Lee, Y.-H., Hsieh, Y.-C., & Hsu, C.-N. (2011).

Adding Innovation Diffusion Theory to the Technology Acceptance Model:

Supporting Employees' Intentions to use E-Learning Systems. Educational Technology & Society, 14 (4), 124137.

Adding Innovation Diffusion Theory to the Technology Acceptance Model:

Supporting Employees Intentions to use E-Learning Systems
Yi-Hsuan Lee1*, Yi-Chuan Hsieh2 and Chia-Ning Hsu1

Department of Business Administration, National Central University, Zhongli, Taiwan // 2Department of Applied
Foreign Languages, Ching Yun University, Zhongli, Taiwan // yihsuanlee@mgt.ncu.edu.tw // ychsieh@cyu.edu.tw //
ning0910@hotmail.com
*corresponding author
ABSTRACT
This study intends to investigate factors affecting business employees behavioral intentions to use the elearning system. Combining the innovation diffusion theory (IDT) with the technology acceptance model
(TAM), the present study proposes an extended technology acceptance model. The proposed model was tested
with data collected from 552 business employees using the e-learning system in Taiwan. The results show that
five perceptions of innovation characteristics significantly influenced employees e-learning system behavioral
intention. The effects of the compatibility, complexity, relative advantage, and trialability on the perceived
usefulness are significant. In addition, the effective of the complexity, relative advantage, trialability, and
complexity on the perceived ease of use have a significant influence. Empirical results also provide strong
support for the integrative approach. The findings suggest an extended model of TAM for the acceptance of the
e-learning system, which can help organization decision makers in planning, evaluating and executing the use of
e-learning systems.

Keywords
E-learning system, Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Innovation Diffusion, Eheory (IDT), Employee training,
Structural equation modeling, System adoption, End-users' perception

Introduction
To maintain competitiveness and keep a highly-trained and educated workforce, organizations have invested
considerable amount of time and resources in e-learning as a supplement to traditional types of training, because it
can be simultaneously implemented company wide, achieve immediacy, consistency and convenience, and is
associated with higher profits and lower turnover, thus playing a significant role in training and development
(DeRouin, Fritzche & Salas, 2005).
Many studies have discussed the benefits of e-learning applications (Ong, Lai, & Wang, 2004; Piccoli, Ahmad, &
Ives, 2001). But, despite increased usage, underutilization remains a problem (Moore & Benbasat, 1991; Johansen &
Swigart, 1996; Ong et al., 2004). Therefore, if learners fail to use-learning systems, the benefits of such systems will
not be achievable (Pituch & Lee, 2006; McFarland & Hamilton, 2006). Researchers and practitioners alike strive to
find answers to the problem by investigating individuals decisions on whether or not to adopt e-learning systems
that appear to promise substantial benefits (McFarland & Hamilton, 2006; Xu & Yuan, 2009; Venkatesh, Morris,
Davis, & Davis, 2003). To this end, studies of user perceptions and of understanding factors involved in promoting
effective use of these systems (Mun & Hwang, 2003) have become increasingly essential to improve understanding
and prediction of acceptance and utilization (Lau & Woods, 2008). Prior empirical studies strived to explicate the
determinants and mechanisms of users adoption decisions on the basis of the technology acceptance model (TAM)
(Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989; Taylor & Todd, 1995; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000) with the conviction that the
adoption process influences successful use of particular technology systems (Karahanna, Straub, & Chervany, 1999;
Liao, Palvia, & Chen, 2009).
This study contributes to the TAM literature by examining the relationships between the innovation diffusion theory
and TAM variables in the same model. We propose to examine the effects of motivational determinants on TAM
constructs using IDT as a background theory. Thus, we employed five factors: relative advantage, compatibility,
complexity, trialability and observability as determinants of perceived usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEU)
and behavioral intention to use (BI). This empirical study could be useful for developing and testing theories related
to e-learning system acceptance, as well as to practitioners for understanding strategies for designing and promoting
e-learning systems.

ISSN 1436-4522 (online) and 1176-3647 (print). International Forum of Educational Technology & Society (IFETS). The authors and the forum jointly retain the
copyright of the articles. Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies
are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by
others than IFETS must be honoured. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, to republish, to post on servers, or to redistribute to lists, requires prior
specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from the editors at kinshuk@ieee.org.

124

E-learning and TAM

The TAM has been widely used as the theoretical basis for many empirical studies of user technology acceptance
and has partially contributed to understanding users acceptance of information systems (IS)/information technology
(IT) (Taylor & Todd, 1995; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). Our research shows that many studies focus on the
acceptance by students in educational institutions (Chang & Tung, 2008; Pituch & Lee, 2006), but acceptance within
organizations is rarely covered, and very few studies have adopted the TAM as a model for explaining the use of an
e-learning system designed and provided by organizations. TAM could be useful in predicting end-users acceptance
of an e-learning system in organizations (Davis et al., 1989; Arbaugh, 2002; Wu, Tsai, Chen, & Wu, 2006);
additionally, existing antecedents of the technology acceptance intention in the TAM model do not sufficiently
reflect the e-learning system end users acceptance within organizations (Ong et al., 2004; Lau & Woods, 2008).
In our model, employees PU of the e-learning systems is defined as the perception of degrees of improvement in
learning because of adoption of such a system. PEU of the e-learning systems is the users perception of the ease of
adopting e-learning systems. We made assumptions that the more end-users who perceive usefulness of the elearning systems within an organization, the more positive their acceptance of e-learning systems, consequently
increasing their chances for future usage of the e-learning systems (Arbaugh & Duray, 2002; Pituch & Lee, 2006).
Furthermore, technology acceptance is determined by behavioral intention to use (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980).
Therefore, within an organizational context adoption of an e-learning system is a positive function of the intention
(BI) to accept the systems.

