NON-INVESTMENT IN INFORMATION
SYSTEMS: A Cognitive Dissonance Case
Study
Completed Research Paper
Luiz Fernando A. Bono Milan
Fundação Getulio Vargas - EAESP
[email protected]
Fernando S. Meirelles
Fundação Getulio Vargas - EAESP
[email protected]
Maria Alexandra Cunha
Fundação Getulio Vargas - EAESP
[email protected]
Abstract
Owing to the complex nature information system investment decisions, the present study presents an
interpretative framework for addressing the postponement of decisions to invest in this kind of
technology. An instrumental case study is used to conduct an analysis based on the proposed framework,
which is based on Cognitive Dissonance (CD) Theory. The illusion of explanatory depth and cognitive
miser theories are also used to interpret the analysis. The case in question is a legal firm in São Paulo,
Brazil, that operates in three areas of law. The contribution of the study is a new form of interpreting the
postponement of information system investment decisions. The non-investment behavior of the managers
concerning IS can change if they are given information that strengthens their cognitive dissonance,
resulting in their becoming sufficiently uncomfortable to change this behavior.
Keywords
Cognitive dissonance, investment decisions, illusion of explanatory depth, cognitive miser.
Introduction
Irrespective of the company’s stance on the use of Information Systems (IS), the effectiveness of
expenditure and investment can be questioned by an interested party involved in the processes or services
supported by IS, including partners, employees, clients or even suppliers. This study addresses a common
issue regarding the use of IT in companies using a new approach to the problem, focusing on how the
decision makers of the company perceives IS in relation to the services offered or made possible by this
technology. More precisely, when a company knows that it can offer its clients more services through the
use of IS, it knows that a competitor can also offer these services, but even so it does not invest in similar
technology. In other words, this study seeks to bridge a theoretical gap and understand decisions not to
invest in IS. The theory used to address this phenomenon can also be regarded as a contribution to the
field of Management Information Systems (MIS), as we have found no other studies in this field that use
the theory of cognitive dissonance as it is articulated in this study.
To examine how those in charge of a company justify not investing in IS, from a perspective of the theory
of cognitive dissonance, we identified a case that met the necessary conditions for this study to be
conducted. The firm would not offer a given service enabled by IS and it would have to be easy to identify
that such services were offered by the firm’s competitors. Despite this fact, those in charge of the firm
would maintain their decision not to invest while recognizing that it would be possible to do so. Finally,
those responsible would have to be willing to answer question on why they had decided not to invest in a
technology that their competitors were offering to their clients. This study involves a legal firm that does
1
not allow its clients to consult the progress of their legal cases on the company website. This case meets
the requirements for the study because the partners decided not to invest in an IS that would offer this
service to their clients, even though they were aware of the existence of this technology and that their
competitors had made the service available to their clients. An assumption of this study is that a decision
not to invest in IT, especially when competitors are investing in it, is likely to change to a decision to
invest at some point in the future.
The aim of the study is to provide an interpretative framework to help managers answer the following
question: In a small services company, how do managers justify not investing in IS to provide services
offered by their competitors?
Researchers argue that small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) often take longer than large
enterprises to invest in IT (Mohamad & Ismail, 2009), leading the present study to select an SME as a
case for investigation. The reason behind this decision was the possibility of a more successful case
identification. It does not mean that this phenomenon does not occur in large enterprises.
In the following sections, a review of the literature is conducted and the illustrative case study and data
collection process are presented, followed by an analysis of the data and a discussion of the results.
Cognitive Dissonance
To address how managers justify not investing in information systems, this study uses cognitive
dissonance theory. In this section, we review the literature and describe the constructs used in the study.
Cognitive dissonance appeared in the field of psychology in the 1950s (Festinger, 1962; Festinger &
Carlsmith, 1959). It claims that individuals seek coherence between their cognitions, i.e., their beliefs,
values and opinions. When there is dissonance between their beliefs or between one or more of their
beliefs and behavior, something needs to change to remove the incoherence or dissonance. In the case of a
discrepancy between beliefs and behavior, it is more likely that the belief will change to accommodate the
behavior (Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959). However, the greater the force of the external justification, the
less it will tend to have an impact on attitude (Aronson & Carlsmith, 1963).
The strength of dissonance can be affected by the number of dissonant convictions or the importance
attributed to each belief. Dissonance is generally eliminated by reducing the importance of dissonant
convictions by identifying more consonant beliefs that outweigh the dissonant convictions or by changing
the dissonant convictions. Many studies have been conducted to understand how cognitive dissonance
operates and how it is minimized, since the results of this minimization of cognitive dissonance are often
counterintuitive (Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959).
There are other mechanisms for reducing cognitive dissonance (CD). An individual can avoid information
or situations that are likely to increase CD, attempting to persuade other individuals to adopt the same
attitudes or seeking support from individuals that share these attitudes (Dillard & Pfau, 2002, p. 101). A
further mechanisms for reducing CD is exaggeration caused by a desire to achieve a certain goal (Aronson
& Mills, 1959). Finally, criticizing what you cannot have can also be considered a mechanism for reducing
CD (Elster, 1985, p. 123) adopted by a manager.
The theory of Cognitive Dissonance has already been used in the field of information technology
management to address changing attitudes to the acceptable use of IT over time, from the first experience
with a technology and its continuing use. Some studies have examined changing attitudes to IT using
theories based on cognitive dissonance theory, the expectation-disconfirmation theory (EDT)
(Bhattacherjee & Premkumar, 2004; Venkatesh & Goyal, 2010) and the expectancy confirmation theory
(ECT) that also stem from CD theory (Chea & Luo, 2005). There are studies that have addressed the
evaluation of service, user satisfaction and alignment between business and IT using CD theory (Benlian,
2013; Szajna & Scamell, 1993). There is also a study that uses CD theory to address the turnover of IT
professionals (Ryan, Prybutok, & Zhang, 2006)
As the aim of this work is not to analyze the changing attitude of managers regarding the use of IS but to
analyze how they support their arguments not to use these systems, the adopted theory is that of cognitive
dissonance.
Expenditure and Investments in IS
Concern over expenditure and investment in information systems is a key point for organizations,
considering that there is evidence that announcing the value of these systems can affect the value of the
2
business and also forecast future returns (Boyko, Rogova, Roztocki, & Weistroffer, 2014; Dehning,
Richardson, & Zmud, 2003; Henderson, Kobelsky, Richardson, & Smith, 2010; Kohli & Ow, 2012).
Justifying expenditure and investments in IS has been a concern among researchers for decades (Brian L.
Dos Santos, 1991; Gartner, Zwicker, & Rödder, 2009; Keen, 1981; McRAE, 1970), and how to evaluate IS
investment and expenditure has been addressed from several different viewpoints, including business
productivity (Brynjolfsson & Hitt, 1996; Brynjolfsson & Hitt, 1998; Hitt & Brynjolfsson, 1996),
profitability (Bharadwaj, 2000; Brian L Dos Santos, Peffers, & Mauer, 1993) and quality and results
(Mukhopadhyay, Rajiv, & Srinivasan, 1997). Due to the complexity and diversity of results concerning the
evaluation of IS investments, especially considering the impact of the problems that the current globalized
scenario can have on academic research (Rush & Melville, 2014), different theoretical approaches have
also been used (Quan, Hu, & Hart, 2003; Matt E Thatcher, 2004; Matt E Thatcher & Oliver, 2001; Matt E.
Thatcher & Pingry, 2004).
Another way of analyzing information system expenditure and investments is to compare them with
market indicators. Although this is a simple principle, there are difficulties involved in obtaining reliable
data on how the market spends and invests in IS. The Getulio Vargas Foundation has a secondary
database that can be used to obtain these indicators: the Annual IT Survey. This survey includes data from
over two thousand companies over the last twenty-five years. It is segmented into sectors of the economy
and company size (Meirelles, 2014). This type of database can provide indicators when it is necessary to
compare IT expenditure of a company and the market in which it operates. The indicators provided by
this database enabled a comparison between the IT expenditure of the case in question and the mean
expenditure on IT on the market. It is important to avoid outlier cases.
Cognitive Dissonance and the decision not to invest in IS
When a manager sees his competitors offering new services to clients and does not invest in solutions so
that he can offer the same services, this decision not to invest can lead to a conviction that is dissonant
with the following attitude (beliefs, values and opinions): our competitors are offering something that we
are not. The cognitive dissonance theory claims that this dissonant conviction causes discomfort that
leads an individual to change his attitude, behavior and even to adopt other attitudes to minimize the
dissonance. A manager who decides not to invest can change his behavior by investing in solutions to offer
the same services as his competitors. He could use consonant attitudes to minimize dissonance, such as
believing that the return does not justify the investment or believing that this type of service is not
important to his own clients. Thus, the attitude regarding the fact that our competitors offer something
that we do not could be minimized. A manager attempting to avoid information or situations that increase
his cognitive dissonance could seek support or arguments that could help him do so in groups that share
his views, attitudes or behavior. The manager could claim that his goal is to keep costs as low as possible.
This argument could be disproportionately important when compared with the real financial condition of
the firm. As a result, any argument in favor of investing in an IS could not be a source of CD or could be
automatically minimized. The manager could also criticize a solution without even knowing whether his
criticism actually carries any weight due to the illusion of explanatory depth that his familiarity with IT
might cause (Rozenblit & Keil, 2002).
Due to the complexity of evaluating investments in IS, it is possible for the manager to accept investment
in IS as an attitude that is consonant with the argument that our competitors offer something that we do
not (e.g., the return does not justify the investment), thereby minimizing the dissonance of his decision
not to invest), or as a dissonant conviction (e.g., investing in this type of system can improve the quality of
our results and increase client satisfaction) by deciding not to invest.
Without considering how managers evaluate their investments in IS, it is probable that these managers do
not wish to risk the chance of ceasing to be a competitive company to the point that they will lose part of
their market share. However, they will not invest without obtaining a justifiable benefit. Comparing their
own expenditure and investment in IT with what the rest of the market does would be one way for a
manager to discover whether the argument that the return does not justify the investment is actually
coherent.
Framework
In the review of the literature on cognitive dissonance theory, we addressed five mechanisms for reducing
CD: adding consonant beliefs, change of attitude or behavior, avoidance of information or situations that
might increase CD, exaggerating the desirability of a goal and criticizing what you cannot get.
3
Figure 1. Framework of Cognitive Dissonance generated by a manager’s decision
Source: Prepared by the authors
4
The framework presented in Figure 1 shows, from the manager investment decision, the CD reduction
mechanisms. Irrespective of the manager’s decision, he will face a CD reduction process (Brehm, 1956;
Egan, Bloom, & Santos, 2010; Gächter, Nosenzo, & Sefton, 2010). A manager, like any other individual,
may be more inclined to act with a certain level of cognitive miser, using mental shortcuts to make
assessments and decisions regarding subjects and ideas of which he knows very little, and also in the case
of highly relevant issues. This cognitive miser is a way for the human brain to handle high volumes and
intensity of information and stimuli to which individuals are subjected (Fiske & Taylor, 2013). Owing to
these mental shortcuts, an individual can be subject to an illusion of explanatory depth regarding a given
theme or subject when, in reality, his knowledge of it is only superficial. Asking an individual to provide a
detailed explanation of a subject may lead him to have an illusion of explanatory depth, which will result
in him evaluating better how much he actually knows of the subject in question (Rozenblit & Keil, 2002).
In other words, identifying the mechanism or mechanisms that a manager is using to reduce CD can help
to identify which arguments he would use to support or not support an investment in IS or any other kind
of investment. Therefore, asking a manager to provide an in-depth explanation of each argument that he
uses to support his decision could be a way of reviewing a decision not to invest.
To identify which CD reduction mechanism a manager is using, the proposed framework is utilized to
analyze the selected instrumental case. This study assumes the definition of an illustrative case presented
by Stake (1995, cap. 14).
As presented in the framework, figure 1, irrespective of the manager’s decision to invest or not invest,
according to the CD theory, the manager will face a CD reduction process (Brehm, 1956; Egan et al., 2010;
Gächter et al., 2010). This study focuses on the period prior to the decision to invest in IS, i.e., the time
during which the managers frequently found arguments to avoid or postpone the investment.
Research and Methodology
In this study, we use a case, but our aim is not to generalize or test CD theory. The aim of the case is to
illustrate how the proposed framework should be made operational, as the single case is interesting when
it successfully provides an empirical illustration of the theoretical argument developed in the article
(Siggelkow, 2007). This may be considered an instrumental case, used to provide a vision or refinement of
a theory, being of secondary interest and offering a supportive role to facilitate the understanding of the
phenomenon proposed in this study (Stake, 1995, cap. 14).
To explore how those in charge of the company justified their decision not to invest in IS, from the
perspective of the cognitive dissonance theory, a case was identified that met the necessary conditions.
These conditions, as briefly outlined in the Introduction, were: 1) the company could not offer a service
enabled by information systems that was offered by its competitors. For this purpose, an IS was chosen
that enabled clients to access information on the firm through its website. The use of the system is easily
identified by accessing the websites of the competitors of the firm in question. 2) The company had to
have made a decision not to invest in this type of IS; 3) The people responsible for making decisions to
invest in technology had to be aware that the service could be offered and had to be willing to answer
questions regarding this decision not to invest in a technology offered by the competition.
All these criteria were met by a law firm that does not allow its clients to consult the progress of their legal
cases using the company website. This case meets the requirements of the study, as the partners are aware
of the existence and purpose of the technology and, even so, decided not to invest in a similar IS for their
firm. We collected the data for the study through individual interviews lasting approximately thirty
minutes with the five partners of the law firm in the second half of 2014, four visits to the firm, field notes,
an evaluation of the firm’s website and the websites of its competitors and conversations with employees
and outsourced IT service providers. Before the interviews were begun, it was clearly explained to each
interviewee that all the questions would refer to the information system that allows their clients track the
status of their case on the firm’s website. Three interviewees pointed out that the same information
system that allows clients to track their status on the website helps them to organize the case internally.
This may lead the reader to assume that they are sometimes talking about IT in general, but they are
always referring to the status tracker information system. The interviews were recorded and transcribed
by the author to enable ready access to the data. To help codify the data, RQDA (R package for Qualitative
Data Analysis) was used. This is freely available open code software. We categorized the data into the five
CD reduction mechanisms presented in the framework.
5
The Law Firm
With its head office located in São Paulo (SP), Brazil, the law firm operates in three areas of law: criminal,
civil and labor. It was founded fifteen years ago and its clientele is made up of individuals in a high
income bracket, medium size companies and large multinationals. The majority partner is the president
of a subsection of the Brazilian bar, the Order of Brazilian Attorneys (OAB). In 2014, the firm was listed in
the Análise Advocacia, which is published annually and includes the 500 law firms most admired by their
clients. As the firm has no IS specialist to advise on investment decisions in this field, the five partners are
responsible for making these decisions. The partners are four men and one woman, aged between thirty
and forty. The five partners have been given the fictitious names of Dr. Paulo, Dr. Tatiana, Dr. Guto, Dr.
Breno and Dr. André to protect their identities. As yet, they have made no investments in IS to manage
the cases handled by the firm or for their clients to access information on the progress of their cases on
the firm’s website. The whole IT infrastructure, including desktop computers and laptops, is based on
products and solutions by Apple, which is not recognized as a low-cost brand. Therefore, we can assume
that keeping costs down is not a strong guiding principle when it comes to making decisions on IT
investments. As mentioned above, the firm operates in three fields. Dr. Tatiana heads the civil law branch
of the firm, which handles approximately 150 cases at a time. Dr. Guto heads the labor law area, which
handles approximately 250 cases. Dr. Paulo heads the business crime branch, handling approximately
620 cases. Each of these areas has teams of associate attorneys, contract attorneys and interns. The
structure maintained in each area, the number of cases per area and the independent contracts with
companies for the legal monitoring of civil and labor cases indicate that the areas are sustainable.
However, an alleged dependence on the criminal department is an argument used by the managers of
these departments against investment in IS.
“[...] we don’t have an information system because our firm mainly works in criminal law [...]”
(Dr. Guto)
This argument is used even when those responsible for decisions to on IT investment can see the
advantages that could result from this investment.
“In the areas outside criminal law, I can see the advantage, indeed I can. [...]” (Dr. Guto)
Dr. Guto, head of the labor law department, believes that an IS would give the firm some advantages.
However, to justify not investing in IS, he claims that the criminal law department is larger and,
externally, it is an area in which this type of IS is not used:
“No, I really don’t know, the information… ah, especially in the field of criminal law. Firms are
just starting to professionalize in this way. It’s something to think about. A lot of them have a
website, created recently. It’s another world.” (Dr. Guto)
Another argument used by Dr. Guto against investment in IS is the security and confidential nature of the
information the firm handles:
“[...] we prefer to keep this type of information safely locked up. We, we don’t supply… we don’t
intend to supply any information about this type of case publicly.[...]” (Dr. Guto)
This attorney knows the advantages that information systems can bring to the business, and although he
has not invested in this type of technology yet, he is seeking a way to supply his clients with the
information they need:
“[...] It’s an interesting tool because it really saves time and time can be used more efficiently.
The client needs to contact his lawyer directly and the lawyer has to go and get hold of the
information. All you have to do is make the tool available and the client can get direct access to
the information by himself.[...]” (Dr. Guto)
6
“[...] So, to my clients who are private individuals, I advise them to register step by step with the
court websites in general and there they can get e-mails sent to them about the progress of every
case they’re involved in. [...]” (Dr. Guto)
Dr. Guto uses the method of adding consonant attitudes to reduce CD, as he knows the advantages that an
information system can bring to a legal firm, and was once a partner in a firm that used a system for
consulting cases. He uses the mechanisms made available by the courts to supply information that the
firm could offer its clients.
Although she is in favor of investing in IS, Dr. Tatiana, head of the civil law department, appears to seek
consonant cognitions to handle the unwillingness of most of the partners to make investments in IS:
“Look, I even think it could be a good idea for us to have here at the office, but I’ve always been
outvoted and we have to have a lot of people on our side. There are five partners, so it has never
been approved because the criminal department would have to use it, we’d have to make it
available to those clients, so it would be a kind of double launch and a lot of hard work. And we,
at the end of the day, we’ve never used it, and we’ve had this structure for seven years, so we’ve
created our own organization methods without any system. I think a system would make things
easier, but, well….” (Dr. Tatiana)
For Dr. Tatiana, identifying the mechanism adopted by her partners to reduce cognitive dissonance could
facilitate her argument with the partners for the purpose of altering their attitude.
Dr. Breno sees the advantages of investing in information systems in the firm’s largest department, which
handles criminal law cases:
“The advantage would be to use one of these systems that I’ve already mentioned. Tedesco,
right? For when a company has two hundred criminal cases with us, and even the teams don’t
know what to tell you, but now the answer is right there in front of you, right? [...]” (Dr. Breno)
However, he uses the argument that there is a weak commercial appeal for investing in this type of
technology:
“Yes, as I’ve already said, I don’t think it’s all that necessary, you know? Of course, when the
time comes to sell the services I offer, I can include this and tell the client, look, you’re going to be
able to follow the case on the firm’s website, but you’ll also be in touch with a professional that’s
looking after you. So I don’t think it’s essential. It’s a plus, but not essential.” (Dr. Breno)
All of the partners use the addition of consonant cognitions to reduce CD, with the exception of Dr. Paulo,
head of the criminal law department and the majority partner. He adopts the mechanism of exaggerating
desirability of goals to keep expenditure as low as possible, with arguments such as:
“OK, we could invest in a system for your clients to access our site, but you’re the ones who’ll
have to pay for it. I don’t need this and our expenses must always be kept under control. (Dr.
Paulo, in a field note)
He also uses the mechanism of criticizing what he cannot have:
“[...] These systems aren’t all they’re cracked up to be! Big companies use this stuff because they
have a lot of money to spend. I don’t think there’s even a demand for this, but as it’s not an
expressive cost to them, they use it because the suppliers pay kickbacks to the people that hire
them. [...]” (Dr. Paulo, in a field note)
7
Although Dr. Paulo uses these arguments to justify not investing in IS, no evidence was found showing
that he knows exactly how much it would cost to invest in the system. Even with this information to hand,
as seen in the review of the literature, measuring whether this investment would be negative or would
bring an advantage to the firm would not be an easy task. Interaction between IT professionals and
business professionals means that expectations in terms of performance and satisfaction concerning an
information system become less divergent (Benlian, 2013). When information is exchanged between
business and IT professionals, the influence that one has on the other reduces both positive and negative
false expectations. As the firm has no internal IT team, there is no interaction with professionals who
could provide counterarguments regarding the advantages and disadvantages for those who have to make
the decisions. IT professionals could show them how the market spends and invests in information
systems. This would reduce false expectations regarding the investments that could be made in IT.
It could be argued that Dr. Paulo may be right and this technology does not apply to criminal cases, but
he, as the senior partner of a firm that operates in three areas of law, is expected to look at the firm’s
operations as a whole rather than only considering his own field when considering IT investments. The
firm has a respectable labor law department and the online status tracker on a law firm’s website is a
widely used technological tool by law firms in this field. Moreover, it might be imagined that Dr. Paulo has
a limited understanding of the potential of IT, but during the interviews he showed a clear perception
regarding the workings of a status tracker.
Final Considerations
Understanding the psychological effects involved in investment decisions is a fertile field for research in
IS, as these decisions are usually high complex due to the degree of abstraction and difficulty in
measuring the returns that are intrinsic to IT solutions.
Investment decisions concerning information systems are generally difficult and managers do not always
use data to conduct a rational analysis when the time comes to make a decision. The illustrative case used
in this study helps to answer the proposed research question, presenting the cognitive dissonance (CD)
reduction mechanisms adopted by those responsible for information system investment decisions when
faced with arguments for and against a decision to invest. Irrespective of how the decision is made,
individuals undergo a process of cognitive dissonance reduction. The present study offers a new form of
interpreting the postponement of information system investment decisions and presents an interpretative
framework based on the theory of cognitive dissonance, the illusion of explanatory depth and cognitive
miser. With the aid of an instrumental case, it demonstrates and conducts an analysis using the proposed
framework.
With the proposed approach, it is possible to understand the individual internal mechanisms of the
managers regarding a decision. This improves our understanding of their decision or its postponement,
enabling the managers to share the decision, structure their arguments to increase the CD of their peers
and improve their chances of persuasion. The non-investment behavior of the managers concerning IS
can change if they are given information that strengthens their cognitive dissonance, resulting in their
becoming sufficiently uncomfortable to change this behavior, before doing this as a laggard adopter.
This study contributes to the literature by filling a theoretical gap regarding understanding of noninvestment in IS. The theory used to address the phenomenon can be considered a contribution to the
field, as we have not found any other studies in this field that use the theory of cognitive dissonance in this
way. The practical contribution of the study is a new way of viewing the psychological consequences of
information system investment decisions, enabling managers to identify ways of arguing more
convincingly in favor of IS investments.
Some limitations of the study and opportunities for future studies should be considered. Future studies
should undertake the task of proving that the framework can be generalized. A limitation of this study is
that psychometric tests were not used to evaluate the degree of CD of each manager responsible for
information system investment decisions. This limitation provides an opportunity for future studies.
Through psychometric tests and conducting experiments, it would be possible to understand how to
interfere in the CD of managers who decide not to invest in IS.
Another limitation of the study is that it does not address the power relationship between the majority
partner and the other partners. Although this is not the objective of this study, the power relationship
between the decision makers may have an influence on or play a role in the formation of CD in each
manager in question, which opens up yet another possibility for future studies.
8
Another interesting opportunity for a future study would be to investigate the role of confirmation bias in
the dissonance reduction process.
The fact that the phenomenon in question was not investigated through the lenses of the Status Quo Bias
Theory, as done by Kim and Kankanhalli (2009), or through the lenses of the Theory of Planned
Behavior (TPB) from Ajzen (1991), can be seen as a limitation of this study. Our understanding is that
when investigating how to accelerate the behavior change of decision makers, the CDT fits better.
REFERENCES
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision processes,
50(2), 179-211.
Aronson, E., & Carlsmith, J. M. (1963). Effect of the severity of threat on the devaluation of forbidden
behavior. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66(6), 584.
Aronson, E., & Mills, J. (1959). The effect of severity of initiation on liking for a group. The Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59(2), 177.
Benlian, A. (2013). Effect mechanisms of perceptual congruence between Information Systems
professionals and users on satisfaction with service. Journal of Management Information
Systems, 29(4), 63-96.
Bharadwaj, A. S. (2000). A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firm
performance: an empirical investigation. MIS quarterly, 169-196.
Bhattacherjee, A., & Premkumar, G. (2004). Understanding changes in belief and attitude toward
information technology usage: a theoretical model and longitudinal test. MIS quarterly, 229-254.
Boyko, X., Rogova, E., Roztocki, N., & Weistroffer, H. R. (2014). Market Reaction to Information
Technology Investment Announcements in Russian Firms Paper presented at the AMCIS 2014
Proceedings, Savannah.
Brehm, J. W. (1956). Postdecision changes in the desirability of alternatives. The Journal of Abnormal
and Social Psychology, 52(3), 384.
Brynjolfsson, E., & Hitt, L. (1996). Paradox lost? Firm-level evidence on the returns to information
systems spending. Management science, 42(4), 541-558.
Brynjolfsson, E., & Hitt, L. M. (1998). Beyond the productivity paradox. Communications of the ACM,
41(8), 49-55.
Chea, S., & Luo, M. M. (2005). eService Customer Retention: The Roles of Negative Affectivity and
Perceived Switching Costs. Paper presented at the AMCIS 2005 Proceedings.
Dehning, B., Richardson, V. J., & Zmud, R. W. (2003). THE VALUE RELEVANCE OF ANNOUNCEMENTS OF
TRANSFORMATIONAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INVESTMENTS. MIS Quarterly, 27(4), 637656.
Dillard, J. P., & Pfau, M. W. (2002). The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice: Sage
Publications.
Dos Santos, B. L. (1991). Justifying Investments in New Information Technologies. Journal of
Management Information Systems, 7(4), 71-89.
Dos Santos, B. L., Peffers, K., & Mauer, D. C. (1993). The impact of information technology investment
announcements on the market value of the firm. Information Systems Research, 4(1), 1-23.
Egan, L. C., Bloom, P., & Santos, L. R. (2010). Choice-induced preferences in the absence of choice:
Evidence from a blind two choice paradigm with young children and capuchin monkeys. Journal
of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(1), 204-207.
Elster, J. (1985). Sour grapes: Studies in the subversion of rationality: Cambridge University Press.
Festinger, L. (1962). A theory of cognitive dissonance (Vol. 2): Stanford university press.
Festinger, L., & Carlsmith, J. M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. The Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58(2), 203.
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (2013). Social cognition: From brains to culture: Sage.
9
Gartner, I. R., Zwicker, R., & Rödder, W. (2009). Investimentos em Tecnologia da Informação e Impactos
na Produtividade Empresarial: uma Análise Empírica à Luz do Paradoxo da Produtividade.
