Not Just Another Type of Resistance - towards a Deeper Understanding of Supportive non-Use

Research on information system (IS) adoption and resistance has accumulated substantial theoretical and managerial knowledge. Surprisingly, the paradox that end users support and at the same time resist use of an IS has received relatively little attention. The investigation of this puzzle, however, is important to complement our understanding of resistant behaviours and consequently to strengthen the explanatory power of extant theoretical constructs on IS resistance. We investigate an IS project within the healthcare sector in the UK in which end-users, who were heavily involved during the design, implementation and roll out, expressed their support for the system, while simultaneously showing resistance. To examine this behaviour in detail, we applied Q methodology. As a result, we identified three different groups: (1) The convinced connector, waiting for collaborators. (2) The savvy explorer, sceptical about the tools’ benefits. (3) The ambivalent follower, overwhelmed by complexity. While the behaviour is similar across all three groups, the reasons for not using the system differ significantly. Based on these groups, as our main contribution, we explain the paradox of supportive nonuse. We further add a fine grained understanding of supportive non-use to the existing types of IS resistance.

[1]  Liwen Chen.  Doing Q Methodological Research: Theory, Method and Interpretation , 2016 .

[2]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Model of Acceptance with Peer Support: A Social Network Perspective to Understand Employees' System Use , 2009, MIS Q..

[3]  Steven Hornik,et al.  Passive resistance misuse: overt support and covert recalcitrance in IS implementation , 1996 .

[4]  D. Norman,et al.  User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction , 1988 .

[5]  Mario Piattini,et al.  Applying Q-methodology to analyse the success factors in GSD , 2013, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[6]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Mobile Application Usability: Conceptualization and Instrument Development , 2015, MIS Q..

[7]  Albert L. Lederer,et al.  A Meta-Analysis of the Role of Environment-Based Voluntariness in Information Technology Acceptance , 2009, MIS Q..

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

[9]  Yogesh Kumar Dwivedi,et al.  Contemporary trends and issues in IT adoption and diffusion research , 2009, J. Inf. Technol..

[10]  N. Selwyn.  Apart from technology: understanding people’s non-use of information and communication technologies in everyday life , 2003 .

[11]  Sven Laumer,et al.  TOWARDS AN UNDERSTANDING OF AN INDIVIDUAL'S RESISTANCE TO USE AN INFORMATION SYSTEM - EMPIRICAL EXAMINATIONS AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH , 2009 .

[12]  Steven R. Brown.  Political Subjectivity: Applications of Q Methodology in Political Science. , 1980 .

[13]  Sven Laumer,et al.  Why do People Reject Technologies? – Towards a Unified Model of Resistance to IT-Induced Organizational Change , 2010 .

[14]  Steven R. Brown.  A Primer on Q Methodology , 1993, Operant Subjectivity.

[15]  P. Leonardi,et al.  What’s Under Construction Here? Social Action, Materiality, and Power in Constructivist Studies of Technology and Organizing , 2010 .

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

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

[18]  G. Robert,et al.  Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. , 2004, The Milbank quarterly.

[19]  Wynne W. Chin,et al.  Changes in Post-Adoption Use of Information Systems , 2013 .

[20]  Suzanne Rivard,et al.  Information Technology Implementers' Responses to User Resistance: Nature and Effects , 2012, MIS Q..

[21]  Anne Beaudry,et al.  Identifying IT User Mindsets: Acceptance, Resistance and Ambivalence , 2014, 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[22]  Jyoti Choudrie,et al.  Understanding individual user resistance and workarounds of enterprise social networks: the case of Service Ltd , 2016, J. Inf. Technol..

[23]  William H. Glick,et al.  Typologies As a Unique Form Of Theory Building: Toward Improved Understanding and Modeling , 1994 .

[24]  Suzanne Rivard,et al.  A Multilevel Model of Resistance to Information Technology Implementation , 2005, MIS Q..

[25]  Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa,et al.  Information Systems Design Decisions in a Global Versus Domestic Context , 1995, MIS Q..

[26]  Kailash Joshi,et al.  Understanding User Resistance and Acceptance during the Implementation of an Order Management System: A Case Study Using the Equity Implementation Model1 , 2005 .

[27]  Shirley Gregor,et al.  The Nature of Theory in Information Systems , 2006, MIS Q..

[28]  Sven Laumer,et al.  Research on information systems failures and successes: Status update and future directions , 2014, Information Systems Frontiers.

[29]  Steven R. Brown.  Q Methodology and Qualitative Research , 1996 .

[30]  Bongsug Chae,et al.  Mandates and technology acceptance: A tale of two enterprise technologies , 2005, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[31]  Patricia Santos,et al.  Networked scaffolding: Seeking support in workplace learning contexts , 2014 .

[32]  Fiona Fui-Hoon Nah,et al.  An Empirical Investigation on End-Users' Acceptance of Enterprise Systems , 2004, Inf. Resour. Manag. J..

[33]  Luis Villa,et al.  A literature review for large-scale health information system project planning, implementation and evaluation , 2017, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[34]  Björn Niehaves,et al.  The Intensified Blurring of Boundaries Between Work and Private Life through IT Consumerisation , 2015, ECIS.

[35]  Atreyi Kankanhalli,et al.  Investigating user resistance to information systems implementation: a status quo bias perspective , 2009 .

[36]  W. STEPHENSON,et al.  Technique of Factor Analysis , 1935, Nature.

[37]  Tim Klaus,et al.  User resistance determinants and the psychological contract in enterprise system implementations , 2010, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[38]  Marjolein van Offenbeek,et al.  Towards integrating acceptance and resistance research: evidence from a telecare case study , 2013, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[39]  R. Cross.  Exploring attitudes: the case for Q methodology. , 2004, Health education research.

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

[41]  Petros Ieromonachou,et al.  User resistance in IT: A literature review , 2016, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[42]  Michael J. Gallivan,et al.  ORGANIZATIONS: A MULTILEVEL PERSPECTIVE , 2007 .

[43]  Marc Berg,et al.  Implementing information systems in health care organizations: myths and challenges , 2001, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[44]  Stephen C. Wingreen,et al.  Resistant groups in enterprise system implementations: a Q-methodology examination , 2010, J. Inf. Technol..

[45]  Yogesh Kumar Dwivedi,et al.  Investigating the Research Approaches for Examining Technology Adoption Issues , 2005 .

[46]  Annette Mills,et al.  Understanding and addressing user resistance to IS implementation in a lean context , 2011, ECIS.

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

[48]  Richard T. Watson,et al.  Q-sorting and MIS Research: A Primer , 2002, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[49]  William Samuelson,et al.  Status quo bias in decision making , 1988 .

[50]  Russell Mannion,et al.  Q methodology in health economics , 2006, Journal of health services research & policy.

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

[52]  Shirley Gregor,et al.  Managerial IT unconsciousness , 2006, CACM.

[53]  Régis Meissonier,et al.  Toward an ‘IT Conflict-Resistance Theory’: action research during IT pre-implementation , 2010, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..