Common use of Development and Acceptance of Online and Mobile Banking Clause in Contracts

Development and Acceptance of Online and Mobile Banking. Figure 2 illustrates when what kind of online services were offered by several banks in the United States and the Netherlands. This figure is used to show the similarities between the development of home banking and mobile banking. We chose these two countries because banks in the United States were among the early adopters to offer ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 49, No. 4, Article 61, Publication date: December 2016. 61:6 X. Xxxxxx et al. home banking services, while the same is true for the banks in the Netherlands for mobile banking. Three technological phases for the development and use of home banking are iden- tified: early adoption, expansion, and exploitation. Some early adopters (both banks and customers in the United States) started with electronic banking using a terminal- based modem connection through a phone line. This evolved into intelligent client-side software that allowed connections with the bank either directly through a phone line or (later) through the Internet. It was this second phase that most banks in the United States and the Netherlands started to offer online banking services that were picked up by the masses, which is why we named it expansion. All banks continued with the exploitation phase and broke off the second phase around the turn of the century. Sites were preferred above client-side code, and eventually were the only way to conduct home banking. The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) can be applied to examine what motivates users to accept (intent to use) new technologies. TAM can also be applied to online banking [Lai and Li 2005]. The overlapping conclusions from research that applies TAM on home banking indicates that the most significant motivators are perceived usefulness and perceived credibility (trust) [Xxxxxxxxxxx et al. 2004; Xxxxx et al. 2010; Xxxxxxxxxx and Xxxxx 2012]. Perceived ease of use has no direct significant effect on the intention to use online banking, although it can indirectly do so by affecting perceived usefulness. For home banking in the early adoption phase, initially not many people had com- puters at home and hardware to make dial-up connections. The intent to use might have been there (if home banking would be perceived as useful and trustworthy at this time), but the ability to actually do so was simply missing. This changed in the expansion phase, in which more bank customers had access to computers at home and more banks started offering home banking. The idea that one could manage their bank affairs from the comfort of his or her home using a personal computer they already owned was considered useful and there was enough trust for users to intend to use it, which they did. Banks switched technologies in the exploitation phase from proprietary client-side code to open web standards by offering websites accessible through popular browsers. Adoption rates did not stall since the use of a browser instead of a bank’s own application did not hamper the perceived usefulness and perceived credibility by bank customers. The development of the technological phases of mobile banking and motivators to use it are similar. Expectations were high [xxx xxx Xxxxxx 2001]*, but the early adoption phase in the Netherlands was not successful [Xxxxxxx 2002; Tomesen 2006b]*. Early mobile sites used standardized technology for web page distribution (I-mode, WAP, or HTTP), but these sites could only be reached if the mobile provider allowed access to the site and if the mobile phone supported the necessary security features to access the site. Therefore, as with the early adoption phase of home banking, not all potential bank customers were able to use mobile banking. The expansion phase began in 2007, when providers started offering more open Internet access and affordable data subscription plans [Xxxxxxx 2006a; Xxxxxxx 2008]*. All mobile sites were now easier to reach, including those of banks. It was also around this time that the mobile operating systems Apple iOS and Google Android were introduced to the market, which both offer a very developer- and user-friendly ecosystem. This made most banks release mobile applications around 2010, which were quickly accepted by their customers. Mobile banking is now offered by a large number of banks3 and its adoption by customers is steadily climbing [Xxxxxxx 2014; Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System 2015]*. 3Of the worldwide 80 banks examined in the survey for this article, at least 66 offer mobile services. ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 49, No. 4, Article 61, Publication date: December 2016. A Survey of Authentication and Communications Security in Online Banking 61:7 The TAM has also been used to examine which perceptions contribute most to the acceptance of mobile banking. As with home banking, perceived usefulness and trust are large motivators to accept (use) mobile banking. Unlike home banking, perceived ease of use also has a direct influence on the intent to use mobile banking [Xxxxx and Xxx 2005; Gu et al. 2009]. One explanation for this is that most mobile banking users use mobile banking in addition to home banking, instead of replacing the latter with the former [Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System 2015]*. The main (perceived) reasons to use mobile banking are the ability to access one’s bank account from anywhere, that it saves time, and that it can be used without either using a home computer or visiting a bank. This is in contrast to home banking, where the main reasons also include managing household finances and financial tasks without visiting a bank [Cetera 2015]*. As mobile banking offers partially redundant functionality, perceived ease of use is also considered important. If it would not be (perceived to be) easy to use, users would be inclined to exclusively use home banking. For mobile banking in its early adoption phase, the intent to use it was there for some part (as with home banking, due to the existing perceptions of usefulness and trustwor- thiness), but it was not perceived as being easy to use. Aesthetics play an important role in the adoption of mobile commerce, such as mobile banking [Xxx et al. 2006]. The displays of older phones did not have the capability to show an aesthetically pleasing user interface due to low resolutions and (in very old phones) the absence of color, which likely influenced the intent to use mobile banking negatively. The expansion phase be- gan at the moment smartphones were introduced. Touch controls likely influenced the ease of use perception positively and the increase in technical capabilities of mobile device displays provided banks the opportunity to improve aesthetics.