System Design Features and Repeated Use of Electronic Data Exchanges



Download 269.61 Kb.
Page3/5
Date09.08.2017
Size269.61 Kb.
1   2   3   4   5

Research Implications

These results show how important it is to study inter-organizational phenomena over time. The study presents findings consistent with past research (e.g., [64]) in which initial (T1) outcome feedback did not have a significant effect on data exchange information quality beliefs. In T2 use of electronic data exchanges, however, outcome feedback was found to have a significant impact on PIQ. As a result, the measurement of constructs across time should enable the examination of a network of beliefs that relate to the success of data exchanges. Limiting the examination to initial use exchanges fails to capture this.

We used structural assurance [30] as a control variable, and found that it affected intention to use directly, although this impact decreased somewhat in T2. Table 6 shows that while much of structural assurance’s effect was suppressed by PIQ (as shown in the two halves of Table 6, where structural assurance had highly increased effects when PIQ was not present), it still had a significant effect. Structural assurance implies that institutional controls are in place to protect the exchange user from transactional problems, providing a safe and secure environment. This should be important to exchange customers. Future research should expand on this finding by modeling the effects of other variables (e.g., asset specificity, goal incongruence).

The results show PIQ becoming a more powerful predictor of intent to use over two time periods, which expands on the findings of Nicolaou and McKnight [64]. Future research should examine whether this trend continues indefinitely or slows/stops over time. We speculate that it continues for a while and then slows, as direct quality of the user’s exchange experience becomes more salient.

Table 9 shows several other ways to expand beyond this study. First, researchers should use other theoretical perspectives to examine the electronic data exchange across time. Table 9 shows that exchanges could be researched by comparing our theory to such other theories as the elaboration likelihood model [69] or the vulnerability-stress-adaptation model Karney and Bradbury [42]. Second, research studies could use the current research model to study people-to-people relationships in other IS domains. For example, the IS-vendor outsourcing relationship and the user-systems developer relationships could also be studied using similar relational constructs as this study used. Control transparency could be adapted to reflect a similar enhancer of communication between people. Quality of information exchanged between people would be the result. Third, this and similar models should be tested using other methods. Our two period study should be retested with more time periods in order to examine longer term effects. In conjunction with the elaboration likelihood model of cognitive processing and attitude change, for example, future models could examine repeated interactions and simulate the optimal number of repetitions needed to achieve enduring attitudes that are resistant to incremental cues and predictive of future behavior. We also recommend including measures that are not self-reported [42].

Study Limitations

This study is limited to one experimental context that may or may not generalize to other contexts. Future research in other contexts and with other experimental or field-study methods can test how well these results generalize. The experimental setting used here does not represent the complexity one would find in real world exchanges among competing and cooperating partners [61]. Our setting more closely resembles a “spot market” exchange than the complex, relational exchange one would find between a major manufacturer (e.g., Ford) and its suppliers. Future research should attempt to capture more of the richness of such real world exchange settings. Another limitation is that several of the PIQ items did not work, so we had to eliminate them. This suggests more measurement work is needed to further refine and validate the PIQ scale of measurement. The control transparency treatment is another limitation. While we tried to form the treatment to represent the transparency of the data coming back to the user about the order s/he placed, the treatment also may indicate to the user that proper controls exist. We caution that the results may be due to either the data transparency or the control the transparency communicates or both.



Implications for Practice

Exchange providers should be careful to provide the right kind of information transparency and outcome feedback on their exchange. Our study finds both design features influence perceived information quality (PIQ), but at different points in time. We also find that PIQ affects exchange success. That is, favorable perceptions of information quality produce greater customer intent to continue to use the exchange. Hence, efforts to improve control transparency, outcome feedback and PIQ will have a large impact on intent to use the exchange. But at T1, users provide the supplier some outcome feedback slack that is not continued long.

No matter how transparent the exchange communication is, the repeated reception of negative feedback about exchange fulfillment outcomes will harm customer PIQ perceptions. This research shows that while positive feedback becomes more valued with continued use, two rounds of negative shipment feedback will negate any positive initial impressions gained from a best-practice exchange design. Therefore, providers should make sure their fulfillment mechanisms work well, and should provide this positive feedback to their customers on a timely basis. This study not only guides organizations to design online data exchanges properly, but also demonstrates the consequences of repeated online transaction failure.

Conclusion

This study produced two key findings. First, it demonstrated clearly that outcome feedback affects perceived information quality (PIQ) and intent to use the exchange differently between the first and second transaction (T1 and T2), occurring within a two-week time period. Second, it showed that negative outcome feedback decreases the effects of control transparency on the intent to use the exchange from T1 to T2. In addition, it shows that PIQ becomes even more predictive of a user’s intent to continue using the exchange by the second transaction. Overall, it shows that the two system design interventions of control transparency and outcome feedback can influence intent to use electronic data exchanges. However, a system designer should not rely solely on providing transparent signals about the data exchanged. While this is found important in both of the first two transactions of use, the effects diminish due to outcome feedback change from the first to the second transaction. Both system designers who employ electronic data exchanges and researchers who examine their effective design, must consider the effects of both control transparency and outcome feedback interventions across time.



