The effect of individual digital skills on the perception of affordances and constraints of an IT application
Friso Salverda S2611694
f.d.salverda@student.rug.nl
Master Thesis
MSc Business Administration: Change Management University of Groningen
Faculty of Economics and Business Nettelbosje 2, 9700 AV Groningen
Supervisor: dr. I. Maris-de Bresser Co-assessor: prof. dr. J. Surroca
June 22nd, 2020
13.221 words excl. appendices
Abstract
In the current labour market, everyone works with IT applications, ranging from complex ERP systems to the use of Word and Excel. Different digital skills are needed to make the best use of what these applications have to offer. This paper focuses on the theory of IT affordances and theory on digital skills, examining how people’s digital skills influence their perception of IT applications and IT use. The aim of this research is to explore the effect of individual digital skills on the perception of IT affordances.
This is done with the help of the 21st-century digital skills identified by Van Laar et al. (2017) and the affordance theory and the perception of individual users (Hutchby, 2001; Chemero, 2003; Markus &
Silver, 2008). To answer the research question, an empirical case study, including fifteen semi- structured interviews at an organization, was conducted. The study indicates that digital skills of Van Laar et al. (2017) were recognized and mentioned by respondents. Findings illustrate that someone’s digital skills do not show a significant effect on the perception of IT affordances. However, several contingency factors have to be taken into account about users and IT use. The explanation for this is that employees who share the same perceptions, encounter the same problems, however differ in how frequently they performed a task, if they depended on colleagues and above all, their interest and their openness to new technologies, which leads to their overall level of digital skills.
Key words: 21st-century skills, digital skills, digital literacy, perceived affordances, system use, IT affordances.
Introduction
Organizations that are engaging in digital transformation, require new leadership roles and new digital skills to handle environmental changes (Nadeem, Abedin, Cerpa, & Chew, 2018). The rapid implementation of ICT has an important influence on what kind of competences are required of individual workers (Calvani, Fini, Ranieri, & Picci, 2012). The current workplace requires digitally skilled workers who are facing increasingly complex and interactive tasks which they need to address by means of various ICT applications. Hence, digital skills are desired among employees. Claro et al.
(2012), describe digital skills as the proficiency to use IT applications to solve cognitive tasks at work.
They also refer to digital skills that are more generic, not technology driven such as the ability to process information and communicate effectively within IT applications. Additional skills named by Claro et al.
(2012), are related to the process of continuous learning and its cognitive processes to achieve this.
Similarly, Van Laar, van Deursen, van Dijk, & de Haan (2017) argue that workers are expected to select the right knowledge from all the available knowledge within the organization or from themselves and their experiences. Van Laar et al. (2017) identified seven core- and three contextual digital skills related to the 21st century which vary from technical know-how of IT applications to less technology driven skills, such as critical thinking and collaboration through IT applications.
To understand digital literacy or possessing skills, it is important to keep in mind that digital skills and technology are highly interrelated. As mentioned before, Claro et al. (2012) emphasized that the interrelation between digital skills and technologies goes beyond simply possessing knowledge about specific software. Following this reasoning, the individual user needs to acquire skills how to interpret, understand and adopt different technologies (Martin & Madigan, 2006; p.27). So, here emerged the concept of the use of a technology.
A specific theory focused on the study of IT use is the theory of IT affordances. Affordances explain the possibilities for actions, IT offers to the users (Markus & Silver 2008), in other words, what users can do with technology. Hutchby (2001) explains that a certain technology, based on its features (Griffith, 1999), can bring a various number of affordances with it that can be perceived by its user. A
technology can offer affordances for action, or the opposite, where the technology is constraining a user’s ability to carry out their goals. Affordances can be seen as relational (Markus & Silver, 2008), meaning that neither the user’s perception nor the technology by itself, provide affordances but rather what a user can do with an IT application is dependent on both the IT’s features and the user’s capabilities. Both concepts have been researched in literature, however, empirical research on IT affordances and digital skills has remained separated so far. Hence, a gap in the literature can be identified regarding the relationship between a user’s digital skills and their perception of IT affordances.
To explore the connection between digital skills and technological affordances, the aforementioned fields of study require more in-depth exploration. Every user has its own perception (Chemero, 2003) in terms of affordances and constraints as Hutchby (2001) and Leonardi (2011, 2013) stated. Olive et al. (2010), emphasize that technology itself cannot facilitate new knowledge and practice. It is the user that has to work with an application. Hence, digital skills are necessary to work with an IT application, while the affordances of applications allow someone to perform a certain task.
While these existing insights are very valuable, knowledge is missing regarding how a user's digital skills influence the perception of identifying affordances and constraints of an IT application.
Regarding the aforementioned topic, proposed directions for future research by van Laar et al. (2017) state, that it is useful to carry out smaller in-depth qualitative research towards the topic of digital skills before starting with more large-scale quantitative research. In line with this, Rietveld & Kiverstein (2014) argued that affordances that an environment offers to an individual, are dependent on the skills that the individual possesses. Moreover, by examining other research about IT affordances, a person's digital skills are not yet associated with a possible effect on the perceived affordances or constraints by that person. Based on scarcity of research in the literature and the proposed future research directions, the following research question is defined: “How do individual digital skills affect the perception of affordances or constraints of an IT application?”.
The aim of this study is to understand the relationship between the individual user, including their digital skills, and the perception of the IT application in terms of affordances or constraints. To accomplish this goal, three research objectives were formulated. The first objective is to gain insight in
the digital skills that individual employees possess in order to be able to indicate a possible distinction between digital skills. The second objective is to get a sense of the perceived affordances and constraints when using a specific IT application. Since affordances explain the possibilities for actions they offer to the users (Markus & Silver, 2008), this objective helps to understand what users can and cannot do with an IT application. The third objective is to see if there are contingency factors (Hickson, Hinings, Lee, Schneck, & Pennings, 1971) to be taken into account while researching the effect of digital skills on the perception of affordances and constraints. The focus will therefore be on explaining the relationship between one and the other.
This research is relevant for both practitioners and academics, since this study extends on prior research that underlined the importance of IT affordances as a relevant factor of technology, complemented by extending the understanding on user’s digital skills. This is done by exploring and theorizing on a system’s affordances in relationship with digital skills that users need to work with this application. By doing so, the gap between how IT affordances are perceived and the digital skills that are needed to work with this IT application, is addressed. The relevance for managers lies within a better understanding of employees’ digital skills and how this impacts their perception of the affordances and constraints of the IT application. Allowing for opportunities to adapt and customize the application to better suit their team.
In the remainder of this report, the theoretical background reviews present research on digital skills and the IT affordance theory. The methods chapter describes how this research is conducted within the given timeframe. After that, the results are elaborated on and conclusions are drawn based on the results. In the discussion chapter, managerial and theoretical implications, as well as research limitations and suggestions for further research are provided.
Literature Review
The following chapter presents an overview of the most relevant literature, concerning digital skills and (technological) affordances.
Digital skills
As indicated by Calvini et al. (2012), information technologies (IT), have a significant influence on what skills are required of an individual. IT advancements allow for intensive collaboration in today’s workplaces, whilst at the same time new skills are required to align with these advancements. The knowledge about required skills has become vital during the 21st century. Voogt, Erstad, Dede, & Mishra (2013), specified skills that are more related to the current economic and social situation, than the skills that were required in the past century. Those skills were more focused on the “industrial mode of production” (van Laar et al., 2017; p.577). Nowadays skills such as collaboration, communication, citizenship, problem-solving and critical thinking are ever so relevant in daily professional life as well as personal life, according to these authors. These skills are essential to be successful in the workplace.
Since in the last years ICT became central in the development of employees, an increased interest emerged in how these skills are adapted to working with ICT.
People who grew up in the digital era are usually expected to have good digital skills and to have universal knowledge about information technologies as well as communication technologies.
However, according to Hargittai (2010), people vary in their digital skills. This statement was also studied in other research where were assumptions about young people being better able to work with IT. This has led to labels such as “digital natives” (Prensky, 2001) and the “net generation” (Tapscott, 2009). These labels implicated that when people are exposed to digital media for their whole life, it results in feeling more comfortable with working in a digital environment and becoming an expert in using IT. This was shown by Tapscott (2009, p. 10-11) by mentioning that employees and managers are approaching work differently than previous generations. People from the “net generation” are working more collaboratively, they desire less hierarchy and thereby force organizations to reconsider how they execute their recruitment, compensation and development processes and how organizations handle and supervise talent. However, other studies (Bennett, Maton, & Kervin, 2008) warned that the aforementioned assumptions about digital skills among younger people, are not necessarily backed up with empirical evidence. They found that technology skills and experiences are far from universal among young people. Zhong (2011) elaborated on this, by stating that digital skills are acquired by learning by doing. So, in this view, it seems that digital skills are not only about growing up in a digital
world but can also be learned in a later stage. In this study, age will thus not be the starting point on which the research focused.
Possessing digital skills is part of a greater comprehensive concept named: “literacy”. Literacy can be described as “an individual’s ability to read, write and speak a language, figure out and solve work-related problems which are needed to function on the job and in the society and moreover to achieve one’s personal ambitions in terms of goals and to develop one’s knowledge and potential”
(Irwin, 1991; p.7). Digital literacy elaborates on the term literacy and is adapted to the digital age and its digital skills. Lanham (1995) states in his work, that digital literacy involves the skill of interpreting images, sounds and texts. Eshet-Alkali & Amichai-Hamburger, (2004) expanded on this, by arguing that digital literacy involves more than the ability to use IT applications or a computer. They state that digital skills include a large variety of more complex skills such as reproducing text and analyze information, related to digital platforms. According to Mendonça, Crespo, & Simões (2015), digital skills can be seen as a more low-level individual know-how for use of IT, where capabilities can be seen as more high-level literacies for creative engagement in digital media and abilities within ICT. Other studies (Claro et al., 2012; Janssen et al. 2013; Van Laar et al., 2017) bundle literacies and individual know-how together as digital skills. In this research, I chose to combine digital literacies and digital know-how by naming them ‘digital skills’, however, keeping in mind that digital skills consist of individual know-how and higher-level literacies as Mendonça et al. (2015) stated.
Claro et al. (2012) specified digital skills in three dimensions. The information-, communication- and the ethics- and social impact dimension. In these dimensions, subdimensions emerged. Digital skills that emerged in the ‘information dimension’ are according to Claro et al.
(2012) “IT fluency/skill in sourcing for information” and “IT skills in processing information”. The skills that are mentioned within the dimension of communication are “IT skills in effective communication” and “IT skills in collaboration and virtual interactions”. In the ethics and social impact dimension the following subdimensions were found: “the ability to evaluate IT responsible use” and
“the ability to evaluate IT social impact”. Janssen et al. (2013) found twelve digital competence areas and developed several areas of digital competences in an experts’ collective view where buildings blocks were illustrated to show the relationship between digital skills and someone’s overall digital
competence. These ‘blocks’ consist of a starting point of being knowledgeable in general and develop towards self-efficacy. Supporting this digital competence, supporting 'blocks' were provided that focus on digital knowledge in daily life, such as attitudes towards technology and understanding ICT in society.
Van Laar et al. (2017) elaborated on Janssen et al. (2013) and focused on digital skills that can be related to the 21st century. They emphasize digital skills and the need for individuals to participate in the “knowledge-based workforce” which is essential in the 21st century (van Laar et al, 2017, p.584).
They elaborate on the fact that it is important what employees can do with knowledge to make efficient and effective use of ICT. Skills that were named by Van Laar et al. (2017) were collected through multiple studies, including the study of Claro et al. (2012) and Janssen et al. (2013) and were then grouped in two categories, namely core- and contextual digital skills. The complete table can be found in Appendix 1. An abbreviated version is provided in Table 1 where skills are listed, for example the technical know-how about applications and other skills regarding the creative use of ICT, to search and select information (information management) and flexibility to cope with upcoming technologies.
For this research, the mentioned skills by Van Laar et al. (2017) were used, since they brought together several existing studies that include what we know so far about today’s digital skills. A question that arises is if someone possesses a lot of the aforementioned digital skills mentioned by Van Laar et al. (2017), does it influence their perception of the ICT applications they are working with, and what they think they can do with that IT? To elaborate on that, the concept of technological affordances is useful. IT Affordances are related to what a technology offers to an individual (Hutchby, 2001).
Affordances
The theory of affordances dates from the late 70s and 80s, when Gibson (1978; 1986) specified the term affordances as what an environment offers to an individual and developed this towards a definition how practice connects with perception (Gibson & Hubbold, 1997). This definition by Gibson was defined in an ecological psychological context. Hutchby (2001), expanded on ideas of Gibson (1978) and connected affordances to IT. According to Pozzi, Pigni, & Vitari (2014), Hutchby (2001) was one of the first scholars who coupled affordances and IT. He described functional and relational aspects of affordances as possibilities for taking action which was subsequently confirmed by Stoffregen (2003). Furthermore, Hutchby (2001) researched the relationship between technologies and its users and stressed that affordances connected to an IT application could be enabling or constraining and that there are multiple ways to use ICT.
Expanding on this knowledge, Markus & Silver (2008) introduced functional affordances that are described as a relationship between a technology and a user (or multiple), that identifies what the users can do with the technology, given the user’s “capabilities and goals” (Markus & Silver, 2008).
Their ideas are theoretical in nature, which invites empirical examination towards this topic. Leonardi (2011), agreed with Gibson’s findings (1978), and stated that “technologies have material properties, but those material properties afford different possibilities for action, based on the contexts in which they are used” (p. 153). Leonardi (2011) elaborated on Hutchby (2001) and Markus & Silver (2008) by stating that affordances and constraints are constructed between users and IT applications.
Here the affordance lens (Majchrzak, Faraj, Kane, & Azad, 2013) emerges, that agrees on the integration of individuals users and their actions with technology. An affordance lens, according to Gibbs, Rozaidi, & Eisenberg (2013), is helpful in interpreting why users use different technologies in comparable ways or the same technology in diverse ways. This perspective compels a researcher to see the relationship between an action that has to be taken, the user’s goal and the IT application with its features.
To find out how the relationship between an action to be taken and an IT application works, the perception of users has to be taken into account. Chemero (2003) focuses on this phenomenon and emphasizes that humans “perceive things about their abilities and the features of the environment”
(p.191). He elaborates on the fact that affordances are not property of an environment alone, but that they appear in a relationship, just as Markus & Silver (2008) stated. Moreover, Markus and Silver’s (2008) explanation of functional affordances recognizes a link with (digital) skills, since someone’s level of digital skills in IT is dependent on someone’s literacy as said before by Mendonça, Crespo, &
Simões (2015). Treem & Leonardi (2012) stated a definition with the help of the aforementioned definitions and stated that “affordances are unique to the particular ways in which an actor, or a set of actors, perceives and uses the object” (p. 145). Here, perception is explicitly mentioned. Markus and Silver (2008) elaborate on the emergence of affordances when a person interprets a technology with his or her goals for action. They define affordances as “the possibilities for goal-oriented action afforded to user groups by technical objects” (p. 622). Also, Leonardi (2013) agrees with the existence of a perception of features of an IT application however, the perception can differ among each individual user. Leonardi (2013), elaborated on this perspective by stating that if multiple users are using an IT application, different affordances will be perceived than if one single user is using an IT application, since every user is using the technology differently, depending on their goals for using the IT as well as their capabilities.. In this research, these combinations of someone’s capabilities in terms of their digital skills and how he/she perceives an IT application’s affordances and constraints while working with a certain technology are therefore to be explored. Thereby making his arguments based on such an empirical study, yet, he did not examine user capabilities in terms of digital skills.
Towards a conceptual framework
This research examines how someone’s possessed digital skills might have an effect on their perception of affordances. By exploring this relationship, this study aims to contribute to closing the gap in the literature where much is only known about these two issues separately. The emergence of a connection in literature is, as said before, given by Marcus & Silver (2008). They stated that the user’s capabilities
and goals make the user able to perform a certain action with an IT application, but the connection needs to be empirically researched. This study does just that by zooming in on the role of the user’s digital skills.
To involve the concept of digital skills, the 21st-century digital skills by Van Laar et al. (2017) are useful as they have carefully developed a contemporary list of relevant skills. To group people in having a higher or lower amount of digital skills, I anticipate a self-reflection of employees in which they indicate whether they encounter a lot of trouble dealing with digital applications, or if they are able to use them effortlessly. Questions were formulated that helped to guide the exploration, which were queried in practice by users of an IT application. Hereby, I asked for examples related to the indicated skills by Van Laar et al. (2017), in order to be able to sketch this distinction. After this, related to the idea of Hutchby (2001) and Leonardi (2011, 2013), questions were asked about respondents' perceptions (Chemero, 2003) in seeing affordances or constraints, while using the system. The assumption is that if someone possesses a high level of digital skills, more affordances are perceived in working with the IT application. And of course, the other way around, if someone has fewer digital skills, does that person in this situation perceive less affordances and experiences more constraints in working with the IT application? In order to investigate this phenomenon further, the research method will be explained in the following chapter.
Methodology
In this chapter, the methodological approach for this research is explained.
Research Design
To answer the question: “How do individual digital skills affect the perception of affordances or constraints of an IT application?” this research takes a case study approach (Eisenhardt, 1989) based on interviews. A case study approach is explained as “an empirical inquiry about a contemporary phenomenon (e.g. a case), set within its real-world context” (Yin, 2012; p.4). The case study is focused on examining the context and other conditions which are related to the case that is studied to understand
this particular case. So, in my research I was open to find out new, contextual factors that could explain the effect of digital skills on the perception of affordances. Here, the focus is mainly based on a broader range of conditions that ensures that different topics will be covered during the research such as digital skills and IT affordances. According to Yin (2012; p.5) a case study is perfectly usable for a research with an explanatory question, how or why something happens. Eisenhardt (1989) amplifies this argument, by stating that in a case study an intimate interaction can be made with the actual evidence so that it produces theory which is reflected to the real situation. The case researched in this paper entails individual users within a company who describe their digital skills and perception of the ERP system they use. This study adopts an embedded single case study design (Yin, 2012) which focuses on a certain ERP system that is used within the organization. The unit of analysis is the relation between humans (users) and the IT-application (ERP-system). This unit is in line with the IT affordance theory perspective, that elaborates on the importance of the interaction between user and application.
Research setting
To gather data, the company AB Vakwerk was selected. AB Vakwerk is a secondment agency that mainly focuses on jobs in construction, technical- and agricultural temporary work. The head office is located in Sneek (in the north of the Netherlands). From here, smaller branches of the organization that are spread over the northern provinces, are managed. Today, AB Vakwerk employs around 1100 permanent skilled workers and annually employs 6000 flexible employees. Approximately 150 people are located at the head quarter in Sneek. Among other IT applications that the organization is using, is the ERP system named ‘My Solution Flex (MSF)’. Additionally, common applications such as Outlook, Teams and other Microsoft Office applications such as Word, Excel and PowerPoint are used.
This specific organization is appropriate, as they depend and rely on the aforementioned IT applications. The ERP system they use, is vital to manage external and internal processes. Therefore, the focus was on this particular system within the organization, as it is widely used within the organization. The research focuses on the permanent employees as the flexible employees do not make use of the ERP system.
Data collection
The conducted interviews were semi-structured, with the main reason that there is room for probing- or follow-up questions. With this approach, multiple insights will be given towards the topic and to assure that the research is done with an open mind. Edmondson & Mcmanus (2007), elaborated on this by stating that input from the field helps to make sure that researchers recognize and research key variables during the study through which conclusions can be drawn. Here, data collection contains exploratory interviews where the connection between digital skills and the perception of different people on affordances or constraints were explored.
The starting point for the case study were two pilot interviews. By doing so, the list of interview questions could be optimized by focusing on the questions which led to the most insights and gave more direction as to which questions should be added or erased. Subsequently, thirteen additional interviews were conducted. The interviews lasted approximately one hour and included different employees of different positions and departments within the company. The interviews were conducted online via Microsoft Teams, given the current developments regarding COVID-19. To align it as closely as possible with the research, potential participants were selected based upon their involvedness in using the ERP system on a daily basis. The diversity among respondents was expressed in age, gender and position within the organization in order to be able to draw conclusions about a larger group. Table 2 illustrates the distribution of the interviews in terms of position and age. All interviews were anonymous;
therefore, each respondent is given a different code. Each respondent has a code with the letter ‘R’ plus a number.
Due to the unusual situation regarding COVID-19, all interviews were conducted from home and the interviewees were also questioned from home to make them feel at ease in their own personal environment with the least possible distractions (Turner, 2010).
The interviews started with some general questions regarding their position within the firm, their responsibilities and how important IT is in their work. After that, the interview focused on digital skills with questions such as: “Which digital skills do you use in your daily work” followed by “What do you find easy to do if you work with an IT application?”. To ask questions related to constraints, questions were asked such as: “Can you name a situation where MSF was constraining you in your work?”. To explore affordances, questions were asked such as: “What opportunities can you name regarding the application MSF?”. The full interview guide was added in Appendix 2.
Data analysis
After conducting the interviews, I analyzed them following Eisenhardt’s (1989) method. First, I recorded all the interviews so that I can fully transcribe them. After that, I read all the transcripts
thoroughly and made a first attempt at recognizing broader patterns. Thereafter, I analyzed the transcripts by using Atlas.ti. Within this application I coded the interviews and I produced a thematic content analysis which focused on themes with broader patterns. The process of coding helped to find themes and Atlas.ti assisted me to organize the input from the interviews and made it clearer for myself and the reader.
