You are on page 1of 8

Information & Management 45 (2008) 474481

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Information & Management


journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/im

The role of readiness for change in ERP implementation: Theoretical bases


and empirical validation
Kee-Young Kwahk a,1, Jae-Nam Lee b,*
a
b

School of Business IT, Kookmin University, 861-1 Jeongneung-dong, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 136-702, Republic of Korea
Korea University Business School, Anam-dong 5 ga, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 136-701, Republic of Korea

A R T I C L E I N F O

A B S T R A C T

Article history:
Received 19 April 2006
Received in revised form 12 June 2008
Accepted 5 July 2008
Available online 9 September 2008

Implementation of ERP systems continues to drive change in organizations. However, the effort is often
considered a failure, partially because potential users resist the change. Readiness plays an active role in
reducing resistance to such efforts. Therefore, we examined the formation of readiness for change and its
effect on the perceived technological value of an ERP system leading to its use. We developed a model of
readiness for change incorporating TAM and TPB. The model was then empirically tested using data
collected from users of ERP systems in Korea. Structural equation analysis using LISREL provided
signicant support for all proposed relationships. Specically, we found that readiness for change had an
indirect effect on behavioral intention to use an ERP system. At the same time, readiness for change was
found to be enhanced by two factors: organizational commitment and perceived personal competence.
2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Organizational change
Readiness for change
ERP systems
User behavior toward IT
Technology acceptance model
Theory of planned behavior

1. Introduction
Organizations are continually faced with the need to change
their structures, objectives, processes, and technologies. Thus, they
must be able to make changes to sustain their competitive
advantage. Many have adopted ERP systems to help do this. Studies
have reported that ERP adoption is about 80% in Fortune 500
companies [23].
However, despite its popularity, ERP implementations have
been plagued with high failure rates and inability to realize
promised benets. The failure rate has been estimated as 6090%.
Some prior studies indicated that a major reason for failure was the
resistance of the user to change [21]. ERP systems are often
associated with fundamental change to organizational processes
that involve different stakeholders [24]. Therefore, though ERP
systems could be implemented successfully from a technical
perspective, success may depend on employees being willing to
use the delivered system.
Creating readiness for change has been proposed as a major
prescription for reducing resistance [26]. We therefore examined

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 2 3290 2812; fax: +82 2 922 7220.
E-mail addresses: kykwahk@kookmin.ac.kr (K.-Y. Kwahk), isjnlee@korea.ac.kr
(J.-N. Lee).
1
Tel.: +82 2 910 4738; fax: +82 2 910 4519.
0378-7206/$ see front matter 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.im.2008.07.002

how readiness for change could affect the perceived value of the
system and thus increase the intention to use ERP.
We explored the role of readiness for change in ERP implementation and its impact on usage intention. To do so, we dened a model
of readiness by incorporating TAM and TPB. We included two
antecedents of readiness for change (perceived personal competence
and organizational commitment) and two process outcome variables
(perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEU)) leading to
ERP usage intention. The model was then tested using a sample of
283 responses from 72 Korean organizations that had already
implemented enterprise-wide ERP systems.
2. Theoretical background
2.1. Underlying theories
The IS literature has become a stage for social psychology-based
and attitude-based models predicting usage and acceptance. But
although both PU and PEU are important predictors of use, they do
not explain individual attitude and behavior. Prior research has
indicated the need for a better understanding of key determinants
and suggested that TAM should be integrated into a broader model
with variables related to human and organizational dimensions.
On the other hand, it has been argued that TPB is difcult to
apply across diverse user contexts [22]. TPB accounts for
conditions where individuals do not have complete control over

K.-Y. Kwahk, J.-N. Lee / Information & Management 45 (2008) 474481

their behavior. Thus, behavioral intention depends on attitude,


subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control [1]. The role of a
subjective norm as a determinant of IS usage is unclear; some
research has not found a signicant relationship between it and
usage intention. In contrast, perceived behavioral control apparently does play a critical role in understanding peoples PEU in
performing a behavior of interest. Therefore, the stronger the
individual feels about his or her ability to execute the behavior, the
more he or she will utilize available resources and opportunities to
execute the behavior. Subsequently, individuals will thus gain
condence from perceived higher behavioral control [6].
To overcome the problems and enhance the understandability of
IS usage and IS acceptance behaviors, we proposed a model that
would be relevant to enterprise-wide initiatives, by identifying not
only the PU and the PEU but also the perceived behavioral control
(i.e., perceived personal competence) and attitude toward behavior
(i.e., readiness for change) as major factors of a successful ERP project.
2.2. Organizational factors for successful ERP implementation
In our study, we decide to focus mainly on positive attitudes
toward behavior readiness for change the extent to which
organizational members hold positive views about the need for
organizational change, as well as their belief that changes are likely
to have positive implications for them and the organization. This
attitude can determine whether an individual supports or resists a
change. Of course, a change may give satisfaction to some and not
to others.
Organizational commitment (the relative strength of an individuals identication with, and involvement in, a particular
organization) and perceived personal competence (the degree of
the individuals feelings of competence in the work role) play key
roles in employees acceptance of change.
3. Research model and hypotheses
To explore how readiness for change affected an individuals
reaction to implementation of an ERP system, we developed a
model that considered its psychological consequences and
antecedents. This is shown in Fig. 1.
3.1. The importance of readiness for change
Readiness for change plays a crucial role in mitigating
resistance to change and thus in reducing the failure rate [14].
Effective ERP system implementation requires enterprise-wide

475

initiatives, bringing large-scale change generally requiring large


investment of resources; a failure results in signicant loss.
Organizational change should be a continuous process [9].
Change initiatives can be characterized as push systems where
senior managers and experts cause change. However, a pull system
may be needed for a successful effort; in this, transitioning to new
technologies is forced by the people who will manage them. The
pull system can be achieved by focusing on user readiness for
change and identifying the circumstance under which users are
receptive to it.
3.2. The effects of readiness for change
Creating the belief that organizational change is needed
requires agreement that there is a gap between the current and
desired end states. In general, an ERP system is introduced into a
company to improve its organizational effectiveness and ll any
performance gap. Organizational members who have favorable
perceptions of organizational transformation and are ready for it
will be more likely to participate positively in the change and
expect enhanced performance after its implementation. A prior
study of ERP implementation [3] suggested that a push for change
from top management was likely to produce positive perception.
When employees are positive about and ready for organizational
change, they appear to be more willing to try out a system. They
think that they might miss benets if they do not try out the
system [30]. Also, when informed about the ERP system and its
impact they have less uncertainty about the technical changes
[12]. Thus, when employees are ready for change, they will nd the
systems more useful. Therefore, we proposed the hypothesis:
H1. Readiness for change has a positive effect on the perceived
usefulness of an ERP system.
Previous studies have paid attention to individual traits, such as
innovativeness or technology readiness, to describe the individuals attitude toward change [8]. Parasuraman [25] has dened
technology readiness as a state of mind that affected peoples
propensity to embrace and use new technologies for accomplishing goals. . . He argued that this related to the degree of readiness
that the individual felt in using a technology. The technologically
ready individual was more likely to see it as easy to use. Similarly,
Walczuch et al. showed that more innovative individuals were
perceived to have a smoother transition into a new technology
without much cognitive effort. Therefore, we expected that
individuals ready for change believed they could easily learn
how to use the system with little effort. This is particularly true for

Fig. 1. Research model.

476

K.-Y. Kwahk, J.-N. Lee / Information & Management 45 (2008) 474481

ERP systems, because users must overcome knowledge barriers


and rid themselves of what was the previous operation [27].
Therefore we hypothesized:
H2. Readiness for change has a positive effect on the perceived
ease of use of an ERP system.
3.3. Creating readiness for change
We considered two major antecedents of readiness for change:
perceived personal competence and organizational commitment. A
high level of perceived competence resulting from prior working
experiences results in self-condence and employees tend to
believe that they can execute their job well when performing
slightly different tasks. Thus, we posited:
H3. Perceived personal competence has a positive effect on readiness for change.
Individuals with strong organizational commitment should be
more willing to accept organizational change if it does not alter
basic values and goals and is seen as benecial; they are also then
willing to expend more effort on behalf of the organization. This
suggests that individuals commitment to the organization has
varying effects on their readiness for change. Thus we made the
following hypothesis:
H4. Organizational commitment has a positive effect on readiness
for change.
3.4. Perceived technological attributes and usage intention
A system must be useful and easy to learn. Consequently, we
added the following two hypotheses for completeness:
H5. Perceived usefulness has a positive effect on the usage intention of an ERP system.
H6. Perceived ease of use has a positive effect on the usage
intention of an ERP system.
3.5. Control variable
Among the determinants of both PU and PEU, computer selfefcacy (the persons belief that he or she can perform a job and is
condent of this) has been proposed as an important antecedent
[29]. Many, for example [18,19] found experimental evidence
supporting this relationship.
4. Research methodology
A eld study using a convenience sample was employed to test
the model. The unit of analysis was the individual who worked for
an organization that had already implemented an enterprise-wide
ERP system.
4.1. Instrument development
The items used to measure the constructs in our study were
adopted and modied, as needed, from previous studies. Each
survey item was rst discussed with and scrutinized by two IS
researchers to check its face validity. All research variables were
measured using multi-item scales, as shown in Appendix A.
Measures of readiness for change were based on an instrument
developed by Dunham et al. [13], which originally consisted of 18

items. From these, we selected seven that revealed high


explanatory power, were not reverse coded because of their
potential negative effect on unidimensionality, and represented
appropriate readiness for change of individuals in terms of content
[17]. Organizational commitment was measured with six items
selected from the instrument developed by Allen and Meyer [2].
This instrument originally had 24 items that represented three
subgroups (affective, continuance, and normative commitment).
As the multidimensionality of these three was not a concern in our
research and because reverse coded items were excluded, we
decided to reduce the items to six by selecting two from each
subgroup while maintaining their original meaning. Perceived
personal competence was measured using ve items from Allen
and Meyers measurement. PU and PEU were each measured by six
items, which were adopted from the previously validated
measurement inventory and then modied to suit the context of
the present research. Two items to measure usage intention were
based on Davis: items for measuring PU, PEU, and usage intention
were modied by changing the target IS into the ERP system to
reect our research context [11]. Finally, to measure the
psychometric properties of computer self-efcacy as a control
variable, we adopted 10 items from an instrument developed by
Compeau and Higgins [10]. All question items were measured
using a seven-point Likert-type scale with anchors ranging from
strongly disagree to strongly agree.
4.2. Data collection and sample characteristics
One of the directors of an ERP vendor agreed to sponsor our
study. We asked the vendor to select its client companies that had
recently nished ERP implementation and had implemented at
least more than two ERP modules. We distributed a total of 350
questionnaires to 72 organizations in Korea through the vendor.
The data were collected from employees who worked with ERP
systems to perform their tasks. Of the 350 questionnaires
distributed, 312 were returned. After being screened for usability

Table 1
Respondent characteristics
Respondent proles

Frequency

Percent (%)

Cumulative (%)

Gender
Male
Female

144
129

52.7
47.3

52.7
100.0

Age
29
3039
40

126
65
12

62.1
32.0
5.9

62.1
94.1
100.0

Educational level
High school
University
Postgraduate

36
222
4

13.7
84.8
1.5

13.7
98.5
100.0

Tenure
3
46
710
11

109
82
52
19

41.6
31.3
19.8
7.3

41.6
72.9
92.7
100.0

Role
Clerical
Supervisory
Middle management

157
73
31

60.2
28.0
11.8

60.2
88.2
100.0

44
16
7
5

61.1
22.2
9.7
7.0

61.1
83.3
93.0
100.0

Industry type
Manufacturing
Service
Information and communication
Food and beverage

K.-Y. Kwahk, J.-N. Lee / Information & Management 45 (2008) 474481


Table 2
Analysis of non-response biases
Measures

Early
respondents
(n = 40)

Late
respondents
(n = 40)

Signicance
(P)

Tenure
Age
Readiness for change (RFC)
Perceived usefulness (PUS)
Perceived ease of use (PEU)
Usage intention (UIT)

5.27
28.94
5.26
5.25
4.72
5.23

5.73
28.67
4.88
4.95
4.43
5.15

0.68
0.84
0.12
0.19
0.23
0.76

477

were observed between the two groups (rst group = 5.3; last
group = 5.7 years). There were no signicant differences in the
major variables, as can be seen in Table 2, suggesting that nonresponse bias was low.
5. Data analysis and results

and reliability, 283 responses were found to be complete and


usable, representing a response rate of about 81%. Table 1 presents
the respondents demographics. On average, the respondents were
29.2 years old. The respondents had about 4.7 years of work
experience, and most had worked for less than 7 years.
Because this study used a convenience sample, it was not
possible to test non-response bias by comparing the respondents
and non-respondents. Instead, non-response bias was assessed by
comparing the responses of early and late respondents, dened as
the rst and last 40 questionnaires received [20]. The average ages
for the early and late respondents were 28.9 and 28.6, respectively,
and these were not signicant. No signicant differences in tenure

LISREL was used for data analysis. Our objective was to test the
proposed factors that lead to usage intention in a holistic
framework. Data analysis was carried out in accordance with a
two-step methodology [5] to avoid the possible interaction
between measurement and structural equation models. The
structural model describes the relationships among the theoretical
constructs, while the measurement model consists of the relationships between the observed variables (items) and the latent
constructs they measure. According to this procedure, after the
model has been modied to create the best measurement model,
the structural equation model can be analyzed.
5.1. Measurement model
Conrmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted using
LISREL 8.7. The overall effectiveness of the measurement model
was examined using seven common model t measures: normed

Table 3
Convergent validity test
Constructs

Items

Factor loading

Composite reliability

Average variance extracted

Readiness for change (RFC)

RFC2
RFC3
RFC4
RFC5
RFC6
RFC7

0.76
0.79
0.88
0.88
0.86
0.85

0.93

0.70

Perceived ease of use (PEU)

PEU1
PEU2
PEU3
PEU4
PEU5
PEU6

0.84
0.84
0.85
0.86
0.90
0.87

0.94

0.74

Perceived usefulness (PUS)

PUS1
PUS2
PUS3
PUS4
PUS5
PUS6

0.85
0.91
0.86
0.87
0.88
0.86

0.95

0.76

Usage intention (UIT)

UIT1
UIT2

0.90
0.86

0.88

0.78

Organizational commitment (OCM)

OCM1
OCM2
OCM3
OCM4
OCM6

0.82
0.76
0.82
0.88
0.67

0.89

0.63

Perceived personal competence (PPC)

PPC1
PPC2
PPC3
PPC4
PPC5

0.78
0.76
0.81
0.70
0.78

0.88

0.59

Computer self-efcacy (CSE)

CSE1
CSE2
CSE3
CSE4
CSE5
CSE6
CSE7
CSE8
CSE9
CSE10

0.75
0.74
0.80
0.83
0.87
0.87
0.86
0.89
0.87
0.86

0.98

0.70

K.-Y. Kwahk, J.-N. Lee / Information & Management 45 (2008) 474481

478

x2 (x2 to degree of freedom), goodness-of-t index (GFI),


normalized t index (NFI), non-normalized t index (NNFI),
comparative t index (CFI), root mean square residual (RMR), and
root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA). The
measurement model in the CFA was revised by removing items
that had large standardized residuals with other items, one at a
time. After dropping two items (RFC1 and OCM5), the measurement model exhibited overall good t. The normed x2 was 1.82,
which was satisfactory, being below the maximum desired cutoff of 3.0 [15]. RMSEA was 0.05, indicating a good t, below the
maximum desired cut-off of 0.06. Also the RMR was 0.04, lower
than the desired maximum cut-off of 0.05. GFI was 0.81, which
was above the recommended threshold of 0.8. The other t
indices were all satisfactory: CFI = 0.99, NFI = 0.97 and
NNFI = 0.99, suggesting that the measurement model t the
data adequately [16].
Further analysis was conducted to assess the psychometric
properties of the scales. The construct validity of the research
instrument determines the extent to which the operationalization
of a construct actually measures what it is designed to measure.
Convergent validity was assessed using three measures, as shown
in Table 3: factor loading, composite construct reliability, and
average variance extracted.
First, in determining the appropriate minimum factor loadings
required for the inclusion of an item within a construct, factor
loadings greater than 0.70 were considered highly signicant. All of
the factor loadings of the items in the measurement model were
greater than 0.70, except for OCM6. Each item loaded signicantly

(p < 0.01 in all cases) on its underlying construct. Second, the


composite construct reliabilities were within the commonly
accepted range greater than 0.70. Finally, the average variances
extracted were all above the recommended level of 0.50. Therefore,
all constructs had adequate convergent validity.
To conrm discriminant validity, the average variance shared
between the construct and its indicators should be larger than the
variance shared between the construct and other constructs. As
shown in Table 4, all constructs share more variances with their
indicators than with other constructs. The discriminant validity of
the constructs was further validated by xing the correlation
between various constructs at 1.0, and then re-estimating the
modied model [28]. Signicant differences in the x2 statistic of
the constrained and unconstrained models imply high discriminant validity. From the constrained testing, the x2 statistic of the
unconstrained model was signicantly better than any possible
constrained models, thereby providing positive support for the
discriminant validity.
5.2. Structural model
The structural model was examined using the cleansed
measurement model. The overall t with the data was evaluated
by the same set of t indices used in the measurement model. The
normed x2 was 1.84, which is within the recommended level of 3.0,
while the structural model exhibited a t value satisfying the
commonly recommended threshold for the respective indices, thus
providing evidence of a good model: GFI = 0.81, NFI = 0.97,

Table 4
Discriminant validity test
Constructs

Mean (S.D.)

RFC

PEU

PUS

UIT

OCM

PPC

CSE

RFC
PEU
PUS
UIT
OCM
PPC
CSE

4.93
4.53
5.00
5.03
4.67
4.66
4.81

0.84
0.61
0.74
0.68
0.50
0.54
0.44

0.86
0.60
0.70
0.49
0.48
0.45

0.87
0.81
0.49
0.50
0.41

0.88
0.50
0.51
0.52

0.79
0.55
0.47

0.77
0.69

0.84

(1.07)
(1.08)
(1.01)
(1.06)
(1.04)
(0.89)
(0.98)

Note: Leading diagonals represent the square root of the average variance extracted between the constructs and their measures, while off diagonal entries are the correlations
among constructs.

Fig. 2. Model testing results.

K.-Y. Kwahk, J.-N. Lee / Information & Management 45 (2008) 474481

NNFI = 0.98, CFI = 0.99, RMR = 0.05, and RMSEA = 0.05. These
results suggested that the structural model t the data adequately.
The standardized LISREL path coefcients and overall t indices
are shown in Fig. 2. Two variables (readiness for change and
computer self-efcacy) were signicantly related to PU and
explained 57% of the variance in PU: readiness for change
(b = 0.70, p < 0.01) and computer self-efcacy (b = 0.12, p < 0.01).
The same two variables were also signicantly related to the PEU
and explained 43% of the variance in PEU: readiness for change
(b = 0.53, p < 0.01) and computer self-efcacy (b = 0.23, p < 0.01).
Two variables (organizational commitment and PEU) were signicantly related to readiness for change and explained 37% of its
variance: organizational commitment (b = 0.30, p < 0.01) and
perceived personal competence (b = 0.39, p < 0.01). Finally, two
variables (PU and PEU) were signicantly related to usage
intention and explained 73% of the variance in usage intention:
PU (b = 0.63, p < 0.01) and perceived ease of use (b = 0.35, p < 0.01).
Thus, all hypotheses were supported.
6. Discussion and implications
6.1. Findings and limitations
In our analysis, we found that behavioral intention to use an ERP
system was affected indirectly by readiness for change, which in
turn inuenced the PU and the PEU of the system. It was also
observed that readiness for change played an important role in
explaining two attributes by identifying the increased variances:
readiness for change and computer self-efcacy accounted for 57% of
the variance in PU. The addition of readiness for change contributed
to an increase in the explained variance of 38% over and above the
variance explained by computer self-efcacy. Readiness for change
and computer self-efcacy together explained 43% of the variance in
the PEU, while computer self-efcacy alone explained 23% of the
variance in the PEU. The addition of readiness for change increased
the explained variance by 21%. We also examined how readiness
for change could be formed. One was through organizational
commitment; another was through perceived competence. Moreover, PU and PEU had a signicant positive effect on the usage
intention of ERP systems.

479

This study has limitations that circumscribe the interpretation


of its ndings. First, measures of all constructs were gathered at the
same time and through the same instrument. Consequently,
common method variance exists. Due to the cross-sectional and
retrospective nature of this study, causality could only be inferred
via theory: a longitudinal approach needs to be considered. Second,
although we attempted to incorporate computer self-efcacy into
the model, other factors may affect the technological attributes of
the system. Third, although our study was conducted in the context
of ERP systems, their introduction is not representative of all kinds
of IT-driven change. Therefore, caution must be exercised in
generalizing our ndings.
6.2. Implications
From a theoretical perspective, our study developed an
integrated framework that provides a rich understanding of IS
implementation. It also provided evidence for the value of using
socio-technical systems (STS) theory in the context of new IS
introduction [7].
From the practical perspective, our ndings shed light on
why and when managers should pay attention to the role of
readiness for change in ERP system implementation. Despite the
promised benets, ERP system implementation is inherently
risky because it requires enterprise-wide initiatives, and
organizations often adjust slowly to complex enterprise system
packages [4]. Therefore, our ndings emphasized the importance of managing employees attitudes toward change. For the
successful adoption of an ERP system, the management and
project team should pay attention to promoting readiness for
change in their users.
7. Conclusion
Our study examined the role of readiness for change in the
context of ERP systems implementation. The empirical ndings
showed how readiness for change indirectly inuenced the
behavioral intention to use ERP systems through PU and PEU,
and was directly affected by organizational commitment and
perceived personal competence.

480

K.-Y. Kwahk, J.-N. Lee / Information & Management 45 (2008) 474481

Appendix A. The structure of the survey instrument


Constructs

Items

Question items

Readiness for change (RFC)

RFC1
RFC2
RFC3
RFC4
RFC5
RFC6
RFC7

I look forward to changes at work


I nd most change to be pleasing
Other people think that I support change
I am inclined to try new ideas
I usually support new ideas
I often suggest new approaches to things
I intend to do whatever is possible to support change

Perceived ease of use (PEU)

PEU1
PEU2
PEU3
PEU4
PEU5
PEU6

Learning to operate the ERP system is easy


It is easy to remember how to use the ERP system
I nd it easy to get the ERP system to do what I want it to do
My interaction with the ERP system is clear and understandable
It is easy to become skillful at using the ERP system
I nd the ERP system easy to use

Perceived usefulness (PUS)

PUS1
PUS2
PUS3
PUS4
PUS5
PUS6

Using
Using
Using
Using
Using
Using

Usage intention (UIT)

UIT1
UIT2

I intend to use the ERP system for performing my job as often as needed
To the extent possible, I would frequently use the ERP system in my job

Organizational commitment (OCM)

OCM1
OCM2
OCM3
OCM4
OCM5
OCM6

I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career with this organization
I enjoy discussing my organization with people outside it
I really feel as if this organizations problems are my own
This organization has a great deal of personal meaning for me
It would be very hard for me to leave my organization right now, even if I wanted to
Too much in my life would be disrupted if I decided I wanted to leave my
organization now

Perceived personal competence (PPC)

PPC1
PPC 2
PPC 3

In general, the work I am given to do at my organization is challenging and exciting


The requirements of my job are demanding
In this organization, I am encouraged to feel that the work I do makes important
contributions to the larger aims of the organization
I am usually given feedback concerning my performance on the job
In my organization, I am allowed to participate in decisions regarding my
workload and performance standards

PPC 4
PPC 5

Computer self-efcacy (CSE)

CSE1
CSE2
CSE3
CSE4
CSE5
CSE6
CSE7
CSE8
CSE9
CSE10

References
[1] I. Ajzen, The theory of planned behavior, Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes 50, 1991, pp. 179211.
[2] N.J. Allen, J.P. Meyer, The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance
and normative commitment to the organization, Journal of Occupational Psychology 63, 1990, pp. 118.
[3] K. Amoako-Gyampha, Perceived usefulness, user involvement and behavioural
intention: an empirical study of ERP implementation, Computers in Human
Behavior 23, 2007, pp. 12321248.
[4] K. Amoako-Gyampha, A.F. Salam, An extension of the technology acceptance
model in an ERP implementation environment, Information and Management 41,
2004, pp. 731745.

the
the
the
the
the
the

ERP
ERP
ERP
ERP
ERP
ERP

system
system
system
system
system
system

enables me to have more accurate information


enhances my effectiveness in performing my task
is useful for performing my task
increases my productivity in performing my task
enables me to access more relevant information
enables me to acquire high-quality information

I could complete a job using the information system if there is no one around
to tell me what to do
I could complete a job using the information system if I have never used an
information system like it before
I could complete a job using the information system if I have only the system
manuals for reference
I could complete a job using the information system if I have seen someone
else using it before trying it myself
I could complete a job using the information system if I could call someone
for help if I got stuck
I could complete a job using the information system if someone else helps
me get started
I could complete a job using the information system if I have a lot of time to
complete the job for which the information system was provided
I could complete a job using the information system if I have just the built-in
help facility for assistance
I could complete a job using the information system if someone shows me
how to do it rst
I could complete a job using the information system if I have used similar
information systems like this one before in doing the job

[5] J.C. Anderson, D.W. Gerbing, Structural equation modeling in practice: a review
and recommended two-step approach, Psychological Bulletin 103 (3), 1988, pp.
411423.
[6] A. Bandura, Self-Efcacy: The Exercise of Control, W.H. Freeman, New York, 1997.
[7] R.P. Bostrom, J.S. Heinen, MIS problems and failures: a socio-technical perspective. Part I. The causes, MIS Quarterly 1 (3), 1977, pp. 1732.
[8] M. Chandrashekaran, R.K. Sinha, Isolating the determinants of innovativeness: a
split-population tobit (SPOT) duration model of timing and volume of rst and
repeat purchase, Journal of Marketing Research 32, 1995, pp. 444456.
[9] C. Clegg, S. Walsh, Change management: time for a change, European Journal of
Work and Organizational Psychology 13 (2), 2004, pp. 217239.
[10] D.R. Compeau, C.A. Higgins, Computer self-efcacy: development of a measure
and initial test, MIS Quarterly 19 (2), 1995, pp. 189211.

K.-Y. Kwahk, J.-N. Lee / Information & Management 45 (2008) 474481


[11] F.D. Davis, Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of
information technology, MIS Quarterly 13 (3), 1989, pp. 319339.
[12] L. Dong, Modeling top management inuences on ES implementation, Business
Process Management Journal 7 (3), 2001, pp. 243250.
[13] R.B. Dunham, J.A. Grube, D.G. Gardner, L.L. Cummings, J.L. Pierce, The development of an attitude toward change instrument, in: Proceedings of Academy of
Management Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, 1989.
[14] L.T. Eby, D.M. Adams, J.E.A. Russell, S.H. Gaby, Perceptions of organizational
readiness for change: factors related to employees reactions to the
implementation of team-based selling, Human Relations 53 (3), 2000, pp.
419442.
[15] D. Gefen, D.W. Straub, M.-C. Boudreau, Structural equation modeling and regression: guidelines for research practice, Communications of the Association for
Information Systems 4 (7), 2000, pp. 170.
[16] J.T. Hair, R.E. Anderson, R.L. Tatham, W.C. Black, Multivariate Data Analysis, Fifth
ed., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1998.
[17] J. Herche, B. Engelland, Reverse-polarity items and scales unidimensionality,
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 24 (4), 1996, pp. 366374.
[18] W. Hong, J.Y.L. Thong, W.M. Wong, K.Y. Tam, Determinants of user acceptance of
digital libraries: an empirical examination of individual differences and system
characteristics, Journal of Management Information Systems 18(3), Winter 2001
2002, pp. 97124.
[19] P.J.H. Hu, T.H.K. Clark, W.W. Ma, Examining technology acceptance by school
teachers: a longitudinal study, Information and Management 41, 2003, pp. 227
241.
[20] E. Karahanna, D.W. Straub, N.L. Chervany, Information technology adoption
across time: a cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption
beliefs, MIS Quarterly 23 (2), 1999, pp. 183213.
[21] L. Lapointe, S. Rivard, A multilevel model of resistance to information technology
implementation, MIS Quarterly 29 (3), 2005, pp. 461491.
[22] P. Legris, J. Ingham, P. Collerette, Why do people use information technology? A
critical review of the technology acceptance model Information and Management
40, 2003, pp. 191204.
[23] META Group, Market Research: The State of ERP Services (Executive Summary),
META Group Inc., Stamford, CT, 2004.
[24] F.F.-H. Nah, X. Tan, S.H. Teh, An empirical investigation on end-users acceptance
of enterprise systems, Information Resources Management Journal 17 (3), 2004,
pp. 3253.
[25] A. Parasuraman, Technology readiness index (TRI): a multi-item scale to measure
readiness to embrace new technologies, Journal of Service Research 2 (4), 2000,
pp. 307320.
[26] S.K. Piderit, Rethinking resistance and recognizing ambivalence: a multidimensional view of attitudes toward an organizational change, Academy of Management Review 25 (4), 2000, pp. 783794.
[27] D. Robey, J. Ross, M.C. Boudreau, Learning to implement enterprise systems: an
exploratory study of the dialectics of change, Journal of Management Information
Systems 19 (1), 2002, pp. 1746.

481

[28] A.H. Segars, Assessing the unidimensionality of measurement: a paradigm and


illustration within the context of information systems research, Omega 25 (1),
1997, pp. 107121.
[29] V. Venkatesh, F.D. Davis, A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use:
development and test, Decision Sciences 27 (3), 1996, pp. 451481.
[30] R. Walczuch, J. Lemmink, S. Streukens, The effect of service employees technology
readiness on technology acceptance, Information and Management 44, 2007, pp.
206215.

Kee-Young Kwahk is an Associate Professor of


management information systems at the School of
Business IT of Kookmin University in Seoul, Korea. He
received his B.A. in Business Administration from
Seoul National University, his M.S. and Ph.D. in MIS
from the Graduate School of Management of the Korea
Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST)
in Seoul. His research interests include strategic agility
based on IT, IT assimilation, IT-enabled organizational
change, knowledge management, and electronic
commerce. His research papers appear in Behavior &
Information Technology, Communications of the AIS,
Decision Support Systems, Information & Management, International Journal of Information Management, Journal of Database Management, and others. He has presented several papers
at AMCIS, DSI International Meeting, and HICSS.

Jae-Nam Lee is an Associate Professor in the Business


School of Korea University in Seoul, Korea. He was
formerly on the faculty of the Department of Information Systems at the City University of Hong Kong. He
holds M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in MIS from the Graduate
School of Management of the Korea Advanced Institute
of Science and Technology (KAIST) in Seoul. His research
interests are IT outsourcing, knowledge management,
e-commerce, and IT deployment and impacts on
organizational performance. His published research
articles appear in MIS Quarterly, Information Systems
Research, Journal of MIS, Journal of the AIS, Communications of the AIS, IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management, European Journal of Information Systems, Communications of the
ACM, Information & Management, and others. He has presented several papers at
the ICIS, HICSS, ECIS, DSI and IRMA Conferences, and serves on the editorial boards
of MIS Quarterly, Information Systems Research, and Journal of the AIS.