Strategies for Cryptocurrency Adoption in
Contemporary Businesses
Section 1: Foundation of the Study
Introduction
Currency is an integral part of every civilized society. Throughout time, currency
has evolved from a bartering system with no set mediums of exchange to nationally
created, state-owned coins stamped in precious metals to paper notes representing coins
made of precious metals (Bridel, 2018). Paper notes, however, are also evolving as
several countries have replaced paper with durable polymer notes to detract from
counterfeiting and improve security and durability (Mikulicova et al., 2019). Physical or
fiat currency itself, however, is quickly becoming obscure. Global trends show increasing
use of electronic currency in the form of debit and credit cards as well as virtual or
cryptocurrency such as Bitcoin. This trend seems set to continue with reasonable
expectations from industry experts expressing beliefs that physical money will eventually
be replaced entirely with electronic currency (Roussou et al., 2019). The challenge to
business leaders, however, is their ability to effectively respond with business strategies
that can accommodate the rapid evolution to electronic currency that is being fueled by
sophisticated and complex technologies.
Background
The origin of currency exists between two philosophies that claim dichotomous
viewpoints of whether money emerged from a trust basis or an authoritative foundation.
The origin of the trust basis was founded by economist Carl Menger (Bridel, 2018;
Menger, 1871). According to Menger’s theory, the value of any currency hinges on the
inherent value of the currency that people are willing to accept in exchange for a certain
commodity (Bridel, 2018; Menger, 1871). This acceptance, however, will never be
attained by all individuals of a group at the same time (Bridel, 2018; Menger, 1871). The
notion of an indirect exchange is a gradual process discovered first by a few members of
a group and then imitated by others as they observe and confirm the success with
currency and obtain the desired commodities (Bridel, 2018; Menger, 1871). According to
the authoritative viewpoint, fiat currency such as coins or paper originate with a
government and bear the markings that are representative of the ruling faction (Bridel,
2018). Authoritative currency is commonly created out of precious metals such as gold,
silver, or copper, and the government controls the creation of this currency (Bridel,
2018). This currency is widely accepted and trusted by the collective group of a society to
represent a contract between two parties (Bridel, 2018). In modern-day, authoritative or
national currency is the most prevalent form of currency used worldwide, with exchange
processes undertaken by the respective central banks to convert currencies of another
country so that individuals can effectively buy and sell within established national
borders.
In 2009, the world’s first decentralized alternative currency known as Bitcoin was
created by Satoshi Nakamoto (Didenko & Buckley, 2019; Nguyen et al., 2018; Raju et
al., 2018). The goal of Nakamoto was to establish an alternative to national,
statecontrolled currencies, provide new opportunities for individuals to preserve wealth
by reducing centralized banking fees, and provide alternative methods for transferring or
storing monetary value (Didenko & Buckley, 2019). As of 2019, there were over 2,000
new, privately held, and controlled virtual currencies (Didenko & Buckley, 2019), which
are giving rise to both economic and business concerns worldwide. The slow regulatory
responses have largely provided only consumer warnings and penalties for illegal
activities associated with the currency (Didenko & Buckley, 2019). Lacking are the
sophisticated dialogues and comprehensive analyses regarding how business leaders can
exploit cryptocurrencies to expand trading and business growth. As such, the potential
benefits that virtual currencies can lend to business strategies remains obscured.
Problem Statement
In 2017, there were approximately 606 million Bitcoin transactions occurring
daily worth nearly $1.9 billion (Foley et al., 2019). Illegal users of Bitcoin accounted for
46% of all transactions or approximately 280 million transactions, versus legal users that
accounted for 54% or approximately 326 million transactions (Foley et al., 2019). The
general business problem is that although federal law enforcement agencies are
continually shutting down illicit markets, sophisticated technology permits anonymous,
untaxable, and untraceable exchanges, leading to volatilities and unfair competitive
advantages for businesses. The specific business problem is that some business leaders
lack strategies to respond to the alternative payment concerns perpetuated by
cryptocurrency markets.
Purpose Statement
The purpose of this qualitative, multiple-case study was to explore the strategies
that business leaders use to respond to the alternative payment concerns perpetuated by
cryptocurrency markets. The targeted population consisted of six business leaders in the
United States who developed successful strategies to respond to the alternative payment
concerns perpetuated by cryptocurrency markets. The results of this study may invoke
social change by providing insight and information regarding the growing illegal and
immoral uses of cryptocurrencies that are harming society globally so that business
leaders can use their power and influence financially as well as politically to support
economic reform and regulation of the currency. This study may also catalyze social
change by encouraging more business leaders to adopt cryptocurrency as a viable
alternative payment method so that the world’s most disenfranchised, impoverished, and
credit-challenged individuals can be afforded the access to goods and services that they
so desperately need.
Nature of the Study
I selected the qualitative research methodology for this study because this method
uses data to provide complex textual descriptions regarding how the social lives of human
beings are impacted by a particular phenomenon (see Saunders et al., 2015). In contrast, a
quantitative study was deemed inappropriate for this research effort because quantitative
researchers examine variables’ statistical characteristics or relationships that can be
applied to a broader population by proving or disproving proposed hypotheses (Saunders
et al., 2015). A mixed-method study was also deemed inappropriate because this method
incorporates both qualitative and quantitative data and hypothesis testing between two or
more variables (Saunders et al., 2015). Since this study’s purpose does not require
examining variables’ characteristics or statistical relationships, the qualitative method
was deemed most appropriate.
I selected a multiple-case study as the qualitative design over an ethnological,
phenomenological, or narrative design because the foundation of the multiple-case design
supports the investigation of an activity, event, process, or individuals by using various
types of data and sources to obtain a profound understanding (Yin, 2018). The benefits of
using a multiple-case study over a single-case study include the ability to analyze data
from both an individual case and across several cases to determine the differences and
similarities among the cases (Yin, 2018). Researchers are therefore provided more robust
and reliable conclusions that are far greater than those obtained from a single case (Yin,
2018). The foundation of the ethnographical design emanates from cultural anthropology,
where researchers immerse themselves within a culture (Marshall & Rossman, 2016). A
phenomenological design was not selected for this study because there was not an interest
in exploring the cultural aspects of this phenomenon. A narrative design is rooted in
various social and humanities disciplines. It includes the reconstruction and retelling of
experiences or events by individuals through personal stories, usually in a chronological
context (Saunders et al., 2015). A narrative design was also not selected for this study
because it was not an effective design to answer the research question for this study.
Research Question
What strategies do business leaders use to address the alternative payment
concerns perpetuated by cryptocurrency markets?
Interview Questions
1. How did you develop the strategies to use cryptocurrency for the settlement
of business transactions?
2. What strategies did you implement to counteract centralized banking system
barriers (i.e., fees and creditworthiness determination) so that all your target
markets can solicit your company for needed goods and services?
3. What key obstacles did you face in the process of adopting cryptocurrency
transactions as a payment method?
4. How did you address and overcome the key barriers to establishing
cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method?
5. How can you, as a business leader, assess the effectiveness of the strategies
your organization developed to address the alternative payment concerns
perpetuated by cryptocurrency markets?
6. What technological safeguards do you use to prohibit illegal cryptocurrency
transactions?
7. What other information would you like to add regarding the strategies that
your organization uses to address the alternative payment concerns
perpetuated by cryptocurrency markets?
8. Is there anything further information that you would like to add at this time?
Conceptual Framework
In this study, I used the diffusion of innovation theory as the conceptual
framework, which was developed by E. M. Rogers in 1962 (Rogers, 1962). The
inauguration of this theory began in the communication discipline to elucidate, over time,
how a concept, idea, or novel product gains momentum and rapidly disperses through a
collective population or communal system (Rogers, 1962). The result of this diffusion is
that people, as part of more extensive social systems, formally adopt an innovative idea,
behavior, or product (Min et al., 2019; Presthus & O’Malley, 2017; Rogers, 1962). By
viewing business leaders ’adoption behaviors of cryptocurrencies through the lens of the
diffusion of innovation theory, I expected to identify the alternative payment concerns
perpetuated by cryptocurrency markets, so that strategy pathways are facilitated for
legitimate business leaders.
As applied to this study, the diffusion of innovation theory holds that I expected
that an exploration of the adoption of cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method
would reveal the strategies that influenced business leaders to adopt the payment method
since the proclamation of Bitcoin’s legal status in 2013 (Bamert et al., 2013) by the
United States Treasury. By using the information derived from using the diffusion of
innovation theory, business leaders who were not innovators or early adopters may be
enlightened by the outcomes of early adoption to develop strategies that will assist in the
future adoption of cryptocurrencies while addressing the concerns as a legitimate
payment option for goods and services.
Operational Definitions
•Blockchain: A distributed, public record of all of the cryptocurrency transactions
that have been executed. The Blockchain only lists the alphanumeric identifier of
the cryptocurrency. The owner’s name and other personal information are not
disclosed (Raju et al., 2018).
•Cryptocurrency: Cryptocurrency is digital or virtual money that does not have a
physical representation, such as a paper bill, metal coin, or plastic card.
Cryptocurrency only exists on the Internet and is represented by a long series of
alpha and numeric characters that are used for the exchange of goods and services
(Broseus et al., 2016).
•Dark Web: The Dark Web is a network of untraceable, anonymous online activity
and websites on the Internet. It cannot be found using conventional Internet
search engines, and specific software is needed for access (Shillito, 2019).
•Decentralized: In the cryptocurrency system, there are no government-regulated,
centralized banks. Owners are charged with safeguarding their own money,
which is usually kept on an encrypted thumb drive (Spithoven, 2019).
•E-Commerce: E-Commerce is another word for e-business or commercial
transactions conducted electronically on the Internet (McCallum, 2015).
Assumptions, Limitations, and Delimitations
Assumptions
Assumptions function as the basic foundation of all research efforts (Leedy &
Ormrod, 2005). Assumptions consist of the suppositions made by the researcher that
cannot be substantiated by facts or other evidentiary support (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2019).
The processes and techniques exercised by the researcher are based on inductive
reasoning about the theoretical framework and the researcher’s own experience in
gathering and analyzing data (Yin, 2018). The research contained in this multiple-case
study was the product of the values of the researcher. My first assumption was that the
participants have the prerequisite knowledge about cryptocurrency and why it was
adopted as an alternative payment method for their particular company. The second
assumption was that the formulation of the interview questions was appropriate to
collecting informative responses in relation to the research question. My third assumption
was related to the limited use of cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method.
Specifically, the information collected from the selected business leaders would be
sufficient and yield enough in-depth information about cryptocurrency strategies to
answer the research question.
Limitations
Limitations are characterized as possible vulnerabilities or weaknesses that are
commonly beyond the researcher’s control that may affect the study design, results, and
ultimately, conclusions (Theofanidis & Fountouki, 2018). The first limitation identified
was that I had to rely on the interview responses provided by the business leaders
identified for this study. Much of the information related to the business decision to adopt
cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method was typically part of internal meetings,
was considered business-sensitive information, and was not publicly distributed; thus,
information pertaining to business strategies regarding the acceptance of cryptocurrency
could not be verified by other documentation beyond the data collected by interviews.
The second limitation identified was the limited number of businesses that currently
accept cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method. Because this currency is
considered cutting-edge technology and not considered mainstream, there was a limited
number of business leaders that could be interviewed for this study.
Delimitations
Delimitations are defined as limitations consciously set by the researchers
themselves (Leedy & Ormrod, 2019; Theofanidis & Fountouki, 2018). Researchers
decide to set boundaries or limits with their study so that the purpose and objectives do
not become unachievable (Theofanidis & Fountouki, 2018). In this study, there were
three delimitations established. The first was that the study only pertained to businesses
within the United States and excluded any foreign businesses. Second, the business
strategies pertained only to legitimate and legal business endeavors. Cryptocurrency is
widely used to purchase goods and services illegally on the Dark Web (Shillito, 2019),
but those businesses were excluded from this study due to their ethical nature and risk to
the researcher. The third delimitation was that the study was limited to only business
strategies and concerns for cryptocurrency adoption even though business leaders may
have other concerns regarding security, regulation, availability, or volatility of the
currency.
Significance of the Study
The findings from this qualitative study can be used by business leaders to
develop strategies for addressing alternative payment concerns perpetuated by
cryptocurrency markets. Business leaders can avoid the barriers created by centralized
banking systems, such as exorbitant fees and creditworthiness, by offering payment
options using cryptocurrencies and providing alternative methods for transferring or
storing monetary value (Didenko & Buckley, 2019) that could potentially widen their
consumer base, increase revenue, and increase business performance.
The results of this study may invoke social change by educating business leaders
regarding the diverse uses of cryptocurrencies that are influencing global economies and
potentially harming society. Business leaders can use the information presented in this
study and, along with their power and influence, financially and politically to support
global economic reform for cryptocurrencies. The information derived from this study
illuminated the growing phenomenon of the Dark Web and associated shadow economies
(Shillito, 2019), which is harming society, and the need for further government action to
impede its expanded influence. Finally, the results of this study may also catalyze social
change by encouraging more business leaders to adopt cryptocurrency as an alternative
payment method so that the world’s most disenfranchised, impoverished, and credit
challenged individuals who were disqualified for credit cards keep more of their earnings,
and can be afforded access to goods and services (DeVries, 2016; McCallum, 2015) that
they so desperately need.
A Review of the Professional and Academic Literature
In this literature review, I examined the technical phenomenon of cryptocurrency,
its origins, growth in popularity worldwide, cryptocurrency advantages and
disadvantages, and the lack of business strategies regarding the acceptance of
cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method. The diffusion of innovation theory
served as the lens for my academic study into the global adoption of cryptocurrency as an
alternative payment method, as well as the associated business strategies for utilizing this
leading-edge technology in today’s economy.
Search Tactics, Content, and Organization of Literature Review
The purpose of this study was to explore the strategies that business leaders use to
respond to the alternative payment concerns perpetuated by cryptocurrency markets. The
research question—What strategies do business leaders use to address the alternative
payment concerns perpetuated by cryptocurrency markets? —served as a compass to
ensure that the search tactics and content selected for this literature review were pertinent
and relevant to the foundational basis of the study. The literature review is organized as
follows: (a) Introduction to Cryptocurrency, (b) Conceptual Framework: The Diffusion of
Innovation Theory, (c) Alternate Theories, (d) Adoption of Cryptocurrency in the United
States, and (e) Companies, Consumers, and Cryptocurrency. The number of resources
reviewed demonstrated the profundity of research by subject and methodology. There
were 27 articles that represented conceptual papers either from scholarly journals or
professional conferences, nine empirical studies, eight qualitative studies, three seminal
books, one government publication, and one corporate publication (see Table 1). Since
the topic of business strategies involving cryptocurrency is at the forefront of innovative
and contemporary business issues, the literature review is as comprehensive as possible,
provided the very recent emergence of this complex technology.
Table 1. L Review Sources by Type and Publication Date
Literature Review Sources by Type and Publication Date
Sources Total Percentage of
peerreviewed
resources
Between 2017
and 2021
Percentage of
current resources
Peer-reviewed sources
Government, seminal, or
other nonpeer-reviewed
sources
47
5
90.4% 31 60.7%
Total 52 90.4% 31 60.7%
The primary research databases used to find articles were ABI/INFORM, Emerald,
ProQuest Central, and SAGE Premier. Primary keywords searched included
cryptocurrency, Bitcoin, alternative payment methods, virtual currency, Blockchain,
ebusiness, Dark Web, money laundering, FinCEN, terrorist financing, and diffusion of
innovation.
Introduction to Cryptocurrency
Cryptocurrency is a new concept of money discovered in 2008-2009 by Satoshi
Nakamoto that addresses many of the risks associated with traditional currency (Didenko
& Buckley, 2019; Nguyen et al., 2018; Raju et al., 2018). In a qualitative study conducted
by Raju et al. (2018), the researchers defined cryptocurrency as a virtual, Internet-based
system of currency exchange that uses a pseudo-anonymous, alphanumeric string of
letters and numbers for identification. Cryptocurrency can be purchased at a machine that
resembles an automated teller machine (ATM), or it can be purchased online with any
number of cryptocurrency exchanges or peer-to-peer directly with individuals (Dyson et
al., 2018). Once users purchase the cryptocurrency, they are provided with the unique
alphanumeric address (i.e., a129vb34tk89dsp14mnwty6554gy) that can be used to
perform exchanges for goods and services. Only the anonymous cryptocurrency address
is recorded on a public ledger called the Blockchain (Suyambu et al., 2020), and no other
customer attributes are stored. The goal of the Blockchain is to ensure that double
spending does not occur and to preserve the privacy and anonymity of the users
(Suyambu et al., 2020), which has introduced a completely novel and technological way
to perform commercial settlements.
Many technical laymen to the world of virtual currency compare the
cryptocurrency address to a prepaid credit card number. The exception is that a plastic
card is not issued, and a central banking system does not insure the currency. According
to research conducted by Nguyen et al. (2018), this unfettered nature makes
cryptocurrency extremely volatile and financially risky. Users are responsible for
safeguarding the address with an access code known as a wallet seed key, which is a
12word phrase. Cryptocurrency addresses cannot be used for transactions without a
wallet seed key. If the wallet seed is forgotten or lost, the currency becomes worthless as
there is no way to reset the wallet seed key or obtain a new one.
While Bitcoin is the most popular cryptocurrency on the market, there have been
over 45 different cryptocurrencies that have had initial coin offerings (ICO) to raise
capital (Liebau & Schueffel, 2019). Cryptocurrency is traded on the futures market, so it
is subject to differing daily values, gains, and losses (Nguyen et al., 2018). Liebau and
Schueffel (2019) found that 80% of all ICOs were scams, which mainly resulted from the
unregulated process, and the remaining 20% incurred high failure rates. While most
investors hope for the stunning performance experienced by Bitcoin, investing in
cryptocurrency remains a very volatile and risky endeavor.
The Ecosystem and Self-Regulation of Cryptocurrency
The ideology behind the invention of cryptocurrency was to permit people to
transact directly with each other without the costs, delays, and regulations of a third party
(Spithoven, 2019). According to Spithoven (2019), the cryptocurrency ecosystem is
comprised of the initiators, the codebase, programmers, miners, middlemen, customers,
and governments. The initiators are the organizations behind the venture capital funding
to create a cryptocurrency (Spithoven, 2019). These organizations ’leaders also influence
governance, lobby politicians, and have many personal interests in non-profit
organizations that fund programmers and form cryptocurrency communities of interest
(Spithoven, 2019). This concept of self-regulation, however innovative, may not inspire
the confidence needed to attract consumers unless it is performed with transparency.
The codebase is the software behind the virtual cryptocurrency (Spithoven, 2019).
Many are unaware that the software behind Bitcoin is very common and is based on an
open-source license (Spithoven, 2019). The decentralized public settlement ledgers,
known as Blockchains, tout efficiency by reducing transaction costs (Spithoven, 2019).
The Blockchain code and algorithms also set the rules for transactions, hash protocols,
block attributes, and consensus mechanisms (Spithoven, 2019), which may provide the
security to attract more consumers.
The programmers centrally coordinate the Bitcoin protocol and regulate the
cryptocurrency through a series of decisions regarding forking and blocking transactions
from specific currency addresses (Spithoven, 2019; Suyambu et al., 2020). The core
programmers contribute to the codebase and interact with commenters who propose
changes to the codebase (Spithoven, 2019). Miners constitute the electronic payment
network that often belongs to a pool of miners that charges a membership fee (Spithoven,
2019). The network security surrounding the payments is complex and can require high
investments from miner companies (Spithoven, 2019; Suyambu et al., 2020) which are
further exacerbated by the high costs of electricity and computer equipment.
Although the ideology behind cryptocurrencies is to eliminate third-party
involvement in transactions, an entire set of intermediaries exist that perform processing
and financial services (Spithoven, 2019). Even the highly criticized traditional centralized
banking system is also interwoven into the mix of middlemen because cryptocurrencies
are listed and traded on public stock exchanges. Customers also fuel the dynamics of
virtual currencies as their behaviors, level of risk, and willingness to adopt radically new
concepts in currency causes vast fluctuations in the value of cryptocurrencies (Spithoven,
2019); therefore, while the seminal ideology behind cryptocurrency was to ultimately
abolish middleman transactions and related fees to preserve wealth for customers, modern
commercial, financial systems are not yet equipped to entirely operate without third party
involvement.
Government leaders are overwhelmed by the popularity of cryptocurrencies and
the Blockchain, and even though they are struggling with how to regulate the currency,
they cannot outright forbid it for fear of stifling innovation (Spithoven, 2019). Although
governments differ from country to county, politicians worldwide are wary of the crime
surrounding cryptocurrencies and desire to protect consumers. They are also aware of the
dangers that cryptocurrencies pose to traditional financial infrastructures and taxation
systems (Spithoven, 2019; Stratiev, 2018). Still, in the United States, federal regulations
are not focused on cryptocurrencies, which means that law enforcement is a challenge.
The Blockchain
A major criticism of the current traditional banking system is the exorbitant length
of time for transactions to reach a settlement between concerned parties. According to
George et al. (2019), traditional banking transactions require that both the payor and
payee’s bank accounts be updated to reflect transactions and often involve intermediaries
such as Paypal. This process usually takes several days and allows for the transactions to
be tampered with and changed (Raju et al., 2018) by hackers and other cybercriminals.
Shillito (2019) stated that legitimate businesses and organizations are aware of these
vulnerabilities; thus, several have adopted Blockchain as a more secure way of banking.
The Blockchain is a publicly distributed ledger of all of the cryptocurrency
transactions that have taken place (Raju et al., 2018; Suyambu et al., 2020).
Organizations called miners exist to record cryptocurrency transactions and place them
on the Blockchain (Raju et al., 2018). The first miner to enter the transactions onto the
Blockchain receives a fee for this service. This process happens at lightning speed so that
the Blockchain is continuously updated in real-time to prevent double or fraudulent
purchases. If a miner in the network attempts to reverse or tamper with a cryptocurrency
transaction, they forfeit their portion of the transaction and all associated fees (Raju et al.,
2018). In addition, their actions are made publicly known to the other miners in the
network (Raju et al., 2018). Illegitimate or illegal organizations use Blockchain for the
same reasons as well and exploit cryptocurrencies’ anonymity features to avoid law
enforcement (Shillito, 2019). This side of the Blockchain has perpetuated a shadow
economy on the portion of the Internet known as the Dark Web (Shillito, 2019).
Security and Cryptocurrency
Studies performed by Nguyen et al. (2018), Raju et al. (2018), and Shillito (2019),
found that decentralized cryptocurrency networks intentionally avoid regulated,
centralized banking systems. Even though cryptocurrency users value their anonymity
and technological security, they have to rely on the Blockchain to thwart fraud and keep
people honest. The Blockchain allows transaction partners, miners, and customers to
publicly observe each other, thus maintaining a level of trust among all (George et al.,
2019). Whether the marketplace networks are for legal or illegal exchanges, the
reconciliation speed of transactions and the restricted one-way operations lower the risk
for transaction fraud (Raju et al., 2018). Speed, however, is just one advantage that the
Blockchain has over conventional financial institutions for daily practical use that is
causing them to fall behind market pace.
The Blockchain has also proven to be more secure than traditional banks, and the
multilevel encryption of cryptocurrency makes it technologically challenging to hack.
This security is further enhanced by the Proof of State concept, whereby a participant in
the Blockchain cannot attempt to settle or mine any cryptocurrency transaction that is
more than its current total worth (Raju et al., 2018). By comparing this concept to a line
of credit in traditional banking, a customer cannot take out a loan for more money than
has previously been approved. Similarly, a participant in the Blockchain cannot attempt
to settle a transaction for more currency than it currently holds on the network (Raju et
al., 2018). This security feature further prevents participants from fraudulent activities on
the network. Roussou et al. (2019) unequivocally concur and maintain that managers
need to build their policies regarding transactions in digital currencies on the basis of
security.
Advantages of Cryptocurrency
Cryptocurrency is considered to be the transformative and disruptive technology
to challenge the historical financial systems that have depleted the wealth of the most
impoverished individuals (DeVries, 2016). Since no middleman or brick and mortar
banks are necessary, individuals can use Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies using just
their mobile phones. Unlike traditional credit cards, cryptocurrencies also do not require
costly intermediaries prior to bank settlement (Amanzholova & Pavel, 2018). Bitcoin and
other cryptocurrencies permit almost anyone to participate in a contemporary economy,
which is advantageous to the millions of people that cannot qualify for credit cards or
other lines of credit (McCallum, 2015). The stark reality of cash-basis of exchange for
everything is a horrifying and unsympathetic simple formula: no cash, no goods, no
services, no anything. A cash-basis economy isolates individuals from e-commerce and
detracts from the financial livelihoods of the world’s most impoverished individuals as
centralized banks and payment companies charge staggering fees – up to 10% for
international money transfers (McCallum, 2015). The lower settlement fees imposed by
Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies help everyone, but especially disenfranchised
individuals who were disqualified for credit cards, keep more of their earnings
(McCallum, 2015). This advantage is also translated into value for businesses that desire
prompt settlements and lower fees (DeVries, 2016), which is passed on to the consumer
in the form of lower prices for goods and services.
Another advantage is that cryptocurrency permits extremely small micropayments
– currently, to the eighth decimal point (McCallum, 2015). These minuscule payments
can be used in a number of innovative ways. For example, McCallum (2015) presented
the idea to charge originators of spam messages a fraction of a Bitcoin for each message
that is sent over the Internet. On the surface, this seems like an insignificant amount, but
when multiplied by the millions of spam messages sent daily, the total fees become
significant, thus deterring spammers on the Internet (McCallum, 2015).
Stegaroiu (2018) explained that the settlement process conducted on the
Blockchain is transparent and available to the public and that Bitcoin is cryptographically
safe, meaning that bad actors cannot manipulate it. Amanzholova and Pavel (2018) added
that another notable strength of cryptocurrency is the anonymity associated with the
currency which also subsequently contributes to the ability to avoid legal tax liabilities.
This advantage is a resounding compliment to the potential profitability of
cryptocurrencies as a speculative financial investment, as many investors have made high
returns on cryptocurrency investments (Amanzholova & Pavel, 2018).
Disadvantages of Cryptocurrency
Cryptocurrencies also have associated threats and inherent risks. Amanzholova
and Pavel (2018) stated that cryptocurrencies can be used for criminal tax evasion and are
actively used for the purchase and sale of illegal goods and services primarily through
shadow economies thriving in markets facilitated by the Darknet (Troeller, 2016). The
lack of mainstream adoption and attractiveness to law-abiding citizens may be a direct
result of the currency’s widespread and continued use by nefarious individuals (Troeller,
2016). Cryptocurrency transactions are also irreversible, so if an error is made in the
payment, the Blockchain prohibits any adjustments (Amanzholova & Pavel, 2018;
Stegaroiu, 2018). Currency users are also susceptible to cyber fraud and hacking
(Amanzholova & Pavel, 2018). Subsequently, the anonymity associated with the currency
makes these crimes nearly impossible to prosecute.
Due to the anonymous nature of cryptocurrency, it is impossible to fully quantify
the extent of criminal activities using traditional law enforcement tactics and strategies.
The international law enforcement community is perplexed by the growing number of
illegal activities propagated by cryptocurrencies and the inability to prosecute the
offenders because of the complexity of such operating environments as the Darknet
(Tziakouris, 2018). Although cryptocurrencies are a disruptive technology that enables
criminals to facilitate crimes easily, the Blockchain ledger is a permanent record of all
illegal activities and can aid investigations via analysis and data extraction (Tziakouris,
2018). Most recently, experts have managed to de-anonymize certain attributes of the
popular Bitcoin, which has caused a shift to other cryptocurrencies such as Ethereum,
Dash, Monero, Verge, and Zcash that are more anonymous (Tziakouris, 2018).
Tziakouris (2018) maintained that cryptocurrencies continue to be widely used for
payments for illegal goods and services such as malware attack ransoms, weapons, child
pornography, drugs, counterfeit documents, and stolen antiquities. Extremist groups and
terror organizations also use cryptocurrencies to crowd-fund their operations (Tziakouris,
2018). Ultimately, cryptocurrency is an alluring phenomenon for tech-savvy criminals.
Additional disadvantages include the technical complexity and sophistication of
cryptocurrency. As such, most people have a general lack of knowledge and
understanding of virtual currency (Stegaroiu, 2018). Compared to fiat currency, there are
also relatively few legitimate companies accepting Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies as
payment, even though that number is growing. Coupled with the past market volatility
and instability of the Bitcoin futures market, many people and businesses chose to pause
regarding future cryptocurrency investments (Stegaroiu, 2018). Finally, cryptocurrency
can be created by anyone with the proper technical skillset, and exchanges can be carried
out by licensed and unlicensed exchange offices (Amanzholova & Pavel, 2018). The
plethora of disadvantages and how to overcome them continue to discourage adoption by
the masses and subsequently the widespread use within businesses today.
The Diffusion of Innovation Theory
Most monetary theories do not emphasize the importance of technological
advancement and innovation (Papadopoulos, 2015). According to Papadopoulos (2015),
technological innovation is often only minimally considered as a factor in a monetary
system. Innovation, however, was the driving force behind the creation of cryptocurrency
(Spithoven, 2019), and thus, the diffusion of innovation theory was an appropriate lens
for this study. The diffusion of innovation (DOI) theory was developed by E. M. Rogers
at the University of New Mexico in 1962 (Rogers, 1962). The inauguration of this theory
began in the communications discipline to elucidate, over time, how a concept, idea, or
novel product attaches itself, gains momentum, and rapidly disperses through a collective
population or communal system (Rogers, 1962). The result of this diffusion is that
people, as part of more extensive social systems, formally adopt an innovative idea,
behavior, or product (Min et al., 2019; Presthus & O’Malley, 2017; Rogers, 1962;
Roussou et al., 2019). The relevance of the diffusion of innovation theory to this study
was that it is the foundational premise to explain business leaders ’behaviors and
strategies to adopt cryptocurrencies as an alternative payment method in the modern
global economy.
The diffusion of innovation theory consists of four elements (a) innovation, (b)
communication through channels, (c) time, and (d) members of a social system, and five
groups of people (a) innovators, (b) early adopters, (c) early majority, (d) late majority,
and (e) laggards (Presthus & O’Malley, 2017). According to E. M. Rogers, the theory’s
author, the innovators and early adopters will welcome innovation, such as a new
technology like Bitcoin, and influence others (early majority, late majority, and laggards)
to adopt later (Presthus & O’Malley, 2017). Methods of communication, subjective
opinions, the amalgam of urban to rural populations within a larger population, level of
education, and the degree of industrialization and economic development are also
important factors that impact how quickly the diffusion occurs (Rogers, 1962). While the
diffusion of innovation theory has its complexities, once mastered, the theory is quite
effective in promoting the adoption of new products.
In addition to the four elements of the diffusion of innovation theory, Rogers
(1995) later pinpointed five constructs that serve as the catalyst for the diffusion of
innovation: (a) relative advantage, (b) compatibility with existing values and practices,
(c) complexity, (d) trialability, and (e) observability, which he termed the Innovation
Decision Process Model (IDPM) (Figure 1). Although the IDPM is constructed on the
theory of communication, it is often associated with the diffusion of innovation theory as
a conjunctive element (Roussou et al., 2019). According to the IDPM, potential groups of
adopters evaluate an innovation using the innovation attributes as a foundation for their
decision to embrace or reject the innovation (Seligman, 2006).
Diffusion of Innovation and Modern Strategies
In the quantitative study conducted by Roussou et al. (2019), the researchers
examined the factors that influence commercial customers to adopt digital currencies
using the diffusion of innovation and the technology acceptance model as a theoretical
basis. In the study, 254 respondents were surveyed globally using an online questionnaire
that probed their attitudes and future prospects of digital currencies. A total of 198
independent variables were identified, but due to potential issues of under-identification
using the structural equation model, only 19 of 198 independent variables were used to
examine their effect on the dependent variable (Roussou et al., 2019). The results derived
from the survey data illustrated that the respondents believed that security was the most
significant factor affecting their decision to adopt digital currencies as an alternative
payment method for commercial transactions, followed by perceived usefulness (Roussou
et al., 2019).
The study conducted by Roussou et al. (2019) further supported studies by Chau
and Hu (2002) and Chismar and Wiley-Patton (2003) using the closely related technology
acceptance method (TAM) that confirmed that usability was not a significant factor
regarding new technology adoption. Also, in the studies conducted by Chau and Hu
(2002) and Chismar and Wiley-Patton (2003), researchers found that early adopters felt
that an understanding of the technology was the most meaningful factor for adoption.
These studies, coupled with Roussou et al.’s. (2019) research based on DOI demonstrated
that early adopters were not heavily reliant on the simplicity and ease of use of new
technology to spur adoption. Other factors such as security ranked far higher for
commercial end-users to adopt the new innovations of digital currencies (Roussou et al.,
2019).
The quantitative study conducted by Kijek et al. (2020) can be used to illustrate
the impact that certain variables have on the rate of diffusion of technology products, as
suggested in the seminal work of Rogers (1962). Kijek et al. (2020) focused on the
influence of social media as a variable on millennials as early adopters regarding
purchasing new and innovative technological goods and services. Using a research model
grounded in the diffusion of innovation theory, the researchers proposed several
hypotheses concerning the power of social media on millennials ’availability of
information on innovative products and whether or not social media had a positive effect
on purchasing innovative products. This study demonstrates the type of modern social
strategies, such as social media campaigns, that business leaders may need to adopt to
further the acceptance of cryptocurrencies as a mainstream alternative payment method
rather than an anonymous phenomenon associated with illicit markets.
Kijek et al. (2020) used seven latent variables: information availability,
convenience, habit, adventure, social media innovative product browsing, social media
innovative product information sharing, and innovative product purchase intention.
Questionnaires using a 5-point Likert scale were distributed to 315 respondents in three
Polish universities (Kijek et al., 2020). The results were calculated using the chi-square
model and indicated that 6 of the 7 latent variables had a positive and significant effect on
millennials ’purchasing of innovative products (Kijek et al., 2020). Contrary to the studies
conducted by Chau and Hu (2002) and Chismar and Wiley-Patton (2003), in this study,
information availability to promote overall understanding was the only variable that did
not have a significant correlation on innovative product browsing (Kijek et al., 2020).
Kijek et al. (2020) concluded that if business leaders and product managers want to
stimulate millennials as early adopters to engage with innovative products, such as
cryptocurrency, they must take steps to fulfill the motives represented by the six latent
variables that proved to have a positive and significant impact on purchasing behavior of
millennials.
Kijek et al. (2020) contended that several forms of Internet communication should
be employed, such as blogs and online reviews, to stimulate the enticements of the
elements of convenience, habit, adventure, and social media innovative product browsing
for the early majority population of innovation adoption (Kijek et al., 2020). By giving
consumers a venue to search and share experiences, they can connect with others to
satisfy their purchasing motives (Kijek et al., 2020). As such, the early adopters may have
significant influence over the early and latent majorities by using technology such as the
Internet to invoke, encourage, and enhance the diffusion of innovation. Kijek et al.
demonstrated that the power of social media has proven to have an influence on specific
age groups, such as millennials as early adopters, to embrace innovative alternative
payment methods such as Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies and may be a basis for
further business strategies to popularize the currency.
Wonglimpiyarat and Yuberk (2005) also explored the entire lifecycle of Roger’s
innovation diffusion theory. In their paper, 53 research and development projects from
two major research funding organizations in Thailand were used to examine the initial
development stages of new ideas through the final diffusion or commercialization stage.
Wonglimpiyarat and Yuberk found that only 10 out of 53 projects (19%) successfully
made it to diffusion (commercialization). All of the 43 other projects (81%) failed to
make it to the commercialization stage due mainly to the extent of the change agents ’
promotion efforts. Wonglimpiyarat and Yuberk demonstrated that the innovation of
diffusion followed an S-curve and that demands for technological innovations are not
overwhelming for projects that did not have significant marketing efforts. The high
demand for the ten successful innovations resulted from intensive marketing campaigns
and effective linkages with industries, thus supporting the need for modern strategies for
successful adoptions of new innovations and technology.
The Diffusion of Innovation Theory and Cryptocurrency
The proclamation of Bitcoin’s legal status by the United States Treasury began in
2013 (Bamert et al., 2013). The early adopters served as paradigm shifters within the
economy and predicted visionary advantages to the cryptocurrency and its rapid and
secure settlement process using Blockchain technology (Harris & Wonglimpiyarat,
2019). These early adopters mentioned such concepts as lending and currency exchange,
as well as real estate, diamond mining, stock trading, hospital operations, and digital
content distribution (Harris & Wonglimpiyarat, 2019). The application of the currency by
early adopters, however, has since extended to many more markets, including both
legitimate and illegal commercial environments.
Within the small-scale qualitative study conducted by Presthus and O’Malley
(2017), the researchers discussed the diffusion of innovation theory as the basis for the
enthusiasm and reluctance regarding the adoption of Bitcoin as a digital currency.
According to Presthus and O’Malley, the profile of the average Bitcoin user is 32.1 years
of age, male (95.2%), full-time employment (44.7%), non-religious (61.8%) and a
libertarian political association (44.3%). Most Bitcoin early adopters embraced the
cryptocurrency out of technical curiosity and not by the potential monetary gain (Presthus
& O’Malley, 2017). The major deterrents, according to Presthus and O’Malley, for the
non-users of Bitcoin were the switching costs between fiat currency and Bitcoin and the
perceived non-value of using the currency. Although this study was very small-scale in
nature, Presthus and O’Malley demonstrated the need for a further in-depth study
demonstrating Bitcoin’s perceived advantages and disadvantages for individuals to make
an educated decision about the innovative currency.
Diffusion of Innovation and the Global Adoption of Cryptocurrency
Cryptocurrency adoption continues to propagate globally, but more than anecdotal
evidence is needed to objectively determine what variables impact the rates of adoption
around the world. In a quantitative study, Reddick et al. (2019) examined the factors that
influenced Blockchain adoption at the national government level using the diffusion of
innovation theory as a theoretical framework. The researchers reviewed Blockchain
initiatives within 213 countries globally and found that only 40 had instigated such
initiatives proving that global adoption of the technology is still very limited. These
results provide insight regarding the likelihood of the continuation of Blockchain
initiatives, which may influence business leaders to consider the initial or continued
adoption of the Blockchain and cryptocurrency.
