Abstract
Organizations often under-utilize expensive information technology (IT) enabled work processes that automate routines or processes that were previously carried out manually. One reason for this phenomenon may lie in the types of decisions made by technological gatekeepers, who are key individuals charged with deploying new technologies in organizations. From an organizational learning perspective, technological gatekeepers are more likely to perform successfully when they make appropriate decisions about exploring or exploiting the routines associated with a new technology. The factors that influence gatekeepers’ decisions about exploration or exploitation, however, are still largely unexplored. In this study, we present a model based on the basic technology acceptance model (TAM) to examine this issue. We use concepts from the literatures on organizational learning, expertise, and cognitive styles to elaborate on the constructs in our model, and examine how these literatures can inform our understanding of technological gatekeepers’ decisions. The goal of this paper is to accelerate micro-level research on new technology deployment in organizations by identifying some key issues and propositions for future studies.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adams, J. A. (1987). Historical review and appraisal of research on the learning, retention, and transfer of human motor skills. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 41–74.
Adelson, B. (1984). When novices surpass experts: the difficulty of a task may increase with expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 10(3), 483–495.
Adler, P. (1990). Shared learning. Management Science, 36(8), 938–957.
Ahuja, M. K., & Thatcher, J. B. (2005). Moving beyond intentions and toward the theory of trying: effects of work environment and gender on post-adoption information technology use. MIS Quarterly, 29(3), 427–459.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: a theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 888–918.
Allen, T. J. (1984). Managing the flow of technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Allen, T. J., & Cohen, S. (1969). Information flow in R&D laboratories. Administrative Science Quarterly, 14, 12–19.
Anderson, J. R. (1982). Acquisition of cognitive skill. Psychological Review, 89, 369–406.
Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Antonacoupoulou, E., & Chiva, R. (2007). The social complexity of organizational learning: the dynamics of learning and organizing. Management Learning, 38(3), 277–295.
Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1978). Organizational learning. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Aykin, N. M., & Aykin, T. (1991). Individual differences in human-computer interaction. Computers and Engineering, 20(3), 373–379.
Bapuji, H., & Crossan, M. (2004). From questions to answers: reviewing organizational learning research. Management Learning, 35(4), 397–417.
Baylor, A. L. (2001). A U-shaped model for the development of intuition by level of expertise. New Ideas in Psychology, 19, 237–244.
Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: the productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review, 2, 238–256.
Bhattacharjee, A., & Premkumar, G. (2004). Understanding changes in beliefs and attitude toward information technology usage: a theoretical model and longitudinal test. MIS Quarterly, 28(2), 229–254.
Burgelman, R. A. (2002). Strategy as vector and the inertia of coevolutionary lock-in. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 325–357.
Camerer, C. F., & Johnson, E. J. (1991). The process-performance paradox in expert judgment: How can experts know so much and predict so badly? In K. A. Ericsson & J. Smith (Eds.), Toward a general theory of expertise (pp. 195–217). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Carlsen, B., & Norheim, O. F. (2003). Introduction of the patient-list system in general practice—changes in Norwegian physicians’ perception of their gatekeeper role. Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care, 21(4), 209–213.
Chakraborty, I., Hu, P. J. H., & Cui, D. (2008). Examining the effects of cognitive style in individuals’ technology use decision making. Decision Support Systems, 45(2), 228–241.
Chase, W. G., & Simon, H. A. (1973). Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 55–81.
Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121–152.
Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R., & Rees, E. (1982). Expertise in problem solving. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence, vol. 1 (pp. 17–76). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cohen, M. D. (2007). Reading Dewey: reflections on the study of routine. Organization Studies, 28(5), 773–786.
Crossan, M. M., Lane, H. W., & White, R. E. (1999). An organizational learning framework: from intuition to institution. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 522–537.
Davenport, T. H. (1993). Process innovation: Reengineering work through information technology. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology—a comparison of 2 theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.
Duncan, R., & Weiss, A. (1979). Organizational learning: implications for organizational design. Research in Organizational Behavior, 1, 75–123.
Easterby-Smith, M. (1997). Disciplines of organizational learning: contributions and critiques. Human Relations, 50(9), 1085–1113.
Easterby-Smith, M., Crossan, M., & Nicolini, D. (2000). Organizational learning: debates past, present and future. Journal of Management Studies, 37(6), 783–796.
Epple, D., Argote, L., & Devadas, R. (1991). Organizational learning curves: a method for investigating intra-plant transfer of knowledge acquired through learning by doing. Organization Science, 2(1), 58–70.
Epstein, S. (1994). Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. American Psychologist, 49, 709–724.
Ericsson, K. A. (2005). Recent advances in expertise research: a commentary on the contributions to the special issue. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 233–241.
Ericsson, K. A., & Lehmann, A. C. (1996). Expert and exceptional performance: evidence of maximal adaptation to task constraints. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 273–305.
Ericsson, K. A., & Smith, J. (1991). Prospects and limits of the empirical study of expertise: An introduction. In K. A. Ericsson & J. Smith (Eds.), Toward a general theory of expertise. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fiol, C. M., & Lyles, M. (1985). Organizational learning. Academy of Management Review, 10, 799–812.
Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. G., & Shalley, C. E. (2006). The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 693–706.
Haerem, T., & Rau, D. (2007). The influence of level of expertise and objective task complexity on perceived task complexity and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1320–1331.
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1977). The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 929–964.
Hayes, J., & Allinson, C. W. (1994). Cognitive style and its relevance for management practice. British Journal of Management, 5, 53–71.
Hayes, J., & Allinson, C. W. (1998). Cognitive style and the theory and practice of individual and collective learning in organizations. Human Relations, 51(7), 847–871.
He, Z., & Wong, P. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: an empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4), 481–494.
Hedberg, B. (1981). How organizations learn and unlearn. In P. Nystrom & W. Starbuck (Eds.), Handbook of organizational design, Vol. 1 (pp. 3–27). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hong, S., Thong, J. Y. L., Moon, J., & Tam, K. (2008). Understanding the behavior of mobile data services consumers. Information Systems Frontiers, 10(4), 431–445.
Huber, G. P. (1991). Organizational learning: the contributing processes and the literatures. Organization Science, 2(1), 88–115.
Jansen, J. J. P., George, G., Van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2008). Senior team attributes and organizational ambidexterity: the moderating role of transformational leadership. Journal of Management Studies, 45(5), 982–1007.
Jasperson, J., Carter, P. E., & Zmud, R. W. (2005). A comprehensive conceptualization of post-adoptive behaviors associated with information-technology enabled work systems. MIS Quarterly, 29(3), 525–557.
Kane, G. C., & Alavi, M. (2007). Information technology and organizational learning: an investigation of exploration and exploitation processes. Organization Science, 18(5), 796–812.
Kanfer, R., & Ackerman, P. L. (1989). Motivation and cognitive abilities: an integrative/ aptitude-treatment interaction approach to skill acquisition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 657–690.
Kim, S., & Garrison, G. (2008). Investigating mobile wireless technology adoption: an extension of the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Frontiers, . doi:10.1007/s10796-008-9073-8.
Kim, T., & Rhee, M. (2009). Exploration and exploitation: Internal variety and environmental dynamism. Strategic Organization, 7(1), 11–41.
Kirton, M. J. (1976). Adaptors and innovators: a description and measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 622–629.
Kirton, M. J. (1977). Manual of the Kirton adaption-innovation inventory. London: National Foundation for Educational Research.
Klien, G. (1998). Sources of power. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Kogan, N., & Wallach, M. A. (1964). Risk taking: A study in cognition and personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Kozhevnikov, M. (2007). Cognitive styles in the context of modern psychology: toward and integrated framework of cognitive style. Journal of Applied Psychology, 133(3), 464–481.
Larkin, J., & McDermott, J. (1980). Expert and novice performance in solving physics problems. Science, 208, 1335–1342.
Lehner, F., & Maier, R. K. (2000). How can organizational memory theories contribute to organizational memory systems? Information Systems Frontiers, 2(3–4), 277–298.
Levitt, B., & March, J. G. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 319–340.
Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics: II. Channels of group life; social planning and action research. Human Relations, 1(2), 143–153.
Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers. New York: Harper.
Lu, Y. (2007). The human in human information acquisition: understanding gatekeeping and proposing new directions in scholarship. Library & Information Science Research, 29(1), 103–129.
MacCrimmon, K. R., & Wehrung, D. A. (1985). A portfolio of risk measures. Theory and Decision, 19, 1–29.
MacCrimmon, K. R., & Wehrung, D. A. (1990). Characteristics of risk taking executives. Management Science, 36(4), 422–435.
Machina, M. J. (1987). Choice under uncertainty: problems solved and unsolved. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 1, 121–154.
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.
Messick, S. (1976). Personality consistencies in cognition and creativity. In S. Messick (Ed.), Individuality in learning (pp. 4–23). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Miller, A. (1987). Cognitive styles: an integrated model. Educational Psychology, 7(4), 251–267.
Miller, D. (1996). A preliminary typology of organizational learning: synthesizing the literature. Journal of Management, 22(3), 485–505.
Miller, K. D., Zhao, M., & Calantone, R. J. (2006). Adding interpersonal learning and Tacit knowledge to March’s exploration-exploitation model. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 709–722.
Nicholson, N., Soane, E., Fenton-O’Creevy, M., & Willman, P. (2005). Personality and domain-specific risk taking. Journal of Risk Research, 8(2), 157–176.
Nicolini, D., & Meznar, M. B. (1995). The social construction of organizational learning: conceptual and practical issues in the field. Human Relations, 48(7), 727–746.
Nochur, K. S., & Allen, T. J. (1992). Do nominated boundary spanners become effective technological gatekeepers? IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 39(3), 265–269.
Patel, V. L., & Groen, G. J. (1991). The general and specific nature of medical expertise: A critical look. In K. A. Ericsson & J. Smith (Eds.), Toward a general theory of expertise (pp. 93–125). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pennings, J. M. E., & Smidts, A. (2000). Assessing the construct validity of risk attitude. Management Science, 46(10), 1337–1348.
Pfeffer, J. (1981). Power in organizations. Marshfield, MA: Putnam.
Schneider, W., & Fisk, A. D. (1982). Dual task automatic and control processing: can it be done without cost? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 8, 261–278.
Schroeder, H. M. (1989). Managerial competence and style. In M. J. Kirton (Ed.), Adaptors and innovators (pp. 97–124). London: Routledge.
Shanteau, J. (1992). Competence in experts: the role of task characteristics. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 53, 252–266.
Shrivastava, P. (1983). A typology of organizational learning systems. Journal of Management Studies, 20(1), 7–28.
Shumsky, R. A., & Pinker, E. J. (2003). Gatekeepers and referrals in services. Management Science, 49(7), 839–856.
Siggelkow, N., & Levinthal, D. A. (2003). Temporarily divide to reconquer: centralized, decentralized, and reintegrated organizational approaches to exploration and exploitation. Organization Science, 14(6), 650–669.
Simon, M., & Houghton, S. M. (2003). The relationship between overconfidence and the introduction of risky products: evidence from a field study. Academy of Management Journal, 46(2), 139–149.
Sitkin, S. B., & Pablo, A. L. (1992). Reconceptualizing the determinants of risk behavior. Academy of Management Review, 17(1), 9–38.
Sitkin, S. B., & Weingart, L. R. (1995). Determinants of risky decision-making behavior: a test of the mediating role of risk perceptions and propensity. Academy of Management Journal, 38(6), 1573–1592.
Sternberg, R. J. (1988). Mental self-government: a theory of intellectual styles and their development. Human Development, 31, 197–224.
Stohr, E. A., & Zhao, J. L. (2001). Workflow automation: overview and research issues. Information Systems Frontiers, 3(3), 281–296.
Sveen, F. O., Rich, E., & Jager, M. (2007). Overcoming organizational challenges to secure knowledge management. Information Systems Frontiers, 9(5), 481–492.
Szajna, B. (1996). Empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Management Science, 42(1), 85–92.
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995a). Assessing IT usage: the role of prior experience. MIS Quarterly, 19(4), 561–570.
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995b). Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 144–176.
Templeton, G. F., Schmidt, M. B., & Taylor, G. S. (2008). Managing the diffusion of organizational learning behavior. Information Systems Frontiers, . doi:10.1007/s10796-008-9117-0.
Uotila, J., Maula, M., Keil, T., & Zahra, A. A. (2009). Exploration, exploitation, and financial performance: analysis of S&P 500 corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 30(2), 221–231.
Vandewalle, D. (1997). Development and validation of a work domain goal orientation instrument. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57(6), 995–1015.
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–205.
Venkatesh, V., & Morris, M. G. (2000). Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 115–139.
Venkatraman, N. (1991). IT-induced business reconfiguration. In M. S. Scott Morton (Ed.), The corporation of the 1990 s: Information technology and organizational transformation [Chap. 5]. New York: Oxford University Press.
Voss, G. B., Sirdeshmukh, D., & Voss, Z. G. (2008). The effects of slack resources and environmental threat on product exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 51(1), 147–164.
Wang, H., & Li, J. (2008). Untangling the effects of overexploration and overexploitation on organizational performance: the moderating role of environmental dynamism. Journal of Management, 34(5), 925–951.
Weick, K. E. (1991). The nontraditional quality of organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 116–124.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Support for this research was provided by Compello Software and Norwegian Research Council of Norway, grant number 162455. Additional support was provided a summer research grant from the Graduate School, Northern Illinois University.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rau, D., Haerem, T. Applying an organizational learning perspective to new technology deployment by technological gatekeepers: A theoretical model and key issues for future research. Inf Syst Front 12, 287–297 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-009-9194-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-009-9194-8