The impact of legitimacy-based motives on IS adoption success: an institutional theory perspective

Firms frequently adopt new information systems (IS). To better understand IS adoption, research has been focused on motives for an IS adoption. In this study, three legitimacy-based motives (coercive, mimetic, and normative pressure) are examined for their impact on two success determinants (i.e., project management approach and team competence) and the subsequent impact of the success determinants on IS adoption success. In a quantitative study of Australian firms, we found that coercive pressure and normative pressure influence the project management approach, whereas mimetic pressure influences team competence. Both the project management approach and team competence in turn influence IS adoption success

The effects of regulatory pressure on information system adoption success: An institutional theory perspective

In today's economy, firms are affected by various government regulations that have implications for their information systems (IS). Regulatory pressure has become a major driver behind IS adoption. Nevertheless, it is currently unknown how regulatory pressure affects adoption success. Using an institutional theory lens, this research proposes that regulatory pressure affects some well established success factors of IS adoption. In particular, we hypothesise that regulatory pressure has a positive effect on top management support, project champion and formal project management; but a negative effect on project team competence. Hypotheses will be tested using a survey approach

Predominantly electronic or personal service delivery? a case in the wealth management context

In today’s economy, firms are affected by various government regulations that have implications for their information systems (IS). Regulatory pressure has become a major driver behind IS adoption. Nevertheless, it is currently unknown how regulatory pressure affects adoption success. Using an institutional theory lens, this research proposes that regulatory pressure affects some well established success factors of IS adoption. In particular, we hypothesise that regulatory pressure has a positive effect on top management support, project champion and formal project management; but a negative effect on project team competence. Hypotheses will be tested using a survey approach

UNDERSTANDING INFORMATION SYSTEM CHANGE: THE RELATION BETWEEN REASONS, GOALS, AND TYPES

Global competition and continuous innovation frequently trigger firms to alter their information systems (ISs). Recent studies indicate that the reasons behind IS changes strongly affect the progress of the changes and the benefits from change for firms. Until now change reasons have mainly been neglected in prior research. Hence, it remains unclear which change reasons exist and how exactly they affect IS changes. This paper aims to address this gap. We argue that change reasons affect IS changes because particular reasons result in particular goals that firms pursue with the changes. The goals can only be achieved with certain change types. A change type is a class of changes with similar characteristics, e.g. IS extension or IS merger. The selection of the change type affects the further course of the change and the change benefits. To provide justification for our argument, we first identify change reasons, goals, and types based on prior theory. Then, we develop a mapping that demonstrates the relations between reasons, goals, and types. Finally, we present three case studies to show that IS changes are more beneficial for firms if the reasons, goals, and types correspond with our mapping. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed

Understanding information system change: The relationship between reasons, goals, and types

Global competition and continuous innovation frequently trigger firms to alter their information systems (ISs). Recent studies indicate that the reasons behind IS changes strongly affect the progress of the changes and the benefits from change for firms. Until now change reasons have mainly been neglected in prior research. Hence, it remains unclear which change reasons exist and how exactly they affect IS changes. This paper aims to address this gap. We argue that change reasons affect IS changes because particular reasons result in particular goals that firms pursue with the changes. The goals can only be achieved with certain change types. A change type is a class of changes with similar characteristics, e.g. IS extension or IS merger. The selection of the change type affects the further course of the change and the change benefits. To provide justification for our argument, we first identify change reasons, goals, and types based on prior theory. Then, we develop a mapping that demonstrates the relations between reasons, goals, and types. Finally, we present three case studies to show that IS changes are more beneficial for firms if the reasons, goals, and types correspond with our mapping. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed

Development of an IS change reason - IS change type combination matrix

Firms change their information systems (IS) for various reasons, ranging from compliance with government regulations to the development of new capabilities. When making these changes a firm can choose between four different IS change types: IS introduction, IS extension, IS replacement, and IS merger. This paper proposes that change reasons and change types are interrelated, and that certain reason-type combinations are more likely than others to result in a successful IS change. To identify these combinations, an IS change reason–IS change type matrix is developed. While the matrix is created from prior IS research, we conducted a focus group study of IS professionals to further explore and refine the matrix. The findings from the focus group study reveal that some IS change reason–IS change type combinations are more appropriate than others to carry out the IS change project successfully. We also present three examples of IS change projects to illustrate the use and value of the matrix in practice

Competitive advantage from mandatory investments: An empirical study of Australian firms

Mandatory information system (IS) investments occur when government regulations require firms to alter their IS. These investments are additional expenditures added onto the initial expenditures of non-mandatory IS investments. Managers are concerned about associated costs and in an attempt to reduce the expenditures, most firms refrain from formal planning methods when mandatory investments are imposed upon them. Drawing on Henderson’s and Sifonis’ (1988) IS Planning and Investment Model as our theoretical lens, this paper argues that firms should re-consider this practice. It is hypothesised that formal planning methods are beneficial because they enable firms to combine mandatory and non-mandatory investments in such a way that competitive advantage can be achieved. We use a secondary dataset provided by the Australian government to test the hypotheses. Results show that only two out of three investigated formal planning methods are positively associated with competitive advantage. We conclude that in the special case of mandatory investments, formal methods are only beneficial if they incorporate information from the entire firm, rather than information from particular departments only

The effects of motives behind the adoption of information systems on adoption success

Across the globe, firms are frequently confronted with the challenge to adopt new information systems (IS). Nevertheless, experiences from practice show that firms often struggle to complete IS adoptions successfully and the success rate of IS adoption is low. In an attempt to increase the success rate of IS adoption, practitioners and researchers alike have investigated determinants that impact IS adoption success, e.g. project team competence. The continuously low success rate of IS adoption indicates, however, that these success determinants do not fully explain IS adoption success. Recently, researchers have suggested that to better understand IS adoption and gain new knowledge of adoption success, it is worthwhile shifting the focus of the investigation to the time before the adoption commences. Following this recommendation, studies on IS adoption began to focus on IS adoption motives, i.e. reasons for initiating and conducting the IS adoption. While focussing on adoption motives seems to be a promising avenue to shed light on IS adoption success, there are currently no studies yet on the relationships between adoption motives and adoption success. This research investigates relationships between adoption motives and adoption success. Drawing on institutional theory as the theoretical lens, this research identifies, and hypothesises how these motives affect success. Data was collected in an online survey from 211 Australian IT managers. Results provide evidence of the relationships between adoption motives and adoption success. This study contributes to IS research because it is an initial attempt to investigate relationships between adoption motives and adoption success. Thus, this study provides new insights into IS adoption success. Further, this research introduces Oliver’s school of institutional theory as a new theoretical lens to IS research. This research also has practical implications as it enables firms to analyse motives that drive IS adoptions, and identify and address benefits and challenges that are associated with particular adoption motives

On the impact of strategic planning on mandatory IS investments

Prior research demonstrated that firms invest in IS to create competitive advantage. Nevertheless, many firms are forced to invest in IS to comply with government regulations, regardless if the investment promises competitive advantage or not. A recent example is the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which required many firms to upgrade their systems. Surprisingly enough, firms sometimes realise that such mandatory investments create competitive advantage. This paper analyses reasons for this phenomenon. We hypothesise that the creation of competitive advantage from mandatory IS investments is facilitated through strategic IS planning (SISP). Our empirical investigation demonstrates that two of three selected SISP methods enable the creation of competitive advantage from mandatory IS investments. The method that does not facilitate competitive advantage differs from the other methods in terms of its scope. Thus, we conclude that the adequacy of SISP methods to unlock competitive advantage from mandatory investments depends on the scope of the methods

The European Master in Renewable Energy.

4 pages pages 3157-3160 CD-RO