Role of Commitment and Motivation In

8/4/2019 Role of Commitment and Motivation In

1/55

Role of Commitment and Motivation in

Knowledge Management Systems Implementation:

Theory, Conceptualization, and Measurement of Antecedents of SuccessMalhotra, Y. and Galletta, D., Role of Commitment and Motivation in Knowledge Management Systems

Implementation: Theory, Conceptualization, and Measurement of Antecedents of Success, Proceedings of 36th

Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, January 6-9, 2003, IEEE, Pages 1-10.

Yogesh MalhotraSyracuse University School of Management

yogesh(at)syr.edu

Dennis F. Galletta

Joseph M. Katz Graduate School of Business

galletta(at)katz.pitt.edu

AbstractOur ignorance exceeds our knowledge where issues of motivation and commitment of knowledge workers are

concerned in the context of knowledge management systems implementation as critical to the implementation

success of KMS [1,16,17,18]. This study is motivated by the pervasive confusion about the role of knowledgeworkers' motivation and commitment in KMS implementation and sparse, if any, theoretical or empirical researchon these issues. This paper proposes a theoretical framework for understanding how knowledge workers'

commitment and motivation affect the use of KMS and resulting organizational performance of the KMS. The

theoretical and empirical validation of the framework require first and foremost the theoretical development of the

knowledge workers' commitment and motivation constructs and empirical validation of these constructs in the

context of a real world organizational study of KMS implementation. The authors attempt to fulfill these specific

goals within the scope of this paper. Future empirical research on the integration of motivation and commitment

within diverse implementation contexts of KMS and organizational knowledge management programs is expected tofurther advance the theoretical and empirical development of the proposed framework.

1. Introduction

Diverse interpretations of knowledge management systems (KMS) [1,16,18,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,38] suggestcommon attributes shared by knowledge management systems (KMS). A review of such interpretations indicates

that most KMS: (i) are based upon some combination of information-enabled enabled communication, coordination,

and collaboration capabilities; (ii) provide the critical link between the information and technology resource inputsand organizational performance; and, (iii) are critically dependent upon active participation and involvement of

knowledge workers to transform the inputs into organizational performance. Not surprisingly, despite the

availability of the best technology or access to the richest warehouses of relevant information, knowledge workersmotivation and commitment often determine the success or failure of such knowledge management systems [16,18].

Similarly, knowledge workers motivation and commitment are critical for sharing of tacit and explicit knowledge

[39,42]. Given their importance, it might at first seem surprising that notions of motivation and commitment have

not been refined in the existing literature on KMS. However, these notions have only recently been refined in the

literature of Social Psychology (cf: [7,14,15,20]). What is needed is a richer conceptualization of motivation and

commitment in a knowledge management context for development and empirical validation of these constructs in a

real world organizational study of KMS implementation [17].This paper refines the conceptualization of KMS user commitment and motivation and provides empirical

validation of these constructs in an organizational field study. The context of the study is the organizational adoptionof an enterprise wide KMS to facilitate communication, coordination, and collaboration system for enabling

organizational transformation. Better understanding of these constructs is anticipated to contribute to developmentof organizational knowledge cultures that foster high levels of commitment and motivation of knowledge workers

that are critical for the success of any KMS implementation [1,45].


2/55

2. Background

The role of motivation and commitment of knowledge workers, professionals, and managers is being increasinglyrealized as a critical success factor for implementation of enterprise knowledge management systems. Researchers

(cf: [8]) have observed that unsuccessful KM projects had "struggled to get organization members to contribute torepositories" and "the motivation to create, share, and use knowledge is an intangible critical success factor forvirtually all knowledge management projects."

Industry surveys (cf: [16], [18]) have consistently reinforced the critical importance of user commitment

and motivation in success of KMS implementations, regardless of geographic and industry differences. Ironically,

the same studies also highlight that despite increased interest in the two enablers of KMS, marked confusion exists

in practice and theory about what can be done to alleviate the lack of user motivation and commitment in

organizational settings. A case in point is that of Pillsbury Co. of Minneapolis where a scientist proposed creating a

forum in which everyone could contribute knowledge about all aspects of batter and related products [2]. The IT

department built the system, seeded it with a few

thought-provoking questions, invited participation via e-mail to all relevant parties. After waiting six months, the

scientist found that not a single user had signed on. The application was deemed a failure and shut down. In

retrospective, the organizational diagnosis of the failure of KMS concluded that there was no incentive for anyone toinvest time and energy to solve other peoples problems. Many other KMS implementations have met the same fate

(cf: [4]) of the unfulfilled vision of the 'field of dreams.' Even when formal incentives were deployed, organizational

KMS often failed to yield sharing of knowledge. In some cases, incentives cajole employees into meeting their

monthly or annual quota of 'points' for knowledge shared regardless of the quality or value of the information that

they share. Such horror stories of KMS implementations have increased organizational urgency for building a shared

sense ofcommitmentacross the enterprise [5,44].Why do organizations often struggle with incentives for knowledge sharing for users of KMS when sharing

of knowledge occurs without any incentive whatsoever in several public online communities? Why do million dollar

investments in KMS fail to whet the interest of employees while some of the same employees participate regularly

in external online communities? These and other similar questions challenge the existing wisdom about harnessing

knowledge workers' motivation and commitment in the success of KMS implementations. This study seeks toimprove the theoretical understanding of motivation and commitment and development of related measures of these

constructs to fill this critical void.


3/55

3. Theoretical Bases for the Study

The conceptualization of knowledge workers' commitment and motivation discussed here provides a theoretical

basis for understanding the fine balance between knowledge workers' concerns about fulfillment of their ownpotential and the need to improve organizational performance. Previous research in adoption and use of innovations

and new information systems, and the key issues relevant to adoption of new KM programs and KM systems will bediscussed. Pragmatic implications are then drawn from that work to help develop an organizational culture forfostering commitment and motivation congruent with organizational goals and to develop proper incentive programs

for successful implementation of KMS.

3.1 Theoretical Bases of KMS User CommitmentIndustry surveys indicate that while they drive development of KMS, the executive board and senior management

often fail to motivate the rest of the organization [18] to adopt the systems. Reasons often cited for failing to meet

expectations or suffering from a negligible user uptake include insufficient communication, failure to integrate KM

in everyday activities, a sense of little personal benefit for the user, lack of time to share knowledge, failure to use

knowledge effectively, and difficulties of capturing tacit knowledge [1].Many forces are at work in KMS acceptance when implementation is driven from top: some workers wish

to please their managers; some conform to demands imposed by performance criteria; and some conform to peerpressures. Given that proactive use of KMS is a prerequisite for alleviating many of the problems of ineffective use

of knowledge and knowledge sharing, many researchers and practitioner experts have recommended the use of

incentives and cultural interventions. However, execution of these recommendations is limited by incompleteunderstanding of the problem at hand as well as the means for solving it: fostering commitment and motivation that

is necessary for the success of KMS implementation.

3.1.1 The Continuum of CommitmentWhile most discussions of knowledge management have treated commitment as a binary variable, underlying theory

suggests otherwise. Rather, commitment can be better represented as a continuum ranging from negligible or partial

commitment to absolute commitment to the organization's KM program, and, from avoidance (nonuse) to meagerand unenthusiastic use (compliant use) to skilled, enthusiastic and consistent use (committed use) of KMS.

This view draws upon Kelmans [19] theory of social influence that explains theoretical distinctionsbetween the varied processes by which social influences affect behavior, and has been used in previous research to

explain users adoption of new information systems (cf: [10]) and other innovations (cf: [21]). Kelmans distinctions

include the three processes of compliance (to gain a reward), identification (to establish or maintain relationships),

and internalization (when the behavior is congruent with value system).

3.1.2 Commitment by ComplianceWhen the adopted behavior is primarily a result of incentives, rewards, or punishments, the user may not necessarily

appreciate or understand the value of the desired behavior. Given that the primary focus of the compliant knowledge

workers attention is on the carrot or stick, emphasis is more on maximizing the incentive, and notnecessarily onmaximizing the value added by ones own contributions.

