Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Accountants Are from Mars, ICT Practitioners Are from Venus. Predicting Technology Acceptance Between Two Groups

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Organizing for Digital Innovation

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation ((LNISO,volume 27))

Abstract

Several authors tried to explain the key determinants in technology acceptance using the technology acceptance model (TAM). TAM posits that ease of use and usefulness predict technology usage. Despite it strong usage there are several studies that show a lack in the model due to the absence of personal factors that should be considered. This paper aims to show the existence of significant difference in technology usage between different groups of people. Two hundred and fifty individuals responded to a survey about technology usage in their firms. Our results show that there is a statistically significant difference in ease of use and in perceived usefulness. The investigation applies TAM to help researchers, developers and managers understand antecedents to users’ intention to use.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Gefen, D., Straub, D.W.: Gender differences in the perception and use of e-mail: an extension to the technology acceptance model. MIS Q. 21, 389–400 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Van Ark, B.: The productivity paradox of the new digital economy. Int. Prod. Monit. 31(1), 3–18 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Prescott, M.B., Conger, S.A.: Information technology innovations: a classification by IT locus of impact and research approach. ACM SIGMIS Database 26(2–3), 20–41 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., Warshaw, P.R.: User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Manage. Sci. 35(8), 982–1003 (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Marangunić, N., Granić, A.: Technology acceptance model: a literature review from 1986 to 2013. Univ. Acc. Inf. Soc. 14(1), 81–95 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Legris, P., Ingham, J., Collerette, P.: Why do people use information technology? a critical review of the technology acceptance model. Inf. Manag. 40(3), 191–204 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lee, Y., Kozar, K.A., Larsen, K.R.: The technology acceptance model: past, present, and future. Comm. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 12(1), 751–781 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kwon, T.H., Zmud, R.W.: Unifying the fragmented models of information systems implementation. In Critical Issues in Information Systems Research, pp. 227–251. Wiley, Hoboken (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hu, P.J., Chau, P.Y.K., Sheng, O.R.L., Tam, K.Y.: Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 16(2), 91–112 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Devaraj, S., Easley, R.F., Crant, J.M.: Research note—how does personality matter? relating the five-factor model to technology acceptance and use. Inf. Syst. Res. 19(1), 93–105 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Pikkarainen, T., Pikkarainen, K., Karjaluoto, H., Pahnila, S.: Consumer acceptance of online banking: an extension of the technology acceptance model. Internet Res. 14(3), 224–235 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Calisir, F., Gumussoy, A.C., Bayraktaroglu, A.E., Karaali, D.: Predicting the intention to use a web-based learning system: perceived content quality, anxiety, perceived system quality, image, and the technology acceptance model. Hum. Fact. Ergon. Manufact. Serv. Ind.` 24(5), 515–531 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cheung, R., Vogel, D.: Predicting user acceptance of collaborative technologies: an extension of the technology acceptance model for e-learning. Comput. Educ. 63(1), 160–175 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kim, H.Y., Lee, J.Y., Mun, J.M., Johnson, K.K.: Consumer adoption of smart in-store technology: assessing the predictive value of attitude versus beliefs in the technology acceptance model. Int. J. Fasion Des. Technol. Educ. 10(1), 26–36 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Teo, T.: Modelling Facebook usage among university students in Thailand: the role of emotional attachment in an extended technology acceptance model. Interact. Learn. Environ. 24(4), 745–757 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Straub, D., Keil, M., Brenner, W.: Testing the technology acceptance model across cultures: a three country study. Inf. Manag. 33(1), 1–11 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. McCoy, S., Everard, A., Jones, B.M.: An examination of the technology acceptance model in Uruguay and the US: a focus on culture. J. Glob. Inf. Technol. Manag. 8(2), 27–45 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Pavlou, P.A.: Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 7(3), 101–134 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Adams, D.A., Nelson, R.R., Todd, P.A.: Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and usage of information technology: a replication. MIS Q. 16, 227–247 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Leidner, D.E., Kayworth, T.: Review: a review of culture in information systems research: toward a theory of information technology culture conflict. MIS Q. 30(2), 357–399 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Baroudi, J.J., Igbaria, M.: An examination of gender effects on career success of information systems employees. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 11(3), 181–201 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hernández, B., Jiménez, J., Martín, J.M.: Age, gender and income: do they really moderate online shopping behaviour? Online Inf. Rev. 35(1), 113–133 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. DeLone, W.H., McLean, E.R.: Information systems success: the quest for the dependent variable. Inf. Syst. Res. 3(1), 60–95 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Mun, Y.Y., Hwang, Y.: Predicting the use of web-based information systems: self-efficacy, enjoyment, learning goal orientation, and the technology acceptance model. Int. J. Hum-Comput. Stud. 59(4), 431–449 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lian, J.W., Yen, D.C., Wang, Y.T.: An exploratory study to understand the critical factors affecting the decision to adopt cloud computing in Taiwan hospital. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 34(1), 28–36 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Dalcher, I., Shine, J.: Extending the new technology acceptance model to measure the end user information systems satisfaction in a mandatory environment: a bank’s treasury. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 15(4), 441–455 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Benbasat, I., Barki, H.: Quo vadis TAM? J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 8(4), 211–218 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Laudon, K.C., Laudon, J.P.: Management information system. Pearson Education, India (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hofstede, G.: Motivation, leadership, and organization: do American theories apply abroad? Org. Dyn. 9(1), 42–63 (1980)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hofstede, G.: Cultural dimensions in management and planning. Asia Pac. J. Manag. 1(2), 81–99 (1984)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kowalczyk, N.: Influence of gender, age, and social norm on digital imaging use. Radiol. Technol. 83(5), 437–446 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Gomez, L.M., Egan, D.E., Bowers, C.: Learning to use a text editor: some learner characteristics that predict success. Hum-Comput. Interact. 2(1), 1–23 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Kirkpatrick, H., Cuban, L.: What the research says about gender differences in access, use, attitudes and achievement with computers. Educ. Technol. 38(4), 56–61 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Likert, R.: A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of psychology (1932)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Min, H., Galle, W.P.: E-purchasing: profiles of adopters and nonadopters. Ind. Mark. Manag. 32(3), 227–233 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Fox, J., Murray, C., Warm, A.: Conducting research using web-based questionnaires: practical, methodological, and ethical considerations. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 6(2), 167–180 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Hu, L.T., Bentler, P.M.: Evaluating model fit. In: Hoyle, R.H. (Ed.), Structural Equation Modeling: Concept, Issues and Applications. Thousand Oaks (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Hu, L.T., Bentler, P.M.: Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychol. Methods 3(4), 424–435 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Hu, L.T., Bentler, P.M.: Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. Multi. J. 6(1), 1–55 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Byrne, B.M.: Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: basic concepts, applications, and programming. Psychology Press (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Gliem, J.A., Gliem, R.R.: Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for Likert-type scales. In: Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Tavakol, M., Dennick, R.:(2011) Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. Int. J. Med. Educ. 53(2)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Kaiser, H.F.: A second generation little jiffy. Psychometrika 35(4), 401–415 (1970)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. McDonald, R.P.: The dimensionality of tests and items. Br. J. Math. Stat. Psyc. 34(1), 100–117 (1981)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Lewis, B.R., Templeton, G.F., Byrd, T.A.: A methodology for construct development. MIS Res. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 14(4), 388–400 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Lederer, A.L., Maupin, D.J., Sena, M.P., Zhuang, Y.: The technology acceptance model and the World Wide Web. Decis. Support Syst. 29(3), 269–282 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Kim, S.S., Malhotra, N.K.: A longitudinal model of continued IS use: an integrative view of four mechanisms underlying postadoption phenomena. Manag. Sci. 51(5), 741–755 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Gangwar, H., Date, H., Ramaswamy, R.: Understanding determinants of cloud computing adoption using an integrated TAM-TOE model. J. Ent. Inf. Manag. 28(1), 107–130 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Holden, R.J., Karsh, B.T.: The technology acceptance model: its past and its future in health care. J. Biomed. Inf. 43(1), 159–172 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Diatmika, I.W.B., Irianto, G., Baridwan, Z.: Determinants of behavior intention of accounting information systems based information technology acceptance. Imp. J. Int. Res. 2(8), 125–138 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Brynjolfsson, E.: The productivity paradox of information technology. Comm. ACM. 36(12), 66–77 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Willcocks, L.P., Lester, S.: Beyond the IT productivity paradox. Wiley, Hoboken (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  53. Acemoglu, D., Dorn, D., Hanson, G.H., Price, B.: Return of the solow paradox? IT, productivity, and employment in US manufacturing. Am. Econ. Rev. 104(5), 394–399 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Keen, P.G.: Information systems and organizational change. Commun. ACM. 24(1), 24–33 (1981)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Hong, S., Thong, J.Y., Tam, K.Y.: Understanding continued information technology usage behavior: a comparison of three models in the context of mobile internet. Decis. Support Syst. 42(3), 1819–1834 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Hong, K.K., Kim, Y.G.: The critical success factors for ERP implementation: an organizational fit perspective. Inf. Manag. 40(1), 25–40 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Cassidy, A.: A practical guide to information systems strategic planning. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  58. Chau, P.Y.K.: An empirical investigation on factors affecting the acceptance of CASE by systems developers. Inf. Manag. 30, 269–280 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Naples Federico II, 80126, Naples, Italy

    Adele Caldarelli, Luca Ferri, Marco Maffei & Rosanna Spanò

Authors
  1. Adele Caldarelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Luca Ferri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marco Maffei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rosanna Spanò
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luca Ferri .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Social and Political Sciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy

    Alessandra Lazazzara

  2. Department of Human Sciences for Education, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy

    Raoul C.D. Nacamulli

  3. Department of Business Administration, University of Verona, Verona, Italy

    Cecilia Rossignoli

  4. LUISS Guido Carli University, Rome, Italy

    Stefano Za

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Caldarelli, A., Ferri, L., Maffei, M., Spanò, R. (2019). Accountants Are from Mars, ICT Practitioners Are from Venus. Predicting Technology Acceptance Between Two Groups. In: Lazazzara, A., Nacamulli, R., Rossignoli, C., Za, S. (eds) Organizing for Digital Innovation. Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation, vol 27. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90500-6_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation