HOW QRIS ECOSYSTEM BECAME INDONESIA’S ACCOUNT-BASED ALTERNATIVE TO CARD-CENTRIC NFC PAYMENTS
Published:
2026-09-26Downloads
Abstract
Indonesia’s account-based payment scheme, QRIS (expanded to QRIS Tap in 2025), faces competition from global card-centric wallets, prompting a strategic choice in payment architecture. Because standard technology-acceptance models overlook the geopolitical dimensions prevalent in Indonesian payment discourse, this study extends the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT2) with two novel demand-side constructs: Sovereignty Perception (salience of domestic control over payment rails and data) and Architecture Preference (favoring account-based over card-centric systems). Using partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM), the extended model was tested on 313 Indonesian digital-payment users and triangulated with qualitative interviews, content analysis, and comparative techno-economic analysis. The model explains significant variance in behavioral intention (R2 = 0.597) and use behavior (R2 = 0.439). Habit ( = 0.256) is the strongest driver of intention, followed by Architecture Preference ( = 0.227) and Sovereignty Perception ( = 0.184). These novel constructs outperform classical UTAUT2 antecedents. The non-significant effects of standard predictors (e.g., performance and effort expectancy) indicate a ceiling effect in a habituated market. Findings demonstrate that macro-level sovereignty logic yields micro-level behavioral consequences. Indonesian users actively favor the architecture itself rather than merely adopting available instruments. This research contributes to adoption theory by empirically linking national payment-sovereignty claims to individual adoption behavior.
Keywords:
QRIS Payment Sovereignty UTAUT2 PLS-SEM Account-Based PaymentsReferences
Abernathy, W. J., & Utterback, J. M. (1978). Patterns of industrial innovation. Technology Review, 80(7), 40–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(78)90041-3
Arthur, W. B. (1989). Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events. The Economic Journal, 99(394), 116. https://doi.org/10.2307/2234208
Bank Indonesia. (2024). Blueprint sistem pembayaran Indonesia 2030. Bank Indonesia. https://www.bi.go.id/id/publikasi/kajian/Documents/Blueprint-Sistem-Pembayaran-Indonesia-2030.pdf
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Cohen, M., & Rysman, M. (2013). Payment choice with consumer panel data. Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (3 (ed.); 3rd ed.). Sage.
Han, X., & Wang, L. (2021). Mobile payments and the incumbent curse of card-based systems. Course-Pack Article.
Henderson, R. M., & Clark, K. B. (1990). Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of Established Firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393549
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
Kala’Lembang, A., Sudarmiatin, Soetjipto, B. E., & Winarno, A. (2024). Understanding the adoption of digital payment in Indonesian SMEs using modified technology acceptance model. Journal of Social Economics Research, 11(2), 213–227. https://doi.org/10.18488/35.v11i2.3672
Limayem, M., Hirt, S. G., & Cheung, C. M. K. (2007). How habit limits the predictive power of intention: The case of information systems continuance. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 31(4), 705–737. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148817
Muchtar, E. H., Trianto, B., Maulana, I., Alim, M. N., Marasabessy, R. H., Hidayat, W., Junaedi, E., & Masrizal. (2024). Quick response code Indonesia standard (QRIS) E-payment adoption: customers perspective. Cogent Business and Management, 11(1), 2316044. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2316044
Rachmad, Y. E., Bakri, A. A., Nuraini, R., Nurdiani, T. W., & Kushariyadi. (2024). Application of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology method to analyze factors influencing the use of digital wallets in Indonesia. Jurnal Informasi Dan Teknologi, 6(1), 229–234.
Shimp, T. A., & Sharma, S. (1987). Consumer Ethnocentrism: Construction and Validation of the CETSCALE. Journal of Marketing Research, 24(3), 280–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378702400304
Teece, D. J. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy, 15(6), 285–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(86)90027-2
Teece, D. J. (2018). Profiting from innovation in the digital economy: Enabling technologies, standards, and licensing models in the wireless world. Research Policy, 47(8), 1367–1387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.01.015
United States Trade Representative. (2025). 2025 national trade estimate report on foreign trade barriers. https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/Press/Reports/2025NTE.pdf
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology1. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Izzat Alwi Alaydrus, Sahat
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
