ICT Adoption and the UTAUT Model

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "ICT Adoption and the UTAUT Model"

Dana Clark
6 years ago
Views:

1 ICT Adoption and the UTAUT Model Wanamina Waehama Michael McGrath Axel Korthaus Michelle Fong College of Business, Victoria University Melbourne, Australia Abstract: The growth and development of technology in the current world has influenced considerable changes. Today, technology has transformed more than a few institutions by improving their performance. This research paper provides contextual information about electronic government (e-government). As a result of egovernment, Information and Communication Technology has become one of the major significant factors in Thai Government. There are more than a few factors that influence ICT such as development. ICT is important because it ranges from a number of factors such as economic, cultural, ethical, and legal. This paper will also review how ICT examines the development of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and use of Technology (UTAUT) model. The paper will also review the advantages and disadvantages of e-government. Keywords-component; e-government; Information and Communication Technology; adoption models. I. BACKGROUND A. Electronic government The electronic government (aka e-government) has been of great prominence and interest across the globe due to rapid growth in information and communication technologies (ICT). A survey by the United Nations [1] found that the e-government could be an engine of development, particularly in enhancing the provision of public service and advancing equitable people-centered development. The potential benefits of e-government have also brought about an increase in the number of e-government initiatives across many developed and developing countries [1]. However, it is very crucial for governments worldwide to place a strong emphasis on integration among distributed government structure in the context of e-government and e-governance in a bid to create interaction for broad sustainable development [4]. In developing countries, e-government projects experience high-failure rates with as many as 35% completely unable to fulfill their aims. Of the remaining, 50% achieve partial success and only 15% turn out to be successful [5][6]. There are various reasons behind the failure rate, such as limited information technology (IT) skills and training, lack of resource and infrastructure, lack of awareness, lack of adoption, non-technical and country-specific factors [5]. The success of e-government projects is dependent on citizen willingness and external factors, and may generate significant impacts when fully adopted. The integration of e-government promises massive advantages, prospects and growth [19]. The factors influencing the adoption and use of ICT range from cultural, economic, environmental, ethical, and legal to social. However, regardless of the promising prospects and growth from e-government, developing countries have seen various challenges in adopting ICT

2 [4]. These challenges vary from one sector to another and depending on the countries emerge in the form of technological capabilities, ability to work with confidential information, transparency, and compliance across different departments [5]. Consequently, it is crucial to identify, understand and analyze these various influencing factors and their impact on the adoption and use of ICT Initiatives in governmental [3][18]. B. Ministry of Information and Communication Technology One of the countries facing such challenges is Thailand, which took initiatives in late 1980s to develop the IT infrastructure to serve government and private sectors. To overcome the failures and limited success, the Thai government established the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology (MICT) in 2002 responsible for developing and supporting electronic processes for government, commerce, industry, and education [17]. As stipulated by the Thai government, the 1 st Information and Communication Technology Master Plan (Fundamental Plan for Information and Communication Technology of Thailand, ) together with the IT 2010 framework highlight five major development goals. The development goals are in the areas of e- government, e-commerce, e-industry, e-education, and e-society. It is believed that these goals would provide a framework for organizations in Thailand to develop their systems [16]. Regardless of these policies and goals, a major challenge faced by various governmental departments, including the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives (MOAC) lies in the initiatives in adopting and using egovernment. The adoption of e-government promises an effective operational system in and among governmental departments, embracing faster response rate, higher efficiency, and greater accessibility to knowledge in comparison to the traditional approach [4]. The traditional approach is labor-intensive, meaning that the use of papers and files requires manual managing and has various disadvantages in terms of inefficiency, lack of quick access to knowledge management, collaboration and accessibility. The adoption of ICT, where the majority of government's activities will take place as e-services, will help to overcome these challenges [14]. The adoption of ICT in e-government would enable these government agencies to enjoy the benefits bestowed by the technology. At the same time, it also important for staff in government departments to effectively adopt and use technology to fully harness its potential. In order for this to happen, staff needs to be well managed, properly trained, and equipped with relevant skills to use the technology. Poor training and illequipped staff would lead to poor IT adoption and low-usage level, which are likely to result in unproductive collaboration and disintegrated processes [12]. The integration of ICT in e-government services for knowledge management and retention will help overcome several critical issues. Therefore, it is very crucial for the Thai government and policy makers to understand and identify relevant critical influencing factors in order to establish effective strategies for adopting ICT in MOAC [2][4]. It can be observed that e-government is a general term and can offer a variety of functions, such as e-voting, e-procurement, data collection, management and analysis, inter-agency collaboration, intra- and inter-agency communication, e-learning, for agency staff, human resource management and interactions between the government and citizens and many government agencies. These various functions of e-government can help MOAC in various ways by boosting and recognizing the agricultural scope and performance. Another important

3 concept involved in the research is the Government Fiscal Management Information System (GFMIS) that computerizes the entire life cycle of budget execution, budget preparation, and financial reporting [14]. II. ABOUT THIS PAPER This paper examines the evolution of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model, and its advantages and shortcomings. III. EVOLUTION OF UTAUT MODEL The phenomenon of technology adoption and acceptance has long been an area of research interest, particularly in the Information Systems discipline. Described below is a brief historical overview of eight of the most significant theoretical technology adoption models [3]. The overview is followed by the introduction of one of the most recent and comprehensive theoretical models, the UTAUT (Carter, and Belanger, 2004), which takes into account all of the earlier models and will form the foundation for the development of the model to be used in this study. One of the earliest theories is the seminal Diffusion of Innovations Theory (DOI), first proposed by Rogers (1960), for explaining factors that impact diffusion of innovation as a result of acceptance from behavioral factors (Roger, 1995). Theory of reasoned action (TRA) aims at predicting behaviors under the influence of attitudes and beliefs that a person has towards the certain things or practices [5]. The theory of TRA, extended as the theory of planned behavior (TPB) determines the impact of perceived behavioral control [2]. In 1989, the Technology Acceptance Model was developed, again using TRA with respect to information system [13]. The theory has been widely used and accepted for understanding how end users adopt and use technology based on its two evaluating factors perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness. TAM is based on the belief that perceived ease of use and usefulness can predict attitudes toward technology [1][16]. The perceived ease of use (PEOU) and Perceived Usefulness (PU) factors have a significant impact on developing attitudes towards the technology and influencing decisions of whether to adopt the technology. Further studies refined these elements, specifically to the field of technology acceptance and became a dominant theoretical framework in information technology and system adoption [15]. The refinements focus on assessing the perceived characteristics of a technological innovation and understanding their impact on the intention to adopt technology [13]. With constant exploration of different aspects, that influence the acceptance of technology, the concept was extended (Thompson, Higgins, and Howell, 1991), and there was an attempt to find the influence of Social cognitive theory (SCT) on technology acceptance. Integration of behavioral science and planned behavior in the acceptance of the innovation led Venkatesh et al. (2003) to determine the role of motivation in leading the technology acceptance by adding intrinsic and extrinsic factors of motivation [2][3]. As a result, Motivational model was also developed. The proposed model from Thompson, Higgins, and Howell (1991) is referred to as the Model of PC Utilization (MPCU). Taylor and Todd (1995) combined TAM and TPB and proposed (C-TAMTPB) by adding two further constructs of usefulness and ease of use in the model [11].

4 Each of these models also undergoes constant developments. For example, within the past decade, TAM has been extended in various studies (such as in Al-Hujran et al. 2011; Al-Khateeb, 2007; Al-Shafi and Weerakkody, 2008; Baakeel, 2012) for investigating the influence of various factors on the adoption and acceptance of e-government services. Considering the fact that the two original factors PEOU and PU are insufficient as evaluating factors, the TAM model has been extended by integrating more factors, such as cultural factors (power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism, masculinity and long-term orientation also known as Hofstede cultural dimension (Hofstede, 1980; Al-Hujran et al. 2011; Kovačić, 2005; Sørnes and Stephens, 2004), external factors (gender, educational background, monthly income, self-reported computer knowledge, internet cost and availability (Al-Khateeb, 2007), trust and technology complexity, age factor (AlShafi and Weerakkody, 2008; Baakeel, 2012), demographic characteristics, civic mindedness, psychological variables and information channels (Dimitrova and Chen, 2006). In early use, the technology acceptance tends to focus on adoption inside the organization (Hofstede, 1980). In the e-government era (beginning circa late 1990s), focus shifted to end users (i.e. citizens) acceptance, as it reverted from adoption inside the organization [11]. The last of the models, UTAUT, as proposed by Venkatesh et al. (2003), has used all the above developments to meet the four objectives that it set. First of the four objectives that finally resulted in the development of UTAUT model was directed at review of the literature in the context of user acceptance. According to the second objective, Venkatesh et al. 2003) intended to compare eight models that were developed in the context of perspectives that influence the technology acceptance [14]. The third and the fourth objectives included the development of a comprehensive model that has taken into account different dimensions that impact people s technology acceptance as UTAUT model empirical validation combining different perspectives (Venkatesh et al., 2003). A summary of various models and the determinants of behaviors is presented below table. Table 1 Determinants of Behavior in Acceptance Models (Dimitrova and Chen, 2006) Model Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) Decomposed Theory of planned Behavior (DTPB) Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) Diffusion of Innovations Theory (DOI) The Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) The Motivational Model (MM) The Model of PC Utilization (MPCU) Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) Determinants of Behavior Attitudes towards the behavior+ social influences Attitude towards behavior+ subject norms + perceived behavioral control (PBC) Attitude towards behavior (compatibility, complexity, and relative advantage)+ subject norms + PBC (Efficiency, and facilitating conditions) Perceived Usefulness +Perceived Ease Of Use Innovation attributes + innovators' characteristics Self-Efficacy + outcome expectations + affect Intrinsic motivation (enjoyment, and fun) + extrinsic motivation (perceived usefulness) Beliefs + affect+ social norms + perceived consequences + habit+ facilitating conditions Effort expectancy + performance expectancy+ social influence+ facilitating condition Each of the models has their own determinants or constructs to validate the hypothesis based on the research question. The UTAUT model by Vankatesh et al (2003) has been developed by comparing the

5 effectiveness of these theoretical models in different IT- related industries. UTAUT model has widely been used to enhance the understanding, adoption and usage of e-government [13]. IV. ADVANTAGES OF UTAUT The UTAUT model has been praised for its capability to inform the understanding of factors, which determine the acceptance of an impending new technology. Although the model is quite new, its growth and popularity is increasingly high as compared to the preceding versions [1]. Moreover, its stability, validity, and viability in technology adoption surveys within several contexts have already been ascertained and practically confirmed. For instance, the study in 2012 by Alshehri et al in TAM, TRA, and TPM ascertained that UTAUT model enlightens the understanding of factors, which influence the acceptance of a vital new technology [14][13]. Most importantly, UTAUT model explains over 70% of all the technology acceptance behaviour, unlike other forms of model that explain as little as 40% of the entire technology acceptance behaviour. Therefore, UTAUT exposes more factors influencing the intention of the observed behaviour [12]. Ultimately, it was intended to counter the deficiencies of prior models and theories by combining them together for a common good. For that reason, it has emerged as one of the most encompassing IT adoption theories [12]. V. SHORTCOMINGS OF UTAUT Even though this model has attained an adequate reception from most researchers, a number of shortcomings exist. Although each of the models utilizes several terminologies within their phraseology of acceptance, these aspects are often similar in nature. Subsequently, every model has its own shortcomings, which also influences the ultimate viability of UTUAT model as a whole [3]. UTAUT has limitations mainly in its relationship between the intention and use of behaviour. Nevertheless, the benefits obtained from this model are far more significant than the shortcomings listed above [14][12]. Based on its limitations, researchers resolved to add precipitating occasions in order to measure the impact of external factors like government policy, and new markets on Information Technology innovations. They observed the impact of the tendency to act as a diplomat among the determinants intensions and usage behaviour. It was noted that where tendency to act is high, taking action might be more probable [11]. Based on UTAUT limitations, researchers added precipitating events so as to measure the impact of external aspects like government policy, new markets, and financial crises. They added these factors to IT innovations and adoption and scrutinized the impact of propensity to perform as a moderator on the association between the determinants intension and custom behaviour. It was noted that where the condition of propensity is high, taking action will more foreseeable. Based on research, it is evident that precipitating occasions might capture the influence of external aspects on the behavioural intension to make a start, enhance the model, and fill intension-behaviour gap [12]. In that case, it is evident that entrepreneurs have different perception on UTAUT because some of them believe that it is a fairly developed model. As a result, this has influenced more than a few organizations to consider other types of models apart from UTAUT [19][20]. VI. CONCLUSION

