteristics and organizational structure factors on technology adoption. Factor analysis yielded a fit structural model, which was used to test the hypotheses. The article found performance expectancy, SMEs management creativity and innovativeness and SMEs organizational size significantly influence technology innovations use. This paper concludes that performance expectancy, management characteristics and organizational size affect technology adoption among agribusinesses critically.
Article Preview
Top

Introduction

Twenty-first century information and communication technologies (ICTs) provide wider and faster Internet access and access to limitless information about virtually everything one could imagine, e.g., sports, news, education and business. Hence, the adoption and use of ICTs in agricultural-related entrepreneurial business is increasingly becoming inevitable (Kolawole, 2017). ICTS are believed to be a key tool that can drive socio-economic development of nations in the 21st Century (Abd Rahman, Kamarulzaman, Nitty Hirawaty & Sambasivan, 2013). ICTs possess immense potential to empower people economically and boost the growth of industries and enterprises (Diga, Nwaiwu & Platinga 2013), especially when used by agro-based small and medium scale enterprises (SMEs) (Hassan, Shaffril & Abu Samah, 2012). Technology innovations (ICTs) tools used by agribusinesses can be categorized into basic such as personal computers Internet services, e-mail, (PC), laptops and mobile phones (or smartphones) and geo-positioning applications (e.g., Google maps) (Hassan, Yassin, Shaffril, Othman, Abu Samah, Abu Samah & Ramli, 2011; Martin & Matlay, 2001), or advanced such as cloud computing (Saedi & Iahad, 2013), enterprise resource planning (ERP), free and open-source software (FOSS), software-as-a-service (SaaS), enterprise management systems (EMS), artificial intelligence systems, automated products processing and preservation systems, especially products with relatively shorter shelf-life, livestock tracking systems (Ibrahim, Hassan & Yusuf, 2017a; Kolawole, 2017) and so on.

SMEs nowadays constitute a major business sector in most countries around the world, covering a wide spectrum of industries, and in most countries the number of SMEs exceeds the number of large firms (Dholakia & Kshetri, 2004). Thus, a successful application of ICTs to agro-based SMEs enhances productivity and contributes strongly to gross domestic products (GDP) of countries (Saleh & Burgess, 2009; Saleh & Ndubisi, 2006a, 2006b). However, globally, SMEs, particularly agribusinesses (Rsanadive 2015) are believed to lag behind in terms of adoption and use of ICTs (Mohapatra, 2013; Rahman & Ramos, 2014). This lagging behind may be attributed to the various challenges SMEs face, which are often inherent, induced by social, economic, geographical, cultural or other reasons beyond their control (Irungu, Mbugua & Mula, 2015), which often prevent them from adopting innovative technologies that can enhance their performance (Zaremohazzabieh, Samah, Omar, Bolong & Shaffril, 2014).

Complete Article List

Search this Journal:
Reset
Open Access Articles
Volume 29: 4 Issues (2021): 3 Released, 1 Forthcoming
Volume 28: 4 Issues (2020): 3 Released, 1 Forthcoming
Volume 27: 4 Issues (2019)
Volume 26: 4 Issues (2018)
Volume 25: 4 Issues (2017)
Volume 24: 4 Issues (2016)
Volume 23: 4 Issues (2015)
Volume 22: 4 Issues (2014)
Volume 21: 4 Issues (2013)
Volume 20: 4 Issues (2012)
Volume 19: 4 Issues (2011)
Volume 18: 4 Issues (2010)
Volume 17: 4 Issues (2009)
Volume 16: 4 Issues (2008)
Volume 15: 4 Issues (2007)
Volume 14: 4 Issues (2006)
Volume 13: 4 Issues (2005)
Volume 12: 4 Issues (2004)
Volume 11: 4 Issues (2003)
Volume 10: 4 Issues (2002)
Volume 9: 4 Issues (2001)
Volume 8: 4 Issues (2000)
Volume 7: 4 Issues (1999)
Volume 6: 4 Issues (1998)
Volume 5: 4 Issues (1997)
Volume 4: 4 Issues (1996)
Volume 3: 4 Issues (1995)
Volume 2: 4 Issues (1994)
Volume 1: 4 Issues (1993)
View Complete Journal Contents Listing