Factors impacting behavioural intentions to adopt the electronic marketplace: findings from small businesses in India.

Richa Misra, Renuka Mahajan, Nidhi Singh, Sangeeta Khorana, Nripendra P Rana
Author Information
  1. Richa Misra: Jaipuria Institute of Management, A-32A, opposite IBM India, Sector 62, Noida, Uttar Pradesh 201309 India.
  2. Renuka Mahajan: Jaipuria Institute of Management, A-32A, opposite IBM India, Sector 62, Noida, Uttar Pradesh 201309 India. ORCID
  3. Nidhi Singh: Jaipuria Institute of Management, A-32A, opposite IBM India, Sector 62, Noida, Uttar Pradesh 201309 India.
  4. Sangeeta Khorana: Bournemouth University Business School, Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, BH8 8EB UK.
  5. Nripendra P Rana: College of Business and Economics, Qatar University, P.O. Box 2713, Doha, Qatar.

Abstract

The pandemic has accelerated e-commerce adoption for both consumers and sellers. This study aims to identify factors critical to the adoption of electronic markets (EM) during the pandemic, from the perspective of small sellers in non-metro cities. The research design utilizes core dimensions of the UTAUT model and selected constructs from protection motivation theory; since business closure vulnerability also triggers electronic market adoption. A questionnaire survey method was used to collect data from 150 sellers from tier-II/III cities of India. Study results identified performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence and perceived vulnerability as significant determinants of behavioural intention towards adoption of EM. The findings also explain the moderating impact of sellers' awareness of information technology and merchants' age on behavioural outcomes. Given the growing demands from such cities, the research offers insights for marketers to understand the bottlenecks and ways to motivate small sellers to get associated with EMs.

Keywords

References

  1. Int J Ment Health Addict. 2022;20(3):1537-1545 [PMID: 32226353]
  2. Int J Ment Health Addict. 2021;19(5):1903-1908 [PMID: 32406404]
  3. Group Process Intergroup Relat. 2023 Feb;26(2):338-356 [PMID: 36816351]
  4. Tijdschr Econ Soc Geogr. 2020 Jul;111(3):543-560 [PMID: 32836487]
  5. Dig Dis Sci. 2020 Jan;65(1):96-103 [PMID: 30604373]
  6. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2014 Oct 16;8(10):e3246 [PMID: 25329829]
  7. Telemed J E Health. 2015 Aug;21(8):661-9 [PMID: 25919800]
  8. Clin Interv Aging. 2020 Feb 05;15:123-129 [PMID: 32103913]
  9. Psychol Aging. 2006 Jun;21(2):333-52 [PMID: 16768579]
  10. J Gerontol Nurs. 2013 Jan;39(1):42-51 [PMID: 23244061]
  11. Nurse Educ Today. 2013 Jun;33(6):655-62 [PMID: 22336478]
  12. J Anxiety Disord. 2021 Jan;77:102323 [PMID: 33137593]
  13. Int J Med Inform. 2017 Sep;105:98-109 [PMID: 28750916]
  14. Int J Consum Stud. 2022 Mar;46(2):558-574 [PMID: 34220343]
  15. J Psychol. 1975 Sep;91(1):93-114 [PMID: 28136248]
  16. Int J Ment Health Addict. 2022;20(4):1913-1922 [PMID: 32372892]
  17. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 Jul 28;117(30):17656-17666 [PMID: 32651281]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0adoptionsellerselectronicsmallcitiesvulnerabilitybehaviouralpandemicEMresearchUTAUTmotivationtheoryalsoIndiaexpectancyfindingsacceleratede-commerceconsumersstudyaimsidentifyfactorscriticalmarketsperspectivenon-metrodesignutilizescoredimensionsmodelselectedconstructsprotectionsincebusinessclosuretriggersmarketquestionnairesurveymethodusedcollectdata150tier-II/IIIStudyresultsidentifiedperformanceeffortsocialinfluenceperceivedsignificantdeterminantsintentiontowardsexplainmoderatingimpactsellers'awarenessinformationtechnologymerchants'ageoutcomesGivengrowingdemandsoffersinsightsmarketersunderstandbottleneckswaysmotivategetassociatedEMsFactorsimpactingintentionsadoptmarketplace:businessesElectronicmarketplacePerceivedProtectionSelf-efficacy

Similar Articles

Cited By

No available data.