SpringerLink
Log in

Unraveling the link between status quo satisfaction and the rejection of digital-only banks

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Financial Services Marketing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The FinTech revolution has spawned several new business models in the financial services industry, including introducing digital-only banks. Due to digital-only banks' novelty, empirical research investigating the rejection of digital-only banks by customers of traditional banks is minimal. This study explores mechanisms that help explain the influence of traditional-bank customers' satisfaction on the rejection intention of digital-only banks. A conceptual model was developed drawing primarily on innovation resistance theory. Six hundred and thirteen only-traditional-bank customers completed an online survey. The moderated-mediation analysis revealed the indirect influence of traditional-bank customers' satisfaction on rejection intention through (1) usage barrier influencing lack of relative advantage perceptions and lack of compatibility perceptions, and (2) tradition barrier influencing lack of compatibility perceptions were stronger for males than females. Statistically significant indirect effects were detected for (1) lack of relative advantage perceptions, (2) lack of compatibility perceptions, and (3) the value barrier influencing lack of relative advantage perceptions as mediators.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abuhashesh, M.Y., M.T. Alshurideh, A.E. Ahmed, M. Sumadi, and R.E. Masa’deh. 2021. The effect of culture on customers’ attitudes toward facebook advertising: The moderating role of gender. Review of International Business and Strategy 31 (3): 416–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal, S., and Varghese, I. 2018. Digital-only banking-a souring wave in consumer banking, available at: https://www.infosys.com/industries/financial-services/white-papers/Documents/next-wave-banking.pdf. Accessed 24 February 2021.

  • Arif, I., W. Aslam, and Y. Hwang. 2020. Barriers in adoption of internet banking: A structural equation modeling–neural network approach. Technology in Society 61: 101231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakar, J.A., M.D. Clemes, and K. Bicknell. 2017. A comprehensive hierarchical model of retail banking. International Journal of Bank Marketing 35 (4): 662–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balogh, S., 2020. Business insider: Digital-only banking is super buzzy, but consumers don't think branches are going away any time soon, available at: https://www.mx.com/news/digital-only-banking-is-super-buzzy. Accessed 14 April 2020.

  • Barba, R., 2018. Digital-only banking customers are the least satisfied. Here's why, available at: https://www.bankrate.com/banking/jd-power-improving-the-digital-banking-experience/. Accessed 25 February 2021 2021.

  • Beldad, A., M. De Jong, and M. Steehouder. 2010. How shall I trust the faceless and the intangible? A literature review on the antecedents of online trust. Computers in Human Behavior 26 (5): 857–869.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biehl, A., A. Ermagun, and A. Stathopoulos. 2019. Utilizing multi-stage behavior change theory to model the process of bike share adoption. Transport Policy 77 (May): 30–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borraz-Mora, J., V. Bordonaba-Juste, and Y. Polo-Redondo. 2017. Functional barriers to the adoption of electronic banking: The moderating effect of gender. Revista De Economía Aplicada 25 (75): 87–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaouali, W., and N. Souiden. 2018. The role of cognitive age in explaining mobile banking resistance among elderly people. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 50 (September): 342–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chuah, S.H.-W., M. Marimuthu, J. Kandampully, and A. Bilgihan. 2017. What drives Gen Y loyalty? Understanding the mediated moderating roles of switching costs and alternative attractiveness in the value-satisfaction-loyalty chain. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 36 (May): 124–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coetzee, J. 2019. Risk aversion and the adoption of fintech by South African banks. African Journal of Business & Economic Research 14 (4): 133–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J.A., and C.P. Zapata-Phelan. 2007. Trends in theory building and theory testing: A five-decade study of the Academy of Management Journal. Academy of Management Journal 50 (6): 1281–1303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deng, Z., Y. Lu, K.K. Wei, and J. Zhang. 2010. Understanding customer satisfaction and loyalty: An empirical study of mobile instant messages in China. International Journal of Information Management 30 (4): 289–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Ruyter, K., M. Wetzels, and M. Kleijnen. 2001. Customer adoption of e-service: An experimental study. International Journal of Service Industry Management 12 (2): 184–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dölarslan, E.S. 2014. Assessing the effects of satisfaction and value on customer loyalty behaviors in service environments: High-speed railway in Turkey as a case study. Management Research Review 37 (8): 706–727.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A.H., and V.J. Steffen. 1984. Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 46 (4): 735–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fain, D., and M.L. Roberts. 1997. Technology vs. consumer behavior: The battle for the financial services customer. Journal of Direct Marketing 11 (1): 44–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falk, T., J. Schepers, M. Hammerschmidt, and H.H. Bauer. 2007. Identifying cross-channel dissynergies for multichannel service providers. Journal of Service Research 10 (2): 143–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Featherman, M.S., and P.A. Pavlou. 2003. Predicting e-services adoption: A perceived risk facets perspective. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 59 (4): 451–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L., 1957. A theory of cognitive dissonance, Row, peterson, Evanston.

