Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Molapo
Molapo
Molapo
by
MASOPHA NEHEMIA MOLAPO
Short dissertation
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree
MASTER COMMERCII
in
Business Management
at
UNIVERSITY OF JOHANNESBURG
STUDY LEADER: Mr C. SCHEEPERS
October 2008
JOHANNESBURG
Abstract
Extensive studies have been done in the past on measuring service quality where the
service is delivered on a face-to-face encounter. This study assesses and measures
online service quality where there is no face-to-face encounter. The service quality
measures are particularly on Internet Banking service. The research problem has
been stated as the lack of insight into customer perceptions on Internet Banking
service quality by management in South African banks. The purpose of this study was
to explore customers perceptions on key electronic service dimensions or factors of
Internet Banking service quality. The primary objective of the study was to have an
insight into how Internet Banking customers in South Africa perceive their respective
banks performance on pre-defined electronic service quality dimensions. The
secondary objective was to determine if there was any difference in Internet Banking
service quality perception based on age, gender, or primary bank offering the service
(service provider).
Even though online shopping and Internet Banking are online services there are
subtle differences between the two services. With online shopping there is a physical
item that gets traded and in Internet Banking only services are traded. It is for this
reason that the original E-S-Q instrument was slightly adjusted. Some of the
dimensions that were excluded from the original E-S-Q instrument include flexibility,
price knowledge and customization
Given the purpose and objectives of the study a quantitative approach was taken as
the major research approach for the study.
probability sampling one because the convenience method of sampling was used.
The survey population was all online banking users, utilizing services from South
African banks. A slightly revised electronic service quality (E-S-Q), a service quality
measurement instrument, was used in this study. Data was collected via a web based
self administered survey. The original E-S-Q instrument measured customer service
quality from an online shopping experience point of view. This study aimed at
gleaning respondents perceptions on key Internet Banking service dimensions.
The study involved collecting primary data through a structured survey questioning
which was followed by statistical analysis of the data. The objective was to generalise
about online banking customers perceptions on the quality of Internet Banking
i
service. To collect primary data the Internet survey method was used. In essence, the
combination of the quantitative approach and the survey method was utilised in this
study.
The findings and conclusion of the study is that the overall respondents perception on
Internet Banking service quality was a satisfactory one. The Internet Banking service
quality perceptions are not influenced by who the service provider is, age or gender.
Respondents perceptions were neutral or indifferent on the responsiveness service
quality dimension. Lastly there were five dimensions that the respondents evaluated
Internet Banking service quality on, that of efficiency, performance, security,
responsiveness and contact.
ii
iii
Acknowledgements
First and foremost I would like to thank my saviour, the Almighty God, for His love and
guidance, for granting me the strength to persevere and the ability to succeed.
Secondly I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my wife Thuso, my children
Khanyapa, Thato and Refiloe, for their love, understanding and patience they gave
me when I could not spend quality time with them during my studies. I am also
thankful to my brothers and sisters for the encouragement and support they gave me
during these trying times.
Lastly I would also like to express my gratitude to the following persons:
Mr. Cor Scheepers for his supervision, advice, guidance and support.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Abstract.......................................................................................................................i
Declaration of Original Work...................................................................................iii
Acknowledgements..................................................................................................iv
Chapter ONE..............................................................................................................1
INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................1
1.1
1.1.2
1.1.3
1.1.4
Internet Banking......................................................................................4
1.2
Problem statement:.......................................................................................5
1.3
1.4
1.4.2
1.4.3
1.4.4
Data Collection........................................................................................6
1.5
1.6
Conclusion ....................................................................................................8
2.2.2
2.2.3
SERVQUAL ..........................................................................................16
2.2.4
2.3
2.3.2
2.3.3
2.4
2.4.2
2.4.3
2.5
2.5.1
2.5.2
2.5.3
2.5.4
2.6
Conclusion ..................................................................................................35
Introduction .................................................................................................38
3.2
3.3
3.4
Sampling .....................................................................................................41
3.4.1
Sampling methodology..........................................................................41
3.4.2
3.5
Research instrument...................................................................................43
3.6
Data Collection............................................................................................44
3.7
3.8
3.9
Conclusion ..................................................................................................47
Introduction. ................................................................................................48
4.2
Missing data................................................................................................48
4.3
Descriptive Statistics...................................................................................48
4.4
4.5
4.6
Chapter FIVE............................................................................................................69
INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS ...........................................................................69
5.1
Introduction. ................................................................................................69
5.2
Findings ......................................................................................................69
5.3
5.3.2
5.3.3
5.3.4
5.4
5.5
Conclusion ..................................................................................................73
Chapter SIX..............................................................................................................74
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...........................................................74
6.1
6.2
Recommendations ......................................................................................75
6.3
REFERENCES..........................................................................................................77
APPENDICES...........................................................................................................81
vii
List of Tables
Page
viii
List of Figures
Page
Appendices
Appendix I: Internet Banking Service Quality Frequency Table ................................ 81
Appendix II: Descriptive Statistics ............................................................................. 82
Appendix III:Normality Test results ...........................................................................83
Appendix IV: Reliability Test results.......................................................................... 85
Appendix V:New Service Dimensions Labels ........................................................... 89
Appendix VI:The Kruskal-wallis Test......................................................................... 91
Appendix VII:Survey Covering Letter........................................................................92
Appendix VIII:The Survey Questionnaire..................................................................93
ix
Chapter ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1
The Internet emerged as a key competitive arena for the future of financial services
hence it came as no surprise when banks and brokers flocked to the Web. The use of
the Internet makes it possible for banks to offer a number of home banking services
24 hours a day (Mls, 1998:331). According to Sayar and Wolfe (2007:123) the term
Internet Banking is used to describe the case where banks customers conduct
banking transactions on the Internet.
1.1.1 Historical background
According to Singh (2004:187) banking in South Africa has its roots in both the British
and Dutch traditions. The British and the Dutch influence led to the existence of
Standard Bank and Nedbank respectively. The year 1998 saw the consolidation of
United, Volskas and TrustBank into a single brand as Absa adopted a new corporate
identity. As a result, four major banks, Standard Bank, Nedbank, Absa and First
National Bank emerged. These banks dominate the South African retail banking
sector (Singh, 2004:188).
Internet Banking in South Africa started in 1996. The start was fairly slow, but
consumers were attracted to the convenience, safety and low costs of online banking.
Absa was the first to offer online services and was followed by Nedcor with Standard
Bank, First National Bank and Mercantile Bank being the last to follow (Singh,
2004:190). Below are some of the key milestones in the history of Internet Banking:
May 1995: Wells Fargo (USA), already on the Web, offered online access to
statements
November1995: NBS became the first South African bank on the Web, offering
only a brochure on its site, with no clickable links.
October 1996: Absa became the first South African bank to offer personal
banking details online.
February 1997: Nedbank became the first South African bank to allow online
transactions.
1
December 1997: Wells Fargo became the first online banking service to signup 400 000 customers.
July 2001: South Africas first standalone bank 20Twenty was launched with
the backing of Saambou and 40 000 customers signed up in the first six
months.
May 2004: Absa reached the 450 000 online banking customer mark
(Goldstuck, 2004:23).
The financial sector is one of the business areas that has been most affected by the
spread of new technologies, particularly the Internet. These technologies have not
only had a bearing on the internal organizational processes, but have also had a
sizeable influence on the way in which financial institutions interrelate with their
customers (Flavian, Guinalu & Torres, 2006:406). The Internet has been accepted as
a new addition to the traditional way of doing business. Banking organisations have
progressed a long way in the use of the Internet, with most banks offering transaction
services over the Internet (Sohail & Shaikh, 2008:58). ONeill, Palmer and Wright
(2003:281) reckon that the winners in the online search market space will be those
who consistently provide compelling, user friendly and responsive online service
experiences. They further suggest that specific research on the identification of
attributes that work together to create effective online services experience is lacking.
electronically
delivered
services.
Service
quality
research
has
core E-S-Q scale that can be used to measure customer perceptions of service
quality. According to Zeithaml (2002:136) the other three dimensions become salient
when
online
customers
responsiveness,
run
into
problems.
compensation
and
contact.
These
These
three
three
dimensions
dimensions
are
were
Online system quality: content, accuracy, ease of use, timeliness, aesthetics, and
security.
and Wolfe (2007:123) the term Internet Banking is used to describe the case where
banks customers conduct banking transactions on the Internet. In the contemporary
context, this mainly implies the usage of computers, and digital TVs for accessing
internet branches.
Internet Banking refers to a service offered by banks that allows account holders to
access their account data via the Internet. In order to take advantage of the Internet
Banking, an account holder would need to meet several technological requirements,
such as having a personal computer with Internet access and a web browser. If these
conditions are satisfied Internet Banking can be performed from anywhere in the
world. Thus, Internet Banking facilitates direct access to account details; enables
transfer of funds; allows for multiple bills payments, and performs an array of other
transactions (Sayar & Wolfe, 2007:124).
1.2
Problem statement:
Research Problem:
Management in South African banks, do not have an insight into how their customers
perceive and evaluate Internet Banking service quality.
1.3
Objective / purpose
This study aims to explore customers perceptions on Internet Banking service quality
dimensions or factors. This will be done with the following objectives in mind:
Have an insight into how Internet Banking customers in South Africa perceive and
evaluate their respective banks performance on pre-defined Internet Banking
service quality dimensions.
1.4
and
secure
confidential
answers
quickly
and
cost-effectively.
Respondents were invited by e-mail to participate in the survey. This ensured that the
respondents feedback was captured at the time when the responses were submitted.
1.5
1.6
Conclusion
Chapter one served as an introduction to the study, outlining the problem statement,
the research objectives and the research methodology were discussed. In chapter two
a review of the related literature will be done. The review will include an explanation of
what service quality, service and electronic service are. The chapter will undertake to
offer insights into service quality dimensions. The other concepts to be discussed
include SERVQUAL and E-S-Q as instruments used to measure traditional service
quality and electronic service quality respectively.
Chapter TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction.
OSullivan, Edmond and ter Hofstede (2002:3) define a service in its simplest form, as
an action which involves transferring value, performed by one entity on behalf of the
other. According to Zeithaml, Bitner and Gremler (2006:6) the broad definition of
service implies intangibility as a key determinant of whether an offering is a service or
not. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) describes a service as
part of the total production concept. A service is generated by a process and the
customer outcome is created in this process. In the case of a service as compared to
a product the customer is present and affects the results in terms of added value and
quality (Edvardsson, 1998:142).
Service quality can be viewed in a structured and integrated way called the GAPS
model of service quality. Zeithaml, Bitner and Gremler (2006:33) depict the GAPS
model as consisting of the customer and provider gaps. The customer gap is the
difference between the customer expectations and perceptions. To close the all
important gaps, the GAPS model suggests that the other four gaps, referred to as
provider gaps, need to be closed. According to Zeithaml et al., (2006:34) the gaps
occurring within the organization providing the service include:
Gap2 refers to not selecting the right service designs and standards.
The literature review will look into the definition of traditional service, service quality,
banking service quality and service quality measurements. This will then lead to a
discussion on electronic service, service quality and electronic service measurements.
The majority of definitions for electronic service use the Internet and/ or workflows as
a conduit to new revenue or task completion. Web services have also been described
as an aggregation of functionality with a single faade and published for the purpose
of use (OSullivan et al. 2002:3). To conclude the literature review an important
Traditional Services
intangibility being the key determinant of service is true, it is also true that few are
purely intangible or totally tangible.
manufactured products. The latter products tend to be more tangible than services.
Bateson and Hoffman (1999:9) agree that it is difficult to define a pure good product
or service. A pure service assumes that there is no goods element to the service that
the customer receives. In reality most services contain some goods element in them
(Bateson & Hoffman, 1999:9). Zeithaml et al. (2006:21) summarises
the
Intangibility
Heterogeneity
No two services will precisely be alike because they are performances frequently
rendered by humans (Zeithaml et al., 2006:22). Baron and Harris (2003:20) say
organisations providing services know that no two service provisions are exactly the
same, whatever the attempts to standardise them. The quality of any service will vary
when offered by different employees, probably at different times of the day.
To receive the benefit of the service, the consumer must be part of the system. It thus
becomes impossible to store a service (Bateson & Hoffman, 1999:12). This situation
of simultaneous rendering and consumption means that the consumer is present while
the service is being rendered and thus views and may even take part in the rendering
process. In simultaneously rendering and consumption of service, customers will
interact with one another during the service rendering process and thus may affect
one anothers experiences (Zeithaml et al., 2006:23). Baron and Harris (2003:20) refer
to this characteristic of service as inseparability.
Perishability
According to Zeithaml et al. (2006:23) perishability refers to the fact that services
cannot be saved, stored resold or returned.
Santos (2003:234) argue that there are two main conceptualisations of service quality
that exist one based on disconfirmation approach, and the other based on the
performance-only approach. Oliver (1980:461) points out that expectations are
thought to create a frame of reference about which one makes a comparative
judgement.
This
means
that
outcomes
poorer
than
expected
(negative
disconfirmation) are rated below this reference point, whereas those better than
expected (a positive disconfirmation) are rated above the base. Service quality was
therefore understood to be a measure of how well the service level delivered matched
customer expectations.
Bateson and Hoffman (1999:340) argue that the two concepts of customer satisfaction
and service quality are intertwined. One plausible explanation is that satisfaction
assists customers in revising service quality perceptions. Bateson and Hoffman
(1999:340) describe the logic for this position as follows:
Subsequent encounters with the service firm lead the consumer through the
disconfirmation process and further revise the perceptions of service quality.
Each additional encounter with the service firm further revises or reinforces
service quality perceptions.
Baron and Harris (2003:136) describe perceived service quality as the degree and
direction of the gap between consumer perceptions and expectations of service. In
the GAPS model as described by Zeithaml et al. (2006:46) this refers to the customer
gap 5 - the gap between the expected service and the perceived service. Baron and
Harris (2003:136) further describe consumer satisfaction as a function of the
similarities between the consumers expectations and the perceived performance of
the purchaser.
12
The conceptual model of service quality as outline in Figure 2.1 was based on the
insights from extensive focus group research with customers and an in-depth
interview with executives in various sectors. The primary thesis of their model is that
the service quality shortfall Gap 5 (the gap between customers service expectations
and perceptions) is a result of a series of shortfalls within the service providers
organisation (Parasuraman, 2004:45). This then means that improving the quality
experienced by customers requires diagnosing the causes of and correcting the
internal deficiencies (Gaps 1-4).
Zeithaml et al. (2006:33) describe the customer gap (service quality gap) as the
difference between the customer expectations and perceptions. Closing the gap
between what customers expect and what they perceive is critical in delivering quality
service; it also forms the basis for the GAPS model (Zeithaml et al., 2006:34).
The GAPS model in Figure 2.1 suggests that the four provider gaps occur within the
organisation. Zeithaml et al. (2006:35) describe the four gaps as:
13
customers have narrow zones of tolerance, requiring a tighter range of service from
providers and others have a greater range of service (Zeithaml et al., 2006:86).
According to Zeithaml et al. (2006:81) customer expectations are beliefs about service
delivery that serve as standards or reference points against which performance is
judged. The level of expectation can vary widely depending on the reference point the
customer holds. These can start with the highest desired service to the lowest
minimum tolerable expectations (Zeithaml et al. 2006:83).
Minimum tolerable expectation: This is the extreme side of the desired service
as it relates to the bottom level of performance acceptable to the customer
(Zeithaml et al., 2006:83).
2.2.3 SERVQUAL
SERVQUAL is a multidimensional scale used to capture customer perceptions and
expectations of service quality. The SERVQUAL scale was first published in 1988 and
has undergone numerous improvements and revisions since then. The scale currently
contains twenty one perception items that are distributed across five service quality
dimensions (Zeithaml et al., 2006:154). Parasuraman (2004:46) indicates that building
on key insights from qualitative research, the research team launched a series of
empirical studies to develop, test and refine a scale for measuring service quality as
perceived by customers. These qualitative studies gave birth to SERVQUAL, a five
dimensional, two part instrument. The first and the second parts measure customer
expectations and perceptions respectively along a variety of service attributes
grouped into five dimensions of reliability, responsiveness, assurance, empathy and
tangibles. The SERVQUAL instrument, though very valuable, is believed to be just
one approach for assessing service quality (Parasuraman, 2004:48).
One criticism of SERVQUAL has been the point that the instrument mainly focuses on
the service delivery process (Kang & James, 2004:266). The other criticism by
Oppewal and Vriens (2000:154) is that SERVQUAL does not provide good measures
of the importance of service attributes and dimensions. SERVQUAL grounded in the
GAPS model, measures service quality as the calculated difference between
customer expectations and the performance perceptions of a service encounter.
Cronin and Taylor (1992:56) challenged this approach and developed the SERVPERF
scale which directly captures customers performance perceptions in comparison to
16
For the personal customer of the bank, the main sources of satisfaction are
attentiveness, responsiveness, care and friendliness. The main sources of
dissatisfaction are integrity, reliability, responsiveness, availability and
functionality.
competence,
functionality,
17
commitment,
access,
flexibility,
2.3
Customers have to rely on only two senses that of sight and sound during the
interaction.
18
There has been considerable research and practice development in the area of
Website design, whilst research on information quality is relatively limited (Rowley,
2006:352). The model as described by Rowley (2006:352) concludes that customer
perceptions of e-Service are driven by Website features, security, communications,
reliability, customer support, responsiveness, information accessibility, delivery and
personalisation.
19
The first box in Figure 2.4 summarizes the issues that both characterise e-Service and
are also open to design by the organisation delivering the service. The second box
includes differentiating factors. This means that one service system and experience
are different from the next in terms of scope and nature. The third box is concerned
with the customers perceptions of the experience of e-Service and derives from work
on e-Service quality dimensions. It summarizes and identifies some of the dimensions
that customers use in their evaluation of e-Service experiences (Rowley, 2006:352).
2.3.2 Electronic Service quality
20
1. Efficiency refers to the ability of customers to get to the Website, find their
desired product and information associated with it and check-out with minimal
effort.
2. Fulfilment incorporates accuracy of service promises, having products in stock
and delivering the products in the promised time.
3. Reliability is associated with the technical functioning of the site, particularly the
extent to which it is available and functioning properly.
4. The privacy dimension includes assurances that shopping behaviour and
information is secured.
The recovery-SQ scale includes the personal service aspects:
1. Responsiveness measures the ability of a company to provide appropriate
information to customers when a problem occurs, have mechanisms for
handling returns and providing online guarantees.
2. Compensation is the dimension that involves receiving money back.
3. Contact points. So that customers should be able to speak to a live service
agent in times of problems.
According to Santos (2003:238) there are two dimensions that determine e-Service
quality, the incubative and active dimensions as indicated in the model of e-Service in
Figure 2.6. The incubative dimension lists the determinants of a Website daily hit rate
and the time length any visitor stays on the Website as ease of use, appearance,
linkages, content and layout. Santos (2003:239) defines these determinants as
follows:
Ease of use is defined as how easy the Website is for customers to conduct
external search in cyberspace and internal navigation and search within the
Website.
Linkages refer to the number and quality of links that a Website offers.
logo being present are some of the key factors that impact on structure and
layout.
Reliability refers to the ability to perform the promised service accurately and
consistently, including frequency of updating the Website, prompt reply to
customer enquiries, and accuracy of online transactions.
Support is constituted by the technical help desk, user guide, help pages,
frequently asked questions (FAQs) and demos.
22
Security refers to the freedom from danger, risk, or doubt (including financial
insecurity) during the service process.
Efficiency and fulfilment were the most critical and important facets of the
Website
service
quality.
Of
the
four
E-S-Q
dimensions,
customers
The systems availability facet of the Websites was also critical contributor to
customers perceptions of overall quality, value and loyalty intentions.
The dimensions on which customers assess electronic service quality (e-SQ) are:
access, ease of navigation, efficiency, customization/personalization, security/
privacy, responsiveness, assurance/ trust, price knowledge, aesthetics, reliability,
flexibility and efficiency. Each of the mentioned general dimensions has a number of
specific attributes (Parasuraman, 2004:50). Parasuraman (2004:50) adds that the
23
qualitative research done suggest a conceptual GAPS model for electronic service
quality (e-SQ) as shown in Figure 2. 7.
2.4
24
25
Structural design
Navigational systems
2. Content
Depth of content
Presentation appropriateness
3. Process
Speed
The empirical results from the Bauer et al. research (2005:172) support the
understanding of portals as integral solutions representing a bundle of various
services and functions. Based on this research, aspects such as depth of service
range and possibility of opening accounts online or call back buttons and prompt
responses to questions, are important drivers leveraging overall service quality in an
effective manner.
26
27
Questions
1. This Website makes it easy to find what I want.
2. It makes it easy to get anywhere on the site.
3. It enables me to complete a transaction quickly.
4. Information on this Website is well organised
5. It loads its pages fast.
6. The Website is simple to use.
7. The Website enables me to get on to it quickly.
8. The Website is well organised.
System availability
Fulfilment
Privacy
1. It protects
behaviour.
2. It does not share my personal information with other
sites.
3. The Website protects information about my credit card
28
Table 2.3 is the original E-S-Q instrument and it is part of the Website service quality
but focuses on the recovery of service (E-RecS- Q)
Table 2.3: E-RecS-Q
Dimension
Responsiveness
Questions
1. It provides me with convenient options for returning my
items.
2. This Website handles product return well.
3. This Website offers meaningful guarantee.
4. It tells me what to do if my transaction is not processed.
5. It takes care of problems promptly.
Compensation
Contact
29
2.5
Internet Banking
31
Banking services
The banking services include services like money withdrawals, payments, money
transfers and account opening (Akinci et al. 2004:215).
Distribution Channels:
Akinci et al. (2004: 214) point out that the advent of new channels has contributed not
only to the adoption of multi-channel strategies by the existing institutions, but also the
emergence of new forms of financial business as virtual banks. The Internet
32
influences the future distribution channel structure in two ways. Firstly, it is in itself a
new distribution channel for financial service. The costs of using it are different from
those of other available distribution channels. Secondly, the Internet influences
consumers many of whom invest time and money in becoming PC literate and getting
to know the Internet (Mls, 1998:332)
Target Market
customer participation
The model permits exploration of the perceived difference between expected service
and the experienced service. Corporate image is regarded as an important
determinant of perceived service quality. Customers build trust based on the image
and reputation of service providers (Broderick & Vachirapornuk, 2002:328). Broderick
and Vachirapornuk (2002:329) further state that the model incorporates concepts of
functional and technical quality by focusing on two elements of service experience,
that of service encounter and that of service setting. In Internet service the service
setting is one of the key elements that will affect perceived quality. In the Internet
environment, the virtual service setting facilitates performance and communicates
evidence to customers about service. User satisfaction was found to be dependent
on Website features such as speed to download, content and design, interactivity,
navigation and security. There is good evidence that service encounter evaluation is
33
significantly correlated with perceived service quality. Customers do play a key role in
the service delivery process, resulting in the perceived service quality becoming
complex and a more involved issue for customers (Broderick & Vachirapornuk,
2002:329). From this model of perceived service quality it is not just the degree of
participation which changes, but also the degree of self-determinism permitted to
customers. The roles and service capability of customers become key inputs to
perceived service quality within their service encounter (Broderick & Vachirapornuk
2002:328).
34
Reliability
Content
Product variety
Responsiveness
Accuracy
Competence
Ease of use
Courtesy
Timeliness
Credibility
Aesthetics
Access
Security
Communications
Understanding the customer
Collaboration
Continuous improvement
Source: Jun and Cai (2001:282).
2.6
Conclusion
The literature reviewed a number of concepts on service quality. It started with the
review of traditional services, traditional service quality, SERVQUAL as an instrument
used to measure traditional service. It also introduced the concept of electronic
service. In measuring electronic service the basis of the SERVQUAL instrument was
used. This was the basis of a new tool called E-S-Q (Carrillant, Jaramilo & Mulki,
2007:473). Internet service quality was also reviewed and a model adapted from Jun
and Cai (2001:238) brought about the fact that dimensions were identified under three
categories, that of customer service quality, online system quality and banking service
product quality.
35
36
5. Assurance and trust: refers to confidence in the online service and how
trustworthy the brand is.
6. Responsiveness: refers to online requests done promptly and issues are
resolved on time.
7. Contact: refers to the bank being easily accessible and support staff available
at all times when needed.
8. Website aesthetics: means how attractive the banking site is.
Chapter Three describes in detail the research methodology used to do the study.
This chapter will capture the research design, sample selection and methods used to
collect primary data. The relevant reliability and validity tests to be employed will also
be discussed in this chapter.
37
Chapter THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1
Introduction
This chapter discusses the methodology that was employed to conduct the study. The
discussion will include the design of the research, population sample, sampling and
data collection methods that were used. The web survey method was used to collect
primary data for this study. Web survey process concerns transforming paper based
instruments into Web forms and incorporate user interface design (Roynolds, Woods
& Baker, 2007:11).
contacted via e-mail and directed via a URL to take a self-administered questionnaire
online. Zikmund (2003:198) defines electronic interactive media as a communication
media that allows an organization and the audience to interact using digital
technology. This method was chosen as the preferred method because of its wide
reach of respondents, convenience, low cost, speed of data collection and the fit that
it has with the study. An Internet survey is a self administered questionnaire posted
on a Website. Respondents provide answers to questions displayed on the screen by
clicking on an icon, keying in an answer or highlighting a phrase (Zikmund, 2003:221).
3.2
Research design
Zikmund (2003:65) defines research design as a master plan specifying the methods,
approaches and procedures for collecting and analysing the needed information. The
objectives of the research, the available data sources, the urgency of the decision,
and the cost of obtaining the data will determine the choice of the appropriate
research design. The quantitative and qualitative research methodologies are the two
main research approaches useful in the classification of studying primary data (Davis,
2000:265).
38
analysis of one or a few observations; they involve less structured questioning and
observations of respondents.
Conversely, quantitative research uses large samples and involves structured survey
questioning that is subsequently numerically and statistically analysed (Davis.
2000:265). Martins et al. (1996:125) highlight that quantitative research objective is to
generalise about a specific population, based on the results of a representative
sample of that population. The method generally involves the collection of primary
data from a large number of individuals, with the intention of projecting the results to a
wider population. Quantitative research approach is based on testable hypothesis
and tends to measure how often or how much. The choice of the approach to be
taken in a research study is primarily based on the research question or problem.
Taking into consideration the description of the two research approaches discussed
above and the studys research objectives, it was decided to use the quantitative
research approach. This study aims to explore customers perceptions on key
electronic service dimensions of Internet Banking service quality. Since this study
explores perceptions it means the study aims to measure how much satisfied online
banking customers are with the quality of Internet Banking service. This approach
allowed for statistical analysis of the data on the basis of a service quality
measurement instrument. The study involved collecting primary data in a structured
survey questioning which was followed by statistical analysis of the data.
The
Research population
Davis (2000:220) defines population as the complete set of units of analysis that are
under investigation. Zikmund (2003:369) brings in an element of commonality by
defining population or universe as a complete group of entities sharing some common
set of characteristics. On the other hand the survey population is an aggregate of
elements from which the sample is drawn (Martins et al., 1996:252). Martins et al.
(1996:252) state that In practice we seldom find complete lists of all the elements, so
39
that the sample has to be drawn from lists that do not always contain all the elements.
The differences between the survey population and the population or universe should
therefore be always noticed. The distinction between a population and the universe
is made on the bases of whether the group is finite (population) or infinite (universe)
(Zikmund, 2003:369). Based on the definitions of universe, population and survey
population by different authors above, these concepts can be summarised as follows:
This study investigated the perception of online banking customers on the quality of
service delivered by Internet Banking. The universe comprised of all banking
customers world wide, whilst Internet Banking customers in the world will be the
population and the Internet Banking customers using South African banks will form
the survey population.
The contact list of online banking customers in South Africa was not commercially
available and the four major banks would not divulge their customers contact details
as a result of legal compliance restrictions. An alternative to reach as many online
banking customers as possible was an approach of social networking to create the
survey population list. An invitation was sent to colleagues, friends, business
associates, family and social contacts from social media (Face book) to provide
contact e-mail addresses of their contacts that are online banking users. This ensured
that there was no bias in selecting users from any specific bank.
Figure 3.1 shows the trend of Internet Banking users in the United States compared to
the world wide trends. The trend shows a 3 275% increase of world wide online
banking users in 12 years between 1995 and 2007.
40
3.4
Sampling
Zikmund (2003:369) defines sampling as the process of using a small number of parts
of a larger population to make a conclusion about the whole population. This study
focused on all Internet Banking customers serviced by South African banks regardless
of their geographic location. The common characteristic of the sampled population
was that all respondents were selected from customers who do online banking using
any South African banks.
3.4.1
Sampling methodology
Davis (2000:229) defines sample design as the method used to select the units of
analysis for a study. He says that such methods can be classified in a variety of ways,
of which the most usual breakdown is into probability and non-probability sampling
designs. In probability sampling every element has an equal chance of being
selected. In non-probability sampling the probability of any particular member of the
population being chosen is unknown. The selection of sampling units is arbitrary as
researchers rely on personal judgment (Zikmund, 2003:379). Zikmund (2003:380)
further suggests that it should be noted that there are no appropriate statistical
41
42
3.5
Research instrument
Zikmund (2003:330) points out that a survey is only as good as the questions it asks,
hence the questionnaire design is a critical stage in the survey research process. The
questionnaire must be relevant and accurate in trying to capture the essence of the
research objective. To achieve these ends, a researcher will be required to make
several decisions:
The questionnaire that was used in this study was based on an E-S-Q instrument that
has been extensively used to measure the quality of service delivered by Websites
and online services. The questionnaire was slightly adjusted to ensure that it captured
the essence of Internet Banking compared to electronic shopping. The instrument has
been used mostly in electronic shopping service quality measurements. This
instrument included amongst others a question on customers perception on how the
depth of functionality offered by their banks Internet Banking service addressed their
needs. Dimensions which were in the original E-S-Q instrument like flexibility, price
knowledge and customization were excluded in this study. These dimensions refer to
online purchasing service rather than banking, hence they were excluded from the
instrument. Twenty four questions were used covering eight key determinants of
electronic banking service quality. Five more questions on the customers personal
information (biographical questions) were covered. The first question in the survey
asked customers if they banked online or not. This was to allow non-Internet Banking
customers not to take the entire questionnaire but rather to fill in only the biographic
information. Customers that responded with a Yes answer to this question were
directed to take the entire questionnaire. A summary of the eight key determinants of
electronic banking service are:
Efficiency: covers the ability to access the banking site, the ease of use, the
speed of completing banking transactions and the depth of Internet Banking
functionality.
43
Assurance and trust: refers to confidence in the online service and how
trustworthy the brand is.
Contact: refers to the bank being easily accessible and support staff available
at all times when needed.
The scale that was used in the instrument was the summated ratings method called
the Linkert scale. With the Linkert scale, respondents indicate their attitude or
perception by checking how strongly they agree or disagree with carefully constructed
statements that range from very negative to very positive towards the attitudinal object
(Zikmund. 2003:312). Schmidt and Hollensen (2006:120) define the Linkert scale as a
widely used rating scale that requires the respondents to indicate a degree of
agreement or disagreement with each of a series of statements about the stimulus
objects. Since Internet survey or questionnaire was used, respondents were given
radio buttons to make their choices. In the questions where personal information was
required input fields were provided.
3.6
Data Collection
Zikmund (2003:72) argues that because there are many research techniques it stands
to reason that there will also be different ways of collecting data. Respondents may be
given a questionnaire to fill or they may interact with an interviewer.
A self-
advantage is that the information collection and capturing can be done in real time
(Zikmund, 2003:227).
The Internet self-administered questionnaire method was used in this study. The
major reason for using this method was that the nature of the topic is around online
banking hence the survey sample was easily reachable through this technique and
was also more willing to take the questionnaire online. This guaranteed some form of
a good response rate. Some of the advantages of using online questionnaire for
primary data collection are:
Versatile questioning.
The questionnaire was open for two weeks. A reminder was sent in the second week
to improve on the response rate. The site was taken down after it has been up for two
weeks.
3.7
Data Analysis
The data was collected online in real time. As respondents submitted their
questionnaire the data was automatically exported into a predefined and coded
database. Each question was coded in the interface (Web form) and matched to field
names in the database. This in turn made analysis to be started much quicker.
STATCON (A statistical services bureau at the University of Johannesburg) was
contracted to host the web side and do the analysis. Some of the services that
STATKON completed included:
Ensuring that respondents only had one opportunity for taking the
questionnaire. This was done by tracking the embedded system controls.
3.8
Ethical Considerations
Ethical questions are philosophical questions. There is no general agreement
amongst philosophers about the answers to such questions. However, the rights
and obligations of individuals are generally dictated by the norms of society. Social
norms are codes of behaviour adopted by a group; they suggest what a member of
a group ought to do under given circumstances (Zikmund, 2003:78). Below are
some of the ethical aspects which were considered during the research project:
Deception - the intent and mandate to do the research was made clear from
the onset.
Roynolds et al. (2007:114) point out that the application of ethical principles in
online surveys implies the following:
46
3.9
Conclusion
The aim of the study was to explore online banking customers perceptions on Internet
Banking service quality. The quantitative approach allowed for statistical analysis of
the data. The sample was a non-probability sample and the study followed a
quantitative research approach. The combination of the quantitative approach and the
survey method was appropriate for the research question in this study as a sample
population was surveyed and the general conclusion drawn for the entire sample
population. The survey population was all online banking users utilizing services from
South African banks and the sampling design was a non-probability one as a
convenience sampling method was used. A slightly revised E-S-Q service quality
measurement instrument was used in this study and data was collected via a web
based self-administered survey.
Chapter Four will concentrate mainly on the presentation of the results. The focus will
be on providing the analysis of the results in terms of elaborating on the research
objectives.
47
Chapter FOUR
PRESENTATION OF RESULTS
4.1
Introduction.
The presentation and analysis of the results of the conducted imperial survey will be
done in this chapter. The results of the survey include the analysis of missing data,
descriptive statistics, Principal Component Analysis, Reliability and Validity tests and
lastly the Internet Banking Service quality measures.
4.2
Missing data
One thousand respondents were invited to participate in the survey. Two hundred and
six (206) responses were received representing a 20.6% response rate. Sixteen of the
responses were non Internet Banking users hence they did not complete the entire
questionnaire and twenty nine had missing information. It therefore meant that there
were one hundred and sixty one (161) valid responses for the demographics
questions.
4.3
Descriptive Statistics
Graph 4.1
Age demographics
Age
4.3%
5.0%
39.7%
51.0%
18 - 24
25- 35
36 - 49
Older than 50
All the responses with missing data were excluded from the demographic analysis.
Graph 4.1 indicates the following age splits: 18-24 (5%), 25-35 (51%), 36-49 (39.7%)
and older than 50 (4.3%). The majority of the respondents were aged between 25 and
35 years followed by the 36 to 49 years age group. Given the above results it was
48
decided for statistical reasons to split the groups into two. One group would be all
respondents who are 35 years and younger and the second group would be that of
respondents who are 36 years and older. Graph 4.2 below indicates the overall split of
the two age groups.
Graph 4.2
44%
56%
Graph 4.3 indicates the gender demographics. Out of the one hundred and sixty one
(161) valid responses 51.5% were males compared to 48.5 females.
Graph 4.3 Gender demographics
Gender
48.5%
Male
51.5%
49
Female
Graph 4.4 indicates the respondents primary bank and it can be seen that from the
161 respondents using Internet Banking, 42.1% bank with Absa, followed by 22.1%
that bank with Standard bank, 12.6% banking with FNB and 6.3% with Nedbank. Only
1.6 banks with Investec.
Graph 4.4
Bank demographics
Distribution by bank
6.2%
1.5%
Absa
22.1%
42.1%
FNB
SBSA
Nedbank
Other
12.7%
Graph 4.5 indicates that 92% of the respondents have been using the service for
more than a year. This implies that the responses given in the survey are based on
solid experience.
Graph 4.5 length of Internet Banking use
Internet Banking use
1%
7%
92%
3 - 12 months
50
4.4
Sphericity results indicates a 0.00 score whilst the KMO score is 0.919. According to
Kenova and Jonasson (2006:30) for a factor analysis to be considered appropriate a
score of the Bartletts Test of Sphericity should be less than 0.05 and a KMO
minimum score of 0.6 is needed for good factor analysis. The result of the Bartlett
test is 0.00 which is less than 0.05 indicating that the factor analysis can be
considered appropriate and KMO Measure of Sampling Adequacy is 0.919, which
exceeds the minimum value of 0.6 for good factor analysis.
Table 4.1
0.919
Adequacy.
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square
df
2,140.468
276
Sig.
0.000
Table 4.2 indicates the communalities of all the twenty four variables (questions)
Communalities consist of Initial and Extracted Values. It represents the result of the
conducted Principal Component Analysis (CPA) on all components with five factors
extracted. Communality can be interpreted as the reliability of the indicator. If the
communality of a given variable is low, then this variable should probably be removed
51
from the instrument (model) because the factor it pertains to cannot explain its
variance. The interpretation of the values of communalities should be done in relation
to the interpretation of the factors. The extracted value represents the percent of
variance in a given variable explained by the extracted factor.
Table 4.2
Initial
Extraction
q1
0.563 0.531
q2
0.463 0.484
q3
0.538 0.518
q4
0.580 0.552
q5
0.509 0.524
q6
0.536 0.498
q7
0.528 0.622
q8
0.414 0.453
q9
0.471 0.463
q10
0.510 0.482
q11
0.707 0.747
q12
0.590 0.606
q13
0.439 0.404
q14
0.506 0.501
q15
0.504 0.532
q16
0.635 0.616
q17
0.544 0.513
q18
0.601 0.632
q19
0.678 0.712
q20
0.535 0.488
q21
0.675 0.741
q22
0.667 0.717
q23
0.598 0.687
q24
0.497 0.587
Extraction
Method:
Principal
Axis
Factoring.
52
Table 4.3
Initial Eigenvalues
Factor
1
Total
9.993
% of
Variance
41.639
Cumulative
%
41.639
Total
9.567
% of
Variance
39.861
Cumulative
%
39.861
Total
3.757
% of
Variance
15.654
Cumulative
%
15.654
1.839
7.664
49.303
1.451
6.048
45.909
3.285
13.689
29.344
1.460
6.083
55.386
1.026
4.273
50.182
2.487
10.364
39.707
1.333
5.555
60.942
0.956
3.982
54.165
2.161
9.005
48.712
1.034
4.307
65.248
0.609
2.538
56.702
1.918
7.990
56.702
0.763
3.180
68.428
0.741
3.088
71.516
0.684
2.849
74.365
0.640
2.668
77.033
10
0.576
2.400
79.433
11
0.570
2.377
81.809
12
0.511
2.129
83.938
13
0.500
2.085
86.023
14
0.443
1.845
87.868
15
0.395
1.645
89.513
16
0.376
1.566
91.079
17
0.362
1.508
92.587
18
0.344
1.433
94.020
19
0.318
1.324
95.343
20
0.299
1.246
96.589
21
0.244
1.015
97.604
22
0.203
0.846
98.450
23
0.192
0.800
99.249
24
0.180
0.751
100.000
Table 4.3 shows the Total Variance Explained eigenvalues. The variance in all the
variables which is accounted for by the given factor is measured by the eigenvalues
for this factor. If the eigenvalue of a specific factor is low it means that this factor
explains less of the variance in the variable and can be dismissed from the
instrument. The data presented in Table 4.3 Total Variance Explained can be used to
determine the number of factors to extract. It therefore means that there are only five
factors to be extracted as there are only five factors with the initial eigenvalue higher
than one.