REFERENCES
1. Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103 (May 1988), 411-423.

2. Axelrod, R. The evolution of cooperation. New York: Basic Books, 1984.

3. Bailey, J. E. and S. W. Pearson. Development of a tool for measuring and analyzing computer user satisfaction. Management Science, 29 (May 1983), 530-545.

4. Baron, R. M. and Kenny, D. A. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 6 (1986), 1173-1182.

5. Bensaou, M. Interorganizational cooperation: The role of information technology – An empirical comparison of U.S. and Japanese supplier relations. Information Systems Research, 8 (June 1997), 107-124.

6. Berscheid, E. and Graziano, W. ‘The initiation of social relationships and interpersonal attraction’, In Burgess, R. L. and Huston, T. L. (eds.). Social Exchange in Developing Relationships, New York: Academic Press, 1979, pp. 31-60.

7. Blau, P. Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: Wiley, 1964.

8. Boudreau, M., Gefen, D. and Straub, W. Validation in information systems research: A state-of-the-art assessment. MIS Quarterly, 25 (March 2001), 1-16.

9. Bovee, M. W. Information Quality: A Conceptual Framework and Empirical Validation. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Kansas, 2004.

10. Bradley, R.V., Pridmore, J.L., and Byrd, T.A. Information systems success in the context of different corporate cultural types: An empirical investigation. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23 (Fall 2006), 267-294.

11. Carte, T. A. and Russell, C. J. In pursuit of moderation: Nine common errors and their solutions. MIS Quarterly, 27 (September 2003), 479-501.

12. Chin, W. The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In Marcoulides, G. A. (ed.). Modern Methods for Business Research. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 1998, pp. 295-336.

13. Churchill, G. A., Jr. A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16, 1 (1979), 64–73.

14. Cole, D.A. and Maxwell, S.E. Testing meditational models with longitudinal data: Questions and tips in the use of structural equation modeling. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112, 4 (2003), 558-577.

15. Daniel, E.M. and White, A. The future of inter-organisational system linkages: Findings of an international Delphi study. European Journal of Information Systems, 14 (2005), 188–203.

16. Davis, F. D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly. 13, 3 (1989), 319–340.

17. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P. and Warshaw, P. R. User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models, Management Science, 35, 8 (1989), 982-1003.

18. DeLone, W. H. and McLean, E. R. Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research, 3, 1 (1992), 60-95.

19. DeLone, W. H. and McLean, E. R. The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems 19, 4 (2003), 9-30.

20. Doll, W. J. and Torkzadeh, G. The measurement of end-user computing satisfaction. MIS Quarterly, 12 (June 1988), 259-274.

21. Early, P. C. Trust, perceived importance of praise and criticism, and work performance: An examination of feedback in the United States and England. Journal of Management, 12, 4 (1986), 457-473

22. Fazio, R. H. and Zanna, M. P. Direct experience and attitude-behavior consistency. In Berkowitz, L. (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 14, New York: Academic Press, 1981, pp. 162-202

23. Fiske, S. T. Thinking is for doing: Portraits of social cognition from daguerreotype to laserphoto. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 6 (1992), 877-889.

24. Fiske, S.T. Social cognition and social perception. Annual Review of Psychology, 44 (1993), 155-194.

25. Fiske, S.T. and Taylor, S. E. Social Cognition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1991.

26. Fiske, S.T. and Taylor, S. E. Social cognition: From brains to culture. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

27. Fornell, C. and Bookstein, F. Two structural equation approaches: LISREL and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. Journal of Marketing Research, 19 (1982), 440-452.

28. Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (1981), 39-50.

29. Freund, R.J. and Wilson, W.J. Statistical Methods, 2nd ed. Boston, MA: Academic Press, 2003.

30. Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., and Straub, D.W. Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly. 27 (March 2003a), 51-90.

31. Gefen, D., Karahanna, E. and Straub, D.W. Inexperience and experience with online stores: The importance of TAM and trust. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 50, 3 (2003b), 307-321.

32. Gefen, D. and Ridings, C. M. Implementation Team Responsiveness and User Evaluation of Customer Relationship Management: A Quasi-Experimental Design Study of Social Exchange Theory. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19, 1 (2002), 47-69.

33. Gordon, M. E., Slade, L. A., and Schmitt, N. The ‘science of the sophomore’ revisited: From conjecture to empiricism. Academy of Management Review, 11, 1 (1986), 191-207.

34. Goodhue, D. L. Understanding user evaluations of information systems. Management Science, 41 (December 1995), 1827-1844.

35. Goodhue, D. L. Development and measurement validity of a task-technology fit instrument for user evaluations of information systems. Decision Sciences, 29 (Winter 1998), 105-138.

36. Greene, M. B2B US Interactive Marketing Forecast, 2009 to 2014. Cambridge, MA: Forrester Research, Inc., 2010.

37. Gulati, R. and Gargiulo, M. Where do interorganizational networks come from? American Journal of Sociology, 104 (1999), 1439-1493.

38. Hart, P. and Saunders, C. Power and trust: Critical factors in the adoption and use of electronic data interchange. Organization Science, 8, 1 (1997), 23-42.

39. Heidi, J. B. and Stump, R. L. Performance implications of buyer-supplier relationships in industrial markets: A transaction cost explanation. Journal of Business Research, 32 (1995), 57-66.

40. Homans, G. Social behavior as exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 62 (1958), 597-606.

41. Jarvenpaa, S. L., Knoll, K. and Leidner, D. E. Is Anybody Out There? Antecedents of Trust in Global Virtual Teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 14 (1998), 29-64.

42. Karney, B. R. and Bradbury, T. N. The longitudinal course of marital quality and stability: A review of theory, method, and research. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 1 (1995), 3-34.

43. Kayande, U., Bruyn, A.D., Lilien, G.L., Rangaswamy, A., and van Bruggen, G.H. How incorporating feedback mechanisms in a DSS affects DSS evaluations. Information Systems Research, 20, 4 (2009), 527-546.

44. Keil, M., Tan, B. C. Y., Wei, K., Saarinen, T., Tuunainen, V., and Wassenaar, A. A cross-cultural study on escalation of commitment behavior in software projects. MIS Quarterly, 24 (June 2000), 299-325.

45. Kim, P., Ferrin, D. L., Cooper, C. and Dirks, K. T. Removing the shadow of suspicion: The effects of apology versus denial for repairing competence- versus integrity-based trust violations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89 (2004), 104-118.

46. Kim, S.S. and Malhotra, N.K. A longitudinal model of continued IS use: An integrative view of four mechanism underlying postadoption phenomena. Management Science 51, 5 (2005), 741-755.

47. Kirsch, L. J. Portfolios of control modes and IS project management. Information Systems Research, 8, 3 (1997), 215–239.

48. Kramer, R. M. Trust and distrust in organizations: Emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Annual Review of Psychology, 50 (1999), 569-598.

49. Levine, J.M., Resnick, L.B. and Higgins, E.T. Social foundations of cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 44 (1993), 585-612.

50. Liu, C., Marchewka, J. T., Lu, J. C., and Yu, S. Beyond concern: A privacy-trust-behavioral intention model of electronic commerce. Information & Management, 42 (2004), 127-141.

51. Lewicki, R. J. and Bunker, B. B. Developing and Maintaining Trust in Work Relationships. In Kramer, R. M. and Tyler, T. R. (eds.) Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1996, pp. 114-139.

52. Luhmann, N. Trust and Power. New York: John Wiley, 1979.

53. MacKinnon, D. P. and Dwyer, J. H. Estimating mediated effects in prevention studies. Evaluation Review, 17 (1993), 144-158.

54. McEvily, B. Perone, V. and Zaheer, A. Trust as an organizing principle, Organization Science, 14, 1 (2003), 91-103.

55. McKinney, V., Yoon, K., and Zahedi, F. M. The measurement of Web-customer satisfaction: An expectation and disconfirmation approach,” Information Systems Research, 13, 3 (2002), 296-315.

56. McKnight, D. H., Cummings, L. L., and Chervany, N. L. Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships. Academy of Management Review, 23 (1998), 473-490.

57. Miller, K. Communication Theories. New York: McGraw Hill, 2005.

58. Mollering, G. Trust, institutions, agency: Towards a neoinstitutional theory of trust. In Bachmann, R. and Zaheer, A. (eds.) Handbook of Trust Research. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2006, pp. 355-376.

59. Molm, L.D. Coercive Power in Social Exchange. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1997.

60. Mukhopadhyay, T. and Kekre, S. Strategic and operational benefits of electronic integration in B2B procurement processes. Management Science, 48, 10 (2002), 1301-1313.

61. Nalebuff, B. J. and Brandenburger, A. M. Co-opetition: Competitive and cooperative business strategies for the digital economy. Strategy & Leadership, 25 (November/December 1997), 28-35.

62. Nelson, R.R., Todd, P.A. and Wixom, B.H. Antecedents of information and system quality: An empirical examination within the context of data warehousing. Journal of Management Information Systems, 21 (Spring 2005), 199-235.

63. Nicolaou, A. I. Research issues on the use of ERPS in inter-organizational relationships. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 9, 4 (2008), 216-226.

64. Nicolaou, A. I. and McKnight, D. H. Perceived Information Quality in Data Exchanges: Effects on Risk, Trust, Expected Performance and Intention to Use. Information Systems Research, 17, 4 (2006), 332-351.

65. Orlikowski, W. J. and Iacono, C. S. Research Commentary: Desperately seeking the “IT” in IT research: A call to theorizing the IT artifact. Information Systems Research, 12, 2 (2001), 121-134.

66. Pavlou, P. Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 7, 3 (2003), 101-134.

67. Pavlou, P.A. and Gefen, D. Building effective online marketplaces with institution-based trust. Information Systems Research, 15, 1 (2004), 37-59.

68. Pavlou, P.A. and Gefen, D. Psychological contract violation in online marketplaces: Antecedents, consequences, and moderating role. Information Systems Research, 16, 4 (2005), 372-399.

69. Petty, R.E. and Cacioppo, J.T. Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1986.

70. Riggins, F. J., Kriebel, C. H., and Mukhopadhyay, T. The growth of interorganizational systems in the presence of network externalities. Management Science, 40, 8 (1994), 984-998.

71. Riker, W. H. The nature of trust. In Tedeschi, J. T. (ed.) Perspectives on Social Power, Chicago: Aldine, 1971, pp. 63-81.

72. Rindfleisch, A. and Heide, K. B. Transaction cost analysis: Past, present, and future applications. Journal of Marketing, 61 (October 1997), 30-54

73. Robey, D., Smith, L. A. and Vijayasarathy, L. R. Perceptions of conflict and success in information systems development projects. Journal of Management Information Systems, 10, 1 (1993), 123-139.

74. Rubin, J. Z., Pruitt, D. G., and Kim, S. H. Social Conflict: Escalation, Stalemate, and Settlement (2nd ed.), New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994.

75. Rustagi, S., King, W. R., and Kirsch, L. J. Predictors of formal control usage in IT outsourcing partnerships. Information Systems Research 19, 2 (2008), 126-143.

76. Singh, J. and Sirdeshmukh, D. Agency and trust mechanisms in consumer satisfaction and loyalty judgments. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28, 1 (2000), 150-167.

77. Sobel, M. E. Asymptotic intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. In Leinhart, S. (ed.), Sociological methodology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1982, pp. 290-312.

78. Straub, D. W. Validating instruments in MIS research. MIS Quarterly, 13 (June 1989), 147-169.

79. Thibaut, J. W. and Kelley, H. H. The Social Psychology of Groups. New York: Wiley, 1959.

80. Tsiros, M. and Mittal, V. Regret: A model of its antecedents and consequences in consumer decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (March 2000), 401-417.

81. Venkatesh, V. and Speier, C. Computer technology training in the workplace: A longitudinal investigation of the effect of mood. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 79 (1999), 1-28.

82. Venkatesh, V. and Davis, F.D. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46, 2 (2000), 186-204.

83. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, F.D., and Davis, G.B. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27, 3 (2003), 425-478.

84. Vollmer, K. B2B Integration Trends: Message Formats. Cambridge, MA: Forrester Research, Inc., 2007.

85. Walker, G. Asset choice and supplier performance in two organizations—US and Japanese. Organization Science, 5, 4 (1994), 583-593.

86. Wang, E. T. G. and Seidmann, A. Electronic data interchange: Competitive externalities and strategic implementation policies. Management Science, 41, 3 (1995), 401-418.

87. Webster, J. and Trevino, L. K. Rational and social theories as complementary explanations of communication media choices: Two policy-capturing studies. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 6 (1995), 1544-1572.

88. Yoo, Y. and Alavi, M. Media and group cohesion: Relative influences on social presence, task participation, and group consensus. MIS Quarterly, 25, 3 (2001), 371-390.

89. Zaheer, A., McEvily, B., and Perrone, V. Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance. Organization Science, 9 (March-April 1998), 141-159.

TABLE 1

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN





Outcome Feedback

Ctrl Transparency:

General Feedback

Specific Positive

Specific Negative

Hi

Exchanges A and C *

Exchanges A and D

Exchanges A and E

Lo

Exchanges B and C

Exchanges B and D

Exchanges B and E

* Note: Letters indicate the types of data exchanges used in each experimental cell. The first letter indicates the exchange used to vary control transparency (A or B; hi/lo transparency, respectively), while the second letter indicates the exchange used to vary outcome feedback (C, D, or E; general, specific positive, specific negative feedback, respectively).


Download 269.61 Kb.

Share with your friends:
1   2   3   4   5




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2020
send message

    Main page