1
Adoption of LMS in the Cultural Context
of Higher Educational Institutions
of the Middle East
1.1 Introduction
Today, information and communication technology impacts
almost all facets of life at the individual, organizational, and
social levels. Academic institutions around the world are in
the process of adopting technology in teaching, professional
development, and curriculum development (Usluel, Askar,
& Bas, 2008). The use of a learning management system
(LMS) is growing in higher education. It has become an
essential tool for instructors and students in their teaching
and learning process (Alghamdi, 2016; Nagy, 2016). LMS is
now equally popular not only in the educational sector but
also in governmental organizations and business sectors for
the training of individuals in the business sector. It helps
corporate designers and educators to plan, organize, and
deliver online courses in an effective way (Jafari, McGee, &
Carmean, 2006).
Numerous models and theories have been presented to
examine the variables that influence the adoption of new
technologies (Baptista & Oliveira, 2015; Rodrigues, Sarabdeen, & Balasubramanian, 2016), in particular LMSs in
education. These variables have been identified by a variety
of information system theories and models, such as the
theory of reasoned actions, technology acceptance model,
and diffusion of innovation. A widely used technology
adoption model, the unified theory of acceptance and use of
technology (UTAUT), was introduced by Venkatesh et al.
(2003), which united eight popular models of technology
acceptance. Later, Venkatesh et al. (2012) revised the model
UTAUT and included new constructs, namely, price value,
hedonic motivation, and habit in the context of mobile phone
consumer research. The new model is known as UTAUT2.
Most of the technology adoption models were established
and tested in developed countries. However, there is little
research on the adoption and use of technology in
non-Western countries (Al-Gahtani, Hubona, & Wang,
2007).
It was pointed out by Hofstede (1980) and other
researchers (such as Baptista & Oliveira, 2015; Hew,
Latifah, & Abdul, 2016) that culture has a remarkable
influence on individuals in the adoption of technology.
Hofstede (1980) provided cultural dimensions as theoretical
grounds for exploring the acceptance of the technology. He
described the cultural dimensions as power distance, masculinity, individualism, and uncertainty avoidance. Later,
two more dimensions (indulgence and monumentalism)
were also included. This book will provide empirical evidence to the validity of this extended model. Building on this
work, we present a new cultural adoption model in the
context of the Middle East. Here, in this chapter, we first
describe the genesis of this book by presenting the context,
problem statement, and the critical research questions.
Finally, we present a content overview of this book.
1.1.1 Why This Book Matter?
New technologies have transformed the teaching and
learning process (Henriksen, Mishra, & Fisser, 2016). The
adoption and use of instructional technology play an
important role in shaping the future of HEIs (Mosa, Naz’ri
bin Mahrin, & Ibrrahim, 2016). The growth of educational
tools such as LMSs in recent years (Siemens, 2015) has
inspired HEIs all over the world to redefine their teaching
and learning processes. Consequently, universities are
making investments in equipment, technology, infrastructure, and professional development programs to improve
their educational effectiveness (Tosunta, Karada, & Orhan,
2015). However, these decisions are generally made without
considering the variables and dimensions that affect the
actual users of the technology, that is, the instructors and
students (Oblinger & Oblinger, 2005). A lack of understanding of the influential variables results in the implementation failure due to users’ unwillingness to adopt new
technology (Dillon & Morris, 1996; Mugo, Njagi, Chemwei,
& Motanya, 2017) and hence these technological investments do not meet the anticipated benefits for these institutions. The institutions are lagging in the adoption of
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021
R. A. Khan and H. Qudrat-Ullah, Adoption of LMS in Higher Educational Institutions of the Middle East,
Advances in Science, Technology & Innovation, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50112-9_1
1
Adoption of LMS in the Cultural Context
of Higher Educational Institutions
of the Middle East
1.1 Introduction
Today, information and communication technology impacts
almost all facets of life at the individual, organizational, and
social levels. Academic institutions around the world are in
the process of adopting technology in teaching, professional
development, and curriculum development (Usluel, Askar,
& Bas, 2008). The use of a learning management system
(LMS) is growing in higher education. It has become an
essential tool for instructors and students in their teaching
and learning process (Alghamdi, 2016; Nagy, 2016). LMS is
now equally popular not only in the educational sector but
also in governmental organizations and business sectors for
the training of individuals in the business sector. It helps
corporate designers and educators to plan, organize, and
deliver online courses in an effective way (Jafari, McGee, &
Carmean, 2006).
Numerous models and theories have been presented to
examine the variables that influence the adoption of new
technologies (Baptista & Oliveira, 2015; Rodrigues, Sarabdeen, & Balasubramanian, 2016), in particular LMSs in
education. These variables have been identified by a variety
of information system theories and models, such as the
theory of reasoned actions, technology acceptance model,
and diffusion of innovation. A widely used technology
adoption model, the unified theory of acceptance and use of
technology (UTAUT), was introduced by Venkatesh et al.
(2003), which united eight popular models of technology
acceptance. Later, Venkatesh et al. (2012) revised the model
UTAUT and included new constructs, namely, price value,
hedonic motivation, and habit in the context of mobile phone
consumer research. The new model is known as UTAUT2.
Most of the technology adoption models were established
and tested in developed countries. However, there is little
research on the adoption and use of technology in
non-Western countries (Al-Gahtani, Hubona, & Wang,
2007).
It was pointed out by Hofstede (1980) and other
researchers (such as Baptista & Oliveira, 2015; Hew,
Latifah, & Abdul, 2016) that culture has a remarkable
influence on individuals in the adoption of technology.
Hofstede (1980) provided cultural dimensions as theoretical
grounds for exploring the acceptance of the technology. He
described the cultural dimensions as power distance, masculinity, individualism, and uncertainty avoidance. Later,
two more dimensions (indulgence and monumentalism)
were also included. This book will provide empirical evidence to the validity of this extended model. Building on this
work, we present a new cultural adoption model in the
context of the Middle East. Here, in this chapter, we first
describe the genesis of this book by presenting the context,
problem statement, and the critical research questions.
Finally, we present a content overview of this book.
1.1.1 Why This Book Matter?
New technologies have transformed the teaching and
learning process (Henriksen, Mishra, & Fisser, 2016). The
adoption and use of instructional technology play an
important role in shaping the future of HEIs (Mosa, Naz’ri
bin Mahrin, & Ibrrahim, 2016). The growth of educational
tools such as LMSs in recent years (Siemens, 2015) has
inspired HEIs all over the world to redefine their teaching
and learning processes. Consequently, universities are
making investments in equipment, technology, infrastructure, and professional development programs to improve
their educational effectiveness (Tosunta, Karada, & Orhan,
2015). However, these decisions are generally made without
considering the variables and dimensions that affect the
actual users of the technology, that is, the instructors and
students (Oblinger & Oblinger, 2005). A lack of understanding of the influential variables results in the implementation failure due to users’ unwillingness to adopt new
technology (Dillon & Morris, 1996; Mugo, Njagi, Chemwei,
& Motanya, 2017) and hence these technological investments do not meet the anticipated benefits for these institutions. The institutions are lagging in the adoption of
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021
R. A. Khan and H. Qudrat-Ullah, Adoption of LMS in Higher Educational Institutions of the Middle East,
Advances in Science, Technology & Innovation, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50112-9_1
1