Journal of Information Technology & Software Engineering
Open Access

Survey on Customer Satisfaction, Adoption, Perception, Behaviour, and Security on Mobile Banking

Afful Ekow Kelly^* and Sellappan Palaniappan ^*Correspondence: Afful Ekow Kelly, Department of Information Technology, School of Science and Engineering Malaysia, Malaysia University of Science and Technology, Malaysia, Email:

Author info »

Introduction

Sixteen years since the inception of activities involved in mobile banking solution in Ghana, the service can be said to be a gamechanger in the country's financial services industry [1].

Mobile banking has had its inception struggles around the world, Zantel, the first mobile money telecom company launched in 1999 in Zanzibar failed just as it’s launched. B-Kash a Bangladesh company; operating as over-the-counter service was not able to convince it the user’s to convert their cash into digital form to manage themselves. Wizzit, which was one first mobile model banking from South Africa, suffered the same fate and faded out in the market [2]. Zain Ghana introduced mobile money in Ghana in the year 2000 known as Zain Zap, this provides customers with increased security and flexibility, reducing the need to carry cash and ensuring prompt payments of bills, goods and services. That service, however, did not get much patronage and soon faded out too. The Philippines too had Globe & Smart telecom, they had almost no active usage not more than airtime resellers, and that resulted in its collapse. However, this outlook of mobile banking has since changed.

As a result of high rate mobile phones penetration over the last decade, this technology has made possible by the financial industry players to deploy to its customers an instant financial solution through the use of self-service technologies. Mobile technology has consciously become a tool used by stakeholders in the mobile banking industry to posit consumers’ adoption for mobile banking [3-5]. Their almost constant proximity to the user, together with their storage and transmission capabilities, making them suitable for a variety of payment options and for storing everything that would normally carry in a physical wallet.

The mobile banking technology is also to address the problems related to bricks and mortar banks, thus queuing, and travelling over a long distance in most cases to carry out simple banking service such as checking of balance, withdrawal and transfers of money. Payment systems and mobile devices and services are crucial, and these are defining the way we live in the twenty-first century in terms of banking. Therefore, mobile payments offer a universal payment solution, thus delivering distinctive value to both consumers and merchants [6].

The Ghana mobile telecommunication industry (GMTI) is one of the keenly competitive markets in Sub-Sahara Africa with six major international players, Yeboah -Asiamah et al. has regarded as one of the powerful economic sectors in the Ghanaian economy [7,8].

Mobile banking is a typical application in the mobile financial field. It refers to the integration of electronic money and mobile communication services through multi-industry and multiplatform cooperation between mobile telecom carriers and banking institutions [9].

Mobile payments are predicted to be one of the future’s most successful mobile services but have achieved limited acceptance in developing countries to date [10-17].

This literature review is distinct on two grounds; firstly, the review has shown some common trends that cut across the already study areas under consideration with mobile banking. Thus, the review has shown that mobile adoption literature, its social and economic impact is widely studied, and the least of such literature is security on mobile banking.

Secondly; this survey reviewed over a decade articles their trends and elements this gives the best-fit understanding of the matter in the field of mobile banking and then posit in the gap of knowledge in that regard.

Mobile banking has a threefold effect and impact on the society and the country as a whole. Firstly user’s impact; with the inception of mobile banking, the number of people that have drawn into this informal banking system is enormous, which formally were left unattended to by the mortal brick system of banking, this has covered almost the remotest areas as far as the network coverage could go. Mobile banking has also opened up the habit of saving by the unbanked users, [18-20]. Now there are more people have a financial account then the combination of all banks put together. This technology has reduced the issues of travelling, joining long queues, waiting for a particular time to start or close a transaction, these and many other factors have zero in the attention to mobile banking. These technologies have cut downtime, workings simultaneously on different issues and increasing efficiency [21-25].

Secondly, the industry players’ in effect (Banks and Telecoms); the industry players are raking in huge sums of profit, these institutions use their existing platform to extend other services to their client through technology. The banks have added on online technology either internet or mobile banking. Mobile banking has enabled the industry to stay in touch with the client and meet their needs during off working hours. Also, the Telecoms have added this mobile banking through mobile banking operators. Mobile banking has been a game-changer for both the banks and the telecoms as an additive and transformative model in mobile banking [26,27]. The cost per channel usage in the financial transaction is higher compared to the mobile system; this has helped reducing cost on the user and overhead cost for the operators [28]. Mobile banking services monetising the value of customer analytics, delivering greater real-time access to products and services, and conducting target marketing that have increased their revenues [29,30].

Finally, the State; the introduction of mobile banking has enabled the government to get extra revenue through the taxes from the agencies, and there are more financial transaction conducted on mobile banking than the mainstream banks [31]. Again with the emerging of centralising all transactions through the operability platforms set by the government helps to enable the government to plan its activities.

Literature Review

The literature review considered the outcomes based on the articles, thus the discussion pattern below.

Customer satisfaction

Customers are very much happy with mobile banking transactions, according to Nagaraju the most effective factor of mobile banking is customer’s satisfaction [32]. Wang and Liao describe customer satisfaction as the total effective response of varying intensity that follows mobile transaction ecosystems, this manipulated by known variables such as information quality, system quality, and service quality [33].