Theoretical background
Although much research supports the TAM as an excellent model to explain the acceptance of IS/IT, it is
questionable whether the model can be applied to analyze every instance of IS/IT adoption and implementation.
Many empirical studies recommend integrating TAM with other theories (e.g. IDT, or DeLone & McLeans IS
success model) to cope with rapid changes in IS/IT, and improve specificity and explanatory power (Carter &
Belanger, 2005; Legris, Ingham, & Colerette, 2003).
TAM and IDT are similar in some constructs and complement each another to examine the adoption of IS/IT.
Researchers indicate that the constructs employed in TAM are fundamentally a subset of perceived innovation
characteristics; thus, the integration of these two theories could provide an even stronger model than either standing
alone (Wu & Wang, 2005; Chen, Gillenson, & Sherrell, 2002). Past studies integrated the two theories, providing
good results (Sigala, Airey, Jones, & Lockwood, 2000; Chen et al, 2002).
This study employs two major theoretical paradigmsthe TAM (Gefen, 2004; Talyor & Todd, 1995; Davis et al.,
1989) and IDT (Roger, 1995; Moore & Benbasat, 1991). After reviewing literature on technology acceptance, we
synthesized the major theories and empirical research, then proposed a model that blended key constructs involved in
e-learning system acceptance and intention to use the e-learning systems.
Five constructs of innovative characteristics, PEU, and usefulness and intention to use the e-learning system, were
taken from the TAM and IDT. With appropriate modifications, our proposed model could successfully be
generalized to acceptance within an organizational context.

The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)

The TAM was derived to apply to any specific domain of humancomputer interactions (Davis et al., 1989). The
TAM asserts that two salient beliefs PU and PEUdetermine technology acceptance and are the key antecedents
of behavioral intentions to use information technology. The first belief, PU was the degree to which an individual
believes that a particular system would enhance job performance within an organizational context (Davis et al.,
1989). PEU, the second key belief, was the degree to which an individual believes that using a particular system
would be free of effort (Davis et al., 1989). In addition, the model indicated that system usage was indirectly affected
by both PEU and PU.
125

Many researchers have conducted empirical studies to examine the explanatory power of the TAM, which produced
relatively consistent results on the acceptance behavior of IT end users (Igbaria, Zinatelli, Cragg, & Cavaye, 1997;
Venkatesh & Davis, 2000; Horton, Buck, Waterson, & Clegg, 2001). Researchers have agreed that TAM is valid in
predicting the individual acceptance of numerous systems (Chin & Todd, 1995; Segars & Grover, 1993). In
summary, TAM provided an explanation of the determinants of technology acceptance that enables explanation of
user behavior across a wide scope of end-user information technologies and user populations (Davis et al, 1989).

Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT)

Research on the diffusion of innovation has been widely applied in disciplines such as education, sociology,
communication, agriculture, marketing, and information technology, etc (Rogers, 1995; Karahanna, et al., 1999;
Agarwal, Sambamurthy, & Stair, 2000). An innovation is an idea, practice, or object that is perceived as new by an
individual or another unit of adoption (Rogers, 1995, p. 11). Diffusion, on the other hand, is the process by which
an innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among the members of a social system (Rogers,
1995, p. 5). Therefore, the IDT theory argues that potential users make decisions to adopt or reject an innovation
based on beliefs that they form about the innovation (Agarwal, 2000, p. 90).
IDT includes five significant innovation characteristics: relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, and
trialability and observability. Relative advantage is defined as the degree to which an innovation is considered as
being better than the idea it replaced. This construct is found to be one of the best predictors of the adoption of an
innovation. Compatibility refers to the degree to which innovation is regarded as being consistent with the potential
end-users existing values, prior experiences, and needs. Complexity is the end-users perceived level of difficulty in
understanding innovations and their ease of use. Trialability refers to the degree to which innovations can be tested
on a limited basis. Observability is the degree to which the results of innovations can be visible by other people.
These characteristics are used to explain end-user adoption of innovations and the decision-making process.
Theoretically, the diffusion of an innovation perspective does not have any explicit relation with the TAM, but both
share some key constructs. It was found that the relative advantage construct in IDT is similar to the notion of the PU
in TAM, and the complexity construct in IDT captures the PEU in the technology acceptance model, although the
sign is the opposite (Moore & Benbasat, 1991). Additionally, in terms of the complexity construct, TAM and IDT
propose that the formation of users intention is partially determined by how difficult the innovation is to understand
or use (Davis, et al., 1989; Rogers, 1995). In other words, the less complex something is to use, the more likely an
individual is to accept it. Compatibility is associated with the fit of a technology with prior experiences, while the
ability to try and observe are associated with the availability of opportunities for relevant experiences. These
constructs relate to prior technology experience or opportunities for experiencing the technology under
consideration. Compatibility, and the ability to try and observe can be treated as external variables, which directly
affect the constructs in the technology acceptance model. After the initial adoption, the effects of these three
constructs could be diminished with continuous experience and reduced over time (Karahanna et al., 1999).
Thus far, numerous studies successfully integrated IDT into TAM to investigate users technology acceptance
behavior (Hardgrave, Davis, & Riemenschneider, 2003; Wu & Wang, 2005; Chang & Tung, 2008). Few have
attempted to examine all IDT characteristics with the integration of TAM. In this research, we improve TAM by
combining IDT characteristics, adding compatibility, complexity, relative advantage, and the ability to try and
observe as additional research constructs to increase the credibility and effectiveness of the study.

Research model and hypotheses

We propose an integrated theoretical framework, which blends TAM and IDT theories. The research model holds
that the five innovative characteristics (compatibility, complexity, relative advantage, ability to try and observe) exert
an important effect on the employees PU, PEU and intention to use e-learning systems. We thus tested the validity
and applicability of the proposed model based on the following hypotheses.

126

Compatibility
Agarwal and Prasad (1999) asserted a positive relationship between an individuals prior compatible experiences and
the new information technology acceptance. They found that the extent of prior experience with similar technologies
was positively associated with an ease of use belief about an information technology innovation. Moreover, Chau
and Hu (2001) reported that the effect of compatibility was found to be significant only in relation to PU. Later, Wu
and Wang (2005) and Chang and Tung (2008a) confirmed that compatibility had a significant positive and direct
effect on PU and the behavioral intention. Likewise, prior studies have investigated compatibility from different
aspects, resulting in support for its impact on PU, PEU and intention to use (Hardgrave et al., 2003). Based upon the
preceding research, the following hypotheses were proposed:
H1-1: Compatibility had a positive effect on PU of the e-learning system.
H1-2: Compatibility had a positive effect on PEU of the e-learning system.
H1-3: Compatibility had a positive effect on behavioral intention to use the e-learning system.

Complexity
Empirical studies provided evidence indicating that complexity had a significantly negative effect on the intention to
use (Shih, 2007; Lee, 2007). Additionally, a negative relationship between complexity and PU was also revealed in a
study conducted by Hardgrave, et al. (2003). Similarly, empirical research has also shown that the more complex the
end users perceived the e-learning system as being, the lower the users intention to use the system (Lin, 2006).
Thus, based on the aforementioned studies, we proposed the following hypotheses:
H2-1: Complexity negatively affected PU of the e-learning system.
H2-2: Complexity negatively affected PEU of the e-learning system.
H2-3: Complexity negatively affected behavioral intention to use the e-learning system.

Relative advantages
Research consistently found that the perceived relative advantages positively affected the users intention to use the
system across different participants (Shih, 2007; Lee, 2007). However, in TAM and IDT research, the relationships
among relative advantages, PU, and PEU had seldom been studied with the only one study revealed that when the
users perceived higher relative advantages, they perceived a higher level of usefulness of the systems. Accordingly,
we hypothesized:
H3-1: The relative advantages had a positive effect on PU of the e-learning system.
H3-2: The relative advantages had a positive effect on PEU of the e-learning system.
H3-3: The relative advantages had a positive effect on behavioral intentions to use the e-learning system.

Observability
Using different methodologies and involving different participants from many fields, some studies found that
observability had a positive impact on the users attitude toward the system and intention to use the system (Lee,
2007). Also in line with previous studies combining TAM and IDT, when the employees perceived the systems as
being easier to be observed or described, they tended to perceive the systems more useful and easier to use (Huang
2004; Yang, 2007). Therefore, we proposed that observability would have a positive effect on PU, PEU, and
behavioral intention to use the e-learning system. The following hypotheses tested these assumptions:
H4-1: Observability had a positive effect on PU of the e-learning system.
H4-2: Observability had a positive effect on PEU of the e-learning system.
H4-3: Observability had a positive effect on behavioral intention to use the e-learning system.

127

Trialability
Some studies have empirically tested in understanding the association between trialability and the intention to use the
system (Lee, 2007). They found that trialability had a positive effect on the intention to use the system. However,
limited research has been conducted to investigate the relationship among trialability, PU, PEU, and behavioral
intentions to use the systems. There was only one research reported that when the users perceived higher trialability,
they perceived higher levels of usefulness, and ease of use of the system (Yang, 2007). Accordingly, we tested the
following hypotheses:
H5-1: Trialability had a positive effect on PU of the e-learning system.
H5-2: Trialability had a positive effect on PEU of the e-learning system.
H5-3: Trialability had a positive effect on behavioral intention to use the e-learning system.

PEU
PEU is the degree to which an individual believes that using a particular system would be free of effort (Davis et al.,
1989). Information system researchers have indicated that PEU has a positive effect on the end-users behavioral
intention and PU to use the systems (Chin & Todd, 1995). Thus, we hypothesized:
H6-1: PEU had a positive effect on the PU of the e-learning system.

PU
PU is the degree to which an individual believes that a particular system would enhance his or her job performance
within an organizational context (Davis et al., 1989). Information system researchers have investigated TAM, and
asserted that PU was valid in predicting the individuals acceptance of various systems (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000).
Previous studies discovered that PU positively affected the users behavioral intention to use systems (Chin & Todd,
1995). Therefore, we hypothesized:
H6-2: PU will have a positive effect on the behavioral intention to use the e-learning system.
Demographics
Gender
Female
Male
Age
29
30-39
40-49
50
Education
High school
College/University degree
Master degree
Doctoral degree
Experience with computers
1 year
1 to 3 years
3 to 6 years
6 to 9 years
9 years

Table 1: Demographics of the respondents

Number
260
292

%
47.1
52.9

320
155
49
28

58.0
28.1
8.9
5.1

13
308
224
7

2.4
55.8
40.6
1.3

120
173
83
54
122

21.7
31.3
15.0
9.8
22.1

128

Research methodology
The subjects and the procedure
This study utilized a web-based and mailed survey to collect data for quantitative testing of the research model.
Because of the lack of a reliable sampling frame, it proved difficult to conduct a random sampling for all the endusers in the organizations using e-learning systems in Taiwan. Thus, in this study we adopted a non-random
sampling technique (i.e. convenience sampling) to collect the sample data. To generalize results, we gathered sample
data from the five largest e-learning systems using industries (Chan, 2005), including manufacturing, finance,
marketing and service, information technology, and government agencies in Taiwan, and randomly selected 15 firms
that provide an e-learning training system for employees (three in each industry). Of the 736 mailed and electronic
questionnaires, 566 were completed and returned. Sample demographic information is depicted in Table 1.

Measures
To ensure content validity of the scales, the items chosen for the constructs were adapted from previous research to
ensure content validity. The questionnaire consisted of three parts. The first part was based on nominal scales and the
rest are 5-point Likert scales. Part 1 of the questionnaire was based on IDT including compatibility (CPA),
complexity (CPL), relative advantages (ADV), observability (OB), and trialability (TRI). The above items were
adapted from the previous studies (Davis et al., 1989; Moore & Benbasat, 1991; Taylor & Todd, 1995; Karahanna et
al., 1999), containing 18 items.
Part 2 of the questionnaire was based on the constructs of PU, PEU, BI in the TAM model and was adapted from the
measurement defined by Davis et al. (1989) and Venkatesh & Davis (2000), containing 12 items for the above
constructs. Part 3 of the questionnaire was to collect the interviewees basic demographic data, such as gender,
educational level, work experience, prior experience using computers, etc.

H1-1

CPA

H1-2 H1-3

CPL

H2-1
H2-2

ADV

PU
H6-2

H2-3

H3-1
H3-3

BI

H3-2
H4-1

OB

H4-

H4-2
H5-1 H5-3

TRI

H6-1

PEU

H5-2
Figure 1. Proposed research model.

129

Results
Instrument validation
Two confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were computed using AMOS 6.0 to test the measurement models. The
model-fit measures were used to assess the models overall goodness of fit (2 /df, GFI, NFI, CFI, RMSEA) and
values all exceeded their respective common acceptance levels (Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson, & Tatham, 2006).
This showed that the measurement model exhibited a fairly good fit with the collected data (Table 2).
Goodness-of-fit
measure
2/df
GFI
AGFI
NFI
CFI
RMSEA
Constructs/Factors
CPA

CPL
ADV

OB
TRI
PU
PEU
BI

Table 2: Fit indices for endogenous and exogenous measurement models

Recommended value
Endogenous measurement
Exogenous measurement
model
model
1.764
1.977
3.00
0.979
0.958
0.90
0.960
0.936
0.90
0.967
0.967
0.90
0.983
0.983
0.90
0.037
0.042
0.05
Indicators
CPA1
CPA2
CPA3
CPA4
CPL1
CPL2
CPL3
ADV1
ADV2
ADV3
ADV4
ADV5
OB1
OB2
OB3
TRI1
TRI2
TRI3
PU1
PU2
PU3
PEU2
PEU3
PEU4
BI1
BI2
BI3
BI4
BI5

Table 3: Convergent validity

Standardized
Reliability
loadings (>0.707) (R2) (>0.50)
.807
.652
.720
.518
.791
.626
.739
.547
.854
.730
.918
.842
.848
.719
.777
.604
.812
.660
.876
.768
.905
.819
.854
.729
.744
.554
.953
.908
.740
.547
.790
.624
.838
.703
.720
.518
.847
.717
.870
.757
.717
.514
.769
.591
.766
.587
.703
.494
.675
.456
.773
.598
.935
.874
.879
.773
.854
.729

Composite
reliability (>0.70)
.849

Average variance
extracted (>0.50)
.585

.906

.764

.926

.716

.857

.670

.827

.615

.854

.663

.841

.570

.915

.686

Convergent validity of scale items was estimated by reliability, composite reliability, and average variance extracted
(Fornell & Larcker, 1981). The standardized CFA loadings for all scale items exceeded the minimum loading
criterion of 0.70, and the composite reliabilities of all factors also exceeded the recommended 0.70 level. In addition,
130

the average variance-extracted values were all above the threshold value of 0.50 (Hair, et al., 2006). Hence all three
conditions for convergent validity were met for the four measurement models (See Table 3).
Discriminant validity was obtained by comparing the shared variance between factors with the average variance
extracted from the individual factors (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). This analysis showed that the shared variances
between factors were less than the average variance extracted for the individual factors. Hence, discriminant validity
was assured (see Table 4). To sum up, the four measurement models reached satisfactory levels of reliability,
convergent validity and discriminant validity.
Construct

Table 4: Discriminant validity

Interconstruct correlations
PU
PEU
CPA
CPL
ADV

BI
OB
TRI
BI
0.828
PU
0.353
0.814
PEU
0.286
0.229
0.755
CPA
0.466
0.401
0.253
0.765
CPL
0.180
0.068
0.572
0.210
0.874
ADV
0.368
0.375
0.269
0.624
0.138
0.846
OB
0.138
0.052
0.094
0.123
0.061
0.138
0.819
TRI
0.228
0.095
0.271
0.240
0.240
0.185
0.203
0.784
Note. Diagonals represent the square root of average variance extracted, and the other matrix entries are the factor
correlation.

Structural model estimation and hypotheses testing

Descriptive statistics
The means and standard deviations for all constructs were determined and were displayed in Table 5. The highest
mean of 3.56 was for the trialability, while the lowest mean for complexity was 2.30 on a scale of 1 to 5. The means
for PU, PEU and behavioral intention were 3.79, 3.73, and 3.62, respectively.
Construct (# Items)
BI (six items)
PU (five items)
PEU (four items)
CPA (four items)
CPL (three items)
RA (five items)
OB (three items)
TRI (three items)

Table 5: Descriptive statistics

Mean
3.62
3.79
3.73
3.54
2.30
3.46
3.39
3.56

Standard deviation
.774
.708
.709
.808
.769
.794
.930
.794

Structural equation modeling (SEM)

SEM was performed to test the fit between the research model (Figure 1) and the obtained data. This technique was
chosen for its ability to simultaneously examine a series of dependence relationships, especially when there were
direct and indirect effects among the constructs within the model (Hair, et al., 2006). The first step in interpreting
SEM results includes reviewing fit indices, which provide evidence on how well the fit is between the data and the
proposed structural model. If the model fits the data well enough, a second step involves reviewing the feasibility of
each path in the model by examining whether the weights are statistically significant and practically significant.
Practical significance is evaluated on the basis of whether the effect size estimation (the R2) regarding a given path in
the models is large enough.

131

In this study, Amos 6.0 was employed and the SEM estimation procedure was a maximum likelihood estimation. A
similar set of fit indices was used to examine the structural model. Comparison of all fit indices with their
corresponding recommended values provided evidence of a good model fit (2/df = 1.42, GFI = 0.95, AGFI = 0.93,
CFI = 0.99, RMR = 0.02, and RMSEA = 0.03). The next step in the data analysis was to examine the significance
and strength of hypothesized relationships in the research model. The results of the analysis of the structural model,
including path coefficients, path significances, and variance explained (R2 values) for each dependent variable
presented in Figure 2.
Figure 2 showed the resulting path coefficients of the proposed research model. Overall, fourteen out of seventeen
hypotheses were supported by the data. Three endogenous variables were tested in the model. The results showed
that PU significantly influenced BI (= 0.267, P<0.001), supporting hypothesis H6-2. PEU was found to be
significant in influencing PU (= 0.38, P<0.001), supporting hypotheses H6-1. Furthermore, PU was significantly
influenced by two exogenous factors: CPA (= 0.33, P <0.001) and ADV (= 0.25, P<0.001) which support
hypotheses H1-1 and H3-1. CPL (= 0.20, P<0.01) and TRI (= -0.099, P<0.01) which also significantly influenced
PU. However, the effect was in contrast to what was hypothesized (H2-1 and H5-1). PEU was found to be
significantly influenced by three exogenous factors: CPL (= -0.64, P<0.001), ADV (=0.21, P<0.001), and TRI (=
0.09, P <0.001), supporting hypotheses H2-2, H3-2, and H5-2, respectively. Thus H1-2 and H4-2 were not
supported. BI was significant influenced by all five exogenous variables: CPA (= 0.23, P<0.001), CPL (= 0.13,
P<0.001), ADV (= 0.13, P<0.05), OB (= 0.08, P<0.05), and TRI (= 0.13, P<0.05). Therefore, hypotheses H1-3,
H2-3, H3-3, H4-3, and H5-3 were supported.
PU was found to be significantly determined by six variables (CPA, CPL, ADV, OB, TRI, and PEU), resulting in an
R2 of 0.42. This meant that the above variables accounted for 42% of variance in PU. Likewise, PEU was found to be
significantly determined by five exogenous variables (CPA, CPL, ADV, OB, and TRI), resulting in an R2 of 0.64.
This meant that the above exogenous variables explained for 64% of variance in PEU. BI was significantly
determined by CPA, CPL, ADV, OB, TRI, and PU, resulting in an R2=0.51. In other words, the variables described
above explained 51% of the variance of BI. A summary of the hypotheses testing results is shown in Table 6.

.339**

CPA

.226**

-.084
.237**

CPL

ADV

PU R2=.42
.264**

-.655** -.136**
.223**
.129*

BI R2=.51

.250**
.017 .079*
.435**

OB

.030
-.109*

TRI

.128**

PEU R2=.64

.096*

(Note. *p<.05 **p<.01)

Figure 2. Path test of the research model

132

Hypotheses
H1-1
H1-2
H1-3
H2-1
H2-2
H2-3
H3-1
H3-2
H3-3
H4-1
H4-2
H4-3
H5-1
H5-2
H5-3
H6-1
H6-2

Table 6: Hypotheses testing results

Path
Direction
CPA PU
Positive
CPA PEU
Negative
CPA BI
Positive
CPL PU
Positive
CPL PEU
Negative
CPL BI
Negative
ADV PU
Positive
ADV PEU
Positive
ADV BI
Positive
OB PU
Positive
OB PEU
Positive
OB BI
Positive
TRI PU
Negative
TRI PEU
Positive
TRI BI
Positive
PEU PU
Positive
PU BI
Positive

Results
Supported
Not supported
Supported
Supported
Supported
Supported
Supported
Supported
Supported
Not supported
Not supported
Supported
Supported
Supported
Supported
Supported
Supported

Discussion
The research purpose was to develop a new hybrid technology acceptance model by combining TAM with IDT to
explore the factors affecting employees behavioral intentions to use the e-learning systems in organizations. This
study was a pioneering effort in applying IDT into a TAM model. Based on our proposed model, we explored the
relationships among five innovative characteristics with the PEU, the PU, and intention to use and the relationship
between usefulness with employees intention to use the e-learning systems. Overall, the results confirmed the
research model and the hypotheses.
The results were consistent with previous studies showing that compatibility and relative advantages had significant
positive effects on PU. It could be implied that prior to the employees decision to use the e-learning systems, they
tended to evaluate whether the e-learning systems could meet their job needs or be relevant to their job. If they
perceived that the e-learning systems could meet their job needs, then they were likely to consider the e-learning
systems to be useful. On the other hand, when the users regarded the e-learning systems as being better than the
traditional training techniques or other approaches, they may perceive the e-learning systems to be more useful
(Chang & Tung, 2008; Wu & Wang, 2005).
Secondly, contrary to the previous studies (Lee, 2007; Hardgrave, et al., 2003), our results showed that complexity
had a significant positive effect on PU. We argued that when the e-learning systems were perceived to be of higher
complexity, the employees tended to perceive higher usefulness of the e-learning systems. Although the employees
felt great difficulty in operating the systems, they believed that e-learning systems helped improve their job
performances. For those employees who considered e-learning systems to be simple, easy to understand or operate,
they may not necessarily regard e-learning systems to be helpful to promote their job performance. Given these
conflicting results, more research remained to be done to explore the relationship between these two constructs.
This study results also indicated that observability had no significant effect on PU, which was inconsistent with prior
studies (Huang, 2004; Yang, 2007). The possible reason was that although the e-learning users could observe other
individuals use of e-learning systems and had an impression of how to operate them, they perceived the e-learning
systems to be less useful in facilitating their job performances. Further rigorous follow-up studies should be
conducted to investigate the precise role of observability in this area.
Moreover, the results suggested that trialability had a significant negative effect on PU. Specifically, the higher the
trialability, the lower the PU would be. However, the test results were incongruent with the previous findings.

133

Our results strongly supported the hypothesis that complexity had a significant negative effect on PEU. In addition,
the relative advantages and trialability had significant positive impacts on PEU. These results were consistent with
previous research findings (Yang, 2007; Hardgrave et al., 2003). We uncovered that the employees would perceive
the e-learning systems with unease, when they felt it was complex and difficult to operate. It implied that if the
employees believed that the e-learning system could promote their job performances, they tended to think e-learning
systems were easy to use. Additionally, when the employees had more opportunities to try the e-learning systems,
they were more likely to view them as being easier to use. Hence, to enhance the perception of ease of use, the elearning system developers should design the systems to be user-friendly and relevant to the employees jobs. The
managers should provide employees with organizational support for trying out e-learning systems.
Compatibility and observability had no significant effects on PEU and was consistent with previous research (Lin,
2006). This was inconsistent with the results from Huang (2004) and Yang (2007). Due to the mixed results, further
investigation should individually examine the effects of specific innovative characteristics on PEU in various
contexts of e-learning systems.
This study found that compatibility, complexity, relative advantages, observability, and trialability had significant
effects on the employees behavioral intention of using e-learning systems. These findings supported existing
research that there existed strong relationships among the five innovative characteristics and the behavioral intention
(Chang & Tung, 2008; Wu & Wang, 2005; Hardgrave et al., 2003). In order to promote the employees intention to
use the e-learning systems, e-learning systems designers should pay attention to the development of innovative
characteristics and content of e-learning systems for potential users.
As prior research demonstrated, we found that the TAM appeared to provide researchers a theoretically sound and
parsimonious model which can be used to predict the employees behavioral intention to use the e-learning systems.
According to TAM, PU and PEU had a significant positive and direct effect on the behavioral intention (BI) to use
the e-learning systems. Such was the case in this study; the e-learning systems users thought that the higher PU
resulted in a higher behavioral intention to use the e-learning systems. This study also indicated that PEU had a
positive direct effect on PU. These findings echoed what Venkatesh & Davis, 2000) found in their study.
Furthermore, these findings supported existing research that found a strong relationship between PEU and PU, as
originally proposed by Davis et al. (1989). If the e-learning systems are perceived as easy to use, employees may
perceive them as useful. With the agreement of previous studies, both usefulness and ease of use were believed to be
important factors in determining the acceptance of e-learning systems.

Limitations, suggestions and implications

Despite the careful attention to research methodology, improvements can be made in future studies in the following
areas. Firstly, although the findings provided meaningful insights for the use of e-learning systems in organizational
contexts, there may be a potential research bias in the sampling method due to the selection of a sample of willing
respondents. To compensate for this drawback, future research should be conducted to test the proposed model using
a random sampling approach. Furthermore, the study data were collected from the self-reported instrument. In fact,
there could be a difference between what the participants responded to and what they actually did in terms of actual
use of the e-learning systems. Hence, other methods of data collection (i.e. interviews and focus groups) and
appropriate qualitative analyses should be conducted to provide a holistic understanding of the results of the current
study. Next, this study was cross-sectional and not longitudinal. Therefore, it was uncertain whether the e-learning
systems acceptance and usage behaviors were influenced by the individuals expectations. Additionally, an
individuals perceptions change over time when they gain more experience (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000; Venkatesh et
al, 2003). Therefore, longitudinal research should be conducted to evaluate the validity of the proposed model and
our findings.
The importance of the five innovative characteristics in affecting behavioral intention had several implications for
researchers and practitioners. Firstly, TAM can be used as a cost-effective measurement to effectively predict the
future use of e-learning systems. Secondly, according to the innovation diffusion theory (Rogers, 1995), adoption is
not a snapshot and one-time decision, but rather a continuously staged process that can be investigated and boosted
(Leonard-Barton, 1988). Potential users must first learn about the innovative tool and be persuaded to try it out
134

before they decide whether to adopt it. Therefore, this study suggested that well-designed trainings should be
provided for the employees to familiarize themselves with the fundamental knowledge about how to use the elearning systems as well as the trial opportunities to build a better understanding in the operational functions. The
trainers frequent demonstration of the use of e-learning systems help the employees form positive beliefs and
attitudes, which in turn influences their behavioral intention and actual use of e-learning systems. As such, trainers
should introduce and describe the benefits of e-learning systems and their relevance to their job performances.
Additionally, trainers and system designers of e-learning systems should carefully consider the needs of e-learning
system users and ensure that the e-learning systems effectively meet their job needs and demands.

Conclusions
This study has validated TAM and IDT in the organizational context and provided a further understanding into the
employees possible perceptions about the use of e-learning systems. The contribution of this study to e-learning
acceptance research was discussed. While the merits of the TAM were manifested, the findings of this study
provided greater insights when analyzing users acceptance and adoption of e-learning systems. As a result, we
proposed that the combination of TAM and IDT models could offer better overall results.
Furthermore, our findings suggested that system developers, designers, and institutional purchasers of e-learning
systems carefully consider the needs of employees and ensure that selected systems effectively meet these demands.
The five innovative characteristics with e-learning systems could be important determinants of user adoption of elearning systems.

Reference
Agarwal, R. (2000), Individual Acceptance of Information Technologies. Educational Technology Research and Development,
40, 90-102.
Agarwal, R., & Prasad, J. (1999). Are individual differences germane to the acceptance of new information technologies?
Decision Sciences, 30, 361-391.
Agarwal, R., Sambamurthy, V., & Stair, R. M. (2000). The evolving relationship between general and specific computer efficacy:
An empirical assessment. Information Systems Research, 11(4), 418-430.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social behavior, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Arbaugh, J. B. (2002). Managing the on-line classroom: a study of technological and behavioral characteristics of web-based
MBA courses. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 13, 203-223.
Arbaugh, J. B., & Duray, R. (2002). Technological and structural characteristics, student learning and satisfaction with web-based
courses: An exploratory study of two on-line MBA programs. Management Learning, 33(3), 331-347.
Carter, L,. & Belanger, F. (2005). The utilization of e-government services: Citizen trust, innovation and acceptance factors.
Information Systems Journal, 15(1), 5-25.
Chan, T. C. (2005). A Study of the Adoption e-Learning Factors on Taiwan, M.S. Thesis, Chaoyang University of Technology.
Chang, S. C., & Tung, F. C. (2008). An empirical investigation of students behavioural intentions to use the online learning
course websites. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(1), 71-83.
Chau, Y. K., & Hu, J. H. (2001). Information Technology Acceptance by Individual Professionals: A Model Comparison
Approach. Decision Sciences, 32(4), 669-719.
Chen, L. D., Gillenson, M. L., & Sherrell, D. L. (2002). Enticing online consumers: An extended technology acceptance
perspective. Information & Management, 39(8), 705-719.
Chin, W. C., & Todd, P. A. (1995). On the use, usefulness and ease of use of structural equation modeling in MIS research: a note
of caution. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 237246.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., &Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical
model. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.
DeRouin, R. E., Fritzsche, B. A., & Salas, E. (2005). E-learning in organizations. Journal of Management, 31(6), 920-940.
135

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error.
Journal of Marketing Research, 48, 39-50.
Gefen, D. (2004). What makes an ERP implementation relationship worthwhile: Linking trust mechanisms and ERP usefulness.
Journal of Management Information, 21(1), 263-288.
Hair, J. F., Jr, Black, B., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hardgrave, B., Davis, F., & Riemenschneider, C. (2003). Investigating Determinants of Software Developers Intentions to
Follow Methodologies. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(1), 123-151.
Horton, R., Buck, T., Waterson, P., & Clegg, C. (2001). Explaining intranet use with the technology acceptance model. Journal of
Information Technology, 16, 237-249.
Huang, L. Y. (2004). A study about the key factors affecting users to accept Chunghwa Telecom's Multimedia on Demand.
Unpublished Master Thesis, National Sun Yat-Sen University.
Igbaria, M., Zinatelli, N., Cragg, P., & Cavaye, A. L. M. (1997). Personal computing acceptance factors in small firms: A
structural equation model. MIS Quarterly, 21(3), 279-305.
Johansen, R., & Swigart, R. (1996). Upsizing the Individual in the Downsizing Organization: Managing in the Wake of
Reengineering, Globalization, and Overwhelming Technological Change. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Karahanna, E., Straub, D.W., & Chervany, N. L. (1999). Information technology adoption across time: A cross-sectional
comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs. MIS Quarterly, 23, 183-213.
Liao, C., Palvia, P., & Chen, J. (2009). Information technology adoption behavior life cycle: Toward a Technology Continuance
Theory (TCT). International Journal of Information Management, 29(4), 309-320.
Lau, S. H., & Woods, P. C. (2008). An Investigation of User Perceptions and Attitudes toward Learning Objects. British Journal
of Educational Technology, 39(4) 685-699.
Lee, Y. H. (2007). Exploring key factors that affect consumers to adopt e-reading services. Unpublished Master Thesis, Huafan
University.
Legris, P., Ingham, J. & Colerette, P. (2003). Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology
acceptance model. Information and Management, 40, 191-204.
Ong, C. S., Lai, J. Y., & Wang, Y. S. (2004). Factors affecting engineers acceptance of asynchronous e-learning systems in hightech companies. Information & Management, 41, 795-804.
McFarland, D. J., & Hamilton, D. (2006). Adding contextual specificity to the technology acceptance model. Computers in
Human Behavior, 22, 427-447.
Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information
technology innovation. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 192-222.
Mun, Y. Y., & Hwang, Y. (2003). Predicting the use of Web-based information systems: Self-efficacy, enjoyment, learning goal
orientation, and TAM. Human-Computer Studies, 59(4), 431-449.
Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R., & Ives, B. (2001). Web-based Virtual Learning Environments: A Research Framework and a Prdiminary
Assessment of Effectiveness in Basic Skills IT training. MIS Quarterly, 25(4), 401-426.
Pituch, K. A., & Lee, Y. K. (2006). The influence of system characteristics on e-learning use. Computer & Education, 47, 222244.
Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th Ed.). New York: Free Press.
Segars, A. H., & Grover, V. (1993). Re-examining PEU and usefulness: a confirmatory factor analysis. MIS Quarterly, 17(4),
517-525.
Shih, C. H. (2007). Integrating Innovation Diffusion Theory and UTAUT to Explore The Influencing Factors on Teacher Adopt Elearning System With MOODLE as an Example. Unpublished Master Thesis, Dayeh University.
Sigala, M., Airey, D., Jones, P., & Lockwood, A. (2000). The diffusion and application of multimedia technologies in the tourism
and hospitality industries. Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2000, Wien: Springer, 396-407.
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing models. Information Systems
Research, 6(1), 144-176.

136

Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Assessing IT usage: The role of prior experience. Management Information Systems Quarterly,
19(4), 561-570.
Venkatesh, V., & Davis F. D., 2000. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies.
Manage Management Science, 46(2), 186-204.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M., Davis, G., & Davis, F. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view.
MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.
Xu, Z., & Yuan, Y. (2009). Principle-based dispute resolution for consumer protection. Knowledge-Based Systems, 22(1), 18-27.
Wu, J. H., & Wang, S. C. (2005). What drives mobile commerce? An empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance
model. Information Management, 42, 719729.
Wu, J. P., Tsai, R. J., Chen, C. C., & Wu, Y. C. (2006). An integrative model to predict the continuance use of electronic learning
systems: Hints for teaching. International Journal on E-Learning, 5(2), 287-302.
Yang, M. M. (2007). An exploratory study on consumers behavioral intention of usage of third generation mobile value-added
services, Unpublished Master Thesis, National Cheng Kung University.

137