"Just Don't Waste My Time": Faculty Definitions of "Useful" Institutional Support

Despite significant institutional investment in digital infrastructure and faculty training, post-pandemic higher education continues to exhibit a disconnect between available support and faculty-perceived usefulness. This qualitative pilot study investigates how university instructors define “useful” versus “wasted” institutional support in the context of digital teaching. Drawing on the Technology Acceptance Model, the study analyzes open-ended responses from a purposive sample of five faculty members across Southern Europe. Directed content analysis reveals a clear bifurcation between tool-centric support, perceived as time-consuming and low-value, and pedagogically embedded support, defined as context-specific, problem-oriented, and efficiency-enhancing. Faculty consistently report that the primary constraint is not lack of technical skill but scarcity of time; consequently, support initiatives are judged by their capacity to reduce workload rather than add complexity. Generic workshops and software tutorials are widely rejected, while targeted course redesign assistance and just-in-time pedagogical consultation are valued. The findings suggest that institutional support systems currently suffer from a “usability gap,” in which resources fail to align with faculty needs and incentives. The study argues for a strategic shift from standardized, top-down training toward flexible, design-focused support models that integrate pedagogy, efficiency, and disciplinary context. Although exploratory, the analysis provides a user-centered framework for rethinking faculty support policies in post-pandemic higher education.