IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v14y2003i1p47-65.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Informational Influence in Organizations: An Integrated Approach to Knowledge Adoption

Author

Listed:
  • Stephanie Watts Sussman

    (Boston University, School of Management, 595 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02106)

  • Wendy Schneier Siegal

    (Boston University, School of Management, 595 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02106)

Abstract

This research investigates how knowledge workers are influenced to adopt the advice that they receive in mediated contexts. The research integrates the Technology Acceptance Model (Davis 1989) with dual-process models of informational influence (e.g., Petty and Cacioppo 1986, Chaiken and Eagly 1976) to build a theoretical model of information adoption. This model highlights the assessment of information usefulness as a mediator of the information adoption process. Importantly, the model draws on the dual-process models to make predictions about the antecedents of informational usefulness under different processing conditions.The model is investigated qualitatively first, using interviews of a sample of 40 consultants, and then quantitatively on another sample of 63 consultants from the same international consulting organization. Data reflect participants' perceptions of actual e-mails they received from colleagues consisting of advice or recommendations. Results support the model, suggesting that the process models used to understand information adoption can be generalized to the field of knowledge management, and that usefulness serves a mediating role between influence processes and information adoption. Organizational knowledge work is becoming increasingly global. This research offers a model for understanding knowledge transfer using computer-mediated communication.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephanie Watts Sussman & Wendy Schneier Siegal, 2003. "Informational Influence in Organizations: An Integrated Approach to Knowledge Adoption," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 14(1), pages 47-65, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:14:y:2003:i:1:p:47-65
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.14.1.47.14767
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.14.1.47.14767
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.14.1.47.14767?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael H. Zack & James L. McKenney, 1995. "Social Context and Interaction in Ongoing Computer-Supported Management Groups," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(4), pages 394-422, August.
    2. Lee Sproull & Sara Kiesler, 1986. "Reducing Social Context Cues: Electronic Mail in Organizational Communication," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(11), pages 1492-1512, November.
    3. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    4. Sniezek, Janet A. & Buckley, Timothy, 1995. "Cueing and Cognitive Conflict in Judge-Advisor Decision Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 159-174, May.
    5. Harvey, Nigel & Harries, Clare & Fischer, Ilan, 2000. "Using Advice and Assessing Its Quality," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 252-273, March.
    6. M. Lynne Markus, 1994. "Electronic Mail as the Medium of Managerial Choice," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 502-527, November.
    7. Ronald E. Rice, 1992. "Task Analyzability, Use of New Media, and Effectiveness: A Multi-Site Exploration of Media Richness," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(4), pages 475-500, November.
    8. James E. Bailey & Sammy W. Pearson, 1983. "Development of a Tool for Measuring and Analyzing Computer User Satisfaction," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(5), pages 530-545, May.
    9. Alan R. Dennis & Susan T. Kinney, 1998. "Testing Media Richness Theory in the New Media: The Effects of Cues, Feedback, and Task Equivocality," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 256-274, September.
    10. Viswanath Venkatesh & Fred D. Davis, 2000. "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 186-204, February.
    11. Michael H. Zack, 1993. "Interactivity and Communication Mode Choice in Ongoing Management Groups," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 4(3), pages 207-239, September.
    12. David Constant & Lee Sproull & Sara Kiesler, 1996. "The Kindness of Strangers: The Usefulness of Electronic Weak Ties for Technical Advice," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(2), pages 119-135, April.
    13. Ratneshwar, S & Chaiken, Shelly, 1991. "Comprehension's Role in Persuasion: The Case of Its Moderating Effect on the Persuasive Impact of," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 18(1), pages 52-62, June.
    14. John Seely Brown & Paul Duguid, 1991. "Organizational Learning and Communities-of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning, and Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 40-57, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Martha L. Maznevski & Katherine M. Chudoba, 2000. "Bridging Space Over Time: Global Virtual Team Dynamics and Effectiveness," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(5), pages 473-492, October.
    2. Michele Griessmair & Sabine T. Koeszegi, 2009. "Exploring the Cognitive-Emotional Fugue in Electronic Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 213-234, May.
    3. Koo, Chulmo & Wati, Yulia & Jung, Jason J., 2011. "Examination of how social aspects moderate the relationship between task characteristics and usage of social communication technologies (SCTs) in organizations," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 445-459.
    4. JoAnne Yates & Wanda J. Orlikowski & Kazuo Okamura, 1999. "Explicit and Implicit Structuring of Genres in Electronic Communication: Reinforcement and Change of Social Interaction," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(1), pages 83-103, February.
    5. Willem Standaert & Steve Muylle & Amit Basu, 2016. "An empirical study of the effectiveness of telepresence as a business meeting mode," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 323-339, December.
    6. Ofir Turel & Catherine E. Connelly, 2012. "Team Spirit: The Influence of Psychological Collectivism on the Usage of E-Collaboration Tools," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 703-725, September.
    7. Sharath Sasidharan & Radhika Santhanam & Daniel J. Brass & Vallabh Sambamurthy, 2012. "The Effects of Social Network Structure on Enterprise Systems Success: A Longitudinal Multilevel Analysis," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(3-part-1), pages 658-678, September.
    8. Meissner, Jens O., 2005. "Relationship Quality in the Context of Computer-Mediated Communication - A social constructionist approach," Working papers 2005/15, Faculty of Business and Economics - University of Basel.
    9. Papadopoulos, Thanos & Stamati, Teta & Nopparuch, Pawit, 2013. "Exploring the determinants of knowledge sharing via employee weblogs," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 133-146.
    10. Lionel P. Robert & Alan R. Dennis & Manju K. Ahuja, 2008. "Social Capital and Knowledge Integration in Digitally Enabled Teams," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(3), pages 314-334, September.
    11. Yates, JoAnne, 1951- & Orlikowski, Wanda J. & Okamura, Kazuo., 1995. "Explicit and implicit structuring of genres : electronic communication in a Japanese R&D organization," Working papers 3809-95., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    12. Kexin Zhao & Bin Zhang & Xue Bai, 2018. "Estimating Contextual Motivating Factors in Virtual Interorganizational Communities of Practice: Peer Effects and Organizational Influences," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 910-927, December.
    13. Gabriel Szulanski & Dimo Ringov & Robert J. Jensen, 2016. "Overcoming Stickiness: How the Timing of Knowledge Transfer Methods Affects Transfer Difficulty," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 304-322, April.
    14. Pranpreya Sriwannawit & Ulf Sandström, 2015. "Large-scale bibliometric review of diffusion research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1615-1645, February.
    15. Jonathan W. Palmer, 2002. "Web Site Usability, Design, and Performance Metrics," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 151-167, June.
    16. Rajiv D. Banker & Robert J. Kauffman, 2004. "50th Anniversary Article: The Evolution of Research on Information Systems: A Fiftieth-Year Survey of the Literature in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(3), pages 281-298, March.
    17. Sasmita Palo & Linu Charles, 2015. "Investigating Factors Affecting Knowledge Sharing Intention of Salespeople," Management and Labour Studies, XLRI Jamshedpur, School of Business Management & Human Resources, vol. 40(3-4), pages 302-324, August.
    18. Ned Kock, 2004. "The Psychobiological Model: Towards a New Theory of Computer-Mediated Communication Based on Darwinian Evolution," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 327-348, June.
    19. Gerardine DeSanctis & Peter Monge, 1999. "Introduction to the Special Issue: Communication Processes for Virtual Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(6), pages 693-703, December.
    20. Brian E. Mennecke & Joseph S. Valacich & Bradley C. Wheeler, 2000. "The Effects of Media and Task on User Performance: A Test of the Task-Media Fit Hypothesis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 9(6), pages 507-529, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:14:y:2003:i:1:p:47-65. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.