ARTICLE IN PRESS

Technovation 27 (2007) 241–253

www.elsevier.com/locate/technovation

Organisational determinants of information technology adoption and

implementation in SMEs: The case of family and cooperative firms
Sebastián Bruquea,, José Moyanob
a
University of Jaén, Department of Business Administration, Accounting and Sociology, E.U.P. Linares, C/Alfonso X el Sabio,
28, 23700 Linares (Jaen), Spain
b
University of Jaén, Department of Business Administration, Accounting and Sociology, E.U.P. Linares, C/Alfonso X el Sabio,
28, 23700 Linares (Jaen), Spain

Abstract

The current work attempts to identify the factors behind the intensity and speed of adoption of information technology in small and
medium-sized firms (SMEs) in which family or cooperative character play an important role. For this purpose, we have used a qualitative
perspective, in which we have taken into account the opinions of entrepreneurs and managers of SMEs that have been involved in
technological change processes in recent years. Our results indicate that there are a number of internal factors that influence the success
of the adoption decision, on the one hand, and the implementation process, on the other hand. Among these, we might mention various
systems for the socialisation of the workers, the rotation of personnel for exemplary purposes, the simultaneous implementation of
information technology and quality systems, and professionalisation in the case of family firms. There are also inhibiting factors of the
adoption and implementation, such as the modification of the firm’s hierarchy and power structures, as well as the absence of qualified
personnel.
r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Information technology; Adoption; Implementation; Cooperative firms; Family firms; Small and medium-sized firms; Internal factors

1. Introduction produce 39% of the gross national product (GNP), and

Identifying why and how firms adopt technological
innovations, and more specifically ‘‘information technol-
ogy’’, is fundamental for ensuring a successful adoption
process (Swanson and Wang, 2005). A research stream has
identified variables that can explain why firms adopt
information technology with different intensities and
speeds (e.g., Premkumar et al., 1997; Mehrtens et al.,
2001; Teo and Pian, 2003).
However, there has been little research on the factors
inducing small and medium-sized firms (SMEs) to introduce
information technology (Premkumar, 2003; Riemenschneider
et al., 2003; Morgan et al., 2006). SMEs are the engine of the
economies of many countries. For instance, in the United
States, small businesses create two-thirds of the new jobs,
Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 953 648571; fax: +34 953 648508.
E-mail addresses: sbruque@ujaen.es (S. Bruque), jmoyano@ujaen.es
(J. Moyano).
generate more than half of the technological innovation
(Kuan and Chau, 2001). In Europe, 99.8% of the firms are
SMEs, responsible for two-thirds of the turnover and
business employment (Carayannis et al., 2006). In Southern
Europe, the importance of SMEs in the total employment is
even higher. For instance, SMEs generate 70% of the
employment in Spain (European Commission, 2005).
Among SMEs, family businesses and cooperative firms
are two highly important forms of ownership structure in
many countries. In the case of the United States, family
firms generate 50% of GNP (Coleman and Carsky, 1999)
and employ 50% of the active population (Ibrahim and
Ellis, 1994). In the European Union, family firms are a
majority in almost all member countries (Donckels and
Fröhlich, 1991). In Spain, family firms make up a major
part of the SMEs, since these firms represent between 65%
and 80% of the business structure, employ 65% of the
active population and generate 65% of GNP (Amat, 1998).
Cooperative firms also represent an important part of the

0166-4972/$ - see front matter r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2006.12.003
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
242 S. Bruque, J. Moyano / Technovation 27 (2007) 241–253
economic activity in several Western European countries,
such as Spain, France and Italy (European Commission,
2005). In Spain, cooperative firms generate 7% of GNP
and employ 4% of the total workforce (Barea-Tejeiro and
Monzón-Campos, 2002). Moreover, practically 99.8% of
them are SMEs.
Despite the importance of family and cooperative firms,
very few studies have analysed information technology
adoption and implementation in SMEs of this type. Thus,
the research question of the current work is to identify
organisational variables that may have a role in informa-
tion technology adoption and implementation in coopera-
tive and family SMEs.
In order to accomplish the above-mentioned objective,
we have structured this work in seven sections including the
current introduction. In Section 2, we discuss the organisa-
tional factors that favour the adoption of information
technology in firms according to the literature. In Section
3, we describe the method employed in our research. In
Section 4, we present the findings, while in Section 5 we
propose the information technology adoption and imple-
mentation model for SMEs. The main conclusions of our
research are outlined in Section 6 and finally in Section 7,
we discuss some managerial implications that may prove
useful for practitioners responsible for technological
change processes in their firms.
2. Literature review
Since information technology began to have an important
impact on the way firms are both managed and organised,
researchers have investigated the organisational factors
behind the degree of adoption of computing, robotic or tele-
communications technologies. Organisational factors behind
information technology adoption may be as important as
other elements such as technical factors (Premkumar et al.,
1997), although they are usually seen as less significant by
practitioners (Fletcher and Wright, 1995).
The previous literature has identified several organisa-
tional factors associated with information technology
adoption (Desai et al., 1998). Among them, we might
mention: the management’s direct and explicit support for
the adoption of information technology (Damanpour,
1991; Thong, 1999; Soliman and Janz, 2004); the existence
of technology leaders (‘‘champions’’ or ‘‘prominent ac-
tors’’) who support the technological change (Sharma and
Rai, 2003; Pitt et al., 2006); the level of technological
education of the workers in the technical departments
(Premkumar et al., 1994); the level of technological
education of the rest of the workers; the strategy chosen
with regards implementation (proactive, reactive, technol-
ogy leader/follower, etc.) (Swanson and Ramiller, 1997;
Lewis and Cockrill, 2002; Teo and Pian, 2003, 2004); the
level of integration of the information system/information
technology in the business strategy (Fletcher and Wright,
1995); and the size of the firm (Young et al., 1999;
Raymond and Bergeron, 1997).
Other studies focus on the previous existence of related
technologies as a positive adoption factor, and the inertia
generated by old technologies and systems as a negative
adoption factor (Hovav et al., 2004). Organisational
culture has been an important topic in the field (Fink,
1998). Some dimensions of culture, such as, flexibility,
communication, absence of conflict and orientation to-
wards innovation have been identified as information
technology adoption facilitators (Powell and Dent-Mical-
lef, 1997; Mirvis et al., 1991). Organic vs. mechanistic
culture has also been identified as a predictor of the extent
to which firms adopt and use information technology and
how they go about it (Tung et al., 2000).
However, most of the previous research has centred on
large firms. Some studies suggest that information system
theories and practices developed for large firms may not be
suitable for small ones (Farhoomand and Hrycyk, 1985;
Premkumar, 2003). SMEs are different from large firms in
several ways. In SMEs, decision-making is centralised in a
reduced number of persons, standard procedures are not
well laid out, there is limited long-term planning, and there
is greater dependence on external expertise and services for
information systems (Premkumar, 2003). Furthermore,
SMEs face substantially greater risks in information system
implementation than large businesses, since they have
inadequate resources and limited education about informa-
tion systems (Cragg and King, 1993). They have difficulties
in recruiting and retaining internal information system
experts due to the scarcity of qualified information system
experts and the limited career advancement prospects in
SMEs (Kuan and Chau, 2001).
In the case of European countries, such as Spain, SMEs
have special characteristics linked to their family and
cooperative nature that merit particular attention. First,
for family firms, the adoption and use of information
technology may be a more contested issue, particularly in
businesses with strong historic and cultural legacies
(Ogbonna and Harris, 2005). The objectives that the firms
hope to achieve by adopting information technology may
differ depending on the character of the family. Family
firms usually develop more informal organisational struc-
tures than non-family firms, with an overlapping between
the roles played in the family and in the business.
Furthermore, the lack of professionalisation and the
autocratic managerial style that characterise some family
firms (Heck, 1998) may hinder a proper management of the
information technology implementation process. Second,
in cooperative firms, active and effective participation in
the production and/or commercialisation process is what
legitimises the capacity to take decisions democratically
among the members (Garcı́a-Gutiérrez, 1988–1989). In-
formation technology adoption by cooperative firms may
differ from that of non-cooperative firms. Cooperative
firms have a distinctive culture, based on principles of
democracy and equity, which are shared and assumed
freely by all their members (Locke and Schweiger, 1979).
Participation in the decision-making by clients, workers or
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S. Bruque, J. Moyano / Technovation 27 (2007) 241–253
suppliers, who are at the same time owners of the firm, may
have an impact on information technology adoption and
implementation processes. On the one hand, the higher
commitment of the members of cooperative firms may
foster the adoption of new information technology, but on
the other hand, the democratic decision-making may slow
down the decision process involved in information
technology adoption and implementation (Bruque et al.,
2003).
In spite of the above-mentioned differences between
small and large firms, research on the adoption of
information technology by SMEs is very limited. Further-
more, previous literature is widely divergent and not
comprehensive enough to create a cumulative research
corpus (Premkumar, 2003). In the case of family and
cooperative firms, evidence on information technology
adoption is even more lacking (Ogbonna and Harris, 2005).
Hence we feel that there is a need to deepen our
understanding of the internal factors that may foster or
inhibit processes of adoption and implementation of
technologies in cooperative and family firms. For this
purpose, we have used the method that we explain in the
following section.
3. Research method
In order to accomplish this work, we have carried out a
qualitative analysis. Qualitative research has been success-
fully used in the field of information systems and
information technology (e.g., Hayne and Pollard, 2000)
especially, when a deeper understanding is required on the
factors that have influence to a relatively new reality. This
research method has been chosen in the case study in order
to describe the factors.
The unit of analysis used in the research corresponds to
the companies selected for the case study. Since the
geographic location of the firms could distort the analysis,
we decided to examine firms, which are located in the same
geographical area. In this respect, we analysed the
information technology adoption processes in firms from
the province of Jaén, in the region of Andalusia, southern
part of Spain, belonged to the following sectors: wood and
furniture, services, computing, textiles and manufacture of
plastic components. The sampling used to select the cases
was judgement purposive sampling, which involved select-
ing those units that best guarantee comprehension of the
studied phenomenon (Sekaran, 2000). To choose the units
of analysis, we took into account the research team’s
knowledge of analysing the territorial scope. The second-
ary data required to classify the units of analysis were
obtained from official registers (classification of gazelle
firms1 by the Central Balance Sheet Data Office of
1 process, on the other hand. The analysis is conducted
Gazelle firms are firms that have increased their sales continuously in
the period 1997–2000. In addition, they must also have earned profits
throughout this period (Central de Balances de Andalucı́a, 2004). See Sims
and O’Regan (2006) for a complete description of this type of firm.
243
Andalusia), as well as databases collecting information
from the Mercantile Register (SABI database, from
INFORMA, S. A.). With the available information, we
drew up a list of firms satisfying our requirements for
participating in the study. These requirements were two:
first, we chose SMEs (family or cooperative firms) with a
positive economic-financial record in terms of profitability
or sales turnover; second, the firms selected had all
undergone a process of technological change involving
information technology, and in most cases they are firms
with a strong tradition of adopting and implementing new
technologies, which have moreover been technology
leaders in their respective sectors. From this point, we
opted for a gradual process of information gathering in
which, in the first stage, we prioritised leading firms in
technological innovation in each sector. Second, we chose
confirmatory cases in each of the sectors analysed. For this
purpose, here we considered SMEs to be firms employing
at most 500 workers (Grandon and Pearson, 2004). The
process concluded when the saturation point was achieved
that a condition when adding a new unit of analysis did not
provide any additional relevant information. We reached
the saturation point by 15 firms where five amongst them
were cooperative firms and 10 family firms.
The technique used for data collection was the in-depth
interview, as we consider the technique to be flexible,
unstructured and suitable for collecting the information
required for our work. Moreover, in-depth interview was
able to identify the underlying factors related to informa-
tion technology adoption and to detect relations between
the identified factors (Pettigrew, 1985; Yin, 1984).
In this research, we used techniques such as triangulation
and the literature review to safeguard the reliability and
validity of the results. To improve the reliability of the data
collection instrument, and as has been done in previous
research (Cragg and King, 1993), we used a triangulated
data collection procedure based on well-organised inter-
views with various respondents from each firm. Thus, we
interviewed a minimum of two and a maximum of three
individuals from each firm. Specifically, we interviewed the
Information Technology Manager and up to two more
managers from each firm. In order to ensure the internal
and external validity of the results, the research team
carried out a prior review of the work relating to
information technology adoption and implementation.
Likewise, we used a relatively high number of cases (15),
in order to replicate the results obtained.
4. Research findings
When we report the results of the research process we shall
bear in mind those results relating to the adoption decision,
on the one hand, and those to do with the implementation
through the transcription of the interviews carried out. Each
of the aspects identified has been illustrated with a quotation
from the interviews (see also Tables 1 and 2).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
244 S. Bruque, J. Moyano / Technovation 27 (2007) 241–253

Table 1
Factors related to information technology (IT) adoption

Factors Family firms Cooperative firms

Management role (MR)
 Implementation of Quality Management Systems requires a large amount of information, so that they could act
as one of the triggers of IT adoption (IT Manager, F13; Administration Manager, F6; Quality and New
Technology Manager, F5)
 Professionalisation processes as the origin of growth and IT adoption for family firms (Quality and New
Technology Manager, F5; IT Manager, F13; HR Manager, F5)

 Participation of member-workers in the capital.

Coinciding ownership, management and workers
favours IT adoption through a higher commitment
(Administration Manager, F15; Data Processing
Manager, F11)

Technological leader role
(TLR)
Technology strategy (TS)
 IT leader or champion responsible for convincing the rest of the firm about the need for change (HR Manager,
F3; Chief Executive, F7; General Manager, F13)
 IT leader may coincide with a member of the family (Chief Executive, F7; General Manager, F13)
 Formal procedures of benchmarking precede adoption decision (Purchasing Manager, F11; General Manager,
F11)

Training & socialisation  Scarcity of qualified personnel as an inhibitor for IT adoption decision (General Manager, F13; Organisation
(T&S) Manager, F3)

Size of firm/need for growth  IT adoption in response to the tensions provoked by the growth, which has to do with pressure exerted on the firm
(S/G) by its competitors (HR Manager, F3; Production Manager, F14; Administration Manager, F8; IT Manager, F8)
 Creation of new departments during the change process with the incorporation of new personnel fosters IT
adoption (Production Manager, F14; Personnel & Administration Manager, F1; Marketing Manager, F5)

During the research process, we identified external or
environmental factors, and internal factors, as was described
in Section 2. Although we focus here on the internal aspects,
the complexity of an organisational analysis such as this
will occasionally make it necessary for us to refer to the
external factors, such as, pressure exerted on the firm by its
competitors, suppliers or customers.
4.1. Factors associated with information technology
adoption
First, we consider the origin of the adoption process. In
many of the firms analysed the respondents mentioned that
the decision to adopt information technology was made in
response to the tensions provoked by the growth of the
firm. We should also note that this growth was promoted
because the firm had developed proactive change strategies
based on diversification and/or internationalisation due to
pressure exerted by competitors, suppliers or customers.
‘‘What’s clear is that if you stay closed in a tiny
environment, then what you need is tiny. If you start
opening up, you obviously need new technologies, new
tools (y) It’s basically that, our need to grow, what
made us invest in new technologies and start changing
our mentality.’’ HR Manager (F3).
tion of new personnel into the organisational structure, and
these employees have played a critical part in the
technological development that has occurred:
‘‘Six years ago a study was made of this firm and they
saw that it had grown too fast for the type of
management that it had then, I mean, er, it was a
typical type of workshop management. Because of this,
they offered me a post—I’d been working in a multi-
national. Well, at that time there were a number of
things that it was pretty clear had to be done, such as for
example changing the technology.’’ Production Man-
ager (F14).
Likewise, the adoption process tended to be led by a
‘‘technological leader’’ or ‘‘champion’’ responsible for
convincing the rest of the firm about the need for change.
The champion’s role was more important when they
supported the introduction of information technology
unequivocally, firmly and decisively, so that the rest of
the firm was convinced of the need to adopt it.
‘‘Here, the person that is most identified with techno-
logical change is the Chief Executive. The CEO’s
committed to this group of firms, and involved with
the group.’’ HR Manager (F3).

The need to grow tended to coincide in time with the In the case of family firms, the role of technology
creation of new departments and hence with the incorpora- innovator could coincide with a member of the family.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S. Bruque, J. Moyano / Technovation 27 (2007) 241–253 245

Table 2
Factors related to IT implementation

Factors Family firms Cooperative firms

Management role (MR)  New IT is implemented more rationally when it is introduced in conjunction with a Quality Management System
(Quality and New Technologies Manager, F5; Marketing Manager, F5)
 Technological crisis and technological optimism cycles, which interfere with the implementation process
(Organisation manager, F7; IT Manager, F8)

Training & Socialisation  Staff renovation is the main means of employee socialisation in terms of technological change, rather than actions
(T&S) aiming to change the attitudes of older workers (Quality and New Technologies Manager, F5; Administration
Manager, F1)
 Socialisation and training usually go together. Basic on-the-job instruction or pyramidal systems are useful not
only to transfer knowledge but also for socialisation purposes during IT implementation (HR Manager, F3;
Technician, Users Solution Centre, F3; Production Manager, F14; General Manager, F4; Quality Manager, F15)
 Job rotation is a key aspect during socialisation and training in IT. Workers who do not adapt satisfactorily
return to their original positions, which have an exemplary and even punitive effect (Chief Executive, F13; IT
Manager, F9)
 Worker’s age as an explanatory factor for failure to adapt, mainly in extreme cases. Employees of an intermediate
age do not have great difficulty in adapting to technology innovations (Organisation Manager, F3; Technician,
User Solution Centre, F3; General Manager, F10; General Manager, F13)
 A greater involvement and knowledge about the business aspects on the part of the IT supplier/vendor ease IT
implementation (Technician, User Solutions Centre, F3; IT Manager, F8)

 Exemplary behaviours of family members regarding  Involvement of workers during implementation by

new IT use are seen as a motivating factor for older means of pyramidal systems taking advantage of
workers who have to adapt to the change higher commitment and participation in
(Technician, User solution centre, F3) cooperative firms (Technician, User Solution
Centre, F3)
 Age factor may be affected also by the level of
commitment and motivation among the members
of the cooperative firm (General Manager, F13;
Production Manager, F14)

Impact on power/hierarchy
structures (P&H)
 Fear of some managers or employees that they will lose part of responsibilities, power or recognition of the work
they did before the new technology was introduced (Chief Executive, F7; Quality and New Technology Manager,
F5)
 New technology implementation felt as a threat to family members who are reluctant to change (Chief Executive,
F7; General Manager, F13)

‘‘I think it’s the management, and in particular I’d have
to say my brother and me. Because computers, you
know, X is a bit lost really, and as for my father, don’t
mention computing to him! He’s more a big-decisions
man, if you see what I mean.’’ Chief Executive (F7).
‘‘Well, the driving force for that, it’s us really. We’re
three brothers, one is here, another’s in production in
charge of this area, and there’s another person in the
office, and then there’s me, who is sort of above
everybody. And so it’s, er, my brother who’s in
production and me who perhaps really push for this
thing and who ask for things, you know? The ones who
are pushing for change.’’ General Manager (F13).
A common feature that tended to accompany the
adoption process had to do with establishing procedures
to imitate firms from the same or different sectors that had
already successfully implemented information technology:
‘‘Before carrying out the change we were looking at
some firms that had already introduced it, in Alicante,
Granada, Malaga, Ciudad Real, Madrid and in Austria,
where the supplier of the technology is.’’ Purchasing
Manager (F11).
The process of adopting information technology was
occasionally linked to an intense professionalisation
process, particularly in family firms. Growth, professiona-
lisation and adoption of new technology tended to
converge in time, so that we could say that there was a
cause–effect relation between professionalisation and the
other variables (growth and information technology
adoption):
‘‘Yes, we started out as, er, a family firm, and practically
all the workers were friends of the bosses and that, you
know, and then the point comes when a number of
managers arrive and they evaluate the posts there are,
and they make a more detailed selection, which moves
away from this family-type firm—that’s left behind a
bit—and they start giving it the structure of a company.
It starts consolidating, with its command structures and
its professionals working, you know, with its workers.’’
Quality and New Technologies Manager (F5).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
246 S. Bruque, J. Moyano / Technovation 27 (2007) 241–253
Another internal element related to information technol-
ogy adoption had to do with the previous implementation
of quality systems both in family and cooperative firms. As
a general rule, these quality systems required a large
amount of information, so that they could act as one of the
triggers of information technology adoption.
‘‘No, but the program came precisely for that reason,
thinking that one of its benefits would be that it would
serve to implement a quality system. Yes, because X [the
General Manager] has said so on various occasions, that
it would be good to put in a quality system, such as ISO
9000 or similar, but one of the conditions of the
program was precisely that.’’ Information Technologies
Manager (F13).
The participation of the member–workers in the capital
of their cooperative firm was also seen as a catalyst of
technological innovation. Some respondents felt that the
fact that the ownership, management and workers coin-
cided could favour the introduction of technological
innovations.2 This situation became even more evident in
the case of workers’ cooperatives than in suppliers’ or
clients’ cooperatives.
‘‘Yes, of course. Because they know they’re risking their
own homes. It’s not the same: well, here they pay me,
and in the other [firm] they don’t. It’s different. They’re
all going 100 per cent here because it’s their money on
the line in any decisions taken, do you see what I mean?
And you know it’s your share, it’s your firm.’’
Administration Manager (F15).
The above factors acted as facilitators of information
technology adoption. However, there might also be some
elements that inhibited adoption. One of these was the scarcity
of qualified personnel in a particular geographical area.
‘‘There aren’t enough specialised people either, because I
know people [firms] that have the same [ERP] program,
(y) and another firm has come along and taken one of
their workers, because, er, I mean working with this type
of program brings you problems like that, because it
isn’t working from day one either, either that or don’t
get it, which is what many people [firms] are scared of
too, they don’t get a type of program because they say,
ok, so I’ve got it now, it’s worth h70,000, but what do I
do with it if I can’t find qualified people?’’ General
Manager (F13).
4.2. Factors associated with information technology
implementation
Once the firm had taken the decision to adopt the new
technology, it embarked on the implementation stage. A
2
In this respect, Ferneley and Bell (2006) point out that for this to be
possible the owner–manager needs to achieve a level of technical under-
standing, they need to nurture an organisational culture that supports their
staff in the utilisation of their current and potential skill sets.
number of factors played a part in the speed and final
success of this stage, many of them linked to internal
aspects, directly associated with the culture and socialisa-
tion processes of the staff in family and cooperative firms.
One of the first aspects to note was that the respondents
recognised the importance of cultural values as either
inducers or inhibitors. However, a very interesting finding
was that the managers considered that staff renovation is
the main means of employee socialisation in terms of
technological change, rather than actions aimed to change
the attitudes of their older workers.
‘‘Yes, there were many people, particularly in the
beginning, who were a bit reluctant, you know? You
would say to them: listen, you’ve got to do it like this, or
we’re going to implement this like that, and them,
because of their ideology and all that, they were
reluctant to change, you know? And so there was a
very intense stage at the beginning of mental prepara-
tion of the staff, to raise their awareness, and that was
really tough. The point is, once the firm is in that
dynamic then obviously the new staff that are coming in
start with that ideology, those guidelines, those objec-
tives.’’ Quality and New Technologies Manager (F5).
Socialisation and training are two processes that went
together. In fact, training—which is normally direct,
through basic on-the-job instruction—served not only to
transfer knowledge but also to inculcate the values and
technological culture of the firm.
‘‘As for the training, we have made a massive effort (y)
We’re going to invest even more resources in training, so
that we cany try to see if we can recycle the people that
are finding it very difficult to adapt to the thing [the
technological change]. And, well, the new generations
that are coming in to teach them as well, because, you
know, nowadays the cultural level is not all that counts,
on top of that they have to learn the business culture,
and we’re going to try to adapt everybody with this
training. With this type of people [the older workers] it’s
more difficult, not just because they were used to
working a certain way but because they often reach a
point in which they don’t feel they can do it (y) and
that makes them just give up, and yes, it’s very difficult
for them to integrate, and I think it’s a question of
changing their mentality.’’ HR Manager (F3).
In some cases, particularly in cooperative firms that took
into account the involvement of the workers by means of a
pyramidal system, instructors from different categories
were chosen, and they taught the workers at lower
hierarchical levels. This method had the advantage that
the knowledge acquired by the workers was more solid,
since they had had to explain the new technology
previously to their colleagues.3
3
Oyelaran-Oyeyinka and Lal (2006) find that non-formal learning is the
dominant form of mastering new technologies.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S. Bruque, J. Moyano / Technovation 27 (2007) 241–253
‘‘There were eight people, five from the zones [branches]
and three from the central services. The idea was that
these eight people would be trained, and once ready, in
turn, for each region a number of instructors B were
selected, and then these instructors B give the training
course to various offices. In total, from these eight
people we had at the end 350 people trained.’’
Technician, User Solutions Centre (F3).
Furthermore, in other cases firms used formalised plans
to incorporate personnel that specifically included informa-
tion technology training.
‘‘For example, in the factory there’re now some training
plans for incorporating new staff, so that whenever a
new person comes in they have some papers containing
summaries of all that you have to know in that section,
you know? So that the process of effective incorporation
of a new person in their job is much quicker, and so
much more efficient than it was before.’’ Production
Manager (F14).
Another key aspect in the socialisation and in the
training in information technology had to do with the job
rotation system. Firms tended to implant a system for
rotating the workers in the positions in which information
technology had been introduced. The workers who did not
adapt satisfactorily returned to their original positions.
This process had an exemplary and even a punitive effect in
terms of convincing the staff of the importance of the new
values of adaptation and technological change.
‘‘What we do have continually is staff rotation, there are
people that don’t adapt well to the jobs and so they
change, er, back to the same place where they started.’’
Chief Executive (F13).
From the interviews analysed, we founded that age
might be an explanatory factor of some workers’ failure to
adapt, but only in extreme cases. In other words, the
younger workers were better predisposed, while the older
ones generally had more problems.
‘‘I remember a point—it might seem really silly but it
was just crazy—when we started using the mouse. That
was massive depressions all round, because they just
couldn’t find them [i.e., the device did not register in
their minds as having the function it has], quite old
people, people who had had to work with the keyboard,
and could do that well enough, but as for using the
mouse to go into Windows and move about Windows,
there was just no wayy’’ Organisation Manager (F3).
Some of the respondents claimed that technological
adaptation was easier for younger people. In contrast,
some managers felt that employees of an intermediate age
did not have great difficulty in adapting to technological
innovations, especially when the older members of the
family firm were used to information technology.
247
‘‘The age: in principle I think it works against some
people, although there are older people who can use the
program easily, and younger people who can’t. But, in
principle, if we were to describe the average user that
can handle the program easily, it would be a young
person who has used Windows before, they find it easier.
However, for older people, the fact of seeing us [two
brothers of 50 and 53 years old] using the new software
is a good motivation’’. Technician, User Solutions
Centre (F3).
For cooperative firms, respondents did recognise that the
age factor might be affected by the level of motivation
among the members of the firm.
‘‘The main thing is for the people to be motivated. We
see all sorts, it’s just as bad to be too young as to be too
old, what’s important is for the people to be positive and
that’s that. I don’t notice any difference between our
older and younger people, the important thing is for
them to like it and that’s that. And that’s why they’re in
their jobs, because they’re the ones that say what they
think, because it’s people that you see they have
qualities, and at the end they are the owners as well.’’
General Manager (F13).
Often we saw problems in the training provided by the
supplier of the technology. In this respect, some respon-
dents would like to see a greater involvement and greater
knowledge about the business aspects (not just the
technical area) on the part of the supplier.
‘‘That’s where we did have a bit of a complaint, because
the training could’ve been better. The point is that they
haven’t been in offices [in this sector], they just make the
program, and that’s that, and in a lot of practical cases
they hadn’t got the faintest idea. We had a bit of a
problem there, you know, but in the end it turned out
ok, as well as could be expected.’’ Technician, User
Solutions Centre (F3).
During the implementation process tensions often
appeared, especially in family firms, as a result of the fear
of some managers or employees that they could lose part of
the responsibilities, power or recognition that had gone
with the work they did before the new technology was
introduced. This factor can be regarded as an obstacle in
the implementation process.
‘‘Generally, when people see that it makes life easier
they accept it immediately [a new ERP Management
System], but you always find somebody who had won a
certain amount of power and, er, he was pretty
comfortable, you could say he moved around very
comfortably in his environment, so when you change the
situation a bit for themy I must admit that the head of
administration in the firm finally—although the rela-
tionship with him is still great and he is still collaborat-
ing with us—left the firm [due to the implementation of
information technology]’’. Chief Executive (F7).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
248 S. Bruque, J. Moyano / Technovation 27 (2007) 241–253
At other times, however, the managers used the
technology as a way of motivating the employees most
involved in the change. The motivation was achieved in
some cases by recognition, and in others by improving the
professional careers of those employees with a better
attitude towards technological change. Among employees
with a better attitude to change, we found those forming
part of the internal training systems.
‘‘People who demonstrate that they adapt well to the
changes have been changing jobs and improving. In fact,
I think they appreciate that change now. I [a family
member] motivated them and they appreciate it that we
give them the tools and possibilities, so that if they
decide to leave the firm tomorrow or start up their own
business, they will have the basis to do that, unlike some
others.’’ General Manager (F13).
The situations of tension in the structure of the firm
worsened at particular points in the implementation
process. It is interesting to note that these moments of
‘‘technological crisis’’ were both preceded and followed by
other moments of technological optimism (or even
euphoria). The optimism–pessimism profile gave rise to a
cycle about which various respondents coincided.
‘‘The point is, there are two stages when there’s a
change: a first phase when everything’s great, it’s really
impressive, then 15, 20, 30 days go by and people say it’s
no good, what we had before was much better, this
system is no good, and then after six months or a year,
when all the problems have been ironed outy the
implementation is completed successfully.’’ Organisa-
tion Manager (F7).
Apart from the factors mentioned above, the implemen-
tation of quality systems not only influenced the adoption
of information technology, but also its implementation.
Some respondents pointed out that information technology
was implemented more rationally when it was introduced
in conjunction with a quality system. The quality system
implied a change in the process flow of the firm, and hence
in the flow of information, which in turn influenced the
development and adoption of information technology by
the firm itself.
‘‘Then, we adopted the quality management certification
systems. We started an ISO 9000 certification to
control all our processes, we integrated everything,
you could say we developed our own system—specific
software to control the production, integrating the
warehouse, the invoicing, the accounting, the lot. And
that was an in-house program where you could say
we can adapt to all our customers’ needs really
fast, really quickly. If a customer asks you for some-
thing very specific, well, you have the capacity to
respond immediately.’’ Quality and New Technologies
Manager (F5).
5. Information technology adoption and implementation
model for SMEs
From the analysis carried out here, it is possible to
deduce a model incorporating the largest number of factors
detected in the fieldwork, as well as their respective
interactions. This model is shown in Tables 1 and 2, as
well in Fig. 1. In the tables, we have grouped the
explanations of the different concepts that we have found
with respect to six large factors (management role,
technological leader role, technology strategy, training
and socialisation, size of firm/need for growth and impact
on power/hierarchy structures). Table 1 refers to the
factors relating to information technology adoption and
Table 2 refers to the factors relating to information
technology implementation. In both the tables, we have
also included the code of some of the respondents
supporting each element referred to by the adoption and
implementation factors. Each of the concepts identified
may be linked to cooperative firms, family firms, or both,
depending on the column where they are (first, second or
both).
Fig. 1 illustrates the groups of factors identified in Tables
1 and 2, as well as the specific concepts that were identified
during the interviews. Fig. 1 has two distinct parts. In the
first part (the top half of the figure) we can see the factors
detected that may be related to the decision to adopt a new
information and communications technology. In the
bottom half of the figure are those factors that may
explain the success of the implementation process, where
success is understood to mean a rapid and effective use of
the new technology, bearing in mind the objectives pursued
in its adoption. We first describe the system of factors
explaining the adoption of information technology in
SMEs, and then subsequently, we describe the factors that
may be associated with the implementation of these
technologies.
As we noted in Section 4, both external and internal
factors can intervene in the adoption decision. Looking
exclusively at the internal factors, the growth of the firm
can be regarded as one of the main driving forces in a firm’s
adoption of new technology. However, there are other
internal elements, such as the technology strategy (a
proactive strategy will favour the adoption), the support
of the managers (especially the technology leaders), the
professionalisation of the family firm, participation and
commitment in cooperative firms, or the implementation of
quality systems. At the same time, firms tend to implement
systems to follow the competition by means of technolo-
gical benchmarking procedures. It is interesting to note
that according to the analysis, these above-mentioned
factors may interact with each other and at the same time
with the adoption decision. Thus, professionalisation and
growth are two phenomena that are difficult to disentangle,
since they normally appear closely interwoven, a situation
that also occurs with the implementation of quality systems
and the adoption of new information technology.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S. Bruque, J. Moyano / Technovation 27 (2007) 241–253 249

Organisational boundary External factors

TLR : Champion or
technological leaders role
Managerial support

TS : Technological
benchmarking
S/G: Growth

TS : Technology
strategy
MR : Commitment,
Firm size
participation in cooperative
firms

MR : Professionalisation of
the family firm

S/G: Organisational
restructuring
New IT adoption decision
New IT-related
MR : Quality
Optimism-pessimism technological

departments
Management
System
Implementation
ADOPTION PROCESS
cycle

T&S : Job rotation

T&S : Staff average age

T&S: Staff socialisation process

T&S : IT training
(pyramidal, classrom, basic on-the-job
T&S: Staff renovation training)
-Provider IT training
-IT training as a way of staff
P&H : Impact on power and indoctrination
hierarchy structures
(+/-)

GROUPS OF FACTORS Success of the implentation process

MR: Management Role
TLR: Technology Leader Role
TS: Technology Strategy
T&S:Training & Socialisation
S/G: Size/Need to Grow
P&H: Impact on Power and Hierarchy IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS
Structures

Fig. 1. Integrative model.

 ARTICLE IN PRESS
250 S. Bruque, J. Moyano / Technovation 27 (2007) 241–253
On the other hand, the factors associated with the
success of the implementation process have to do mainly
with the socialisation of the employees in aspects concern-
ing the values of adaptation and acceptance of technolo-
gical change. This socialisation is achieved fundamentally
through training, in which various agents intervene, and
which is conducted in various modes. The agents are both
internal and external (the supplier of the technology).
Meanwhile, the training modes identified are on-the-job,
classroom and pyramidal training. It is interesting to note
that the managers also occasionally use training as a form
of indoctrination of their workers, in an attempt to create
an attitude favourable to change among them. The effect of
training may be moderated by other factors, such as job
rotation (especially when this is exemplary or punitive), age
(especially in extreme cases), and staff renovation (which
fosters the socialisation processes favourable to technology
implementation). We should also highlight that, as can be
seen in the bottom half of the figure, technological change
normally has an impact on the structures of hierarchy and
power, which could negatively affect the success of the
implementation process.
6. Discussion and conclusions
With this work, we have aimed to contribute to the
literature on the determinants underlying information
technology adoption and implementation in family and
cooperative firms. The results of the research allow us to
draw a number of relevant conclusions, which will in turn
lead to recommendations for both researchers and practi-
tioners. In this section, we describe the main conclusions of
our work, while in the last section we outline the most
important implications for management and the future
trends.
With regards the internal factors, and in the context of
SMEs, our findings demonstrate that various elements
influence the adoption of information technology. First,
there is a broad consensus on the part of the respondents
that the adoption is motivated by the growth experienced
by the firm. Growth makes it necessary for firms to adopt
new and more powerful technological solutions. This
conclusion is in line with other research demonstrating
the importance of size in technology adoption models for
SMEs (Premkumar, 2003).
However, there are other internal elements that have
received little attention in the literature on information
technology adoption. Among these, we should mention
two processes that are occasionally directly associated with
growth: the professionalisation processes (Anderson and
Reeb, 2004) of the management in family SMEs and the
implementation of total quality systems. Both phenomena,
which we include in the management role factor, create a
new work structure that affects the flows of decision-
making and information in the firm. A logical response
from the managers to these modifications would be to
implement information technology that facilitates and
rationalises the interchange of information in the new
structure.
Another related management role concept is the owner-
ship structure of cooperative firms, which leads to a higher
level of commitment and participation among the mem-
ber–workers in their firm, and consequently, a stronger
involvement in technology adoption (see Fig. 1). This
relation is the strongest in workers’ cooperatives and
consumer cooperatives in which cooperativised activity
makes up member–owners’ largest source of income
(Bruque Cámara et al., 2004). This result is related to the
one obtained by O’Regan et al. (2006b), in which
empowerment culture is associated with innovation.
Other internal elements that foster technological adop-
tion in SMEs have to do with the introduction of new
departments (occasionally unipersonal) relating to the
technological change. In addition, the respondents mention
the importance of the managers’ explicit support for the
implementation, especially when one or several family
members (or a small group of people) become the
standard-bearers of change, convince others of its advan-
tages and counteract the states of generalised pessimism
during situations of crisis (technological ‘‘champions’’).
These findings are supported by previous studies that also
demonstrate the importance of technology leaders in
adoption processes (Premkumar et al., 1994; O’Regan et
al., 2006b). We have also identified some factors linked
with the technology strategy, such as the imitation of firms
that have already implemented the technology (Swanson
and Ramiller, 1997), or the proactive orientation of the
strategy towards technological change (Teo and Pian, 2003;
O’Regan et al. (2006a).
This work also presents a series of results concerning the
implementation process of the technology. The research
carried out here allows us to offer a number of facilita-
tors of technology implementation in cooperative and
family SMEs. Among these, we might mention training
systems, which not only allow for a transfer of the
knowledge required to make use of the new tools, but
also modify the workers’ attitude towards technological
change. The transmission of knowledge and the improve-
ment in attitudes foster the values of flexibility and
adaptation to change, which could be called a positive
socialisation process (Schein, 1968; Mintzberg, 1979). This
process can, however, be affected by elements such as
the average age of the workers, the degree to which the
staff are renovated, the job rotation system (particularly
if the rotations are exemplary or punitive), and especially
by the modification of the hierarchy and power structures
(Doolin, 2004). We should also point out that the managers
interviewed prefer socialisation in the new technologies
to start from zero, with workers that have recently arrived
in the firm, rather than re-socialising current workers.
This finding could also be explained by the learning
curve, which shows that the level of learning is relatively
greater at the beginning of the individual’s working life
(Argote, 1999).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S. Bruque, J. Moyano / Technovation 27 (2007) 241–253
7. Managerial implications and future trends
The conclusions obtained here allow us to offer a series
of points that may prove useful for practitioners respon-
sible for processes of information technology adoption and
implementation. In this section, we outline our main
recommendations for managing the adoption and imple-
