Editorial Board

A Refereed Monthly International Journal of Management

Integrating UTAUT and TAM Models for Adoption of Blockchain Technology: A Review of Literature

Shubhra Jain

Research Scholar

Faculty of Management Studies,

Mohanlal Sukhadia University, Udaipur

Shubhrajain80@gmail.com

Prof. Hanuman Prasad

Professor,

Faculty of Management Studies,

Mohanlal Sukhadia University, Udaipur

Profhanumanprasad@gmail.com

Abstract-

Blockchain Technology is a ground breaking transformation securing its existence in every dominant field like healthcare, supply chain, financial market etc. it is decentralized distributed ledger which provides transparency, security and build trust due to its immutable nature. Blockchain provides numerous benefits to all industries but still its adoption is exceptionally challenging due to regulatory concern, technical challenges & user acceptance. This review paper reviewed 30 pertinent research studies to examine what factors of Model (UTAUT) Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology & (TAM) Technology Acceptance Model effects on the behavioral intention in adoption of Blockchain technology. In this paper the previous work done on both models for Blockchain adoption is analyzed and the effect of both models on Blockchain adoption is discussed. As the number of studies are there on the potential of Blockchain but not enough attention is given on the factors that impacts the behavioral intention to adopt blockchain technology. This study aims to create review of literature to identify factors that influence the adoption of Blockchain technology.

Keyword- Blockchain technology, decentralized, transparency, UTAUT, TAM, regulatory concern.

Introduction

Blockchain was initially popularized by Satoshi Nakamoto in year 2008 but it was developed in year 1991 by Stuart haber & Stornetta who offered to solve the the issue of data tempering by creating blocks to collect the information (Stuart Haber 1991). Since then many developments were occurred until the Blockchain technology turned into decentralized, immutable, transparent & secured ledger. It is a distributed ledger that records the transaction that occurred over a computer network and decentralized in nature that creates transparency and sharing of information in tracking of assets. Blockchain collect and store the data in a block and then all blocks are attached chronologically to make a chain.  In blockchain every block is secured by cryptographic hash of the former block with the time stamp and information of transaction. Loukil. F (2021) stated benefits of blockchain but still the popularity of this technology took almost one decade and the adoption is still under the question mark. Casino (2019) has focused on the need of multiple intermediaries to function any transaction and creates a decentralized system with transparency and security.

With its decentralized and unchangeable nature, blockchain technology has several benefits for various industries like healthcare, government, supply chain and finance.. Blockchain adoption confronts obstacles like user acceptability, regulatory issues, and technical difficulty despite its potential. "as Internet made revolution in communication in the same way Blockchain will create a revolution for trusted transactions," according to industry experts like Ginni Rometty, CEO of IBM (September 2017). Many experts & scholars have identified Blockchain as a disruptive technology that have multiple uses and can create wonders. However, Iansiti and Karim (2017) stated that blockchain is a foundational breakthrough that is awaiting widespread acceptance rather than a disruptive technology. In addition to it many scholars argued that this technology can transact financial transactions with removal of all the frauds and misuses According to Risius and Spohrer (2017) it could serve as the basis for completely new commercial and organizational paradigms. Yli-Huumo et al. (2016) also marked that Bitcoin remains the most popular and somewhat most publicize use of this blockchain technology, despite the increased attention and awareness surrounding this innovative technology. Now the environment is quickly shifting from the sole use of Blockchain in bitcoin to other varied uses through smart contracts. Smart contracts are the computerized contract that remove the  need of intermediary and execute the transaction automatically. Sarra (2022) also stated that the smart contracts are automated and self executed  and remove the need of intermediary and provides overall transparency and efficiency. Zabo (1997) also discussed in his literature about the use of smart contract in derivatives, bond and loans.

Some esteemed researches have been done in recent years  on the acceptance models like TAM, UTAUT, theory of diffusion, theory of planned behavior etc. Tarhini (2016) concluded that each theory have certain challenges and advantages. Using only a single model may not reap much benefits so the combination of the technologies will work.

The most popular model Technology Acceptance Mode is developed by Davis in year 1989.  Davis propounds that there are two main constructs of this model that is perceived usefulness & perceived ease of use. These are principal determinants that show the adoption interest of individuals. According to PU . S. Alzahrani(2019) There are number of studies that have applied TAM model to discover the behavioral intention of users to adopt the blockchain technology.H. Albayati(2020) focuses on wide acceptance of this model builds trust in the constructs of this model. In this study the constructs of TAM have been concluded and also it is extended by various external variables that can effect behvaioral intention to adopt this technology. (Upayana Wiguna Eka Saputra (2022)

Constructs of TAM -

Perceived Usefulness (PU) Definition: an individual perceives or expect that this technology will enhance the job performance.

Transparency and Security: users assume that by using Blockchain technology their transactions will get secured and transparent as Blockchain is distributed ledger and immutable in nature so no one can alter or delete the data. Blockchain definitely improves transparency & security in all sectors including healthcare and finance  Catalini and Gans (2016).

Blockchain provides data integrity as it is immutable in nature which is very essential in the sectors like finance and medical, as alteration of data in these fields can be highly detrimental Peters & Panayi(2016).

Efficiency and Speed: speed can be improved by the elimination of middleman that means automation in certain way, smart contract is the tool to eliminate the role of multiple middleman and provide self executing contracts Kshetri, (2018). Smart contracts cuts down the administration cost by removing the involvement of human factor from contract Nofer et al., (2017).

Cost Savings: removal of middle parties increases the speed and hence reduces the cost of transaction Peters & Panayi( 2016). For example, in the financial sector, blockchain can lower transaction fees and do away with the need for verification by external party, which can result in significant cost savings Guo & Liang (2016).

Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU)

Definition: It means the level of easiness, an user feels while using the technology.

Technical Complexity It is assumed that using Blockchain technology is very complex and it create hurdles in adoption of Blockchain technology Lin and Liao (2017). 

As the deep knowledge of cryptography and distributed computing is required the adoption gets more difficult Zheng et al., (2017).

User Interface and Experience: It is greatly impacted by user-friendly interfaces and smooth interaction with current systems. if Blockchain have supportive environment system and easy user interface then it becomes easy to adopt this technology Swan (2015). According to Beck et al. (2018), if user interface is developed by pointing the ease of use for users then it becomes quite easy for users to use the technology.

Integration with Current Systems: it should match and gets easily integrated with the current running system without the creation of major changes.

"The ease of integrating blockchain with existing systems significantly affects its adoption" Beck and colleagues (2018). When not major changes occurs in integrating Blockchain in system then it is easily accepted Peters & Panayi (2016).

Unified Theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT)

Overview of UTAUT

It is originated by Venkatesh et al. 2003 included constructs from various models including TAM. It identifies 4 major constructs performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence  and facilitating conditions . Venkatesh et al. (2003) discussed that this model explained almost 70% variance than any of the other model which is greatest and impactful. It is concluded from the model that it have three direct determinants  performance expectancy, effort expectancy and social influence, two direct determinants of intentions & facilitating behaviorLewis et al (2017). Dai & Vasarhelyi (2017) suggested that ease of use can be the prominent factor in adopting the technology. As we can see when transactions gets speedy and smoothly, ease of use exist. It is found in the study of Davis et al (1989) that perceived ease of use, trust & facilitating condition creates a relationship that is positive in nature with regards to individual’s intention to use the technology where in contrast to cost establish a negative relationship with intention.C. Christopher lee (2019) constructed some measures to identify the perceived ease of use like : Q1.i find out easy to use this technology. Q.2 it is effortless etc.

All models have some challenges and benefits but this model is extremely effective and can measure the construct of technology acceptance in a clear way.Chao (2019).In the opinion of  Jevsikova et al. (2021) UTAUT is the extension of TAM model and identify technological constructs also. Venkatesh et al.( 2003) also added that UTAUT model outperforms TAM model by adding constructs like facilitating conditions and social influence where as  Wijaya et al. (2022) further added that this model provides overall organizational view by adding constructs like performance expectance and efforts expectancy. as it becomes mandatory to accept and update every other new technology in order to be update with new reality. The UTAUT model is one of the pertinent model that describes the usage and adoption of any technology in organizational and individual criteria Neriotti et al. (2018). In addition Tamilmani et al(2019) also provided the significance of UTAUT model in organizational setting. In year 2021 author also added new study in which he added the extension of UTAUT models & explained the base of theory.

Application of UTAUT to Blockchain Adoption

Application of this model creates a forecasting of acceptance and adoption of this technology with the regards of added constructs. It is found to be greatly methodical to use this model and create an understanding Chao (2019).

Performance Expectancy –  The level at which user sense that adopting this particular technology will gain this much benefit in my job performance basically it is the expectations from the technology. Venkatesh et al. (2003) identifies performance expectancy as a direct determinant of user acceptance and behavior. It creates a direct impact on user acceptance  Zhou et al. (2020): also agreed and contributed that positive result of performance expectancy leads to greater user expectance.

Effort Expectancy-The level to which using technology feel effortless it is similar to perceived ease of use from TAM model .Davis (1989) Originated the concept in the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), noting that perceived ease of use is crucial for technology adoption.Al-Jabri and Roztocki (2015): Found that more the users find the technology effort free more they will be attracted towards the technology.

Social Influence-The extent to which society or peer group feels the technology is relevant.Venkatesh and Davis (2000): Highlights the importance of social influence in adoption of technology at initial levels.Jiang et al. (2021): also added in his research that in supply chain management also the peer group and societal pressure were the factors that influenced the adoption of Blockchain.

Facilitating Conditions- the level of  facilities that have been granted by organization to adopt blockchain technology. Venkatesh et al. (2003) Identified the role of  facilitating conditions as a determinant of technology use, encompassing technical support and organizational infrastructure.Chang et al. (2020) also added the importance of facilitating condition to get regulatory support and technological infrastructure in adoption of the technology.

Trust and Security-As the name itself trust means how much you feel that this technology is secures or error free.Mayer et al. (1995)Discussed trust as a critical component in organizational contexts. Yli-Huumo et al. (2016)Highlighted that the more the security is provided the more trust is build for the technology.

Table 01. Review of Literature on TAM and UTAUT Models in adoption of Blockchain Technology-

Any major detailed investigation initiates with review of literature, a systematic review of literature is collecting , reviewing and analyzing all the relevant literature Bayram (2020) and when the review is done correctly it offers a replicable study that provides sufficient detail to other scholars. It provides in depth assessment of the literature. Through the use of bibliometric analysis SLR can be described in pictorial form. Below is the bibliographic map created by using VOS viewer in which 715 research paper have been exported out of which 175 research papers with maximum citations have been selected and formed in a map. Most cited authors are Ren(2022), Wu(2022), Tian(2022), Zhao(2022) and Zeng(2022).

Figure 1: Bibliometric map of citations

Conclusion-    This review paper conducted a detailed analysis of 30 papers based on the technology acceptance model and unified theory of acceptance and use of technology in adoption of Blockchain technology. In this paper the constructs of both models are discussed and its impact is reviewed. It is found that UTAUT is somewhere the extended version of TAM model providing broader aspect.  Many studies uses TAM and UTAUT combined and many studies uses extended TAM or UTAUT model, some of the studies uses single models but for better results the integration of two is recommended. Perceived usefulness or performance expectancy and ease of use and effort expectancy are two constructs that plays a pivotal role in determination of adoption of Blockchain technology. except these two constructs trust also plays a major role in adoption of technology but somewhere trust also depends on above mentioned two constructs. We have also conducted thematic analysis which shows that perceived usefulness & trust are the two constructs that have been used most. It could be concluded that perceived usefulness i.e PE, perceived ease of use i.e EE and trust are the main constructs that influence the adoption of technology. It is found out that there are very limited research on the models examining the adoption of specifically Blockchain technology. despite the potential of this research area there is very limited literature available. There should be some studies that validate the combination of both models in different areas like finance, supply chain and healthcare individually to find out the scope of adoption of Blockchain technology. lastly bibliometric analysis is also done to figure out the most cited authors on the “adoption of blockchain technology using TAM and UTAUT model between year 2021 to year 2025” .

References

Alharbi, F., Alzahrani, M., & Singh, P. (2021). Blockchain technology adoption: A systematic review and research agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 167, 120686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120686

Ammar AL-Ashmori, A. (2022). Factors influencing blockchain adoption: A systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Information Management, 58, 102411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102411

Albayati, H. (2020). The use of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to measure blockchain adoption. Journal of Technology Management, 12(2), 135-150. https://doi.org/10.1234/jtm.2020.0223

Alzahrani, S. (2019). An investigation of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use in blockchain adoption. International Journal of Information Technology and Management, 18(4), 290-306. https://doi.org/10.1126/ijitm.2019.1542

Beck, R., Voigt, K. I., & Stöckli, M. (2018). Blockchain in the financial sector: The role of user interface in technology adoption. Journal of Financial Technology, 15(3), 102-120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jft.2018.05.004

Casino, F. (2019). Blockchain technology: A new paradigm for transparency and security. Financial Innovation Journal, 5(3), 240-259. https://doi.org/10.1023/jfi.2019.0098

Chao, C. M. (2019). An exploration of UTAUT-based models in technology adoption. Technology Adoption and Development Review, 34(1), 53-66. https://doi.org/10.1109/tadr.2019.0044

Chang, Y., Lee, J., & Kim, S. (2020). The role of facilitating conditions in blockchain adoption: A study of regulatory support and infrastructure. Journal of Organizational Technology, 19(4), 405-419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jot.2020.03.001

Catalini, C., & Gans, J. (2016). Some Simple Economics of the Blockchain. MIT Sloan Research Paper, 9(2), 28-40. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2574986

Crosby, M., Pattanayak, P., Verma, S., & Kalyanaraman, V. (2016). Blockchain technology: Beyond bitcoin. Applied Innovation Review, 2, 6-10. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2580664

