The Rational Use of TOE Framework
The TOE framework was developed by Tornatzky et al. (1990). It identifies three aspects of an enterprise’s context that influence the process by which it adopts and implements a technological innovation: technological context, organizational context, and environmental context (Oliveira & Martins, 2011).
But traditionally, researchers have assumed that for each specific technology or context that is being studied, there is a unique set of factors or measures. Thus, the TOE framework usually has a limited number of factors (Bakar et al., 2011). The traditional technological view is mainly focused on the content of the project or technology, while the organizational view includes the softer aspects related to the firm and the environmental view includes the influence of the environment (Bosch-Rekveldt, Jongkind, Mooi, Bakker, & Verbraeck, 2010). The TOE framework has been extensively used in technology adoption studies (Oliveira & Martins, 2011). In each of the empirical studies that test the TOE framework, researchers have used slightly different factors for the technological, organizational, and environmental contexts (Bakar et al., 2011). IS studies have used the TOE framework in different settings such as electronic data interchange, e-procurement adoption, e-commerce, e-business, and e-governance (Oliveira & Martins, 2011; Pudjianto, Zo, Ciganek, & Rho, 2011; Zhu, Kraemer, Xu, & Dederick, 2004), including e-banking (Riyadh et al., 2009), from the perspectives of the organization, external institutions, and the government (Boumediene & Kawalek, 2008; Pudjianto et al., 2011; Scupola, 2009). Recently, Polydorpoulou et al. (2011) deployed a TOE in a study of a port community system investigating employee perspectives on change.Mixed model approaches have been extensively used by prior literature in technology adoption studies.
The technology acceptance model (TAM), theory of planned behavior (TPB), innovation of diffusion (IDT), the resource-based view (RBV), and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) are typical examples of such theoretical models (Boumediene & Kawalek,2008). Using perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use as salient antecedents of intention to use makes TAM a partial adoption model at the individual level. However, in a firm level study where more comprehensive constructs are necessary, the TOE framework is more commonly used due to its comprehensiveness as it examines the technological, business, and environmental contexts (Riyadh et al., 2009). Due to the presence of the environmental context, the TOE framework is considered superior to other theories such as DOI, institutional intervention theory, and institutional theory, when used at the intra-firm level (Bou- mediene & Kawalek, 2008; Riyadh et al., 2009).
Online B2B banking generally consists of a significant number of complex operations and activities. Assessing how employees will perceive value and accept changes from B2B e-banking is among the main factors influencing the likelihood of adoption and implementation of B2B e-banking. Thus, a dedicated framework is necessary for determination of employee perspectives on the value of B2B banking services. The TOE framework is useful for this study because it not only has a solid theoretical basis and consistent empirical support but also the potential for application in the IS innovation domain (Oliveira & Martins, 2011). While a number of studies have focused on technology adoption using the TOE framework, several studies have directly examined how TOE factors affect the impact of an IS innovation on firm performance, explicitly investigating e-business value (Zhu et al., 2004), particularly the B2B aspect. Thus, this study uses TOE as a theoretical lens for assessing B2B e-banking value in terms of user satisfaction, individual impacts, and organizational impacts.
More on the topic The Rational Use of TOE Framework:
- The Preconditions of Rational Legal Discourse
- Instrumental Variations I: Rational Choice Theory
- Equivalence of Rational Expectations to a Strategic Game
- Rational justifications against Conjecture
- Do All Rational Disagreements about the Vague Boil Down to Disagreements about the Precise?
- The STEHD framework
- What is the STEHD framework for?
- 1 A Framework of Statutory Rights
- Section 2. A framework for comparative analysis
- Article 3.7 New framework for sovereign defaults