Critical success factors influencing the adoption of digitalisation for teaching and learning by business schools

Abstract

The world is transforming through digitalisation and business schools are predisposed to this transition. Some universities have slickly sailed through the digitalisation challenge, while others have been left behind. The purpose of this research paper is to identify and examine the variables that impact the successful adoption of digitalisation by business schools. Gaining an understanding of these variables will help business schools adopt digitalisation for long-term improvement. Analysing gaps in the literature (mostly using sources from 2013 to 2019) helped identify eight independent variables that can influence the adoption of digitalisation in business schools. A five-point Likert scale questionnaire containing 56 non-demographic questions was sent to the target population. The survey saw responses from 421 participants worldwide, including academics from flagship business schools and education technology experts. A conceptual model was developed using a structural equation model in ADANCO 2.0.1, which was used to postulate the hypotheses. Empirically, students’ competence has the strongest influence on the adoption of digitalisation by business schools, followed closely by teachers’ competence and technology diffusion, in that order. However, industry expectations do not significantly influence this adoption. This reflects a lapse from business schools in coping with the expectations of the corporate world, thus indicating that future researchers need to study this misalignment. The results from this study display a left shift in the bell-shaped curve of Rogers’ (2003) theory of diffusion of innovations, indicating an increase in the category of early adopters of technology from 50 to 90%.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Aasi, P., Rusu, L. (2017). ‘Facing the digitalisation challenge: Why organisational culture matters and how IT influences IT governance performance’. In Paspallis, N., Raspopoulos, Barry, M., Lang, M., linger, H. and C. Schneider (eds), Information systems development: Advances in methods, tools and management, Larnaca, Cyprus, ISBN: 978-9963-2288-3-6.

  2. Babaheidari, S. M. and Svensson, L. (2014). ‘Managing the digitalisation of schools: An exploratory study of school principals’ and IT managers’ perceptions about ICT adoption and usefulness’, E-Learn: World Conference on e-learning in corporate, government, healthcare and higher education. New Orleans, 27–30 October, Association for the Advancement of computing in education, pp. 106–113.

  3. Baum, S., Kurose, C., & McPherson, M. (2013). An overview of American higher education. The Future of Children, 23(1), 17–39.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (Eds.). (2013). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing for 21st-century learning. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Blau, I., & Shamir-Inbal, T. (2017). Digital competences and long-term ICT integration in school culture: The perspective of elementary school leaders. Education and Information Technologies, 22(3), 769–787.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bowen, W. G. (2012). The ‘cost disease’ in higher education: Is technology the answer? Stanford: The Tanner Lectures.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bullmore, E. T., Horwitz, B., Honey, G. D., Brammer, M. J., Williams, S. C. R., & Sharma, T. (2000). How good is good enough in path analysis of fMRI data? NeuroImage, 11, 289–301.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bulman, G., & Fairlie, R. W. (2016). Technology and education: Computers, software and the internet. In E. A. Hanushek, S. J. Machin, & L. Woessmann (Eds.), Handbook of the Economics of Education Vol. 5 (pp. 239–280). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Burgess, S. M., & Steenkamp, J. B. E. (2006). Marketing renaissance: How research in emerging markets advances marketing science and practice. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 23(4), 337–356.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Business Council of Australia. (2016) Being work-ready: A guide to what employers want [Online]. Available at https://www.bca.com.au/being_work_ready_a_guide_to_what_employers_want. Accessed 18 December 2017.

  11. Cattaneo, M., Horta, H., Malighetti, P., Meoli, M., & Paleari, S. (2019). The relationship between competition and programmatic diversification. Studies in Higher Education, 44(7), 1222–1240.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Chua, J. H., Chrisman, J. J., & De Massis, A. (2015). A closer look at socioemotional wealth: Its flows, stocks, and prospects for moving forward. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(2), 173–182.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Chulkov, D. V. (2017). On the role of switching costs and decision reversibility in information technology adoption and investment. Journal of Information Systems and Technology Management, 14(3), 309–321.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Davies, R. S., & West, R. E. (2014). Technology integration in schools. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 841–853). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  16. del Pozo, M. M., & González, M. C. (2017). Study on the personal indicators that influence the development of digital competence in primary education students. In J. Mena, A. García-Valcárcel, F. J. Peñalvo, & M. Martín (Eds.), Search and research: Teacher education for contemporary contexts (pp. 1071–1080). Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Deming, D. J., Hastings, J. S., Kane, T. J., & Staiger, D. O. (2014). School choice, school quality, and postsecondary attainment. American Economic Review, 104(3), 991–1013.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Deming, D. J., Goldin, C., Katz, L. F., & Yuchtman, N. (2015). Can online learning bend the higher education cost curve? American Economic Review, 105(5), 496–501.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Dijkstra, T. K., & Henseler, J. (2015). Consistent and asymptotically normal PLS estimators for linear structural equation. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 81, 10–23.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Dimitriadis, Y., Prieto, L. P., & Asensio-Pérez, J. I. (2013). The role of design and enactment patterns in orchestration: Helping to integrate technology in blended classroom ecosystems. Computers & Education, 69, 496–499.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Dougherty, K. (2015). Factors that influence college faculty to adopt digital technologies in their practice (pp. 307–318). Dublin: Higher Education in Transformation Conference.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Efron, B. (1987). Better bootstrap confidence intervals. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82(397), 171–185.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. European Commission. (2013). Modernisation of higher education. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Ferris, J. M., and Riveros, G. E. (2019). US patent application no. 10/181,990.

  25. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Frey, C. B., & Osborne, M. A. (2017). The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 114, 254–280.

    Google Scholar 

  27. From, J. (2017). Pedagogical digital competence: Between values, knowledge and skills. Higher Education Studies, 7(2), 43–50.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Gašević, D., Kovanović, V., Joksimović, S., & Siemens, G. (2014). Where is research on massive open online courses headed? A data analysis of the MOOC research initiative. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(5), 134–176.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Gil-Flores, J., Rodríguez-Santero, J., & Torres-Gordillo, J. J. (2017). Factors that explain the use of ICT in secondary-education classrooms: The role of teacher characteristics and school infrastructure. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 441–449.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Griesbaum, J. (2017). Trends in e-learning: Impacts of social mobile technologies on information behaviour, formal learning and the educational market. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 7(2), 123.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Gudmundsdottir, G. B., & Hatlevik, O. E. (2018). Newly qualified teachers’ professional digital competence: Implications for teacher education. European Journal of Teacher Education, 41(2), 214–231.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Gürfidan, H., & Koç, M. (2016). The impact of school culture, technology leadership, and support services on teachers’ technology integration: A structural equation modelling. Education and Science, 41(188), 99–116.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hatlevik, O. E., Guðmundsdóttir, G. B., & Loi, M. (2015). Digital diversity among upper secondary students: A multilevel analysis of the relationship between cultural capital, self-efficacy, strategic use of information and digital competence. Computers & Education, 81, 345–353.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Henderson, M., Selwyn, N., & Aston, R. (2017). What works and why? Student perceptions of ‘useful’ digital technology in university teaching and learning. Studies in Higher Education, 42(8), 1567–1579.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Henriksen, D., Mishra, P., & Fisser, P. (2016). Infusing creativity and technology in 21st-century education: A systemic view for change. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 27–37.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Henseler, J., & Fassott, G. (2010). Testing moderating effects in PLS path models: An illustration of available procedures. In V. Esposito Vinzi, W. W. Chin, J. Henseler, & H. Wang (Eds.), Handbook of partial least squares (pp. 713–735). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Hwang, G. J., Lai, C. L., & Wang, S. Y. (2015). Seamless flipped learning: A mobile technology-enhanced flipped classroom with effective learning strategies. Journal of Computers in Education, 2(4), 449–473.

    Google Scholar 

  39. IGI Global. (2019). What is ICT policy? [Online]. Available at https://www.igi-global.com/dictionary/gender-ict-policy-development-empowerment/13656. Accessed 12 August 2019.

  40. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (2006). LISREL 8.80. Chicago: Scientific Software International.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kashada, A., Li, H., & Koshadah, O. (2018). Analysis approach to identify factors influencing digital learning technology adoption and utilisation in developing countries. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 13(2), 48–59.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Losh, E. (2014). The war on learning. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Macher, J., Miller, N. H. and Osborne, M. (2017) An Empirical Study of Competition and Technology Adoption. pp. 5.

  44. McKnight, K., O’Malley, K., Ruzic, R., Horsley, M. K., Franey, J. J., & Bassett, K. (2016). Teaching in a digital age: How educators use technology to improve student learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 48(3), 194–211.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Miranda, H. P., & Russell, M. (2012). Understanding factors associated with teacher-directed student use of technology in elementary classrooms: A structural equation modelling approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(4), 652–666.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Moore, R. L., & Fodrey, B. P. (2018). Distance education and technology infrastructure: Strategies and opportunities. In A. A. Piña, V. L. Lowell, & B. R. Harris (Eds.), Leading and managing e-learning: What the e-learning leader needs to know (pp. 87–100). Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Navimipour, N. J., & Soltani, Z. (2016). ‘The impact of cost, technology acceptance and employees’ satisfaction on the effectiveness of the electronic customer relationship management systems’. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 1052–1066.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Nguyen, L., Barton, S. M., & Nguyen, L. T. (2015). iPads in higher education - hype and hope. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(1), 190–203.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Nicoli, N. and Komodromos, M. (2019 ‘CSR communication in the digital age: A case study of the Bank of Cyprus’. In Alexandros, A. and Evi, D. (eds), Cases on Corporate Social Responsibility and Contemporary Issues in Organisations, Pennsylvania, IGI Global, pp. 71–89.

  50. Palacios-Marqués, D., Soto-Acosta, P., & Merigó, J. M. (2015). Analyzing the effects of technological, organisational and competition factors on web knowledge exchange in SMEs. Telematics and Informatics, 32(1), 23–32.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Petko, D., Prasse, D., & Cantieni, A. (2018). The interplay of school readiness and teacher readiness for educational technology integration: A structural equation model. Computers in the Schools, 35(1), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Piper, B., Zuilkowski, S. S., Kwayumba, D., & Strigel, C. (2016). Does technology improve reading outcomes? Comparing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ICT interventions for early grade reading in Kenya. International Journal of Educational Development, 49, 204–214.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Pucciarelli, F., & Kaplan, A. (2016). Competition and strategy in higher education: Managing complexity and uncertainty. Business Horizons, 59(3), 311–320.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Rabah, J. (2015). Benefits and challenges of information and communication technologies (ICT) integration in Québec English schools. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 14(2), 24–31.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Reitz, T. (2017). Academic hierarchies in neo-feudal capitalism: How status competition processes trust and facilitates the appropriation of knowledge. Higher Education, 73(6), 871–886.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Scherer, R., Tondeur, J., Siddiq, F., & Baran, E. (2018). ‘The importance of attitudes toward technology for pre-service teachers’ technological, pedagogical and content knowledge: Comparing structural equation modelling approaches’. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 67–80.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Selwyn, N. (2016). Digital downsides: Exploring university students’ negative engagements with digital technology. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(8), 1006–1021.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Sosa, E., Salinas, J., & De Benito, B. (2019). Emerging technologies (ETs) in education: A systematic review of the literature published between 2006 and 2016. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 12(5), 128–149.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Souder, D., Zaheer, A., Sapienza, H., & Ranucci, R. (2017). How family influence, socioemotional wealth and competitive conditions shape new technology adoption. Strategic Management Journal, 38(9), 1774–1790.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Thomas, M., & Thomas, H. (2012). Using new social media and web 2.0 technologies in business school teaching and learning. Journal of Management Development, 31(4), 358–367.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Tuisk, T., Nekrassova, N., & Miller, L. (2015). Digitization and student communication patterns in higher education. Australian & New Zealand Journal of European Studies, 7(2), 87–100.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Uerz, D., Volman, M., & Kral, M. (2018). Teacher educators’ competences in fostering student teachers’ proficiency in teaching and learning with technology: An overview of relevant research literature. Teaching and Teacher Education, 70, 12–23.

    Google Scholar 

  64. van de Oudeweetering, K., & Voogt, J. (2018). Teachers’ conceptualisation and enactment of twenty-first-century competences: Exploring dimensions for new curricula. The Curriculum Journal, 29(1), 116–133.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Wright, S. (1934). The method of path coefficients. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 5(3), 161–215.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  66. Zhu, C., & Engels, N. (2014). Organisational culture and instructional innovations in higher education: Perceptions and reactions of teachers and students. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 42(1), 136–158.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ritu Gupta.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gupta, R., Seetharaman, A. & Maddulety, K. Critical success factors influencing the adoption of digitalisation for teaching and learning by business schools. Educ Inf Technol 25, 3481–3502 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10246-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Education technology
  • Digitalisation in higher education
  • Business schools
  • University culture
  • Teachers’ competence
  • Students’ competence
  • Industry expectations of academia
  • Technology diffusion
  • University competition
  • Infrastructure
  • Cost of digitalisation
  • Rogers’ theory of diffusion of innovation