Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Skype case study

  • Login to see the comments

  • Be the first to like this

Skype case study

  1. 1. EXAMINING THE NON-ADOPTION OF IN MAINLAND CHINA Group 9
  2. 2. Introduction Worldwide: Skype, brought more than 300 million people worldwide together Mainland China: 84% of Internet users, around 497 million people, make use of instant messaging applications. Sources from: China Internet Network Information Center (CNNIC)
  3. 3. However…
  4. 4. Do you use Skype? Do you use Skype for domestic contact ?!
  5. 5. Video
  6. 6. WHY PEOPLE DO NOT ADOPT FOR DOMESTIC CONTACT IN MAINLAND CHINA?
  7. 7. Agenda • Introduction • Literature review • Methodology • Findings • Conclusion
  8. 8. Before Literature Review... • Non-adoption: • Low frequency, low intensity. • Or, never use. • Domestic contact: • People contact with each other within mainland China.
  9. 9. 1.Diffusion of Innovation Triability is the degree to which an innovation may be experimented with on limited basis. (Inapplicable!) Complexity Relative Advantage Compatibility Observability Triability Adoption of other applications Literature Review
  10. 10. 2.The theory of reasoned action (TRA) 3.Techonology of Acceptance Model (TAM) Peer influence (Reciprocity) Perceived popularity Literature Review
  11. 11. Research Framework Non-Adoption Complexity Relative Disadvantage Incompatibility Absence of observed benefits Peer influence Perceived popularity Adoption of other applications Frequency Intensity DV IV
  12. 12. Complexity the degree to which an innovation is perceived as difficult to understand and use. • More complex an innovation is, less rapidly it is adopted. • H1: complex non-adopters Relative disadvantage the degree to which an innovation is not perceived as good as other ideas. • An innovation has obvious disadvantages than the alternatives. • H2: relative disadvantage non-adopters Literature Review
  13. 13. Literature Review Incompatibility the degree to which an innovation is perceived as being consistent with existing values, past experiences, and needs of potential adopters. • Incompatible idea is not adopted as rapidly as compatible one. • H3:incompatibility non-adopters Absence of observed benefits the degree to which the results of an innovation are invisible to others. • Less benefits of innovation observed, less rapidly it is adopted. • H4: Absence of observed benefits non-adopters
  14. 14. Adoption of other applications the use of functionally similar technologies is a significant predictor of the adoption of innovation. • H5: other applications non-adopters Peer influence (Reciprocity) derived from SN from TRA • H6: friends non-adopters Perceived popularity derived from “perceived enjoyment” from TAM • H7: perceived popularity non-adopters Literature Review
  15. 15. Methodology • Online survey created on www.sojump.com • Snowball sampling • 202 respondents: 91 Male + 111 Female • All aged from 17- 28
  16. 16. Sample Characteristics Reliability Test Descriptive Analysis Regression Analysis Findings
  17. 17. 1. Sample Information Male 45%Female 55% 1.1 Gender Male : 91, 45.0% Female : 111, 55.0% --------------------------------- Total : 202
  18. 18. 1. Sample Information Primary school and below 1% High school 2% Under- graduate 60% Post- graduate 37% 1.2 Education Primary school & below : 2, 1.0% High school : 5, 2.5% Undergraduate : 121, 59.9% Postgraduate : 74, 36.6% --------------------------------- Total : 202
  19. 19. 1. Sample Information 0-1000 15% 1001- 2000 22% 2001- 3000 19% 3001- 4000 16% above 4001 28% 1.3 Income 0 – 1000 : 31, 15.3% 1001 – 2000 : 43, 21.3% 2001 – 3000 : 39, 19.3% 3001 – 4000 : 33, 16.3% Above 4000 : 56, 27.7% --------------------------------- Total : 202 MEAN : 3.20 SD : 1.439 The average income is 2000 – 3000
  20. 20. 2. The use of Skype Never 47% Seldom 35% Some- times 12% Often 3% Always 3% How often do you use Skype for domestic contact? Never : 95, 47.0% Seldom : 70, 34.7% Sometimes : 24, 11.9% Often : 7, 3.5% Always : 6, 3.0% --------------------------------- Total: 202 About 81.7% of the responders choose they never use or seldom use Skype. Only 6.5% of the responders choose that they often or very often to use it.
  21. 21. 2. The use of Skype Less than 10 mins 72% 10-20 mins 11% 20-30 mins 9% 30-60 mins 3% Above 60 mins 5% How long do you spend on Skype each time for domestic call? Less than 10 mins : 145, 71.8% 10 – 20 mins : 22, 10.9% 20 – 30 mins : 18, 8.9% 30 – 60 mins : 6, 3.0% Above 60 mins : 11, 5.4% --------------------------------- Total: 202 About 71.8% of the responders chose they use Skype less than 10 minutes. Combined with these 2 questions… The adoption rate of Skype among mainland China youngsters is relatively LOW.
  22. 22. Reliability test Complexity Relative advantage Compatibility Reciprocity Complexity Cronbach's Alpha N of Items .912 5 Relative disadvantage Cronbach's Alpha N of Items .828 4 Peer Influence Cronbach's Alpha N of Items .904 4 Incompatibility Cronbach's Alpha N of Items .836 4 Our scales all have relatively high Alpha and are reliable.
  23. 23. Relation analysis (linear regression) • Adjusted R Square: 0.54  Our combined IVs explain… 54% of the variance of the DV.
  24. 24. Relation analysis (linear regression) Coefficientsa Model Standardized Coefficients Beta Sig. 1 (Constant) .000 Gender -.033 .521 Education -.100 .064 Income -.025 .625 Complexity -.376 .000 Relative Disadvantage .282 .000 Incompatibility .012 .859 Observability (Absence of visible benefit) -.259 .000 Peer Influence -.319 .000 Perceived Popularity -.051 .428 Adoption of other applications .026 .609 a. Dependent Variable: DV Significant: • Complexity • Relative Disadvantage • Absence of observed benefits • Peer Influence
  25. 25. Relative disadvantages
  26. 26. Conclusion • H1 : Supported The more complex the Skype service is, the more likely people will become non-adopters of Skype • H2 : Supported The more relative disadvantages Skype has, the more likely people will become non-adopters of Skype • H3 : Not supported (Not significant) The more incompatibility Skype service has with people’s existing values, the more likely they will become non-adopters of Skype • H4 : Supported The more absence of benefits of Skype people observe, the more likely they will become non-adopters.
  27. 27. Conclusion • H5 : Not supported (Not significant) The more other applications people use, the more likely they will become non-adopters of Skype • H6 : Supported The fewer friends are using Skype, the more likely people will become non-adopters of Skype • H7 : Not supported (Not significant) The less popularity of Skype people perceive, the more likely they will become non-adopters of Skype
  28. 28. Limitation • Snowball sampling: respondents are almost university students • Sampling size is not large enough • Predictors are limited
  29. 29. Implication • For Skype- examine their failure in mainland China • For Developers of information systems and organizations- adopting the new technology. • For professionals-design systems and implementation methodologies
  30. 30. Q & A? Thank you for your time!

×