Digital Transformation of Enterprises to Enhance Sustainability: How Does the Reputation of Digital Applications Influence the Attributes of E-Commerce
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Background
2.1. eTrust and eLoyal
2.2. The Mediation Role of eTrust between ePriv and eLoyal
2.3. The Mediation Role of eTrust between eSec and eLoyal
2.4. The Mediation Effect of eTrust between ePay and eLoyal
2.5. The Mediation Effect of eTrust between ULY and eLoyal
2.6. The Mediation Effect of eTrust between eInnov and eLoyal
2.7. The Moderation Effect of RTN between eTrust and eLoyal
3. Data and Methods
3.1. Context and Sample
3.2. Scales and Measurements
3.3. Methods
4. Results
4.1. Convergent Validity
4.2. Discriminant Validity
4.3. Bivariate Analysis
4.4. Structural Model and Path Coefficients
5. Discussions
5.1. Theoretical Implications
5.2. Practical Implications
5.3. Limitations and Future Research
6. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Surana, K.; Singh, A.; Sagar, A.D. Strengthening science, technology, and innovation-based incubators to help achieve Sustainable Development Goals: Lessons from India. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2020, 157, 120057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Denoncourt, J. Companies and UN 2030 Sustainable Development Goal 9 Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure. J. Corp. Law Stud. 2020, 20, 199–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brodny, J.; Tutak, M. Assessing regional implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 9 “Build resilient infrastructure, promote sustainable industrialization and foster innovation” in Poland. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2023, 195, 122773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, C.; Mirosa, M.; Bremer, P. Review of online food delivery platforms and their impacts on sustainability. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Poon, W.C.; Tung, S.E.H. The rise of online food delivery culture during the COVID-19 pandemic: An analysis of intention and its associated risk. Eur. J. Manag. Bus. Econ. 2022, 33, 54–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hanson, K.T.; Puplampu, K.P. The Internet of Things and the sharing economy: Harnessing the possibilities for Africa’s sustainable development goals. In From Millennium Development Goals to Sustainable Development Goals: Rethinking African Development; Taylor & Francis Ltd.: Abingdon, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Faccia, A.; Le Roux, C.L.; Pandey, V. Innovation and E-Commerce Models, the Technology Catalysts for Sustainable Development: The Emirate of Dubai Case Study. Sustainability 2023, 15, 3419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Varese, E.; Cesarani, M.C.; Kabaja, B.; Sołtysik, M.; Wojnarowska, M. Online food delivery habits and its environmental impact during the COVID-19 pandemic: An Italian and Polish study. Br. Food J. 2023, 126, 191–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Talwar, S.; Kaur, P.; Ahmed, U.; Bilgihan, A.; Dhir, A. The dark side of convenience: How to reduce food waste induced by food delivery apps. Br. Food J. 2023, 125, 205–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, Y.; Bacao, F. What factors determining customer continuingly using food delivery apps during 2019 novel coronavirus pandemic period? Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2020, 91, 102683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernández-Bonilla, F.; Gijón, C.; De la Vega, B. E-commerce in Spain: Determining factors and the importance of the e-trust. Telecommun. Policy 2022, 46, 102280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mofokeng, T.E. The impact of online shopping attributes on customer satisfaction and loyalty: Moderating effects of e-commerce experience. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2021, 8, 1968206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Okaily, M.; Alalwan, A.A.; Al-Fraihat, D.; Alkhwaldi, A.F.; Rehman, S.U.; Al-Okaily, A. Investigating antecedents of mobile payment systems’ decision-making: A mediated model. Glob. Knowledge, Mem. Commun. 2022, 73, 45–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raza, A.; Asif, M.; Akram, M. Give your hunger a new option: Understanding consumers’ continuous intention to use online food delivery apps using trust transfer theory. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2023, 47, 474–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dsouza, D.; Sharma, D. Online food delivery portals during COVID-19 times: An analysis of changing consumer behavior and expectations. Int. J. Innov. Sci. 2021, 13, 218–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wen, H.; Pookulangara, S.; Josiam, B.M. A comprehensive examination of consumers’ intentions to use food delivery apps. Br. Food J. 2022, 124, 1737–1754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faraoni, M.; Rialti, R.; Zollo, L.; Pellicelli, A.C. Exploring e-Loyalty Antecedents in B2C e-Commerce. Br. Food J. 2019, 121, 574–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moon, J.; Lee, W.; Shim, J.; Hwang, J. Structural Relationship between Attributes of Technology Acceptance for Food Delivery Application System: Exploration for the Antecedents of Perceived Usefulness. Systems 2023, 11, 419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.W.; Sung, H.J.; Jeon, H.M. Determinants of continuous intention on food delivery apps: Extending UTAUT2 with information quality. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Algamash, F.A.; Mashi, M.S.; Alam, M.N. Understanding the Antecedents of Use of E-Commerce and Consumers’ E-Loyalty in Saudi Arabia Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic. Sustainability 2022, 14, 14894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alalwan, A.A.; Dwivedi, Y.K.; Rana, N.P.; Algharabat, R. Examining factors influencing Jordanian customers’ intentions and adoption of internet banking: Extending UTAUT2 with risk. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2018, 40, 125–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Venkatesh, V.; Thong, J.Y.L.; Xu, X. Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology: A synthesis and the road ahead. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2016, 17, 328–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Venkatesh, V.; Thong, J.Y.L.; Xu, X. Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Q. 2012, 36, 157–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Preetha, S.; Iswarya, S. Factors influencing the intension to use food online order and delivery appvia platforms-using TAM (Technology Acceptance Model). Int. J. Recent Technol. Eng. 2019, 7, 1141–1147. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, E.-Y.; Lee, S.-B.; Jeon, Y.J.J. Factors influencing the behavioral intention to use food delivery apps. Soc. Behav. Personal. Int. J. 2017, 45, 1461–1473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Venkatesh, V.; Morris, M.G.; Davis, G.B.; Davis, F.D. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Q. 2003, 27, 425–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dwivedi, Y.K.; Rana, N.P.; Jeyaraj, A.; Clement, M.; Williams, M.D. Re-examining the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): Towards a revised theoretical model. Inf. Syst. Front. 2019, 21, 719–734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarfaraz, J. Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model-mobile banking. J. Internet Bank. Commer. 2017, 22, 1–20. [Google Scholar]
- Marangunić, N.; Granić, A. Technology acceptance model: A literature review from 1986 to 2013. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 2015, 14, 81–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hong, C.; Choi, E.K.C.; Joung, H.W.D. Determinants of customer purchase intention toward online food delivery services: The moderating role of usage frequency. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2023, 54, 76–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, X.; Lim, X.J.; Cheah, J.H.; Ng, S.I.; Kamal Basha, N. Food at your doorstep? Examining customer loyalty towards online food delivery applications. Br. Food J. 2023; ahead of print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, T. How information acceptance model predicts customer loyalty?: A study from perspective of eWOM information. Bottom Line 2020, 33, 60–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agag, G.M.; El-Masry, A.A. Why Do Consumers Trust Online Travel Websites? Drivers and Outcomes of Consumer Trust toward Online Travel Websites. J. Travel Res. 2017, 56, 347–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Esmaeili, A.; Haghgoo, I.; Davidaviciene, V.; Meidute-Kavaliauskiene, I. Customer loyalty in mobile banking: Evaluation of perceived risk, relative advantages, and usability factors. Eng. Econ. 2021, 32, 70–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burlea-Schiopoiu, A.; Puiu, S.; Dinu, A. The impact of food delivery applications on Romanian consumers’ behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic. Socio-Econ. Plann. Sci. 2022, 82, 101220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Raitani, S.; Vyas, V. An exploratory study of factors influencing the e-Loyalty of online banking consumers. Online Bank. Consum. 2014, 13, 34–48. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, Y.H.; Barnes, S. Initial trust and online buyer behaviour. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2007, 107, 21–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gong, J.; Said, F.; Ting, H.; Firdaus, A.; Aksar, I.A.; Xu, J. Do Privacy Stress and Brand Trust still Matter? Implications on Continuous Online Purchasing Intention in China. Curr. Psychol. 2022, 42, 15515–15527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rattanawicha, P.; Esichaikul, V. What makes websites trustworthy? A two-phase empirical study. Int. J. Electron. Bus. 2005, 3, 110–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vila, N.; Kuster, I. Consumer feelings and behaviours towards well designed websites. Inf. Manag. 2011, 48, 166–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Filieri, R. What makes an online consumer review trustworthy? Ann. Tour. Res. 2016, 58, 46–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Y.S.; Huang, S.Y.B. The effect of task-technology fit on purchase intention: The moderating role of perceived risks. J. Risk Res. 2017, 20, 1418–1438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sorathia, N.G.; Morosan, C. Antecedents of using the online food delivery subscription services. J. Hosp. Tour. Technol. 2023, 14, 762–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dutta, N.; Bhat, A. Exploring the Effect of Store Characteristics and Interpersonal Trust on Purchase Intention in the Context of Online Social Media Marketing. J. Internet Commer. 2016, 15, 239–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, J.; Yang, K.; Kim, B.Y. Online retailer reputation and consumer response: Examining cross cultural differences. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 2013, 41, 688–705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gašević, D.; Vranješ, M.; Drinić, D. Identification of Key Determinants of Satisfaction of Users of Electronic Banking Services. Econ. Themes 2016, 54, 301–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lowry, P.B.; Wells, T.M.; Moody, G.D.; Humpherys, S.; Kettles, D. Online payment gateways used to facilitate e-commerce transactions and improve risk management. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2006, 17, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pigatto, G.; Machado, J.G.d.C.F.; Negreti, A.d.S.; Machado, L.M. Have you chosen your request? Analysis of online food delivery companies in Brazil. Br. Food J. 2017, 119, 639–657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Handoyo, S. Purchasing in the Digital Age: A Meta-Analytical Perspective on Trust, Risk, Security, and e-WOM in e-Commerce. Heliyon 2024, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bonfanti, A.; Rossato, C.; Vigolo, V.; Vargas-Sánchez, A. Improving online food ordering and delivery service quality by managing customer expectations: Evidence from Italy. Br. Food J. 2023, 125, 164–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sachdeva, G. Perceived Benefits & Risks Towards E-Shopping: Analyzing the Youth Attitude. PRIMA Pract. Res. Mark. 2016, 7, 41–48. [Google Scholar]
- Mardjo, A. Impacts of Social Media’S Reputation, Security, Privacy and Information Quality on Thai Young Adults’ Purchase Intention Towards Facebook Commerce. UTCC Int. J. Bus. Econ. 2019, 11, 167–188. [Google Scholar]
- Gani, M.O.; Faroque, A.R.; Muzareba, A.M.; Amin, S.; Rahman, M. An integrated model to decipher online food delivery app adoption behavior in the COVID-19 pandemic. J. Foodserv. Bus. Res. 2023, 26, 123–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oentoro, W. Mobile payment adoption process: A serial of multiple mediation and moderation analysis. Bottom Line 2020, 34, 225–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hsu, J.S.C.; Hung, Y.W.; Chiu, C.M. Cross-Border Social Commerce: From a Trust Transfer Perspective. J. Electron. Commer. Res. 2022, 23, 115–137. [Google Scholar]
