Key Factors Influencing E-HRM Adoption: An Integrated ‎Approach Based on The Technology Acceptance Model

  • Authors

    • Qnais Chaimae Faculty of Legal, Economic and Social Sciences, Sidi Mohammed Ben Abdellah ‎University, Fez, Morocco
    • Akioud Malika Faculty of Legal, Economic and Social Sciences, Sidi Mohammed Ben Abdellah ‎University, Fez, Morocco
    https://doi.org/10.14419/5g1zq424

    Received date: September 17, 2025

    Accepted date: October 27, 2025

    Published date: November 7, 2025

  • E-HRM; Intention to Use; University; Digital Transformation; HR Information Systems

  • Abstract

    Against a backdrop of modernization of administrative services in Moroccan higher education, ‎this study examines the determinants of intention to adopt electronic human resource ‎management (e-HRM) systems at Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah University in Fez. Using the ‎Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), the study focuses on three main variables: perceived ‎usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEOU), and intention to use (IU). Data were collected ‎from 98 users of the e-GRH system across 14 university establishments. Statistical analysis ‎was performed using SmartPLS 3.0 software. The results reveal that perceived ease of use ‎exerts a significant impact on intention to use the e-GRH system (β = 0.499; p < 0.001) as well ‎as on perceived usefulness (β = 0.464; p < 0.001). On the other hand, the effect of perceived ‎usefulness on intention to use the system was not statistically significant (β = 0.158; p = ‎‎0.156), leading us to reject this hypothesis. These results suggest that the perceived usability ‎of the system is a major lever in the adoption of e-HRM, independently of perceived ‎functional utility. The study contributes to a better understanding of the acceptance dynamics ‎of digital technologies in academic institutions and proposes concrete avenues for optimizing ‎their deployment‎.

  • References

    1. E. Galanaki, A. Lazazzara, and E. Parry, “A Cross-National Analysis of E-HRM Configurations: Integrating the Information Technology and HRM Perspectives,” Lect. Notes Inf. Syst. Organ, vol. 27, no. August 2018, pp. 261–276, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90500-6_20.
    2. N. Iqbal, M. Ahmad, M. M.C. Allen, and M. M. Raziq, “Does e-HRM improve labour productivity? A study of commercial bank workplaces in Pakistan,” Empl. Relations, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 281–297, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-01-2017-0018.
    3. J. H. Marler and E. Parry, “Human resource management, strategic involvement and e-HRM technology,” Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag., vol. 27, no. 19, pp. 2233–2253, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1091980.
    4. H. J. M. Ruël and T. Bondarouk, “The intersection between information technology and human resource management from a cross-national perspective: Towards a research model,” Handb. Res. Comp.. Hum. Resour. Manag. Second Ed., pp. 339–357, 2018, https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784711139.00025.
    5. H. Ruël, T. Bondarouk, and J. K. Looise, “E-HRM: Innovation or Irritation. An Explorative Empirical Study in Five Large Companies on Web-based HRM,” Manag. Revu, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 364–380, 2004, https://doi.org/10.5771/0935-9915-2004-3-364.
    6. P. Tambe, P. Cappelli, and V. Yakubovich, “Artificial intelligence in human resources management: Challenges and A path forward,” Calif. Manage. Rev., vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 15–42, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125619867910.
    7. T. V. Bondarouk and H. J. M. Ruël, “Electronic human resource management: Challenges in the digital era,” Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag., vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 505–514, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190802707235.
    8. S. Panos and V. Bellou, “Maximizing e-HRM outcomes: a moderated mediation path,” Manag. Decis., vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 1088–1109, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-07-2015-0269.
    9. P. Poisat and M. R. Mey, “Electronic human resource management: Enhancing or entrancing?,” SA J. Hum. Resour. Manag., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 1–9, 2017, https://doi.org/10.4102/sajhrm.v15i0.858.
    10. T. Bondarouk, E. Parry, and E. Furtmueller, “Electronic HRM: four decades of research on adoption and consequences,” Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 98–131, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2016.1245672.
    11. T. Bondarouk and H. Ruël, “The strategic value of e-HRM: Results from an exploratory study in a governmental organization,” Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 391–414, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2012.675142.
    12. E. Wahyudi and S. M. Park, “Unveiling the value creation process of electronic human resource management: An Indonesian case,” Public Pers. Manage., vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 83–117, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026013517555.
    13. M. Rahman and C. Mordi, “Factors Influencing E-HRM Implementation in Government Organisations,” J. Enterp. Inf. Manag., vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 247–275, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-05-2017-0066.
    14. J. Sungwa, “e-HRM within an African Context,” OALib, vol. 08, no. 07, pp. 1–19, 2021, https://doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1107596.
    15. M. Voermans and M. Van Veldhoven, “Attitude towards E-HRM: An empirical study at Philips,” Pers. Rev., vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 887–902, 2007, https://doi.org/10.1108/00483480710822418.
    16. S. Strohmeier, “Research in e-HRM: Review and implications,” Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 19–37, 2007, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2006.11.002.
    17. M. L. Lengnick-Hall and S. Moritz, “The impact of e-HR on the human resource management function,” J. Labor Res., vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 365–379, 2003, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12122-003-1001-6.
    18. W. J. Orlikowski and S. V. Scott, “10 Sociomateriality: Challenging the Separation of Technology, Work and Organization,” Acad. Manag. Ann., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 433–474, 2008, https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520802211644.
    19. D. P. Lepak and S. A. Snell, “Virtual HR: Strategic human resource management in the 21st century,” Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 215–234, 1998, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-4822(98)90003-1.
    20. E. Parry and S. Tyson, “Desired goals and actual outcomes of e-HRM,” Hum. Resour. Manag. J., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 335–354, 2011, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-8583.2010.00149.x.
    21. M. Steen and J. Nauta, “Advantages and disadvantages of societal engagement: a case study in a research and technology organization,” J. Responsible Innov., vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 598–619, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2020.1813864.
    22. P. Poba-Nzaou, S. Uwizeyemunugu, khadija Gaha, and M. Laberge, “Taxonomy of business value underlying motivations for e-HRM adoption: An empirical investigation based on HR processes,” Bus. Process Manag. J., vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 1661–1685, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-06-2018-0150.
    23. H. G. Gueutal, S. Strohmeier, and R. Kabst, “Organizational adoption of e/HRM in Europe: An empirical exploration of major adoption factors,” J. Manag. Psychol., vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 482–501, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940910974099.
    24. N. Oswal and G. L. Narayanappa, “Evolution of HRM to E-HRM to Achieve Organizational Effectiveness and Sustainability,” Int. J. Bus. Adm. Manag. Res., vol. 1, no. 2, p. 22, 2015, https://doi.org/10.24178/ijbamr.2015.1.2.22.
    25. R. Fenech, P. Baguant, and D. Ivanov, “The changing role of human resource management in an era of digital transformation,” J. Manag. Inf. Decis. Sci., vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 176–180, 2019.
    26. S. R. Barley, “Technology as an occasion for structuring: Evidence from observations of CT scanners and the social order of radiology departments,” Strateg. as Pract. Res. Dir. Resour., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 83–100, 2007, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511618925.005.
    27. F. D. Davis, “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology,” MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 319–339, 1989, https://doi.org/10.2307/249008.
    28. R. Gomm, “Social Research Methodology,” Soc. Res. Methodol., 2008, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-22911-2.
    29. V. Venkatesh and F. Davis, “A theoretical extension of the tecgnology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies University of Maryland at College Park,” Manage. Sci., vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 186–204, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926.
    30. V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis, “User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view,” MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 425–478, 2003, https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540.
    31. D. A. Dillman, J. D. Smyth, M. Christian, and J. Wiley, “Crítica de libros,” pp. 161–176, 2016.
    32. J. F. Hair, J. J. Risher, M. Sarstedt, and C. M. Ringle, “The Results of PLS-SEM Article information,” Eur. Bus. Rev., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 2–24, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203.
    33. C. Fornell and D. F. Larcker, “Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error,” 1981. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312.
    34. J. F. Hair, C. M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt, “PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet,” J. Mark. Theory Pract., vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 139–152, 2011, https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202.
    35. Mohamed, E.-S., Elmoukhtar, M., Mohammed, F., Yassine, N., & Mounir, B. (2024). Modeling the impact of exchange rate fluctuations on agricultural performance : Evidence from Morocco during the period 2000-2023. Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology, 8(6). https://doi.org/10.55214/25768484.v8i6.3731.
    36. Mohamed, E.-S., Khaoula, E., Idriss, O., Meryam, E.-A., & Mounir, B. (2025). The Impact of Exchange Rate and Inflation on Economic Growth : Empirical Evidence from the MENA region using Panel Data Analysis. Journal of Ecohumanism, 3(8). https://doi.org/10.62754/joe.v3i8.5848.
    37. Ali, B. T., Abdellah, H.-A., Hicham, O., Ouidad, B., & Mohamed, E.-S. (2025). From hesitation to integration : A UTAUT model analysis of ChatGPT adoption in Moroccan universities. Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology, 9(5), 2980‑2995. https://doi.org/10.55214/25768484.v9i5.7623.
    38. J. Henseler, C. M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt, “A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling,” J. Acad. Mark. Sci., vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 115–135, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8.
    39. A. A. Alalwan, Y. K. Dwivedi, N. P. Rana, B. Lal, and M. D. Williams, “Consumer adoption of Internet banking in Jordan: Examining the role of hedonic motivation, habit, self-efficacy and trust,” J. Financ. Serv. Mark., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 145–157, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1057/fsm.2015.5.
    40. J. C. Nunnally, I. H. B. Psychometric, and T. New, “REVIEW This book is a revision of the late Jum Nunnally ’ s Psychometric Theory which appeared in 1967 and 1978 ( second edition ). Psychometric Theory was a unique text- procedures that explain variance to modern inferential procedures " that has taken,” vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 313–315, 1995.
    41. N. Tabri and C. M. Elliott, Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, vol. 1, no. 1. 2012. https://doi.org/10.15353/cgjsc-rcessc.v1i1.25.
    42. B. Bervell and I. N. Umar, “Validation of the UTAUT model: Re-considering non-linear relationships of exogeneous variables in higher education technology acceptance research,” Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ., vol. 13, no. 10, pp. 6471–6490, 2017, https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/78076.
    43. H. Ouzif et al., “Analyzing the adoption of artificial intelligence by Moroccan university teachers: Key insights and implications from the UTAUT model,” Edelweiss Appl. Sci. Technol., vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 2722–2732, 2025, https://doi.org/10.55214/25768484.v9i4.6644.
    44. O. Hicham, C. Ouail, E. L. A. Maryem, B. Ouidad, and E. L. B. Hayat, “Educational Technology Adoption in Moroccan Universities : Empowering Employability and Aligning with the Industrial Ecosystem,” vol. 10, pp. 518–531, 2025. https://doi.org/10.52783/jisem.v10i49s.9901.
    45. Factors influencing electronic human resource management implementation in public organisations in an emerging economy: An empirical study Amoako, R., Jiang, Y., Adu-Yeboah, S. S., Frempong, M. F., & Tetteh, S. (2023). South African Journal of Business Management, 54(1), a2937. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajbm.v54i1.2937.
    46. Comprehending the Adoption of e HRM: Application of Technology Acceptance Model Chaudhary, A., & Khandelwal, S. (2024). Journal of Informatics Education and Research, Vol. 4, No. 3.
    47. Effects of different electronic HRM configurations on organizational consequences: An intra country analysis Nyathi, M. (2024). Human Resources Management and Services, 6(2), Article ID 3487. https://doi.org/10.18282/hrms.v6i2.3487.
    48. Digital maturity in transforming human resource management in the post COVID era: A thematic analysisShahiduzzaman, M. (2025). Administra-tive Sciences, 15(2), 51. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci15020051.
    49. An integrated adoption model of cloud computing based human resource management by SMEs in developing countries: evidence from Bahrain (2025). Frontiers in Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2025.1503423.
    50. The Impact of E HRM Tools on Employee Engagement Stachová, K., Stacho, Z., Šamalík, P., & Sekan, F. (2024). Administrative Sciences, 14(11), 303. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci14110303.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Chaimae , Q. ., & Malika, A. . (2025). Key Factors Influencing E-HRM Adoption: An Integrated ‎Approach Based on The Technology Acceptance Model. International Journal of Accounting and Economics Studies, 12(7), 288-296. https://doi.org/10.14419/5g1zq424