Organisationaler Wandel als Bedrohung – von impliziter Angst zur Annäherung durch prozedurale Gerechtigkeit

Reiß, Stefan; Prentice, Liza; Schulte-Cloos, Christoph; Jonas, Eva

doi:10.1007/s11612-019-00469-x

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, change managers can use the UX TAM as a means to facilitate participation in change processes. Employees who have a say during change processes have greater organizational commitment, less anxious affect and thus show less resistance to change (Lines 2004;Reiss et al 2019). Thus, change managers should include the future users' opinions in the technology design process (Paruzel et al 2020).…”

Section: Practical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to raise technology acceptance: user experience characteristics as technology-inherent determinants

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper in the journal "Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation. (GIO)" presents a study that investigated user experience characteristics as determinants of technology acceptance. Organizations planning to implement new technologies are confronted with the challenge to ensure user acceptance. Barely accepted technologies are used less often, result in lower job satisfaction, and ultimately lead to performance losses. The technology acceptance model (Venkatesh and Bala 2008) incorporates determinants of information technology use. The model's predictors have a strong focus on interindividual user characteristics (such as computer self-efficacy) and the job context (e.g., voluntariness). Yet, what is lacking in the model, are characteristics of the technology itself that can be used as starting points to design better technologies. To bridge this gap, we introduce the User Experience Technology Acceptance Model, and provide a first test of this model. In our online survey (N = 281), we investigated how technological determinants, more specifically user experience characteristics, affected technology acceptance. Except for two paths of our proposed model, all path coefficients were significant with small to large effect sizes (f 2 = 0.02-0.66). User experience predictors resulted in 60.6% of explained variance in perceived ease of use, 38.2% of explained variance in perceived usefulness, and 25.8% of explained variance in behavioral intention. Our results provide mostly support for our extension of the technology acceptance model. The technology-inherent characteristics output quality, perspicuity, dependability, and novelty were significant predictors of technology acceptance. We discuss theoretical and practical implications with the focus on technology designers, change managers, and users.

show abstract

Section: Practical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to raise technology acceptance: user experience characteristics as technology-inherent determinants

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Central to our assumptions, we generated three latent variables for motivational-affective states: BIS-anxiety, consisting of PANAS-X-fear and BIS-state items (8 items, e.g., anxious, inhibited, worried) [34][35][36]; reactance affect, consisting of reactance and PANAS-X-hostility items (13 items, e.g. restricted, frustrated, hostile) [37,38]; and BAS-approach, consisting of BAS-high activation items (5 items; e.g., determined, energetic) [36,39]. The CFA for the three latent variables showed acceptable fit (χ 2 (270) = 674.59; RMSEA = .062; SRMR = .067; CFI = .924).…”

Section: State Affectmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Next, we assessed state affect in 34 items judged on a 5-point likert-type scale. Central to our assumptions, we generated three latent variables for motivational-affective states: BIS-anxiety , consisting of PANAS-X-fear and BIS-state items (8 items, e.g., anxious , inhibited , worried ) [ 34 – 36 ]; reactance affect , consisting of reactance and PANAS-X-hostility items (13 items, e.g. restricted , frustrated , hostile ) [ 37 , 38 ]; and BAS-approach , consisting of BAS-high activation items (5 items; e.g., determined , energetic ) [ 36 , 39 ].…”

Section: Materials and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

From anxiety to action—Experience of threat, emotional states, reactance, and action preferences in the early days of COVID-19 self-isolation in Germany and Austria

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID-19 pandemic has interrupted everyday life virtually everywhere in the world, enabling real-life research on threat-and-defense processes. In a survey conducted within the first days of implementing social distancing measures in Austria and Germany, we aimed to explore the pathways from threat perception to preferences of defense strategies. We found that anxiety, approach-related affect, and reactance were specifically elicited by motivational (vs. epistemic) discrepancies. In a second step, we tested the mediating effect of anxiety, approach-related affect, and reactance on preferences regarding personal-social and concrete-abstract defenses. Experiencing anxiety was related to interest in security-related actions, and approach-affect was related to both personal projects and social media use. Participants experiencing reactance were more inclined to pursue personal projects (personal-abstract) and less interested in security-related (personal-concrete) actions. They also showed marginally lower system justification (social-abstract). Additionally, we examined the relationship of loneliness with defense strategies, showing that loneliness was associated with lower system justification and security behaviors. The results suggest that individuals deal with threat in their own ways, mostly depending on affective state and motivational orientation: Anxiety was related to security, approach-state to action (both social and personal), reactance to derogation of the system and disregard for security, while loneliness was associated with inaction.

show abstract

“…Taken together, the first two phases served the purpose of providing the employees with a voice, which means that they were able to express their views, arguments, and concerns regarding the new process. This was important because organizational change can sometimes be perceived as a threat, and giving employees a voice might help them to regain a feeling of control and participation (Reiss et al, 2019). Voice is one of the main means to facilitate procedural justice, which describes the fairness or justice of the process that leads to a decision (Colquitt, 2001) and is related to work performance, job satisfaction, and affective commitment, among other things (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001).…”

Section: Valencementioning

confidence: 99%

With a Little Help From Change Management

Mlekus

Kato-Beiderwieden

Schlicher

et al. 2022

Zeitschrift für Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie A&O

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Change-management activities require extensive interventions, for which small and medium-sized companies often lack the expertise. Thus, we examined whether a short-term intervention could be an innovative approach that affects employees’ attitudes and behavior. In the cooperative project IviPep, a company developed digital tools for its own internal development process. Our intervention was part of the corresponding training and consisted of a 5-minute presentation about prototypical reactions to change and a 45-minute workshop. Employees could voice their concerns, reflect on advantages, and work on potential solutions to address their concerns. Results of a survey before and after the training ( N = 22) showed that the short-term intervention significantly increased readiness for change ( d = 0.72) but did not significantly increase overall attitude toward change ( d = 0.16) or behavioral resistance to change ( d = -0.37), although the effects pointed in the intended direction. Our results indicate that even small change efforts can make a difference.

show abstract

Organisationaler Wandel als Bedrohung – von impliziter Angst zur Annäherung durch prozedurale Gerechtigkeit

Cited by 10 publications

References 58 publications

How to raise technology acceptance: user experience characteristics as technology-inherent determinants

How to raise technology acceptance: user experience characteristics as technology-inherent determinants

From anxiety to action—Experience of threat, emotional states, reactance, and action preferences in the early days of COVID-19 self-isolation in Germany and Austria

With a Little Help From Change Management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About