Fornell-Larcker correlation matrix
| BI | CP | Comp | Compat | Custp | ES | Obs | PC | Rela | Tri | VA | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BI | 0.889 | ||||||||||
| CP | 0.607 | 0.878 | |||||||||
| Comp | 0.567 | 0.326 | 0.882 | ||||||||
| Compat | 0.645 | 0.433 | 0.410 | 0.875 | |||||||
| Custp | 0.767 | 0.496 | 0.477 | 0.589 | 0.918 | ||||||
| ES | 0.453 | 0.370 | 0.221 | 0.396 | 0.448 | 0.925 | |||||
| Obs | 0.707 | 0.445 | 0.301 | 0.549 | 0.635 | 0.335 | 0.926 | ||||
| PC | 0.193 | 0.265 | 0.128 | 0.265 | 0.247 | 0.303 | 0.227 | 0.843 | |||
| Rela | 0.699 | 0.463 | 0.485 | 0.532 | 0.611 | 0.474 | 0.569 | 0.311 | 0.846 | ||
| Tri | 0.457 | 0.336 | 0.267 | 0.299 | 0.365 | 0.242 | 0.382 | 0.406 | 0.444 | 0.892 | |
| VA | 0.630 | 0.431 | 0.435 | 0.542 | 0.584 | 0.436 | 0.465 | 0.380 | 0.612 | 0.373 | 0.919 |
| BI | CP | Comp | Compat | Custp | ES | Obs | PC | Rela | Tri | VA | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BI | |||||||||||
| CP | 0.607 | ||||||||||
| Comp | 0.567 | 0.326 | |||||||||
| Compat | 0.645 | 0.433 | 0.410 | ||||||||
| Custp | 0.767 | 0.496 | 0.477 | 0.589 | |||||||
| ES | 0.453 | 0.370 | 0.221 | 0.396 | 0.448 | ||||||
| Obs | 0.707 | 0.445 | 0.301 | 0.549 | 0.635 | 0.335 | |||||
| PC | 0.193 | 0.265 | 0.128 | 0.265 | 0.247 | 0.303 | 0.227 | ||||
| Rela | 0.699 | 0.463 | 0.485 | 0.532 | 0.611 | 0.474 | 0.569 | 0.311 | |||
| Tri | 0.457 | 0.336 | 0.267 | 0.299 | 0.365 | 0.242 | 0.382 | 0.406 | 0.444 | ||
| VA | 0.630 | 0.431 | 0.435 | 0.542 | 0.584 | 0.436 | 0.465 | 0.380 | 0.612 | 0.373 |
Note(s): BI = behavioral intention, CP = competitive pressure, CUST = customer pressure, ES = external support, PC = perceived cost, comp = complexity, Compat = compatibility, Tri = trialability, Obs = observability, Rela = relative advantage, VA = value alignment