An Understanding of Power Issues Influencing Employees' Acceptance of KMS: An Empirical Study of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Companies

The shift from a product-based to a knowledge-based economy is resulting in an increased demand for knowledge workers who are capable of higher-order thinking and reasoning to solve intricate problems in the work place. This requires organizations to implement knowledge management systems (KMS) at an accelerating pace to facilitate the work of their employees. However, the large investment requires for a KMS has made it imperative for organizations to understand the factors that contribute to employees' acceptance of KMS. This paper draws attention to users' concerns about loss of power and influence through the sharing of information/knowledge via KMS. We propose a new construct, perceived power security, to examine the applicability of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) in explaining the decisions of the employees to accept KMS. The results based on a sample of 145 employees taken mostly from four international semiconductor manufacturing companies in the Hsin-Chu Science-based Industrial Park in Taiwan strongly support the extended TAM in predicting employees’ behavioral intention to use KMS.

[1]  R. Sitgreaves.  Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). , 1979 .

[2]  Lauren Ruth Wiener.  Digital woes - why we should not depend on software , 1993 .

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

[4]  Young-Gul Kim,et al.  Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context , 2000, Inf. Manag..

[5]  Rob Kling,et al.  Social Analyses of Computing: Theoretical Perspectives in Recent Empirical Research , 1980, CSUR.

[6]  Patrick Y. K. Chau,et al.  An Empirical Assessment of a Modified Technology Acceptance Model , 1996, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[7]  J. Storck,et al.  Knowledge Diffusion through “Strategic Communities” , 2000 .

[8]  Blake Ives,et al.  The measurement of user information satisfaction , 1983, CACM.

[9]  John F. Rockart,et al.  Computers, networks, and the corporation , 1991 .

[10]  K. D. Joshi,et al.  Knowledge manipulation activities: results of a Delphi study , 2002, Inf. Manag..

[11]  Peter A. Todd,et al.  Perceived Usefulness, Ease of Use, and Usage of Information Technology: A Replication , 1992, MIS Q..

[12]  D. Gustafson,et al.  An empirical study of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use on computerized support system use over time , 1994 .

[13]  Varun Grover,et al.  General Perspectives on Knowledge Management: Fostering a Research Agenda , 2001, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[14]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Things That Make Us Smart: Defending Human Attributes In The Age Of The Machine , 1993 .

[15]  Jennifer E. Rowley,et al.  Eight questions for customer knowledge management in e-business , 2002, J. Knowl. Manag..

[16]  Kieran Mathieson,et al.  Predicting User Intentions: Comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior , 1991, Inf. Syst. Res..

[17]  Ritu Agarwal,et al.  Are Individual Differences Germane to the Acceptance of New Information Technologies , 1999 .

[18]  Mo Adam Mahmood,et al.  A Comprehensive Model for Measuring the Potential Impact of Information Technology on Organizational Strategic Variables , 1991 .

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

[20]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  A Model of the Antecedents of Perceived Ease of Use: Development and Test† , 1996 .

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

[22]  Edmond F. Vail.  Knowledge Mapping: Getting Started with Knowledge Management , 1999, Inf. Syst. Manag..

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

[24]  John Ingham,et al.  Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model , 2003, Inf. Manag..

[25]  Michael H. Zack,et al.  Managing Codified Knowledge , 1999 .

[26]  William J. Doll,et al.  The Measurement of End-User Computing Satisfaction , 1988, MIS Q..

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

[28]  Kar Yan Tam,et al.  Determinants of User Acceptance of Digital Libraries: An Empirical Examination of Individual Differences and System Characteristics , 2002, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[29]  J. Nunnally.  Psychometric Theory (2nd ed), New York: McGraw-Hill. , 1978 .

[30]  Brent J. Bowman.  Building Knowledge Management Systems , 2002, Inf. Syst. Manag..

[31]  Anil Gupta,et al.  Knowledge Management’s Social Dimension: Lessons from Nucor Steel , 2000 .

[32]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Creation of Favorable User Perceptions: Exploring the Role of Intrinsic Motivation , 1999, MIS Q..

[33]  G. Krogh.  Care in Knowledge Creation , 1998 .

[34]  M. Lynne Markus,et al.  Power, politics, and MIS implementation , 1987, CACM.

[35]  Prashant C. Palvia,et al.  Developing and validating an instrument for measuring user-perceived web quality , 2002, Inf. Manag..

[36]  Gary Hackbarth,et al.  Computer playfulness and anxiety: positive and negative mediators of the system experience effect on perceived ease of use , 2003, Inf. Manag..

[37]  Andrew B. Whinston,et al.  Knowledge-based organizations , 1987, Inf. Soc..

[38]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior , 1980 .

[39]  Charles D. Barrett.  Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior , 1980 .

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

[41]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model , 2000, Inf. Syst. Res..

[42]  Robert Johansen,et al.  Upsizing The Individual In The Downsized Organization: Managing In The Wake Of Reengineering, Globalization, And Overwhelming Technological Change , 1994 .

[43]  Glenn J. Browne,et al.  Evoking Information in Probability Assessment: Knowledge Maps and Reasoning-Based Directed Questions , 1997 .

[44]  Patrick Y. K. Chau,et al.  Influence of Computer Attitude and Self-Efficacy on IT Usage Behavior , 2001, J. Organ. End User Comput..

[45]  Robert W. Zmud,et al.  An attributional explanation of individual resistance to the introduction of information technologies in the workplace , 1996, Behav. Inf. Technol..

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

[47]  Olivia R. Liu Sheng,et al.  Examining the Technology Acceptance Model Using Physician Acceptance of Telemedicine Technology , 1999, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[48]  Dorothy E. Leidner,et al.  Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues , 2001, MIS Q..

[49]  Morten T. Hansen,et al.  What's your strategy for managing knowledge? , 1999, Harvard business review.

[50]  James J. Jiang,et al.  User resistance and strategies for promoting acceptance across system types , 2000, Inf. Manag..

[51]  Kailash Joshi,et al.  A Model of Users' Perspective on Change: The Case of Information Systems Technology Implementation , 1991, MIS Q..

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

[53]  R. S. Davidson,et al.  Computer Fear and Addiction , 1985 .

[54]  D. Campbell,et al.  Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. , 1959, Psychological bulletin.

[55]  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..