Quantity-based incentives for knowledge sharing or knowledge use would likely lead to minimalinvestment in the process itself and users would focus instead on a high number of contributions of low value. In the

longer run, such problems lead to increased amounts of information in the common pool, but dramatically increased

effort is consumed in finding high quality information that of value in specific organizational contexts.3.1.3 Commitment by IdentificationWith commitment by identification, the adopted behavior is primarily a result of the knowledge workers need for

acceptance by peers and managers and esteem based upon such recognition. Through such identification processes,knowledge workers seek to adopt the values, beliefs, or behavior associated with other well known, recognized, or

popular figures in order to emulate their perceived social image.Two caveats are important about the effectiveness of the social influence processes of identification. First,

the specific role models should be chosen carefully as knowledge workers primarily identify with these socialcharacters and not necessarily with the espoused values or related behaviors. Second, regardless of the conformity of

behavior, the specific content of the induced behavior is more or less irrelevant to the knowledge worker.


4/55

3.1.4 Commitment by InternalizationMost organizations and managers emphasize the need for imparting values that guide specific behaviors. This is not

surprising given that values have a much longer-lasting effect than rewards, punishments, or social recognition in

sustaining desired behaviors. Internalization of values, rather than focusing on extrinsic rewards or social referents,ensures that the knowledge worker is invested at the deepest level in the prescribed behavior that serves the specific

values.Given that there is no 'other' involved, commitment in this case is self-generated and hence there is lesser, if

any, chance of deceiving or cheating that may be present in the case of compliance without real uptake. In this case,

the knowledge worker does not only want to be perceived as contributing to the value of the knowledge processes,

but is genuinely invested in doing so. One can deduce that such behavior would be evident in KMS in which there is

greater focus on value addition through high quality contributions rather than on gaming the system by artificially

inflating the quantity with lesser regard for quality.Compliance can occur only if the organizational managers have control over the knowledge workers whose

behavior they want to change. Identification will serve as a basis for behavior change only if there is strong

affiliation between the role models established and the knowledge workers whose behavior needs to be modeled

accordingly. As noted earlier, both compliance and identification can be manipulative as they may be used to causebehavior change through rewards, punishments, and social recognition. On the other hand, internalization represents

a self-governing process of commitment that produces more lasting change in behavior.The above processes describe the varieties of influence [41] that may exist alone or in combination along

a continuum of use of the KMS: from avoidance or pro-forma and uninvested use on one end to committed and

enthusiastic use on the other [21].The next section describes in detail the motivation construct so that a better understanding of knowledge

workers' behavior is possible based upon an integrated perspective of processes underlying commitment and

motivation.

3.2 Theoretical Bases for KMS User MotivationOften the issue of motivation generates strong debate about incentives for knowledge workers [9]. Regardless, it is

recognized that rewards depend to a great extent on the cultural norms in an organization or group. Wenger et al.([44], p. 181-183) describe the use of rewards and incentives for contributions to KM programs in organizationssuch as Daimler-Chrysler, McKinsey, World Bank, and Xerox. At Daimler-Chrysler the "executive Tech Clubs" areresponsible for reviewing the results of engineering Tech Clubs with emphasis on quantitative data about

contributions to knowledge assets such as completed sections of the Engineering Book of Knowledge (EBoK). At

McKinsey, competitive presentations of various practice-development teams at luxury resorts with attention and

recognition from peers and senior directors are used as rewards for the winning teams.Wenger et al. ([44], p. 182) observe that rewarding "voluntary" behavior poses a dilemma: "How do we

encourage behavior through extrinsic means when the intrinsic motivation for such behavior is considered a matter

of pride and identity?" They observe that people often value the satisfaction derived from giving for reasons of

professional affiliation or commitment to a larger cause, not because they are rewarded with a "carrot". They further

observe that Xerox technicians valued their name being posted "in lights" before thousands of peers over beingrewarded by small financial incentives. They assert that: (a) recognition by peers, not financial rewards, is the

primary motivator for community participation; and, (b) people who contribute regularly to a community often wantthat contribution to be recognized by the organization.

As described earlier, truly voluntary [internalized] behavior is based upon internal value systems of the

knowledge workers in contrast to pride and identity that characterize social influences based upon identification.

Also, their assertions do not provide a satisfactory answer to the two questions posed at the beginning of the paper:

Why do organizations often struggle with incentives for knowledge sharing for users of KMS while similar sharing

of knowledge occurs without any incentive whatsoever in several external online communities? Why do milliondollar investments of organizations in KMS often fail to whet the interest of employees while some of the same

employees participate regularly in external online communities?We believe that the above problem is attributable to ambiguity in distinguishing between intrinsic and

extrinsic motivation and confusion between the constructs of motivation and commitment as discussed by manyauthors (for example, [44], [9]). The rest of this paper presents theoretical development and empirical validation ofthese two constructs to facilitate bridging this gap in understanding that is necessary for solving the "real challenges"of KM [18].


5/55

3.2.1 The Continuum of MotivationMost discussions of knowledge management have treated extrinsic and intrinsic motivation as opposites. This is

theoretically incorrect. Drawing on self-determination theory (SDT) [11,15,35,36] motivation is more accuratelyrepresented as a gradient of knowledge workers' perceived locus of causality (PLOC) of specific behavior as

illustrated in Figure 1.

This theory is the one that has been most extensively developed in Social Psychology and validated over several

studies that relate to the issue of rewards and incentives [14]. A more complete conceptualization of intrinsic

motivation would consider the continuum of PLOC which accounts for variations in the degree to which an

intentional action is self-determined[13]. In the context of KMS, PLOC would determine to what extent intentional

knowledge use, knowledge creation, and, knowledge sharing are self-determined depending upon the actor's

perceived locus of initiation for specific behavior.This extension, developed here, has material significance for how organizational KM programs treat

motivation and related issues of incentives and rewards. In accord with the theory of self-determination, intrinsicmotivation must be understood in a relative sense that contrasts external and internal locus of the users behavior interms of the individual's organismic need for competence and self-determination [12].

As shown in Figure 1, Deci & Ryan [13] suggest that regulation of behavior can be viewed as being self-

determined, controlled, or amotivated. Both self-determined and controlled behaviors are intentional, though only

self-determined behaviors involve a true sense of choice, a sense of feeling free in doing what one has chosen to do.

Controlled behaviors, although undertaken with the intentof achieving an outcome are not truly chosen but


6/55

compelled by some internal or externalforce - one feels one has to do them, whether to attain a monetary payment

or to appease some generalized sense of authority. Thus intentional actions are differentiated along a perceived

locus of causality continuum, anchored by self-determination and [external] control. Amotivated actions, in

contrast, are ones whose occurrence is not mediated by intentionality and hence is characterized by impersonalPLOC. According to the SDT taxonomy of self-regulation, external, introjected, identified and integrated regulation

are all differing forms of extrinsic motivation and can be contrasted with amotivation and intrinsic motivation [37]:1. Intrinsic Motivation(Internal PLOC): "The inherent tendency to seek out novelty and challenges, to extend

and exercise one's capacities, to explore, and to learn." For interest and enjoyment and the inherent satisfaction in

the specific behavior, e.g. I enjoy sharing my knowledge as it gives me a sense of satisfaction. 2.External Regulation (External PLOC): "Such behaviors are performed to satisfy an external demand or

reward contingency." Based on rule following and avoidance of punishment; e.g. My manager will be upset if I did

not share my knowledge. I need to share my knowledge to do well on my performance evaluation.3.Introjected Regulation (Somewhat External PLOC): "Introjection involves taking in a regulation but not fully

accepting it as one's own. It is a relatively controlled form of regulation in which behaviors are performed to avoid

guilt or anxiety or attain ego enhancement such as pride." It is based on self- and other- approval or avoidance of

disapproval; e.g. I am expected to share knowledge by me managers and my peers. I feel guilty if I do not share myknowledge.

4.Identified Regulation (Somewhat Internal PLOC): "Identification reflects a conscious valuing of a behavioralgoal or regulation, such that the action is accepted or owned as personally important." Based on self-valued goals or

issues of personal importance; e.g. I feel great about myself when I share knowledge. 5.Integrated Regulation (Internal PLOC): "Integration occurs when identified regulations are fully assimilated

to the self, which means they have been evaluated and brought into congruence with one's other values and

needs." e.g. Sharing of knowledge makes perfect sense for me.As illustrated in Figure 1, extrinsic is not the same as external in the sense of being outside of the

individual. Introjection, identification and integration are just as internal to the person as intrinsic motivation. They

are extrinsic regulatory styles in the sense that they are concerned with the outcomes or consequences of engaging in

the behavior, rather than with the immediate rewards inherent in the specific behavior.This distinction is important because of the existing confusion in the literature about intrinsic and extrinsic

motivation discussed earlier. Current discussions (cf: [44] and [9]) on incentives and rewards in knowledgemanagement might lead one to assume that all behaviors emanating from within the individual are intrinsic andtherefore of beneficial nature. From the self-determination theory perspective, this is not the case. The consequences

of feeling controlled (i.e. non-self-determining) are the same whether the PLOC is internal or external as in the case

of external regulation, introjection, identification, and, integration as illustrated in Figure 1 [15].

This distinction is also important as it explains how intrinsic motivation contributes to the success of manypublic online virtual communities. The suggestion is not that other behaviors are not present in such self-sustaining

emergent communities of practice. Rather, intrinsic motivation ensures that the processes are primarily driven by

key participants for their own interest and enjoyment to extend and exercise one's capacities, to explore, and to

learn. The above distinction also explains the failure of many online communities that are created by organizations

and institutions but fail to build the critical mass or fail to generate value-added contributions to the knowledgeprocesses facilitated by the KMS despite incentives.


7/55

4. Research Method and Measures

The context of the study is the implementation of a Windows NT based knowledge management system in thehealthcare system to enable communication, coordination and collaboration within an organization wide

reengineering effort. The system's implementation included initial training of users with the goal of immediateimprovement in their effectiveness and productivity.

Data were collected from questionnaires completed by the users participating in the training sessions. Over

a six-week period, 35 performance-based training sessions were conducted in which 239 potential users

volunteered to participate. The specific focus of each performance-based training session was on development of

skills for performance-based activities KMS enabled communication, coordination, and collaboration activities

expected to directly influence organizational performance. These activities were identified by the managers as being

most significant for relating the system based activities to organizational performance criteria. During each training

session, the survey questionnaires were distributed to the KMS trainees who were expected to complete the

questionnaire at the end of the training session. These surveys were returned to the instructor before the trainees left

the classroom. 208 usable questionnaires were received, thus giving a response rate of over 87%. All usersparticipating in the training sessions were cognizant of the potential impact of the new KMS as introduced by the

senior management to them in very high profile meetings. All of them were familiar with the context of the high profile implementation of the new system championed by top executives and functional administrators. As

introduced to all of them in large-scale meetings, the new system was expected to facilitate organizational

transformation through introducing a new paradigm of communication, coordination, and collaboration. The specificand explicit emphasis of the 'performance-based' training on the KMS was on imparting to the users proficiency,

skills, and capabilities for effectively executing the pre-specified communication, coordination, and collaboration

activities enabled by the KMS.

4.1 Instruments Used for Data CollectionKMS User Commitmentis the degree of commitment of the knowledge worker toward the KM program

and related systems and processes based on the effect of social influences on his or her behavior. It is measured interms of Kelmans [19] processes of social influence discussed earlier -compliance, identification andinternalization. The 12-item scale developed by O'Reilly and Chatman [32] and validated by Becker et al. [3] andVandenberg et al. [43] was adapted for measuring the user commitment to the KMS.

KMS User Motivation is the construct representing user motivation and is defined as the degree to which

the system use is self-determined by the KMS user. It denotes the locus of causality of KMS use as perceived by the

user. Internal PLOC(identification PLOC and intrinsic PLOC) implies that the locus of system use is moreproximal to the users own self, whereas external PLOCimplies that the locus of system use is perceived by the user

to be more proximal to external agents. In between the two ends lies introjection PLOCwhich implies behavior is

motivated by approval seeking or by a disapproval minimizing mindset. For measuring PLOC, the scales are

adapted from Ryan and Connell's [36] methodology of 'self-determination,' which they used to determine the

respondent'sperceived locus of causality for one's actions.The measures used for empirical validation are listed in Appendix 1.

4.1.1 Reliability and Validity of MeasuresThe refinement of measures for the proposed constructs follows Churchill's [6] eight-step procedure.

Principal components analysis and maximum likelihood analysis using both varimax and oblimin rotations were

used and compared for each of the proposed constructs. The distinct factors were confirmed from the corresponding

scree test plots. Cronbachs alpha was used for determining the reliability of individual scales and subscales.

Convergent and discriminant validity of the measures was verified by observing the correlations between thevariables of possibly overlapping components.

4.2 Empirical Validation of KMS User CommitmentThe principal component analyses with varimax rotation for the proposed construct of KMS user commitment

yielded 2 distinct factors instead of the 3 proposed factors: Compliance, Identification, and Internalization. All four

items for Compliance loaded on a distinct factor, however, the three items of Identification and three items of

Internalization loaded together on another factor.


8/55

Factor loadings for all variables, which represent the correlations between the variables and the respective

factors, are greater than 0.55 and are thus considered high [31]. Together, the two observed factors account for

60.31% of the variability of the original ten variables representing KMS user commitment.The scree test plot verifies the presence of the two distinct factors having eigenvalues greater than 1. This

observation is consistent with O'Reilly, Chatman and Caldwell [33] and Sutton and Harrison [40], whose empirical

validation of compliance, identification and internalization as dimensions of organizational commitment yieldedsimilar two-factor solutions.

Together, the two factors account for 60.45% variability of the original ten variables. Cronbachs alpha for

the KMS user commitment instrument composed of the original 10 items is .8047. Alpha for the Compliance,

Identification, and Internalization subscales underlying KMS user commitment were .74, .76, and .77, respectively.

However, when the two scales for Identification and Internalization are combined, their reliability is higher than

either separately. The alpha score for the combined IDIN (Identification + Internalization) scale is .86.

Because all ten proposed items for KMS user commitment construct have high loadings, and the two scales

achieved after factor extraction have high reliability, all ten proposed items of this construct were retained in the

refined instrument. This observation was also verified by examining the loadings of individual items on the two

factors that were extracted from the principal components analysis. It was also verified that the two observed factors

are distinct, because the items within the scales correlate highly and the items across the scales have low

correlations. Specifically, a high correlation was found between the items of the Compliance scale as well asbetween the (Identification + Internalization) scale and a low correlation was found across the items of the two

factors. Convergent and discriminant validity of the measures was thus verified by observing the correlations

between the variables of possibly overlapping components.Empirical validation of the measures of KMS User Commitment supports prior theoretical discussion that

questions the dichotomous assumptions about simple presence or absence of user commitment to use, sharing,

renewal, or creation of knowledge. It also suggests that the linkage between the information-based model and the

knowledge-based view of organizations needs to be informed by understanding KMS user commitment in terms of

compliance, identification, and internalization [45].

4.3 Empirical Validation of KMS User MotivationThe principal component analyses with varimax rotation for KMS user motivation yielded three distinct

factors. The scree test plot verifies the presence of the three distinct factors, each having eigenvalue greater than 1

that together explain 66.7% of the total variance: External Regulation (External PLOC): Consisting of EXPLOC2, EXPLOC4, EXPLOC6, IJPLOC8. The last

item (Because my supervisor would think that I should use the KMS) seems to fall in the rule

followingand avoidance of punishmentcategory characterized by External PLOC.

Intrinsic Motivation (Internal PLOC): Consisting of INTPLOC1, INTPLOC2, IDPLOC3, IDPLOC4,

IDPLOC5. These items are all considered under the category of Intrinsic PLOC to include items that

reflect self-valued goalsorissues of personal importance, as well as items that characterize the notions

ofenjoymentandfun. In this broader notion, Intrinsic PLOC is considered to stand forpersonal fulfillment.


9/55

Introjected Regulation (Somewhat External PLOC): Consisting of IJPLOC1, IJPLOC2, IJPLOC3, IJPLOC4,

IJPLOC5, IJPLOC6, IJPLOC7 and EXPLOC7. All these items, including the last item originally under External

PLOC, are considered as items characterizing seekingself- and other- approvaloravoidance of disapproval.

Alpha for the 17-item PLOC scale was .88, which is comparable with earlier observations for the larger set of

users. The Alpha scores for the three subscales EXPLOC, INTPLOC, and IJPLOC are also comparable with thevalues obtained earlier: .81, .84, and .92, respectively.

The factorial solution of our exploratory analysis is comparable with other similar analyses such as that

offered by Ryan and Connell [36] who observed that the items load on two clean subscales, one external and one

internal, the two representing opposite ends of the PLOC continuum. In addition, the middle-ground items, such asthose originally in the introjection and identification categories, generally manifest a cross-loading pattern.

It was also verified that the three observed factors are distinct, since the items within the subscales correlate

highly and the items across the subscales have low correlations. Specifically, the variables within each of the threeobserved subscales had high correlations with other variables within the same scales and low correlations with other

variables within other scales. Convergent and discriminant validity of the measures was thus verified by observing

the correlations between the variables of possibly overlapping components.Alpha for the KM user motivation instrument composed of the original PLOC scale containing 22 items

was .78. However, the elimination of five items that loaded on more than one factor resulted in a noticeable increase

in reliability: Alpha for the shortened KM user motivation scale containing 17 items is .92. Alpha for the EXPLOC,

INTPLOC, and IJPLOC subscales obtained after elimination of five items that loaded on more than one factor are

.777, .845, and .916, respectively.Empirical validation of the measures of KMS User Motivation supports prior theoretical discussion that

questions the dichotomous assumptions about simple presence or absence of user motivation in using, sharing,renewal, or creation of knowledge. It also suggests that the linkage between the information-based model and the

knowledge-based view of organizations needs to be informed by understanding KMS user motivation in terms of theKMS user's degree of self-determination of behavior pertinent to use, sharing, renewal, or creation of knowledge.


10/55

5. Discussion

Despite extensive literatures on knowledge management that have grown over the past few years, there are critical

gaps in existing knowledge that have significant implications for research and practice in knowledge management[1] [18]. This study contributes to development of theory, conceptualization, and measurement of KMS user

motivation and commitment as antecedents of KMS implementation success. Industry surveys as well as academicresearch literatures suggest that these two constructs are of critical importance to advancement of research and

practice for successful implementation of organizational KMS. Alavi and Leidner [1] have underscored the need for

research on conditions that facilitate knowledge creation and understanding of organizational cultures that can foster

knowledge creation.This study developed the theoretical bases for understanding the knowledge workers' commitment and

motivation constructs and supported these with empirical validation of the proposed constructs in the context of a

real world organizational study of KMS implementation. Future empirical research on the integration of motivation

and commitment within diverse implementation contexts of KMS and organizational knowledge management

programs is expected to further advance the theoretical and empirical development of the proposed framework.Prior literature has seemed to imply an infallibility of formal incentives, but theoretical and empirical

evidence exists to suggest that incentives may not always be beneficial for facilitating users' creation, sharing, use,

and application of knowledge. The theoretical bases explained in this paper and validated in prior empirical studiesin related domains also suggest detrimental implications of formal incentives in similar social, cultural, and technical

contexts [14] where value-driven behavior is desirable.It is being increasingly realized that organizational performance often depends more on the ability to turn

knowledge into effective action and less on the knowledge itself [1]. It has also been emphasized that further

research in Information Systems should attempt to bridge the gap between the information-based model of the

organization and the knowledge based view that recognizes diverse perspectives, values and interests of KM users

[45]. By developing the theoretical, conceptual, and empirical basis for KMS user motivation and commitment

issues, this study contributes to understanding of the critical linkages of motivation and commitment between the

information-inputs and knowledge-action-outputs. Better understanding of the role of commitment and motivation in

the above equation will facilitate balanced investments in IT infrastructures and social-cultural infrastructuresrequired for leveraging tacit knowledge [39,42,46].

Better understanding of commitment and motivation of knowledge workers will also help in alleviating the"knowledge application gap" [1] resulting from what users know and what they [choose to] do ordo not [choose to]

do [34]. Organizational attempts to explicate, share and leverage tacit knowledge often presume not

only capability butwillingness on the part of KM users to co-opt in the organizational agenda of knowledge sharing

[1,39,46]. The measures proposed and validated in this paper would facilitate organizational assessment of suchpremises that have critical relevance for organizational attempts to explicate, share and leverage tacit knowledge. It

is also possible that motivation and commitment might change as the KMS becomes a part of the daily work

activities of the users. Therefore longitudinal studies of real world organizational implementations of KMS can

advance our understanding of how commitment and motivation dynamically evolve over extended use. Such

longitudinal studies could deploy behavioral intentions to use the system as an intermediate variable with specificorganizational performance variables that can more concretely define the dependent variable of KMS success. The

context of performance-based training and performance-based activities described in this study may be helpful in bridging the gap between the information and technology inputs and the organizational performance related

dependent variables.Research is now needed that moves beyond the source and state of knowledge to consider the conditions

that facilitate knowledge creation [1]. Accordingly, researchers need to develop conceptual and theoretical linkages

beyond the information-inputs to understand how they translate into knowledge-action-outputs and organizational

performance outcomes. An understanding of these issues is necessary for the justification of organizationalinvestments in the technologies and infrastructures as CEOs demand greater justifications of the dollars spent on

KMS and projected contributions to the bottom line.Also, a richer understanding of sense making and action linkages between information-inputs and

knowledge-action-outputs is necessary. Existing literature in Information Systems has focused on social constructionof knowledge and its implications for organizational performance. As individual level commitment and motivationof actors in a given social network influence success of KMS implementations, a better understanding of relating theindividual, group, and organizational levels of analysis is needed. Given the role ofmeaningandsense makingin the

above linkages, better theoretical, conceptual, and empirical understanding of these constructs will help link the


11/55

information-inputs and knowledge-action-outputs. Any understanding of these constructs will need to consider how

social influences and self-determination influence individual and collective meaning and sense making.Sparse research on the above topics might help explain the existing failures of KMS implementations that

are grounded on the information-inputs but are disconnected from knowledge-action-outputs. Therefore, there isneed for better understanding of how to account for motivation, commitment, meaning, and, sense making in

comparing human performance to machine performance [30]. Except in very limited cases, the sense making andself-determining nature of humans cannot be ignored in comparing human performance with the performance ofmachines. Better understanding of the issues outlined here is expected to result in KMS that effectively leverage the

strengths ofbothtechnologies and humans for maximizing the organizational returns on investments in technology

and social-cultural infrastructures of knowledge management.Acknowledgements: We are thankful to the three anonymous reviewers for their feedback on earlier version of this paper and tothe Center for Creation and Management of Digital Ventures (CCMDV) at Syracuse University for research support.


12/55

References[1] Alavi, M. and Leidner, D. Review: knowledge management and knowledge management systems: conceptual foundationsand research issues.MIS Quarterly, v. 25, no1, Mar. 2001, p. 107-36[2] Barth, S. KM Horror Stories.Knowledge Management. 3, 10, October 2000, pp. 36-40.[3] Becker, T. E., Randall, D. M., and Riegel, C. D. The Multidimensional View of Commitment and the Theory of ReasonedAction: A Comparative Evaluation.Journal of Management, 21, 1995, pp. 617- 638.[4] Charles, S. K. Knowledge Management Lessons from the Document Trenches. Online, Jan-Feb 2002, 26, 1, pp. 22-29.

[5] Chiem, P.X. Trust Matters.Knowledge Management,4, n.5, May 2001, pp. 50-55.[6] Churchill, G.A. (1979). A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs. Journal of MarketingResearch, 16, 64-73.[7] Darley, J.M. The Dynamics of Authority Influence in Organizations and the Unintended Action Consequences. In J.M.Darley, D.M. Messick, and, T.R. Tyler (Eds.), Social Influences on Ethical Behavior in Organizations. Mahwah, N.J.: LawrenceErlbaum Associates, 2001, 37-52.[8] Davenport, T. H., De Long, D.W. and Beers, M.C. Successful Knowledge Management Projects. Sloan ManagementReview, 39, 2, Winter 1998, pp. 43-57.

[9] Davenport, T.H. and Prusak, L. Working Knowledge: HowOrganizations Manage What They Know. Boston: HarvardBusiness School Press, 1998.[10] Davis, F. D. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly,13, 1989, pp. 319-340.[11] Deci, E. L. Intrinsic Motivation. New York: Plenum Press, 1975.[12] Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M.Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum Press,1985.

