Mobile Technology Adoption and the Effects of Cultural Factors

198 Pages·2017·2.47 MB·English

by  Sanakulov, Nodir

JYU DISSERTATIONS 55
Nodir Sanakulov
Mobile Technology Adoption and
the Effects of Cultural Factors
Esitetään Jyväskylän yliopiston kauppakorkeakoulun suostumuksella
julkisesti tarkastettavaksi yliopiston Agora-rakennuksen salissa Ag Delta
helmikuun 7. päivänä 2019 kello 12.
Academic dissertation to be publicly discussed, by permission of
the Jyväskylä University School of Business and Economics,
in Agora building, hall Ag Delta, on February 7, 2019 at 12 o’clock noon.
JYVÄSKYLÄ 2019
Editors
Tuomo Takala
Jyväskylä University School of Business and Economics
Timo Hautala
Open Science Centre, University of Jyväskylä
This is a printout of the original online publication.
Copyright © 2019, by University of Jyväskylä
Permanent link to this publication: http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-951-39-7676-7
URN:ISBN:978-951-39-7676-7
ISBN 978-951-39-7676-7 (PDF)
ISSN 2489-9003 Jyväskylä University Printing House, Jyväskylä 2019
ABSTRACT
Sanakulov, Nodir
Mobile Technology Adoption and the Effects of Cultural Factors
Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä, 2018, 63 p.
(JYU Dissertations,
ISSN 2489-9003; 55)
ISBN 978-951-39-7676-7 (PDF)
Mobile technologies are an important part of human life in both the personal
and professional realms. Many services (banking, news, health, education, etc.)
that traditionally offered either face-to-face, telephone, or other conventional
platforms and technologies are now establishing services on mobile platforms
as well. Mobile gadgets are now also being used by company employees as
sales automation tools.
The importance of culture in technology adoption and usage has been
well-established. The adoption of any technology includes a set of factors that
determine if the technology is either accepted or rejected, and the individual
strengths of these determining factors may vary greatly, depending on the im-
portance placed on them by an individual. Because culture affects human be-
havior, there will be obvious differences in technology adoption between two
groups with distinct cultural differences.
This dissertation aims to contribute to the technology adoption literature
by conducting a cross-cultural study of consumer smartphone adoption to de-
termine adoption levels in general and the differences between the antecedents
of adoption in the included groups in particular. It will also examine salesper-
sons´ adoption and usage of mobile sales customization tools.
The findings will confirm the importance of cultural factors in technology
adoption, identify primary variables for adoption within each group, offer con-
ceptualization of MSCT adoption, compile suggestions for further development
of the sales tool, and make recommendations that will help increase efficiency
in usage and sales.
Keywords: technology adoption, technology acceptance model, UTAUT,
cultural factors, smartphones, mobile, sales force automation, mobile sales
configuration tool
Author’s address Nodir Sanakulov
University of Jyväskylä
School of Business and Economics
P.O. Box 35
FI-40014 University of Jyväskylä, Finland
Email: [email protected]

Supervisor Professor Heikki Karjaluoto
University of Jyväskylä
School of Business and Economics

Reviewers Professor Hannu Saarijärvi
University of Tampere
Faculty of Management

Professor Jin Yong Park
Konkuk University
Konkuk School of Business

Opponent Professor Hannu Saarijärvi
University of Tampere
Faculty of Management
TIIVISTELMÄ
Sanakulov, Nodir
Mobile Technology Adoption and the Effects of Cultural Factors
Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä, 2018, 63 p.
(JYU Dissertations,
ISSN 2489-9003; 55)
ISBN 978-951-39-7676-7 (PDF)

Mobiiliteknologiat ovat tärkeä osa ihmisten elämää sekä yksityis- että työelä-
män piirissä. Monet palvelut (pankki-, uutis-, terveys- ja koulutuspalvelut jne.),
jotka perinteisesti on tarjottu kasvokkain, puhelimitse tai muiden tavanomais-
ten kanavien ja teknologioiden välityksellä, ovat nyt siirtyneet myös mobii-
lialustoille. Mobiilivälineitä käytetään yrityksissä myös myynnin automatisoin-
nin välineinä. Kulttuurin tärkeys teknologian omaksumisessa on osoitettu sel-
keästi. Teknologian omaksumiseen vaikuttaa joukko eri tekijöitä, mikä määrit-
tää sen, että omaksutaanko teknologia vai ei. Näiden yksittäisten tekijöiden tär-
keys voi vaihdella suuresti riippuen yksilöiden näille antamasta painoarvosta.
Koska kulttuuri vaikuttaa ihmisten käytökseen, kahden selkeästi eri kulttuurin
edustajan välillä on selkeitä eroavaisuuksia teknologian omaksumisessa.
Tämän väitöskirjan tavoitteena on edistää teknologioiden omaksumista
käsittelevää kirjallisuutta toteuttamalla kulttuurien välinen tutkimus älypuhe-
linten omaksumisesta kuluttajien parissa. Tavoitteena on määrittää yleinen
omaksumisaste ja erot etnisten ryhmien välillä, erityisesti tässä tutkimuksessa
mukana olevien etnisten ryhmien välillä. Tutkimus selvittää lisäksi myyntihen-
kilöiden mobiiliteknologioiden omaksumista ja käyttöä.
Tutkimuksen tulokset vahvistavat kulttuuristen tekijöiden tärkeyden tek-
nologian omaksumisessa ja identifioivat omaksumiseen vaikuttavat primääri-
muuttujat ryhmittäin. Tutkimus myös esittää käsitteellisen viitekehyksen
myyntihenkilöiden mobiiliteknologioiden omaksumisesta, tarjoaa ehdotuksia
myynnin työkalujen kehitystä varten ja suosituksia tehokkuuden lisäämiseksi
myyntityössä mobiililaitteita käyttämällä.

Avainsanat: teknologian omaksuminen, teknologian hyväksymismalli, UTAUT,
kulttuuritekijät, älypuhelimet, mobiili, myynnin automatisointi, mobiilimyyn-
nin työkalu
FOREWORD AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
My decision to pursue a doctoral degree was made while working for an inter-
national marketing research company at which I experienced marketing re-
search in practice and found it quite exciting. I was assigned to a multi-country
project team, which involved conducting projects in at least two countries sim-
ultaneously. It was fascinating to see how survey results would vary from
country to country regarding different levels of perceptions about technology
attributes.
At that time, I knew that I wanted to study technology acceptance, includ-
ing the effects of cultural factors. Therefore, I applied to JSBE and sent an email
to Professor Heikki Karjaluoto expressing my interest in pursuing a doctoral
degree under his supervision. He liked my research proposal, and after only a
few months, I found myself in the corridors of JSBE. Mika Haapanen, the doc-
toral school coordinator, told me that I was the first foreign student to be admit-
ted to the doctoral school. Although I am sure it was unintentional, his words
put me under enormous pressure to do well.
Why Finland? People ask this question often, and the answer is obvious
and straightforward: It is a country with the best educational system, advanced
social welfare, modest people, beautiful nature, and great fishing locales. My
decision to study in Finland is one of the best I have ever made.
Once the dissertation process began, many setbacks, achievements, disap-
pointments, journal acceptances, journal rejections, productive days, slow pro-
gress, and long waits followed. Some of them were motivating, while others
were quite frustrating. Even on the worst days, I managed to stay focused by
knowing that, no matter what, I was determined to and would therefore suc-
ceed. A great source of my strength came from several people to whom I owe
my sincere gratitude.
I would like to firstly thank my academic supervisor Heikki Karjaluoto,
who guided me through this challenging yet exciting path by helping me stay
focused and sharing his invaluable thoughts and ideas, which immensely im-
proved my dissertation’s quality. He is a great leader who aims to ensure that
everyone on his team stays focused on research. He also tirelessly seeks grant
opportunities so that his students are financially secure. I am indebted to him
for everything he has done for me.
I would also like to thank all the university professors and lecturers, in-
cluding those from KATAJA, whose courses I attended. Thanks to them, I
gained extensive knowledge on various topics, had opportunities to participate
in interesting discussions, and exchanged many ideas.
I would like to thank the deans of JSBE, the Foundation of Economic Edu-
cation, and the University of Jyväskylä for providing financial support during
the past few years, without which completing this dissertation would not have
been possible. I am thankful to everyone at JSBE, from the international rela-
tions department to the student registrar and secretary. They have all been ex-
tremely helpful since my first day at the university. Through their help and
guidance, everything that a foreign student needs, from admission to gradua-
tion, went smoothly for me.
Finally, I would like to thank my wife, children, and parents for their sup-
port, patience, and understanding during this time. As a father myself, I know
how it feels for my parents and what a child´s smallest achievement can mean.

Jyväskylä 8.8.2018, Nodir Sanakulov
FIGURES
FIGURE 1  Original Technology Acceptance Model ........................................ 22 
FIGURE 2 Technology Acceptance Model 2 ..................................................... 22
FIGURE 3 Technology Acceptance Model 3 ..................................................... 25
FIGURE 4 Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology ............... 26
FIGURE 5 UTAUT2 .............................................................................................. 27
FIGURE 6 Kano Model ........................................................................................ 33
FIGURE 7 Functional and dysfunctional questions on the Kano
questionnaire ...................................................................................... 34
FIGURE 8 Research model for Study 2 ............................................................. 43
FIGURE 9 Research model for Study 3 ............................................................. 45
FIGURE 10 Main determinants of MSCT adoption and usage ........................ 46
TABLES
TABLE 1 Papers included in the dissertation ................................................. 16
TABLE 2 Hofstede’s national culture dimensions ......................................... 31
TABLE 3 Kano evaluation table ....................................................................... 35
TABLE 4 Participant details .............................................................................. 39
TABLE 5 Summary of studies included in the dissertation ......................... 41
TABLE 6 Comparison of cultural dimensions: Uzbekistan and
South Korea ........................................................................................ 44
TABLE 7 Frequently tested paths with acceptance rates .............................. 48
TABLE 8 Analysis results for Study 2 ............................................................. 49
TABLE 9 Test results for Study 3 ..................................................................... 49
TABLE 10 Determinants of MCST adoption .................................................... 52
CONTENTS
ABSTRACT
TIIVISTELMÄ
FOREWORD AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
FIGURES AND TABLES
CONTENTS
1  INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 11 
1.1  Study background and research questions ........................................... 11 
1.2  Emerging trends in mobile technologies ............................................... 16 
1.3  Research approach and methodology ................................................... 17 
1.4  Key concepts .............................................................................................. 17 
1.4.1  Marketing ....................................................................................... 17 
1.4.2  Technology adoption .................................................................... 18 
1.4.3  Cultural factors .............................................................................. 18 
1.4.4  Hofstede´s cultural framework ................................................... 18 
1.4.5  Kano Model .................................................................................... 19 
1.5  Outline of the dissertation ....................................................................... 19 
2  THEORETICAL FOUNDATION ..................................................................... 21 
2.1  Technology acceptance ............................................................................ 21 
2.1.1  TAM ................................................................................................ 22 
2.1.2  TAM2 .............................................................................................. 23 
2.1.3  TAM3 .............................................................................................. 23 
2.1.4  Further extensions/developments ............................................. 23 
2.2  Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology ........................... 25 
2.2.1  UTAUT2 ......................................................................................... 27 
2.3  Cultural factors and technology acceptance ......................................... 28 
2.3.1  Culture ............................................................................................ 29 
2.3.2  National culture and Hofstede´s cultural dimensions ............ 30 
2.4  Kano Model ............................................................................................... 32 
3  METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................. 36 
3.1  Research design ......................................................................................... 36 
3.2  Data collection and analysis .................................................................... 37 
3.2.1  Quantitative studies ...................................................................... 37 
3.2.2  Qualitative study ........................................................................... 38 
3.2.3  Measures ......................................................................................... 39 
3.2.4  Data analysis .................................................................................. 40
4  SUMMARY OF DISSERTATION ARTICLES ................................................ 42 
4.1  Literature review: Consumer adoption of mobile technologies ........ 42 
4.2  A cultural comparison of smartphone adoption in Uzbekistan,
South Korea, and Turkey ......................................................................... 43 
4.3  A cross-cultural study of smartphone adoption in Uzbekistan
and South Korea ........................................................................................ 44 
4.4  Salespersons’ adoption and usage of mobile sales configuration
tools ............................................................................................................. 45 
5  DISCUSSION ...................................................................................................... 47 
5.1  Theoretical contributions ......................................................................... 47 
5.1.1  What are the main drivers of consumers’ adoption of
smartphones? ................................................................................. 47 
5.1.2  Do cultural factors matter in smartphone adoption,
and do they have varying effects on adoption in different
countries? ....................................................................................... 49 
5.1.3  How do the adoption and usage of mobile sales
configuration tools work, and what areas should be
further developed to meet salespersons’ needs and
increase work productivity? ........................................................ 50 
5.1.3.1  Performance expectancy/usefulness .................................. 50 
5.1.3.2  Effort expectancy/perceived ease of use ........................... 51 
5.1.3.3  Further development of MSCT ........................................... 52 
5.2  Managerial implications .......................................................................... 53 
5.3  Limitations and avenues for further studies......................................... 55 
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 57 
ORIGINAL PAPERS