Mangawang 2018

DIVINE WORD COLLEGE OF SAN JOSE
ONLINE VS OFFLINE SHOPPING: AN ANALYSIS OF BANK

EMPLOYEES’ BUYING PREFERENCES IN SAN JOSE,
OCCIDENTAL MINDORO
A Thesis
Presented to the
Graduate School Faculty
of the Divine Word College of San Jose,
San Jose, Occidental Mindoro, Philippines
In Partial Fulfilment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Master in Business Administration
AIROTCIV IVY BLAISE P. MANGAWANG
September 2018
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The researcher wishes to extend her inmost gratitude and genuine appreciation to
the following persons who contributed much for this success.
Rev. Fr. Renato A. Tampol, SVD, PhD (Cand), DWCSJ President, for his
unending support and continuous enhancement of graduate school researches;
Ms. Maybelle A. Paulino, PhD (Cand), her thesis adviser for the enthusiasm in
sharing enormous knowledge and advice to improve this research;
Dr. Chona T. Jarabata, her statistician, for sharing her expertise in statistics and
related articles about her study;
Dr. Luis I. Gante, Jr., her English editor, for proofreading the grammatical
content of this research;
Dr. Jason S. Valera, Rev. Fr. Joel E. Sagdullas, SVD, PhD, Dr. Lynda
Christine Diaz and Mr. Antonio E. Etrata Jr., PhD (Cand), the panelists, for their
critics and suggestions to improve the study;
Dr. Maria Pura C. Rayton, Dr. Wenceslao M. Paguia, Jr., and Dr. Angela M.
Galisanao, for their assistance during the validity testing of the research instrument;
Dr. Heliodoro E. Macabata and Dr. Nancy S. Macabata, former thesis adviser
and critic reader, for their extended time and dedicated involvement to make this research
possible;
The Commission on Higher Education and Dr. Arnold N. Venturina, for the
scholarship granted to the researcher;
Dr. Marlyn G. Nielo, OMSC President, for her undying support and motivation
towards the completion of the study;

v
Dr. Miguel C. Elausa, former SHS Principal of OMSC, for his encouragement to
apply for CHED scholarship;
Mrs. Paciencia C. Advincula, SHS Principal of OMSC, for her heartfelt
understanding during the tough times of the researcher;
Ms. Ana May G. Ramos, her best friend, for the ideas and inspiration to make
this study possible;
Ms. Allaine Mae V. Balleza, and Ms. Fatima Dela Cruz, her colleagues for the
determination to finish this study despite of hectic schedule in school;
Bank Managers and Employees, for accommodating the researcher during the
conduct of data gathering;
Mrs. Neofe Lazaro, Mrs. Angie Pasion, Ms. Dane Ong, other library staffs
and student aides of DWCSJ, for accommodating and helping the researcher in the
duration of her schooling;
Mr. Vicente C. Mangawang and Mrs. Conchita P. Mangawang, her
grandparents, for being an inspiration and stronghold in her career;
Mr. Venchito P. Mangawang, her uncle, for his financial assistance during the
difficult times of the researcher;
Mrs. Victoria M. San Agustin, her mother and her two brothers, Rafael and
Ryan, for the internet connection and their emotional motivation throughout the conduct
of the study;
Above all, Our Almighty God for preparing a good harvest, strength,
determination and courage to surpass the hardship that led to successful fields.
A. I. B. P. M.
vi
DEDICATION
To father GOD
To Mama and Lolo
To my Mommy and Siblings
This piece which stands as
attestation to your unconditional
love, support and encouragement I offer thee.
A. I. B. P. M.
vii
ABSTRACT
This research is entitled, Online VS Offline Shopping: An Analysis of Bank Employees

Buying Preferences in San Jose, Occidental Mindoro.
The researcher specifically described the profile of bank employees in terms of age, sex
and personal income. Also, the preferred channel in terms of buying products and the factors
influencing online and offline shopping preferences of bank employees was described.
Further, it analysed the bank employees’ switching behaviour from online to offline
shopping and vice versa, and the extent of bank employees buying preferences in terms of
motivation, buying attitude, buying intention, and purchasing behaviour.
The profile of the bank employees in terms of age, sex and personal income are the
independent variables tested for its relationship with the dependent variables, online and offline
buying preferences. Also, the bank employees’ switching decision and its relationship to the
buying preferences in terms of motivation, buying attitude, buying intention, and purchasing
behaviour was tested.
Lastly, the bank employees’ buying preferences in terms of motivation, buying attitude,
buying intention, and purchasing behaviour were tested for its significant difference between
online and offline shopping.
A descriptive-correlational and comparative method was used to describe, assess the
relationship, and discover the differences between and among the variables. A structured
questionnaire was used as research instrument. It has undergone expert validation and resulted in
a very high reliability.
Based on the findings and results presented, it was discovered that grocery was more
preferred to be purchased offline while airplane ticket was more preferred to be bought online. It
also revealed that risk was the common factor that influences online shopping preferences of bank
employees while financial security was the common factor influencing otherwise.
Moreover, the results have arrived at the following conclusions: the level of bank
employees’ switching behaviour from online to offline shopping and vice versa are both at a high
extent. The level of buying preferences in terms of motivation, buying attitude, and purchasing
behaviour were highly agreed for both online and offline shopping. On the other hand, the level
of buying preferences in terms of buying intention vary since online shopping resulted on a high
extent while offline shopping resulted on a very high extent.
The overall findings implied that there is no significant relationship between bank
employees’ profile and their online buying preferences. But it showed a relationship between sex
and their offline buying preferences in terms of buying attitude. The bank employees’ switching
decision were found as well to have a significant effect to their buying preferences in terms of
motivation, buying attitude, buying intention, and purchasing behaviour. It further indicated that
buying preferences in terms of buying attitude, buying intention, and purchasing behaviour differ
between online and offline shopping.
In the light of the results gathered in this study, the buying preferences of bank
employees were proven to have variation in different aspects and can be concluded to have
interest to shop on both online and offline stores depends on their level of satisfaction.
Thereafter, recommendations are enumerated to help assist bank employees in
determining a smart choice.
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE i
APPROVAL SHEET ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iii
DEDICATION v
ABSTRACT vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS vii
LIST OF TABLES ix
LIST OF APPENDICES x
CHAPTER I - THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND
Introduction 1
Research Locale 3
Statement of the Problem 4
Statement of Hypothesis 5
Significance of the Study 5
Scope and Limitation of the Study 7
Theoretical Framework 7
Conceptual Framework 11
Definition of Terms 12
CHAPTER II – REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND
STUDIES 14
ix
CHAPTER III – RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research Design 33
Respondents of the Study 33
Research Instrument Used 36
Validity of the Instrument 38
Reliability of the Instrument 38
Data Gathering Method 38
Statistical Treatment 39
CHAPTER IV – PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND
INTERPRETATION OF DATA 41
Proposed Development Program 64
CHAPTER V – SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary 66
Findings 68
Conclusions 72
Recommendations 75
REFERENCES 77
APPENDICES 90
CURRICULUM VITAE 131

x
LIST OF TABLES
Table Title Page
1 Synthesis Matrix 30
2 Population Distribution 35
3 Bank Employees’ Profile in Terms of Age 41
4 Bank Employees’ Profile in Terms of Sex 42
5 Bank Employees’ Profile in Terms of Personal Income 43
Bank Employees’ More Preferred Channel When Shopping

6 44
Products
Factors Influencing Shopping Preferences of Bank

7 46
Employees Whether Online Shopping or Offline Shopping
Mean Extent of Bank Employees’ Decision to Switch from

8 49
Online Shopping to Offline Shopping
Mean Extent of Bank Employees’ Decision to Switch from

9 Offline Shopping to Online Shopping 51
10 Mean Extent of Bank Employees’ Buying Preferences 52
Multiple Regression Analysis Between Bank Employees’

57
11 Profile and their Online Buying Preferences

58
12 Profile and their Offline Buying Preferences

61
13 Switching Decision and their Buying Preferences
Comparative Analysis Between Online Shopping and Offline

62
14 Shopping in terms of Buying Preferences
Development Program to Assist Bank Employees in 64

15
Determining a Smart Choice
xi
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix Title Page
A Respondents of the Study Description 95
A Letter of Request to Gather Data from the Banks in San

B 99
Jose, Occidental Mindoro
C A Letter of Request to Validate the Research Instrument 100
A Letter of Request to Test the Reliability of the Research

D 106
Instrument
A Letter of Request to the Respondents to answer the

E 108
Research Instrument
109
F Survey Questionnaire
Computer Print-out of the Statistical Computation for the
G 114
Reliability of Research Instrument
Computer Print-out of the Statistical Computation for Data

H 117
Analysis
xii
CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND
Introduction
Shopping, as defined by various authors, is a habit or a process of browsing
and/or purchasing the most preferred items in stores in exchange for money. Barišić
(2016) mentioned on his blog that some researches indicate shopping to have a direct
effect on the brain’s pleasure centers. It can flood the brain with dopamine, similar to the
way a drug addict experiences a fix. The idea of shopping seems to divide people into
two camps: those who love it and those who really don’t (Zyla & Mell, 2015). Aside
from that, they shared that not all shopping is created equal. There are times when
consumers’ preferred browsing, and when consumers’ preferred buying.
Several years ago, people tend to buy products along street markets or being
referred now as bazaars, whereas, foods and Jewelry were the most popular products
then. Reaching wide-range of retailers that period is only for big people and firms. But
time after time, from the existence of railway systems through the infrastructure of roads,
bridges, and other transportation development has made trading or buying and selling
possible for reaching global market. Due to that, way of shopping was made a lot easier
than before along with the rapid boom of catalog trading and huge malls. Further, the
entrance of technology has made it the easiest for many firms to do business. Besides,
technological advancement contributed not only to businesses but also to shoppers
especially during the birth of internet services.
Throughout the late 1990s, for Worzala and McCarthy (2002) as cited by Croome
(2006), internet was addressed as a revolution that would profoundly change the way
xiii
business would be conducted in the 21s Century. Actually, Liang and Lai (2000) in the
study of Li and Zhang (2002) said that internet shopping is the most popular and is the
third best activity over the internet. They even said that online (internet) shopping is
developing very fast in recent years. In fact, it provides good chances to sellers to reach
their consumers in much faster and convenient way. But despite of millions of people
who shop online, still, offline shopping is continuing over years. Many shoppers choose
to purchase offline because they want to physically examine the product before paying
for it. Nevertheless, the benefit of online shopping in terms of convenience and less
pricey products convinces many potential consumers to shop online (Gupta, 2015).
However, this rapid development of e-commerce creates confusion among
retailers because consumers’ shopping patterns and preferences are hard to predict.
Thus, in this competitive world, it is very important to determine how customers
wisely decide on a particular medium of purchase, whether online or offline, to
understand the buying preferences concerning the motivation factors, buying attitudes
and intention, and purchasing behaviour.
With the foregoing statements, the following objectives motivated the researcher
to conduct this study:
1. describe the consumers’ profile, preferred channel in terms of purchasing
products, and the factors that influence consumers’ shopping preferences;
2. describe the extent of consumers;’ switching behaviour;
3. describe the extent of consumers’ buying preferences;
4. assess the relationship between consumers’ profile and their online and offline
buying preferences;
xiv
5. assess the effect of consumers’ switching decisions to their buying
preferences; and
6. compare the online and offline buying preferences of bank employees.
Research Locale
While Mamburao is known as the “Provincial Capital”, San Jose is considered as
the “Business Capital” of the province of Occidental Mindoro. In fact, according to
National Competitiveness Council (n.d.), San Jose is one of the first class municipalities
which contributed the highest revenue in pesos as of 2010. Further, based on the
statistical data, San Jose leads the two other first class municipalities (Sablayan and Sta.
Cruz) in terms of capacity to generate employment and financial institutions with a 7334
in 2015 and 99 in 2016, respectively. This data proves that San Jose is able to
accommodate future investors and economic success.
Recently, due to the emerging number of commercial businesses and financial
institutions, San Jose can be referred as “more than a gateway” not just in tourism but
also in economic development. Out of these bountiful financial firms, 15 among them are
banks. It can be classified in any of the following: commercial and universal banks; thrift
banking system; and rural and cooperative banks (Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas [BSP],
n.d.). Nevertheless, only 14 out of 15 agreed to be respondents of this study. See
Appendix “A” for the description of each respondent.

xv
Statement of the Problem
The researcher sought to investigate the following problems:
1. What is the bank employees’
1.1 demographic profile in terms of:
1.1.1 age;
1.1.2 sex; and
1.2 personal income?
2. What is the bank employees’ preferred channel when shopping products: online
or offline?
3. What are the factors influencing online and offline shopping preferences of bank
employees?
4. What is the extent of bank employees’ switching behaviour from:
4.1 online shopping to offline shopping;
4.2 offline shopping to online shopping?
5. What is the extent of bank employees’ online and offline buying preferences, in
terms of:
5.1 motivation;
5.2 buying attitude;
5.3 buying intention; and
5.4 purchasing behaviour?
6. Is there a significant relationship between bank employees’ profile and their
online and offline buying preferences?

xvi
7. Is there a significant relationship between bank employees’ switching decision
and their buying preferences?
8. Is there a significant difference between online shopping and offline shopping in
terms of their buying preferences?
Statement of Hypothesis
The following are the statements of hypotheses of the study:
Ho1. There is no significant relationship between bank employees’ profile and
their online and offline buying preference.
Ho2. There is no significant relationship between bank employees’ switching
decision and their buying preferences.
Ho3. There is no significant difference between online shopping and offline
shopping.
Significance of the Study
The result of the study will be helpful to:
Bank Employees. This study will help assist the employees in determining a smart
choice when purchasing products, be it online shopping or offline shopping. Also, this
will determine their level of awareness on the benefits they deserve to receive, one of
which is the work life balance.

xvii
Bank Management. This study will be a useful tool for the management of banks to
determine if their employees still have time to go out for shopping despite of busy
working schedules. This will serve as a basis that could help the management in
formulating strategic development program for employees especially with regards to
addressing work life balance among them.
Business Sectors. As business sectors provide a vital role in the economic growth of
each municipality or city, this study will guide businesses to provide necessary
innovation to respond to the consumers’ needs and buying preferences.
Offline Sellers. This study will serve as a basis for local offline sellers (e.g.
physical/concept stores, catalog tradings, etc.) to come up with innovative strategies that
will enable consumers’ to continuously purchase their products despite of technological
advancement brought by other bigger establishments.
Online Sellers. The discoveries of this research paper could be beneficial for national or
provincial online sellers to improve their online services since most consumers of today
would like fast and convenient way of shopping.
Future Researchers. The findings of this study will also serve as relevant point of
information for future researchers and further studies.

xviii
Scope and Limitation of the Study
This study aimed to find out the buying preferences of bank employees in San
Jose, Occidental Mindoro. This study is, therefore, subject to the following limitations:
This study focused on all types of employees, both Regular and Contractual,
classified as Supervisory/Managerial and Rank & File positions in Commercial and
Universal Banks, Thrift Banks, and Rural and Cooperative Banks such as: AgriBusiness
Rural Bank (AGRIBANK), Center for Agriculture and Rural Development, Inc. (CARD
Bank), China Banking Corporation (China Bank), City Savings, Development Bank of
the Philippines (DBP), First Consolidated Bank (FCB), Land Bank of the Philippines
(LBP), Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co. (Metrobank), Occidental Mindoro Cooperative
Bank (OMCB), Philippine National Bank (PNB), Philippine National Bank Savings
(PNB Savings), Philippine Veterans Bank (PVB), Rizal MicroBank (RMB), and United
Coconut Planters Bank (UCPB), in the municipality of San Jose, Occidental Mindoro,
considering those who are employed a month thereafter. It includes the profile of the
employees in terms of age, sex, personal income, and digital literacy. The study also used
terms to determine the bank employees’ buying preferences: motivation factor, buying
attitude, buying intention, and purchasing behaviour.
Theoretical Framework
Motivation is a suppositious concept that serves as a driving force impelling
behaviour within individuals to urge them to do the action (D’Souza, 2008; Kahayon &
Berba, 2005). They further emphasized that motivation, therefore, may be referred to
either energization of goals or to the intrinsic or extrinsic factors which are significant to
xix
help achieve desired and planned effort. Kahayon and Berba (2005) mentioned as well
that when an individual succeed on various tries at meeting his needs, it is perceived that
motives can be a tendencies towards definite kinds of behaviour.
Motivating an individual forces him into motion or action, therefore, Deceeco and
Tutoo (2000) categorized it as those factors which tend to increase or decrease, encourage
or discourage the virus in an individual with the aim of determining his level of activity.
Nasibov (2015) defined motivation as a word derived from the word ‘motive’
which means needs, desires, wants or drives within persons. For Tria, Gaerlan, and
Limpingco (2012), motives condition may be psycho-social or biological. These are
drives that produce agitated activity that makes tissue needs to continue until satisfied.
To supplement these statements, the Motivational Theory of Abraham Maslow
will provide deeper understanding on consumer’s motivation patterns.
The Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs is a motivational theory comprising a
five-pyramid level of human needs (McLeod, 2018). The basic needs or deficiency needs
is found at the bottom and the growth needs is at peak. For Maslow, people are motivated
to achieve definite needs and clarified that satisfying one’s need is not an all-or-none
occurrence. In fact, Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is adapted on market segmentation and
business advertisements for there are products intended for satisfaction level of an
individual where most are shared by a large number of consumers (Svatosova, 2013).
These needs are enumerated as follows: 1)Psysiological needs – needs necessary for
survival (foods, and other goods of everday use); 2) Safety Needs – needs for protection
(insurance); 3) Social Needs – needs for solidarity and love (clothes, cosmetics, other
body cares, clubs); 4) Need for recognition – needs of the status and success (Luxury
xx
cars, other luxurious items); 5) Self-Actualization – realizing personal skills and
ambitions (education, experiences, and happiness).
Moreover, attitude and intention being the second and third on the dependent
variables in this study also contribute to the determination of bank employees’ buying
preferences. The authors Tria, et al. (2012) defined attitude as a stable way of evaluating
person, objects or situation which is rooted in an ABC Approach or the Affectivity,
Behaviour, and Cognition
Approach. It was discussed that a person’s affective approach is a physiological response
to a particular motives that entails his/her preferences. The behavioural component, on
the other hand, is an indication of an individual’s verbal language pertaining to what that
person intends to do. While cognitive response describes the individual’s cognitive
evaluation of the entity, which is then used in the formation of an attitude.
Further, the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) predicts an individual’s intention
which was determined by attitude, subjective norm, and product brand image to engage
on a particular behaviour (The Theory of Planned Behaviour, n.d.; Yunus, Yusof, &
Hashim, 2016). This statement shows a positive relationship between consumer’s
intention and attitude.
According to Arnitage and Conner (2001), as cited by Yunus, et al. (2016),
intention serves as a motivation drive for an individual to engage in certain behaviour.
Aside from that, intention or person’s willingness to buy is defined by Doss and Supa
(2011) and Sam and Tahir (2009) as the likelihood for a consumer to purchase a specific
product or services (Yunus, et al., 2016).

xxi
Abovementioned terminologies pertaining to motivation, attitude, and intention
creates a linkage to purchasing behaviour of an individual. There were a number of
theories discussed about how a consumer behaves while doing a purchase. Behaviour or
the sum total of consumer’s motive, attitude, and intention, is defined by Eduardo and
Panganoron (2015) as action of an organism which embraces other factors that can be
directly observed, measured and repeated. For Guevara (2014), numerous significant
contributors added up to list of understanding behaviour, namely: Sigmund Freud,
Francis Galton, and Charles Darwin. On a marketing perspective, theories relevant to
consumer behaviour were explained. The Theory of Reasoned Action by Martin Fishbein
and Icek Aizen, recently known as the Theory of Planned Behaviour, as being mentioned
above, is one of the considered theories which analyse the importance of pre-existing
attitudes in the decision making process (Four Consumers Behaviour Theories, n.d.).
These theories highly reinforced motivation factor, buying attitude, buying
intention, and purchasing behaviour’s great impact in bank employees’ buying
preferences.
xxii
Conceptual Framework
IV
DV
Bank Employees’
Profile BUYING PREFERENCES
 Age
 Sex ONLINE OFFLINE
 Personal Income
 Motivation
 Buying Attitude
 Buying Intention
 Purchasing Behaviour
SWITCHING
DECISION
Figure 1. Schematic presentation of the Conceptual

Framework
The framework shows the relationship and difference between the variables used
in this study.
The dependent variables were divided into two. The online shopping preferences
and offline shopping preferences in terms of motivation factor, buying attitude, buying
intention, and purchasing behaviour could be directly influenced by the profile of the
respondents such as age, sex, personal income, and digital literacy and their switching
decision.
xxiii
Definition of Terms
For better understanding and clarity, the researcher defines the following terms
operationally:
Buying Attitude. It refers to bank employees’ feeling or way of thinking towards a
certain matter that people could regard either as friendly or rude.
Buying Intention. It is a state of the bank employees’ intended purpose when making a
purchase.
Buying Preferences. It refers to the choice/option of bank employees’ on a particular
channel of purchase, whether online shopping or offline shopping, in terms of: motivation
factor, buying attitude, buying intention, and purchasing behaviour.
Income. It refers to bank employees’ personal salary received on a regular basis, for the
means of work.
Motivation. It denotes to the bank employees’ motives or drives that encourage them to
make a purchase for the satisfaction of needs.
Offline Shopping. It is an action of purchasing products or services in a traditional brick-
and-mortar store where you can physically examine the products and services.
xxiv
Online Shopping. It is an action of purchasing products or services on various online
retailers with the use of computer or digital devices.
Purchasing Behaviour. The sum total of consumer’s motive, attitude, and intention
which is defined in this study as the consumer’s behaviour when purchasing products or
services in a particular channel of purchase, whether online shopping or offline shopping.
Switching Behaviour. It pertains to the overall decision of bank employees in switching
from online to offline shopping and vice versa.
Switching Decisions. These are the written statements that dictate the reason of
consumers to switch the shopping pattern from online to offline shopping and vice versa.
xxv
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES
This part of the study reviews some related literature and studies about the
variables included in the study such as profile, online shopping preferences and offline
shopping preferences in terms of: (1) motivation factor; (2) buying attitude; (3) buying
intention; (4) purchasing behaviour. With the help of reliable readings used as references,
the accuracy of relationships and differences of variables was made possible. These
reliable sources of information were herein organized according to the variables in this
study.
Age
Young ones and adults, even the ones go in between, play a vital role in the
society. However, their ages vary not just in numbers but in many aspects.
E-commerce or online shopping is growing very fast and implemented on several
countries around the world (Tananuraksakul, 2007). On the study of Nielsen (2014), the
leading age of consumers who purchase online and contributed to the growth of e-
commerce are found to be Millennials with age bracket from 21-34 years old. Similar
judgement was articulated by Smith (2015) as he revealed that Millennials spend more
money online compared to any other age group despite having minimal amount of
income. This is in contrast on the article written by Silverberg (2016). For her,
Generation Z or consumers born after 2000 have more actual money to spend than the
generation before them, thus, marketers keep pace with these skilled researchers. In the
Philippines, according to the number one (1) online store in Asia, Lazada (2015),
xxvi
individuals aging 18-25 or 27% of the market, was the most frequent buyers online. It
was supported by the findings of Gupta (2015) where 68.6% of his respondents (ages 18-
25) tend to be the major customers who shop online to fulfil their needs. Perhaps it was
because of the increasing technology revolution among them whereas technology will aid
their well-being. Meanwhile, Rappler (n.d.) labelled Millennials with median age of 24 as
individuals who grew up as digital populaces.
Not surprisingly, Lieber and Syverson (2010) study elucidated that the proclivity
to be online declines with age. Furthermore, Kau, et al. (2003) as mentioned by
Tananuraksakul (2007) found that Asian countries like Singapore, Hongkong, Taiwan,
and Malaysia with males aging slightly younger between 20-29 years old have made
most purchases online, whereas, those who are in the ages 40-49 years old preferred to
purchase offline. But still, Nielsen (2014) said to never count old generations out on
online purchases where 40% of them are into online shopping and are classified as:
Generation X (35-49 years old); Baby Boomers (50-64 years old); Silent Generation (65
years old and above).
Though other studies believed that offline shopping is only for old generations, in
Nigeria, Falode, et al. (2016), it was found out that 19% or 76 among 400 respondents
with the age 18-25 years old were offline shoppers, resulted higher compare to ages 26
years old and above. Nevertheless, those 19% offline shoppers were also considered to be
41% or 7 out of 17 online shoppers, which was relatively higher to ages 26 and above.
Hence, out of all these findings, Pratap (2017) emphasized age to be one of the
factors affecting consumer’s buying decisions.

xxvii
Sex
Several different studies and researches argued as if two sexes differ or relates to
each other. However, it reflected to similar results, that the two sexes (male and female)
differ in variety of ways such as actions, motives, perspective, and rationales (Lewis,
n.d.).
In a shopping perspective, it was always believed that women are more likely to
shop than men. The study of Gupta (2015) reinforced this as it revealed that 60.40%
women do the shopping while 40.60% men go for shopping. But there were plenty of
articles and research studies saying that both men and women share a percentage depend
on different shopping patterns and approach. Like the survey made by Payment Sense,
according to Karr (2014). The survey found out that when it comes to online shopping,
time allotted for shopping, behavioural insight, and spending patterns, women showed a
much higher percentage. But when it comes to usage of shopping apps, especially the use
of social media, men lead the way because they preferred fast and effortless way of
shopping (Zorzini, 2017; Aswegen, 2015). Schlossberg (2016) confirmed this based on
the findings of Business Insider Intelligence (2016) that men were doing a lot of shopping
online and that women still care on the traditional in-store shopping experience. But the
reason why women were always on top when it comes to shopping is conceivably due to
the feeling of enjoyment while on shop (Hoger, 2015).
In addition, Taylor (2015) aroused the fact that men and women way of shopping
is relevant to the “Hunter-Gatherers” Theory, whereas, the patterns of meeting survival
needs before provided similarities between men and women’s shopping habits of today.
Kruger and Byker (2009) also established the same findings and reiterated women to be
xxviii
more persuaded to spend comprehensive time browsing around shopping malls as they
were gathering survival needs before, than men who immediately buy what they need and
leave straight away as they were hunting like before. For Aswegen (2015), it can be
because women make decisions based on emotions while men make decisions based on
facts and data.
Personal Income
According to Investopedia (n.d.), consumer makes decision by allotting their
scarce income thru all possible goods in order to gain greatest satisfaction.
The value of money is significant in every aspect of today’s needs. It is
determined by the demand for it, the same with how people demand for goods and
services (Amadeo, 2017). The book of Solomon (2004) said that the income level affects
what consumers can afford. For Balasubraanian, Raghunathan, and Mahajan (2005),
consumer’s use of channel/s in making a purchase was associated by the attainment of its
economic goals. Let's say for instance, a middle class consumer makes his/her buying
decisions based on usefulness while an upper class consumer would prefer style and
special features on making a purchase (Pratap, 2017). But as evidenced by Consumer
Lifestyles (2018), despite of obstinately inequality on the levels of income, middle
consumers were expanding, lashing an increase on demand for extensive array of modern
products and services.
The Philippine Star (2017) indubitably strengthen the statement of Willy Kruh
based on the KPMG International Report, as he said, “Stage of life and income levels are
undoubtedly primary factors driving both online and offline shopping…”. He also stated
xxix
that consumers who are more established in their careers and has the capacity of building
homes are likely buying more goods than the ‘Tech Savvy’ Millennials.
Further, Reyes (2016) asserted that consumers whose income is in middle range
are most likely to shop online, whose per capita income ranges between P31, 560 to
P78,900 per month (Alber, Gaspar, & Raymundo, 2015).
However, the findings of Gupta (2015) specified the dominance of students to be
engaged in online shopping than paid employees. These people are not employed yet the
capacity of purchase is probably due to their allowances and their exposure to
technology. Additionally, though, students ensued a high result, subsequent to this was
the group of people earning 15, 000 to 30, 000 a month or equivalent to 12, 065 to 24,
130 Philippine Peso per month as of today.
On the contrary, Cai, Schen, and Guo (2013) study resulted non-significance of
income and other demographic profiles between online shopping and offline shopping.
Online Shopping and Offline Shopping in terms of purchasing products.
A quote by Margaret Atwood, as mentioned by Snapcart (2017) says, “Touch
comes before sight, before speech. It is the first language and the last, and it always tells
the truth.” This compresses the dominant role of human sensory experience while
shopping offline. However, the article reiterated that this experience is ‘virtually
impossible to replicate’ when it comes to online grocery shopping based on the research
of The Future of Online Grocery. These inferences pointed out the question whether or
not the brick-and-mortar store will ever be replaced by online stores in terms of grocery
shopping. Using the 150,000 monthly active Indonesian users of Snapcart, it revealed that
xxx
majority or 71% among them agreed that they shop groceries offline more than online,
21% said they shop on both channels, and a handful 8% said they go for online. Perhaps
it is due to the perishability of grocery products as evident by 70% of the same
respondents preferred to buy food and beverages offline while product categories like
home care and personal care (non-perishable goods) garnered better percentage in online
shopping survey with 33% and 37% respectively. Similar in shopping fresh groceries,
significant barriers on the adoption of online shopping are present – only the countries
like China, South Korea, and India preferred to purchase fresh groceries online gaining
40%, 39%, and 35% respectively (Nielsen, 2017). Aside from perishability, the findings
of Aysev, Malek, Muller, and Stoian (2017) found that 56% of their respondents go for
offline grocery shopping because of the last-mile delivery issues caused by online
grocery shopping. And though the world has different perceptions when it comes to
grocery shopping, it was concluded by Nielsen (2014) that Filipinos still prefer the
traditional ‘brick-and-mortar’ experience, when it comes to shopping of grocery items.
Grocery has seen as the most popular and preferred product category to be bought
in-store; however, Statista (2017) global survey discovered other product categories.
These are the consumer electronics and computers with 51% global consumer percentage,
sports equipment/outdoor 44%, health and beauty (cosmetics) 47%, clothing and
footwear 51%, Jewelry/watches 49%, household appliances 56%, DIY/home
improvement 52%, and furniture and home ware 59%. Product categories in line with
books, music, movies and video games, on the other hand, ranked top as being preferred
to purchases online with 60% global consumer percentage, followed by toys with 39%.
xxxi
But for some surveys and researches conducted by online retailers, such as
Amazon, items in the category of electronics are most popular items online while, eBay’s
top three (3) products categories were jewelry, grocery, and home appliances (Breslin,
n.d.). Meanwhile, in the Philippines, Lazada (2015) declared their fast growing categories
based on purchases such as fashion, home and living, automotive and gadgets, and sports.
Furthermore, Reyes (2016) affirmed that Filipinos are mostly interested in consumer
electronics, clothes and shoes, home furniture, appliances, food, cosmetics, and
pharmaceuticals, to buy online, based on revenue sales. This was supported by Lazo
(2013) as she considered consumer electronics as the second biggest category online with
resulted at 20% from online Filipino shoppers; and clothing, other apparels and books
which showed a shared percentage of 15%. Also, according to her, while there were
product categories who are both popular online and offline worldwide, Filipinos will
mostly be engaged in availing ‘travel services’ which at 33% leading the other categories
of online products. Nielsen (2012) in Green (2014) research is congruent as it reported
that Filipinos are seen to be growing in online purchases for travel services where more
than half or 55% of Filipino consumers are planning to buy airline tickets and
reservations for the next six (6) months.
Online Shopping and Offline Shopping in terms of influencing factors:
The study of Kacen, Hess, and Chiang (2003) conducted a comparison based on
consumers’ valuation of online and traditional stores considering 18 attributes. Survey
questionnaires were distributed to 224 shoppers via web and paper. They found out that
all product categories included on their questionnaire were found to be less acceptable
xxxii
than to traditional stores. It is mainly because online stores has competitive disadvantages
in terms of many factors like shipping and handling charges, refund and exchange policy,
social experience, uncertainty on getting the right item, and more. Though online stores
has variety of product choices and has the advantage when it comes to ease of browsing,
it will not still dominate the number of disadvantages brought by online stores.
There are bountiful factors that could influence shopping preferences of
consumers. In order to identify common factors, disparities among research studies were
consolidated.
Studies of Singh and Kaur (2017), Gupa and Sethi (2016) and Gupta (2015)
shared the same insight on the factors affecting both online and offline shopping. Here
are the factors that for them were influencing online shopping: risk; convenience;
anxiety; previous online experience; pricing policy; quality of products; online trust;
tangibility of the products; delivery time; income; taste and preferences; information;
variety; discreet shopping; offers and deals; instant gratification; and available products
and services. For offline shopping, the factors were: time consuming; information;
authenticity; taste and preference; and bargaining. Other factors have similar viewpoint
with the study of Sarkar and Das (2017). In fact they made comparison between online
shopping and offline shopping along these factors: convenience; variety; customer
review; comparison shopping; discounts; availability of unique products; tangibility and
trialability; shopping experience; delivery of products. The authors highlighted these
factors based on positivity and negativity effect on both shopping channels. Also, these
factors made by various authors were reflected from other research studies.
xxxiii
Like the study carried out by Chiang and Dholakia (2003) where they examined
and found accessibility features, type and characteristics of products, and the actual price
significantly affects consumer to purchase online or offline. On the other hand, Dennis,
Merrilees, Jayawardhena and Wright (2009) focused on consumers’ excitement in
determining consumers’ choice. The findings said there were features causing
consumers’ excitement, such as convenience, involvement, and attribute of web site
which can definitely lead to consumers’ intent of return on a particular channel of their
choice.
Moreover, a study indicated that marketing communication varies between online
and offline shopping decision, whereas, this decision reflects to the consumer behaviour
which is caused by motivation factors (Katawetawaraks & Wang, 2011).
On the perspective of Yulihasri, Islam, and Daud (2011) where they used students
as respondents, has identified four factors that has been found to influence internet
shopping intention of students in US, namely: compatibility, usefulness, ease of use, and
security.
In Malaysia, it was successfully proven that web navigation is an important factor
to regulate the possible online purchases but has no impact on online purchasing decision
(Chua & Adeline, 2008). One more study in Malaysia was conducted by Suki and Suki
(2007). It focused on consumers’ feeling of enjoyment while shopping online. According
to the study, Malaysian consumers professed the involvement of risk like security and
privacy of information in online shopping. Aside from that, they noticed that consumer’s
enjoyment is allied with the uncertainty of the product in terms of its delivery and quality
if from online.
xxxiv
These uncertainties were linked to customer service assumption of Liu, He, Gao,
and Xie (2008) in China. The outcome of their study showed that customer service is
heavily connected in projecting satisfaction of customers in online market. And if
shoppers are satisfied with the services given by online shops, here comes the customer
loyalty. A study based in Taiwan concluded that customer’s satisfaction is considered to
be the most substantial aspects that define online customer loyalty. Further, the study
found that online trust creates a positive impact on both customer satisfaction and
customer loyalty (Hsu, 2008). Supplementary to this was the consumer brand loyalty
study of Danaher, Wilson and Davis (2003) over online shopping and offline shopping.
The aftermath of the study exposed that high brands of products were more likely be
bought online and small share brand was bought otherwise. In traditional shopping,
however, was observed not related to brand share at all.
The measures of satisfaction among Filipino consumers were found no difference
to global standpoint. According to written article of Pedroso (2015), most of the Filipinos
were satisfied to shop online where 73% of them said shopping online is easy; 71.9% said
it creates convenience; 64.4% said it was fun; and 79.2% expressed their re-patronage
intention in the next six months. But just like global shoppers, Filipino consumers also
consider other factors before heading to online shopping like the security of payment
facilities, speed of transactions, and online reviews.
Filipino consumers also favour internet websites that stores their payment details
and quoting faster checkouts of orders using payment cards powered by visa, banknet,
mastercard, and others (Torres, 2015). Nevertheless, there were few Filipinos who still
prefer cash on delivery and bank transfers on the checkout process. He also revealed 80%
xxxv
among Filipino who preferred shopping among local online shoppers for quick and fast
deliveries and less risk of lost orders.
Since e-business nowadays has been spreading its wings around the world,
different sensitivities, shopping perceptions, opinions, and preferences were uttered by
global consumers. Thus, online marketers look forward to these matters to be able to
adapt on the cultural differences among consumers. Just like the traditional word of
mouth (WOM) study of Goodrich and Mooij (2014). Before, e-communication was only
used to reach relatives, and friends from afar. There’s the rise of famous social media
sites like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc. that people used to communicate. But the
authors Goodrich and Mooij (2014) emphasized the use of the social networking sites for
possibility of electronic Word of Mouth (e-WOM) to predict consumer decision making
athwart 50 countries. He concluded that there are major differences on online purchase
decision by country, due to cultural disparity, and, hence, marketers should adhere their
e-WOM depends of cultural indifferences among consumers.
Consumer’s channel switching behaviour:
Consumer’s behaviour changes through time. And since this generation already
provides diversified options for purchasing products, there’s a probability of buyer’s to
switch from one channel to another, and vice versa.
Lai, Debbarma, and Ulhas (2012) investigated the factors that could influence
consumer switching behaviour from in-store to mobile shopping. The author used Push-
Pull-Mooring to demarcate switching behaviour of consumers. The findings stated that
mooring forces such as: privacy and security, trust, and switching cost has resilient effect
xxxvi
on switching intentions. The effects of pull forces, on the other hand, comprised of peer
influence, and attractiveness on intentions was found to be stronger than inconvenience.
Another study of channel-switching behaviour was scrutinized by Bendoly,
Blocher, Bretthauer, Krishnan, and Ventaramanan (2005). They believed that increased
perceive amalgamation between channels can lead to firm loyalty. Nonetheless, if
consumers are in hurry to purchase goods and they think a specific channel wouldn’t be
able to provide them what they need, alternative channels may be present.
But the findings of Burke (2002) indicated that consumers are less interested to
shop on multi-channel stores especially if the products were bought frequently like
groceries and other basic necessities. Aside from that, consumers likewise appreciate the
options either buying online then pick it up on the nearest store, or shop on offline stores
and have it delivered to home.
In terms of home décor, Bickle, Buccine, Makela, and Mallatte (2006) identified
their respondents’ high preference on brick-and-mortar sellers, medium on catalog
sellers, and low on e-sellers. The findings also indicated that uniqueness of products can
lead to the possibility of cross-channel shopping.
Moreover, Gupta, Su, and Walter (2004) postulation on utility maximization
emphasized that the efficacy acquired from shopping online must be greater than what
shopping offline can provide. The researchers tested several hypotheses, however, only
the difference between price-search intention of online and offline channels had resulted
to positive influence on channel switching.
Dissimilar judgement was utilized by Levin, Levin and Heath (2003). For them,
product categories predict channel-switching behaviour of consumers. Their research

xxxvii
resulted to two indicators: “high-touch” products (e.g. clothing, health and grooming,
sports and recreation); and “low-touch” products (e.g. computer software, airline tickets)
– high-touch products which is mostly preferred to shop in the traditional bricks-and-
mortar stores; and low-touch products which mostly preferred to shop in online stores.
Furthermore, statistical findings focused on the differences between choice and
behaviour of consumers was discovered by Andrews and Currim (2000). The study
established positive hypothesis among the variables with regards to choice process. It
also concluded that associated with offline shop consumers, online shops are less price
sensitive, which make consumers switching behaviour possible.
Channel-switching behaviour of consumers is indeed a complicated matter and
given that multi-channel selling is a challenging scheme which offers sellers massive
opportunities (Wallace, Giese, & Johnson, 2004). Besides, it may help develop deeper
relationships lower risk in making transaction, and gain much trust among retailers
(Kumar & Venkatesan, 2005).
In terms of finding an effect between the switching decision of bank employees
and their buying preference, available literatures, however, limits only to the effect of
other factors to switching behaviour and/or to buying preferences. Like the study of
Mirabi, Akbayireh, and Tahmasebifard (2015), whereas, the authors only discussed the
factors affecting the purchase intention of Bono brand tile consumers. Saeed, Hussain,
and Riaz (2011) study has similarity to this but focus on the factors affecting switching
intentions such as outcome quality, perceived commitment, price, and anger incident.
Nevertheless, there were studies that link motivation, buying attitude, buying intention,
and purchasing behaviour altogether and to switching behaviour. The findings of Ahmed,
xxxviii
Gull, and Rafiq (2015) highlighted other factors including perceptions, behaviour, and
attitude of consumers to have a significant effect towards stimulating and de-motivating
the behaviour of mobile users regarding keeping loyal with a particular brand or
switching to other brand. Moreover, the study of Haryono, Haryanto, and Riani (2015)
resulted to the factors: product attributes, inconvenience, and attitudes towards organic
food moderated by motivation which influenced the intention to switch from
conventional food to organic food.
These literatures were indirectly related and have no supporting details to the
hypothesis. Thus, it is considered as the research gap of the researcher.
Buying Preferences
This study aimed to determine and compare the predictors on bank employees’
buying preferences in San Jose, Occidental Mindoro in terms of motivation, buying
attitude, buying intention, and purchasing behaviour given the two channel alternatives:
(1) online shopping; and (2) offline shopping. Various related researches and findings
were gathered and reviewed to add suffice information that could support the results of
this study.
Motivation. According to the study of Falode, Amubode, Adegunwa, and
Ogunduyile (2015), there are many reasons why an individual decides to shop whether
online or offline, and these are referred as shopping motivations. The authors stressed out
two kinds of consumer motivation as connoted by other literature – the objective or
utilitarian motivation and subjective or hedonic motivation. Utilitarian motivation
involves the satisfactions of needs while hedonic focuses on enjoyment while on shop.
xxxix
This was further sustained by Uzan (2014) as he emphasized motivation as influencing
factor that drives convenience for an online channel (functional motivation) and
experience for an offline channel (hedonic motivation).
Morevover, Svatosova (2013) study reflected on the acceptance of Maslow’s
Hierarchy Theory as basis of online buyer behaviour. Nonetheless, the author deliberated
motivation to be a dynamic process which changes relentlessly based on life experiences.
The empirical study conducted by Koo, Kim, and Lee (2008), on the other hand,
discussed a different point of view about the motivational upshot of personal values to
online shopping perspective. The research established a judgement that attributes of
online stores are significantly relevant to re-patronage intention to shop online and that
social affiliation and self-actualization attends as beliefs in molding motives of
consumer’s online shopping.
Buying Attitude. On the word of Guo and Jaafar (2011), one of the good
examples of business revolution in China was the birth of online shopping. Its rapid
development is resulted to wide-ranging online markets. Their study tested several
variables to determine the attitudes of consumers in adapting this new breed of business
channel. The findings concluded marketing mix and reputation to be significantly
influencing consumer’s adaptability attitude. Another conclusion was made by Islam
(2015). The above findings mentioned other factors to influence attitude, but this study
decreed attitude to positively affect consumer’s online shopping behaviour.
Buying Intention. Besides attitude, perceived internet confidence and search
intention, on the other hand, were believed to be strong predictors of consumer’s
behavioural intention on shopping online (Hahn & Kim, 2009). Different views were
xl
made by Lee and Littrell (2005). They investigated the factors influencing intention while
shopping for cultural products offline. The study used the Theory of Reasoned Action
and found it to be determinant of consumer’s attitude and attitude to be determinant of
consumer’s behavioural intention. Findings of Ho (2013) is relatively connected as this
exhibited attitude to be strongly correlated with consumer’s behavioural intention.
Other factors were measured by Jarvelainen (2007). The study focused on the
background of e-commerce, such as: selective behaviour of consumers towards purchase
channels; and the security and confidentiality matters. It turned out that ease of system
use; trustworthiness; usefulness; and constancy were essential factors considering
behavioural intention. Online trust was also reflected on the study of Teo, Srivastava, and
Jiang (2009). The study was conducted due to the worries of consumers in US about the
internet security. Based on the results, third party logos brought direct effect on the
perception of consumers which influence transmission of trust to e-commerce.
Purchasing Behaviour. For Lee and Lin (2005), the relationship between internet
service and service quality is deliberated to perceived customers satisfaction level and
their buying intention. Successfully, the study proved that internet services like web
design, reliability, responsiveness, and trust affects the satisfaction of customers and the
overall service quality of internet services. These findings are related to purchase
intention and behaviour of consumers.
Finally, the research of Devaraj, Fan, and Kohli (2005) gave an emphasis on the
online channel preference. Upon examining the behavioural and economic features
relevant to consumer’s satisfaction headed to their preferences, the researchers found that
reliability, security, personalization, and time responsiveness significantly affects buyer’s

xli
satisfaction. Also, it is indicated that satisfaction subsequent from the variables used
above was solidly related to consumer’s online shopping behaviour.
Table 1
SYNTHESIS MATRIX
Researcher (Year) Significant Variables Impact on the Study

