Understanding the Internet of Things ecosystem: multi-level analysis of users, society, and ecology

Purpose This study aims to conduct socio-technical analysis of the rapidly evolving Internet of Things (IoT) ecosystem and industry, including such factors as market growth and user experiences, policy and the impact of IoT on various areas. Design/methodology/approach By applying a multi-level socio-technical framework to IoT in South Korea, this study seeks an ecological understanding of how IoT will evolve and stabilize in a smart environment. Findings The study shows the values influencing potential users’ adoption of IoT by integrating cognitive motivations and user values as primary determining factors. Along with user modeling, the findings reveal the challenges of designing, deploying and sustaining the diverse components of IoT, and provides a snapshot of Korea’s current approach to meeting these challenges. Originality/value The study’s findings offer a contextualized socio-technical analysis of IoT, providing insight into its challenges and opportunities. This insight helps to conceptualize how IoT can be designed and situated within human-centered contexts.

[1]  Donghee Shin,et al.  Der Open-access-publikationsserver Der Zbw – Leibniz-informationszentrum Wirtschaft the Open Access Publication Server of the Zbw – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics a Socio-technical Framework for Internet-of-things Design a Socio-technical Framework for Internet-of-things Design , 2022 .

[2]  M. Siponen,et al.  Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology: Adding consumption theory to UTAUT2 , 2011 .

[3]  Rolf H. Weber,et al.  Internet of Things - New security and privacy challenges , 2010, Comput. Law Secur. Rev..

[4]  Michael G. Morris,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Theories and Models , 1996 .

[5]  D. Betsy McCoach,et al.  The Performance of RMSEA in Models With Small Degrees of Freedom , 2015 .

[6]  Martin Maguire,et al.  Socio-technical systems and interaction design - 21st century relevance. , 2014, Applied ergonomics.

[7]  John W. Creswell,et al.  Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research , 2006 .

[8]  Myeong-Cheol Park,et al.  Mobile internet acceptance in Korea , 2005, Internet Res..

[9]  Dong-Hee Shin,et al.  A critique of Korean National Information Strategy: Case of national information infrastructures , 2007, Gov. Inf. Q..

[10]  Guofan Shao,et al.  The planning, construction, and management toward sustainable cities in China needs the Environmental Internet of Things , 2013 .

[11]  Alessandro Aurigi.  Competing urban visions and the shaping of the digital city , 2005 .

[12]  Marimuthu Palaniswami,et al.  Internet of Things (IoT): A vision, architectural elements, and future directions , 2012, Future Gener. Comput. Syst..

[13]  Marc Roelands,et al.  IoT service platform enhancement through ‘in-situ’ machine learning of real-world knowledge , 2013, 38th Annual IEEE Conference on Local Computer Networks - Workshops.

[14]  N. Kshetri.  Big data's impact on privacy, security and consumer welfare , 2014 .

[15]  Lingling Gao,et al.  A unified perspective on the factors influencing consumer acceptance of internet of things technology , 2014 .

[16]  Dong-Hee Shin,et al.  A socio-technical framework for cyber-infrastructure design , 2010 .

[17]  A. Parasuraman,et al.  SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. , 1988 .

[18]  C. May,et al.  Implementing, Embedding, and Integrating Practices: An Outline of Normalization Process Theory , 2009 .

[19]  Philip J. Morrow,et al.  Performance evaluation of green data centre management supporting sustainable growth of the internet of things , 2013, Simul. Model. Pract. Theory.

[20]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology , 2012, MIS Q..

[21]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Explaining information systems change: a punctuated socio-technical change model , 2008, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[22]  Bong Gyou Lee,et al.  Privacy Protection for a Secure u-City Life , 2007, International Conference on Computational Science.

[23]  Dong-Hee Shin,et al.  An acceptance model for smart watches: Implications for the adoption of future wearable technology , 2015, Internet Res..

[24]  Dong-Hee Shin,et al.  User centric cloud service model in public sectors: Policy implications of cloud services , 2013, Gov. Inf. Q..

[25]  Gunnar Ellingsen,et al.  Nursing Terminologies as Evolving Large-Scale Information Infrastructures , 2012, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[26]  Dong-Hee Shin,et al.  User value design for cloud courseware system , 2015, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[27]  Gudela Grote,et al.  Designing Controllable Accountabilities of Future Internet of Things Applications , 2012, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[28]  Carlos Flavián,et al.  Consumer trust, perceived security and privacy policy: Three basic elements of loyalty to a web site , 2006, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[29]  Laurence T. Yang,et al.  The Internet of Things: From RFID to the Next-Generation Pervasive Networked Systems , 2008 .

[30]  Robert P. Bostrom,et al.  MIS Problems and failures: a sociotechnical perspective part I: the cause , 1977 .

[31]  Gail Krantzberg,et al.  Capacity-building for restoring degraded areas in the Great Lakes , 1995 .

[32]  Wiebe E. Bijker,et al.  Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs: Toward a Theory of Sociotechnical Change , 1995 .

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

[34]  T. Pinch,et al.  The Social Construction of Facts and Artefacts: or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology might Benefit Each Other , 1984 .