Scholarly article on topic 'An Empirical Investigation on Mobile Banking Service Adoption in Rural Karnataka'

An Empirical Investigation on Mobile Banking Service Adoption in Rural Karnataka Academic research paper on "Economics and business"

Share paper
Academic journal
OECD Field of science

Academic research paper on topic "An Empirical Investigation on Mobile Banking Service Adoption in Rural Karnataka"

An Empirical Investigation on Mobile Banking Service Adoption in Rural Karnataka


January-March 2016: 1-21 © The Author(s) 2016 DOI: 10.1177/2158244016633731

S. V. Krishna Kishore1 and Aloysius Henry Sequeira1


Government of India (GOI) initialized financial inclusion campaign to quell exclusion. The campaign did not gain expected progress. Government employed technologies to speed up the process. Among banking technologies, mobile banking appeared as a possible solution for financial exclusion with wide mobile phone coverage. Inputs on rural people's intention toward technologies for effective financial inclusion were essential. Technology adoption factors, performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, attitude, perceived risk, and behavioral intention (BI), were short listed after literature review. Factors were subjected to reliability, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), multiple regression, and interaction analysis. Rural provinces in Karnataka state were surveyed. We used mixed sampling technique to reach 959 samples. Multiple regression-interaction analysis revealed age and gender moderated attitude's path toward BI.


mobile banking, adoption, rural, Karnataka


Financial inclusion promotes economic growth. Rural people get payments and services at affordable costs. With technology intervention in financial inclusion, electronic banking activity in rural India leads to increased savings and better living standards (The Economist, 2004). Good living standard paves way to balanced regional development (Donner, 2008; Duncombe & Heeks, 2002; Hudson, 2006). Financial inclusion campaign routes organized financial system to low-income strata in a rural region enabling inclusive growth. Inclusive banking gained pace after 1969 bank nationalization further supplemented by micro finance in the 1990s.

Government of India (GOI) commenced financial inclusion campaign in 2006 and established 96,828 Customer Service Points (CSPs) by March 2012. Banking correspondents (BCs) visited remote locations to give bank services. Unable to pursue campaign on a large scale, GOI in 2008 constituted Rangarajan committee to assess facts in rural region. Rangarajan committee defined financial inclusion as "the process of ensuring access to financial services providing timely and adequate credit required by vulnerable groups such as weaker sections and low-income groups at an affordable cost" (Vijaya Bhaskar, 2013). Rangarajan committee's report was an eye opener for banks. Union Budget report of 2007 to 2008 suggested imminent need for financial inclusion. Banks spotted the opportunity in rural regions. Reserve Bank of India (RBI; 2007) estimated population with no

bank accounts at 41%. One third of Indian population with 51.4% farmer households were not aware of formal finance, and 73% of excluded rural households had no reach to credit (Rangarajan Committee, 2008).

Well-planned campaigns educate, train, and clear anxiety (Carter & Bélanger, 2005). Worldwide, governments have electronically reengineered their conventional public services to reach underprivileged segments (Schaupp & Bélanger, 2005). Developing countries need technologies for economic growth (Avgerou, 2008). So far, low trust level on government campaigns has hampered e-governance success (Belanger & Hiller, 2006; Carter & Bélanger, 2005; Gefen & Heart, 2006; Shim et al., 2002; Welch, Hinnant, & Moon, 2005). Low technology adoption rates and resistance are a matter of concern in developing countries where high utility and value-based technologies were resisted (Bélanger & Carter, 2008; B. Gupta, Dasgupta, & Gupta, 2008; Qian & Dongdong, 2011; Schuppan, 2009).

Planning commission of India, through carefully planned financial inclusion, vast coverage, and information gaps on ground realities, hampered progress. As rural people get farm yield, it is sold for cash. This time spectrum was best

1 National Institute of Technology Karnataka, Surathkal, Mangalore, India Corresponding Author:

S. V. Krishna Kishore, Research Scholar, National Institute of Technology Karnataka, Surathkal, Mangalore, Karnataka 575 025, India. Email:

Creative Commons CC-BY: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License ( which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages

,, . , , , , Downloaded from by guest on June 5, 2016


Table 1. Comparison of Mobile Phones and Bank Accounts.

Sl. No. Geographical limit and population Population with mobile phones Percentage of population having bank account

1. World (7 billion) 6 billion 2 billion

2. Bangladesh (150 million) 85.5 million 19.5 million

3. India (1.2 billion) Around 900 million 250 million

Source. Sunil (2013).

for banks to approach farmers. Dasgupta, Paul, and Fuloria (2011) found that saving habits results in better cash management skills among rural people.

Without banks, rural farmers do not save (Sunil, 2013). Indian banks covered metropolitan areas in the last 30 years, except rural areas (Manjule & Arunkumar, 2014). For a successful inclusive banking, acceptance of banking technology is imperative (Chugh, 2014).

Problem Identification

Banking sector used technology in 1960. Researches related technology to economic development. Banking industry experienced technological changes in information management and money transfer. Unnithan and Swatman (2001) studied technology-mediated banking service. Previous studies did not give groundbreaking facts. Information technology (IT) was widely associated with economic development strategies in 2003 (World Bank, 2003). According to Khan Commission Report (2004), India had the second highest financially excluded households in the world. Initially, RBI used micro finance institutions (MFIs), business facilitators (BFs), and BCs to reach remote rural regions. Inclusion campaign did not gain expected success. RBI aimed rules for mobile banking transactions in 2008. Daily transactions limit was raised to INR 50,000 (US$1,000; RBI, 2009). RBI aimed IT and banking services to 600 million new customers (Ketkar et al., 2012). Mobile banking guidelines emphasized safety, efficiency, and accessibility (RBI, 2014).

Donner (2008) found more mobile phones possessions than bank accounts in the world. According to Jiang (2009), rural areas represent real India. Even after urban migration trend, 69% of the population are still in rural areas.

Indian government reports show increase in rural branches from 8,000 in 1969 to 89,000 in 2011. These numbers made no difference in rural regions. Potnis and Deosthali (2012) pointed the need to find factors that explain electronic banking resistance.

Data comparison of the world with two growing nations, India and Bangladesh, confirms that mobile phones outnumber bank accounts (Table 1). Dahotre (2009) already observed India as a potential market for mobile banking service implementation. Business Monitor International (BMI) in 2011 estimated positive trend for e-banking services supported by Sachin (2012). Fully implemented mobile banking service offers mini statement, account history check, SMS alerts,

access to card statement, balance check as well as mobile recharges (Vinayagamoorthy, Sankar, & Sangeetha, 2012). Bihari (2012) found mobile banking as a valuable addition to traditional services. Mobile phones are available at just US$15 (~INR 900) in India. This favored mobile phones diffusion among rural people. However, widespread coverage and large mobile phone use in Delhi did not result in mobile banking adoption (S. Singh, 2014). Annesha (2014) observed a consistent increase of wireless subscribers from 2012 to 2014. Recent developments in the mobile banking domain are as follows:

• Philippines started Smart Money and G-Cash mobile money transfer services (Wishart, 2006).

• MTN offered mobile banking, and WIZZIT money transfer was also introduced in South Africa (Richardson, 2008).

• Mobile-based DrumNet application was launched in Kenya and e-diary in Sri Lanka. Farmers earned US$262 per month (Qiang, Kuek, Dymond, & Esselaar, 2011).

• With 43% of the population in the financially excluded group, telecom companies and banks in India tied up to offer mobile savings accounts.

• Vodafone and Safaricom started M-PESA in Kenya around 2005. Initially, there were 2.37 million subscribers. Number of subscribers in 2012 increased to 15 million. This figure comprised 70% of the Kenyan population. Presently, M-PESA accounts half of the world's mobile money transfers (CGAP, 2010; Maitrot & Foster, 2014; Maurer, 2012).

• According to Central Intelligence Agency World Factbook (2013), in the year 2010-2011, nonbank financial institutions (NBFIs) eyed more market share as BCs. RBI denied permission for NBFIs.

• RBI issued Aadhaar cards to 510 million people and enabled 182 million information and communication technology (ICT) bank accounts (RBI, 2014).

• Twelve Indian banks in 2010 offered mobile banking services. Another 61 banks added up by 2014 (RBI, 2014; TRAI, 2013).

Bina and Giaglis (2007) concluded mobile phones as the best alternatives for financial inclusion. This finding was already supported based on location free access, real-time information, and improved control on bank accounts (Krishna

& Walsham, 2005; Laukkanen & Lauronen, 2005; Rao & Prathima, 2003; Scornavacca & Hoehle, 2007; Varshney & Vetter, 2002). Archer, Hollingworth, and Halsall (2007) with Naqvi and Al-Shihi (2009) pointed post 2009 as apt for banks to look beyond traditional banking. C. Vyas (2009) observed India and Australia as potential markets for mobile banking implementation. Mobile banking enables service delivery from any place, any time (Jonathan, 2010). McKay and Pickens (2010) concluded branchless banking as 19% cheaper than traditional banking practices. Potnis and Deosthali (2012) observed first 1 billion mobile phones slowly moved in the market until 20 years worldwide. Next 2 billion phones circulated in 4 years and next 3 billion vanished within a year.

According to 2012 Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI; 2012) press release, as of April 7, 2012, wireless phone subscribers in India were 911.17 million. Out of 911.17 million, 594.11 million (65.20%) accounted for urban cities, and rural subscribers were 317.06 million (34.80%). Indiscriminate service delivery was the prime objective of public policy. Statistical details such as 17 million out of 143.2 million using mobile Internet in 2011 remain a concern where telecom and banking industry need to reach unbanked population (Archana, 2012; R. Gupta & Jain, 2014, 2015; Ketkar et al., 2012).

Research Gap 1

According to Basu (2005), Dev (2006), and Mohan (2006), rural institutional credit was extended ignoring facts on rural people's saving intention. Mobile phones helped drive growth in saturated markets (Donner & Excobari, 2010). Hudson (2006) recognized mobile phone's productive role in agricultural development. Jensen (2007) highlighted the digital divide as a major issue in developed and developing countries. Burrell and Anderson (2008) brought out advantages of mobile phones in constrained situations. Indian banks used business correspondents for inclusive banking with less success. Banking technology is essential for effective inclusion (Chung & Kwon, 2009; Duncombe & Boateng, 2009; C. S. Yu, 2012; T. Yu & Fang, 2009).

Research Gap 2

According to Ravichandran and Rai (2000), technology adoption requires active user participation. Developing nations face resistance in technology implementation (Kleijnen, Wetzels, & de Ruyter, 2004). Suoranta and Mattila (2004) expressed concern on low mobile banking adoption rates in the world. Riivari (2005) and Y.-S. Wang, Lin, and Luarn (2006) concluded technological advances and service availability do not trigger adoption. Mallat, Rossi, and Tunainen (2004) and Y.-S. Wang and Liao (2007) emphasized reason behind fewer mobile phone transactions to be studied. Mobile banking with convenience, ubiquity, and interactivity solves coverage problem (Bihari, 2011). In

India, mobile phones have penetration than computers. Vaishnavi (2011) and Dash (2014) observed India lags behind other countries in mobile payment adoption with a very large potential.

Research Gap 3

The mobile phone is simple compared with computers. Carroll (2005) pointed mobile phones diffusion in urban, suburban, and rural areas unexpectedly fast. Widespread mobile phones diffusion did not result in mobile banking adoption (Laforet & Li, 2005; Luarn & Lin, 2005; Scornavacca & Hoehle, 2007). H. Kim, Chan, and Gupta (2007) recommended more studies on mobile banking adoption. Indians have consistently resisted new technologies (Chaipoopirutana, Combs, Chatchawanwan, & Vij, 2009; Laukkanen & Pasanen, 2008; Maurer, 2008; Puschel, Mazzon, & Hernandez, 2010; Zarifopoulos & Economides, 2009). Knowledge on motivators and inhibitors of mobile banking technology is required (Ashta & Assadi, 2011; H. F. Lin, 2011; Thakur & Srivastava, 2014).

