Ethics and Information Technology

, Volume 16, Issue 2, pp 103–117 | Cite as

Green is good but is usability better? Consumer reactions to environmental initiatives in e-banking services

Original Paper


There is an emerging consensus in the corporate social responsibility (CSR) literature suggesting that the quest for the so-called business case for CSR should be abandoned. In the same vein, several researchers have suggested that future research should start examining not whether, but rather when CSR is likely to have strengthened, weakened or even nullified effects on organizational outcomes (e.g. Margolis et al. in Does it pay to be good? A meta-analysis and redirection of research on corporate social and financial performance. Working Paper, Harvard Business School, 2007; Kiron et al. in MIT Sloan Manag Rev 53(2):69–74, 2012). Using perspectives from several theoretical frameworks (Needs Theory, Technology Acceptance Theory, and Psychological Distance Theory), we contribute to the literature by empirically examining the tension between functional and sustainability attributes in a novel context, namely that of green e-banking services. The findings indicate that the positive effect of CSR on users’ attitudes towards green e-banking services is moderated by two primarily utilitarian information systems factors—namely perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness—and an important utilitarian individual difference variable—namely perceived self-efficacy with technology. Our findings are also important if interpreted within the context of the ethical decision-making literature (e.g. O’Fallon and Butterfield in J Bus Ethics 59(4):375–413, 2005), as they indicate that the linkage between moral judgment and moral outcomes is unlikely to be that straightforward.


Ethical consumerism Corporate social responsibility Green websites Attitudes Sustainability 



This research was supported by Piraeus Bank at the data collection phase.


  1. Agarwal, R., & Karahanna, E. (2000). Time flies when you’re Having Fun: Cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly, 24(4), 665–694. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. AGB Nielsen (2008). E-metrics online survey. Accessed 15 Dec 2012.
  3. Al-Saggaf, Y., & Burmeister, O. K. (2012). Improving skill development: An exploratory study comparing a philosophical and an applied ethical analysis technique. Computer Science Education, 22(3), 237–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Auger, P., Burke, P., Devinney, T. M., & Louviere, J. J. (2003). What will consumers pay for social product features? Journal of Business Ethics, 42, 281–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Auger, P., Devinney, T. M., & Louviere, J. J. (2007). Using best-worst scaling methodology to investigate consumer ethical beliefs across countries. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(3), 299–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Auger, P., Devinney, T. M., Louviere, J. J., & Burke, P. F. (2008). Do social product features have value to consumers? International Journal of Research in Marketing, 25(3), 183–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Babin, B. J., Darden, W. R., & Griffin, M. (1994). Work and/or fun: Measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(4), 644–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bar-Anan, Y., Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (2006). The association between psychological distance and construal level: Evidence from an implicit association test. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135(4), 609–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barone, M. J., Miyazaki, A. D., & Taylor, K. A. (2000). The influence of cause-related marketing on consumer choice: Does one good turn deserve another? Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 248–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Belk, R., Devinney, T. M., & Eckhardt, G. (2005). Consumer ethics across cultures. Consumption, Markets and Culture, 8(3), 275–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Berens, G., van Riel, C. B. M., & Van Rekom, J. (2007). The CSR-quality trade-off: When can corporate social responsibility and corporate ability compensate each other? Journal of Business Ethics, 74(3), 233–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Berglind, M., & Nakata, C. (2005). Cause-related marketing: More buck than bang? Business Horizons, 48(5), 443–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bhattacharya, C. B., Korschun, D., & Sen, S. (2009). Strengthening stakeholder-company relationships through mutually beneficial corporate social responsibility initiatives. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 257–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bouldstridge, E., & Carrigan, M. (2000). Do consumers really care about corporate responsibility? Highlighting the attitude-behaviour gap. Journal of Communication Management, 4(4), 355–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bray, J., Johns, N., & Kilburn, D. (2011). An exploratory study into the factors impeding ethical consumption. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(4), 597–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Brown, S. P., & Chin, W. W. (2004). Satisfying and retaining customers through independent service representatives. Decision Sciences, 35(5), 527–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Busch, T. (2011). Capabilities in, capabilities out: Overcoming digital divides by promoting corporate citizenship and fair ICT. Ethics and Information Technology, 13(4), 339–353.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. Büttner, O. B., Florack, A., & Göritz, A. S. (2013). Shopping orientation and mindsets: How motivation influences consumer information processing during shopping. Psychology & Marketing, 30(9), 779–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Carrigan, M., & Attalla, A. (2001). The Myth of the ethical consumer—Do ethics matter in purchase behaviour? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 560–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Carrington, M. J., Neville, B. A., & Whitwell, G. J. (2010). Why ethical consumers don’t walk their talk: Towards a framework for understanding the gap between the ethical purchase intentions and actual buying behaviour of ethically minded consumers. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1), 139–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cassidy, S., & Eachus, P. (2002). Developing the Computer User Self-Efficacy (CUSE) Scale: Investigating the relationship between computer self-efficacy, gender and experience with computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 26(2), 133–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Chatzidakis, A., Hibbert, S., & Smith, A. P. (2007). Why people don’t take their concerns about fair trade to the supermarket: The role of neutralisation. Journal of Business Ethics, 74, 89–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Chau, P. Y. K. (1996). An empirical assessment of a modified technology acceptance model. Journal of Management Information Systems, 13(2), 185–204.Google Scholar
  24. Childers, T. L., Carr, C. L., Peck, J., & Carson, S. (2001). Hedonic and utilitarian motivations for online retail shopping behavior. Journal of Retailing, 77(4), 511–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Chin, W. W., & Newsted, P. R. (1999). Structural equation modeling analysis with small samples using partial least squares. Statistical strategies for small sample research, 2, 307–342.Google Scholar
  26. Connelly, B. L., Ketchen, D. J., & Slater, S. F. (2011). Toward a “Theoretical Toolbox” for sustainability research in marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(1), 86–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Cronin, J. J., Brady, M. K., & Hult, G. T. M. (2000). Assessing the effects of quality, value, and customer satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environments. Journal of Retailing, 76(2), 193–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. De Pelsmacker, P., Driesen, L., & Rayp, G. (2005). Do consumers care about ethics? Willingness to pay for fair-trade coffee. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 39(2), 363–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Devinney, T. M., Auger, P., & Eckhardt, G. M. (2010). The Myth of the ethical consumer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2010). Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 8–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Echambadi, R., Campbell, B., & Agarwal, R. (2006). Encouraging best practice in quantitative management research: An incomplete list of opportunities. Journal of Management Studies, 43(8), 393–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Eckhardt, G., Belk, R., & Devinney, T. M. (2010). Why don’t consumers consume ethically? Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 9(6), 426–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Folkes, V. S., & Kamins, M. A. (1999). Effects of information about firms’ ethical and unethical actions on consumers’ attitudes’. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 8(3), 243–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Follows, S. B., & Jobber, D. (2000). Environmentally responsible purchase behaviour: A test of a consumer model. European Journal of Marketing, 34(5/6), 723–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Fornell, C., & Bookstein, F. L. (1982). Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(4), 440–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Greenpeace. (2012). Accessed March 12, 2012.
  39. Greenwashing Index. (2012). Help keep advertising honest. Accessed March 11, 2012.
  40. Groza, M. D., Pronschinske, M. R., & Walker, M. (2011). Perceived organizational motives and consumer responses to proactive and reactive CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(4), 639–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Handelman, J. M., & Arnold, S. J. (1999). The role of marketing actions with a social dimension: Appeals to the institutional environment. Journal of Marketing, 6(3), 33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hardy, S. A., Bhattacharjee, A., Reed, A., & Aquino, K. (2010). Moral identity and psychological distance: The case of adolescent parental socialization. Journal of Adolescence, 33(1), 111–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Herzberg, F. I. (1966). Work and the nature of man. Cleveland: World Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  44. Holbrook, M. B., & Hirschman, E. C. (1982). The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies, feeling, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(September), 132–140.Google Scholar
  45. Hult, G. T. M. (2011). Market-focused sustainability: Market orientation plus! Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(1), 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (1999). The psychological origins of perceived usefulness and ease-of-use. Information & Management, 35(4), 237–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Karnani, A. (2011). Doing well by doing good: The grand illusion. California Management Review, 53(2), 69–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kiron, D., Kruschwitz, N., Haanaes, K., & Velken, I. V. S. (2012). Sustainability nears a tipping point. MIT Sloan Management Review, 53(2), 69–74.Google Scholar
  49. Kronrod, A., & Danziger, S. (2013). Wii Will Rock You! The use and effect of figurative language in consumer reviews of hedonic and utilitarian consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(4), 726–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Laufer, W. S. (2003). Social accountability and corporate greenwashing. Journal of Business Ethics, 43(3), 253–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Liberman, N., Trope, Y., & Stephan, E. (2007). Psychological distance. In A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 353–381). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  52. Lichtenstein, D. R., Drumwright, M. E., & Braig, B. M. (2004). The effect of corporate social responsibility on customer donations to corporate-supported nonprofits. Journal of Marketing, 68(4), 16–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lii, Y. S., & Lee, M. (2012). Doing right leads to doing well: When the type of CSR and reputation interact to affect consumer evaluations of the firm. Journal of Business Ethics, 105(1), 69–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Luo, X., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2006). Corporate social responsibility, customer satisfaction, and market value. Journal of Marketing, 70(4), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Luo, X., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2009). The debate over doing Good: Corporate social performance, strategic marketing levers, and firm-idiosyncratic risk. Journal of Marketing, 73(6), 198–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Malär, L., Krohmer, H., Hoyer, W. D., & Nyffenegger, B. (2011). Emotional brand attachment and brand personality: The relative importance of the actual and the ideal self. Journal of Marketing, 75(4), 35–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Margolis, J. D., Elfenbein, H. A., & Walsh, J. P. (2007). Does it pay to be good? A meta-analysis and redirection of research on corporate social and financial performance. Working Paper, Harvard Business School.Google Scholar
  58. Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. McKay, R. B. (2000). Consequential utilitarianism: Addressing ethical deficiencies in the municipal landfill siting process. Journal of Business Ethics, 26, 289–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Melville, N. P. (2010). Information systems innovation for environmental sustainability. MIS Quarterly, 34(1), 1–21.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  61. Mill, J. S. (1910). Utilitarianism liberty and representative government. London: J.M. Dent.Google Scholar
  62. O’Fallon, M. J., & Butterfield, K. D. (2005). A review of the empirical ethical decision-making literature: 1996–2003. Journal of Business Ethics, 59(4), 375–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Öberseder, M., Schlegelmilch, B. B., & Gruber, V. (2011). “Why don’t consumers care about CSR?” A qualitative study exploring the role of CSR in consumption decisions. Journal of Business Ethics, 104, 449–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Okada, E. (2005). Justification effects on consumer choice of hedonic and utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 42(1), 43–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Parasuraman, A. (2000). Technology Readiness Index (TRI): A multiple-item scale to measure readiness to embrace new technologies. Journal of Service Research, 2(4), 307–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Pikkarainen, T., Pikkarainen, K., Karjaluoto, H., & Pahnila, S. (2004). Consumer acceptance of online banking: An extension of the technology acceptance model. Internet Research, 14(3), 224–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Ping, R. A. (1998). EQS and LISREL examples using survey data. In R. E. Schumacker & G. A. Marcoulides (Eds.), Interactions and nonlinear effects in structural equation modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  68. Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 5–12.Google Scholar
  69. Progressive Grocer. (2008). Special report: Environmental sustainability.
  70. Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
  71. Reich, R. B. (2008). The case against corporate social responsibility. Goldman School of Public Policy Working Paper No. GSPP08-003.
  72. Reuters. (2008). Consumers put ads to green washing test.
  73. Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Will, S. (2005) SmartPLS 2.0 M3 Beta. Retrieved March 10, 2011.
  74. Rokka, J., & Uusitalo, L. (2008). Preference for green packaging in consumer product choices—Do consumers care? International Journal of Consumer Studies, 32, 516–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Rupp, D. E., Shao, R., Thornton, M. A., & Skarlicki, D. P. (2013). Applicants’ and employees’ reactions to corporate social responsibility: The moderating effects of first-party justice perceptions and moral identity. Personnel Psychology, 66, 895–933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Schulze, C., Schöler, L., & Skiera, B. (2013). Not all fun and games: Viral marketing for utilitarian products. Journal of Marketing (in press).Google Scholar
  77. Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 225–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Shaw, D. S., Hogg, G., Wilson, E., Shiu, E., & Hassan, L. M. (2006). Fashion victim: The impact of fair trade concerns on clothing choice. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 14(4), 427–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sheth, J. N., Sethia, N. K., & Srinivas, S. (2011). Mindful consumption: A customer-centric approach to sustainability. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(1), 21–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Stanaland, A. J. S., Lwin, M. O., & Murphy, P. E. (2011). Consumer perceptions of the antecedents and consequences of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(1), 47–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Straub, D., Limayem, M., & Karahanna-Evaristo, E. (1995). Measuring system usage: Implications for IS theory testing. Management Science, 41(8), 1328–1342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Sykes, G. M., & Matza, D. (1957). Techniques of neutralization: A theory of delinquency. American Sociological Review, 22(6), 664–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Smith-Crowe, K. (2008). Ethical decision making: Where we’ve been and where we’re going. The Academy of Management Annals’, 2(1), 545–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Tenenhaus, M., Vinzi, V. E., Chatelin, Y.-M., & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS path modeling. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 48(1), 159–205.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  85. Triandis, H. (1971). Attitude and attitude change. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  86. Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117(2), 440–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Tsikriktsis, N. (2004). A technology readiness-based taxonomy of customers: A replication and extension. Journal of Service Research, 7(1), 42–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Türk, V., Kuhndt, M., Alakeson, V., Aldrich, T., & Von Geibler, J. (2003). The environmental and social impacts of e-banking: A case study with Barclays PLC. Case study within the project Digital Europe: E-business and sustainable development.
  89. Umphress, E. E., & Bingham, J. B. (2011). When employees do bad things for good reasons: Examining unethical pro-organizational behaviors. Organization Science, 22(3), 621–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Vaccaro, A., & Madsen, P. (2009). Corporate dynamic transparency: The new ICT-driven ethics? Ethics and Information Technology, 11(2), 113–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.Google Scholar
  93. Voss, K. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Grohmann, B. (2003). Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude. Journal of Marketing Research, 40(3), 310–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Wagner, T., Lutz, R. J., & Weitz, B. A. (2009). Corporate hypocrisy: Overcoming the threat of inconsistent corporate social responsibility perceptions. Journal of Marketing, 73, 77–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Watson, R. T., Boudreau, M.-C., & Chen, A. J. W. (2010). Information systems and environmentally sustainable development: Energy informatics and new directions for the IS community. MIS Quarterly, 34(1), 23–38.Google Scholar
  96. Watson, R. T., Boudreau, M.-C., Chen, A., & Huber, M. H. (2008). Green IS: Building sustainable business practices. In R. T. Watson (Ed.), Information systems. Athens: Global Text Project.Google Scholar
  97. WCED. (1987). Our common future. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  98. Werther, W. B, Jr, & Chandler, D. B. (2011). Strategic corporate social responsibility: Stakeholders in a global environment. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.Google Scholar
  99. Westbrook, R. A., & Black, W. C. (1985). A motivation-based shopper typology. Journal of Retailing, 61(Spring), 78–103.Google Scholar
  100. White, K., MacDonnell, R., & Ellard, J. H. (2012). Belief in a just world: Consumer intentions and behaviors toward ethical products. Journal of Marketing, 76(1), 103–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. White, C. J., Varadarajan, R. P., & Dacin, P. (2003). Market situation and response: The role of cognitive style, organizational culture, and information use. Journal of Marketing, 67(3), 63–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Xiaoli, N., & Kwangjun, H. (2007). Consumer responses to corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives. Journal of Advertising, 36(2), 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • George Lekakos
    • 1
  • Pavlos Vlachos
    • 2
  • Christos Koritos
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Management Science and TechnologyAthens University of Economics and BusinessAthensGreece
  2. 2.ALBA Graduate Business School at The American College of GreeceAthensGreece

Personalised recommendations