Factors Influencing Blockchain Technologies Adoption in Supply Chain Management and Logistic Sectors: Cultural Compatibility of Blockchain Solutions as Moderator
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- Do technological, organizational, and environmental factors influence the adoption of blockchain in the Saudi supply chain and logistics sector?
- Does blockchain technology adoption influence operational excellence in the Saudi supply chain and logistics sector?
- Does the cultural compatibility of blockchain solutions moderate the relationship between adopting blockchain technology and operational excellence?
2. Literature Review and Theoretical Model
2.1. Supply Chain, Logistics and Industry 4.0 Technologies
2.2. Digital Supply Chain, Logistics Customer Service Using Blockchain Technology
2.3. Integration of the Diffusion of Innovation Theory (DOI) and Technology–Organization–Environment (TOE)
2.4. Technological Factor and the Adoption of Blockchain Technology
2.5. Organizational Factors and the Adoption of Blockchain Technology
2.6. Environmental Factors and the Adoption of Blockchain Technology
2.7. The Adoption of Blockchain Technology and Operational Excellence
2.8. Moderating Role of Cultural Compatibility of Blockchain Solutions
3. Research Methodology
3.1. Research Design
3.2. Data Collection Procedures
3.3. Instrumental Scales
3.4. Data Analysis
4. Results
4.1. Demographic Information
4.2. Assessing Model Validity and Reliability
4.3. Assessing Path Model
4.4. Assessing Model Fitness
5. Discussion
5.1. Managerial Implications
5.2. Limitations and Future Directions
5.3. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Measurement of Research Variables
Variable | Items | Reference |
Relative Advantage | RA1: Blockchain technology enables our company to operate more efficiently. | Yang et al. [49], Oliveira et al. [48], Mohammed et al. [41], and Al-Gahtani [7]. |
RA2: Blockchain technology allows us to perform specific tasks more quickly. | ||
RA3: Our company expects that blockchain technology can help to reduce unnecessary costs. | ||
Top management support | TOP1: Our company’s top management has provided strong leadership to engage with blockchain technology adoption. | Chong et al. [32]. |
TOP2: Our company’s top management recognizes the benefits of blockchain technology adoption. | ||
TOP3: Our company’s top management provides adequate resources required to adopt blockchain technology. | ||
TOP4: Our company’s top management is willing to take any possible risks associated with the adoption of blockchain technology. | ||
Openness to use innovation | OPN1: Our company actively monitors and assesses new technologies. | Chong et al. [32]. |
OPN2: Our company implement new innovations to improve business process. | ||
OPN3: Our company encourages employees to learn and use new technologies | ||
Competitor influence | CMP1: Our company is under competitive pressure to adopt blockchain technology. | Yang et al. [49], Chong et al. [32]. |
CMP2: Some of our competitors adopted blockchain technology before we did. | ||
CMP3: Our competitors know the importance of blockchain technology for their business | ||
Government support | GOV1: Government has provided incentives to early blockchain technology adopters. | Chong et al. [32]. |
GOV2: There is sufficient training provided by the government to support blockchain technology adoption. | ||
GOV3: Adequate legal safeguards exist to permit the utilization of blockchain technology. | ||
Vendor orientation and support | VES1: We received satisfactory assistance and technical support from our blockchain technology vendor. | Chong et al. [32]; Shamout et al. [59] |
VES2: We received adequate training from our blockchain technology vendor | ||
VES3: In general, our blockchain technology vendor possess proficient technical expertise. | ||
Blockchain Technology Adoption | BCA1: Our company has already introduced and adopted blockchain technology to increase transparency and integrity in the process of supply chain and logistics. | Ahmadi et al. [10] and Chong et al. [32]. |
BCA2: Our firm intends to use blockchain technology as much as possible to manage supply chain and logistics | ||
BCA3: Our company will strongly advise others to adopt blockchain technology to manage supply chain and logistics. | ||
Operational excellence | OPE1: The use of blockchain technology in supply chain and logistics reduces transactional costs. | Naway & Rahmat [37] |
OPE2: The use of blockchain technology in supply chain and logistics reduces information processing. | ||
OPE3: The use of blockchain technology in supply chain and logistics enhances customer service. | ||
OPE4: The use of blockchain technology in supply chain and logistics improves responsiveness to market demands. | ||
Cultural compatibility of blockchain solutions | CCB1: Blockchain technology is consistent with our corporate culture. | Vos & Boonstra [47]. |
CCB2: Blockchain technology fits with our company’s principles of integrity | ||
CCB3: Blockchain technology is consistent with our company’s inclination towards transparency. |
References