mentation of information technology. First, managers of
family firms could accelerate the adoption of new
information technology by encouraging the professionali-
sation of their firms. According to the results we have
obtained here, family firms that have experienced profes-
sionalisation to a greater extent tend to welcome techno-
logical change. Second, SME managers of both
cooperative and family businesses can exploit the impulse
to renovate that is generated in the implementation stages
of quality systems. As we observed above, the implementa-
tion of quality systems generates the need to re-organise the
information flows, as well as the interfaces of communica-
tion and presentation of the information. This renewal of
the formal information and communication structures may
create an environment favourable to the introduction of
deep technological changes that are compatible with the
new quality system. Third, cooperative and family firms
can mitigate the disadvantages of their small size by
undertaking active benchmarking policies in firms that
have successfully implemented similar technological
changes, either in other sectors or in other geographical
areas. Likewise, building a close and smooth relationship
with the technology supplier may help the firm to remain
up-to-date with innovations and their possible applications
to its business. At the same time, the SME’s policies of
benchmarking and building closer relationships with the
technology supplier can be fostered if it establishes a
complete network of relationships (by means of collabora-
tion agreements, strategic alliances, joint ventures, etc.)
with firms that are innovative in information technology.
Equally, there may be a positive association between
networks of SMEs and technological learning (Chipika and
Wilson, 2006).
With regards the implementation of new technology, we
can also outline a number of implications. First, all
technological changes that substantially alter the structure
of the firm must be accompanied by modes of training that
involve all the employees, such as the pyramidal training
procedures described in previous sections. Second, family
members may lead the process of technological change
acting as an example for the rest of the staff to follow.
Third, cooperative and family managers can prevent any
adverse reactions from certain workers who may feel
threatened by the implementation of new information
technology. In these cases, it may be useful to start a
campaign of communication in which the affected parties
are informed about the effects of the technological change
in the tasks and responsibilities of their post, as well as in
their professional status. Third, the upper and middle
management of the firm need to know, and hence
251
anticipate, the consequences of the optimism–pessimism
cycles that are commonly observed in the diffusion of
innovations involving information technology. Merely
knowing about these optimism–pessimism cycles is, in all
probability, not enough to be able to avoid them, but it will
prove useful for preventing reactions of excessive euphoria
or defeatism that may hamper the change process. Fourth,
interaction with more advanced firms may also be a good
idea in implementation processes. Thus, just before the
implementation, the firm could arrange for the managers
or workers who are to lead the change to have ‘‘techno-
logical stays’’ in advanced firms or public institutions.
Finally, it may prove useful to coincide the technological
change process with periods of staff renovation, since
technological change tends to be quicker when it involves
staffs who have recently been taken on, and who are on
average younger.
This paper is not without its limitations, which we now
outline. First, it suffers from the problems of qualitative
work, in particular, regarding the generalisation of the
results. Second, the methodology used does not ensure the
exhaustiveness of the model. Third, we have been able to
identify a number of interrelations between the variables in
this current research, but it has not been possible to
measure the intensity of these interrelations. Likewise, the
model has been deduced in a particular geographic context.
It is necessary to validate the model for other geographical
areas and for sectors not considered in the present work.
These limitations could serve as starting points for future
research streams. Such research could be directed at
identifying new organisational factors, and also attempt
to measure the intensity of the relations that we have
detected. For this purpose, it would be advisable to
combine qualitative and quantitative methodologies, as
this would allow the researcher to get round the general-
isation problems mentioned above.
References
Amat, J., 1998. La Continuidad de la Empresa Familiar. Gestión 2000,
Barcelona.
Anderson, R.C., Reeb, D.M., 2004. Board composition: balancing family
influence in S&P 500 firms. Administrative Science Quarterly 49,
209–229.
Argote, L., 1999. Organizational Learning: Creating, Retaining and
Transferring Knowledge. Kluwer, Norwell, MA.
Barea-Tejeiro, J., Monzón-Campos, J.L., 2002. Informe de sı́ntesis sobre
la economı́a social en España en el año 2000. Ciriec, Valencia.
Bruque Cámara, S., Vargas Sánchez, A., Hernández Ortiz, M.J., 2004.
Organizational determinants of IT adoption in the pharmaceutical
distribution sector. European Journal of Information Systems 13,
133–146.
Bruque, S., Moyano, J., Vargas, A., Hernández, M.J., 2003. Ownership
structure, technological endowment and competitive advantage: do
democracy and business fit? Technology Analysis and Strategic
Management 15, 65–79.
Carayannis, E.G., Popescu, D., Sipp, C., Stewart, M., 2006. Technological
learning for entrepreneurial development (TL4ED) in the knowledge
economy (KE): case studies and lessons learned. Technovation 26 (4),
419–443.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
252 S. Bruque, J. Moyano / Technovation 27 (2007) 241–253
Central de Balances de Andalucı́a, 2004. 2000 referencias empresariales
de Andalucı́a: empresas lı́deres, gacela y de alto rendimiento. Obtenido
en /http://www.centraldebalancesdeandalucia.org/S, January 22,
2004.
Chipika, S., Wilson, G., 2006. Enabling technological learning among
light engineering SMEs in Zimbabwe through networking. Technova-
tion 26 (8), 969–979.
Coleman, S., Carsky, M., 1999. Sources of capital for small family-owned
businesses: evidence from the National Survey of Small Business
Finances. Family Business Review 12, 73–85.
Cragg, P.B., King, M., 1993. Small-firm computing: motivators and
inhibitors. MIS Quarterly March, 47–60.
Damanpour, F., 1991. Organizational innovation: a meta analysis of
determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal 34,
555–590.
Desai, C., Wright, G., Fletcher, K., 1998. Barriers to successful
implementation of database marketing: a cross-industry study.
International Journal of Information Management 18, 256–276.
Donckels, R., Fröhlich, E., 1991. Are family business really different?
European experiences from STRATOS. Family Business Review 4,
149–160.
Doolin, B., 2004. Power and resistance in the implementation of a medical
management information system. Information Systems Journal 14,
343–362.
European Commission, 2005. Gateway to the European Union, /http://
www.europa.eu.intS.
Farhoomand, F., Hrycyk, G.P., 1985. The feasibility of computers in the
small business environment. American Journal of Small Business 17,
15–22.
Ferneley, E., Bell, F., 2006. Using bricolage to integrate business and
information technology innovation in SMEs. Technovation 26 (2),
232–241.
Fink, D., 1998. Guidelines for the successful adoption of information
technology in small and medium enterprises. International Journal of
Information Management 18, 243–253.
Fletcher, K., Wright, C., 1995. Organizational, strategic and technical
barriers to successful implementation of Database Marketing. Inter-
national Journal of Information Management 15, 115–126.
Garcı́a-Gutiérrez, C., 1988–1989. El problema de la doble condición de los
socios-trabajadores (socios-proveedores y socios-consumidores) ante
la gerencia de la empresa cooperativa. Revesco 56–57, 83–121.
Grandon, E.E., Pearson, J.M., 2004. Electronic commerce adoption: an
empirical study of small and medium US business. Information and
Management 42, 197–216.
Hayne, S.C., Pollard, C.E., 2000. A comparative analysis of critical issues
facing Canadian information systems personnel: a national and global
perspective. Information and Management 38, 73–86.
Heck, R.K.Z., 1998. The Entrepreneurial Family. Family Business
Resources Publishing, Needham, MA.
Hovav, A., Patnayakuni, R., Schuff, D., 2004. A model of Internet
standards adoption: the case of IPv6. Information Systems Journal 14,
265–294.
Ibrahim, A., Ellis, W., 1994. Family Business Management. Concepts and
Practice. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque.
Kuan, K.K.Y., Chau, P.Y.K., 2001. A perception-based model for
EDI adoption in small business using a technology–organization–
environment framework. Information and Management 38,
507–521.
Lewis, R., Cockrill, A., 2002. Going global, remaining local: the impact of
e-commerce on small retail firms in Wales. Journal of International
Information Management 22 (3), 195–215.
Locke, E., Schweiger, D.M., 1979. Participation in decision-making: one
more look. In: Cummings, L.L., Staw, B.M. (Eds.), Research in
Organizational Behavior, Greenwich, pp. 265–339.
Mehrtens, J., Cragg, P.B., Mills, A.M., 2001. A model of Internet
adoption by SMEs. Information and Management 39, 165–176.
Mintzberg, H., 1979. The Structuring of Organizations (A Synthesis of the
Research). Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NY.
Mirvis, P.H., Sales, A.L., Hackett, E.J., 1991. The implementation and
adoption of new technology in organizations: the impact on people,
work and culture. Human Resource Management 30, 113–140.
Morgan, A., Colebourne, D., Thomas, B., 2006. The development of ICT
advisors for SME businesses: an innovation approach. Technovation
26 (8), 980–987.
Ogbonna, E., Harris, L.C., 2005. The adoption and use of information
technology: a longitudinal study of a mature family firm. New
Technology, Work and Employment 20 (1), 1–18.
O’Regan, N., Ghobadian, A., Gallear, D., 2006a. In search of drivers of
high growth in manufacturing SMEs. Technovation 26 (1), 30–41.
O’Regan, N., Ghobadian, A., Sims, M., 2006b. Fast tracking innovation
in manufacturing SMEs. Technovation 26 (2), 251–261.
Oyelaran-Oyeyinka, B., Lal, K., 2006. Learning new technologies by small
and medium enterprises in developing countries. Technovation 26 (2),
220–231.
Pitt, L., Van der merwe, R., Bretón, P., Salehi-Sanagari, E., Barnes, B.R.,
2006. Swedish bio tech SMEs: the veiled values in online networks.
Technovation 26 (5–6), 553–560.
Pettigrew, A.M., 1985. Contextualist research and the study of organiza-
tional change processes. In: Mumford, E. (Ed.), Research Methods in
Information Systems. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 53–78.
Powell, T.C., Dent-Micallef, A., 1997. Information technology as
competitive advantage: the role of human, business and technology
resources. Strategic Management Journal 18, 375–405.
Premkumar, G., 2003. A meta-analysis of research on information
technology implementation in small business. Journal of Organiza-
tional Computing and Electronic Commerce 13, 91–121.
Premkumar, G., Ramamurthy, K., Nilakanta, S., 1994. Implementation of
electronic data interchange. Journal of Management Information
Systems 11, 157–186.
Premkumar, G., Ramamurthy, K., Crum, M., 1997. Determinants of EDI
adoption in the transportation industry. European Journal of
Information Systems 6, 107–121.
Raymond, L., Bergeron, F., 1997. Global distribution systems: a field
study of their use and advantages in travel agencies. Journal of Global
Information Management 5, 23–33.
Riemenschneider, C.K., Harrison, D.A., Mykytyn Jr., P.P., 2003. Under-
standing IT adoption decisions in small business: integrating current
theories. Information and Management 40, 269–285.
Schein, E.H., 1968. Organizational socialization and the profession of
management. Industrial Management Review winter, 1–16.
Sekaran, U., 2000. Research Methods for Business. Wiley, New York.
Sharma, S., Rai, A., 2003. An assestment of the relationship between ISD
leadership characteristics and IS innovation adoption in organizations.
Information and Management 40, 391–401.
Sims, M.A., O’Regan, N., 2006. In search of gazelles using a research
DNA model. Technovation 26 (8), 943–954.
Soliman, K.S., Janz, B.D., 2004. An exploratory study to identify the
critical factors affecting the decision to establish Internet-based
interorganizational information systems. Information and Manage-
ment 41, 697–706.
Swanson, B., Ramiller, N.C., 1997. The organizing vision in information
systems innovation. Organization Science 8, 458–476.
Swanson, E.B., Wang, P., 2005. Knowing why and how to innovate with
packaged business software. Journal of Information Technology 20,
20–31.
Teo, T.S.H., Pian, Y., 2003. A contingency perspective on Internet
adoption and competitive advantage. European Journal of Informa-
tion Systems 12, 78–92.
Teo, T.S.H., Pian, Y., 2004. A model for web adoption. Information and
Management 41, 457–468.
Thong, Y.J.L., 1999. An integrated model of information systems
orientation and business use of the Internet: an empirical study.
International Journal of Electronic Commerce 4, 105–130.
Tung, L.L., Tan, J.H., Er, J.P.L., Lian, K., Turban, E., 2000. Adoption,
use and implementation of lotus notes in Singapore. International
Journal of Information Management 20 (5), 369–382.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S. Bruque, J. Moyano / Technovation 27 (2007) 241–253
Yin, R.K., 1984. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Sage
Publications, Newbury Park.
Young, D., Carr, Rainer Jr., R.K., 1999. Strategic implications of
electronic linkages. WinterInformation Systems Management Winter
61, 29–32.
Sebastián Bruque-Cámara is professor of Management in the
Department of Business Administration, Accounting and Socio-
logy at the University of Jaén (Spain). He currently conducts
research on organizational factors affecting IT adoption and
social networks effects on workers’ acceptance of technological
changes. His research has appeared in the European Journal of
Information Systems, Internet Research, Journal of High Techno-
logy Management Research and Strategic Management and
Technology Analysis Journal. e-mail: sbruque@ujaen.es
253
José Moyano-Fuentes is professor of Management in the
Department of Business Administration, Accounting and Socio-
logy at the University of Jaén (Spain). He currently conducts
research on the effect of the ownership structure on firm
performance. He also has interests on the role of technology in
organizations, with current emphasis involving social networks
influence on employees’ technology acceptance. His research has
appeared in the Administrative Science Quarterly (in press),
Journal of Management Studies, International Journal of Manage-
ment Reviews, and Strategic Management and Technology
Analysis. e-mail: jmoyano@ujaen.es