Despite widespread adoption of crowdfunding for funding social donation projects, its adoption among start-up entrepreneurs is significantly low, in developing countries in particular. Research has been performed to investigate the crowdfunding adoption intention of start-up entrepreneurs in Bangladesh. This study aimed to identify the motivation behind the intentions of the entrepreneurs to adopt crowdfunding, using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model with extensions. Empirical data were collected from 317 respondents and analyzed using Partial Least Squares-based Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). The results indicate that performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions and perceived trust mpact significantly ion the entrepreneurs’ behavioral intention to adopt crowdfunding. In contrast, trialability and perceived trust were not found to be significant determinants. However, trialability has a significant positive relation with use behavior or actual use, whereas no significant relationship has been identified between behavioral intention and use behavior.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbbasSKHassanHAAsifJAhmedBHassanFHaiderSS (2018) Integration of TTF, UTAUT, and ITM for Mobile Banking Adoption. International Journal of Advanced Engineering, Management and Science (IJAEMS)4(5): 375–379.
2.
AboelmagedMGebbaT (2013) Mobile banking adoption: an examination of technology acceptance model and theory of planned behavior. International Journal of Business Research and Development2(1).
3.
AdhikaryBKKutsunaKHodaT (2018) Crowdfunding Potential in Developing Countries—A Case of Bangladesh. In AdhikaryBKKutsunaKHodaT, Crowdfunding Lesson from Japan’s Approach. Singapore: SpringerBriefs in Economics. Springer, Singapore, pp. 77–94.
4.
AdhikaryBKutsunaK (2016) Small Business Finance in Bangladesh: Can ‘Crowdfunding’ Be an Alternative?Review of Integrative Business and Economics Research4(4): 1–21.
5.
AgarwalRPrasadJ (1997) The role of innovation characteristics, and perceived voluntariness in the acceptance of information technologies. Decision Sciences28(3): 557–582.
6.
AggelidisVPChatzoglouPD (2009) Using a modified technology acceptance model in hospitals. International journal of medical informatics78(2): 115–126.
7.
AhlersGKCummingsDGuntherCSchwelzerD (2015). Signalling in equity crowdfunding. Entrpreneurship Theory and Practice39: 955–980.
8.
AjzenI (2002) Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32: 665–683.
9.
AkerDAKumarVDayGS (2004) Pesquisa de marketing. Portugues: Atlas.
10.
AlAwadhiSMorrisA (2008) The Use of the UTAUT Model in the Adoption of E-government Services in Kuwait. In: Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Proceedings of the 41st Annual, pp. 219–220. Hawaii: IEEE.
11.
Al-ShafiSWeerakkodyV (2009) Understanding citizens’ behavioral intention in the adoption of e-goverrnment services in the state of Qatar. In: 17th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2009). pp.1618–1629. Verona, Italy.
12.
Al-SomaliSAGholamiRCleggB (2011) An investigation into the adoption of electronic commerce among Saudi Arabian SMEs. E-Commerce for Organizational Development and Competitive Advantage9(2): 41–65.
13.
AndersonJGerbingD (1988) Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin103(3): 411–423.
14.
BabbieE (2004) Survey research. In: BabbieE, The practice of social research. Belmount, USA: Nelson Education, pp. 242–280.
15.
BagozziRPYiYSinghS (1991) On the use of structural equation models in experimental designs: Two extensions. International Journal of Research in Marketing8(2): 125–140.
16.
BanduraA (1982) Self efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist37(2): 122.
BarclayDHigginsCThompsonR (1995) The partial least squares (PLS) approach to causal modeling: Personal computer adoption and use as an illustration. Technology studies2(2): 285–309.
20.
BelleflammePLambertTSchwienbacherA (2013) Individual crowdfunding practices. Journal of Venture Capital15(4): 313–333.
21.
BenassiP (1999) TRUSTe: An online privacy seal program. Communication of the ACM42(2): 56.
22.
BergerANBlackLK (2011) Bank size, lending technologies and small business finance. Journal of Banking and Finance35(3): 724–735.