Reddick et al. (2019) used the diffusion of innovation theory to explain the
elements leading to the Blockchain initiatives and their level of influence at the national
government level. Reddick et al. investigated the five adoption categories within the
diffusion of innovation: innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and
laggards, and their role in influencing new innovations such as the Blockchain; however,
Reddick et al. also examined the five aspects of innovation that significantly influence
technological adoption: relative advantage, complexity, compatibility, trialability, and
observability, and provided an overview of each aspect and its significance within the
diffusion of innovation theory. The variables examined in the study by Reddick et al.
were the level of cybersecurity, e-government adoption, government effectiveness,
control of corruption, political stability and absence of terrorism, voice and
accountability, and gross domestic product per capita. The results of this study indicated
high levels of correlation between government effectiveness and control of corruption, as
well as e-government adoption and government effectiveness (Reddick et al., 2019).
Additionally, results showed higher scores on all independent variables (Reddick et al.,
2019). Specifically, the early adopters of Blockchain technologies displayed, on average,
a better national framework of cybersecurity, control of corruption, e-government
development, government effectiveness, and political stability (Reddick et al., 2019).
Reddick et. al.’s (2019) overview of each aspect and its significance within the
diffusion of innovation theory provided insight into the fundamental elements needed to
achieve successful national adoption of cryptocurrency. The results of the study
conducted by Reddick et al. also upheld their prediction that countries may likely have
Blockchain initiatives based on their internal characteristics examined as independent
variables. Of the six variables examined, only three were statically significant for
Blockchain initiatives and adoption: cybersecurity, government effectiveness, and
political stability (Reddick et al., 2019). The remaining three variables, e-government
adoption, control of corruption, and GDP per capita, were not statistically significant
(Reddick et al., 2019). This insight into the fundamental elements necessary for
cryptocurrency adoption fostered by Reddick et al. provided a glimpse into the likelihood
of the continuation of Blockchain initiatives in certain countries, which may influence
business leaders to consider the initial or continued adoption of the Blockchain and
cryptocurrency.
Alternate Theories
Researchers are expected to make a distinctive application of the constructs of the
selected conceptual framework within their doctoral studies. The selection of the
conceptual framework requires comprehensive knowledge and appreciation of the
problem, purpose, and significance of the study. As such, the chosen conceptual
framework must give emphasis to the purpose and importance of the inquiry (Grant &
Osanloo, 2014). If the selection of the conceptual framework is poorly chosen, the entire
foundation of the study can be flawed. By reviewing an alternate theory as well,
researchers increase the validity of the study by ensuring the guiding principles of the
selected conceptual framework provide the soundest underpinning for the inquiry. Game
theory was an alternate conceptual framework reviewed for this doctoral study.
Game Theory
Although cryptocurrency adoption continues to propagate globally, anecdotal
evidence suggests that the rates of adoption around the world are influenced by illegal
commercial markets in virtual environments such as the Darknet (Berdiev et al., 2018).
Berdiev et al. investigated the growing size of underground shadow economies and the
clandestine environment that keeps them hidden from main national economies. Many
experts believe that the overall size of shadow economies constitutes nearly 30% of the
world’s gross domestic product (GDP) (Berdiev et al., 2018). While this number
represents a worldwide average, the size of shadow economies from country to country
varies greatly. In this virtual environment, vendors engage in strategic business-building
endeavors utilizing cryptocurrency and a labyrinth of online goods and services.
In unregulated shadow economies such as those that exist on the Darknet, the
game theory is used in a practical business application to demonstrate how business
leaders employ games of strategy, but not chance (Fatemi et al., 2012) to grow their
business ventures. Ott (1999) agreed, stating that the game theory is not limited to
mathematics and can be appropriately applied to international business by using the
theory as a strategic tool to examine rational analysis. Ott (1999) also examined strategic
choices and decisions as part of the game theory and believed that it overlaid the
foundations for economic influences of international business.
Game theory was developed by Oskar Morgenstern and John von Neumann in
1944 (Aigbokhaevbolo, 2011; von Neumann & Morgenstern,1944) and involves strategic
interaction between two or more individuals in a situation containing set rules and
outcomes (Fatemi et al., 2012). The participants are confronted with choices of
engagement or actions (Aigbokhaevbolo, 2011), whereby each participant can gain or
lose, depending on what others choose to do or not do (Fatemi et al., 2012). The final
outcome of the game, therefore, is determined jointly by the strategies chosen by all
participants (Fatemi et al., 2012).
For businesses operating in shadow economies, anonymous cryptocurrency is
used as a medium for exchange and trade where business leaders, vendors, and customers
face a series of strategic decisions to achieve their desired goals, which are to achieve
wealth, attain illegal goods or services, and avoid detection by law enforcement and
taxation authorities (Shillito, 2019). For vendors, they must respect the privacy and
anonymity of customers and fellow vendors, and they must truthfully represent the goods
that they are selling, even if the goods are illegal. Vendors must make a good faith effort
to deliver the goods to the customers ’desired location even if the authorities intercept
them. It is accepted as a known risk of doing business on the Darknet.
Transactions of the shadow economy remain anonymous by using cryptocurrency.
By conducting business on the Darknet, participants decrease the likelihood of being
detected by law enforcement and tax authorities (Shillito, 2019). As likened to the game
theory, there is no advantage for the vendors to try and disrupt sales for another vendor,
cooperate with authorities, or reveal anyone’s identity. Any participant attempting a
zerosum game, whereby one vendor wins and one loses, would eventually disrupt the
delicate balance of the shadow economy (Aigbokhaevbolo, 2011). The outcome of the
game, or in this case, the continued existence of the shadow economy on the Dark Web,
depends on the strategies jointly chosen by all participants. Although there is no way of
knowing what the other participants are going to decide, ultimately, if everyone does not
play by the same rules, the entire economy could fail, and everyone would lose
(Aigbokhaevbolo,
2011).
Game Theory and Behavior Prediction
According to Casey et al. (2019), the current phenomenon of pseudonymous
identities on the Internet has the possibility of enforcing a system of usage identity. By
applying the game theory, Casey et al. stated that it is possible to analyze individuals ’
decisions to establish patterns of behavior, to include commercial purchasing activities,
and expose identities. By using a dynamic system to capture decisions over a period of
time, repeated play and strategies are captured, thus creating a roadmap to a
pseudonymous individual. Casey et al. liken this human behavior to an ant colony where
the insects use pheromone communication to reinforce good paths of travel between the
nest and food source. Behaviors become predictable, thus exposing the ants ’roles in the
colony. Pseudonymous users of social networks are much the same as ants by exhibiting
patternistic behaviors that can lead to identity exposure. Business leaders could exploit
the patterns of behavior to develop marketing strategies for cryptocurrency to consumers
who show behavior patterns towards technology and fit the consumer profile for their
goods and services.
Similarly, Castiglione et al. (2019) utilized game theory to establish community
detection to uncover the underlying social structure of Internet influencers and their
associated communities known as hubs. By using the game theory and the Nash
equilibrium for this phenomenon, Castiglione et al. believed that social network
participants would behave as rational actors who influenced the individual strategies and
independent decisions of others unknown to them within a virtual community. The goal
of the actors, while only assuming knowledge of the other participants, was to exert an
influence that triggered others to react to maximize the actors ’personal benefits and
utilities. Business leaders who possess the ability to influence segments of the population
using the game theory could establish business strategies to make cryptocurrency
adoption desirable to those who exhibit specific behaviors and tendencies.
Game Theory versus Diffusion of Innovation
Business leaders may consider whether the game theory or the diffusion of
innovation theory better explains the rate of global adoption for cryptocurrency as an
alternative payment method. Although the purpose of this study was to explore the
strategies that legitimate business leaders use to respond to the alternative payment
concerns perpetuated by cryptocurrency markets through the lens of the diffusion of
innovation theory, there was value to examining the growing success of illegal shadow
economies and the operating strategies that have been adopted using cryptocurrencies as
an exclusive medium of exchange (Berdiev et al., 2018) using the game theory.
It was expected, however, that legitimate business leaders may not have the palate
to forensically examine the intricate commercial strategies regarding the buying and
selling of the plethora of goods and services offered on the Darknet. Even though shadow
economies represent an estimated 30% of the GDP in some countries (Berdiev et al.,
2018), adopting cryptocurrency strategies used for illegal drug sales, human trafficking,
terrorism financing, and credit card and document fraud (Shillito, 2019) may not be
applicable in the legitimate and regulated legal, commercial environment. As such, using
the diffusion of innovation theory as a lens for this study can apply to all business
environments to explain the adoption of cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method
and expose associated concerns with the strategies to broaden the pace and size of the
adoption.
Shifting from Traditional Fiat Currency to Cryptocurrency
In a qualitative study, Wonglimpiyarat (2015) discussed whether or not Bitcoin
had the potential to transform the traditional fiat payment systems worldwide. According
to Wonglimpiyarat (2015), technological advancements in banking have caused a shift
towards cashless transactions such as credit cards and electronic fund transfers in the last
several decades. Cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin, are the latest trend in electronic
settlement concepts and appear to be slowly gaining in popularity, especially among
millennials who have extensive experience, contentment, and attachment with technology
and related solutions (Kijek et al., 2020). Wonglimpiyarat (2015) questioned, though, if
the cryptocurrency innovation had the potential to cause a sweeping revolution in
electronic payments. U.S. government agency leaders, such as those in the U.S. Treasury
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), however, have voiced suppositions
that Bitcoin could possibly provide business leaders with the assurance that the currency
is likely to be long-lived (Singh, 2015), thus aiding the catalyst for a possible global
transformation of alternative payment methods such as cryptocurrencies.
By applying Gompertz’s model within the theory of innovation diffusion,
Wonglimpiyarat (2015) explored how technological advancements trigger paradigm
shifts in society to become widely accepted and if Bitcoin was following the standard
Scurve experienced by other technological inventions. According to Wonglimpiyarat, the
most significant reasons noted for the hesitance in the widespread adoption of Bitcoin
were (a) competing mining protocol standards, (b) legality of Bitcoin activities, (c) risk
loss or theft of digital wallets, (d) financial crime concerns such as money laundering, (e)
insecure computer and Internet infrastructure, and (f) lack of trust in Bitcoin exchanges
since central banks do not issue it. These reasons are significant enough to have
prohibited Bitcoin from widespread adoption and achieve only a penetration rate of less
than 5 percent (Wonglimpiyarat, 2015). Subsequently, the low penetration rate
demonstrates another problematic issue for business leaders to consider about accepting
cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method.
In a quantitative study, Yoo et al. (2019) applied the diffusion of innovation
theory to examine four user-oriented theories regarding consumers ’willingness and
intention to use new goods and services. By using the theory as a lens, Yoo et al.
investigated the benefit-risk concept, the theory of planned behavior, and transaction cost
theory to address 1300 samples to propose that apparent benefits and corresponding
service had significant roles in determining Bitcoin adoption behavior of individuals.
Comparatively, Yoo et al. also determined that risk, cost, and complexity had no
substantial impact on users ’adoption behavior. The researchers found that the study
participants ’attitudes towards services were a key determinant in user adoption. More
simply put, if the participants believed that the innovation was not unique or new,
adoption behavior was hindered. Yoo et al. concluded that potentially both business
leaders ’and customers ’attitudes toward Bitcoin could be a determining factor on whether
or not business leaders would risk implementing Bitcoin as an alternative payment
method for goods and services in legitimate markets.
The findings of Yoo et al. (2019) were echoed by Narman and Uulu (2020), who
found that investors reacted to the positive and negative attitudes on social media towards
cryptocurrencies. Narman and Uulu’s (2020) results are significant to contemporary
businesses that desire to explore the establishment of cryptocurrencies as alternative
payment methods. Business leaders should first explore the feelings and attitudes
regarding specific digital currencies before making definitive decisions on what
cryptocurrencies to accept as alternative payment, especially since this action would
represent a hefty shift away from convention fiat payments and conventional payment
options such as credit cards.
Adoption of Cryptocurrency in the United States
The Stamp Payment Act of 1862 made it illegal for anyone to create and circulate
money intended to be used as lawful currency in the United States (Lane, 2014). It is,
however, in the interpretation of The Stamp Payment Act as to whether or not
cryptocurrencies are indeed money (Lane, 2014). Lane contended that many view
cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin, like credit cards, as an electronic payment method used
for the exchange of goods and services. However, Bitcoin is not backed by official
currency or commodities like gold or silver; therefore, others believe that Bitcoin does
not meet the standards for traditional currency and is not subject to securities regulation
(Lane, 2014). Without any new federal legislation in the United States regarding
cryptocurrency, politicians and scholars are left to engage in the subjective interpretation
of existing laws (Lane, 2014). As such, debates continue on each side of the aisle in the
United States Congress. Still, without evolving laws that address new technologies, there
may never be a clear argument on whether or not Bitcoin is actually money in the eyes of
the law (Lane, 2014).
Cryptocurrency as a U.S. National Currency
McCallum (2015) stated that Article 1, Sections 8 and 10 of the U.S. Constitution
stipulate that the nation’s monetary system will be based in gold and silver. Unless the
Supreme Court rules to change this portion of the U.S. Constitution, it is unlikely that
Bitcoin will ever become the official national currency of the United States (McCallum,
2015). The U.S. Constitution, however, does not preclude private individuals from
creating money (McCallum, 2015). While counterfeiting is illegal, scholars have argued
that money is based on tangible assets, and since Bitcoin is an intangible asset, it does not
qualify as money (McCallum, 2015). Counterfeiting laws, subsequently, do not apply
(McCallum, 2015). It is the consensus of scholars and policy experts that Bitcoin will
likely remain an unregulated, technical phenomenon that is likely to grow in popularity
without interference from policymakers (McCallum, 2015).
Regulation of Cryptocurrency in the United States
The United States Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) is
the first federal agency to address the regulation of cryptocurrency (Singh, 2015). Singh
(2015) explained that under FinCEN’s Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), statutory conditions
attempt to address money laundering by requiring the reporting of certain transactions
using banks and other financial institutions (Singh, 2015). According to the stipulations in
the BSA, all financial institutions are required to report transactions in excess of $10,000
in Currency Transaction Reports (CTR) (Singh, 2015). In addition, all financial
institutions are required to file Suspicious Activity Reports (SAR) if suspected illegal
transactions are encountered (Singh, 2015). The Money Laundering Control Act of 1986
made money laundering a federal crime, and the USA Patriot Act of 2001 made any
unlicensed money-transmission business a felony (Singh, 2015). Under the Cybersecurity
Information Sharing Act (CISA), companies are required to combine and share their
information with the government to counter cybersecurity threats (DiPiero, 2017). The
Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) was also established to provide a pathway
for law enforcement to identify Dark Web users to be able to prosecute them due to
involvement in illegal activities (Dipiero, 2017). While the United States has instituted
several statutory measures to combat illegal currency transactions, the same has not been
undertaken by other countries on the global frontier.
FinCEN recently proposed, as part of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), a requirement
for:
Banks and money service businesses (MSB) to document, submit, and verify the
identity of customers engaging in transactions involving convertible virtual
currency (CVC) or digital assets with legal tender status (legal tender digital
assets or LTDA) held in unhosted wallets, or held in wallets hosted in a
jurisdiction identified by FinCEN (Bank Secrecy Act, 2020, Summary section, p.
83840).
Although this proposal is still in the exploratory public comment stage, business leaders
have expressed extreme concern with bearing the responsibility to identify and report on
individuals using cryptocurrency under the guidelines proposed by FinCEN. By removing
the anonymous benefits of using the currency, this proposal has the ability to detract
cryptocurrency adoption as an alternative payment method as well as derail the overall
general use and purchasing activity using cryptocurrency. Subsequently, this proposal, if
adopted, could also negatively impact the business leaders who are considering
cryptocurrency adoption as a way to expand their commercial footprint to techno-savvy
consumers who prefer anonymity and shopping privacy.
Legal Interpretation and Evolving Viewpoints
According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and FinCEN, virtual
currency is not a legal tender, and its value is propagated on the individuals ’acceptance
that the currency represents value (Trautman & Harrell, 2017). The currency is not
backed by assets or precious metals such as gold or silver but instead is generated by
sophisticated computer algorithms (Trautman & Harrell, 2017). FinCEN, however, has
also issued interpretive guidance of money-service-businesses, such as Paypal, provided
definitions of virtual currency and information for contemporary technical environments
regarding federal reporting responsibilities (Singh, 2015). FinCEN is the only federal
agency that has attempted such interpretive guidance and continues to bear the burden of
continuing uncertainties surrounding cryptocurrencies (Singh, 2015). FinCEN has also
recognized the benefits of cryptocurrency to the public and has officially stated that it
does not want to stifle Bitcoin’s potential to improve the lives of poverty-stricken
individuals (Singh, 2015). As such, FinCEN’s position on Bitcoin could possibly provide
business leaders with the assurance that the currency is likely to be long-lived, thus
reducing the business risk of adopting the currency as an alternative payment (Singh,
2015). An endorsement such as this from FinCEN may be a catalyst that improves
cryptocurrency’s outlook among many leaders in contemporary businesses.
Notwithstanding the endorsement from FinCEN, there is still cautious speculation
regarding the investment in cryptocurrency because of the lack of comprehensive
regulation worldwide. In a quantitative study, Liebau and Schueffel (2019) examined the
popularity of Bitcoin cryptocurrency on the market and also explored over 45 other
cryptocurrencies that have had initial coin offerings (ICO) to raise capital. Liebau and
Schueffel concluded that 49% of ICO were failures, of which 6.7% were scams, which
largely resulted from the overarching, unregulated process. The remaining 51% were
deemed survivors that yielded an annual interest rate of 164%. While most investors hope
for the stunning performance experienced by Bitcoin, Liebau and Schueffel stated that
investing in cryptocurrency remains a very volatile and risky endeavor. Liebau and
Schueffel’s empirical studies on the market volatility of cryptocurrency and the factors
that affect the networks that create and support virtual digital currencies demonstrated the
perpetual risks of virtual currencies as well as the high failure rates of ICOs.
Business Ethics of Cryptocurrency
In addition to the volatility of cryptocurrency, business leaders are faced with an
ethical dilemma as well regarding the currency. According to Dierksmeier and Seele
(2018), there is an ethical significance of cryptocurrencies and the impact of Blockchain
technology on financial transactions in the global business environment. Cryptocurrency
has been hailed by many as the solution to persistent societal ailments such as poverty,
growing debt crises, and hyperinflation. Still, others have touted the currency as one that
encourages shadow economies and nefarious markets dealing in sex, drugs, human
trafficking, child exploitation, and weapons trafficking (Shillito, 2019). Regardless, both
sides agree that cryptocurrency has the potential to transform the previous forms of
traditional money.
Immoral Uses of Cryptocurrency on the Darknet
The Darknet was developed by the United States Naval Research Laboratory to
protect sensitive information but was made available to the general public in 2004
(Alnabulsi & Islam, 2018). Since then, the Darknet has given rise to the Dark Web, which
is an unsafe environment for users because of the unethical and illegal goods and services
that are traded on that portion of the Internet (Alnabulsi & Islam, 2018). In addition to
drugs, weapons, fake documents, stolen merchandise, and pornography, users can
purchase the services of hitmen and hackers (Alnabulsi & Islam, 2018; Shillito, 2019).
Terrorist and extremist organizations use the Darknet to spread information about
improvised explosive devices, as well as Jihadist forums and other violent propaganda
(Alnabulsi & Islam, 2018).
Shillito (2019) provided poignant and illustrative statistics and information
regarding the illegal and immoral cryptomarkets that have emerged as a result of the
anonymity and subsequent lawlessness of the shadow economies on the Dark Web.
Shillito also illustrated that the users of virtual private networks (VPN) and The Onion
Router (TOR) could conduct illegal businesses from any place in the world anonymously.
The advanced technology of the Dark Web, coupled with anonymous digital currency,
has presented extraordinary challenges to law enforcement.
In addition to law enforcement challenges, cryptocurrency tests the traditional
relationships between vendors and consumers. Dierksmeier and Seele (2018) expressed a
genuine desire to invoke a candid discussion on the pros and cons of cryptocurrencies
from an exploratory basis, without bias or moral opinions. Of particular interest in their
essay was the examination of trust among payers and payees involved in financial
transactions. With no opportunity to establish transparency and credibility through faceto-
face business relationships, cryptocurrencies users believe in verification technology to
mediate the settlement of transactions. Most claim that this risk is worth being able to
avoid centralized banking, high settlement fees, and government manipulation of
currency valuation.
Dierksmeier and Seele (2018) acknowledged that academic endeavors are lacking
in the specific subject of the business ethics of cryptocurrencies and offer a limited
overview of the phenomenon from a micro, meso, and macro perspective; however, when
the subject is broadened to consider illegal and immoral activities on the Dark Web
concerning transactions for good and services as unethical using cryptocurrencies, the
academic endeavors are more robust. Given the newfound phenomenon of
cryptocurrency, some latitude should be provided to examine the comprehensive
commercial uses of cryptocurrencies, even if illegal businesses are involved.
Companies, Consumers, and Cryptocurrency
For an innovation in currency to flourish in today’s economy, it needs to expand
and enhance the existing benefits of credit and debits cards (Parashar & Rasiwala, 2019).
The innovation also has to be safer, expedient, more convenient, and widely accepted by
merchants and businesses globally (Parashar & Rasiwala, 2019). Although
cryptocurrency has not yet achieved vast adoption within the United States, a growing
number of legitimate companies have ventured forward as early adopters of the currency
as an alternative payment.
In 2019, Zogby Analytics was commissioned by HSB Group, Inc. to conduct a
survey of 505 small to medium-sized businesses within the United States (Hartford,
2020). The survey found that 36% of all small and medium-sized companies in the
United States now accept cryptocurrency as an alternative payment. Several major
companies are also following suit regarding the acceptance of cryptocurrency as payment.
For example, Wikipedia is an American non-profit and charitable organization
headquartered in San Francisco, California (Wikimedia, n.d.). Wikipedia is the world’s
largest open-source encyclopedia and began accepting donations in Bitcoin on July 30,
2014 and achieved $140k in its first week (Wikimedia, n.d.). The organization cited
grassroots community support for the integration of Bitcoin with a goal to offer flexible
payment options to those who donate to keep the online encyclopedia running. Payments
are made through an online service called BitPay and offer patrons greater versatility in
their donation options (Wikimedia, n.d.). While Bitcoin adoption continues to slowly
progress among businesses, the study conducted by Parashar and Rasiwala (2019) found
that respondents felt that the risks for online theft or technical problems remained
significant disadvantages and subsequently deterrents from fully embracing Bitcoin as an
alternative payment method. Despite the controversy surrounding cryptocurrency, the
lack of global regulation, and the market volatility, cryptocurrency, an increasing number
of small, medium, and large business leaders are choosing to adopt the currency as an
alternative payment method. Additionally, the growth of the virtual currency industry to
include Bitcoin Exchanges, Bitcoin Banks, Bitcoin ATMs, Bitcoin Wallets, and Bitcoin
payment gateways all support the use of Bitcoin as a global medium of payment for
goods and services as well as a speculative investment (Tu & Meredith, 2015)
Additionally, innovative technologies present opportunities organizations to increase their
economic growth and market competitiveness (Wong et al., 2020). With a focus on
technological innovations and perceived value, organizational leadership is able to use
cryptocurrency to capitalize on operational and environmental conditions that improve
their competitiveness in the global marketplace (Wong et al., 2020).
An increasing number of institutions and individuals are opting out of
conventional banking systems because of privacy concerns, overt government influence,
and corruption. The complete lack of unified global regulatory frameworks and growing
criminal involvement (i.e., human trafficking, illegal drug distribution, etc.) with
cryptocurrencies, however, leave many people and business leaders wary about the
volatility and legitimization of the currency (Dierksmeier & Seele, 2018). As such, the
legitimate and legal aspects of cryptocurrency are still widely debated topics.
Consumer Demand
Additionally, Dierksmeier and Seele (2018) expressed that, on a micro-level,
cryptocurrencies are typically not a reliable method for personal savings due to the risk of
accidental loss of the unique, irreplaceable wallet seed key, valuation fluctuations, and
the criminal activity of hackers. Cryptocurrency does have the potential to reduce poverty
for individuals who cannot qualify for a credit card or who cannot afford the high interest
or yearly membership fees, but hurdles still exist regarding overcoming the inherent risks.
Speculation, therefore, remains if cryptocurrency is palatable for the average citizen.
On a meso-level, Dierksmeier and Seele (2018) pointed out that cryptocurrencies
have enormous potential for pockets of worker populations like migrant workers who are
charged exorbitant transaction fees up to 17% to wire money to their home countries of
origin. Unfortunately, the continuing volatility of cryptocurrencies has resulted in many
firms not accepting the currency as mainstream payment for goods and services. The
essential dilemma, therefore, remains regarding how business leaders will change their
business strategies to adopt cryptocurrency more widely as an alternative payment
method while combating the stigma of illegal market uses and law enforcement concerns
of the currency.
Summary and Transition
The concept of currency has existed for thousands of years in every civilized
society and has evolved throughout the ages (Bridel, 2018). Contemporary currency has
been transformed by technology from fiat currency that is made of paper and precious
metals to one that is virtual, where all transactions occur with a computer using the
worldwide web. Virtual or cryptocurrency is more secure, provides faster settlements, and
is widely accessible to all people, even those who were previously barred from credit
cards due to their existing creditworthiness. According to government organizations like
FinCEN, cryptocurrency is the currency of the future (Singh, 2015), but accommodating
it, is likely to present several challenges.
Money illusion refers to the influence that the nominal value of currency has on
individuals’ perception of its true value (Wertenbroch et al., 2007). Carl Menger (1871)
believed that the value of any currency hinges on the inherent value of the currency that
people are willing to accept in exchange for a certain commodity, but this acceptance,
however, will never be attained by all individuals of a group at the same time (Bridel,
2018; Menger, 1871). Cryptocurrency’s market volatility and the instability of the Bitcoin
futures market have resulted in many people and businesses choosing to pause regarding
future cryptocurrency investments as society debates over the value of the virtual
currency that is not backed by any asset or precious metal (Stegaroiu, 2018). This
phenomenon presents extraordinary challenges for business leaders who are debating and
strategizing over how to integrate cryptocurrency into their businesses as an alternative
payment method, but the lack of acceptance by mainstream society leaves them perplexed
regarding the next steps.
In Section 1, I provided the basis for an applied business study on cryptocurrency
adoption using a multiple-case qualitative study. A research question, interview
questions, conceptual framework, operational definitions, assumptions, limitations,
delimitations, and significance of the study were also provided, along with a thorough
and comprehensive literature review. The literature review included an introduction to
cryptocurrency and its ecosystem along with the most contemporary information on the
Blockchain, the security of cryptocurrency, advantages and disadvantages, as well as the
current state of global adoption and national regulation of the currency. In Section 2, I
provide information on how the study was conducted, data collection instruments and
techniques used in the study, the data organization technique, and the data analysis
approach. Section 2 also includes details on the strategies used to enhance the overall
reliability and validity of the study.
Section 2: The Project
In Section 2, information is provided on the study’s purpose, the role of the
researcher, the participants selected for the study, the research method and design, and the
population and sampling of the business leaders engaged in cryptocurrency adoption for
their companies within the United States. Section 2 also includes the details on the
adherence to ethical research standards, data collection instruments and techniques used
in the study, the data organization technique, and the data analysis approach. The final
area of Section 2 details the strategies that were used to enhance the overall reliability and
validity of the study.
Purpose Statement
The purpose of this qualitative, multiple-case study was to explore the strategies
that business leaders use to respond to the alternative payment concerns perpetuated by
cryptocurrency markets. The targeted population consists of six business leaders in the
United States who have developed successful strategies to respond to the alternative
payment concerns perpetuated by cryptocurrency markets. The results of this study may
invoke social change by providing education and information regarding the growing
illegal and immoral uses of cryptocurrencies that are harming society globally so that
business leaders can use their power and influence financially as well as politically to
support economic reform and regulation of the currency. This study may also catalyze
social change by encouraging more business leaders to adopt cryptocurrency as a viable
alternative payment method so that the world’s most disenfranchised, impoverished, and
credit-challenged individuals can be afforded the access to goods and services that they
so desperately need.
Role of the Researcher
In a qualitative research effort, the research is conducted from an emic perspective
whereby the researcher has categorical involvement with the research participants for the
purposes of collaboration, interaction, and interpretation (Marshall & Rossman, 2016;
Terrell, 2016). The researcher becomes the data collection tool with receptivity and
mindfulness to demonstrate trust and ethical behavior with the participants and to avoid
potential biases that may not be open to contrary evidence that does not support their
research problem (Marshall & Rossman, 2016; Yin, 2018). I served as the principal data
collection instrument in this qualitative study. Achieving the knowledge to answer the
research question required a thorough comprehension of the cryptocurrency technology,
which I obtained as a federal technical analyst at the U.S. Treasury, Financial Crimes
Enforcement Network (FinCEN). Academic training also assisted me in developing an
acute awareness of a researcher’s innate beliefs, opinions, and biases so that research can
be conducted in the most neutral, non-judgmental, and objective environment (Klamer et
al., 2017; Marshall & Rossman, 2016). These efforts helped ensure that qualitative data
was collected in a sensitive and respectful manner while providing maximum
consideration to ethical issues (Marshall & Rossman, 2016).
Researcher’s Relationship with the Topic
A researcher should design the research with consideration to one’s identity,
experiences, sensitivities, perceptions, opinions, and assumptions (Marshal & Rossman,
2016). Awareness of the whole self helps minimize personal biases so that interpretation
of results data was done in such a way as to strengthen the validity of the study overall.
By seeking to discover and understand the meaning and experience of the study, the
researcher was able to acknowledge how personal values impact the study (Bloomberg &
Volpe, 2019). The resulting consciousness of this information and dispositions also
helped to control the intrusion of bias.
As a retired U.S. Army officer and now federal employee of the U.S. Department
of the Treasury, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), my personal
experience, perspectives, and values were defined by a keen sense of duty to the United
States of America, along with strict ethical and moral boundaries. I believe in democracy
and capitalism, whereby anyone from any background in life has the opportunity to
succeed in life and to carve out a path of prosperity with hard work and dedication. I am
also the descendant of a grandfather who fought in World War II and the wife of a retired
Army officer who fought in Desert Storm, Operation Enduring Freedom, and Operation
New Dawn. In my current position with FinCEN, I design and manage software
applications to thwart money laundering and terrorism financing. I am intimately
knowledgeable of U.S. federal policy on cryptocurrency and consider myself a subject
manager expert on the topic. In my previous position as an IT project manager with the
Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), I created and managed law enforcement
software applications to assist federal agents in the war against drugs. These software
applications included ones that collected and tracked cryptocurrency addresses and other
attributes used in illegal drug transactions.
According to Terrell (2016), the researcher often desires to prove things that
support their principles, personal convictions, or beliefs. Additionally, valuations of most
anything are based on knowledge, experience, familiarity, and interpretation (Klamer et
al., 2017). My knowledge and expertise of cryptocurrency are entrenched in years of
experience with my current and previous federal positions as a technical analyst and
project manager with FinCEN and the DEA, which included training federal and contract
personnel. I was vigilant and receptive recognizing and accepting contrary or divergent
data and subsequent findings of my desired conclusions (Yin, 2018). Additionally, I was
cognitively aware to not disregard data that does not fit my preconceptions of the desired
outcome of my study.
Peer reviews have long since been recognized as a prerequisite and essential
component for any journal, study, or academic writing process (Kelly et al., 2014).
Subjecting a researcher’s study to the inspection and examination of others who are
experts in the same field helps to ensure that only superior research that withstands the
rigors of peer scrutiny is published (Kelly et al., 2014). Peer reviews can also illustrate
areas of bias, but researchers are ultimately responsible for the rigor, validity, and
objectivity of their studies (Yin, 2018). Although I have an elaborate knowledge of
cryptocurrency, its history, and various commercial uses, I took extraordinary measures
not to exhibit bias or to judge my research participants’ viewpoints on cryptocurrency,
their past or future business strategies, technological knowledge, or awareness of the
illegal uses of the currency. I was not an acquaintance of any of the research participants,
nor did I have any in-depth knowledge of their business entities, other than the general
brand recognition of the average consumer.
Researcher’s Role Related to Ethics and the Belmont Report Protocol
The ethical behaviors of researchers regarding the health and humane treatment of
human research participants were not always a mandate of academic research. The
Belmont Report instigated by the United States government Health and Human Services
(HHS) (1979) overhauled the research standards on human subjects and mandated three
overarching principles. The first mandate related to beneficence and the ethical treatment
of participants, protection from harm, and respect for their decisions (HHS, 1979; Terrell,
2017). The second mandate directed that participants be treated as persons capable of
making their own decisions regarding their health and welfare. Even persons that were
incapable of acting on their own behalf were entitled to the same protections (HHS, 1979;
Terrell, 1979). The third mandate pertained to justice for participants and their
entitlement to all entitled benefits without imposed burdens or inequality amongst
research participants (HHS, 1979). More succinctly, these mandates focused on informed
consent whereby researchers must ensure that all participants give informed consent and
understand their rights as a participant (HHS, 1979; Terrell, 1979); the assessment of
risks and benefits for each participant as well as provisions for information to participants
to assist them in their decision to participate in the study (HHS, 1979; Terrell, 1979); and
that researchers must establish impartial protocols for the identification and selection of
study participants (HHS, 1979; Terrell, 1979). I was committed to ensuring the
safeguarding of each participant and that each participant benefitted equally from
participation in my study. By adhering to the Belmont Study mandates, I provided open
and transparent access to my study’s raw data collection, findings, and conclusions to
Walden University’s chief academic officer for review and approval.
Bias Mitigation Efforts
Researchers must be cognizant of their personal lens and be prepared to respond
to any concerns about subjectivities that may influence the research study at any point
within the effort (Marshall & Rossman, 2016). The strength of any qualitative research
study depends on how intently a researcher understands each participant’s world from
their unique point of view and the ability to objectively collect and interpret data. A
researcher’s personal biases can only serve to unfavorably impact the authenticity of the
participants’ contributions and negatively affect the validity of the study overall;
therefore, researchers should attempt to dimmish bias by employing tools and tactics
throughout their study.
One common tool used by researchers is triangulation. Methodological
triangulation combines various sources of data together to assist in the minimization of
fundamental biases arising from the utilization of a single source of information and
develop a more complex understanding of the phenomena being studied (Marshall &
Rossman, 2016; Yin, 2018). By utilizing various data types such as documents, reports,
interviews, and observations, researchers are able to corroborate their findings and
increase the overall validity of their study (Yin, 2018). Other tools, such as case study
databases, are used as a repository for data so that the researcher can organize, revisit, and
analyze data throughout the study (Yin, 2018). Having a well-organized database also
permits ease of peer review to identify bias and tolerance for divergent findings, as well
as other academic officer reviews for validity and rigor (Yin, 2018).
Training is considered by Yin (2018) as an essential component for any research
effort. Walden University requires all doctoral students to take a prerequisite number of
courses that prepare us for the inevitable influence of our personal biases and how to
minimize their impact within our doctoral study. Because of this training and information
that I gleaned from my coursework, I selected a multiple-case study instead of a single
case study to combat bias and improve the validity and rigor of my study. Finally, is the
act of reflexivity. Reflexivity is the description of the relative nature of the association
and interactions that occur between a researcher and the study’s participants (Dodgson,
2019). A reflexivity journal is a record of common intersections between the researcher
and participants such as age, ethnicity, community, cultural background, or any other
element, however minute, that may invoke bias and impact the credibility of the research
findings (Dodgson, 2019). Maintaining such an artifact allows the researcher to selfreflect
on their experiences with participants and monitor the impact of serendipitous events,
circumstances, or situations that have an inevitable impact on the overall study.
Interview Protocol Rationale
Interviews are the most prevailing form of qualitative data (Bloomberg & Volpe,
2019). When used correctly, interviews can offer a researcher a rich and in-depth
description of a participant’s experiences, feelings, and viewpoints (Bloomberg & Volpe,
2019). Yin’s (2018) philosophy is in alignment with Bloomberg and Volpe’s (2019)
summation that interviews offer the most intimate understanding of a study participant.
As such, established protocols provide researchers with the best chance of gleaning the
most relevant data from participants. First, researchers must be sure to follow their
established line of questioning (Yin, 2018). Secondly, researchers must ask their
questions in an unbiased, non-threatening, and friendly way to the participants (Yin,
2018). Electronically recording all interviews provides the most accurate interpretation of
the interviews but should only be used with the participant’s permission (Yin, 2018).
Interviewing is an art form and requires training and practice for a smooth, comfortable,
and effortless execution. Despite the obvious strengths of interviews, there are several
associated shortcomings that may present obstacles to researchers. For example,
participants may not be equally articulate or cooperate (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2019). To
combat these issues, researchers should present themselves as neutral and nonthreatening
to put participants at ease. Rehearsals can also aid the researcher in helping ensure
successful interview sessions. An interview protocol was established for my multiple-
case study to provide consistency among participants, ease of transcription and member
checking, and minimize researcher bias throughout the participant interviews.
Participants
Eligibility Criteria
The recruitment and selection of participants are two of the most critical tasks that
a researcher undertakes as part of the qualitative study and carries with it the credibility
of the entire study (Bloomberg & Volpe 2019; Marshall & Rossman, 2016). Compared to
the random participant sampling strategies in quantitative research efforts, participants in
qualitative research are purposely and intentionally selected (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2019;
Patton, 2015). Qualitative research participants are selected for their ability to provide
prolific information about themselves and the phenomenon being studied (Bloomberg &
Volpe, 2019). Other considerations include access to the participants for interviews and
member checking.
For this research study, the purposive sample selection method was used to select
the research participants. The first criterion was that each participant was a business
leader for an entity within the United States. The size of the business was not considered
pertinent, only that it was a legal entity headquartered within the United States. The
second criterion was that cryptocurrency was adopted as an alternative payment method
and was used within the business. The length of time since adoption was not considered
relevant. The third criterion was that the participants must have a tenure of at least one
year at their organization and have intimate knowledge of why cryptocurrency was
adopted and how it contributed to the overall business strategy. There were no exclusion
criteria based on position, gender, ethnicity, or age, but the participant must be able to
provide a rich background on how the decision to adopt cryptocurrency was made and
how it contributed to their company’s business strategy for future growth.
Gaining Access to Participants
Scrupulous and ethical behavior was at the heart of identifying and gaining access
to participants for purposes of encouraging them to participate in the research effort
(Marshall & Rossman, 2016). Monetary enticements or the promise of tangible gifts may
skew the study’s data, so the focus must be on establishing truthful relationships with the
participants in order to gather data to answer the research question (Marshall & Rossman,
2016).
Through my professional network, I was able to identify the names and contact
information of six business leaders in the United States who have developed successful
strategies to respond to the alternative payment concerns perpetuated by cryptocurrency
markets. I first created a protocol explaining the study’s purpose, background, specific
business problem, and the assurance of confidentiality (Yin, 2018) so that my
professional network was able to more succinctly help me identify participants who
possessed the technical background and unique experience regarding cryptocurrency that
was necessary to answer my research question. This protocol was also subsequently used
with research participants to ensure that they had a thorough understanding of the study.
Walden University’s (2020) research ethics policy permits a researcher to use
professional networks to assist with participant recruitment activities, such as providing
participant contact information that was available from social media platforms, public
websites and directories, and other public-facing websites. Although formal recruitment
efforts of participants may not begin until after Institutional Review Board (IRB)
approval (Walden, 2020), discussions with my professional network to learn more about
the prospective participants served as a great foundation for building fruitful and trusting
relationships.
Strategies for Establishing a Working Relationship with Participants
Qualitative research efforts rely heavily on the informed research interviews of the
selected study participants. The relationship between the researcher and the participants
plays a vital and dynamic role in eliciting and comprehending the individual experiences
of each participant, as well as influencing the data collection process overall (Harvey,
2017). In the purest sense, the researcher–participant relationship is a human relationship
that serves as a portal through which data are collected (Harvey, 2017). Even though
researchers are trained to be keenly aware of the risks of personal biases, each must be
constantly mindful to exhibit neutrality so that participants’ responses are not influenced
(Yin, 2018).
Harvey (2017) also included considerations such as the researcher’s personality,
mannerisms, physical appearance, and dress that need to be restrained and filtered to
conscious neutrality so that participants’ responses are not affected. Additionally, Harvey
(2107) cautioned situations where researchers and participants share particular identities
and experiences. This circumstance may result in participants responding in a more
candid or outspoken manner due to the perceived kinship (Harvey, 2017). Ultimately,
being knowledgeable of the conscious and subconscious aspects of the
researchparticipant relationship inevitably assisted researchers in establishing the most
trusting and impartial relationship possible with the study’s participants for the most
reliable and valid data collection.
Initial contact with potential participants was through an introductory email from
one of my professional colleagues. The email provided a cursory explanation of the study
along with a few biographical sentences about me and a request for an initial online
meeting or phone call. After potential participants have affirmatively responded to my
email invitation to participate in the study and an initial agreement for a meeting has been
established, my efforts shifted to the mechanics of establishing relationships with the
participants. I pressed for at least one introductory phone call or online meeting to create
a stronger foundational relationship with the participants, along with several emails
addressing any questions they may have, a general timeline for interviews and data
collection to set expectations, as well as emails thanking them for their time and
commitment to my study. Yin (2018) recommended that such protocols be established,
which provide an introductory overview of the study as well as setting expectations for
the participants. Once the potential participants met the established criteria and verbally
agreed to be engaged in the study, I obtained a signed consent form from each participant
in addition to answering any further questions that they may have, which is a best practice
according to Walden University’s, Ethics Review Board (Walden, 2020). I also assured
each participant of strict confidentiality and safeguarding of the study’s data, both of
which aided in establishing a more trusting relationship between the participants and me.
Research Method and Design
Together, the research method and design serve as a comprehensive road map for
the researcher to progress from a problem statement to a conclusion in a reliable and valid
fashion. Research methods refer to the techniques and procedures used to obtain and
analyze data (Saunders et al., 2015). Research design provides the framework and
reasoned justification for the collection methods and data analysis techniques to answer
the research problem more effectively (Saunders et al., 2015). Although the research
method and design are closely intertwined, both are necessary for a successful research
study endeavor.
Research Method
The research method is a foundational element of every research effort that
defines how the research was conducted. Researchers must decide between using a
qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-method approach, as each method has its own
distinction regarding what kind of data is used (Saunders et al., 2015; Trochim &
Donnelly, 2008). The hallmark of the qualitative research method is the use of contextual,
non-numeric data whereby participant interviews, observations, or images are categorized
and interpreted to answer a research question (Saunders et al., 2015; Yin, 2018). In
contrast, the quantitative method distinguishes between numerical data using statistics
and graphs to prove or disprove a number of precise hypotheses (Saunders et al., 2015;
Yin, 2018). The mixed-method approach uses the strengths of qualitative and quantitative
data collection techniques and is particularly beneficial in comprehending contradictions
between quantitative results and qualitative findings by using a panoramic view of all
data collected (Saunders et al., 2018; Shorten & Smith, 2017). I selected the qualitative
research methodology for this study because I endeavored to understand the perspective
of business leaders to address alternative payment concerns perpetuated by
cryptocurrency markets. A qualitative researcher explores complex textual descriptions
regarding how the social life of human beings are impacted by a particular phenomenon
(Saunders et al., 2015). By using a multiple-case study, I performed a comprehensive
investigation of multiple organizations to strengthen the reliability and validity of my
study (Yin, 2018). According to Yin (2018), case studies are a practical approach to
research that explores the outcome of current phenomena in the context in which they
occur while attempting to dissect how, what, and why decisions occurred. I interviewed
business leaders to attain their perspective on the decision to adopt cryptocurrency as an
alternative payment method and their plans to thwart concerns associated with the
currency’s anonymous features.
In contrast, a quantitative study was deemed inappropriate for this research effort
because quantitative researchers examine variables’ statistical characteristics or
relationships that can be applied to a broader population by proving or disproving
proposed hypotheses (Saunders et al., 2015; Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). A
mixedmethod study was also deemed inappropriate because this method incorporates
both qualitative and quantitative data and hypothesis testing between two or more
variables (Saunders et al., 2015). Specifically, mixed-method researchers attempt to view
a phenomenon from diverse viewpoints and through distinct and disparate research lenses
to provide a broad and varied body of data (Corr et al., 2020; Gallant & Luthy, 2020;
Shorten & Smith, 2017). Additionally, addressing this study’s purpose does not require
examining variables’ characteristics or statistical relationships; therefore, the qualitative
method was deemed most appropriate.
Research Design
There are many approaches for conducting qualitative research ranging from
grounded theory to feminist and historical qualitative research and beyond, but the most
common approaches are case study, ethnography, narrative inquiry, and phenomenology
(Tomaszewski et al., 2020; Yin, 2018). While qualitative research is considered
interpretive, no one research design approach is neither encouraged nor discouraged as a
practice (Denzin & Lincoln, 2018). According to Denzin and Lincoln (2018), qualitative
research is a “field of inquiry” (p.9) and contains prolific histories that bring the
complexity of humanity to the forefront of contemporary research efforts. Ultimately,
however, a researcher must select the design approach that will provide the greatest
likelihood that relevant, useful, reliable, and valid data can be obtained to answer the
research question at hand.
Case Study. I selected a multiple-case study as the qualitative design over an
ethnological, phenomenological, or narrative design because the foundation of the
multiple-case design supports the investigation of an activity, event, process, or
individuals by using multiple types of data and sources to obtain a profound
understanding (Yin, 2018). The benefits of using a multiple-case study over a single-case
study include the ability to analyze data from both an individual case and across several
cases to determine the differences and similarities among the cases (Yin, 2018).
Multiplecase studies explore several instances of a phenomenon as a means to construct
pragmatic and contextualized knowledge known as phronesis, which is indispensable data
elicited from the authentic participants within the token environment (Marshall &
Rossman, 2016). This collection of data, therefore, can provide more robust and reliable
conclusions that are far greater than those from a single-case study (Yin, 2018). Denzin
and Lincoln (2018) caution, however, that there is no true transparent window into an
individual’s life experiences and that all data obtained from human beings will always be
tainted, however slight or unintentional, by a film of bias that can never be completely
removed.
Ethnography. The foundation of the ethnographical design emanates from
cultural anthropology, where researchers immerse themselves within a particular culture,
usually for an extended period of time (Marshall & Rossman, 2016; Yin 2018).
Ethnographical researchers seek to expose the raw context of the interactions within a
community, its social norms, and practices to provide descriptive frameworks for an
observed phenomenon (Sayago & Blat, 2011). These lengthy observations have the
potential to result in substantial field efforts that carry sizable investments in time and
capital for the researcher (Sayago & Blat, 2011). Criticisms of this design model also
include lengthy observation documentation that may be difficult to digest, categorize, and
interpret (Sayago & Blat, 2011). The ethnographical design was not selected for this
study because participant-observer data was not required to answer the research question.
Phenomenology. According to da Pos (2020), relevant research data stems from
either the physical world or the phenomenal world. The physical world is wrought with
measurements, calculations, statistics, and absolute dimensions. The phenomenal world
exists within the psychological mind, perceptions, and lived experiences of individuals
and their interpretation of specific events (da Pos, 2020; Halling, 2020; Marshall &
Rossman, 2016). This research design seeks to focus on the life of each study participant
as they have lived it and share the accounts with others (Marshall & Rossman, 2016). A
phenomenological design was also not selected for this study because there was not an
interest in exploring the aspects of this phenomenon or the cognitive view of individuals.
Narrative Design. A narrative design is rooted in various social and humanities
disciplines and includes the reconstruction and retelling of experiences or events by
individuals through personal stories, usually in a chronological context (Saunders et al.,
2015). A researcher in narrative inquiry assumes that individuals appreciate their life
experiences by attaching their own narrative constructs to these experiences (Marshall &
Rossman, 2016; Visser et al., 2019). A researcher’s primary objective is to probe how
people structure, recall and relay their lived experiences in the form of unique narratives
(Visser et al., 2019). A narrative design was rejected for this study because it was not an
effective design to answer the research question for this study.
Population and Sampling
According to Stake (2006), sampling refers to the selection of particular data
sources from which data are collected to answer the research question and address the
research objectives. As such, sampling is considered to be the cornerstone of integrity for
the entire research effort (Abrams, 2010). Qualitative research differs from quantitative
research in sampling protocol construction because qualitative research does not require a
representative sample that can be extended to an entire population (Abrams, 2010;
Saunders et al., 2016). Qualitative researchers seek out samples within a distinctive
population to provide key insight and understanding regarding a certain phenomenon
(Abrams, 2010; Marshall & Rossman, 2016).
In qualitative research utilizing a case study design, each case selected for
inclusion in the research effort is considered a complex and intricate entity set in its own
environment (Stake, 2006). Each case has its own context, background, and set of
conditions that have determined its current state of affairs. (Stake, 2006; Yin, 2018).
These constructs are what the qualitative researcher desires to learn more about and make
the center of the research study endeavor (Marshall & Rossman, 2016). Non-probability
sampling was used for this multiple-case study, and participants were intentionally
recruited and selected based on certain criteria.
Sampling Methods
There are many genres of non-probability sampling, but all generally fit under two
general approaches: convenience and purposive (Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). Accidental
or haphazard sampling resembles the act of asking for volunteers from a group of people
or standing outside of a busy grocery store asking random patrons for their opinion on a
popular issue (Saunders et al., 2016; Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). A purposive sample
begins with a plan that best meets the research objective or a goal (Saunders et al., 2016;
Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). Types of purposive sampling include modal instance
sampling, expert sampling, quota sampling, heterogeneity sampling, and snowball
sampling (Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). Modal sampling targets the most frequently
occurring value in a population distribution (Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). Expert
sampling focuses on individuals who exhibit a high level of expertise in a certain area
(Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). Quota sampling is further broken down into the
subcategories of proportional and non-proportional (Saunders et al., 2016; Trochim &
Donnelly, 2008). Proportional sampling occurs when major characteristics are equally
represented in the sample (Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). Non-proportional sampling only
specifies a total number of samples and is not concerned with the proportions of a normal
population (Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). Heterogeneity sampling is also known as
diversity sampling (Saunders et al., 2016; Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). It includes all
opinions or views from a group and is sampling for the widest variety (Trochim &
Donnelly, 2008). Snowball sampling occurs when participants are selected for a study
and then asked to identify others who may fit the criteria for study inclusion (Marshall &
Rossman, 2016; Saunders et al., 2016; Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). Expert sampling was
used in this study and participants were recruited based on their knowledge, and expertise
of cryptocurrency as an alternative payment within their own organizations.
Sample Size
A multiple-case study design is used when a researcher desires to perform a
crosscase analysis to compare and contrast several cases on the same research topic and
to analyze the data to confirm or dispute the findings between the cases (Bloomberg &
Volpe, 2019). Yin (2018) asserted that researchers should conduct six to 10 individual
case studies for the purposes of replication and compelling support to strengthen the
research findings; however, other researchers such as Morse (2015) argue that the sample
size is more subjective and relies on the disposition, longevity, and complexity of the
phenomenon. Additionally, the experience, background, and analytic skills of the
researcher, together with the robustness of the overall interview, can make a
predetermined sample size superfluous if adequate saturation is achieved with a smaller
number of individual cases (Morse, 2015). Vasileiou et al. (2018) concurred and
maintained that sample size in qualitative research stereotypically tends to be modest in
numbers due to the focused efforts of the researcher to select cases that are abundant in
information pertinent to the specific phenomenon being probed for academic study; as
such, it was my goal to identify, recruit, and select at least six individual cases as
participants for my research study.
As stated above, potential participants categorized as business leaders in
cryptocurrency were identified using my professional network, and contact information
was cross-checked using LinkedIn and online public directories to confirm that all contact
information was publicly available. Purposive selection criteria were used to ensure that
business leaders work for firms based in the United States and have intimate knowledge
regarding the business strategy to adopt cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method
based on their published biographies and experience. Once potential participants were
contacted and agreed to participate, I obtained a signed informed consent form using the
Walden University IRB template.
Data Saturation
According to Marshall and Rossman (2016), little value is achieved when a
researcher begins to hear and see the same patterns in data. This phenomenon, also
known as data saturation, results when no new findings are occurring and theoretical
sufficiency has been attained (Marshall & Rossman, 2016; Saunders et al., 2016). As
participant interviews were conducted, I defined and formed categories of data for each
individual case. (Marshall & Rossman, 2016). I expected that, due to the finite number of
businesses that currently accepted cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method, data
saturation would be reached with six individual cases. If this was not the case, I would
again look to my professional network to identify further potential participants for my
research study until data saturation was achieved. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic,
interviews were conducted using the Zoom online service, which had recording options
available if the participant consented. A saturation grid was used as a visual tool to track
the interview question topics by participants (Fusch & Ness, 2015) to more easily
recognize when data saturation has been reached.
Ethical Research
Ethics in research is defined by norms for conducting acceptable and unacceptable
behavior with study participants through which we are morally and professionally bound
and enforced by Institutional Review Boards (IRB) (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2019). Ethics
are entrenched in the methodology, conduct, procedures, and perspectives regarding how
a researcher designs the research effort, collects data and analyzes complex problems
(Dawson et al., 2019; Yin, 2018). All researchers have an obligation to faithfully adhere
by the strictest ethical standards in all aspects in the performance of their research
endeavors, protect all human subjects, and abide by the dictates of beneficence which
directs primum non nocere (first, do no harm) (Ayodele, 2019; HHS, 1979; Marshall &
Rossman, 2016; Yin, 2018).
There are several components of ethical research that all researchers are obligated
to heed. Voluntary participation in research efforts entails that all participants were
willing and not under the influence of any type of coercion when participating in a
research endeavor (Trochim & Donnelly, 2008; Yin, 2018). As such, I ensured that
informed consent was obtained, without exception, from each and every participant. To
ensure that all identified individuals were comfortable about their participation, I
informed each person about the objectives, procedures, and risks of the study and
obtained a formal written consent form before any data collection began. In accordance
with the Belmont Report (HHS, 1979), I also provided each participant with information
regarding how to withdraw from the study at any time, if so desired, without
repercussions or other negative ramifications or consequences. Participants were
informed that they could review their responses provided during the study at any time.
Participants were informed that there would be no incentives offered for this research
inquiry.
Confidentiality represents the responsibility to protect the privacy rights of all
individuals and groups participating in the study and to not disclose any identifying
information to anyone that was not directly associated with the research inquiry (Colosi et
al., 2019; Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). These measures also include protecting personal
information from unauthorized access and use (Colosi et al., 2019) with intentionally
established physical and technological protections, redaction, and the use of non-
attributional codes for each participant’s covert identification. Modern technology has
created special considerations for contemporary research efforts. Disruptive technologies
like artificial intelligence are evolving in a direction that has to potential to be greatly
beneficial to society (Jia, 2020); however, these potent technologies affect societies,
communities, and individuals from diverse angles and varying degrees, researchers must
always take the necessary precautions from unauthorized access of sensitive research
data, analysis, and related products that could jeopardize participant confidentiality and
privacy (Jia, 2020).
I correctly labeled and safely and securely maintained all research data on USB
portable media (i.e., thumb drive), which will be kept for five years after the study in my
personal home safe. This safe is only accessible by me, and the combination was not
shared with anyone. I did not discuss the participants’ confidential and personal
information, or the data collected with anyone outside of this study. Upon conclusion of
the 5-year storage, all data on the USB thumb drive will be destroyed by electronic
shredding, and the thumb drive will be entirely reformatted. Reformatting the thumb
drive will completely wipe any attributional metadata remaining on the drive. While each
research endeavor carries a set of distinct ethical requirements, all researchers are
obligated to conduct each study to the highest moral, ethical, and professional standards
(HHS, 1979) to the best of their abilities. I pledged to conduct myself in accordance with
these standards, without exception.
Data Collection Instruments
According to Yin (2018), interviews are critical sources of evidence for qualitative
case studies. As such, semistructured interviews were the primary data gathering
instrument used in this study. As a result of safety concerns predicated by the COVID-19
pandemic, in-person meetings cannot occur between the researcher and participants
(Gruber et al., 2021). All interviews were conducted virtually over the Internet using
Zoom online meeting applications, which also enabled high-quality interviews (Lynch &
Mah, 2018; Sah et al., 2020; Sedgwick & Spiers, 2009). The Zoom application had the
ability to record meetings as well, so all interviews were recorded with the expressed
agreement and permission of each participant. To obtain agreement, I individually and
privately asked each participant if they agreed to be recorded and, if objections were
noted, the interview was not recorded.