Research Gap 4

Wareham, Zheng, and Straub (2005) attracted information system (IS) researchers toward mobile commerce. Observing mobile commerce growth, more e-payment feasibility studies by Harle and Beresford (2005); H. Wang, Cao, and Zhang (2005); Gianluigi, Strangio, and Schuster (2006); and Huang and Boucouvalas (2006) surfaced. Kendall, Kendall, and Kah (2006) supporting Ravichandran and Rai (2000) highlighted necessity of people's participation in technology adoption campaigns. Laukkanen and Cruz (2009) and K. Lee and Chung (2009) observed mobile banking idea gaining awareness in the world. International Telecom Union (ITU) stated, out of 5 billion users worldwide, India had already 500 million telecom subscribers by December 2009. According to R. Singh (2009) and S. Singh, Srivastava, and Srivastava (2010), low-cost mobile phones sold well in Indian markets supported by Zainudeen and Ratnadiwakara (2011). Khalifa, Cheng, and Shen (2012) predicted the mobile industry would surpass US$119 billion mark from tiny US$18.3 billion industry. Every year in India, after 2008, more than 100 million mobile subscribers added to telecom density (Vishal, Pandey, & Sanjay, 2012).

Research Objectives

The article investigates mobile banking service adoption in rural Karnataka. Subobjectives assess the relationship of independent variables, performance expectancy (PE), effort expectancy (EE), social influence (SI), attitude, and perceived risk (PR), with dependent variable, behavioral intention (BI). The study also attempts to measure moderation of age and gender on PE, EE, SI, and attitude's path toward BI.

Prior Research and Theoretical Background

In literature review, various theoretical models in IT/IS domain were reviewed. Conceptual models had roots in psychology and sociology explaining technology acceptance (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). Technology adoption was a distinguished area in IS research (Benbasat & Barki, 2007; Venkatesh, Davis, & Morris, 2007).

Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) introduced "Theory of Reasoned Action" (TRA). TRA had three variables, namely, BI, attitude, and subjective norm. In 1980, Ajzen and Fishbein revised TRA as "Theory of Planned Behavior" (TPB) later known as "Decomposed Theory of Planned Behavior" (DTPB). DTPB used relative advantage, compatibility, and risk variables. These variables belonged to Diffusion of Innovation (DOI) theory, also known as Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT). Rogers (1995) introduced DOI with five attributes: relative advantage, complexity, trialability, compatibility, and observability. Out of five variables in DOI, relative advantage, complexity, and compatibility were consistently related to innovation adoption.

Davis in 1986 studied computer-usage behavior. Davis (1989) improved TRA framework to Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) with perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEOU) as basic factors. Venkatesh and Davis (2000) improved TAM to TAM2. TAM2 examined PU and usage intention from SI perspective.

TAM was influential and famous. Various empirical platforms tested TAM for measurement validity. Adoption studies based on TAM investigated simple technologies. TAM studies used teenagers and students in universities. Generalization of findings was questionable (Legris, Ingham, & Collerette, 2003).

Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, and Davis (2003) had already introduced Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). UTAUT explained the adoption of complex technologies like online bulletin boards and instant messengers, online stock trading (Yang, 2005), electronic marketplaces (Y.-S. Wang et al., 2006), and mobile commerce adoption in Finland (Carlsson, Waiden, & Bouwman, 2006; Park, Yang, & Lehto, 2007). Fruhling and Vreede (2006) and Lucas, Swanson, and Zmud (2007) reviewed IS adoption studies on TAM and stressed on the need to look beyond TAM. UTAUT is a powerful framework (Goodhue, 2007). There are limited studies on UTAUT investigating mobile banking adoption (Samudra & Phadtare, 2012).

Research Gap 5

UTAUT condenses 32 variables not only from TAM but also from Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) by Bandura (1977) and Compeau and Higgins (1995), Model of Personal Computer Usage (MPCU) by Triandis (1977) and Thompson, Higgins, and Howell (1991), and Motivational Model (MM) by Davis,

Bagozzi, and Warshaw (1992). UTAUT helped to study mind-sets of people at organizational and nonorganizational environments. Johns (2006) and Alvesson and Karreman

(2007) suggested borrowing and experimenting variables improve a theory. Moderating variable (MV) inclusion in UTAUT boosts its ability to measure interaction effects (Bagozzi, 2007). Three types of UTAUT extensions are as follows:

1. Studying new users (Yi, Jackson, Park, & Probst, 2006), new technologies (Chang, Hwang, Hung, & Li, 2007), and new cultural settings (B. Gupta et al., 2008);

2. The new addition of constructs to test endogenous variables (K. Y. Chan, Gong, Xu, & Thong, 2008; Sun, Bhattacherjee, & Ma, 2009);

3. Addition of exogenous variables (Neufeld, Dong, & Higgins, 2007; Yi et al., 2006).

Al-Gahtani, Hubona, and Wang (2007) and Armida

(2008) pointed out the requirement of systematic investigation of technology adoption as earlier studies did not research moderators. Initially, UTAUT catered to technology acceptance explanation in organizations. Later, the framework was also used to study consumer technologies as it was a multibillion dollar industry (Llamas & Stofega, 2010). Basic constructs of UTAUT, PE, EE, SI, and facilitating condition consistently measured BI. Innovations and perceived enjoyment constructs effectively measured actual usage (Thakur, 2013).

Hypothesis Development

Variables PE, EE, SI, and BI are from UTAUT. Study dropped facilitating condition variable as its items measured after sales service aspect. Study has added attitude and PR variables to theoretical framework from TAM as each experiment is a quest for more knowledge (Alvesson & Karreman, 2007).

PE. PE describes the extent of benefits technology offers in a job. Nysveen, Pedersen, and Thorbjornsen (2005a, p. 252) stated, "If a system doesn't assist its users performing jobs, it is not received." PE consistently relates to BI at voluntary (nonorganizational) and involuntary (organizational) settings (Al-Qeisi, 2009; Jack, Suri, and Townsend (2010); Venkatesh et al., 2003).

We can compare PE with relative advantage (McCloskey, 2006; Plouffe, Hulland, & Vandenbosch, 2001; Rogers, 2003), convenience, affordability (H. F. Lin, 2011), and PU in TAM (Venkatesh et al., 2003). Previous studies of Pikkarainen, Pikkarainen, Karjaluoto, and Pahnila (2004) and Cheong and Park (2005) uphold PU's role in technology adoption studies. Eriksson, Kerem, and Nilsson (2005); Luarn and Lin (2005), and Chiu, Hsu, Sun, Lin, and Sun

(2005) linked PU to BI supported by Guriting and Ndubisi

(2006). PU helped to study performance aspects in technology adoption. Venkatesh and Bala (2008), Chung and Kwon (2009), Daud and Yusoff (2011), T. Zhou (2011), and Padashetty and Krishna (2013) studied and validated PU performance.

PE was consistently related to BI in adoption studies of online context (Koufaris, 2002; J. C. C. Lin & Lu, 2000), productivity in the workplace (O'Cass & Grace, 2004; Yang, 2005), Wireless Application Protocol (WAP), phones (Nysveen, Pedersen, & Thorbjornsen, 2005b), and mobile commerce (Y.-S. Wang et al., 2006). Lai, Lai, and Jordan (2009); Luo, Li, Zhang, and Shim (2010); T. Zhou, Lu, and Wang (2010); Bumguardner, Strong, Murphrey, and Dooley (2014); and Marchewka and Kostiwa (2014) concluded PE influences BI. This leads us to hypothesize the following:

Hypothesis 1 (H1): PE about mobile banking service

technology has a positive impact on user's intention to

adopt it.

EE. EE was consistently related to BI in both organizational and nonorganizational settings. EE effectively measures technology adoption behavior in pretechnology implementation stages. Postimplementation studies cannot access details of product/service features (Venkatesh & Morris, 2000). EE is ease of learning a technology (Meuter, Ostrom, Roundtree, & Bitner, 2000; Venkatesh & Brown, 2001; Venkatesh et al., 2003). EE evolved from PEOU and complexity variable. Complex technologies face resistance (Y. E. Lee & Benbasat, 2004; Meuter, Bitner, Ostrom, & Brown, 2005; Venkatesh & Zhang, 2010).

Usability characteristics explain PEOU (Lederer, Maupin, Sena, & Zhaung, 2000). Plouffe et al. (2001) and Venkatesh et al. (2003) have linked EE to PEOU as they both measure complexity levels in technology usage. Better ease of use promotes usefulness (Au & Kauffman, 2008; Mallat, 2007; Ondrus & Pigneur, 2006; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000; Vrechopoulos, Constantiou, Sideris, Doukidis, & Mylonopoulos, 2003). Ease of use in mobile services is a crucial factor for adoption (C. Kim, Mirusmonov, & Lee, 2010; H. F. Lin, 2011).

According to Venkatesh (2000), inexperienced people in surveys respond based on beliefs. PEOU was strongly related to BI in TAM, TAM2, and combined technology acceptance model and technology planned behavior (C-TAM-TPB; Venkatesh et al., 2003; Y.-S. Wang, Wang, Lin, & Tang, 2003). There are various aspects of experience (Luarn & Lin, 2005; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000; Y.-S. Wang & Liao, 2007). Amin, Hamid, Lada, and Anis (2008) observed the PEOU's relationship with BI in mobile banking service adoption. PEOU was also used by AL Rawashdeh, Abu-Errub, Areiqat, and Dbbaghieh (2012) to study e-learning adoption, Internet pass delivery adoption (M. Y. Wu, Yu, & Weng, 2012), e-books adoption (Gao & Deng, 2012), and interaction board adoption (Wong & Dioko, 2013).

Foon and Fah (2011); Pappas, Giannakos, Pateli, and Chrissikopoulos (2011); Yahya, Nadzar, Masrek, and Rahman (2011); Govender and Sihlali (2012); Moghavvemi, Salleh, Zhao, and Mattila (2012); and Jeong and Yoon (2013) validated significant relationship of EE and BI. Hence, we hypothesized the following:

Hypothesis 2 (H2): EE about mobile banking service technology has a positive impact on user's intention to adopt it.

SI. SI is an individual's belief on other's expectation of him or her to use a system (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). SI construct consists of family, relatives, and friends items (Pedersen & Ling, 2002). SI has two facets. That is interpersonal and external influence in DOI theory. Interpersonal influence occurs from family, friends, neighbors, and relations, whereas media externally influences (Bhattacherjee, 2001; Teo & Pok, 2003). SI in UTAUT evolved from social factors, social image, and subjective norms. S. Singh et al. (2010), Puschel et al. (2010), and Riquelme and Rios (2010) noticed the strong family and friends influence in technology adoption. Social norm explains SI. SI is a perception an individual holds on people important to him or her expecting a particular behavior (Puschel et al., 2010).

Karahana and Limayem (2000) validated social norm by studying email acceptance (Hsu & Lu, 2004), online games (S. C. Chan & Lu, 2004), Internet banking (Riquelme & Rios, 2010; Schepers & Wetzels, 2007), and mobile banking adoption. Dahlberg, Mallat, Ondrus, and Zmijewska (2008) and Puschel et al. (2010) found a significant relationship of social norm with BI. van Biljon and Kotze (2008) found two facets of social pressure. They are neighbors and family as well as relations. Puschel and Mazzon (2010) studied product decision patterns for Internet service adoption using SI.

Rural people depend on opinion leaders for decision making. In these situations, SI provides vital inputs on varied belief structures and attitudes. Venkatesh and Davis (2000), Cheong and Park (2008), Akour (2009), Lai et al. (2009), Williams (2009), C. Kim et al. (2010), and Chen and Chang. (2011) validated SI effect on BI. Therefore, we hypothesized the following:

Hypothesis 3 (H3): SI about mobile banking service technology has a positive impact on user's intention to adopt it.

Attitude. Attitude variable was widely used in TAM (Fish-bein & Ajzen, 1975). The attitude variable provides insight on favorable and unfavorable beliefs about a specific behavior (Xu, 2006). Attitude explained adoption leading to intention development for decades (Schepers & Wetzels, 2007). Ajzen and Fishbein linked attitude to BI as early as 1980. Their work garnered good support.

TRA and TPB models assume that intention exactly predicts an individual's behavior better. Ajzen in 1985 argued

intention as a function of attitude and reiterated again in 2002. Attitude is an outcome of personal influence and SI (Nysveen et al., 2005b). Later, Nysveen et al. (2005b) concluded relationship between attitude and BI varies for technologies in service sectors. Tsang, Ho, and Liang (2004), Park et al. (2007), Gao and Deng (2012), and Asif and Krogstie (2012) validated attitude's relationship with intention. This led us to hypothesize the following:

Hypothesis 4 (H4): Attitude about mobile banking service technology has a positive impact on user's intention to adopt it.

PR. PR is an insecure feeling about technologies (Bebko, 2000; M. Kim & Lennon, 2000; Venkatesh & Brown, 2001). During 1960s, technology adoption studies used PR variable (Laroche, McDougall, Bergeron, & Yang, 2004). Doubts augment risk perception on technologies (Chen, 2008; Gewald, Wullenweber, & Weitzel, 2006; I. Lee, Choi, Kim, & Hong, 2007; Ndubisi & Sinti, 2006). Risk perception includes low trust, technological anxiety, and behavioral introspection variables.

Security is a concern for banks in the mobile banking introduction where data safety (Coursaris, Hassanein, & Head, 2003), security aspect (Luarn & Lin, 2005), and immediate action on lost PIN codes (Kuisma et al., 2007; Poon, 2008) need attention. Strategy plays an important role in managing consumer anxiety (G. Kim, Shin, & Lee, 2009; Koenig-Lewis, Palmer, & Moll, 2010). Banks need strong know your customer (KYC) norms (Dasgupta et al., 2011). Privacy issues fuel increased risk perception (Bansal, Zahedi, & Gefen, 2010; Dupas, Green, Keats, & Robinson, 2012; Eastlick, Lotz, & Warrington, 2006; Greenberg & Baron, 2008; Lim, 2003; Malhotra, Kim, & Agarwal, 2004; Tan & Teo, 2000). PR gained recognition from scholars in IS studies by providing insight on hidden intentions behind a conduct. Service intangibility makes consumer decision complex and sensitive (Bebko, 2000; J. Kim & Lennon, 2013; Laroche et al., 2004).

Pavlou (2003) described PR as user's expectation of loss in the course of achieving targeted result. Coursaris et al. (2003) observed 62,000 mobile phones lost by London taxi passengers. J. H. Wu and Wang (2005) found a significant relationship between PR and intention studying mobile commerce adoption at Taiwan. Furthermore, Gu, Lee, and Suh (2009); Luo et al. (2010); Safeena, Date, and Kammani (2011); Monitise (2012); and Sathya and Sabhyasachi (2015) found PR as a major barrier in mobile banking adoption. Therefore, we can hypothesize the following:

Hypothesis 5 (H5): PR about mobile banking service technology has a negative impact on user's intention to adopt it.

BI. BI is defined as the degree of user's willingness to use new technology. Ajzen and Fishbein in 1980 introduced BI as reliable predictor. Multiattribute models used BI. Ajzen

and Fishbein explored consumer belief, attitudes, and intentions. Most of the technology adoption frameworks used BI as the dependent variable. Predicting outcomes were better (DeLone & McLean, 2003; Venkatesh et al., 2003).

Featherman and Fuller (2003); Cunningham, Gerlach, and Harper (2004); and Lapointe and Rivard (2005) concluded BI development patterns vary, and they depend on features of technologies. BI played vital role in IS adoption studies (Y.-S. Wang & Liao, 2007; T. Zhou et al., 2010).

UTAUT had voluntariness of use and experience as MVs. They were only significant in organizational settings. Prior experiences of mobile banking were nil in rural areas, and therefore, study selected age and gender for moderation analysis. Age and gender are demographic variables. Baker, Al-Gahtani, and Hubona (2007); Sulaiman, Jaafar, and Mohezar (2007); Harma and Dubey (2009); and Alafeef, Singh, and Ahmad (2011) validated importance of age and gender role in IS research.

Gender (MV). Gender is one of the crucial variables in consumer behavior research (Forsythe & Chun, 2000). Lack of gender-based studies, especially in mobile banking adoption research, was clear (Thomas & Taskov, 2007; Venkatesh & Morris, 2000). Some isolated technology adoption studies are found on email (Venkatesh & Morris, 2000), information retrieval (Venkatesh & Morris, 2000), e-learning (Ong & Lai, 2006), communication technologies (Laforet & Li, 2005), and online purchasing behavior (Thomas & Taskov, 2007).

Morris and Venkatesh (2000) identified gender and age differences in technology adoption. Venkatesh and Morris (2000) and Venkatesh (2000) concluded EE as a stronger determinant for women than men supported by Venkatesh et al. (2003). Kirchmeyer (2002) observed gender can give psychological insight explaining mobile banking adoption behavior. Perea y Monsuwe, Dellaert, and de Ruyter (2004) found that men were interested than women in the online shopping trail. Females preferred more catalog and mall shopping. Consistent records of age and gender moderation were found in the literatures (Nysveen et al., 2005b; Venkatesh et al., 2003).

According to Venkatesh, Morris, and Ackerman (2000), PU affected attitudes at the workplace where external suggestions shaped female attitude. Lynott and McCandless (2000) observed that gender role depends on birthplace and culture. Gender and age were widely acclaimed by Venkatesh et al. (2003) as key determinants. Garbarino and Strahilevitz (2004) and Nysveen et al. (2005a, 2005b) stated gender as important demographic variable in technology adoption studies. Li and Kishore (2006) theorized that gender moderates the relationship in the path of PE, EE, and SI leading to BI. We can hypothesize the following:

Hypothesis 7a (H7a): The influence of PE on development of BI is moderated by gender.

Hypothesis 7b (H7b): The influence of EE on development of BI is moderated by gender. Hypothesis 7c (H7c): The influence of SI on development of BI is moderated by gender. Hypothesis 7d (H7d): The influence of attitude on development of BI is moderated by gender.

According to Fernando and Porter (2002), men adopt technologies faster than women. Slyke, Comunale, and Belanger (2002) found gender moderation in Internet banking adoption supported by Lichtenstein and Williamson (2006). Sulaiman et al. (2007) in a Malaysian study found 70% of men preferred mobile banking compared with 34.4% females as men read more technology magazines. Females used more online shopping than men. In the latest research on gender differences, L. Zhou, Dai, and Zhang (2007) identified gap reduction in gender behaviors. Porter (2008), further explaining Fernando and Porter's (2002) findings, concluded that, in the transportation sector, males adopted technologies faster as their occupation demanded it. Kwiatkowski, Zettlemoyer, Goldwater, and Steedman (2010) observed low-cost online service drives mobile banking adoption.

Age. Affiliation needs increase with age. Elderly people with low experience gave more importance for SI (Venkatesh & Morris, 2000). Older people resisted scanners (Oumlil & Williams, 2000). Age was preferred by psychology researchers and practitioners (Mattila, Karjaluoto, & Pento, 2003). While reviewing age literature, the quest was on whether young or old people prefer technology. Sulaiman et al. (2007) found that younger age group was interested in technologies. Laukkanen (2007a, 2007b) related education and income of people with adoption. According to Rettie (2008), age explained adoption than gender in Western geographies. Venkatesh and Goyal (2010) theorized gender and age moderating independent variables in UTAUT model. This lead us hypothesize the following:

Hypothesis 8a (H8a): The influence of PE on development of BI is moderated by age.

Hypothesis 8b (H8b): The influence of EE on development of BI is moderated by age.

Hypothesis 8c (H8c): The influence of SI on development of BI is moderated by age.

Hypothesis 8d (H8d): The influence of attitude on development of BI is moderated by age.

Moderation findings in UTAUT are reliable (Venkatesh et al., 2003). Varied demographic patterns and cultural influence make studying age complicated. Most researchers have found aging results in low intellectual ability. Harma and Dubey (2009) observed 20 to 30 age group corporate people had a low PR on mobile banking. Needs and preferences change with age. Age and gender are crucial in moderating paths of independent and dependent variables (Y. C. Lee, Li, Yen, & Huang, 2010).

Research Methodology

The study probes prevailing mobile banking service adoption problem by descriptive approach.

Data Collection

A questionnaire consisted of variables and their items. Questionnaire measured items on a 7-point scale. Technology adoption studies in nonorganizational setting measured variables on a 7-point scale. Survey method execution prompted administering of questionnaire.

Sampling Design

The mixed sampling technique helped to reach 959 samples. The technique combines probability and nonprobability sampling methods. Absence of sample frame led to use of non-probabilistic sampling method. Mixed sampling enhances internal and external validity of a study. It facilitates generalization with less bias in procedure.

Probabilistic sampling methods randomly pick samples. Probabilistic sampling requires a sample frame. Villagers' list of names (sample frame) was not clearly available. The Indian Census database as sample frame was a clear fit in sampling process (see Data_2001/Village_Directory/List_of_Villages/List_of_ Villages_Alphabetical.aspx?cki=&ComboState_Code=29). With systematic probability sampling, villages were randomly selected. Nonprobabilistic sampling permits inclusion or exclusion of population elements in a sample. Researcher used judgmental sampling to include rural respondents in the sample (see Figure 1).

Probabilistic sampling method randomly picked villages from a vast exhaustive list of villages in Karnataka using 2011 census. Calculation of Kth element is as follows:

* = N,

where N is the population size, and n is the sample size.

Rural population of Karnataka was 37,469,335 (N); 959 (n) was sample size. When substituted, the result was 39,071. So 39,071 was kth element. Every 39,071th village in the exhaustive list was a rural area for the survey. Judgmental sampling helped in identifying the respondent depending on his or her ability to understand and respond to queries. The survey collected a total of 972 samples, out of which 959 samples were eligible for editing, coding, and tabulating processes.

Data Analysis and Interpretation

Data analysis consisted of various steps. The procedure examined coded data before analysis. The steps involved in data analysis are as follows:

Figure 1. Mixed sampling technique. Source. Literature Review.

1. Data screening for treatment (missing data, unengaged responses, outliers)

2. Reliability analysis (for Cronbach's a values above .70)

3. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) for validity

4. Multiple regression analysis

5. Mean centering instead of median split

6. Interaction/moderation analysis (Aiken and West's approach, Jeremy Dawson's approach).

After treating data, constructs of theoretical framework were subjected to reliability analysis. Convincing values of Cronbach's alpha cleared the way for EFA. EFA was conducted to check sample adequacy by Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test and convergent validity of the constructs. Principal components analysis (PCA) extracted pure and true eigenvalues. While performing EFA, multicollinearity was also examined to decide on rotation pattern. As there was no correlation among constructs, variables were orthogonally rotated with varimax rotation. After confirming validity and successful extraction of constructs, multiple regression analysis revealed relationship strengths. In the interaction analysis, every data entry influences the output. Interaction approach followed mean centering for accurate results. Previous studies used median split. Median split, though widely followed, was not supported by IS adoption researchers (Irwin & McClelland, 2003). Splitting converts a continuous variable to categories (low, high) on the basis of median. Studies that preferred median split were much familiar using ANOVA not regression analysis. Median split results in loss of predicting power in a continuous variable (Aiken & West, 1991). Nearly one third of the data are lost (MacCallum et al., 2002) and lead to false conclusions (Austin, Barbir, Ferris, & Garg, 2004; McClelland, Lynch, Irwin, Spiller, & Fitzsimons, 2015). Centering was essential in interval scale measurement. Centering concentrates power in variables (Snijders & Bosker, 2012). Later interaction moderation analysis output provided interesting insights on relationships.

Preanalysis Data Screening

The details of factor and reliability analysis are as follows (see Table 2).

PCA method perfectly loads variables with small dimensions (Berk, 2008). All items under six factors loaded on their constructs. KMO test and Bartlett's test for sample adequacy were significant at 0.853, explaining 62.75% of variance from six factors. Gorsuch (1983) recommended minimum sample size of 100 for EFA. Comrey and Lee (1992) suggested 100 samples are poor for EFA, 200 to 300 are good, 500 are very good, and 1,000 samples are excellent supported by Pearson and Mundform (2010). Sample size 959 was convincing for EFA (see Table 3).

Reliability value of the model remained .798. Constructs exceeded the acceptable norm of .50 to .60. Reliability score of all constructs met Hari, Egbu, and Kumar's (2006) required alpha value of mobile banking adoption constructs (equal or more than .70).

In multiple regression analysis, we followed Aiken and West's approach for mean centering of variables. Tables 4 to 6 represent a multiple regression analysis.

R and R2 values were .583 and .340. ANOVA was statistically significant. Independent variables, PE, EE, SI, Attitude, and PR, were significantly related to dependent variable BI. H1, H2, H3, H4, and H5 were satisfied.

Centered variables were further subjected to interaction analysis. Gender was not centered as it was a perfect categorical variable. Attitude had interaction effect by age and gender. Tables 7 to 9 and diagrams of interaction analysis are as follows.

Gender moderated attitude's path to BI. R and R2 values were .466 and .217. ANOVA was significant. Interaction was significantly related (.028) with beta -.182. Figure 2 is an interaction output.

The interaction plot follows Jeremy Dawson's approach. Gender dampened positive relationship between BI and attitude (see Tables 10-12).

Table 2. Factor Loadings of Constructs.

Sl. No. Constructs/ variables Factor loadings in extraction method: Principal components analysis

Performance PEI 0.613

expectancy PE2 0.775

PE3 0.824

PE4 0.623

Effort EEI 0.579

expectancy EE2 0.754

EE3 0.695

EE4 0.629

Social SII 0.739

influence SI2 0.778

SI3 0.730

SI4 0.709

Attitude ATTI 0.826

ATT2 0.776

Perceived PRI 0.794

risk PR2 0.828

PR3 0.776

Behavioral BII 0.759

intention BI2 0.710

BI3 0.740

Source. Data Analysis.

Table 3. Reliability Value of Constructs.

Cronbach's Cronbach's a

Constructs/ a values by value of overall

Sl. No variables constructs model

1. Performance .780 .798 expectancy

2. Effort expectancy .698

3. Social influence .743

4. Attitude .750

5. Perceived risk .730

6. Behavioral .722


Source. Data Analysis.

Table 4. Results of Multiple Regression.

Model R R2 Adjusted R2 SE of the estimate

1 .583 .340 .337 3.04536

Source. Data Analysis.

Age moderated attitude's path to BI. R and R2 values were .466 and .217. ANOVA was significant. Interaction variable was significant (.032) with beta value .081 (see Figure 3).

Age strengthened the positive relationship of attitude and BI, but the gender weakened relationship. Age provided vital insight on mobile banking adoption behavior in rural Karnataka (see Figure 4).

Table 5. ANOVA of the model.

Sum of

Model square df Ml2 F Significant

Regression 4,553.607 5 910.721 98.199 .000

Residual 8,838.326 953 9.274

Total 13,391.933 958

Source. Data Analysis.

Table 6. Regression Values.

Unstandardized Standardized coefficients coefficients

Model B SE ß t Significant

(Constant) 5.649 0.098 57.447 .000

Performance 0.245 0.025 .304 9.609 .000


Effort 0.073 0.02I .I05 3.4I5 .00I


Social 0.056 0.0I7 .093 3.349 .00I


Attitude 0.372 0.04I .27I 9.072 .000

Perceived -0.049 0.02I -.062 -2.347 .0I9

Source. Data Analysis.

Among H6 and H7, only H6d and H7d were statistically significant. H6a, H6b, H6c, H7a, H7b, and H7c were not statistically significant. Results are found in the online appendix.


Technology, installed just as a part of the campaign, is aimless. Hands on training and demonstrations drive adoption (Keengwe et al., 2008). By the findings, it was clear that if mobile banking technology improves job performance compared with traditional banking methods, it gets adopted as PE was related to BI. If mobile banking service is easier to learn, rural people would adopt it as part of EE's relationship with BI. SI revealed a mild influence of family members and friends on people in adopting mobile banking service. The attitude was significantly related to the BI signaling presence of favorable environment for mobile banking service. PR had a negative relationship indicating risk perception of rural people. In interaction analysis, age strengthened attitude's relationship with BI. Higher the age of an individual, more positive would be the individual's attitude leading to BI development.

Implication on Academics

Generalization is tough for academicians in adoption and interaction curve predictions due to uneven demographic

Table 7. Interaction Analysis: Attitude (IV)-Gender (MV)-BI (DV).

Model R R2 Adjusted R2 SE of the estimate

.466 .217 .214 3.31386

Source. Data Analysis. Note. IV = independent variable; MV = moderating variable; BI = behavioral intention; DV = dependent variable.

Table 8. ANOVA of Att-Gende-BI Interaction.

Model Sum of squares df M2 F Significant

Regression 2,904.462 3 968.154 88.161 .000

Residual 10,487.470 955 10.982

Total 13,391.932 958

Source. Data Analysis.

Table 9. Interaction Relationship (ATT-Gender-BI).

Unstandardized coefficients Standardized coefficients

Model B SE Beta t Significant

Constant 5.383 0.344 15.649 .000

ATT (centered) 0.923 0.140 .672 6.595 .000

ATT x Gender -0.182 0.082 -.224 -2.207 .028

Gender 0.200 0.216 .027 0.924 .356

Source. Data Analysis.

Note. ATT = attitude; BI = behavioral intention.

Figure 2. Interaction effect of gender on attitude's path toward behavioral intention. Source. Data Analysis.

patterns (Rheingold, 2002). According to Alvesson and Kärreman (2007) and Johns (2006), geographical variables of various adoption stages (timelines) would give groundbreaking knowledge on technology adoptions supported by

Stofega and Ilamas (2009). Survey projects funded by government research agencies such as the NCAER (National Council of Applied Economic Research) and NSSO (National Sample Survey Organization) can spread awareness of

Table 10. Interaction Analysis: Attitude (IV)-Age (MV)-BI (DV).

Model R R2 Adjusted R2 SE of the estimate

.466 .217 .215 3.31293

Source. Data Analysis.

Note. IV = independent variable; MV = moderating variable; BI = behavioral intention; DV = dependent variable.

Table 11. ANOVA of Att-Age-BI Interaction.

Model Sum of squares df M2 F Significant

Regression 2,910.339 3 970.113 88.389 .000

Residual 10,481.593 955 10.975

Total 13,391.932 958

Source. Data Analysis.

Table 12. Interaction Relationship of Age.

Unstandardized coefficients Standardized coefficients

Model B SE Beta t Significant

Constant 5.632 0.107 52.505 .000

ATT (centered) 0.623 0.040 .454 15.776 .000

ATT x Age 0.081 0.038 .062 2.145 .032

Age 0.137 0.105 .037 1.301 .194

Source. Data Analysis. Note. ATT = attitude.

Figure 3. Interaction effect of age on attitude relationship with behavioral intention. Source. Data Analysis.

financial inclusion. These projects improve financial literacy among rural people. Rural people can learn the need of opening and sustaining bank accounts. Bank transactions enhance their cash management skills and increase national financial depth.

E-Commerce offers bank opportunity in mobile banking service. Mobile currency service providers can get a gist of rural population's mind-set by academic studies. The campaigns should communicate mobile banking advantages. Ease of use variable gives product/service implication

Performance Expectancy

Perceived Risk


Behavioral Intention Toward Mobile Banking Adoption

Figure 4. Relationship of independent and moderating factors leading to intention. Source. Data Analysis.

information to corporate sector (Venkatesh, Thong, Chan, Hu, & Brown, 2011). Mild SI relationship with BIs indicates probability of opinion leader's influence to help technology adoption. Corporates can target promotions of mobile banking services with opinion leaders. The issue of risk perception needs attention. Instilling confidence and trust eliminates gossips and grapevines. As more aged people are with favorable attitude, people aged >30 years can also be targeted based on mobile banking's valuable contribution to their occupation and lifestyle. Academics can supplement corporate with crucial inputs to target campaigns. Companies can design campaigns to diffuse mobile banking service technology among rural people (Munongo & Chitungo, 2013; Sathya & Sabhyasachi, 2015).


Mobile phones are the future of financial transaction. It should reach average person (Sharma & Kansal, 2012). Favorable attitude was found in rural people. These factorial relationships hold crucial information for technology diffusion.

Relevance of Findings

The findings were relevant with earlier studies conducted by IS adoption scholars. List of supporting studies in chronological order is as follows:

PE was related to BI, supported by J. C. C. Lin and Lu

(2000), Wolcott and Cagiltay (2001), Koufaris (2002), Pikkarainen et al. (2004), Cheong and Park (2005), Chiu et al. (2005), Eriksson et al. (2005), Luarn and Lin (2005), Nysveen et al. (2005b), Guriting and Ndubisi (2006), Y.-S. Wang et al. (2006), Y. K. Lee, Park, and Chung (2008), Chung and Kwon (2009), Lai et al. (2009), Luo et al. (2010), and T. Zhou et al. (2010).

EE was related to BI, supported by Venkatesh and Davis (1996, 2000), Meuter et al. (2000), Venkatesh and Brown

(2001), Venkatesh et al. (2003), Meuter et al. (2005), Y.-S. Wang and Liao (2007), Amin et al. (2008), Cohen (2008), Y. K. Lee et al. (2008), Chung and Kwon (2009), Venkatesh and Zhang (2010), Foon and Fah (2011), Pappas et al. (2011), Yahya et al. (2011), Moghavvemi et al. (2012), Govender and Sihlali (2012), and Jeong and Yoon (2013).

SI had mild influence on BI, supported by Venkatesh and Davis (2000), Lu, Yao, and Yu (2005), Schepers and Wetzels (2007), Cheong and Park (2008), Wills et al. (2008), Akour (2009), Lai et al. (2009), Williams (2009), C. Kim et al. (2010), Puschel and Mazzon (2010), Riquelme and Rios (2010), Quazi (2011), and Shen et al. (2011).

Attitude variable was related to BI, supported by Ajzen (1985), Pedersen, Methlie, and Thorbjornsen (2002), Tsang et al. (2004), Park et al. (2007), and Schepers and Wetzels (2007).

Table 13. Unsupported Findings.

Findings not supported

1. No significant relationship of SI with BI (in the study, SI had a Venkatesh and Morris (2000)

significant relationship) Chau and Hu (2001), Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, and Davis (2003)

2. Gender interaction with PE (not supported in the study) Wood and Li (2005), Ong and Lai (2006)

3. Gender interaction with EE (not supported in the study) Nysveen, Pedersen, and Thorbjornsen (2005b)

4. Gender interaction with SI (not supported in the study) Wood and Li (2005)

Source. Literature Review.

Note. SI = social influence; BI = behavioral intention; PE = performance expectancy; EE = effort expectancy.

PR was negatively related to BI in the study. PR was found to be a barrier, supported by Gu et al. (2009), Luo et al. (2010), Safeena et al. (2011), Monitise (2012), and Sathya and Sabhyasachi (2015).

Gender moderated attitude's path to BI. Gender's moderation was supported by Kirchmeyer (2002), Venkatesh et al. (2003), Garbarino and Strahilevitz (2004), and Nysveen et al. (2005a).

The age moderated attitude's path toward BI. Mattila et al. (2003); Laforet and Li (2005); Laukkanen et al. (2007); Flinders (2008); Cruz, Filgueiras Neto, Muñoz-Gallego, and Laukkanen (2010); and Venkatesh et al. (2010) supported age's moderation. Findings unsupported by earlier studies are given in Table 13.

IS Studies from 2008 to present timeline supported our findings. Compared with PE, EE, and attitude's strength, SI's relationship with BI was weak. However, responses indicated that surrounding people mildly influenced rural people's choice in mobile banking service adoption. PR was negatively related to BI. SI consistently did not influence BI in the Venkatesh and Morris (2000) and Chau and Hu (2001) studies. Venkatesh et al.'s (2003) study upholds varied demographic distributions as a reason. Kleijnen et al. (2004) and S. C. Chan and Lu (2004) used SI construct to study wireless finance adoption and Internet banking, where a significant relationship with BI was clear. Gender dampened strength between attitude and BI. Age strengthened the relationship. The study did not support the Ben Oumlil and Williams (2000). Laukkanen and Lauronen's (2005) findings were older age resulted in lesser chances of technology adoption. A study supported rare finding of Karjaluoto, Pakola, Pietilä, and Svento (2003), where middle-aged people (30-49 years) adopted technology faster than younger people. Furthermore, Laforet and Li (2005) in china, Flinders (2008) in Japan, and Cruz et al. (2010) in Brazil had similar conclusions. Study concludes rural elders have a favorable attitude leading to BI development adopting mobile banking service.

Future Scope of the Study

In Pune (Maharashtra), electricity payment, telephone bill payments, and funds transfers are already launched as pilot projects. Future studies can aim inclusion of more independent

variables and dependent variables with added moderators at an expanded territory. SI apart from the present practice of measuring in basic items can also be measured from social network sources (Goldstein & Cialdini, 2009; Sykes, Venkatesh, & Gosain, 2009). This can work well in an urban setting. According to Central Intelligence Agency (2011), India is a mixture of multilingual, multiethnic symphony. North and South India are demographically different. Identical financial inclusion campaigns all over the country may not yield success. As moderations of age and gender have occurred, especially in the path of attitude to BI, more studies can also focus on exploring attitude and its nearest components leading toward development of BI.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.


The author(s) received no financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article.


Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing

and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE. Ajzen, I. (1985). From intention to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action-control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11-39). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational

Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Alafeef, M., Singh, D., & Ahmad, K. (2011). Influence of demographic factors on the adoption level of mobile banking application in Jordan. Journal of Applied Science, 6, 373-377. Al-Gahtani, S. S., Hubona, G. S., & Wang, J. (2007). Information technology (IT) in Saudi Arabia: Culture and the acceptance and use of IT. Information & Management, 44, 681-691. Al-Qeisi, K. I. (2009). Analyzing the use of UTAUT model in explaining an online behavior: Internet banking adoption (Doctoral thesis). Brunel University Brunel Business School, Middlesex, UK.

AL Rawashdeh, B., Abu-Errub, A., Areiqat, A., & Dbbaghieh, M. (2012). Information technology role in reducing e-banking

services risk in Jordanian banking sector. Journal of Computer Science, 8, 374-381.

Alvesson, M., & Karreman, D. (2007). Constructing mystery: Empirical matters in theory development. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1265-1281.

Amin, H., Hamid, M., Lada, S., & Anis, Z. (2008). The adoption of mobile banking in Malaysia: The case of Bank Islam Malaysia Berhad (BIMB). International Journal of Business and Society, 9(2), 43-53.

Annesha, B. M. (2014). A study of the factors influencing the adoption of mobile banking services by bank customers, a quantitative research. International Journal of Management and Commerce Innovation, 2, 313-324.

Akour, H. (2009). Determinants of mobile learning acceptance: An empirical investigation in higher education (Doctoral dissertation). Oklahoma State University, Stillwater.

Archana, V. R. (2012). Financial inclusion for banks in India. International Indexed & Referred Research Journal, 1, 45-46.

Archer, L., Hollingworth, S., & Halsall, A. (2007). University's not for me—I'm a Nike person': Urban, working-class young people's negotiations of style', identity and educational engagement. Sociology, 41, 219-237.

Armida, E. (2008). Adoption process for VOIP: The influence of trust in the UTAUT model (Doctoral dissertation). Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.

Ashta, A., & Assadi, D. (2011). The use of Web 2.0 technologies in online lending and impact on different components of interest rates. In A. Ashta (Ed.), Advanced technologies for microfinance: Solutions and challenges (pp. 206-224). Hershey, PA: Business Science Reference.

Asif, M., & Krogstie, J. (2012). Research issues in personalization of mobile services. International Journal of Information Engineering and Electronic Business, 4(4), 1-8.

Au, Y. A., & Kauffman, R. J. (2008). The economics of mobile payments: Understanding stakeholder issues for an emerging financial technology application. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 7, 141-164.

Austin, D., Barbir, A., Ferris, C., & Garg, S. (Eds.). (2004). Web services architecture requirements, W3C Working Group Note, W3C. Retrieved from

Avgerou, C. (2008). Information systems in developing countries: A critical research review. Journal of Information Technology, 23, 133-146.

Bagozzi, R. P. (2007). The legacy of the Technology Acceptance Model and a proposal for a paradigm shift. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8, 244-254.

Baker, E. W., Al-Gahtani, S. S., & Hubona, G. S. (2007). The effects of gender and age on new technology implementation in a developing country: Testing the implementation in a developing country: Testing the theory of planned behavior (TPB). Information Technology & People, 20, 352-375.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-125.

Bansal, G. F., Zahedi, M., & Gefen, D. (2010). The impact of personal dispositions on information sensitivity, privacy concern and trust in disclosing health information online. Decision Support Systems, 49, 138-150.

Basu, A. K. (2005). Labor contracts and the effectiveness of rural public works programs. Williamsburg, VA: Department of Economics, The College of William & Mary.

Bebko, C. P. (2000). Service intangibility and its impact on customer expectation of service quality. Journal of Service Marketing, 14, 9-26.

Bélanger, F., & Carter, L. (2008). Trust and risk in e-government adoption. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 17, 165-176.

Belanger, F., & Hiller, J. S. (2006). A framework for e-government: Privacy implications. Business Process Management Journal, 12, 48-60.

Benbasat, I., & Barki, H. (2007). Quo Vadis TAM? [Where are you going TAM?] Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8, 212-218.

Ben Oumlil, A., & Williams, A. J. (2000). Consumer education programs for mature consumers. Journal of Services Marketing, 14, 232-243.

Berk, R. A. (2008). Statistical learning from a regression perspective. New York, NY: Springer.

Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-confirmation model. MIS Quarterly, 25, 351-370.

Bihari, S. C. (2011). Financial inclusion for the Indian scene. SCMS Journal of Indian Management, 3, 384.

Bihari, S. C. (2012). CRM is all about bringing people, processes & technology together—A case study of banking sector in India. Romanian Journal of Marketing, 1, 50-56.

Bina, M., & Giaglis, G. M. (2007). Perceived value and usage patterns of mobile data services: A cross-cultural study. Electronic Markets, 17, 241-252.

Bumguardner, K. M., Strong, R., Murphrey, T. P., & Dooley, L. M. (2014). Examining the blogging habits of agricultural leadership students: Understanding motivation, use, and self-efficacy. Journal of Agricultural Education, 55(3), 32-42.

Burrell, J., & Anderson, K. (2008). "I have great desires to look beyond my world": Trajectories of information and communication technology use among Ghanaians living abroad. New Media & Society, 10, 203-224.

Carlsson, C., Waiden, P., & Bouwman, H. (2006). Adoption of 3G+ services in Finland. International Journal Mobile Communications, 4, 369-385.

Carroll, J. (2005). Risky business: Will citizens accept M-government in the long term? In I. Kushchu, C. Broucki, & G. Fitzpatrick (Eds.), Euro mGov (pp. 77-87). mGci.

Carter, L., & Bélanger, F. (2005). The utilization of e-government services: Citizen trust, innovation and acceptance factors. Information Systems Journal, 15, 5-25.

Central Intelligence Agency. (2011). The Centre of Intelligence— Publication. Retrieved from

Central Intelligence Agency World Factbook. (2013). Retrieved from

Chaipoopirutana, S., Combs, H., Chatchawanwan, Y., & Vij, V. (2009). Diffusion of innovation in Asia: A study of Internet banking in Thailand and India. Innovative Marketing, 5, 27-31.

Chan, K. Y., Gong, M., Xu, Y., & Thong, J. Y. L. (2008, July 3-7). Examining user acceptance of SMS: An empirical study in China and Hong Kong. Proceedings of the 12th Pacific Asia Conference on Information System, Suzhou, China.

Chan, S. C., & Lu, M. T. (2004). Understanding internet banking adoption and use behavior: A Hong Kong perspective. Journal of Global Information Management, 12, 21-43.

Chang, I. C., Hwang, H. G., Hung, W. F., & Li, Y. C. (2007). Physicians' acceptance of pharmacokinetics-based clinical decision support systems. Expert Systems With Applications, 33, 296-303.

Chau, P. Y. K., & Hu, P. J. H. (2001). Information technology acceptance by individual professionals: A model comparison approach. Decision Sciences, 32, 699-719.

Chen, L. D. (2008). A model of consumer acceptance of mobile payment. International Journal of Mobile Communications, 6, 32-52.

Chen, K. Y., & Chang, M. L. (2011). User acceptance of NFC mobile phone service: an investigation based on the UTAUT model. The Service Industries Journal, 1-15.

Cheong, J. H., & Park, M. C. (2005). Mobile Internet acceptance in Korea. Journal of Internet Research, 15, 125-140.

Cheong, J. H., & Park, M. C. (2008, September). Mobile payment adoption in Korea: Switching from credit card. Proceedings of the 15th International Telecommunication Society Europe Regional Conference, Berlin, Germany.

Chiu, C. M., Hsu, M. H., Sun, S. Y., Lin, T. C., & Sun, P. C. (2005). Usability, quality, value and e-learning continuance decisions. Computers & Education, 45, 399-416.

Chugh, V. (2014). Reserve Bank of India. Retrieved from http://

Chung, N., & Kwon, S. J. (2009). The effects customers' mobile experience and technical support on the intention to use mobile banking. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12, 539-543.

Cohen, G. S. (2008). Mobile banking: Lessons from the field. Bank Technology News, 21. Retrieved from http://connection.ebscohost. com/c/interviews/33313283/mobile-banking-lessons-from-field

Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19, 189-211.

Comrey, A., & Lee, H. (1992). A first course in factor analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Coursaris, C. K., Hassanein, K., & Head, M. (2003). M-commerce in Canada: An interaction framework for wireless privacy. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 20, 54-73.

Cruz, P., Filgueiras Neto, L. B., Muñoz-Gallego, P., & Laukkanen, T. (2010). Mobile banking rollout in emerging markets: Evidence from Brazil. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 28, 342-371.

Cunningham, L. F., Gerlach, J., & Harper, M. D. (2004). Perceived risk and e-banking services: An analysis from the perspective of the consumer. Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 10, 165-178.

Dahlberg, T., Mallat, N., Ondrus, J., & Zmijewska, A. (2008). Past, present and future of mobile payments research: A literature review. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 7, 165-181.

Dahotre, S. G. (2009). Mobile banking adoption in India.

Dasgupta, S., Paul, R., & Fuloria, S. (2011). Factors affecting behavioral intentions towards mobile banking usage: Empirical evidence from India. Romanian Journal of Marketing, 6(1), 6.

Dash, M. (2014). Determinants of customers' adoption of mobile banking: An empirical study by integrating diffusion of innovation with attitude. Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, 19(3), 25-29.

Daud, S., & Yusoff, W. F. W. (2011). How intellectual capital mediates the relationship between knowledge management

processes and organizational performance? African Journal of Business Management, 5, 2607-2617.

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319-340.

Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 1111-1132.

DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4), 9-30.

Dev, M. S. (2006). Financial inclusion: Issues and challenges. Economic & Political Weekly, 41, 4310-4313.

Donner, J. (2008). Research approaches to mobile use in the developing world: A review of the literature. The Information Society, 24, 140-159.

Donner, J., & Excobari, M. X. (2010). A review of evidence on mobile use by micro and small enterprises in developing countries. Journal of International Development, 22, 641-658.

Duncombe, R., & Boateng, R. (2009). Mobile phones and financial services in developing countries: A review of concepts, methods, issues, evidence and future research directions. Third World Quarterly, 30, 1237-1258.

Duncombe, R., & Heeks, R. (2002). Enterprise across the digital divide: Information systems and rural micro-enterprise in Botswana. Journal of International Development, 14, 61-74.

Dupas, P., Green, S., Keats, A., & Robinson, J. (2012). Supply and demand challenges in banking the rural poor: Evidence from Kenya (NBER Africa Project Conference Volume). Retrieved from

Eastlick, M. A., Lotz, S. L., & Warrington, P. (2006). Understanding online B-to-C relationships: An integrated model of privacy concerns, trust, and commitment. Journal of Business Research, 59, 877-886.

The Economist. (2004). Economic development. The Economist, p. 59.

Eriksson, K., Kerem, K., & Nilsson, D. (2005). Customer acceptance of internet banking in Estonia. International Journal BankMarketing, 23, 200-216.

Featherman, M., & Fuller, M. (2003, January). Applying TAM to e-services adoption: The moderating role of perceived risk. Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on IEEE.

Fernando, P., & Porter, G. (2002). Balancing the load: Women, gender and transport. London, England: Zed Books.

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Flinders, K. (2008). E-bank Japan sets mobile banking example. Computer Weekly. Retrieved from

Foon, Y. S., & Fah, B. C. Y. (2011). Internet banking adoption in Kuala Lumpur: An application ofUTAUT model. International Journal of Business and Management, 6, 161-167.

Forsythe, S., & Chun, L. (2000). Exploring gender differences in online behavior. International Textile and Apparel Association (ITAA) Annual Conference Proceedings.

Fruhling, A., & Vreede, G. J. D. (2006). Field experiences with eXtreme programming: Developing an emergency response

system. Journal of Management Information Systems, 22(4), 39-68.

Gao, T., & Deng, Y. (2012). A study on users' acceptance behavior to mobile e-books application based on UTAUT model. Paper presented at the Software Engineering and Service Science (ICSESS), IEEE 3rd International Conference.

Garbarino, E., & Strahilevitz, M. (2004). Gender differences in the perceived risk of buying online and the effects of receiving a site recommendation. Journal of Business Research, 57, 768-775.

Gefen, D., & Heart, T. (2006). On the need to include national culture as a central issue in e-commerce trust beliefs. Journal of Global Information Management, 14(4), 1-30.

Gewald, H., Wüllenweber, K., & Weitzel, T. (2006). The influence of perceived risks on banking managers' intention to outsource business processes—A study of the German banking and finance industry. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 7, 78-96.

Gianluigi, M., Strangio, M. A., & Schuster, A. (2006). Mobile local macropayments: Security and prototyping. Pervasive Computing, IEEE, 5(4), 94-100.

Goldstein, N. J., & Cialdini, R. B. (2009). Normative influences on consumption and conservation behaviors. In M. Wanke (Ed.), Social psychology of consumer behavior (pp. 273-296). New York, NY: Social Psychology.

Goodhue, D. L. (2007). Comment on Benbasat and Barki's "Quo Vadis TAM" article. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, S(4), Article 15.

Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Govender, I., & Sihlali, W. (2012). A study of mobile banking adoption among university students using an extended TAM. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5, 453-457.

Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations. Retrieved from

Gu, J. C., Lee, S. C., & Suh, Y. H. (2009). Determinants of behavioral intention to mobile banking. Expert Systems With Applications, 36, 11605-11616.

Gupta, B., Dasgupta, S., & Gupta, A. (2008). Adoption of ICT in a government organization in a developing country: An empirical study. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 17, 140-154.

Gupta, R., & Jain, K. (2014). Adoption of mobile telephony in rural India: An empirical study. Decision Sciences, 45, 281-307.

Gupta, R., & Jain, K. (2015). Adoption behavior of rural India for mobile telephony: A multigroup study. Telecommunication Policy, 39, 691-704.

Guriting, P., & Ndubisi, N. O. (2006). Borneo online banking: Evaluating customer perceptions and behavioral intention. Management Research News, 29(1/2), 6-15.

Hari, S., Egbu, C., & Kumar, B. (2006). A knowledge capture awareness tool: An empirical study on small and medium enterprises in the construction industry. Engineering Construction and Architectural Management, 12, 533-567.

Harle, R., & Beresford, A. (2005). Keeping big brother off the road (road congestion charging scheme). IEEReview, 51, 34-37.

Harma, M. K., & Dubey, R. (2009, April 17-20). Prospects of technological advancements in banking sector using mobile banking and position of India. Proceedings of the International

Association of Computer Science and Information Technology, Spring Conference, Singapore.

Hsu, C. L., & Lu, H. P. (2004). Why do people play on-line games? An extended TAM with social influences and flow experience. Information & Management, 41, 853-868.

Huang, P., & Boucouvalas, A. C. (2006). Future personal e-payment. IEEE Wireless Communications, 13(1), 60-66.

Hudson, H. (2006). From rural village to global village: Telecommunications for development in the information age. Danbury, CT: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Irwin, J. R., & McClelland, G. H. (2003). Negative consequences of dichotomizing continuous predictor variables. Journal of Market Research, 40, 366-371.

Jack, W., Suri, T., & Townsend, R. M. (2010). Monetary theory and electronic money: Reflections on the kenyan experience. FRB Richmond Economic Quarterly, 96, 83-122.

Jensen, R. (2007). The digital provide: Information (technology), market performance, and welfare in the South Indian fisheries sector. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122, 879-924.

Jeong, B. K., & Yoon, T. E. (2013). An empirical investigation on consumer acceptance of mobile banking services. Business and Management Research, 2(1), 31.

Jiang, P. (2009). Consumer adoption of mobile internet services: An exploratory study. Journal of Promotion Management, 15, 418-454.

Johns, G. (2006). The essential impact of context on organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 31, 386-408.

Karahana, E., & Limayem, M. (2000). E-mail and v-mail usage: Generalizing across technologies. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 10, 49-66.

Karjaluoto, H., Pakola, J., Pietilä, M., & Svento, R. (2003). An exploratory study on antecedents and consequences of mobile phone usage in Finland. Proceedings of the AMA Conference, 14, 170-178.

Keengwe, J., Onchwari, G., & Wachira, P. (2008). Computer technology integration and student learning: Barriers and promise. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 560-565.

Kendall, K. E., Kendall, J. E., & Kah, M. M. O. (2006). Formulating information and communication technology (ICT) policy through discourse: How internet discussions shape policies on ICTs for developing countries. Information Technology for Development, 12, 25-43.

Ketkar, S., Kock, N., Parente, R., & Verville, J. (2012). The impact of individualism on buyer-supplier relationship norms, trust and market performance: An analysis of data from Brazil and the U.S.A. International Business Review, 21, 782-793.

Khalifa, M., Cheng, S., & Shen, K. N. (2012). Adoption of mobile commerce: A confidence model. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 53, 14-22.

Khan Commission Report 2004, Government of India.

Kim, C., Mirusmonov, M., & Lee, I. (2010). An empirical examination of factors influencing the intention to use mobile payment. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 310-322.

Kim, G., Shin, B., & Lee, H. G. (2009). Understanding dynamics between initial trust and usage intentions of mobile banking. Information Systems Journal, 19, 283-311. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2575.2007.00269.x

Kim, H., Chan, H., & Gupta, S. (2007). Value-based adoption of mobile internet: An empirical investigation. Decision Support Systems, 43, 111-126.

Kim, J., & Lennon, S. J. (2013). Effects of reputation and website quality on online consumers' emotion, perceived risk and purchase intention: Based on the stimulus-organism-response model. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 7, 33-56.

Kim, M., & Lennon, S. J. (2000). Television shopping for apparel in the United States: Effects of perceived amount of information on perceived risks and purchase intentions. Family & Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 28, 301-330.

Kirchmeyer, C. (2002). Change and stability in manager's gender roles. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 929-939.

Kleijnen, M., Wetzels, M., & de Ruyter, K. (2004). Consumer acceptance of wireless finance. Journal of Financial Service Marketing, 8, 206-217.

Koenig-Lewis, N., Palmer, A., & Moll, A. (2010). Predicting young consumers' take up of mobile banking services. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 28, 410-432.

Koufaris, M. (2002). Applying the Technology Acceptance Model and flow theory to online consumer behavior. Information Systems Research, 13, 205-223.

Krishna, S., & Walsham, G. (2005). Implementing public information systems in developing countries: Learning from a success story. Information Technology for Development, 11, 123-140.

Kuisma, T., Laukkanen, T., & Hiltunen, M. (2007). Mapping the reasons for resistance to Internet banking: A means-end approach. International Journal of Information Management, 27, 75-85.

Kwiatkowski, T., Zettlemoyer, L., Goldwater, S., & Steedman, M. (2010). Inducing probabilistic CCG grammars from logical form with higher-order unification. Proceedings of EMNLP-10, Cambridge, MA.

Laforet, S., & Li, X. (2005). Consumers' attitudes towards online and mobile banking in China. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 23, 362-380.

Lai, D. C. F., Lai, I. K. W., & Jordan, E. (2009). An extended UTAUT model for the study of negative user adoption behaviors of mobile commerce. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Electronic Business.

Lapointe, L., & Rivard, S. (2005). A multilevel model of resistance to information technology implementation. MIS Quarterly, 29, 461-491.

Laroche, M., McDougall, G. H. G., Bergeron, J., & Yang, Z. (2004). Exploring how intangibility affects perceived risk. Journal of Service Research, 6, 373-389.

Laukkanen, T. (2007a, January 3-6). Bank customers' channel preferences for requesting account balances. Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Waikoloa, HI.

Laukkanen, T. (2007b). Customer preferred channel attributes in multi-channel electronic banking. International Journal Retail Distribution, Management, 35, 393-412.

Laukkanen, T., & Cruz, P. (2009). Comparing consumer resistance to mobile banking in Finland and Portugal. In J. Filipe & M. S. Obaidat (Eds.), Communications in computer and information science (pp. 89-98). New York, NY: Springer.

Laukkanen, T., & Lauronen, J. (2005). Consumer value creation in mobile banking services. International Journal of Mobile Communications, 3, 325-338.

Laukkanen, T., & Pasanen, M. (2008). Mobile banking innovators and early adopters: How they differ from other online users? Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 13(2), 86-94.

Laukkanen, S., Sarpola, S., & Hallikainen, P. (2007). Enterprise size matters: objectives and constraints of ERP adoption. Journal of enterprise information management, 20(3), 319-334.

Lederer, A. L., Maupin, D. J., Sena, M. P., & Zhaung, Y. (2000). The Technology Acceptance Model and the World Wide Web. Decision Support Systems, 29, 269-282.

Lee, I., Choi, B., Kim, J., & Hong, S. J. (2007). Culture-technology fit: Effects of cultural characteristics on the post-adoption beliefs of mobile Internet users. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 11(4), 11-51.

Lee, K., & Chung, N. (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, 385-392.

Lee, Y. C., Li, M. L., Yen, T. M., & Huang, T. H. (2010). Analysis of adopting an integrated decision making trial and evaluation laboratory on a Technology Acceptance Model. Expert Systems With Applications, 37, 1745-1754.

Lee, Y. E., & Benbasat, I. (2004). A framework for the study of customer interface design for mobile commerce. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 8(3), 79-102.

Lee, Y. K., Park, J. H., & Chung, N. (2008). An exploratory study of factors affecting usage intention toward mobile banking: A unified perspective using structural equation modeling. Society for Marketing Advances Proceedings. Retrieved from .8409&rep=rep1&type=pdf#page=371

Legris, P., Ingham, J., & Collerette, P. (2003). Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the Technology Acceptance Model. Information & Management, 40, 191-204.

Li, J. P., & Kishore, R. (2006). How robust is the UTAUT instrument? A multigroup invariance analysis in the context of acceptance and use of online community weblog systems. In Proceedings of the 2006 ACM SIGMIS CPR conference on computer personnel research: Forty-four years of computer personnel research: Achievements, challenges & the future (pp. 183-189). New York, NY: ACM

Lichtenstein, S., & Williamson, K. (2006). Understanding consumer adoption of Internet banking: An interpretive study in the Australian banking context. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 7(2), 50-66.

Lim, N. (2003). Consumers' perceived risk: Sources versus consequences. Electronic Consumer Research and Applications, 2, 216-228.

Lin, H. F. (2011). An empirical investigation of mobile banking adoption: The effect of innovation attributes and knowledge-based trust. International Journal of Information Management, 31, 252-260.

Lin, J. C. C., & Lu, H. (2000). Towards an understanding of the behavioral intention to use a web site. International Journal of Information Management, 20, 197-208.

Llamas, R. T., & Stofega, W. (2010). Worldwide smartphone 20102014 forecast update: December 2010. Framingham, MA: International Data Corporation.

Lu, J., Yao, J. E., & Yu, C.-S. (2005). Personal innovativeness, social influences and adoption of wireless Internet services via mobile technology. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 14, 245-268.

Luarn, P., & Lin, H. (2005). Toward an understanding of the behavioral intention to use mobile banking. Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 873-891.

Lucas, H. C., Jr., Swanson, E. B., & Zmud, R. W. (2007). Implementation, innovation, and related themes over the years in information systems research. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8, 206-210.

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

Lynott, P., & McCandless, N. (2000). The impact of age vs. life experience on the gender role attitudes of women in different cohorts. Journal of Women & Aging, 12(2), 5-21.

Maitrot, M. R. L., & Foster, C. (2014). Social protection and modern technologies, the case study of M-PESA. Retrieved from

Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., & Agarwal, J. (2004). Internet users' information privacy concerns (IUIPC): The construct, the scale, and a causal model. Information Systems Research, 15, 336-355.

Mallat, N. (2007). Exploring consumer adoption of mobile payments—A qualitative study. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 16, 413-432.

Mallat, N., Rossi, M., & Tunainen, V. K. (2004). New architectures for financial services. Communication of ACM, 47(5), 42-46.

Manjule, R., & Arunkumar, S. (2014). Awareness of adoption modern banking technologies. International Journal of Advance Foundation and Research in Computer, 1(8), 100-105.

Marchewka, J. T., & Kostiwa, K. (2014). An application of the UTAUT model for understanding student perceptions using course management software. Communications of the IIMA, 7(2), 10.

Mattila, M., Karjaluoto, H., & Pento, T. (2003). Internet banking adoption among mature customers: Early majority or laggards? Journal of Services Marketing, 17, 514-528.

Maurer, B. (2008). Retail electronic payments systems for value transfers in the developing world. Retrieved from Department of Anthropology, University of California, Irvine website:

Maurer, B. (2012). Mobile money: Communication, consumption and change in the payments space. Journal of Development Studies, 48, 589-604.

McClelland, G. H., Lynch, J. G., Jr., Irwin, J. R., Spiller, S. A., & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2015). Median splits, Type II errors, and false positive consumer psychology: Don't fight the power. Retrieved from

McCloskey, W. D. (2006). The importance of ease of use, usefulness, and trust to online consumers: An examination of the Technology Acceptance Model with older consumers. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 18(3), 47-65.

McKay, C., & Pickens, M. (2010). Branchless banking 2010: Who's served? At what price? What's next? (CGAP Focus Note 66). Washington, DC: World Bank Group.

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

Meuter, M., Ostrom, A., Roundtree, R., & Bitner, M. (2000). Selfservice technologies: Understanding customer satisfaction with technology-based service encounters. Journal of Marketing, 64(3), 50-64.

Mitchener, J. (2010, January 19). The next 25 years of the mobile phone. Retrieved from

Moghavvemi, S., Salleh, N. A. M., Zhao, W., & Mattila, M. (2012). The entrepreneur's perception on information technology innovation adoption: An empirical analysis of the role of precipitating events on usage behavior. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, 14, 231-246.

Mohan, R. (2006). Economic growth, financial deepening and financial inclusion. Annual Banker's Conference 2006, Hyderabad, India. Retrieved from

Monitise. (2012). Emerging trends in mobile banking and payment services. Retrieved from file/2012%20Conferences/ES/Pierre%20Cardenas%20-%20 Mobile%20Baning%20and%20Payment%20Services.pdf

Munongo, S., & Chitungo, S. K. (2013). Extending the technology adoption model to mobile banking adoption in rural Zimbabwe. Journal of Business Administration and Education, 3, 51-79.

Naqvi, S. J., & Al-Shihi, H. (2009). M-government services initiatives in Oman. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 6, 817-824.

Ndubisi, N., & Sinti, Q. (2006). Consumer attitudes, system's characteristics and internet banking adoption in Malaysia. Management Research News, 29(1/2), 16-27.

Neufeld, D. J., Dong, L., & Higgins, C. (2007). Charismatic leadership and user acceptance of information technology. European Journal of Information Systems, 16, 494-510.

Nysveen, H., Pedersen, P. E., & Thorbj0rnsen, H. (2005a). Explaining intention to use mobile chat services: Moderating effects of gender. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22, 247-256.

Nysveen, H., Pedersen, P. E., & Thorbj0rnsen, H. (2005b). Intentions to use mobile services: Antecedents and cross-service comparisons. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 33, 330-346.

O'Cass, A., & Grace, D. (2004). Exploring consumer experiences with a service brand. Journal of Product & Brand Management,

13, 257-268.

Ondrus, J., & Pigneur, Y. (2006). Towards a holistic analysis of mobile payments: A multiple perspectives approach. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 5, 246-257.

Ong, C. H., & Lai, J. Y. (2006). Gender differences in perceptions and relationships among dominants of e-learning acceptance. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 816-829.

Oumlil, A. B., & Williams, A. J. (2000). Consumer education programs for mature consumers. Journal of Services Marketing,

14, 232-243.

Padashetty, S., & Krishna, S. V. (2013). An empirical study on consumer adoption of mobile payments in Bangalore city: A case study. International Journal of Arts, Science & Commerce, 4, 54-57.

Pappas, I., Giannakos, M. N., Pateli, A., & Chrissikopoulos, V. (2011). Online purchase intention: Investigating the effect of the level of customer perceptions on adoption. Retrieved from

Park, J., Yang, S., & Lehto, X. (2007). Adoption of mobile technologies for Chinese consumers. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 8, 356-367.

Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the Technology Acceptance

Model. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 7(3), 69-103.

Pearson, R. H., & Mundform, D. J. (2010). Recommended sample size for conducting exploratory factor analysis on dichoto-mous data. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 9, 359-368.

Pedersen, P., & Ling, R. (2002, January 6-9). Modifying adoption research for mobile internet service adoption: Cross-disciplinary interactions. Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Big Island, HI.

Pedersen, P., Methlie, L., & Thorbjornsen, H. (2002, January). Understanding mobile commerce end-user adoption: A triangulation perspective and suggestions for an exploratory service evaluation framework. Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE.

Perea y Monsuwé, T., Dellaert, B. G., & de Ruyter, K. (2004). What drives consumers to shop online? A literature review. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 15, 102-121.

Pikkarainen, T., Pikkarainen, K., Karjaluoto, H., & Pahnila, S. (2004). Consumer acceptance of online banking: An extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. Internet Research, 14, 224-235.

Plouffe, C. R., Hulland, J. S., & Vandenbosch, M. (2001). Richness versus parsimony in modeling technology adoption decisions— Understanding merchant adoption of a smart card-based payment systems. Information Systems Research, 12, 208-222.

Poon, W. C. (2008). Users' adoption of e-banking services: The Malaysian perspective. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 23, 59-69.

Porter, M. E. (2008). Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

Potnis, D., & Deosthali, K. (2012, October). Laggards or victims of socioeconomic conditions? Findings from ongoing survey of female slum-dwellers without cell phone ownership. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (pp. 202-205). New York, NY: ACM.

Puschel, J., Mazzon, J. A., & Hernandez, J. M. C. (2010). Mobile banking: Proposition of an integrated adoption intention framework. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 28, 389-409.

Qian, L., & Dongdong, C. (2011, May). Notice of retraction study on the problems and countermeasures of e-government construction. E-Business and E-Government (ICEE), 2011 International Conference on IEEE.

Qiang, C. Z., Kuek, S. C., Dymond, A., & Esselaar, S. (2011). Mobile applications for agriculture and rural development. Washington, DC: ICT Sector Unit, World Bank.

Rangarajan Committee. (2008). Report of the committee on financial inclusion. New Delhi: Government of India.

Rao, G. R., & Prathima, K. (2003, April 11). Online banking in India. Mondaq Business Briefing.

Ravichandran, T., & Rai, A. (2000). Quality management in systems development: An organizational system perspective. MIS Quarterly, 24, 381-415.

Reserve Bank of India. (2007). Financial inclusion—The Indian experience. Author. Retrieved from scripts/bs_speechesview.aspx?id=342

Reserve Bank of India. (2009, September). Reserve Bank of India, Monthly Bulletin (Vol. LXII, No. 9). Available from

Reserve Bank of India. (2014, January). Report of the Technical Committee. Retrieved from PublicationReportDetails.aspx?UrlPage=&ID=760

Rettie, R. (2008). Mobile phones as network capital: Facilitating connections. Mobilities, 3, 291-311.

Rheingold, H. (2002). Smart mobs: The next social revolution. Cambridge, MA: Basic Books.

Richardson, B. (2008, May). Mobile money transfer summit. GSM Association. Available from

Riivari, J. (2005). Mobile banking: A powerful new marketing and CRM tool for financial services companies all over Europe. Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 10, 11-20.

Riquelme, H. E., & Rios, R. E. (2010). The moderating effect of gender in the adoption of mobile banking. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 28, 328-341.

Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Elements of diffusion. In Diffusion of innovations (Vol. 5, pp. 1-38). New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.

Sachin, G. (2012). Analysis: Mobile banking. Asian Banking & Finance, 4, 27-29.

Safeena, R., Date, H., & Kammani, A. (2011). Internet banking adoption in an emerging economy: Indian consumer's perspective. International Arab Journal of e-Technology, 2, 56-64.

Samudra, M. S., & Phadtare, M. (2012). Factors influencing the adoption of mobile banking with special reference to Pune City. ASCI Journal of Management, 42(1), 51-65.

Sathya, S. D., & Sayasachi, D. (2015). Factors affecting adoption of mobile banking: An empirical study in the state of Odisha. International Journal Management and Business Studies, 5, 15-22.

Schaupp, L. C., & Bélanger, F. (2005). A conjoint analysis of online consumer satisfaction. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 6, 95-111.

Schepers, J., & Wetzels, M. (2007). A meta-analysis of the Technology Acceptance Model: Investigating subjective norm and moderation effects. Information & Management, 44, 90-103.

Schuppan, T. (2009). E-government in developing countries: Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa. Government Information Quarterly, 26, 118-127.

Scornavacca, E., & Hoehle, H. (2007). Mobile banking in Germany: A strategic perspective. International Journal of Electronic Finance, 1, 304-320.

Sharma, A., & Kansal, V. (2012). Mobile banking as technology adoption and challenges: A case of mobile banking in India. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 2(2), 3-7.

Shim, J. P., Warkentin, M., Courtney, J. F., Power, D. J., Sharda, R., & Carlsson, C. (2002). Past, present, and future of decision support technology. Decision Support Systems, 33, 111-126.

Singh, R. (2009). Mobile phones for development and profit: A win-win scenario. London, England: Overseas Development Institute.

Singh, S. (2014). The impact and adoption of mobile banking in Delhi. International Research Journal of Business and Management, 1, 22-26.

Singh, S., Srivastava, V., & Srivastava, R. K. (2010). Customer acceptance of mobile banking: A conceptual framework. SIES Journal of Management, 7, 55-64.

Slyke, C. V., Comunale, C. L., & Belanger, F. (2002). Gender differences in perceptions of web-based shopping. Communications of the ACM, 45(7), 82-86.

Snijders, T. A., & Bosker, R. (2012). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modelling (2nd ed.). London, England: SAGE.

Stofega, W., & Llamas, R. T. (2009). Worldwide mobile phone 2009-2013 forecast update (IDC Document No. 217209). Framingham, MA: International Data Corporation.

Sulaiman, A., Jaafar, N. I., & Mohezar, S. (2007). An overview of mobile banking adoption among the urban community. International Journal of Communication, 5, 157-168.

Sun, Y., Bhattacherjee, A., & Ma, Q. (2009). Extending technology usage to work settings: The role of perceived work compatibility in ERP implementation. Information & Management, 46, 351-356.

Sunil, G. (2013). The mobile banking and payment revolution. European Financial Review, 1(2), 3-7.

Suoranta, M., & Mattila, M. (2004). Mobile banking and consumer behavior: New insights into the diffusion pattern. Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 8, 354-366.

Sykes, T. A., Venkatesh, V., & Gosain, S. (2009). Model of acceptance with peer support: A social network perspective to understand employees' system use. MIS Quarterly, 33, 371-393.

Tan, M., & Teo, T. S. H. (2000). Factors influencing the adoption of internet banking. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 1(5), 1-44.

Telecom Regulatory Authority of India. (2012). Highlights on telecom subscription data as on 30th September, 2012 (Press Release No. 199/2012).

Teo, T. S., & Pok, S. H. (2003). Adoption of WAP-enabled mobile phones among Internet users. Omega, 31, 483-498.

Thakur, R. (2013). Customer adoption of mobile payment services by professionals across two cities in India: An empirical study using modified Technology Acceptance Model. Business Perspectives and Research, 1, 17-30.

Thakur, R., & Srivastava, M. (2014). Adoption readiness, personal innovativeness, perceived risk and usage intention across customer groups for mobile payment services in India. Internet Research, 24, 369-392.

Thomas, P., & Taskov, K. (2007). Extending gender differences and technology acceptance to a database environment. The 6th annual ISOnEworld Conference, Las Vegas, NV.

Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., & Howell, J. M. (1991). Personal computing: Towards a conceptual model of utilization. MIS Quarterly, 15, 125-143.

Triandis, H. C. (1977). Interpersonal behavior. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Tsang, M. M., Ho, S. C., & Liang, T. P. (2004). Consumer attitudes toward mobile advertising: An empirical study. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 8(3), 65-78.

Unnithan, C., & Swatman, P. (2001). eBanking adaptation and dot. com viability: A comparison of Australian and Indian experiences in the banking sector. In Proceedings of the 11th Annual BIT Conference, Manchester Metropolitan University Business School (pp. 1-15). Manchester, UK: Manchester Metropolitan University Business School.

Vaishnavi, A. (2011, May 23). India interview. IndiaTimes.

van Biljon, J., & Kotze, P. (2008). Cultural factors in a mobile phone adoption and usage model. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 14, 2650-2679.

Varshney, U., & Vetter, R. (2002). Mobile commerce: Framework, applications and networking support. Mobile Networks and Applications, 7, 185-198.

Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model. Information Systems Research, 11, 342-365.

Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39, 273-315.

Venkatesh, V., & Brown, S. A. (2001). A longitudinal investigation of personal computers in homes: Adoption determinants and emerging challenges. MIS Quarterly, 25, 71-102.

Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (1996). A model of the perceived ease of use development and test. Decision Sciences, 27, 451-481.

Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four longitudinal studies. Management Science, 46, 186-204.

Venkatesh, V., Davis, F. D., & Morris, M. G. (2007). Dead or alive? The development, trajectory and future of technology adoption research. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8, 268-286.

Venkatesh, V., & Goyal, S. (2010). Expectation disconfirmation and technology adoption: Polynomial modeling and response surface analysis. MIS Quarterly, 2, 281-303.

Venkatesh, V., & Morris, M. G. (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, 115-139.

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., & Ackerman, P. L. (2000). A longitudinal field investigation of gender differences in individual technology adoption decision-making processes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 83, 33-60.

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27, 425-478.

Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y., Chan, F. K., Hu, P. J. H., & Brown, S. A. (2011). Extending the two stage information systems continuance model: Incorporating UTAUT predictors and the role of context. Information Systems Journal, 21, 527-555.

Venkatesh, V., & Zhang, X. (2010). Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology: U.S. vs. China. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 13, 5-27.

Vijaya Bhaskar, P. (2013, December 10). Financial inclusion in India—An assessment. Speech delivered at the Reserve Bank of India at the MFIN and Access-Assist Summit, New Delhi, India.

Vinayagamoorthy, A., Sankar, C., & Sangeetha, M. (2012). Mobile banking—An analysis. Asian Journal of Research in Banking and Finance, 2(7), 76-86.

Vishal, G., Pandey, U. S., & Sanjay, B. (2012). Mobile banking in India: Practices, challenges and security issues. International Journal of Management, 1, 57-60.

Vrechopoulos, A., Constantiou, I. S., Sideris, I., Doukidis, G. D. G., & Mylonopoulos, N. (2003). The critical role of consumer behaviour research in mobile commerce. International Journal of Mobile Communications, 1, 329-340.

Vyas, C. (2009). Mobile banking in India-Perception and Statistics. Vital Analytics.

Wang, H., Cao, J., & Zhang, Y. (2005). A flexible payment scheme and its role-based access control. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 17, 425-436.

Wang, Y.-S., & Liao, Y.-W. (2007). The conceptualization and measurement of m-commerce user satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 381-398.

Wang, Y.-S., Lin, H.-H., & Luarn, P. (2006). Predicting consumer intention to use mobile service. Information Systems Journal, 16, 157-179.

Wang, Y.-S, Wang, Y.-M., Lin, H.-H., & Tang, T.-I. (2003). Determinants of user acceptance of internet banking: An empirical study. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 14, 501-519.

Wareham, J., Zheng, J. G., & Straub, D. (2005). Critical themes in electronic commerce research: A meta-analysis. Journal of Information Technology, 20, 1-19.

Welch, E. W., Hinnant, C. C., & Moon, M. J. (2005). Linking citizen satisfaction with e-government and trust in government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15, 371-391.

Williams, P. W. (2009). Assessing mobile learning effectiveness and acceptance (Doctoral dissertation). George Washington University, Washington, DC.

Wishart, N. (2006). Micro payment systems and their application to mobile networks. Retrieved from Publication.43.html

Wolcott, P., & Cagiltay, K. (2001). Telecommunications, liberalization, and the growth of the internet in Turkey. Information Society, 17, 133-142.

Wong, I. A., & Dioko, L. D. A. (2013). Understanding the mediated moderating role of customer expectations in the customer satisfaction model: The case of casinos. Tourism Management, 36, 188-199.

Wood, W., & Li, S. (2005). The empirical analysis of technology camel. Issues in Information Systems, 6(2), 154-160.

World Bank. (2003). ICT and MDGs: A World Bank group perspective. Washington, DC: Author.

Wu, J. H., & Wang, S. C. (2005). What drives mobile commerce? An empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 42, 719-729.

Wu, M. Y., Yu, P. Y., & Weng, Y. C. (2012). A study on user behaviour for I pass by UTAUT: Using Taiwan's MRT as an example. Asia Pacific Management Review, 17, 92-111.

Xu, D. J. (2006). The influence of personalization in affecting consumer attitudes toward mobile advertising in China. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 47(2), 9-19.

Yahya, M., Nadzar, F., Masrek, N., & Rahman, B. A. (2011, July). Determinants of UTAUT in measuring user acceptance of e-syariah portal in syariah courts in Malaysia. Paper

presented at the 2nd International Research Symposium in Service Management, Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Yang, K. (2005). Exploring factors affecting the adoption of mobile commerce in Singapore. Telematics and Informatics, 22, 257-277.

Yi, M. Y., Jackson, J. D., Park, J. S., & Probst, J. C. (2006). Understanding information technology acceptance by individual professionals: Toward an integrative view. Information & Management, 43, 350-363. Yu, C. S. (2012). Factors affecting individuals to adopt mobile banking: Empirical evidence from the UTAUT model. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 13, 104-121. Yu, T., & Fang, K. (2009). Measuring the post adoption customer perception of mobile banking services. CyberPsychology & Behaviour, 12, 33-35. Zainudeen, A., & Ratnadiwakara, D. (2011). Are the poor stuck in voice? Conditions for adoption of more-than-voice mobile services. Information Technologies & International Development, 7(3, Mobile Telephony Special Issue), 45-59. Zarifopoulos, M., & Economides, A. A. (2009). Evaluating mobile banking portals. International Journal of Mobile Communications, 7, 66-90. Zhou, L., Dai, L., & Zhang, D. (2007). Online shopping acceptance model: A critical survey of consumer factor in online shopping. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 8, 66-87. Zhou, T. (2011). An empirical examination of initial trust in mobile

banking. Internet Research, 21, 527-540. Zhou, T., Lu, Y., & Wang, B. (2010). Integrating TTF and UTAUT to explain mobile banking user adoption. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 760-767.

Author Biographies

S. V. Krishna Kishore, MBA, PhD from NITK, Surathkal, has experience of 7 years in teaching and research. Handled subjects like research methodology, macro economics, and all marketing subjects. Currently serving as assistant professor at MBA department of Dayanand Sagar College of Engineering.

Aloysius Henry Sequeira, BE, MTech (Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay), Diploma in training and development, and PhD, has professional experience of more than 35 years as teacher, researcher, and administrator. Published 39 technical papers in national and international journals. Successfully guided 10 research scholars for award of PhD. Member of various university bodies/ institutions/governing boards/council/Board of Studies /Board of Studies, and others. Currently serving as professor and head, School of Management at National Institute of Technology Karnatakata, Surathkal.