Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics: Article Information

Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics
The effects of integrated information & service, institutional mechanism and

need for cognition (NFC) on consumer omnichannel adoption behavior
Joonyong Park, Renee Boyoung Kim,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Joonyong Park, Renee Boyoung Kim, (2019) "The effects of integrated information & service,
institutional mechanism and need for cognition (NFC) on consumer omnichannel adoption behavior",
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-06-2018-0209
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-06-2018-0209
Downloaded by Boston College At 04:50 15 May 2019 (PT)
Downloaded on: 15 May 2019, At: 04:50 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 127 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 12 times since 2019*
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:261926 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1355-5855.htm
Consumer
The effects of integrated omnichannel
information & service, adoption
behavior
institutional mechanism and need
for cognition (NFC) on consumer
omnichannel adoption behavior Received 7 June 2018
Revised 10 November 2018
10 January 2019
Joonyong Park and Renee Boyoung Kim 14 January 2019
1 February 2019
School of Business, Hanyang University, Seoul, The Republic of Korea Accepted 10 March 2019
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the antecedents of consumers’ omnichannel (OC) adoption
intention and explore how consumers’ personality trait affects their OC adoption behavior.
Design/methodology/approach – A total of 227 Korean consumers were invited to participate in a survey
study, and partial least squares–structural equation modeling was performed to analyze the measurement
and structural models.
Findings – The results show that three consumer groups by “Need for Cognition (NFC)” show different
response to four identified OC attribute/benefits. Finally, the authors hypothesize and find that shed light on
the possible ways to differentiate OC marketing for different target consumers and provide implications for
practice and further research.
Research limitations/implications – This study provides empirical evidence that OC is an expanded
retail format of e-commerce, which is predominantly affected by how information on the cross-channel
marketing mix/retail strategies is delivered to consumers. From communication perspective, findings suggest
that retail communication strategy need more careful attention in dealing with individual difference of
consumers. In addition, the significant role of NFC on consumers’ OC adoption process validates the
importance of customization and differentiation in retailers’ message to different consumer groups. In order to
do so, comprehensive analysis on consumer database may be necessary to develop personalized OC service.
In-depth analysis of consumer profile may enable more specific methods for marketing and managing
consumers in the OC context. Although the study provides additional empirical findings for consumers’
perception on selected characteristics of OC (i.e. delivery approach of information and service in OC and
institutional mechanism of OC), there may be additional extrinsic motivation factors which affect consumers’
OC adoption behavior. Extrinsic factors such as web design, convenience, assortment, moving saving which
trigger positive perception of OC, may be important determinants to consider. Furthermore, situational factor
such as social media (Huseyinoglu et al., 2018) and behavioral factors such as platform use habit (Chen, 2018)
may also be significant in assessing consumers’ OC adoption behavior. Finally, this study has been conducted
on a particular culture setting, and the generalizability of study findings, particularly about the role of NFC
may need to be improved by cross-culture evaluation.
Practical implications – NFC-high and medium consumers are likely to use the four OC service options in
future, while a larger proportion of the NFC-low consumers shows negative response to the OC service usage.
This evidently shows that innovative features of OC service are not homogenously adopted by consumers,
and subject to their experience and intrinsic difference, adoption rate was found to vary. This suggests that
companies need to pay careful attention in implementing innovative OC service, and may approach
communication of information strategically for different consumer groups. For high-NFC consumers with
previous BOPIS experience, retailers may effectively engage them by enhancing and expanding the BOPIS
service features, yet for low-NFC consumers, raising awareness and initiating interest among unexperienced
consumers may be more imminent issue. Indirect communication using peripheral cues may be necessary to
draw less motivated consumer group.
Social implications – The OC retailers may need to set the scope and range of information into in-depth
information and simplified/unified information, and address the different type of information to different
consumer groups in order to facilitate consumers’ OC adoption. For consumers with medium and high NFC,
it may be necessary to provide in-depth, detailed information relevant to product quality and promotional
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing
and Logistics
This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National © Emerald Publishing Limited
1355-5855
Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2016S1A3A2924243). DOI 10.1108/APJML-06-2018-0209
APJML items consistently both in on/offline channels to gain their trust. Consumers with low NFC are found to prefer
unified and simplified messages on information for price, delivery, inventory in on/offline channels.
Originality/value – This study addresses the perceived value of unique and fundamental features and
specificity of OC service by consumers with different personality trait. The authors develop consumers’ OC
adoption model based on the theory of reasoned action, which depicts relationship between four extrinsic
motivation factors and consumers’ intention for the OC usage, which is further differentiated by an intrinsic
factor. We segment consumers based on individual difference of “NFC” and investigate how different
consumer groups value different aspect of the selected OC attributes and benefits. Findings validate the
importance of customization and differentiation in retailers’ message to different consumer groups and in
facilitating consumers’ OC adoption.
Keywords Need for cognition, Retail management, Consumer behaviour, Integrated information and service,
Omnichannel, Information consistency, Omnichannel institutional mechanisms, Service integration
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Retailing has changed dramatically in the last two decades due to the emergence of the
online channel and digitalization (Verhoef et al., 2015). In the retail markets, the online
channel has become very dominant and can be considered a disruptive development
(Christensen and Raynor, 2003). With the advent of mobile channels, tablets and social
media channels and the integration of online and offline channels, the retail environment
continues to evolve, shifting from a multichannel to an omnichannel (OC) retailing model
(Rigby, 2011).
In a multichannel retail environment, channels have different characteristics and are not
necessarily direct substitutes for one another, thus shoppers exploit channels’ distinctive
characteristics and take advantages of the opportunities offered by a multichannel
environment (Harris et al., 2018). However, Wilding (2013) argues that multichannel systems
usually consist of detached channels, developed by retailers in response to the rapidly
shifting world of e-commerce and information technology. When channels work
independently of each other, they create fragmented supply chains, and struggle to
deliver a consistent and reliable consumer experience (Saghiri et al., 2017). OC retailing
accommodates this downside of multichannel system by coordinating processes and
technologies across all channels, to provide seamless, consistent and more reliable services
for consumers (Verhoef et al., 2015). This retailing model operates in all of the available
channels and eliminates the distinctions among them (Zhang et al., 2018).
In OC retailing, firms are involved in selling merchandise or services to consumers
through more than one retail channel (Levy and Weitz, 2009), such as the physical store,
catalog, telephone, online shop and mobile shop. The OC consumer can trigger full channel
interaction and/or the retailer controls full channel integration (Beck and Rygl, 2015).
The concept of the OC is focused on integrating activities within and across channels to
correspond to how consumers shop (Ailawadi and Farris, 2017). Integration of multiple
channel activities requires consistent service offering such as retailing, price and product
information across online and offline channel, and development of such infrastructure may
incur substantial resources and investment. Thus, the OC retailing is an integrated sales
experience that melds the advantages of the physical stores with the information-rich
experience of online shopping, where the distinctions between physical and online vanish
and provide an integrated shopping experience to consumer (Rigby, 2011; Brynjolfsson
et al., 2013). As retailers develop more touch points for consumers, consumers exhibit more
complex shopping behaviors and the number of touch points used by consumers is
increasing concomitantly (Ailawadi and Farris, 2017).
In response to this transformation, consumers are adopting progressively, and consumer
behavior is becoming complex and versatile (Crittenden et al., 2010). Consumers increasingly
use more than one retail format, such as brick-and-mortar retailers, websites and mobile
apps to shop for products and services, and this consumer group is defined as OC consumer
(Verhoef et al., 2015). Unlike single channel consumers buying in an offline retail, OC Consumer
consumers learn about product specifications and pricing from a wide variety of sources omnichannel
(Tanner et al., 2005), and exhibit appreciably different search and buying behaviors from adoption
non-OC consumers (Verhoef et al., 2015). Consumers can easily switch from one channel to
another in their buying experience, where they may find a product in one channel (e.g. the behavior
manufacturer’s website), place the order via another channel (e.g. an online retailer), and
have the product delivery from a third channel (e.g. home delivery) (Saghiri et al., 2017).
Thus, consumer behavior is evolving vastly with a synergistic use of channels and touch
points, namely, OC shopping (Rigby, 2011), posing a disruptive market pressure on retailers.
Researchers reported numerous findings on difference in consumer behavior for
multichannel adoption, choices and channel usage for different stages of shopping, and
identified various factors for determining consumers’ online shopping behavior. These
studies primarily focused on topics relevant to effects of multichannel on performance;
consumers’ choice for different retail channels and retail mix across channels. (Avery et al.,
2012; Pauwels et al., 2011; Van Nierop et al., 2011). Some researchers have extensively
studied consumers online shopping behavior using theoretical model such as the TAM
(Ashraf et al., 2014; Sin et al., 2012; Shen et al., 2016), which proposes instrumental
performance of using technology (i.e. perceived use of technology and perceived ease of use)
as an extrinsic motivational factor explaining consumers’ adoption of online shopping (Lee
et al., 2012). Thus, combinative technological and behavioral factors have been identified
and tested under theoretical and conceptual models to predict and understand consumers’
shopping in multichannel environment (Faqih, 2016; Srinivasan, 2015; Lim et al., 2016;
Cervellon et al., 2015; Frasquet et al., 2015).
However, from the perspective of OC service, these studies have an evident limitation: OC
service provides multifaceted value to consumers, and there likely to be interaction effects
which may arise when consumers shop in multiple touch points (Melero et al., 2016).
Many studies have neglected the importance of the multifaceted value of OC service.
Hure et al. (2017) describe multichannel as a siloed strategy that operate channels as
independent entities (Yan et al., 2010) and cross-channel as multiple channels which allow
consumers to move and collaborate through channels and touch points (Chatterjee, 2010;
Schramm-Klein et al., 2011). On the other hand, OC has a feature of complete alignment of
the different channels and touch points, leading to an optimal-brand customer experience,
and customer lock-in within the retail brand ecosystem. This prompt further study in
specificity of OC service values which are perceived by consumers. Disentangling the effects
of OC on consumers has been acknowledged as a critical but underexplored topic in the
context of OC retailing, and prior research do not yield adequate understanding of how OC
drives consumer reaction (Li et al., 2018). In this regard, we propose an assessment of the
impact of OC specific attributes (i.e. integration of information and service across channels)
on consumer’s OC adoption behavior.
Some studies stress the importance of individual characteristics (i.e. personality traits) as a
major determinant for technology adoption tendency (Lian and Lin, 2008). Bosnjak et al. (2007)
examined the role of personality constructs on online purchase intention with a hierarchical
model of personality. “Need for cognition (NFC)” is one of the important personality traits
identified in their framework, which can be described as “need for activity or stimulation”
which often shaped during socialization or by external influences, and also by interaction of
one’s learning experiences (Cacioppo and Petty, 1982). Previous studies have mainly identified
the impact of personality trait on consumers’ behavior in a single channel setting; however,
the implicit impact of consumers’ personality traits on their adoption behavior of OC service is
yet to be explored. For this reason, we develop a framework that validates the distinct
mechanisms which dictate the impact of OC service attributes on consumers’ OC adoption
behavior by causing variation in their personality traits.
APJML Consumers may perceive a seamless customer experience through the provision of a
borderless cross-channel service system (Verhoef et al., 2015), reducing uncertainty (Gao and
Su, 2016), providing attractive offers (Li et al., 2018) and engendering switching costs
(Brynjolfsson et al., 2013). Thus, a consumer’s perception for consistency and integration of
cross-channel activities in the OC retail service system is proposed to be determining drive
for their OC adoption. Concurrently, NFC is a consumers’ personality trait which is
considered as an intrinsic motivation factor, affecting the relationship between the extrinsic
determinants and consumers’ OC adoption intention. In this study, the effects of both
extrinsic motivation factors (i.e. attributes of OC services) and intrinsic motivation factor
(i.e. personality traits) are assessed together in order to have a better understanding of
consumers’ OC adoption behavior.
The remainder of this paper proceeds as follows. Section 2 presents a theoretical
background, Section 3 proposes the research model and hypothesis development with a
review of related literature, and Section 4 describes the research method. Section 5 reports
the data analysis and results, and Section 6 provide discussions on the findings, followed by
theoretical and practical implications and limitations.
2. Research background
2.1 Conceptual framework
The adoption theory is the theoretical framework of this study, which aims to explain the
important factors that drive consumers to perform specific behaviors (Shen et al., 2016;
Dang and Pham, 2018). The theory of reasoned action (TRA) is the first model of adoption
theory which was proposed by Fishbein and Ajzen, with an assumption that a person’s
positive attitude together with the individual’s thought constituted to the behavioral
intention of one person (Lim et al., 2016). This theoretical framework provides an
explanation of behavioral model that a person is assumed to perform certain behavior when
he/she has a favorable attitude or perceive benefits. According to the TRA, people elicit and
use available information in most efficient and systematic way to make a beneficial choice
for themselves, and this choice selection process can be controlled by decision makers
through conscious efforts. (Ajzen, 1991).
In this study, we develop consumers’ OC adoption model based on the TRA framework,
which depicts the relationship between four extrinsic motivation factors and consumers’
intention for the OC usage, which is further differentiated by an intrinsic motivation factor
(Figure 1). The concept of motivation is incorporated in our theoretical framework to
describe consumers’ behavior as it has been found to influence a broad range of cognitive
SVIT
H1
IFIT H2
H5
UIT UBH
H3
PEOIM
H4
Figure 1. H6
Proposed omnichannel IFCs
(OC) adoption model
NFC Group
processes, including perception, attention, learning and memory (Yee and Braver, 2018). Consumer
It is generally assumed that providing incentives (e.g. rewards or benefits) can induce a omnichannel
motivational state, which then lead to dynamic adjustments in cognitive processing, and adoption
consequently influence behavior. Thus, when an external or internal incentive alters the
biological system of an individual, generating a “motivated state,” change in his/her behavior
behavior can be observed (Yee and Braver, 2018).
One’s action (i.e. change in behavior) is the outcome which indicate an individual’s
intentional behavior influenced by his/her freedom of choice (e.g. internal factor) and
controlled agents (e.g. external factors), and both internal and external factors are known as
intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Lee et al., 2005). The motivation theory is widely applied
in psychology field to explain human behavior (Lee et al., 2015), and researchers claim that
people’s motivations are centered on the value that they can potentially gain from
consumption behavior (Ozturk et al., 2016). When consumers are motivated, the extrinsic
and intrinsic rationale determines individual’s behaviors and they are more likely to persist
and have engagement in activities that satisfy these needs (Ryan et al., 2013).
Motivation constitutes a basic need for competence, and consumers are intrinsically and
extrinsically motivated to engage in a certain behavior to receive a reward or benefit.

Based on the theory of motivation and previous research related to innovation adoption
(Yang et al., 2013), this study aims to assess the effect of delivery approach of information,
service and institutional mechanism of OC (i.e. extrinsic factors) and the effect of
consumers’ personality trait (i.e. intrinsic factor) on consumers’ OC adoption behavior.
With concurrent assessment of both intrinsic and extrinsic motivational factors, we aim to
project consumers’ reaction to the OC service attributes which can be differentiated by
consumer characteristic.
2.2 Determinants of consumers’ OC adoption

As an innovative service, OC has received considerable research attentions, yet much of
literature has shown extensive investigation on consumers’ intention to adopt and choice of
multichannel service (Wolny and Charoensuksai, 2014). Some researchers considered
channel attributes (Gensler et al., 2012), marketing efforts (Sunil, 2015), social influence,
individual differences, channel integration and situational factors as determinants of
multichannel choices, other researchers focused on channel benefits (Hsiao et al., 2007),
channel capabilities, perceived risk (Cervellon et al., 2015) and customer experience as
important determinants.
OC retailing aims to address the issue of fragmented supply chains, lack of consistency,
reliability in consumer experience (Saghiri et al., 2017) by integrating processes and
technologies across all channels, providing more seamless services for consumers
(Verhoef et al., 2015). Thus, OC retail represent an evolutionary step of multichannel and
cross-channel concept, which deserve a distinctive appreciation and evaluation.
How consumers value and appreciate the channel coordination and integrative process
may markedly determine their adoption decision. Verhoef et al. (2015) proposed consumer
belief, which is associated with channel attributes, as a major determinant for multichannel
preference based on TRA model. Drawing on the TRA model, we propose that OC specific
attributes function as major determinant for OC adoption behavior in conjunction with
assessing the impact of individual difference.
Some recent research on OC information system mainly focuses on proposing research
agenda (Saghiri et al., 2017; Piotrowicz and Cuthbertson, 2014; Manser et al., 2017), and
addressing the challenges and opportunities in OC practices from a firm-level perspective
(Hensen and Sia, 2015; Luo et al., 2016), or the applied technology acceptance model
(TAM), the extend unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (Celik, 2016)
to explain customer usage and purchasing behavior in the OC context, explaining the
APJML effects of perceived usefulness, east of use, customer attitudes and social influence
(Shen et al., 2018). This study offers a few interesting theoretical contributions from
customer perspectives to literature.
Brynjolfsson et al. (2013) emphasize the importance of optimizing OC channel
management with key factors such as attractive pricing, merchandize information
consistency (IFCS), integrative inventory, consumer transaction analysis, channel usage
frequency, data management, channel and product attributes, promotional sales and
embracing competition. Retailers are increasingly launching OC platform in their systems to
leverage the synergetic management of various channels and to ensure lock-in of consumers
through enhanced customer experience. Unless consumers perceive these envisioned
promises of the OC system, the justification of introducing such system may not be realized.
It is important to recognize that customer is the goal of any business, and especially OC
strategy aims to reach and target customers from different channels (Shen et al., 2018).
In this sense, our model, built on the TRA framework, will provide a meaningful assessment
of the OC service from a consumer perspective, and provide enhanced understanding of
consumers’ interaction with OC service.
3. Research model and hypothesis development

In this study, we propose to assess the effect of both perceived attributes and benefits of OC
service (i.e. extrinsic motivation) and individual personality traits (i.e. intrinsic motivation)
on consumers’ OC adoption behavior (Yang et al., 2012; Yang et al., 2014).
The selected four extrinsic factors convey cross-channel coordination and integration of
elements in the areas of promotion, transaction information management, product, pricing,
and delivery information and customer service, which are associated with four Ps of
marketing mix. These extrinsic factors are selected based on relevant literature
(Appendix 1), which may motivate consumers to adopt OC, include: service integration
(SVIT); information integration (IFIT); IFCS; and perceived effectiveness of omnichannel
institutional mechanism (PEOIM). These four extrinsic factors are distinctive characteristics
of the OC which may be perceived by consumers as beneficiary conditions for OC retail
platform, motivating consumers to adopt. We also explore the implicit effect of NFC, as an
intrinsic motivation factor, on consumers’ OC adoption behavior by dividing consumers into
three groups which have different level of personality trait. Their OC adoption behaviors are
compared to determine whether individual personality trait cause difference in information
search and choice behavior.
3.1 Service integration

Consumers interact with touch points throughout the shopping journey, which are offered by
retailers, and prefer the one that delivers the highest value regarding their expectations
(e.g. finding best information, comparing prices most efficiently, evaluating product most
accurately, ordering most conveniently) (Hansen and Sia, 2015). OC provides an integrated
shopper experience that merges the physical store with online, mobile shopping, providing a
seamless service and information regardless of channel format (Verhoef et al., 2015; Golombek,
2013). The integration and connectivity among channels enable consumers to enjoy several
benefits simultaneously which are distinctively inherited in each channel (Richrelevance, 2015).
Thus, consumers move effortlessly from one touch point to another (Brynjolfsson et al., 2013;
Cao, 2014; Fulgoni, 2014) in an OC setting, and have a seamless shopping experience.
It is in the OC retailers’ interest to provide identical and consistent service in on/offline
channels which can be achieved by effective integration of service. Cummins et al. (2016)
state that it is important to minimize inconsistency in customer experience of service in
different channels which may arise for services such as after-sales, promotion, discount
and customer relations. Thus, the OC approach aims to establish unified systems in
operations, including logistics and after-sales support (Ailawadi and Farris, 2017). In this Consumer
study, SVIT is defined as online/offline integration of retail service which are largely omnichannel
related to “Promotional” aspect of the marketing mix such as mileage system, discount, adoption
payment, delivery and pick-up, after service and refund. Based on the extant research, we
hypothesize that: behavior
H1. SVIT of OC positively influences consumers’ use intention (UIT).
3.2 IFIT and consistency

Consumers are becoming sophisticated enough to optimize their shopping experience by
exhaustively considering all possible alternatives across all possible channels (Gao and
Su, 2016). As a result, retailers face immense pressure to integrate the best of both digital and
physical worlds at each step of the customer experience (Rigby, 2011). One of the greatest
challenges in the OC environment is to effectively deliver information (Bell et al., 2014). As
consumers actively seek information about product value and inventory availability, retailers
can influence shopping paths by managing the sources of information (Gao and Su, 2016).
Furthermore, retailers need to provide consistent and integrated information to consumers to

facilitate their OC adoption and usage. Different factors and characteristics of channels are
considered to be important for different channels, yet “integration” and “consistency” are
two characteristics necessary for synchronization of a few channels thus, only exist in OC.
Integration and consistency of information can be considered when online and offline
channels are interconnected, thus these characteristics do not exist in one type of channel
environment (Beck and Rygl, 2015).
IFIT refers to the degree of integration in platform and information between OC
retail-affiliates (Table I). This construct particularly addresses issues primarily related with
“Placing” and “Price” aspect of the marketing mix; all related information such as product
inventory, product launch and arrival date, price, pickup and delivery information are
provided in an integrated and interlocked mode. When consumers perceive integration in
the price, distribution service of on/offline channels, consumer may consider this to provide
convenience of visiting one channel while having access to information for both channels
(on/offline stores).
Yang et al. (2014) reported that integration of all channels’ data (i.e. product inventory,
launch date, arrival date, and price and retail information) have positive impact on
customers’ intention to use the OC retail service. Zhang et al. (2010) argue that information
regarding pricing, promotion, delivery and return policies, assortments need to be provided
consistently to consumer in order to OC to be acknowledged and accepted by consumers.
Wang et al. (2013) state that integration of information facilitates consistency in the service,
which lead to increased trust of consumers. This has positive effect on customers’ intention
to use the OC retail service. Based on the previous studies, we hypothesize that:
H2. IFIT of OC service positively influences consumers’ UIT.
IFCS refers to the degree of consistency of “Product” information (Table II), which is one of
the four major components of the marketing mix. In the OC retail platform, product quality,
composition, color, reputation, consumer evaluation and review information are consistently
provided to consumers both in on/offline channels. Joseph (2015) states “above all, given the
range of options and relatively insignificant switching costs available to today’s customers,
giving them a consistent and seamless experience across every channel becomes imperative
for a successful omnichannel retailer.” Huseyinoglu et al. (2018) also identify “channel
consistency” as one of the major factor determining the OC capability. Based on the extant
research, we hypothesize that:
H3. IFCS of OC service positively influences consumers’ UIT.
APJML Valid Frequency Percent
Gender
Male 120 52.9
Female 107 47.1
Experience with pickup service
Used pick up service before 120 52.9
Do not use 107 47.1
Age
20s 146 64.3
30s 44 19.4
40s 27 11.9
50s over 10 4.4
Job
Student 98 43.2
Government official 90 39.6

Office worker 1 0.4
Educator 2 0.9
Self employed 12 5.3
Housewife 8 3.5
Other 16 7.0
Main shopping channela
In-store 60 26.4
Online(PC) shopping 73 32.2
Mobile shopping 37 16.3
TV Home shopping 6 2.6
Online/offline/mobile mixedb 46 20.3
Omni channelc 5 2.2
NFC
High 87 38.3
Medium 100 44.1
Low 40 17.6
Total 227 100.0
Notes: n ¼ 227. aThis indicates the most frequently used shopping channel; bonline/offline/mobile mixed:
multichannel service in which services of different may be segmented; cmajor retail brands in Korea mostly
Table I. offer omnichannel services, and many consumers may use omnichannel service while they don’t recognize the
Sample characteristics concept of this service
3.3 Perceived effectiveness of omnichannel institutional mechanisms (PEOIM)

In the institutional context, trust is referred as a formal regulative structure initiated to
protect the transaction environment (Zucker, 1986), and has been identified as a major
predictor for customer retention particularly in the case of uncertainty, interdependence and
fear of opportunism (Fang et al., 2014). Trust becomes more important when consumers
experience interface of on/offline channels as the layer of touchpoint increases.
In this context, Fang et al. (2014) developed the perceived effectiveness of e-commerce
institutional mechanisms (PEOIM) in order to grasp the customer’s perceptions of the
vendor-independent e-commerce institutional environment and examined the extent to
which PEOIM affects how customer online trust influences online purchase.
PEOIM refers to online customer perceptions of third-party safeguarding mechanisms,
such as online credit card guarantees, escrow services and privacy protection existing to
protect consumers against potential risks in the e-commerce environment (Fang et al., 2014).
PEOIM is included in the proposed model in order to determine the importance of Consumer
institutional frame of OC in consumers OC adoption. omnichannel
In this study, PEOIM is defined as consumers’ perception of a formal “integrated” adoption
regulatory mechanism for both on and offline channels, which has two characteristics; first,
mechanism of consistent and identical information availability (Gallino and Moreno, 2014; behavior
Gao and Su, 2016), which mitigates consumers’ perceived risk ( Joseph, 2015); and, second,
service which is provided by major global retailers who has high reputations and sufficient
capacity for managing risk and costs associated with OC service. Consumers tend to trust
these major retailers with high brand reputation and perceive these service providers to
have a solid institutional mechanism for protection (Han et al., 2015):
H4. PEOIM of OC service positively influences consumers’ UIT.
3.4 Use intention and use behavior

Several studies in the past have confirmed the powerful relationship between intention and
actual behavior (Rezai et al., 2013; Liu et al., 2016; Kumar et al., 2017). Based on the TRA and
theory of planned behaviorTPB (Ajzen, 1991), TAM (Davis, 1989) model postulate a causal
relationship between attitude, intention and behavior for measuring technology acceptance
(Davis et al., 1989; Kim et al., 2008). Several recent studies on consumer behavior for retail
shopping with mobile application and personal computer have shown significant
relationship between intention and behavior (Groß, 2015; Chopdar et al., 2018; Venkatesh
et al., 2012). Purchase behavior has been treated in the literature as the main construct
describing the determinants of computer use behavior (UBH) (Davis et al., 1989), and the
main antecedent of purchase behavior in the TAM is framed as the behavioral intention,
having a single direct effect on individual’s actual use of a given technology (Venkatesh
et al., 2012). Groß (2015) states that consumers’ m-shopping behavior are significantly
determined by their behavioral intention to use m-shopping, confirming previous empirical
findings (Aldas-Manzano et al., 2009). In this study, we postulate this causal relationship in
explaining consumers’ acceptance for the OC service, and expect a positive link between
UIT for a certain OC vendor and consumers’ actual purchase behavior:
H5. OC consumers’ UIT positively influences purchase behavior of OC consumers.
3.5 Need for cognition

NFC can be defined as personal need for activity or stimulation with cognitive efforts
(Cacioppo and Petty, 1982). Awasthy et al. (2012) state that motivation to search is an
important antecedent to amount of information search. Thus, the motivational measure is the
proximal measure to other antecedent constructs (i.e. a behavioral measure of search).
According to Yee and Braver (2018), NFC-low people have little effort to achieve their goals,
and NFC-high people have more efforts to achieve their goals. They suggest that an
individual’s cost-benefit tradeoff is constrained by the perceived costs of exerting cognitive
effort because cognitive processing is inherently resource-limited, and individual’s decision to
engage in effortful cognitive processing should be dictated. For example, NFC-high people
may have a higher motivation to use OC than NFC-low people because NFC-high people’s
cognitive effort (i.e. searching cost) is much greater than NFC-low people in product search;
thus, the benefits of use OC are much greater as it provide integrated information. Thus, NFC
is considered to be an important construct of personality traits which affect information
process and management in many studies.
This personality trait may have an implicit effect on the relationship between extrinsic
motivation factors and intention for the OC adoption. Dabholkar and Bagozzi (2002)
studied the moderating effects of consumer traits on the relationships between external
APJML factors and consumers’ attitude for technology-based self-service. They compared a full
direct effects of consumer traits with moderating effects on consumers attitudinal model of
technology-based self-service and found the moderating effects to be much more
significant empirically and far more meaningful in terms of implications for researchers
(Dabholkar and Bagozzi, 2002). NFC may be an important personality trait affecting
the relationship between extrinsic motivational factors and consumers’ user intention,
and we hypothesize:
H6. Difference in consumers’ NFC may affect the relationship between extrinsic
motivational variables and consumers’ UIT.
4. Method
A survey questionnaire was developed, incorporating 41 items compiled from the literature
(Appendix 1). In total, 5 items were included for SVIT; 4 items for IFIT; 4 items for PEOIM;
5 items for IFCS; 5 items for UIT; 3 items for UBH; and 14 items for NFC. These indirect
measures were empirically tested and used by various researchers (Appendix 1). The survey
had 49 items in total, including eight socio-demographic questions. All the variables were
measured on a Likert scale, using 1–5 points (strongly disagree to strongly agree; Appendix 2).
The survey questionnaire was designed to be clear and pertinent with detailed instructions,
definitions and examples. The questions were designed in sections, and an introductory
statement about each section was provided to minimize confusion among the respondents
(Neuman, 2013). Convenient sampling was applied to collect the data from general shoppers in
Korea with a survey questionnaire, and the survey yielded a total of 241 respondents’ answers.
A total of 14 questionnaires were excluded, and 227 clean responses were used for further
analysis. The sample data were further divided into three groups: high, medium- and low-NFC
groups for comparative analysis among three groups.
To measure NFC, a shortened version of the NFC scale was used based on Kim (1994)’s
study. NFC scale consisted of 14 items, including items such as “I prefer my life to be filled
with puzzles I must solve” or “I really enjoy a task that involves coming up with new
solutions to problems.” All items were rated on a five-point Likert-scale ranging from 1
(completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree) (Appendix 2).
The NFC scale showed internal consistency (α ¼ 0.712). We used the principal
component analysis and scree plot of the factor analysis using SPSS 21.0. Initial eigenvalues
of each items were examined and the NFC factor was found to contain ten NFC items (with
eigenvalue W1), explaining 42.05 percent of variance. Scores from the ten items were
averaged to develop a single NFC indicator. The NFC indicator with higher scores indicates
high in NFC, whereas lower scores indicate low in NFC (Table I). In order to divide
participant, distribution of the NFC scores was checked and found to approximate a normal
distribution rather than a bimodal distribution. Participants were divided into three groups:
low NFC (1–3.09; n ¼ 40), medium NFC (3.10–3.56; n ¼ 100) and high NFC (3.57–5; m ¼ 87).
5. Results
Partial least squares–Structural equation modeling (PLS–SEM) was used to test the
proposed research model. The PLS–SEM method has been designed as a prediction-oriented
approach to SEM that relaxes the demands on data and specification of relationships set by
CB-SEM (Dijkstra, 2010; Rigdon et al., 2010; Hair et al., 2014). PLS–SEM provides
researchers with more flexibility in terms of data requirements, model complexity and
relationship specification (Sarstedt et al., 2014). The statistical software used in this study is
Smart-PLS (v 3.2.7).
To assess construct reliability, Cronbach’s α (Cronbach, 1951) was computed. Nunnally
(1978) suggested that a value of at least 0.70 indicates adequate reliability. Cronbach’s α value
of our finding showed a value between 0.716 and 0.930 in all items and all NFC groups, Consumer
exceeding recommended thresholds. To improve reliability of the constructs, three measures omnichannel
were omitted from the following constructs: SVIT (SVIT4), UIT (UIT1) and IFCS (IFCS3). We adoption
considered the composite reliability (CR) of constructs and the outer loads of the measures
with PLS–SEM guidelines, and the six constructs had adequate reliability. behavior
If the CR is more than 0.7, internal consistency reliability is secured (Hair et al., 1998), and
average variance extracted (AVE) is more than 0.5, the measurement model has convergent
validity (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). Findings show that the CR is greater than 0.7, the AVE
is greater than 0.5 and the square root of AVE is greater than the correlation coefficient.
Thus, construct validity is ensured, and the measurement model has convergent validity
and discriminant validity (Tables II and III). According to Hair et al. (2012), the cut-off value
for VIF (collinearity) should be smaller than 0.5, and our VIF results were smaller than 0.5
(from 1.292 to 4.750), as shown in Appendix 1.
To determine construct validity and interaction effects, factor loadings of the principal
component analysis were examined (Table IV ). The significance probability of Bartlett’s
sphericity was 0.000, so the correlations of the variables were generally significant. The
Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure was also higher than the reference value of 0.50, exceeding
the recommended values. Factor analysis yielded six components with eigenvalues above 1,
and these six components corresponded to the six constructs (Table II).
We also examined correlation between the constructs with Pearson correlation
coefficients to determine occurrence of multi-collinearity. The correlation coefficient values
were less than 0.7 (the maximum value: 0.536), showing no presence of multi-collinearity
between the constructs (Table V ).
To validate the hypotheses, the bootstrapping PLS method was used upon three group
(NFC-high, NFC-medium, low) sample data. The values of the f2 values and the R2 values are
individual measures of the explanatory power of the model. The f2 values for the five variables
involved in the hypothesized significant relationships ranged from 0.024 to 0.398. The R2
values for these relationships ranged from 0.076 to 0.636. The Q2 is considered as a measure of
out of sample prediction, and the Q2 values larger than zero for an endogenous construct
indicate that the path model’s predictive accuracy is acceptable for that particular construct
(Ringle et al., 2014). In this study, all Q2 values were larger than zero (see Appendix 2).
Overall, this analysis suggests a good explanatory power for the proposed model.
The results of the hypothesis test were in Table VI and Figure 2, demonstrating the
differences among the results of the three NFC groups. Two constructs – PEOIM and
UIT – were statistically significant for all three NFC groups. In the NFC-H and NFC-M
groups, the construct IFCS and the construct SVIT were supported, while the construct IFIT
was excluded. In contrast, the construct IFIT was significant for the NFC-L group, and the
two constructs – IFCS and SVIT – were rejected.
Cronbach’s α Composite reliability Average variance extracted (AVE)

Measures All High Medium Low High Medium Low High Medium Low
IFCS 0.793 0.752 0.767 0.724 0.854 0.866 0.780 0.663 0.684 0.567
IFIT 0.771 0.826 0.778 0.716 0.892 0.870 0.838 0.734 0.691 0.634
PEOIM 0.774 0.790 0.784 0.745 0.860 0.857 0.836 0.612 0.601 0.562
SVIT 0.868 0.837 0.842 0.795 0.902 0.904 0.879 0.756 0.758 0.708
UBH 0.907 0.899 0.860 0.930 0.936 0.931 0.955 0.829 0.818 0.877
UIT 0.901 0.895 0.886 0.845 0.935 0.929 0.906 0.828 0.813 0.763
Notes: SVIT, Omnichannel service integration; IFIT, omnichannel information integration; IFCS, omnichannel Table II.
information consistency; PEOIM, perceived effectiveness of omnichannel institutional mechanism; UIT, Construct reliability
use intention; UBH, use behavior and validity
Table III.
APJML
Discriminant validity
IFCS IFIT PEOIM SVIT UBH UIT
H M L H M L H M L H M L H M L H M L
IFCS 0.814 0.827 0.753

IFIT 0.401 0.417 0.161 0.857 0.832 0.796
PEOIM 0.693 0.377 0.401 0.422 0.274 0.341 0.782 0.775 0.749
SVIT 0.271 0.217 0.231 0.49 0.454 0.572 0.327 0.282 0.39 0.869 0.87 0.841
UBH 0.205 0.315 0.018 0.027 0.183 0.061 0.009 0.223 0.025 −0.036 0.01 −0.091 0.911 0.904 0.936
UIT 0.613 0.436 0.158 0.492 0.242 0.261 0.614 0.364 0.317 0.628 0.334 0.192 0.275 0.517 0.444 0.91 0.902 0.874
Notes: SVIT, omnichannel service integration; IFIT, omnichannel information integration; IFCS, omnichannel information consistency; PEOIM, perceived effectiveness
of omnichannel institutional mechanism; UIT, use intention; UBH, use behavior
Component
Consumer
1 2 3 4 5 6 omnichannel
adoption
SVIT2 0.822 0.118 0.023 −0.066 0.229 0.070
SVIT3 0.776 0.096 −0.011 0.005 0.271 0.098 behavior
SVIT1 0.771 0.164 0.168 −0.012 0.197 0.057
SVIT5 0.752 0.225 0.007 −0.129 0.234 0.093
UIT4 0.176 0.832 0.108 0.201 0.094 0.104
UIT3 0.174 0.829 0.028 0.172 0.119 0.079
UIT2 0.088 0.815 0.139 0.178 0.098 0.218
UIT5 0.198 0.771 0.299 0.205 0.027 0.121
IFCS5 0.033 0.051 0.780 0.053 −0.030 0.100
IFCS4 0.001 0.052 0.762 0.032 0.158 0.081
IFCS2 0.135 0.171 0.741 0.069 0.128 0.178
IFCS1 0.024 0.177 0.716 0.017 0.204 0.154
UBH2 −0.036 0.159 0.056 0.910 0.017 0.053
UBH3 −0.070 0.177 0.087 0.880 0.013 0.015
UBH1 −0.052 0.296 0.022 0.870 0.016 0.001
IFIT2 0.276 0.159 0.153 −0.007 0.728 0.102

IFIT3 0.142 0.047 0.094 −0.102 0.714 −0.012
IFIT1 0.211 0.089 0.057 0.098 0.713 0.095
IFIT4 0.316 0.014 0.179 0.112 0.661 0.224
PEOIM4 −0.067 0.137 0.074 0.039 0.216 0.752
PEOIM3 −0.006 0.207 0.102 −0.059 0.220 0.739
PEOIM2 0.331 0.115 0.357 0.043 −0.121 0.692
PEOIM1 0.382 0.036 0.229 0.093 −0.038 0.673
Extraction Method: principal component analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization
Rotation converged in 7 iterations
Notes: SVIT, Omnichannel service integration; IFIT, omnichannel information integration; IFCS, omnichannel
information consistency; PEOIM, perceived effectiveness of omnichannel institutional mechanism; UIT, Table IV.
use intention; UBH, use behavior Factor analysis
Pearson correlation IFIT SVIT PEOIM IFCS UIT UBH
IFIT 1 0.536** 0.319** 0.316** 0.292** 0.047

SVIT 0.536** 1 0.345** 0.204** 0.358** −0.048
PEOIM 0.319** 0.345** 1 0.434** 0.379** 0.102
IFCS 0.316** 0.204** 0.434** 1 0.340** 0.149*
UIT 0.292** 0.358** 0.379** 0.340** 1 0.419**
UBH 0.047 −0.048 0.102 0.149* 0.419** 1
N 227 227 227 227 227 227
information consistency; PEOIM, perceived effectiveness of omnichannel institutional mechanism; UIT, Table V.
use intention; UBH, use behavior. *,**Correlation is significant at 0.05 and 0.01 levels (two-tailed) Correlations
Considering the path coefficients of the three groups (NFC-H, NFC-M and NFC-L), SVIT
(0.442) of the NFC-H, IFCS (0.340) of the NFC-M and PEOIM (0.249) of the NFC-L had the
highest values.
6. Discussion
6.1 Theoretical contribution
Retail digitalization enables consumers to leverage various channels for shopping
activities simultaneously, raising their expectation for seamless shopping experience.
APJML Path coefficients t-statistics (|O/STDEV|) p-values
Hypothesis H M L H M L H M L
IFCS→UIT 0.311 0.340 0.033 2.129 2.930 0.216 0.017** 0.002*** 0.414
IFIT→UIT 0.053 −0.057 0.180 0.457 0.433 1.437 0.324 0.333 0.076*
PEOIM→UIT 0.232 0.185 0.249 1.761 1.416 1.633 0.039** 0.079* 0.051*
SVIT→UIT 0.442 0.234 −0.016 4.161 2.726 0.134 0.000*** 0.003*** 0.447
UIT→UBH 0.275 0.517 0.444 1.554 6.602 4.358 0.060* 0.000*** 0.000***
Table VI. information consistency; PEOIM, perceived effectiveness of omnichannel institutional mechanism; UIT,
PLS–SEM results use intention; UBH, use behavior. *po0.05; **po0.01; ***po0.001
NFC High
NFC Medium
SVIT NFC Low
(H)0.442***
(M)0.234***
IFIT
(L)0.180*
(H)0.275*
(H)0.232** (M)0.517***
UIT UBH
(M)0.181*
PEOIM (L)0.444***
(L)0.249*
(H)0.311**
IFCS (M)0.340***
Figure 2.
Research model
results
Notes: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001
Emerging literature on OC consumer behavior identified technological, behavioral and

situational factors. For example, perceived risk/benefit (utilitarian and hedonic), trust,
privacy, self-efficacy, price, cost, innovativeness and social influence are suggested as
determinants for OC consumer behavior in previous studies (Faqih and Jaradat, 2015;
Srinivasan, 2015; Lim et al., 2016; Ailawadi and Farris, 2017; Piotrowicz and Cuthbertson,
2014). Yet, limited and fragmented understanding of OC consumers behavior still exist, and
further assessment is necessary, particularly how information delivery approach and
institutional mechanism plays a critical role which extrinsically motivate consumers to
accept OC as a new form of shopping channel, while considering the importance of
individual difference as an intrinsic motivation factor. In this regard, we propose the role of
information and service delivery approach, institutional mechanism and individual
difference as additional key factors to explain consumers OC shopping adoption.
The findings of this study add to existing literature about the role of information and
service delivery approach, which is distinctively framed in an OC environment
(i.e. integration and consistency). Extending the current knowledge from communication
and marketing perspective, this study empirically tested: the significance of information
delivery approach (i.e. whether information on the marketing mix – product and service is
completely aligned between online and offline and the role of formal regulatory structure as
a risk alleviating mechanism) on consumers’ intention to use the OC. Several studies
emphasized the role of information on consumers’ shopping behavior: Ngai and Wat (2002) Consumer
state that e-commerce refers to the delivery of information, product/services from a omnichannel
communication perspective; Cervellon et al. (2015) and Frasquet et al. (2015) find that adoption
consumer channel utilization is influenced by utilitarian values (i.e. information search for
money saving, assortment, convenience, and time saving); and Bigne-Alcaniz et al. (2008) behavior
claim positive influence of information dependency and consumer innovativeness
(Kim et al., 2011) for the internet shopping adoption. Breugelmans and Campo (2016)
show that IFCS for price across channel affects consumers’ shopping intention. Park and
Lee (2017) also emphasize the importance of retailer communication strategy and pricing
strategy for consumer OC adoption behavior. On the other hand, Hure et al. (2017)
propose an OC shopping model with hedonic, utilitarian and social values as three key
dimensions and claimed that each touch point (i.e. on/off/mobile) differ in terms of their
attributes and characteristics; thus, each touch point should be individually emphasized
based on its aspect for different purposive use. Although several studies agreed on the
importance of the role of information for consumers’ shopping behavior, yet limited
studies examined how new form of information delivery approach (i.e. integration and
consistency of the marketing mix across channels) plays when consumers’ individual
difference take into account.
Thus, this study extends findings from previous studies and assesses whether the
information and service consistency and integration plays differentially for consumers with
different personality trait (i.e. NFC). Our study shows that not all consumers find IFIT to be
critical in their adoption intention; the effect of IFIT on consumer behavior was found only
for low-NFC individuals, but not for high- and medium-NFC individuals, while IFCS was
found to be significant for high- and medium-NFC individuals. This study provides
empirical evidence that OC is an expanded retail format of e-commerce, which is
predominantly affected by how information on the cross-channel marketing mix/retail
strategies is delivered to consumers. From a communication perspective, findings suggest
that retail communication strategy need more careful attention in dealing with individual
difference of consumers.
Furthermore, perceived effectiveness of the institutional mechanism, ensuring privacy,
product/service guarantee for OC, is a proxy for consumers’ trust in OC, which was found to
be essential in successful acceptance of OC by consumers regardless of their individual
differences. This supports Sunil’s (2015), suggestion which emphasizes the importance of
after-sale service (e.g. return policy, payment policy); see Hsiao et al.’s (2007) finding on the
value of safety (i.e. information asymmetry reduction and boosting confidence). Li et al. (2018)
also conceptualized consumer’s online shopping behavior with trust/risk factor or uncertainty
avoidance as an important determinant, yet Wen et al.’s (2011) model is framed based on the
TAM, technology-based theory and Liu and Forsythe’s (2010) analysis propose risk as part of
innovation attributes (i.e. channel risk, product risk). This study looks into the trust factor
from an institutional perspective, and assess whether consumers value OC institutional
mechanism as protective function in a multiple transaction environment.
This study further advances the understanding of the role of NFC in the evolving OC
environment. General findings on NFC research support that as NFC increases,
information processing would increase, and individual differences in NFC determine
people’s motivation to engage in information processing (See et al., 2009). Overall, the
findings of this study are consistent with existing research in marketing: consumers with
high NFC tend to be more engaged in information processing (Chaiken, 1980) and the ones
with low NFC tend to avoid effortful cognitive activities and rely more on heuristic
information processing (Cacioppo and Petty, 1982). Our study finding shows that three
consumer groups with different NFC levels perceived different extrinsic factors to be
important for their OC adoption decision. This stresses the importance of developing a
APJML differentiated communication strategy, regarding the attributes and benefits of the OC
service, for different consumer groups. Cacioppo and Petty (1982) report that NFC-high
consumers found the simple version of a task to be more unpleasant than the complex
version, whereas NFC-low consumers found the complex version more unpleasant than
the simple (less cognitively demanding) version of the task. Thus, individual difference
in consumers’ tendency to enjoy complex problem-solving activities is reflected in
differential impact of the selected five determinants of our model.
6.2 Implications for practice

The findings of this study provide OC retailers with practical insights to consider as they
continue to develop the OC retail environment that fulfill the needs of rapidly evolving
consumers. OC retailing is observed as providing opportunity for firms to emphasize on the
channel integrative approach and enhance the role of marketing aspect of cross-channel
shopping in solidifying consumer shopping value and experience (Chatterjee, 2010;
Verhoef et al., 2015), yet it is a complicated adaptive system which needs to be strategically
managed (Saghiri et al., 2017). Saghiri et al. (2017) claim that retailer is key channel agent
who needs to provide ubiquity across all channel types, stages, and agents with channel
visibility (i.e. integrated promotion, transaction, pricing, product information, customer
service, delivery), yet this may come at an expensive logistical design, realignment of
multiple channels. Thus, it is necessary to have good understanding of key elements of an
OC retail system which are valued by consumers, and building a cost effective OC supply
chain. Development of channel synchronization which enables innovative shopping values
to consumers is crucial as it allows OC consumer journey, which could be highly valued
across touch points, and drives customer satisfaction and brand equity compared to other
shopping alternatives (Kumar & Reinartz, 2016).
Findings evidently show that different aspect of OC service system was found to play an
important role for OC adoption of consumer group with different level of NFC. SVIT
construct was perceived to be substantially significant for the high-NFC group’s OC
adoption. IFCS was found to be second most influential factor, affecting the medium-NFC
group. Perceived effectiveness of institutional mechanism (PEOIM) was third most
significant factor, affecting the low-NFC group’s OC adoption behavior. This suggests that
individual difference is an underlying factor impacting consumers’ behavioral intent, which
could not be underestimated. This study suggests that firms should pay more attention to
concreteness of market efforts highlighted according to individual difference of consumers.
Thus, the OC retailers may need to set the scope and range of information into in-depth
information and simplified/unified information and address the different type of information
to different consumer groups in order to facilitate consumers’ OC adoption. Hence, this
study addresses the perceived value of unique and fundamental features and specificity of
OC service by consumers with different personality traits.
Institutional mechanism (i.e. PEOIM) is found to be an important determinant for all
three groups of consumers’ OC adoption. This suggests the critical role of OC institutional
mechanism alleviating consumer concerns and perceived risk of using OC. Consumers may
have trust in the OC’s institutional mechanism since large conglomerate and branded
retailers (e.g. Walmart, Macy’s) are the early adopters of the OC platform with sufficient
resources and capacity, and their brand reputation as a retailer may have a positive
spillover effect on the institutional arrangement of the OC. Institutional trust has received
considerable discussion in several branches of the social science literature where scholars
have recognized trust as a key relational principle in buyer–seller relationships (Ebert, 2006;
Schoorman et al., 2007). Thus, the institutional mechanism of the OC play a critical role in
shaping consumer behavior toward the OC retail service and for a successful transition
toward this new retail format, and this study validates such point.
We performed crosstab analysis (Table VII and Figure 3), and demonstrate the difference Consumer
in perceived value of OC service options among consumers with different NFC levels. The omnichannel
results show that two groups of NFC-high and medium consumers are likely to use the four adoption
OC service options in future, while larger proportion of the NFC-low consumers show
negative response to the OC service usage. This evidently shows that innovative features of behavior
OC service are not homogenously adopted by consumers, and subject to their experience
and intrinsic difference, the adoption rate was found to vary. This suggests that companies
need to pay careful attention in implementing innovative OC service, and may approach
communication of information strategically for different consumer groups.
Buy-online-pickup-in-store (BOPIS) is one of the latest popular OC services which are
rapidly implemented by major retailers to promote their OC service. Table VII shows
significant difference in the extent of experience with BOPIS among three consumer groups.
EXP Gender BISD BOPIS BMAIS

Yes No M F Disagree Neutral Agree Disagree Neutral Agree Disagree Neutral Agree
Table VII.
NFC Preference for
Low (%) 39.1 60.9 43.7 56.3 41.4 23.0 35.6 56.3 23.0 20.7 41.4 28.7 29.9 OC service options
Medium (%) 58.0 42.0 64.0 36.0 30.0 14.0 56.0 38.0 16.0 46.0 35.0 22.0 43.0 by three
High (%) 70.0% 30.0 87.5 12.5 25.0 10.0 65.0 45.0 7.5 47.5 27.5 10.0 62.5 consumer groups:
Pearson χ2
0.002 0.000 0.014 0.002 0.011 crosstab analysis
NFC Low NFC Medium NFC High
EXP Yes
90.0%
BMAIS Agree EXP No
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
BMAIS Neutral Gender Male
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
BMAIS Disagree 10.0% Gender Female
0.0%
BOPIS Agree BISD Disagree
BOPIS Neutral BISD Neutral

Figure 3.
Characteristics
of NFC group
BOPIS Disagree BISD Agree
APJML In total, 60 percent of the NFC-low consumers did not try BOPIS, while 70 percent of the
NFC-high consumers had experience with BOPIS. The NFC-low consumers were found to be
less willing to use the BOPIS service compared to other two consumer groups, reflecting
their passive characteristics toward new and innovative product and service.
Regarding the future intention to use the OC service, the NFC-low consumers showed
relatively high level of negative answers. For three options of OC service, buy-in-store-
delivery (BISD), BOPIS, buy-online (using mobile app) in-store (BMAIS), 41.4, 56.3 and
41.4 percent of the NFC-low consumers disagreed with using the OC service, respectively.
This implies that retailers may need to develop differentiated communication strategy to
reach out to consumers with different personality types. For high-NFC consumers with
previous BOPIS experience, retailers may effectively engage them by enhancing and
expanding the BOPIS service features, yet for low-NFC consumers, raising awareness
and initiating interest among inexperienced consumers may be more imminent issue.
To appeal to the consumers with low-NFC, the OC retailers may need to communicate
attributes and benefits of the OC service indirectly, using peripheral cues such as celebrity,
OC brand name and visual image of the model.
Figure 3 also shows different preferences for OC service by three consumer groups. The
high-NFC group is predominantly male, has experience with OC service, and willing to try
various types of OC services: BISD, BOPIS, BMAIS, while the low-NFC group has female
consumers, with high percentage of no OC experience and less willing to try the specific OC
services. This finding suggests that personal experience with OC service tend to facilitate
consumers’ OC adoption intention, and also socio-demographic factor plays a role in
adoption approach.
6.3 Limitations
Although the study provides additional empirical findings for consumers’ perception on
selected characteristics of OC (i.e. delivery approach of information and service in OC and
institutional mechanism of OC), there may be additional extrinsic motivation factors which
affect consumers’ OC adoption behavior. For instance, Dang and Pham (2018) applied the
adoption theory and TAM to investigate interrelationships among consumer perceptions of
web design, reliability, privacy and customer service and their effect on purchase intention.
Extrinsic factors, such as web design, convenience, assortment, moving saving which
triggers a positive perception of OC, may be important determinants to consider.
Furthermore, situational factor such as social media (Huseyinoglu et al., 2018) and
behavioral factors, such as platform use habit (Chen, 2018), may also be significant in
assessing consumers’ OC adoption behavior. Finally, this study has been conducted on a
particular culture setting, and the generalizability of study findings, particularly about the
role of NFC, may need to be improved by a cross-culture evaluation.
References
Ailawadi, K.L. and Farris, P.W. (2017), “Managing multi- and omni-channel distribution: metrics and
research directions”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 93 No. 1, pp. 120-135.
Ajzen, I. (1991), “The theory of planned behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Decision Processes,
Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 179-211.
Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1980), Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behaviour,
Prentice-Hall, NJ.
Aldas-Manzano, J., Lassala-Navarre, C., Ruiz-Mafe, C. and Sanz-Blas, S. (2009), “The role of consumer
innovativeness and perceived risk in online banking usage”, International Journal of Bank
Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 53-75.
Ashraf, A.R., Thongpapanl, N. (Tek) and Auh, S. (2014), “The application of the technology acceptance Consumer
model under different cultural contexts: the case of online shopping adoption”, Journal of omnichannel
International Marketing, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 68-93.
adoption
Avery, J., Steenburgh, T.J., Deighton, J. and Carvella, M. (2012), “Adding bricks to clicks: predicting
the patterns of cross-channel elasticities over time”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 76 No. 3, behavior
pp. 96-111.
Awasthy, D., Banerjee, A. and Banerjee, B. (2012), “Understanding the role of prior product knowledge
to information search: an application of process theory to the Indian market”, Asia Pacific
Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 257-287.
Beck, N. and Rygl, D. (2015), “Categorization of multiple channel retailing in multi-, cross-, and
omni-channel retailing for retailers and retailing”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services,
Vol. 27, pp. 170-178.
Bell, B.D.R., Gallino, S. and Moreno, A. (2014), “How to win in an omnichannel world how to win in an
omnichannel world”, MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 45-54.
Bigne-Alcaniz, E., Ruiz-Mafé, C., Aldás-Manzano, J. and Sanz-Blas, S. (2008), “Influence of online
shopping information dependency and innovativeness on internet shopping adoption”, Online
Information Review, Vol. 32 No. 5, pp. 648-667.

Bosnjak, M., Galesic, M. and Tuten, T. (2007), “Personality determinants of online shopping: explaining
online purchase intentions using a hierarchical approach”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 60,
pp. 597-605.
Breugelmans, E. and Campo, K. (2016), “Cross-channel effects of price promotions: an empirical
analysis of the multi-channel grocery retail sector”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 92 No. 3,
pp. 333-351.
Brynjolfsson, E., Hu, Y.J. and Rahman, M.S. (2013), “Competing in the age of omnichannel retailing”,
MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol. 54 No. 4, pp. 23-29.
Cacioppo, J.T. and Petty, R.E. (1982), “The need for cognition”, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 116-131.
Cao, L. (2014), “Business model transformation in moving to a cross-channel retail strategy: a case
study”, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 69-96.
Celik, H. (2016), “Customer online shopping anxiety within the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use
Technology (UTAUT) framework”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 28
No. 2, pp. 278-307.
Cervellon, M.C., Sylvie, J. and Ngobo, P.V. (2015), “Shopping orientations as antecedents to channel
choice in the French grocery multichannel landscape”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, Vol. 27, pp. 31-51.
Chaiken, S. (1980), “Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus
message cues in persuasion”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 39 No. 5,
pp. 752-766.
Chatterjee, P. (2010), “Causes and consequences of ‘order online pick up in-store’ shopping behavior”,
The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 20 No. 4,
pp. 431-448.
Chen, H.J. (2018), “What drives consumers’ mobile shopping? 4Ps or shopping preferences?”,
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 797-815.
Chopdar, P.K., Korfiatis, N., Sivakumar, V.J. and Lytras, M.D. (2018), “Mobile shopping apps adoption
and perceived risks: a cross-country perspective utilizing the Unified theory of acceptance and
use of technology”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 86, pp. 109-128.
Christensen, C.M. and Raynor, M.E. (2003), The Innovator’s Solution, Harvard Business Press,
Boston, MA.
Cohen, A.R., Stotland, E. and Wolfe, D.M. (1955), “An experimental investigation of need for cognition”,
The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, Vol. 51 No. 2, pp. 291-294.
APJML Crittenden, V.L., Peterson, R.A. and Albaum, G. (2010), “Technology and business-to-consumer selling:
contemplating research and practice”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 30
No. 2, pp. 103-110.
Cronbach, L.J. (1951), “Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests”, Psychometrika, Vol. 16
No. 3, pp. 297-334.
Cummins, S., Peltier, J.W. and Dixon, A. (2016), “Omni-channel research framework in the context of
personal selling and sales management: a review and research extensions”, Journal of Research
in Interactive Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 2-16.
Dabholkar, P.A. and Bagozzi, R.P. (2002), “An attitudinal model of technology-based self-service:
moderating effects of consumer traits and situational factors”, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 184-201.
Dang, V.T. and Pham, T.L. (2018), “An empirical investigation of consumer perceptions of online
shopping in an emerging economy: adoption theory perspective”, Asia Pacific Journal of
Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 952-971.
Davis, F.D. (1989), “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information
technology”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 319-340.

Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P. and Warshaw, P.R. (1989), “User acceptance of computer technology: a
comparison of two theoretical models”, Management Science, Vol. 35 No. 8, pp. 982-1003.
Dijkstra, T.K. (2010), “Latent variables and indices: Herman Wold’s basic design and partial least
squares”, Handbook of Partial Least Squares, Springer, Berlin and Heidelberg, pp. 23-26.
Ebert, T. (2006), “Operationalisation and antecedents of trust in business networks dealing with
complex products and food products”, paper provided by European Association of Agricultural
Economists in its series 99th Seminar, Bonn, February 8–10.
Fang, Y., Qureshi, I., Sun, H., McCole, P., Ramsey, E. and Lim, K.H. (2014), “Trust, satisfaction, and
online repurchase intention: the moderating role of perceived effectiveness of e-commerce
institutional mechanisms”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 407-427.
Faqih, K.M. (2016), “An empirical analysis of factors predicting the behavioral intention to adopt
internet shopping technology among non-shoppers in a developing country context: does gender
matter?”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 30, pp. 140-164.
Faqih, K.M. and Jaradat, M.I.R.M. (2015), “Assessing the moderating effect of gender differences and
individualism-collectivism at individual level on the adoption of mobile commerce technology:
TAM3 perspective”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 22, pp. 37-52.
Fishbein, M.A. and Ajzen, I. (1975), Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behaviour: An Introduction to Theory
and Research, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Frasquet, M., Mollá, A. and Ruiz, E. (2015), “Identifying patterns in channel usage across the search,
purchase and post-sales stages of shopping”, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications,
Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 654-665.
Fulgoni, G.M. (2014), “Omni-channel retain insights and the consumers’ path to purchase: how digital
has transformed the way people make purchasing decisions”, Journal of Advertising Research,
Vol. 54 No. 4, pp. 377-380.
Gallino, S. and Moreno, A. (2014), “Integration of online and offline channels in retail: the impact
of sharing reliable inventory availability information”, Management Science, Vol. 60 No. 6,
pp. 1434-1451.
Gao, F. and Su, X. (2016), “Online and offline information for omnichannel retailing”, Manufacturing &
Service Operations Management, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 84-98.
Gensler, S., Verhoef, P.C. and Böhm, M. (2012), “Understanding consumers’ multichannel choices across
the different stages of the buying process”, Marketing Letters, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 987-1003.
Golombek, J. (2013), “Omni-channel: the future of retailing”, working paper, The Pennsylvania State Consumer
University, University Park, PA, available at: www.personal.psu.edu/users/j/l/jlg5690/images/ omnichannel
WhitePaper.Pdf
adoption
Groß, M. (2015), “Exploring the acceptance of technology for mobile shopping: an empirical
investigation among Smartphone users”, The International Review of Retail, Distribution and behavior
Consumer Research, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 215-235.
Hair, J.F. Jr, Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1998), Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th ed.,
Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Hair, J.F. Jr, Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L. and Kuppelwieser, G.V. (2014), “Partial least squares structural
equation modeling (PLS-SEM) An emerging tool in business research”, European Business
Review, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 106-121.
Hair, J.F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C.M. and Mena, J.A. (2012), “An assessment of the use of partial least
squares structural equation modeling in marketing research”, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 414-433.
Han, S.H., Nguyen, B. and Lee, T.J. (2015), “Consumer-based chain restaurant brand equity, brand
reputation, and brand trust”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 50, pp. 84-93.
Hansen, R. and Sia, S.K. (2015), “Hummel’s digital transformation toward omnichannel retailing: key
lessons learned”, MIS Quarterly Executive, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 51-66.
Harris, P., Riely, F.D. and Hand, C. (2018), “Understanding multichannel shopper journey configuration:
an application of goal theory”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 44, pp. 108-117.
Hensen, R. and Sia, S.K. (2015), “Hummel’s digital transformation toward omnichannel retailing: key
lessons learned”, MIS Quarterly Executive, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 51-66.
Hsiao, C., Yen, R. and Li, E.Y. (2007), “Exploring consumer value of multichannel shopping: a
perspective of means-end theory”, Internet Research, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 318-339.
Hure, E., Picot-Coupey, K. and Ackermann, C. (2017), “Understanding omni-channel shopping value: a
mixed-method study”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 39, pp. 314-330.
Huseyinoglu, I.S., Sorkun, M.F. and Boruhan, G. (2018), “Revealing the impact of operational logistics
service quality on omni-channel capability”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics,
Vol. 30 No. 5, pp. 1200-1221.
Joseph, G. (2015), “Sustaining brick and mortar through omnichannel: an emerging story of retail
business model convergence”, The International Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 3
No. 2, pp. 203-211.
Kim, D.J., Ferrin, D.L. and Rao, H.R. (2008), “A trust-based consumer decision-making model in
electronic commerce: the role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents”, Decision Support
Systems, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 544-564.
Kim, W.S. (1994), “Korean version of need for cognition scale”, Korean Journal of Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 87-101.
Kim, W.Y., Di Benedetto, A., Lancioni, C. and Richard, A. (2011), “The effects of country and gender
differences on consumer innovativeness and decision processes in a highly globalized high-tech
product market”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 714-744.
Kumar, B., Manrai, A.K. and Manrai, L.A. (2017), “Purchasing behavior for environmentally
sustainable products: a conceptual framework and empirical study”, Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Service, Vol. 34, pp. 1-9.
Kumar, V. and Reinartz, W. (2016), “Creating enduring customer value”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 80
No. 6, pp. 36-68.
Lee, M.K.O., Cheung, C.M.K. and Chen, Z.H. (2005), “Acceptance of Internet-based learning medium: the role
of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation”, Information & Management, Vol. 42 No. 8, pp. 1095-1104.
Lee, Y., Lee, J. and Hwang, Y. (2015), “Relating motivation to information and communication
technology acceptance: self-determination theory perspective”, Computers in Human Behavior,
Vol. 51, pp. 418-428.
APJML Lee, Y.K., Park, J.H., Chung, N. and Blakeney, A. (2012), “A unified perspectives on the factors
influencing usage intention toward mobile financial services”, Journal of Business Research,
Vol. 65 No. 11, pp. 1590-1599.
Levy, M. and Weitz, B. (2009), Retailing Management, 7th ed., Mc-Graw Hill, New York, NY.
Li, Y., Liu, H., Lim, E.T.K., Goh, J.M., Yang, F. and Lee, M.K.O. (2018), “Customers’ reaction to cross-
channel integration in omnichannel retailing: the mediating roles of retailer uncertainty, identity
attractiveness, and switching costs”, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 109, pp. 50-60.
Lian, J.W. and Lin, T.M. (2008), “Effects of consumer characteristics on their acceptance of online
shopping: comparisons among different product types”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 24
No. 1, pp. 48-65.
Lim, Y.J., Osman, A., Salahuddin, S.N., Romle, A.R. and Abdullah, S. (2016), “Factors influencing online
shopping behaviour: the mediating role of purchase intention”, Procedia Economics and
Finances, Vol. 35, pp. 401-410.
Liu, C. and Forsythe, S. (2010), “Sustaining online shopping: moderating role of online shopping
motives”, Journal of Internet Commerce, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 83-103.
Liu, H., McCarthy, B. and Chen, T. (2016), “Green food consumption in China: segmentation based on
attitudes toward food safety”, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, Vol. 28
No. 4, pp. 346-362.
Luo, J., Fan, M. and Zhang, H. (2016), “Information technology, cross-channel capabilities and
managerial actions: evidence from the apparel industry”, Journal of the Association for
Information Systems, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 308-327.
Manser, E., Payne, J. and Peltier, V.A. (2017), “Omnichannel marketing, integrated marketing
communications, and consumer engagement: a research agenda”, Journal of Research in
Interactive Marketing, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 185-197.
Melero, I., Sese, F.J. and Verhoef, P.C. (2016), “Recasting the customer experience in today’s omni-channel
environment”, University Business Review, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 18-37.
Neuman, W.L. (2013), Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, 7th ed.,
Pearson Education, Essex.
Ngai, E.W.T. and Wat, F.K.T. (2002), “A literature review and classification of electronic commerce
research”, Information Management, Vol. 39 No. 5, pp. 415-429.
Nunnally, J. (1978), Psychometric Methods, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Ozturk, A.B., Nusair, K., Okumus, F. and Hua, N. (2016), “The role of utilitarian and hedonic values on
users’ continued usage intention in a mobile hotel booking environment”, International Journal
of Hospitality Management, Vol. 57, pp. 106-115.
Park, S. and Lee, D. (2017), “An empirical study on consumer online shopping channel choice behavior
in omni-channel environment”, Telematics and Informatics, Vol. 34 No. 8, pp. 1398-1407.
Pauwels, K., Leeflang, P.S., Teerling, M.L. and Huizingh, K.E. (2011), “Does online information drive
offline revenues?: only for specific products and consumer segments!”, Journal of Retailing,
Vol. 87 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
Pavlou, P.A. and Fygenson, M. (2006), “Understanding and predicting electronic commerce adoption:
an extension of the theory of planned behavior”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 115-143.
Piotrowicz, W. and Cuthbertson, R. (2014), “Introduction to the special issue information technology in
retail: toward omnichannel retailing”, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol. 18
No. 4, pp. 5-16.
Priester, J.R. and Petty, R.E. (1996), “The gradual threshold model of ambivalence: relating the positive
and negative bases of attitudes to subjective ambivalence”, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, Vol. 71 No. 3, pp. 431-449.
Rezai, G., Teng, P., Mohamed, Z. and Shamsuding, M.N. (2013), “Consumer willingness to pay for green
food in Malaysia”, Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, Vol. 25, pp. 1-18.
Richrelevance (2015), “Omnichannel retail”, L2 Intelligence Report.
Rigby, D. (2011), “The future of shopping”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 89 No. 12, pp. 65-76. Consumer
Rigdon, E.E., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2010), “Structural modeling of heterogeneous data omnichannel
with partial least squares”, in Malhotra, N.K. (Ed.), Review of Marketing Research, Emerald adoption
Group Publishing Limited, Armonk, New York, NY, pp. 255-296.
behavior
Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M. and Schlittgen, R. (2014), “Genetic algorithm segmentation in partial least
squares structural equation modeling”, OR Spectrum, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 251-276.
Ryan, R.M., Huta, V. and Deci, E.L. (2013), “Living well: a self-determination theory perspective on
eudaimonia”, in Fave, A.D. (Ed.), The Exploration of Happiness, Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 117-139.
Saghiri, S., Wilding, R., Mena, C. and Bourlakis, M. (2017), “Toward a three-dimensional framework for
omni-channel”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 77, pp. 53-67.
Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C.M., Smith, D., Reams, R. and Hair, J.F. Jr (2014), “Partial least squares structural
equation modeling (PLS-SEM): a useful tool for family business researchers”, Journal of Family
Business Strategy, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 105-115.
Schoorman, F.D., Mayer, R.C. and Davis, J.H. (2007), “An integrative model of organizational trust: past,
present and future”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 344-354.
Schramm-Klein, H., Wagner, G., Steinmann, S. and Morschett, D. (2011), “Cross-channel integration – is
it valued by customer?”, International Review of Retail, consumer Research, Vol. 21 No. 5,
pp. 501-511.
See, Y.H.M., Petty, R.E. and Evans, L.M. (2009), “The impact of perceived message complexity and need
for cognition on information processing and attitudes”, Journal of Research in Personality,
Vol. 43 No. 5, pp. 880-889.
Shen, S.L., Li, Y.J., Sun, Y. and Wang, N. (2018), “Channel integration quality, perceived flency and
omnichannel service usage: the moderating roles of internal and external usage experience”,
Decision Support Systems, Vol. 109, pp. 61-73.
Shen, X.L., Zhang, K.Z.K. and Zhao, S.J. (2016), “Herd behaviour in consumers’ adoption of online
reviews”, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 67 No. 11,
pp. 2754-2765.
Sin, S.S., Nor, K.M. and AlAgaga, A.M. (2012), “Factors affecting Malaysian young consumers’ online
purchase intention in social media websites”, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 40
No. 1, pp. 326-333.
Srinivasan, R. (2015), “Exploring the impact of social norms and online shopping anxiety in the
adoption of online apparel shopping by Indian consumers”, Journal of Internet Commerce,
Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 177-199.
Sundaram, D.S. and Taylor, R.D. (1998), “An investigation of external information search
effort: replication in in-home shopping situations”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 25,
pp. 440-445.
Sunil, G. (2015), “Trends and practices of consumers buying online and offline: an analysis of factors
influencing consumer’s buying”, International Journal of Commerce and Management, Vol. 25
No. 4, pp. 442-455.
Tanner, J.F. Jr, Ahearne, M., Leigh, T.W., Mason, C.H. and Moncrief, W.C. (2005), “CRM in sales-
intensive organizations: a review and future directions”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales
Management, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 169-180.
Teo, T.S.H. and Liu, J. (2007), “Consumer trust in e-commerce in the United States, Singapore and
China”, Omega, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 22-38.
Van Nierop, E.J.M., Leeflang, P.S.H., Teerling, M.L. and Huizingh, E.K.R. (2011), “The impact of
introducing and using an informational website on offline customer buying behavior”,
International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 155-165.
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y. and Xu, X. (2012), “Consumer acceptance and use of information
technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology”, MIS Quarterly,
Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 157-178.
APJML Verhoef, P.C., Kannan, P.K. and Inman, J.J. (2015), “From multi-channel retailing to omni-channel
retailing: introduction to the special issue on multi-channel retailing”, Journal of Retailing,
Vol. 91 No. 2, pp. 174-181.
Wang, N., Shen, X.L. and Sun, Y. (2013), “Transition of electronic word-of-mouth services from web to
mobile context: a trust transfer perspective”, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 54 No. 3,
pp. 1394-1403.
Wen, C., Prybutok, V.R. and Xu, C. (2011), “An integrated model for customer online repurchase
intention”, Journal of Computer Information Systems, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 14-23.
Wilding, R. (2013), “Multichannel or omnichannel?”, Logistics and Transport Focus, Vol. 15 No. 10, p. 44.
Wolny, J. and Charoensuksai, N. (2014), “Mapping customer journeys in multichannel decision-
making”, Journal of Direct, Data and Digital Marketing Practices, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 317-326.
Yan, R., Wang, J. and Zhou, B. (2010), “Channel integration and profit sharing in the dynamics of
multi-channel firms”, Journal of Retail and Consumer Service, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 430-440.
Yang, S., Gupta, S. and Cao, Y. (2012), “Does context matter? The impact of use context on mobile
internet adoption”, International Journal of Human Computer Interaction, Vol. 28 No. 8,
pp. 530-541.
Yang, S., Lu, Y. and Chau, P.Y. (2013), “Why do consumers adopt online channel? An empirical
investigation of two channel extension mechanisms”, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 54 No. 2,
pp. 858-869.
Yang, S., Wang, Y. and Wei, J. (2014), “Integration and consistency between web and mobile services”,
Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 114 No. 8, pp. 1246-1269.
Yee, D.M. and Braver, T.S. (2018), “Interactions of motivation and cognitive control”, Current Opinion
in Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 19, pp. 83-90.
Zhang, J., Farris, P.W., Irvin, J.W., Kushwaha, T., Steenburgh, T.J. and Weitz, B.A. (2010), “Crafting
integrated multichannel retailing strategies”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 24 No. 2,
pp. 168-180.
Zhang, M., Ren, C., Wang, G.A. and He, Z. (2018), “The impact of channel integration on consumer
responses in omnichannel retailing: the mediating effect of consumer empowerment”, Electronic
Commerce Research and Applications, Vol. 28, pp. 181-193.
Zucker, L.G. (1986), “Production of trust: institutional sources of economic structure, 1840-1920”,
Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 8, pp. 53-111.
Further reading
Bigne, E., Sanz, S., Ruiz, C. and Aldas, J. (2010), “Why some internet users don’t buy air tickets online”,
in Gretzel, U., Law, R. and Fuchs, M. (Eds), Information Communication Technologies in
Tourism, Springer Wiens, New York, NY, pp. 209-221.
Cao, L. and Li, L. (2015), “The impact of cross-channel integration on retailers’ sales growth”, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 91 No. 4, pp. 198-216.
Chen, Y.H., Hsu, I.C. and Lin, C.C. (2010), “Website attributes that increase consumer purchase
intention: a conjoint analysis”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 63 Nos 9–10, pp. 1007-1014.
Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P. and Warshaw, P.R. (1992), “Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use
computers in the workplace”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 22 No. 14, pp. 1111-1132.
Jiunn-Woei, L. and Tzu-Ming, L. (2008), “Effect of consumer characteristics on their acceptance of
online shopping: comparisons among different product types”, Computers in Human Behavior,
Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 48-65.
Lin, H.F. (2011), “An empirical investigation of mobile banking adoption: the effect of innovation
attributes and knowledge-based trust”, International Journal of Information Management,
Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 252-260.
Pauwels, K. and Neslin, S.A. (2015), “Building with bricks and mortar: the revenue impact of opening
physical stores in a multichannel environment”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 91 No. 2, pp. 182-197.
Shimp, T.A. and Kavas, A. (1984), “The theory of reasoned action applied to coupon usage”, Journal of Consumer
Consumer Research, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 795-809. omnichannel
Sorescu, A., Frambach, R.T., Singh, J., Rangaswamy, A. and Bridges, C. (2011), “Innovations in retail adoption
business models”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 87, pp. S3-S16.
behavior
Thompson, E.P., Chaiken, S. and Hazlewood, J.D. (1993), “Need for cognition and desire for control as
moderators of extrinsic reward effects: a person × situation approach to the study of intrinsic
motivation”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 64 No. 6, pp. 987-999.
Trivedi, R.H., Patel, J.D. and Acharya, N. (2018), “Causality analysis of media influence on
environmental attitude, intention and behaviors leading to green purchasing”, Journal of Cleaner
Production, Vol. 196 No. 20, pp. 11-22.
Wu, C.H., Parker, S.K. and De Jong, J.P. (2014), “Need for cognition as an antecedent of individual
innovation behavior”, Journal of Management, Vol. 40 No. 6, pp. 1511-1534.
APJML Appendix 1
Construct Items Definition of construct Related literature
Service integration SVIT1 Integration of omnichannel services to Cummins et al. (2016), Teo and Liu (2007)
(SVIT) SVIT2 customers, such as promotions,
SVIT3 points, discount, payment, shipping,
SVIT4 pickup, customer service, after service,
SVIT5 refund, etc.
Information IFIT1 The degree of integration of platform and Brynjolfsson et al. (2013), Gao and Su
integration (IFIT) information between OCR affiliates (2016), Rigby (2011), Bell et al. (2014),
All related information such as product Beck and Rygl (2015), Yang et al. (2014),
inventory, product launch and arrival Wang et al. (2013)
IFIT2 date, price, pick-up and delivery
IFIT3 information are provided in an integrated
IFIT4 and be interlocked
Perceived effectiveness PEOIM1 PEOIM refers to omnichannel consumer Fang et al. (2014), Gallino and Moreno
of omnichannel perceptions that omnichannel retails and (2014), Gao and Su (2016), Joseph (2015),
institutional mechanisms related vendors safeguarding Sundaram and Taylor (1998)
(PEOIM) mechanisms, such as online credit card
guarantees, escrow services, product
warranties, refunds, payment and
privacy protection exist to protect them
PEOIM2 against potential risks in the
PEOIM3 omnichannel environment
PEOIM4
Information IFCS1 The degree of consistency of product Brynjolfsson et al. (2013), Gao and Su
consistency (IFCS) IFCS2 information. Such as, Product quality, (2016), Rigby (2011), Bell et al. (2014),
IFCS3 composition, color, reputation, consumer Beck and Rygl (2015), Zhang et al. (2010),
IFCS4 evaluation and review information Joseph (2015)
IFCS5
Use intention (UIT) UIT1 Behavioral intention, or more Davis (1989), Fishbein and Ajzen (1975),
UIT2 specifically intention to purchase (UIT) Ajzen (1991), Kim et al. (2008), Pavlou
UIT3 from a certain vendor through the and Fygenson (2006), Ajzen and
UIT4 omnichannel Fishbein (1980)
UIT5
Use behavior (UBH) UBH1 Consumer’s actual behavior or purchase Davis (1989), Fishbein and Ajzen (1975),
decision (UBH) Ajzen (1991), Kim et al. (2008), Pavlou
UBH2 and Fygenson (2006), Ajzen and
UBH3 Fishbein (1980)
Need for cognition (NFC) NFC1 As an internal motivation to encourage Cacioppo and Petty (1982), Cohen et al.
NFC2 information processing behavior, (1955), Priester and Petty (1996)
NFC3 individual differences in the degree of
NFC4 cognitive elaboration that enjoys
NFC5 thinking and cognitive effort
NFC6
NFC7
NFC8
NFC9
NFC10
NFC11
NFC12
NFC13
NFC14
Table AI. Notes: SVIT, Omnichannel service integration; IFIT, omnichannel information integration; IFCS, omnichannel infor-
List of items mation consistency; PEOIM, perceived effectiveness of omnichannel institutional mechanism; UIT, use intention; UBH,
by construct use behavior
Appendix 2 Consumer
omnichannel
adoption
Construct Items Measures behavior
5-point Likert scale: “1” Disagree Strongly and “5” Agree Strongly
Service integration (SVIT) SVIT1 I think that Omnichannel service is integrated because I can freely
choose to pick up or delivery at the desired place after purchasing
the product
SVIT2 With omnichannel service, I think that online and offline services
are integrated because I can buy online and pick up products in
offline stores
SVIT3 I think that service is integrated, because omnichannel service’s
online and offline payment are interlinked
SVIT4 I think that omnichannel services are integrated because the same
services (e.g. mileage usage/credits, coupons, discounts) are
provided in online and offline stores
SVIT5 I think that omnichannel services are integrated because

I can receive the same refund, exchange, and AS in online and
offline stores
Information integration (IFIT) IFIT1 I think that omnichannel service’s online and offline store inventory
information is integrated
IFIT2 I think that omnichannel service’s online and offline affiliate
customer information is integrated
IFIT3 I think that omnichannel service’s online and offline logistic and
delivery information are integrated
IFIT4 I think that omnichannel service’s online and offline product price
information is integrated
Perceived effectiveness of PEOIM1 When using omnichannel I am confident that there are the
omnichannel institutional institutional mechanisms in place to protect me against any
mechanisms (PEOIM) potential risks of online and offline shopping (e.g. leaking of
personal information, credit card fraud, goods not received, waste
of time due to out of stock, etc.)
PEOIM2 I have confidence in omnichannel service to protect me against any
potential risks (e.g. leaking of personal information, credit card
fraud, goods not received, waste of time due to out of stock, etc.) of
online, offline shopping if something goes wrong with my purchase
PEOIM3 I think omnichannel has the working principle and mechanisms to
protect me from the potential risk of online and offline shopping
PEOIM4 I am convinced that omnichannel is more secure than online and
offline shopping because I am confident that omnichannel is the
solution if anything goes wrong
Information consistency IFCS1 In using omnichannel service, I can get consistent information of
(IFCS) goods (constituent item, materials) either from online or offline
IFCS2 With omnichannel service, I think that I can get consistent
information about the reputation of the products, whether online
or offline
IFCS3 With omnichannel service, I think that information of products in
online or offline is the same quality as the information of products
that are provided in offline or online stores
IFCS4 In the omnichannel service, there is no difference between the
online information of seller’s evaluation and of the offline
seller’s evaluation
IFCS5 Omnichannel service provides consistent information both in online
and offline
Table AII.
(continued ) Measures
APJML Construct Items Measures
Use intention (UIT) UIT1 I will intent to recommend omnichannel service to others
UIT2 I intent to purchase products through omnichannel service in the
future
UIT3 I will make purchases through omnichannel service whenever
possible
UIT4 I will use the omnichannel service in the future
UIT5 I intend to use omnichannel services in purchasing
Use behavior (UBH) UBH1 I usually use omnichannel service
UBH2 I often use omnichannel services
UBH3 I use omnichannel service when shopping
Not always: 0 point, Generally not: 1 point, Average: 2 points, Usually so: 3 points, Always: 4 points
Reverse (R): Not always: 4 points, Generally not: 3 points, Average: 2 points, Usually so: 1 point, Always: 0
points
Need for cognition (NFC) NFC1 I like to discuss
NFC2 I do not usually think about the problems that others think are
tricky (R)
NFC3 I solve complex problems well
NFC4 When I come into contact with an unfamiliar task, I think it is more
annoying than I think I should solve (R)
NFC5 I am excited to learn new solutions to some problems
NFC6 I think I want to analyze it for some kind of complex problem
NFC7 I want to know more about what I do not know well
NFC8 I try to solve difficult and time-consuming problems as far as
possible
NFC9 I am more active in what I need to think
NFC10 I tend to accept whatever it is, rather than try to understand why it
is so (R)
NFC11 I try to avoid situations that I have to think deeply (R)
NFC12 I like to challenge my thinking skills
NFC13 I hear that I am a logical from others
NFC14 I am more enjoyable while solving difficult problems than simple
Table AII. problems
Appendix 3 Consumer
omnichannel
adoption
Collinearity statistics (VIF)
H M L behavior
IFCS1 1.711 1.667 1.659
IFCS2 1.683 2.262 1.522
IFCS5 1.333 1.544 1.292
IFIT1 1.992 1.649 1.308
IFIT2 1.894 1.928 1.621
IFIT4 1.768 1.486 1.447
PEOIM1 2.960 1.909 1.525
PEOIM2 3.469 2.065 1.543
PEOIM3 1.670 1.551 1.412
PEOIM4 1.556 1.523 1.358
SVIT1 1.731 1.895 1.826
SVIT2 2.424 2.360 1.751
SVIT5 3.238 1.949 1.560

UBH1 3.297 2.770 4.557
UBH2 2.293 3.397 4.653
UBH3 3.343 2.274 2.992
UIT2 4.750 2.299 1.840
UIT4 3.294 2.826 2.072 Table AIII.
UIT6 2.463 2.594 2.393 Collinearity statistics
Appendix 4
R2 Q2 f2
Measures H M L H M L H M L
IFCS UIT UIT UIT

0.135 0.120 0.001
IFIT UIT UIT UIT
0.005 0.003 0.024
PEOIM UIT UIT UIT
0.072 0.039 0.052
SVIT UIT UIT UIT
0.398 0.058 0.000
UBH 0.076 0.267 0.197 0.044 0.199 0.155 Table AIV.
UIT 0.636 0.280 0.128 0.454 0.189 0.061 UBH UBH UBH Path model’s
0.082 0.365 0.245 predictive accuracy
Corresponding author
Renee Boyoung Kim can be contacted at: kimrby@gmail.com
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics: Article Information

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

Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics: Article Information

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics

The effects of integrated information & service, institutional mechanism and

Downloaded on: 15 May 2019, At: 04:50 (PT)

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

extrinsically motivated to engage in a certain behavior to receive a reward or benefit.

2.2 Determinants of consumers’ OC adoption

3. Research model and hypothesis development

3.1 Service integration

3.2 IFIT and consistency

Furthermore, retailers need to provide consistent and integrated information to consumers to

Government official 90 39.6

3.3 Perceived effectiveness of omnichannel institutional mechanisms (PEOIM)

3.4 Use intention and use behavior

3.5 Need for cognition

Cronbach’s α Composite reliability Average variance extracted (AVE)

IFCS 0.814 0.827 0.753

IFIT2 0.276 0.159 0.153 −0.007 0.728 0.102

Pearson correlation IFIT SVIT PEOIM IFCS UIT UBH

IFIT 1 0.536** 0.319** 0.316** 0.292** 0.047

Emerging literature on OC consumer behavior identified technological, behavioral and

6.2 Implications for practice

EXP Gender BISD BOPIS BMAIS

NFC Low NFC Medium NFC High

BOPIS Agree BISD Disagree

BOPIS Neutral BISD Neutral

Information Review, Vol. 32 No. 5, pp. 648-667.

technology”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 319-340.

Construct Items Definition of construct Related literature

SVIT5 I think that omnichannel services are integrated because

SVIT5 3.238 1.949 1.560

IFCS UIT UIT UIT

You might also like

IFIT 1 0.536 0.319 0.316 0.292 0.047