[13] Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. A Motivational Approach to Self-Integration in Personality. In R. Dienstbier (Ed.), NebraskaSymposium on Motivation (pp. 237-288). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1991.[14] Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewardson intrinsic motivation.Psychological Bulletin, v. 125, 1999, 627-668.[15] Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (Eds.), HandbookOf Self-Determination Research, 2002, University of Rochester Press,Rochester: NY.[16] Dyer, G. and McDonough, B. The State of KM,Knowledge Management, v. 4, no. 5, May 2001.[17] Huber, G.P. Transfer of Knowledge in Knowledge Management Systems: Unexplored Issues And SuggestedStudies.European Journal of Information Systems, v. 10, no. 2, June 2001, 72-79.

[18] KPMG Consulting.Knowledge Management Research Report, Netherlands: KPMG, 2000.[19] Kelman, H. C. Compliance, Identification, and Internalization: Three Processes of Attitude Change? Journal of ConflictResolution, 2, 1958, pp. 51-60.[20] Kelman, H.C. Ethical Limits on the Use of Influence in Hierarchical Relationships. In J.M. Darley, D.M. Messick, and, T.R.Tyler (Eds.), Social Influences on Ethical Behavior in Organizations. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2001, 11-20.[21] Klein, K. J. and Sorra, J. S. The Challenge of Innovation Implementation.Academy of Management Journal, 21, 1996, pp.

1055-1080.[22] Malhotra, Y. Knowledge Management in Inquiring Organization.Proceedings of the 3rd Americas Conference on

Information Systems, August, 1997, pp. 293-295.[23] Malhotra, Y. Deciphering the Knowledge Management Hype.Journal for Quality & Participation, July-August, 1998, v.21, no. 4, pp. 58-60.[24] Malhotra, Y. Knowledge Management for E-Business Performance: Advancing Information Strategy to 'InternetTime'.Information Strategy: The Executive's Journal, Summer, 2000, v. 16, no. 4, pp. 5-16.[25] Malhotra, Y. From Information Management to Knowledge Management: Beyond the 'Hi-Tech Hidebound' Systems. InK.Srikantaiah & M.E.D. Koenig (Eds.),Knowledge Management for the Information Professional. Medford, N.J.: InformationToday Inc., 2000, pp. 37-61.[26] Malhotra, Y. Knowledge Management and New Organization Forms: A Framework for Business ModelInnovation.Information Resources Management Journal, v. 13, no. 1, January-March, 2000, pp. 5-14.[27] Malhotra, Y. Expert Systems for Knowledge Management: Crossing the Chasm Between Information Processing and SenseMaking,Expert Systems With Applications, v. 20, no. 1, 2001, pp. 7-16.[28] Malhotra, Y. Information Ecology and Knowledge Management: Toward Knowledge Ecology for HyperturbulentOrganizational Environments. In Kiel, Douglas L. (Ed.), UNESCO Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS), 2002, inpress.[29] Malhotra, Y. Why Knowledge Management Systems Fail? Enablers and Constraints of Knowledge Management in HumanEnterprises. In Holsapple, C.W. (Ed.),Handbook on Knowledge Management, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany, 2002, in

press.[30]Nissen, M. An Experiment To Assess The Performance Of A Redesign Knowledge System.Journal of ManagementInformation Systems, v. 17, no 3, Winter 2000-2001, p. 25-43.[31]Nunnally, J. C. and Bernstein, I. H.Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993.[32] O'Reilly, C., III, & Chatman, J. Organizational Commitment and Psychological Attachment: The Effects of Compliance,Identification, and Internalization on Prosocial Behavior.Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 1986, pp. 492-499.


13/55

[33] O'Reilly, C., III, Chatman, J., and Caldwell, D. F. People and Organizational Culture: A Profile Comparison Approach toAssessing Person-Organization Fit.Academy of Management Journal, 34, 1991, pp. 487-516.[34] Pfeffer J., and Sutton R. I. The Knowledge-Doing Gap: How Smart Companies Turn Knowledge into Action, HarvardBusiness School Press, Boston: MA, 2000.[35] Rigby, C. S., Deci, E. L., Patrick, B. C., & Ryan, R. M. Beyond the Intrinsic-Extrinsic Dichotomy: Self-Determination in

Motivation and Learning.Motivation and Emotion, 16(3), 1992, pp. 165-185.[36] Ryan, R. M., & Connell, J. P. Perceived Locus of Causality and Internalization: Examining Reasons for Acting in Two

Domains.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 57(5), 1989, pp. 749-761.[37] Richard, M. and Edward L. Deci. Self-Determination Theory And The Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, SocialDevelopment, and Well-Being. American Psychologist, 55, pp. 68-78, 2000.[38] Schultze, U. and Leidner, D.E. Studying Knowledge Management in Information Systems Research: Discourses andTheoretical Assumptions.MIS Quarterly, v. 26, no. 3, September 2002, pp. 213-242.[39] Stenmark, D. Leveraging tacit organizational knowledge.Journal of Management Information Systems, v. 17, no3, Winter

2000-2001, p. 9-24.[40] Sutton, C. D. and Harrison, A. W. Validity Assessment of Compliance, Identification, and Internalization as Dimensions ofOrganizational Commitment.Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 1993, pp. 217-223.[41] Sussman, M., & Vecchio, R. P. A Social Influence Interpretation of Worker Motivation. Academy of Management Review,7, 1992, pp. 177-186.[42] Tuomi, I. Data Is More Than Knowledge: Implications Of The Reversed Knowledge Hierarchy For KnowledgeManagement And Organizational Memory.Journal of Management Information Systems, v. 17, no3, Winter 2000-2001, p. 103-17.

[43] Vandenberg, R. J., Self, R. M., and Seo, J. H. A Critical Examination of the Internalization, Identification, and Compliance

Commitment Measures.Journal of Management, 20, 1994, pp. 123- 140.[44] Wenger, E., McDermott, R., and Snyder, W.M. Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge.Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2002.[45] Zack, M.H. If Managing Knowledge is the Solution, then What's the Problem? In Malhotra, Y. (Ed.), KnowledgeManagement and Business Model Innovation, 2001, Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.[46] Zack, M.H. Managing Codified Knowledge. Sloan Management Review, Volume 40, Number 4, Summer, 1999, pp. 45-58.

Management Development is best described as the process from which managers learn and improve their skills not only to benefit

themselves but also their employing organisations.[1]

In organisational development (OD), the effectiveness of management is recognised as one of the determinants of organisational success.

Therefore, investment in management development can have a direct economic benefit to the organisation.

Managers are exposed to learning opportunities whilst doing their jobs, if this informallearning is used as a formal process then it is regarded

as management development.

In 2004 the spend per annum per manager on management and leadership development was 1,035, an average of 6.3 days per

manager.[2]

What management development includes:


14/55

structured informal learning: work-based methods aimed at structuring the informal learning which will always take place formal training courses of various kinds: from very specific courses on technical aspects of jobs to courses on widermanagement skills

education: which might range from courses for (perhaps prospective) junior managers or team leaderso Level 2 Teamleading (ILM)o NVQ Level 3o Certificate in Management /Studieso Diploma in Management /Studieso MSc/MA in management or Master of Business Administration (MBA) degrees.The term 'leadership' is often used almost interchangeably with 'management' Leadership which deals with emotions is an important

component of management which is about rational thinking.. [3]

The Management Charter Intiative (MCI) originally set out management competencies for management S/NVQs, these competencies arenow part of the National Qualification Framework (NQF), it is from these competencies that managers can be assessed and development

needs determined.


15/55

Articles - Our Motivational Stories

Barriers to Goal Setting

One of the biggest barriers to goal setting can be the thought that, sometimes our goals can seem beyond our

reach. Use the "next-mile" principle to help you overcome your barriers to goal setting.

Curiously, one of the biggest barriers to goal setting

can be too much focus on the bigger picture. It's one

thing to set a challenging, worthwhile goal, it's quite

another to achieve it. Sometimes, what we desire can

seem too far away or just too hard to reach.

Of course, there is much written on this site about

the importance of leadership with vision, purpose and

passion. Thesecharacteristics of leadership are

essential and we still agree with Henry Thoreau when

he said:

Ifone advances confidently in the direction ofhisdreams, and endeavours to live the life which hehas imagined, he will meet with a successunexpected in common hours

However, what if your aspiration seems just that - a dream? What if you think the endeavours required seem toobig a barrier to your goal setting before you even begin? Perhaps the answer comes in taking things step by step.The next-mile principle is illustrated by this short story from our growing collection of motivational stories. Thestory shows how difficult or seemingly impossible goals can be achieved. Not by narrowing your vision, loweringthe bar or altering the dream. Rather than shortening your grasp, perhaps the answer lies in shortening yoursteps....

Benefits of Time Management

This article uses the story of a Greek fisherman showing a Harvard MBA graduate the real meaning of time

management.

Which benefits of time management are you hoping to achieve? To save some time by consolidating activities? Toeliminate typical time wasters? To feel more in control and that you're doing more of the activities that matter?

All of these are valuable but arguably the real benefits come when we think laterally about what timemanagement means.

Here are two things to consider when evaluating the benefits of time management. Firstly, consider a counter-

intuitive thought.

Try defining success in qualitative rather than quantitative terms. It may be that broad, subjective benefits areultimately of greater benefit than the narrow specifics we normally associate with time management theory.

Secondly, begin any activity or project with the end in mind. If you're going to put the time and effort into anactivity, ask yourself, is it really what I want to do? If the benefit of time management is the quality of life we getfrom the time we invest, begin any task with the end in mind.


16/55

Destination Success? Try the Road Less TravelledIs your destination success? Perhaps; if you try taking a road less travelled. This classic poem might inspire you to

reach that destination, and maybe to move from good to great......

Ever thought about where you're going? Is your destination success? This article combines a classic motivational

poem with the priceless advice of best-selling author Jim Collins. In his book: "Good to Great", Collins convincingly

examined what it was that turned good companies into greats. A basic tenet of his book was "first who ... then

what". For these companies, one of the first steps in changing from good to great was to take a road less

travelled.

When Collins and his team started their research project they expected to find that "the first step in taking a

company from good to great would be to set a new direction, a new vision and strategy for the company, and then

to get people committed and aligned behind the new direction." However, the leaders of these great companies

chose a different path.

What did Collins' successful business leaders do differently? Collins' favourite analogy was that of driving a business

like a bus, but one without a particular destination on display. Instead, we imagine the bus with a sign saying

simply - "Destination: Success". On this bus, the driver hasn't decided on a destination then recruited the crew.

On Collins' bus, the first decision is who, not where. "... first get the right people on the bus, the wrong people off

the bus, and the right people in the right seats, then figure where to drive the bus." Once on the bus, the right

people together would work out how to "take it someplace great."

The power of taking a road less travelled is captured in a famous poem by Robert Frost: The Road Not Taken.

Although its possible to interpret the poem in different ways, the most popular interpretation is that it encourages

non-conformity.

It epitomises the value of setting off in new directions, taking a direction that others may not have journeyed.Choosing a different path. Maybe destination success!


17/55

Goal Setting Leaders Put Their Legacy First

Alfred Nobel's premature obituary illustrates the importance of legacy to our happiness, and how it's never too late

to plan for it!

What separates goal setting leaders from the crowd? In any given situation, true leaders are inclined to look at the

bigger picture. True, narrow life goals are important - life is for living, after all. Leaders though, might reasonably

ask: is true success measured by what we have, or by what we leave behind?

As Russell Crowes "Maximus" shouts, when exhorting his troops to battle in the opening scenes of the epic film

"Gladiator": What we do in this life echoes in eternity!

Lesson on Goal Setting

An unusual lesson on goal setting and an interesting business success story.

Want a counter-intuitive lesson on goal setting? How about: not setting goals! Well, perhaps allowing goal-free

time, to be more precise. Most advice on goal setting or time management in the workplace implies the need for

order, structure and regimentation.

It's important though, to ensure that you and your colleagues allow yourself time to think. In fact, one notablebusiness success story indicates how sticking to just such a free-time policy has paid a world-famous dividend.....

A Note-able Story

What if you and your staff could spend 15% of your time on projects of your own

choosing, pursuing ideas you think could make a difference for your organisation? What

kind of lesson on goal setting would that be? That's exactly what U.S. corporation 3M

have done to encourage creativity and to allow people with ideas to take a lead.

The 15 percent rule, as it has become known, has been the catalyst for some of 3M's most

famous products, such as Scotch tape and "notably" Post-it Notes.

But the "Post-it note" story is not just about giving people the time and the opportunity

to follow their ideas. It's also a lesson in perseverance and in realising success fromfailure.

Sticking but not remaining stuck!

In 1968, 3M scientist Dr Spencer Silver discovered a formula for a glue which didn't seem to work properly. It was

sticky, but didn't stick! Another failed experiment?

Possibly, if not for the predicament of a colleague.

Silver's colleague Art Fry was experiencing a problem. A very frustrating problem. Whilst singing in the churchchoir his book marks kept falling out of the hymnal, causing him to lose his page. Fry needed a repositionablenote, one which would stick, but would not remain stuck. Six years after Silver's "failed" experiment, Fryremembered his colleague's low-tack glue.

You may think the story ends here and that the rest is history, but connecting a problem to a possible solution wasonly the beginning. Using 3M's 15% rule, it took Fry another three years to create a practical product. Post-it noteswere first introduced in 1977, and were in mass production by 1980. Today, Post-it is a globally recognised brand,with around 600 products.


18/55

Motivation in the Workplace: How Do You Define Your Work?

Two stories, one from Martin Seligman, the other based on a Peter Drucker story, demonstrate that in all walks of

life people can make their work more a calling than just a job. How do you define your work? These two stories

challenge us all to think again about what we do.

Motivational stories have the power to go where no business plan has ever been! In business, as in life, stories can

captivate the heart, stir the imagination and create the desire to act.

Story telling is an ancient art, but we shouldn't underestimate its effectiveness as a learning and motivational tool.

There are few better ways to learn than by merging creativity with context.

Personal Development Stories

This page contains our stories designed to help you with your personal growth. Whether in search of career

development or just a happier life.

Here's a useful goal setting tip. Reading personal development stories is one of the best ways to add wisdom, wit,

vision, colour, and fun to your personal development plan. Whatever your goal, whether personal growth or formalcareer development, you'll benefit from reading these stories.

Stress Management And Relaxation: The Bigger Picture

This article uses a story which is well known by several names. Whether you prefer buckets, rocks and water, - or

jars, golf balls and wine (like us), the important thing is to remember why you're working.

There can be no doubting the link between stress management and relaxation. Taking time off work for recreation

is essential if were to be healthy, happy managers. The trouble is, those who are most stressed are often the ones

who just cant see the wood for the trees.

The Secret of My Success.....

The Secret of My Success? This challenging story demonstrates how Christopher Reeve bravely redefined success.

It's a story that will make us all think, then maybe think again......


19/55

]


20/55

Perceived Quality Levels and their Relation to

Involvement, Satisfaction, and Purchase Intentions

Rodoula Tsiotsou

This study investigated the effect of various perceived quality levels on product involvement, overall

satisfaction and purchase intentions. The research involved a survey of 204 students at a Greek

university. The results show that perceived perceptions of product quality were significantly related to

all the variables under investigation. However, perceived quality explained more of the variance in

overall satisfaction than in product involvement and purchase intentions.

Keywords: purchase intentions, satisfaction, product involvement, perceived product quality

Introduction

Perceived product quality is perhaps one of the most important constructs in marketing. In recent years,

perceived quality has been the subject of considerable interest by both practitioners and researchers,

mainly in

services marketing (Cronin & Taylor, 1992; Parasuraman, Zeithaml & Berry 1996). However, work that

integrates the role of perceived product quality within the context of other marketing variables like

product

involvement, consumer satisfaction and purchase intentions has received less attention. Moreover, the

relationships between these constructs for goods rather than services have not been studied

extensively in

marketing.

Perceived quality has attracted the interest of practitioners and researchers because of a belief in its

beneficial

effects on marketing performance. Indeed, the belief that high perceived quality leads to repeated

purchases is

the bedrock of any business. Thus a better understanding of the relationship between perceived product

quality

and product involvement, consumer satisfaction and purchase intentions may help academics develop a

model of


21/55

consumer decision making for goods. It may also provide practitioners with indications as to where best

to

devote marketing attention and scarce corporate resources.

