Home⇛Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives⇛vol. 3 no. 12 (2025)

Acceptability and Readiness of Fast-Food Personnel Toward Artificial Intelligence Financial Tools for Internal Control

Vince Ledren A. Deleste | Joshua James Zar D. Batallones | Jeo Francis S. Bijare | Francine I. De La Cruz | Kristian Jerund G. Germia | Ace Gerome M. Niño

Discipline: business studies

 

Abstract:

Despite the growing integration of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in financial operations, there is a limited understanding of how fast-food employees perceive and adapt to such technologies. This study aimed to assess the level of acceptability of artificial intelligence (AI) financial tools for internal control and their impact on the readiness of fast-food personnel, as well as the differences and relationships between acceptability and readiness. Using a quantitative-correlational research design, the study examined fastfood personnel through the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and Technology Readiness Index (TRI). Results revealed that both the willingness to adopt and readiness of the fast-food personnel were high, indicating a positive perception of AI financial tools. Moreover, no significant differences in acceptability were found when participants were grouped by age and job position; however, a considerable difference emerged when participants were grouped by sex in terms of ease of use, suggesting that males and females perceive AI financial tools differently. Regarding readiness, significant differences were observed in optimism and innovativeness when grouped according to sex, indicating that sex influences an individual’s level of preparedness. Lastly, a powerful and significant positive relationship was found between the respondents’ level of acceptability and readiness, implying that readiness and acceptability influence each other, suggesting that openness to AI tools and the capacity to engage with them are mutually reinforcing. These findings offer practical insights for organizational training programs and digital transformation strategies in the fast-food sector. The study recommends that owners and management provide proper formal training for personnel and identify key areas for improvement. Future research should also explore other factors that may affect acceptability and readiness.



References:

  1. Albofera, Q. K. L., Digan, D. A., Torres, J. R., & Quezada, R. J. C. (2024). Technology acceptance among college students living in remote areas. American Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Innovation, 3(4), 138–147. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajmri.v3i4.2898
  2. Anand, A. (2022). What is a survey? Analytics steps. Retrieved from https://tinyurl.com/365xjy63 
  3. Bhandari, P. (2023). Correlational research | When & how to use. Scribbr. Retrieved from https://tinyurl.com/4sxtfxs8
  4. Deloitte. (2024). New Deloitte survey on Gen AI adoption. Retrieved from https://tinyurl.com/mr2dchub 
  5. Domingo, M. A., Galeon, K. S., Pastor, D. A., & Toribio, J. B. (2022). University students’ levels of anxiety, readiness, and acceptance for e-learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Social Sciences, Humanities and Education Journal (SHE Journal), 4(1), 73–86. Retrieved from https://tinyurl.com/32anp5fj 
  6. Ethan, H. (2023). The limitations of manual data processing: Overcoming human error and inefficiency | Insightvity. Insightvity. https://tinyurl.com/4w7se3y2
  7. Gaganao, R. D., Discar, R. N., & Fabillar, I. N. L. (2022). E-learning readiness of teachers in the new normal education: The case of national high schools in Eastern Samar. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), 11(3), 1040. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v11i3.22542 
  8. Gfrerer, A., Hutter, K., Füller, J., & Ströhle, T. (2020). Ready or not: Managers’ and employees’ different perceptions of digital readiness. California Management Review, 63(2), 23–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125620977487 
  9. Golzar, J., Noor, S., & Tajik, O. (2022). Convenience sampling. International Journal of Education Language Studies, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.22034/ijels.2022.162981
  10. Goswami, A., & Dutta, S. (2016). Gender differences in technology usage—A literature review. Open Journal of Business and Management, 04(01), 51–59. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojbm.2016.41006
  11. Heale, R., & Twycross, A. (2015). Validity and reliability in quantitative studies. Evidence-Based Nursing, 18(3), 66–67. https://doi.org/10.1136/eb-2015-102129
  12. Joseph, G. V., Thomas, K. A., & Nero, A. (2021). Impact of technology readiness and techno stress on teacher engagement in higher secondary schools. Digital Education Review, 40, 51–65. https://doi.org/10.1344/der.2021.40.51-65 
  13. Kaushik, M. K., & Agrawal, D. (2021). Influence of technology readiness in adoption of e-learning. International Journal of Educational Management, 35(2), 483–495. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijem-04-2020-0216 
  14. Latif, D. V., Arsalan, S., & Hussain, H. I. (2021). The effect of gender in the implementation of self-ordering machine in a fast food restaurant. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education Vol. 12 No.11 (2021), 1392–1396. https://doi.org/10.17762/turcomat.v12i11.6051 
  15. Mordorintelligence. (2024). Philippines' foodservice market size. Market Research Company - Mordor IntelligenceTM. Retrieved from https://tinyurl.com/578wf8d5 
  16. Morris, M. G., Venkatesh, V., & Ackerman, P. L. (2005). Gender and age differences in employee decisions about new technology: An extension to the theory of planned behavior. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 52(1), 69–84. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2004.839967
  17. Na, T.-K., Lee, S.-H., & Yang, J.-Y. (2021). Moderating effect of gender on the relationship between technology readiness index and consumers’ continuous use intention of self-service restaurant kiosks. Information, 12(7), 280. https://doi.org/10.3390/info12070280
  18. PricewaterhouseCoopers. (2022). PwC’s global economic crime and fraud survey 2022. PwC. Retrieved from https://tinyurl.com/mr45ft3w 
  19. PricewaterhouseCoopers. (2024). Asia Pacific CEO Survey 2024_Territory snapshot (Philippines). PwC. Retrieved from https://tinyurl.com/k6zrpb5k 
  20. Quah, W. B., Che Abu Bakar, A. F., & Mohd Yusop, N. (2021). Determining the relationship between self-directed learning readiness and acceptance of E-learning among culinary students. Journal of Tourism, Hospitality & Culinary Arts, 13(1), 37–45. https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/67502/ 
  21. Rusli, N. M. B. R., Samah, R. S., & Kamaruddin, R. K. (2023). Technology readiness index of paddy farmers in MADA, KADA, and IADA BLS, Malaysia. Journal of Economics and Sustainability, 5(1), 27–42. https://doi.org/10.32890/jes2023.5.1.3
  22. Singh, S. (2023). What is descriptive research? Definition, methods, types, and examples | Researcher. Life. Retrieved from https://tinyurl.com/4tv8ybnx 
  23. Sreekumar, D. (2023). What is quantitative research? Definition, methods, types, and examples | Researcher. Life. Retrieved from https://tinyurl.com/jhw4p93z 
  24. Su, Y.-S., Lai, C.-C., Wu, T.-K., & Lai, C.-F. (2022). The effects of applying an augmented reality English teaching system on students’ STEAM learning perceptions and technology acceptance. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 996162. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.996162
  25. Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
  26. Taherdoost, H. (2016). Validity and reliability of the research instrument; How to test the validation of a questionnaire/survey in a research. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3205040
  27. Tarhini, A., Hone, K., & Liu, X. (2014). Measuring the moderating effect of gender and age on E-learning acceptance in England: A structural equation modeling approach for an extended technology acceptance model. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 51(2), 163–184. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.51.2.b
  28. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). Assessing its usage: The role of prior experience. MIS Quarterly, 19(4), 561. https://doi.org/10.2307/249633
  29. Tsai, Y.-R. (2015). Applying the technology acceptance model (TAM) to explore the effects of a course management system (CMS)-assisted EFL writing instruction. CALICO Journal, 32(1), 153–171. https://doi.org/10.1558/calico.v32i1.25961
  30. Ubah, A. E. (2023). Investigating the impact of artificial intelligence tools in finance. Retrieved from https://docs.neu.edu.tr/library/9618305364.pdf 
  31. Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, G., & Davis, F. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
  32. Venkatesh, V., & Morris, M. G. (2000). Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 115. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250981
  33. Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x
  34. Wang, Y., Wu, M., & Wang, H. (2009). Investigating the determinants of age and gender differences in the acceptance of mobile learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 92–118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00809.x
  35. Williams, K. (2024). What are questionnaires? Benefits, types, and examples. SurveySparrow. Retrieved October 3, 2024, from https://surveysparrow.com/blog/questionnaires/

Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic