Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Factors for and against resistance to smart services: role of consumer lifestyle and ecosystem related variables

Factors for and against resistance to smart services: role of consumer lifestyle and ecosystem... Consumers are increasingly connected to, and make use of, a multitude of technologies in their daily lives. The exponential growth in the use of Internet of Things (IoT)-based services is ushering in a new era of e-services, in which the service experience is becoming autonomous (intelligence), devices are intercommunicating (connectivity) and consumers can access the service anytime, anywhere and using any device (ubiquity). However, a number of challenges have arisen. The purpose of this paper is to investigate factors that reduce consumer resistance to smart services (factors against resistance) and factors that promote this resistance (factors for resistance), by means of a dual-factor approach.Design/methodology/approachTo test this theoretical model, the authors developed a Web-based survey and used structural equation modeling.FindingsResults show that consumer-lifestyle factors (individual “mobiquity” and self-image congruence) reduce consumer resistance to smart services (factors against resistance). Conversely, innovation-related factors (perceived security, perceived complexity) and ecosystem-related factors (perceived government surveillance and general skepticism toward IoT) promote consumer resistance to smart services (factors for resistance). In addition, general skepticism toward IoT has a significant positive effect on perceived complexity, perceived security risk and perceived government surveillance.Originality/valueThis research investigates consumer resistance to smart services using a dual-factor perspective (Cenfetelli, 2004; Claudy et al., 2015): factors reducing resistance versus factors promoting resistance. This paper provides evidence for the importance of consumer lifestyle-related factors, innovation-related factors and ecosystem-related factors in explaining consumer resistance to smart services. This work enriches previous studies of consumer resistance to innovation (Ram and Sheth, 1989; Ram, 1987) by studying original variables (individual mobiquity, technological innovativeness, government surveillance). http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Services Marketing Emerald Publishing

Factors for and against resistance to smart services: role of consumer lifestyle and ecosystem related variables

Journal of Services Marketing , Volume 33 (4): 14 – Sep 18, 2019

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/factors-for-and-against-resistance-to-smart-services-role-of-consumer-1VGCBQxC4W

References (74)

Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
© Emerald Publishing Limited
ISSN
0887-6045
eISSN
0887-6045
DOI
10.1108/jsm-01-2018-0046
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Consumers are increasingly connected to, and make use of, a multitude of technologies in their daily lives. The exponential growth in the use of Internet of Things (IoT)-based services is ushering in a new era of e-services, in which the service experience is becoming autonomous (intelligence), devices are intercommunicating (connectivity) and consumers can access the service anytime, anywhere and using any device (ubiquity). However, a number of challenges have arisen. The purpose of this paper is to investigate factors that reduce consumer resistance to smart services (factors against resistance) and factors that promote this resistance (factors for resistance), by means of a dual-factor approach.Design/methodology/approachTo test this theoretical model, the authors developed a Web-based survey and used structural equation modeling.FindingsResults show that consumer-lifestyle factors (individual “mobiquity” and self-image congruence) reduce consumer resistance to smart services (factors against resistance). Conversely, innovation-related factors (perceived security, perceived complexity) and ecosystem-related factors (perceived government surveillance and general skepticism toward IoT) promote consumer resistance to smart services (factors for resistance). In addition, general skepticism toward IoT has a significant positive effect on perceived complexity, perceived security risk and perceived government surveillance.Originality/valueThis research investigates consumer resistance to smart services using a dual-factor perspective (Cenfetelli, 2004; Claudy et al., 2015): factors reducing resistance versus factors promoting resistance. This paper provides evidence for the importance of consumer lifestyle-related factors, innovation-related factors and ecosystem-related factors in explaining consumer resistance to smart services. This work enriches previous studies of consumer resistance to innovation (Ram and Sheth, 1989; Ram, 1987) by studying original variables (individual mobiquity, technological innovativeness, government surveillance).

Journal

Journal of Services MarketingEmerald Publishing

Published: Sep 18, 2019

Keywords: Lifestyle; Innovation; Internet of things; Mobility; Consumer resistance; Dual factor; Smart service

There are no references for this article.