مقایسه مدیران نوآور و سازشگر در پذیرش، استفاده و پیاده سازی سیستم برنامه ریزی منابع سازمان (ERPs)

محورهای موضوعی : حسابداری مدیریت

منیر امیری نسب ¹ , علیرضا مهرآذین ²

1 - ندارد
2 - ندارد

تاریخ دریافت : 1392/02/21 تاریخ پذیرش : 1392/05/15 تاریخ انتشار : 1392/12/22

کلید واژه: سبک شناختی, سبک شناختی نوآور, سبک شناختی سازشگر, سیستم برنامه ریزی منابع سازمان,

چکیده مقاله :

پژوهش حاضر برای اولین بار در ایران، سبک شناختی نوآور سازشگر را به دلیل ارتباط نزدیک آن با پذیرش واستفاده از فن آوری اطلاعات جدید، مورد توجه قرار داده و به مقایسه مدیران نوآور و سازشگر در خصوصمی پردازد. مدل مورد نظر برای ارزیابی (ERPs) پذیرش، استفاده و پیاده سازی سیستم برنامه ریزی منابع سازمانمی باشد. جامعه آماری (UTAUT ) پذیرش و استفاده از سیستم مذکور، تئوری اتحاد پذیرش و استفاده از فن آوریشامل 31 نفر از مدیران شاغل در شرکتهای صنعت سیمان می باشد. داده ها از پرسشنامه ای حاوی 50 پرسشگردآوری شده است. یافته ها نشان داد، بین مدیران با سبک شناختی نوآور و مدیران با سبک شناختی سازشگر، دردر شرکتهای سیمان، تفاوت معناداری وجود ندارد.

چکیده انگلیسی:

The present study, the first of its kind in Iran, focused on an innovative- adaptive cognitivestyle due to its close relationship with one's acceptance and use of new informationtechnology. More specifically, it compared innovative and adaptive managers, regardingacceptance, using, and implementation of Enterprise Resource Planning system (ERPs). WithUnified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), the present study examinedthe acceptance and the using of Enterprise Resource Planning system by managers. Theparticipants were 31 managers working in cement industry companies. The necessary datawere collected using a questionnaire containing 50 questions. The results showed thatbetweeb managers with innovative cognitive style and adaptive cognitive style about theacceptance, use and implementation of ERP system in cement Firms does not exist asignificant difference.

منابع و مأخذ:

فهرست منابع
 Agarwal, R & Prasad, J. (1999). Are
Individual Difference Germane to the
Acceptance of New Information
Technologies?
 Aldwani, A. M. (2001). Change
Management Strategies for Successful ERP
Implementation. Business Process
Management Journal, 7(3), 266–275.
 Amoako-Gyampah, K. & Salam, A. F.
(2004). An extension of the Technology
Acceptance Model in an ERP
Implementation Environment. The Journal
of Information & Management, 41(6), 731–
745.
 Amoako-Gyampah, K. (1999). User
involvement, Ease of Use, Perceived
Usefulness and Behavioural Intention: A
Test of the Enhanced Technology
Acceptance Model in an ERP
Implementation Environment.
 Amoako-Gyampah, K. (2004). ERP
Implementation Factors a Comparison of
Managerial and End-User Perspectives.
Business Process Management Journal,
10(2), 171-181.
 Banker, R. D; & Kauffman, R. J. (2004).
The evolution of research on information
systems: a fiftieth-year survey of the
literature in management science.
Management Science 50 (3), 281–298.
 Benbasat, I; & Taylor, R. (1978). The
Impact of Cognitive Styles on Information
System Design. MIS Quarterly 2(2): 43-54.
 Calisir, F. & Calisir, F. (2004). The relation
of interface usability characteristics,
perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of
use to end-user satisfaction with enterprise
resource planning (ERP)
systems.Computers in Human Behaviour,
20(4), 505–515.
 Chakarborty, I; Hu, P; & Cui,D. (2008).
Examining the Effects of Cognitive Style
Individuals Technology Use Decision
Making, Journal of Decision Support
Systems, 45, 228-241.
 Chilton, M., Hardgrave, B; &, Armstrong,
D. (2005). Person-Job Cognitive Style Fit
for Software Developers: The Effect of
Strain and Performance. Journal of
Management Information Systems 22(2):
193-226.
 Devaraj, S; & Kohli, R. (2003).
Performance Impacts of Information
Technology. Journal of Management
Science,. 3, 273–289
 Dickson, G.W; DeSanctis, G; & McBride,
D.J. (1986). Understanding the effectiveness
of computer graphics for decision support:
acumulative experimental approach.
Communications of the ACM 29, 40–47.
 Harrison, A. W; & Rainer Jr, R.K. (1992).
The influence of individual differences on
skill in end-user computing, Journal of
Management Information Systems 9 (1) ,
93–111.
 Guynes Clark. Jan; Warren. John (2008).
The Impact of Information Systems on End
User Performance: Examining the Effects of
Cognitive Style Using Learning Curves in
an Electronic Medical Record
Implementation
 Karahanna, E. (1999). Symbolic adoption of
information technology. Proceedings from
the International Decision Sciences Institute
Conference, Athens, Greece.
 King, R. C. & Xia, W. (1997). Media
Appropriateness: Effects of Experience on
Communication Media Choice, Journal of
Decision Sciences, 28(4), 877– 910.
 Morris, M. G, & Venkatesh, V. (2000). Age
differences in technology adoption
decisions: implications for a changing
workforce, Personnel Psychology 53 (2),
375–403.
 Nah, F. F., Lau, J. L. & Kuang, J. (2001).
Critical Factors for Successful
Implementation of Enterprise Systems,
Business Process Management, 7(3), 285–
296.
 Rawstorne, P., Jayasuriya, R. & Caputi, P.
(1998). An integrative model of information
systems use in mandatory environments.
Proceedings of the Nineteenth International
Conference on InformationSystems,
Helsinki, Finland.
 Seymour, L; Makanya, W; & Berrange, S.
(2007). End-Users, Acceptance of Enterprise
Reasource Planning Systems: Investigation
of Antecedents.
 Skinner, Ellen A. (1995). Perceived
Control, Motivation, and Coping, Thousand
Oaks, CA, Sage, 1995.
 Soh, C; Kien, S; & Tay- Yap, J. (2000).
Cultural Fits and Misfits: Is ERP a
Universal Solution?
 Taylor, S.,& Todd, P. (1995).
Understanding information technology
usage: A test ofcompeting models,
Information systems research, 6(2), 144-
176.
 Tchokogué, A., Bareil, C. & Duguay, C. R.
(2005). Key lessons from the
implementation of an ERP at Pratt &
Whitney Canada, International Journal of
Production Economics, 95, 151–163.
 Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B.,
& Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of
information technology: Toward a unified
view, MIS Quarterly, (27:3), pp 425-478.
 Ward, J., Hemingway, C. & Daniel, E.
(2000). A framework for addressing the
organisational issues of enterprise systems
implementation, Journal of Strategic
Information Systems, 14, 97–119.
 Watson, E. E; & Schneider, H. (1998).
Using ERP in Education.
 Webster,J ; & Martocchio, J. J. (1992).
Microcomputer playfulness: developmentof
a measure with workplace implications,
MISQuarterly 16 (2), 201–266.
 Witkin, H. A; & Goodenough, D.R. (1981).
Cognitive Styles: Essence and Origins. New
York, International Universities Press.
 Yi, Y., Wu, Z. & Tung, L. L. (2005/2006).
How Individual Differences Influence
Technology Usage Behaviour? Towards an
Integrated Framework, Journal of Computer
Information Systems, 46(2), 52-62.
 Ying, T.C; Wang, E. T. G. (2004).
Collective Participation Organizational
Innovation: An Empirical Examination of
ERP Implementatin.
 Yuan, Y., Fulk, J. & Shumate, M. (2005).
Individual participation in organizational
information commons.
 Zinkhan, G. M; Joachimsthaler, E. A; &
Kinnear, T. C. (1987). Individual
differences and marketing decision support
system usage and satisfaction, Journal of
Marketing Research 24 (2, 208–214