Teknoloji Kabul Modeli'nin Kurumsal Kaynak Planlaması Uygulamalarında Kullanılması

YAŞAR AKÇA, (Bartin University)
GÖKHAN ÖZER (Gebze Institute of Technology, Faculty of Business Administration, Kocaeli/Turkiye)
İşletme ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi
9 2
Yıl: 2012 Cilt: 3 Sayı: 2 Sayfa Aralığı: 79 - 96 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 29-07-2022

Teknoloji Kabul Modeli'nin Kurumsal Kaynak Planlaması Uygulamalarında Kullanılması

Öz:
Teknoloji Kabul Modeli (TKM), Davis (1989) tarafından -daha önce doktora tezinde kullandığı (1986) fikirleri geliştirmesi sonrasında- yeni bir teknolojinin kullanıcı tarafından kabulünün; (1) Algılanan Fayda ve (2) Algılanan Kullanım Kolaylığı değişkenlerine bağlı olarak oluşabileceğini savunan bir modeldir. Teknoloji Kabul Modeli, -teknolojik olarak- bilişim sistemlerinin başarısının sadece teknik ve yönetsel özelliklere göre değil aynı zamanda sistem kullanıcılarının kişisel özelliklerine, beklentilerine ve algılarına göre ortaya çıkabileceğini ve çeşitli konulardaki kullanıcı algısının da bu başarıyı etkileyebileceğini savunan fikirlere yol göstermiştir. Bu çalışma Kurumsal Kaynak Planlaması (KKP) sistemlerinin başarısının belirlenmesinde, kullanıcı faktörünü TKM çerçevesinde incelemektedir. KKP programlarını kullanan 236 firma ankete katılmıştır. Algılanan kullanım kolaylığı ve algılanan faydanın hem KKP uygulama başarısı hem de algılanan organizasyonel performans üzerinde istatistiki olarak anlamlı ve pozitif yönde etkisi olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Bu sonuçlar tüm hipotezlerin desteklendiğini, literatürdeki benzer çalışmaların bulgularıyla örtüştüğünü ortaya koymaktadır.
Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Bilgisayar Bilimleri, Yapay Zeka

The Use of Technology Acceptance Model in Enterprise Resource Planning Implementations

Öz:
Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) is a model by Davis (1989) which was developed after improving his ideas previously-used in his doctoral dissertation that states the acceptance of the new technology of end-users can be formed by the aid of (1) Perceived usefulness and (2) Perceived ease of use. Technology Acceptance Model guided the ideas which defending that success of the information systems - technologically - can be achieved not only by technical and administrative features of the users but also by their personal characteristics, expectations and perceptions; user's perception on various issues can affect this success as well. This study examines the user factor in order to determine the success of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems, within the framework of TAM. 236 firms which use ERP softwares participated in the survey study. Results prove that perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness have a positive and statistically significant effect on ERP implementation success as well as on perceived organizational performance. These results reveal that all hypotheses have been supported and the study is coherent the findings of similar studies within the literature.
Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Bilgisayar Bilimleri, Yapay Zeka
Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Adamson, I. & Shine, J. (2003). Extending The New Technology Acceptance Model to Measure The End User Information Systems Satisfaction in a Mandatory Environment: A Bank's Treasury, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 15(4), 441-455.
  • Agarwal, R. & Prasad, J. (1998). The Antecedents and Consequents of User Perceptions in Information Technology Adoption, Decision Support Systems, 22, 15-29.
  • Agarwal, R. & Prasad, J. (1999). Are Individual Differences Germane to the Acceptance of New Information Technologies?, Decision Sciences, 30(2), 361-391.
  • Agarwal, R.; Tanniru, M. & Wilemon, D. (1997). Assimilating Information Technology Innovations: Strategies and Moderating Influences, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 44(4), 347-358.
  • Al-Gahtani, S.S. & King, M. (1999). Attitudes, Satisfaction and Usage: Factors Contributing to Each in The Acceptance of Information Technology, Behaviour & Information Technology, 18(4), 277-297.
  • Ashill, N.J. & Jobber, D. (1999). The Impact of Environmental Uncertainty Perceptions, Decision Maker Characteristics and Work Environment Characteristics on The Perceived Usefulness of Marketing Information Systems (MkIS): A Conceptual Framework, Journal of Marketing Management, 15, 519-540.
  • Carayannis, E.G. & Turner, E. (2006). Innovation Diffusion and Technology Acceptance: The Case of PKI Technology, Technovation, 26(7), 847-855.
  • Chau, P.Y.K. & Hu, P.J.H. (2001). Information Technology Acceptance by Individual Professionals: A Model Comparision Approach, Decision Sciences, 32(4), 699-719.
  • Choe, J.M. (1998). The Effects of User Participation on The Design of Accounting Information Systems, Information&Management, 34, 185-198.
  • Choi, B.; Poon, S.K. & Davis, J.G. (2008). Effects of Knowledge Management Strategy on Organizational Performance: A Complementarity Theory Based Approach, Omega, 36, 235-251.
  • Chou, S.W. & Chang, Y.C. (2008). The Implementation Factors That Influence The ERP Benefits, Decision Support Systems, 46, 149-157.
  • Chung, S.H. & Snyder, C.A. (2000). ERP Adaption: A Technological Evoluation Approach, International Journal of Agile Management Systems, 2(1), 24-32.
  • Cronbach, L.J. (2004). My Current Thoughts on Coefficient Alpha and Successor Procedures, University of California, CSE Report 643, 1-32.
  • Dasgupta, S.; Granger, M. & McGarry, N. (2002). User Acceptance of E-Collaboration Technology: An Extension of The Technology Acceptance Model, Group Decision and Negotiation, 11, 87-100.
  • Davis, F.D. (1986). A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New End-User Information Systems: Theory and Results. (Doctoral dissertation, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology).
  • Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use and User Acceptance of Information Technology, MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-339.
  • Davis, F.D.; Bagozzi, R.P. & Warshaw, P.R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models, Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.
  • Deloitte Consulting (1999). ERP's Second Wave: Maximizing The Value of ERP-Enabled Processes, www.ctiforum.com/technology/CRM/wp01/download/erp2w.pdf
  • Doll, W.J. & Torkzadeh, G. (1988). The Measurement of End User Computing Satisfaction, MIS Quarterly, 12(2), 259-274.
  • Downing, C.E. (1999). System Usage Behavior as a Proxy for User Satisfaction: An Empirical Investigation, Information&Management, 35, 203-216.
  • Floyd, S.W. & Zahra, S.A. (1990). The Effect of Fit Between Competitve Strategy and IT Adoption on Organizational Performance in Small Banks, Technology Analysis&Strategic Management, 2(4), 357-372.
  • Gaski, J.F. (1984). The Theory of Power and Conflict in Channels of Distribution, Journal of Marketing, 48(3), 9-29.
  • Griffith, T.L.; Zammuto, R.F. & Smith, L.A. (1999). Why New Technologies Fail?, Industrial Management, 41(3), 29-34.
  • Gyampah, K.A. & Salam, A.F. (2004). An Extension of The Technology Acceptance Model in an ERP Implementation Environment, Information & Management, 41, 731-745.
  • Hartman, S.J.; Fok, L.Y.; Fok, W.M. & Li, J. (2002). Relationships Among Quality Management, IS Use and Organizational Performance in The Health Care and Nonhealth Care Setting, Total Quality Management, 13(7), 927-943.
  • Hong, K.K. & Kim, Y.G. (2002). The Critical Success Factors for ERP Implementation: An Organizational Fit Perspective, Information & Management, 40, 25-40.
  • Hsu, C. (2008). Knowledge Sharing Practices as a Facilitating Factor for Improving Organizational Performance Through Human Capital: A Preliminary Test, Expert Systems with Application, 35, 1316-1326.
  • Hu, Q. & Quan, J.J. (2005). Evaluating The Impact of IT Investments on Productivity: A Causal Analysis at Industry Level, International Journal of Information Management, 25, 39-53.
  • Hunton, J.E.; Lippincott, B. & Reck, J.L. (2003). Enterprise Resource Planning Systems: Comparing Firm Performance of Adopters and Nonadopters, International Journal of Accounting Information Sytems, 4, 165-184.
  • Igbaria, M.; Guimaraes, T. & Davis, B. (1995). Testing The Determinants of Microcomputer Usage via a Structural Equation Model, Journal of Management Information Systems, 11(4), 87-114.
  • Jones, A.B. & Hubona, G.S. (2006). The Mediation of External Variables in The Technology Acceptance Model, Information & Management, 43, 706-717.
  • Kim, D. & Chang, H. (2007). Key Functional Characteristics in Designing and Operating Health Information Websites for User Satisfaction: An Application of The Extended Technology Acceptance Model, International Journal of Medical Informatics, 76, 790-800.
  • King, W.R. & He, J. (2006). A Meta Analysis of The Technology Acceptance Model, Information & Management, 43, 740-755.
  • Law, C.C.H. & Ngai, E.W.T. (2007). ERP Systems Adoption: An Exploratory Study of The Organizational Factors and Impacts of ERP Success, Information & Management, 44, 418-432.
  • Legris, P.; Ingham, J. & Collerette, P. (2003). Why Do People Use Information Technology? A Critical Review of The Technology Acceptance Model, Information & Management, 40, 191-204.
  • Li, E.Y. (1997). Perceived Importance of Information System Success Factors: A Meta Analysis of Group Differences, Information & Management, 32, 15-28.
  • Lu, J.; Yu, C.S.; Liu, C. & Yao, J.E. (2003). Technology Acceptance Model for Wireless Internet, Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, 13(3), 206-222.
  • Mabert, V.A., Soni, A. & Venkataramanan, M.A. (2001). Enterprise Resource Planning: Common Myths Versus Evolving Reality, Business Horizons, May-June, 69-76.
  • Ma, Q. & Liu, L. (2004). The Technology Acceptance Model: A Meta Analysis of Empirical Findings, Journal of Organizational and User Computing, 16(1), 59-72.
  • Markus, M.L.; Axline, S.; Petrie, D. & Tanis, C. (2000). Learning From Adopters' Experiences with ERP: Problems Encountered and Success Achieved, Journal of Information Technology, 15, 245-265.
  • Martinsons, M.G. & Chong, P.K.C. (1999). The Influence of Human Factors and Specialist Involvement on Information Systems Success, Human Relations, 52(1), 123-152.
  • Mitchell, V.W. (1994). How to Identify Psychographic Segments: Part1, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 12(7), 4-10.
  • Ndubisi, N.O. & Jantan, M. (2003). Evaluating IS Usage in Malaysian Small and Medium Sized Firms Using The Technology Acceptance Model, Logistics Information Management, 16 (6), 440-450.
  • Özer, G. & Yılmaz, E. (2010). Mantıklı Eylem Teorisi (MET) ile Muhasebecilerin Bilgi Teknolojisi Kullanımına Yönelik Bir Uygulama, İktisat İşletme ve Finans Dergisi, 25(290), 65-88.
  • Özer, G. & Yılmaz, E. (2010a). Planlı Davranış Teorisi (PDT) ile Muhasebecilerin Bilgi Teknolojisi Kullanımına Yönelik Bir Uygulama, MÖDAV Dergisi, 2, 33-54.
  • Özer, G.; Yücel, R. & Yılmaz, M. (2003). Kurumsal Kaynak Planlama Sistemlerine Yönelik Kullanıcı Algılarının Analizi, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(2), 77-94.
  • Poston, R. & Grabski, S. (2001). Financial Impacts of Enterprise Resource Planning Implementations, International Journal of Accounting Information Sytems, 2, 271-294.
  • Ramamurthy, K. & Premkumar, G. (1995). Determinant and Outcomes of Electronic Data Interchange Diffusion, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 42(4), 332-351.
  • Reck, J.L. (2004). Firm Performance Effects in Relation to The Implementation and Use of Enterprise Resource Planning Systems, Journal of Information Systems, 18(2), 107-110.
  • Saade, R. & Bahli, B. (2005). The Impact of Cognitive Absorption on Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use in On-line Learning: An Extension of The Technology Acceptance Model, Information & Management, 42, 317-327.
  • Sheu, C.; Chae, B. & Yang, C.L. (2004). National Differences and ERP Implementation: Issues and Challenges, Omega, 32, 361-371.
  • Short, J.C. & Palmer, T.B. (2003). Organizational Performance Referents: An Empirical Examination of Their Content and Influences, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 90, 209-224.
  • Siriginidi, S.R. (2000). Enterprise Resource Planning in Reengineering Business, Business Process Management Journal, 6(5), 376-391.
  • Staples, D.S.; Wong, I. & Seddon, P.B. (2002). Having Expectations of Information Systems Benefits That Match Received Benefits: Does it Really Matter?, Information & Management, 40, 115-131.
  • Stenbeck, J. (1998). Evolving Enterprise, Information Technologies for Manufacturing Competitiveness, 1(2), 1-9.
  • Stratman, J.K. & Roth, A.V. (2002). Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Competence Constructs: Two-Stage Multi-Item Scale Development and Validation, Decision Sciences, 33(4), 601-628.
  • Szajna, B. (1996). Empirical Evaluation of The Revised Technology Acceptance Model, Management Science, 42(1), 85-92.
  • Taylor, S. & Todd, P.A. (1995). Understanding Information Technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models, Information Systems Research, 6(2), 144-176.
  • Thong, J.Y.L.; Yap, C.S. & Raman, K.S. (1996). Top Management Support, External Expertise and Information Systems Implementation in Small Businesses, Information Systems Research, 7(2), 248-267.
  • Umble, E.J.; Haft, R.R. & Umble, M.M. (2003). Enterprise Resource Planning: Implementation Procuderes and Critical Success Factors, European Journal of Operational Research, 146, 241-257.
  • Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model, Information Systems Research, 11(4), 342-365.
  • Venkatesh, V. & Davis, F.D. (2000). A Theoretical Extension of The Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies, Management Science, 46(2), 186-204.
  • Venkatesh, V. & Morris, M.G. (2000). Why Don't Men Ever Stop to Ask for Directions? Gender, Social Influence and Their Role in Technology Acceptance and Usage Behavior, MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 115-139.
  • Vijayasarathy, L.R. (2004), Predicting Consumer Intentions to Use On-Line Shopping: The Case for an Augmented Technology Acceptance Model, Information & Management, 41, 747-762.
  • Wall, F. & Seifert, F. (2003). Does The Structure of an Organization Influence The Success of its ERP Systems? Results of an Empirical Study, 6th European Conference on Accounting Informations Systems (ECAIS), Sevilla: 1-27.
  • Weill, P. (1992). The Relationship Between Investment in Information Technology and Firm Performance: A Study of The Valve Manufacturing Sector, Information System Research , 3(4), 307-333.
  • Whyte, G.; Bytheway, A. & Edwards, C. (1997). Understanding User Perceptions of Information Systems Success, Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 6, 35-68.
  • Yang, H.D. & Yoo, Y. (2004). It's All About Attitude: Revisiting The Technology Acceptance Model, Decision Support Systems, 38, 19-31. Zviran, M. & Erlich, Z. (2003). Measuring IS User Satisfaction: Review and Implications, Communications of The Association for Information Systems, 12, 81-103.
APA AKÇA Y, Özer G (2012). Teknoloji Kabul Modeli'nin Kurumsal Kaynak Planlaması Uygulamalarında Kullanılması. , 79 - 96.
Chicago AKÇA YAŞAR,Özer Gökhan Teknoloji Kabul Modeli'nin Kurumsal Kaynak Planlaması Uygulamalarında Kullanılması. (2012): 79 - 96.
MLA AKÇA YAŞAR,Özer Gökhan Teknoloji Kabul Modeli'nin Kurumsal Kaynak Planlaması Uygulamalarında Kullanılması. , 2012, ss.79 - 96.
AMA AKÇA Y,Özer G Teknoloji Kabul Modeli'nin Kurumsal Kaynak Planlaması Uygulamalarında Kullanılması. . 2012; 79 - 96.
Vancouver AKÇA Y,Özer G Teknoloji Kabul Modeli'nin Kurumsal Kaynak Planlaması Uygulamalarında Kullanılması. . 2012; 79 - 96.
IEEE AKÇA Y,Özer G "Teknoloji Kabul Modeli'nin Kurumsal Kaynak Planlaması Uygulamalarında Kullanılması." , ss.79 - 96, 2012.
ISNAD AKÇA, YAŞAR - Özer, Gökhan. "Teknoloji Kabul Modeli'nin Kurumsal Kaynak Planlaması Uygulamalarında Kullanılması". (2012), 79-96.
APA AKÇA Y, Özer G (2012). Teknoloji Kabul Modeli'nin Kurumsal Kaynak Planlaması Uygulamalarında Kullanılması. İşletme ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(2), 79 - 96.
Chicago AKÇA YAŞAR,Özer Gökhan Teknoloji Kabul Modeli'nin Kurumsal Kaynak Planlaması Uygulamalarında Kullanılması. İşletme ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi 3, no.2 (2012): 79 - 96.
MLA AKÇA YAŞAR,Özer Gökhan Teknoloji Kabul Modeli'nin Kurumsal Kaynak Planlaması Uygulamalarında Kullanılması. İşletme ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, vol.3, no.2, 2012, ss.79 - 96.
AMA AKÇA Y,Özer G Teknoloji Kabul Modeli'nin Kurumsal Kaynak Planlaması Uygulamalarında Kullanılması. İşletme ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi. 2012; 3(2): 79 - 96.
Vancouver AKÇA Y,Özer G Teknoloji Kabul Modeli'nin Kurumsal Kaynak Planlaması Uygulamalarında Kullanılması. İşletme ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi. 2012; 3(2): 79 - 96.
IEEE AKÇA Y,Özer G "Teknoloji Kabul Modeli'nin Kurumsal Kaynak Planlaması Uygulamalarında Kullanılması." İşletme ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3, ss.79 - 96, 2012.
ISNAD AKÇA, YAŞAR - Özer, Gökhan. "Teknoloji Kabul Modeli'nin Kurumsal Kaynak Planlaması Uygulamalarında Kullanılması". İşletme ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi 3/2 (2012), 79-96.
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
23-04-2024 1:46

İLETİŞİM

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Dizin

Yüzüncüyıl, İşçi Blokları Mahallesi

Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu Caddesi No:51/C

06530 Çankaya / ANKARA +90 (312) 298 92 00

trdizin@tubitak.gov.tr

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Gizlilik Politikası Kullanım Şartları