The inception of mobile banking technology has led to an increase in levels of customer satisfaction. Stakeholders have ventured into the use of virtual banks, mobile banking and internet banking to reduce their user’s costs as well as improve on customer satisfaction, [34]. Customer satisfaction used as an indicator success of the mobile banking adoption [35].

Customer satisfaction of mobile banking has being extensible studied over this scoping period of this research, Geetha and Vinay used an empirical survey to study value-added to technology-savvy customers, the research indicated that financial security, education and training, connectivity and reliability were the most assertive factors influencing the value added to the customers satisfaction [36]. In the other narratives from Nagaraju he used exploratory research method to look out for factors affecting the satisfaction of users in mobile banking [37]. The study conclusion came out that, cost, security and time are the main factors leading on consumer satisfaction to adopt mobile banking. However, they suggested that if banks will spend time and resource on awareness creation and building customer-friendly software’s that will also go a long way to enhance customer satisfaction.

Notwithstanding that, Oscar mentioned that factors such as tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, security, and empathy, thus, communication and understanding; would be the most demanding factors to uphold users satisfaction, he however also indicated that perception of individual could improve in other not negatively affect the service, in the case of physiotherapy services [38]. Romario and Maseke using quantitative design, crystallising through the factors to influence the customer satisfaction, had this principle factors such as; reliable, convenient, cost-effective, available on different mobile networks, advertisements are encouraging, service is compatible with mobile devices, income (social aspect of transacting) is contribution factors on customer satisfaction [39]. In the study of Brown et al. using qualitative approach and UTAUT model, to investigate factors influencing satisfaction with cell phone banking in South Africa, their conclusion was that; service quality, information quality, system quality, transaction and payment quality, perceived usefulness, trust, innovativeness were most established factors to influence customer satisfaction [40].

In summary, customer satisfaction was one of the most researched areas in the mobile banking literature, the most occurrence factors, which influence customer satisfaction and have strongly suggested in almost all the research under customer satisfaction, is “security”. It was determined to be the most preferred factor in satisfying and assuring customers of their safety and interns of data generated along their transactional process of mobile banking. The following factors also appeared to have influenced customer satisfaction, reliability, perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, system quality, compatible, and cost-effectiveness. Table 1 gives additional information on literature, on customer satisfaction.

Table 1: Customer satisfaction.

Adoption and impact

There are several definition, concept and model that have used adoption, this review set is not on any particular field of definition on adoption, but the general customer adoption concept. According to Bharti mobile banking has received as adoption tool for banking in the recent years than ever, and this has had a huge impact on the global business pattern across individuals and state [41-47].

According to Rogers, adoption as a process composed of learning, deciding and acting over some time, till a decision to continue full use of an innovation [48]. Adoption may be both an economic necessity and the result of peer pressure [49]. The process of adopting innovation has well been studied, and one of the most popular adoption models described by Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, Sherry et al. and Rogers have used the term “Innovation-decision process” in place of ‘adoption process’ and have conceptualised the following five stages [50,51]:

i. Knowledge: The individual has encountered the existence of innovation and gains some understanding of how it functions.

ii. Persuasion: The individual forms a favourable or unfavourable attitude toward innovation adapt to it.

iii. Decision: The individual engages in activities which lead to a choice to adopt or reject the innovation.

iv. Implementation: It occurs when an individual or other decision making unit puts an innovation into use.

v. Confirmation: The individual search for reinforcements on the innovation-decision he or she has made, but they may reverse their previous decision if exposed to conflicting messages about the innovation.

The adoption process grouped into five categories and their composition give a complete meaning of adoption, as shown in Figure 1 above. Thus; innovator, they can apply and understand technical knowledge and have understood uncertainty. Early adopters, they are cautious about approving of innovation and others turned to seek their view of such innovation. Early majority, they wait and deliberate on such innovation, but they do adopt quite early before average members of the society do. Late majority they are careful and influenced by peer pressure. Laggards are cautious of change and mostly about far behind awareness of new knowledge. Under this section, the research review considers the factors for adoption and impact related to why consumers will want to adopt, in this case to mobile banking. According to Shamsher the adoption and impact of mobile banking on consumers influenced by safety and security, reliability, efficiency and responsiveness [52]. Notwithstanding that, Prerna and Singh in their earlier research using exploration methods indicated that mobile handset operability, security or privacy and standardization of services, have indeed influenced the consumer in adoption to mobile banking [53]. In Mostafa and Eneizan study’s on factors influencing the acceptance of mobile banking, using a survey, the research findings showed that perceived self-efficacy, perceived ease of use, and perceived usefulness are reliable to impact on consumer’s choice on the adoption of mobile banking [54]. This was similar to what, Emma Slade et al. when using exploration study, mentioned that, the factors affecting nonusers’ intention to adopt, even though they used UTUAT model and a survey method, their study outcome includes; performance expectancy, social influence, innovativeness, and perceived risk to be the most influential in aiding in adoption to mobile banking [55]. Then Endah et al. in their quantitative research to determine the attitude of the customer and the value of the customer to adopt mobile banking, they came up with outcomes which were focusing on the bank's actions to aid adoption [56]. The following factors stand as factors which customer will look out for in adoption, thus; compatibility, and relative profitability and integrity. According to Glavee-Geo et al. in their study, provides comprehensive insight into the factors affecting an individual’s intention to adopt mobile banking services in Pakistan [57]. Their survey concluded that, perceived behavioural control and attitudes toward mobile banking adoption intentions were significant, they also observed that the effect of perceived behavioural control on mobile banking adoption intention was found to be significantly stronger for men than for women, even though the study was to look at gender difference in adoption of mobile banking in Pakistan. From Hamza et al. using exploratory study through a survey to determine factors affecting Jordanian consumers’ adoption of mobile banking services, from their finding which came close with what have been discussed on adoption, but concluded that self-efficacy, trialability, compatibility, complexity, risk and relative advantage were statistically significant in influencing mobile banking adoption [58]. Again from Ibrahim and Sohail with a different perspective influenced, concluded that trial ability and complexity perceived risk hurts adoption influence consumers to adopt [59,60]. Their study was done under a different jurisdiction, by Kibicho and Mungai to evaluate the intention of adopting a future mobile payment service from the perspective of Brazilian consumers of mobile phones [61,62]. Using a Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model, indicated that, performance expectation, effort expectation, social influence and perceived risk, good performance, easy to use, security promotes the action of the social circle in adopting mobile banking. However, added that Perceived cost not significant in influencing the adoption.

