Reducing Digital Resistance through Digital Competence: Evidence from Administrative Staff at Universitas Padjadjaran
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58812/wsbm.v4i03.3041Keywords:
Digital Competence, Digital Workload, Technostress, Digital Resistance, PLS-SEMAbstract
Administrative work at Universitas Padjadjaran changed considerably as the university expanded its use of integrated digital systems for academic and administrative services, a shift that raised concerns about digital resistance because technology adoption in higher education does not always proceed smoothly when staff readiness is uneven. Positioning digital competence as a central factor, this study investigated its role in reducing digital resistance among administrative staff, alongside the contributions of digital workload and technostress, with technostress modeled as a mediator. A causal explanatory, cross-sectional, quantitative design was used. Structured questionnaires using a five-point Likert scale were distributed to administrative staff, yielding 215 initial responses; after a data quality screening process removed 13 unsuitable responses, 202 valid responses were retained for analysis. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling, applying a second-order reflective-reflective construct model in SmartPLS, was used to analyze the data. Findings revealed that digital competence exerted a negative, significant effect on technostress and constituted the strongest path within the model, whereas digital workload showed no significant effect on technostress. Neither digital competence nor digital workload directly and significantly predicted digital resistance; instead, technostress significantly and positively predicted digital resistance and fully mediated the pathway from digital competence to digital resistance. Digital competence therefore appeared to lower digital resistance indirectly, by reducing technostress rather than through a direct effect. Universitas Padjadjaran was encouraged to strengthen digital competence development and improve communication during system changes to manage technostress and digital resistance among its administrative staff.
References
[1] A. Carvalho, J. Leitão, and H. Alves, “Digital transformation, state Hei performance and the moderating role of leadership,” Int. J. Leadersh. Educ., pp. 1–33, 2023.
[2] B. Deacon, M. Laufer, and L. O. Schäfer, “Infusing educational technologies in the heart of the university—A systematic literature review from an organisational perspective,” Br. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 441–466, 2023.
[3] P. A. P. Mabotha and B. S. Ngcamu, “Digital transformation in the higher education sector: A systematic literature review,” Adm. Sci., vol. 16, no. 1, p. 1, 2025.
[4] R. Ramadania, Y. Hartijasti, B. B. Purmono, N. Haris, D. Muhammad, and M. Z. Afifi, “A Systematic Review on Digital Transformation and Organizational Performance in Higher Education.,” Int. J. Sustain. Dev. Plan., vol. 19, no. 4, p. 1239, 2024.
[5] A. T. On and W. Terms, “Technology in education :,” 2023.
[6] D. Wiyono, N. Parwitasari, E. Ambiapuri, H. Setiadi, and K. Khusna, “Digital Empowerment for Administrative Staff in Private Higher Education Institutions,” WSEAS Trans. Comput. Res., vol. 12, pp. 475–493, 2024.
[7] M. L. Markus, “Power, politics, and MIS implementation,” Commun. ACM, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 430–444, 1983.
[8] R. Vuorikari, S. Kluzer, Y. Punie, and S. Carretero, “DigComp 2.2: The digital competence framework for citizens. Publications Office of the European Union.” Joint Research Center. https://doi. org/10.2760/115376, 2022.
[9] S. Connectivity, OECD Digital Economy Outlook 2024 (Volume 2), vol. 2, no. Volume 2. 2024.
[10] J. S. Moreira-Choez et al., “Influence of gender and academic level on the development of digital competencies in university teachers: A multidisciplinary comparative analysis,” in Frontiers in Education, Frontiers Media SA, 2024, p. 1436368.
[11] S. Ličen and M. Prosen, “Strengthening sustainable higher education with digital technologies: development and validation of a digital competence scale for university teachers (DCS-UT),” Sustainability, vol. 16, no. 22, p. 9937, 2024.
[12] M. Molino et al., “Wellbeing costs of technology use during Covid-19 remote working: An investigation using the Italian translation of the technostress creators scale,” Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 15, p. 5911, 2020.
[13] M. Tarafdar, C. L. Cooper, and J. Stich, “The technostress trifecta‐techno eustress, techno distress and design: Theoretical directions and an agenda for research,” Inf. Syst. J., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 6–42, 2019.
[14] C. Califf and S. Brooks, “An empirical study of techno-stressors, literacy facilitation, burnout, and turnover intention as experienced by K-12 teachers,” Comput. Educ., vol. 157, Nov. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103971.
[15] G. La Torre, A. Esposito, I. Sciarra, and M. Chiappetta, “Definition, symptoms and risk of techno-stress: a systematic review,” Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health, vol. 92, no. 1, pp. 13–35, 2019, doi: 10.1007/s00420-018-1352-1.
[16] M. Nedeljko, Y. Gu, and C. M. Bostan, “The dual impact of technological tools on health and technostress among older workers: an integrative literature review,” Cogn. Technol. Work, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 47–61, 2024.
[17] “ANALYSIS OF DIGITAL SKILLS DEVELOPMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR,” no. 5, 2024.
[18] A. B. Bakker, E. Demerouti, and A. Sanz-Vergel, “Job demands–resources theory: Ten years later,” Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 25–53, 2023.
[19] A. B. Bakker and E. Demerouti, “Job demands–resources theory: Taking stock and looking forward.,” J. Occup. Health Psychol., vol. 22, no. 3, p. 273, 2017.
[20] E. Demerouti, A. B. Bakker, F. Nachreiner, and W. B. Schaufeli, “The job demands-resources model of burnout.,” J. Appl. Psychol., vol. 86, no. 3, p. 499, 2001.
[21] V. Cieslak and C. Valor, “Moving beyond conventional resistance and resistors: an integrative review of employee resistance to digital transformation,” Cogent Bus. Manag., vol. 12, no. 1, p. 2442550, Dec. 2025, doi: 10.1080/23311975.2024.2442550.
[22] J. F. Hair, “A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), 3/E.,” 2021.
[23] M. Sarstedt, J. F. Hair Jr, J.-H. Cheah, J.-M. Becker, and C. M. Ringle, “How to specify, estimate, and validate higher-order constructs in PLS-SEM,” Australas. Mark. J., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 197–211, 2019.
[24] G. Shmueli et al., “Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: guidelines for using PLSpredict,” Eur. J. Mark., vol. 53, no. 11, pp. 2322–2347, 2019.
[25] P. Spagnoli, M. Molino, D. Molinaro, M. L. Giancaspro, A. Manuti, and C. Ghislieri, “Workaholism and technostress during the COVID-19 emergency: The crucial role of the leaders on remote working,” Front. Psychol., vol. 11, p. 620310, 2020.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Nina Susanti, Dina Sartika, Wa Ode Zusnita Muizu
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Facebook 
Instagram 
Twitter 
Youtube 
westscience.journals@gmail.com