  • Fortnum, D., Pollari, I., Mead, W., Hughes, B. and Speier, A. 2017. The pulse of Fintech q1 2017, available at: https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/xx/pdf/2017/04/pulse-of-fintech-q1.pdf. Accessed 29 January 2021.

  • ftadviser.com, 2019. Quarter of Brits to use digital-only bank within five years, available at: https://www.ftadviser.com/your-industry/2019/01/11/quarter-of-brits-to-use-digital-only-bank-within-five-years. Accessed 25 February 2021.

  • Gefen, D., and D.W. Straub. 1997. Gender differences in the perception and use of e-mail: An extension to the technology acceptance model. MIS Quarterly 21 (4): 389–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomber, P., R.J. Kauffman, C. Parker, and B.W. Weber. 2018. On the fintech revolution: Interpreting the forces of innovation, disruption, and transformation in financial services. Journal of Management Information Systems 35 (1): 220–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, S., and H.W. Kim. 2010. Value-driven internet shop**: The mental accounting theory perspective. Psychology & Marketing 27 (1): 13–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gurtner, S. 2014. Modelling consumer resistance to mobile health applications. In: 22nd European conference on information systems. Tel Aviv.

  • Hair, J.F., Jr., T.G.M. Hult, C.M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt. 2017. A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Los Angeles: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J.F., J.J. Risher, M. Sarstedt, and C.M. Ringle. 2019. When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review 31 (10): 2–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heidenreich, S., and M. Handrich. 2015. What about passive innovation resistance? Investigating adoption-related behavior from a resistance perspective. Journal of Product Innovation Management 32 (6): 878–903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henseler, J., C.M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt. 2015. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 43 (1): 115–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschheim, R., and M. Newman. 1988. Information systems and user resistance: Theory and practice. The Computer Journal 31 (5): 398–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. 1980. Culture and organizations. International Studies of Management & Organization 10 (4): 15–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. 1998. Masculinity and feminity: The taboo dimension of national cultures. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holak, S.L., and D.R. Lehmann. 1990. Purchase intentions and the dimensions of innovation: An exploratory model. Journal of Product Innovation Management 7 (1): 59–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homburg, C., and A. Giering. 2001. Personal characteristics as moderators of the relationship between customer satisfaction and loyalty—an empirical analysis. Psychology & Marketing 18 (1): 43–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, T. 2019. This is what you need to know about digital-only banking, available at: https://www.fxempire.com/education/article/this-is-what-you-need-to-know-about-digital-only-banking-551762 . Accessed 12 February 2020.

  • Jain, N.K., H. Gajjar, and B.J. Shah. 2021. Electronic logistics service quality and repurchase intention in e-tailing: Catalytic role of shop** satisfaction, payment options, gender and returning experience. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 59: 102360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joachim, V., P. Spieth, and S. Heidenreich. 2018. Active innovation resistance: An empirical study on functional and psychological barriers to innovation adoption in different contexts. Industrial Marketing Management 71 (May): 95–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., and A. Tversky. 1979. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47 (2): 263–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karahanna, E., R. Agarwal, and C.M. Angst. 2006. Reconceptualizing compatibility beliefs in technology acceptance research. MIS Quarterly 30 (4): 781–804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kesharwani, A., and S. Singh Bisht. 2012. The impact of trust and perceived risk on internet banking adoption in India: An extension of technology acceptance model. International Journal of Bank Marketing 30 (4): 303–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H.-W., and A. Kankanhalli. 2009. Investigating user resistance to information systems implementation: A status quo bias perspective. MIS Quarterly 33 (3): 567–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen, M., N. Lee, and M. Wetzels. 2009. An exploration of consumer resistance to innovation and its antecedents. Journal of Economic Psychology 30 (3): 344–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koch, L. 2019. How many millennials want digital-only banking?, available at: https://www.emarketer.com/content/how-many-millennials-want-digital-only-banking. Accessed 17 February 2020.

  • Kuisma, T., T. Laukkanen, and M. Hiltunen. 2007. Map** the reasons for resistance to internet banking: A means-end approach. International Journal of Information Management 27 (2): 75–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, W.-S., and S.J. Lennon. 2009. What induces online loyalty? Online versus offline brand images. Journal of Business Research 62 (5): 557–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laidroo, L., E. Koroleva, A. Kliber, R. Rupeika-Apoga, and Z. Grigaliuniene. 2021. Business models of FinTechs–difference in similarity? Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 46: 101034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laukkanen, T. 2016. Consumer adoption versus rejection decisions in seemingly similar service innovations: The case of the internet and mobile banking. Journal of Business Research 69 (7): 2432–2439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laukkanen, T., and V. Kiviniemi. 2010. The role of information in mobile banking resistance. International Journal of Bank Marketing 25 (5): 372–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laukkanen, T., S. Sinkkonen, M. Kivijärvi, and P. Laukkanen. 2007. Innovation resistance among mature consumers. Journal of Consumer Marketing 24 (7): 419–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laukkanen, P., S. Sinkkonen, and T. Laukkanen. 2008. Consumer resistance to internet banking: Postponers, opponents and rejectors. International Journal of Bank Marketing 26 (6): 440–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M.-C. 2009. Factors influencing the adoption of internet banking: An integration of TAM and TPB with perceived risk and perceived benefit. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 8 (3): 130–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, K.C., and N. Chung. 2009. Understanding factors affecting trust in and satisfaction with mobile banking in Korea: A modified DeLone and McLean’s model perspective. Interacting with Computers 21 (5–6): 385–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y.-H., Y.-C. Hsieh, and C.-N. Hsu. 2011. Adding innovation diffusion theory to the technology acceptance model: Supporting employees’ intentions to use e-learning systems. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 14 (4): 124–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leong, L.-Y., T.-S. Hew, K.-B. Ooi, and J. Wei. 2020. Predicting mobile wallet resistance: A two-staged structural equation modeling-artificial neural network approach. International Journal of Information Management 51 (April): 102047.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang, H., N. Saraf, Q. Hu, and Y. Xue. 2007. Assimilation of enterprise systems: The effect of institutional pressures and the mediating role of top management. MIS Quarterly 31 (1): 59–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, X., H. Li, J. Zhang, and J.P. Shim. 2010. Examining multi-dimensional trust and multi-faceted risk in initial acceptance of emerging technologies: An empirical study of mobile banking services. Decision Support Systems 49 (2): 222–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattila, A.S., A.A. Grandey, and G.M. Fisk. 2003. The interplay of gender and affective tone in service encounter satisfaction. Journal of Service Research 6 (2): 136–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meuter, M.L., M.J. Bitner, A.L. Ostrom, and S.W. Brown. 2005. Choosing among alternative service delivery modes: An investigation of customer trial of self-service technologies. Journal of Marketing 69 (2): 61–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milian, E.Z., M.D.M. Spinola, and M.M.D. Carvalho. 2019. Fintechs: A literature review and research agenda. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 34: 100833.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mittal, V., and W.A. Kamakura. 2001. Satisfaction, repurchase intent, and repurchase behavior: Investigating the moderating effect of customer characteristics. Journal of Marketing Research 38 (1): 131–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mittelstaedt, R.A., S.L. Grossbart, W.W. Curtis, and S.P. Devere. 1976. Optimal stimulation level and the adoption decision process. Journal of Consumer Research 3 (2): 84–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molesworth, M., and J.P. Suortti. 2002. Buying cars online: The adoption of the web for high-involvement, high-cost purchases. Journal of Consumer Behaviour: An International Research Review 2 (2): 155–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, G.C., and I. Benbasat. 1991. Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research 2 (3): 192–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreau, C.P., D.R. Lehmann, and A.B. Markman. 2001. Entrenched knowledge structures and consumer response to new products. Journal of Marketing Research 38 (1): 14–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nabih, M.I., and T.B.C. Poiesz. 1997. Conceptual issues in the study of innovation adoption behavior. In NA-advances in consumer research volume 24, ed. M. Brucks and D.J. Macinnis. Provo: UT Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newswire, P.R. 2019. Global digital banking market size was 5180 million US$ and it is expected to reach 16200 million US$ by the end of 2025, with a CAGR of 15.3% during 2019–2025: Valuates reports, available at: https://www.prnewswire.com/in/news-releases/global-digital-banking-market-size-was-5180-million-us-and-it-is-expected-to-reach-16200-million-us-by-the-end-of-2025-with-a-cagr-of-15-3-during-2019-2025-valuates-reports-892944689.html#:~:text=22%204056%200001-,Global%20Digital%20Banking%20Market%20Size%20was%205180%20Million%20US%24%20and,During%202019%2D2025%3A%20Valuates%20Reports. Accessed 24 February 2021.