*Consumer switching behaviour Significant factors stimulating and
Ahmed, Gull & Rafiq
*Marketing tactics (promotional and de-motivating the behaviour of
(2015)
loyalty campaigns) mobile users
Andrews & Currim *brand loyalty
Choice and behaviour of consumers
(2000) *online and offline grocery shopping
*Multi-channel environment product
Balasubramanian,
utility
Raghunathan, Mahajan Purchases and economic goals
*process utility
(2005)
*channel choice
*perceived characteristics of the internet
Bagdoniene & Zemblyte as a sales channel Preferred channel when purchasing
(2009) *consumer characteristics products
*characteristics of product
Bendoly, Blocher,
*perceptions on channel integration
Krishnan & Channel switching behaviour
*purchasing decisions
Venkataramanan (2005)
*technology
Burke (2002) Multi-channel shopping
*consumer interface
Bickle, Buccine, Makela *consumer’s uniqueness in home décor
Cross-channel shopping
& Mallette (2006) *retail channel choice
*convenience characteristics of shopping
Factors that significantly affects
Chiang & Dholakia channels
consumer to purchase online or
(2003) *product type characteristics
offline
*perceived price of the product
Web navigation as factor to
Chua & Adeline (2008) *web navigation behaviour
regulate possible online purchases
*Dimensions of behavioural beliefs
*attitude
*normative beliefs
*subjective norms
Croome (2006) Channel switching behaviour
*self-efficacy
*perceived behaviour control
*channel switching intention and
behaviour
*brand loyalty
Danaher, Wilson & Consumer brand loyalty over online
*brand choice
Davis (2003) and offline shopping
*purchase behaviour
Dennis, Merrilees, *role of image
Consumer’s excitement in
Jayawardhena & Wright *trust
determining consumers’ choice
(2009) *e-interactivity
Devaraj, Fan, Ming & *electronic commerce
Online channel preference
Kohli (2005) *online consumer satisfaction
xlii
*shopping motivation
Falode, et al. (2016) Shopping motivations
*online and offline shopping purchases
Goodrich & Mooij *traditional word of mouth Electronic networking sites for
(2014) *purchase decisions possible electronic word of mouth
*time of delivery
Attitudes of consumers in adapting
Guo & Jaafar (2011) *safety procedure
new breed of business channel
*instruction of the products
*preference on different online shopping
site
*mostly purchased goods from shopping Factors affecting online and offline
Gupta (2015)
sites shopping
*delivery of the product
*website accuracy
*product search
*experience attributes
Gupta, Su & Walter *channel-risk perceptions Positive influence on channel
(2004) *price-search intentions switching
*evaluation effort
*delivery time
Factors affecting online and offline
Gupta & Sethi (2016) *purchase attitudes
shopping
*ethnocentrism Online trust to consumer
Hsu (2008)
*online trust satisfaction and loyalty
Attitudes to consumer’s online
Islam (2015) *consumer attitudes
shopping behaviour
*financial security Background of e-commerce and the
Jarvelainen (2007)
*data security security and confidentiality matters
*consumer valuation
*consumer perception
*shipping and handling charges
Kacen, Hess & Chiang *refund policy Consumer’s valuation of online and
(2003) *social or family experience traditional stores
*assistance of salespeople
*post-purchase service
*uncertainty on getting the right item
Marketing communication varies
Katawetawaraks & *marketing communication process
between online and offline
Wang (2011) *online consumer decision
shopping decision
Attributes of online stores are
*personal values
Koo, Kim & Lee (2008) relevant to re-patronage intention to
*motivation
shop online
*shopping on multiple product categories
*initiate contacts with firms
Kumar & Venkatesan Deep relationship and trust among
*previous experience through online
(2005) retailers
channel
*frequent purchase
*construct specification and
Lai, Debbarma & Ulhas Consumer’s switching behaviour
misspecification of push-pull mooring
(2012) from in-store to mobile shopping
theory
*internet users’ attitude Internet service and service quality
Lee & Lin (2005)
*physical interaction to customers satisfaction level
*web site beliefs
Factors influencing intention to
Lee & Littrell (2005) *shopping attitude
cultural products
*shopping intention
xliii
Levin, Levin & Heath Product categories predict channel
*product category dependent
(2003) switching behaviour
*information quality
*website design
*merchandise attributes
Liu, He, Gao & Xie Customer service as predictors of
*transaction capability
(2008) consumer’s satisfaction
*security/privacy of payment
*delivery
*customer service
*purchasing behaviour
Mirabi, Akbayireh &
*determinants of purchasing decision Factors affecting purchase intention
Tahmasebifard (2015)
*factors of brand loyalty
*customer satisfaction
Saeed, Hussain & Riaz Factors affecting switching
*switching costs
(2011) intention
*attractiveness of alternatives
*products attributes Comparison between online and
Sarkar & Das (2017) *consumer loyalty offline shopping considering
*influencing factors influencing factors
Scarborough & *convenience e-shopping in multiple channel
Lindquist (2006) *loyalty environment
*customer satisfaction
Factors affecting online and offline
Singh & Kaur (2017) *repeat purchase
shopping
*positive word of mouth
*feeling of enjoyment Feeling of enjoyment while
Suki & Suki (2007)
*online shopping attributes shopping online
*demographic profile
Acceptance of Maslow’s Hierarchy
Svatosova (2013) *motives
of Needs
*experience
Teo, Srivastava & Jiang *online trust
Internet security
(2009) *online security
Motivation as influencing factor
*motivation
Uzan (2014) that drives convenience for an
*online convenience
online channel
*usefulness
*ease of use
*compatibility
Yulihasri, Islam & Daud Factors that influence internet
*privacy
(2011) shopping intention
*security
*normative-beliefs
*attitude
*channel tracking capability
Wallace, Giese & Channel switching and multi-
*reward alignment capability
Johnson (2004) channel selling
*multi-channel distribution complexity
xliv
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
This chapter presented the methodologies and procedures on how the study was
conducted. It will include the research design, instrument used, data gathering method,
and statistical treatment of the data.
Research Design
This research used descriptive-correlational and comparative method to answer
the problems sought for investigation. A descriptive method was used to describe a
particular situation or subject that answers question of who, what, when, where, and how;
a correlational method was used to assess and understand the statistical relationship of
two variables with little or no effort to control extraneous variable; a comparative method
was used to discover the differences between and among the variables and to reveal the
general underlying structure which generates or allows such a variation and to find out if
variables differ in some aspects or otherwise.
Respondents of the Study
The respondents of this study were the bank employees, both in
supervisory/managerial and rank & file level, from commercial & universal banks, thrift
banks, and rural & cooperative banks in San Jose, Occidental Mindoro
The following banks covered by the study are enumerated below:
a. AgriBusiness Rural Bank (AGRIBANK)
b. Center for Agriculture and Rural Development Inc. (CARD Bank)

xlv
c. China Banking Corporation (China Bank)
d. City Savings
e. Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP)
f. First Consolidated Bank (FCB)
g. Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP)
h. Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co. (Metrobank)
i. Occidental Mindoro Cooperative Bank (OMCB)
j. Philippine National Bank (PNB)
k. Philippine National Bank Savings (PNB Savings)
l. Philippine Veterans Bank (PVB)
m. Rizal MicroBank (RMB)
n. United Coconut Planters Bank (UCPB)
The total statistical population is Two Hundred Ninety (290) respondents. It is
composed of 72 supervisory/managerial employees, and 218 rank & file employees who
comprise 25% and 75% of the total, respectively. AGRIBANK has 41 employees; CARD
Bank has 97; China Bank has 10; City Savings has eight (8); DBP has 16; FCB has six
(6); LBP has 38; Metrobank has 14; OMCB has 19; PNB has seven (7); PNB Savings has
five (5); PVB has eight (8); RMB has 10; and UCPB has 11.
A sample size of One Hundred Sixty-Five (165) bank employees was arrived at
using the alternative formula for computing the sample size for population less than 1000
by Calmorin (2007):
𝑁𝑧 2 [𝑝(1−𝑝)]
n=
𝑁𝑒 2 + 𝑧 2 [𝑝(1−𝑝)]
xlvi
where:
n – sample size
N – total population
z – value of nominal variables of 1.96
e – margin of error of 5%
p – largest possible proportion (50%)
Each percentage was multiplied by the computed total sample size of 165 to get
the proportionate sample size for each of the bank positions. The accessible number of
population targeted for the study facilitated the distribution of the questionnaire. These
figures were extracted from the bank’s management and presented in Table 1.
Table 2
Population Distribution
Population Percentage Sample Percentage
Banks
(N) (%) Size (n) (%)
AGRIBANK 41 14 23 14
CARD Bank 97 33 53 32
China Bank 10 3 6 4
City Savings 8 3 5 3
DBP 16 6 9 5
FCB 6 2 4 2
LBP 38 13 21 13
Metrobank 14 5 8 5
OMCB 19 7 11 7
PNB 7 2 4 2
PNB Savings 5 2 3 2
PVB 8 3 5 3
RMB 10 3 6 4
UCPB 11 4 7 4
OVERALL
290 100 165 100
TOTAL
Informed consent was obtained from the participants by means of their signature
on the letter that explains the purpose of the study and the reason for needing their
xlvii
information. Participants were instructed to answers every part of the questionnaires to
formulate reliable results.
Research Instrument Used
The research instrument used in this study is a survey questionnaire and has three
(3) parts. The first part established the profile of the respondents’ by identifying their
name, age, sex, and personal income. The second part pertained to the: (1) more preferred
channel on purchasing products online and/or offline; (2) factors that could influence
their shopping preferences to shop whether online and/or offline; and (3-4) factors that
could affect their decision to switch from online to offline and vice versa – which
composed of 10, 15,and 20-item questionnaire, respectively. The last part are the
statements relevant to buying preferences which composed of the 20-item questionnaire
distributed as 5-item each to motivation factor, buying attitude, buying intention, and
purchasing behaviour. It utilized the five-point Likert Scale – a scale which is used to
allow the individual to express how much they agree or disagree with a particular
statement (McLeod, S., 2008).
For the second part item numbers three to four (3-4), the respondents will be
advised to indicate their responses by encircling the number in the box that corresponds
to their answer. The options are namely: ‘Strongly Agree’; ‘Agree’; ‘Undecided’;
‘Disagree’; and ‘Strongly Disagree’, will be given a numerical equivalent from five to
one, respectively.
Questions from the second and third parts of the questionnaire were guided
accordingly from previous researches and studies. The item number one (1) on the second
xlviii
part of the questionnaire was adapted from a downloaded document on the internet. It is a
survey for MBA student project in the university research studies of Illinois State
University under the direct supervision of Dr. Michael P. Dumbler.
Further, the item number two (2) on the same part was adapted from researches of
Bagdoniene & Zemblyte (2009), Gupta (2015), and Sarkar & Das (2017). The content
was modified congruent to the needs of the study.
Meanwhile, the items number three and four (3 & 4) on the same part were
adapted from the study of Croome (2006) entitled: “Online-Offline Channel Switching
Behaviour of Retail Consumers: Towards a Model of consumer Value”. These sets of
situations were composed of factors such as content, tangibles/information,
differentiation, price, trust, and shopping enjoyment. Out of these several situations, the
researcher modified the number of the contents using a ratio proportion to meet the 20-
item number of questions.
Each situation for the Bank Employees’ Preferences aspects was adapted from the
various studies of Falode, Amubode, Adegunwa, and Ogunduyile (2016); and Jeon
(2006), and was modified based on applicability on the four (4) components such as:
Motivation, Buying Attitude, Buying Intention, and Purchasing Behaviour.
Also, the survey questionnaire is associated with the consideration of research
ethical standards. The instrument was accompanied by a cover letter that includes the
following: the purpose of the research (motivating the respondent to participate); a
guarantee of confidentiality; the contact details of the researcher; instructions for
completing the questionnaire; and an offer to send the summary of the research findings
xlix
(Bueno & Matriano, 2009). All of these were observed during the conduct of data
gathering.
Validity of the Instrument
The self-made questionnaire was tested through content validity. The researcher
asked assistance from the Professors of the Divine Word College of San Jose Graduate
School and Professor from Occidental Mindoro State College with a degree in Ph.D. in
Business Management to assess the applicability and appropriateness of the items in the
questionnaire. Evaluation and suggestions were taken into consideration for the
improvement of the instrument.
Reliability of the Instrument
The self-made questionnaire was used for reliability testing and administered once
to the employees’ of various banks in Sablayan and Mamburao, Occidental Mindoro who
tried answering the instrument. This resulted on a very high reliability that falls between
+.91 – +.99 scale. The reliability analysis of the instrument used Split-half method and a
correlation formula of Spearman Brown coefficient has been utilized.
Data Gathering Method
The questionnaires were in printed form. These were distributed among the
respondents after office hours to save cost and time. The process was coordinated with
the Managers and Supervisors of banks.

l
With an approved request, the population of bank employees’ in both
supervisory/managerial and rank & file position was gathered.
Statistical Treatment
Data were collected, classified, tabulated, and encoded for analysis in SPSS 20
software. The employees’ profile in terms of age, sex, job position, income, and digital
literacy was illustrated to determine the factor which represents highest percentage
distribution.
The Frequency Distribution was used to describe the sampling of bank
employees’ profile, preferred shopping channel when buying products, and factors
influencing online and offline shopping. While Weighted Mean will be used to analyse
the respondent’s degree of agreement or disagreement to the statements given regarding
the bank employees’ decision in switching from online to offline and vice versa; and the
statements given regarding the bank employees’ buying preferences.
Multiple regression analysis through the stepwise technique was used to find the
degree of correlation between the respondents’ profile and their online/offline
preferences; and between the respondents’ switching decision and their buying
preferences. Independent Paired T-test, on the other hand, was used to find the significant
difference between and among the comparative variables.

li
To interpret the respondents’ responses, the indices used are as follows:
For online to offline switching and vice versa and buying preferences:
Weighted Mean Rating Interpretation Description

4.20 – 5.00 5 Strongly Agree Very High Extent
3.40 – 4.19 4 Agree High Extent
2.60 – 3.39 3 Undecided Moderate Extent
1.80 – 2.59 2 Disagree Low Extent
1.00 – 1.79 1 Strongly Disagree Very Low Extent
The interpretations of the correlation index were based on intervals, presented as
follows:
Reliability Index Descriptive Interpretation

0.00 No correlation
below + .21 Very Low correlation
+.21 – +.40 Low correlation
+.41 – +.70 Moderate correlation
+.71 – +.90 High correlation
+.91 – +.99 Very High correlation
1.00 Perfect correlation
lii
CHAPTER IV
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This chapter presents the results of the computer-generated statistical
computations utilizing the SPSS software with the relative statistical analysis and
interpretation. Each table displays the information that responds to the statement of the
problems enumerated below.
Problem 1. What is the bank employees’
1.1 Demographic profile in terms of:
1.1.1 age;
1.1.2 sex; and
Bank employees who were considered to be consumers of products and services
display variation of age shown in Table 3.
Table 3
Bank Employees’ Profile in Terms of Age
PERCENTAGE
Age FREQUENCY
DISTRIBUTION
20-29 98 59.4
30-39 46 27.9
40-49 14 8.5
50-59 6 3.6
60 and above 1 .6
Total 165 100.0
liii
The frequency and percentage distribution of bank employees’ age demonstrates a
majority on the age bracket of 20-29 years old which are composed of 98 or 59.4%
among the respondents. Subsequent to this are 46 or 27.9% of the respondents aging 30-
39 years old. This is followed by 14 or 8.5% whose age are nearly approaching elderly as
they fall on the age bracket of 40-49 years old. The ages considered to be between Baby
Boomers and Silent Generation (50-59 years old and 60 years old and above) comprise
the lowest frequency and percentage distribution with 6 or 3.6% and 1 or .6% of the
respondents, respectively.
Table 4
Bank Employees’ Profile in Terms of Sex
PERCENTAGE
SEX FREQUENCY
DISTRIBUTION
Male 73 44.2
Female 92 55.8
Total 165 100.0
The Table 4 exhibits the frequency and percentage distribution of bank
employees’ profile in terms of sex. It shows that most of the bank employees here in San
Jose, Occidental Mindoro are female showing 92 or 55.8% based on the statistical
calculation while 73 or 44.3% are male.

liv
Table 5
Bank Employees’ Profile in Terms of Personal Income
PERCENTAGE
PERSONAL INCOME FREQUENCY
DISTRIBUTION
Below 10,000 58 35.2
10,000 – 19,999.99 58 35.2
20,000 – 29,999.99 28 17.0
30,000 – 39,999.99 8 4.8
40,000 – 49,999.99 1 .6
50,000 and above 12 7.3
Total 165 100.0
Illustrated on Table 5 is the ratio proportion of the bank employees’ personal
income per month. Bank Employees who receive a personal income below P10,000.00
and in a bracket of P10,000 – P19,999.99 earned the highest proportion with a result of
58 employees or 35.2%. Next to this are 28 or 17% of the employees that range in the
personal income of P20,000 – P29,999.99. Also, it can be observed on the table that those
who are earning P50,000 and above are only 12 or 7.3%, probably Bank Managers and/or
Supervisors. This is closely followed by 8 or 4.8% bank employees with personal
income falls on the bracket of P30,000 – P39,999.99. Lastly, there is only 1 or .6% of
them receives an income that range between P40,000-49,999.99, perhaps in the edge of
being promoted.
Since most of the bank employees are tellers and/or agents, it is evident that they
cover the majority of the results who receive a personal income per month of below
P10,000 and between P10,000 to P19,999.99.

lv
Problem 2. What is the bank employees’ more preferred channel when shopping
products: online or offline?
This study aims to determine the bank employees’ more preferred channel when
shopping products. It used a frequency distribution to know the variation of each channel
in terms of products.
Table 6
Bank Employees’ More Preferred Channel
When Shopping Products
ONLINE SHOPPING OFFLINE SHOPPING TOTAL

PRODUCTS
F % F % F %
Groceries 4 2.4 161 97.6 165 100
Cosmetics 39 23.6 126 76.4 165 100
Books 35 21.2 130 78.8 165 100
Electronic Gadgets 61 37.0 104 63.0 165 100
Toys 33 20.0 132 80.0 165 100
Furniture and Fixtures 9 5.5 156 94.5 165 100
Apparels 49 29.7 116 70.3 165 100
Appliances 23 13.9 142 86.1 165 100
Airplane Tickets 103 62.4 62 37.6 165 100
Jewelry 18 10.9 147 89.1 165 100
Adopted and modified from MBA student project survey of Illinois State University under the direct
supervision of Dr. Michael P. Dumbler.
Table 6 shows a huge gap between the bank employees preferred product/s when
shopping online since majority of them comprising 103 or 62.4% buy airplane tickets
online. This result was sustained by Lazo (2013) and Nielsen (2012) in Green (2014) as
they found out that Filipinos are growing in online purchases for travel services.
Subsequent to this are the electronic gadgets with 61 or 37%; apparels shared 49
or 28.7%; cosmetics has 39 or 23.6%; closely followed by books and toys with 35 or
21.2% and 33 or 20%, respectively; appliances were composed of 23 or 13.9%; jewelry

lvi
pooled 18 or 10.9%; furniture and fixtures, and grocery which got the lowest online
shopping share of 9 or 5.5% and 4 or 2.4%, respectively.
Though these products were seen to show low share in online purchases for bank
employees; in general, products such as electronics, Jewelry, grocery, home appliances,
fashion, home and living, automotive and gadgets, sports, cosmetics, and pharmaceuticals
gained online popularity in purchases according to Breslin (n.d), Lazada (2015), and
Reyes (2016).
Meanwhile, groceries have showed dominance on offline purchases composing
161 of the bank employees or 97.6%. Actually, a number of studies have shared same
insights about in-store purchases of groceries. A study of Snapcart (2017) revealed that
grocery shopping experience in stores is virtually impossible to replicate. This is perhaps
due to the perishability of items because items in food and beverage category gathered
70% of same respondents. Moreover, Nielsen (2017) found out that there were significant
barriers on the adoption of shopping fresh groceries online. The findings of Aysev,
Malek, Muller, and Stoian (2017), on the other hand, discovered last-mile delivery as
another factor for people to shop groceries offline.
Apparently, this study resulted that most purchases made by bank employees in
terms of products were made offline or in a traditional brick-and-mortar stores. As
evidenced by the close shares of bank employees in furniture and fixtures with 156 or
94.5%; Jewelry 147 or 89.1%; appliances 142 or 86.1%; toys 132 or 80%; books 130 or
78.8%; cosmetics 126 or 76.4%; apparels 116 or 70.3%; and electronic gadgets 104 or
63%; so on a global survey made by Statista (2017), products that global consumers
preferred to buy offline are electronics and computers with 51% global consumer
lvii
percentage, sports equipment/outdoor 44%, health and beauty (cosmetics) 47%, clothing
and footwear 51%, Jewelry/watches 49%, household appliances 56%, DIY/home
improvement 52%, and furniture and home ware 59%.
Problem 3. What are the factors influencing online and offline shopping preferences
of bank employees?
This study aims to determine the factors influencing bank employees to shop
either online or offline. It used a frequency distribution to know the discrepancy of each
channel in terms of influencing factors.
Table 7
Factors Influencing Shopping Preferences of Bank Employees’ Whether Online
Shopping or Offline Shopping
ONLINE OFFLINE
BOTH TOTAL
FACTORS SHOPPING SHOPPING
F % F % F % F %
Risky 145 87.9 14 8.5 6 3.6 165 100
Convenient 66 40.0 71 43.0 28 17.0 165 100
Affordable
50 30.3 76 46.1 39 23.6 165 100
Products
Variety of
59 35.8 80 48.5 26 15.8 165 100
Products
Quality of
14 8.5 130 78.8 21 12.7 165 100
Products
Instant
36 21.8 115 69.7 14 8.5 165 100
Gratification
Availability of
47 28.5 97 58.8 21 12.7 165 100
Stocks
Customer Service 32 19.4 111 67.3 22 13.3 165 100
Financial Security 9 5.5 153 92.7 3 1.8 165 100
Loyalty 14 8.5 136 82.4 15 9.1 165 100
Adopted and modified from the studies of Bagdoniene & Zemblyte (2009), Gupta (2015), and Sarkar &Das
(2017).
lviii
Table 7 displays a clear illustration that online shopping is risky for bank
employees as it congregated 145 or 87.9% of the respondents. A study in Malaysia
conducted by Suki and Suki (2007) that focused on consumers’ feeling of enjoyment
while shopping online indicated that Malaysian consumers professed the involvement of
risk like security and privacy of information in online shopping.
‘Risky’ shows the highest share of the respondents among the other online
factors, such as: convenient 66 or 40%, variety of products 59 or 35.8%, affordable
products 50 or 30.3%, availability of stocks 47 or 28.5%, instant gratification 36 or
21.8%, customer service 32 or 19.4%, quality of products and loyalty shared the same
number of respondents of 14 or 8.5%, and financial security 9 or 5.5%.
Meanwhile, financial security can be observed to have the most number of the
respondents in terms of shopping offline that garnered 153 or 92.7%. Aside from that, all
other factors except from ‘risky’ commonly influence most of the bank employees to
shop offline as these resulted to higher share compare to online shopping – loyalty was
composed of 136 or 82.4% of the respondents; quality of products 130 or 78.8%; instant
gratification 115 or 69.7%; customer service 111 or 67.3%; availability of stocks 97 or
58.8%; variety of products 80 or 48.5%; affordable products 76 or 46.1%; convenient 71
or 43%. The factor ‘risky’, on the other hand, still affects few of the bank employees to
shop offline for it comprised of 14 or 8.5% of them.
Interestingly, the results also exposed that bank employees are not just interested
to purchase products in one channel. There were few among them whose preference was
into both online and offline shopping. These few preferred cross-purchasing because they
were influenced by the following: affordable products with 39 or 23.6% of the

lix
respondents, convenient 28 or 17%, variety of products 26 or 15.8%, customer service 22
or 13.3%, both quality of products and availability of stocks comprised of 21 or 12.7%,
loyalty 15 or 9.1%, instant gratification 14 or 8.5%, risky 6 or 3.6%, and financial
security with 3 or 1.8%.
Though there were disparities among the choices of respondents, the above
information only pertains that all of these factors could influence the shopping
preferences of bank employees whether online or offline. This was supported by the
studies of Singh and Kaur (2017), Gupa and Sethi (2016), Gupta (2015), and Sarkar and
Das (2017) where they shared same insights on a comparison between online and offline
shopping along these factors: convenience; variety; customer review; comparison
shopping; discounts; availability of unique products; tangibility and trialability; shopping
experience; delivery of products; risk; anxiety; previous online experience; pricing
policy; quality of products; online trust; delivery time; income; taste and preferences;
information; discreet shopping; offers and deals; instant gratification; and available
products and services. The authors highlighted these factors based on the negativity and
positivity effect on both shopping channels.
Another study based in Taiwan concluded that customer’s satisfaction is
considered to be the most substantial aspects that define online customer loyalty. Further,
the study found that online trust creates a positive impact on both customer satisfaction
and customer loyalty (Hsu, 2008).
Nevertheless, in general the results perceived that bank employees are offline
shoppers as they were mostly influenced by the factors offline than online channel or
both; thus, an opposition on a nationwide perspective of Filipinos based on the written

lx
article of Pedroso (2015). According to the article, most of the Filipinos were satisfied to
shop online where 73% of them said shopping online is easy; 71.9% said it creates
convenience; 64.4% said it was fun; and 79.2% expressed their re-patronage intention in
the next six months. But just like global shoppers, Filipino consumers also consider other
factors before heading to online shopping like the security of payment facilities, speed of
transactions, and online reviews, which are considered risky for online shopping.
Problem 4. What is the extent of bank employees’ switching behaviour from:
4.1 online shopping to offline shopping; and
Table 8
Mean Extent of Bank Employees’ Decision to Switch from Online Shopping to
Offline Shopping
VERBAL
NO DECISION/S MEAN
DESCRIPTION
1 It is easy to compare products in offline store. 4.33 Very High Extent
It is easy to get clearer product information in an offline store than Very High Extent
2 4.35
online.
3 Products in offline stores can be inspected physically. 4.64 Very High Extent
4 The product can be bought immediately in offline store. 4.42 Very High Extent
5 Products in offline store are of good quality. 4.05 High Extent
6 It is the most practical way to make the purchase in an offline store. 4.21 Very High Extent
7 Purchasing products in an offline store is very simple. 4.16 High Extent
8 It is easier to make purchase offline than online. 4.07 High Extent
9 There is a control in making purchases offline. 4.18 High Extent
10 There are no hidden costs such as freight in offline stores. 4.23 Very High Extent
11 It is easy to get big discounts in offline stores. 3.95 High Extent
12 It is easy to know the costs of purchases made in offline stores. 4.12 High Extent
13 Transacting using debit or credit cards are not available in offline store. 3.25 Moderate Extent
14 Privacy is better respected offline than online. 4.04 High Extent
15 It is easy to return the product in an offline store if it is defective. 4.32 Very High Extent
16 Offline store sales staffs have more relevant information than in online. 4.04 High Extent
17 Offline store is a pleasing environment. 3.96 High Extent
18 There is no pressure in buying products offline. 4.05 High Extent
19 Offline shopping is more enjoyable than online shopping. 4.01 High Extent
20 Shopping offline is more exciting than shopping online. 3.97 High Extent
OVERALL MEAN 4.12 High Extent
Legend:
4.20 – 5.00 – Very High Extent
3.40 – 4.19 – High Extent
2.60 – 3.39 – Moderate Extent
1.80 – 2.59 – Low Extent
1.00 – 1.79 – Very Low Extent
lxi
The results which are shown in Table 8 disclose on a large scale of the High
Extent on the statements that describes the respondents’ switching behaviour from online
to offline shopping. This is reflected in the overall mean of 4.12.
Meanwhile, it is proven through the results that 12 out of 20 statements fall on the
bracket of 3.40 to 4.19 or ‘HIGH EXTENT’ that entails positive statements like,
“Products in offline store are of good quality”; “Purchasing products in an offline store is
very simple”; “It is easier to make purchase offline than online”; “There is a control in
making purchases offline”; “It is easy to get big discounts in offline stores”; “It is easy to
know the costs of purchases made in offline stores”; “Privacy is better respected offline
than online”; “Offline store is a pleasing environment”; “There is no pressure in buying
products offline”; “Offline shopping is more enjoyable than online shopping”; and
“Shopping offline is more exciting than shopping offline” respectively.
Furthermore, the statements that registered a ‘VERY HIGH EXTENT’
description fall on the items 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 10, and 15 with a mean of 4.33, 4.35, 4.64, 4.42,
4.21, 4.23, and 4.32 respectively.
Nevertheless, it can be noted that the item number 13 resulted only on a
‘MODERATE EXTENT’ description. This is due to the negativity of the statement that,
“Transacting using debit or credit cards are not available in offline store.”
lxii
Table 9
Mean Extent of Bank Employees’ Decision to Switch from Offline Shopping to
Online Shopping
VERBAL
NO DECISION/S MEAN
DESCRIPTION
1 The information about the product online is timely. 3.99 High Extent
2 It is easier to compare competing products online than offline. 3.79 High Extent
3 There is no need to physically inspect the products online. 3.48 High Extent
It is possible to watch a demonstration version before buying High Extent
4 3.81
products online.
5 The products available online is not available locally. 3.68 High Extent
6 The products available online is unusual. 3.67 High Extent
7 The products available online is of moderate cost. 3.59 High Extent
Moderately
8 It is safe to make purchase online. 3.18
Extent
9 Purchasing products in an online store is very easy. 3.84 High Extent
10 Purchasing products in an online store can save time. 4.16 High Extent
11 Online shopping is the most useful way to make a purchase. 3.74 High Extent
12 There is a control in making purchases online. 3.52 High Extent
13 It is easy to get bigger discounts in an online store. 3.44 High Extent
14 It is easy to know the costs of purchases made in online store. 3.79 High Extent
It is easy to transact using debit or credit cards online than High Extent
15 3.73
offline.
16 The checkout information online is presented in a clear way. 3.69 High Extent
17 Delivery of the product is easy in online store. 3.63 High Extent
Moderately
18 The online vendor is trustworthy. 3.26
Extent
19 There is no pressure in buying products online. 3.65 High Extent
20 Online shopping is more interesting than offline shopping. 3.56 High Extent
OVERALL MEAN 3.66 High Extent
Legend:
4.20 – 5.00 – Very High Extent
3.40 – 4.19 – High Extent
2.60 – 3.39 – Moderate Extent
1.80 – 2.59 – Low Extent
1.00 – 1.79 – Very Low Extent
The results reflected in Table 9, on the other hand, revealed a larger scale of the
‘HIGH EXTENT’ on the statements that describe the respondents’ switching behaviour
from offline to online shopping compared with the previous data stipulated in Table 8.
This showed an overall mean of 3.66.
This was evidenced through the results which is 18 out of 20 statements fall on
the bracket of 2.33 to 3.00 or ‘HIGH EXTENT’ that involve positive statements such as,
lxiii
“The information about the product online is timely”; “It is easier to compare competing
products online than offline”; “There is no need to physically inspect the products
online”; “It is possible to watch a demonstration version before buying products online”;
“The products available online is not available locally”; “The products available online is
unusual”; “The products available online is of moderate cost”; ” Purchasing products in
an online store is very easy”; “Purchasing products in an online store can save time”; ”
Online shopping is the most useful way to make a purchase”; “There is a control in
making purchases online”; “It is easy to get bigger discounts in an online store”; “It is
easy to know the costs of purchases made in online store”; “It is easy to transact using
debit or credit cards online than offline”; “The checkout information online is presented
in a clear way”; “Delivery of the product is easy in online store”; “There is no pressure in
buying products online”; and “Online shopping is more interesting than offline shopping”
respectively.
Moreover, there were two of the remaining, particularly the statements, “It is safe
to make purchase online”; and “The online vendor is trustworthy”, that resulted on the
‘MODERATE EXTENT’ description with a mean of 3.18 and 3.26 respectively. This is,
perhaps due to the uncertainty of the statements that were not convincing for bank
employees to make them switch from offline to online.
Regardless of the results on Table 8 and Table 9, what matters most are their
intentions in switching from online to offline shopping and vice versa.
The information only pertains that consumers don’t always stick to one channel
but decide on the best possible alternatives that could provide their needs. Just like the
study scrutinized by Bendoly, Blocher, Bretthauer, Krishnan, and Ventaramanan (2005).

lxiv
They believed that increased perceive amalgamation between channels can lead to firm
loyalty. Nonetheless, if consumers are in a hurry to purchase goods and they think a
specific channel wouldn’t be able to provide them what they need, alternative channels
may be present.
Problem 5. What is the extent of bank employees’ online and offline buying
preferences, in terms of:
5.1 motivation;

lxv
Table 10
Mean Extent of Bank Employees’ Buying Preference
ONLINE SHOPPING OFFLINE SHOPPING

NO MOTIVATION Verbal Verbal
Mean Mean
Description Description
1 I shop here because of the wide variety of items. 4.04 High Extent 3.93 High Extent
2 I shop here because I find whatever I need easily. 4.06 High Extent 3.98 High Extent
3 I like to shop here because the time is flexible. 4.13 High Extent 3.84 High Extent
4 I buy here to take advantage of the sales promo. 4.05 High Extent 4.10 High Extent
5 I am able to accomplish what I plan to buy when I shop here. 3.89 High Extent 3.98 High Extent
6 I shop here because of the less hassle shopping environment. 3.85 High Extent 4.09 High Extent
OVERALL MEAN 4.00 High Extent 3.99 High Extent
NO BUYING ATTITUDE Verbal Verbal
Mean Mean
1 I enjoy spending time shopping here. 3.90 High Extent 4.17 High Extent
I enjoy exploring several different product
2 4.05 High Extent 4.06 High Extent
alternatives while shopping here.
Shopping here makes me feel good even if I don’t
buy anything there.
I feel more updated here about new products
before other people do.
I shop here to experience more affordable and
quality products.
I shop here because of the attractiveness of
shopping environment.
NO BUYING INTENTION Verbal Verbal
Mean Mean
Very High
1 I shop here for guarantees and warrantees. 3.78 High Extent 4.35
Extent
I shop here for the privacy of my personal Very High
2 3.75 High Extent 4.35
information. Extent
Very High
3 I shop here for the security of payment methods. 3.73 High Extent 4.36
Extent
4 I shop here for good customer service. 3.78 High Extent 4.18 High Extent
5 I shop here to easily compare prices of products. 4.12 High Extent 4.09 High Extent
Very High
6 I shop here to satisfy my needs. 3.97 High Extent 4.25
Extent
Very High
OVERALL MEAN 3.86 High Extent 4.26
Extent
NO PURCHASING BEHAVIOUR Verbal Verbal
Mean Mean
I shop here because I can often consult other people to help me Very High
1 choose the best alternative available. 3.96 High Extent 4.21
Extent
If I hear that new products or brands are available here, I will
2 be interested enough to buy them. 3.99 High Extent 4.14 High Extent
I like to have the new trend items sold here before my friends
3 and neighbours do have those. 3.87 High Extent 3.91 High Extent
4 I like to shop here as to keep up with friends. 3.65 High Extent 4.00 High Extent
Very High
5 I like to shop here to create bonds with family. 3.53 High Extent 4.23
Extent
6 I like to shop here when it is for co-workers. 3.79 High Extent 3.98 High Extent
lxvi
Illustrated on Table 10 is the mean extent of bank employees’ buying preferences
in terms of motivation, buying attitude, buying intention and purchasing behaviour.
The results disclosed majority of ‘High Extent’ description on the overall result of
both online and offline shopping preferences in terms of motivation, buying attitude,
buying intention, and purchasing behaviour. For online shopping preference, this is
reflected in the overall mean of 4.00, 3.94, 3.86, and 3.80, respectively. For offline
shopping preference, this is reflected in the overall mean of 3.99, 4.07, and 4.08,
respectively.
Meanwhile, this is verified through the results of online shopping preferences as
there were 24 out of 24 statements resulted on ‘HIGH EXTENT’ description with mean
that falls on the bracket of 3.40 to 4.19. This comprises of the following affirmative
written statements: Motivation – 1) “I shop here because of the wide variety of items”; 2)
“I shop here because I find whatever I need easily”; 3) “I like to shop here because the
time is flexible”; 4) “I buy here to take advantage of the sales promo”; 5) “I am able to
accomplish what I plan to buy when I shop here”; and 6) “I shop here because of the less
hassle shopping environment”; Buying Attitude – 1) “I enjoy spending time shopping
here”; 2) “I enjoy exploring several different product alternatives while shopping here”;
3) “Shopping here makes me feel good even if I don’t buy anything there”; 4) “I feel
more updated here about new products before other people do”; 5) “I shop here to
experience more affordable and quality products”; and 6) “I shop here because of the
attractiveness of shopping environment”; Buying Intention – 1) “I shop here for
guarantees and warrantees”; 2) “I shop here for the privacy of my personal information”;
3) “I shop here for the security of payment methods”; 4) “I shop here for good customer
lxvii
service”; 5) “I shop here to easily compare prices of products”; and 6) “I shop here to
satisfy my needs”; Purchasing Behaviour – 1) “I shop here because I can often consult
other people to help me choose the best alternative available”; 2) “If I hear that new
products or brands are available here, I will be interested enough to buy them”; 3) “I like
to have the new trend items sold here before my friends and neighbours do have those”;
4) “I like to shop here as to keep up with friends”; 5) “I like to shop here to create bonds
with family”; and 6) “I like to shop here when it is for co-workers”.
However, it can be witnessed that items, 1, 2, 3, and 6 of offline shopping
preferences in terms of buying intention garnered a ‘VERY HIGH EXTENT’ description
with a mean of 4.35, 4.35, 4.36, and 4.25, respectively and an overall mean of 4.26. This
only denotes that bank employees’ buying preferences is mostly due to their intention
rather than motivation, attitude, and behaviour towards offline shopping.
Nonetheless, consumer behavioural intention was found mostly as an indicator of
online shopping based on researches of Hahn and Kim (2009), Lee and Lin (2005), and
Jarvelainen (2007). And the significance of shopping intention is affiliated with
motivations and attitudes towards shopping; thus, indicates consumer shopping behaviour
(Koo, Kim, & Lee, 2008; Littrell, 2005).
Problem 6. Is there a significant relationship between bank employees’ profile and
their online and offline buying preferences?
The study intends to establish a possible connection between the bank employees’
profile and their online and offline shopping preferences. To test the relationship among
lxviii
the variables, the multiple regression analysis applying the stepwise technique were
utilized wherein all computations were anchored at the 0.05 significance level.
Table 11
Multiple Regression Analysis Between the

Bank Employees’ Profile and their
Online Buying Preferences
Dependent Variable that Entered the

Multiple r Ajusted r2 t Sig.
Variable Regression Model
Motivation None - - - -
Buying
None - - - -
Attitude
Buying
None - - - -
Intention
Purchasing
None - - - -
Behaviour
Table 11 presents the relationship between the bank employees’ profile and their
online buying preferences in terms of motivation, buying attitude, buying intention, and
purchasing behaviour. The table clearly displayed to have no correlation with any of the
independent variable since there is no entry at the regression model that is set at 0.05.
This result simply indicates non-significance on the relationship of bank employees’
profile and their online shopping preferences, thus, acceptance of null hypothesis, that
there is no significant relationship between bank employees’ profile and online buying
preferences.
This denotes that regardless of age, sex, and personal income, these are still
comparable in terms of their online buying preferences.
In fact, Cai, Schen and Guo’s (2013) study found non-significance of income and
other demographic profiles on online shopping.

lxix
Table 12

Bank Employees’ Profile and their
Offline Buying Preferences
Dependent Variable that Entered the

Multiple r Ajusted r2 t Sig.
Variable Regression Model
Motivation None - - - -
Buying
Sex 0.172 0.024 2.236 0.027
Attitude
Buying
None - - - -
Intention
Purchasing
None - - - -
Behaviour
Table 12 exemplifies the relationship between the bank employees’ profile and
their offline buying preferences in terms of motivation, buying attitude, buying intention,
and purchasing behaviour. The table clearly displayed that three among the five
predictors of offline buying preferences have no correlation with any of the independent
variable since there is no entry on the regression model that is set at 0.05. This result
simply indicates non-significance on the relationship of bank employees’ profile and their
online shopping preferences in terms of motivation, buying intention, and purchasing
behaviour, thus, acceptance of null hypothesis.
This denotes that regardless of age, sex, and personal income, these are still
comparable in terms of their motivation, buying intention, and purchasing behaviour.
Nevertheless, one of the predictors of offline buying preferences resulted on a
computed multiple regression value at 0.172 for sex. This value appears very low but
considered deemed significant due to their entry in the regression model that is set at
0.05. Moreover, the t level of 2.236 has been calculated; this is likewise considered
significant at Sig. 0.027 levels, thus rejection of null hypothesis, that there is no
lxx
significant relationship between bank employees’ profile in terms of sex and their offline
buying preferences in terms of buying attitude.
The significant influence of sex on buying attitude is further supported by the
adjusted r2 value of 0.024. This proves the relevance of sex in shopping offline stores
highlighting the dominance of women with 60.40% while men with 40.60% (Gupta,
2015).
Problem 7. Is there a significant relationship between bank employees’ switching
decision and their buying preferences?
The study intends to establish a possible effect bank employees’ switching
decision to their buying preferences in terms of: motivation, buying attitude, buying
intention, and purchasing behaviour. To test the connection among the variables, the
multiple regression analysis applying the stepwise technique has been utilized wherein all
computations were anchored at the 0.05 significance level.
Table 13 demonstrates the effect of bank employees’ switching decision to their
purchasing behaviour. The multiple regression values at .583, .629, .670, .657, and .484
for motivation; .624, .550, .640, .592, and .468 for buying attitude; .579, .634, .604, .645,
.523, .459, and .620 for buying intention; .496, .573, .591, .607, .551, and .388 for
purchasing behaviour have been computed. These values appear very low but considered
deemed significant due to their entry in the regression model that is set at 0.05. Though
there is negativity on the result whereas the statement, “It is possible to watch a
demonstration version before buying products online” for buying intention is at t level of
-1.988 is likewise considered significant at Sig. 0.049 levels.

lxxi
The significant effect of bank employees’ switching decisions to buying
preferences is further supported by the adjusted r2 values of .332, .384, .432, .417, and
.229; .374, .294, .391, .339 and .215; .323, .379, .349, .391, .264, .205, and .365; .237,
.312, .329, .345, .290, and .146 for motivation, buying attitude, buying intention, and
purchasing behaviour, respectively.
Though the study of Ahmed, Gull, and Rafiq (2015) and Irianto, et al. (2015)
supported this indirectly, still, it somehow added an impact as they emphasize the factors
such as perceptions, behaviour, and attitude to significantly affect the switching
intentions of consumers.
The results displayed otherwise as the switching decisions of bank employees are
those that significantly affect their buying preferences in terms of motivation, buying
attitude, buying intention, and purchasing behaviour, thus, rejection of the null hypothesis
that there is no significant relationship between bank employees’ switching decision and
their buying preferences.

lxxii
Table 13

Bank Employees’ Switching Decision
and their Buying Preferences
Multiple Ajusted
DV Variable that Entered the Regression Model t Sig.
r r2
It is easy to compare products in offline store. .583 .332 5.108 .000
Offline store sales staffs have more relevant
.629 .384 3.819 .000
information than in online.
Offline shopping is more enjoyable than online
.670 .432 2.275 .024
Motivation shopping.
Purchasing products in an online store can save
.657 .417 3.180 .002
time.
Online shopping is more interesting than offline
.484 .229 7.057 .000
shopping.
It is easy to get clearer product information in an
.624 .374 3.160 .002
offline store than online.
Purchasing products in an offline store is very
.550 .294 4.401 .000
Buying simple.
Attitude Purchasing products in an online store is very easy. .640 .391 2.349 .020
There is a control in making purchases online. .592 .339 3.459 .001
Online shopping is more interesting than offline
.468 .215 6.768 .000
shopping.
.579 .323 3.874 .000
There is no pressure in buying products offline. .634 .379 2.155 .033
The information about the product online is timely. .604 .349 2.757 .007
Buying It is possible to watch a demonstration version
Intention .645 .391 -1.988 .049
before buying products online.
The products available online is unusual. .523 .264 3.739 .000
There is a control in making purchases online. .459 .205 6.588 .000
It is easy to get bigger discounts in an online store. .620 .365 2.227 .027
.496 .237 4.518 .000
There is no pressure in buying products offline. .573 .312 2.468 .015
Purchasing The information about the product online is timely. .591 .329 2.234 .027
Behaviour Purchasing products in an online store can save
.607 .345 2.204 .029
time.
It is easy to get bigger discounts in an online store. .551 .290 3.641 .000
The online vendor is trustworthy. .388 .146 5.381 .000
lxxiii
Problem 8. Is there a significant difference between online shopping and offline
shopping in terms of buying preferences?
The study intends to establish a comparative analysis between the online shopping
and offline shopping in terms of motivation, buying attitude, buying intention, and
purchasing behaviour. To test the difference among the variables, the Independent Paired
T-Test has been utilized.
Table 14
Comparative Analysis between Online Shopping and Offline Shopping in terms of
Buying Preference
PAIR SOURCES OF VARIATION MEAN T df Sig.

(2-tailed)
Motivation-Online
1 .10909 .284 164 .777
Motivation-Offline
Buying Attitude-Online
2 -.73939 -2.052 164 .042
Buying Attitude-Offline
Buying Intention-Online
3 -2.45455 -6.308 164 .000
Buying Intention-Offline
Purchasing Behaviour-Online
4 Purchasing Behaviour-Offline
-1.66667 -4.621 164 .000
It can be observed in the statistical computation displayed in Table 14 the
acceptance of the null hypothesis that there is no significant difference between online
shopping and offline shopping in terms of motivation. This is because the Sig. or the
critical value (.777) is higher than the F-value or computed value (.284).
The results only interpret that people shop whether online and offline because of
their shopping motivation (Falode, Amubode, Adegunwa, Ogunduyile, 2015) and that
motivation could influence both channel in terms of convenience and experience (Uzan,
2014).
lxxiv
Despite of non-significance of motivation to online and offline shopping, it can be
noted that buying attitude, buying intention, and purchasing behaviour were found to
have a significant difference between online and offline shopping. The statistical data
shows an alternative result wherein the buying attitude, buying intention, and purchasing
behaviour resulted on a Sig. of 0.042, 0.000, and 0.000 comparable to the F-value of -
2.052, -6.308, and -4.621, respectively. This indicates the rejection of the null hypotheses
that there is no significant difference between online shopping and offline shopping in
terms of buying attitude, buying intention, and purchasing behaviour.
Meanwhile, Islam (2015) signified that attitude has a positive effect only to
consumer’s online shopping behaviour. Aside from that, attitude was found to be a
determinant of consumer’s behavioural intention when buying cultural products offline
(Littrell, 2005) and that attitude has strong relationship to consumer’s behavioural
intention(Ho, 2013). Further, Lee and Lin (2005) highlighted customer satisfaction level
to be correlated with customer’s purchase intention and behaviour in an online market.
Thus, this significance draw attention to the information that consumer’s attitude,
intention, and behaviour while on shop (online and offline) has no difference in
expectations and needs.

lxxv
Table 15
Development Program to Assist
Bank Employees in Determining a Smart Choice
This section identified the proposed development program for the bank employees
to assist them in determining a smart choice.
Key
Objectives Activities/ Person/s Time Resources Expected
Result
Strategies Responsible Frame Needed Output
Area
Online
purchasing
To educate
materials
consumers Maximized
Consumers, such as use
about the E- number of
educators, of
benefits commerce When the consumers
experienced technology
and awareness need arises who are
online (e.g.,
drawback campaign aware of e-
consumer desktop,
of e- commerce
mobile
commerce
phones,
tablets, etc.)
Online
To purchasing
determine Improve materials A clear
what online such as use review
Online
products sellers’ of section
sellers, Continuous
can be review technology with
E- online activity
beneficiary page for (e.g., product
commerce buyers
to be transparent desktop, comments
Awareness
bought feedbacks mobile and ratings
online phones,
tablets, etc.)
Online
purchasing
An
Publish materials
improved
blogs to Bloggers, such as use
To provide search
determine online of
necessary Continuous option for
the sellers, technology
tips to activity secured
reliability online (e.g.,
avoid websites/
of the buyers desktop,
being online
website mobile
scammed stores
phones,
online
tablets, etc.)
Utilize the Online Online Advanced
Continuous
mode of sellers, purchasing payment
activity
payment buyers, materials options for
lxxvi
section partner such as use online
financial of sellers such
agencies technology as cash on
(e.g., delivery
desktop,
mobile
phones,
tablets, etc.),
credit/
debit cards
Online
To
purchasing
improve An e-
Create a materials
online commerce
user Online such as use
purchasing website
friendly sellers, of
capability Continuous with
website online technology
of activity precise and
which can buyers, IT (e.g.,
consumers easy to
be used of experts desktop,
for understood
all ages mobile
convenient options
phones,
shopping
tablets, etc.)
lxxvii
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter summarizes the findings and conclusions of this study and proposes
recommendations based on the results generated from this research.
Summary
This study reflected the buying preference, whether online or offline shopping, of
bank employees in San Jose, Occidental Mindoro. Specifically, it sought answers to the
following:
1. What is the bank employees’
1.3 demographic profile in terms of:
1.3.1 age;
1.3.2 sex; and
2. What is the bank employees’ more preferred channel when shopping products: online
or offline?
3. What are the factors influencing online and offline shopping preferences of bank
employees?
4. What is the extent of bank employees’ switching behaviour from:
4.1 online shopping to offline shopping; and

lxxviii
5. What is the extent of bank employees’ online and offline buying preferences in terms
of:
5.1 motivation;
6. Is there a significant relationship between bank employees’ profile and their online and
offline buying preferences?
7. Is there a significant relationship between bank employees’ switching decision and
their buying preferences?
8. Is there a significant difference between online shopping and offline shopping in terms
of buying preferences?
This study used descriptive-correlational and comparative method as the research
design to describe a particular subject that answers questions of who, what, when, where,
and how; to assess and understand the statistical relationship between two variables; and
to discover the differences between and among the variables and to reveal the general
underlying structure which generates or allows such a variation. 14 out of 15 banks in
San Jose, Occidental Mindoro participated in the research comprising of One Hundred
Sixty Five (165) respondents.
In seeking answers to the problems, a three-part questionnaire was concocted for
this study.
The first part recognized the profile of the respondents including their name, age,
sex, personal income, and level of digital literacy. The second part, on the other hand, is
lxxix
composed of (1) more preferred channel on purchasing products online and/or offline; (2)
factors that could influence their shopping preferences to shop whether online and/or
offline; and (3-4) factors that could affect their decision to switch from online to offline
and vice versa. Meanwhile, the last part identified the level of bank employees’ buying
preferences in terms of their motivation, buying attitude, and purchasing behaviour.
The instrument used for data gathering was validated by six (6) Graduate School
Professors of the Divine Word College of San Jose and two (2) Professors with PhD in
Business Management at Occidental Mindoro State College. Further, the reliability of the
questionnaire was tested using the split-half method.
All the data gathered were treated statistically using frequency, mean, and
underwent multiple regression method and independent paired T-test.
Findings
Out of the One Hundred Sixty-Five responses taken for this study, the study
revealed the following findings:
1. Profile of the respondents in terms of:
1.1 Age
Out of the 165 respondents, the results revealed that majority or 59.4% of
the employees in a bank in San Jose, Occidental Mindoro were aging between 20-
29 years old.
1.2 Sex
lxxx
This study indicated that employees in diversified banks in San Jose,
Occidental Mindoro were dominated mostly by female showing 55.8% based on
the statistical computation.
1.3 Personal Income
38.2% or 58 employees among the respondents’ were seen to receive a
monthly income ranging from 10,000 to 19,999.99.
2. More Preferred Channel When Shopping Products
This study found out that most of the respondents are interested in shopping
groceries offline with a percentage of 97.6% while airplane ticket is mostly preferred to
be bought online with 62.4% of the respondents.
3. Factors Influencing Shopping Preferences of Bank Employees
The frequency distribution regarding the factors influencing shopping preferences
of bank employees discovered that 87.9% of the respondents indicated online shopping to
be risky. On the other hand, 92.7% said that financial security influences them to shop
offline.
4. Bank Employees’ Switching Behaviour from Online Shopping to Offline Shopping
and vice versa
The statistical computation for bank employees’ decision in switching channels
both arrived at ‘HIGH EXTENT’ description with an overall mean of 4.12 for switching
from online to offline shopping and 3.66 for switching from offline to online shopping.
5. Bank Employees Buying Preference in terms of:
5.1 Motivation
lxxxi
The results revealed that bank employees’ level of agreement in
motivation is high for both online and offline shopping. It can be noted as well
that the overall mean of online and offline shopping showed a close results of
4.00 and 3.99, respectively.
5.2 Buying Attitude
In terms of respondents’ buying attitude, the results indicated that bank
employees’ agreement could be interpreted as high for it provided an overall
mean of 3.94 for online shopping and 4.07 for offline shopping.
5.3 Buying Intention
The respondents’ level of agreement on buying intention resulted to a
comparable mean of 3.86 with a descriptive interpretation of ‘HIGH EXTENT’
for online shopping and 4.26 with a descriptive interpretation of ‘VERY HIGH
EXTENT’ for online offline shopping.
5.4 Purchasing Behaviour
The results on purchasing behaviour specified as well a reasonable
outcome as respondents’ highly agree to the statements that described their
purchasing behaviour on both channels which comprised of an overall mean of
3.80 and 4.08, respectively.
6. Relationship Between Bank Employees’ Profile and their Online and Offline Buying
Preference
Statistically, the relationship between bank employees’ profile and online buying
preferences in terms of motivation, buying attitude, buying intention, and purchasing
behaviour showed non-significance since there is no numerical value entered the

lxxxii
regression model. Thus, this indicated an acceptance of the null hypothesis that there is
no significant relationship between bank employees’ profile and online shopping
preference.
The relationship between bank employees’ profile and offline buying preferences
in terms of motivation, buying intention, and purchasing behaviour was found to have no
significant relationship as there were no values entered the regression model. However,
the offline buying preference in terms of buying attitude reflected on a significant
relationship with sex. Though a multiple regression value of 0.172 appeared very low, it
is considered deemed significant due to their entry in the regression model that is set at
0.05. This indicated a rejection of the null hypothesis that there is no significant
relationship between bank employees’ profile and offline shopping preference.
7. Relationship of Bank Employees’ Switching Decision to their Buying Preferences
The bank employees’ switching decision has showed a significant relationship to
their buying preferences in terms of motivation, buying attitude, buying intention and
purchasing behaviour. Though the multiple regression values of .583, .629, .670, .657,
and .484 for motivation; .624, .550, .640, .592, and .468 for buying attitude; .579, .634,
.604, .645, .523, .459, and .620 for buying intention; .496, .573, .591, .607, .551, and .388
for purchasing behaviour appeared very low, it is considered to have a significant
relationship due to their entry at the regression model that is set at 0.05. Thus, a rejection
of the null hypothesis that there is no effect between bank employees’ switching decision
and their buying preference was specified.
8. Difference of Online Shopping and Offline Shopping in terms of Buying Preferences

lxxxiii
The results showed that there is a significant difference between online and
offline shopping in terms of buying attitude, buying intention, and purchasing behaviour.
This is proven by the statistical computation using Independent Paired T-test which
resulted on a Sig. of 0.042, 0.000, and 0.000 comparable to the F-value of -2.052, -6.308,
and -4.621, respectively.
Conclusion
Based on the findings, the study therefore yielded the following conclusions:
1. The respondents’ profile can be summarized as follows:
1.1 Majority of the respondents are Millennials.
1.2 The bank employees in San Jose, Occidental Mindoro are mostly female.
1.3 Most of the bank employees’ receives a monthly income ranging between
P10,000 – P19,999.99.
2. The interest of respondents in shopping products revealed that perishable and tangible
products are preferred to be bought offline like groceries while intangible products
are preferred to be bought online like airplane tickets.
3. The factors influencing shopping preferences of bank employees discovered that risk
and financial security impelled the interest of the respondents whether to shop or not
to shop online and offline.
4. The bank employees’ high agreement with the statements that describes their decision
to switch from online to offline shopping and vice versa exposed that consumers
don’t always stick to one channel but decide on the best possible alternatives that
could provide their needs.

lxxxiv
5. Bank Employees Buying Preference in terms of:
5.1 Motivation
The respondents’ high agreement in motivation for both online and offline
shopping indicated that bank employees were driven by motivation when shopping
online and offline.
5.2 Buying Attitude
The respondents’ high agreement in buying attitude for both online and offline
shopping described that bank employees’ attitude while shopping pushed them go
online and offline.
5.3 Buying Intention
The respondents’ very high agreement in buying intention for offline shopping
and their high agreement for online shopping indicated that their intention in
shopping on both channels is comparable since bank employees’ express different
intent when shopping online and/or offline.
5.4 Purchasing Behaviour
The respondents’ high agreement in purchasing behaviour for online and
offline shopping revealed their positive behaviour when shopping on both channels.
6 Relating their profile with their online buying preference, it is therefore concluded
that there are variations between the bank employees’ age, sex, and personal income
while shopping online. On the other hand, relating their profile with their offline
buying preference, is therefore concluded that bank employees’ preferred to shop
offline regardless of sex with indication of their attitude while on shop

lxxxv
7 The bank employees’ switching decision is therefore concluded to have a significant
relationship to their buying preferences in terms of motivation, buying attitude,
buying intention, and purchasing behaviour.
8 The buying preference in terms of buying attitude, buying intention, and purchasing
behaviour is therefore concluded to have a significant difference between online
shopping and offline shopping.

lxxxvi
Recommendation
Based on the aforementioned findings and conclusion, the following
recommendations are therefore presented:
1. In choosing ideal purchasing channel, advanced research regarding the pros and cons
of a certain channel is recommended to help consumers provide wise decisions.
2. To further enhance their shopping skills, it is recommended to ask experts beforehand
like colleagues with great shopping experience.
3. Considering the bank employees’ channel switching behaviour, it is important that
bank employees are able to identify their needs as they may buy on a specific channel
which can’t afford those and thus, making an alternatives.
4. For Bank Employees’ Buying Preferences:
8.1 The shopping motives of the bank employees must be specifically identified. This
is essential in meeting the satisfaction level of every individual.
8.2 It is recommended to conduct a personal observation regarding the changes in
attitude while shopping to avoid spending too much due to pressure brought by
peers and social media.
8.3 Likewise, identifying buying intention in order to secure and manage expenses is
recommended.
8.4 To be able to produce a positive purchasing behaviour, an understanding on the
law of supply and demand should be addressed to be able to control oneself from
spending and buying unnecessary items just to be updated to trends.

lxxxvii
5. It is further recommended that future researchers be able to recognize wider scope of
respondents in determining consumer’s buying preferences to come up with a
quantifiable and comparable data.

lxxxviii
REFERENCES
BOOKS
Bueno, D. & Matriano, E. (2009). Research Writing for Business and Hospitality
Management. Quezon City: Great Books Trading.
Eduardo, J. & Panganoron, C. (2015). Human Behavior and Crisis Mangement.

Wiseman’s Books Trading, Inc. Philippines.
Guevara, R. (2014). Human Behavior and Crisis Management. Wiseman’s Books

Trading, Inc. Philippines.
Kahayon, A. & Berba, M. (2005). Psychology Towards a New Millennium. National

Book Store. Mandaluyong City, Philippines.
Solomon, M. 2004. Consumer behavior. Sixth edition. Prentice Hall.
Tria, G., Gaerlan, J., & Limpingco, D. (2012). General Psychology. KEN INC.
Tomas Morato Ave., Quezon City, Philippines.
Zyla, D. & Mell, E. (2015). How to Win at Shopping: 297 Insider Secrets for Getting
the Style You want at the Price You Want to Pay. Workman Publishing
Company, Inc. New York, New York.
JOURNALS
Ahmed, Z., Gull, M., & Rafiq, U. (2015). Factors affecting consumer switching
behavior: Mobile phone market in Manchester-United Kingdom. International
Journal of Scientific and Research Publication, 5 (7), 2250-3153.
Andrews, R. & Currim, I. (2000). Recovering and profiling the true segmentation
structure in markets: an empirical investigation. International Journal of Research
in Marketing, 20, 177-192. doi:10.1016/S0167-8116(03)00017-X
Balasubramanian, S., Raghunathan, R., & Mahajan, V. (2005). Consumers in a

multichannel environment: Product utility, process utility, and channel choice.
Journal of Interactive Marketing, 19 (2), 12-30. doi: 10.1002/dir.20032
Bagdoniene, L. & Zemblyte, J. (2009). Online shopping motivation factors and their
effect on lithuanian consumers. Journal of Economics and Management, 14,
,1822-6515.
lxxxix
Bendoly, E., Blocher, J., Bretthauer, K., Krishnan, S., & Venkataramanan, M. (2005).
Online/In-Store integration and consumer retention. Journal of Service
Research, 5 (1), 55-59.
Burke, R. (2002). Technology and the Customer Interface: What consumers want in
the physical and virtual store. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 8 (3),
66-74.
Bickle M., Buccine, R., Makela, C., & Mallette, D. (2006). ‘Consumers' uniqueness
in home décor: Retail channel Choice behaviour. The International Review of
Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 16(3), 317–31.
Cai, Y., Shen, K. & Guo, Z. (2013). When do online consumers need an offline store:
the moderating effects of product characteristics? American Marketing
Association, United States, 24, 301-308.
Chambers, C., Echenique, F., & Shmaya, E. (2017). General revealed preference
theory. Theoretical Economics, 12, 493-511. doi: 10.3982/TE1924
Chiang, K. & Dholakia, R. (2003). Factors driving consumers intention to shop

online: An empirical investigation. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13 (1),
177-183. doi: 10.1207/S15327663JCP13-1&2_16
Chua, H. & Adeline, P. (2008). Web navigation behaviour of Malaysians in relation

to online purchasing. International Journal of Business and Society, 9 (1),
Abstract from https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1P3-1503631451/web-
navigation-behaviour-of-malaysians-in-relation
Danaher, P., Wilson, I., & Davis, R. (2003). A comparison of online and offline
consumer brand loyalty. Marketing Science Conference, 22 (4), 461-476.
Dennis, C., Merrilees, B., Jayawardhena, C., & Wright, L. (2009). E‐consumer
behaviour. European Journal of Marketing, 43 (9/10), 1121-1139, doi:
/10.1108/03090560910976393
Devaraj, S., Fan, Ming., & Kohli, R. (2005). Examination of online channel
preference: Using the structure conduct-outcome framework. Science
Direct: Division Supports System, 1, 1-15. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2005.09.004
Falode, B., et al. (2016). Online and offline shopping motivation of apparel
consumers in Ibadan Metropolis, Nigeria. Canadian Center of Science and
Education, 8 (1), 1918-7203. doi:10.5539/ijms.v8n1p150
Goodrich, K., & Mooij, M. (2014). How ‘social' are social media? A cross-cultural
comparison of online and offline purchase decision influences. Journal of
Marketing Communications, 20(2), 103-116.
xc
Guo, J., & Jaafar, N. I. (2011). A study on consumers' attitude towards online
shopping in China. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(22),
122-132.
Gupta, A., Su, B-C., & Walter, Z. (2004). An empirical study of consumer switching
from traditional to electronic channel: A purchase decision process perspective.
International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 8(3), p131.
Gupta, P. & Sethi, N. (2016). Factors affecting consumers’ choice of shopping: A

comparative study of online and offline shopping in Odisha, India. Journal of
Marketing Vistas, 6 (1), 63-79.
Hausman, A. & Siekpe, J. (2009). The effect of web interference features on

consumer online purchase intentions. Journal of Business Research, 62 (1), 5
13.
Hsu, H. (2008). Developing an index for online customer satisfaction: Adaption of

american customer satisfaction index. 34, 3033-3042.
doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2007.06.036
Irianto, H., Haryono, T., Haryanto, B., & Riani, A. (2015). The model of consumer’s
switching intention from conventional food to organic food: An experimental
design study. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6 (3) s. 2, 2039-2117.
doi:10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n3s2p588
Islam, S. (2015). An analysis of factors affecting on online shopping behavior of

consumers. European Journal of Business and Management, 7 (28), 1-12.
Iyer, R., & Eastman, J. (2004). The elderly's uses and attitudes towards the
Internet. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 21 (3), 208-220. doi:
/10.1108/07363760410534759
Järveläinen, J. (2007). Online purchase intentions: an\ empirical testing of a

multiple theory model. Journal of Organizational Computing, 17 (1), 53-74.
Javadi, M., Dolatabadi, H., Nourbakhsh, M., Poursaeedi, A., & Asadollahi, A. (2012).
An analysis of factors affecting on online shopping behaviour of consumers.
International Journal of Marketing Studies, 4 (5), 1 18. doi:10.5539/ijms.v4n5p81
Kacen, J., Hess, J., & Chiang, W. (2003). Bricks or clicks? Consumer attitudes
towards traditional stores and online stores. Global Economics and
Management Review, 18 (1), 12-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2340-
1540(13)70003-3
Katawetawaraks, C. & Wang, C. (2011). Online shopper behaviour: influences of

offline shopping decision. Asian Journal of Business Research, 1 (2), 1-9.
xci
Kim, H., & Kim, J. (2009). The effect of offline brand trust and perceived internet
confidence on online shopping intention in the integrated multi‐channel
context. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 37 (2),
126-141. doi: /10.1108/09590550910934272
Kim J., & Park, J. (2005). A consumer shopping channel extension model:
attitude shift toward the online store. Journal of Fashion Marketing and
Management, 9 (1), 106-121. doi: /10.1108/13612020510586433
Kruger, D. & Byker, D. (2009). Evolved foraging psychology

underlies sex differences in shopping experiences and behaviors. Journal of
Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 3 (4), 315-327.
Koo, D., Kim, J., & Lee, S. (2008). Personal values as underlying motives of
shopping online. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 20 (2),
156-173. doi: /10.1108/13555850810864533
Kumar, V. & Venkatesan, R. (2005). Who are the multi-channel shoppers and how do
they perform?: Correlates of multi-channel shopping behaviour. Journal of
Interactive Marketing, 19 (2), 44-62. doi: 10.1002/dir.20034
Lai, J., Debbarma, S., & Ulhas, K. (2012). An empirical study of consumer switching
behaviour towards mobile shopping: a Push–Pull–Mooring model.
International Journal of Mobile Communications, 10 (4). doi:
/10.1504/IJMC.2012.048137
Lee, G., & Lin, H. (2005). Customer perceptions of e service quality in online
shopping. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 33 (2),
161-176, https://doi.org/10.1108/09590550510581485
Lee, S., & Littrell, M. (2005). Global e‐tailing: US consumers' intention to shop
for cultural products on the internet. International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, 33 (2), 133 -147. doi:
/10.1108/09590550510581467
Levin, A., Levin, I., & Heath, E. (2003). Product category dependent consumer
preferences for online and offline shopping features and its influence on multi-
channel retail alliances. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 4 (3), 85 -
93.
Li, N., & Zhang, P. (2002). Consumer online shopping attitudes and behavior: an
assessment of research. In Proceedings of the 8th Americas Conference on
Information Systems, pp. 508-517.
xcii
Liang, T., and Lai, H. (2000). Electronic store design and consumer choice: an
empirical study. Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on
System Sciences.
Liu, X., He, M., Gao, F., & Xie, P. (2008). An empirical study of online shopping
customer satisfaction in China: a holistic perspective. International Journal
of Retail & Distribution Management, 36 (11), 919-
940. doi:/10.1108/09590550810911683
Mirabi, V., Akbayireh, H., & Tahmasebifard, H. (2015). A study of factors affecting on
customers purchase intention. Journal of Multidisciplinary Engineering Science
and Technology, 2 (1). 257-272.
Muzumdar, P. (2011). Online bookstore - a new trend in textbook sales

management for services marketing. Journal of Management and Marketing
Research, 9, 122-135.
Oklar, A., Yaman, N., & Yurdakul, I. (2017). Information literacy and digital
nativity as determinants of online information search strategies. Journal of
Computers in Human Behaviour, 70 (C), 1-9. Doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.050
Saeed, A., Hussain, N., & Riaz, A. (2011). Factors affecting consumers’ switching
intention. European Journal of Scoial Sciences, 19 (1), 54-60.
Sarkar, R. & Das, S. (2017). Online shopping vs offline shopping: a comparative

study. International Journal of Scientific Research in Science and Technology,
3 (1), 2395- 6011.
Scarborough, C. & Lindquist, J. (2006). E-shopping in a multiple channel

environment. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 19 (4), 333-350. doi:
10.1108/07363760210433645
Singh, R. & Kaur, R. (2017). Comparative study of factors affecting online and
offline shopping. International Journal Of Management Studies And Research,
5, 880-889. doi: 1508947816_GNC909_MM
Suki, N., & Suki, N.M. (2007). Mobile phone usage for m-learning: comparing
heavy and light mobile phone users. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 24
(5), 355-365, https://doi.org/10.1108/10650740710835779
Svatosova, V. (2013). Motivation of online buyer behaviour. Journal Of

Competitiveness, 5 (3), 14-30. doi: 10.7441/joc.2013.03.02
Teo, T., Srivastava, S., & Jiang, L. (2009). Trust and electronic government success:
an empirical study. Journal of Management Information Systems, 25 (3), 99
-131. doi: 10.2753/MIS0742-1222250303
xciii
Yulihasri, Islam, A. & Daud, K. (2011). Factors that influence customers’ buying
intention on shopping online. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 3
(1), 128-139. doi: 10.1.1.663.31
Wallace, D., Giese, J., & Johnson, J. (2004). Customer retailer loyalty in the context
of multiple channel strategies. 80 (4), 249-263. doi: /10.1016/j.jretai.2004.10.002
THESES AND DISSERTATIONS
Croome, R. (2006). Online-OfflineChannel Switching Behaviour of Retail

Consumers: Towards a Model of Consumer Value. PhD Dissertation.
University of the Sunshine Coast. Queensland, Australia, pp. 19-53.
Domingo, M. (2014). Factors Affecting the Entrepreneurial Characteristics of

Graduating Business Education Students in Occidental Mindoro State
College. Master’s Thesis. Divine Word College of San Jose, San Jose, Occidental
Mindoro, pp. 2-43.
Gupta, P. (2015). Comparative Study of Online and Offline Shopping: A Case Study of
Rourkela in Odisha. Master’s Thesis. National Institute of Technology.
Odisha, India, pp. 2-44.
Jeon, S. (2006). The Effect of Consumer Shopping Motivations And Attitudes on

Online Auction Behaviors: An Investigation Of Searching, Bidding,
Purchasing, And Selling. Master’s Thesis. University of North Texas, USA, pp. 5
-34.
Ofielda, Y. (2016). Employment Readiness of Graduating Business Administration

Students of Occidental Mindoro State College for S.Y. 2015 - 2016. Master’s
Thesis. Divine Word College of San Jose, San Jose, Occidental
Mindoro, pp. 47-125.
Pookulangara, S. (2008). Explaining Consumers’ Channel switching Behaviour using

the Theory for Planned Behaviour. PhD Dissertation. University of Missouri,
USA, pp. 13-19.
Uzan, M. (2014). Consumers’ Online and Offline Shopping Behaviour. Master’s

Thesis. The Swedish School of Textiles. University of Boras, pp. 6-17.
ELECTRONIC SOURCES
AgriBusiness Rural Bank Inc. (AGRIBANK). (n.d.) About us: Corporate Profile.
Retrieved on December 28, 2017 from http://www.agribank.com.ph/about
xciv
Albert, J., Gaspar, R., & Raymundo, MJ. (2015). Who are the Middle Class?
Retrieved on January 13, 2018 from https://www.rappler.com/thought-
leaders/98624-who-are-middle-class
Amadeo, K. (2017). What is the Value of Money? Retrieved on January 13, 2018 from
https://www.thebalance.com/value-of-money-3306108
Anonymous. (2015). Theoretical Foundations of Purchase Intention. Retrieved on

January 17, 2018 from https://www.ukessays.com/essays/marketing/the-
theoretical-foundation-of-purchase-intention-marketing-essay.php
Arcega, A. (2017). Pinoys do most online shopping during office hours, research
shows. Retrieved on December 8, 2017 from
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/597374/scitech/technology/pinoys-do-
most-online-shopping-during-office-hours-research-shows/
Aswegen, A. (2015). Women VS Men – Gender differences in purchase decision

making. Retrieved on January 17, 2018 from https://www.guided-
selling.org/women-vs-men-gender-differences-in-purchase-decision-making/
Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP). (2017). Ranking as to Assets of Banks. Retrieved on

December 28, 2017 from http://www.bsp.gov.ph/
banking/psoc/by_ranks/assets.htm
Barišić, B. (2015). Fun Facts About Shopping. Retrieved on December 8, 2017 from
http://wishsterapp.com/2016/06/07/fun-factsabout-shopping/
Barker, E. (2011). Here’s The Real Reason Women Buy Makeup. Retrieved on May 19,
2018 from http://www.businessinsider.com/do-women-buy-cosmetics-because-
theyre-useful-or-because-they-make-them-feel-good-2011-7
Breslin, S. (n.d.). Discover the bestselling products in Amazon and eBay. Retrieved on
February 4, 2018 from https://www.repricerexpress.com/best-selling-products-on-
amazon-ebay/
Center for Agriculture and Rural Development Inc. (CARD Bank Inc.). (n.d.). Who
we are: History. Retrieved on December 28, 2017 from
https://cardbankph.com/?page_id=1021
China Banking Corporation (CHINA Bank). (n.d.). About China Bank. Retrieved on
December 28, 2017 from http://www.chinabank.ph/about_china_bank.aspx
City Savings. (n.d.) About us: Corporate Profile. Retrieved on December 28, 2017 from
https://citysavings.com.ph/about-us
xcv
Consumer Lifestyles. (2018). Consumer Lifestyles in the Philippines. Retrieved on
December 8, 2017 from https://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=
t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiXr5
XAw8zYAhUN2WMKHU0sCWsQFggnMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eur
omonitor.com%2Fconsumer-lifestyles-in-the-philippines%2Freport&usg=
AOvVaw0vy8x5MDxQodRaOhB1TwUw
D’Souza, W. (2008). Motivation. Retrieved on March 27, 2018 from

http://consumerbehaviour4vtu.blogspot.com/2009/03/motivation.html
Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP). (n.d.). About DBP: History. Retrieved
On December 28, 2017 from https://www.devbnkphl.com/about.php?cat=9
First Consolidated Bank (FCB). (n.d.). About us: History. Retrieved on December 28,
2017 from http://www.fcb.com.ph/history.php
Four Consumer Behaviour Theories. (n.d.). Four Consumer Behaviour Theories

Every Marketer Should Know. Retrieved on January 27, 2018 from
https://onlinemasters.ohio.edu/four-consumer-behavior-theories-every-marketer-
should-know/
Gordon, D. (2016). 8 Reasons People Buy Books. Retrieved on February 29, 2018 from
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/8-reasons-people-buy-books-
firsteditiondesignpublishing-com-
Green, L. (2014). Nielsen study shows Filipinos still prefer in-store experience to
online shopping. Retrieved on May 18, 2018 from
https://kickerdaily.com/posts/2014/09/nielsen-study-shows-filipinos-still-prefer-
in-store-experience-to-online-shopping/
Hicken, M. (2011). Why Do We Really Use Cosmetics? Retrieved on January 18, 2018
from https://www.newbeauty.com/blog/dailybeauty/5005-why-do-we-really-use-
cosmetics/
Ho, S. F. (2013). A Study On Consumers’ Attitude Towards Online Shopping On

Penang Famous Fruit Pickles. Retrieved on March 27, 2018 from
http://library.oum.edu.my/repository/976/1/library-document-976.pdf
Hoger, I. (2009). Men hate it, women love it? A Critical Examination of Shopping as
a Gendered Activity. PhD Thesis. University of Exeter. Retrieved January 18,
2018 from https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/bitstream/
handle/10036/92361/HoegerI_fm.pdf?sequence=2
Inside Retail Philippines. (2017). National Bookstore plans two-pronged expansion.

Retrieved on March 28, 2018 from https://insideretail.ph/national-bookstore-
plans-two-prongedexpansion/
xcvi
Inquirer.net. (2015). What Brands are Filipinos buying Online? Retrieved on May 18,
2018 from http://business.inquirer.net/199012/what-brands-are-filipinos-buying-
online
Karr, D. (2014). Men vs Women Online Shopping. Retrieved January 18, 2018 from
https://martech.zone/men-vs-women-online-shopping/
Korea Bizwire. (2017). Cosmetic Consumers Preferred to Buy New Items Offline,
and Bestsellers Online. Retrieved on January 17, 2018 from
http://koreabizwire.com/cosmetics-consumers-prefer-to-buy-new-items-offline-
and-bestsellers-online/94433
Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP). (n.d.). About us: Corporate Profile. Retrieved
on December 28, 2017 from https://www.landbank.com/about
Lautiainen, T. (2015). Factors Affecting Consumer’s Buying Decision in the

Selection of Coffee Brand. Retrieved on January 18, 2018 from
http://www.theseus.fi/bitstream/10024/94486/Lautianinen_Tanja.pdf;jsessionid=0
811B4F25AA12B1AA04DD3AD11A85896?sequence=1
Lazada. (2015). E-Commerce Statistics Across Southeast Asia. Retrieved on Janaury 18,
2018 from https://www.lazada.com.ph/lazada-statistics/
Lazo, K. (2013). Filipinos prefer ‘traditional buying’ to online shopping. Retrieved on

March 27, 2018 from http://www.manilatimes.net/filipinos-prefer-traditional-
buying-to-online-shopping/5312/
Mark. (2014). 5 Psychological Theories of Motivation to Increase Productivity.

Retrieved on December 19, 2017 from https://contactzilla.com/blog/5-
psychological-theories-motivation-increase-productivity/
Maxwell, J., Doornbosch, H., Borghouts, H., Palmer, M., & Moeller, L., Sutton, N.
(2017). How do consumer’s shop? Retrieved on December 8, 2017 from
https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/industries/retail-consumer/total-retail/total-retail-
categories.html
Mayhew, R. (n.d.). What is a Rank and File Employee? Retrieved on December 8, 2017
From http://smallbusiness.chron.com/rankandfile-employee-24601.html
McLeod, S. (2018). Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Retrieved on December 8, 2017 from

https://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html
Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co. (MB). (n.d.). About Metrobank: Overview – About
us: Business Profile. Retrieved on December 28, 2017 from
https://www.metrobank.com.ph/Business_profile.asp
xcvii
National Economic Development Authority (NEDA). (2015). MIMAROPA at a
glance: 2014. Retrieved on December 7, 2017 from http://industry.gov.ph/wp-
content/uploads/2015/11/Potentials-and-Challenges-in-the-Region-by-Regional-
Director-Atty.-Romeo-Escandor-NEDA-IV-B.pdf
Nielsen. (2014). Age Matters with Digital Shoppers. Retrieved on March 26, 2018 from
http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2014/age-matters-with-digital-
shoppers.html
Nielsen. (2014). Beneath the Makeup, Online Cosmetic Shoppers in China are Young
and Affluent. Retrieved on January 18, 2018 from http://www.nielsen.com/us/en
/insights/news/2014/beneath-the-makeup-online-cosmetic-shoppers-in-china-are-
young-and-affluent.html
Nielsen. (2014). Filipinos Prefer In-Store Experience for Grocery Shopping; Online
Shopping for Non-Consumables and Services. Retrieved on February 4, 2018
from http://pana.com.ph/filipinos-prefer-in-store-experience-for-grocery-
shopping-online-shopping-for-non-consumables-and-services/
National Economic Development Authority. Occidental Mindoro Economic Growth.

(n.d.). Retrieved on November 22, 2017 from http://industry.gov.ph/wpcontent/
uploads/2015/11/ Potentials-and-Challenges-in-the-Region-by-Regional-Director-
Atty.-Romeo-Escandor-NEDA-IV-B.pdf
Pedroso, K. (2015). More Filipinos Choosing to Shop Online, study says. Retrieved on
March 26, 2018 from http://business.inquirer.net/195931/more-filipinos-
choosing-to-shop-online-study-says
Penn, S. (n.d.). Business Theories of Buying Behaviour. Retrieved on January 3, 3018

From http://smallbusiness.chron.com/business-theories-buying-behavior-
13883.html
Peters, M. (2008). Preferences. Retrieved on January 15, 2018 from

https://montoya.econ.ubc.ca/Econ304/preference-theory-304.pdf
Peterson, H. (2014). Fascinating Facts About 10 of the World’s Best-Selling

Products. Retrieved on March 26, 2018 from http://www.businessinsider.com/10-
of-the-worlds-best-selling-items-2014-7
Philippine National Bank (PNB). (n.d.). About us: Corporate Profile. Retrieved on
December 28, 2017 from http://www.pnb.com.ph/index.php/about/history
Philippine National Bank Savings (PNB Savings). (n.d.) About us: Vision and
Mission. Retrieved on December 28, 2017 from
https://www.pnbsavings.com.ph/site/about
xcviii
Philippine Veterans Bank (PVB). (n.d.). History. Retrieved on December 28, 2017 from
https://www.veteransbank.com.ph/history.html
Pratap, A. (2017). Effects of Demographic Factors on Consumer Behaviour: Age,

Sex, Income and Education. Retrieved on February 12, 2018 from
https://www.cheshnotes.com/2017/07/effect-of-demographic-factors-on-
consumer-behavior-age-sex-income-and-education/
Rappler. (2015). What is the Top 10 Seller of Convenience Stores? Retrieved on April 17,
2018 from https://www.rappler.com/business/industries/176-food-and-
beverage/89588-top-products-filipinos-buy-convenience-stores
Rappler. (n.d.). The People of Internet Users in the Philippines: In Partnership with
Globe. Retrieved on February 12, 2018 from
https://www.rappler.com/brandrap/profile-internet-users-ph
Reyes, T. (2016). INFOGRAPHIC: Fast facts on Online Shopping in PH. Retrieved

on January 17, 2018 from https://www.rappler.com/brandrap/finance-and-
industries/134852-ecommerce-industry-philippines
Rizal MicroBank (RMB). (n.d.). About: Brief History and Background. Retrieved on
December 29, 2017 from https://www.rizalmicrobank.com/index.php/profile-
page/background-and-history/
Roesler, P. (n.d.). NRD Survey shows Most Shopping Done In-Stores But Online
Tools Help. Retrieved on January 12, 2018 from https://www.inc.com/peter-
roesler/nrf-survey-shows-most-shopping-done-in-store-but-online-tools-help.html
Schlossberg, M. (2016). Men are twisting the knife that’s already killing shopping
malls. Retrieved on January 23, 2018 from http://www.businessinsider.com/men-
shop-online-more-frequently-than-women-2016-2
Schnabel, C. (2017). Philippine Retail Industry Gears up for the Future. Retrieved
On Janaury 18, 2018 from https://www.rappler.com/business/178607-philippines-
retail-industry-ecommerce
Silverberg, J. (2016). Generational Marketing: Age Appropriate. Retrieved on Janaury

23, 2018 from http://www.mytotalretail.com/article/age-appropriate-where-
different-generations-buy-and-how-to-reach-them/
Smith, C. (2015). The surprising facts about who shops online and on mobile.
Retrieved on February 12, 2018 from http://www.businessinsider.com/the-
surprisingdemographics-of-who-shops-online-and-on-mobile-2014-6
xcix
Staff Workplace Online. (2017). Staff Workplace Online Shopping Habits Revealed.
Retrieved on December 12, 2017 from
https://www.onehrsoftware.com/2017/04/staff-workplace-online-shopping-habits-
revealed/
Statista. (2016). Age distribution of Online Buyers in United States in 2014 and 2016.
Retrieved on January 18, 2018 from
https://www.statista.com/statistics/239428/number-of-us-online-shoppers-since-
2010/
Statista. (2017). Online or In-store Shopping Preference for selected product

categories by consumers worldwide as of 2017. Retrieved on March 26, 2018
from https://www.statista.com/statistics/692871/global-online-shopping-
preference-by-category/
Tantuco, V. (2017). Jobstreet 2017 report: Highest paying jobs for fresh grads.
Retrieved on December 8, 2018 from https://www.rappler.com/life-and-
style/career/164232
-jobstreet-2017-fresh-graduates-report-highest-paying-jobs.
Taylor, S. (2014). Why Men Don’t Like Shopping and (Most) Women Do. Retrieved
on February 12, 2018 from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/out-the-
darkness/201402/why-men-dont-shopping-and-most-women-do
The Theory of Planned Behaviour. (n.d.). Retrieved on March 14, 2018 from
http://sphweb.bumc.bu.edu/otlt/MPHModules/SB/BehavioralChangeTheories/Be
havioralChangeTheories3.html
The Philippines Star. (2017). What do Online Shoppers Really Want? Retrieved on
February 12, 2018 from https://www.pressreader.com/philippines/the-philippine-
star/20170130/282381219269870
Torres, T. (2015). 9 of 10 Pinoys prefer online shopping.

Retrieved on Janaury 18, 2018 from
http://www.philstar.com/banking/2015/03/10/1431749/9-10-pinoys-prefer-online-
shopping
UC Berkeley Human Resources. (n.d.). What is the difference between a

Manager/Supervisor and a Professional? Retrieved on November 23, 2017 from
https://hr.berkeley.edu/node/3816
United Coconut Planters Bank (UCPB). (n.d.). About Us: We are changing and our
new logo tells you why. Retrieved on December 28, 2017 from
https://www.ucpb.com/about/
c
Yunus, N., Yusof, R., and Hashim, H. (2016). The Influence of Attitude, Subjective
Norms, and Product Brand Image Toward Purchase Intention of Products
Previously Retracted Off Its Halal Certification. E-Proceeding of the 2nd
global Conference on Economics and Management Sciences (GEMS).
Retrieved on May 21, 2018 from
https://worldconferences.net/proceedings/gems2016/
fullpapers/GE%20038%20THE%20INFLUENCE%20OF%20ATTITUDE
,%20SUBJECTIVE%20NORMS%20AND%20PRODUCT%20BRAND%20IMA
GE.pdf
Zorzini, C. (2017). Infographic: An Analysis of Online Shopping Habits of Men and

Women. Retrieved on February 12, 2018 from https://ecommerce-
platforms.com/ecommerce-news/infographic-online-shopping-habits-men-vs-
women
ci
APPENDIX “A”
RESPONDENTS OF THE STUDY DESCRIPTION
AgriBusiness Rural Bank is the number one (1) rural bank in Region II.
Formerly known as Rural Bank of Sta. Fe Inc., and was established in its hometown in
Nueva Vizcaya year 1978. Today, Agribank is considered as one of the fast growing
banks in the Philippines reinforced by 800 well trained, faithful, and devoted bankers and
professionals and with over P3.5 billion worth of resources in total.
Center for Agriculture and Rural Development, Inc., opened its door to public
in San Pablo City in the year 1997 upon obtaining a licence from Bangko Sentral ng
Pilipinas as microfinance-oriented rural bank. Its vision as supported by its founder, that
their clients could have a vehicle for asset ownership to ensure that the less fortunate will
gain control over their own resources.
China Banking Corporation is said to be a catalyst of wealth creation for its
clients. The founders of China Bank believe that banking is an affiliation with trust,
integrity, fairness, and transparency. China Bank has been the right banking partner to
many people for it provides young professionals, retirees, and OFWs benefits that
achieve dreams.
City Savings is a thrift bank subsidiary of Union Bank of the Philippines who
retained their “small bank” personality while embracing technology and growing their
network to offer their convenience to its customers. City Savings offers financial
assistance to those who contributed to their communities but had no access to banking
services.
cii
Development Bank of the Philippines, former Rehabilitation Force Corporation
(RFC), started with an initial capital of P500 million subscribed by the government to
expand its facilities. Between the years of 1958 and 1986, DBP experienced financial
crisis due to the non-performing accounts. However, during the time of Late President
Corazon Aquino, an Executive Order No. 81 provided a rehabilitation program that
restored its operations. In 1995, DBP expanded its services and even attained a universal
banking status to fulfil a more meaningful development mandate.
First Consolidated Bank is an approved Thrift Bank by the Securities and
Exchange Commission in December 1996. Actually, before branching out, the beginning
of FCP started on the consolidation of 14 private banks in the Province of Bohol in 1982.
Since then, it grew on many parts of Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. Impressively, the
capital adequacy ratio of FCP turned out to be higher than the average top five (5)
commercial banks in the country.
Land Bank of the Philippines famously known by its tag line, “We’ll help you
grow.” is a governmental financial institution with a unique dual function of corporate
social responsibility and financial viability. LBP provides banking services to its priority
sectors and one among those are small farmers and fishers who are agrarian reform
beneficiaries. LBP being one of the largest banks in rural communities is part of the
country’s Top 5 commercial banks.
Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co. is a multi-awarded bank for over 50 years
and is 2nd on the leading financial conglomerate based on assets, according to Bangko
Sentral ng Pilipinas as of 2017. Majority of its shares is owned by Ty Family whose
business interests include real estate development, power and marketing, and financial
ciii
services. The growth of Metrobank is indeed outstanding for it already expanded its
branches beyond Philippines only a few years after it was established.
Occidental Mindoro Cooperative Bank is a progressive bank owned by locally
registered and organized twenty-nine (29) primary cooperatives who are members of
Occidental Mindoro Federation Multi-Purpose Cooperative. In 1998, OMCB opened its
banking operations to public and recently, the bank has been operating in the whole
province of Occidental Mindoro with already 38 primary co-operators and a total assets
amounting to P90.7 million.
Philippine National Bank is a former government-owned financial institution in
1916 and is the first universal bank in the Philippines. As early as 1917, PNB already
branch out overseas particularly in New York and China and five (5) more domestic
branches. Even so, between 1967 and 1979 where it continued to expand its branches in
European countries and other ASIAN countries. However, PNB experienced its major
downfall in mid-80s which resulted to privatization of the bank. Though it was being
privatized, still, PNB experienced losses in operations thus, national government injected
P25 million as liquidity assistance. Gladly, in 2006, PNB started to pay its liabilities and
net income also started increasing. Recently, PNB remains as one of the largest financial
conglomerates in the wide array of competitive banking in the country.
Philippine National Bank Savings is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Philippine
National Bank whose vision is “To be preferred lending and savings bank serving the
Small and Medium Scale Enterprise (SMEs) and consumer market which aim to deliver
superior value to clients and shareholders through excellent products, efficiency, and
growth.”
civ
Philippine Veterans Bank, a veterans-owned bank was created as a private
commercial bank in 1963 for the World War II veterans. According to Republic Act No.
3518 that PVP would be a government depository as an appreciation to the veterans who
sacrificed to achieve the altar of freedom. Government then was responsible for
appointing members of the board, while veterans were given less opportunity to be part
of its planning and development. Hence, during 1980s, this concluded on a consequence
when PVP experienced capital deficiency that leads to its closure and worse, liquidation.
Meanwhile, in 1992, veterans finally partook to the success of the bank. Since then, it
never failed to distribute stock dividends and cash annually.
Rizal MicroBank originally Merchants Savings & Loan Association, Inc. was
incorporated in December 1976 as a thrift bank and has 21 branches in the country. Rizal
MicroBank became a full-pledge subsidiary of Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation
(RCBC) in 2008 and is RCBC’s ally in fulfilling its role in unbanked and underserved
segments of the Philippine population.
United Coconut Planters Bank is a bank aimed to provide financial related
activities and programs to help uplift the lives of people in coconut communities. UCPB
has always been a vanguard to customer service innovations that provides continuous
customer satisfaction. Aside from that, UCPB was the first private bank in the country to
become a universal bank in 1981. Moreover, UCPB is engaging in the implementation of
the one of the most successful virtuously private reforestation initiative and gained
outstanding awards in 1999 and 2004, respectively.

cv
APPENDIX “B”

San Jose, Occidental Mindoro
Graduate School – Master in Business Administration
January 17, 2018
TO THE MANAGERS
Commercial/Thrift/Urban/Rural Banks
Dear Sir/Madam:
Good day!
As a partial fulfilment to complete my Master in Business Administration degree at the

Divine Word College of San Jose, I am currently conducting a study entitled “Online vs
Offline Shopping: A Review of Bank Employees’ Buying Preferences In San Jose,
Occidental Mindoro”.
In line with this, I would like to humbly request from your good office to please grant me
an access to acquire information regarding the number of employees on your
establishment, both in supervisory and rank & file positions.
Rest assured that all the data gathered will be utilized solely for this study and thus will
be treated with utmost confidentiality.
Your cooperation is very much appreciated.
Respectfully yours,
AIROTCIV IVY BLAISE P. MANGAWANG (Sgd.)

Researcher
Noted by:
HELIODORO E. MACABATA, PhD (Sgd.)

Adviser
cvi
APPENDIX “C”

February 26, 2018
DR. LUIS I GANTE, JR.

Vice President for Academic Affairs
This College
Dear Sir:
Good day!

Since your knowledge and expertise in this matter is highly valuable to conduct this
study, may I humbly ask your assistance in validating the questionnaire pertinent to my
present study.
I am looking forward for your support.
Thank you very much and more power!
Respectfully yours,

Researcher
Noted by:

Adviser
cvii
APPENDIX “C”

February 26, 2018
DR. CHONA T. JARABATA

VP for Basic Education/ SHS Principal
This College
Dear Madam:
Good day!

present study.
Respectfully yours,

Researcher
Noted by:

Adviser
cviii
APPENDIX “C”

February 26, 2018
DR. JASON S. VALERA

Dean – College of Education and CSIT
This College
Dear Sir:
Good day!

present study.
Respectfully yours,

Researcher
Noted by:

Adviser
cix
APPENDIX “C”

January 11, 2018
DR. MARIA PURA C. RAYTON

Faculty Member
Senior High School Department
This College
Dear Madam:
Good day!

present study.
Respectfully yours,

Researcher
Noted by:

Adviser
cx
APPENDIX “C”

January 11, 2018
DR. WENCESLAO M. PAGUIA, JR.

Dean – CBAM
Occidental Mindoro State College
Dear Sir:
Good day!

present study.
Respectfully yours,

Researcher
Noted by:

Adviser
cxi
APPENDIX “C”

January 11, 2018
DR. ANGELA M. GALISANAO

Program Head
FM/OM - CBAM
Dear Madam:
Good day!

present study.
Respectfully yours,

Researcher
Noted by:

Adviser
cxii
APPENDIX “D”

February 26, 2018
TO THE BANK EMPLOYEES

Supervisory and Rank & File
Sablayan, Occidental Mindoro
Dear Mr./Ms.:
Good day!

In this regard, I humbly request your participation by answering these sets of

questionnaires to test the reliability of my research instrument.
Respectfully yours,

Researcher
Noted by:

Adviser
cxiii
APPENDIX “D”

February 26, 2018

Mamburao, Occidental Mindoro
Dear Mr./Ms.:
Good day!

In this regard, I humbly request your participation by answering these sets of

questionnaires to test the reliability of my research instrument.
Respectfully yours,

Researcher
Noted by:

Adviser
cxiv
APPENDIX “E”
May 2, 2018

Commercial & Universal/ Thrift/ Rural and Cooperative Banks
Dear Sir/Madam:
Heartfelt Greetings!
I am AIROTCIV IVY BLAISE P. MANGAWANG, a Temporary Instructor I at Occidental Mindoro State

College – Senior High School Department. I am currently enrolled in the Master in Business
Administration (MBA) Program of the Divine Word College of San Jose Graduate School.
As a partial fulfilment to complete my Master in Business Administration degree at the Divine Word
College of San Jose, I am currently conducting a study entitled “Online vs Offline Shopping: An Analysis
of Bank Employees’ Buying Preferences in San Jose, Occidental Mindoro”.
In this regard, I would like to humbly ask you to answer the questionnaire attached herewith so that I may
be able to arrive at reliable results. I believe this study will further benefit your personal growth through
knowing your buying preference which is necessary to consider these days.
Rest assured that all the data gathered will be utilized solely for this study and thus will be treated with
utmost confidentiality.
Upon completion of this study, should you wish to have a summary of the findings, please feel free to reach
me through my email, rampairotciv11@gmail.com, or on my mobile number, ( +639) 12-889-6544. I will
be very glad to share it with you.
You can also reach me out in case you have queries, comments, and/or suggestions for the improvement of
my research paper. I will be very eager to accommodate you.
Thank you very much for your precious time and cooperation.
May God Bless you!
Respectfully yours,

Researcher
Noted by:

Adviser
cxv
APPENDIX “F”
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
ONLINE VS OFFLINE SHOPPING: AN ANALYSIS OF BANK EMPLOYEES’

BUYING PREFERENCES IN SAN JOSE, OCCIDENTAL MINDORO
I. PROFILE
Note to Respondents: Please answer the following by putting a check on

the box provided after each item.
Name: _________________________________ (Optional)
Age:
20-29 years old 50-59 years old
30-39 years old 60 years old and above
40-49 years old
Sex:
Male Female
Personal Income in Peso:

Below 10,000 30,000 to 39,999.99
10,000 to 19,9999.99 40,000 to 49,999.99
20,000 to 29,999.99 50,000 and above
Digital Literacy:
Highly Literate Poorly Literate
Moderately Literate Not Literate
cxvi
II. ONLINE VS OFFLINE SHOPPING
1. Please write a check mark on the column of your choice based on where you preferred
more to do shopping.
NO PRODUCT/S ONLINE SHOPPING OFFLINE SHOPPING

1 Groceries
2 Cosmetics
3 Books
4 Electronic Gadgets
5 Toys
6 Furniture & Fixtures
7 Apparels
8 Appliances
9 Airplane Tickets
10 Jewelry
2. Please write a check mark on the columns of your choice based on your level of
agreement on the factors that could influence you to shop ONLINE and/or OFFLINE. You can
have two options at once.
NO FACTORS ONLINE SHOPPING OFFLINE SHOPPING

1 Risky
2 Convenient
3 Affordable Products
4 Variety of Products
5 Quality of Products
6 Instant Gratification
7 Availability of Stocks
8 Customer Service
9 Financial Security
10 Loyalty
3. Please encircle the number which corresponds to your decision to switch from ONLINE TO
OFFLINE SHOPPING based on your own opinion using the scale below.
5 – Strongly Agree (SA)
4 – Agree (A)
3 – Undecided (U)
2 – Disagree (D)
1 – Strongly Disagree (SD)
NO DECISIONS SA A U D SD
1 It is easy to compare products in offline store. 5 4 3 2 1
It is easy to get clearer product information in an offline store
2 5 4 3 2 1
than online.
3 Products in offline stores can be inspected physically. 5 4 3 2 1
4 The product can be bought immediately in offline store. 5 4 3 2 1
5 Products in offline store are of good quality. 5 4 3 2 1
It is the most practical way to make the purchase in an offline
6 5 4 3 2 1
store.
7 Purchasing products in an offline store is very simple. 5 4 3 2 1
8 It is easier to make purchase offline than online. 5 4 3 2 1
9 There is a control in making purchases offline. 5 4 3 2 1
10 There are no hidden costs such as freight in offline stores. 5 4 3 2 1
cxvii
NO DEICIONS SA A U D SD
11 It is easy to get big discounts in offline stores. 5 4 3 2 1
It is easy to know the costs of purchases made in offline
12 5 4 3 2 1
stores.
Transacting using debit or credit cards are not available in
13 5 4 3 2 1
offline store.
14 Privacy is better respected offline than online. 5 4 3 2 1
It is easy to return the product in an offline store if it is
15 5 4 3 2 1
defective.
Offline store sales staffs have more relevant information than
16 5 4 3 2 1
in online.
17 Offline store is a pleasing environment. 5 4 3 2 1
18 There is no pressure in buying products offline. 5 4 3 2 1
19 Offline shopping is more enjoyable than online shopping. 5 4 3 2 1
20 Shopping offline is more exciting than shopping online. 5 4 3 2 1
4. Please encircle the number which corresponds to your decision to switch from OFFLINE TO
ONLINE SHOPPING based on your own opinion using the scale below.
4 – Agree (A)
3 – Undecided (U)
2 – Disagree (D)
NO DECISIONS SA A U D SD
1 The information about the product online is timely. 5 4 3 2 1
2 It is easier to compare competing products online than offline. 5 4 3 2 1
3 There is no need to physically inspect the products online. 5 4 3 2 1
It is possible to watch a demonstration version before buying products
4 online.
5 4 3 2 1
5 The products available online is not available locally. 5 4 3 2 1
6 The products available online is unusual. 5 4 3 2 1
7 The products available online is of moderate cost. 5 4 3 2 1
8 It is safe to make purchase online. 5 4 3 2 1
9 Purchasing products in an online store is very easy. 5 4 3 2 1
10 Purchasing products in an online store can save time. 5 4 3 2 1
11 Online shopping is the most useful way to make a purchase. 5 4 3 2 1
12 There is a control in making purchases online. 5 4 3 2 1
13 It is easy to get bigger discounts in an online store. 5 4 3 2 1
14 It is easy to know the costs of purchases made in online store. 5 4 3 2 1
15 It is easy to transact using debit or credit cards online than offline. 5 4 3 2 1
16 The checkout information online is presented in a clear way. 5 4 3 2 1
17 Delivery of the product is easy in online store. 5 4 3 2 1
18 The online vendor is trustworthy. 5 4 3 2 1
19 There is no pressure in buying products online. 5 4 3 2 1
20 Online shopping is more interesting than offline shopping. 5 4 3 2 1
cxviii
III. BUYING PREFERENCES
Note to Respondents: The statements below aims at defining your buying preferences in terms of
motivation, buying attitude, buying intention, and purchasing behaviour. Your answers will be used to
identify the development program that will help assist the bank employees in determining a smart choice.
Rest assured that that your answers will be treated with utmost confidentiality. Please encircle the number
of your choice which best describes your purchasing preference to both channels, ONLINE or OFFLINE,
using the scale below.
4 – Agree (A)
3 – Undecided (U)
2 – Disagree (D)
OFFLINE
NO BUYING PREFERENCES ONLINE SHOPPING
SHOPPING
Motivation SA A U D SD SA A U D SD
1 I shop here because of the wide variety of items. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
2 I shop here because I find whatever I need easily. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
3 I like to shop here because the time is flexible. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
4 I buy here to take advantage of the sales promo. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
I am able to accomplish what I plan to buy when I
5
shop here. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
I shop here because of the less hassle of shopping
6 environment. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
Buying Attitude SA A U D SD SA A U D SD
1 I enjoy spending time shopping here. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
I enjoy exploring several different product
2
alternatives while shopping here. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
Shopping here makes me feel good even if I don’t
3
buy anything there. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
I feel more updated here about new products
4
before other people do. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
I shop here to experience more affordable and
5
quality products. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
I shop here because of the attractiveness of
6 shopping environment. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
Buying Intention SA A U D SD SA A U D SD
1 I shop here for guarantees and warrantees. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
I shop here for the privacy of my personal
2
information. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
3 I shop here for the security of payment methods. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
4 I shop here for good customer service. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
5 I shop here to easily compare prices of products. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
6 I shop here to satisfy my needs. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
Purchasing Behaviour SA A U D SD SA A U D SD
I shop here because I can often consult other
1 people to help me choose the best alternative 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
available.
cxix
Purchasing Behaviour SA A U D SD SA A U D SD
If I hear that new products or brands are available
2
here, I will be interested enough to buy them. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
I like to have the new trend items sold here before
3
my friends and neighbours do have those. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
4 I like to shop here as to keep up with friends. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
5 I like to shop here to create bonds with family. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
6 I like to shop here when it is for co-workers. 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1
Thank you for your cooperation.
May God bless you!
-AIBPM-
cxx
APPENDIX “G”
COMPUTATION PRINT-OUT OF THE STATISTICAL COMPUTATION
FOR THE RELIABILITY OF RESEARCH INSTRUMENT
Reliability
[DataSet1] F:\GRADSCH\THESES\AIROTCIV.sav
Scale: ALL VARIABLES
Ca se Processing Sum ma ry
N %
Cases Valid 30 100.0
Ex cludeda 0 .0
Total 30 100.0
a. Lis twis e deletion based on all
variables in the procedure.
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha Part 1 Value .746
N of Items 10 a
Part 2 Value .793
N of Items 10 b
Total N of Items 20
Correlation Between Forms
.903
Spearman-Brown Equal Length .949

Coefficient Unequal Length .949
Guttman Split-Half Coefficient
.949
a. The items are: ONF1, ONF3, ONF5, ONF7, ONF9, ONF11, ONF13,
ONF15, ONF17, ONF19.
b. The items are: ONF2, ONF4, ONF6, ONF8, ONF10, ONF12,
ONF14, ONF16, ONF18, ONF20.
cxxi
N of Items 10 a
Part 2 Value .906
N of Items 10 b
Total N of Items 20
.948

.973
a. The items are: FON1, FON3, FON5, FON7, FON9, FON11, FON13,
FON15, FON17, FON19.
b. The items are: FON2, FON4, FON6, FON8, FON10, FON12,
FON14, FON16, FON18, FON20.
Re liability Sta tistics

N of Items 12 a
Part 2 Value .914
N of Items 12 b
Total N of Items 24
.978
Coeffic ient Unequal Lengt h .989
.989
a. The items are: BFON1, BFON3, BFON5, BFON7, BFON9,

BFON11, BFON13, BFON15, BFON17, BFON19, BFON21,
BFON23.
b. The items are: BFON2, BFON4, BFON6, BFON8, BFON10,
BFON12, BFON14, BFON16, BFON18, BFON20, BFON22,
BFON24.
cxxii
N of Items 12 a
Part 2 Value .787
N of Items 12 b
Total N of Items 24
.906

.945
a. The items are: BFOF1, BFOF3, BFOF5, BFOF7, BFOF9, BFOF11,

BFOF13, BFOF15, BFOF17, BFOF19, BFOF21, BFOF23.
b. The items are: BFOF2, BFOF4, BFOF6, BFOF8, BFOF10, BFOF12,
BFOF14, BFOF16, BFOF18, BFOF20, BFOF22, BFOF24.
cxxiii
APPENDIX “H”
COMPUTATION PRINT-OUT OF THE STATISTICAL
COMPUTATION FOR DATA ANALYSIS
Frequencies
[DataSet1] F:\GRADSCH\THESES\MANGAWANG\AIROTCIV_FINALDATA.sav
Statistics
PERSONAL DIGITAL
AGE SEX INCOME LITERACY
N Valid 165 165 165 165
Missing 0 0 0 0
Frequency Table
AGE
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 20 - 29 98 59.4 59.4 59.4
30 - 39 46 27.9 27.9 87.3
40 - 49 14 8.5 8.5 95.8
50 - 59 6 3.6 3.6 99.4
60 AND ABOVE 1 .6 .6 100.0
Total 165 100.0 100.0
SEX
Cumulative
Valid MALE 73 44.2 44.2 44.2
FEMALE 92 55.8 55.8 100.0
Total 165 100.0 100.0
cxxiv
PERSONAL INCOME
Cumulative
Valid BELOW PHP10,000 58 35.2 35.2 35.2
PHP10,000 - 19,999.99 58 35.2 35.2 70.3
PHP20,000 - 29,999.99 28 17.0 17.0 87.3
PHP30,000 - 39,999.99 8 4.8 4.8 92.1
PHP40,000 - 49,999.99 1 .6 .6 92.7
PHP50,000 AND ABOVE 12 7.3 7.3 100.0
Total 165 100.0 100.0
DIGITAL LITERACY
Cumulative
Valid HIGHLY LITERATE 60 36.4 36.4 36.4
MODERATELY LITERATE 105 63.6 63.6 100.0
Total 165 100.0 100.0
GROCERIES
Cumulative
Valid ONLINE SHOPPING 4 2.4 2.4 2.4
OFFLINE SHOPPING 161 97.6 97.6 100.0
Total 165 100.0 100.0
COSMETICS
Cumulative
Total 165 100.0 100.0
BOOKS
Cumulative
Total 165 100.0 100.0
cxxv
ELECTRONIC GADGETS
Cumulative
Total 165 100.0 100.0
TOYS
Cumulative
Total 165 100.0 100.0
FURNITURE/FIXTURES
Cumulative
Total 165 100.0 100.0
APPARELS
Cumulative
Total 165 100.0 100.0
APPLIANCES
Cumulative
Total 165 100.0 100.0
cxxvi
AIRPLANE TICKETS
Cumulative
Total 165 100.0 100.0
JEWELRY
Cumulative
Total 165 100.0 100.0
Frequency Table
RI SKY
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Perc ent Percent
BOTH 6 3.6 3.6 100.0
Total 165 100.0 100.0
CONVENI ENT
Cumulative
BOTH 28 17.0 17.0 100.0
Total 165 100.0 100.0
AFFORDABLE PRODUCTS
Cumulative
BOTH 39 23.6 23.6 100.0
Total 165 100.0 100.0
cxxvii
VAR[I ETY OF PRODUCTS
Cumulative
BOTH 26 15.8 15.8 100.0
Total 165 100.0 100.0
QUALITY OF PRODUCTS
Cumulative
BOTH 21 12.7 12.7 100.0
Total 165 100.0 100.0
INSTANT GRATIFICATION
Cumulative
BOTH 14 8.5 8.5 100.0
Total 165 100.0 100.0
AVAILABI LITY OF STOCKS
Cumulative
BOTH 21 12.7 12.7 100.0
Total 165 100.0 100.0
CUSTOMER SERVICE
Cumulative
BOTH 22 13.3 13.3 100.0
Total 165 100.0 100.0
cxxviii
FI NANCIAL SECURITY
Cumulative
BOTH 3 1.8 1.8 100.0
Total 165 100.0 100.0
LOYALTY
Cumulative
BOTH 15 9.1 9.1 100.0
Total 165 100.0 100.0
Descriptives
ONLINE TO OFFLINE SHOPPING
N Mean
ONF1 165 4.33
ONF2 165 4.35
ONF3 165 4.64
ONF4 165 4.42
ONF5 165 4.05
ONF6 165 4.21
ONF7 165 4.16
ONF8 165 4.07
ONF9 165 4.18
ONF10 165 4.23
ONF11 165 3.95
ONF12 165 4.12
ONF13 165 3.25
ONF14 165 4.04
ONF15 165 4.32
ONF16 165 4.04
ONF17 165 3.96
ONF18 165 4.05
ONF19 165 4.01
ONF20 165 3.97
MEAN 4.12
cxxix
OFFLINE TO ONLINE SHOPPING
N Mean
FON1 165 3.99
FON2 165 3.79
FON3 165 3.48
FON4 165 3.81
FON5 165 3.68
FON6 165 3.67
FON7 165 3.59
FON8 165 3.18
FON9 165 3.84
FON10 165 4.16
FON11 165 3.74
FON12 165 3.52
FON13 165 3.44
FON14 165 3.79
FON15 165 3.73
FON16 165 3.69
FON17 165 3.63
FON18 165 3.26
FON19 165 3.65
FON20 165 3.56
MEAN 3.66
Descriptives
MOTIVATION: Online Shopping
N Mean
BFON1 165 4.04
BFON2 165 4.06
BFON3 165 4.13
BFON4 165 4.05
BFON5 165 3.89
BFON6 165 3.85
MEAN 4.00
cxxx
BUYING ATTITUDE: Online Shopping
N Mean
BFON7 165 3.90
BFON8 165 4.05
BFON9 165 3.88
BFON10 165 4.10
BFON11 165 3.90
BFON12 165 3.82
MEAN 3.94
BUYING INTENTION: Online Shopping
N Mean
BFON13 165 3.78
BFON14 165 3.75
BFON15 165 3.73
BFON16 165 3.78
BFON17 165 4.12
BFON18 165 3.97
MEAN 3.86
PURCHASING BEHAVIOUR: Online Shopping
N Mean
BFON19 165 3.96
BFON20 165 3.99
BFON21 165 3.87
BFON22 165 3.65
BFON23 165 3.53
BFON24 165 3.79
MEAN 3.80
MOTIVATION: Offline Shopping
N Mean
BFOF1 165 3.93
BFOF2 165 3.98
BFOF3 165 3.84
BFOF4 165 4.10
BFOF5 165 3.98
BFOF6 165 4.09
MEAN 3.99
cxxxi
BUYING ATTITUDE: Offline Shopping
N Mean
BFOF7 165 4.17
BFOF8 165 4.06
BFOF9 165 4.15
BFOF10 165 3.84
BFOF11 165 4.18
BFOF12 165 4.00
MEAN 4.07
BUYING INTENTION: Offline Shopping
N Mean
BFOF13 165 4.35
BFOF14 165 4.35
BFOF15 165 4.36
BFOF16 165 4.18
BFOF17 165 4.09
BFOF18 165 4.25
MEAN 4.26
PURCHASING BEHAVIOUR: Offline Shopping
N Mean
BFOF19 165 4.21
BFOF20 165 4.14
BFOF21 165 3.91
BFOF22 165 4.00
BFOF23 165 4.23
BFOF24 165 3.98
MEAN 4.08
Regression
Variables Entered/Removeda
a. Dependent Variable: MOTIV_ON
Regression
a. Dependent Variable: ATT_ON

cxxxii
Regression
a. Dependent Variable: INTENT_ON
Regression
a. Dependent Variable: BEHAV_ON
Regression
a. Dependent Variable: MOTIV_OFF
Regression
a
Va riables Entere d/Removed
Variables Variables
Model Entered Removed Method
1 St epwise (Crit eria: Probability-of-F-to-enter
SEX . <= .050, Probability-of-F-to-remove >= .
100).
a. Dependent Variable: ATT_OFF
Model Summary
Adjusted Std. Error of

Model R R Square R Square the Estimate
1 .172a .030 .024 3.34825
a. Predictors: (Constant), SEX
cxxxiii
Coeffi cientsa
Unstandardized St andardiz ed
Coeffic ient s Coeffic ient s
Model B St d. Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Const ant) 22.566 .858 26.301 .000
SEX 1.173 .525 .172 2.236 .027
a. Dependent Variable: ATT_OFF
Regression
a. Dependent Variable: INTENT_OFF
Regression
a. Dependent Variable: BEHAV_OFF
Regression - Switching Behavior VS Buying Preference
a
Va riables Entere d/Re moved
Variables Variables
1 St epwise (Crit eria: Probability-of-F-to-enter <= .050,
FON20 .
Probability -of-F-to-remove >= . 100).
ONF1 .
ONF16 .
FON10 .
ONF19 .
a. Dependent Variable: motiv
cxxxiv
Model Summary

1 .484a .234 .229 .40026
2 .583b .340 .332 .37261
3 .629c .395 .384 .35790
4 .657d .431 .417 .34819
5 .670e .449 .432 .34373
a. Predictors: (Constant), FON20
b. Predictors: (Constant), FON20, ONF1
c. Predictors: (Constant), FON20, ONF1, ONF16
d. Predictors: (Constant), FON20, ONF1, ONF16, FON10
e. Predictors: (Constant), FON20, ONF1, ONF16, FON10,
ONF19
Coefficientsa
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) 3.239 .112 29.033 .000
FON20 .212 .030 .484 7.057 .000
2 (Constant) 2.374 .199 11.953 .000
FON20 .212 .028 .483 7.567 .000
ONF1 .200 .039 .326 5.108 .000
3 (Constant) 2.009 .213 9.417 .000
FON20 .215 .027 .490 7.996 .000
ONF1 .159 .039 .260 4.083 .000
ONF16 .131 .034 .243 3.819 .000
4 (Constant) 1.719 .227 7.583 .000
FON20 .179 .029 .408 6.267 .000
ONF1 .153 .038 .250 4.026 .000
ONF16 .121 .033 .225 3.616 .000
FON10 .117 .037 .208 3.180 .002
5 (Constant) 1.623 .228 7.126 .000
FON20 .176 .028 .402 6.244 .000
ONF1 .131 .039 .214 3.383 .001
ONF16 .081 .037 .150 2.156 .033
FON10 .124 .036 .220 3.396 .001
ONF19 .084 .037 .162 2.275 .024
a. Dependent Variable: motiv
cxxxv
Regression
a
Va riables Entered/Re moved
Variables Variables
1 St epwise (Criteria: Probability-of-F-to-enter <= .
FON20 .
050, Probabilit y-of-F-to-remove >= .100).
ONF7 .
FON12 .
ONF2 .
FON9 .
a. Dependent Variable: buyat tit
Model Summary

1 .468a .219 .215 .40252
2 .550b .303 .294 .38160
3 .592c .351 .339 .36931
4 .624d .389 .374 .35941
5 .640e .410 .391 .35444
c. Predictors: (Constant), FON20, ONF7, FON12
d. Predictors: (Constant), FON20, ONF7, FON12, ONF2
e. Predictors: (Constant), FON20, ONF7, FON12, ONF2,
FON9
cxxxvi
Coefficientsa
1 (Constant) 3.275 .112 29.191 .000
FON20 .205 .030 .468 6.768 .000
2 (Constant) 2.606 .185 14.053 .000
FON20 .189 .029 .432 6.541 .000
ONF7 .174 .040 .291 4.401 .000
3 (Constant) 2.429 .187 13.012 .000
FON20 .118 .035 .270 3.411 .001
ONF7 .168 .038 .282 4.396 .000
FON12 .129 .037 .274 3.459 .001
4 (Constant) 2.033 .221 9.216 .000
FON20 .123 .034 .280 3.629 .000
ONF7 .123 .040 .206 3.090 .002
FON12 .134 .036 .286 3.708 .000
ONF2 .126 .040 .209 3.160 .002
5 (Constant) 1.863 .229 8.127 .000
FON20 .092 .036 .209 2.557 .011
ONF7 .130 .039 .217 3.289 .001
FON12 .118 .036 .251 3.244 .001
ONF2 .123 .039 .204 3.118 .002
FON9 .085 .036 .172 2.349 .020
a. Dependent Variable: buyattit
Regression
Variables Variables
1 Stepwise (Criteria: Probability-of-F-to-enter <= .050,
FON12 .
Probability-of-F-to-remove >= .100).
FON6 .
ONF2 .
FON1 .
FON13 .
ONF18 .
FON4 .
a. Dependent Variable: buyintent
cxxxvii
Model Summary

1 .459a .210 .205 .45369
2 .523b .273 .264 .43664
3 .579c .335 .323 .41891
4 .604d .365 .349 .41057
5 .620e .384 .365 .40559
6 .634f .402 .379 .40102
7 .645g .417 .391 .39732
b. Predictors: (Constant), FON12, FON6
c. Predictors: (Constant), FON12, FON6, ONF2
d. Predictors: (Constant), FON12, FON6, ONF2, FON1
e. Predictors: (Constant), FON12, FON6, ONF2, FON1,
FON13
f. Predictors: (Constant), FON12, FON6, ONF2, FON1,
FON13, ONF18
g. Predictors: (Constant), FON12, FON6, ONF2, FON1,
FON13, ONF18, FON4
cxxxviii
Coefficientsa
1 (Constant) 3.116 .134 23.283 .000
FON12 .242 .037 .459 6.588 .000
2 (Constant) 2.719 .167 16.298 .000
FON12 .205 .037 .389 5.599 .000
FON6 .143 .038 .260 3.739 .000
3 (Constant) 1.940 .257 7.548 .000
FON12 .209 .035 .397 5.947 .000
FON6 .152 .037 .276 4.131 .000
ONF2 .169 .044 .250 3.874 .000
4 (Constant) 1.666 .271 6.152 .000
FON12 .179 .036 .339 4.941 .000
FON6 .122 .038 .222 3.250 .001
ONF2 .166 .043 .246 3.887 .000
FON1 .126 .046 .195 2.757 .007
5 (Constant) 1.598 .269 5.935 .000
FON12 .140 .040 .266 3.532 .001
FON6 .096 .039 .174 2.449 .015
ONF2 .180 .043 .267 4.227 .000
FON1 .107 .046 .166 2.339 .021
FON13 .091 .041 .181 2.227 .027
6 (Constant) 1.439 .276 5.206 .000
FON12 .124 .040 .235 3.095 .002
FON6 .082 .039 .149 2.090 .038
ONF2 .150 .044 .222 3.371 .001
FON1 .109 .045 .168 2.393 .018
FON13 .099 .041 .198 2.448 .015
ONF18 .090 .042 .144 2.155 .033
7 (Constant) 1.553 .280 5.551 .000
FON12 .137 .040 .260 3.413 .001
FON6 .095 .039 .173 2.425 .016
ONF2 .157 .044 .233 3.562 .000
FON1 .114 .045 .176 2.524 .013
FON13 .124 .042 .247 2.942 .004
ONF18 .084 .042 .134 2.016 .045
FON4 -.085 .043 -.146 -1.988 .049
a. Dependent Variable: buyintent
cxxxix
Regression
Variables Variables
FON18 .
ONF2 .
FON13 .
ONF18 .
FON1 .
FON10 .
. FON18
a. Dependent Variable: purchasbehav
Model Summary

1 .388a .151 .146 .49611
2 .496b .246 .237 .46897
3 .551c .303 .290 .45218
4 .573d .329 .312 .44520
5 .591e .349 .329 .43974
6 .607f .369 .345 .43451
7 .601g .361 .341 .43575
c. Predictors: (Constant), FON18, ONF2, FON13
d. Predictors: (Constant), FON18, ONF2, FON13, ONF18
e. Predictors: (Constant), FON18, ONF2, FON13, ONF18,
FON1
f. Predictors: (Constant), FON18, ONF2, FON13, ONF18,
FON1, FON10
g. Predictors: (Constant), ONF2, FON13, ONF18, FON1,
FON10
cxl
Coefficientsa
1 (Constant) 3.196 .143 22.334 .000
FON18 .227 .042 .388 5.381 .000
2 (Constant) 2.233 .252 8.848 .000
FON18 .230 .040 .393 5.766 .000
ONF2 .219 .049 .308 4.518 .000
3 (Constant) 1.879 .262 7.170 .000
FON18 .131 .047 .224 2.782 .006
ONF2 .251 .048 .353 5.269 .000
FON13 .157 .043 .297 3.641 .000
4 (Constant) 1.636 .276 5.923 .000
FON18 .108 .047 .184 2.268 .025
ONF2 .214 .049 .301 4.352 .000
FON13 .163 .043 .308 3.829 .000
ONF18 .114 .046 .172 2.468 .015
5 (Constant) 1.374 .297 4.627 .000
FON18 .086 .048 .146 1.792 .075
ONF2 .211 .049 .296 4.337 .000
FON13 .140 .043 .264 3.227 .002
ONF18 .112 .045 .169 2.459 .015
FON1 .109 .049 .160 2.234 .027
6 (Constant) 1.105 .318 3.474 .001
FON18 .066 .048 .114 1.383 .169
ONF2 .198 .048 .278 4.087 .000
FON13 .115 .044 .217 2.591 .010
ONF18 .124 .045 .187 2.735 .007
FON1 .108 .048 .159 2.241 .026
FON10 .104 .047 .157 2.204 .029
7 (Constant) 1.077 .318 3.385 .001
ONF2 .197 .049 .277 4.068 .000
FON13 .141 .040 .266 3.507 .001
ONF18 .137 .044 .207 3.089 .002
FON1 .121 .047 .178 2.560 .011
FON10 .115 .046 .174 2.490 .014
a. Dependent Variable: purchasbehav
cxli
T-Test
Pa ire d Sa mples Sta tisti cs
St d. Error
Mean N St d. Deviation Mean
Pair MOTIV_ON 24.0242 165 3.72197 .28976
1 MOTIV_OFF 23.9152 165 3.64325 .28363
Pair ATT_ON 23.6545 165 3.75249 .29213
2 ATT_OFF 24.3939 165 3.38882 .26382
Pair INTENT_ON 23.1333 165 4.04024 .31453
3 INTENT_OFF 25.5879 165 3.23281 .25167
Pair BEHAV_ON 22.7939 165 4.13860 .32219
4 BEHAV_OFF 24.4606 165 3.78781 .29488
Pa ired Sa mples Test
Paired Differences
95%
Confidence
Int erval of t he
St d. Error Difference Sig.
Mean St d. Deviation Mean Lower Upper t df (2-tailed)
Pair MOTIV_ON -
.10909 4.93126 .38390 -.6489 .86711 .284 164 .777
1 MOTIV_OFF
Pair ATT_ON -
-.73939 4.62878 .36035 -1. 451 -.0279 -2. 052 164 .042
2 ATT_OFF
Pair INTENT_ON -
-2. 45455 4.99811 .38910 -3. 223 -1. 686 -6. 308 164 .000
3 INTENT_OFF
Pair BEHAV_ON -
-1. 66667 4.63330 .36070 -2. 379 -.9544 -4. 621 164 .000
4 BEHAV_OFF
cxlii
CURRICULUM VITAE
AIROTCIV IVY BLAISE P. MANGAWANG

E-mail Address : rampairotciv11@gmail.com
Address : M.H. Del Pilar St., Barangay VII,
EMPLOYMENT BACKGROUND
November 2017 – Present Temporary Instructor I

November 2016 – November 2017 Part-time Instructor

June 2016 – October 2016 Part-time College Instructor

CBAM
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
Graduate School September 2018

Master in Business Administration
Divine Word College of San Jose
Tertiary Education April 2016

Bachelor of Science in Business Administration
Major in Management Accounting
cxliii
Secondary Education March 2012
Elementary Education March 2008

Occidental Mindoro National College
HONORS/ AWARDS RECEIVED
Tertiary Education Best Student Researcher

“Establishment of Beach Resort in Barangay Inasakan,
Ilin Island, San Jose, Occidental Mindoro”
April 2016
Outstanding Student Leader

A.Y. 2015 – 2016
SEMINARS and TRAININGS ATTENDED
January 27, 2018 Research Capability Building Seminar

September 29, 2016 RDE Capability Building Cum Planning Workshop

August 6, 2016 Symposium on “Education &

Globalization” and “ASEAN Integration”
PERSONAL INFORMATION
Birthdate July 11, 1995

Civil Status Single
Parent/s Mrs. Victoria M. San Agustin

Mangawang 2018

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mangawang 2018

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DIVINE WORD COLLEGE OF SAN JOSE

ONLINE VS OFFLINE SHOPPING: AN ANALYSIS OF BANK

Graduate School Faculty

of the Divine Word College of San Jose,

San Jose, Occidental Mindoro, Philippines

of the Requirements for the Degree of

Master in Business Administration

AIROTCIV IVY BLAISE P. MANGAWANG

the following persons who contributed much for this success.

unending support and continuous enhancement of graduate school researches;

sharing enormous knowledge and advice to improve this research;

related articles about her study;

content of this research;

critics and suggestions to improve the study;

scholarship granted to the researcher;

towards the completion of the study;

apply for CHED scholarship;

Mrs. Paciencia C. Advincula, SHS Principal of OMSC, for her heartfelt

understanding during the tough times of the researcher;

this study possible;

determination to finish this study despite of hectic schedule in school;

conduct of data gathering;

duration of her schooling;

Mr. Vicente C. Mangawang and Mrs. Conchita P. Mangawang, her

grandparents, for being an inspiration and stronghold in her career;

difficult times of the researcher;

To Mama and Lolo

To my Mommy and Siblings

This piece which stands as

attestation to your unconditional

love, support and encouragement I offer thee.

This research is entitled, Online VS Offline Shopping: An Analysis of Bank Employees

TABLE OF CONTENTS vii

CHAPTER I - THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

Statement of the Problem 4

Significance of the Study 5

Scope and Limitation of the Study 7

CHAPTER II – REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND

Respondents of the Study 33

Research Instrument Used 36

Validity of the Instrument 38

Reliability of the Instrument 38

Data Gathering Method 38

CHAPTER IV – PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND

Proposed Development Program 64

CHAPTER V – SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND

CURRICULUM VITAE 131

Table Title Page

3 Bank Employees’ Profile in Terms of Age 41

4 Bank Employees’ Profile in Terms of Sex 42

5 Bank Employees’ Profile in Terms of Personal Income 43

Bank Employees’ More Preferred Channel When Shopping

Factors Influencing Shopping Preferences of Bank

Mean Extent of Bank Employees’ Decision to Switch from

Mean Extent of Bank Employees’ Decision to Switch from

10 Mean Extent of Bank Employees’ Buying Preferences 52

Multiple Regression Analysis Between Bank Employees’

Multiple Regression Analysis Between Bank Employees’

Multiple Regression Analysis Between Bank Employees’

Comparative Analysis Between Online Shopping and Offline

Development Program to Assist Bank Employees in 64

Appendix Title Page

A Respondents of the Study Description 95

A Letter of Request to Gather Data from the Banks in San