(Portuguese). Information Technology Investments and Impact on the Productivity of Firms: an
Empirical Analysis in Light of the Productivity Paradox. (English), 13(3), 391-409.
Gächter, S., Nosenzo, D., & Sefton, M. (2010). Peer effects in pro-social behavior: social norms or social
preferences? : CeDEx discussion paper series.
Henderson, B. C., Kobelsky, K., Richardson, V. J., & Smith, R. E. (2010). The Relevance of Information
Technology Expenditures. Journal of Information Systems, 24(2), 39-77. doi:
10.2308/jis.2010.24.2.39
Hitt, L. M., & Brynjolfsson, E. (1996). Productivity, Business Profitability, and Consumer Surplus: Three
Different Measures of. MIS quarterly, 20(2), 121-143.
Keen, P. G. (1981). Value analysis: justifying decision support systems. MIS Quarterly, 1-15.
Kim, H.-W., & Kankanhalli, A. (2009). INVESTIGATING USER RESISTANCE TO INFORMATION SYSTEMS
IMPLEMENTATION: A STATUS QUO BIAS PERSPECTIVE. MIS Quarterly, 33(3), 567-582.
Kohli, R., & Ow, T. T. (2012). Does Information Technology Investment Influence a Firm’s Market Value?
A Case of Non-Publicly Traded Healthcare Firms. Management Information Systems Quarterly,
36(4), 1145-1163.
McRAE, T. W. (1970). The Evaluation of Investment in Computers. Abacus, 6(1), 56–70. doi:
10.1111/j.1467-6281.1970.tb00435.x
Meirelles, F. (2014). Pesquisa Anual do Uso de TI nas Empresas (25ª ed.): GVCIA, Centro de Tecnologia
de Informação Aplicada da FGV-EAESP.
Mohamad, R., & Ismail, N. A. (2009). Electronic Commerce Adoption in SME: The Trend of Prior Studies.
Journal of Internet Banking & Commerce, 14(2), E1-E16.
Mukhopadhyay, T., Rajiv, S., & Srinivasan, K. (1997). Information technology impact on process output
and quality. Management Science, 43(12), 1645-1659.
Quan, J. q. J. q., Hu, Q., & Hart, P. J. (2003). Information Technology Investments and Firms'
Performance--A Duopoly Perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(3), 121158.
Rozenblit, L., & Keil, F. (2002). The misunderstood limits of folk science: An illusion of explanatory depth.
Cognitive Science, 26(5), 521-562.
Rush, D. E., & Melville, N. P. (2014). Market Value Impacts of Information Systems Around the World: A
Monte Carlo Investigation to Reduce Bias in International Event Studies Paper presented at the
AMCIS 2014 Proceedings, Savannah.
Ryan, S., Prybutok, V., & Zhang, X. (2006). Job Satisfaction and Turnover among IT Professionals: A
Cognitive Dissonance Approach Paper presented at the AMCIS 2006 Proceedings.
Siggelkow, N. (2007). Persuasion with case studies. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 20-24.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research: Sage.
Szajna, B., & Scamell, R. W. (1993). The effects of information system user expectations on their
performance and perceptions. Mis Quarterly, 493-516.
Thatcher, M. E. (2004). The Impact of technology on product design, productivity, and profits: A duopoly
model of price-quality competition. Paper presented at the System Sciences, 2004. Proceedings
of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on.
Thatcher, M. E., & Oliver, J. R. (2001). The impact of technology investments on a firm's production
efficiency, product quality, and productivity. Journal of Management Information Systems,
18(2), 17-46.
Thatcher, M. E., & Pingry, D. E. (2004). Understanding the Business Value of Information Technology
Investments: Theoretical Evidence from Alternative Market and Cost Structures. Journal of
Management Information Systems, 21(2), 61-85.
10
Venkatesh, V., & Goyal, S. (2010). Expectation disconfirmation and technology adoption: polynomial
modeling and response surface analysis. MIS quarterly, 34(2), 281-303.
11