  • Nixon, G. 2020. Will millions of Britons really make the move to a mobile-only bank soon? New data suggests they are now true challengers to the big boys, available at: https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/saving/article-7987609/One-five-say-open-account-smartphone-bank.html. Accessed 25 February 2021.

  • Ostlund, L.E. 1974. Perceived innovation attributes as predictors of innovativeness. Journal of Consumer Research 1 (2): 23–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, K., and J. Koh. 2017. Exploring the relationship between perceived pace of technology change and adoption resistance to convergence products. Computers in Human Behavior 69: 142–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pieters, R. 2017. Meaningful mediation analysis: Plausible causal inference and informative communication. Journal of Consumer Research 44 (3): 692–716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pihlström, M., and G.J. Brush. 2008. Comparing the perceived value of information and entertainment mobile services. Psychology & Marketing 25 (8): 732–755.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pikkarainen, T., K. Pikkarainen, H. Karjaluoto, and S. Pahnila. 2004. Consumer acceptance of online banking: An extension of the technology acceptance model. Internet Research 14 (3): 224–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ram, S., and J.N. Sheth. 1989. Consumer resistance to innovations: The marketing problem and its solutions. Journal of Consumer Marketing 6 (2): 5–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ram, S. 1987. A model of innovation resistance. ACR North American Advances [Online], Vol. 4. Available on < http://acrwebsite.org/volumes/6688/volumes/v14/NA-14 >. Accessed 4.

  • Rogers, E.M. 2002. Diffusion of preventive innovations. Addictive Behaviors 27 (6): 989–993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E.M. 2003. Diffusion of Innovations. New York, NY: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossiter, J.R. 2002. The c-oar-se procedure for scale development in marketing. International Journal of Research in Marketing 19 (4): 305–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, W., and R. Zeckhauser. 1988. Status quo bias in decision making. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1 (1): 7–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sánchez-Franco, M.J. 2006. Exploring the influence of gender on the web usage via partial least squares. Behaviour & Information Technology 25 (1): 19–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, P., I.S.N. Chen, and S.T.K. Luk. 2012. Gender and age as moderators in the service evaluation process. Journal of Services Marketing 26 (2): 102–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheth, J.N., and W.H. Stellner. 1979. Psychology of innovation resistance: The less developed concept (LDC) in diffusion research. Research in Marketing 4 (622): 273–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srinivas, V. and Wadhwani, R. 2020. Recognizing the value of bank branches in a digital world: Findings from the global digital banking survey, available at: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/insights/us/articles/4999_Global-banking-survey/DI_Bank-branches-digital-world.pdf. Accessed 3 March 2021.

  • Srinivas, V., Schoeps, J.-T., Ramsay, T., Wadhwani, R., Hazuria, S. and Jain, A. 2019. 2020 banking and capital markets outlook: Fortifying the core for the next wave of disruption, available at: https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/industry/financial-services/financial-services-industry-outlooks/banking-industry-outlook.html. Accessed 24 February 2021.

  • Streeter, B. 2019. More cconsumers will leave banks if digital offerings don't improve, available at: https://thefinancialbrand.com/90248/digital-banking-customer-experience-security-online-branch/. Accessed 23 February 2020.

  • Szmigin, I., and G. Foxall. 1998. Three forms of innovation resistance: The case of retail payment methods. Technovation 18 (6–7): 459–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talke, K., and S. Heidenreich. 2014. How to overcome pro-change bias: Incorporating passive and active innovation resistance in innovation decision models. Journal of Product Innovation Management 31 (5): 894–907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Templeton, G.F., and T.A. Byrd. 2003. Determinants of the relative advantage of a structured SDM during the adoption stage of implementation. Information Technology and Management 4 (4): 409–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., and M.G. Morris. 2000. Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS Quarterly 24 (1): 115–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, M. 2019. Digital banks need to collaborate to compete, available at: https://thefintechtimes.com/digital-banks-collaborate/. Accessed 25 February 2021.

  • Wells-Barrett, C. 2020. Neobank adoption, available at: https://www.finder.com/neobank-adoption. Accessed 3 March 2021.

  • Wu, C.-C. 2016. Status quo bias in information system adoption: A meta-analytic review. Online Information Review 40 (7): 998–1017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, X., X. Guo, Y. Wu, K.-H. Lai, and D. Vogel. 2017. Exploring the inhibitors of online health service use intention: A status quo bias perspective. Information & Management 54 (8): 987–997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Management, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa

    Jacques Nel

  2. Department of Business Management, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa

    Christo Boshoff

Authors
  1. Jacques Nel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christo Boshoff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jacques Nel.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Scale items

Lack of compatibility (Karahanna et al. 2006)

LCOMP1: A digital-only bank is not compatible with all aspects of managing my personal finances.

LCOMP2: I think that a digital-only bank does not fit well with the way I would like to manage my personal finances.

LCOMP3: Using a digital-only bank to manage my personal finances does not fit into my style of banking.

Lack of perceived relative advantage (Moore and Benbasat 1991)

LRA1: Using a digital-only bank would not enable me to accomplish my financial transactions more quickly, compared to using a traditional bank.

LRA2: Using a digital-only bank would not make it easier to do financial transactions, compared to using a traditional bank.

LRA3: Using a digital-only bank is not more effective than banking with a traditional bank.

LRA4: Using a digital-only bank would not give me greater control over managing my personal finances, compared to banking with a traditional bank.

Rejection intention (Gurtner 2014; Park and Koh 2017)

RJI1: I do not need a digital-only bank to manage my personal finances.

RJI2: Using a digital-only bank to manage my personal finances is not for me.

RJI3: Becoming a customer of a digital-only bank is not wise.

RJI4: I will reject any recommendations from people to become a customer of a digital-only bank.

Tradition barrier (Chaouali and Souiden 2018)

TB1: I would find conducting financial transactions using a digital-only bank less pleasant than using a traditional bank.

TB2: I prefer to carry out financial transactions using a traditional bank, rather than to use a digital-only bank.

TB3: I am so used to a traditional bank that I would find it difficult to do my financial transactions using a digital-only bank.

TB4: Doing financial transactions in the branch and chatting to branch employees (such as tellers, customer service employees) is a nice occasion from time-to-time.

Image barrier (Chaouali and Souiden 2018)

IB1: I have a very negative image of a digital-only bank.

IB2: In my opinion, using a digital-only bank to do my financial transactions would be too complicated to be useful.

IB3: I have a feeling that the services of a digital-only bank are difficult to use.

Value barrier (Chaouali and Souiden 2018)

VB1: I am quite skeptical about the economic benefits of being a customer of a digital-only bank.

VB2: In my opinion, a digital-only bank does not offer any advantage in handling my personal finances compared to a traditional bank.

VB3: In my opinion, a digital-only bank will not improve my ability to control my financial matters by myself.

Usage barrier (Chaouali and Souiden 2018)

UB1: To my knowledge, conducting financial transactions using a digital-only bank are difficult.

UB2: I heard that using a digital-only bank to do financial transactions is not convenient.

UB3: I think that it is not fast to use a digital-only bank to complete financial transactions.

Risk barrier (Meuter et al. 2005)

RB1: I fear using a digital-only bank reduces the confidentiality of my personal transaction/banking information.

RB2: I am unsure whether a digital-only bank performs satisfactorily.

RB3: Overall, using a digital-only bank is risky.

RB4: I am not sure whether a digital-only bank performs as well as traditional bank.

Traditional-bank satisfaction (Lee and Chung 2009)

TSAT1: I am satisfied with the way that a traditional bank carries out transactions.

TSAT2: Based on my experience, the service of a traditional bank is satisfactory.

TSAT3: Overall, I am satisfied with using a traditional bank to manage my finances.

TSAT4: I strongly recommend to others to bank with a traditional bank.

Appendix 2: Visualization of the moderation effects

figure a
figure b
figure c
figure d

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nel, J., Boshoff, C. Unraveling the link between status quo satisfaction and the rejection of digital-only banks. J Financ Serv Mark 28, 189–207 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41264-022-00146-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41264-022-00146-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation