300 likes | 505 Views
Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure. PPE Summer School 2008, Ohrid, FYROM. Patrick Johnscher (TU Darmstadt) Sebastian Kelle (Open University, Heerlen) Steinn E. Sigurðarson (WU Vienna). Training & Learning.
E N D
Acceptance of TEL:Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure PPE Summer School 2008, Ohrid, FYROM Patrick Johnscher (TU Darmstadt) Sebastian Kelle (Open University, Heerlen) Steinn E. Sigurðarson (WU Vienna)
Training & Learning Training measures can be used simply because there is no alternative… ….but it should be about good design! 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 2
Good TEL Design … is more than just a collection of PowerPoint slides… 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 3
So why don't we design what the users want? 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 4
Why is acceptance of TEL important? • What we just learned from Dilbert: • TEL design should consider the users' requirements • A system that meets expectations is more likely to gain acceptance and get used – at least if there are learning alternatives • Common misperception: "If we build it, they will come!" • E-Learning is not a field of dreams: just providing technology doesn't mean learners will use the systems • At the end of the day, TEL is no end in itself: there has to be a measurable learning outcome, and a business case has to be made • Davis (1989): "Technology Acceptance" • Information technology offers the potential for substantially improving white collar performance • But performance gains are often obstructed by users' unwillingness to accept and use available systems • Because of the persistence and importance of this problem, explaining user acceptance has been a long-standing issue in MIS research 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 5
A What-went-wrong Example: COVCELL • COVCELL Project – Effective language learning (http://www.covcell.org) • Most important factor for language learning: • “learning through conversation” • 88% of students • 75.9% of teachers • So, interaction and communication is quite important? • COVCELL developed tools such as: • User Presence and Chat • Audio/Video Conferencing • Collaborative Whiteboard • Audio Recording • User acceptance as a basis for design requirement specifications 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 6 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 6
71,4% …using the forum 28,6% …using the wiki 7,1% …user presence and chat …audio/video conferencing 14,3% …whiteboard …audio recording 0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% COVCELL: Percentage of users happy with… 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 7 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 7
4.2 / 5 …forum 4.5 / 5 3.6 / 5 …wiki 3.4 / 5 2.3 / 5 ...user presence and chat 2.4 / 5 2.3 / 5 Scale: 0-5 …audio/video chat 2.3 / 5 3.4 / 5 …whiteboard 3.2 / 5 3.0 / 5 …audio recording 2.8 / 5 0.5 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.5 0 1 2 3 4 5 Language Learning General COVCELL: User Ratings of… 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 8 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 8
COVCELL: People didn't use… 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 85,7% …user presence and chat 78,6% …audio/video conferencing 92,9% …whiteboard 71,4% …audio recording 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 9 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 9
A Few Questions… • What is "acceptance"? • Let's try some definition… • Which factors influence acceptance? • A closer look at acceptance models… 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 10
Acceptance – A Definition • "Acceptance of an innovation or technology describes the positive adoption decision of users – in contrast to the rejection of an innovation or technology." (Simon 2001, p. 87) • Technology acceptance usually consists of two separate aspects: • An attitude component, comprising affective and rational aspects • A behavioral component, describing the adoption of an innovation in the form of actual observable behavior (e.g. use of a system) • Since the behavioral component is usually easy to observe (and thus easy to measure), modeling and research is mostly focused on the attitude component of user acceptance: • Affective aspects, including motivational and emotional attributes • Rational aspects, including cost-benefit relations as seen from the users' individual perspective 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 11
Acceptance Models Frequently cited models in the literature are: • Technology Acceptance Model • Technology Acceptance Model 2 • The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology • Basic concept underlying user acceptance models: 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 12
Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) • Developed by Davis (1989) • Main idea: Perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use are fundamental factors influencing the user acceptance as they influence the user’s attitude towards the system. 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 13
Technology Acceptance Model (TAM2) • Developed by Venkatesh and Davis (2000) • Extension of the original TAM model to explain perceived usefulness and usage intentions in terms of social influence process and cognitive instrumental processes. 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 14
Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) • Developed by Venkatesh et al (2003) • Consolidation of eight prominent technology user acceptance models. The eight models reviewed are: • Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) • Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) • Motivational Model (MM) • Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) • Combined TAM and TPB (C-TAM-TPB) • Model of PC Utilization (MPCU) • Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT) • Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) • The UTAUT states that four constructs play a significant role as direct determinants of user acceptance and usage behavior. They are: • performance expectancy • effort expectancy • social influence • facilitating conditions 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 15
Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 16
Acceptance Model for TEL? 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 17
Influence Factors (Exogenous Variables): Draft Classification • Technological • Organizational • Didactical / Pedagogical • Personal • Cognitive • Cultural • Motivational • … • Others? 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 18