23.
BhimaniA (1996) Securing the commercial Internet. Communication of the ACM, 39(6): 29–35.
24.
BrymanACramerD (2005) Quantitative data analysis with SPSS 12 and 13: a guide for social scientists. Routledge: London.
25.
ByunHChiuWBaeJ (2018) Exploring the Adoption of Sports Brand Apps: An Application of the Modified Technology Acceptance Model. International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management (IJABIM)9(1): 52–65.
26.
ChinWW (1998) Commentary: Issues and opinion on structural equation modeling. MIS Quarterly Vol. 22
27.
ChurchillGAIacobucciD (2002) Marketing research (8th ed.). Florida: Harcourt College Publishers.
28.
ColomboMFranzoniCRossi-LamastraC (2015) Internal social capital and the attraction of early contributions in crowdfunding. Entreprise Theory Practice(39): 75–100.
29.
DavisFD (1989) Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly13(3): 319–340.
30.
FalkRFMillerNB (1992) A primer for soft modelling. Akron: University of Akron Press.
31.
FeathermanMPavlouP (2003) Predicting e-services adoption: A perceived risk facets perspective. International Journal of Human Computer Studies59(4): 451–474.
32.
FeathermanMPavlouP (2003) Predicting E-Services Adoption: A Perceived Risk Facets Perspective. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies59(4): 451–474.
33.
FieldA (2013) Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. London: SAGE.
34.
FornellCLarckerDF (1981) Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of marketing research18(3): 382–388.
35.
GefenDStraubDBoudreauMC (2000) Structural equation modeling and regression:guidelines for research practice. Communications of Association for Information Systems4(7): 1–77.
36.
GerberEMHuiJSKuoPY (2012) Crowd-funding: Why people are motivated to post and fund projects on crowd funding platforms. In: the International Workshop on Design, Influence, and Social Technologies: Techniques, Impacts and Ethics 2:11. Northwestern University Evanston, IL.
37.
GerberEHuiJ (2013) Crowdfunding: Motivations and deterrents for participation. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction(20): 34.
38.
GleasureR (2015) Resistance to crowdfunding among entrepreneurs: An impression management perspective. Journal of Strategic Information Systems24(1): 219–233.
GotzOLiehrGKKrafftM (2010) Evaluation of structural equation models using the partial least squares (PLS) approach. In: Handbook of Partial Least Squares. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 691–711.
41.
GrewalDGotliebJMarmorsteinH (1994) The moderating effects of message framing and source credibility on the price-perceived risk relationship. Journal of Consumer Research21: 145–153.
42.
HairJFJrHultGTRingleCSarstedtM (2014) A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). California: SAGE.
43.
HairJFTathamRL (2006) Multivariate data analysis (Vol. 6th). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
44.
HairJFBlackWCBabinBJAndersonRETathamRL (2006) Multivariate Data Analysis (6th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall, Pearson Education, Inc.
45.
HairJFSarstedtMRingleCMMenaJA (2012) An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. Journal of the academy of marketing science40(3): 414–433.
46.
HasanMRAhmadMSRahmanMSIslamMT (2017) Exploring the Prerequisites of Institutionalizing Crowdfunding Process in Bangladesh as an Alternative Financing Option for the Startups. Global Journal Of Management And Business Research18(1): 1–16.
HenselerJHubonaGRayPA (2016) Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: Updated guidelines. Industrial Management and Data Systems116(1): 2–20.
49.
HenselerJRingleCMSinkovicsRR (2009) The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Advances in international marketing20(1): 277–319.
HofstedeG (1980) Culture and organizations. International Studies of Management & Organization, 10(4): 15–41.
52.
IfinedoP (2012) Technology acceptance by health profesionals in Canada: An analysis with a modified UTAUT model. In: Proceedings of the 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, USA, pp. 4–7.
53.
infoDev (2013) Crowdfunding’s Potential for the Developing World. Washington, DC: The World Bank, Finance and Private Sector Development.
54.
IslamM (2018) Oporajoy has introduced a crowdfunding platform. The Daily Asian Age, 18 July.
55.
JegeleviciuteSValencieneL (2015) Comparative analysis of the ways crowdfunding is promoted. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences213: 268–274.
56.
KangMGaoYWangTZhengH (2016) Understanding the determinants of funders’ investment intentions on crowdfunding platforms: A trust-based perspective. Industrial Management & Data Systems116(8): 1800–1819.
57.
KimSDJeonIO (2017) Influencing Factors on the Acceptance for Crowd Funding—Focusing on Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technoloyg. Journal of Korean Institute of Intellegence Systems (27): 150–156.
58.
KimSGLeeSG (2014) Can Crowd Funding be the Economic Basis for the Independence of Small-Scale Culture & Arts?-A Study on Funding Experiences of Indie Musicians. Media Gend. Culture29: 5–42.
59.
KlarnerPSarstedtMHoeckMRingleCM (2013) Disentangling the effects of team competences, team adaptability, and client communication on the performance of management consulting teams. Long Range Planning46(3): 258–286.
60.
KochJASieringM (2015) Crowdfunding success factors: The characteristics of successfully funded projects on crowdfunding platforms. In: Proceedings of the 23rd European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2015), Muenster: SSRN, pp. 1–15.
61.
KwonHILeeSHNaYB (2014) Success and Failure Case Analysis of Crowdfunding: Focused on Community Art Project. Journal of Korea Contents Association14: 125–136.
62.
LacanCDesmetP (2017) Does the crowdfunding platform matter? Risks of negative attitudes in two-sided markets. Journal of Consumer Marketing34(6): 472–479.
63.
LeeALeeSJKimKKwonHJ (2016) Promoting the Masses’ Investment through Crowdfunding Platform: Focusing on Lending based Crowdfunding Platform. Journal of Korea Contents Association16: 644–660.
64.
LeeCLeeJShinD (2015) Factor Analysis of the Motivation on Crowdfunding Participants: An Empirical Study of Funder Centered Reward-type Platform. The Journal of Society for e-Business Studies20(1): 137–151.
65.
LeeHS (2016) Effect of Perceived Risk, Perceived Benefit, and Korea Wave to Crowdfunding Participation in China. Journal of Korea Contents Association16: 204–213.
66.
LeeNBrownR (2017) Innovation, SMEs and the liability of distance: The demand and supply of bank funding in peripheral UK regions. Journal of Economic Geography17(1): 233–260.
67.
LeeTT (2004) Nurses’ Adoption of Technology: Application of Rogers’ Innovation-Diffusion Model. Applied Nursing Research17(4): 231–238.
68.
LeyAWeavenS (2011) Exploring Agency Dynamics Of Crowdfunding In Start-Up Capital Financing. Academy Of Entrepreneurship Journal, 85–110.
69.
LiYZHeTLSongYRYangZZhouRT (2018) Factors impacting donors’ intention to donate to charitable crowd-funding projects in China: A UTAUT-based model. Information Communication for Society21: 404–415.
70.
LitwinMS (1995) How to measure survey reliability and validity (Vol. 7). California: SAGE.
71.
LuJYuCSLiuC (2005) Facilitating conditions, wireless trust and adoption intention. Journal of Computer Information Systems46(1): 17–24.
72.
MachtSWeatherstonJ (2014) The benefits of online crowdfunding for fund seeking business ventures. Journal of Strategic Change23(2): 1–14.
MitchellVW (1992) Understanding consumers’ behavior: can perceived risk theory help?Management Decision30(2): 26–31.
75.
MollickE (2014) The dynamics of crowdfunding: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Venture29: 1–16.
76.
MoonYHwangJ (2018) Crowdfunding as an Alternative Means for Funding Sustainable Appropriate Technology: Acceptance Determinants of Backers. Sustainability10: 1–18.
77.
MooreGCBenbasatI (1991) Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information systems research2(3): 192–222.
78.
MooreGBenbasatI (1991) Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information System Research12: 192–222.
79.
MorduchJ (1999) The Microfinance Promise. Journal of Economic Literature37(4): 1569–1614.
80.
OliveiraTFariaMThomasMPopovicA (2014) Extending the understanding of mobile banking adopion: When UTAUT meets TTF and ITM. International Journal of Information Management34(5): 689–703.
81.
OrdaniniAMiceliLPizzettiMParasuramanA (2011) Crowd-funding: Transforming customers into investors through innovative service platforms. Journal of Service Management (22): 443–470.
82.
OrlikowskiWJBaroudiJJ (1991) Studying information technology in organizations: Research approaches and assumptions. Information systems research2(1): 1–28.
83.
PallantJ (2005) SPSS Survival Guide. NSW: Allen & Unwin.
84.
PalviaPLSalamAF (2004) Research methodologies in MIS: An Update. Communications of the Association for Information Systems14(1): 24.
85.
ParkWLeeSY (2016) An Exploratory Study on the Factors Affecting Crowdfunding: An Analysis on Online Donation. e-Business Studies (17): 55–69.
86.
PaschenJ (2017) Choose wisely: Crowdfunding through the stages of the startup life cycle. Business Horizons60(2): 179–188.
87.
RaymondS (2015) Crowdfunding in Emerging Markets: Lessons from East African Startups. Washington DC: World Bank Group.
RogersE (2003) Diffusion of Innovations (4th ed.). New York: Free Press.
91.
RosenPA (2005) The effect of personal innovativeness on technology acceptance and use. Oklahoma: Oklahoma Stae University.
92.
SahinIThompsonA (2006) Using Rogers’ Theory to Interpret Instructional Computer Use by COE Faculty. Journal of Research on Technology in Education39(1): 81–104.
93.
SantosaPIWeiKKChanHC (2005) User involvement and user satisfaction with information-seeking activity. European Journal of Information Systems14(4): 361–370.
94.
SaundersMN (2011) Research methods for business students (5th ed.). India: Pearson Education.
95.
SaundersMLewisPThornhillA (2003) Research methods for business students (3rd ed.). Harlow: Prentice Hall.
SteinbergSDeMariaR (2012) The Crowdfunding Bible. Australia: Read Me.
101.
StemlerAR (2013) The JOBS Act and crowdfunding: Harnessing the power and money of masses. Business Horizons56(3): 271–275.
102.
StemlerA. R. (2013). The JOBS Act and Crowdfunding: Harnessing the power and money of the masses. Business Horizons, 56(3), 271–275.
103.
TabachnickBGFidellLS (1996) SPSS for Windows Workbook to Accompany Large Sample Examples of Using Multivariate Statistics. Harper Collins College Publishers.
104.
TabachnickBGFidellLS (2007) Profile analysis: the multivariate approach to repeated measures. In: TabachnickBGFidellLS, Using multivariate statistics (5th ed). Boston: Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education, pp. 311–374.
105.
TanPJ (2013) Applying the UTAUT to understand the factors affecting the use of English e-learning websites in Taiwan. Sage Open3(4): 215.
106.
TuranSS (2015) Financial Innovation Crowdfunding: Friend or Foe?Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences195(1): 353 – 362.
107.
Van SchaikP (2009) Unified theory of acceptance and use for websites used by students in higher education. Journal of Educational Computing Research40(2): 229–257.
108.
VenkateshVMorrisMDavisGDavisF (2003) User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quaterly27: 425–478.
109.
VenkateshVThongJXuX (2012) Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quaterly36: 57–178.
110.
VenkateshVThongJXuX (2012) Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quaterly36: 57–178.
111.
WilliamsMRanaNDwivediY (2015) The unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): a literature review. Journal of Enterprise Information Management28(3): 443–488.
112.
WrightKB (2005) Researching Internet-based populations: Advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages, and web survey services. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication10(3).
113.
Ya-ZhengLTong-LiangHYi-RanSZhengYRong-TingZ (2018) Factors impacting donors’ intention to donateo charitable crowd-funding projects in China: a UTAUT-based model. Information, Communication & Society21(3): 404–415.
