Factors Influencing Adoption of Wearable Devices in Dubai

• Autorzy: Anna Tarabasz , Garima Poddar
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Aim/purpose - Increasing importance of quantified self along with the number of available wearable devices create base for excitement among those perceiving technology as a catalyst for change. Despite multiple theories, in vain is to search for a model that would be suitable to visualise the adoption of wearables. The objective of this study is to recognise factors influencing the adoption of smart wearable devices and measure the strength of relationships between identified variables and dependent factor. Design/methodology/approach - A proposed research model was developed and tested, based on an analysis of 108 survey insights from existing and potential users of smart wearable devices. With Dubai claiming itself 'the smartest city worldwide', research was purposely focused on this city, with insights collected during 37th GITEX (Gulf Information Technology Exhibition) Technology Week (8-12 October 2017), in Dubai. Statistical analysis, with the use of Adanco 2.0.1 software, was conducted and as a result, structural equation modelling was proposed. Findings - The study shows clearly the growing importance of the wearables trend and consumers' willingness to possess the same. Based on the conducted literature analysis, factors playing critical role, like Product Attributes (PA), Perceived Ease of Use (PE) and Perceived Usefulness (PU), were identified along with the gaps pertaining to the adoption of smart wearable devices in Dubai. Research implications/limitations - The outputs of the conducted research provide practical guidance for solution/technology/product makers as well as sales representatives, to mould and pitch the product in a more effective manner. Due to time and financial constraints, study lacks conducted in-depth expert reviews, focus groups and laboratory experiment for real-time experience with existing/planned products. The limited sample size (108 respondents) and lack of possibility to generalise on the population, due to sampling by convenience are other points of improvements for future research. Originality/value/contribution - The study bridges the literature gap, providing quantitative analysis and overview of factors impacting on the adoption of wearable devices, based on the Theory of Reasoned Action, the Theory of Planned Behaviour and the Technology Acceptance Model. Moreover, constructed on achieved results, it proposes a new sequential multi-method approach model of technology adoption, based on researched factors such as Perceived Usefulness and Attitude towards smart wearable devices, influenced by Perceived Ease of Use and Perception towards new technology. Findings of the study allow for direct business implementation by smart devices developers, willing to introduce their new solutions to the market and plan their promotional strategy.(original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Electrical devices; Internet of Things (IoT); Mobile technologies

PL

Urządzenia elektryczne; Internet rzeczy; Technologie mobilne

• Czasopismo: Journal of Economics & Management / University of Economics in Katowice
• Rocznik: 2019
• Numer: nr 36
• Strony: 123--143

Twórcy

autor

Anna Tarabasz

• S P Jain School of Global Management Dubai, United Arab Emirates

autor

Garima Poddar

• S P Jain School of Global Management Dubai, United Arab Emirates

Bibliografia

• Adapa, A., Nah, F. F.-H., Hall, R., Siau, K., & Smith, S. N. (2017). Factors influencing the adoption of smart wearable devices. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 34(5), 399-409. doi: 10.1080/10447318.2017.1357902
• Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11-39). Berlin - Heidelber - New York: Springer Verlag.
• Ajzen, I, & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Upper-Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.
• Bock, G. W, Zmud, R. W., Kim, Y. G., & Lee, J. N. (2005). Behavioural intention formation in knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social- -psychological forces, and organizational climate. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 87-111. doi: 10.2307/25148669
• Business Wire. (2018). Top wearable technology trends that will have a major impact this year. New York, NY - San Francisco, CA: Author. Retrieved from https://www. businesswire.com/news/home/20180719005443/en/Top-Wearable-Technology- Trends-Major-Impact-Year
• Chan, M., Campo, E., Estève, D., & Fourniols, J.Y. (2009, October). Smart homes - current features and future perspectives. Maturitas, 64(2), 90-97. doi: 10.1016/ j.maturitas.2009.07.014
• Chen, C. C., & Shih, H. S. (2014). A study of the acceptance of wearable technology for consumers - an analytical network process perspective. Proceedings of International Symposium of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Washington, DC, USA, June 29 - July 2. doi: 10.13033/isahp.y2014.011
• Ching, K. W., Singh, M. M. (2016, May) Wearable technology devices security and privacy vulnerability analysis. International Journal of Network Security & Its Applications, 8(3), 19-30. doi: 10.5121/ijnsa.2016.8302
• Chuah, S., Rauschnabel P. A., Krey, N., Nguyen, B., Ramayah, T., & Lade, S. (2016, December). Wearable technologies: The role of usefulness and visibility in smartwatch adoption. Computers in Human Behaviour, 65, 276-284. doi: 10.1016/ j.chb.2016.07.047
• Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334. doi: 10.1007/BF02310555
• Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281-302. doi: 10.1037/h0040957
• Çiçek, M. (2015, April). Wearable technologies and its future applications. International Journal of Electrical, Electronics and Data Communication, 3(4), 45-50.
• Davis, F. D. (1985). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results. Massachusetts: MIT Sloan. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/35465050_A_Technology_Acceptance _Model_for_Empirically_Testing_New_End-User_Information_Systems
• Delventhal, S. (2016). Wearable tech market to surpass $72B by 2021. Retrieved July 2017 from http://www.investopedia.com/news/wearable-tech-market-surpass-72b2021/
• Ericsson Consumer Lab. (2016). Wearable technology and the Internet of Things. Stockholm: Author. Retrieved from https://www.ericsson.com/en/news/2016/6/wearabletechnology- and-the-internet-of-things
• Fang, Y. M., & Chang, C. C. (2016). Users' psychological perception and perceived readability of wearable devices for elderly people. Behaviour & Information Technology, 35(3), 225-232. doi: 10.1080/0144929X.2015.1114145
• Funk, K. (2015). Strategy in 2015: Wearable technology is changing the workplace. Retrieved from http://www.interiorarchitects.com/blog/strategy-in-2015-wearabletechnology- is-changing-the-workplace
• Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981, August). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382-388. doi: 10.2307/3150980
• Gao, L., & Bai, X. (2014). A unified perspective on the factors influencing consumer acceptance of internet of things technology. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 26(2), 211-231. doi: 10.1108/APJML-06-2013-0061
• Gartner. (2017). Gartner says worldwide wearable device sales to grow 17 percent in 2017. Egham, UK: Author. Retrieved from https://www.gartner.com/newsroom /id/3790965
• Gimpel, H., Nissen, M., & Gorlitz, R. (2013). Quantifying the quantified self: A study on the motivations of patients to track their own health (Completed Research Paper). In Proceedings from International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS) (pp. 1-16), Milan: AIS.
• Hair, J. F., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. Upper-Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.
• Hayward, J., Chansin, G., & Zervos, H. (2017). Wearable technology 2017-2027: Markets, players, forecasts. Cambridge, UK: IDTechEx. Retrieved from https://www. idtechex.com/research/reports/wearable-technology-2017-2027-markets-playersforecasts- 000536.asp
• Hwang, C. (2014). Consumers' acceptance of wearable technology: Examining solarpowered clothing (Master dissertation, Iowa State University). Retrieved from https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/13950. doi: 10.31274/etd-180810-5880
• Anderson, C. J., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411-423.
• Juniper Research. (2017). Future digital advertising: AI, Ad Fraud & Ad Blocking 2017- 2022. Retrieved from https://www.juniperresearch.com/researchstore/contentcommerce/ future-digital-advertising/ai-ad-fraud-ad-blocking-2017-2022
• Kesharwani, A., & Bisht, S. S. (2012). The impact of trust and perceived risk on internet banking adoption in India. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 30(4), 303-322. doi: 10.1108/02652321211236923
• Kozinets, R. V. (2008, April). Technology/ideology: How ideological fields influence consumers' technology narratives. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(6), 865-881. doi: 10.1086/523289
• Kurwa, M., Mohammed, A., & Liu, W. (2008). Wearable technology, fashioning the future. Singapore: Flextronics. Retrieved March 1, 2018 from http://www.flex tronics.com/Documents/Whitepapers/WTFashioningtheFuture-FINAL_AE.PDF
• Lamkin, P. (2016) Wearable tech market to be worth $34 billion by 2020. Forbes, February 17. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/paullamkin/2016/02/17/ wearable-tech-market-to-be-worth-34-billion-by-2020/

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.22367/jem.2019.36.07