Implementation of Digital Innovations: Comparative Study of Technology Acceptance Model and Normalisation Process Theory

Year 2025, Volume: 80 Issue: 3, 469 - 489, 10.09.2025

Fatma Zehra Köker , Recep Varçın

https://doi.org/10.33630/ausbf.1580926

Abstract

Many digital innovations fail due to poor implementation of new digital products/services. This study aims to comparatively analyze the contributions of the Normalization Process Theory (NPT) and Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to the success of implementing new digital products/services. Both implementation theories explain how new digital products/services can be successfully implemented. NPT examines creating coherent meaning for a new application, organizing to ensure participation, collective action, evaluation, and restructuring. TAM, on the other hand, focuses on the perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness of the new product/service. These are addressed through the first construct of TAM, which helps predict resistance to change. The other three constructs of TAM go beyond simply implementing the new digital product/service and ensure that the change is integrated into existing ways of doing business in a routine and accepted manner

Keywords

innovation , Normalisation process theory , Technology acceptance Model , Literature review

Dijital İnovasyonların Uygulanması: Teknoloji Kabul Modeli ve Normalleşme Süreci Kuramı’nın Karşılaştırmalı İncelemesi

Abstract

Yeni dijital ürünlerin/hizmetlerin zayıf uygulamaları nedeniyle birçok dijital inovasyon başarısız olmaktadır. Çalışmanın amacı Teknoloji Kabul Modeli’nin (TKM) ve Normalleşme Süreci Kuramı’nın (NSK) yeni dijital ürünlerin/hizmetlerin uygulanma başarısına olan katkılarını karşılaştırmalı olarak analiz etmektir. İki uygulama kuramı da yeni dijital ürünlerin/hizmetlerin nasıl başarılı bir şekilde uygulanabileceğini açıklamaktadır. NSK, yeni bir uygulama ile tutarlı bir anlam yaratmayı, katılımı güvence altına alacak şekilde örgütlenmeyi, kolektif eylemi, değerlendirmeyi ve yeniden yapılandırmayı incelemektedir. TKM ise yeni ürüne/hizmete ilişkin algılanan kullanım kolaylığına ve algılanan kullanışlılığına odaklanmaktadır. Bunlar, NSK'nın ilk yapısı ile ele alınarak değişime karşı direncin öngörülmesi sağlanmaktadır. NSK’nın diğer üç yapısıyla yeni dijital ürünün/hizmetin kolaylıkla uygulanmasının ötesine geçilerek değişimin rutin ve kabul görmüş bir şekilde mevcut iş yapma şekillerine yerleştirilmesi sağlanmaktadır

Keywords

Dijital inovasyon , Normalleşme süreci kuramı , Teknoloji kabul modeli , Literatür taraması

