DIGITAL DESIGN TOOLS’ IMPACT ON ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE: A MODEL FOR CHINESE GRAPHIC DESIGN AGENCIES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55197/qjssh.v6i1.634Keywords:
predictive model, organizational performance, digital design tools, graphic design agencies, technology adoptionAbstract
This concept paper aims to develop and validate a model that determines organizational performance based on the intensity of the use of digital design tools in the leading Chinese graphic design firms. This paper will seek to contribute to the existing literature as more organizations adopt the use of digital design tools in the creative industry. Still, few studies have addressed the impact of these tools on organizational performance. This work adopts a Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), the Componential Theory of Creativity, and The Diffusion of Innovations (DOI) Theory into practice. However, the current literature is minimal in understanding these tools' effects on key performance indicators of leading graphic design agencies in China, which is a significant research void in both the theoretical and application domains. To this end, the present study aims to develop a model that captures the extant performance measures of organizations, including efficiency, creativity, client satisfaction, and financial results. Further details and expansion of this model will be provided based on empirical research, data analysis, and a review by a panel of experts. This concept holds a lot of promise as it will help graphic design agencies understand how they can better leverage digital tools to improve their results. Furthermore, it will advance the study of organizational management and digital transformation by providing a tested model for evaluating the impact of technology on business success.
References
Amabile, T.M. (2018): Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. – Routledge 336p.
Amabile, T.M. (1983): The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. – Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 45(2): 357-376.
Bilton, C. (2007): Management and creativity: From creative industries to creative management. – Blackwell Publishing 216p.
Bryman, A. (2016): Social research methods. – Oxford University Press 747p.
Creswell, J.W., Poth, C.N. (2016): Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. – Sage Publications 414p.
Davis, F.D. (1989): Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. – MIS Quarterly 21p.
Farrell, R., Hooker, C. (2013): Design, science and wicked problems. – Design Studies 34(6): 681-705.
Hargadon, A. (2003): How breakthroughs happen: The surprising truth about how companies innovate. – Harvard Business Press 254p.
Hesmondhalgh, D., Baker, S. (2013): Creative labour: Media work in three cultural industries. – Routledge 280p.
Kumar, V. (2014): Making" freemium" work. – Harvard Business Review 92(5): 27-29.
Lee, Y., Kozar, K.A., Larsen, K.R. (2003): The technology acceptance model: Past, present, and future. – Communications of the Association for Information Systems 12(1): 752-780.
Li, C., Bernoff, J. (2011): Groundswell: Winning in a world transformed by social technologies. – Harvard Business Press 332p.
Quinn, J.B. (1992): Intelligent enterprise: a knowledge and service based paradigm for Industr. – Simon and Schuster 473p.
Rogers, E.M., Singhal, A., Quinlan, M.M. (2014): Diffusion of innovations. – In An Integrated Approach to Communication Theory and Research, Routledge 16p.
Shalley, C.E., Zhou, J., Oldham, G.R. (2004): The effects of personal and contextual characteristics on creativity: Where should we go from here? – Journal of Management 30(6): 933-958.
Shams, S.R. (2016): Entrepreneurial challenges in the 21st century: Creating stakeholder value co-creation. – Springer 287p.
Venkatesh, V., Davis, F.D. (2000): A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. – Management Science 46(2): 186-204.
Zhu, K., Kraemer, K.L., Xu, S. (2006): The process of innovation assimilation by firms in different countries: a technology diffusion perspective on e-business. – Management Science 52(10): 1557-1576.
