Exploring risks in the adoption of business intelligence in SMEs using the TOE framework

Stjepić, Ana-Marija; Pejić Bach, Mirjana; Bosilj Vukšić, Vesna Article Exploring risks in the adoption of business intelligence in SMEs using the TOE framework Journal of Risk and Financial Management Provided in Cooperation with: MDPI – Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, Basel Suggested Citation: Stjepić, Ana-Marija; Pejić Bach, Mirjana; Bosilj Vukšić, Vesna (2021) : Exploring risks in the adoption of business intelligence in SMEs using the TOE framework, Journal of Risk and Financial Management, ISSN 1911-8074, MDPI, Basel, Vol. 14, Iss. 2, pp. 1-18, https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm14020058 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/239474 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Journal of Risk and Financial Management Article Exploring Risks in the Adoption of Business Intelligence in SMEs Using the TOE Framework Ana-Marija Stjepi´c *, Mirjana Peji´c Bach and Vesna Bosilj Vukši´c   Citation: Stjepi´c, Ana-Marija, Mirjana Peji´c Bach, and Vesna Bosilj Vukši´c. 2021. Exploring Risks in the Adoption of Business Intelligence in SMEs Using the TOE Framework. Journal of Risk and Financial Management 14: 58. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/jrfm14020058 Academic Editors: Jakub Górka and Malte Krueger Received: 30 December 2020 Accepted: 23 January 2021 Published: 2 February 2021 Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). Faculty of Economics & Business, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia; [email protected] (M.P.B.); [email protected] (V.B.V.) *Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +385-1-238-3333 Abstract: The business success of smalland medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) increasingly relies on the adoption of various technological innovations. For today’s unpredictable business operations, business intelligence systems (BISs) represent one of the most prominent tools with a significant impact on business performance. However, different internal and external risks may influence BIS adoption. The goal of this paper is to investigate the risks that impact BIS adoption in SMEs, using the Technology, Organization, and Environment (TOE) framework. For that purpose, we develop the logistic regression model, using data collected by a questionnaire survey using a sample of 100 Croatian SMEs. The results indicate the applicability of the TOE theoretical framework for examining BIS adoption in SMEs. Given the results obtained, the sampled SMEs should take into account the internal risks related to the organizational dimension and external risks related to the environmental dimension. Our research did not reveal the significant impact of technological risks that encompass characteristics of considered technological innovation related to the technology dimension. Keywords: business intelligence systems; adoption; risk; TOE framework 1. Introduction Currently, business success is mainly correlated with adopting innovations, especially innovations in the context of information technology (Haseeb et al. 2019;Basole et al. 2013; Wu et al. 2015). According to Grauer (2001) and Hughes (2016), each of these emerging technology innovations improves and upgrades enterprises’ overall business activities (Kusuma et al. 2020). Enterprises are encouraged to change their business models into electronic-based business models. Consequently, a large number of business processes, such as a large number of business transactions, brought out the problem of accumulating a large amount of business data (Kusuma et al. 2020). This challenge has brought out the development of innovative technologies in the context of data management in the form of numerous solutions designed for storing and analyzing accumulated business data. Consequently, for enterprises that generate large amounts of structured and unstructured data by using different technologies, while operating their daily businesses (Xu et al. 2020), it is crucial to establish a reliable solution for storing, analyzing, and distributing those data (Mola et al. 2020). Enterprises adapt their products and services to customer needs, using external and internal data sources. One of the best tools for using the various forms of internal and external data sources, and harmonizing them into the solution with relevant business value, is the business intelligent system (BIS), which allows enterprises to recognize and wisely use data to stabilize or improve their position on the market (Khan et al. 2020). Consequently, strategic decisions based on quality data analysis lead to higher financial gains for the enterprise’s operations. In particular, the increasing use of technological innovations, such as the BIS, in conducting financial activities, the so-called FinTech, stands out (Muhammad et al. 2014;Marrara et al. 2019). Fintech represents a bridge between the achievements of technological innovation and product and service development in the J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021,14, 58. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm14020058 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/jrfm J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021,14, 58 2 of 18 financial sector (Marrara et al. 2019). In this field, the BI technology as data mining supports the enterprise to predict future financial opportunities and risks, create client-need-tailored products and services, and, finally, achieve financial prosperity (Marrara et al. 2019). However, the implementation of complex information systems is often prone to risks related to various sources, such as lack of management support or lack of sufficient resources in terms of finance and workforce. Therefore, it is strongly advised for enterprises to consider all the internal and external factors that could impact the success of adopting the BIS. A theoretical framework Technology–Organization–Environment (TOE) framework, designed by Tornatzky and Fleischer (1990), has been widely used for the investigation of the adoption of various technologies. The name of this theoretical framework rests on three dimensions in which it explores the success factors of adopting various technological innovations in enterprises: technology, organization, and environment context of business. The technology dimension includes internal and external technology infrastructure available for the enterprise. Characteristics of the market, such as competitive forces, are included within the environmental context. The organizational context, such as management support, comprises relationships and mechanisms that exist within the enterprise and that are relevant for the technology adoption (Tornatzky and Fleischer 1990). Taking into account the need for the assessment of relevant factors that would support the implementation of BIS, this study aimed to examine the determinants that could affect BIS adoption in smalland medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) through the identification of the determining factors within the selected Technology, Organization, and Environment (TOE) framework. For this aim, we conducted a survey on a sample of 100 Croatian SMEs that operate in the sector and developed a logistic regression model. Our results reveal that the organizational and environmental factors are relevant for the implementation of BIS in SMEs, while the technological factors did not have a significant impact. Practical and theoretical implications of our work emerge from these results. The paper is structured as follows. After the introduction, a theoretical background is presented, emphasizing the key ideas for examining the potential risk of innovative technology adoption, as well as the BIS adoption process in SMEs. The third part of the paper describes the methodology, and the fourth part presents the research results. In the fifth part of this paper, a brief discussion based on obtained results is given. In the concluding part of the paper, final thoughts, as well as limitations of this research, and recommendations for further research are given. 2. Theoretical Background and Research Model 2.1. SMEs and Technology Technological innovation can represent an upgrade of existing products or services according to market expectations or lead to the introduction of new products or services in enterprises (Hisrich et al. 2017). According to different authors (i.e., Pavitt 1987; OECD 2005 ; Diaconu 2011), technological innovations can be defined as processes or products. Such innovations impact daily life, business, government, and the environment. Expansion, adoption, and the appliance of technological innovations can lead to better productivity, purchasing power, increased employment rates, and reduced environmental pollution, but it can also lead to changes in the behavior of existing society and reduce social disparities among people (Kusuma et al. 2020;Viswanathan and Sreekumar 2019). According to various authors, innovative technologies rapidly change the service sector, as well as the existing seller–buyer relationship (Jeon et al. 2020;Iqbal et al. 2018). Currently, SMEs are becoming crucial in the economic progress of many countries worldwide, as well as in the Republic of Croatia (Zhen 2013;Casanova et al. 2018;da Silva et al. 2020;CEPOR 2019). Notwithstanding that SMEs are representing the driving force of many countries, they still face many risks that challenge their sustainability in today’s turbulent market. SMEs often encounter a lack of financial and human resources, as well as technology infrastructure insufficiency, competition on the market, and other J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021,14, 58 3 of 18 internal and external barriers that limit their full business accomplishment (da Silva et al. 2020). According to Ploh (2017), it is crucial to support Croatian SMEs in development and networking by preparing a more suitable legal framework for their establishment, supporting their participation in various types of education, and using different IT innovations. Accordingly, SMEs need to consider investing in different technological innovations which could enhance their efficiency in terms of process performance, preserve sustainability, and encourage their competitive advantage development (da Silva et al. 2020). 2.2. Technology Adoption Models Many theoretical models, frameworks, and theories for investigating successful technology adoption paths in businesses are developed over time. Thus, different authors examined various technological innovation adoption within enterprises using the Theory of reasoned action (TRA) (i.e., Tran et al. 2014), Technology acceptance model (TAM) (i.e., Najib and Fahma 2020), Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) (i.e., Abu et al. 2015), Theory of planned behavior (TPB) (i.e., Seol et al. 2016), Diffusion of innovation (DOI) (i.e., Tehrani and Shirazi 2014), and the TOE framework, just to name as the most important. According to Kim and Eunil (2020), user resistance, privacy concerns, trust, perception of technology usage and benefits, accessibility, and perception of costs are recognized as potential challenges in the adoption process. Similarly, technical complexity, prediction, and consequences of the consumer technology usage perception and financial risks are also recognized as potential risks for successful technological innovation adoption (Jeon et al. 2020) . Inadequate data management is also classified as a perceived risk for the adoption process (Khan et al. 2020). Najib and Fahma (2020) accentuate the difficulty to set up a technology and costs of the project as one of the main risks that could make the innovational technology adoption unsuccessful and later usage of planned technology ineffective. Igwe et al. (2020) emphasize organizational capabilities, like insufficient technical, human, time, management resources, and top-management support deficiency, as potential challenges of successful conduction of technological innovation adoption project within the enterprise. Moreover, competitive and supplier pressure is stressed as a potential risk that could slow down or stop the adoption of the new technology adoption project (Igwe et al. 2020). The TOE framework includes the above-stated factors as the determinants for successful technology adoption. The TOE framework is the most recognized and used in the scientific field of examining the potential factors that could affect the technological innovation adoption process in enterprises and therefore prevent the potential risks that could cause the failure of the adoption project. Moreover, determinants within this framework can be simultaneously observed as constraining factors and influencing factors of particular technological innovation adoption within the enterprise (Bijker and Hart 2013). 