Figure 1: A Model of Five Stages in the Innovation-Decision Process (Source: Diffusion of Innovations, Fifth Edition by Everett M. Rogers. Copyright (c) 2003 by The Free Press.

From the overview of the review as shown in Table 2, summarise of factors considered by different research under the adoption of mobile banking; there are several other factors which have strongly influenced the users in adopting mobile banking. This is consistent with other literature reviewed, where perceived privacy, security and risk are most factor which has negative impact influencing consumers adoption, [63,64]; together, however; these factors also, fuel the impact on adoption of mobile banking, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, compatibility, subjective norm, perceived relative advantage, innovativeness, and trust according to Abdul and Muhammad [65].

Table 2: Adoption of consumers

Customer perception

User’s perception associated with technology through the concept of TAM developed by Davis [66]. TAM explains the determinants of computer acceptance that lead to explaining users’ behaviour thus, end-user computing technologies and user interest to use. The basic TAM model included and tested two specific beliefs: Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of use [67-70]. Perceived Usefulness described as "the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would enhance their job performance", Perceived ease of use refers to the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would be free from effort" [71]. The belief of the person towards a system may influence by several other factors referred to as external variables in TAM, and these factors are what customer perception literature turns to consider and look at it veracity and degree to influence one's choice of decision making to use, in this instance mobile banking.

The survey under customer perception considered research work as customer perception in adopting mobile banking [72] research works focus on customer perception through perceived quality, using the service quality model (SERQUAL). The outcome from their work to prove why consumers will adapt to technology includes factors such as reliability, empathy and network quality. Their research was done in the telecom industry to merit why telecommunication and mobile services were relevant was indeed not far-fetched. Also, according to Tai and Fang in establishing a better measurement model for post-adoption user perception of mobile banking services using exploratory factor analysis (EFA), it was concluded that six (6) constructs were outstanding in supporting post-adoption behaviour analysis, thus; security, interactivity, relative advantage, ease of use, interface creativity and customer satisfaction [73].

In the latest research by Ali AlSoufi and Hayat Ali using an empirically study with Technology Adoption Model (TAM) to incorporate the role of factors in influencing customer’s perception towards mobile banking adoption, the following was what the research come-up with as convenience to influence mobile banking [74]. Thus, perceived usefulness and ease of use, the study did also suggest that factors such as perceived cost and perceived risk did not show any effect on the users' intention to use mobile banking. The study was to enable managers to consider them as influential factors in aiding their decision making towards costumers adoption understanding. In this section of understanding the factors and reasons assigned to why customers will adapt to mobile banking, the most factors which came up was security and ease of use were preferred variable to consider. Table 3 gives detail and overview of the work done in this area on customer perception of mobile banking.

Table 3: Customer perception.

Security and encryption

Security-related matters that come with mobile banking are as a result of the insurgent from the medium from which the mobile banking is carried out and those who use it, and not necessarily because of transactions therein. Security (privacy, trust and security) issues have gradually crept into mobile banking because the reason to do so or otherwise is obvious.

Trust frequently used in the mobile banking literature, often as a common term for “privacy” and “security” Huang and Nicol, Kim and Kim and Chong et al. have explained that the precision of facts and information is known as the accuracy of trust, which means that the computation of trust is accurate at estimation time [75,76]. Trust model consists of various parameters that depend on subparameters and functions, and Trust model is nothing but some set of protocols which are to be followed by the service provider and their users or customers [77].

Goodwin used term privacy as the users’ ability to control the environment during a transaction and dissemination of information related to providing such transactions [78].

From the survey, Uma Dixit discuss various data encryption techniques based on cryptographic technologies and review various methods of electronic banking security [79]. The various cryptographic methods looked and each working according to the medium it was intended and purposed it was built for, Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) for ATMs, fuzzy extractor, Global System for Communication (GSM) and Radio Frequency Identification for EMV cards, (Europay, MasterCard and Visa) and One Time Password (OTP) for Mobile banking. Nyamtiga et al. also with their research, on SMS based model designed security features to enhance data protection across mobile networks. Their model is a prototype to test their algorithms; they use both Global System for Communication (GSM) and Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) [80]. The outcome shows that there were still some issues that were considered to hinder mobile security, and that includes data confidentiality, user authentication and message integrity.

Hayikader et al., they examine issues on the architecture and some security issues of mobile internet banking apps; they explore some security measures to deal with the associated security challenges [81]. They adopted the Intrusion Detection System (IDS) to enhance the existing security deployed on the current system. According to Kavita and Kumar they considered the adoption of mobile banking services in the UAE [82]. The perception of risk factors about the customer, they developed a model which deployed on the customer adoption process of mobile banking. They were some concern in the cause of deployment and modelling, and the concluded that time risk, financial risk and performance risk are the most prominent factors which could hinder the security matters on adoption by the consumer. According to Wu et al. examining the security risks of mobile banking applications through the blog, mining concluded that security remains a significant attribute in determining the choice of use of mobile banking by a user [83]. However, from Ahmad and Saleh security and acceptance of mobile banking depends on social influence, mobile self-efficacy, trust and the user’s resistance to change [84].

The conclusion from Oluwafemi et al. studies gives the best summary to the general review of security in mobile banking usage and its other related matters [85]. Using forensic analysis of mobile banking application in Nigeria concluded that security was not given due consideration in the development of those mobile applications and certainly would induce such problem in all facets of users adoption, behaviour, satisfaction, and perception of the technology. Table 4 also gives much information about the overall work done on security related to mobile banking.

Table 4: Security

Customer behaviour

According to Hale et al. behavioural intentions are thought to be the result of both an individual influence and a normative influence [86]. Davis and Davis et al. [87,88] in the TAM, proposed that behavioural intention affects and causes actual behaviour when using a new system, this supported [87-89]. According to Davis, this concept was proposed from the perspective of behavioural science, integrating expectation theory and self-efficacy theory, and is mainly used to study the behavioural intentions of individuals to use technology [90].

Customer behaviour or intention is an antecedent effect of both perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use Al-Gahtani, Venkatesh and Bala, Zhou, Hanafizadeh [91]. From Shaikh, in his paper, contributing to the mobile banking literature by examining consumer behaviour in mobile banking services as well as technology adoption and continuous usage using exploratory research design, concluded that perceived value is the most significant factor to influence a consumer to adopt [91-95].

Moreover, Shanmugam et al. using the same model of TAM, to find out the factors that influence Malaysian to adopt mobile banking as the tool for their banking purpose where attitude as a mediator, listed perceived usefulness, perceived benefit and perceived credibility as been the factors that influence customer or user behavior [96]. Siddik1 et al. could not agree more on these, but to support such [97]. In the case of Tobbin, exploring the key factors that affect the Ghanaian consumer’s acceptance and use of mobile money transfer, his outcomes were not much different [98].

Again, Alalwan et al. from their study to determine factors influencing behavioural intention and adoption of mobile banking by customers of Jordanian banks using UTAUT model also had the same outcome especially on performance expectancy, effort expectancy, hedonic motivation, but the construct they added price value and trust also influence the user [99]. Tan and Lau. in work to examine the intention to adopt mobile banking services among Generation Y consumers also concluded that performance expectancy, effort expectancy, perceived risk and social influence [100].

The research users of the GAM model and frequency and monetary model (RFM), for Shareef et al. who used GAM model to investigate consumers’ behavioural intentions to adopt mobile banking [101]. There are three distinct service stages stated such as static, interaction and transaction service would influence users to adopt, whiles Behrooz Noori using RFM to the analysis of mobile banking user behaviour using customer segmentation indicated the customer segregated to clear understanding of their needs so, as to meet their choose of influence [102].

Apart from the TAM and TPB model, the UTAUT model was also another model that mostly used for customer behaviour research. These have some interesting outcomes, according to Waranpong and Krittipat trying to explore the determinants affecting behavioral intention to adopt mobile banking among generation Y, concluded that, hedonic motivation, social influence, performance expectancy, effort expectancy facilitating security, selfefficacy in mobile banking application and behavioural intention will influence user to adopt mobile banking [103]. However, added that security hurt influencing users to adopt.

The constructs that influence users to adopt mobile banking were performance and effort expectation, perceived trust, perceived usefulness, perceived risk, perceived ease of use and self-efficacy as the most determinant that influenced a consumer to adopt. Table 5 on customer behaviour can be related to detail information on customer behaviour.

Table 5: Customer behaviour.

Research Methodology

This research was conducted with extensive literature, from various works of literature related to mobile banking, within the period of ten (10) years thus; ranging from 2009 to 2019. This survey is from the various journal, article and conference database such as Science Direct, Emerald, IEEE, Research gate, ERIC, JSTOR, Science open, British library, ACM, Wiley, google scholar, and other related research sources for this survey. These were recent broad base research ranging from peer-reviewed, scientific, working papers, conferences papers and business journals over the period.

The outcome of the raw data of the survey was grouped into like and common lexis, which appears in each research into a single related grouping. The outcome was the following; customer satisfaction, adoption and impact, customer perception and security and encryption and those that did not fall into any of these was classified as “others”. This done on the backdrop of the current trends in the field of mobile banking from reports, articles, journals and working papers were considered. This research was not restricted to any specific classification of mobile banking, either m-banking or mobile banking each research articles from that title was used.

According to Carlos and Tiago definitions given to mobile banking geared toward the scope of work that particular research is considering [104]. He classified banking as “local-centric (branches and ATM) to place- centric (internet banking) and then to equipment-centric (accessible anywhere)”, so to avoid such, the definition used in this study was considered to have general technology inclined definition about what mobile banking is, how it is, and the benefit therein with the technology. However, there were a few exceptions to the articles, any article without conclusion and future reference was not used. Again, those articles that were written in any other language apart from English was not selected. Also, there was a mixture of snowball review approach; where within the article review you pick on other articles as and when you deem fit to use; thus those that meet your scope and criteria. In all, there were 132 articles, per the criteria only 84 articles satisfied the research criteria, from these, there were articles which were grouped as “other” it had two difficult classifications these were also not used. Finally, only 68 made the specific conditions and that was what was used for the final review.

The articles were grouped base on the purpose it was presented, the author and year, the main task resolved, tools and methodology used, and principal factors discovered in the article. This resulted in haven the articles classified into, customer satisfaction, adoption, perception, behaviour, security. The articles were then reviewed based on the classification given.

Tools and methods for mobile banking

There were several tools and methods deployed in the reviewed research for mobile banking research; each one has its limitations. This section group the research work into classification, this was done after the various articles were reviewed and did not influence the search criteria. This happened as a result of the ideas, outcome and title of the research articles. Thus this classification resulted in the following, customer satisfaction, adoption and impact, customer perception, consumer behaviour, trends and development and security and encryption.

Deduction from literature

From the general outlook of the review done in respect to the best of literature, there are some issues that were not conclusively resolved from the various literature. The ultimate underline of the models could not tell, whether the conditions from which user adopted mobile banking was the same or have changed over time and as result, they have or will want to stop using the technology. There was some literature on post-adoption, which will determine how relevant these technology are to the users. Even those that were studied still could not give a general overview of the need why the adoption was relevant. The most studied literature from the review was adoption of mobile banking. The most model used in all literature under review was TAM. Finally, the most construct studied in all were Security (trust and privacy), perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, perceived risk, performance and effort expectations, competitive advantage and benefit, compatible, self-efficacy and subjective norm.

Results and Discussion

Customer satisfaction

Under customer satisfaction, the most methodology used was surveyed either qualitative or quantitative, the qualitative research was 60%, and quantitative was 40% of the research method used under customer satisfaction. The model that the literature most used for customer satisfaction was, in the ascending order, SERVQUAL, TAM, UTAUT and DOI. The variables that were considered most under section from the literature were; Security (trust and financial), reliability, compatible, connectivity, costeffective, perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness and system quality. This can be related to in Figure 2, which gives the summary of occurrence on the models used in the articles reviewed.

Figure 2: The models and their occurrence over the period from 2010 to 2019.

Adoption and impact

With the research work done in mobile banking under the adoption and impact, the tools and methods used for all the articles indicated that; the most used tool was surveyed, this was categorised under quantitative and qualitative, the overall outcome concluded that 90% of the tools used for all research work was quantitative under the adoption. Again the most used model for research work under section was TAM, this was followed by the UTAUT. The most combined model was TAM and TPB. The review also indicated that there are some variables under these model which were most used. The outcome shows that, the variables that are likely to be used under adoption are; perceived usefulness, perceived risk, perceived ease of use, perceived (privacy, trust and security), compatibility and perceived relative advantage, the least used variable is, trialability, service quality, perceived credibility, consumer feedback and consumer awareness.

Security

The outcomes from the security review indicated that there is very little research work done in this field and also very little or none recommendations are followed up by stakeholders to reach the needed outcomes and benefit related to such research. The well-known tools used from the literature were cryptography and encryption and their related tools to be used. These tools were tried on some limited mobile application. This result shows the level of security lapses in the mobile security settings in those applications and others indicate the none existence of security in such applications.

Customer perception

The review shows that most of the research methodology used is survey under customer perception, also comprising of both qualitative and quantitative tools. In the section, most of the research data collection tools were quantitative, representing 93% of such numbers under the articles reviewed. The most research model used for these studies under the literature for customer perception, DOI, followed by TAM. Also, the new model for such studies introduced was SERVPERF and Bank-led-model. The most variable considered under the customer perception literature were, in the order of most used, security concerns and trust, competitive advantage and relative advantage, perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, perceived risk, structure assurance and service quality. In conclusion, the most used model for the research review articles’ were, TAM, UTAUT and DOI respectively and not or little recommendation of about security were followed up in the development stages of development (Figure 3).

Figure 3: Security concern a major factor incomplete adoption of mobile banking.

Conclusion and Future Scope

The future scope of this literature will consider two issues; one the security issues which have been the most considered and recommended factor as hindering consumers. This is seen as pervasive influence consumers’ attitude, perception, behaviour and satisfaction in accepting and adopting mobile technology. Secondly, what are the imperative measure that should be considered by stakeholder and consumers in making mobile banking most outstanding banking service in the 21st century technological world, the above figure entrenched on what should have been considered as the future works on mobile banking.

References

1. Denyes L.Digital Financial Services Practice Group Lead, Financial Institutions Group - Advisory Services in Middle East & Africa.
2. Lin, H.F.“An empirical investigation of mobile banking adoption: the effect of innovation attributes and knowledge- based trust”.Int J Info Manag.2011;31(3):252-260.
3. Glavee-Geo R,Shaikh A A,Karjaluoto H.Mobile banking services adoption in Pakistan: are there gender differences.Int J  Bank Mark.2017;35(7):1090-1114.
4. Medhi, I,Ratan, A,Toyama, K.Mobile-banking adoption and usage by low- literate, low-income users in the developing world, In Internationalization, Design and Global Development. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.2009;485-494
5. Mallat.N. Exploring consumer adoption of mobile payments – A qualitative study. J Stra Info Sys.2007;16:413–432.
6. Yeboah-Asiamah E, Nimako SG,Quaye DM,Buame S.Implicit and explicit loyalty: The role of satisfaction, trust and brand image in mobile telecommunication industry.Int J Bus Emerg Markets.2016;8(1):94–115.
7. Mahmoud MA,Hinson RE.Market orientation, innovation and corporate social responsibility practices in Ghana’s telecommunication sector. Soc Respons J.2012;8(3):327–346.
8. Sun B,Gui C,Liu C, Chen X, Sun C.Multi-dimensional trust evaluation of mobile banking risk index system.2017.
9. Slade EL,Dwivedi YK,Piercy NC,Williams MD. Modeling Consumers’ Adoption Intentions of Remote Mobile Payments in the United Kingdom: Extending UTAUT with Innovativeness, Risk, and Trust. 2015.
10. Daud NM, Kassim NEM , Said WSRWM, Noo MMM.Determining Critical Success Factors of Mobile Banking Adoption in Malaysia, Australian J Basic and App Sci.2011;5(9):252-265.
11. http://www.accenture.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/PDF/Technology/accenture
12. Shoriful Islam.systematic literature review, security challenges of mobile banking and payments system.2014.
13. Mawere T, Denhere P.T, Giyane M and Mupfiga P.An Analysis of Mobile Banking in Zimbabwe.J Int AcadeRes for Multidsciplinary.2013.
14. Gëzim Tosuni, Ibrahim Krasniqi, Marina Dabić .factors influencing usage of mobile banking in the republic of kosovo.2019.
15. https://ir.unimas.my/id/eprint/13026/1/Intention%20to%20Use%20Mobile%20Payment%20System%20A%20Case%20of%20Developing%20(abstract).pdf
16. Khraim HS,Shoubaki YEA,Khraim AS,Factors Affecting Jordanian Consumers’ Adoption of Mobile Banking Services, Int J Bus and Social Sci.2011;2(20).
17. Mas, Ignacio.“The Economics of Branchless Banking.” Innovations.2009;4(2).
18. Collins, Daryl, Jonathan Morduch, Stuart Ratherford and Orlanda Ruthven. Portfolios of the Poor: How the World’s Poor Live on $2 a Day. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.2009.
19. Banerjee, Abhijit V. and Esther Duflo.Poor Economics: A Radical Rethinking of the Way to Fight Poverty. New York: Public Affairs.2011.
20. Khalifa, G. S. A.‘Ethnic Restaurants’ Meal Experience: Egyptian Customers’ Perceptions’, J  Faculty of Tourism and Hotels.2015;9(1):92–112.
21. Mohamud, S. S. et al.‘Investigating the Antecedents of Coffee Shop Customers’ Behavioral Intentions in Kuala Lump.2017.
22. Mohamed, M. S. et al.‘The Mediation Effect of Innovation on the Relationship between Creativity and Organizational Productivity: An Empirical Study within Public Sector Organizations in the UAE’, J Eng App Sci.2019;14(10):3234–3242.
23. Nusari, M. et al.‘The Impact of Project Management Assets and Organizational Culture on Employee Performance.Int J Manage Human Sci.2018;2(3):15–26.
24. Shamsi, R. S. H. A.et al.‘The Impact of Innovation and Smart Government on Happiness: Proposing Conceptual Framework.Int J Manage Human Sci.2018;2(2):10–26.
25. Weber, Rolf H,Darbellay A.“Legal Issues in Mobile Banking.” Journal of Banking Regulation.2010;11(2):129-145.
26. Dias, Denise and Katharine McKee.“Protecting Branchless Banking Consumers: Policy Objectives and Regulatory Options.”2010.Focus Note No. 64.
27. Malhotra, Sarika.“Human ATMs- A Business Correspondent Model at Work.”Open Forum.The Financial Express.2010;5.
28. Deloitte report.Mobile banking A catalyst for improving bank performance.2010
29. Almazan, M,Vonthron, N.“Mobile money profitability: A digital ecosystem to drive healthy margins”.GSMA.2014.
30. Swift White Paper.“Mobile Payments: Three Winning Strategies for Banks,”.2012.
31. S. Nagaraju.mobile banking- perception of customers and bankers, Int J Bus Adm Res Revi.2015;3(9):23.
32. Wang Y,Liao Y.The conceptualization and measurement of m-commerce user satisfaction, Computers in Human Behavior.2007;23(1):381-398.
33. DeloneWH,McLean E R.The Delone and McLean model of information systems success: A tenyear update. J Manage Info Sys.2003;19(4):9-30.
