Advertisement

Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science

, Volume 19, Issue 4, pp 297–307 | Cite as

Resistance to technological innovations: An examination of the role of self-efficacy and performance satisfaction

  • Pam Scholder Ellen
  • William O. Bearden
  • Subhash Sharma
Article

Abstract

Technological innovation is seen as the key to survival and success for many firms. Whether intended for internal use or for customers, adoption decisions must consider the response of the final user to such technological alternatives. This paper argues for greater attention to the factors which cause individual resistance to technological innovations. The results of two studies are reported which examined the effects of self-efficacy (Bandura 1977) and performance satisfaction on consumers’ response to technological changes. Results indicate that a person’s perceived ability to use a product successfully affects their evaluative and behavioral response to the product. In addition, the level of satisfaction experienced with an existing behavior increases resistance to and reduces likelihood of adopting an alternative.

Keywords

Technological Innovation Consumer Research Manual Task Manipulation Check Performance Satisfaction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ajzen, Icek. 1985. “From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned Behavior.” InAction Control: From Cognition to Behavior, pp. 11–39. Eds. Julius Kuhl and Jurgen Beckman. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlog.Google Scholar
  2. Ajzen, Icek and Martin Fishbein. 1980.Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  3. Bandura, Albert. 1986. “The Explanatory and Predictive Scope of Self-Efficacy Theory,”Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 4 (3): 249–255.Google Scholar
  4. —. 1977. “Self-Efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change.”Psychological Review 84: 191–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beals, Ralph L. 1968. “Resistance and Adaptation to Technological Change: Some Anthropological Views.”Human Factors 10 (6): 579–588.Google Scholar
  6. Blackler, Frank and Colin Brown. 1985. “Evaluation and the Impact of Information Technologies on People in Organizations.”Human Relations 38 (3): 213–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brod, Craig. 1982. “Managing Technostress: Optimizing the Use of Computer Technology.”Personnel Journal 61 (October): 753–757.Google Scholar
  8. Byrnes, Elizabeth and James H. Johnson. 1981. “Change Technology and the Implementation of Automation in Mental Health Care Settings.”Psychonomic Science 13 (4): 573–580.Google Scholar
  9. Calantone, Roger J., C. A. diBenedetto, and Michael H. Morris. 1985. “Technological Innovation: An Emerging Paradigm.” InAMA Educators’ Proceedings 51: 324–329. Eds. R. F. Lusch, G. L. Ford, R. D. Howell, C. A. Ingene, M. Reilly and R. W. Stampfl. Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association.Google Scholar
  10. Carlsmith, J. Merrill, Phoebe C. Ellsworth and Elliot Aronson. 1976.Methods of Research in Social Psychology. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  11. Cervone, Daniel, and Philip K. Peake. 1986. “Anchoring, Efficacy, and Action: The Influence of Judgmental Heuristics on Self-Efficacy Judgments and Behavior.”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50 (3): 492–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Coch, Lester and John R. P. French, Jr. 1948. “Overcoming Resistance to Change.”Human Relations 1 (4): 512–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cohen, J. 1977.Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  14. Danko, William O. and James M. MacLachlan. 1983. “Research to Accelerate the Diffusion of a New Invention.”Journal of Advertising Research 23 (June–July): 39–43.Google Scholar
  15. Davis, Fred D., Richard P. Bagozzi, and Paul R. Warshaw. 1989. “User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models.”Management Science 35 (August): 982–1003.Google Scholar
  16. Dickerson, Mary Dee and James W. Gentry. 1983. “Characteristics of Adopters and Non-Adopters of Home Computers.”Journal of Consumer Research 10 (September): 225–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Frantzich, Stephen E. 1979. “Technological Innovation Among Congressmen.”Social Forces 57 (March): 968–974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gatignon, Hubert and Thomas S. Robertson. 1985. “A Propositional Inventory for New Diffusion Research.”Journal of Consumer Research 11 (March): 35–49.Google Scholar
  19. Gatignon, Hubert and Thomas S. Robertson. 1989. “Technology Diffusion: An Empirical Test of Competitive Effects.”Journal of Marketing 53 (January): 35–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gold, Bela. 1981. “Technological Diffusion in Industry: Research Needs and Shortcomings.”The Journal of Industrial Economics 29 (3): 247–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Goldstein, Jeffrey. 1988. “A Far-from-Equilibrium Systems Approach to Resistance to Change.”Organizational Dynamics 17 (2): 16–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hill, Thomas, Nancy D. Smith, and Millard Mann. 1985a. “Communicating Innovations Convincing Computer Phobics to Adopt Innovative Techniques.” InAdvances in Consumer Research 13: 419–422. Ed. Richard Lutz. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research.Google Scholar
