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.

1. Investigating mobile
payment
technologies as a
replacement for
cash/EFTPOS
transactions
Name: Bo Wang
Student ID: 0952224
Date: 24/05/2012

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. 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. STATISTICS
Spending via smartphone Worldwide Forecast of cell
(source: AITE Group) phones with NFC capability
(Source: iSuppli)

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. 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. 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. TECHNOLOGIES
8

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. LITERATURE - CONTINUE
M-payment Framework of Factors M-Payment Service Value Chain
(adapted from: Dahlberg, Mallat, Ondrus (Adapted from: Smith, Markendahl, and
and Zmijewska (2008) ) Andersson (2010))
10

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. 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. 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. 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. 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
15

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. DATA ANALYSIS
Participant background
17

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 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. 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. 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. 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. CONCLUSION - CONTINUE
 Implications
 M-payment system providers to offer superior
features and reliability.
 Aggressive
product promotion for m-payment is
recommended.
22

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. 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

25. THE FUTURE OF SHOPPING
25

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.)
26