PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to further the understanding of innovation resistance by dividing internet banking non‐adopters into three groups based on their intentions to use the innovation. Thereafter, the aim is to identify how the resistance differs in these customer groups.Design/methodology/approachThis study identifies three groups of internet banking non‐adopters, namely postponers, opponents and rejectors. The data were collected by conducting an extensive postal survey among the retail banking customers in Finland who had not adopted internet banking. The measurement development was based on consumer resistance theory and the earlier literature on internet banking. Principal component analysis was used to classify the resistance items into five adoption barriers derived from the earlier literature. Thereafter, analysis of variance was used to analyse the statistical differences in resistance to internet banking between the three groups.FindingsSignificant differences were identified between the groups explored. The resistance of the rejectors is much more intense and diverse than that of the opponents, while the postponers show only slight resistance. The results also indicate that psychological barriers are even higher determinants of resistance than usage and value, which are constructs related to ease‐of‐use and usefulness determining acceptance in the traditional technology acceptance model. Moreover, the findings highlight the role of self‐efficacy in bank customers' risk perceptions to internet banking.Originality/valueThis study provides further understanding of what inhibits internet banking adoption by comparing three non‐adopter groups with respect to their resistance to internet banking. It also has implications for management in overcoming non‐adopters' resistance to the innovation.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to investigate innovation resistance among mature consumers in the mobile banking context. The reasons inhibiting mature consumers' mobile banking adoption were compared to those of younger consumers.Design/methodology/approachFollowing Ram and Sheth, resistance was measured with five barriers namely Usage, Value, Risk, Tradition and Image barriers. An extensive internet survey was implemented and 1,525 usable responses were collected, of which 370 respondents (24.3 percent) represented the mature consumer segment (age over 55) and 1,155 respondents (75.7 percent) represented the younger consumers.FindingsThe empirical findings indicate that the value barrier is the most intense barrier to mobile banking adoption among both mature and younger consumers. However, aging appears to be related especially to the risk and image barriers; the most significant differences between mature and younger consumers' perceptions of mobile banking were related to input and output mechanisms of information, the battery life of a mobile phone, a fear that the list of PIN codes would be lost and end up in the wrong hands and the usefulness of new technology in general.Practical implicationsThe study has practical implications to marketers in different fields in that strategies to overcome resistance to innovations like mobile banking are discussed.Originality/valueInnovation resistance can be seen as a less developed concept in adoption research. While the majority of studies have focused on the success of innovations and reasons to adopt, this study empirically investigates the reasons preventing innovation adoption.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract