Accepted Manuscript

Motivating users toward continued usage of information system: self-determination

theory perspective

Azadeh Rezvani, Pouria Khosravi, Linying Dong

PII: S0747-5632(17)30454-5

DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.07.032

Reference: CHB 5085

To appear in: Computers in Human Behavior

Received Date: 24 November 2016

Revised Date: 17 July 2017

Accepted Date: 21 July 2017

Please cite this article as: Azadeh Rezvani, Pouria Khosravi, Linying Dong, Motivating users toward
continued usage of information system: self-determination theory perspective, Computers in
Human Behavior (2017), doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.07.032

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form.
Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the
content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Motivating users toward continued usage of information system: self-

determination theory perspective

Azadeh Rezvani1 Email: azadeh.rezvani@hdr.qut.edu.au

Faculty of Business, Queensland University of Technology, Australia

Pouria Khosravi Email: pouria.khosravi@hdr.qut.edu.au

Faculty of Business, Queensland University of Technology, Australia

Linying Dong Email: ldong@ryerson.ca

Ted Rogers School of Information Technology Management, Ryerson University, Canada

Corresponding author1: 2 George St, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD

4000
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Motivating users toward continued usage of information systems: self-determination

theory perspective

Abstract

Continued usage of new Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems has plagued organizations
that intend to maximize long-term benefits from their ERP investments. Leadership behavior is
widely regarded as one of the key influences for motivating ERP users toward using the system.
This study investigates how direct supervisors’ leadership styles influence ERP users’ motivation
to continuously engage with the ERP system. We employed self-determination theory (SDT) and
the post-acceptance model of information systems to propose a conceptual model theorizing how
transformational and transactional leadership styles affect users’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivation,
which in turn impacts ERP continuance intentions through user satisfaction and perceived
usefulness. Our research model was empirically examined using data collected from 299 ERP
users. Our findings have revealed that transformational leadership motivates ERP users differently
than transactional leadership, and that user satisfaction and perceived usefulness are salient
predictors of ERP continuance intentions. In addition, our research demonstrates a critical role of
direct managers’ leadership styles in the ERP post-implementation phase. Important theoretical
contributions and significant implications for practice are discussed.

Keywords: Transformational leadership, Transactional leadership, Self-determination theory,

Enterprise Resource Planning, Information system continuance

1. Introduction

Continuous use of new Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems has plagued

organizations that intend to maximize long-term benefits from their ERP investments (Hsieh, Rai,

& Xu, 2011; Liu, Feng, Hu, & Huang, 2011; Zhu, Li, Wang, & Chen, 2010). As a result, long-term

benefits from the use of ERP systems have been questioned, as it is not uncommon for demotivated

users to discontinue using the system entirely and switch back to the shadow system (Boudreau &

Robey, 2005; Kerr & Houghton, 2014). Empirical studies have demonstrated that many ERP

systems do not achieve their anticipated outcomes because of non-supportive system users in the

post-acceptance phase (Limayem, Hirt, & Cheung, 2007; Kerr & Houghton, 2014).

It has been found that nearly 50% of ERP-using organizations are unsatisfied with ERP

usage outcomes (Grabski, Leech, & Lu, 2003; Krigsman, 2010). Those that have managed to

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

successfully achieve ERP implementation, in many instances have proved unsuccessful in the post

implementation (Barker & Frolick, 2003). Kerr and Houghton (2014), for instance, found that due

to mistrust and confusion that an ERP system brought to the organization, system users worked

around the system and developed unauthorized software to fit previous work processes. As ERP

systems require effective and continued use in order to attain the expected benefits from these large

investments (Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015; Recker, 2016; Liu, Feng, Hu, & Huang, 2011) it is

essential to understand how to motivate users to ensure continued system usage.

Leadership is widely regarded as one of the key influences for motivating employees (Kark

& Van Dijk, 2007; Rezvani et al., 2016). Over the past couple of decades there has been an increase

in research examining leadership styles and behaviors in the Information Systems (IS) context

(Cho, Park, & Michel, 2011; Dong, Sun, & Fang, 2007; Ke & Wei, 2008; Neufeld, Dong, &

Higgins, 2007; Rezvani, Khosravi, Subasinghage, & Perera, 2012; Wang, Chou, & Jiang, 2005).

Amongst various leadership theories, transformational and transactional leadership approaches

have been linked with managerial effectiveness, and have been used to explain the link between

leadership behavior and IS success (Shao, Feng & Liu, 2012; Ke & Wei, 2008). Dong et al. (2007),

for example, revealed that transformational leaders were able to influence users’ perceived

usefulness of the system. In the same vein, Neufeld et al. (2007) found that charismatic leaders had

a positive effect on performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence and facilitating

condition perceptions of users.

Previous studies have advanced our understanding of leadership theories in an IS context

by establishing a direct link between leadership behaviors and users’ perceptions of success (e.g.

intention to use the system or perceived usefulness of the system). However, little attention has

been given to examining how different types of leadership styles motivate continued usage of ERP

systems. Furthermore, previous studies in the IS literature seem to overlook users’ psychological

needs and motivations, which have been known to directly influence user behavior. The lack of

motivation may result in resistance to use the system and, consequently, system workaround or

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

discontinued use of the system (Ferneley & Sobreperez, 2006). Even when users are mandated to

continue to use the ERP systems disruption behavior may arise, which could be detrimental to

operational efficiency (Recker, 2016). Consequently, the existing research has not clearly explained

what best motivates users to achieve continuous use of ERP systems.

Moreover, little attention has been paid to the influence of direct line managers in the post-

implementation of IS (Shao, Feng & Hu, 2016; Rezvani, Dong and Khosravi, 2017). Managing the

post-implementation stage is challenging because direct managers have to attend to

individuals’ needs and motivate users to use the system over an extended period of time in order to

ensure expected benefits from the IS investment (Shao et al., 2016). Yet, “there is still a dearth of

knowledge informing managers how best to facilitate the continuous post-implementation

adaptation of IS” (Aanestad & Jensen, 2016, p., 13). Taking into account these gaps in the existing

body of knowledge, and the call to address the absence of research regarding direct managers (Shao

et al., 2016), our study examines the role of direct managers’ leadership behavior in the post-

implementation phase of ERP systems.

The purpose of this research is to address the following question: “How do supervisors’

transformational versus transactional leadership styles motivate users to continue ERP usage?” To

answer this research question we draw on two theories: self-determination theory (SDT), one of

the most detailed and best-validated frameworks (Greguras & Diefendorff, 2009; Olafsen, Halvari,

Forest & Deci, 2015) explaining the link between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, and increased

performance (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2012), and the post-acceptance model of IS that explains the

link between satisfaction and perceived usefulness as predictors of continuance intention

(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015).We argue that SDT provides a framework to comprehend the

fundamental processes behind the effectiveness of transformational and transactional leadership

behavior in the IS context, because in the work context managers have the power to influence the

psychological needs of their subordinates (Graves, Sarkis & Zhu, 2013). Based on these two

theories we propose a model conceptualizing how the two leadership styles – transformational and

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

transactional – exert their influence on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, which in turn affect users’

satisfaction and perceived usefulness toward achieving ERP continuance intentions.

This study focuses on the post-adoption behaviors of ERP system users, which are the

behaviors exhibited after the initial acceptance of the system, embracing continuance, routinization

and assimilation. As the continuance or post-adoption stage is often the longest phase of the ERP

lifecycle and the phase during which benefits from the investment begin to be realized (Jasperson,

Carter, & Zmud, 2005; Chou & Chen, 2009; Hsu, Yen, & Chung, 2015), we aim to investigate this

phenomenon at the individual level, focusing on employees’ continuance intention (Bhattacherjee,

2001).

This study contributes to academic research and practice in various ways. First, it deepens

the understanding of users’ continuance intention by providing an insight into various motivations

and motivational triggers. Second, it demonstrates the role of two leadership styles,

transformational and transactional, in the post-adoption stage of the ERP system. Third, it shows

the effect of various motivations on user satisfaction and perceived usefulness of the ERP system,

which are key determinants of users’ continued engagement with the system.

The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. We first introduce and synthesize the

literature on the post-acceptance model of continuance, leadership styles and self-determination

theory, and then describe our research model and hypotheses. This is followed by the research

methods used to test the model. The paper concludes with a summary of the key findings and

implications for theories and practice.

2. Theoretical background

2.1. Post-acceptance model of IS continuance

The post-acceptance IS continuance model (Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015) serves as a useful

framework to explain user intention to continue their engagement with the ERP system. Our review

of research on continued IS use has revealed that the research at the individual user level is largely

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

informed by the IS continuance model to examine psychological motivations driving continued IT

usage. In this model, two antecedents of satisfaction and perceived usefulness are found to predict

continuance intentions. ERP satisfaction is described as “an end-user’s overall affective and

cognitive evaluation of their fulfilment” when using an ERP system (Bhattacherjee, 2001). Users

have a tendency to rely more on their satisfaction than on relatively unknown future expectations

(Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015). Indeed, satisfied ERP users are more likely to continue using the ERP

system, while dissatisfied users are more likely to discontinue ERP usage or switch to shadow

systems. Perceived usefulness is referred to as the “extent to which individuals believe that using

a particular IT will enhance their job performance” (Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015). The expectation

is that ERP users are more likely to have positive intentions regarding IS usage when systems are

perceived as being useful. Users have fewer tendencies to continue ERP use unless the system

benefits them in their prospective routines (Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015; Venkatesh, Morris, Davis,

& Davis, 2003). In addition, perceived usefulness and satisfaction have proven to be salient

predictors of continued IS usage and success (Yeh & Teng, 2012). In our study, we adapted the

post-acceptance model of IS continuance (Bhattacherjee & Lin, 2015) to investigate the link

between leadership style, motivation and ERP continuance intention. Our review of research on

continued IS use has revealed that the research at the individual user level is largely informed by

the post-acceptance IS continuance model to examine psychological motivations driving continued

IT usage. In addition, the IS continuance model has been validated in different contexts, such as

mobile payment (Zhou, 2013), electronic medical records (Ayanso, Herath, & O'Brien, 2015),

knowledge sharing in virtual environments (Zheng, Zhao, & Stylianou, 2013) and continuous use

of ERP systems (Chou & Chen, 2009; Khosravi et al., 2012).

