In a study by Carlsson et al. [2006] using the UTAUT in Finland, performance expectancy and effort expectancy are found to be the main determinants of behavioural intention in using mobile service [Carlsson et al, 2006]. The UTAUT model has also been revised to study mobile commerce acceptance, where additional determinants such as trust, privacy, convenience and cost were shown to affect the behavioural intention [Min, Ji & Qu, 2008].
The effort expectancy from UTAUT, PEOU from TAM and complexity from IDT are regarded as similar [Venkatesh et al., 2003]. Similarly, the relative adventage of IDT and performance expectancy of UTAUT are analogous to PU from TAM [Taylor & Todd, 1995; Venkatesh et al., 2003]. For this study, the term POEU and PU are adopted as independent variables on the research model.Luarn and Lin [2005] conducted a study in Taiwan, where TAM and the theory of planned behaviour [TPB] by Ajzen [1991] were combined. The study investigated the possible factors affecting mobile banking users behavioural intentions. These factors include perceived usefulness [PU], perceived ease of use [PEOU], perceived credibility, self-efficacy, and perceived financial cost [Luarn & Lin, 2005].
In a study by Lee [2009] in Taiwan which investigated the factors influencing the adoption of internet banking, the TAM and TPB were intergrated with perceived rish and perceived benefit constructs were added to the research model. In a study by Lee [2009], the following five antecedents of perceived risk were discussed: performance risk,social risk, financial risk, time risk and security risk.
For the purpose of this study, a research model is proposed as outlined in Figure 2.2, consisting of the original determinants of TAM2: PU, PEOU, adoption of mobile banking [analogous with Behaviour Intention], Actual Usage [AU] and additional determinants: the five facets of perceived risk, trust and perceived cost.
[perceived usefulness] [perceived ease of use] [perceived cost]
[trust] [perceived risk] [performance risk] [security/privacy risk] [time risk] [social pisk] [financial risk] [adoption of mobile banking ] [ actual usage]
Figure 2.2: Research Model basesd on TAM2 with perceived risk, trust and perceived cost
2.5 Perceived risk of mobile banking
Various studies on consumer perception of risks were conducted in the context of online banking [Tan & Teo,2000; Im ,Kim & Han 2008; Wu & Wang,2005],but the perceived risk variable has only been modelled as a single construct.When the perceived risk is modelled as single construct, it fails to reflect on the characteristics of the perceined risk [Lee,2009].
Lee [2009] conducted a study on perceived risk in the context of Internet [online] banking adoption .The perceived risk was divided into five facets [performance risk, social risk , financial risk, time risk and security risk], which provided a more in depth understanding of the characteristics of rishs regarding Internet banking [Lee, 2009].Mobile banking may be considered an extension oi Internet banking , but whith its own unique characteristics given that a cell phone is used rather than a web browser on a personal computer [Brown, Cajee, Davies & Stroedel, 2003]. Thus, a similar set of risk factors can be derived for mobile banking by using the five risk facets as used by Lee [2009] as a basis : performance risk, social risk,financial risk,time risk and security risk. As defined by Lee [2009], these five risks can be describedfor mobile banking as follows:
Performance risk: refers to losses incurred by deficienciens or malfunctions of mobile banking servers [Lee, 2009].According to Littler & Melanthiou [2006], a malfunction of a banking server, and a similar notion applies in the context of mobile banking
Security/privacy risk: is defined as a potential loss due to fraud or a hacker compromising the security of a mobile banking user. In a similar study,Luarn and Lin [2005] used the construct perceived credibility, which is defined as the extent to which a person believes that using mobile banking will be considered to be similar to a lack of credibility.
Time /convenience risk: this refer to a loss of time and any inconvenience incurred due to the delays of receiving payments or the difficulty of navigation [finding approariate services and relevant commands] [Lee,2009].
Social risk: refers to the possibility that using mobile banking may result in disapproval by ones friends/family/work group [Lee, 2009].
Financial risk: is defined as the potential for monetary loss due to transaction errors or bank account misuse [Lee,2009].
Lee [2009] & Lee,Lee and Kim [2007] found that all five risks: security, financial, time, social and performsnce risks, emerged as negatine factors im the intention to adopt online banking. However, social rik was found to have an insignificant effect on the intention to adopt online banking [Lee,2009].
A study by Im et al. [2008] found that when deploying a technology perceived by users to be high risk, managers need to emphasis ease of use. When deploying a technology perceived to be low risk, managers need to focus on communicating the usefulness of the technology [Im et al.,2008].
A study by wu and Wang [20050 conducted on mobile commerce, where more than three-fifths [60%] of the respondents had online transaction experience, showed that perceived risk s have positive influences on the behavioural intention to use the product. The study by Wu and Wang [2005] fails to clearly explain the reason for these results; it rather assumes that the respondents might have been aware of the existing risk of mobile commerce.
A study by Tan and Teo [2000] on the adoption of Internet banking revealed that perceived risk is a significant determinant. Brown et al. [2003] applied Tan and Teos Internet banking adoption. However ,in their studies, perceived risk was modeled as a sindle construct [Tan & Teo, 2000;Brown et al.,2003].
For this study, all five risk facets will be adapted as antecedents of perceived risk in the research model [as outlined in Figure 2.1]. As per literature review, it is hypothesised that security, financial, time, social and performance risk are more likely to have a negative effect on the adoption of mobile banking.
2.6 perceived cost
Perceived cost is defined as the extent to which a person believes that using mobile banking will cost money [Luarn &Lin 2005]. The cost may include for sending communication traffic [including SMS anhd data ] and mobile device cost.
A study by Wu and Wang [2005] on mobile commerce acceptance showed that perceived cost had minimal significance when compared to other variables such as perceived risk, compatibility and perceived usefulness .A further qualitative investigation on the same study as conducted, which revealed that perceived cost is normally a major concern when a tecnolegy is first introduced [Wu & Wang,2005].however,when there is an emergency or sudden need ,the utility benefits outweigh the cost issues. The study by Wu and Wang [2005] was conducted on respondents with an average income level was regarded as being a good financial status, implying that the users coud afford mobile commerce [Wu & Wang, 2005]. This study however focuses on the BOP context, a population with low disposable income. According to Karnani [2009] people at the BOP have very low purchasing power and are price sensitive. According to Guesalaga and Marshall [2008], in developing countries, the consumotion pattern of the BOP concentrates mainly on basic needs such as food, housing and household