1 / 7

Understanding Factors Influencing Continuous Auditing Technology Adoption in Organizations

The study explores the antecedents of internal auditors' adoption of continuous auditing technology, using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) as a framework. The research reviews existing models, formulates a new model, and tests its components in an organizational context. Results suggest that effort expectancy and social influence significantly impact intentions to use, emphasizing the complexity of adoption factors. The discussion highlights the importance of careful interpretation in lessons learned from UTAUT in public accounting.

jerry
Télécharger la présentation

Understanding Factors Influencing Continuous Auditing Technology Adoption in Organizations

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Antecedents of Internal Auditors’ Adoption of Continuous Auditing Technology: Exploring UTAUT in an Organizational Context Discussion Mary B. Curtis, University of North texas

  2. Motivation Continuous auditing has not been adopted as quickly or completely as expected I agree … and it is important to know why

  3. Theory • Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) • Venkatesh et al. developed a theory • Reviewed the user acceptance literature – compared 8 models • Formulated a new model based on this body of research • Tested their theorized model • Four components • Performance expectancy – impacts – intentions to use • Effort expectancy – impacts – intentions to use • Social influence – impacts – intentions to use • Facilitating conditions – actual use, not intentions • Most academic research measures intentions to use

  4. Results • Four components • Performance expectancy – not significant – probably more relevant at the organization level • Effort expectancy – significant • Social influence – significant • Facilitating conditions – not significant – UTAUT says should only impact actual use

  5. Is it possible that the relationships are a little more complex than depicted?UTAUT in Public Accounting

  6. Is it possible that the relationships are a little more complex than depicted?UTAUT in Public Accounting Effort Expectancy Performance Expectancy Intention to Use Facilitating Conditions Social Influence

  7. It is important that we state our lessons carefully • Who are participantsspeaking for? Level of Analysis • Themselves (intention to use) or the organization (adoption) • What is the dependent variable? • Adoption or use of existing system • Voluntariness • How measured? Voluntary use or adoption • Annual sales • Relevant if we are measuring individual intention?

More Related