5 1/2 96.06/96.12 壹 前 言 Alavi & Leidner, 2001; Quaddus & Xu, 2005 95 1986 Tayloruserdriven model Taylor, 1986 Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989 91 88 Aj

51/2 96.06/96.1269-90 使 用 者 採 用 知 識 管 理 系 統 之 影 響 因 素 研 究 理 論 模 型 的 比 較 取 向 A Study on Influencing Factors of Knowledge Management Systems Adoption: Models Comparison Approach *** Mei-Chun Yeh*, Ming-Shu Yuan** 摘 要 LISREL 421 Abstract Using Linear Structural Relation model (LISREL model) as analysis method and technology acceptance model and decomposed theory of planned behavior as research foundation, this study approaches mainly from the angle of behavioral intention to examine the influential factors of 421 employees adopting knowledge management systems and in the meantime to compare the two method models mentioned on the top. According to the research, there is no, in comparison with technology acceptance model and decomposed theory of planned behavior, apparent increase on the explanatory power with the posterior. On the aspect of influential factors of users toward knowledge management systems, behavioral intention can efficiently predict the usage behavior, while attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control the behavioral intention. Perceived usefulness can only predict the behavioral intention indirectly, while perceived ease of use can efficiently predict perceived usefulness. Perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use can predict attitude effectively. Both peer influence and superior s influence can operatively predict the subjective norm. Self efficacy and resource facilitating can predict perceived behavioral control. Keywords: knowledge management systems; technology acceptance model; decomposed theory of planned behavior; linear structural relation model * (Master degree in Graduate Program of Information and Communications, Shih Hsin University) ** (Associate Professor, Graduate Program and Department of Information and Communications, Shih Hsin University) 69

5 1/2 96.06/96.12 壹 前 言 Alavi & Leidner, 2001; Quaddus & Xu, 2005 95 1986 Tayloruserdriven model Taylor, 1986 Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989 91 88 Ajzen, 1985 WriteOne Davis et al., 1989Davis et al. 1989 WriteOne 0.35 0.63 Venkatesh and Davis 2000 44% 57% 40% Money 2004 Davis, et al. 1989 Dillon & Morris, 1996 Money & Turner, 2004 9193 94 70

421 貳 文 獻 探 討 Davis et al. 1989 Roger 1983 referent groups Theory of reasoned action: TRA behavior intention to perform behavior attitude toward behavior subjective norm concerning behavior beliefs about consequences of behavior normative beliefs about behavior Technology acceptance model: TAM Davis et al. 1989 actual system use Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I.(1975). Beliefs, Attitude, Intentions and Behavior: An Introduction to theory and Research. Addition-Wesley, Boston, MA. p16. 71

5 1/2 96.06/96.12 external variables Theory of planned behavior: TPB Ajzen, 1989 Ajzen Ajzen, 1985 behavioral beliefs outcome evaluations normative beliefs motivation to comply control beliefs perceived facilitation Decomposed theory of planned behavior: DTPB Taylor and Todd 1995 786 Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., & Warshaw, P.R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models, Management Science, 35(8), p.985. 72

Ajzen, I. (1989). Attitude Structure and Behavior. In A. R. Pratkanis, S. J. Breckler, & A. G. Greenwald (Eds.), Attitude Structure and Function (p.252). NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Ajzen 1989 Davis et al. 1989 Roger 1983 referent groups 1. 2. Taylor and Todd 1995 ( ) 1. 2.3.4. 5. Rogers, 1983 Davis et al. 1989 Moore & Benbasat, 1991Taylor and Todd 1995 Taylor & Todd, 1995 ( ) Taylor and Todd 1995 73

5 1/2 96.06/96.12 Taylor & Todd, 1995 ( ) Ajzen, 1991Taylor and To d d 1995 Compeau & Higgins, 1995 Triandis resource facilitating conditions technology facilitating conditions Taylor & Todd, 1995 Taylor and Todd 1995 參 研 究 方 法 compatibility Rogers, 1983 technology facilitating conditions Web ( ) H1 74

Taylor, S., & Todd, P.A.(1995). Understanding information technology usage A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(2), p.146. 75

