Influence factors on the intention to use technology for compliance with business process among employees at the Vietnam Joint Stock Commercial Bank for Industry and Trade branches in Thua Thien Hue
Vol. 133 No. 5B (2024), Original Article
Vol. 133 No. 5B (2024)

Influence factors on the intention to use technology for compliance with business process among employees at the Vietnam Joint Stock Commercial Bank for Industry and Trade branches in Thua Thien Hue

Original Article
https://doi.org/10.26459/hueunijed.v133i5B.7369
Published 2024-06-28
Ha Ngoc Long
University of Economics, Hue University, 99 Ho Dac Di St., Hue, Vietnam
Le Van Phuc
MBI Innovation Challenges Company Limited, 107A Ton Duc Thang St., Hanoi, Vietnam
Truong Tan Quan
University of Economics, Hue University, 99 Ho Dac Di St., Hue, Vietnam
Do Song Huong
University of Economics, Hue University, 99 Ho Dac Di St., Hue, Vietnam
Nguyen Hoang
University of Economics, Hue University, 99 Ho Dac Di St., Hue, Vietnam
Thai Thi Van Anh
University of Economics, Hue University, 99 Ho Dac Di St., Hue, Vietnam

Keywords

business process management
business process compliance management
Vietnamese bank
intention to use
TAM quản trị quy trình nghiệp vụ
quản trị tuân thủ quy trình nghiệp vụ
ngân hàng Việt Nam
ý định sử dụng
TAM

Abstract

Compliance with business processes is crucial for the sustainable development of the financial market. Implementing business process compliance management (BPCM) solutions is essential for enhancing competitiveness and ensuring transparency in management. This study examines the factors influencing the intention to use the BPCM system at VietinBank branches in Thua Thien Hue, based on an extended technology acceptance model (TAM). The factors include perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, innovativeness, and perceived risk. Data collected from bank employees were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Cronbach's alpha, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and regression analysis. The results show that perceived usefulness and ease of use positively impact the intention to use BPCM, while perceived risk negatively impacts it. Notably, innovativeness is the most significant factor in determining usage intention.

