No abstract

Post-acceptance IS use is the key to leveraging value from IS investments. However, it also poses many demands on the user. Drawing on the challenge-hindrance stressor framework, this study develops a theory to explain how and why IS use stressors influence post-acceptance use. We identify two different types of IS use stressors: challenge IS use stressors and hindrance IS use stressors. We hypothesize that they are appraised through challenge IS use appraisal and hindrance IS use appraisal, respectively, through which they influence routine use and innovative use. We evaluate our hypotheses by surveying 178 users working in one organization and analyze the data collected using consistent partial least square (PLSc). We find that challenge IS use stressors positively influence routine use and innovative use via challenge IS use appraisal. Hindrance IS use stressors negatively influence routine use via hindrance IS use appraisal. We then dive deeper into these findings using a two-step fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA), identifying the presence of challenge IS use stressors and challenge IS use appraisal as necessary conditions for high innovative use. We also reveal that the presence of hindrance IS use stressors and hindrance IS use appraisal only influences routine use and innovative use in the absence of challenge IS use stressors and challenge IS use appraisal. We discuss the practical relevance and transferability of our findings based on a comprehensive applicability check. Our findings advance IS scholarship of IS use stress and post-acceptance use by showing how routine use and innovative use emanate from IS use stressors.

No abstract

No abstract

PurposeQualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) is a promising, powerful method that is increasingly used for IS research. However, the Information Systems (IS) discipline still lacks a shared understanding of how to conduct and report QCA. This paper introduces the fundamental concepts of QCA, summarizes the status quo, and derives recommendations for future research.Design/methodology/approachA descriptive literature review in major IS outlets summarizes how and why QCA has been used in the IS discipline, critically evaluates the status quo, and derives recommendations for future QCA studies.FindingsThe literature review reveals 32 empirical research articles in major IS journals that have used the QCA method. Articles applied QCA to a broad range of research topics at the individual and organizational levels, mainly as a standalone analysis for theory development, elaboration and testing. The authors also provide evidence that most published IS research articles do not take full advantage of the potential QCA, such as analyzing necessary causal conditions or testing the robustness of QCA results. The authors provide seven actionable recommendations for future IS research using QCA.Originality/valueThe literature review assesses the status quo of QCA’s application in the IS discipline and provides specific recommendations on how IS researchers can leverage the full potential of QCA.