Blockchain Implementation: A Two-Sided Market
Analysis
Name: Nils Hollak
Student Number: 10559728
Date of submission: 20-06-2018 – Final version
Study Field: MSc in Business Administration – Digital Business track
Institution: University of Amsterdam – Faculty of Economics and Business
Supervisor:
Prof. em. dr. ir. Hans J. Oppelland
i
This document is written by Student Nils Hollak who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document.
I declare that the text and the work presented in this document are original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it.
The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents.
ii
Table of Content
Abstract ... 1 1. Introduction ... 1 1.1 Research problem ... 2 1.2 Research objective ... 2 1.3 Research method ... 4 2. Literature Review ... 62. 1 How does Blockchain work? ... 6
2.2 Characteristics of Blockchain ... 7
2.3 Further Literature ... 10
3. Research Design ... 16
3.1 Research Objective ... 16
3.2 Research approach ... 17
3.3 Case study approach ... 17
3.4 Description of research instruments and procedures ... 18
4. Analysis and interpretation of the results ... 20
4.1 Trust ... 21
4.2 Security ... 23
4.3 Anonymity ... 25
4.4 Speed ... 27
4.5 Sustainability ... 29
4.6 Perceived ease of use ... 31
4.7 Perceived usefulness ... 32
5. Discussion ... 33
5.1 Trust and Security ... 33
5.2 Anonymity ... 34 5.3 Speed ... 35 5.4 Sustainability ... 35 5.5 Likelihood of Implementation ... 36 6. Conclusions ... 37 6.1 Limitations ... 40 6.2 Future Research ... 40 6.3 Managerial Implications ... 41 Bibliography ... 42 Appendix ... 45
iii
Abstract
Blockchain is a decentralized distributed ledger technology, capable of handling transactions, creating smart contracts and storing valuable documents. It can potentially become a disruptive innovation, providing companies with opportunities by implementing this technology. At the same time, problems could occur when implementing a new disruptive technology, as companies need their customers to accept this new technology. Yet, little is known about how companies and its customers can be affected by Blockchain. This research focusses on an important factor of every implementation, the acceptance of its users. In order to address this, this research provides both the company perception as the consumer perception on Blockchain implementation. In this way, I was able to show where differences in the perception on Blockchain technology implementation reside in, and how managers of companies can cope with these differences in perception. By using a qualitative survey the diversity within the research sample is determined. The findings show that consumers indeed differ from managers of companies in their perception on which characteristics are important for the acceptance of Blockchain. Finally, a framework is presented covering the biggest differences in perception for each characteristic mentioned. This framework can be used to prevent mistakes in the implementation process of companies and should help managers understand the line of reasoning of their customers.
1
1. Introduction
The recent developments on the cryptocurrency market, with the price of Bitcoin moving from $0.06 in 19th of July 2010, to a peak of $ 19343.04 on the 16th of December 2017, got Bitcoin to be a major topic of discussion all over the world. And who could have thought that the peak reached on the 16th of December, would be the start of a big downfall of the cryptocurrency, and on the 1st of February 2018, Bitcoin is only worth $9320.69 1. Which means that in one-and-a-half month the value of Bitcoin fell with almost 52%. Where the value of Bitcoin is still difficult to assess due to its volatility, the technology behind Bitcoin, Blockchain, is a stable factor which has the potential to become a disruptive innovation not only for financial transactions systems, but it can be applied in many more ways 2345.
Blockchain is the accumulation of ‘Blocks’, that store the transactions’ data that take place on a platform that uses Blockchain, for example the Bitcoin platform. On top of that, each block also has a record of the records of the previous block in the chain, called Proof of Work. This means that fraud can only occur when all proof of work in all the distributed ledgers (blocks) in the chain are adjusted. The blocks are completely public but transactions’ can be anonymous. There are no central
institutions involved in managing the transaction data, anyone with the right equipment and skills can become a miner which solves the proof of work from a transaction block. This means that Blockchain is completely decentralized 6.
1https://www.coindesk.com/price/ 2 Colombo, Franzoni, Veugelers, 2014 3 Henderson, Clark, 1990
4 Zhou, Yim, Tse, 2005
5 Lindman, Rossi, Tuunainen, 2017 6 Nakamoto, 2008
2
1.1 Research problem
Until now, little is known about how consumers perceive the Blockchain technology. And about what consumers deem as important characteristics of Blockchain, and how firms should cope with the consumer’s willingness to accept this technology.
Established models like the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)7, the Unified Technology Acceptance and Use Theory (UTAUT & UTAUT2)89, and the Web of System Performance (WOSP) model 10, can be used when considering the implementation of new information technologies. But paradoxically, these are established models used to address innovative technologies, and therefore they might not be as effective when considering a new disruptive technology like Blockchain. As this technology has different characteristics, consumers might feel that different factors are important for accepting this technology.
Adding Blockchain to a firm’s information technology portfolio, could provide the firm with a competitive advantage, as Blockchain technology offers characteristics, which are not offered by other ‘regular’ information systems. Therefore, it is important for companies to understand what Blockchain has to offer, and what consumers deem as important factors for accepting the Blockchain technology. Hence, the knowledge gap which will be addressed in this research is: Firms do not have sufficient knowledge available about the important characteristics of Blockchain applications, which they would need to consider when implementing Blockchain applications successfully in their information technology portfolio. This has also been addressed as a knowledge gap by Risius and Spohrer (2017), in their research where they provided a list of future research areas.
1.2
Research objective
Disruptive technologies can give firms the opportunity to gain a competitive advantage by being an early adopter. This is more in line with academic tradition, discussed by Barney (1991)11. According to his resource-based view, competitive advantage can be established by owning assets that the competition does not possess and are difficult to copy. Therefore, it can be interesting for
7 Davis, Bagozzi, Warshaw., 1989 8 Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, 2003 9 Venkatesh, Thong, Xu, 2012 10Whitworth, Zaic, 2003 11 Barney, 1991
3 firms to implement Blockchain, before this becomes an universally used technology. If a firm is able to use the characteristics of Blockchain technology to address customers’ needs which other competitors do not yet exploit and therefore differentiate themselves from competitors, the implementation of Blockchain might prove a major asset to the firm’s information technology portfolio. But currently, not a lot is known about what characteristics are the most important to customers, and which characteristics could lead to a differentiating information technology portfolio.
Therefore, the objective of this research is a framework covering the difference in perception on most important characteristics of Blockchain for the consumers to accept and use the Blockchain technology, and the difference in perception on the importance of these characteristics with managers of companies. This framework can be used by firms in order to make sure that they address the most important characteristics when implementing Blockchain, and therefore increasing the rate of acceptance of the consumers.
4
1.3 Research method
In order to achieve this research objective, an exploratory research approach has been applied. In their book, Blumberg et al. (2011)12 state that exploratory research is especially a good fit for a research area about which not a lot is known. As this research area is relatively new, and few articles have been published, this research will have an exploratory approach.
In order to achieve the chosen research objective, an analysis of the Blockchain technology is needed, where the basics of the Blockchain technology characteristics will be introduced. After that, by analysing the factors used in established models, like UTAUT, UTAUT2, TAM, and WOSP, I will complement the list of important features 131415. The characteristics found will be used to create a conceptual model, after the literature review. This model will be confronted with the reality of the collected data.
The data will be acquired by conducting a multiple case study, this will be done by using a qualitative survey. Participants filling out the surveys, will be divided into two groups: company owners and consumers, in order to gather data from both sides of the market.
The targeted firms consist solely of firms that in some way could use Blockchain technology within their business. This is an important factor in selecting the participants representing the company side of the market, as it is important for participants to see the use of Blockchain for their company to be able to create a relevant perception. The survey for owners of firms, will focus on their perception of the important characteristics in Blockchain technology, and their willingness to implement the technology.
Purposive sampling will be used in order to select respondents for the survey. Purposive sampling is the selection by which the judgement of the researcher is the main criteria for the selection of a respondent 16. As this research aims to provide managers of companies with a model which shows the differences in their perception on Blockchain characteristics and the consumers’ perception. It is both more logical and more efficient to select a sample with the aim to cover all existing relevant varieties of the phenomenon 17. This has been done by either looking at their working experience, or the study programme that the participants are following. By selecting the
12 Blumberg, Cooper, Schindler, 2011 13 Davis, Bagozzi, Warshaw., 1989 14 Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, Davis, 2003 15 Venkatesh, Thong, Xu, 2012
16 Saunders, Lewis, Thornhill, 2011 17 Jansen, 2010
5 participants in this manner, I tempted to gather useful data from consumers who are actually able to form an opinion supported by relevant arguments and thoughts. This led to a sample consisting of former banking directors, real estate agents, IT specialists and Business students. The surveys for the consumers are mainly focussed on how important the consumers perceive the characteristics of Blockchain for their acceptance.
Qualitative surveys are used in order to get an understanding of the reasoning on the preference of described characteristics in the survey. The second use for a qualitative research method is to get confirmation on the theories and information the researcher already holds 18. As Blockchain is a relatively new technology, and knowledge about Blockchain is not yet widely
distributed, qualitative surveys have been used as the research method. A drawback of this method is the lack of interaction, and therefore provides less qualitative data per interviewee compared to conducting interviews. On the other hand, it provided the possibility to study more cases (n=25), which helps to create a more representative sample with more diversity.
Therefore, the qualitative surveys are a good fit for this research, as these surveys should both provide new information and theories which complement the theories discussed in the literature review, and also confirm theories from the literature review 19.
This research takes a deductive approach, as at first a conceptual model will be formulated by reading and analysing the existing literature, which will thereafter be tested by observing the data acquired by the semi-structured interviews.
18 Blumberg, Cooper, Schindler, 2011 19 Blumberg, Cooper, Schindler, 2011
6
2. Literature Review
2. 1
How does Blockchain work?
The Blockchain is a distributed ledger technology of which the transactional databases are decentralized, security is ensured by cryptography and controlled by a consensus mechanism, where digital events are recorded in Blocks, and need to be equal throughout the chain 20. It can record transactions between two parties in an efficient and permanent way, and it can be programmed to trigger transactions automatically 21. Due to the absence of a trusted third party, which would
normally check if there is no case of double-spending, the need for trust in a Blockchain system has to be addressed in another way. This is done by making the history of all transactions available to every user, and every user has to agree on this history 22. The proof-of-work is a cryptographic puzzle
that needs to be solved for each transaction, in all the blocks on the chain of the transaction. Due to this proof-of-work, a consensus mechanism is used as a transaction only occurs if the majority of the miners accept, and therefore solve the cryptographic puzzle. Users can be identified by a 30-plus character, which provides them with a certain level of anonymity 23.
Currently, Blockchain is mostly known for the cryptocurrency markets, which use Blockchain as their platform. But Blockchain can be used for more purposes than just the cryptocurrency transactions. It can be used for other financial instruments like smart contracts and trading records, as it limits the possibilities of forgeries, double-spending and false disputes 24.
Besides financial transactions, Blockchain is applicable in more situations. It can also be used for legal and public records, like titles, voting records and birth certificates. On top of that Blockchain can also be used to create ‘smart property’. In these cases, Blockchain becomes an inventory,
tracking and buy-sell mechanism. And finally, Blockchain can be used in sharing economy services, as it can function as a transactional mechanism where trust is an important factor 25.
As Blockchain has this many different applications and therefore also a potential to become a widely spread disruptive information technology, it is needed to gain more knowledge about the
20 Beck, Avital, Rossi, Thatcher, 2017 21Iansiti, Lakhani, 2017
22Nakamoto, 2008 23Nakamoto, 2008
24 Lindman, Rossi, Tuunainen, 2017 25 Lindman, Rossi, Tuunainen, 2017
7 importance of its characteristics which were mentioned shortly in this chapter: Security, Trust, Anonymity, Speed and Sustainability.
2.2 Characteristics of Blockchain
In order to indicate the important characteristics of Blockchain, an overview of important characteristics that Blockchain entails will be elaborated on in this chapter.
Security
First of all, the security of Blockchain will be discussed. As the security of a new technology that handles large amounts of money and can potentially be used for private issues such as smart contracts and birth certificates, should be of the highest quality. The Blockchain technology enables a high level of security by having a chain of blocks, which are also called ledgers. These ledgers contain data of their own transactions, enhanced, all the data of transactions from the ledgers previous in the chain. This means, that once a transaction is entered in the database, all the accounts have to be updated. It is not possible to alter data from the ledger wrongfully, because of the consensus
mechanism of Blockchain. Due to this consensus mechanism, the level of security can be measured in the length of the chain on which the transaction occurs. The longer the chain, the higher the security as more miners need to agree on and solve the proof of work 26. Several computational algorithms and approaches are used to ensure that the recording on the database is permanent, chronologically ordered, and available to all others 27.
Trust
The second characteristic that has been critical in the growth of Blockchain, is the major role of trust. This is due to the big financial crisis that struck America and Europe at 2008. This financial crisis originated from the deregulation practices from the 1970’s. Because of these deregulations, commercial banks, investment banks, hedge and private equity funds, were not monitored closely. This led to big economic growth, as the banks were able to provide risky loans, without being controlled or sanctioned. But as long as cash was flowing, and the economy kept growing, there was no problem. But the crash of the American housing market, which was also due to loans that were
26 Lerider, 2018
8
given out to people who were in the end not able to repay these loans, triggered the big financial crisis 28.
These central banks, that had handled our money for decades, suddenly did not seem as trustworthy and solid as they were. Therefore, the idea of a non-centralized financial institution gained ground 29. Due to Blockchain technology, consumers are not dependent of central banks
handling their money responsibly. The second, application of trust in the Blockchain technology, resides in the fact that one does not have to worry about dealing with dubious transactions, as each party has access to the entire database and its history 30. So, a seller is not able to hide his or her
fraudulent historic actions. A third application of improved trust are the smart contracts, which are transactions that are considered reliable, as there is no human interaction involved, and these transactions follow the predetermined rules in the computer protocol 31.
Speed:
As for most technologies, speed is an important characteristic. In Blockchain, speed is realized by the fact that Blockchain is digital. This means that the transactions in Blockchain are tied to computational logic, and therefore they can be programmed. Hence, the users can create algorithms and rules that can handle transactions on their own 32. This is for example the case for smart contracts. Where different circumstances in a process, can lead different predetermined transactions. For instance, when a concert has been cancelled, and a smart contract between the seller and buyer is in place, the event of the cancellation can trigger the repayment of the ticket. This example shows, that there is no human interaction involved in the transaction, which increases the speed of handling transactions.
On the other hand, the transaction speed itself is not as fast as established payment, due to Blockchain’s structure. As explained in the chapter on security, the level of security of a Blockchain based system, is based on the chain of ledgers that need to be updated in order to verify a
transaction. The more ledgers there are, the more confirmations are needed, which are called proof of work. Therefore, the speed also depends on the level of security the user of Blockchain accepts 33. The Transactions Per Second (TPS), on the Bitcoins server, which uses Blockchain as an transaction
28Crotty, 2009 29Weber, 2014 30 Nakamoto, 2008
31Beck, Czepluch, Lollike, Malone, 2016 32 Iansiti, Lakhani, 2017
9 enabler, is significantly lower than the TPS of PayPal or Visa 34. But, if the characteristics of Blockchain can be seen as trade-offs, this might be a drawback of Blockchain the users are willing to accept. So if the user values security more than it values speed, the user will choose the longer chain of blocks where more miners have to solve the Prove of Work. The number of miners needed per transaction brings us to the next characteristic of Blockchain, its sustainability.
Sustainability:
A major point of discussion about the future of Blockchain, is the amount of energy it uses, and therefore the sustainability of Blockchain. For sustainability, mainly environmental sustainability will be considered, and therefore energy consumption of the system. This sustainability of Blockchain is determined by its own structure.
As explained earlier, transactions are enabled by miners who solve the cryptographic puzzles, called Prove of Work. In the Blockchain technology, the rewarding system is designed in such a way, that mining has become a competitive environment. The first miner to solve the Prove of Work, adds a block to the chain, and receives a reward. This reward can for example be a fixed amount of
cryptocurrency. Therefore, miners are constantly increasing the computational power of their mining tools, which consume more energy 35. A big problem for miners, is the rapid growth of the currencies. Taylor (2017) states that, the growth in complexity of mining, is not met with the same growth in computing speed. In their article, O’Dwyer and Malone (2014), conclude that the costs of mining, at that point, exceeded the value of the rewards. Therefore, there is the need to create more powerful, and more energy efficient tools. On top of that, they conclude that the total electricity consumption of bitcoin, is at the same level of the electricity consumption of Ireland. Even China, the biggest producer of Bitcoin using mining, is trying to shut the miners down. One of the reasons for this is the high level of energy usage 36. This creates another trade-off situation, where one can ask himself if this resource intensive process, is worth the benefits of the Blockchain technology
Anonymity:
Another important characteristic of Blockchain, is the anonymity throughout the transaction process. Anonymity is established by the fact that each user is identified by an alphanumerical address that contains 30-plus characters. The user can make the decision to stay anonymous by themselves, as they are also allowed to proof their identity to the other party involved in the transaction. But the transaction itself, will always occur between the alphanumerical addresses 37.
34 Kiayias, Panagiotakos, 2015 35Mishra, 2017
36 Hsu, 2018
10
This anonymity is also often mentioned as a drawback of the Blockchain technology, as it would allow criminality to flourish without it being traced back to the one committing the crime. But for
Blockchain based transactions, where the Prove of Work is an important aspect is validating the transaction, there is no assurance of full anonymity, as the alphanumerical address is merely a pseudonym 38. Due to this pseudo-anonymity it is possible for regulatory institutions to recover the
person(s) behind the alphanumerical address, by linking all the transactions to the address. The linking of all the transactions is possible due to another characteristic; trust. In the Blockchain characteristic ‘’Trust’’, the availability of the full history of all records was mentioned, and due to this availability of the history of transactions regulatory firms are able to combine and trace these records back to a specific user 39. As a result of pseudo-anonymity in several blockchain based systems like
bitcoin, a lot of criminal activity has transferred to altcoins, which indeed offer full anonymity 40.
2.3 Further Literature
In this chapter, theories covering different types of innovation and several models covering the performance of technologies and acceptance of technologies will be discussed. These theories are not directly based on Blockchain technology but can be used to help understand what type of innovation Blockchain is, and what important factors need to be taken into consideration for most technologies in order to perform well according to the consumers, or be accepted for consumer use.
In his first article on disruption, Christensen (1997) states that one of the characteristics of a disruptive innovation, is that it offers a different package of attributes which are only valued in the emerging markets remote from, and unimportant to, the mainstream. This can be said about
Blockchain as well, as its current use is mostly as an enabler of the cryptocurrency markets but is not (yet) used in other contexts. Radical innovation is innovation that breaks established rules, as it is often based on a different set of engineering. It can potentially create entirely new markets or product classes, or lead to major product replacements within established product classes 4142. In yet another article, breakthrough innovation is explained as usually novel, unique, or state of the art
38 Conoscenti, Vetrò, De Martin, 2016 39Nakamoto, 2008
40Blumberg, 2017
41 Colombo, Franzoni, Veugelers, 2014 42 Henderson, Clark, 1990
11 technological advances in a product category which has a significant influence on the consumption patterns of a market 43.
The novel Blockchain technology enabled the emergence of a new market, namely the cryptocurrency market. And it could lead to the replacement of several centralized information technology systems, and could be applicable in multiple ways, as discussed earlier. Therefore, in this research, Blockchain is regarded as a disruptive technology innovation. For this research the term disruptive will be used instead of Radical or Breakthrough, which is also used in established literature, for similar innovations.
As described by Lindman, Rossi and Tuunainen (2017), Blockchain can be applicable in multiple ways in many types of businesses, and therefore has the potential to play an essential role in our daily life. But the question arises; will this new technology be accepted by the consumers? To gain knowledge on the acceptance of Blockchain, I started by looking at the Technology Acceptance Model from Davis, Bagozzi et al. (1989). This article concludes that the main determinant of people’s computer use, are their intentions whether to use the technology. And these intentions are
influenced by the perceived usefulness and the perceived ease of use.
After creating an Unified Technology Use and Acceptance Theory aimed at employees of a firm which implements a new technology in 2003, which focussed on Performance expectancy, Effort expectancy, Social Influence and Facilitating conditions as the main determinants of technology acceptance. (UTAUT) Venkatesh et al. (2012) created a second Unified Technology Use and Acceptance model aimed at the acceptance of the consumer (UTAUT2). The UTAUT2 model takes seven main factors into consideration, which are the four initial factors of the UTAUT model plus the Hedonic motivations, Price value and Habit. And it used age, gender and experience as moderating values.
Another comparable model to the models mentioned above is the web of system
performance model (WOSP). The WOSP starts with four basic system elements; Boundary, Internal Structure, Effectors, Receptors. For each of these four basic system elements, Whitworth and Zaic (2003) propose that each element has a dual role in the system’s performance 44. The WOSP has eight goals of which four of them could generate an success; Functionality, Flexibility, Extendibility, Connectivity. And the other four can mainly be seen as failure avoiding; Security, Reliability, Privacy, Usability 45This distinction between ‘’success factors’’ and failure avoiding factors can be linked with
43 Zhou, Yim, Tse, 2005 44
Whitworth, Zaic, 2003
12
the classification Johnston described in 1995. He made a distinction between satisfiers and dissatisfiers, where satisfiers where the attributes of a services that could lead to a positive
appreciation. Whereas dissatisfiers are not able to generate a positive generation, but the lack of or the absence of the attribute can only lead to a negative attitude towards the service. When the dissatisfier attribute is perfect or at least high enough, it will be a neutral factor in the judgement of the service 46. All the factors discussed in the models above are summarized in Table 1.
46
Johnston, 1995
13 Theory: Determinant 1 Determinant 2 Determinant 3 Determinant 4
Technology Acceptance Model (Davis FD, Bagozzi
RP, Warshaw PR. 1989)
Perceived Usefulness *
Perceived Ease of
Use ** X X
Unified Technology Use and Acceptance Theory (Venkatesh, V., Morris, MG., Davis, GB., Davis, FD. 2003) Performance Expectancy * Effort Expectancy ** Social Influence Facilitating Conditions **
Unified Technology Use and Acceptance Theory 2
(Venkatesh, V., Thong, JYL., Xu, X. 2012)
Hedonic
Motivations ** Price Value * Habit X
Web of System Performance Model
''Succes factors'' (Whitworth, B. & Zaic, M.
2003)
Functionality * Flexibility Extendibility Connectivity
Web of System Performance Model ''Failure avoiding'' (Whitworth, B., Fjermestad, J., & Mahinda, E. 2006)
Security Reliability Privacy Usability
Table 1: The determinants of User Acceptance as discussed by each model * Comparable factors, mainly concerned with how the technology performs
** Comparable factors, mainly concerned with how easily Blockchain can be used and implemented * Category factors will from now be referred to as Perceived Usefulness
14 As Blockchain is mainly a technology that allows transactions to occur, the characteristics which customers will focus on, will mostly consist of failure avoiding features. But for managers this might be less the case, as for managers actually dealing with Blockchain the perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness are also important factors. Therefore, the characteristics of both groups that will be taken into consideration are different. For customers the focus will be on: Security, Trust, Speed, Sustainability, and anonymity. These are features of Blockchain of which an absence might lead to a negative evaluation of the Blockchain system. For managers, besides the above mentioned characteristics, also Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use as discussed at table 1, will be considered.
As mentioned in the introduction, the use of established models might not be preferable when coping with a disruptive technological innovation like Blockchain. As this means that
established models which are based on the acceptance of older technologies, are trying to explain the acceptance of a technology which is completely new, which creates the need for a model that specifically addresses the characteristics of the Blockchain technology.
On top of that, Christensen (1997) also states in the article discussed earlier, that leading firms which are encountered with disruptive innovation, had great difficulty in managing the low degree of willingness to adapt to a disruptive innovation of their own customers. Which shows the importance for firms to emphasize the preferred characteristics of Blockchain of their consumers, when implementing the Blockchain technology.
The characteristics and theories mentioned above, have been used in order to create this conceptual model (figure 1.), of which the relations depicted in the model will be analysed:
15 This model implicates that the acceptance of Blockchain from customers is dependent on whether the perspective of the company is in line with the perspective of the customer regarding the most important characteristics of Blockchain. Both perspectives are formed by how managers of companies and consumers perceive the importance of the characteristics discussed earlier. It also assumes that, a difference in perception, can lead to a lower rate of acceptance by the consumers. Which was addressed by Christensen (1997), as an often occurring event when dealing with disruptive innovation.
Therefore, this research focusses on the technology acceptance and use, of the consumers regarding Blockchain’s characteristics. Also, this research will focus on whether or not the
perceptions of company owners and consumers are in line with each other regarding the
characteristics of Blockchain. This is mentioned by Risius and Spohrer (2017) as a research gap. They note that in order to understand the applicability, use and effects of Blockchain technology, that future research should focus on the interdependencies and trade-offs between different Blockchain features.