  23. Hill, Thomas, Nancy D. Smith, Millard Mann, and Bruce F. Roberson. 1985b. “Efficacy Expectations and Technology Adoption: The Case of Computers.” InProceedings of the Division of Consumer Psychology (Division 23), pp. 15–19. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  24. Hiltz, Starr Roxanne and Kenneth Johnson. 1990. “User Satisfaction with Computer-Mediated Communication Systems.”Management Science 36 (6): 739–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kelman, Herbert C. and Donald P. Warwick. 1973. “Bridging Micro and Macro Approaches to Social Change: A Social Psychological Perspective.” InProcesses and Phenomena of Social Change, pp. 13–59. Ed. Gerald Zaltman. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  26. Kirsch, Irving. 1986. “Early Research on Self-Efficacy: What We Already Know Without Knowing We Knew.”Journal of Clinical and Social Psychology 4 (3): 319–358.Google Scholar
  27. Leonard-Barton, Dorothy, and William A. Kraus. 1985. “Implementing New Technology.”Harvard Business Review 63 (November–December): 102–110.Google Scholar
  28. Maddux, James E., and R. W. Rogers. 1983. “Protection Motivation and Self-Efficacy: A Revised Theory of Fear Appeals and Attitude Change.”Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 19: 469–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Maddux, James E., Larry W. Norton and Cal D. Stoltenberg. 1986. “Self-Efficacy Expectancy, Outcome Expectancy and Outcome Value: Relative Effects on Behavioral Intentions.”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51 (4): 783–789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Markus, M. Lynne and Daniel Robey. 1983. “The Organizational Validity of Management Information Systems.”Human Relations 36 (3): 203–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Midgely, David F. and Grahame R. Dowling. 1978. “Innovativeness: The Concept and Its Measurement.”Journal of Consumer Research 4 (March): 229–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Murdock, Gene W. and Lori Franz. 1983. “Habit and Perceived Risk as Factors in the Resistance to Use of ATMs.”Journal of Retail Banking 5 (2): 20–29.Google Scholar
  33. Nadler, David A. 1981. “Managing Organizational Change: An Integrative Perspective.”The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 17 (2): 191–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. O’Connor, Edward, Charles Parsons, Robert Liden and David Herold. 1990. “Implementing New Technology: Management Issues and Opportunities.”The Journal of High Technology Management Research 1 (1): 68–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Perdue, Barbara and John O. Summers. 1986. “Checking the Success of Manipulations in Marketing Experiments.”Journal of Marketing Research 22 (November): 317–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Peterson, Robert A., Gerald Albaum, and Richard F. Beltramini. 1985. “A Meta-Analysis of Effect Sizes in Consumer Behavior Experiments.”Journal of Consumer Research 12 (June): 97–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Raju, P. S. 1980. “Optimum Stimulation Level: Its Relationship to Personality, Demographics, and Exploratory Behavior.”Journal of Consumer Research 7 (December): 272–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ram, S. 1987. “A Model of Innovation Resistance.”Advances in Consumer Research 14: 208–212. Eds. Melanie Wallendorf and Paul Anderson, Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research.Google Scholar
  39. — 1989. “Successful Innovation Using Strategies to Reduce Consumer Resistance: An Empirical Test.”Journal of Product Innovation Management 6: 20–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rogers, Everett M. 1983.Diffusion of Innovations. New York: McMillan Publishers.Google Scholar
  41. Salerno, Lynn M. 1985. “What Happened to the Computer Revolution?”Harvard Business Review (November–December): 129–138.Google Scholar
  42. Schein, Edgar H. 1985.Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  43. Seltzer, Leon F. 1983. “Influencing the ‘Shape’ of Resistance: An Experimental Exploration of Paradoxical Directives and Psychological Reactance.”Basic and Applied Social Psychology 4 (1): 47–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sheth, Jagdish N. 1981. “Psychology of Innovation Resistance: The Less Developed Concept (LDC) in Diffusion Research.” InResearch in Marketing, pp. 273–282. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  45. Sheth, Jagdish N. and Gary L. Frazier. 1982. “A Model of Strategy Mix for Planned Social Change.”Journal of Marketing 46 (Winter): 15–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Taylor, Thayer C. 1987. “Computers in Sales and Marketing: S&MM’s Survey Results.”Sales and Marketing Management 138 (May): 52–53.Google Scholar
  47. Thompson, Thomas W. 1984. “Slow Down, Fit It Together... and Let People Catch Up.”United States Banker (December): 56–57.Google Scholar
  48. Watson, Goodwin. 1971. “Resistance to Change.”American Behavioral Scientist 4 (May–June): 745–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zaltman, Gerald and Robert Duncan. 1977.Strategies for Planned Change. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  50. Zaltman, Gerald, R. Duncan, and J. Holbeck. 1973.Innovations and Organizations. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  51. Zuboff, Shoshana. 1982. “New Worlds of Computer-Mediated Work.”Harvard Business Review 60 (September–October): 142–152.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of Marketing Science 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pam Scholder Ellen
    • 1
  • William O. Bearden
    • 2
  • Subhash Sharma
    • 2
  1. 1.Georgia State UniversityGeorgiaUSA
  2. 2.University of South CarolinaUSA

Personalised recommendations