As the researcher for this study, I served as the primary data collector. I have
received formal training as an interviewer as part of my past position as a certified (K121,
mild-moderate) special education teacher. I have conducted hundreds of interviews with
children, parents, family members, and caregivers as part of the overall academic
assessment process for special education services. Interviews are ultimately meant to
uncover information and the perspectives of the participants on a chosen topic
(Bloomberg & Volpe, 2019); therefore, interviewers must learn to interpret cues from the
participants and alter the way the interview is being conducted. I was keenly observant of
each participant’s body language, eye contact, and facial expressions, as all are telling for
an observant researcher. Semistructured interviews may also have a constrained outcome
depending on how the questions are asked. For example, language constructs play a
pivotal role in probative events so, I adjusted all elements such as tone, inflection, speed,
volume, clarity, and eye contact, and limit the use of colloquialisms so that each
participant encounters a pleasant, calm interview environment, and understands each
questioned asked. I conducted myself with the utmost professionalism by frequently
checking with the participant to ensure that they were comfortable so that an optimal
outcome was achieved.
The use of protocols ensures that all interviews are conducted in the same manner
so that reliability and validity are enhanced (Yin, 2018). To ensure the quality of
established protocols, I conducted several pilot tests of the interview questions with
academic or professional colleagues prior to the commencement of data collection, as
well as conducted member checking and transcript review with the study’s actual
participants after the data collection interviews were conducted.
Data Collection Technique
My primary objective as a researcher was to establish a high level of trust and
mutual respect with each participant so that an optimal level of professional comfort was
achieved. I strived for an environment that emulated a relaxed conversation rather than an
inquisition in order to get the best responses to the interview questions. While the desired
face-to-face experience was not possible due to the COVID-19 pandemic, virtual
interviews resulted in similar personal and information-rich experiences (Lynch & Mah,
2018; Sah et al., 2020; Sedgwick & Spiers, 2009). My goal as the researcher during an
interview was to uncover robust information and perspectives from the participants
relating to the established interview questions. Due to the extraordinary situation caused
by COVID-19, unique interviewing solutions were deemed appropriate.
Interviews
Interview planning can be an exhaustive and intricate endeavor. Participant
selection, protocols, question development, session scheduling, recordings, and
transcribing are just a few of many tasks that all researchers engage in when conducting
qualitative studies (Yin, 2018). For this study, participants were selected using my
professional network to identify business leaders who have implemented cryptocurrency
as an alternative payment method. Interviews were carried out in 45- to 60-minute
sessions with intermittent breaks as needed for both the researcher and participant to
combat fatigue. Participants were provided with the option to extend past the 60-minute
increment if no objections and stamina persisted. According to Sah et al. (2020) and
Sedwick and Spiers (2009), face-to-face interviews are preferable; however, due to the
implications of COVID-19, all interviews were conducted using the virtual meeting
applications Zoom to accommodate social distancing concerns. Telephonic interviews
were also made available if the participant was unable to access a virtual meeting
application.
Successful interviews normally began with several introductory questions as an
icebreaker between the researcher and participant to ensure that the participant was at
ease and comfortable (Trochim & Donnelly, 2008; Yin, 2018). I conducted all interviews
beginning with a general upbeat greeting thanking each individual again for their
participation. I also asked a few questions as an icebreaker to ensure that each person was
feeling well and was prepared to start the interview. I then, once again, provided the
background for the research inquiry and answered any questions that the participant had
at that time. The restatement of the research inquiry background was vital so that I could
articulate the study’s origin and its importance to the field of business administration. I
also wanted to establish myself as an authoritarian on the subject matter and achieve the
confidence of the participant. After the introduction, ice-breaker questions, a restatement
of the background was provided. Each participant was then asked all of the interview
questions in a standardized way to ensure consistency of the data as well as adding to the
reliability and validity of the study.
Interviews, especially virtual interviews, offer inherent flexibility and are
tremendously accommodating to both the researcher and participant (Sah et al., 2020;
Sedgwick & Spiers, 2009). According to Trochim and Donnelly (2008), one of the most
problematic areas of research design is the ordering of the interview questions. Lengthy
interview sessions can lead to participant fatigue and the dissipating quality of
responsiveness, especially for the latent questions. (Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). Another
issue that I expected during the virtual interview was a poor Internet connection resulting
in less-than-optimal video and audio quality. I established a contingency plan to
reschedule the interview in case the virtual interview got disrupted and could not continue
on the prescribed date and time. I also anticipated that the participants might experience
interruptions from family members, so I gently emphasized the need for a quiet space for
the duration of the interview (Lynch & Mah, 2020). I reviewed both the need for a stable
Internet connection as well as a quiet place for the interview via email with each
participant one week before the scheduled interview and again the day before the
interview. I acknowledged and thanked each participant for the time devoted to the
interview, along with the mention of a future appointment to conduct member checking
of the transcribed interview information. Once all interview data were transcribed, I sent
an email to each participant with their respective interview transcription attached
requesting member checking. Participants were provided seven days to respond with any
changes to the transcript content. The email to the participants also included explicit
instructions on how to review the transcripts and make any corrections necessary through
the use of tracked changes. With a methodical research design, proper interview
planning, a robust contingency plan, and member checking, researchers are better
positioned for research success and enhanced reliability and validation of the overall
study (Houghton et al., 2013; Yin, 2018).
Secondary Data Sources
In addition to the data derived from the semistructured interviews, secondary data
sources were also available in relation to the research topic of cryptocurrency adoption.
Cryptocurrency and Blockchain analysis organizations such as Chainalysis are emerging
in the United States on a regular basis. These organizations provide data, software,
services, and research to government agencies, exchanges, financial institutions, and
insurance and cybersecurity companies globally and are a fantastic resource of reliable
and valid data. For example, Chainalysis launched a detection tool for suspicious
cryptocurrency transactions, which I used to validate business leaders’ stated efforts to
counter the concerns created by the currency (Chainalysis, n.d.). My efforts to obtain
secondary data also include researching corporate annual reports, press releases, or other
briefing minutes provided by the participants or through open-source research.
Additionally, I scoured mass-media channels or contacted corporate public relations
departments directly with requests to provide data-rich information for triangulation
purposes. These resources, along with a rich supply of Internet and company website
information, offered distinct and abundant secondary sources of data for the purposes of
triangulation (Bevan et al., 2013).
Data Organization Technique
All data and consent forms gathered as part of this research inquiry were
organized and stored on my personal laptop via daily electronic reflective journals using
Microsoft Word or Excel and NVivo software for unstructured data. NVivo software
assisted me in organizing and analyzing unstructured data obtained from participant
interviews and secondary sources of data. The NVivo software classified, categorized,
and arranged information to illuminate relationships in the data. A standard file naming
convention was used for all documents, files, and folders for organized access. My laptop
was biometrically protected by the researcher’s fingerprint for access and was protected
from unauthorized access such as hacking using Norton 360 security software. The data
was also be backed up daily onto an external hard drive that was stored in an office safe
in the researcher’s home. My home was protected with a security alarm and external
dome video cameras, which were directly linked to a monitoring company for added
security protection. The data will be safeguarded for five years in accordance with
Walden University (2020) IRB guidance, at which point the physical data reports will be
destroyed by crossbar shredding, and electronic data will be deleted and wiped from the
researcher’s personal computer and external hard drive and USB thumb drive. These
measures will ensure the safeguarding of all research data and the confidentiality of the
participants.
Data Analysis
The most significant purpose of data analysis in a qualitative study is to identify
and expose patterns in the data (Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). Yin (2018) described four
general strategies for data analysis: (a) relying on theoretical propositions, (b) working
the data from the bottom up, (c) developing descriptions for the cases, and (d) examining
the possible explanations. Theoretical propositions begin with the research design of the
selected case study and subsequently form the proposed data collection strategy (Yin,
2018). Analyzing or working the data using an inductive approach allowed the themes
and patterns to naturally emerge, which can often expose unexpected or novel concepts
not previously considered (Yin, 2018). Developing description for cases uses a
scaffolding approach to organize research data (Yin, 2018). It is often considered a
contingency plan if researchers are having difficulty applying form to their study. The
fourth strategy described by Yin (2018) is examining the data for possible explanations.
This strategy was an amalgamation of the previous three strategies and encompasses
formulating reasonable alternative descriptions of the selected case study (Yin, 2018).
For the purposes of this study, inductive analysis was selected using NVivo
software to assist with coding and identifying themes. Data for this study began with
participant interviews that were recorded and transcribed. For the interviews where
participants do not permit audio recordings, copious notes were taken by the researcher
and transcribed. The data was uploaded into NVivo software, where data analysis began
with the establishment of codes. Codes are short phrases or expressions that capture a
portion of the transcribed data and serves as the researcher’s analytic lens for qualitative
inquiry (Saldaña, 2016). Caution was heeded, however, when establishing codes so that
they serve as an appropriate filter for the phenomenon being studied (Saldaña, 2016).
According to Saldaña (2016), coding is rarely done right the first time. The researcher
must pay scrupulous attention to the language expressed by the participants during the
interview in order to correctly capture their true reflections, or else recoding is likely to
occur (Saldaña, 2016). The data were synthesized, divided, and grouped into categories
once adequate coding was established. The categories were then compared and combined
to determine if logical relationships exist, and patterns emerge. The data were analyzed
using a content analysis method known as thematic analysis. This method of data analysis
allowed the researcher to group the text, transcriptions, observation notes, recordings, and
all other applicable data into themes or parking lots of categorizations (Bloomberg &
Volpe, 2019; Saldaña, 2016; Trochim & Donnelly, 2008).
The grouping or theming of data can occur either inductively or deductively and
serves as the crucial first step to organizing, understanding, and analyzing the data to see
where patterns emerge (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2019). Inductive analysis occurs when the
researcher begins with a shortlist of expected themes, but additional themes can emerge
as the data is progressively and more thoroughly analyzed (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2019;
Saldaña, 2016). Deductive analysis occurs with the researcher begins with a predefined,
structured list of themes and places the data into only the categories on that list
(Bloomberg & Volpe, 2019); No additional themes are added beyond the predefined list
with deductive analysis. For this study, inductive analysis was used, and I began with
initially expected themes based on the established interview questions. The initially
expected themes are: (a) origins of business strategies, (b) cryptocurrency adoption
obstacles, (c) technological safeguards, and (d) effectiveness of strategies. The coding
themes were augmented depending on the participants’ responses during the interviews,
and all data from all sources were organized in a database for organization purposes as
well to produce a report of interpretations and conclusions derived from the data (Yin,
2018).
The next step of analyzing the data involved building a plausible explanation for
the patterns that have emerged (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2019; Yin, 2018). It was here that I
instituted a system of denoting the participants’ perspectives. In other words, data was
meaningless without context (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2019). The subsequent descriptions
and interpretations represented the logic of the argument that I built as evidence to
support the findings. The final step in data analysis was presenting the analysis and
synthesis of the data. According to Bloomberg and Volpe (2019) and Yin (2018), the
emphasis and value in qualitative research are in the understanding of the data. In this
step of the research inquiry, I expressed how the data evolved, the patterns it formed, and
the context of the findings. The patterns and findings were then overlayed onto the
literature review on cryptocurrency and the diffusion of innovation theory to convey
robust insights to readers and demonstrate a genuine and authentic value of the research
that was conducted.
Reliability and Validity
Reliability
Validity and reliability are critical to ensuring the data quality of a doctoral
research study. Reliability in a quantitative research effort refers to the likelihood that
another researcher would be able to replicate the predictions and results obtained by
another researcher (Collingridge & Gantt, 2019). In qualitative research, reliability refers
to the adoption of accepted research methods used to collect and analyze data, and
successful efforts result in a meaningful and illustrative description of the selected
phenomena (Collingridge & Gantt, 2019). Morse (2015) believed that this aspect of
quality and rigor has a direct association with the reliability of a study’s future
application, which is referred to as trustworthiness and dependability. Additionally,
according to Yin’s (2018) first principle, researchers who use methodological
triangulation to converge on various lines of inquiry subsequently can establish lines of
intersection between various sources of evidence to establish a more rigorous case study
design, strengthen outcomes (Bekhet & Zauszniewski, 2012) and provide convincing
conclusions.
Dependability is paramount to achieving a prominent and formidable research
study. Member checking permits the participants of the research effort to read the
transcripts of their interviews for accuracy (Houghton et al., 2013). Although participant
feedback should not be solicited, there is value in ensuring that interviews were recorded
verbatim and thematic coding of responses was clear (Houghton et al., 2013). Even
though participants cannot influence the interpretation of their interview data, their
review can be invaluable to ensure that data collection occurred correctly (Houghton et
al., 2013). Member checking was conducted during this study via electronic
correspondence such as email due to COVID-19 concerns. Once all interview data were
transcribed, I sent an email to each participant with their respective interview
transcription attached requesting member checking. Each participant also received
explicit instructions on how to review the transcripts and make any corrections necessary
through the use of tracked changes. Participants were provided seven days to respond
with any changes to the transcript content.
Validity
Validity refers to whether or not the research endeavor measured what it intended
to measure (Collingridge & Gantt, 2019). The validity of a study denotes the credibility
of the processes and mechanisms used in the research effort and the accurateness and
believability of information that was reported. Without validity, a research study does not
promote a thorough understanding of the impact or context of the investigation
(Collingridge & Gantt, 2019).
There are several sources of data quality issues that could negatively impact a
research study. First, scholars who do not invest in prolonged engagement and persistent
observation rob the study of sufficient time to learn about the participants, identify
anomalies, and establish trust in the information that is gathered (Houghton et al., 2013). I
ensured that I allocated sufficient time to establish initial contact with the study’s
potential participants, provide them with a robust background for the research inquiry,
answer all questions and concerns that they had, and conduct thorough and thoughtful
interviews. Second, researcher bias can influence investigations towards the desired result
instead of actual events (Johnson, 1997; Yin, 2018). Since qualitative studies are less
structured than quantitative research, selective observations and selective recordings can
result when personal opinions and perspectives are permitted to influence the
interpretation of the study’s events (Johnson, 1997).
To thwart potential data quality issues, I took intentional steps to ensure research
validity. Triangulation was used to establish relationships between various sources of
research data and converge on numerous lines of inquiry (Houghton et al., 2013). By
establishing lines of intersection with various and robust data sources, case study findings
were strengthened and ultimately more credible (Bekhet & Zauszniewski, 2012).
Using members of my professional network, I employed additional rigors such as
peer debriefing support and requested that an impartial subject matter expert review the
credibility of my research findings, which is a best practice cited by Houghton et al.
(2013). Expert peer review added to the validity of my research inquiry by establishing an
agreement with the roadmap of the research effort and the logical steps taken to collect
and interpret data. By seeking out external scholars for research review from my
academic and professional network, the integrity and reliability of the study were also
enhanced (Houghton et al., 2013).
Perhaps one of the most pertinent rigors of qualitative research efforts is
reflexivity. Although personal bias should be avoided, the researcher is considered part of
the overall research effort (Houghton et al., 2013). The protocols, procedures, and
processes followed reflect directly on the credibility of the researcher and the associated
level of self-awareness (Houghton et al., 2013). My perspectives were kept memorized in
a reflection journal or diary for periodic rumination to aid in the subsequent decisions
undertaken in the study, which is a best practice according to Houghton et al. (2013). I
periodically sought confidential assistance from a fellow researcher to review my
reflection journal as well as converse with me regarding my feelings, thoughts, and
actions within my research inquiry. According to Borraz et al. (2021), the emotional
weight of academic research is perceived differently when shared. As such, another
researcher’s perspective helped to illuminate any biases that I may have inadvertently
exerted within the confines of my research study.
Transition and Summary
In Section 2, I included detailed information about the role of the researcher,
including the relationship with the topic and bias mitigation efforts. Participant eligibility,
selection criteria, and working relationship were also highlighted, along with the research
methodology and design, which were justified and supported with a thorough literature
review. I also encompassed a robust explanation regarding the crucial nature of ethics in
research. Data collection instruments, including collection methods, storage,
safeguarding, and destruction, were also discussed and analyzed in addition to the process
behind the formulation of the interview questions. Finally, both reliability and validity
were discussed to ensure that thorough details of my plans for data collection and the
credibility of data interpretation were provided.
Section 3: Application to Professional Practice and Implications for Change
Introduction
The purpose of this qualitative multiple-case study was to explore the strategies
that business leaders use to address the alternative payment concerns perpetuated by
cryptocurrency markets. Using semistructured interviews, I acquired information from six
business leaders who employed effective strategies to address alternative payment
concerns of cryptocurrency adoption. In this study, thematic analysis was used as the data
analysis process for the various data sources. I also used methodical triangulation to
establish validity and consistency for all of the data obtained during the course of this
study. Qualitative thematic analysis was used to identify patterns and themes within the
data and to determine the findings and conclusion of this study.
The research question for this study was “What strategies do business leaders use
to address the alternative payment concerns perpetuated by cryptocurrency markets?” In
this section, I describe the data collection method and the thematic analysis method
applied in this study. Also, I present the findings of this study from the thematic analysis.
Subsequent to the presentation of the findings, I impart insights on how the findings
connect to the diffusion of innovation theory and how the findings apply to the business
decisions to adopt cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method in the future. Lastly,
the implications for social change are discussed, the recommendations for action,
recommendations for further research, reflections, and finally, the conclusion.
Presentation of Findings
Participant Descriptions
The participants for this study consisted of six business leaders from varying sizes
and types of companies. Six business leaders were interviewed; five identified as male
and one as female. The participants were geographically dispersed within the United
States, with one participant located in Washington D.C., two in Virginia, two in
California, and one in Utah. The participants were between the ages of 39 to 54 years old,
and all were college-educated. Two of the participants held juris doctorate degrees, two
master’s-level degrees, and two participants held a bachelor’s degree. The participants’
tenure with their current employer ranged from 3 to 30 years. Table 1 below is a
summary of the participants’ titles, company revenue, education level, company tenure,
gender, and age.
Table 2
Participant Demographics Summary
Participant Title Company
Revenue
Education
Level
Company
Tenure
Gender Age
P-1 Owner $200K Doctorate 7 years M 41
P-2 C.E.O. $3B Doctorate 20 years M 54
P-3 C.E.O. $10M Master’s 3 years M 44
P-4 Owner/C.E.O. $70K Master’s 10 years M 40
P-5 C.E.O./
CoFounder
$250M Bachelor’s 30 years M 52
P-6 Owner $10K Bachelor’s 11 years F 39
I obtained consent from each participant via email and used the Zoom video
conferencing service to schedule each interview for a convenient time for each of the
participants. I conducted the interviews remotely via Zoom from my private home office
and recorded each interview using the Zoom audio recording function. I began each
interview thanking each participant as well as expressing my sincere appreciation for
volunteering to participate in my research study. I reviewed the consent form with each
respective participant that was returned to me electronically via email and reminded each
participant that the audio portion of the interview would be recorded with their expressed
permission. I also stated that the interviews were confidential and that their identity and
privacy would be protected by using a participant identification number instead of their
name, company, or any other uniquely identifying information in the study. Each
participant was also informed that all data would be destroyed after 5 years. I also stated
that participation in my research study was voluntary, and each participant had the right
to withdraw from the study at any point by informing me either verbally or in writing that
they no longer wished to participate. Each participant was asked if they had any questions
or concerns before the interview commenced, and each stated they had no questions or
concerns. After each participant verbally stated they had no concerns, I began the
interview. I observed each participant during the interview and took field notes to record
their sentiment and to supplement the interview transcripts as part of the overall interview
process. Below is a summary of the participants based on my notes and observations.
Participant #1
Participant #1 was a 40-year-old licensed attorney in the state of Virginia and
Louisiana and holds a juris doctorate degree. His law firm was established in 2015 and is
a full-service personal injury and civil law firm located in Virginia. He has been
practicing law for over ten years and is the sole proprietor of his law firm, which grosses
approximately $200k (USD) per year. Participant #1 was solely responsible for the
adoption of cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method for his clients. Participant
#1 was interviewed from his private office after work hours and was calm and collected
during the interview.
Participant #2
Participant #2 was a 54-year-old chief executive officer (C.E.O.) of one of the
largest online retailers in the United States. Participant #2 holds a juris doctorate degree
and has nearly 20 years of tenure with his company. He was an integral part of the growth
of his company from a small start-up to a publicly traded company with over $3 billion
(USD) in sales and nearly 2,000 employees in 2021. Participant #2 also served on the
company’s board of directors and was responsible for leading his company in the
adoption of cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method. Participant #2 was
interviewed from his private office during a break from his normal work hours and was
calm and collected during the interview.
Participant #3
Participant #3 was a 44-year-old C.E.O. of a small online retailer in the United
States that focused on exceptionally designed goods from independent vendors around
the world. He has served as C.E.O. since 2019 and was tasked with re-inventing and
rebuilding the brand while focusing on profitability. Participant #3 has a master’s degree
and leads a team of 25 employees. The company’s annual revenue is approximately $10
million (USD) in sales. Although Participant #3 was not employed as C.E.O. at the time
that his company initially adopted cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method, he
was well-versed in the history of that decision. Participant #3 was interviewed from his
private office during a break from his normal work hours and was calm and collected
during the interview.
Participant #4
Participant #4 was a 40-year-old owner and C.E.O. of a small recording company
in the United States and holds two master’s degrees. He assumed the role of C.E.O. in
2012 with a commitment to give more people in the world access to a particular style of
eclectic music. Participant #4 collaborates with music artists and distributors worldwide
and leads a team of 35 part-time employees with annual sales of approximately $70k
(USD). He was jointly responsible for leading his company in the adoption of
cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method. Participant #3 was interviewed from
his home after work hours and was calm and collected during the interview.
Participant #5
Participant #5 was a 52-year-old C.E.O. and co-founder of a large online business
established nearly 30 years ago in the United States. He holds a bachelor’s degree.
Currently, the company serves almost 400,000 customers annually, has 100 employees,
and has $250M (USD) in sales each year. Participant #5 was responsible for the adoption
of cryptocurrency as an alternate payment method in 2013 and now accepts over ten
different cryptocurrencies from a discerning client base. Participant #3 was interviewed
from his home after work hours and was calm and collected during the interview.
Participant #6
Participant #6 was a 39-year-old sole proprietor of a small photography business
in Virginia. She started her business in 2011 and has sales of approximately $10k per
year. Participant #6 has a bachelor’s degree and was responsible for the adoption of
cryptocurrency as an alternate payment method for her business in 2013. She was
interviewed from her home during a break during her workday and was calm and
collected during the interview.
Thematic Data Analysis
After each interview, I uploaded the Zoom recording to Sonix software for
transcription. Sonix transcription software provided a verbatim transcription of each
interview that I used along with my respective field notes to create a summary interview
document for each participant to review. I summarized the participants’ responses to each
interview question and captured the information in a Microsoft Word document. I then
emailed the respective summary to each participant to conduct member checking, and
each participant responded back via email to confirm the accuracy of the interpretation.
One participant emailed back, validating the interview summary interpretation, and also
provided an additional resource regarding applicable Bar Association guidance regarding
cryptocurrency that was not revealed during the initial interview.
I uploaded each interview transcript into NVivo once I received the respective
participant’s confirmation of accuracy. As recommended by Silverman (2016) and Yin
(2018), I began examining the transcripts to ascertain whether or not the data needed to
be revised, transformed, or remodeled to conduct coding, identify concepts, patterns, and
themes, and reach a conclusion. I performed initial coding that explored the structure and
descriptions of the collected data as recommended by Saldaña (2016). I executed several
queries in NVivo to identify the commonly used words and terms throughout the
interview transcripts. I then reviewed the secondary data collected from various
organizational documents to substantiate the data I gathered from the study’s participants.
After the initial coding process, I thoroughly scrutinized all the data, I began the
secondary-focused coding process. I first ran several queries in NVivo based on
frequently occurring words that related to technology adoption and my conceptual
framework – the diffusion of innovation theory. I queried words such as compatibility,
complexity, cost, effectiveness, advantage, technology, etc. After I identified applicable
and frequently occurring words, I created a node in NVivo and entered the codes that I
selected for identification within the interview transcripts. Each transcript was then
subsequently color-coded using NVivo software based on the code words, phrases, and
topics that served as an appropriate filter for the participants’ interview question
responses. I monitored these codes as I proceeded through the interview transcripts to
ensure that no additions, deletions, or changes were needed to the selected codes. My
field journal was also used during the coding process to record my thoughts and ideas for
later use.
After all of the transcripts ’coding was completed, I began to review the codes to
distinguish patterns and common themes between the participants ’interview data. Once I
had an inventory of all of the patterns and themes, I constringed the list down to those
themes that specifically addressed the research question for this study. Most succinctly, I
identified themes that focused on the strategies that business leaders used to address the
alternative payment concerns perpetuated by cryptocurrency markets. These themes and
strategies were also assessed regarding their applicability to the diffusion of innovation
theory and the literature review for this study.
The five constructs of the diffusion of innovation theory are (a) relative
advantage, (b) compatibility with existing values and practices, (c) complexity, (d)
trialability, and (e) observability (Rogers, 1995). Relative advantage and compatibility
with existing values and practices drive innovators and early adopters to take
technological risks to distinguish their organizations from their competition. Complexity
is a hurdle that is frequently overcome with the education of staff and customers and, in
the case of cryptocurrency adoption, through the use of a third-party settlement company
to simplify the settlement process. Trialability relates to innovators and early adopters
and their fervor to embark on trials of new technologies, never being quite sure if their
customers and clients will latch on to the advancements. Observability is crucial in
determining if relative advantages of the new technology are, in fact, being realized
(Rogers, 1995). Observability can also advance the diffusion effect and is considered a
critical component of technology transfer (Rogers, 1995).
The emergent themes and the corresponding codes are shown in Table 3. Each
theme identified as an element of this study was the result of coding the participants’
interviews and review of secondary data sources through the lens of the diffusion of
innovation theory. The following section provides a robust discussion, details, and direct
quotations from the study’s participants to support the emergent themes identified in this
study.
Table 1
Data Analysis Codes and Themes
Themes and codes n of
participants
n of
data excerpts
Theme 1. Commitment to Innovation as a Relative Advantage
Effectiveness (Better, Faster, Cheaper) 6 23
Use of Advanced Technology 6 22
Theme 2. Cryptocurrency Compatibility within the Organization
Alignment of Business Strategies
Fit of Technological Innovation
Social Impact
Theme 3. Overcoming Complexity of Cryptocurrency Adoption
6
6
4
24
13
10
Barriers or Obstacles to Adoption 6 31
Employee and Customer Education Safeguards
from Nefarious Actors
6
3
30
11
Theme 4. Trialability and Observability of Innovative Technology
Cost of Implementation
Cryptocurrency Payment Concerns
3
6
9
18
Customer Participation 5 22
Emergent Themes
As a result of the qualitative thematic analysis, four key themes were identified
that related to the research question: “What strategies do business leaders use to address
the alternative payment concerns perpetuated by cryptocurrency markets?” The themes
identified provide business leaders with information regarding the commitment of
innovation as a relative advantage, cryptocurrency compatibility within the organization,
overcoming complexities of cryptocurrency adoption, trialability, and observability of
innovative technology. The commitment of innovation as a relative advantage refers to
the degree of superiority and attractiveness to customers over similar existing products or
services (Rogers, 2003). A competitive advantage is commonly achieved by offering
consumers greater value, either by lowering prices or by supplying improved benefits and
services (Rogers, 2003). Cryptocurrency compatibility refers to how well the innovation
fits with established ways within the organization of accomplishing the same goal or the
needs of potential adopters of the technology (Rogers, 2003). Overcoming complexity
refers to how easy the innovation is to understand and use by both employees and
customers (Rogers, 2003). Trialability refers to the extent to which the cryptocurrency
adoption decision is reversible or can be managed in stages (Rogers, 2003). Observability
refers to the extent to which outcomes can be seen both internally and externally to the
organization (Rogers, 2003) and is a crucial element to facilitate technology transfer.
Following is a comprehensive discussion of the themes identified in this study
accompanied with direct interview quotations and literature to support the discussion.
Theme 1. Using Technology as a Competitive Advantage in the Marketplace
Businesses of all sizes seek to attain a degree of superiority, attractiveness, or
differentiation from competitors. While there is a sundry of ways in which to achieve a
competitive advantage in the marketplace, there are only two basic types: cost or
differentiation advantage (Phong & Hui, 2018). All participants in this study (6 out of 6)
indicated that they sought to achieve a differentiation advantage by adopting
cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method. All participants (6 out of 6) also
indicated that they wanted to be considered as an organization that embraced advanced
technology. For example, participant # 2 stated:
We were very intrigued by the underlying Blockchain technology and the ways
that it could change the world. We've always viewed Bitcoin as the first killer
application on Blockchain technology, but there are a lot more applications that
are going to use Blockchain to be meaningful. Beyond cryptocurrency, we think
that Blockchain technology has really useful applications in voting, supply chain
management, and land titling.
Additionally, 4 out of 6 business leaders also desired to improve settlement times and
reduce the transaction costs such as those associated with credit cards. For example,
Participant #1 felt that the Blockchain was “great technology” that would provide clients
who could not afford a retainer with a “pay-as-you-go” payment option. Bitcoin also
provided his clients with an alternative payment method that reduced the settlement times
for checks and reduced transactions fees that were inherent of credit cards.
Participant #2 stated that his organization had a “commitment to innovation” and
that the entire senior management team was “enthusiastic” about offering Bitcoin as an
alternative payment option and wanted to provide their customers with “another payment
method that made it easy” to purchase items on their website. Additionally, by initially
partnering with a third-party settlement company like ShapeShift and Coinbase, the
company was able to accept other cryptocurrencies other than Bitcoin as payment
options.
Participant #5 had followed cryptocurrency for some time and found it
“interesting” and “intriguing.” Starting in 2013, he and his senior leadership team had
“experimented with several different currencies besides Bitcoin. Some were abandoned,
and some were kept” as alternative payment options within their periods of trialability.
His goal was to generate a “curiosity” with current and potential customers to gain a
competitive advantage in his industry sector. What resulted was an ideological following
of customers who were passionate about safeguarding their identities from big data and
who preferred to have an anonymous way to do business. Participant #5’s company now
accepts ten different cryptocurrencies with associated sales amounting to 8–9% of its
annual revenue total of $250M.
The other participants shared similar histories regarding their journeys to
cryptocurrency adoption, with their primary goals being to become organizations that
embraced technology while providing alternative payment methods to their customers
and clients that afforded lower transaction costs and faster settlements. All participants
had an excitement and passion for innovation, a willingness to embrace advanced
technology, and a belief that cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method could
create an improvement, advantage, or benefit for their customers and clients.
Theme 2. Cryptocurrency Compatibility with the Organization
According to Rogers (1995), compatibility refers to the extent to which an
innovation is perceived as being acceptable with prevailing values, prior experiences,
and needs of potential customers. An innovation must also be considered socially
acceptable to be implemented. In the case of Participant #1, finding a business model for
a law firm involving cryptocurrency was a challenge. Participant #1 stated that he did
enormous amounts of research to “really understand the ethical rules that apply to
attorneys who want to accept crypto, especially for trust transactions.” Specifically:
One reason that some law firms are hesitant to accept crypto payments is that not
all state bar authorities have issued clear ethical guidance on the matter.
[Washington] D.C. has, for example, but Virginia has not. Some advocates are
pushing for the Virginia State Bar to issue guidance, but so far, there does not
seem to be much momentum in that direction. I am hearing that several firms are
interested in pursuing crypto payments after they can be more confident it won’t
result in disciplinary action.
Additionally, Participant #1 needed a business model that did not require “some
sort of a retail merchant refund policy,” which was not typical of most businesses that
accept cryptocurrency. Participant #1 applied for an account with the third-party
settlement company, Coinbase, and the requirement for a merchant code had been
modified or eliminated, and his settlement account was approved. While his business
model is somewhat atypical in general commercial settings involving cryptocurrency,
working with a third-party settlement company like Coinbase resulted in an alignment to
the company’s business practices and the ability to accept cryptocurrency as an
alternative payment method.
For Participant #2, the issues were centered around establishing internal corporate
policies for converting cryptocurrency once it was received as payment from a customer.
According to Participant #2:
Initially, the corporate treasury department held 10% of the Bitcoin revenue, and
90% was converted to United States dollars (USD). Eventually, the policy was to
keep 50% of Bitcoin and convert the other 50% to USD. Currently, [the
organization] holds 100% of its Bitcoin revenue as Bitcoin.
Participant #2 also added that several of their suppliers accept Bitcoin as payment, which
supported holding the Bitcoin revenue as actual Bitcoin.
Refund policies for Participants #2 and #5 proved to be another challenging
organizational issue. Due to the volatility and price fluctuations of cryptocurrency,
Participant #2’s organization issued refunds for merchandise in USD instead of
cryptocurrency to ensure that the equivalent amount was refunded compared to what was
received as payment. Participant #5’s company issued refunds back in the cryptocurrency
that it received as payment. Participant #5 expressed that the refunds issued in
cryptocurrency are necessary to support the ardent demands of his client base, who value
anonymity regarding their purchasing activities.
For 5 out of 6 case studies examined, cryptocurrency as an alternative payment
method was compatible with their organizations. The exception was with Participant #3.
Cryptocurrency was initially adopted in his company to cater to their international
customer base, which represented 30–35% of its annual revenue and also in response to
the market hype and excitement around Bitcoin. A third-party settlement company,
BitPay, processed transactions involving cryptocurrency, which provided accounting
reconciliations that were straightforward and simple. Unfortunately, according to
Participant #3, the company experienced some significant issues:
In 2019 the organization began having some credibility issues as a company in the
world and as a marketplace. It had sellers from all over the world selling on our
website, and at times, the company had not always done a great job vetting these
sellers. So, there were things that were sold that were maybe of lower quality.
There was [also] a fulfillment potential for fraud.
Additionally, there was a resulting perception that the company was linked to the
Dark Web. It was not the impression the senior leadership wanted for the company.
Subsequently, sales involving cryptocurrency dwindled to just “a handful of transactions
a month,” so the decision was made to stop accepting cryptocurrency and undergo a
radical transformation that would improve the reputation of the company. To date,
Participant #3’s company still does not accept cryptocurrency as it is not yet considered
compatible with the organization due to past events.
Theme 3. Overcoming Complexity of Cryptocurrency Adoption
One of the objectives of cryptocurrency was to simplify transactions and remove
the central settlement authority by allowing payments by a digital coin on a publicly
visible network known as the Blockchain or peer-to-peer. What seems simple in
principle, however, has presented several obstacles and barriers to companies in their
efforts to adopt cryptocurrency.
In 4 out of 6 cases studied, employee and customer education were at the forefront
of unraveling the complexity of cryptocurrency and creating business practices, policies,
and procedures to accommodate the new alternative payment method. For the sole
proprietorships, this involved enormous amounts of research on behalf of the owners
(Participant #1, Participant #4, and Participant #6) in understanding the Blockchain,
cryptocurrency, and how settlements would be handled with third-party settlement
companies like BitPay, Coinbase, and PayPal. For example, Participant #1 stated: “I've
had to do a lot of research and really understand the ethical rules that apply to attorneys
who want to accept crypto, especially for the trust transactions.” For the C.E.O.s of larger
organizations (Participant #2, Participant #3, and Participant #5), research and education
involved their corporate board members as well as their employees.
All participants stated that the complexity of fraud prevention was less with
cryptocurrency due to the safeguards built into the Blockchain. Although the participants
of large companies in this study had the resources to maintain a sizable fraud detection
department (Participant #2 and Participant #5), they stated that fraud was not a problem
with cryptocurrencies because the settlements were completed within minutes. Both
C.E.O.s stated that they spend most of their resources on credit card fraud prevention, not
cryptocurrency.
Slow regulatory responses from the U.S. Treasury’s Internal Revenue Service
(I.R.S.) and Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) have also not helped
companies exploit the benefits of cryptocurrency and have largely provided only
consumer warnings and penalties for illegal activities associated with the currency
(Didenko & Buckley, 2019). There remains a lack of resources, discussions, and
comprehensive analyses regarding how business leaders can implement and use
cryptocurrencies to expand trading and business growth on a more comprehensive and
even global level. As such, the potential benefits that virtual currencies can lend to
business strategies remains partially obscured.
Theme 4. Trialability and Observability of Innovative Technology
Within the diffusion of innovation theory, as it relates to this study, trialability
refers to the level of effort necessary to experiment with the innovation of cryptocurrency
within a contemporary business. Commonly evaluated elements include costs,
reversibility, organization culture change, and usability (Sonnenwald et al., 2001).
Observability refers to the visible outcomes of innovation adoption and encompasses both
internal and external phenomena (Rogers, 2003). Both trialability and observability are
considered before an organization makes a full commitment to adopt the innovation.
In 5 out of 6 interviews conducted for this study, the participants responded that
the trialability of cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method presented very few
barriers or obstacles. In fact, the participants described the process as “a relatively easy
thing to do,” “effortless,” and “easy to integrate.” Participant #3 stated that the decision to
stop accepting cryptocurrency was also not difficult when his company halted all
cryptocurrency payments in 2019. In other words, the trialability was reversible, without
any inconvenience. In all cases, a third-party settlement company such as BitPay,
Coinbase, and PayPal was used to complete the customer payment transactions, and the
business leaders felt that using these settlement companies reduced their overall risk of
cryptocurrency adoption.
Observability via customer participation and related revenue was most prominent
in Participant #2 and Participant #5’s companies. Participant #2 stated cryptocurrency
revenue amounted to approximately $50K per month and Participant #5 stated that his
cryptocurrency revenue was 8–9% of his total annual revenue to $250M. The other
business leaders of the sole proprietorships (Participant #1, Participant #4, and Participant
#6) reported negligible customer participation and associated revenues. Also, none of the
participants in this study indicated that they ran targeted marketing campaigns
highlighting their acceptance of cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method. All
cases within this study were considered stealth adoptions whereby information about the
cryptocurrency adoption was spread by word-of-mouth or blogs by existing customers
and employees of the companies, which may have contributed to the low customer
participation rates.
Connections to Theory
The findings from this multiple-case study demonstrate that the constructs of
technology adoption identified within the diffusion of innovation theory (Rogers, 1962)
manifested in the business leaders’ adoption strategies of cryptocurrency. Although this
theory began in the communications discipline (Rogers, 1962), researchers and
practitioners have applied the theory to study the diffusion of technologies in many fields.
The result of this diffusion is that people, as part of more extensive social systems,
formally adopt an innovative idea, behavior, or product (Min et al., 2019; Presthus &
O’Malley, 2017; Rogers, 1962; Roussou et al., 2019). The relevance of the diffusion of
innovation theory to this study is that it is the foundational premise to explain business
leaders’ behaviors and strategies to adopt cryptocurrencies as an alternative payment
method in the modern global economy.
Rogers (1995) pinpointed five constructs that serve as the catalyst for the diffusion
of innovation: (a) relative advantage, (b) compatibility with existing values and practices,
(c) complexity, (d) trialability, and (e) observability. Regarding relative advantage, in 6
out of 6 cases, the business owners embraced the technology of cryptocurrency and
believed that it would provide a competitive advantage for their business. During the
interviews, sentiments such as “great technology,” “commitment to innovation,”
“enthusiastic,” “interesting,” and “intriguing” were mentioned by the participants.
Additionally, 4 out of 6 business leaders also desired to improve settlement times and
reduce the transaction costs such as those associated with credit cards, thus creating a cost
advantage for both the business and customers. Relative advantage was clearly prominent
in Theme1: Using Technology as a Competitive Advantage in the Marketplace.
Regarding compatibility, in 5 out of 6 cases, cryptocurrency adoption was
compatible with the business mission, vision, and goals and aligned with Theme 2:
Cryptocurrency Compatibility with the Organization. For example, one company was
described by their previous C.E.O. in a press release that the company was “pro-freedom,
including the freedom of individuals to communicate information about value and
scarcity without relying on a medium created through the fiat of unaccountable
government mandarins.” In 1 out of 6 cases, the adoption of cryptocurrency was deemed
not compatible with the organization due to issues with vendor merchandise quality and
perceived associations with the Dark Web.
Complexity was experienced by all (6 out of 6) business leaders, whether they
were sole proprietorships or part of a large corporation. Education and training were
essential to not only understanding cryptocurrency but also in understanding how the
currency fit into their organizational culture. None of the adoptions occurred without this
preparation which was evident in Theme 3: Overcoming Complexity of Cryptocurrency
Adoption.
Regarding trialability and observability, in 2 out of 6 cases, cryptocurrency
generated a notable amount of revenue for the businesses classified as large corporations.
In 3 out of 6 cases, cryptocurrency adoption did not generate any significant revenue for
sole proprietor businesses. Although the adoption was favorably received by business
associates and customers, very few customers took advantage of this payment option. In 1
out of 6 cases, the cryptocurrency adoption trial was considered a failed undertaking and
abandoned. It is important to note that none of the participants employed an aggressive
marketing campaign to promulgate the use of cryptocurrency as an alternative payment
method. This behavior is counterintuitive to the research by Wonglimpiyarat & Yuberk
(2005), which found that the high demand for ten successful innovations resulted from
intensive marketing campaigns and effective linkages with industries as part of their
overall business strategies. As demonstrated in Theme 4: Trialability and Observability of
Innovative Technology, however, all participants established a trial period for the
adoption of cryptocurrency and employed methods to observe the success or failure of the
adoption.
The results of this study reinforced the appropriateness of the diffusion of
innovation theory as a conceptual framework and how it applies to strategies for
cryptocurrency adoptions in contemporary businesses. The five theoretical constructs of
the theory manifested within the realities of the context of the adoption and use of
cryptocurrencies and through summative validity demonstrated how business leaders may
likely apply these constructs in conceptualizing and planning for the adoption and use of
cryptocurrencies in the future (Lee & Hubona, 2009).
Applications to Professional Practice
The purpose of this qualitative, multiple-case study was to explore the strategies
that business leaders use to respond to the alternative payment concerns perpetuated by
cryptocurrency markets. The findings from this study are applicable to business leaders
who aspire to adopt cryptocurrency in the future as an alternative payment method. In the
following paragraphs, I conveyed how and why the findings are relevant to improved
business practices regarding cryptocurrency adoption. The applications to professional
practice include:
•identifying and understanding what relative advantages can be gained
from cryptocurrency adoption.
•determining if the complexity of cryptocurrency as an alternative payment
method is compatible with a business.
•establishing a trial period for cryptocurrency adoption to determine the
success or failure of the trial.
The first application to professional practice is for business leaders to identify and
understand the relative advantages of cryptocurrency adoption. All of the business leaders
(6 out of 6) that were interviewed expressed that cryptocurrency adoption was undertaken
in part as a response to the excitement surrounding Bitcoin. While many innovators
possess this same passion for advanced technology, it is prudent to understand what
relative advantages cryptocurrency can provide for an organization. For example,
according to Presthus and O’Malley, the profile of the average Bitcoin user is 32.1 years
of age, male (95.2%), full-time employment (44.7%), non-religious (61.8%), and a
libertarian political association (44.3%). Most Bitcoin early adopters embrace
cryptocurrency out of technical curiosity and not for the potential monetary gain
(Presthus & O’Malley, 2017). If this consumer group is not an integral part of a business’
client base, further research and efforts should be had to determine if courting this group
is in alignment with an established or future business strategy.
The second application to professional practice is determining if the complexity of
cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method is compatible with a business.
Determining the compatibility of cryptocurrency requires a comprehensive evaluation of
the organization to include the degree to which the innovation is perceived as being
consistent with prevailing values, prior experiences, and needs or demands of potential
adopters or customers (Rogers, 1995). An innovation must also be considered socially
acceptable to be implemented (Rogers, 1995). The cultural mindset should be heeded as
well. In the case studies that were examined, all business leaders stated that education and
knowledge about cryptocurrency for both employees and customers were essential.
According to Participant #5, “There was a learning curve for not just our development
team, but also our customer support team understanding the nuances of paying with
crypto, and the fact that you don't get an instant payment.” Depending on the type of
organization in question, technical education and training regarding cryptocurrency may
or may not be a suitable endeavor.
Finally, the last application to professional practice is establishing a trial period
for cryptocurrency adoption to determine the success or failure of the trial. There can be
major deterrents toward adoption, according to Presthus and O’Malley (2017), for the
non-users of Bitcoin. For example, the switching costs between fiat currency and Bitcoin
and the perceived non-value of using the currency can greatly influence the target
customer base during a trial period (Presthus & O’Malley, 2017). For example,
Participant #5 stated,
We put it out there to see what would happen with it and how interested or not
interested our customers would be, and we were very pleasantly surprised with
the response. Almost immediately, we started getting a handful of sales the first
day. We then started getting some attention in a few of the online forums, and it
snowballed from there.
Conversely, Participant #1 stated, “No one's ever taken advantage of this [crypto payment
option], but it's something that I offer, and I wish people would [use it]. I've often thought
about offering discounts to get people to [use it].” For both of these companies,
trialability and observability are dichotomous in determining the success of
cryptocurrency adoption. Business leaders should ask themselves — Can a trial be
successful if no one participates? Of course, a business leader can be successful at
establishing cryptocurrency as a payment option, but if no one uses it, observability is
null.
Implications for Social Change
The results of this study may be helpful for business leaders to facilitate social
change by understanding the diverse uses of cryptocurrencies that are influencing global
economies. Business leaders can also use the information presented in this study and,
along with their power and influence, financially and politically support global economic
reform for cryptocurrencies. The information derived from this study’s literature review
also illuminated the growing phenomenon of the Dark Web and associated shadow
economies (Shillito, 2019), which is harming society, and the need for further
government action to impede its expanded influence. Finally, the results of this study may
also catalyze social change by encouraging more business leaders to adopt
cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method so that the world’s most
disenfranchised, impoverished, and credit-challenged individuals who are unbanked and
disqualified for credit cards, keep more of their earnings, and subsequently be afforded
access to more goods and services (DeVries, 2016; McCallum, 2015) that they so
desperately need.
Recommendations for Action
Four themes emerged from this study on strategies for cryptocurrency adoption in
contemporary business. Table 4 contains the recommendations for action based on the
emergent themes of this study.
Table 4
Recommendations for Action
Recommendation Related Theme
Create business models to encourage more cryptocurrency
transaction-based outcomes versus investment-based outcomes. 1
Collaborate with global partners. 1
Shape the future of cryptocurrency. 2
Create education and training programs regarding cryptocurrency for
employees and customers.
3
The following recommendations may assist business leaders to enhance or
improve the results of their cryptocurrency adoptions as well as the entire ecosystem by
enhancing their knowledge as well as their cooperative behaviors on a global basis.
Below is an explanation of the suggested actions for business leaders.
Create Business Models to Encourage more Cryptocurrency Transaction-based
Outcomes versus Investment-based Outcomes
The first recommendation for action calls for the creation of business models that
encourage transaction-based outcomes versus investment-based outcomes for
cryptocurrency. Currently, many Bitcoins and alternative coins (a.k.a. altcoins) are held
for investment purposes and are referred to as digital gold (Kaur et al., 2021). Many
people might remember when the first image representation emerged that presented
Bitcoin as a gold coin with a “B” stamped on the front. This representation was created
for more reasons than to just sell magazines and other publications. This particular meme
emerged because Bitcoin, as an investment, behaved much like gold in 2019 (Kaur et al.,
2021) and was part of many investment portfolios. Investments, stereotypically, are held
for various timeframes as short, medium, and long-term investments (Bedi & Nashier,
2020). To date, within the United States, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are rarely
used as transactional currency (Bedi & Nashier, 2020) for things like buying a cup of
coffee, dinner at your favorite restaurant, or movie tickets. This model, however, is
changing. On September 27, 2021, the President of El Salvador, Nayib Bukele, issued a
decree making Bitcoin an official currency and legal tender within the country. Article 7
of the law stated that all businesses in El Salvador must accept Bitcoin as payment for
goods and services when presented by a customer (McDonald, 2021). To jump-start this
effort, President Bukele issued every citizen of El Salvador the equivalent of $30 USD in
Bitcoin. The government also built a network of 200 Bitcoin automatic teller machines
(ATMs), established a digital Bitcoin wallet application called Chivo, and offered
permanent residency to anyone who invested three Bitcoins or more in El Salvador
(McDonald, 2021). Many might call President Bukele’s efforts aggressive, dynamic, or
even radical. Even though hardships occurred early in his efforts which were caused by
hackers and protesters and malfunctioning ATMs, it is still too early to tell if his efforts
will succeed in El Salvador.
This information is not presented as a pro or a con stance for El Salvador’s efforts.
It is merely to demonstrate that disruptive innovations often follow a radical path of
hardship and even initial failure before success is observed. It is these types of radical
efforts that will be needed to begin the transition to transaction-based ecosystems for
cryptocurrency if the currency is to evolve into routine, transaction-based phenomena for
all people. Participant #5 also addressed the issue of transaction-based events stating,
[Cryptocurrency transactions] don't work quickly enough. The smaller
[cryptocurrencies] have tried to get around that and have better faster
confirmations, but if Bitcoin or any of these cryptocurrencies are ever going to
really make a dent in actual commerce, that they have to be more scalable.
Despite all of the triumphs and strengths, scalability remains the foremost
challenge that impedes the comprehensive adoption of Blockchain in some areas of the
world (Singh et al., 2020). Compared to non-Blockchain systems such as Visa and
PayPal, Blockchain systems have minimal throughput and latency performance. For
example, the throughput of Bitcoin and Ethereum Blockchains are 3–4 and 15
transactions per second (TPS), respectively (Sanka & Cheung, 2021). In comparison,
Visa and PayPal achieve 1667 and 193 TPS, respectively (Sanka & Cheung, 2021). In
other words, for cryptocurrency to evolve as an acceptable transactional currency, people
must be provided the mechanism at the point of sale (POS) to purchase cryptocurrency
easily and quickly by converting standard fiat currency to digital at the current speed
afforded by systems such as Mastercard, Visa, and PayPal (Sanka & Cheung, 2021).
Mechanisms must also be in place to allow consumers to rapidly execute digital payment
for goods and services without the need for intermediaries.
Collaborate with Global Partners
The second recommendation for action is for businesses to collaborate with global
partners that can propagate legitimate markets. Many countries around the world are now
participating in cryptocurrency evolution, including emerging markets. According to the
2021 Global Crypto Adoption Index performed by Chainalysis (2021), Vietnamese are
the most open to crypto trading and spending, accompanied by other Southeast Asian
countries such as India and Pakistan (Chainalysis, 2021). Ukraine also makes a strong
showing along with Kenya and Nigeria (Chainalysis, 2021). Two countries from Latin
America, Venezuela, and Argentina, break the top ten, but the world’s most powerful
nation with the biggest economy, the United States, fell to the bottom half of the list
(Chainalysis, 2021).
1. Vietnam
2. India
3. Pakistan
4. Ukraine
5. Kenya
6. Nigeria
7. Venezuela
8. United States
9. Togo
10. Argentina
The data published by Chainalysis (2021) includes cryptocurrency transactions in
all markets, both legal and illegal transactions such as those conducted on the Dark Web;
therefore, caution must be heeded in order to foster economic relationships with countries
that actively combat shadow economy activities that relate to illegal drugs, human
trafficking, terrorism, and identity theft.
To demonstrate the extent of shadow economies, Berdiev et al. (2018)
investigated the growing size of underground shadow economies and the clandestine
environment that keeps them hidden from main national economies. Many experts
believe that the overall size of shadow economies constitutes nearly 30% of the world’s
gross domestic product (GDP). While this number represents a worldwide average, the
size of shadow economies from country to country varies greatly.
Berdiev et al. (2018) examined the size of shadow economies in relation to the
level of economic freedom in over 100 countries. The variables examined were the
relationship to the size of the government, legal system, property rights, money stability,
trade freedom, and regulations for credit, labor, and business. The results suggested that
increases in economic freedom significantly reduced the size of the shadow economy in
the respective country. Berdiev et al. (2018) also concluded that economic freedom, not
political freedom was most effective at reducing underground shadow activities.
Participants in the study felt freer to participate in a market environment with institutions
that advocated and supported strong private property rights and that did not encumber
private citizens to absurd levels of taxation and regulations. In other words, countries
with economic freedom encouraged people to participate with merchants openly without
the need to go underground.
Shape the Future of Cryptocurrency
The third recommendation for action is to shape the future of cryptocurrency. The
United States Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) is the first
federal agency to address the regulation of cryptocurrency (Singh, 2015). Singh (2015)
explained that under FinCEN’s Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), statutory conditions attempt to
address money laundering by requiring the reporting of certain transactions using banks
and other financial institutions (Singh, 2015). U.S. federal regulations are minimal and
primarily address penalties for illegal transactions; as such, regulations are not focused on
cryptocurrencies as a common medium of exchange that can create an economic
environment of growth.
It is important to note that FinCEN has also recognized the benefits of
cryptocurrency to the public and has officially stated that it does not want to stifle
Bitcoin’s potential to improve the lives of poverty-stricken individuals (Singh, 2015). As
such, FinCEN’s position on Bitcoin could possibly provide business leaders with the
assurance that the currency is likely to be long-lived, thus reducing the business risk of
adopting the currency as an alternative payment (Singh, 2015). FinCEN may also be the
appropriate conduit or springboard to shape the future of cryptocurrency into one that is
more accommodating and user-friendly to the general public.
Create Education and Training Programs Regarding Cryptocurrency for
Employees and Customers
In a qualitative multiple-case study analysis, Clohessy and Acton (2019) explored
the potential of the Blockchain to transform global markets in developed countries. The
researchers studied 20 companies in Ireland to determine the influential factors regarding
the decision on whether or not to adopt the Blockchain. Clohessy and Acton (2019) found
that three significant themes emerged during their study regarding Blockchain adoption:
senior leadership support, organizational readiness, and company size. Additionally, the
researchers found that the potential favorable impact of technological advancements also
played a significant part in the adoption decision.
Clohessy and Acton (2019) determined that executive-level support of IT
innovation was a significant driver for initiatives such as Blockchain adoption. The
continued commitment of resources and long-term vision were vital elements to ensure
the integration of cutting-edge technology such as the Blockchain. Additionally,
organizational readiness, such as the presence of employee training and knowledge,
adequate financial infrastructure, and contemporary human resource departments, also
aided in the adoption of IT innovations. Clohessy and Acton (2019) also concluded that
large organizations with over 250 employees were also more likely to adopt the
Blockchain due to its “complex and diverse facilities” that were absent in most small and
medium-sized enterprises.
Wonglimpiyarat and Yuberk (2005) also demonstrated that innovation diffusion
does not occur by chance or without the knowledge of how to manage innovations with
consumers. Their findings may also explain the relatively slow commercial adoption
rates for Bitcoin and the poor marketing and socialization efforts that have been
undertaken to acclimate individuals to an unconventional, alternative virtual currency.
Recommendations for Further Research
This study contained several limitations that could demonstrate a variety of future
research topics. The first limitation identified was that I had to rely on the interview
responses provided by the business leaders identified for this study. By not obtaining the
views of pertinent non-management employees with similar levels of knowledge and
experience of cryptocurrency adoption, significant perspectives may have been missed as
part of my data collection efforts. Further research involving tenured employees may be
warranted to ensure that all viewpoints, events, and experiences were considered during
the period of cryptocurrency adoption.
The second limitation identified was the limited number of businesses that
currently accept cryptocurrency as an alternative payment method. Because this currency
is considered advanced technology and not yet mainstream, there was a limited number of
business leaders that could be interviewed for this study. As cryptocurrency adoption
continues to expand, further research involving a larger sampling of business leaders
could be warranted to explore evolving challenges to established business strategies for
cryptocurrency adoption.
Reflections
As mentioned previously in the earlier sections of this study, my prior experience
and knowledge of cryptocurrency were primarily focused on law enforcement from the
viewpoint of combating the illegal drug trade and financial crimes. I had extensive
knowledge of the Dark Web, but my knowledge of cryptocurrency adoption in the private
sector was very constrained, with only a cursory exposure to adoptions within small,
medium, and large-size organizations. I was aware of my biases and took exceptional
care not to influence the responses from the participants of this study.
The personal challenges that I faced during my doctoral journey were extensive. I
learned the value of self-discipline and sacrifice and how much I could accomplish with
very little sleep. I quickly realized that attaining my doctoral degree would likely be one
of the most demanding and ambitious ordeals of my life but also the most rewarding. I
have grown not only as an academic scholar but as a human being who began life in this
world with very little. The knowledge that I have attained has opened my eyes and my
mind to the global phenomenon of cryptocurrency and what is possible with advanced
technology. I am grateful to be present for its evolution and to witness the plethora of
possibilities using Blockchain technology in the future.
Conclusion
Throughout my academic journey, to understand the business strategies of
cryptocurrency adoption, I have uncovered information that will hopefully assist other
business leaders in the future. It is my hope that the findings from this study will provide
guidance and foundational knowledge for businesses that will serve as the blueprint for a
successful cryptocurrency adoption effort. By using the diffusion of innovation theory as
my conceptual framework, business leaders can now form a logical and calculated path
that addresses relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and
observability. It is my hope that this study will provide clarity and contribute to the
adoption of even more advanced technologies that can improve company revenues,
country economies, and enrich the lives of many people globally.
