IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/spacre/v18y2015i2p127-137.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of cultural factors on attitude toward using ERP systems in public hospitals

Author

Listed:
  • Escobar-Rodríguez, Tomás
  • Bartual-Sopena, Lourdes

Abstract

The main problems that arise in adopting most enterprise resources planning (ERP) strategies come from organizational, rather than technical, issues, for example, social and cultural barriers, and user resistance. This paper analyzes the impact of cultural factors on user attitudes toward ERP use in public hospitals and identifying influencing factors. The theoretical grounding for this research is the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). The proposed model has six constructs (“resistance to be controlled”, “resistance to change”, “perceived risks”, “perceived usefulness”, “perceived ease of use”, and “attitude toward using”), and nine hypotheses have been generated from the connections between these six constructs. Results suggest important practical implications for attitude toward using ERP and to develop an understanding about how to improve this attitude in hospitals.

Suggested Citation

  • Escobar-Rodríguez, Tomás & Bartual-Sopena, Lourdes, 2015. "Impact of cultural factors on attitude toward using ERP systems in public hospitals," Revista de Contabilidad - Spanish Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 127-137.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:spacre:v:18:y:2015:i:2:p:127-137
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rcsar.2014.04.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1138489114000259
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rcsar.2014.04.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. João A. Ribeiro & Robert W. Scapens, 2006. "Institutional theories in management accounting change: Contributions, issues and paths for development," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 3(2), pages 94-111, July.
    2. Viswanath Venkatesh, 2000. "Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 342-365, December.
    3. Cavalluzzo, Ken S. & Ittner, Christopher D., 2004. "Implementing performance measurement innovations: evidence from government," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(3-4), pages 243-267.
    4. Kristi Wenrich & Norita Ahmad, 2009. "Lessons Learned During a Decade of ERP Experience: A Case Study," International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems (IJEIS), IGI Global, vol. 5(1), pages 55-73, January.
    5. Kieran Mathieson, 1991. "Predicting User Intentions: Comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 173-191, September.
    6. Amelia S. Carr & Man Zhang & Inge Klopping & Hokey Min, 2010. "RFID Technology: Implications for Healthcare Organizations," American Journal of Business, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 25(2), pages 25-40, October.
    7. Fiona Fui-Hoon Nah & Xin Tan & Soon Hing Teh, 2004. "An Empirical Investigation on End-Users' Acceptance of Enterprise Systems," Information Resources Management Journal (IRMJ), IGI Global, vol. 17(3), pages 32-53, July.
    8. Robert Scapens & Mostafa Jazayeri, 2003. "ERP systems and management accounting change: opportunities or impacts? A research note," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 201-233.
    9. Fred D. Davis & Richard P. Bagozzi & Paul R. Warshaw, 1989. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 982-1003, August.
    10. Helmut Herwartz & Christoph Strumann, 2014. "Hospital efficiency under prospective reimbursement schemes: an empirical assessment for the case of Germany," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(2), pages 175-186, March.
    11. Abernethy, Margaret A. & Vagnoni, Emidia, 2004. "Power, organization design and managerial behaviour," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(3-4), pages 207-225.
    12. Marios Koufaris, 2002. "Applying the Technology Acceptance Model and Flow Theory to Online Consumer Behavior," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 205-223, June.
    13. Subhasish Dasgupta & Mary Granger & Nina McGarry, 2002. "User Acceptance of E-Collaboration Technology: An Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 87-100, March.
    14. Quattrone, Paolo & Hopper, Trevor, 2005. "A 'time-space odyssey': management control systems in two multinational organisations," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(7-8), pages 735-764.
    15. Umble, Elisabeth J. & Haft, Ronald R. & Umble, M. Michael, 2003. "Enterprise resource planning: Implementation procedures and critical success factors," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 146(2), pages 241-257, April.
    16. Gary C. Moore & Izak Benbasat, 1991. "Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 192-222, September.
    17. Bernadette Szajna, 1996. "Empirical Evaluation of the Revised Technology Acceptance Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(1), pages 85-92, January.
    18. Shan L. Pan & Sue Newell & Jimmy Huang & Robert D. Galliers, 2007. "Overcoming knowledge management challenges during ERP implementation: The need to integrate and share different types of knowledge," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 58(3), pages 404-419, February.
    19. John Hulland, 1999. "Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: a review of four recent studies," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(2), pages 195-204, February.
    20. Helmut Klaus & Michael Rosemann & Guy G. Gable, 2000. "What is ERP?," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 141-162, August.
    21. Viswanath Venkatesh & Fred D. Davis, 2000. "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 186-204, February.
    22. Julie Battilana & Tiziana Casciaro, 2013. "Overcoming Resistance to Organizational Change: Strong Ties and Affective Cooptation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(4), pages 819-836, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fakher Jaoua & Hussein M. Almurad & Ibrahim A. Elshaer & Elsayed S. Mohamed, 2022. "E-Learning Success Model in the Context of COVID-19 Pandemic in Higher Educational Institutions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-19, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Naresh K. Malhotra & Sung S. Kim & Ashutosh Patil, 2006. "Common Method Variance in IS Research: A Comparison of Alternative Approaches and a Reanalysis of Past Research," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(12), pages 1865-1883, December.
    2. Andrei OGREZEANU, 2015. "Models Of Technology Adoption: An Integrative Approach," Network Intelligence Studies, Romanian Foundation for Business Intelligence, Editorial Department, issue 5, pages 55-67, June.
    3. Christopher R. Plouffe & John S. Hulland & Mark Vandenbosch, 2001. "Research Report: Richness Versus Parsimony in Modeling Technology Adoption Decisions—Understanding Merchant Adoption of a Smart Card-Based Payment System," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 208-222, June.
    4. Kim, Nooree & Park, Yuri & Lee, Daeho, 2019. "Differences in consumer intention to use on-demand automobile-related services in accordance with the degree of face-to-face interactions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 277-286.
    5. Agarwal, Reeti & Rastogi, Sanjay & Mehrotra, Ankit, 2009. "Customers’ perspectives regarding e-banking in an emerging economy," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 340-351.
    6. Nan Zhang & Xunhua Guo & Guoqing Chen, 2011. "Why adoption and use behavior of IT/IS cannot last?—two studies in China," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 381-395, July.
    7. Viswanath Venkatesh, 2000. "Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 342-365, December.
    8. Gao, Tao (Tony) & Rohm, Andrew J. & Sultan, Fareena & Pagani, Margherita, 2013. "Consumers un-tethered: A three-market empirical study of consumers' mobile marketing acceptance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(12), pages 2536-2544.
    9. Irfan Bashir & C. Madhavaiah, 2014. "Determinants of Young Consumers’ Intention to Use Internet Banking Services in India," Vision, , vol. 18(3), pages 153-163, September.
    10. Nripendra P. Rana & Yogesh K. Dwivedi & Banita Lal & Michael D. Williams & Marc Clement, 2017. "Citizens’ adoption of an electronic government system: towards a unified view," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 549-568, June.
    11. Kathrin Dudenhöffer, 2013. "Why electric vehicles failed," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 95-124, July.
    12. Türker, Cansu & Altay, Burak Can & Okumuş, Abdullah, 2022. "Understanding user acceptance of QR code mobile payment systems in Turkey: An extended TAM," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    13. Hsiao, Chun Hua & Yang, Chyan, 2011. "The intellectual development of the technology acceptance model: A co-citation analysis," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 128-136.
    14. Hamed Taherdoost, 2019. "Importance of Technology Acceptance Assessment for Successful Implementation and Development of New Technologies," Post-Print hal-02557395, HAL.
    15. Hamed Taherdoost, 2021. "Importance of Technology Acceptance Assessment for Successful Implementation and Development of New Technologies," Post-Print hal-03741844, HAL.
    16. Sung S. Kim & Naresh K. Malhotra, 2005. "A Longitudinal Model of Continued IS Use: An Integrative View of Four Mechanisms Underlying Postadoption Phenomena," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(5), pages 741-755, May.
    17. Soud M. Almahamid & Amjad F. Tweiqat & Mousa S. Almanaseer, 2016. "University website quality characteristics and success: lecturers' perspective," International Journal of Business Information Systems, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 22(1), pages 41-61.
    18. Ingrid Gottschalk & Stefan Kirn, 2013. "Cloud Computing As a Tool for Enhancing Ecological Goals?," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 5(5), pages 299-313, October.
    19. Kim, Hyo-Jeong & Mannino, Michael & Nieschwietz, Robert J., 2009. "Information technology acceptance in the internal audit profession: Impact of technology features and complexity," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 214-228.
    20. Nripendra P. Rana & Yogesh K. Dwivedi & Banita Lal & Michael D. Williams & Marc Clement, 0. "Citizens’ adoption of an electronic government system: towards a unified view," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Information and communication technology; Technological change; Technological innovation; Employee participation; Health; Tecnologías de la información y comunicación; Cambio tecnológico; Innovación tecnológica; Participación de los empleados; Servicios sanitarios;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M1 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration
    • M1 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:spacre:v:18:y:2015:i:2:p:127-137. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/intelligence .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.