Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Janet Fulk, Feb 17, 2015
6 Followers
 · 
206 Views
  • Source
    • "Social influence is defined as the degree to which an individual perceives that others believe he or she should use the new system (Venkatesh et al., 2003). There is strong evidence that the attitudes and behaviours of other individuals in a user's social and work circles significantly impacts the user's actions regarding technology use (Fulk, Schmitz & Steinfield 1990; Kraut, Rice, Cool & Fish, 1998; Rice, Grant, Schmitz & Torobin, 1990; Schmitz & Fulk, 1991; Yuan, Fulk & Shumate, 2005). When new technologies are implemented within an organisation, institutional and social influence may arise because individuals experience ambiguity and uncertainty about the value of a new information technology for their work (Weick, 1990). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Businesses that are implementing Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems are becoming more concerned with, and realising the importance of, end-user acceptance, a key success factor of ERP implementations (Tchokogué, Bareil & Duguay, 2005, Calisir & Calisir, 2004). Previous research concerning ERP acceptance has been based on the popular Technology Acceptance Model first proposed by Davis (1989). Criticism against applying the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to examine ERP acceptance is that the use of an ERP is mandatory while an implicit assumption of TAM is that users of the information systems have some level of choice with regard to the extent that they use the technology. This research paper aims to investigate the factors that affect end-user acceptance of ERP systems and is primarily based on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) first proposed by Venkatesh, Morris, Davis and Davis (2003). UTAUT is considered as an improvement on the TAM models when evaluating end-user acceptance of ERP systems because it purports to consider the mandatory nature of ERP systems. This paper evaluates the factors that make up UTAUT and leads to the proposal of a research model that is an adjustment of UTAUT. The model contains the dependant variable symbolic adoption that has been shown to better indicate end-user acceptance of mandatory technologies by Nah, Tan and Teh (2004). The research model is validated through a 2006 survey of users of the PeopleSoft Student Administration System at the University of Cape Town and subsequent quantitative analysis. The PeopleSoft system is mainly used for the maintenance of access to student related data and for student processes such as registration and graduation. The factors, performance expectancy ; effort expectancy; project communication; training and shared belief were all found to be antecedents to symbolic adoption and age was found to have a moderating influence on the relationships between:  Effort expectancy and symbolic adoption .  Training and symbolic adoption .  Shared belief and symbolic adoption.  Project communication and symbolic adoption. These findings should be of relevance to future researchers and to organisations that intend installing ERP systems. It is hoped that practitioners pay attention to these factors that can influence end-user acceptance of a new ERP system.
  • Source
    • "Social presence is defined as the degree to which a user feels personal connection with others (Fulk et al., 1990). In computer-mediated communication, users' satisfaction or performance largely depends on the quality of users' perception of connection with others (Biocca et al., 2003), and thus it has frequently appeared in studies on web user behavior. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite an exponentially increasing number of registered users, social virtual worlds have the problem of a high user attrition rate. It is thus meaningful to explore which factors influence users' continued use of social virtual worlds. The current study attempts to find these factors in unique characteristics (e.g., 3-dimentional environment, avatar interaction, and user empowerment) in the world, which can be sources for retaining users. Specifically, the study employs the sense of presence and perceived autonomy. 194 users of Second Life, which is the largest social virtual world, participated in the survey. The findings support the argument that the sense of presence and autonomy are influential in users' continued use of social virtual worlds.
    Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 07/2011; 16(4):492-510. DOI:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2011.01540.x · 2.17 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "However, critics have argued that the benefits and costs of innovations also have a social component—one likely to be determined by the actions or decisions of other people (Markus, 1990). The social influence model of technology use (Fulk et al., 1990), for instance, assumes that attitudes toward the use of new media are subjectively rational and socially influenced. According to this perspective, rationality (including instrumental beliefs about communication technologies) is subjective, retrospective, and influenced by ongoing social processes. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study examined the distinctiveness of two primary factors of social influence (perceived critical mass [PCM] and subjective norms [SN]) and their theoretical relationships with beliefs and behavioral intentions (BI) in the context of 3rd generation (3G) mobile services in Singapore. The findings revealed that both social influence (PCM in particular) and cognitive instrumental processes (perceived usefulness [PU] and perceived ease of use) significantly influenced BI. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated the importance of distinguishing between PCM and SN. PCM strongly influenced BI both directly and indirectly by changing the utility (i.e., externalities) and the normative beliefs surrounding the new technology (i.e., descriptive norms). SN, however, influenced BI indirectly through PCM and PU.
    Journal of Communication 03/2011; 61(2):283 - 306. DOI:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01532.x · 2.45 Impact Factor
Show more