UN MODÈLE UNIFIÉ DE PRÉPARATION TECHNOLOGIQUE ET DE PARADOXE TECHNOLOGIQUE DANS LE SECTEUR INDUSTRIEL MAROCAIN
Abstract
Cet article propose un cadre conceptuel pour étudier l’acceptation des technologies dans le secteur industriel marocain. Il rapproche le modèle d’acceptation des technologies, le modèle de préparation et d’acceptation des technologies (TRAM) et la théorie du paradoxe technologique afin de prendre en compte les perceptions favorables et défavorables des utilisateurs. À partir de la littérature, le modèle envisagé relie la préparation technologique, l’utilité et la facilité d’utilisation perçues, le plaisir, la confusion et la désillusion à l’attitude envers la technologie. L’ambiguïté des performances et la confiance technologique sont proposées comme mécanismes intermédiaires. Cette synthèse permet de formuler des pistes de recherche sur les conditions d’adoption des technologies en milieu industriel. Les relations proposées demeurent des hypothèses théoriques : l’article ne présente ni enquête marocaine ni validation statistique. Une étude empirique auprès d’entreprises et de salariés serait nécessaire pour évaluer leur portée.
This article proposes a conceptual framework for studying technology acceptance in the Moroccan industrial sector. It brings together the technology acceptance model, the technology readiness and acceptance model (TRAM), and technological paradox theory to account for both favorable and unfavorable user perceptions. Drawing on prior literature, the proposed model links technology readiness, perceived usefulness and ease of use, enjoyment, confusion, and disillusionment to attitudes toward technology. Performance ambiguity and technology trust are proposed as intermediate mechanisms. This synthesis identifies research directions concerning the conditions for technology adoption in industrial settings. The proposed relationships remain theoretical: the article reports neither a Moroccan survey nor statistical validation. An empirical study involving firms and employees would be needed to assess the model’s relevance.
JEL: O33, M15, O32, L60
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman. Retrieved from https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1997-08589-000?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Järvenpää, S. L., & Lang, K. R. (2005). Managing the paradoxes of mobile technology. Information Systems Management, 22(4), 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1201/1078.10580530/45520.22.4.20050901/90026.2
Johnson, D. S., Bardhi, F., & Dunn, D. T. (2008). Understanding how technology paradoxes affect customer satisfaction with self-service technology: The role of performance ambiguity and trust in technology. Psychology & Marketing, 25(5), 416–443. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20218
Kim, C.-S., & Park, S.-B. (2017). A unified model combining technology readiness acceptance model and technology paradox theory. Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business, 8(7), 39–49. https://doi.org/10.13106/ijidb.2017.vol8.no7.39
Lin, C.-H., Shih, H.-Y., & Sher, P. J.-H. (2007). Integrating technology readiness into technology acceptance: The TRAM model. Psychology & Marketing, 24(7), 641–657. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20177
McKnight, D. H., Carter, M., Thatcher, J. B., & Clay, P. F. (2011). Trust in a specific technology: An investigation of its components and measures. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems, 2(2), 12:1–12:25. https://doi.org/10.1145/1985347.1985353
Mick, D. G., & Fournier, S. (1998). Paradoxes of technology: Consumer cognizance, emotions, and coping strategies. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(2), 123–143. https://doi.org/10.1086/209531
Parasuraman, A. (2000). Technology Readiness Index (TRI): A multiple-item scale to measure readiness to embrace new technologies. Journal of Service Research, 2(4), 307–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/109467050024001
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejmms.v11i2.2321
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2026 Samir Rachid, Abdeljalil Louhmadi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The research works published in this journal are free to be accessed. They can be shared (copied and redistributed in any medium or format) and\or adapted (remixed, transformed, and built upon the material for any purpose, commercially and\or not commercially) under the following terms: attribution (appropriate credit must be given indicating original authors, research work name and publication name mentioning if changes were made) and without adding additional restrictions (without restricting others from doing anything the actual license permits). Authors retain the full copyright of their published research works and cannot revoke these freedoms as long as the license terms are followed.
Copyright © 2017-2026. European Journal of Management and Marketing Studies (ISSN 2501 - 9988) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.
This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library. All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and standards formulated by Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002), the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing (2003) and Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities (2003) and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Copyrights of the published research works are retained by authors.
