Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

Methods and Models

  • Chapter
Healthcare Technology Innovation Adoption

Part of the book series: Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management ((ITKM))

Abstract

This section of the document describes the proposed HIT diffusion framework based on capabilities. In this section diffusion and adoption theories, software engineering techniques, dynamic capabilities, and multi-perspectives are discussed. In the later sections the model is future reasoned for in the context of modeling, documenting, and simulating it. Various perspectives are discussed and why certain particular design decisions were made.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • “Basic Flow Chart Sample.”

    Google Scholar 

  • “NDE Project Management.”

    Google Scholar 

  • “OMG SysML.”

    Google Scholar 

  • “SysML Forum—SysML FAQ.”

    Google Scholar 

  • “UML 2.0.”

    Google Scholar 

  • “What Could OOA&D Benefit From Gounded Theory?.”

    Google Scholar 

  • “Data flow diagram—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.”

    Google Scholar 

  • “Unified Modeling Language—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.”

    Google Scholar 

  • “Unified Modeling Language—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.”

    Google Scholar 

  • Abrahamson, E. (1991). Managerial fads and fashions: The diffusion and refection of innovations. Academy of Management Review, 16, 586–612.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abrahamson, E. (1996). Management fashion. Academy of Management Review, 21, 254–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abrahamson, E., & Fombrun, C. J. (1994). Macrocultures: Determinants and consequences. Academy of Management Review, 19, 728–755.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abrahamson, E., & Rosenkopf, L. (1993). Institutional and competitive bandwagons: Using mathematical modeling as a tool to explore innovation diffusion. Academy of Management Review, 18, 487–517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abrial, J. R. (1996). The B-book: assigning programs to meanings. Cambridge Univ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams, D. A., Nelson, R. R., & Todd, P. A. (1992). Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and usage of information technology: A replication. MIS Quarterly, 16, 227–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. (1985). “From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. SSSP Springer Series in Social Psychology (pp. 11–39). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1973). Attitudinal and normative variables as predictors of specific behaviors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27, 41–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambler, S. W. (2004). The object primer: Agile model-driven development with UML 2.0. Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Amey, P. Dear sir, Yours faithfully: An everyday story of formality. Proc. 12th Safety-Critical Systems Symposium, pp. 3–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amit, R., & Schoemaker, P. J. (1993). Strategic assets and organizational rent. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 33–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bain, J. S. (1956). Barriers to new competition. Cambridge: Harvard Univ Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. B. (1986). Strategic factor markets: Expectations, luck, and business strategy. Management Science, 32, 1231–1241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1991). Special theory forum: The resource-based model of the firm: Origins, implications, and prospects. Journal of Management, 17, 97–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. B., & Clark, D. N. (2007). Resource-based theory: Creating and sustaining competitive advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville, R., & Pries-Heje, J. (1999). Grounded action research: A method for understanding IT in practice. Accounting, Management and Information Technologies, 9, 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batra, D. (2009). Unified modeling language (UML) topics: Cognitive issues in UML research. Journal of Database Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Behkami, N. A. (2009). Diffusion of Innovation (Healthcare IT)--System Dynamics. Portland State University: Department of Engineering & Technology Management Working Paper Series.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D. K., & Mead, M. (1987). The case research strategy in studies of information systems. MIS quarterly, 369–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty, S., & Dehlinger J. (2009). Applying the Grounded Theory Method to Derive Enterprise System Requirements. Software Engineering, Artificial Intelligence, Networking, and Parallel/Distributed Computing, ACIS International Conference on, Los Alamitos, CA, USA: IEEE Computer Society, 2009, pp. 333–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkland, P. (1999). Systems thinking, systems practice: Includes a 30-year retrospective. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkland, P., Scholes, J. (1990). Soft systems methodology in action. John Wiley & Sons Ltd (Import).

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, C. Method-Case Study vs Grounded Theory.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chuttur M (2009) Overview of the technology acceptance model: Origins, developments and future directions

    Google Scholar 

  • Collan M, Tétard F (2007) Lazy user theory of solution selection. Proceedings or the CELDA 2007 conference, pp. 7–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Collis, D. J., & Montgomery, C. A. (1995). Competing on resources: Strategy in the 1990s. Knowledge and Strategy, 25–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. B., & Zmud, R. W. (1990). Information technology implementation research: A technological diffusion approach. Management Science, 36, 123–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cousins, J. B., & Simon, M. (1996). The nature and impact of policy-induced partnerships between research and practice communities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 18(Autumn), 199–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2006). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damanpour, F. (1988). Innovation type, radicalness, and the adoption process. Communication Research, 15, 545–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 555–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damanpour, F., & Evan, W. M. (1984). Organizational innovation and performance: The problem of “organizational lag”. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 392–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Data Flow Diagram—SSADM Diagrams—SmartDraw Tutorials.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. D. (1985). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Sloan School of Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35, 982–1003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demsetz, H. (1973). Industry structure, market rivalry, and public policy. Journal of Law and economics, 16, 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dierickx, I., & Cool, K. (1989). Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Management Science, 1504–1511.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobing, B., & Parsons, J. (2005). Current practices in the use of UML. Perspectives in Conceptual Modeling, 2–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dori, D. (2001). Object-process methodology applied to modeling credit card transactions. Journal of Database Management, 12, 4–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dori, D. (2002). Why significant UML change is unlikely.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers Fort Worth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review 532–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erdil, N., & Emerson, C. R. (2008). Modeling the dynamics of electronic health records adoption in the us healthcare system. Proceedings of the 26th international conference of the system dynamics society, 2008

    Google Scholar 

  • Evermann, J., & Wand, Y. (2006). Ontological modeling rules for UML: An empirical assessment. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 46, 14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finegan, A. D. (2003). Wicked problems, organizational complexity and knowledge management–a systems approach. The International Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Change Management, 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, M. (1967). Attitude and the prediction of behavior. Readings in attitude theory and measurement 477–492

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein M, Ajzen I (1975) Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research

    Google Scholar 

  • Forrester, J. W. (1994). System dynamics, systems thinking, and soft OR. System

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Sociology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis: Emergence vs forcing. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G. (1998). Doing grounded theory: Issues and discussions. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G. (2001). The grounded theory perspective: Conceptualization contrasted with description. Sociology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goede, R., & Villiers, C. D. (2003). The applicability of grounded theory as research methodology in studies on the use of methodologies in IS practices. Proceedings of the 2003 annual research conference of the South African institute of computer scientists and information technologists on Enablement through technology, South African Institute for Computer Scientists and Information Technologists, 2003, pp. 208–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldkuhl, G., & Cronholm, S. (2003). Multi-grounded theory–Adding theoretical grounding to grounded theory. European conference on research methodology for business and management studies, p. 177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. M. (1991). The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy formulation. California Management Review, 33, 114–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 109–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, R. (1992). The strategic analysis of intangible resources. Strategic Management Journal, 135–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68, 79–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, D. R., & Algozzine, R. (2006). Doing case study research: A practical guide for beginning researchers. Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, D. N. (2005). Information systems foundations. ANU E Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson-Sellers, B., & Gonzalez-Perez, C. (2006). Uses and Abuses of the Stereotype Mechanism in UML 1.x and 2.0. Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems 16–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E., & Kim, H. (1997). International diversification: Effects on innovation and firm performance in product-diversified firms. Academy of Management Journal 767–798.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hitt, M. A., & Ireland, R. D. (1985a). Strategy, contextual factors, and performance. Human Relations, 38, 793.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hitt, M. A., & Ireland, R. D. (1985b). Corporate distinctive competence, strategy, industry and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 6, 273–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hitt, M. A., & Ireland, R. D. (1986). Relationships among corporate level distinctive competencies, diversification strategy, corporate structure and performance. Journal of Management Studies, 23, 0022–2380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hrebiniak, L. G., & Snow, C. C. (1982). Top-management agreement and organizational performance. Human Relations, 35, 1139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Itami, H., & Roehl, T. (1987). Mobilizing intangible assets. Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. B. (2004). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Research Edition, Second Edition, Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein H. K., & Myers, M. D. (1999). A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems. MIS Quarterly 67–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kossiakoff, A., & Sweet, W. N. (2003). Systems engineering. Wiley-IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Learned, E., Christensen, C., Andrews, K., & Guth, W. (1969). Business policy: Text and cases’. Homewood IL: Richard D., Irwin, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann, H. (2001). Using grounded theory with technology cases: Distilling critical theory from a multinational information systems development project. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 4, 45–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liebeskind, J. P. (1996). Knowledge, strategy, and the theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 93–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maznevski, M. L., & Chudoba, K. M. (2000). Bridging space over time: Global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness. Organization Science, 473–492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, B. (1997). UML: The positive spin. Cutter IT Journal, x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R., & Winter S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Belknap Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nutley, S., & Davies, H. T. O. (2000). Making a reality of evidence-based practice: some lessons from the diffusion of innovations. Public Money & Management, 20, 35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O'Neill, H. M., Pouder, R. W., & Buchholtz, A. K. (1998). Patterns in the diffusion of strategies across organizations: Insights from the innovation diffusion literature. Academy of Management Review, 23, 98–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski, W. J. (1993). CASE tools as organizational change: Investigating incremental and radical changes in systems development. MIS Quarterly, 309–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, S. P. (1998). Naming the beast: Defining and classifying service innovations in social policy. Human Relations, 51, 1133–1154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Otto, P., & Simon, M. (2009). Coordinating quality care: A policy model to simulate adoption of EHR. Proceedings of the 26th international system dynamics conference, Albuquerque, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peleg, M., & Dori, D. (2000). The model multiplicity problem: Experimenting with real-time specification methods. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 26, 742–759.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penrose, E. (1959). The theory of the growth of the firm. New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (1981). The contributions of industrial organization to strategic management. The Academy of Management Review, 6, 609–620.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage. Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter Michael, E. (1979). How competitive forces shape strategy. Harvard Business Review, 57, 137–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K., & Bettis, R. A. (1986). The dominant logic: A new linkage between diversity and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 485–501.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rennie, D. L., Phillips, J. R., & Quartaro, G. K. (1988). Grounded theory: A promising approach to conceptualization in psychology. Canadian Psychology, 29, 139–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ricardo, D. (1817). The principles of political economy and taxation (1817). The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, hrsg. v. Sraffa, Piero, Bd. I, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, K., Berrisford, G. (1994). Object oriented SSADM. Prentice Hall PTR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rumelt, R. P., & Lamb, R. (1984). Competitive strategic management. Toward a Strategic Theory of the Firm, 556–570.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, M. J. (2002). Assistive technology: Matching device and consumer for successful rehabilitation. Washington, DC: APA Books.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Segars, A. H., & Grover, V. (1993). Re-examining perceived ease of use and usefulness: A confirmatory factor analysis. MIS Quarterly, 17, 517–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siau, K., & Cao, Q. (2001). Unified modeling language: A complexity analysis. Journal of Database Management, 12, 26–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siau, K., & Loo, P. P. (2006). Identifying difficulties in learning UML. Information Systems Management, 23, 43–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smart, P. A., Maddern, H., & Maull, R. S. (2008). Understanding business process management: Implications for theory and practice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snook, C., & Butler, M. (2006). UML-B: Formal modeling and design aided by UML. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM), 15, 122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sommerville, I. (2000). Software engineering. Addison Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spender, J. C., & Grant, R. M. (1996). Knowledge and the firm: Overview. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 5–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SSADM Diagram Software—Structured Systems Analysis and Design Methodology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stake, D. R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Sage Publications, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stalk, G., Evans, P., & Shulman, L. E. (1992). Competing on capabilities: The new rules of corporate strategy. Harvard Business Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, W., Myers, G., & Constantine, L. (1979). Structured design, Classics in software engineering. Yourdon Press, 205–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. L., Corbin, J. M. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage Pubns.

    Google Scholar 

  • Subramanian, G. H. (1994). A replication of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use measurement. Decision Sciences, 25, 863–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szajna, B. (1994). Software evaluation and choice: Predictive validation of the technology acceptance instrument. MIS Quarterly, 18, 319–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. (1980). Economy of scope and the scope of the enterprise. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1, 223–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 509–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tetard, F., & Collan, M. (1899). Lazy user theory: A dynamic model to understand user selection of products and services. HICSS (pp. 1–9). Big Island, HI: IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Theories Used in IS Research Wiki, York University

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, A. A., & Strickland, A. J. (1983). Strategy formulation and implementation: Tasks of the general manager. Business Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tornatzky, L. G., & Fleischer, M. (1990). Processes of technological innovation. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trauth, E. M., & Jessup, L. M. (2000). Understanding computer-mediated discussions: Positivist and interpretive analyses of group support system use. MIS Quarterly, 24, 43–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urquhart, C. (2001). An encounter with grounded theory: Tackling the practical and philosophical issues. Qualitative Research in IS: Issues and Trends, 104–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • van de Water, H., Schinkel, M., & Rozier, R. (2006). Fields of application of SSM: A categorization of publications. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 58, 271–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandeven, A. H., & Rogers, E. M. (1988). Innovations and organizations: Critical perspectives. Communication Research, 15, 632–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., Davis, F. D., DeLone, W. H., McLean, E. R., et al. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. Inform Management, 27, 425–478.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viswanath, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27, 425–478.

    Google Scholar 

  • W.W. Wakeland, E.J. Gallaher, L.M. Macovsky, and C.A. Aktipis, “A Comparison of System Dynamics and Agent-Based Simulation Applied to the Study of Cellular Receptor Dynamics,” Proceedings of the Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’04)—Track 3—Volume 3, IEEE Computer Society, 2004, p. 30086.2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 171–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, B. (2005). Soft systems methodology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies, analysis and antitrust implications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wixom, B. H., & Todd, P. A. (2005). A theoretical integration of user satisfaction and technology acceptance. Information Systems Research, 16, 85–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, R. A. (1994). Organizational innovation: Review, critique and suggested research. Journal of Management Studies, 31, 405–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Sage Publications, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zenobia, B. (2008). A grounded agent model of the consumer technology adoption process. Portland State University.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Merck Research Laboratories, Boston, MA, USA

    Nima A. Behkami

  2. Portland State University, Portland, OR, USA

    Tugrul U. Daim

Authors
  1. Nima A. Behkami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tugrul U. Daim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tugrul U. Daim .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Behkami, N.A., Daim, T.U. (2016). Methods and Models. In: Healthcare Technology Innovation Adoption. Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17975-9_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation