Organizational and Institutional Determinants of B2C Adoption under Shifting Environments

This study examines the adoption of business-to-consumer (B2C) e-commerce by bricks-and-mortar companies comprising the Standard & Poor\u27s 500 (S&P 500) listings between 1992 and 2003. B2C represents a Type III information systems (IS) innovation that integrates IS with core business technologies. Extant studies on Type III innovations have examined organizational and institutional factors, solely or collectively, in explaining adoption, but not how their effects change under shifting environments over time. We develop an integrated model comprising organizational factors (i.e., espoused values and resources) and institutional factors (i.e., normative and mimetic pressures), as well as the moderating influence of shifting environments (i.e., early period and late period demarcated by changes in the environment). Using a piecewise event-history model specification, we examine the adoption of B2C innovations by 93 organizations over time. Our results show that both organizational and institutional factors influence B2C adoption; however, their effects varied with the environmental shifts. Specifically, senior IS executives influenced adoption in the early period whereas bandwagon mimetic pressures and business norms influenced adoption in the late period. The findings of our research demonstrate the importance of explicitly modeling environmental shifts in theorizing organizational adoption of innovations

Organizational and Institutional Determinants of B2C Adoption under Shifting Environments

This study examines the adoption of business-to-consumer (B2C) e-commerce by bricks-and-mortar companies comprising the Standard & Poor\u27s 500 (S&P 500) listings between 1992 and 2003. B2C represents a Type III information systems (IS) innovation that integrates IS with core business technologies. Extant studies on Type III innovations have examined organizational and institutional factors, solely or collectively, in explaining adoption, but not how their effects change under shifting environments over time. We develop an integrated model comprising organizational factors (i.e., espoused values and resources) and institutional factors (i.e., normative and mimetic pressures), as well as the moderating influence of shifting environments (i.e., early period and late period demarcated by changes in the environment). Using a piecewise event-history model specification, we examine the adoption of B2C innovations by 93 organizations over time. Our results show that both organizational and institutional factors influence B2C adoption; however, their effects varied with the environmental shifts. Specifically, senior IS executives influenced adoption in the early period whereas bandwagon mimetic pressures and business norms influenced adoption in the late period. The findings of our research demonstrate the importance of explicitly modeling environmental shifts in theorizing organizational adoption of innovations

Organizational and Institutional Determinants of B2C Adoption under Shifting Environments

This study examines the adoption of business-to-consumer (B2C) e-commerce by bricks-and-mortar companies comprising the Standard & Poor\u27s 500 (S&P 500) listings between 1992 and 2003. B2C represents a Type III information systems (IS) innovation that integrates IS with core business technologies. Extant studies on Type III innovations have examined organizational and institutional factors, solely or collectively, in explaining adoption, but not how their effects change under shifting environments over time. We develop an integrated model comprising organizational factors (i.e., espoused values and resources) and institutional factors (i.e., normative and mimetic pressures), as well as the moderating influence of shifting environments (i.e., early period and late period demarcated by changes in the environment). Using a piecewise event-history model specification, we examine the adoption of B2C innovations by 93 organizations over time. Our results show that both organizational and institutional factors influence B2C adoption; however, their effects varied with the environmental shifts. Specifically, senior IS executives influenced adoption in the early period whereas bandwagon mimetic pressures and business norms influenced adoption in the late period. The findings of our research demonstrate the importance of explicitly modeling environmental shifts in theorizing organizational adoption of innovations

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health