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

25

THE FUTURE OF SHOPPING

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.)