IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/elmark/v29y2019i1d10.1007_s12525-017-0274-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Smart services in healthcare: A risk-benefit-analysis of pay-as-you-live services from customer perspective in Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Rouven-B. Wiegard

    (Leibniz Universität Hannover)

  • Michael H. Breitner

    (Leibniz Universität Hannover)

Abstract

The recent boom in wearable technologies generates enormous vital data sets, which are the ideal starting point for new service offers by Big Data Analytics. In a Pay-As-You-Live (PAYL) service, insured track activities, transfer current data on the lifestyles of users, who receive rewards from their insurance companies. The aim of this study is to investigate the readiness of customers to adopt PAYL services using wearable technology by comparing perceived privacy risks and perceived benefits. The research model is developed on a basis of a literature review and expert interviews. By conducting an online survey involving 353 participants, a structural equation modelling approach is used to test the research model. The results show that current privacy risk factors dominate the perceived value of an individual to use PAYL services. Insurance companies, service providers and manufacturers of wearables must therefore primarily work together and offer solutions for greater data security and data protection before focusing on gamification and functional congruence.

Suggested Citation

  • Rouven-B. Wiegard & Michael H. Breitner, 2019. "Smart services in healthcare: A risk-benefit-analysis of pay-as-you-live services from customer perspective in Germany," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 29(1), pages 107-123, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:elmark:v:29:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s12525-017-0274-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s12525-017-0274-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12525-017-0274-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s12525-017-0274-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chen, Ching-Fu, 2008. "Investigating structural relationships between service quality, perceived value, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions for air passengers: Evidence from Taiwan," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 709-717, May.
    2. Diamantopoulos, Adamantios & Riefler, Petra & Roth, Katharina P., 2008. "Advancing formative measurement models," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(12), pages 1203-1218, December.
    3. Mary J. Culnan & Pamela K. Armstrong, 1999. "Information Privacy Concerns, Procedural Fairness, and Impersonal Trust: An Empirical Investigation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(1), pages 104-115, February.
    4. Rainer Alt, 2016. "Electronic Markets on customer-orientation," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 26(3), pages 195-198, August.
    5. Viswanath Venkatesh, 2000. "Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 342-365, December.
    6. Naresh K. Malhotra & Sung S. Kim & James Agarwal, 2004. "Internet Users' Information Privacy Concerns (IUIPC): The Construct, the Scale, and a Causal Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 336-355, December.
    7. Tamara Dinev & Paul Hart, 2006. "An Extended Privacy Calculus Model for E-Commerce Transactions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 61-80, March.
    8. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    9. Allen S. Lee & Richard L. Baskerville, 2003. "Generalizing Generalizability in Information Systems Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 221-243, September.
    10. Kathy A. Stewart & Albert H. Segars, 2002. "An Empirical Examination of the Concern for Information Privacy Instrument," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(1), pages 36-49, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Davide Lanfranchi & Laura Grassi, 2022. "Examining insurance companies’ use of technology for innovation," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 47(3), pages 520-537, July.
    2. Yuho Shimizu & Aimi Ishizuna & Shin Osaki & Takaaki Hashimoto & Mitsuharu Tai & Tetsushi Tanibe & Kaori Karasawa, 2022. "The Social Acceptance of Smart Health Services in Japan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-11, January.
    3. Tran, Cong Duc & Nguyen, Tin Trung, 2021. "Health vs. privacy? The risk-risk tradeoff in using COVID-19 contact-tracing apps," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    4. Martin Eling & Irina Gemmo & Danjela Guxha & Hato Schmeiser, 2024. "Big data, risk classification, and privacy in insurance markets," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 49(1), pages 75-126, March.
    5. Rainer Alt, 2021. "Electronic Markets on platform complexity," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 31(4), pages 737-742, December.
    6. Nora Nahr & Marikka Heikkilä, 2022. "Uncovering the identity of Electronic Markets research through text mining techniques," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(3), pages 1257-1277, September.
    7. Rainer Alt & Haluk Demirkan & Jan Fabian Ehmke & Anne Moen & Alfred Winter, 2019. "Smart services: The move to customer orientation," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 29(1), pages 1-6, March.
    8. Christiane Lehrer & U. Yeliz Eseryel & Annamina Rieder & Reinhard Jung, 2021. "Behavior change through wearables: the interplay between self-leadership and IT-based leadership," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 31(4), pages 747-764, December.
    9. Angela Zeier Röschmann & Matthias Erny & Joël Wagner, 2022. "On the (future) role of on-demand insurance: market landscape, business model and customer perception," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 47(3), pages 603-642, July.
    10. Shang, Dawei & Wu, Weiwei & Schroeder, Daniel, 2023. "Exploring determinants of the green smart technology product adoption from a sustainability adapted value-belief-norm perspective," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Morlok, Tina & Matt, Christian & Hess, Thomas, 2017. "Privatheitsforschung in den Wirtschaftswissenschaften: Entwicklung, Stand und Perspektiven," Working Papers 1/2017, University of Munich, Munich School of Management, Institute for Information Systems and New Media.
    2. Darrell Carpenter & Alexander McLeod & Chelsea Hicks & Michele Maasberg, 0. "Privacy and biometrics: An empirical examination of employee concerns," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    3. Shaw, Norman & Sergueeva, Ksenia, 2019. "The non-monetary benefits of mobile commerce: Extending UTAUT2 with perceived value," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 44-55.
    4. Darrell Carpenter & Alexander McLeod & Chelsea Hicks & Michele Maasberg, 2018. "Privacy and biometrics: An empirical examination of employee concerns," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 91-110, February.
    5. Corey Angst, 2009. "Protect My Privacy or Support the Common-Good? Ethical Questions About Electronic Health Information Exchanges," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 90(2), pages 169-178, November.
    6. Zhenhui (Jack) Jiang & Cheng Suang Heng & Ben C. F. Choi, 2013. "Research Note —Privacy Concerns and Privacy-Protective Behavior in Synchronous Online Social Interactions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 579-595, September.
    7. Tabitha L. James & Quinton Nottingham & Stephane E. Collignon & Merrill Warkentin & Jennifer L. Ziegelmayer, 2016. "The interpersonal privacy identity (IPI): development of a privacy as control model," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 341-360, December.
    8. Liang, Sai & Li, Hui & Liu, Xianwei & Schuckert, Markus, 2019. "Motivators behind information disclosure: Evidence from Airbnb hosts," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 305-319.
    9. Carpenter, Darrell & Maasberg, Michele & Hicks, Chelsea & Chen, Xiaogang, 2016. "A multicultural study of biometric privacy concerns in a fire ground accountability crisis response system," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 735-747.
    10. Nam, Taewoo, 2018. "Untangling the relationship between surveillance concerns and acceptability," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 262-269.
    11. Sumeet Gupta & Haejung Yun & Heng Xu & Hee-Woong Kim, 2017. "An exploratory study on mobile banking adoption in Indian metropolitan and urban areas: a scenario-based experiment," Information Technology for Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 127-152, January.
    12. Tamara Dinev & Paul Hart, 2006. "An Extended Privacy Calculus Model for E-Commerce Transactions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 61-80, March.
    13. Heng Xu & Hock-Hai Teo & Bernard C. Y. Tan & Ritu Agarwal, 2012. "Research Note ---Effects of Individual Self-Protection, Industry Self-Regulation, and Government Regulation on Privacy Concerns: A Study of Location-Based Services," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 1342-1363, December.
    14. Weiyin Hong & Frank K. Y. Chan & James Y. L. Thong, 2021. "Drivers and Inhibitors of Internet Privacy Concern: A Multidimensional Development Theory Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 539-564, January.
    15. Janice Y. Tsai & Serge Egelman & Lorrie Cranor & Alessandro Acquisti, 2011. "The Effect of Online Privacy Information on Purchasing Behavior: An Experimental Study," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(2), pages 254-268, June.
    16. Wall, Marco, 2022. "One User – Two Viewpoints? An Examination of Information Privacy Concerns from the Employee and Consumer Perspective," Junior Management Science (JUMS), Junior Management Science e. V., vol. 7(4), pages 986-1000.
    17. Grace Fox & Tabitha L. James, 2021. "Toward an Understanding of the Antecedents to Health Information Privacy Concern: A Mixed Methods Study," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 23(6), pages 1537-1562, December.
    18. Huarng, Kun-Huang & Yu, Tiffany Hui-Kuang & Lee, Cheng fang, 2022. "Adoption model of healthcare wearable devices," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    19. David Harborth & Sebastian Pape, 2020. "Empirically Investigating Extraneous Influences on the “APCO” Model—Childhood Brand Nostalgia and the Positivity Bias," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-16, December.
    20. Yi Sun & Shihui Li & Lingling Yu, 2022. "The dark sides of AI personal assistant: effects of service failure on user continuance intention," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(1), pages 17-39, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Pay-As-You-Live service; Wearable technologies; perceived privacy risk; perceived benefit; intention to use;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:elmark:v:29:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s12525-017-0274-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.