Consumer adoption of pro-poor service innovations in subsistence marketplaces

Abstract

The version in the Kent Academic Repository may differ from the final published version. Users are advised to check http://kar.kent.ac.uk for the status of the paper. Users should always cite the published version of record.

Adoption of Mobile Banking by Microentrepreneurs at the Bottom of the Pyramid

“…Systematic empirical research on the adoption of innovation at the bottom of the pyramid has begun to develop (Hasan et al, 2019). The studies on mobile banking adoption at the BOP are consumer-oriented and use different models to predict adoption intent.…”

“…The first study that used TPB to predict mobile banking adoption at the BPO was that by Hasan et al (2019), which determined the factors that affect the adoption of mobile consumer banking at the bottom of the pyramid. Their study employed the Consumer Acceptance Model of Technology (CAT), Diffusion of Innovations (DOI), Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), Theory of reasoned action (TRA), Value-based adoption model (VAM) models.…”

“…In this regard, the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) is one of the best-suited models on technological adoption to explain individuals' behavior when performing a given action in those contexts where they lack full control and are conditioned by other non-motivational factors associated with the availability of specific requirements, knowledge, skills, and resources (Ajzen, 1991;Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, and Davis, 2003;Santos, Veiga, and Souza, 2011). According to Hasan, Lowe, and Petrovici (2019), given the limitations that BOP consumers face, TPB is a good predictor. Moreover, two other independent variables, namely, relative advantage and perceived risk, explain differences in individuals' behavior in the context of adopting new technologies (Brown, Cajee, Davies, and Stroebel, 2003).…”

Guest editorial

“…Taking a model comparison approach similar to that of Venkatesh et al (2003) the authors compare the explanatory power of some widely used adoption models including the Technology Acceptance Model (Davis, 1989), Innovation Diffusion Theory (Rogers, 2003) and Perceived Risk Theory (Featherman and Pavlou, 2003). As has been illustrated in prior research (Venkatesh et al , 2003; Hasan et al, 2019a, 2019b) technology adoption is often context specific and no one model can provide an adequate explanation of the drivers of adoption, yet most well used models provide some degree of explanatory power. Consequently, such hybrid models developed from this horse race approach can lead to the development of more comprehensive models suited to the context under investigation.…”

“…Typical discourse around consumers and technology focuses on the adoption and use of popular consumer technologies for segments with a high disposable income, often with hedonic purchase motivations. However, increasingly research is tackling questions about technology adoption and use among consumers in what are termed subsistence marketplaces (Hasan et al , 2019a, 2019b; Miller and Mobarak, 2014; Nakata and Weidner, 2012). The subsistence marketplaces literature complements work in the area of the so-called Bottom-of-the-Pyramid (BOP) and takes a bottom-up approach to understanding these consumers and marketplaces.…”