Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.

Information technology (IT) acceptance research has yielded many competing models, each with different sets of acceptance determinants. In this paper, we (1) review user acceptance literature and discuss eight prominent models, (2) empirically compare the eight models and their extensions, (3) formulate a unified model that integrates elements across the eight models, and (4) empirically validate the unified model. The eight models reviewed are the theory of reasoned action, the technology acceptance model, the motivational model, the theory of planned behavior, a model combining the technology acceptance model and the theory of planned behavior, the model of PC utilization, the innovation diffusion theory, and the social cognitive theory. Using data from four organizations over a six-month period with three points of measurement, the eight models explained between 17 percent and 53 percent of the variance in user intentions to use information technology. Next, a unified model, called the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), was formulated, with four core determinants of intention and usage, and up to four moderators of key relationships. UTAUT was then tested using the original data and found to outperform the eight individual models (adjusted R2 of 69 percent). UTAUT was then confirmed with data from two new organizations with similar results (adjusted~ of 70 percent). UTAUT thus provides a useful tool for managers needing to assess the likelihood of success for new technology introductions and helps them understand the drivers of acceptance in order to proactively design interventions (including training, marketing, etc.) targeted at populations of users that may be less inclined to adopt and use new systems. The paper also makes several recommendations for future research including developing a deeper understanding of the dynamic influences studied here, refining measurement of the core constructs used in UTAUT, and understanding the organizational outcomes associated with new technology use.

Self-study questions:

Question 1

This question is about Figure 3 on page 447.

In this figure, it can be seen that an arrow points from 'Behavioral Intention' to 'Use Behavior', which indicates that intention to use technology influences the actual use of technology. The constructs 'Performance Expectancy', 'Effort Expectancy', and 'Social Influence' have a direct effect on 'Behavioral Intention' and an indirect effect on 'Use Behavior' (their arrows point at 'Behavioral Intention', and the arrow from 'Behavioral Intention' points at 'Use Behavior'). If you put yourself in the position of an HRD professional, how would you use the UTAUT model to advice organizations about stimulating the use of technology in their organization?

Question 2

However, the arrow of the construct 'Facilitating Conditions' points directly at 'Use Behavior', so apparently 'Facilitating Conditions' are thought to directly influence 'Use Behavior', but not 'Behavioral Intention'. Why is that, do you think? And would you agree that Facilitating Conditions do not influence the behavioral intention?