The Rotated Component Matrix shows the correlation between each question in the
survey and the different factors. Each variable (question) should pertain to the factor
with which it correlates best. Observing Table 4.4 on Rotated Factor Matrix it shows
that the following questions (variables) are best correlated to Factor1 and should as
such be grouped together to represent that factor: Q19 (76.1%), Q18 (66.1%), Q16
53
(61.9%), Q6 (56.7%), Q9 (56.9%) and Q17 (51.3%). Although the communality value
for Q9 is below 50% at (47%) it will be retained in the instrument as a result of the
good correlation at (56%) which is higher than 50%.
Following similar logic the following questions correlates best to Factor2 as observed
from Table 4.4 hence they will be grouped together: Q21 (79%), Q22 (78%), Q11
(73.5%), Q3 (60.2) and Q1 (51.4) All factors will be retained as the communality
scores of all the five questions is above 50. The third factor as observed from Table
4.4 will be grouped as follows: Q12 (65.3%), Q4 (57.2%), Q5 (47.9%), Q10 (44.8)
and Q13 (38.8). Question 10 can be retained as it has a communality value of more
than 50%; however question 13 cannot be retained as it has the less favourable
correlation of 38.8% which is less than the 60% and also the communality value of
less than 50%. Question 13 was about the brand reputation, this question was
included because from the theory it is stated that a well known brand will always
positively influence customer perceptions. This variable will however be excluded
based on the results above. The fourth factor should include the following questions
which best correlates to factor4: Q7 (70.8), Q8 (65.8), Q14 (48.4), Q2 (46.3) and Q20
(41.6). All the other questions can be retained in the exception of question 2 as it has
a communality value of less than 50%. Lastly, the fifth factor as observed from Table
4.4 will be represented by the following questions (variables): Q24 (66.8%), Q23
(65.2%) and Q15 (54%).
54
Table 4.4
q19
q18
q16
q6
q9
q17
q21
q22
q11
q3
q1
q12
q4
q5
q10
q13
q7
q8
q14
q2
q20
q24
q23
q15
1
0.761
0.661
0.619
0.567
0.561
0.513
0.281
0.402
0.250
0.442
0.446
0.299
2
0.312
Factor
3
5
0.331
0.341
0.322
0.299
0.790
0.780
0.735 0.359
0.602
0.514 0.270
0.288 0.653
0.572
0.479
0.448
0.306 0.388
0.322
0.260
0.394
0.297
0.262
0.419
0.289
0.486
0.298
0.265
0.314
0.708
0.658
0.484
0.463
0.416
0.668
0.652
0.357 0.540
As a result of the analysis done above of the collected data, the number of
dimensions included into the presented theoretical model, should be decreased from
eight to five. The performed factor analysis with Principal Component Analysis as an
extraction method showed that all the variables pertaining to the initial theoretical
model are not well grouped to represent the eight initial dimensions and thus should
be rearranged to represent five quality dimensions. Appendix V indicates the new
labels for the five extracted dimensions with the associated questions (variables). The
five new service dimensions are summarised as efficiency, fulfilment, security,
responsiveness and contact. The questions are split as follows per dimensions:
55
Factor one refers to efficiency and includes variables like adequacy of functionality,
the ease of finding information on the banking site, aesthetics of the site and speed of
transacting amongst others. These variables are more inclined towards the service
efficiency as perceived by customers hence it was labelled Efficiency. The second
factor relates to the fulfilment. Variables included cover speed at which the Website
pages load at, the availability of the Website and the speed of accessing the Website
hence the dimension was labelled Fulfilment. The third factor relates to the security
of the information exchanged, the protection of information, and the assurance with
the transactions and confidence in the service. As a result this dimension was labelled
Security. The fourth factor relates to customer feedback and accessibility of the
bank. The variables contained in this factor address issues like how responsive is the
bank and how it communicates on customers requests hence it was labelled
Responsiveness. Lastly the fifth factor is around contact. The related variables
(questions) relate to the bank offering contact details on the site and having personnel
available online and telephonically. This factor was labelled Contact.
4.5
Reliability is broadly defined as the degree to which measures are free from error and
therefore yield consistent results (Zikmund, 2003:300). Kurpius and Stafford
(2006:121) concur by defining reliability as the trustworthiness or accuracy of
measurement. The terms consistency and stability are also used when discussing
reliability. According Kurpius and Stafford (2006:121) reliability coefficient refers to the
scores obtained on a test. A reliability coefficient of zero indicates that the test scores
are unreliable. On the other hand the higher the reliability coefficient, the more reliable
or accurate the test scores. A reliability coefficient is a numerical value that can range
from zero to one. For research purposes, tests with a reliability score of 0.7 and above
are accepted as reliable, whilst for clinical decision making, test scores of between 0.8
and 0.9 are acceptable (Kurpius & Stafford, 2006:121).
The Cronbachs Alpha Test of reliability was used to test the reliability of the
instrument (model) used for the survey. The reliability test was done on the five
extracted factors or dimensions and the scores are reflected in Table 4.5. Detailed
scores across all dimensions and variables are obtained in Appendix IV. From Table
4.5 it can be seen that the Alpha scores on all dimensions, efficiency, fulfilment,
56
security, responsiveness and contact are all higher than 0.7 indicating that the scores
on these tests were reliable.
Table 4.5
Component
Factor 1 (efficiency)
Factor 2 (fulfilment)
Factor 3 (security)
Factor 4 (responsiveness)
Factor 5 (contact)
Internet Banking Quality
Cronbach's
Alpha score
Number of items
0.868
6
0.881
5
5
0.816
0.791
5
0.765
3
0.935
24
Component
Factor 1 (efficiency)
Factor 2 (fulfilment)
Factor 3 (security)
Factor 4 (responsiveness)
Factor 5 (contact)
Internet Banking Quality
Potential
Cronbach's maximum validity Number
Alpha score coefficient
of items
0.931
0.868
6
0.938
0.881
5
0.903
0.816
5
0.889
0.791
5
0.874
0.765
3
0.967
0.935
24
The instrument used in the survey was a slight variation of the (E-S-Q) instrument
which has been adapted from the SERVQUAL instrument for face-to-face service
delivery. The SERVQUAL instrument has been used extensively in the research
because its validity is not questionable. Secondly, the maximum potential validity
coefficient of all the dimensions as indicated in Table 4.6 is closer to 1 indicating
57
strong evidence that the test scores are indeed measuring the construct under
investigation which in this case is Internet Banking service quality.
The Sig values in the Test for Normality Table 4.7 represent the p-values based on
testing the null hypothesis that the data is normally distributed.
designed to determine whether the data observed closely fit the shape of a normal
curve. Both tests for the five factors and the overall Mean-Quality-Internet- Banking is
significant as the scores lie between (p = 0.068 and 0.000) which suggests that the
data is not normal but it is skewed to the right. The details of the distribution of the
different factors and the overall mean are discussed in the next section.
Table 4.7
Normality test
Kolmogorov-Smirnov(a)
Statistic
Mean_Factor1
(efficiency)
Mean_Factor2
(fulfilment)
Mean_Factor3
(security)
Mean_Factor4
(responsiveness)
Mean_Factor5
(contact)
Mean_Quality_Internet_Ba
nking
Shapiro-Wilk
df
Sig.
Statistic
df
Sig.
0.161
165
0.000
0.108
165
0.000
0.115
165
0.000
0.078
165
0.015
0.113
165
0.000
0.067
165
0.068
4.6
responses for this section. The frequencies in Appendix I indicate that customers are
generally satisfied with all the variables of Internet Banking service quality. The overall
distribution curve for Internet Banking service quality is skewed to the right. The
distribution of the service efficiencies dimension is illustrated in graph 4.5 (a) and
58
graph 4.5 (b) below. The dimension of service efficiency had mean of 4.09 from the
five point Linkert-Scale indicating that the 161 valid responses are satisfied with this
dimension. There were an insignificant number of respondents who were extremely
dissatisfied with this dimension.
Graph 4.5(a): Efficiency
59
The second dimension of service quality, fulfilment as extracted in this study had a
mean of 3.97 and as illustrated by graph 4.6(a) and graph 4.6(b) below. The graphs
show that the respondents were also satisfied with this dimension of service as well.
Graph 4.6(a): Fulfilment
60
The third dimension of security which encompasses assurance, trust and privacy
indicated a mean north of 4 (4.29) as indicated in graph 4.7(a) and graph 4.7(b)
respectively, showing that the respondents were satisfied with this dimension.
Graph 4.7(a): Security
61
The contact dimension also had a mean of 4.06 showing satisfaction with this
dimension as indicated in graphs 4.8(a) and 4.8(b).
Graph 4.8(a) : Contact
62
The overall Internet Banking service quality indicated a mean of 4.03 as per graphs
4.9(a) and 4.9(b) indicating that the respondents were generally satisfied with Internet
Banking service quality.
Graph 4.9(a): Internet Banking Service Quality
63
64
The only dimension that showed a mean south of 4 at (3.74) was that of
responsiveness which encompasses the communications and fulfilment dimensions.
Although a mean of 3.74 does not look bad, but compared to all the other four
dimensions it is the one where respondents showed the most indifference. This
indicates that most of the respondents were neutral and indifferent on this particular
dimension of service quality as indicated in graph 4.10 (a) and graph 4.10(b)
respectively.
The respondents indicated a neutral or indifferent level on the responsiveness
dimensions which pertains to service recovery and fulfilment as indicated by the
frequencies in the variables (questions) listed below.
(Q8) The bank is easily accessible. (27.9% were neutral, 37% satisfied and
23% strongly satisfied).
65
(Q20) The banks site makes accurate promises about the services delivered
(24.8% were neutral, 47.3% satisfied and 23.6% strongly satisfied).
(Q23) My banks Internet Banking site does not share my personal information
with other sites. (24.2% were neutral, 36.4% satisfied and 36.4% strongly
satisfied).
Comparing the respondents levels of dissatisfaction per variable, the highest scores
were recorded on the following variables:
My Bank's Internet Banking site pages download quickly all the time. (11.5%).
It is easy for me to find what I want on my bank's Internet Banking site. (9.7%).
This is in line with the variables where respondents indicated neutrality and would
thus be the dimension that would need improvement to enhance the Internet Banking
service quality.
Table 4.8: ANOVA T-Test on age
T-Test Age
Mean_Factor1
Mean_Factor2
Mean_Factor3
Mean_Factor4
Mean_Factor5
Mean_Quality_Internet_Banking
rq27
35 and younger
36 and older
35 and younger
36 and older
35 and younger
36 and older
35 and younger
36 and older
35 and younger
36 and older
35 and younger
90
71
90
71
90
71
90
71
90
71
90
Mean
4.13
4.09
3.99
4.00
4.31
4.28
3.77
3.74
4.07
4.06
4.06
Std.
Deviation
0.653
0.656
0.771
0.716
0.509
0.650
0.704
0.640
0.710
0.825
0.535
71
4.03
0.563
0.067
36 and older
Elliot and Woodward (2007:52) indicate that the analysis of covariance ANOVA is
used to determine whether there are any differences in perception amongst identified
groups. From Table 4.8 on age distribution, the two age groups were consolidated
into two major groups, ages 35 and younger and ages 36 and older. Applying the
ANOVA t-Test on age it can be seen that there is an insignificant difference in the p66
values of the two age groups across all dimensions and including the overall Internet
Banking service quality where the p-value for respondents 35 years and younger is
0.535 and that of respondents 36 years and older is 0.563. This then means that age
does not influence the perception of Internet Banking service quality.
T-Test Gender
Group Statistics
Mean_Factor1
Mean_Factor2
Mean_Factor3
Mean_Factor4
Mean_Factor5
Mean_Quality_Internet_Banking
q26
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
83
78
83
78
83
78
83
78
83
78
83
Mean
4.12
4.10
4.03
3.95
4.32
4.27
3.75
3.76
4.06
4.08
4.06
Std.
Deviation
0.580
0.726
0.722
0.772
0.524
0.624
0.712
0.638
0.800
0.721
0.501
78
4.03
0.593
0.067
Female
From Table 4.9 it is evident that there is an insignificant difference between the pvalue scores on both genders across all dimensions including the overall Internet
Banking service quality. The p-value for male on the mean Internet Banking service
quality is 0.501 and that of females is 0.593 showing an insignificant difference. This
indicates that males and females have similar perceptions when it comes to Internet
Banking service quality.
From the ANOVA T-Test on primary bank in Table 4.10, the p-values scores across
the five dimensions are very close, indicating an insignificant variance in the
perception of Internet Banking service quality from the different banks services. The
scores for an overall Internet Banking service quality are as follows:
Absa (4.05)
FNB (4.01)
Nedbank and other (Investec) scores were excluded from this test as a result of the
low number of responses from these banks as indicated in graph 4.3.
67
N
Mean_Factor1
Absa
FNB
SBSA
Total
Absa
Mean_Factor2
FNB
SBSA
Total
Absa
Mean_Factor3
FNB
SBSA
Total
Mean_Factor4
Absa
FNB
SBSA
Total
Absa
Mean_Factor5
FNB
SBSA
Total
Mean_Quality_Internet_ Absa
Banking
FNB
SBSA
Total
80
24
42
146
80
24
42
146
80
24
42
146
80
24
42
146
80
24
42
146
80
24
42
146
Mean
4.08
4.07
4.15
4.10
3.95
3.95
4.01
3.97
4.34
4.28
4.22
4.30
3.77
3.86
3.71
3.77
4.16
3.78
4.07
4.07
4.05
4.01
4.03
4.04
Std.
Deviation
0.686
0.857
0.517
0.671
0.738
0.824
0.721
0.743
0.525
0.806
0.512
0.575
0.711
0.617
0.606
0.665
0.685
1.043
0.712
0.769
0.555
0.683
0.462
0.550
68
Std. Error
0.077
0.175
0.080
0.056
0.082
0.168
0.111
0.061
0.059
0.165
0.079
0.048
0.080
0.126
0.094
0.055
0.077
0.213
0.110
0.064
0.062
0.139
0.071
0.046
95% Confidence
Interval for Mean
Minimu Maxim
Bound
Bound
m
um
3.92
4.23
2
5
3.71
4.43
1
5
3.99
4.31
3
5
3.99
4.21
1
5
3.79
4.11
1
5
3.60
4.30
1
5
3.79
4.24
2
5
3.85
4.09
1
5
4.22
4.46
3
5
3.94
4.62
1
5
4.06
4.38
3
5
4.20
4.39
1
5
3.61
3.93
2
5
3.60
4.12
3
5
3.52
3.90
2
5
3.66
3.87
2
5
4.01
4.32
3
5
3.34
4.22
1
5
3.85
4.29
1
5
3.95
4.20
1
5
3.93
4.18
3
5
3.72
4.30
1
5
3.89
4.18
3
5
3.95
4.13
1
5
Chapter FIVE
INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS
5.1
Introduction.
In this chapter the results presented in Chapter four are interpreted and discussed.
The findings and issues picked up including limitations of the study are also
discussed. The findings are also linked to the literature that was reviewed
5.2
Findings
The findings below were made in respect of the three biographical variables (gender,
age and primary bank) in the survey,
Gender
It was observed that the p-values between males and females across all five
dimensions were insignificant. This then indicates that there are no differences in
perception or opinion on Internet Banking service quality between males and females.
Age
The p-values across all variables for the two identified age groups (35 and younger
and older that 36) showed no significant difference. The overall mean on the quality of
Internet Banking was 0.535 for respondents 35 years and younger compared to 0.563
for respondents 36 years and older. This indicates age does not play a major role in
influencing the respondents perceptions on Internet banking service quality.
Primary bank
69
perception with a lowest p-value of 3.7 was that of responsiveness. This dimension
comprised of the following variables:
The banks site makes accurate promises about the services delivered
The neutral or indifferent perception on these variables implies that the banks can
improve overall satisfaction of Internet Banking service quality by:
Ensuring that the banks quickly resolves problems customers encounter with
Internet Banking transactions
5.3
products
as
intangibility,
heterogeneity,
simultaneous
production
and
Parasuraman et al. (2005:230) on their research on electronic service quality (E-SQ), a multiple item scale for assessing electronic service quality, came up with five
managerial implications as described in Chapter Two. From these managerial
70
implications one finding that came up as an area of concern from the analysis of the
survey results was that of the responsiveness dimension. This dimension covers
variables such as communications with customers and solving customers problems
which are in line with service recovery. This dimension indeed mirrors aspects of
traditional service such as ready access to company personnel and solving
customers problems. The respondents were neutral and indifferent on this dimension.
The critical incident technique as defined by Johnston (1995:65) indicates that
responsiveness is the crucial determinant of quality, as it is the key component in
providing satisfaction and the lack of it is a major source of dissatisfaction
Gap2 refers to not selecting the right service designs and standards.
In this study the responsiveness dimension was the one where respondents were
indifferent.
The overall satisfaction of Internet Banking service quality in this study was skewed to
the right implying that respondents were generally satisfied with the level of service
quality. The two most critical and influential dimensions were that of efficiency and
fulfilment. In the literature Parasuraman et al. (2005:230) describe these two
dimensions as follows: efficiency and fulfilment were the most critical and important
facets of the Website service quality. Of the four E-S-Q dimensions, customers
assessments of a Website on these two dimensions had the strongest influence not
only on the overall quality perceptions but also on perceived value and loyalty
intentions. The systems availability facet of the Websites was also the critical
contributor to customers perceptions of overall quality, value and loyalty intentions.
71
5.4
As with any research, there were limitations to this study. Firstly, the respondents lists
that would allow for random sampling were not readily available. The sample used
was a non-probability sample because it is was a convenience one. Projecting results
beyond a specific sample in a non-probability sample (convenience) might be
inappropriate. Zikmund (2003:382) points out that convenience samples are best
used for exploratory research when additional research will subsequently be
conducted with a probability sample.
The instrument used, only measured the level of customer satisfaction with different
dimensions characterising Internet Banking services quality, but does not show the
relative importance of each dimension in comparison to the others.
5.5
Conclusion
The following conclusions can be arrived at based on the research results analysis
and interpretation. The overall respondents perception of Internet Banking service
quality was skewed to the right, indicating a satisfactory perception. There was no
difference in perception of Internet Banking service quality based on age, gender or
primary bank of the respondents. This implies that Internet Banking service quality
perceptions are not influenced by respondents age, gender or bank. The only service
quality dimension where the respondents exhibited a neutral stance was that of
responsiveness. Lastly, the instrument used in the survey was reliable and the results
obtained can be trusted as they have been proven to be valid.
73
Chapter SIX
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1
Banks have invested heavily in introducing and making Internet Banking service, with
the objective of improving customer satisfaction and loyalty, ultimately contributing
positively to income and profits. This studys purpose was to explore customers
perceptions on key electronic service dimensions or factors of Internet Banking
service quality. The survey was done with a primary objective of having an insight
into Internet Banking service quality as offered by South African banks.
The
ONeill, Palmer and Wright (2003:281) concluded that the winners in the online market
space will be those who consistently provide compelling, user-friendly and responsive
online service experiences. Overall Internet Banking customers in South Africa are
satisfied with Internet Banking service quality. However, attention needs to be given to
the service recovery dimension of Internet Banking service which was identified as
responsiveness. These findings mean that Internet Banking service quality is not
74
influenced by gender, age or the bank offering the service. People of different age and
gender have similar Internet Banking service expectations. Lastly the study indicated
that the respondents evaluated Internet Banking service quality on five key
dimensions: efficiency, performance, security, responsiveness and contact
6.2
Recommendations
As outlined in the limitations section of this study it is important to further develop the
instrument in order to better understand Internet Banking service dimensions and their
relative importance as perceived by customers. The analysis of the survey includes
implications to bank mangers as far as satisfaction levels of their customers on
different aspects of Internet Banking are concerned.
The respondents in this study have shown the highest level of indifference or
dissatisfaction with aspects of Internet Banking service quality such as the bank giving
prompt responses to customer requests or complaints, being easily accessible by
phone, speed of resolving problems encountered with Internet Banking and banks
making accurate promises about the services they deliver on their sites. Bank
managers should improve on the following responsiveness or service recovery
aspects of Internet Banking service:
Ensuring that all contact details given on the banks information and banking
Websites are manned and relevant responses are given to customers within
reasonable time frames.
Ensuring that the banks meet all obligations and promises that are made on
their Websites.
The results of the analysis indicate that banks perform relatively well on aspects of
Internet Banking such as service efficiency (the service is quick, easy to use, and it
addresses customer needs), fulfilment (speed of loading and availability which refer
to the ability of customers to get to the Website and do banking). It is recommended
that banks keep on innovating in this area as more and many customers are starting
75
to bank online. Banks must always try to exceed the customers expectations. This is
one critical area of Internet Banking service that could impact the overall satisfaction
negatively if it were to be allowed to deteriorate or not leave up to customers
expectations.
Bank managers do not need to segment the market by gender or age to achieve
Internet Banking service quality because the results of this study have revealed that
there is no significant gender-based or age-based difference in so far as Internet
Banking service quality is concerned. .
6.3
The instrument used in this study, only measured the level of customer satisfaction
with different dimensions characterising Internet Banking services quality. The
instrument fell short of showing the relative importance of each dimension in
comparison to the others. It is suggested that a further study on Internet Banking
service quality be undertaken where the relative importance of the dimensions is
tested. The importance-performance analysis (IPA) approach is built around
customer-perceived importance of quality attributes and attributes of performance, the
interplay of which suggests strategies for service improvement and satisfaction
management (Ibrahim et al., 2005:479).
Time permitting and a list of customers using Internet banking available, probability
sampling method could be used to ensure that the survey sample is representative of
the population.
In view of the relative immaturity of online banking, other interesting areas for further
research include:
76
REFERENCES
Akinci A, Aksoy S & Atilgan E. 2004. Adoption of Internet Banking amongst
sophisticated consumer segments in an advanced developing country. The
International Journal of Bank Marketing, 22(3):212-232. Available from Emerald:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ [Accessed: 2008-03-03].
Bahia K. & Nantel J. 2000. A reliable and valid measurement scale for the perceived
service quality of banks. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 18(2):84-91.
Available from Emerald: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ [Accessed: 2008-08-09].
Barnes SJ & Vidgen R. 2003. Measuring Website quality improvements: A case study
of the forum of strategic management, Industrial Management and Data Systems,
103(5):297-309. Available from Emerald: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ [Accessed:
2008-08-14].
Baron S & Harris K. 2003. Services Marketing. 2nd ed. New York: Palgarve
Macmillan.
Bateson JEG & Hoffman KD. 1999. Managing Services Marketing. Orlando FL:
Dryden.
Bauer HH, Hammerschmidt M &Falk T. 2005: Measuring the quality of e-banking
portals. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 23(2):153-175. Available from
Emerald: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ [Accessed: 2008-02-16].
Bradley L & Steward K. 2003. A Delphi study of Internet Banking. Marketing
Intelligence
and
Planning,
21(5):272-281.
Available
from
Emerald:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ [Accessed: 2007-07-24].
Broderick AJ & Vachirapornuk S. 2002. Service quality in Internet Banking: the
importance of customer role. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 20(6):327-335.
Available from Emerald: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ [Accessed: 2008-04-12].
Bucley J. 2003. E-service Quality and the public sector. Managing Service Quality,
13(6):453-462. Available from Emerald: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ [Accessed:
2008-08-11].
Carrillant FA, Jaramillo F & Mulki PJ. 2007. The validity of the SERVQUAL and
SERVPERF scales: A meta-analytic view of 17 years of research across five
continents. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 18(5):472-490.
Available from Emerald: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ [Accessed: 2008-02-16].
Cronin J.J & Taylor S.A. 1992. Measuring Service Quality: A re-examination and
Extension.
Journal of Marketing, 56(3):56-58. Available from Emerald:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ [Accessed: 2008-08-10].
Davis D. 2000. Business Research for decision making. 5th ed. Pacific Groove:
Thomson Learning.
77
78
Kurpius SER & Stafford ME. 2006. Testing and Measurement: A user friendly guide.
London: Sage
Martins JH. Lobser M & van Wyk HJ. 1996. Marketing Research: A South African
Approach. Parow. CTP.
Mls PN. 1998. The Internet and the banks' strategic distribution channel decision.
Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, 8(4):331-337. Available from Emerald:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ [Accessed: 2008-04-22].
Mukherjee A & Nath P. 2005. An empirical assessment of comparative approaches to
service quality measurement. Journal of service marketing. 19(3):174-184. Available
from Emerald: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ [Accessed: 2008-05-26].
Oliver RL. 1980. A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of
satisfaction decisions, Journal of marketing research (17) 4: 460-469. Available from
Emerald: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ [Accessed: 2008-09-04].
O'Neill M, Palmer A & Wright C. 2003. Disconfirming user expectations of the online
service experience: Inferred versus direct disconfirmation modelling. Internet
Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy. 13(4):281-296. Available
from Emerald: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ [Accessed: 2008-01-30].
OSullivan J, Edmond D & ter Hofstede. 2002. Service Description: A survey of the
general nature of services. Distributed and Parallel Database, 12(2):117-133.
Available from Emerald: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ [Accessed: 2008.01-30].
Oppewal H & Vriens M. 2000. Measuring perceived service quality using integrated
conjoint experiments. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 18(4):154-169.
Available from Emerald: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ [Accessed: 2008-02-17].
Parasuraman A. 2004. Assessing and improving service performance for maximum
impact: Insight from a two decade-long research journey. Performance Measurement
and Metrics, 5(2):45-52. Available from Emerald: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/
[Accessed: 2008-02-05].
Parasuraman A, Zeithamal V.A & Malhotra A. 2005. E-S-QUAL: A Multiple-Item Scale
for Assessing Electronic Service Quality. Journal of Service Research, 7(3):213-233.
Available from Emerald: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ [Accessed: 2006-08-08].
Pikkarainen T, Pikkarainen K, Karjaluoto H & Pahnila S. 2004. Consumer
acceptance of online banking: An extension of the technology acceptance model.
Internet
research,
14(3):224-235.
Available
from
Emerald:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ [Accessed: 2006-05-29].
Roynolds R.A, Woods R & Baker J.D. 2007. Handbook of Research on Electronic
Surveys and Measurements. Hershey. Idea Group.
Rowley J. 2006. An analysis of the literature: Towards a research agenda. Internet
research, 16(3):339-359.Available from Emerald: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/
[Accessed: 2008-01-30].
79
80
APPENDICES
Appendix I: Internet Banking Service Quality Frequency Table
Quality of Internet Banking Services
Strongly
Disagree Disagree
I am able to get to my bank's Internet Banking site
quickly.
When my bank promises to do something at a specific
time, it keeps its promises.
