An integrated TOE–DoI framework for cloud computing adoption in the higher education sector: case study of Sub-Saharan Africa, Ethiopia

  • Kamal Kant HiranEmail author
  • Anders Henten
Original Article


This research paper describes an integrated framework based on both the ‘Technology–Organization–Environment (TOE) framework’ and ‘Diffusion of Innovation (DoI) theory’. The study explores the noteworthy factors and sub-factors which are pertinent for the adoption of cloud computing in the Ethiopian Higher Education (EHE) sector. The technology literature herein was based on technology adoption frameworks and theories which were studied in order to identify a set of factors and sub-factors relevant to cloud computing adoption. It resulted in conceptualizing an integrated TOE–DoI framework for cloud computing adoption in higher education at the university in Ethiopia and in developing its reliable measures. Accordingly, a quantitative study was done with a questionnaire survey comprising 500 respondents in connection with 4 factors (technological, organizational, environmental and socio-cultural). Consequently, the cloud computing adoption in Ethiopia was established using factors and concepts adopted from the study. It confirmed that the TOE–DoI approach to higher education in Ethiopia is authenticated. Thus, the four factors’ reliability statistics validated with a Cronbach’s alpha a = 0.739, 0.712, 0.761, 0.841, and Cronbach’s alpha ‘a’ based on standard items a = 0.740, 0.713, 0.762 and 0.842 for technology, organizational, environmental, and socio-cultural factors. This indicates that scaling the four aspects therein suggests profound evidence to determine a cloud computing adoption in EHE with TOE–DoI integration.


TOE DoI Ethiopian Higher Education (EHE) Factors Integration Cloud computing 



  1. Ajzen I (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Human Decis Process 50(2):179–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alshamaila Y, Papagiannidis S, Li F (2013) Cloud computing adoption by SMEs in the north east of England: a multi-perspective framework. J Enterp Inf Manag 26(3):250–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baker J (2012) The technology–organization–environment framework. Integrated series in information system: information system theory, vol. 28, Springer. pp 231–245.
  4. Bhardwaj T, Kumar M, Sharma SC (2018) Megh: a private cloud provisioning various IaaS and SaaS. Adv Intell Syst Comput 584:485–494Google Scholar
  5. Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q 13(3):319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fishbein M, Ajzen I (1975) Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., Reading, Mass; Don Mills, OntarioGoogle Scholar
  7. Filiopoulou E, Mitropoulou P, Michalakelis C (2014) SMEs in the cloud: the impact of cloud adoption on economic growth and development. ICEIRD, p 11Google Scholar
  8. García-Sánchez E, García-Morales VJ, Bolívar-Ramos MT (2017) The influence of top management support for ICTs on organisational performance through knowledge acquisition, transfer, and utilisation. Rev Manag Sci 11(1):19–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gens M, Shirer F (2011) I agree Public IT Cloud services spending to reach $72.9 Billion in 2015, capturing nearly half of net new spending growth in five key product segments, according to IDCGoogle Scholar
  10. Hassan H, Herry M, Nasir M, Khairudin N, Adon I (2017) Factors influencing cloud computing adoption in small and medium enterprises. J ICT 16(1):21–41Google Scholar
  11. Hiran KK, Doshi R, Rathi R (2014) Security & privacy issues of cloud & grid computing networks. Int J Comput Sci Appl 4(1):83–91Google Scholar
  12. Hiran KK, Henten A, Shrivas MK, Doshi R (2018) Hybrid educloud model in higher education: The case of Sub-Saharan Africa, Ethiopia. IEEE Int Conf Adapt Sci Technol ICAST 2018:1–9Google Scholar
  13. Hiran KK, Doshi R, Fagbola DT, Mahrishi M (2019) Cloud computing: concepts, architecture and applications with real-world examples and case studies. BPB Publications, New Delhi, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  14. Ifijeh G (2014) Adoption of digital preservation methods for theses in Nigerian Academic Libraries: applications and implications. J Acad Librariansh 40(3–4):399–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Njenga K, Garg L, Bhardwaj AK, Prakash V, Bawa S (2019) The cloud computing adoption in higher learning institutions in Kenya: Hindering factors and recommendations for the way forward. Telemat Inf 38:225–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Oliver RL (2018) A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. J Mark Res 17(4):460–469MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Oliveira T, Thomas M, Espadanal M (2014) Assessing the determinants of cloud computing adoption: an analysis of the manufacturing and services sectors. Inf Manag 51(5):497–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rogers EM (1995) Diffusion of innovations. 4th edn. The Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Schnabel HSSI (2018) Money and trust: lessons from the 1620s for money in the digital age. BIS Working Papers, 2018. Available: Accessed Feb 2018
  20. Tesfaye S, Bedada B, Mesay Y (2016) Impact of improved wheat technology adoption on productivity and income in Ethiopia. Afr Crop Sci J 24(1):127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Tornatzky L, Fleischer M (1990) The process of technology innovation. Lexington Books, Lexington, MAGoogle Scholar
  22. Venkatesh V (2000) Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Inf Syst Res 11(4):342–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Venkatesh V, Bala H (2008) Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decis Sci 39(2):273–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Venkatesh V, Davis FD (2000) A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Manage Sci 46(2):186–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis FD, Davis GB (2003) User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q 27:425–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Reliability Engineering, Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM), India and The Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Aalborg UniversityCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations