TECHNOLOGY READINESS IN CUSTOMERS PERCEPTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF M(OBILE)-PAYMENT: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY IN FINLAND, GERMANY, THE USA AND JAPAN

Transcription

1 11th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik Track 1: Individualisierung und Konsumentenorientierung TECHNOLOGY READINESS IN CUSTOMERS PERCEPTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF M(OBILE)-PAYMENT: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY IN FINLAND, GERMANY, THE USA AND JAPAN Nadine Guhr, Tai Loi, Rouven Wiegard & Michael H. Breitner {guhr, loi, wiegard, WI Page 1

2 Agenda Information Systems Institute Introduction Motivation, Problems and Questions Research Design and Hypotheses Generation Hypotheses and Conceptual Research Model Sample and Procedure Measurement and Model Testing Results Critical Appraisal and Outlook Limitations Conclusion and Further Research WI Page 2

3 Theoretical foundation M(-obile) Payment What is M(obile)-Payment? M-Payment can be defined as the use of a mobile device to conduct a payment transaction in which money or funds are transferred from payer to receiver via an intermediary or directly, without an intermediary (Mallat, 2007, p. 415). The payment transaction can be made e. g.: via SMS or NFC / RFID. The payment amount will be deducted via direct debit, via credit card, via credit account or via phone bill / prepaid card. WI Page 3

4 Relevance and Motivation Success or failure of m-payment depends heavily on the consumer acceptance and their technology readiness (TR). Previous studies in the sector of consumer adoption and acceptance of m-payment focused on: Costs (Cheong and Park, 2008; Schierz et al., 2010), Convenience (Chen, 2006; Viehland and Leong, 2007), Security (Dewan and Chen, 2005), Trust (Mallat et al., 2006; Dahlberg, 2007), Ease of Use and Usefulness (Zmijewska et al., 2004). But there are no specific studies that examine the adoption of m-payment extending the TAM by TR in different countries. Research Question How does technology readiness (TR) affect the acceptance of consumer towards m-payment in different countries? WI Page 4

5 Theoretical foundation Cultural differences and TR In the literature, we find different views on how a culture can be characterized, measured and compared. The most accepted research framework is the framework by Hofstede (1980, 1983, 2002). Cultural dimensions by Hofstede (1980, 1983) Power Distance Index (PDI), Individualism vs. Collectivism (IDV), Masculinity vs. Femininity (MAS), Uncertainty Avoidance (UAI), Long-Term Orientation (LTO) Within these investigations it became apparent that it seems to be promising to combine TAM with the direct role of TR against a intercultural background. Technology Readiness by Parasuraman (2000) optimism (OPT), innovativeness (INNO), discomfort (DISCOM), and insecurity (INSEC) WI Page 5

6 Agenda Information Systems Institute Introduction Motivation, Problems and Questions Research Design and Hypotheses Generation Hypotheses and Conceptual Research Model Sample and Procedure Measurement and Model Testing Results Critical Appraisal and Outlook Limitations Conclusion and Further Research WI Page 6

7 Hypotheses and Conceptual Research Model Research Hypotheses: H1: PEOU will have a positive effect on PU. H2: PEOU will have a positive effect on INTUSE. H3: PU will have a positive effect on INTUSE. H4: TR will have a positive effect on PEOU. H5: TR will have a positive effect on PU. H6: TR will have a positive effect on INTUSE. H5+ Insecurity INSEC Perceived Usefulness PU H3+ H1+ H2+ Intention to Use INTUSE H6+ Discomfort DISCOM Innovativeness INNO Perceived Ease of Use PEOU H4+ Optimism OPT Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) Technology Readiness (TR) Fig. 1. Conceptual Research Model WI Page 7

8 Sample and Procedure Survey instrument for data collection Online networking websites (XING; LinkedIn etc.) and link to the questionnaire with personalized cover letters via . Construct FIN = 50 GER = 115 USA = 52 JPN = 53 Gender N % N % N % N % Female 35 70, , , ,0 Male 15 30, , , ,0 Age <18 3 6,0 0 0,0 2 3,8 3 5, , , , , , , ,8 9 17, ,0 0 0,0 3 5,8 6 11, ,0 0 0,0 5 9,6 2 3,8 >60 2 4,0 0 0,0 1 1,9 2 3,8 Profession Student 22 44, , , ,7 Employee 13 26, , , ,3 Public officer 4 8,0 3 2,6 0 0,0 1 1,9 Self employed 5 10,0 1 0,9 4 7,7 5 9,4 Pension 0 0,0 0 0,0 0 0,0 2 3,8 Not specified 6 12,0 0 0,0 3 5,8 1 1,9 WI Page 8

9 Measurement and Model Testing Indicators were adapted from Davis (1989) and Davis et al. (1989). The measurement of TR was partly adapted from Parasuraman (2000). Large number of indicators. Factor analysis as a dimensional reduction method. Using varimax rotation as the extraction method. Identification of indicators based on an eigenvalue of greater than one. Empirical data is analyzed with Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to test the causal-effect relations among the latent constructs. SmartPLS version 2.0 M3 Variance analytical SEM technique. Utilizes a component-based approach to estimation. WI Page 9

10 Agenda Information Systems Institute Introduction Motivation, Problems and Questions Research Design and Hypotheses Generation Hypotheses and Conceptual Research Model Sample and Procedure Measurement and Model Testing Results Critical Appraisal and Outlook Limitations Conclusion and Further Research WI Page 10

11 Results Information Systems Institute Perceived Usefulness PU USA R² = GER R² = FIN R² = JPN R² = USA 0.559*** GER 0.447*** FIN 0.623*** JPN 0.493*** Perceived Ease of Use PEOU USA R² = GER R² = FIN R² = JPN R² = USA 0.458** GER 0.403*** FIN JPN 0.447*** USA GER 0.257*** FIN JPN 0.249** USA 0.360** GER 0.406*** FIN 0.288** JPN 0.335*** Intention to Use INTUSE USA R² = GER R² = FIN R² = JPN R² = USA 0.641*** GER 0.718*** FIN 0.736*** JPN 0.415** denotes significance at the p < 0.10 level * denotes significance at the p < 0.05 level ** denotes significance at the p < 0.01 level *** denotes significance at the p < level USA GER 0.308*** FIN JPN 0.325** Insecurity INSEC Discomfort DISCOM Innovativeness INNO Optimism OPT Technology Readiness (TR) Key findings There is no one size fits all approach. Cultures that are more masculine (JPN) will be more technology ready than less masculine cultures. Companies should strengthen positive TR drivers (OPT, INNO) On the other hand, companies have to reduce TR inhibitors (DISCOM, INSEC) We can assume that TR is an important factor in the context of the analysis of technology acceptance of m-payment. Hypotheses Results Hypothesis H 1 : PEOU PU (+) Hypothesis H 2 : PEOU INTUSE (+) Hypothesis H 3 : PU INTUSE (+) Hypothesis H 4 : TR PEOU (+) Hypothesis H 5 : TR PU (+) Hypothesis H 6 : TR INTUSE (+) FIN GER USA JPN = Hypothesis supported = Hypothesis not supported WI Page 11

12 Agenda Information Systems Institute Introduction Motivation, Problems and Questions Research Design and Hypotheses Generation Hypotheses and Conceptual Research Model Sample and Procedure Measurement and Model Testing Results Critical Appraisal and Outlook Limitations Conclusion and Further Research WI Page 12

13 Critical Appraisal and Outlook (1/2) Limitations First, the survey was only provided in English. This can lead to misunderstandings by the respondents due to language barriers. Second, the study considers the adjustment of users in Germany, Finland, the USA and Japan, but other countries might demonstrate notable differences for cultural, economic and socio-cultural reasons. Third, it is not possible to say with certainty that a link between cultural factors and technology has been empirically established. Fourth, other constructs might influence the acceptance of m-payment (e. g. personality traits). Ultimately, the variance in consumer s intention can be explained by the current TAM research approach. Examine qualitative investigations that aim at exploring and capturing the subtleties of consumer behaviors that cannot be directly observed or measured by quantitative research. WI Page 13

14 Critical Appraisal and Outlook (2/2) Conclusion and Further Research The paper contributes to acceptance research by providing a better understanding of the impacts of factors, particularly technology readiness and therefore acceptance of m-payment in an international context. Factors such as perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness show similarity in all four countries and increase the intention to use m-payment. In the field of m-payment further research has to note socio-cultural difference, because this field has not been considered sufficiently. In addition, the study presented here, considers the adjustment of users in Germany, Finland, the USA and Japan, but other countries (e. g. developing countries like Kenya) might demonstrate notable differences for cultural and economic reasons. Furthermore, personality traits can be included in the study (FFM model). The study in the field of m-payment furthermore did not directly measure cultural dimensions. This could be considered in further research. Qualitative investigations could be made to explore consumer behaviors that cannot be directly measured by quantitative research. WI Page 14

15 Thank you for your attention! WI Page 15