Bridging the Micro-Business Digital Divide: Drivers of Technology Acceptance in Ayer Keroh, Malacca
Authors
Fakulti Pengurusan Teknologi dan Teknousahawanan, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Malaysia (Malaysia)
Fakulti Pengurusan Teknologi dan Teknousahawanan, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Malaysia\Centre for Technopreneurship Development (C-TeD), Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Malaysia (Malaysia)
Fakulti Pengurusan Teknologi dan Teknousahawanan, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Malaysia\Centre for Technopreneurship Development (C-TeD), Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Malaysia (Malaysia)
Article Information
DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS.2026.100800535
Subject Category: Education
Volume/Issue: 10/8 | Page No: 8173-8183
Publication Timeline
Submitted: 2026-08-26
Accepted: 2026-08-31
Published: 2026-09-11
Abstract
Global business environment has changed due to the rapid acceleration of digitalization, which offers Micro, Small and Medium-sized Enterprise (MSMEs) huge changes to improve operational efficiency, drive ongoing innovation and increase market access. However, resource-constrained traditional small businesses located in semi-urban areas frequently encounter substantial hurdles in integrating digital technologies, risking economic marginalization. This empirical study investigates the critical determinants of digital tool adoption among traditional MSMEs (including retail, food and beverage, and handicraft enterprises) operating within the tourism-centric MITC Ayer Keroh commercial zone in Malacca, Malaysia. A quantitative research design was implemented by utilizing an extended Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) incorporating the construct of Trust. Primary data were collected via structured questionnaires from a representative sample of N=159 MSME owners selected through simple random sampling. Descriptive analysis revealed high adoption rates of basic digital payment systems (TNG E-Wallet and DuitNow at 98.7% usage) and social media marketing platforms (TikTok at 92.4% and Instagram at 90.7%), whereas more advanced cloud services, data analytics, and CRM tools exhibited low penetration. Multiple linear regression analysis demonstrated that the extended TAM model explains 74.6% of the variance in digital tool adoption (R2 = 0.746, F = 151.565, p < 0.001). Perceived Ease of Use exerted the strongest positive influence on digital adoption (beta = 0.411, t = 4.075, p < 0.001), followed by Trust (beta = 0.294, t = 3.337, p = 0.001) and Perceived Usefulness (beta = 0.208, t = 2.898, p = 0.004). The results underscore the necessity of expanding theoretical models of technology acceptance to encompass the emotional and security dimensions of Trust in resource-constrained contexts. Pragmatically, the study recommends targeted policy interventions such as subsidized digital infrastructure, tailored digital literacy training, and localized cybersecurity workshops, in alignment with the Melaka Smart City Blueprint 2035 to bridge the digital divide and ensure long-term small business sustainability.
Keywords
Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs), Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Trust, Digital Adoption, Semi-Urban Commercial Zone, Operational Efficiency
Downloads
References
1. Ahmad, N., Alias, F., Hamat, M., & Mohamed, S. (2024). Reliability analysis: Application of Cronbach's alpha in research instruments. Proceedings of the SIGCS 2024 Conference. https://appspenang.uitm.edu.my/sigcs/2024-2/Articles/20244_ReliabilityAnalysis-ApplicationOfCronbachsAlphaInResearchInstruments.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
2. Ahmed, S. K. (2024). Research methodology simplified: how to choose the right sampling technique and determine the appropriate sample size for research. Oral Oncology Reports, 12, 100662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oor.2024.100662 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
3. Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: An introduction to theory and research. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233897090 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
4. Alabi, O., & Bukola, T. M. (2023). Introduction to descriptive statistics. In IntechOpen eBooks. IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.1002475 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
5. Alshamaila, Y., Papagiannidis, S., & Li, F. (2013). Cloud computing adoption by SMEs in the north east of England: A multi-perspective framework. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 26(3), 250–275. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
6. Ammeran, M., Ibrahim, N., Hashim, N., & Yusof, M. (2023). Digital transformation and resilience of MSMEs in Malaysia: Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 35(2), 215–230. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
7. Awa, H. O., Ojiabo, O. U., & Emecheta, B. C. (2015). Integrating TAM, TPB and TOE frameworks and expanding their characteristic constructs for e-commerce adoption by SMEs. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 6(1), 76–94. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-04-2014-0012 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
8. Bansal, G., Zahedi, F. "Mariam", & Gefen, D. (2010). The impact of personal dispositions on information sensitivity, privacy concern and trust in disclosing health information online. Decision Support Systems, 49(2), 138–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2010.01.010 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
9. Bin, M. K., Hui, G. J. T., & Education, M. (2021). A systematic review of factors influencing digital transformation of SMEs. TURCOMAT, 12(11), 1673–1686. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
10. Blank, Carol Ann. (2013). Mixed methods in social & behavioral research. Journal of Music Therapy, 50(4), 321–325. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmt/50.4.321 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
11. Bresciani, S., Huarng, K., Malhotra, A., & Ferraris, A. (2021). Digital transformation as a springboard for product, process and business model innovation. Journal of Business Research, 128, 204–210. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
12. Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
13. Cavana, R., Delahaye, B., & Sekaran, U. (2001). Applied Business Research. Wiley. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
14. Chuang, L. M., Liu, C. C., & Kao, H. K. (2016). The adoption of Fintech service: TAM perspective. International Journal of Management and Administrative Sciences (IJMAS), 3(7), 1–15. http://www.ijmas.org [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
15. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
16. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
17. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
18. Davis, F. D. (2013). Information technology introduction. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
19. Department of Statistics Malaysia. (2024). Malaysia digital economy 2024. https://www.dosm.gov.my/portal-main/release-content/malaysia-digital-economy-2024 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
20. Erda. (2024, September 8). Strategic partnerships, digital platforms keys to unlocking full potential of MSMEs. The Borneo Post. https://www.theborneopost.com/2024/09/08/strategic-partnerships-digital-platforms-keys-to-unlocking-full-potential-of-msmes/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
21. Faruque, M. O., Chowdhury, S. N., Rabbani, Md. G., & Khan, N. A. (2024). Technology adoption and digital transformation in small businesses: Trends, challenges, and opportunities. International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research, 6(5). https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2024.v06i05.29207 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
22. Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 51–90. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036519 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
23. Hair, J., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2018). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
24. Hamid, A. K. A., & Aliman, N. K. (2020). The Characteristics of Adopters and Non-Adopters of Digital Marketing Application among Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs). Asian Journal of Business and Management, 8(5). https://doi.org/10.24203/ajbm.v8i5.6441 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
25. Lin, F., Fofanah, S. S., & Liang, D. (2011). Assessing citizen adoption of e-government initiatives in Gambia: A validation of the technology acceptance model in information systems success. Government Information Quarterly, 28(2), 271–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2010.09.004 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
26. Malaysian Digital Economy Corporation (MDEC). (2025). Malaysia Digital. https://mdec.my/malaysiadigital/rakyat [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
27. McKnight, D. H., Choudhury, V., & Kacmar, C. (2002). Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: An integrative typology. Information Systems Research, 13(3), 334–359. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.13.3.334.81 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
28. Melaka State Government. (2021). Melaka Smart City Blueprint 2035 (SMB2035). Melaka State Government. https://www.melakagreentech.gov.my/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/SMB2035-English_compressed.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
29. Ministry of Finance Malaysia – MOF. (2025). Geran Padanan Digital PMKS Madani. Belanjawan 2026. https://manfaat.mof.gov.my/b2025/perniagaan/pmks_madani [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
30. National Entrepreneur and SME Development Council. (2024). MSME Insights 2022/2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
31. Neuman, W. (2014). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (7th ed.). Essex: Pearson Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
32. OECD. (2021, February 3). The digital transformation of SMEs. OECD. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/the-digital-transformation-of-smes_bdb9256a-en.html [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
33. Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 7(3), 101–134. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2742286 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
34. Punch, K. F. (2014). Introduction to social research: Quantitative & qualitative approaches. London: SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
35. Riduwan. (2012). Skala pengukuran variabel-variabel penelitian. Bandung: Alfabeta. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
36. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
37. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2019). Research methods for business students (8th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
38. Shuaib, K. M., He, Z., & Song, L. (2021). Innovation & Dynamic Capabilities. Quality Management Journal, 28(4), 223–247. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
39. SME Corp Malaysia. (2020). SME definitions. https://www.smecorp.gov.my/index.php/en/policies/2020-02-11-08-01-24/sme-definition [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
40. Tahar, A., Riyadh, H. A., Sofyani, H., & Purnomo, W. E. (2020). Perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, perceived security and intention to use e-filing: The role of technology readiness. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics, and Business, 7(9), 537–547. https://doi.org/10.13106/JAFEB.2020.VOL7.NO9.537 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
41. Tarnoki, C., & Puentes, K. (2019). A review of qualitative inquiry and research design. The Qualitative Report, 24(5), 4294. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2019.4294 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
42. Van Teijlingen, E. R., & Hundley, V. (2001). The importance of pilot studies. Social Research Update, 35. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
43. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
44. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://www.jstor.org/stable/30036540 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
45. Zainol, F. A., Daud, W. N. W., & Hassan, H. (2022). The impact of digital entrepreneurship and marketing on women entrepreneurs in semi-urban Malaysia. Asian Journal of Business Research, 12(3), 145–160. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
Metrics
Views & Downloads
Similar Articles
- Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
- Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
- “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
- Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
- Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study