ICT Implementation: Innovation and Diffusion

The ICT implementation research stream is primarily based on the innovation and diffusion literatures (Cooper and Zmud, 1990; Lucas et al. 2007); Lucas et al. (2007) outline how the ICT implementation research stream has developed over time to become integrated with the innovation and diffusion research streams. These authors also discuss briefly how and when the acceptance research stream came about. Table 3-1 provides a brief summary of this evolution (for more detail see Lucas et al. (2007)).

Table 3-1: Evolution of Implementation Research (adapted from Lucas et al. 2007) Implementation Research Stream

 Began early 1970s to address ICT implementation problems and prospered well into the 1980s.  Roots in the field of management science, bringing together design and use of ICT.

 Proved to be deficient in several respects; failing to establish a unifying theory bringing various factors of implementation together & primarily addressed the individual acceptance or rejection of systems.

 Has succeeded in identifying factors associated with successful implementation and process of implementation.

Innovation and its Diffusion in the ICT Context

 Closely related to the Implementation theme.

 Existing fragmented models of implementation could be unified with an innovation perspective.  1990s repositioned implementation research in terms of innovation theory to complement diffusion.

 This innovation perspective still lacks a unifying theory or even a small assemblage of sub-theories that complement one another.

Individual Adoption Acceptance and Use

 TAM emerged in the late 1980s explaining individual use and adoption of ICT innovations.

 This model and its descendants (e.g. TAM2, TAM3 and UTAUT) are not focused on the provision of practical advice for management attempting to implement new technology.

This thesis is concerned with ICT implementation and with the adoption, acceptance and use of ICT as part of an organisational change project. Examples of two ICT implementation methods drawing on a number of earlier models from other authors – Kwon & Zmud’s six stage model and LaPointe & Rivard’s IS implementation outcomes – are described below. While these models will not be developed further in this thesis, they are relevant examples of ICT implementation models which have incorporated existing organisational change models. In particular, LaPointe and Rivard’s model demonstrates the need to consider and use different theories and models depending upon the level of analysis to be undertaken.

Six Stage Model of the ICT Implementation Process

In 1987 Kwon and Zmud created a six stage model of the ICT implementation process (Cooper and Zmud, 1990) drawing on Lewin’s three step change model (for more detail see Section 3.8.3) from the organisational change literature, combined with terms from the innovation and diffusion literature. The stages consist of: Initiation; Adoption; Adaptation; Acceptance; Routinisation and Infusion as applied to Lewin’s three step change process outlined in Table 3-2.

33

Table 3-2: ICT Implementation Process (adapted from Cooper and Zmud, 1990)

Kwon & Zumd’s Six Stage Model Initiation

Adoption Adaptation

Acceptance Routinisation Infusion Lewin’s Three Step Change Process Unfreezing Change Freezing

In addition to its similarities with Lewin’s model, the Kwon & Zmud model also has similarities to Kotter’s eight-step model and Oakland and Tanner’s organisational change framework, as outlined in Section 3.8.3. For example the initiation, adoption and, to a certain degree, the adaptation stages in the Kwon & Zmud model can be expressed in terms of the first cycle (readiness for change) of the organisational change framework with the final stages of acceptance, routinisation and infusion being similar to the second cycle (implementing change) of the organisational change framework.

IS Implementation Outcomes

LaPointe and Rivard (2007, p. 89) “propose an alternate-template theory of IS implementation outcomes that takes into account all three levels of analysis, their respective outcomes, and the time dimension”. The ‘outcomes’ for LaPointe & Rivard are: emergence; use; resistance and routinisation. These authors argue that their theory will provide researchers with a holistic understanding of IS implementation – and they review and choose three models at each level of analysis within their study to explain individual use, group resistance and organisational adoption (in terms of emergence and routinisation) as shown in Table 3-3.

Table 3-3: Models selected for each level of analysis in LaPointe and Rivard (2007)

Individual Use Group Resistance Organisational Adoption

Model Chosen Agarwal and Karahanna’s Cognitive Absorption (CA) is preferred over the technology acceptance model

Markus’ Political Variant of Interaction Theory (PVIT)

Mintzerg’s Organisational Configurations Model (OC)

LaPointe & Rivard then apply these three models to the four-phase Enterprise System (ES) experience model (which is composed of: project chartering, configuration & roll out, shake down; and onward & upward) as a way of explaining each outcome (see LaPointe and Rivard, 2007).

Diffusion and innovation theories are seen as taking a macro perspective, focusing on the organisation (Straub, 2009; Venkatesh et al. 2003), whereas adoption theories are considered to be a micro-level analysis of individuals choosing to accept or reject a particular innovation (Straub, 2009; Venkatesh et al. 2003). Morris and Venkatesh (2010) argue that individual-level research within the technology-based organisational change literature is limited, despite a contrary view from Malhotra and Galletta (1999) who believed that a major (if not the major) key to successful ICT implementation is the fostering of favourable user attitudes to the change and to ICT more generally, leading to positive acceptance behaviour. Rogers (2003, p. 115) extends this view, believing the diffusion research stream should expand its “understanding of motivations for adopting an innovation”.

34

The research reported in this thesis is focused on the ‘people’ approach to change, as opposed to the technological approach where the major issues are the processes needed to implement an ICT-enabled organisational change and workers’ reactions to these changes (Cooper and Zmud, 1990), particularly with respect to worker motivation. This ‘people’ approach requires a micro-level analysis or, from LaPointe and Rivard’s model above, an individual use level of analysis paying particular attention to the acceptance of and resistance to ICT and change which may occur during an ICT-enabled organisational change project.

In document Technology acceptance, organisational change and autonomous motivation : reducing the crowding out effect in the non profit sector (Page 48-50)