2.2. Transformational and transactional leadership styles

The two leadership styles, transformational and transactional, are commonly used in the IS

literature to explain the role of leaders in influencing employees’ behavior (i.e. Shao et al., 2016;

Ke & Wei, 2008). Transformational leaders are characterized by individuals who have the power

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

to influence the attitudes and behavior of their subordinates through inspirational motivation,

intellectual stimulation and individual consideration. Transactional leaders, on the other hand, are

intent on controlling and monitoring subordinates through contingent rewards and management by

exception (Bass, 1985). The key differences between transformational and transactional leadership

are grounded in the approach through which leaders motivate their followers (Bass, Avolio, Jung,

& Berson, 2003). Transformational leaders attain a higher level of performance and creativity by

elevating the level of intrinsic motivation of their subordinates beyond exchange values (Zhu &

Akhtar, 2014). Burns (1978) defined the transformational leader as a leader who “seeks to satisfy

higher needs and engages the full potential of the follower” (p. 4). In the same way, Bass (1985)

characterized transformational leadership as addressing followers’ psychological needs, which in

turn motivate followers to performance better. Transactional leadership focuses more on extrinsic

motivation for the performance of job tasks. Transactional leadership is based on an exchange

relationship, whereby subordinates’ compliance is exchanged for expected rewards and which may

promote a productive workplace (Olafsen et al., 2015). In the context of IT system use,

transactional leaders actively regulate users’ activities by implementing transparent and clear rules

and objectives to impose adequate system usage (Rezvani et al., 2012). If managers fail to motivate

end users to adopt ERP systems into their work routines and processes the organization may suffer

from ERP system failure, despite their implementation being declared a success (Ke, Tan, Sia, &

Wei, 2012; Mitchell, Gagné, Beaudry, & Dyer, 2012).

In the IS literature various leadership behaviors have been found to influence technology

adoption (Dong, 2006; Neufeld et al., 2007; Ke & Wei, 2008), user satisfaction (Cho et al., 2011)

and employee innovation (Pieterse, Knippenberg, Schippers & Stam, 2010). Leadership theories

provide a lens through which different phases of ES implementation can be studied. Table 1

summarizes some of the major studies in this area.

Table 1. Summary of seminal research.

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Source Research Theoretical model(s) Major findings Focus

method applied

Neufeld et al. Survey Unified theory of Charismatic leadership has a IT adoption –

(2007) acceptance and use of positive effect on performance Project champion
technology (UTAUT) expectancy, effort expectancy,
and charismatic social influence and facilitating
leadership theory conditions
Dong et al. Survey Transformational Transformational and contingent ES (Enterprise
(2007) leadership theory reward behaviors of project System)
champions positively influence adoption –
perceived usefulness of the system Project champion
Wang et al. Survey Team leadership Charismatic behaviors positively ES
(2005) theory influence team members’ implementation –
cohesiveness and improve team Project leader
performance
Prybutok, Zhang, Survey DeLone and Leadership triad had a positive IT
& Ryan (2008) McLean’s IS Success impact on system and service implementation –
model quality Top manager
Ding, Li, & Survey Upper echelon theory Strategic leadership has a positive IT
George (2014) – DeLone and effect on IS quality and implementation –
McLean’s IS Success organizational benefit Top manager
model
Cho et al. (2011) Survey DeLone and Transformational leadership has a IT
McLean’s IS Success positive effect on perceived implementation –
model usefulness and IS satisfaction – Top manager
perceived organizational support
and system self-efficacy mediates
the relationships
Shao et al. (2012) Survey Organizational culture Organizational culture and ES post-
theory and knowledge sharing mediate the implementation –
knowledge-based relationship between Top manager
view transformational leadership and
ERP success
Shao et al. (2016) Case Contingency theory Transformational leadership fits All phases of the
studies best with the adoption phase, ES life-cycle –
transactional leadership fits best Top manager
with the implementation phase,
and a combination of
transformational and transactional
leadership styles are most effective
in the post-implementation phase
As demonstrated in Table 1, these studies have advanced our understanding regarding

leadership behavior in IS. Several conclusions can be drawn and research gaps identified from the

extant literature. First, the existing literature mainly focuses on the role of top managers/project

champions, suggesting that leadership behavior can shape users’ technology beliefs and is

necessary for successful IS implementation. While senior or top managers affect IS implementation

(Shao et al., 2012) it is the direct supervisors who play an ongoing and immediate supporting role

in the system assimilation (Liu et al., 2011). Serving as agents of the organization (DeConinck,

7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

2010), direct supervisors are psychologically more proximal than upper level managers (Sikora &

Ferris, 2014) and hence are more likely to affect employees’ behavior (Rouleau & Balogun, 2011).

Employees strongly rely on their immediate supervisors’ directions and role expectations (Sikora

& Ferris, 2014). A number of studies have shown that direct supervisors are better equipped to help

employees with challenging tasks and building skills essential for those tasks (e.g., Tepper &

Taylor, 2003; Liu et al., 2011). For instance, Liu et al. (2011) explored key influence factors

affecting ES assimilation and revealed the significant influence of supervisors on individual ES

assimilation. Their study indicates that it was direct supervisors who had the most influence on

individual system assimilation. In contrast, top managers barely had “any significant influence” on

individual users (Liu et al., 2011, p. 192).

Second, most of the studies have explored the direct relationship between leadership and

the desired outcomes, but overlooked the mechanisms between these relationships. For instance,

Dong et al. (2007) and Cho et al. (2011) have found that transformational leaders motivate and

convince users of the usefulness of a new information system through persuading users the benefits

of a new system and articulating a clear vision. However, no clear understanding can be drawn

from the literature as to through which mechanisms leadership behavior affect users’ continuous

use. Previous studies seem to have neglected users’ psychological needs, which are a central tenet

of leadership theories such as transformational theory. We seek to address the above limitations

and extend the prior IS literature by identifying the critical roles of transformational and

transactional leadership behaviors of direct supervisors in the post-implementation of ERP systems.

2.3. Motivation theory

According to SDT an individual’s enthusiasm to pursue a task can be either intrinsic or

extrinsic (Deci & Ryan, 2008). Intrinsic motivation rests on the assumption that individuals possess

an innate desire for autonomy, competence and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Perceived

autonomy refers to an individual’s desire to self-organize one’s own behavior, whilst perceived

competence implies that individuals tend to be effective and expand their own capabilities.

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Perceived relatedness refers to a feeling of association and involves a sense of being significant to

others. On the other hand, extrinsic motivation involves a drive to take action in order to attain

rewards, career prestige, a positive assessment from others, or to avoid punishment. The primary

form of extrinsic motivation is external regulation, which implies that the individual engages in the

desired behavior in order to receive external rewards or to avoid punishment (Deci & Ryan, 2012;

Liang, Xue, & Wu, 2013). Transactional leadership in the form of contingent reward behavior

promotes extrinsic motivation in system users (Dong et al., 2007). A fear of managerial sanctions

related to the use or misuse of the system is extrinsically motivated and based on feelings of

coercion.

Motivation theories are broadly used to study IS acceptance and use (Gerow, Ayyagari,

Thatcher, & Roth, 2013; Chung, Koo & Kim, 2014; Venkatesh, 1999). Prior research has examined

intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from many perspectives. In the IS literature one of the most

common predictors of users’ motivation is perceived enjoyment (e.g. Venkatesh, 2000; Cyr, Head,

& Ivanov, 2006; Wu & Lu, 2013). Scholars have also examined the role of playfulness, described

as a pleasant feeling that motivates a user to interact with mobile learning (Wang, Wu & Wang,

2009), online learning (Saadé, He & Kira, 2007), virtual stores (Oh et al., 2009), social networking

(Sledgianowski & Kulviwat, 2009) and online games (Tao, Cheng & Sun, 2009). However,

theorizing motivation as playfulness and enjoyment seems to have limited application in the

workplace, particularly using utilitarian IS. We therefore apply SDT for a more suitable

conceptualization of motivation in the workplace context for four reasons. First, SDT is one of the

most detailed and best-validated frameworks (Olafsen, Halvari, Forest & Deci, 2015) explaining

the link between intrinsic / extrinsic motivation, and positive outcomes (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2012).

Second, SDT has focused on interpersonal settings in organizations that are need-supportive,

because need-support has been shown to facilitate motivation and performance (Deci &

Ryan, 2012). The notion of managerial need support refers to the supervisor recognizing

subordinates' perspectives and encouraging self-initiation (Olafsen et al., 2015), as the

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

interpersonal climate in the work environment is shaped by supervisors (Zohar & Luria, 2004). In

other word, SDT provides a framework to comprehend the fundamental processes behind the

effectiveness of transformational and transactional leadership behavior in the IS context, because

in the work context managers have the power to influence the psychological needs of their

subordinates (Graves, Sarkis & Zhu, 2013). Third, SDT enables researchers to study the mechanism

through which leadership behaviors, enhance or diminish motivation of ERP users to use the newly

implemented system. In addition, SDT helps managers identify better strategies to support ERP

users. Finally, intrinsic and extrinsic motivating factors have typically been investigated in isolation

from each other in various studies. We argue that different motivational factors are likely to

harmonize by having a mutually reinforcing effect on ERP users’ continuance intentions. We

believe that examining the consequences of diverse motivations in a unique model will offer more

insights into the continued use of ERP systems.

3. Research model and hypotheses development

The theoretical model supporting this study is presented in Fig. 1. This model demonstrates

how the two different leadership styles (transformational and transactional) impact the intrinsic and

extrinsic motivations (perceived autonomy, competence, relatedness and perceived external

regulation) of ERP users, which in turn affects satisfaction and the perceived usefulness of ERP

continuance. In accordance with the post-acceptance IS continuance model, we have included two

direct determinants of continuance intention, perceived usefulness and satisfaction with IS use, in

our model. Here we extend the theorizing to consider factors that influence the magnitude of those

two effects based on the notion that various motivations and direct managers’ leadership behaviors

exert a powerful contextual influence on employees’ interpretations of their job characteristics and

work experiences (Zhang et al., 2014). The following sections explain the proposed relationships

between the constructs.

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 1. Research model.

3.1. Transformational leadership and intrinsic motivation

As emphasized by SDT, the first component of intrinsic motivation – perceived autonomy

– refers to users’ perceptions of the extent to which they are instructed to use certain system

features, or given freedom to experiment with system features (Ahuja & Thatcher, 2005). Users

need the perception of autonomy to deliberate on innovative system features (Ahuja & Thatcher,

2005). Transformational leaders foster this perception by providing an environment for learning

through trial and error, where users can freely explore the capacity of the product and express their

own opinions (Bass, 1985). A need for autonomy among system users is related to the willingness

to self-regulate their commitment to exploit ERP functionalities and constitutes the origin of the

usage patterns. Li, Tan and Teo (2012) revealed that transformational leadership behavior is closely

linked to employees’ perceptions of autonomy, in which a user’s perceived autonomy and freedom

is expressed in the way they fulfil and perform their work. Transformational leadership encourages

ERP users to participate through self-initiation, instead of pressuring and instructing them on when

and how to use the system. As such, we hypothesize that:

Hypothesis 1. There is a positive association between transformational leadership and an ERP

user’s perceived level of autonomy.

Transformational leaders were found to improve the capabilities and knowledge of system

users through providing substantial training (Cho et al., 2011). Transformational leaders have also

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

been described as shaping a sense of self-confidence among ERP users when it comes to

experimenting with ERP functionalities, by empowering users to suggest new approaches that

allow them to competently accomplish their tasks (intellectual stimulation). In addition, there has

been some positive evidence to demonstrate that management support, expectations and inspiration

are major behavioral predictors regarding the perception of ERP user competence (Mitchell et al.,

2012). Transformational leaders can be seen as successful role models who improve perceived

competency among system users by articulating high expectations (Cho et al., 2011; Olafsen et al.,

2015). According to SDT theory, increasing one’s capabilities is a significant feature for the

perception of competency (Ryan & Deci, 2008). Characteristics of transformational leadership are

suggested to effectively fulfil this perception among ERP users. Therefore, we hypothesize that:

Hypothesis 2. There is a positive association between transformational leadership and an ERP

user’s perceived level of competence.

Transformational leaders foster a sense of relatedness among employees by offering a non-

threatening environment and encouraging open communication and teamwork. IS research reveals

that transformational leadership increases the sense of relatedness among system users in various

ways, for example by nourishing relationships between leaders and ERP users or by facilitating

networking and building connections among ERP users of various business units (Ke & Wei, 2008;

Rezvani, Khosravi & Ahmad, 2012). SDT posits that the perception of relatedness is decisively

reliant on a sense of connectedness to others (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Olafsen et al., 2015). As an ERP

system is a very intricate, inter-reliant and multifunctional tool that requires connections between

system knowledge and employees placed in various business units (Xue, Liang, & Wu, 2011), it is

essential that leaders motivate and inspire ERP users to cooperate with each other.

Transformational leadership, known to have the ability to foster connections between various

organizational units and hierarchical levels, meets these criteria (Boehm, Dwertmann, Bruch, &

Shamir, 2015). Acknowledgement and support from leadership demonstrate genuine interest in

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

users’ relatedness, which in turn encourages ERP users to engage with the new ERP system.

Consequently, we hypothesize that:

Hypothesis 3. There is a positive association between transformational leadership and an ERP

user’s perceived level of relatedness.

3.2. Transactional leadership and extrinsic motivation

One primary form of extrinsic motivation is external regulation, which is based on attaining

a reward or avoiding punishment administered by others (Deci & Ryan, 1985). Prior organizational

studies have found that incentives can increase employee motivation, job satisfaction, performance

and other desirable behavioral and attitudinal outcomes (Podsakoff, Bommer, Podsakoff, &

MacKenzie, 2006). SDT posits that the perception of external regulation depends on an exchange

of resources (Deci & Ryan, 2000). In these exchange relationships ERP users are externally

regulated, based on rewards or punishment, adjust their level of effort to engage with the system

(Rezvani, 2013). Thus transactional leaders, employing contingent reward behavior, influence

users’ perceptions of external regulations through the use of rewards as positive reinforcement, or

by utilizing punishment as a coercive force. This implies that punishment and reward are crucial

driving factors, promoting certain behaviors (Ryan & Deci, 2008; Olafsen et al., 2015), such as

influencing ERP usage behavior (Xue et al., 2011; Rezvani et al., 2012). As a result, we hypothesize

that:

Hypothesis 4. There is a positive association between transactional leadership and an ERP user’s

perceived level of external regulation.

3.3. Intrinsic motivation, satisfaction and perceived usefulness

An integral assumption of SDT theory is that all three components of intrinsic motivation

promote employees’ desirable behaviors (Ryan & Deci, 2008). As a result, intrinsically-motivated

ERP users are more likely to develop continuance use, which is in line with SDT. Sørebø, Halvari,

Gulli and Kristiansen (2009) argue that the achievement of perceived autonomy, competency and

13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

relatedness contribute to user satisfaction. They further argue that each of the three components of

intrinsic motivation has a distinct effect on satisfaction, which in turn leads to e-learning

continuance intention.

The perception of autonomy is crucial in the post-adoption stage for promoting positive

behavior (Sun, 2012), such as ERP continuance intentions. Sun (2012) further argues that the

perceived autonomy of individual system users decreases resistance and increases user satisfaction,

leading to adaptive system features in the continuance stage. A study by Sørebø et al. (2009)

empirically demonstrated that autonomy positively influences individual satisfaction with e-

learning usage. In addition, Roca and Gagné (2008) view autonomy as a significant intrinsic

variable, which is positively related to perceived usefulness. Therefore, we hypothesize that:

Hypothesis 5. There is a positive association between an ERP user’s level of perceived autonomy

and user satisfaction.

Hypothesis 6. There is a positive association between an ERP user’s level of perceived autonomy

and perceived level of usefulness.

A need for competence among system users reflects their need to be effective in how they

use system functionalities (Khosravi et al., 2016). Such desire has a positive effect on system users’

satisfaction and improved productivity (Roca & Gagné, 2008; Lee et al., 2015). Perceived

competence reflects system users’ effectiveness in their ability to use the system and its features in

the continuance stage (Shih, 2006). Individuals’ past knowledge and skills, along with a personal

mastery, are the key sources of competence. Hence, when individuals do well in applying their

technical skills and knowledge to enhance computer-correlated responsibilities they are likely to

be more satisfied with the adoption of the system (Shih, 2006). In addition, perceived competence

is a significant factor of user performance in computer use (Munro, Huff, Marcolin, & Compeau,

1997; Lindgren, Stenmark, & Ljungberg, 2003). Blili, Raymond and Rivard (1998) empirically

demonstrated that perceived competence positively and extensively affects user satisfaction, while

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Roca and Gagné (2008) report that perceived competence is positively related to perceived

usefulness. Accordingly, we hypothesize that:

Hypothesis 7. There is a positive association between an ERP user’s level of perceived competence

and their satisfaction.

Hypothesis 8. There is a positive association between an ERP user’s level of perceived competence

and their perceived level of usefulness.

During the continuance stage, perceived relatedness refers to the possibility of

collaboration with others. Perceived relatedness is an important factor because ERP systems are

often implemented alongside business process re-engineering (Liang & Xue, 2004), which requires

collaboration between functional units, peers and project leaders to fully understand the application

of ERP features, and the potential use of those features and work systems (Boudrau & Robey, 2005;

Khosravi et al., 2013). Bhattacherjee (2001) argues that interpersonal influence is a significant

predictor of intention to use electronic brokerage services. This is because perceived relatedness

can reduce employees’ fears and increase their openness in sharing their knowledge related to the

system features with others. This need for interaction must be satisfied, because errors could be

diagnosed and resolved when users enter into collaboration with other functional units, and when

management is eager to accept responsibilities for inaccuracies (Ke & Wei, 2008; Lee et al., 2015).

Based on that we hypothesize that:

Hypothesis 9. There is a positive association between an ERP user’s level of perceived relatedness

and their satisfaction.

Hypothesis 10. An ERP user’s level of perceived relatedness has a positive effect on their

perceived level of usefulness.

3.4. Extrinsic motivation, satisfaction and perceived usefulness

There are studies demonstrating that the effect of intrinsic motivation on task

accomplishment can be diminished by presenting an extrinsic reward (Deci, 1971; Ryan, Mims, &

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Koestner, 1983). This negative interaction between extrinsic rewards and intrinsic motivation is

often moderated for behaviors that are not purely intrinsic (Hirst, 1988; Mossholder, 1980), such

as using an ERP system. When users perform ERP functions that they do not find stimulating they

may not be as enthusiastic in performing those activities; however, they may still perform them

given reasonable external incentives (Malhotra, Galletta, & Kirsch, 2008) or to avoid punishment

(Xue et al., 2011; Mitchell et al., 2012). As a result, activities that are not fully self-endorsed and

perceived as not enjoyable are less likely to be performed (Teo, Limb, & Lai, 1999). Under the

influence of external regulation (punishment and incentives) these activities may be perceived as

personally meaningful and useful. Prior studies in IS also reveal that perceived external regulation

predicts perceived usefulness and intention to use the system (Malhotra et al., 2008). Hence, we

argue that perceptions of external regulation are likely to influence users’ thoughts regarding

satisfaction and perceived usefulness. Therefore, we hypothesize that:

Hypothesis 11. There is a positive association between an ERP user’s level of perceived external

regulation and their satisfaction.

Hypothesis 12. There is a positive association between an ERP user’s level of perceived external

regulation and their perceived level of usefulness.

3.5. ERP continuance intentions

Users’ intention to continue to use an IS system is determined by their satisfaction and the

system’s perceived usefulness (Bhattacherjee, 2001), which entails a positive association between

the common indicators of IS post-adoption, more specifically continuance and usage. A comparable

rationale can be made in the context of ERP continuance, where satisfaction with an ERP system

would reinforce a user’s intention to continue using the system (Chou & Chen, 2009). Satisfaction

has been found to contribute to a positive judgment of a user’s decision to continue prescribed ERP

functionalities (Chon & Chen, 2009). Based on the post-acceptance IS continuance model

(Bhattacherjee, 2001), satisfaction implies a positive attitude, which results in increased

continuance intentions. In addition, the impact of perceived usefulness on satisfaction at the post-

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

adoption phase is that the perception of usefulness can be considered as perceived performance,

which is a significant predictor of satisfaction (Venkatesh, Brown, Maruping, & Bala, 2008).

Therefore, we hypothesize that:

Hypothesis 13. Perceived usefulness is positively associated with satisfaction.

Hypothesis 14. Satisfaction is positively associated with ERP continuance intention.

Hypothesis 15. Perceived usefulness is positively associated with ERP continuance intention.

4. Methodology

4.1 Measurement

We used published and validated measures, obtained through a comprehensive literature

review, with some minor changes in wording reflecting the technology utilized in the context of

this study (see Appendix 2). Transformational as well as transactional leadership measures were

based on the multi-factor leadership questionnaire (Bass & Avolio, 1997), which is one of the most

widely-used measurements in management literature. A sample item is “My direct manager

specifies to us the importance of having a strong sense of purpose in using the ERP system.” Four

items adopted from Davis (1989) were used to measure perceived usefulness. Items include overall

judgment of usefulness as well as an assessment of effectiveness. A sample item is “Using an ERP

system improves the quality of my work.” Four items were used to measure users’ satisfaction with

the system (Bhattacherjee, 2001). A sample item is “Using an ERP system makes me feel very

satisfied.” Four items assessing ERP continuance were also adapted from Bhattacherjee (2001). A

sample item is “I plan to continue using ERP to contribute to my work rather than discontinue use.”

The intrinsic motivation elements (perceived relatedness, autonomy and competence) were based

on the basic need of satisfaction at work, using the scale employed by Kasser, Davey and Ryan

(1992) and Baard, Deci and Ryan (2004). A sample item is “I am free to express my ideas and

opinions on using ERP systems in my work.” The extrinsic motivation was based on the academic

motivational scale (Vallerand et al., 1992). To measure these elements we used a seven-point Likert

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

scale from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”. Naturally, all elements were reflective.

Considering systematic variations based on individual responses, we controlled for gender, age,

education and experience, evaluated by employing standard survey questions (Agarwal & Prasad,

1999; Venkatesh et al., 2003).

4.2. Data collection

A survey research method was selected because it has the potential to provide generalizable

results (King & He, 2005). Moreover, the nature of the research question investigated through the

SDT lens requires a quantitative approach for theoretical consistency. We obtained the data for

testing the research model by running a survey among primary front-line ERP users from medium

and large organizations in Malaysia that had successfully implemented an enterprise system at least

two years prior to our data collection. Targeted organizations were identified from different

sources, including the Export Directory of Manufacturers and the Malaysian Business Directory.

An enterprise system was chosen as the focus of this study as it matches the context within which

we have developed our theory. Focusing on one type of IS rules out a potential conflict in findings

arising from the nature of the system examined. Nineteen firms were then contacted by telephone

to explain the nature of the study and to request their participation. Eleven companies (see Table

2) met our criteria and agreed to participate in the study. Following the common ethics protocol we

asked each organization to distribute the questionnaires to system users. To facilitate participation,

surveys were administered during a monthly staff meeting and employees were asked to return the

questionnaire at the end of the business day.

Table 2. Descriptive statistics of firms participating in the survey.

Sample No of ERP system Number of
industry participating respondents
companies
Manufacturing 8 SAP and Oracle 243
Retail and 2 SAP 38
wholesale
Services 1 SAP 17

18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Because we carried out our survey in a non-English speaking country we first developed

the questionnaire in English and then translated it into the local language. Using the back-

translation method (Brislin, 1980) we asked a translator, who was not aware of our research context,

to translate from Bahasa Malaysia back into English. After comparing the two English versions we

found no semantic differences.

Prior to data collection a small-scale pre-test of the questionnaire was conducted with 12

volunteer ERP users to examine the ease of understanding and contextual relevance. A total of 500

questionnaires were then distributed among front-line system users and 299 valid responses were

returned, resulting in a response rate of 59%. Our sample comprised 172 males and 127 females,

with a mean age of 38 (see Table 3).

Table 3. Sample demographics.

Attributes Categories # % Attributes Categories # %
Gender Male 172 57.5 Education Diploma 27 9
Female 127 42.5 College 50 16.7
Age Bachelor 179 59.9
18-25 11 3.7 Master 43 14
26-30 33 11
31-35 58 19.4
36-40 121 40.5
41-45 40 13.4
46+ 36 12

5. Results

Partial least squares (PLS) was used to validate the model. Indeed, PLS was employed since

it seems to be appropriate for exploratory work and for prediction, as well as for analyzing

complicated relations and models (Ringle, Sarstedt, & Straub, 2012). Also, PLS has a minimal

request on measurement scale and it needs no particular distribution for measured variables (Chin,

1998). The statistical program SmartPLS version 3 was used to analyse the data (Ringle et al.,

2015).

To analyze the data we performed: (I) model and construct validation, (II) discriminant and

criterion validity, and (III) structural model testing. Before trying to test the model it was decided

19
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

to test the validity as well as reliability of the construct measures. Two approaches were employed

to assess reliability: Cronbach alpha scores and composite reliability. Both methods reflected the

inner persistency of the scale elements that measured a particular factor (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).

Both Cronbach alpha scores and composite reliability reported beyond the proposed cut-off value

of 0.70 are displayed in Table 4.

Table 4. Confirmatory factor analysis.

Variables AVE Composite Cronbach’s
Reliability Alpha
CON 0.64 0.84 0.72
ER 0.75 0.90 0.84
PA 0.63 0.87 0.80
PC 0.67 0.86 0.76
PR 0.89 0.94 0.88
PU 0.66 0.88 0.81
SAT 0.73 0.89 0.81
TFL 0.64 0.96 0.96
TSL 0.71 0.90 0.88
CON = ERP continuous intention; ER = perceived external regulation; PA= perceived
autonomy; PC = perceived competence; PR = perceived relatedness; PU = perceived usefulness;
SAT= satisfaction; TFL= transformational leadership; TSL = transactional leadership

Convergent validity was evaluated by calculating the average variance that was derived for

all measures. As illustrated in Table 1, the derived average variances achieved the cut-off norm of

0.5 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).

Accordingly, discriminant validity was evaluated by two methods: A) the cross-factor

loadings (see Appendix 1 Table A.1) (Chin, 1998); and B) the square root of the average variance

derived, as suggested by Fornell and Larcker (1981). The results are captured in Table 5 which

shows strong discriminant validity.

Table 5. Mean, standard deviation (SD) and discriminant validity.

Mean SD CON ER PA PC PR PU SAT TFL TSL
CON 5.94 0.93 0.803
ER 3.78 1.40 -0.061 0.866
PA 4.65 0.57 0.541 0.006 0.793
PC 4.41 0.68 0.697 -0.038 0.543 0.822

20
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Mean SD CON ER PA PC PR PU SAT TFL TSL

PR 4.71 0.63 0.348 0.054 0.610 0.421 0.946
PU 5.86 1.14 0.602 -0.011 0.582 0.481 0.646 0.811
SAT 5.70 1.01 0.304 0.112 0.201 0.276 0.138 0.261 0.858
TFL 4.27 1.32 0.380 0.308 0.537 0.470 0.515 0.462 0.156 0.802
TSL 5.43 1.20 0.208 0.202 0.375 0.343 0.306 0.189 0.169 0.453 0.845
CON = ERP continuous intention; ER = perceived external regulation; PA= perceived
autonomy; PC = perceived competence; PR = perceived relatedness; PU = perceived usefulness;
SAT= satisfaction; TFL= transformational leadership; TSL = transactional leadership

Data were collected at a single point in time using a single survey, which could potentially

create problems with common method bias. Various remedies suggested by Podsakoff, MacKenzie

and Lee (2003) were used, including: proximal as well as methodological separation of

measurement, anonymity of respondents, and minimizing evaluation apprehension by reassuring

respondents that there were no right and wrong answers and no incentive or disincentive. To

minimize consistency bias, measurement elements were inter-joined randomly. In addition, we

used Harman's single factor test to statistically test common method bias. Harman's test indicated

that there was more than one factor that accounted for the majority of co-variance. In addition, the

PLS marker variable analysis was performed following the approach suggested by Rönkkö and

Ylitalo (2011). First, we identified marker variables in our data set which were not included in the

research model. We used polychronic attitude index (Bluedorn, Kaufman, & Lane, 1992) as marker

variables. Marker variables showed low correlations to the study constructs and do not have an

explicit theoretical influence on other constructs. Second, the marker variable was added as a

predictor to all endogenous latent variables in the PLS model. Finally, we compared the model with

and without the marker variable and found that the significant paths in the baseline model remain

significant in the method factor model (see Appendix 1 Table A.2). Furthermore, we found three

insignificant relationships in our model, suggesting that common method bias is not an issue in this

study.

