Organisational Change and Acceptance: Perspectives of the Technology Acceptance Model

Organisational Change and Acceptance: Perspectives of the Technology Acceptance Model

Marilyn Wells
Copyright: © 2012 |Pages: 20
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-60960-768-5.ch007
OnDemand:
(Individual Chapters)
Available
$37.50
Current Special Offers
No Current Special Offers
TOTAL SAVINGS: $37.50

Abstract

This chapter reports on the development of the technology acceptance model from 1986 when Davis investigated technology acceptance from an individual’s view as to the ease of use and perceived usefulness of a system. Since then, many variations have been presented in attempts to explain how and what influences a computer system user’s uptake of new technology within an organisation. Whilst all variations were developed explicitly to predict users’ acceptance or rejection of new technology, these variations are in essence predictors of acceptance or rejection of change. Factors such as the organisational change environment and informal communication (rumours), together with social influence as exercised by colleagues should be considered major contributors to the perceptions of new technology and therefore acceptance. This chapter extends the original model to include the variations and proposes that rather than look at technology acceptance in isolation, acceptance of new technology should be viewed as acceptance of change. The author proposes the model Social Influence and Change Acceptance (SICAM) to reflect the inclusion of TAM’s variations in an organizational change context.
Chapter Preview
Top

Research Methodology

The research methodology for this chapter follows two paths. The first entails a qualitative review of literature since 1986 to 2009 involving significant stages of the evolution of TAM. A perceived bias in making this selection is that published research is assumed to have some significance. A second bias is evident in that by limiting the search and selection of papers based on the number of citations since publication, it is assumed that all papers will earn a similar number over time. A third bias is introduced as the number of citations depends on the type of study (qualitative or quantitative) and which evolution the researcher is using or proposing.

A search for studies related to TAM was undertaken across the publications types: referred journals, conference papers and proceedings, and theses. The keyword search criteria for indentifying the papers were “technology acceptance model” or “TAM.” Irrelevant papers (such as those with the acronym TAM meaning test access mechanism) were removed from the list. Once the core set of articles was determined, the articles were sorted into categories based on the main concepts contained therein.

Complete Chapter List

Search this Book:
Reset