Review on IT adoption: insights from recent technologies
Abstract
Purpose: – The purpose of this paper is to review the literature on information technology adoption in organizations to understand the need of integrated models for technology adoption. It further makes an attempt to identify key parameters to integrate technology acceptance model (TAM) and technology-organization-environment (TOE) framework for firm level technology adoption. This integration is intended to improve predictive power of resulting model. Design/methodology/approach: – The research papers are accessed from the popular databases from 2000 to 2012. The selected papers have addressed technology adoption in context of recent technologies such as e-commerce, ERP, RFID, EDI and knowledge management, etc. The paper attempts to review the studies based on TAM model and TOE framework to identify relevant set of variables for the adoption of these technologies in organizations. Findings: – TAM and its extended versions have high capability to explain the technology adoption while the significance of TOE framework is similarly recognized in explaining technology adoption. This review presents a holistic picture of a set of variables which can be used in the adoption of similar technologies in future. Further, the study has advocated the integration of TAM model and TOE framework to improve their explanatory power in technology adoption. The identified set of variables of TAM model and TOE framework can be used to integrate the two. Guidelines for integrating the two are also explained. Research limitations/implications: – This study provides a platform for studying adoption of similar technologies using integration of TAM and TOE. Practical implications: – The researchers and managers can use the set of variables identified for adoption of similar technologies in organizations. Originality/value: – The review presents a set of variables which can be used to study adoption of similar technologies in future.
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?
T-O-E framework integrates the constructs of environment, whereas IDT uses only organization and technology contexts.
“IDT framework uses the constructs within organization and technology contexts to explain adoption whereas T-O-E stepped further to integrate the constructs of environment (Gangwar, Date, & Raoot, 2014).”
From Using T-O-E theoretical framework to study the adoption of ERP solution (2016) · cites this paper as Gangwar, Date, & Raoot, 2014
TAM is valid, robust, and most dominant and specific in studying organizational-level adoption.
“TAM is valid, robust, and most dominant and specific in studying organizationallevel adoption (Gangwar et al., 2014) because its proposed generic factors provide more meaningful lenses”
From Using T-O-E theoretical framework to study the adoption of ERP solution (2016) · cites this paper as Gangwar et al., 2014
T-O-E framework provides a more superior theoretical analysis than IDT in studying technology adoption, use, and value creation.
“by integrating the constructs of environment, T-O-E framework provides a more superior theoretical analysis than IDT in studying technology adoption, use, and value creation (Gangwar et al., 2014;Hossain & Quaddus, 2011;Oliveira & Martins, 2011).”
From Using T-O-E theoretical framework to study the adoption of ERP solution (2016) · cites this paper as Gangwar et al., 2014
T-O-E framework earns substantial theoretical and empirical supports and validated inventory of psychometric measurements; hence it is more widely used in the IS domain at the organizational level than alternative models.
“T-O-E framework earns substantial theoretical and empirical supports (see Eze et al., 2013;Henriksen, 2006;Hong et al., 2006;Kuan & Chau, 2001;Yoon & George, 2013;Zheng et al., 2011;Zhu & Kraemer, 2005;Zhu et al., 2003) as well as validated inventory of psychometric measurements; and hence, it is more widely used in IS domain at the organizational level than alternative models (Gangwar et al., 201”
From Using T-O-E theoretical framework to study the adoption of ERP solution (2016) · cites this paper as Gangwar et al., 2014
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
An extension of the technology acceptance model in an ERP implementation environment
Amoako-Gyampah, K., & Salam, A. F. (2004) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2003.08.010 · Cited by 922 · see citing works
Determinants of e-business diffusion: A test of the technology diffusion perspective
Lin, H.-F., & Lin, S.-M. (2008) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2007.10.003 · Cited by 447 · see citing works
Adopters and non-adopters of e-procurement in Singapore: An empirical study
Teo, T. S. H., Lin, S., & Lai, K.-H. (2009) · Omega · doi:10.1016/j.omega.2008.11.001 · Cited by 397 · see citing works
The adoption of information technology in the sales force
Schillewaert, N., Ahearne, M. J., Frambach, R. T., & Moenaert, R. K. (2005) · Industrial Marketing Management · doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2004.09.013 · Cited by 362 · 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
Technology Adaptation in E-commerce:
Chen, L.-D., & Tan, J. (2004) · European Management Journal · doi:10.1016/j.emj.2003.11.014 · Cited by 306 · see citing works
E‐commerce usage and business performance in the Malaysian tourism sector: empirical analysis
Intan Salwani, M., Marthandan, G., Daud Norzaidi, M., & Choy Chong, S. (2009) · Information Management & Computer Security · doi:10.1108/09685220910964027 · Cited by 202 · see citing works
The adoption and continued usage intention of RFID: an integrated framework
Alamgir Hossain, M., & Quaddus, M. (2011) · Information Technology & People · doi:10.1108/09593841111158365 · Cited by 134 · 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
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) for talent acquisition in IT/ITeS organizations
Pillai, R., & Sivathanu, B. (2020) · Benchmarking: An International Journal · doi:10.1108/bij-04-2020-0186 · Cited by 422 · 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
“, 2003) as well as validated inventory of psychometric measurements; and hence, it is more widely used in IS domain at the organizational level than alternative models (Gangwar et al., 2014; Hong et al., 2006; Hossain & Quaddus, 2011).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialAn attention-based view of AI assimilation in public sector organizations: The case of Saudi Arabia
Alshahrani, A., Dennehy, D., & Mäntymäki, M. (2022) · Government Information Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.giq.2021.101617 · Cited by 106 · see citing works
Acceptance of 5 G technology: Mediation role of Trust and Concentration
Akbari, M., Rezvani, A., Shahriari, E., Zúñiga, M. Á., & Pouladian, H. (2020) · Journal of Engineering and Technology Management · doi:10.1016/j.jengtecman.2020.101585 · Cited by 72 · 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
- Authors
- Gangwar, H., Date, H., & Raoot, A. D.
- Affiliations
- Indian Institute of Management Mumbai (IN)
- ORCID
- Gangwar, Hemlata
- Venue
- Journal of Enterprise Information Management
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2014-07-08
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 488-502
- ISSN
- 1741-0398 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2094492276
- Cited by
- 289
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 24 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 54 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 6
- FWCI
- 19.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Enterprise Information Management (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › ERP Systems Implementation and Impact
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Innovation Diffusion and Forecasting
- Keywords
- information technology adoption, technology acceptance model, technology-organization-environment framework, e-commerce adoption, ERP adoption, RFID adoption, electronic data interchange, knowledge management adoption, adoption factors
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
