Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
produced an r-square of .16. The results were not different when utilization was measured as dura-
tion and frequency of use. Although not a lot of variance is explained, this certainly suggests that
TTF may be more important than utilization in determining benefits. In other words, Figure 9.1C
is a more accurate model of the relationship between technology and performance than Figure
9.1A, at least in this context.
Accurate Feedback to Users May be Important for Accurate User Evaluations of TTF
The argument that user evaluations of TTF are reasonable surrogates for the actual underlying
TTF depends upon the assumption that users want to achieve good performance and thus are cog-
nizant of how the technology affects performance at their tasks. Goodhue et al. (2000) acciden-
tally discovered some possible limitations in this assumption when they asked laboratory subjects
to retrieve answers to a series of managerial questions using queries on an information system.
Half the subjects were presented with an integrated database, and half with a non-integrated data-
base. Performance was measured in time to complete the tasks and accuracy. User evaluations of
TTF did correlate significantly with time performance, but, contrary to expectations, not with
accuracy performance. In hindsight, the authors recognized that subjects were well aware of the
impacts of technology on time (since subjects themselves experienced any time delays caused by
poor fit), but they were never made aware of accuracy problems in their answers, since they were
never told the correct answers. Thus they had feedback in terms of time but not in terms of accu-
racy. Since the link between user perceptions of TTF and actual TTF depends upon users being
aware of performance-related aspects of their use of the technology, this suggests that only with
accurate feedback will user perceptions of TTF reflect actual TTF.
The Effect of TTF on the Impact of Group Support Systems
Though this paper has focused on TTF at the individual level, the concept is also clearly applica-
ble at the group level. Dennis et al. (2001) conducted a meta-analysis of group support systems
(GSS) to determine whether task-technology fit could help explain inconsistencies in GSS per-
formance impacts from previous research. They proposed a model in which the fit between GSS
capabilities and task type, along with appropriation support, should explain effectiveness, effi-
ciency, and satisfaction. They looked at sixty-one studies that reported at least several of the key
variables and also included direct comparison of GSS to non-GSS groups. They found that task-
technology fit (matching task type with an appropriate GSS capability) improves effectiveness
(decision quality and number of ideas generated), while appropriation support improves effi-
ciency and process satisfaction. They concluded that although past GSS research lacks consistent
findings when task-technology fit is not considered, that inconsistency is removed when TTF is
taken into account.
The Relationship Between Environmental Uncertainty and User Evaluations of TTF
Goodhue (1995) and Goodhue and Thompson (1995) demonstrated the interaction effect of tech-
nology and task characteristics on evaluations of TTF, as described above. Karimi, Somers, and
Gupta (2004) extended the focus further back and showed that organizational environmental char-
acteristics (dynamism, hostility, and heterogeneity) heightened managers' perceptions of task
non-routineness and interdependence with other parts of the organization. These heightened task
characteristics in turn created more demanding information needs for managers, which lowered
Search WWH ::
Custom Search