Self-service technology in supermarkets – Do frontline staff still matter?

A model of adoption of AR-based self-service technologies: a two country comparison

“…As Blut et al (2016) posited in their meta-analysis, the factors that impact on SST acceptance remain unclear. Based on Blut et al (2016) and the most recent literature on retailing (Adapa et al, 2020;Lee and Lyu, 2019;Sharma et al, 2021) the drivers of SST adoption can be sorted into three categories: (1) SST characteristics such as perceived ease of use, usefulness, convenience, newness, enjoyment, perceived control and perceived risk; (2) customer characteristics such as the need for interaction, perceived self-efficacy, perceived complexity, demographics, technology anxiety, need for human interaction, consumer innovativeness, technology readiness, attitudes towards use, attitudes towards control and convenience, perceptions of personalisation and cost efficiency, subjective norms and behavioural inertia;…”

“…The need for personal interaction with service employees has been found to be an important determinant influencing SST use (Demoulin and Djelassi, 2016) but there are contradictory results. Some studies have highlighted the consumer's need for interaction with employees (Larivi ere et al, 2017) and its beneficial effects on service quality (Sharma et al, 2021) and reduced perceived risk (Featherman and Hajli, 2016). On the other hand, other studies have found that consumers prefer to avoid AR-based selfservice technologies contact with employees (Meuter et al, 2000) because technology provides functional performance and replaces social needs (Fernandes and Oliveira, 2021); similarly, situational factors, such as perceived waiting time, have been proposed as reasons for avoiding contact with employees (Wang et al, 2013).…”

An analysis of the relationships between human, technological and physical factors in the retail banking sector

“…Self-Service Technologies (from now on, SSTs) are the most ubiquitous technologies in the service landscapes (Sharma et al, 2021 ). Their popularity largely resides in the advantages they offer both for customers and for companies.…”

“…In the past 2 decades, the debate on SSTs in marketing and consumer research revolved around some well-identified areas, which mostly explored the way in which consumers relate to SSTs: the antecedents of consumer adoption of SSTs (e.g., Collier et al, 2015 ; Oghazi et al, 2012 ; Wang et al, 2012 ), and their satisfaction related to technology usage (e.g., Narteh, 2015 ). While extant research on the factors which determine consumers reactions regarding SSTs appears well developed, more recently, research has called for developing a broader understanding of the ways in which technological adoption is reshaping the overall relationship between service providers and customers, in terms, for instance, of overall customer evaluations and responses (e.g., Dekimpe et al, 2020 ; Sharma et al, 2021 ).…”

“…In terms of SSTs research, of particular importance is exploring the relationship between SSTs and the human factor. Scholars consistently reported that the success (and failure) of SSTs introduction within a service environment may frequently depend upon how SSTs relate with the human presence within the environment (e.g., Bulmer et al, 2018 ; Sharma et al, 2021 ). For instance, there is evidence of the fact that failure of technology introduction in service settings may be mostly due to the lack of social interaction with other people in the service encounter (Scherer et al, 2015 ); indeed, the presence of technology, without any kind of “human touch” within the service environment may simply be not be enough to achieve the goal of cross-selling or up-selling, which, rather, much more rely upon the action of individuals (e.g., Lee & Coughlin, 2015 ).…”