Running head: ATTRIBUTION THEORY 1

Attribution Theory

Student Name

Course Name

Professor Name

January 19, 2021

Attribution Theory
ATTRIBUTION THEORY 2

Introduction

The attribution theory is to explain the attitude of an employee when implementing the

technology. The authors provide an analysis of employee actions about organizational intentions

of technology implementation. Technology has proved to be a critical feature of the changing

market environment: it's competitive at the same time. Researchers continuously observed the

connection between the adoption of technologies and the approval of workers and their

implementation. The responsibility of workers for technical implementation is important for

understanding how they view and react to innovation. Many theoretical frameworks can be used

to provide an analysis of employee's perspectives on innovation. For example, the model of

technology acceptance utilizes the concept of usability and ease of use, which the model suggests

are key factors that encourage innovation[ CITATION Cho19 \l 1033 ].

Although a theory of attribution has been included with variables and linked to

performance in the knowledge system, it works to acknowledge at the same time evidence from

the theory. It is motivating context and the success/failure existence of system results and

understanding users of the causes of outcomes (attributions), and the degree of user satisfaction.

The results of this study show the importance of the theory of attribution as a theoretical

framework to understand these factors that decide the attributions of users for information

system results and their effect on the level of user satisfaction with the system and the quality of

the system performance.

Implementation of Innovation Technologies

It is necessary to determine how employees perceive an organization's intentionality to be

successful in innovation adoption. The positive behavioral approach to innovation is proactive

ATTRIBUTION THEORY 3

intentionality, and it encourages acceptance of innovation. Construct intent has an optimistic

impact on the productivity of employee innovation. The constructive impact on the dynamic use

of innovative technologies and the adverse impact on results make this possible. The attribution

of employees to positive purpose improves innovation productivity by increasing successful

execution and decreasing deployment avoidance. By comparison, workers' attribution

disappointment reduces creativity efficiency by increasing the avoidance of

implementation[ CITATION Wal15 \l 1033 ].

In the context of innovation implementation, the intentionality contributions cause the

sense of employees' innovation acceptance. Subsequently, we recommended that workers assign

positive (i.e., constructive) or negative motives to an organization's decision on innovation (i.e.,

deceptive intentionality). Attribution of positive intent refers to individuals thinking that their

company has embraced creativity with real and sincere intent, such as corporate growth and

employee well-being, to achieve desirable results. The workers have taken innovation with self-

employed, deceptive intent such as keeping up with a managerial fad or increasing political

power and control of management to manipulate their employees is the attribution of misplaced

intent. While they are independent, they do not exclude each other. These roles affect the

interpretation and marking of workers and the reaction to human resources

activities[ CITATION Kim17 \l 1033 ].

Successful Innovation Implementations

One key part is the package of policies and practices developed by an organization.

Policy and practices implemented include, for instance, standard and quantity of instruction

needed to teach staff to take advantage of innovations; technical assistance offered as appropriate

to innovation users; the provision of innovation rewards; and the quality, accessibility, and
ATTRIBUTION THEORY 4

usefulness of the technology itself. The combined and compensatory impact of those policies and

activities. For an organization's success in implementing innovation, no single strategy or

activity appears to be completely vital. However, the overall quality of a company's strategies

and activities predictive[ CITATION Nde16 \l 1033 ].

The second major factor is the team or organization's innovation environment—a shared

understanding of the value of the application of innovation in the team and organization among

employees. When a unit's environment for introducing innovation is good and positive, it is not a

distraction and barrier to the success of its 'real work' that staff sees innovation as a big priority.

Managers play a crucial part in the implementation process, and thus, the third critical

element is their support for creativity. Management support for the execution in the absence of

solid, convincing, informed, and demonstrable support. Fourth, financial resources are available.

It's not cheap to introduce, of course. It needs funds to provide formal preparation, provide

customer assistance, initiate a marketing program to clarify innovation's merits and those

expectations of success as workers learn the advantages of innovation. Financial capital

availability is an important indicator of the overall efficiency and, therefore, indirectly, the

success of the organization's implementation policies and activities[ CITATION Var17 \l 1033 ].

Conclusion

It is concluded an established theory of causal attribution to the literature on

organizational innovation. The results suggest that assigning proactive intentionality indirect and

beneficial impacts on innovation effectiveness through its direct positive influence on the active

implementation and its direct negative effect on the avoidance of implementation, and not

through passive implementation. On the other hand, the allocation of misleading intent has a
ATTRIBUTION THEORY 5

negative indirect influence on the efficacy of creativity, but not by active or passive execution,

on the avoidance of implementation.

References

Choi, S. Y., Chung, G. H., & Choi, J. N. (2019). Why are we having this innovation? Employee

attributions of innovation and implementation behavior. Social Behavior and

Personality, 47(7), 1-12. Retrieved from

http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&sid=63c42e0d-badd-4723-

81db-c263fc69b886%40pdc-v-sessmgr02

Kim, J. S., & Chung, G. H. (2017). Implementing innovations within organizations: asystematic

review and research agenda. Innovation: Organization & Management, 19(3), 1-28.

Retrieved from
ATTRIBUTION THEORY 6

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317781594_Implementing_innovations_within

_organizations_a_systematic_review_and_research_agenda

Ndesaulwa, A. P., & Kikula, J. (2016). The impact of technology and innovation (technovation)

in developing countries: A review of empirical evidence. Journal of Business and

Management Sciences, 4(1), 7-11. Retrieved from

http://article.businessmanagementsciences.com/pdf/jbms-4-1-2.pdf

Vargas, S. M., Gonçalo, C. R., & Ribeirete, F. (2017). Organizational practices required for

innovation: a study in an information technology company. Gest. Prod., São Carlos,

24(2), 221-235. Retrieved from https://www.scielo.br/pdf/gp/v24n2/en_0104-530X-gp-

0104-530X2161-16.pdf

Walker, R. C., & Aritz, J. (2015). Women doing leadership: Leadership styles and organizational

culture. International Journal of Business Communication, 52(4), 452–478. Retrieved

from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2329488415598429