A psychometric measurement for assessing individual appropriation of a technology

Christina Tsoni

Abstract


Appropriation is defined as being at once a psychological state and a behavior. However, till now research dealing with appropriation of technologies has mainly focused on tool usage, referring to the behavioral aspects of the concept. Therefore, there is a lack of measurement instruments assessing appropriation as user feeling. Our research objective is to propose a psychometric measurement of individual appropriation of a technology. We consider that the study of user perceptions of appropriation would allow a better understanding of the process of appropriation and especially of non appropriation. A twofold research design was deployed within a bank a year after a technology change implementation. Firstly, an exploratory study was conducted containing 13 semi-directive interviews with technology users. Its objective was to understand the way users define appropriation. User discourse has been coded and regrouped in relevant themes. Secondly, the identified themes were used to generate items for a quantitative survey assessing individual appropriation. In total, 332 complete surveys were collected. The statistical analysis identified (PCA) and validated (CFA) two dimensions of individual appropriation of a technology: the Preference for the technology, with regard to other alternatives, and the Mastery of the technology. Preference and Mastery have straight forward implications for managers during technology change implementation. They invite managers to deal with both psychological and behavioral aspects of user technology appropriation. Whereas Mastery is necessary to efficiently use the technology, Preference refers to user personal interest to the technology. We believe that considering at once psychometric and behavioral indicators of appropriation would allow a better comprehension and assessment of the concept. In particular in new technology post implementation contexts, knowing individual perceptions of appropriation would help managers to better chose accompaniment means and assess their impact on individual appropriation.

Keywords


Individual appropriation, technology, obligatory use, measurement scale

Full Text:

 Subscribers Only

References


Agarwal, R., Prasad, J., (1997), “The Role of Innovation Characteristics and Perceived Voluntariness in the Acceptance of Information Technologies”, Decision Sciences, Vol. 28, N° 3, pp. 557-582

Barley, S.R., (1986), Technology as an Occasion of Structuring: Evidence from Observations of CT Scanners and the Social Order of Radiology Departments, Administrative Science Quarterly, 31, 78-108.

Bonnin, G., (2002), Magasin et expérience de magasinage : le rôle de l’appropriation, Décisions Marketing, 28 : octobre-décembre, 65-75.

Callon, M., Latour, B., (1981), « Le grand Léviathan s’apprivoise-t-il ? », in M. Akrich, M.Callon et B. Latour, Sociologie de la Traduction : textes fondateurs, Les Presses Mines Paris, Collection Sciences Sociales, 2006, pp. 11-32

Carù, A., Cova, B., (2003), Approche empirique de l’immersion dans l’expérience de consommation : les opérations d’appropriation, Recherche et Applications en Marketing, 18 : 2, 47-65.

Chin, W.W., Gopal, Salisbury, W.D., (1997), Advancing the Theory of Adaptive Structuration: the Development of a Scale to measure Faithfulness of Appropriation, Information Systems Research, 8 : 4, 342-367.

Churchill, G.A., (1979), A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs, Journal of Marketing Research, 16, 64-73.

Davis, F.D., (1989), “Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use and User Acceptance of Information Technology”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13, N° 3, pp. 319-339

Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M., (1985), Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior, New York : Plenum.

DeSanctis, G., Poole, M.S., (1994), Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory, Organization Science, 5 : 2, 121-147.

Deschenaux, F., Bourdon, S., (2005), Introduction à l’analyse qualitative informatisée à l’aide du logiciel QSR Nvivo2.0, Les Cahiers pédagogiques de l’Association pour la recherche qualitative, Bibliothèque nationale du Québec (http://www.recherche-qualitative.qc.ca), 45p.

Evrard, Y., (1985), Validité des mesures et causalité en marketing, Revue Française du Marketing, 101, 17-32.

Fischer, G., N., (1983), Le travail et son espace : de l’appropriation à l’aménagement, Paris : Dunod.

Fischer, G., N., (1997), Psychologie de l’environnement social, Paris : Dunod.

Grimand, A. (ed.), (2006), L’appropriation des outils de gestion : vers de nouvelles perspectives théoriques ?, Publications de l’Université de Saint Etienne, Coll. Gestion.

Haumesser, M., (2004), « La « seconde nature », entre propre et appropriation », in J.-P. Zarader (sous la dir.), La propriété : le propre, l’appropriation CAPES/Agrégation Philosophie, Ellipses, Paris, 93-116.

Hussenot, A., (2007), « Dynamiques d’appropriation organisationnelle des solutions TIC : une approche en termes de « démarches itératives d’appropriation » », Systèmes d’Information et Management, Vol. 12, N°1, 39-53

Hussenot, A., (2009), « Manager l’appropriation des solutions TIC : des controverses aux modes d’appropriation », Systèmes d’Information et Management, Vol. 14, N°2, 66-85

Isaac, H., Leclercq, A., Besseyre des Horts, C.-H., (2006), « Adoption and appropriation: towards a new theoretical framework. An explanatory research on mobile technologies in French companies”, Systèmes d’Information et Management, Vol. 11, N° 2, 9-47.

Jasperson, J.S., (2005), “A comprehensive conceptualisation of post-adaptive behaviors associated with information technology enabled work systems”, MIS Quarterly, vol. 29, N°3, pp. 525-557

Jöreskog, K.G. (1971), “Statistical analysis of a set of congeneric tests”, Psychometrica, 36, 109-133.

Karahanna, E., Straub, D.W., (1999), “The Psychological Origins of Perceived Usefulness and Ease of Use”, Information and Management, Vol. 35, N° 4, pp. 237-250

Martineau, R., (2012), « Les usages types d’un outil de gestion des risques à l’hôpital », Management et Avenir, Vol.54, pp. 216-237.

Miles, M.B, Huberman, A.M., (2003), Analyse des données qualitatives, Traduction de la 2ième édition américaine par M.H Rispal, Paris : De Boeck.

Millerand, F., (1999), “Usages des NTIC : les approches de la diffusion, de l’innovation et de l’appropriation”, http://composite.org/99.1/articles/ntic_2.htm, 20 p.

Moore, G.C., Benbasat, I., (1991), “Development of an Instrument to Measure Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation”, Information Systems Research, Vol. 2, N° 3, pp. 192-222

Orlikowski, W., (1992), The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology and Organizations, Organization Science, 3, 398-472.

Orlikowski, W., Robey, D., (1991), Information Technology and the Structuring of Organizations, Information Systems Research, 2 : 2, 143-169.

Prohansky, H.M., Ittelson, W.H., Rivlin, L.G., (1970), Environmental psychology – man and his physical setting, New York : Holt, Rinehart et Winston.

Roehrich, G., (1994), Innovativités hédoniste et sociale : proposition d’une échelle de mesure, Recherche et Applications en Marketing, IX : 2, 19-42.

Rogers, E., (1962), Diffusion of Innovations, Free Press, New York.

Ross, M., Sicoly, F., (1979), Egocentric biases in availability and attribution, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 322-336.

Roussel, P., Durrieu, F., Campoy, E., El Akremi, A., (2002), Méthodes d’Equations structurelles : Recherche et Applications en Gestion, Paris : Economica.

Rowine, B., (2005), « La “traduction” une démarche de conduite du changement organisationnel lié aux TIC », Revue Gestion 2000, Dossier spécial, La gestion des changements stratégiques », N° 5, septembre-octobre, pp. 61-76

Salisbury, W.D., Chin, W.W., Gopal, A., Newsted, P.R., (2002), Research Report: Better Theory through Measurement –Developing a Scale to Capture Consensus on Appropriation, Information Systems Research, 13 : 1, 91-103.

Serfaty-Garzon, P., (2003), L’appropriation, in M. Segaud, J. Brun et J.-C., Driant (sous la dir.), Dictionnaire critique de l’habitat et du logement, Paris, Editions Armand Colin, 27-30 et aussi sur le site : http://www.perlaserfaty.net/texte4.htm.

Strauss, A.L., Corbin, J., (1998), Basics Qualitative Research Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 2ième édition, Sage Publications.

Strong, T.B., (1996), Nietzsche's Political Misappropriation, The Cambridge Companion to Nietzsche, Eds. Bernd Magnus and Kathleen M. Higgins. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Thiétart, R.-A. et al. (2003), Méthodes de recherche en management, 2ième édition, Dunod, Paris.

Vaujany (de), F.-X., (1999), « Stylisation de l’appropriation individuelle des technologies Internet à partir de la TSA », Systèmes d’Information et Management, N° 1, Vol. 4, p. 57-74

Vaujany (de), F.-X., (sous la dir.), (2005), De la conception à l’usage : éléments d’un management de l’appropriation des objets et des outils de gestion, Collection « Questions de Société », Editions EMS.

Vaujauny (de), F.-X., (2006), Pour une théorie de l’appropriation des outils de gestion : vers un dépassement de l’opposition conception-usage, Revue Management et Avenir, 9 : juin, 109-126.

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., Davis, F. D., (2003), “User Acceptance of Information Technology : Toward a Unified view”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 27, N° 3, pp. 425-478

Voynnet Fourboul, C., (2004), Analyse des données qualitatives et analyse de contenu : vers une distinction, in H. Savall, M. Bonnet et M. Peron (sous la dir.), Traversée des frontières entre méthodes de recherche qualitatives et quantitatives, First International Co-sponsored Conference, Research Methods Division, 18-20 Mars 2004, Lyon.

Wicklund, R. A., Reuter, T., Schiffmann, R., (1988), Acting on Ideas: appropriation to One’s Self, Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 9 : 1, 13-31.

Zwick, W.R., et Velicer, W. F. (1982), Variables influencing four rules for determining the number of components to retain, Multivariate Behavioral Research, 17, 253‑269.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.9876/sim.v17i4.502

Copyright (c)