Assessing Technology Acceptance for SIAKAD Usage among Scholarly Community
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32664/j-intech.v14i01.2246Keywords:
Delone & Mclean, pls-sem, TechnologyAcceptance, UTAUT2Abstract
The deployment of academic information systems in higher education institutions necessitates both technological preparedness and user acceptance to guarantee sustained utilization. In practice, users frequently encounter challenges, including confusion when retrieving academic material, doubts regarding the accuracy of presented data, and dependence on manual verification despite the system's availability. Such circumstances diminish trust and render the system seen as a mere formal obligation rather than a beneficial academic resource. Differences in user perceptions of system quality, information quality, and behavioral aspects consequently affect the efficacy of system adoption. By integrating UTAUT 2 with the Delone & Mclean Model, this research aims to analyse the variables that influence user acceptance and the usage behaviour of the current academic information system. A quantitative explanatory approach was employed, utilizing survey data collected from 450 active users. PLS-SEM was employed to examine the data for the assessment of both measurement and structural models. The findings demonstrate that performance expectancy, effort, facilitating conditions, habit, system quality, and knowledge all have a substantial impact on behavioral intention and usage behavior. Conversely, social influence does not substantially impact behavioral intention, indicating that system utilization is primarily motivated by functional requirements rather than normative pressure. Practically, the results suggest that universities should prioritize system reliability, accurate and timely academic information, responsive user support, and routine integration of SIAKAD into core academic workflows to strengthen continued usage.
References
[1] J. E. Technol, H. Educ, M. Bond, S. Bedenlier, V. I. Marín, and M. Händel, “Emergency remote teaching in higher education : mapping the first global online semester,” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 2021, doi: 10.1186/s41239-021-00282-x.
[2] N. Selwyn, B. Academic, and N. York, “Education and technology: Key issues and debates,” International Review of Education, no. 0123456789, pp. 10–11, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s11159-022-09971-9.
[3] H. S. Hidayat, I. G. A. Maragi, and W. L. Setiawan, “Digitalisasi sebagai Jawaban atas Permasalahan Manajemen dan Pembelajaran di Perguruan Tinggi,” RIGGS: Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Business, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 191–197, 2025, doi: 10.31004/riggs.v4i1.393.
[4] D. Al-Fraihat, M. Joy, R. Masa’deh, and J. Sinclair, “Evaluating E-learning systems success: An empirical study,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 102, no. August 2019, pp. 67–86, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.004.
[5] K. Tamilmani, N. P. Rana, Y. K. Dwivedi, G. P. Sahu, and S. Roderick, “Exploring the role of ‘price value’ for understanding consumer adoption of technology: A review and meta-analysis of UTAUT2 based empirical studies,” Proceedings of the 22nd Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems - Opportunities and Challenges for the Digitized Society: Are We Ready?, PACIS 2018, 2018.
[6] H. Gilch, A. S. Beise, R. Krempkow, M. Müller, F. Stratmann, and K. Wannemacher, “Survey on the Status of Digitization at German HEI,” European Journal of Higher Education IT, vol. 1, no. 01/2020, 2020.
[7] H. Handayani, A. M. Ayulya, K. U. Faizah, D. Wulan, M. F. Rozan, and M. L. Hamzah, “Perancangan Sistem Informasi Inventory Barang Berbasis Web Menggunakan Metode Agile Software Development,” Jurnal Testing Dan Implementasi Sistem Informasi, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 29–40, 2023.
[8] S. Petter and E. R. McLean, “A meta-analytic assessment of the DeLone and McLean IS success model: An examination of IS success at the individual level,” Information & Management, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 159–166, 2009.
[9] C. Zhao and L. Zhao, “Digital Nativity, Computer Self-Efficacy, and Technology Adoption: A Study Among University Faculties in China,” Front. Psychol., vol. 12, no. September, pp. 1–7, 2021, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.746292.
[10] H. College, U. Sultan, and Z. Abidin, “Factors propelling the adoption of internet banking : the role of e-customer service , website design , brand image and customer satisfaction Samar Rahi * Mazuri Abd Ghani Abdul Hafaz Ngah,” vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 549–569, 2020.
[11] W. H. DeLone and E. R. McLean, “The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update,” Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 9–30, 2003, doi: 10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748.
[12] D. Dajani, S. G. Yaseen, I. El Qirem, and H. Sa’d, “Predictors of Intention to Use a Sustainable Cloud-Based Quality Management System among Academics in Jordan,” Sustainability (Switzerland), vol. 14, no. 21, pp. 1–18, 2022, doi: 10.3390/su142114253.
[13] F. D. Davis, “A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results,” 1985, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
[14] V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis, “User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view,” MIS quarterly, pp. 425–478, 2003.
[15] D. M. Putri and M. V. Adil, “SIAKAD UI/UX Design using the Design Thinking Method at the Indonesian Catholic University Santu Paulus Ruteng,” J-INTECH, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 383–392, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.32664/j-intech.v11i2.1044.
[16] D. A. Purnomo, N. D. Tektanto, K. W. Prasetyo, and H. N. Hadi, “Pengembangan Modul Pengelolaan Praktek Kerja Lapangan Pada Sistem Informasi Akademik Perguruan Tinggi (Studi Kasus : STIKI),” J-INTECH, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 278–286, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.32664/j-intech.v11i2.998.
[17] Y. Sugiarti et al., “Usability Evaluation on Website Using the Cognitive Walkthrough Method,” in 2023 11th International Conference on Cyber and IT Service Management (CITSM), IEEE, Nov. 2023, pp. 1–8. doi: 10.1109/CITSM60085.2023.10455564.
[18] V. Venkatesh, J. Y. L. Thong, and X. Xu, “Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology1,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 157–178, Mar. 2012, doi: 10.2307/41410412.
[19] K. Tamilmani, N. P. Rana, and Y. K. Dwivedi, “Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology: A Meta-Analytic Evaluation of UTAUT2,” Information Systems Frontiers, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 987–1005, Aug. 2021, doi: 10.1007/s10796-020-10007-6.
[20] “The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update,” Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 9–30, Apr. 2003, doi: 10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748.
[21] A. Rai, S. S. Lang, and R. B. Welker, “Assessing the Validity of IS Success Models: An Empirical Test and Theoretical Analysis,” Information Systems Research, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 50–69, Mar. 2002, doi: 10.1287/isre.13.1.50.96.
[22] S. Petter and E. R. McLean, “A meta-analytic assessment of the DeLone and McLean IS success model: An examination of IS success at the individual level,” Information & Management, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 159–166, Apr. 2009, doi: 10.1016/j.im.2008.12.006.
[23] D. Al-Fraihat, M. Joy, R. Masa’deh, and J. Sinclair, “Evaluating E-learning systems success: An empirical study,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 102, pp. 67–86, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.004.
[24] D. Dajani, S. G. Yaseen, I. El Qirem, and H. Sa’d, “Predictors of Intention to Use a Sustainable Cloud-Based Quality Management System among Academics in Jordan,” Sustainability, vol. 14, no. 21, p. 14253, Nov. 2022, doi: 10.3390/su142114253.
[25] A. Subiyakto, N. Erlina, Y. Sugiarti, N. Hakiem, Moh. Irfan, and Abd. R. Ahlan, “Assessing mobile learning system performance in Indonesia: Reports of the model development and its instrument testing,” 2021, p. 060014. doi: 10.1063/5.0041678.
[26] N. Kumaladewi, S. Ratnawati, Y. Sugiarti, and A. Burhanuddin Umar Lubis, “Evaluation of e-Halal Certification System Acceptance to Improve Halal Certification Services at LPPOM MUI,” in 2020 8th International Conference on Cyber and IT Service Management (CITSM), IEEE, Oct. 2020, pp. 1–5. doi: 10.1109/CITSM50537.2020.9268919.
[27] M. Q. Huda, M. S. Irahman, and N. A. Hidayah, “Conceptual Model of Loyalty on Mobile AIS Users Using the Expectation Confirmation Model (ECM),” in 2024 12th International Conference on Cyber and IT Service Management (CITSM), IEEE, Oct. 2024, pp. 1–6. doi: 10.1109/CITSM64103.2024.10775726.
[28] M. Q. Huda, M. S. Irahman, N. A. Hidayah, N. Hasanati, and Y. Sugiarti, “Evaluation of Mobile Application Service on User Loyalty Using Expectation Confirmation Model,” INTENSIF: Jurnal Ilmiah Penelitian dan Penerapan Teknologi Sistem Informasi, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 71–89, Feb. 2026, doi: 10.29407/intensif.v10i1.25253.
[29] H. Latan, J. F. Hair, and R. Noonan, Eds., Partial Least Squares Path Modeling. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2023. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-37772-3.
[30] M. N. K. . Saunders, Philip. Lewis, and Adrian. Thornhill, Research methods for business students. Pearson, 2023.
[31] M. Sabol, J. Hair, G. Cepeda, J. L. Roldán, and A. Y. L. Chong, “PLS-SEM in information systems: seizing the opportunity and marching ahead full speed to adopt methodological updates,” Industrial Management & Data Systems, vol. 123, no. 12, pp. 2997–3017, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1108/IMDS-07-2023-0429.
[32] D. A. Dillman, J. D. Smyth, and L. M. Christian, Internet, Phone, Mail, and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method, 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2020.
[33] S. Communication and O. Access, “Guide to the design and application of online questionnaire surveys Abstract :,” vol. 6, no. December, pp. 640–644, 2016.
[34] J. F. Hair, G. T. M. Hult, C. M. Ringle, M. Sarstedt, N. P. Danks, and S. Ray, Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Using R. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2021. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7.
[35] H. Boone and D. Boone, “Analyzing Likert Data,” J. Ext., vol. 50, no. 2, Apr. 2012, doi: 10.34068/joe.50.02.48.
[36] G. Shmueli et al., “Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: guidelines for using PLSpredict,” Eur. J. Mark., vol. 53, no. 11, pp. 2322–2347, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.1108/EJM-02-2019-0189.
[37] S. M. Rasoolimanesh, “Discriminant validity assessment in PLS-SEM : A comprehensive composite-based approach,” vol. 3, no. February, pp. 1–8, 2022.
[38] M. A. Almaiah, M. M. Alamri, and W. Al-Rahmi, “Applying the UTAUT Model to Explain the Students’ Acceptance of Mobile Learning System in Higher Education,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 174673–174686, 2019, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2957206.
[39] G. Lorenz and K. Buhtz, “Social influence in technology adoption research: A literature review and research agenda,” 2017, pp. 2331–2351.
[40] G. Baptista and T. Oliveira, “Understanding mobile banking: The unified theory of acceptance and use of technology combined with cultural moderators,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 50, pp. 418–430, Sep. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.024.
[41] M. El-Masri and A. Tarhini, “Factors affecting the adoption of e-learning systems in Qatar and USA: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT2),” Educational Technology Research and Development, vol. 65, no. 3, pp. 743–763, Jun. 2017, doi: 10.1007/s11423-016-9508-8.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 J-INTECH
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
