MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS IN HIGHER EDUCATION - Key Factors of User Acceptance

Elisabeth Milchrahm

Abstract

The pan-European management of higher education has resulted in management information systems being developed by the universities to administer courses and examinations more effectively and more efficiently. Management information systems in universities have to meet particular requirements, as they not only have to ensure that large volumes of data are managed smoothly; they also have to take account of complex decision-making structures. Object of research of the present study is the most widely distributed university management information system in Austria. The aim is to analyse user acceptance of students based on the following key factors identified: usefulness, ease of use, trust, registration/cancellation methods and mandatory use. Drawing on statistical data of more than 1,100 questionnaires the survey focuses on the critical success factors and provides recommendations for measures to encourage acceptance of management information systems.

References

  1. Baroudi, J., Orlikowski, W. (1988). A short-form measure of user information satisfaction: a psychometric evaluation and notes on use, Journal of Management Systems, 4 (4), pp. 44-59.
  2. Burton-Jones, A., Hubona, G. (2006). The mediation of external variables in the technology acceptance model, Information & Management, 43, pp. 706-717.
  3. Chen, J.V., Yen, D.C., Chen, K. (2009). The acceptance and diffusion of the innovative smart phone use: A case study of delivery service company in logistics, Information & Management, 46, pp. 241-248.
  4. Compeau, D.R., Higgins, C.A. (1995). Computer SelfEfficacy: Development of a measure and initial test, Management Information Systems Quarterly, 19 (2), pp. 189-211.
  5. Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceivend usefulness, ease of use and user acceptance of information technology, Management Information Systems Quarterly, 13 (3), pp. 319-339.
  6. Dishaw, M.T., Strong, D.M. (1999). Extending the technology acceptance model with task-technology fit constructs, Information & Management, 36, pp. 9-21.
  7. Dyer, J.H., Chu, W. (2000). The determinants of trust in supplier-automaker relationships in the U.S., Japan, and Korea, Journal of International Business Studies, 31 (2), pp. 259-285.
  8. Gatian, A. (1994). Is user satisfaction a valid measure of system effectiveness? Information & Management, 26, pp. 119 -131.
  9. Gilbert, J., Kelly, R. (2005). Frontiers and frontlines: metaphers describing lecturersattitudes to ICT adoption, Educational Technology & Society, 8 (3), pp. 11-121.
  10. Goodhue, D.L., Thompson, R.L. (1995). Task-technology fit and individual performance, Management Information Systems Quarterly, pp. 213-236.
  11. Goodhue, D.L., Klein, B.D., March, S.T. (2000). User evaluations of IS as surrogates for objective performance, Information & Management, 30, pp. 87- 101.
  12. Govindarajulu, C., Reithel, B.J., Sethi, V. (2000). A model of end user attitudes and intentions toward alternative sources of support, Information & Management, 37, pp. 77-86.
  13. Klopping, I.M., McKinney, E. (2004). Extending the Technology Acceptance Model and the TaskTechnology Fit Model to Consumer E-Commerce, Information Technology, Learning and Performance Journal, 22 (1), pp. 35-48.
  14. Lee, S., Kim, B.G. (2009). Factors affecting the usage of intranet: A confirmatory study, Computers in Human Behavior, 25, pp. 191-201.
  15. Macy, M.W., Skvoretz, J. (1998). The evolution of trust and cooperation between strangers: A computational model, American Sociological Review, 63, pp. 638-660.
  16. Melone, N.P. (1990). A theoretical assessment of the usersatisfaction construct in information systems research, Management Science, 36 (1), pp. 76-91.
  17. Milchrahm, E. (2003). Modelling the acceptance of information technology: System Trust, Ease of Use and Usefulness. Fine Tuning Information Strategies, Proceedings of the 9th Annual Conference on Professional Information Resources, ISSN: 1214-1429.
  18. Schepers, J., Wetzels, M. (2007). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model: investigating subjective norm and moderation effects, Information & Management, 44, pp. 90-103.
  19. Venkatesh, V., Davis, F.D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies, Management Science, 46 (2), pp. 186-203.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Milchrahm E. (2010). MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS IN HIGHER EDUCATION - Key Factors of User Acceptance . In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 5: ICEIS, ISBN 978-989-8425-08-9, pages 227-230. DOI: 10.5220/0002906502270230


in Bibtex Style

@conference{iceis10,
author={Elisabeth Milchrahm},
title={MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS IN HIGHER EDUCATION - Key Factors of User Acceptance},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 5: ICEIS,},
year={2010},
pages={227-230},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0002906502270230},
isbn={978-989-8425-08-9},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 5: ICEIS,
TI - MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS IN HIGHER EDUCATION - Key Factors of User Acceptance
SN - 978-989-8425-08-9
AU - Milchrahm E.
PY - 2010
SP - 227
EP - 230
DO - 10.5220/0002906502270230