6 In summation, it is clear that e-government has influenced interests across the world as a result of rapid growth on information technology and communication technologies. Based on research, it is clear that egovernment can be an engine of growth mainly in improving the delivery of public service and evolving unbiased people-centred development. Based on research, it is evident that of ICT in organizations has enhanced considerable growth and development of more than a few factors. The implementation of ICT in e-government would permit Thai administration agencies to relish the welfares given by the technology. However, it important for the entire government to successfully approve and use technology in order to effusively improves its potential objectives. The government ought to manage its staff well in order for this to happen. For instance, the staff ought to be well trained, and armed with pertinent skills to use the technology. Conversely, despite all the limitations related to UTAUT model, it is clear that model has enhanced considerable changes in the field of innovations. The UTAUT model has been admired for its competence to notify the understanding of influences, which regulate the approval of any looming new technology. As a new model, its development and reputation is progressively high compared to other models or versions. VII. REFERENCES

7 [1] Al-Hakim, L. (2007). Global e-government: Theory, applications and benchmarking. Hershey [u.a.: Idea Group Publ. [2] Carter, L. and Belanger, F. (2004). Citizen Adoption of Electronic Government Initiatives.In Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 04), IEEE publications Computer Society Digital Library. [3] Cetron, J. F. (2007). Wireless acceptance in a university setting using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. [4] Chhabra, S. (2013). ICT influences on human development, interaction, and collaboration. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. [5] Dada, D. (2006). The failure of E-Government in Developing Countries: A Literature Review, The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 26, 7, 1-10 [6] Dhillon, G., CreativeSME <2009, Guimarães>, & International Federation for Information Processing. (2009). Information systems - creativity and innovation in small and medium-sized enterprises: IFIP WG 8.2 international conference ; proceedings. Berlin: Springer. [7] Dwivedi, Y. K., Wade, M. R., & Schneberger, S. L. (2012). Information Systems Theory. Dordrecht: Springer. [8] Gascó, H. M. (2012). Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on egovernment: Institute of Public Governance and Management ESADE Barcelona Campus Sant Cugat, Barcelona, Spain, June, [9] Grèonlund, A., & ebrary, Inc. (2002). Electronic government: Design, applications and management. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing. [10] Heeks, R. (2003). Most E-government-For-Development projects Fail: How can Risks be reduced? Igovernment working paper series, paper no (14) [11] International Conference on e-learning, & #The #Federico Santa María Technical University. (2014). Proceedings of the the 9th International Conference on e-learning, ICEL-2014, June Reading: Academic Conferences and Publishing International Limited. [12] International Conference on Information Management and Evaluation, Grant, K., & Academic Conferences International. (2011). Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Information Managemant and Evaluation: Ryerson University, Toronto Canada, April Reading: Academic Pub. International Ltd. [13] Jaeger, P. and Matteson, M. (2009).e-Government and Technology Acceptance: The Case of the Implementation of Section 508 Guidelines for Websites, Electronic Journal of e-government Volume 7 Issue , pp [14] Mayer-Schönberger, V., & Lazer, D. (2007). From e-government to i-government: Governance and information technology in the 21st century. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [15] Prins, C. (2001). Designing e-government: On the crossroads of technological innovation and institutional change. The Hague [u.a.: Kluwer Law Internat.

8 [16] Schedler, K., Summermatter, L., & Schmidt, B. (2004). Managing the electronic government: From vision to practice. London: Information Age Publishing. [17] United Nations. (2012). United Nations E-Government Survey 2012, E-Government for the People. New York: Department of Economic and Social Affairs. [18] Wimmer, M. A., & International Conference on Electronic Government, EGOV. (2009). Electronic government: 8th international conference, EGOV 2009, Linz, Austria, August 31 - September 3, 2009 : proceedings. Berlin [etc.: Springer. [19] Woodside, A. G., & Kozak, M. (2014). Tourists' behaviors and evaluations. Bingley, U.K: Emerald. [20] Xiang, Z., & Tussyadiah, I. (2013). Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2014: Proceedings of the International Conference in Dublin, Ireland, January 21-24, 2014.

Factors Influencing Electronic Government Adoption: Perspectives Of Less Frequent Internet Users Of Pakistan

Factors Influencing Electronic Government Adoption: Perspectives Of Less Frequent Internet Users Of Pakistan Farooq Alam Khan, Basheer Ahmad Abstract: Much literature on electronic government services