Technology Adoption by Groups: A Valence Perspective

While past research has contributed to an understanding of how organizations or individuals adopt technologies, little is known about how such adoption occurs in groups. Given the widespread acknowledgment that organizations are moving to group-based structures and that groups often utilize technologies for performing their tasks, it is critical that we understand how such collective social entities adopt technologies. Such an understanding can better guide investment and implementation decisions. In this paper, we draw on existing literature about groups, technology characteristics, and valence to conceptualize a model of technology adoption by groups (referred to as the TAG model). We view the TAG phenomenon as a process of communication and negotiation in which analytically distinct factors-such as the individual members’ a priori attitudes toward the technology, the majority subgroup’s opinion, high-status members’ opinions, substantive conflict, and relevant characteristics of the technology play an important role. We develop several theoretical propositions regarding the nature of the contribution of these factors toward an adoption decision and discuss measurement tradeoffs and guidelines.

[1]  W ZmudRobert,et al.  Information Technology Implementation Research , 1990 .

[2]  Deepinder S. Bajwa,et al.  Does Size Matter? An Investigation of Collaborative Information Technology Adoption by US Firms , 2003 .

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

[4]  E. Mannix,et al.  The Dynamic Nature of Conflict: A Longitudinal Study of Intragroup Conflict and Group Performance. , 2001 .

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

[6]  Barry O'Neill,et al.  The Group problem solving process : studies of a valence model , 1982 .

[7]  Jeffrey Pfeffer,et al.  The Bases and Use of Power in Organizational Decision Making: The Case of a University. , 1974 .

[8]  E.,et al.  GROUPS : INTERACTION AND PERFORMANCE , 2001 .

[9]  Daniel Robey,et al.  More on myth, magic and metaphor: Cultural insights into the management of information technology in organizations , 1999, Inf. Technol. People.

[10]  Judy Bayer,et al.  A critique of diffusion theory as a managerial framework for understanding adoption of software engineering innovations , 1989, [1988] Proceedings of the Twenty-First Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Volume II: Software track.

[11]  Janet Fulk,et al.  Organizational Colleagues, Media Richness, and Electronic Mail , 1991 .

[12]  James D. McKeen,et al.  Enhancing Computer-Mediated Communication: An experimental investigation into the use of a Group Decision Support System for face-to-face versus remote meetings , 1990, Inf. Manag..

[13]  L. Festinger A Theory of Social Comparison Processes , 1954 .

[14]  Monica J. Garfield,et al.  The Adoption and Use of GSS in Project Teams: Toward More Participative Processes and Outcomes , 2003, MIS Q..

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

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

[17]  Kenneth H. Price,et al.  Process and Outcome Expectations for the Dialectical Inquiry, Devil's Advocacy, and Consensus Techniques of Strategic Decision Making , 1991 .

[18]  Robert S. Baron,et al.  Reaffirmation of Social Comparison Views of Choice Shifts: Averaging and Extremity Effects in an Autokinetic Situation , 1976 .

[19]  R. Hirschheim,et al.  Critical issues in information systems research , 1987 .

[20]  J. Cockcroft The process of technological innovation , 1965 .

[21]  Raimo Tuomela,et al.  Group beliefs , 2020, Synthese.

[22]  John F. Rockart,et al.  Editor’s comments , 2005, MIS Q. Executive.

[23]  Jennifer Caroline Greene,et al.  Handbook of communication and social interaction skills , 2003 .

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

[25]  J. McGrath Groups interacting with technology: the complex and dynamic fit of group, task, technology, and time , 1992, CSCW '92.

[26]  Suprateek Sarker,et al.  Implications of space and time for distributed work: an interpretive study of US–Norwegian systems development teams , 2004, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[27]  Erja Mustonen-Ollila,et al.  How organizations adopt information system process innovations: a longitudinal analysis , 2004, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[28]  B. Fisher Small Group Decision Making: Communication and the Group Process , 1980 .

[29]  Allen S. Lee,et al.  Information systems and qualitative research , 1997 .

[30]  J. Thong,et al.  CEO characteristics, organizational characteristics and information technology adoption in small businesses , 1995 .

[31]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory , 1994 .

[32]  Marshall Scott Poole,et al.  A comparison of normative and interactional explanations of group decision‐making: Social decision schemes versus valence distributions , 1982 .

[33]  Peter Gyngell,et al.  Process Innovation: Reengineering Work through Information Technology , 1994 .

[34]  Amy E. Randel,et al.  Understanding Group Efficacy , 2000 .

[35]  Paul R. Yost,et al.  Potency in groups: articulating a construct. , 1993, The British journal of social psychology.

[36]  M. Scott Poole,et al.  The Valence Model Unveiled: Critique and Alternative Formulation , 1981 .

[37]  Kar Yan Tam,et al.  Organizational adoption of open systems: a 'technology-push, need-pull' perspective , 2000, Inf. Manag..

[38]  Lisa A. Keister,et al.  Adapting to Radical Change: Strategy and Environment in Piece-Rate Adoption During China's Transition , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[39]  Thiagarajan Ravichandran,et al.  Swiftness and Intensity of Administrative Innovation Adoption: An Empirical Study of TQM in Information Systems , 2000, Decis. Sci..

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

[41]  Sherah Kurnia,et al.  The need for a processual view of inter-organizational systems adoption , 2000, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[42]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Electronic Data Interchange and Small Organizations: Adoption and Impact of Technology , 1995, MIS Q..

[43]  John Thibaut,et al.  Trade versus expropriation in open groups: A comparison of two types of social power. , 1983 .

[44]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Beta Versus VHS and the Acceptance of Electronic Brainstorming Technology , 2004, MIS Q..

[45]  T. H. Kwon,et al.  Unifying the fragmented models of information systems implementation , 1987 .

[46]  Gloria Mark,et al.  Group-to-Group Distance Collaboration: Examining the "Space Between" , 2003, ECSCW.

[47]  Nicholas S. Vonortas The Process of Technological Innovation , 1997 .

[48]  A. Delbecq,et al.  Nominal Versus Interacting Group Processes for Committee Decision-Making Effectiveness , 1971 .

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

[50]  Graham Button,et al.  Getting real about privacy and surveillance at work , 2002 .

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

[52]  Dale E. Brashers,et al.  Argument in group decision making: Explicating a process model and investigating the argument‐outcome link , 1998 .

[53]  John K. Brilhart Effective Group Discussion , 1974 .

[54]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  The psychological origins of perceived usefulness and ease-of-use , 1999, Inf. Manag..

[55]  L. Festinger Informal social communication. , 1950, Psychological review.

[56]  V. Lai,et al.  An assessment of the influence of organizational characteristics on information technology adoption decision: a discriminative approach , 1997 .

[57]  Dorothy Leon Ard-Barton Implementation Characteristics of Organizational Innovations , 1988 .

[58]  John A. Pearce,et al.  A measure of ceo social power in strategic decision‐making , 1987 .

[59]  David Budgen,et al.  Software design , 2020, International computer science series.

[60]  Morgan W. McCall,et al.  Stogdill's Handbook of Leadership , 1982 .

[61]  K. Weick What Theory Is Not, Theorizing Is , 1995 .

[62]  Robert S. Baron,et al.  Reaffirmation of social comparison views of choice shifts: Averaging and extremity effects in an autokinetic situation. , 1976 .

[63]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  The Identity Crisis Within the IS Discipline: Defining and Communicating the Discipline's Core Properties , 2003, MIS Q..

[64]  Robert P. Bostrom,et al.  The Impact of Group Support Systems on Group Conflict and Conflict Management , 1993, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[65]  B. Bass Bass & Stogdill's handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications, 3rd ed. , 1990 .

[66]  Donelson R. Forsyth,et al.  Social Comparison and Influence in Groups , 2000 .

[67]  Shoshana Zuboff,et al.  In the Age of the Smart Machine: The Future of Work and Power , 1989 .

