MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS IN HIGHER

EDUCATION

Key Factors of User Acceptance

Elisabeth Milchrahm

Institute of Information Science and Information Systems, University Graz, Universitaetsstrasse 15, 8010 Graz, Austria

Keywords: Technology Acceptance, Management Information Systems, User Needs, Higher Education.

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.

1 INTRODUCTION

While the last few years have primarily seen the

publication of works on the technical and

organisational implementation of university

management information systems, more recent

publications present initial findings of case studies

on user acceptance. However, there are still no

comprehensive, empirical findings. In the literature,

the term acceptance refers to the recurrent decision

on the part of an individual to make frequent task-

based use of an information system (Venkatesh and

Davis, 2000; Govindarajulu, Reithel and Sethi,

2000). For the user, acceptance problems mean that

his perceptions about completing tasks using

management information systems are only given

minor consideration. Knowledge of the variables

that influence acceptance is however crucial for the

development of information systems. It is therefore

important to view empirical research into acceptance

in close context with research on implementation.

The model from Davis (1989) has frequently been

the subject of empirical surveys in acceptance

research: The Technology Acceptance Model is

adapted according to the application (Schepers and

Wetzels, 2007; Burton-Jones and Hubona, 2006)

with studies on user satisfaction (Baroudi and

Orlikowski, 1988; Melone, 1990) also making an

important contribution. Further approaches have

been developed, such as the Task-Technology-Fit

model (Gilbert and Kelly, 2005; Goodhue and

Thompson, 1995) or combined research models

(Klopping and McKinney, 2004; Dishaw and

Strong, 1999; Compeau and Higgins, 1995).

2 UNIVERSITY MANAGEMENT

INFORMATION SYSTEMS

IN AUSTRIAN UNIVERSITIES

The new regulatory framework for universities in

Austria over the past few years has also required that

a change be made to how courses and examinations

are administered. As early as 1998, a new concept of

degree courses started at Austrian universities with

international credits for examination performance.

The majority of Austrian universities now use the

system UnigrazOnline (UGO) developed by Graz

University of Technology and accredited by EUNIS

(European University Information Systems

Association). The management information system

can be used both by staff and students.

227

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 - Human-Computer Interaction, pages 227-230

 SciTePress

Alongside having to use the system to register

and cancel a registration for courses and

examinations, students are also free to use additional

options: For students authorised to use the system,

the course units can be transferred to a personalised

electronic timetable. Additionally, a personal

business card can be generated or an automatic e-

mail can set up that provides information about

events at the university. ‘Personal settings’ concern

the system-specific display options, such as ‘account

status’ with individual details (validity of the

password, e-mail address, transcript of records). A

further service can be used to import a digital image

for the personal identification (‘unicard image

upload’). In the discussion fora, the students are able

to communicate electronically with other course

participants.

3 RESEARCH DESIGN

The aim of the survey was for at least 300 students

from each of the faculties of Social and Economic

Sciences, Law and Natural Sciences to take part in

the written survey. Setting a benchmark for the

number of respondents and focussing on three of the

total of five faculties at Graz University was crucial

to ensure that the process of data collection did not

get out of hand. After a preliminary study, it was

possible for the written questionnaires to be used in

a total of 29 courses just two months after the

university-wide roll-out of the system. The

frequency of active use outside the registration

periods was surveyed, as registration for courses and

examinations have to be carried out using UGO, and

any enquiry into frequency of use during this

registration period would have produced biased

results.

The questionnaire is divided into several sections

with a series of open and closed questions on the

degree of use and on the main areas of focus:

usefulness (Lee and Kim, 2009; Davis, 1989), ease

of use (Chen, Yen and Chen, 2009; Davis, 1989),

registration/cancellation methods, trust (Milchrahm,

2003; Dyer and Chu, 2000; Macy and Skvoretz,

1998) and mandatory use. In the context of the

factor usefulness it is assumed that there is a positive

correlation between the quality of information

provided and the level of user acceptance with

respect to the information system (Gatian, 1994).

Thus, questions about the access of important course

information or services making the curriculum easier

for students are included. Regarding ease of use,

basic prerequisites of user friendly information

systems are well structured presentation and useful

search functions. Another important aspect is the

support of the user in the completion of a given task.

Concerning university management information

systems it means, for example, that the registration

for courses has to be easy to manage. Registration

methods with an optimal allocation of course places

play also a crucial role in the research on user

acceptance among students. Besides, the stability of

the system should prevent registration chaos even

for mass registrations. Apart from the technical

security, it is assumed that contacts and FAQs

(Frequently Asked Questions) strengthen user trust

in the system. Furthermore, information on the

institutes’ webpages should agree with the

information in the university management

information system. With regard to mandatory use, a

further question is included. Finally, socio-

demographic information, such as the age of the

respondents, completes the questionnaire.

4 RESULTS

1,102 questionnaires were distributed and all of

them were capable of being analysed: 343

respondents (31%) of the faculty of Social and

Economic Sciences, 348 students (32%) of the

faculty of Law and 406 (37%) of the faculty of

Natural Sciences. Two further respondents belong to

another faculty and three respondents did not

provide information about their faculty. The average

age of female students (60%) was 21.88, whereas

the average age for male students (40%) was 22.95.

On average, the respondents were in the 4

semester

of their study.

Table 1 provides a summary of the descriptive

statistics on the questionnaires. The dimension

frequency of use encompasses ‘daily’, ‘several times

a week’, ‘once per week’, ‘several times a month’

and ‘once per month or less’. The possible responses

to the other areas of focus range from ‘disagree’,

‘disagree somewhat’, ‘undecided’, ‘agree somewhat’

to ‘strongly agree’. With respect to frequency of use,

the median ‘several times/week’ denotes that 50% of

the responses relate to either a more or less frequent

use of the system.

ICEIS 2010 - 12th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

228

Table 1: Key factors and acceptance features.

Key factor

Acceptance feature

Median

Frequency of use

Ease of use

Usefulness

Trust

Usefulness

Mandatory use

Trust

Registration/

Cancellation

methods

Frequency of use of UGO outside the registration periods

I find it very easy to register/cancel registrations for courses and

examinations.

The user interface of UGO is very easy to understand.

I find the general search function in UGO very useful.

Using UGO saves me going to different institutes.

Information on courses on the institutes’ webpages agrees with the

information in UGO.

Notifications about course changes work.

The stability of UGO prevents registration chaos even for mass registrations.

I am able to access important course information using UGO.

I only use UGO because I have to and not because I find it helpful.

I know who to approach when I have problems relating to the content of the

system.

I know where I can find FAQs.

I prefer to register in person for courses.

A ‘first come, first served’ allocation of places is optimal when registering

for courses.

The allocation of places during course registration is optimal and takes the

requirements of the curriculum into account.

Several times/week

Strongly agree

Agree somewhat

Undecided

Agree somewhat

Undecided

Agree somewhat

Undecided

Agree somewhat

Disagree somewhat

Disagree

Disagree somewhat

Undecided

The implementation of the system for

registering/cancelling a registration for courses and

examinations in UGO can be seen as successful, as

the majority of respondents find the electronic

process very easy. This result is also encouraging, as

the students have to use the corresponding services

and high acceptance can also have positive effects

on the pattern of use of other services. The clarity of

the user interface as a feature of the university

management information system’s ease of use is

judged relatively good. The results into the questions

whether the general search function is very useful

and whether the course information on the webpages

agree with information in UGO show a somewhat

indifferent picture.

Even though there is some potential for

improvement in terms of the consistency of

information, the relevance of the published

information was hardly called into question. The

task of the management information system to

publish important course information has been

achieved in the eyes of the students questioned.

Regarding the factor of mandatory use the results

reveal that the majority of the respondents do not

only use the system because they have to. Instead

they use the system because they find it helpful.

In principle there is support through contacts.

However, 31% of those surveyed had no idea who to

contact with questions regarding the content of the

system. Combined with the ease of access of FAQs,

also perceived as poor, some action is required here.

The question about registering in person for

courses is based on the assumption that user

acceptance of the university management

information system also depends on the attitude to

the registration methods. A strong preference for

registering for courses in person (for example in the

institute’s registration office) could be interpreted as

a somewhat negative attitude towards electronic

registration methods. However, it has to be stated

that such a preference has various reasons. The

allocation of course places by means of a

chronological registration sequence using waiting

list (first come, first served) is rather unpopular with

the respondents.

The point mentioned most frequently with

respect to suggestions for improvement is, first and

foremost, the aspect of clearly represented

information, followed by additional information

(information about courses and waiting lists, sample

curricula), improved additional functions (FAQs,

better search function, better print options) and the

system’s ease of use. At the same time, the complex

functions with countless, automatically opening

windows is criticised. Further problem areas concern

the design of the user interface with the graphic

format of the system being seen as antiquated and

dull. A more modern image was therefore proposed

by several students.

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

229

5 CONCLUSIONS

The survey into user acceptance of the university

management information system has shown that the

take-up of the system by students has been good,

with usages of several times a week outside the

registration periods. The following main areas were

identified as key factors: ease of use, usefulness,

mandatory use, trust and registration/cancellation

methods. Areas of weakness emerged in particular in

the last two. This means that, on the one hand,

greater awareness training is required in terms of

contacts and online help and, on the other, the

allocation of course places on the basis of a

chronological sequence of waiting lists should be re-

considered. Special information on degree

programmes and the preparation of sample curricula

could be of considerable benefit as an information

guide, particularly for those in their first semester,

and was therefore explicitly requested by the users

surveyed. A better positioning of FAQs and an

extension of this static help facility in the form of

so-called interactive ‘wikis’, on which several

interested people work as an online dictionary, could

significantly improve the available help. This could

lead to reinforcing users’ trust in the system.

REFERENCES

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.

Burton-Jones, A., Hubona, G. (2006). The mediation of

external variables in the technology acceptance model,

Information & Management, 43, pp. 706-717.

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.

Compeau, D.R., Higgins, C.A. (1995). Computer Self-

Efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test,

Management Information Systems Quarterly, 19 (2),

pp. 189-211.

Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceivend usefulness, ease of use and

user acceptance of information technology,

Management Information Systems Quarterly, 13 (3),

pp. 319-339.

Dishaw, M.T., Strong, D.M. (1999). Extending the

technology acceptance model with task-technology fit

constructs, Information & Management, 36, pp. 9-21.

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.

Gatian, A. (1994). Is user satisfaction a valid measure of

system effectiveness? Information & Management, 26,

pp. 119 -131.

Gilbert, J., Kelly, R. (2005). Frontiers and frontlines:

metaphers describing lecturers`attitudes to ICT

adoption, Educational Technology & Society, 8 (3),

pp. 11-121.

Goodhue, D.L., Thompson, R.L. (1995). Task-technology

fit and individual performance, Management

Information Systems Quarterly, pp. 213-236.

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.

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.

Klopping, I.M., McKinney, E. (2004). Extending the

Technology Acceptance Model and the Task-

Technology Fit Model to Consumer E-Commerce,

Information Technology, Learning and Performance

Journal, 22 (1), pp. 35-48.

Lee, S., Kim, B.G. (2009). Factors affecting the usage of

intranet: A confirmatory study, Computers in Human

Behavior, 25, pp. 191-201.

Macy, M.W., Skvoretz, J. (1998). The evolution of trust

and cooperation between strangers: A computational

model, American Sociological Review, 63, pp.

638-660.

Melone, N.P. (1990). A theoretical assessment of the user-

satisfaction construct in information systems research,

Management Science, 36 (1), pp. 76-91.

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.

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.

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.

ICEIS 2010 - 12th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

230