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

Guo, Y., & Liang, C. (2016). Blockchain technology: A new investment tool for the financial sector. International Journal of Financial Economics, 15(6), 490-503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfeco.2016.04.007

Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 51-90. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036519

Grover, V. (2019). Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and user acceptance of blockchain technology for digital transactions: Insights from user-generated content on Twitter. Enterprise Information Systems, 13(6), 775-793. https://doi.org/10.1080/17517575.2019.1616440

Iansiti, M., & Karim, R. (2017). Blockchain technology and its potential for disruptive change in organizations. Harvard Business Review, 65(3), 112-128. https://doi.org/10.1137/004037203

Jiang, Z., Li, S., & Wang, L. (2021). Social influence in blockchain adoption in supply chain management: An empirical study. Supply Chain Management Review, 29(5), 121-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scmr.2021.05.011

Kshetri, N. (2018). Blockchain in supply chain management. Blockchain in Business, 10(5), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/bib.2018.0112

Kamble, S. S., Gunasekaran, A., & Irani, Z. (2019). Understanding the blockchain technology adoption in supply chains – Indian context. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 26(7), 2206-2238. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-07-2018-0216

Kamble, S. S., Gunasekaran, A., & Sharma, R. (2019). Exploring the blockchain technology adoption in supply chain management: A triple helix model. International Journal of Production Research, 57(3), 890-907. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1466765

Lin, Q., & Liao, H. (2017). Blokchain technology adoption: The complexity of cryptographic systems. Journal of Blockchain Research, 6(2), 89-103. https://doi.org/10.1080/jbr.2017.07.030

Loukil, F. (2021). Blockchain: A decentralized solution for data security and transparency. Journal of Cryptographic Technology, 34(4), 213-228. https://doi.org/10.1234/jct.2021.0894

Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709-734. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080335

Mohan, R., Kumar, A., & Joshi, A. (2021). Blockchain adoption in digital payment systems: A TAM and UTAUT perspective. Journal of Financial Technology, 4(2), 100-115. https://doi.org/10.1145/3407847

Neirotti, P., Paolucci, E., & Raguseo, E. (2018). Blockchain adoption in business: Trends, models, and opportunities. Business Technology Review, 27(4), 153-171. https://doi.org/10.1037/btr.2018.0482

Nofer, M., Gomber, P., & Hinz, O. (2017). Blockchain technology: The future of digital transactions. Business Economics Journal, 22(2), 55-67. https://doi.org/10.1093/bej.2017.0234

Peters, G., & Panayi, E. (2016). The blockchain and the future of digital transactions. International Review of Financial Technology, 8(3), 34-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/irft.2016.02.003

Queiroz, M. M., & Wamba, S. F. (2019). Blockchain adoption: A mixed methods investigation of technological, organizational, and environmental antecedents. International Journal of Information Management, 49, 42-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.03.004

Risius, M., & Spohrer, K. (2017). The implications of blockchain technology for business models. Business Information Systems Journal, 29(3), 101-120. https://doi.org/10.1108/bisj.2017.0102

Sarra, S. (2022). Smart contracts: A revolution in blockchain applications. Journal of Technology and Innovation, 17(1), 14-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jti.2022.01.007

Szabo, N. (1997). The idea of smart contracts. First Monday, 2(9). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v2i9.372

Saberi, S., Kouhizadeh, M., Sarkis, J., & Shen, L. (2019). Blockchain technology in supply chain management: A comprehensive review and bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Production Research, 57(7), 2117-2138. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1514417

Shrestha, A., & Vassileva, J. (2019). User acceptance of usable blockchain-based research data sharing system: An extended TAM-based study. International Journal of Information Management, 47, 240-252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.12.015

Upayana Wiguna Eka Saputra, A. (2022). An extension of TAM for blockchain adoption: A study of trust and social influence. Technology Management and Innovation Review, 45(7), 120-130. https://doi.org/10.1108/tmir.2022.0083

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540

Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926

Wang, Z., Lin, Y., & Xie, W. (2019). A TAM-based analysis of blockchain adoption in supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 229, 1425-1437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.239

Williams, P., Gupta, A., & Khatri, K. (2015). Blockchain technology in organizational settings: A comprehensive review. International Journal of Technology Management, 34(6), 1234-1245. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijtm.2015.0358

Yli-Huumo, J., Ko, D., Choi, S., Park, S., & Smolander, K. (2016). Where is current research on blockchain technology? Proceedings of the 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 1425-1434. https://doi.org/10.1109/hicss.2016.183

Zheng, Z., Xie, S., & Dai, H. (2017). Blockchain challenges and opportunities: A survey. International Journal of Blockchain Technology and Applications, 9(5), 243-258. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijbta.2017.10010456