Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 50

SELF-SERVICE TECHNOLOGY

AND LOW-LITERATE
CONSUMERS

Section A - Group 12
Mukul Dhamija (2018031)
Akshita Sabharwal (2018067)
Ravi Kamani (2018101)
Bhawana Dwivedi (2018139)
Rohan Saha (2018175)
Bibhu Panda (2018205)

AUGUST 7, 2019
GOA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT

1|Page
Table of Contents

Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................3
Research Questions ...............................................................................................................................4
Objective of the Study ...........................................................................................................................4
Conceptual Model .................................................................................................................................4
Methodology .........................................................................................................................................5
Method of Sample Collection ........................................................................................................5
Sample Size ....................................................................................................................................5
Measures/ Questionnaire..............................................................................................................5
Analysis of Interviews ............................................................................................................................7
(A) Qualitative Analysis ...............................................................................................................7
(B) Quantitative Analysis .............................................................................................................9
Data Cleaning.................................................................................................................................9
Factor Analysis ...............................................................................................................................9
Cronbach alpha ........................................................................................................................... 16
Independent Samples T-Test ...................................................................................................... 23
One-Way ANOVA ........................................................................................................................ 25
Two-Way ANOVA........................................................................................................................ 28
One Way MANOVA ..................................................................................................................... 33
Correlation .................................................................................................................................. 39
Structured Equation Modelling .................................................................................................. 42
SEM Model- Path Analysis .......................................................................................................... 42
Cluster Analysis........................................................................................................................... 44
Findings............................................................................................................................................... 47
Annexure ............................................................................................................................................ 48
References .......................................................................................................................................... 50

2|Page
Introduction

Self-Service Technologies (SST) are technological interfaces allowing customers to produce


services independent of involvement of direct service employee. The intention is to replace
many face-to-face service interactions so as to make the transactions more accurate,
convenient and faster.
Examples of SSTs include ATMs, Self-pumping at gas stations, Self-ticket purchasing on
internet, Online Banking, Mobile Banking, Online Shopping etc.
Self-service technology (SST) is very popular nowadays. Automatic Teller Machine (ATM) is
one of the most popular SST, which provides bank service along with NEFT, IMPS, Payments
wallet etc. However, there is still a certain unknown about SST and personal service usage
on its consumer satisfaction and consumer commitment.
Importance of self-servicing technologies for industries as well as consumers have grown
leaps and bounds in recent decades. While SSTs have seen an increasing level of consumer
acceptance in Western countries, the same cannot be said in various developing economies.
Some cultures have been very receptive to new retailing technologies, such as self-service
applications, while others have been slow to accept and adopt these innovations (Gefen,
Karahanna, & Straub, 2003; Lin & Hsieh, 2006). These cultural influences may play a critical
role in defining the social context and expectations for retailer-consumer interactions in an
emerging economy such as India.
The demand for self-service technologies by the Indian consumers rank highest according to
a report by Buzz Back. However, this is true for a very small segment of people, primarily in
urban cities. The service sector contribution to India has been 54.40 % of total India’s GVA
of 169.61 lakh crore Indian GVA in 2018-19. The government push for financial inclusion may
have led to opening of bank accounts, especially for availing social service schemes, but
digital literacy hasn’t been able to surge up usage of ATMs.

3|Page
Research Questions
• To check which factors affect trust of low literate consumers towards SST
• Does loyalty of users depend upon the gender of the respondent?
• Does trust of users depend upon the gender of the respondent?
• Does Customer Satisfaction depend upon the gender of the respondent?
• Does customer satisfaction depend on on age of the low-literate consumer?

Objective of the Study

The purpose of the study is to understand factors which drive trust for consumers towards a
particular SST.

Conceptual Model

4|Page
Methodology
Qualitative as well as Quantitative research was used for finding out the impact and usage of
self-service technology amongst the low literate users.

• We started with qualitative research by referring to Secondary data available, followed by


in-depth interviews with various low literate respondents to get insights about the self -
service technology that they generally use.
• We further analysed the in-depth interviews using content analysis and word cloud to
shortlist the parameters on which the questionnaire should be prepared.
• The questionnaire has a response scale in the form of a Likert scale, with around 4-5
questions related with each identified parameter.
• Further, responses were filled by low literate consumers.
• Conclusions were drawn from these responses with SPSS.
• Also, model has been built using AMOS software to find out the overall relation and
dependence of independent variables amongst each other.

Method of Sample Collection


Judgement Sampling has been used. It is the non-random sampling technique wherein the choice
of sample items depends exclusively on the investigator’s knowledge.

Judgment sampling is most effective when only a limited number of individuals possess the trait
that a researcher is interested in.

Sample Size
For Qualitative Analysis, we took 13 respondents while for Quantitative Analysis, we took 18
respondents

Measures/ Questionnaire
1. What is the highest level of education you have completed?
2. Your monthly income falls in which bracket
3. Gender
4. Age
5. Occupation
6. Contact
7. Place from where you belong

Factors which be considered for any of the SST’s are mentioned below.

1. Ease of use/ FUNCTIONALITY


Complicated user interface of a machine can drive away customers from using it. If a website or
a mobile app is very complicated to use customers will avoid using it.

2. Customer service and Grievance addressal/ASSURANCE


In case of any doubts or any issue that has occurred while using the SST, there needs to be a
support system to address the request.

5|Page
3. Processing time
Time taken/delay in order to complete the process for which the SST is used is an important
factor.

4. Trust
Brand which provides the SST matters as people trust using the technology offered by a well-
known brand.

Loyalty/ Commitment/ Behavioural intentions (WOM, Cross Buying Intentions)/ Satisfaction


levels/ Design/ Convenience/ Customization possibilities/ Less human interaction/ Language/
Failures (Technological, Transactional, Customer driven)

5. Accessibility
If the machine or any other mode offering the service is not accessible easily, customers are
likely to avoid using it. Like, for online services, ‘Is the service accessible through a mobile app?’
can be a factor.

6. Comfort level/Experience/ENJOYMENT
Overall experience in using the SST is also a factor to look for. A bad experience while using the
SST can push the customer to an extent that the person can totally avoid using the service in
future.

7. Safety/SECURITY/PRIVACY
Equipment in use, is it safe to use. Also, SST involving payments, sharing of personal details are
to be made safe to prevent any fraud from happening.

8. Cost of service
Finally, Price can be a major factor while deciding which service to use. Transaction charges
occurred during online payments or prices involved in the use of ATM machines are considered
as the cost of service and can be a deciding factor for its use.

Questions (in Points)

• Respondent Name
• Age
• Gender
• Education Level
• Monthly Income
• Occupation
• Contact
• Belong To
• Awareness of ATM
• Possesses Credit/Debit Card
• Self-user
• Reasons for not using Debt/ATM card
• Use for ATM/Debit card
• Frequency of Use
• Period of usage
• Difficulty in Use
• Comfort level
6|Page
• Problem Encountered
• Problem Type
• Problem Resolution
• Awareness about problems that could arise
• Processing Time
• Banks in use
• Preferred Bank
• Consideration for Cost of Service
• Bank Loyalty
• Reason of Switching, if no loyalty
• Awareness about Banks
• Why prefer ATMs
• Any special feeling
• Any other mode of money withdrawal or transacting
• Proximity
• Security Concerns
• Someone withdraws on their behalf
• Overall Experience

Analysis of Interviews

(A) Qualitative Analysis


Qualitative Analysis was done by taking in-depth interviews of low literate consumers.

Interviews were recorded by taking permission from the respondent, which were then transcribed,
followed by making a collated excel sheet of all the responses. The excel sheet was further
analysed, followed by formation of Word Cloud.

Word cloud shows what all words are repeating the maximum in the respondent’s answers and
which in turn helps one to make the parameters for the Survey Questionnaire.

Out of 13 interviews conducted, 3 were males and 10 females.

• Awareness about ATM was 100%


• 61.5 % of respondents possessed ATM cards
• 61.5 % of respondents were self-users
• Cash withdrawal was the main reason to have an ATM card. Only 1/13 used ATM for reason
other than bank withdrawal. 2/13 uses ATM/Debit card for using other SSTs like online
shopping
• Average Frequency of usage was 2 times a month
• Most of the respondents found it easy to use
• 61.5 % had high level of comfort while using it
• Users were not aware about the problems that could arise by or during the usage if they
hadn’t encountered it themselves
• 3/13 users encountered problems in transacting money. In all of these cases, banks
resolved their problem.

7|Page
• Cost of Service was a consideration in 3/13 respondents while using ATM services. Rest
were either ignorant or do not consider cost to be an issue
• SBI was the major dominating bank in the responses. Bank of India and ICICI were other
two secondary players in the given sample
• ‘Convenience’ and ‘Time Saving’ are the two major reasons why respondents like ATMs and
prefer it over going to banks
• There were no concerns of security or fraudulent transaction
• Most of them found it convenient to use the ATM with fast processing time
• Very low preference of banks in ATM usage unless high cost of transaction
• Most of them were okay with the cost of service
• 2/13 respondents- Around 15% of the respondents possess ATM card but don’t use it
themselves
• There was no negative overall experience and majority of them responded ‘Good’.

The above word cloud as well as interpretation of the consolidated IDI sheet was used to come
up with the parameters for the survey.

8|Page
(B) Quantitative Analysis

Data Cleaning

In the above normality test, we see that data is skewed

Factor Analysis

Descriptive Statistics

Mean Std. Deviation Analysis N

V2 5.39 .979 18
V3 5.56 1.381 18
V4 6.06 .725 18

9|Page
V5 4.56 1.097 18
V8 4.22 1.060 18
V10 5.39 1.461 18
V17 5.50 1.150 18
V20 4.17 1.043 18
V23 4.72 1.274 18
V24 5.67 .767 18
V30 4.78 .878 18
V31 5.44 1.423 18
V32 4.56 1.097 18
V39 4.50 1.339 18
V40 4.78 1.263 18
V41 4.94 .802 18
V12 5.89 1.023 18
V14 4.78 1.003 18
V19 4.72 .826 18
V28 5.22 1.003 18
V33 4.89 1.231 18

10 | P a g e
The correlation matrix is a non – positive definite matrix. The determinant value of the matrix is
zero.
We have not got the value of KMO and Bartlett since Bartlett formula contains log of determination
and its log will be undefined. Since the correlation matrix has a linear dependency so KMO value
can’t be calculated.

Communalities

Initial Extraction

V2 1.000 .900
V3 1.000 .785
V4 1.000 .749
V5 1.000 .928
V8 1.000 .908
V10 1.000 .880
V17 1.000 .938
V20 1.000 .866
V23 1.000 .806
V24 1.000 .834
V30 1.000 .909
V31 1.000 .605
V32 1.000 .869
V39 1.000 .883
V40 1.000 .953
V41 1.000 .822
V12 1.000 .875
V14 1.000 .898
V19 1.000 .850
V28 1.000 .763
11 | P a g e
V33 1.000 .871

Extraction Method: Principal


Component Analysis.

Communalities shows how much of the variance in the variables has been explained by each factor.

Here we can see that first seven factors explain 85.191% variance of our model.

12 | P a g e
Eigen value shows how all variables share its variance with each factor. Scree plot is a
graph which shows how many factors should we retain. The curve starts to flat after factor
9, 10. From here we can analyse initially how many factors will be formed.

The 7 factors which were formed are named: -

a) Experience
b) Functionality
c) Trust
d) Loyalty
e) Convenience
f) Customer Satisfaction
g) Accuracy

13 | P a g e
14 | P a g e
While analysing the Rotated component matrix we finalize how many factors are there and each
factor would have how many variables. We kept the absolute value below 0.4 which tells SPSS not
to print any of the correlation that are 0.4 or less.

15 | P a g e
Cronbach alpha

Reliability for Factor 1

16 | P a g e
Reliability analysis for Factor 2

17 | P a g e
Reliability analysis for Factor 3

Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if Scale Variance Corrected Squared Cronbach's
Item Deleted if Item Item-Total Multiple Alpha if Item
Deleted Correlation Correlation Deleted
V10 9.28 6.330 -.687 .479 .929
V39 10.17 1.206 .140 .761 -4.184a
V40 9.89 1.399 .140 .781 -3.617a

18 | P a g e
19 | P a g e
Reliability analysis of Factor 4

20 | P a g e
Reliability analysis of Factor 5

21 | P a g e
Reliability analysis of Factor 6

Both Factor 3 and Factor 5 had negative Cronbach alpha.

Factor 3 -After analysing the Item -Total Statistics table it was found that Cronbach alpha became
positive if the Question 3 was deleted. Hence the responses for the question were mirror imaged
and changed accordingly resulting in a positive Cronbach alpha after running the test again.

Factor 5-There were two questions in this factor having a negative Cronbach alpha. After mirror
imaging the responses of one of the questions the resulting Cronbach alpha was positive.

Cause of a negative Cronbach alpha-There is a chance the respondent might have mis interpreted
the question and thereby answered in an opposite manner.

For all other factors the Cronbach alpha was positive and the minimum level of Cronbach alpha used
for the study is 0.517

22 | P a g e
Independent Samples T-Test

Research question 1- Does loyalty of users depend upon the gender of the respondent?

Hypothesis, H0 : There is no Significant difference in loyalty between Male and Female users.

Independent Variable: GENDER (Gender of the user)

Dependent Variable: Z_Loyalty (Loyalty of user)

Test Used: Independent Sample t-Test

Here in Levene’s test p (0.037) <0.05 so the difference in variances is statistically significant and
null hypothesis is rejected. The difference in variances is statistically significant and the test is
invalid but all would not be lost. We would simply use the results in the second row “Equal
variances not assumed”.
The t value has a Sig. (2-tailed) value of 0.031 (what we call p). So, in this case p<0.05, and the
difference in means is statistically significant. Null hypotheses of T test is rejected and we can
say that gender of the user affects the loyalty.

23 | P a g e
Research question 2- Does trust of users depend upon the gender of the respondent?

Hypothesis, H0 : There is no Significant difference in trust between Male and Female users.

Independent Variable: GENDER (Gender of the user)

Dependent Variable: Z_Trust (Trust of user)

Test Used: Independent Sample t-Test

In Levene’s test, the sig. value (0.139) is >0.05, thus the difference in variances is statistically NOT
significant and the test is valid. Null hypothesis won’t be rejected. We will see Equal variances
assumed column. The t value (0.227) has a Sig. (2-tailed) value of 0.823. As p > 0.05, and thus the
difference in means is NOT statistically significant. Thus, we fail to reject H0, so we can say that
gender does not impact trust of users.

Research question 3- Does Customer Satisfaction depend upon the gender of the respondent?

Hypothesis, H0 : There is no Significant difference in Customer Satisfaction between Male and


Female users.

Independent Variable: GENDER (Gender of the user)

Dependent Variable: Z_CSAT (Customer Satisfaction of user)

Test Used: Independent Sample t-Test

24 | P a g e
In Levene’s test, the sig. value (0.080) is >0.05, thus the difference in variances is statistically NOT
significant and the test is valid. Null hypothesis won’t be rejected. We will see Equal variances
assumed column. The t value (0.359) has a Sig. (2-tailed) value of 0.724. As p > 0.05, and thus the
difference in means is NOT statistically significant. Thus, we fail to reject H0, so we can say that
gender does not impact customer satisfaction of users.

One-Way ANOVA

Research question: Does customer satisfaction depend on on age of the low-literate consumer?
Hypothesis(Ho): Customer Satisfaction level doesnot depend on the age of low-literate consumer
Independent Variable: AGE(age category of low-literate consumer)
Dependent Variable: Customer Satisfaction(Z_CSAT)

Test Used: One-Way Annova

25 | P a g e
26 | P a g e
27 | P a g e
Test of homogeneity: Levene’s test tests the variances of each age group. Here H0 is that
the variances of each category are not different.
The p-value is 0.637 which is greater than 0.05. So, we fail to reject the null hypothesis and
assume that there is homogeneity of variance.

Since the significance value is 0.011 which is less than 0.05, we conclude that there is
significant relationship between age and customer satisfaction. Hence, we can reject null
hypothesis and accept the alternate hypothesis.
The descriptive output shows the number each of the category of age (independent
variable), standard deviation, etc.
Since, there is significant relationship between age and customer satisfaction we have to
conduct Post Hoc test. In the Post Hoc test we will check for significant differences
between the age groups for Tukey’s (because equal variances assumed). In Tukey test we
see that there are significant differences in the variances between age group 21-30 and 31-
40 because significance level is 0.042 which is less than 0.05. Also, there is significant
difference between age group 31-40 and 41-50 because significance level is 0.014 which is
less than 0.05.

In the mean plot, we can see the different means for each of the age groups. We can see a
clear difference in the mean of 21-30 and 31-40. Also, we can see the difference in mean of
31-40 and 41-50.

Two-Way ANOVA

Research question: Is there a significant difference in the means of convenience level with respect
to the age and gender of the low-literate consumer?

28 | P a g e
Hypothesis(Ho): Customer Satisfaction level doesnot depend on the age and gender of low-literate
consumer
Independent Variable: AGE(age category of low-literate consumer); GENDER
Dependent Variable: Customer Satisfaction(Z_CSAT)

29 | P a g e
30 | P a g e
31 | P a g e
For age p=0.013 and for gender p=0.101. So, for age p<0.05 which means that there is
significant difference in customer satisfaction level mean in between different age
categories but there is no significant difference in the customer satisfaction level

32 | P a g e
One Way MANOVA

Research Question: Is there significance dependency between customer satisfaction level


& functionality and age category with respect to low-literate consumers of SST
Hypothesis: There is no dependency between customer satisfaction level, functionality and
age category with respect to low-literate consumers of SST.
Independent Variable: Age (age category of low-literate consumers)
Dependent Variable: Customer Satisfaction level; functionality

33 | P a g e
34 | P a g e
Multiple Comparisons

Dependent Variable (I) Age (J) Age Std. Error Sig. 95% Confidence Interval
35 | P a g e
Mean Lower Bound Upper
Difference (I- Bound
J)

31-40 -1.0952* .36566 .042 -2.1580 -.0324

21-30 41-50 .5714 .45354 .601 -.7468 1.8897

>50 .0714 .52697 .999 -1.4602 1.6031

21-30 1.0952* .36566 .042 .0324 2.1580

31-40 41-50 1.6667* .46474 .014 .3159 3.0175

>50 1.1667 .53664 .178 -.3931 2.7264


Tukey HSD
21-30 -.5714 .45354 .601 -1.8897 .7468

41-50 31-40 -1.6667* .46474 .014 -3.0175 -.3159

>50 -.5000 .59998 .838 -2.2439 1.2439

21-30 -.0714 .52697 .999 -1.6031 1.4602

>50 31-40 -1.1667 .53664 .178 -2.7264 .3931

41-50 .5000 .59998 .838 -1.2439 2.2439


Z_CSAT
31-40 -1.0952* .32297 .031 -2.0903 -.1001

21-30 41-50 .5714 .57143 .761 -2.0142 3.1571

>50 .0714 .57143 .999 -4.8520 4.9949

21-30 1.0952* .32297 .031 .1001 2.0903

31-40 41-50 1.6667 .52705 .172 -1.3077 4.6410

>50 1.1667 .52705 .435 -6.4669 8.8002


Games-Howell
21-30 -.5714 .57143 .761 -3.1571 2.0142

41-50 31-40 -1.6667 .52705 .172 -4.6410 1.3077

>50 -.5000 .70711 .888 -4.2256 3.2256

21-30 -.0714 .57143 .999 -4.9949 4.8520

>50 31-40 -1.1667 .52705 .435 -8.8002 6.4669

41-50 .5000 .70711 .888 -3.2256 4.2256


31-40 .0429 .49054 1.000 -1.3829 1.4686

21-30 41-50 .4762 .60844 .861 -1.2923 2.2447

>50 .6429 .70694 .800 -1.4119 2.6976

21-30 -.0429 .49054 1.000 -1.4686 1.3829

31-40 41-50 .4333 .62346 .897 -1.3788 2.2455

>50 .6000 .71991 .838 -1.4925 2.6925


Z_Functionality Tukey HSD
21-30 -.4762 .60844 .861 -2.2447 1.2923

41-50 31-40 -.4333 .62346 .897 -2.2455 1.3788

>50 .1667 .80489 .997 -2.1728 2.5061

21-30 -.6429 .70694 .800 -2.6976 1.4119


>50 31-40 -.6000 .71991 .838 -2.6925 1.4925

41-50 -.1667 .80489 .997 -2.5061 2.1728

36 | P a g e
31-40 .0429 .57861 1.000 -1.8457 1.9314

21-30 41-50 .4762 .26564 .353 -.4122 1.3645

>50 .6429 .27590 .180 -.2707 1.5564

21-30 -.0429 .57861 1.000 -1.9314 1.8457

31-40 41-50 .4333 .52260 .839 -1.4716 2.3383

>50 .6000 .52789 .685 -1.3004 2.5004


Games-Howell
21-30 -.4762 .26564 .353 -1.3645 .4122

41-50 31-40 -.4333 .52260 .839 -2.3383 1.4716

>50 .1667 .12019 .610 -.7176 1.0510

21-30 -.6429 .27590 .180 -1.5564 .2707

>50 31-40 -.6000 .52789 .685 -2.5004 1.3004

41-50 -.1667 .12019 .610 -1.0510 .7176

Based on observed means.


The error term is Mean Square (Error) = .777.
*. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.

Multivariate Test table : The multivariate Tests is where we find the actual result of the
one-way MANOVA.
To determine whether the one-way manova was statiscally significant you need to look
at ‘sig’ coloumn of
Wilks Lamda. We can see from the table that we have sig value of 0.47 which is greater
than 0.05.
Therefore, we can conclude that age categories are not significantly dependent on
customer satisfaction
levels and functionality.

Test between subject effect table: to determine how the dependent variables differ from
the independent
variables. We need to look at the Tests of Between-Subjects Effects.
We can see from this table the the age category has significant impact on customer
satisfaction level
(p value 0.011) but no significant impact on functionality (p value 0.728).

37 | P a g e
38 | P a g e
Correlation

Descriptive Statistics

Mean Std. Deviation N

Z_Experience 5.1944 .80693 18


Z_Functionality 4.7778 .83705 18
Z_Trust 3.9630 1.22549 18
Z_Loyalty 5.4722 .83968 18
Z_Convenience 4.3611 1.01178 18
Z_CSAT 4.8333 .87447 18
Z_Accurate 4.56 1.097 18

Z_Experience Z_Functionality Z_Trust Z_Loyalty Z_Convenience Z_CSAT Z_Accurate

Pearson 1 .320 .023 .307 -.343 .184 -.129

Correlation

Sig. (2- .195 .929 .215 .163 .465 .609

tailed)

Sum of 11.069 3.678 .380 3.535 -4.764 2.208 -1.944


Squares
Z_Experience
and Cross-
products

.651 .216 .022 .208 -.280 .130 -.114


Covariance

18 18 18 18 18 18 18
N

Pearson .320 1 -.039 -.089 -.080 -.046 -.024

Correlation

Sig. (2- .195 .878 .726 .752 .858 .924

tailed)

Z_Functionality Sum of 3.678 11.911 -.681 -1.061 -1.156 -.567 -.378


Squares
and Cross-
products
.216 .701 -.040 -.062 -.068 -.033 -.022
Covariance

39 | P a g e
18 18 18 18 18 18 18
N

Pearson .023 -.039 1 .037 .162 -.061 .177

Correlation

Sig. (2- .929 .878 .884 .522 .810 .483

tailed)

Sum of .380 -.681 25.531 .648 3.407 -1.111 4.037


Squares
Z_Trust
and Cross-
products
.022 -.040 1.502 .038 .200 -.065 .237
Covariance

18 18 18 18 18 18 18
N

Pearson .307 -.089 .037 1 -.299 -.047 -.190

Correlation

Sig. (2- .215 .726 .884 .228 .854 .450

tailed)

Sum of 3.535 -1.061 .648 11.986 -4.319 -.583 -2.972


Squares
Z_Loyalty
and Cross-
products
.208 -.062 .038 .705 -.254 -.034 -.175
Covariance

18 18 18 18 18 18 18
N

Pearson -.343 -.080 .162 -.299 1 -.061 .206

Correlation

Sig. (2- .163 .752 .522 .228 .810 .412

tailed)

Z_Convenience Sum of -4.764 -1.156 3.407 -4.319 17.403 -.917 3.889


Squares
and Cross-
products
-.280 -.068 .200 -.254 1.024 -.054 .229
Covariance

40 | P a g e
18 18 18 18 18 18 18
N

Pearson .184 -.046 -.061 -.047 -.061 1 -.020

Correlation

Sig. (2- .465 .858 .810 .854 .810 .936


tailed)
Sum of 2.208 -.567 -1.111 -.583 -.917 13.000 -.333
Z_CSAT
Squares
and Cross-
products
.130 -.033 -.065 -.034 -.054 .765 -.020
Covariance

N 18 18 18 18 18 18 18

Pearson -.129 -.024 .177 -.190 .206 -.020 1

Correlation

Sig. (2- .609 .924 .483 .450 .412 .936


tailed)

Sum of -1.944 -.378 4.037 -2.972 3.889 -.333 20.444


Z_Accuracy
Squares
and Cross-
products

-.114 -.022 .237 -.175 .229 -.020 1.203


Covariance

N 18 18 18 18 18 18 18

Since we are testing for metric variables hence, we run the Pearson Correlation Test. According to
the Pearson correlation test, two variables should not be highly correlated i.e. having a value of 0.8
and above. So, in the above table we have run the Pearson test on the mean of all the factors which
we are considering for our model.

41 | P a g e
Structured Equation Modelling

SEM Model- Path Analysis

42 | P a g e
Due to small sample size we are not getting all the three models but only the default model is being
displayed and CMIN value is shown.

We analyse the standardized regression weights and see the estimate values of following
independent variables: Experience, Accuracy and Convenience on our dependent variable: Trust

43 | P a g e
Cluster Analysis

Hierarchical Cluster Analysis- Used because samples size is very small i.e. 18 <100

Agglomeration Schedule

Stage Cluster Combined Coefficients Stage Cluster First Appears Next Stage

Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 1 Cluster 2

1 3 6 .853 0 0 3

2 13 18 1.723 0 0 4

3 3 5 1.742 1 0 5

4 11 13 2.648 0 2 11

5 1 3 2.715 0 3 7

6 10 16 3.064 0 0 8

7 1 4 3.291 5 0 8

8 1 10 4.186 7 6 10

9 2 12 5.047 0 0 10

10 1 2 6.599 8 9 11

11 1 11 5.748 10 4 13

12 8 9 7.438 0 0 13

13 1 8 7.421 11 12 14

14 1 17 11.413 13 0 15

15 1 7 13.739 14 0 16

16 1 15 14.119 15 0 17

17 1 14 16.905 16 0 0

• The Agglomeration schedule summarizes the cluster solution. In the first stage, Cases 3 & 6
i.e. Pushplata and Laxman Sawant are combined because they have the smallest distance
(Euclidian distance) is the smallest.

44 | P a g e
The Dendrogram findings are same as the Agglomeration schedule. There isn’t a strong
classification and definite clusters couldn’t be formed.

45 | P a g e
46 | P a g e
Findings

Discussions

Looking at the different aspects of SST through the eye of the consumers revealed interesting
findings for usage of SST among low literate consumers. Even though the data size was small, the
awareness levels of ATMs are 100% among those who were surveyed.

On a scale of 1-7, with 7 being the highest, Customer Loyalty had an average of 5.4, while the
Customer Experience and Satisfaction levels were around 5. Thus, on an overall the low literate
consumer was contended with the ATMs.

The number of questions in questionnaire were tedious for some respondents. So, a reduction of
questions can be done while doing a similar survey next time for the given target segment.

Implications

Banks

Banks could use the data and analysis by making customer centric solution for low literate
consumers. For eg., Trust on an average for the respondents was found to be 3.96. Thus, the banks
can take feedback from these customers so that they can increase their accounts through word of
mouth.

