Task-Technology Fit Theory: A Survey and Synopsis of the Literature

Part of the Integrated Series in Information Systems book series (ISIS, volume 28)


Over the past decade there has been a notable increase in the use of Task-Technology Fit (TTF) theory within the field of information systems. This theory argues that information system use and performance benefits are attained when an information system is well-suited to the tasks that must be performed. As such, it seeks to offer an account of two of the key outcomes of interest to information systems (IS) researchers. Continued interest in the application of TTF theory is therefore expected and, as a result, the following chapter aims to provide a brief overview of the theory and how it has been applied in prior work. Readers are presented with an overview of the diverse range of research contexts and methodologies that have been used to test and extend TTF theory. Key outcomes of interest to TTF researchers are also examined as are the various approaches that researchers have used to operationalize the notion of TTF. It is hoped that this overview will serve as a sound basis for future research and simultaneously help to ensure that IS research does not continue to tread the same ground.


Task-Technology Fit Information Systems Adoption Group Support Systems Literature Survey 



Enterprise Resource Planning


Information System


Technology Acceptance Model


Task-Technology Fit


  1. Avital, M., & Te’eni, D. (2009). From generative fit to generative capacity: Exploring an emerging dimension of information systems design and task performance. Information Systems Journal, 19(4), 345–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baloh, P. (2007). The role of fit in knowledge management systems: Tentative propositions of the KMS design. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 19(4), 22–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barki, H., Titah, R., & Boffo, C. (2007). Information system use-related activity: An expanded behavioral conceptualization of individual-level information system use. Information Systems Research, 18(2), 173–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Becerra-Fernandez, I., & Sabherwal, R. (2001). Organization knowledge management: A contingency perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 23–55.Google Scholar
  5. Belanger, F., Collins, R. W., & Cheney, P. H. (2001). Technology requirements and work group communication for telecommuters. Information Systems Research, 12(2), 155–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Benford, T. L., & Hunton, J. E. (2000). Incorporating information technology considerations into an expanded model of judgment and decision making in accounting. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 1(1), 54–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Burton-Jones, A., & Gallivan, M. J. (2007). Toward a deeper understanding of system usage in organizations: A multilevel perspective. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 31(4), 657–679.Google Scholar
  8. Cane, S., & McCarthy, R. (2009). Analyzing the factors that affect information systems use: A task-technology fit meta-analysis. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 50(1), 108–123.Google Scholar
  9. Chang, H. H. (2008). Intelligent agent’s technology characteristics applied to online auctions’ task: A combined model of TTF and TAM. Technovation, 28(9), 564–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. D’Ambra, J., & Rice, R. E. (2001). Emerging factors in user evaluation of the world wide web. Information Management, 38(6), 373–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. D’Ambra, J., & Wilson, C. S. (2004a). Explaining perceived performance of the world wide web: Uncertainty and the task-technology fit model. Internet Research, 14(4), 294–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. D’Ambra, J., & Wilson, C. S. (2004b). Use of the world wide web for international travel: Integrating the construct of uncertainty in information seeking and the task-technology fit (TTF) model. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55(8), 731–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Daft, R. L., Lengel, R. H., & Trevino, L. K. (1987). Message equivocality, media selection, and manager performance: Implications for information systems. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 11(3), 355–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (1992). Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 60–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dennis, A. R., Wixom, B. H., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2001). Understanding fit and appropriation effects in group support systems via meta-analysis. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 25(2), 167–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dishaw, M. T., & Strong, D. M. (1998a). Assessing software maintenance tool utilization using task-technology fit and fitness-for-use models. Journal of Software Maintenance: Research and Practice, 10(3), 151–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dishaw, M. T., & Strong, D. M. (1998b). Supporting software maintenance with software engineering tools: A computed task-technology fit analysis. The Journal of Systems and Software, 44(2), 107–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dishaw, M. T., & Strong, D. M. (1999). Extending the technology acceptance model with task-technology fit constructs. Information Management, 36(1), 9–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dishaw, M. T., & Strong, D. M. (2003). The effect of task and tool experience on maintenance CASE tool usage. Information Resources Management Journal, 16(3), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Doty, D. H., Glick, W. H., & Huber, G. P. (1993). Fit, equifinality, and organizational effectiveness: A test of two configurational theories. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1196–1250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fuller, R. M., & Dennis, A. R. (2009). Does fit matter? The impact of task-technology fit and appropriation on team performance in repeated tasks. Information Systems Research, 20(1), 2–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Galbraith, J. R. (1973). Designing complex organizations. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  23. Gebauer, J., & Ginsburg, M. (2009). Exploring the black box of task-technology fit. Communications of the ACM, 52(1), 130–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gebauer, J., & Shaw, M. J. (2004). Success factors and impacts of mobile business applications: Results from a mobile e-procurement study. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 8(3), 19–41.Google Scholar
  25. Goette, T. (2000). Keys to the adoption and use of voice recognition technology in organizations. Information Technology & People, 13(1), 67–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Goodhue, D. L. (1995). Understanding user evaluations of information systems. Management Science, 41(12), 1827–1844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Goodhue, D. L. (1997). The model underlying the measurement of the impacts of the IIC on the end-users. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(5), 449–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Goodhue, D. L. (1998). Development and measurement validity of a task-technology fit instrument for user evaluations of information systems. Decision Sciences, 29(1), 105–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Goodhue, D. L., Klein, B. D., & March, S. T. (2000). User evaluations of IS as surrogates for objective performance. Information Management, 38(2), 87–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Goodhue, D. L., & Thompson, R. L. (1995). Task-technology fit and individual performance. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 19(2), 213–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Goodhue, D. L., Littlefield, R., & Straub, D. W. (1997). The measurement of the impacts of the IIC on the end-users: The survey. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(5), 454–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Grossman, M., Aronson, J. E., & McCarthy, R. V. (2005). Does UML make the grade? Insights from the software development community. Information and Software Technology, 47(6), 383–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hahn, J., & Wang, T. (2009). Knowledge management systems and organizational knowledge processing challenges: A field experiment. Decision Support Systems, 47(4), 332–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Heine, M. L., Grover, V., & Malhotra, M. K. (2003). The relationship between technology and performance: A meta-analysis of technology models. Omega, 31(3), 189–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ioimo, R. E., & Aronson, J. E. (2003). The benefits of police field mobile computing realized by non-patrol sections of a police department. International Journal of Police Science and Management, 5(3), 195–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jarupathirun, S., & Zahedi, F. M. (2007). Exploring the influence of perceptual factors in the ­success of web-based spatial DSS. Decision Support Systems, 43(3), 933–951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Junglas, I., Abraham, C., & Watson, R. T. (2008). Task-technology fit for mobile locatable information systems. Decision Support Systems, 45(4), 1046–1057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kacmar, C. J., McManus, D. J., Duggan, E. W., Hale, J. E., & Hale, D. P. (2009). Software development methodologies in organizations: Field investigation of use, acceptance, and application. Information Resources Management Journal, 22(3), 16–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kanellis, P., Lycett, M., & Paul, R. J. (1999). Evaluating business information systems fit: From concept to practical application. European Journal of Information Systems, 8(1), 65–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Karimi, J., Somers, T. M., & Gupta, Y. P. (2004). Impact of environmental uncertainty and task characteristics on user satisfaction with data. Information Systems Research, 15(2), 175–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Karsh, B.-T., Holden, R., Escoto, K., Alper, S., Scanlon, M., Arnold, J., et al. (2009). Do beliefs about hospital technologies predict nurses’ perceptions of quality of care? A study of task-technology fit in two pediatric hospitals. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 25(5), 374–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Klaus, T., Gyires, T., & Wen, H. J. (2003). The use of web-based information systems for non-work activities: An empirical study. Human Systems Management, 22(3), 105–114.Google Scholar
  43. Klopping, I. M., & McKinney, E. (2004). Extending the technology acceptance model and the task-technology fit model to consumer E-commerce. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 22(1), 35–48.Google Scholar
  44. Kositanurit, B., Ngwenyama, O., & Osei-Bryson, K. M. (2006). An exploration of factors that impact individual performance in an ERP environment: An analysis using multiple analytical techniques. European Journal of Information Systems, 15(6), 556–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lam, T., Cho, V., & Qu, H. (2007). A study of hotel employee behavioral intentions towards adoption of information technology. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 26(1), 49–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lee, J.-N., Miranda, S. M., & Kim, Y.-M. (2004). IT outsourcing strategies: Universalistic, contingency, and configurational explanations of success. Information Systems Research, 15(2), 110–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lee, C.-C., Cheng, H. K., & Cheng, H.-H. (2007). An empirical study of mobile commerce in insurance industry: Task-technology fit and individual differences. Decision Support Systems, 43(1), 95–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lending, D., & Straub, D. W. (1997). Impacts of an integrated information center on faculty end-users: A qualitative assessment. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(5), 466–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lin, T.-C., & Huang, C.-C. (2008). Understanding knowledge management system usage antecedents: An integration of social cognitive theory and task technology fit. Information Management, 45(6), 410–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lin, T.-C., & Huang, C.-C. (2009). Understanding the determinants of EKR usage from social, technological and personal perspectives. Journal of Information Science, 35(2), 165–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lippert, S. K., & Forman, H. (2006). A supply chain study of technology trust and antecedents to technology internalization consequences. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 36(4), 270–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Lucas, H. C., Jr., & Spitler, V. (2000). Implementation in a world of workstations and networks. Information Management, 38(2), 119–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Maruping, L. M., & Agarwal, R. (2004). Managing team interpersonal processes through technology: A task-technology fit perspective. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 975–990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Massey, A. P., Montoya-Weiss, M., Hung, C., & Ramesh, V. (2001). Cultural perceptions of task-technology fit. Communications of the ACM, 44(12), 83–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Mathieson, K., & Keil, M. (1998). Beyond the interface: Ease of use and task/technology fit. Information Management, 34(4), 221–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Murthy, U. S., & Kerr, D. S. (2004). Comparing audit team effectiveness via alternative modes of computer-mediated communication. Auditing, 23(1), 141–152.Google Scholar
  57. Nakatsu, R. T., & Benbasat, I. (2003). Improving the explanatory power of knowledge-based systems: An investigation of content and interface-based enhancements. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man & Cybernetics: Part A, 33(3), 344–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Nance, W. D., & Straub, D. W. (1996). An investigation of task/technology fit and information technology choices in knowledge work. Journal of Information Technology Management, 7(3 & 4), 1–14.Google Scholar
  59. Norzaidi, M. D., Siong Choy, C., Murali, R., & Salwani, M. I. (2007). Intranet usage and managers’ performance in the port industry. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 107(8), 1227–1250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Norzaidi, M. D., Chong, S. C., Murali, R., & Salwani, M. I. (2009). Towards a holistic model in investigating the effects of intranet usage on managerial performance: A study on Malaysian port industry. Maritime Policy & Management, 36(3), 269–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Pendharkar, P. C., Khosrowpour, M., & Rodger, J. A. (2001). Development and testing of an instrument for measuring the user evaluations of information technology in health care. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 41(4), 84–89.Google Scholar
  62. Potter, R. E., & Balthazard, P. A. (2000). Supporting integrative negotiation via computer mediated communication technologies an empirical example with geographically dispersed Chinese and American negotiators. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 12(4), 7–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Raman, P., Wittmann, C. M., & Rauseo, N. A. (2006). Leveraging CRM for sales: The role of organizational capabilities in successful CRM implementation. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 26(1), 39–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rousseau, D. M. (1985). Issues of level in organizational research: Multi-level and cross-level perspectives. Research in Organizational Behavior, 7, 1–37.Google Scholar
  65. Shirani, A. I., Tafti, M. H. A., & Affisco, J. F. (1999). Task and technology fit: A comparison of two technologies for synchronous and asynchronous group communication. Information Management, 36(3), 139–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Staples, D. S., & Seddon, P. (2004). Testing the technology-to-performance chain model. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 16(4), 17–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Stock, R. (2004). Drivers of team performance: What do we know and what have we still to learn? Schmalenbach Business Review, 56(3), 274–306.Google Scholar
  68. Strong, D. M., Dishaw, M. T., & Bandy, D. B. (2006). Extending task technology fit with computer self-efficacy. Database for Advances in Information Systems, 37(2/3), 96–107.Google Scholar
  69. Teo, T. S. H., & Bing, M. (2008). Knowledge portals in Chinese consulting firms: A task-technology fit perspective. European Journal of Information Systems, 17(6), 557–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., & Howell, J. M. (1991). Personal computing: Toward a conceptual model of utilization. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 15(1), 125–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Tjahjono, B. (2009). Supporting shop floor workers with a multimedia task-oriented information system. Computers in Industry, 60(4), 257–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Todd, P., & Benbasat, I. (1999). Evaluating the impact of DSS, cognitive effort, and incentives on strategy selection. Information Systems Research, 10(4), 356–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Venkatraman, N. (1989). The concept of fit in strategy research: Toward verbal and statistical correspondence. Academy of Management Review, 14(3), 423–444.Google Scholar
  74. Vessey, I. (1991). Cognitive fit: A theory-based analysis of the graphs versus tables literature. Decision Sciences, 22(2), 219–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Vessey, I., & Galletta, D. (1991). Cognitive fit: An empirical study of information acquisition. Information Systems Research, 2(1), 63–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Vlahos, G. E., Ferratt, T. W., & Knoepfle, G. (2004). The use of computer-based information systems by German managers to support decision making. Information Management, 41(6), 763–779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Wilson, E. V., & Sheetz, S. D. (2008). Context counts: Effects of work versus non-work context on participants’ perceptions of fit in e-mail versus face-to-face communication. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 2008(22), 311–338.Google Scholar
  78. Wongpinunwatana, N., Ferguson, C., & Bowen, P. (2000). An experimental investigation of the effects of artificial intelligence systems on the training of novice auditors. Managerial Auditing Journal, 15(6), 306–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Wu, J.-H., Chen, Y.-C., & Lin, L.-M. (2007). Empirical evaluation of the revised end user computing acceptance model. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(1), 162–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Wu, J.-H., Shin, S.-S., & Heng, M. S. H. (2007). A methodology for ERP misfit analysis. Information Management, 44(8), 666–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Zhou, Z., Guoxin, L. I., & Lam, T. (2009). The role of task-fit in employees’ adoption of it in Chinese hotels. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 8(1), 96–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Zigurs, I., & Buckland, B. K. (1998). A theory of task/technology fit and group support systems effectiveness. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 22(3), 313–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Zigurs, I., & Khazanchi, D. (2008). From profiles to patterns: A new view of task-technology fit. Information Systems Management, 25(1), 8–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Zigurs, I., Buckland, B. K., Connolly, J. R., & Wilson, E. V. (1999). A test of task-technology fit theory for group support systems. Database for Advances in Information Systems, 30(3/4), 34–50.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Business and EconomicsMaastricht UniversityMaastrichtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations