Subjective Norm in the ERP Context (Essay Sample)

Note: Please add some of your own sources regarding Subjective Norm in the ERP context.
2.5.1 Subjective Norm (SN)
According to the TRA model, in addition to the individuals' perceptions and beliefs, social influences may affect behaviour (Ajzen, 1985).
(Venkatesh, 1998) stated that social influence joins two factors: subjective norms and social factors. Subjective norms are defined "as a person's perception that most people who are important to him/her think that he/she should or should not perform the behaviour in question”
In Taylor and Todd's study (1995), social influences were equivalent to subjective norms and referred to other people's opinion, superior influence, and peer influence. Davis et al. (1989) believed that in some cases people might use a system to comply with others' mandates rather than their own feelings and beliefs. Adler (1996) stated that social pressure could affect behaviour of individuals in varying degrees in different societies depending on the culture. In terms of technology acceptance, individuals from a collectivist culture may use computers because of the perceived social pressure from superiors and peers.
Subjective norm has been found to play two separate and different roles: one as the antecedent of behavioural intention and the other as the antecedent of perceived usefulness. Empirical support for the relationship between social norms and behaviour can be found in many studies (e.g. Tornatsky and Klein, 1982; Venkatesh and Davis, 2000). Individuals can choose to perform a specific behaviour even if they are not positive towards the behaviour or its consequences. The choice depends on how important the individuals think that the important referents believe that they should act in a certain way (e.g. Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975, Venkatesh and Davis, 2000). Melone (1990) and Hartwick and Barki (1994) contended that subjective norm would have a positive and significant impact on intention to use in mandatory settings
In addition, SN was found to be a strong determinant to behavioural intention and to a wide range of social behaviours (e.g. Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975). SN has been empirically tested and has had a significant direct (e.g. Ajzen, 1988; Mathieson, 1991; Taylor and Todd, 1995) or indirect effect (e.g. Venkatesh and Davis 2000) in predicting an individual's intention to use computer technology. However, SN is not consistent in predicting computer use intention. Some studies found that it was not significant at all (e.g. Davis, 1986). Unfortunately, early research on the TAM dropped SN as it showed insignificant results in affecting intention. Although, recently Lee (2006) found that the effects of SN significantly influenced perceived usefulness.
Although the TAM is useful in determining factors affecting technology acceptance and use, it is not capable of examining the effect of user communication patterns. In fact, TAM's referent theory, the TRA, includes social influence via a construct called SN. A major benefit of the TRA is the inclusion of SNs and the examination of the roles they can play in some situations (Glassberg, 2000). In addition, SN is a construct that yielded significant results in relation to intention in the TRA, TPB, and DTPB (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975; Ajzen, 1985; Taylor and Todd, 1995).
In this study, subjective norm refers to the user's perception of opinions or suggestions of the significant referents concerning his or her acceptance of Enterpirse Resourse Planaing system (ERP) . A user's decision on ERP system use might be influenced by the opinions or suggestions of their important referents. This need not be an explicit statement or order from the managers, colleagues and friends. The focus of the measurement was to examine how a user subjectively evaluated the thought of important referents in their decision process. Subjective norm was considered an important factor in several models (e.g. TRA, TPB, and DTPB), included in the TAM2 model, received empirical supports, and viewed as a core construct (Venkatesh et al., 2003). In addition, it is empirically confirmed to be the most influential determinant of perceived usefulness, especially when the user has little experience with the technology (Venkatesh and Davis, 2000).
2.5.4 Self-Efficacy (SE)
Note: Please add some of your own sources regarding Self-Efficacy in the ERP context.
Self-efficacy is a belief in an individual's capability to perform certain behaviours or it is one's personal beliefs about his or her ability to perform certain tasks successfully (Bandura, 1986, 1997). Perceived self-efficacy refers to the beliefs in one's capability to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce a given accomplishment or outcome and originates from various sources including performance accomplishments, vicarious experience, verbal persuasion, and psychological states. Self-efficacy was one of the important beliefs in the social learning theory (Bandura, 1986, 1997). Several studies found that self-efficacy perceptions influenced decisions about what behaviours to undertake, pers