Tourism Recreation Research

ISSN: 0250-8281 (Print) 2320-0308 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtrr20

A conceptual model for adoption of information

communication technology in the travel and
tourism industry

Amol S. Dhaigude, Rohit Kapoor & Sudhir Ambekar

To cite this article: Amol S. Dhaigude, Rohit Kapoor & Sudhir Ambekar (2016): A conceptual
model for adoption of information communication technology in the travel and tourism
industry, Tourism Recreation Research, DOI: 10.1080/02508281.2015.1126919

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2015.1126919

Published online: 06 Jan 2016.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 3

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rtrr20

Download by: [University of California, San Diego] Date: 12 January 2016, At: 13:49
 TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH, 2016
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2015.1126919

A conceptual model for adoption of information communication technology in

the travel and tourism industry
Amol S. Dhaigudea, Rohit Kapoora and Sudhir Ambekarb
a
Operations Management and Quantitative Techniques Area, Indian Institute of Management, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India; bNational
Institute of Construction Management and Research, Pune, Maharashtra, India

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The tourism industry was among the early adopters of information and communication technology Received 4 November 2014
(ICT), such as the Computer Reservation System of the early 1950s and the adoption of Global Accepted 23 November 2015
Distribution Systems in the late 1980s. However, after several decades of ICT adoption, the degree
KEYWORDS
Downloaded by [University of California, San Diego] at 13:49 12 January 2016

of adoption as well as use of ICT among enterprises related to travel and tourism (T&T) has been Information and
quite uneven. The objective of this study is to provide a model that explains the ICT adoption communication technologies;
process in the T&T industry through a combination of Adoption Diffusion (AD) and Usage technology adoption model;
Diffusion (UD). The model incorporates the UD concepts of variety of use and rate of use with the use diffusion; adoption
perceived usefulness concept of AD. The UD model, unlike the AD model, focuses on the extent diffusion; travel and tourism
of use rather than on the act of adoption. The model consists of three main parts, namely, management
determinants, user patterns and outcomes. Based on these three dimensions, adopters are
categorized into eight groups: Tech-Savvy, Obligatory, Early Adopter, Focused, Limited,
Constrained, Follower and Laggards. The model was empirically tested and the results show that
perceived usefulness is an important element in the adoption process. This model will be a ready
reference for professionals, managers working in T&T firms, policy makers and government bodies
in strategy formulation. It will also help IT professionals and researchers who work in the T&T domain.

Introduction advantage (Law & Jogaratnam, 2005). ICT implemen-

The travel and tourism industry (T&T) has huge growth
potential. There were 1.133 billion international tourist
arrivals across the world in 2014 and this is expected to
increase 3–4% in 2015 (UNWTO 2015). The major contri-
butors to this growth are globalization, the development
of transportation technology and the increasing use of
information and communication technology (Berne,
Garcia-Gonzalez, & Mugica, 2012). The T&T industry is
characterized by the presence of a large number of
actors present at different levels of the value chain, a
high level of intangibility, value-conscious customers
and variations in terms of regulations. The actors vary
in size, functionality, location and level of autonomy.
For example, large players such as airline operators or
hotels are actual service providers and may be located
far away from their customers, whereas booking agents
and car rentals are smaller and located close to the cus-
tomer. For efficient and effective service delivery, the
independent actors in the T&T industry must be inte-
grated and this integration is feasible only via ICT. ICT
has the ability to transform the entire business processes
in the T&T industry into an integrated operation and
firms that fail to adopt ICT will lose their competitive
tation helps firms improve the quality of services
offered, enhances operational efficiency, increases their
global reach and reduces costs, resulting in better consu-
mer experience (Law, Leung, & Buhalis, 2009). The variety
and intensity of ICT usage in the T&T industry is increas-
ing by leaps and bounds, resulting in the transfer of accu-
rate information demanded by customers at the right
time (Connolly & Lee, 2006; Singh & Kasavana, 2005).
ICT has become the must-have factor for operations in
the T&T industry. As Poon (1993, p. 153) stated, ‘a
whole system of information technologies is being
rapidly diffused throughout the tourism industry and
no player will escape information technologies impacts’.
Unlike manufacturing firms, which have a uniform
adoption process, the T&T industry has variations in
terms of level of adoption and uses of ICT among the
members of the value chain, resulting in a high level of
complexity in the diffusion process of ICT. The nature
of ICT adoption in the T&T industry, coupled with increas-
ing investment in ICT, makes it necessary to formulate a
holistic method for the ICT adoption process (Law et al.,
2009). There are methods available to measure technol-
ogy acceptance, popularly known as the technology
adoption model (TAM), which is based on the Theory

CONTACT Rohit Kapoor rohitk@iimidr.ac.in

© 2016 Taylor & Francis
 2 A. S. DHAIGUDE ET AL.
of Reasoned Action (Davis, 1989). TAM explains the
Adoption Diffusion (AD) process. The AD phenomenon
observes the process through which an innovation
grasps the major portion of adopters, hastens the diffu-
sion, and ultimately reaches a stage where the inno-
vation is seen as a success (Mahajan, Muller, & Bass,
1990). However, AD models have limitations and
researchers have criticized the AD model for not consid-
ering the nature of adoption. In order to take a holistic
view of the phenomenon of diffusion, use-diffusion
(UD) should be taken into account (Anderson &
Ortinau, 1988; Golder & Tellis, 1998; Lewis & Seibold,
1993; Robertson & Gatignon, 1986). However, AD and
UD appear separately in published research studies.
These two aspects of technology adoption need to be
Downloaded by [University of California, San Diego] at 13:49 12 January 2016
studied together for a better understanding of the tech-
nology diffusion process. This is particularly valid in T&T
context due to the protracted route and time of diffusion
caused by the complexity of the processes, which arises
from the diversity in the activity profile of the supply-side
enterprises and the high levels of autonomy enjoyed by
customers. Other contributing factors are the distinct
stages which customers pass through to experience
tourism products and services.
Along the same lines, our research extends to ICT
adoption in the T&T industry by systematically taking
into account the combination of the AD and UD
phenomenon. The proposed model incorporates UD
concepts (rate of use and variety of use) with the per-
ceived usefulness concept of AD to explain the adoption
process. More specifically, the study tries to answer the
following questions related to ICT adoption in the T&T
industry:
. What combination of the AD and UD phenomenon
can explain ICT adoption in the T&T industry?
. What are the determinants of ICT in the T&T industry?
. Since T&T firms exhibit different usage patterns, how
can adopters be classified into useful segments?
. How is the segmentation of adopters useful for strat-
egy formulation?
Table 1. AD vs. UD.
Model Key variable Typology of adoption Relevant criteria
AD Adoption Innovators Timing or rate of adoption
Early adopters
Early majority
Late majority
Conservatives
UD Use Intense users Rate of use
Specialized users Variety of use
Non-specialized users
Limited users
Source: Shih and Venkatesh (2004).
The model considers factors that propel the adoption
process as well as the unique characteristics of the indus-
try so that it can be used as a strategic tool for ICT adop-
tion. The study will provide a base for ICT
implementation in the T&T industry. The model will be
a ready reference for professionals, managers working
in T&T companies, policy makers and government
bodies in strategy formulation. It will also help IT pro-
fessionals and researchers who work in these domains.
The subsequent parts of the paper have been orga-
nized into different sections. The next section gives a
brief outline of AD and UD theories. The following
section presents the proposed model for the adoption
of ICT in the T&T industry and discusses the proposed
hypothesis. The next section describes the research
methodology. This is followed by the data analysis and
the final section summaries the study.
Adoption diffusion and use-diffusion theories
The main difference between the UD and AD models is
the variables used. The AD model uses the rate or time
of adoption as a variable, whereas the UD model uses
interest in ‘use’, or to be more precise, the rate and
variety of use. A comparison of the two models as
given by Shih and Venkatesh (2004) is shown in Table 1.
AD theory contains a two-stage diffusion model,
S-curved diffusion, critical mass and diffusion speed. The
theoretical elements of the UD model consist of use
(variety and rate), disadoption and technology outcomes
(perceived impact, technology integration and proneness
for adoption). AD theory predicts introduction, growth
and maturity to be the three stages of the diffusion curve.
It categorizes adopters into five types, namely, innovators,
early adopters, early majority, late majority and laggards.
Both models have some common constructs such as
innovativeness, relative advantage, media influence
and complexity and social communication, although
the mentioned constructs might not be similar in their
content. Certain criteria also distinguish AD and UD, for
example, trialability, observability and compatibility are
purely AD parameters (Rogers, 1995), whereas the
Elements unique to each model Elements common to both models
Observability Innovativeness
Compatibility Social communication
Trialability Complexity
Influence of media
Relative advantage
Product experience
Competition for use
Sophistication of technology
Satisfaction

exclusive parameters for UD are competition among
various users for use, experience with technology, satis-
faction from use and technology sophistication.
Conceptual model and hypothesis
development
The conceptual model for ICT adoption by the T&T indus-
try is shown in Figure 1. Our model is an extension of the
model proposed by Shih and Venkatesh (2004), which
was proposed for testing the UD model in the US in
the context of home technology. Our model extends
the previous model by adding the variable ‘perceived
usefulness of AD’ to the UD phenomenon, namely, rate
of use and variety of use. With the addition of a new vari-
Downloaded by [University of California, San Diego] at 13:49 12 January 2016
able, the user categories increase from four to eight:
tech-savvy, obligatory, early adopter, focused, limited,
constrained, follower and laggards.
The proposed model consists of three parts: Determi-
nants, Usage patterns and Outcome.
Each of these parts has sub-parts as shown in Figure 1.
Although all three parts of the proposed model are
important, the central section (on usage patterns) plays
Figure 1. Conceptual model for ICT adoption in the T&T industry.
TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH 3
an important role owing to the UD phenomenon.
Hence, we will begin by describing usage patterns.
Usage pattern
Usage pattern has been conceptualized as a combi-
nation of three dimensions: variety of use taken on the
y-axis, rate of use taken on the x-axis and perceived use-
fulness taken on the z-axis. Variety of use means the
different ways in which ICT is used. Rate of use is the
amount of time a person spends using ICT during a
selected time period. Perceived usefulness is defined as
‘the degree to which a person believes that using a par-
ticular system would enhance his or her job perform-
ance’ (Davis, 1989, p. 320). Even though it is plausible
that these three dimensions are correlated (e.g. the
higher the perceived usefulness, the higher the variety
of use, ultimately leading to higher rate of use), an
empirical examination of these concepts has not been
carried out. Studies find that a higher rate of use and a
low variety of use come from routine needs (Ram &
Jung, 1990; Ridgway & Price, 1994). In addition, a high
rate of adoption but low rate of use can be attributed
 4 A. S. DHAIGUDE ET AL.

to compulsory/ legal/ forced adoption (Choi, Kim, & Kim, Determinants

2011; Mahler & Rogers, 1999).
We have taken four determinants that may affect usage
The combination of variety of use (low/high), rate of
patterns, namely, prior experience with technology, frus-
use (low/ high) and perceived usefulness (low/high)
tration with technology, technological sophistication and
yields eight types of users (Figure 1): tech-savvy, obliga-
service/product portfolio. These determinants have
tory, early adopter, focused, limited, constrained, fol-
inspired us to put forward the various hypotheses in
lower and laggard. Table 2 shows the typology of users.
the proposed study as follows:
Tech-savvy users figure in situations where an inno-
vation is treated as high on perceived usefulness and is
used in a considerable manner in terms of variety of Prior experience with technology
use and rate of use, i.e. the number of tools and time User knowledge determines the UD pattern directions
spent, respectively. With focused use, the focus shifts (Alba & Hutchinson, 1987; Kiesler, Kraut, Lundmark,
to escalating rate of use and perceived usefulness. Scherlis, & Mukhopadhyay, 1997; Norman, 1998). User
According to Tinnell (1985) this kind of usage leads to knowledge is the outcome of prior experience with the
a tendency to treat innovation as a specialized tool. Obli- technology that empowers users to identify situations
Downloaded by [University of California, San Diego] at 13:49 12 January 2016

gatory use is characterized by a high rate of use, but is for applying the technology and how to apply technol-
low on perceived usefulness and variety of use. This ogy successfully. Technology is continuously changing,
pattern is seen in the service industry where product so users need to keep pace with advances in technology.
augmentation is widespread (Kotler, 2009). Early adop- Hahn, Park, Krishnamurthi, and Zoltners (1994) explained
ters benchmark themselves against tech-savvy users. that triers can become adopters if they have positive
They are higher on rate and variety of use than on per- product experience. Therefore, when people have
ceived usefulness. some prior experience with the technology, it leads to
Limited use is a pattern in which rate of use is lower the development of technology efficiency and depen-
than variety and rate of and perceived usefulness. Trial- dence on technology for continuous use. At the same
and-error usage patterns are common among these time, a higher accumulated experience leads to increas-
users. Constrained use is characterized by low rate and ing familiarity with the technology and its different capa-
variety of use, but high perceived usefulness; these bilities. Shih and Venkatesh (2004) stated that prior
users lack the resources to upgrade the technology. Fol- experience is positively associated with a high rate of
lowers are low on rate of use and perceived usefulness, use and variety of use. McFarland and Hamilton (2006)
but high on variety of use. They opt for the technology argued that prior experience has a positive and direct
when it becomes widespread. Finally, laggards score relationship with perceived usefulness evaluations. Kim,
low on all three dimensions; these users neglect the Lee, and Law (2008) explained that perceived usefulness
product and this can even lead to disadoption (Lindlof, leads to actual use, which consists of rate of use and
1992). variety of use. Therefore, we hypothesize the following:
This typology has face validity since we have separ-
H1: Higher accumulated prior experience with technol-
ated eight different types of users based on UD and ogy results in higher perceived usefulness, variety of
AD characteristics. The user categories are mutually use and rate of use.
exclusive, i.e. at any point of time the user belongs to
one category. However, user identities can change over
time as shown by psychographic studies, for example, Frustration with technology
a focused user may become a tech-savvy user if the Frustrated users are the product of complicated technol-
variety of use increases. ogy (Mick & Fournier, 1998). As argued by Mukherjee and
Hoyer (2001, p. 470), frustration is also ‘associated learn-
ing cost and comprehension difficulty … and lack of
Table 2. Typology of users. control’. Therefore, as an outcome, we can say that
User classification Rate of use Variety of use Perceived usefulness hitches in making technology perform the desired
Tech-Savvy High High High tasks leads to feelings varying from aggravation to disap-
Obligatory High Low Low pointment. Frustration is a product of either technology
Early Adopter High High Low
Focused High Low High failure to perform as intended or inability to cope with
Limited Low High High the user’s expectations. As a result, the rate and variety
Constrained Low Low High
Follower Low High Low of uses decrease. Frustration leads to an unpleasant
Laggard Low Low Low association or a feeling of unease with the use of technol-
Source: Compiled by authors. ogy. McFarland and Hamilton (2006) discussed computer
 TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH 5

anxiety as a feeling of unease with the technology and
they showed that anxiety has a negative, direct relation-
ship with perceived usefulness evaluations. Kim et al.
(2008) explained that perceived usefulness leads to
actual use, which consists of rate of use and variety of
use. Therefore, we hypothesize the following:
H2: Higher frustration with the technology leads to lower
perceived usefulness, variety of use and rate of use.
Technological sophistication
Technological sophistication has two main components:
technology versatility and technology capabilities (Shih
& Venkatesh, 2004). To achieve sophistication, the tech-
nology does not need to be complicated to use, for
Downloaded by [University of California, San Diego] at 13:49 12 January 2016
questionnaire was used to collect data from 211
Indian travel and tourism agents operating in Tier II
cities. The questionnaire contained four sections: the
first three sections captured information on variety of
use, rate of use and perceived usefulness, while the
fourth section captured demographic details. The
item-wise detail in the questionnaire is shown in
Tables 3–6. All the respondents were male and belong-
ing to Tier II cities, the demographic details are shown
in Figure 2. The questionnaire was pre-tested on 25
travel agents in order to check validity, accuracy and
administration ease.
Dependent variables: variety of use, rate of use

example, compared to the year 1985, computers today and perceived usefulness
are technologically sophisticated, and even user-friendly.
Variety of use was based on an exhaustive list of business
The capability of the technology determines what users
activities performed by employees using ICT (Pena &
can do with it. Therefore, we anticipate that the more
sophisticated the technology, the more the user will
Table 3. Variety of use.
use it and in a variety of ways. Consequently, technology
Computers Internet Mobile app
sophistication leads to higher variety and rate of use.
Intranet LAN/WAN Audio/Video Devices
Technology can be sophisticated without being diffi- Telephone Fax Bluetooth
cult to use, i.e. high on perceived ease of use. Huh, PDA Mobile WiFi
CCTV Card swiping machine Biometric/Card Reader
Kim, and Law (2009) argued that perceived ease of use Printer/Scanner Website Others (please specify)
leads to perceived usefulness. Kim et al. (2008) explained Source: Compiled by authors.
that perceived usefulness leads to actual use, which con-
sists of rate of use and variety of use. Therefore, we
hypothesize the following: Table 4. Rate of use.
Real-time ticket management/Online booking Net banking
H3: Technological sophistication results in higher per-
Local booking using computers e-transfer/ money transfer
ceived usefulness, variety of use and rate of use. Scanning/Printing/Fax/PDA Mobile money
Mobile alerts Online promotion
GPS tracking Mobile promotion
Service/product portfolio Tele-booking/Call centre e-Brochure
Service/product portfolio is the basket of offerings by a Mobile app Virtual tourism
ERP/CRM Social network
particular firm. As the size of the portfolio increases, Dynamic packaging Game
the firms need to perform more tasks in the given Pod guide/Audio guide/Video guide Web browsing
Website- dynamic/static Shopping
time. Consequently, the variety of use and rate of use e-insurance e-mails
will be directly related to the service/product portfolio. Payroll/Attendance system/ Accounting Sports
In order to do more tasks in the same time, firms need Source: Compiled by authors.
to work on their efficiency. McFarland and Hamilton
Table 5. Perceived usefulness.
(2006) found that computer efficiency has a positive,
Using ICT in my firm would enable me to accomplish tasks more quickly
direct relationship with perceived usefulness. Perceived Using ICT would improve my firm performance
usefulness will lead to actual use, which comprises Using ICT in my firm would increase my productivity
Using ICT would enhance my effectiveness on the job
variety and rate of use. Hence, we propose the following Using ICT would make it easier to do my job
hypothesis: Source: (Davis, 1989; Venkatesh, 1999).

H4: Larger the service/product portfolio results in higher

Table 6. Rate of use.
perceived usefulness, variety of use and rate of use.
Bus booking Taxi booking
Flight booking Train booking
Research methodology Passport and Visa Package tours
Currency conversion Courier
Local sightseeing Hotel booking
To test our conceptual model of ICT adoption, we con- Other (please specify) Other (please specify)
ducted a survey of travel and tourism agents. Between Other (please specify) Other (please specify)
January 2015 and February 2015, a structured Source: Compiled by authors.
 6 A. S. DHAIGUDE ET AL.
Downloaded by [University of California, San Diego] at 13:49 12 January 2016

Figure 2. Demographics of the respondents.

Jamilena, 2010). For our analysis, we identified 18 items Determinants

of ICT (Table 3). The variety of use depicts how ICT use
The independent variables are summarized in Table 7.
diffuses among various activities at the firm level. The
Frustration with technology was measured through a
responses were categorized as 1 = ‘yes’, 0 = ‘no’. For
two-item scale (‘ICT is difficult to use’ and ‘Often feel
each firm we then summed the responses on all 18 ICT
frustrated using ICT’). Experience with ICT was
tools; the data show that the mean and median uses
measured as the number of years the firms had been
are 7.29 and 7, respectively.
using ICT tools.
Rate of use was taken as the total number of hours
of ICT usage by the firm in a week. The owner/
manager of the firm provided information on the use Analyses and results
of every ICT tool listed in Table 3 coupled with the
We assume that perceived usefulness, variety of use and
T&T business activities shown in Table 4. The rate of
rate of use are correlated, such that an increase in per-
use was divided into low and high rate of use. The
ceived usefulness results in an increase of variety of
mean and median use for each firm was 33.19 and
use which leads to an increase in rate of use as more
31 hours per week, respectively. To eliminate firm
time is needed to perform more tasks. If the user has
size bias, we normalized this measure by the number
low perceived usefulness, the variety of use will be
of employees using ICT. The normalized rate of use
lower, leading to a low rate of use. In addition, we
was then divided by the median, giving the low and
assume that perceived usefulness, rate of use and
high rate of use.
variety of use are dependent on exogenous variables,
Dimensions of perceived usefulness were taken from
previously validated scales (Davis, 1989; Gefen, Kara-
hanna, & Straub, 2003; Grover & Ramanlal, 1999; Rose Table 7. Summary of determinants.
& Straub, 1998; Venkatesh, 1999). This is shown in Variable Variable Standard
Table 5. name description Measure Mean deviation

Finally, the service/product portfolio was collected FT Frustration with Two-item scale 1.63 1.28
technology
using information shown in Table 6 with yes/no types TS Technology Age of newest 3.31 1.52
of responses. The data show that the mean and Sophistication personal
computer
median are 5.36 and 5, respectively. SE Prior experience No. of years since 5.36 3.81
Together, the variety of use, rate of use and perceived technology adoption
PORT Service/Product List of services/ 5.36 2.71
usefulness produced the cube divided into an eight-part Portfolio products offered
matrix of usage patterns (see Figure 1). Source: - Compiled by authors.
 TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH 7

Table 8. Results of the 3SLS analysis

reg3 (PU: PU = RATE VAR) (VAR: VAR = RATE PU) (RATE: RATE = PU VAR), exog (FT SE TS PORT) level (95) first all base levels.
First-stage regressions
Source SS Df MS Number of obs = 211
Model 91.7878329 4 22.9469582 F(4, 206) = 44.84
Residual 105.409703 206 0.511697586 Prob > F = 0.0000
Total 197.1975 210 0.939035884 R-Squared = 0.4655
Adj R-Squared = 0.4551
Root MSE = 0.71533
PU Coef. Std. err. t P>| t | [95% Conf. Interval ]
FT −0.4895285 0.0427645 −11.45 0.000 −0.5738407
−0.4052162
SE 0.0044494 0.0064029 0.69 0.488 −0.0081742
0.017073
TS −0.0312718 0.03285 −0.95 0.342 −0.0960371
0.0334935
PORT 0.024737 0.0200592 1.23 0.219 −0.0148106
0.0642847
_cons 6.401863 0.1997475 32.05 0.000 6.008051
Downloaded by [University of California, San Diego] at 13:49 12 January 2016

6.795674
Source SS Df MS Number of obs = 211
Model 1855.79923 4 463.949807 F(4, 206) = 67.21
Residual 1421.98276 206 6.90282894 Prob > F = 0.0000
Total 3277.78199 210 15.6084857 R-Squared = 0.5662
Adj R-Squared = 0.5578
Root MSE = 2.6273
VAR Coef. Std. err. t P>| t | [95% Conf. Interval ]
FT −0.4496904 0.1570691 −2.86 0.005 −0.7593595
−0.1400214
SE 0.0476101 0.023517 2.02 0.044 0.0012452
0.0939751
TS −0.0197834 0.1206541 −0.16 0.870 −0.2576586
0.2180919
PORT 0.9631063 0.0736751 13.07 0.000 0.8178525
1.10836
_cons 2.665536 0.7336489 3.63 0.000 1.219113
4.111959
Source SS Df MS Number of obs = 211
Model 35390.8446 4 8847.71115 F(4, 206) = 46.81
Residual 38938.7952 206 189.023278 Prob > F = 0.0000
Total 74329.6398 210 353.950666 R-Squared = 0.4761
Adj R-Squared = 0.4660
Root MSE = 13.749
RATE Coef. Std. err. t P>| t | [95% Conf. Interval]
FT −2.909163 0.8219299 −3.54 0.000 −4.529637
−1.28869
SE 0.6797339 0.1230628 5.52 0.000 0.4371099
0.922358
TS −0.6000298 0.6313733 −0.95 0.343 −1.844812
0.6447522
PORT 3.350355 0.3855357 8.69 0.000 2.590253
4.110457
__cons 18.29271 3.839126 4.76 0.000 10.7237
25.86173

as argued in the hypothesis section. Therefore, we opted
for a three-equation model of perceived usefulness, rate
and variety of use, and then used three-stage least
squares (3 SLS).
3SLS regression analysis
The results of the 3SLS analysis for determinants of
ICT usage are shown in Tables 8 and 9. The first
determinant, prior experience with technology (SE),
showed partial empirical support; it had a significant
relationship with the variables Variety of use (Coef. =
0.0476, p < 0.05) and Rate of use (Coef. = 0.6797, p <
0.05) but no significant relationship with perceived
usefulness. This indicates that accumulated prior
experience with the technology leads to a higher
variety of use and rate of use, partially supporting
Hypothesis 1.
 8 A. S. DHAIGUDE ET AL.

Table 9. Results of the 3SLS analysis.

Three-stage least squares regression
Equation Obs Parms RSME ‘R-sq’ Chi2 P
PU 211 2 0.9186686 0.0970 67.21 0.0000
VAR 211 2 2.606939 0.5625 635.44 0.0000
RATE 211 2 11.52996 0.6226 792.94 0.0000
Coef. Std. err. z P>| z | [95% Conf. Interval]
PU
RATE 0.0552533 0.0120628 4.58 0.000 0.0316106
0.0788961
VAR −0.1031678 0.055079 −1.87 0.061 −0.2111208
−0.0047851
_cons 4.575003 0.1564531 29.24 0.000 4.268361
4.881646
VAR
RATE 0.2268151 0.00983 23.07 0.000 0.2075487
0.2460815
PU −0.7489176 0.2943172 −2.54 0.011 −1.325769
−0.1720664
Downloaded by [University of California, San Diego] at 13:49 12 January 2016

_cons 4.000324 1.540559 2.60 0.009 0.9808839

7.019763
RATE
PU 5.509382 1.131694 4.87 0.000 3.291302
7.727462
VAR 4.042511 0.1713493 23.59 0.000 3.706673
4.378349
_cons −27.45224 6.067874 −4.52 0.000 −39.34506
−15.55943
Endogenous variables: PU VAR RATE.
Exogenous variables: FT SE TS PORT.

The second determinant, frustration with technology technology (SE) and technology sophistication (TS). In
(FT), showed good empirical support. There was a signifi- the case of perceived usefulness, the ranking of determi-
cant relationship with the variables Perceived usefulness nants is frustration with technology, product/service
(Coef. = −0.4895, p < 0.05), Variety of use (Coef. = portfolio, prior experience with technology and technol-
−0.4496, p < 0.05) and Rate of use (Coef. = −2.9091, p < ogy sophistication.
0.05). Thus, we conclude that a higher frustration with The overall results of the hypothesis are summarized
the technology leads to lower perceived usefulness, in Table 10.
variety of use and rate of use, which supports Hypothesis 2.
The third determinant, technology sophistication (TS), Discussion
was found to have no significant relationship with
the variables Perceived usefulness, Variety of use and We started with the premise that the much-researched
Rate of use. Thus, there was no empirical support for AD paradigm has some limitations. The literature on
Hypothesis 3. tourism and related fields supports our premise and
The fourth determinant, service/product portfolio gives some scope for the ICT adoption framework
(PORT), showed partial empirical support; it had a signifi- (Bedard, 2000; Frew, 2000; Hashim, Scaglione, &
cant relationship with the variables Variety of use (Coef. Murphy, 2012; Ram & Jung, 1990; Ridgway & Price,
= 0.9631, p < 0.05) and Rate of use (Coef. = 3.3503, p <
0.05), but no significant relationship with Perceived use-
Table 10. Summary of hypotheses.
fulness. Thus, we conclude that a larger service/product Prior
portfolio (PORT) leads to a higher variety of use and experience Frustration Service/
rate of use, partially supporting Hypothesis 4. with with Technology product
technology technology sophistication portfolio
Variety of use (Adj. R- squared = 0.55) was supported (H1) (H2) (H3) (H4)
more than rate of use and perceived usefulness. For Perceived No Significant No significant No
rate of use, the three determinants (FT, SE and PORT) Usefulness significant relation relation significant
relation relation
are significant (Adj. R- squared = 0.46), and for perceived Variety of Significant Significant No significant Significant
usefulness it is (Adj. R- squared = 0.45). The relative ranks use relation relation relation relation
Rate of use Significant Significant No significant Significant
based on the magnitude of explanatory power for variety relation relation relation relation
and rate of use is product/service portfolio (PORT), frus- Overall Partially Fully Not supported Partially
supported supported supported
tration with technology (FT), prior experience with

1994). We used three elements – perceived usefulness,
rate of use and variety of use – divided into high and
low to categorize users into eight different segments:
tech-savvy, obligatory, early adopter, focused, limited,
constrained, follower and laggard. There are some lin-
kages between the determinants and the user typology,
but the exact relationship was not examined in this
paper and is marked for further research. However, the
tentative linkages between the determinants and the
typology are as follows:
Frustration with technology: The complexity of the
system is the major reason for frustration, but this
problem can be overcome by increasing the perceived
usefulness. We speculate that the most amenable cat-
egories would be tech-savvy, early adopter and follower
Downloaded by [University of California, San Diego] at 13:49 12 January 2016
or laggards, follower and constrained. Although these
categories are distinct, they are related since a follower
can become an early adopter and an early adopter can
transform to tech-savvy; the same path is true for fol-
lower to constrained to laggard.
Technology sophistication: It is not so easy for firms to
keep pace with the ever-changing technology. Most of
the time, technology decisions are irreversible. Therefore,
technology sophistication has a lot of costs. However, the
silver lining is that the benefits of technology sophisti-
cation are high. Here, we believe that technology sophis-
tication will lead to the creation of the tech-savvy, early
adopter, follower or focused categories.
Prior experience with technology: Prior experience is an
important determinant, since experience plays a crucial
role in UD and AD, leading to knowledge accumulation
and learning (Hoch & Deighton, 1989). Learners who
are motivated exhibit a high variety of use. We believe
that experienced users fall into the tech-savvy, early
adopter, follower and limited segments.
Product/service portfolio: The product portfolio is a
strategic decision. As the size of the portfolio increases,
the need for ICT also increases. We believe that the cat-
egories impacted by this determinant will be almost
everybody other than laggard.
Conclusions and research directions
The tourism industry is one of the major benefiters of the
ICT revolution. The very nature of the T&T industry makes
ICT adoption of immense importance and a complex
process.
The proposed model takes a holistic view of the deter-
minants of ICT adoption. The model combines important
determinants of ICT adoption in the T&T industry, which
can be studied either individually or in small groups. In
addition, the AD and UD phenomenon were combined
to derive the adoption process. The model particularly
TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH 9
looks at the rate of use, variety of use and perceived use-
fulness together in order to arrive at the usage pattern.
The model classifies users into eight different categories
as tech-savvy, obligatory, early adopter, focused, limited,
constrained, follower and laggards. This is a general
classification of the users and can be used in any
industry.
In the case of the T&T sector, the tech-savvy users may
be taxi aggregators such as Uber Technologies Inc. These
firms provides technology platform through mobile
apps. This allows smart phone users to submit the
request for a cab. These requests are routed to registered
drivers on the platform. Since the launch of Uber in 2009,
several companies across the globe have imitated the
Uber business model. The obligatory users in the case
of the T&T industry may be a local taxi or bus operator.
The majority of the local players tie up with taxi aggrega-
tors such as Uber for finding their customers. These
players keep their independence intact and are not
obliged to work with others. Therefore, these local
players are high on the rate of use but low on the
other two dimensions. The early adopters may be the
versions of Uber in developing countries such as TaxiFor-
Sure. TaxiForSure is a taxi aggregator firm situated in
Bangalore, India. A taxi can be booked using the ICT
applications such as a mobile app and voice calling.
The focused users may be the online bus ticketing plat-
forms. These players are specialized in bus management
software and masters in bringing the inventories of bus
operators on an online platform and they deal with the
bus booking service only. Consequently, their rate and
perceived usefulness is higher than the variety of use.
The limited users in the case of the T&T sector may be
government run resorts chains. They are compelled by
external pressure to use ICT, resulting in a lower rate of
use compared to the other two dimensions. Constrained
users in the case of the T&T sector may be online hotel
room aggregators such as OYO Rooms. OYO Rooms are
limited to a room booking service and is only available
through an app. Being only on a mobile application pres-
ence OYO Rooms has high-perceived usefulness com-
pared to the other two dimensions. The followers in
the case of the T&T industry may be state run bus ser-
vices. These firms adapt to ICT based on the pressures
from the other bus operators/ online bus ticketing plat-
forms. The laggards may be the small restaurants and
local players in the T&T sector in a developing country.
They are happy with the local and loyal customer base.
They neither use nor perceive ICT as an essential
business element.
The combination of the adoption diffusion and usage
diffusion phenomenon proposed by the model enables a
more realistic and practical categorization of the
 10 A. S. DHAIGUDE ET AL.
adopting firms. This is because the multifaceted, varied
and complex nature of the activities that comprise the
task environment of any T&T-related enterprise make it
difficult for a two-dimensional framework to explain
the adoption process.
The applicability of the model varies from an individ-
ual T&T firm to policy-making bodies. It can be used for
understanding the firm-level requirements of ICT, bench-
marking firms against the best in the industry and for
devising strategies for the business. At the industry
level, the model will help to compare firms, so that an
industry can put their demands in front of the appropri-
ate bodies. For policy makers, the model can be the base
for designing appropriate policies to regulate and
promote the T&T industry. The model can also be used
Downloaded by [University of California, San Diego] at 13:49 12 January 2016
by T&T allied industries to devise their products/services
offerings. Finally, the model could provide insights into
the evolution of the T&T industry.
There are some limitations in this study, which can be
addressed in future research. First, longitudinal studies
are required to capture the complete UD dynamics.
Second, the findings of our study are correlated and
not casual. Third, the study considers only four determi-
nants; by adding more determinants, the model will
achieve better predictive power. Finally, the study does
not empirically test the outcome with the patterns or
determinants. These research directions will add to the
predictive power of the model.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank the anonymous referees, copy
editors and the editor for their valuable feedback, which
significantly improved the positioning and presentation of
this paper.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes on contributors
Amol S. Dhaigude is a Research Scholar at the Indian Institute
of Management Indore, India. He stood first in the university in
his PG course in management. He was the recipient of various
awards including Samsika award for academic excellence in
marketing, best outgoing student 2010, best teacher award,
and ‘Ignited Minds’ article writing competition by IIM Kozhi-
kode. He has published his research in various international
journals. His research interest includes supply chain coordi-
nation, tourism management and services marketing.
Rohit Kapoor is a faculty in the Operations Management and
Quantitative Techniques area at the Indian Institute of Manage-
ment Indore, India. He is a Fellow of IIM Ahmedabad. His
research interests are in the areas of supply chain management,
production planning, inventory control and network design. He
has good exposure in mathematical programming, optimal
control, Monte-Carlo simulation and meta-heuristics.
Sudhir Ambekar is a faculty at the School of General Manage-
ment, National Institute of Construction Management and
Research (NICMAR), Pune, India. He is a Fellow of the Indian
Institute of Management, Indore. His research interests are in
the areas of supply chain management, ICT adoption, sustain-
able sourcing and modeling using multi agent system.
References
Alba, J. W., & Hutchinson, J. W. (1987). Dimensions of consumer
expertise. Journal of consumer research, 13(4), 411–454.
Anderson, R. L., & Ortinau, D. J. (1988). Exploring consumers’
post adoption attitudes and use behaviors in monitoring
the diffusion of a technology-based discontinuous inno-
vation. Journal of Business Research, 17(3), 283–298.
Bedard, F. (2000). Tomorrow’s travel agency: A survey of
adaptation and positioning strategies to new technologies in
services. Vienna: Springer.
Berne, C., Garcia-Gonzalez, M., & Mugica, J. (2012). How ICT
shifts the power balance of tourism distribution channels.
Tourism Management, 33(1), 205–214.
Choi, H., Kim, Y., & Kim, J. (2011). Driving factors of post adop-
tion behavior in mobile data services. Journal of Business
Research, 64(11), 1212–1217.
Connolly, D. J., & Lee, S. (2006). Developing information technol-
ogy proficiencies and fluency in hospitality students. Journal
of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 18(3), 15–29.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use,
and user acceptance of information technology. MIS
Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.
Frew, A. J. (2000). A critical analysis of tourism information tech-
nology research. Vienna: Springer.
Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Trust and TAM
in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27
(1), 51–90.
Golder, P. N., & Tellis, G. J. (1998). Beyond diffusion: An afford-
ability model of the growth of new consumer durables.
Journal of Forecasting, 17(3–4), 259–280.
Grover, V., & Ramanlal, P. (1999). Six myths of information and
markets: Information technology networks, electronic com-
merce, and the battle for consumer surplus. MIS Quarterly,
23(4), 465–495.
Hahn, M., Park, S., Krishnamurthi, L., & Zoltners, A. A. (1994).
Analysis of new product diffusion using a four-segment
trial-repeat model. Marketing Science, 13(3), 224–247.
Hashim, N. H., Scaglione, M., & Murphy, J. (2012). Information
and communication technologies in tourism 2012. Helsingborg:
Springer.
Hoch, S. J., & Deighton, J. (1989). Managing what consumers
learn from experience. The Journal of Marketing, 53(2), 1–20.
Huh, H. J., Kim, T. T., & Law, R. (2009). A Comparison of
competing theoretical models for understanding acceptance
behavior of information systems in upscale hotels.
International Journal of Hospitality Management, 28(1),
121–134.
Kiesler, S., Kraut, R., Lundmark, V., Scherlis, W., & Mukhopadhyay,
T. (1997). CHI97. Georgia: ACM.

Kim, T. G., Lee, J. H., & Law, R. (2008). An empirical examination
of the acceptance behaviour of hotel front office systems: An
extended technology acceptance model. Tourism manage-
ment, 29(3), 500–513.
Kotler, P. (2009). Marketing management: A South Asian perspec-
tive. New Delhi: Dorling Kindersley India.
Law, R., & Jogaratnam, G. (2005). A study of hotel information
technology applications. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 17(2), 170–180.
Law, R., Leung, R., & Buhalis, D. (2009). Information technology
applications in hospitality and tourism: A review of publi-
cations from 2005 to 2007. Journal of Travel & Tourism
Marketing, 26(5–6), 599–623.
Lewis, L. K., & Seibold, D. R. (1993). innovation modification
during intra-organizational adoption. Academy of
Management Review, 18(2), 322–354.
Lindlof, T. R. (1992). Computing tales: Parents’ discourse about
Downloaded by [University of California, San Diego] at 13:49 12 January 2016
technology and family. Social Science Computer Review, 10(3),
291–309.
Mahajan, V., Muller, E., & Bass, F. M. (1990). new product diffu-
sion models in marketing: A review and directions for
research. Journal of Marketing, 54(1), 1–26.
Mahler, A., & Rogers, E. M. (1999). The diffusion of interactive
communication innovations and the critical mass: The adop-
tion of telecommunications services by German banks.
Telecommunications policy, 23(10), 719–740.
McFarland, D. J., & Hamilton, D. (2006). Adding contextual speci-
ficity to the technology acceptance model. Computers in
Human Behavior, 22(3), 427–447.
Mick, D. G., & Fournier, S. (1998). Paradoxes of technology:
Consumer cognizance, emotions, and coping strategies.
Journal of Consumer Research, 25(2), 123–143.
Mukherjee, A., & Hoyer, W. D. (2001). The effect of novel attri-
butes on product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research,
28(3), 462–472.
Norman, D. A. (1998). The invisible computer: Why good products
can fail, the personal computer is so complex, and information
TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH 11
appliances are the solution. Cambridge: Massachusetts
Institute of Technology Press.
Pena, A. I. P., & Jamilena, D. M. F. (2010). The relationship
between business characteristics and ICT deployment in
the rural tourism sector: The case of Spain. International
Journal of Tourism Research, 12(1), 34–48.
Poon, A. (1993). Tourism, technology and competitive strategies.
New York: CABI Publishing.
Ram, S., & Jung, H. S. (1990). The conceptualization and
measurement of product usage. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 18(1), 67–76.
Ridgway, N. M., & Price, L. L. (1994). Exploration in product
usage: A model of use innovativeness. Psychology &
Marketing, 11(1), 69–84.
Robertson, T. S, & Gatignon, H. (1986). Competitive
effects on technology diffusion. Journal of Marketing, 50(3),
1–12.
Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. New York: The Free
Press.
Rose, G., & Straub, D. (1998). Predicting general IT use: Applying
TAM to the Arabic world. Journal of Global Information
Management, 6(3), 39–46.
Shih, C. F., & Venkatesh, A. (2004). Beyond adoption:
Development and application of a use-diffusion model.
Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 59–72.
Singh, A. J., & Kasavana, M. L. (2005). The impact of
information technology on future management of lodging
operations: A Delphi study to predict key technological
events in 2007 and 2027. Tourism and Hospitality Research,
6(1), 24–37.
Tinnell, C. S. (1985). An ethnographic look at personal compu-
ters in the family setting. Marriage & Family Review, 8(1–2),
59–69.
UNWTO (2015). Tourism Highlights. Madrid: UNWTO.
Venkatesh, V. (1999). Creation of favorable user perceptions:
Exploring the role of intrinsic motivation. MIS Quarterly,
23(2), 239–260.