Now over to you… • Form up in groups of 4-5 students • Think about factors influencing the acceptance of TEL – and reasons why TEL implementation fails • Try to cluster the success factors / reasons of failure into categories, e.g. "organizational", "technological" • Identify connections and dependencies between the separate factors: which factors directly influence acceptance; which influence each other (indirect influence on acceptance)? • Visualize your group results on a flipchart 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 19
Literature • Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, F.D., and Davis, G.B.: "User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View," MIS Quarterly, 27, 2003, 425-478. • Venkatesh, V. and Davis, F.D.: "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, 46, 2000, 186-204. • Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., and Warshaw, P. R.: "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, 35, 1989, 982-1003. • Goodhue, D. L.; Thompson, R. L. (1995): "Task-Technology Fit And Individual Performance", MIS Quarterly, Vol. 19, Issue 2, 213-237. • Rogers, E. M. (2003): Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press. • Nanayakkara, C. (2007): "A Model of User Acceptance of Learning Management Systems: a study within Tertiary Institutions in New Zealand", Educause Australasia 2007, http://www.caudit.edu.au/educauseaustralasia07/authors_papers/Nanayakkara-361.pdf. • Tai, L. (2008): Corporate E-Learning: An Inside View of IBM's Solutions. Oxford University Press, New York. 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 20
Construct Definitions • Attitude: Individual's positive or negative feeling about performing the target behavior (e.g., using a system). • Behavioral intention: The degree to which a person has formulated conscious plans to perform or not perform some specified future behavior. • Computer anxiety: The degree of an individual’s apprehension, or even fear, when she/he is faced with the possibility of using computers. • Computer playfulness: The degree of cognitive spontaneity in microcomputer interactions. • Computer self-efficacy: The degree to which an individual beliefs that he or she has the ability to perform specific task/job using computer. • Effort expectancy: The degree of ease associated with the use of the system. • Facilitating conditions: The degree to which an individual believes that an organizational and technical infrastructure exists to support use of the system. 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 21
Construct Definitions • Image: The degree to which use of an innovation is perceived to enhance one's status in one's social system. • Job relevance: Individual's perception regarding the degree to which the target system is relevant to his or her job. • Objective usability: A comparison of systems based on the actual level (rather than perceptions) of effort required to complete specific tasks. • Output quality: The degree to which an individual believes that the system performs his or her job tasks well. • Performance expectancy: The degree to which an individual believes that using the system will help him or her to attain gains in job performance. • Perceived ease of use: See the definition of effort expectancy. • Perceived enjoyment: The extent to which the activity of using a specific system is perceived to be enjoyable in it’s own right, aside from any performance consequences resulting from system use. • Perceived usefulness: See the definition of performance expectancy. 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 22
Construct Definitions • Perception of external control: See the definition of facilitating conditions. • Result demonstrability: Tangibility of the results of using the innovation. • Social influence: The degree to which an individual perceives that important others believe he or she should use the new system. • Subjective norm: Person's perception that most people who are important to him think he should or should not perform the behavior in question. • Voluntariness: The extent to which potential adopters perceive the adoption decision to be non-mandatory. 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 23
2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 24
Acceptance – A Definition • "Acceptance of an innovation or technology describes the positive adoption decision of users – in contrast to the rejection of an innovation or technology." (Simon 2001, p. 87) • "Accordingly, the innovation-decision process is the process through which an individual or other decision-making unit passes • from first knowledge of an innovation, • to forming an attitude toward the innovation, • to a decision to adopt or reject, • to implementation of the new idea, and • to confirmation of this decision." (Rogers: Diffusion of Innovations, 2003, p. 161) 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 25
Acceptance – A Definition • Technology acceptance usually consists of two separate aspects: • An attitude component, comprising affective and rational aspects • A behavioral component, describing the adoption of an innovation in the form of actual observable behavior (e.g. use of a system) • Since the behavioral component is usually easy to observe (and thus easy to measure), modeling and research is mostly focused on the attitude component of user acceptance: • Affective aspects, including motivational and emotional attributes • Rational aspects, including cost-benefit relations as seen from the users' individual perspective 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 26
A Few Questions… • What is "acceptance"? • Let's try some definition… • Which factors influence acceptance? • A closer look at acceptance models… • How can I measure acceptance? • Using acceptance models in empirical research… 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 27
Using Acceptance Models in Empirical Research • Models are so-called "Structural Equation Models" (SEM) or "Causal Models" • SEM encourages confirmatory rather than exploratory modeling; thus, it is suited to theory testing rather than theory development. • There are usually two main parts to SEM: • the structural model showing potential causal dependencies between endogenous and exogenous variables, • and the measurement model showing the relations between the latent variables and their indicators. • Benefits: • User Acceptance Models like TAM, UTAUT and others are widely accepted and represent state-of-the-art in IS research • Models come with hypotheses "on board"; you don't have to formulate your own • Scales and question items exist and have been tested in a number of previous studies ("tried and true") • Drawbacks: • Relatively high demands on data quality • Parameter estimation using covariance-based techniques can be considered advanced statistics 2008-06-19 | PPESS 08 Ohrid, FYROM | Workshop: "Acceptance of TEL: Key Success Factors and Reasons of Failure" | 28