E-Customer Behaviour and Cross Border Shopping Development: Petra Jílková, Petra Králová

Open Economics 2019; 2: 109–123
Research article
Petra Jílková, Petra Králová
E-customer behaviour and cross border

shopping development
https://doi.org/10.1515/openec-2019-0010
Received September 9, 2019; accepted November 25, 2019
Abstract: The digitalisation of business processes, cultural backgrounds and consequences on behavioural
differences make a direct impact on customer purchase behaviours across different markets. The main
aim of this paper is to analyse the effect of the economic situation in the selected countries regarding
the e-commerce business. On the sample of the situation in the Czech Republic, the article presents the
increasing potential of e-commerce and focuses not only on the statistics review but on the psychological
aspects of online behaviour. Firstly, the paper presents a theoretical model for customer purchase behaviour
and the development of the theory in correspondence with B2C e-commerce background. Secondly, this
research analyses the main aspects of shopping behaviour in selected countries; the research shows the
main characteristics of shopping and provides a better understanding of the impact of digitalisation.
Finally, the paper confirmed the fact that the Czech e-commerce market is developed and has potential to
grow nationally and internationally. The paper investigates online shopping for the period between 2010 –
2017. Finally, the authors discuss all the theoretical and practical implications of these results.
Keywords: e-customer journey, customer purchase behaviour, e-commerce, shopping, STDC concept.
JEL Classification: M31, O33, L86
1 Introduction
Technology and new solutions have affected the global economy and e-commerce system transformation.
According to Kotler (2001), e-commerce can be divided into the following categories: B2B (business to
business); B2C (business to consumer); C2B (consumer to business), and C2C (consumer to consumer -
consumers participate in the transaction). Bartzak (2016) defined more five segments for cross-border
e-commerce shopping: B2G or B2A (business to government or business to administration); G2B (government to
business); G2C (consumer to business); G2G (government to government). E-commerce in Europe is becoming
increasingly important. Improved living standards and the cross-border e-commerce trade has become a new
trade mode in global economic activities. According to Yugang, & Jingnan (2019), economic growth is powerful
to drive the development of cross-border e-commerce trade. In the research paper, there are many limitations,
such as the social system, cultural system or something else may affect the cross-border e-commerce trade.
According to Digital 2019, there are 87% of Internet users in the European Union, 5.11 billion unique mobile
users (January 2019), and 2% increase in comparison with January 2018. 3.26 billion people use social media
on mobile devices. The highest growth is in Asia, where we can find 4.25 billion unique users in comparison
*Corresponding author: Petra Králová, Masaryk Institute of Advanced Studies, Czech Technical University in Prague, Kolejní
2637/2a, Czech Republic, petra.kralova@cvut.cz, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1607-7243
Petra Jílková, Masaryk Institute of Advanced Studies, Czech Technical University in Prague, Kolejní 2637/2a, Czech Republic,
petra.jilkova@cvut.cz, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2884-5334
Open Access. © 2019 Petra Jílková, Petra Králová, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 International License. Unauthenticated
Download Date | 1/31/20 1:34 PM
110 P. Jílková, P. Králová
with Europe, where is only 0.846 billion users. 90% of internet users visited an e-commerce site on the web by
any devices. 62% of men and 65% of women used a shopping app in the year 2018.
The e-commerce business model provides many benefits to both sellers and buyers. Over the last
several years, there is a significant increase in automation. Companies are required to accept the ongoing
integration of information technologies to support the digital transformation of these firms. E-commerce
within the EU is growing in general. Moreover, cross-border shopping is increasing as well. Cross border
purchase within the EU increased by 3% from 2017 to 2018. 8% of individuals in the EU purchased in other
EU countries in 2008, the share of EU individuals buying within the EU was 21% in 2018. Luxembourg,
Austria and Malta are countries with the highest amount of individuals purchasing within the EU. On the
other side, Romania, Poland, Bulgaria and the Czech Republic are the countries with the lowest amount of
buying individuals.
E-commerce in the Czech Republic is stably growing. The most significant increase is among people
(aged 25-34), mothers on maternity leave and pensioners. By comparing gender, women purchase more
than men (2018). The most popular type of goods and services purchased online in the Czech Republic
were clothes, sporting goods, and accommodation, which is similar to the EU (CSO, 2018). Consumers
appreciate their ability to compare products easily, lower prices, and the convenience of at-home shopping.
The growing trend is evident in the number of internet shops; it counts for around 40 000 e-shops within
the Czech Republic. APEK refers to an approximate turnover of 135 billion CZK during 2018. The main
aim of this article is to analyse the effect of the economic situation in the selected countries regarding the
e-commerce business. The article demonstrates the main principles of customer purchase behaviour and
presents a development of the theory in the B2C e-commerce context.
Secondly, this research analyses the main aspects of shopping behaviour in selected countries; the
research demonstrates the main characteristics of shopping in B2C and provides a better understanding
of the impact of digitalisation. Besides, a literature review and analysis of secondary data is based on
publishing on or before August 2019. The digitalisation of business processes, cultural backgrounds, and
the consequences of behavioural differences make a direct impact on customer purchase behaviours across
different countries.
2 Research Methodology
The data is based on the Czech Statistical Office, which covers a period from 2010 to 2018. (Respondents of
the survey purchased online in the 12 months before 2018.) It will focus on the shopping in B2C e-commerce
market in the Czech Republic and the European Union in comparison with the context of the economic
situation. The methodologies used in this paper are the analysis, synthesis, comparison in time. The
conclusion sums up the findings and discusses them. Data analysis are providing a more in-depth insight
into an e-customer purchase behaviour developing and implementing a customer-oriented strategy.
3 Literature review
Internet development has driven the cost of distributing information virtually to zero, creating extraordinary
opportunities for sharing product evaluations (Avery, Resnick, & Zeckhauser, 1999). For the last 15 years,
value creation for the customer has been put forward as a critical variable in marketing. Rooderkerk and
Pauwels (2016) explain that there is a need for a better understanding of e-commerce customer. Chen, & Xie
(2008) examine four specific strategic issues: (1) when an online seller should provide consumer reviews to
its customers, (2) how a seller’s decision to supply consumer reviews interacts with its product assortment
strategy, (3) how the seller’s plan regarding the supply of consumer reviews interacts with its traditional
marketing communication strategy, and (4) what timing is the best for the seller to offer consumer review
information for a product.
The primary aims of communication strategy are a brand promotion or targeting of the performance
of our communication. We use tools such as viral campaigns, banner ads, online PR, employee loyalty
Unauthenticated
E-customer behaviour and cross border shopping development 111
programs and others to promote the brand on the Internet. Conversely, performance-driven search engine
marketing (SEM) or e-mailing strategies work for performance targeting. For more details about the online
communication mix matrix, see the Figure 1.
Forouzandeh, Soltanpanah, & Sheikhahmadi (2014) mentioned that digital marketing is used on
social media channels. This fact is the reason why online marketing campaigns have a bigger audience
compared to campaigns in the past. The phrase delivering value to customers implies that value is added
to the leading products and services provided to customers for their use. Several marketing strategists
(Huber, Herrmann, & Morgan, 2001 and Reichheld, Robert, & Hopton, 2000) underline that the creation
of customer value is a crucial element for ensuring the success to B2C companies. Marketing strategies
changed from a one-way to a multi-way communication process. According to Dhingra, & Dhingra (2013)
and Maroofi, Darabi, & Torabi (2012), the use of e-Consumer Relationship Management can play the leading
role in online customer satisfaction. Relationship quality, trust, and it can support adequate service quality.
Thanks to digital solutions, the advantages of serverless, integrated, and complex end-to-end data analytics
services that go beyond limits can be realised. According to Kumar, & Malik (2013) e-CRM can be defined
as a strategic technology-centric relationship marketing business model, combining traditional CRM with
e-business market place applications. Eroglu, Machleit, & Davis, 2003 show a significant effect of site
atmospherics on shopper attitudes, satisfaction, and various approach/avoidance behaviours as a result
of the emotions experienced during the shopping process. Mosteller, Donthu, & Eroglu, 2014 examines
how consumers’ perceived fluency of online verbal information affects their perceived cognitive effort and
positive effect within a chosen context. Consumer purchase behaviour analysis is a crucial aspect of the
success of e-business.
ONLINE COMMUNICATION MIX MATRIX
ONLINE PUBLIC DIRECT ONLINE

ONLINE SALES PROMOTION ONLINE ADDS OWN WEB PAGES
RELATIONS MARKETING
PRESS MESSAGING, AFFILIATE

RELEASES EMAILING MARKETING
WEBPAGES NEWSLETTERS COMPETITION

(OWN, OTHERS)
COUPONS,
SAMPLES
SOCIAL MEDIA
LOYALTY
PROGRAM
CASE STUDIES
VIDEOS
EVENTS
ARTICLES
Figure 1. Online Communication Matrix (Source: Own processing)
Unauthenticated
The attributes of the e-shops were focused researches of Zeithamel, Parasuraman, & Malhotra, 2002 and
many other authors (Lee, & Lin, 2005 and Li, & Suomi, 2009). The researches adjusted model SERVQUAL that
evaluates customers satisfaction according to the followed indicators: tangibles, reliability, responsiveness,
assurance and empathy. The model has been tested for e-commerce settings. Li, & Suomi (2009) proposed
eight dimension scale, where main attributes are: Website, Reliability, Responsiveness, Security, Fulfillment,
Personalization, Information and Empathy. Website is the starting point for customers to gain confidence.
According to Li, & Suomi (2009) the reliability means 1/ the accurate delivery and order service; 2/ truthful
product offer; 3/ keeping service or promoting promise; 4/ to have accurate online booking records; 5/
website availability. The responsiveness means answering all customerś questions or solving any problems
without interrupting the purchase. Security is an essential factor for customers. The customers perceive
significant risk during the purchasing sharing their financial data, terms of payment and delivery. Another
critical factor is fulfilment. All crucial information about product and purchase conditions are available for
the customer, and the system of the e-shop runs appropriately. The personalisation means using shared
customers data and applying them for providing services tailored to customers needs. The personalisation
is a reliable instrument for the building of customers loyalty.
Information is a crucial point. Customers can not physically see the offered products, and they can not
touch them. Therefore they need updated and correct information. The Empathy is essential for creating
accurate contact with the customers enabling the right interactions. To determine e-customer behaviour,
several frameworks have been created. For the purpose of the paper, there are three main e-customer
behaviour models – AIDA, FCB matrix, and See Think Do Care (STDC) concept. Although the AIDA
model was developed a century ago, the basic principle of the model is still relevant, despite a variety of
modifications. Solomon (2010) defined that the key to the successful implementation of the AIDA model is to
understand the mental state of the buyer. It is a very complicated process that requires skill and experience.
AIDA is a model of communication that is designed to capture the process that firms go through to reach
prospective buyers to sell their products and services. There are four main steps such as Attention, Interest,
Desire, Action (Belch, & Belch, 2004) and Satisfaction (Kotler, & Armstrong, 2001). Montazeribarforoushi,
Keshavarzsaleh, & Ramsøy (2017) connected the response hierarchy models with neuroscience. Based
on their research, they concluded that the AIDA model is not applicable and substantially problematic.
The FCB (Foot Cone Belding) help to understand where a product stands in the mind of a consumer, by
estimating whether or not purchase requires a highly involved emotional decision or a highly involved
intelligent decision. With that information, we can devise four advertising concepts about a single product
that will influence different buyers (Bains, 2015).
These trends bring the new STDC concept created in 2015 by Google company Kaushik (2015). We could
say that the STDC framework is suitable for an e-customer way, and this model has four main steps (See-
Think-Do-Care stage). The See stage includes the most massive audience, and in the Think stage, there is
the segment of consumers thinking about a particular purchase. In the Do stage, our consumer is ready
to buy something concrete. In the Care stage, we would like to have the repeated purchase, so we need to
offer to our customers something special, the benefit which inspires our customer to repeat the purchase.
Implementation of this concept to the online marketing communication mix could be implemented in the
case of the website optimisation. The main aim is to create an organic search, conversions, and revenues.
Thinking about this model is the future of marketing communication. The model is in line with Kim, & Choi
(2019) that mentioned that the relationship between a social media platform and users’ value co-creation.
The theory is based on four core drivers of social media success include experience, satisfaction,
expression, and sharing ability. Each of these drivers, in turn, contains conditions for understanding
users’ value-creation process and the creation of drivers for successful social media strategies. The paper
presents a theoretical model for customer purchase behaviour and the development of the theory in the B2C
e-commerce context. A difference between the traditional and e-commerce model has been found. Next, the
paper is analysing the main aspects of shopping behaviour in selected countries; the research shows the
main characteristics of shopping in B2C and provides a better understanding of the impact of digitalisation.
Unauthenticated
4 Findings and Results

The data presented by the Czech Statistical Office shows the development of the purchases during the
period between 2010 till 2018. (Respondents of the survey purchased online in the last 12 month period
before 2018.) The data set allows us to compare the situation in the Czech Republic and within the EU. This
article is focused on the situation in the Czech Republic, specifically the purchases related to the gender,
age, education and type of goods and services purchased.
Period Total 16+ Men 16+ Women 16+

2010 25,4 28,0 23,0
2011 28,0 29,0 26,9
2012 30,6 31,5 29,8
2013 34,4 35,6 33,4
2014
Period Total 16+ Men 16+ Women 16+
39,3 40,5 38,1
2015 2010
41,9 25,4
42,6 41,2 28,0 23,0
2016 43,6
2011 42,3 44,9
28,0 29,0 26,9
2017 51,6 53,0 50,3
2012 30,6 31,5 29,8
2018 53,9 53,6 54,2
2013 34,4 35,6 33,4
90,0
Figure 2. Internet customers (users/buyers) in the Czech Republic in the last 12 months period, Individuals according to
80,0 2014
gender (Source: Czech Statistical Office) 39,3 40,5 38,1
70,0
2015 41,9 42,6 41,2
60,0
Figure 2 presents the proportion of individuals who purchased online within the last 12 months between
50,0 2016 43,6 42,3 44,9
40,0
2010 and 2018. The percentage of individuals (aged 16+) are continually growing during the focused period.
30,0
2017 the difference
The indicators illustrate 51,6 53,0for men and women.
between purchases 50,3 Men aged 16+ bought online
proportionally more than women, except for 2016 and 2018.
20,0
2018 53,9 53,6 54,2
10,0
0,0
90,0 2011
2010 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
16–24
80,0 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–64 65+
70,0
economic activity (16+) 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
60,0
Employed 32,7 35,9 39,8 45,0 50,3 53,8 56,0 66,5 68,4
Unemployed 50,0 39,7 25,7 25,7 27,3 33,8 33,8 31,5 36,7 38,5
Mother on maternity leave n/a n/a n/a 55,1 64,6 65,5 72,4 77,6 82,7
40,0
Students 40,7 40,9 46,9 54,5 62,5 61,4 58,3 68,5 69,5
30,0
Old-age pensioner 3,7 4,4 4,2 6,4 8,4 9,9 11,4 14,5 15,5
Disabled pensioner
20,0 n/a n/a n/a 15,7 19,4 17,3 22,8 28,4 32,4
10,0
0,0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
16–24 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–64 65+
Employed 32,7in the35,9
Figure 3. Internet users/buyers 39,8 in
Czech Republic 45,0
the last50,3 53,8
12 months 56,0
period, 66,5 share
percentage 68,4
of whole individuals in
the socio-demographic group.
Unemployed Individuals
39,7 25,7 according
25,7 to27,3
age (Source:
33,8 Czech Statistical
33,8 31,5 Office)
36,7 38,5
Students 40,7 40,9 46,9 54,5 62,5 61,4 58,3 68,5 69,5
Disabled pensioner n/a n/a n/a 15,7 19,4 17,3 22,8 28,4 32,4 Unauthenticated
60,0
50,0
114 P.
40,0Jílková, P. Králová
30,0
20,0
The increase in online shopping is evident in every age group. There was the highest share for
10,0aged between 25 and 34. The 65+ age group is continuously increasing, as well. 13,5% of this
individuals
demographic
0,0 group bought online 12 months before 2018. The highest proportion of the audience have
2010individuals
university-educated 2011 (76%2012in the
2013 2014before
12 months 2015
2018),2016 2017
the lowest 2018 has people with
percentage
primary education (16,5%
16–24in the 1225–34
months before 2018). The mothers
35–44 45–54 on maternity
55–64 segment 65+leave have an
enormous potential for the future, especially for purchasing of goods for family, kids and household.
Employed 32,7 35,9 39,8 45,0 50,3 53,8 56,0 66,5 68,4
Unemployed 39,7 25,7 25,7 27,3 33,8 33,8 31,5 36,7 38,5
Students 40,7 40,9 46,9 54,5 62,5 61,4 58,3 68,5 69,5
Disabled pensioner n/a n/a n/a 15,7 19,4 17,3 22,8 28,4 32,4
Figure 4. Internet users/buyers in the Czech Republic in the last 12 months period, percentage share of whole individuals in
the socio-demographic group. Individuals according to economic activity (Source: Czech Statistical Office)
The survey presented by APEK used the primary sample of 1505 individuals. Most individuals who bought
online are between the age of 35 and 44 years (24%). There are also buyers older than 55 years old (24%).
The comparison of internet users in the EU and the Czech Republic illustrates the Figure below, which
shows that both indicators are increasing and the gap between these two is getting lower.
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
EU28 Czechia
Figure 5. Internet users/buyers in the Czech Republic and the EU in the last 12 months period, percentage share of whole
individuals in the socio-demographic group, aged 16-74 (Source: Czech Statistical Office)
300
250
Following figures express GDP (recalculated for one person and expressed in PPS, average EU 28 equals
100)200
and the proportion of individuals who bought online in the last 12 months. In general, the well-
developed countries (high PPS) are in correlation with the high share (%) of online purchasing. Exceptions
150
are Lichtenstein and Ireland where the online purchase penetration is not so high.
100
50
0
Poland
Greece
Austria
Malta
Latvia
Romania
Croatia
ted Kingdom
Denmark
Portugal
Germany
Italy
Hungary
Ireland
Sweden
Finland
Spain
Netherlands
France
Cyprus
Czechia
Slovenia
Estonia
Lithuania
Slovakia
Bulgaria
Luxembourg
Belgium
Unauthenticated
0%
50% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
40% EU28 Czechia
30%
20%
10%
300
0%
250
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
200
EU28 Czechia
150
100
50
0
300
Poland
Greece
Austria
Malta
Latvia
Romania
Croatia
United Kingdom
Denmark
Portugal
Germany
Italy
Hungary
Ireland
Sweden
Finland
Spain
Netherlands
France
Cyprus
Czechia
Slovenia
Estonia
Lithuania
Slovakia
Bulgaria
Luxembourg
Belgium
250
200
150
100
Figure
90%6. PPS in EU (Source: Czech Statistical Office)
50
80%
The comparison
0 of GDP development is essential for many reasons. Firstly, it tries to identify and describes
the70%
conditions that hinder the adoption and diffusion of e-commerce in developing countries. The level of
Poland
Greece
Austria
Malta
Latvia
Romania
Croatia
United Kingdom
Denmark
Portugal
Germany
Italy
Hungary
Ireland
Sweden
Finland
Spain
Netherlands
France
Cyprus
Czechia
Slovenia
Estonia
Lithuania
Slovakia
Bulgaria
Luxembourg
Belgium
the60%
development of the state influences the maintaining of technologies, limitation of connectivity, physical
infrastructure, but also a legal and regulatory framework, ability to pay, confidence in online purchasing
50%
(Lawrence, & Tar, 2010). The less developed countries are characterised with developing technological
40%
infrastructure, socio-economic, socio-cultural and governmental policies environments that hinder the
adoption
30% and diffusion of e-commerce.
20%
90%
10%
80%
0%
70%
Austria
Hungary
Italy
Portugal
Germany
Ireland
Finland
Poland
Sweden
Spain
France
Greece
Cyprus
Romania
Latvia
Croatia
Bulgaria
Malta
Slovenia
Slovakia
Czechia
Estonia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
United Kingdom
Belgium
Denmark
Netherlands
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Austria
Hungary
Italy
Portugal
Germany
Ireland
Finland
Poland
Sweden
Spain
France
Greece
Cyprus
Romania
Latvia
Croatia
Bulgaria
Malta
Slovenia
Slovakia
Czechia
Estonia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
United Kingdom
Belgium
Denmark
Netherlands
Figure 7. Proportion of individuals who bought online in the last 12 months (Source: Czech Statistical Office)
Unauthenticated
Individuals from the Czech Republic are buying not only in the Czech Republic but also in the whole EU
28. The most purchases in the Czech Republic were made in 2018 (4 291 800 pcs), purchases from the EU
countries were 874 900, and 475 200 purchases were realized from countries outside the EU. The trend
(focus period was 2008 – 2018) has been increasing in all countries where Czech individuals were buying.
The most frequent buyers in the EU who purchase from other EU members are Luxembourg, Austria,
Malta, Belgium and Ireland purchasers. The less many EU countries are Greece, the Czech Republic,
Bulgaria, Poland and Romania. Except for the Czech Republic, these countries purchases are less in general.
2018
2017
2012
2008
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
EU28 Czechia
Figure 8. National and Cross-border purchases, EU-28, 2008-2018, % individuals who bought or ordered goods or services
20,0
over the internet for private use in the previous 12 months (Source: Czech Statistical Office)
18,0
16,0 The main barriers that hindered the purchasing from other EU countries are language and delivery costs.
Cross-border online purchases can be an indicator of the smooth functioning of the single market for
14,0
e-commerce. A vast majority of e-shoppers in the 12 months before the survey made online purchases from
12,0 sellers in their own country: 88 %, i.e., down by one percentage point from 2013 (Figure 4; Eurostat). The
year-to-year comparison shows the increase of usage of foreign countries e-shops in general. Purchases of
10,0
Czech individuals outside the EU are still lower than purchases within the EU. The figure compares 2017
8,0 and 2018 (purchased realised prior 12 months). Men purchased more than women and the significant group
are people between 24 and 35 years. The figure is focused on people with specific economic activities.
6,0
Increasing meaning influence within e-commerce is supposed.
4,0 48% of the respondents use e-shop outside the Czech Republic at least once a year. 71% of respondents
2,0
aged 15-24 prefer foreign e-shops before domestic, but only 25% of respondents older than 55 years from
that group are purchasing online. Foreign shops are used more by men than by women (APEK, 2018).
0,0 The reasons, why respondent are buying abroad are according to the APEK research in 2018: lower
prices (87%), better offer (61%), unique source for the selected goods (35%), favourite brand not available
6+
+
+
44
e
6+
er
+
24
34
54
64
16
16
av
65
n
l1
s1
–
le
sio
–
–
en
in the Czech Republic (21%), better delivery conditions (18%). 74% of respondents who bought in last year
en
35
ta
t
16
25
45
55
ty
en
n
M
om
To
pe
ni
ud
er
abroad found their buying experience similar to buying in the Czech Republic, 18% of respondents found
W
e
St
at
ag
m
-
ld
the abroad purchasing better and 8% of respondents had a worse experience. Though 92% of respondents
on
O
r
te
found abroad experience similar or even better than in the Czech Republic, the customers mentioned easier
oh
M
followed communication and claims solving in the Czech shops.

2017 - Pur chase i n the EU 2017 - Pur chase outsi de the EU
90
80
70 Unauthenticated
60
2008
2017
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

2012
E-customerEU28
behaviour and cross border shopping development
Czechia
117
2008
20,0
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
18,0 EU28 Czechia
16,0
14,0
20,0
12,0
18,0
10,0
16,0
8,0
14,0
6,0
12,0
10,0
4,0
2,08,0
6,0
0,0
4,0
6+
+
+
44
e
6+
er
+
24
34
54
64
16
16
av
65
n
s1
l1
le
sio
–
–
en
en
35
ta
t
16
25
45
55
ty
en
2,0
n
M
om
To
pe
ni
ud
er
W
e
St
at
ag
0,0
nm
-
ld
O
ro
6+
+
oh5 +
44
e
6+
er
+
te
24
34
54
64
16
16
av
n
s1
l1
M6
–
le
sio
–
–
en
en
35
ta
t
16
25
45
55
ty
en
n
M
om
To
pe
ni
ud
er
W
e
St
at
ag
-
ld
on
O
r
te
oh
M

Figure 9. Individulas in the Czech 2018
90 Republic, 2017 – 2018 (%of individuals
- Pur chase i n the EU
who bought outside the EU in the previous 12
2018 - Pur chase outsi de the EU
months (Source: Czech Statistical Office)
80
70 90
60 80
50 70
40 60
30 50
40
20
30
10
20
0
10 men women 15 - 24 years 25 - 34 years 35 - 44 years 45 - 54 years 55 and more at least once a at least once a at least once a at least once a
0 years 14 days month quarter year
men women 15 - 24 years 25 - 34 years 35 - 44 years 45 - 54 years 55 and more at least once a at least once a at least once a at least once a
yes, several ti mes yes, years
once no 14 days month quarter year
yes, several ti mes yes, once no
Figure 10: Czech abroad purchasing, 2017, individuals who bought abroad of the Czech republic (Source APEK)
According to the quality of the services is the third-best e-shop Ali Express.com. 4% of respondents
appreciate this e-shop because of lower prices and delivery without a fee. On the first and the second place
are two Czech e-shops (Source: Alza.cz, Mall.cz)
The chart presents a comparison of goods purchased in the EU and the Czech Republic. The proportion of
purchased products is similar, except for the category which groups clothes, shoes, and sporting goods and
also the group including meals, chemistry and cosmetics. The biggest group of purchases in EU countries
are clothes, shoes, household equipment, books, newspapers and magazines. EU defines white goods as
white goods and toys; the Czech Republic represents this category the same, excluding toys. It gives us two
numbers, if we would like to compare the EU and the Czech Republic we add these two numbers together.
By combining these two numbers, we obtain a number which can be „compared“ with the EU to have an
approximate result.
Unauthenticated
100
90
80
70
60
100
50
90
40
80
30
70
20
60
10
50
0
40
2016 2017 2018
30
20 better exper ience compa rable experience worse experience
10
0
2016 2017 2018
Figure 11: Czech
Books, experience
newspapers, with abroad purchasing, 2016 – 2018 (Source APEK)
magazines
better exper ience compa rable experience worse experience
Films, music
Books,
Othernewspapers, magazines
electronic equipm ent
Films,
Computers and music
Hardware
Other electronicHouseholds
equipm ent
Clothes, shoes,
Computers andsports goods
Hardware
Households
Medicines, vitami nes
Food,Clothes, shoes,
dr ugstore sports
g oods, goods
cosmetics
Medicines, vitami nes 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Czechia EU28
Food, dr ugstore g oods, cosmetics
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Czechia EU28
Tickets for cultur al and sport events

