IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ininma/v50y2020icp144-154.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholder perceptions of information security policy: Analyzing personal constructs

Author

Listed:
  • Samonas, Spyridon
  • Dhillon, Gurpreet
  • Almusharraf, Ahlam

Abstract

Organizational stakeholders, such as employees and security managers, may understand security rules and policies differently. Extant literature suggests that stakeholder perceptions of security policies can contribute to the success or failure of policies. This paper draws on the Theory of Personal Constructs and the associated methodology, the Repertory Grid technique, to capture the convergence and divergence of stakeholder perceptions with regards to security policy. We collected data from the employees of an e-commerce company that had developed five information security sub-policies. Our study highlights the practical utility of the Repertory Grid analysis in helping information security researchers and managers pinpoint a) the aspects of a security policy that are well-received by stakeholders, as well as those that are not, and b) the variance in the perceptions of stakeholders. Organizations can, then, capitalize on the well-received aspects of the policy and take corrective action for the ill-received ones.

Suggested Citation

  • Samonas, Spyridon & Dhillon, Gurpreet & Almusharraf, Ahlam, 2020. "Stakeholder perceptions of information security policy: Analyzing personal constructs," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 144-154.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ininma:v:50:y:2020:i:c:p:144-154
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.04.011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0268401218303451
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.04.011?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.

    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:eee:ininma:v:50:y:2020:i:c:p:144-154. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/international-journal-of-information-management .

    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.