Google Answers Logo
View Question
Q: Best practices around change management - technology implementations ( No Answer,   2 Comments )
Subject: Best practices around change management - technology implementations
Category: Business and Money > Consulting
Asked by: se_4564-ga
List Price: $150.00
Posted: 14 Apr 2006 12:39 PDT
Expires: 08 May 2006 18:42 PDT
Question ID: 718936
I am looking for research around cultural aspects of implementation of
systems and tools for content management processes in a global

Specifically, there defined stages of adoption - during
implementation, people need to 

1. Be educated at a conceptual level
2. Understand how their business needs are related to the concepts
3. Have a level of comfort with specific capabilities, 
4. Be able to connect business needs to those capabilities, 
5.  Have a technical/tactical understanding of what to do

One might say this would happen all at once, but in a large global
enterprise, this happens gradually over time and requires multiple
channels of communication and repetition of messages.

States of adoption might be 

1. Ad hoc 
2. Defined, but inconsistent implementation
3. Embedded measured processes 
4. etc.  

I am looking for research or references that would back up this model
or offer another model for cultural adoption or ?socialization? of

1.	Stages of education/awareness (like the steps above)
2.	Stages of adoption (like the three I mention but I would imagine
there are more)
3.      Strategies for achieving success
4.      Specific facilitation techniques, processes or exercises that
can be used in live workshops or virtual training to engage people and
move them through stages of adoption. (This last question is somewhat
optional.  If you can find information in this area, include it. There
may be games that can be played in a working session or other
interactive approaches to aid the learning process and help with

This can draw from organizational development, organizational
psychology, change management, technical implementation or other
related fields (consulting methodologies and so on).

I am looking for information to inform and support an educational and
change management plan and technology rollout strategy.

This information needs to be specific and applicable.  Please try to
edit out platitudes and trivial information (for example, obvious
statements around culture being an important consideration in
technology or the hackneyed "people, process, technology" stuff.) 
Thanks :-)
There is no answer at this time.

Subject: Re: Best practices around change management - technology implementations
From: roxrox-ga on 15 Apr 2006 09:39 PDT
Based on this abstract I believe this research by the Association for
Computing Machinery might be of interest

***Process improvement initiatives such as metrics programs have a
high failure rate during their assimilation in a software
organization. Lack of attention to social issues and lack of
communication are some of the factors affecting their acceptance.
Social Psychology includes study of such acceptance issues in the
adoption of technology in the workplace. Although metrics
implementations are often more intrusive and their benefits are
indirect compared to workplace technology in general, both are ...

and this abstract
Software Process Improvement (SPI) initiatives induce organizational
change, by introducing new tools, techniques and work practices.
Organizations have to address acceptance issues such as resistance to
change, compatibility and fear of adverse consequences. Social
psychology literature includes the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), which study such adoption
issues and predict intention to use and actual usage of workplace
technology. Some constructs of ...

Keywords: social psychology, software process improvement, technology acceptance 
Predicting acceptance of Software Process Improvement
Software Process Improvement (SPI) initiatives induce organizational
change, by introducing new tools, techniques and work practices.
Organizations have to address acceptance issues such as resistance to
change, compatibility and fear of adverse consequences. Social
psychology literature includes the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), which study such adoption
issues and predict intention to use and actual usage of workplace
technology. Some constructs of these models could be applied to
software organizations to make it easier for them to counter the
initial resistance and to assimilate process improvement into the work
culture. To increase applicability of these models to the SPI context,
some additional constructs are proposed, by taking into account
organizational culture, the impact of changes caused by SPI and the
unique characteristics of software developers.

University of Texas has a good research article-
Understanding the factors that influence user acceptance of
information technology is of interest both to researchers in a variety
of fields as well as procurers of technology for large organizations.
The present chapter reviews literature which demonstrates the nature
of technological acceptance is mediated by distinct factor groups
related to the psychology of the users, the design process of
information technology, and the quality of the technology in user
terms. It is concluded that current research offers insights that can
support the derivation of reliable predictions of user acceptance.
However, potentially overlapping theories seem to exist independently
of each other and there exists scope for a unifying framework to
extend innovation diffusion concepts and systems design models
(particularly user-centered design) into a formal theory of user
acceptance of information technology

This is a nice overall article

An interview with Fred Davis collaborator on TAM,Viswanath Venkatesh, Ph.D.
Where he discusses "The second set of influences is called SOCIAL (my
caps) influence processes. Until we looked at technology acceptance in
this way, typically SOCIAL (my caps) influences were taken to be
something external to the individual.

My motivation was essentially two-fold: to bring a scientific
perspective to the problem about how people form opinions about
technology, and to help these organizations implement technology
successfully. One thing I tried to do in this work was to study
technology implementation longitudinally:

Interestingly enough, I believe you know how to reach me :) 

At different times throughout the year I am availabe for short term projects.
Subject: Re: Best practices around change management - technology implementations
From: roxrox-ga on 15 Apr 2006 15:50 PDT
There is one more research paper I'll throw in-

User acceptance enablers in individual decision making about
technology: Toward an integrated model
Decision Sciences,  Spring 2002  by Venkatesh, Viswanath,  Speier,
Cheri,  Morris, Michael G

I'll post the Discussion, you can use the link to read the whole article.

Basically it says that User Acceptance is largely determined by a
users intrinsic motivation (it will make my job easier than our
current system)to use the new software and also how the user percieves
the ease of use of the software will be.  Fear of ease of use can be
mitigated tremendously by good training, fun training. Hands on
training. Training can overcome perceptions.
So to answer your question to "socialize" the roll out the message
should be sent out in advance how much easier the staff will be able
to work with the new software, basically a positive attitude.

From the article - A core theme that underlies this research is that
both pre-training interventions and training environment manipulations
(labeled "user acceptance enablers") can positively influence user
perceptions, leading to greater technology usage both immediately
after training and continued use post-training. Specific to intrinsic
motivation, research has shown that training interventions can create
an enhanced state of playfulness among users (Starbuck & Webster,
1991; Webster & Martocchio, 1992), thus making a training program more
intrinsically motivating while continuing to provide adequate
information to facilitate knowledge acquisition. Furthermore,
play-like activities that increase intrinsic motivation are more
likely to create "deep learning" in participants (e.g., Piaget, 1951).
End from article

Pre Training Perception
Pre implementation Perception
Post Training Perception
Post Implementation Perception

The research shows that the key to the success is in the Training.
Training changes attitudes/perceptions.

There were other notations to more psychological studies at the end of
the article, however I was not able to seach and get the articles to
come up.

Per the article-

This research has developed and tested an integrated model that helps
unify two parallel streams of research on information systems
acceptance. In doing so, this integrated model provides a much richer
understanding of the factors influencing technology use immediately
after training, and more importantly, over an extended period of time.
Although intrinsic motivation had no direct influence on intention to
use technology, one should not conclude that intrinsic motivation is
therefore not important. Rather, intrinsic motivation served as an
important catalyst for both perceived usefulness and perceived ease of
use-both important predictors of intentions to use
technology-suggesting that the indirect role of intrinsic motivation
is a critical one in understanding short-term acceptance or rejection
decisions of new users.

From a theoretical perspective, as a predictor of intention, the
effects of the tested user acceptance enablers were fully mediated by
intrinsic motivation, perceived ease of use, and perceived usefulness.
This suggests that both pre-training and training environment
interventions play a pivotal role in shaping initial user motivations
and perceptions that, in turn, form the bases for intentions and
technology use over time. While the design of this study necessitated
that these were looked at independently, the results suggest that
managerial interventions aimed at both types of UAEs might be a
powerful strategy for inducing widespread adoption and use of new

Within our baseline integrated model of technology acceptance, it is
interesting to note that perceived usefulness had a very strong
positive effect on intention to use information technology, yet
training interventions did not influence perceived usefulness. In
addition, perceived ease of use had a strong influence on intention
over and above that of perceived usefulness while intrinsic motivation
exerted a significant indirect influence on intention. Given the
strong direct and indirect influences of ease of use and intrinsic
motivation, technology acceptance initiatives should focus on
interventions designed to increase perceptions that the technology is
easy and enjoyable to use. The implications for addressing perceived
usefulness through UAEs is less clear. Strictly looking at the
results, one could conclude that there is no value gained by
developing UAEs designed to increase usefulness perceptions about a
technology. However, there is research demonstrating that other
potential UAEs (e.g., subjective norm) can influence usefulness
perceptions (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000; Galletta, Ahuja, Hartman, Teo, &
Peace, 1995). Additional research is needed to better understand the
contingencies associated with different user, technology, and
organizational environments that can directly affect perceived
usefulness-particularly when one considers the critical role that
perceived usefulness plays in influencing intention to use a

One implication of the results of this study is that those responsible
for technology implementation should beta test new technologies (built
or bought) with small groups of diverse users to better understand
perceptual and motivational reactions. Attending to user concerns in
the analysis and design phases of a technology decision can have
important payoffs for managers attempting to implement new
technologies. These findings suggest that it is important to get user
"buy-in" during technology design and/or selection to help eliminate
usability problems early in the design process. Waiting until a system
is deployed and then collecting feedback from users to assist with bug
fixes or revisions is probably dangerous at best. Once the system is
fielded, it is often too late to have any real impact on system design
(Landauer, 1995) and, per the findings of this research, managers
struggling to implement the system may have already seriously damaged
chances for system acceptance and success.

Given the demonstrated critical role for user acceptance enablers,
organizations who desire to outsource their training function may
consider contracting mechanisms that reward innovative training
techniques or require user validation of training quality versus more
traditional fixed price contracts. Regardless of whether training is
outsourced or kept as an in-house function, the current research
suggests that training should not be considered ancillary-rather, it
is an essential component in the technology acceptance equation.
Again, regardless of the mechanism chosen for delivering that
training, organizations will likely have different orientations and
capabilities associated with technology training and, therefore,
assessing the perceptions and motivations of beta users to different
training sessions would provide insights into those training
organizations that can maximize technology acceptance within a firm.

Finally, this research further emphasizes the importance of early
(i.e., shortterm) perceptions and acceptance decisions by users. From
a longitudinal perspective, the perceptions formed immediately
following training are critical-not only to early acceptance
decisions, but to continued usage as well. Subsequent user perceptions
and motivation had no significant effect on short-term use-suggesting
that once users are "turned off" to a system, fixes to that system,
redesign, or encouragement from others are not likely to play a major
role in getting users to adopt the system over time. Systems that are
introduced and used immediately, but ultimately rejected over time by
users are likely to result in significant expenditures of
organizational resources (money, time, personnel) in attempting to
discover why the system fell into disuse and in correcting flaws in
the system. The current research indicates that, in trying to gain
acceptance for continued and extended technology use, such fixes are
likely to be an uphill battle. Thus, this research suggests that
positive pre-training and training environment interventions can be
used as a catalyst for increasing intrinsic motivation and perceived
ease of use-important success factors in both initial and enduring
acceptance of new technology by end users within the organization.

Important Disclaimer: Answers and comments provided on Google Answers are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Google does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. Please read carefully the Google Answers Terms of Service.

If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by emailing us at with the question ID listed above. Thank you.
Search Google Answers for
Google Answers  

Google Home - Answers FAQ - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy