Nowadays, the rapid expansion of Information and Communication Technology has changed the ways of delivering services in different industries. Many organizations attempt to increase the variety of their services. However, accepting new ideas may lead to innovative proposals and new technologies in manufacturing products or delivering services, but in turn requires investing and taking risks by innovative organization. Therefore, identification of various factors affecting adoption of new technologies is a favorite field of study for researchers.
The purpose of this article is to explore the level of information technology acceptance and propose a comprehensive model for Nir Pars Company. This is an applied, descriptive-correlation research, conducted by survey methodology. A collection of 400 experts and managers of different organizational levels of Nir Company were selected as the statistical population of the study and a batch of 240 persons were chosen by simple random sampling. Library method was used for Data collection to form the theoretical foundations of the research, and we used our own questionnaire to confirm or refute the research hypotheses; which has the required reliability and validity (Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.946). To explore the relationships between the elements of the Model, factor analysis and structural equation modeling techniques were used. According to achieved results, the acceptance of information technology exceeds 0.79 (for all parameters of the model).
1. Abdullah I, Che Rose R, Masrom M, Zain M. 2005. The relationship between information technology acceptance and organizational agility in Malaysia. Journal of Information & Management, 42: 829–839.
2. Adams D, Nelson R, Todd P. 1992. Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and usage of information technology: a replication. Mis Quarterly, V.16, 2: 224-227.
3. Al-Gahtani S. 2001. The applicability of tam outside North America: an empirical test in the United Kingdom. Information Resources Management Journal, V.14, 3: 37- 46.
4. Burton JA, Hubona GS. 2005. Individual differences and usage behavior: revisiting a technology acceptance model assumption. Database for Advances in Information Systems Vol. 36, 2: 58-77.
5. Chen L, Gillenson ML, Sherrell DL. 2002. Enticing online consumers: an extended technology acceptance perspective. Journal of Information & Management, 39: 705-719.
6. Cochran, W. G. (1977), Sampling Techniques, Third Edition, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
7. Davis FD. 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, V.13, 3: 319-340.
8. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR. 1989. User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, V.35, 8: 982-1003.
9. Fishbein M, Ajzen I. 1975. Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Reading, Mass, Don Mills, Ontario: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., 89–114.
10. Grandon E.E. 2005. Extension and validation of the theory of planned behavior: the case of electronic commerce adoption in small and medium sized businesses in chile. Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, 213 p.
11. Greis NP, Kasarda, JD. 1997. Enterprise logistics in the information era. California Management Review, V.39, 3: 55-78.
12. Holden RJ, Karsh BT. 2010. The technology acceptance model: its past and its future in health care review article. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, V. 43, 1: 159-172.
13. Lu Y, Zhou T, Wang B. 2009. Exploring Chinese users’ acceptance of instant messaging using the theory of planned behavior, the technology acceptance model, and the flow theory. Computers in Human Behavior, V. 25, 29-39.
14. Mathieson K. 1991. Predicting user intentions: comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planne behavior. Information Systems Research, V.2, 3: 173-191.
15. Ong CS, Lai JY, Wang YS. 2004. Factors affecting engineer's acceptance of asynchronouse e-learning systems in high technology companies. Information and Management, V.41, 795-804.
16. Park N, Roman R, Lee S. 2009. User acceptance of a digital library system in developing countries: an application of the technology acceptance model. International journal of information management. V. 29, 3: 196-209.
17. Raitoharju R. 2007. Information technology acceptance in the finish social and healthcare sector, exploring the effect of cultural factors. Publications of the Turku School of Economic. 57- 65.
18. Schumacker R. E, Lomax R. G. A .2010. Beginner's Guide to Structural Equation Modeling, Routledge; 3th edn, 536 p.
19. Siegel DM. 2008. Accepting technology and overcoming resistance to change using the motivation and acceptance, model. Phd Thesis, Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Educational Research, Technology, and Leadership in the College of Education at the University of Central Florida Orlando. Available at: http://proquest.umi.com/login.
20. Taylor S, Todd PA. 1995a. Assessing IT usage: the role of prior experience. MIS Quarterly, V.19, 4: 561– 570.
21. Taylor S. Todd PA. 1995b. Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, v.6, 2: 144-176.
22. Venkatesh V, Davis FD. 2000. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, V.46, 2: 186. 206.
23. Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD. 2003. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, V.27, 3: 425-478.
Copyright: © 2013 The Author(s)
Published by Human Resource Management Academic Research Society (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
