Measuring National Culture Impact (NCI) At An
Individual Level:
A Conceptual Model For
Capturing The NCI On Knowledge Sharing Via Video-Conferencing
Ayman N. Alkhaldi, Zawiyah M. Yusof, Mohammad. J. Ab Aziz, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
ABSTRACT:
Knowledge is deemed necessary in giving competitive advantages. As globalization comes into view, technologies are unavoidable in enabling interactions between virtual teams, across cultures, in materialising the sharing of knowledge. This paper seeks to investigate the impact of national culture, by means of video conferencing, on knowledge sharing. Existing models that capture national cultural impact are lacking, in that they only focus on general information technology acceptance, without any particular medium other than measuring national culture at a national level. These authors were carried out a review on previous work; and examine cultural and technology acceptance theories before proposing a conceptual model. Studies on the cultural dimension yielded contradicting results. It is important to measure national cultural value at an individual level, as the results are more accurate than measuring at other levels, such as organizational or national. The proposed model will be able to address articulated views on the impact of national culture through video conferencing, on the endeavour of knowledge sharing.
Keywords: Knowledge sharing, Technology acceptance model, National culture, Video-conferencing, Virtual teams.
1.
Introduction
Cultural anthropologists argue that
technology has a cultural component that impacts
the adoption, use, and management, of the technology itself (Swigger et al, 2004). Until now, literature has been at its infancy stage with regard to the role
of national culture differences on IT acceptance, whilst globalization has
continued (Cardon & Marshall, 2008). Guo et al, (2009)
investigated the impact of the dialogue technique, through video-conferencing
technology, for sharing virtual team members in China. They rejected the
importance of the national culture impact.
Although
national culture was considered crucial in virtual teams, the impact of
national culture on knowledge sharing is often ignored in literature and not
well articulated. However, it is widely considered that cultural orientation
might inhibit or motivate the sharing of knowledge, and these cultural factors
could be more significant than the technical factors on knowledge sharing
success (Hutchings & Michailova, 2006; Huang & Trauth, 2007).
Cross-cultural differences show the most effective impact on Computer Mediated
Communications (CMC) (Law, 2007; Hutchings & Michailova, 2006). Since virtual teams are composed
of members’ cultural heterogeneity, it is therefore relevant to CMC studies (Guo et al, 2006).
The aim of this study is to
synthesize the significance of national culture on CMC generally, but
video-conferencing specifically.
2.
Base Theories For The
Proposed Conceptual Model
This study
is based on two kinds of theories, namely cultural and technology acceptance.
The following is a definition of the concepts and discussion of these theories.
2.1. Cultural
Theories
This study
utilizes Hofstede’s cultural theory, including five
dimensions and the context communication dimension from Hall’s cultural
communication theory, as bases to measure the impact of national culture. In
order to recover the related cultural theories in this study, the primary cultural
theories (with their dimensions) are reviewed as follows:
2.1.1. Hofstede’s Cultural Theory
Culture,
typically indicates the feasible perception, thoughts, and actions, of human behaviour. Culture is defined as ‘a collective programming
of the mind, which distinguishes one group from another’ (Hofstede,
1980). It is also defined as ‘a collective
programming of the mind; it manifests itself, not only in values, but also in
more superficial ways’ (Hofstede, 2001). Wei (2007)
argues that Hofstede’s cultural theory, with the five
dimensions, is identified as the most commonly used in information system
researches. Hofstede (2001) identified the five
independent dimensions of national culture. The following section will review
the concepts and arguments of each dimension:
·
Power
Distance. The extent to which the less
powerful members of organizations accept that power is distributed unequally
(Wei et al, 2008). In technology usage, high-power distance users pay more
attention to the community’s reaction to the technology, and then alter their
reaction, relying on their place within the hierarchical structure. However,
low-power distance users are more self-governing in their technology use (Li et
al, 2009).
·
Individualism
versus Collectivism. This refers to the
degree to which individuals are supposed to look after themselves or remain
integrated into groups and family (Wei et al, 2008). In high collectivist
cultures, users have a tendency to focus more on the community
to which they belong. They are more impacted by their peers and superiors, by
satisfying their opinions; however, the opposite occurs in individualistic
cultures. In technology adoption and use, high
collectivism users care more about regarding how their community is possibly
affected by their adoption behaviours (Li et al,
2009).
·
Masculinity
versus Femininity. The degree to which
tough values, such as assertiveness, performance, success, and competition
(which are associated with the role of men), prevail over tender values, such
as quality of life, maintaining warm personal relationships, service, care for
the weak, and solidarity (which are associated with women’s roles) (Wei et al,
2008). In using technology, feminine users usually care more about building
relationships with other users, than the technology itself. They focus on
maintaining interdependency and accepting others’ suggestions and desires.
Users with feminine values are expected to conform to social pressures more
than those with highly masculine values (Li et al, 2009).
·
Uncertainty
Avoidance. The extent to which a
culture programs its members to feel either uncomfortable or comfortable, in
unstructured situations. Unstructured situations are novel, unknown,
surprising, or different from usual (Wei et al, 2008). In high uncertainty
avoidance cultures, users have a low tolerance of the unknown and risk. When
high uncertainty avoidance users do not avoid ambiguous situations, they will
seek easy rules, in order to decrease the ambiguity. Generally, high uncertainty
avoidance users are expected to comply with their community beliefs more in
adopting technology; the opposite is true for low uncertainty avoidance culture
users (Li et al, 2009).
·
Long-term
versus Short-term Time Orientation. Long-term
time orientation, means focusing on the future. It implies a cultural trend
towards delaying immediate gratification, by practicing persistence and
thriftiness. In contrast, short-term time orientation, means focusing on the
past and present, by respecting tradition and through a need to follow spending
trends (Wei et al, 2008). The technology’s usage nature shapes the users’
perception, because they have different time orientations. As users with
short-term orientation values are concerned with the difficulty of beginning to
learn the usage technology, users with long-term orientation values look
forward to the learning process and practicing, and how it would be easy to use
the technology. Long-term users perceive the support of technology to improve
their performance next time; they are also patient and enthusiastic in
affording extra effort to accomplish in their future; whilst, the opposite is
true for short-term oriented users (Li et al, 2009).
2.1.2. Hall’s Cultural Communication Theory
Hall’s
effort on cultural communication is divided into three cultural dimensions,
namely; context style; time (polychronism versus monochronism),
and Space (high versus low territoriality). This study only involves the
context style communication dimension, because the researcher found its suitability to
be synthesized with the extended model constructs, in order to explore its
effects. The definition for this dimension (Context Style Communication) is the degree to which users are aware of, and
pay attention to, any situational and contextual cues, when interpreting
messages. In quoting Hall (1976), Vatrapu & Suthers (2010) point out that the context style cultural dimension
is relevant to the contexts involving intra- and inter-cultural computer
supported collaboration groups. In quoting Hall (1976), Wang et al, (2009)
indicate that there is diversity between cultures, in the way that speakers
ground their messages to make sure that the messages have been understood, and
further quo Hall (1976) that low context is common in Western cultures,
especially U.S. culture, in their desire for more direct communication forms,
where they are relying mainly on words to express meaning. In contrast, high
context is common in Asian cultures, especially among the Chinese and Japanese,
where the desire is more for indirect communication forms, where they are
relying on the situational context to make the meaning apparent (Setlock & Fussell, 2010; Wang et al, 2010) . Briefly, understanding
messages could be easier for low context users through using textual
technologies, such as e-mail or text
chatting, than through using a rich technology, such as video-conferencing (Wang et al, 2009).
2.2. Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) Theory
TAM is ‘an information system theory that models how users come to accept and use a
technology’. It was developed by Davis (1989) to study an individual’s
acceptance and adoption of technology and information systems, and to explain
computer usage behaviour. The main components of the TAM
are the perceived usefulness and ease of use dimensions, which determine system
use.
TAM is the most popular employed theory model for examining an individual’s acceptance of technology (Lai & Li, 2010; Law, 2007; Yi et al, 2006). Researchers have used TAM on various fields of technology (Jan & Contreras, 2010). However, Durfee et al (2006) state that since TAM is an individual level adoption model, it should be applied at the individual level of culture measures. However, an investigative study suggests that TAM could only be valuable if it is extended to take in specific issues, such as cultural issues, as well in this study (Khasawneh & Ibrahim, 2008).
3. The Importance Of
Measuring The National Culture At An Individual Level
In quoting Pawlowski & Robey (2004), Dulipovici (2009) mentions that, generalizing data at an individual
level is fitting to social studies, which are related to knowledge sharing. In
social cultural studies related to CMC, the impact of culture could be measured
at either an individual, organizational, or a national level (Bagchi & Kirs, 2009; Leidner & Kayworth, 2006).
Researchers in information system fields of study shall apply cultures in a
dynamic view, culture should be investigated at the
different levels of analysis (Gaspay et al, 2009).
The measurement of national culture is one of the main challenges. Although
measuring cultural values at an individual level is significant, the majority
of cultural studies have measured the cultural values impact at the national
level of their analysis. The problem with investigating the national culture
impact at the national level is that it results in assuming that all users in a
country support the same cultural values impact. Nevertheless,
in case studies measuring the cultural constructs of individual level
processes, the national cultural level is not required (Earley,
2006). Actually, the
improvement of measures at the individual level of cultural values, support the
studies investigating how these cultural values may interrelate to impact
technology human behaviours (Li et al, 2009). (Law,
2007; Baker et al, 2009) argue that it is valuable to measure the impact of the national
culture of any country at an individual level of
analysis. However, Bagchi and Kirs (2009) point out that those studies at the individual
level of analysis, generally involved a single nation.
4.
The Impact Of
National Culture On Technology Acceptance And Adoption
Many
researchers had extended the origin TAM; different types of information system
were examined, such as e-mail, v-mail, fax, dial-up systems, and others (Lee et
al, 2003; Chuttur, 2009). The following is an
overview of cultural studies using TAM theory at an individual level of
analysis.
4.1. Cultural Studies Using TAM Theory (At An Individual Level Of Analysis)
The
following is a summary of several cultural studies, at an individual level of
analysis:
·
Durfee et al (2006) examined instance message adoption across cultures. The study, conducted in Mexico and the
United States, relied on four of Hofstede’s cultural
dimensions. They found that cultural dimensions affected instance message usage
within Mexico and the United States.
·
Srite & Karahanna
(2006) investigated IT adoption, and how four of Hofstede’s
cultural dimensions, affected the acceptance of IT in 30 countries. They found
that social influence had a stronger influence of intention to adopt an IT than
PU in high power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and masculine cultures.
·
Akour et al, (2006) examined internet usage, and
the impact of four of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions,
PEOU, and PU of managers' intentions in Jordan. They found that power distance
and collectivism impacted significantly and positively, whilst, uncertainty
avoidance and femininity had no impact at all. Furthermore, both PEOU and PU
dimensions had significant positive impacts on managers' intentions, because of
their moderation of the relationship between cultural dimensions and managers'
intentions.
·
Zakour (2007) explored IT adoption and reported
that individualistic users are more concerned about their own opinion. However,
the opposite is true for collectivists. Individuals from feminine cultures care
more about other’s opinions than those from masculine cultures. Those from high
power distance cultures care less about their superiors’ opinions; high
uncertainty avoidance cultures are more respectful of regulations; high context
cultures prefer unwritten messages, but the opposite is true in low context
cultures. High power distance cultures are less accepting of IT than those from
low power distance cultures. Masculine cultures are more established for IT
usage, because the use of IT is associated with accomplishing their goals.
·
Li et al, (2009) investigated how national culture affects the acceptance
of global websites. Five national cultural dimensions were measured by
integrating both the moderating and direct effects of cultural values, in the
scope of the USA and China; they found that individualism and time orientation
influences PEOU and PU, directly. Four of Hofstede’s
dimensions had no significant moderating effect on the relationship between
social influence and intention.
The studies
reviewed generated contrary results, such as by (Zakour,
2007; Strite, 1999) examined IT adoption; resulting
in the impact of cultural dimensions. Different results by (Li et al, 2009)
found that four of Hofstede’s dimensions had no
effect. Therefore, examining video-conferencing technology will possibly
promise different findings.
In addition,
most previous works explored the CMC in general, without focusing on a
particular medium, or a modern medium, such as video-conferencing.
Video-conferencing is different to other mediums, in that it is the richest CMC
tool, and offers further social presence (Setlock et
al, 2004). Studies by (Tan et al, 1998a; Tan et al, 1998b; Setlock
et al, 2004; Hewling, 2005; Zhang et al, 2007; Wei & Crowston,
2010;
Wang et al, 2009; Vatrapu & Suthers,
2010), emphasized the CMC in general. Some researches mentioned a particular
medium(s). For example, (Setlock et al, 2004) made a
comparison between face-to-face and instance messages. Meanwhile, studies by (Kayan et al, 2006;
Setlock et al, 2007; Wang et al, 2009), explored
audio and video-conferencing in particular. As mentioned by (Ahmad et
al, 2010) most researchers explored the adoption of a set of mediums.
Undoubtedly, these measuring studies are considered only as approaches of
understanding technology acceptance in general, and are not enough to represent
the uses of a specific technology. However, there are a small number of
researches exploring a particular aspect of CMC and culture, thus, a consistent
body of research in this field, does not yet exist (Setlock
& Fussell, 2010).
Setlock & Fussell (2010) described several
constraints of research during the last decade, and how they assumed those
communication goals; relationships belonging to communicators; and situation in
context, are perceived to be the same across cultures. The challenge is that
researchers have generated opposite findings. For instance, (Setlock et al, 2004) discovered that in face-to-face
Chinese and Chinese, there is more talk than that of communication between
American and American. This difference is because relationships are considered
more important in Chinese society. Whilst, an American communicating with a
Chinese through instance
messages, is more similar due to the
lower social presence; which reduces the building of a relationship in that
context. In contrast, (Wang et al, 2009) found that Chinese generally talk
less, as they converse more when they collaborate via text-based chatting, or
over video-based chatting. Similarly, (Kayan et al,
2006) found that Asians come from high context cultures, as they prefer
audio-video chatting more than North Americans do. Nevertheless, (Setlock et al, 2007) found no differences between Asian and
American cultures, when communicating, via audio or video conferencing.
The above
results reflect the important role of social influence, in addition to the role
of communication context style. However, Hofstede’s
five cultural dimensions, which could affect social influence, directly impact
the perception of accepting technology, as asserted by previous researchers,
such as (Tan et al, 1998a; Strite, 1999; Guo & D’ambra, 2002; Loch et
al, 2003; Setlock et al, 2004; Guo
et al, 2006; Al-Ghahtani et al, 2007; Zhang et al,
2007; Zakour, 2007; Li et al, 2009).
5. Existing Technology
Acceptance Model (TAM)
There are two models related to this study.
(i) Model developed by Karahanna & Straub (1999).
Karahanna & Straub (1999) limit their study on the acceptance of e-mail. They measured the impact of social presence, social influence, training and support, and physical accessibility on the system usage of e-mail through PU and PEOU. The study revealed that the degree of social influence and social presence, exerted by supervisors of the medium, and the availability of training and support, had no impact on the perceptions of PEOU or PU of e-mail. The model developed by Karahanna & Straub (1999) is shown in Figure 1 below.
Figure
1: Model By Karahanna &
Straub (1999)
(ii) Model developed by Karahanna & Limayem (2000).
Karahanna & Limayem (2000) extended the model previously developed Karahanna & Straub (1999) by asserting that e-mail and v-mail measures should include social presence, social influence, support and training, physical accessibility, informational accessibility, and media style. They investigated the acceptance of e-mail and v-mail with the intention to distinguish between the perceptions to use both. Training and support are only a significant determinant of PU in the v-mail. Finally, the result was reversed in the case of v-mail. The model developed by Karahanna & Limayem (2000)is shown in Figure 2 below.
Figure 2: Model \By Karahanna
& Limayem (2000)
It appears valuable to observe that the findings of (Karahanna & Straub, 1999; Karahanna & Limayem, 2000), reveals that e-mail and v-mail are different in adoption. Therefore, this encourages the intention of this study to extend (Karahanna & Limayem, 2000), with the aim to investigate video-conferencing usage, because different mediums might have different results, even in measuring the same dimensions, as they measure the effect of PU and PEOU on actual system use directly.
6.2. A Proposed Model By These Authors
The models by Karahana and Straub (1999) and Karahana and Limayem (2000) are modified and extended by these authors in order to produce a new model for capturing the national culture impact on knowledge sharing. The same constructs proposed by (Karahanna & Limayem, 2000), that influenced user's beliefs are expected to play a role in affecting the user's perception of video-conferencing usage across a cultural environment. However, physical accessibility, informational accessibility, and media style are excluded because the researcher only synthesized the cultural construct with some constructs from (Karahanna & Limayem, 2000), with the intention of measuring what the moderating impact could be.
(Setlock et al., 2007) indicate that interaction styles across cultures possibly impacted in different ways by the use of various technology tools that could or could not provide cues such as intonation of voice or facial expressions. Video-conferencing technology tools provide a high social presence through the ability of these cues (Hills, 2005). Therefore, social presence is associated with the nature of video-conferencing collaborations and as such, could be moderated by context style dimension. On the other hand, due to the fact that video-conferencing technology is more complicated than both e-mail and v-mail thus, more training and support are needed to use video-conferencing technology. Therefore, it deserved to measure the effect of training and support with regard of the time orientation that could moderate the relationship as well.
Practical researchers have indicated how culture plays an important indirect effect or a moderating effect on technology acceptance (Guo et al, 2009; Twati, 2008). Some variables, such as culture would have indirect effects for TAM, which are essential to be examined (Lee et al, 2003). Consequently, there are further factors that could have an indirect effect on the user's perception to use video-conferencing technology. The proposed model is shown in Figure 3 below.
Figure
3: The Proposed Conceptual Model
7. Conclusion
The new proposed conceptual model provides relationships and an articulate view for future researchers to adopt conceptually in a different scope. This study provides a better understanding of the cross-cultural perspective, that there are differences between simple virtual teams and global virtual teams, due to globalization. This study will add to the existing limited available researches by specifically exploring the video-conferencing medium. Furthermore, measuring of cultural values at an individual level of analysis would lead to results that are more accurate. The proposed model will be able to address articulated views on the impact of national culture through video conferencing, on the endeavour of knowledge sharing. However, the proposed model is applicable for other mediums, not just video-conferencing medium. However, this study tests TAM’s applicability across cultures.
8. References
Ahmad, T., Madarsha, K., Zainuddin, A., Ismail, N. & Nordin, M. (2010), Faculty's Acceptance of Computer Based Technology: Cross-validation of an Extended Model, Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(2), 268-279.
Akour, I., Alshare, K., Miller, D. & Dwairi, M. (2006), An Exploratory Analysis of Culture, Perceived Ease of Use, Perceived Usefulness, and Internet Acceptance: The Case of Jordan, Journal of Internet Commerce, 5(3), 83-108.
Al-Gahtani, S., Hubona, G. & Wang, J. (2007), Information Technology (IT) in Saudi Arabia: Culture and the Acceptance and Use of IT, Journal of Information & Management, 44(8), 681-691.
Bagchi, K. & Kirs, P. (2009), The Impact of Schwartz's Cultural Value Types on ICT Use: A Multi-national Individual-level Analysis, ICIS 2009 Proceedings, 1-18.
Baker, D. S., Carson, K. D. & Carson, P. P. (2009), An Individual-level Examination of the Impact of Cultural Values on Organizational Identification, Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 14(2), 29-43.
Cardon, P. W. & Marshall, B. A. (2008), National Culture and Technology Acceptance: The Impact of Uncertainty Avoidance, Issues in Information Systems, 9(2), 103-110.
Chuttur, M. (2009), Overview of the Technology Acceptance Model: Origins, Developments and Future Directions, Indiana University, USA, Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems 9(37), Accessed July 2010: http://sprouts.aisnet.org/9-37.
Davis, F. D. (1989), Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease Of Use, And User Acceptance of Information Technology, MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
Dulipovici, A. M. (2009), Exploring IT-based Knowledge Sharing Practices: Representing Knowledge Within and Across Projects, Phd Thesis, Georgia State University, Atlanta.
Durfee, A., Shinnar, R. & Gonzalez, P. (2006), A Cross-cultural Examination of Instant Messaging Acceptance in Mexico and the U.S. in: Proceedings of the Twelfth Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), Acapulco. Association for Information Systems AIS Electronic Library (AISEL), 150-155, Accessed June 2010: http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2006/20.
