一件任務的完成，主要受到任務執行者、任務所需工具及其他環境因素的影響。任務要成功的達成，有賴於這些因素之間良好的配合與互動。資訊系統必須滿足工作任務所需，並且被正確有效的運用，才能夠真正提升工作績效，進而對企業競爭力有所幫助。本研究以任務科技配適度理論為研究基礎，希望能夠瞭解資訊系統特性、任務特性與個人特性對工作績效所造成的影響。
任務科技配適度理論的相關研究，向來皆著重於討論任務與科技之間的配適，對於使用者與任務，或使用者與科技之間的配適關係，則較少提及。自我效能是社會學習理論的重要觀念之一，代表個人對自身能力的評價，對個人的態度與行為有相當的影響力。然而自我效能大多出現在教育學習領域的相關研究，在組織及工作績效方面，則鮮少被討論。因此本研究除了瞭解個人特性在任務科技配適理論中的重要性外，也將社會學習理論的重要概念帶入，希望能瞭解自我效能與個人工作績效之間的關係。
研究結果發現，資訊系統特性、任務特性與電腦自我效能三者對任務科技配適度都有顯著影響，而以電腦自我效能的影響力最大。在自我效能與工作績效方面，其影響力並不顯著，與過去文獻之觀點不同，仍須進一步研究探討。

古永嘉(民84)，「企業研究方法」，華泰書局。
麥孟生(民89)，「個人心理類型、自我效能及態度對電腦學習成效之影響」，國立中央大學資訊管理學系碩士論文。
陳純德(民90)，「以工作－技術配適度進行企業資源規劃系統使用者滿意度之研究」，私立中原大學資訊管理學系碩士論文。
Bandura, A. (1977), “Self-efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change,” Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1986), Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory, Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A., Adams, N. E., Hardy, A. B., and Howells, G. N. (1980), “Test of the Generality of Self-Efficacy Theory, ” Cognitive Therapy and Research, 4, 39-66.
Bandura, A. and R.Wood (1989), “Effect of Perceived Controllability and Performance Standards on Self-regulation of Complex Decision-making ,“ Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(5), 805-814.
Benbasat, I., Dexter, A. S. and P. Todd (1986), “An Experimental Program Investigating Color-Enhanced and Graphical Information Presentation: An Integration of the Findings,” Communications of the ACM, 29(11), 1094-1105.
Campbell, D. J. (1988), “Task Complexity: A Review and Analysis,” Academy of Management Review, 13(1), 40-52.
Compeau, D. R. and C. A. Higgins (1995), “Application of Social Cognitive Theory to Training for Computer Skills,” Information Systems Research, 6(2), 118-143.
Compeau, D. R. and C. A. Higgins (1995), “Computer Self-Efficacy: Development of a Measure and Initial Test,” MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 189-211.
Dishaw, M. T. and D. M. Strong (1999), “Extending the Technology Acceptance Model with Task-technology Fit Constructs,” Information & Management, 36, 9-21.
Ferratt, T. W. and G. E. Vlahos (1998), “An Investigation of Task-technology Fit for Managers in Greece and the US,” European Journal of Information Systems, 7, 123-136.
Fred, D. D. (1989), ”Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology,” MIS Quarterly, 319-340.
Fred, D. D., Richard, P. B. and R. W. Paul (1989), “ User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models,” Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.
Gist, M. E., Schwoerer, C. and B. Rosen (1989), “Effects of Alternative Training Methods on Self-Efficacy and Performance in Computer Software Training,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(6), 884-891.
Goodhue, D. L. (1995), “Understanding User Evaluations of Information Systems,” Management Science 41(12), 1827-1844.
Goodhue, D. L. and R. L. Thompson (1995), “Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance,” MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 213-236.
Goodhue, D. L. (1998), “Development and Measurement Validity of a Task-Technology Fit Instrument for User Evaluations of Information Systems,” Decision Sciences, 29(1), 105-138.
Goodhue, D. L., Klein, B. D. and S. T. March (2000), “User Evaluations of IS as Surrogates for Objective Performance,” Information & Management, 38, 87-101.
Harrison, A.W., Rainer, R. K. Jr., Hochwarter, W. A. and K.R. Thompson (1997), “Testing the Self-efficacy-performance Linkage of Social-cognitive Theory,” The Journal of Social Psychology, 137(1), 79-87.
Hill, T., Mann, M. F. and N. D. Smith (1987),“Role of Efficacy Expectations in Predicting the Decision to Use Advanced Technologies - The Case of Computers,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(2), 307-313.
Igbaria, M. and J. Iivari (1995), “The Effects of Self-efficacy on Computer Usage,” Journal of Management Science, 23(6), 587-605.
Igbaria, M. and M. Tan (1997), “The Consequence of Information Technology Acceptance Subsequent Individual Performance,” Information and Management, 32, 113-121.
Igbaria, M., Nancy, Z., Paul, C. and L. M. C. Angele (1997), “Personal Computing Acceptance Factors in Small Firms: A Structural Equation Model,” MIS Quarterly, 279-302.
Igbaria, M., Parasuraman, S. and J.B. Jack (1996), “ A Motivational Model of Microcomputer Usage,” Journal of Management Information Systems, 13(1), 127-143.
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D. and G. Hackett (1994), “Toward a Unifying Social Cognitive Theory of Career and Academic Interest, Choice, and Performance,” Journal of Vocational Behavior Monograph, 45, 79-122.
Marakas G. M., M. Y. Yi and R. D. Johnson (1998), “The Multilevel and Multifaceted Character of Computer Self-Efficacy: Toward Clarification of the Construct and an Integrative Framework for Research,” Information Systems Research, 9(2), 126-163.
Murphy, C.A., Coover, D. and S.V. Owen (1989), “Development and Validation
of the Computer Self-efficacy Scale,” Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 49, 893-899.
Schunk, D. H. (1995), “Self-efficacy and Education and Instruction. In J. Maddux (Ed.),” Self-efficacy adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, Research and Application (281-303), New York: Plenum Press.
Stajkovic, A. D. and F. Luthans (1998), “Self-Efficacy and Work-Related Performance: A Meta-Analysis,” Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 240-261.
Szajna, B. (1996), “Empirical Evaluation of the Revised Technology Acceptance Model,” Management Science, 42(1), 85-92.
Vessey, I. and D. Galletta (1991), “Cognitive Fit: An Empirical Study of Information Acquisition,” Information Systems Research, 2(1), 63-84.