https://doi.org/10.26459/hueunijed.v133i5B.7369

References

  1. M. Hashmi, G. Governatori, H. P. Lam, and M. T. Wynn (2018), Are we done with business process compliance: state of the art and challenges ahead, Knowledge and Information Systems, 57(1), 79–133, doi: 10.1007/s10115-017-1142-1.
  2. Phạm Hồng Linh, Nguyễn Thị Diễm Hương, (2021), Nghiên cứu ảnh hưởng của các sự kiện tổn thất hoạt động đến các ngân hàng thương mại Việt Nam, Tạp Chí Công Thương, 13, 402–407.
  3. Trần Việt Dũng (2022), Hiệp ước quốc tế Basel và thực trạng kỷ luật thị trường ngành ngân hàng Việt Nam, Tạp chí Kinh tế Châu Á - Thái Bình Dương, 613, 10–12.
  4. G. Governatori and S. Sadiq (2008), The Journey to Business Process Compliance, Handbook of Research on Business Process Modeling, 426–454, doi: 10.4018/978-1-60566-288-6.ch020.
  5. P. Küng and C. Hagen (Jul. 2007), The fruits of Business Process Management: an experience report from a Swiss bank, Business Process Management Journal, 13(4), 477–487, doi: 10.1108/14637150710763522.
  6. G. Governatori (Jun. 2005), Representing Business Contracts In RuleML, International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, 14(2-3), 181–216, doi: 10.1142/S0218843005001092.
  7. Phạm Ngọc Phong, Nguyễn Thị Diễm, Nguyễn Thị Ái Ngọc (2022), Suptech: Công nghệ giám sát bảo vệ tính toàn vẹn của thị trường, Tạp Chí Ngân Hàng, 5, 37–45.
  8. M. Dumas, M. La Rosa, J. Mendling, and H. A. Reijers (2018), Fundamentals of Business Process Management, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi: 10.1007/978-3-662-56509-4.
  9. OMG (2011), Business process model and notation (version 2.0), OMG Specification, Object Management Group.
  10. F. Corradini, C. Muzi, B. Re, L. Rossi, and F. Tiezzi (2018), Global vs. Local Semantics of BPMN 2.0 OR-Join, in In: Tjoa A., Bellatreche L., Biffl S., van Leeuwen J., Wiedermann J. (eds) SOFSEM 2018: Theory and Practice of Computer Science. SOFSEM 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 10706. Edizioni della Normale, Cham, 321–336. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-73117-9_23.
  11. Hà Ngọc Long, Nguyễn Thanh Tuấn, Đỗ Sông Hương (2021), Ứng Dụng Công Nghệ Tuân Thủ Quy Trình Nghiệp Vụ Trong Hoạt Động Chuyển Đổi Số Của Ngành Tài Chính: Góc Nhìn Từ Fintech Và Regtech, Tạp Chí Khoa học Quản Lý Và Kinh tế, Trường Đại học Kinh Tế, Đại học Huế, 18, [Online]. Available: https://tapchi.hce.edu.vn/index.php/sjme/article/view/73.
  12. Hà Ngọc Long, Đỗ Sông Hương, Nguyễn Hoàng (2023), Đề Xuất Mô Hình Quản Trị Tuân Thủ Quy Trình Dựa Trên Nền Tảng Điện Toán Đám Mây, Tạp Chí Khoa học Và Công nghệ - Đại học Đà Nẵng, 21, số p.h 1, 43–50 [Online]. Available: https://jst-ud.vn/jst-ud/article/view/8117.
  13. N. L. Ha and T. M. Prinz (2021), Partitioning Behavioral Retrieval: An Efficient Computational Approach With Transitive Rules, IEEE Access, 9, 112043–112056, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3102634.
  14. M. H. Kalayou, B. F. Endehabtu, and B. Tilahun (Dec. 2020), The Applicability of the Modified Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) on the Sustainable Adoption of eHealth Systems in Resource-Limited Settings, Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, 13, 1827–1837, doi: 10.2147/JMDH.S284973.
  15. W. A. Harsanto, N. Matondang, and R. P. Wibowo (Sep. 2023), The Use of Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to Analyze Consumer Acceptance Towards E-Commerce Websites. A Case of the Plantage.id Digital Transformation Solution, Journal of Environmental and Development Studies, 4(2), 206–213, doi: 10.32734/jeds.v4i2.13144.
  16. S. Koul and A. Eydgahi (Dec. 2018), Utilizing Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) for driverless car technology Adoption, Journal of technology management & innovation, 13(4), 37–46, doi: 10.4067/S0718-27242018000400037.
  17. G. Nuryyev et al., (Feb. 2020), Blockchain Technology Adoption Behavior and Sustainability of the Business in Tourism and Hospitality SMEs: An Empirical Study, Sustainability, 12(3), 1256, doi: 10.3390/su12031256.
  18. F. Shahzad, G. Xiu, J. Wang, and M. Shahbaz (Nov. 2018), An empirical investigation on the adoption of cryptocurrencies among the people of mainland China, Technology in Society, 55, 33–40, doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.05.006.
  19. Q. Guo, D. Zhu, F. (Sam) Li, X. Wang, and Y. Shu (Mar. 2024), Tourists’ Adoption of Extended Reality Technologies: A MetaAnalytical Structural Equation Modeling, Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 48(3), 450–463, doi: 10.1177/10963480221108906.
  20. F. D. Davis, R. P. Bagozzi, and P. R. Warshaw (Aug. 1989), User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models, Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003, doi: 10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982.
