INFORMATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT

2020, VOL. 37, NO. 1, 16–32

https://doi.org/10.1080/10580530.2020.1696530

An Integrative Framework on Mobile Banking Success

Mousa Albashrawia and Luvai Motiwallab
a
KFUPM Business School, King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia; bManning School of Business, University of
Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, Massachusetts, USA

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
This paper explores mobile banking (MB) acceptance and use through subjective measures (self- Mobile banking; IS success;
reported data) and objective measures (computer-recorded log data) with an integrative beha- UTAUT; objective and
vioral framework that combines UTAUT and IS Success models. The purpose of this framework is subjective system use
to determine the influence of both system-oriented and non-system-oriented factors on user measures
behavior with MB use. SEM regression results are contrasted with both subjective and objective
system use. Study’s contributions are communicated to the theory and practice.

Introduction withdrawals, loan applications or getting financial advice

from their bankers, customers are conducting majority of
The banking and financial industry has conventionally
these transactions remotely with online banking. Banks are
been very conservative in their interactions with custo-
expecting an increase in acceptance and use of MB by their
mers, limiting the use of systems through nearby bank
customers due to many reasons, some of which could be
branches or ATMs. With the advances in the Internet and
easy access, convenience, social influence, flexibility, and
web systems in 1990s, banks started providing remote
others. New MB system features such as mobile deposits,
access to customer account information and limited
payments, loan applications, and investment advice
transactions through online banking systems. Most of
through robo-advisors have increased the popularity of
these interactions were limited to transfers, bill payments,
these systems in last few years (WSJ, 2015). MB as self-
and other basic transactions until recently. The advent of
service technology, is a big factor in cutting labor and
smartphones is transforming the banking industry with
operational costs, enhancing customer satisfaction, and
rapid innovations in the financial technology (FinTech)
improving productivity and profitability for banks
with new banking information systems (IS) for transac-
(Alalwan, Dwivedi, & Williams, 2016). The ease and con-
tions and communication (Economist, 2015). “People will
venience of MB systems with anywhere and anytime access
use their smartphones, increasingly stacked with artificial
to numerous banking services from their mobile device
intelligence and behavior monitoring services, in place of
have increased their acceptance and use with more custo-
the various [conventional] financial services products we’ve
mers using online services than going to a bank branch or
come to expect from banks. In the next 10 years, technology
ATM (Demos, 2016). Due to recent competition from the
is going to have more impact on the banking industry than
FinTech startups companies, banks also require a deeper
we’ve seen for the last 100 years” (Casey, 2015).
understanding of acceptance and use of MB systems to
Understanding the mobile systems’ acceptance and use
retain and attract customers to their services. Yet, banks
is this new era of banking is, therefore, an important issue
have very little insights on why customers are using their
for both research and practice.
MB services and will they continue using their services in
Mobile commerce and their applications in banking;
long-run (Wannemacher et al., 2015). In this study, we are
mobile banking (MB), have leveraged the customer rela-
applying established IS acceptance and use theoretical
tionship, enabled direct marketing, and promoted banking
models to systematically examine the factors influencing
activities (Frolick & Chen, 2004). As well, this type of the
MB success (satisfaction and use) with objective and sub-
digital transformation of banks give customers
jective measurement approaches.
a convenient usage experience for banking services.
Prior research on IS acceptance and use has been criti-
Instead of visiting bank branches or ATMs for deposits,
cized for measuring system use mostly with subjective

CONTACT Mousa Albashrawi bishrama@kfupm.edu.sa KFUPM Business School, King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi
Arabia
Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/uism.
© 2019 Taylor & Francis

measures, such as self-reported survey studies (Baptista &
Oliveira, 2015; Chatterjee, Chakraborty, Sarker, Sarker, &
Lau, 2009). A big concern associated with the self-reported
survey studies, besides validity threat, is the potential bias
generated from overestimating or underestimating the sys-
tem usage (Collopy, 1996), thereby leading to wrong con-
clusions (de Reuver & Bouwman, 2015) or intention-
behavior gap in technology use measures (Bhattacherjee
& Sanford, 2009). One way to reduce this gap is by combin-
ing the subjective measures that capture system use percep-
tions (by asking questions), with objective measures that
capture actual system use (analysis of user log files).
Objective approaches capture the rich measures of the
system usage, which includes use intensity and appropri-
ateness, in addition to usage frequency and duration
(Delone & McLean, 2003; Straub, Limayem, & Karahanna-
Evaristo, 1995). They do not require the users to recall their
use of the system and do not introduce any biases. Our
study has collected data on MB system use from the log data
files and from a survey administered to the same MB users
of a mid-sized US bank.
We have developed an integrated framework from
two established IS adoption theoretical models that
have been validated with a variety of systems, including
mobile systems in the last decade. The reason for com-
bining the IS success with UTAUT is that both models
measure the influence on MB success from a different
perspective due to their underlying theoretical focus
(explained further in the next section). IS success
model helps us understand whether end-users are influ-
enced by the qualities of the MB’s artifact, namely, their
system, information and service qualities, which are
used to predict user satisfaction and system use
(Delone & McLean, 2003). These could be considered
as the object-based influences on MB success. UTAUT,
on the other hand, helps us understand whether end-
users are influenced by the adoption environment,
namely, their behavior on the expected performance
with MB system, community influences, and conveni-
ence (facilitating resources) provided by banks that
influences their system use (Venkatesh, Morris, Davis,
& Davis, 2003). These could be considered as behavior-
based influences on MB success. Therefore, combining
the two models in one study helps understand the
influence of both object-based and behavior-based fac-
tors on MB system success allowing future designs to
calibrate between system and user environments to
increase the chances of system success.
The goal of this study is to shed light on the users’
acceptance and use in the MB system context with two
popular adoption models: IS success and UTUAT, using
two data sources of system use: objective and subjective.
No prior study in mobile systems context has analyzed
INFORMATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT 17
system use data from two alternate sources on the same
users. The underlying assumptions of both models, IS
success and UTAUT, as explained earlier raises interest-
ing research questions: 1) Does the integrative framework
provide a better understanding of MB success? 2) Does
objective system use differ from subjective system use? 3)
Which factors, from each model, are more influential on
MB system satisfaction and use?
This study makes three key contributions. First, to our
best of knowledge, this is the only study that combines IS
success with UTAUT in MB context with an empirical
validation from two alternate data sources. The validation
of these two-established IS acceptance models in one study
provides an opportunity for a comprehensive understand-
ing of MB success factors and their underlying items on
system satisfaction and use. As explained earlier, the com-
bination of these two models helps us understand the
system and user-behavior-oriented influences on the sys-
tem success. Second, the measurement of MB system use
with objective and subjective measures, with the same user
sample, helps us determine whether one is a better method
than another for the data collection on system use.
Objective measures of system usage have faded in the IS
adoption and use, especially since 2011 and hardly ever
used in the context of mobile innovation usage
(Walldén, Mäkinen, & Raisamo, 2015). Third contribution
is the extension of traditional regression techniques with
a deeper analysis of the importance and performance
dimensions of the acceptance factors on MB success. The
importance performance map analysis or IPMA (Ringle &
Sarstedt, 2016) helps highlight the importance of individual
items in the factors based on their high or low performance
(i.e. low-performing factors indicate that they have more
room for improvement) on influencing the dependent
variables. By providing two layers of analysis (latent vari-
able and manifest variable), IPMA can help bank practi-
tioners in prioritizing their focus on improving the most-
needed-for-attention factors and their underlying items.
In sum, our study contributes to the IS adoption theory
and practice by providing an extensive framework that
incorporates both system-oriented and behavior-oriented
factors affecting MB success. The rest of the paper reviews
the previous works in UTAUT, IS success model, objective
versus subjective measures of system usage, and develops
our research model and hypotheses, discusses our findings
and implications for theory and practice and finally, con-
cludes with our study’s limitations and future directions.
Theoretical background
MB, like mobile payment, is distinctively identified not to
only collect and store information of high sensitivity but
also to process financial-confidential information on the
18 M. ALBASHRAWI AND L. MOTIWALLA
go, which makes the acceptance of this technology in need
for more deliberate and thorough measures that can holi-
stically capture user satisfaction. Several frameworks have
been developed for mobile user interface and experience
(Hoehle & Venkatesh, 2015; Khalid, Shihab, Nagappan, &
Hassan, 2015; Mendiola, Kalnicki, & Lindenauer, 2015;
Tian, Nagappan, Lo, & Hassan, 2015). Their focus is on
mobile app success factors as measured through the apps’
user interface (UI), app complexity, ease of use, app size,
app promotions, and several other technical and systems
design guidelines and features. Also, the context of these
studies is either in social media, m-health or gaming. Our
study focus is more on the features and functionality of MB
services provided through the mobile apps: how they are
used by bank customers and what factors impact their
popularity through satisfaction and continued usage inten-
sion. Also, we wanted to determine the factor influences on
objective and subjective use measures.
We have developed an integrative framework by
expanding theoretical boundaries of IS acceptance models
to cover the two sides of the coin, namely to understand the
systems and behavioral factors of MB usage. This motivates
us to select two IS adoption models that complement each
other. We argue that IS success and UTAUT implicate
different underlying theory and hence their integration
can increase the understanding of user satisfaction and
use toward MB. UTAUT reflects on user’s intension to
use through social influence and facilitating conditions,
respectively. While IS success reflects on user’s satisfaction
and actual use through the attractiveness, personalization,
accuracy and other features of the system with service, and
information quality, respectively. Two prior studies in IS
context that combined these two models. The first study
provides a conceptual model IS success’s factors are ante-
cedents of UTAUT’s factors for predicting the adoption of
government e-services (Molnar, Weerakkody, El-
Haddadeh, Lee, & Irani, 2013). Similarly, the second
study theoretically suggests to combine perceived useful-
ness from the technology acceptance model (TAM), and
performance expectancy, effort expectancy, and social
influence from UTAUT to IS success model for predicting
behavioral intention (Mardiana, Tjakraatmadja, &
Aprianingsih, 2015). Both studies have not conducted an
empirical analysis to validate the integrated models thus,
limiting their contributions to the IS adoption theory.
IS success model
Based on their review for IS research between 1970s and
1980s, DeLone and McLean (1992) proposed a taxonomy
of the IS success model that reveals six interrelated factors:
system quality, information quality, system use, satisfac-
tion, individual impact, and organizational impact. These
factors have guided IS research in evaluating the accep-
tance of IS across various contexts over two decades.
Delone and McLean (2003) reassessed the effectiveness
of IS success model after 10 years and modified it to align
with emerging IS practices, especially electronic com-
merce. The updates with the refined model included; 1)
the integration of service quality to highlight the impor-
tance of customer service, 2) the separation of use into
actual use and behavioral intention, and 3) the combina-
tion of individual impact and organizational into net
benefits to form a multi-level measure. The IS success
model has been widely used and applied in various con-
texts of IS research. For example, IS success was adapted
to study consumer’s intention of online shopping (Chen
& Cheng, 2009), e-government success (Teo, Srivastava, &
Jiang, 2009), mobile work of healthcare (Chatterjee et al.,
2009), mobile banking (Chung & Jae Kwon, 2009; Lee &
Chung, 2009), and mobile payment services (Zhou, 2013).
It is important to note that the aforementioned studies
that used the IS success model had not provided
a pronounced explanatory power, indicating there could
be other relevant IS factors to be included for extending
its theoretical boundaries and increasing its explanatory
power. Secondly, the primary goal of DeLone and
McLean’s model is to evaluate IS success (satisfaction
and system use) by focusing on the influence of system
characteristics on user satisfaction and use. System char-
acteristics include reliability, flexibility, attractiveness, per-
sonalization, and accuracy, which are incorporated in the
three quality pillars of the IS success model (system,
service, and information). Focusing only on the system
side of the coin does provide a complete explanation on
why users accept and use systems.
UTAUT model
Venkatesh et al. (2003) developed UTAUT model by
synthesizing determinants of system acceptance from
eight prominent theoretical perspectives, namely, theory
of reasoned action (TRA), TAM, motivational model, the-
ory of planned behavior (TPB), a model combining the
technology acceptance model and theory of planned beha-
vior, a model of PC utilization (MPCU), innovation diffu-
sion theory (IDT), and social cognitive theory (SCT). This
synthesis has established the UTAUT model with its four
pillars; performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social
influence, and facilitating conditions which predict user’s
behavioral intention and use behavior. UTAUT has been
applied to a non-mobile system context, like studying
acceptance of Facebook among college students
(Lallmahomed, Rahim, Ibrahim, & Rahman, 2013), and
to a mobile system context, like studying acceptance of
mobile banking (Baptista & Oliveira, 2015; Zhou, Lu, &

Wang, 2010). UTAUT, like DeLone and McLean’s model,
focuses to measure IS success through system use but with
employing non-system-related factors. In particular,
UTAUT determines system acceptance by examining
user convenience, community or social impact, and
accompanying resources through performance expectancy,
social influence, and facilitating conditions, respectively.
The nature of such factors only reflects the behavioral
side of the coin and therefore, does not provide an exten-
sive view for predicting IS success, limiting it to advance
the understating of MB usage.
Framework of IS success and UTAUT
Both IS success and UTAUT have been widely used
independently and validated across different contexts
including measuring IS success of mobile technologies
(Baptista & Oliveira, 2015; Chatterjee et al., 2009; Lee &
Chung, 2009). Besides the above studies, we have found
the standalone model of IS success in MB research needs
a further theoretical extension to improve its analytical
power. Hence, it would be necessary to consider
a deliberate approach for augmenting such power.
Secondly, motivated by Venkatesh, Thong, & Xu’s study
(2012) that emphasizes the importance of integrating
UTAUT with other models, particularly in consumer
voluntary or hedonic use context, to extend its theoretical
boundaries and gain a greater cognitive understanding of
system use behavior. We believe that UTAUT can be
extended by combining it with IS success model in the
MB context. The IS success model covers technical,
semantic and service quality within the system (Delone
& McLean, 2003); three key factors predicting MB suc-
cess. Such factors are more about what the system reflects,
for example, providing an attractive interface, persona-
lized service, and accurate information. In contrast, the
UTAUT model covers the instrumental beliefs of user
behavioral characteristics, for example, to what extent
MB decreases time for banking transactions (efficiency),
increases access to banking services from anywhere and
anytime (convenience), how bank customers are influ-
enced by their community and social circles, and encour-
aged to use MB app by the banks’ supporting resources,
like help desk, low transaction fees, etc. Collectively, the
UTAUT’s factors are also important for predicting MB
system success (Venkatesh et al., 2003). In short, consid-
ering the underlying perspectives of both models, it is
possible to state that they are complementary and provide
a more robust understanding of satisfaction and use, and
a deeper understanding for predicting MB system success.
However, it has been noted that the UTAUT factor,
effort expectancy significantly overlaps with system qual-
ity in capturing the easiness part of the system. Because
INFORMATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT 19
system quality is more rich measure that captures system
responsiveness and attractiveness, besides the easiness,
than effort expectancy; the latter was excluded. While
user satisfaction, as a reliable dependent variable and
widely recognized in system usage environment (Brown,
Venkatesh, Kuruzovich, & Massey, 2008), is used to
replace behavioral intention of UTAUT because the
study’s focal point is to understand MB success, which
can be better achieved through satisfaction because; 1)
Van Schaik and Ling (2008) emphasize that hedonic value
can be associated with the use of technology. As an
emerging technology, MB may enable users to check
their points collected from the utilization of debit/credit
card and browse the corresponding rewards to be
redeemed. Such a hedonic aspect of MB can be properly
captured through satisfaction. 2) Chan et al. (2010) pro-
pose that satisfaction is more appropriate dependent vari-
able when being compared to behavioral intention and
hence they integrate it to UTAUT for examining e-gov-
ernment usage, and 3) Brown et al. (2008) suggest that
satisfaction is to be a better predictor of use in e-banking
context. Although the two previous studies have a non-
voluntary use setting, Venkatesh et al. (2003) highlight
that the effect on usage behavior does not change across
voluntary and non-voluntary use settings. Thus, we have
used satisfaction as a primary mediating variable for MB
system use with both IS success and UTAUT.
MB system usage and objective system usage
MB system usage, a proxy for IS success, is defined as to
what extent system capabilities of MB are utilized by bank
customers (Petter, DeLone, & McLean, 2013). IS scholars
have seldom studied MB system use nevertheless we
found few examples from literature. Zhou (2013) devel-
oped a model with a Chinese sample to explore the impact
of flow on MB system use. Yu (2012) extended UTAUT
by credibility, financial cost, and self-efficacy with includ-
ing gender and age as moderators to examine the use of
MB system in Taiwan. Baptista and Oliveira (2015)
expanded UTAUT2 with cultural moderators of power
distance, individualism/collectivism, long/short term,
uncertainty avoidance, and masculinity/femininity to
investigate MB system use in Mozambique. With the
limited number of research studies on MB system use
and most of them using a self-reported survey on the
MB system use, or subjective measures, the results from
these studies have limited validation of the two models.
On the other hand, a number of studies have explored
objective system usage across different IT innovations
through measuring system usage via computer-recorded
data in the past 19 years and emphasized the superiority of
computer-recorded data (log data) over self-reported data
20 M. ALBASHRAWI AND L. MOTIWALLA
for measuring system usage. Straub et al. (1995) measured
the usage of a voice mail system objectively through com-
puter-recorded data and subjectively through self-reported
data using TAM with the purpose of addressing conceptual
and methodological issues associated with system usage
measurement. Szajna (1996), similar to Straub et al.
(1995), highlighted the issues between self-reported and
computer-recorded data through measuring the usage of
an electronic mail system. The period ranging from 2000 to
2003 was considered as a golden era for objective system
measurement because of the ample published studies in
this domain (Walldén et al., 2015). For example, Horton,
Buck, Waterson, and Clegg (2001) investigated the accep-
tance of intranet system by employing a questionnaire and
capturing system log data. Venkatesh et al. (2003) com-
pared a number of IT acceptance models to develop
UTAUT through subjective and objective measurement
of system usage. Stoel and Hye Lee (2003) utilized TAM
to measure the learning system (WebCT) usage objectively
via the number of pages visited in WebCT and subjectively
via the duration and frequency of use.
Although the period between 2004 and 2011 has been
characterized by a low publishing rate of objective system
measurement papers, the focus was on web-based sys-
tems. For example, Klein (2007) adapted TRA to measure
the objective usage of web-based patient-physician com-
munication application via capturing the number of
Figure 1. Conceptual framework.
e-mails sent. The focus, however, has shifted to be more
on e-learning systems since 2011 till present (Walldén
et al., 2015). Ma and Yuen (2011) applied UTAUT to
predict the usage of e-learning system in a university
setting by the help of system log. Joo, Lim, and Lim
(2014) used the access frequency to objectively measure
the usage of a mobile learning system among students
from South-Korean online university. These studies show
that objective measures were more superior and valid in
capturing system usage than subjective measures
(Walldén et al., 2015). These studies indicate that objec-
tive use should be more accurate that subjective MB use,
in a mobile context. We, therefore, theorize that both
systems and behavioral factors will have a more accurate
influence on objective use than subjective use measures.
Research model and hypothesis development
The two acceptance models of IS success and UTAUT
were adapted to help in measuring MB system usage
subjectively and objectively via survey and computer-
recorded data, respectively. With the capability of IS
success model to determine satisfaction and usage of IT
innovations (Delone & McLean, 2003) as well as with
UTAUT to predict system usage (Venkatesh et al.,
2003), we have employed both models to measure MB
system use subjectively and objectively. According to

our above argument of providing a comprehensive the-
oretical perspective in MB, IS success (factors internal
to the system) and UTAUT (factors external to the
system) are considered to be complementary and
accordingly integrated. Figure 1 below visualizes our
integrative framework.
MB system quality (TQ)
System quality refers to the extent MB systems are visually
appealing and easy to use and navigate (Zhou, 2013).
System quality is manifested in the easy access to different
and trustworthy services. System reliability and flexible
features with the attractive interface are crucial to promot-
ing MB services and thus could affect customers’ satisfac-
tion level. It is evident that improving the overall system
performance besides usability and integration, which
reflects the core features of system quality, can lead to
have satisfied customers (Teo et al., 2008). In other
words, better system quality yields higher user satisfaction.
Past research empirically validates this relationship across
different IT applications, in mobile payment (Zhou, 2013),
electronic service (Xu, Benbasat, & Cenfetelli, 2013), and
e-government system (Teo et al., 2008). MB shares
a number of similarities with the above-mentioned infor-
mation systems, therefore we suggest that:
H1: MB system quality will influence positively user
satisfaction.
MB service quality (SQ)
Service quality refers to what extent MB provides reliable,
timely, responsive, and personalized services (Zhou, 2013).
Service quality has not only been viewed as a critical ele-
ment of traditional customer service channels like face-to-
face interaction, but also its role can be extended to online
channels like MB. Over the last decade, the dimensions of
system availability, reliability, fulfillment, design, privacy,
and security have emerged to shape service quality
(Shareef, Dwivedi, Stamati, & Williams, 2014). Most MB
innovations are associated with such dimensions and thus
influencing user satisfaction positively. Prior IS research
confirms that high service quality can predict user satisfac-
tion on the empirical plane (Cenfetelli, Benbasat, & Al-
Natour, 2008; Xu et al., 2013). This relationship is also
supported in the context of mobile technology (Zhou,
2013). Therefore, we suggest that:
H2: MB service quality will influence positively user
satisfaction.
INFORMATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT 21
MB information quality (IQ)
Information quality refers to what extent MB provides
sufficient, relevant, accurate, and timely information
(Zhou, 2013). As customers may struggle to find their
banking information because of the small screen size,
how information is organized and presented in MB can
influence their level of satisfaction. Also, when custo-
mers perceive that MB services meet their needs by
providing them with up-to-date, precise, and above all
pertinent information, they would tend to be satisfied.
An empirical support has been found to relate informa-
tion quality and user satisfaction in a context of elec-
tronic service (Xu et al., 2013). Since MB is a type of
electronic service, we suggest that:
H3: MB information quality will influence positively
user satisfaction.
Performance expectancy (PE)
Performance expectancy is defined by Venkatesh et al.
(2003, p. 447) as “the degree to which an individual
believes that using the system will help him or her to
attain gains in job performance”. Simply put, perfor-
mance expectancy indicates maximizing efficiency and
productivity. Hence, customers who feel that MB app
can offer efficient, effective, and quick-to-access services
will tend to be pleased toward using it. Since performance
expectancy had been developed from TAM’s perceived
usefulness (Venkatesh et al., 2003), it is considered as
a key element to user satisfaction (Chan et al., 2010).
Several studies suggested that performance expectancy is
related to positive attitude and satisfaction, for example,
in mobile internet services (Thong, Hong, & Tam, 2006)
and in banking information system (Brown et al., 2008).
Therefore, we suggest that:
H4: Performance expectancy will positively influence
user satisfaction for using MB.
Social influence (SI)
Social influence refers to what extent a person feels that
a MB technology should be used by his/her social net-
work (Miltgen, Popovič, & Oliveira, 2013). People nor-
mally share their positive and negative experience of
using technological innovations with others. This is
more manifested in the younger generation (Miltgen
et al., 2013). Individuals may show levels of commit-
ment and satisfaction toward MB when it is being
accepted and recommended by their social network,
22 M. ALBASHRAWI AND L. MOTIWALLA
which includes family members, friends, and cowor-
kers. Chan et al. (2010) suggested that a positive atti-
tude is affected by the influence of the social circle.
Since satisfaction is basically a positive attitude being
formed over a course of time of dealing with MB
services (Kim, Oh, Shin, & Chae, 2009), we suggest
that:
H5: Social influence will positively influence user satis-
faction for using MB.
Facilitating conditions (FC)
Facilitating conditions show to what extent a person
perceives that the use of MB system is supported with
organizational and technical infrastructure (Miltgen
et al., 2013). Facilitating conditions for technological
innovations, which include but not limited to help-desk
support, peer support, and sufficient knowledge, can
provide a strong foundation for both of positive feeling
and system usage. For example, when individuals are
armed with the necessary resources for using MB and
provided with a responsive assistance team, they may
feel MB is highly reliable and thus would be more
satisfied toward using it. A causal link between facil-
itating conditions and satisfaction is empirically vali-
dated in prior research in the contexts of e-government
services (Chan et al., 2010) and mobile banking
(Baptista & Oliveira, 2015), thus, we suggest that:
H6: Facilitating conditions will positively influence user
satisfaction for using MB.
Satisfaction (SAT) and system use (SU)
Satisfaction reflects the affective reaction that indivi-
duals have when interacting with MB services
(Cenfetelli et al., 2008). Satisfaction has been widely
accepted as a key IS metric for predicting both beha-
vioral intention and system use (Delone & McLean,
2003). When banks keep the satisfaction level up
among MB users, this may help to sustain the level of
MB usage. Additionally, it is most likely that indivi-
duals who have an enjoyable and pleasant experience
with MB, they will develop a positive attitude, motivat-
ing them to involve in more system use of MB. In the
same vein, users who feel they are served well often
show a greater level of satisfaction toward MB, which in
turn encourage them to keep up their engagement to
the system. According to Delone and McLean (2003),
satisfaction is an important predictor of system usage.
Furthermore, the positive relationship between
satisfaction and system use has empirical support in
the e-learning system (Mohammadi, 2015), which over-
laps with MB system. Since the subjective system usage
mirrors the objective system usage, we assume that the
influence of satisfaction will be the same on both.
Therefore, we propose that:
H7: User satisfaction will influence positively MB
usage.
Research method
To test our research model above, we have analyzed
data on MB use collected with a field survey and com-
puter-recorded data extracted from the bank log files.
The survey was conducted by the bank with all online
users, our target population. The questionnaire was
developed by using well-established measures from
literature.
Measurement
All factors items were adapted from previous research
to ensure face validity. The items were measured via
a seven-point Likert-scale with 7 “Strongly agree” and 1
“Strongly disagree”. Quality factors (system, informa-
tion, and service) and satisfaction were adapted from
Zhou (2013). UTAUT factors of performance expec-
tancy, social influence, and facilitating conditions were
adapted from Chan et al. (2010). Subjective and objec-
tive MB usage was adapted from Straub et al. (1995).
Subjective MB usage reflects customers’ system use
derived from the survey while objective MB use reflects
customers’ system usage derived from MB system log
data over an eight-month period (Table 1). The system
log file contained a detailed MB use data on 51 attri-
butes such as user identifier number, name, date of first
registration and others. We used seven attributes to
measure objective MB use, including: 1) number of
general activities, like balance check, 2) number of
transfers, 3) number of bill payment, 4) number of
deposits, 5) total amount of deposits, 6) total amount
of bill payments, and 7) total amount of money trans-
fer. The same attributes were added to the online ques-
tionnaire in order to measure subjective MB use. The
survey responses regarding MB system use were
matched to each MB user in the system log file by
e-mail accounts. This mechanism had enabled to con-
duct a valid comparison between subjective and objec-
tive measures of MB system usage. For consistency
through the analysis, values of system use from the
log data were first averaged, then rescaled with min-
 INFORMATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT 23

max normalization (Raschka, 2014), and after that, Table 1. Construct operationalization.
transformed into seven-point Likert-scale using the Item
Construct Code Lead Questions and Item Scales Citation
techniques suggested by Aiken (1987) to form objective
System TQ1 Q1. MB quickly loads all the text and Zhou
MB use. The online questionnaire was pilot tested with Quality TQ2 graphics. (2013)
10 MB users, namely bank employees, and preliminary (TQ) TQ3 Q2. MB is easy to use.
TQ4 Q3. MB is easy to navigate.
evidence had been found for scales’ validity and Q4. MB is visually attractive.
reliability. Service SQ1 Q9. MB provides me real-time services. Zhou
Quality SQ2 Q10. MB provides me quick response- (2013)
(SQ) SQ3 time services.
SQ4 Q11. MB provides me professional
Data collection and participants’ profile services.
Q12. MB provides me personalized
Participants were recruited from a US mid-sized bank, services.
headquartered in the northeastern region. The reason Information IQ1 Q5. MB provides me with information Zhou
Quality (IQ) IQ2 relevant to my needs. (2013)
for selecting this bank was convenience and bank’s IQ3 Q6. MB provides me with sufficient
willingness to collect and provide us the data. Besides, IQ4 information.
Q7. MB provides me with accurate
this bank is believed to represent a typical mid-sized US information.
bank as demonstrated from the user demographics Q8. MB provides me with up-to-date
information.
(Table 1). The targeted sample was the customers who Satisfaction SAT1 Q13. I feel satisfied with using MB. Zhou
are currently using online banking and were aware of (SAT) SAT2 Q14. I feel happy with using MB. (2013)
SAT3 Q15. I feel pleased with using MB.
MB. An online questionnaire was administrated by the Performance PE1 Q22. Using MB enables me to access Chan
bank through sending an invitation e-mail to their Expectancy PE2 bank services more quickly et al.
(PE) PE3 Q23. Using MB makes it easier to (2010)
customers to participate in the study. The bank, also, access bank services.
offered an incentive for its customers for completing Q24. Using MB enhances my
the survey, which helped to obtain a response rate of effectiveness in accessing bank
services.
16%. The subjective and objective of MB system usage Social SI1 Q28. People who influence my Chan
were collected via the online survey and from the Influence SI2 behavior think that I should use MB to et al.
(SI) SI3 access bank services. (2010)
banks’ log data files, respectively. The log data, from Q29. People who are important to me
the bank’s mobile billing analytics and reporting file, think that I should use MB to access
bank services.
was for a period of 8 months and shared with us with- Q30. People who are in my social
out any personal identifiers to protect customers’ priv- circle think that I should use MB to
access bank services.
acy. Again, seven of the 51 attributes related to MB Facilitating FC1 Q31. I have the resources necessary to Chan
usage were extracted from this file to help us under- Conditions FC2 use MB to access bank services. et al.
(FC) FC3 Q32. I have the knowledge necessary (2010)
stand the usage behaviors of MB users. To be consistent to use MB to access bank services.
with the survey, those attributes capturing MB system Q33. I have a specific person (or
use were collected, aggregated, averaged to monthly group) available for assistance with
difficulties using MB to access bank
usage, and scaled to a 1–7 Likert measure during the services.
period of collecting responses from the survey. The Subjective SSU Q34. Perception of system usage Straub
System Use frequency for transfer, bill payment, et al.
bank matched the customers from system log use with (SSU) deposit, and other MB activities. (1995)
the survey responses and provided us the combined Objective OSU Q35. Actual system usage frequency Straub
System Use for transfer, bill payment, deposit, and et al.
data with system generated (anonymized) user IDs. (OSU) other MB activities. (1995)
We had signed a non-disclosure agreement with the
bank which was approved by our university IRB office.
Our sample consisted of 1,165 users, of which 760 records between the survey and the log data for a few
are MB users while the remaining 355 are non-users. cases. As per Table 2, it is possible to state that gender
From the 760 MB users, we ended up with 472 valid is quite equally distributed between males and females,
respondents due to the huge number of missing values and age of the participants was generally skewed
and unmatched records between survey and log files. toward the senior population as customers with the
These matching errors occur because some MB users age of 46 and above represent about 60% of the sample.
that were in the system log stopped using MB after Similarly, in education and work, the majority of the
completing the survey. When aggregating the data for respondents were literate and employed with a full-time
8 months, we did not find those users in the aggregated job. Since the sample showed fairly an equal number of
data of 8 months and hence, they were removed from males and females as well as most of them are greater
our sample. This is the main cause to have unmatched than the 40s, we could say, with the help of industry
24 M. ALBASHRAWI AND L. MOTIWALLA

Table 2. Demographic profile for participants. Table 3. Descriptive statistics and factor loadings.
Variable Frequency Percentage Factors Items Mean S.D. Factor loadings
Gender TQ TQ1 5.797 1.042 0.732
Male 224 47.46 TQ2 5.981 1.054 0.909
Female 248 52.54 TQ3 5.949 1.001 0.893
Age TQ4 5.436 1.287 0.767
18–25 48 10.17 SQ SQ1 5.879 1.126 0.798
26–35 60 12.71 SQ2 5.809 1.109 0.857
36–45 81 17.16 SQ3 5.761 1.052 0.773
46–55 115 24.36 SQ4 5.443 1.176 0.817
56–60 57 12.08 IQ IQ1 5.850 1.030 0.873
> 60 111 23.52 IQ2 5.782 1.082 0.870
Education IQ3 6.242 0.782 0.815
High school 55 11.65 IQ4 6.163 0.869 0.773
Some college 131 27.75 PE PE1 6.017 0.996 0.923
College degree 148 31.36 PE2 5.928 1.127 0.953
Graduate degree 134 28.39 PE3 5.773 1.152 0.937
Other 4 0.85 SI SI1 4.290 1.539 0.964
Work Status SI2 4.358 1.535 0.966
Full-time 309 64.47 SI3 4.284 1.497 0.949
Part-time 59 12.50 FC FC1 6.144 0.824 0.955
Unemployed 16 3.39 FC2 6.239 0.701 0.806
Retired 77 16.31 SAT SAT1 5.869 1.168 0.956
Student 11 2.33 SAT2 5.799 1.214 0.971
SAT3 5.809 1.181 0.965
SSU (Survey) SSU 1.892 1.260 1.000
OSU (Log Data) OSU 1.288 0.671 1.000
experts, it maps well to the bank’s typical customer
profile for a US mid-sized bank.
Table 4. Instrument reliability and validity.
Factors Cronbach’s alpha Composite reliability AVE VIF
TQ 0.846 0.897 0.687 2.467
Measurement model SQ 0.828 0.886 0.660 2.579
IQ 0.855 0.901 0.695 2.520
Before testing the structural model, we analyzed the PE 0.932 0.956 0.880 2.050
SI 0.957 0.972 0.921 1.169
variables in terms of mean and standard deviation FC 0.745 0.876 0.781 1.434
and also checked for confirmatory factor analysis SAT 0.962 0.975 0.929 N/A
(CFA) to evaluate the reliability of the instruments
through factor loadings as shown in Table 3.
As per Table 4, Cronbach’s alpha, and composite relia- Table 5. Fornell-Larcker criterion.
bility were evaluated for further proof of instruments’ Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
reliability. Convergent validity was tested with average 1. AU 1.000
2. FC 0.028 0.884
variance extracted (AVE) while collinearity between vari- 3. IQ −0.017 0.451 0.834
ables was assessed via variance inflation factor (VIF). As 4. PE 0.162 0.500 0.555 0.938
5. SAT 0.053 0.335 0.731 0.678 0.964
per Table 5, discriminant validity was checked by com- 6. SQ 0.068 0.429 0.708 0.609 0.688 0.812
paring the square root of AVEs with other variable coeffi- 7. SI 0.156 0.149 0.214 0.343 0.334 0.305 0.960
8. IQ 0.093 0.354 0.692 0.604 0.770 0.688 0.307 0.829
cients (Fornell-Larcker Criterion) (Fornell & Larcker,
1981). Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, and Podsakoff (2003)
suggested to use Harman’s single-factor test to evaluate to factors) while used the computer-recorded data for the
what degree a common method variance (CMV) can be outcome variable (MB objective use).
a problem. The results obtained from SPSS for the The above tables showed that all factors and their
Harman’s single-factor test shows 40% of variance respective items have values above the recommended
emerged to explain a single factor, and hence giving an thresholds in literature, for example, 0.7 for Cronbach’s
indication the CMV is not a big concern (Zhou, 2013). alpha (Straub et al., 1995), 0.5 for AVE (Henseler,
Since the Harman’s test is not recommended to be used as Ringle, & Sinkovics, 2009), and 0.7 for factor loading
the sole assessment tool for CMV (Hulland, Baumgartner, (Churchill, 1979). This indicates that instruments’ relia-
& Smith, 2018), we employed another mechanism for bility and validity have been established. For common
CMV. Obtaining measures from different sources can method variance, the Herman’s single-factor test
attenuate the CMV problem, thus, we used the self- showed that the large factor explains 43.97% of the
reported data for predictors (IS success and UTAUT’s total variance. Hence, there is no dominant single fac-

tor since this percentage is less than 50%, confirming
our data is not affected by common method variance.
Results
Structural model
Structural equation modeling – partial least square (SEM-
PLS) is an advanced regression analysis technique because
it combines the characteristics of both factor analysis and
multiple regression analysis. What makes SEM better than
traditional regression techniques is that SEM can estimate
the measurement and the structural properties of theore-
tical model. Additionally, SEM performs well when mea-
suring the relationship between observed and latent
variables (Babin, Hair, & Boles, 2008), and thus we
employed it in our study. With the help of SmartPLS soft-
ware, this technique revealed the significant relationships
with path coefficients in the tested model as shown in
Figure 2. We tested the hypothesized relationships in two
Figure 2. Integrative structural model.
INFORMATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT 25
separate models; the first structural model has subjective
system usage (Table 6) while the second structural model
has objective system usage (Table 7) so that we can effec-
tively compare the findings of system usage variable.
Under the subjective system usage model, SEM-PLS
results indicate that system quality (β = 0.347, p < .01)
and information quality (β = 0.312, p < .01) are highly
significant but service quality is not that significant (β =
0.093, p > .05). Also, as hypothesized, both of perfor-
mance expectancy (β = 0.278, p < .01) and social influ-
ence (β = 0.054, p < .05) have a significant and positive
impact on user satisfaction while facilitating conditions
(β = −0.115, p < .01) has a significant but negative impact
instead. Satisfaction, however, does not determine the
perceived MB system usage (β = 0.053, p > .05).
Under objective system usage model, it appears that
SEM-PLS results of the significant factors in model 2 are
similar of those in model 1 except for MB system usage,
which turned to be significant (β = 0.087, p < .05). It is
important to note that MB system usage retrieved from
26 M. ALBASHRAWI AND L. MOTIWALLA

Table 6. Model 1 (Subjective MB System Use). IPMA

Path Estimate Std. Error t-statistics p-Value Supported
H1: TQ → SAT 0.347 0.055 6.265** 0.000 Yes
IPMA, introduced by Ringle and Sarstedt (2016), enriches
H2: SQ → SAT 0.093 0.049 1.919 0.056 No PLS-SEM analysis with more in-depth results by providing
H3: IQ → SAT 0.312 0.046 6.778** 0.000 Yes
H4: PE → SAT 0.278 0.042 6.679** 0.000 Yes not only importance dimension of the target factors but
H5: SI → SAT 0.054 0.023 2.298* 0.022 Yes also their performance. As well, this technique provides
H6: FC → SAT −0.115 0.039 2.926** 0.004 Yes
H7: SAT → SSU 0.053 0.043 1.240 0.215 No a priority map analysis at not only the level of latent
n = 472, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05 variables but also at the level of their corresponding indi-
Explained variance in satisfaction = 73% cators. Hence, it allows identifying which factors that need
Explained variance in system use = 0.50%
first attention to be addressed and improved. Given
IPMA’s capabilities, we can generate critical insights and
high-value implications, particularly to the industry.
Table 7. Model 2 (Objective MB System Use Usage).
Path Estimate Std. Error t-statistics p-Value Supported IPMA can provide very valuable information for practi-
H1: TQ → SAT 0.346 0.055 6.245** 0.000 Yes tioners as well as theorists to understand the influence of
H2: SQ → SAT 0.093 0.052 1.801 0.072 No MB systems on individuals. Tables 8 and 9 show the
H3: IQ → SAT 0.312 0.046 6.802** 0.000 Yes
H4: PE → SAT 0.278 0.042 6.699** 0.000 Yes importance and performance of latent and manifest vari-
H5: SI → SAT 0.054 0.023 2.300* 0.022 Yes ables from both UTAUT and IS success with providing
H6: FC → SAT −0.115 0.037 3.095** 0.002 Yes
H7: SAT → OSU 0.087 0.036 2.435* 0.015 Yes a computed index value for each variable. The index value
n = 472, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05 determines to what extent a latent variable is improved by
Explained variance in satisfaction = 73% a set of manifest variables, in other words, the bigger value
Explained variance in system use = 0.90%
Correlation between subjective and objective system usage = 0.495 of the index, the smaller area to improve on. Consequently,
the focus should be on improving the variables that show
computer-recorded data was significant, but MB system values with a lower index (Hair, Hult, Ringle, & Sarstedt,
usage retrieved from the survey was not. Also, it is impor- 2014). In essence, this technique enhances the current
tant to note that subjective system usage had a low corre- version of classical regression by demonstrating not only
lation with objective system usage; 0.495. Although these which latent and manifest variables have a bigger influence
two factors are literally the same: one determined through (importance) but also which ones have higher index values
a survey and the other determined through a log file, both (performance) on satisfaction. This analysis matrix rescales
from the same user sample and yet, they had a low corre- the index values to show performance level on a scale of 0
lation. This unexpected finding from our analysis is furth- to100, indicating that the closer to 100, the better perform-
ered in the discussion section. ing variable or item. For a better graphical interpretation,
The integrated framework of IS success and UTAUT IPMA inverts the index values (100-index value) for the
accounted for 0.9% of the explained variance in objective negative coefficients/estimates (Trang, Zander, de Visser, &
MB system usage, but for 73% of the explained variance in Kolbe, 2016), as shown in the case for facilitating condi-
user satisfaction. However, the results obtained for running tions. Figures 5 and 6 visualize the IPMA of our latent
the integrative model’s factors directly on objective and variables to enable a better and faster understanding of
subjective system use did not show a high level of signifi- their importance and performance.
cance. For example, system quality was the only significant Since the relative importance and performance are
factor for objective system use; while, no factors appeared reflected by path coefficients and index values, respectively,
to be positively affecting subjective system use. Hence, it would allow us to determine the most needed areas to
these empirical findings confirm that satisfaction can med- improve on by identifying the significant predictors that
iate the relationship between the model’s factors and MB have higher coefficients values but low index values in
system use and so to be used as a hub for combining both regards to satisfaction. Our IPMA analysis results related
models. Gender, age, education, and occupation were to IS success’s factors show that system quality (β = 0.346,
added as control variables to the integrated model but index value = 80.403), and information quality (β = 0.312,
none of such appeared to be significant. index value = 82.808) are very important but have high
Lastly, due to the combination of both IS success and index values, which indicates minor potential for improve-
UTAUT, it can be said that the integrated framework out- ment. While service quality (β = 0.093, index value =
performs the standalone models depicted below in 77.767) seems less important and less performing. On the
Figures 3 and 4 (IS success = 68%, and UTAUT = 47%), other hand, UTAUT’s factors show that both performance
and, hence confirming the authenticity and validity of this expectancy (β = 0.278, index value = 81.819) and facilitat-
integration. ing conditions (β = −0.115, index value = 79.820) are

Figure 3. Structural model for IS success model.
Figure 4. Structural model for UTAUT.
important and well-performing, while social influence
(β = 0.053, index value = 55.147) was important but less-
performing. This means that the potential for improving
social influence is much higher than performance expec-
tancy and facilitating conditions. These insights are valu-
able for bank practitioners wanting to improve satisfaction
and MB system use.
With regards to the manifest variables in our IPMA
analysis, most of the items show high index values at
the performance axis (≥ 80), meaning there is less room
to improve MB services through such items. Some of
these items, however, have viable rankings at both axes
of importance and performance. For example, the
fourth item of information quality (TQ4) in Table 10
INFORMATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT 27
shows a high importance score and less-than-80 perfor-
mance index value, indicating more potential for
improvement. This also applies to the fourth and
third items of service quality (SQ4 and SQ3). Social
influence items (SI1, SI2, and SI3) seem to be a bit
less important than the items of service quality but
they have a higher potential for improvement.
Discussion
Summary of findings
Our results provide two key findings specific to the MB
context. First, most of our hypothesized relationships are
28 M. ALBASHRAWI AND L. MOTIWALLA

Table 8. Importance of Latent variables and their manifest of user satisfaction. This could be attributed to the fact
variables (Items). that MB lacks to provide personalized services to its users
Latent Variables Manifest Variables and few real-time services, like notifications of cash
System Quality 0.346
TQ1 0.082
deposits. None of these services are available through
TQ2 0.123 the MB app. Second, the factor of facilitating conditions
TQ3 0.111
TQ4 0.099 is significant, and therefore consistent with Chan et al.
Service Quality 0.093 (2010) and Baptista and Oliveira (2015). But, it unexpect-
SQ1 0.029
SQ2 0.030 edly shows a negative sign. This negative direction may be
SQ3 0.026 attributed to the easy-to-use user interface and other user-
SQ4 0.030
Information Quality 0.312 friendly system features in MB do not require users to
IQ1 0.111 access the help/support resources when using the MB
IQ2 0.101
IQ3 0.082 system.
IQ4 0.078
Performance Expectancy 0.278
PE1 0.093
PE2 0.103 Theoretical implications
PE3 0.100
Social Influence 0.053 This study makes two major theoretical contributions.
SI1 0.021 First, it seems that subjective system use does not
SI2 0.017
SI3 0.018 strongly correlate with objective system use, even
Facilitating Conditions −0.115
FC1 −0.085
though they are measuring the same factor; the sub-
FC2 −0.043 jective measure was determined from self-reported sur-
vey data whereas the objective measure was determined
from system log data. Besides that, objective system use
Table 9. Performance of latent variables and their manifest
is significantly predicted by satisfaction, while subjec-
variables (Items).
tive system use surprisingly is not associated with the
Latent Variables Manifest Variables
System Quality 80.403
same statistical significance. The contradictory results
TQ1 79.944 mean that many MB users have underestimated their
TQ2 83.016
TQ3 82.486 system use. In other words, from the survey, data users
TQ4 73.941 perceive themselves to be casual users, but in reality
Service Quality 77.767
SQ1 81.321 they are not, as reflected by the computed-recorded
SQ2 80.155 data of their system use (objective use). Such under-
SQ3 75.212
SQ4 74.047 estimation of MB system use leads us to argue about
Information Quality 82.808 the authenticity of subjective system use, which has
IQ1 80.826
IQ2 79.696 been used as a dependent variable in prior IS research
IQ3 84.831 (Hou, 2012; Mohammadi, 2015) and particularly in MB
IQ4 86.052
Performance Expectancy 81.819 (Zhou et al., 2010). Due to the flaws in human percep-
PE1 83.616 tion, this perceived construct does not reflect the actual
PE2 82.133
PE3 79.555 system use among MB users and could be due to the
Social Influence 55.147 self-reported bias mentioned in prior studies (Collopy,
SI1 54.838
SI2 55.968 1996; de Reuver & Bouwman, 2015). Moreover, the low
SI3 54.732 correlation found between subjective and objective sys-
Facilitating Conditions 79.820
FC1 82.881 tem use of MB has augmented this concern. As a result,
FC2 74.647 it is plausible to infer that many of prior MB studies
employing subjective system use may not be providing
an adequate measure for this construct. Therefore, it is
significant and, are consistent with prior IS research. critical that future studies shift their focus toward more
System quality and information quality are positively sig- objective measurement of system use with new big data
nificant and in line with results reported by Xu et al. analytic techniques from system log data. This can help
(2013) and Zhou (2013). Performance expectancy and to reduce the self-reporting bias concerns and provide
social influence are also important predictors of user more reliable results of IS adoption research (Walldén
satisfaction and supported by IS studies of Brown et al. et al. 2015).
(2008) and Chan et al. (2010). Contrary to the findings of Second, this IS adoption study has enabled a better
Cenfetelli et al. (2008) and Xu et al. (2013), service quality understanding of MB use behavior through user satis-
turns not to be highly significant and so not a determinant faction by developing and testing a parsimonious, and

Figure 5. High and low-performing latent variable.
Figure 6. High and low-performing manifest variables (Items).
yet comprehensive conceptual framework that com-
bines system-related factors (IS success) with non-
system-related factors (UTAUT). Such integration
helps increase the underlying theoretical boundaries of
these two well-established models and accordingly con-
tributes to advance the theory of technology acceptance
and use in the context of MB. Considering satisfaction
to be the outcome variable in this MB study, the inte-
grative framework has outperformed the two standa-
lone models and provided a higher explanatory power,
which suggests that both system and user’s cognitive
influences are important for MB acceptance and use. By
noting that, this integrative framework can be estab-
lished as a robust theoretical base model to examine
MB system use in future research studies or even can be
INFORMATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT 29
generalized to other mobile technologies, like FinTech
apps, mobile payment, sharing-economy services, etc.
because MB shares many similarities with them.
Practical implications
This study makes two significant practical implications
that are of a great help to the banking industry. IPMA
highlights not only the key factors that need their
attention, but also their respective indicators in terms
of importance and performance. First, at the variable-
level of IPMA, banks practitioners should focus on
improving the service quality, and divert their resources
toward social influence because both are critical to the
consumers. Also, banks could achieve a better return
30 M. ALBASHRAWI AND L. MOTIWALLA
on their investment as there is room for improvement
and influence on the consumer is higher. The specific
actions, advised in those areas, are: 1) increase the
quality of the services embedded in MB app by improv-
ing the responsiveness of MB services and provide
timely feedback on the conducted transactions,
and, 2) incentivize MB users to influence their social
circle (e.g., family, friends, colleagues, etc.) in order to
increase their engagement and use of MB services. For
example, use of mobile payment systems like Zelle will
encourage the users’ social circle to adopt MB applica-
tions. Banks must leverage their word-of-mouth mar-
keting strategy so that their MB users would become
informal marketing agents. Second, at the indictor-level
of IPMA, there are several sub-areas should be invested
on for backing the aforementioned areas and enhancing
the improvement process of MB services; 1) MB users
are mostly affected by the user interface of the MB
services. One way for the bank is to provide a more
personalized and interactive user interface. 2) Users are
more satisfied when they interact with MB services that
are reliable and consistent. This may even increase the
users’ trust, thereby, banks must invest more on net-
work resources for better access to MB services. 3) The
level of satisfaction among MB users gets very high
when they are provided with personalized services
based on their demographics and experience profiles.
This should motivate the banks to capture their users’
profiles and employ data analytics techniques to predict
their needs for giving the users a personalized experi-
ence. 4) The level of users’ satisfaction toward MB
increases when their social circle is effectively engaged
in a viral marketing strategy; hence, the banks should
heavily invest on it.
Overall, banks have limited resources, thus, it is very
critical to pinpoint the direction to the most needed
areas that require enhancement of their MB services.
IPMA can play a key role in this process through high-
lighting the most significant areas with their subs so
that banks get more certain and accordingly give them
a special attention in the process of designing, refining,
and implementing MB services, which results in
increasing user satisfaction dramatically. When such
satisfaction is sustained, banks would be able to retain
those customers and gain their loyalty, which is
a bottom-line goal for banks.
Limitations and directions for future research
The two major limitations of this study that can provide
future research opportunities are; first, while our sample
size was good, all users were from one bank at a single point
of time, which affects the study’s external validity. Our
results can only be generalized to US mid-sized banks
with similar customer demographics, therefore, we recom-
mend future work should include banks of different sizes
from various geographic regions of US to enhance the
findings’ generalizability. Also, by expanding the study to
non-US countries would allow the study of cultural influ-
ences on MB acceptance and use. Second, our study used
a cross-sectional sample for hypotheses testing, hence, it
establishes an association rather than causality between the
hypothesized relationships. Although the study’s model is
grounded on the extant theories of IS literature, it is highly
recommended to adopt more rigor avenue of future
research in the MB area by conducting a longitudinal or
experience-based study.
Conclusion
In sum, this study contributes to the theory of IS adop-
tion by 1) combining system-oriented factors with user
behavior-oriented factors to evaluate the robustness of
integrative framework for the acceptance and use in the
MB context, and 2) comparing objective and subjective
use measures to determine system success which has not
been employed in the MB context. These two theoretical
contributions help to advance the robustness of mobile
systems adoption research. This study also provides
insightful feedback for bank practitioners and financial
institutions on how their users are adapting to the digital
transformation of banking services through their use and
experience of mobile devices. With deeper insights from
our IPMA analysis, banks can efficiently guide the pro-
cess of MB services improvements and refinements.
Notes on contributors
Dr. Mousa Albashrawi is an Assistant Professor of
Management Information Systems (MIS) at King Fahd
University of Petroleum and Minerals, KSA. Dr. Albashrawi
earned his PhD degree from University of Massachusetts
Lowell in 2017. His research interests include, but not limited
to, acceptance of mobile technologies, entrepreneurial inten-
tion, data analytics, and information privacy. He has pre-
sented his research in good IS conferences such as, AMICS,
Eastern Academy of Management, Pre-ICIS, ACM, and
HICSS. As well, his works have been published in qualityIS
journals, like Journal of Data Science, Information Systems
Frontiers, and International Journal of Information
Management.
Dr. Luvai Motiwalla is Professor of Management
Information System at the University of Massachusetts
Lowell. Dr. Motiwalla earned his Ph.D. in MIS, in 1989,
from the University of Arizona. His current research focuses
on system usage, mobile systems adoption, organizational
system assimilation of enterprise systems, behavioral analy-
tics, information privacy and behavioral analytics. He has
 INFORMATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT 31

published two books, several articles in several MIS journals, Churchill, G. A. (1979). A paradigm for developing better
and presented at numerous national and international con- measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing
ferences. He has also received grants from NIH, NSF, U.S. Research, 16(1), 64–73. doi:10.1177/002224377901600110
DoE and funding from private foundations. Collopy, F. (1996). Biases in retrospective self-reports of time
use: An empirical study of computer users. Management
Science, 42, 758–767. doi:10.1287/mnsc.42.5.758
de Reuver, M., & Bouwman, H. (2015). Dealing with
References self-report bias in mobile internet acceptance and usage
studies. Information and Management, 5(3), 287–294.
Aiken, L. R. (1987). Formulas for equating ratings on differ-
doi:10.1016/j.im.2014.12.002
ent scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 47
Delone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean
(1), 51–54. doi:10.1177/0013164487471007
model of information systems success: A ten-year update.
Alalwan, A. A., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Williams, M. D. (2016).
Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4), 9–30.
Customers’ intention and adoption of telebanking in
DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (1992). Information systems
Jordan. Information Systems Management, 33(2),
success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information
154–178. doi:10.1080/10580530.2016.1155950
Systems Research, 3(1), 60–95. doi:10.1287/isre.3.1.60
Anonymous. (2015, May 9). The Fintech revolution: A wave
Demos, T. (2016, Jan 12). For the first time, more are
of startups is changing finance—For the better. The
mobile-banking than going to a branch. WSJ.
Economist, Leaders section.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating structural equa-
Babin, B. J., Hair, J. F., & Boles, J. S. (2008). Publishing
tion models with unobservable variables and measurement
research in marketing journals using structural equation
error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.
modeling. Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice, 16(4),
doi:10.1177/002224378101800104
279–285. doi:10.2753/MTP1069-6679160401
Frolick, M., & Chen, L. (2004). Assessing m-commerce
Baptista, G., & Oliveira, T. (2015). Understanding mobile
opportunities. Information Systems Management, 21(2),
banking: The unified theory of acceptance and use of
53–61. doi:10.1201/1078/44118.21.2.20040301/80422.8
technology combined with cultural moderators.
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M.
Computers in Human Behavior, 50(50), 418–430.
(2014). A primer on partial least squares structural equa-
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.024
tion modeling (PLS-SEM). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bhattacherjee, A., & Sanford, C. (2009). The intention–
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use
Behaviour gap in technology usage: The moderating role
of partial least Squares path modeling in international
of attitude strength. Behaviour & Information Technology,
marketing. Advances in International Marketing, 20,
28(4), 389–401. doi:10.1080/01449290802121230
277–319.
Brown, S. A., Venkatesh, V., Kuruzovich, J., & Massey, A. P.
Hoehle, H., & Venkatesh, V. (2015). Mobile application
(2008). Expectation confirmation: An examination of three
usability: Conceptualization and instrument development.
competing models. Organizational Behavior and Human
MIS Quarterly, 39(2). doi:10.25300/MISQ/2015/39.2.08
Decision Processes, 105(1), 52–66. doi:10.1016/j.
Horton, R. P., Buck, T., Waterson, P. E., & Clegg, C. W.
obhdp.2006.09.008
(2001). Explaining intranet use with the technology accep-
Casey, M. J. (2015, June 5). Bold bet that banking industry is
tance model. Journal of Information Technology, 16(4),
poised for serious disruption. WSJ.
237–249. doi:10.1080/02683960110102407
Cenfetelli, R. T., Benbasat, I., & Al-Natour, S. (2008).
Hou, C. K. (2012). Examining the effect of user satisfaction on
Addressing the what and how of online services:
system usage and individual performance with business intel-
Positioning supporting-services functionality and service
ligence systems: An empirical study of Taiwan’s electronics
quality for business-to-consumer success. Information
industry. International Journal of Information Management, 32
Systems Research, 19(2), 161–181. doi:10.1287/isre.1070.0163
(6), 560–573. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2012.03.001
Chan, F. K., Thong, J. Y., Venkatesh, V., Brown, S. A.,
Hulland, J., Baumgartner, H., & Smith, K. M. (2018).
Hu, P. J., & Tam, K. Y. (2010). Modeling citizen satisfac-
Marketing survey research best practices: Evidence and
tion with mandatory adoption of an e-government
recommendations from a review of JAMS articles.
technology. Journal of the Association for Information
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 46(1),
Systems, 11(10), 519–549. doi:10.17705/1jais
92–108. doi:10.1007/s11747-017-0532-y
Chatterjee, S., Chakraborty, S., Sarker, S., Sarker, S., &
Joo, Y. J., Lim, K. Y., & Lim, E. (2014). Investigating the struc-
Lau, F. Y. (2009). Examining the success factors for mobile
tural relationship among perceived innovation attributes,
work in healthcare: A deductive study. Decision Support
intention to use and actual use of mobile learning in an online
Systems, 46(3), 620–633. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2008.11.003
university in South Korea. Australasian Journal of Educational
Chen, C.-W. D., & Cheng, C.-Y. J. (2009). Understanding
Technology, 30(4), 427–439. doi:10.14742/ajet.681
consumer intention in online shopping: A respecification
Khalid, H., Shihab, E., Nagappan, M., & Hassan, A. E. (2015).
and validation of the DeLone and McLean model.
What do mobile app users complain about? IEEE Software,
Behaviour & Information Technology, 28(4), 335–345.
32(3), 70–77. doi:10.1109/MS.2014.50
doi:10.1080/01449290701850111
Kim, C., Oh, E., Shin, N., & Chae, M. (2009). An empirical
Chung, N., & Jae Kwon, S. (2009). Effect of trust level on
investigation of factors affecting ubiquitous computing use
mobile banking satisfaction: A multi-group analysis of
and u-business value. International Journal of Information
information system success instruments. Behaviour &
Management, 29(6), 436–448. doi:10.1016/j.
Information Technology, 28(6), 549–562. doi:10.1080/
ijinfomgt.2009.06.003
01449290802506562
32 M. ALBASHRAWI AND L. MOTIWALLA
Klein, R. (2007). Internet-based patient-physician electronic
communication applications: Patient acceptance and trust.
E-Service Journal, 5(2), 27–51. doi:10.2979/esj.2007.5.2.27
Lallmahomed, M. Z., Rahim, N. Z. A., Ibrahim, R., &
Rahman, A. A. (2013). Predicting different conceptualiza-
tions of system use: Acceptance in hedonic volitional con-
text (Facebook). Computers in Human Behavior, 29(6),
2776–2787. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.07.018
Lee, K. C., & Chung, N. (2009). Understanding factors affect-
ing trust in and satisfaction with mobile banking in Korea:
A modified DeLone and McLean’s model perspective.
Interacting with Computers, 21(5–6), 385–392.
doi:10.1016/j.intcom.2009.06.004
Ma, W., & Yuen, A. (2011). E-learning system acceptance and
usage pattern. Technology Acceptance in Education, 201–216.
Mardiana, S., Tjakraatmadja, J. H., & Aprianingsih, A. (2015).
DeLone-McLean information system success model revis-
ited: The separation of intention to use-use and the inte-
gration of technology acceptance models. International
Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 5, 172–182.
Mendiola, M. F., Kalnicki, M., & Lindenauer, S. (2015). Valuable
features in mobile health apps for patients and consumers:
Content analysis of apps and user ratings. JMIR mHealth and
uHealth, 3(2), e40. doi:10.2196/mhealth.4283
Miltgen, C. L., Popovič, A., & Oliveira, T. (2013).
Determinants of end-user acceptance of biometrics:
Integrating the “Big 3” of technology acceptance with
privacy context. Decision Support Systems, 56, 103–114.
doi:10.1016/j.dss.2013.05.010
Mohammadi, H. (2015). Investigating users’ perspectives on
e-learning: An integration of TAM and IS success model.
Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 359–374. doi:10.1016/j.
chb.2014.07.044
Molnar, A., Weerakkody, V., El-Haddadeh, R., Lee, H., &
Irani, Z. (2013). A framework of reference for evaluating
user experience when using high definition video to video
to facilitate public services. In International Working
Conference on Transfer and Diffusion of IT (pp. 436–450).
doi:10.1177/1753193413478393
Petter, S., DeLone, W., & McLean, E. R. (2013). Information
systems success: The quest for the independent variables.
Journal of Management Information Systems, 29(4), 7–62.
doi:10.2753/MIS0742-1222290401
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., &
Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in beha-
vioral research: A critical review of the literature and
recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88
(5), 879–903. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
Raschka, S. (2014). Naive bayes and text classification
i-introduction and theory. arXiv Preprint arXiv:1410.5329.
Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). Gain more insight from
your PLS-SEM results: The importance-performance map
analysis. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 116(9),
1865–1886. doi:10.1108/IMDS-10-2015-0449
Shareef, M. A., Dwivedi, Y. K., Stamati, T., & Williams, M. D.
(2014). SQ mGov: A comprehensive service-quality paradigm
for mobile government. Information Systems Management, 31
(2), 126–142. doi:10.1080/10580530.2014.890432
Stoel, L., & Hye Lee, K. (2003). Modeling the effect of experi-
ence on student acceptance of Web-based courseware.
Internet Research, 13(5), 364–374. doi:10.1108/
10662240310501649
Straub, D., Limayem, M., & Karahanna-Evaristo, E. (1995).
Measuring system usage: Implications for IS theory testing.
Management Science, 41(8), 1328–1342. doi:10.1287/
mnsc.41.8.1328
Szajna, B. (1996). Empirical evaluation of the revised tech-
nology acceptance model. Management Science, 42(1),
85–92. doi:10.1287/mnsc.42.1.85
Teo, T. S., Srivastava, S. C., & Jiang, L. (2009). Trust and
electronic government success: An empirical study. Journal
of Management Information Systems, 25(3), 99–132.
doi:10.2753/MIS0742-1222250303
Teo, Thompson S. H.., Srivastava, S. C., & Jiang, L. (2008). trust
and electronic government success: an empirical study. 3 3
25, pp. 99–132. doi:10.2753/MIS0742-1222250303
Thong, J. Y., Hong, S. J., & Tam, K. Y. (2006). The effects of
post-adoption beliefs on the expectation-confirmation
model for information technology continuance.
International Journal of Human-computer Studies, 64(9),
799–810. doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.05.001
Tian, Y., Nagappan, M., Lo, D., & Hassan, A. E. (2015,
September). What are the characteristics of high-rated apps?
A case study on free android applications. In 2015 IEEE
International Conference on Software Maintenance and
Evolution (ICSME) (pp. 301–310). Bremen, Germanay: IEEE.
Trang, S. T. N., Zander, S., de Visser, B., & Kolbe, L. M.
(2016). Towards an importance–Performance analysis of
factors affecting e-business diffusion in the wood industry.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 110, 121–131. doi:10.1016/j.
jclepro.2015.05.051
Van Schaik, P., & Ling, J. (2008). Modelling user experience
with web sites: Usability, hedonic value, beauty and
goodness. Interacting with Computers, 20(3), 419–432.
doi:10.1016/j.intcom.2008.03.001
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D.
(2003). User acceptance of information technology:
Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.
doi:10.2307/30036540
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer
acceptance and use of information technology: Extending
the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology.
MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178. doi:10.2307/41410412
Walldén, S., Mäkinen, E., & Raisamo, R. (2015). A review on
objective measurement of usage in technology acceptance
studies. Universal Access in the Information Society, 15, 1–14.
Wannemacher, P., Ensor, B., Ask, J. A., Clarke, A., Roizen, R.,
& Blumstein, A. (2015). The mobile banking imperative.
Forrester. Retrieved from https://www.forrester.com/The
+Mobile+Banking+Imperative/fulltext/-/E-RES75581
Xu, J. D., Benbasat, I., & Cenfetelli, R. T. (2013). Integrating
service quality with system and information quality: An
empirical test in the e-service context. MIS Quarterly, 37
(3), 777–794. doi:10.25300/MISQ/2013/37.3.05
Yu, C. (2012). Factors affecting individuals to adopt mobile
banking: Empirical evidence from the UTAUT model.
Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 13(2), 104–121.
Zhou, T. (2013). An empirical examination of continuance
intention of mobile payment services. Decision Support
Systems, 54(2), 1085–1091. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2012.10.034
Zhou, T., Lu, Y., & Wang, B. (2010). Integrating TTF and
UTAUT to explain mobile banking user adoption.
Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 760–767.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.01.013
Copyright of Information Systems Management is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and
its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.