The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Information Technology Implementers’ Responses to User Resistance: Nature And Effects1
Abstract
User resistance has long been acknowledged as a critical issue during information technology implementation. Resistance can be functional when it signals the existence of problems with the IT or with its effects; it will be dysfunctional when it leads to organizational disruption. Notwithstanding the nature of resistance, the implementers—business managers, functional managers, or IT professionals—have to address it. Although the literature recognizes the importance of user resistance, it has paid little attention to implementers’ responses—and their effect—when resistance occurs. Our study focuses on this phenomenon, and addresses two questions: What are implementers’ responses to user resistance? What are the effects of these responses on user resistance? To answer these questions, we conducted a case survey, which combines the richness of case studies with the benefits of analyzing large quantities of data. Our case database includes 89 cases with a total of 137 episodes of resistance. In response to our first research question, we propose a taxonomy that includes four categories of implementers’ responses to user resistance: inaction, acknowledgment, rectification, and dissuasion. To answer our second question, we adopted a set-theoretic analysis approach, which we enriched with content analysis of the cases. Based on these analyses, we offer a theoretical explanation of how implementers’ responses may affect the antecedents that earlier research found to be associated with user resistance behaviors.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis
Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005) · Qualitative Health Research · doi:10.1177/1049732305276687 · Cited by 44,601
The Nature of Theory in Information Systems1
Gregor, S. (2006) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148742 · Cited by 3,306 · cited 1×
“…further refined these categories into subcategories to better specify the nature of the responses, using simple and parsimonious rules to assign instances to each subcategory and ensure that the categories were mutually exclusive, were easily understood, and appeared natural (Gregor 2006, p. 619).”
BackgroundA set-theoretic approach to organizational configurations
Fiss, P. C. (2007) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2007.26586092 · Cited by 2,225
Set Relations in Social Research: Evaluating Their Consistency and Coverage
Ragin, C. C. (2006) · Political Analysis · doi:10.1093/pan/mpj019 · Cited by 1,784 · cited 6×
“Indeed, set-theoretic analysis has been said to be relevant to any social scientific argument or statement that is formulated in terms of sets (Ragin 2006) when the aim is to identify " the common causal conditions— whether constituted by a single causal factor or combinations of causal factors "…”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialStandards of Good Practice in Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Fuzzy-Sets
Schneider, C. Q., & Wagemann, C. (2010) · Comparative Sociology · doi:10.1163/156913210x12493538729793 · Cited by 1,473
Investigating User Resistance to Information Systems Implementation: A Status Quo Bias Perspective1
Kim, H.-W., & Kankanhalli, A. (2009) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/20650309 · Cited by 1,135
Greckhamer, T., Misangyi, V. F., Elms, H., & Lacey, R. (2008) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428107302907 · Cited by 399
User resistance and strategies for promoting acceptance across system types
Jiang, J. J., Muhanna, W. A., & Klein, G. (2000) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/s0378-7206(99)00032-4 · Cited by 265 · cited 2×
“A few researchers have studied the link between user resistance to IT implementation and implementers' actions (Jiang et al. 2000; Lederer and Nath 1991; Teng et al. 1996).”
Background
Cited by
Pluye, P., & Hong, Q. N. (2014) · Annual Review of Public Health · doi:10.1146/annurev-publhealth-032013-182440 · Cited by 1,363
An innovation resistance theory perspective on mobile payment solutions
Kaur, P., Dhir, A., Singh, N., Sahu, G., & Almotairi, M. (2020) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102059 · Cited by 487
Park, Y., Fiss, P. C., & El Sawy, O. A. (2020) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2020/13879 · Cited by 300
Lee, K., & Joshi, K. (2017) · Information Systems Journal · doi:10.1111/isj.12118 · Cited by 94
Frantzen, K. K., & Fetters, M. D. (2016) · Quality & Quantity · doi:10.1007/s11135-015-0261-6 · Cited by 91
Metadata
- Authors
- Rivard, S., & Lapointe, L.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 2012-09-01
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 897-920
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W1596144669
- Cited by
- 244
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 64.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Information Technology Implementers’ Responses to User Resistance: Nature And Effects1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/41703485
- The paper
- Rivard, S., & Lapointe, L. (2012). Information Technology Implementers’ Responses to User Resistance: Nature And Effects1. MIS Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/41703485
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.