∎ Status quo bias in information system adoption- a meta-analytic review - Wu - 2016 - Reading Session 202406101100
# ð– « Status quo bias in information system adoption- a meta-analytic review - Wu - 2016
Samuelson and Zeckhauser (1988) term the tendency of a decision agent to adhere to the situation or decision already in place as ==status quo bias==. ==They propose three main categories to explain the status quo bias: cognitive misperception, psychological commitment, and rational decision making.==
Cognitive misperception stems from three propensities of decision agents: loss aversion, anchoring, and bounded rationality. Loss aversion refers to the phenomenon where decision agents tend to weigh losses heavier than gains (Kahneman and Tversky, 1979). In addition, the previous decision is often used as an anchor for following decision making. With bounded understanding of a new alternative’s pros and cons, decision makers only evaluate the available options. As for new IS adoption, managers use the performance and deployment of incumbent IS to evaluate the possible solutions.
Psychological commitment may be the result of sunk costs, the efforts of making consistent decisions and feeling in control, and the avoidance of regrettable decisions (Samuelson and Zeckhauser, 1988). Firms allocate plenty of tangible and intangible resources to leverage IT investments (Zhu et al., 2006a). These can be sunk costs when companies to move to a new system. In addition, IP shape the norms prevailing over change in the business environment. To maintain competitive advantage or to avoid regrettable decisions, a firm’s reaction to a new system depends on the attitudes and reaction of its partners or competitors.
Rational decision making means that decision makers consider the costs and benefits of switching to a new option in the presence of transition costs and uncertainty. The initial choice introduces transition costs for the subsequent decision. However, adopting new IS often accompanies uncertainty of the firm’s adaptation. The limited knowledge and experience of new systems may lead organizations to continue with the incumbent systems (Polites and Karahanna, 2012).
Status quo bias is an interesting contrast to CRIMPing. Both biases explain a lot about modern technology acceptance and use: it is hard to stay between these two polarities. Either you are slightly lagging or you are adopting things too early/often.