34. RajaramGM ,Vinay S.Customer Perception Of Mobile Banking Adoption In Bengaluru City.Int J Adv Res.2017.
35. Nagaraju.‘Mobile banking-perception of customers and bankers’. Int J Bus Admin Res Rev.2015;3(9):236.
36. Oscar S. Effects of mobile banking on customer satisfaction: Int J innov res.2013;3:7
37. Romario Gomachab,Maseke BF .the impact of mobile banking on customer satisfaction: commercial banks of Namibia.J Internet Banking and Commerce.2018;23(2).
38. Brown, Irwin,Licker, Paul,Kashora. "Customer Satisfaction with Cell Phone Banking in South Africa" (2010).AMCIS 2010 Proceedings.444.
39. Impact of Dimensions of Mobile Banking on User Satisfaction. J Internet Bank Comm.2016 .
40. Shaikh A,Karjaluoto H.Mobile banking adoption: A literature review. Telemat Informat.2015;32(1).
41. Carlos Tam,Tiago Oliveira."Literature review of mobile banking and individual performance".International Journal of Bank Marketing. 2017;35(7):1042-1065.
42. Tobbin PE.Modeling Adoption of Mobile Money Transfer: A Consumer Behaviour Analysis. Paper presented at The 2nd Int Conf  Mobile Commun Tech Develop.2010.
43. Daud NM,Kassim NEM ,Said WSRWM, Noo MMM.Determining Critical Success Factors of Mobile Banking Adoption in Malaysia, Australian J  Basic Appl Sci;2011;5(9):252-265.
44. Abraham R. Mobile phones and economic development: evidence from the fishing industry in India.InfoTech and Int Develop.2007.
45. Shaikh AA,Examining Consumers’ Intention, Behavior, and Beliefs in Mobile Banking Adoption and Continuous Usage.
46. Kee K.F. Adoption and diffusion. Inc. Scott, & L. Lewis.Int encyclo organiz commun.2017.
47. Sherry L,Billig S,Tavalin F,Gibson D.New insights on technology adoption in communities of learners. SITE;2000;1:2044-2049
48. Rogers EM, Diffusion of Innovations, Free Press 3rd edition ,1983.New York, NY
49. Singh S, Customer perception of mobile banking: An empirical study in National Capital Region Delhi J. Internet Bank Commer, Array Develop.2014;19:3.
50. Bamoriya PS, Singh P, ‘Issues & challenges in mobile banking in India : A customers Perspective’ Res J Fin Account, 2011; 2:1697
51. Mostafa AAN , Eneizan B.  Factors Affecting Acceptance of Mobile Banking in Developing Countries, Intern  J Acade Res Bus Soc Sci .2018;8:1.
52. Slade EL , Dwivedi YK , Piercy NC, Williams MD, Modeling Consumers’ Adoption Intentions of Remote Mobile Payments in the United Kingdom: Extending UTAUT with Innovativeness, Risk, and Trust. Psycho Mark . 2015;32(8):860-873.
53. Purwati ED, Soewarno N, Isnalita, “The Influence of Innovation Attributes and Level of Trust on Mobile Banking Adoption”. KnE Soc Sci.2018; 2018:974–988.
54. Geo RG , Shaikh AA , Karjaluoto H, Mobile banking services adoption in Pakistan: are there gender differences, Inter J Bank Mark.2017;35:7.
55. Khraim HS, Shoubaki YEL, Khraim AS  , Factors Affecting Jordanian Consumers’ Adoption of Mobile Banking Services, Inter J Bus Soc Sci.2011;2:20.
56. Jabri IMA, Sohail MS .Mobile banking adoption: application of diffusion of innovation theory, J Elect Comm Res.2012;13:4.
57. Aboelmaged MG , Gebba TR  , Mobile Banking Adoption: An Examination of Technology Acceptance Model and Theory of Planned Behavior. Intern  J Bus Res Develo.2013;2:135‐150.
58. Kibicho N , Mungai J. Mobile Banking Adoption and Financial Credit Accessibility in Wote Sub – County, Makueni County, Kenya. Inter J Current Aspects.2019;3(4):65-79.
59. Sena Abrahãoa RD, Moriguchi BSM, Andrade DF. Intention of adoption of mobile payment: An analysis in the light of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), RAI. 2013;13:221–230.
60. Lwin N. Mobile Banking Adoption among Customers within Private Commercial Banking Sector in Yangon, Myanmar. Int  J Manage Human Sci. 2019;3(2):44-59.
61. Cheah CM , Teo AK , Sim JJ , Oon KH, Tan BI (), Factors Affecting Malaysian Mobile Banking Adoption: An Empirical Analysis, Int J Net Mob Techn.2011;2(3).
62. Kazi AK , Mannan MA , Factors affecting adoption of mobile banking in Pakistan: Empirical Evidence, International J Res Bus and Soc Sci.2013;2:3.
63. Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly.1989;13(3):319-340.
64. Krogstie J. The Adoption of Mobile Tourism Services : An Empirical Study.2012;3–5.
65. Anisur, M., Qi, X., Islam T.Banking access for the poor : Adoption and strategies in rural areas of Bangladesh. J Economic & Financial Studies.2016;4(3):1–10
66. Norzaidi M D,Ezalin N,Kassim M,Seri W,Wan R,Said M,et al.Determining Critical Success Factors of Mobile Banking Adoption in Malaysia.2011;5(9):252–265.
67. Lewis KN, Palmer A, Moll A. Predicting young consumers take up of mobile banking services. Int J Bank Mark.2010;28(5): 410–432.
68. Davis F D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly.1989;13(3):319–340.
69. Jun M, Cai S. The key determinants of internet banking service quality: A content analysis. Int J Bank Mark. 2008;19(7):91-276
70. Yu KT, Fang K .Measuring the post adoption customer perception of mobile banking services’ Cyber psychology and behavior.2009;12:1
71. AlSoufi A,Ali H . Customers perception of m-banking adoption. Int J Manag InfoTech (IJMIT) 2014;6:1
72. Huang J , Nicol DM. Trust mechanisms for cloud computing. J Cloud Comput.2013;114.
73. Kim YH, Kim DJ, A Study of Online Transaction Self-Efficacy, Consumer Trust, and Uncertainty Reduction in Electronic Commerce Transaction. Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.2005
74. Randhawa RS, Jain S. Trust Models in Cloud Computing: A Review. Int Wireless Microwave Tech.2017;7(4):14-27.
75. Goodwin C.  Privacy: Recognition of a consumer right. J Pub Poli Mark.1991;10(1):106-119.
76. Uma Dixit (), Cryptography – Security in E-Banking, IOSR J Bus Manag.2017;23:33-37
77. Nyamtiga BW , Sam A , Laizer LS  , Enhanced Security Model For Mobile Banking Systems In Tanzania, Int J Tech Enhan Emerg Eng Research.2013;1(4):20.
78. Hayikader S, AbdHadi FNHB, Ibrahim J.  Issues and Security Measures of Mobile Banking Apps. Int J Sci Res Pub.2016; 6(1):36.
79. Chavali K , Kumar J . Adoption of Mobile Banking and Perceived Risk in GCC. Banks Bank Sys.2018;13(1):72-79.
80. He W, Tian X, Shen J. Examining Security Risks of Mobile Banking Applications through Blog Mining. 2015.
81. Mashhour AS, Saleh Z . Community Perception of the Security and Acceptance of Mobile Banking Services in Bahrain: An Empirical Study. Int J Adv Comp Sci App.2015;6:9.
82. Mohammed OOL, Nimzing UN, Uduimoh N, Andrew ,Misra, Sanjay. Forensic Analysis of Mobile Banking Apps. 2019;49.
83. http://eclipse.rutgers.edu/wp- content/uploads/sites/51/2014/pdf/TRAbkch02.pdf
84. Davis F D. perceived Usefulness, Perceived ease of use, and User Acceptence of inforamtion technology. MIS Quarterly.1989;13(3):319–340.
85. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR. User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Manag Sci.1989;35(8):982–1003.
86. Davis F D. A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New End-User Information Systems: Theory and Results. Thesis Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.1986.
87. Ali H. Customer’s perception of m-banking adoption in Kingdom of Bahrain. Int  J Manag Info Techn.2014;6:1
88. Venkatesh, Viswanath,Bala, Hillol. Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions. Decision Sci.2008;39:273-315.
89. ZhouT. Understanding users initial trust in Mobile Banking. An elaboration likelihood perspective.Cumput Hum Behav. 2012;28(4):1518-1525
90. HanafizadehP, Behboudi M, Koshksaray A A, Tabar M J S. Mobile-banking adoption by Iranian bank clients. Telematics Inform. 2014;31(1):62–78.
91. Shaikh, Ahmed A. Examining consumers’ intention, behavior, and beliefs in mobile banking adoption and continuous usage. Jyvaskyla Stud Bus Eco.2016;104:172.
92. Shanmugam A , Savarimuthu MT, Wen TC. Factors Affecting Malaysian Behavioral Intention to Use Mobile Banking With Mediating Effects of Attitude. Acad Res Int.2014;5(2).
93. Siddik MNA, Sun G , Yanjuan CUI , Kabiraj S . Financial Inclusion through Mobile Banking: A Case of Bangladesh, J App Fin Bank.2014;4( 6):109-136 .
94. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Modeling-Adoption-of-Mobile-Money-Transfer%3A-A-Tobbin/f99066232bfbe6d73efd8974ed3dc05b1291b969
95. Alalwan AA, Dwivedi YK, Rana NP, Factors influencing adoption of mobile banking by Jordanian bank customers: Extending UTAUT2 with trust. Int J Info Manag.2017;37( 3):99-110.
96. Tan E, Lau LJ."Behavioural intention to adopt mobile banking among the millennial generation", Young Consumers. 2016;17( 1):18-31.
97. Shareefa MA , Baabdullahb A , Duttac S , Kumard V , Dwivedie YK.Consumer adoption of mobile banking services: An empirical examination of factors according to adoption stages, J Retail Cons Serv.2018;43:54-67
98. Noori B, An Analysis of Mobile Banking User Behavior Using Customer Segmentation.Int J Global Bus.2015;8(2):55-64.
99. Boonsiritomachai W , Pitchayadejanant K. Determinants affecting mobile banking adoption by generation Y based on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology Model modified by the Technology Acceptance Model concept Kasetsart .J Soci Sci.2017;1-10.
100. Tam C, Oliveira T. "Literature review of mobile banking and individual performance. Int J Bank Mark.2017;35(7):1042-1065.