A Review of the Predictors, Linkages, and Biases in IT Innovation Adoption Research
Open accessAbstract
We present a review and analysis of the rich body of research on the adoption and diffusion of IT-based innovations by individuals and organizations. Our review analyzes 48 empirical studies on individual and 51 studies on organizational IT adoption published between 1992 and 2003. In total, the sample contains 135 independent variables, eight dependent variables, and 505 relationships between independent and dependent variables. Furthermore, our sample includes both quantitative and qualitative studies. We were able to include qualitative studies because of a unique coding scheme, which can easily be replicated in other reviews. We use this sample to assess predictors, linkages, and biases in individual and organizational IT adoption research. The best predictors of individual IT adoption include Perceived Usefulness, Top Management Support, Computer Experience, Behavioral Intention, and User Support. The best predictors of IT adoption by organizations were Top Management Support, External Pressure, Professionalism of the IS Unit, and External Information Sources. At the level of independent variables, Top Management Support stands as the main linkage between individual and organizational IT adoption. But at an aggregate level, two collections of independent variables were good predictors of both individual and organizational IT adoption. These were innovation characteristics and organizational characteristics. Thus, we can consistently say that generic characteristics of th…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The extent of technological advancement and the techno-HR alliance is becoming increasingly important as it provides support to a diverse set of actors in HRM to undertake their tasks effectively.
“The extent of technological advancement and the techno-HR alliance is becoming increasingly important as it provides support to a diverse set of actors in HRM to undertake their tasks effectively”
From AI-augmented HRM: Antecedents, assimilation and multilevel consequences (2023) · cites this paper as Jeyaraj, Rottman & Lacity, 2006
Competitive pressure and demands of marketplace participants are strategic necessities and critical innovation adoption drivers.
“Recognizing retaliation and actions going endless vicious circle, studies (Al-Qirim, 2004;Jeyaraj et al., 2006;Pflughoeft et al., 2003;Sinkkonen, 2001;Windrum & de Berranger, 2004;Zhu & Kraemer, 2005;Zhu et al., 2003) found competitive pressure and demands of marketplace participants as strategic necessities and critical innovation adoption drivers.”
From Using T-O-E theoretical framework to study the adoption of ERP solution (2016) · cites this paper as Jeyaraj et al., 2006
In past studies, facilitating conditions have been among the worst predictors of individual usage behaviour.
“Our results are in line with a review by Jeyaraj et al. (2006) who find that in past studies, facilitating conditions have been among the worst predictors of individual usage behaviour, as training is found insignificant in our study as well.”
From Examining the antecedents of the technology acceptance model within e-procurement (2018) · cites this paper as Jeyaraj et al. (2006)
Cites
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587 · see citing works
Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology
Davis, F. D. (1989) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249008 · Cited by 68,483 · see citing works
User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward A Unified View1
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036540 · Cited by 45,035 · see citing works
Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2.3.192 · Cited by 9,150 · see citing works
Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing models
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.6.2.144 · Cited by 8,815 · see citing works
Agarwal, R., & Karahanna, E. (2000) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3250951 · Cited by 4,726 · see citing works
Empirical Evaluation of the Revised Technology Acceptance Model
Szajna, B. (1996) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.42.1.85 · Cited by 1,656 · see citing works
Factors Affecting the Adoption of Open Systems: An Exploratory Study1
Chau, P. Y. K., & Tam, K. Y. (1997) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249740 · Cited by 1,067 · see citing works
An Empirically Derived Model for the Adoption of Customer‐based Interorganizational Systems*
Grover, V. (1993) · Decision Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.1993.tb01295.x · Cited by 757 · cited 3× · see citing works
“These theories typically deal with DECISION TO ADOPT (e.g. Grover, 1993), INTENTION TO ADOPT (e.g. Plouffe .”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Framework for Guiding and Evaluating Literature Reviews
Templier, M., & Paré, G. (2015) · Communications of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1cais.03706 · Cited by 553 · see citing works
The effect of characteristics of source credibility on consumer behaviour: A meta-analysis
Ismagilova, E., Slade, E., Rana, N. P., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2020) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.01.005 · Cited by 504 · see citing works
Online banking adoption: an empirical analysis
Yee‐Loong Chong, A., Ooi, K., Lin, B., & Tan, B. (2010) · International Journal of Bank Marketing · doi:10.1108/02652321011054963 · Cited by 343 · see citing works
Technology readiness and the organizational journey towards AI adoption: An empirical study
Uren, V., & Edwards, J. S. (2023) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2022.102588 · Cited by 335 · see citing works
Kinkel, S., Baumgartner, M., & Cherubini, E. (2022) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102375 · Cited by 316 · see citing works
SMEs' e‐commerce adoption: perspectives from Denmark and Australia
Scupola, A. (2009) · Journal of Enterprise Information Management · doi:10.1108/17410390910932803 · Cited by 306 · see citing works
Why is it difficult to implement e-health initiatives? A qualitative study
Murray, E., Burns, J., May, C., Finch, T., O'Donnell, C., Wallace, P., & Mair, F. (2011) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-6-6 · Cited by 270 · see citing works
Using T-O-E theoretical framework to study the adoption of ERP solution
Awa, H. O., Ukoha, O., & Emecheta, B. C. (2016) · Cogent Business & Management · doi:10.1080/23311975.2016.1196571 · Cited by 272 · see citing works
“Many studies recognize the strategic necessity of competitive pressure (Iacovou, Benbasat, & Dexter, 1995; Jeyaraj et al., 2006; Zhu et al., 2003; Zhu & Kraemer, 2005) in altering the rules of the games, restructuring the industry make-ups, and unraveling novelty in outperforming rivals (Porter & Millar, 1985).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialWeb-Based Interventions for Behavior Change and Self-Management: Potential, Pitfalls, and Progress
Murray, E. (2012) · Medicine 2.0 · doi:10.2196/med20.1741 · Cited by 219 · see citing works
An empirical investigation of factors affecting e-collaboration diffusion in SMEs
Chan, F. T. S., Yee-Loong Chong, A., & Zhou, L. (2012) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.04.004 · Cited by 202 · see citing works
AI-augmented HRM: Antecedents, assimilation and multilevel consequences
Prikshat, V., Malik, A., & Budhwar, P. (2023) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2021.100860 · Cited by 200 · see citing works
Templier, M., & Paré, G. (2018) · European Journal of Information Systems · doi:10.1080/0960085x.2017.1398880 · Cited by 180 · see citing works
Examining the antecedents of the technology acceptance model within e-procurement
Brandon-Jones, A., & Kauppi, K. (2018) · International Journal of Operations & Production Management · doi:10.1108/ijopm-06-2015-0346 · Cited by 181 · see citing works
Elwyn, G., Légaré, F., Weijden, T. V. D., Edwards, A., & May, C. (2008) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-3-57 · Cited by 159 · see citing works
Technology acceptance research: Meta-analysis
Marikyan, D., Papagiannidis, S., & Stewart, G. (2026) · Journal of Information Science · doi:10.1177/01655515231191177 · Cited by 140 · see citing works
Hofstede’s cultural dimensions in technology acceptance models: a meta-analysis
Jan, J., Alshare, K. A., & Lane, P. L. (2024) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-022-00930-7 · Cited by 127 · see citing works
A systematic literature review of the role of trust and security on FinTech adoption in banking
Jafri, J. A., Mohd Amin, S. I., Abdul Rahman, A., & Mohd Nor, S. (2024) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e22980 · Cited by 126 · see citing works
E-government diffusion: a comparison of adoption constructs
Carter, L. (2008) · Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy · doi:10.1108/17506160810902167 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
Poba-Nzaou, P., Uwizeyemungu, S., Raymond, L., & Paré, G. (2014) · Information Systems Frontiers · doi:10.1007/s10796-012-9361-1 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Aboelmaged, M., & Hashem, G. (2018) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2018.07.009 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
An Empirical Study of Some Critical Adoption Factors of ERP Software
Awa, H. O., Uko, J. P., & Ukoha, O. (2017) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2016.1265828 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
A Comprehensive Review of Research in IT Adoption
Liu, Z., Min, Q., & Ji, S. (2008) · 2008 4th International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing · doi:10.1109/wicom.2008.2808 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
- Authors
- Jeyaraj, A., Rottman, J. W., & Lacity, M. C.
- Affiliations
- University of Missouri–St. Louis (US)
- Corresponding author
- Lacity, Mary C
- Venue
- Journal of Information Technology
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2006-02
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-23
- ISSN
- 0268-3962 (ISSN-L)
- 1466-4437
- OpenAlex
- W1983586681
- Cited by
- 1,136
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 22 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 53 · 2023: 61 · 2022: 62 · 2021: 76 · 2020: 68 · 2019: 42 · 2018: 65 · 2017: 63 · 2016: 74 · 2015: 80 · 2014: 74 · 2013: 61 · 2012: 58
- FWCI
- 88.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- works.bepress.com
- Locations
- Journal of Information Technology (publishedVersion)
- Journal of Bioresource Management (submittedVersion)
- Journal of the Association for Information Systems (submittedVersion)
- Journal of Bioresource Management (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Innovation Diffusion and Forecasting
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
- Keywords
- technology adoption in organizations, diffusion of innovations, top management support, perceived usefulness, behavioral intention, user support, external pressure, external information sources, innovation characteristics, organizational characteristics, research bias
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
