02 Whole

University of Wollongong Thesis Collections
University of Wollongong Thesis Collection

University of Wollongong Year 
Critical success factors for executive

information systems usage in
organisations
Emmanuel Matthew Ikart
University of Wollongong
Ikart, Emmanuel Matthew, Critical success factors for executive information systems usage in
organisations, PhD thesis, School of Management and Marketing, University of Wollongong,
2005. http://ro.uow.edu.au/theses/459
This paper is posted at Research Online.

http://ro.uow.edu.au/theses/459
Critical Success Factors for Executive Information Systems
Usage in Organisations
A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the

requirements for the award of the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
from
THE UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG
by

MBA (University of Wollongong, 2001)
MIS (Distinction, University of Wollongong, 2001)
BCOM (Economics & Management Studies, University of Wollongong, 1998)
SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT AND MARKETING
November 2005
CERTIFICATION
I, Emmanuel Matthew Ikart, declare that this dissertation, submitted in fulfilment of the
requirements for the award of Doctor of Philosophy, in the School of Management and
Marketing, University of Wollongong, Australia is wholly my work unless otherwise
referenced or acknowledged. The work has not been submitted for a degree at any other
academic institution.
November 2005
ii
ABSTRACT
Executive Information Systems (EIS) are computer-based information systems (CBIS)
designed to provide executives with easy on-line access to internal and external information
relevant to their business success factors. The aim of EIS is to bring relevant information
from the external environment and all parts of an organisation and present it in a way that is
meaningful to executives. Hence, to improve the performance of executives’ tasks, a
significant number of organisations have invested heavily in EIS projects. Although
executives presided over and authorised investment in EIS projects to support their roles,
the majority of executives are unenthusiastic about using EIS because of the design flaws
and failures of these systems. Due to this, the actual engagement with EIS by executives is
relatively small.
Although the failures of EIS in organisations can be linked to social, cultural, psychological
and organisational factors rather than technical factors alone, previous research studies on
EIS usage have focused on the overall benefits, pattern and frequency of use, impacts and
emergence of EIS. Research efforts for key determinants of user acceptance and use of EIS
have been constrained by a lack of appropriate reference theory and key variables. Further,
research studies on the actual engagement of EIS by executives are rather limited in number
or scope. Given this gap, this study aims to investigate and examine the cultural, social,
individual and organisational critical success factors that might explain executives’
behaviour to adopt and use EIS. Further, the study aims to establish the relative importance
of these variables in determining user acceptance and the use of EIS in the organisational
setting.
iii
The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis, 1986) and Triandis’ framework (1979)
are two of the important theories useful in predicting human behaviour with respect to.
TAM proposes how users come to accept and use a technology and suggests that when a
person is adopting a new technology, a number of factors such as its Perceived usefulness
(PU), Perceived ease of use (PEOU), Attitude towards Using (ATU) and behavioural
intentions (BI) influence their decision about how and when he/she will use it. Also,
Triandis’ framework, a theory from social psychology, explicitly addresses the social,
cultural, individual and organisational factors that influence human behaviour. This study
uses TAM and Triandis’ framework as the theoretical foundation. However, the study
extends TAM with such variables as Habits, Social factors and Facilitating conditions
from Triandis’ framework to derive a research model suitable for the adoption and usage of
EIS in organisations. The model hypothesises that behaviour positively relates to: Habits
(executives experience in computer-based information systems (CBIS), EIS and the ability
to use EIS); Social factors (subjective norms, roles, values and social situations); and
Facilitating conditions (EIS development processes, EIS management processes and
organisational environment of EIS) by means of PU, PEOU and ATU.
The study aims to: (1) provide a better understanding of the choices of executives in using
EIS, (2) assist EIS developers to understand the core information processing requirements
of the executives’ tasks for which they are building EIS, in order to implement appropriate
functionalities to support those tasks, (3) support researchers to further explain human
behaviour towards IS including EIS acceptance and usage, based on the framework and
research model, and (4) through the proposed model aims to redress the limitations of the
iv
extant research model, by accounting for intrinsic motivation and social-cultural factors
relevant in explaining executives’ behaviour towards EIS adoption and usage.
Data used in testing the research model and associated hypotheses was collected using a
mail survey questionnaire of executives such as the CFOs, CEOs and other executives from
255 organisations that use EIS in Australia.
The results of this study emphasise the importance of social, cultural, individual and
organisational variables in explaining executives’ behaviour towards the adoption and
usage of EIS by means of PU, PEOU and ATU. The importance of these variables from
most influential to least influential is: social, cultural, individual and organisational
variables.
This study is a significant contribution to academic literature and management/ practice.
Theoretically, the study has established TAM and Triandis’ framework - as appropriate
reference theories suitable in studying the adoption and usage of EIS by executives.
Methodologically, the approach used for this study to address the research problem, as a
behaviour using TAM and Triandis’ framework variables is a significant contribution to the
body of knowledge. This methodology is important for further research into IS including
EIS adoption and usage by executives. Managerially/practically, the findings of this study
have significant implications to EIS designers/developers, implementers and managers of
organisations. (In particular, EIS designers and implementers are urged to take into account
the importance of social factors, facilitating conditions, habits, PU and PEOU that influence
the behaviour of EIS users to use EIS).
v
Publications Arising From The Thesis
Referenced Journal Article
Ikart, E.M. (2005). Executive Information Systems and the Top-Level Officers’ Roles: An
Exploratory Study of User-behaviour Model and Lessons learnt. The Australian
Journal of Information Systems (AJIS), Vol 13, No.1, September 2005, 78-100.
Referenced Conference Papers
Ikart, E.M. Ikart (2005). An Investigation of the Determinants of User Acceptance of

Information Technology in a West African Nation: The Case of Nigeria, Accepted
for Presentation at the 16th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Manly
Pacific Hotel, Manly, Sydney Australia 30 November – 2 December, 2005.
Ikart, E.M. (2005). Towards Executive Information Systems Adoption by Knowledge

Workers: An Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model to Account for
Social-Cultural Factors. The BAI 2005 International Conference on Business and
Information, Hong Kong Harbour Plaza Hotel, Hong Kong July 14 -15, 2005.
Ikart, E.M. (2005). A Theory-based Model for the Study of Executive Information Systems
Adoption by the Top-Level Managers, The Ninth Pacific Asia Conference on
Information systems (PACIS2005), Bangkok, Thailand, 7-10 July, 2005, 414 – 427.
Ikart, E.M. and Ditsa, G. (2004a). A Research Framework for the Adoption and Usage of
Executive Information Systems by Organisational Executives: An Exploratory
Study, Australasian Conference on Information Systems, 1-3 December 2004
Hobart Tasmania.
Ikart, E.M. and Ditsa, G. (2004b). An Exploratory Study of Factors Contributing to
Successful Adoption and Usage of Executive Information Systems, The 2004
International Research Conference on Innovations in Information Technology,
Dubai, UAE, October 4 – 6, 2004.
Ikart, E.M. (2004). Factors Influencing Executive Information Systems Adoption and
Usage by Organisational Executives, Conference on Information Sciences and
Technology Management, July 8-9 2004, Ancient Library of Alexandria, Egypt.
Ikart, E.M. (2004). A Research Model for the Investigation of Top Management Adoption
and Use of Executive Information Systems, Proceedings of The 2004 International
Business Information Management Conference July 4 – 6 Amman, Jordan, pp.169-
181.
Ikart, E.M. (2003). Critical Success Factors of Executive Information Systems Usage in
Organisations, Ph.D. Consortium, 14th Australasian Conference on Information
Systems, 26-28 November 2003, Perth, Western Australia.
vi
Working Paper Series:
Department of Information Systems University of Wollongong
Ikart, E.M. (2005). An Exploratory Study of Organisational Contextual Factors

Contributing to the Actual Engagement of Executive Information Systems by
Knowledge Workers, University of Wollongong Information Systems Working
Paper Series.
Ikart, E.M. (2004). A New Theoretical Foundation for the Study of Executive Information
Systems, University of Wollongong Information Systems Working Paper Series.
vii
Acknowledgements
I wish to express my sincere appreciation and gratitude to all the people who have
contributed to the completion of this dissertation. First and foremost, I had a great fortune
to study under the supervision of Associate Professor Sam Garrett-Jones, Dr. Suku
Sinnappan and Dr. George Ditsa. I am extremely grateful to Associate Professor Sam
Garrett-Jones. He has guided this research with a sure hand, drawing deeply upon his
wealth of experience as an eminent researcher in the field of management and always
exercising an unerring judgment of what differentiated a good research endeavour from a
mediocre attempt. No doctoral student could have wished for a more helpful faculty
advisor.
I am very grateful to Dr. Suku Sinnappan for his friendly support and enthusiasm. His
profound knowledge of different perspectives of Information Systems and communications
provided the opportunity to broaden my knowledge. And to Dr. George Ditsa for initially
supervising/co-supervising this research before departing the University, I offer my sincere
thanks.
I own my thanks to Dr. Chandra Gulati. As my statistical advisor, he has provided
statistical advice, alternatives for the analysis of the empirical data, interpretation and
presentation of findings.
viii
I would like to extend my sincere thanks to the family of Paul Tuckerman. Patrick, John
and Clare Tuckerman have spent many hours reading, and thinking about this research, and
have helped to add clarity and rigor to its presentation.
A very special thanks goes to my parents, brothers and sisters who have believed in my
ability and patiently waited for me. I would like to dedicate this dissertation to my father
and mother, the family whose loving care and determination in the midst of very little,
started me on a career path through formal education. I am glad they are alive to see this
dream come true.
Last but certainly not the least, I will like to thank the Dean and Faculty of Commerce for
providing a warm and supportive environment for this research to develop.
ix
Table of Contents
Certification …………………………………………………………….. ii
Abstract …………………………………………………………………. iii
Publications Arising from the Thesis …………………………………. vi
Acknowledgement ……………………………………………………… viii
Table of Contents ………………………………………………………. X
List of Tables …………………………………………………………… xvi
List of Figures ………………………………………………………….. xx
Acronyms………………………………………………………………... xxi
Glossary…………………………………………………………………. xxiii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Present Study………………………………………… 1

1.2 Research Problem and Research Questions ……………………………... 6
1.3 Conceptual Framework for the Present Study…………………………… 8
1.3.1 The Technology Acceptance Model …………………………………….. 11
1.3.2 Triandis’ Theoretical Framework ……………………………………….. 12
1.4 Research Design …………………………………………………………. 14
1.5 Measures of EIS Acceptance ……………………………………………. 14
1.6 Justifications and Significance of the Study……………………………... 16
1.6.1 Expected Contributions ……………………………………………………….. 19
1.7 Thesis Structure ………………………………………………………… 20
1.8 Conclusions ……………………………………………………………… 22
CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………….. 23
2.2 EIS Definitions, Characteristics and Potential Benefits …………………. 23
2.2.1 EIS Definitions…………………………………………………………… 24
2.2.2 Characteristics ……………………………………………………………. 26
2.2.3 The Potential Benefits ……………………………………………………. 28
2.3 The Nature of Executives’ Work and How EIS Fits-in ………………….. 31
2.3.1 Kotter’s “Job Demands” Agenda Setting and “Network Building”……… 32
2.3.2 Anthony’s Planning and Control Model…………………………………. 33
x
2.3.3 Mintzberg’s Roles Model Theory ………………………………………. 34
2.4 How EIS Differ from other CBIS, Components, and Examples…………. 40
2.4.1 A Comparison of EIS with other CBIS ………………………………….. 40
2.4.2 An Organisational EIS Architecture …………….……………………….. 42
2.4.2.1 Hardware Issues …………………………………………………………. 43
2.4.2.2 Software Issues ………………………………………………………….. 44
2.5 Historical Aspects and Growth of EIS …………………………………… 46
2.5.1 Current View and Growth of EIS ……………………………………… 48
2.6 Evidence on the Growth of Use of EIS ………………………………….. 50
2.7 Pressures to EIS Implementations in Organisations ……………………... 53
2.8 Factors Contributing to EIS Success or failure in Organisations………… 55
2.9 Evidence of Lack of, or Underutilisation of EIS…………………………. 59
2.10 Factors Determining a Successful EIS Implementation in an Organisation 61
2.11 Past Research Studies on EIS Usage …………………………………….. 65
2.12 Summary and Conclusion ……………………………………………….. 69
CHAPTER 3 THEORETICAL FOUNDATION, RESEARCH
MODEL AND HYPOTHESES
3.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………. 71
3.2 Theoretical Perspectives in IS Research Studies ………………………… 71
3.3 Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) …………………………………. 77
3.3.1 Definitions of Key Constructs in TAM …………………………………. 78
3.3.2 The Importance of TAM in IS Research ………………………………… 81
3.4 An Overview of Triandis’ Theoretical Framework ……………………… 84
3.4.1 Definitions of Key Constructs in Traindis’s framework for the 87
Study……………………………………………………………………..
3.4.2 The Importance of Triandis’ Framework………………………………… 89
3.5 The Research Model and Hypotheses …………………………………… 90
3.5.1 The Research Model for EIS Adoption and Usage ……………………… 90
3.5.1.1 Classification of Variables in the Research Model……………………… 94
3.5.2 Research Hypotheses ……………………………………………………. 95
3.5.2.1 Habits on Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use…………… 96
3.5.2.2 Facilitating Conditions on Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of 98
Use…………………………………………………………………………
xi
3.5.2.3 Social Factors on Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use ……. 99
3.5.2.4 The Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use on Behaviour…….. 102
3.5.2.5 Attitudes Towards Using on Actual System Use…………………………. 104
3.6 Summary and Conclusions ……………………………………………….. 106
CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
4.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………. 108
4.1.1 Definition of Research Design …………………………………………… 108
4.1.2 Research Approach ………………………………………………………. 109
4.1.3 Research Paradigm ………………………………………………………. 110
4.1.4 Nature of the Study ……………………………………………………… 111
4.1.5 Research Setting …………………………………………………………. 112
4.1.6 Unit of Analysis …………………………………………………………. 113
4.1.7 Type of Investigation …………………………………………………….. 114
4.1.8 Time horizon ……………………………………………………………... 115
4.1.9 Data Collection Methods ………………………………………………… 115
4.1.9.1 The Importance of Mail Survey…………………………………………... 118
4.1.9.2 The Social Exchange Theory and Mail Survey………………………….. 119
4. 2 Conceptualisation and Operationalisation of Variables …………………. 121
4.2.1 Definitions of key Terms ……………………………………………….. 121
4.2.2 Reliability and Validity …………………………………………………. 124
4.2.3 Measurement of Variables ………………………………………………. 127
4.2.3.1 Habits …………………………………………………………………… 128
4.2.3.2 Facilitating conditions …………………………………………………… 129
4.2.3.3 Social factors……………………………………………………………… 130
4.2.3.4 Perceived Usefulness (PU) and Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU)………… 133
4.2.3.5 Attitude towards using (ATU)……………………………………………. 134
4.2.3.6 Actual system use – Behaviour…………………………………………… 135
4.3 Questionnaire Design …………………………………………………….. 137
4.3.1 Questionnaire Design for the Present Study……………………………… 139
4.4 Pre-Pilot Surveys ………………………………………………………. 141
4.4.1 Pilot Survey………………………………………………………………. 143
4.5 The Main Survey ………………………………………………………… 145
xii
4.5.1 Administration of the Main Survey Questionnaire ……………………… 146
4.5.2 Distribution and Return of Mail Survey …………………………………. 146
4.5.2.1 Ethical Considerations in the Study………………………………………. 147
4.5.3 Monitoring Returns ………………………………………………………. 148
4.5.3.1 Drawbacks in the Returns ………………………………………….…….. 149
4.5.4 Follow-up Mailing ……………………………………………………….. 150
4.5.5 Organisations Surveyed for the present Study …………………………... 151
4.5.5.1 Justification of Sample Size …………………………………………….. 152
4.5.6 Response Rate and Results ………………………………………………. 153
4.5.7 Test of Non–Response Error …………………………………………….. 154
4.6 Summary and Conclusions ………………………………………………. 156
CHAPTER 5 RESULTS OF DATA ANALYSIS
5.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………. 158

5.2 Coding of Measurement Scale for EIS Adoption and Usage…………….. 159
5.3 Respondents’ Demographic Factors ………………….………………… 162
5.4 Analysis of Frequency Test Result of Variables for the Research 163
Model …………………………………………………………………….
5.5 Analysis of Descriptive Statistics of Variables for the Research Model…. 165
5.6 Factor Analysis …………………………………………………………... 166
5.6.1 Factor Analysis for the Social Factor Variables ………………………….. 167
5.6.2 Factor Analysis of TAM Variables: Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease 169
of Use and Attitudes towards using Items……………………………..
5.6.3 Factor Analysis for Habit Variables: Experience in CBIS, Experience in 171
EIS and Ability to use EIS …………………………………………...
5.6.4 Factor Analysis for Facilitating Condition Variables: EIS development 173
processes, EIS management processes and Organisational environment
of EIS ……………………………………………………………………...
5.7 Multiple linear Regression, MANOVA and One-Way ANOVA for 175
Hypotheses ……………………………………………………………….
5.8 Hypotheses Testing ……………………………………………………… 178
5.8.1 Hypotheses: Habits vs PU and PEOU ……………………………………. 178
5.8.2 Hypotheses: H3a, H3b, and H3c vs. PU …………………………………. 183
5.8.3 Hypotheses: H4a, H4b and H4c vs. PEOU ………………………………. 184
xiii
5.8.4 Hypotheses: H5a, H5b, H5c and H5d vs. PU …………………………….. 185
5.8.5 Hypotheses: H6a, H6b, H6c and H6d vs. PEOU ………………………… 186
5.8.6 Hypotheses: H7 and H8 vs. ATU ………………………………………… 187
5.8.7 Hypothesis: H9 vs. Actual System Use ………………………………… 188
5.8.7.1 Stepwise Regression Analysis ……………………………………………. 191
5.8.7.2. Stepwise Regression for Habits, Facilitating Conditions, Social Factors 192
and PEOU ………………………………………………………………..
5.8.7.3 Stepwise Regression for Habits, Facilitating Conditions, Social Factors 193
And PU …………………………………………………………………..
5.8.7.4 Stepwise Regression for PEOU and PU and Attitude toward Using …….. 194
5.8.7.5 Testing Multiple Regression Assumption ……………………………….. 195
5.8.7.6 Testing the Assumption of One-Way ANOVA ………………………….. 197
5.8.7.7 Practical Assumption of MANOVA ……………………………………... 198
5.8.7.8 Summary and Conclusions ………………………………………………. 200
CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
6.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………….. 203

6.2 A Summary of the Study…………………………………………………. 203
6.3 Findings, Implications and Conclusions Related to the Hypotheses …….. 205
6.3.1 Findings and Implications Related to the Hypotheses…………………… 207
6.3.2 Conclusions Related to Research Hypotheses …………………………… 221
6.4 Findings, Conclusions and Implications Related to the Research 222
Questions …………………………………………………………………
6.4.1 Findings Related to the Research Questions …………………………….. 222
6.4.2 Conclusions related to the research questions …………………………… 224
6.4.3 Implications Related to the research questions …………………………. 225
6.5 Conclusions Related to the Research Problem …………………………... 226
6.6 A Modified Version of the Research Model ……………………………. 228
6.7 Contributions of the Study ………………………………………………. 229
6.7.1 Contributions to Academic literature ……………………………………. 230
6.7.2 Contributions to Management/ Practice …………………………………. 232
6.8 Implications of the Study for Policy and Future Research ………………. 237
6.9 Limitations of the Study and Implications for Future Study …………….. 238
xiv
REFERENCES …………………………………………………………. 241
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Template of Cover letter and Questionnaire………………… 260
Appendix 2: Template of Follow-up Reminder to Questionnaire………... 266
Appendix 3: Industry Codes and Industry Groups in Database………….. 267
Appendix 4: Tables A4.1 – 4.10: Inter-item Correlation for all the Scales 271
Appendix 5: Factor Analysis Information ……………………………….. 274
xv
List of Tables
Table 2.1 Definitions of EIS and Illustrative References 24

Table 2.2 EIS Applications at Marine Midland Bank 31
Table 2.3 Mintzberg’s (1973) Roles Model of managers 35
Table 2.4 A Comparison of Mintzberg’s, Kotter’s & Anthony’s Models 37
Table 2.5 A Comparison of EIS, MIS and DSS (Watson et al. 1997) 41
Table 2.6 Historical Aspects for the Quest of EIS 47
Table 2.7 Expenditure on EIS in Different Market 52
Table 2.8 Pressures Leading to EIS Development (Watson et al. 1991) 53
Table 2.9 Reasons for Implementing EIS in Australia (Pervan & Phua, 54
1996)
Table 2.10 Factor Contributing to EIS Failure (Young & Watson, 1995) 58
Table 2.11 Factors contributing to EIS success 63
Table 2.12 Classification of EIS Usage Research 65
Table 3.1 Theoretical Perspective in IS Research 72
Table 3.2 Classification of Research Variables into Social, Cultural, 94
Individual and Organisational Factors
Table 3.3 A Summary of the Interrelationship between Hypotheses in the 95
Model
Table 4.1 Aspects of Research Design and Methodology 109
Table 4.2 Reliability Coefficients of scales (Cronbach’s Alpha) for 137
Scaled Variables used in the Study. Scale = 5 point Likert
Scale
Table 4.3 Batch Distributions of Survey Questionnaires 147
Table 4.4 A Summary of Initial and follow-up Responses 151
Table 4.5 Demographic Data of Surveyed Organisations 152
Table 4.6 Summary of Responses to Mail Survey Questionnaire 153
Table 4.7 Mann-Whitney Test of Non-response Error 156
Table 5.0 Coding of Measurement Scale for EIS Adoption and Usage 159
Table 5.1 Demographic Factors of Respondents (n = 121) 162
xvi
Table 5.2 Frequency Results of Variables for the Research Model 164
(n=121)
Table 5.3 A Descriptive Statistic of Variables in the Study (n = 121) 166
Table 5.4 Rotated Component Matrix for Social Factors 169
Table 5.5 Rotated Component Matrix for TAM Variables: PU 171
PEOU and ATU Items
Table 5.6 Rotated Component Matrix for Habit Variables 173
Table 5.7 Rotated Component Matrix for Facilitating Conditions 175
Table 5.8 A Summary of the Hypothesised Relationships between 176
Variables
Table 5.9A Results of MANOVA test for Habits Vs PU 180
Table 5.9B Results of MANOVA test for Habits Vs PEOU 182
Table 5.10 Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for Facilitating 184
Conditions vs. PU
Table 5.11 Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for Facilitating 185
conditions vs. PEOU
Table 5.12 Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for facilitating 185
conditions vs. PEOU without M Variable
Table 5.13 Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for Social Factors vs. 186
PU
Table 5.14 Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for Social Factors vs. 187
PEOU
Table 5.15 Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for PU and PEOU vs. 188
ATU
Table 5.16a Report ATU 190
Table 5.16b ANOVA: ATU 190
Table 5.16c Student-Newman-Keuls ATU Test 190
Table 5.16d ANOVA: ATU 191
Table 5.17 Stepwise Regression Analysis – The Perceived Ease of Use 193
Table 5.18 Stepwise Regression Analysis – Perceived Usefulness 194
Table 5.19 Stepwise Regression Analysis – Attitudes towards Using 195
Table 6.1 Summary of Test Results for the Study Hypotheses 206
xvii
Table 6.2 Critical Success Factors for EIS Usage in Organisations 227
Appendix Tables
Table A4.1 Correction Matrix for EIS Development Processes Scale 271
Table A4.2 Correlation Matrix for EIS Management Processes Scale 271
Table A4.3 Correlation Matrix for Organisational Environment Scale 271
Table A4.4 Correlation Matrix for Subjective Norms Scale 272
Table A4.5 Correlation Matrix for Subjective Values 272
Table A4.6 Correlation Matrix for Subjective Roles Scale 272
Table A4.7 Correlation Matrix for Subjective Social Situations Scale 272
Table A4.8 Correlation Matrix for PEOU Scale 273
Table A4.9 Correlation Matrix for PU Scale 273
Table A4.10 Correlation Matrix for Attitudes Scale 273
Table A 5.1 KMO and Bartlett's Test for Social Factor Variables 274
Table A 5.2 Total Variance Explained for Social Factor Variables 275
Table A 5.3 Communalities for the Social factors 275
Table A5.4 KMO and Bartlett's Test for TAM Instrument 276
Table A5.5 Total Variance Explained for TAM Instrument 276
Table A5.6 Communalities for TAM Instrument 277
Table A5.7 KMO and Bartlett's Test for Habits 278
Table A5.8 Total Variance Explained for Habits 278
Table A5.9 Communalities for Habit Variables 279
Table A5.10 KMO and Bartlett's Test for the Facilitating Conditions 279
Table A5.11 Total Variance Explained for the Facilitating Conditions 279
Table A5.12 Communalities for Facilitating Conditions 280
Table A5.13a The Mean Scores of EXPCBIS on PU and PEOU 281
Table A5.13b The Mean Scores of EXPEIS on PU and PEOU 281
Table A5.13c The Mean Scores of ABIS on PU and PEOU 282
Table A5.13d ANOVA Test for Habit (EXPCBIS) Vs PEOU 282
Table A5.13d1 Test of Homogeneity of Variances for PEOU 282
Table A5.13e ANOVA Test for Habit (EXPEIS) Vs PEOU 282
Table A5.13e1 Test of Homogeneity of Variances for PEOU 283
xviii
Table A5.13f ANOVA Test for Habit (ABEIS) Vs PEOU 283
Table A5.13f1 Test of Homogeneity of Variances for PEOU 283
Table A5.14 Test of Homogeneity of Variances: ATU 287
Table A5.15a ANOVA 289
Table A5.15b Residuals Statistics 290
Table A5.15c Box's M Test of Equality of Covariance Matrices 290
Table A5.15d Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for PU and PEOU vs. 290
ATU1
Table A5.15e Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for PU and PEOU vs. 291
ATU2
Table A5.15f Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for PU and PEOU vs. 291
ATU3
Table A5.15g Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for PU and PEOU vs. 291
ATU4
Table A5.15h Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for PU and PEOU vs. 292
ATU5
xix
List of Figures
Figure 2.1 The General Model of an EIS (Source: Nord and Nord, 1995 26
p.96)
Figure 2.2 Client/Server Architecture of EIS (Source: Watson et al, 1997) 43
Figure 2.3 General Purpose Software and EIS (Watson et al, 1997 p. 148) 45
Figure 3.1 Technology Acceptance Model (Source: Davis, 1993 p.476) 80
Figure 3.2 The Theory of Reasoned Action (Source: Fishbein, 1979 p.69) 80
Figure 3.3 Triandis’ framework (Source: Triandis, 1979 p.199) 86
Figure 3.4 Research Model for EIS Adoption and Usage Adapted from 91
TAM and Triandis Model
Figure 5.1 The Box Plots and Descriptive Statistics 191
Figure 6.1 EIS Adoption and Usage Model (EISAUM) 229
Appendix Figures
Figure A 5.1 The Scree Plot for the Social factor Variables 274
Figure A5.2: Scree Plot for TAM Instrument 277
Figure A5.3 Scree Plot for Habit Variables 278
Figure A5.4: Scree Plot for the Facilitating Conditions 280
Figure A5.5 Results of test for linearity and homoscedasticity assumptions 283
Figure A5.6 Results of test of linearity and homoscedasticity assumptions 284
Figure A5.7 Results of test for linearity and homoscedasticity assumptions 284
Figure A5.8 Results of test for normality assumptions 285
Figure A5.14 Results of Test for normality 288
Figure A5.15 Results of Test for Normality 288
Figure A5.16 Results for test of normality 288
xx
Acronyms
A Actual system use
ABEIS Ability to use executive information systems
ANOVA One-Way Analysis of Variance
ATU Attitude towards using
BI Behavior intentions
CBIS Computer-based information systems
CEO Chief executive officers
CFO Chief financial officers
CBIS Computer-based information systems
CSF Critical success factors
EDU Education
EIS Executive information systems
EXPCBIS Experience in computer-based information system
EXPEIS Experience in executive information systems
FC Facilitating conditions
GUI Graphical user interface
H Habits
JOBP Job position
MANOVA Multiple Analysis of Variance
MDDBMS Multi-dimensional database management systems
MOLAP Multi-dimensional on-line analytical processing
NTUEIS Number of times of using executive information

systems
OLAP On-line analytic processing
PEOU Perceived ease of use

PU Perceived usefulness
ROLAP and Relational on-line analytical processing
SF Social factors
xxi
SQL Structure query language
TAM Technology Acceptance Model
TDM Total design method
TRA Theory of Reason Action

WWW World Wide Web
xxii
Glossary
Affect The feeling of pleasure, displeasure, joy, delight or disgust towards the
behaviour.
Attitude object An external stimulus of an attitude.
Attitude towards the Individual’s evaluation of a specified behaviour involving the object.
behaviour
Attitude towards the An individual’s effective evaluation of a specified attitude object.

object
Balanced scorecard The balanced scorecard is a management system (not only a

measurement system) that enables organisations to clarify their vision
and strategy and translate them into action. It provides feedback
around both the internal business processes and external outcomes in
order to continuously improve strategic performance and results.
When fully deployed, the balanced scorecard transforms strategic
planning from an academic exercise into the nerve center of an
enterprise.
Case study research Studies which enable researchers to systematically gather in-depth
information on a single entity using a variety of data gathering methods.
Causal investigation An investigation used in establishing definitively the cause and effect
relationships of the research problem.
Correlation An investigation used in identifying important variables associated with the

investigation problem
Critical success Organisational contextual factors determining the success or failure (of e.g.,
factors EIS).
Cross-sectional Research study which allows the unit of analysis to be observed at one point
study in time. In other words, data for the study are gathered just once, perhaps
over a period of days or weeks or months, in order to answer the research
question.
Data mining Knowledge discovery (KDD), knowledge extraction, data pattern

processing, data archaeology, information harvesting, software or data
dredging.
Data warehouse A subject-oriented, integrated, time-variant and nonvolatile collection of

data in support of management’s decision-making process.
Descriptive research Study conducted to describe the precise measurement and reporting of the
characteristics of the phenomena under investigation.
xxiii
Enterprise Management information system (MISs) including EIS that integrate
Resources Planning and automate many of the business practices associated with the
operations or production and distribution aspects of a company
engaged in manufacturing products or services. The systems
concentrate on the efficiency of a firm's internal production,
distribution and financial processing.
Executives Corporate knowledge workers responsible for corporate strategic

management activities.
Executive Computer-based information system specifically designed to provide broad

Information and deep information support and analytical capability for a wide range of
Systems executive (top level management) decisions. It is easy to use and provide
access to information in the internal and external business environments.
Explanatory Research carried out to discover and report relationships among different
Research aspects of the phenomena.
Exploratory Research employed to develop a preliminary understanding of some

research phenomena.
Facilitating Objective factors in the environment such that several judges or observers
conditions can agree to make an act easy to do.
Field study Research based on organisational and individual variables. A field study
setting enables data to be gathered on a number of ongoing, uncontrolled
situations. It allows researchers to establish cause and effect relationships
using the same natural environment in which the employees normally work.
Habits Situation-behaviour sequences that are or have become automatic so that

they occur without self-instruction.
Laboratory Research performed to establish cause and effect relationships beyond the
experiment shadow of a doubt requiring the creation of an artificial, contrived
environment in which all the extraneous factors are strictly controlled. Also,
subjects are carefully selected by the researcher to respond to certain
manipulated stimuli.
Longitudinal studies Research studies where the unit of analysis can be investigated over a long
period of time.
Mail survey Data collection method where researchers mail-out survey questionnaire to
sample respondent for his/her responses to the questionnaire.
Multi-dimensional System where data is stored along dimensions that correspond to business
database concepts.
management
xxiv
Norms Self-instructions to do what is perceived to be appropriate by members of the
culture in certain situation.
On-line analytical Key technology for successful analysis of business data e.g., multi-user
processing support, client-server architecture and transparency of operation.
Operationalisation The linking of the conceptual definitions of a specific set of measurement

techniques or procedure.
Perceived ease of “The degree to which individual believes that using a particular system
use (PEOU) would be free of physical and mental effort” (Davis, 1993, p. 447).
Perceived The degree to which individual believes that using a particular system will
usefulness (PU) enhance his or her job performance (Davis, 1993).
Reference theory An established theory employed in research to guide the research design. A
reference theory aids the researcher to identify appropriate independent
variables and intervening variables that relate to utilisation, and provides
definition of utilisation that suggests good operationalisation.
Roles Appropriate behaviour by a person holding an office in a group.
Social situations A behaviour setting where more than one person is present.
Structure query A term used in connection with relational database structure (RDBS) for data
language query.
The Web “An information space consisting of hyperlinked documents published on

the internet”.(Arnott and Tan, 2000) The World Wide Web.
Theory A systematic way of organizing and explaining observations that include a

set of propositions or statements about the relations among various
phenomena.
Unit of analysis Those things that we examine in order to create summary descriptions of all
such units and explain differences among them.
Values The tendency to prefer a state of affairs over another.
Variables Symbols to which values are assigned.
xxv
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
“Issues of organisational behaviour and culture are perhaps the most deadly barriers to effective Executive
Information Systems”(Kelly, 1994).
1.1 Background to the Present Study
The importance of information in executive decision-making has been extensively
documented (Walters et al. 2003). One of the main roles of executives is monitoring
information from a myriad of sources about their organisations and environments
(Mintzberg, 1973; Martensson, 1996; Vandenbosch and Huff, 1997). The greater the
uncertainty in the business environment, the greater the need for information processing
(Arnott and Tan, 2000; Salmeron et al. 2001; Choo, 2002). Because of the uncertainty of
the business environment two factors are important namely, (1) Executives choose their
information to inform them on where, when, and towards what their attention should be
directed and to help them formulate or define organisational problems, (2) guided by their
social norms and culture (Vandenbosch and Huff, 1997) habits and facilitating conditions
of the environment (Ditsa, 2003). Without concise and timely information (Walters et al.
2003; Khalil and Elkordy, 2005), executives will be unable to determine if their views of
the environment and their organisation’s position within it remain appropriate
(Vandenbosch and Huff, 1997). Given proper problem formulation, information helps
executives to establish options and select a course of action. Information helps stimulate
creativity, generate scenarios, determine trends and monitor performance. Information is
the fuel for planning and strategising (Mintzberg, 1973) and without appropriate
information executives simply will not function.
1
McLeod and Jones (1992) studied the use of information sources by executives based on
four decisional roles (disturbance handler, resources allocator, entrepreneur and negotiator)
proposed by Mintzberg (1973). The authors collected data by interviews, questionnaires
and logs of information transactions of five executives over a period of two weeks. A large
proportion of the executives’ information that came from the external environment was
divided equally between people and organisational sources. Information from first- and
second- level subordinates was frequently obtained and valued highly. The most valued
source of information was committee meetings. In terms of information media, verbal
media such as social activities, tours and scheduled and unscheduled meetings were ranked
the most valuable sources. When executives engaged in the entrepreneurial role, they
preferred internal sources and verbal information. When executives engaged in resources
allocator role, although they preferred internal information, it did not matter to them
whether the information was written and/or oral information. In the disturbance handler
role, they preferred internal verbal sources to external sources. Finally, in the negotiator
role, they did not rate such information highly and were indifferent of the sources.
Although the McLeod and Jones study revealed that executives attached limited value to
computer-based reports, Khalil and Elkordy (2005) cited later studies (e.g., Benard and
Satir, 1993; Lan and Scott, 1996) that indicated an improvement in managers’ ranking of
computer-based sources as compared to non-computer-based sources, and more emphasis
on external sources as compared to internal sources.
Executive Information Systems (EIS) are computerised systems designed to provide
executives with easy on-line access to internal and external information relevant to their
business success factors (Rainer and Watson, 1995; Hung, 2003). The aim of EIS is to
2
bring relevant information such as news, regulations and competitive analyses from the
external environment (Vandenbosch and Huff, 1997; Salmeron et al. 2001), and all parts of
an organisation and present it in a way that is meaningful to executives (McBride, 1997).
Relevant information is timely, accurate and actionable (Arnott et al. 2004; Khalil and
Elkordy, 2005), about most aspects of a business such as planning and control, competitive
analyses, communications, and decision-making which are of particular interest to
executives (Salmeron, 2003). EIS are specifically designed to capture both “hard” and
“soft” forms of information from the business environments. The former refers to numbers
and figures and the latter refers to explanations of the numbers presented; for example,
hearsay, rumours and opinions. This soft data however provides additional meanings and
richness to hard data (Singh et al. 2002).
The characteristics of EIS, such as the ability to move freely between a high-level view of
data and a detailed view (“drill-down”), a concentration on data relating to key
performance indicators and critical success factors (Hung, 2003), the ability to highlight
exceptions and variances automatically and to present information in graphical, tabular,
textual and colours to the executives make EIS a suitable tool for executives’ work
(McBride, 1997).
To improve the performance of executives’ tasks, a significant number of organisations
have invested heavily in EIS. Although executives preside over and authorise investment in
EIS projects, the majority of executives are unenthusiastic to use EIS because of the design
flaws and failures of these systems (Fitzgerald, 1998; Ditsa, 2003). From the study by
Averweg et al. (2004) of the use of EIS within organisational hierarchies in South Africa, it
is acknowledged that the actual engagement of EIS by executives is relatively low.

3
Recently, the use of EIS in organisations has spread to managers at various levels such as
functional areas and other levels of management (Vlahos et al. 2000; Singh et al. 2002).
Although this spread has given EIS new names such as, enterprise information system and
business intelligence (BI) software and Balanced Scorecards(Liang and Miranda, 2001), the
problem of their underutilisation by executives remains unresolved (Ditsa, 2002, 2003).
Historically, business executives have not been using EIS (Tao et al. 2001). It is generally
agreed that with the implementation and operation of EIS often championed by senior
executives with broad and general management support (e.g., McBride, 1997; Poon and
Wagner, 2001), one should expect a significant level of use by executives. Nonetheless, the
actual use of EIS by executives is relatively small (Thodenius, 1996).
Several studies (e.g., Kumar and Palvia, 2001; Singh et al. 2002) have reported the growing
popularity of EIS in organisations. New concepts such as enterprise resources planning
(ERP), data warehousing, data mining, web-based portal to “dashboard” and “scorecards”
and the on-line analytical processing (OLAP) engine have paved the way for a new era of
managing corporate data. Despite these, the underutilisation of EIS by executives remains
an important challenge to user organisations (Ditsa, 2003; Salmeron and Herrero, 2005).
As reported by Ikart (2005b), the US studies (e.g., Rainer and Watson, 1995; Koh and
Watson, 1998) contended that approximately 60% of organisations investing in EIS have
experienced significant failure of EIS. Further, in their study, Poon and Wagner (2001)
reported on the failure rate of EIS as high as 70%. These failures have been linked to
social, cultural, organisational (McBride, 1997) and psychological (Poon and Wagner,
4
2001) factors rather than technical factors alone (McBride, 1997). Also, studies in Australia
(e.g., Pervan, 1992; Pervan and Phua, 1996) have linked these failures to technological,
data management and loss of interest by executives. Pervan and Phua (1997) acknowledged
that executives are often disappointed by the quality of information received from EIS and
even get frustrated when trying to operate them. According to Fitzgerald and Murphy
(1994) executives are often not confident about using EIS.
A number of researchers (e.g., Szajna, 1993; Davis, 1993; Young and Watson, 1995; Mao,
2002) have investigated organisational and technological factors that determine user
acceptance of IS, including EIS. Although these research efforts have provided some
valuable results, they have been constrained by lack of appropriate reference theoretical
foundations and variables for key determinants of user acceptance and use of information
systems (Trice and Treacy, 1988). Appropriate reference theory is an established theory
employed in research to guide the research design. A reference theory aids the researcher to
identify appropriate independent variables and intervening variables that relate to
utilisation, and provides a definition of utilisation that suggests good operationalisation
(Trice and Treacy, 1988). While variables are symbols to which values are assigned
(Kerlinger, 1986), operationalisation is the linking of the conceptual definitions of a
specific set of measurement techniques or procedures (Neuman, 2003).
The motivation for the present study comes from the realisation that there is: (1) limited
research on the actual use of EIS by executives, (2) a lack of appropriate reference
theoretical foundation of social, cultural, individual and organisational factors in
determining key factors for user acceptance and use of EIS.
5
The remainder of this Chapter is organised as follows: first, Section 1.2 presents the
problem and research questions. Second, Section 1.3 presents the conceptual framework for
the study. Third, Section 1.4 presents the research design followed by measures of EIS
acceptance in Section 1.5. Further, Section 1.6 presents the justifications and significance
of the study. Next, Section 1.7 presents the organisation of the thesis. Finally, 1.8 presents
the conclusion of the Chapter and a preview of the remaining Chapters.
1.2 Research Problem and Research Questions
In his study, Lucas (1975) encouraged the measurement of IS usage because if an IS system
is not used it is not considered successful. Trice and Treacy (1988) also noted that system
use is a necessary condition through which an information system can affect performance.
Fuerst and Cheney (1982) further reinforced that unless IS are used they will have no
benefit to organisations implementing them. In the review of Bruwer (1984), it also pointed
out that the most attractive indicator of IS success in an organisation from a measurement
standpoint is its usage. As indicated above efforts to identify the measure of IS success
have been of some use (e.g., Young and Watson, 1995; Mao, 2002). But such efforts were
constrained by the lack of appropriate reference theory and/or key variables.
The question is why executives choose or choose not to use EIS? The main objective of this
research is to investigate and examine the cultural, social, individual and organisational
critical success factors that might explain executives’ behaviour in accepting and using
EIS. Specifically, the study investigates two research questions:
1. What are the social, cultural and organisational factors that explain executives’
behaviour towards using EIS in organisations?; and

6
2. What are the relative importance of these factors in determining EIS usage by the
executives of an organisation?
An overview of studies (e.g., Thodenius, 1996; Liang and Hung, 1997) from the historical
perspective suggests that executives have not been using EIS. First, a study by Thodenius
(1996) in Sweden about a decade ago concluded that the actual use of EIS by executives
was relatively small. Second, a study by Liang and Hung (1997) in Taiwan about eight
years ago further noted the underutilisation of EIS by executives. Third, a study by
Fitzgerald (1998) in the United Kingdom (UK) found that only 32% of EIS users were at
the executive level while the majority (68%) of users were at the middle management level.
A recent survey of the state of EIS in organisations in South Africa by Averweg et al.
(2004) further revealed the underutilisation of EIS by executives. Averweg et al. found that
middle managers showed significantly higher EIS usage levels (77.4%) than top managers
(45.2%). Overall, the above studies suggest a higher degree of EIS usage at the middle
management level than at the strategic management level, which is the level the system is
supposed to serve.
Trice and Treacy (1988) asserted that, as a behaviour whose determinants are not well
understood in IS research, system use can best be explained by referring to an appropriate
reference theory. This assertion has guided several studies (e.g., Venkatesh et al. 2003;
Wang and Yang, 2005). To provide a solution to the above problem, a research model
drawn from Triandis’ (1979) framework and Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) as the
theoretical foundation is employed in Chapter 3. The main purpose of the research model
and the hypotheses embedded in the research model is to identify the correlating factors
7
determining successful EIS acceptance and usage by executives. The theoretical foundation
for this study is presented in the next section.
1.3 Conceptual Framework for the Present Study
In the past few decades, IS acceptance issues have been extensively studied. In contrast to
earlier studies (e.g., Young and Watson, 1995; Poon and Wagner, 2001), which lacked
appropriate theoretical foundations, more recent studies (e.g., Ditsa, 2003; Khalil and
Elkordy, 2005; Wang and Yang, 2005) focus on theory-based models to investigate the
factors that could explain individual’s reactions to computers. Candidates among these
theories include Activity Theory (e.g., Verenikina and Gould, 1997), the Task Technology
Fit Model (e.g., Dishaw and Strong, 1997), the Theory of Planned Behaviour (e.g.,
Mathieson, 1991; Taylor and Todd, 1995), and the Contingency Model (e.g., Handzic,
1997). Following later studies this study employs a theory-based model to investigate and
examine the cultural, social, individual and organisational critical success factors that
might explain executives’ behaviour in accepting and using EIS. These theories are
recognised in the IS research domain because they enable researchers to gain a useful
insight into the reaction of people toward information technology and factors affecting
their reactions. A brief discussion of each of these theories is presented below as well as
the theories used for the study:
o Activity Theory (AT) aims to explain the connection between human psychology
and computer interface design in a social work environment. As a result, it
establishes the relationship between human computer interactions and computer
interface design by taking into consideration the context of the work environment
8
(Verenikina and Gould, 1997; Hasan and Gould, 2001). AT is normally used in
qualitative case-based research where units of analysis are investigated over a very
long period of time (Hasan and Gould, 2001). Because this study employs a cross-
sectional time dimension where the unit of analysis is observed at a point in time,
therefore, AT is not a feasible theory for this study.
o The Task-Technology Fit Model (TTF) aims to match the capability of the
technology to the demand placed on the technology in a work environment. TTF
posits that technology will be used if, and only if, the functions available to the user
support fit the activities of the user (Dishaw and Strong, 1997). TTF suggests that
rational and experienced users will choose those tools which allow them to
complete the task with the greatest net benefit. However, a model focusing on fit
alone does not give sufficient attention to the fact that a system must be utilised
before it can deliver performance impacts. Because utilisation is a complex
outcome, based on other factors (e.g., habits, social factors and facilitating
conditions), TTF can only benefit from the addition of this richer understanding of
utilisation (Goodhue and Thompson, 1995). Further, TTF does not establish user
specific beliefs about technology such as perceived usefulness and perceived ease
of the technology that can influence system use by means of users’ attitude and
behaviour intention. Based on the above discussion, the TTF model is not feasible
for the present study.
o The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) incorporates the notion of perceived
behaviour control (PBC) as an independent influence on behaviour, recognising
that there are circumstances in which behaviour might be expected to result in
positive consequences (or net benefits), yet not be undertaken due to a perceived
9
lack of ability to control the execution of behaviour. PBC encompasses perceptions
of resources and technology facilitating conditions such as in addition to
perceptions of ability or self-efficacy (Taylor and Todd, 1995; Mathieson et al.
2001; Musa et al. 2003). Interestingly, despite TPB’s intuitive plausibility, the
interactive hypothesis has received limited empirical support due to its conditional
requirements in predicting behaviour (Ajzen, 1991). Further, TPB leaves aside
other beliefs such as the perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use
(PEOU) (Venkatesh et al. 2003), which could also have an influence on behavioural
intentions, and on behaviour itself. Hence, TPB is not a feasible model for this
study.
o The Contingency Model (CM) of human information processing suggests that the
utilisation and effectiveness of information systems may be dependent upon the
characteristics of the user and the demand of the systems. CM suggests that higher
reliability information results in superior task performance rather than low
reliability information. However, performance is due to the adaptive nature of
human information processing in terms of the ability to take advantage of the task
context to perform at satisfying levels while saving in cognitive cost (Handzic,
1997). Nonetheless, a contingency model does not explicitly examine
organisational contextual factors, such as cultural, social, and organisational
variables, that might explain executives’ behaviour towards adoption and use of
EIS. Further, it does not take into account the importance of beliefs such the PU,
PEOU and individual’s attitude (Davis, 1993) in predicting the behaviour towards
IS adoption and usage. Therefore, it is not a feasible theory for this study.
10
TAM (Davis, 1986) and Triandis’ framework (1979) remain two most important/relevant
theories that are useful in predicting human behaviour (e.g., Gahtani, 2001; Venkatesh et
al. 2003). TAM proposes how users come to accept and use a technology. In particular,
TAM suggests that when a person is using a new technology, a number of factors such as
the PU, PEOU, attitude towards use (ATU) and behaviour intentions (BI) influence a
person’s decision about how to and when will use it. Triandis’ framework, a theory from
social psychology explicitly addresses the social, cultural, individual and organisational
factors that influence behaviour. This study uses TAM and Triandis’ framework as the
theoretical foundation. A brief discussion on TAM and Triandis’ model follows.
1.3.1 The Technology Acceptance Model
The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (e.g., Davis, 1989, 1993; Davis et al. 1989
Davis et al. 1992) is an intention-based model derived from the Theory of Reasoned Action
(TRA) (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975; Fishbein, 1979) of social psychology. Davis (1986)
developed TAM to explain the effect of user perception of system characteristics on the
user acceptance of computers. The objective of TAM is “to provide an explanation of the
determinants of computer acceptance that is capable of explaining the behaviour of users
across a broad range of end-user computing and user populations while concurrently being
parsimonious and theoretically justified” (Davis et al. 1989, p. 985). Two particular belief
constructs, PU and PEOU are central in TAM for predicting information about technology
users’ acceptance behaviours. According to TRA external indirectly stimuli influence a
person’s attitude towards the behaviour, through BI by influencing his/her salient beliefs
about the consequences of performing the behaviour (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975, p. 396).
TAM uses TRA as a theoretical basis to specify causal chain linkage between two key sets
11
of constructs: (1) PU and PEOU and (2) ATU, BI and actual system usage (A) (Malhotra
and Galletta, 1999). PU is defined as “the degree to which an individual believes that
using a particular system will enhance his or her job performance” (Davis, 1993, p. 477).
PEOU is defined as “the degree to which an individual believes that using a particular
system would be free of physical and mental effort” (Davis, 1993, p. 477). The aim of
TAM, therefore, is to provide a basis for tracing the impact of external factors on internal
beliefs and attitudes. TAM was developed in an attempt to achieve these aims by
identifying a number of fundamental variables that deal with cognitive and affective
determinants of computer acceptance (Gahtani, 2001). In other words, TAM assumes that
the decision to use a particular computer technology is based upon one’s cognitive response
(PU and PEOU) to using the technology, which in turn affects one’s affective response
(attitude) toward the technology. As a result, the affective response drives the behavioural
response about whether to use the technology. A full discussion on TAM is presented in
Sections 3.3 and 3.4 of Chapter 3.
1.3.2 Triandis’ Theoretical Framework
Triandis (1979) presents a theoretical framework from social psychology with central
themes which focus on the relationships of values, attitude, and other acquired behavioural
dispositions to action or behaviour. The framework pulls together the relationship involving
these concepts. According to Triandis, personality internalises the cultural way of
perceiving the social environment known as the subjective culture of a group. The
subjective culture of the reference group identifies the boundaries of their interactions. The
subjective culture consists of: norms (self instructions to do what is perceived to be
appropriate by members of the culture in certain situation), roles (appropriate behaviour by

12
a person holding an office in a group), values (the tendency to prefer a state of an affairs
over an other and social situations (a behaviour setting where more than one person is
present). The internalisation of the culture, Triandis says, forms the social factors that
influences the intentions to behave. Habits are among the determinants of the behaviour.
Triandis defines habits as “situation-behaviour sequences that are or have become
automatic, so that they occur without self-instruction” (p. 204). Triandis suggests that
habits are what people usually do and the individual is usually not conscious of the
sequences, for example, riding a bicycle or driving a car. He closely linked habits to an
individual’s past experience and ability to perform an act. Acts, he says, are socially
defined patterns of muscle moments. His framework suggests that the habitual nature of a
behaviour, in addition to intentions, will have a significant influence on the individual’s
behaviour in a given situation. Triandis even argues that for many behaviours habits are
more important than intentions. Furthermore, Triandis suggests that an individual’s
previous experience with particular behaviours results in affects toward the behaviour,
which in turn determines intentions to behave. Affect relates to the individual’s feeling of
pleasure, displeasure, joy, delight or disgust towards the behaviour. Positives feeling will
increase the intention towards a given behaviour, while negative feelings will decrease
them. Triandis argues that even when the intentions are high and habits well established in
an individual, there may be no behaviour when the geography of the situation (facilitating
conditions) makes the behaviour impossible. He defined facilitating conditions as
“objective factors which are out there in the geographical environment such that several
judges or observers can agree to make an act easy to do” (p. 205). Triandis’ model
suggests that facilitating conditions are some of the determinants of the behaviour. This
study uses a subset of Triandis’ framework – habits, facilitating conditions and social
factors. A more detailed discussion on Triandis’ framework is presented in Chapter 3.

13
1.4 Research Design
Data for this study was collected by a mail survey. This commenced with questionnaires
being sent out to 500 executives who actually use business intelligence (BI) EIS software in
255 companies within Australia chosen for the study. The questionnaire was validated
using expert opinions in the field. The companies chosen were from both small and
medium sized firms and large corporations. Also, they had long history of IS including EIS
usage and integration into business activities. The number of employees in these
organisations ranges from a minimum of 1,100 to a maximum of 650,000 people, their
annual turnover ranges from $0 up to AUD$1billion. These factors suggest that the sample
chosen and survey questionnaire method selected offered the best approach to the research
objective. Also, the number of respondents was large enough to provide likely valid answer
to the research questions of this study. The names of these companies and their executives
were obtained from the Fairfax Business Media’s Database. Further, the database indicated
that all companies within it had business intelligence (BI) EIS software. This demonstrates
that the respondents did not misunderstand the scope of EIS in the survey questionnaire.
1.5 Measures of EIS Acceptance
Based on previous studies (e.g., Trice and Treacy, 1988; Habona and Jones, 2002; Ditsa,
2003), EIS usage will be defined as synonymous with EIS acceptance. IS including EIS use
has been measured primarily in terms of quantity, specifically, frequency and volume of
use (e.g., Gahtani, 2001; Habona, 2002). A single indicator of EIS usage that is, the
frequency of use of EIS, will be included in the survey questionnaires.
14
o The frequency of use of EIS - Measured using five-point scale ranging from (1) “Not
at all” to (5) “several times each day” (Habona, 2002; Ditsa, 2003).
o Habits – Measured by assessing the number of years of an individual’s experience
in using computer-based information systems and EIS, as well as his/her ability to
use EIS (e.g., Bergeron et al. 1995; Ditsa, 2003).
o Facilitating conditions – Measured based on the degree of EIS development
processes, EIS management processes and organisational environment of EIS using
5-point Likert scales with 1 for strongly disagree and 5 for strongly agree (Bergeron
et al. 1995; Ditsa, 2003).
o Social factors – Defined as subjective norms, roles, values and social situations of
the group. Social factors will be measured based on the degree to which these
subjective variables influence the organisational managers and EIS users, using four
5-point Likert scales (Ditsa, 2003).
o Perceived usefulness – Measured based on a six-item scale adapted from Davis,
(1993) with appropriate modifications to make them specifically relevant to EIS.
o Perceived ease of use – Measured based on a six-item scale adapted from Davis,
(1993) with appropriate modifications to make them specifically relevant to EIS.
o Attitudes towards using – Measured using 5-standard 7-point semantic differential
scales for operational attitude towards the behaviour as suggested by Fishbein and
Ajzen (1975) and used in the IS research domain (e.g., Davis, 1993; Mao, 2002).
Also, appropriate modifications will be provided to make them specifically relevant
to EIS.
From the research model to be presented in Chapter 3 and hypotheses to be embedded in
the research model, EIS use is predicted by an individual’s attitude towards the behaviour.
15
Attitude towards the behaviour is determined by two specific beliefs; that is, the PU and
PEOU of EIS. Both the PU and PEOU are in turn determined by their habits, facilitating
conditions and social factors. Hence, utilisation is defined as “an active use of the system”
(Trice and Treacy, 1988, p.37).
To identify key factors determining EIS usage, the research model and associated
hypotheses will initially be tested through MANOVA, One-way ANOVA (Francis, 2004)
and multiple linear regressions (Davis, 1993). Further, analysis will be conducted using
stepwise regression to establish the relative importance of the independent variables in
explaining executives’ behaviour towards EIS adoption and usage (Bergeron, et al. 1995;
Ditsa, 2003).
1.6 Justifications and Significance of the Study
“Executive information systems are the most-recent computer-based information systems
to have emerged with the intention of providing executives with the information they
require to run their business. Some advocates of these systems see EIS as a panacea. The
long-awaited moment when computing will provide meaningful and significant assistance
to top management” (Fitzgerald, 1998). A study by Kumar and Palvia (2001) suggests that
“data plays a vital role in organisations, and in recent years companies have recognised
the significance of corporate data as an organisational asset” (p. 154). An overview of
scholarly further research studies (e.g., Singh et al. 2002; Xu et al. 2003; Salmeron and
Herrero, 2005) reveals that data as a corporate resource has been consistently ranked as a
top priority by IS executives.
16
Although the failure of EIS in organisations has ostensibly been linked to organisational,
managerial (Pervan and Phua, 1996), social and cultural factors rather than technical factors
alone (McBride, 1997), the majority of previous studies on EIS usage presented below have
focused on (i) overall benefits, (ii) pattern of use and frequency of use, (iii) impact, and (iv)
emergence of EIS. Research studies on the actual engagement of EIS by executives (e.g.,
Bergeron et al. 1995) from (v) focus area, factors influencing use are limited.
(i) Overall benefits from EIS – Research studies (e.g., Kelly, 1994; Nord and Nord, 1995;
Salmeron et al. 2001) in this area focused on the overall benefits of EIS such as their direct
support to decision-making, strategic planning, communication and environmental
scanning. These studies focused on the importance of EIS characteristics such as their drill
down tool, graphical interface and exceptional reporting of critical information to executive
users. It also focused on the importance of specific EIS software to their users.
(ii) Pattern of use and frequency of use – Research studies (e.g., Thodenius, 1996; Seeley
and Targett, 1999) in this area rather focus on the pattern of use and frequency of use of the
systems by the users. While Seeley and Targett’s study focuses on the pattern of use,
Thodenius’ study focus on the frequency of use: how often do senior managers use EIS.
Findings from his study revealed that while senior managers were using EIS at least once a
month, two thirds of them were using EIS at least once a week.
(iii) Impact of EIS – Research studies (e.g., Leidner and Elam, 1994; Liang and Miranda,
2001; Salmeron, 2002) in this group focus on the impact of EIS on executives’ roles such
as improving communication, immediate access to internal and external data for
management planning and control responsibilities and improving the mental models of
17
executives which afford executives fresh insights into how they conceptualise and
understand their businesses. Their studies also shed light on the benefits of EIS to users
such as improving analytical and modeling capabilities of the executives that allow
assumptions to be made and tested and the ability of the system to combine data from
multiple sources and presenting it in a way that is meaningful to the executives.
(iv) Emergence of EIS - The research studies (Fitzgerald and Murphy, 1994; Fitzgerald,
1998) in this area focus on factors enhancing the emergence of EIS usage in an
organisation. Factors mentioned include: increased readiness on the part of executives to
make use of computers, the competitive nature of the business environment and availability
of the enabling technology on the systems (e.g., email and calendaring tools). Although
this group presents the potential benefits of EIS to users similarly to those presented by the
EIS impact focus group, they were critical of EIS designed/development methods and
information content on the system. Because they found there was higher utilisation of EIS
by middle managers rather than top-level managers for whom an EIS is designed to serve.
(v) Factors influencing/explaining EIS use – Although there are large numbers of research
studies (e.g., Young and Watson, 1995; Bergeron et al. 1995; Pervan and Meneely, 1995;
Pervan and Phua, 1996; Basu et al. 2000) in this area, only limited numbers of research
studies (e.g., Bergeron et al. 1995; Ditsa, 2003) employed appropriate reference theories to
gain insights into factors that influence the actual use of the systems by managers. Other
research studies (e.g., Poon and Wagner, 2001) in this group employed simplistic models or
frameworks that do not lead their studies to explain user behaviours.
18
To summarise, research efforts for key determinants of user acceptance and use of EIS
have been constrained by lack of appropriate reference theoretical foundation and key
variables (Trice and Treacy, 1988). The majority of research on EIS usage has been
exploratory instead of theory testing (e.g., Young and Watson, 1995; Poon and Wagner,
2001). Cheon et al. (1993) suggest that initial IS exploratory research should be followed
by theory-testing. Also, research studies on the actual engagement of EIS by executives are
limited. Without a significant number of EIS research studies with appropriate reference
theories it will be difficult to understand the factors that influence individual’s behaviour
towards the adoption and use EIS (Trice and Treacy, 1988).
1.6.1 Expected Contributions
This study is a significant contribution to management practice and to academic literature.
Theoretically – The study aims to (1) establish TAM and Triandis’ framework as
appropriate reference theories suitable in explaining the factors influencing the adoption
and usage of EIS at organisational strategic management level. Undoubtedly, Triandis’
framework variables – habits, facilitating conditions and social factors are able to address
the social, cultural, individual and organisational factors that explain behaviour towards the
adoption and usage of EIS by executives. The research model emphasises (2) the
importance of social, cultural, individual and organisational factors for a successful EIS
adoption and usage in organisations. In other words, the proposed model can redress the
limitations of the extant research model by accounting for intrinsic motivation and social-
cultural factors relevant to influencing users’ behaviour towards EIS acceptance. The
framework and the research model can be applied (3) in other social science research
disciplines including marketing, E-commerce and Internet banking for user-behaviour

19
testing, and (4) with different populations of IS including EIS users and different software
choices.
Methodology – In providing answers to the research questions and the hypotheses to be
employed, this study advocates a research design relevant to the empirical confirmatory
analysis of a representative sample of real life organisations. This methodology will be (1)
a significant contribution to the body of knowledge, and (2) important for further research
into IS including EIS adoption and usage by executives.
Management/ Practice - The results of this study will (1), provide better understanding of
the choices of executives in using EIS, (2) enable managers of organisations to make the
necessary improvements and interventions to maximise the possibility of successful
adoption, (3), assist EIS developers to better understand the core information processing
requirements for executives’ tasks for which they are building the systems in order to
implement appropriate system functionalities to support those tasks.
1.7 Thesis Structure
Chapter 1 Introduction
o Background to the Present Study
o Research problem and research questions
o Research conceptual framework
o Research methodology
o Research justification and research aims
o Research scope
o Summary and organisation of the entire thesis
20
Chapter 2 Review of Related Literature on EIS
o Historical glimpse of EIS
o Definition of EIS
o Characteristics of EIS
o A comparison of EIS with other CBIS
o Potential benefits of EIS
o EIS Architecture
o Factors contributing to success and failure of EIS
o The nature of executive work and how EIS fits-in
o Past research on EIS usage
o Summary and conclusion
Chapter 3 Theoretical Foundation, Research Model and Hypotheses

o Theoretical perspective of IS research studies
o The Technology Acceptance Model
o Triandis’ framework
o The research model and research hypotheses
Chapter 4 Research Design and methodology

o Aspects of research design and methodology
o Conceptualisation and operationalisation of constructs
o Rationale of questionnaire design
o Pre-pilot surveys and pilot Survey
o Test of Non-response Errors
Chapter 5 Results of Data Analysis

o Presents results of data analysis
o Presents results of data analysis for the best model
21
Chapter 6 Conclusion and Implications
o Discuss findings and results, explain why things are the way they are
o Summarise the theoretical discussion and practical findings of the study
o Discuss the contribution of the study to the body of knowledge
o Consider limitations
o Provide suggestions for future studies
o Sum up the overall message of the thesis.
1.8 Conclusions
To conclude, this chapter establishes the basis of this study. Chapter 2 will present the
literature review and issues of EIS. Also, the chapter presents the nature of executives’
work and how EIS fits-in with. In Chapter 3, the theoretical foundation, the research model
and research hypotheses are presented. In Chapter 4, the aspects of the research design and
methodology are presented. Chapter 5 will present the results of data analysis. Finally,
Chapter 6 will present the discussion of the findings and their implications for theory,
policy and practice. This is followed by the limitations of the study and implications for
future research.
22
CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 Introduction
The background to the present study, the research problems and research questions were
presented in chapter 1. In order to establish the importance of EIS to executives’ roles and
highlight a gap in previous studies on the actual use of EIS by executives, this chapter
presents a review of the related literature. First, the chapter presents definitions of EIS and
the definition used for this study followed by the characteristics and potential benefits of
EIS. Second, the chapter presents executives’ roles and how EIS fits-in. Third, the chapter
examines how EIS differ from other computer-based information systems followed by
components of EIS such as the hardware and software. Next, the chapter presents the
historical aspects and growth of EIS, evidence of the growth of EIS, and pressures for
implementing EIS in organisations. The chapter then examines the factors contributing to
the success or failure of EIS usage in organisations followed by evidence of lack of or,
underutilisation of EIS. The chapter further presents the critical success factors of EIS in
organisations followed by previous studies on EIS usage. Finally, the concluding
paragraphs summarise the issues and problems presented in the chapter.
2.2 EIS Definitions, Characteristics and Potential Benefits
This section (2.2) examines EIS definitions, characteristics and potential benefits.
23
2.2.1 EIS Definitions
There is no universally agreed definition of Executive Information Systems (EIS) in the
literature. Definitions of the term have varied according to the weight attached to the three
elements in the term. Moreover, end-users’ roles differ in terms of personal management
styles, hierarchy and organisational size. Table 2.1 presents some EIS definitions.
Table 2.1: Definitions of EIS and Illustrative References
Please see print copy for Table 2.1
24
To sum up the ideas in the above definitions, any computer-based information system that
serves the information needs of the executives for decision making in real time, reveal the
critical success factors and key performance indicators of business activities and support
executives in other managerial roles including strategic planning may be termed as EIS.
As noted previously, there is no universally accepted definition of EIS because of a
significant variety in their applications and functionalities. EIS are now spreading both
vertically and horizontally within organisations. Therefore, in the context of the present
study, EIS is defined as: A computer-based information system (CBIS) specifically
designed to provide broad and deep information support and analytical capability for a
wide range of executive decisions. It is easy to use and provides access to information in
the internal and external business environments.
EIS have been specifically designed and tailored to executives of organisations to meet
their distinct information needs for their managerial roles (Salmeron, 2002) such as
strategic planning, decision-making and organisational learning (Arnott and Pervan, 2005).
EIS are user-friendly (Averweg and Roldan, 2005) and their ability to analyse business data
and access to both the internal and external information that is meaningful to executives
make them suitable tools for executives’ work (McBride, 1997, Salmeron, 2002).
Figure 2.1 depicts the general model of an EIS. It indicates how internal transaction data
can be collected at the strategic management level. Data extracted from the external
business environment can be integrated at the management subset and stored in a database.
Both sources of data can then be transformed and manipulated on EIS screens into formats
that facilitate decision-making, development of management reports and queries. Senior

25
executives are particularly interested in summaries and compilations of information. Data
transformed in EIS provides meaningful formats like graphics and colours to aid executive
users of the systems (Nord and Nord, 1995).
Figure 2.1: The General Model of an EIS (Source: Nord and Nord, 1995 p.96)
Please see print copy for Figure 2.1
2. 2.2 Characteristics
This subsection examines the characteristics of EIS. While a definition of EIS is useful,
describing the characteristics and benefits of EIS provides a richer understanding. Common
characteristics of EIS are presented as follows:
o Flexible and easy to use tools with a maintainable user interface. Executives require
no computer skill or intermediaries assistance in order to use them (Averweg and
Roldan, 2005);
o Providing executives with direct on-line access to relevant information in databases,
including data marts and datawarehouse, in a useful and navigational format (Singh
et al. 2002);
26
o Possessing “drill down” analytical tools (incremental examination of data at
different levels of detail), what-if analysis, ad hoc queries and statistical and
analytical tools to support executive decision making (Rainer and Watson, 1995);
o Presenting information in graphical, tabular, and/or textual forms and colours to
enhance executives’ strategic business needs (Averweg and Roldan, 2005);
o Providing executives with immediate access to a single database where all current
financial and operational data can be found (Salmeron et al. 2001);
o Tailoring information to users’ decision making styles through touch screens, user
mouse, keyboards, other devices or combinational features (Averweg and Roldan,
2005);
o Providing executives easy access to data on company’s intranet and internet from
the interface Web browser (Singh et al. 2002);
o Capability to compress, filter, organise and deliver data to required destinations
(Averweg and Roldan, 2005);
o Providing executives with insight view on relationships hidden in the data through a
data mining component (Singh et al. 2002);
o Analyse business trends (Hung, 2003), including examining business data across
desired time intervals, e.g., ability to classify and analyse sales items by days,
weeks, months and years for comparison with past records (Nord and Nord, 1995)
o Possessing office facilities such as electronic mail, diaries, calenders, video
conferencing, computer conferencing and presentations (Fitzgerald, 1998);
o Highlighting exceptional conditions of business e.g., competitors, customers, sales,
external laws and regulations critical for organisations (Ditsa, 2003);
o Are tailored to individual executive users (Averweg and Roldan, 2005).
27
To summarise, the above characteristics suggest that EIS can enable executives to quickly
search and scan the business environments for threats and opportunities for immediate and
appropriate decisions. As a decision support tool, an EIS is able to support and improve the
decision-making process by an executive by providing the basic usable and relevant
information from internal and external business environments. Because executives devote
much of their time to acquiring and analysing information through interactions with people
and processing of documents, EIS can save executives a considerable amount of time by
facilitating the collection, retrieval, storage and analysing of information. The “what-if”
analytical capability of EIS combined with executives’ decision-making imagination and
judgment can support executives to arrive at a decision easily and with accuracy.
2.2.3 The Potential Benefits
On the basis of the characteristics of EIS presented in the previous subsection (2.2.2), EIS
presents potential benefits to executives. This subsection examines some potential benefits
of EIS to users. The literature (e.g., Fitzgerald, 1998; Rockart and De Long, 1992)
postulates the potential benefits of EIS to users in terms of improved span of control,
mental model, efficiency and communication.
Increased Span of Control – Researchers (e.g., Pervan, 1992; Fitzgerald, 1998; Ditsa, 2003)
have reported the need to increase the span of control of executives in the modern
organisations. The electronic mail of an EIS can contribute to increase span of control of
executives by enabling them to keep in close contact with their subordinates across their
business units. EIS can support to motivate and focus the organisation towards top
management’s goals and values. Because EIS are tailored to individual executive users,
28
they are capable of extending the psychological presence of the executives throughout the
organisation (Fitzgerald, 1998).
Improved Mental Models – EIS can enhance the fundamental business understanding of
executives by providing them with: (1) improved access to relevant external data for
environmental scanning, (2) a new way to combine data from multiple sources which
enables them to have a firm grasp of the business through exploring cause–and–effect
relationships, (3) a sophisticated analytical and modeling capability for exploring the cause-
and-effect relationships underlying an organisation’s business environment, (4) an ability to
identify and test assumptions about corporate performance by providing data that might
challenge assumptions that underlying executives mental models and (5) off-hours data
access on demand without relying on staff or secretarial support (Rockart and De Long,
1992).
Data in Meaningful Formats – Presenting data in flexible formats that combine text,
numbers, and graphics is one of the primary benefits of EIS. This can assist executives
understand their businesses by highlighting trends they might not recognise, in tabular data
alone. These tools have important effects about the way executives consider information
for their organisational strategies ( Rockart and De Long, 1992).
Saves Time – Gathering and sorting of critical information has become a strategic weapon
and EIS can furnish decision-makers with timely information. As such, executives’
precious time can be better spent on other strategic activities such as planning, and
decision-making. Executives can also access their information anytime, anywhere, through
a terminal (Rockart and De Long, 1992). A study by Nord and Nord (1995) in the US
29
reports that executives’ confidence in decision-making as well as their access to otherwise
unavailable information increased by 62.5% as a direct result of an EIS.
Improved Efficiency and Communication – An EIS is capable of improving communication
within an organisation and between organisations. For instance, in a study conducted by
Nord and Nord (1995) in the US, the majority of executives (87%) indicated their
communication improved as a direct result of an EIS. EIS can gather information about the
activities of competitors, and major clients as well as their plans from external sources.
Competitors’ information on a firm’s EIS aids executives to develop superior strategies that
counter competitors’ own strategies (Rainer and Watson, 1995). Moreover, EIS
“applications such as calendaring facilities, diary facilities and electronic mail for instance
have the potential to make the executive more efficient, rationalising the aspects of their
work that lend themselves to computer support, thus, freeing up the executive to spend
more time on complex unstructured tasks, which is more properly the remit of the
executive” (Fitzgerald, 1998).
Increased Business Profits – Although EIS are expensive to develop with average cost
greater than US$25,000 for hardware, software, development personnel and training, a total
of 96.55% of users surveyed in Spanish market reported a sizeable increase in profits
(Salmeron et al. 2001). Also, Robert Wallace of Phillips 66 contended that an EIS
increased their profits from oil trading by $US20 million per year (Nord and Nord, 1995).
Moreover, research findings (Table 2.2) by Volonino and Robinson (1992) of EIS
experiences at Marine Midland Bank in the US identify the benefits of EIS applications in
an organisation in terms of their functions and support for decision-making.

30
Table 2.2 EIS Applications at Marine Midland Bank (Volonino and Robinson, 1992)
2.3 The Nature of Executives’ Work and How EIS Fits-in
Having presented EIS definitions, characteristics and their potential benefits to executives
in Section 2.2, this section will present executives’ roles and how EIS fits-in. The nature of
executives’ work has been characterised as brevity, variety, interrupted and fragmented
(e.g., Mintzberg, 1973; Kotter, 1982). According to Rockart (1979 p.82), “there is no
position in the organisational hierarchy that is less understood than that of the executives”.
Moreover, the functions, and how those functions are performed, vary between
organisations and between executives within organisations. Indeed, one of the many
reasons of EIS failure in organisations has been the lack of understanding of executives’
work by the EIS developers (Fitzgerald, 1998). In fact, a clear understanding of the nature
of executives’ roles and how executives acquire and use their information would provide a
31
useful starting point in designing and implementing effective and efficient EIS systems to
support executives’ roles.
Executives’ work has traditionally been related to identifying problems and opportunities
and making the decisions of what to do with those problems and opportunities (Ditsa,
2002). In addition to playing leadership roles expected of them (Mintzberg, 1973) much of
the work of executives revolves around developing agendas, goals (Kotter, 1982), strategies
that may not be documented (Anthony, 1992) establishing networks, and developing
corporate relationships with people inside and outside their organisations who may play a
role in developing future agenda (Kotter, 1982); The following section examines the nature
of executives’ work in terms of 1), Kotter’s “job demands” agenda setting and “network
building” 2), Anthony’s planning and control model and 3), Mintzberg’s roles model.
2.3.1 Kotter’s “Job Demands” Agenda Setting and “Network Building”
Kotter (1982) studied fifteen executives through observation, questionnaires and interviews
in nine USA corporations. He identified the job demands of executives and categorised
them in terms of agenda setting, network building and execution (getting networks to
implement agendas).
Agenda-setting is the process whereby executives develop loosely connected goals and
plans relating to short, medium and long terms responsibilities in the form of formal
document and ideas in their heads. Agenda setting is less detailed in financial objectives
and more detailed in strategies and plan for the organisation. This is based on executives’
32
knowledge of their work and information they have gathered through primary discussions
with people.
Network building is the process whereby executives develop networks of cooperative
relationships with people such as subordinates, peers, superior, outsiders and those they
feel would make an important contribution to a successful implementation of the agendas.
This network does not necessarily have to be exactly the same as the organisation chart, but
it is consistent with it.
Execution the process whereby executives mobilise support from the network for the
implementation of the agendas. Often this is done by giving the authority to those with the
capacity to accomplish a task successfully to do just that and not directly intervening.
Sometimes direct intervention occurs to ask, demand, cajole, threaten, praise or reward.
Some actions involve the use of the managers’ formal power, others are based on informal
persuasion.
2.3.2 Anthony’s Planning and Control Model
Anthony (1992) suggested his well-known model of planning and control. According to
this model, executives’ roles fall within three categories, namely; strategic planning,
management control and task control.
Strategic planning is the process by which executives determine organisational goals and
develop strategies for achieving the goals. The plan of action facilitates the utilisation of
the firm’s resources and the choice of the best methods to use for attaining the objective. It
33
suppresses hesitancy, false steps, unwarranted changes of course of action and helps to
improve personnel productivity.
Management control which is the process by which executives influence their participants
to implement the established strategies. They ensure that resources are obtained and
employed effectively and efficiently in achieving the established goals and objectives.
Task control which is the process of ensuring specific tasks are handled with effectiveness
and efficiency according to plan and, if necessary taking steps to correct performance. Each
of these activities requires different types of information. Although at the strategic planning
level executives rely on summary information from external sources, at the task control
level, they rely on detailed information generated from within their organisations. The
information for management control falls within strategic planning and task control levels.
2.3.3 Mintzberg’s Roles Model Theory
Mintzberg’s roles model is perhaps the best-known characterisation of the duties of an
executive. In his research work, Mintzberg (1973) describes executives’ jobs in terms of
ten roles. He categorises these roles into three major classes such as interpersonal,
informational and decisional roles. He subdivides the interpersonal role into figurehead,
leadership and liaison roles. Also, he subdivides the informational roles into monitor,
disseminator and spokesperson roles. The decisional roles, he subdivides into
entrepreneur, disturbance handler, resource allocator and negotiator. Table 2.3 presents
the classifications of Mintzberg’s roles model of executives.
34
Table 2.3 Mintzberg’s (1973) Roles Model of Managers
Interpersonal roles cover, figurehead, liaison and leadership roles. As the figurehead,
executives represent their organisations in all matters of formality such as ceremonies,
visitations, legal and other social activities. As liaison, executives operate outside their
vertical chain of command. They interact with people within and outside their
organisations. As leader, they motivate subordinates and they are responsible for
recruitment, selection, training and promotion.
35
Informational roles cover monitor, disseminator and spokesman. As monitor, the executive
receives and collects a variety of information to develop a thorough understanding of their
organisation and its environment. He/she is the key nerve centre of the external and internal
information of their organisation. As disseminators, the executives share available
information with their subordinates within their business units to enable them to perform
operational activities and make decisions. As spokesman, the executive communicates their
information to outsiders on the organisational plans, policies, actions and results.
The decisional roles cover disturbance handler, entrepreneur, resource allocator and
negotiator. As disturbance handler, the executive is responsible for taking corrective action
in situations when their organisation is threatened with unforeseeable events or
disturbances. As entrepreneur, executives are actionable. They seek to improve the
performance of their business units and adapt them to changing conditions of the
environment by reviewing current activities and initiating new ones. As resources allocator,
the manager allocates resources of all kinds including money, time, human resources and
material resources to their business units. As negotiator, the executive represents their
organisation in major negotiations with other organisations, individuals and government to
arrive at concrete decisions.
Table 2.4 presents a comparison of Mintzberg’s, Kotter’s and Anthony’s models.
36
Table 2.4: A Comparison of Mintzberg’s, Kotter’s and Anthony’s Models
Table 2.4 suggests that first, when executives engage in the interpersonal roles of
Mintzberg’s model discussed in subsection 2.3.3, Kotter’s model instead portrays
executives to be involved in agenda setting roles such as goals and strategies, resources
allocation and monitoring. Similarly, Anthony’s model presents executives as engaging in
such roles as monitoring and resources allocation involving goals setting, budgeting,
staffing and development of plans for the achievement of goals. An overview of the three
models suggests that there is a clear similarity among leadership, liaison, agendas setting
and strategic planning. But Mintzberg’s model differs from both Kotter’s and Anthony’s
models in the sense that executives are also being portrayed as figurehead role players
involving duties of symbolic, legal and social nature.
37
When executives engage in the informational roles (monitor, disseminator and
spokesperson) of Mintzberg’s role model, involving such duties as seeking and receiving
information, transmitting and communicating information to others about organisational
plans, Kotter’s model presents executives as being involved in network building roles
involving such duties as getting cooperation from others, managing conflicts, motivating
and controlling resources. Anthony’s model also presents executives to as engaged in
monitoring and resource allocation roles involving goals setting, staffing and budgeting. A
closer examination of the relationship between informational roles, network building roles
and strategic planning roles of the three models suggests that while Mintzberg portrays
executives as information seekers, transmitters and communicators within the network,
Kotter portrays executives as information seekers, relationship builders motivators of
human resources and conflict managers. Anthony’s model also portrays executives as both
information seekers (monitors) and resources allocators.
When executives engage in decisional roles (entrepreneur, disturbance handler, resources
allocator and negotiator) of Mintzberg’s model while reviewing strategies, managing crises,
allocating resources to tasks and representing the organisation at major negotiations,
Kotter’s model describes executives as repeating the core processes. That is, setting
agenda, building network and executing agenda via the network. Anthony’s model also
presents executives as engaging in both monitoring and resources allocation roles.
The conclusion that can be drawn from the above discussion in terms of EIS application is
that Mintzberg’s model represents the best description of executives’ roles because these
roles are well defined in each category. They are non repetitive.
38
In interpersonal roles (figurehead, leader, and liaison) for instance the electronic
communication software of EIS can enhance virtual organisations including teams,
meetings and other teleconferences between executives and other participants without any
geographical barriers. Further, EIS have been designed specifically to support executives in
strategic activities. EIS can provide executives with on-line access to internal and external
information that is relevant to the critical business success factors in a navigational format.
Their drill down and analytical capabilities (e.g., what-if- analysis, ad hoc queries) aim to
enhance executives’ decision-making, personal productivity, mental model of organisations
and learning of their work for their survival.
In informational roles (monitor, disseminator and spokesperson), the increased speed and
analysis of computer-based information helps executives audit an organisation’s
performance. An EIS enables executives to retrieve on-line internal and external
information (e.g., competitors, news and other market-oriented information) in real time for
decision-making. Further, EIS tools enable the executives to communicate, in real time,
business relevant information to people in the networks to influence organisational
purposes. Also, the electronic voice mailing, video conferencing and communication
software of the system aim to promote a network of relationships between executives and
participants.
Finally, in decisional roles (entrepreneur, disturbance handler, resource allocator and
negotiator), EIS capabilities can support executives to search and scan their environment
for real time information with regards to opportunities, threats and for immediate and
appropriate decision-making. EIS are designed to support and enhance executives’
decision-making by providing them with access to business related information in both the
39
internal and external environments. Because executives spend a huge amount of time
making contacts (e.g., personal, tours, telephone and so on) within their organisation and
outside their organisation for information, EIS not only relieves executives from some of
these contacts, but they enhance their information retrieval, collection, storage and
analytical capabilities. Interestingly, the “what-if” analysis tools of the systems together
with individual decision-making judgment can aid the manager to arrive at immediate and
accurate decisions.
2.4 How EIS Differ from other CBIS, Components, and Examples
Having discussed executive roles and how EIS fits-in in the previous section (2.3), this
section examines how EIS differ from traditional computer based information systems such
as decision support systems (DSS) and conventional management information systems
(MIS) in terms of the characteristics presented above. This section also presents an
organisational architecture of EIS namely, the hardware and software components of EIS.
2.4.1 A Comparison of EIS with other CBIS
EIS differ from traditional computer based information systems such as Decision support
systems (DSS) and conventional management information systems (MIS). Table 2.5
presents a comparison of EIS, MIS and DSS as presented by Watson et al. (1997).
40
Table 2.5: A Comparison of EIS, MIS and DSS (Source: Watson et al. 1997, p. 11)
To summarise, a comparison of EIS, MIS and DSS suggests that while MIS and DSS are
designed to support standardised decision-making at the operational levels, EIS are:
o Designed to guide executives’ actions and plans.
41
o Designed to support environmental scanning, performance evaluation, identifying business
problems and opportunities for the executives’ decision-making.
o Designed to provide support for high level and unstructured decision and policies made by
the executives.
o User-friendly systems supported by graphical, tubular and textual information.
o Designed to support executives in filtering and compressing and tracking critical data
and information.
o Designed to provide executives with instant access to supporting details of any summary of
information display on EIS screen.
2.4.2 An Organisational EIS Architecture
Having considered a comparison of EIS, MIS and DSS, this section looks at the
architecture of EIS. An organisational EIS architecture is composed of hardware, software,
communications, data, people and procedures. The architecture provides the framework for
deploying the EIS applications throughout the organisation so that managers can rapidly
access critical information to make fast, precise and informed decisions (Alter, 1996;
Watson et al. 1997). The subsection considers only the hardware and software issues of EIS
as discussed in the literature (e.g., Alter, 1996; Watson et al. 1997).
42
2.4.2.1 Hardware Issues
A number of hardware components are available in the market today, which can be used to
build effective and efficient EIS. Figure 2.2 presents the client/server architectures
(hardware components) of an EIS. The client/server architectures divide processing
networks between clients and servers with processing delegated to the machine most suited
to perform it. The executives typically interact with the client portion of the application,
which runs on their desk desktop PC. Client processing includes the interface, data input,
database query, report generation, graphics processing for information display, local data
storage, screen caching, and other personal productivity applications (Watson et al. 1997).
Figure 2.2 Client/Server Architecture of EIS (Source: Watson et al. 1997, p.144)
43
The server portion of the application runs on a number of application-specific servers, such
as file servers, data servers, application servers, and so on. Server processing includes
managing peripheral devices such as printers, controlling access to databases, processing
business applications such as finance and marketing, and managing the network. Data and
file servers include mainframe, structure query language (SQL), data warehouse, Lotus
Notes, WWW, legacy applications and others (Watson et al. 1997).
Several advantages can be derived from client/server architectures. These advantages are as
follows: first; client/server architecture provides multiple views of data residing on all
corporate computer platforms from mainframe to personal computers regardless of data
format including relational, hierarchical or flat files. Second, client/server architecture
establishes a flexible system, which can be changed and expanded as the organisation
changes, responding to the dynamic environment and to the need of the users at all times.
Third, client/server architecture enables executives to manage with real time data resulting
in more informed decision. This provides organisations with a competitive edge by
compressing the time factors without sacrificing detailed analysis. Further, the mainframe
of the client/server offers reliable and available processing power, data storage and
security. Executives can pre-process mainframe data and store them on other servers
(Watson et al. 1997).
2.4.2.2 Software Issues
Both general software and special purpose software can be used to build an EIS. The
general-purpose software such as databases, spreadsheets, report generators, Lotus Notes
and World Wide Web (WWW) provide a graphical EIS-like front end (Watson et al. 1997).
44
There are several benefits an organisation can obtain for using general-purpose software in
building EIS. First, the IS staff will be more comfortable because they are familiar with
using the software. Second, the software will fit within the firm’s existing IT architecture
and, finally, it is less expensive to use software that may be already available in-house.
Figure 2.3 shows a wide variety of general-purpose software that can be used to build an
EIS system (Watson et al. 1997).
Figure 2.3: General Purpose Software and EIS (Watson et al. 1997 p. 148)
The special-purpose software, which is also used in building and operating an EIS, can
provide important functions to users including the following:

45
o Extensive reporting functions
o Support for multiple user interfaces
o Access to emails
o Integrated multidimensional databases
o Access to external databases (e.g., Dow-Jones News Retrieval)
o Provide telephone, Calendar and reminder functions
o Integrates soft, hard, internal and external data
To summarise, the advancement in IS software and hardware such as Web browser, CD-
ROM, Internet, Lotus notes, enterprise resources planning, data mining and data
warehousing have added further richness to the features of EIS. These features can enable
executives to quickly search and scan their organisational environment for threats and
opportunities for immediate and appropriate decisions.
2.5 Historical Aspects and Growth of EIS
A comparison of EIS, MIS and DSS and the architectural components of EIS were
presented in the previous section (2.4). This section presents the historical aspects, current
view and growth of EIS. Table 2.6 presents the historical aspects of EIS.
46
Table 2.6: Historical Aspects for the Quest of EIS
47
Table 2.6: Historical Aspects for the Quest of EIS Continues
2.5.1 Current View and Growth of EIS
Having presented the historical aspects of EIS in section 2.5, this section presents the
current view of EIS. The literature (e.g., Singh et al. 2002) suggests that EIS can be viewed
as a suite of tools that may be used on an ad hoc basis to provide information for the
support of executives’ and enterprise wide decision-making. Some software innovations
that can be included in EIS are as follows:
o Access to the intranet and the World wide web
o Data-warehousing
o Open system and client/server
o Decision support system using data analysis
o Multi-dimensional Database Management Systems (MDDBMS) with On-line
Analytic Processing (OLAP)
o Direct manipulation with graphical user interface (GUI) point and click
o Intelligent agents using knowledge-based techniques (Singh et al. 2002).
48
This suggests that EIS now contain a combination of tools that can best suits the
executives, the industry and the environment in which it is used.
Several studies (e.g., Kumar and Palvia, 2001; Singh et al. 2002; Xu et al. 2003) have
reported the growing popularity of EIS in organisations as new concepts such as enterprise
resources planning (ERP), data warehousing, data mining, web-based portal to “dashboard”
and “scorecards” and the on-line analytical processing (OLAP) engine have paved the way
for a new era of managing corporate data.
New technologies such as data mining, data warehousing, enterprise resources (ERP)
software tool and the World Wide Web have increased the popularity of EIS instead of
replacing them. These technologies have now provided the impetus for the widening use of
EIS by executives whose decisions must be made timely in an increasingly competitive and
uncertain environment (Ditsa, 2002). Data warehousing and data marts software
applications for instance are commonly regarded as the prerequisite for effective decision
support because they provide access to clean, consistent and integrated data (Singh et al.
2002). Also, ROLAP and MOLAP (relational and multidimensional operations for on-line
analytical processing) have given rise to concepts such as “slicing” and “dicing” of data,
which have added more flexibility and ease of use to EIS (Bashein and Markus, 2000). The
capability of data mining provides insights into relationships that are hidden or not readily
visible in the data (Singh et al. 2002).
The balanced scorecard concept which influences the design and content of EIS also
highlights the importance of monitoring financial information, customers, internal
operations, innovations and learning measures (Tao et al. 2001; Singh et al. 2002). The
49
balanced scorecard concept is often used in connection with the business’s strategic
information. That is the proportion of organisational information that is beyond purely key
financial information (Thonedius, 1996).
“The current explosion of the World Wide Web (WWW) which began in the late 1990s has
led to a vast array of options for developers to create applications and deliver them
expediently to users. A web-based solution can overcome some of the drawbacks of the
traditional EIS, especially with regard to cost, ease of use, development cycle and
architecture, and even added features such as intelligent agents” (Basu et al. 2000 p. 271).
2.6 Evidence on Growth of Use of EIS
Having presented the general growth of EIS in Section 2.5, this Section will present
evidence on growth of use of EIS based on historical perspective.
First, in the year 1985, a study conducted by MIT’s Centre for Information Systems
Research revealed that about one third of large US corporations had some kind of EIS
installed or under installation. This MIT study also contended that top executives of the
corporations surveyed, directly used about half of all such systems (ITAC Publications,
2002). Second, in their study Bergeron et al. (1995) noted that as of 1988 approximately
25% of large US corporations had senior managers who directly accessed their EIS through
workstations. Third, in 1996 a study of 200 large Swedish corporations between 1991 and
1995 by Thodenius (1996) revealed that while 8% of these corporations actually used EIS
in 1991, 17% were using EIS in both 1993 and 1995. Thodenius research further
contended that although the usage rate of EIS increased with company size measured by
50
turnover, a significant percentage of these corporations were actively planning to introduce
EIS in each of those years. Fourth, in the year 1996, a survey of 300 top Australians and
New Zealand firms in Australia of their state of EIS, Pervan and Phua (1996) contended
that almost half of the firms which responded were either in the operational state (17%) or
development/implementation (32%) phase of EIS. They also found that 45% of these
organisations were in the process of evaluating hardware and software for the EIS projects
and 6% has no existing EIS or planned. Next, in 2002 a study conducted by Salmeron
(2002, 2003) noted that the Spanish market for EIS was growing at almost 37.5% with
89.6% of the companies completed the implementation of EIS. His research also found that
executives directly used EIS in 68.96% cases. Finally, in a recent study of 31 EIS firms in
South Africa, Averweg et al. (2004) suggest that while 87.1% of these organisations had
their EIS operational, 9.7% had it underdevelopment. Further, a recent study in Spain
suggests that while 91.4% of the firms surveyed had their EIS operational, 8.6% who
accepted EIS had it underdevelopment and implementation (Averweg and Roldan, 2005).
In addition to growth of use of traditional EIS, the web-based EIS technology has grown
amazingly since its inception in the late 1990s. Existing firms are investing a considerable
amount of resources in the web-based EIS being that the Web has become an important
medium to deploy decision support and EIS capabilities on a global scale (Averweg and
Roldan, 2005). This provides further evidence on the growth of use of EIS. Being that web
based EIS use web browser (network access tools) for the user interface, this technology
provides easy access to data on a company’s intranet (customized network such as querying
and electronic calendering) and from the Internet. Web statistics tracked since 1994 by
Georgia Tech reflect a rapid business growth of the technology (Basu et al. 2000).
According to Basu et al., the Georgia Tech survey found that the existence of corporate
51
intranets grew from 34.5% to 50% between 1996 and 1998 and from 1994 to 1998. The use
of the Internet technology for work purposes increased from 16% to 58%. Also, the
percentage of senior managers who directly used the Internet rose from 7% to 11% (Basu et
al. 2000). Another survey by Anderson Consulting (1999) suggests that 92% of CEOs,
CFOs and CIOs have Internet access, 81% go on-line at least once weekly and 50% feel
comfortable using Web Browser technology. An average annual growth rate of businesses
over the web in the US was reported to reach as high as 110% (Lederer et al. 2000).
Although the evidence on the growth of use of EIS can be noted as above, Table 2.7
presents the expenditures on EIS in dollar terms on the global perspective, US market and
European market.
Table 2.7: Expenditures on EIS in Different Markets
52
2.7 Pressures to EIS Implementations in Organisations
Having presented the historical aspects of EIS, the growth of EIS and evidence on the
growth of use of EIS in Section 2.6, this section present the pressures leading to EIS
implementation in organisations. Past studies (e.g., Watson et al. 1992; Pervan and Phua,
1996) have established a number of pressures for EIS implementation in organisations.
This pressure includes environmental turbulence (e.g., changing costs of materials,
increased competition, a need for new, better and timely information in order to manage
organisations that are increasingly complex and difficult to run and a need for more
efficient reporting, need for rapid status updates (Watson et al. 1992; Pervan and Phua,
1996).
Table 2.8: Pressures Leading to EIS Development (Watson et al. 1992, p. 118)
53
A US study (Table 2.8 above) by Watson et al. (1992) groups these pressures based on
internal and external pressures. Further, they rank both sets of pressures in order of
importance with the greatest points allocated to the most pressing pressure followed by
second greatest pressures and so on. They suggested that the increasingly competitive
environment was the most leading external pressure. This was followed by rapidly
changing external environment and a need to be more proactive in dealing with external
environment. For the Internal pressure, a need for timely information received the highest
score followed by a need for improved communication. A need for access to operational
data was rated third. Other internal and external pressures received low ratings.
A study by Pervan and Phua (1996) in Australia referred to these pressures leading to EIS
implementation in organisations as reasons. Further, they ranked these reasons in order of
importance using a Likert scale of 1-5 (with 1 for strongly disagree and 5 for strongly
agree). Table 2.9 presents the major reasons why Australian organisations implemented
EIS. The Table also presents their average rating.
Table 2.9: Reason for Implementing EIS in Australia ( Pervan & Phua, 1996 p. 116)
54
To summarise, the above Table 2.9 suggests that: items (1) - to - (7) with average rating 4
or more were the strongest reasons for EIS implementation in Australian organisations
followed by those for items (8) and (9) with 3.84 and 3.75 average ratings. Other reasons
for the latter items were not highly rated and therefore were not as important as the former.
Overall, this result suggests that EIS are designed to:
o Improve communication and personal efficiency of executives;
o Improve planning and control;
o Support managers in improving decision-making;
o Bring information from diverse and often heterogenous sources to information users
with a minimum knowledge of the source environment;
o Improve the flow of critical information to executives by providing information to
them in a top-down exception-oriented fashion via electronic reporting;
o Help executives formulate, assess, and modify their mental models;
o Assist executives to understand the complex, turbulent internal and external
environments of their organisations.
2.8 Factors Contributing to EIS Success or failure in Organisations
Having examined the pressures for the implementation of EIS in organisations in Section
2.7, this section will examine the factors contributing to the success or failure of EIS in
organisations. There are many reasons why efforts to bring computer support to executives
have failed. Understanding these reasons is of vital importance because they provide
insights into what problems must be overcome if an EIS project is to be successful.
55
EIS are high-risk systems (Poon and Wagner, 2001). As presented by Rainer and Watson
(1995) and Koh and Watson (1998) surveys in the US approximately 60% of organisations
invested in EIS have experienced failure. Also, a study by Poon and Wagner (2001)
estimated the failure rate of EIS as high as 70%. These failures have been attributed to
managerial (e.g., Pervan and Phua, 1996), psychological (e.g., Poon and Wagner, 2001),
social and cultural factors rather than technical factors alone (e.g., McBride, 1997;
Salmeron and Herrero, 2005; Khalil and Elkordy, 2005).
The absence of executives’ involvement in the development processes of EIS can cause a
significant problem in their use of EIS (Kelly, 1994). Executives are the potential users of
EIS therefore understanding their information requirement, decision-making style and
information search behaviour is critical to success. Their constructive guidelines in the
design process will contribute immensely to the system’s success (Khalil and Elkordy,
2005).
One of the difficulties involves executives themselves. Most senior managers missed the
computer revolution. Consequently, they may feel uncomfortable using computers, have
poor keyboarding skills or believe that “real” executives do not need to use computers
(Watson et al. 1992). They acknowledged that these problems can be resolved through
ongoing education and increasing executives’ computer awareness (Ditsa, 2003).
Rockart and De Long (1992) have attributed lack of enthusiasm for EIS use by top
executives to the fact that executives have ready have access to staff personnel to fulfill
their request for information. Therefore, any system developed for the executives must
prove to be more responsive than a human or manual system.

56
Another common mistake is that system analysts assume that they know exactly what
executives’ want. This assumption leads them to develop systems that are untailored to the
management style and requirements. EIS are rejected at the very inception if the initial
version does not fit and facilitate the way executives’ work (Fitzgerald, 1998).
McBride (1997) contends that EIS projects might not work well in all circumstances. From
his study he argues that a division-based structure organisation with a centralised control
might encourage the spread of EIS once approved by executive sponsor and general
management. But for sites-based structure organisation where local autonomy in relation to
standard, budgets and control is very pronounced, he acknowledges that EIS projects might
not work because some sites can resist EIS projects. Their resistance would effectively
reduce the importance of EIS in organisations (McBride, 1997).
The change in the business environment has a significant influence on EIS projects. The
need for consistent information for better reporting of business activities often results in the
development of EIS in some organisations (Salmeron, 2002). However, the demise of EIS
in organisations can be influenced by the changing priorities of the executives who might
be responding to the revolution in the business environment (Martensson, 1996)
Further, EIS projects are influenced by power, politics and user resistance to change
required in the projects. Research (e.g., McBride, 1997) shows that most EIS projects only
gain momentum and support by the general management because their initiators such as the
CEO and CFO which have both political and financial resources and are within the top
management level. Their departures from the organisations may bring about the end of
these projects especially if these projects are not financially viable. A new executive’s
57
interest in an EIS project may wane resulting in the failure of the project. A radical change
by a technology adverse executive can bring an end to an EIS project unless such change is
gradually introduced (Martensson, 1996; McBride, 1997). Young and Watson (1995) group
the failure factors of EIS into technology-related, support-related and user-related factors
(see Table 2.10). Later studies (e.g., Koh and Watson, 1998; Salmeron and Herrero, 2005)
have validated their findings.
Table 2.10: Factors Contributing to EIS Failure (Young and Watson, 1995, p. 154)
o Technology-Related-Factors – This means that the EIS developers/designers are
developing MIS type systems with complicated and unfriendly interface to
executive users.
o Support-Related-Factors – This means that during EIS development
developers/designers most often fail to address the critical success factors of the
system such as, executives’ information requirement, business problem, changing
pace of users’ information requirements and ability of the system to access external
data critical for strategic tasks.
58
o User-Related-Factors – This means that an organisational EIS project can fail if the
technology is so complicated that users resist its implementation, there is a political
resistance by potential users’ against its development and the developers restrict the
focus of the system to only few executives rather than to all executives. Also, users
make no commitment through such means as education and training to
understanding the system.
2.9 Evidence of Lack of, or Underutilisation of EIS
The previous section (2.8) considers a number of factors contributing to the success or
failure of EIS in organisation. This section will consider the evidence of lack of use or
underutilization of EIS by executives. First, Fitzgerald (1998) studied the usage of EIS at
organisational levels in the United Kingdom. His study found the usage gap of EIS between
executives and middle managers as high as 36%. He contended that only 32% of EIS users
were at executive level while the majority (68%) of users were at middle management
level. His study attributed the underutilization of EIS by executives to technological factors
and poor design of the system to meet executive information requirements (Fitzgerald,
1998). Second, a recent survey of the state of EIS in organisation in South Africa by
Averweg et al. (2004) acknowledged that the actual engagement of EIS by executives is
relatively low. They found that middle managers show a significant higher EIS usage levels
(77.4%) than top managers (45.2%). Third, in their study Pervan and Phua (1996)
investigate the factors contributing to the failure of EIS in Australia. The results suggest
that both organisational and technological factors such as inadequate and inappropriate
technology, loss of interest by executives and data management issues are the main causes
of the failure of EIS in Australia. A further study by Pervan and Phua (1997) reveals that
59
executives are often disappointed by the quality of information received from EIS and
become frustrated when trying to operate them. Executives are not confident about using
EIS (Fitzgerald and Murphy, 1994). Also, they do not also feel the necessity to use the
systems because they can always rely on their assistants to fulfill their information
requirements (Pervan and Phua, 1996). Pervan (1992) investigated the amount of time used
by executives and their assistants on accessing EIS each week. The results suggest an
underutilisation of EIS by executives because EIS are used by the assistants on behalf of
the executives.
Poon and Wagner (2001) investigated success and failures cases of EIS in six organisations
in Hong Kong based on ten critical success factors (CSFs) presented in the subsequent
section (2.10). They contend that (1) lack of commitment by executive sponsors of EIS
projects, (2) insufficient IS resources including IS staff and technology, (3) poor data
management, (4) lack of clear link of EIS to business objectives, (5) organisational
resistance to EIS project, (6) ill-defined information and system requirements, and (7) poor
management of systems evolution and spread resulted in the failure of EIS in two
organisations. Their study attributes these factors leading to EIS failure to technological,
organisational, educational and psychological factors.
McBride (1997) studied the rise and fall of EIS within a manufacturing firm in the United
Kingdom over nine years. His study revealed that: (1) the effect of culture change within an
organisation, (2) lack of accountability to EIS project by EIS sponsors, (3) shift in power
and politics among EIS promoters, (4) organisational resistance to the EIS project, (5)
change of organisational structure, (6) changing priorities of managers in the business
environment, and (7) lack of technical awareness of EIS by users across the organisation
60
resulted in a failure of the EIS project. As a result he concludes “no study that concerns
itself with how to develop a successful IS and how to avoid failures can reach many
reasonable conclusions unless it addresses issues of context and culture” (McBride, 1997 p.
277). He attributed the above factors resulting in the failure of EIS to social, cultural,
organisational and political factors. The conclusion that can be drawn from the above
discussion is that the root of the success or failure of EIS in organisations is more or less
attributed to social, cultural, psychological and organisational factors and not technical
factors alone.
2.10 Factors Determining a Successful EIS Implementation in an Organisation
Having discussed the evidence of lack of use, or underutilisation of EIS in Section 2.9, this
section examines the critical success factors (CSF) for implementing EIS in organisations.
Rockart and De Long (1992) observed 30 cases where attempts were made to implement
EIS. As a result they proposed eight critical factors for a successful EIS implementation:-
o A committed and informed executive sponsor who has a basic understanding of the
system capabilities and limitations and who can spend time and energy on its
development.
o An operating sponsor who can manage the details of the system from the users side.
This person should be able to communicate with the CEO and IS staff effectively.
He/she should be acquainted with the management styles of executive sponsors.
o Appropriate technology such as specifically designed EIS product, which should be
able to support a demanding working environment. Although the technology is
important, the relevance of the information is much more crucial.
61
o Appropriate IS staff including a project manager and support staff who possess
good technical and business capabilities as well as excellent communication skills.
o Management of data by aggregating, accessing, and extracting from various internal
and external sources. EIS can provide consistency by using the same data with the
same terminology throughout the organisation. There will be resistance to the
system by users if the data is not well managed.
o Management of organisational resistance, which is inevitable due to changes in the
flow of information. The resistance can simply be ignored or attempted to be
overcome through the use of power, or, preferably, eliminated through a
participative and educational approach.
o Clear link to business objectives with the purpose of solving real business problems
or to meet a need that can be addressed effectively with IS technology. “There
should be a clear link to business objectives and clear benefits in using the
technology. The systems must provide something that would not otherwise be
available and add value to the data” (Poon and Wagner, 2001 p. 396).
o Management of system evolution and spread vertically and horizontally in a
demanding environment. With explicit goals, fast response to users’ demands, well
managed expectations and ensured availability of resources.
o “Evolutionary development methodology is widely acknowledged as a key factor
for system success. The most common way of finding how the technology can
provide value for the executives is through prototyping. This also keeps executives
aware of and hopefully enthusiastic concerning the project” (Poon and Wagner,
2001 p. 396).
o Carefully defined information and system requirements by the executives. This is
because a successful system can only be achieved when the executives’ needs e.g.,
62
information and search behaviour are understood and taken into consideration
(Poon and Wagner, 2001; Salmeron and Herrero, 2005).
Several studies (e.g., Arnott et al. 2004; Salmeron and Herrero, 2005) have reaffirmed the
above CSF plus two others proposed by Poon and Wagner (2001). A recent study of
Executive Information Systems development in Thailand by Arnott et al. (2004) contended
that culture fit is an important CSF of EIS projects in emerging economy. Because the
concept of EIS originated from the western organisations (e.g., Rockart and Treacy, 1992;
Rockart and De Long, 1992), they defined EIS culture fit in emerging economy as “the
degree of similarity of both the organisation’s social and cultural context and its IT policies
and methods with that of the large western organisations where the concepts that underlie
EIS were originally created” (Arnott et al. 2004, p. 6).
Leidner and Elam (1994) group the above CSFs of EIS (see Table 2.11) in terms of
information, management, development and financial levels.
Table 2.11: Factors Contributing to EIS Success (Leidner and Elam, 1994 p.138)
o Informational level – This means that EIS developers should have some creativity
in developing a system from the prototype phase to a fully automated system with
63
little or no technical and political issues. Further, the system must be able to provide
executive users with an immediate access to both the internal and external data
sources.
o Management level – This means that if for whatever reason the initial users of the
system retired or resigned from the organisation, new executives should be able to
use the systems without difficulty. Also, there should be IS support staff with
excellent communication and relationship skills to help executive users when there
are problems.
o Development level – This means that for an EIS project to be successful, the IS
department should be involved in EIS development. This will allow the IS
department to assist executive users following implementation by modifying the
system when need the arises. A further explanation is that a successful EIS project
requires the deployment of a rapidly building prototyping and compatible IS
architectures.
o Financial level – This means that for an EIS project to be successful, both the hard
and software should be affordable, effective and efficient for EIS development.
There should also be some payoffs to organisations that invest resources
particularly human resources in EIS project.
However, the opposite will be the case if the above factors are ignored in EIS project.
64
2.11 Past Research Studies on EIS Usage
Having reviewed the critical success factors determining EIS implementation in
organisations, this section will examine previous studies on EIS usage. As shown in the
classification (Table 2.12), previous research studies on EIS usage can be classified into
five major areas as follows: (i) Factors influencing and explaining use, (ii) Overall benefits
from EIS, (iii) Pattern of use and frequency of use, (iv) Impact of EIS on managerial
activities, and (v) Emergence of EIS. Each of these research areas is explained as follows:
Table 2.12: Classification of EIS Usage Research
(i) Factors influencing/explaining EIS use – Although there are large numbers of research
studies in this area (Table 2.12), only limited numbers of research studies (Bergeron et al.
1995; Ditsa, 2003) employed appropriate reference theories to gain insights into factors that
influence the actual use of the systems by managers. Other research studies (e.g., Young
65
and Watson, 1995; Poon and Wagner, 2001) in this group employed simplistic models or
frameworks that do not lead their studies to explain user behaviours.
(ii) Overall benefits from EIS – Research studies in this area focused on the overall benefits
of EIS such as their direct support to decision-making, strategic planning, communication
and environmental scanning. These studies focused on the importance of EIS
characteristics such as their drill down tool, graphical interface and exceptional reporting of
critical information to users. Nord and Nord (1995) and Salmeron et al. (2001) for instance
also focus on the importance of specific EIS software for managerial decision-making.
(iii) Pattern of use and frequency of use – Research studies (e.g., Thodenius, 1996; Seeley
and Targett, 1999) in this area focus on the pattern of use and frequency of use of the
systems by the users. While Seeley and Targett’s study focus on the pattern of use,
Thodenius’ studies focus on the frequency of use: how often do senior managers use EIS.
Findings from his studies revealed that while senior managers were using EIS at least once
a month, two thirds of them were using EIS at least once a week.
(iv) Impact of EIS – Research studies (e.g., Rockart and De Long, 1992; Leidner and Elam,
1994) in this group focus on the impact of EIS on executives’ roles such as improving
communication immediate access to internal and external data for management planning
and control responsibilities, improving the mental models of executives which afford fresh
insights into how they conceptualise and understand their businesses. These studies also
shed light on the benefits such as improving analytical and modeling capabilities of the
executives that allow assumptions to be made and tested; the ability of the system to
66
combine data from multiple sources and presenting it in a way that is meaningful to the
executives.
(v) Emergence of EIS - The studies (Fitzgerald and Murphy, 1994; Fitzgerald, 1998) in this
area focus on factors enhancing the emergence of EIS usage in an organisation. Factors
mentioned include: increased readiness on the part of executives to make use of computers
the competitive nature of the business environment and availability of the enabling
technology’s on the systems (e.g., email and calendaring tools). Although this group
presents the potential benefits of EIS to users similarly to the ones presented by the impact
of EIS focus group, they were critical of EIS development methods by designers and
information content on the system because they found that there is higher utilisation of EIS
by middle managers than top-level managers, which EIS are supposed to serve.
To summarise, although the failure of EIS usage in organisations has ostensibly been linked
to organisational (Nandhakumar and Jones, 1997), managerial (Pervan, 1997), social and
cultural (McBride, 1997), psychological (Poon and Wagner, 2001) rather than technical
factors alone (McBride, 1997), the majority of previous studies on EIS (see Table 2.12)
have focused on the benefits of the systems, pattern and frequency of use of the system,
impact and emergence of the system.
Nandhakumar and Jones (1997) witnessed an EIS development project in their in-depth
study of the development methods in organisations where potential executive users were
not involved in the design phases. As a result, they suggest that there should be better
theoretical conceptualisation of the dynamic relationship between the developers and
67
executives to assist in understanding how the relationship shapes, and is shaped by, various
constraints.
McBride (1997) studied the progress of an EIS project within a manufacturing organisation
in the UK over a 9-year period. The study demonstrates “the importance of the interaction
between the business environment, the organisational environment and the perceptions and
interpretations of events by stakeholders on the success or failure of EIS” (p. 277).
Particularly, it illustrates the importance of the organisational context and the dynamic
nature of the social, economic and technical factors critical in shaping acceptance and use
of EIS in organisations.
The above two studies suggest that the roots of the success or failure of IS (including EIS)
can be attributed to social, cultural and organisational factors and not to technical factors
alone.
The majority of research on EIS usage (Table 2.12) has been exploratory instead of theory
testing. Only a limited number of research studies (Bergeron et al. 1995; Ditsa, 2003) in
area (i) employed appropriate reference theories to investigate the factors influencing the
actual use of the systems in organisations. Without appropriate reference theories it will be
difficult to understand the factors that influence individual behavior towards computers.
Kling (1991) who studied the social impact of human computing argued that, “in order to
identify the social impact of computing, one must have at least implicitly a theory of the
causal power that computerised systems can exert upon individuals, groups, organisations,
institutions, social networks, social world and other social entities” (p. 151). In other words,
68
to understand computing it is important to understand the conceptions of social life that
would aid in discerning the critical social aspect. Cheon et al. (1993) further argues that
initial IS exploratory research should be followed by theory-testing. Trice and Treacy
(1988) asserted that, as a behaviour whose determinants are not well understood in IS
research, system use can best be explained by referring to an appropriate reference theory.
This assertion has guided several studies (e.g., Venkatesh et al. 2003; Wang and Yang,
2005). This study employs TAM and Triandis’ framework as the theoretical foundation to
investigate and examine the social, cultural, individual and organisational critical success
factors that might explain executives’ behaviour towards the adoption and usage of EIS in
an organisational setting.
2.12 Summary and Conclusion
This chapter reviewed the related literature for the present study. First, Section 2.2
presented various definitions of EIS, the definition used for this study, EIS characteristics
and potential benefits to end-users. Second, Section 2.3 presented the nature of executive
work and how EIS fits-in. Third, Section 2.4 presented a comparison of EIS with DSS and
MIS followed by components of EIS. Next, Sections 2.5 – 2.7 presented the growth of EIS,
the evidence on growth and use of EIS and pressures leading to EIS implementation in
organisations. Further, factors contributing to EIS success or failure, the evidence of lack
of, or underutilisation of EIS and factors determining a successful EIS usage in
organisations were presented in Sections 2.8, 2.9 and 2.10. Finally, Section 2.11 critically
evaluates previous research on EIS usage. A summary for each Section has been provided.
69
The important conclusion that can be drawn from this chapter is that: (1) there is limited
research on the actual use of EIS by executives. As discussed, the classifications of EIS
usage research studies presented in Table 2.12 show that the majority of the research on
EIS usage has been exploratory instead of theory testing, (2) only a limited number of
research studies (e.g., Bergeron et al. 1995; Ditsa, 2003) employed appropriate reference
theories to investigate the factors that influence users’ behaviour towards EIS adoption and
usage. Without a significant number of research studies with appropriate reference theories
it will be difficult to understand the factors that might influence individuals’ behaviour to
use EIS.
Therefore the motivation for this study was due to the realisation that there is: 1) limited
research on the actual use of EIS by executives, 2) lack of appropriate reference theoretical
foundation of, 3) social, cultural, individual and organisational variables in determining key
factors for user acceptance and use of EIS.
Chapter 3 will present the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and Triandis’ framework
upon which this study is based. Further section 3.5 of chapter 3 will present the research
model derived from TAM and Triandis’ framework variables - habits, social factors and
facilitating conditions and the research hypotheses to be tested in the study.
70
CHAPTER 3 THEORETICAL FOUNDATION, RESEARCH
MODEL AND HYPOTHESES
3.1 Introduction
A review of the related literature on EIS and the nature of executives’ work and how an
EIS fits-in were discussed in the previous chapter. In order to establish the theoretical
foundations of the research model and to derive the hypotheses that can explain executives’
behaviour towards the adoption and use of EIS in an organisational setting, this chapter
examines some theoretical perspectives in the IS research domain. This chapter also
employs organisational behaviour theories such as the Technology Acceptance Model
(TAM) and such variables as habits, social factors and facilitating conditions from
Triandis’ framework to establish the theoretical foundation for the present study. This
chapter begins with a discussion of the theoretical perspective in IS research. This is
followed by an examination of TAM, its underlying constructs and its importance in the IS
research studies. Further, this chapter examines Triandis’ framework, its underlying
constructs and its importance in IS studies. Finally, this chapter presents the research model
and the hypotheses derived from the model.
3.2 Theoretical Perspectives in IS Research Studies
In the past few decades, IS acceptance issues have been extensively studied. In contrast to
earlier studies (e.g., Young and Watson, 1995; Poon and Wagner, 2001), which lacked
appropriate theoretical foundations, more recent studies (e.g., Khalil and Elkordy, 2005;
Wang and Yang, 2005) focus on theory-based models to investigate the factors that could
71
explain individual’s reactions to computers. Candidates among these theories include the
Task Technology Fit Model (e.g., Dishaw and Strong, 1997), the Contingency Model (e.g.,
Handzic, 1997), the Activity Theory (e.g., Verenikina and Gould, 1997) and the Theory of
Planned Behaviour (e.g., Mathieson, 1991; Taylor and Todd, 1995). Following later studies
this study employs a theory-based model to investigate and examine the cultural, social,
individual and organisational critical success factors that might explain executives’
behaviour in accepting and using EIS. These theories are recognised in the IS research
domain because they enable researchers to gain a useful insight into the reaction of people
toward computer technology and factors affecting their reactions. A brief discussion of
each of these theories is presented below as well as TAM and Triandis’ framework used
for this study. First, Table 3.1 presents a snapshot of IS research theories.
Table 3.1: Theoretical Perspectives in IS Research
72
Table 3.1: Theoretical Perspectives in IS Research Continues
o Activity Theory (AT) aims to explain the connection between human psychology
and computer interface design in a social work environment. As a result, it
establishes the relationship between human computer interactions and computer

73
interface design by taking into consideration the context of the work environment
(Verenikina and Gould, 1997; Hasan and Gould, 2001). AT is often used in the
qualitative study involving case study. Research based on AT enables the unit of
analysis to be investigated over a very long period of time (Hasan and Gould,
2001). Because the study uses a cross-sectional time dimension where unit the of
analysis is observed at a point in time AT is not a feasible theory for this study.
o The Task-Technology Fit Model (TTF) aims to match the capability of the
technology to the demand placed on the technology in a work environment. TTF
posits that technology will be used if, and only if, the functions available to user
support fit the activities of the user (Dishaw and Strong, 1997). TTF suggests that
rational and experienced users will choose those tools, which allow them to
complete the task with the greatest net benefit. However, a model focusing on fit
alone does not give sufficient attention to the fact that the system must first be
utilised before performance impacts can be delivered. As utilisation is a complex
outcome, based on other factors (e.g., habits, social factors and facilitating
conditions), TTF can only benefit from the addition of this richer understanding of
utilisation (Goodhue and Thompson, 1995). Further, TTF does not establish user
specific beliefs about technology such as perceived usefulness and perceived ease
of the technology that can influence system use by means of users’ attitude and
behaviour intention. Based on the above discussion, the TTF model is not feasible
for this study.
o The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) incorporates the notion of perceived
behaviour control (PBC) as an independent influence on behaviour, recognising

74
that there are circumstances in which behaviour might be expected to result in
positive consequences (or net benefits), yet not be undertaken due to a perceived
lack of ability to control the execution of behaviour. PBC encompasses perceptions
of resources and technology facilitating conditions such as the addition to
perceptions of ability or self-efficacy (Taylor and Todd, 1995; Mathieson et al.
2001; Musa et al. 2003). Interestingly, despite TPB intuitive plausibility, the
interactive hypothesis has received limited empirical support due to its conditional
requirements in predicting behaviour (Ajzen, 1991). Further, TPB leaves aside
other beliefs such as the perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use
(PEOU) (Venkatesh et al. 2003), which could also have an influence on behaviour
intentions and on behaviour itself. Hence, TPB is not a feasible model for this
study.
o The Contingency model (CM) of human information processing suggests that the
utilisation and effectiveness of information systems may be dependent upon the
characteristics of the user and the demand of the systems. CM suggests higher
reliability information led superior task performance rather than low reliability
information. Performance is, however, due to the adaptive nature of human
information processing in terms of the ability to take advantage of the task context
and to perform at satisfying levels while saving in cognitive cost (Handzic, 1997).
Nonetheless, a contingency model doesn’t explicitly examine organisational
contextual factors such as cultural, social, and organisational variables that can
explain executives’ behaviour towards adoption and use of EIS. Further, it does not
take into account the importance of beliefs such the PU, PEOU and individual’s
75
attitude (Davis, 1993) in predicting the behaviour towards IS adoption and usage.
Therefore, it is not a feasible theory for this study.
The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis, 1986) and Triandis’ framework (1979)
are useful in predicting human behaviour. TAM suggests how users come to accept and
use a technology and proposes that when a person is adopting a new technology, a number
of factors such as the perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, attitude towards use and
behaviour intentions influence their decision about how and when he/she will use it. Also,
Triandis’ framework, a theory from social psychology, explicitly addresses the social,
cultural, individual and organisational factors that influence the behaviour.
Both TAM and Triandis' framework have separately guided several researchers (Davis,
1993; Mao, 2002; Money and Turner, 2004; Bergeron et al. 1995; Ditsa, 2003) to explain
human behaviour towards computer adoption and usage. This study uses TAM and
Triandis’ framework as theoretical foundations. The study extends TAM with such
variables as habits, facilitating conditions and social factors from Triandis’ framework to
derive the research model suitable for the study of the adoption and usage of EIS by
organisational executives. A discussion of TAM and Triandis’ model is presented below.
76
3.3 Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
A significant body of research knowledge of the factors affecting information systems
acceptance has as its foundation in TAM (for example see Davis, 1989; Davis et al. 1989;
Mao, 2002; Zakour, 2004). TAM is a model originally conceived by Davis (1986). Davis
developed TAM while under contract to IBM Canada Limited to evaluate the market
potential for a variety of the then-emerging PC-based applications in the area of
multimedia, image processing, and pen-based computing in order to guide investments in
new product development (Davis, 1986; Davis and Venkatesh, 1996). Davis developed
TAM to explain the effect of the user’s perception of system characteristics on the user
acceptance of computers (Davis, 1986). TAM is an adaptation of the Theory of Reasoned
Action (TRA) (see Figure 3.2) from social psychology (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975;
Fishbein, 1979; Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980). The objective of TAM is “to provide an
explanation of the determinants of computer acceptance that is capable of explaining the
behaviour of users across a broad range of end-user computing and user populations while
concurrently being parsimonious and theoretically justified” (Davis et al. 1989, p. 985).
Two particular belief constructs, PU and PEOU are centrally important in TAM for
predicting information users’ acceptance behaviours.
TRA suggests that external stimuli indirectly influence a person’s attitude towards the
behaviour indirectly via behaviour intentions by influencing his/her salient beliefs about the
consequences of performing the behaviour (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975). The behaviour
intentions (BI) are influenced by subjective norms in addition to attitudes via normative
beliefs and motivation to comply (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975). TAM uses TRA to specify
causal chain linkage between two key sets of constructs namely, the perceived usefulness
77
(PU) and perceived ease of use (PEOU), attitude towards using (ATU), behavioural
intention (BI) and actual usage (A) or behaviour (Malhotra and Galleta, 1999).
3.3.1 Definitions of Key Constructs in TAM
The TAM instrument consists of five key constructs presented as follows:
Perceived Usefulness: Davies et al. (1989, p. 320) define PU as the user’s “subjective
probability that using a specific application system will increase his/her job performance
within an organisational context”.
Perceived Ease of Use: Davis defines PEOU as “the degree to which an individual
believes, that using a particular system would be free of physical and mental effort” (Davis,
1993 p. 447). While PEOU relates to the assessment of the intrinsic characteristics of IT
such as ease of use, ease of learning, flexibility and clarity of IT interface, PU on the other
hand is a response to user assessment of the extrinsic, i.e., task-oriented outcomes: how IT
helps users achieve task-related objectives, such as task efficiency and effectiveness (Gefen
and Straub, 2000). These two beliefs can create a favorable disposition or intention toward
using the IS systems (Davis et al. 1989; Gefen and Straub, 2000).
Behaviour Intention: According to the TRA an individual’s behaviour intention (BI) is a
function of two basic determinants; one is a personal factor in nature and the other reflects
the social influences. The former refers to an individual’s positive or negative evaluation of
performing the behaviour. This is termed as attitude towards the behaviour. The latter
78
reflects an individual’s perception of the social pressures put on him/her to perform or not
to perform the behaviour in question. These are termed subjective norms. In other words,
BI is determined by an individual’s perception of personal factors such as attitude towards
the behaviour and, subjective norms, which are the social pressures on the behaviour in
question (Fishbein and Azjen, 1975; Fishbein, 1979; Azjen and Fishbein, 1980).
Attitude Towards Using: TAM is based on the TRA attitudes paradigm which specifies
how behaviour relevant components of attitudes can be measured. It distinguishes between
beliefs and attitudes and specifies how external stimuli such as objective features of attitude
object, are causally linked to beliefs, attitudes and behaviour (Davis (1986). Fishbein and
Ajzen (1975) draw the distinction between two attitude constructs such as attitude towards
the object and attitude towards the behaviour. The former refers to an individual’s effective
evaluation of a specified attitude object and the later refers to an individual’s evaluation of
a specified behaviour involving the object. Attitude object refers to an external stimulus of
an attitude (Davis, 1993). Based on prior studies (e.g., Davis, 1986, 1993), attitude towards
the behaviour relates more strongly to a specified behaviour than attitude towards the
object (Davis, 1993). Within the present study attitude towards using EIS is used.
According to the TRA, attitudes are a function of beliefs. Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) draw
the distinction between beliefs and attitudes. Whereas individual beliefs of the behaviour
(also known as the perceived consequence of the behaviour) refers to his/her subjective
likelihood that performing the behaviour will lead to a specified outcome. Attitude towards
the behaviour is a behavioural belief or an effective evaluation of the behaviour (Fishbein,
1979; Davis, 1993). Attitude towards the behaviour can be determined by an expectancy-
79
value model of beliefs weighted by evaluations of the consequences (Fishbein and Azjen,
1975).
Figure 3.1 represents a version of TAM and Figure 3.2 represents a version of TRA.
Arrows in both figures indicate the direction of influence (Davis, 1989; Davis, et al. 1989;
Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975). TAM (Figure 3.1) suggests both PU and PEOU influence
attitude towards (ATU). Also, while PEOU has an indirect influence on BI via PU and
ATU, ATU has a direct influence on BI. Also, BI influences actual system use (A).
Figure 3.1 Technology Acceptance Model (Source: Davis, 1993 p.476)
Figure 3.2: The Theory of Reasoned Action (Source: Fishbein, 1979 p.69)
80
3.3.2 The Importance of TAM in IS Research
Since its original development, TAM has been the focus of considerable academic attention
(e.g., Adams et al. 1992; Gefen and Straub, 2000; Mao, 2002; Venkatesh et al. 2003; Ditsa,
2003; Money and Turner, 2004; Zakour, 2004). TAM has been revised, adapted and
extended by numerous researchers (e.g., Davis, 1993; Chau, 1996; Dishaw and Strong,
1997; Gefen and Straub, 2000, Hardgrave and Johnson, 2003). These adaptations have
variously explored TAM’s beliefs and attitudinal constructs and their antecedents (e.g.,
Davis, 1993); issues of social influence (e.g., Malhotra and Galletta, 1999); the temporal
dimension of IT adoption behaviour (e.g., Karahanna et al. 1999); the degree of volitional
control in IT adoption and usage (e.g., Rawstorne et al. 2000); usage self measurement bias
(e.g., Straub et al. 1995) and the case of object-oriented systems development (e.g.,
Hardgrave and Johnson, 2003).
Further, the theoretical importance of TAM as a determinant of user behaviour is revealed
by various kinds of research studies including the adoption of innovations, the cost-benefit
paradigm, expectancy theory, and self-efficacy theory (Davis, 1989). An overview of
scholarly research studies (e.g., Davis 1989; Davis et al. 1989; Robey, 1979; Hardgrave and
Johnson, 2003; Zakour, 2004) on IS acceptance and usage suggests that TAM has emerged
as one of the most influential models in this stream of research including e-commerce and
the adoption of internet technology (e.g., Gefen and Straub, 2000; Suh and Han, 2002;
Corbitt et al. 2003). TAM with its original emphasis on system design characteristics
represents an essential theoretical contribution in understanding IS usage and acceptance
behaviours (Davis et al. 1989; Vijayasarathy, 2002; Lim, 2002, Zakour, 2004). For
instance, Davis (1989) originally examined an email system and file-editor used at the time
81
at IBM Canada and found the PEOU and PU to be significantly correlated with self-
reported use of the system.
Moreover, evidence of the research community’s growing acceptance of TAM is more or
less reflected in the fact that the Institute for Scientific Information’s Social Science
Citation Index as referenced in Money and Turner (2004), recently listed 335 journal
citations since 1999 of the initial research paper published by Davis et al. (1989). More
than a decade after its original publication, TAM continues to receive a significant use in
social science research studies (e.g., Hardgrave and Johnson, 2003; Zakour, 2004; Wang
and Yang, 2005).
Nevertheless, TAM has been replicated and tested extensively to provide empirical
evidence on the relationship that exists between PU, PEOU and A (e.g., Davis et al. 1989;
Adams et al. 1992; Segars and Grover, 1993; Hendrickson et al. 1993; Szajna, 1994). The
sum of these studies has confirmed the validity and reliability of Davis’ instrument, and to
support its use with different populations of users and different software choices.
TAM uses multiple-item scales to operationalise ATU, PU and PEOU in order to measure
these constructs more reliably than would be possible with single-item scales. The Crobach
alpha reliability of TAM scales has been found to exceed 0.9 across numerous studies (e.g.,
Davis, 1993; Davis and Venkatesh, 1996). In addition, TAM item scales exhibit a high
degree of discriminant, convergent and nomological validity (e.g., Davis and Venkatesh,
1996; Davis, 2001). The importance of these psychometric properties and the high
proportion of variance in ATU to actual system use explained by PU and PEOU have led to
confidence in TAM for studying IS adoption (Davis, 1993; Davis and Venkatesh, 1996).
82
However, there are potential biases in TAM. One of the major biases is that TAM assumes
that when someone forms an intention to act, that they will be free to act without limitation.
However, in the real world, there will be many constraints such as limited ability, time
constraints, environmental or organisational limits and subconscious habits, which will
limit individual freedom to act (Bagozzi et al. 1992). TAM with its original emphasis on
the system design characteristics does not account for social norms, subconscious habits
and facilitating conditions of the organisational environment in the adoption and utilisation
of new IS including EIS (Davis, 1986; Davis et al. 1989; Davis and Venkatesh, 1996).
Furthermore, most of the existing studies on TAM were conducted in North American
countries (e.g., Davis 1986; Davis et al. 1989; Vijayasarathy, 2002). When TAM is tested
in other countries such as Switzerland (e.g., Straub et al. 1997) and Japan (e.g., Straub et al.
1997) the results vary on TAM’s predictive power. Culture, social norms, habits and
facilitating conditions have been suggested to play an essential role in explaining different
patterns in individual IS including EIS adoption (Thompson et al. 1991, Bergeron et al.
1995; Straub et al. 1997; McBride, 1997; Ditsa, 2003; Zakour, 2004).
“Davis (1986) and Davis et al. (1989) had observed that the omission of a subjective norm
from TAM represented an important area that needed further research. They had noted that
the theoretical basis of TRA makes it difficult to distinguish if usage behaviour is caused
by the influence of referents on one’s intent or by one’s own attitude. For instance, Davis
(1986) observed that the subject may want to do what Referent X thinks he/she should do,
not because of X’s influence, but because the act is consistent with the subject’s own
[attitude]” (Malhotra and Galletta, 1999 p.2). Davis (1986) and Davis et al. (1989) did not
only underscore the importance of social norms that can explain behaviour in the adoption
83
and use of IS in the ‘real world’ applications of TAM, they failed to recognise the
importance of habits and other facilitating conditions suggested above to have important
influence on behaviour.
Because the role of external variables vis-à-vis TAM was not well explored, Davis (1993)
encouraged “future research [to] consider the role of additional [external variables] within
TAM” (p. 483). In other words, his study highlighted the growing importance of
developing knowledge from TAM. This study employs TAM and incorporates selected
variables such as social factors, habits and facilitating conditions from Triandis’ framework
as an extension to form the theoretical foundation and research model that can explain
executives’ behaviour towards the adoption and usage of EIS. The next subsection presents
an overview of Triandis’ (1979) framework and examines the underlying concepts as well
as variables relevant to this study.
3.4 An Overview of Triandis’ Theoretical Framework
Triandis (1979) presents a theoretical framework with central themes, which focus on the
relationships of values, attitude, and other acquired behavioural dispositions to action or
behaviour. The framework pulls together the relationship involving these concepts.
According to Triandis’ framework, Personality internalises the cultural way of perceiving
the social environment known as the subjective culture of a group. The subjective culture
of the reference group identifies the boundaries of their interactions. The subjective culture
consists of: norms, roles, values and social situations. The subjective culture variables
constitute the social factors. Furthermore, Triandis explains that individual previous
84
experience with particular behaviours results in affect towards the behaviour, which in turn
determines intentions about behaviour.
Affect relates to the individual’s feeling of pleasure, displeasure, joy, delight or disgust
towards the behaviour. Positive feeling will increase the intention towards a given
behaviour, while negative feelings will decrease them. Affect is directly influenced by the
habits and individual perception of the subjective culture variables. According to Triandis’
framework, habits and relevant arousal (physiological factors) are among the determinants
of behaviour. He states, “physiological arousal of the organism that is relevant to the act
facilitates and increases probability of the act” (Triandis, 1979, p. 205). Thus, the model
suggests that relevant arousal directly influences behaviour and is influenced by genetic
and biological factors as well as the social situation that is the behaviour setting. Triandis
argues that even when the intentions are high, habits well established, and the arousal
optimal in an individual, there may be no behaviour when the geography of the situation
(facilitating conditions) makes the behaviour impossible. In other words, behaviour is
determined as well by the facilitating conditions of an environment.
Intentions are another construct in Triandis’s model. As shown in Figure 3.3, intentions are
directly influenced by social factors, affect and behaviour consequences. According to
Triandis, behaviours have objective consequences (that occur “out there” in the real world)
which are interpreted (occur inside a person) and, as a result of the interpretation the person
feels reinforced” (p. 198). Reinforcement, Triandis says, affects the perceived consequences
of the behaviour by changing the perceived probabilities that the behaviour will have on
particular consequences and the value of the consequences.
85
Figure 3.3: Triandis’ framework (Source: Triandis, 1979 p.199)
According to the framework, the probabilities and values, in turn, constitute the
determinants of behavioural intentions to behave. The interpretations of the objective
consequences, Triandis says, differ due to genetic/biological influences or because of
previous situation-behaviour reinforcement sequences that one has encountered in his/her
history.
86
As shown in the model (Figure 3.3), although Triandis’ framework is quite complex, it
consists of networks of interrelated hypotheses, which are useful in summarising a state
of knowledge. For the purpose of this study, it appeared more appropriate to focus on the
subset model that includes the variables most useful in explaining EIS adoption and
usage in organisations. The subset model and variables used from Triandis framework
are: Social factors, Habits and Facilitating conditions. These are explained as follows:
3.4.1 Definitions of Key Constructs in Traindis’s framework for the Study
Habits: Triandis defines habits as “situation-behaviour sequences that are or have become
automatic such that they occur without self-instruction” (Triandis, 1979, p. 204). Triandis
explains that habits are what individuals normally do and individuals are not usually
conscious of their sequences, e.g., playing a piano. Triandis closely links habits to
individual past experience and ability in performing a given act. Triandis’ model suggests
that the habitual nature of the behaviour (in addition to intentions) will have a significant
influence on an individual response to a given situation. According to Triandis, habits are
more important than intentions in some behaviours.
Facilitating conditions: Triandis defines facilitating conditions as “objective factors which
are out there in the geographical environment such that several judges or observers can
agree make an act easy to do” ( Triandis, 1979, p. 205). Acts he says are socially defined
patterns of muscle movements. According to Triandis in some circumstances an individual
may have intentions to perform a given act but he/she is unable to do so because the
environment prevents the act from being performed. Consequently, the level of the
geographical environment (Facilitating conditions) is an important factor in explaining an
87
individual’s behaviour and must be taken into account. In turn, facilitating conditions are
influenced by the social situation.
Social factors: Triandis (1971) argued that behaviour is influenced by social norms, which
depend on messages received from others and reflects what individuals think they should
do. In his later work, Triandis (1979) expanded this term and called it social factors; that is,
the individual’s internalisation of the reference groups subjective culture, and specific
interpersonal agreements that the individual has made with others in specific social
situations (Triandis, 1979). The subjective culture consists of: norms (self-instruction to do
what is perceived to be appropriate by members of the culture in certain situations); value
(the tendencies to prefer one state of affairs over another); roles (appropriate behaviour by
a person holding an office in a group) and, social situations (a behaviour setting where
more than one person is present). Triandis states that the internalisation of the reference
group subjective culture forms the social factors that influence intentions to behave, which
determine the behaviour. In addition to influencing intentions, social factors are themselves
dependent on social situations and on an individual’s perception of subjective culture
variables. Social factors are similar to Ajzen and Fishbein’s social norms (Azjen and
Fishbein, (1980). Although Bergeron et al. (1995) whose research model was based on
Triandis framework ignored the importance of subjective-objective culture and social
situations, these items were taken as important by Ditsa (2003) for the operationalisation of
social factors variables.
88
3.4.2 The Importance of Triandis’ Framework
Triandis’ framework has been recognised in social psychology as an important model for
studying behaviour. Although Triandis framework is not widely used in the IS research
domain as a behaviour model, findings from previous IS studies (e.g., Thompson et al.
1991; Bergeron et al. 1995; Ditsa, 2002; 2003) based on Triandis framework have
demonstrated the importance of the framework variables in understanding and/or
explaining the factors that influence individual reaction to IS and EIS acceptance.
Thompson et al. (1991) employed Triandis’ framework as a theoretical foundation to gain a
better understanding of the factors that influence the use of personal computers in
organisations. Unfortunately, Thompson et al. disregarded habits as a construct in their
study but later in the paper admitted that habits are clearly important determinants of
behaviour and must be acknowledged in IS research because of the importance of
experience and ability for a given act that habits entail (Thompson et al. 1991). Bergeron et
al. (1995) employed Triandis’ framework as a theoretical foundation to better understand
the various factors related to EIS utilisation at the strategic management level. Recently,
Ditsa (2002, 2003) employed Triandis framework as a theoretical foundation to investigate
factors that explain users’ behaviour towards using EIS. In fact, the sum of these studies
has confirmed the validity, reliability and appropriateness of Triandis’ framework variables
and support its use in explaining user’s behaviour towards IS including EIS.
However, Triandis’ framework is very complex. This makes it very difficult to employ in
its entirety in IS research (e.g., Thompson et al. 1991; Bergeron et al. 1995; Ditsa, 2002,
2003). Moreover, some constructs in Triandis’ model are closely related such that it may
89
be difficult to operationalise without any redundancy in their measures (Ditsa, 2003).
Because of its complexity, most research based on Triandis’ model only focuses on a
subset of the framework (e.g., Thompson et al. 1991; Bergeron et al. 1995; Ditsa, 2003).
The present study does not employ the whole Triandis’ framework as a theoretical basis
rather the study employs TAM as the basis and incorporates a subset of Triandis’ model
focusing on variables such as habits, facilitating conditions and social factors as the
theoretical foundation. The present study aims to investigate organisational contextual
factors such as cultural, social and individual factors that could explain executives’
behaviour towards EIS adoption and usage. The research model and hypotheses are
presented in section 3.5.
3.5 The Research Model and Hypotheses
Having presented the theoretical perspectives in the IS including EIS research domain in
section 3.4, this section will present the research model, which is based on TAM and
Triandis’ framework, as well as the hypotheses to be tested in the study. The section begins
with the research model.
3.5.1 The Research Model for EIS Adoption and Usage
Although Davis (1986) and Davis et al. (1989) highlight the importance of developing
knowledge from TAM, Thompson et al. (1991), Bergeron et al. (1995) and Ditsa (2003)
advocate the use of Triandis’ framework as a theoretical foundation in understanding and
explaining users’ behaviour towards IS including EIS adoption and usage. In accordance
90
with the above suggestions, the present study employs TAM and incorporates such
variables as habits, social factors and facilitating conditions from Triandis’ framework as
extension to form the research model that can explain executives’ behaviour towards the
adoption and usage of EIS.
Figure 3.4: Research Model for EIS Adoption and Usage Adapted from TAM and Traindis
Model
In the model (Figure 3.4), habits consist of variables such as experience in computer-based
information systems (CBIS), EIS and the ability to use EIS (Bergeron et al. 1995; Ditsa,
2003). Habits are operationalised based on the number of years of executives’ experience
with CBIS, EIS and their ability to use EIS. Ditsa (2003) reported that Shneiderman (1998)
classified computer users into novice users, knowledgeable intermittent (casual users) and
91
frequent (expert users). The ability of executives to use EIS is measured by assessing an
executive user’s class.
o Facilitating conditions again following Ditsa consist of variables such as EIS
development processes, EIS management processes and organisational environment
(Ditsa, 2002, 2003). Facilitating conditions are operationalised based on the degree
to which EIS development processes, EIS management processes and organisational
environment facilitate executives’ use of EIS (Ditsa, 2002, 2003).
o Social factors consist of such variables as subjective norms, roles, values and social
situations (Ditsa, 2002, 2003). Social factors measure the degree to which the
subjective variables such as norms, roles, values and social situations influence
executives’ behaviour in their use of EIS (Ditsa, 2002, 2003).
o Perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use (e.g., Davis, 1986, 1989, 1993;
Davis et al. 1992; Mahotra and Galletta, 1999; Kwon and Chidambaram, 2000;
Mao, 2002) are operationalised by obtaining users’ assessment of their PU and
PEOU of EIS based on twelve similar items developed and refined by Davis
(2001).
o Attitude towards using consist of attitude variables. Attitude towards using is
operationalised based on five standard 5-point semantic differential scales for
operational attitude towards the behaviour (Fishbein and Azjen, 1975; Azjen and
Fishbein, 1980; Davis, 1993).
92
o Actual system use (behaviour) consists of the number of times of system usage.
Actual system use is operationised in terms of frequency of use of EIS (Fishbein
and Ajzen, 1975; Davis, 1989; 1993; Mahotra and Galletta, 1999; Kwon and
Chidambaram, 2000; Mao, 2002). Details of the operationalisation are provided in
Chapter 4, subsection 4.2.3.
As with Davis (1993, p. 476), behaviour intention is not included as a construct in the
research model. Fishbein, (1979) argues that in many situations intentions might not
necessarily lead to behaviour. For example, an individual intention “to lose weight, to diet,
to exercise, to quit smoking or quit drinking are mere behavioural categories” (p. 710).
In the model (Figure 3.4) a prospective executive’s overall attitude towards using EIS is
hypothesised to be the major determinant of whether or not executives actually use EIS.
Executives’ attitude towards using EIS in turn is influenced by two beliefs: perceived
usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEOU). Furthermore, the facilitating conditions
(EIS development processes, EIS management processes and organisational environment);
habits (CBIS experience, EIS experience and the ability to use EIS); and social factors
(subjective norms, roles, values and situations) have indirect influence on behaviour by
means of PU, PEOU and ATU. The objective of this study is to investigate and examine the
cultural, social, individual and organisational critical success factors that might explain
executives’ behaviour towards the adoption and usage of EIS. Arrows in the research
model indicate the direction of probable influence.
93
3.5.1.1 Classification of Variables in the Research Model
The variables in the research model have been classified (see Table 3.2) into social,
cultural, individual and organisational factors. The definition of EIS, survey questionnaire
and concepts of the variables used for this study were considered in the classification. In
the classification, some variables by definition and concepts, overlap some of the factors.
For example; norms, roles, values and social situations of social factors were classified as
social factors as well as organisational cultural factors. Further, experience in CBIS, EIS,
the ability to use EIS, the perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and attitude towards
using were classified as organisational factors as well individual factors. Because the
variables in the social, cultural, individual and organisational factors were overlapping,
therefore, the constructs in the research model were used in the analysis. Also, these factors
have been considered in discussing the findings/results and implications of this study.
Table 3.2: Classification of Research Variables into Social, Cultural, Individual and
Organisational Factors
Social Factors Organisational factors Individual Cultural Factors

Norms Experience in CBIS Experience in CBIS Norms
Roles Experience in EIS Experience in EIS Roles
Values Ability to use EIS Ability to use Values
Social situations EIS development process Perceived usefulness Social situations
EIS Management processes Perceived ease of use
Organisational environment Attitudes towards use
Perceived usefulness
Perceived ease of use
Attitudes towards use
94
3.5.2 Research Hypotheses
The research model was presented in section 3.5.1. This section (3.5.2) presents the
hypotheses to be tested, which were implanted in the research model. First, Table 3.3
presents a summary of the interrelationships between hypotheses in the research model.
Table 3.3: A Summary of Interrelationship of the Hypotheses in the Research Model
Hypotheses Predictors Dependents

Hypothesis HI a Experiences in CBIS PU
Hypothesis H1b Experiences in EIS PU
Hypothesis H1c Ability to use EIS PU
Hypothesis H2a Experiences in CBIS PEOU
Hypothesis H2b Experiences in EIS PEOU
Hypothesis H2c Ability to use EIS PEOU
Hypothesis H3a EIS development processes PU
Hypothesis H3b EIS management processes PU
Hypothesis H3c Organisational environment PU
Hypothesis H4a EIS development processes PEOU
Hypothesis H4b EIS management processes PEOU
Hypothesis H4c Organisational environment PEOU
Hypothesis H5a Subjective norms PU
Hypothesis H5b Subjective roles PU
Hypothesis H5c Subjective values PU
Hypothesis H5d Subjective social situations PU
Hypothesis H6a Subjective norms PEOU
Hypothesis H6b Subjective roles PEOU
Hypothesis H6c Subjective values PEOU
Hypothesis H6d Subjective social situations PEOU
Hypothesis H7 PU ATU
Hypothesis H8 PEOU ATU
Hypothesis H9 ATU A
95
3.5.2.1 Habits on Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use
Triandis (1979) states that habits can be measured based on individual experience and the
ability in performing a given task. Prior research has shown that habits are a strong
predictor of behaviour. For example as cited in Thompson et al. (1991), Sugar (1967)
measured the attitudes, norms and habits of college students regarding cigarette smoking.
On separate occasions, the same students were offered a cigarette. The strongest single
predictor of behaviour was habit, followed by norms and then attitudes. In the EIS domain,
habits have been operationalised on the basis of EIS experience and the ability to use EIS
(Bergeron et al. 1995; Ditsa, 2002, 2003). In their study, Dambrot et al. (1988), indicate
that subjects who failed an assembly language programming course had significantly less
computer experience than those who did not fail the course. In his study of text editing,
Rosson (1983) explains that experience was positively correlated with the number of lines
edited per minute. Elkerton and Williges (1984) indicate in their work that experience
explains more variance in information search times than do other individual variables.
According to Zmud (1979) people’s level of education influences their successful use of
computer systems. In the training environment users who were more highly educated
significantly outperformed those who were less educated (Davies and Davies, 1990). It has
been documented that a higher level of education negatively relates to computer anxiety
whilst positively relating to favourable computer attitude. According to Lucas (1978), less
educated individuals have more negative attitudes to using computer technology than
individuals with better education. Education is effective in overcoming negative attitudes
towards computers (Harrison and Rainer, 1992). Hubona and Jones (2002) found in their
study of user acceptance of email that the length of time since the first use and the level of
96
education directly influence email usage behaviour. Education and length of time in using
information technology parallel individual experience and ability towards the adoption and
usage of new information systems such as EIS (Ikart and Ditsa, 2004a, 2004b).
In the present study, experience in CBIS, EIS and the ability to use EIS are used as a proxy
for habits. Executives who had been using organisational computer applications are seen to
have better attitudes in terms of user comprehension and participation (Raymond, 1988). In
the same vein, the length of use was positively related to satisfaction with decision support
systems (DSS) (Sanders and Courtney, 1985). Accordingly, it is hypothesised that:
H1a: Executives who have more years of experience in CBIS will have a higher perceived
usefulness of EIS than those who have limited years of experience in CBIS.
H1b: Executives who have more years of experience in EIS will have a higher perceived
usefulness of EIS than those who have limited years of experience in EIS.
H1c: Executives who have higher ability in using EIS will have a higher perceived usefulness
of EIS than those who have limited ability in using EIS.
H2a: Executives who have more years of experience in CBIS will have a higher perceived
ease of use of EIS than those who have limited years of experience in CBIS.
H2b: Executives who have more years of experience in EIS will have a higher perceived ease
of EIS than those who have limited years of experience in EIS.
H2c: Executives who have higher ability in using EIS will have a higher perceived ease of use
of EIS than those who have limited ability in using.
97
3.5.2.2 Facilitating Conditions on Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use
Triandis (1979) argues that behaviour will not occur if objective factors (facilitating
conditions) of the geographical environment prevent it. In the IS research domain,
facilitating conditions had been defined as support provided to users to enhance EIS use
(Thompson et al. 1991; Bergeron et al. 1995). This support could be hotline help, user
training and other assistance given to users to counter difficulties experienced by them
(Thompson et al. 1991; Bergeron et al. 1995). However, in this present study, facilitating
conditions are operationalised based on the degree of EIS development processes, EIS
management processes and the organisational environment (Ditsa, 2003). Triandis (1979)
argued that facilitating conditions would be positively related to behaviour. He further
explained that behaviour would not occur if objective factors (facilitating conditions) of the
situation prevent it.
Research efforts on EIS development (e.g., Watson et al. 1992) have sought to understand
the factors contributing to the cost-effectiveness of EIS projects in organisations. Findings
have linked this research to factors such as general top management support, committed
executive sponsorship, management of user resistance and expectations and users’
involvement in the development and linking of the EIS project to business objectives
(Watson et al. 1992; Nandhakumar and Jones, 1997; McBride, 1997). Also, research
efforts on EIS management have linked it to such factors as the established management
policies and rules for the systems, strategic data management on EIS, availability of user
support group on EIS and the availability and accessibility of information on EIS (Ditsa,
2002, 2003; Ikart and Ditsa, 2004a, 2004b). With regards to organisational environment
factors for an EIS adoption, findings from previous studies (McBride, 1997; Ditsa, 2003;
98
Ikart and Ditsa, 2004a, 2004b) have linked it to such factors as the dynamic change of the
business environment, influence of the organisational culture on EIS project, interaction of
the EIS with other systems between business units and, organisational commitment to wide
use of EIS. This suggests that EIS development processes, EIS management processes and
organisational environment will be positively related behaviour. Accordingly, it is
hypothesised that:
H3a: EIS development processes are positively related to the perceived usefulness of EIS.
H3b: EIS management processes are positively related to the perceived usefulness of EIS.
H3c: Organisational environment is positively related to the perceived usefulness of EIS.
H4a: EIS development processes will have a positive effect on the perceived ease of use of
EIS.
H4b: EIS management processes are positively related to the perceived ease of use of EIS.
H4c: Organisational environment will have a positive effect on the perceived ease of use of
EIS.
3.5.2.3 Social Factors on Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use
The internalisation of the reference group’s subjective culture and specific interpersonal
agreements that the individual has made with others in specific social situations, Triandis
(1979) argues, constitute the social factors that determine behavioural intention. He defines
subjective culture as the “human group characteristic way of viewing the human-made part
of the environment” (p. 208), consisting of ways of categorising experience such as values,
norms and roles and social situations. In the information systems research domain,
superior, peer and subordinate influences have been strong determinants of subjective
99
norms (Mathieson, 1991; Taylor and Todd, 1995; Venkatesh and Davies, 1996; Elkordy,
2000; Ditsa, 2002).
Mao (2002) investigated the IT usage behaviour of 80 end-users in four organisations at
two points in time based on the TAM model with the subjective norm as a construct of the
research model. It was implied that the subjective norms within the group play a more
important role in the long run. Referenced field studies (e.g., Lucas and Spitler, 1999;
Karahanna et al. 1999) in Mao (2002) found subjective norm to be a significant
determinant of IS usage. Also, Kwon and Chidambaram (1999) studied the patterns of
cellular phone adoption and usage in an urban setting. They found social pressure to have
positive outcome among professionals as a motivation to adopt and use the systems. Igbaria
(1993) studied microcomputer usage in organisations and found social norms to have
significant effects on system usage. In his studies, Rogers (1986), indicates the importance
of social norms on the rate of the diffusion of innovation.
In the social psychology domain, Lieberman (1956) cited in Westen (1996) examined how
workers’ attitudes change as a result of job promotions. He measured the attitudes of plant
workers and then reassessed them after some were promoted to foreman (a management
position) and some as shop stewards. Not surprisingly, after the promotions the foremen
were more pro-company than they had been as workers, whereas the shop stewards had
become more pro-union. More interestingly however, when the company later experienced
financial problems and had to demote the foremen to their previous rank-and-file positions
they returned to their original attitudes (Westen, 1996). This study shows that individual’s
attitude has a significant influence on his/her behaviour.
100
Triandis (1979) argued that a behaviour setting in social situations has time-place
coordinates, physical entities and processes and it evokes particular behaviours that
distinguish it from what is outside of it. It has structural features, and exists independently
of any particular individual’s perception of it. He sets an example of this as a classroom
with a particular location and time where members meet. The classroom has chairs, walls
and black boards and in it members act in certain ways including talking, listening, writing,
and taking notes. According to Triandis’ work, the “social situation in a behaviour setting is
a bounded, self-regulated and orderly system composed of replaceable human and non-
human components that interact in a synchronised fashion in carrying out an orderly
sequence of events such as the setting program” (Triandis, 1979, p. 214).
In EIS research studies, (e.g., Bergeron, 1995; Ditsa, 2003) social factors are defined as the
executive’s work group (peers, superior, subordinates, IS directors). In several studies,
social factors have shown strong influence on behaviour and utilisation of IS including EIS
(Thompson et al. 1991; Bergeron et al. 1995; Venkatesh et al. 2003). Thus, it is
hypothesised that:
H5a: Subjective norms positively relate to perceived usefulness.

H5b: Subjective roles positively relate to perceived usefulness.
H5c: Subjective values positively relate to perceived usefulness.
H5d: Subjective social situations positively relate to perceived usefulness.
H6a: Subjective norms positively relate to perceived ease of use.

H6b: Subjective roles positively relate to perceived ease of use.
H6c: Subjective values positively relate to perceived ease of use.
H6d: Subjective Social situations positively relate to perceived ease of use.
101
3.5.2.4 The Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use on Behaviour
Davies (1989) and Davies et al. (1992) identified two specific beliefs: PU and PEOU as
important user acceptance criteria of computer technology. PU is “the degree to which an
individual believes that using a particular system would enhance his or her job
performance” (p. 320), whilst, PEOU is “the degree to which an individual believes that
using a particular system would be free of physical and mental effort” (Davies, 1993
p.477). Several IS research theories (e.g., diffusion of innovation and motivation) are
consistent with the PEOU and PU (Davis, 1989; Davis et al. 1989; Davis, 2001). The
theory of motivation identifies extrinsic motivation as a class of motivation of an individual
to perform an activity (e.g., Davies et al. 1992). Extrinsic motivation refers to the
performance of an activity because it is perceived to be instrumental to achieving a value
outcome that is distinct from the activity itself. This includes, improvement in task
performance, pay, promotions, working conditions, status, quality of interpersonal relations
among peers, with superiors, and with subordinates and quality of technical supervision.
Intrinsic motivation on the other hand refers to the performance of an activity for no
apparent reason other than ease of use, ease of learning, flexibility and clarity of the IT
interface (Gefen and Straub, 2000). While the PU is consistent with extrinsic class of
motivation (Davies et al. 1992), PEOU is consistent with intrinsic class of motivation.
Research indicates that voluntary computer usage is driven to a large extent by PU (Davis,
et al. 1992). Robey (1979) studied industrial sales forces and observed that users’ expected
performance impacts of a computerised sales record-keeping system were positively
correlated with the measure of actual use of the system. Other MIS studies, (e.g., Davis,
1989; Mathieson, 1991; Davis et al. 1992; Adams et al. 1992; Davis, 1993; Taylor and
102
Todd, 1995; Venkatesh and Davis, 1996; Dishaw, and Strong, 1997; Kwon and
Chidambaram, 2000; Elkordy, 2000; Mao, 2002) have shown that PU and PEOU are strong
determinants of user acceptance and adoption of computer technology. Research on the
adoption of innovation has suggested a relevant role for PU and PEOU. According to
Rogers (1986), relative advantage and compatibility are important attributes of innovations
affecting adoption. Rogers suggested a number of sub-dimensions of relative advantage
including the degree of economic profitability, decrease in discomfort and saving in time.
Also, Davis (1989) argued that compatibility, relative advantage and complexity have the
most consistent significant relationships across a broad range of innovation types. PU
parallels relative advantage (Mao, 2002) and PEOU parallels compatibility and complexity
of innovations (Davis, 1989). This finding is consistent with the finding of Tornatzky and
Klein (1982) in their meta-analysis of innovation diffusion literature. Tornatzky and Klein
reviewed seventy-five articles and discovered more than thirty innovation characteristics.
They investigated ten major innovation characteristics including: compatibility, relative
advantage, complexity, communicability, cost, divisibility, profitability, social approval,
observability and trial ability. Tornatzky and Klein found compatibility, relative advantage
and complexity to strongly measure innovation attributes affecting innovation diffusion.
Swanson (1987) referenced in Davis (1989) introduced and tested a channel disposition
model for explaining the choice and use of information reports. The concept of channel
disposition is defined as the psychological cost-benefit utility assessment in which a user
implicitly trades off the benefits of a channel’s information against the associate cost of
access. This means, users of information would use information based on the assessment of
relative quality and accessibility, which parallel perceived usefulness, and perceived ease
of use. To measure information quality and access quality, Swanson performed exploratory
103
factor analysis. Five factor solutions were obtained with a factor corresponding with
information quality (Factor #3, “value”) and another one to access quality (Factor #2,
“accessibility”). An inspection of the items that load on these factors suggested a close
correspondence to perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. For instance, items
“important”, “relevant”, “useful” and “valuable” load strongly on the value dimension.
Therefore, value parallels perceived usefulness. Accessibility items including “easy”,
“unburdensome”, “controllable”, and “convenient” correspond with perceived ease of use.
The study agrees with the conceptual distinctions between the perceived usefulness and
perceived ease of use of computer information. Self-reported information channel use
correlated with value and accessibility dimensions (Davis, 1989). This analysis suggests
that both PU and PEOU relate strongly to behaviour via the attitude variable. Thus, it is
hypothesised that:
H7: Perceived usefulness positively relates to the attitudes towards using EIS.
H8: Perceived ease of use positively relates to attitudes towards using EIS.
3.5.2.5 Attitude Towards Using on Actual System Use
Fishbein (1979, p. 68) defined attitude as, “a function of beliefs”. Fishbein and Ajzen
(1975) distinguished between beliefs and attitudes and specified how external stimuli like
the objective feature of attitude object such as individuals, situation and social groups can
be causally linked to beliefs, attitudes and behaviour. According to Fishbein and Ajzen
(1975), individual beliefs about the behaviour, also known as the perceived consequence of
the behaviour, refers to an individual’s subjective likelihood that performing the behaviour
will lead to a certain outcome (p.233). On the other hand, attitudes toward the behaviours
104
are an effective evaluation of the behaviour. Attitude towards the behaviour is determined
by an expectancy-value model of beliefs (Fishbein, 1979, p.68) weighted by the evaluations
of the consequences (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975, p.233). In their study, they draw a
distinction between two separate attitude constructs such as attitude towards the object and
attitude towards the behaviour. The former refers to an individual’s effective evaluation of
a specified attitude object while the latter refers to an individual’s evaluation of a specified
behaviour that involves the object (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975; Davis, 1993). This paper
employs attitude towards the behaviour because research studies (e.g., Ajzen and Fishbein,
1980; Robey, 1979; Davis, 1993; Dishaw and Strong, 1997; Galletta and Malhotra, 1999;
Srivihok, 1999; Mao, 2002; Hubona and Jones, 2002; Lim, 2002; Venkatesh et al. 2003)
have shown that attitudes toward the behaviour relate more strongly to a specified
behaviour. It is therefore hypothesised that:
H9: There will be a significant difference in mean attitude towards using for actual
users of EIS and non-users of EIS.
105
3.6 Summary and Conclusions
Chapter 3 presented a brief discussion on theoretical perspectives such as task Technology
Fit Model, Contingency Model, Activity Theory and the Theory of Planned Behaviour used
in IS research studies to gain useful insights into the reaction of people towards computers
and factors enabling such reaction. The chapter also highlighted the limitations of these
theories in examining explicitly organisational contextual factors such as cultural and social
that might explain individual behaviour towards computers. As a result the chapter
established an alternative theoretical foundation based on TAM combined with selected
variables from Triandis’ framework for the present study.
Based on the theoretical foundation developed for the present study, the chapter examined
the importance of TAM variables such as their reliability and validity in IS research studies
(e.g., Davis, 1989; Davis et al. 1989) for the present study. The limitations of TAM (e.g.,
lack of antecedents such as cultural, social and subconscious habits) and the basis of TAM
in the IS research domain were discussed. Also, the chapter presented an overview of
Triandis’ framework as well as the selected variables such as habits, social factors and
facilitating conditions used as part of the theoretical foundation for the present study. The
importance of Triandis’ framework in the IS research domain in particular in explaining
user behaviour towards IS including EIS adoption has been examined in the chapter. The
limitations of Triandis’ model, in particular its complexity and limited usage in IS research,
were examined.
106
Moreover, the chapter presented several research studies based on TAM and a number of
research studies based on Triandis’ model as well as their backing for the use of both
models as theoretical foundations in IS research studies.
The chapter further presented the research model derived from TAM and selected variables
such as habits, social factors and facilitating conditions from Triandis’ framework. The
hypotheses to be tested have been derived from the research model and prior empirical
studies.
The purpose of this study is to investigate and examine the cultural, social, individual and
organisational critical success factors that might explain executives’ behaviour towards the
adoption and usage of EIS in the organisational setting. The results of the study is to assist
EIS developers and implementers to understand the core information processing
requirements for executives’ tasks for which they are building EIS in order to implement
appropriate system functionalities in supporting those tasks. The results will further provide
better understanding of the choices of the executives in using EIS. This kind of
enhancement of EIS design by the designers should encourage their adoption and usage at
the workplace and in particular at the strategic management level. The next chapter
examines the research design and methodology as well as the conceptualisation and
operationalisation of constructs.
107
CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
4.1 Introduction
In the previous chapter the theoretical foundation, research model and hypotheses of the
present study were discussed. In order to measure the constructs and to empirically test the
hypotheses derived from the research model, this chapter presents the research design, the
research methodology and the operational measures of construct defined. The chapter
begins with the research design and research methodology. Second, the conceptualisation
and operationalisation of major constructs are presented. Third, the rationale of the
questionnaire design is presented followed by the pre-pilot, pilot surveys and main study.
Finally, the test of non-response error is presented.
4.1.1 Definition of Research Design
Kerlinger (1986) defines research design as “a plan and structure of investigation so
conceived as to obtain answers to research questions”(p.280). According to Kerlinger, a
plan is an overall scheme or program of the research. Although research designs are
invented to enable the researcher to answer research question as validly, objectively,
accurately and economically as possible, research plans are deliberately and specifically
conceived and executed to bring empirical evidence to bear on a research problem
(Kerlinger, 1986). This research study addresses broadly the question of why executives
choose or choose not to use Executive information systems (EIS). Specifically, the study
investigates the following two research questions:
108
1. What are the social, cultural and organisational factors that can explain executives’
behaviour towards using EIS in an organisation?; and
executives of organisations?
The aspects of research design and methodology for the present study (see Table 4.1) were
guided by the work of Sekaran (1992), Babbie (2004). A detailed discussion of the aspects
of research design and methodology is provided as follows:
Table 4.1 General Aspects of Research Design and Methodology
Sections Research Design Methodology

4.1.2 Research Approach Quantitative
4.1.3 Research Paradigm Positivism
4.1.4 Nature of the Study Exploratory, Explanatory
4.1.5 Research Setting Field
4.1.6 Unit of Analysis Individuals
4.1.7 Type of Investigation Causal, Correlation
4.1.8 Time Horizon One – shot (Cross sectional)
4.1.9 Data collection Methods Mail Survey
4.1.2 Research Approach
Generally, two research approaches are used in social science research studies including IS.
These are quantitative and qualitative research approaches. Quantitative research involves
numerical representation and manipulation of observations for the purpose of describing
and explaining the phenomena that those observations reflect. Qualitative research on the
other hand involves non-numerical examination and interpretation of observations, for the
purpose of discovering the underlying meanings and patterns of relationships. Qualitative
109
research emphasises the processes and meaning that are not rigorously examined or
measured (if measured at all), in terms of quantity, amount, intensity or frequency. In
contrast, quantitative studies emphasise the measurement and analysis of causal
relationships between variables, not processes (Casebeer and Verhoef, 1997).
In quantitative research, variables and relationships are the central idea (Neuman, 2003).
Further, quantitative research is useful in providing detailed planning prior to data
collection and analysis, because it provides tools for measuring concepts, planning design
stages and for dealing with population or sampling issues. In addition, the quantitative
research approach utilises a deductive mode in testing the relationship between variables
and to provide evidence for or against pre-specific hypotheses (Neuman, 2003). This is
study employs quantitative research approach.
4.1.3 Research Paradigm
Kuhn (1970) defines a paradigm as “a set of values and techniques which is shared by
members of a scientific community, which acts as a guide or map, dictating the kinds of
problems scientists should address and the types of explanations that are acceptable to
them” (p.175). In simple terms, a paradigm is a set of propositions that explain how the
world is perceived, and it contains a world view, a way of breaking down the complexity of
the real world, telling researchers and social scientists in general what is important, what is
legitimate, and what is reasonable (Patton, 1990; Sarantakos, 2002). Paradigms allow
researchers to identify the relationship between variables and to specify appropriate
methods for conducting particular research (Guba and Lincoln, 1994). Five types of
paradigms such as positivism, realism, post-positivism, critical theory and constructivism

110
have been identified for social science research (Guba and Lincoln, 1994; Sarantakos,
2002). There are perceptions of reality, of the human beings, of the nature of science and of
the purpose of research distinctly held for each of these paradigms. These philosophical
assumptions, which relate to the underlying epistemology guiding the research.
Epistemology refers to assumptions about knowledge and how it can be obtained (Myers,
2004).
The positivism paradigm forms the basis of natural science and has influenced scholars of
management as a rational system. The positivism paradigm claims that one reality is driven
to a large extent by universal laws and truths. Positivist studies generally attempt to test
theory, in an attempt to increase the predictive understanding of the phenomena (Myers,
2004). Researchers adopting this paradigm claim to be objective and independent. The
problem solving process in the positivism paradigm commences with formulating
hypotheses that are subject to empirical testing through quantitative methods (Buttery and
Buttery, 1991). The quantitative method provides objective value free and unambiguous
interpretation of reality (Guba and Lincoln, 1994). In line with this, as reported by Myers
(2004), Orlikowski and Baroudi (1991) classified IS research as positivist if there was
evidence of formal propositions, quantifiable measures of variables, hypothesis testing, and
the drawing of inference about a phenomenon from the population sample. From the above
discussion, the present study is best classified as a positivism paradigm.
4.1.4 Nature of the Study
The three common nature of research used in social science research studies are
exploratory, explanatory and descriptive studies (Sekaran, 1992; Babbie, 2004).

111
Exploratory research is often employed to develop a preliminary understanding of some
phenomena. Explanatory research is carried out to discover and report relationships among
different aspects of the phenomena. A descriptive study is conducted to describe the
precise measurement and reporting of the characteristics of the phenomena under
investigation.
The primary purpose of the present study is to investigate the social, cultural, individual
and organisational variables that can explain executives’ behaviour towards the use of EIS
in an organisation. Therefore the nature of the study is both exploratory and explanatory.
4.1.5 Research Setting
Four research settings have been identified for empirical IS studies namely: case studies,
field studies, field tests and laboratory studies (Sekaran, 1992). In case studies researchers
systematically gather in-depth information on a single entity using a variety of data
gathering methods. Field studies allow researchers to establish cause and effect
relationships using the same natural environment in which the employees normally
function. Further, research done to establish cause and effect relationships beyond the
shadow of a doubt require the creation of an artificial, contrived environment in which all
the extraneous factors are strictly controlled. Also, subjects are carefully selected by the
researcher to respond to certain manipulated stimuli. This type of research setting is
referred to as a laboratory experiment.
Research based on organisational and individual variables is known as field study, which is
the research method employed by the present study. A field study setting enables data to
112
be gathered on a number of ongoing, uncontrolled situations (Sekaran, 1992). Also, a field
study is deemed to be the most economical method in examining complex phenomena. In
addition, field studies produce relatively strong effects of independent variables on
dependent variables and thus enhance the statistical conclusion (Ditsa, 2004).
4.1.6 Unit of Analysis
According to Babbie (2004) the unit of analysis consists of “those things that we examine
in order to create summary descriptions of all such units and explain differences among
them” (p. 95). The unit of analysis must be appropriately described for the conceptual and
methodological operationalisation of the research. An inappropriate unit of analysis may
influence the researcher to choose erroneous tools, distorting the results and confounding
the conclusions of the study (Babbie, 2004). The units of analysis primarily studied in
social research are individuals, two-person interactions, groups or organisations, and social
artifacts (Sekaran, 1992; Babbie, 2004). In studying human behaviour, three facets of
human behaviour, namely the actor or actors engaging, behaviour-towards-an-object and a
setting or context should be taken into consideration because actors, behaviour and objects
exist in contexts (Ditsa, 2004).
The present study investigates the factors such as social, cultural, individual and
organisational variables that can influence executives’ behaviour to use EIS in
organisational settings. Executives are therefore individuals, organisations are contexts and
EIS are objects (Khalil and Ekordy, 2005). Behaviour is influenced by habits, social factors
and facilitating conditions in an organisational context (Triandis, 1979). Thus, the result to
113
be derived from this study will have potential significant implications to an organisation as
a whole, apart from enriching the IS literature regarding EIS adoption.
4.1.7 Type of Investigation
Two types of investigations, causal and correlation, are used in social research to provide
answers to the research questions (Sekaran, 1992). While causal investigation is used to
definitively establish the cause and effect relationships of the research problem, correlation
investigation is used to identify important variables associated with the problem. Attempts
are often made to establish cause and effect relationships in correlation studies through the
application of regression analyses and justifications of results.
The research problem that the present study seeks to provide a solution to is: The question
of why executives choose or choose not to use EIS. Specifically, the present study
investigates the following two research questions.
1. What are the social, cultural and organisational factors that can explain executives’
behaviour towards using EIS in an organisation?; and
2. What are the relative importance of these factors in determining EIS usage by
executives of organisation?
Based on the research problem and research questions identified above, the present study
seeks to employ both causal and correlation investigations.
114
4.1.8 Time horizon
Time is one of the most important factors in social science research. Researchers have an
option of two horizons: cross sectional or longitudinal studies to choose from (Sekaran,
1992; Babbie, 2004). In a cross-sectional study, the unit of analysis is observed at one point
in time. In other words, data for the study are gathered just once, perhaps over a period of
days or weeks or months, in order to answer the research question (Khalil and Elkordy,
2005). The cross-sectional studies are also referred to as one-shot studies (Sekaran, 1992).
The longitudinal studies on the other hand allow the unit of analysis to be investigated over
a long period of time (Sekaran, 1992; Babbie, 2004). A heavy burden in terms of time and
money typically precludes researchers from conducting longitudinal studies. Also,
unanticipated changes in the unit of analysis and the research environment influence the
generalisability of the research (Babbie, 2004).
Judging from the above discussions, a cross-sectional or one-shot study is most feasible and
appropriate for the present study. The present study seeks to explain individual’s behaviour
towards the use of EIS but will not attempt to predict the behaviour. For this reason, a
longitudinal study is not feasible for this study.
4.1.9 Data Collection Methods
Survey questionnaires can be administered through face-to-face, self-administered
questionnaires, telephone survey methods, focus groups or home delivery survey (Babbie,
2004). These methods are explained as follows:
115
o Face-to-face – The process to administer survey questionnaire by interview with the
respondent in a face-to-face encounter.
o Self-administered questionnaires – In self-administered questionnaires respondents
are requested to complete the questionnaires themselves. Mail survey is the most
common form of self-administered questionnaires. Mail survey is administered by
mailing the questionnaires through the mail, and/or by personal delivery to
respondents. According to Dillman (2000), mail survey also includes electronic
mail, web and interactive voice response (IVR).
o Telephone survey – In this method the researcher reads the survey questionnaire
over the telephone to the respondent for his/her verbal responses to the
questionnaires.
o Focus group survey – This method enables the researcher to administer a
questionnaire to a group of 7-to-8 respondents gathered at the same place at the
same time. An example is a survey of a group of students at the school campus.
o Home delivery questionnaire – In this method a research worker delivers the
questionnaire to the home of sample respondents and explains the study.
Although selecting a particular method depends on the research objectives, time and
financial resources of the study (Kerlinger, 1986), mail survey is probably the most suitable
method to collect original data from a sample too large to observe directly (Babbie, 2004).
116
The primary method of data collection for the present study is mail survey questionnaires.
The mail survey questionnaire is chosen for a number of reasons. First, there have been
very few studies on individual behaviour towards EIS in Australia. So, one aim of this
study is to collect data to provide a broad picture of individual behaviour towards EIS
adoption and usage in the Australian organisational setting. Hence with such a large
population mail survey is considered most appropriate (Babbie, 2004). The present study
uses mail survey as an economical and efficient way of covering a study population that is
geographically dispersed across Australia.
Second, given the size of Australian states and territories and response rates required for
statistical analysis, mail survey research is preferred to face-to-face survey or telephone
survey. Third, data collection by either telephone, face-to-face or home delivery methods
was considered infeasible due to the expected associated high costs in terms of both
financial and time required to complete the survey in such a large population sample.
Fourth, data collection based on focus group was ruled out because such a method can be
less feasible.
Further, because a major part of the study is concerned with the respondents’ perceptions of
EIS and how these perceptions influence their behaviour towards EIS utilisation, a mail
survey questionnaire in which respondents indicate their perceptions of these systems is
considered appropriate. Moreover, the busy schedules of the population sample respondents
such as executives and other top officers of Australian organisations makes any utilisation
of face-to-face, telephone survey, home delivery questionnaire and/or focus group methods
unachievable.
117
4.1.9.1 The Importance of Mail Survey
There are many shortcomings associated with mail surveys. One is that the response rate is
normally low. In the case of requesting senior executives to answer a mail survey
questionnaire, the response rate may be even poorer than usual because executives are often
busy with corporate activities. Also, a mail survey hinders researcher’s ability to collect
detailed information that allows in-depth analysis. Researchers do not have control over
administration of the mail survey questionnaire (Kerlinger, 1986; Dillman, 2000; Babie,
2004). In a mail survey the researcher is unable to interact with the respondents. In
addition, the researcher is unsure whether the intended respondent is the actual respondent
and the respondent may find the process too impersonal (Galpin et al. 1984; Malhotra et al.
1996).
Generally, it is agreed (e.g., Dillman, 1978; Babbie, 2004) that the gains in mail survey
surpass the shortcomings. According to Babbie (2004), executives prefer mail survey to
other methods of data collection due to their busy schedules. Further, mail survey
minimises the costs of research in terms of financial resource and time resource (Ditsa,
2004). Also, it is possible for the researcher to administer a mail survey for the population
sample studied and to provide respondents with anonymity for open responses.
Additionally, a mail survey can help the researchers to increase the number of sample
respondents through follow-up mail-outs and to collect data on particular characteristics
that are of interest (Ivancevich and Mattheson, 1990). Finally, the mail survey
questionnaires are uniform, consistent and stable; these characteristics make it possible for
the respondents to complete the questionnaire at their own convenience (Sarantakos, 2002;
118
Babbie, 2004). Mail survey is likely to have less researcher bias than interview. Therefore,
there is higher perceived anonymity of respondents and less vulnerability to social
desirability (Zikmund, 2003).
4.1.9.2 The Social Exchange Theory and Mail Survey
Dillman (1978) views the process of sending a questionnaire to prospective respondents,
having them to complete and return the questionnaire, as a special case of “social
exchange”. Based on social exchange theory, Dillman (1978) argues that an individual is
most likely to answer a questionnaire when the perceived cost of answering the
questionnaire is minimised, the perceived reward is maximised and the respondent trusts
that the expected reward will be delivered. The associated costs to the respondent can be
reduced in many ways such as making the questionnaire easy to read and fill out, packaging
the questionnaire to look slim, asking clear, interesting and concise questions, and
including prepaid return envelopes. Social rewards can be provided to the respondents in
various forms such as explaining how the study would be useful to the respondents,
expressing gratitude and offering copies of the research outcomes. Trust can be established
through sponsorship by trusted authorities, use of letterhead stationery from legitimate
sponsors and inclusion of names of prominent members of trusted authorities.
Exchange theory claims that the concepts of costs, rewards, and trust interact and may
offset each other. For instance, an attempt to reduce costs such as an easy questionnaire
may be offset by failure to offer rewards such as not explaining the benefits of the research
study. As explained by Dillman (1978) and supported by Babbie (2004) whether people
actually do respond is based on their overall evaluation of the survey instead of an isolated
119
reaction to specific aspects of the survey. This means, every aspect of the survey instrument
must be planned in detail and integrated completely to establish an overall perception in the
respondents, which will encourage a significant response.
On the basis of social exchange theory Dillman developed a set of survey procedures that
can be applied for higher response rates. The procedure is collectively known as “Total
Design Method” (TDM), which consists of two parts as follows:
(a) Identify and design each aspect of the survey process that may affect response in a
way that maximises response rates;
(b) Organise the survey effort in a way that assures that the design intentions are carried
out in complete detail.
TDM provides highly specific guidelines for developing or constructing survey
questionnaires and implementing the survey. For questionnaire development or
construction, detailed instructions govern the use of paper, typefaces, page layout and
sequence of questions. For survey implementation, comprehensive rules are provided on
the content and personalisation of the cover letter, signing of the letter, the mail out
package and the follow-up appeals to non-respondents. TDM thus, relies on a theoretical
based view of why potential participants do not respond to questionnaires and a well-
confirmed belief that attention to administrative details is important to conducting a
successful survey. The present study used TDM guidelines in constructing the
questionnaire and administering the mail survey.
120
4.2 Conceptualisation and Operationalisation of Variables
The conceptual framework of the present study consists of seven constructs (see Figure
3.4). These constructs include habits (H), facilitating conditions (FC), social factors (SF),
perceived usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEOU), attitudes toward using (ATU)
and actual system use (A). The independent variables are H, FC, SF, PU, PEOU, and ATU.
The dependent variables are PEOU, PU, ATU and A. Although A is a dependent variable
of ATU, ATU is a dependent variable of PEOU and PU. Also, PEOU and PU are
dependent variables of H, FC and SF. Table 3.3 of Chapter 3 presented a summary of the
interrelationship of the hypotheses in the research model. Further, Section 3.4.1 and Figure
3.4 of the research model provided definitions of construct variables.
4.2.1 Definitions of key Terms
Before any conceptualisation and operationalisation of construct variables can be initiated,
it is important for the researcher to identify the concepts relevant to the problem (Zikmund,
2003; Neuman, 2003). This subsection (4.2.1) presents definitions of key terms such as
conceptualisation, concepts, operations and measures.
Conceptualisation is the process of taking a construct and redefining it and giving it a
conceptual or theoretical meaning (Neuman, 2003). To put simply, conceptualisation is the
process that involves the identification and clarification of a conceptual idea that people
have about the nature of things or a process of coming into agreement about what terms
mean (Neuman, 2003; Babbie, 2004). Concepts (or constructs) are generalised ideas,
thoughts about a class of objects, attributes or processes expressed as symbols or words

121
(Zikmund, 2003; Babbie, 2004). A concept is born through observations, experience and
mental images or conceptions (Babbie, 2004). Also, concepts express an abstraction formed
by generalisation of particulars such as weight (Kerlinger, 1986), and they form the
building blocks of a theory.
A theory is a systematic way of organising and explaining observations that include a set of
propositions or statements about the relations among various phenomena. In research,
theory provides a framework for the researcher’s specific hypotheses (Westen, 1996).
Variable is any phenomenon or concept that can change or vary from one situation to
another or differ from one person to another. In research, the term variable is used as a
synonym for the construct or property being studied (Cooper and Emory, 1995). Also,
researchers measure variables they believe have important connections with each other
(Westen, 1996). In the context of the present study, variable is a symbol to which values
are assigned (Kerlinger, 1986). In research studies (e.g., Bergeron et al. 1995) there are
situations where the measurement for a variable is determined by a measurement of a
number of variables. For instance to determine the measure for the subjective norms of
user adoption of EIS, the present study considers the influence of individual’s colleagues,
superior and IS director. Thus, these items determining a measure of another variable are
referred to as sub-variables or variable items. The variables for the present study are
presented in Chapter 3 section 3.4.1 and Figure 3.4. The sub-variables or variable items are
in the study survey questionnaire.
While conceptualisation provides an academic clarification of concepts to be measured,
operationalisation provides meaning to a concept by turning an abstract concept into a

122
concrete variable as defined by some sets of actions or operations (Westen, 1996).
Operationalisation links conceptual definitions of a specific set of measurement techniques
or procedure (Neuman, 2003). While measurement is a careful and deliberate observation
of the real world for the purpose of describing objects and events in terms of the attributes
composing a variable (Babbie, 2004), a measure is a concrete way of assessing a variable;
it is a way of bringing an abstract concept down to earth (Westen, 1996). A measure
determines what variable amount an object possesses (Emory and Cooper, 1991). The
measurement process of constructs commences with conceptualisation, followed by
operationisation and then the application of measurement tools.
To establish a good measure of construct variables Neuman (2000) recommends the
following guides to social science researchers:
o Remembering the conceptual definition – Understanding the underlying principle
for a measure to match the specific conceptual definition of the variable;
o Keeping an open mind – Displaying creativity and constantly seeking better
measures;
o Borrowing from others – Using good ideas based on prior studies for the measure
and providing modifications to the measure where applicable;
o Anticipating difficulties – Having advance thoughts of logical and practical
problems that may arise in measuring variables of interest and how to avoid such
problems with careful foresight and planning;
o Not forgetting unit of analysis – Ensuring that measures used fit the unit of analysis
and allow for generalisation to the universe of interest.
These recommendations have been considered in the operationalisation of construct
variables for the present study.

123
4.2.2 Reliability and Validity
The two main criteria for testing the goodness of measures are reliability and validity.
Validity tests how well an instrument that is developed measures the particular concept it is
supposed to measure. Reliability tests how consistently a measuring instrument measures
whatever concept it is measuring. In other words, validity is concerned with whether we are
measuring the right concept and reliability is concerned with stability and consistency in
measurement. Reliability and validity attest to the rigor applied to the research studies
(Sekaran, 1992).
A measure is reliable to the extent that it provides a consistent set of scores to represent an
attribute (Heneman and Judge, 2003). Reliability is a necessary but not sufficient condition
for validity (Kerlinger, 1986). A construct is considered reliable if its indicators explain the
majority of the construct’s variation (Ahire et al. 1996).
The stability of measures and the internal consistency of measures are used to assess
reliability of measures. The stability of a measure is the ability of a measure to remain
stable overtime; despite uncontrollable testing conditions. The state of the respondents
themselves is an indication of its stability and low vulnerability to changes in the situation.
Two tests used in testing the stability of measures are test-retest reliability and parallel-
form reliability. The reliability coefficient obtained with repetition of an identical measure
on a second occasion is known as test-retest reliability. That is, the tendency of the test to
yield relatively similar scores for the same individual over time. However, parallel-form
reliability occurs when responses on two comparable sets of measures tapping the same
construct are highly correlated with minimal error variance.

124
The internal consistency of measure is an indication of the homogeneity of the items in the
measure that tap the construct. In other words, the items should “hang together as a set” and
be capable of independently measuring the same concept such that the respondents attach
the same overall meaning to each of the items. Internal consistency can be tested through
interitem consistency and interrater consistency.
Interrater Reliability is the extent to which several raters agree on their interpretations of
responses. It addresses the consistency of the implementation of the rating system and the
relationship between the judgments that at least two raters make independently about a
phenomenon. Also, it is relevant when the data are obtained through projective tests.
Interitem consistency is a test of internal consistency. A measure is internally consistent if
several ways of asking the same question yield similar results. The Cronbach alpha is a
general formula for scale reliability based on internal consistency. The Cronbach alpha
coefficient was used in estimating the internal consistency of constructs for this study.
Although 0.7 has been suggested as an acceptable cut-off (Hair et al. 1995), a value greater
than 0.6 is regarded as a satisfactory level of internal consistency of measure (Nunnally,
1978; Ven de Van and Ferry, 1980, Malhotra et al. 1996; Hair et al. 2000).
As defined previously, validity is the degree to which an instrument measures the attribute
or construct it intends to measure (Heneman and Judge, 2003). Validity tests can be
grouped into three broad headings: content validity, criterion-related validity and construct
validity (Sekaran, 1992).
125
Content validity ensures that the measure includes an adequate and representative set of
items that would tap the concept. To put it differently, content validity is a function of how
well the dimensions and elements of a concept have been delineated. Face validity is a
basic and a very minimum index of content validity. Face validity ensures that experts in
the field of area of research study agree that the instrument used measures what it is
suggested to measure (Sekaran, 1992).
Criterion-Related Validity is established when the measure differentiates the individual on
a criterion it is expected to predict. This is obtained by establishing concurrent validity or
predictive validity. Concurrent validity is established when the scale discriminates
individuals who are known to be different; that is, they should score differently on the test.
Predictive validity on the other hand, is the ability of the test to differentiate among
individuals as to the future criterion (Sekaran, 1992).
Construct validity testifies to how well the result obtained from the use of the measure fits
with the theories around which the test is designed. This is assessed through convergent
and discriminant validity. Convergent validity is established when the scores obtained by
two different instruments measuring the same concepts are highly correlated. Discriminant
validity is established when, based on theory, two different variables are predicted to be
uncorrelated, and the scores obtained by measuring them are indeed empirically found to be
so (Sekaran, 1992).
Another kind of validity test used in research is factorial validity. Factorial validity is
concerned with whether the items measured in a test formed distinct constructs (Davis,
126
2001; Francis, 2004). The test results of factorial validity by factor analysis for distinct
scale of constructs variables are presented in Chapter 5, section 5.6 – 5.6.4.
The validity measures explained above were used in the conceptualisation and
operationalisation of construct variables of the present study.
4.2.3 Measurement of Variables
Chapter 3, section 3.2 presents some highlights of the main concepts underlying the TAM
and, section 3.2.1 presents the definitions of TAM constructs used for the study. Section
3.3 of Chapter 3 also presents key constructs underlying Triandis’ framework and section
3.3.1 presents key definitions of selected variables from Triandis’ framework such as
habits, social factors and facilitating conditions used for the present study. This section
(4.2.3) explains the operationalisation of the TAM and selected Triandis’ framework
variables for the present study.
The measurement scales for habits, facilitating conditions and social factors are based on
Triandis’ suggested operationalisation of these constructs in his framework. It is also
guided by previous empirical studies on EIS (e.g., Thompson et al. 1991; Bergeron et al.
1995), which utilised Triandis’ framework. The measurement scales for the perceived
usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEOU), attitude towards using (ATU) and actual
system use (A) constructs are drawn from the work of several researchers (e.g., Fishbein
and Azjen, 1975; Fishbein, 1979; Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980; Davis, 1989; Davis et al.
1989; Davis, 1993; Mao, 2002; Venkatesh et al. 2003). The measurement scales used for
these constructs are explained below. To facilitate the response rate (Wiersma, 2000), a
127
five-point Likert scale is used in the study throughout, except where otherwise stated. In
addition to consulting prior studies, a qualified statistician (SC)1 appointed by the
University of Wollongong (UOW) for research higher degrees (RHD) was regularly
consulted, in particular, during the development of the scales in the questionnaire to ensure
the reliability and validity of measurement scales. Table 4.2 shown below presents the
results of the reliability test measure of constructs and variables for the study.
4.2.3.1 Habits
According to Triandis (1979) habits can be measured by individual’s past experience with
an act and the ability of the individual to perform the given act. Previous IS research
studies found computer experience to relate very well to successful implementation of end-
user computing (Rivard and Huff, 1988) and personal DSS application (Bergeron and
Raymond, 1992). According to Martin et al. (1973), computer users learn experimentally.
Moreover, other IS studies (e.g., Zmud, 1979; Rosson, 1983) also found that user
experience relates to successful IS use (Lucas, 1978; Zmud, 1979; Rosson, 1983; Elkerton
and Williges, 1984; Hubona and Jones, 2002). Accordingly, habits are measured based on
the number of years of experience that executives have had in EIS. The research question
posed to assess the number of years of executives’ experience in EIS was as follows:
How many years have you personally been using EIS for your work? (Please tick one)
⁭0–4 ⁭5-9 ⁭ 10 – 14 ⁭ 15 – 19 ⁭ 20 or more years
The same question was posed to assess their experience in computer-based information
systems prior to using EIS because experience in CBIS would lead to experience in EIS.
1
Qualified Statistician (SC) refers to statistician appointed by the University of Wollongong (UOW) for
research higher degree (RHD).
128
Ditsa (2003) classified computer users into: novice users, knowledgeable intermittent
(casual users) and frequent (expert users) based their ability to use the systems. Thus, the
ability to use EIS was measured by assessing the executive’s class. The question posed was
as follows:
The types of EIS users can be categorized as follows. Please tick the box which best represents you
Novice casual (intermittent) user ⁭

Novice frequent user ⁭
Expert (knowledgeable) casual user ⁭
Expert (knowledgeable) frequent user ⁭
4.2.3.2 Facilitating conditions
Triandis argued that behaviour will not occur if the objective conditions of the situation
prevent it. Triandis (1979) defines this construct as, “objective factors ‘out there’ in the
environment, which several judges or observers can agree make an act easy to do” (p. 205).
In this study, this construct was measured based on three variables. The first variable
measures the degree to which the EIS development process in an organization facilitates
the use of EIS by their executives. It uses similar questions to those used by prior studies
(e.g., Nandhakumar, 1996; Nandhakumar and Jones, 1997) with five-point Likert scales.
The second variable measures the degree to which the EIS management processes facilitate
executives’ use of the systems using similar questions used by Nandhakumar and Jones
(1997) and Ditsa (2003) with five point Likert scales. The third variable measures the
degree to which an organisational environment facilitates the use of EIS by the executives.
It uses similar five questions derived from previous studies (e.g., Ditsa, 2003), with five-
point Likert scales. The scales were found to be reliable with Cronbach’s alpha equal to
0.76, 0.74 and 0.70 respectively. The questions posed for the three variables were as
follows:
129
1. The following aspects of the EIS Strongly Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly
development processes (e.g., Disagree Agree
documentation, training & development) in
my organization encourage me to use EIS:
The EIS project with executive 1 2 3 4 5
sponsorship
My involvement in EIS development 1 2 3 4 5
phases
The availability of relevant resources other
than technical
The spread of use following the 1 2 3 4 5
implementation
Follow-ups carried out immediate after the
implementation 1 2 3 4 5
Communication patterns between the 1 2 3 4 5
developers and I in the development phases
2. The following aspects of the EIS

management processes in my organization
encourage me to use EIS:
The established management policies and
rules for the systems 1 2 3 4 5
Strategic data management on EIS 1 2 3 4 5
Available users’ support group on EIS 1 2 3 4 5
The availability and accessibility of

information on the systems 1 2 3 4 5
3. The following aspects of my organization

The dynamic changes of the business 1 2 3 4 5
environment
The culture of my organization on EIS 1 2 3 4 5
The interaction of the EIS with other
system between business units 1 2 3 4 5
The influence of powers and politics on 1 2 3 4 5
EIS
My organisation’s commitment to wide use
of EIS 1 2 3 4 5
4.2.3.3 Social factors
The reference group’s subjective culture of the social factors influences the individual
notion of desirable behaviour (Triandis, 1979). In the present context this refers to the
influence of the executive’s work group such as, peers, superiors, subordinates and IS
130
directors upon his/her use of the systems. According to Triandis, subjective culture
variables include norms, roles, and values. Moreover, the social situation of the group
evokes particular behaviour. In the present study this construct is operationised through
these four variables (norms, roles, values and social situations). The scales and procedures
for the variables were adapted from previous studies (e.g., Triandis et al. 1968; Kohn,
1969; Bergeron et al. 1995).
The first variable measures the subjective norms (self-instructions to do what is perceived
to be correct and appropriate by the work group), by obtaining users’ assessment of the
influence of the work group upon their behaviour in general using four 5-point Likert scales
(-2: strongly disagree, +2: strongly agree). This score was then multiplied by evaluating
their probability that the work group wants them to use EIS, using four 5-point Likert
scales (0: strongly disagree, 4: strongly agree). The scales were obtained from Ajzen and
Fishbein (1980), and adapted to the EIS environment (e.g., Bergeron et al. 1995).
The second variable measures the subjective roles (an expected correct behaviour from
executive users of EIS) using four 5-point Likert scales. The third variable measures the
subjective values (the broad tendencies of the executives’ work group to prefer a certain
state of affairs over others in relation to EIS usage) using four 5-point Likert scales. The
final variable measures the subjective social situations of the workplace setting by
obtaining executives’ assessment of their interpersonal relationships with their peers,
superiors, subordinates, the IS directors and the EIS support group in relation to EIS usage.
This is measured using five 5-point Likert scales. The scales were adapted from prior
studies (e.g., Bergeron et al. 1995), as they appear reliable with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.81,
131
0.9 and 0.86 (Bergeron et al. 1995). The questions posed for the measurement of the four
variables were as follows:
1. The following people think that I Strongly Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly
should use EIS: Disagree Agree
My colleagues 1 2 3 4 5
My superior 1 2 3 4 5
The IS director 1 2 3 4 5
My subordinates 1 2 3 4 5
2. Generally, I want to do what the

following people want me to:
3. By virtue of my role in my
organization the following people
expect that I will use EIS:
4. The social working relationships Strongly Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly

between me and the following people Disagree Agree
EIS support team 1 2 3 4 5
132
4.2.3.4 Perceived Usefulness (PU) and Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU)
Among the variables that can influence IS usage; prior research (e.g., Davis, 1989; Davis et
al. 1989) suggests two determinants as of vital importance. They suggest that people tend to
use or not use information systems to the extent they believe that it will assist them to
perform their job better. They refer to this variable as PU. Second, even if system users
believe that a given system is useful they may at the same time, believe that the system is
too hard to use and that the performance benefits of usage are outweighed by the effort of
using the system (Davis, 1989). In other words, in addition to usefulness, usage is theorised
to be influenced by PEOU. In the IS context including EIS, PU can be defined as, “the
degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would enhance his or her
job performance ” (Davis, 1989, p. 320). In contrast, PEOU refers “to the degree to which a
person believes that using a particular system will be free of effort” (Davis, 1989, p. 320).
In this study the PU and PEOU variables are operationalised by obtaining users’
assessment of their PU and PEOU of EIS based on twelve similar items, six items for each
developed, refined and streamlined by Davis (1989) with 7-point Likert scales. Thus, PU
and PEOU are adapted from IS studies (e.g., Davis, 1989; Davis et al. 1989; Matheison,
1991; Venkatesh and Davis, 1996; Venkatesh and Davis, 2000; Venkatesh et al. 2003).
Prior study (e.g., Davis, 1989) has demonstrated the validity and reliability of PU and
PEOU with Cronbach alpha of 0.98 and 0.94 respectively (Davis, 1989). However, the
original 7-point Likert scales have been adjusted to 5-point scale, with one being the
negative end of the scale and five being the positive end of the scale. The adjustment was
based on the advice of the SC and pre-test results. The following questions were posed to
assess the PU and PEOU of EIS.
133
1. Perceived usefulness (e.g., usage outcomes)
I believe my use of EIS will have the Strongly Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly
following result: Disagree Agree
Increase my performance in the
organization 1 2 3 4 5
Provide my organization with a
competitive edge 1 2 3 4 5
Provide me with greater level of 1 2 3 4 5
control over our activities
Increase the quality of my decision- 1 2 3 4 5
making
Provide me with information to 1 2 3 4 5
detect problems
Increase the speed of my decision- 1 2 3 4 5
making
2. Perceived ease of use (e.g., user-friendliness, clarity, effortless)
Based on my knowledge of EIS Strongly Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly

disagree agree
Learning to operate EIS is easy for 1 2 3 4 5
me
I find EIS flexible to interact with 1 2 3 4 5
I find it easy to get EIS to do what 1 2 3 4 5
I want it to do
It is easy for me to become skilful 1 2 3 4 5
at using EIS
I find EIS easy to use 1 2 3 4 5
My interactions with EIS are clear 1 2 3 4 5
and understandable
4.2.3.5 Attitude towards using (ATU)
Although the distinction between beliefs and attitudes has often been overlooked in IS
studies (Davis, 1993), Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) draw the distinction between beliefs and
attitudes. Whereas a person’s belief of behaviour (the perceived consequence of the
behaviour) refers to his/her subjective likelihood that performing the behaviour will lead to
a specified outcome (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975, p. 233), attitude towards the behaviour is
an affective evaluation of the behaviour.
134
Attitude towards using is measured using five standard 5-point semantic differential scales
for operational attitude towards behaviour: “All things considered, my using EIS in my job
is Good – Bad; Wise – Foolish; Favourable – Unfavorable; Beneficial – Harmful; and
Positive – Negative” on 5-point scale with midpoint labeled “Neutral”. Although, Azjen
and Fishbein, (1980) suggested five standard 7-point semantic differential rating scales, the
scales have been adjusted to 5 based on the advice of the SC and the outcome of pre-
testing. Attitude measurement is therefore adapted from prior IS studies (e.g., Robey,
1979; Malhotra and Galletta, 1999; Hubona and Jones, 2002; Mao, 2002). The question
posed to assess ATU was as follows:
1. All things being equal, my using EIS in my job is:
Bad 1 2 3 4 5 Good
Foolish 1 2 3 4 5 Wise
Unfavourable 1 2 3 4 5 Favourable
Harmful 1 2 3 4 5 Beneficial
Negative 1 2 3 4 5 Positive
4.2.3.6 Actual system use - Behaviour
The measurement for actual system use was adapted from prior studies, many of them
having established the reliability and validity of this construct (e.g., Davis, 1989;
Mathieson, 1991; Venkatesh and Davis 1996; Moore and Benbasat, 1991). This construct
was measured in terms of the frequency of system use (‘how often’). A similar measure
was used in research on TAM (e.g., Davis, 1989; Davis et al. 1989; Malhotra and Galletta,
135
1999; Hubona and Jones, 2002). Obtaining users’ assessment of the number of times they
use EIS in a week and/or their frequency of using EIS was the measure used. The Likert
scales used for the measurement were adapted from Davis (1989) and other prior IS
research studies (e.g., Adam et al. 1992; Davis, 1993; Mao, 2002; Hubona and Jones, 2002;
Venkatesh et al. 2003). The scales have been adjusted from 7-point to 5-point scales with
one being the negative end of the scale and five being the positive end of the scale based on
the advice of the SC and pre-testing results. The question posed to obtain actual system use
by executives was as follows:
On average, how many times do you use EIS in a week? (Please tick one)
Not at all ⁭
Less than once a week ⁭
2 or 3 times a week ⁭
Several times a week ⁭
Several times each day ⁭
Table 4.2 presents the results of the reliability test measure of constructs and variables for
the study with Cronbach alpha greater than 0.65 up to maximum of 0.88. This was
expected because all the constructs and variables used in this study were based on well-
established instruments with significant reliability from prior research (Davis, 1989,
Thompson et al. 1991; Bergeron et al. 1995, Ditsa, 2003). This suggests that the scales
used for this study have high internal consistency and therefore should be considered
reliable. Also, Tables A4.1 – A4.10 of Appendix A4 present inter-items correlation for all
the scales noted above.
136
Table 4.2: Reliability Coefficients of scales (Cronbach’s Alpha) for Scaled Variables
used in the Study. Scale = 5 point Likert Scale
Variables Number No of Cronbach

of items cases Alpha
EIS Development Processes 6 121 0.7316
EIS Management Processes 4 121 0.7505
Organisational Environment 5 121 0.8012
Facilitating Conditions 15 121 0.8641
Subjective Norms 4 121 0.6610
Subjective Roles 4 121 0.7506
Subjective Values 4 121 0.7410
Subjective social situations 5 121 0.8225
Social Factors 17 121 0.8820
Perceived Usefulness 6 121 0.7378
Perceived Ease of Use 6 121 0.8330
Attitude towards using 5 121 0.8835
4.3 Questionnaire Design
Sekaran, (1992) defines a questionnaire as “a preformulated written set of questions to
which respondents record their answers, usually within rather closely defined alternatives.
A questionnaire is an efficient data-collection mechanism when the researcher knows
exactly what is required and how to measure the variables of interest” (p. 200).
Two forms of questions often used by researchers to pose questions in survey
questionnaires are open-ended versus closed questions (Babbie, 2004).
Open-ended questions allow the respondents to answer the questions in any form they
choose. For example, in an open-ended question the respondent may be asked to state five
things that are interesting and challenging in his/her job (Sekaran, 1992). Or, the
respondent may be asked, “what do you feel is the most important issue facing the United
States today” (Babbie, 2004, p. 245).
137
Closed-ended questions; in the case of closed-ended questions, the respondent is asked to
make a choice from among a set of alternatives or a list provided by the researcher. For
instance, instead of the researcher asking the respondents to state five things that are
interesting and challenging in their job, he/she might list ten to fifteen characteristics that
might seem interesting or challenging in jobs and ask the respondents to rank the first five
among these (Sekaran, 1992).
Generally, closed-ended questions help the respondents to make quick decisions by making
a choice among several alternatives that are provided. Also they assist the researcher to
code the information easily for subsequent analysis (Sekaran, 1992). Further, closed-ended
questions are very popular in survey research because they provide a greater uniformity of
responses that are more easily processed than open-ended questions. Also, closed-ended
question responses can be transferred directly into computer format (Babbie, 2004).
Responses to open-ended questions have to be edited and categorised for subsequent data
analysis. Also, open-ended questions must be coded and processed before computer
analysis can be done. The coding process requires that the researcher interpret the meaning
of the responses, opening the possibility of misunderstanding and researcher bias.
Moreover, there is a danger that some respondents’ responses may be irrelevant to the
researcher’s intent (Babbie, 2004).
The main shortcoming of closed-ended questions lies in the researchers’ structure of
responses. When the relevant answers to a given question are relatively clear, there should
be no problem. In other cases, however, the researcher’s structuring of responses may
overlook some important responses (Babbie, 2004). “For instance, in asking about the most
138
important issue facing the US, for example his/her checklist of issues might omit certain
issues that respondents would have said were important” (p.245).
Thus, Babbie (2004) explains that the construction of closed-ended questions should be
guided by two structural requirements. First, the response categories provided should be
exhaustive. That is, they should include all the possible responses that might be expected.
Often, researchers ensure this by adding a category such as “Other (Please specify:__).”
Second, the answer categories must be mutually exhaustive: the respondent should not feel
compelled to select more than one. To ensure the categories are mutually exclusive,
researchers should carefully consider each combination of categories, asking themselves
whether a person could reasonably choose more than one answer. To that effect, Babbie
argued that it can be useful to add an instruction to the question, which asks the respondent
to choose the one best answer (Babbie, 2004).
4.3.1 Questionnaire Design for the Present Study
In designing the questionnaire for the present study the procedures and guidelines discussed
by Dillman (1978), Sekaran (1992), Babbie (2004) and Kerlinger (1986) were carefully
considered. In addition to those discussions, all questions were adapted from past studies
(e.g., Bergeron et al. 1995; Davis, 1989; Ditsa, 2003). Each question in the questionnaire
represents a component of the research model. The questions were selected based on their
theoretical importance as well as, potential relevance to practice.
The design of the questionnaire for the study was subjected to a three-stage pre-pilot. A
pilot survey for survey questionnaires is universally considered relevant for the purposes of
139
establishing content validity and reducing bias in responses due to misinterpretation of the
instrument (Sekaran, 1992; Babbie, 2004). Therefore, the pilot survey of the draft
questionnaire was one of the most important parts of the research study. Further, another
main concern of the pilot was to ensure that the instrument used is reliable and valid and
that the issue of instrument rigour is systematically addressed.
Moreover, the research study employed five-point Likert scales through the questionnaire
for all the statements requiring scaling except questions on attitude towards using EIS
where semantic differential scale was employed. This was done to keep the respondents’
mind and feeling more focused on the statements in the questionnaire and to enable them to
indicate the extent to which they agree or disagree with a variety of statements.
Further, coloured paper was used to printout the questionnaires for mail out to the sample
respondents. This was done to make the questionnaire more eye-catching to the
respondents, because an eye-catching questionnaire can help ensure a significant response
rate (Dillman, 1978; Sekaran 1992; Babbie, 2004).
The questions in the questionnaire were coded with one being the negative end and five
being the positive end. The codes for Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Uncertain, Agree and
Strongly Agree were used through the questionnaire where the statement requires the
respondents to make a choice from the options provided. This was done to make it easier
for the respondents to circle their choice of response following the statement and to
minimise confusion regarding the meaning of the code (Sekaran, 1992; Babbie, 2004).
140
The section of the questionnaire requiring the respondents’ personal information was
placed at the end of the questionnaire. The main purpose was to enable the respondents to
proceed to answering the questions immediately after reading through the cover letter of
the questionnaire, which provided guidance to the respondents. On the very last page of the
questionnaire, the researcher thanked the respondents and provided them with a blank page
to make any comments about the questionnaire and/or research study ( Sekaran, 1992;
Dillman, 1978; Babbie, 2004).
As a requirement in Australia, an application was made to the Human Research Ethics
Committee (HREC) of the University of Wollongong where the research was carried-out
for approval of the research study. Following the approval of the study by the HREC, the
cover letter of the questionnaire has a statement guaranteeing the confidentiality of the
respondents and a statement of how the research has been reviewed by the HREC. The
design of the cover letter was based on the suggestions provided by Sekaran (1992),
Dillman (1978) and Babbie (2001, 2004). Throughout the process of data collection there
was no complaint made by any respondent to the HREC.
4.4 Pre-Pilot Surveys
Two initial pre-pilot surveys were utilised in designing the questionnaire for the study. The
pre-pilot surveys were conducted with The Statistical Consultation Unit of the University
of Wollongong and with academics and PhD students drawn from the School of Economics
and Information Systems and the School of Management, Marketing and Employment
Relations. The procedure used was as follows:
141
A six-page questionnaire drafted for the study was initially given to The Statistical
Consultation Unit of the University of Wollongong for review. During the meeting with the
Unit representative, the Unit representative was interviewed and asked to comment on the
questionnaire in terms of its ease of use, comprehensibility, meaningfulness, effectiveness
and content validity (i.e., whether the scale items appear to measure what they intend to
measure) and overall suitability. Based on the feedback received from the representative,
some modifications were made to the individual questions and instructions for the
respondents. The feedbacks received include suggestions to number the questions in the
questionnaire and including the researcher’s email address for contact.
The revised questionnaire was then subjected to the next phase of pre-pilot with ten
academics and four doctorate degree students drawn from the School of Economics and
Information Systems and the School of Management, Marketing and Industrial Relations of
the University of Wollongong where the project was conducted. This was done because
those academics and doctorate students were well versed with the design of questionnaires.
Panel members were asked to comment on the validity, consistency and clarity of the
questionnaire. Comments and suggestions provided by them as feedback, regarding the
validity, consistency and clarity of the questions were carefully considered and
incorporated into the survey questionnaire. The feedbacks received include swapping some
questions in the questionnaires for logical flows and providing blank space in the
questionnaire for comments by the respondents.
On the basis of the above two pre-pilot surveys and expert assessment, it was concluded
that the measurement scales in the draft questionnaire had an acceptable level of content or
142
face validity. The pre-pilot questionnaire then subjected to the pilot survey in the field with
senior executives and managers who actually use EIS in their organisations within the
Illawarra region of Australia.
4.4.1 Pilot Survey
A pilot survey was carried out with the aim of pre-testing the survey with executives who
actually use EIS in the field. The main concern in pre-testing the questionnaire in the field
was to detect any problems with its validity and reliability. The pilot survey seeks to
determine whether the words used in each question were properly understood, each
question measures what it is intended to measure, each question is interpreted similarly by
the respondents and whether each question contained an adequate range of response
categories.
A cover letter explaining the purpose of the survey was designed. It was mailed with a
prepaid envelope to the participants for the pilot study. The cover letter had a statement
guaranteeing the confidentiality of the respondents and a statement of how the research had
been reviewed by the HREC, as required in Australia.
The respondents were specifically asked to complete the enclosed questionnaire in the mail
and return it by mail in the enclosed self-addressed prepaid envelope. Twenty minutes were
estimated as an average time for the respondents to complete the questionnaire. This was
indicated in the cover letter. Because the researcher was interested in the comments and
suggestions to be given by the respondents for improvements of the questionnaire for the
main survey as well as their use of EIS, additional blank space was provided in the
143
questionnaire for comments. An email address was also provided for those who wished to
comment via this medium. In pre-testing the questionnaire, the TDM survey method
discussed in subsection 4.1.9.2 was used. The pilot survey was conducted on the basis of
the principles specified by Dillman (1978). To achieve a good response rate, the pilot
survey was carried out exactly as if it was the main survey although on a small sample of
executives and managers who actually use EIS in their organisations.
Although there is no widely agreed sample size for a pilot survey, between 12 and 30
subjects is generally recommended (e.g., Hunt et al. 1982). The pilot survey was carried out
on a representative sample of 30 executives and managers of medium size organisations
within the Illawarra region of Australia who actually used EIS. After 3 follow-ups by
telephone calls 19 completed questionnaires were received, giving a response rate of 63
percent. The returned questionnaires were carefully examined for signs of respondents
having difficulty in understanding the questions or interpreting ambiguous questions
differently. None of these problems was noticed. All the 19 questionnaires returned were
acceptable for analysis. There were some suggestions and comments from respondents,
which were noted for improvement in the main study. The feedback includes suggestion to
defining the term Executive Information Systems in a plain language in the questionnaire
such that it can be understood by all potential respondents. The last suggestion led to the
inclusion of executive’s experience in computer-based information systems (CBIS) prior to
using EIS as a variable for habits.
Due to the size of the data for the pilot study, a qualitative analysis of the data was carried
out. Among the 19 participants for the pilot, the results showed that 14 were males while 5
144
were females. The results also showed that on average, EIS users are between 46 - 55 years
of age. At the educational level, the results showed that the majority (10) of EIS users were
postgraduate degree holders while seven (7) users were undergraduate degree holders.
Regarding the management levels held among participants in their respective organisations,
the results showed that majority of EIS users (9) were from the middle management level
while five (5) were from the top-level management. Given these characteristics, it was
reasonable to argue that the pilot test sample was a representative of the population from
which it was drawn. The preliminary results of the pilot suggest: Firstly, executives’
experience in EIS positively relates to their experience in computer-based information
systems (CBIS). Secondly, the results suggest that although some managers have
significant knowledge in EIS due to length of use, executives who have been using EIS
applications for a greater length of time have greater knowledge of the systems.
Thirdly, the results suggest a high degree of perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use as
well as a positive attitude towards using EIS by executives. This may be due to the user-
friendliness and clarity of the systems to users. Furthermore, the results suggest that
executives consider social factors in using EIS in their work. Finally, the results suggest
that facilitating conditions variables such as EIS development process, EIS management
process and organisational environment are strongly related to the adoption and use of EIS
by executives.
4.5 The Main Survey
In this section the administration process employed for the survey questionnaires as well as
the sample of organisations surveyed for the study are presented.

145
4.5.1 Administration of the Main Survey Questionnaire
The basic processes used in the administration of the survey questionnaire included the
distribution of the questionnaire to the sample respondents, monitoring of the returned
questionnaires and the follow-up.
As explained by Babbie (2004), “the basic method for collecting data by mail has been to
send a survey questionnaire accompanied by a letter of explanation and self-addressed
stamped envelope for returning the questionnaire. The respondent is expected to complete
the questionnaire, put it in the envelope and return it” (p. 259). He warns that a common
reason for not returning survey questionnaires is that it is too much trouble. To overcome
this problem, this study provided an easy way for respondents to complete the questions in
the questionnaire and return it in the self-addressed prepaid envelope provided without their
effort in folding the questionnaire. A cover letter explaining the completion of the
questionnaire and return procedures were provided in the package.
4.5.2 Distribution and Return of Mail Survey
Five hundred mail survey questionnaire packages were mailed out in 5 batches through
ordinary mail to the sample respondents. Table 4.3 indicates the date and batch size of each
mail-out. The main reasons for using the batch mail out method were to minimise the
researcher’s workload and enhance the administration of the survey.
The questionnaire package was mailed out in pre-paid C4 size “Easy/open” envelopes that
had the University name, emblem and address of the School where the study was
conducted on the left hand corner of the envelope. Within the packages were the cover
146
letter, questionnaire and pre-paid self addressed C4 size envelope, which had the
University’s name and address at the left hand corner.
Table 4.3 Batch Distributions of Survey Questionnaires
Batches Dates Number

First Batch 2/08/04 100
Second Batch 6/08/04 100
Third Batch 12/08/04 100
Fourth Batch 16/08/04 100
Fifth Batch 20/08/04 100
Total Batches 500
To help provide records of returns and facilitate the mailing of follow-up to non-
respondents, all mailed out questionnaires were pre-numbered. A statement to that effect
was provided on the cover letter. Further, the cover letter explained the purpose of the
study, how the respondent’s name was obtained for the study, what the respondent needed
to do, a guarantee of the confidentiality of the respondent, an estimate of time for the
respondent to complete the questionnaire and the expected date for the respondent to return
the completed questionnaire. The cover letter thanked the respondents for their time and
effort in participating in the study. The cover letter was printed on the University
letterhead. Also, the main supervisor of this PhD project signed the cover letter.
4.5.2.1 Ethical Considerations in the Study
Ethical issues are important considerations in social research studies. Fontana and Frey
(1998) emphasised that the object of inquiry in social research is the human being and
147
extreme care should be taken to avoid any harm to people. Further, according to
VanManen, (1990), psychological harms such as stress, emotional distress and self-doubt
can cause sensitivity issues and emotional expression. Because it is a requirement in
Australia, an application was made to the HREC of the University of Wollongong where
the research was carried out for approval. Following the approval of the study by the HREC
the cover letter had a statement, which explained how the study was reviewed by the HREC
of the University where the study was conducted. The statement in the cover letter advised
the respondent to refer any queries or complaints they may have about the way the study
was conducted to the Complaints-handling Officer of HREC of the University where the
study was conducted. A telephone number was provided on the cover letter to that effect.
4.5.3 Monitoring Returns
In his recent work, Babbie (2004) states that “a researcher should not sit back idly as
questionnaires are returned; instead, they should undertake a careful recording of varying
rates of return among respondents” (pp. 259-260). In the present study, a table for each
batch of the questionnaires mailed out was tabulated with columns for the respondent’s
title, name, job title, company address, pre-numbered identity of the questionnaire mailed
to the respondent, dispatch date, received date, follow-up and for comments where
applicable.
In addition, a table was developed to note the sum total for the number of questionnaires
completed and valid for analysis, number of completed and uncompleted questionnaires
that were not useful for the analysis, the number of questionnaires marked, “return to
148
senders”, and the number of telephone calls as well as email received about the survey from
the respondents.
In order to facilitate the follow-up process, as each questionnaire was returned, the received
date was marked in the received column against the sample respondent using the pre-
numbered identity on the questionnaire.
4.5.3.1 Drawbacks in the Returns
There were some drawbacks in the returns of the mail survey. For instance some survey
packages were returned with marks: “return to sender”, “the addressee has left the company
or the addressee has retired”. In a situation where the addressee had left the company or
retired, the researcher made telephone calls to the organisations to ask them whether the
current persons in those positions would like to participate in the study and complete the
survey questionnaire. If they consented, then the name of the person in that position was
recorded and sent the survey package. But if they refused to participate in survey and stated
that it was their company policies not to participate in surveys then their decisions were
respected.
Also, there were cases in which respondents called directly informing of their policy not to
participate in such surveys. Based on such responses their names were excluded from the
follow-up mail-out. Furthermore, in other cases, some sample respondents’ emailed or
phoned to inform that their organisations did not use EIS and their names should be
removed from the database used for the study. On the basis of such requests and
information received their names were removed from the database and the planned follow-
up mail out. Also, there were cases where the returned questionnaires were incompletely
149
filled in and, as a result were excluded from the analysis. Nevertheless, a significant
number of respondents provided valuable comments regarding the study and expressed
their interest in the research findings.
4.5.4 Follow-up Mailing
The follow-up mailings were carried-out after three weeks and three days to non-
respondents in each batch of survey questionnaires initially distributed. The additional three
days to three weeks was to allow the survey packages to get to the non-respondents in the
initial mailing of the survey questionnaire. The follow-up process was done to ensure
proper timing of the follow-up process (Babbie, 2004).
Each questionnaire package in the follow-up was exactly the same as the initially
distributed questionnaire plus a reminder letter mailed to the non-respondents. The
construction of the reminder letter was business-like and placed emphasis on the
importance of completing the survey. This was meant to encourage non-respondents to
respond to the questionnaire by filling-out the questionnaire and returning it to us. The
essential purpose of the follow-up mailings was to increase the return rate of the mail
survey (Babbie, 2004). A total of 85 responses were received in the follow-up. Table 4.4
shows a comparison of initial and follow-up responses of the mail survey.
150
Table 4.4: A Summary of Initial and follow-up Responses
Initial Survey (%) Follow-up (%) Total (%)
Useable Returns 71 (35.3) 50 (24.9) 121(60)
Unusable Returns 45 (22.4) 35(17.4) 80 (39.8)
Total Returns 116 (57.7) 85 (42.3) 201 (100)
As indicated in Table 4.4, out of a total of 500 questionnaires initially distributed, a total of
116 were returned. Out of that total (116), 71 returns were usable for analysis and 45 were
not. Also, of a total of 85 questionnaires returned during the follow-up, 50 were useful for
analysis but 35 were not useful for analysis. On the whole, a total of 201 responses were
received from both the initial and follow-up mailings, 121 were useful for analysis but 80
were not useful for analysis. Of a total of 80 responses found unusable for analysis, 15 were
discarded from analysis because some questions were not completed, 20 returns were
marked “back to sender”, 25 respondents returned with notes that their organisations do not
participate in surveys, and 20 returned with notes that their organisations were not using
EIS.
4.5.5 Organisations Surveyed for the Present Study
Two hundred and fifty five (255) organisations identified as EIS users in Australia were
surveyed for this study. The organisations and names of EIS user persons were documented
in a database purchased from Fairfax Business Media of Australia. The database contains
500 records of EIS users from large to small and medium sized (SMSs) organisations.
151
The details provided by the database were as follows:
Company information: Company ID; legal name; address; city; state; postcode; telephone
number; fax number; industry code; email domain; email convention and web address.
Potential respondent’s information: prefix; first name; last name; job title; address; city;
state; postcode, country and telephone number. The demographic data of both small and
medium sized (SMSs) and large organisations surveyed is presented in Table 4.5. As
indicated, about 22.31% of useable respondents in the study were from SMSs while
77.69% were from large firms. The industry codes and group information is presented in
Appendix 3. The names of organisations surveyed are presented in appendix 3 as well.
Table 4.5 Demographic Data of Surveyed Organisations
Industry Sector No .of Turnover No. of Potential SMSs Large

Employees (million US$) Companies Respondents Useable Firms
Responses Useable
% Responses
%
Community services 1100 –30000 0 – 1000 36 50 2 (1.65) 5 (4.13)
Finance & Business 1200 – 17800 0 to > 1000 34 78 3(2.48) 7( 5.79)
Transport & Storage 1370 – 45000 101 to >1000 11 29 2(1.65) 8 (6.61)
Utilities & Construction 1400 – 7500 0 to > 1000 20 41 2(1.65) 9 (7.43)
IT Suppliers 1100 -12000 0 to > 1000 11 32 2(1.65) 7 (4.13)
Manufacturing 1120-100000 0 to > 1000 66 101 3(2.48) 8 (6.61)
Agriculture & Mining 1200-38000 0 to > 1000 12 35 4(3.31) 9 (5.79)
Wholesale & Retail 1100-150000 0 to > 1000 29 49 3 (2.48) 9 (7.79)
Communications 1450-650000 101 to >1000 5 14 2 (1.65) 10(8.26)
Personal & Other 1220-18000 0-1000 14 33 4 (3.31) 9 (5.79)
services
Govt.& Defence 1100-23000 0-1000 17 38 0 (0.0%) 13 (10.74)
Total 500 255 27 (22.31) 94 (77.69)
4.5.5.1 Justification of Sample Size
The types of organisations (see Table 4.5) selected for this study based on secondary
data/Fairfax Business Media Database provide abroad picture of EIS user organisations in
Australia. Second, the number of organisations (n=255) selected meet or match the
152
objective of this study in terms of EIS usage, duration of use and integration of EIS into
business activities. Third, the number of respondents chosen from these organisations (n=
500) is large enough to achieve responses to satisfy the research objective and likely
valid/reliable answer to the research questions. Fourth, in light of past studies (e.g., Pervan,
1992; Kim, 1996; Leidner and Elam, 1994) the sample size is large enough for this study.
4.5.6 Response Rate and Results
A total of 500 questionnaires were initially mailed out to sample respondents of 255
organisations using EIS in Australia. One hundred and sixteen (116) responses were
received. Of that number (116) 71, were usable for analysis but forty-five were unusable.
This was followed by the follow-up mailings to non-respondents. A total of 85
questionnaires were returned after the follow-up. Of that number (85), 50 were usable for
analysis but 35 were unusable for analysis. Therefore, the overall response to the mail
survey was: 201(116 + 85). Thus, the gross response rate of the research survey was 40.2%
(201/500), of which, 121 (71+50) returns i.e., 24.2% (121/500) were suitable for analysis.
A summary of responses to the mail survey questionnaires is presented in Table 4.6.
Table 4.6: Summary of Responses to Mail Survey Questionnaire
Total Number of Questionnaire mailed out 500

Total Number of Questionnaire Returned 201
Total Number of Returns Useful for Analysis 121
Total number of Returns Unsuitable for Analysis 80
Gross Response Rate 40.2%
Usable Response Rate 24.2%
153
The gross response rate and useable response rate received for the present study is quite
high compared with previous similar studies in North American countries and other
developed countries such as the United Kingdom (UK) and recently Australia. In the US
for instance, North and North (1995) sent out 500 questionnaires to mainly chief executives
of Fortune 500 companies. The initial mailing and follow-up mailings resulted in a total of
152 returns, giving it a response rate of 32.4%. Further, Kim (1996), mailed out 400 survey
questionnaires to mainly EIS users in the US and received a total 112 returns, giving it a
response rate of 28%. Leidner and Elam (1994) mailed out 303 questionnaires to mainly
EIS users in the US and received a total response of 97, i.e., 32% response rate. In Canada,
Bergeron et al. (1995) obtained data from 38 EIS users in a field study of 9 Canadian
organisations. In the UK, Elkordy and Khalil (2005) obtained a response rate of only 22.5%
(216) from 960 questionnaires mailed out to mainly EIS users. In Australia, Pervan (1992)
obtained 22% response rate from the questionnaires mailed to IS managers in 200
Australians companies identified in the Business Review Weekly as having EIS. Recently,
Ditsa (2003) obtained a 37.14% response rate, of which 20.57% was suitable for analysis
from 700 initial questionnaires plus follow-up mail out to mainly EIS users. On the basis of
the response rates of prior studies discussed above, as well as the comparative size of
commerce in Australia, the response rate for the present study is satisfactory.
4.5.7 Test of Non–Response Error
The mail survey method has been criticised for non-response bias because of its low
response rates (De Vaus, 2002). According to Malhotra et al. (1996), higher response rates,
in general, imply lower rates of non-response biases. However, response rates may not be
an adequate indicator of non-response bias, since they do not indicate whether or not the
154
respondents are representative of the original sample. Moreover, non-respondents can differ
from respondents in terms of demographic, psychographic, personality, attitudinal, and
motivational and behavioural variables. If the respondents differ substantially from the non-
respondents, the results do not directly allow one to say how the entire sample would have
responded, and thus, generalise from the sample to the population (Armstrong and Overton,
1977). According to Wayne (1975), while the most commonly recommended protection
against non-response bias has been to reduce non-response itself, the more common
approach is to estimate the effects of non-response
In testing the existence of non-response biases, this study employed the extrapolation
estimation method, which states that the demographic factors and other motivational factors
in terms of individual experience in information systems in the present study represent the
attributes of the key informants in organisations and therefore, their non-response biases.
The extrapolation method is used as a way to estimate non-response, and is based on the
assumption that subjects who respond less readily are more like those who do not respond
at all (Kanuk and Berenson, 1975). ‘Less readily’ is defined as answering later or as
requiring more prodding to answer, and readily as answering sooner, or requiring less
prodding to answer (Armstrong and Overton, 1977). Employing the extrapolation
estimation method, the first 50 responses are treated as the early responses, whereas the last
50 are late responses. As the first 50 responses arrived before mailing the follow-up letter,
these are regarded as non–stimulated responses and the last 50 responses as the stimulated
responses. The two groups are compared in terms of the Mann-Whitney test to see
whether or not there is a significant difference between the two groups.
155
In Table 4.7, the Mann-Whitney test proved not significant (p>.05) in all the variables.
Therefore, the null hypothesis should be accepted and the alternative hypothesis should be
rejected. That is, the two groups must come from the same population and there is no
significant difference between them. From the results of the Mann-Whitney test between
the early and the late respondents in the mail survey in terms of the demographic variables
such as job position (JOBP), education (EDU), experience in computer-based information
systems (EXPCBIS) and experience in EIS (EXPEIS), the non-response bias is regarded as
negligible
Table 4.7 Mann-Whitney Test of Non-response Error
Test Statisticsa
EXPCBIS EXPEIS JOBP EDU

Mann-Whitney U 624.000 712.500 622.000 615.000
Wilcoxon W 1444.000 1532.500 1442.000 1395.000
Z -1.576 -.694 -1.684 -1.782
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .115 .488 .092 .075
a. Grouping Variable: VAR00001
4.6 Summary and Conclusions
This Chapter presented the research design, the research methodology, the
conceptualisation and operationalisation of construct variables in order to empirically test
the research hypotheses derived from the research model of the previous Chapter. The
rationale of research design and methodology such as research approach, nature of the
study, research setting, research paradigm, unit of analysis, types of investigation, time
horizon and data collection method have been discussed in the Chapter. From prior studies
(e.g. Davis, 1989; Bergeron et al. 1995), and theoretical foundations presented, the
156
conceptualisation and operationalisation of construct variables of the research model have
been established. Also, the Cronbach’s alpha for all the scales is in acceptable range.
The rationale for questionnaire design such as prior studies, pre-pilot surveys with experts
and pilot survey in the field has been established as well. Further, the procedures employed
in the main survey such as administration, distribution and returns, monitoring of returns,
follow-up, organisation surveyed and response rate and results have been discussed in the
chapter. The non-response bias has been regarded as negligible because there was no
significant difference between the respondents before and after the follow-up letter in terms
of demographic variables.
The conclusion that can be drawn from this Chapter is that the timing of the survey tasks
such as administration of returns and follow-ups of non-responses is of vital importance for
a good response rate.
The next Chapter will present the data analyses and results of the hypotheses presented in
Section 3.5. Data analyses and results of the hypotheses are based on MANOVA, multiple
regressions, One-Way ANOVA and stepwise regressions.
157
CHAPTER 5 RESULTS OF DATA ANALYSIS
5.1 Introduction
In order to measure the constructs and to empirically test the hypotheses derived from the
research model in Chapter 3, Chapter 4 presented the research design, the research
methodology and operational measure of constructs. This Chapter presents the results of
data analysis for this study. First, the Chapter presents the measurement scales for the
constructs and their coding for data collection and analyses. Second, the Chapter presents
the results of the descriptive statistics of demographic factors of the respondents followed
by the frequency test results and descriptive statistics of variables for the research model.
Age, education and job position of the respondents were used to determine the
demographic factors. Experience in computer based information systems, experience with
executive information systems (EIS), ability to use EIS and frequency of EIS, use in a
week, were used determine the results of the frequency test and descriptive statistics of
variables for the research model.
Third, the Chapter presents the results of factor analyses for construct variables of the
research model. The aims of the factor analyses were to reduce the large number of
interrelated variables to a small number of underlying factors and explain the interrelation
between variables and the variables measuring them (Francis, 2004). The principal
components extraction method was used in the analyses. The Barlett’s test of Sphericity
and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of Sampling Adequacy were employed to assess the
suitability of data for the analyses. Further, the Scree Plot was used to determine the
number of factors to be retained in the factor loading.
158
Next, the Chapter presents the results of, MANOVA, multiple linear regressions and
analyses of variance (One-Way ANOVA) for the research hypotheses. The MANOVA,
multiple regression and ANOVA tests were conducted as a preliminary evaluation of the
research model and the hypotheses associated with the research model. A further analysis
was conducted using stepwise regression to establish the relative importance of the
independent variables in explaining EIS usage. Finally, to ensure there were no obvious
violations of the assumptions of multiple regressions, MANOVA, and ANOVA tests, the
Chapter examines their assumptions. SPSS software version 12 was used for these tests.
5.2 Coding of Measurement Scale for EIS Adoption and Usage
This section presents the coding of measurement scale for this study. Table 5.0 shows the
scales in a draft instrument. There were approximately 69 scale items in the questionnaires
including Habits (14 items), system usage (5 items), perceived usefulness (6 items),
Perceived ease of use (6 items), attitudes towards using (5 items), Social factors (17 items),
Facilitating conditions (15 items).
Table 5.0: Coding of Measurement Scale for EIS Adoption and Usage
Construct Code Statement
Habits - H: How many years have you personally been using
Experience in CBIS EXPCBIS CBIS for your work?
EXPEIS How many years have you personally been using
Experience in EIS EIS for your work?
ABEIS Please tick the category of EIS which best

Ability to use EIS represents you in the box provided
Actual System Use – A:
Number of times of using EIS in a NTUEIS On average, how many times do you use EIS in a
Week week?
159
Table 5.0: Coding of Measurement Scale for EIS Adoption and Usage Continues
PU1 I believe my using EIS will increase my

Perceived Usefulness – PU performance in the organization
PU2 I believe my using EIS will provide my
organization with competitive edge
PU3 I believe my using EIS Provide me with greater
level of control over our activities
PU4 I believe my using EIS will Increase the quality of
my decision-making
PU5 I believe my using EIS will provide me with
information to detect problems
PU6 I believe my using EIS will Increase the speed of
my decision-making
PEOU1 Based on my knowledge of EIS learning to
Perceived Ease of Use – PEOU operate EIS is easy for me
PEOU2 Based on my knowledge of EIS I find EIS
flexible to interact with
PEOU3 Based on my knowledge of EIS I find it easy to
get EIS to do what I want it to do
PEOU4 Based on my knowledge of EIS it is easy for me
to become skillful at using EIS
PEOU5 Based on my knowledge of EIS I find EIS easy to
use
PEOU6 Based on my knowledge of EIS my interactions
with EIS are clear and understandable
ATU1 All things being equal, my using EIS in my job is:
Attitudes Towards Using – ATU ATU2 All things being equal, my using EIS in my job is:

Social Factors – SF: N1 My colleagues think that I should use EIS
N2 My superior think that I should use EIS
Subjective norms – N N3 My IS director think that I should use EIS
N4 My subordinates think that I should use EIS
V1 Generally, I want to do what my colleagues want
me to do
V2 Generally, I want to do what my superior wants
Subjective Values – V me to do
V3 Generally, I want to do what my IS director wants
me to do
V4 Generally, I want to do what my subordinates
want me to do
R1 By virtue of my role in my organisation my
colleagues expect me to use EIS
superior expects me to use EIS
Subjective Roles – R R3 By virtue of my role in my organisation my IS
director expects me to use EIS
subordinates expect me to use EIS
160
Table 5.0: Coding of Measurement Scale for EIS Adoption and Usage Continues
S1 The social working relationships between me and

my colleagues encourages me to use EIS
Subjective Social Situations – S S2 The social working relationships between me and
my superior encourages me to use EIS
my IS director encourages me to use EIS
my subordinates encourages me to use EIS
my EIS support team encourages me to use EIS
Facilitating Conditions – FC: D1 An EIS development project with executive
sponsorship in my encourages to use EIS
EIS Development Processes – D D2 My involvement in EIS development phases in
my organisation encourages me to use EIS
D3 The availability of relevant resources other than
technical in my organisation encourages to use
EIS
D4 The spread of use of EIS in my organisation
following the implementation encourages me to
use EIS
D5 The follow-ups of EIS project carried out
immediate after the implementation in my
organisation encourages me to use EIS
D6 Communication patterns between the developers
and I in the development phases in my
M1 The established management policies and rules
EIS Management Processes – M for EIS in my organisation encourages me to use
EIS
M2 The strategic data management on EIS in my
M3 The available users’ support group on EIS in my
M4 The availability and accessibility of information
on EIS in my organisation encourages me to use
EIS
Organisational Environment – OE OE1 The dynamic changes of the business
environment my organisation encourages me to
use
OE2 The culture of my organization on EIS
encourages me to use EIS
OE3 The interaction of the EIS with other system
between business units in my organisation
encourages me to use EIS
OE4 The influence of powers and politics on EIS in
my organisation encourages me to use EIS
OE5 My organization commitment to wide use of
EIS encourages me to use EIS
161
5.3 Respondents’ Demographic Factors
Having presented the coding and measurement scales for this study in section 5.2, this
section presents the respondents’ demographic factors. Demographic factors are those
variables such as gender, education level and job position of the survey participants
(Francis, 2004). Of the 500 questionnaires distributed for this study, 121 of the (164)
responses were useable for the analysis. Of these 121 respondents (see Table 5.1), 78.5%
(95) were males and 27.5% (26) were females. In the age group, the modal group was 46 –
55 years with 47.1 % (57), followed by the 36 – 45 group with 37.2% (45) participation
rate. As expected, the group of more than 55 years was among the lowest with 6.6% (8)
after 18 - 25 group who had just 0.8% (1) participation rate. This suggests that while people
over 55 years of age in management positions may be retiring from the workforce, e very
few of those within the 18 – 25 group have just entered management positions.
Table 5.1: Demographic Factors of Respondents (n = 121)
Demographic The valid items Frequency Percentage

Factors %
Gender Female 26 21.5
Male 95 78.5
Age 18 – 25 1 .8
26 – 35 10 8.3
36 – 45 45 37.2
46 – 55 57 47.1
>55 8 6.6
Education High School 4 3.3
TAFE 7 5.6
Undergraduate 55 45.5
Postgraduate 48 39.7
Others (please specify) 7 5.8
Job Position Top-Level Manager 51 42.1
Middle Management 49 40.5
Lower Management 20 16.5
Others (please specify) 1 .8
162
The majority of the respondents were highly educated. For instance 45.5 % (55) of the
respondents held an undergraduate degree, 39.7% (48) held postgraduate degree, and 5.8%
(7) held professional qualifications such as chartered accounting qualifications. Of the
respondents 3.3% (4) held a High School Certificate and 5.6% (7) held a TAFE Certificate.
In terms of job position, the results show that while 42.1% (51) of the respondents held top-
level management positions such as Chairman, Presidents, CEOs, CIOs, and CFOs, 40.5%
(49) of the respondents held middle management positions. Also, while 16.5% (20) of the
respondents held lower level management positions, 0.8% (1) held another position,
specifically a clerical assistance position. Although the study was aimed at the top-level
management, the spread of EIS to middle and lower management levels has made this
unattainable. However, the demographic statistics (see Table 5.1) indicated that the
majority of the respondents were top-level managers (51). Regardless of the proportion of
the responses from other management levels other than top management which the study
particularly focused on the responses were important for the objective of the study
5.4 Analysis of Frequency Test Result of Variables for the Research Model
To detect the number and percentage of frequency of variables for the model, the frequency
test was conducted on variables such as experience in CBIS (EXPCBIS), experience in EIS
(EXPEIS), ability to use EIS (ABEIS) and number of times to use EIS (NUEIS) for the 121
useable returns. The result of the frequency test for each of these variables is presented as
follows. Table 5.2 summarises the frequency results of variables for the research model.
163
Experience in CBIS: The important finding in experience in CBIS was that most
respondents had been using CBIS for between 10 –14 years. Therefore, the modal group in
experience in CBIS was 10 – 14 years experience with 28.9% (35) followed by 15 – 19 years
group with 26.4% (32). The next was the 5 – 9 years group with 19% (23) followed closely
by the 0 – 4 years group with 13.2% (16). The group of more than 20 years experience in
CBIS was the smallest with just 12.4% (15).
Table 5.2: Frequency Results of Variables for the Research Model (n=121)
Habit & Usage Variables The valid items Frequency Percentage

%
Experience CBIS 0 – 4 years 16 13.2
(EXPCBIS) 5 – 9 years 23 19
10 – 14 years 35 28.9
15 – 19 years 32 26.4
> 20 years 15 12.4
Experience in EIS 0 – 4 years 26 21.5
(EXPEIS) 5 – 9 years 46 38
10 – 14 years 33 27.3
15 – 19 years 13 10.7
> 20 years 3 2.5
Ability to use EIS Novice casual (intermittent) user 14 11.6
(ABEIS) Novice frequent user 37 30.6
Expert (knowledgeable) casual user 42 34.7
Expert (Knowledgeable) frequent user 28 23.1
Number of times to use Not at all 4 3.3
EIS (NTUEIS) Less than once a week 21 17.4
2 or 3 times a week 43 35.5
Several times a week 34 28.1
Several times each day 19 15.7
Experience in EIS: The important finding in experience in EIS was that most respondents
had been using CBIS for between 5 to 9 years. Thus, the modal group in EIS experience was
5 – 9 years with 38% (46) followed by the 10 – 14 years group with 27% (33). The group
164
with 0 – 4 years was next with 21.5% (26) followed closely by the 15 – 19 years group with
10.7% (13). The group with more than 20 years experience in EIS was the smallest with just
2.5% (3).
Ability to use EIS: In this category, expert (knowledgeable) casual user was the modal
group with 34.7% (43) followed by novice frequent user group with 30.6% (37). The expert
(knowledgeable) frequent user group was next with 23.1% (28) followed by the novice
casual (intermittent) user group as the smallest with 11.6% (14).
Number of times respondents use EIS in a week: In this category, the modal group was the
2 or 3 times a week user group with 35.5% (43) followed by the several times a week user
group with 28% (34). The next largest group was the several times each day user group with
17.4% (21) followed by the less than once a week user group. However, the not at all user
group was the smallest with only 3.3% (4).
5.5 Analysis of Descriptive Statistics of Variables for the Research Model
The research model was tested using MANOVA, multiple regressions and One-Way
ANOVA. As preliminary analyses, MANOVA, multiple regressions and One-Way
ANOVA were computed using SSPS version 12 to assess the initial associations between
variables. Further, a stepwise regression was performed to establish the importance of the
independent variables in explaining the behaviour of executives towards EIS adoption. This
section (5.5) presents the analyses of descriptive statistics of variables in the study that
explain the behaviour of users towards EIS adoption.
165
A summary of descriptive statistics of variables for the research model is presented in
Table 5.3. As shown, the means of each variable is relatively high, indicating generally
positive response to the variables.
Table 5.3: A Descriptive Statistic of Variables in the Study (n = 121)
Variables Min Max Mean Std. Dev.

Perceived Usefulness 2 5 4.09 0.74
Perceived Ease of Use 2 5 3.88 0.76
Attitudes towards Using 2 5 4.38 0.63
Subjective Norms 2 5 3.98 0.77
Subjective Roles 1 5 3.82 0.92
Subjective Values 1 5 4.04 0.79
Subjective social situations 1 5 3.85 0.95
EIS Development Processes 1 5 3.80 0.82
EIS Management Processes 1 5 3.94 0.83
Organisational Environment 1 5 3.78 0.92
5.6 Factor Analysis
Factorial validity was conducted to analyse the scale items of habits, facilitating conditions,
social factors, and perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness variables for the research
model. The aim of the analysis was to reduce the large number of interrelated variables to a
small number of underlying factors. The analysis was also conducted to explain the
interrelation between variables and the variables measuring them (Davis, 2001; Al-Hawari
and Hasan, 2004; Francis, 2004).
The Principal Components Extraction and Varimax with Kaiser Normalization rotation
methods were employed for these analyses. First, the Barlett’s Test of Sphericity and the
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of Sampling Adequacy were employed to assess
whether the data was suitable for analysis. Second, the Scree Plot was utilised to determine
166
the numbers of factors to be retained in the factor loading (Francis, 2004). Factors with
Eigenvalues greater than one were retained in the factor loading (Kaiser’s criterion)
(Francis, 2004). Also, it is required that each variable clearly differentiate itself in the
factor loadings otherwise it should be removed. Factor loadings below 0.4, which is the
cut-off limit for loading items, should be considered low and any low items should be
eliminated from the analysis for the underlying factors that explain joint variation in the
items measured (e.g., De Vaus, 1991; Stevens, 1992; Hair et al. 1995; Garson, 2001; Al-
Hawari and Hasan, 2004). Additionally, it is required that each variable should have a
moderate to strong loading that is possible to interpret with a single factor (Francis, 2004).
Factor analysis for each of the above-mentioned constructs for the research model is
presented as below:
5.6.1 Factor Analysis for the Social Factor Variables
The social factor construct consists of four variables, namely: subjective norms (N),
subjective roles (R), subjective values (V) and subjective social situations (S). Each of
these variables has more than three items. Factor analysis was conducted to detect the
validity of N, R, V and S items of the social factor construct. To examine whether the data
set was suitable for analysis, the Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin
Measure of Sampling Adequacy were utilised. These two tests results are presented in
Table A5.1 in Appendix 5, the KMO statistic showed 0.797 at a significance level of 0.000.
The results of these two tests indicated that the data was suitable for a factor analysis being
that KMO value was greater than 0.6 and Barlett’s Test of Sphericity was significant (chi-
square =1028.195 with 136 degree of freedom at p <0.000) (Francis, 2004).
167
Next, the initial Eigenvalue and the scree plot were investigated to determine the number of
factors to be retained. The initial Eigenvalues show the variance explained by each of the
factors extracted by the Principal component extraction method. In setting up the factors
analysis we chose to retain four factors, therefore the variance explained by these factors is
shown in the second section of Table A5.2 in Appendix 5. Overall, the four factors
explained 64% of the original variance. All of the four variables have initial Eigenvalues
which are greater than 1.
methods were used for the analysis therefore the initial communities were 1 (see Table
A5.3 in Appendix 5). The communality is the proportion of the variance in each item,
which is explained by the factors (Francis, 2004). That is, all the factors explain all of the
variance in each item. With the four factors solution, about 65% to 70% of the original
variance is explained for each of the variables (Francis, 2004).
After some rotations of the factors those with loadings less than 0.4 were eliminated from
the loading (Al-Hawari and Hasan, 2004). Also, items that could not differentiate
themselves from the four loadings were eliminated (Chidambaram, 2003; Francis, 2004).
As a result, items N3 and N4 of the subjective norms and item R4 of subjective roles were
eliminated (Francis, 2004). These eliminations allowed items N1 and N2 of subjective
norms to load moderately to strongly on Factor 1 on a distinct scale. Items R1, R2 and R3
of subjective roles also load from moderate to strong on a distinct scale on Factor 3.
Further, all items of subjective values such as, VI, V2, V3 and V4 load from moderate to
strong on a distinct scale on Factor 4. As well, all subjective situation variables such as S1,
S2, S3, S4 and S5 load from moderate to strong on a distinct scale on Factor 2 (Francis,
168
2004). Table 5.4 presents the results of the rotated component matrix for the social factor
variables. The loaded items are in bold. We chose to retain 4 factors. The Scree Plot (see
Figure A5.1 in Appendix 5) suggests that it was appropriate to retain only four factors. The
line begins to flatten out at about the fifth factor – this is the beginning of the Scree.
Table 5.4: Rotated Component Matrix for Social Factors
Factors Loading
Items 1 2 3 4
N1 0.681 0.045 0.120 0.069
N2 0.823 0.237 0.020 0.035
R1 0.082 0.121 0.817 0.152
R2 0.362 0.110 0.732 -0.003
R3 -0.004 0.184 0.792 0.071
V1 0.663 0.072 0.149 0.545
V2 0.647 0.109 0.054 0.582
V3 0.095 0.199 0.238 0.730
V4 0.043 0.375 -0.008 0.656
S1 0.475 0. 488 0.288 -0.005
S2 0.524 0.701 0.162 0.049
S3 0.156 0.671 0.436 0.192
S4 0.077 0.791 0.027 0.266
S5 0.051 0.678 0.179 0.308
Variables N3, N4 and R4 are eliminated because they were less than 0.4 which is the cut off level.
5.6.2 Factor Analysis of TAM Variables: Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use
and Attitudes towards using Items
The Principal Components Cxtraction using Varimax with Kaiser Normalization rotation
was performed on the perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEOU) 12
items, six for each and the five items of attitudes toward using (ATU). The Bartlett’s Test
of Sphericity and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy were utilised to
examine whether the data set was suitable for analysis. These two tests result (see Table
A5.4 in Appendix 5), the KMO statistic showed 0.856 at a significance level of 0.000. The
results of these two tests indicated that the data was suitable for a factor analysis being that
169
KMO values was greater than 0.6 and Barlett’s Test of Sphericity (887.537 with 136 degree
of freedom) at a significant level of 0.000 (Francis, 2004).
Next, the initial Eigenvalue and the Scree Plot were investigated to determine the number
of factors to be retained. Initial Eigenvalues show the variance explained by each of these
factors extracted by Principal component extraction method. In setting up the factor
analysis we chose to retain three factors, the variance explained by these factors is shown in
the second section of Table A5.5 in Appendix 5. Overall, the three factors explained
57.95% of the original variance. All the three factors have initial Eigenvalues which are
greater than 1.
methods were used for the analysis the initial communities were 1 (see Table A5.6,
appendix 5). That is, all the factors explain all of the variance in each item. With the three
factors solution, about 50% to 70% of the original variance is explained for each of the
variables.
In a rotation that converged in five iterations, all items of TAM loaded well, from moderate
to strong (Francis, 2004), among three factor loadings. For instance, PU items load from
moderate to strong on Factor 3 on a distinct scale. Also, PEOU items load from moderate to
strong on a distinct scale on Factor 1. Finally, ATU items load from moderate to strong on
a distinct scale on Factor 3 (Francis, 2004). Each item also differentiates itself between the
three factors (Francis, 2004). The result of this analysis is presented in Table 5.5. The
loaded items in each factor are in bold to ease identification. Because we chose to retain
three factors, the Scree Plot (see Figure A5.2, Appendix 5) suggests that it was appropriate
170
to retain three factors. The line begins to flatten out at about the fourth factor – this is the
beginning of the Scree (Francis, 2004).
Table 5.5: Rotated Component Matrix for TAM Variables: PU

PEOU and ATU Items
Factors Loading
Items 1 2 3
PEOU1 0.549 0.240 0.155
PEOU2 0.620 0.121 0.096
PEOU3 0.788 0.127 0.241
PEOU4 0.735 0.062 -0.007
PEOU5 0.817 0.027 -0.005
PEOU6 0.779 0.235 0.023
PU1 -0.003 0.385 0.610
PU2 0.345 0.234 0.476
PU3 0.205 -0.006 0.633
PU4 -0.003 0.197 0.690
PU5 0.030 0.135 0.788
PU6 0.571 0.202 0.406
ATU1 0.211 0.743 0.291
ATU2 0.088 0.771 0.159
ATU3 0.157 0.856 0.110
ATU5 0.255 0.726 0.148
ATU5 0.150 0.841 0.078
5.6.3 Factor Analysis for Habit Variables: Experience in CBIS, Experience in EIS and
Ability to use EIS
The Principal components analysis with extraction method was performed on the three
items of habits: experience in CBIS (EXPCBIS), experience in EIS (EXPEIS) and the
ability to use EIS (ABEIS). To examine whether the data set was suitable for analysis, the
Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy were
utilised. These two tests results (see Table A5.7 in Appendix 5), the KMO statistic showed
0.607 at a significance level of 0.000. The results of these tests indicated that the data was
suitable for a factor analysis as KMO values were greater than 0.6 and Barlett’s Test of
171
Sphericity (92.803 with 3 degree of freedom) was highly significant at 0.000 level (Francis,
2004).
Further, the initial Eigenvalue and the Scree Plot were investigated to determine the
number of factors to be retained. Initial Eigenvalues show the variance explained by each
of the factors extracted by Principle Component Extraction Method (Francis, 2004). In
setting up the factors analysis we chose to retain 1 factor, therefore the variance explained
by this factor is shown in the second section of Table A5.8 in Appendix 5. Overall, a single
factor explained 65% of the original variance. The factor chosen has initial Eigenvalues
which is greater than 1 (Francis, 2004).
methods were used for the analysis the initial communities were 1 (see Table A5.9 in
Appendix 5). That is, this factor explains the variance in the item. With a single factor
solution, about 45% to 70% of the original variance is explained for each of the variables
(Francis, 2004).
In a rotation that converged in an iteration these items loaded from moderate to strong in
single factor loading on a distinct scale (Francis, 2004). Because we chose to retain one
factor, the Scree Plot (see Figure A5.3, appendix 5) suggests that it was appropriate to
retain one factor. The line begins to flatten out at about the second factor – this is the
beginning of the Scree. Table 5.6 presents the result of factor analysis for the habit
variables. From the table each item loaded from moderate to strong on a distinct scale.
172
Table 5.6: Rotated Component Matrix for Habit Variables
Items Factor Loadings
EXPCBIS 0.845
EXPEIS 0.885
ABEIS 0.675
5.6.4 Factor Analysis for Facilitating Condition Variables: EIS development

processes, EIS management processes and Organisational environment of EIS
The Principle components extraction using Varimax with Kaiser Normalization rotation
was performed on the 15 items of EIS development processes (D), EIS management
processes (M) and organisational environment (OE). First, the Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity
and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy were utilised to examine whether
the data set was suitable for analysis. From the two tests result (see Table A5.10 in
Appendix 5), the KMO statistic showed 0.807 at a significant level of 0.000. The results of
these two tests indicated that the data was suitable for a factor analysis because the KMO
values was greater than 0.6 and Barlett’s Test of Sphericity (625.461 with 105 degree of
freedom) was highly significant at 0.000 level (Francis, 2004).
Second, the initial Eigenvalue and the Scree Plot were investigated to determine the
number of factors. Initial Eigenvalues show the variance explained by each of the factors
extracted by Principle Component Extraction Method (Francis, 2004). In setting up the
factors analysis we chose to retain three factors, therefore the variance explained by these
factors is shown in the second section of Table A5.11 in Appendix 5. Overall, the three
factors explained 54.36% of the original variance. Also, all three factors have initial
Eigenvalues which are greater than 1 (Francis, 2004).
173
Because we chose to use the principle components extraction and Varimax with Kaiser
Normalization rotation methods for the analysis therefore the initial communities were 1
(see Table A5.12 in Appendix 5). That is, all the factors explain all of the variance in each
item. With the three factors solution, about 55% to 70% of the original variance is
explained for each of the variables (Francis, 2004).
In a rotation that converged in five iterations, D group items such as D2, D3, D5, D6
loaded between moderate to strong on factor two on a distinct scale (Francis, 2004). D1 (an
EIS project with executive sponsorships) and D4 (the follows-up carried out immediately
after the implement effort) were eliminated. This was because their loaded values were less
than the acceptable limit of 0.40 (Chidambaram, 2003; Al-Hawari and Hasan, 2004).
Moreover, M group items, M1 – M4 loaded between moderate to strong on factor 3 on a
distinct scale (Francis, 2004). In addition, OE items, OE1 – OE5 loaded between moderate
to strong on Factor 1 on a distinct scale (Davis; 2001; Francis, 2004).
Because we chose to retain 3 factors, the Scree Plot (see Figure A5.4 in Appendix 5)
suggests that it was appropriate to retain the three factors. The line of the Scree Plot begins
to flatten out at about the fourth factor – this is the beginning of the Scree. All loaded items
among these factors are shown in bold in Table 5.7.
174
Table 5.7: Rotated Component Matrix for Facilitating Conditions
Factors Loading
Items 1 2 3
D2 0.079 0.740 0.181
D3 0.157 0.800 0.159
D5 0.383 0.656 0.053
D6 0.064 0.743 0.191
M1 0.072 0.058 0.821
M2 0.369 0.198 0.653
M3 0.310 0.218 0.647
M4 0.175 0.293 0.595
OE1 0.776 0.206 -0.002
OE2 0.717 0.097 0.304
OE3 0.609 0.326 0.323
OE4 0.660 0.077 0.233
OE5 0.591 0.089 0.491
5.7 Multiple linear Regression, MANOVA and One-Way ANOVA for Hypotheses
Having presented the results of factor analysis for the study in Section 5.6, this Section
(5.7) will present the results of hypotheses testing for the research model. Multiple linear
regressions, MANOVA and One-Way ANOVA were used to test the associated hypotheses
for the research model. Whereas a One-Way ANOVA examines the variance between the
independent variable attitudes towards using (ATU) and dependent variable Actual System
Use (A), multiple regressions explore the relationships between several independent
variables and the dependent variable. MANOVA explores the relationships between habits
such as experience in CBIS, experience in EIS and the ability to use EIS on perceived
usefulness and perceived ease of use. One-Way ANOVA was utilised to examine the
variance for the relationship between ATU and actual system use because actual system use
variable was a category variable (Francis, 2004). Multiple regressions were used to explain
how the predictor variables combine to influence the dependent variables because both the
175
predictors and dependent variables were continuous variables. The MANOVA test was
used to test the relationship between habits and PU and PEOU because habits were
category variables and PU and PEOU were continuous or metric variables.
Multiple regressions were used to test the relationship between the facilitating condition
variables (predictors) such as EIS development processes, EIS management processes,
organisational environment and PU (dependent) as well as their relationships with the
PEOU (dependent). Moreover, multiple regressions were used to test the relationships
between social factors variables (predictors) such as subjective norms, subjective roles,
subjective values, subjective social situations and PU as well as their relationships with
PEOU. Multiple regressions were further used to explore the relationship between PU,
PEOU (predictors) and ATU (dependent). A summary of the interrelationships of variables
and types of tests used is presented in Table 5.8.
Table 5.8: A Summary of Interrelationships of Variables and Tests Used
Predictors Dependent Variables Types of Test Conducted

Habits (H):
Experience in CBIS (EXPCIS) PU MANOVA
Experience in EIS (EXPEIS) PEOU ANOVA (confirmatory)
Ability to use EIS (ABEIS)
Facilitating conditions (FC):
EIS development processes (D) PU
EIS Management processes (M) PEOU Multiple regressions
Organisational environment (OE)
Social Factors (SF):
Subjective norms (N) PU
Subjective roles (R) PEOU Multiple regressions
Subjective values (V)
Subjective social situations (S)
Perceived usefulness (PU) Multiple regressions
Perceived ease of use (PEOU) ATU
Attitude towards using (ATU) Actual system use (A) ANOVA
176
To test the hypotheses associated with the predictors and dependent variables, the SPSS
computer package was utilised to compute: predictor variables, entered/removed, model
summary, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and residuals statistics. The ANOVA tests
whether multiple regressions R is significantly different from zero (F statistics). R is the
correlations between the observed value of dependent variable and predicted values based
on regression equation. R Square is the coefficient of multiple determinations. An adjusted
R Square reflects the goodness of fit of the model to the population taking into account the
sample size and the number of predictors used. Also, while the partial regression
coefficients (r) in the coefficients table give the regression equation of the model, the
standardised regression coefficients (beta) assess the relative importance of the predictors.
The t value and Sig t values in the coefficient table show how the partial regression
coefficient (slopes) differ significantly from zero. The residual shows the difference
between the actual value and predicted value of dependent value (Francis, 2004).
The general form of the multiple regressions equation for the variables in this present study
is as follows:
Y=β0+β1 χ1+ β2 χ2 +…+βn χn +∈,
Where y is the response variable; χ1, χ2 ….χn are the predictor variables; β0, β1, β2…βn are the
partial regression coefficients, net regression coefficients or just regression coefficients.
Also, ∈ is the error or residual assumed to be random and normally distributed with equal
variances at every χ point (Mason et al. 1999). In the present study Y represents the PU of
EIS, PEOU of EIS or ATU in their equations. Also, χ1, χ2 …χn are the predictors.
177
The next section presents the results of MANOVA, multiple regressions analyses and
ANOVA for the research hypotheses.
5.8 Hypotheses Testing
The results of the hypotheses proposed in this study are reported in sections: 5.8.1, 5.8.2,
5.8.3, 5.8.4, 5.8.5, 5.8.6, 5.8.7, 5.8.7.1, 5.8.7.2, 5.8.7.3 and 5.8.7.4. Further, sections
5.8.7.5, 5.8.7.6 and 5.8.7.7 present the results of practical assumptions of multiple
regressions, One-Way ANOVA and MANOVA.
5.8.1 Hypotheses: Habits vs PU and PEOU
Because habit variables such as experience in CBIS, experience in EIS and ability to use
EIS are category variables and PU and PEOU are continuous variables (Francis, 2004), the
MANOVA test was conducted for the relationships between Habit variables on perceived
usefulness (H1a, H1b and H1c) and perceived ease of use (H2a, H2b and H2c).
H1a: executives who have more years of experience in CBIS will have a higher perceived
usefulness of EIS than those who have limited years of experience in CBIS.
H1b: executives who have more years of experience in EIS will have a higher perceived
usefulness of EIS than those who have limited years of experience in EIS.
H1c: executives who have higher ability in using EIS will have a higher perceived
usefulness of EIS than those who have limited ability in using EIS.
178
H2a: executives who have more years of experience in CBIS will have a higher perceived
ease of use of EIS than those who have limited years of experience in CBIS.
H2b: executives who have more years of experience in EIS will have a higher perceived
ease of use of EIS than those who have limited years of experience in EIS.
H2c: executives who have higher ability in using EIS will have a higher perceived ease of
use of EIS than those who have limited ability in using EIS.
The results of MANOVA tests (Table 5.9A) for the hypotheses H1a, H1b and H1c are as
follows:
1. There was no significant main effect across EXPCBIS on PU. F (4, 81) =2.137,
p>.05=0.84, η2= .095. F ratio is reported with the degree of freedom and residual degree
of freedom.
2. There was no significant main effect across EXPEIS on PU. F (4, 81) =.983,
p>.05=.421, η2 =.046.
3. There was a significant main effect across ABEIS on PU. F (3, 81), =4.426,
p<.05=.006, η2=.141.
4. The interaction effect across EXPCBIS and EXPEIS on PU was statistically significant
F (7, 81) =3.123, p<.05=.006, η2 =.213.
5. The interaction effect across EXPCBIS and ABEIS on PU was statistically
insignificant. F (9, 81) =1.473, p>.05=.172, η2 =.141.
6. The interaction effect across EXPEIS and ABEIS on PU was statistically insignificant.
(F (7, 81) =.660, p>.05=.705, η2 =.054.
179
Table 5.9A: Results of MANOVA test for Habits Vs PU
Sources Dependent F Df Sig. Partial Eta

Variables Squared (η2)
EXPCBIS PU 2.137 4 .084 .095
EXPEIS PU .983 4 .421 .046
ABEIS PU 4.426 3 .006 .141
EXPCBIS*EXPEIS PU 3.123 7 .006 .213
EXPCBIS*ABEIS PU .1.473 9 .172 .141
EXPEIS*ABEIS PU .660 7 .705 .054
EXPCBIS*EXPEIS*ABEIS PU 3.423 3 .021 .113
Residual 81
p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001
Overall the results showed that although there were no significant interaction effects across
(1) EXPCBIS * EXPEIS on PU and (2) EXPCBIS * ABEIS on PU, there were significant
interaction effects across (3) EXPCBIS * EXPEIS * ABEIS on PU. F (3, 81) =3.423,
p<.05 =.021, η2=.113. The significant interactions effect among these last three variables
suggests that the main effect must be treated with caution. However, a further investigation
of the means and standard deviations scores of EXPCBIS, EXPEIS and ABEIS for PU
revealed (see Table A5.13a - A5.13c) that the means range for the PU were substantially
higher. Therefore, the Null hypotheses (H0a, H0b and H0c) were rejected. The result
suggests that (1) executives who have more years of experience in CBIS and EIS have a
higher perceived usefulness of EIS than those who have limited years of Experience. The
result also suggests that (2) executives who have higher ability in using EIS have a higher
perceived usefulness of EIS than those who have limited ability in using EIS. Hence, the
180
result is considered statistically significant. Also, about 11.3% of the variance in PU could
be explained by the interactions among EXPCBIS * EXPEIS * ABEIS.
Also, the results of the MANOVA tests for the hypotheses H2a, H2b and H2c are
presented in Table 5.9B. These results showed as follows:
1. There was no significant main effect across EXPCBIS on PEOU. F (4, 81) = 2.459, p >.05 =
0.52, η2 = .108. F ratio is reported with the degree of freedom and residual degree of
freedom.
2. There was no significant main effect across EXPEIS on PEOU. F (4, 81) = .610,
p>.05=.657, η2= .029;
3. There was no significant main effect across ABEIS on PEOU. F (3, 81) =2.438, p>.05=.07,
η2 =.083.
4. The interaction effect across EXPCBIS and EXPEIS on PEOU was statistically insignificant.
F (7, 81) = .433, p>.05=.879, η2 =.036.
5. The interaction effect across EXPCBIS and ABEIS on PEOU was statistically
insignificant. F (9, 81) =1.497, p>.05=.163, η2 =.143
6. There was no significant interaction effect across EXPEIS and ABEIS on PEOU. F (7, 81)
=1.212, p>.05=.306, η2 =.095.
181
Table 5.9B: Results of MANOVA test for Habits Vs PEOU
Sources Dependent F Df Sig. Partial Eta

Variables Squared (η2)
PEOU 2.459 4 .052 .108
EXPCBIS
PEOU .610 4 .657 .029
EXPEIS
PEOU 2.438 3 .070 .083
ABEIS
PEOU .433 7 .879 .036
EXPCBIS*EXPEIS
PEOU 1.497 9 .163 .143
EXPCBIS*ABEIS
PEOU 1.212 7 .306 .095
EXPEIS*ABEIS
PEOU .937 3 .427 .034
EXPCBIS*EXPEIS*ABEIS
Residual 81
p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001
Overall the results showed that there were no significant interaction effects across
EXPCBIS, EXPEIS and ABEIS on PEOU. F (3, 81) = .937, p>.05= .427, η2 =.034.
Therefore, the Null hypotheses (H20a, H20b and H20c) have been accepted. The result is
considered statistically insignificant. The results suggest that (1) executives who have more
years of experience in CBIS and EIS have same level of perceived ease of use of EIS with
those who have limited years of experience in the systems. Also, the results suggest that (2)
executives who have higher ability in using EIS have same level of perceived ease of use of
EIS with those who have limited ability in using EIS. Also, about 3.4% of the variance in
PEOU could be explained by the interactions among EXPCBIS, EXPEIS and ABEIS.
To confirm the MANOVA test results for the relationship between habit variables
(EXPCBIS, EXPEIS and ABEIS) and PEOU, a One-Way ANOVA test was conducted for
each of the habits variables and PEOU. The results of these three tests were statistically
182
insignificant (see Tables A5.13d, A5.13e and A5.13f in appendix 5). Therefore, the Null
hypotheses (H20a, H20b and H20c) have been accepted.
The results (Lenven’s tests) of a check for the equality of variance for each of the habit
variables (EXPCBIS, EXPEIS and ABEIS) and PEOU further indicated no significant
difference in the variability of the groups (see Table A5.13 d1, A5.13 e1 and A5.13 f1 in
Appendix 5).
5.8.2 Hypotheses: H3a, H3b, and H3c vs. PU
Hypotheses H3a, H3b and H3c collectively tested the relationship between facilitating
conditions and perceived usefulness of EIS. Hypotheses H3a, H3b and H3c hypothesized
that development processes (D), EIS management processes (M) and organisational
environment (OE) would be positively related to PU. A multiple regression analysis was
used in testing the associated hypotheses (H3a, H3b and H3c). The results (Table 5.10)
show that in general, all the dimensions significantly affect PU (p<. 05 = .000). Also, the
entire dimensions explain 20.6% of the total variance of PU. D has a positive influence
(beta = .219) on PU but the result is significant (p< .05 = .024). Therefore, H3a is
supported. Moreover, M has a negative influence (beta = -.002) on PU but the result is not
significant (p> .05 = .984). Therefore H3b is not supported. OE has a positive influence
(beta= .310) on PU but the result is significant (p< .05 = .005). Therefore, H3c is
supported.
183
Table 5.10: Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for Facilitating Conditions vs. PU
Dependent Independent Unstandardized Standardized
Variable variable Coefficients Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta t Sig
PU D .250 .110 .219 2.281* 024
PU M -.003 .126 -.002 -.020 .984
PU OE .262 .092 .310 2.842*** .005
In general
F 10.101***
454
R2 .206
* p < .05, ** p <. 01, *** p <. 001
5.8.3 Hypotheses: H4a, H4b and H4c vs. PEOU
Hypotheses H4a, H4b and H4c collectively tested the relationship between facilitating
conditions and perceived ease of use of EIS. Hypotheses H4a, H4b and H4c hypothesized
that development processes (D), EIS management processes (M) and organisational
environment (OE) would be positively related to PEOU. A multiple regression analysis was
employed to test the associated hypotheses (H4a, H4b and H4c). The results (Table 5.11)
show that in general, all the dimensions significantly affect PEOU (p<. 05 = .000). Also,
the entire dimensions explain 19.0% of the total variance of PEOU. D has a positive
influence (beta = .213) on PEOU but the result is significant (p< .05 = .030). Therefore,
H4a is supported. Moreover, M has a positive influence (beta = .100) on PEOU but the
result is not significant (p> .05= .369). Therefore, H4b is not supported. OE has a positive
influence (beta= .215) on PEOU but the result is not significant (p< .05 = .054). Therefore,
H4c is not supported. However, when variable M was dropped from the analysis base and
the hypothesis retested (see result in Table 5.12) OE become significant (P<.05=.005).
H4c is thus, supported.
184
Table 5.11: Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for facilitating conditions vs.
PEOU

B Std. Error Beta T Sig
PEOU D .291 .132 .213 2.202* .030
PEOU M .137 .152 .100 .902 .369
PEOU OE .215 .111 .215 1.944* .054
In general
F 9.156***
R 436
R2 .190
* p < .05, ** p <. 01, *** p <. 001
Table 5.12: Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for facilitating conditions vs.
PEOU without M Variable

B Std. Error Beta T Sig
PEOU D .320 .128 .235 2.509** .013
PEOU OE .268 .094 .267 2.848*** .005
In general
F 13.348***
R 430
R2 .185
* p < .05, ** p <. 01, *** p <. 001
5.8.4 Hypotheses: H5a, H5b, H5c and H5d vs. PU
Hypotheses H5a, H5b, H5c and H5d collectively tested the relationship between social
factors and perceived usefulness of EIS. Hypotheses H5a, H5b, H5c and H5d
hypothesized that subjective norms (N), subjective roles (R), subjective values (V) and
subjective social situations (S) would be positively related to PU. A multiple regression
analysis was used in testing the associated hypotheses (H5a, H5b, H5c and H5d). The
185
results (Table 5.13) show that in general all the dimensions significantly affect PU (p<. 05=
.000). Further, the entire dimensions explain 35.9% of the total variance of PU. N has a
positive influence (beta = .205) on PU but the result is significant (p< .05 = .019).
Therefore, the H5a is supported. Moreover, R has a positive influence (beta = .287) on PU
but the result is significant (p< .05= .001). Therefore H5b is supported. Also, V has a
positive influence (beta= .048) on PU but the result is not significant (p> .05 = .613).
Therefore, H5c is not supported. Finally, S has a positive influence (beta= .250) on PU but
the result is significant (p< .05 = .013). Therefore, H5d is supported.
Table 5.13: Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for Social Factors vs. PU

t
B Std. Error Beta Sig
PU N .496 .208 .205 2.385** .019
PU R .381 .111 .287 .3.442*** .001
PU V 5.867E-02 .116 .048 .508 .613
PU S .201 .080 .250 .013** .013
In general
F 16.240***
R 599
R2 .359
* p < .05, ** p <. 01, *** p <. 001
5.8.5 Hypotheses: H6a, H6b, H6c and H6d vs. PEOU
factors and PEOU. Hypotheses H6a, H6b, H6c and H6d hypothesized that subjective
norms (N), subjective roles (R), subjective values (V) and subjective social situations (S)
would be positively related to PEOU. A multiple regression analysis was utilised to test the
associated hypotheses (H6a, H6b, H6c and H6d). The results (Table 5.14) show that in
186
general, all the dimensions significantly affect PEOU (p<. 05= .000). Also, the entire
dimensions explain 24.7% of the total variance of PEOU. N has a negative influence (beta
= -.111) on PEOU but the result is not significant (p> .05 = .238). Therefore, the H6a is not
supported. Moreover, R has a positive influence (beta = .064) on PEOU but the result is not
significant (p> .05 = .479). Therefore H6b is not supported. Also V has a positive influence
(beta= .004) on PEOU but the result is not significant (p> .05= .966). Therefore, H6c is not
supported. Finally, S has a positive influence (beta =.500) on PEOU but the result is
significant (p< .05= .000). Therefore, H6d is supported.
Table 5.14: Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for Social Factors vs. PEOU

Variable Variables Coefficients Coefficients
t
B Std. Error Beta Sig
PEOU N -.318 .268 -.111 -1.1.85 .238
PEOU R .101 .143 .064 .710 .479
PEOU V 6.395E-03 .149 .004 .043 .966
PEOU S .477 .103 .500 4.635*** .000
In general
F 9.487***
R 496
R2 .247
* p < .05, ** p <. 01, *** p <. 001
5.8.6 Hypotheses: H7 and H8 vs. ATU
Hypotheses H7 and H8 collectively tested the relationship between PU and PEOU and
attitudes towards using (ATU). Hypotheses H7 and H8 hypothesized that PU and PEOU
would be positively related to ATU. A multiple regression analysis was employed to test
the associated hypotheses (H7 and H8). The results (Table 5.15) show that in general, all
the dimensions significantly affect ATU (p< .05 = .000). Also, all the dimensions
187
explained 28.4% of the total variance of ATU. Moreover, PEOU has a positive influence
(beta = .219) on ATU but the result is significant (p< .05= .011). Therefore, H7 is
supported. PU has a positive influence (beta= .405) on ATU but the result is significant (p<
.05= .000). Therefore, H8 is supported.
Table 5.15: Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for PU and PEOU vs. ATU

ATU PEOU .164 .064 .219 2.575 ** .011
ATU PU .361 .076 .405 4.758*** .000
In General
F 23.417***
R 533
R2 .284
* p < .05, ** p <. 01, *** p <. 001
But when PU and PEOU were tested on individual’s ATU (ATU1, ATU2, ATU3, ATU4
and ATU5) following finding were derived: first, PU has positive influence on each ATU
but the results (Table A5.15d-A.15h appendix 5) were significant (P<.05=.000, .001, .000,
.000 and .002). Therefore, H7 is supported. Second, although PEOU has positive influence
on all ATUs only the results of ATU1 and ATU4 (P<.05=.015, .011) were significant, the
results of ATU2, ATU3 and ATU5 (P<.05= .217, .069, .055) were not significant.
Therefore, H8 is partially supported when PEOU is tested with individual ATU.
5.8.7 Hypothesis: H9 vs. Actual System Use
Hypothesis H9 tested the relationship between ATU and actual system use (A). Hypothesis
H9 hypothesized that ATU would be positively related to actual system use (A). One -Way
188
ANOVA was used to test the associated hypothesis (H9) because A was a category
variable. The results (Table 5.16a – 5.16c) show that there was a significant difference
between ATU and A. An analysis of variance revealed a significant difference in mean
between people who actually use EIS and people who never use EIS (F = 3.369, (p< .05=
.012). A Newman Keuls post hoc test (∝=0.05) indicated that people who never use EIS
have a significantly lower mean (M=18.75, SD= 2.5, n = 4) than those who actually use
EIS (i.e., less than once a week, 2 or 3 times a week, several times a week and several times
each day) (M= 21.874525, SD= 2.027488, n = 117).
The Eta Squared (η2) derived by dividing “Between groups” of the ANOVA by Total of
the ANOVA (84.261/809.603) (see Table 5.16b) = 0.104. This shows that 10.4% of the
variance in ATU could be explained by differences between non-use at all and the actual
use of EIS (Francis, 2004).
The Box plots (see Figure 5.1) also show the distributions in the relationships between
attitude towards using (ATU) with Actual users of EIS and Non-users of EIS (NTUEIS).
On average, Actual users of EIS have slightly higher ATU than the Non-users. However,
the patterns for the users are different. While those who use EIS less than once a week had
an ATU mean of 20. 86, those who use it 2 or 3 times a week had an ATU mean of 22.07.
Moreover, those who use it several times a week had ATU mean of 22.68 and those who
use it several times each day had a mean value of 21.89. The difference in mean among
users of EIS indicates the levels of perceptions of EIS among user groups. The non-users
were only 4 in the distributions. Hence, the null is rejected. The result suggests that there is
a significant difference in mean attitude towards use for difference actual use groups.
189
However, when the Non users of EIS were dropped from the analysis and the test rerun the
result (Table 5.16c) suggests that the mean of the Actual Users of EIS differs significantly
for people with different levels of ATU (F (10, 106) = 3.2.04, p<.001).
Table 5.16a: Report ATU

NTUEIS Mean N Std. Deviation
Not at all 18.7500 4 2.50000
Less than once a week 20.8571 21 2.17453
2 or 3 times a week 22.0698 43 2.52035
Several times a week 22.6765 34 1.85408
Several times each day 21.8947 19 3.58848
Total 21.8926 121 2.59744
Table 5.16b ANOVA: ATU

Sum of
Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 84.261 4 21.065 3.369 .012
Within Groups 725.343 116 6.253
Total 809.603 120
Table 5.16c: Student-Newman-Keuls ATU Test
Subset for alpha = .05

NTUEIS N 1 2
Not at all 4 18.7500
Less than once a week 21 20.8571
Several times each day 19 21.8947
2 or 3 times a week 43 22.0698
Several times a week 34 22.6765
Sig. 1.000 .273
190
Figure 5.1: The Box Plots and Descriptive Statistics
26.00
24.00
22.00
20.00
atu
18.00
16.00
14.00
12.00 68
Not at all Less than once a 2 or 3 times a week Several times a Several times each
week week day
NTUEIS
Table 5.16d ANOVA: ATU

NTUEIS
Sum of
Between Groups 25.244 10 2.524 3.204 .001
Within Groups 83.525 106 .788
Total 108.769 116
5.8.7.1 Stepwise Regression Analysis
The analyses presented in sections 5.7 examined multiple regressions, which explored the
relationships between several predictors and dependent variables as well as the relationship
between ATU and A based on ANOVA. In order to make accurate and efficient predictions
191
of the dependent variables and in particular to determine the relative importance of the
independent variables (best model) in explaining EIS adoption and usage in organisations a
stepwise regression analysis was performed.
Using the SPSS computer package version 12, this approach commenced by entering the
predictors most strongly correlated with the dependent variable. This allowed the predictors
with significant impact to the R Square to be added. This continued until none of the
variables could make an important change to R Square. The completion of the process
allowed only the predictors contributing significantly to remain in the model (Francis,
2004).
The results of stepwise regression analyses for the PU and PEOU as dependent variables
and habits, facilitating conditions and social factors as independent variables are
summarised as follows.
5.8.7.2. Stepwise Regression for Habits, Facilitating Conditions, Social Factors

and PEOU
As shown in Table 5.17 below, 27.1% of the variance in PEOU was explained by the social
situations (S3), relating to an individual relationship with the IS director (Social Factors),
organisational environment (OE2), relating to the influence of organisational culture
(Facilitating Conditions) and EIS development process (D2), relating to the individual
involvement in the EIS development process (Facilitating Conditions).
192
On the whole, the results suggest that social factors were of vital important in explaining
the PEOU of EIS with individual influenced by those at the top, organisational culture and
the geography of the environment. The result was contributed to by including variables
such as S3, OE2 and D2 of the social factors and facilitating conditions of the environment
into the equation.
Table 5.17: Stepwise Regression Analysis – The Perceived Ease of Use
Variable Unstandardized Standardized

Entered Source Construct Coefficients Coefficients
S3 Social Factor – Social
1.115 .314 .305 3.552 .001
situations
OE2 Facilitating Conditions –
Organisational .824 .301 .236 2.738 .007
environment
D2 Facilitating Conditions –
.765 .368 .171 2.078 .040
EIS development process
In General
F 14.356: Sig = 0.000
R 520
R2 .271
5.8.7.3 Stepwise Regression for Habits, Facilitating Conditions, Social Factors

and PU
As shown in Table 5.18, 43.1% of the variance in PU was explained by subjective social
situations (S3), which relates to the influence of the IS director on EIS adoption (Social
Factors), subjective norms (N1), which relates to the influence of colleagues on individual’s
towards EIS adoption, subjective roles (R3), which relates to the influence of IS direction
on an individual towards EIS adoption, subjective values (V1), relating to the influence of
193
colleagues in EIS adoption as well as the ability to use EIS (ABEIS), relating to the
individual’s ability in the use of EIS (Habits).
On the whole, the results suggest that the relevant constructs in explaining the PU of EIS
were social factors and habits with individual influence by the IS director and colleagues as
well as their ability in using EIS. This was established due to the contribution by: S3, N1,
R3, V1 and ABEIS variables of the social factors and the habits constructs into the
equation.
Table 5.18: Stepwise Regression Analysis – Perceived Usefulness
Variable Source Construct Unstandardized Standardized

Entered Coefficients Coefficients

S3 Social Factor – Social
.802 .250 .3.210 3.210 .002
Situations
N1 Social Factors –
.823 .325 2.527 2.527 .013
Subjective Norms
ABEIS Habits .671 .226 2.969 2.969 .004
R3 Social Factors –
.905 .237 3.813 3.813 .000
Subjective Roles
V1 Social Factors –
.781 .353 2.212 2.212 .029
Subjective Values
In General
F 17.247: Sig = 0.000
R 656
.431
R2
5.8.7.4 Stepwise Regression for PEOU and PU and Attitude toward Using
Table 5.19 shows that 31.4% of the variance in attitudes towards using was explained by
perceived usefulness (PU1) which relates to an increase in organisational performance due
to EIS adoption and another perceived usefulness variable (PU6), relating to an increase in
speed in an individual’s decision-making due to system use (PU) and (PEOU6), relating to
194
the individual’s clear understanding of the system due to frequent interactions with it
(PEOU).
On the whole, the results suggest that the relevant constructs in explaining ATU were both
the PU and PEOU with an increase in organisation performance, speed in decision-making
and an individual’s clear understanding of the system following frequent interactions with
it. This was established by the influence of the PU1, PU6 and PEOU6 variables of both the
PU and PEOU into the equation.
Table 5.19: Stepwise Regression Analysis – Attitudes towards Using
Variable Unstandardized Standardized

Entered Source Construct Coefficients Coefficients
PU1 Perceived Usefulness 1.331 .303 .346 4.387 .000
PEOU6 Perceived Ease of Use .897 .322 .240 2.784 .006
PU6 Perceived Usefulness .596 .266 .198 2.240 .027
In General
F 17.839: Sig = 0.000
R 560
R2 .314
5.8.7.5 Testing Multiple Regression Assumption
The significance figures in a multiple regression output are based on a number of
assumptions. These assumptions are as follows:
o Metric scales – The dependent variable must be measured on a metric scale and all
of the predictors must be either metric or dichotomous.
195
o Independence of observations – Every observation in the sample is assumed to be
independent of all other observations.
o Linearity and additivity – This assumes that the independent variables are all
linearly related to the dependent variables and that there is no interaction between
the predictors.
o Normality – This assumes that in the population, for each combination of values of
the independent variables the residuals are normally distributed.
o Equal variances (homoscedasticity) – This assumes that in the population for each
combination of values of the independent variables, the distribution of residuals has
the same spread (Francis, 2004).
The first two assumptions are considered at the experimental design stage (Francis, 2004),
and are therefore not important for the present study. The linearity and homoscedasticity of
variances assumptions can be checked by looking at a plot of residuals versus predicted
values. The plot should show a broad, horizontal band of points. Any ’fanning out’ of the
residuals indicates a violation of the equal variances assumption and any pattern in the plot
indicates a violation of linearity (Francis, 2004). As shown in Figure A5.5 to A5.7 in
appendix 5, the scatter plots for the PU, PEOU and ATU do not show any definite pattern,
nor any ‘fanning out’ of residuals. Therefore it is reasonable to assume that the linearity
and homoscedasticity of variances assumptions have been met. Also, as shown in the
abovementioned figures, the residuals are randomly and evenly dispersed throughout the
scatter plot (Hair et al. 1995). Hence, the above assumptions have been met.
The normality assumption can be checked by looking at the histogram or a normal
probability plot of the residuals (Hair et al. 1995; Francis, 2004). Residuals are the
196
differences between the observed and the predicted value of dependent variables of the
regression analysis (Francis, 2004). The residuals should be approximately normally
distributed (Hair et al. 1995; Francis, 2004). As shown Figures A5.8 to A5.13 in appendix
5, while the residual points are slightly positively skewed from left to right, the bell-shaped
histograms approximated the normal distribution, i.e., they are approximately symmetrical
and not too kurtonic. This suggests that there are no obvious violations of assumptions for
the normality for the PU, PEOU and ATU.
5.8.7.6 Testing the Assumption of One-Way ANOVA
Having presented the results of the data analyses in the previous section, this subsection
presents the assumptions underlying One-Way ANOVA.
The assumptions underlying the analysis of variance are as follows:
o Each of the observations must be independent;
o The dependent variable must be an interval level of measurement;
o The underlying population must be normally distributed;
o Each of the underlying populations must have the same variance (Francis, 2004).
Leven’s test is used to check for equality of variance, and a normal probability plot is used
to check for normality (Francis, 2004). The result of Leven’s test (Table A5.14, appendix
5) indicates no significant difference in the variability of the group (p >.05) = 0.130. The
standard deviations (SD) for the two groups (i.e., actual user of EIS and not at all) are
similar. SDs for the two groups are 2.027 and 2.5 (see Table 5.16a and 5.16c). Therefore,
the two populations have similar variance (Francis, 2004). The normal probability plots
197
(see Figures A5.14 – A5.18, appendix 5) show that the number of times of EIS usage
(NTUEIS) is approximately normally distributed in the populations (Francis, 2004).
5.8.7.7 Practical Assumption of MANOVA
According to Francis (2004) the dependent variable used in a multivariate analysis of
variance should be measured on metric scales and should measure different aspects of some
cohesive theme. The dependent variable should be moderately correlated. If two dependent
variables are strongly correlated there is no point including them in the analysis as they
contain essentially the same information (Francis, 2004).
The assumptions underlying MANOVA are an extension of those for ANOVA and, they
are as follows:
o Independence of observations
o Metric data
o Multivariate Normality – Each dependent variable must be normally distributed,
and all possible linear combinations of the dependent variables must be
normally distributed, in each treatment population.
o Homogeneity of variance/covariance matrix – this is an extension of
homogeneity of variance assumption in ANOVA. In this assumption, not only
must the variance of dependent variable be the same across all treatment
populations, the correlation between any pair of dependent variables must also
be the same across all treatment populations (Francis, 2004).
198
Because the first two assumptions are often considered at the experimental level, therefore
they are not important for this study (Francis, 2004).
(1) Multivariate Normality – Multivariate outliers can be checked by the use of the
Mahalanobis distance (Francis, 2004). If the Mahalanobis distance is significant at p <
0.001, the case is a potential outlier (Francis, 2004). Critical values for the Mahalanobis
distance are taken from the χ2 equal to the number of variables. Any case with a
Mahalanobis distance greater than 13.8 is a potential outlier (Francis, 2004).
Using the SPSS procedure the test result (see Table A5.15a, appendix 5) indicates that the
Mahalanobis distance is insignificant (P>0.001)= 0.035. Furthermore, the residual statistics
(see Table A5.15b, appendix 5) indicate that both the minimum and maximum values of
Mahalanobis distance are less than 13.8 therefore there are no outliers in any of the groups.
(2) Checking for Homogeneity of the Variance/Covariance Matrix
The Box‘s M is used to test homogeneity of the variance/covariance matrix assumption. If
the Box’s M is significant at ∝ = 0.001 then there is a potential violation of the
homogeneity assumption (Francis, 2004). From the test results presented in Table A5.16, in
Appendix 5, the Box’s M is not significant (∝=0.001<0.019). Therefore, there are no
violations of the assumption of homogeneity of the variance/covariance matrix.
The results of the assumption tests of multiple regressions, ANOVA and MANOVA
showed that there was no violation of assumptions.
199
5.8.7.8 Summary and Conclusions
This chapter presents the results of the data analyses for the present study. The results of
multiple regressions, MANOVA and ANOVA showed that fourteen out of twenty-three
hypotheses were supported, while nine were not supported. Three out of the fourteen supported
hypotheses were from the relationship between habits and PU variables, four were from the
relationships between facilitating conditions and PU and PEOU variables, four were from the
relationships between social factors and PU and PEOU variables, two were the relationships
between PU, PEOU and ATU. Finally, one was from the relationship between ATU and A.
With reference to the nine unsupported hypotheses, three were those from the relationships
between habits and PEOU variables, two were from the relationships between facilitating
conditions and PU and PEOU variables and four were from the relationships between social
factors and PU and PEOU variables.
The results of the stepwise regressions showed that PU was a more appropriate measure of user
behaviour than PEOU and ATU. For instance 43.1% of the variance in PU was explained by
variables such as subjective social situations, norms, roles and values of social factors and the
ability to use EIS of Habits. On the whole, the result emphasise that the relevant constructs in
explaining the PU of EIS were social factors and habits with individual being influenced by the
IS director, colleagues and their ability to use the systems.
Further, approximately, 31.4% of the variance in ATU was explained by PU and PEOU
variables such as (PU1), relating to an increase in organisational performance due to systems
use, (PU6), relating to an individual’s speed in decision-making due to system use and
200
(PEOU6), relating to an individual’s clear understanding of the system due to frequent
interactions. On the whole, the results suggest that the relevant constructs in explaining ATU
were both the PU and PEOU with an increase in organisational performance, speed in decision-
making and an individual’s clear understanding of the system following frequent interactions
with them.
Moreover, 27.1% of the variance in PEOU was explained by the social situations of social
factors, organisational environment and EIS development processes of facilitating conditions.
On the whole, the results suggest that social factors were of vital importance in explaining the
PEOU of EIS with individual being influenced by those at the top management. Also,
organisational culture and user involvement in the systems development processes were found
to be important.
The chapter presents the results of the tests of assumptions of multiple regressions, ANOVA
and MANOVA. The test results of linearity and homoscedasticity of variances assumptions of
regression analysis based on a plot of residual and predicted value suggest no obvious violation
of assumptions. Also, the residual points of the normal probability plot which show a slightly
positive skewness from left to right suggest no obvious violation of the assumptions of
normality. Regarding the ANOVA test of assumptions, the result of Leven’s test shows no
significant difference in the variability of the group (p > 0.05 = 0.130). Further, the standard
deviations for the two groups (i.e., actual user of EIS and none users of EIS) were similar
indicating no difference between the two populations. In addition, the normal probability plots
were approximately normally distributed in the populations. With regards to MANOVA, the
test result of Mahalanobis distance is insignificant (p>0.001) =0.035. Further, the test result
indicates that in every case the Mahalanobis distance is less than 13.8 therefore there were no
201
potential outliers. Also, the test result of Box’s M is insignificant ∝ > 0.001=0.019, therefore
there were no violations of homogeneity of the variance/covariance matrix.
One important conclusion that can be drawn from the results of data analyses is that the
majority of the hypotheses proposed in Chapter Three have been significant. Chapter 6 will
presents the conclusions and implications of this study. Future directions and limitations of the
study will also be presented in Chapter 6.
202
CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
6.1 Introduction
The results of data analysis derived from MANOVA, multiple linear regressions, One-Way
ANOVA and stepwise regressions as well as their assumptions were presented in the
previous chapter. This chapter presents the conclusions of the research hypotheses, research
questions and the research problem. The contributions of the present study, its implications
and limitations are presented as well. The chapter begins with the summary of each chapter
followed by the findings, implications and conclusions related to the research hypotheses.
Further, the chapter presents the findings, implications and conclusions related to the
research questions. Next, the chapter presents the conclusions related to the research
problem followed by the contributions of the study and the implications for theory, policy
and practice. Finally, the limitations of the study and its implications for further research
are discussed.
6.2 A Summary of the Study
This study was motivated by the realisation that there was (1) marked limited research on
the actual use of EIS by executives and (2), lack of an appropriate reference theoretical
foundation of social and cultural, individual and organisational variables in determining the
factors for user acceptance and use of EIS despite the failure of EIS and their
underutilisation by organisational executives.
203
The research problem that this study sought to resolve was the underutilisation of EIS by
executives due to the failures of these systems. To provide a solution to the problem, a
research model drawn from TAM and Triandis’ framework was employed. The main
objective was to investigate and examine the cultural, social, and organisational critical
success factors (CSF) that might explain executives’ behaviour in accepting and using EIS.
Specifically, the study investigated two research questions:
1. What are the social, cultural and organisational factors that explain executives’
behaviour towards using EIS in organisations?; and
executives of organisation?
The results of the study:
o Provide a better understanding of the choices in using EIS by the executives;
o Assist EIS developers and designers to understand the core information processing
requirements for executives’ tasks for which they are building the EIS systems, in
order to implement appropriate system functionalities to support those tasks;
o Assist researchers to further research the factors influencing human behaviour
towards IS including EIS adoption and usage;
o Support the development of a methodology that is useful for further research into IS
including EIS adoption and usage;
o Provide suggestions about the importance of user involvement and participation in
EIS design, development and implementation;
204
o Provide suggestions about the importance of EIS user training and education to
enhance use.
The present chapter summarises the results of the hypotheses tests and presents
implications and conclusions of the study. First, the chapter presents a discussion on the
findings, implications and conclusions related to the research hypotheses followed by a
discussion on the findings, implication and conclusions related to the research questions.
Third, the chapter presents a discussion and conclusion related to the research questions.
Further, the chapter presents an updated version of the research model used for the present
study and implications for EIS adoption and usage. Next, the chapter presents the
contributions of the study and the implications of the study for theory, policy and practice.
Finally, the chapter presents the limitations of the present study along with some
suggestions for further research.
6.3 Findings, Implications and Conclusions Related to the Hypotheses
The hypotheses of the present study were proposed in Chapter 3 Section 3.5.2 to provide
answers to the research questions. These hypotheses were embedded in the research model
in Chapter 3 Section 3.5.1. The analysis of the research hypotheses and their corresponding
test results were presented in Chapter 5 Section 5.7. Table 6.1 below summarises the
research hypotheses and their test results. While fourteen of the twenty-three research
hypotheses have been supported (H1a, H1b, H1c, H3a, H3c, H4a, H4c, H5a, H5b, H5d,
H6d, H7, H8 and H9) from the empirical test, nine (H2a, H2b, H2c, H3b, H4b, H5c, H6a,
205
H6b, H6c) have not been supported. We present the findings and implications related to the
research hypotheses in the next section.
Table 6.1 Summary of Test Results for the Study Hypotheses

Study Hypotheses Results
H1a: Experience in CBIS will have a positive effect on perceived usefulness of EIS. Supported
H1b: Experience in EIS will have a positive effect on perceived usefulness of EIS. Supported
H1c: Ability to use will have a positive effect on perceived usefulness of EIS. Supported
H2a: Experience in CBIS will have a positive effect on perceived ease of use of EIS. Not Supported
H2b: EIS experience will have a positive effect on perceived ease of use of EIS. Not Supported
H2c: Ability to use EIS will have a positive effect on perceived ease of use of EIS. Not Supported
H3a: EIS development processes will have a positive effect on the perceived usefulness of EIS. Supported
H3b: EIS management processes will have a positive effect on the perceived usefulness of EIS. Not Supported
H3c: Organisational environment processes will have a positive effect on the perceived
usefulness of EIS. Supported
H4a: EIS development processes will have a positive effect on the perceived ease of use of EIS. Supported
H4b: EIS management processes will have a positive effect on the perceived Ease of use of EIS. Not Supported
H4c: Organisational environment will have a positive effect on the perceived ease of use of EIS. Supported
H5a: Subjective norms will have a positive effect on perceived usefulness. Supported
H5b: Subjective roles will have a positive effect on perceived usefulness. Supported
H5c: Subjective values will have a positive effect on perceived usefulness. Not Supported
H5d: Subjective social situations will have a positive effect on perceived Usefulness. Supported
H6a: Subjective norms will have a positive effect on perceived ease of use. Not Supported
H6b: Subjective roles will have a positive effect on perceived ease of use. Not Supported
H6c: Subjective values will have a positive effect on perceived ease of use. Not Supported
H6d: Subjective social situations will have a positive effect on perceived ease of use. Supported
H7: Perceived usefulness will have a positive effect on attitude towards using EIS. Supported
H8: Perceived ease of use will have a positive effect on attitude towards using EIS. Supported
H9: Executive attitudes towards using EIS will have a positive effect on Actual use of EIS. Supported
206
6.3.1 Findings and Implications Related to the Hypotheses
Hypotheses: H1a, H1b and H1c: Habits and Perceived Usefulness
Interpretation
H1a, H1b and H1c tested hypothesis about Habits and their relationships with Perceived
Usefulness. H1a postulated that there would be a positive relationship between experience
in computer-based information systems (CBIS) and perceived usefulness of EIS. H1a was
introduced to the main study based on the suggestion from the preliminary study that
executives’ experience in CBIS positively related to their experience in EIS. H1b posited
that there would be a positive relationship between EIS experience and the perceived
usefulness of EIS. That is, the more years of experience that executive had with EIS, the
more was his/her perceived usefulness of EIS. Further, H1c postulated that there would be
a positive relationship between the ability to use EIS and perceived usefulness of EIS. That
is, the greater the executive’s ability in using EIS, the higher his/her perceived usefulness
of EIS.
Discussion of the findings and implications of H1a, H1b, and H1c
As might be expected, the results of H1a, H1b and H1c were supported in the study. The
results of H1a, H1b and H1c were consistent with many previous studies that focused on
the acceptance and use of new technology (Lucas, 1978; Zmud, 1979; Rosson, 1983;
Elkerton and Willges, 1984; Davies and Davies, 1990; Davis, 1993; Thompson et al. 1994;
Kim, 1996; Compeau and Higgins, 1995a; 1995b; Hubona and Jones, 2002; Ditsa, 2003).
From the results we can draw several conclusions. First, the results suggests that the more
experience that executives’ had with EIS due to their experience in CBIS, the more their
207
perceived usefulness of EIS. Second, the results suggest that the higher the level of
executives’ experience with EIS, the higher the intensity of their perceived usefulness of
EIS. Third, the results suggest that an increase in executives’ ability to use EIS would lead
to their positive perceived usefulness of EIS.
The implications of these results are that EIS designers/developers and managers of
organisations do not need to worry too much about the low level of use of EIS during the
first few months of implementing the systems in their organisations. With time, executive
users’ learning experience will favour a more intensive utilisation, which would result in
their perceived usefulness of the systems in their roles. Further, organisations should aim at
providing executives the required experience in EIS by means of training and education in
order to enhance their perceived usefulness of the systems to their roles. Further, EIS
designers/developers need to address the issue of tailoring EIS to meet the managerial
needs of users. The designers/developers should align the systems with the strategic
business processes of organisations.
Hypotheses H2a, H2b and H2c: Habits and Perceived Ease of Use
Interpretation
H2a posited that there would be a positive relationship between experience in computer-
based information systems (CBIS) and perceived ease use of EIS. H2b posited that there
would be a positive relationship between EIS experience and perceived ease of use of EIS.
That is, the more years of experience that an executive had with EIS, the more his/her
perceived ease of use of EIS. Further, H2c postulated that there would be a positive
relationship between the ability to use EIS and the perceived ease of use of EIS. That is,
executives’ ability in using EIS would lead to a positive effect on their perceived ease of
208
use of EIS. In order words, H2c assumed that the higher an executive’s ability in using EIS,
the higher his/her perceived ease of use of EIS.
Discussion of Findings and Implications of H2a, H2b and H2c
Contrary to expectation no significant relationship was found between experience in CBIS,
EIS and the ability to use EIS (H2a, H2b and H2c). However, these findings should not be
surprising because prior empirical studies (e.g., Raymond, 1985; Mathieson, 1991; Adams
et al. 1992; Davis, 1993; Bergeron et al. 1995; Gefen and Straub, 2000; Hubona and Jones,
2002) tend to report similar relationships. For instance, in his study of IS applications,
Davis (1993) did not find a direct effect between system use and ease of use of system.
Further, in Hubona and Jones (2002) study, there was no significant relationship between
individual’s level of education and perceived ease of use of IS application. The perceived
ease of use mostly failed as a moderating variable on IS utilisation in IS studies (e.g.,
Raymond, 1985; Mathieson, 1991; Davis, 1993; Chau, 1996; Gefen and Straud, 2000).
A possible explanation of these findings for H2a, H2b and H2c may lie with the fact that
EIS users with more computer literacy have higher expectations (in terms of ease of use) of
the system than those with low computer literacy. Thus, they may react negatively to the
delivered EIS system when it does not meet these expectations (Srivihok, 1999).
Further, the findings of the relationship between executives’ experience in CBIS, EIS and
the ability to use EIS on perceived ease of use may be more or less dependent upon the
stage of EIS diffusion. Executives need some initial skills to handle the EIS technology
hence there will be an initial positive relationship between experience to use EIS, the
ability to use EIS and perceived ease of use. However, in the mature stage, users will have
209
much less difficulty in using the system since the system should be relatively easy to use.
Accordingly, there will be no relationship, which seems a much more plausible explanation
for the results (Chau, 1996). EIS designers/developers and implementers are therefore
urged to design/develop-customized systems with flexible features that enhance use beyond
novice users to expert knowledgeable users (Nord and Nord, 1995).
However, prior studies (e.g., Davis, 1989; Adams, et al. 1992; Rainer and Watson, 1995;
Young and Watson, 1995; Chau, 1996) argue that the perceived ease of use may not be an
important variable for explaining user acceptance of new technology such as EIS but there
are other factors that influence technology acceptance. These factors encompass technology
characteristics such as functionalities, development life cycle, access to other applications,
organisational tools (e.g., user interface), easy retrieval of data and so on (Young and
Watson, 1995; Rainer and Watson, 1995). According to Young and Watson, (1995) and
Rainer and Watson, (1995), user acceptance of EIS more or less depends upon EIS support
staff characteristics such as staff qualifications, proximity of staff to user ratio, reporting
relationship and face-to-face time with users.
This suggests that the study of EIS acceptance should therefore be guided by a more
sophisticated theoretical framework that reflects broader influential factors including
technology characteristics and EIS support staff characteristics as well.
Hypotheses H3a, H3b and H3c: Facilitating Conditions and Perceived Usefulness.
Interpretation
H3a, H3b and H3c tested the impacts of social factors on perceived usefulness of EIS. H3a
hypothesised that there would be a positive relationship between EIS development

210
processes and perceived usefulness of EIS. H3b hypothesised that there would be a positive
relationship between EIS management processes and perceived usefulness of EIS. Also,
H3c hypothesised that there would a positive relationship between organisational
environment and perceived usefulness of EIS.
Discussion of Findings and Implications of H3a, H3b and H3c
The test results for H3a, H3b and H3c were mixed. The results supported hypotheses H3a
and H3c but not H3b. The positive results of hypotheses H3a and H3c compare favourably
with previous studies (e.g., Ditsa, 2003). But the result of H3b contrasted with previous
study (e.g., Ditsa 2003).
It can be argued that there may be a shift in users’ perceptions of EIS applications since
2003 following the advancement in information technology as well as the effect of cultural
change such as policies, rules and management within organisations. These shifts in users’
perception may have resulted in the spread of EIS to other levels of management within
organisations. A further suggestion to this is that more and more executives are now using
EIS following the spread and perceived usefulness of EIS for executives’ roles.
In general, the perceived usefulness clearly mediates the effect of facilitating conditions
and executive’s behaviour. Specifically, perceived usefulness mediates the effect of EIS
development processes and the organisational environment of EIS on behaviour but has no
effect on behaviour through EIS management processes. This suggests that although EIS
management processes may be a unit by itself in the initial EIS project phase, it is
embedded within the EIS development processes and the organisational environment in the
long run of the EIS project.

211
Implications of the H3a, H3b and H3c
The implications of these findings are that EIS designers/implementers and managers of
organisations should involve executive users in all phases of the EIS projects. This is
because first; executives’ involvement in EIS design will improve the design process by
identifying executives’ requirements, validating design options and creating better
understanding and ownership options. Second, executives’ involvement in the system
implementation process would facilitate implementation by ensuring acceptance, follow-up
and continuous resource support and overcome resistance to use. Third, executives’
involvement in EIS projects would address ethical concerns such as norms and values of
the organisations (Nandhakumar and Jones, 1997; McBride, 1997). Overall, executives’
involvement and participation in EIS projects can have a positive effect on their satisfaction
with EIS. User satisfaction is a valid indication of how well an EIS project supports the
business.
Also, by identifying every executive who will be directly or indirectly affected by the EIS
project at the development phases the chances of EIS success can be more easily evaluated.
Further, close relationships between executives and developers/designers in the EIS project
assist the developers/designers to: identify critical success factors and stakeholder
expectations, determine reporting formats and frequency, outline information flows and its
usage and document performance measures that monitor the critical success factors and
stakeholder expectations.
Further, developers/designers and organisational managers should take into consideration
the importance of resources other than technical ones to enhance system use. This includes
the provision of appropriate IS staff with relevant business skills, communication skills and
212
strong interpersonal skills to assist and resolve users’ problems during the project life and
technology that is able to support the demands of a working environment. Although the
technology is important, the importance of the information is much more crucial.
Additionally, EIS designers/developers and organisational managers must take into
consideration the importance of organisational culture, their interactions among business
units and the dynamics of the environment over the life of an EIS project in their
organisations. In fact, the effect of perceived usefulness of the systems and the impacts on
executives’ roles such as producing results and benefits valued by managers can be felt
from the above discussions.
Hypotheses H4a, H4b, and H4c: Facilitating Conditions and Perceived Ease of Use
Hypotheses H4a, H4b and H4c tested the relationship between facilitating conditions of
EIS and perceived usefulness of EIS.
Interpretation of H4a, H4b and H4c
Hypotheses H4a, H4b and H4c assumed that there would be a positive relationship
between: EIS development processes, EIS management processes, organisational
environment on the one hand, and perceived ease of use of EIS on the other.
Discussions of Findings and Implications of H4a, H4b and H4c
The results of the study supported two of the hypothesised relationships between
facilitating conditions and perceived ease of use. The results of H4a and H4c were
significant but H4b was not significant. The positive results of H4a and H4c compared
favourably with prior studies (e.g., Ditsa, 2003) but H4b did not. Although Ditsa (2003)
213
tested the relationship between facilitating conditions and behaviour, this current study
tested the relationship between facilitating conditions and perceived ease of use. The
findings of H4 are similar to those of H3 above where H3a and H3c were significant but
H3b was not significant.
The results suggest that the perceived ease of use of EIS has no mediating effect on EIS
management processes and utilisation of EIS by the executives (H3b). It may be that EIS
management processes are embedded within the EIS development processes and
organisational environment of EIS in the long run since both of these variables encompass
management.
Also, because EIS has the potential to drastically alter the prevailing patterns of
communication within the organisation and thus will typically be met with resistance due to
lack of knowledge, feelings of fear, insecurity and cynicism experienced by individuals
throughout the organisations (Kelly, 1994). This can be a potential problem that can inhibit
the success of the EIS project.
This implies EIS designers/developers must enhance the facilitating conditions (EIS
development processes and organisational environment of EIS) of their products by
improving the technical capabilities and functionalities of EIS. Examples include
improving access to an external database, providing sophisticated features such as online
help screen, data support tools, dial-in access to EIS, graphic, tabular and textual data on
screen. To enhance use, these features must be made flexible and user-friendly.
214
Further, EIS designers/developers, implementers and managers of organisations should
have face-to-face meetings with EIS user groups so that problems proposed by users
including issues of business culture and decision-making style can be resolved in the design
phases of the system. Also, EIS implementers need to see an EIS project as an ongoing
project. As a result, they should make available adequate user support staff, data
management processes and resources for a sustainable EIS project. The implementers must
also ensure that these systems are available and can be accessed anytime anywhere.
Executive champions of EIS projects are urged to consistently reinforce the purpose of EIS
and direct the attention of the executive group away from unproductive and punitive
behaviours. Further, managers of organisations must consider the importance of enlisting
heads of their business units into an EIS project such that user resistance can be managed
from each business unit. User resistance within each business unit can be managed through
communication to users about the importance of EIS for their roles and through education
and training in the development and implementation phases on how to use statistics,
performance measures and so on.
In addition, managers of organisations must consider the importance of organisational
culture, the interactions among and between business units and the dynamics of the
environment for the success of the EIS project.
Hypotheses H5a, H5b, H5c and H5d: Social factors and Perceived Usefulness
Interpretations
factors and perceived usefulness. Hypotheses H5a, H5b, H5c and H5d hypothesised that
215
subjective norms, roles, values and social situations would be positively related to
perceived usefulness of EIS.
Discussion of the Findings and Implications of H5
The results of the study supported hypotheses H5a, H5b and H5d but did not support H5c.
The results of H5a, H5b and H5d compare favourably with previous studies (Mathieson,
1991; Taylor and Todd, 1995; Bergeron et al. 1995; Venkatesh and Davies, 1996; Elkordy,
2000; Mao, 2002; Ditsa, 2002, 2003; Venkatesh et al. 2003). Although the previous studies
cited above predicted the importance of social factors such as subjective norms, roles and
social situations on behaviour, this study predicted the relationship of social factors and
perceived usefulness. This might be the reason that the result of the hypothesised
relationship between subjective roles (H5c) and perceived usefulness of EIS has been
insignificant. However, in a similar study, Bergeron et al. (1995) found a non-significant
relationship between work group influence and frequency of EIS use.
In general, hypothesis H5 that suggests social factors in the workplace would have a
significant impact on the perceived usefulness of EIS by the executives.
The above results have a significant implication to EIS designers/developers and managers.
These findings call for the organisations to adequately prepare EIS by focusing not only on
individual users but also on their work units (Bergeron et al. 1995). Further, EIS
designers/implementers should note that EIS are social systems therefore the social
working relationships within organisation must be considered in the EIS projects (McBride,
1997; Nandhakumar and Jones, 1997; Ditsa, 2003). Furthermore, EIS
designers/implementers and top managers need to involve users in all phases of an EIS
216
project because interactions among participants will have a positive effect on the success of
EIS and minimise resistance to use. In this way, users’ resistance can be managed through
identifying their requirements such as information, decision-making style and training and
assistance required to encourage EIS use. In summary appropriate user involvement in EIS
project and measure of EIS objectives is a precondition for reducing organisational
resistance to an EIS and is the root of effective EIS use.
Hypotheses H6a, H6b, H6c and H6d: Social Factors and Perceived Ease of Use
Interpretation
Hypotheses H6a, H6a, H6c and H6d collectively postulated that social factors of the work
environment would be positively related to perceived ease of use of EIS. Hypotheses H6a,
H6b, H6c and H6d hypothesised that subjective norms, roles, values and social situations
would be positively related to perceived ease of use.
Discussion of the Findings and Implications of H6
Although the test results indicated that in general all the dimensions significantly affect
PEOU (p< .05=.000) and the entire dimensions explained 24.7% of the total variance of
PEOU, H6a, H6b and H6c were unsupported. Only H6d was supported. The results did not
disagree with prior studies ((Mathieson, 1991; Taylor and Todd, 1995; Bergeron et al.
1995; Venkatesh and Davies, 1996; Elkordy, 2000; Mao, 2002; Ditsa, 2002, 2003;
Venkatesh et al. 2003). Although, prior empirical studies (Mathieson, 1991; Taylor and
Todd, 1995; Bergeron et al. 1995; Venkatesh and Davies, 1996; Elkordy, 2000; Mao, 2002;
Ditsa, 2002, 2003; Venkatesh et al. 2003) utilised system use or user behaviour as the
dependent variable of social factors this study employed perceived ease of use as the
dependent variable. This suggests that social factors such as subjective norms, roles, and
217
values except social situations have little effect on the perceived ease of use of EIS. This
might be explained by the fact that EIS may be sufficiently user-friendly and easy enough
to use that social factors such as norms (H6a), values (H6b) and rules (H6c) are not
specifically required as ease of use variables, once initial training has been provided to the
managers. Although, subjective norms, roles and values may have a substantial influence
on the perceived usefulness of EIS in the initial training period and implementation phases
of the EIS project, this influence does not extend to later periods. Therefore, their
relationships to ease of use in the later period would become insignificant.
Implications of the Results
The implications of the results are that the perceived ease of use of EIS to executives may
be more or less achieved through their effectiveness to users’ business requirements such as
accessibility to relevant information, flexibility and user friendliness, timeliness and
accuracy and so on rather than by the group subjective factor variables such as norms
(H6a,), roles (H6b) and values (H6c). EIS designers/implementers and managers of
organisations must therefore ensure that EIS projects are more or less business-led and
expert-driven (Sannes, 1996) such that:
o Executive users can have direct hands-on usage,
o The system can provide immediate access to internal and external data;
o The system can provide accurate data;
o The systems are used directly by executives without intermediaries;
o The systems are user-friendly and require minimal or no training to use (Young and
Watson, 1995).
218
Further, the significant relationship between social situations (workplace influence) and
perceived ease of use of EIS (H6d) calls for the organisation to adequately prepare EIS
implementation by focusing not only on individual users but also on their work units, peer
groups and executive user’s group (Bergeron et al. 1995). This will enable every group that
is involved and participates in the implementation processes to perceive the intrinsic
characteristics of EIS such as ease of use, ease of learning, flexibility and clarity of the
interface (Gefen and Straub, 2000).
Hypotheses H7 and H8
Interpretation
H7 posited that there would be a positive relationship between the perceived usefulness of
EIS and attitude towards use. That is, the greater the perceived usefulness of EIS by the
executives, the more positive attitude they have would towards using the systems. H8
postulated that there would a positive relationship between the perceived ease of use of EIS
and attitudes towards use. That is, the greater the perceived ease of use of EIS by the
executives, the greater their perception of the systems in terms of attitudes towards using it.
Discussion of Findings and Implications of H7 and H8
As expected the results of the test supported hypotheses H7 and H8 in the study. The test
results agreed with previous studies (e.g., Davis, 1993; Agarwal and Prasad, 1999; Moon
and Kim, 2001; Mathieson and Chin, 2001; Mao, 2002) concerning the acceptance of new
technology. The results suggest that executives tend to have more positive attitudes towards
using EIS when EIS is seen as having more perceived usefulness. Further, the results
suggest that executives tend to have a more positive attitude towards using EIS when the
systems are perceived to be easy to use. In other words, the model views computer usage
219
behaviour to be extrinsically and intrinsically motivated. That is, computer users are more
or less driven by concern over performance gain and associated rewards as well as,
enjoyment, flexibility and clarity of EIS interface.
These results have a significant implication to EIS designers/developers, EIS implementers
and organisational managers. EIS designers/developers should ensure that there is a
significant perceived usefulness of EIS to users in terms of users’ productivity,
efficiency/effectiveness, communication, time saving and enhancement of their mental
model of their organisations.
Further, EIS designers/developers should ensure that the attributes of EIS are such that
users can easily access and assimilate information from the systems. Executives need not
be sophisticated computer users in order to use EIS. Instead minimal training and education
of executives should be enough to enable them to navigate through the system. The system
interface such as keyboard, mice, touchscreens, infared devices or combination should be
flexible to users to enhance use (Rainer and Watson, 1995), because executives will be
unwilling to tolerate using a difficult interface (Davis, 1993). It could be argued that 15
years later managers are much more IT capable.
EIS designers/developers and managers of organisations should note that EIS is never
complete but should be seen as a system in constant development. The users information
needs can change. Equally, these needs are personal and, changes in the composition of
senior management almost always lead to changes in the content of EIS. Therefore, EIS
designers/developers, implementers and organisational managers should plan for the future
right from the start. The actual development of EIS should take place in close contact with
220
the users as an interactive process. Equally, their introduction should take place in stages in
order to test what users prefer (Thodenius, 1996).
Hypothesis H9: Attitudes Towards Using and Actual use
Interpretation
H9 posited that there would be a positive relationship between attitudes towards using EIS
and actual use of EIS. In other words, the more positive attitudes that executive have
towards EIS, the more he/she would use the systems.
Discussion of Results and Implications of H9
As expected, the test result supported the hypothesis. Further, the test result compared
favourably with previous empirical studies on IS (e.g., Robey, 1979; Malhotra and Galletta,
1999; Hubona and Jones, 2002; Mao, 2002).
EIS designers are urged, therefore, to create favourable user attitudes, usually through such
practices as involving users in the system development work. This allows user concerns
over performance and rewards to be addressed before irretrievable investments are made in
design efforts. Also, system designers/implementers would be well advised to find some
means of addressing these concerns during EIS development (Robey, 1979). Section 6.3.2
that follows presents the conclusions related to the research hypotheses.
6.3.2 Conclusions Related to Research Hypotheses
To summarise, the results indicate that all the hypothesised relationships were supported
except the relationship between Habits and Perceived ease of use. We have presented the
221
findings and implications of the study for EIS designers/developers; EIS implementers and
organisational managers to enable them to improve the adoption and usage of EIS by senior
managers.
Further, the results and findings of the present study have some implications to IS including
EIS researchers. EIS researchers can apply the model for further testing of user behaviour
towards the adoption and usage of EIS by modifying constructs and variables and/or
proposing new hypotheses between these constructs. Also, the model can be applied in IS
research studies including E-commerce, Internet banking and marketing in testing human
behaviour in IS adoption and usage. We present the findings, conclusions and implications
related to the research questions in the next section.
6.4 Findings, Conclusions and Implications Related to the Research Questions
We presented the analyses and test results that addressed the research questions in Chapter
5 Section 5.7.9. In this section we present the findings and conclusions based on the test
results. We also present the implications of the findings to EIS designers/developers,
implementers and organisational managers to assist them to improve the acceptance and
usage of EIS in their organisations.
6.4.1 Findings Related to the Research Questions
To provide answers to the research questions we performed stepwise regression analyses on
the data collected for the study. The best stepwise regression models selected to address
222
the research have been presented in Table 5.16, 5.17 and 5.18 in Chapter 5 for actual
system usage by means of perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and attitudes towards
using.
The results of the stepwise regressions showed that PU was a more appropriate measure of
user behaviour than PEOU and ATU. About 43.1% of the variance in PU was explained by
variables such as subjective social situations, norms, roles and values of Social factors and
the ability to use EIS of Habits. On the whole, the results suggest that the relevant
constructs in explaining the PU of EIS were Social factors and Habits with individuals
being influenced by the IS director, colleagues and their ability to use the systems. Habits
followed Social factors in a decreasing order of importance in explaining the perceived
usefulness of EIS.
Further, about 31.4% of the variance in ATU was explained by PU and PEOU variables
such as (PU1), relating to an increase in organisational performance due to systems use,
(PU6), relating to individual’s speed in decision-making due to system use and (PEOU6),
relating to individual’s clear understanding of the system due to frequent interactions. On
the whole, the results suggest that the relevant constructs in explaining ATU were both the
PU and PEOU with an increase in organisational performance, speed in decision-making
and an individual’s clear understanding of the system following frequent interactions with
them. The PU followed PEOU in a decreasing order of importance in explaining attitudes
towards using.
Moreover, about 27.1% of the variance in PEOU was explained by the social situations of
Social factors, organisational environment and EIS development processes of the

223
Facilitating conditions. On the whole, the results suggest that Social factors were of vital
importance in explaining the PEOU of EIS with individuals influenced by those at the top
management. Also, organisational culture and user involvement in the systems
development processes of the Facilitating conditions were found to be important. The
Social Factors followed Facilitating conditions in a decreasing order of importance in
explaining the PEOU of EIS.
6.4.2 Conclusions Related to the Research Questions
To summarise, the results suggest that PU was a more important measure of user behaviour
towards EIS by means of attitudes. This was followed by the ATU measure and finally, the
PEOU measure via attitudes. The contributions from the PU, ATU and PEOU in explaining
user behaviour towards EIS adoption and usage were significant.
When deciding to design/develop and implement EIS in organisations,
designers/developers, implementers and organisational managers are therefore
recommended to consider the perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and attitudes
towards using as important aspects of behaviour in using the systems. The perceived
usefulness and perceived ease of use of EIS can be linked to user involvement in the
development phases of the EIS projects. This is because user involvement in EIS design
improves the design process by identifying the requirements, validating design options and
creating better understanding and ownership options and facilitate implementation by
ensuring acceptance, follow-up and continuous resource support.
224
Further, designers/developers are recommended to ensure that design EIS are intuitive and
easy to use and that minimal training is required from executive in order to use the systems.
The features of the systems should as key boards and mice, touch screens should be flexible
enough to enhance use
Based on the analysis of the results, organisational, social factors, facilitating conditions
and habits represent the most important factors in explaining executives’ behaviour towards
EIS adoption and usage by means of the perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and
attitudes towards using the systems.
6.4.3 Implications Related to the research questions
The implications of these findings and conclusions are as follows:
o Organisations need to play the leading roles in influencing the EIS
design/development and implementation to suit executives’ information
requirements as opposed to developing EIS without taking this requirement into
consideration.
o EIS users should be actively involved and participate in the design development and
implementation of the EIS systems.
o EIS design, development and implementation in organisations should be business-
led and expert driven for positive user behaviour towards using EIS. Executive
sponsors of EIS projects need to reinforce the importance of EIS for strategic
management activities to executive users.
o Initial training needs of users and support from the IS team are of vital importance
to enhance use of the system.

225
We present the conclusions related to the research problem in the next section.
6.5 Conclusions Related to the Research Problem
The research problem for which this study seeks to provide solution to is: the
underutilisation of EIS by executives of organisations due to the failures of these
systems. The findings, conclusions and implications of the research hypotheses and the
research questions, which were components in providing the solution to the problem, were
presented in sections 6.2 and 6.3.
On the basis of the findings and results of the research hypotheses and questions in sections
6.2 and 6.3, the general conclusion that can be drawn from the present study is that: social,
cultural, individual (beliefs) and organisational variables represent the important factors
that explain executives’ Behaviour towards the adoption and usage of EIS in the
organisational setting. Therefore these factors can influence the underutilisation of EIS by
executives and the failures of the systems. Their importance of these factors from most
influential to least influential is: social, cultural, individual and organisational variables.
Table 6.2 presents the classification of social, cultural, organisational and individual
variables along with their sub-variables as critical success factors for EIS usage in
organisations – as derived from hypotheses H6a, H6b, H6c and H6d of Social factors; H3a
and H3c of Facilitating conditions and H1b and H1c, H7 and H8 of Habits, PU and
PEOU.
226
Table 6.2 Critical Success Factors for EIS Usage in Organisations
Social and culture Organisational factors Individual

Factors
Norms EIS development process Experience in EIS
Roles Organisational Ability to use
Values environment Perceived usefulness
Social situations Perceived ease of use
Social and cultural factors – The conclusions and findings of this study suggest that
organisational social and cultural factors such as norms, values, roles and social situations
are of vital importance in influencing executives’ behaviour towards the adoption and
usage of EIS in an organisational setting. This suggests that social factors defined as
executive’s work group (Bergeron et al. 1995) such as peers, superiors, subordinates and IS
directors have strong influence on behaviour and utilisation of EIS. Further, the social
working relationships among executives are important in influencing executives to use EIS.
Organisational factors – The conclusions and findings of this thesis suggest that
organisational factors such as system development processes and organisational
environment represent the critical success factors that could influence executives’
behaviour towards the adoption and usage of EIS. This suggests that EIS project with: (1)
executive sponsorship, (2) that users directly or indirectly involve in development
processes, (3) with the spread of use following implementation, (4) follow-ups processes
immediate after the implementation and, (5) well established communication patterns
between the designers and users would have a significant impact on behaviour.
227
Further, organisation’s environment such as (1) the impact of an organisational culture on
the EIS project, the interaction of the EIS systems with other systems, (3) the influence of
power and politics within organisations on EIS and (4) organisational commitment via
executive sponsorships to wide use of EIS should significantly influence executives’
behaviour towards EIS adoption.
Individual factors – The conclusions drawn from this thesis further suggest that PU and
PEOU of EIS as well as executives’ ability and experience in the systems are critical for
EIS adoption. This means that executives would use EIS provided the systems can increase
their organisational performance following use. Further, executives would use EIS
provided the systems can increase their decision-making speed following use. Next,
executives would use EIS provided they can understand the systems following frequency of
use. Finally, executives would use EIS provided EIS designers along with other IT staff
provide executives relevant training and education to enhance use.
Therefore these factors must be considered by designers and organisational managers in
any EIS projects to enhance use by executives. Based on the results established, we present
a modified version of the model in the next section.
6.6 A Modified Version of the Research Model
On the basis of the results obtained, the research model in Figure 3.4 has been modified to
the model in Figure 6.1. The hypothesised relationship between habits and perceived ease
of use has been excluded from the modified version of the model. The EIS management
processes, a sub-variable of the facilitating conditions, has been excluded as well. In both
228
cases the test results indicated that there was no relationship. The modified version of the
research model (Figure 6.1) can be used for further research study on the adoption and
usage of EIS at the strategic management level. Accordingly, we therefore characterised
Figure 6.1 as the EIS Adoption and Usage Model (EISAUM).
Habits:
CBIS experience
EIS Experience
Ability to use EIS
Perceived
Usefulness
Facilitating
Conditions:
EIS Development Attitudes Actual
Process towards using System
Organisational Use
Environment
Social Factors: Perceived

Subjective norms Ease of Use
Subjective roles
Subjective values
Social situations
Figure 6.1: EIS Adoption and Usage Model (EISAUM)
6.7 Contributions of the Study
Having presented the findings, conclusions and implications related to the research
questions in Section 6.4, the remaining section will present practical benefits, which differ
from existing practices. The section begins with the contributions of the study followed by
the limitations of the study as well as the implications for future research and theory.
229
As presented below, this study is a significant contribution to academic literature and
management/ practice.
6.7.1 Contributions to Academic literature
The academic contributions of this study are the furthering of theory and methodology.
These are presented as follows:
Theoretically, the study has established TAM and Triandis’ framework as appropriate
reference theories suitable in investigating the adoption and usage of EIS by organisational
executives. The Triandis’ framework variables – habits, facilitating conditions and social
factors have unequivocally addressed the social, cultural, individual and organisational
factors that explain and influence executives’ behaviour towards the adoption and usage of
EIS the in organisational setting for their roles.
The model for EIS adoption and usage (EISAUM) has been derived from the research
model and presented in (Figure 6.1). The model (EISAUM) emphasises the importance of
social, cultural, individual and organisational variables in the development and
implementation of IS including EIS for a successful users adoption and usage. The
framework together with the EISAUM can be applied in other social science research
disciplines including marketing, E-commerce and Internet banking for user behaviour
testing. EISAUM can also be applied with different populations of IS users and different
software choices.
Further, a major methodological theme throughout the behavioural and social sciences
since the late-20th century has been the need for researchers to pay more attention to
230
instrumentation. That is, how measurement instruments are developed and validated. In IS
including EIS research, questionnaire design is often driven by pragmatism and
expediency, and so issues of instrument validation tend to receive scant attention. This also
applies to the pilot testing of questionnaires, which as Hunt et al. (1982) point out “… is
often done in a hurried, non-systematic fashion” (p. 269). While researchers can employ
previously used scales with the confidence that these may have been assessed (often over
several independent studies) as reliable and valid, this may not be sufficient due to
variations in language and sense-making across populations and even across cohorts or
cultures within populations. This research study has centered the discussion on the
procedures through which the draft questionnaire was pilot tested, which had been
constructed by appropriating and modifying previously used scales.
Three main benefits have been derived from a more rigorous pilot test of the instrument.
First, the two-stage process ensured that appropriate language was used for scale items and
that the questionnaire was both meaningful and comprehensible to members of the
population of interest in the study. As a result, the possibility of obtaining “noise” in the
data collected was reduced and the researcher could be more confident that the responses to
the questions were valid. Second, the pilot test ensured that the measuring instruments used
were, after some modifications (a process often referred to as measure “purification”),
internally consistent, reliable and had an acceptable level of content or face validity. Third,
based on prior studies from which the measurement scales were derived (e.g., Fishbein and
Ajzen, 1975; Davis, 1989; Bergeron et al. 1995; Ditsa, 2003), the pilot study enabled the
researcher to conclude that the multi-item scales were indeed likely to be valid measures of
the constructs in the theoretical model.
231
The methodology employed in this study to address the research problem as a behaviour
using TAM and Triandis’ variables was highly robust. Therefore, it is a significant
contribution to the body of knowledge. This methodology is important for further research
into IS including EIS adoption and usage by executives. Also, the hypotheses derived from
the research model provide research opportunities into IS including EIS adoption and usage
by individuals.
6.7.2 Contributions to Management/ Practice
In terms of management/practice, the results and findings of this research study have
significant implications to EIS designers/developers, implementers and managers of
organisations. Practically, EIS designers/developers, implementers and managers of
organisations are urged to take into account the importance of Social factors, Facilitating
conditions, Habits, Perceived usefulness and Perceived ease of use that influence the
Behaviour of EIS users to use EIS. For example users need to be involved and participate
in the EIS project such that they obtain the necessary experience and ability in using the
systems. Also, developers must ensure that EIS tools are user-friendly and can support
executives with relevant information for decision-making. Theoretically, the results and
findings of the study revealed that the PU, ATU and PEOU significantly influence the
behaviour towards the adoption and usage of EIS. The results revealed that PU followed by
ATU are more appropriate measures of the behaviour than PEOU. This suggests that
organisations can improve EIS adoption and usage by aiming at increasing the Perceived
usefulness of EIS, Attitudes towards using EIS and Perceive ease of use of EIS. This can be
done by:
232
Improving users’ EIS experience and the ability in EIS through user education and
training;
Adequately preparing EIS by focusing not only on individual users but also on their
units being that EIS are social systems;
Providing relevant resources other than technical including appropriate IS staff with
relevant business skills and communication skills to support users;
Providing the technology that is capable of supporting a demanding working
environment and market oriented information critical for executive’s roles;
Creating favourable user attitudes, usually through such practices as involving users
in the EIS development work, since this would allow user concerns over
performance and rewards to be addressed before irretrievable investments are made
in design efforts. Of vital importance, organisations would be well advised to find
some means of addressing users’ concerns in the development phases of the
systems.
To summarise, the results of this research study suggest that the underutilisation of EIS by
organisational executives, which is caused by the failures of the EIS systems can be
improved by addressing behavioural factors (see Figure 6.1: EISAUM) towards using EIS.
To enhance users’ behaviour (PU, ATU and PEOU) towards using the EIS systems,
designers/developers, implementers and managers of organisations are urged to take the
measures stated as follows:
233
Emphasis on Perceived Usefulness of EIS
Enhancing users’ EIS experience and their ability in EIS. This can be achieved by
means of user involvement, education and training in the development and
implementation phases of the systems (Ditsa, 2003; Khalil and Elkordy, 2005).
Preparing an EIS that focuses both on individual users and their business units via
education and training (Salmeron et al. 2001).
Ensuring that adequate resources other than technical aspect such as appropriate IS
staff and technology capable of supporting a demanding working environment are
made available.
Based on the literature (e.g., Salmoron, 2002; Xu et al. 2003; Averweg and Roldan,
2005), emphasis on perceived usefulness of EIS can further be pursued by
developing an EIS that aims at providing executives with:
o More timely information;
o Faster access to information;
o Improved communications;
o More accurate information;
o More relevant information;
o More concise information;
o More competitive information;
o Improved mental model.
And enable them to:
o Improve executive performance;
o Improve presentation of data;
o Improve decision-making (Averweg and Roldan, 2005).

234
Emphasis on Attitude Towards Using
Involving users in the system development work in order to create favourable user
attitudes towards the systems. User involvement would allow user concerns over
performance and rewards to be addressed before irretrievable investments are made
in design efforts. EIS designers/implementers and managers of organisations are
advised to find some means of addressing users concerns in the development and
implementation phases.
Developing an EIS that aimed at:
o Increasing the speed of users’ decision-making;
o Providing organisations with a competitive edge;
o Providing users with greater level of control over their activities;
o Increasing organisational performance;
o Providing users with relevant information to detect problems;
o Flexible and user-friendly systems;
o Easy to use interfaces;
o Clear and easy understandable systems;
o EIS requiring minimal training needs.
Emphasis on Perceived Ease of Use
Increasing the EIS development work in an organisation through:
o The influence of the CEOs, CFO and top officers in relation to the EIS projects;
o Involving potential users in EIS development and implementation work;
o Ensuring the availability of relevant resources other than technical e.g., human,
financial and information in the system project;

235
o Ensuring that there are effective and efficient follow-ups immediately after the
implementation of the systems;
o Ensuring there is an adequate communication pattern between developers/designers,
implementers and executives sponsoring the EIS project.
Changing/improving some aspects of the organisation to encourage system use such
as:
o Adapting to dynamic changes of the business environment;
o Maintaining a culture suitable to an EIS project;
o Ensuring EIS are compatible with other systems in the business units;
o Ensuring that existing power and politics in an organisation have a positive
influence on the EIS project.
Changing/improving the social situations of the EIS project through:
o Ensuring general management involvement in the EIS projects;
o User involvement and participation in the EIS project;
o Development of policies and rules to guide norms and values for system usage;
o Development of social working groups that foster learning, development and
problem solving among users EIS.
To summarise, the findings and results of this study suggest:
o Users’ involvement and participation in the design of the EIS interface;
o Better training and education of users in the EIS project;
o Better allocation of scarce resources other than technical for the EIS project;
o Enhancing the development and implementation of EIS projects;

236
o Addressing users’ concern in the development phases of EIS;
o Further studies into EIS acceptance and usage factors;
o Further studies into acceptance and use factors for other IS systems.
6.8 Implications of the Study for Policy and Future Research
A number of prior researchers (e.g., Robey, 1979; Szajna, 1993; Davis, 1993; Young and
Watson, 1995; Mao, 2002) have investigated organisational and technological factors that
determine user acceptance of IS including EIS. Although their research efforts have
provided some valuable results, they have been constrained by a lack of appropriate
reference theoretical foundations and variables for key determinants of user acceptance and
use of information systems. Without appropriate reference theories it is difficult or even
impossible to determine the factors that affect individual behaviour to use information
systems. Kling (1991) who studied the social impact of computers on human social
environment argued that, “ in order to identify the social impact of computing one must
have at least implicitly a theory of the causal power that computerised systems can exert
upon individuals, groups, organisations, institutions, social networks, social world and
other social entities” (p. 151). This implies that without a reference theory of causal power
it is difficult or even impossible to identify the social impact of computer upon individuals
or groups.
Further, Trice and Treacy (1988), assert that, as a behaviour whose determinants are not
well understood in IS research, system use can best be explained by referring to an
appropriate reference theory. This assertion has guided some IS studies (e.g., Venkatesh et
al. 2003; Wang and Yang, 2005). Pursuing the assertions of both Kling (1991) and Trice
237
and Treacy (1988), plus a thorough assessment of the theoretical perspectives used in IS
research, this study employed TAM and Triandis’s framework as a theoretical foundation.
The study used TAM as the basis and incorporated Triandis’ (1979) framework variables
(habits, social factors and facilitating conditions) as the extension to derive the research
model to investigate the social, cultural, individual and organisational critical success
factors that might explain the behaviour of executives towards the adoption and usage of
EIS in organisations. The results and findings presented in this study reveal that both TAM
and Triandis’ framework represent an appropriate reference theoretical foundation in
understanding user behaviour towards EIS adoption and usage.
The framework presented in this study together with the EISAUM (see Figure 6.1) provides
some prospects for IS researchers studying user behaviour to test the model with different
populations of IS users and software choices. EISAUM can be applied in other social
science disciplines. For example, marketing and E-commerce by adding new constructs or
deleting constructs or simply use it in its current form. For instance a new construct can be
added between social factors and behaviour other than the relationships between social
factors and perceived ease of use. Further, another way to built upon this research study is
to apply the model and the methodology to a different culture. For example it may be
useful to test the behaviour of executives towards IT tools in a country such as Nigeria.
6.9 Limitations of the Study and Implications for Future Study
There were some limitations associated with the research methodology employed in this
study. The limitations observed include geographical coverage, research design, electronic
database and response rate. Each of these is presented as follows:
238
Firstly, the present research used a cross-sectional research study, where the unit of
analysis was observed at one point in time. While it provided a useful “snapshot” in
collecting data over a period of weeks to help in understanding the phenomenon under
investigation, it could not explain possible changes in respondents’ attitudes over time.
Generally, it is recognised that longitudinal studies (or at least a series of cross-sectional
studies) can detect attitude changes over time and allow stronger inferences to be drawn
about the dynamic elements of behaviour (De Wulf, 1999).
Second, the Fairfax Business Media’s database was used as a source of EIS user
organisations. This database list was incomplete because it did not update recent changes of
addresses of some EIS users and recent new users had not been added to the list. This has
influenced the gross response rate and consequently useable response rate of the study.
However, this was the best list available for the present study. Moreover, the database used
did not indicate the level of sophistication of the types of EIS used by the respondents. In
such a situation one would argue that some respondents might not have used the EIS
system at the level expected by the research study. Future studies should ensure and note
the importance of using a freshly updated database or an entirely new database for IS
including EIS study. The questionnaire should also include questions of the level of
sophistication of EIS use by the potential respondent.
Third, there were limitations arising from the sample size used in this study. The sample
size was relatively small (n = 121). Due to the relatively small sample size, more versatile
and powerful statistical techniques such as Structural Equation Model (SEM), which is
optimised for large samples of 200 to 400 subjects (Muehling and Laczniak, 1992), could
239
not be employed. Instead the present study utilised the conventional ordinary least squares
(OLS) regression to analyse data gathered from the mail survey.
Further, the objective of this study was to investigate the social, cultural, individual and
organisational critical success factors that might influence executives’ behaviour towards
the adoption and usage of EIS in organisations. Therefore the analyses focus on measuring
only the direct influence from perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEOU)
via Attitude towards using (ATU) to Actual System Use (A), and no direct influence from
exogenous variables to A was measured. Although the One-Way ANOVA exhibits a
satisfactory fits with the observed data, only 10.4% of the variance in ATU could be
explained by differences between non-use at all and the actual use of EIS. Having only
ATU as a determinant of A weakens the explanatory power of the model. In an attempt to
explain more variance in Actual System Use future research may be designed to measure
the indirect as well as the direct influences from the exogenous variables of Habits,
Facilitating conditions, Social factors, PU and PEOU.
Finally, this research was conducted in the Australian business environment only. To
strengthen the findings of this research internationally, future research should be conducted
in a cross-cultural environment.
Despite these limitations, the present study provides valuable insights into the study of EIS
adoption and usage in organisations. The limitations acknowledged above therefore provide
some suggestions for further research.
240
REFERENCES
Adams, D .A., Nelson, R. R. & Todd, P. A. (1992). Perceived Usefulness, Ease of Use, and
Usage of Information Technology: A Replication. MIS Quarterly, June, 227-247.
Agarwal, P. & Prasad, J. (1999). Are individual differences germane to the acceptance of new
information technologies? Decision Sciences, 30(2), 361- 391.
Ahire, S.L., Golhar, D.y. & Waller, M.A. (1996). Development and Validation of TQM
Implementation Construct. Decision Sciences (27:1), Winter (23 –57).
Ajzen I. (1991). Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, Academic Press.
Inc 50, 179-211.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behaviour,
Prentice Hall, Eagle Cliffs NJ.
Al-Hawari, M. & Hasan, H. (2004). Knowledge Management Styles and Organisational
Performance: An Empirical Study in a K-Space Framework, Journal of Information
and Knowledge Management, Vol.3, No.4 (1-26).
Alter S., (1996). Information Systems: A Management perspective, Benjamin/Cummings
Publishing Co., Inc. New York.
Anderson Consulting News (1999). Geographic differences in Internet access among
corporate executives narrows. Available:www.ac.com/news>(12/05/03).
Anthony, R. N.,J. & Dearden, V. Govindarajan, (1992), Management Control Systems, 7th ed.,
Irwin.
Armstrong, J. & Overton, T. (1977). Estimating Noneresponse Bias in Mail Surveys: Journal
of Marketing Research (14), 396-402.
Arnott, D. R. & Tan, W. D. (2000) Managerial information acquisition and the World Wide
Web: An exploratory study, Monash SIMs Working paper 1/2000.
241
Arnott, D., & Pervan, G. (2005). A critical analysis of decision support systems research,
Journal of Information Technology, 20 (2), 67-87.
Arnott, D., Jirachiefpattana, W. & O’Donnell, P. (2004). Decision Support System, 1-7.
Averweg, U., Erwin, G. & Petkov, D. (2004). A survey of the State of Executive Information
Systems in Organisation in South Africa, Proceedings of SAICSI, 216-220.
Averweg, U.R. & Roldan, J.L. (2005). Executive Information System implementation in
organisation in South Africa and Spain: A comparative analysis, Computer
Standards & Interfaces, 1 - 10.
Babbie E. (2004). The Practice of Social Research, 10th edn, Thomson Wadsworth Australia.
Babbie, E. R. (1990). Survey Research Methods. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.
Bagozzi, R. P., Davis, F. D. & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Development and Test of a Theory of
Technological Learning and Usage. Human Relations 45 (7), 660-686.
Bashein, B.J. & Markus, M.L. (2000). Data Warehouses: More than just mining, Financial
Executives Research Foundations Inc.
Basu, C., Poindexter, S. & Addo, T. (2000). Diffusion of Executive Information Systems in
Organisations and the shift to Web Technologies. Industrial Management & Data
Systems. MCB University Press (100)6, 271-276.
Bergeron, F. & Raymond, L.(1992). Evaluation of EIS From a Managerial Perspective,
Journal of Information Systems, 2, 1, 45-60.
Bergeron, F., Raymond, L., Rivard, S. & Gara M. (1995). Determinants of EIS Use: Testing a
Behavioural Model, Decision Support Systems, 14, 131-146.
Bruwer, P. J. S. (1984). A Descriptive Model of Success of Computer-Based Information
Systems. Information and Management, Vol.7, pp.63-67.
242
Buttery, E. A., & Buttery, E.M. (1991). Design of a Marketing Information System Useful
Paradigms. European Journal of Marketing Vol.25 No.1 pp.26-39.
Casebeer, A. L. & Verhoef, M. J. (1997). Combining Quantitative and Qualitative Research
Methods: Considering the Possibilities for Enhancing the Study of Chronic
Diseases, Available at: www.hc-sc.gc.ca/pphb-dgspsp/publicat/cdic-mcc/18-
3/d_e.html. Accessed Date 2/8/2004.
Chau, P.Y.K. (1996). An Empirical Assessment of a Modified Technology Acceptance Model.
Journal of Management Information Systems, 13 (2), pp.185-204.
Cheney, P.H. & Dickson, G.W. (1982). Organisational Characteristics and Information
Systems: An Exploratory Investigation, Academic of Management Journal, Vol.25,
N0.1, pp.170-184.
Cheon, M.J., Grover V. & Sabherwal, (1993). “The Evolution in Empirical Research in IS”,
Information & management, iss. 24, 107-119.
Chidambaram, L. (2003). Factor Analysis, Chapter 11[On-line].Available
at:www:laku.net/bad6243_home.htm (12/08/03).
Choo C. W., (2002). Environmental Scanning as Information Seeking and Organisational
Knowing. PrimaVera Working Paper Series, Universiteit van Amsterdam.
Compeau, D.R. & Higgins, C.A. (1995a). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure
and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 189-211.
Compeau, D.R. & Higgins, C.A. (1995b). Application of social cognitive theory to training for
computer skills. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 118-143.
Corbitt, B.J., & Thanasankit T. Yi, H. (2003). Trust and e-commerce: a study of consumer
perceptions, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 2, 203-215.
243
Dambrot, F. H.,Silling S. M. & Zook S. (1988). Psychology of Computer Use: Sex
Differences in Prediction of course Grades in a Computer Language Course.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 66, 627 – 636.
Davies, L. D. & Davies, F. D. (1990). The Effects of Training Techniques 7 Personal
characteristics on Training End users of information systems. Journal of
management Information Systems 7, 93 -110.
Davis, F. & Venkatesh, V. (1996). A critical assessment of potential measurement biases in
the technology acceptance model: three experiments, Int. J. Human – Computer
Studies, 45, 19-45.
Davis, F. D. (1993). User acceptance of Information System Technology: System
Characteristics, User Perceptions and Behavioural Impacts, International Journal
Man-Machine Studies. Academic Press Limited, 38, 475 – 487.
Davis, F. D., Bagazzi, R. P. & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation to
Use Computers in the Workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, (14) 22,
1111-1132.
Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of
Information Technology. MIS Quarterly (13:3), 319-333.
Davis, F.D. (2001). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of
Information Technology. MIS Quarterly/September (318-340).
Davis, F.D., (1986). A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New End-User
Information Systems: Theory and Results, in MIT Sloan School of Management,
Cambridge, MA: Mit Sloan School of Management.
Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R. P. & Warsaw, P.R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer
Technology: A Comparison of Two. Management Science (35:8) 982-1003
De Vaus, D. A. (1991). Surveys in social research (3rd ed.). Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
244
De Vaus, D.A.(1991). Survey in Social Research (5th edn) London UCL Press.
De Vaus, DA (2002). Survey in Social Research, 5th edn. Australia: Allen & Unwin.
De Wulf, K. (1999). The role of the seller in enhancing buyer-seller relationships: Empirical
studies in a retail context. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Vlerick Leuven Gent
Management School, Leuven and Gent, Belgium.
Dillman D. A. (1978). Mail and Telephone Surveys- The Total Design Method. John Wiley
and Sons, New York.
Dillman D.A. (2000). Mail and Internet Surveys- The Tailored Design Method, 2n edn., John
Wiley and Sons.
Dishaw M. & Strong D.(1997). Extending Technology Acceptance Model. Retrieved 27th
September, 2003 from://hsb.baylor.edu/ramsower/ais.ac.97/papers/dishaw.htm
Ditsa, G. (2002). Executive Information Systems Use in Organisation Contexts: An
Exploratory Study in Issues and Trends of IT Management in Contemporary
Organisations. Idea Group Publishing London, 182-191.
Ditsa, G. (2003). Executive Information Systems Use in Organisational Contexts: An
Exploratory User Behaviour Testing. Information Management: Support Systems &
Multimedia Technology IRM Press London (109-155).
Ditsa, G. (2004). A Research Design and a Methodological Approach to an Exploratory User
Behaviour Testing: Lessons Learnt. Information Resources Management
Association International Conference, May 2004, New Orleans, USA.
Elkerton, J. & Williges, R. C. (1984). Information Retrieval Strategies in a File-search
Environment, Human Factors, 26, 171-184.
Elkordy, M.M. (2000). An Integrated Model of EIS Use, in Proceedings of 2000 Information
Resources Management Association, International Conference Anchorage, Alaska,
USA, 624-627.
245
Elkordy, M.M. & Khalil, O.E.M. (2005). EIS Information: Use and Quality Determinants,
Information Resources Management Journal 18(2), 68-93.
Emory, C.W. & Cooper, D.R. (1991). Business Research Methods, edn, Irwin, Homewood.
Fishbein, M. (1979). A Theory of Reason Action: Some applications and Implications, In
Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, H. Howe and Page (Edn). University of
Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NB. 65-116.
Fishbein, M. & Ajzen I.(1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behaviour: An Introduction to
Theory and Research. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Fitzgerald B. & Murphy C. (1994). The EIS Paradox: Putting the Executive into Executive
Information System. Journal of information Technology Vol. 9 No.4, 288-296.
Fitzgerald B., (1998), Executive Information Systems without executives. Proceedings of the
3rd conference of UK Academy for Information systems. Lincoln University, UK
Mcgraw-Hill (288-310), in Avison. D. & Edgar Nevill D. (eds.) matching
Technology with organisational needs.
Fontana, A. & Frey, J. H. (1998). Interviewing: the art of science, collecting and interpreting
qualitative materials, in N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln, Eds Thousand Oaks, Sage
Publication, 47-78.
Francis, G. (2004). Introduction to SPSS for Windows Versions 12.0 & 11.0 with notes for
Studentware: 4th edition. Pearson Education Australia, Pearson Prentice Hall.
Fuerst, W.L. & Cheney, P.H. (1982). Factors Affecting the Perceived Utilisation of Computer-
Based Decision Support Systems in the Oil Industry. Decision Sciences, Vol.13, pp.
554-569.
Gahtani, S. (2001). The Applicability of TAM Outside North America: An Empirical Test in
the United Kingdom, Information Resources Management Journal, pp. 26-35
246
Galpin, T. & James, G. (1984). The use of Mail Questionnaires as a Method of data
Collection, paper presented at the Annual Conference of Southern Association for
Institutional Research.
Garr N. (2003). IT Doesn’t Matter. Harvard Business Review.
Garson, G. D. (2001). Factor analysis. [Online]. Available at.
http://www2.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/pa765/factor.htm.
Gefen, D. & Straub, D. (2000). The relative importance of Perceived Ease of Use in IS
Adoption: A Study of E-Commerce Adoption. Journal of the Association for the
Information system 1(8).
Goodhue, D. L. & Thompson, R. L. (1995). Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance,
MIS Quarterly/June, 213-236.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y.S. (1994). Competing Paradigms in Qualitative Research, in
Handbook of Qualitative Research. Sage Publication.
Hair, J. F. J., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate data
analysis with readings (4th ed.). Sydney: Prentice Hall.
Hair, J. F. J., Bush, R. P., & Ortinau, D. J. (2000). Marketing research: A practical approach
for the new millennium. Sydney: Irwin McGraw-Hill.
Handzic M., (1997). The Impact of Information Reliability on Utilisation and Effectiveness
of Executive Information Systems. 8th Australasian Conference on information
Systems.
Hardgrave, B.C. & Johnson, R.A. (2003). Toward an Information Systems Development
Acceptance Model: The Case of Object-Oriented Systems Development,
Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 50, No. 3, (322 –336), IEEE.
247
Harrison, A.W. & Rainer Jr. R.K. (1992). The Influence of individual Differences on Skills
in End-user Computing, Journal of Management Information Systems, 9, 93 – 111.
Hasan, H. & Gould, E. (2001). Support for the Sense-Making Activity of Managers. Decision
Support Systems, 31, (71-86).
Hendrickson, A. R., Massey, P. D., & Cronan, T. P. (1993). On the Test-retest Reliability of
Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use Scales. MIS Quarterly, 17, 227-
230
Heneman, H. G. & Judge, T.A. (2003). Staffing Organisations, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill, New
York.
Hubona, G. S. & Jones, A. B (2002). Modelling the User Acceptance of E-Mail. Proceedings
of the 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HISS’03).
Hung, S. Y. (2003). Expert versus novice use of the executive support systems: an empirical
study, Information & Management, 40, 177-189.
Hunt, S. D., Sparkman, R. D., & Wilcox, J. B. (1982). The pretest in survey research: Issues
and preliminary findings. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(May), 269-273.
Igbaria, M. (1993). User Acceptance of Microcomputer Technology: An Empirical Test.
Omega International Journal of Management science, (21)1, 73-90.
Ikart, E.M. & Ditsa, G. (2004). A Research Framework for the Adoption and Usage of
Executive Information Systems by Organisational Executives: An Exploratory
Study, Australasian Conference on Information Systems, 1-3 December 2004
Hobart Tasmania.
Ikart, E.M. & Ditsa, G. (2004). An Exploratory Study of Factors Contributing to Successful
Adoption and Usage of Executive Information Systems. The 2004 International
248
Research Conference on Innovations in Information Technology, Dubai, UAE,
October 4 – 6, 2004.
Ivancevich J. & Mattheson M. F. (1990). Organizational Behavior and Management 2nd:
International Student Edition. BPI/IREWIN Boston, MA USA.
Kanuk, L. & Berenson, C. (1975). Mail surveys and response rates: A literature review,
Journal of marketing research, Vol.12, no.4, 440-453.
Karahanna, E. Straub, D & Chervany, N.L. (1999). Information Technology Adoption Across
Time: Across-Sectional Comparison of Pre-adoption and Post- adoption Beliefs.
MIS Quarterly, 23 (2), pp183-213.
Kelly, F. (1994). Implementing an EIS (Executive Information System).
www.itmweb.com/essay519.htm (Accessed date: 24/03/04).
Kerlinger, F. N. (1986). Foundations of Behavioral Research, 3rd ed, Rinehart and Winston,
Holt New York.
Khalil, O. E. & Elkordy, M. M. (2005). EIS Information: Use and Quality Determinants, Idea
Group Publishing in Information Resources Management Journal 18(2), 68-93.
Kim, J. (1996). An Empirical Investigation of Factors Influencing the Utilisation of Executive
Information Systems, Doctoral Dissertation, University of Nebraska.
Kling R. (1991). “Excerpts From ‘Social Analysis of Computing: Theoretical Perspectives in
Recent Empirical Research” in Dunlop, C. & Kling eds/ (1991) computerization
and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices Boston: Academic Press,
Part11, 150-166.
Koh, C. E. & Watson, H. J. (1998). Data management in executive information systems,
Information & Management, 33, 301-314.
Kohn, M. L. (1969). Class and Confirmatory: A Study of Values. The Dorsey Press.
Kotter, J.P.(1982). The General Manager. The Free Press, New York.
249
Kuhn, T.S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutios, 2nd edn., The University of Chicago
Press.
Kumar, A. & Palvia, P. (2001). Key data management issues in a global executive information
system. Industrial Management & Data Systems 101/4[2001] 153-164.
Kwon, H. S. & Chidambaram, L. (2000). A Test of Technology Acceptance Model: The Case
of Cellular Telephone Adoption. Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences, IEEE.
Lederer, A. L., Maupin, D. J., Sena, M. P. & Zhuang, Y. (2000). The technology acceptance
model and the World Wide Web, Decision Support Systems (29) 269-282.
Leidner D. & Elam J. (1994). Senior and Middle Management Use of EIS: A Descriptive
Study. Proceeding of the Twenty-Seventh Annual Hawaii International Conference
on System Sciences,135-144.
Liang, L. Y. & Miranda, R. (2001) Dashboards: Executive Information Systems for the Public
Sector: Government Officers Association USA.
Liang, T. P & Hung, (1997). DSS and EIS Application in Taiwan, Information Technology
and People, 10(4). 303-315
Lim, K. S. (2002). Validation of the Technology Acceptance Model with Academic Users.
Decision Sciences Institute Annual Meeting Proceedings, 1402- 1407.
Lucas, H. C. (1978). Empirical Evidence for a Description Model of Implementation. MIS
Quarterly, 2, 27-52.
Lucas, H.C. (1975). Performance and the Use of an Information Systems, Management
Science, Vol. 21, N0.8 pp.908-919.
Lucas, H.C. (1978). The Use of an Interactive Information Storage and Retrieval System in
Medical Research. Communication of the ACM, Vol.21 n. 3, pp. 197-205.
250
Malhotra, N. K., Hall, J., Shaw, M., & Crisp, M. (1996). Marketing research: An applied
orientation. Sydney: Prentice Hall.
Malhotra, Y., & Galletta, D. (1999). Extending the Technology Acceptance Model to Account
for Social Influence: Theoretical Bases and Empirical Validation. Proceeding of the
32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences IEEE.
Mao, E. (2002). An Investigation of IT Usage over Time. Eight Americas Conference on
Information Systems, pp.1307-1312.
Martensson P. (1996). Developing Executives’ Information. Lundeberg, M. & Sundgren, B.
(eds.). Advancing your Business: People and information Systems in Concert, EFI,
Stockholm School of Economics Sweden.
Martin, J.H, Carlisle, H. H & Tren, S. (1973). The user interface for interactive bibliographic
searching and analysis of the attitudes of nineteen information scientists. Journal of
the American Society for Information Science 24(2), 47-66.
Mason, R.D, Lind, D.A & Marchal, W.G. (1999). Statistical Techniques in Business and
Economics 10th edn. Irwin/McGraw Hill United States of America.
Mathieson, K. (1991). Predicting user intentions: Comparing the technology Acceptance
Model with the Theory of Planned Behaviour. Information System Research, 2(3),
173-191.
Mathieson, K. & Chin, W.W. (2001). Extending the Technology Acceptance Model: The
Influence of Perceived User Resources. The DATA BASE for Advances in
Information Systems, Vol. 32, No.3, 86-112.
McBride N., (1997). The Rise and Fall of an Executive Information System: a Case Study.
Info Systems Journal (1997) 7, 277- 287.
McLeod, Jr. R. & Jones J.W. (1992). Making Executive Information Systems More Effective,
John Wiley & Sons, Inc USA.

251
Mintzberg, H. (1973). The Nature of Managerial Work. Harper & Row, Publishers London.
Money, W. & Turner, A. (2004). Application of Technology Acceptance Model to a
Knowledge Management Systems”, Proceeding of the 37th Hawaii International
Conference on System Science. IEEE.
Moon, J. & Kim, Y. (2001). Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context. Information
& Management, 38, 217-230.
Moore, G. C & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions
of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation, Information System Research,
2, (192-222).
Muehling, D. D. and Laczniak, R. N. (1992). An examination of factors mediating and
moderating advertising's effect on brand attitude formation. Journal of Current
Issues and Research in Advertising, 14(1), 23-34.
Musa, P.F., Meso, P. & Mbarika, V. W. (2003). Towards a Model of Interactions of
Technology Adoption Factos Vis-a’-Vis Social-Economic Development Issues in
Sub-Saharan Africa. Proceeding of the 2003 information Resources Management
association International Conference Philadelphia PA USA (434-436).
Myers, M.C. (2004). Qualitative Research in Information Systems,
www.qual.auckland.acnz/accessed (7/6/2004).
Nandhakumar, J. & Jones M. (1997). Designing in the Dark: The Changing User-Developer
Relationship in Information Systems Development, Proceedings of the Eighteenth
International Conference on Information Systems, Atlanta Georgia, 75-89.
Nandhakumar, J. (1996). Design for Success?: critical success factors in executive information
systems development. European Journal of Information Systems, 5, 62 –72.
Neuman, W.L. (2000). Social Research Methods: Qualitative Approaches, 4th edn, Allyn and
Bacon.
252
Neuman, W.L. (2003). Social Research methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approach.
Pearson Education, Inc. Sydney.
Nord J., & Nord G., (1995). Executive Information System: A study and Comparative
Analysis, Information & Management, 29, 95-106, Elsevier B.V.
Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric Theory, 2nd edn., New York: McGraw Hill.
Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods, Sage.
Pervan, G. P. (1992 ). Issues in EIS: An Australian Perspective, Journal of Computer
Information Systems, 32, 4, 6-10.
Pervan, G. P. & Meneely, J. (1995). Implementing and Sustaining Executive Information
Systems: Influencing Factors in the Mining Industry Context, Proceedings of the
28th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 101-109.
Pervan, G. P. & Phua, R. (1996). Executive Information Systems in Australia: Current Status
and Some Historical Comparisons, Proceedings of the annual Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences, 110-119.
Pervan, G. P. & Phua, R. (1997). A survey of the state of executive information systems in
large Australian organisations. Information Technology, 29(2), 65-73.
Poon, P. & Wagner, C. (2001) Critical Success Factors Revisited: Success and Failure Cases
of Information Systems for Senior Executives, Decision Support Systems 30, 393-
418 Elsevier Science B.V.
Rainer, Jr. R. & Watson, H.,(1995).What Does It Takes for Successful Executive information
Systems? Decision Support Systems (14), 147-156, Elsevier Science B.V.
Rawstorne, P. Jayasuriya, R. & Caputi, P. (2000). Issues in Predicting and Explaining Usage
Behaviours with the Technology Acceptance Model and the Theory of Planned
Behaviour when Usage is Mandatory. Proceedings of the International Conference
on Information Systems, Brisbane, Australia.

253
Raymond , L. & Bergeron, F. (1992). Personal DSS Success in Small Enterprises. Information
and Management, 22, 301 – 308.
Raymond, L. (1985). Organisational Characteristics and the success of MIS in the Context of
Small Business, MIS Quarterly, 9, 1, March, 37-52.
Raymond, L. (1988). The Impact of Computer Training on the Attitudes and Usage Behaviour
of Small Business Management. Journal of Small Business Management, 25, 3 July
8-13.
Rivard, S. & Huff, S.L. (1988). Factors of Success for End-User Computing. Communications
of ACM,31(5), 552-561.
Robey, D. (1979). User Attitude and Management Information System Use. Academy of
Management Journal, 22(3), 527-538.
Rockart J.F. & Treacy M.E. (1992). Executive Information Systems: Emergence.
Development. Impact, John Wiley & Son, Inc, 3-12.
Rockart J. F. & De Long D. W. (1992). Executive Information Systems: Emergence.
Development. Impact, John Wiley & Son, Inc, 315-325.
Rockart, J.F. (1979). Chief Executive Define Their Own Needs, Harvard Business Review, 5
(1), 81-93.
Rogers, E.M. (1986). Communication Technology – The New Media In Society. New York,
NY: The Free Press.
Rosson, M.B. (1983). Patterns of Experience in Text Editing. Proceedings of the CHI’83
Human Factors in Computing Systems,171-175.
Salmeron J. L (2002). EIS Evolution in Large Spanish Businesses. Information &
Management, 40, Elsevier Science B.V., 41-50.
254
Salmeron, J. L., Luna, P. & Martinez F.J. (2001). Executive information system in major
companies: Spanish case study, Computer Standards & Interfaces, 23, 195-207.
Salmeron, J.L. (2003). EIS Success: Keys and difficulties in major companies, Technovation
23, 35-38.
Salmeron, J.L. & Herrero, I. (2005). An AHP-Based methodology to rank critical success
factors of executive information systems, Computer Standards & Interfaces 28, 1-
12.
Sanders, G. L. & Courtney, J. F. (1985). A Field Study of Organisational Factors Influencing
DSS Success. MIS Quarterly , 9, 1, March (77-93).
Sannes, R. (1996). The Relationship between Managers, Developers and Users. Lundeberg,
M. and Sundgren, B.(eds), Advancing Your Business: People and Information
Systems in Concert, EFI, Stockholm School of Economics, Sweden.
Sarantakos, S. (2002). Social Research, 2nd edn, MacMillan Publishers Australia Pty Ltd.
Seeley, M. & Targett D., (1999) “Patterns of Senior Executives’ Personal Use of Computer”,
Information Management (35), 315-330, Elsevier Science B.V.
Segars, A. H. & Grover, V. (1993). Re-examining Perceived Ease of Use and Usefulness: A
Confirmatory Factor Analysis. MIS Quarterly, 17, 517-525.
Sekaran, U.(1992). Research Methods for Business: A skill-Building Approach, 2nd edn, John
Wiley & Sons Inc.
Singh S. K, Watson H. J. & Watson R. T, (2002). EIS Support for Strategic Management
Process. Decision Support Systems (33), 71-85. Elsevier Science B.V.
Srivihok, A. (1999). Understanding Executive Information Systems Implementation: an
Empirical Study of EIS Success Factors. Proceedings of the 32th Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE.
255
Stevens, J. P. (1992). Applied multivariate statistics for social sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Straub, D., Keil, M. & Bernner, W. (1997). Testing the technology acceptance model across
culture: A three country study, Information and Management, 33, 1 – 11.
Straub, D.W., Keil, M., & Brenner, W.(1995). Measuring System Usage: Implications for IS
Theory Testing, Management Sciences (25:5/6), 1328-1342).
Suh, B. & Han I. (2002). Effect of trust on customer acceptance of Internet banking,
Electronic Commerce and Applications, 1, 247-263.
Szajna, B. (1993). Determining Information System Usage: Some Issues and Examples.
Information and Management (25), Elsevier Science B.V. 147-154.
Szajna, B. (1994). Software Evaluation and Choice: Predictive Evaluation of the Technology
Acceptance Instrument. MIS Quarterly, 18(3), 319-324.
Tao, Y. H., Ho, I. F. & Yeh R. C. (2001). Building a user-based model for web executive
learning systems – a study of Taiwan’s medium manufacturing companies,
Computers & Education, 36, 317-337.
Taylor, S. & Todd, P.A. (1995). Understanding Information Technology Usage: A Test of
Competitive Models. Information System Research, 6(2)144 – 176.
Thierauf R., (1991). Executive Information Systems: A Guide for Senior Management and MIS
Professionals, Quorum Book New York.
Thodenius, B. (1996). Using Executive Information Systems. Lundeberg, M. &Sundgren,
B.(eds), Advancing Your Business: People and Information Systems in Concert,
EFI, Stockholm School of Economics, Sweden.
Thompson, R.L. Higgins, C.A & Howell, J.M, (1991). Personal Computing towards a
Conceptual Model of Utilisation. MIS Quarterly, 15(1) 125-143.
256
Thompson, R.L., Higgins, C.A., & Howell, J.M. (1994). Influence of Experience on Personal
Computer Utilisation: Testing a Conceptual Model, Journal of MIS Vol.11, No.1,
167-187.
Tornatzky, L. G. & Klein, R.J. (1982). Innovation Characteristics and Innovation Adoption-
Implementation: A Meta-analysis of Findings. Transactions on Engineering
Management, IEEE, EM-29, (28-45).
Triandis H.C., (1971), Attitude and Attitude Change. John Wiley & Son, Inc. New York USA.
Triandis, H.C. (1979). Values, Attitudes, and Interpersonal behaviour. Nebraska Symposium
on Motivation: Beliefs, Attitude, and Values. University of Nabraska Press, 195-
259.
Triandis, H.C., Vassiliou, V. & Nassiakou, M. (1968). Three Cross-culture Studies of
Subjective Culture. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Monograph
Supplement, 8(4), part 2, 1 – 42.
Trice, A.W. & Treacy, M.E., (1988). Utilisation as a Dependent Variable in MIS Research,
Data Base, Fall Winter , 33 – 41.
Turban E. (1993). Decision Support Expert Systems: Management Support Systems,
Macmillan Publishing Company, New York.
Van de Ven, A. H. & Ferry, D. L. (1980). Measuring and assessing organization. New York:
John Wiley & Sons.
Vandenbosch, B. & Huff, S. L. (1997). Searching and scanning: how executives obtain
information from executive information systems. MIS Quarterly, March 1997 v.27
n. 1 p.81 (27).
VanManen, M. (1990). Researching Lived Experience, New York. State University of New
York Press.
257
Venkatesh V., Morris M., Davis G.B. & Davis F.D. (2003). User Acceptance of Information
Technology: Toward A Unified View. MIS Quarterly Vol.27 No.3, pp. 425-478.
Venkatesh, V. & Davies F.D. (1996). A model of antecedents of perceived ease of use:
Development and test. Decision Sciences, 27(3), 451-482.
Venkatesh, V. & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance
model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204.
Verenikina I. & Gould E. (1997). Activity Theory As A Framework for Interface Design.
ASCILITE December 7-10’97.
Vijayasarathy, L. R. (2002). An Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model to B2C E-
Commerce. Decision Sciences Institute Annual Meeting Proceedings, 415-418.
Vlahos G.E., Ferratt T. W. & Knoepfle G., (2000). Use and Perceived Value of Computer-
Based Information Systems in Supporting the Decision Making of German
Managers, SIGCPR Evanston Illinois USA, ACM, (111-123).
Volonino L. & Robinson S.,(1992). Executive Information Systems: Emergency. Development.
Impact. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., (245-255).
Walters, B. A., Jiang, J. J. & Klein, G. (2003). Strategic information and strategic decision
making: the EIS/CEO interface in smaller manufacturing companies, Information &
Management (40), 487 – 495.
Wang, H. & Yang, H. (2005). The Role of Personality Traits in UTAUT Model under Online
Stocking, Contemporary Management Research, Vol., 1 No.1, 69-82.
Watson H., & Rainer R., Houdeshel G., (1992), Executive Information System: Emergence.
Development. Impact, John Willey & Sons, Inc. New York.
Watson, H. J. & Koh, C. E. (1998). Data management in executive information systems,
Information & Management 33, 301-312.
258
Watson, H. J., Houdeshel, G. & Rainer, Jr. R. K. (1997). Building Executive Information
Systems and other Decision Support Applications. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Watson, H. J., Rainer Jr. R.K. & Koh C. E., (1992). Executive Information Systems: A
Framework for development and Survey of Current Practices, John Willey & Son,
Inc., USA.
Wayne, W. D. (1975). Nonresponse in sociological surveys: A review of some methods for
handling the problem, Sociological methods and research, (3), 291-307.
Westen, D. (1996). Psychology Mind, Brain, & Culture. John Weiley & Son, Inc. New York
USA.
Wiersma, W. (2000). Research Methods in Education: An Introduction, 7th edn, Allyn and
Bacon.
Xu, X. M., Lehaney, B., Clarke, S. & Duan, Y. (2003). Some UK and USA Comparisons of
Executive Information Systems in Practice and Theory, Journal of End-User
Computing 15(1), 1-19.
Young D. & Watson H. J., (1995), Determinates of EIS Acceptance. Information &
Management 29, 153-164. Elsevier Science B.V.
Zakour, A. B. (2004). Cultural Differences and Information Technology Acceptance.
Proceedings of the 7th Annual Conference of the Southern Association for
Information Systems, 156-161.
Zikmund, W.G.(2003). Business Research Methods. Australia, South Western.
Zmud, R. W.(1979). “Individual Differences & MIS success: A Review of the Empirical
literature,” Management Science, 25, 966-979.
259
Appendix 1: Template of Cover letter and Questionnaire
6/08/04
<Title> First Name> <Last Name>

<Role> <Company>
<Address1> <Address2>
<City> <State> PostCode>
Dear <Title> <LastName>,
Project Title: Critical Success Factors Determining Executive Information

Systems Usage in Organisations
We are inviting you to participate in this research study, regarding the critical success factors determining executive
information systems (EIS) usage in organizations by executives. We are conducting this study as part of Mr Emmanuel
Ikart’s PhD research and further publications.
Purpose of the Study

Since the past decade, the use of Computer-Based Information Systems (CBIS) in organisations has increased. Today,
the use of CBIS has cut across functional areas and levels of management. The use of CBIS has provided the means by
which organizations work more efficiently and effectively.
A CBIS is generally designed for collecting data, processing data into information and using the information to
support decision-making, coordination, planning and control. There are specific CBIS designed for specific levels of
management in organisation to serve managerial purposes. EIS are CBIS designed to support executives in their
managerial roles. Although EIS hold reasonable potential towards managerial roles, there are indications that a number
of EIS are not meeting the needs and expectations of executive users. We as a team of researchers from the School of
Economics and Information Systems and School of Management, Marketing and Employment Relations at the
University of Wollongong are embarking on a research effort to better understand EIS users’ needs and expectations,
and to suggest ways of improving the systems from the users’ viewpoints. We believe that the findings from this study
will be of significant benefit to EIS user organizations.
Confidentiality
You have been selected to participate in this study because you have EIS. Your name was obtained from the Fairfax
Business Media’s Database, with a signed agreement to use it for this purpose only. Your reply will be anonymous and
no attempt will be made to identify any response with you. We are also asking you some personal information at the
end of the questionnaire which will not identify you but which will be used in the analysis. The questionnaire has been
pre-numbered solely to provide us with a record of returns and facilitate the mailing of the follow-up questionnaires to
achieve a maximum return rate.
As a policy, the Human Research Ethics Committee of the University has reviewed this study. If you have any queries
or complaints regarding the way the study is or has been conducted, please contact the Complaints Officer, Human
Research Ethics Committee, University of Wollongong at (02) 42214457.
What you need to do

If you are willing to participate in this study, please complete the enclosed questionnaire and return it in the enclosed
self-addressed prepaid envelope. We estimate an average of 20 minutes to complete the questionnaire. Please return
your completed questionnaire to us by 31th August 2004.
Thank you for your time and effort in participating in this study. We will inform you of the findings before any
publication. If you will like to discuss any part of this study, contact us at (02) 42214276 or email
emi01@uow.edu.au
Yours sincerely,
Associate Professor Sam Garrett-Jones
260
Executive Information Systems Survey Questionnaire
This questionnaire is part of the study of factors influencing Executive Information Systems (EIS) usage in
organizations by senior managers. EIS are computer-based information systems (CBIS) specifically designed
to provide broad and deep information support and analytical capability for a wide range of executive
decisions. In your organization, EIS may go by other names such as, Enterprise-wide Information Systems;
Enterprise Business Intelligence and Balanced Scorecard: but their primary purpose remain the same –
providing broad and deep information support and analytical capability for a wide range of executive
decisions.
A. CBIS, EIS Experience and Ability
The following questions relate to your experiences with CBIS and EIS your ability in using EIS and how
frequently you use EIS
1. Your Experience with CBIS
How many years have you personally been using CBIS for your work? (Please tick one)
⁭0 – 4 ⁭5 - 9 ⁭10 – 14 ⁭15 – 19 ⁭20 or more years
2. Your experience in EIS
How many years have you personally been using EIS for your work? (Please tick one)
⁭0 – 4 ⁭5 - 9 ⁭10 – 14 ⁭15 – 19 ⁭20 or more years
3. Your ability in using EIS
The types of EIS users can be categorized as follows. Please tick the box which best represents you
Novice casual (intermittent) user ⁭

Novice frequent user ⁭
Expert (knowledgeable) casual user ⁭
Expert (knowledgeable) frequent user ⁭
4. Number of times you often use EIS in a week
On average, how many times do you use EIS in a week? (Please tick one)
Not at all ⁭
Less than once a week ⁭
2 or 3 times a week ⁭
Several times a week ⁭
Several times each day ⁭
261
B. Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use of EIS in Relation to Use
Below are statements of your personal opinion of the usefulness and ease of use of EIS to organizations and
your inclination to use the systems. Please circle your response to each of the statements.
1. Perceived usefulness (e.g., usage outcomes)
I believe my use of EIS will have the Strongly Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly
following result: Disagree Agree
Increase my performance in the
organization 1 2 3 4 5
Provide my organization with a
competitive edge 1 2 3 4 5
Provide me with greater level of
control over our activities 1 2 3 4 5
Increase the quality of my decision-
making 1 2 3 4 5
Provide me with information to
detect problems 1 2 3 4 5
Increase the speed of my decision-
making 1 2 3 4 5
2. Perceived ease of use (e.g., user-friendliness, clarity, effortless)
Based on my knowledge of EIS Strongly Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly

disagree agree
Learning to operate EIS is easy for
me 1 2 3 4 5
I find EIS flexible to interact with 1 2 3 4 5
I find it easy to get EIS to do what
I want it to do 1 2 3 4 5
It is easy for me to become skillful
at using EIS 1 2 3 4 5
I find EIS easy to use 1 2 3 4 5
My interactions with EIS are clear
and understandable 1 2 3 4 5
262
C. Attitude towards using EIS
It is a common view individual attitudes towards information systems in an organization can influence their
use of the systems in their jobs. Please circle your response to each of the following statements.
33. All things being equal, my using EIS in my job is:
Bad 1 2 3 4 5 Good
Foolish 1 2 3 4 5 Wise
Unfavourable 1 2 3 4 5 Favourable
Harmful 1 2 3 4 5 Beneficial
Negative 1 2 3 4 5 Positive
D. Norms, Roles, Values and Social situations in Relation to EIS Usage

People use information systems because of self-instructions being that, it is perceived to be appropriate by
their organizational members (organizational norms). Moreover, by virtue of their roles in organizations,
other people may be expected to use particular systems. Further, the broad tendency to prefer certain states
of affairs to others (values) can dictate the useable systems in organizations. Additionally, the social working
relationships among workers within organizations can make it easier to use particular information systems.
Please circle your response to each of the following statements.
1. The following people think that I Strongly Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly
should use EIS: Disagree Agree
2. Generally, I want to do what the

following people want me to:
263
3. By virtue of my role in my
organization the following people
expect that I will use EIS:
4. The social working relationships

between me and the following people
EIS support team 1 2 3 4 5
E. EIS Development, EIS Management and Organizational Environment

Some aspects of organizational environment, information system development processes as well as the
management processes can encourage people in organizations to use these systems. Please circle your
response to each of the following statements.
1. The following aspects of the EIS Strongly Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly
development processes (e.g., Disagree Agree
documentations, training and development)
in my organization encourage me to use
EIS:
The EIS project with executive
sponsorship 1 2 3 4 5
My involvement in EIS development
phases 1 2 3 4 5
The availability of relevant resources other
than technical 1 2 3 4 5
The spread of use following the 1 2 3 4 5
implementation
Follow-ups carried out immediate after the
implementation 1 2 3 4 5
Communication patterns between the
developers and I in the development phases 1 2 3 4 5
264
2. The following aspects of the EIS
Management processes in my organization
The established management policies and
rules for the systems 1 2 3 4 5
Strategic data management on EIS

1 2 3 4 5
Available users’ support group on EIS 1 2 3 4 5
The availability and accessibility of 1 2 3 4 5

information on the systems
3. The following aspects of my organization

The dynamic changes of the business 1 2 3 4 5
environment
The culture of my organization on EIS 1 2 3 4 5
The interaction of the EIS with other
system between business units 1 2 3 4 5
The influence of powers and politics on
EIS 1 2 3 4 5
My organization commitment to wide use
of EIS 1 2 3 4 5
F. Participant Personal Information
For the analysis we require the following personal information of yours. Any information you provide will in
no way be used as an example and will be strictly confidential. Please tick appropriate box representing your
response.
1. Your Gender:
Female ⁭ Male
2. Your Age
⁭ 18 – 25 ⁭ 26 – 35 ⁭ 36 – 45 ⁭ 46 – 55 ⁭ Over 55
3. Your highest Education level attained:
⁭ High school ⁭ TAFE ⁭ Undergraduate ⁭ Postgraduate
⁭ Others (please specify) e.g., CA
4. Your Job Position
⁭ Top – level Manager ⁭ Middle Management ⁭ Lower Management
⁭ Others (please specify)
265
Appendix 2: Template of Follow-up Reminder to Questionnaire
25/08/04
<Title> First Name> <Last Name>

<Role> <Company>
<Address1> <Address2>
<City> <State> PostCode>
Dear <Title> <LastName>,
Project Title: Critical Success Factors Determining Executive Information

Systems Usage in Organisations
About three weeks ago, you received a questionnaire designed to investigate “critical success
factors determining executive information systems (EIS) usage in organisations by executives” as
part of a PhD degree by Emmanuel Matthew Ikart.
From the responses received to date, our records indicate that we have not received your completed
questionnaire. In case your letter and questionnaire were misplaced or lost, we have enclosed a new
questionnaire with a copy of the original letter for your completion. Your responses will remain
confidential.
Please return the completed questionnaire in the enclosed self-addressed stamped envelope to us by
15th September 2004.
Your consideration and prompt return will be appreciated. Thank you for your valuable
contribution. If you would like any further information, please contact us on (02) 42214276 or
email emi01@uow.edu.au
Yours sincerely,
Associate Professor Sam Garrett-Jones
Encl.
266
Appendix 3: Industry Codes and Industry Groups in Database
Industry Codes and Groups in the Database
Code Description Industry Group

00 IT Supplier IT Supplier
01 Agriculture Agriculture and Mining
02 Services to Agriculture, Hunting and Trapping Agriculture and Mining
03 Forestry and Logging Agriculture and Mining
04 Commercial Fishing Agriculture and Mining
11 Coal Mining Agriculture and Mining
12 Oil and Gas extraction Agriculture and Mining
13 Metal Ore Mining Agriculture and Mining
14 Other Mining Agriculture and Mining
15 Services to Mining Agriculture and Mining
21 Food, Beverages and Tobacco Manufacturing
22 Textile, Clothing, Footware and Leather Manufacturing
23 Wood and Paper products Manufacturing
24 Printing, Publishing and Recorded Media Manufacturing
25 Petrol, Coal and Chemical Products Manufacturing
26 Non-Metallic Mineral products Manufacturing
27 Metal Products Manufacturing
28 Machinery and Equipment Manufacturing
29 Other Manufacturing Services Manufacturing
36 Electricity and Gas Utilities and Construction
37 Water, Sewerage and Drainage Utilities and Construction
41 General Construction Utilities and Construction
42 Construction and Engineering Services Utilities and Construction
45 Wholesale Trade - Basic Material Wholesales and Retails
46 Wholesale Trade – Machinery and Motor vehicle Wholesales and Retails
47 Wholesale Trade – Personal & House Goods Wholesales and Retails
51 Retail Trade – Food Wholesales and Retails
52 Retail Trade – Personal and Household Goods Wholesales and Retails
53 Retail Trade: Motor Vehicle Wholesale and Retail
57 Accommodation and Restaurant Trade Wholesale and Retail
61 Road Transport Transport and Storage
62 Rail Transport Transport and Storage
63 Water Transport and Port Authority Transport and Storage
64 Air and Space Transport Transport and Storage
65 Other Transport Transport and Storage
66 Services to Transport Transport and Storage
67 Storage and Marketing Board Transport and Storage
71 Communications Communications
73 Banking and Finance Finance and Business
74 Insurance Finance and Business
75 Service to Finance and Insurance Finance and Business
77 Property Service Finance and Business
78 Marketing and Business Management Services Finance and Business
80 Federal Government Government and defense
81 State Government Government and defense
82 Defense Government and defense
83 Local Government Government and Defense
267
84 Education and Research Community Services
86 Health Services Community Services
87 Community Services and welfare Community Services
91 Film, Radio and TV Community Services
92 Libraries, Museums and Arts Personal and Other Services
93 Sport and Recreation Personal and Other Services
95 Personal Services, Tourism and Entertainment Personal and Other Services
96 Other Services Personal and Other services
Appendix 3 continues: Lists of companies in Database Surveyed
Names of Companies Surveyed Companies Surveyed Continue

Hydro Tasmania Leighton Group Pty Ltd
Australia Guarantee Corporation LTD NSW Byvan Management Pty Ltd
Integral Energy Amatek Ltd
Hewlett-Packard Australia Ltd AMF Bowling Centres Australia
International Inc
Energy Australia Tricon Restaurants Australia Pty Ltd
NRMA Insurance Group Ltd Nestle Australia Ltd
IBM Australia Ltd Unisys Australia Pty Ltd
MLC Ltd Orange Australia Ltd
Unisys Direct Royal & Sun Alliance Australia Ltd
Power & Water Authority Godfrey Hirst Australia Pty Ltd
Illawarra Private Hospital Deakin University
One Steel Bendigo Bank Ltd
Gosford City Council Austrim Nylex Industrial Products Pty Ltd
Sanitarium Health Food Company Portland Aluminium Pty Ltd
Rural Press Ltd Royal Hobart Hospital
Wentworth Area Health Service Rivers & Water Supply Commission (TAS)
Hunter Area Health Service Pasminco Hobart Smelter
OneSteel Wire Ltd Community & Health Services Northern
Region
Information Services International University of Melbourne
Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander FASCO Australia Ltd
Commission
Australian Taxation Office Australian Associated Motor Insurers Pty
Ltd
Centrelink 147. National Australia Bank
Attorney Generals Dept (ACT) Pilkington Ltd
Australian Federal Police Amcor Ltd
Airservices Australia Email Metals Australia Pty Ltd
Dept of Environment & Heritage (ACT) Email Major Appliances Pty Ltd
Southern Area Health Service Hagemeyer Electrical Group
Mid-Western Area Health Service Visy Paper Pty Ltd
Agriculture (NSW) Police Service (VIC)
Southern Cross University Carter Holt Harvey Wood Products
New England Area Health Service Safeway Stores Ltd
Macquarie Area Health Service Country Road Clothing Pty Ltd
Ricegrowers Cooperative Ltd BP Australia Ltd
Citibank Ltd National Foods Ltd
268
ABN AMRO Australia Ltd Spotless Group Ltd
PricewaterhouseCoopers Bonlac Foods Ltd
Advantra Pty Ltd ExxonMobil Australia Pty Ltd
Sisters of Charity Health Pacific Dunlop Ltd
Travelex Australasia Group-Thomas Cook ANZ Banking Group Ltd
George Weston Foods (NSW) Ltd Reece Pty Ltd
URS Australia (NSW) Pty Ltd Smorgon Business Services
Coal & Allied Industries Ltd Rio Tinto Ltd
J Blackwood & Son Ltd Toll Holdings Ltd
Sodexho Australia Pty Ltd AXA Australia
Boral Ltd Pasminco Ltd
Jones Lang LaSalle (NSW) Ltd Crown Limited
Freehills NIKE Australia Pty Ltd
Australian Stock Exchange (NSW) ACI Packaging Group
Perpetual Australia Ltd Ericsson Australia Pty Ltd
ING Ltd South Pacific Tyres
St George Bank Ltd Menzies International Australia Pty Ltd
OneSteel Ltd Royal Women's & Children's Health
Network
GDH Pty Ltd Kodak Australasia Pty Ltd
Cleanaway Linfox Pty Ltd
State Transit Authority (NSW) Ford Motor Company of Australia Ltd
Brambles Industrial Services Smorgon Steel Group Ltd
Caltex Australia Ltd Dept of Natural Resources & Environment
(VIC)
HSBC Australia Just Jeans Group Holdings Pty Ltd
TMP Worldwide Executive Search Pty Ltd Epworth Hospital
AMP Services Ltd La Trobe University
Dept of Health & Aged Care Computer Science Corporation (VIC)
Hilton Hotels of Australia Pty Ltd Robert Bosch Australia Pty Ltd
David Jones Ltd Progress Printers & Distributors Pty Ltd
Dept of Education & Training (NSW) Trollope Silverwood & Beck Pty Ltd
American Express International Pacific Automotive Ltd
Incorporated
Transfield Pty Ltd Southern Health
Hoyts Cinemas Pty Ltd The Age
Police Service (NSW) BHP Billiton
John Fairfax Holdings Ltd Dept of Human Services (VIC)
Phillips Fox Lawyers Dept of Justice (VIC)
Lang Corporation Pty Ltd Telstra Corporation Ltd
Crowne Plaza Foster's Group Limited
Owens International Freight Australia Pty Ltd BHP Petroleum Pty Ltd
Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu City of Melbourne
Medical Benefits Fund of Australia Ltd Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology
KPMG Australia Metropolitan Fire & Emergency Services
Board
St George Hospital Orica Australia Pty Ltd
University of Sydney Shell Services International Ltd
Hannanprint Sydney Esanda Finance Corporation Ltd
P & O Australia Ltd Southcorp Ltd
British American Tobacco Ltd Southcorp Packaging
269
Tradelink Ltd WMC Pty Ltd
Dept of Public Works & Services (NSW) Beringer Blass Wine Estates Ltd
Zurich Financial Services Australia Ltd Australian Red Cross
NSW Health HSV Channel 7 Pty Ltd
Arnotts Ltd Royal Automobile Club of Victoria
Vodafone Australia Bakers Delight Holdings Pty Ltd
Reed Elsevier Pty Ltd Amcor Australasia
Broadlex Cleaning Australia Pty Ltd PMP Communications Ltd
Cognos Pty Ltd Spherion Corporation
Hatch Associates Pty Ltd Coles Myer Ltd
Sydney Adventist Hospital Kmart Australia Ltd
Metal Manufacturers Ltd Mayne
Central Sydney Area Health Service TAB Corp Holdings Ltd
ADI Ltd Lincraft Pty Ltd
Haden Engineering Pty Ltd Foster's Brewing Group Ltd
Dick Smith Electronics Pty Ltd QBuild
Capral Aluminium Ltd Dept of Families
CSR Construction Materials Ltd Queensland Health
Boral Ltd Queensland Rail
QANTAS Airways Ltd Golden Circle Ltd
Toyota Motor Corporation Australia Ltd Mincom Ltd
Electrolux Home Product Pty Ltd Hastings Deering Australia Ltd
Angus & Coote Pty Ltd MIM Holdings Ltd
Philips Electronics Australia Pty Ltd Pauls Limited
Liquorland Australia Pty Ltd Queensland University of Technology
Steelmark-Eagle & Globe Griffith University
Lotteries Corporation (NSW) Golden Casket Lottery Corporation
Mayne Health Ergon Energy
Environment Protection Authority (NSW) Capricornia Electricity Corporation
South Western Sydney Area Health Services Woolworths (SA) Ltd
Blacktown City Council Origin Energy Ltd
Tempo Services Ltd Dept Primary Industries & Resources (SA)
Big W Gerard Industries Pty Ltd
Boral Bricks (NSW) Pty Ltd Tenix Defence Systems
Unilever Australia Pty Ltd Hills Industries Ltd
McDonalds Australia Ltd University of South Australia
BBC Hardware Ltd Normandy Mining Limited
Woodside Energy Ltd Agriculture Western Australia
Boral Building Products Ltd Leisure Australia Co
FreightCorp BAE (SA) Pty Ltd
CSC Australia Australian Securities & Investments
Commission (WA)
Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd Sons of Gwalia Ltd
Australian Securities & Investments Atkins Carlyle Ltd
Commission (NSW)
AGL Company Pty Ltd Edith Cowan University
Novell Australia Alcoa World Alumina Australia
270
Appendix 4: Tables A4.1 – 4.10: Inter-item Correlation for all the Scales
o Facilitating Condition Variables
Table A4.1: Correction Matrix for EIS Development Processes Scale
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
D1 1.0000
D2 .3839 1.0000
D3 .1953 .4571 1.0000
D4 .2841 .1346 .1433 1.0000
D5 .1372 .2989 .4669 .4144 1.0000
D6 .3768 .4246 .4246 .1656 .3684 1.0000
Table A4.2: Correlation Matrix for EIS Management Processes Scale
M1 M2 M3 M4
MI 1.0000
M2 .5186 1.0000
M3 .4264 .4074 1.0000
M4 .2719 .4892 .4939 1.0000
Table A4.3: Correlation Matrix for Organisational Environment Scale
OE1 OE2 OE3 OE4 OE5

OE1 1.0000
OE2 .5093 1.0000
OE3 .3861 .4917 1.0000
OE4 .3659 .3625 .5145 1.0000
OE5 .4374 .5432 .5101 .3799 1.0000
271
o Social Factors Variables
Table A4.4: Correlation Matrix for Subjective Norms Scale
N1 N2 N3 N4
N1 1.0000
N2 .4986 1.0000
N3 .3515 .3175 1.0000
N4 .2703 .2490 .3451 1.0000
Table A4.5: Correlation Matrix for Subjective Values
V1 V2 V3 V4
V1 1.0000
V2 .7185 1.0000
V3 .4158 .4533 1.0000
V4 .3713 .3785 .2831 1.0000
Table A4.6 Correlation Matrix for Subjective Roles Scale
R1 R2 R3 R4
R1 1.0000
R2 .5780 1.0000
R3 .5189 .4452 1.0000
R4 .4596 .2422 .3784 1.0000
Table A4.7 Correlation Matrix for Subjective Social Situations Scale
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5
S1 1.0000
S2 .5091 1.0000
S3 .4178 .6331 1.0000
S4 .3863 .5373 .4855 1.0000
S5 .3327 .4907 .5711 .4542 1.0000
272
o TAM Variables
Table A4.8: Correlation Matrix for PEOU Scale
PEOU1 PEOU2 PEOU3 PEOU4 PEOU5 PEOU6

PEOU1 1.0000
PEOU2 .3039 1.0000
PEOU3 .3831 .5760 1.0000
PEOU4 .4017 .2661 .4999 1.0000
PEOU5 .3730 .4137 .5367 .5888 1.0000
PEOU6 .5190 .3859 .5842 .5093 .5649 1.0000
Table A4.9: Correlation Matrix for PU Scale
PU1 PU2 PU3 PU4 PU5 PU6

PU1 1.0000
PU2 .3703 1.0000
PU3 .2471 .2814 1.0000
PU4 .4423 .1653 .2418 1.0000
PU5 .3600 .3400 .3804 .4986 1.0000
PU6 .2420 .4027 .2883 .2152 .3661 1.0000
Table A4.10: Correlation Matrix for Attitudes Scale
ATU1 ATU2 ATU3 ATU4 ATU5

ATU1 1.0000
ATU2 .6086 1.0000
ATU3 .6085 .6630 1.0000
ATU4 .5674 .4311 .6468 1.0000
ATU5 .5795 .5558 .7172 .6498 1.0000
273
Appendix 5A: Factor Analysis Information
Table A 5.1: KMO and Bartlett's Test for Social Factor Variables
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy.

.797
Bartlett's Test of Approx. Chi-Square

1028.195
Sphericity
Df 136
Sig. .000
Figure A 5. 1: The Scree Plot for the Social factor Variables
Scree Plot
5
Eigenvalue
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Component Number
274
Table A 5.2 Total Variance Explained for Social Factor Variables
Component Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings

% of Cumulative % of Cumulative
Total Variance % Total Variance %
1 6.038 35.516 35.516 6.038 35.516 35.516
2 1.838 10.813 46.329 1.838 10.813 46.329
3 1.792 10.540 56.869 1.792 10.540 56.869
4 1.276 7.503 64.372 1.276 7.503 64.372
5 1.101 6.475 70.847
6 .942 5.542 76.389
7 .737 4.336 80.725
8 .607 3.570 84.295
9 .476 2.800 87.096
10 .434 2.554 89.650
11 .351 2.062 91.712
12 .319 1.876 93.588
13 .306 1.802 95.391
14 .251 1.477 96.868
15 .192 1.129 97.997
16 .176 1.035 99.032
17 .165 .968 100.000
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Table A 5.3 Communalities for the social factors
Initial Extraction
N1 1.000 .423
N2 1.000 .681
N3 1.000 .656
N4 1.000 .673
R1 1.000 .736
R2 1.000 .693
R3 1.000 .665
R4 1.000 .794
V1 1.000 .662
V2 1.000 .647
V3 1.000 .589
V4 1.000 .709
S1 1.000 .444
S2 1.000 .638
S3 1.000 .739
S4 1.000 .604
S5 1.000 .592
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis
275
Table A5.4 KMO and Bartlett's Test for TAM Instrument

.856
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 887.537

Df 136
Sig. .000
Table A5.5 Total Variance Explained for TAM Instrument
Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings

Component Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 5.821 34.239 34.239 5.821 34.239 34.239
2 2.414 14.201 48.441 2.414 14.201 48.441
3 1.617 9.509 57.950 1.617 9.509 57.950
4 1.005 5.912 63.861
5 .840 4.941 68.802
6 .814 4.786 73.588
7 .709 4.172 77.760
8 .576 3.388 81.149
9 .545 3.208 84.357
10 .468 2.752 87.109
11 .421 2.479 89.588
12 .374 2.201 91.789
13 .354 2.081 93.870
14 .313 1.842 95.712
15 .269 1.581 97.293
16 .248 1.460 98.754
17 .212 1.246 100.000
276
Figure A5.2: Scree Plot for TAM Instrument
Scree Plot
4
Eigenvalue
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Component Number
Table A5.6 Communalities for TAM Instrument
Initial Extraction
PU1 1.000 .521
PU2 1.000 .400
PU3 1.000 .446
PU4 1.000 .516
1.000 .640
PU5
PU6 1.000 .532
PEOU1 1.000 .383
PEOU2 1.000 .409
PEOU3 1.000 .695
PEOU4 1.000 .548
PEOU5 1.000 .671
PEOU6 1.000 .662
ATU1 1.000 .682
ATU2 1.000 .627
ATU3 1.000 .769
ATU4 1.000 .615
ATU5 1.000 .736
277
Table A5.7: KMO and Bartlett's Test for Habits
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling

Adequacy. .607
Bartlett's Test of Approx. Chi-Square

92.083
Sphericity
Df 3
Sig. .000
Table A5.8: Total Variance Explained for Habits
Component Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings

Cumulative % of Cumulative
Total % of Variance % Total Variance %
1 1.954 65.123 65.123 1.954 65.123 65.123
2 .720 24.011 89.134
3 .326 10.866 100.000
Figure A5.3: Scree Plot for Habit Variables
S cree P lo t
2.0
1.5
Eigenvalue
1.0
0.5
0.0
1 2 3
Com ponent N um ber
278
Table A5.9 Communalities for Habit Variables
Initial Extraction
EXPCBIS 1.000 .714
EXPEIS 1.000 .784
ABEIS 1.000 .456
Table A5.10 KMO and Bartlett's Test for the Facilitating Conditions
.807
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 625.461

Df 105
Sig. .000
Table A5.11 Total Variance Explained for the facilitating Conditions
Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings

Component Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 5.276 35.176 35.176 5.276 35.176 35.176
2 1.578 10.520 45.697 1.578 10.520 45.697
3 1.301 8.670 54.367 1.301 8.670 54.367
4 .994 6.629 60.996
5 .948 6.322 67.317
6 .858 5.723 73.040
7 .688 4.589 77.629
8 .596 3.974 81.603
9 .577 3.849 85.452
10 .472 3.147 88.600
11 .432 2.880 91.480
12 .402 2.677 94.157
13 .370 2.468 96.625
14 .283 1.887 98.511
15 .223 1.489 100.000
279
Figure A5.4: Scree Plot for the Facilitating Conditions
S c r e e P lo t
4
Eigenvalue
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
C om ponent Num ber
Table A5.12 Communalities for Facilitating Conditions
Initial Extraction
D1 1.000 .630
D2 1.000 .560
D3 1.000 .645
D4 1.000 .441
D5 1.000 .468
D6 1.000 .574
M1 1.000 .705
M2 1.000 .552
M3 1.000 .498
M4 1.000 .356
OE1 1.000 .509
OE2 1.000 .584
OE3 1.000 .592
OE4 1.000 .449
OE5 1.000 .592
280
Table A5.13a: The Mean Scores of EXPCBIS on PU and PEOU
peou pu * EXPCBIS
EXPCBIS peou pu
0-4 Mean 22.9375 23.5000
N 16 16
Std. Deviation 4.02440 3.96653
5-9 Mean 21.6522 23.8261
N 23 23
10-14 Mean 23.5429 24.5714
N 35 35
15-19 Mean 24.0000 25.5625
N 32 32
>20 Mean 24.1333 24.6667
N 15 15
Total Mean 23.2975 24.5620
N 121 121
Table A5.13b: The Mean Scores of EXPEIS on PU and PEOU
peou pu * EXPEIS
EXPEIS peou pu
0-4 Mean 22.5385 23.5000
N 26 26
5-9 Mean 23.5435 24.8696
N 46 46
10-14 Mean 23.2424 24.6667
N 33 33
15-19 Mean 24.2308 25.5385
N 13 13
>20 Mean 22.6667 23.6667
N 3 3
Total Mean 23.2975 24.5620
N 121 121
281
Table A5.13c: The Mean Scores of ABIS on PU and PEOU
peou pu * ABEIS
ABEIS peou pu
Novice casual Mean 21.2143 21.5000
(intermittent) user N 14 14
Novice frequent user Mean 23.4324 24.8108
N 37 37
Expert (knowledgeable) Mean 23.7143 25.0952
casual user N 42 42
Std. Deviation
3.00638 2.84399
Expert (knowledgeable) Mean 23.5357 24.9643

frequent user N 28 28
Total Mean 23.2975 24.5620
N 121 121
Table A5.13d: ANOVA Test for Habit (EXPCBIS) Vs PEOU
Sum of
Between Groups 92.715 4 23.179 1.994 .100
Within Groups 1348.574 116 11.626
Total 1441.289 120
Table A5.13d1: Test of Homogeneity of Variances for PEOU
Levene
Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
.853 4 116 .495
Table A5.13e: ANOVA Test for Habit (EXPEIS) Vs PEOU
Sum of
Between
30.380 4 7.595 .624 .646
Groups
Within Groups 1410.910 116 12.163
Total 1441.289 120
282
Table A5.13e1: Test of Homogeneity of Variances for PEOU
Levene
1.666 4 116 .163
Table A5.13f: ANOVA Test for Habit (ABEIS) Vs PEOU
Sum of
Between Groups 70.315 3 23.438 2.000 .118
Within Groups 1370.974 117 11.718
Total 1441.289 120
Table A5.13f1: Test of Homogeneity of Variances for PEOU
Levene
2.114 3 117 .102
Figure A5.5: Results of test for linearity and homoscedasticity assumptions
Scatter plot
Dep end en t V ariab le: p u
3
Regression Standardized Residual
-1
-2
-3
-4 -2 0 2 4
Regress ion Standardized P redicted V alue
283
Figure A5.6: Results of test of linearity and homoscedasticity assumptions
S c a tt e r p l o t
D e p e n d e n t V a r ia b le : p e o u
2
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2
R e g r e s s io n S t a n d a r d iz e d P r e d ic t e d V a lu e
Figure A5.7: Results of test for linearity and homoscedasticity assumptions
S c a tt e r p l o t
D e p e n d e n t V a ri a b l e : a tu
3
-1
-2
-3
-4
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
R e g r e s s io n S t a n d a r d iz e d P r e d ic t e d V a lu e
284
Figure A5.8: Results of test for normality assumptions
H is to g ra m
D e pe n d e nt V ar ia b le : pe o u
40
30
Frequency
20
10
M ean = -4 .4 9E -16
Std . De v . = 0.9 8 3
0 N = 121
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2
Re g res sio n Stan d a rd iz ed Res id ua l

Histogram
Dependent Variable: pu
14
12
10
Frequency
2
Mean = 5.56E-15
Std. Dev. = 0.987
0 N = 121
-4 -2 0 2 4
285
H is t o g r a m
D e p e n d e n t V a ria b le : a tu
2 5
2 0
Frequency
1 5
1 0
M e a n = -4 .5 1 E - 1 7
S td . D e v . = 0.9 9 2
0 N = 1 2 1
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
R e g re s s io n S t a n d a r d iz e d R e s i d u a l
N o r m a l P - P P lo t o f R e g r e s s io n S t a n d a r d i z e d R e s id u a l
D e p e n d e n t V a riab le: p u
1 .0
0 .8
Expected Cum Prob
0 .6
0 .4
0 .2
0 .0
0 .0 0.2 0 .4 0 .6 0 .8 1 .0
O b served C u m P ro b
286
D e p e n d e n t V a riab le: P E O U
1 .0
0 .8
Expected Cum Prob
0 .6
0 .4
0 .2
0 .0
0 .0 0.2 0 .4 0 .6 0 .8 1 .0
O b served C u m P ro b
D e p e n d e n t V a r i a b l e : a tu
1 .0
0 .8
Expected Cum Prob
0 .6
0 .4
0 .2
0 .0
0 .0 0.2 0 .4 0 .6 0 .8 1 .0
O b served Cu m P ro b
Table A5.14: Test of Homogeneity of Variances: ATU
Levene
1.819 4 116 .130
287
Figure A5.14: Results of Test for normality
N o r m a l Q -Q P lo t o f a tu
fo r N T U E IS = N o t a t a ll
0 .2
0 .0
Expected Normal
- 0 .2
- 0 .4
- 0 .6
- 0 .8
1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0
O b s e r v e d V a lu e
Figure A5.15: Results of Test for Normality
N o r m a l Q - Q P lo t o f a t u
fo r N T U E IS = L e s s th a n o n c e a w e e k
1
Expected Normal
- 1
- 2
1 6 1 8 2 0 2 2 2 4 2 6
Figure A5.16: Results for test of normality
N o r m a l Q - Q P lo t o f a t u
f o r N T U E I S = 2 o r 3 t im e s a w e e k
1 .0
0.5
Expected Normal
0.0
- 0 .5
- 1 .0
- 1 .5
- 2 .0
16 18 20 22 24 26
288
Figure A5.17: Results for test of normality
N o r m a l Q - Q P l o t o f a t u
f o r N T U E I S = S e v e r a l t im e s a w e e k
1 . 5
1 . 0
Expected Normal
0 . 5
0 . 0
- 0 . 5
- 1 . 0
- 1 . 5
2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5
O b s e r v e d V a l u e
Figure 5.18: Results for test of normality
N o r m a l Q - Q P l o t o f a t u
f o r N T U E I S = S e v e r a l t i m e s e a c h d a y
1 . 0
0 . 5
Expected Normal
0 . 0
- 0 . 5
- 1 . 0
- 1 . 5
- 2 . 0
1 2 1 4 1 6 1 8 2 0 2 2 2 4 2 6
O b s e r v e d V a l u e
Table A5.15a: ANOVA
Sum of
Model Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 9.833 2 4.917 3.438 .035
Residual 168.762 118 1.430
Total 178.595 120
a Predictors: (Constant), pu, peou; b Dependent Variable: EXPCBIS
289
Table A5.15b: Residuals Statistics
Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation N

Predicted Value 2.266 3.752 3.058 .2863 121
Std. Predicted Value -2.765 2.424 .000 1.000 121
Standard Error of
Predicted Value .111 .381 .179 .060 121
Adjusted Predicted Value 2.301 3.736 3.060 .2858 121
Residual -2.5677 2.5464 .0000 1.1859 121
Std. Residual -2.147 2.129 .000 .992 121
Stud. Residual -2.189 2.192 -.001 1.005 121
Deleted Residual -2.6699 2.6994 -.0019 1.2179 121
Stud. Deleted Residual -2.226 2.229 -.001 1.011 121
Mahal. Distance .037 11.179 1.983 2.101 121
Cook's Distance .000 .096 .009 .015 121
Centered Leverage Value .000 .093 .017 .018 121
Table A5.15c: Box's M Test of Equality of Covariance Matrices

Box's M 108.906
F 1.448
df1 54
df2 1949.009
Sig. .019
Table A5.15d: Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for PU and PEOU vs. ATU

ATU1 PEOU .039 .016 .211 2.4779 ** .015
ATU1 PU .090 .019 .411 4.826*** .000
In General
F 23.377***
R .533
R2 .284
* p < .05, ** p <. 01, *** p <. 001
290
Table A5.15e: Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for PU and PEOU vs. ATU

ATU2 PEOU .021 .017 .115 1.240 .217
ATU2 PU .072 .020 .331 3.577*** .001
In General
F 10.713***
R .392
R2 .154
* p < .05, ** p <. 01, *** p <. 001
Table A5.15f: Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for PU and PEOU vs. ATU

ATU3 PEOU .032 .018 .168 1.837 .069
ATU3 PU .075 .021 .327 3.589*** .000
In General
F 12.903***
R .424
R2 .179
* p < .05, ** p <. 01, *** p <. 001
Table A5.15g: Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for PU and PEOU vs. ATU

ATU4 PEOU .040 .015 .240 2.695** .011
ATU4 PU .062 .018 .313 3.514*** .000
In General
F 16.297***
R .465
R2 .215
* p < .05, ** p <. 01, *** p <. 001
291
Table A5.15h: Results of Multiple Regression Analysis for PU and PEOU vs. ATU

ATU5 PEOU .032 .017 .179 1.942 .055
ATU5 PU .062 .020 .290 3.143*** .002
In General
F 11.111***
R .398
R2 .158
* p < .05, ** p <. 01, *** p <. 001
292

02 Whole

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

02 Whole

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

University of Wollongong Thesis Collections

University of Wollongong Thesis Collection

Critical success factors for executive

This paper is posted at Research Online.

A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the

THE UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG

Emmanuel Matthew Ikart

SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT AND MARKETING

Marketing, University of Wollongong, Australia is wholly my work unless otherwise

Emmanuel Matthew Ikart

Executive Information Systems (EIS) are computer-based information systems (CBIS)

meaningful to executives. Hence, to improve the performance of executives’ tasks, a

significant number of organisations have invested heavily in EIS projects. Although

Facilitating conditions (EIS development processes, EIS management processes and

organisational environment of EIS) by means of PU, PEOU and ATU.

relevant in explaining executives’ behaviour towards EIS adoption and usage.

255 organisations that use EIS in Australia.

organisational variables in explaining executives’ behaviour towards the adoption and

This study is a significant contribution to academic literature and management/ practice.

have significant implications to EIS designers/developers, implementers and managers of

the behaviour of EIS users to use EIS).

Referenced Journal Article

Referenced Conference Papers

Ikart, E.M. Ikart (2005). An Investigation of the Determinants of User Acceptance of

Ikart, E.M. (2005). Towards Executive Information Systems Adoption by Knowledge

Ikart, E.M. (2005). An Exploratory Study of Organisational Contextual Factors

wealth of experience as an eminent researcher in the field of management and always

exercising an unerring judgment of what differentiated a good research endeavour from a

profound knowledge of different perspectives of Information Systems and communications

supervising/co-supervising this research before departing the University, I offer my sincere

I own my thanks to Dr. Chandra Gulati. As my statistical advisor, he has provided

have helped to add clarity and rigor to its presentation.

dream come true.

providing a warm and supportive environment for this research to develop.

1.1 Background to the Present Study………………………………………… 1

5.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………. 158

6.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………….. 203

Table 2.1 Definitions of EIS and Illustrative References 24

CFO Chief financial officers

CBIS Computer-based information systems

CSF Critical success factors

MOLAP Multi-dimensional on-line analytical processing

NTUEIS Number of times of using executive information

PEOU Perceived ease of use

TRA Theory of Reason Action

Attitude object An external stimulus of an attitude.

Attitude towards the An individual’s effective evaluation of a specified attitude object.

Balanced scorecard The balanced scorecard is a management system (not only a

Correlation An investigation used in identifying important variables associated with the

Data mining Knowledge discovery (KDD), knowledge extraction, data pattern

Data warehouse A subject-oriented, integrated, time-variant and nonvolatile collection of

Executives Corporate knowledge workers responsible for corporate strategic

Executive Computer-based information system specifically designed to provide broad

Exploratory Research employed to develop a preliminary understanding of some

Habits Situation-behaviour sequences that are or have become automatic so that

Operationalisation The linking of the conceptual definitions of a specific set of measurement

Roles Appropriate behaviour by a person holding an office in a group.

The Web “An information space consisting of hyperlinked documents published on

Theory A systematic way of organizing and explaining observations that include a

Values The tendency to prefer a state of affairs over another.

Variables Symbols to which values are assigned.

Information Systems”(Kelly, 1994).

1.1 Background to the Present Study