16
3. Research Design
This chapter covers the selected research methods. It will become clear how the data is collected and to what extent the data is relevant for this research. Also, the justification of the chosen research method is included. Subsequently, the data is collected by using qualitative surveys. This chapter concludes with a discussion of the data analysis methods.
3.1 Research Objective
The expected contribution of this research is to create a framework that describes the differences in perception between consumers and managers of companies, which can be used by managers in increasing the rate of acceptance of Blockchain after implementation. This will be created by analysing both the preferences from a company perspective as the preferences from a consumer perspective. By doing this, it will become clear if company managers are focussing on the right characteristics of Blockchain in order for their customers to accept this technology.
This is a relevant research objective, because following Henderson and Clark (1990) line of reasoning, Blockchain is a potentially disruptive innovation. As this is a relatively new technology about which little is known, which was also addressed by Risius and Spohrer (2017), an exploratory research on the most important characteristics will be performed. As exploratory research is often used when the investigation area is so new that the researcher needs to do an exploration just to learn something about the about the research or management dilemma 47.
47 Blumberg, Cooper, Schindler, 2011
17
3.2 Research approach
This research has a deductive approach as it tests a composed theory through research. This theory is created by reading existing literature, which will be tested after the data collection method, which is typically a deductive approach 48.
Furthermore, this research is cross sectional, as this data is gathered within a one-and-a-half-month timeframe, and there will not be any data gathered at another point in time for this research 49.
3.3 Case study approach
This research will be a multiple case study, as multiple qualitative surveys will be conducted on several single cases. Important in this research design is acquiring the diversity of the Blockchain users. Also, multiple case studies tend to have stronger designs for theory building compared to single case studies 50. The cases that will be studied reside in two sides of the market, the companies and its management that could implement Blockchain, and the consumers who could use or have to accept this technology. Therefore, there will be two different units of analysis. The first unit of analysis is companies which could profit from or make use of Blockchain. This could for example be for companies that are involved with international payments, or companies which could benefit from smart contracts, or any other application of Blockchain which is discussed earlier.
The second unit of analysis is customers which could potentially have to deal with Blockchain technology. When selecting these respondents, I took into account that they either currently own cryptocurrency, or that they could provide a useful opinion about transactions via Blockchain for example by asking former banking directors. As this research aims to find a difference between the preferred characteristics of companies compared with consumers, the use of qualitative surveys is a good fit, as Jansen (2010) describes:
‘The qualitative type of survey does not aim at establishing frequencies, means or other parameters but at determining the diversity of some topic of interest within a given population’ (p. 3)
48 Saunders, Lewis, Thornhill, 2011 49 Blumberg, Cooper, Schindler., 2011 50 Yin, 2009
18 Due to the pre-structured nature of the qualitative survey, the diversity to be studied is defined beforehand, and the aim is to see which of the characteristics exist or are more dominant in the population’s preferences 51.
The respondents are selected by purposive sampling, which is the selection by which the judgement of the researcher is the main criteria for the selection of a respondent. The researcher can make his own judgement on the usefulness of a respondent, and whether or not he will use this respondent for his research 52. It is both more logical and more efficient to select a sample with the aim to cover all existing relevant varieties of the phenomenon 53. This method fits this research strategy the most, as this research focusses on the different characteristics of the Blockchain implementation. Due to the choice for purposive sampling, it is possible to consciously look for respondents which are more likely to provide diversified and valuable knowledge. This will provide a more holistic analysis of different perceptions on the characteristics of Blockchain.
For both the firms as well as the consumers that will be questioned, it is crucial to have sufficient knowledge on Blockchain or cryptocurrency, or that they are able to have a perception on Blockchain valuable for this research, this shows the importance of the judgment from the
researcher in purposive sampling.
3.4 Description of research instruments and procedures
The research instrument that will be used, is a qualitative survey. (see appendix) As there is the need gather qualitative answers in order to get usable information about the opinion or perception of the respondents on Blockchain. But on the other hand, the aim of this research is to cover the relevant diversity between managers of companies and consumers, which is the aim of qualitative surveys described by Jansen (2010):
‘The goal is not to detail concepts exhaustively for a theoretical domain, but to cover relevant diversity in an empirically-defined population which may comprise only a small number of units’. (p. 8)
The surveys will consist of five questions, where the respondents are allowed to distribute 10 points among the five characteristics, more points indicating higher importance. (see appendix) After which they are asked to elaborate on the importance of the characteristic, in order to get the
51 Jansen, 2010
52 Saunders, Lewis, Thornhill, 2011 53 Jansen, 2010
19 qualitative answers. Beforehand, the respondents will be provided with an explanation on how Blockchain works and which characteristics it has, which is similar to the literature review in chapter 2. Also, it is made clear, that the perception of the respondents is enough for them to complete the survey, and extent knowledge on Blockchain is not a necessity.
The survey for the consumers will have a length of five questions, and the survey for company perception will consist of eight questions, as for this survey also the willingness for implementation, the ease of use, and the perceived usefulness will be requested. After each rating the respondent is asked to provide an explanation of their choices. Company owners from different segments will be approached, as this will cover a wider range of Blockchain applications. In selecting respondents for the consumer participants, the most important criterium was the ability of the respondent to form a diversified and valuable perception, which could lead to useful data.
The strengths of this research design, are that it will provide an overview of how company owners in different segments consider the characteristics of Blockchain. And on the other hand, also the consumers’ perspective of the important characteristics of Blockchain. This will result in a holistic research. On top of that by using this qualitative survey, a higher number of respondents have been reached, and have been asked on their perception of Blockchain. Which led to a more broadly oriented view on both sides of the markets. A limitation of this research also resides in the data collection method, as this is not the most effective way to gather qualitative data, which should also be taken into account when drawing conclusions from the data.
The reliability of this research, mainly depends on the knowledge of the interviewees. Therefore, it is crucial that the interviewees are provided with an introduction into the Blockchain technology, in order to enable the respondents to form a perception if they do not yet have sufficient knowledge on the subject.
In order to establish good validity, it is important to make sure that the questions are as clear as possible 54. As a qualitative survey is used for data gathering, it is crucial that the survey itself is as clear as possible, as asking questions on the spot like in an interview is not possible. For this reason, a clear introduction and instruction have been included in the survey, in order to limit the factors that could negatively influence the validity of the survey.
54 Saunders, Lewis, Thornhill, 2011
20
4. Analysis and interpretation of the results
In this chapter an analysis of the acquired data will be performed. This will be done by a comparison for each of the five characteristics that are relevant for both the companies’ as the consumers’ side of the market. In the end, an analysis on the ease of implementation and the perceived usefulness from the firms’ side of the market will be conducted. Table 2 and 3, include all the nodes and sub-nodes created by analysing the acquired data using Nvivo. Using these nodes and sub-nodes helped structuring the responses and led to an overview of comments that were
mentioned the most. Each chapter will start with a table providing an overview of the type of comments mentioned the most for each characteristic, which will thereafter be discussed by explaining the tables, and adding the most representative quotes.
Table 2: Customer Perspective Nodes and Sub-Nodes
Anonymity Cybercrime
Privacy Security
Safe transactions Safe system Relation with trust
Speed Important Not a priority Sustainability Competition Environment Not a priority
Trust Relationship with Security
Key factor Table 3: Company Perspective Nodes and Sub-Nodes
Anonymity Criminality Transparency Security Client Data Cybercrime Secure system Related to trust Speed Banks’ speed Automation Volatility Sustainability Relevant Not relevant
Trust Basis of Acceptance
Compensated by security Perceived ease of use
Company size Presence of Knowledge Standardization Perceived usefulness Worth it Not worth it Overall acceptance
21
4.1 Trust
Table 4: Consumer perception vs. Company perception on Trust
Consumer Perception Company Perception
Key factor Fundamental for acceptance
Covered by the technology Compensated by Technology Related to Security
Loss of Control
At first glance, the perception of the importance of trust seems similar for both groups, but going more in depth differences in perception are present. First, the consumer side of trust will be discussed. One of the factors which is mentioned a lot is that trust is a key factor in accepting the Blockchain as a technology. This is mainly argued by stating that trust is the basis for every transaction. Which is true but does not show how Blockchain affects the level of trust for the consumer, and I therefore consider this value not relevant for the analysis.
Another factor that is mentioned often, is that the trust is covered by the technology of Blockchain itself. Especially the openness of the system would have an influence on the level of trust the consumers would have in Blockchain technology.
‘The system is very “open” and cheaters or people with bad intentions are identified by the system so I trust such are excluded from further participation’
This shows that the openness of the system could influence the degree of trust needed from a consumer. When this open system is being supervised closely, and untrustworthy actors on this system are excluded, or as mentioned by another respondent a black list entailing all untrustworthy or shady participants in the Blockchain system, would suffice for him to have enough trust in the system, as long as the other factor which he deemed important were covered.
A third important factor, is that the level of trust needed in doing transactions to accept Blockchain, is strongly influenced by the level of security the technology has to offer. Stating that a high level of security, would mean that they automatically would trust the Blockchain technology.
For the last two types of reasoning, both the Blockchain system itself, and the level of security could be making up for the amount of trust needed. This would mean that for these
22 technology would suffice for them to accept the technology. And therefore, trust can be seen as less important.
For the respondents who deemed trust more important overall, especially losing control was mentioned as an important factor that determines the fact that there is a high need for trust.
‘In order to hand over the control of your transaction, I need to really trust and rely on the method that is used for the transaction’
Also mentioned was the fact that it is an untouchable technology which controls itself, and therefore the users need to have confidence and trust in the system. This follows the reasoning of the quoted respondent mentioned above, and shows that consumers currently feel more in control of their transactions. This could be due to the fact that the banks currently handling the transactions, can guarantee a refund in case of a wrongful transaction, or investigate where mistakes were made and correct it. This cannot (yet) be guaranteed by the decentralized structure dealing with
transaction on the Blockchain, as is shown by the following response:
‘If I’d invest my money in it, I would want to make sure it gets stored safely. A friend of mine lately used blockchain for the first time, read a LOT about it but accidentally send it to the wrong platform, and therefore lost everything.’
Looking at the firms’ side of the market, the most important argument for trust is the need for trustworthy transaction system, as it will be used for transactions with clients and business partners. This can indicate a certain level of responsibility from their firm’s perspective towards their business partners and clients.
The other perspective mainly addressed by firm owners, is that the clarity of the technology will make up for the level of trust needed for them to accept the technology:
‘Blockchain technology makes it transparent and multisource based which improves quality of information. It also breaks down the power of companies because these organisations are not alone anymore in building up profile information on consumers, mining this customer information and even selling it.’
In this case the improved quality of the information is due to the transparent and
23 respondent mentioned the importance of a clear and explainable concept, in order to reduce the need for a high level of trust, and focus on the importance of other characteristics instead.
4.2 Security
Table 5: Consumer perception vs. Company perception on Security
Consumer Perspective Company perspective
Relation to trust Client data
Safe system Cybercrime
Safe transactions Secure algorithm
Need for knowledge Relation to trust
In rating security, one of the important factors for consumers is the relation to trust, which is no surprise given the responses on the factor trust previously discussed. The consumers who
mentioned that their trust would depend on the level of security of the Blockchain system, indeed stated the high importance of security in their responses. This shows that for a part of the
consumers, the amount of trust needed can be directly replaced by an increased level of security.
‘In the case of smart contracts and automated processes, security has a high priority, as a certain amount of control will be lost by automation. A large number of mistakes and disruptions would make the system irrelevant.’
Another popular thought, is that the Blockchain system seems to be a safe system where the level of security is partly a choice by choosing a longer chain of blocks. As mentioned by a user of cryptocurrency, there is the need for more knowledge for the users on how to deal with their currency or documents in a safe manner.
‘It's important that you need to know how to protect your files, currencies etc. There must come more information available how users can protect their values. I think the system itself is really well
protected.’
And finally, consumers perceive the need for security important, for the reason that it deals with their money or other valuable data which they obviously want to be secure.
From the company perspective the by far most mentioned factor in determining the importance of the level of security of Blockchain is that they have a responsibility towards their clients, to handle their transactions and personal data in a secure way. This shows that the company
24 owners are aware of the fact that the clients’ data needs to be safe, in order for the customer to stay loyal to the company’s services.
‘Especially as a firm, you also have a kind of obligation towards clients to operate in a safe business environment.’
The second most mentioned factor is the that the system or algorithm is very secure, and possible flaws would mainly reside in mistakes from the users’ side, which should therefore also be monitored. A threat would for example be stolen keys of users, this key is a code for having access to for example your own wallet with cryptocurrency or mistakes in transactions, as was mentioned before by one of the respondents. The responsibility of keeping this key safe is completely up to the owner of the key, and potential loss of this key cannot be blamed on another party. Blockchain would even be a solution for main issues in of the current connected world;
‘Distributed systems will be harder to hack in the future. Also, the blockchain will be able to reproduce information that is lost by accident or on purpose. The level of security is improved because of the architectural design of the system. Security is a main issue of the connected world, blockchain technology can provide solutions for complex and valuable transactions.’
This example shows that the owners of companies perceive the security Blockchain of a high level, and potentially even higher than the current connected world, due to its distributed nature and architectural design. The importance of security for company owners, resides mainly in their
awareness of the growing level of cybercrime and the financial risks tied to cybercrime.
Difference between company perspective and consumer perspective is mainly that companies tend to see the security of the system, where consumers are mainly focussed on the value of their transactions. As mentioned by a consumer, there is a lack of knowledge for consumers. This gap in knowledge should be managed by the companies thinking about implementing the technology. This should be in line with their expectations as company owners mentioned the flaws in the system are mainly due to mistakes of its users, on top of that the majority of the firms mentioned its responsibility of creating a safe business environment for its customers.
25
4.3 Anonymity
Table 5: Consumer perception vs. Company perception on Anonymity
Consumer Perspective Company perspective
Privacy Transparency
Cybercrime Criminality
Regarding anonymity from the perspective of consumers, the most mentioned influence factor is privacy, but the opinion towards privacy is very much divided into two sides. The first view on privacy is a critical view, where consumers see this anonymity as a false anonymity. As nowadays, most information is already somewhere to be found on the internet. This view on anonymity also goes along with a low rating of anonymity as a factor in accepting the Blockchain technology. Also, it is mentioned that the use of a 30-character code instead of personal details would suffice as a means to provide enough anonymity.
‘I think that anonymity is not that relevant either, as it will just be a fake anonymity. People will perceive that they are anonymous, but in the end, no one is able to be completely anonymous anymore.’
The other view on anonymity concerns either the importance to keep anonymity or to improve consumers’ anonymity and is linked with the openness of the Blockchain system, where everyone is able to look into each other’s transactions in order to see if the users are trustworthy. From this point of view, the consumers see the need for anonymity as people might perform transactions they do not wish to share with anyone else. Another point of view is to increase the level of anonymity compared to the low anonymity in which the consumers currently operate, in which the option for anonymity could lower the amount of information going to big corporations or third parties.
‘Obviously, there is some weight attached to this variable because anonymity and privacy play an important role in society nowadays even more so because of personal information leaking everywhere (think of WikiLeaks)’
A final consideration in rating the importance of anonymity for consumers, is the relation with cybercrime. Anonymity would open doors for criminality to rise within the Blockchain systems, and it will lead to ‘shady transactions’.
‘The anonymity for blockchain isn't personal relevant for myself. From my point of view, it's better to get visibility in the transactions for several reasons like avoiding attacks.’
26 In sum, most of the consumers do not need a high level of anonymity, as they perceive it either as false anonymity, or as a source for criminality. The ones who perceive anonymity as important should be reassured that their personal data is safe and will not be used for other purposes than just the business purpose.
The major concern from a company perspective on anonymity, is the need to show
transparency towards customers and the government. Therefore, the required level of anonymity for companies is very low. Transparency is seen as a source of trust and clarity, for both the customers as for the regulatory institutions. Operating in a high degree of anonymity is perceived more of bad factor in conducting business and using Blockchain, than it would be an asset for the companies. Another concern from company owners, which is in line with the consumer perspective, is that anonymity is could only attract criminality and fraud.
‘In my opinion business transactions with a high degree of transparency, will lead to trust and clarity.’
27
4.4 Speed
Table 6: Consumer perception vs. Company perception on Speed
Consumer Perspective Company perspective
Important for acceptance Banks’ speed
Not a priority Volatility
Automatic acceptance Related to security
The speed of Blockchain is for most consumers an important aspect for the acceptance of the technology. The need for a high degree of speed can be derived from multiple factors. The first consideration mentioned is that currently Blockchain is mainly used to enable cryptocurrency transactions to happen. Due to the volatility of these cryptocurrency, the need for quick transactions is high, as waiting for money to arrive in your wallet and therefore not being able to spend it, could directly influence the profitability of the upcoming cryptocurrency transfer due to changing rates. The second argument, is that Blockchain’s speed should be able to compete with the banks’ speed, as speed is becoming more important in the modern era, and consumers are not feeling comfortable in waiting for technology as most of it is already (almost) instant.
‘Speed is in every case important, we are moving towards a world were waiting is considered annoying and the speed is an important factor for consumers’
Another reason for stressing the importance of speed, resides in the fact that consumers are not comfortable waiting for technology. But in this case, the reasoning also affects the trust involved of the consumer towards the technology.
‘Speed is one of the main aspects of a Blockchain technology which makes it a really useful and trusted way of doing purchases. Trust derives from speed in my case. When your purchase or
money floats between your wallet and the relevant actor, one can get a little bit anxious. I need some grip on my transactions. I need to know what I can expect and speed is an important factor on this aspect.’
In sum, the characteristic speed is overall considered important, also in the responses labelled as ‘not a priority’. The main argument for these responses is that speed is indeed important for acceptance, but it should not compromise one of the other characteristics (Mainly Trust and Security).
28 Also, from the companies’ perspective the arguments for a high level of speed in order for them to use Blockchain mainly involves that it should be able to compete with the speed of the banks currently handling the transactions. As it will be used to replace the banks.
‘Blockchain was created to decrease the need for banks to be the centre of the transactions.
Therefore, speed should be at least up to the level of the banks currently handling our transactions.’ Also, the volatility of prices is once more an important incentive for a high level of speed, for example for one respondent oil prices have a significant influence on the cost price of his products, the volatility of the oil prices creates the need for a fast almost instant transaction in order to get favourable prices. Another response involved the use of smart contracts, that could increase the speed of his business significantly. Operating as a health insurance mediator, smart contracts could lead to an increase of speed of its business processes, as this decreases the number of manual tasks needed to be performed.
‘Currently, all applications are processed periodically. The use of Blockchain technology could improve the speed of this process and therefore increase the speed of payments. This will ensure that once an applicant has been accepted, the payment will be done automatically. […..] a lot of manual tasks can be replaced by the blockchain technology.’
Only one respondent stated that the characteristic of speed, was for him not as important as a decrease in speed, by choosing a longer chain of blocks, could also mean a higher level security. From his point of view the expectations around speed can be managed and communicated.
‘Speed is less relevant for me, as this could compromise the level of safety. On top of that, when handling with a low transaction speed, this could be pro-actively communicated with the business partners, emphasizing that this increase the safety of the transaction.’
29
4.5 Sustainability
Table 7: Consumer perception vs. Company perception on Sustainability
Consumer Perspective Company perspective
Competitiveness Priority
Environmental Consideration Not a priority Not a priority
Regarding the sustainability of Blockchain the opinions of consumers can be divided in two sides. The first side is that sustainability is important, as we need to handle consciously in order to be environmental friendly, and should not unnecessarily waste resources when other options are in place. This view is best represented by the following statement:
‘If we are talking sustainability in terms of block chain using enormous amounts of energy, I think this needs to be addressed directly. The world is already deteriorating due to mankind’s doing, and mining would even contribute to more deterioration and use of fossil fuels.’
On the other side, the importance of sustainability is still mentioned and acknowledged, but is seen as less important compared to the other characteristics. A reason for this is that the other characteristics affect the respondents directly and personally, but sustainability although important, does not, and therefore is less important in considering accepting and using Blockchain. Another respondent mentioned that the high energy use does not have to be a problem, as long as we are able to find greener solutions to create this energy:
‘I think we need to find greener solutions to accommodate in our need for energy and not blame the servers who need to calculate the difficult combinations what results in better protection for the owners.’
The company owners mainly state that the sustainability of the Blockchain, in terms of their huge use of energy, is something they will take into consideration when deciding on whether or not to implement Blockchain technology. In most cases this is due to the fact that they are confident that the systems they are currently using are sufficient or of high quality for conducting their business, and do not feel the need to change this for a technology with such a high energy consumption rate. Argued is that corporate social responsibility is an important value within their firm, and that therefore choosing for Blockchain technology with these high levels of energy consumption would not fit within their organization, unless it brings major improvements to their technology portfolio.
30 ‘In my opinion the current functioning systems in the financial/legal industry are sufficient for the day to day business of these days. In the future we might need blockchains to improve this, but not at the cost of our (limited) energy resources.’
The other approximately half of the respondents argued that sustainability does not have their priority when deciding whether to use Blockchain technology or not. They argue that sustainability is not as important as the other characteristics discussed, and is therefore the least important characteristic for them.
31
4.6 Perceived ease of use
Table 8: Company perceived ease of use
In the survey used to get an understanding of the companies’ perceptions on Blockchain technology, an additional two questions were asked in order to gain knowledge on how company owners think about implementing and the usefulness of Blockchain for their business.
This basically created two types of outcomes, company owners who perceive the
implementation of Blockchain as easy, and company owners who perceive the implementation of Blockchain as difficult. One reason for perceiving the implementation as easy is that the knowledge needed is available as the company has employees who have sufficient knowledge on Blockchain. A second reason is the absence of difficult systems in terms of size and complicated CRM and CIT programmes, which leads to the perception that the implementation will not become a difficult task.
The main reason for perceiving the implementation of Blockchain as a difficult task, is the lack of sufficient knowledge on the Blockchain technology. For most company owners in this category, the technology is still unknown and there is a need for more knowledge. Another reason for the perceived difficulty is the dependence on other parties that are integrated in the systems of the firms, which means the need for adoption of the Blockchain technology throughout the value chain of the firm.
A solution for these firms which was mentioned the most is a standardized programme, which they would be willing to implement once the technology is more widely spread.
‘For us it will be hard to implement blockchain because we are dependent on payments from other organizations. This means that these organizations have to implement the same technology before it will be beneficial for both parties.’
Company perspective Employees
Lack of Knowledge Company size Standardized
32
4.7 Perceived usefulness
Table 8: Company perceived ease of use
Company perspective Could be worth it Not worth it Overall acceptance
The perceived usefulness of the Blockchain technology shows to be mainly dependent on the overall acceptance of Blockchain technology. Which makes sense as a transaction mechanism
becomes more valuable as more people use it. But most company owners see the potential value of Blockchain for the future, replacing the current banking system and improving the quality of the current systems in place.
‘I believe that if Blockchain keeps developing and more and more organization will implement the technology there will be a point that we have to implement blockchain …….. Especially, because it would increase payment speed, decrease the margin error and takes away manual tasks.’
Owners who perceive Blockchain as not useful, do not see the direct improvement of the system for their business, and they therefore do not see a need to invest in the technology. The costs of the technology, the stress of the implementation, and the perceived lack of security are
mentioned as influence factors for the perceived usefulness of Blockchain.
For both categories, the firm owners mention that the overall acceptance of Blockchain would eventually lead to their acceptance and the adoption of the technology.
33
5. Discussion
In this chapter the most important findings and their implications will be discussed. In order to get an idea on what aspects company management should focus on regarding their customers during the adoption of Blockchain.
5.1 Trust and Security
Analysing the responses, it became clear that the desired level of trust and the desired level of security are strongly related to each other. Interesting to see is that both sides of the market mention that the security of the system could make the need for a high level of trust less important. Which is supposed to be addressed by the design of the technology, by creating an open system where users have access to the entire database and history, and where several miners will control for the legitimacy of the transaction 55.
In discussing the level of trust needed, the biggest difference between the consumers’ and the company owners’ perspective is the feeling of losing control from the consumer side of the market. This should be managed carefully by the managers of companies, as trust has shown to be an important factor in accepting and using Blockchain technology. Firm owners should be aware of the fact that their customers could have a hostile attitude towards this new and for most customers unknown technology, if the feeling of losing control over their documents and financial transactions keeps raising questions. The following factors could help managers increase the level of trust of their customers or diminish the level of trust needed for their customers to accept Blockchain technology.
First of all, both the customers as the company owners mentioned that the needed level of trust, is dependent on the security of the system itself. Where a higher security leads to a higher level of trust. And therefore, creating a highly secure Blockchain system would increase the amount of trust from both parties. By analysing the responses discussing the security of Blockchain, the majority of the respondents perceived the Blockchain technology as secure, but on the other hand the loss of control and the lack of knowledge proved to be threats for the acceptance of Blockchain for the consumers.
The perception of a loss of control, can be due to the fact that customers have a lack of knowledge on the system. As Blockchain has characteristics which do in fact enable its users to have more control over their transactions. They have the option to select their own string of blocks on
