A

SD

a

KEEFE

1

ehTdai

ceTetopn

(

TT

a

h

n

0d

International Journal of Information Management 29 (2009) 27–36

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Information Management

journa l homepage: www.e lsev ier .com/ locate / i j in fomgt

framework for evaluating electronic commerce adoption in Iranian companies

haaban Elahi ∗, Alireza Hassanzadehepartment of Information Technology Management, Tarbiat Modares University (TMU), Iran

r t i c l e i n f o

eywords:lectronic commercevaluatingramework

a b s t r a c t

In order to acquire the numerous advantages of electronic commerce, issue of evaluating electronic com-merce adoption has its own importance. For this purpose, based on the scientific research and literaturereviews, technical, organizational and inter-organizational are identified as the three dimensions for eval-

lectronic commerce adoptionuating electronic commerce adoption of the companies. Thereafter, expert viewpoints were put forwardabout criteria and indicators in each of the above-mentioned dimensions. On the basis of identified indica-tors and criteria, a framework was developed for evaluating the electronic commerce adoption in Iraniancompanies. Furthermore in this research, the framework is tested in 27 Iranian companies. The resultindicates that there is a significant positive relationship between degree of electronic commerce adoptionand stages of electronic commerce development in the companies. Based on the findings and test of the

nece

2CT2JMLS2fclcht2

framework, it will present

. Introduction

Presently, electronic commerce (EC)1 is in the state of globalxpansion and has influenced all the industries. This phenomenonas been widened under the effect of extensive use of Internet.oday, the discussion on utilizing EC is one of the current and hotebates in the world of trade and commerce. Due to unlimiteddvantages of EC, interest of companies to employ this, is beingncreased, day-by-day.

Due to its own special technological essence, EC has some spe-ific needs, till it becomes successful in its employment. Issue ofvaluating electronic commerce adoption has its own importance.hrough assessing basic components and different requirements tomploy EC, degree of the EC adoption by the companies determinesheir probable weaknesses and strengths. With the identificationf those weaknesses and strengths, there are possibilities of better

lanning to EC adoption and implementation in order to acquire itsumerous advantages.

There are numerous models or frameworks about EC adoptionAkkeren & Cavaye, 2000; Daniel & Grimshaw, 2002; Fiona & Cathy,

∗ Corresponding author at: Department of Information Technology Management,arbiat Modares University (TMU), Jalale Alahmad Avenue, Tehran, Iran.el.: +98 21 82883637; fax: +98 21 82883637.

E-mail addresses: elahi@modares.ac.ir, Elahi mmm@yahoo.com (S. Elahi),r hassanzadeh@modares.ac.ir, hasanzadeh.alireza@gmail.com (A. Hassanzadeh).

URLs: http://www.modares.ac.ir/fhum/elahi/ (S. Elahi),ttp://www.modares.ac.ir/hum/elahi/ (S. Elahi).1 In this paper, E-commerce has been defined as “the use of the Internet and otheretworking technologies for conducting business transactions” (Turban et al., 2007).

oe

2

vAoaSpoi

268-4012/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.oi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2008.04.009

ssary guidelines for evaluating electronic commerce adoption.© 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

000; Grandon & Michael, 2004; Jun, 2003; Ling, 2001; Mehrtens,ragg, & Mills, 2001; Molla & Licker, 2005b; Mukti, 2000; Tan,yler, & Manica, 2007; Wang & Tasi, 2002; Zhu, Kracmir, & Xu,002), eReadiness (APEC, 1999, 2000; Budhiraha, 2004; CSPP, 1998;ulta, Bodorick, & Dhaliwad, 2002; Kirkman, Osorio, & Sachs, 2002;

cconnell, 2000; Molla & Licker, 2005a; Rao, Truong, Senecal, &e, 2007; Rashid & Qirim, 2001; Ruikar, Anumba, & Carrillo, 2006;iemieniuch & Sinclair, 2004), and EC implementation (Zulkifli,001). Beyond the criteria mentioned in the current models andrameworks, it is necessary to consider and evaluate the importantriteria such as compatibility, Internet security, interoperability,eadership and management, financial structure, organizationalulture and competitors, which no models or frameworks to dateave covered all of them. The aim of our research was to extendhe recent work of Tan et al. (2007) about EC adoption (Tan et al.,007) and develop a framework to help assess all of the technical,rganizational, and inter-organizational dimensions for evaluatinglectronic commerce adoption.

. Literature review of EC adoption

EC and its application have become everyday discussions andarious articles and literature have been written in this regard.ccess to the domain of electronic world has become prioritiesf most of the big and small public and private organizations and

s such, managers have encountered new challenges in this field.ince electronic world has outstanding differences compare to thehysical world, planning for Internet presence and implementationf EC are very crucial and important. One of the important stepsn the planning is evaluating electronic commerce adoption possi-

2 nal of Information Management 29 (2009) 27–36

btwd

imd(wpibepb

a

2

ceHfoaa

tetapaatccsAaoa2Wfin

2

nn

2

sttteeao

Table 1Criteria for EC adoption at the national level derived from literature review.

Criteria Sources

Infrastructure APEC (2000), Kirkman et al. (2002),CSPP (1998), Mosaic (1997), Julta et al.(2002), and Budhiraha (2004)

Access Kirkman et al. (2002), Budhiraha(2004), and CSPP (1998)

Positioning for the digital economy APEC (2000)Information security CSPP (1998), Muenchinger (2003) and

Sen and Tarun (2005)Human capital Mcconnell (2000), APEC (2000),

Kirkman et al. (2002), and Julta et al.(2002)

EE

iqaftwbte

ntwEitfia

ttiaPndnPait

aofcMttEptc

8 S. Elahi, A. Hassanzadeh / International Jour

ilities and prerequisites for the implementation of EC. Accordingo Zulkifli (2001) and Wu (2004) the EC adoption process beginsith knowledge awareness; continues through attitude formation,ecision and implementation.

Based on Rao, Metts, and Monge (2003) EC development andmplementation takes place in four stages (1) presence: in this stage

ost companies make their first steps in electronic commerce byisplaying their company brochure and product offer on a Web site;2) portals: the portals stage is viewed as the introduction of two-ay communication, customer or supplier order placing, the use ofrofiles and cookies; (3) transactions integration: the transactions

ntegration stage (TI) is differentiated from the portals stage mainlyy the presence of financial transactions between partners; and (4)nterprises integration: enterprises integration (EI) refers to com-lete integration of business processes to the extent that old-lineusiness is indistinguishable from online business.

This section will discuss about the adoption, implementation,nd the criteria for the electronic commerce adoption.

.1. Electronic commerce adoption models and frameworks

The most important models or frameworks related to electronicommerce adoption are: Ling (2001), Wang and Tasi (2002), Zhut al. (2002), Rashid and Qirim (2001), Akkeren and Cavaye (2000),eck and Ribbers (1999), Daniel and Grimshaw (2002), readiness

ramework and E-work of Craij and Julta (Julta et al., 2002), modelf Canadian government’s trading department, and application forssessment of E-Readiness for construction companies (Ruikar etl., 2006).

Study of the aforementioned models and frameworks showshat EC subject is not a distinct and unique phenomena that ismployed by a company alone. Even, if the website of a companyhat has capacity of exchange, but the consumers would not haveccess to the network, a suitable legal system would not be com-iled to solve the difference in the electronic exchange, advancednd suitable systems of communications would not be availablend the electronic financial and banking systems are not present,hen it is evident that EC would not be fruitful at any cost. Electronicommerce adoption can be studied and assessed at all levels for suc-essful implementation of EC. Some of the models and frameworksuch as, Harvard model (Kirkman et al., 2002), Mcconnell (2000),PEC (2000) and Mosaic (1997) examine the electronic readinesst the national and macro level. Meanwhile, some of the variablesf EC adoption propounded mostly at the macro or national levelre also mentioned in micro models such as the Ling model (Ling,001), Rashid and Qirim framework (Rashid & Qirim, 2001), andang and Tsai (Wang & Tasi, 2002). Therefore, EC adoption can

nally be divided at two different levels: (1) National, and (2) Orga-izational.

.1.1. EC adoption at national levelBy reviewing different models and frameworks that exist at

ational level for evaluating electronic commerce adoption at theational level can be seen in Table 1.

.1.2. EC adoption at organizational levelThe literature on EC adoption by businesses suggests that

ome models or frameworks of EC adoption, examine onlyhe external environment of firms, while some are focused onechnological aspects. Models and frameworks drawing upon

he Technology–Organization–Environment framework attempt toxamine the organizational context of EC adoption. In these mod-ls and frameworks, only factors such as firm size and scopere included. Other, more important, managerial and internalrganizational aspects are left unevaluated, such as the central-

cpicc

-business climate Mcconnell (2000)-government Mcconnell (2000), Kirkman et al.

(2002), Julta et al. (2002), and Turner etal. (2002)

zation, formalization, and complexity of managerial structure, theuality of human resources, and the amount of slack resourcesvailable internally. Mehrtens et al. (2001) have developed aramework for EDI adoption, and Zhu et al. (2002) have usedechnology–organization–environment framework. In their frame-ork, the technological context refers to perceived technologicalenefits; the organizational context refers to perceived organiza-ional resources; and the environmental context refers to perceivednvironmental pressure.

According to Grandon and Michael (2004) organizational readi-ess was assessed by including two items about the financial andechnological resources that the company may have available asell as factors dealing with the compatibility and consistency of

C with firm’s culture, values, and preferred work practices (exist-ng technology infrastructure; and top management’s enthusiasmo adopt EC). External pressure was assessed by incorporatingve items: competition, social factors, dependency on other firmslready using EC, the industry, and the government.

Molla and Licker’s (2005a,b) Perceived eReadiness Model iden-ifies many of the relevant contextual and organizational factorshat might affect EC adoption in developing countries. The modelncludes two major constructs which measure both endogenousnd exogenous factors: Perceived Organizational eReadiness anderceived External eReadiness. Perceived Organizational eReadi-ess is defined as managers’ perception and evaluation of theegree to which they believe that their organization has the aware-ess, resources, commitment, and governance to adopt EC. Theerceived Environmental eReadiness is the degree to which man-gers believe that market forces, government, and other supportingndustries are ready to aid in their organizations’ EC implementa-ion (Tan et al., 2007).

The theoretical root of this model is interactionism, whichllows for a multi-perspective audit of the managerial, internalrganizational and external con-textual issues to provide meaning-ul predictors of business-to-business EC adoption in developingountries (Molla & Licker, 2005a,b). The Perceived eReadinessodel includes both external environmental and internal organiza-

ional issues. Tan et al. (2007) assess the internal organization andhe external environment in the context of business-to-businessC adoption in China. According to Lee and Kim (2007) theotential enabling factors important to successful implementation:op management support, appropriate user–designer interaction,ompatibility of task characteristics, innovation characteristics,

ommitment to change and implementation efforts, and extensiveroject definition and planning. The process of innovation adoption

s influenced by three elements: (1) the external environmentalontext, (2) the technological context, and (3) the organizationalontext.

S. Elahi, A. Hassanzadeh / International Journal of Information Management 29 (2009) 27–36 29

Table 2Technical criteria for EC adoption derived from literature review.

Criteria Sources

Compatibility Rashid and Qirim (2001), Ling (2001),Trouong (2002), Heck and Ribbers(1999), and Lee and Kim (2007)

Problem in integrating existedcomputer systems with EDI/EC

Jun (2003)

Issue of Internet security APEC (1999), Wang and Tasi (2002),Mukti (2000), Jun (2003), and Turbanet al. (2002)

Enough computer Mukti (2000)Speed of Internet network Flynn (2000)IA

ttof

2ocawIo

ts&&a

2dta(ftEta

ltcs

2pmfd

aiepme

Table 3Effective organizational criteria for EC adoption derived from literature review.

Criteria Sources

Leadership and management issues Fiona and Cathy (2000), Akkeren andCavaye (2000), Ling (2001), Mehrtenset al. (2001), Jun (2003), Trouong(2002), APEC (1999), Nath et al. (1998),Mukti (2000), Zhu et al. (2002),Grandon and Michael (2004), Ruikar etal. (2006), and Lee and Kim (2007)

Human resource management issues Jun (2003) and Standing and Chad(2007)

Size of the company or organization Nath et al. (1998), Mukti (2000), APEC(1999), Trouong (2002) and Mehrtenset al. (2001)

Organization culture Grandon and Michael (2004) and Ling(2001)

Organizational structure Ling (2001)Products Fiona and Cathy (2000) and Wang and

Tasi (2002)Financial structure Grandon and Michael (2004)Organizing (Flynn (2000)

Table 4Criteria for EC adoption at the inter-organizational level derived from literaturereview.

Criteria Sources

High competition Trouong (2002), Heck and Ribbers(1999), Zhu et al. (2002), Akkeren andCavaye (2000), Rashid and Qirim(2001), Wang and Tasi (2002), Ling(2001), and Heck and Ribbers (1999)

Customers pressure Rashid and Qirim (2001), Ling (2001),Wang and Tasi (2002), Heck andRibbers (1999), and Daniel andGrimshaw (2002)

Suppliers pressure Heck and Ribbers (1999), Wang andTasi (2002), Ling (2001), and Rashidand Qirim (2001)

Customers readiness Fiona and Cathy (2000), Zhu et al.(2002), Sung (2006), Hoffman andChatterjee (1995), and Turban et al.(2007)

DRL

caa

3

rfia

rt

tc

nteroperability Flynn (2000)ccess to remote communicationservices

APEC (1999)

Based on the literature review EC adoption at organiza-ional level can be divided at three different dimensions: (1)echnical dimension, (2) organizational dimension, and (3) inter-rganizational dimension. These dimensions will explain asollows.

.1.2.1. Technical dimension of electronic commerce adoption. Today,ne of the important and perhaps the most important source of thehange and transformation of global business are the advanced andstonishing technology particularly in the domain of computer net-orks and information sciences. The core of EC is technology and

nternet that is propounded at the technical level. Technical level isne of the most vital factors in electronic commerce adoption.

Going through articles and researches, Table 2 indicates theechnical criteria for EC adoption. Based on Table 2, issue of Internetecurity (APEC, 1999; Jun, 2003; Mukti, 2000; Turban, Kelly, Porter,Richard, 2002; Wang & Tasi, 2002) and then compatibility (HeckRibbers, 1999; Ling, 2001; Rashid & Qirim, 2001; Trouong, 2002)

re the frequent criteria for the technical dimension.

.1.2.2. Organizational dimension of EC adoption. Organizationalimension is another important level of EC adoption. Organiza-ional criteria are variables that affect organizational structurend help the organization to adapt with environmental changesTrouong, 2002). In other words, organizational factors derivedrom organizational approach to electronic commerce implementa-ion (Flynn, 2000). Organizations vary in their propensity to deployC; it is affected by the role of top management, aspects of organiza-ion culture, characteristics of Information Systems professionals,nd organization structure (Tarafdara & Sanjiv, 2006).

As a whole, important and effective variables at organizationalevel for evaluating EC adoption point to characteristics of organiza-ion and its ingredients. Table 3 shows the effective organizationalriteria for the adoption of EC that has been pointed by differentcholars.

.1.2.3. Inter-organizational dimension of EC adoption. EC is aartnership and inter-organizational system and cannot be imple-ented separately or distinctively. In the case, a company is ready

or EC; it would not acquire profits if business partners or customerso not have essential infrastructure.

In order to successfully utilize EC, buyers and sellers must havedequate information system infrastructures and resources to max-

mize their participation benefits. On the buyer side: (1) the usagextent of IT in purchasing, (2) the usage extent of the Internet inurchasing activities, and (3) the usage extent for supply chainanagement activities indicate how ready a firm is to do EC (Rao

t al., 2007).

d

era

emonstration of electronic purchasing Kare-Silver (2002)eadiness of business companies Zhu et al. (2002)ack of vital expansion Ling (2001), APEC (1999), Jun (2003),

and Turban et al. (2006)

Thus, successful adoption of electronic commerce needs suitableircumstances so that it could enjoy the profits. On the basis of liter-ture reviews, various criteria of EC adoption have been identifiedt the inter-organizational level (see Table 4).

. Research methodology

From the point of view of its aim, the present study is an appliedesearch because various companies for EC adoption will utilize itsndings. So far as data collection is concerned, the research hasccomplished through survey.

Based on the accumulated results from previous studies, thisesearch aims to determine the criteria and indicators of the elec-ronic commerce adoption of the companies.

Then the compiled criteria and indicators are compared withhe viewpoints of various experts. After analyzing the data, a con-eptual framework for evaluating electronic commerce adoption is

esigned.

To get the opinion of experts, a questionnaire was prepared afterxtracting criteria and indicators of the EC adoption. To test theeliability of this questionnaire, Cronbach Alpha coefficient waspplied that indicated 0.979, which shows high reliability rate. The

30 S. Elahi, A. Hassanzadeh / International Journal of Information Management 29 (2009) 27–36

Table 5Effective technical criteria and indicators for EC adoption and their priority.

Effective technical criteria Rank Question no. Indicators Mean rank Average Standard deviation

Compatibility 5 10 Integration of different units oforganization through availablenetworks

8.71 4.47 0.72

13 12 Facility of integrating presentcomputer systems with EC

5.50 4.00 1.00

11 2 Maximum speed of information systemin the organization

5.79 4.05 0.75

10 3 Availability of standards anddocumentations for the organization’sinformation system

6.17 4.06 1.14

Issue of Internet security 4 13 High security network 8.83 4.41 0.71Enough computer 9 14 Abundance of computers 6.46 3.88 0.93

Speed of Internet network 3 7 Connection to Internet network 8.92 4.53 0.876 15 Suitable speed of network and Internet

explorer7.88 4.35 0.70

Interoperability 5 8 Activation of computer network 8.71 4.50 0.638 16 Capability to connect available

technical infrastructure with othersystems

6.88 4.00 0.78

12 9 Possibility of exchange of audio-videoinformation via internal network(Internet)

5.58 3.69 0.95

Access to remote communication services 2 6 Access to email in the organization 8.96 4.47 0.62able psitelabilitysites)

qwqwwfa

pfapEuhEmEc

4

tgnuaodwoapottD

wc

4

t

lttc

•

•

tbni

4

4

rt

Wilcoxon nonparametric test shows that on 95% confidencelevel, the following indicators of Table 6 can be considered the

1 5 Probweb

7 4 Avai(web

uestionnaires were distributed through correspondences and theebsites of Institute for Trade Studies and Research. A total 17

uestionnaires were used and analyzed during the course, whichere prepared through the correspondences and email contactsith the experts. On the basis of identified indicators and criteria, a

ramework was developed for evaluating the electronic commercedoption in Iranian companies.

The framework for evaluating the EC adoption by Iranian com-anies has been applied tentatively in 27 sample companies. Apartrom gathering information based on the framework, informationbout four stage of EC development (Rao et al., 2003) in the sam-le companies was also collected. Its aim was just to identify theC development stage of the companies. Then the findings could besed with the outputs from the framework. By this way, initial focusas been put to test the framework and then relationship betweenC adoption by Iranian companies and stage of the EC develop-ent of the companies. The assumption is that the higher stage of

C development of the company, the greater EC adoption by theompany.

. Data analysis and framework development

Based on scientific and research reviews, technical, organiza-ional and inter-organizational factors were identified as the threeroups for evaluating electronic commerce adoption of the compa-ies. In order to determine the validity of identified elements, bysing Known Group method, viewpoints of experts about indicatorsnd criteria in each of the technical, organizational and inter-rganizational dimensions were acquired. Questionnaires wereesigned based on five multiple choice Likert’s scale and expertsere asked to give their opinion on each of the indicators in each

f three groups based on 1–5 spectrum (in which 1 indicates tobsolutely disagree and 5 refers to absolutely agree). Regarding this

ossibility also, it was further clarified that if experts have differentpinion about the criteria and indicators, they can mention them athe end of every section. As has been mentioned earlier, the ques-ionnaires sent to the experts via manual or electronic manners.ata were analyzed by applying SPSS software. Following results

ia

resence of services via 9.25 4.59 0.62

of Internet address 7.38 3.94 0.83

ere accumulated from the experts regarding the criteria and indi-ators:

.1. Technical dimension

Average and standard deviation of each of the response relatedo technical Indicators for EC adoption are mentioned in Table 5.

Nonparametric Wilcoxon test shows that at 95% confidenceevel, the following 14 indicators in Table 5 can be considered ashe effective technical factors for the electronic commerce adop-ion. According to the same finding, the two indicators are notonsidered as the effective technical factors and thus are omitted.

Use of wireless communication in the organization (aver-age = 3.22 and Stdv2 = 0.97).Technical complexity of EC system (need of diverse technical fac-tors) (average = 3.36 and Stdv = 1.39).

Friedman nonparametric analysis of variance shows that athe significant level of ˛ = 5%, there exist meaningful differencesetween mean ranks of responses to the questions related to tech-ical Dimension. By this way, Table 5 shows the most and the less

mportant technical indicators.

.2. Organizational dimension

.2.1. Indicators related to leadership and managementTable 6 shows the average and standard deviations of the

esponses of each questions related to leadership and organiza-ional management indicators for EC adoption.

ndicators related to effective leadership and organizational man-gement that affect electronic commerce adoption.

2 Standard deviation.

S. Elahi, A. Hassanzadeh / International Journal of Information Management 29 (2009) 27–36 31

Table 6Indicators related to the readiness of leadership and management of organization to EC adoption and their priorities.

Rank Question no. Variables Mean rank Average Standard deviation

1 1 Executives positive understanding about EC 11.85 4.41 1.0032 2 Executives support for EC plans 11.41 4.35 0.9963 7 Positive mental norms of executives about EC 11.41 4.35 0.7024 3 Efforts of top and middle managers to create suitable climate to EC adoption 10.26 4.18 0.8825 8 Bright management perception to the manners of integration strategy of EC with strategic

programs of organization10.26 4.18 0.883

6 16 Inclination of superior management to permit new innovation specially in the field of EC 10.12 3.59 0.8707 9 Presence of strategic plan of EC 10.03 4.12 1.0548 19 Efforts for compatibility with innovative changes in the market of EC 9.18 3.94 1.1449 5 High knowledge of IT and EC by senior managers 9.09 3.94 0.899

10 11 Strength of management to integrate IT needs of the company with internal and external ITresources

8.97 3.94 0.748

11 17 Inclination of executive management to admit financial risk with regard to investment in EC 8.94 3.94 1.14412 14 Inclination of executive management to increase expertise of employees 8.00 3.82 0.63613 18 Exact supervision on the actions of competitors in the EC field 7.62 370 1.159

eableerme

aiems

mnimBa

4

rt

ccc

seea

4

ti

obf

••

••

drt

4

rf

dce

sb

TA

R

12345678

14 13 Inclination of executive management to increase knowledg15 15 Inclination of executive management to employees empow16 4 Innovative power of superior managers17 6 Self-confidence of superior managers

Thus, on the basis of the above test, the indicators, whichre omitted from the leadership and management criterion, are:dentification of the suitable criteria for the assessment of EC strat-gy (average = 3.5, standard deviation = 0.966), inclination of topanagement to flexible organizational structure (average = 3.06,

tandard deviation = 0.899).In order to rank the indicators related to leadership and

anagement for the electronic commerce adoption, Friedmanonparametric analysis of variance were applied. Friedman test

ndicated that at ˛ = 5%, there exist significant differences betweenean ranks of leadership and organization management indicators.

y this way, Table 6 shows the most and less important leadershipnd organization management indicators in descending order.

.2.2. Indicators related to financial infrastructureTable 7 indicates average and standard deviation of the

esponses of each questions related to financial infrastructure cri-erion for EC adoption.

Nonparametric Wilcoxon test indicated that 5th and 6th indi-ators of the above table will be omitted while rest of them at theonfidence level of 95%, are liable to be accepted as effective finan-ial infrastructure indicators for the electronic commerce adoption.

Friedman nonparametric analysis of variance shows that at theignificant level of ˛ = 5%, there does not exist significant differ-nces between mean ranks of responses to the questions related toffective financial infrastructure criterion for electronic commercedoption.

.2.3. Indicators related to organizational cultureAverage and standard deviation of the responses of each ques-

ions related to organizational culture criterion for EC adoption arendicated in Table 8.

r

4

q

able 7verage and standard deviation of the responses of experts about the indicators related to

ow Indicators

Financial ability to finance EC set up costsFinancial ability to finance Internet connectionFinancial ability to execute employees training coursesFinancial strength to maintain EC system (repair, protection and modernizatioFinancial strength towards utilizing advisors from outside the organizationFinancial strength to safeguard research plan related to ECFinancial strength towards creating well equipped and suitable IT and EC depaPresence of financial information, necessary to analyze the expenditure/useful

of employees 7.35 3.71 0.985nt 6.50 3.59 0.870

6.12 3.47 0.7175.88 3.47 0.624

Nonparametric test shows that at the confidence level of 95%,ther than the following indicators the rest of the above table cane considered the part of effective organizational culture criterionor the electronic commerce adoption:

Presence of previous experiences of using EC.EC compatibility with previous experiences of the employees tothe organization.EC compatibility with the previous values to the organization.Feeling of increased capacity through the EC.

Friedman nonparametric analysis of variance shows that thereoes not exists significant differences between the ranks of averageesponses related to effective organizational culture criterion forhe electronic commerce adoption.

.2.4. Indicators related to human resourcesTable 9 indicates the average and standard deviation of the

esponses to each questions related to human resources criterionor EC adoption.

Nonparametric Wilcoxon result shows that at the 95% confi-ence level, 10th and 18th indicators in the above table can beonsidered the part of effective human resource criterion for thelectronic commerce adoption.

Friedman nonparametric analysis of variance shows that at theignificant level of ˛ = 5%, there does not exist significant differencesetween the mean ranks of responses related to effective human

esources criterion for the electronic commerce adoption.

.2.5. Indicators related to organizational dimensionAverage and standard deviation of the responses to each of the

uestion related to organization dimension criterion for the elec-

effective financial infrastructure for the EC adoption by companies.

Average Standard deviation Wilcoxon test results

4.06 0.827 Accepted4.60 0.899 Accepted4.35 0.996 Accepted

n, etc.) 4.18 0.809 Accepted3.59 1.176 Rejected3.31 0.946 Rejected

rtment 3.88 0.928 Acceptedness of the EC 3.88 0.857 Accepted

32 S. Elahi, A. Hassanzadeh / International Journal of Information Management 29 (2009) 27–36

Table 8Average and standard deviation of experts’ responses about the indicators related to organizational culture of the companies towards EC adoption.

Row Indicators Average. Standard deviation Wilcoxon test results

1 High innovation level of organization 4.18 0.728 Accepted2 High level of risk management 4.06 0.659 Accepted3 High level of creativeness in the organization 3.94 0.658 Accepted4 Positive views of employees from benefits, applications and, process of EC 3.88 0.928 Accepted5 Presence of previous experiences of using EC 3.53 1/125 Rejected6 Positive feeling of employees towards the effect of EC 4.18 1.074 Accepted7 Admitting the economic of EC system adoption 3.81 1.109 Accepted8 Positive feeling of more EC profits to own company, compare to others 3.81 1.109 Accepted9 EC compatibility with previous experiences of the employees to the organization 3.47 1.124 Rejected10 EC compatibility with the previous values of the organization 3.35 1.057 Rejected11 EC compatibility with user’s needs 3.88 1.054 Accepted12 Confidence to the access to customers at global scale through EC adoption 3.94 1.249 Accepted13 Belief to speedy access of information through EC adoption 4.00 1.033 Accepted14 Belief to expansion of market domain through EC adoption 4.31 0.793 Accepted15 Belief to improve customer service through EC adoption 4.06 0.998 Accepted16 Believing to create New opportunities via EC 4.37 0.885 Accepted17 Believing to privacy in EC 4.29 0.686 Accepted18 Absence of the feeling of legal problems arise from EC adoption 4.06 0.929 Accepted19 Feeling of possible execution of accounting and control through EC 3.75 1.000 Accepted20 Feeling of increased capacity through the EC 3.56 1.093 Rejected21 Positive feeling towards EC, due to use of business shareholders 3.81 1.047 Accepted

Table 9Average and standard deviation of experts’ responses about the indicators related to human resources criterion.

Row Indicators Average Standard deviation Wilcoxon test results

1 Participation of employees in the formulation of EC plans 3.82 0.728 Accepted2 Participation of employees in executing EC plans 4.00 0.612 Accepted3 Presence of formulated plan to figure out the worries of employees about EC effects 3.81 0.834 Accepted4 Presence of formulated and suitable plans for training of employees about the EC skills 4.24 0.752 Accepted5 Presence of reward system for encouraging employees’ innovation and suggestions 3.88 0.857 Accepted6 Presence of Internet networks to acquire new and up-to-date information by employees 3.74 0.970 Accepted7 Employees’ acquaintance with the fundamental definition of EC 4.00 0.866 Accepted8 Employees’ acquaintance with strategic usage of EC 3.69 0.873 Accepted9 Employees’ acquaintance with practical instances of EC 3.69 0.793 Accepted10 Employees’ acquaintance with expenses and profits of EC 3.44 0.964 Rejected11 Technical employees’ acquaintance with role and usage of EC standards 3.88 0.957 Accepted12 Technical employees’ acquaintance with kinds of EC standards 3.87 0.957 Accepted13 Technical employees’ acquaintance with role and applications of EC software 3.81 0.981 Accepted14 Technical employees’ acquaintance with the kinds of EC software 3.88 0.885 Accepted15 Technical employees’ acquaintance with human interaction with EC system 3.68 1.078 Accepted16 Employees’ acquaintance with EC functions 3.94 0.854 Accepted17 Familiarity of employees with EC impacts on different business processes 4.06 0.854 Accepted18 Technical employees’ acquaintance with problem related to network security 4.06 0.854 Rejected1 net, v

2

t

st

4

qc

TAs

R

1234

de

• Expansion of foreign market of the organization (foreign market

9 Ratio of use of information technology like fax, telephone, Internet, extraconferencing by employees

0 High ratio of young employees

ronic commerce adoption are mentioned in Table 10.Wilcoxon result shows, none of the above indicators can be con-

idered as the part of indicators related to organizational dimensionhat are effective on the EC adoption by the companies.

.2.6. Indicators related to organization domainAverage and standard deviation of the responses to each of the

uestion related to organization domain criterion for the electronicommerce adoption are mentioned in Table 11.

able 10verage and standard deviation of experts’ responses about the organization dimen-ion criterion.

ow Indicators Average Standard deviation

High volume of assets of organization 3.26 1.35High sale volume of organization 3.35 1.22High market share of the organization 3.47 1.28High ratio of staff to line personnel 2.94 1.03

TAc

R

1

23

4

ideo 4.41 0.618 Accepted

3.75 0.931 Accepted

Wilcoxon nonparametric result shows that at the 95% confi-ence level, only the following indicators can be considered anffective organizational domain for EC adoption by the companies:

domain).

able 11verage and standard deviation of organization domain criterion for the electronicommerce adoption.

ow Indicators Average Standard deviation

Expansion of internal market of theorganization (internal market domain)

2.81 0.981

High external market scope 3.94 1.181High variety of real customers(persons) of organization

3.47 1.125

High variety of legal customers(companies) of organization

3.53 1.302

S. Elahi, A. Hassanzadeh / International Journal of Information Management 29 (2009) 27–36 33

Table 12Average and standard deviation of the responses about organizational structurecriterion for the electronic commerce adoption.

Row Indicators Average Standarddeviation

1 Low formality of organization 3.00 1.2402 High formality of organization 2.38 1.3873 Low centralization of organizational 3.13 1.4074 High organizational centralization 2.25 1.1835 Low levels of organizational hierarchy 3.31 1.4486 High levels of organizational hierarchy 2.29 1.1397 Low variety of organization’s specialized units 2.43 1.2848 High variety of organization’s specialized units 2.86 1.5619 Low spatial distribution of departments 2.08 1.03810 High spatial distribution of departments 3.29 1.489

Table 13Experts’ response on the indicators related to product criterion for the electroniccommerce adoption.

Row Indicators Average Standard deviation

1 High degree of product digitalizability 4.31 0.7042 High degree of brand reputation 3.86 0.9573 High prices of the products 2.50 0.8174 Low prices of the products 3.07 1.163567

4

qt

dpe

4

qa

fip

•••

Table 14Priority of the indicators related to product criterion for the electronic commerceadoption.

R

12

df

etmp

4

4

qm

tc

“ae

crp

4

r

dt

TI

R

1

High diversity of products 3.00 1.095Low diversity of products 2.33 0.899Electronically transferability of products 4.29 0.914

.2.7. Indicators related to organization structureAverage and standard deviation of the responses to each of the

uestion related to organization structure criterion for the elec-ronic commerce adoption are mentioned in Table 12.

Wilcoxon nonparametric results show that at the 95% confi-ence level, none of the above indicators can be considered theart of organizational structure criterion that are effective on thelectronic commerce adoption.

.2.8. Indicators related to productsAverage and standard deviation of the responses to each of the

uestion related to product criterion for the electronic commercedoption are mentioned in Table 13.

Wilcoxon nonparametric findings show that at the 95% con-dence level, the following indicators can be considered as the

roduct criterion for the electronic commerce adoption:

High degree of product digitalizability.High degree of brand reputation.Electronically transferability of products.

Mirwi

able 15ndicators related to customers’ criterion for the electronic commerce adoption and their

ow Question no. Proposed variables

1 18 High ratio of customers’ access to Internet2 12 High degree of customers contact with company for order t3 5 Use of customer relationship management (CRM) software4 10 Importance of 24 h inquiry centers to customers5 11 Importance of providing new methods for customer easier6 9 Customer’s demand to set up websites7 17 Importance of finding new customers and new markets for8 6 Fulfilling customer orders on time9 16 Risk acceptance by customers

10 8 Existing of appropriate ability for after sales services11 13 Attention to customer preferences by the company2 4 Presence of necessary information of customers on compan

13 14 High degree of customer trust on EC14 1 High importance of Internet marketing for the company15 15 Accessibility of customers to credit cards16 2 Current use of Internet for tracking changes and finding new17 3 Existence of appropriate system for responding to custome

ow Question no. Proposed variables Mean rank

1 High degree of product digitalizability 1.632 High degree of brand reputation 1.38

Analyzing the responses of experts, the high degree of productigitalizability is an indicator similar to high electronically trans-erability of products and thus the last indicator is also omitted.

Friedman nonparametric analysis of variance shows that therexist significant differences between the mean ranks of responseso the questions related to products criterion for the electronic com-

erce adoption. Therefore the most important indicator related toroducts is indicated in Table 14 in descending order.

.3. Inter-organizational dimension

.3.1. Indicators related to customersAverage and standard deviation of the responses to each of the

uestion related to customers’ criterion for the electronic com-erce adoption are mentioned in Table 15.Wilcoxon test results show that at the 95% confidence level,

he indicators shown in Table 15 can be considered related to theustomers’ criterion.

It is worth to mention here that from the viewpoints of expertsFamiliarity with complexity of fulfilling export orders” (with aver-ge 3.41, standard deviation 1.28) has not been accepted as an-readiness indicator of customers.

Friedman analysis of variance show the existence of signifi-ant differences between mean ranks of responses to the questionselated to e-readiness indicator of customers. Table 15, thusresents the indicators related to e-readiness of customers.

.3.2. Indicators related to competitorsTable 16 shows the average and standard deviation of the

esponses of each questions related to competitors.Wilcoxon nonparametric results showed that at the 95% confi-

ence level, the indicators shown in Table 16 can be considered ashe competitors’ criterion for the electronic commerce adoption.

eanwhile, Friedman analysis of variance shows that at the signif-cant level of ˛ = 5% there are differences between mean ranks ofesponses to the questions related to competitors’ criterion. By thisay, the most important indicators related to competitors’ criterion

s shown in Table 16 in descending order.

priority.

Mean rank Average Standard deviation

11.63 4.71 0.469racking 10.57 4.50 0.730

10.13 4.47 0.79910.03 4.41 0.712

buying 9.67 4.19 1.1679.63 4.18 0.883

company 9.43 4.29 0.7719.43 4.35 0.4939.43 3.59 0.9399.30 4.24 0.8319.23 4.31 0.793

y’s website 8.97 4.29 0.6868.50 4.18 0.9518.43 4.24 0.4378.33 4.06 0.899

business opportunities 7.50 4.12 0.600rs who contact by Email 7.23 4.00 0.867

34 S. Elahi, A. Hassanzadeh / International Journal of Information Management 29 (2009) 27–36

Table 16Indicators related to competitors criterion towards electronic commerce adoption and their priorities.

Rank Question no. Proposed variables Mean rank Average Standard deviation

1 6 Possibility of gaining competitive advantage in industry due to adoption of EC 6.41 4.41 0.7122 9 Company’s weakness from its access to customers, compare to competitors 5.65 4.12 0.9283 5 Decreasing company customers because of competitors presence in electronic commerce 5.35 4.06 1.1974 4 Competitors usage of website 5.29 4.06 0.8285 2 Degree of company’s awareness about the effect of competitors EC plans on the company 5.24 4.06 0.7476 1 Degree of company’s awareness about the competitors EC plans 4.65 4.00 0.7077 3 Company awareness about advantage and risks of creating strategic alliance with selected competitors 429 3.71 1.0478 7 Possibility of improving efficiency due to make up strategic alliance with competitors 4.18 3.65 1.1159 8 Increase of market share of competitors 3.94 3.71 0.919

Table 17Indicators related to suppliers in EC adoption and their priorities.

Row Question no. Variables of case study Mean rank Average Standard deviation

1 11 Pressure from suppliers to adopt EC 7.47 4.53 0.7992 11 Suppliers access to EC infrastructure 7.35 4.47 0.7173 7 Ability of suppliers to accept and process the online orders 6.88 4.29 1.7714 2 Current use of the electronic markets for finding suppliers by company 6.53 4.24 0.7525 8 Degree of Internet usage by suppliers 6.29 4.18 0.8096 1 Current use of the Internet to find material and parts suppliers by company 5.71 4.06 0.8287 6 Continuous contact with suppliers for awareness of order status 5.47 3.94 1.0298 9 Presence of trust between company and suppliers 5.44 4.00 0.707

using

4

rt

tr

otmTi

5

weeacor

rdz

TCd

TE

OIT

*

ia

6

aAwpersan

6c

bt

9 4 Current use of SCM software by company10 3 Prior experience in ordering material and parts by11 5 Diversity of company’s suppliers

.3.3. Indicators related to suppliersTable 17 shows the average and standard deviation of the

esponses of each questions related to suppliers’ criterion for elec-ronic commerce adoption.

Nonparametric results showed that at the 95% confidence level,he indicators of Table 17 can be considered as the suppliers’ crite-ion.

Friedman analysis of variance shows that at the significant levelf ˛ = 5% there is differences between mean ranks of responseso the questions related to suppliers’ criterion. By this way, the

ost important indicators related to suppliers are indicated inable 17 in descending order, i.e. from most important to the lessmportant.

. Designing a framework

On the basis of the above-mentioned statistical tests a frame-ork of effective factors can be draw in Fig. 1 on the evaluating

lectronic commerce adoption. As has been observed in this figure,mphasis of this framework is on evaluating electronic commercedoption at organizational level. At this level, the framework isonsisted of three parts of technical, organizational and inter-rganizational dimensions that with the interaction of each other

epresent the EC adoption at organization level.

As has been observed in Table 18, there exists significant cor-elation among technical, organizational and inter-organizationalimensions. Correlation coefficient among technical and organi-ational dimensions is equal to 0.865; between technical and

able 18orrelation coefficients between inter-organizational, technical and organizationalimensions.

hree dimensions ofC adoption

Organizational Inter-organizational Technical

rganizational 1 0.773** 0.865**nter-organizational 0.773** 1 0.690**echnical 0.865** 0.690** 1

*Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed).

s(sc

a

TRd

DS

*

5.38 3.88 1.054EDI 5.03 3.88 0.928

5.44 3.65 1.169

nter-organizational dimensions 0.690 and between organizationalnd inter-organizational 0.773.

. Pilot implementation and test of the framework

The designed framework for evaluating electronic commercedoption has been applied tentatively in 27 sample companies.part from gathering information based on the developed frame-ork, information about four stage of EC development-presence,ortals, transactions integration, and enterprises integration (Raot al., 2003) in the sample companies was also collected. Then theelationship between degree of electronic commerce adoption andtages of EC development in company were analyzed. Based on datanalysis of the findings and test of the framework, it will presentecessary guidelines for employing the framework.

.1. Study of the relationship between degree of electronicommerce adoption and stages of EC development in company

As can be seen in Table 19, there exist significant connectionsetween the degree of electronic commerce adoption and stages ofhe development of electronic commerce of companies.

High correlation between the degree of EC adoption and thetages of EC development, i.e. presence (corr. = 0.64), having portal

corr. = 0.65), transaction integration (corr. = 0.72) indicate that thetage of EC development is indication of the degree of electronicommerce adoption by the company (Table 20).

In order to test the developed framework, correlation tests werepplied. By this way, correlation between the EC adoption from the

able 19elation between the degree of electronic commerce adoption and stage of ECevelopment.

Degree of electroniccommerce adoption

Stage of ECdevelopment

egree of electronic commerce adoption – 0.71**tage of EC development 0.71** –

*Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed).

S. Elahi, A. Hassanzadeh / International Journal of Information Management 29 (2009) 27–36 35

Fig. 1. A framework for evaluating electronic co

Table 20Relationship between degree of electronic commerce adoption and stages of ECdevelopment in company.

EC adoption

Presence 0.64**Portal 0.65**II

*

pdw

mdtTEd

TCi

S

*

7

ottcopii

amIi

ntegration exchange 0.72**ntegration of companies –

*Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed).

oint of view of technical, organizational and inter-organizationalimensions and the stage of EC development were calculated,hose result is shown in Table 21.

As has been mentioned in the above table, stage of EC develop-ent in the sample companies is correlated with the EC adoption

egree: from the point of technical dimension (0.47), organiza-ion dimension (0.65), and inter-organizational dimension (0.67).hus, the developed framework correctly evaluates the degree ofC adoption by the companies for electronic commerce from threeimensions, i.e. technical, organizational and inter-organizational.

able 21orrelation of EC adoption from the point of view of technical, organizational and

nter-organizational dimensions with the stage of EC development.

TECHNICA ORGANIZA INTER ORG EVOUTIO

pearman’s �TECHNICA

Correlation coefficient 1.000 .512** .622** .470**Sig. (two-tailed) . .000 .000 .001N 48 48 48 48

ORGANIZACorrelation coefficient .512** 1.000 .811** .655**Sig. (two-tailed) .000 . .000 .000N 48 48 48 48

INTER ORGCorrelation coefficient .622** .811** 1.000 .666**Sig. (two-tailed) .000 .000 . .000N 48 48 48 48

EVOUTIOCorrelation coefficient .470** .655** .666** 1.000Sig. (two-tailed) .001 .000 .000 .N 48 48 48 48

*Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed).

Tem

ze

••••••

cafitbvovtE

mmerce adoption at organizational level.

. Discussion and conclusion

On the basis of this research, technical, organizational and inter-rganizational dimensions are the three dimensions that identifyhe degree of electronic commerce adoption. As has been observedhese three dimensions are related to each other and as such,hange in any of them lead to change in other. Therefore inrder for evaluating electronic commerce adoption of the com-anies, it is necessary to put emphasis on the three dimensions

.e. technical, organizational and inter-organizational and theirnteractions.

According to the viewpoints of the experts on compiled criteriand indicators in the technical dimension, the most important ele-ents for EC adoption in the companies are: compatibility, issue of

nternet security, enough computers, speed of Internet network,nteroperability, and access to remote communication services.hus in the technical dimension, it is suggested that companies forvaluating technical dimension of electronic commerce, keeping inind the mentioned technical elements.On the basis of the findings, it is evident that in the organi-

ational dimension, following criteria are considered to be fit forvaluating electronic commerce adoption of the companies.

Leadership and managementFinancial structureOrganizational cultureHuman resourcesOrganizational scopeFactors related to products

The most important organizational indicators in the so-calledriteria for EC adoption are: executives positive understandingbout EC; executives support for EC plans; financial ability tonance EC set up costs; financial ability to execute employeesraining courses; financial ability to finance Internet connection;elieving to create new opportunities via EC; believing to pri-

acy in EC; high level of innovation in organization; ratio of usef information technology like fax, telephone, Internet, extranet,ideo conferencing by employees; existence of formulated plan torain EC needed skills for employees; familiarity of employees withC impacts on different business processes; high external market

3 nal of

sr

at

•••

dItwofa

A

wSTvc

R

A

A

A

B

C

D

F

F

G

H

H

J

J

KK

L

L

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

N

R

R

R

R

S

S

S

S

T

T

T

T

T

T

T

W

W

Zhu, K., Kracmer, K., & XU, S. (2002). A cross–country study of electronic business

6 S. Elahi, A. Hassanzadeh / International Jour

cope; High degree of product digitalizability; high degree of brandeputation.

Based on this research, for evaluating electronic commercedoption of the companies, the following criteria are proposed inhe inter-organizational dimension:

CustomersCompetitorsSuppliers

The most important indicators in the inter-organizationalimension for EC adoption are: high ratio of customer’s access to

nternet; high degree of customers contact with company for orderracking; use of customer relationship management (CRM) soft-are; importance of 24 h inquiry centers to customers; possibilityf gaining competitive advantage in industry due to of EC; pressurerom suppliers to adopt EC; suppliers access to EC infrastructure;bility of suppliers to accept and process the online orders.

cknowledgements

This paper has been extracted from the research-plan, whichas accomplished with the financial support of Institute for Trade

tudies and Research at the Tarbiat Modares University—Center forechnology Development & Management Studies in Iran. We areery much obliged to the finance officials of these centers for theirooperation and support.

eferences

kkeren, J. K. V., & Cavaye, A. L. M. (2000). Factors influence on entry-level electroniccommerce adoption in the automobile industry in Australia. Working paper.

PEC (1999). The APEC E-commerce readiness assessment initiative an overview of theassessment process. Retrieved April 17, 2007. From http://www.apec.org/apec/publications/free downloads/2000.html.

PEC (2000). The APEC E-commerce readiness assessment initiative an overview of theassessment process. Retrieved April 17, 2007. From http://www.apec.org/apec/publications/free downloads/2000.html.

udhiraha, R. S. S. (2004). e-Readiness assessment. Retrieved June 20, 2005. Fromhttp://www.mit.gov.in/eg/ereadiness.doc.

SPP (1998). The CSPP readiness guide. From http://www.CSPP.org/projects/readiness/.

aniel, E. M., & Grimshaw, D. J. (2002). An exploratory comparison of electronic com-merce adoption in large and small enterprises. Journal of Information Technology,17, 133–147.

iona, N. C. E., Cathy, H. (2000). An investigation of the factors affecting theadoption of e-commerce amongst uk-based retailers. Working paper. Fromhttp://www.viewswire.com.

lynn, A. P. S. (2000). Perceptions of barriers to e-commerce. In ANZMAC conferenceNew Zealand, Massey University,

randon, E. P., & Michael, J. (2004). Electronic commerce adoption an empirical studyof small and medium US business. Information and Management, 42, 197–216.

eck, E., & Ribbers, P. (1999). The adoption and impact of EDI in Dutch SME’S. InProceedings of the 32th Hawaii International Conference on System Science Hawaii.

offman, D. L.N. T; Chatterjee, P. (1995). Commercial scenarios for the web: Oppor-tunities and challenges. Journal of computer-mediated commerce. Vol. 1 (No.3).

ulta, D., Bodorick, P., & Dhaliwad, J. (2002). Supporting the e-business readiness ofsmall and medium-sized enterprises: Approaches and metrics. Electronic Net-working Applications and Policy, 12(2), 139–164.

un, M. C. S. (2003). Key obstacles to EDI success: From the US small manufacturingcompanies’ perspective. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 103(3), 192–203.

are-Silver, M. D.(2002). Electronic shock 2000. New York, McMillan Press.irkman, G. S., Osorio, C. A., & Sachs, J. D. (2002). The networked readiness index:

Measuring the preparedness of nations for the networked world. Center for Inter-national Development at Harvard University.

Z

Information Management 29 (2009) 27–36

ee, S., & Kim, K.-J. (2007). Factors affecting the implementation success of Internet-based information systems. Computers in Human Behavior, (23), 1853–1880.

ing, C. Y. (2001). Model of factors influences on electronic commerce adoption dif-fusion in small & medium sized enterprise. Curtin University of Technology.Working Paper.

cconnell (2000). Risk E-business: Seizing the opportunity of global e-readiness.www.mcconnellInternational.com/ereadiness/EreadinessReport.htm.

ehrtens, J., Cragg, P. B., & Mills, M. A. (2001). A model of Internet adoption by SmEs.Information and Management, 39(3), 165–176.

olla, A., & Licker, P. S. (2005a). Perceived E-Readiness factors in ECommerce adop-tion: An empirical investigation in a developing country. International Journal ofElectronic Commerce, 10(1), 83–110.

olla, A., & Licker, P. S. (2005b). eCommerce adoption in developing countries: Amodel and instrument. Information & Management, 42, 877–899.

osaic (1997). The global diffusion of the Internet project. From http://mosaic.Unmaha.edu/gdi.html.

uenchinger, N. V., Denton Sales & Thomas (2003). France: a new draft implemen-tation of the electronic commerce directive under consideration. Computer law& security report Vol 19 (No3) 212–215.

ukti, N. A. (2000). Barriers to putting business on Internet in Malaysia. The Elec-tronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Country, 2(6), 1–6.

ath, R., Akmanligil, M., Hjelm, K., Ssakaguchi, T., & Schultz, M. (1998). Electroniccommerce and the Internet Issue, Problems and perspectives. International Jour-nal of Information Management, 18(2), 91–101.

ao, S. S., Metts, G., & Monge, C. M. (2003). Electronic commerce development insmall and medium sized enterprise: A stage model and its implication. BusinessProcess Management Journal, 9(1), 11–32.

ao, S. S., Truong, D., Senecal, S., & Le, T. T. (2007). How buyers’ expected benefits,perceived risks, and e-business readiness influence their e-marketplace usage.Industrial Marketing Management, 36(8), pp. 1035–1045

ashid, M. A., & Qirim, N. A. (2001). E-commerce technology adoption frameworkby New Zealand SME’s. In Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii international conferenceon system science.

uikar, K., Anumba, C. J., & Carrillo, P. M. (2006). VERDICT—An E-readiness assess-ment application for construction companies. Automation in Construction, 15,98–110.

en, R. S., & Tarun, K. (2005). A meta-modeling approach to designing e- warehous-ing systems. Journal of organizational computing and electronic commerce, 15(4),295–316.

iemieniuch, C. E., & Sinclair, M. A. (2004). A framework for organizational readinessfor knowledge management. International Journal of Operations & ProductionManagement, 24(1/2), 79–98.

tanding, C., & Chad, L. (2007). Organizational evaluation of the benefits, constraints,and satisfaction of business to business electronic commerce. International Jour-nal of electronic commerce, 11(3), 107–134.

ung, T. K. (2006). E-commerce critical success factors:East v. West. Technologicalforecasting & social change, 73(9), 1161–1177.

an, J. T., Tyler, K., & Manica, A. (2007). Business-to-business adoption of eCommercein China. Information & Management, 44, 332–351.

arafdara, M. V., & Sanjiv, D. (2006). Challenges in the adoption of E-Commercetechnologies in India: The role of organizational factors. International Journal ofInformation Management, (26), 428–441.

rouong, D., Rao S.S. (2002). Development a contingency model for adoption of elec-tronic commerce. Decision Science Institute, annual meeting proceedings.

urban, E. R., Jr., Kelly, R., & Porter, R. E. (2002). Information technology. New Jersey:John Wiley & Sons.

urban, E., Dave, K., Lee, J. K., & Viehland, D. (2006). Electronic commerce: A manage-ment perspective , prentice-Hall.

urban, E. R., Jr., Kelly, R., & Porter, R. E. (2007). Information technology (p. 615). NewJersey: John Wiley & Sons.

urner, M., Mary, T., & Smith, H. (2002). E-commerce directive - UK implementa-tion electronic commerce (EC directive). Computer law & security report, 18(6),396–403.

ang, J. C., & Tasi, K. H. (2002). Factor in Taiwanese firm’s decisions to adopt elec-tronic commerce: An empirical study. The Word Economy, 25(8), 1145–1167.

u, C. (2004). A readiness model for adopting Web services. The Journal of EnterpriseInformation Management, 17(5), 361–371.

adoption using the technology–organization–environment framework. In Pro-ceedings of the 32th international conference on information systems.

ulkifli, Z. (2001). Factors related to information technology implementation in theMalaysian Ministry of Education Polytechnics. Doctoral Dissertation. Faculty ofthe Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.