A paradigm shift for bring your own device (BYOD)

The present paper aims to understand the effectiveness of the current adoption models in newly-built concept of Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) and also the role of IT departments in adopting BYOD in organizations. The paper extends the literature on adoption and combines them with the body of work on BYOD. The article compares these two concepts to build a theoretical framework in which BYOD can be examined. The paper presents the lessons learned from four different case studies in Australia, United Kingdom and Denmark. It was found that BYOD requires adaptation as opposed to adoption of technologies. Adaptation is a process in which an employee customises software in a way that allows them to do their task on their own device, at their own place and in their own time. The paper also reports that the adaptation process dictated by BYOD can lead to either innovation or errors and difficulties made by inconsistent use of technologies. The article informs IS researchers that there is a need to study the phenomena of technology adaption further. The research also rises awareness among practitioners on the significant changes that need to be implemented to run BYOD practices.

[1]  R. Stake.  The art of case study research , 1995 .

[2]  Barbara H Wixom,et al.  A Theoretical Integration of User Satisfaction and Technology Acceptance , 2005, Inf. Syst. Res..

[3]  Peter A. Todd,et al.  Assessing IT usage: the role of prior experience , 1995 .

[4]  Martin Brodin.  COMBINING ISMS WITH STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT: THE CASE OF BYOD , 2015, ICIS 2015.

[5]  Michael D. Myers,et al.  A Set of Principles for Conducting and Evaluating Interpretive Field Studies in Information Systems , 1999, MIS Q..

[6]  Jane E. Klobas,et al.  The role of spreadsheet knowledge in user-developed application success , 2005, Decis. Support Syst..

[7]  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..

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

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

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

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

[12]  Henri Barki,et al.  Explaining the Role of User Participation in Information System Use , 1994 .

[13]  Luke Houghton,et al.  Power Relationships that Lead to the Development of Feral Systems , 2007, Australas. J. Inf. Syst..

[14]  Don V. Kerr,et al.  A Creative and Useful Tension? Large Companies Using "Bring Your Own Device" , 2014, TDIT.

[15]  Luke Houghton,et al.  JUST IN TIME OR JUST IN CASE: A CASE STUDY ON THE IMPACT OF CONTEXT IN ERP IMPLEMENTATIONS , 2010 .

[16]  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..

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

[18]  Robert E. Crossler,et al.  Implications of Monitoring Mechanisms on Bring Your Own Device Adoption , 2017, J. Comput. Inf. Syst..

[19]  Luke Houghton,et al.  Issues that support the creation of ICT workarounds: towards a theoretical understanding of feral information systems , 2017, Inf. Syst. J..

[20]  S. Deetz.  Crossroads---Describing Differences in Approaches to Organization Science: Rethinking Burrell and Morgan and Their Legacy , 1996 .

[21]  Ritu Agarwal,et al.  The Role of Innovation Characteristics and Perceived Voluntariness in the Acceptance of Information Technologies , 1997 .