Advertisement

Abstract

In this paper we study the adoption of Web 2.0 platforms. Existing theoretical approaches to understand the adoption of IT are critically re-examined for their applicability in the Web 2.0 domain. We find that the two basic assumptions of traditional approaches 1) the unit of analysis is a person and 2) the technology´s primary utility is personal, does not hold for Web 2.0 platforms. Instead, we argue, the appropriate unit of adoption is the social network and the utility stems mainly from collective use.

Keywords

web 2.0 adoption social network diffusion 

References

  1. Adler, P.S., Kwon, S.-W.: Social Capital: Prospects for a New Concept. Academy of Management Review 27(1), 17–40 (2002)Google Scholar
  2. Ajzen, I.: From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. Action-control: From cognition to behavior (11), 39 (1985)Google Scholar
  3. Andersen, P.B., Emmeche, C., Finnemann, N.O.: Downward Causation: Minds, bodies and matter. Aarhus University Press (2000)Google Scholar
  4. Andriole, S.J.: Business Impact of Web 2.0 Technologies. Communications of the ACM 53(12), 67–79 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Attewell, P.: Technology diffusion and organizational learning: The case of business computing. Organization Science 3(1), 1–19 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Benbasat, I., Barki, H.: Quo vadis, TAM. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 8(4), 211–218 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. Bovasso, G.: A Network Analysis of Social Contagion Processes in an Organizational Intervention. Human Relations 49(11), 1419 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burt, R.S.: The Contingent Value of Social Capital. Administrative Science Quarterly 42(2), 339–365 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burt, R.S.: Structural Holes versus Network Closure as Social Capital. In: Lin, N., Cook, K.S., Burt, R.S., Gruyter, A.D. (eds.) Social Capital: Theory and Research, p. 1 (2000)Google Scholar
  10. Buskens, V., Yamaguchi, K.: A New Model for Information Diffusion in Heterogeneous Social Networks. Sociological Methodology (29), 281–325 (1999)Google Scholar
  11. Chi, F., Yang, N.: Twitter Adoption in Congress. Social Science Research Network (2010)Google Scholar
  12. Coleman, J.S.: Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. The American Journal of Sociology (94), S95-S120 (1988)Google Scholar
  13. Davis, F.D.: Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 13(3), 319–340 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., Warshaw, P.R.: User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science 35(8), 982–1003 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dishaw, M.T., Strong, D.M.: Extending the technology acceptance model with task-technology fit constructs. Information & Management 36(1), 9–21 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I.: Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1975)Google Scholar
  17. Galaskiewicz, J., Burt, R.: Interorganization Contagion in Corporate Philanthropy. Administrative Science Quarterly 36(1) (1991)Google Scholar
  18. Gefen, D., Straub, D.W.: Gender differences in the perception and use of e-mail: An extension to the technology acceptance model. MIS Quarterly 21(4), 389–400 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Granovetter, M.S.: The Strength of Weak Ties. The American Journal of Sociology 78(6), 1360–1380 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hester, A.: Innovating with organizational wikis: factors facilitating adoption and diffusion of an effective collaborative knowledge management system, pp. 161–163. ACM, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  21. Lyytinen, K., Damsgaard, J.: What’s wrong with the diffusion of innovation theory? Diffusing Software Products and Process Innovations, 173–190 (2001)Google Scholar
  22. Lyytinen, K., Damsgaard, J.: Inter-organizational information systems adoption - a configuration analysis approach. European Journal of Information Systems 18(1) (2011)Google Scholar
  23. Malhotra, Y., Galletta, D.F.: Extending the technology acceptance model to account for social influence: theoretical bases and empirical validation, p. 14. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2002)Google Scholar
  24. Moore, G.C., Benhasat, I.: Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research 2(3), 192–221 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mustonen-Ollila, E., Lyytinen, K.: Why organizations adopt information system process innovations: a longitudinal study using Diffusion of Innovation theory. Information Systems Journal 13(3), 275–297 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. O’Reilly, T.: What is web 2.0. Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software 30 (2005)Google Scholar
  27. Parameswaran, M., Whinston, A.B.: Research issues in social computing. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 8(6), 336–350 (2007)Google Scholar
  28. Rogers, E.M.: Diffusion of innovations. Free Pr., New York (1995)Google Scholar
  29. Scott, S.V., Orlikowski, W.J.: Getting the truth’: exploring the material grounds of institutional dynamics in social media (2009)Google Scholar
  30. Siam, A., Esfahanipour, A.: Effect Of Network Relations On The Adoption Of Electronic Trading Systems. Journal of Management Information Systems 25(1) (2008)Google Scholar
  31. Singh, J.: Collaborative networks as determinants of knowledge diffusion patterns. Management Science 51(5), 756–770 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sledgianowski, D., Kulviwat, S.: Using Social Network Sites: The Effects of Playfulness, Critical Mass and Trusti in a Hedonic Context. Journal of Computer Information Systems 49(4), 74–83 (2009)Google Scholar
  33. Straub, D., Keil, M., Brenner, W.: Testing the technology acceptance model across cultures: A three country study. Information & Management 33(1), 1–11 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sykes, T.A., Venkatesh, V., Gosain, S.: Model of Acceptance with Peer Support: A Social Network Perspective to Understand Employees’ System Use. MIS Quarterly 33(2), 371–393 (2009)Google Scholar
  35. Vannoy, S.A., Palvia, P.: The social influence model of technology adoption. Communications of the ACM 53(6), 149–153 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Venkatesh, V., Davis, F.D., Morris, M.G.: Dead or alive? The development, trajectory and future of technology adoption research. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 8(4), 267–286 (2007)Google Scholar
  37. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., Davis, F.D., DeLone, W.H., McLean, E.R., Jarvis, C.B., MacKenzie, S.B., Podsakoff, P.M., Chin, W.W.: User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. Inform Management 27(3), 425–478 (2003)Google Scholar
  38. Vilpponen, A., Winter, S., Sundqvist, S.: Electronic Word-of-Mouth in Online Environments: Exploring Referral Network Structure and Adoption Behavior. Journal of Interactive Advertising 6(2), 71–86 (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nikhil Srinivasan
    • 1
  • Jan Damsgaard
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Information Technology ManagementFrederiksbergDenmark

Personalised recommendations