The Impact of Servant Leadership and Technology Acceptance Model on Lecturer Performance through Proactive Behavior

Herson Keradjaan, Bernhard Tewal, Olivia Nelwan, Viktor Lengkong


This study aims to prove the influence of servant leadership and technology acceptance models on proactive behavior and lecturer performance. It proves the indirect influence of servant leadership and technology acceptance models on lecturer performance through proactive behavior. This research is a new model that places proactive behavior as an intervening variable between servant leadership and technology acceptance models as independent variables, with lecturer performance as the dependent variable. The method used is a survey method using a research questionnaire instrument. The analysis used structural equation modeling with the help of SmartPLS Software. The analysis was conducted to determine the direct effect of servant leadership and technology acceptance models on proactive behavior, including testing the direct effect of proactive behavior on lecturer performance. An analysis was also carried to determine the indirect effect of servant leadership and technology acceptance models on lecturer performance through proactive behavior. This study proves that the technology acceptance model has a positive effect on proactive behavior. Proactive behavior has a positive effect on lecturer performance. The technology acceptance model influences lecturer performance through proactive behavior. Meanwhile, servant leadership does not affect proactive behavior. Servant leadership has no effect on lecturer performance through proactive behavior. If a university wants to improve lecturer performance, the strategic action that can be taken is to increase the proactive behavior of lecturers, as well as maximize the use of the technology acceptance model.


Keywords: servant leadership, technology acceptance model, proactive behavior, lecturer performance.

Full Text:



MENTERI PERENCANAAN PEMBANGUNAN NASIONAL/KEPALA BAPPENAS. Dampak Ekonomi Dan Skema Pembiayaan Pemindahan Ibu Kota Negara. Supply Chain Indonesia, 2019.

TAMBUN S., HERYANTO H., MULYADI M., SITORUS R. R., and PUTRA R. R. Pelatihan Aplikasi Olah Data SmartPLS Untuk Meningkatkan Skill Penelitian Bagi Dosen Sekolah Tinggi Theologia Batam. Jurnal Pengabdian Undikma, 2022, 3(2): 233–240.

WANG, A.-C., KIM T.-Y., JIANG Y., and TANG G. Employee Proactive Goal Regulation and Job Performance: The Role Modeling and Interacting Effects of Leader Proactive Goal Regulation. Human Relations, 2022, 75(2): 373–400.

SCHULZE, A., TOWNSEND J. D., and TALAY M. B. Completing the Market Orientation Matrix: The Impact of Proactive Competitor Orientation on Innovation and Firm Performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 2022, 103: 198–214.

MEYERS M. C. The Neglected Role of Talent Proactivity: Integrating Proactive Behavior into Talent-Management Theorizing. Human Resource Management Review, 2020, 30(2): 100703.

XU A. J., LO R., and CHOW C. W. C. Why and When Proactive Employees Take Charge at Work: The Role of Servant Leadership and Prosocial Motivation. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 2022, 31(1): 117–127.

REZAEI R., SAFA L., and GANJKHANLOO M. M. Understanding Farmers’ Ecological Conservation Behavior Regarding the Use of Integrated Pest Management-an Application of the Technology Acceptance Model. Global Ecology and Conservation, 2020, 22: e00941.

BAUER T. N., PERROT S., LIDEN R. C., and ERDOGAN B. Understanding the Consequences of Newcomer Proactive Behaviors: The Moderating Contextual Role of Servant Leadership. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 2019, 112: 356-368.

MOSTAFA, A. M. S., & ABED EL-MOTALIB E. A. Servant Leadership, Leader–Member Exchange and Proactive Behavior in the Public Health Sector. Public Personnel Management, 2019, 48(3): 309–324.

CHOCARRO EGUARAS R., CORTIÑAS UGALDE M., and MARCOS MATAS G. Teachers’ Attitudes towards Chatbots in Education: A Technology Acceptance Model Approach Considering the Effect of Social Language, Bot Proactiveness, and Users’ Characteristics. Educational Studies, 2021, 49(2): 295-313.

AJZEN, I. The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1991, 50(2): 179-211.

ADIGUZEL Z., FARUK OZCINAR M., and KARADAL H. Does Servant Leadership Moderate The Link Between Strategic Human Resource Management On Rule Breaking And Job Satisfaction? European Research On Management And Business Economics, 2020, 26(2): 103–110.

RAFIQUE H., OMRAN ALMAGRABI A., SHAMIM A., ANWAR F., and KASHIF BASHIR A. Investigating The Acceptance of Mobile Library Applications with an Extended Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Computers & Education, 2020, 145: 103732.

SCHERER R., SIDDIQ F., and TONDEUR J. The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM): A Meta-Analytic Structural Equation Modeling Approach to Explaining Teachers’ Adoption of Digital Technology in Education. Computers & Education, 2019, 128: 13–35.

SUKENDRO S., HABIBI A., KHAERUDDIN K., INDRAYANA B., SYAHRUDDIN S., MAKADADA F. A., and HAKIM H. Using an Extended Technology Acceptance Model to Understand Students’ Use of E-Learning During Covid-19: Indonesian Sport Science Education Context. Heliyon, 2020, 6(11): e05410.

TSAI H.-Y. Do You Feel Like Being Proactive Day? How Daily Cyberloafing Influences Creativity and Proactive Behavior: The Moderating Roles of Work Environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 2023, 138(6): 107470.

YE Y., LYU Y., and HE Y. Servant Leadership And Proactive Customer Service Performance. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 2019, 31(3): 1330–1347.

VARELA J. A., BANDE B., DEL RIO M., and JARAMILLO F. Servant Leadership, Proactive Work Behavior, and Performance overall Rating: Testing a Multilevel Model of Moderated Mediation. Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, 2019, 26(2): 177-195.

KEMP A., PALMER E., and STRELAN P. A Taxonomy of Factors Affecting Attitudes Towards Educational Technologies for Use With Technology Acceptance Models. British Journal of Educational Technology, 2019, 50(5): 2394–2413.

ZHANG Y., LUO Y., ZHANG X., and ZHAO J. How Green Human Resource Management Can Promote Green Employee Behavior in China: A Technology Acceptance Model Perspective. Sustainability, 2019, 11(19): 5408.

PORTZ J. D., BAYLISS E. A., BULL S., BOXER R. S., BEKELMAN D. B., GLEASON K., and CZAJA S. Using the Technology Acceptance Model to Explore User Experience, Intent to Use, and Use Behavior of a Patient Portal Among Older Adults with Multiple Chronic Conditions: Descriptive Qualitative Study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 2019, 21(4): E11604.

HUA L., & WANG S. Antecedents of Consumers’ Intention to Purchase Energy-Efficient Appliances: An Empirical Study Based on The Technology Acceptance Model and Theory of Planned Behavior. Sustainability, 2019, 11(10): 2994.

EVA N., ROBIN M., SENDJAYA S., VAN DIERENDONCK D., and LIDEN R. C. Servant Leadership: A Systematic Review and Call for Future Research. The Leadership Quarterly, 2019, 30(1): 111–132.

PARKER S. K., & COLLINS C. G. Taking Stock: Integrating and Differentiating Multiple Proactive Behaviors. Journal of Management, 2010, 36(3): 633–662.

UDIYANA I. B. G. Prosedur Dan Unsur Penilaian Beban Kerja Dosen Dan Laporan Kinerja Dosen. Proceedings of the Sosialisasi Dan Pelatihan BKD-LKD Di Lingkungan LLDIKTI Wilayah VIII Bali, Denpasar 2019.


  • There are currently no refbacks.