2.3. BIS Adoption BIS has become crucial for modern business, as it provides companies with information and new knowledge that, if used on time and for the right problem, can bring many positive effects to the business results. BIS refers to a set of different tools, methods, and applications used to store, analyze, and visualize business data relevant for successful decision-making (Agiu et al. 2014) . However, BIS is one of the most demanding technological innovations for adopting in the enterprise, especially since it requires employee’s training and additional time to acquire knowledge on how to use the obtained information, thus how to analyze the business data (Nelke 2012). The examination of the BIS adoption process using the TOE framework within different businesses worldwide is conducted by numerous papers. In their research, different authors have focused on diverse stages of BIS adoption in business. For example, Hung et al. (2016) investigated the BIS implementation success factors, using TOE determinants, within Taiwan’s enterprises that participated in the BIS implementation process. J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021,14, 58 4 of 18 In their paper, Hung et al. (2016) observed two main effects of BIS implementation on (1) user satisfaction and (2) overall system effectiveness. On the other hand, Lautenbach et al. (2017) researched the business intelligence and analytics (BI&A) usage level among 72 enterprises in South Africa that already used BI&A in their businesses. Lautenbach et al. (2017) investigated the impact of six TOE determinants on the BIS usage, half of which proved to be significant, i.e., determinants as data-related infrastructure capabilities, top management support, and external market impact. Owusu et al. (2017) investigated the TOE determinants’ impact on the overall BIS adoption process among 120 private universities in Malaysia. Owusu et al. (2017) focused on TOE determinants by observing five BIS adoption stages: (1) basic information system (IS) usage, (2) data warehouse (DW) usage, (3) DW and analytics usage, (4) DW, analytics and strategic tools usage, and (5) real-time use of all previously mentioned BIS tools and methods. Puklavec et al. (2018) distinguished 11 potentially influencing TOE determinants on the overall BIS adoption process by conducting an extensive literature review and qualitative research based on ten in-depth interviews among BIS and IT experts employed within diverse European SMEs. Even though the BIS adoption topic within various businesses is getting more attention within scientific circles, investigation of potential BIS adoption risks within SMEs is sparse. Prior studies are mostly focusing on the TOE determinants that encouraged BIS implementation or usage in different sized enterprises. While discussing their results and explaining the importance of obtained results for each determinant, some researchers also glinted on the opposite, the negative impact of observed determinants on BIS adoption (i.e., Hung et al. 2016;Lautenbach et al. 2017) Therefore, it would be advisable to observe the adoption of determinants from the BIS adoption risk perspective. Moreover, few studies focus only on BIS adoption within individual business sectors. Due to the emphasized economic-driving importance of SMEs for the Republic of Croatia, the SMEs’ need to adopt technological innovations, such as BIS, that contribute to better decision-making, higher profits, and meeting growing customer needs must not be neglected. In the Republic of Croatia, the BI usage within enterprises of all sizes is getting more attention over time. According to Bilandži´c et al. (2012), 57% of all sized enterprises in the Republic of Croatia were doing some part of BI in their business, while only 19% had separate BI departments. Moreover, Bilandži´c et al. (2012) argued that Croatian enterprises had not reached the BI usage level as in other countries. Dubravac and Bevanda (2015), concluded that Croatian SMEs lag behind other countries in the process of BI adoption due to insufficient financial resources, lack of technological knowledge, and fear of security vulnerabilities and data loss. Since there is no similar research that would examine the BIS adoption risks in the Croatian tertiary SMEs and that is known to us, the authors of this paper decided to observe the potential BIS adoption determinants from the risk perspective. 2.4. Technological Context According to Tornatzky and Fleischer (1990), the technology dimension includes technologies and tools already in use or available for the enterprise. Therefore, based on previous research and the importance of each determinant within the technology dimension for technological innovation adoption perception of the comparative advantage (Pan and Pan 2019), perception of the BIS’s complexity (Gupta and Bhatia 2019), BIS compatibility with enterprise information system (Pan and Pan 2019), and key personnel ability to assess the BIS benefits (Acheampong and Moyaid 2016) are observed in this study as potential risks for successful conduction of BIS adoption project. The perception of the comparative advantage of BIS is the level of the user perception of how BIS usage is better for achieving higher business performance than some other technological innovation (Pan and Pan 2019). Wang and Wang (2016) found that relative advantage significantly influences knowledge management systems, while Boonsiritomachai et al. (2016) also noted that perception of relative advantage has a significant impact on BI adoption. J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021,14, 58 5 of 18 Therefore, this study hypothesized that Croatian SMEs within the tertiary sector would more likely adopt BIS in their businesses if there were no barriers in their perception of the comparative advantage associated with BIS. Accordingly, the first hypothesis is proposed as follows: Hypothesis 1. Perception of the comparative advantage of BIS has a positive impact on SMEs’ adoption of BIS. Furthermore, Ahmad and Siraj (2018) define complexity as the user perception level of how difficult technological innovation is for understanding or usage. According to Ramamurthy et al. (2008), a higher level of technological innovation complexity will result in a lesser adoption of that technology in business. Boonsiritomachai et al. (2016) proved the significant correlation of complexity determinant with BI adoption. Similarly, Yeoh (2011) mentioned how the complexity of BIS process of adoption can be too demanding and therefore cause a decline in the number of enterprises willing to conduct the BIS project. According to the aforementioned suggestions, it is supposed that SMEs are less likely to adopt BIS if they perceive it as complicated to understand or use. Hence, the second hypothesis is proposed: Hypothesis 2. Perception of the BIS’s complexity has a negative impact on SMEs’ adoption of BIS. Pan and Pan (2019) define the compatibility determinant as the level of competence with infrastructure, technologies, tools, and business practices already existing in the enterprise. Yoon et al. (2014) state that it is more likely for the enterprise to reject the new technology adoption plan if it finds it incompatible with current technology or business procedures. Acheampong and Moyaid (2016) also suggest the importance of observing compatibility as a determinant in the case of the BIS adoption investigation. Based on the mentioned findings, this study proposed that SMEs are more likely to adopt BIS if it is compatible with their existing infrastructure, technologies, tools, business values, and procedures. Hence, the authors propose the third hypothesis as follows: Hypothesis 3. BIS’s compatibility with enterprise information system has a positive impact on SMEs’ adoption of BIS. Ghobakhloo and Ching (2019) describe the key personnel ability to assess the BIS benefits as their level of clarity and understanding of values and benefits that they can achieve by adopting BIS. According to Tornatzky and Fleischer (1990), the constantly growing number of new technology solutions on the market can cause various difficulties for the enterprise to understand its need and recognize the proper technological solution for their business. As well as compatibility, BIS observability and trialability are positively related to the BIS adoption (Acheampong and Moyaid 2016). Accordingly, this study proposes that SMEs are more likely to adopt BIS if the key personnel can easily understand and recognize BIS adoption values and benefits within their business. Therefore, the fourth hypothesis is proposed: Hypothesis 4. Key personnel ability to assess the BIS benefits has a positive impact on SMEs’ adoption of BIS. 2.5. Organizational Context The organizational dimension observes formal and informal relationships among employees and the existing organizational mechanisms within the enterprise (Tornatzky and Fleischer 1990). According to previous research in the field of new technologies’ adoption within enterprises, top management organizational support (Ahmad and Siraj 2018), organizational readiness (Acheampong and Moyaid 2016), and data management J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021,14, 58 6 of 18 (Puklavec et al. 2014) are identified as significant determinants within the organizational context, for the adoption process. Acheampong and Moyaid (2016) define top-management organizational support as its active involvement during the overall BIS adoption process. Wang and Wang (2016) found a high level of top-management support within the enterprises that adopted KMS. Similarly, Yeoh (2011) noted that highly dedicated management, as well as sponsorship within the enterprise, will cause a higher rate of BIS adoption. In light of the mentioned suggestions, this study hypothesized that SMEs in which top management actively participate in the overall adoption process will be more likely to adopt BIS. Hence, the fifth hypothesis of this paper is proposed as follows: Hypothesis 5. Top management organizational support has a positive impact on SMEs’ adoption of BIS. Organizational readiness can be defined as a sufficient amount of resources (e.g., human, financial, technical, knowledge, skills, etc.) that an enterprise possesses (Puklavec et al. 2014). Boonsiritomachai et al. (2016) found that the availability of organizational resources is a significant determinant when observing the BIS adoption process within the enterprise. Similarly, Acheampong and Moyaid (2016) identified organizational readiness as a determinant that has a significant impact on BIS adoption. Hence, this study contends that SMEs are less likely to adopt BIS if they do not have sufficient resources. Accordingly, the sixth hypothesis of this study is proposed: Hypothesis 6. Organizational readiness has a positive impact on SMEs’ adoption of BIS. According to Olexova (2014), DW and data marts are two crucial elements of BIS. Thus, data management is crucial for the data-dependent technologies adoption such as BIS, since it prevents subjective data definition, defines data dictionary standards, enables data security, ensures enterprise integrity and credibility, and manages database modeling and operation (Ramamurthy et al. 2008). Puklavec et al. (2014) treated the organizational data environment as an influential determinant on the BIS adoption. For example, Olexova (2014) stated that the data dictionary establishment was crucial for the further conduction of the BIS adoption process. Because of that, it is expected that SMEs with better data management as a backbone for decision-making processes will be more likely to adopt BIS. Therefore, the seventh hypothesis of this study is proposed as follows: Hypothesis 7. Data management as a backbone for decision-making processes has a positive impact on SMEs’ adoption of BIS. 2.6. Environmental Context Environmental context includes everything within the business environment that surrounds the business operating field of the enterprise (Tornatzky and Fleischer 1990). Inspired by today’s competitive business market, as well as a growing number of new technologies and their providers, competitive pressure (Acheampong and Moyaid 2016) and BIS vendors’ quality (Boonsiritomachai et al. 2016) are identified as crucial determinants within this TOE dimension. Competitive pressure is defined as the competitiveness intensity present on the market in which enterprise participates (Tornatzky and Fleischer 1990) . Boonsiritomachai et al. (2016) found competitive pressure to be a determinant that has a significant impact on the BIS. Similarly, Wang and Wang (2016) also proved that higher competitive pressure leads to a higher likelihood of KMS adoption. Consequently, SMEs that have greater competitive pressure in their market are more likely to adopt the BIS. Therefore, the next, i.e., the eighth, hypothesis in a row is proposed as follows: Hypothesis 8. Competitive pressure has a positive impact on SMEs’ adoption of BIS. J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021,14, 58 7 of 18 BIS vendors’ quality includes timely adoption project attainment, the post-adoption vendor support, as well as their marketing activities (Puklavec et al. 2014;Boonsiritomachai et al. 2016). According to Puklavec et al. (2014), if enterprises are familiar and satisfied with the work and the competencies of their service providers, it is very likely that they will adopt the BIS. Similarly, Boonsiritomachai et al. (2016) noted that BIS vendors’ quality significantly influences the BIS adoption. Therefore, it is expected that SMEs which are satisfied with the way of how their potential vendors complete and support their projects will be more likely to adopt BIS. Thus, ninth, and final, hypothesis of this study is proposed: Hypothesis 9. BIS vendors’ quality has a positive impact on SMEs’ adoption of BIS. 3. Methodology 3.1. Sample Description We tested our model on the sample of Croatian SMEs, for which relevance for the Croatian economy is noticeable through several indicators: employment rate, productivity rate, total income and export, and financial efficiency (CEPOR 2019). According to the Accounting Act (2020) and The Small Business Development Promotion Act (2020), Croatian SMEs are enterprises that do not exceed boundary indicators in two of the following three conditions: total assets EUR 4,000,000.00; turnover EUR 8,000,000.00; the average number of workers during the business year is 50 workers (small enterprises) and total assets EUR 20,000,000.00; turnover EUR 40,000,000.00; the average number of workers during the business year is 250 workers (medium-sized enterprises). SMEs in the Republic of Croatia occupy 99.7% of the total structure of all-sized enterprises (CEPOR 2019) and operate mostly in the sector (Hrvatska.eu 2017). Several employees in SMEs are constantly growing. For example, the employment rate in Croatian small enterprises increased by 3.8% and by 6.1% in medium-sized enterprises in 2018, compared to 2017 (CEPOR 2019). In the Republic of Croatia, SMEs are showing a positive trend in innovating their businesses (CEPOR 2019). In 2018, 13.8% of them offered new products that were new for anyone, 17.9% of them were innovative for only some businesses on the market, and 68.3% offered products that were not new to any business, which are slightly better results than the year before (CEPOR 2019). To test the empirical model, we used the survey research approach. To gather as many enterprises as possible to participate in the research, we used the snowball approach as a sampling method. The chosen sampling method is mostly used in the studies in which the aiming sample is not easy to approach. It is also advisable to use this sampling method when investigating perceptions of respondents via survey, as is the case in this research (Dragan and Isaic-Maniu 2012). The snowball method is also known as the chain method since existing respondents are finding new respondents, mostly their contacts, which are suitable for the research sample that is difficult to identify (Naderifar et al. 2017). Respectively, the chosen sampling method involves giving recommendations for contacts of potential members of the selected research sample, with the purpose to achieve the sample growth as a snowball. It is most often used in hidden populations, which is the case with this research in which BIS is rarely used in SMEs in the Republic of Croatia. In this research, experts within the BIS field were asked to recommend their contacts who would participate in the research. This method was carried out until the moment when the recommendations of the respondents started to repeat (Etikan et al. 2016). Using this method, a total of 110 responses were collected, of which 100 answers were valid. The questionnaires were sent online, directly to the respondents via email or through social networks (LinkedIn). The respondents are top management, IT professionals, and employees that understand the functionalities of BIS within the smalland medium-sized enterprises in the Republic of Croatia. Therefore, the sample includes companies engaged in service activities, financial activities, wholesale and retail trade, etc. (Biere 2010), whose business success is assumed to be mostly based on well-organized and used information. The sample consisted of 37% of small-sized and 38% of medium-sized enterprises. J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021,14, 58 8 of 18 The largest number of enterprises (49%) within the sample is engaged in information and communication activities. Enterprises participating in wholesale and retail trade comprise 15% of the research sample. About 10% of enterprises are engaged in professional, scientific, and technical activities; 6% are engaged in financial and insurance activities; and 3% provide transport and storage services. Merely 1% of enterprises are included in providing accommodation, food preparation, serving, administrative and support services, and educational activities, while a total of 7% of enterprises did not want to classify their businesses. Most enterprises answered that they employ around 11–250 per year (79%), while 58% of enterprises answered that they earn between EUR 0.7 million and EUR 40 million of average annual income. In this research, enterprises operating on the market from 11–50 years (70%) mostly participated. They are followed by 16% of enterprises conducting their businesses from 6–10 years and 12% operating businesses for over 50 and less than 5 years. Only 2% of respondents did not answer the question about their enterprises’ operation years. Most enterprises operate in the European Union (45%), while 38% operate in national markets of several or all countries in the region. An equal number of respondents of 24% are employed in enterprises operating in a part of the market within Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, or Serbia and in the entire area of the national market of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, or Serbia. The enterprises that participated in the survey are domestic, mostly private companies (72%). They are followed by foreign privately owned companies (19%). Only 4% of enterprises are domestic enterprises, classified as semiprivate and semi-state, while 3% of enterprises are predominantly state-owned. When asked about the ownership structure of the company, only 2% of respondents did not answer. Most enterprises do not operate as part of a larger multinational company (77%), while a small number participate as a subsidiary of a multinational company (21%). Only 2% did not answer this question. Regarding the respondents’ education level, most of them have a graduate degree (74%), followed by those who have an MBA or PhD (15%). Just 4% of respondents have an undergraduate degree, while only 2% of them have completed high school. To this question, 5% of respondents did not want to give their answer. Among the respondents, the largest number are IT experts (28%), top managers (24%), and department managers (15%). A total of 4% of BI specialists participated in the study, while only 2% were supervisors. Moreover, 20% of respondents declared themselves as other occupations, while 7% of respondents did not answer this question. Most respondents work in their current workplace for two to three years (26%), more than 10 (21%), or less than 1 (19%). Almost the same percentage of respondents work in their current workplace from four to five years (15%) and five to ten (14%), while only 5% of respondents did not answer this question. 3.2. Research Instrument The dependent variable is defined as the BIS’s adoption with enterprises divided into two groups: BIS is not yet implemented in the enterprise, and BIS is fully implemented in the enterprise (Tornatzky and Fleischer 1990;Puklavec et al. 2018). Independent variables comprise the determinants within the TOE framework that could influence the adoption process in Croatian SMEs. (i) The technology dimension is perception of the comparative advantage of BIS, BIS’s complexity, BIS’s compatibility with the enterprise information system, and key personnel ability to assess the BIS benefits. (ii) The organizational dimension refers to top-management organizational support, organizational readiness, and data management as a backbone for decision-making processes. (iii) The environmental dimension is the BIS vendors’ quality and competitive pressure. Table 1 presents the research instrument in detail. J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021,14, 58 15 of 18 tian SMEs recognized potential risks for conducting BIS adoption within their competition and BIS vendor’s support as well. Within the technology dimension, SMEs recognized BIS’s compatibility with enterprise information system as a potential problem for enterprises that want to engage in the BIS adoption process. On the other hand, Croatian SMEs do not experience a lack of organizational support, since this determinant is not identified as a potential threat for BIS adoption. The perception of BIS’s complexity determinant is another determinant that is not recognized as a potential threat for the adoption process since today’s BIS solutions are available in the form of a cloud or mobile solution and therefore becoming more accessible and easier to use for SMEs. Moreover, BIS software solutions are mostly used as an integrated model within some larger enterprise systems, so SMEs do not perceive their competitive advantage compared to other technological solutions. Hence, perception of the comparative advantage of BIS is the determinant that has also not been revealed as a potential risk for the BIS adoption project’s success. Furthermore, the risk of BIS adoption does not arise from the lack of clear and understandable presentation of benefits to company employees, whose need for the presentment of its advantages was considered one of the factors of successful BIS adoption (Rostek 2013). The explanation for such a result may be in today’s wide BIS availability and its use as an integrated module within another system. Even though this paper expands the existing literature in the scientific field of BIS adoption in small and medium enterprises, this research has certain limitations that should be noted. First, this study is conducted on a small sample size that only encompasses the sector. Second, this research is only examined by using quantitative methods. Therefore, it is advisable for further research to conduct this study on a larger sample or within SMEs that operates under the primary or secondary sector. Likewise, the recommendation for future research is to conduct a qualitative analysis of this research to achieve the depth of understanding obtained results and more detailed proof of the relationship between the established variables. Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.-M.S., M.P.B., and V.B.V.; methodology, M.P.B. and A.-M.S.; validation, A.-M.S., M.P.B., and V.B.V.; formal analysis, A.-M.S.; data curation, A.-M.S.; writing—original draft preparation, A.-M.S., M.P.B., and V.B.V.; writing—review and editing, M.P.B.; visualization, M.P.B.; supervision, M.P.B. and V.B.V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This research was funded by the Croatian Science Foundation, grant number IP-2014–093729. Acknowledgments: This research has been fully supported by the Croatian Science Foundation under the PROSPER (Process and Business Intelligence for Business Performance) project (IP-2014– 09-3729). Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. References Abu, Fairus, Jabar Juhaini, and Yunus Ahmad Rozelan. 2015. Modified of UTAUT theory in adoption of technology for Malaysia small medium enterprises (SMEs) in food industry. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences 9: 104–9. Accounting Act. 2020. Available online: https://zakon.hr/z/118/Zakon-o-ra%C4%8Dunovodstvu (accessed on 20 January 2021). Acheampong, Owusu, and Said Alman Moyaid. 2016. An integrated model for determining business intelligence systems adoption and post-adoption benefits in banking sector. Journal of Administrative and Business Studies 2: 84–85. Agiu, Dragos, Vlad Mateescu, and Iulia Muntean. 2014. Business intelligence overview. Database Systems Journal 5: 23–36. Ahmad, Mansoor, and Sadaf Siraj. 2018. A systematic review and analysis of determinants impacting adoption and assimilation of e-commerce in small and medium enterprises. International Journal of Electronic Business 14: 326–51. [CrossRef] Ahmad, Sumera, Suraya Miskon, Rana Alabdan, and Iskander Tlili. 2020. Exploration of Influential Determinants for the Adoption of Business Intelligence System in the Textile and Apparel Industry. Sustainability 12: 7674. [CrossRef] Awa, Hart O., Ojiabo Ukoha Ojiabo, and Longlife E. Orokor. 2017. Integrated technology-organization-environment (TOE) taxonomies for technology adoption. Journal of Enterprise Information Management 30: 893–921. [CrossRef] Basole, Rahul C., C. David Seuss, and William B. Rouse. 2013. IT innovation adoption by enterprises: Knowledge discovery through text analytics. Decision Support Systems 54: 1044–54. [CrossRef] J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021,14, 58 16 of 18 Biere, Mike. 2010. The New Era of Enterprise Business Intelligence: Using Analytics to Achieve a Global Competitive Advantage. London: Pearson Education. Bijker, Marle, and Mike Hart. 2013. Factors influencing pervasiveness of organisational business intelligence. Paper presented at Third International Conference on Business Intelligence and Technology, Valencia, Spain, May 27–June 1; pp. 21–26. Bilandži´c, Mirko, Benjamin ˇ Culig, Danijela Luci´c, Martina Putar-Novoselec, and Jelena Jakši´c. 2012. Business intelligence in the Croatian economy. Poslovna Izvrnost 6: 9–27. Boonsiritomachai, Warapong. 2014. Enablers Affecting the Adoption of Business Intelligence: A Study of Thai Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises. Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements of the Degree of Doctor of Business Administration. Melbourne: Victoria University. Boonsiritomachai, Warapong, G. Michael McGrath, and Stephen Burgess. 2016. Exploring business intelligence and its depth of maturity in Thai SMEs. Cogent Business & Management 3: 1–17. Casanova, Lourdes, Peter Klaus Cornelius, and Soumitra Dutta. 2018. Policies to Drive Innovation in India. In Financing Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Markets. London: Academic Press, Chapter 5. pp. 117–31. CEPOR. 2019. Small and Medium Enterprises Report Croatia—2019 Including the Results of GEM—Global Entrepreneurship Monitor Research for Croatia for 2018. Available online: http://www.cepor.hr/izvjesce-o-malim-i-srednjim-poduzecima-u-hrvatskoj/ (accessed on 1 December 2020). da Silva, Humberto Caetano Cardoso, Denis Silva da Silveira, Jairo Simiao Dornelas, and Henrique Santos Ferreira. 2020. Information technology governance in small and medium enterprises—A systematic mapping. Journal of Information Systems and Technology Management 17. [CrossRef] Diaconu, Mihaela. 2011. Technological Innovation: Concept, Process, Typology and Implications in the Economy. Theoretical & Applied Economics 18: 127–44. Dragan, Irina-Maria, and Alexandru Isaic-Maniu. 2012. Snowball Sampling Developments used in Marketing Research. International Journal of Arts and Commerce 1: 214–23. Dubravac, Ivana, and Vanja Bevanda. 2015. Mobile Business Intelligence Adoption (Case of Croatian SMEs). Paper presented at International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies—CompSysTech’15, Dublin, Ireland, June 25–26; pp. 136–43. Etikan, Ilker, Rukayya Alkassim, and Sulaiman Abubakar. 2016. Comparision of snowball sampling and sequential sampling technique. Biometrics and Biostatistics International Journal 3: 55. [CrossRef] Ferrando, Pere J., and Urbano Lorenzo-Seva. 2018. Assessing the quality and appropriateness of factor solutions and factor score estimates in exploratory item factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement 78: 762–80. [CrossRef] Ghobakhloo, Morteza, and Ng Tan Ching. 2019. Adoption of digital technologies of smart manufacturing in SMEs. Journal of Industrial Information Integration 16. [CrossRef] Grauer, M. 2001. Information Technology. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 7473–76. Gupta, Vikram, and Sarvjit Singh Bhatia. 2019. Reliable Cloud Based Framework for the Implementation of ERP. International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering 8: 655–61. Hair, Joseph F., William C. Black, Barry J. Babin, and Rolph E. Anderson. 2010. Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed. New York: Pearson. Haseeb, Muhammad, Hafezali Hussain Iqbal, Sebastian Kot, Armenia Androniceanu, and Kittisak Jermsittiparsert. 2019. Role of Social and Technological Challenges in Achieving a Sustainable Competitive Advantage and Sustainable Business Performance. Sustainability 11: 3811. [CrossRef] Hisrich, Robert D., Michael P. Peters, and Dean A. Shepherd. 2017. Entrepreneurship. New York: McGraw Hill Education. Hrvatska.eu. 2017. Gospodarske Grane. Available online: http://www.croatia.eu/article.php?lang=1&id=32 (accessed on 2 December 2020). Hughes, Ralph. 2016. Essential DW/BI Background and Definitions. In Agile Data Warehousing for the Enterprise a Guide for Solutions Architects and Project Leaders. Waltham: Morgan Kaufmann, Chapter 4. pp. 59–84. Hung, Shin-Yuan, Yu-Wen Huang, Ching-Chieh Lin, Kuan-chin Chen, and J. Michael Tarn. 2016. Factors Influencing Business Intelligence Systems Implementation Success in the Enterprises. Paper presented at PACIS, Chiayi City, Taiwan, June 27–July 1; vol. 297. Igwe, Sunny R., Augustina Ebenuwa, and Otite Wisdom Idenedo. 2020. Technology adoption and sales performance of manufacturing small and medium enterprises in port harcourt. Journal of Marketing 5: 44–59. Iqbal, Muhammad Shahid, UL Hassan Masood, and Habibah Ume. 2018. Impact of self-service technology (SST) service quality on customer loyalty and behavioral intention: The mediating role of customer satisfaction. Cogent Bus Manage 5: 1–23. [CrossRef] Ismail, Wan Nur Syahida Wan, and Mohd Zulkifli Mokhtar. 2016. Application of TOE framework in examining the factors influencing pre and post-adoption of CAS in Malaysian SMEs. International Journal of Information Technology & Business Management 49: 26–37. Jeon, Hyeon Mo, Sung Hye Jin, and Young Kim Hyun. 2020. Customers’ acceptance intention of self-service technology of restaurant industry: Expanding UTAUT with perceived risk and innovativeness. Service Business 14: 533–51. [CrossRef] Khan, Anupriya, Satish Krishnan, and Jithesh Arayankalam. 2020. The Role of ICT Laws and National Culture in Determining ICT Diffusion and Well-Being: A Cross-Country Examination. Information Systems Frontiers 22: 1–26. [CrossRef] Kim, Jina, and Park Eunil. 2020. Understanding social resistance to determine the future of Internet of Things (IoT) services. Behaviour & Information Technology 39: 1–11. J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021,14, 58 17 of 18 Kusuma, Hadri, Muafi Muafi, AJI Hendy Mustiko, and Sigit Pamungkas. 2020. Information and Communication Technology Adoption in Smalland Medium-Sized Enterprises: Demographic Characteristics. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business 7: 969–80. [CrossRef] Lautenbach, P., Kevin Johnston, and Tejumade Adeniran-Ogundipe. 2017. Factors influencing business intelligence and analytics usage extent in South African organisations. South African Journal of Business Management 48: 23–33. [CrossRef] Marrara, Stefania, Mirjana Peji´c Bach, Sanja Seljan, and Amir Topalovic. 2019. FinTech and SMEs: The Italian Case. In FinTech as a Disruptive Technology for Financial Institutions. Edited by Rafay Abdul. Hershey: IGI Global, pp. 42–60. Mola, Lapo, Cecilia Rossignoli, Andrea Carugati, and Antonio Giangreco. 2020. Business Intelligence System Design and Its Consequences for Knowledge Sharing, Collaboration, and Decision-Making: An Exploratory Study, Ch. 19. In Information Diffusion Management and Knowledge Sharing: Breakthroughs in Research and Practice. Hershey: IGI Global, pp. 382–402. Muhammad, Gul, Jamaludin Ibrahim, Zeeshan Bhatti, and Ahmad Waqas. 2014. Business Intelligence as a Knowledge Management Tool in Providing Financial Consultancy Services. American Journal of Information Systems 2: 26–32. Naderifar, Mahin, Hamideh Goli, and Fereshteh Ghaljaie. 2017. Snowball Sampling: A Purposeful Method of Sampling in Qualitative Research. Strides in Development of Medical Education 14: 1–6. [CrossRef] Najib, Mukhamad, and Farah Fahma. 2020. Investigating the Adoption of Digital Payment System through an Extended Technology Acceptance Model: An Insight from the Indonesian Small and Medium Enterprises. International Journal on Advanced Science Engineering Information Technology 10: 1702–1708. [CrossRef] Nelke, Margareta. 2012. Competitive intelligence, In Strategic Business Development for Information Centres and Libraries Chandos Information Professional Series. Witney: Chandos Publishing, pp. 19–41. OECD. 2005. Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data 3ed. Available online: https://www.oecdilibrary.org/science-and-technology/oslo-manual_9789264013100-en (accessed on 3 December 2020). Olexova, Cecilia. 2014. Business Intelligence Adoption: A Case Study in the Retail Chain. WSEAS Transactions on Business and Economics 11: 95–106. Owusu, Acheampong, Abbas Ghanbari-Baghestan, and Abdolhosein Kalantari. 2017. Investigating the factors affecting business intelligence systems adoption: A case study of private universities in Malaysia. International Journal of Technology Diffusion (IJTD) 8: 1–25. [CrossRef] Pan, Ming-Ju, and Woan-Yuh Jang. 2008. Determinants of the adoption of enterprise resource planning within the technologyorganization-environment framework: Taiwan’s communications industry. Journal of Computer Information Systems 48: 94–102. Pan, Mi, and Wei Pan. 2019. Determinants of adoption of robotics in precast concrete production for buildings. Journal of Management in Engineering 35: 05019007. [CrossRef] Pavitt, Keith. 1987. The Objectives of Technology Policy. Science and Public Policy 14: 182–88. Ploh, Matija. 2017. Ograniˇcenja i mogu´cnosti financiranja malih i srednjih poduze´ca u Republici Hrvatskoj. FIP—Financije i Pravo 5: 79–106. Puklavec, Borut, Tiago Oliveira, and Aleš Popoviˇc. 2014. Unpacking business intelligence systems adoption determinants: An exploratory study of small and medium enterprises. Economic & Business Review 16: 185–213. Puklavec, Borut, Tiago Oliveira, and Aleš Popoviˇc. 2018. Understanding the determinants of business intelligence system adoption stages. Industrial Management & Data Systems 118: 1–35. Ramamurthy, K. Ram, Arun Sen, and Atish P. Sinha. 2008. An empirical investigation of the key determinants of data warehouse adoption. Decision Support Systems 44: 817–41. [CrossRef] Rostek, Katarzyna. 2013. Dedicated business intelligence system for SMEs consortium. African Journal of Business Management 7: 999–1014. Senyo, Prince Kwame, John Effah, and Erasmus Addae. 2016. Preliminary insight into cloud computing adoption in a developing country. Journal of Enterprise Information Management 29: 505–24. [CrossRef] Seol, Seyoung, Lee Hwansoo, and Zo Hangjung. 2016. Exploring factors affecting the adoption of mobile office in business: An integration of TPB with perceived value. International Journal of Mobile Communications 14: 1–25. [CrossRef] Soares-Aguiar, Antonio, and Antonio Palma-dos-Reis. 2008. Why do firms adopt e-procurement systems? Using logistic regression to empirically test a conceptual model. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 55: 120–33. [CrossRef] Stjepi´c, Ana-Marija. 2020. The Success Factors of Business Intelligence System Adoption in Small and Medium Sized Enterprises of the Tertiary Sector. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia. Suvedi, Murari, Raju Ghimire, and Michael D. Kaplowitz. 2017. Farmers’ participation in extension programs and technology adoption in rural Nepal: A logistic regression analysis. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension 23: 351–71. [CrossRef] Tan, Felix Ter Chian. 2010. A perception-based model for technological innovation in small and medium enterprises. Paper presented at 18th European Conference on Information Systems, Pretoria, South Africa, June 7–9; pp. 1–13. Tehrani, Shima Ramezani, and Fahrid Shirazi. 2014. Factors Influencing the Adoption of Cloud Computing by Small and Medium Size Enterprises (SMEs). Paper presented at International Conference on Human Interface and the Management of Information HIMI 2014: Human Interface and the Management of Information. Information and Knowledge in Applications and Services, Crete, Greece, June 22–27; pp. 631–42. The Small Business Development Promotion Act. 2020. Available online: https://zakon.hr/z/527/Zakon-o-poticanju-razvoja-maloggospodarstva (accessed on 20 January 2021). J. Risk Financial Manag. 2021,14, 58 18 of 18 Tornatzky, Louis. G., and Mitchell Fleischer. 1990. The Processes of Technological Innovation. Lexington: Lexington Books. Tran, Quangdung, Zhang Changzheng, Sun Hongyi, and Huang Dechun. 2014. Initial adoption versus institutionalization of eprocurement in construction firms: An empirical investigation in Vietnam. Journal of Global Information Technology Management 17: 91–116. [CrossRef] Viswanathan, Madhubalan, and Arun Sreekumar. 2019. Consumers and technology in a changing world: The perspective from subsistence marketplaces. European Journal of Marketing 53: 1254–74. [CrossRef] Walker, John H., Kojo Saffu, and Marica Mazurek. 2016. An empirical study of factors influencing e-commerce adoption/non-adoption in Slovakian SMEs. Journal of Internet Commerce 15: 189–213. [CrossRef] Wang, Yu-Min, and Yao-Ching Wang. 2016. Determinants of firms’ knowledge management system implementation: An empirical study. Computers in Human Behavior 64: 829–42. [CrossRef] Wang, Yu-Min, Yi-Shun Wang, and Yong-Fu Yang. 2010. Understanding the determinants of RFID adoption in the manufacturing industry. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 77: 803–15. [CrossRef] Wu, Shelly Ping-Ju, Detmar W. Straub, and Ting-Peng Liang. 2015. How information technology governance mechanisms and strategic alignment influence organizational performance: Insight form a matched survey of business and IT managers. MIS Quarterly 39: 497–518. Xu, Zhongping, Tao Zhang, Rongrong Zheng, Xiangna Li, and Dong Li. 2020. Knowledge Discovery and Analysis of ICT Customer Service Data Relying on Multi-frequency Mode Data Mining. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1648: 1–4. [CrossRef] Yeoh, William. 2011. Business intelligence systems implementation: Testing a critical success factors framework in multiple cases. International Journal of Business Information Systems 8: 192–209. [CrossRef] Yoon, Tom E., Biswadip Ghosh, and Bong-Keun Jeong. 2014. User acceptance of business intelligence (BI) application: Technology, individual difference, social influence, and situational constraints. Paper presented at 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Waikoloa, HI, USA, January 6–9; pp. 3758–66. Zeller, Richard A. 2005. Measurement Error, Issues and Solutions. In Encyclopedia of Social Measurement. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 665–76. Zhen, Yong. 2013. China’s stock market. In China’s Capital Markets: Chandos Asian Studies Series. Witney: Chandos Publishing, pp. 1–43.