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
2
1.2%
3
1.8%
2
1.2%
2
1.2%
1
0.6%
3
1.8%
1
0.6%
4
2.4%
4
2.4%
1
0.6%
1
0.6%
1
0.6%
1
0.6%
2
1.2%
4
2.4%
1
0.6%
1
0.6%
2
1.2%
3
1.8%
1
0.6%
2
1.2%
4
2.4%
3
1.8%
2
1.2%
81
4
2.4%
15
9.1%
12
7.3%
1
0.6%
3
1.8%
8
4.8%
16
9.7%
16
9.7%
16
9.7%
2
1.2%
10
6.1%
5
3.0%
5
3.0%
6
3.6%
11
6.7%
8
4.8%
3
1.8%
3
1.8%
9
5.5%
6
3.6%
19
11.5%
15
9.1%
2
1.2%
6
3.6%
Neutral
8
4.8%
48
29.1%
15
9.1%
27
16.4%
10
6.1%
30
18.2%
46
27.9%
46
27.9%
25
15.2%
8
4.8%
32
19.4%
23
13.9%
4
2.4%
63
38.2%
30
18.2%
14
8.5%
13
7.9%
9
5.5%
20
12.1%
41
24.8%
38
23.0%
33
20.0%
40
24.2%
15
9.1%
Agree
69
41.8%
66
40.0%
87
52.7%
70
42.4%
86
52.1%
82
49.7%
60
36.4%
61
37.0%
81
49.1%
69
41.8%
73
44.2%
78
47.3%
69
41.8%
65
39.4%
69
41.8%
69
41.8%
89
53.9%
83
50.3%
77
46.7%
78
47.3%
71
43.0%
71
43.0%
60
36.4%
73
44.2%
Strongly
Agree
82
49.7%
33
20.0%
49
29.7%
65
39.4%
65
39.4%
42
25.5%
42
25.5%
38
23.0%
39
23.6%
85
51.5%
49
29.7%
58
35.2%
86
52.1%
29
17.6%
51
30.9%
73
44.2%
59
35.8%
68
41.2%
56
33.9%
39
23.6%
35
21.2%
42
25.5%
60
36.4%
69
41.8%
Total
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
165
100.0%
Frequency
Yes
Valid
Cumulative
Percent
Percent
Male
83
43.7
51.6
51.6
Female
78
41.1
48.4
100.0
161
84.7
100.0
29
15.3
190
100.0
Total
Missing
Percent
Valid
System
Total
Frequency
Yes
Valid
Cumulative
Percent
Percent
18 - 24
4.2
5.0
5.0
25- 35
82
43.2
50.9
55.9
36 - 49
64
33.7
39.8
95.7
3.7
4.3
100.0
161
84.7
100.0
29
15.3
190
100.0
Older than
50
Total
Missing
Percent
Valid
System
Total
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Percent
Valid
Cumulative
Percent
Percent
Absa
80
42.1
49.7
49.7
FNB
24
12.6
14.9
64.6
Standard Bank
42
22.1
26.1
90.7
Nedbank
12
6.3
7.5
98.1
Other
1.6
1.9
100.0
Total
161
84.7
100.0
29
15.3
190
100.0
System
Total
82
Mean_Factor2
Mean_Factor3
Mean_Factor4
Mean
95% Confidence Lower Bound
Interval for
Upper Bound
Mean
5% Trimmed Mean
Median
Variance
Std. Deviation
Minimum
Maximum
Range
Interquartile Range
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mean
95% Confidence Lower Bound
Interval for
Upper Bound
Mean
5% Trimmed Mean
Median
Variance
Std. Deviation
Minimum
Maximum
Range
Interquartile Range
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mean
95% Confidence Lower Bound
Interval for
Upper Bound
Mean
5% Trimmed Mean
Median
Variance
Std. Deviation
Minimum
Maximum
Range
Interquartile Range
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mean
95% Confidence Lower Bound
Interval for
Upper Bound
Mean
5% Trimmed Mean
Median
Variance
Std. Deviation
Minimum
83
Statistic
4.09
3.99
Std. Error
0.052
4.19
4.13
4.17
0.443
0.666
1
5
4
1
-1.142
2.444
3.97
3.86
0.189
0.376
0.058
4.09
4.02
4.00
0.562
0.750
1
5
4
1
-0.882
1.187
4.29
4.20
0.189
0.376
0.045
4.38
4.32
4.40
0.330
0.574
1
5
4
1
-1.319
5.393
3.74
3.64
3.85
3.75
3.80
0.464
0.682
2
0.189
0.376
0.053
Mean_Factor5
Mean_Quality_Internet_Banking
Maximum
Range
Interquartile Range
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mean
95% Confidence Lower Bound
Interval for
Upper Bound
Mean
5% Trimmed Mean
Median
Variance
Std. Deviation
Minimum
Maximum
Range
Interquartile Range
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mean
95% Confidence Lower Bound
Interval for
Upper Bound
Mean
5% Trimmed Mean
Median
Variance
Std. Deviation
Minimum
Maximum
Range
Interquartile Range
Skewness
Kurtosis
84
5
3
1
-0.140
-0.296
4.06
3.94
0.189
0.376
0.059
4.18
4.11
4.00
0.571
0.756
1
5
4
1
-0.998
2.497
4.03
3.95
0.189
0.376
0.043
4.12
4.05
4.04
0.304
0.552
1
5
4
1
-0.891
2.790
0.189
0.376
Valid
Excluded(a)
Total
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha
0.881
86.8
13.2
100.0
N of Items
5
Item Statistics
Mean
3.72
3.80
3.96
4.02
4.36
q21
q22
q11
q3
q1
%
165
25
190
Std. Deviation
0.968
1.001
0.890
0.890
0.789
N
165
165
165
165
165
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if Item
Scale Variance if Corrected Item-Total Cronbach's Alpha if Item
Deleted
Item Deleted
Correlation
Deleted
16.15
8.861
0.739
0.850
16.07
8.538
0.772
0.842
15.90
9.100
0.776
0.842
15.84
9.597
0.665
0.867
15.50
10.215
0.638
0.874
q21
q22
q11
q3
q1
Efficiency
Case Processing Summary
N
Cases
Valid
Excluded(a)
Total
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha
0.868
q19
q18
q16
q6
q9
q17
q19
q18
q16
q6
q9
q17
%
165
25
190
86.8
13.2
100.0
N of Items
6
Item Statistics
Mean
4.05
4.28
4.24
3.92
3.82
4.22
Std. Deviation
0.919
0.756
0.849
0.890
0.983
0.719
N
165
165
165
165
165
165
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if Item
Scale Variance if Corrected Item-Total Cronbach's Alpha if Item
Deleted
Item Deleted
Correlation
Deleted
20.49
10.556
0.761
0.828
20.26
11.865
0.674
0.845
20.30
11.152
0.718
0.836
20.62
11.297
0.644
0.849
20.73
11.065
0.598
0.861
20.32
12.256
0.630
0.853
85
Security
Case Processing Summary
N
Cases
Valid
Excluded(a)
Total
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha
0.816
86.8
13.2
100.0
N of Items
5
Item Statistics
Mean
4.13
4.18
4.28
4.42
4.42
q12
q4
q5
q10
q13
%
165
25
190
Std. Deviation
0.808
0.814
0.712
0.700
0.741
N
165
165
165
165
165
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if Item
Scale Variance if Corrected Item-Total Cronbach's Alpha if Item
Deleted
Item Deleted
Correlation
Deleted
17.30
5.127
0.674
0.759
17.25
5.301
0.610
0.780
17.16
5.646
0.619
0.777
17.01
5.780
0.588
0.786
17.02
5.750
0.548
0.797
q12
q4
q5
q10
q13
Responsiveness
Case Processing Summary
N
Cases
Valid
Excluded(a)
Total
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha
0.791
q7
q8
q14
q2
q20
q7
q8
q14
q2
q20
%
165
25
190
86.8
13.2
100.0
N of Items
5
Item Statistics
Mean
3.76
3.68
3.68
3.67
3.90
Std. Deviation
0.962
1.011
0.847
0.957
0.824
N
165
165
165
165
165
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if Item
Scale Variance if Corrected Item-Total Cronbach's Alpha if Item
Deleted
Item Deleted
Correlation
Deleted
14.94
7.435
0.620
0.735
15.02
7.725
0.510
0.775
15.02
8.030
0.597
0.745
15.03
7.700
0.564
0.754
14.81
8.206
0.578
0.751
86
Contact
Case Processing Summary
N
Cases
Valid
Excluded(a)
Total
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha
0.765
86.8
13.2
100.0
N of Items
3
Item Statistics
Mean
4.22
4.04
3.92
q24
q23
q15
%
165
25
190
Std. Deviation
0.849
0.906
0.988
N
165
165
165
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if Item
Scale Variance if Corrected Item-Total Cronbach's Alpha if Item
Deleted
Item Deleted
Correlation
Deleted
7.96
2.669
0.630
0.654
8.14
2.682
0.551
0.735
8.26
2.304
0.620
0.661
q24
q23
q15
All Dimensions
Case Processing Summary
N
Valid
Excluded(a)
Total
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.
Cases
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha
0.935
q1
q2
q3
q4
q5
q6
q7
q8
q9
q10
q11
q12
q13
q14
q15
q16
q17
q18
q19
q20
q21
q22
q23
q24
%
165
25
190
86.8
13.2
100.0
N of Items
24
Item Statistics
Mean
4.36
3.67
4.02
4.18
4.28
3.92
3.76
3.68
3.82
4.42
3.96
4.13
4.42
3.68
3.92
4.24
4.22
4.28
4.05
3.90
3.72
3.80
4.04
4.22
Std. Deviation
0.789
0.957
0.890
0.814
0.712
0.890
0.962
1.011
0.983
0.700
0.890
0.808
0.741
0.847
0.988
0.849
0.719
0.756
0.919
0.824
0.968
1.001
0.906
0.849
87
N
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
165
q1
q2
q3
q4
q5
q6
q7
q8
q9
q10
q11
q12
q13
q14
q15
q16
q17
q18
q19
q20
q21
q22
q23
q24
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if Item
Scale Variance if Corrected Item-Total Cronbach's Alpha if Item
Deleted
Item Deleted
Correlation
Deleted
92.37
162.064
0.631
0.932
93.06
160.362
0.581
0.933
92.71
161.915
0.559
0.933
92.55
161.859
0.621
0.932
92.45
163.079
0.648
0.932
92.81
160.214
0.637
0.932
92.97
161.981
0.509
0.934
93.05
165.498
0.340
0.937
92.92
160.298
0.566
0.933
92.31
163.971
0.609
0.933
92.77
159.312
0.680
0.931
92.60
162.010
0.618
0.932
92.32
163.632
0.590
0.933
93.05
160.839
0.643
0.932
92.81
159.727
0.587
0.933
92.49
159.471
0.707
0.931
92.51
162.751
0.660
0.932
92.45
162.554
0.635
0.932
92.68
159.207
0.660
0.932
92.84
161.260
0.642
0.932
93.02
159.518
0.610
0.932
92.93
158.624
0.624
0.932
92.69
162.947
0.501
0.934
92.52
163.190
0.528
0.933
88
Variables
New dimension
(Questions)
Q19
Q18
Q16
label
The information on my banks Internet Banking
site is well organised and is easy to follow.
Efficiency
(The
The
Internet
Banking
website
it
is
addresses
customer needs)
service
design
is
aesthetically attractive
Q9
Q17
Q21
(Speed of loading
Q11
get
to
the
and
do
banking)
business
Q1
availability it
Q3
Fulfilment
Q12
Q4
(Assurance, Trust,
Q5
89
privacy)
and
Q10
Q7
(Communications
Q8
Q14
Q20
accuracy of service
Q24
Q23
(contact
Q15
availability
90
support)
details
and
of
service
Appendix VI:
Kruskal-Wallis Test
Ranks
N
80
24
42
146
80
24
42
146
80
24
42
146
80
24
42
146
80
24
42
146
80
24
42
146
Mean Rank
72.96
76.60
72.75
71.95
73.85
76.25
76.03
79.04
65.51
74.95
79.35
67.39
76.90
62.19
73.49
74.62
76.90
69.43
Test Statistics(a,b)
Chi-Square
df
Asymp.
Sig.
0.924
0.865
0.326
0.486
0.317
Mean_Factor1
0.157
2
Mean_Factor2
0.289
2
Mean_Factor3
2.240
2
Mean_Factor4
1.443
2
Mean_Factor5
2.299
2
Mean_Quality_Internet_
0.601
2
0.741
Banking
a. Grouping
Kruskal Wallis
Test Who is your primary bank; i.e. Where you do most of your
b.
Variable:
online Banking?
91
92
Appendix IV
93
Neutral
Agree
Strongly
Agree
94
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly
Agree
95