5 1/2 96.06/96.12 H2a H2b H3a H3b H4 ( ) H1 H2a H2b H2c H3a H3b H4a H4b 76

H5a H5b Likert1 7 coefficient of internal consistency Cronbach s α 0.7 Cronbach s α 0.7 肆 結 果 與 討 論 LISREL EQS AMOS SAS/ Cronbach s α Cronbach s α 7 0.9616 7 0.9616 7 0.9230 7 0.9230 3 0.9179 3 0.9179 4 0.8015 4 0.8015 4 0.7015 4 0.7015 6 0.6255 2 5 0.7329 5 0.9668 5 0.9668 3 0.9540 3 0.9540 5 0.9493 5 0.9493 4 0.9554 4 0.9554 7 0.8496 7 0.8496 77

5 1/2 96.06/96.12 CALIS TAM 9 4 LISREL 8.7 SPSS 10.5 89 100 200 93 94 95 425445 25445 95% 0.05 379 n N dd 0.05Z α/2 Z 0.05 1.96 92 600 Microsoft Excel XP 600 SEM 93 95 89600 52787.8% 106 20% 421 1.2. 41 70.6% LISREL 8.7 Bagozzi & Yi, 1988; Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1998 78

( ) offending estimates (1) (2) 1.0 1.0 0.95 (3) T Y7 0.97Y16 0.96 0.95 0.48 0.95 T 0.04 0.08 Y7 Y16 Y7Y16 ( ) Hair et al. 1998 X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 X8 X9 X10 X11 X12 X13 X14 X15 X16 X17 79

80 5 1/2 96.06/96.12 X18 X19 X20 X21 X22 X23 X24 X25 X26 X27 X28 X29 X30 Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Y6 Y8 Y9 Y10 Y11 Y12 Y13 Y14 Y15 Y17

1. χ 2 c h i- square1937.34 5564.20P 0 χ 2 chi-square 5.28 4.56 3 GFI0.760.66 AGFI 0.71 0.62 Hu and Bentler 1999 GFI 0.9Browne and Cudeck 1993 GFI 0.8 GFI AGFI RMSEA 0.05 RMSEA0.10 0.092 χ 2 Chi-Square P TAM DTPB 1937.34 P 0.0 0.05 Df 367 Df 1219 χ 2 Chi-Square / 3 5.28 4.56 GFI 0.9 0.76 0.66 0.9 0.71 0.62 AGFI RMSEA 81 5564.20 P 0.0 0.05 0.1 0.092 NFI 0.9 0.97 0.96 0.9 0.97 0.97 NNFI CFI 0.9 0.97 0.97 IFI 0.9 0.97 0.97 RFI 0.9 0.96 0.96 0.5 0.87 0.88 PNFI PGFI 0.5 0.64 0.59 AIC Model AIC 2073.34 5882.20

5 1/2 96.06/96.12 2. 1. NFI2. NNFI3. CFI4. IFI5. RFI 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.96 NFI NNFI CFI IFI RFI 0.96 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.96 0.9 3. PNFIPGFI AIC PNFI PGFI 0.87 0.64 0.88 0.59 0.5 AIC2073.34 5882.20 ( ) Hair et al. 1998 Measurement Model Fit SMCCR AVE 1. SMC LISREL R-Square Squared Multiple Correlation SMC SMC 0.5 X17 X20 X21 X23 X24 X29 X30 Y18 Y19 Y20 SMC 0.5 SMC 0.5 2. CR C R Fornell and Larcker 19810.6 CR 0.78 0.95 0.6 3. AVE Bagozzi and Yi 19880.5 AV E 0.48 0.88 0.50.5 82

