Table 1 Adoption theories Theory Aim... | Emerald Publishing

Table 1

Adoption theories

Theory	Aim	Drivers	Dep. variable	General evaluation and applicability	Applicability among 3DP adoption research	References from adoption literature
TPB	Predicts human behavior prior to an action	Perceived behavioral control Subjective norm Attitude toward behavior	Intention	Focuses on individuals not organizations Predicts the intention to perform an action Does not account for environmental or economic factors of influence	Explains intention to adopt 3DP not its adoption Quantitative studies: survey with +80% non adopters, focus on perception and attitude Qualitative studies: focus on drivers and attitude	Chatzaglou and Michailidou (2019), Schniederjans and Yalcin (2018)
TAM	Predicts the acceptability of a technology among users	Perceived ease of use Perceived usefulness External variables TAM 2 Social influence Cognitive processes	Attitude (TAM 1) Intention to use (TAM 2)	Focuses on individuals not organizations Predicts the intention to use a new technology Intention is an insufficient prerequisite for a successful behavior (intention-behavior gap) TAM 1 represents only a fraction of variances of technology use	Explains 3DP acceptance not its adoption Focuses on ease of use and usefulness of 3DP, helpful variables to understand user behavior Quantitative studies combine TAM with organizational adoption models (DOI…)	Schniederjans and Yalcin (2018), Chaudhuri et al. (2018), Wang et al. (2016), Marak et al. (2019), Chatzaglou and Michailidou (2019), Oettmeier and Hoffman (2017)
UTAUT	Explains user intention to use a technology	Facilitating conditions Effort expectancy Social influence Performance expectancy	Behavioral intention use behavior	Focuses on individuals not organizations Relation between intention and use unclear Intention is an insufficient prerequisite for a successful behavior (intention-behavior gap) External factors are not included (legal, economic and environmental…) R2 is only achieved through high # of moderators	Quantitative studies combine UTAUT with organizational adoption models (DOI…) Included for the analysis of facilitating conditions (e.g. resources) and social influence (e.g. competitors) Studies observe organizational adoption of 3DP from a managerial perspective	Schniederjans (2017), Marak et al. (2019), Schniederjans and Yalcin (2018)
TEO	Examines the influence of a firm's context on technology adoption	Environmental elements Organizational elements Technological elements	Technological innovation decision	Analyzes organizational technology adoption Considers organizational and technological dimensions, as well as external factors Consistent with DOI, however includes environmental context Decision-maker characteristics are part of organizational context	Analyzes the 3DP adopting organization as a whole Analyzes organizational perspectives and adoption drivers Contemplates for environmental elements (competition, trading partners and government…)	Yeh and Chen (2018a, b), Tsai and Yeh (2019)
DOI	Analyzes how, why and at what rate new ideas/technology spread among society	Compatibility Complexity Relative advantage Triability Observability	Intention to adopt/rate of diffusion	Analyzes organizational technology adoption Technology is diffused among a social system through certain channels overtime Complements other models through specifying the context (decision-maker, technology, organizational characteristics…) Does not include environmental drivers Bigger picture: focuses on a social system rather than an individual organization	Insights into general determinants of 3DP adoption Usually employed in combination with TAM, TEO, or TPB such as to contemplate for the analysis of behavioral motivations of decision-makers) Based on perceptions of 3DP characteristics Does not include all firm-external contextual dimensions	Schniederjans (2017), Oettmeier and Hoffman (2017), Chatzaglou and Michailidou (2019), Marak et al. (2019), Wang et al. (2016), Chaudhuri et al. (2018), Schniederjans and Yalcin (2018), Steenhuis et al. (2020), Garza (2016)
IT	Examines how organizational behavior/action is influenced by isomorphic pressures	Coercive pressures Normative pressures Mimetic pressures	Intention to adopt	Analyzes organizational technology adoption Usually combined with TEO or DOI Contemplates that organizational decisions are not only driven by performance key performance indicators (KPIs) but also by social and cultural factors Hypothesizes that firms become homogenous Complements environmental elements of TOE through stakeholder pressures	Only one qualitative research employs IT No quantitative research yet Other models reveal familiarities with IT (e.g. Social pressure in TAM/UTAUT)	Schniederjans and Yalcin (2018)

Theory	Aim	Drivers	Dep. variable	General evaluation and applicability	Applicability among 3DP adoption research	References from adoption literature
TPB	Predicts human behavior prior to an action	Perceived behavioral control Subjective norm Attitude toward behavior	Intention	Focuses on individuals not organizations Predicts the intention to perform an action Does not account for environmental or economic factors of influence	Explains intention to adopt 3DP not its adoption Quantitative studies: survey with +80% non adopters, focus on perception and attitude Qualitative studies: focus on drivers and attitude	Chatzaglou and Michailidou (2019), Schniederjans and Yalcin (2018)
TAM	Predicts the acceptability of a technology among users	Perceived ease of use Perceived usefulness External variables TAM 2 Social influence Cognitive processes	Attitude (TAM 1)Intention to use (TAM 2)	Focuses on individuals not organizations Predicts the intention to use a new technology Intention is an insufficient prerequisite for a successful behavior (intention-behavior gap) TAM 1 represents only a fraction of variances of technology use	Explains 3DP acceptance not its adoption Focuses on ease of use and usefulness of 3DP, helpful variables to understand user behavior Quantitative studies combine TAM with organizational adoption models (DOI…)	Schniederjans and Yalcin (2018), Chaudhuri et al. (2018), Wang et al. (2016), Marak et al. (2019), Chatzaglou and Michailidou (2019), Oettmeier and Hoffman (2017)
UTAUT	Explains user intention to use a technology	Facilitating conditions Effort expectancy Social influence Performance expectancy	Behavioral intention use behavior	Focuses on individuals not organizations Relation between intention and use unclear Intention is an insufficient prerequisite for a successful behavior (intention-behavior gap) External factors are not included (legal, economic and environmental…) R2 is only achieved through high # of moderators	Quantitative studies combine UTAUT with organizational adoption models (DOI…) Included for the analysis of facilitating conditions (e.g. resources) and social influence (e.g. competitors) Studies observe organizational adoption of 3DP from a managerial perspective	Schniederjans (2017), Marak et al. (2019), Schniederjans and Yalcin (2018)
TEO	Examines the influence of a firm's context on technology adoption	Environmental elements Organizational elements Technological elements	Technologicalinnovation decision	Analyzes organizational technology adoption Considers organizational and technological dimensions, as well as external factors Consistent with DOI, however includes environmental context Decision-maker characteristics are part of organizational context	Analyzes the 3DP adopting organization as a whole Analyzes organizational perspectives and adoption drivers Contemplates for environmental elements (competition, trading partners and government…)	Yeh and Chen (2018a, b), Tsai and Yeh (2019)
DOI	Analyzes how, why and at what rate new ideas/technology spread among society	Compatibility Complexity Relative advantage Triability Observability	Intention to adopt/rate of diffusion	Analyzes organizational technology adoption Technology is diffused among a social system through certain channels overtime Complements other models through specifying the context (decision-maker, technology, organizational characteristics…) Does not include environmental drivers Bigger picture: focuses on a social system rather than an individual organization	Insights into general determinants of 3DP adoption Usually employed in combination with TAM, TEO, or TPB such as to contemplate for the analysis of behavioral motivations of decision-makers) Based on perceptions of 3DP characteristics Does not include all firm-external contextual dimensions	Schniederjans (2017), Oettmeier and Hoffman (2017), Chatzaglou and Michailidou (2019), Marak et al. (2019), Wang et al. (2016), Chaudhuri et al. (2018), Schniederjans and Yalcin (2018), Steenhuis et al. (2020), Garza (2016)
IT	Examines how organizational behavior/action is influenced by isomorphic pressures	Coercive pressures Normative pressures Mimetic pressures	Intention to adopt	Analyzes organizational technology adoption Usually combined with TEO or DOI Contemplates that organizational decisions are not only driven by performance key performance indicators (KPIs) but also by social and cultural factors Hypothesizes that firms become homogenous Complements environmental elements of TOE through stakeholder pressures	Only one qualitative research employs IT No quantitative research yet Other models reveal familiarities with IT (e.g. Social pressure in TAM/UTAUT)	Schniederjans and Yalcin (2018)