Bundled Mobile Services:  The Impact on Consumers’ Intention to Adopt Marije Teerling, Timber Haaker, Henny de Vos, Mirell...
Mobiles are increasingly used as a third screen Mobile seen as integrated communication device But! Mobile TV is taking of...
Mobile service bundles <ul><li>Packaged set of mobile services, mobile device, (data) subscription, e-services for one pri...
What is a bundle? <ul><li>Focus on bundling from end-user perspective.. </li></ul><ul><li>Bundling is the sale of two or m...
Forms of bundling <ul><ul><li>Pure bundling is selling only the bundle and not (all) products separately </li></ul></ul><u...
Focus of bundling <ul><li>Service bundling  is the  integration  and  sale  of two or more separate services </li></ul><ul...
Objective  <ul><li>Examine to what extent  bundling  contributes to the consumers’ adoption and value perceptions of m-ser...
Conceptual Background <ul><li>Value – intention framework </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Value mediates between service quality and...
Theoretical Framework <ul><li>H1: Perceived total value is positively related to the intention to use m-services </li></ul...
<ul><li>2x2 experimental design </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Two types of service bundles </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Experien...
M-service bundles
Research Design (2) <ul><li>Questionnaire development based on </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Literature review </li></ul></ul><ul>...
Analysis & Results (1) <ul><li>Gender </li></ul><ul><ul><li>56% women </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>44% men </li></ul></ul><u...
Analysis & Results (2)
Analysis & Results (3)
Conclusions (1) <ul><li>Value    Intention </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Adopters show stronger relationship  </li></ul></ul><ul>...
Conclusions (2) <ul><li>Conditional value </li></ul><ul><ul><li>increases total value indirectly through hedonic and utili...
Limitations & Future research <ul><li>Laboratory setting </li></ul><ul><ul><li>results may have limited external validity ...
Q
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Bundled Mobile Services: The Impact on Consumers’ Intention to Adopt

1,558

Published on

Mobile services (m-services) are different from traditional services in that the use of these services takes place through a mobile device and as such can be used any time and any place. Even though consumers increasingly use their mobile phones, adoption of m-services is still lingering. In this study, we add to current knowledge on the consumer’s value and adoption of m-service bundles. We determine how m-service bundle compatibility, meaning the extent to which the m-service bundle fits together, affects consumers’ value and intention to use a m-service bundle. We show that m-service bundle compatibility enhances key relationships in the value-intention framework. The analyses reveal that not only does m-service bundle compatibility matter, but also that this varies for current adopters versus non-adopters of m-services. As a result, managers should focus on designing compatible m-service bundles in order to increase adoption amongst new customers.

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
6 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,558
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
6
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Bundled Mobile Services: The Impact on Consumers’ Intention to Adopt