SMC SMC SMC SMC SMC SMC X1 0.85 X12 0.78 X23 0.31 Y4 0.79 Y17 0.83 X2 0.89 X13 0.79 X24 0.22 Y5 0.75 Y18 0.48 X3 0.84 X14 0.58 X25 0.72 Y6 0.83 Y19 0.46 X4 0.67 X15 0.84 X26 0.62 Y8 0.88 Y20 0.35 X5 0.73 X16 0.84 X27 0.67 Y9 0.64 Y21 0.81 X6 0.65 X17 0.43 X28 0.59 Y10 0.71 Y22 0.84 X7 0.56 X18 0.77 X29 0.42 Y11 0.73 Y23 0.59 X8 0.70 X19 0.82 X30 0.23 Y12 0.82 Y24 0.53 X9 0.56 X20 0.44 Y1 0.77 Y13 0.82 X10 0.73 X21 0.35 Y2 0.84 Y14 0.86 X11 0.77 X22 0.66 Y3 0.80 Y15 0.92 X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 0.95 0.74 X8 X9 X10 X11 X12 X13 X14 0.94 0.70 X15 X16 X17 0.87 0.70 X18 X19 X20 X21 0.85 0.59 X22 X23 X24 X25 0.78 0.48 X26 X27 X28 X29 X30 0.83 0.51 Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 0.95 0.79 Y6 Y8 0.93 0.88 Y9 Y10 Y11 Y12 Y13 0.94 0.75 Y14 Y15 Y17 0.95 0.87 Y18 Y19 Y20 Y21 Y22 Y23 Y24 0.90 0.58 83

5 1/2 96.06/96.12 ( ) -1 +1 *p 0.05 **p 0.01 H2b R 2 0.49 0.59 0.70.45 T ( ) T1.96p 0.05 TAM T H1 0.70 13.0** H2a 0.67 9.93** H2b 0.12 1.79 H3a 0.67 14.30** H3b 0.22 5.08** H4 0.67 14.37** 84

DTPB T H1 0.69 12.59** H2a 0.53 11.50** H2b 0.29 6.97** H2c 0.12 2.97** H3a 0.68 13.70** H3b 0.23 5.34** H4a 0.72 13.29** H4b 0.15 3.10** H5a 0.77 11.95** H5b 0.14 2.60** R 2 0.48 0.61 0.72 0.69 0.77 T ( ) R 2 0.59 0.61 R 2 0.610.59 0.02 伍 結 論 與 建 議 85

5 1/2 96.06/96.12 TAM DTPB TAM Decomposed TPB R 2 0.49 0.48 R 2 0.59 0.61 R 2 0.70 0.72 R 2 0.45 R 2 0.69 R 2 0.77 86

R 2 0.59 R 2 0.49 R 2 0.61 R 2 0.48 Hartwick & Barki, 1994 87

5 1/2 96.06/96.12 s e l f- reported computerrecorded log log 致 謝 LISREL 參 考 書 目 91 93 94 12 4211-234 93 LISREL 94 88 9 3 89 91 12 2002 95 43 4487-507 92 Ajzen, I. (1985). From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned Behavior. In J.Kuhl and J.Bechmann (Eds.), Action Control: From Cognition to Behavior (pp.11-39). Berlin; New York: Springer-Verlag. Ajzen, I. (1989). Attitude Structure and Behavior. In A. R. Pratkanis, S. J. Breckler, & A. G. Greenwald (Eds.), Attitude Structure and Function (pp.241-274). NY: Lawrence 88

Erlbaum Associates. Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211. Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Review: Knowledge Management And Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations And Research Issues. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 107-136. Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the Evaluation Structural Equation Models. Academic of Marketing Science, 16, 74-94. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models. Newsbury Park, CA: Sage. Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer Self-Efficacy: Development of a Measure and Initial Test. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 189-211. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1002. Dillon, A., & Morris, M. G. (1996). User Acceptance of Information Technology: Theories and Models. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST), 31, 3-32. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I.(1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to theory and Research. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobervables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Hartwick, J., & Barki, H. (1994). Explaining the Role of User Participation in Information System Use. Management Science, 40(4), 440-465. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria Versus New Alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55. Money, W., & Turner, A. (2004). Application of the Technology Acceptance Model to a Knowledge Management System. Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. M o o r e, G. C., & B e n b a s a t, I. (1991). D e v e l o p m e n t o f a n I n s t r u m e n t t o Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 192-222. 89

5 1/2 96.06/96.12 Quaddus, Q., & Xu, J. (2005). Adoption and Diffusion of Knowledge Management Systems: Field Studies of Factors and Variables. Knowledge-Based Systems, 18, 107-115. Rogers, E. M. (1983). Diffusion of Innovations. New York, NY: The Free Press. Taylor, R. S. (1986). Value-Added Processes in Information Systems. Westport. CT: Greenwood. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 145-176. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Modes: Four Longitudinal Field Studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. 97 11 28 98 2 11 90