Research Presentation (m-payment)


Published on

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.

Published in: Business, Economy & Finance
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Good evening everybody, thank you for coming along this evening. It was a great pleasure to hear the work of some awesome research.I always had a passion for mobile enriched user experience, and how it will transform people’s life. I learnt Krassie is the leading mobile adoption researcher at the university. So about a year and half ago, I approached Krassie, who now is my supervisor and explained to her what it is that I want to do for my research. At the time, I only had a very board idea about mobile industry and applications in general. So our decisions were most about what the specific areas of mobile that interests me, later we reached agreements on the scoping and methods, hence the beginning of this project.The topic is Investigating mobile payment technologies as a replacement for cash/EFTPOS transactions, I think it is both attractive and appealing, also it has practical meanings to people’s life.I look back today and knowing it was right choice. You will see why in a minute.
  • So this presentation covers every element and experience took place during my research. It was a pleasure to share with you all, and I hope the experience shared here is useful and may assist your project.Once again thank you for coming along, I’d like to close this presentation by playing a short video clip from paypal to show what m-payment would do to our shopping experience in the future.
  • Research Presentation (m-payment)

    1. 1. Investigating mobile payment technologies as a replacement for cash/EFTPOS transactions Name: Bo Wang Student ID: 0952224 Date: 24/05/2012
    2. 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? 2
    3. 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. 3
    4. 4. STATISTICS Spending via smartphone Worldwide Forecast of cell (source: AITE Group) phones with NFC capability (Source: iSuppli)
    5. 5. WHAT IS M-PAYMENT? Retail Space POS Terminal Retailer Database Near Field Communication Customer Smart Phone Bank 3G Radio Mobile Network Operator Wireless Mobile Network Internet Payment Gateway 5
    6. 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. 6
    7. 7. M-PAYMENT Current adoptions:  Digitalcontent, music, games etc.  Tickets, parking fee, movie ticket etc. Emerging trends:  Peerto peer payment  General goods and services 7
    8. 8. TECHNOLOGIES 8
    9. 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. 9
    10. 10. LITERATURE - CONTINUEM-payment Framework of Factors M-Payment Service Value Chain(adapted from: Dahlberg, Mallat, Ondrus (Adapted from: Smith, Markendahl, andand Zmijewska (2008) ) Andersson (2010)) 10
    11. 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. 11
    12. 12. LITERATURE - CONTINUE Factors in Literature Review Factors for IT adoption References 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 Culture (2002) Dholakia and Dholakia (2004); Gódor et al. (2009); Petrova Technology (2008); Dahlberg et al., (2008); Bradford and Hayashi (2007) 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, Commerce Jukic, and Velasco (2009); Riemenschneider (2003) Pousttchi and Zenker (2003); Kreyer, Pousttchi, and Turowski Standardization (2002); Godbole and Pais (2008) 12
    13. 13. RESEARCH PROCESS Conceptualise Research Problem Formulate Research Determine Research Obtain Ethic Approval Questions Methodology Develop Interview Revise Interview Technique Conduct a Pilot Interview Questions and Questions Collect Qualitative Data Recruite Participants Analyse Data (Interviews) 13
    14. 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? 14
    15. 15. RESEARCH METHODOLOGYInterpretivist 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 15
    16. 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) 16
    17. 17. DATA ANALYSISParticipant background 17
    18. 18. DATA ANALYSIS - CONTINUESample from CodingSchema 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 Type Possible Possible Detractor Driver Relative M-payment provides consumers with MP Yes advantage1 ubiquitous payment possibilities, timely access to financial assets and an alternative to cash payments. Compatibility1 The compatibility of m-payment with MP Yes consumers’ purchase transactions and habits is correspondingly expected to impact the adoption. Complexity1 Typical limitations include small MP Yes keypads, limited transmission speeds and memory, and short battery life. All these add complexity to m-payment for ordinary users. 18
    19. 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. 19
    20. 20. FINDINGS Adoption Factors from Consumer Perspective Type of Data Factors Demographics Age, Profession, Education Background Mobile phone skills, Lack of knowledge, Internet skills Attitude towards M- Convenience, Competition with existing payment payment. technology, Willingness to adopt, Limitations of Adoption Factors from Merchant Perspective system, Customer satisfaction current payment 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 20
    21. 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. 21
    22. 22. CONCLUSION - CONTINUE Implications  M-payment system providers to offer superior features and reliability.  Aggressive product promotion for m-payment is recommended. 22
    23. 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 23
    24. 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 24
    26. 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 individuals adoption decision of innovative services. Telematics and Informatics 26 (3), 270 - 281. (Doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.tele.2008.11.005.) Retrieved from 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 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 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 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 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.) 26