| Academic Open Internet Journal ISSN 1311-4360 |
Volume 20, 2007 |
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK TO MEASURE THE USER
SATISFACTION IN INTERNET BANKING
|
|
INTRODUCTION
In the recent years there has been explosion of Internet-based electronic banking applications (Liao & Cheung, 2003). Beckett, Hewer & Howcroft (2000) states that the emergence of new forms of technology has created highly competitive market conditions for bank providers. However, the changed market conditions demand for banks to better understanding of consumers' needs (Beckett et al., 2000).
Liao et al. (2003) stress that the success in Internet banking will be achieved with tailored financial products and services that fulfill customer' wants, preferences and quality expectations. Mattila (2001) concedes that customer satisfaction is a key to success in Internet banking and banks will use different media to customize products and services to fit customers' specific needs in the future. Liao et al. (2003) suggest that consumer perceptions of transaction security, transaction accuracy, user friendliness, and network speed are the critical factors for success in Internet banking. From this perspective, Internet banking includes many challenges for human computer interaction (HCI) (Hiltunen, Heng, & Helgesen, 2004).
Hiltunen et al (2004) have remarked that there are at least two major HCI challenges in Internet banking. The first challenge is related to the problem how to increase the number of services of Internet banking and simultaneously guarantee the quality of service for individual customers. The second challenge is related to the problem how to understand customer's needs, translate them into targeted content and present them in a personalized way in usable user interface. Hiltunen et al. (2004) imply that Internet banking research will concentrate more on HCI factors in the future. Recently, Lindgaard & Dudek (2003) emphasize that now is an ideal time for HCI researchers to analyse user satisfaction, because there is growing interest in how to attract and increase the number of online customers in e-business and e-commerce. Lindgaard et al. (2003) stress that HCI researchers should reveal a structure of user satisfaction, determine how to evaluate it and conclude how it is related to the overall user experience of online customers.
DEFINITION OF ELECTRONIC BANKING
The concept of electronic banking has been defined in many ways (e.g. Daniel, 1999). According to Karjaluoto (2002) electronic banking is a construct that consists of several distribution channels. Daniel (1999) defines electronic banking as the delivery of banks' information and services by banks to customers via different delivery platforms that can be used with different terminal devices such as a personal computer and a mobile phone with browser or desktop software, telephone or digital television. The different forms of electronic banking are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1. Different forms of banking in electronic banking (Daniel 1999)
|
Form of banking |
Description |
|
PC banking |
The customer installs banking software on his or her personal computer. The customer has access to his or her account with that specific software. |
|
Internet banking |
Customer can access his or her bank account via the Internet using a PC or mobile phone and web-browser. |
|
TV-based banking |
The use of satellite or cable to deliver account information to the TV screens of customers. |
|
Telephone-based banking |
Customers can access their bank and account via SMS and as well as by ordinary phone using services of interactive voice responses (IVR). |
It should be noted that electronic banking is a larger concept than banking via the Internet (Karjaluoto, 2002). The Internet is a main delivery channel for electronic banking and its value to customers and banks is continuously increasing (Karjaluoto, 2002; Mattila, 2001).
DIFFERENT BANKING CHANNELS FOR CUSTOMERS
Hadden & Whalley (2002) observe that customers often simultaneously used many banking channels. Hadden & Whalley (2002) point out that a challenge for banks is how to connect with customers and provide financial services to them through the right channels, at the right time and in the right way.
The HCI-related challenges in Internet banking are related to business interaction between the bank and customer. Hadden & Whalley (2002) stress that it is crucial that the banking interaction is suited the customer's life situation. From this perspective it is important to give customers freedom to choose the most appropriate channel that best suits their preferences. In addition, the type of business affects customers’ choice of channel. According to Hiltunen, Laukka, & Luomala (2002), customers’ channel preferences vary between countries because of cultural differences, use-habits and legislation.
The business interaction between the bank and the customer takes place through different channels (Hiltunen et al., 2002). According to Hiltunen et al. (2002) the interaction can be described as a continuum, which is described in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Different banking channels
Figure 1 shows the different banking channels presented as a continuum where left side channels are limited by time and place and channels on the right side are more free from these constraints (Hiltunen, et al 2002).
The physical interaction between the bank and customer takes place in branch offices, which are limited in both time and location. By contrast Internet banking and mobile banking are the most flexible banking channels that are more free from constraints such as time and place (Hiltunen et al., 2002). It has been proposed that a branch office is the primary channel for purchasing many financial products because it offers the customer a secure physical location for the transaction of complex financial business with real people (Hadden et al., 2002)
However, The Finnish Banker's Association (2004b) concludes that Finnish retail banking differs in many ways from typical retail banking in Europe. In Finland, the current trend is the movement from traditional branch banking to electronic banking, which provides many benefits, challenges, and opportunities for the whole banking sector (Karjaluoto, 2002)
From the customer's point of view, Internet banking offers new value to customer because it makes available a full range of services that are not offered in branch offices (Karjaluoto, 2002). Modern Internet technology makes it possible to create customized banking services for every individual customer (Mattila, 2001). According to Daniel (1999), customers' value features in Internet banking such as convenience, increased choice of access to the bank, improved control over their banking activities and finances, ease of use, speed and security.
From the banks perspective the main benefits of electronic banking are cost savings, reaching new segments of the population, efficiency, cross selling, third-party integration, and customer satisfaction (Hiltunen et al., 2004; Joseph, 1999). Wah (1999) remarks that the success of banks operating via the Internet depends on their ability to attract and keep customers. Sheshunoff (2000) admits that banks implement Internet banking services in an attempt to create powerful barriers to customers exiting. In general, it has been reported that Internet banking saves time and money, provides convenience and accessibility, and has a positive impact on customer satisfaction (Karjaluoto, 2002; Mattila, 2001). To summarize, Internet banking offers many benefits both to banks and their customers (Karjaluoto, 2002; Mattila, 2001).
Despite of these benefits Internet banking includes many challenges. HCI-related challenge of Internet banking is how to satisfy new online customer segments. Hiltunen et al. (2002) argue that a key factor in this competition for online customers is the quality of customer service, which includes usable user interfaces of Internet banking. From this perspective the usability of Internet banking becomes an essential factor in the competition for online customers.
DEFINITIONS OF USABILITY
The concept of usability has been defined in many ways in the academic literature (Nielsen, 1993; Shneiderman & Plaisant, 2005). Nielsen (1993) stresses that usability is not a single, one-dimensional property of a user interface, and argues that usability could be defined by using five attributes, which are learnability, efficiency, memorability, errors and satisfaction. A formal and stricter definition of the term is derived from the ISO 9241-11 (1998) standard, which defines usability as:
The extent to which a product can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified context of use.
FRAMEWORK TO MEASURE THE USER SATISFACTION
The concept of user satisfaction has been used since the early 1980 (Bailey & Pearson, 1983; Ives, Olson, & Baroudi, 1983) and the end user computing satisfactions have been studied since the 1980 (Bailey & Pearson, 1983; J. Chin, Diehl, & Norman, 1988; Ives et al., 1983; Rivard & Huff, 1988; Rushinek & Rushinek, 1986). Bailey et al. (1983) state that several factors affect the user satisfaction and it can be seen as a bi-dimensional attitude. The user satisfaction can be seen sum of user’s feeling and attitudes toward several factors that affect the usage situation (Bailey et al., 1983).
Recently, there has been growing interest in user experience (Hiltunen et al., 2002; Lindgaard & Dudek, 2003; Wilson & Sasse, 2004), which can be seen as much larger concept than user satisfaction. User experience has become an important factor in e-business because the end user often pays for the majority of new products and services, which indicates that new products characteristics such as perceived usability, usefulness, appeal and value of money must be matched or exceeded with user expectations toward the product (Wilson & Sasse, 2004). From this perspective, assessing the user experience is essential for many technology products and services (Wilson & Sasse, 2004).
Lindgaard & Dudek (2003) state that user experience consists of some senses of "satisfaction". They define user satisfaction as a subjective sum of the interactive experience. Recently, Tractinsky, Katz, & Ikar (2000) show that perceived aesthetics and perceived usability correlated strongly with each other. They argue that "beauty" or "appeal" is linked to the perceived usability, and consequently what is seen as beautiful is also perceived as usable. However, Lindgaard & Dudek (2003) argue that those business to consumer (B2C) web sites which got high appeal scores but low perceived usability score from users yielded very high satisfaction, but low perceived usability scores, suggesting that what is perceived as beautiful need not also be perceived to be usable.
Lindgaard & Dudek (2003) emphasize that aesthetics, emotion, expectation, likeability and usability all influence the interactive experience, but their significance depends on the current situation. Furthermore, they argue that usability is a important factor in experiencing interactive B2C sites, but it is not known is user interaction with B2C sites whether usability- or satisfaction driven. Their results suggested that web designers should pay attention to both visual appeal and usability. Bailey et al., (1983) report that the HCI research needs a clear definition of user satisfaction, including a complete and valid set of factors and instrument that measures this phenomenon. Lindgaard & Dudek (2003) add that HCI researchers should formulate a clear user experience notion, where the relationship between satisfaction, appeal, perceived and actual usability would be determined. User satisfaction and usability measurements will be next clarified.
In general, user interfaces can be evaluated in many ways (J. Chin et al., 1988). In addition, it has been stated that each component of usability such as effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction can be examined by using either objective or subjective measures (Nielsen, 1993; ISO 9241-11, 1998). User satisfaction has mainly been examined with subjective measurements such as a multiple-item user questionnaire (J. Chin et al., 1988; Lewis, 2002; Lindgaard & Dudek, 2003). Furthermore, the subject satisfaction, which is measured in user test, has been also used as a indicator of user satisfaction, but results are contradictory (Notes & Swan, 2003). Recently, other approaches such as the objective measurement of user experience have been introduced (Wilson & Sasse, 2004).
Wilson & Sasse (2004) show that in some cases objective psychophysiological measures such as skin conductance, heart rate and blood volume pulse can reveal users’ responses toward product which they are either not aware of, or cannot recall at subjective assessment session after the test. However, there are several problems in using physiological measures to analyze user satisfaction and user experience. For example, data analysis and learning to use the equipment are time consuming, and equipment and sensors are financial costly (Wilson & Sasse, 2004). Furthermore, interpretation of user’s mental process and experiences contain difficult problems even in studies where a clear cause and effect relationship has been revealed (Ward & Marsden, 2004). Because of these problems of physiological measures, this research concentrated on examining how the user experience of Internet banking can be evaluated by using subjective measures.
Many studies have concentrated on developing tools to measuring user satisfaction (J. Chin et al., 1988; Rivard & Huff, 1988), user information satisfaction (W. Chin & Lee, 2000; Ives et al., 1983) and usability (Lin, Choong, & Salvendy, 1997). In general, the user satisfaction measurements have been questionnaire scales for which either a Likert or a semantic differential scale have been used.
CONCLUSIONS
In this paper a new conceptual perspective on how to measure user experience in the Internet banking context was introduced. The user experience in Internet banking was a construct of three underlying dimensions: 1) Satisfaction, 2) Appearance, and 3) Ease of use. In addition, when markets of electronic services mature a good user experience of customer could be a competitive advantage, with which companies could differentiate their products and services. From this perspective, it could be argued that evaluation of user experience and different user experience scales will be likely needed in the future.
