Perceived critical mass and the adoption of a communication technology

Computer-based communication technologies are increasingly important to personal and organizational communication. One important factor related to the adoption and diffusion of communication innovations is critical mass. Critical mass influences the adoption and diffusion of interactive communication innovations, both through network externalities and through sustainability of the innovation. Unfortunately, critical mass is difficult to measure and is typically only demonstrable after the critical mass point has been reached. Potential adopters’ perceptions of critical mass also may be important to adoption decisions. In this paper, we extend this thinking using a synthesis of the Theory of Reasoned Action and Diffusion of Innovation theory by developing a research model. The model is empirically tested using survey data that are analyzed using partial least squares. The focal innovation is instant messaging. Results indicate that perceived critical mass influences use intentions directly and through perceptions of the characteristics of the innovation. The perceived innovation characteristics impact attitude toward use, which in turn impacts use intentions. The model predicts a sizable and significant portion of both attitudes and use intentions. Further, perceived critical mass is able to explain a significant portion of the variance in each perceived innovation characteristic. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

[1]  Gina Green,et al.  Gender Differences in Perceptions and Use of Communication Technologies: A Diffusion of Innovation Approach , 2005, Inf. Resour. Manag. J..

[2]  Wynne W. Chin,et al.  Adoption intention in GSS: relative importance of beliefs , 1995, DATB.

[3]  C. Shapiro,et al.  Technology Adoption in the Presence of Network Externalities , 1986, Journal of Political Economy.

[4]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies , 2000, Management Science.

[5]  Craig Van Slyke,et al.  Grassroots Diffusion: A Research Agenda and Propositional Inventory , 2004 .

[6]  Anol Bhattacherjee,et al.  Understanding Post-Adoption Behavior in the Context of Online Services , 1998, Inf. Syst. Res..

[7]  John Day,et al.  The Impact of Perceived Innovation Characteristics on Intention to Use Groupware , 2002, Inf. Resour. Manag. J..

[8]  Fred D. Davis Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[9]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models , 1989 .

[10]  Howard Lloyd Balsley,et al.  Quantitative research methods for business and economics , 1970 .

[11]  Ritu Agarwal,et al.  The Role of Innovation Characteristics and Perceived Voluntariness in the Acceptance of Information Technologies , 1997 .

[12]  Susan A. Brown,et al.  Do I really have to? User acceptance of mandated technology , 2002, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[13]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation , 1991, Inf. Syst. Res..

[14]  Said S. Al-Gahtani,et al.  The Applicability of TAM Outside North America: An Empirical Test in the United Kingdom , 2001, Inf. Resour. Manag. J..

[15]  A. Adam Whatever happened to information systems ethics? Caught between the devil and the deep blue sea , 2004 .

[16]  James Y. L. Thong,et al.  An Integrated Model of Information Systems Adoption in Small Businesses , 1999, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[17]  Anol Bhattacherjee,et al.  Understanding Information Systems Continuance: An Expectation-Confirmation Model , 2001, MIS Q..

[18]  E. Rogers Diffusion of Innovations , 1962 .

[19]  F. N. Ford,et al.  Intraorganizational Versus Interorganizational Uses and Benefits of Electronic Mail , 2002, Inf. Resour. Manag. J..

[20]  Ritu Agarwal,et al.  A Conceptual and Operational Definition of Personal Innovativeness in the Domain of Information Technology , 1998, Inf. Syst. Res..

[21]  France Bélanger,et al.  Factors influencing the adoption of web-based shopping: the impact of trust , 2004, DATB.

[22]  Sue A. Conger,et al.  INNOVATIONS : A CLASSIFICATION BY IT LOCUS OF IMPACT AND RESEARCH APPROACH , 2002 .

[23]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of innovations , 1964, Encyclopedia of Sport Management.

[24]  Said S. Al-Gahtani,et al.  Attitudes, satisfaction and usage: Factors contributing to each in the acceptance of information technology , 1999, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[25]  Wynne W. Chin,et al.  A Partial Least Squares Latent Variable Modeling Approach for Measuring Interaction Effects: Results from a Monte Carlo Simulation Study and an Electronic - Mail Emotion/Adoption Study , 2003, Inf. Syst. Res..

[26]  Ritu Agarwal,et al.  A field study of the adoption of software process innovations by information systems professionals , 2000, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[27]  Daniel J. Kealey,et al.  The effectiveness of cross-cultural training for expatriates: An assessment of the literature on the issue , 1996 .

[28]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Why Don't Men Ever Stop to Ask for Directions? Gender, Social Influence, and Their Role in Technology Acceptance and Usage Behavior , 2000, MIS Q..

[29]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[30]  Lori Rosenkopf,et al.  INSTITUTIONAL AND COMPETITIVE BANDWAGONS: USING MATHEMATICAL MODELING AS A TOOL TO EXPLORE INNOVATION DIFFUSION , 1993 .

[31]  Peter A. Todd,et al.  Understanding Information Technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models , 1995, Inf. Syst. Res..

[32]  W. Powell,et al.  The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields , 1983 .

[33]  Paul Jen-Hwa Hu,et al.  Information Technology Acceptance by Individual Professionals: A Model Comparison Approach , 2001, Decis. Sci..

[34]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  The Effect of Culture on IT Diffusion: E-Mail and FAX in Japan and the U.S , 1994, Inf. Syst. Res..

[35]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  A Longitudinal Investigation of Personal Computers in Homes: Adoption Determinants and Emerging Challenges , 2001, MIS Q..

[36]  M. Markus Electronic Mail as the Medium of Managerial Choice , 1994 .

[37]  Diane M. Strong,et al.  Perceived critical mass effect on groupware acceptance , 2000, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[38]  Kweku-Muata Osei-Bryson,et al.  An exploration of factors that impact individual performance in an ERP environment: an analysis using multiple analytical techniques , 2006, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[39]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research , 1977 .

[40]  Elena Karahanna,et al.  Time Flies When You're Having Fun: Cognitive Absorption and Beliefs About Information Technology Usage , 2000, MIS Q..

[41]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Trust and TAM in Online Shopping: An Integrated Model , 2003, MIS Q..

[42]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Predicting Intention to Adopt Interorganizational Linkages: An Institutional Perspective , 2003, MIS Q..

[43]  Mike Chiasson,et al.  Taking Industry Seriously in Information Systems Research , 2005, MIS Q..

[44]  Paul Jen-Hwa Hu,et al.  Examining a Model of Information Technology Acceptance by Individual Professionals: An Exploratory Study , 2002, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[45]  Ronald E. Rice,et al.  Is It Really Just Like a Fancy Answering Machine? Comparing Semantic Networks of Different Types of Voice Mail Users , 1993 .

[46]  Mark Vandenbosch,et al.  Research Report: Richness Versus Parsimony in Modeling Technology Adoption Decisions - Understanding Merchant Adoption of a Smart Card-Based Payment System , 2001, Inf. Syst. Res..

[47]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Information Technology Adoption Across Time: A Cross-Sectional Comparison of Pre-Adoption and Post-Adoption Beliefs , 1999, MIS Q..