Abstract
How could traditional financial institutions attract online users? Should they mimic their online counter-parts, or compete based on an existing offline business? This research compares different effects of the adoption drivers between pure-play and click-and-mortar e-payment services based on a trust-based Valence Framework. Use intention is proposed to be affected by perceived benefit, perceived risk, and trust, which is in turn affected by familiarity, reputation and security protection. 276 subjects’ responses about Quick Pay (a pure online third-party payment) and Union Pay (an e-payment service offered by a traditional financial institution) were collected. The data analysis reveals: (1) the pure-play e-payment performs much better than the click-and-mortar e-payment except for information risk and property risk; (2) all the path coefficients are significant except the link between perceived risk and use intention for Union Pay; (3) most of the path coefficients for pure-play e-payment service are stronger than those of click-and-mortar e-payment service, except for the links between perceived benefit and intention, trust and perceived risk, and familiarity and trust. These differences can be attributed to different resource endowments owned by service providers. The results suggest that pure-play and click-andmortar e-payment should have different focuses when promoting their services.
Recommended Citation
Pei, Yanli; Wang, Shan; and Guo, Ting, "Whether Adoption Drivers Differ between Click-and-mortar and Pure-play E-payment Services?" (2017). WHICEB 2017 Proceedings. 60.
https://aisel.aisnet.org/whiceb2017/60