21
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

5.1. Structural model and hypotheses testing

The hypotheses testing used bootstrapping, including 500 subsamples, to investigate the

statistical importance of every path coefficient, employing t-tests as suggested by Chin (1998).

Findings from the analysis are captured in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2. Structural model.

*Dash arrows show insignificant path; T-values are in the parentheses

Hypotheses 1, 2 and 3, which tested the relationships between transformational leadership

and perceived autonomy (β=.53, t= 10.15), perceived competence (β=.47, t= 5.34) and perceived

relatedness (β=.51, t= 13.08), were supported. Hypothesis 4, which proposed a positive effect of

transactional leadership and ERP users’ perceived level of external regulation (β=.20, t= 3.91), was

also supported. Hypotheses 5 and 6 examined the relationship between ERP users’ perceived

autonomy and their perceived satisfaction with, and usefulness, of the ERP system. The relationship

between perceived autonomy and perceived usefulness (Hypothesis 6) was supported (β=.21, t=

3.13); however, the relationship between perceived autonomy and satisfaction (Hypothesis 5) was

not supported (β=.03, t= .47). Hypotheses 7 and 8, which tested the relationships between ERP

users’ perceived competence and their perceived satisfaction (β=.20, t= 2.63) and usefulness

(β=.18, t= 2.32), were both supported. Hypotheses 9, which measured the relationship between

ERP users’ perceived relatedness and satisfaction (β=-.11, t= 1.6), was not supported, while the

relationship between ERP users’ perceived relatedness and perceived usefulness (β=.40, t= 6.27),

was supported (Hypothesis 10). Hypotheses 11 and 12 tested perceived external regulation,

22
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

satisfaction and usefulness respectively. The results shown in the model indicate that only the

relationship between ERP users’ perceived external regulation and satisfaction (β=.13, t= 2.38) was

supported, while relationships between perceived external regulation and usefulness were

insignificant (β=.02, t= .63). For other relationships, Hypothesis 13 through to Hypothesis 15, the

relationships between perceived usefulness, satisfaction and ERP continuance intentions were

supported. Hypothesis 13, which tested the relationship between perceived usefulness and

satisfaction (β=.22, t= 3.34), was supported. Similarly, Hypotheses 14 and 15, which proposed a

positive effect between the two variables of satisfaction (β=.16, t= 2.56) and perceived usefulness

(β=.56, t= 8.64) on ERP continuance intentions, were both supported. Additionally, we tested for

age, gender, experience and education as control variables; however, we did not find any significant

differences.

6. Discussion

This study extends the prior literature on the continuing use of IS by proposing and testing

a model where the transformational and transactional leadership behaviors of supervisors influence

the continuing use of IS through different types of motivation. In response to the call for more

research on the role of direct managers in the post-implementation stage (Aanestad & Jensen, 2016;

Shao et al., 2016) this study integrated transformational leadership theory (Bass, 1985), motivation

theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000) and the post-acceptance IS continuance model (Bhattarchajee, 2001)

in an ERP continuous use context. Our findings unpack the impact mechanism of transformational

and transactional leadership on the continuous use of ERP systems. Below, we discuss the

implications of the findings for research and practice, the limitations of the study and directions for

future research.

Prior studies have advanced our understanding regarding leadership behaviors and a variety

of positive outcomes in the IS context. However, the literature has some important limitations

which we addressed in this paper. Prior literature in management information system seems to have

overlooked users’ psychological needs, which is a central tenet of transformational theory. In

23
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

addition, they focused on the roles of top management and do not considered the role of supervisory

leadership. This study addressed the above two limitations by identifying the critical roles of

transformational and transactional leadership behaviors of supervisors in the post-implementation

phase of ERP systems.

Our findings contribute to motivation theory, management literature and the IS continuance

model. We have found significant relationships between ERP users’ perceived competence,

perceived usefulness and satisfaction. This is consistent with the finding of the study of Davis,

Bagozzi and Warshaw’s (1992) that intrinsic motivation shapes users’ interactions with IS. In

addition, we have discovered that perceived autonomy is strongly related to perceived usefulness,

but not related to satisfaction. This finding is contrary to that of Sørebø et al. (2009), who tested

this relationship in the context of e-learning usage. It is likely that the voluntary engagement in e-

learning played a role in determining user satisfaction. We could not find any relation between

perceived relatedness and satisfaction in the current study. This result might be attributable to the

contextual setting. Moreover, consistent with the prior literature (Li & Liu, 2014), we have

identified that satisfaction and perceived usefulness are salient predictors of ERP continuance

intentions. This study also extends the IS continuance model to account for the role of intrinsic and

extrinsic motivation.

Furthermore, our findings have demonstrated how transformational leadership motivates

ERP users differently than transactional leadership in the post-implementation phase. These results

contribute to leadership literature in several ways. First, the results support Bass’ (1985) and Burns’

(1978) findings related to the role of leadership styles in influencing intrinsic and extrinsic

motivation. Second, our findings indicate that transformational and transactional leadership are

related to specific outcomes such as user satisfaction and perceived usefulness, which in turn shapes

users’ intentions to continuously engage with the system. This is consistent with Dong et al. (2007)

and Cho et al. (2011) finding that transformational and transactional leadership have positive effect

on user satisfaction and perceived usefulness. Lastly, the results of our research model suggest that

24
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

different leadership styles can have a distinguished impact on different dimensions of intrinsic and

extrinsic motivation, rather than conceptualizing a solitary association between leadership and

desired outcomes.

Our results also contribute to the IS literature by demonstrating the critical role of direct

managers in the under-researched context of the post-implementation phase of ERP systems. The

extant literature has been mainly focusing on the role of management in the successful adoption of

information systems, and discovered top management as a main salient source of influence for the

successful adoption of enterprise systems (Dong et al., 2007; Neufeld et al., 2007; Shao, Feng &

Hu, 2017). Our research findings enrich our understanding of direct managers’ influence in the

post-adoption stage by revealing the mechanisms through which supervisors take effect.

Specifically we have found that both leadership styles are equally important to motivate ERP users

in the continuance phase. Our findings have revealed that there is a strong relationship linking

transformational leadership to satisfying ERP users’ intrinsic motivation, and transactional

leadership to motivating ERP users extrinsically.

This study has some limitations. First, we gathered data from a region in Asia and these

findings might not be generalizable to other countries; future research might test the model in

different sectors and different regions for generalizability. Second, we did not include ERP users’

personality and task characteristics as they might affect the relationship between leadership and

ERP users’ motivation; future studies could test these factors. Third, we have found a positive

relationship between extrinsic motivation and satisfaction. However, we did not differentiate

various types of extrinsic motivation. Previous studies have shown that various types of rewards or

punishments may have different effect on employees’ attitudes and behaviors (Liang et al., 2013);

future studies could test the relationships between various types of reward or punishment and users’

continuance use of enterprise systems.

8. Implications for practice

25
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Findings from this study offer practical implications for ERP managers and practitioners

regarding how transformational and transactional leadership styles can be used to motivate system

users in the post-implementation phase, especially in organizations where long-term usage of ES

is vital to raising revenue. Managers representing both leadership styles can be equally effective in

promoting the ongoing use of ES. Their different leadership styles are likely to promote different

forms of motivation – intrinsic or extrinsic – to influence users to embrace ERP systems. Moreover,

by realizing the underlying process of influencing subordinates to adopt favorable actions and

efforts managers can promote continuous usage of the ERP system.

Managers may encounter circumstances where addressing all psychological needs

simultaneously is not achievable. Under these circumstances, they might have to prioritize the

fulfillment of one or two needs. For example, to increase the continuance use of enterprise systems,

managers should provide an environment that supports satisfaction of perceptions of competence

and relatedness among their ERP users. In addition, they should provide autonomy-supportive

conditions to encourage system users to show great effort to use the system. Our findings confirm

that organizations should also monitor external regulations in a form of rewards or punishments as

it has direct influence on user satisfaction and consequently on continuance use of enterprise

systems. Findings from this study demonstrate that to reinforce ERP users’ continuance use

managers should place a higher priority on perceived autonomy and competence as intrinsic

motivators, as well as perceived external regulation as an extrinsic motivator.

In addition, our findings suggest that lack of intrinsic or extrinsic motivation may prevent

users from using the system even after an enterprise system has been put into place and used for

some time. Therefore, it is imperative for organizations to encourage direct managers to pay close

attention to everyday enterprise systems usage, monitor user progress, and identify and address

emerging issues in a timely manner. Prior studies have revealed the usefulness of leadership

training curricula targeted at building awareness and skills related to motivating employees in the

workplace. Devoting training curricula at the leadership level may, therefore, lead to increased IS

26
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

use among employees in the future. For example, orgaizations should train direct managers to use

autonomy-supportive techniques such as the provision of informational feedback to system users.

Direct managers can also increase perceived usefulness by enhancing perceived relatedness

through team-building exercises and regular meetings.