To show the coding process, I added a codebook (Appendix 3). I worked with first and second order coding. This means, that in the first stage I wrote down all possible codes that I found in the transcripts of the interviews which had to do with the subject in a broader view. This is called open coding by Wolfswinkel, Furtmueller, & Wilderom (2013). Two examples of open codes where the search for ‘affordances of the system’ and ‘contingency factors’. In the next phase, I grouped the codes into smaller code groups with similar characteristics or corresponding perspectives, this is called axial coding (Wolfswinkel et al., 2013). Examples of axial codes in terms of digital skills were ‘usability of the system’ and within contingency factors the ‘dependency on colleagues. After this, selective coding (Wolfswinkel et al., 2013) was executed which is about identifying and developing relations between the categories that were found during the axial coding process. A relationship that occurred was that the digital skill: ‘curiosity and the ability to adapt to new technologies’, often determined their judgment of their own digital skills.
With this process the reader can see how certain decisions were made, and how the codes are structured. As Eisenhardt (1989) mentioned, the process of building theory from case study is an
‘iterative’ process. I took an iterative approach during the research as first I only focused on digital skills and the perception of individual users on perceiving affordances and constraints. Reflecting on the outcomes of the pilot interviews I then proceeded to search for contingency factors that could potentially affect the perception and their level of digital skills in order to gain more in-depth insights.
In addition, the process of coding consists of inductive as well as deductive codes, where inductive codes appear during the data collection, such as ‘dependence on colleagues’ and deductive codes are based on theoretical background, such as the digital skills mentioned by Van Laar et al. (2017).
To report the findings, quotes were selected based upon their detailed illustration of the code. All interviews were conducted in Dutch, therefore English translations of quotes were used.
Research Design quality
To ensure quality of the research, validity and reliability are important. To ensure reliability, four potential biases are controlled for: researcher, respondent, circumstance and the instrument bias. In Table 3, these biases and the actions I took to overcome them are presented (van Aken & Berends, 2018;
Yin, 2009).
On top of these biases being tackled, internal- and construct validity were ensured as well, as emphasized by Yin (2009). In this study, the internal validity is guaranteed by using existing literature and empirical data. For instance, competing statements were evaluated and referred to and the interviews were conducted in one time period to avoid that respondents would talk to each other about certain questions in the meantime. Additionally, construct validity was ensured by reading transcripts and checked validity of statements by paraphrasing and summarizing the arguments during interviews (Yin, 2009).
Results
This chapter provides an overview of the findings. First, an illustration is given of the digital skills that were named, and second, several IT affordances and constraints are elaborated on that were experienced by the respondents. Moreover, the effects of the identified skills on the perception of these affordances and constraints were illustrated. Lastly, a summary of the findings is provided. Empirical evidence is given to support the key arguments in terms of quotes given by respondents.
Digital skills
The first finding, and at the same time a distinction that is worth mentioning, is that digital skills can be subdivided into ‘specific digital know-how’ and ‘general digital skills’. Skills are more generally applicable skills related to the use of IT, whereas digital know-how is related to a specific system that is used. Digital skills identified by respondents, are described in order of relevance. As seen in Table 2, ten respondents have described themselves as digitally skilled and five respondents marked themselves as ‘less’ digitally skilled. These statements were based on respondents' own assessment of their digital skills.
Digital skills
Adaptability to new technologies. This general, digital skill is named by respondents who
describe themselves as being able to adapt towards new technologies and updates of the system.
Adaptability represents the skill of being adaptable towards new opportunities in technology and goes hand in hand with being curious and open to new technologies. More specifically, to exploit this curiosity to become more digitally skilled and to be able to adapt to a new situation. Seven respondents named this ‘skill’ to be important within their daily work and six respondents were less curious and less able to adapt towards new technologies. The following quote is provided by a respondent who claims that he has this digital skill: “I've gone through a lot of changes in my working life. As a result, I have come to realize that you have to do your best not to lag behind in technology. (...) I'm also open to new
developments. I think that's what you have to be in order to stay in the market for so many years...”
(R5). This quote came from an employee who has been in the business for a long time. Another respondent added: “I search on the internet to see what the latest developments are. From the industry we also regularly receive information about what is being delivered to us, from accountancy or other financial sectors or sources. I often search for that” (R12). This respondent is curious what is going on in the current market.
Between the respondents’ responses you see a distinction between employees who are curious about all the functions of a certain system and exploit all the useful features and employees who only use the necessary functions and are not curious about further possibilities. What also occurs among respondents is a willingness to adapt to the situation if it improves their work, even though they are not interested in technology in general. The following quote explains this finding “I am not going to figure the system out right away. I'm going to need it to do my job and only then am I going to figure it out”
(R1). Another respondent said something similar: “How the system works from the inside, yeah, that doesn't bother me. I just want to know how to work with it (…) I'm not a wizkid who wants to know everything” (R8).
Another respondent (R10) added that you have different ‘personalities’ who differ in how they react to new technologies: “You have marketing terms like early adaptors, followers and then the mainstream. I wait until all the first errors in a system have been eliminated, until it is workable, and then I step in.” This quote is an example of a respondents’ view on dealing with changing technologies and how to adapt to the new situations. She added: “I’m not the first to use it, but I'm critical, like:
where is a manual and where can I find more information about what I can do with the system?”.
Creative use of the system. The next digital skill was mentioned by ten respondents and
emphasizes creativity while working with the system. This is illustrated in the next quote: “You have four different ways of doing it, so to speak. There's not one way to do that particular task with the system” (R1). Another respondent (R11) thought there should be guidelines within the system: "There should be one way to use the system, now there are several ways in which each has its own way of working.". This topic was also touched upon by another respondent and user of the system, he adds: “I think I only know a limited part of the system, because these are my most common activities. But every
week I still think oh, that's possible too, oh and I can do it that way. Because there are many roads that lead to Rome with this system” (R3). What stands out here, is that digital skills are less important if the system affords users to be guided through a path in the system. An alternative perception is given by a manager: “One day I had to go to the largest customer of my office (…) I spent half an hour trying to find the cooperation agreement. Colleagues and me, we are trying to save it differently, (…) people are creative to make all kinds of detours. This shouldn't be possible at all.” (R14). So, different perspectives emerge, regarding creative use of the system.
Another example is mentioned, that emphasized creativity in initiating ideas to improve digital collaboration: “Someday I was invited to a technical meeting. (…) I was the first to say: shall we make an e-mail group so we can send each other a short e-mail of a CV of an available candidate. I was the one to make it as quickly as possible and I'll make sure we inform each other about it. In digital collaboration I'm like just bring in the handy tools and proactively inform everyone about it” (R10).
Another respondent (R1) mentioned creativity in terms of problem-solving, as: “I think you should be able to be creative, in the sense of being solution-oriented. The system is not logical, (…), You have to be able to search and think logically”.
Knowledge sharing on digital applications. The following digital skill: knowledge sharing is
mentioned by nine out of fifteen respondents and is helpful to collaborate in a team. The next quote shows a respondent’s vision on this skill: “Communicating is the hardest thing there is. The obligation to retrieve information and to distribute it yourself. (…) Especially for part timers who have to transfer knowledge, who work in the same sector but not the same days, that’s hard. (R3). This example is given by an account manager who experiences the difficulty to share knowledge when there are part timers in the team. The same respondent thinks he possesses this skill: “I often work with email and with information about which I think: that's information I have, but that's information my colleague, who works part-time, also needs to know. Then I can make different decisions. (...) In general I do feel that I take good care that my colleagues are connected to the work I do by sharing knowledge” (R3).
Another respondent’s opinion about knowledge sharing skills is: “MSF is the main framework on which the company runs. What I submit, they can use in the payroll to create an invoice for example.
It is very essential that it works well and that a worker can deal with it and has the right skills to share
information.” (R6). This respondent shared his opinion about his skills to share knowledge: “I often use e-mail to communicate. I'm quite good at this. (...) In MSF I store a lot of information that can eventually be collected by other colleagues.” (R5).
Critical thinking about information you receive. Critical thinking is a digital skill that is
identified among six respondents. This skill is related to the large amounts of information to which the organization’s employees are exposed. “I'm critical as in: I look at the source of where the information comes from. Then I look at the first search results. (…) With some websites you're like, this isn't what I'm looking for, it's wrong information. Some websites like the national government, that's reliable.”
Complemented by recognized behavior from the same respondent who described herself as being critical: “I don't immediately accept the first answer. I want one or two or even more sources that say the same thing. And then, if those sources also look reliable, that you then decide that you have your answer” (R6). Another respondent asks a colleague if he is skeptic about a source: “If I have to choose which information is correct, I have to think about it. If I have any doubts, I'll ask someone else. Is it true what it says here? (R7). Another respondent mentioned the aspect of how old information is, something that triggers him to be critical or not: “I will also receive search results from 2012 and 2015.
These are no longer relevant to me and I don't read them anymore. In that case I'll see how the website seems to me and how old the information is” (R4).
Problem solving: Independent working with digital applications. The skills to solve problems
and the independency of someone, is a skill that is named by four respondents. The first respondent who describes this skill said: “I'm handling the system pretty well. I'm also independent in figuring something out if I don't know it. I'm going to check it out myself before I ask someone else. If you look inside the team, if there are any problems, they'll probably ask me to fix it.” (R6). So, working independently within a team is also mentioned here: “I'm good at teaching myself how to work with a system digitally.
What I said before: as long as it is properly installed, so that I can use all the tools optimally. In that scenario, I'll work with it anyway. That's what I've taught myself in all these years, to make independent use of the functions within the system.” (R8).
Specific digital know-how
Employees at AB Vakwerk use the ERP System ‘My Solution Flex (MSF)’. This ERP system needs various digital skills since it is a large and complex system.
Documenting skills. This digital know-how entails that a user needs to know how to document
and archive information in the system. Since knowledge sharing is seen as an important digital skill among respondents, documenting is a skill to collect the information someone possesses and place it in the system. Since this skill is very much related to the ERP-system AB Vakwerk is using, documenting is more an organization-related digital know-how than a general digital skill such as knowledge sharing and being adaptable. Documenting is mentioned by ten of the fifteen respondents and is regarded as an essential skill for an employee at AB Vakwerk. “I'm an advocate of documenting in the system. I always say, if a request comes in, record it in the planning immediately. (...) By doing this, we can clearly state our thoughts and options and then someone else can proceed with the application, should that be necessary, and the person can switch quickly” followed by “The main goal of documenting is to keep an overview of customer requests.” (R10). There is a difference in how people document according to the following respondent: “One person is better than the other at documenting information. It does create irritation when the other doesn't document well. Then you have to do things twice, it feels like being amateuristic towards clients. You just have to document everything. I'm very punctual in that myself. I also have an administrative background, so I'm well grounded.” (R9).
Loyalty in documenting. The skill about documenting goes along with another digital know-
how that is mentioned by eight respondents. Loyalty is often named in relationship with documenting.
It is about sharing knowledge and interactions that you have had with the client. The following quotation outlines an example of loyalty in documenting: “If you are loyal in documenting, you can make an extensive file. Of course, you're not going to document an entire phone conversation. You should be able to derive some urgency from that. If you think I have to save this for myself then you can choose to do that. (…) It is important that everyone is loyal in this.” (R1). Another respondent mentioned:
“Because documenting is important to me, I'm also pushing them. Like: everything you know, for example, a certain e-mail from a customer who sent something. You can save it in MSF and then you can read it back in interactions. Then you can see that for example something went wrong. In that case,
another employee will not send the same message to the same customer. But if you are not informed by your colleagues, you are missing something. That's probably why I'm a core user, because I push others like, put everything in the system and do it consistently.” (R8). This respondent is someone who encourages others to be loyal in documenting and sees the benefits of it.
Personal knowledge about organization-specific system. Another digital skill that is named is
that a person should be able to translate his or her personal knowledge about organization-specific knowledge into the organization, such as inside information about projects. They should be able to make effective use of the digital applications, since: “MSF depends on the user and his personal knowledge”
(R11). An example mentioned by a respondent was: “I think we have to keep in mind that there are also employees who fit in very well with the organization because they do have the knowledge. By that, I don't mean the digital knowledge, but the agricultural knowledge, the knowledge that is organization- specific.” (R10). With this ‘digital skill’, it is more a translation between the user of the system and the system itself. Knowledge sharing and someone’s personal knowledge are digital skills which go hand in hand according to the same respondent: “The process of knowledge sharing and someone’s own knowledge, is a combination of common sense and knowing how to arrange something digitally” (R10).
A respondent who describes herself as less digital skilled said the following, regarding personal knowledge: “I'd describe myself as mediocre. I can work with the system (…). But I notice, that if I'm in a new office, I'm confronted with other issues. I have to explore that again.” (R9). This person indicates that she needs time to obtain more know-how about the application.
Perceived affordances
Based on their level of digital skills, respondents experienced a couple of affordances while using the system which afforded them to carry out a particular action. More or less the same affordances were perceived by both skilled and less skilled respondents, only slightly less affordances were perceived by less digital skilled respondents.
Perception of affordances by digitally skilled respondents
Assistance in everyday work. The system affords that users find it very useful to assist them in
their work. This affordance is named by all nine respondents who named themselves as being digitally skilled and can be specified in various forms of assistance. A respondent said the following about the assistance offered by the system: “If you fill in the system in terms of data, it can support you in many ways. For example, it helped me to schedule our employees well. (...) Otherwise you have everything in separate Excel sheets. (…). There's more of a system in there, it really assisted me in my work through the workflow that the system provides in order to track your work properly.” (R6). The effectiveness of using the system to meet employees’ goals, is also part of the assistance of the system and is named by a respondent as to what affords them in their work. Another statement is made by a digitally skilled respondent: "It depends on what the application is for. Above all, it has to perform its purpose, then an application can be used effectively." (R1). Efficiency of the system is an important affordance and relates to the system as assisting to work more efficiently. A respondent (R4) said the following about it: “If someone calls me in MSF, it's only been in there for a year or two, that's quite an improvement and really works perfectly. Then you immediately get the customer from the employee or the customer himself. That speeds up the process on all fronts.”. The respondent adds the following example to underline the affordance he perceives regarding efficiency of the system: “When a customer appears on my screen and I pick up my phone, I get data from the company on my screen. I can take a quick look at this, what's going on, what is he calling for, what invoice is he talking about. That's very fast and very efficient.” (R4).
Accessibility of data in the system. The accessibility of data in the system is perceived by two
respondents who named themselves digitally skilled. “All my clients are in the cloud, employees are in the cloud, administration is in the cloud, working hours are in the cloud. You name it, it's all available on my laptop.” (R3). Another respondent mentioned: “You always have everything at hand, when you have your computer with you. You can retrieve a lot of information very quickly. Where you used to have a paper file, you can now just sit at home. Now you have everything available.” (R1).
Knowledge sharing through the system. Knowledge sharing through the system is named as an affordance by nine respondents. A respondent described: “Usually we use MSF for internal information
and sharing knowledge throughout the system” (R5). Another example of knowledge sharing in the application MSF was mentioned by a respondent: "In MSF you have a possibility to document interactions between yourself and the customer(…) For example: Someone calls and has a broken arm, then someone from HR and the absenteeism coordination colleagues can read that, that is a transfer of information and sharing it with others." (R3). There are different possibilities to share knowledge within the team and the system affords users to do so, such as a customer database where communication is documented that is accessible to all people involved and emails can be send via the system.
Modifiability of the system. The next perceived affordance emphasizes the modifiability of the
application MSF. This is mentioned by two respondents, one of them mentioned: "MSF has been built up in the years: you have the standard application MSF and we have built that standard application our way, how we want it to be within AB Vakwerk (…) For example, we built something that triggers when you want something to happen. Then the system gives that message and then the user should take action, otherwise you can't go any further." (R3). Here you can see the affordance of a system that affords users to modify it towards their desired system. However, other employees indicated that the system had become vulnerable as a result of this, which will be mentioned later among the constraining factors.
Perception of affordances by less digitally skilled respondents
The respondents who described themselves as being less digitally skilled, named the following affordances.
Assistance in everyday work. This skill is named by all five respondents who describe
themselves as less digitally skilled. A respondent declared that the system assists him/her to obtain the required information first: "Last year there was a working group that uh, reviewed certain fields in the system's layout. That made it a lot clearer. That you don't get the non-information first, but the things that matter." (R11). Another respondent mentioned that the systems affords him to follow up his work properly through the workflow that is afforded by the system: “The workflow is very convenient; it secures and ensures that you take your action on time. Then you know that if you report an illness on time, you will immediately receive a second contact moment to follow up.” (R9). Another respondent stated that the system is efficient: “The system is fast. In the sense that you can quickly confirm
information to someone. Employment contracts can very easily be sent digitally via e-mail” (R10).
Another statement by a respondent entails that the system offers assistance in terms of relief in their work: “In the past, the deployed people entered the hours themselves. Then I had to agree, I had to pass them on. Now they forward them all at once and then the system checks it itself” (R7).
System transparency. Transparency of the system is not named as an affordance by digitally
skilled respondents but is named by one respondent who described himself as being less digitally skilled.
This is in line with the mentioned affordance about the systems’ accessibility. "My colleague can look at the same clients as I can. In this way she can see how I set it up in the system. (…) If I am away from my workplace, my colleague can also look into the system. The system is clear to everyone and it is a transparent open system" (R8). It affords users to see what other colleagues are doing. Since less digitally skilled people rely on other colleagues (which is a contingency factor, discussed later in this chapter), this feature of the system affords them to do see how other colleagues did a task.
Knowledge sharing through the system. This affordance is also named by only one respondent.
She mentioned: “Changes in planning can be passed on very quickly. For example, if someone starts a new assignment on Monday, I always send a message in MSF on Friday with all the details, so that someone can read it over the weekend, if they don't work.” (R10). The system afforded the respondent to share her knowledge with a new colleague who was about to start.
Accessibility of data in the system. The accessibility of data in the system is, just as the digitally
skilled respondents, also mentioned by one less digitally skilled respondent. “Well, if you open your laptop, you'll have the whole system at your disposal. If you take it with you, you'll have everything and everyone in it. That's ideal. You can calculate and execute everything and so on” (R7). The system affords this user to work wherever she desires. Moreover, she has access to all the information she would have at the office.
Perceived constraints
Just as the respondents experienced affordances, they also experienced constraints while working with the system, which limited them in taking actions. Constraints that were named, concerned the cumbersomeness of the system, the error-sensitivity, the usability and the vulnerability of the system.
Perception of constraints by digital skilled respondents
Cumbersomeness of the system. This constraint has to do with slow and burdensome processes
within the system that are experienced as constraining by employees to do their work efficiently. It is mentioned by seven of nine respondents who describe themselves as digitally skilled. This constraint is illustrated by the following quotation: “Some actions in the system are a bit cumbersome and they take a lot of time” (R4). Another respondent added that the difference between doing commercially focused work and administrative work is out of balance, which constrains him: “I think that this job as a commercial employee, the tasks are too much administrative. (…) There are a lot of administrative tasks you have to do every day within the system.” (R3).
A respondent also mentioned that the system can be cumbersome due to the extensiveness and the combination of the front- and back-end in the same system: “I think it is very cumbersome. I really had to get used to how big the system is. (…) Now we have both the front- and back-end in one system.”
(R13). Here, it is noticeable that the connection between the front- and backend of a program can cause constraints. These occur when different roles within the organization collide, if different roles within the organization use the program in their own way. Cumbersomeness in the design of the system is also perceived as being constraining when there is no overview in the system: “I'd like to see more general information. (…) We should be working together and take over from each other. So, if somebody has a day off, and they've introduced somebody, I need to know who's been introduced (...) and what's been agreed. Have you agreed on a rate yet? (…) Now, if it's listed somewhere, it’s placed in interactions in separate columns. That doesn't really work, you should have an overview of it.” (R9).
Error sensitivity of the system. This constraint, mentioned by six respondents, entails that the
system becomes error-sensitive by its extensiveness and modifiability. This constraint is mentioned in the following quote: “What I find very annoying is that you have to fill in a lot of mandatory fields. I would very much like to follow a path in which you fill in everything and make sure you don't get any further if you don't fill in something” (R3). So, here the focus is on making a path for users to make it easier and less error-prone to use it. Another quote related to the system which was perceived as constraining was the following: “What I was also very surprised about when I joined the company, an employee sometimes gets a payroll tax declaration, you can decide yes or no. MSF automatically selects
yes for all employees. (…). I find that very error sensitive, that goes wrong a couple of times a year. (…) I would like to see that MSF supports us more in this and that you also need to be less digitally skilled to use the program in a correct way.” (R13). So, more assistance is demanded from the system to help users become more digitally knowledgeable, in line with the previous quote in which the respondent suggests a specific path to go through and make the system less error sensitive.
Usability of the system. Usability of the system is something that is experienced as constraining
by three out of nine respondents: "ICT is important for recruitment and selection. That could perhaps be improved, the matching function and so forth. That leaves much to be desired. MSF is not very user- friendly." (R1). This constrains the respondent to be able to carry out his responsibilities properly and to match the right candidate with the inquiring client.
Vulnerability of the system. Vulnerability is mentioned by three out of nine respondents. If the
system fails, employees cannot work properly, for example if they have no internet connection et cetera.
The following was mentioned by a respondent regarding the vulnerability of the system: "If the system fails, I have a very big problem. I think that makes us very vulnerable." (R4). Another respondent used the metaphor about the system as a waterbed: “MSF can be compared to a waterbed. The moment it drips somewhere, you have a problem somewhere else. (…) That’s the same with a waterbed.” (R12).
This respondent found the system vulnerable, since mistakes might reappear at some time you do not expect. This makes the system vulnerable, as a user has to check every time, he or she makes an adjustment to make sure everything is still correct. However, if someone possesses the digital skill creativity, this could lead to a perception that digital skills are less needed, if the system had various paths where users must go through to finish a task. This also would decrease the error sensitivity and the vulnerability of the system since users are guided.
Perception of constraints by less digitally skilled respondents
Constraints experienced by people who are less digitally skilled, are to a large extent, in line with the constraints that digitally skilled respondents experienced. However, there are a number of other experiences such as with usability and the cumbersomeness of the system.