    1. 1. Bundled Mobile Services: The Impact on Consumers’ Intention to Adopt Marije Teerling, Timber Haaker, Henny de Vos, Mirella Kleijnen HICSS 2009
    2. 2. Mobiles are increasingly used as a third screen Mobile seen as integrated communication device But! Mobile TV is taking off slowly Mobile internet usage is relatively low Current reality seems disappointing (Newell & Newell-Lemon, 2001) Hence: Need to move beyond technology push
    3. 3. Mobile service bundles <ul><li>Packaged set of mobile services, mobile device, (data) subscription, e-services for one price plan. </li></ul><ul><li>Examples: </li></ul><ul><li>Research Motivation: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Adoption of mobile services is hampered by [..] mismatch between launched applications and everyday user needs (Carllson, 2006) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Bundle may provide ‘bundle of benefits’ (Kotler, 1999) </li></ul></ul>
    4. 4. What is a bundle? <ul><li>Focus on bundling from end-user perspective.. </li></ul><ul><li>Bundling is the sale of two or more separate products or services in one package </li></ul><ul><li>Separate product is one for which a separate market exists for end-users </li></ul><ul><li>Separate markets for parts exist at other levels in the channel </li></ul>
    5. 5. Forms of bundling <ul><ul><li>Pure bundling is selling only the bundle and not (all) products separately </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mixed bundling is selling both the bundle and the separate products </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Unbundling is only selling the products separately </li></ul></ul>
    6. 6. Focus of bundling <ul><li>Service bundling is the integration and sale of two or more separate services </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Customer may benefit from discount price but also from added value from integration </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provider may create added value and has possibility for differentiation </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Bundle compatibility is the level to which the individual services in the bundle enhance each other </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Customer may benefit more from services that complement each other </li></ul></ul>
    7. 7. Objective <ul><li>Examine to what extent bundling contributes to the consumers’ adoption and value perceptions of m-services. </li></ul><ul><li>Research questions: </li></ul><ul><li>How does perceived m-service bundle compatibility impact the relationships in the value-intention framework? </li></ul><ul><li>How do these relationships vary for current adopters versus non-adopters of m-services? </li></ul>
    8. 8. Conceptual Background <ul><li>Value – intention framework </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Value mediates between service quality and intention (Brady et al. 2005) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Value-Based adoption Model (Kim et al., 2007) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Conditional value </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ubiquity increases importance of m-services (Pura 2005, Nysveen et al., 2005) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>M-service bundle compatibility </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Compatible services in a bundle may enhance overall value (Stremersch & Tellis, 2002) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Not to be confused with service compatibility (Kleijnen et al., 2007) </li></ul></ul>
    9. 9. Theoretical Framework <ul><li>H1: Perceived total value is positively related to the intention to use m-services </li></ul><ul><li>H2: Perceived hedonic and utilitarian value are positively related to the perceived total value of the m-services. </li></ul><ul><li>H3: Perceived conditional value is positively related to the perceived hedonic and utilitarian value of the m-services. </li></ul><ul><li>H4: The level of perceived m-service bundle compatibility strengthens the relationships between (H4a) hedonic value and total value and (H4b) utilitarian value and total value increases. </li></ul>Hedonic value Utilitarian value Conditional value Total value Intention M-service bundle compatibility
    10. 10. <ul><li>2x2 experimental design </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Two types of service bundles </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Experience or hedonic oriented bundle </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Goal-directed or utilitarian oriented bundle </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Two types of consumer groups </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Current adopters of m-services </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Current non-adopters of m-services </li></ul></ul></ul>Research Design (1)
    11. 11. M-service bundles
    12. 12. Research Design (2) <ul><li>Questionnaire development based on </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Literature review </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Extensive pre-testing </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Data collection: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Consumer panel </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Bundle assigned at random </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Sample </li></ul><ul><ul><li>403 respondents, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>245 adopters, 159 non-adopters </li></ul></ul></ul>
    13. 13. Analysis & Results (1) <ul><li>Gender </li></ul><ul><ul><li>56% women </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>44% men </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Age </li></ul><ul><ul><li><25: 6% </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>25 – 35: 19% </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>36-45: 25% </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>45-55: 25% </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>>55: 25% </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Reliability & validity </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Cronbach’s alpha > .8 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Average variance extracted > .65 </li></ul></ul>
    14. 14. Analysis & Results (2)
    15. 15. Analysis & Results (3)
    16. 16. Conclusions (1) <ul><li>Value  Intention </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Adopters show stronger relationship </li></ul></ul><ul><li>M-services compatibility strengthens value-intention relationship </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Non-adopters use the cue (bundle compatibility) as a means to reduce complexity. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Adopters do not necessarily need the bundle to reduce cognitive efforts </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Utilitarian versus hedonic value </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Non-adopters: no strong differences  both types of value relevant </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Adopters: utilitarian value in general determines total value, hedonic value is strongly enhanced by high bundle compatibility </li></ul></ul>
    17. 17. Conclusions (2) <ul><li>Conditional value </li></ul><ul><ul><li>increases total value indirectly through hedonic and utilitarian value. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Similar for both groups </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Non-adopters are capable of perceiving this benefit before having actually used m-services. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Adopters perceive a higher overall value for utilitarian m-services rather than for hedonic m-services. </li></ul>
    18. 18. Limitations & Future research <ul><li>Laboratory setting </li></ul><ul><ul><li>results may have limited external validity </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Age distribution of the sample </li></ul><ul><ul><li>relatively ‘at age’ given the domain of m-services </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>observed valuations did not differ significantly with age </li></ul></ul><ul><li>More insight into consumers’ perceived value and adoption of m-services which have high conditional value </li></ul><ul><ul><li>perhaps the greatest advantage of mobile commerce </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Are consumers really interested in obtaining m-services that are truly context aware? </li></ul></ul>
    19. 19. Q

    ×