Acceptance of mobile money by poor citizens of India: integrating trust into the technology acceptance model

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to understand the acceptance of mobile-money (m-money) among target populations, i.e. below-poverty-line citizens in India, using the technology acceptance model (TAM). The m-money service is a major initiative that can enable the provision of low-cost and speedy money transfer through mobile phones, especially in developing countries such as India. For a large section of the population in India, m-money can act as a way to achieve financial inclusion. However, for m-money to succeed, users should accept the initiative wholeheartedly. Design/methodology/approach – The survey data were collected from 225 actual and prospective m-money users and analysed using partial least square technique. Findings – The findings imply that the trust and the core constructs of TAM such as perceived usefulness, trust and attitude towards usage contribute in influencing the intention to accept m-money. Perceived ease of use neither impacts perceived usefulness nor attitude towards usage. Practical implications – This research also provides possible explanations for the significant relationships between the constructs and discusses how this information can be used to enhance the acceptance of m-money among poor Indians. Originality/value – This research is original and is based on primary data collection and its interpretation. It provides thorough empirical insights on the acceptance of m-money among poor Indian citizens which is currently a weakly addressed and empirically less explored area of research.

Facilitating mCommerce Growth in Nigeria through mMoney Usage: A Preliminary Analysis

“…The preliminary finding in this paper that worry over ease of use negatively associates with perceived usefulness of the service is in tandem with the reported findings of Altai Consulting (2013). Put differently, perceived ease of use of mMoney is a significant predictor of the service's perceived usefulness, and the result offers preliminary empirical support for prior related research (see Chauhan, 2015;Dass & Pal, 2011;Peng, Xiong, & Yang, 2012;Tobbin, 2010).…”

“…It is no wonder that TAM, including its extended version, has been extensively used by scholars in understanding the success factors behind the adoption of mobile financial services (MFS) such as mMoney (cf. Chauhan, 2015;Dass & Pal, 2011;Tobbin, 2010). In a similar fashion, Morgan and Ravindran (2014) in their work adopted a revised TAM, which the authors referred to as "A Reduced Form Technology Consumer Product Adoption Model" (p. 6) to study important factors impacting the interaction(s) between home Internet and mobile device use in the US context.…”

“…Recent research is suggestive that lowering transactions cost of MFSs like mMoney is critical for increasing the service perceived usefulness and importantly greater adoption of the service (Chauhan;Mbogo, 2010;Osakwe, 2013;Upadh-yay & Jahanyan, 2016). Cost factors suggest that perceived relative economic advantages will motivate consumers to use a mobile platform, particularly when it is perceived to lead to a reduction in human errors and labour cost savings at the same time (Gan, Clemes, Limsombunchai, & Weng, 2006;Sathye, 1999).…”

“…Arguably, the advent of mMoney in the SSA region offers the possibilities of facilitating mCommerce growth potentials in the region. mMoney is simply a form of mobile-enabled localized banking cum payment system that relies heavily on the availability of agents' network (cash-in-cash-out centres) (Chauhan, 2015;Cobert, Helms, & Parker, 2012;Osakwe, 2013). In other words, mMoney could be seen as a form of electronic money that is readily available on a mobile device and that can be easily converted into cash equivalent and/or transmitted electronically to a third party.…”

“…In other words, mMoney could be seen as a form of electronic money that is readily available on a mobile device and that can be easily converted into cash equivalent and/or transmitted electronically to a third party. It is pertinent to point out that mobile banking (mBanking) differs from mMoney in the sense that the former is strictly an add-on service to existing conventional banks' customers while the latter can be seen as an alternative banking channel to serve the hitherto unbanked and underbanked segments that are predominantly part of the Bottom of the Pyramid (BoP) market in most developing economies (also, see Chauhan, 2015;Osakwe, 2013). Within the SSA region, 76% of its adult population do not have formal bank accounts with only 15% and 3% of the adult population having a debit card and credit card respectively (Demirguc-Kunt & Klapper, 2012).…”