Institutional isomorphism and adoption of e-marketing in the hospitality industry: a new perspective for research

  • Amos GyauEmail author
  • Randy Stringer
Conference paper


Many factors have been used to explain adoption behaviours of managers in the hospitality industry. Studies employing these factors have been carried out with the assumption (implicit or explicit) that the managers are free and independent in their decision to adopt innovations such as the use of e-marketing without much attention to the effects of external pressures. In this paper we provide a relatively new conceptual framework for innovation adoption in the field of tourism based on the concept of institutional isomorphism. We argue that e-marketing adoption decisions by tourist operators can be influenced either singly or jointly by important aspects of institutional factors namely ‘institutional isomorphism’, which, when combined with the traditional innovation adoption factors can enhance a better understanding of tour operators adoption behaviour.


In der Literatur finden sich viele Faktoren, die das Innovationsverhalten von Managern im Gastgewerbe erklären. Studien, die diese Faktoren nutzen, sind mit der (impliziten oder expliziten) Annahme durchgeführt worden, dass Manager ihre Entscheidungen, Innovationen wie z. B. E-Marketing einzuführen, frei und unabhängig treffen können, ohne äußeren Druck berücksichtigen zu müssen. In diesem Beitrag bieten wir ein relativ neues konzeptionelles System für die Einführung von Innovationen in der Tourismus-Branche, das auf dem Konzept der institutionellen Isomorphie beruht. Es wird argumentiert, dass die Entscheidungen von Reiseveranstaltern bzgl. der Einführung von E-Marketing entweder durch einzelne oder mehrere institutionelle Faktoren beeinflusst werden können. Dem Konzept der institutionellen Isomorphie kommt hierbei eine besondere Bedeutung zu. Kombiniert mit traditionellen Faktoren der Innovations-Übernahme kann sie das Verständnis des Innovationsverhalten der Reiseveranstalter verbessern.


Sono stati usati molti fattori per spiegare i comportamenti adottati dai manager nell’industria dell’ospitalità. Si son fatti degli studi che utilizzano tali fattori con il presupposto - implicito o esplicito- che i manager siano liberi e indipendenti circa la decisione di adottare delle innovazioni quali ad esempio l’utilizzo dell’e-marketing. Poca attenzione è stata data a eventuali pressioni esterne e alle loro conseguenze. In questo lavoro forniamo un quadro concettuale relativamente nuovo per l’adozione di innovazioni nel campo del turismo basato sul concetto dell’isomorfismo istituzionale. Crediamo che le decisioni di adottare l’e-marketing da parte degli operatori turistici possano essere influenzate singolarmente o collettivamente da un importante complesso di fattori istituzionali detti “isomorfismo istituzionale”. Quest’ultimo, insieme ai tradizionali fattori che spiegano il comportamento relativo alle innovazioni, può aiutare a meglio comprendere perché i tour operators adottino tali comportamenti.


Institutional isomorphism Tourism e-marketing adoption 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abrahamson, E., and Rosenkopf, F. (1993). Institutional and competitive bandwagons: using mathematical modeling as a tool to explore innovation diffusion. Academy of Management Review, 18(3), 289-309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ashworth, R., Boyne, G., and Delbridge, R. (2007). Escape from the iron cage? Organisational change and isomorphic pressures in the public sector. Journal of Public administration Research and Theory. Retrieved December 21, 2007, from
  3. Barowski, M. (2000). Online-marketing (1st ed.). Berlin: Cornelsen.Google Scholar
  4. Bourland, A., and Handley, A. (2000). E-Mail Marketing Secrets. Retrieved September 10, 2009, from Email%20Marketin^%20Secrets%2Oli.pdf.
  5. Cho, W. and Olsen, M.D. (1998). A case study approach to understanding the impact of information technology on competitive advantage in the lodging industry. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 22(4), 376-394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P. and Warshaw, P.R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology. A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.Google Scholar
  7. Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 13(3), 318-340.Google Scholar
  8. DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organisational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147-160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fuchs, M., Tuta, M., and Höpken, W. (2008). Adoption of Email marketing in the hotel sector. In Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2008 Proceedings of the International Conference in Innsbruck, Austria, 2008. Wien: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. Ghadim, A.K., and Pannell, D.J. (1999). A conceptual framework for the adoption of an agricultural innovation. Agricultural Economics, 21(2), 145-154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Greenwwod, R., and Hinnings, C.R. (1996). Understanding radical organisational change: Bringing together the old and new institutionalism. Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1022-1054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hawley, A. (1968). Human ecology. In David L. Sills (Ed.), International Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences (pp. 328-337). New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  13. Lai, K.-H., Wong, C., and Cheng, T.C. (2006). Institutional isomorphism and the adoption of information technology for supply chain management.Computers in Industry, 57, 93-98.Google Scholar
  14. Langyintuo, A., and Mekuria, M. (2008). Assessing the influence of neighbourhood effects on the adoption of improved agricultural technologies in developing agriculture. African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 2, 151-169.Google Scholar
  15. Lin, H.-F., and Lin S.-M. (2007). Determinants of e-business diffusion: A test of the technology diffusion perspective. Technovation, 28, 135-145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. March, J.G., and Olsen, J.P. (1976). Ambiguity and choice in organisations. Bergen: Univertetsforlaget.Google Scholar
  17. Michihiro, K., and Rob, F. (1998). Bandwagon effects and long run technology choice. Games and Economic Behaviour, 22, 30-60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mir, M.Z., and Rahaman A.S. (2005). The adoption of international accounting standards in Bangladesh: An exploration of rationale and process. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 18(6), 816-841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Moore, G.C., and Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 192-222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Porter, M.E. (1985). Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  21. Rogers, E.M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  22. Sauer, C. (2000). Managing the infrastructure. In Willcocks, L., and Sauer, C. (Eds.), Moving to e-business. London: Random house.Google Scholar
  23. Scott, W., and Meyer, J. (1992). The organisations of social sectors. In Meyer, J., and Scott, R. (Eds.), Organisaional environment: Ritual and rationality (pp. 129-153). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Scott, W. (1987). The adolescence of institutional theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32, 493-511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Siguaw, J.A., and Enz, C.A. (1999). Best practices in information technology. Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 40(10), 58-71.Google Scholar
  26. Tornatzky, L., and Fleischer, M. (1990). Process of technology innovation. Lexington: MA.Google Scholar
  27. Zhu, K., and Kraemer, K.L. (2002). E-commerce metrics for net enhanced organisations: Assessing the value of e-commerce to firms’ performance in the manufacturing sector. Information Systems Research, 13(3), 275-295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Zhu, K. (2004). The complimentarity of information technology infrastructure and e-commerce capability: a resource based assessment of their business value. Journal of Management Information Systems, 21(91), 167-202.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of agriculture, food and wine Discipline of Agri-food and Wine BusinessThe University of AdelaideAdelaideAustralia

Personalised recommendations