Managers

Managers in the future (especially Marketing Managers) could use this study to understand
differences in different customer segments for a same product. This could be an aid to better
segmentation of target markets based on demographics and behaviour. It can also generate
consumer insights for the existing product and offer innovation in its features or service offerings.

Policy

Government policy makers can assess the usage frequency and change in awareness
levels/addition of new customers for the given SST. Thus, government banks or government
support to corporates can alter according to the responses.

47 | P a g e
Annexure

NAME: TEL/EMAIL:

GENDER: HOMETOWN:

AGE:

HIGHEST EDUCATION:

GROSS MONTHLY INCOME: SST USED:

Strongly Disagree Partly Neither Partly Agree Strongly


Disagree Disagree Disagree Agree Agree
Statements nor Agree
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1. I can get my service done with the “above-


mentioned” SST in a short time.
2. The service process of the “above-
mentioned” SST is clear.
3. Using the “above-mentioned” SST requires
little effort.
4. I can get my service done smoothly with the
“above-mentioned” SSTs.

5. Each service item/function of the SST is


error-free.

6. The operation of the “above-mentioned”


SST is interesting.
7. I feel good being able to use the SSTs.
8. The “above-mentioned” SST has interesting
additional functions.
9. The “above-mentioned” SST provides me
with all relevant information.
10. I feel safe in my transactions with the
“above-mentioned” SST.
11. A clear privacy policy is stated when I use
the “above-mentioned” SST.
12. The firm providing the SST is well-known.
13. The firm providing the SST has a good
Reputation.
14. The layout of the “above-mentioned” SST is
aesthetically appealing.
15. The “above-mentioned” SST appears to use
up-to-date technology.
16. The SST has operating hours convenient to
Customers.
17. It is easy and convenient to reach the “above-
mentioned” SST.
18. The “above-mentioned” SST understands
my specific needs.

48 | P a g e
19. The “above-mentioned” SST has my best
interests at heart.
20. The “above-mentioned” SST has features
that are personalized for me.
21. Overall, I am satisfied with the SST service
offered by the bank.
22. The SST service offered by the bank exceeds
my expectations.
23. The SST service offered by the bank is close
to my ideal SSTs.
24. My choice to use this service was a wise one.
25. The “above-mentioned” SST can be trusted .
26. I can rely on the “above-mentioned” SST to
execute my transactions reliably.
27. I am able to trust the “above-mentioned”
SST completely.
28. The “above-mentioned” SST will be sincere
in promises.
29. The “above-mentioned” SST will treat me
fairly and honestly.
30. I feel a very high degree of association with
the “above-mentioned” SST.
31. I have a very long association with the
“above-mentioned” SST.
32. I feel a sense of belonging to the “above-
mentioned” SST.
33. I would like to talk to my friends and
acquaintance about the “above-mentioned” SST.
34. I would like to continue using the services of
the “above-mentioned” SST through the next six
months.
35. The “above-mentioned” SST facility is
exactly what is needed for this service.
36. The likelihood that I would recommend this
“above-mentioned” SST to a friend is high.
37. If I had to do it over again, I would make the
same choice.
38. I would do more business with this bank in
the future.
39. I would buy new products/services offered by
this “above-mentioned” org..
40. I would buy more products/services from this
“above-mentioned” org..
41. Due to the performance of “above-
mentioned” SST, I will patronize the “above-
mentioned” org..

49 | P a g e
References

• SST (Self-service technology) in Service Sector and India — | ISME. (2019). Retrieved 6 August
2019, from https://www.isme.in/sst-self-service-technology-in-service/.
• Self Service Technology Global Market Research 2019 Industry Statistics Report Analysis by
Size, Share, Trends, Growth, Developments and Demand By 2023. (2019). Retrieved 6 August
2019, from https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/self-service-technology-global-
market-research-2019-industry-statistics-report-analysis-by-size-share-trends-growth-
developments-and-demand-by-2023-2019-03-06.
• Sector-wise contribution of GDP of India - StatisticsTimes.com. (2019). Retrieved 6 August
2019, from http://statisticstimes.com/economy/sectorwise-gdp-contribution-of-india.php.

50 | P a g e

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi