Upload
bo-wang
View
973
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Due to the increasing popularity of smart phones, mobile payment (m-payment) is now a reality which is about to transform consumers’ daily activities such as paying for purchases in retail. For this new technology to become successful mainstream in New Zealand, it is important for the local industry stakeholders to gain in-depth understanding of retailers’ motives to adopt and validate its suitability as a replacement for cash/EFTPOS.
Citation preview
Name: Bo Wang Student ID: 0952224
Date: 24/05/2012
Investigating mobile payment technologies as
a replacement for cash/EFTPOS
transactions
2
CONTENT
Why choose m-payment? What is m-payment and how does it work? What is being researched up till now? What is the research process? What are the research questions and
methodology? How the data analysis and findings are carried
out? What is the research contribution, implications
and limitations of this research?
3
BACKGROUND
Balan et al. (2009) pointed out that mobile phones were increasingly being explored with respect to the advantages of their hardware offerings in replacing cash based transactions.
Slade (2010) suggests smartphones captures 11% market share in New Zealand and sales grew by 95% last year.
STATISTICS
Spending via smartphone (source: AITE Group)
Worldwide Forecast of cell phones with NFC capability (Source: iSuppli)
5
WHAT IS M-PAYMENT?
Customer
3G Radio
Near Field Communication
Smart Phone
POS Terminal Retailer Database
Wireless Mobile Network
Mobile Network Operator
Payment Gateway
Internet
Bank
Retail Space
6
DEFINITIONS
M-Commerce Petrova & MacDonell (2010) stipulates that mobile commerce is
formed when a business activity is conducted over the mobile data network with products and services to be sold without the need to have a fixed transaction location.
M-Payment Xinyan et al. (2009), mobile payment is defined as a way in which
payment transaction is delivered via mobile device wireless network.
Petrova & Mehra (2010) defines m-payment as a way for people to conduct a commercial activity anywhere and anytime with the ease for financial transaction.
7
M-PAYMENT
Current adoptions: Digital content, music, games etc. Tickets, parking fee, movie ticket etc.
Emerging trends: Peer to peer payment General goods and services
8
TECHNOLOGIES
9
LITERATURE
Rouibah (2009) from Kuwait University claims many m-payment attempts fail due to lack of understanding customer perceptions and motivations.
Xinyan et al. (2009) from Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications claims m-payment technology has experienced a rapid adoption in several East Asia markets
Littler & Melanthiou (2006) argues that the adoptions for innovative products have been proven to be more likely to succeed as oppose to those of services.
10
LITERATURE - CONTINUE
M-payment Framework of Factors (adapted from: Dahlberg, Mallat, Ondrus and Zmijewska (2008) )
M-Payment Service Value Chain (Adapted from: Smith, Markendahl, and Andersson (2010))
11
LITERATURE - CONTINUE
Constantiou (2008) from Copenhagen Business School suggestscompeting technology innovations actually decreases the usefulness being perceived by the user.
Littler & Melanthiou (2006) from Manchester Business school, UK claims that user adoptions are more likely to be made by judging on the perceived risks.
Mallat (2007) from Finland rejects the general consumer adoption theories for mobile payment and argued that there are more dynamic factors involved such as queue avoidance, lack of other way of payments.
12
LITERATURE - CONTINUE
Factors in Literature Review
Factors for IT adoption References
Culture
Mallat (2007); Khan and Craig-Lees (2009); Dahlberg et al. (2008); Rouibah (2009); Dholakia and Dholakia (2004); Tomi and Anssi (2007); Dhir (1987); CHEN, CHEN, and TSAI (2002)
Technology
Dholakia and Dholakia (2004); Gódor et al. (2009); Petrova (2008); Dahlberg et al., (2008); Bradford and Hayashi (2007)
Commerce
Mallat and Tuunainen (2005); Xinyan et al. (2009); Luo, and Peter (2010); Mallat, Rossi, and Tuunainen (2004);Pau (2009);Smith et al. (2010); Wang and Qualls (2007); Jukic, Jukic, and Velasco (2009); Riemenschneider (2003)
StandardizationPousttchi and Zenker (2003); Kreyer, Pousttchi, and Turowski (2002); Godbole and Pais (2008)
13
RESEARCH PROCESS
Develop Interview Questions Conduct a Pilot Interview Revise Interview Technique
and Questions
Recruite Participants Collect Qualitative Data (Interviews) Analyse Data
Formulate Research Questions Obtain Ethic ApprovalDetermine Research
Methodology
Conceptualise Research Problem
14
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
What are the challenges in implementing mobile phone powered payment system from the perspective of industry stakeholders?
What motivates customers to accept and use such systems in their daily life as a way to pay for goods and services where instead of cash and/or EFTPOS?
15
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Interpretivist paradigm Reality exists socially and it advocates paying
attention to the meaning people give to social phenomena. ()
Why it is suitable for this study? Several studies reviewed in Chapter 2 suggest that
the process of technology adoption is considered a social phenomenon
Suits the objective of this research because it focuses on the perceptions of retailers and their understanding of the influential factors and challenges for m-payment adoption
16
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY - CONTINUE
Qualitative Using semi structured interviews as the use of
verbal communications to collect data from people past or current experiences of the subject.
Quantitative Gathering numerical data and generalising it
across groups of people.
Foddy (1993)
17
DATA ANALYSIS
Participant background
18
DATA ANALYSIS - CONTINUE
Sample from Coding Schema Coding Schema
Source: 1. Mallat (2007); 2. Dahlberg et al. (2008); 3. Xinyan et al. (2009); 4. Mallat, Rossi, and Tuunainen (2004); 5. Luo, and Peter (2010); 6. Tomi and Anssi (2007); 7. Pousttchi and Zenker (2003); 8. Mallat and Tuunainen (2005);
Code Definition/Explanation Typ
e
Possible
Detractor
Possible
Driver
Relative advantage1
M-payment provides consumers with ubiquitous payment possibilities, timely access to financial assets and an alternative to cash payments.
MP Yes
Compatibility1 The compatibility of m-payment with consumers’ purchase transactions and habits is correspondingly expected to impact the adoption.
MP Yes
Complexity1 Typical limitations include small keypads, limited transmission speeds and memory, and short battery life. All these add complexity to m-payment for ordinary users.
MP Yes
19
DATA ANALYSIS - CONTINUE
Interview transcripts Created transcripts from audio clips
recorded during interview. Descriptive coding
Group answers from the interviewee using the two research questions.
Interpretive coding Apply coding schema and interpret the
meanings being said in the interviews.
20
FINDINGSAdoption Factors from Consumer Perspective
Type of Data Factors
Demographics Age, Profession, Education
Background Mobile phone skills, Lack of knowledge,
Internet skills
Attitude towards M-
payment.
Convenience, Competition with existing
payment technology, Willingness to adopt,
Limitations of current payment system,
Customer satisfactionAdoption Factors from Merchant Perspective
Type of Data Factors
Business Related
Factors
Efficiency, Customer awareness of service,
Changing commercial environment, Changing
in technological environment, Cost, Customer
satisfaction, Business hour phone support,
Productivity, Better service for higher cost,
On-site support, Return on Investment,
Quality support service
Attitude towards M-
payment
Competition with existing payment
technology, Low fees, Time saving,
Willingness to adopt, Limitations of current
payment system, Influence of mobile
commerce, Lack of knowledge, Support
material
21
CONCLUSION
In summary: m-payment is considered favourably by
retailers over traditional payment technologies due to the perceived business efficiency and convenience of m-payment.
knowledge and competition with existing payment technology are the major challenges facing retailers when considering m-payment adoption.
22
CONCLUSION - CONTINUE
Implications M-payment system providers to offer
superior features and reliability.
Aggressive product promotion for m-payment is recommended.
23
CONCLUSION - CONTINUE
Contribution A framework in which factors found in
extant research literature are validated in the study context.
Additional factors not previously found in the literature of mobile service adoption including m-payment
24
CONCLUSION - CONTINUE
Limitations One specific group of retailers within one
city in New Zealand Its primary focus is on merchants’ attitude
towards m-payment Future considerations
Examine the attitude of consumers towards m-payment in New Zealand
26
REFERENCE Balan, R. K.,Ramasubbu, N., et al. (2009). mFerio: The design and evaluation of a peer-to-peer mobile payment system. Procs. of the 7th
Int. Conf. on Mobile systems, applications, and services (pp. 291-304). Constantiou, I. D. (2009). Consumer behaviour in the mobile telecommunications' market: The individual's adoption decision of
innovative services. Telematics and Informatics 26 (3), 270 - 281. (Doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.tele.2008.11.005.) Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V1H-4V1KMNN-1/2/f6c1fe00eaf49851f3d0c73ca953818d.
Dahlberg, T., Mallat, N., Ondrus, J., & Zmijewska, A. (2008). Past, present and future of mobile payments research: A literature review. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 7(2), 165-181. doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2007.02.001
Foddy, W. (1993). Constructing questions for interviews and questionnaires : theory and practice in social research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Littler, D. & Melanthiou, D. (2006). Consumer perceptions of risk and uncertainty and the implications for behaviour towards innovative retail services: The case of Internet Banking. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 13 (6), 431 - 443. (Doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2006.02.006.) Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VGN-4JRVFST-3/2/1158b9292217d85c4166a3273cba1dd0.
Mallat, N. (2007). Exploring consumer adoption of mobile payments - A qualitative study. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems 16 (4), 413 - 432. (Doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.jsis.2007.08.001.) Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VG3-4R2H1R1-1/2/07ea6fad10a0c47f904398b05b324df9.
Petrova, K., & MacDonell S. G. (2010). Mobile services and applications: Towards a Balanced Adoption Model. Proceedings of UBICOMM 2010. Florence, Italy.
Petrova, K., & Mehra, R. (2010). Mobile payment: An exploratory study of customer attitudes. In J. L. Mauri et al. (Eds). Proc. 6th Int. Conf. on Wireless and Mobile Communications (pp. 378-383).
Rouibah, K. (2009). The failure of mobile payment: evidence from quasi-experimentations. In EATIS '09: Proceedings of the 2009 Euro American Conference on Telematics and Information Systems (pp. 1--7). ACM. (ISBN: 978-1-60558-398-3.)
Schutt, R. K. (2006). Investigating the social world: the process and practice of research: SAGE Publications, Inc. Slade, M. (2010). Smartphone wars in time for Xmas. The New Zealand Herald. Retrieved from
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10687402. Smith, M., Markendahl, J., & Andersson, P. (2010). Analysis of roles and position of mobile network operators in mobile payment
infrastructure. In 21st European Regional ITS Conference. Copenhagen. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10419/44311 Xinyan, Z., Wei, G. & Tingjie, L. (2009). Study on consumer demands and merchant participation motives of mobile payment services in
China. In ICIS '09: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Interaction Sciences (pp. 1447--1451). ACM. (ISBN: 978-1-60558-710-3.)