Factors Affecting Employees’ Acceptance of Blockchain in the Higher

Education Institutions

Mohammed Alhumayzi, Luciano Batista and Vladlena Benson

Operation and Information Management, Aston University, Aston Street, Birmingham, U.K.

Keywords: Blockchain, Technology Acceptance, Security, Trust, Behavioural Intention, UTAUT.

Abstract: Blockchain technology is a distributed digital ledger that boosts decentralised applications. This technology

has many potential applications in the Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) industry. Yet, blockchain

technology adoption is still low in HEIs. Within the adoption process, neglecting employees’ acceptance of

blockchain technology might cause a failure in adopting blockchain. To address the blockchain acceptance

problem, this study aims to determine the factors that impact employees’ acceptance of blockchain technology

within HEIs. To accomplish this aim, this paper proposes a framework that extends the unified theory of

acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) with blockchain characteristics to determine the factors that

affect blockchain acceptance among HEIs’ employees. Specifically, the proposed model includes UTAUT

constructs: effort expectance, performed expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, behavioural

intention and technology use, and blockchain characteristics, including security and trust. Also, this study

investigates HEIs employees’ awareness as a moderator of UTAUT factors. This paper contributes to

academia as it proposes a new theoretical framework that contains factors that might facilitate or hinder the

implementation of blockchain technology applications among employees. The present paper also contributes

to practitioners in HEIs as it informs decision-makers about potential factors concerning employees’

acceptance of the blockchain technology.

1 INTRODUCTION

Blockchain technology can disrupt individuals’ daily

activities and organisations’ operations. Indeed, it can

potentially disrupt different sectors, including Higher

Education Institutions (HEIs) (Tapscott & Tapscott,

2017). Blockchain can be described as ‘a distributed

digital ledger used to support the applications such as

Bitcoin’ (Beynon-Davies, 2020, p.175). Blockchain

represents a list that is recorded in a distributed

database, which could be confirmed by network

participants, called nodes (Yli-Huumo et al., 2016).

The nodes can employ blockchain to provide a new

method to store and share data (Grech & Camilleri,

2017).

The HEIs industry has issues in developing the

learning system as it has not evolved for a long time,

particularly in developing states (Sharma & Batth,

2020). Trust, security and privacy are significant

issues HEIs encounter within their cyber systems

(Raimundo & Rosário, 2021), which could be

significantly decreased by adopting a well-developed

blockchain-based application(s) (Alammary et al.,

2019; Awaji et al., 2020). Blockchain could improve

various sections and activities, including, but not

limited to, finance, human resources and libraries (Al

Harthy et al., 2019; Loukil et al., 2021). For instance,

Sony Global Education team (2017) proposed their

blockchain-based system for authenticating, storing

and managing educational records. Relatedly, some

HEIs have applied blockchain, such as the University

of Nicosia, King’s College and Open University.

They use blockchain to issue and store certificates,

receive tuition fees and administrate educational

procedures (Fedorova P. & Skobleva I., 2020). Hence,

HEIs could benefit from adopting blockchain within

their systems and across different sections.

Previous studies show that HEIs attempt to adopt

emerging technology (Kaushik & Verma, 2020). In

this context, employees play a significant role in the

adoption process. For example

, a modest level of

productivity and failure of adoption might occur if

employees reject the adoption of a technology

(Brandon-Jones & Kauppi, 2018; Brown et al., 2014;

Alhumayzi, M., Batista, L. and Benson, V.

Factors Affecting Employees’ Acceptance of Blockchain in the Higher Education Institutions.

DOI: 10.5220/0011833500003467

In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS 2023) - Volume 2, pages 297-303

ISBN: 978-989-758-648-4; ISSN: 2184-4992

 2023 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. Under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

297

Venkatesh et al., 2003). Also, most employees resist

general organisational changes, which might lead to

turnover intention (Laumer et al., 2016; Srivastava &

Agrawal, 2020). Therefore, blockchain acceptance by

employees in HEIs is critical to achieve successful

adoption.

This study aims to explore the factors that

determine blockchain acceptance in HEIs among

employees. The objectives of this paper are: 1)

identifying the drivers and barriers to using

blockchain among HEIs’ employees; and 2)

developing a conceptual model that supports HEIs’

decision-makers to adopt the blockchain. Further,

these objectives contribute to academia in different

aspects. It explores blockchain acceptance from a

new individual perspective. Secondly, it proposes a

new developed conceptual framework. Further, it

provides HEIs’ decision-makers with individual and

technological factors that might cause accepting or

rejecting blockchain applications by employees.

2 LITERATURE BASIS

Literature studies have explored the technical and

financial aspects of blockchain and tend to disregard

the talk about adopting this technology (Chod et al.,

2018; Cole et al., 2019; Janssen et al., 2020; Nofer et

al., 2017; Saberi et al., 2019). To explore, in their

systematic literature review (SLR), Alshamsi et al.

(2022) found that blockchain adoption is

concentrated around organisational facets (not

individual). In HEIs, the authors of the current study

align with Taherdoost's (2022) findings, have found

that only three studies examined blockchain adoption

in HEIs (i.e., Iftikhar et al., 2021; Kumar et al., 2022;

Ullah et al., 2021). However, these studies differ from

the current study.

For instance, one of the closest studies to this

paper is from Ullah et al. (2021). However, it differs

from the current study in the context and theoretical

framework. Ullah et al. (2021) integrated the

Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and Diffusion

of Innovation theory, while the current study is based

on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of

Technology (UTAUT). Secondly, their investigation

concerned e-learning only and not other HEIs’

activities.

Kumar et al. (2022) presented a recent study about

blockchain adoption in HEIs. However, it varies from

the current paper in the underpinning framework and

targeted sample. Kumar and others mainly extended

TAM, not UTAUT. Moreover, they did not include

administrative employees in their study. Further, this

study does not include students, which was part of

Kumar’s investigation.

Likewise, Iftikhar et al. (2021) recently discussed

blockchain technology adoption in HEIs. The

framework of Iftikhar and others is based on the

integration of TAM and technology-organization-

environment (TOE) frameworks. Unlike Iftikhar et al.

(2021), the present study employs UTAUT as the

underlined theory, not TAM and TOE.

Therefore, there is no published paper that aims to

provide a conceptual framework based on UTAUT to

determine the factors that predict blockchain

acceptance among employees in the HEIs industry.

This paper endeavours to close this gap by exploring

factors that predict employees’ acceptance of

blockchain technology in HEIs.

3 TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE

MODEL

Venkatesh et al. (2003) proposed the UTAUT to unify

the view of technology user acceptance. UTAUT is

employed in the current study for three factors. Firstly,

it is among the most utilised theoretical acceptance

model in studies that regard blockchain technology

adoption in different sectors, excluding the HEIs

sector (Taherdoost, 2022). Secondly, UTAUT could

investigate the actual use of different technologies,

individuals segments, industries, and nations

(Venkatesh et al., 2016). Finally, UTAUT is preferred

in studies investigating workplaces (Sneesl et al.,

2022). Hence, UTAUT is selected as the main theory

of the current study.

However, UTAUT constructs do not include

blockchain characteristics. In UTAUT’s initial

proposal, Venkatesh et al. (2003) identified

“performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social

influence and facilitating conditions” (p.447) as the

determinants of users’ acceptance and use behaviour

of an emerging technology. However, the UTAUT

constructs do not include blockchain’s characteristics,

namely, security, privacy and trust. Indeed,

blockchain attributes are deemed substantial in

investigating individuals’ acceptance of use (Albayati

et al., 2020). Hence, the framework of the current

paper adds the blockchain characteristics to the

UTAUT constructs. Moreover, it investigates the

moderating role of awareness because blockchain

remains an infant technology (Toufaily et al., 2021).

ICEIS 2023 - 25th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

298

Following Venkatesh et al. (2016) suggestion, this

study extends the UTAUT constructs by employing

the New Endogenous Mechanisms and New

Moderation Mechanisms to build determinants

consistent with the blockchain characteristics. These

mechanisms are employed to extend UTAUT with the

blockchain technology characteristics. Additionally,

awareness moderates the correlation between

UTAUT antecedents and intention to use blockchain.

Furthermore, the proposed framework of this study

does not employ the UTAUT initial moderators (i.e.,

gender, age, experience and voluntariness of use)

because they do not exhibit flexibility in acceptance

and usage (Alazab et al., 2021). Hence, the selected

factors for the present study include UTAUT

constructs, blockchain main characteristics and

awareness as a moderating variable.

3.1 Hypotheses Development

Based on the discussion above, the following

hypotheses will be employed.

3.1.1 Performance Expectancy

In the present study, performance expectancy refers

to the degree to which employees believe that using

blockchain will enhance their performance (Alazab et

al., 2021). Following the blockchain use cases in

higher education (e.g., Bhaskar et al., 2020 and

Eaganathan et al., 2019), this study assumes potential

advancements in job performance among the HEIs’

employees when applying blockchain.

Furthermore, previous studies have found that

performance expectancy positively and significantly

affects the intention to adopt blockchain (Abu Afifa

et al., 2022; Alazab et al., 2021; Queiroz et al., 2021).

Therefore, this study formulates the following

hypothesis:

H1. Performance expectancy has a significant and

positive impact on the behavioural intention to adopt

blockchain among HEIs employees.

3.1.2 Effort Expectancy

Venkatesh et al. (2003) referred to effort expectancy

as the extent of easiness correlated to using a

technology (e.g. blockchain).

The acceptance of using an emerging technology

is more likely to decrease among employees if they

believe it is complex and not easy to use (Alazab et

al., 2021). Thus, this study proposes that if HEIs’

employees find the utilisation of blockchain

diminishes their effort to implement their tasks and is

not complex; they will accept the use of blockchain

applications (Wamba & Queiroz, 2019). Further,

blockchain’s autonomy feature might reduce

employees’ effort to fulfil tasks.

Previous studies have found that effort

expectancy positively and significantly affects the

intention to adopt blockchain (Abu Afifa et al., 2022;

Alazab et al., 2021). Therefore, this study proposes

the following hypothesis:

H2. Effort expectancy has a significant and

positive impact on the behavioural intention to adopt

blockchain among HEIs employees.

3.1.3 Social Influence

In this study, social influence refers to the extent to

which employees comprehend the reasons their

colleagues, friends and/or family members believe in

using blockchain technology (Alazab et al., 2021;

Queiroz & Fosso Wamba, 2019). Additionally,

blockchain is a new technology, which might increase

the importance of social influence on employees’

intention to accept or reject utilising blockchain

applications (Abu Afifa et al., 2022).

Previous studies concerning blockchain adoption

have found a positive and significant correlation

between social influence and the intention to use

blockchain applications (Abu Afifa et al., 2022;

Khazaei, 2020). Hence, this study proposes the

following hypothesis:

H3. Social influence has a significant and positive

impact on the behavioural intention to adopt

blockchain among HEIs employees.

3.1.4 Facilitating Conditions

Facilitating conditions factor refers to employees’

feelings toward the availability of the organisational

and technological infrastructure to support the use of

blockchain applications (Venkatesh et al., 2003).

This study postulates that if employees perceive

that the organisational and technological

infrastructure (e.g., human support) is

accommodating to utilise blockchain applications,

they are more likely to attain a better experience of

utilising blockchain application which will increase

their intention to accept using blockchain technology

(Alazab et al., 2021; Queiroz & Fosso Wamba, 2019).

Prior literature investigating blockchain has found

that facilitating conditions significantly and

positively impact the behavioural intention to utilise

blockchain technology applications (Alazab et al.,

2021). Thus, this study formulates the following

hypothesis:

Factors Affecting Employees’ Acceptance of Blockchain in the Higher Education Institutions

299

H4. Facilitating conditions has a significant and

positive impact on the behavioural intention to adopt

blockchain among HEIs employees.

3.1.5 Trust

Grech and Camilleri (2017) define trust as the

judgement between two or more parties, such as

individuals and technologies.

The significance of trust in various technologies

has been discussed widely in previous literature that

concerns blockchain adoption (e.g., Alazab et al.,

2021; Queiroz & Fosso Wamba, 2019). Trust

between users and a particular technology affects

users’ intention to utilise the technology (Zakaria,

2020). Further, trust is significantly pertinent to

blockchain and higher education shareholders, such

as employees (Ramos & Queiroz, 2022). Hence, it

could be argued that a lack of trust can cause the

rejection of using blockchain technology applications

among HEIs’ employees (Alazab et al., 2021;

Almaiah et al., 2019). In other words, the less an

individual trusts a technology, the less he or she

accepts the use of the technology.

This study argues that trust significantly impacts

users’ behaviour toward a particular technology

(Zakaria, 2020). Previous studies found that trust

significantly correlates with the intention to use

blockchain technology (Khazaei, 2020; Queiroz et al.,

2021; Ramos & Queiroz, 2022; Wamba & Queiroz,

2020; Zakaria, 2020). Additionally, trust has been

found to have a significantly positive impact on the

effort expectancy and performance expectancy

(Chang et al., 2022). Hence, this study hypothesises:

H5A. Trust has a significant impact on the

behavioural intention to adopt blockchain among

HEIs employees.

H5B. Trust has a positive significant impact on

the effort expectancy to adopt blockchain among

HEIs employees.

H5C. Trust has a positive significant impact on

the performance expectancy to adopt blockchain

among HEIs employees.

3.1.6 Perceived Security

Perceived security is the employees’ perception of

safeguarding against security breaches, threats and

data control within the blockchain technology

application (Salisbury et al., 2001).

Privacy aspects could be integrated as part of

perceived security. The overlapping characteristics of

security and privacy, might lead to integrate the

privacy factor into the security factor in order to test

individuals’ intention to accept an emerging

technology (Treiblmaier & Sillaber, 2021). Hence,

this study adds privacy as an additional aspect of the

perceived security construct. Hence, Perceived

privacy and security as one construct can demonstrate

users’ perceptions which concern whether accessing,

utilising and disclosing personal information will

remain confidential (Kumar et al., 2022; Treiblmaier

& Sillaber, 2021).

Perceived security is a significant factor for HEIs

stakeholders (Alammary et al., 2019; Loukil et al.,

2021). Typically, HEIs store a massive amount of

data within their system, including employees’ data.

Employees’ perception or feeling of acquiring higher

security protection while utilising blockchain

technology make them feel safer against

cybersecurity attacks and breaches (Khazaei, 2020).

Hence, employees need to be confident that utilising

blockchain applications increases their perceived

security while conducting their tasks.

It has been found in previous studies that

perceived security affects individuals' intention to

utilise emerging technologies significantly and

positively (Khazaei, 2020; Kumar et al., 2022; Lim et

al., 2019). Also, it has been found in previous studies

that perceived security positively and significantly

affects users’ trust (Almaiah et al., 2019; Kumar et al.,

2022). Based on the discussion above, this study

proposes the following hypothesis:

H6A. Perceived security of blockchain has a

significant positive impact on the behavioural

intention to adopt blockchain among HEIs employees.

H6B. Perceived security of blockchain has a

significant positive impact on trust to adopt

blockchain among HEIs employees.

3.1.7 Awareness

Awareness refers to employees’ knowledge about

blockchain's existence, characteristics, advantages,

ease of use, and usefulness to their institution

(Abubakar et al., 2013).

Awareness is critical in determining the

acceptance or rejection of blockchain technology

among HEIs’ employees. Inadequate awareness of

blockchain would cause employees to encounter

difficulties in shifting from the current system toward

a blockchain application (Khazaei, 2020). Indeed,

employees’ modest awareness of blockchain

technology is considered the most significant barrier

to adopting blockchain (Sadhya & Sadhya, 2018).

Hence, this study argues that the less employees are

aware of blockchain, the more they resist its adoption

in the HEIs systems (Abubakar et al., 2013).

ICEIS 2023 - 25th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

300

Recent studies have found that awareness has a

significant impact as a moderation role between

behavioural intention and UTAUT’s constructs

(Daniali et al., 2022; Omar & Ala’a, 2011). In the

present study, awareness does not moderate the

blockchain characteristics because, to the authors’

best knowledge, no studies have employed awareness

as a moderating variable between security and trust

and behavioural intention to use blockchain.

Consequently, the following is hypothesised:

H7A. Awareness of blockchain significantly

moderates the correlation between performance

expectations and the intention to adopt blockchain.

H7B. Awareness of blockchain significantly

moderates the correlation between effort expectations

and the intention to adopt blockchain.

H7C. Awareness of blockchain significantly

moderates the correlation between social influence

and the intention to adopt blockchain.

H7D. Awareness of blockchain significantly

moderates the correlation between facilitating

conditions and the intention to adopt blockchain.

3.1.8 Behavioural Intention

Intention to use is a central antecedent in previous

theories concerning technology acceptance, such as

TAM and TPB. According to Fishbein and Ajzen

(1975), behavioural intention is the users’ goal or

purpose in carrying out the behaviour. In the context

of the present study, behavioural intention indicates

employees’ goal or purpose to utilise blockchain

applications in HEIs.

Previous studies have seen the intention to use a

technology as the main factor that affects the actual

use of the technology (Venkatesh et al., 2003).

Intention to use a particular technology can predict

the utilisation of an individual’s (e.g., employee)

actual technology use (Cody-Allen & Kishore, 2006).

Based on the significant correlation between

behavioural intention and actual use in previous

models, including UTAUT, this study hypothesises:

H8. Behavioural intention has a significantly

positive impact on the actual use to adopt blockchain

among HEIs employees.

3.2 The Proposed Framework

Following the previous discussion, figure 1

demonstrates this study’s proposed conceptual model.

Figure 1: Proposed conceptual framework.

4 CONCLUSION

This paper presents a conceptual framework that can

contribute to explaining the factors that affect

employees’ acceptance of blockchain technology

within HEIs. The proposed framework was built

based on the UTAUT due to its efficiency in

explaining the acceptance of an emerging technology

by different stakeholders, different time frames, and

different contexts (Venkatesh et al., 2016). The

UTAUT model was expanded in this study by the

inclusion of new factors related to blockchain

characteristics, namely, security, trust and awareness

(as a moderator of UTAUT variables). The proposed

model will be empirically tested in a future study.

REFERENCES

Abu Afifa, M. M., Vo Van, H., Le, T., & Van, H. (2022).

Blockchain Adoption in Accounting by an Extended

UTAUT Model: Empirical Evidence from An Emerging

Economy. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFRA-12-2021-0434

Abubakar, F. M., ini Ahmad, H., Muhammad Abubakar, F.,

& Hartini Ahmad, A. B. (2013). The Moderating Effect

of Technology Awareness on the Relationship between

UTAUT Constructs and Behavioural Intention to Use

Technology. Australian Journal of Business and

Management Research, 3(02).

Al Harthy, K., Al Shuhaimi, F., & Juma Al Ismaily, K. K.

(2019). The Upcoming Blockchain Adoption in Higher-

education: Requirements and Process. 2019 4th MEC

International Conference on Big Data and Smart City,

ICBDSC 2019, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICBDS

C.2019.8645599

Alammary, A., Alhazmi, S., Almasri, M., & Gillani, S.

(2019). Blockchain-Based Applications in Education: A

Systematic Review.

Factors Affecting Employees’ Acceptance of Blockchain in the Higher Education Institutions

301

Alazab, M., Alhyari, S., Awajan, A., & Abdallah, A. B.

(2021). Blockchain Technology in Supply Chain

Management: An Empirical Study of the Factors

Affecting User Adoption/Acceptance. Cluster

Computing, 24(1), 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10

586-020-03200-4

Albayati, H., Kim, S. K., & Rho, J. J. (2020). Accepting

Financial Transactions Using Blockchain Technology

and Cryptocurrency: A Customer Perspective

Approach. Technology in Society, 62(December 2019),

1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101320

Almaiah, M. A., Alamri, M. M., & Al-Rahmi, W. (2019).

Applying the UTAUT Model to Explain the Students’

Acceptance of Mobile Learning System in Higher

Education. IEEE Access, 7, 174673–174686. https://doi.

org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2957206

Alshamsi, M., Al-Emran, M., & Shaalan, K. (2022). A

Systematic Review on Blockchain Adoption. Applied

Sciences (Switzerland), 12(9), 1–18. https://doi.org/1

0.3390/app12094245

Awaji, B., Solaiman, E., & Albshri, A. (2020). Blockchain-

Based Applications in Higher Education: A Systematic

Mapping Study. ACM International Conference

Proceeding Series, 96–104. https://doi.org/10.

1145/3411681.3411688

Beynon-Davies, P. (2020). Business Information System

(Third edit). Macmillan International Higher Education.

Bhaskar, P., Tiwari, C. K., & Joshi, A. (2020). Blockchain

in Education Management: Present and Future

Applications. Interactive Technology and Smart

Education, 18(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-

07-2020-0102

Brandon-Jones, A., & Kauppi, K. (2018). Examining the

Antecedents of the Technology Acceptance Model

within E-procurement. International Journal of

Operations and Production Management, 38(1), 22–42.

https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-06-2015-0346

Brown, S. A., Venkatesh, V., & Goyal, S. (2014).

Expectation Confirmation in Information Systems

Research Author(s): MIS Quarterly: Management

Information Systems, 38(3), 729–756.

Chang, M., Arachchilage C. S. M, W., Kim, M., & Lim, H.

(2022). Acceptance of Tourism Blockchain Based on

Utaut and Connectivism Theory. SSRN Electronic

Journal, 71(May), 102027. https://doi.org/10.2139/

ssrn.4017406

Chod, J., Trichakis, N., Tsoukalas, G., Aspegren, H., &

Weber, M. (2018). Blockchain and the Value of

Operational Transparency for Supply Chain Finance.

Management Science, August. https://doi.org/10.2139/

ssrn.3078945

Cody-Allen, E., & Kishore, R. (2006). An Extension of the

UTAUT Model with E-Quality, Trust, and Satisfaction

Constructs. An Extension of the UTAUT Model with E-

Quality, Trust, and Satisfaction Constructs

Cole, R., Stevenson, M., & Aitken, J. (2019). Blockchain

technology: implications for operations and supply

chain management. Supply Chain Management, 24(4),

469–483. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-09-2018-0309

Daniali, S. M., Barykin, S. E., Zendehdel, M., Kalinina, O.

V., Kulibanova, V. V., Teor, T. R., Ilyina, I. A.,

Alekseeva, N. S., Lisin, A., Moiseev, N., & Senjyu, T.

(2022). Exploring UTAUT Model in Mobile 4.5G

Service: Moderating Social–Economic Effects of

Gender and Awareness. Social Sciences, 11(5). https://

doi.org/10.3390/socsci11050187

Eaganathan, U., Indrian, V. V., & Nathan, Y. (2019).

Ideation Framework of Block Chain Adoption in

Malaysia Higher Education. Journal of Physics:

Conference Series, 1228(1). https://doi.org/10.

1088/1742-6596/1228/1/012072

Fedorova P., E., & Skobleva I., E. (2020). Application of

Blockchain Technology in Higher Education.

European Journal of Contemporary Education, 9(3),

552–571. https://doi.org/10.13187/ejced.2020.3.552

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention

and Behaviour: An Introduction to Theory and

Research. MA: Addison-Wesey.

Grech, A., & Camilleri, A. F. (2017). Blockchain in

Education. https://doi.org/10.2760/60649

Iftikhar, W., Vistro, D. M., & Mahmood, Z. (2021).

Blockchain Technology Adoption by Malaysian Higher

Education Institutes: A Perspective of Integrated Tam

Model and Toe Framework. Proceedings of the 3rd

International Conference on Integrated Intelligent

Computing Communication & Security (ICIIC 2021),

4(Iciic), 606–617. https://doi.org/10.2991/ahis.k.21

0913.077

Janssen, M., Weerakkody, V., Ismagilova, E., Sivarajah, U.,

& Irani, Z. (2020). A Framework for Analysing

Blockchain Technology Adoption: Integrating

Institutional, Market and Technical Factors.

International Journal of Information Management,

50(July 2019), 302–309. https://doi.org/10.101

6/j.ijinfomgt.2019.08.012

Kaushik, M. K., & Verma, D. (2020). Determinants of

Digital Learning Acceptance Behavior: A Systematic

Review of Applied Theories and Implications for Higher

Education. Journal of Applied Research in Higher

Education, 12(4), 659–672. https://doi.org/10.1

108/JARHE-06-2018-0105

Khazaei, H. (2020). Integrating Cognitive Antecedents to

UTAUT Model to Explain Adoption of Blockchain

Technology Among Malaysian SMEs. International

Journal on Informatics Visualization, 4(2), 85–90.

https://doi.org/10.30630/joiv.4.2.362

Kumar, N., Singh, M., Upreti, K., & Mohan, D. (2022).

Blockchain Adoption Intention in Higher Education:

Role of Trust, Perceived Security and Privacy in

Technology Adoption Model. In ICETIS 2021 (Vol.

299). Springer International Publishing.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-82616-1_27

Laumer, S., Maier, C., Eckhardt, A., & Weitzel, T. (2016).

User Personality and Resistance to Mandatory

Information Systems in Organizations: A Theoretical

Model and Empirical Test of Dispositional Resistance

to Change. Journal of Information Technology,

31(1),

67–82. https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2015.17

Lim, S. H., Kim, D. J., Hur, Y., & Park, K. (2019). An

Empirical Study of the Impacts of Perceived Security

and Knowledge on Continuous Intention to Use Mobile

Fintech Payment Services. International Journal of

ICEIS 2023 - 25th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

302

Human-Computer Interaction, 35(10), 886–898.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1507132

Loukil, F., Abed, M., & Boukadi, K. (2021). Blockchain

Adoption in Education: A Systematic Literature

Review. Education and Information Technologies, May.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10481-8

Nofer, M., Gomber, P., Hinz, O., & Schiereck, D. (2017).

Blockchain. Business and Information Systems

Engineering, 59(3), 183–187. https://doi.org/10.1

007/s12599-017-0467-3

Omar, K., & Ala’a, A.-N. (2011). Determinants of E-Gov

Adopt in Kuwait: The Case of the Traffic Violation E-

payment System (TVEPS). Second Kuwait Conference

on E-Services and e-Systems, Kuwait.

Queiroz, M. M., & Fosso Wamba, S. (2019). Blockchain

Adoption Challenges In Supply Chain: An Empirical

Investigation of the Main Drivers in India and the USA.

International Journal of Information Management,

46(September 2018), 70–82. https://doi.org/10.101

6/j.ijinfomgt.2018.11.021

Queiroz, M. M., Fosso Wamba, S., De Bourmont, M., &

Telles, R. (2021). Blockchain Adoption in Operations

and Supply Chain Management: Empirical Evidence

from An Emerging Economy. International Journal of

Production Research, 59(20), 6087–6103. https://

doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2020.1803511

Raimundo, R., & Rosário, A. (2021). Blockchain System in

the Higher Education. European Journal of Investigation

in Health, Psychology and Education, 11(1), 276–293.

https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe11010021

Ramos, C. R. dos S., & Queiroz, M. M. (2022). Blockchain

in Education: The Influence of Trust on Adoption and

Implementation. RAUSP Management Journal, 57(3),

316–331. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-06-2021-0097

Saberi, S., Kouhizadeh, M., Sarkis, J., & Shen, L. (2019).

Blockchain technology and its relationships to

sustainable supply chain management. International

Journal of Production Research, 57(7), 2117–2135.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1533261

Sadhya, V., & Sadhya, H. (2018). Barriers to Adoption of

Blockchain Technology. Proceedings of the 24th

Americas Conference on Information Systems, 1–10.

Salisbury, W. D., Pearson, R. A., Pearson, A. W., & Miller,

D. W. (2001). Perceived Security and World Wide Web

Purchase Intention. Industrial Management & Data

Systems, 101(4), 165–177. https://doi.org/10.1108/02635

570110390071

Sharma, S., & Batth, R. S. (2020). Blockchain Technology

for Higher Education Sytem: A Mirror Review.

Proceedings of International Conference on Intelligent

Engineering and Management, ICIEM 2020, 348–353.

https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIEM48762.2020.9160274

Sneesl, R., Jusoh, Y. Y., Jabar, M. A., & Abdullah, S.

(2022). Revising Technology Adoption Factors for IoT-

Based Smart Campuses: A Systematic Review.

Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(8), 1–27. https://doi.

org/10.3390/su14084840

Sony Global Education team. (2017).

Sony develops system

for authentication, sharing, and rights management

using blockchain technology A technology that makes

mutual use of educational achievements. https://www.

sonyged.com/2017/08/10/news/press-blockchain/

Srivastava, S., & Agrawal, S. (2020). Resistance to Change

and Turnover Intention: A Moderated Mediation Model

of Burnout and Perceived Organizational Support.

Journal of Organizational Change Management, 33(7),

1431–1447. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-02-2020-

0063

Taherdoost, H. (2022). A Critical Review of Blockchain

Acceptance Models—Blockchain Technology Adoption

Frameworks and Applications. Computers, 11(2). https://

doi.org/10.3390/computers11020024

Tapscott, D., & Tapscott, A. (2017). The Blockchain

Revolution & Higher Education. Education Review,

52(2), 10–24.

Toufaily, E., Zalan, T., & Dhaou, S. Ben. (2021). A

Framework of Blockchain Technology Adoption: An

Investigation of Challenges and Expected Value.

Information and Management, 58(3), 103444. https://

doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2021.103444

Treiblmaier, H., & Sillaber, C. (2021). The Impact of

Blockchain on E-commerce: A Framework for Salient

Research Topics. Electronic Commerce Research and

Applications, 48. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ELER

AP.2021.101054

Ullah, N., Al-Rahmi, W. M., Alzahrani, A. I., Alfarraj, O.,

& Alblehai, F. M. (2021). Blockchain Technology

Adoption in Smart Learning Environments.

Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(4), 1–18. https://doi.

org/10.3390/su13041801

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D.

(2003). User Acceptance of Information Technology:

Toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–

478.

Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xin Xu. (2016). Unified

Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology: A

Synthesis and the Road Ahead. Journal of the

Association for Information Systems, 17(5), 328–376.

Wamba, S. F., & Queiroz, M. M. (2019). The Role of Social

Influence in Blockchain Adoption: The Brazilian

Supply Chain Case. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 52(13), 1715

–1720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2019.11.448

Wamba, S. F., & Queiroz, M. M. (2020). Industry 4.0 and

the Supply Chain Digitalisation: A Blockchain

Diffusion Perspective. Production Planning and

Control, 193–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.

2020.1810756

Yli-Huumo, J., Ko, D., Choi, S., Park, S., & Smolander, K.

(2016). Where is Current Eesearch on Blockchain

Rechnology? - A Systematic Review. PLoS ONE,

11(10), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.

0163477

Zakaria, Z. (2020). Factors Determine the Behavioural

Intention in Adopting the Blockchain Technology by

Malaysian Public Sector Officers Interaction between

Crude Oil and Budget Variables in Malaysia View

project Macroeconomic Environments and Demand for

Retail Space in Sho. Journal of Advanced Research in

Business and Management Studies, 20, 34–43. https://

doi.org/10.37934/arbms.20.1.3443

Factors Affecting Employees’ Acceptance of Blockchain in the Higher Education Institutions

303