The antecedents of m-banking usage under capital controls in Greece – a mixed methods approach

Abstract

Purpose Capital controls restrict cash withdrawals and international transfers, among other restrictions. The purpose of the study is to explore how capital controls have influenced m-banking usage and disclose the underlying factors that explain m-banking usage intentions. Design/methodology/approach Grounded on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), this study assumes that usage behavior may be different from intentions to adopt. In-depth interviews (study 1) were employed with both consumers and bank employees to explore the factors of m-banking adoption under capital controls, followed by an online survey (study 2) pertaining to examine the relationships between underlying factors. Findings Study 1 reveals that the growth of m-banking usage is strongly associated with capital controls that perceived ease of use, usefulness, risk, technology anxiety and decision comfort are significant attributes in influencing usage intention. Study 2 verifies that most underlying factors are important predictors of m-banking usage intention, except technology anxiety does not impact m-banking usage. Research limitations/implications The respective effects on usage intentions may be different in the absence of capital controls. A similar study could examine the importance of the respective constructs in conditions of no forced use. The case of forcing consumers to adopt a technological innovation could be further explored. Practical implications Retail banking consumers have changed their banking and financing behaviors because of capital controls. Forced usage may cause customers to cultivate positive attitudes towards the technology and consider it for continuous usage. Originality/value Capital controls were found to impact positively customer behavior towards m-banking. It is revealed that capital controls have forced bank customers to adopt and use m-banking for their financial needs.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 7 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.