Towards modelling the effects of national culture on IT implementation and acceptance

Two of the most significant forces shaping organizations are globalization and the continued, rapid and, some would say, radical changes taking place in information technology (IT). To date, the extant literature has centred on the technology acceptance model (TAM) because it is arguably one of the most widely cited and influential models used for explaining the acceptance of IT. However, this literature has remained relatively silent with respect to the role that differences in national culture might play in IT acceptance as globalization continues. In order to begin to address this deficit, this paper offers a series of research propositions that explore the potential impact of differences in national culture on IT implementation and acceptance. Specifically, the paper explores the effects of culturally induced beliefs – including individualism–collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, long-/short-term orientation and power distance – on the implementation processes that impact on key variables in the TAM. The paper then discusses the potential importance of the revisions it has made for both researchers interested in employing the model for predicting IT acceptance in cross-cultural contexts and for managers faced with introducing new IT in a global organization.

[1]  William R. Cupach,et al.  A cross-cultural comparison of the interpretation and management of face: U.S. American and Japanese responses to embarrassing predicaments , 1994 .

[2]  Kwok Kee Wei,et al.  National culture and group support systems: filtering communication to dampen power differentials , 1995 .

[3]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Testing the technology acceptance model across cultures: A three country study , 1997, Inf. Manag..

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

[5]  Steven W. Floyd,et al.  Chapter 6: A Micro Level Model of Information Technology Use by Managers , 1988 .

[6]  Gregory E. Prussia,et al.  A motivational investigation of group effectiveness using social-cognitive theory. , 1996 .

[7]  G. Rose,et al.  PREDICTING GENERAL IT USE : APPLYING TAM TO THE ARABIC WORLD , 1998 .

[8]  D. Straub,et al.  A Qualitative Assessment of Arab Culture and Information Technology Transfer , 1998 .

[9]  Bernadette Szajna,et al.  Empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model , 1996 .

[10]  G. Hofstede.  Cultural constraints in management theories , 1993 .

[11]  Scott Shane,et al.  Cultural influences on national rates of innovation , 1993 .

[12]  Jane M. Howell,et al.  Personal Computing: Toward a Conceptual Model of Utilization , 1991, MIS Q..

[13]  H. Hasan,et al.  The impact of culture on the adoption of IT: an interpretive study , 1999 .

[14]  Laura B. Cardinal,et al.  Strategic Planning and Firm Performance: A Synthesis of More Than Two Decades of Research , 1994 .

[15]  John F. Veigal.  The Frequency of Self-Limiting Behavior in Groups: A Measure and an Explanation , 1991 .

[16]  Robert A. R. Parker.  A-Model for the , 1967 .

[17]  Ben L. Kedia,et al.  Cultural Constraints on Transfer of Technology Across Nations: Implications for Research in International and Comparative Management , 1988 .

[18]  H. Russell Johnston,et al.  Developing Capabilities to Use Information Strategically , 1988, MIS Q..

[19]  A. H. Abdul-Gader,et al.  Information systems strategies for multinational companies in Arab Gulf countries , 1997 .

[20]  Maddy Janssens,et al.  A paradigm for confirmatory cross-cultural research in organizational-behavior , 1995 .

[21]  Charles J. McMillan,et al.  The Japanese Industrial System , 1984 .

[22]  Steven W. Floyd,et al.  Managerial Work, User Background, and the Use of Information Technology , 1988 .

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

[24]  J. V. Maanen,et al.  The Flow of Culture: Some Notes on Globalization and the Multinational Corporation* , 1993 .

[25]  Robert W. Zmud,et al.  The Nature and Determinants of IT Acceptance, Routinization, and Infusion , 1993, Diffusion, Transfer and Implementation of Information Technology.

[26]  V. Vroom.  Work and motivation , 1964 .

[27]  M. Bond,et al.  The Confucius connection: From cultural roots to economic growth , 1988 .

[28]  N. Adler.  International Dimensions of Organizational Behavior , 1986 .

[29]  A. T. Poffenberger,et al.  The Feeling Value of Lines. , 1924 .

[30]  M. Baba,et al.  Technology management and american culture: Implications for business process redesign , 1996 .

[31]  Steven W. Floyd,et al.  Path Analysis of the Relationship between Competitive Strategy, Information Technology, and Financial Performance , 1990, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

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

[33]  P. Berger,et al.  Social Construction of Reality , 1991, The SAGE International Encyclopedia of Mass Media and Society.

[34]  Henry C. Lucas,et al.  Technology Use and Performance: A Field Study of Broker Workstations* , 1999 .

[35]  K. Weick.  FROM SENSEMAKING IN ORGANIZATIONS , 2021, The New Economic Sociology.

[36]  G. Hofstede.  Motivation, leadership, and organization: Do American theories apply abroad? , 1980 .

[37]  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..

[38]  Weidong Chen,et al.  Declarative updates of relational databases , 1995, TODS.

[39]  H. Triandis.  Cross-cultural industrial and organizational psychology. , 1994 .

[40]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Gender Differences in the Perception and Use of E-Mail: An Extension to the Technology Acceptance Model , 1997, MIS Q..

[41]  Chad Perry,et al.  Earthmoving on Construction Projects: A Postscript , 1984 .

[42]  A. Bandura.  Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control , 1997, Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy.

[43]  Raymond S. Nickerson,et al.  Why Interactive Computer Systems are Sometimes Not Used by People Who Might Benefit from Them , 1999, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[44]  C. Entsua-Mensah,et al.  Towards effective information management: A view from Ghana , 1996 .

[45]  John Short,et al.  The social psychology of telecommunications , 1976 .

[46]  Abraham Edel,et al.  Culture; A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions , 1954 .

[47]  Raymond S. Nickerson.  Why interactive computer systems are sometimes not used by people who might benefit from them , 1999, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

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

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

[50]  John F. Veiga,et al.  Emerging cultural values among Russian managers: What will tomorrow bring? , 1995 .

[51]  SzajnaBernadette.  Empirical Evaluation of the Revised Technology Acceptance Model , 1996 .

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

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

[54]  George W. England,et al.  The manager and his values , 1976 .

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

[56]  Fred D. Davis.  A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems : theory and results , 1985 .

[57]  Seymour E. Goodman,et al.  Cyberspace across the Sahara: computing in North Africa , 1995, CACM.