IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/oabmxx/v4y2017i1p1339338.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-level analysis framework for reviewing IDT-based studies

Author

Listed:
  • Mahdi Omidi
  • Qingfei Min
  • Ali Omidi

Abstract

Researchers have for years emphasized the value of multi-level studies. This research attempts to develop a framework for analyzing IT adoption studies from a multi-level perspective. Specifically, it examines research involving Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT), using a framework devised on the multi-level analysis guidelines proposed by two studies. Four empirical IDT-based research papers are reviewed by applying the developed multi-level analysis framework. In doing so, this paper finds that by following the proposed framework, researchers can avoid the weakness of level bias caused by single-level analysis. In addition, the framework provides insights for managerial strategies in successful information system implementation, adoption and diffusion. Finally, the proposed framework can be referenced by future researchers for conducting multi-level analysis on IT adoption-related topics.

Suggested Citation

  • Mahdi Omidi & Qingfei Min & Ali Omidi, 2017. "Multi-level analysis framework for reviewing IDT-based studies," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 1339338-133, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:oabmxx:v:4:y:2017:i:1:p:1339338
    DOI: 10.1080/23311975.2017.1339338
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/23311975.2017.1339338
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/23311975.2017.1339338?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elfreda A. Chatman, 1986. "Diffusion theory: A review and test of a conceptual model in information diffusion," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 37(6), pages 377-386, November.
    2. Gershon Feder & Gerald T. O'Mara, 1982. "On Information and Innovation Diffusion: A Bayesian Approach," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 64(1), pages 145-147.
    3. Gary C. Moore & Izak Benbasat, 1991. "Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 192-222, September.
    4. Milton Harris & Artur Raviv, 2005. "Allocation of Decision-making Authority," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 9(3), pages 353-383.
    5. Robert W. Zmud, 1982. "Diffusion of Modern Software Practices: Influence of Centralization and Formalization," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(12), pages 1421-1431, December.
    6. Randolph B. Cooper & Robert W. Zmud, 1990. "Information Technology Implementation Research: A Technological Diffusion Approach," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(2), pages 123-139, February.
    7. Milton Harris & Artur Raviv, 2005. "Allocation of Decision-making Authority," Review of Finance, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 353-383, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Abul Khayer & Mohammad Tariqul Islam & Yukun Bao, 2023. "Understanding the Effects of Alignments between the Depth and Breadth of Cloud Computing Assimilation on Firm Performance: The Role of Organizational Agility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-23, January.

    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. Carol Hsu & Jae-Nam Lee & Detmar W. Straub, 2012. "Institutional Influences on Information Systems Security Innovations," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(3-part-2), pages 918-939, September.
    2. Sana Akbar Khan, 2017. "Consumer Innovation Adoption Stages and Determinants," Working Papers 03, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    3. Hori, Kazumi, 2008. "The role of private benefits in information acquisition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 68(3-4), pages 626-631, December.
    4. Elbanna, Amany & Newman, Mike, 2022. "The bright side and the dark side of top management support in Digital Transformaion –A hermeneutical reading," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    5. Tim Baldenius & Xiaojing Meng & Lin Qiu, 2021. "The value of board commitment," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 1587-1622, December.
    6. Dongmin Kong & Ling Zhu & Ni Qin, 2022. "Does corruption shape firm centralisation? Evidence from state‐owned enterprises in China," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(3), pages 3365-3395, September.
    7. Rantakari, Heikki, 2014. "A simple model of project selection with strategic communication and uncertain motives," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 14-42.
    8. Paola Rovelli & Vincenzo Butticè, 2020. "On the organizational design of entrepreneurial ventures: the configurations of the entrepreneurial team," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 47(2), pages 243-269, June.
    9. Nagy, A., 2009. "Adoption of interorganizational information systems : The adoption position model," Other publications TiSEM af471297-bf03-43bf-88c1-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Ricardo Alonso & Niko Matouschek, 2008. "Optimal Delegation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 75(1), pages 259-293.
    11. Ying Chen & Sidartha Gordon, 2015. "Information transmission in nested sender–receiver games," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 58(3), pages 543-569, April.
    12. Silvia Marchesi & Laura Sabani & Axel Dreher, 2009. "Agency and Communication in IMF Conditional Lending: Theory and Empirical Evidence," CESifo Working Paper Series 2574, CESifo.
    13. Axel Dreher & Sarah Langlotz & Silvia Marchesi, 2017. "Information Transmission And Ownership Consolidation In Aid Programs," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(4), pages 1671-1688, October.
    14. McGee, Andrew & Yang, Huanxing, 2013. "Cheap talk with two senders and complementary information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 181-191.
    15. Hung-pin Shih & Kee-hung Lai & T. C. E. Cheng, 2015. "Examining structural, perceptual, and attitudinal influences on the quality of information sharing in collaborative technology use," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 455-470, April.
    16. Tamada, Yasunari & Tsai, Tsung-Sheng, 2009. "The Allocation of Decision-Making Authority when Principal has Reputation Concerns," MPRA Paper 20225, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Silvia, Marchesi & Tania, Masi, 2019. "Allocation of implementing power: Evidence from World Bank projects," Working Papers 399, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Jan 2019.
    18. Bernardo, Antonio E. & Luo, Jiang & Wang, James J.D., 2006. "A theory of socialistic internal capital markets," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 485-509, June.
    19. Schmidbauer, Eric, 2019. "Budget selection when agents compete," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 255-268.
    20. Cyrus Aghamolla & Tadashi Hashimoto, 2021. "Aggressive Boards and CEO Turnover," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 437-486, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:oabmxx:v:4:y:2017:i:1:p:1339338. 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 Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://cogentoa.tandfonline.com/OABM20 .

    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.