[68]  Hoffman Lr,et al.  Valence in the adoption of solutions by problem-solving groups. II. Quality and acceptance as goals of leaders and members. , 1967 .

[69]  Diane M. Strong,et al.  Extending the technology acceptance model with task-technology fit constructs , 1999, Inf. Manag..

[70]  Varun Grover,et al.  Information technology innovations: general diffusion patterns and its relationships to innovation characteristics , 2002, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[71]  M. E. Shaw Group dynamics : the psychology of small group behavior , 1971 .

[72]  Gert-Jan de Vreede,et al.  Exploring the Application and Acceptance of Group Support Systems in Africa , 1998, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[73]  Adam LeBrocq Style Guide for the Journal of the Association for Information Systems , 2022 .

[74]  R. Zmud,et al.  Information technology implementation research: a technological diffusion approach , 1990 .

[75]  Lynda Aiman-Smith,et al.  Assessing a multidimensional measure of radical technological innovation , 1995 .

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

[77]  Lynda Aiman-Smith,et al.  Implementing New Manufacturing Technology: The Related Effects of Technology Characteristics and User Learning Activities , 2002 .

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

[79]  Paul S. Goodman,et al.  Institutionalization of Planned Organizational Change , 1978 .

[80]  Kar Yan Tam,et al.  Factors Affecting the Adoption of Open Systems: An Exploratory Study , 1997, MIS Q..

[81]  Dale Goodhue,et al.  Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance , 1995, MIS Q..

[82]  G. Walsham Actor-network theory and IS research: current status and future prospects , 1997 .

[83]  Mark G. Simkin,et al.  The analysis and study of the impact of technology on groups: a conceptual framework , 1999 .

[84]  Vincent S. Lai,et al.  A model of ISDN (integrated services digital network) adoption in U.S. corporations , 1994, Inf. Manag..

[85]  M. Markus,et al.  Information technology and organizational change: causal structure in theory and research , 1988 .

[86]  L. R. Hoffman,et al.  Individual and Group in Group Problem Solving The Valence Model Redressed , 1994 .

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

[88]  Dennis S. Gouran COMMUNICATION SKILLS FOR GROUP DECISION MAKING , 2003 .

[89]  V. Sambamurthy,et al.  Information Technology Assimilation in Firms: The Influence of Senior Leadership and IT Infrastructures , 1999, Inf. Syst. Res..

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

[91]  Deborah L. Wells,et al.  Leadership and Ethics in Work Groups , 2002 .

[92]  Rich Ling,et al.  "We will be reached": the use of mobile telephony among Norwegian youth , 2000, Inf. Technol. People.

[93]  A. Scupola,et al.  The Adoption of Internet Commerce by SMEs in the South of Italy: An Environmental, Technological and Organizational Perspective , 2003 .

[94]  G. S. Sanders,et al.  Is social comparison irrelevant for producing choice shifts , 1977 .

[95]  Jr. French,et al.  The disruption and cohesion of groups. , 1941 .

[96]  J. R. French,et al.  The bases of social power. , 1959 .

[97]  Ronald E. Rice,et al.  Computer-Mediated Communication System Network Data: Theoretical Concerns and Empirical Examples , 1990, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[98]  Shoshana Zuboff In the Age of the Smart Machine , 1988 .

[99]  Suprateek Sarker,et al.  Understanding mobile handheld device use and adoption , 2003, CACM.

[100]  H. P. Sims,et al.  Top management team diversity, group process, and strategic consensus , 1999 .

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

[102]  M. Lynne Markus,et al.  Toward a “Critical Mass” Theory of Interactive Media , 1987 .

[103]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Electronic meeting systems , 1991, CACM.

[104]  L. R. Hoffman,et al.  VALENCE IN THE ADOPTION OF SOLUTIONS BY PROBLEM-SOLVING GROUPS: CONCEPT, METHOD, AND RESULTS. , 1964, Journal of abnormal psychology.