The Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) is characterised by remarkable technological advancements and innovations (Schwab, 2016; Batra, 2023). During this era, integrating cutting-edge technologies, particularly cloud-based technology, which is referred to under the term technology in this study, emerged as a strategic imperative for contemporary organisations (Yadegaridehkordi et al., 2018). This digital transformation fundamentally reshaped business operations, customer interactions and the development of innovative products and services (Bharadwaj et al., 2013). The ongoing technological disruption places technology adoption at the forefront, enabling organisations to gain competitive advantages, enhance operational efficiencies and foster sustainable growth (Westerman et al., 2014). Notably, this digital transformation trend has accelerated in recent years, with advancements in artificial intelligence, data analytics and cloud computing continuing to reshape industries (McAfee & Brynjolfsson, 2017). These changes are expected to endure globally over time (Brem, Viardot & Nylund, 2021; Vaiman et al., 2021; Kaur et al., 2020).

Understanding and identifying the factors that influence successful technological acceptance and adoption have never been more critical (Nambisan et al., 2019; Roberts et al., 2020). A McKinsey study revealed that the rate of technological advancement in organisations is expected to increase by 30%–40% by the year 2030 (Hancock et al., 2020). Despite its transformative potential, the 4IR has faced criticism for not adequately addressing a wide range of societal needs. Critics have pointed out its failure to integrate sustainability from a human-centric perspective, considering human preferences and its lack of accommodation for circular economy initiatives aimed at addressing resource-related challenges (Mhlanga, 2022; Ozmen et al., 2023; Rauch et al., 2020). Additionally, the 4IR could potentially widen global inequality among and within countries, posing challenges to inclusive and sustainable economic growth, employment and industrialisation (Korinek et al., 2021).

Studies of technological acceptance models have been scarcely investigated by industrial and organisational psychologists (Erasmus et al., 2015; Molino et al., 2021). Kohnke et al. (2010) have noted that research on technology acceptance has been somewhat abandoned in industrial and organisational psychology. Currently, no psychological study has been found, which examines technological acceptance at the individual level (Bögel & Upham, 2018). There is furthermore a void in the literature investigating technology acceptance in developing countries, with a multi-cultural lens and specifically within South Africa (Averweg, 2008; Erasmus, et al., 2015; Guenther & Weingart, 2016; Kohnke et al., 2010).

While the benefits of technological innovation are evident, the journey towards successful technology acceptance and adoption often presents challenges (Bharadwaj et al., 2013; Davis, 1989; Rogers, 2003; Venkatesh et al., 2003). Organisations worldwide grapple with issues related to resistance to change, employee buy-in and the effective implementation of new technologies (Stratman & Roth, 2002). These challenges are particularly pronounced in diverse and multicultural workforces, where varying perspectives, experiences and expectations intersect (Ruggunan, 2016).

Technological acceptance characterised by the favourable reception of technology leading to an intention to adopt it (Alotumi, 2020) varies among employees (Moon & Kim, 2001; Youngberg et al., 2009), and the role that employees play in adopting technological innovations remains largely understudied (Nguyen & Süß, 2023). Researchers have found that achieving acceptance is crucial for the implementation of any technology as it determines whether it will be utilised (Taherdoost, 2019). Taherdoost (2017) argues that an improved understanding of individual perceptions towards technology will help facilitate implementation. Addressing these challenges necessitates a comprehensive understanding of the psychological factors underlying technology acceptance (Akkaya, 2020; Bharadwaj et al., 2013; Bughin et al., 2020; Hilbert, 2011; Westerman et al., 2014).

International literature has indicated that employee attitudes towards technology adoption vary, with antecedent factors including beliefs and emotions needing consideration when introducing technology (Admiraal & Lockhorst, 2009; Curran & Meuter, 2005; Grindle 2014).

Employee resistance to technology has proven to have detrimental impacts to the business in terms of expenditure, reduced organisational commitment, delayed productivity, operational efficiency, limiting innovative capabilities, organisational culture, overall business vision as well as sabotages (Barton et al., 2012; Cameron et al., 2006; Davids & Martin, 1992; Gallego-Toledo, 2014; Ghani & Jayabalan, 2000; Kaplan & Norton, 2006; Kusy & Holloway, 2009). Failed technological implementation efforts are largely because of organisations underestimating the importance of employee involvement (Ghani & Jayabalan, 2000). It has been found that 70% of tech-implementation failures are related to a reduced employee motivation to embrace the change (Burnes, & Jackson, 2011). Employee resistance to technology can lead to financial losses and unforeseen expenses resulting from project delays, increased costs and missed opportunities for productivity gains (Benson et al., 2018). Gaynor (1996) noted that when a new technology is introduced, it is expected that an organisation’s productivity will initially drop because of the resistance to the technology among employees. Fostering technological acceptance among employees is vital to mitigate the financial losses and unforeseen expenses that can result from resistance to technology adoption. Thus, to ensure that investments in technological innovations fulfil strategic business purposes and reap the intended benefits from implementation, fostering technological acceptance among the workforce right from the inception of technological implementations is paramount (Gupta, 2018; Khaw et al., 2022).

Furthermore, technology can involve potential risks to employees such as negative psychological consequences including, lower levels of motivation, stress, low morale, job insecurity and job dissatisfaction that ultimately influence their performance (Al-Ameri, 2013; Joshi & Lauer, 1998; Kølbjornsrud et al., 2016; Press, 2019). Stamate et al. (2021) have noted that technology can have positive or negative effects on the psychological health of workers, depending on how it is perceived and accepted. The acceptance of technology involves a psychological process that consists of psychological factors that influence technological acceptance (Stamate et al. 2021). Technological innovations within organisations have been associated with negative employee outcomes including risks to the psychological wellbeing of the individual worker (Fernandez, 2006). A possible explanation is attributed to an individual’s psychological experiences when faced with a new technology; familiarity provides cognitive comfort to an individual compared with the uncertainty of a new technology (Alas & Sharfi, 2002). Strickland (2003) noted that employees resist change resulting from the implementation of technology because of perceived losses that accompany transitions. These losses include a loss of identity, a loss of belonging and a loss of meaning (Strickland, 2003). There is a need for theories that denote the effects of emotions on technological acceptance (Bagozzi, 2007). Such an approach may include considering the emotions (Bagozzi et al., 1998) and attitudes (Bagozzi et al., 2004) as anticipated considerations required in achieving or failing to attain successful technological adoption. The long-term success or failure of organisational investments in technological innovations may ultimately depend on an organisation’s prioritisation and consideration of their employees’ individual experiences with technological change.

User resistance to technology adoption is a common challenge worldwide (Alotumi, 2020; Venkatesh et al., 2003). Employees’ resistance may stem from factors such as fear of job displacement, lack of trust in technology and concerns about increased workloads (Davis, 1989; Rogers, 2003).

Within the African context, the perception of technology can differ based on socio-cultural, socio-economic and personal factors (Kolade et al., 2022; Mbarika et al., 2007, Musa, 2006). The digital divide is a significant concern in Africa and can affect how employees view and engage with technology in the workplace (Mutula & Van Brakel, 2006). In South Africa, employee aversion towards technological change remains high, resulting in feelings of fear, uncertainty, reduced levels of trust in management and an increase in resignations (Roberts et al., 2021; Visagie, 2010). The attitudes of South African employees towards technological advancements have been noted to be informed by age, education, access to resources and socio-economic background (Averweg, 2008; Roberts et al., 2021).

For over the last 20 years and more, literature has identified that there is a persistent lack of technological acceptance within organisations; however, to this day, this issue remains unresolved (Ismail et al., 2023). A possible reason for this may be attributed to a lack of empirical psychological research within technological acceptance literature and a largely understudied area of the psychological variables impacting technological acceptance. It has been increasingly recognised that further explanatory variables are required to grasp an individual’s technological acceptance of technological changes (Kulviwat et al., 2014; Samaradiwakara & Gunawardena, 2014; Sohn & Kwon, 2020). Roberts and Flin (2020) noted that to maximise opportunities in the adoption of innovation, the understanding of the psychological variables influencing the acceptance of technology is necessary.

The majority of research on technological acceptance lies within the realm of information technology (IT) (Al-Ameri, 2013; Jiang et al., 2000). Widespread models of technology acceptance originate from the IT field (Davis et al., 1989; Gallivan, 2001; Hart & Porter, 2004; Hwang, 2005; Lee et al., 2003; Mathieson, 1991; Morris & Venkatesh, 2000; Nah et al., 2004; Prescott & Conger, 1995; Rogers, 1976). Additional research is required to further the understanding of complex issues surrounding technological change, its acceptance and implementation (Al-Ameri, 2013; Joshi & Lauer, 1998).

Technological acceptance literature has noted that research might require a methodological repositioning to obtain a deeper understanding of factors, which have been less studied (Sun & Zhang, 2006). The majority of studies utilise quantitative approaches, typically from a positivist point of view (Sun & Zhang, 2006). Qualitative methodology, specifically from an interpretive point of view, is rich in information and can be a valuable alternative that can provide contemporary insights into research (Lee et al., 2003; Sun & Zhang, 2006). Furthermore, developments in technology may involve psychological factors that have scarcely been considered in the past, such as the concept of trust, which is not a classical factor that has been considered to influence an individual’s adoption of technology (Liu et al., 2019). Factors, such as optimism, innovativeness, discomfort, insecurity and subjective norms, have been found to have direct positive and negative impacts on people’s trust in adopting technology (Illia et al., 2015). Koh et al. (2010) and Chatterjee et al. (2021) have noted that determinants of psychological constructs (such as employee attitude – a psychological antecedent) warrant further investigation in technology acceptance models and that key factors that may impact relevant psychological constructs need to be scrutinised. Utilising a qualitative methodological perspective is key to identifying potential factors inductively. Roberts et al. (2020) maintain that the influence of psychological variables on employees’ technological acceptance behaviour has not been satisfactorily explored, and a deeper dive into how these factors are understood is crucial for organisations that aspire to successfully adopt technological innovations.

The concept of technological acceptance holds a pivotal role in the dissemination of technology and its integration into organisations (Carey & Kacmar, 2010; Gong et al., 2004; Holden & Rada, 2011). Addressing the factors that influence this acceptance, researchers have delved deeply into the interplay between technological acceptance and psychological factors (Mahmood et al., 2021; Mirriahi et al., 2012; Musarrat et al., 2013; Roberts & Flin, 2020; Saghafian et al., 2021; Steel & Levy, 2009; Stevens, 2020; Terras & Ramsay, 2015; Venkatesh et al., 2003). For instance, when technology usage is obligatory, as highlighted by Chandler (2012), individuals who are dissatisfied with the technology often find themselves adjusting their mental attitude towards it to alleviate cognitive dissonance, instead of outright rejecting its use. Assessing employee’s mental acceptance of technology and their attitudes towards its usage have been highlighted in research as important considerations (Hennemann et al., 2018; Nguyen & Süß, 2023; Paganin & Simbula, 2021; Shamsi et al., 2021). Roberts and Flin (2020) conducted a literature review and through a thematic analysis of research articles, found five psychological factors that influence the adoption of technology in the oil and gas industry; these were: personality (e.g. exploration traits and risk aversion), attitude (e.g. trust and not-invented-here syndrome), social (e.g. social norms), cognition (e.g. risk perception) and psychological factors at an organisational level (leadership and organisational culture). Studies have shown that personality dimensions, such as innovativeness and optimism, significantly influence technology acceptance and are of major importance when adopting new technology (Godoe & Johansen, 2012; Stevens, 2020). Musarrat et al. (2013) noted that there are specific promoters and obstacles to technology adoption by academics and found that enjoyment, optimism, motivation, interest and preferences served as promoters of technology acceptance, while perceived pressure from authority, time commitment to learn and time commitment to use were the biggest obstacles to technology uptake. Mahmood et al. (2021) identified fear of job losses, lack of advanced and continued education of employees and fear of data loss, as the most prominent psychological barriers to adopting Industry 4.0 technologies in the manufacturing sector of a developing economy.

Within the diverse and dynamic context of South Africa, where myriad backgrounds converge, the understanding of the psychological factors that influence technological acceptance takes on even greater importance. Nonetheless, it is crucial to recognise that the challenges and opportunities surrounding technology acceptance are not limited to South Africa alone. The global digital divide persists, with unequal access to technology and digital resources impacting individuals and communities worldwide (Hilbert, 2011). Bridging this divide is an urgent global concern, and understanding the psychological factors of technology acceptance can contribute to more inclusive and equitable digital transformation efforts (UNESCO, 2019).

Against this backdrop, this research aims to identify the psychological barriers to technological acceptance specifically for South African employees from various socio-cultural backgrounds. By unravelling these intricate dynamics, this study contributes to a more profound understanding of the factors shaping technology acceptance, paving the way for strategic interventions that promote technological adoption across varied workplace environments. The present study thus seeks to address the following research question: What are the psychological barriers to technology acceptance among South African employees?

The theory of reasoned action (TRA) developed by Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) offers a valuable framework for understanding technology adoption. The TRA posits that an individual’s intention to adopt a behaviour or course of action is influenced by two main factors: attitude towards the behaviour and subjective norms (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1983). Attitude towards behaviour reflects an individual’s assessment of the desirability of adopting a specific behaviour, in this case, using new technology. It involves considering the perceived consequences of adopting or not adopting the technology. This attitude can be either positive or negative, depending on the individual’s evaluation (Azjen & Fishbein, 1983).

Subjective norms are related to an individual’s perception of whether others approve or disapprove of adopting the technology. It also includes the inclination to conform to what they believe others expect them to do. The TRA underscores the role of social influences in decision-making, highlighting the significance of social norms (Hale et al., 2002).

In the context of employee decision-making regarding technology adoption, social norms play a pivotal role. Extensive research on technological acceptance consistently emphasises the impact of reference groups. These reference groups often comprise individuals with similar socio-economic status, and their choices significantly influence individuals when deciding whether to accept and adopt new technology (Chang & Cheung, 2001; Karahanna & Limayem, 2000).

The technology acceptance model (TAM), developed by Davis (1989), is a widely employed framework to understand user acceptance of new technologies (Erasmus et al., 2015). Building upon the TRA (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975), TAM provides a straightforward and effective tool for examining user acceptance behaviour (Legris et al., 2003).

Technology acceptance model comprises six key factors: attitude, behavioural intention, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and external variables (Davis, 1989). Among these, perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use are central in determining technology acceptance (Davis, 1989; Yucel & Gulbahar, 2003). While TAM has been extensively applied and tested across various global contexts, including Japan, Singapore, the United Kingdom, Europe and the United States (Dulcic et al., 2012; Kahlert et al., 2017; Montargot & Lahouel, 2017; Skoumpopoulou et al., 2018; Wang et al., 2011; Youngberg et al., 2009), its exploration in South Africa and other developing countries remains limited (Erasmus et al., 2015).

In essence, TAM offers a framework to assess technology acceptance by considering factors such as functionality and ease of use. It extends the TRA by proposing that an individual’s attitude towards technology is shaped by their perceptions of its benefits and challenges.

This research employs a qualitative approach rooted in a constructivist epistemological tradition (Berger & Luckmann, 2006) and embraces the interpretive paradigm. This paradigm is well suited for exploring the subjective experiences and meanings surrounding technology adoption in the diverse South African context. Additionally, a hermeneutical phenomenological research approach (Husserl, 1992) is integrated to explore employees’ subjective encounters with technology and provide insightful interpretations of the findings (Clarke & Hogget, 2009; Creswell, 2013; Hassan & Ghauri, 2014).

A total of 17 interviewees commented on the participant’s psychological barriers theme, as presented in Table 2.

Several limitations should be acknowledged in interpreting the findings of this study. Firstly, the sample size was relatively small, comprising only 17 individuals, predominantly females with ages ranging from 18 to 57 and possessing high educational backgrounds and professional occupations, potentially limiting the generalisability of the results. Secondly, the study was confined to eight organisations located solely in Johannesburg, South Africa, thus restricting the broader applicability of the findings to a single regional context. Thirdly, methodologically, the reliance solely on semi-structured interviews without additional data collection methods such as observations or focus groups may have limited the depth of insights gained. Fourthly, the study primarily focused on identifying barriers to technology acceptance, without delving deeper into potential facilitators or exploring alternative theoretical perspectives. Lastly, inherent biases may have influenced the research process, given that all researchers were women from a predominantly Western background, potentially shaping the interpretation and framing of the data within a specific cultural and gendered context.

This study explored the complex realm of technological acceptance and its associated psychological barriers within the South African organisational context. The findings reveal the powerful role of attending to psychological factors when facilitating the adoption of new technology in the workplace. Lack of psychological safety, organisational trust and psychological availability, as well as experiencing negative emotions, low self-efficacy and low frustration tolerance emerged as psychological barriers to technology acceptance, inhibiting participants’ willingness to learn and accept new technologies.

Understanding and addressing these factors should be integrated into organisational strategies to mitigate barriers and promote a culture of technological acceptance. As organisations increasingly embrace technological innovations, cultivating positive psychological resources becomes imperative to ensure successful adoption and integration, ultimately driving organisational growth and success.

It is necessary to collaborate with organisations to foster an optimal environment by promoting open communication, encouraging feedback and addressing concerns without fear of reprisal at the individual level. This will require a combined effort consisting of creating psychologically safe environments with positive reinforcement such as adding praise or incentivising employees for resilience shown and for conquering fear and hesitance. To improve confidence in technological abilities, practitioners can design training programmes and provide coaching to boost employees’ self-efficacy, encompassing skill development, goal setting and feedback mechanisms. In order to manage negative emotions that may arise during this process, it is important to concurrently implement strategies such as stress management techniques, emotional intelligence training and creating a supportive work environment.

For the South African context, this study’s findings hold substantial implications for fostering technology adoption and addressing the psychological barriers that hinder it. To effectively promote the adoption of new technologies, organisations should consider the following recommendations:

Organisations should prioritise the establishment of a workplace culture that fosters psychological safety and trust among employees. This involves creating an environment where employees feel secure in taking risks, voicing opinions and experimenting with new technologies. Encouraging open communication channels and providing assurances that employees will not face negative consequences for their actions can contribute significantly to building this culture.

Transparent communication is paramount in addressing the lack of trust and psychological safety. Organisations should engage in open and honest dialogues with employees about technological changes, their intentions and the expected benefits. Involving employees in decision-making processes related to technology adoption can further enhance their trust and commitment to these changes.

Recognising that self-efficacy plays a pivotal role in technology acceptance, South African organisations should invest in training and skill development programmes. These initiatives should aim to enhance employees’ technological capabilities and their confidence in using new tools. Providing employees with the resources and support necessary for acquiring new skills can lead to higher levels of self-efficacy.

Organisations should focus on creating a positive emotional experience during technology adoption. Encouraging curiosity, excitement and a sense of accomplishment can motivate employees to explore and embrace new technologies willingly. Recognising and celebrating small victories and successful technology adoption stories can contribute to this positive emotional climate.

Given the importance of psychological availability and frustration tolerance, organisations should promote mindfulness practices and resilience-building strategies. Mindfulness can help employees stay present and engaged during technological changes, reducing distractions and enhancing their ability to adapt. Resilience-building programmes can equip employees with the tools to persevere through challenges and setbacks related to technology adoption.

Cultural diversity within the South African context should be acknowledged and respected when implementing technology adoption strategies. Recognising that cultural backgrounds influence the emphasis on trust, organisations should tailor their approaches to accommodate different cultural perspectives. Cultural sensitivity and inclusivity should be integral components of technology adoption initiatives.

The findings of this study carry implications not only for South African organisations but also for global studies in the field of technology adoption. There is a universality of these psychological factors that transcend geographical and cultural boundaries. Organisations worldwide can benefit from similar strategies to promote technology adoption, as the core psychological drivers of acceptance appear to be consistent. However, it is crucial to consider the specific cultural nuances and organisational contexts of each region when tailoring interventions effectively.

Building upon the insights provided by this study, several avenues for future research emerge. Firstly, investigating the role of cultural differences in influencing the relevance of psychological barriers can provide a nuanced understanding. Secondly, exploring the impact of interventions such as training programmes, mindfulness practices and mentorship initiatives on enhancing technology acceptance would contribute to practical strategies for organisations. Thirdly, longitudinal studies tracking employees’ technological adoption journeys over time could reveal the long-term effects of positive psychological constructs. Lastly, a comparative analysis across industries and sectors could uncover sector-specific challenges and opportunities for technology adoption.

Overall, the findings of this study contribute to the evolving understanding of technology acceptance within organisational contexts and offer actionable insights for practitioners, HR professionals and change managers seeking to facilitate successful technological transitions. As organisations continue to navigate the dynamic landscape of technological innovation, the integration of positive psychological factors emerges as a key strategy to foster a culture of adaptability, growth and sustainable success.