9. Conclusion

This study is one of a few attempts to investigate the role of direct supervisors in the post-

implementation of IS. In response to the call for more research regarding the role of direct

managers’ behavior, we have adopted a motivational perspective and the post-acceptance IS

continuance model to explain users’ continuance intentions regarding an ERP system. This study

takes a primary step toward extending the post-acceptance IS continuance model by introducing

leadership and motivational factors affecting perceived usefulness and satisfaction in a work

context. Our findings provide support for the critical role of supervisors in users’ perceptions of

autonomy, competence relatedness and external regulation in their work setting as significant

determinants of post-acceptance IS continuance variables. Our research also provides practitioners

with important guidelines on the post-adoption phase of ERP systems.

References

Ahuja, M.K., & Thatcher, J.B. (2005). Moving beyond intentions and toward the theory of trying:
Effects of work environment and gender on post-adoptive information technology use. MIS
Quarterly, 29, 427-459.
Agarwal, R., & Prasad, J. (1999). Are individual differences germane to the acceptance of new
information technologies? Decision Sciences, 30(2), 361-391.
Aanestad, M., & Jensen, T. B. (2016). Collective mindfulness in post-implementation IS adaptation
processes. Information and Organization, 26(1), 13-27.
Ayanso, A., Herath, T. C., & O'Brien, N. (2015). Understanding continuance intentions of physicians
with electronic medical records (EMR): An expectancy-confirmation perspective. Decision
Support Systems, 77, 112-122.
Baard, P.P., Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2004). Intrinsic need satisfaction: A motivational basis of
performance and well-being in two work settings. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34,
2045-2068.

27
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Barker, T., & Frolick, M. N. (2003). ERP implementation failure: A case study. Information Systems
Management, 20(4), 43-49.
Bass, B.M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1997). Full range leadership development: Manual for the Multifactor
Leadership Questionnaire (pp. 43-44). Palo Alto, CA: Mind Garden.
Bass, B.M., Avolio, B.J., Jung, D.I., & Berson, Y. (2003). Predicting unit performance by assessing
transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 207-218.
Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-
confirmation model. MIS Quarterly, 25, 357-370.
Bhattacherjee, A., & Lin, C. P. (2015). A unified model of IT continuance: Three complementary
perspectives and crossover effects. European Journal of Information Systems, 24(4), 364-373.
Blili, S., Raymond, L., & Rivard, S. (1998). Impact of task uncertainty, end-user involvement, and
competence on the success of end-user computing. Information and Management, 33(3), 137-
153.
Bluedorn, A. C., Kaufman, C. F., & Lane, P. M. (1992). How many things do you like to do at once?
An introduction to monochronic and polychronic time. The Executive, 6(4), 17-26.
Boehm, S. A., Dwertmann, D. J., Bruch, H., & Shamir, B. (2015). The missing link? Investigating
organizational identity strength and transformational leadership climate as mechanisms that
connect CEO charisma with firm performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(2), 156-171.
Boudreau, M.-C., & Robey, D. (2005). Enacting integrated information technology: A human agency
perspective. Organization Science, 16(1), 3-18.
Brislin, R. W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written material. Handbook of
Cross-cultural Psychology, 2(2), 349-444.
Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.
Chin, W.W. (1998). Issues and opinion on structural equation modeling. MIS Quarterly, 22(1), 7-16.
Cho, J., Park, I., & Michel, J. W. (2011). How does leadership affect information systems success?
The role of transformational leadership. Information & Management, 48(7), 270-277.
Chou, S. W., & Chen, P. Y. (2009). The influence of individual differences on continuance intentions
of enterprise resource planning (ERP). International Journal of Human-Computer Studies,
67(6), 484-496.
Chung, N., Koo, C., & Kim, J. K. (2014). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation for using a booth
recommender system service on exhibition attendees’ unplanned visit behavior. Computers in
Human Behavior, 30, 59-68.
Cyr, D., Head, M., & Ivanov, A. (2006). Design aesthetics leading to m-loyalty in mobile commerce.
Information & Management, 43(8), 950-963.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information
technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. DOI: 10.2307/249008

28
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., & Warshaw, P.R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use
computers in the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(14), 1111-1132.
Deci, E.L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 18(1), 105-115.
Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior.
New York: Plenum.
Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2000). Target article: The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits: Human needs
and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.
Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation,
development, and health. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 49(3), 182-185.
Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Motivation, personality, and development within embedded social
contexts: An overview of self-determination theory. In R. M. Ryan (Ed.), The Oxford
handbook of motivation (pp. 85–107). New York: Oxford University Press.
DeConinck, J. B. (2010). The effect of organizational justice, perceived organizational support, and
perceived supervisor support on marketing employees' level of trust. Journal of Business
Research, 63(12), 1349-1355.
Dong, L. (2006). Modelling leadership influence on information systems implementation
effectiveness. International Journal of Information Systems and Change Management, 1(4).
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJISCM.2006.012049
Dong, L., Sun, H., & Fang, Y. (2007). Do perceived leadership behaviors affect user technology
beliefs? An examination of the impact of project champions and direct managers.
Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 19(1), 31.
Ding, F., Li, D., & George, J. F. (2014). Investigating the effects of IS strategic leadership on
organizational benefits from the perspective of CIO strategic roles. Information &
Management, 51(7), 865-879.
Ferneley, E. H., & Sobreperez, P. (2006). Resist, comply or workaround? An examination of different
facets of user engagement with information systems. European Journal of Information
Systems, 15(4), 345-356.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(2), 39-50.
Gerow, J. E., Ayyagari, R., Thatcher, J. B., & Roth, P. L. (2013). Can we have fun @ work? The role
of intrinsic motivation for utilitarian systems. European Journal of Information Systems,
22(3), 360-380.
Grabski, S. V., Leech, S. A., & Lu, B. (2003). Enterprise system implementation risks and controls. In
G. Shanks, P.B. Seddon, & L.P. Willcocks (Eds), Second-Wave Enterprise Resource
Planning Systems: Implementing For Effectiveness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

29
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Graves, L. M., Sarkis, J., & Zhu, Q. (2013). How transformational leadership and employee
motivation combine to predict employee proenvironmental behaviors in China. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 35, 81-91.
Greguras, G. J., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2009). Different fits satisfy different needs: linking person-
environment fit to employee commitment and performance using self-determination
theory. Journal of applied psychology, 94(2), 465.
Hirst, M.K. (1988). Intrinsic motivation as influenced by task interdependence and goal setting.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(3), 96-101.
Hsieh, J. P.-A., Rai, A., & Xu, S. X. (2011). Extracting business value from IT: A sensemaking
perspective of post-adoptive use. Management Science, 57(11), 2018-2039.
Hsu, P. F., Yen, H. R., & Chung, J. C. (2015). Assessing ERP post-implementation success at the
individual level: Revisiting the role of service quality. Information & Management, 52(8),
925-942.
Jasperson, J.S., Carter, P.E., & Zmud, R.W. (2005). A comprehensive conceptualization of the post-
adoptive behaviors associated with it-enabled work systems. MIS Quarterly, 29(3), 525-557.
Kark, R., & Van Dijk, D. (2007). Motivation to lead, motivation to follow: The role of the self-
regulatory focus in leadership processes. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 500-528.
Kasser, T., Davey, J., & Ryan, R.M. (1992). Motivation and employee-supervisor discrepancies in a
psychiatric vocational-rehabilitation setting. Rehabilitation Psychology, 37(3), 175-188.
Ke, W., Tan, C. H., Sia, C. L., & Wei, K. K. (2012). Inducing intrinsic motivation to explore the
enterprise system: The supremacy of organizational levers. Journal of Management
Information Systems, 29(3), 257-290.
Ke, W., & Wei, K. K. (2008). Organizational culture and leadership in ERP implementation. Decision
Support Systems, 45(2), 208-218.
Kerr, D., & Houghton, L. (2014). The dark side of ERP implementations: Narratives of domination,
confusion and disruptive ambiguity. Prometheus, 32(3), 281-295.
Khosravi, P., Rezvani, A., & Ahmad, M. N. (2013). Does organizational identification lead to
information system success?. World Applied Sciences Journal, 21(3), 402-408.
Khosravi, P., Rezvani, A., & Wiewiora, A. (2016). The impact of technology on older adults’ social
isolation. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 594-603.

Khosravi, P., Rezvani, A., Subasinghage, M., & Perera, M. (2012). Individuals' absorptive capacity in
enterprise system assimilation. In ACIS 2012: Location, location, location: Proceedings of
the 23rd Australasian Conference on Information Systems 2012 (pp. 1-7). ACIS.
King, W. R., & He, J. (2005). External validity in IS survey research. Communications of the
Association for Information Systems, 16(1), 45.

30
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Krigsman, M. (2010). ERP failure: New research and statistics.

