ERP Software and Practicing Auditors: An Empirical Study Applying UTAUT Model
Abstract
The purpose of the study is to find out Information Technology challenges facing by practicing auditors using measurement variables used in the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model. This research study has adopted the sequential mixed method research in which the exploratory qualitative study is conducted with the qualified practicing auditors across Kerala to identify various Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) software using in their audit firms. The results of this exploratory study are then empirically tested with the 321 respondents from qualified practicing-auditor accountants in Kerala using Structural Equation Modelling-Partial Least Squares (SEM-PLS). The findings reveal that there is a significant and positive relationship between variables used in the UTAUT model with practicing auditors. Thus, the results suggest that all the four constructs from UTAUT (performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and facilitating conditions) seem to be predominantly significant factors influencing practicing auditors.
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?
When system users believe that the level of facilitating conditions within the company is high, they can accept the use of the information system in their day-to-day work.
“In summary, when system users believe that the level of facilitating conditions within the company is high, they can accept the use of the information system in their day-to-day work (Maita et al., 2018; Thottoli & Thomas, 2022; Yohanes et al., 2020).”
From ERP Post-Implementation Phase: Deployment of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) Model on User Acceptance (2023) · cites this paper as Thottoli & Thomas, 2022
Cites
The Supply Chain Has No Clothes: Technology Adoption of Blockchain for Supply Chain Transparency
Francisco, K., & Swanson, D. (2018) · Logistics · doi:10.3390/logistics2010002 · Cited by 951 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mohamad Zain, M. R., Tajul Urus, S., Trinh, T., Amirul, S. M., & Tuan Mat, T. Z. (2023) · Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal · doi:10.24191/apmaj.v18i1-05 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
- Authors
- Thottoli, M. M., & V., T. K.
- Affiliations
- University of Nizwa (OM)
- Marian College (Autonomous), India
- Venue
- International Journal of Innovation in the Digital Economy
- Publisher
- IGI Global Scientific Publishing
- Published
- 2022-03-04
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-13
- ISSN
- 1947-8305 (ISSN-L)
- 1947-8313
- OpenAlex
- W4210249327
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2023: 3
- FWCI
- 0.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- ng
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Innovation in the Digital Economy (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 › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Decision Support System Applications
- Keywords
- enterprise resource planning software, information technology adoption, UTAUT model, public accounting firms, performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, technology acceptance
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