- Busagara, T.; Mori, N.; Mossberg, L.; Jani, D.; Andersson, T. Customer information sharing and new service development: Is there a link? Bottom Line 2020, 33, 133–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barbosa, B.; Shabani Shojaei, A.; Miranda, H. Packaging-free practices in food retail: The impact on customer loyalty. Balt. J. Manag. 2023, 18, 474–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, H.; Niehm, L.S. The Impact of Website Quality on Information Quality, Value, and Loyalty Intentions in Apparel Retailing. J. Interact. Mark. 2009, 23, 221–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tarmazi, S.A.A.; Wan Ismail, W.R.; Noor Azmin, N.A.S.; Abu Bakar, A.R. Consumer Purchase Intention toward Online Food Delivery Service: The Implication for Future Research. Malays. J. Soc. Sci. Humanit. 2021, 6, 347–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferreira, A.; Silva, G.M.; Dias, Á.L. Determinants of continuance intention to use mobile self-scanning applications in retail. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 2023, 40, 455–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muangmee, C.; Kot, S.; Meekaewkunchorn, N.; Kassakorn, N.; Khalid, B. Factors determining the behavioral intention of using food delivery apps during COVID-19 pandemics. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2021, 16, 1297–1310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ali, S.; Khalid, N.; Javed, H.M.U.; Islam, D.M.Z. Consumer adoption of online food delivery ordering (Ofdo) services in pakistan: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic situation. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021, 7, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patton, M.A.; Jøsang, A. Technologies for Trust in Electronic Commerce. Electron. Commer. Res. 2004, 4, 9–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rita, P.; Eiriz, V.; Conde, B. The role of information for the customer journey in mobile food ordering apps. J. Serv. Mark. 2023, 37, 574–591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- An, S.; Eck, T.; Yim, H. Understanding Consumers’ Acceptance Intention to Use Mobile Food Delivery Applications through an Extended Technology Acceptance Model. Sustainability 2023, 15, 832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, D.; Moon, J.; Kim, Y.J.; Yi, M.Y. Antecedents and consequences of mobile phone usability: Linking simplicity and interactivity to satisfaction, trust, and brand loyalty. Inf. Manag. 2015, 52, 295–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, W.S.; Song, M.; Moon, J.; Tang, R. Application of the technology acceptance model to food delivery apps. Br. Food J. 2023, 125, 49–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pal, D.; Funilkul, S.; Eamsinvattana, W.; Siyal, S. Using online food delivery applications during the COVID-19 lockdown period: What drives University Students’ satisfaction and loyalty? J. Foodserv. Bus. Res. 2021, 25, 561–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, H.H.; Wang, Y.H.; Yang, W.Y. The impact of e-service quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty on e-marketing: Moderating effect of perceived value. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 2009, 20, 423–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salehnia, M.; Saki, M.; Eshaghi, A.; Salehnia, N. A Model of E-Loyalty and Word-Of-Mouth based on e-trust in E-banking services (Case Study: Mellat Bank). In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on e-Commerce in Developing Countries: With Focus on e-Trust, Mashhad, Iran, 24–25 April 2014; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Suhartanto, D.; Helmi Ali, M.; Tan, K.H.; Sjahroeddin, F.; Kusdibyo, L. Loyalty toward online food delivery service: The role of e-service quality and food quality. J. Foodserv. Bus. Res. 2019, 22, 81–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tan, S.Y.; Lim, S.Y.; Yeo, S.F. Online food delivery services: Cross-sectional study of consumers’ attitude in Malaysia during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. F1000Research 2021, 10, 972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ackoff, R. The Design of Social Research, 5th ed.; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 1953; Volume 28, pp. 356–358. [Google Scholar]
- Flavián, C.; Guinalíu, M. Consumer trust, perceived security and privacy policy: Three basic elements of loyalty to a web site. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2006, 106, 601–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Crespo, A.H.; del Bosque, I.R. The effect of innovativeness on the adoption of B2C e-commerce: A model based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour. Comput. Human Behav. 2008, 24, 2830–2847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jarvenpaa, S.L.; Tractinsky, N.; Saarinen, L. Consumer trust in an Internet store: A cross-cultural validation. J. Comput. Commun. 1999, 5, JCMC526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, C.; Mirusmonov, M.; Lee, I. An empirical examination of factors influencing the intention to use mobile payment. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2010, 26, 310–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kirakowski, J.; Claridge, N.; Whitehand, R. Human centered measures of success in web site design. In Proceedings of the Fourth Conference on Human Factors & the Web, Los Angeles, CA, USA, 18–23 April 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Lin, H.X.; Choong, Y.-Y.; Salvendy, G. A proposed index of usability: A method for comparing the relative usability of different software systems. Behav. Inf. Technol. 1997, 16, 267–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ranganathan, C.; Ganapathy, S. Key dimensions of business-to-consumer web sites. Inf. Manag. 2002, 39, 457–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeithaml, V.A.; Berry, L.L.; Parasuraman, A. SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. J. Retail. 1988, 64, 12–40. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, S.; Lu, Y.; Gupta, S.; Cao, Y.; Zhang, R. Mobile payment services adoption across time: An empirical study of the effects of behavioral beliefs, social influences, and personal traits. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2012, 28, 129–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Srinivasan, S.S.; Anderson, R.; Ponnavolu, K. Customer loyalty in e-commerce: An exploration of its antecedents and consequences. J. Retail. 2002, 78, 41–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zaheer, M.A.; Anwar, T.M.; Iantovics, L.B.; Raza, M.A.; Khan, Z. Enticing attributes of consumers’ purchase intention to use online food delivery applications (OFDAs) in a developing country. J. Electron. Bus. Digit. Econ. 2024; ahead of print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.F., Jr.; Sarstedt, M.; Hopkins, L.; Kuppelwieser, V.G. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An emerging tool in business research. Eur. Bus. Rev. 2014, 26, 106–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hsu, S.-H.; Chen, W.; Hsieh, M. Robustness testing of PLS, LISREL, EQS and ANN-based SEM for measuring customer satisfaction. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 2006, 17, 355–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.F.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 2011, 19, 139–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shapiro, S.S.; Wilk, M.B. An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika 1965, 52, 591–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reinartz, W.; Haenlein, M.; Henseler, J. An empirical comparison of the efficacy of covariance-based and variance-based SEM. Int. J. Res. Mark. 2009, 26, 332–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teng, Y.M.; Wu, K.S.; Wang, W.C.; Chen, L.W. What factors drive consumers’ desire to continue using food delivery apps (FDA) in Taiwan after the COVID-19 pandemic? J. Hosp. Tour. Technol. 2023, 14, 878–892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bender, K.E.; Badiger, A.; Roe, B.E.; Shu, Y.; Qi, D. Consumer behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic: An analysis of food purchasing and management behaviors in U.S. households through the lens of food system resilience. Socio-Econ. Plann. Sci. 2021, 82, 101107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Connolly, R.; Bannister, F. Consumer trust in Internet shopping in Ireland: Towards the development of a more effective trust measurement instrument. J. Inf. Technol. 2007, 22, 102–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Durst, S.; Leyer, M. The influence of institutional conditions on firms’ process innovation—Evidence from firms based on a multi-country analysis. Bottom Line 2022, 35, 161–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shankar, A.; Jebarajakirthy, C. The influence of e-banking service quality on customer loyalty: A moderated mediation approach. Int. J. Bank Mark. 2019, 37, 1119–1142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- de Moraes, G.H.S.M.; Pelegrini, G.C.; de Marchi, L.P.; Pinheiro, G.T.; Cappellozza, A. Antecedents of big data analytics adoption: An analysis with future managers in a developing country. Bottom Line 2022, 35, 73–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, J.; Jin, B.; Swinney, J.L. The role of etail quality, e-satisfaction and e-trust in online loyalty development process. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2009, 16, 239–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ladhari, R.; Leclerc, A. Building loyalty with online financial services customers: Is there a gender difference? J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2013, 20, 560–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Characteristics | Sample | Percentage |
---|---|---|
Gender | ||
Female | 280 | 55.9 |
Male | 221 | 44.1 |
Age Group | ||
Less than 18 | 43 | 8.6 |
18–25 years | 149 | 29.7 |
26–35 years | 123 | 24.6 |
36–45 years | 113 | 22.6 |
More than 45 years | 73 | 14.5 |
Qualification | ||
Primary/Middle/High school | 59 | 11.8 |
College/Diploma/Technical | 103 | 20.6 |
Undergraduate | 199 | 39.7 |
Graduate/Postgraduate | 140 | 27.9 |
Monthly Income | ||
Less than (USD 210) PKR 60,000. | 196 | 39.1 |
(USD 210) PKR 60,000 to (USD 305) 100,000. | 107 | 21.4 |
(USD 305) PKR 100,000 to (USD 1000) 300,000. | 25 | 5.0 |
More than (USD 1000) PKR 300,000. | 173 | 34.5 |
Constructs | Items | Loadings | Cronbach’s Alpha | Composite Reliability (CR) | Average Variance Extracted (AVE) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ePriv | ePriv1 | 0.788 | 0.759 | 0.845 | 0.576 |
ePriv2 | 0.729 | ||||
ePriv3 | 0.778 | ||||
ePriv4 | 0.744 | ||||
eSec | eSec1 | 0.802 | 0.800 | 0.869 | 0.625 |
eSec2 | 0.781 | ||||
eSec3 | 0.806 | ||||
eSec4 | 0.771 | ||||
ePay | ePay1 | 0.843 | 0.801 | 0.883 | 0.716 |
ePay2 | 0.819 | ||||
ePay3 | 0.876 | ||||
ULY | ULY1 | 0.773 | 0.840 | 0.886 | 0.608 |
ULY2 | 0.741 | ||||
ULY3 | 0.819 | ||||
ULY4 | 0.762 | ||||
ULY6 | 0.803 | ||||
eInnov | eInnov1 | 0.822 | 0.784 | 0.874 | 0.698 |
eInnov2 | 0.870 | ||||
eInnov3 | 0.814 | ||||
eTrust | eTrust1 | 0.831 | 0.852 | 0.900 | 0.693 |
eTrust2 | 0.776 | ||||
eTrust3 | 0.880 | ||||
eTrust4 | 0.840 | ||||
eLoyal | eLoyal1 | 0.837 | 0.827 | 0.885 | 0.659 |
eLoyal2 | 0.778 | ||||
eLoyal3 | 0.846 | ||||
eLoyal4 | 0.783 | ||||
RTN | RTN1 | 0.872 | 0.759 | 0.862 | 0.677 |
RTN2 | 0.738 | ||||
RTN3 | 0.852 |
Constructs | (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | (8) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(1) eInnnov | 0.836 | |||||||
(2) eLoyal | 0.505 | 0.811 | ||||||
(3) ePay | 0.456 | 0.643 | 0.846 | |||||
(4) ePriv | 0.379 | 0.394 | 0.414 | 0.759 | ||||
(5) eSec | 0.396 | 0.318 | 0.382 | 0.449 | 0.790 | |||
(6) eTrust | 0.683 | 0.698 | 0.614 | 0.577 | 0.535 | 0.833 | ||
(7) RTN | 0.138 | 0.222 | 0.124 | 0.077 | −0.060 | 0.078 | 0.823 | |
(8) ULY | 0.476 | 0.474 | 0.506 | 0.557 | 0.467 | 0.643 | 0.027 | 0.780 |
Constructs | (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | (8) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(1) eInnnov | ||||||||
(2) eLoyal | 0.622 | |||||||
(3) ePay | 0.578 | 0.784 | ||||||
(4) ePriv | 0.475 | 0.482 | 0.521 | |||||
(5) eSec | 0.500 | 0.384 | 0.473 | 0.572 | ||||
(6) eTrust | 0.833 | 0.827 | 0.740 | 0.696 | 0.641 | |||
(7) RTN | 0.187 | 0.276 | 0.158 | 0.108 | 0.076 | 0.097 | ||
(8) ULY | 0.571 | 0.551 | 0.606 | 0.687 | 0.566 | 0.742 | 0.057 |
Variable | (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | (8) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(1) ePriv | 1.000 | |||||||
(2) eSec | 0.436 ** | 1.000 | ||||||
(3) ePay | 0.404 ** | 0.380 ** | 1.000 | |||||
(4) ULY | 0.546 ** | 0.463 ** | 0.493 ** | 1.000 | ||||
(5) eInnov | 0.364 ** | 0.395 ** | 0.456 ** | 0.460 ** | 1.000 | |||
(6) eTrust | 0.553 ** | 0.531 ** | 0.613 ** | 0.624 ** | 0.682 ** | 1.000 | ||
(7) eLoyal | 0.378 ** | 0.311 ** | 0.638 ** | 0.454 ** | 0.502 ** | 0.694 ** | 1.000 | |
(8) RTN | 0.072 | −0.059 | 0.123 ** | 0.024 | 0.139 ** | 0.078 | 0.219 ** | 1.000 |
Hypothesis | Relationship | OS | SM | SD | p Values |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
H1 | eTrust → eLoyal | 0.651 | 0.646 | 0.035 | 0.000 |
H2 | ePriv → eTrust → eLoyal | 0.115 | 0.115 | 0.027 | 0.000 |
H3 | eSec → eTrust → eLoyal | 0.087 | 0.086 | 0.019 | 0.000 |
H4 | ePay → eTrust → eLoyal | 0.146 | 0.144 | 0.024 | 0.000 |
H5 | ULY → eTrust → eLoyal | 0.126 | 0.125 | 0.024 | 0.000 |
H6 | eInnov → eTrust → eLoyal | 0.240 | 0.238 | 0.024 | 0.000 |
H7 | RTN x eTrust → eLoyal | 0.085 | 0.083 | 0.031 | 0.005 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Zaheer, M.A.; Anjum, T.; Díaz Tautiva, J.A.; Heidler, P. Digital Transformation of Enterprises to Enhance Sustainability: How Does the Reputation of Digital Applications Influence the Attributes of E-Commerce. Sustainability 2024, 16, 7365. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177365
Zaheer MA, Anjum T, Díaz Tautiva JA, Heidler P. Digital Transformation of Enterprises to Enhance Sustainability: How Does the Reputation of Digital Applications Influence the Attributes of E-Commerce. Sustainability. 2024; 16(17):7365. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177365
Chicago/Turabian StyleZaheer, Muhammad Asif, Temoor Anjum, Julián Andrés Díaz Tautiva, and Petra Heidler. 2024. "Digital Transformation of Enterprises to Enhance Sustainability: How Does the Reputation of Digital Applications Influence the Attributes of E-Commerce" Sustainability 16, no. 17: 7365. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177365