Cited by 679Technology Adoption and User BehaviourInformation Systems Theories and ImplementationERP Systems Implementation and Impact

Shackled to the Status Quo: The Inhibiting Effects of Incumbent System Habit, Switching Costs, and Inertia on New System Acceptance1

Polites, Greta L., Karahanna, Elena·2012·MIS Quarterly

Abstract

Given that adoption of a new system often implies fully or partly replacing an incumbent system, resistance is often manifested as failure of a user to switch from an incumbent technology to a newly introduced one. Thus, a potential source of resistance to adopting a new system lies in the use of an incumbent system. Using the status quo bias and habit literatures as theoretical lenses, the study explains how use of an incumbent system negatively impacts new system perceptions and usage intentions. We argue that habitual use of an incumbent system, rationalization due to perceived transition costs, and psychological commitment due to perceived sunk costs all encourage development of inertia. Inertia in turn fully mediates the impact of these incumbent system constructs on constructs related to acceptance of the new system via psychological commitment based on cognitive consistency and by increasing the importance of normative pressures. Specifically, we hypothesize that inertia leads to decreased perceptions of the ease of use and relative advantage of a newly introduced system and has a negative impact on intentions to use the new system, above and beyond its impact through perceptions. Finally, we hypothesize that inertia moderates the relationship between subjective norm and intention, such that normative pressures to use a new system become more important in the presence of inertia. Empirical results largely support the hypothesized relationships showing the inhibiting effect of incumbent-system habit, transition and sunk costs, and inertia on acceptance of a new system. Our study thus extends theoretical understanding of the role of incumbent system constructs such as habit and inertia in technology acceptance, and lays the foundations for further study of the interplay between perceptions and cognition with respect to the incumbent system and those with respect to a new system.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/41410404

Cites

98 of 98 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 99 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Polites, G. L., & Karahanna, E.
Affiliations
  • Bucknell University (US)
  • University of Georgia (US)
Venue
MIS Quarterly
Publisher
MIS Quarterly
Published
2012-03-01
Volume
36
Issue
1
Pages
21-42
ISSN
  • 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
  • 2162-9730
OpenAlex
W104754383
Cited by
679
References
99
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 74 · 2022: 66 · 2021: 85 · 2020: 52 · 2019: 61 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 49 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 50 · 2014: 40 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 11
FWCI
79.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
MIS Quarterly (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › ERP Systems Implementation and Impact
Keywords
inertia, status quo bias, switching costs, sunk costs, technology adoption, technology acceptance, resistance to change, perceived ease of use, relative advantage, intention to use, subjective norms, normative pressure, cognitive consistency, psychological commitment

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