This Article 
 Bibliographic References 
 Add to: 
Explaining Software Developer Acceptance of Methodologies: A Comparison of Five Theoretical Models
December 2002 (vol. 28 no. 12)
pp. 1135-1145

Abstract—Many organizations attempt to deploy methodologies intended to improve software development processes. However, resistance by individual software developers against using such methodologies often obstructs their successful deployment. To better explain why individual developers accept or resist methodologies, five theoretical models of individual intentions to accept information technology tools were examined. In a field study of 128 developers in a large organization that implemented a methodology, each model explained significant variance in developers' intentions to use the methodology. Similar to findings from the tool adoption context, we found that, if a methodology is not regarded as useful by developers, its prospects for successful deployment may be severely undermined. In contrast to the typical pattern of findings in a tool context, however, we found that methodology adoption intentions are driven by: 1) the presence of an organizational mandate to use the methodology, 2) the compatibility of the methodology with how developers perform their work, and 3) the opinions of developers' coworkers and supervisors toward using the methodology. Collectively, these results provide surprising new insights into why software developers accept or resist methodologies and suggest what software engineering managers might do to overcome developer resistance.

[1] I. Aaen and J. Damsgaard, “Software Process Improvement: What Management Tends to Forget,” Information Systems: Current Issues and Future Changes, Proc. IFIP WG8.2 and WG8.6 Joint Working Conf., pp. 89-110, Dec. 1998.
[2] R. Agarwal and J. Prasad, “The Role of Innovation Characteristics and Perceived Voluntariness in the Acceptance of Information Technologies,” Decision Sciences, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 557-582, 1997.
[3] R. Agarwal and J. Prasad, “A Field Study of the Adoption of Software Process Innovations by Information Systems Professionals,” IEEE Trans. Eng. Management, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 295-308, Aug. 2000.
[4] R. Agarwal, A. Sinha, and M. Tanniru, “Cognitive Fit in Requirements Modeling: A Study of Object and Process Methodologies,” J. Management Information Systems, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 137-162, Fall 1996.
[5] L. Aiken and S. West, Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1991.
[6] I. Ajzen, “From Intentions to Action: A Theory of Planned Behavior,” Action Control: From Cognition to Behavior, J. Kuhl and J. Beckmann eds., New York: Springer Verlag, pp. 11-39, 1985.
[7] I. Ajzen, Attitudes, Personality, and Behavior. Chicago: Dorsey Press, 1988.
[8] I. Ajzen, “The Theory of Planned Behavior,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol. 50, pp. 179-211, 1991.
[9] I. Ajzen and M. Fishbein, Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1980.
[10] I. Ajzen and T. Madden, “Prediction of Goal-Directed Behavior: Attitudes, Intentions, and Perceived Behavioral Control,” J. Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 22, pp. 453-474, 1986.
[11] J. Brancheau, B. Janz, and J. Wetherbe, “Key Issues in Information Systems Management: 1994-1995 SIM Delphi Results,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 225- 242, June 1996.
[12] F. Brown, Principles of Educational and Psychological Testing. New York: Holt, Reinhart, and Whinston, 1976.
[13] R. Burns and A. Dennis, “Selecting the Appropriate Application Development Methodology,” DATA BASE, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 19-23, 1985.
[14] P. Chau, “An Empirical Investigation on Factors Affecting the Acceptance of CASE by Systems Developers,” Information&Management, vol. 30, pp. 269-280, 1996.
[15] W. Chin and A. Gopal, “Adoption Intention in GSS: Relative Importance of Beliefs,” Data Base Advances, vol. 26, pp. 42-64, 1995.
[16] F. Davis, “Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 318-339, Sept. 1989.
[17] F.D. Davis, R.P. Bagozzi, and P.R. Warshaw, "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, Vol. 35, No. 8, 1989, pp. 982-1003.
[18] G. Dickson, R. Leitheiser, J. Wetherbe, and M. Nechis, “Key Information Systems Issues for the 1980's,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 135-159, Sept. 1984.
[19] G. Dietrich, D. Walz, and J. Wynekoop, “The Failure of SDT Diffusion: A Case for Mass Customization,” IEEE Trans. Eng. Management, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 390-398, Nov. 1997.
[20] Digital Economy 2000, U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration,http:/, 2000.
[21] M. El Louadi, Y. Pollalis, and J. Teng, “Selecting a Systems Development Methodology: A Contingency Framework,” Information Resources Management J., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 11-19, Winter 1991.
[22] B. Fitzgerald, “Formalized Systems Development Methodologies: A Critical Perspective,” Information Systems J., vol. 6, pp. 3-23, 1996.
[23] W. Gibbs, “Software's Chronic Crisis,” Scientific Am., pp. 86-95, Sept. 1994.
[24] R. Glass, “A Snapshot of Systems Development Practice,” IEEE Software, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 110-111, May/June 1999.
[25] R. Glass, “The Realities of Software Technology Payoffs,” Comm. ACM, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 74-79, Feb. 1999.
[26] B. Hardgrave, R. Wilson, and K. Eastman, “Toward a Contingency Model for Selecting an Information System Prototyping Strategy,” J. Management Information Systems, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 113-136, 1999.
[27] D. Harter, M. Krishnan, and S. Slaughter, “Effects of Process Maturity on Quality, Cycle Time, and Effort in Software Product Development,” Management Science, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 451-466, Apr. 2000.
[28] C. Hartog and M. Herbert, “1985 Opinion Survey of MIS Managers: Key Issues,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 351-361, Dec. 1986.
[29] M. Hebert and I. Benbasat, “Adopting Information Technology in Hospitals: The Relationships between Attitudes/Expectations and Behavior,” Hospital and Health Services Administration, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 369-383, 1994.
[30] J. Herbsleb, A. Carleton, J. Rozum, J. Siegel, and D. Zubrow, “Benefits of CMM-Based Software Process Improvement: Initial Results,” Technical Reports CMU/SEI-94-TR-013 and ESC-TR-94-013, Software Eng. Inst., Carnegie Mellon Univ., Aug. 1994.
[31] J. Hoffer, J. George, and J. Valacich, Modern Systems Analysis and Design, second ed. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1999.
[32] G. Howard, T. Bodnovich, T. Janicki, J. Liegle, S. Klein, P. Albert, and D. Cannon, “The Efficacy of Matching Information Systems Development Methodologies with Application Characteristics—An Empirical Study,” The J. Systems and Software, vol. 45, pp. 177-195, 1999.
[33] J. Iivari, “Why are CASE Tools Not Used?” Comm. ACM, vol. 39, pp. 94-103, Oct. 1996.
[34] R. Johnson and B. Hardgrave, “Object-Oriented Systems Development: Current Practices and Attitudes in Industry,” J. Systems&Software, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 5-12, 1999.
[35] R. Johnson, B. Hardgrave, and E. Doke, “An Industry Analysis of Developer Beliefs About Object-Oriented Systems Development,” The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 47-64, 1999.
[36] M. Jones and K. Arnett, “Current Practices in Management Information Systems,” Information&Management, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 61-69, 1993.
[37] M. Keil, “Pulling the Plug: Software Project Management and the Problem of Project Escalation,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 421-447, Dec. 1995.
[38] M. Khalifa and J. Verner, “Drivers for Software Development Method Usage,” IEEE Trans. Eng. Management, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 360-369, Aug. 2000.
[39] K. Kozar, “Adopting Systems Development Methods: An Exploratory Study,” J. Management Information Systems, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 73-86, 1989.
[40] M. Krishnan, T. Mukhopadhyay, and D. Zubrow, “Software Process Models and Project Performance,” Information Systems Frontiers, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 267-277, 1999.
[41] M.S. Krishnan, C.H. Kriebel, S. Kekre, and T. Mukhopadhyay, “An Empirical Analysis of Productivity and Quality in Software Products,” Management Science, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 745-759, 2000.
[42] D. Leonard-Barton, “Implementing Structured Software Methodologies: A Case of Innovation in Process Technology,” Interfaces, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 6-17, May/June 1987.
[43] K. Mathieson, “Predicting User Intentions: Comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior,” Information Systems Research, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 173-191, 1991.
[44] G. Moore and I. Benbasat, “Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation,” Information Systems Research, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 192-222, 1991.
[45] C. Necco, C. Gordon, and N. Tsai, “Systems Analysis and Design: Current Practices,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 461-475, Dec. 1987.
[46] F. Niederman, J. Brancheau, and J. Wetherbe, “Information System Management Issues for the 1990s,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 475-500, Dec. 1991.
[47] W. Orlikowski, “CASE Tools as Organizational Change: Investigating Incremental and Radical Changes in Systems Development,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 309-340, Sept. 1993.
[48] P. Palvia and J. Nosek, “An Empirical Evaluation of System Development Methodologies,” Information Resources Management J., vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 23-32, 1990.
[49] M.C. Paulk, C.V. Weber, S.M. Garcia, M.B. Chrissis, and M. Bush, “Key Practices of the Capability Maturity Model,” Technical Report CMU/SEI-93-TR-25, Version 1.1, Software Eng. Inst., Carnegie Mellon Univ., Feb. 1993.
[50] S.L Pfleeger, “Understanding and Improving Technology Transfer in Software Engineering,” J. Systems and Software, vol. 47, no. 2 and 3, pp. 111-124, July 1999.
[51] D. Ratbe, W. King, and Y. Kim, “The Fit Between Project Characteristics and Application Development Methodologies: A Contingency Approach,” J. Computer Information Systems, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 26-33, 1999-2000.
[52] T. Roberts, M. Gibson, and K. Fields, “System Development Methodology Implementation: Perceived Aspects of Importance,” Information Resources Management J., vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 27-38, July-Sept. 1999.
[53] T.L. Roberts, M.L. Gibson, K.T. Fields, and R.K. Rainer, “Factors that Impact the Implementation of a System Development Methodology,” IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 640-649, Aug. 1998.
[54] E. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, third ed. New York: Free Press, 1983.
[55] D. Schifter and I. Ajzen, “Intention, Perceived Control, and Weight Loss: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior,” J. Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 49, pp. 843-851, 1985.
[56] Software Engineering Institute, Process Maturity Profile of the Software Community 1999 Year End Update, Mar. 2000, .
[57] F. Sultan and L. Chan, “The Adoption of New Technology: The Case of Object-Oriented Computing in Software Companies,” IEEE Trans. Eng. Management, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 106-126, Feb. 2000.
[58] S. Taylor and P. Todd, “Understanding Information Technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models,” Information Systems Research, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 144-176, 1995.
[59] R. Thompson, C. Higgins, and J. Howell, “Personal Computing: Toward a Conceptual Model of Utilization,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 125-143, Mar. 1991.
[60] H. Triandis, “Values, Attitudes, and Interpersonal Behavior,” Nebraska Symp. Motivation, 1979, H. Howe and M. Page eds., pp. 195-259, 1979.
[61] V. Venkatesh, “Creation of Favorable User Perceptions: Exploring the Role of Intrinsic Motivation,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 239-260, June 1999.
[62] V. Venkatesh and F. Davis, “A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies,” Management Science, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 186-204, Feb. 2000.
[63] I. Vessey and R. Glass, “Strong vs. Weak Approaches to Systems Development,” Comm. ACM, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 99-102, Apr. 1998.
[64] H. Touati, H. Savoj, B. Lin, R. Brayton, and A. Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, "Implicit State Enumeration of Finite State Machines Using BDDs," Proc. Int'l Conf. Computer-Aided Design, pp. 130-133, 1990.
[65] R. Whiting, “Development in Disarray,” Software Magazine, vol. 18, no. 12, p. 20, Sept. 1998.
[66] J. Wynekoop and N. Russo, “Systems Development Methodologies: Unanswered Questions,” J. Information Technology, vol. 10, pp. 65-73, 1995.
[67] S. Yadav, N. Shaw, L. Webb, and C. Sutcu, “Comments on `Factors that Impact Implementing a System Development Methodology,'” IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 279-281, Mar. 2001.
[68] E. Yourdon, “Where's the Basis for Year 2000 Optimism?” Computerworld, vol. 32, no. 7, p. 68, 1998.
[69] R. Zmud, “An Examination of `Push-Pull' Theory Applied to Process Innovation in Knowledge Work,” Management Science, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 727-738, June 1984.
[70] R. Zmud, “Diffusion of Modern Software Practices: Influence of Centralization and Formalization,” Management Science, vol. 28, no. 12, pp. 1421-1431, Dec. 1982.

Index Terms:
Software development, methodologies, intention models, technology acceptance model, theory of planned behavior, diffusion of innovations.
Cynthia K. Riemenschneider, Bill C. Hardgrave, Fred D. Davis, "Explaining Software Developer Acceptance of Methodologies: A Comparison of Five Theoretical Models," IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 28, no. 12, pp. 1135-1145, Dec. 2002, doi:10.1109/TSE.2002.1158287
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.