- Javaid, M.; Haleem, A.; Singh, R.P.; Suman, R.; Gonzalez, E.S. Understanding the adoption of Industry 4.0 technologies in improving environmental sustainability. Sustain. Oper. Comput. 2022, 3, 203–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nath, S.D.; Khayer, A.; Majumder, J.; Barua, S. Factors affecting blockchain adoption in apparel supply chains: Does sustainability-oriented supplier development play a moderating role? Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2022, 122, 1183–1214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vaidya, S.; Ambad, P.; Bhosle, S. Industry 4.0–A glimpse. Procedia Manuf. 2018, 20, 233–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chittipaka, V.; Kumar, S.; Sivarajah, U.; Bowden, J.L.H.; Baral, M.M. Blockchain Technology for Supply Chains operating in emerging markets: An empirical examination of technology-organization-environment (TOE) framework. Ann. Oper. Res. 2023, 327, 465–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Çolak, H. Acceptance of blockchain technology in supply chains: A model proposal. Oper. Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 2022, 15, 17–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taherdoost, H. A critical review of blockchain acceptance models—Blockchain technology adoption frameworks and applications. Computers 2022, 11, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Gahtani, S.S. Computer technology adoption in Saudi Arabia: Correlates of perceived innovation attributes. Inf. Technol. Dev. 2003, 10, 57–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malik, S.; Chadhar, M.; Vatanasakdakul, S.; Chetty, M. Factors affecting the organizational adoption of blockchain technology: Extending the technology–organization–environment (TOE) framework in the Australian context. Sustainability 2021, 13, 9404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, L.; Liang, C.; Gu, D.; Ma, Y.; Xie, Y.; Zhao, S. What advantages of blockchain affect its adoption in the elderly care industry? A study based on the technology–organisation–environment framework. Technol. Soc. 2021, 67, 101786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmadi, H.; Nilashi, M.; Shahmoradi, L.; Ibrahim, O. Hospital information system adoption: Expert perspectives on an adoption framework for Malaysian public hospitals. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 67, 161–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marengo, A.; Pagano, A. Investigating the Factors Influencing the Adoption of Blockchain Technology across Different Countries and Industries: A Systematic Literature Review. Electronics 2023, 12, 3006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wong, L.W.; Tan, G.W.H.; Lee, V.H.; Ooi, K.B.; Sohal, A. Unearthing the determinants of Blockchain adoption in supply chain management. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2020, 58, 2100–2123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gökalp, E.; Gökalp, M.O.; Çoban, S. Blockchain-based supply chain management: Understanding the determinants of adoption in the context of organizations. Inf. Syst. Manag. 2022, 39, 100–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tripathi, V.; Chattopadhyaya, S.; Mukhopadhyay, A.K.; Sharma, S.; Li, C.; Singh, S.; Mohamed, A. A sustainable productive method for enhancing operational excellence in shop floor management for industry 4.0 using hybrid integration of lean and smart manufacturing: An ingenious case study. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, Q.; Bai, C.; Sarkis, J. Blockchain technology and supply chains: The paradox of the atheoretical research discourse. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2022, 164, 102824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Treiblmaier, H. Combining blockchain technology and the physical internet to achieve triple bottom line sustainability: A comprehensive research agenda for modern logistics and supply chain management. Logistics 2019, 3, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nguyen, H.B.; Nguyen, L.T. Factors influence blockchain adoption in supply chain management among companies based in Ho Chi Minh City. In Conference towards ASEAN Chairmanship 2023 (TAC 23 2021); Atlantis Press: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2021; pp. 1–13. [Google Scholar]
- Tran LT, T.; Nguyen, P.T. Co-creating blockchain adoption: Theory, practice and impact on usage behavior. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logist. 2021, 33, 1667–1684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Orji, I.J.; Kusi-Sarpong, S.; Huang, S.; Vazquez-Brust, D. Evaluating the factors that influence blockchain adoption in the freight logistics industry. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2020, 141, 102025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarfraz, M.; Khawaja, K.F.; Han, H.; Ariza-Montes, A.; Arjona-Fuentes, J.M. Sustainable supply chain, digital transformation, and blockchain technology adoption in the tourism sector. Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun. 2023, 10, 557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agi, M.A.; Jha, A.K. Blockchain technology in the supply chain: An integrated theoretical perspective of organizational adoption. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2022, 247, 108458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amini, M.; Jahanbakhsh, J.N. A Multi-Perspective Framework Established on Diffusion of Innovation (DOI) Theory and Technology, Organization and Environment (TOE) Framework toward Supply Chain Management System Based on Cloud Computing Technology for Small and Medium Enterprises (January 2023). Int. J. Inf. Technol. Innov. Adopt. 2023, 11, 1217–1234. [Google Scholar]
- Akhavan, P.; Philsoophian, M. Improving of supply chain collaboration and performance by using block chain technology as a mediating role and resilience as a moderating variable. J. Knowl. Econ. 2022, 14, 4561–4582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Benzidia, S.; Makaoui, N.; Subramanian, N. Impact of ambidexterity of blockchain technology and social factors on new product development: A supply chain and Industry 4.0 perspective. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2021, 169, 120819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gupta, S.; Prathipati, B.; Dangayach, G.S.; Rao, P.N.; Jagtap, S. Development of a structural model for the adoption of industry 4.0 enabled sustainable operations for operational excellence. Sustainability 2022, 14, 11103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Azadeh, S.S.; Atasoy, B.; Ben-Akiva, M.E.; Bierlaire, M.; Maknoon, M.Y. Choice-driven dial-a-ride problem for demand responsive mobility service. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2022, 161, 128–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nayal, K.; Raut, R.D.; Narkhede, B.E.; Priyadarshinee, P.; Panchal, G.B.; Gedam, V.V. Antecedents for blockchain technology-enabled sustainable agriculture supply chain. Ann. Oper. Res. 2021, 327, 293–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Attaran, M. Digital technology enablers and their implications for supply chain management. Supply Chain Forum Int. J. 2020, 21, 158–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kache, F.; Seuring, S. Challenges and opportunities of digital information at the intersection of Big Data Analytics and supply chain management. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2017, 37, 10–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MacCarthy, B.L.; Blome, C.; Olhager, J.; Srai, J.S.; Zhao, X. Supply chain evolution–theory, concepts and science. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2016, 36, 1696–1718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kadłubek, M. Completeness meter in logistics service quality management of transport companies. Int. J. Qual. Res. 2020, 14, 1223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheung, K.F.; Bell, M.G.; Bhattacharjya, J. Cybersecurity in logistics and supply chain management: An overview and future research directions. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2021, 146, 102217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chai, Y. Research on influencing factors of knowledge sharing in supply chain enterprises under blockchain environment. Teh. Vjesn. 2021, 28, 1553–1559. [Google Scholar]
- Sumarliah, E.; Li, T.; Wang, B.; Khan, S.U.; Khan, S.Z. Blockchain technology adoption in Halal traceability scheme of the food supply chain: Evidence from Indonesian firms. Int. J. Emerg. Mark. 2023, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, L.; Zhou, J.; Zhang, J.Z.; Behl, A. Blockchain technology adaptation and organizational inertia: Moderating role between knowledge management processes and supply chain resilience. Kybernetes, 2023; ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chong, K.W.; Kim, Y.S.; Choi, J. A study of factors affecting intention to adopt a cloud-based digital signature service. Information 2021, 12, 60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guan, W.; Ding, W.; Zhang, B.; Verny, J. The role of supply chain alignment in coping with resource dependency in blockchain adoption: Empirical evidence from China. J. Enterp. Inf. Manag. 2023, 36, 605–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clohessy, T.; Acton, T. Investigating the influence of organizational factors on blockchain adoption: An innovation theory perspective. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2019, 119, 1457–1491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wamba, S.F.; Queiroz, M.M. Industry 4.0 and the supply chain digitalisation: A blockchain diffusion perspective. Prod. Plan. Control 2022, 33, 193–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Venkatesh, V.; Thong, J.Y.L.; Xu, X. Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. MIS Q. 2012, 36, 157–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Naway, F.; Rahmat, A. The mediating role of technology and logistic integration in the relationship between supply chain capability and supply chain operational performance. Uncertain Supply Chain Manag. 2019, 7, 553–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Noor, A. Adoption of Blockchain Technology Facilitates a Competitive Edge for Logistic Service Providers. Sustainability 2022, 14, 15543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mougayar, W. The Business Blockchain: Promise, Practice, and Application of the Next Internet Technology; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Chaudhary, R.; Jindal, A.; Aujla, G.S.; Aggarwal, S.; Kumar, N.; Choo, K.K.R. BEST: Blockchain-based secure energy trading in SDN-enabled intelligent transportation system. Comput. Secur. 2019, 85, 288–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohammed, F.; Ibrahim, O.; Ithnin, N. Factors influencing cloud computing adoption for e-government implementation in developing countries: Instrument development. J. Syst. Inf. Technol. 2016, 18, 297–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- KPMG. The Time Has Come: Survey of Sustainability Reporting; KPMG: Amstelveen, The Netherlands, 2020; Available online: https://kpmg.com/xx/en/home/insights/2020/11/the-time-has-come-survey-of-sustainability-reporting.html (accessed on 3 June 2022).
