Promoting radical innovation through end-user computing satisfaction
| Pages | 1629-1646 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-06-2017-0256 |
| Date | 10 September 2018 |
| Published date | 10 September 2018 |
| Author | Emilio Domínguez-Escrig,Francisco Fermín Mallén Broch,Rafael Lapiedra,Ricardo Chiva |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Information systems,Data management systems,Knowledge management,Knowledge sharing,Management science & operations,Supply chain management,Supply chain information systems,Logistics,Quality management/systems |
Promoting radical innovation
through end-user computing
satisfaction
Emilio Domínguez-Escrig, Francisco Fermín Mallén Broch,
Rafael Lapiedra and Ricardo Chiva
Department of Business Administration and Marketing, Universitat Jaume I,
Castelló de la Plana, Spain
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to provide empirical evidence of the relationship between
end-user computing satisfaction (EUCS) and radical innovation, using organizational learning as an
explanatory variable.
Design/methodology/approach –An empirical study was conducted in a population of 402 Spanish
companies. A sample of 251 valid questionnaires was obtained. Structural equations were used to validate the
proposed hypotheses.
Findings –Organizational learning capability fully mediates the relationship between EUCS and radical
innovation.
Research limitations/implications –The sample of companies is heterogeneous in terms of size, sector,
age and market share. The study uses single informants.
Practical implications –Results highlightthe need to implement adequateinformation systems to promote
radical innovation. In addition, it is necessary to facilitate organizational contexts that encourage dialogue,
experimentation, risk-taking, participative decision-making and opennessto the external environment.
Originality/value –This research contributes to the study of alternative antecedents of radical innovation
by highlighting the importance of EUCS.
Keywords Radical innovation, Organizational learning capability, End-user computing satisfaction
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Under conditions of uncertainty and high competition,suchasthosefacedbycompanies
in many sectors nowadays, innovation is one of the main mechanisms that allow
organizations to increase their competitiveness and ensure their long-term continuity in
the market. Among the different types of innovation distinguished in the literature, radical
innovation occupies a prominent place as a means to achieve these objectives (Chandyand
Tellis, 1998; McDermott and O’Connor, 2002), since it advances the price/performance
frontier by far more than the existing rate of progress (Gatignon et al., 2002, p. 1107), and
is crucial for both organizational and economic growth (Büschgens et al., 2013).
Radical innovations present a high degree of novelty for both the firm that develops
themandthemarkettowhichtheyareaddressed. They represent revolutionary changes
in technology (Dewar and Dutton, 1986) and are foundational innovations that serve
as the basis for future technical developments (Datta and Jessup, 2013). Radical
innovation can refer to a new product, service, productive process, etc. (O’Malley et al.,
2014). Product innovation is defined as the product or service introduced to meet the
needs of the market or of an external user, while process innovation is understood as a
new element introduced into production operations or functions (Alegre et al., 2005).
In the present research we have focused the analysis on product, service, and
process innovation.
Yang et al. (2014) argue that radical innovation needs a wide range of facilitators, both
within and outside the organizations. For instance, internal factors such as corporate culture
Industrial Management & Data
Systems
Vol. 118 No. 8, 2018
pp. 1629-1646
© Emerald PublishingLimited
0263-5577
DOI 10.1108/IMDS-06-2017-0256
Received 12 June 2017
Revised 31 August 2017
9 November 2017
3 January 2018
Accepted 22 January 2018
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0263-5577.htm
1629
Promoting
radical
innovation
(Tellis et al., 2009), internal knowledge sharing (Zhou and Li, 2012) or education and
experience of the entrepreneurs (Marvel and Lumpkin, 2007) are antecedents of radical
innovation. External factors such as political ties (Zhao et al., 2016), external market
knowledge acquisition (Zhou and Li, 2012) or reliance on partners (Slater et al., 2014) appear
to be drivers of this type of innovation. Nevertheless, some authors consider that
antecedents and processes related to radical innovation are not well documented (O’Malley
et al., 2014). López-Cabrales et al. (2008) consider that studying the organizational
characteristics related to radical innovation is still a promising field of study because much
of the previous research has been focused on traditional parameters, proposing the analysis
of alternative organizational variables.
Radical innovation involves working on highly complex, risky and uncertain projects
(Büschgens et al., 2013). In these projects, good quality information systems may be decisive.
Popovičet al. (2014, p. 270) state that information systems “support timely decisions,
provide information that enhances comparative advantage, promote innovation, and offer a
means to manage the uncertainty inherent in the business environment.”
In addition, the evolution of information technologies has enhanced the effect of
information systems on innovation development ( Jha and Bose, 2016). Sainio et al. (2012)
suggest that, nowadays, there is a greater potential to innovate and achieve competitive
advantages due to new information technologies and the internet.
In recent times, the amount of information available has increased appreciably, which
has been accompanied by the proliferation of systems to access and retrieve it. New
information technologies have had a great impact at the organizational level, affecting the
way people work within organizations and giving rise to a new type of worker. End-user
computing emerged when personal computers allowed users to exert control over their own
needs for information without depending upon centralized technologies or departments that
managed these needs (Govindarajulu and Arinze, 2008). Nonetheless, although the
development of communication and information technologies has improved access to
information, detecting information that is both relevant and useful is difficult and requires
intensive efforts (Burcharth et al., 2015). In this context, organizations make large
investments to develop information systems to achieve their objectives. These investments
will be successful if users are satisfied and use the information technology in an effective
manner (Somers et al., 2003).
Bokhari (2005) states that the evaluation of the success of information systems is a
complicated phenomenon by nature. It is difficult to obtain economic and quantitative
measures to evaluate the success of an information system, so scholars and practitioners
use subjective measures to do so. The end-user computing satisfaction (EUCS) model is
commonly used as a surrogate measure for information system success (Aggelidis
and Chatzoglou, 2012). Although there are other means to measure the success of an
information system, they present important shortcomings which make them
inappropriate to this end, user satisfaction being the best measure of information
system success (Lapiedra et al., 2011). EUCS is defined as the affective attitude toward a
specific computer application by someone who interacts directly with the application (Doll
and Torkzadeh, 1988).
Information systems have a positive impact on organizational performance (Abugabah
et al., 2009) and provide a wide variety of benefits for organizations, such as competitive
advantage or improvements in decision-making (Ghobakhloo and Tang, 2015).
However, although information systems are positively related to innovation (Popovič
et al., 2014; Jha and Bose, 2016), the number of studies that analyze their influence on
radical innovation is scarce. Taking into account that the promoters and the consequences
of radical innovation are completely different to other innovation typologies and
the paramount outcomes that may be achieved through this type of innovation
1630
IMDS
118,8
To continue reading
Request your trial