• No results found

Blockchain in the banking industry : the impact on customer experience from an employee perspective

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Blockchain in the banking industry : the impact on customer experience from an employee perspective"

Copied!
78
0
0

Bezig met laden.... (Bekijk nu de volledige tekst)

Hele tekst

(1)

M

sc. Business Administration

Track: Digital Business

Blockchain in the banking industry

The impact on customer experience from an employee perspective

By Suzanne Sweers 10460470 June 22nd, 2018

Supervisor: Second reader:

(2)

i

Statement of Originality

This document is written by Student Suzanne Sweers, 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.

(3)

ii Table of Contents Abstract ... iv 1. Introduction ... 1 1.1 Research problem ... 1 1.2 Research objective ... 2 1.3 Research method ... 3

1.4 Structure of the thesis ... 3

2. Literature review ... 4

2.1 Blockchain technology ... 4

2.1.1 Permissionless blockchain ... 5

2.1.2 Permissioned blockchain ... 5

2.2 Blockchain in the banking industry ... 6

2.2.1 Benefits of blockchain in the banking industry ... 7

2.2.2 Challenges of blockchain in the banking industry ... 8

2.3 Customer experience in the banking industry ... 9

2.3.1 Customer experience in the banking industry in general ... 10

2.3.2. Customer experience with online banking ... 11

2.3.3 Customer experience in relation to blockchain in banking ... 11

3. Conceptual research model ... 15

3.1 Conceptual research model visualized ... 16

3.2 Conceptual research model explained ... 17

4. Research design and methodology ... 24

4.1 Research design ... 24

4.2 Research method ... 25

4.2.1 Research setting ... 25

4.3 Reliability and validity ... 29

4.3.1. Reliability ... 29

4.3.2. Validity ... 30

5. Results ... 31

5.1. Results from the interviews ... 31

5.1.1 Functional quality ... 33

5.1.2 Relational quality ... 35

5.1.3 Convenience ... 38

(4)

iii

5.1.5 Problem handling ... 40

5.1.6 Challenges ... 40

5.1.7 Other results ... 43

5.2 Results from Delphi method ... 43

6. Discussion ... 45

6.1 Theoretical contributions ... 45

6.2 Practical contributions ... 48

6.3 Strengths and limitations ... 50

6.3.1 Strengths ... 50 6.3.2 Limitations ... 51 6.4 Future research ... 52 7. Conclusion ... 55 Bibliography ... 56 Appendices ... 62 Appendix 1 ... 62 Appendix 2 ... 64 Appendix 3 ... 65 Appendix 4 ... 68 Appendix 5 ... 73

(5)

iv

Abstract

In the banking industry the first blockchain implementations are being executed, while little is yet know about the impact for one of the primary stakeholders of the bank: the customer. This research investigated this impact from an employee perspective, using the framework from Arbore & Busacca (2009) concerning customer experience. A multi-method triangulation was carried out by conducting interviews with experienced blockchain bank employees and by applying the Delphi method. Due to the variation in type of user case and underlying type of blockchain in the sample, generalizability of the results was challenging. Nonetheless, the results do show that blockchain implementation does not negatively impact the reliability and positively impacts accuracy, price-quality ratio and assurance perceived by the customer. Furthermore, the relevance of blockchain being a hype was also addressed by the

interviewees. These results were confirmed with the Delphi method, enhancing the rigor of the research. While the generalizability of the results was limited, the variety in answers provided a rich basis for theoretical and practical implications and for future research suggestions.

(6)

1

1. Introduction

“We want to be a tech company with a banking license” stated Ralph Hamers, the CEO of ING Bank N.V. in August 2017 (ING, 2017). This quote demonstrates the transition taking place in the financial sector. Financial institutions, including banks, are increasingly trying to profile and cast themselves further away from the traditional bank image. According to Guo and Liang (2016) it is essential for banks adapt to changes in the industry, by relying on technological development. One example of this new technology is blockchain.

Blockchain is a technology that is receiving a growing amount of attention, also in the banking industry (Zhao, Fan & Yan, 2016). For 2017 it was predicted that financial

institutions were to spend one billion dollar on blockchain projects, thereby making it “one of the fastest developing enterprise software markets of all time” (Morgan Stanley Global Insight: Global Financials/ FinTec, 2016, in: Zuberi, 2017, p.1). Besides investing money in blockchain projects, large commercial banks have performed several experiments in the last year(s) on where to integrate the technology. They have moved one step further and are now focusing on the execution of these successful experiments (Baghiuc, 2018; Ducas & Wilner, 2017; Rabobank, 2018).

1.1 Research problem

Zhao et al. in their article on research opportunities in blockchain state that “while many blockchain development projects are emerging, research in blockchain is still in its infancy” (2016, p.6). The financial sector, including the banking industry, until now has received the most attention in literature concerning blockchain (Schlegel, Zavolokina & Schabe, 2018). This is not quite surprising, considering the fact that the most famous cryptocurrency was built upon blockchain technology (Nofer, Gomber, Hinz & Schiereck, 2017).

However, research rarely focused on what effect the implementation of this new technology will be on the customer experience (Schlegel et al., 2018). As customers are one of the primary stakeholders of banks (de Graaf, 2016), it is important to investigate the effect of the implementation of this new technology on this stakeholder group (Schlegel et al., 2018). Minto, Voelkerling and Wulff (2017) confirm the relevance of looking into this topic: “The application of technology to finance is changing market structures, their dynamics as well as customer experiences and behavioral patterns” (2017, p.432). Until now only one conference pending article looked at the customer experience of the blockchain technology

(7)

2 beyond the onboarding process of customers, the research by Schlegel et al., (2018). Based on existing literature they investigated this topic in a broad range of sectors: financial, records management, entertainment and communication, state government, supply chain and private transportation (Schlegel et al., 2018).

As stated, Schlegel et al. (2018) identified the customer experience in the financial sector, but they only partially investigated the banking industry with the representation of the subsector payments and money transfer. In their research Schlegel et al. (2018) acknowledge that their literature review did not cover all subsectors where blockchain can be applied. Furthermore, they identified the relevance of blockchain application in another subsector represented in the banking industry: trade finance. It is therefore relevant to look at the impact of blockchain implementation on the customers in the entire banking industry.

1.2 Research objective

The research objective is to explore the impact of blockchain implementation in the banking industry for customers in the several subsectors where blockchain is being integrated. This research, opposed to the article of Schlegel et al. (2018), focused on the banking industry specifically and analyze the effect of blockchain implementation on customer experience. A practical outcome of this research is an identification of the impact of blockchain

implementation on customer experience elements that can be used for banks to improve the implementation of blockchain with respect to their customer. This is relevant as banks are now experimenting and starting with the implementation of this new technology (Baghiuc, 2018; Ducas & Wilner; 2017; Rabobank, 2018). A theoretical contribution can be found in the investigation the customer experience of blockchain implementation. While the

expectations about the blockchain technology are high, the benefits, and thus also the pitfalls, for the users are still unclear (Seebacher & Schüritz, 2017). In the banking industry, where blockchain is (soon to be) integrated, the effect on one of the primary stakeholders, the customer, has only partially been investigated (Schlegel et al., 2018).

The research objective was both theoretically and practically feasible. It was

theoretical achievable as this research could build upon existing research on both blockchain and customer experience in the banking industry. The first received a lot of attention in the banking industry since the introduction of the cryptocurrency bitcoin (Nofer et al., 2017). The latter has been receiving more attention in the banking industry since customer experience is recognized as an important element of competitive advantage (Chalal & Dutta, 2015). Schlegel et al. (2018) are the first to have investigated customer experience of blockchain

(8)

3 implementation and thereby partially looked at bank customers. The article from Schlegel et al. (2018) provided a good foundation for further research. This research followed their suggestion to interview other roles besides blockchain experts, as they might provide new data. Schlegel et al. 92018) propose to interview for instance end customers. However, to gain relevant information, it was decided to interview employees at banks that are in contact with both the technology and the customer. A customer namely rarely actively engage with the technology behind products and services offered in the banking industry (Schlegel et al., 2018). The interviewing of employees instead of end customers enhanced the practical feasibility of the research objective for two reasons. Firstly, it was more easy to get in contact with employees at banks within the set time frame of this research instead of end customers. Secondly, by interviewing employees that can also relate to the customer viewpoint this research could include technological elements of blockchain that might impact customer experience, without excluding the customer perspective.

1.3 Research method

The blockchain implementation in banking sector and the effect on customer experience wase investigated by gathering and analyzing data concerning the potential (dis)advantages of this integration for the customers. The data was collected through interviewing several blockchain experts in the sector and employees who both can relate to the technological part and the customer perspective of the blockchain implementation. In order for the interviewees to reach consensus on the information retrieved from the interviews, a Delphi method approach was applied after conducting the interviews. This multi-method approach enhances the validity of the data obtained (Gliner, 1994).

1.4 Structure of the thesis

The structure of this research is as follow: first a literature review will be presented. This will include an explanation of the blockchain and an analysis of blockchain implementation in the banking industry. Besides that, it will also address the construct customer experience and review what has been investigated about customer experience in the banking industry in three ways: customer experience in general, in online banking and in relation with blockchain. A conceptual research model is proposed and afterwards the methodology of this research will be elaborated upon. Then the results of both the interviews and the Delphi method will be discussed and the theoretical and practical implications of the research are examined. After stating the strengths and limitations of this research, future research suggestions will be given. In the end a conclusion will be formulated.

(9)

4

2. Literature review

A literature review will be presented to introduce the constructs and to present a synopsis of current literature. First of all an introduction in the blockchain technology will be provided, then blockchain in the banking industry is examined. Finally, the customer experience in the banking industry is discussed: customer experience in general, customer experience with online banking and customer experience with blockchain solutions.

2.1 Blockchain technology

In order to understand the utility of blockchain in the banking industry, it is important to know what blockchain is. Blockchain technology underlies the most popular cryptocurrency, the Bitcoin, and has received a lot of attention after the introduction of this coin (Schlegel et al., 2018) and is even being called a hype nowadays (Walsh et al., 2016). Blockchain is a type of distributed ledger technology. Or, as Treleaven, Brown & Yang say, “Not all distributed ledgers are blockchains, but all blockchains are distributed ledgers” (2017, p.15). The

distributed ledger technology (DLT), as the name entails, comprises a ledger. This is a shared record of transactions between the parties involved, replacing a third party that otherwise would monitor the transaction (Nofer et al., 2017). Blockchain technology is a particular type of DLT, whereby the data on these transactions are stored in a particular way.

Blockchain can be seen as a form of a database, in which all data is synchronized and secured in a decentral way (Peters & Panayi, 2016). Data in the blockchain is collectively validated by the other parties in the network using a consensus protocol (Ducas & Wilner, 2017; Yli-Huumo, Ko, Choi, Park & Smolander, 2016). Once all the parties in the network reach consensus on the validity of the information, it is aggregated into a ‘block’ of

information (Nofer et al., 2017). This block is then connected to the ‘chain’ of earlier validated blocks of information. Hence the word ‘blockchain’.

The authenticity of the data in the blockchain is secured through cryptographic sealing (Treleaven et al., 2017). This is the process of verifying transactions through a consensus protocol, which ensures that new transactions are not automatically added to the ledger (Nofer et al., 2017; Treleaven et al., 2017). Each of these blocks are linked to each other and each succeeding block contains information of the other blocks in the chain. This way the validity of the information in the blockchain is assured, because a change in every previous block is nearly impossible (Ducas & Wilner, 2017).

On what terms a transaction is validated and executed can be comprised in a smart contract (Treleaven et al., 2017). A smart contract can specify certain conditions under which

(10)

5 a transaction can take place (Cocco, Pinna & Marchesi, 2017). It allows to create contracts between participants, comprising rules that the participants in the network have all agreed upon (Treleaven et al., 2017; Yli-Huumo et al., 2016). These rules can be programmed so a transaction is automatically executed by the blockchain system, when the contract’s terms are fulfilled (Treleaven et al., 2017; Yli-Huumo et al., 2016).

There are different types of blockchain technologies, as a different type of application requires a different type of technology (Peters & Payani, 2016). Blockchain can operate in a permissionless and permissioned network, where the latter consists of a private and hybrid blockchain (de Kruijff &Weigand, 2017; Peters & Panayi, 2016). These types will be explained now.

2.1.1 Permissionless blockchain

The permissionless blockchain allows anyone to join the network (Peters & Panayi, 2016). It is also called a public blockchain, as anyone can engage by reading, sending or verifying the transactions as an anonymous node, also called a ‘miner’ (de Kruijff & Weigand, 2017). This type of blockchain is transparent and according to de Kruijff & Weigand (2017, p.4) “their main goal is to prevent concentration of power”. In the public blockchain miners are stimulated to join the verification process and even get compensated to do so (Nofer et al. 2017; Peters & Panayi, 2016). In a public blockchain this process is called a mining mechanism and can have various forms, depending on the type of consensus protocol (de Kruijff & Weigand, 2017).

2.1.2 Permissioned blockchain

In a permissioned blockchain prior authorization from either a central authority or consortium is required (Peters & Panayi, 2016). Here, a distinction can be made between a private or hybrid blockchain. On the one hand there are private blockchain transactions, executed with trusted parties in the network (de Kruijff & Weigand, 2017). De Kruijff & Weigand (2017) state that private blockchains have emerged to perform transactions without anonymous nodes and are linked to a specific organization, for instance for internal operational processes. On the other hand, there is a hybrid blockchain. This type of blockchain has a broader scope and includes a few parties in the network that can share a ledger (de Kruijff & Weigand, 2017). It is also often called a consortium blockchain (Cachin & Vulkolic, 2017). This is an

explanatory name, as this blockchain type thus entails a consortium of parties in the network. The validation of data in these two types of blockchain are done by non-anonymous

(11)

6 nodes, a validator, and each validator in the network/consortium has to sign every block to conform the validity of that block in the chain (de Kruijff & Weigand, 2017). For both types the possibility to read transactions could be public or restricted to a certain extent (de Kruijff & Weigand, 2017).

It is important to make the distinction between the different blockchain types, as the different types enable different range of activities and operations (Swanson 2015, In: Peters & Panayi, 2016). Permissioned blockchains for instance are faster and need less energy to operate (Sankar, Sindhu & Sethumandhavan, 2017). The different applications of blockchain can also be seen in the banking industry, which will be discussed next.

2.2 Blockchain in the banking industry

Now that the technology has been introduced, it is time to investigate blockchain in the studied sector in this research: the banking sector. Researchers have identified several

(potential) applications of blockchain in the banking industry, without specifically taking into account the underlying type of blockchain. Payments, including cryptocurrencies, is

mentioned most often in literature as an application of blockchain technology in the banking sector (Guo & Liang, 2016; Nofer et al, 2017; Schlegel et al, 2018; Zuberi, 2017).

Furthermore, the trade finance subsector is named often, including post-trade settlements and securities settlement (Cocco et al., 2017; Nofer et al, 2017; Schlegel et al., 2018; Zuberi, 2017;). Besides that, subsectors such as insurance (Nofer et al.,2017), smart assets (Zuberi, 2017) and regulatory compliance (Cocco et al., 2017) are recognized for (potential)

blockchain applications in the banking industry. This sums up where present literature sees the contribution of blockchain in banking, without making a distinction between different types of blockchain.

However, as stated before, different applications can operate on a different type of blockchain. According to de Kruijff and Weigand (2017) a permissioned blockchain is suitable for the banking industry, as it allows transactions with trusted parties in the network. One example of a permissioned blockchain application used by several banks is R3. Over 40 of the world’s important financial institutions, including the Bank of America, Deutsche Bank and Barclays Bank, have joined the R3 blockchain consortium (Guo & Liang, 2016). R3 aims to perform financial transactions between the members involved using blockchain protocols (Fanning & Centers, 2016). Besides this application, also in the subsector trade finance of the banking industry a consortium blockchain can be applied (Guo & Liang, 2016). Hereby, several parties are included in the transaction and have insight and validation power. Lastly, a

(12)

7 purely private blockchain can be addressed to improve internal processes, like a Know Your Customer procedure (Underwood, 2015).

This division presents how the different blockchains can be applied in the banking industry. However, this section does not elaborate on the benefits and challenges that this new technology offers in these areas. First the benefits of blockchain in banking will be discussed.

2.2.1 Benefits of blockchain in the banking industry

The banking industry entails various inefficiencies and costs that blockchain could potentially be a solution for (Cocco et al., 2017; Nofer et al., 2017; Zuberi, 2017). Benefits of the

implementation of blockchain in the banking industry are for instance a higher efficiency, lower costs, better safety and better customer experience, as opposed to traditional banks (Guo & Liang, 2016). These benefits will be elaborated upon now.

Firstly, increased efficiency and decreased costs are seen as a benefit of blockchain implementation. Traditionally, payments between banks are executed by intermediary firms, involving series of processes, e.g.: bookkeeping, transaction reconciliation, balance

reconciliation, payment initiation (Guo & Liang, 2016). Especially for cross-border payments this process can become very lengthy, and thus costly (Cocco et al., 2017; Guo & Liang, 2016). With the introduction of blockchain technology, processes such as balance

reconciliation are not needed. The intermediary firm is also superfluous and eliminated, thus increasing the efficiency and decreasing the costs (Guo & Liang, 2016). The automated process of validating and storing data in the back-end also contributes to a decline in costs for operations (Guo & Liang, 2016; Zuberi, 2017).

Additionally, blockchain implementation contributes to an better safety for two reasons. According to Guo and Liang (2016) blockchain entails a distributed data storage that cannot be meddled with. Besides that, they state that the validation process ensures the security of personal information of a customer, through the use of cryptographic sealing. An increase in security as benefit in the banking sector is confirmed by the research of Zuberi (2017).

Finally, the research by Guo and Liang predicts a good customer experience, in comparison with traditional banking, due to rich scenarios and personalized service. The richness and personalization mainly arises from applications in the banking industry that blockchain might boost, according to Guo and Liang (2016). Remainder benefits of blockchain implementation in banking that are mentioned in the literature and that can be linked with above mentioned benefits are: increased discoverability and trust (Cocco et al.,

(13)

8 2017), smart contracts, increased transparency and thus a lower risk of fraud and lastly the use of a confirmed digital identity (Zuberi, 2017).

2.2.2 Challenges of blockchain in the banking industry

Besides the benefits that can be seen in the banking industry with the implementation of blockchain, also some challenges can be identified. The scalability and costs for the feasibility of this new technology are recognized to be concerns in present literature (Cocco et al., 2017; Zuberi, 2017). This includes the questions of whether the technology will be able to reach the same level of the status quo nowadays and whether banks will be able to scale up this

technology to the entire financial system (Cocco et al., 2017; Zuberi, 2017). Another factor that might influence the scalability and costs of the blockchain implementation is the uncertainty of how much computational power behind each block is needed. The

computational power needed for the validation process might cost a lot of energy and also drive up costs (Cocco et al., 2017; Zuberi, 2017). Lastly, Cocco et al. (2017) and Zuberi, (2017) mention that it is questionable whether costs will still decrease if larger volumes are involved.

Furthermore, challenges of blockchain implementation can be detected in governance, regulation & legal hurdles (Zuberi, 2017). Agreements need to be made on how blockchains can be administered and improved once they are in use, including governance processes (Zuberi, 2017). Besides that, it is challenging that until now there is no regulatory framework for a structure like the blockchain, where no third party is involved (Zuberi, 2017). Regulators are concerned how a blockchain implementation can be controlled to prevent money

laundering and the financing of terrorist actions through the use of blockchain applications (Zuberi, 2017). According to Zuberi (2017) these elements are especially relevant in the financial industry, as it is commonly a heavily regulated sector. At the moment the regulation and governance is unsure, thus forming a real challenge for the implementation of blockchain in the banking industry.

Finally, the security of the blockchain technology can be seen as a risk for the implementation of blockchain (Cocco et al, 2017). Especially in the financial industry, security is key, as vulnerabilities can lead to financial losses (Li, Jian, Chen, Luo & Wen, 2017). For instance, in 2014 there was an attack on a Bitcoin trading platform, resulting in stolen Bitcoins at a value of 450 million dollars (Adelstein, 2016 In: Li et al., 2017). Li et al. (2017) identified nine blockchain security risks in their research. These are, a.o.: transaction privacy leakage, vulnerabilities in smart contracts, criminal smart contracts, private key security and double spending. These risks can be linked to flaws in the blockchain operating

(14)

9 mechanism or the can be linked to the application of smart contracts (Li et al., 2017). The causes of these risks and security enhancements for blockchain are being investigated (Li et al., 2017), but the identified categories display that security is a challenge to keep in mind for the implementation of blockchain.

2.3 Customer experience in the banking industry

Now that blockchain has been explained and that the application possibilities and

corresponding benefits and challenges have been identified, the focus is now directed towards another important construct of this research: customer experience. Customer experience is a very important element in business nowadays. This is demonstrated by the implementation of a CCEO, a Chief Customer Experience Officer, by several companies, including Google and Amazon, to monitor the customer experience (Lemon & Verhoef, 2016). Customer

experience is defined as “anything that explains customer dissatisfaction or delight, be it in control of the firm or not” (Maklan, Antonetti & Whitty, 2017, p.93). As the definition shows, customer experience is often linked with (dis)satisfaction of customers. In this research the notion of customer experience will also encompass customer (dis)satisfaction, as a positive customer experience can naturally lead to customer satisfaction and vice versa. According to research, customer experience even explains 61% of the variance in satisfaction (Srivastava & Kaul, 2014) and will therefore be used interchangeably with the term customer experience in this literature review.

According to Maklan et al. (2017), experiences of customers are becoming more important, as nowadays the economy is shifting towards an ‘experience economy’. This means that experiences form the basis of competitive advantage within industries, as also is visible within the banking industry (Arbore & Busacca, 2009; Kaur, Sharma & Kapoor, 2012; Maklan et al., 2017). It is therefore not surprising that research has paid attention to customer experience and (dis)satisfaction in the banking industry. Research has looked at general customer satisfaction in the banking industry (Arbore & Busacca, 2009; Chalal & Dutta, 2015), but also investigated this in several countries. Among others in: Bangladesh (Rana, 2014), Pakistan (Zafar, Zaheer & ur Rehman, 2011), Kenya (Kombo, 2015) and even in North Cyprus (Ozatac, Saner & Sen, 2016). Research also investigated customer satisfaction in banking in relation with other aspects: corporate social responsibility (Senthikumar, Ananth, & Arulraj, 2011), service quality (Kaur et al., 2012), the onboarding process of customers (Moyano & Ross, 2017) and also a lot of attention has been given to online/internet/e- banking, hereafter named online banking (Asad, Mohajeranib & Nourseresh, 2016; Chu, Lee

(15)

10

& Chao, 2012; Yoon, 2010; Zafar et al., 2011).

This enumeration presents that many aspects about customer experience and

(dis)satisfaction in banking could be discussed. However, for the scope of this research it is appropriate to focus on general satisfaction in banking to analyze the sentiment present in the industry. Besides that, it is relevant to focus on how technological developments have

impacted customer satisfaction in the banking industry, as blockchain is also a technological development that might impact customer experience. Therefore, also customer experience with online banking and customer experience with blockchain developments will be elaborated upon, as both are technological applications.

2.3.1 Customer experience in the banking industry in general

First of all, customer experience in the banking industry without connecting it to any technological aspects has been investigated by researchers. Several dimension of customer experience can be identified. One way to comprise customer satisfaction is to divide it in sensory, cognitive, behavioural, affective and relation factors (Chalal & Dutta, 2015). A combination of the cognitive, affective and behavioural factors are shown to have the most significant effect on customer satisfaction in the banking industry (Chalal & Dutta, 2015). The cognitive aspect entails knowledge/information sharing and the affective aspect includes problem handling, responding quality, aesthetic, and empathy. Finally, the behavioural aspect comprises concern and caring attitude, fast customer service and error free bank services. According to the research of Chalal and Dutta (2015) bank customers are thus most satisfied when the bank shares information and when customers feel that they are treated

professionally, also with their problems.

Another way customer satisfaction can be untangled, is by splitting it in the following six dimensions: functional quality, relational quality, convenience, economics, tangibles and problems (Arbore and Busacca, 2009). These categories all consist of different attributes that influence customer satisfaction. These factors mostly have been investigated by looking at the linear relationship between the attribute and customer satisfaction (Arbore & Busacca, 2009). Besides that, also the relative importance of the different attribute has been investigated. These results demonstrate that there is also a non-linear, asymmetric relationship between customer satisfaction and the attributes through three factors (Arbore & Busacca, 2009). Firstly, there are basic factors that only foster dissatisfaction, if not fulfilled. Secondly, there are attributes that can create satisfaction when delivered: excitement factors. Lastly, there are performance factors that can both impact satisfaction and dissatisfaction (Arbore & Busacca,

(16)

11 2009). Arbore and Busacca (2009) demonstrate with their research that reputation is an important basic factor for customer satisfaction in the banking industry. Additionally, in line with research from Chalal and Dutta (2015), they find that customers value receiving good (technical) information from the bank and that a good, professional relationship between customer and (several) employee(s) is an important element in customer satisfaction.

2.3.2. Customer experience with online banking

Secondly, research has looked at customer experience while linking it to a newly developed banking product: online/ internet banking (Asad et al., 2016; Yoon, 2010). Several elements can be regarded as antecedents of customer satisfaction in online banking (Asad et al., 2016; Yoon, 2010). For instance, the look of the website is important, stating significant results for design (Yoon, 2010) and identifying site aesthetic also affects customer satisfaction (Asad et al., 2016). Besides that, research agrees that both security and customer support service are important influencers of customer satisfaction (Asad et al., 2017; Yoon, 2010). The latter is confirmed by other research on online banking, stating that web service quality is a crucial element in increasing customer satisfaction (Chu et al., 2012; Zafar et al., 2011).

Apart from the commonalities stated above, research also separately identifies some other elements that influence customer satisfaction in online banking. One research identifies ease of use, fulfilment and website navigability as factors affecting customer satisfaction (Asad et al., 2016). Moreover, also a significant effect of information content and speed on customer satisfaction in online banking can be found (Yoon, 2010).

Besides that, the level of customer experience also matters in customer satisfaction for online banking (Yoon, 2010). A differentiation between customers with low and high level of experience (more than one use of online banking per month) can be made. With this

distinction, not surprisingly, it was found that customer support service more affected customers with low experience in online banking (Yoon, 2010). Design, speed, security and information content were found to be more important for customers with a high level of experience (Yoon, 2010).

2.3.3 Customer experience in relation to blockchain in banking

As asserted in the introduction, there is only one conference pending paper that has

investigated customer experience with blockchain implementations beyond the onboarding process. However, research did investigate the implementation of a part of blockchain technology: the distributed ledger technology (DLT), in the onboarding process of financial institutions and its effect on customer experience (Moyano & Ross, 2017). Therefore, now

(17)

12 both the onboarding process and blockchain implementations in the banking industry with regards to customer experience will be discussed.

2.3.3.1 Distributed Ledger Technology in the onboarding process

The onboarding process of new customers is called the Know Your Customer (KYC) process and is used to verify the identity of the customer (Moyano & Ross, 2017). This until now has been excluded from this research for three reasons:

1. It entails not entirely the same technology: the onboarding process is proposed to be integrated with DLT rather than blockchain (Moyano & Ross, 2017).

2. Technically speaking, the customer is only a customer after the onboarding process, the onboarding process is a very short journey of the customer to-be. After screening the documents a customer can be either validated or rejected and in case of the latter, the customer will not be engaging further with banking products or services (Moyano & Ross, 2017).

3. This process is not initiated by the customer, like a payment can be initiated by a customer. The onboarding is a check that is performed by bank employees in order to validate the identity of the potential customer (Moyano & Ross, 2017).

However, since research on the onboarding process states that the KYC procedure could potentially also operate specifically on blockchain (and not only on DLT), it is integrated here in this section to give an accurate representation of literature currently available (Moyano & Ross, 2017).

Moyano and Ross (2017) state that the customer often experiences extensive waiting times before conducting business, especially for large corporates. They propose a distributed ledger technology (DLT) to improve customer experience in the KYC procedure, as mostly transaction costs and waiting time can be reduced by integrating DLT for the KYC process. Also Martens, Tuyll van Serooskerken, & Steenhagen (2017) acknowledge that enhanced customer experience can be obtained when using a KYC model where a distributed ledger is shared. According to them, customers of banks now have a “far-from optimal user

experience” because of long onboarding time and the repetition of this procedure at every new bank they want to engage with (p.123). However, there is also a less positive note to the customer experience of the KYC procedure via blockchain. Cermeño (2016) investigated the regulatory landscape, where KYC on blockchain could reduce costs (Moyano & Ross, 2017) and states that the preservation of anonymity and privacy of the information obtained in the blockchain is a challenge.

(18)

13 2.3.3.2 Blockchain implementation in general

As stated before, there is until now only one conference pending paper that investigated the relationship between blockchain applications and customer experience beyond the onboarding process. This is the research by Schlegel et al. (2018), looking at the customer experience with respect to the users of blockchain applications. In order to give more direction to this holistic concept of customer experience, Schlegel et al., (2018) applied the framework of Neumeier, Wolf & Oesterle (2017) on customer experience in digitalization. According to them, this framework is suitable, because the introduction of the blockchain, a new

technology, fits within the concept of digitalization. The framework comprises four elements of customer experience:

- Product & service quality - Customer tailored solution - Innovative products & service - Customer interaction convenience.

Neumeier et al. (2017), identified these elements as benefits that can be derived from the interaction with customers with digitalization and thus influences customer experience. Schlegel et al. (2018) state that with ongoing digitalization and newly developed technologies, like blockchain, consumers “can and should”(p. 3478) await advancements in these

categories.

Schlegel et al., (2018) investigated customer experience for blockchain applications in several sectors: the financial sector, records management, entertainment & communication, state government, supply chain and private transportation with the help of these four

categories. They find that customers who engage with blockchain solutions experience: “more trust, less corruption, smaller fees, faster processes, better access, more granularity and less censorship in the products and services” (p.3484).

However, this is their conclusion about all the sectors in general. For the financial sector they analyze the following subsectors: payments & money transfer, crowdfunding, donations, prediction markets and microloans. In this industry the following effects on the customer of the blockchain solution are stated: an increased product & service quality, a customer tailored solution, innovative products and services and an increased customer interaction convenience (Schlegel et al., 2018). It is not clear to what extent these apply in the banking industry in particular. The only subsector where they specifically identify the

customer as ‘bank customer’ is the payments & money transfer sector. However, it is not known to what extent their communicated effects of blockchain earlier mentioned, are

(19)

14 applicable for blockchain applications in the banking industry. In order to investigate the effect of blockchain implementation for the customer experience in banking, the framework of Schlegel et al. (2018) could be applied again, focused on the bank customer.

However, the four categories of product & service quality, customer tailored solution, innovative products & service and customer interaction convenience are rather broad themes to address the customer experience in relation to blockchain in the banking industry.

Especially since this subject has not been investigated much, there is a need for a more in-depth analysis on the benefits and also pitfalls of blockchain (Schlegel et al., 2018), which this research will address in the banking industry with regards to the customer experience.

(20)

15

3. Conceptual research model

As the literature review demonstrates, the customer experience in the banking industry has been investigated on several aspects, including the effect of blockchain implementation on customer experience. However, there is a need to investigate in depth the effect of the blockchain implementation on customer experience in the banking industry specifically, as this link has not received a lot of attention especially with regards to one of the primary stakeholders of the bank: the customers (Schlegel et al., 2018). Therefore, the research of Arbore and Busacca (2009) will be adduced. They looked at customer (dis)satisfaction in banking and, as stated before, identified the following dimensions that influence customer experience: functional quality, relational quality, convenience, economics, tangibles and problem handling and recovery. Some of these dimensions can again be divided in attributes of that dimension, broadening the understanding of what entails customer experience.

Customer experience can thus be analyzed through several dimensions identified by Arbore & Busacca (2009) which will be conducted in relation with blockchain implementation in the banking industry. However, one dimension Arbore and Busacca (2009) identified is excluded in this research. This entails the category ‘tangibles’. Since blockchain implementation is not a tangible object where customers will be in physical contact with, this element is beyond the scope of this research.

Additionally, three challenges that can impact the relationship between the implementation of blockchain technology and customer experience will be investigated: technical, institutional and scalability challenges. Figure 1 on the next page shows a visual representation of the conceptual research model, including the investigated elements of customer satisfaction and the three challenges.

(21)

16

Figure 1: Conceptual research model

3.1 Conceptual research model visualized

(22)

17

3.2 Conceptual research model explained

As Figure 1 shows, several dimensions that influence customer experience can be deduced: functional quality, relational quality, convenience, economics, tangibles and problem handling and recovery, of which some dimensions consist of several attributes (Arbore & Busacca, 2009). Customer experience can thus be analyzed through these elements, which will be conducted in relation with blockchain implementation in the banking industry.

Foremost, Arbore and Busacca (2009) state that functional quality is one of the elements that influence customer (dis)satisfaction. Functional quality is related to how efficient the product or service is delivered, concerning the core product/service of the company (Sánchez-Hernández, Martínez-Tur, Peiró & Moliner, 2010). Arbore and Busacca also call functional quality “the quality of the core service provided by the bank” (2009, p.272). If the quality of the core service delivered by the bank is high, it can positively impact the relationship with the customer, and thus increase the customer experience (Arbore & Busacca, 2009). Therefore, preliminary proposition 1 will be:

P1: The implementation of blockchain technology has a positive impact on the functional quality experienced by the customer.

Functional quality is still a rather broad concept to investigate. Arbore & Busacca find five attributes that contribute to functional quality: reliability, security, speed, accuracy and functionality. Reliability and security are expected to negatively impact customer experience, whereas speed, accuracy and functionality are expected to positively impact customer

experience. Concerning reliability, recent research has stated that the reliability of the blockchain architecture has received most attention concerning the software of the

blockchain, rather than the hardware (Xiao, …, & Huang, 2018). However, attention to the hardware is necessary to strengthen the reliability and to ensure security and privacy of blockchain (Xiao, …, & Huang, 2018). This demonstrates that reliability is closely linked another element of functional quality: security. Some argue that the implementation of

blockchain will enhance the security of customer data, as fraud and hacks concerns are limited with blockchain (Zuberi, 2017) and the removal of third parties will improve user’s security (Nofer et al., 2016). Besides that, the security of the authentic data is also improved through cryptographic sealing (Treleaven et al., 2017). However, the implementation of blockchain can also negatively impact the customer experience, as it is still a challenge to preserve data in the blockchain to ensure anonymity and privacy (Cermeño, 2016). Since security is pertinent in the financial sector and hacks on blockchain platforms recently have caused financial losses

(23)

18 for customers (Li et al., 2017), it is expected that the instability of the blockchain architecture will have a negative impact on the reliability and security experienced by the customer.

The other three elements of functional quality are assumed to positively impact the customer experience when blockchain is implemented. The speed at which the

product/service is likely to increase with the implementation of blockchain because of automated processes (Zuberi, 2017). The accuracy is increased with the implementation of smart contracts (Zuberi, 2017). The third element functionality is also positively influenced with blockchain implementation, as the functionalities of the network still continue to work when nodes in the network break down (Nofer et al., 2017). Hence, the following detailed propositions can be phrased:

P1:The implementation of blockchain technology has a negative impact on the reliability (1.1) and security (1.2) experienced by the customer and a positive impact on the speed (1.3), accuracy (1.4) and functionality (1.5) on experienced by the customer.

Secondly, Arbore and Busacca (2009) investigate another type of quality that influences customer experience in the banking sector: relational quality. It is defined as the relation of the customer with the bank beyond the core performance, including how the social interaction between customer and employee is perceived by the customer (Sánchez-Hernández et al., 2010). According to Arbore and Busacca (2009) the drivers behind this type of quality are even more important for the customer experience than the functional quality discussed previously. For relational quality also a positive impact on customer experience can be expected, as a higher relational quality between customer and bank will increase customer satisfaction (Arbore & Busacca, 2009). Preliminary proposition 2 thus will be:

P2: The implementation of blockchain technology has a positive impact on the relational quality experienced by the customer.

Again, relational quality is a term that can be obviated by other attributes: responsiveness, commitment, communication, friendliness, courtesy and assurance (Arbore & Busacca, 2009). These are all expected to positively influence customer experience, as will be clarified now. Responsiveness is the ability to respond to customer requests timely and flexibly (Iberahim, Taufik, Adzmir & Saharuddin, 2016). With the current technological development, as for example blockchain, banks are able to enhance their responsiveness, which will increase customer satisfaction (Iberahim et al., 2016). Furthermore, commitment is proposed to positively influence customer experience, as it is a way of responding to customer needs and

(24)

19 can stimulate customer satisfaction (Ndubisi, 2006). Communication relates to the exchange of information and the quality of that information, which can positively contribute to

customer satisfaction (Ndubisi, 2006). Providing and communicating blockchain implementation solutions to react to customers need can show the commitment to the customer and enhance the quality of communication experienced by the customer.

Friendliness and courtesy are linked with how the employee approaches the customer and it was found to positively influence customer satisfaction (Al-Eisa & Alhemoud, 2009). Since the implementation of blockchain is only recently introduced in the banking sector (Ducas & Wilner, 2017), it can be expected that more communication to the customer is needed

concerning blockchain solutions. When this is done in a friendly and courteous way, it can improve customer satisfaction (Al-Eisa & Alhemoud, 2009). Assurance relates to friendliness and courtesy and also evolves from the interaction between employee and customer (Kumar, Mani, Mahalingam, Vanjikovan, 2010; Narteh, 2017). Therefore, it is presupposed that assurance has the same impact on customer experience. The following detailed propositions can be stated:

P2: The implementation of blockchain technology has a positive impact on

responsiveness (2.1), commitment (2.2), communication (2.3), friendliness, courtesy and assurance (2.4) experienced by the customer.

Thirdly, the convenience aspect is an important element in customer (dis)satisfaction (Arbore & Busacca, 2009). Since Arbore and Busacca (2009) investigated the customer

(dis)satisfaction in specific retail banking, the convenience element is related to offices that are accessible for customers. They identify (among others) opening hours, travel distance and parking places as attributes to convenience for the customer. These are all practical items that are not applicable when looking at blockchain implementation in the banking industry. The research of Srivastava and Kaul (2014), acknowledged there is great variety in what can be convenient for the customer. Research has shown that convenience affects customer experience in a significant and positive way (Srivastava & Kaul, 2014). Therefore, in this research, general convenience will be investigated: to what extent the service is more easy to consume for the customer (Srivastava & Kaul, 2014). Therefore, proposition 3 is as follows:

P3: The implementation of blockchain technology has a positive impact on the convenience experienced by the customer.

(25)

20 Next, Arbore and Busacca (2009) identify economics as a dimension influencing customer experience, defining it as “the perception of costs” (p.272). Previous research in the banking sector found that a decent perception of price directly positively impacts customer satisfaction (Varki & Colgate, 2001). It is expected that a decent perception of costs is present when blockchain is implemented, as its implementation leads to a decline of costs (Guo & Liang, 2016), which can be translated to a lower price. Therefore this element will also be

investigated in this research, leading to the preliminary proposition 4:

P4: The implementation blockchain technology has a positive impact on the perception of costs experienced by the customer.

Arbore and Busacca (2009) make a distinction in perception of costs between: price-quality ratio, price fairness and charges. These can all positively impact the customer experience when blockchain is implemented. Firstly, the price-quality ratio for the customer can be defined as the trade-off between the quality of the product or service and monetary costs linked with it (Matzler, Würtele & Renzl, 2006). According to Schlegel et al. (2018) the product and service quality for the customer will increase if blockchain is implemented. This will enhance the favourability of the price-quality ratio and will increase customer satisfaction (Lam, Shankar, Erramilli & Murthy, 2004). Secondly, price fairness is the perception of the consumer whether the price is reasonable, acceptable or justifiable (Matzler et al., 2006). Perceived price fairness positively impacts customer satisfaction (Varki & Colgate, 2001), as customers feel they are being treated equitable (Matzler et al., 2006). Price-quality ratio can be seen as a dimension of price fairness, as both link to the perception of price perceived by the customer (Matzler et al., 2006). Hence, it can be assumed that price fairness influences customer satisfaction the same way, thus also positively impaction customer experience. Lastly, charges are seen as an element that can influence customer experience when looking at perception of costs. Charges can be seen as a reasonable price paid for the service of the bank (Kumar et al, 2006). A reasonable perception of price also relates to the definition of price fairness, where a price is perceived as reasonable, acceptable or justifiable (Matzler et al, 2006). Hence, it can be assumed that charges influence customer satisfaction the same way as price fairness does, thus also positively impact customer experience. Therefore, the following detailed proposition can be phrased:

P4: The implementation of blockchain technology has a positive impact the price-quality ratio (4.1), the price fairness (4.2) and the charges (4.3) experienced by the customer.

(26)

21 Lastly, Arbore and Busacca (2009) recognize problem handling and recovery to be a

component of customer satisfaction. In their research, they approach this theme regarding customer support characteristics such as: capability to avoid potential conflicts, complaints handling and efficiency of solving problems. Customer support is not something that can be linked with the implementation of blockchain technology, as customers will not interact with the technology itself. However, this research will step away from the customer support element of problem handling and include the general perception of problem handling and recovery. Research shows that technological errors can cause a decrease in customer

satisfaction, but when resolved quickly on the spot, that it can increase customer satisfaction (Dabholkar & Spaid, 2012). This shows that in general recovery of errors and problem handling can both positively and negatively influence customer experience. However, since blockchain is a rather new technology and the reliability of the blockchain architecture is not yet optimal (Xiao et al., 2018) it might be the case that problems might not be resolved quickly. Therefore, proposition 5 will be phrased as following:

P5: The implementation of blockchain technology has a negative impact on the problem handling and recovery of errors experienced by customers.

To summarize: five propositions have evolved in which the effect of blockchain technology implementation on several dimensions of customer experience have been addressed. These all have been decomposed in more detailed propositions on how the customer experience might increase or decrease with the implementation of blockchain technology within the banking sector.

However, looking at the relationship between the implementation of blockchain technology and customer experience, three factors can be considered that can moderate this relationship. The following three challenges can be detected: technical, institutional and scalability challenges. These will be explained now.

Firstly, there are technological challenges related to the blockchain implementation and its effect on customer experience (Paech, 2017). According to Swan (2017), the

technology behind the blockchain is difficult to grasp both conceptually and technically and this can hinder effective decision making and the implementation of blockchain. Besides that, she recognizes cybersecurity as a technical challenge. While improvements are being

developed concerning the blockchain technology, several unresolved technical concerns are still present (Swan, 2017). A software bug or a loophole in the blockchain network can have

(27)

22 negative influence on the financial institution and its clients (Paech, 2017). Hence, the

following proposition is phrased:

P6: Technical challenges have a negative impact on the implementation of blockchain experienced by the customer.

Secondly, institutional challenges can be found to influence the relationship between blockchain implementation and customer experience. Institutional challenges entail the regulation of blockchain, such as government restrictions or promotions towards blockchain services (Schlegel et al., 2018). According to Paech (2017, p.1110) “There is a general understanding that blockchain based financial networks should operate within the reach of law, courts and supervisors”. However, it has been recognized that the potential dangers have not been recognized enough (Paech, 2017). This should first be understood thoroughly, before the correct regulatory and legal aspects of blockchain based financial services can be

integrated (Paech, 2017). Guo et al. (2016) also state that more attention should be directed to the regulation of blockchain technology. Regulation is necessary, for example to prevent money laundering and the financing of terrorist actions through the use of blockchain applications (Zuberi, 2017). In the Netherlands it is still being debated how the blockchain technology should be regulated (Boersma, Verwaal & Bijloo, 2017). The institutional nature of blockchain is thus still uncertain and this may negatively influence the relationship between blockchain implementation and customer experience. Therefore, the following proposition is framed:

P7: Institutional challenges have a negative impact on the implementation of blockchain experienced by the customer

Lastly, another factor that can influence the relationship of the blockchain implementation and customer experience can be seen in the scalability of the blockchain technology. As stated before in this research, the scalability is a challenge for the utility of this new technology in the banking industry (Zuberi, 2017). The consensus protocol in blockchain is the cause of this, for both private and public blockchains (Swan, 2017). In public blockchains the

consensus protocol is not efficient enough to scale up, as the process takes a lot of electricity (computational power) (Cocco et al., 2017; Swan, 2017). Even in private blockchains, where the members in the network are known, the updating of every validator in very large networks is not efficient and limits the scalability (Swan, 2017). The early applications of blockchain in financial services face problems with scale (Underwood, 2017) and it can be questioned to

(28)

23 what extent blockchain applications can be scaled by banks to the entire financial system (Zuberi, 2017) and still offer a good customer experience for every level of demand. Therefore, the following proposition can be framed:

P8: Scalability challenges have a negative impact on the implementation of blockchain experienced by the customer

(29)

24

4. Research design and methodology

This section will describe the research design and method applied to investigate the research objective: analyzing the impact of blockchain implementations in the banking industry on the customer experience.

4.1 Research design

The approach of this research is qualitative, as the research topic has not been investigated thoroughly. The research is thus of exploratory nature, as new insights about a phenomenon or problem are sought (Saunders et al., 2009). It is common that a qualitative approach is linked with an inductive research method, where observations lead to a theory, which in turn can lead to certain conclusions (Saunders et al., 2009). However, in this case the article by Schlegel et al. (2018) has already provided a foundation of theory on the effect of blockchain implementation on customer experience. This research was thus conducted deductively, as theory was tested based on existing literature (Saunders et al., 2009). This research builds upon the article of Schlegel et al. (2018) in several ways. First of all, this research applied a different framework to investigate the customer experience, as was suggested by Schlegel et al. (2018) because it might lead to new results and insights. The framework from Arbore & Busacca (2009) allowed a more in-depth analysis by distinguishing multiple components that comprise the holistic concept of customer experience, as could be seen in Figure 1. Secondly, this research builds upon the research by Schlegel et al. (2018) by narrowing down the scope of this research to one of the subsectors Schlegel et al. identified in their paper: the banking industry. This focus allows a thorough investigation of the impact of blockchain

implementation in this one particular industry.

Furthermore, two smaller suggestions given by Schlegel et al. (2018) were also incorporated while conducting this research. First of all, they stated that companies might overestimate the positive effect of blockchain implementation “to reach their own competitive goals” (p. 3485), with as a result an exaggeration of advantages and a underestimation of the challenges of blockchain. In order to avoid these prejudices, in the interviews statements with either a positive or a negative impact were constructed. In some cases a negative impact was assumed, creating a momentum for interviewees to reconsider the potential positive impact. Secondly, Schlegel et al., interviewed blockchain experts for their research and stated that interviewing different type of interviewees could lead to new insights. This research included interviewees with varied roles, obtaining data from a different point of view.

(30)

25 The relevant unit of research for this research is a case study, as it is a research

strategy that can be used to understand a contemporary phenomenon in detail within its real-life context (Yin, 2009). More specifically, an embedded multiple case study was carried out, as different subunits (trade finance, payments) from different Dutch banks were investigated (Yin, 2009). Dyer & Wilkins (1991) in their research state that one case, or thus one

company, could be enough to investigate a research objective. However, this research

conducted interviews at four different companies, which is in line with Eisenhardt (1989). She states that four to ten cases will provide theoretical saturation, giving a more comprehensive understanding of the investigated topic. Due to the time frame set for this research a cross-sectional study was performed, whereby at one point in time research was conducted (Saunders et al., 2009).

4.2 Research method

4.2.1 Research setting

The banking industry in the Netherlands was chosen as unit of analysis for the case study, as in 2016 it was already observed by Guo and Liang (2016) that banks were paying more attention and focusing on blockchain. The growing attention has not eluded since 2016 and at present Dutch banks are experimenting and implementing this new technology (Baghiuc, 2018; DNBulletin, 2017; Rabobank, 2018), even though little research is yet present about what the effects will be on the customers, one of the primary stakeholder of the bank (Schlegel et al, 2018). As stated, several Dutch banks were chosen as multiple case study to investigate this more in depth. A short description of the cases will follow now.

Interviews were conducted at INGB Bank N.V., ABN Amro, Rabobank and the Dutch Central Bank. It was decided to not exclude the latter from the banking industry and to not approach it differently as a regulatory perspective, since the answers were in line with the answers given by the other interviewees. Setting these interview answers apart would not have given a different or opposing insight in the results gathered from the remaining

interviews. Besides that, like other banks the Dutch Central Bank is also experimenting with blockchain (DNBulletin, 2017). Furthermore, interviews were conducted at ING Bank N.V. It is the biggest commercial bank in the Netherlands, ranking 11th in Europe in terms of total assets (Relbanks, 2017). Since 2017 it is actively focusing on blockchain with a blockchain expert team experimenting on implementation of blockchain in different subunits (Baghiuc, 2018). They are not alone in this. ABN Amro is also investing time, money and energy in the

(31)

26 blockchain technology (ABN Amro, n.d.). Rabobank in November 2017 also published a report on the effects of blockchain on trade finance (Rabobank/RaboResearch, 2017).

4.2.2 Sampling

In order to investigate the effect of blockchain implementation on customer experience, it was chosen to engage employees at banks that both interact with blockchain and can apply a customer perspective in order to investigate the effect of blockchain implementation on customers. According to Chalal & Dutta (2015) customer experience can effectively be investigated form an employee’s point of view. The sample is a non-probability sample, which is a helpful way of gathering data in exploratory research (Saunders et al., 2009). More specifically, it is a non-probability purposeful sample, as respondents were selected that have particular knowledge concerning the research question. (Saunders et al., 2009). Because respondents were selected because of expertise knowledge (on blockchain), this reflects an expert case sampling (Etikan, Musa & Alkassim, 2016).

To reach the employees for the sample, the personal network of the researcher was used. Firstly, people working in banks were approached to receive more information on who and where to find the appropriate employees. Besides that, employees interacting with blockchain in banks were searched via internet and via articles published by banks.

Employees were first contacted via email, describing the purpose of the research and asking them to participate. After approval, interviews were scheduled.

Nine interviews were conducted in total, of which one was conducted via telephone, due to traveling of the interviewee. This interview was shortest with 25 minutes, all other interviews took between 30 and 60 minutes. The sample consisted of 1 female and 8 males, all between the age of 24 and 57. They had all been working on the blockchain projects between 6 months and three years. An overview of the cases and interviews is given in the Table 1 below:

(32)

27

Table 1: Overview cases and interviewees function.

4.2.3 Data collection and analysis method

Semi-structured interviews were held with employees at banks to collect data on how the implementation of blockchain may effect customer experience, after pre-testing the interview. After the pretest the sequence of the interviews was slightly adjusted. Besides that, it was decided to send out the interview set-up on beforehand, because the interview questions were found to be difficult to directly link to an answer. This way the interviewees could have some time to let the themes settle and ask questions on beforehand. The interview set-up can be found in Appendix 1.

All propositions during the semi-structured interviews were answered using a Likert-style rating scale, which is frequently used for rating questions (Saunders et al., 2009). For all propositions a five-point rating skill proposed by Saunders et al. (2009) was used: strongly agree, agree, not sure, disagree, strongly disagree. It was applied for the entire series of statements, to avoid confusion among the interviewees (Dillman, 2007). In the beginning of each interview participation and consent were asked, for both the interview and the Delphi method, confirming confidentiality. Participants were also asked to grant permission for the recording of the interview.

In the interviews, the interviewees were asked to answer the questions with regards to one blockchain user case that they had knowledge of, to make the answers more concrete. After sending the interview set-up to the first interview, the interviewee responded that the answer to the questions depended greatly on which case you are looking at. Hence, it was decided to focus on one user case, without stopping the interviewees from relating it to other

Number Organization Function interviewee

1 Dutch Central Bank Team member innovation team

2 ING Blockchain expert

3 ING Blockchain team

4 ING Blockchain team

5 ABN Amro Team member blockchain project

6 Rabobank Product owner blockchain project

7 ING Blockchain expert

8 ING Blockchain team

(33)

28 user cases too.

Next, the interviews were conducted and transcribed verbatim1. Afterwards, the themes in the content were deducted using NVivo pro version 12 for windows, which is a qualitative data analysis software. Firstly, a mix of open and axial coding was performed. The structure of the article of Arbore and Busacca (2009) used in the interviews provided a basis for axial coding with the connections between categories already stated in the interview structure, (Corbin, Strauss & Strauss, 2014), as also visible in Figure 1. However, not all data fit this structure. Hence open coding was performed too, in order to label concepts in the data that were left unidentified by the applied structure (Corbin et al., 2014). Afterwards, selective coding was performed, grouping the codes and themes in core categories (Corbin et al., 2014). In order to capture the answer categories (strongly agree – strongly disagree) in coding, when the codes stated a negative or positive impact, the five answer categories were linked with it as separate codes. An overview including all these five answer categories per customer

experience element would be too elaborate to show. However, in Appendix 2 overview of the codes is shown whereby the first code is collapsed, showing how the five answer categories look.

After analyzing the interview data, the Delphi method was applied. The objective of this method is to obtain “the most reliable consensus of opinion of a group of experts” (Dalkey & Helmer, 1963, p.458 ). In this research it was used to strengthen the results of the interviews by sharing a summary with the group of experts, reaching consensus about the data obtained from the interviews. Traditionally, the Delphi method exists of three rounds (Brady, 2015). First, data is tested from what is known about the topic, based on literature. In this research this was in the form of conducting semi-structured interviews. Then, participants are allowed to provide feedback on the data collected. The participants of this research received an anonymized summary of the data retrieved to express their opinion about. Lastly, a questionnaire is traditionally used to find consensus on the topic of inquiry (Brady, 2015). However, the Delphi method is flexible in design (Okoli & Pawlowski, 2004) and an additional questionnaire after receiving the first responses was not distributed. Since no disagreement on the content of the summary was expressed by the interviewees, consensus was already achieved. Hence, the goal of the Delphi method was reached.

The summary the participants received was concise in text and included a visual representation of the results, to make it as attractive as possible for the interviewees to

1 These transcripts are not included in the Appendix, as their inclusion would greatly elongate the size of this

Referenties

GERELATEERDE DOCUMENTEN

by I-O psychologist during counselling, counsellor competencies required of I-O psychologists, post graduate counselling training received by I-O psychologists,

Secondly, representational understanding is achieved by using an appropriate drawing technique and, finally, appropriate strategies are used to assist learners in moving

Given the different characteristics of the online and offline channel, and the customers that use a respective channel, channel choice is expected to moderate the

Theoretical Framework Churn Drivers Relationship Breadth H1: - Relationship Depth H2: - Relationship Length H3: - Age H4: - Gender H5: - Prior Churn H6: + Price H7: + Promotion H15:

That conflicts evolve over time and that conflicts are likely to influence other conflicts was also anticipated (Boonstra & de Vries, 2015). Still, this paper

Therefore, this study is to examine how intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation are affected by the practice of performance management process and how they in

There were no pronounced differences between excluded and included cases (Appendix 2). All included cases met all inclusion criteria. Similar ratings based on received EWOM

So based on the change model results using median hypothesis 1 is accepted, suggesting that the M&As announcements in the South and Central American banking industry do have