IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jouret/v93y2017i1p7-28.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Shopper-Facing Retail Technology: A Retailer Adoption Decision Framework Incorporating Shopper Attitudes and Privacy Concerns

Author

Listed:
  • Inman, J. Jeffrey
  • Nikolova, Hristina

Abstract

Continual innovation and new technology are critical in helping retailers’ create a sustainable competitive advantage. In particular, shopper-facing technology plays an important role in increasing revenues and decreasing costs. In this article, we briefly discuss some of the salient retail technologies over the recent past as well as technologies that are only beginning to gain traction. Additionally, we present a shopper-centric decision calculus that retailers can use when considering a new shopper-facing technology. We argue that new technologies provide value by either increasing revenue through (a) attracting new shoppers, (b) increasing share of volume from existing shoppers, or (c) extracting greater consumer surplus, or decreasing costs through offloading labor to shoppers. Importantly, our framework incorporates shoppers by considering their perceptions of the new technology and their resulting behavioral reactions. Specifically, we argue that shoppers update their perceptions of fairness, value, satisfaction, trust, commitment, and attitudinal loyalty and evaluate the potential intrusiveness of the technology on their personal privacy. These perceptions then mediate the effect of the technology on shopper behavioral reactions such as retail patronage intentions and WOM communication. We present preliminary support for our framework by examining consumers’ perceptions of several new retail technologies, as well as their behavioral intentions. The findings support our thesis that shopper perceptions of the retailer are affected by new shopper-facing technologies and that these reactions mediate behavioral intentions, which in turn drives the ROI of the new technology.

