By Jacob Stoller CMA Management The IT user adoption factor

If you find this article helpful:

IT has the potential to revolutionize the workplace, but there’s a catch — technology doesn’t change anything unless people use it. As many organizations are finding out, user adoption isn’t something that can be taken for granted

We all have our frustrations with IT, and perhaps a little guilt as well. After all, how many of us really make proper use all the tools that IT gives us? “You’ve heard the saying that we only use a percentage of our brain,” says Jennifer Shaheen, President of New York-based The Technology Therapy Group. “I jokingly tell people we only use a percentage of every software application.”

Misuse or non-use of corporate apps creates a range of problems for companies. Loss of individual productivity is the most obvious, but may be just the tip of the iceberg. Many IT features are collaborative, and don’t work unless participation is universal. For example, if you use e-mail to announce a meeting, you are depending on not just some, but 100% of desired attendants checking their e-mail on a regular basis.

The same logic applies to calendaring systems, where everybody has to consult their electronic schedule on a regular basis, CRM systems, which depend on people inputting customer information, or ERP systems, where the status of jobs and orders needs to be updated on a regular basis. When these systems don’t get used, symptoms vary from empty chairs in meeting rooms to missing financial information to missed shipment deadlines. Invariably, the fallout affects co-workers, business partners, and customers.

Explain change

There can be legal implications as well. Circumstances in which data collection is mandated by Bill 198 (Canada) or Sarbanes-Oxley (U.S.), user compliance is absolutely critical. Management not only needs to show the information at audit time, but that it has taken steps to ensure that the information will be collected and stored in a timely fashion. So if sales reps aren’t filling in all the blanks in the on-line order processing system, tensions can quickly rise.

A key cause of user resistance is the coercive stance that management and IT often takes towards user adoption — a stance which labels stragglers as lazy, techno phobic, or that favourite catch-all — resistant to change. According to Peter de Jager, a Brampton, Ont.-based change management guru, this approach is fundamentally flawed. “There’s a lot of nonsense being spouted about change and technology and how we respond to it,” explains de Jager. “What we resist, if you want to talk about it properly, is being changed. We resist, and are afraid of things we don’t understand. So the answer is, help me understand why this is necessary.”

“The biggest issue that I see in corporate environments,” observes Shaheen, “is that people are not included in the discussions. Overall, I find people are supportive if they understand the reasoning behind the changes. Many people feel companies upgrade or change just for the sake of change. A few minutes of explaining the reasoning can go along way to a smoother migration.”

The bigger picture

The need for open dialogue is especially important when workers are asked to use systems to benefit people elsewhere in the organization.

For example, a new online purchasing system might save untold time and effort in accounting, but might require Joe on the factory floor to walk back to his office to place parts orders on his computer. This requires a lot more effort than phoning his buddy Sam in purchasing, and unless Joe understands the bigger picture, he is bound to see this extra step as an unnecessary distraction from his work.

Furthermore, if the distraction is going to cause delays on the shop floor, adjustments may have to be made, such as the shifting of responsibilities from one individual to another, or the introduction of handheld wireless devices that can access the system.

Top management — walking the talk

Many applications clearly do save time for individuals, but still might not be well received, according to Athol Cohen of Toronto-based Athol Cohen & Associates. “A worker might ask, ‘If I can do more, and become more productive, will it give me more free time, or will it just burden me with more stuff to do?’” explains Cohen.

“There’s a school of thought that says ‘I’m quite happy to plod along this way because it takes up my day, and then I go home.’ So I think there may be that subconscious reluctance to learn.”

Workers can also get discouraged when people in authority don’t embrace the technology themselves. “There has to be a top-down mentality,” explains Shaheen. “What I mean by that is that if your executives and your staff members are not buying into the technology, then your people who are below them are asked to do double and triple the work because the people above them are relying so much on their skill set.”

Conversely, buy-in at senior levels can be a huge catalyst. “When I work with companies where the owners or the senior partners or any higher level management is really excited about this, then the team is excited.”

Management participation also fills another important role — making sure the application is the right tool in the first place. As Shaheen points out, this is often sadly lacking. “People start evaluating software before they really write out that process,” explains Shaheen, “and I think they’re doing it backwards. You really need to figure out internally how you want your workflow to work. And then look at technology.”

Budget for training

Another aspect of the adoption issue is that people who grew up before the computer age are seen to have a tough time with technology. This is a misunderstanding, according to de Jager.

“It’s not that they have any greater difficulty in using it,” de Jager explains, “it’s that they have less reason to use it. In other words, they have a lifetime’s worth of experience doing it a different way. And what you’re trying to do is throw away a lifetime’s worth of experience in exchange for something that’s brand new, they don’t know how to do, and they won’t be very good at using in the beginning. That’s where the resistance comes from.”

Whenever users are asked to do things differently, training should be considered as a matter of course, argues Shaheen, even for an upgrade such as moving from Windows XP to Windows Vista. “People assume, ‘well, it’s Windows,’” explains Shaheen, “but it’s different — there’s an upgrade for a reason. So you should be budgeting for training. Cut down the anxiety of your staff by saying ‘we’re upgrading, but we’re going to bring someone in to explain to you what’s different so you can get around faster without feeling frustrated.’”

Cohen believes that providing universal training is important because people may not be aware of their weaknesses, or may not want to admit to them. “There’s a reluctance to expose yourself to the fact that, hey, maybe you don’t know. One of the reasons training works is because you don’t know what you don’t know.”

In fact, the only real known in IT is that organizations will be constantly calling on workers to change the way they do their jobs. As de Jager points out, how that is done is key.

“In most organizations, the resistance that you encounter has nothing to do with the change you are trying to implement,” says de Jager. “It has everything to do with how you’re trying to implement that change.”

Jacob Stoller (jacob@stollerstrategies.com) is a Toronto-based independent writer and researcher.  

If you find this article helpful: