Figure 1.
Mean, standard deviation, convergence, validity of measurements
| Factor | Indicator | Mean | Standard deviation | Standardized loading | Composite reliability | AVE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Management support (MS) | MS1 | 3.47 | 1.20 | 0.879 | 0.832 | 0.553 |
| MS2 | 3.39 | 1.24 | 0.866 | |||
| MS3 | 3.29 | 1.24 | 0.961 | |||
| MS4 | 3.34 | 1.18 | 0.906 | |||
| Technical support (TS) | TS1 | 3.45 | 1.15 | 0.871 | 0.809 | 0.515 |
| TS2 | 3.48 | 1.14 | 0.780 | |||
| TS3 | 3.48 | 1.15 | 0.839 | |||
| TS4 | 3.54 | 1.10 | 0.764 | |||
| Course quality (CQ) | CQ1 | 3.56 | 1.19 | 0.839 | 0.884 | 0.562 |
| CQ2 | 3.53 | 1.12 | 0.734 | |||
| CQ3 | 3.46 | 1.21 | 0.974 | |||
| CQ4 | 3.44 | 1.16 | 0.896 | |||
| CQ5 | 3.44 | 1.10 | 0.801 | |||
| CQ6 | 3.44 | 1.14 | 0.920 | |||
| Perceived usefulness (PU) | PU1 | 3.51 | 1.17 | 0.816 | 0.812 | 0.590 |
| PU2 | 3.46 | 1.13 | 0.936 | |||
| PU3 | 3.42 | 1.21 | 0.939 | |||
| Perceived ease of use (PEOU) | PEOU1 | 3.47 | 1.33 | 0.958 | 0.757 | 0.511 |
| PEOU2 | 3.42 | 1.29 | 0.975 | |||
| PEOU3 | 3.46 | 1.24 | 0.817 | |||
| E-learning adoption (EA) | EA1 | 3.51 | 1.15 | 0.729 | 0.758 | 0.516 |
| EA2 | 3.35 | 1.16 | 0.733 | |||
| EA3 | 3.46 | 1.16 | 0.993 |
Sample characteristics (N = 248)
| Variable | - | Frequency | Percent |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 149 | 60.0 |
| Female | 99 | 40.0 | |
| Age (years) | 18–29 | 43 | 17.3 |
| 30–39 | 119 | 48.0 | |
| 40–49 | 78 | 31.5 | |
| 50–60 | 8 | 3.2 | |
| Work experience | <3 years | 38 | 15.3 |
| 3–5 years | 39 | 15.7 | |
| 5–10 years | 40 | 16.1 | |
| >10 years | 131 | 52.8 | |
| Job position | Employee | 116 | 46.8 |
| First-line manager | 64 | 25.8 | |
| Middle manager | 39 | 15.7 | |
| Top manager | 29 | 11.7 |
Appendix: Measurement items
| No | Scale | Item |
|---|---|---|
| Management support (MS) | ||
| 1 | MS1 | My manager encourages me to upgrade my capabilities by studying e-learning |
| 2 | MS2 | My manager suggests relevant content to me on e-learning |
| 3 | MS3 | My manager supports and encourages me to refer e-learning for my work |
| 4 | MS4 | My manager cares about my using e-learning |
| Technical support (TS) | ||
| 5 | TS1 | A hotline is available to support technical issues about the e-learning system |
| 6 | TS2 | An email line is available to support technical issues about the e-learning system |
| 7 | TS3 | TS for e-learning is provided shortly after requested |
| 8 | TS4 | Overall, I am satisfied with the TS regarded to e-learning |
| Course quality (CQ) | ||
| 9 | CQ1 | The courses’ difficulty is moderate on e-learning to me |
| 10 | CQ2 | The courses’ duration is suitable on e-learning for me |
| 11 | CQ3 | The courses’ structure is clear and understandable on e-learning |
| 12 | CQ4 | The courses’ content is presented attractively |
| 13 | CQ5 | The courses are relevant to my work requirement |
| 14 | CQ6 | Overall, I am satisfied with the course content on e-learning |
| Perceived usefulness (PU) | ||
| 15 | PU1 | Using e-learning helped me to improve my learning effectiveness |
| 16 | PU2 | Using e-learning helped me to improve my performance |
| 17 | PU3 | Overall I think e-learning is beneficial to my work |
| Perceived ease of use (PEOU) | ||
| 18 | PEOU1 | I understand how to use e-learning system |
| 19 | PEOU2 | I do not have difficulties in interacting with e-learning system |
| 20 | PEOU3 | Overall I think the system is easy to use |
| E-learning adoption (EA) | ||
| 21 | EA1 | I intend to use e-learning as a method to study |
| 22 | EA2 | I prefer e-learning over other traditional methods |
| 23 | EA3 | I would recommend e-learning to my colleagues |
Discriminant validity analysis result
| Factor | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. MS | 0.744 | - | - | - | - | - |
| 2. TS | 0.268** | 0.718 | - | - | - | - |
| 3. CQ | 0.260** | 0.230** | 0.750 | - | - | - |
| 4. PU | 0.487*** | 0.356* | 0.397* | 0.768 | - | - |
| 5. PEOU | 0.002 | 0.489*** | 0.364** | 0.444** | 0.715 | - |
| 6. EA | 0.314*** | 0.311* | 0.402*** | 0.654*** | 0.499*** | 0.718 |
Standardized causal effects for the structural model and hypotheses assessment
| Endogenous variable | Determinant | Standardized causal effect | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| PU | H1 – MS | 0.403*** | Supported |
| H3 – CQ | 0.157* | Supported | |
| H5 – PEOU | 0.317*** | Supported | |
| - | - | - | - |
| PEOU | H2 – TS | 0.461*** | Supported |
| H4 – CQ | 0.311*** | Supported | |
| - | - | - | - |
| EA (R2 = 0.505) | H6 – PU | 0.484*** | Supported |
| H7 – PEOU | 0.199** | Supported |