I has received much attention in the transportation and logistics literature, particularly in the area of shipper-carrier relationships. EDI is often considered an indicator of mutual cooperation between a carrier and a shipper, as well between a customer and a supplier in a supply chain. As people began viewing EDI as the glue that holds partnerships together, the decision to adopt (or not adopt) became a decision to be made by multiple firms rather than a single-firm decision. The use of EDI for transportation-related transactions by a shipper, for example, requires the use of EDI by its carriers. Similarly, if a retailer wants to use EDI for achieving higher operational efficiency, the use of EDI by its suppliers is a must. In other words, a successful implementation of EDI strategy (strategic use of EDI for achieving higher cost efficiency and improved customer service) greatly depends on whether a firm can persuade its trading partners to adopt the EDI system. Given these situations, firms pursuing the EDI strategy began feeling the need to learn effective ways of persuading their trading partners to adopt the EDI system" (Suzuki, 36). In an attempt to provide insights on how to persuade non-adopters to adopt EDI, numerous researchers conducted studies to determine the factors that influence the decision to adopt or not. Those studies are invaluable tools that firms can use to attempt to persuade their trading partners to adopt EDI. The studies, however, did not study why firms choose not to adopt EDI. Adoption and resistance behavior may seem to be opposite sides of the same coin but in fact there could be numerous reasons not to adopt EDI. For instance a firms business environment may not require the adoption of EDI, that doesn't mean that firm is resisting EDI it just means it doesn't need it. On the other hand if a firm has adopted EDI but only uses it for certain limited purposes, like the issue of bills of lading, despite rep...
