Review by: Reichert, Raimond (2004-10-25)

The authors are well-known for their previous work on explaining and predicting user acceptance of information technology in the work place. The original Technology Acceptance Model by Davies in 1989 is widely referenced. It explaines users’ intention to use a new system through two beliefs, perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use.

The extension of the original model presented in this paper explores the factors influencing perceived usefulness, since perceived usefulness in many empirical tests has been a consistently strong determinant of usage intentions. The paper factors hypothesized in this paper fall into two categories, social influence processes (subjective norm, voluntariness, and image) and cognitive instrumental processes (job relevance, output quality, result demonstrability, and perceived ease of use). For each hypothesis, a brief theoretical reasoning is given. The authors conducted four longitudinal studies, two based on voluntary use of a new system and two based on mandatory use.

The results of those studies explain up to 60% of the variance regarding the factors which influence perceived usefulness. The results can only be briefly summarized here. Social influence, e. g. through subjective norm, defined as “person’s perception that most people who are important to him think he should or should not perform the behavior in question”, significantly influences perceived usefulness. Cognitive factors also play an important role. For example, the greater the perceived job relevance (defined as “the individual’s perception regarding the degree to which the target system is applicable to his or her job”) of a new system is, the more important output quality (defined as the “consideration how well the system performs those tasks”) becomes. The authors draw a number of practical conclusions from their results, e. g. it’s important to empirically demonstrate the comparative effectiveness of a new system to the potential users. One might add that, considering the social influence factors, such demonstrations should be done by or with the explicit endorsement of people important to the potential users.

The paper is a must-read for those involved in introducing new information technology in the workplace. It is written in a very compact style, but still presents its results in a clear and concise fashion. The conclusions and implications drawn from the longitudinal studies are highly relevant for IT change agents and probably apply to the higher education context as well.