Suggested Citation

  • Inman, J. Jeffrey & Nikolova, Hristina, 2017. "Shopper-Facing Retail Technology: A Retailer Adoption Decision Framework Incorporating Shopper Attitudes and Privacy Concerns," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 7-28.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jouret:v:93:y:2017:i:1:p:7-28
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jretai.2016.12.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022435916300859
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jretai.2016.12.006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter M. Guadagni & John D. C. Little, 1983. "A Logit Model of Brand Choice Calibrated on Scanner Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 203-238.
    2. V. Kumar & Werner Reinartz, 2018. "Customer Relationship Management," Springer Texts in Business and Economics, Springer, edition 3, number 978-3-662-55381-7, April.
    3. Posner, Richard A, 1981. "The Economics of Privacy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(2), pages 405-409, May.
      • Posner, Richard A., 1980. "The Economics of Privacy," Working Papers 16, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.
    4. Jenny Doorn & Janny Hoekstra, 2013. "Customization of online advertising: The role of intrusiveness," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 339-351, December.
    5. David Godes & Dina Mayzlin, 2004. "Using Online Conversations to Study Word-of-Mouth Communication," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 545-560, June.
    6. David Godes & Dina Mayzlin, 2009. "Firm-Created Word-of-Mouth Communication: Evidence from a Field Test," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(4), pages 721-739, 07-08.
    7. Bowie, Norman E. & Jamal, Karim, 2006. "Privacy Rights on the Internet: Self-Regulation or Government Regulation?," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 323-342, July.
    8. Erin Anderson & Barton Weitz, 1989. "Determinants of Continuity in Conventional Industrial Channel Dyads," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(4), pages 310-323.
    9. Fred D. Davis & Richard P. Bagozzi & Paul R. Warshaw, 1989. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 982-1003, August.
    10. Vikas Mittal & Eugene W. Anderson & Akin Sayrak & Pandu Tadikamalla, 2005. "Dual Emphasis and the Long-Term Financial Impact of Customer Satisfaction," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 544-555, August.
    11. Herr, Paul M & Kardes, Frank R & Kim, John, 1991. "Effects of Word-of-Mouth and Product-Attribute Information on Persuasion: An Accessibility-Diagnosticity Perspective," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 17(4), pages 454-462, March.
    12. Eastlick, Mary Ann & Lotz, Sherry L. & Warrington, Patricia, 2006. "Understanding online B-to-C relationships: An integrated model of privacy concerns, trust, and commitment," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(8), pages 877-886, August.
    13. Naresh K. Malhotra & Sung S. Kim & James Agarwal, 2004. "Internet Users' Information Privacy Concerns (IUIPC): The Construct, the Scale, and a Causal Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 336-355, December.
    14. Kathy A. Stewart & Albert H. Segars, 2002. "An Empirical Examination of the Concern for Information Privacy Instrument," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(1), pages 36-49, March.
    15. Bernadette Szajna, 1996. "Empirical Evaluation of the Revised Technology Acceptance Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(1), pages 85-92, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Morlok, Tina & Matt, Christian & Hess, Thomas, 2017. "Privatheitsforschung in den Wirtschaftswissenschaften: Entwicklung, Stand und Perspektiven," Working Papers 1/2017, University of Munich, Munich School of Management, Institute for Information Systems and New Media.
    2. Inyoung Chae & Andrew T. Stephen & Yakov Bart & Dai Yao, 2017. "Spillover Effects in Seeded Word-of-Mouth Marketing Campaigns," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(1), pages 89-104, January.
    3. Kim, Yeolib & Kim, Seung Hyun & Peterson, Robert A. & Choi, Jeonghye, 2023. "Privacy concern and its consequences: A meta-analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    4. Gao, Tao (Tony) & Rohm, Andrew J. & Sultan, Fareena & Pagani, Margherita, 2013. "Consumers un-tethered: A three-market empirical study of consumers' mobile marketing acceptance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(12), pages 2536-2544.
    5. Tamara Dinev & Paul Hart, 2006. "An Extended Privacy Calculus Model for E-Commerce Transactions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 61-80, March.
    6. Ashutosh Tiwari & Timothy J. Richards, 2016. "Social Networks and Restaurant Ratings," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(2), pages 153-174, April.
    7. Naresh K. Malhotra & Sung S. Kim & Ashutosh Patil, 2006. "Common Method Variance in IS Research: A Comparison of Alternative Approaches and a Reanalysis of Past Research," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(12), pages 1865-1883, December.
    8. Weiyin Hong & Frank K. Y. Chan & James Y. L. Thong, 2021. "Drivers and Inhibitors of Internet Privacy Concern: A Multidimensional Development Theory Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 539-564, January.
    9. Kirsten Martin, 2016. "Understanding Privacy Online: Development of a Social Contract Approach to Privacy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 137(3), pages 551-569, September.
    10. Richards, Timothy J. & Tiwari, Ashutosh, 2014. "Social Networks and Restaurant Choice," 2014 AAEA/EAAE/CAES Joint Symposium: Social Networks, Social Media and the Economics of Food, May 29-30, 2014, Montreal, Canada 166112, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Taylor, David G. & Strutton, David, 2010. "Has e-marketing come of age? Modeling historical influences on post-adoption era Internet consumer behaviors," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(9-10), pages 950-956, September.
    12. Colmekcioglu, Nazan & Marvi, Reza & Foroudi, Pantea & Okumus, Fevzi, 2022. "Generation, susceptibility, and response regarding negativity: An in-depth analysis on negative online reviews," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 235-250.
    13. Garrett P. Sonnier & Leigh McAlister & Oliver J. Rutz, 2011. "A Dynamic Model of the Effect of Online Communications on Firm Sales," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 702-716, July.
    14. Haque, Md Ziaul & Qian, Aimin & Hoque, Md Rakibul & Lucky, Suraiea Akter, 2022. "A unified framework for exploring the determinants of online social networks (OSNs) on institutional investors’ capital market investment decision," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    15. Neill, William D. & Richard, James E., 2012. "Intranet portals: Marketing and managing individuals’ acceptance and use," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 147-157.
    16. Sullivan, Yulia W. & Kim, Dan J., 2018. "Assessing the effects of consumers’ product evaluations and trust on repurchase intention in e-commerce environments," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 199-219.
    17. Yucheng Zhang & Zhiling Wang & Lin Xiao & Lijun Wang & Pei Huang, 2023. "Discovering the evolution of online reviews: A bibliometric review," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-22, December.
    18. Tiwari, Ashutosh & Richards, Timothy J., 2013. "Anonymous Social Networks versus Peer Networks in Restaurant Choice," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150467, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Sebastian Schneider & Frank Huber, 2022. "You paid what!? Understanding price-related word-of-mouth and price perception among opinion leaders and innovators," Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(1), pages 64-80, February.
    20. Sunil Gupta & Valarie Zeithaml, 2006. "Customer Metrics and Their Impact on Financial Performance," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 718-739, 11-12.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jouret:v:93:y:2017:i:1:p:7-28. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-retailing .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.