INTRODUCTION

The expansion of the e-commerce sector, along with the emergence of digital technologies like big data,
Artificial Intelligence, cloud computing, and robotics, serves as a catalyst for the integration of new
technologies within organizations (Verhoef et al., 2021). The progression in information communication
technology (ICT) has brought about significant transformations in the operational practices of
organizations. The assimilation of these technologies in the work environment has redefined both inter-
and intra-organizational communication, thereby optimizing business procedures to yield advantages
such as enhanced productivity, employee well-being, and consumer satisfaction (Papagiannidis &
Marikyan, 2020). In order to attain these advantages, corporations allocate substantial resources
towards technological investments. Nonetheless, the implementation of ICT does not always result in
successful deployment and frequently leads to suboptimal returns (Davis, 1989; Venkatesh et al., 2003).
Findings from market studies indicate that the efficacy of technology adoption in organizations, where
the technologies deliver the anticipated return on investment (i.e. enhanced performance), stands at
less than 30 percent. This figure diminishes further when accounting for companies that manage to
enhance performance initially but struggle to sustain these improvements over time (De la Boutetière,
Montagner & Reich, 2018). Given the impact of technology adoption on organizational performance and
the associated cost-revenue dynamics, the disparity between technology utilization and acceptance
continues to be a prominent area of investigation within the Information Systems literature.

The interest of the research community in technology acceptance within private and organizational
contexts started to grow about thirty years ago (Davis, 1989; Compeau & Higgins, 1995; Goodhue, 1995;
Leonard-Barton & Deschamps, 1988). By the year 2000, research on technology acceptance had
generated a significant amount of evidence concerning user behavior in relation to technology adoption
(Hu et al., 1999). Several models and theories were developed to comprehend technology acceptance,
collectively explaining 40% of the variability in technology use intention (Davis, 1989; Davis, Bagozzi &
Warshaw, 1989; Taylor & Todd, 1995; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). These models originated from various
disciplines, which restricted their applicability to specific contexts. For instance, the Theory of Planned
Behavior and the Theory of Reasoned Action offer a psychological outlook on human behavior by
analyzing variables like perceived behavioral control, attitude, and subjective norms (Ajzen, 2011). These
theories yield general insights into individuals' attitudes, making them relevant to a broad spectrum of
research areas beyond information system management. Conversely, the Diffusion of Innovation Theory
concentrates on innovation-specific factors influencing users' behavior towards adopting new
technology (Moore & Benbasat, 1991). Furthermore, the models differ in perspectives, incorporating
variables such as subjective norms, motivation, attitudes towards technology performance, social
aspects, experience, and facilitating conditions (Venkatesh et al., 2003; Taylor & Todd, 1995; Ajzen,
2011; Thompson, Higgins & Howell, 1991; Davis, Bagozzi & Warshaw, 1992; Venkatesh & Speier, 1999).
The choice of model limits research outcomes to specific situations and requirements, indicating the
necessity for a comprehensive approach to encompass diverse variables and disciplines, enhancing the
theories' applicability across various contexts (Venkatesh et al., 2003).

To achieve a comprehensive understanding of technology acceptance, Venkatesh et al. (Venkatesh et

al., 2003) aimed at developing a unified theory of technology acceptance by integrating key constructs
that predict behavioral intention and use. In pursuit of this goal, the foundational literature on IS
acceptance was scrutinized to identify theoretical and contextual similarities and disparities among
technology acceptance theories stemming from three distinct research streams – namely, social
psychology, IS management, and behavioral psychology (see (Venkatesh et al., 2003)). As these theories
emerge from diverse disciplines, they offer varied perspectives on technology acceptance and adoption.
The socio-psychological standpoint in the study of individual behavior was exemplified by the Theory of
Reasoned Action (TRA), the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), and Social Cognitive Theory (SCT).
Drawing from TRA and TPB, individual behavior is assessed based on the impact of attitude towards
behavior, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control on behavioral intention (Ajzen, 2011).
These theories are employed in IS management to investigate the influence of perceived task
complexity, group norms, and attitude on technology acceptance (Karahanna, Straub & Chervany, 1999;
Zhang & Mao, 2020). TRA significantly contributed to the theories of IS acceptance through the
provision of a theoretical framework elucidating human behavior (Ajzen, 2011; Davis, 1989). SCT
operates on the premise that behavioral, cognitive, and environmental elements (e.g., outcome
expectations-performance, outcome expectations-personal, self-efficacy, affect, and anxiety) interact to
influence individuals' conduct (Bandura, 2001). This theory has been instrumental in exploring human-
computer interaction (Compeau & Higgins, 1995; Compeau, Higgins & Huff, 1999). The acceptance of
technology from an IS management perspective found its main explanations in the Technology
Acceptance Model (TAM), the combined TAM and TPB model (C-TAM-TPB), Innovation Diffusion Theory
(IDT), and the Model of PC Utilization (MPCU). TAM and C-TAM-TPB highlight the significance of
cognitive reactions to IS attributes in behavior prediction (Venkatesh et al., 2003; Taylor & Todd, 1995),
while IDT emphasizes system characteristics and features in innovation adoption determination (e.g.,
relative advantage, complexity, compatibility, image) (Moore & Benbasat, 1991). MPCU, with a narrow
focus, delves into the factors influencing personal computer usage (e.g., job fit, complexity, long-term
consequences, affect towards use, facilitating conditions, and social factors) (Thompson, Higgins &
Howell, 1991), distinguishing itself from other theories exploring IS and innovation adoption (Venkatesh
et al., 2003; Taylor & Todd, 1995; Moore & Benbasat, 1991). The Motivational Model (MM) represents
the behavioral psychology perspective on technology acceptance, proposing that user motivations
underpin technology adoption and usage behavior exploration (Davis, Bagozzi & Warshaw, 1992;
Venkatesh & Speier, 1999). Users assess the propensity for engaging in behavior based on how much
the behavior triggers instrumental rewards (extrinsic motives) and/or internal reinforcement like
enjoyment, satisfaction, and fun (intrinsic motives) (Davis, Bagozzi & Warshaw, 1992).

The examination of the aforementioned theories prompted Venkatesh to pinpoint limitations, leading to
the development of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. A key limitation was the
lack of empirical testing and comparison of predominant technology acceptance models in the
literature, leaving room for speculation regarding the predictive capacity of each theory's constructs.
Research on technology use behavior predominantly concentrated on basic systems (e.g., PC),
neglecting more intricate technologies (Venkatesh et al., 2003). Focusing on a single technology restricts
the explanatory prowess of theories, given that individuals' encounters, purchase choices, and use
instances vary according to IT systems and circumstances (Brown, Venkatesh & Hoehle, 2015). For
instance, consumer motivations for purchasing entertainment technology differ from those of
employees driving the utilization of enterprise management systems, which serve a mainly utilitarian
purpose and are primarily used in obligatory settings. Methodological constraints were also identified in
earlier studies, with many adopting a cross-sectional approach, measuring variables pre- or post-
acceptance stages (e.g., (Venkatesh et al., 2003; Taylor & Todd, 1995)), despite certain constructs (e.g.,
experience) necessitating longitudinal examination. The limitations highlighted the necessity of
employing a longitudinal approach to comprehensively grasp the dynamics of technology acceptance
and usage. Prior research primarily concentrated on technology acceptance within a voluntary context,
where societal influence was negligible, leading to limitations on the generalizability of the results. Thus,
in order to enhance the broader applicability of the frameworks, the acceptance of technology was
examined in both mandatory and voluntary scenarios. Through an empirical analysis of the different
theories, scholars were able to devise a comprehensive acceptance model that encompassed and
mirrored all pivotal acceptance elements (Venkatesh et al., 2003).

Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology

The theoretical framework of UTAUT postulates that the utilization of technology is influenced by
behavioral intent. The perceived probability of embracing the technology hinges on the direct impact of
four fundamental constructs: performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and
facilitating conditions. Furthermore, the predictors' effects are moderated by variables such as age,
gender, experience, and the voluntary nature of usage (Venkatesh et al., 2003).

 Performance expectancy is the concept that an individual holds a belief regarding the system's
capability to enhance job performance gains (Venkatesh et al., 2003). This notion is rooted in
various models such as Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), TAM2, Combined TAM and the
Theory of Planned Behaviour (CTAMTPB), Motivational Model (MM), the model of PC utilisation
(MPCU), Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT), and Social Cognitive Theory (SCT), encompassing
factors like perceived usefulness, extrinsic motivation, job-fit, relative advantage, and outcome
expectations. Notably, it stands out as the primary predictor of usage intention, holding
significance in both voluntary and mandatory contexts (Zhou, Lu & Wang, 2010; Venkatesh,
Thong & Xu, 2016).

 Effort expectancy pertains to the level of simplicity associated with utilizing the system
(Venkatesh et al., 2003). This construct is founded on perceived ease of use and complexity as
derived from TAM, MPCU, IDT, which exhibit similarities in definitions and measurement scales.
However, its impact diminishes with prolonged technology usage, as indicated by studies
(Gupta, Dasgupta & Gupta, 2008; Chauhan & Jaiswal, 2016).

 Social Influence refers to an individual's perception of the extent to which influential figures
endorse the adoption of the new system (Venkatesh et al., 2003). This concept aligns with
subjective norms, social factors, and image constructs present in TRA, TAM2, TPB, CTAMTPB,
MPCU, and IDT, suggesting that people's actions are influenced by others' perceptions. Notably,
the effect of social influence is particularly pronounced in mandatory technology usage
scenarios (Venkatesh et al., 2003), where compliance rather than personal preference drives
 individuals to engage with technology, possibly explaining the varied results observed in studies
validating the model (Zhou, Lu & Wang, 2010; Chauhan & Jaiswal, 2016).

 Facilitating conditions are the belief an individual holds regarding the organization's and
technical infrastructure's support for system utilization (Venkatesh et al., 2003). This construct
stems from compatibility, perceived behavioral control, and facilitating conditions found in TPB,
CTAMTPB, MPCU, and IDT. While facilitating conditions initially positively influence usage
intention, their impact diminishes over time. Thus, the model suggests that facilitating
conditions directly and significantly impact usage behavior (Venkatesh et al., 2003).