- Bulut, E. Blockchain-based entrepreneurial finance: Success determinants of tourism initial coin offerings. Curr. Issues Tour. 2022, 25, 1767–1781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Treiblmaier, H.; Rejeb, A.; Ahmed, W.A. Blockchain technologies in the digital supply chain. In The Digital Supply Chain; MacCarthy, B.L., Ivanov, D., Eds.; Elsevier Science: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2022; pp. 3–24. [Google Scholar]
- Kayikci, Y.; Durak Usar, D.; Aylak, B.L. Using blockchain technology to drive operational excellence in perishable food supply chains during outbreaks. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 2022, 33, 836–876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kucukaltan, B.; Kamasak, R.; Yalcinkaya, B.; Irani, Z. Investigating the themes in supply chain finance: The emergence of blockchain as a disruptive technology. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2022, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vos, J.F.; Boonstra, A. The influence of cultural values on Enterprise System adoption, towards a culture–Enterprise System alignment theory. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2022, 63, 102453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oliveira, T.; Thomas, M.; Espadanal, M. Assessing the determinants of cloud computing adoption: An analysis of the manufacturing and services sectors. Inf. Manag. 2014, 51, 497–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Z.; Sun, J.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, Y. Understanding SaaS adoption from the perspective of organizational users: A Tripod Readiness Model. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 45, 254–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Creswell, J.W. A Concise Introduction to Mixed Methods Research; SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Lavrakas, P.J. Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Johnson, B.; Christensen, L. Educational Research: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Approaches; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Denzin, N.K.; Lincoln, Y.S. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Krejcie, R.V.; Morgan, D.W. Determining sample size for research activities. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 1970, 30, 607–610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fan, W.; Yan, Z. Factors affecting response rates of the web survey: A systematic review. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2010, 26, 132–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E. Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective; Pearson: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2010; Volume 7. [Google Scholar]
- Baruch, Y.; Holtom, B.C. Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research. Hum. Relat. 2008, 61, 1139–1160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.F.; Risher, J.J.; Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M. When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. Eur. Bus. Rev. 2019, 31, 2–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shamout, M.; Ben-Abdallah, R.; Alshurideh, M.; Alzoubi, H.; Kurdi, B.A.; Hamadneh, S. A conceptual model for the adoption of autonomous robots in supply chain and logistics industry. Uncertain Supply Chain Manag. 2022, 10, 577–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Field, A. Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics; SAGE Publications Limited: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M.; Straub, D.W. A critical look at the use of PLS-SEM in “MIS Quarterly”. MIS Q. 2020, 44, iii–xiv. [Google Scholar]
- Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ceptureanu, S.; Cerqueti, R.; Alexandru, A.; Popescu, D.; Dhesi, G.; Ceptureanu, E. Influence of blockchain adoption on technology transfer, performance and supply chain integration, exibility and responsiveness. A case study from IT&C medium size enterprises. Stud. Inform. Control 2021, 30, 61–74. [Google Scholar]
Variables | Categories | Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Gender | Male | 247 | 61.3% | 61.3% | 61.3% |
Female | 156 | 38.7% | 38.7% | 100% | |
Age | Younger than 25 years old | 40 | 9.9% | 9.9% | 9.9% |
26–40 years old | 335 | 83.1% | 83.1% | 93.1% | |
More than 40 years old | 28 | 6.9% | 6.9% | 100% | |
Industry | Manufacturing | 206 | 51.1% | 51.1% | 51.1% |
Hotels and restaurants | 171 | 42.4% | 42.4% | 93.5% | |
Retail | 11 | 2.7% | 2.7% | 96.3% | |
Other | 15 | 3.7% | 3.7% | 100% | |
Awareness | Aware of blockchain technology | 352 | 87.3% | 87.3% | 87.3% |
Not aware of blockchain technology | 51 | 12.7% | 12.7% | 100% |
Scales | Items | Factor Loadings | Cronbach’s Alpha | Composite Reliability | AVE |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Blockchain technology adoption | BCA1 | 0.818 | 0.797 | 0.881 | 0.711 |
BCA2 | 0.840 | ||||
BCA3 | 0.871 | ||||
Competitor influence | CMP1 | 0.870 | 0.844 | 0.905 | 0.761 |
CMP2 | 0.871 | ||||
CMP3 | 0.877 | ||||
Cultural compatibility of blockchain solutions | CCB1 | 0.827 | 0.770 | 0.867 | 0.684 |
CCB2 | 0.835 | ||||
CCB3 | 0.819 | ||||
Government support | GOV1 | 0.854 | 0.789 | 0.875 | 0.700 |
GOV2 | 0.781 | ||||
GOV3 | 0.872 | ||||
Openness to innovation use | OPN1 | 0.822 | 0.714 | 0.840 | 0.636 |
OPN2 | 0.809 | ||||
OPN3 | 0.760 | ||||
Operational excellence | OPE1 | 0.837 | 0.868 | 0.910 | 0.717 |
OPE2 | 0.806 | ||||
OPE3 | 0.885 | ||||
OPE4 | 0.856 | ||||
Relative advantage | RAD1 | 0.704 | 0.707 | 0.793 | 0.561 |
RAD2 | 0.782 | ||||
RAD3 | 0.758 | ||||
Top management support | TOP1 | 0.760 | 0.769 | 0.852 | 0.590 |
TOP2 | 0.775 | ||||
TOP3 | 0.790 | ||||
TOP4 | 0.747 | ||||
Vendor orientation and support | VES1 | 0.877 | 0.870 | 0.920 | 0.793 |
VES2 | 0.907 | ||||
VES3 | 0.888 |
Scales | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Blockchain technology adoption | ||||||||
Competitor influence and pressure | 0.648 | |||||||
Cultural compatibility of blockchain solutions | 0.849 | 0.539 | ||||||
Government support | 0.714 | 0.617 | 0.700 | |||||
Openness to innovation use | 0.659 | 0.837 | 0.564 | 0.712 | ||||
Operational excellence | 0.721 | 0.670 | 0.686 | 0.849 | 0.713 | |||
Relative advantage | 0.761 | 0.759 | 0.678 | 0.744 | 0.887 | 0.694 | ||
Top management support | 0.711 | 0.760 | 0.667 | 0.699 | 0.774 | 0.727 | 0.816 | |
Vendor orientation and support | 0.545 | 0.607 | 0.659 | 0.629 | 0.651 | 0.693 | 0.589 | 0.642 |
Direct and Moderating Effects | Beta Values | t -Values | p -Values |
---|---|---|---|
H1. Relative advantage → Blockchain technology adoption | 0.153 | 2.687 | 0.007 |
H2. Top management support → Blockchain technology adoption | 0.168 | 2.785 | 0.005 |
H3. Openness to innovation use → Blockchain technology adoption | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.999 |
H4. Competitor influence → Blockchain technology adoption | 0.166 | 2.675 | 0.007 |
H5. Government support → Blockchain technology adoption | 0.286 | 5.086 | 0.000 |
H6. Vendor orientation and support → Blockchain technology adoption | 0.065 | 1.281 | 0.200 |
H7. Blockchain technology adoption → Operational excellence | 0.417 | 7.107 | 0.000 |
Cultural compatibility of blockchain solutions → Operational excellence | 0.294 | 5.057 | 0.000 |
H8. Cultural compatibility of blockchain solutions x Blockchain technology adoption → Operational excellence | 0.020 | 0.503 | 0.615 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
AlKubaisy, Z.M.; Al-Somali, S.A. Factors Influencing Blockchain Technologies Adoption in Supply Chain Management and Logistic Sectors: Cultural Compatibility of Blockchain Solutions as Moderator. Systems 2023, 11, 574. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems11120574
AlKubaisy ZM, Al-Somali SA. Factors Influencing Blockchain Technologies Adoption in Supply Chain Management and Logistic Sectors: Cultural Compatibility of Blockchain Solutions as Moderator. Systems. 2023; 11(12):574. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems11120574
Chicago/Turabian StyleAlKubaisy, Zenah Mahmoud, and Sabah Abdullah Al-Somali. 2023. "Factors Influencing Blockchain Technologies Adoption in Supply Chain Management and Logistic Sectors: Cultural Compatibility of Blockchain Solutions as Moderator" Systems 11, no. 12: 574. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems11120574
APA StyleAlKubaisy, Z. M., & Al-Somali, S. A. (2023). Factors Influencing Blockchain Technologies Adoption in Supply Chain Management and Logistic Sectors: Cultural Compatibility of Blockchain Solutions as Moderator. Systems, 11(12), 574. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems11120574