End User Support Usage

- ~ -- --- - -- --- - --- - - --- - , 146 Munkvold Chapter IX -::J End User Support Usage . o .c== ::as ==:: E~ ...- Robin Munkvold Nord-Trøndelag University College, Norway o.. ->>-a. :a8 co!! .- ..Q 't:I1II CDU u:: ::Ja. 't:Ia. 0111 0.0 CD ~c4 ..Q:J O" c-8 >-c III::J :ii't:l CD .= 't:I.- CDE c: Gi :J: a. ~0 J!j:J: .c::J 01.= 8':J! =.. c:(a. CD :::: gCD "Q...: ::J CD O~ ABSTRACT ~:5 This study explores how different end user qualities affect actual use of support sources in organizations. It identijies three qualities: information technologyskills; computer self-efficacy; information technology (IT) -involvement. Sources of support are divided in: formal sources of support; in/ormal sources of support; use oJ internal documentation and lise of external documentation. Hypotheses are tested empirically through a cross sectional study in a large Norwegian organization. The results show end user qualities in varying degree may affect the end users' choice of different support sources. The study also shows access to a computer expert and giving collegial support might be important factors for explaining the variation in the end users' choices of support services. III::J CDa. :E~ ae °0 C'I.. @';; -O .c..-010 0 ~'E a... O CD Oa. Copyright @ 2003. Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. -Gordon. Steve(Editor). COMPUTING INFORMATION Hershey, PA, USA: Idea Group Inc., 2003. p 146. -TECHNOLOGY: httD:/I.~ite.ebra,.v.com/lib/ntnl//Doc?id=I 0032055&DDI!=159 ---THE HUMAN SIDE. - - --- - - - - - - - -~--- End User Support Usage ---, 147 INTRODUCTION Support services are central elements of any organization. To be competitive, organizations need to optimise the use of the information technology (IT)-resources. The problem is, however, end users tend to spend a lot of their working hours fixing IT-related problems that has nothing to do with their actual work assignments. The employee's expertise and skills in using computer systems have become a critical factor for successful use of information technology in organizations (Cheney, Mann & Amoruso, 1986;Nelson & Cheney, 1987; Mirani & King, 1994). Gartner Group found that about 60 percent of the time end users spend in front of a computer will be to make it work satisfactorily and to leam how to use different programs (Kirwin, 1995). The solutions for solving these problems usually are to offer the employees training, education, assistance or guidance. Do these solutions solve our probierns? Some information systems (IS) researchers have studied the antecedents of variation inthe support needs of end users so that these needs can be better explained, predicted and fulfilled (Mirani & King, 1994). Maybe one should look at the end user's actual use of support and make this the basis for figuring out ways to make end users more effective in their daily work. Why do end users choose different support services? Is it due to variations in end user qualities (Le., skills, self-efficacy, involvement, etc.)? Is it the qualities of the actual support (context, vicinity, sources, etc.)? Or could it be aresult of the end user's relation to the support personnei or the competence of the support personnel that makes the end user choose his source of support? These questions are many that must be answered when searching to find eauses of variation in the end user' s use of different support sources. Most literature view end user computing (EVC) support from an overall organizational perspective. Information centre (IC) approaches, generally, do not take into account differences among users, when designing and providing support services (Mirani & King, 1994). To make end users more effective, auseful approach could be to map the causes for the end user's need for different kinds of support. By finding these causes one could improve end user qualities and, therefore increase effectiveness. My focus is on end user qualities, and I aim to find out whether basic end user qualities can affect the way end users choose sources of support or solve their IT-related probierns. That is, are there any basic end user qualities that can be of significance when they choose their sources of support? The objective of this study is to identify end user qualities (variables) that may be important for explaining differences in usage of different support sources. I will address three different qualities that might be of significance, when end users solve their probierns. These qualities include: IT-skills, computer self-efficacy and ITinvolvement. Copyright ~ 2003, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic fonns without written pennission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. - -- -- Gordon. Steve(Editor). COMPUTING INFORMATION Hershey. PA. USA: Idea Grollp Inc.. 2003. p 147. TECHNOLOGY: httv://site.ebrarv.com/lib/ntllll/Doc ?id=10032055&vvl!= 160 THE HUMAN SIDE. - - ' -~- ~~- --- - -- -- 148 Munkvold THEORY, RESEARCH QUESTIONS, CONCEPTUAL MODEL AND HYPOTHESIS End User Computing Support - . :J o .c== ~ca === E~ ~.o~ ->o >oD. eIII U o e~ .J:I "ti III CIIU u= :J D. "tiD. 0111 0.0 CII ~ . CII~ .c;:) o~ e~ >oe 1\1:J ::æ: "ti CII .= "ti.~E ~~ CIICII 111D. !!! 111 S$ .c:J til.!:: :::-! <Ce. CII : ~ gCII ~.: :J CII 0-; &:5 1\1:J To measure the use of different sources of support, EVC needed a more precise detinition. Many studies show different perspectives on EVC support (Arnoudse & Oulette, 1986;Bruton, 1995;Doll & Torkzadeh, 1993;Heie & Heistad, 1998;Larsen, 1989; Smith, 1997;Winter, Chudoba & Gutek, 1997). Through a thorough analysis of the different perspectives on EVC support, a partitioning ofEVC support was needed. Doll and Torkzadeh (1993) divides EVC support into three categories. These are: Consultation . .. Training Documentation This survey seeks to measure ad hoc support needs. The category Training is therefore irrelevant. Consultation and Documentation were singled out as the types ofEU C support that would be tested for in this survey. Further analysis showed that Consultation and Documentation could be divided in formal vs. informal sources of support and personnei vs. impersonal sources of support. This resulted in four different types of EVC support sources: Personal and informal consultation with colleagues. Personal and formal consultation with computer experts. Use of external documentation (impersonal and informal). Vse ofinternal documentation (impersonal and formal). . . .. Through this review EVC support was detined to be: All sorts of IT-help that an end user receives or uses in his work to so/ve arising problems or acquire expertise and skilIs within IS-use, so that they easier can achieve organizational goals. GID. :!2~ ~E Co N~ -o .c.- This detinition limits the perspective on EVC support and makes it somewhat easier to measure. @)';; .-til 111 111 ~.~ OGI OD. End User Qualities As the purpose ofthis study is to tind out whether different end user qualities can explain the differences in their choice of support sources, it is equally important to tind these qualities. There exists some literature on EVC support, but not very much on the end user's choices of support depending on his basic qualities (Le., skills, etc.). Winter Copyright ~ 2003, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic fonns without written pennission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. -~---~ --- GOI'don. Steve(Editor). COMPUTING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: Hershey. PA, USA: Idea Gro//p Inc., 2003. p 148. htttJ://site.ebrarv.comilib/lItnu/Doc ?id= J0032055&tJtJJ!= J61 --THE HUMAN SIDE. - - -- - - --- --- ---- End User Support Usage 149 Table 1: EUC Support Categor;zation Infonnal Personal ConslIltation with colleaglles, or other Consllltation with ISnon professionallT :J o . .s::.== :t::ca ==:: E'§, ...- Fonnal workers I professionals Impersonal Use of external docllmentation not Use of internal docllmentation developed by the local IC. This could developed by the local IC be manuals,periodicals, etc. l o.. ->o >oa. cO til U eGl .:c 'C til Glu u= :Ja. 'Ca. O til 0.0 GI ~c4 .c::) o'" e~ >oe tII:J :E 'CGI .= 'C.- GlE >... i~ GI Ul "'GI SUl .s::.:J .~.S =.::= C(å. GI :~ gGl ~.: :J GI o~ <;:5 tII:J Gla. :2,! SE °0 N... -O .s::..@)~ .-C'lUI Ul !>. 's a.... OGI Oa. et al. (1997) concluded in their survey that even though training and support could have improved the end user's computer knowledge, it is clear that it has not lead to high computer knowledge. Their opinion is that it is important for the support personnei to have some knowledge about the end user' s computer skills to give them proper support. It then seems reasonably obvious that computer skills might affect the end user's choice of different support services. I therefore ask: Do IT-skills influence the end user's choice of support services? Ollewould believethat end users with low computer knowledge and skills would need more support than those with high computer knowledge and skills. Øystein Sørebø wrote a paper in 1996 called: "End-User Computing and the perceived need for support services: Toward an explanation of the independent-user paradox." The qualities he believed to affect the perceived need for support services include: IT-involvement, computer self-efficacy, and informational influence (from colleagues). Sørebø questions whether the end user's IT-involvement might have a significant influence on the perceived need for support services. Earlier studies have shown that involvement affects information searching (Laurent & Kapferer, 1985; Zaichkowsky, 1986).Finding the solution tocomputerrelated problems, through the use of different support sources, could easily be compared with information searching. Zaichkowsky (1986) also points out that an individual' sattention towards and experience of what's important in relation to the execution of a specific behaviour will vary with the individual's involvement. In this context, execution of a specific behaviour can be compared with the use of different sources of support and the individual's involvement could be different aspects of the end user's involvement toward the computer. On these basis one could ask: Do IT-;nvolvement ;njluence the end user 's choice of support services ? Copyright ~ 2003, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. Gordon. Steve(Editor). COMPUTJNG INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: Hershey. PA, USA: Idea Group Inc.. 2003. p 149. httD://site.ebrarv.comilib/ntnu/Doc ?id= I 0032055&tJtJJ!= 162 --THE HUMAN SIDE. ---- -- ~ - --- --- 150 Munkvold Computer Sel/.Efjicacy is an important end user quality. Compaeu and Higgins (1995) argues that this special psychological state will affect the end user's belief about his need for support services. Belief about the need for support services and actual use of different support services are clearly related topics, and therefore my question is: Do computer self-efjicacy injluence the end user's choice of support services ? o Now I will turn to a more detailed description of each of the three explanatory factors. ;:, . ..c=: ~(U =:;: e~ o--.>o >oQ. IT-SkUls The concept IT-skills is not easily defined. IT is widely used, but often without providing a precise definition. Much work is done on the related concept End User Computing Sophistication. The reason why I have not used the concept, End User Computer Sophistication, is that different authors have defined it differently in different surveys (Blili, Raymond &Rivard, 1994;Huff, Malcolm & Marcolin, 1992; Marcolin, Munro & Compeau, 1993; Rockart & Flannery, 1983;Zinatelli, 1996). It would be difficult to compare the results from the different surveys because of the variations in the definition of the concept. The subject skill is often connected to the subject's ability. A few researchers (Cheney & Nelson, 1988; Koohang et al., 1992; Marcolin et al., 1996) have tested end user ability. Both Marcolin (1996) and Koohang (199x) have used Cheney and Nelson' s instrument for developing their instruments on end user abilities. Cheney and Nelsonidentifiedthree clearfactors within end usercomputingabilities: technical abilities, modelling abilities and application abilities. Technical abilities apply to programming, the use ofhardware and operating systems. Modelling abilities apply to subjects regarding software engineering. Application abilities apply to skills that are most typically associated with the use ofapplications systems. All these factors are important formeasuring end-users' IT-skills. The aim ofthis study was, however to measure work-relevant IT-skills. The measure oftechnical andmodelling abilities was therefore less interesting. On this basis, I defined IT-skills to be: In what degree a person manages to solve different problems with help from different work-relevant information system tools. cO a:!U co!!! ..c "Ca:! Glu u= ;:'Q. "CQ. o a:! 0.0 GI - . GI~ .c;:) oc~ >oc al;:' ::æ "C GI .= "C.Gle ~... GI GI III Q. ~!11 ,SIII ..c;:' .2"5 .::-= :;;:0. GI g:~GI ~.: ;:, GI o~ t;;s al;:' GI Q. :!2,! 8e °0 C'I... @)';; ..c ..-C'l1II III $,'s Q.... -o IT-Involvement OGI OQ. Earlierresearch on IT-involvement has mostly been aboutparticipator behaviour within IS-development (Ives & Olsen, 1994). The psychological dimension ofthis participation has been brought to focus in the later years. In spite of Barki and Hartwick (1989), Kappelman (1990) and Kappelman and McLean (1993, 1994) trying to establish a conceptual partitioning between participation and engagement as two aspects of involvement, it is still common to use end user involvement as a Copyright 10 2003, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic fonus without written pennission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. -- -- - - - - - --- - -- Gordon. Steve(Editor). COMPUTING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: Hershey, PA, USA: Idea Group Inc.. 2003. p 150. httv://site.ebrarv.com/lib/ntmtlDoc ?id= I 0032055&vol!= 163 - -- - - - - THE HUMAN SIDE. ------ - ------- - - End --- Us er Support Usage , 151 Table 2: End User Involvement Partitioning End User Involvement Related to the Phenomenon Behaviour Situational Involvement (End User Participation) Intrinsic Involvement (End User Engagement) Can be Divided Into: Proeess Participation or Svstem Usage Involvement Towards Information Technology, the Computer and Software or Involvement Towards a Proeess Psychological State -:::I o . .c== ~ca === description of participant behaviour E~ ....o... ->o >oD. cO is to denote IIIU co!! .- ..Q ~IU Glu u:: :::ID. ~D. 0111 15.0 GI =<4 ..Q:J o'" c~ >oc 111:::1 :i 'ti GI .= ~.- ~E "'GI (Do Il& T orkzadeh, 1994). A solution to this partitioning ofbehavioural them both end user involvement, 1994; 19b ara & Guimaraes, and psychological and to distinguish involvement between the two situational involvement and intrinsic involvement (Jackson et al., 1997). One can further divide intrinsic involvement in a psychological condition and as involvement towards information technology, the computer and software or involvement towards a process. My aim with IT -involvement is to measure involvement towards information technology, the computer and software. Table 2 shows the partitioning of the concept. With basis in the work of Barki and Hartwick (1989), I have defined ITInvolvementas follows: The importance and personal relevancy an end user attaches to a computer and the use of it. components ID. 2!gj J!!Ul .c:::l .21'iij -=<c. GI :~ gGl 'Q..: :::IGI o~ 5:a 111:::1 GID. :2~ ai @~ -o Co N.. .c .ClUI .- Ul ;"E D.... o GI OD. Computer Self-Efficacy Compeau and Higgins (1995) did a survey on the concept of self-efficacy to prove its usability in the attempt to understand individual behaviour towards computers. The term self-efficacy is future-oriented. It does not deal with what a person has done earlier, butratherwith a person's beliefs ofwhatcan be done in the future (Compeau & Higgins, 1995b, p. 192). It is "borrowed" from social psychology, where self-efficacy is said to be the user' s beliefs about his capability to organize and execute the courses of action required to manage prospective situations (Bandura, 1996). Self-efficacy has its origin in the writings of Albert Bandura (1986, 1995). He defines it to deal with: "peoples judgement of their own capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of performance. It is concern not with the skilIs one has, but with thejudgements of what one can do with whatever skilIs one possesses" (Bandura 1986, p. 391). Thus, Computer Self-Efficacy represents an individual' s perception of his ability to use computers in the accomplishment of a task (Compeau & Higgins, 1995a). The concept has three dimensions (Compaeu & Higgins, 1995a, 1995b). These dimensions are: magnitude - the leve! of computing task difficulty the user can attain; strength - whether the conviction regarding magnitude is strong orweak and Copyright ~ 2003, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic farms without written permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. Gordon. Steve(Editor). COMPUTING INFORMATION Hershey, PA, USA: Idea GrO/Ip Inc.. 2003. p 151. - - TECHNOLOGY: htto://site.ebrarv.com/lib/mnu/Doc ?id=10032055&002= 164 --THE HUMAN SIDE. --- ~ --' --- --- - --- 152 --- -- - different software End the degree packages users with themselves -- -- - -- to which and a high the expectation different computer magnitude is generalized across systems. of Computer Self-Efficacy might judge as capable of operating with less support and assistance than those with lower magnitude Compeau of self-efficacy (Compaeu and Higgins (1995b, to self-efficacy with aregression that the more support given & Higgins, p. 195) show coefficient of -0,16. to the end 1995a, that supportwas The 1995b). negatively related survey thereby showed user the less computer self-efficacy he possessed. . ::J o Following .ei: =:ca i:= E-§, ....o... ->o >oe. cO these research will utilize the model in Figure questions, conceptual definitions and discussions, I 1. Hypothesis: IIIU cGl .- ::a "0111 Glu Hl: The end user'siT -skills will covariate with their respective source of support choices. HIa: High IT-skills is negatively related to the use of formal sources of support. Hlb: High IT-skills is positively related to the use ofinformal sources of support. Hlc: High IT-skills is negatively related to the use ofinternal documentation. Hld: High IT-skills is positively related to the use ofexternal documentation. H2: The end user's Computer Self-Efficacy will covariate with their respective source of support choices. H2a: A high degree of Computer Self-Efficacy is negatively related to the use of formal sources of support. H2b: A high degree of Computer Self-Efficacy is negatively related to the use of informal sources of support. H2c: A high degree of Computer Self-Efficacy is negative ly related to the use of internaldocumentation. H2d: A high degree of Computer Self-Efficacy is positive ly related to the use of internal documentation. H3: The end user's IT-involvement will covariate with their respective source of support choices. H3a: High IT-involvement is positive ly related to the use of formal sources of support. u= ::Je. "O e. o III ...... ato ~c4 ..Q::) -... o GI C"O >OC III::J =="0 GI "O'='- ~E ... - - Munkvold generalizability - - -- ... GI GI Ule. GI Ul ...GI Ul Ul E::J Ol.!:: .~ --ca <lå. GI :u (J)( CGI "Q...: ::JGI oi 0:5 III::J Gle. :E~ SE °0 (\I... @)';;; -o Figure 1: Research Model .e .C)UI .- Ul !>. 's e.... OGI Oe. IT-skiIIs .. . Support usal:e Formal sources of support Informal sources of support Use of internal documentation . Use of external documentation IS-involvement Self-efficacy Copyright @ 2003, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic fonns without written pennission of ldea Group Inc. is prohibited. - - - -- - -- - ----- Gurdon, Steve(Editor). COMPUTING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: Hershey, PA, USA: ldea GrOllp Inc., 2003. p 152. httD://site.ebrurv.com/lib/ntnu/Doc ?id= J0032055&DD2= J65 - THE HUMAN SIDE. -- -- J - - -- ---- - End User Support Usage 153 H3b: High IT-Involvement is positively related to the use ofinformal sources of support. H3c: High IT-Involvement is positively related tothe use ofinternal documentation. H3d: High IT-Involvement is positively related to the use of external documentation. RESEARCH METHOD -::J o With basis in the requirements to causal research models (Bollen, 1989; Churchill, 1995; Frankfort-Nachmias & Nachmias, 1996), a quantitative approach was chosen, with a cross sectional design. To answer the research questions, a questionnaire was developed to measure the different variables. It was important to find a setting where one would surely find variation in end user's choices of different support sources. It was also important to find a setting that was homogeneous. Homogeneity diminishes the danger with alternative predecessors that might create spurious relations (Mitchell, 1985). To ensure a homogenous setting and variation in the end user's answers, a large organization in Norway was chosen (more than 800 employees). IS-professionals were not included in the survey. The reason was most ISprofessionals seldom utilize support personneI. The population was therefore selected to be all non-IS-professionals in the organization. . ~~ .'!::ca ~= E~ ....o... -:>. :>.e. cO tVI,) c~ ..o 'C tV GlI,) 1,)= ::J e. 'Ce. OtV &0 GI ~c4 .0::::1 -... o GI C 'ti :>.C tV::! :i:'ti .=G! 'C.- The Independent Variable (Support Usage): ~E "'G! Through the studies of Lee (1986), Larsen (1989), Delone and McLean; Compeau and Higgins (1995b); Blili et al. (1997), I found threedifferentaspects on the measure of usage: time spent, frequency and exploitation ratio. Since this research project had a time limit, time spent would be difficult to measure. To measure time spent, one must be sure that the respondents record the time they spend on support usage for a specific period of time. Most end users don't want to be bothered with these things and their answer to such a survey would probably be an estimate anyway. Exploitation ratio measures if a support service is of any use to the respondent. It will not measure in what degree the respondents utilizes different support-services, which was the aim of this study. Therefore frequency seemed the best measure to use. Blili et al.'s instrument was changed to tit the aims of the study. The measure was: How often do you utilize different support sources when using your computer? Different sources were divided into these categories: in/ormal support sources, traditional support sources, internal documentation and external documentation. Frequency was measured with five categories, from less than once a month to several times a day. Since there is limited research on support usage, and since this instrument never had been tested before, I chose to develop an alternative instrument. This alternative instrument tested for different error situations and asked the respondent which support source would be his first choice if a spedjic problem were to arise. me. ~U! !!Ja: ~::! c:n.~ .~ -! =.. <te. G! :~ gG! "Q...: ::J G! 0-; ~:5 tV::! Gle. 'C G! -~ Se °0 1:'1... @';; ~..-01U! U! s,'e e.... -o OG! Oe. Copyright i!:)2003, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic fonns without written permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. - -- ---- -- --- Gordoll, Steve(Editor). COMPUTING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: Hershey, PA, USA: /dell Group Inc., 2003. p 153. httv://site.ebrarv.com/lib/ntllll/Doc ?id= 10032055 &VTJI!=166 THE HUMAN SIDE. ------ --- -' -- - - 154 Munkvold Pre-tests and later factor analysis showed the alternative instrument was better, and this instrument was chosen to measure the end users' use of different support sources. Computer Self-Efficacy was measured with Compeau and Higgins's (1995b) instrument. The different items focus on the degree to which the respondent masters the use of new software with different levels of support. An instrument onIT-Involvement developed by Barki andHartwick (1994)was pre-tested in the organization. The scale was difficult to translate to Norwegian and the items that were chosen to measure different aspects of the concept were quite similar. A newly developed instrument developed by my mentor0ystein Sørebø was adopted. This instrument measured the importance and personal relevancy an end user expresses towards the computer and use of it. The IT-skills instrument was developed based on Cheney and Nelson' s (1988) instrument. The respondents were asked to indicate to what degree they used different software and to indicate their level of skill within the different types of software. In addition to the variables chosen for measuring different end user qualities, three control variables were included. These were giving collegial support, direct access to IS-professionals and IC relationship. The variable giving collegial support measures to what degree the respondent gives collegial support to fellow workers. Direct access to IS-professionals shows if the respondents have direct access to IS-professionals in the same office location. IC relationship defines the respondents ' relationships to the information centre on a scale from very good to very bad. Further reviews (through test-respondents) showed that the questionnaire was missing an alternative choice in problem solving. This was solving the problem themselves. I, therefore, added this dependent variable to the questionnaire. The questionnaire was sent to 670 employees. Two hundred and seventy-seven usable questionnaires were returned, which gave a 41.3 percent response rate. :;, o --- . .c~ ;!::ca === E~ ....o.. ->o >00. :;8 co!! .-.c 'Cm GIu u= :;'0. 'Co. Om ..... g.o ~c4 .c~ o~ c'C >oc ca :I :æ 'C GI 'C.= .- ~E GI GI 1/)0. GI I/) ...GI I/) I/) :c: c:n.- :::J2 C;:'Q. GI g: ~ GI 'C...: :;,GI o~ t5~ RESULTS ca :I Glo. The various sets ofvariables that are included in this survey have gone through factor analysis, to filter unwanted items that do not measure the variables well enough. Through convergent and divergent validity analysis some items were rejected. This was to ensure the lack of non-redundant concepts. The results from the analysis supports the following hypothesises: HIa, Hlc, Hle, H2b, H2d, H2e and H3a. In addition, direct access to IS-professionals seems to correlate positively with the use offormal support services, negatively with the use of informal support services and negatively with the use of external documentation. AIso, giving collegial support correlates negatively with the use of both formal and informal support services and positively with the added dependent :!:!,! Be Co N.. @)';; .c .c:nl/) .- I/) -o !>. 'E 0... o GI 00. Copyright @ 2003, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic fonns without written pennission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. - --- - Gordoll, Steve(Editor). COMPUTING INFORMATION Hershey, PA, USA: Idell Grollp 111C., 2003. P 154. - -TECHNOLOGY: htto://site.ebrarv.com/lib/Jltllu/Doc ?id=I 0032055&001!=167 THE HUMAN SIDE. ----- End User Support Usage 155 Figure 2: Summarizing the Results Direcl access lo IS-professional -' .. ::I o . .1:.:= :t: ca :=:: E~ :1:0,20 Formal supportservices R2=18.7 Informal supportservices R2=11.0 ....o... ->o >o Q. cO -0.1& 1'11 U eGl .- :iS Inlernal documenlalion "a 1'11 Glu R2=4,6% u= ::IQ. "a Q. 01'11 0.0 GI (+0.14).... ~uj .c~ ...... °Gl e"a >oe 1'11::1 :E "a GI "a.=.- ~E "'GI Q. :J! GI Ul ...GI .!!I Ul .1:.::1 CI.!:: -t: S =... c(Q. GI :~ gGl "Q..: ::IGI External documenlalion R'=5,2% Solving the problem Ihemselves R2=25.3 variable solving the problem themselves. Figure 2 summarizes the results of the analysis. The beta (multiple regression) values that are indicated along the arrows apply to the covariance after the inclusion of the control variables. The dashed arrow between Computer Self Efficacy and Extemal Documentation point out there was covariance between the two variables, but this covariance disappeared when the control variables was accounted for. R2states explained variance in the dependent variable(s). O~ ~:E 1'11::1 GI Q. IMPLICATIONS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS :E11 SE °0 (\I... @~ "'0 .1:..ClUI .- Ul !>. 'E Q.... OGI OQ. The results show IT -skills might be of importance for the use of formal support services. The negative covariance indicates that formal support services, first of all, would be ofuse for the novice end users. Earlierdiscussions point out end users might demand more and better services, from the formal support sources, the higher their IT-skills. My survey does not support these viewpoints. One could expect the enquiries from expert end users would be of such specific nature, the formal support service would not be competent enough to solve such probierns. Since I do not have a measure on the actual qualifications possessed by the formal support services in Copyright ~ 2003. Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic fonus without written penuission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. - ---~ -- Gordoll, Steve(Editor). COMPUTING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: Hershey, PA, USA: Idea GrO/Ip Inc., 2003. p 155. htto://site.ebrarv.com/lib/ntlll//Doc ?id= 10032055&tJtJf!= 168 -- - THE HUMAN SIDE. ------- - - - -- - - 156 Munkvold the organization,theanswerto this anticipationseemsveryuncertain. But itmight E o ol: c o 'ii I/) E .. GI CI. indicate that one, by increasing support qualifications naturally, will be able to help a bigger group of end-users. The results also show there is a negative covariance between IT-skills and the use of Internal documentation, Le., the higher IT-skills the less the use ofintemal documentation. This could imply thatthe quality ofthe internal documentation isnot good enough. Maybe most internal documents aremade for novice users, explaining basic use of different software. The quality of the intemal documentation is not measured in this survey, and therefore it will be difficult to point out that documentation quality would impact (indirectly) on the end users' use ofintemal documentation. Later studies on the subject should therefore contain a measure on the perceived quality of internal and external documentation. An indication that shows the data collected is quite reliable is the result that shows a positive covariance between high IT-skills and the variable solving the problem themselves. This covariance is expected, and any other result would be suspicious. Anotherresultthat indicates reliability is the result showing the end users giving collegial supportnegatively covariates withthe use offormal support sources. The hypotheses regarding Computer Self-Efficacy shows a negative covariance towards the use of informal support sources (H2b), and a positive covariance towards the use of external documentation and towards solving the problem themselves. This could imply end users, with a high degree of computer selfefficacy, basically want to solve the problems themselves, either by using extemal documentation and/or by solving the problems without the use of any support sources. That indicates these end users probably have such high beliefs about themselves they don't see themselves as people needing any help from others. They would expect that no others could solve the problem any faster than themselves anyway. It is important to notice, when the control variables are included, Computer SelfEfficacy is no longer a valid factor in explaining the use of extemal documentation. That might indicate a spurious connection. Bytesting covariance between Computer Self-Efficacy and access to a computer expert, I found no covariance. That again might indicate the strong covariance (beta value: -0,17), between access to a computer expert and the use of external documentation, confounds the effect of Computer SelfEfficacy. I would, therefore suggest to test for this in future surveys to clarify the uncertainty around the model. The results regarding IT-involvement only show covariance with the use of formal support sources . Another survey conducted at almost the same time as mine shows the exact same result (Haukedalen, 1998, p. 65). This indicates end users with a high degree of IT-involvement use formal sources of support more. The reason why might be, these end users showa bigger interest in computers and computer technology, and therefore are eager to solve IS-related problems. The formal support source might also work as an information channei for these endusers. Copyright tC 2003, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic fonns without wrinen pennission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. - -- Gordon. Sreve(Editor). COMPUTlNG INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: Hershey. PA. USA: Idea Grollp Inc.. 2003. p 156. hrrv://sire.ebrarv.com/lib/mnll/Doc ?id=l 0032055&(1ve= /69 - THE HUMAN SIDE. -- - - ~ -- --- --- -- --------- End User Support Usage As their involvement towards IT is higher, they show more general interest for IT, and therefore have the need to get answers regarding information technology. The results ofthis survey clearly indicate specific end user qualities affect the end user's choice of support source. I, therefore, recommend organizations to improve these basic qualities of the end user, instead of only providingthe traditional support services. Not only should the employees attend training courses to improve these basic qualities, one should also seek to improve the end users' Self-Efficacy and involvement towards computers and computer technology. Especially ITinvolvement should be increased. By increasing this quality, one will make the end users use formal support services more often, which again can lead to more effective employees. ane must take into mind, although an end-user has high IT-skills and a high magnitude of computer self-efficacy, itdoes not automatically mean that he/she will solve IT-related problems faster than the formal support group can. Forexample, if end users feel they aresufficiently qualified to solve IT-related probierns, theymay well spend days doing exactly this, whereas calling the IT support staff could have solved the problem within minutes. By increasing endusers IT-involvement and by improvingquality and increasing availability of the IT support staff, employees would likely become more effective in their everyday work. In addition, support personnei ought to aim to provide the end users relevant knowledge every time they need help to solve a problem. Bento (1996) talks about doers andfacilitators, when speaking of different types of support personneI. It is not enough that support personnei just solve the problem and leave (doers). They must also transfer the knowledge to the end user, so that the end user more easily can confront the next problem situation they face (facilitators). It is nevertheless important to notice this survey has been done with data materials from one big Norwegian organization. This does not mean the results and recommendations in this survey would apply to any other arbitrary organization. More research is needed to generalize the conclusions made in this survey. ::I o . .c~ .:!::ca ~= E~ ....o... ->o >o Q. cO 111U C,! .- .c "m Glu U= ::IQ. "Q. Om .. ... g.o ~~ .0::1 -... O GI c" >oc m::l :i" GI ".= .- ~E ... 157 ... GI Q) tilQ. f!m Sm .c::l ~Ctc. Q) .21'1;; :~ gQ) "Q...: ::IQ) oi ~:s 111::1 GI Q. REFERENCES :E~ SE °0 Amoudse, D. M., & au lette, L.P. (1986). An introduction to the information centre concept. Information Strategy, 3(2), 9-12. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Series in sociallearning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Barki, H., & Hartwick, J. (1989, March). Participation and concept of user involvement. MIS Quarterl,y 13, (1), 53-63. Barki, H., & Hartwick, J. (1994a, March). Measuring user participation, user involvement and user attitude. MIS Quarterly, 59-82. Barki, H., & Hartwick, J. (1994b). Explaining the role of user participation in information-System use. Management Science, 4(40),440-465. N... @)~ -O .c.eim .m ~.§ OQ) OQ. Copyright ib> 2003, Idea Group Inc. Copying permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. - - Gordoll, Steve(Editor). COMPUTlNG INFORMATION Hershey, PA, USA: Idea Grcll/p 111C.,2003. P 157. or distributing -- -TECHNOLOGY: httv://site.ebrarv.com/lib/Iltlll//Doc ?id=10032055 &DDI!= 170 in print or electronic forms without - - -- - - - -- --THE HUMAN SIDE. written - 158 - -- - ---- --- - --- - - Munkvold Bento, R. F. (1996). Life in the middle: An analysis of infonnation centres from the perspective of their major stakeholders. Information Management, 30, 101- 109. ::I o . .c== :!::ca === E'§. ....o... ->o >o Q. cO IIIU c~ .- J:I "'0111 G)u u= ::IQ. "'OQ. 0111 Q.6 G) ~~ J:I;:) O'" c~ >OC 111::1 ::æ "'O G) .= "'O .- ~E ...... G)G) tfJQ. G)tfJ "'G) tfJtfJ 1:::1 CI.!:: S =«Q. -i: G) :~ gG) ~..: ::IG) 0-; G:E 111::1 G) Q. :!:!,! Se °0 1:'01.. @)~ -o ~'iii .- tfJ ~.~ OG) OQ. Blili, S., Raymond, L, & Rivard, S. (1994). Definition and measurement of end-user computing sophistication. Journal of End User Computing, 2(8), 3-12. Blili, S., Raymond, L., & Rivard, S. (1997). Impact oftask uncertainty, end user involvement, and competence on the success of end-user computing.lnformation Management, 33, 137-153. (1998). Bollen, K., A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley. Bruton, N. (1995). EjJective user support: How to manage the IT helpdesk. McGraw-Hill Book Company. Cheney, P.H., & Nelson, R. R. (1988). Briefcommunication: A tool formeasuring and ana1ysing end user computing abilities. Information Proeessing & Management, 24(2), 199-203. Cheney, P.H,Mann, R.I., &Amoruso, D.L. (1986). Organizational factors affecting the success of end-user computing. Journal of Management Information Systems, 1, (3),65-80. Churchill, G. A. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures for marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. XVI. Churchill, G. A. (1996). Marketingresearch: Methodological foundations. Dryden Press; c1995. (6thedition). Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C.A. (1995a). Application of social cognitive theory to training for computer skilis. Information Systems Research 6, 2. The University of Western Ontario London, Ontario, Canada N6A 5B9. Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C.A. (1995b, June). Computer elf-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 189-211 Delone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (1992). Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research, 3(1),60-95. Doll, W. J., & Torkzadeh, G. (1988). The measurement of end-user computing satisfaction. MIS Quarterly, 2(12), 259-274. Doll, W. J., & Torkzadeh, G. (1993). The place and value ofdocumentation in end user computing. Information and Management, 24, 147-158. Frankfort-Nachmias, c., & Nachmias, D. (1996). Research methods in the social sciences (5thEd.). London: Arnold. Haukedalen, K. (1998). Bruk av brukerstøtte: Hvilke egenskaper for sluttbrukeren kan være av betydning for bruk av brukerstøtte? HiBu - Hønefoss. Heie, T. H., & Hestad, K. I. (1998). Brukerstøtte: Fra et sluttbrukerperspektiv. HiBu - Hønefoss. Huff, S.L., Malcolm, C. & Marcolin, B. (1992) Modelling and measuring end user sophistication. ACM. Huff, S. L., Marcolin, B., Munrow, M. C., & Compeau, D. R. (1994, August). Copyright ~ 2003, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic fonns without written pennission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. - --- Gordon. Steve(Editor). COMPUTING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: Hershey. PA. USA: Idell Grollp Inc., 2003. p 158. htttJ://site.ebrarv.com/lib/ntllll/Doc ?id= I 0032055 &tJtJ/!= I 71 -- - - -- THE HUMAN SIDE. --- -- -- - -- End User Support Usage -::s o . .c== :!::as ==:: E~ ...o .. -;>. ;>.Q. cO as I.) c~ ..c 't:Ias G)I.) 1.):: ::SQ. 't:IQ. Oas .... ~o :;<4 .c~ -.. OG) C't:l ;>.c as ::s :i:'t:I G) .= 't:I.- ~ .. ..E G) G) 111 Q. G) 111 .. G) 111111 :C::S CI.!:: ~J! <te.G) : I.) g~ "Q...: ::s G) 0-; ~:6 as ::s G)Q. :211 Se °0 ('I.. @';;; -o .c..-ClI1I 111 ~'E Q... OG) OQ. 159 Understanding and measuring end user sophistication. Journal ofComputing, 6(IA). The University of Western Ontario, New Zealand. Igbaria, M., & Guimaraes, T. (1994). Empirically testing the outcomes of user involvement in DSS development. Omega, International journal of Management Science, 22(2), 157-172. Ives, B., & Olson, M. H. (1984, May). User involvement and MIS success: A review of research. Management Science, 30(5), 586-603. Jackson, C.M., Chow, S., & Leitch, R.A. (1997). Toward an understanding of the behavioural intention to use an information system. Decision Sciences, 2(28), 357-389. Kapferer, & Laurent (1985). Measuring consumer involvement for end user computing support. Decision Science. 25(4),481-498. KappeIman, L.A. (1990). The implementation of computer-based information systems: The respective roles ofparticipation and involvement in information system success. Unpublished doetoral dissertation, Georgia State University. Kappeiman, L. A. (1995). Measuring user involvement with information systems success: The respective roles of user participation and user involvement. Journal of Information Technology Management, 3(1), 1-12. KappeIman, L. A., & McLean, E. R. (1991, December). The perspective roles of userparticipation and userinvolvement in information system implementation success. Twelfth International Conference on Information Systems (pp. 339-350). New York. Kappeiman, L. A., & MeLean, E. R. (1993, October). User engagement in information system development, implementation, and use: Towards conceptual clarity. Proceedings of the IFIP TC8 Working Conference on Diffusion, Transfer and Implementation of Information Technology (pp. 199214). Pittsburgh, PA: North-Holland. Kappeiman, L. A., & MeLean, E. R. (1994, January). User Engagement in the development, implementation, and use ofinformation technologies. Proceedings of the 27th Hawaiian International Conference on the System Sciences, 4,512-521. Maui, Hawaii, USA. Kirwin, W. (1995, Mareh). The true cost of personal computers. Across The Board. Larsen, T. J. (1989). Managers' use of computers: Middle managers' end-user computing utilization levels and support requirements by leve!innovativeness. A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the graduate School of the University of Minnesota. University of Minnesota: Minneapolis, MN. Lee, D. (1986). Usage pattern and sources of assistance for personal computer users. MIS Quarterly, 10(4),313-326. Marcolin, B. 1.,Munro, M. C., & Campbell, K. G. (1996). End user ability: Impact ofjob and individual differences. Journal of End User Computing, 3(9), 3-12. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing. Marcolin, B. 1.,Munro, M. C., & Compeau, D. R. (1993). End user sophistication: A multitrait-multimethod analysis. Copyright ~ 2003, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. -- - - - - -- --- - - Gordon. Steve(Editor). COMPUTlNG INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: Hershey. PA. USA: Idell Group Inc.. 2003. p 159. httv://site.ebrarv.com/lib/ntnu/Doc ?id= I 00.n055&vvJ!= 172 -- - THE HUMAN SIDE. - -- -- -- -- - - - --- -- 160 Munkvold -:::s o . .c~ ~ca ~= E~ ....o... ->o >oa. cO mU c~ '-..c "Dm Glu u:: :::Sa. "Da. om a.~ GI :;'4 J:I;:) -.. o GI c"D >oc m:::s :æ"DGI .=."D GlE c=~ la. GI Ul "'GI Ul Ul :C:::S aJ.!:: "t: S =eta. Mirani, R, & King, W. R. (1994a). Impacts of end-user and information center characteristics on end-user computing support Journal of Management Information Systems, 11(1), 141-166. Mirani, R., & King, W. R (1994b). The development of a measure for end-user computing support. Decision Science, 25(4), 481-498. Mitchell, T. R (1985). An evaluation of the validity of correlational research conducted in organizations. Academy and Management Review, 10(2), 192205. Reve, T. ( 1985) Validitet i økonomisk-administrativ forskning, i metoder og perspektiver i økonomisk-adminstrativ forskning, 52-72. Oslo, Universitetsforlaget. Rockart, J. F., & Flannery, L. S. (1983). The management for end user computing. Communications at the ACM, 10(26), 776-784. Smith, A. (1997). Human computer factors: A study of users and information systems. McGraw-Hill Book Company. Sørebø, ø. (1996). End user computing and the perceived need for support services: Towardan explanation ofthe independent-userparadox. Høgskolen i Buskerud, Konferanse: Fifth Edamba Summer School. Winter, S. J., Chudoba, K. M., & Gutek, B. A. (1997). Misplaced resources? Factors associated with computer literacy among end-users. Information & Management, 32, 29-42. Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1986, Oecember). Conceptualising the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer Research, (12), 341-351. Zinatelli, N., Cragg, P. B., & Cavaye, A. L. M., (1996) "End user computing sophistication and success in small firms." European Journal of Information Systems, 3(Vol. 5), 172-181. CI) : ~ gCl) ~.: :::sCl) o~ ~:E m:::s Gla. :!2~ ås Co C\I.. -o @~ .c..-ClUI Ul ~'E a.... OGI Oa. Copyright ~ 2003, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. -- - -- -- Gordoll. Steve(Editor). COMPUTING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: Hershey. PA. USA: Idea Grol/p Inc.. 2003. p /60. httv://site.ebrarv.com/lib/ntllu/Doc ?id= / 0032055&vvl!= 173 -- -- THE HUMAN SIDE. --- - - -