International Journal of


EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12

line decor
line decor

 Volume 10, Issue 4 (April 2023), Pages: 188-196


 Original Research Paper

Determinants of the intention to use information system: A case of SIMAD University in Mogadishu, Somalia


 Husein Osman Abdullahi 1, *, Ahmed Hassan Mohamud 2, Abdifatah Farah Ali 1, Abdikarim Abi Hassan 3


 1Faculty of Computing, SIMAD University, Mogadishu, Somalia
 2Faculty of Management Science, SIMAD University, Mogadishu, Somalia
 3Faculty of Engineering, SIMAD University, Mogadishu, Somalia

  Full Text - PDF          XML

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile:

 Digital Object Identifier:


Online information management system (OIMS) contributes to the overall operations of higher education systems, enhancing operations' productivity and facilitating the university's service delivery. This article highlights the use of the OIMS system by SIMAD University (SU). The system is crucial in enhancing the university's productivity and performance. In this research, the technology acceptance model (TAM) and the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) are combined to provide a stronger understanding of information systems (IS). Other than that, the model was tested based on the sample size of 100 staff and students from different departments using the path coefficient created via a bootstrapping method. According to the obtained results, perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEOU) have little impact on users' intentions to utilize IS. Still, facilitating condition (FC), performance expectancy (PE), as well as effect expectancy (EE) do have an impact. The knowledge and literature in the field of this study are enriched by looking at the UTAUT and TAM from the standpoint of IS.

 © 2023 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (

 Keywords: Technology acceptance model, Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology, Information systems adoption

 Article History: Received 17 October 2022, Received in revised form 26 January 2023, Accepted 31 January 2023


No Acknowledgment.

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.


 Abdullahi HO, Mohamud AH, Ali AF, and Hassan AA (2023). Determinants of the intention to use information system: A case of SIMAD University in Mogadishu, Somalia. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 10(4): 188-196

 Permanent Link to this page


 Fig. 1 Fig. 2


 Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4


 References (53)

  1. Abdulrazaq MB and Mustafa OM (2017). Designing and implementing of an online library management system. Science Journal of University of Zakho, 5(3): 278-284.   [Google Scholar]
  2. Afonso CM, Roldán Salgueiro JL, Sánchez Franco MJ, and González MDLO (2012). The moderator role of gender in the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): A study on users of electronic document management systems. In the 7th International Conference on Partial Least Squares and Related Methods, Houston, USA: 1-8.   [Google Scholar]
  3. Ayaz A and Yanartaş M (2020). An analysis on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology theory (UTAUT): Acceptance of electronic document management system (EDMS). Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 2: 100032.   [Google Scholar]
  4. Back WE and Moreau KA (2001). Information management strategies for project management. Project Management Journal, 32(1): 10-19.   [Google Scholar]
  5. Basri WS, Alandejani JA, and Almadani FM (2018). ICT adoption impact on students’ academic performance: Evidence from Saudi universities. Education Research International, 2018: 1240197.   [Google Scholar]
  6. Buabeng-Andoh C and Baah C (2020). Pre-service teachers’ intention to use learning management system: An integration of UTAUT and TAM. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 17(4): 455-474.   [Google Scholar]
  7. Bygstad B, Øvrelid E, Ludvigsen S, and Dæhlen M (2022). From dual digitalization to digital learning space: Exploring the digital transformation of higher education. Computers and Education, 182: 104463.   [Google Scholar]
  8. Chao CM (2019). Factors determining the behavioral intention to use mobile learning: An application and extension of the UTAUT model. Frontiers in Psychology, 10: 1652.   [Google Scholar] PMid:31379679 PMCid:PMC6646805
  9. Chinyemba A and Ngulube P (2005). Managing records at higher education institutions: A case study of the University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg Campus. South African Journal of Information Management, 7(1).   [Google Scholar]
  10. Chiu CM and Wang ET (2008). Understanding web-based learning continuance intention: The role of subjective task value. Information and Management, 45(3): 194-201.   [Google Scholar]
  11. Cobarsí J, Bernardo M, and Coenders G (2008). Campus information systems for students: Classification in Spain. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 25(1): 50-64.   [Google Scholar]
  12. Davis FD (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3): 319-340.   [Google Scholar]
  13. Duncombe R and Molla A (2009). Formalisation of information systems in sub-Saharan African small and medium enterprises: Case of Botswana. The African Journal of Information Systems, 1(2): 1-29.   [Google Scholar]
  14. Dwivedi YK, Hughes DL, Coombs C, Constantiou I, Duan Y, Edwards JS, and Upadhyay N (2020). Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on information management research and practice: Transforming education, work and life. International Journal of Information Management, 55: 102211.   [Google Scholar]
  15. Egoeze F, Misra S, Maskeliūnas R, and Damaševičius R (2018). Impact of ICT on universities administrative services and management of students' records: ICT in university administration. International Journal of Human Capital and Information Technology Professionals (IJHCITP), 9(2): 1-15.   [Google Scholar]
  16. Elpez I and Fink D (2006). Information systems success in the public sector: Stakeholders' perspectives and emerging alignment model. Informing Science: International Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline, 3: 219-231.   [Google Scholar]
  17. Fornell C and Larcker DF (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3): 382–388.   [Google Scholar]
  18. Gefen D, Karahanna E, and Straub DW (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27(1): 51-90.   [Google Scholar]
  19. Ghobakhloo M, Arias-Aranda D, and Benitez-Amado J (2011). Adoption of e-commerce applications in SMEs. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 111(8): 1238-1269.   [Google Scholar]
  20. Goodhue DL and Thompson RL (1995). Task-technology fit and individual performance. MIS Quarterly, 19(2): 213-236.   [Google Scholar]
  21. Hair JF, Hult GTM, Ringle CM, and Sarstedt MA (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). 2nd Edition, SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  22. Hamid AA, Razak FZA, Bakar AA, and Abdullah WSW (2016). The effects of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use on continuance intention to use e-government. Procedia Economics and Finance, 35: 644-649.   [Google Scholar]
  23. Harwick J and Barki H (1994). Explaining the role of user participation in information systems use. Management Science, 40(4): 440-465.   [Google Scholar]
  24. Hoque R and Sorwar G (2017). Understanding factors influencing the adoption of mHealth by the elderly: An extension of the UTAUT model. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 101: 75-84.   [Google Scholar] PMid:28347450
  25. Kaul S (2006). Higher education in India: Seizing the opportunity. Development Economics Working Papers 22169, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi, India.   [Google Scholar]
  26. Khalilzadeh J, Ozturk AB, and Bilgihan A (2017). Security-related factors in extended UTAUT model for NFC based mobile payment in the restaurant industry. Computers in Human Behavior, 70: 460-474.   [Google Scholar]
  27. Koç T, Turan AH, and Okursoy A (2016). Acceptance and usage of a mobile information system in higher education: An empirical study with structural equation modeling. The International Journal of Management Education, 14(3): 286-300.   [Google Scholar]
  28. Lanlan Z, Ahmi A, and Popoola OMJ (2019). Perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness and the usage of computerized accounting systems: A performance of micro and small enterprises (MSES) in China. International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering, 8(2): 324-331.   [Google Scholar]
  29. Lawrence JE (2015). Examining the factors that influence ICT adoption in SMEs: A research preliminary findings. International Journal of Technology Diffusion, 6(4): 40-57.   [Google Scholar]
  30. Li H and Liu Y (2014). Understanding post-adoption behaviors of e-service users in the context of online travel services. Information and Management, 51(8): 1043-1052.   [Google Scholar]
  31. Livingstone S (2012). Critical reflections on the benefits of ICT in education. Oxford Review of Education, 38(1): 9-24.   [Google Scholar]
  32. Macevičiūtė E and Wilson TD (2002). The development of the information management research area. Information Research, 7(3). Available online at:
  33. Maillet É, Mathieu L, and Sicotte C (2015). Modeling factors explaining the acceptance, actual use and satisfaction of nurses using an electronic patient record in acute care settings: An extension of the UTAUT. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 84(1): 36-47.   [Google Scholar] PMid:25288192
  34. Malhotra R, Kumar D, and Gupta DP (2020). An android application for campus information system. Procedia Computer Science, 172: 863-868.   [Google Scholar]
  35. Min Q, Ji S, and Qu G (2008). Mobile commerce user acceptance study in China: A revised UTAUT model. Tsinghua Science and Technology, 13(3): 257-264.   [Google Scholar]
  36. Mou J and Cohen JF (2017). Trust and online consumer health service success: A longitudinal study. Information Development, 33(2): 169-189.   [Google Scholar]
  37. Nag AK and Gilitwala B (2019). E-Wallet-factors affecting its intention to use. International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering, 8(4): 3411-3415.   [Google Scholar]
  38. Park N, Rhoads M, Hou J, and Lee KM (2014). Understanding the acceptance of teleconferencing systems among employees: An extension of the technology acceptance model. Computers in Human Behavior, 39: 118-127.   [Google Scholar]
  39. Pinho C, Franco M, and Mendes L (2018). Web portals as tools to support information management in higher education institutions: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Information Management, 41: 80-92.   [Google Scholar]
  40. Pollock N and Cornford J (2004). ERP systems and the university as a "unique" organization. Information Technology and People, 17(1): 31–52.   [Google Scholar]
  41. Prajogo D, Toy J, Bhattacharya A, Oke A, and Cheng TCE (2018). The relationships between information management, process management and operational performance: Internal and external contexts. International Journal of Production Economics, 199: 95-103.   [Google Scholar]
  42. Puspitasari N, Firdaus MB, Haris CA, and Setyadi HJ (2019). An application of the UTAUT model for analysis of adoption of integrated license service information system. Procedia Computer Science, 161: 57-65.   [Google Scholar]
  43. Rothnie L (1993). Campus wide information system development at three UK universities. VINE, 23(4): 18–30.   [Google Scholar]
  44. Samsudeen SN and Mohamed R (2019). University students’ intention to use e-learning systems: A study of higher educational institutions in Sri Lanka. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 16(3): 219-238.   [Google Scholar]
  45. Sanchez-Puchol F, Pastor-Collado JA, and Borrell B (2017). Towards an unified information systems reference model for higher education institutions. Procedia Computer Science, 121: 542-553.   [Google Scholar]
  46. Shiau WL and Luo MM (2013). Continuance intention of blog users: The impact of perceived enjoyment, habit, user involvement and blogging time. Behaviour and Information Technology, 32(6): 570-583.   [Google Scholar]
  47. Straub D, Boudreau M, and Gefen D (2004). Validation guidelines for IS positivist research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 13: 24.   [Google Scholar]
  48. Šumak B, Pušnik M, Heričko M, and Šorgo A (2017). Differences between prospective, existing, and former users of interactive whiteboards on external factors affecting their adoption, usage and abandonment. Computers in Human Behavior, 72: 733-756.   [Google Scholar]
  49. Tosuntaş ŞB, Karadağ E, and Orhan S (2015). The factors affecting acceptance and use of interactive whiteboard within the scope of FATIH project: A structural equation model based on the Unified Theory of acceptance and use of technology. Computers and Education, 81: 169-178.   [Google Scholar]
  50. Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, and Davis FD (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3): 425-478.   [Google Scholar]
  51. Venkatesh V, Sykes TA, and Zhang X (2011). 'Just what the doctor ordered': A revised UTAUT for EMR system adoption and use by doctors. In the 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE, Kauai, USA: 1-10.   [Google Scholar] PMid:20972605
  52. Wong KT, Russo S, and McDowall J (2013). Understanding early childhood student teachers' acceptance and use of interactive whiteboard. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 30(1): 4-16.   [Google Scholar]
  53. Zhou LL, Owusu-Marfo J, Asante Antwi H, Antwi MO, Kachie ADT, and Ampon-Wireko S (2019). Assessment of the social influence and facilitating conditions that support nurses’ adoption of hospital electronic information management systems (HEIMS) in Ghana using the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 19: 230.   [Google Scholar] PMid:31752840 PMCid:PMC6873399