As the speed of travel on the “Information Superhighway” accelerates, many small-to-medium sized enterprises (SMEs) do not effectively keep pace. SME computer resistors include 1) the slow-plodding neophyte computer users in the far right hand lane, 2) the firms curious about computerization but who are yet to make a purchase decision, idling in neutral on the access ramps, and 3) the business that purchases improper equipment and/or software and ventures onto the “road” without proper training and support, being run over by the speeding industry. In the information high-tech world of the 1990s it seems amazing that an estimated quarter of all small businesses still do not have their first personal computer. This article calls upon the innovators of the communications field to look in the rear view mirror to see the businesses left behind in the information expansion race. A model utilizing social learning theory defines a framework for road service [1], getting the small business “resister” up to the information superhighway speed limit.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BanduraA., Social Foundation of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1986.
2.
CooleyP. L.WalzD. T., and WalzD. B., A Research Agenda for Computers and Small Business, American Journal of Small Business, pp. 31–42, Winter 1987.
3.
CoyP., Start with Some High-Tech Magic, Business Week Enterprise, pp. 24–32, 1993.
4.
TesserA. and ShafferD. R., Attitudes and Attitude Change, Annual Review of Psychology, 41, pp. 479–523, 1990.
5.
AlexanderG. O., Computing Practices in Small Arkansas Manufacturing Firms, Business & Economic Review, pp. 20–26, Summer 1993.
6.
FilipczakB., Technoliteracy, Technophobia, and Programming Your VCR, Training, pp. 48–52, January 1994.
7.
O'BrienT. L., Information Superhighway Will Aid Output, Small-Business Executives Say, Wall Street Journal, p. B.2, February 9, 1994.
8.
HolzingerA. G. and HotchR., Small-Business Computing, Nation's Business, pp. 39–42, August 1994.
9.
MehtaS. N., Older Business Owners Ponder the New Technology, Wall Street Journal, p. B.2, May 27, 1994.
10.
MintzbergH., The Simple Structure, in The Strategy Process: Concepts, Contexts and Cases, QuinnJ. B.MintzbergH., and JamesR. M. (eds.), Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, pp. 532–539, 1988.
11.
TracyK. B., Effects of Need for Achievement, Task Motivation, Goal Setting and Planning on the Performance of the Entrepreneurial Firm, Dissertation Abstracts International, 54, p. 996-A, 1992.
12.
BarkerS. B. and BarkerR. T., Managing Change in an Inpatient Interdisciplinary Unit: An Action Research Approach, The Journal of Mental Health Administration, pp. 80–91, Winter 1994.
13.
IgbariaM. and ParasuramanS., A Path Analytic Study of Individual Characteristics, Computer Anxiety and Attitudes towards Computers, Journal of Management, 15:3, pp. 373–388, 1989.
14.
KroeheJ.Jr., The Productivity Pit, Across the Board, pp. 16–21, October 1993.
15.
HowardG. S., Computer Anxiety and the Use of Microcomputers in Management, UMI Research Press, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1986.
16.
GookinD., WordPerfect for Dummies, IDG, San Mateo, California, 1992.
17.
StampsD., Stalking the Elusive Technology Payoff, Training, pp. 47–53, November 1993.
18.
RaymondL., The Impact of Computer Training on the Attitudes and Usage Behavior of Small Business Managers, Journal of Small Business Management, pp. 8–13, July 1988.
19.
RobertsonI. T. and SadriG., Managerial Self-Efficiency and Management Performance, British Journal of Management, 4:1, pp. 37–45, 1993.
20.
KruegerN. F. and DicksonP. R., Perceived Self-Efficacy and Perceptions of Opportunity and Threat, Psychological Reports, 72:(3, Pt. 2), pp. 1235–1240, 1993.
21.
DukesR. L.DiscengzR., and CongerJ. D., Convergent Validity of Four Computer Anxiety Scales, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49:1, pp. 195–203, 1989.
22.
WoodR. E. and BanduraA., A Social Cognitive Theory of Organizational Management, Academy of Management Review, 14, pp. 361–384, 1989.
23.
WeissH. M., Subordinate Imitation of Supervisory Behavior: The Role of Modeling in Organizational Socialization, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 19, pp. 89–105, 1977.
24.
DeLoneW. H., Determinants of Success for Computer Usage in Small Business, MIS Quarterly, 12, pp. 51–61, 1988.
25.
KernanM. C. and HowardG. S., Computer Anxiety and Computer Attitudes: An Investigation of Construct and Predictive Validity Issues, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 50, pp. 681–690, 1990.
26.
MorrowP. C.PrellE. C., and McElroyJ. C., Attitudinal and Behavioral Correlates of Computer Anxiety, Psychological Reports, 59, pp. 1119–1204, 1986.
27.
BarkerRandolph T. and HolleyC.Interactive Distance Learning: Perspective and Thoughts, Business Communication Quarterly, 59:4, pp. 88–97, December 1996.
28.
BarkerRandolph T. and HallBarbara, Using the Business Briefing to Develop Oral Communication Skills, Journal of Management Education, 19:4, November 1995.
29.
BarkerRandolph T. and PearceC. G.Personal Attributes and Computer Writing Quality, Journal of Educational Computing Research, 13:1, November 1995.
30.
JohnsonI.BarkerRandolph T., and PearceC. G.Using Journals to Improve Listening Behavior: An Exploratory Study, Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 9:4, October 1995.
31.
BarkerRandolph T.PearceC. Glenn, and JohnsonIris W., An Investigation of Perceived Managerial Listening Ability, Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 6:4, October 1992.
32.
PearceC. Glen and BarkerRandolph T., A Comparison of Business Communication Quality Between Computer, Written and Handwritten Samples, Journal of Business Communication, 28:2, Spring 1991.
