Background: NFTs (non-fungible tokens) have raised much attention within last year’s media. Many uses can be addressed by and benefit from the underlying technology that enables NFTs. NFTs have already found applications in various industries and are representing a disruptive technological innovation. Nevertheless, the hype goes along with a lot of resistance. As NFTs gained some traction in the art market, this setting is a good example to demonstrate this controversy. The focus of this study lies on the driving forces behind resistance and acceptance in the context of the NFT Art market.    Purpose: This thesis investigates the perceptions of psychological and functional barriers regarding the innovation of NFT Art resulting in active innovation resistance.    Method: This study meets its purpose by conducting a qualitative, exploratory study using technology-mediated interviews for data collection. Participants included in the study were surrounding the NFT Art market displaying different perspectives, touchpoints and levels of engagement within the market. Interview participants were purposefully selected and contacted through online platforms. The interview followed a semi-structured approach using an interview guide that was inspired by the active innovation theory. The data analysis method related to grounded analysis by following the Gioia approach   Conclusion: Perceived functional barriers identified in relation to NFT Art are complexity-, co-dependence-, and norm barriers while perceived psychological barriers emerged due to information asymmetries, economic risks, and the image barrier. Next to the initially targeted innovation-specific factors, this study showed the impact of situation-specific factors when it comes to the emergence of barriers leading to active innovation resistance. The large impact of individual characteristics influencing the evaluation and interpretation of innovation-specific factors explains the controversial perceptions regarding the NFT Art market. Examples are perceptions about the value of the innovation, surrounding communities or environmental impact. Further, the research also revealed perceived opportunities relating to potential uses NFT Art offers for both artists and buyers. Here, the ideological value attached to the underlying technology contributed to this completion.

Submitted by Cristiano Amaral (cristiano.ab.castro@gmail.com) on 2018-03-22T19:12:42Z No. of bitstreams: 1 TESE CRISTIANO AMARAL Final.pdf: 3722353 bytes, checksum: 7441768901a6b92171fb0a12d72bc78c (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Debora Nunes Ferreira (debora.nunes@fgv.br) on 2018-03-23T16:49:21Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 TESE CRISTIANO AMARAL Final.pdf: 3722353 bytes, checksum: 7441768901a6b92171fb0a12d72bc78c (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Suzane Guimarães (suzane.guimaraes@fgv.br) on 2018-03-23T17:43:03Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 TESE CRISTIANO AMARAL Final.pdf: 3722353 bytes, checksum: 7441768901a6b92171fb0a12d72bc78c (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-03-23T17:43:03Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 TESE CRISTIANO AMARAL Final.pdf: 3722353 bytes, checksum: 7441768901a6b92171fb0a12d72bc78c (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018-02-28 / The Diffusion of Innovation literature is based on well succeeded products and present a pro-change bias, an assumption that innovations are positive and will be adopted by all consumers. However, a large portion of new products fail and those that do not fail are not promptly adopted, indicating that consumers’ natural response to innovations is resistance. Despite its relevance to both researchers and managers, little research has been conducted toward a deeper understanding of consumers’ resistance to innovation. The extant literature presents two types of resistance, Passive Innovation Resistance (PIR) which is the antecedent of Active Innovation Resistance (AIR). Notwithstanding the indications that affect plays a major role in consumers’ decision-making process, mostly cognitive factors are listed as antecedents of both. Thus, the studies herein aim to evaluate the impact of affect on consumers’ resistance to innovation. In a series of studies based on structural modelling, it is presented here indications of the moderating role of affective state in the relationship between PIR and AIR, as well as of the existence of both cognitive and affective active resistance to innovation. Considering both forms of AIR yields higher explanatory and predictive power as to intention to adopt that considering only the cognitive form of AIR, which is the prevailing understanding of AIR in the literature. Also, the affective form of AIR alone is shown to provide better results that the cognitive form alone. / A literatura de Difusão da Inovação baseia-se em inovações bem-sucedidas e apresenta um viés pró- mudança, uma premissa de que inovações são positivas e serão adotadas por todos os consumidores. No entanto, uma grande parcela de novos produtos falha ao ser lançada no mercado e aqueles que não falham não são prontamente adotados por todos os consumidores, o que indica que a resposta natural do consumidor às inovações é a resistência. Apesar de sua importância tanto para pesquisadores quanto para gerentes, poucas pesquisas foram realizadas objetivando um melhor entendimento da resistência do consumidor à inovação. A literatura existente apresenta dois tipos de resistência: a Resistência Passiva à Inovação que é antecedente à Resistência Ativa à Inovação. Desconsiderando as indicações de que afeto possui um papel importante no processo decisório do consumidor, os fatores apresentados como antecedentes dos dois tipos de resistência são predominantemente cognitivos. Assim, a pesquisa aqui apresentada possui o objetivo de avaliar o impacto do afeto na resistência do consumidor à inovação. Em uma série de estudos baseados em equações estruturais, são apresentadas indicações de que afeto possui um papel moderador na relação entre Resistência Passiva e Resistência Ativa à Inovação, assim como acerca da existência de Resistência Ativa Cognitiva e Resistência Ativa Afetiva à Inovação. Considerando-se ambas formas de resistência ativa, obtêm-se maior poder explicativo e preditivo quanto à intenção de adotar a inovação por parte do consumidor do que se obtém utilizando-se apenas a forma cognitiva de resistência ativa, que é a dominante na literatura. Além disso, é demonstrado que a Resistência Ativa Afetiva por si só apresenta melhores resultados que a Resistência Ativa Cognitiva.