Towards integrating acceptance and resistance research: evidence from a telecare case study

Abstract

There is wide agreement that acceptance and resistance are crucial factors in information system (IS) adoption. Research has yielded many theories that have focused on either acceptance or resistance, often implicitly assuming that these are opposites. This paper proposes a two-factor view on acceptance and resistance, and shows how this idea may advance our knowledge of IS adoption. In developing a user reactions framework, we take a first step towards integrating the IS literature on acceptance and on resistance. This framework distinguishes between two behavioural dimensions, namely, acceptance, ranging from high use to non-use, and a dimension that ranges from enthusiastic support to aggressive resistance. Combining the two dimensions leads to four categories of user reactions. We show the framework's usefulness by analysing data from a telecare implementation project. The findings identify ambivalent reactions. Many clients are identified as supporting but non-using, while we also find telenurses and care coordinators that show themselves to be resisting but using. These findings support the view that non-acceptance and resistance are conceptually non-equivalent. Our data suggest voluntariness as one determinant of the variation in behavioural reactions encountered. We argue that the concepts are also functionally different: IS implementers will have to adapt their strategies to the different reactions described.

An empirical investigation of Technology Readiness among medical staff based in Greek hospitals

“…They support ICT use in clinical settings without feeling obliged to use it themselves. This finding is in line with recent theorizing and research results reported by van Offenbeek et al (2013). These authors proposed a two-factor framework and suggested that ambivalent (i.e., opposing forces existing simultaneously within a person) user behaviours, such the ones observed for the Sceptics in our sample, are common, reflecting the fact that acceptance of technology and support/resistance of technology can be conceptualized as two distinct behavioural dimensions.…”

Telemonitoring for Seniors with Chronic Heart Failure: Patient Self-Care, Empowerment, and Adoption Factors

“…They further observed that telehomecare acceptance is higher when the patient lives alone and when there are fixed daily contacts with the telecare system. As another example, van Offenbeek et al [36] developed a conceptual framework combining two behavioral dimensions, acceptance (from high use to non-use) and resistance (from enthusiastic support to aggressive resistance). Using qualitative case data from a telecare implementation project, they found patients' ambivalent reactions toward telehomecare (e.g., supporting it but non-using it).…”

Diagnosing organizational risks in software projects: Stakeholder resistance

“…By itself, user resistance is neither positive nor negative even though it is commonly associated by a negative connotation (Ferneley and Sobreperez, 2006;Hultman, 2003;Lawrence, 1954;Rivard and Lapointe, 2012;van Offenbeek et al, 2013). On one hand, it can be destructive and consume excessive resources (Hong and Kim, 2002;Kim, 2011).…”