TECHNOLOGY READINESS AND TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE OF ACADEMIC STAFFS

Abstract

Technology Reading Index (TRI) has used to determine individuals’ willingness to use of technology. This study focuses on differences among belief and use new technology of academic staffs. The article examines how each dimension (optimism, innovativeness, discomfort, insecurity) of Technology Reading Index (TRI) influences Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) which have consumer perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use dimensions. The results show that of optimism dimension of TRI has a positive effect on both consumers perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use while innovativeness dimension has a positive effect on perceived ease of use. Researches on TRI and TAM have overlooked the potential role of technology readiness and acceptance in the development of academic staff. This study tests belief and use new technology of academic staffs.

Keywords

• Technology Reading Index
• Technology Acceptance Model
• New Technology Belief

References

1. Acar, Z., & Gürol, P. (2018). Çalışanların teknoloji kullanım adaptasyonunun firmaların lojistik servis performansına etkisi. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 19(1), 59-68.
2. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3. Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 16, 74-94.
4. Borrero, J. D., Yousafzai, S. Y., Javed, U., & Page, K. L. (2014). Expressive participation in internet social movements: Testing the moderating effect of technology readiness and sex on student sns use. Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 39-49.
5. Brahima, S. (2017). The world in 2017: ICT facts and figures, https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/ Pages/facts/default.aspx.
6. Cibaroğlu, M. O., & Turan, A. H. (2018). Elektronik belge yönetim sistemlerinin genişletilmiş teknoloji kabul modeli temelinde kullanımı: Ampirik bir değerlendirme. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 5(2), 204-217.
7. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
8. Demirci, A.E., & Ersoy, N. F. (2008). Technology readiness for innovative high-tech products: How consumers perceive and adopt new technologies. Business Review, 10(2).

9. Elliott, K. M., Hall, M. C. & Meng, J. G. (2008). Student technology readiness and its impact on cultural competency. College Teaching Methods & Styles Journal (CTMS), 4(6), 11-22.
10. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
11. Godoe, P., & Johansen, T. S. (2012). Understanding adoption of new technologies: Technology readiness and technology acceptance as an integrated concept. Journal of European Psychology Students, 3, 38-53.
12. Hagspiel, V., Huisman, K. J., & Nunes, C. (2015). Optimal technology adoption when the arrival rate of new technologies changes. European Journal of Operational Research, 243, 897-911.
13. Haidari, S. M., Yelken, T. Y., & Akay, C. (2019). Technology-enhanced self-directed language learning behaviors of efl student teachers. Contemporary Educational Technology, 10(3), 229-245.
14. Hair, J. E., Anderson, R. E., Tatman, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. 5th Edition, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
15. Lam, S. Y., Chiang J., & Parasuraman, A. (2008). The effects of the dimensions of technology readiness on technology acceptance: An empirical analysis. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 22(4),19-39.
16. Lee, H.-J., Cho, H.J., Xu, W., & Fairhust, A. (2010). The influence of consumer traits and demographics on intentions to use retail self-service checkouts. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 28(1), 46- 58.
17. Liljander, V., Gillberg, F., Gummerus, J., & Riel, A. van (2006). Technology readiness and the evaluation and adoption of self-service technologies. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 13, 177- 191.
18. Lin, C., Shih H., & Sher, P. J. (2007). Integrating technology readiness into technology acceptance: The tram model. Psychology and Marketing, 24(7), 641-657.
19. Kumar, S. (2012). Use of computer, internet, and library opacs among rural and urban postgraduates in Indian universities. OCLC Systems & Services: International Digital Library Perspectives, 28(3), 144-163.
20. Meng, J. G., Elliot, K. M., & Hall, M. C. (2009). Technology readiness index (TRI): Assessing crosscultural validity. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 22, 19-31.
21. Olschewski, M., Renken, U. B., Bullinger, A. C., & Möslein, K. M. (2013). Are you ready to use? Assesing the meaning of social influence and technology readiness in collaboration technology adoption. 46th Hawai International Conference on System Sciences, 620-629.
22. Özer, G., Günlük, M., & Özcan, M. (2019). Muhasebe akademisyenlerinin muhasebe eğitiminde uzaktan eğitim uygulamaları kullanımına yönelik algılarının teknoloji kabul modeli çerçevesinde incelenmesi. Muhasebe ve Vergi Uygulamaları Dergisi, 12(1), 65-90.
23. Parasuraman, A. (2000). Technology readiness index (TRI): A multiple-item scale to measure readiness to embrace new technologies. Journal of Service Research, 2(4), 307-320.
24. Parasuraman, A., & Colby, C. L. (2015). An updated and streamlined technology readiness index: TRI 2.0. Journal of Service Research, 18(1), 59-74.
25. Partala, T., & Saari, T. (2015). Understanding the most influential user experiences in succesful and unsuccesful technology adoptions. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 381-395.
26. Ramaseshan, B., Kingshott, R. P. J., & Stein, A. (2015). Firm self-service technology readiness. Journal of Service Marketing, 26(5), 751-776.
27. Rogers, E. M., & Scott, K. L. (1997). The diffusion of innovations model and outreach from the national network of libraries of medicine to native American communities. https://nnlm.gov/archive/pnr/ eval/rogers.html.
28. Singh, S. (2006). Cultural differences in, and influences on consumers’ propensity to adopt ınnovations. International Marketing Review, 23(2), 173-191.
29. Son, M., & Han, K. (2011). Beyond the technology adoption: Technology readiness effects on postadoption behavior. Journal of Business Research, 64, 1178-1182.
30. Stock, R., & Grob, M. (2016). How does knowledge workers’ social technology readiness affect their innovative work behavior? 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2166-2175.
31. Srite, M., & Karahanna, E. (2006). The role of espoused national cultural values in technology acceptance. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 679-704.
32. Tsourela, M., & Roumeliotis, M. (2015). The moderating role of technology readiness, gender, and sex in consumer acceptance and actual use of technology-based services. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 26, 124-136.
33. Westjohn, S. A., Arnold, M. J., Magnusson, P., Zdravkovic, S., & Zhou, J. X. (2009). Technology readiness and usage: A global-identity perspective. Journal of the Academy Marketing Science, 37, 250-265.
34. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204.
35. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Towards a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.
36. Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decisions Sciences, 39(2), 273-315.
37. Vize, R., Coughlan, J., Kennedy, A., & Ellis-Chadwick, F. (2013). Technology readiness in a B2B online retail context: An examination of antecedents and outcomes. Industrial Marketing Management, 42, 909-918.
38. Yıldırır, S. C., & Kaplan, B. (2019). Mobil uygulama kullanımının benimsenmesi: Teknoloji kabul modeli ile bir çalışma. Kafkas Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(19), 22-51.