Figure 12. Purchased goods, comparison EU and Czechia (Source: Czech Statistical Office)
The statistics are from 2018 – individualsTr ansport

from EU and the Czech Republic who purchased in the last 12
months. The figure regarding services compares groups of services that are purchased via the internet
in the EU and the Czech Republic. The most purchased services in the EU and the Czech Republic are
accommodation, tickets for culture and sports events, and the third being transportation. The data are from
Accomodation
Tr ansport
2018 - individuals from EU and the Czech Republic who purchased in the last 12 months.
One-third of individual customers who purchased online spent in the past three months a maximum
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
of 2500 CZK (100 EUR). Half of all buyers spent between 2 500 and 10 000 CZK, and almost one fifth spent
Accomodation Czechia EU28
more than 10 thousands CZK. According to the APEK research, 40% of the respondents spend between 501
and 1000 CZK, 31% spend between 1001 and 2000 CZK. The most used way how to pay online is the credit
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
card (39%) then by invoice. 15% of respondents prefer to pay in cash on delivery. The paying by credit card
Czechia EU28
is for the respondents the most comfortable way of paying.
Men spent more money than women, and this disproportion is influenced by categories of goods
purchased by men and women. The most procured products by men are software, PC applications, PC
games, Car accessories, notebooks, hardware, cameras and their accessories. The most purchased products
by women are clothing accessories, jewellery, watches, products for pets, flowers, small presents, products
for health, beauty, cosmetics, perfumes and other drug products, products for kids and clothes for kids.
Unauthenticated
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Czechia EU28
Tr ansport
Accomodation
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Czechia EU28
Figure 13. Purchased services, Comparison EU and Czechia (Source: Czech Statistical Office)
Customers aged 35-44 spent the most, one-fourth of this group spent more than 10 thousand CZK, for
three months. The highest-spending group are university-educated individuals, 30% of them spent online
more than 10 thousand CZK for three months (Czech Statistical Office).
The Czech Republic compared to the EU, is below average regarding online purchases, despite having
more internet users than the average EU citizen. 56% of Czech individuals seven between 16 and 74
purchased within the last 12 months (2017), EU 28 has an individual count of 58%. The most active being
British customers (82%), Swedish (81%), Dansk and Luxembourg (80%), the less active customers are from
Romania (16%), Bulgaria (17%) and Croatia (29%) (Czech Statistical Office).
Some individuals do not purchase online ever, and they mention no possibility of seeing the product, to
try, test and or taste it. Therefore 49% of individuals who do not purchase online prefer shopping in regular
stores (data from 2017). Individuals older than 65 years do not regularly purchase because they do not have
internet knowledge (77%). Some of them do not use the internet (67%), or they use the internet only for
essential activity (10%). (Czech Statistical Office) Other reasons for not-purchasing online are potential
difficulties caused by complaints and misusage of personal data or payments data. Czech e-commerce
discovered that 41% of individuals who do not buy online are because it is not possible to touch the goods.
21% of customers are afraid of potential problems related to complaints, 7% are aware of the misuse of bank
details, and 6% are aware of the misuse of personal data. 21% don’t mention any reason; they don’t know
why they don’t purchase online (Ceska e-commerce).
In the case of grocery, 44% of responders are willing to select and touch the food in the grocery store.
31% of them are used to buy only in the stores, and 29% mentioned they prefer availability/close distance of
the store in their near surrounding. Respondents were unsatisfied with a long time of the delivery, and they
were dissatisfied with the products that do not fill their expectations, or they had a problem with the process
of the shipment. The most popular above standard services are delivery for free, loyalty programmes and
the more prolonged guarantee. The services that the individuals would like to pay are the more extended
guarantee, installation and transportation to the flats in the higher storeys.
61% of the respondents used the delivery of the goods for free in the last 12 months. 24% of respondents
used a loyalty program and its advantages. 15% of the respondents used the prolonged guarantee, and
12% appreciate the return of the old item. Less than 10% used delivery of the goods to the higher storeys,
insurance of the products, prolonged guarantee for the performance of the products, installation of the
products, just in time delivery (by the courier) or delivery in the evening. The respondents that were older
than 55 years like the possibility of the return of the old item. The insurance of the goods is prefered by
respondents between 15 and 24 years. The respondents from the bigger towns prefer delivery in the evening
hours.
Unauthenticated
According to APEK, the main reasons for dissatisfaction of customers are: 1/ 38% was not satisfied with
the delivery period, 2/ 26% mentioned dissatisfaction with the delivered product and 22% of respondents
were not satisfied with the delivery itself. The sample consisted of 181 dissatisfied respondents who were
asked online purchasing in the last 12 months.
other reason
the destroyed package
long waiting time during the release of goods
problem with withdrawal fr om the contract
information defi cit during online shopping
poor customer services
wrong information on the e-shop websites
problem with claims
destroyed goods
wrong communication of the e-shop
problem with the delivery
dissatisfaction with the delivered product
long delivery period
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
6014: Dissatisfaction reasons, online purchasing in the last 12 months, (APEK)

Figure
The used device for shopping is another important factor. During years, the customers have been changing
the 50
used devices. Currently, prefered devices are smartphones. The smartphones are for the customer
convenient because of online connectivity, personalised applications. The smartphone enables instant
sharing of information, and at least it is an instrument for payment.
40
The ownership of smartphones and tablets is increasing. 29% of respondents did not have a smartphone
or/and tablet in 2014. In comparison, only 11% of respondents did not have smartphones or/and tablet in
2018. 35% of respondents realised their purchase last year via smartphones. 8% purchased via tablet, and
30 a smartphone or tablet for their purchases a previous year. In comparison with 2014, only 18% of
7% used
respondents used smartphone and/or tablet for their purchases, 50% of respondents use a smartphone
and/or tablets for their purchases in 2018. The trend of using a smartphone and/or tablet for purchasing
20
is increasing in general. The purchasing via tablet is slowly growing (6% in 2014, 8% in 2018), but the
purchasing via smartphone is growing significantly (9% in 2014, 35% in 2018).
The ownership of smartphones (tablet) influenced shopping habits. The most significant change is
10
searching for information about services. More often, individuals compare the rating of the products and use
smartphones for searching for the nearest store or shopping centre (23%). The payments via smartphones
are increasing significantly (6% paid via smartphones (tablet) in 2014, 17% paid via smartphones (tablet) in
2018).0 The satisfaction with purchasing via smartphones (tablets) is during years increasing.
Nevertheless,2014 2015
22% of respondents 2016
visit e-shop via smartphone, but they2017 2018 via PC
realise their purchases
or tablet. 20% of respondents
smartphone purchase
tablet online inand
smartphone case ofetbeingnone
tabl out of home or need
of them toown
I do not order
anyordevice
purchase
products immediately. 18% of respondents compare prices of the e-shops and stores. The content for
smartphones is customised. On the other side, smartphones have their disadvantages. The individuals
are dissatisfied with the small screen, with clarity about information and uncomfortable comparison of
the information. A comparison of the information via smartphone during the purchasing in the store are
realised very rarely. 61% of individuals use the smartphone for comparison very infrequently or never. Only
Unauthenticated
wrong communication of the e-shop
problem with the delivery
dissatisfaction with the delivered product
long delivery period
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
smartphone tablet smartphone and tabl et none of them I do not own any device
Figure 15: The used devices during purchasing (APEK)
10% of respondents compare online information during purchasing in the store almost always.
Online purchasing is affected by many factors. From the above-depicted tables (2, 3, 4) it is evident that
online shopping is influenced with age, sex, education, employment. On the other side, online purchasing
is affected by the attributes of the online shop and used devices.
These finding confirmed the research hold by the APEK association. 59% of respondents mentioned the
description of the technical information regarding the product should be in high quality. 54% of respondents
proposed the availability of the presented goods and its early delivery. The other essential attributes are
according to the APEK research full offer of the products, presentation of the products in high quality and
the delivery without any fees. The less essential attributes mentioned by respondents are the possibility of
re-payment, advertisement in the media, presence on the socials sites (i.a., Facebook, Twitter), the possibility
of information newsletters and potential of the helpline, option of asking. In general, e-commerce creates
9,1% of all retail in the Czech Republic, in-between years increase is 1% (Ceska e-commerce). Commercial
statistics expect 42 000 in the Czech Republic till the end of the year 2019. Expected revenue is 139 billion
CZK which means more than 18,5% increase between 2018 and 2019 (APEK).
No changes i n my shopping habits
Searching for information regarding products and services…
Reading comments and rati ngs regarding the products and…
Searching for the nearest store
Visit the e-shop, but the purchase is realized via PC/notebook
Online purchasing in case of beeing out of home or need to…
Online purchasing
No differences between devices
Fast price comparison of e-shops and stores
Use for payments
Other
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Figure 15: The shopping habits caused thanks to the usage of smartphones, in the last 12 months, (APEK)
09207002236911.
Unauthenticated
5 Conclusions
This paper analyses the literature in connection with e-customer behaviour and cross-border shopping
development. The purpose of this research is twofold. Firstly, we examine a theoretical model for customer
purchase behaviour and the development of the theory in the B2C e-commerce context. A difference
between the traditional and e-commerce model has been found. Brands are focused on storytelling. Social
media-based brand communities are playing an essential role between customers and firms. Secondly, the
paper demonstrates the main aspects of shopping behaviour in selected countries; the research shows the
main characteristics of e-commerce shopping in B2C and provides a better understanding of the impact of
digitalisation. The data presented by the Czech Statistical Office and APEK show the development of the
purchases during the period between 2010 and 2018. The data allows comparing the situation in the Czech
Republic and the EU. The Czech Republic compared with the EU is under average in contrast to having more
internet users than average in the EU.
The increasing trend of purchasing is significant within students and mothers on maternity leave
demographic groups. Both of these groups are not the person who generates the primary family income. On
the other side, we cannot forget the increasing trend in the number of e-shops. Above mentioned analyses
clearly show the big potential of e-shopping. The paper confirmed the fact that the online market in the
Czech Republic is developed and has the potential to grow both nationally and internationally. However, it
is necessary to further investigate the relationship between customer purchase behaviour, e-commerce and
other economic indicators, possibly including other factors.
References
Asociace pro elektronickou komerci - APEK. (2018). Turnover growth in e-commerce retrieved. Available at: https://www.apek.
cz/en.
Avery, C., Resnick, P., & Zeckhauser, R. (1999). The market for evaluations. American economic review, 89(3), 564-584. doi:
10.1257/aer.89.3.564.
Bains, J. (2015). The FCB Grid: What It Is and How It Works. SEMRUSH. Available at: https://www.semrush. com /blog/the-fcb-
grid-what-it-is-and-how-it-works/.
Bartzak, K. (2016). Bariery rozwojowe handlu elektronicznego. Exante.
Belch, G. E., & Belch, M. A. (2004). Advertising and Promotion: An Integrated Marketing Communications. Perspective 6th.
New York: NY: McGraw-Hill.
Česká e-commerce. (2018) Velikost e-commerce trhu. Available at: https://www.ceska-ecommerce.cz/
Chen, Y., & Xie, J. (2008). Online consumer review: Word-of-mouth as a new element of marketing communication mix.
Management science, 54(3), 477-491. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1070.0810
Content Marketing Institute - CMI. (2017). What is content marketing? Available at: www.contentmarketinginstitute.com/
what-is-content-marketing
Czech Statistical Office. (2018). Využívání informačních a komunikačních technologií v domácnostech a mezi jednotlivci
– 2018. Available at: https://www.czso.cz/csu/czso/vyuzivani-informacnich-a-komunikacnich-technologii-v-domac-
nostech-a-mezi-jednotlivci
Dhingra, M., & Dhingra, V. (2013). Determinants of Electronic customer relationship management (e-CRM) for customer
satisfaction in banking sector in India. African Journal of Business Management, 7(10), 762-768. doi: 10.5897/
AJBM11.712
Digital 2019. Available at: https://wearesocial.com/global-digital-report-2019
Eroglu, S. A., Machleit, K. A., & Davis, L. M. (2003). Empirical testing of a model of online store atmospherics and shopper
responses. Psychology & marketing, 20(2), 139-150. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.10064
Eurostat. (2018). E-commerce statistics for individuals. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.
php?title=E-commerce_statistics_for_individuals#E-shopping:_biggest_increase_among_young_internet_users
Forouzandeh, S., Soltanpanah, H., & Sheikhahmadi, A. (2014). Content marketing through data mining on Facebook social
network. Webology, 11(1), 1. doi 10.5120/ijca2015905313
Huber, F., Herrmann, A., & Morgan, R. E. (2001). Gaining competitive advantage through customer value oriented
management. Journal of consumer marketing, 18(1),41-53. doi:10.1108/07363760110365796
Kaushik (2015). See-Think-Do_Care Matrix. Avalilable at: https://www.kaushik.net/avinash/see-think-do-care-win-content-
marketing-measurement/
Unauthenticated
Kim, J., & Choi, H. (2019). Value co-creation through social media: a case study of a start-up company. Journal of Business
Economics and Management, Vol.20 (1), 1-19. doi: 10.3846/jbem.2019.6262.
Kotler, P., Armstrong, G., Saunders, J., & Wong, V. (2001). Principles of Marketing, 2nd edition. Corporate Communications: An
International Journal, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 164-165. doi: 10.1108/ccij.2001.6.3.164.1.
Kumar, N., & Malik, K. (2013). E-CRM golden opportunity for banks. International Journal of Multidisciplinary and Academic
Research, 2, 1-10.
Lawrence, J. E., & Tar, U. A. (2010). Barriers to e-commerce in developing countries. Information, society and justice
journal, 3(1), 23-35.
Lee, G. G., & Lin, H. F. (2005). Customer perceptions of e-service quality in online shopping. International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, 33(2), 161-176. doi: 10.1108/09590550510581485.
Li, H., & Suomi, R. (2009). A proposed scale for measuring e-service quality. International Journal of u-and e-Service, Science
and Technology, 2(1), 1-10.
Magrath, A. J. (1986). When marketing services, 4 Ps are not enough. Business Horizons, 29(3), 44-50. https://doi:
10.1016/0007-6813(86)90007-8
Maroofi, F., Darabi, A., & Torabi, J. (2012). Effects of E-CRM on customer-bank relationship quality and result. International
Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, 2(3), 164-182.
Montazeribarforoushi, S., Keshavarzsaleh, A., & Ramsøy, T. Z. (2017). On the hierarchy of choice: An applied neuroscience
perspective on the AIDA model. Cogent Psychology, 4(1), 1363343. doi: 10.1080/23311908.2017.1363343
Mosteller, J., Donthu, N., & Eroglu, S. (2014). The fluent online shopping experience. Journal of Business Research, 67(11),
2486-2493. doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.03.009.
Reichheld, F. F., Robert Jr, G., & Hopton, C. (2000). The loyalty effect-the relationship between loyalty and profits. European
business journal, 12(3), 134-134.
Rooderkerk, R. P., & Pauwels, K. H. (2016). No comment?! The drivers of reactions to online posts in professional
groups. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 35, 1-15. doi: 10.1016/j.intmar.2015.12.003.
Solomon, M. R. (2010). Consumer behaviour: A European perspective. Pearson education.
Yugang, H. E., & Jingnan, W. A. N. G. (2019). A Panel Analysis on the Cross Border E-commerce Trade: Evidence from ASEAN
Countries. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business (JAFEB), 6(2), 95-104. doi 10.13106/jafeb.2019.vol6.
no2.95
Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A., & Malhotra, A. (2002). Service quality delivery through web sites: a critical review of extant
knowledge. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 30(4), 362-375. doi: 10.1177/009207002236911.
Unauthenticated

E-Customer Behaviour and Cross Border Shopping Development: Petra Jílková, Petra Králová

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

E-Customer Behaviour and Cross Border Shopping Development: Petra Jílková, Petra Králová

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

E-Customer Behaviour and Cross Border Shopping Development: Petra Jílková, Petra Králová

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

 Open Economics 2019; 2: 109–123

E-customer behaviour and cross border

JEL Classification: M31, O33, L86

ONLINE COMMUNICATION MIX MATRIX

ONLINE PUBLIC DIRECT ONLINE

PRESS MESSAGING, AFFILIATE

WEBPAGES NEWSLETTERS COMPETITION

Figure 1. Online Communication Matrix (Source: Own processing)

4 Findings and Results

Period Total 16+ Men 16+ Women 16+

16–24 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–64 65+

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

followed communication and claims solving in the Czech shops.

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

2017 - Pur chase i n the EU 2017 - Pur chase outsi de the EU

yes, several ti mes yes, once no

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Tickets for cultur al and sport events

The statistics are from 2018 – individualsTr ansport

Tickets for cultur al and sport events

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

6014: Dissatisfaction reasons, online purchasing in the last 12 months, (APEK)

Figure 15: The used devices during purchasing (APEK)

No changes i n my shopping habits

Searching for information regarding products and services…

Reading comments and rati ngs regarding the products and…

Searching for the nearest store

Visit the e-shop, but the purchase is realized via PC/notebook

Online purchasing in case of beeing out of home or need to…

No differences between devices

Fast price comparison of e-shops and stores

Use for payments

You might also like

Open Economics 2019; 2: 109–123