Complexity and Control as Determinants of Performance with Information Technology Innovations

Introducing innovations (e.g., new software applications) is a challenge to organizations as well as in the classroom. Using 244 students, this laboratory experiment evaluates the impact of perceived complexity and control on performance with a computer-assisted software engineering tool. The students were placed into three groups on the basis of their formal IS education and the length of their training on the tool. Upon completion of their database design task, they completed a questionnaire concerning their perceptions of the complexity of the tool and the control they had using the tool. The findings show that perceived complexity and control impacted performance, but did so in different ways for each group. Further, the experiment revealed that training had a greater impact than formal education.

[1]  Deborah Compeau,et al.  Application of Social Cognitive Theory to Training for Computer Skills , 1995, Inf. Syst. Res..

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

[3]  Jon M. Werner,et al.  Computer training through behavior modeling, self-paced, and instructional approaches : A field experiment , 1996 .

[4]  E. Trist,et al.  The Causal Texture of Organizational Environments , 1965 .

[5]  M. L. Gibson,et al.  Students as Surrogates for Managers in a Decision-Making Environment: An Experimental Study , 1991, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[6]  S. Parker,et al.  The demands—control model of job strain: A more specific test , 1996 .

[7]  J. Averill.  Personal control over aversive stimuli and its relationship to stress. , 1973 .

[8]  Michael J. Gallivan,et al.  Organizational adoption and assimilation of complex technological innovations: development and application of a new framework , 2001, DATB.

[9]  R. L. Dipboye,et al.  Effects of trainer expressiveness, organization, and trainee goal orientation on training outcomes. , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[10]  Richard D. Johnson,et al.  The Multilevel and Multifaceted Character of Computer Self-Efficacy: Toward Clarification of the Construct and an Integrative Framework for Research , 1998, Inf. Syst. Res..

[11]  G. A. Miller.  THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

[12]  H A Simon,et al.  How Big Is a Chunk? , 1974, Science.

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

[14]  Larry N. Killough,et al.  Testing the Interaction Effects of Task Complexity in Computer Training Using the Social Cognitive Model , 2001, Decis. Sci..

[15]  Marilyn E. Gist,et al.  EFFECTS OF ALTERNATIVE TRAINING METHODS ON SELF-EFFICACY AND PERFORMANCE IN COMPUTER SOFTWARE TRAINING , 1989 .

[16]  Tor Guimaraes,et al.  Empirically testing the impact of manufacturing system complexity on performance , 1999 .

[17]  Dov Te'eni,et al.  Direct Manipulation as a Source of Cognitive Feedback: A Human-Computer Experiment with a Judgment Task , 1990, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[18]  Said S. Al-Gahtani,et al.  The Applicability of TAM Outside North America: An Empirical Test in the United Kingdom , 2001, Inf. Resour. Manag. J..

[19]  Leisa D. Sargent,et al.  The effects of work control and job demands on employee adjustment and work performance , 1998 .

[20]  R. Flood.  Complexity: A definition by construction of a conceptual framework , 1987 .

[21]  F KemererChris.  Reliability of function points measurement , 1993 .

[22]  Michael Frese,et al.  A theory of control and complexity: implications for software design and integration of computer systems into the work place , 1988 .

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

[24]  Robert E. Wood,et al.  The effects of feedback format on dynamic decision making , 2002 .

[25]  Shani D. Carter.  Matching training methods and factors of cognitive ability: A means to improve training outcomes , 2002 .

[26]  William T. Faranda.  A scale to measure the cognitive control form of perceived control: Construction and preliminary assessment , 2001 .

[27]  A. F. Kramer,et al.  Cognitive representations, control, and understanding of complex systems: a field study focusing on components of users' mental models and expert/novice differences. , 1991, Ergonomics.

[28]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Some observations on mental models , 1987 .

[29]  Nerina L. Jimmieson,et al.  The moderating role of task characteristics in determining responses to a stressful work simulation , 1999 .

[30]  John Day,et al.  The Impact of Perceived Innovation Characteristics on Intention to Use Groupware , 2002, Inf. Resour. Manag. J..

[31]  Vojislav B. Misic,et al.  Cost estimation based on business models , 1999, J. Syst. Softw..

[32]  A. Bandura,et al.  Social Cognitive Theory of Organizational Management , 1989 .

[33]  Thomas W. Ferratt,et al.  End user training: an experimental comparison of lecture versus computer-based training , 1997 .

[34]  Jeff Moad.  Calculating the real benefit of training , 1995 .

[35]  N. Schillewaert,et al.  Organizational innovation adoption: a multi-level framework of determinants and opportunities for future research , 2002 .

[36]  Chetan S. Sankar,et al.  Teaching Project Management through an Information Technology-Based Method , 1998 .

[37]  R. Sternberg.  Human Abilities: An Information Processing Approach , 1985 .

[38]  P. Bierly,et al.  Analyzing innovation adoption using a knowledge-based approach , 2001 .

[39]  John W. Satzinger,et al.  Computer training and individual differences: When method matters , 1998 .

[40]  Carmi Schooler,et al.  The Reciprocal Effects of the Substantive Complexity of Work and Intellectual Flexibility: A Longitudinal Assessment , 1978, American Journal of Sociology.

[41]  A. Bandura.  Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. , 1977, Psychological review.

[42]  Ting-Peng Liang,et al.  User interface design for decision support systems: A self-adaptive approach , 1987, Inf. Manag..