Earley, P. C. (2006), Leading Cultural Research in The Future: A Matter of Paradigms and Taste, Journal of International Business Studies, 37(6), 922–931.
Gaspay, A., Legorreta, L. & Dardan, S. (2009), The Role Of The Individualism-Collectivism Dimension in Distance Learning Environments: An Empirical Study, in: Proceedings of the 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2009, Waikoloa, Hawaii. IEEE, 1-9.
Guo, Z. & D'ambra, J. (2002), Normative Social Influence and Communication Media Perception and Choice: An Exploration in an Individualistic and a Collectivistic Culture, in: ACIS 2002 Proceedings, Australia, 61.
Guo, Z., D'ambra, J., Turner, T. & Zhang, H. (2009), Improving the Effectiveness of Virtual Teams: A Comparison of Video-conferencing and Face-to-Face Communication in China, Professional Communication, IEEE Transactions On, 52(1), 1-16.
Guo, Z., Turner, T. & Tan, F. (2006), The Effect of Normative Social Influence and Cultural Diversity on Group Interactions, in: Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Kauai. IEEE Computer Society, 1-9.
Hewling, A. (2005), Culture in the Online Class: Using Message Analysis to Look Beyond Nationality-based Frames Of Reference, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(1), 337-356.
Hills, A. L. (2005), Social Presence and Communication Quality in Videoconferencing, Bachelor Dissertation, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand, 129.
Hofstede, G. (1980), Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values, Beverly Hill, CA, Sage Publications, 1st Edn.
Hofstede, G. (2001), Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations across Nations, Sage Publications, CA, 2nd Edn.
Huang, H. & Trauth, E. (2007), Cultural Influences and Globally Distributed Information Systems Development: Experiences From Chinese IT Professionals, in: Proceedings of the 2010 ACM-IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, New York. ACM, 36-45.
Hutchings, K. & Michailova, S. (2006), The Impact of Group Membership on Knowledge Sharing in Russia and China, International Journal of Emerging Markets, 1(1), 21-34.
Jan, A. & Contreras, V. (2010), Technology Acceptance Model for the Use of Information Technology in Universities, Computers in Human Behavior, Elsevier, 27(2), 845-851.
Karahanna, E. & Limayem, M. (2000), E-Mail and V-Mail Usage: Generalizing Across Technologies, Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 10(1), 49-66.
Karahanna, E. & Straub, D. (1999), The Psychological Origins of Perceived Usefulness and Ease-of-Use, Journal of Information & Management, 35(4), 237-250.
Kayan, S., Fussell, S. R. & Setlock, L. D. (2006), Cultural Differences in the Use of Instant Messaging in Asia and North America. In: CSCW 2006, Banff, ACM, 525-528.
Khasawneh, M. M. F. & Ibrahim, H. B. H. (2008), Toward an Information and Communication Technology Development in Developing Countries, Communications of the IBIMA, 4, 135-140.
Lai, D. & Li, Y. (2010), Examining the Technology Acceptance Model of the Computer Assistance Orthopedic Surgery System, in: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Service Systems and Service Management (ICSSSM) 2010, Tokyo. IEEE, 1-6.
Law, W. (2007), Information Resources Management: Global Challenges, IGI Publishing, Hershey, 1st Edn.
Lee, Y., Kozar, K. & Larsen, K. (2003), The Technology Acceptance Model: Past, Present, and Future, Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 12(50), 752-780.
Leidner, D. & Kayworth, T. (2006), Review: A Review of Culture in Information Systems Research: Toward A Theory of Information Technology Culture Conflict, MIS Quarterly, 30(2), 357-399.
Li, X., Hess, T., Mcnab, A. & Yu, Y. (2009), Culture and Acceptance of Global Web Sites: A Cross-Country Study of the Effects of National Cultural Values on Acceptance of a Personal Web Portal, ACM SIGMIS Database, 40(4), 49-74.
Loch, K., Straub, D. & Kamel, S. (2003), Diffusing the Internet in the Arab World: The Role of Social Norms and Technological Culturation, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 50(1), 45-63.
Setlock, L., Quinones, P. & Fussell, S. (2007), Does Culture Interact With Media Richness? The Effects of Audio vs. Video conferencing on Chinese and American Dyads, in: Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2007, Waikoloa, Hi. IEEE, 1-10.
Setlock, L. D. & Fussell, S. R. (2010), What's It Worth To You?: The Costs And Affordances of CMC Tools to Asian and American Users, In: CSCW 2010, Savannah. ACM, 341-350.
Setlock, L. D., Fussell, S. R. & Neuwirth, C. (2004), Taking It Out Of Context: Collaborating Within and Across Cultures in Face-to-Face Settings and Via Instant Messaging. In: CSCW 2004, November 6–10, Chicago, ACM, 604-613.
Srite, M. (1999), The Influence of National Culture on the Acceptance and Use of Information Technologies: An Empirical Study, In: Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS) 1999 Proceedings, Florida, Florida State University, 1019-1021.
Srite, M. & Karahanna, E. (2006), The Influence of National Culture on the Acceptance of Information Technologies: An Empirical Study, MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 679-704.
Swigger, K., Alpaslan, F., Brazile, R. & Monticino, M. (2004), Effects of Culture on Computer-Supported International Collaborations, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 60(3), 365-380.
Tan, B., Wei, K., Watson, R., Clapper, D. & Mclean, E. (1998a), Computer-Mediated Communication and Majority Influence: Assessing the Impact in an Individualistic and a Collectivistic Culture, Management Science, 44(9), 1263-1278.
Tan, B. C. Y., Wei, K.-K., Watson, R. T. & Walczuch, R. M. (1998b), Reducing Status Effects with Computer-Mediated Communication: Evidence from Two Distinct National Cultures, Journal of Management Information System, 15(1), 119-141.
Twati, J. M. (2008), The Influence of Societal Culture on the Adoption of Information Systems: The Case of Libya, Communications of the International Business Information Management Association (IBIMA), 8(1), 1-12.
Vatrapu, R. K. & Suthers, D. D. (2010), Cultural Influences in Collaborative Information Sharing and Organization, in: ICIC 2010, Copenhagen, Denmark, ACM, 161-170.
Wang, H.-C., Fussell, S. F. & Setlock, L. D. (2009), Cultural Difference and Adaptation of Communication Styles in Computer-Mediated Group Brainstorming, in: Proceedings of The 27th International Conference On Human Factors in Computing Systems, Boston, ACM, 669-678.
Wang, L., Rau, P.-L. P., Evers, V., Robinson, B. K. & Hinds, P. (2010), When in Rome: The Role of Culture & Context in Adherence to Robot Recommendations, Proceeding of the 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-robot Interaction, 359-366.
Wei, J., Stankosky, M., Calabrese, F. & Lu, L. (2008), A Framework for Studying the Impact of National Culture on Knowledge Sharing Motivation in Virtual Teams, VINE, 38(2), 221-231.
Wei, K. (2007), Sharing Knowledge in Global Virtual Teams: How Do Chinese Team Members Perceive the Impact of National Cultural Differences on Knowledge Sharing?, AMCIS 2007 Proceedings, 394.
Wei, K. & Crowston, K,
(2010), The Impact of National Culture on Knowledge Sharing in Global Virtual
Collaboration: A Practice Lens, ICIS 2010 Proceedings, Accessed October 2011: http://aisel.aisnet.org/icis2010_submissions/137
Yi, M., Jackson, J., Park, J. & Probst, J. (2006), Understanding Information Technology Acceptance by Individual Professionals: Toward an Integrative View, Journal of Information & Management, 43(3), 350-363.
Zakour, A. (2007), Information Technology Acceptance across Cultures. Information Resources Management: Global Challenges, Hershey, IGI Publishing, 1st Edn.
Zhang, D., Lowry, P., Zhou, L. & Fu, X. (2007), The Impact of Individualism—Collectivism, Social Presence, and Group Diversity on Group Decision Making Under Majority Influence, Journal of Management Information Systems, 23(4), 53-80.
Contact the Authors:
Ayman N. Alkhaldi,
Email: ayman_alkhaldi@yahoo.com
Zawiyah M. Yusof,
Email: zmy@ftsm.ukm.my
Mohammad. J. Ab Aziz, Email: din@ftsm.ukm.my
Faculty of Information
Science and Technology, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 Bangi,
Selangor, Malaysia