This study intends to contribute to the development of a conceptual framework that integrates

perceived product

quality, involvement, satisfaction and purchase intentions. Specifically, the study investigates the

relation

between differences in quality perceptions and product involvement, consumer satisfaction and

purchase

intentions. It reviews the literature on these four constructs and outlines the expected relationships.

Appropriate

measures are identified and research is carried out among sport shoes consumers. Implications for

theory

development and management are discussed, limitations of the study are noted and possible areas for

further

research are indicated.

Hypotheses

While quality is a multidimensional concept that cannot be easily defined or measured, a

distinction can be made between objective quality and perceived quality. Objective quality

refers to the actual technical excellence of the product that can be verified and measured

(Monroe & Krishman 1985). In contrast, perceived quality is the consumers judgment about

a products overall excellence or superiority (Zeithaml 1988). Perceived product quality is a

global assessment ranging from bad to good, characterized by a high abstraction level and

refers to a specific consumption setting.

The importance of perceived quality derives from its beneficial impact on purchase intentions,

although contradictory research findings have been reported in the literature. Some scholars

support a positive direct effect of perceived quality on purchase intentions (Carman 1990;

Boulding, Staelin & Zeithaml 1993; Parasuraman et al. 1996), others report only an indirect


22/55

Page 1 of 10 http://marketing-bulletin.massey.ac.nz Marketing Bulletin, 2005, 16,

Research Note 4

effect through satisfaction (Cronin & Taylor 1992; Sweeney, Soutar, & Johnson 1999) and

yet others argue that both relationships exist (Tsiotsou 2006). However, it is of note that the

dual effect (direct and indirect) of perceived product quality on purchase intentions has been

found for goods, while the single effects (direct or indirect) have been reported from studies

focused on services.

Although perceived quality is generally treated as a post-purchase construct (Holbrook &

Corfman 1985; Roest & Pieters 1997), some scholars (Rust & Oliver 1994) support the notion

that perceived quality is both a pre- and post-purchase construct, as they argue that a previous

product experience is not needed to assess quality. Whether an interaction, a direct and/or

indirect effect exists between perceived product quality and purchase intentions, marketing

scholars agree that a relationship between these two constructs exists. Thus, it is hypothesized

that:

H1: Consumers perceiving a product being of high quality have higher intentions to purchase

the product than consumers perceiving a product being of low quality.

Often, the terms perceived quality and satisfaction have been used interchangeably, especially

among practitioners. However, Rust and Oliver (1994) proposed that perceived quality and

satisfaction differ in two ways: perceived quality is a more specific concept based on product

and service features, whilst satisfaction can result from any dimension (e.g. loyalty,

expectations). In addition, perceived quality can be controlled to a certain degree by a

company whilst satisfaction can not. Thus, it is suggested that when perceived quality and

satisfaction are regarded as overall assessments, perceived quality is understood as an

antecedent of satisfaction and therefore precedes it (Llusar, Zornoza & Tena 2001, p.721).

The research findings reported by Caruana (2002) and Tsiotsou (2006) verify the preceding

role of perceived quality and suggest a direct effect of perceived quality on consumer


23/55

satisfaction. Thus, it is expected that the higher the perceived quality of a product, the higher

the consumer satisfaction. There is no agreement however, on whether there is an interaction

effect between perceived quality and satisfaction. For some researchers no interaction effect

exists between the two concepts (Llusar, Zornoza & Tena 2001) whereas others have reported

an interaction effect between satisfaction and perceived quality on purchase intentions (Taylor

& Baker 1994). Because marketing research reports that perceived quality is an important

input to consumer satisfaction it was hypothesized that:

H2: Consumers perceiving a product being of high quality are more satisfied with the product

than consumers perceiving a product being of low quality.

Another relationship proposed in this paper is that between perceived product quality and

product involvement. Involvement has been defined as a person's perceived relevance of the

object based on inherent needs, values, and interests (Zaichkowsky 1985, p.342) and more

recently as a motivational and goal directed emotional state that determines the personal

relevance of a purchase decision to a buyer (Brennan & Mavondo 2000, p.132). Involvement

has been divided into product involvement and brand-decision involvement. Brand-decision

involvement is the interest taken in making the brand selection whereas product involvement

refers to the interest a consumer finds in a product class (Zaichkowsky 1985).


Research Note 4

Marketing researchers have used product involvement for segmentation purposes because it is

related to consumer behavior (Warrington & Shim 2000). Involvement has been related to

information processing and search behavior (Bloch, Sherrell & Ridgway 1986), to brand

loyalty and brand commitment (Beatty & Kahle 1988; Knox 2003), money spent and buying

frequency (Shim & Kotsiopulos 1993). Furthermore, it has been found to have a direct effect

on the level of satisfaction (Richins & Bloch 1991; Tsiotsou 2006), and to be a mediator

between mood and shopping intentions (Swinyard 1993). However, the relationship between


24/55

product involvement and perceived product quality has not been studied adequately in

marketing.

There have been some studies which have indirectly linked involvement to perceived quality

through various cues (Zaichkowsky 1988). Research has suggested that involvement affects

the way quality cues operate. For example, low-involvement consumers are more inclined to

adopt price as a cue whereas high-involvement consumers in addition to price, consider a

variety of cues (Zaichkowsky 1988). However, there has been little to connect involvement

and perceived quality directly. Tsiotsou (2006) found a direct relationship between these two

constructs and reports product involvement is a significant predictor of perceived product

quality.

Another recent study on wine drinkers, suggests that there are differences in the way drinkers

at varying involvement levels approach the quality of the product. High-involvement drinkers

differ from low-involvement drinkers in the conceptualization of product quality and in the

importance of certain product attribute (Charters & Pettigrew 2006). Thus, it is expected that:

H3: Consumers perceiving a product being of high quality are more involved with the product

than consumers perceiving a product being of low quality.

In summary, there are a range of differing opinions about the relationships between the

various constructs outlined above, and these need to be resolved. This study is an attempt to

contribute to this process. The purpose of the study was to investigate the relationship

between perceived quality and consumers product involvement, overall satisfaction, and

purchase intentions. Specifically, the objective was to examine how different levels of

perceived product quality relate to consumers level of involvement, satisfaction and purchase

intentions.

Method

The particular focus of the research is on university students and sports shoes. A study conducted by

Hsu, Wu


25/55

and Tien (2003) reported that university students attributed a symbolic value to sport shoes related to

their

lifestyle and showed a high degree of involvement with the product. This would therefore seem an ideal

group to

use to explore the relationships between perceived quality, involvement, satisfaction and purchase

intention.

Thus, an anonymous questionnaire was given to 226 university students in Athens, Greece. The

response rate

was 92%.


Research Note 4

Instrument

The questionnaire consisted of four parts (Table 1). Part I included four questions related to

sport shoes (use, time of use, frequency, importance of attributes).

Table 1: Items of the Study Questionnaire

___________________________________________________________________________

Part I Use of Sport Shoes Scale

___________________________________________________________________________

Q1: Do you wear sport shoes? YES NO

Q2: When do you wear sport shoes?

(during exercise, all day long, when you walk, at work) YES NO

Q3: How often do you wear sport shoes? (1=very rarely, 5= very often)

Q4: What are the most important attributes (1=not important, 5= very important)

taken into account when buying sport shoes?

(Quality, Fashionable, Anatomic, color, design, Cheap)

___________________________________________________________________________

Part II Perceived Quality, Satisfaction, Purchase Intentions Scale


26/55

___________________________________________________________________________

Q1: How would you evaluate the quality of your sport shoes? (1=very bad, 7=very good)

Q2: Overall, are you satisfied with your sport shoes? (1=very dissatisfied, 7=very satisfied)

Q3: Will you buy sport shoes of the same brand? yes, no, maybe, do not know

___________________________________________________________________________

Part III Personal Involvement Inventory (7 point bi-polar scale)

___________________________________________________________________________

important - unimportant

irrelevant - relevant

means a lot means nothing

worthless - valuable

interesting - boring

unexciting to me - exciting

unappealing to me - appealing

not needed - needed

mundane - fascinating

uninvolving - involving

___________________________________________________________________________

Part IV Demographics

___________________________________________________________________________

Q1: Gender

Q2: Age

Q3: Education

Q4: Marital status

___________________________________________________________________________


27/55

Part II consisted of three items. The first item measured perceived product quality (7 point

scale; 1 = very bad quality, 7 = very good quality). The second item referred to overall

satisfaction (7 point scale; 1 = very dissatisfied, 7 very satisfied) and the third item asked

about purchase intentions.


Research Note 4

Part III measured the respondents involvement with sport shoes. The revised version of the

Personal Involvement Inventory (PII) developed by Zaichkowsky (1985, 1994) was used to

measure involvement with sport shoes. The Personal Involvement Inventory (PII) has a

reported reliability of 0.90 and has been extensively used in the marketing literature to

measure consumer involvement with products, advertising, and purchase decisions

(Goldsmith & Emmert 1991). Part IV gathered demographic data.

Sample

The sample consisted of 128 females (63%) and 76 males (37%), with a range in age from 17

to 45 years (mean = 21.64, median = 21). Most of them were first time students (90%)

whereas 10% already held a bachelors degree. The majority of the respondents were single

(93%).

From the sample of 204 subjects, 197 (96.56%) wore sports shoes. The majority wore them

very often (47.1%) or often (21.2%); 67.9% wore sport shoes all day long and 17.3% only

during exercise. Good quality (32.2%), innovative design (23.6%) and anatomic

manufacturing (15.1%) were cited as the main attributes taken into account when buying sport

shoes.

Analysis

Preliminary inspection suggested that assumptions made in using the MANOVA

(independence of observations, equality of variance-covariance matrices for the independent

variable and normality of the dependent variables) were not compromised to any significant


28/55

extent. Furthermore, using Stevens (1992) sample size recommendations for MANOVA, the

size of the groups (low=60, medium=74, and high=63) was considered more than adequate

for running a 3-group MANOVA (power = 0.90 at =0.05).

Results

One-way Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) was used to uncover group

differences across multiple variables in a design with one factor (perceived quality). The

MANOVA was used to investigate the effect of different perceived quality levels on

satisfaction, involvement and purchase intentions. The independent variable, perceived sports

shoe quality, was used to classify respondents as low, medium, and high quality (with group

sizes 60, 74 and 63 respectively). The dependent variables of the study were product

involvement, overall satisfaction and purchase intentions. The results of the MANOVA are

presented on Table 2.

Table 2: Mean Ratings for the Dependent Variables in Each Perceived Quality Group

a

___________________________________________________________________________

Perceived Sport Shoe Quality Level

Variable Low Medium High

___________________________________________________________________________

Purchase Intentions 2.15 (1.039) 2.65 (0.711) 2.94 (0.246)

Overall Satisfaction 5.02 (0.813) 5.88 (0.661) 6.54 (0.563)

Involvement 4.26 (1.049) 5.11 (0.951) 5.57 (0.962)

___________________________________________________________________________

a

Table contains means and (in parentheses) standard deviations.


Research Note 4


29/55

Follow-up Analyses of Variance (ANOVAs) and pair-wise comparisons using the Tukey test

were conducted to determine if any differences existed within the groups in the dependent

variables. The null hypothesis of no differences was rejected (Wilks =0.499, p=0.000).

Thus, the overall MANOVA results show that the three groups based on perceived quality

differ overall in terms of their involvement, overall satisfaction, and purchase intentions.

Univariate F-tests were run for all sets of groups on the dependent variables to determine

where the differences existed (Table 3). Significant differences between groups on each

dependent variable were detected (p=0.00). The eta squares (

2

) of the univariate F-tests

indicated that perceived sport shoes quality explained more of the variance in overall

satisfaction (0.441), than in product involvement (0.225) and purchase intentions (0.157).

Table 3: ANOVA Results for the Dependent Variables

___________________________________________________________________________

Variable F Significance ETA Square

___________________________________________________________________________

Purchase Intentions 18.081 0.000 0.157

Overall Satisfaction 76.701 0.000 0.441

Involvement 28.228 0.000 0.225

___________________________________________________________________________

To protect against family-wise error, group contrasts for all the dependent variables were

tested using the Tukey procedure. Pair-wise multiple comparison tests tested each pair of

perceived quality groups to identify similarities and differences. All the contrasts were

significant at the 0.05 level except one (medium vs. high perceived quality group on purchase

intentions) - see Table 4.


30/55

Table 4: Perceived Sport Shoes Quality Contrasts

___________________________________________________________________________

Contrast Estimate (Standard Error) 95% Interval

___________________________________________________________________________

Purchase Intentions

___________________________________________________________________________

Low vs. High -0.79

a

(0.132) -1.10, -0.47

Medium vs. High -0.29 (0.126) -0.58, 0.01

Low vs. Medium -0.50

a

(0.127) -0.80, -0.20

___________________________________________________________________________

Overall Satisfaction

___________________________________________________________________________

Low vs. High -1.52

a

(0.123) -1.81, -1.23

Medium vs. High -0.66

a

(0.117) -0.14, -0.38


a

(0.119) -1.14, -0.58


31/55

___________________________________________________________________________

Involvement

___________________________________________________________________________

Low vs. High -1.32

a

(0.178) -1.74, -0.90

Medium vs. High -0.46

a

(0.169) -0.86, -0.06


a

(0.171) -1.26, -0.45

___________________________________________________________________________

a

The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.


Research Note 4

Discussion

The main objective of the study was to investigate the effect of perceived product quality on

product involvement, consumers overall satisfaction, and purchase intentions. This

investigation confirmed previous findings on the important role of perceived product quality

on consumer behavior, and lead to the identification of the effects that different levels of

perceived quality have on involvement, overall satisfaction and purchase intentions.

The multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) results showed that the three groups based

on perceived quality (low, medium and high) all differed significantly from each other with

regard to purchase intentions, overall satisfaction and involvement. Thus, the three hypotheses


32/55

of the study were confirmed and perceived product quality was able to discriminate between

the three groups.

The group-mean scores indicate that overall satisfaction, product involvement and purchase

intentions are low in the low perceived quality group and high in the high perceived quality

group. Thus, consumers who perceive the quality of their sport shoes as low are less involved

and satisfied with them whereas they report less intention for buying them in the future.

However, consumers perceiving the quality of their sport shoes to be of high quality report

higher involvement and satisfaction with them and higher intentions to buy them again.

The ANOVA results indicate that the differences between groups on each dependent variable

are significant. However, the biggest difference was detected in satisfaction. Perceived quality

explained 44% of the variance in satisfaction confirming the close relationship between the

two construct reported in previous studies (Llusar, Zornoza & Tena 2001; Caruana 2002;

Tsiotsou 2006). The second biggest difference was detected in product involvement

(explained variance 0.225) followed by purchase intentions (explained variance 0.157).

Pair-wise comparisons between perceived quality groups (low vs. high, medium vs. high, low

vs. medium) in purchase intentions, product involvement and overall satisfaction showed that

all groups were different with one exception: the medium and high perceived quality groups

did not differ significantly from each other in terms of purchase intention. Thus, consumers,

perceiving the quality of their sport shoes being of medium or high do not differ significantly

in their purchase intentions. This finding indicates that a threshold might exist in perceived

quality. When perceived quality passes this threshold, consumers will have the same (higher)

intentions to buy a product regardless of their satisfaction and involvement level with it.

The results on sport shoes (frequency of use and important attributes) indicated that sport shoe

is a frequently used product that has become an everyday and all day long worn shoe. Quality

and design are the two most important factors that are taken into account by young consumers


33/55

when buying sport shoes.

Perceived product quality is an important issue in the development and implementation of

marketing strategies aimed at brand image building and increasing market share. To build

long-term relationships with consumers, marketers must ensure that the perceived quality of

their products among consumers is high and remains so. Thus, when developing marketing

strategies, marketers have to take into consideration perceived quality and every factor

associated with the construct. Knowledge of how service quality is related to satisfaction,

purchase intentions and product involvement might enable marketing managers to develop


Research Note 4

more effective marketing mixes, as product quality is more under the control of the business.

Because perceived quality is a subjective judgment, marketing managers need to use possible

cues or attributes that are related to quality. For example, external cues such as price, brand

name, warranties, and objective quality information have been found to be related to

perceived product quality and consumers product evaluations (Rao & Monroe 1989; Dodds,

Monroe & Grewal 1991; Dodds 2002). This suggests that promoti

Role of Commitment and Motivation In

Documents

Transcript of Role of Commitment and Motivation In