References

• Ajibade, P. (2018). Technology acceptance model limitations and criticisms: Exploring the practical applications and use in technology-related studies, mixed-method, and qualitative researches. Library Philosophy and Practice, 9, 1-13.
• Ballinger, C., Taylor, A., Loudon, D., & Macdonald, A. S. (2016). Rehabilitation professionals' perceptions of the use of new visualisation software tools with people with stroke. Disability and rehabilitation Assistive technology, 11(2), 139–149. https://doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2015.1111941
• Carroll, N. (2020). Theorizing on the normalization of digital transformations. Proceedings of the Twenty-Eight European Conference on Information Systems, IE, 75,1-17.
• Carroll, N., Conboy, K., & Wang, X. (2023). From transformation to normalisation: an exploratory study of a large-scale agile transformation. Journal of Information Technology, 38(3), 267–303. https://doi.org/10.1177/02683962231164428
• Carroll, N., & Maher, M. (2023). How shell fueled digital transformation by establishing diy software development. MIS Quarterly Executive, 22(2), 99-127. https://doi.org/10.17705/2msqe.00076
• Carroll, N., Mc Lafferty, B., Conboy, K., & Donnellan, B. (2021). Normalising a digital transformation. Proceedings of the Forty-Second International Conference on Information Systems, IE, 12, 1-9. Corrigan, A., Lake, S., & McInnes, R. (2021). Normalisation process theory as a conceptual framework for continuity of carer implementation. Women and Birth, 34 (2), 204-209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2020.02.017
• Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
• Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
• Hinings, B., Gegenhuber, T., & Greenwood, R. (2018). Digital innovation and transformation: an institutional perspective. Information and Organization, 28 (1), 52-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2018.02.004
• Jacobs, S., Weiner, B., Reeve, B., Hofmann, D., Christian, M., & Weinberger, M. (2015). Determining the predictors of innovation implementation in healthcare: a quantitative analysis of implementation effectiveness. BMC Health Services Research, 15(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-014-0657-3
• Jeffries, M., Keers, R., Phipps, D., Williams, R., Brown, B., Avery, A., Peek, N., & Ashcroft, D. M. (2018). Developing a learning health system: Insights from a qualitative process evaluation of a pharmacist-led electronic audit and feedback intervention to improve medication safety in primary care, Plos One, 13(10), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0205419
• Kaler, J., & Ruston, A. (2019). Technology adoption on farms: Using normalisation process theory to understand sheep farmers’ attitudes and behaviours in relation to using precision technology in flock management. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 170, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2019.104715
• Kane, G. C., Phillips, A. N., Copulsky, J. R., & Andrus, G. R. (2019). The technology fallacy: how people are the real key to digital transformation (1st ed.). MIT Pres.
• Luig, T., Asselin, J., Sharma, A. M., & Campbell-Scherer, D. L. (2018). Understanding implementation of complex interventions in primary care teams. The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 31(3), 431-444. https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2018.03.170273
• Machiavelli, N. (2014). The prince. (Çev. D. Donno). Open Road Media. (Original work published 1532)
• May, C. R. (2006). A rational model for assessing and evaluating complex interventions in health care. BMC Health Services Research, 6(86), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-6-86
• May, C. R., & Finch, T. (2009). Implementing, embedding, and integrating practices: an outline of normalisation process theory. Sociology, 43(3), 535-554. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038509103208
• May, C. R., Mair, F., Finch, T., MacFarlane, A., Dowrick, C., Treweek, S., Rapley, T., Ballini, L., Ong, B. N., Rogers, A., Murray, E., Elwyn, G., Legare, F., Gunn, J., & Montori, V. M. (2009). Development of a theory of implementation and integration: normalisation process theory. Implementation Science, 4(29), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-29
• May, C. R., Rapley, T., Mair, F. S., Treweek, S., Murray, E., Ballini, L., Macfarlane, A. Girling, M., & Finch, T. L. (2015). Normalization process theory on-line users’ manual, toolkit and NoMAD instrument. Retrieved January 9, 2025, from https://normalization-process-theory.northumbria.ac.uk/theory-behind-npt/core-propositions-of-npt/
• McCarthy, S., Fitzgerald, C., Sahm, L., Bradley, C., & Walsh, E. K. (2022). Patient- held health IT adoption across the primary-secondary care interface: a normalisation process theory perspective. Health Systems, 11(1), 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/20476965.2020.1822146
• Mogaji, E., Viglia, G., Srivastavave, P., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2024). Is it the end of the technology acceptance model in the era of generative artificial intelligence?. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 36(10), 3324-3339. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijchm-08-2023-1271
• Murray, E., Treweek, S., Pope, C., MacFarlane, A., Ballini, L., Dowrick, C., Finch, T., Kennedy, A., Mair, F., O'Donnell, C., Ong, B. N., Rapley, T., Rogers, A., & May, C. (2010). Normalisation process theory: a framework for developing, evaluating and implementing complex interventions. BMC Medicine, 8(63), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-8-63
• Oludapo, S., Carroll, N., & Helfert, M. (2024). Why do so many digital transformations fail? A bibliometric analysis and future research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 174, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.114528
• Pope, C., Halford, S., Turnbull, J., Prichard, J., Calestani, M., & May, C. (2013). Using computer decision support systems in NHS emergency and urgent care: ethnographic study using normalisation process theory. BMC Health Services Research, 13(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-13-111 Tatnall, A. (2010). Innovation translation, innovation diffusion and the technology acceptance model: comparing three different approaches to theorising technological innovation. A. Tatnall (Ed.), Actor-network theory and technology innovation: advancements and new concepts (pp. 1-12). IGI Global Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/9781609601973.ch004
• Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
• Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. Management Information Science Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540