Conceptual Model of Technology Acceptance Model Modification on Robo Advisor Acceptance in Indonesia

Arief Fahruri, Mohammad Hamsal, Asnan Furinto, Rano Kartono

Abstract


The success factor in implementing new technology is the acceptance and use of the technology by users. Indonesia is a country with significant investor growth since 2018 with the presence of technology that makes it easier to open accounts and online transactions. Is the presence of Robo advisor technology in investment products also expected to be acceptable like existing online investment applications? This paper provides a conceptual TAM model by adding UI/UX and Security as the driver of Perceived Usefulness (PU) and Perceived Ease of Use (PEU). We also add Trust and Expected Return variables related to financial variables. So that the proposed model can be used as a basis for empirical research in the future to validate the context of accepting Robo advisors in Indonesia.

 

Keywords: UI & UX, Security, Trust, Expected Return, Intention to Use, Actual Use.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Abraham, F., Schmukler, S. L., & Tessada, J. (2019). Robo-Advisors: Investing through Machines. Ssrn.

B.U., D., B.O., O., N.N., S., & S.O., U. (2021). Integrating Trust into Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), the Conceptual Framework for E-Payment Platform Acceptance. British Journal of Management and Marketing Studies, 4(4), 34–56. https://doi.org/10.52589/bjmms-tb3xtkpi

Bhatia, A., Chandani, A., Atiq, R., Mehta, M., & Divekar, R. (2021). Artificial intelligence in financial services: qualitative research to discover robo-advisory services.

Qualitative Research in Financial Markets, 13(5), 632–654. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRFM-10-2020-0199

Davis, F D. (1985). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results. Management, Ph.D.(May), 291. https://doi.org/oclc/56932490

Davis, Fred D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 13(3), 319–339. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

Davis, Fred D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982

Gan, L. Y., Khan, M. T. I., & Liew, T. W. (2021). Understanding consumer’s adoption of financial roboâ€advisors at the outbreak of the COVID â€19 crisis in Malaysia.

Financial Planning Review, October 2020, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/cfp2.1127

Harrison, D. A., Mykytyn, P. P., & Riemenschneider, C. K. (1997). Executive Decisions about Adoption of Information Technology in Small Business: Theory and Empirical Tests. Information Systems Research, 8(2), 171–195. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.8.2.171

Hildebrand, C., & Bergner, A. (2021). Conversational robo advisors as surrogates of trust: onboarding experience, firm perception, and consumer financial decision making. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 49(4), 659–676. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-020-00753-z

Hohenberger, C., Lee, C., & Coughlin, J. F. (2019). Acceptance of Roboâ€advisors: Effects of financial experience, affective reactions, and selfâ€enhancement motives. Financial Planning Review, 2(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/cfp2.1047

Lai, P. C. (2017). Security as an Extension to TAM Model: Consumers’ Intention to Use a Single Platform E-Payment. Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation, 13(3–4), 110–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/2319510x18776405

Management, W. (n.d.). The Rise of Robo-Advice.

Markowitz, H. (1952). Portfolio Selection. The Journal of Finance, 7(1), 77–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1952.tb01525.x

Moulliet, D., Stolzenbach, J., Majonek, A., & Voelker, T. (2016). The Expansion of Robo-Advisory in Wealth Management. Deloitte GmbH Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft, 1–5. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/de/Documents/financial- services/Deloitte-Robo-safe.pdf

robo-advisor @ www.bareksa.com. (n.d.). https://www.bareksa.com/robo-advisor Salo, M., & Haapio, H. (2017). ROBO-advisors and investors: Enhancing human-robot

interaction through information design. Jusletter IT, February, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2937821

Santoso, W. (2018). Siaran Pers: OJK Resmikan Pusat Inovasi dan Keuangan Digital (Fintech Center). 20–21. https://www.ojk.go.id/id/berita-dan-kegiatan/siaran- pers/Pages/Siaran-Pers-OJK-Resmikan-Pusat-Inovasi-Keuangan-Digital-Fintech- Center.aspx

Seiler, V., & Fanenbruck, K. M. (2021). Acceptance of digital investment solutions: The case of robo advisory in Germany. Research in International Business and Finance, 58(October 2020), 101490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2021.101490

Siau, K., & Wang, W. (2018). Building Trust in Artificial Intelligence , Machine Learning , and Robotics. March.

Tao, R., Su, C. W., Xiao, Y., Dai, K., & Khalid, F. (2021). Robo advisors, algorithmic trading and investment management: Wonders of the fourth industrial revolution in financial markets. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 163(May), 120421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120421

Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., & Howell, J. M. (1991). Personal Computing: Toward a Conceptual Model of Utilization Utilization of Personal Computers Personal Computing: Toward a Conceptual Model of Utilization1. Source: MIS Quarterly, 15(1), 125–143.

Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use : integrating control, intrinsic motivation, acceptance model. Inorganic Chemistry Communications, 11(3), 319–340.

Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions; Decision Sciences, Vol. 39 (2) pp 273 – 315. Decision

Sciences Institute, 39(2), 273–315.

Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (1996). A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test. Decision Sciences, 27(3), 451–481. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb00860.x

Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926

https://databoks.katadata.co.id/datapublish/2021/09/07/pencurian-data-pribadi-makin- marak-kala-pandemi

https://www.bareksa.com/robo-advisor

https://bibit.id/




DOI: https://doi.org/10.32535/jicp.v5i1.1787

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2022 Arief Fahruri, Mohammad Hamsal, Asnan Furinto, Rano Kartono

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Flag Counter

Published by:

AIBPM Publisher

Editorial Office:

JL. Kahuripan No. 9 Hotel Sahid Montana, Malang, Indonesia
Phone:+62 341 366222
Email: journal.jicp@gmail.com
Website:http://ejournal.aibpmjournals.com/index.php/JICP

Supported by: Association of International Business & Professional Management

If you are interested to get the journal subscription you can contact us at admin@aibpm.org.

ISSN 2622-0989 (Print)
ISSN 2621-993X (Online)

DOI:Prefix 10.32535 by CrossREF

Journal of International Conference Proceedings (JICP) INDEXED:

 

In Process


This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.