Background <p>The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated unprecedented digital transformation in higher education, compelling institutions worldwide to rapidly adopt diverse educational technologies. While the Technology-Organization-Environment (TOE) framework has been extensively applied to examine technology adoption in organizational contexts, a comprehensive synthesis of its application across different educational technologies at the institutional level remains absent. Existing systematic reviews have focused on specific technologies (e.g., cloud computing, learning management systems) or individual-level adoption, leaving a critical gap in understanding cross-technology patterns of institutional adoption.</p> Objective <p>This systematic review synthesizes empirical evidence on the application of the TOE framework to educational technology adoption at the institutional level in higher education, identifying common facilitators, barriers, and patterns across diverse technologies during the pandemic and post-pandemic period (2020–2024).</p> Methods <p>Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we systematically searched four major academic databases (Scopus, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore, ACM Digital Library) for peer-reviewed journal articles published in English between January 2020 and December 2024. Of 42 studies meeting inclusion criteria after title/abstract screening, 36 were successfully accessed and included in the final synthesis (86% retrieval rate); six studies (14%) were excluded due to inaccessible full texts.</p> Results <p>The review synthesized 36 empirical studies examining 7 primary categories of educational technologies. The 36 studies in this review were conducted across 18 countries and regional spaces. Geographically, studies were conducted primarily in the Middle East (n = 15, 42%), followed by Asia (n = 11, 30%), Africa (n = 8, 22%), the Americas (n = 1, 3%), and multi-regional contexts (n = 1, 3%). Cloud computing was the most frequently studied technology (<i>n</i> = 11, 30%), followed by e-learning systems (<i>n</i> = 9, 25%), big data analytics (<i>n</i> = 8, 22%), blockchain (<i>n</i> = 3, 8%), artificial intelligence (<i>n</i> = 2, 6%), learning management systems (n = 2, 6%), and gamification (<i>n</i> = 1, 3%). Methodologically, quantitative approaches dominated (<i>n</i> = 28, 78%), with qualitative (<i>n</i> = 5, 14%) and mixed methods (<i>n</i> = 3, 8%) less common. Technology dimension analysis revealed that complexity (<i>n</i> = 22, 61%), compatibility (<i>n</i> = 19, 53%), and relative advantage (n = 19, 53%) were the most frequently investigated factors, exhibiting the highest prevalence of research attention across synthesized literature. Organization dimension findings showed top management support (<i>n</i> = 27, 75%), financial resources (n = 24, 67%), and technical competence (<i>n</i> = 21, 58%) as the most frequently documented factors in institutional contexts, with institutional size (n = 9, 25%) frequently reported as a contextual modifier of agility and resource availability. Environment dimension results highlighted government policy and regulatory support (n = 25, 69%), competitive pressure (<i>n</i> = 18, 50%), and vendor support and partnership (<i>n</i> = 14, 39%) as the most widely reported environmental attributes across the sample. The cross-technology synthesis revealed that technological factors (particularly complexity, compatibility, and relative advantage) and organizational factors (especially top management support and financial resources) emerged as the most frequently documented variables across technologies.</p> Conclusions <p>This review provides the first comprehensive cross-technology synthesis of TOE framework applications in higher education institutional technology adoption. The findings advance theoretical understanding by demonstrating both universal adoption patterns applicable across technologies and context-specific variations requiring nuanced approaches. For institutional practice, the review offers evidence-based guidance emphasizing the prominent role of securing leadership commitment, building organizational readiness, carefully evaluating technology-institution fit, and strategically managing environmental pressures. For policymakers, findings highlight the significant role of government support and regulatory frameworks, particularly in developing country contexts. For researchers, the review identifies theoretical gaps and methodological limitations, suggesting future directions including longitudinal studies, integration of TOE with other frameworks, examination of post-adoption outcomes, and investigation of equity and access issues in institutional technology adoption.</p>