Correlational study shows a significant link between technology self-efficacy and IT management strategy in librarians, indicating its importance.
This study examined the relationship between technology self-efficacy and information technology (IT) management strategy adoption among systems librarians in universities in South-South, Nigeria. A correlational research design was adopted for the study. The population consisted of 66 systems librarians across federal, state, and private universities in South-South, Nigeria. Due to the manageable population size, the entire population was used as the sample. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire entitled “Relationship Between Technology Self-Efficacy and Information Technology Management Strategy Adoption among Systems Librarians Questionnaire (RBTSEITMSASLUQ),” validated by two experts in library and information science. Reliability was confirmed through the test-retest method with 30 librarians from Federal University of Technology, Akure, yielding a reliability coefficient of 0.88. Out of 66 copies of questionnaire administered, 55983%) were retrieved and used for the study. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) and inferential statistics (Pearson’s Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient). The findings revealed that systems librarians possessed a high level of technology self-efficacy; that the extent of IT management strategy adoption was moderate; and a statistically significant positive relationship between technology self- efficacy and IT management strategy adoption. The study concluded that technology self-efficacy is a critical determinant of effective IT strategy implementation in university libraries and recommended targeted professional development, institutional support, and capacity-building initiatives to strengthen librarians’ technological confidence and improve strategic IT management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Irogbo et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: