Determinants of fintech adoption: An Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) approach
Keywords:
Fintech adoption, Analytic Hierarchy Process, Security and Privacy, Trust, Digital Payments, Technology adoption.Abstract
Over the last few years, the financial technology (Fintech) sector has experienced fast growth, revolutionizing financial services by providing innovative, convenient, and accessible digital solutions. However, several factors impact the adoption of fintech services, and the impact on each factor varies based on how important it is. This research is to find key determinants' priority to adopt fintech by using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Six criteria (Security and Privacy, Trust, Ease of Use, Perceived Usefulness, Cost Advantage and Social Influence) were measured using pairwise comparisons. The Consistency Ratio (CR = 0.069) which was obtained from the AHP analysis was fairly acceptable, which means that the judgments are reliable. These findings showed that Security and Privacy (44.5%), Trust (25.7%), Ease of Use (12.7%), Perceived Usefulness (9.1%), Cost advantage (5.0%) and social influence (2.9%) were the most influential factors respectively. The results indicate that security and trustworthiness of fintech platforms outweighs economic benefits and social recommendations. The study adds to the existing literature on fintech adoption by offering an ordered framework which can help Fintech companies and policymakers design a strategy to increase the adoption of fintech services by consumers and digital financial inclusion.
Downloads
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 51–90. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036519
Kim, D. J., Ferrin, D. L., & Rao, H. R. (2008). A trust-based consumer decision-making model in electronic commerce. Decision Support Systems, 44(2), 544–564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2007.07.001
Lee, I., & Shin, Y. J. (2018). FinTech: Ecosystem, business models, investment decisions, and challenges. Business Horizons, 61(1), 35–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2017.09.003
Oliveira, T., Thomas, M., Baptista, G., & Campos, F. (2016). Mobile payment adoption: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology model. Information Systems Frontiers, 18(6), 1153–1168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-015-9600-2
Parasuraman, A. (2000). Technology readiness index (TRI): A multiple-item scale to measure readiness to embrace new technologies. Journal of Service Research, 2(4), 307–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/109467050024001
Ryu, H. S. (2018). Understanding benefit and risk framework of fintech adoption: Comparison of early adopters and late adopters. Proceedings of the 51st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 3864–3873. https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2018.486
Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590
Schierz, P. G., Schilke, O., & Wirtz, B. W. (2010). Understanding consumer acceptance of mobile payment services. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 9(3), 209–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2009.07.005
Slade, E., Williams, M., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Piercy, N. C. (2015). Exploring consumer adoption of proximity mobile payments. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 23(3), 209–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2014.914075
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412
Wonglimpiyarat, J. (2017). FinTech banking industry: A systemic approach. Foresight, 19(6), 590–603. https://doi.org/10.1108/FS-07-2017-0026
Yousafzai, S. Y., Foxall, G. R., & Pallister, J. G. (2010). Explaining Internet banking behavior: Theory of reasoned action, theory of planned behavior, or technology acceptance model? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40(5), 1172–1202. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00615.x
Zhou, T. (2012). Examining mobile banking user adoption from the perspectives of trust and flow experience. Information Technology and Management, 13(1), 27–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10799-011-0092-8
