“Building Systems that Users Want to Use”

1. “Building Systems that Users Want to Use” YogeshMalhotra, Dennis F. Galetta (2004) MOIS508 MarihamBoshra

2. IT Productivity Paradox – Current Understanding “Technically Successful, but unused or underused systems cost US businesses millions of dollars each year” • “…never used or avoided by the very people who are intended to use them?” • Markus and Keil (1994) • “IT Doesn’t Matter” • Nicholas Carr (2003)

3. "Does IT matter?"

4. Greater IT expenditures=best firm-level business performance • A comparison of IT expenditures and financial performance of 7,500 U.S. companies: • Top business performers  lowest IT investment. • 25 top performers spent just 0.8% of their revenues on IT • Overall average 3.7%. • Highest IT spenders underperformed by 50% compared with their best-in-class peers. • Usage behaviors determine if systems are used, misused, abused, or not used at all. • “Does IT Matter?”  How IT business performance depends on effective usage

5. IT Performance Equation Internal and external change management determine IT success External change management ensures business models and processes remain aligned with a changing business environment Internal change management ensures that IT systems are adopted and used effectively.

6. Organizational Transformation Enabled by IT • Site Major national health care research & service center • C3  New communication, coordination and collaboration system expected to boost productivity & cut costs • Users to interact and engage with each other as well as with the outside world. • Top executives shared vision of the interface with employees (potential users). • Specialized professional training was provided –developing users' understanding of the key system’s activities relevant to business performance. • Goal: What users expect to derive from system use V.S. What managers expect in terms of business performance. • Users' motivation and commitment define this intersection. • Systems usage instrument: (developed, pilot tested, &administered) • Completed surveys were collected from 700 users immediately after training. • 500 users were sent follow-up surveys after using the C3 system for 5 mths 200 completed surveys were received by the deadline. • Statistical tests confirmed no significant differences between the two data samples.

7. Direct & Indirect Effects of M&C on Attitudes & Behavioral Intentions Analysis of System User Responses

8. IT System Users’Commitment & Motivation • "Systems do not improve organizational performance or create business value; users and their managers do".

9. 1. Users’ Commitment • A scientist at Pillsbury Company installed an intranet for knowledge sharing about products. Then, he seeded the forum with questions, sent out email invitations, and waited ... for 6 mths! But no one showed up • Similar failures of IT systems: intranets, portals, CRM systems – missing User Commitment technical usability (IT designer perspective) performance usability (user perspective)

10. Management Social Influences processes affecting Commitment Levels: • Compliance. Users’ feel they have to use the IT system, even if they don't want to. Ex. "[Users] have just been fighting N/MCI so long, it has become a passion," noted an IT engineer in a Computerworld report. • Identification. Users' desire to be accepted by peers & managers to enhance self-esteem. May be used positively if rewarded through performance & value creation. Ex. Xerox and McKinsey. • Internalization. Ideal case. Users' values and beliefs about performance and how the system facilitates such performance drive system use. System use is seen as contributing to personal and organizational improvement. Ex. ordinary mailing list (Kraken), started by self-selected "creatives" at PriceWaterhouse Coopers (PWC), became a primary channel for communication and collaboration on new ideas.

11. 2. Users’ Motivation • “What makes a successful deployment is when you have users aggressively adopting a technology and asking for more, rather than having to sell it to them.” as noted by VP of Information Week. • System users need to be willing to use the system not only able! • Intrinsic motivation. “inherent tendency to seek out novelty and challenges, to extend and exercise one's capacities, to explore, and to learn.” Greater performance, persistence, satisfaction and creativity rather than monetary incentives and punishments. For ex. PwC mailing list, virtual communities, Amazon.com, online opinion forums, Weblogs, eBay • Extrinsic motivation. A command-and-control-driven organizational culture. EM is not good or bad in itself. It is important that user behavior is self-determined & freely chosen; not pressured or controlled by an external mandate or internal feelings of guilt or shame.

12. Conclusion • Understanding users' commitmentand motivation, and designing systems that support them, is crucial for delivering and sustaining IT systems that improve business performance.