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/projectfailures/erp-failure-new-research-and-statistics/8253
Accessed 1.10.2015.
Lee, Y., Lee, J., & Hwang, Y. (2015). Relating motivation to information and communication
technology acceptance: Self-determination theory perspective. Computers in Human
Behavior, 51, 418-428.
Li, H., & Liu, Y. (2014). Understanding post-adoption behaviors of e-service users in the context of
online travel services. Information & Management, 51(8), 1043-1052.
Li, Y., Tan, C.H., & Teo, H.H. (2012). Leadership characteristics and developers’ motivation in open
source software development. Information & Management, 49, 257-267.
Liang, H., & Xue, Y. (2004). Coping with ERP-related contextual issues in SMEs: A vendor's
perspective. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 13(4), 399-415.
Liang, H., Xue, Y., & Wu, L. (2013). Ensuring employees' IT compliance: Carrot or stick?
Information Systems Research, 24(2), 279-294.
Limayem, M., Hirt, S.G., & Cheung, C.M. (2007). How habit limits the predictive power of intention:
the case of information systems continuance. MIS Quarterly, 31(4), 705-737.
Lindgren, R., Stenmark, D., & Ljungberg, J. (2003). Rethinking competence systems for knowledge-
based organizations. European Journal of Information Systems, 12(1), 18-29.
Liu, L., Feng, Y., Hu, Q., & Huang, X. (2011). From transactional user to VIP: How organizational
and cognitive factors affect ERP assimilation at individual level. European Journal of
Information Systems, 20(2), 186-200.
Malhotra, Y., Galletta, D.F., & Kirsch, L.J. (2008). How endogenous motivations influence user
intentions: Beyond the dichotomy of extrinsic and intrinsic user motivations. Journal of
Management Information System, 25(1), 267-299.
Mitchell, J.I., Gagné, M., Beaudry, A., & Dyer, L. (2012). The role of perceived organizational
support, distributive justice and motivation in reactions to new information technology.
Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 729-738.
Mossholder, K.W. (1980). Effect of externally mediated goal setting on intrinsic motivation: A
laboratory experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65(2), 202-210.
Munro, M.C., Huff, S.L., Marcolin, B.L., & Compeau, D.R. (1997). Understanding and measuring
user competence. Information & Management, 33(1), 45-57.
Neufeld, D. J., Dong, L., & Higgins, C. (2007). Charismatic leadership and user acceptance of
information technology. European Journal of Information Systems, 16(4), 494-510.
Oh, S. H., Kim, Y. M., Lee, C. W., Shim, G. Y., Park, M. S., & Jung, H. S. (2009). Consumer
adoption of virtual stores in Korea: Focusing on the role of trust and playfulness. Psychology
& Marketing, 26(7), 652-668.

31
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Olafsen, A. H., Halvari, H., Forest, J., & Deci, E. L. (2015). Show them the money? The role of pay,
managerial need support, and justice in a self-determination theory model of intrinsic work
motivation. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 56(4), 447-457.
Pieterse, A.N., Knippenberg, D.v., Schippers, M., & Stam, D. (2010). Transformational and
transactional leadership and innovative behavior: The moderating role of psychological
empowerment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(4), 609-623.
Podsakoff, P.M., Bommer, W.H., Podsakoff, N.P., & MacKenzie, S.B. (2006). Relationships between
leader reward and punishment behavior and subordinate attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors:
A meta-analytic review of existing and new research. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 99(2), 113-142.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., & Lee, J.Y. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral
research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.
Prybutok, V. R., Zhang, X., & Ryan, S. D. (2008). Evaluating leadership, IT quality, and net benefits
in an e-government environment. Information & Management, 45(3), 143-152.
Recker, J. (2016). Reasoning about discontinuance of information system use. JITTA: Journal of
Information Technology Theory and Application, 17(1), 41.
Rezvani, A. (2013). Assessing the Role of Leadership in Continuous Intention of Enterprise Resource
Planning (Doctoral dissertation, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia).
Rezvani, A., Dong, L., & Khosravi, P. (2017). Promoting the continuing usage of strategic
information systems: The role of supervisory leadership in the successful implementation of
enterprise systems. International Journal of Information Management, 37(5), 417-430.
Rezvani, A., Khosravi, P., & Ahmad, M. N. (2012). Assessing The Role Of Transactional And
Transformational Leadership In Continuance Intentions Of Enterprise Resource Planning.
In PACIS (p. 75).
Rezvani, A., Khosravi, P., Subasinghage, M., & Perera, M. (2012). How does contingent reward
affect enterprise resource planning continuance intention? The role of contingent reward
transactional leadership. In ACIS 2012: Location, location, location: Proceedings of the 23rd
Australasian Conference on Information Systems 2012 (pp. 1-9). ACIS.
Rezvani, A., Chang, A., Wiewiora, A., Ashkanasy, N. M., Jordan, P. J., & Zolin, R. (2016). Manager
emotional intelligence and project success: The mediating role of job satisfaction and
trust. International Journal of Project Management, 34(7), 1112-1122.
Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., & Straub, D. W. (2012). Editor's comments: A critical look at the use of
PLS-SEM in MIS quarterly. MIS quarterly, 36(1), iii-xiv.
Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J. M. (2015). SmartPLS 3. Boenningstedt: SmartPLS GmbH,
http://www. smartpls. com.

32
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Roca, J.C., & Gagné, M. (2008). Understanding E-learning continuance intention in the workplace: A
self-determination theory perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 1585-1604.
Rouleau, L., & Balogun, J. (2011). Middle managers, strategic sensemaking, and discursive
competence. Journal of Management Studies, 48(5), 953-983.
Rönkkö, M., & Ylitalo, J. (2011). PLS marker variable approach to diagnosing and controlling for
method variance. ICIS 2011 Proceedings.
Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2008). Self-determination theory and the role of basic psychological needs
in personality and the organization of behavior. In O. P. John, R. W. Robbins, & L. A. Pervin
(Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 654-678). New York, NY:
Guilford Press.
Ryan, R. M., Mims, V., & Koestner, R. (1983). Relation of reward contingency and interpersonal
context to intrinsic motivation: A review and test using cognitive evaluation theory. Journal
of personality and Social Psychology, 45(4), 736.
Saadé, R. G., He, X., & Kira, D. (2007). Exploring dimensions to online learning. Computers in
Human Behavior, 23(4), 1721-1739.
Shao, Z., Feng, Y., & Liu, L. (2012). The mediating effect of organizational culture and knowledge
sharing on transformational leadership and Enterprise Resource Planning systems success: An
empirical study in China. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6), 2400-2413.
Shao, Z., Feng, Y., & Hu, Q. (2016). Effectiveness of top management support in enterprise systems
success: A contingency perspective of fit between leadership style and system life-cycle.
European Journal of Information Systems, 25(2), 131-153.
Shih, H.P. (2006). Assessing the effects of self-efficacy and competence on individual satisfaction
with computer use: An IT student perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 1012-
1026.
Sikora, D. M., & Ferris, G. R. (2014). Strategic human resource practice implementation: The critical
role of line management. Human Resource Management Review, 24(3), 271-281.
Sledgianowski, D., & Kulviwat, S. (2009). Using social network sites: The effects of playfulness,
critical mass and trust in a hedonic context. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 49(4),
74-83.
Sørebø, Ø., Halvari, H., Gulli, V.F., & Kristiansen, R. (2009). The role of self-determination theory in
explaining teachers’ motivation to continue to use e-learning technology. Computers &
Education, 53, 1177-1187.
Sun, H. (2012). Understanding user revisions when using information system features: Adaptive
system use and triggers. MIS Quarterly, 36(2), 453-478.
Tao, Y. H., Cheng, C. J., & Sun, S. Y. (2009). What influences college students to continue using
business simulation games? The Taiwan experience. Computers & Education, 53(3), 929-
939.

33
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Teo, T.S.H., Limb, V.K.G., & Lai, R.Y.C. (1999). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in internet usage.
Omega – The International Journal of Management Science, 27, 25-37.
Tepper, B. J., & Taylor, E. C. (2003). Relationships among supervisors' and subordinates' procedural
justice perceptions and organizational citizenship behaviors. Academy of Management
Journal, 46(1), 97-105.
Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., Blais, M. R., Briere, N. M., Senecal, C., & Vallieres, E. F. (1992).
The Academic Motivation Scale: A measure of intrinsic, extrinsic, and a motivation in
education. Educational and psychological measurement, 52(4), 1003-1017.
Venkatesh, V. (1999). Creation of favourable user perceptions: Exploring the role of intrinsic
motivation. MIS Quarterly, 23, 239-260.
Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation,
and emotion into the technology acceptance model. lnformation Systems Research, 11(4),
342-365.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., & Davis, F.D. (2003). User acceptance of information
technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.
Venkatesh, V., Brown, S. A., Maruping, L. M., & Bala, H. (2008). Predicting different
conceptualizations of system use: The competing roles of behavioral intention, facilitating
conditions, and behavioral expectation. MIS Quarterly, 483-502.
Wang, E., Chou, H.-W., & Jiang, J. (2005). The impacts of charismatic leadership style on team
cohesiveness and overall performance during ERP implementation. International Journal of
Project Management, 23(3), 173-180.
Wang, Y. S., Wu, M. C., & Wang, H. Y. (2009). Investigating the determinants and age and gender
differences in the acceptance of mobile learning. British Journal of Educational Technology,
40(1), 92-118.
Wu, J., & Lu, X. (2013). Effects of extrinsic and intrinsic motivators on using utilitarian, hedonic, and
dual-purposed information systems: A meta-analysis. Journal of the Association for
Information Systems, 14(3), 153.
Xue, Y., Liang, H., & Wu, L. (2011). Punishment, justice, and compliance in mandatory IT settings.
lnformation Systems Research 22(2), 400-414.
Yeh, R. K.-J., & Teng, J. T. (2012). Extended conceptualisation of perceived usefulness: Empirical
test in the context of information system use continuance. Behaviour & Information
Technology, 31(5), 525-540.
Zheng, Y., Zhao, K., & Stylianou, A. (2013). The impacts of information quality and system quality
on users' continuance intention in information-exchange virtual communities: An empirical
investigation. Decision Support Systems, 56, 513-524.
Zhou, T. (2013). An empirical examination of continuance intention of mobile payment
services. Decision Support Systems, 54(2), 1085-1091.

34
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Zhu, Y., & Akhtar, S. (2014). How transformational leadership influences follower helping behavior:
The role of trust and prosocial motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(3), 373-
392.
Zhu, Y., Li, Y., Wang, W., & Chen, J. (2010). What leads to post-implementation success of ERP?
An empirical study of the Chinese retail industry. International Journal of Information
Management, 30, 265-276.
Zohar, D., & Luria, G. (2004). Climate as a social-cognitive construction of supervisory safety
practices: scripts as proxy of behavior patterns. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(2), 322.

35
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Appendix 1.

Table A.1
Cross loadings.
CON ER PA PC PR PU Sat TFL TSL
CON1 0.828 -0.018 0.463 0.637 0.243 0.518 0.201 0.384 0.002
CON2 0.735 -0.122 0.358 0.590 0.313 0.406 0.155 0.236 0.308
CON3 0.842 -0.025 0.471 0.690 0.294 0.516 0.353 0.288 0.221
ER1 -0.035 0.933 0.015 -0.029 0.101 0.019 0.134 0.297 0.231
ER2 -0.055 0.873 -0.045 -0.013 0.030 0.005 0.100 0.292 0.134
ER3 -0.094 0.784 0.052 -0.070 -0.048 -0.091 0.019 0.189 0.121
PA1 0.420 -0.116 0.641 0.377 0.223 0.318 0.069 0.418 0.184
PA2 0.492 -0.135 0.877 0.518 0.594 0.527 0.169 0.390 0.297
PA3 0.373 0.154 0.734 0.383 0.465 0.498 0.167 0.421 0.303
PA4 0.435 0.085 0.893 0.439 0.595 0.475 0.211 0.476 0.380
PC1 0.617 0.026 0.520 0.829 0.356 0.322 0.156 0.530 0.254
PC2 0.627 -0.076 0.349 0.801 0.403 0.464 0.228 0.325 0.310
PC3 0.726 -0.045 0.470 0.836 0.275 0.401 0.302 0.296 0.281
PR1 0.329 0.039 0.586 0.413 0.938 0.591 0.147 0.409 0.265
PR3 0.330 0.061 0.571 0.385 0.954 0.629 0.116 0.556 0.310
PU1 0.498 0.026 0.502 0.408 0.667 0.891 0.265 0.351 0.126
PU2 0.455 -0.106 0.390 0.379 0.447 0.821 0.130 0.399 0.095
PU3 0.482 0.009 0.544 0.372 0.712 0.890 0.179 0.448 0.160
PU4 0.529 0.023 0.433 0.409 0.179 0.610 0.276 0.294 0.243
SAT1 0.310 0.115 0.219 0.265 0.168 0.284 0.948 0.193 0.054
SAT2 0.287 0.094 0.209 0.248 0.129 0.244 0.929 0.112 0.052
SAT3 0.157 0.075 0.046 0.193 0.024 0.108 0.670 0.080 0.088
TFL1 0.372 0.186 0.507 0.433 0.261 0.290 0.156 0.768 0.296
TFL10 0.393 0.152 0.366 0.465 0.389 0.362 0.113 0.822 0.290
TFL11 0.386 0.088 0.388 0.453 0.482 0.434 0.086 0.798 0.294
TFL12 0.230 0.320 0.277 0.306 0.436 0.268 0.109 0.757 0.332
TFL13 0.214 0.141 0.386 0.216 0.349 0.280 0.003 0.508 0.248
TFL14 0.129 0.376 0.308 0.219 0.341 0.279 0.133 0.799 0.401
TFL15 0.214 0.350 0.390 0.329 0.438 0.342 0.145 0.850 0.399
TFL2 0.253 0.268 0.323 0.277 0.055 0.185 0.084 0.751 0.341
TFL3 0.255 0.324 0.467 0.308 0.291 0.291 0.173 0.850 0.428
TFL4 0.328 0.287 0.591 0.381 0.570 0.506 0.169 0.878 0.438
TFL5 0.387 0.198 0.520 0.503 0.585 0.533 0.152 0.802 0.412
TFL6 0.398 0.193 0.566 0.475 0.606 0.551 0.154 0.846 0.380
TFL7 0.281 0.318 0.457 0.350 0.412 0.369 0.129 0.897 0.430
TFL8 0.249 0.339 0.194 0.310 0.204 0.256 0.040 0.764 0.310
TFL9 0.302 0.311 0.418 0.402 0.338 0.273 0.141 0.872 0.400
TSL1 0.138 0.045 0.299 0.261 0.104 0.002 0.039 0.283 0.795
TSL2 0.336 0.087 0.479 0.410 0.341 0.273 0.198 0.440 0.787
TSL3 0.188 0.209 0.330 0.323 0.277 0.157 0.165 0.440 0.916
TSL4 0.118 0.208 0.264 0.234 0.258 0.161 0.044 0.354 0.876

36
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table A.2
Common method bias assessment.
Path coefficients Research model (without marker Research model (with
variable) marker variable)
TFL PA 0.53*** 0.53***
TFLPC 0.47*** 0.47***
TFLPR 0.51*** 0.50***
PAPU 0.21** 0.21**
PASAT 0.03 n.s. 0.02 n.s.
PCPU 0.18* 0.17*
PCSAT 0.20** 0.20**
PR PU 0.40*** 0.41***
PR SAT -0.11 n.s. -0.12 n.s.
TSL ER 0.20*** 0.20***
ER PU 0.02 n.s. 0.02 n.s.
ER  SAT 0.13* 0.12*
SAT CON 0.27** 0.26**
PU CON 0.57*** 0.56***
Marker  PA 0.04 n.s.
Marker  PC 0.00 n.s.
Marker  PR 0.01 n.s.
Marker  ER 0.00 n.s.
Marker PU -0.01 n.s.
Marker  SAT 0.06 n.s.
Marker  CON 0.03 n.s.
n.s: non-significant

CON = ERP continuous intention; ER = perceived external regulation; PA= perceived

autonomy; PC = perceived competence; PR = perceived relatedness; PU = perceived usefulness;
SAT= satisfaction; TFL= transformational leadership; TSL = transactional leadership

37
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Appendix 2. Measurment items.

Transformational leadership
Source: Multi-factor leadership questionnaire (Bass & Avolio, 1997)
My direct manager articulates (through emails, forums, etc.) to us about his most
important values and beliefs
My direct manager specifies to us the importance of having a strong sense of
purpose in using of ERP system
My direct manager considers the moral and ethical consequences of ERP user
toward continuance intention.
My direct manager emphasizes to us the importance of having a collective sense of
mission
My direct manager seeks differing perspectives/opinions from us when solving
problems
My direct manager gets us to look at problems from many different angles
My direct manager suggests new ways of developing new functionalities for the
ERP system
My direct manager talks optimistically about the future of the ERP system
My direct manager articulates a compelling vision about the ERP system
My direct manager talks enthusiastically about what needs to be accomplished
My direct manager expresses confidence that goals will be achieved
My direct manager spends time teaching and coaching
My direct manager treats each ERP user as an individual rather than just as a
member of a group
My direct manager considers each ERP user as having different needs, abilities and
aspirations from others
My direct manager helps other ERP users to develop their strengths
Transactional Leadership
Source: Multi-factor leadership questionnaire (Bass & Avolio, 1997)
My direct manager provides me with assistance in exchange for my efforts
My direct manager discusses in specific terms who is responsible for achieving
performance targets
My direct manager Expresses satisfaction when I meet expectations
My direct manager makes clear what one can expect to receive when performance
goals are achieved
Perceived competence
Source: (Baard et al., 2004)
Most days I feel a sense of accomplishment from working with ERP system
My supervisor tell me I am good at using ERP system in my work
I have been able to learn interesting new skills in ERP system through my job
I do not feel very competent when I use ERP system in my work*
Perceived relatedness
Source: (Baard et al., 2004)
In the working relationship with my supervisor:

38
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

I feel loved and cared about

I feel a lot of closeness and intimacy
I often feel a lot of distance in our relationship
Perceived autonomy
Source: (Baard et al., 2004)
I feel like I can make a lot of inputs to deciding how I use ERP system in my work
I feel pressured at using ERP system in my work
I am free to express my ideas and opinions on using ERP system in my work
My feelings toward ERP system are taken into consideration at work
When I am using ERP system, I have to do what I am told
External regulation
Source: (Vallerand et al., 1992)
I have intention to continue using ERP system because:
I receive some form of explicit compensation (e.g., income, contract)
In one way or another I will receive money from my intention to continuance ERP
system
I will earn through training, implementation or customization services related to the
ERP system
Satisfaction
Source: (Bhattacherjee, 2001)
Using ERP systems makes me feel very satisfied
Using ERP systems makes me feel very pleased
Using ERP systems makes me feel very contented
Perceived usefulness
Source: (Davis, 1989)
Using ERP system improves the quality of my work
Using ERP system increases my productivity
Using ERP system enhances my effectiveness in my work
Overall, ERP system is useful in my work
ERP continuance intention
Source: (Bhattacherjee, 2001)
I plan to continue using ERP to contribute to my work rather than discontinued use
My intentions are to continue using ERP rather than use alternative means (other
information systems)
I plan to adjust my work processes to better fit the best practices of ERP
Polychronic attitude index
Source: (Bluedorn, Kaufman, & Lane, 1992)
I do not like to juggle several activities at the same time
People should not try to do many things at once

* Italic items were removed due to low factor loadings

39
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Acknowledgment

We acknowledge the helpful and valuable comments of Professor Jan Recker and Dr Anna

Wiewiora on our first draft. We also thank Professor Min Liu and two anonymous reviewers for their

comments, which help to improve the presentation of this paper.

 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

 We examined how supervisors’ leadership styles influence ERP users’ motivation

 We have adopted a motivational perspective and the IS continuance model
 We differentiated the influence of transformational and transactional leadership
 Findings provide support for the critical role of supervisors in post-acceptance phase