Measurement value for German sample

The data analysis was performed for the users from Germany to assess the measurement model for the German respondents. The model value is 2.634, which shows that the model overall shows good result. This shows that the validity of the model can be trusted. The model value described 83.0% of the sample with 0.83 GFI and after adjusting the total of sample and variable, the model can describe as much as 73.9% of sample with 0.739 AGIF. The RMSEA model value is 0.128, which is more than 0.08 therefore met the measurement model fitness. The c.r. value is 3.606 which is more than 2.5, this shows that the data is not normal multivariate distributed. According to Bollen (1989), estimation form MLE method does not have to be normal multivariate distributed. The data is analyzed using 95% confidence level (alpha = 0.05). Most of the fitness measures were acceptable. The result of SEM is summarized in Table 6.36.

Table 6.36 Statistics of model fit measure for German model Model Fit Measure Model _value

CMIN/D.F 2.634 Goodness-of-fit index (GFI) 0.83

Adjusted GFI (AGFI) 0.739

Root mean square error of

approximation (RMSEA) 0.128

Multivariate (kurtosis mardia c.r.) 3.606

The statistical significance for the constructs “cultural influence on specific preference” were examined and found that CP1 (0.363), CP2 (0.672), and CP3 (1) have positive relation with highly statistically significant p value (<0.001). This shows that for Germany’s model, positive relations were constructed by the questions asked regarding the importance to have an interface that is adapted to their culture and whether they would refuse to use an application that has materials or features that is not suitable for their culture. Variable items properties of the German measurement model are shown in Table 4.33.

The measurement construct of “perception of system ease of use” were examined through the following variable items (PE1 – PE 12). The statistical significance were examined and found that only PE7 (2.879) and PE10 (1) have positive relation with statistically significant p value 0.005 and <0.001, P4 also shows positive relation but with not too strong significant p value of 0.022. This shows that for German users, the construct ease of use is formed by only the easiness to perform certain task or functionalities, such as the use of audio, chat message and having the option to perform multitasking. Results show that P9 has a relation toward user’s perception of ease of use but negatively. This represents the question asked regarding the freedom to choose the layout/color/size of user’s screen, negative relation show that user’s ability to change the layout/color/size of the screen has a negative effect toward the easiness of a system.

The measurement construct of “usefulness influence attitude of satisfaction” and “ease of use influence attitude of satisfaction” were examined through the following variable item (UA1 – UA4) and (EA1-EA3). The statistical significance were examined and found that all UA (1-4) positive relation with highly statistically significant p value (<0.005) and only EA3 has a positive relation with highly statistically significant p value (<0.001). This shows that for German sample, user’s satisfaction is influence significantly mostly by an application usability rather than its ease of use. Such examples of an application that satisfied user’s preference are if the application can run several features, display

their native language, record conversations (audio, video and chat), and the ability to track changes on a shared file. Examples on how user’s may be satisfied on the ease of use of an application is when the application is familiar to use and the ability to find a lost file just by entering short key words.

The measurement construct of “intention to use” and “system usage” were examined through the following variable item IU and SU. The statistical significance were examined and found that all IU and SU have positive relation with highly statistically significant p value (<0.001). This shows that for German sample, the variable items asked in IU and SU shows positive significant relation. IU was asked in regards to the purpose of using a groupware application, whether it is for group discussion, producing reports, weekly meetings, negotiating tools or non-business purpose. System usage was asked whether or not culture plays a role in the actual usage of the groupware.

Table 6.37 Variable item properties of the German measurement model Variable

Item Measurement model Significant Value (P)

CP1 0.363 <0.001 CP2 0.672 <0.001 CP3 1 <0.001 PE4 1.281 0.022 PE7 2.879 0.005 PE9 -2.636 0.004 PE10 1 <0.001 UA1 1 <0.001 UA2 1.024 0.003 UA3 0.935 0.005 UA4 1.258 0.002 EA3 1 <0.001 IU1 1 <0.001 SU1 1 <0.001 0.548 0.787 2.258 0,403  Preference of  system  usefulness (PU)  Perception of  system ease  of use (PE)  Usefulness‐ Attitude  of satisfaction in  using the application  (UA) Ease of use‐ Attitude  of  satisfaction  in  using the application  (EA) Anticipated  application use /  Intention to use  (IU)  System  usage  (SU)  Cultural factor  that influence  specific design  preference  (CP) 

Figure 6.30 Significant relation results for Germany

The entire model presents a good fit, but did not exactly matches the entire research model. Figure 6.30 shows the causal relationship. The statistical significance were examined and found no significance between cultural influence on specific design preference influence user’s perception of system usefulness (β=-0.001, P=0.99), hypothesis H1 was therefore not supported. Cultural influence

on specific design preference shows no significance with user’s perception of the system ease of use (β=0.082, P=0.281), therefore hypothesis H2 is also not supported. User’s perception of system usefulness has a positive effect on user’s perception of ease of use (β=0.403, P= 0,007), therefore H3 is supported. User’s belief of usefulness influence user’s attitude of satisfaction in using groupware (β=2.258, P=0.089), therefore H4 is supported. User’s belief on ease of user influence user’s attitude of satisfaction in using groupware (β=0.787, P=0.104), therefore H5 is supported. User’s attitude of satisfaction in usefulness in using groupware give a positive effect on the use of groupware (β=0.548, P= 0.137), therefore H6 is supported. User’s attitude of satisfaction in ease of use using groupware does not have a positive effect on the use of groupware (β=-0.13, P=0.86), therefore H7 is not supported. User’s anticipated behavior or intention to use the application shows no significant to user’s actual system usage (β=-0.051, P=0.6), therefore H8 is not supported. Table 6.38 describes the measurement model value of the significant relation only.

Table 6.38 Measurement model for Germany Causal relationship Measurement _model Significant value

PE – PU 0.403 0,007

PU – UA 2.258 0,089

PE – EA 0.787 0,104

UA – IU 0.548 0,137

6.8.2.6 Summary of Result

The findings of this study suggest that cultural influence play an important role in determining the acceptance and usage behavior in adapting new groupware technologies. The result of this empirical study validates the proposed research model and hypotheses, and demonstrates that the hypotheses can be supported. Cultural specific design preference influences user’s preference of system usefulness and user’s perception of system ease of use. When users get greater satisfaction with culturally design interface system (e.g., it is interesting, not too hard, and meets the needs of users at different levels), the stronger their feelings about its usefulness and ease of use. In term of ease of use, it is when the system design is developed in a more culture-friendly form, users will feel more comfortable and find the system familiar and easier to use.

The result of the study finds strong support for the use of a modified TAM in groupware usage for multicultural users. The data showed that culturally adapted interface has a significant direct effect on perceived ease of use and usefulness, while perceived ease of use and usefulness are the dominant factor affecting the attitude of users using groupware application. The result indicates the importance of perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness in mediating the relationship of users’ preference with attitude and groupware application usage. Culturally specific design preference related significantly with system usefulness (H1). The relation seems to be strongest for the Indonesian users. There are significant relation between system usefulness and ease of use (H3) and significant relations between system usefulness and attitude of satisfaction (H4), but there are significant relation between ease of use influence attitude of satisfaction and intention to use (H7). There are also significant relation between intention to use and system usage (H8).

In the Malaysian model, culturally specific designed preference relate significantly to both, perception of system usefulness (H1) and system ease of use (H2). Significant relation can also be seen between system usefulness and ease of use (H3). Significant relation was also found between system usefulness and attitude of satisfaction (H4), as well as between ease of use and attitude of satisfaction (H5). Significant relation can also be found between usefulness in influencing user’s attitude of satisfaction (H6) and ease of use in influencing attitude of satisfaction (H7) which then leads to user’s intention of use. However, there is no significant relation between anticipated application use behavior and system usage (H8).

A different path of model was found as the result for the German users, whereas it turns out that culturally specific design preferences did not relate significantly with system usefulness (H1) and system ease of use (H2). However, there are significant relation between system usefulness and ease of use (H3) and significant relations between system usefulness and attitude of satisfaction (H4), as well as between ease of use and attitude of satisfaction (H5). Only significant relation between usefulness influence attitude of satisfaction and intention of use (H6) was found. No significant relation between ease of use influence attitude of satisfaction and intention to use (H7) and no significant relation between intention to use and system usage (H8) was obtained from the executed model.

When the total population of countries’ sample is combined, the result achieved is the most optimal model; this proved that cultural factors influence the acceptance of groupware application. Culturally specific design preferences relate significantly with system usefulness (H1) and system ease of use for the total sample (H2). Significant correlation was found between system usefulness and ease of use (H3). Significant relations between system usefulness and attitude of satisfaction (H4), as well as between ease of use and attitude of satisfaction (H5) also was found. However, there is no significant relation between usefulness influence attitude of satisfaction and intention of use (H6) and between intention to use and system usage (H8), but there are significant relation between ease of use influence attitude of satisfaction and intention to use (H7). The summary of the hypotheses’ result is shown in Table 6.39.

Table 6.39 Summary for all countries sample

Hypothesis

Result (supported / not supported)

Total Sample Indonesia Malaysia Germany

H1 : Cultural specific design preference influence user’s perception on system

usefulness while using groupware application Supported Supported Supported Not supported H2 : Cultural specific design preference

influence user’s perception about system ease

of use while using groupware application Supported Not supported Supported Not supported H3 : Perceive ease of use has a positive effect

on the perceived usefulness Supported Supported Supported Supported

H4: User’s belief on usefulness influence their attitude of satisfaction in using groupware

Supported Supported Supported Supported H5: User’s belief on ease of use influence

their attitude of satisfaction in using

groupware Supported Not Supported Supported Supported

H6: User’s attitude of satisfaction in

effect on the use of groupware

H7: User’s attitude of satisfaction in ease of use using groupware have a positive effect on

the use of groupware Supported Not Supported Supported Supported

H8: User’s anticipated behavior or intention to use the application influence user’s actual system usage

Supported Supported _supported Not _supported Not

6.8.2.7 Conclusion

Study 1 show that TAM provides explanation for groupware adoption and usage in all three countries studied, although with less effect for Germany. Relationships among primary TAM constructs found in this research are largely consistent with those typical in previous TAM research. The only finding in this research that is inconsistent with previous TAM research concerns the perceived usefulness and how it affects users’ satisfaction in using the application. The impact of usefulness in user’s attitude of satisfaction on user’s anticipated application use behavior is not as strong as that of user’s belief on ease of use in user’s attitude of satisfaction in using groupware. It shows that user’s would be more intended to use a system that is easy to use rather that useful but complicated to use, especially since modern applications are becoming more and more sophisticated. The differences found in each culture can be concluded that culture does play an important role in determining users’ preference in working with groupware applications.

6.8.3 Part 2: Selected Cultural Dimension Influences User’s Intention to Use Groupware