Post on 27-Mar-2018
140
CHAPTER 6
USEFULNESS AND BENEFITS OF E-BANKING / INTERNET BANKING SERVICES 6.1 Introduction
In the previous two chapters, bank customers’ adoption of e-banking /
internet banking services and functional / psychological aspects of barriers /
benefits in adoption of e-banking are evaluated. In this chapter an attempt is
made to evaluate the usefulness and benefits of e-banking services as well as
intention to use e-banking / internet banking services in the future.
In the questionnaire, to find out the benefits of e-banking / internet
banking, 14 statements pertaining to different characteristics of e-banking have
been included with 7 point scale from “Very Strongly Disagree (VSD)”,
“Strongly Disagree (SD)”, “Disagree (D)”, “Normal (N)”, “Agree (A)”,
“Strongly Agree (SA)” and “Very Strongly Agree (VSA)”. The collected data
were first subjected to reliability analysis to ascertain internal consistency of the
items in the scale. After ascertaining that the items in the scale were consistent,
the data were subjected to “Principal component method of Factor analysis with
varimax rotation” to find out primary benefits (major dimensions) of e-banking.
After identifying the primary benefits, the average scores for each primary
benefit and then compared across respondent groups based on type of bank
sector, availing e-banking services, location, gender, age, education, occupation
and family income to evaluate whether the opinion regarding benefits of
e-banking is independent of the socio-economic and banking characteristics or
not.
141
Similarly, seven different services through e-banking / internet banking
included with 7-point scale ranging from “Not at all useful”, “Little useful”,
“Somewhat useful”, “Moderately useful”, “Useful”, “Very useful” and “Very
highly useful” to measure the usefulness of e-banking. The most useful services
are identified by ordering the seven different services based on mean perception
scores of the entire sample. Then the perception of the respondents across
categories by type of bank sector, availing e-banking services, location, gender,
age, education, occupation and family income is compared to identify whether
there is any association between socio-economic / banking characteristics and
perceived usefulness of e-banking services.
Further, information regarding intention to use e-banking / internet
banking in the future gathered from respondents were also analysed in this
chapter. Finally, the relationship of benefits as well as usefulness of e-banking
with intention to use e-banking / internet banking were analyzed using Canonical
correlation analysis. The results of the analysis are presented and discussed
hereunder.
The results of the reliability / item analysis for scale items measuring
benefits of e-banking / internet banking are reported in Table 6.1.
142
Table 6.1
Reliability / Item Analysis Results for Scale Items Measuring Benefits of e-Banking / Internet Banking [IB]
Item
No
Description of Scale Items Item to
Total Correlation
Alpha if Deleted
1 IB transactions save more time 0.4109 0.8921
2 IB provides more responsive service 0.6780 0.8797
3 IB transactions have lower cost 0.6066 0.8826
4 IB can make me feel enjoyable that I can control processes of financial transactions on my own via the Internet
0.7221 0.8777
5 IB provides customized services according to my needs and wants
0.5152 0.8873
6 IB provides systems to assist me to share my experiences with other customers of my bank more efficiently
0.5447 0.8855
7 IB provides systems to assist me to share my experiences with my bank more efficiently
0.4984 0.8876
8 IB provides link to other websites 0.5998 0.8832
9 IB provides accurate information 0.4770 0.8880
10 IB provides relevant information 0.6222 0.8827
11 IB provides up-to-date information 0.6129 0.8826
12 IB is easy to access with my Convenience 0.6339 0.8816
13 IB has more flexible ways to search for information 0.6269 0.8824
14 IB transactions save more time 0.5622 0.8846
Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability Coefficient 0.8915
Source: Primary Data
From the table, it can be seen that the correlation of all 14 items with their
total sum score (Item to total correlation) ranged between 0.4109 (Item 1) and
0.7221 (Item 4). It reveals the sufficient positive correlation values of at least
0.30 for all items in the scale. As there is sufficient correlation between each
143
item and total sum score, all 14 items in the scale for measuring benefits of e-
banking / internet banking are considered to be internally consistent with each
other.
It is further apparent from the table that the Cronbach’s alpha reliability
coefficient is 0.8915, indicating that the degree of internal consistency among 14
items in the scale has been excellent. It further reveals that information against
18 items collected from respondents are consistent, reliable and valid. As the
scale items measuring benefits of e-banking / internet banking are highly reliable
and internally consistent, further analysis have been carried with collected data.
As the scale items measuring benefits of e-banking and internet banking
is reliable, the opinion data against these items were subjected to factor analysis.
The results of factor analysis, such as eigen value and explained variance of each
factor are reported in Table 6.2 and factor loadings of each item with valid
factors are depicted in Table 6.3.
According to the table 6.2, the initial eigen values before Varimax
rotation is above one (the required nor for valid factors as per Kaiser Criterion)
for first four factors. This envisages that there are four major benefits from
adoption of e-banking / internet banking.
144
Table 6.2
Eigen values of Factors Underlying Benefits of e-Banking / Internet Banking
Factors Eigen value % of Total Variance
Cumulative % ofTotal Variance
1 6.00 42.85 42.85
2 1.57 11.19 54.04
3 1.32 9.44 63.48
4 1.10 7.85 71.33
5 0.71 5.05 76.39
6 0.61 4.39 80.77
7 0.48 3.43 84.20
8 0.44 3.15 87.35
9 0.40 2.86 90.21
10 0.34 2.46 92.67
11 0.32 2.28 94.95
12 0.26 1.89 96.83
13 0.25 1.79 98.63
14 0.19 1.37 100.00
Source: Primary Data
Further, from eigen value of 6.00 for the first, 1.57 for the second, 1.32
for the third and 1.10 for the fourth factor, it is understood that the first, second,
third and fourth factors posses 42.85 per cent, 11.19 per cent, 9.44 per cent and
7.85 per cent of the essence of original data before Varimax rotation
respectively. The total variance explained together by all these four valid factors
is 71.33 per cent in the actual data regarding benefits of e-banking / internet
banking. The extractable factors are shown diagrammatically using Scree plot
chart in 6.1.
145
Chart 6.1
Eigen values of Factors Underlying Benefits of e-Banking / Internet Banking
In the above Scree plot, it is apparent that the mountain point (steep slope
from top) ends at eigenvalue ‘1’. This strongly provides evidence that there are
four benefits of e-banking / internet banking according to bank customers in the
sample.
Table 6.3 reports the factor loadings of each item with four valid factors
(correlation between each item and each factor) benefits of e-banking / internet
banking after varimax rotation. After varimax rotation, the eigen values
(variance in the data) of valid factors have become 2.47 (17.65 per cent), 2.48
(17.73 per cent), 2.97 (21.18 per cent), 2.07 (14.77 per cent) and at the same
time leaving the total explained variance in the actual data as the same as before
rotation (71.33 per cent).
146
Table 6.3
Factor Loadings of Items with Extracted Factors (After Varimax Rotation)
Factor
Item
N
o Description of Scale Items 1 2 3 4
1 IB transactions save more time 0.87 0.10 0.12 -0.10
2 IB provides more responsive service 0.84 0.17 0.25 0.22
3 IB transactions have lower cost 0.74 0.19 0.22 0.24
9 IB provides accurate information 0.14 0.84 0.05 0.09
10 IB provides relevant information 0.16 0.76 0.19 0.28
11 IB provides up-to-date information 0.21 0.70 0.32 0.11
8 IB provides link to other websites 0.10 0.63 0.31 0.31
12 IB is easy to access with my Convenience 0.21 0.13 0.85 0.11
13 IB has more flexible ways to search for information
0.17 0.21 0.81 0.11
14 Using IB fits well with the way I like to manage my finances
0.09 0.12 0.80 0.17
4 IB can make me feel enjoyable that I can control processes of financial transactions on my own via the Internet
0.37 0.19 0.68 0.27
6 IB provides systems to assist me to share my experiences with other customers of my bank more efficiently
0.06 0.25 0.20 0.81
7 IB provides systems to assist me to share my experiences with my bank more efficiently
0.08 0.22 0.14 0.79
5 IB provides customized services according to my needs and wants
0.36 0.03 0.22 0.60
Explained Variance 2.47 2.48 2.97 2.07
% of Total Variance 17.65 17.73 21.18 14.77
Cumulative % of Total Variance 17.65 35.38 56.57 71.33
Factor Label
Sav
e ti
me
&
Cos
t Les
s
Pro
vide
acc
urat
e,
rele
vant
and
up-
to d
ate
info
rmat
ion
Fle
xibl
e an
d ea
sily
ac
cess
ible
wit
h co
nven
ienc
e
Ass
ists
to s
hare
the
expe
rien
ce w
ith
bank
an
d ot
her
cust
omer
s
mor
e ef
fici
entl
y
Source: Primary Data
147
From the observation of the factor loadings, it is understood that the
loadings of items 1 (0.87), 2 (0.84) and 3 (0.74) with the first factor, items 9
(0.84), 10 (0.76), 11 (0.70) and 8 (0.63) with the second factor, items 12 (0.85),
13 (0.81), 14 (0.80) and 4 (0.68) with the third factor, and items 6 (0.81), 7
(0.79) and 5 (0.60) with the fourth factor are higher than that of those with other
remaining factors. The above picture implies that most of the characteristics of
items 1 and 2, item 9, items from 12 to 14 and items 6 and 7 are possessed by the
first, second, third and fourth factors respectively.
Therefore, from highest loading of item(s) with each factor, the first
factor is identified as “Save time & Cost less”, the second factor as “Provide
accurate, relevant and up-to date information”, the third factor as “Flexible and
easily accessible with convenience” and the fourth factor is identified with label
as “Assists to share the experience with bank and other customers more
efficiently
The scores for each valid factor are calculated by averaging the scores of
items highly loaded in that factor. The scores thus obtained are used in the
subsequent analysis. As the opinion from each respondent against each items in
the scale is measured using 7 point Likert type scale ranging from ‘1’ for “Very
Strongly Disagree” to ‘7’ for “Very Strongly Agree”, the opinion of a
respondent group is considered to be as “Very Strongly Disagree”, “Strongly
Disagree”, “Disagree”, “Neutral”, “Agree”, “Strongly Agree”, “Very Strongly
Agree” for mean score of “< 1.50”, “>= 1.50 and < 2.50”, “>= 2.50 and
< 3.50”, “>=3.50 and < 4.50”, “>= 4.50 and < 5.50”, “>= 5.50 and < 6.50” and
“>= 6.50” respectively.
148
6.2 Benefits of e-Banking / Internet Banking Vs Socio-Economic /
Banking Characteristics
First, the level of opinion of the entire sample about major benefits is
evaluated by averaging the opinion scores against each dimension. The mean
and standard deviation of the score are reported in Table 6.4.
Table 6.4
Major Benefits of e-Banking as per Entire Sample
Benefits Mean Standard Deviation
Save time & Cost Less 5.00 1.20
Provide accurate, relevant and up-to date information
5.10 1.04
Flexible and easily accessible with convenience
5.12 1.08
Assists to share the experience with bank and other customers more efficiently
4.79 1.17
Source: Primary Data
As shown in the table, the mean perception scores of all sample are in the
agree range (>= 4.50 and < 5.50) for all four benefit dimension. However, the
score is as high as 5.12 for “Flexible and easily accessible with convenience”
followed by 5.10 for “Provide accurate, relevant and up-to date information”,
5.00 for “Save time & Cost Less” and 4.79 for “Assists to share the experience
with bank and other customers more efficiently”. This envisages that “flexibility
and easy accessibility with convenience” is the top most benefit followed by
“Providing accurate, relevant and up-to date information” and “Saving time &
Cost Less”.
149
The major benefits of e-banking / internet banking adoption as perceived
by the respondent are compared between public and private sector banks and the
results of the test are reported in Table 6.5.
Table 6.5
Benefits of e-Banking - Comparison of Perception between Public and Private Sector Bank Customers
Banking Sector
Public Private Q. No
Major Benefits
(n=247) (n=113)
t value
4.89 5.26 2.72*** 1 Save time & Cost Less
(1.26) (1.02)
5.00 5.31 2.61*** 2
Provide accurate, relevant and up-to date information (1.05) (0.99)
4.97 5.43 3.81*** 3
Flexible and easily accessible with convenience (1.14) (0.86)
4.73 4.92 1.38 4 Assists to share the experience with bank and other customers more efficiently
(1.19) (1.12)
Source: Primary Data. Figures in brackets are standard deviation. ***Significant at 1% level.
It can be seen from the table, the bank customers of both public and
private sector banks have agreed that e-banking / internet banking save time &
cost less (Mean = 4.89 for public & 5.26 for private sector), provide accurate,
relevant and up to date information (Mean = 5.00 for public & 5.31 for private
sector), flexible and easily accessible with convenience (Mean = 4.97 for public
& 5.43 for private sector) and it assists to share the experience with bank and
150
other customers more efficiently (Mean = 4.73 for public & 4.92 for private
sector). However, from F value, which is significant at 1 per cent level for all
benefits except “assists to share the experience with bank and other customers
more efficiently”, it is apparent that the level of agreement among private bank
customers is significantly higher than that of public sector bank customers. This
shows that adoption of e-banking / internet banking provided by the private
sector banks is more beneficial in terms of “time and cost”, “providing accurate,
relevant and up-to date information” and “accessibility with convenience”
compared to public sector banks.
The opinion about benefits of e-banking / internet banking is compared
between non-users and users of e-banking groups and Table 6.6 presents the
results.
Table 6.6
Benefits of e-Banking - Comparison of Perception between Users and Non-Users of e-Banking / Internet Banking [IB]
e-Banking / IB
User Non-User Q. No
Major Benefits
(n=229) (n=131)
t value
5.10 4.84 1.96** 1 Save time & Cost Less
(1.17) (1.24)
5.27 4.80 4.29*** 2
Provide accurate, relevant and up-to date information (0.96) (1.10)
5.34 4.73 5.27*** 3
Flexible and easily accessible with convenience (0.90) (1.25)
4.90 4.60 2.42** 4
Assists to share the experience with bank and other customers more efficiently
(1.07) (1.31)
Source: Primary Data. Figures in brackets are standard deviation. **Significant at 5% level; ***Significant at 1% level
151
From the perusal of the table, it is evident that the users and non-users of
e-banking / IB among bank customer groups have agreed with all four primary
benefits of e-banking / IB. But the level of agreement is significantly less
among non-user group than that of user group with regard to all benefit
dimensions. Hence, it is concluded that perceived benefits of e-banking /
internet banking is significantly influenced by availing of e-banking / IB
services among bank customers.
From the opinion of respondent groups from rural, semi-urban and urban
areas four major benefits of e-banking / IB is compared using F-test and results
of the analysis are reported in Table 6.7.
Table 6.7
Benefits of e-Banking - Comparison of Perception by Respondents’ Location
Location
Rural Semi-urban
Urban Q. No
Major Benefits
(n=161) (n=80) (n=119)
F value
4.82 5.21 5.11 3.53*** 1 Save time & Cost Less
(1.05) (1.26) (1.32)
4.82 5.52 5.20 13.82*** 2
Provide accurate, relevant and up-to date information (1.14) (0.67) (1.00)
4.82 5.44 5.30 12.36*** 3
Flexible and easily accessible with convenience (1.20) (0.74) (1.01)
4.45 5.16 5.00 13.67***
4
Assists to share the experience with bank and other customers more efficiently
(1.32) (0.85) (1.01)
Source: Primary Data. Figures in brackets are standard deviation. ***Significant at 1% level.
152
According to the table 6.7, the urban customers have agreed with all
benefits, while semi-urban customers have strongly agreed with “Assists to share
the experience with bank and other customers more efficiently” (Mean = 5.52,
in the strongly agree range) and agree with the other three benefits (Mean scores
are in agree range). The rural groups, on the other hand, have neither disagreed
nor agreed with “Assists to share the experience with bank and other customers
more efficiently” (Mean = 4.45, in “neutral” range) while agreeing with other
benefits. The F value, 3.53, 13.82, 12.36 and 13.67 for the first, second, third
and fourth benefits are significant at one per cent level. This has led to the
finding that the perceived level of benefits from e-banking / IB adoption differ
significantly by location of the bank customers.
Table 6.8 exhibits the results of comparison of opinion about e-banking /
IB benefits across respondent groups by Gender. It can be observed from the
table that the mean perception scores for both male and female groups are in the
‘agree’ range in respect of all the four major benefits of e-banking / IB. At the
same time, the number of female customers with ‘agree’ opinion about the
second and third benefits is less compared to those in the male groups as the
mean perception score for female group is less than that of the male group.
However, from the F values, which are insignificant for all, it is apparent that the
difference in opinion between the two gender groups is due to chance and not
significant at required hypothetical level.
153
Table 6.8
Benefits of e-Banking - Comparison of Respondents’ Perception by Gender
Gender
Male Female Q. No
Major Benefits
(n=286) (n=74)
t value
5.00 5.01 0.04 1 Save time & Cost Less
(1.19) (1.27)
5.13 4.98 1.08 2
Provide accurate, relevant and up-to date information (1.03) (1.07)
5.16 4.94 1.55 3
Flexible and easily accessible with convenience (1.04) (1.24)
4.84 4.62 1.44
4
Assists to share the experience with bank and other customers more efficiently
(1.06) (1.52)
Source: Primary Data. Figures in brackets are standard deviation.
So, it is concluded from the results of comparative analysis for customer
groups by gender that the perceived level of benefits of e-banking / IB is
independent of gender of the bank customers.
Table 6.9 reports the results of one way ANOVA (F test) comparing the
mean perception scores by Age groups with regard to benefits of e-banking / IB.
From the examination of the table, it is clear that the mean scores for all age
groups against all benefit dimensions are in between 4.50 and 5.50, the range for
“agree” opinion. Regarding all benefits except “Assists to share the experience
with bank and other customers more efficiently”, all age groups have expressed
similar level of agreement (F values are insignificant).
154
Table 6.9
Benefits of e-Banking - Comparison of Respondents’ Perception by Age
Age (in Years)
Up to 25 26 - 40 Above 40 Q. No
Major Benefits
(n=87) (n=216) (n=57)
F value
4.94 5.06 4.90 0.55 1 Save time & Cost Less
(1.03) (1.28) (1.15) 5.06 5.11 5.11 0.08
2 Provide accurate, relevant and up-to date information (1.02) (0.99) (1.23)
5.05 5.17 5.03 0.60 3
Flexible and easily accessible with convenience (1.09) (0.97) (1.43)
4.58 4.90 4.71 2.44*
4
Assists to share the experience with bank and other customers more efficiently
(1.25) (1.11) (1.22)
Source: Primary Data. Figures in brackets are standard deviation. *Significant at 10% level.
But there seems to be marginal difference in the level of agreement
among age groups regarding the fourth benefit as mean scores of respondents
with age up to 25 years is 4.58 and F value is 2.44, which is significant at 10 per
cent level. As the difference in the opinion among age groups about the fourth
benefit is marginal, and the level of agreement among all groups about the
remaining three benefits is at similar extent, it is deduced that the perceived
benefits of e-banking / IB is independent of the age of the bank customers.
The difference in opinion about benefits of e-banking / internet banking
among respondent groups by education is tested with F-test and the results of the
test are depicted in Table 6.10.
155
Table 6.10
Benefits of e-Banking - Comparison of Respondents’ Perception by Education
Education
Secondary Degree Above Degree
Q. No
Major Benefits
(n=42) (n=145) (n=173)
F value
4.90 4.81 5.19 4.36*** 1 Save time & Cost Less
(0.95) (1.10) (1.31)
5.46 4.82 5.24 9.70*** 2
Provide accurate, relevant and up-to date information (0.67) (1.10) (1.00)
5.24 4.89 5.27 5.38*** 3
Flexible and easily accessible with convenience (0.99) (1.14) (1.03)
5.09 4.44 5.01 11.41***
4
Assists to share the experience with bank and other customers more efficiently
(1.00) (1.14) (1.16)
Source: Primary Data. Figures in brackets are standard deviation. ***Significant at 1% level
An examination of the table indicates that the mean perception scores for
all educated groups against all benefit dimensions except for graduates in respect
of “Assists to share the experience with bank and other customers more
efficiently” (Mean = 4.44) are in the “agree” range. The level of agreement is
significantly higher for post-graduates (above degree holders) (Mean = 5.19)
with “Save time & Cost Less” (F = 4.36, p < 0.01) whereas it is significantly
lesser among graduates regarding “Provide accurate, relevant and up-to date
information” (Mean = 4.82) (F = 9.70, p < 0.01), “Flexible and easily accessible
with convenience” (Mean = 4.89) (F = 5.38, p < 0.01) and “Assists to share the
experience with bank and other customers more efficiently” (F = 11.41,
156
p < 0.01). To sum up, it is found that the perceived level of benefits from
adoption of e-banking / internet banking is related to educational status of the
bank customers.
Table 6.11 provides the results of F test comparing respondents’ opinion
about benefits from e-banking / IB among groups by occupational status.
Table 6.11
Benefits of e-Banking - Comparison of Respondents’ Perception by Occupation
Occupation
Stu
den
t
Hou
sew
ife
Gov
t.
Em
plo
yee
Pri
vate
E
mp
loye
e
Bu
sin
ess
/
Sel
f
Em
plo
yed
Q. No
Major Benefits
(n=55) (n=18) (n=136) (n=120) (n=31)
F value
4.89 5.11 4.92 5.13 5.01 0.65 1 Save time & Cost Less
(0.97) (0.94) (1.34) (1.13) (1.35)
5.25 5.61 5.09 4.94 5.18 2.16* 2
Provide accurate, relevant and up-to date information
(0.85) (0.61) (1.08) (1.13) (0.85)
5.15 5.15 5.06 5.15 5.12 0.14 3
Flexible and easily accessible with convenience
(1.14) (1.27) (1.20) (0.91) (0.96)
4.65 4.24 4.74 4.86 5.30 2.91**
4
Assists to share the experience with bank and other customers more efficiently
(1.27) (1.73) (1.19) (1.03) (0.80)
Source: Primary Data. Figures in brackets are standard deviation. *Significant at 10% level; **Significant at 5% level
According to the table, bank customers belonging to student, housewife,
government employee, private employee and business / self-employed groups
157
have all agreed with all benefits except housewives in respect of “Assists to
share the experience with bank and other customers more efficiently” and
“Provide accurate, relevant and up-to date information”. The housewife group,
while expressing “strong agreement” with “Provide accurate, relevant and up-to
date information” (Mean = 5.61), have expressed neither disagreement nor
agreement with “Assists to share the experience with bank and other customers
more efficiently” (Mean = 4.24). From F value, it is evident that the level of
agreement is similar among all occupational groups with regard to “Save time &
Cost Less” and “Flexible and easily accessible with convenience”, whereas the
level of agreement among housewives is marginally higher in respect of
“Provide accurate, relevant and up-to date information” (F value = 2.16,
p < 0.10) and significantly less regarding “Assists to share the experience with
bank and other customers more efficiently” (F value = 2.91, p < 0.05) compared
to that of those in other occupational groups.
So, it is concluded that perceived benefits from e-banking / IB such as
“save time & cost less” as well as “Flexible and easily accessible with
convenience” is independent of the occupational status whereas the perception
regarding the other two benefits is affected by the occupational status of the
bank customers.
Table 6.12 presents the results of the analysis comparing the respondents’
perception about the four major benefits of e-banking / IB adoption by monthly
income of the family.
158
Table 6.12
Benefits of e-Banking - Comparison of Respondents’ Perception by Income
Income
Up to Rs.10000
Rs.10001 - 25000
> Rs.25000
Q. No
Major Benefits
(n=119) (n=154) (n=87)
F value
4.90 4.85 5.43 7.48*** 1 Save time & Cost Less
(1.23) (1.14) (1.18)
4.84 5.17 5.32 6.11*** 2
Provide accurate, relevant and up-to date information (1.23) (0.93) (0.84)
5.04 5.19 5.10 0.65 3
Flexible and easily accessible with convenience (1.06) (1.20) (0.87)
4.63 4.60 5.34 13.72***
4
Assists to share the experience with bank and other customers more efficiently
(1.18) (1.21) (0.89)
Source: Primary Data. Figures in brackets are standard deviation. ***Significant at 1% level
As shown in the table, the level of opinion about all four benefits of
e-banking / IB among respondents groups with all levels of family income (per
month) is in between 4.50 and 5.50, the range for “agree”. But the mean
perception, 5.43, 5.32 and 5.34 of respondent group with family income above
Rs.25000 are significantly higher than the mean perception of those in the group
with family income up to Rs.10000 and between Rs.10000 and 25000 in respect
of “Save time & Cost Less” (F value = 7.48, p < 0.01), “Provide accurate,
relevant and up-to date information” (F value = 6.11, p < 0.01) and “Assists to
share the experience with bank and other customers more efficiently” (F value =
13.72, p < 0.01) respectively. Regarding “Flexible and easily accessible with
convenience”, the level of agreement is the same among all income groups
159
(F value is insignificant). From the inferences of the results, it is found that the
perceived benefits of e-banking / IB is related to the status of family income of
bank customers.
6.3 Usefulness of e-Banking / Internet Banking
The usefulness of e-banking / Internet banking as perceived by the
respondents are evaluated here. Table 6.13 presents the opinion of all
respondents in the sample. The opinion is obtained in the 7 point scale, the mean
score “< 1.50”, “>= 1.50 and <2.50”, “>= 2.50 and 3.50”, “>= 3.50 and 4.50”,
“>= 4.50 and 5.50”, “>= 5.50 and < 6.50” and “>= 6.50” refers to “Not at all
useful”, “Little useful”, “Somewhat useful”, “Moderately useful”, “Useful”,
“Very useful” and “Very highly useful” respectively.
Table 6.13
Usefulness of e-Banking / IB – All Sample
e-Banking Services Mean Standard Deviation
Account details and balance statements 5.11 1.56
Funds transfer 5.19 1.40
Loan transaction 4.69 1.83
Pay bills using available cash in the accounts 5.18 1.34
Order to buy and sell shares 5.16 1.46
Open new accounts 4.66 1.82
Generate the latest reports of banking transactions 5.36 1.46
Source: Primary Data.
160
As per the table, the mean perception of the total sample, which ranges
between 4.66 and 5.36, is in the “useful” opinion range (>= 4.50 and < 5.50), in
turn indicating that majority of the respondents in the sample have perceived all
facilities of e-banking / IB as useful. Further from the ordering of mean scores
from high to low, it is clear that “Generating the latest reports of banking
transactions” (Mean = 5.36) is major usefulness followed by “Funds transfer”
(Mean = 5.19), “Pay bills using available cash in the accounts” (Mean = 5.18)
and “Order to buy and sell shares” (Mean = 5.16) whereas e-banking / IB is not
very much useful for “opening new accounts” and “loan transactions”.
To check whether the usefulness of e-banking / Internet banking differ by
type of banking sector, the mean perception between public and private sector
bank customers is compared with t-test and the results of the test are given in
Table 6.14.
From the table, it can be seen that the public sector group have seen all
but “open new accounts” as usefulness of e-banking / internet banking as the
mean scores are in the “useful” range (>= 4.50 and 5.50). Regarding “open new
accounts” (Mean = 4.48), public sector customer group have perceived as
“moderately useful” (>= 3.50 and 4.50). On the other hand, private sector bank
customers have found “Account details and balance statements” (Mean = 5.33),
“Loan transaction” (Mean = 4.86), “Pay bills using available cash in the
accounts” (Mean = 5.21) and “Open new accounts” (Mean = 5.04) as useful
whereas they found “Funds transfer” (Mean = 5.67), “Order to buy and sell
shares” (Mean = 5.59) and “Generate the latest reports of banking transactions”
(Mean = 6.02) as very useful (Mean scores are >= 5.50 and < 6.50, the range for
“very useful”).
161
Table 6.14
Usefulness of e-Banking / IB - Comparison of Perception between Public and Private Sector Bank Customers
Banking Sector
Public Private Q. No
e-Banking Services
(n=247) (n=113)
t value
5.02 5.33 1.77* 1
Account details and balance statements (1.64) (1.35)
4.97 5.67 4.54*** 2 Funds transfer
(1.56) (0.76)
4.61 4.86 1.21 3 Loan transaction
(1.95) (1.55)
5.17 5.21 0.28 4
Pay bills using available cash in the accounts (1.43) (1.11)
4.97 5.59 3.85*** 5 Order to buy and sell shares
(1.56) (1.07)
4.48 5.04 2.75*** 6 Open new accounts
(1.93) (1.50)
5.06 6.02 6.07*** 7
Generate the latest reports of banking transactions (1.57) (0.90)
Source: Primary Data. Figures in brackets are standard deviation. *Significant at 10% level; ***Significant at 1% level
The level of opinion among private sector bank customers is significantly
higher than that of public sector bank customers in respect of “Funds transfer”
(t-value = 4.54, p < 0.01), “Order to buy and sell shares” (t-value = 3.85,
p < 0.01), “Open new accounts” (t-value = 2.75, p < 0.01) and “Generate the
latest reports of banking transactions” (t-value = 6.07, p < 0.01). This in turn
reveals that these services through e-banking / internet banking are much better
in private sector banks compared to their public sector counterparts. In short, it
is found that all services of e-banking / IB is useful according to both public and
162
private sector bank customers, but usefulness of services like “Funds transfer”,
“Order to buy and sell shares”, “Open new accounts” and “Generate the latest
reports of banking transactions” in private sector banks are significantly better
compared to these services in public sector banks through e-banking / internet
banking.
The level of usefulness of e-banking and internet banking for users and
non-users of these services is analyzed by comparing the mean perception
between two groups. Table 6.15 reports the results of the analysis.
As reported in the table, the users of e-banking services have perceived all
the services except “Generate the latest reports of banking transactions” as
“useful” as the mean perception score these services, which ranges between 4.83
(Open new accounts) and 5.40 (Funds transfer). In respect of “Generate the
latest reports of banking transactions”, the mean perception score is 5.66
(>= 5.50 and < 6.50, the range for “very useful”), indicating that the e-banking /
internet banking is very useful for generating the latest reports of banking
transactions for user group. The perceived status of usefulness is slightly
different among non-users of e-banking services.
163
Table 6.15
Usefulness of e-Banking / IB - Comparison of Perception between Users and Non-Users of e-Banking / IB
e-Banking / IB
User Non-User Q. No
e-Banking Services
(n=229) (n=131)
t value
5.32 4.75 3.42*** 1
Account details and balance statements (1.49) (1.60)
5.40 4.82 3.85*** 2 Funds transfer
(1.22) (1.60)
4.92 4.27 3.27*** 3 Loan transaction
(1.67) (2.03)
5.34 4.92 2.89*** 4
Pay bills using available cash in the accounts (1.12) (1.62)
5.34 4.85 3.16*** 5 Order to buy and sell shares
(1.40) (1.51)
4.83 4.35 2.44** 6 Open new accounts
(1.70) (1.98)
5.66 4.84 5.28*** 7
Generate the latest reports of banking transactions (1.30) (1.59)
Source: Primary Data. Figures in brackets are standard deviation. **Significant at 5% level; ***Significant at 1% level
Though non-user group have perceived all services except “loan
transaction” and “open new accounts” through e-banking as useful (Mean scores
are >= 4.50 and < 5.50), the level of their opinion about all services is
significantly less than that of those in the user group. Regarding “loan
transaction” and “open new accounts”, the perception of the non-user group is in
the “moderately useful” level. To sum up, it is understood that almost all the
services are perceived to be useful by both user and non-user of e-banking
services, but the level of perception about usefulness of e-banking/IB among
non-user group is significantly less than that of user group.
164
The perception of the respondents about usefulness of e-banking / IB is
compared across categories of respondents based on their socio-economic and
banking characteristics to ascertain whether the opinion is independent of these
characteristics or not. First in this line, Table 6.15 present the results of the
analysis comparing the opinion among respondent groups belonging to rural,
semi-urban and urban areas.
Table 6.16
Usefulness of e-Banking / IB - Comparison of Perception by Respondents’ Location
Location
Rural Semi-urban
Urban Q. No
e-Banking Services
(n=161) (n=80) (n=119)
F value
4.64 5.39 5.57 14.91*** 1
Account details and balance statements (1.61) (1.69) (1.17)
4.88 5.39 5.48 7.53*** 2 Funds transfer
(1.55) (1.44) (1.02)
4.18 5.43 4.87 14.27*** 3 Loan transaction
(1.96) (1.28) (1.77)
4.80 5.39 5.57 13.58*** 4
Pay bills using available cash in the accounts (1.45) (1.26) (1.08)
4.81 5.58 5.37 9.64*** 5 Order to buy and sell shares
(1.50) (1.12) (1.49)
4.52 5.29 4.43 6.41*** 6 Open new accounts
(1.96) (1.31) (1.84)
5.22 5.70 5.31 2.97** 7
Generate the latest reports of banking transactions (1.70) (1.15) (1.27)
Source: Primary Data. Figures in brackets are standard deviation. **Significant at 5% level; ***Significant at 1% level.
165
From the perusal of the table, it is apparent that the bank customers
belonging to rural areas have seen all e-banking services except “loan
transaction” as useful (Mean scores ranging between 4.18 and 5.22 are >= 4.50
and < 5.50, in the “useful” range). The “loan transaction” through e-banking is
moderately useful according to rural customers (Mean = 4.18). On the other
hand, semi-urban group have perceived the “Order to buy and sell shares” (Mean
= 5.58) and “Generate the latest reports of banking transactions” (Mean = 5.70)
through e-banking as “very useful” (“>= 5.50 and < 6.50”, very useful) while
considering other remaining services as “useful” (Mean scores are in between
4.50 and 5.50). The urban bank customers have considered the “Account details
and balance statements” (Mean = 5.57) and “Pay bills using available cash in the
accounts” (Mean = 5.57) as “very useful” and other services as “useful” (>= 4.50
and 5.50).
The F values obtained for the difference in group mean values are
significant in respect of all e-banking services. This has led to the conclusion
that the level of usefulness of e-banking services is significantly less for rural
bank customers compared to their semi-urban and urban counterparts.
Table 6.17 shows mean perception score and t-values for the difference in
mean perception between male and female respondents regarding usefulness of
e-banking.
166
Table 6.17
Usefulness of e-Banking / IB - Comparison of Respondents’ Perception by Gender
Gender
Male Female Q. No
e-Banking Services
(n=286) (n=74)
t value
5.10 5.16 0.30 1
Account details and balance statements (1.60) (1.39)
5.23 5.03 1.14 2 Funds transfer
(1.36) (1.53)
4.62 4.95 1.37 3 Loan transaction
(1.85) (1.76)
5.27 4.84 2.51** 4
Pay bills using available cash in the accounts (1.33) (1.31)
5.13 5.28 0.79 5 Order to buy and sell shares
(1.48) (1.35)
4.60 4.86 1.10 6 Open new accounts
(1.79) (1.92)
5.42 5.14 1.48 7
Generate the latest reports of banking transactions (1.39) (1.71)
Source: Primary Data. Figures in brackets are standard deviation. **Significant at 5% level
It can be seen from the table that the male respondents have considered all
the e-banking services as useful because the mean perception scores, ranging
between 4.60 and 5.42, are in “useful” range (>= 4.50 and 5.50). The perceived
status of e-banking /IB services has also been in the useful range for female
respondent groups. Both male and female bank customers do not differ in their
level of opinion about usefulness of all e-banking services except “Pay bills
using available cash in the accounts”. For male customers, usefulness of
e-banking service for paying bills using available cash in the accounts is
significantly higher than that of female customers (F value = 2.51, p < 0.05).
167
Overall, it is found that there is no difference in the perceived status of
usefulness of e-banking services between male and female customers.
The usefulness of e-banking / internet banking services is compared by
age of the respondents and the results of the comparative analysis are reported in
Table 6.18.
Table 6.18
Usefulness of e-Banking / IB - Comparison of Respondents’ Perception by Age
Age (in Years)
Up to 25 26 - 40 Above 40 Q. No
e-Banking Services
(n=87) (n=216) (n=57)
F value
5.13 5.04 5.39 1.14 1
Account details and balance statements (1.68) (1.60) (1.15)
5.05 5.13 5.63 3.54** 2 Funds transfer
(1.49) (1.48) (0.70)
4.39 4.89 4.37 3.36** 3 Loan transaction
(1.84) (1.81) (1.84)
5.34 5.06 5.42 2.54* 4
Pay bills using available cash in the accounts (1.28) (1.38) (1.21)
5.18 5.11 5.33 0.53 5 Order to buy and sell shares
(1.07) (1.55) (1.61)
4.71 4.56 4.93 0.96 6 Open new accounts
(1.70) (1.92) (1.59)
5.56 5.19 5.70 4.01** 7
Generate the latest reports of banking transactions (1.18) (1.62) (1.10)
Source: Primary Data. Figures in brackets are standard deviation. *Significant at 10% level; **Significant at 5% level.
As reported in the table, the bank customers group with age up to 25 have
perceived all services except “loan transaction” and “Generate the latest reports
168
of banking transactions” as useful (Mean scores are >= 4.50 and < 5.50). The
bank customers with the age group of, up to 25 years and above 40 years have
both perceived “loan transaction” service as “moderately useful” (Mean = 4.39
& 4.37) and “Generate the latest reports of banking transactions” as “very
useful” (Mean = 5.56 & 5.70 “>= 5.50 and < 6.50”). The usefulness of
e-banking services in respect of “loan transaction” is significantly higher
(F value = 3.36, p < 0.05) while in the case of “Generate the latest reports of
banking transactions”, it is significantly less (F value = 4.01, p < 0.05) among
bank customers with the age between 26-40 years compared to the other two age
groups.
For the customer group with the age above 40 years, the fund transfer
through e-banking is found to be “very useful” (Mean = 5.63) and it is
significantly higher compared to that of the other two age groups (F value =
3.54, p < 0.05). Regarding “Pay bills using available cash in the accounts” also,
the customer group with the age between 26-40 years, perceived status of
usefulness is significantly less at marginal level compared to the other two age
groups (F value = 2.54, p < 0.10).
As there is difference in the perceived status of usefulness in respect of 4
out 7 e-banking / IB services by age, it is concluded that usefulness of e-banking
/ internet banking services is depending upon the age of the bank customers.
Table 6.19 presents the F-test results comparing the status of usefulness
by educational status of the bank customers.
169
Table 6.19
Usefulness of e-Banking / IB - Comparison of Respondents’ Perception by Education
Education
Secondary Degree Above Degree
Q. No
e-Banking Services
(n=42) (n=145) (n=173)
F value
5.10 4.73 5.44 8.51*** 1
Account details and balance statements (1.46) (1.65) (1.43)
4.62 5.03 5.46 8.01*** 2 Funds transfer
(1.32) (1.60) (1.15)
4.10 4.50 4.98 5.30*** 3 Loan transaction
(1.95) (1.80) (1.78)
5.64 5.02 5.21 3.62** 4
Pay bills using available cash in the accounts (1.21) (1.43) (1.27)
5.19 5.06 5.24 0.61 5 Order to buy and sell shares
(0.94) (1.38) (1.62)
4.60 4.43 4.87 2.35* 6 Open new accounts
(1.61) (2.01) (1.68)
5.17 5.30 5.45 0.81 7
Generate the latest reports of banking transactions (0.96) (1.62) (1.42)
Source: Primary Data. Figures in brackets are standard deviation. *Significant at 10% level; **Significant at 5% level; ***Significant at 1% level
It can be observed from the table that the “loan transaction” for secondary
educated (Mean = 4.10) and “open new account” for graduates (Mean = 4.43)
are moderately useful. For secondary education, the service like “Pay bills using
available cash in the accounts” through e-banking is “very useful” (Mean=5.64).
Generally, for all educated groups with regard to all the services other than the
above, the e-banking and internet banking is useful (Mean scores are >= 4.50
and < 5.50).
170
From the observation of the significant F values, it is understood that
usefulness of e-banking / IB in respect of “Account details and balance
statements” is significantly less among graduates compared to that of secondary
educated and post graduates (F value = 8.51, p < 0.01).
Also, the level of usefulness of e-banking services like “Fund transfer”
(F value = 8.01, p < 0.01), “loan transaction” (F value = 5.30, p < 0.01) among
secondary educated and extend of using e-banking services such as “Pay bills
using available cash in the accounts” (F value = 3.62, p < 0.05) and “open new
accounts” (F value = 2.35, p < 0.10) among graduates is remarkably less
compared to that of those in the respective other educated groups. On the whole,
from the entire above results, it is found that there is significant difference in the
perceived status of usefulness of e-banking / internet banking services by
educational status of the bank customers.
The results of comparative analysis between usefulness of e-banking /
internet banking services and occupational status of the bank customers are
depicted in Table 6.20.
171
Table 6.20
Usefulness of e-Banking / IB - Comparison of Respondents’ Perception by Occupation
Occupation
Stu
den
t
Hou
sew
ife
Gov
t.
Em
plo
yee
Pri
vate
E
mp
loye
e
Bu
sin
ess
/ S
elf
Em
plo
yed
Q. No
e-Banking Services
(n=55) (n=18) (n=136) (n=120) (n=31)
F value
5.05 5.06 5.01 5.33 4.90 0.88 1
Account details and balance statements (1.67) (0.94) (1.54) (1.56) (1.70)
5.29 4.89 5.15 5.36 4.74 1.56 2 Funds transfer
(1.05) (1.88) (1.29) (1.41) (1.88)
4.53 4.39 4.65 4.79 4.87 0.41 3 Loan transaction
(1.72) (2.52) (1.84) (1.75) (1.88)
5.33 4.89 5.32 4.89 5.65 3.13** 4
Pay bills using available cash in the accounts (1.23) (1.91) (1.26) (1.36) (1.17)
5.15 5.50 5.07 5.23 5.13 0.44 5
Order to buy and sell shares (1.03) (0.92) (1.67) (1.44) (1.45)
4.85 4.17 4.41 4.64 5.74 3.99*** 6 Open new accounts
(1.56) (1.76) (1.93) (1.88) (1.00)
6.02 5.22 5.03 5.44 5.39 4.87*** 7
Generate the latest reports of banking transactions (0.99) (2.13) (1.66) (1.33) (0.67)
Source: Primary Data. Figures in brackets are standard deviation. **Significant at 5% level; ***Significant at 1% level
From the perusal of the table, it is understood that the e-banking / internet
banking service like “generating the latest reports of banking transaction” is very
useful for student group (Mean = 6.02), “loan transaction” (Mean = 4.39) and
“open new accounts” (Mean = 4.17) is moderately useful for housewife group,
and “Pay bills using available cash in the accounts” is very useful for business /
self employed group (Mean = 5.65).
172
The e-banking service for opening new account is found to be moderately
useful for Government employees (Mean = 4.41) while it is very useful for
business / self-employed group (Mean = 5.74).
Further, from the perusal of F values, it is evident that the perceived status
of usefulness in the case of services like “Pay bills using available cash in the
accounts” (F value = 3.13, p < 0.05), “open new accounts” (F value = 3.99,
p < 0.01) and “generating the latest reports of banking transaction” (F value =
4.87) differ by occupational status of bank customers.
In short, it is found that the extent of usefulness of e-banking services –
“Account details and balance statements”, “Funds transfer”, “Loan transaction”
and “Order to buy and sell shares” is same for all occupational groups whereas
there is significant difference in the usefulness of e-banking services - “Pay bills
using available cash in the accounts”, “open new accounts” and “generating the
latest reports of banking transaction” by occupational status of bank customers.
Table 6.21 presents the mean scores and F values eliciting the statistical
significance of the difference in mean perception among respondent groups with
different levels of family income regarding usefulness of e-banking and internet
banking services.
173
Table 6.21
Usefulness of e-Banking / IB - Comparison of Respondents’ Perception by Income
Income
Up to Rs.10000
Rs.10001 - 25000
> Rs.25000 Q. No
e-Banking Services
(n=119) (n=154) (n=87)
F value
4.61 5.18 5.68 12.80*** 1
Account details and balance statements (1.85) (1.28) (1.37)
4.64 5.30 5.76 18.63*** 2 Funds transfer
(1.87) (1.02) (0.85)
4.18 4.74 5.29 9.83*** 3 Loan transaction
(2.04) (1.74) (1.47)
4.93 5.38 5.18 3.74** 4
Pay bills using available cash in the accounts (1.76) (1.04) (1.08)
4.57 5.41 5.54 16.20*** 5 Order to buy and sell shares
(1.78) (1.15) (1.18)
4.70 4.32 5.21 6.89*** 6 Open new accounts
(1.76) (2.02) (1.34)
4.91 5.69 5.39 10.09*** 7
Generate the latest reports of banking transactions (1.68) (1.24) (1.34)
Source: Primary Data. Figures in brackets are standard deviation. **Significant at 5% level; ***Significant at 1% level
According to the table, the mean scores for all services except “loan
transaction” ranges between 4.57 and 4.93 (>= 4.50 and 5.50, the range for
“useful”) for the respondent group with family income up to Rs.10000 per
month. In respect of “loan transaction”, the above income group has perceived
“moderately useful” (Mean = 4.18). For respondent group with family income
between Rs.10001 and Rs.25000, the mean scores with regard to all services
except “open new accounts” and “Generate the latest reports of banking
transactions” are in the “useful” range. The above respondent group has
174
perceived the e-banking service for opening new accounts as “moderately
useful” (Mean = 4.32) and generating the latest reports of banking transactions
as “very useful” (Mean = 5.69).
The bank customer group in the sample with family income above
Rs.25000 per month has perceived the “Loan transaction” (Mean = 5.29), “Pay
bills using available cash in the accounts” (Mean = 5.18), “Open new accounts”
(Mean = 5.21) and “Generate the latest reports of banking transactions”
(Mean = 5.39) as “useful”, and “Account details and balance statements”
(Mean = 5.68), “Funds transfer” (Mean = 5.76) and “Order to buy and sell
shares” (Mean = 5.54) as “very useful”.
F values for the difference in group means are significant for all services
through e-banking / internet banking. This has led to the conclusion that the
perceived status of usefulness is associated with monthly income of the bank
customers.
6.4 Intention to use e-Banking / Internet banking in the Future
The bank customers’ opinion about their intention to use e-banking /
Internet banking in the future is obtained using four statements with 7-point
scale (From “Very Strongly Disagree (VSD)”, “Strongly Disagree (SD)”,
“Disagree (D)”, “Neutral (N)”, “Agree (A)”, “Strongly Agree (SA)” to “Very
Strongly Agree (VSA)”) in the questionnaire. The data of the entire sample
were first subjected to descriptive statistics. Then canonical correlation analysis
was used to find out the relationship of benefits and usefulness (of e-banking /
IB) with an intention to use in future. The canonical correlation is the statistical
175
technique used to find out the relationship between two sets of variables – one
dependent set and another independent. The results of the above analysis are
presented and discussed in the remaining part of this chapter.
Table 6.22 shows mean level of opinion of all respondents about their
intention to use e-banking / internet banking in the future.
Table 6.22
Intention to use e-Banking / Internet Banking in the Future – Opinion of Entire Sample
Intention Mean Standard Deviation
I intend to continue using this Internet banking site in the future
5.34 1.29
I expect my use of this Internet banking site to continue in the future
5.41 1.16
I will frequently use this Internet banking site in the future
5.45 1.28
I will strongly recommend others to use this Internet banking site
5.54 1.34
Source: Primary Data.
It can be seen from the table that the mean perception of the entire sample
of the bank customers have agreed that they have intention to continue using this
Internet banking site in the future (Mean = 5.34), expect their use of this Internet
banking site to continue in the future (Mean = 5.41) and frequently use this
Internet banking site in the future (Mean = 5.45) as the mean values are in the
agree range (>= 4.50 and 5.50). At the same time, the respondents have strongly
agreed that they would strongly recommend to others to use this Internet banking
site (Mean = 5.54 >= 5.50 and < 6.50, the range for “strongly agree”). In short,
176
it is found that majority of the bank customers, whether presently use e-banking
or not, have intention to continue using e-banking / internet banking and strongly
recommend to others to use this Internet banking site in the future.
The results of canonical correlation between “intention to use in the
future” and “benefits of e-banking” are presented in Table 6.23 and 6.24. In the
table 6.23, the canonical function and chi-square test statistics indicating the
significance of the function are presented.
Table 6.23
Chi-Square Tests with Successive Roots Removed testing Significance of Overall Model Fit for Canonical Correlation between “Intention to
Use in the Future” and “Benefits of e-Banking”
Canonical Function
Canonical R
Can
onic
al R
2 (E
igen
val
ue)
Chi-Square df p-Value Wilks
Lambda
1 0.6201 0.3845 244.59 16 0.0000 0.5016
2 0.4260 0.1815 72.51 9 0.0000 0.8150
3 0.0637 0.0041 1.52 4 0.8240 0.9957
4 0.0143 0.0002 0.07 1 0.7874 0.9998
Source: Primary Data
There are four canonical functions in the table. Canonical function is
nothing but relationship between two canonical variates, which is similar to
latent variables (factors) in Factor analysis. So, each canonical function has two
canonical variates, one for left set and another for right set of variables. The
strength of relationship between two canonical variates is given by canonical
correlation. Number of canonical function produced by the canonical correlation
177
analysis is equal to number of variables in the smaller set. Here in both left set
(intention to use) and right set (benefits of e-banking), the number of variables is
four. Hence, number of function produced by the analysis is four here.
In the table, it can be observed that out of four canonical functions first
two functions are significant at one per cent level with correlation of 0.6201 and
0.4260. That is, the first and the second pair of canonical variables are
correlated with each other and therefore the first two functions are considered for
final inference.
The variables loadings, also called factor structure matrix or canonical
loadings, with significant canonical functions are reported in Table 6.24. The
canonical loadings are nothing but the correlation between variables in the
analysis and canonical functions.
From the examination of the table, it is understood that, out of four
measures of “intention to use e-banking in the future”, the measure “I intend to
continue using this Internet banking site in the future” has high loading with first
function (0.9784) followed by “I expect my use of this Internet banking site to
continue in the future” (0.8683). The correlation of “I will frequently use this
Internet banking site in the future” with first function is higher than that of
second function. As far as the variables in the second set (benefits of e-banking)
are concerned, only “Save time & Cost Less” is highly correlated with first
canonical function. This indicates that “time saving and less cost” tend to
influence the bank customers’ “intention to continue using this Internet banking
site in the future”.
178
Table 6.24
Variables’ Loadings (Factor Structure Matrix) with Canonical Function – Intention to Use Vs Benefits from e-Banking
Canonical Loadings
Variables First Function
Second Function
Intention to Use e-Banking in the Future
I intend to continue using this Internet banking site in the future
0.9784 0.1065
I expect my use of this Internet banking site to continue in the future
0.8683 -0.2030
I will frequently use this Internet banking site in the future 0.4838 -0.3105
I will strongly recommend others to use this Internet banking site
0.4176 -0.9017
Benefits from e-Banking
Save time & Cost Less 0.9206 -0.0962
Provide accurate, relevant and up-to date information
0.1498 -0.7016
Flexible and easily accessible with convenience 0.5112 -0.8346
Assists to share the experience with bank and other customers more efficiently
0.1150 -0.5319
Source: Primary Data
The second canonical function, “I will strongly recommend others to use
this Internet banking site” is highly but negatively correlated. In the right set, all
the variables other than “Save time & Cost Less” are highly loaded with second
canonical function, also with negative sign. The variables in both left and right
sets are loaded with the same sign on second function. This reveals that the
benefit of e-banking in providing accurate, relevant and up-to date information,
flexibility and easy accessibility with convenience and assisting to share the
experience with bank and other customers more efficiently tend to influence the
179
bank customers to strongly recommend to others to use e-banking / internet
banking in the future.
Table 6.25 presents the first part of the results of canonical correlation
eliciting number of canonical functions and chi-square test results for the
statistical significance of the functions between “intention to use in the future”
and “usefulness of e-banking”.
Table 6.25
Chi-Square Tests with Successive Roots Removed testing Significance of Overall Model Fit for Canonical Correlation between “Intention to
Use in the Future” and “Usefulness of e-Banking”
Canonical Function
Canonical R
Can
onic
al R
2 (E
igen
val
ue)
Chi-Square
df p-Value Wilks
Lambda
1 0.5941 0.3530 298.5482 28 0.0000 0.4292
2 0.5145 0.2647 144.8614 18 0.0000 0.6634
3 0.2523 0.0637 36.2990 10 0.0001 0.9023
4 0.1907 0.0364 13.0811 4 0.0109 0.9636
Source: Primary Data
As can be seen in the table, all four canonical functions are significant at
one per cent level with shared variance of 35.30 per cent and 26.47 per cent
between canonical variates of left and right set (i.e., common characteristics
between left set and right set canonical variates) in the first and second canonical
functions respectively. Though the third and fourth canonical functions are
fitted significantly, the shared variance is very low in both functions and
180
therefore considered as less important. So, only the first two canonical functions
are considered for final inference.
Table 6.26 is presents the canonical loadings of variables in the left and
right with first and second canonical functions.
Table 6.26
Variables’ Loadings (Factor Structure Matrix) with Canonical Function – Intention to Use Vs Usefulness from e-Banking
Canonical Loadings Variables First
Function Second
Function
Intention to Use e-Banking in the Future
I intend to continue using this Internet banking site in the future 0.9795 -0.1034
I expect my use of this Internet banking site to continue in the future 0.8241 -0.4545
I will frequently use this Internet banking site in the future 0.4753 -0.4560
I will strongly recommend others to use this Internet banking site 0.1980 -0.9516
Usefulness from e-Banking
Account details and balance statements 0.9021 -0.2516
Funds transfer 0.6156 -0.5443
Loan transaction 0.0799 -0.7406
Pay bills using available cash in the accounts 0.2974 -0.7401
Order to buy and sell shares 0.2595 -0.6037
Open new accounts 0.1978 -0.6476
Generate the latest reports of banking transactions 0.2069 -0.6724 Source: Primary Data
From the perusal of the canonical loadings of variables with the first
function, it is apparent that, out of four measures of “intention to use e-banking
181
/IB in the future”, the correlation (loading) of “I intend to continue using this
Internet banking site in the future” (0.9795) and “I expect my use of this Internet
banking site to continue in the future” (0.8241) is very high. The correlation of
“I will frequently use this Internet banking site in the future” with both functions
is almost equal. The item “I will strongly recommend others to use this Internet
banking site” is highly loaded with second function.
Among the variables in the right set (Usefulness of e-banking), “Account
details and balance statements” (0.9021) has high loadings followed by “Funds
transfer” (0.6156) with first function. The variable “funds transfer” is also
substantially loaded with second canonical function (-0.5443). All the variables
other than the above are highly loaded with second function. Among the
variables having high loadings with second function, the loadings of “Loan
transaction” (-0.7406) and “Pay bills using available cash in the accounts”
(-0.7401) are higher compared to that of others. It can be further seen that the
sign of the loadings of both left set and right set variables with second canonical
function is negative, indicating that the direction of relationship is same for both
set of variables.
Hence, from the above results, it is found that the bank customers have
intention to continue using e-banking / internet banking in the future” as it is
useful in getting account details and balance statements as well as for
transferring funds. Further, bank customers tend to strongly recommend to
others to use e-banking / internet banking as it is useful for loan transaction,
paying bills using available cash in the accounts, making order to buy and sell
shares and generating latest reports of banking transactions.
182
6.5 Conclusion
In this chapter, usefulness and benefits of e-banking / internet banking in
addition to “intention of using e-banking / internet banking in the future” is
evaluated based on the opinion of the bank customers in the sample
(respondents). Factor analysis was used to identify the major benefits of
e-banking / IB. The factor analysis identified four benefits, such as “Save time
& Cost Less”, “Provide accurate, relevant and up-to date information”, “Flexible
and easily accessible with convenience” and “Assists to share the experience
with bank and other customers more efficiently” as major benefits.
The perception of the respondents is compared across categories by type
of banks, nature of users and socio-economic characteristics using t-test and F-
test. From the interpretation of the results, it is found that “flexibility and easy
accessibility with convenience” is the top most benefit followed by “Providing
accurate, relevant and up-to date information” and “Saving time & Cost Less”
and perceived status of the above benefits is associated with education and
family income of the respondents. It is concluded that there is significant
difference in the perceived level of benefits of e-banking / IB between public
and private sector banks as well as between non-users and users of e-banking /
IB.
Regarding usefulness of e-banking / internet banking, it is concluded that
“Generating the latest reports of banking transactions” is the major usefulness
followed by “Funds transfer”, “Pay bills using available cash in the accounts”
and “Order to buy and sell shares”. It is also concluded that the usefulness of e-
banking / IB provided by private sector banks is remarkably higher than that of
183
public sector banks. Further, the perceived status of usefulness among non-user
group as well as among rural group is significantly less than that of their
respective counterparts. It is found that the perceived status of usefulness of
e-banking / IB is also related to education and family income of the respondents.
With regard to “intention to use e-banking / internet banking in the
future”, all respondents have expressed positive opinion that they have intention
of using these services in the future. The canonical correlation analysis was used
to find out the relationship of benefits and usefulness of e-banking / internet
banking on intention to use. It is identified from the results of the analysis
between “intention to use” and “benefits” that “time saving and less cost” tend
to influence the bank customers’ “intention to continue using this Internet
banking site in the future” whereas “providing accurate, relevant and up-to date
information”, “flexibility and easy accessibility with convenience” and
“assisting to share the experience with bank and other customers more
efficiently” tend to influence the bank customers to strongly recommend to
others to use e-banking / internet banking in the future”. Similarly from the
results of the canonical analysis between “intention to use” and “usefulness”, it
is concluded that the bank customers have intention to continue using e-banking
/ internet banking in the future” as it is useful in getting account details and
balance statements as well as for transferring funds. Further, it is concluded that
bank customers tend to strongly recommend to others to use e-banking / internet
banking as it is useful for loan transaction, paying bills using available cash in
the accounts, making order to buy and sell shares and generating latest reports of
banking transactions.