International Journal of Wireless and Microwave Technologies (IJWMT)
IJWMT Vol. 8, No. 5, 8 Sep. 2018
Cover page and Table of Contents: PDF (size: 562KB)
The Moderating Effect of Mandatoriness on the Acceptance of Mobile Phone Technology: SMEs Perspective
Full Text (PDF, 562KB), PP.46-59
Views: 0 Downloads: 0
Author(s)
Renatus Mushi
1,*
Index Terms
SMEs, Mobile phone Technology, Mandatoriness, TAM, SEM, AMOS and ICT
Abstract
The mobility and pervasiveness have created many opportunities of using mobile phones in performing activities of SMEs. This is due to the low ICT readiness especially in SMEs operating in less developed countries compared to large firms. Some of the challenges facing Tanzanian SMEs include but are not limited to poor ICT infrastructures, lack of ICT skills, lack of management support, poor financial capabilities and lack of reliable electrical power supply.
While there is a number of studies which explains the factors influencing adoption and usage of mobile phones in SMEs, it is still unclear whether the mandatoriness has an impact on such acceptance. Understanding the voluntary aspects provides informed decision-making for SME managers and potential stakeholders on identifying the issues which need their attention. This study involved a survey of 459 respondents from Tanzanian SMEs using SEM and AMOS. The results show that the mandated use of mobile phones in the SMEs has a moderating effect on the overall acceptance of mobile phones in performing daily activities. Recommendations and suggestions for future works are also highlighted in this article.
Cite This Paper
Renatus Mushi, "The Moderating Effect of Mandatoriness on the Acceptance of Mobile Phone Technology: SMEs Perspective ", International Journal of Wireless and Microwave Technologies(IJWMT), Vol.8, No.5, pp. 46-59, 2018. DOI: 10.5815/ijwmt.2018.05.06
Reference
[1]Awang, Z. (2015). SEM made simple: A gentle approach to learning Structural Equation Modeling. MPWS Rich Publication.
[2]Baraldi, A. N., & Enders, C. K. (2010). An introduction to modern missing data analyses. Journal of School Psychology, 48(1), 5–37.
[3]Bhattacherjee, A., & Sanford, C. (2004). Persuasion strategies for information technology usage: An elaboration likelihood model.
[4]Byomire, G., & Maiga, G. (2015). A model for mobile phone adoption in maternal healthcare. In IST-Africa Conference, 2015. IEEE.
[5]Chen, J. V., Yen, D. C., & Chen, K. (2009). The acceptance and diffusion of the innovative smartphone use: A case study of a delivery service company in logistics. Information & Management, 46(4), 241–248.
[6]Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 319–340.
[7]Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: An introduction to theory and research. Retrieved from http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=1150648
[8]Gallego, M. D., Luna, P., & Bueno, S. (2008). User acceptance model of open source software. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 2199–2216.
[9]Gribbins, M., Shaw, M., & Gebauer, J. (2003). An investigation into employees’ acceptance of integrating mobile commerce into organizational processes. AMCIS 2003 Proceedings, 11.
[10]Hair, J. F., Wolfinbarger, M. F., Ortinau, D. J., & Bush, R. P. (2008). Essentials of marketing research. McGraw-Hill/Higher Education.
[11]Huber, E., & Stephens, J. D. (1993). Political parties and public pensions: a quantitative analysis. Acta Sociologica, 36(4), 309–325.
[12]Kelman, H. C. (1958). Compliance, identification, and internalization: Three processes of attitude change. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 51–60.
[13]Kim, T. G., Lee, J. H., & Law, R. (2008). An empirical examination of the acceptance behaviour of hotel front office systems: An extended technology acceptance model. Tourism Management, 29(3), 500–513.
[14]Kwon, H. S., & Chidambaram, L. (2000). A test of the technology acceptance model: The case of cellular telephone adoption. In System Sciences, 2000. Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Hawaii International Conference on IEEE.
[15]Lindsay, R., Jackson, T. W., & Cooke, L. (2011). Adapted technology acceptance model for mobile policing. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 13(4), 389–407.
[16]Pedersen, P. E. (2005). Adoption of mobile Internet services: An exploratory study of mobile commerce early adopters. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 15(3), 203–222.
[17]Peng, R., Xiong, L., & Yang, Z. (2012). Exploring Tourist Adoption of Tourism Mobile Payment: An Empirical Analysis. [17] Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2006). The content validity index: are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 29(5), 489–497.
[18]Prieto, J. C. S., Migueláñez, S. O., & García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2015). Mobile acceptance among pre-service teachers: a descriptive study using a TAM-based model. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (pp. 131–137). ACM.
[19]Ruuska-Kalliokulju, S., Schneider-Hufschmidt, M., Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K., & Von Noman, B. (2001). Shaping the Future of Mobile Devices. Results of the Workshop on Future Mobile Device User Interfaces at CHI 2000. SIGCHI Bulletin, 33, 16–21.
[20]Sun, Y., Wang, N., Guo, X., & Peng, Z. (2013). Understanding the acceptance of mobile health services: a comparison and integration of alternative models. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 14(2), 183.
[21]Tassabehji, R., Wallace, J., & Srivastava, A. (2008). Corporate Acceptance of M-Technology in the Service Sector: A Case Study. AMCIS 2008 Proceedings, 208.
[22]Van Biljon, J., & Kotzé, P. (2007a). Modelling the Factors That Influence Mobile Phone Adoption. In Proceedings of the 2007 Annual Research Conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists on IT Research in Developing Countries (pp. 152–161). New York, NY, USA: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1292491.1292509
[23]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.
[24]Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). The technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273–315.
[25]Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.
[26]Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 425–478.
[27]Yueh, H.-P., Lu, M.-H., & Lin, W. (2015). Employees’ acceptance of mobile technology in a workplace: An empirical study using SEM and fsQCA. Journal of Business Research. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296315006736
[28]Zhao, Y., & Cavusgil, S. T. (2006). The effect of supplier’s market orientation on manufacturer’s trust. Industrial Marketing Management, 35(4), 405–414.