  21. K. J. Patel and H. J. Patel (Feb. 2018), Adoption of internet banking services in Gujarat, International Journal of Bank Marketing, 36(1), 147–169, doi: 10.1108/IJBM-08-2016-0104.
  22. Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, and Davis (2003), User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View, MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425, doi: 10.2307/30036540.
  23. P. Legris, J. Ingham, and P. Collerette (Jan. 2003), Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model, Information & Management, 40(3), 191–204, doi: 10.1016/S0378-7206(01)00143-4.
  24. J.-F. Chen, J.-F. Chang, C.-W. Kao, and Y.-M. Huang (Feb. 2016), Integrating ISSM into TAM to enhance digital library services, The Electronic Library, 34(1), 58–73, doi: 10.1108/EL-01-2014-0016.
  25. R. A. Bauer (1960), Consumer behavior as risk taking, in Proceedings of the 43rd National Conference of the American Marketing Assocation, June 15, 16, 17, Chicago, Illinois, 1960.
  26. M. S. Featherman and P. A. Pavlou (Oct. 2003), Predicting e-services adoption: a perceived risk facets perspective, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59(4), 451–474, doi: 10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00111-3.
  27. K. Dankwa and K. Nakata (2018), Getting it Right: A Model for Compliance Assessment, in In: Liu, K., Nakata, K., Li, W., Baranauskas, C. (eds) Digitalisation, Innovation, and Transformation. ICISO 2018. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, 2018, 228–237. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-94541-5_23.
  28. Y. C. Cho and E. Sagynov (Jan. 2015), Exploring Factors That Affect Usefulness, Ease Of Use, Trust, And Purchase Intention In The Online Environment, International Journal of Management & Information Systems (IJMIS), 19(1), 21, doi: 10.19030/ijmis.v19i1.9086.
  29. B. Ly and R. Ly (Aug. 2022), Internet banking adoption under Technology Acceptance Model—Evidence from Cambodian users, Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 7, 100224, doi: 10.1016/j.chbr.2022.100224.
  30. F. Sonmez (Mar. 2018), Technology Acceptance of Business Intelligence and Customer Relationship Management Systems within Institutions Operating in Capital Markets International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 8(2), doi: 10.6007/IJARBSS/v8-i2/3882.
  31. Z. Hu, S. Ding, S. Li, L. Chen, and S. Yang (Mar. 2019), Adoption Intention of Fintech Services for Bank Users: An Empirical Examination with an Extended Technology Acceptance Model, Symmetry, 11(3), 340, doi: 10.3390/sym11030340.
  32. T. Zhang, C. Lu, and M. Kizildag (Sep. 2018), Banking ‘on-the-go’: examining consumers’ adoption of mobile banking services, International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 10(3), 279–295, doi: 10.1108/IJQSS-07-2017-0067.
  33. R. Thakur and M. Srivastava (May 2014), Adoption readiness, personal innovativeness, perceived risk and usage intention across customer groups for mobile payment services in India, Internet Research, 24(3), 369–392, doi: 10.1108/IntR-12-2012-0244.
  34. D. J. Kim, D. L. Ferrin, and H. R. Rao (Jan. 2008), A trust-based consumer decision-making model in electronic commerce: The role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents, Decision Support Systems, 44(2), 544–564, doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2007.07.001.
  35. D. Littler and D. Melanthiou, (Nov. 2006), Consumer perceptions of risk and uncertainty and the implications for behaviour towards innovative retail services: The case of Internet Banking, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 13(6), 431–443, doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2006.02.006.
  36. S. A. Kamal, M. Shafiq, and P. Kakria (Feb. 2020), Investigating acceptance of telemedicine services through an extended technology acceptance model (TAM), Technology in Society, 60, 101212, doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.101212.
  37. J. J. F. Hair, R. E. Anderson, R. L. Tatham, and W. C. Black (2006), Multivariate Data Analysis. in Pearson international edition. Pearson Prentice Hall, [Online]. Available: https://books.google.com.vn/books?id=WESxQgAACAAJ.
  38. N. L. Leech, K. Barrett, and G. Morgan (2005), SPSS for intermediate statistics; use and interpretation lawrence erlbaum associates, New Jersey London, England: Publishers Mahwah.
  39. V. Venkatesh and F. D. Davis (Feb. 2000), A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies, Management Science, 46(2), 186–204, doi: 10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926.
Creative Commons License

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

Copyright (c) 2024 Array