Thus, we expected the experienced mobile service customers to evaluate the proposed services more positively than the less experienced customers.. There was no relationship between the l
Trang 1differences between more experienced and less
experienced mobile service customers Research
on technology adoption covers descriptions of
adopter characteristics (e.g., Okazaki, 2006) but
to a lesser extent differences between perceptions
of technological applications in different adopter
groups For example, Anckar and D’Incau (2002)
IRXQG VLJQL¿FDQW GLIIHUHQFHV LQ LQWHQWLRQV WR
use mobile services between adopters and
non-adopters of the Internet Thus, we expected the
experienced mobile service customers to evaluate
the proposed services more positively than the
less experienced customers
Sample
6WUDWL¿HGVDPSOLQJZDVXVHGWRLQFOXGHFXVWRP-HUVIURPDOOIUHTXHQWÀ\HUOHYHOVUHSUHVHQWLQJD
variety of customer loyalty to the company Since
there are fewer customers on the higher levels,
a normal probability sampling procedure would
have yielded a disproportionately high number of
EURQ]HPHPEHUVPDQ\RIZKRPÀ\LQIUHTXHQWO\
DQGWKXVZRXOGQRWEHWKHSULPHEHQH¿FLDULHVRI
the proposed services
7KHVXUYH\ZDVSRVWHGLQDQRI¿FLDODLUOLQH
branded envelope, together with an introductory
letter and a prepaid return envelope, to 262
fre-TXHQWÀ\HUVLQFOXGLQJ%URQ]H6LOYHU
Gold members, and all the Platinum members
(52) The total response rate was 42%, yielding
104 completed questionnaires In addition to
the completed responses, nine were returned
uncompleted One questionnaire was discarded
as incomplete, two were returned blank because
WKHUHVSRQGHQWVZHUHQRWSUR¿FLHQWLQWKHORFDO
language, and six envelopes were returned because
of change of address
7KH UHVSRQVH UDWHV IRU IUHTXHQW À\HU OHYHOV
were: Bronze (32.9%), Silver (40%), Gold (45.7%),
and Platinum (40.4%) There may be several
rea-sons for a higher response rate among the more
IUHTXHQWÀ\HUVDPRQJOR\DOW\FDUGPHPEHUV2QH
reason could be that people who travel often are more likely to have sophisticated phones, with which they can access e-mail while being away from work Another plausible reason is that cus-tomers who have reached a higher level within the loyalty program feel a greater attachment to the airline and thus are more inclined to respond
to the survey
Answers to the background questions revealed that 78.8% of all respondents were male, which
is representative of the total sample that received the survey Male customers are overrepresented
on all loyalty program levels, except the Bronze level The age distribution among survey par-ticipants was 18-25 years (1.9%), 26-35 (13.5%), 36-50 (46.2%), 51-65 (37.5%), and 66+ (1%) 7KHVH¿JXUHVFRUUHVSRQGZLWKSUHYLRXVVWXGLHV RIWKH¿UP¶VIUHTXHQWÀ\HUVDQGVXJJHVWWKDWWKH age distribution is representative of the airline’s loyalty program clientele
RESULTS
Customer Readiness to use Mobile Services
When new services and technologies emerge, customer adoption is often slower than expected
by companies (Gilbert & Han, 2005) For ex-ample, customer adoption of self-service check-in automats at airports has been slow, as has been the adoption of electronic check-in (Liljander
et al., 2006) However, the customers who re-sponded to the present survey appear to be at the forefront of mobile service adoption More than half of the respondents (53.8%) used the mobile Internet daily, weekly, or monthly, whereas only 26% had never used it, or had only tried
it (20.2%) There was no relationship between the loyalty program level and the use of mobile Internet services (Chi-Square=5.049, p= 0.168)
In addition, Chi-square tests showed that there
Trang 2was no relationship between gender and mobile
Internet adoption (p=0.258), but that there was a
relationship between adoption and age (p=0.025)
1RW VXUSULVLQJO\ EXW FRQWUDU\ WR LQVLJQL¿FDQW
¿QGLQJVLQRWKHUPRELOHVHUYLFHFRQWH[WV 0RUW
& Drennan, 2005), older customers (51-65, 66+)
had adopted sophisticated mobile services to a
lesser extent than younger customers
Customers are not necessarily aware of what
applications they use to access services, and thus
they may possess Java-supporting phones
with-out being aware of this Among the respondents RQO\ZHUHFRQ¿GHQWWKDWWKHLUSKRQHVXS-ports Java, 22.1% said that it did not, and 33.7% did not know Thus a fairly large percentage of loyalty program customers have the necessary equipment to access and receive new services, but the majority showed the need to either update their phones or receive help in recognizing and using inherent mobile features The results are presented in Table 1
Percentages Use of mobile internet Bronze Silver Gold
Plati-num Total N=23 N=28 N=32 N=21 N=104
Have tried a couple of
Have never used 43.5 25.0 12.5 28.6 26.0
Use of mobile
internet M F 18-25 26-35 36-50 51-65 66+
N=82 N=22 N=2 N=14 N=48 N=39 N=1
Have tried a
couple of times 22.0 13.6 50.0 14.3 25.0 15.4 0
Have never used 22.0 40.9 50.0 14.3 10.4 46.2 100.0
Awareness of JAVA support in respondents’ personal mobile phone Total
Mobile phone has JAVA support 43.3
Mobile phone has no JAVA support 22.1
Table 1 Mobile Internet use and awareness of JAVA support
Trang 3Next, the attractiveness of the proposed
services, as well as their impact on image and
loyalty will be presented The respondent data
were divided into two groups, those who used
the mobile Internet daily, weekly, or monthly
(mobile Internet adopters) and those who never
used it, or who had only tried it (mobile Internet
QRQDGRSWHUV $VSUHYLRXVO\PHQWLRQHGWKH¿UVW
group was expected to evaluate the services more
highly than the second group
Mobile Service Evaluation
Table 2 presents the mean result for customer
evaluations of SCU; comfort and security;
m-feedback; and improvement of brand assets The
results for the total sample show a neutral
atti-tude towards the proposed mobile services, with
means close to the middle value of the scale (4)
T-tests were performed to investigate differences
in means between adopters and non-adopters
of the mobile Internet Since mobile Internet
adopters were expected to exhibit higher scores
than non-adopters, one-tailed t tests are reported
As expected, customers who already use more
sophisticated mobile services found the offered
VHUYLFHVVLJQL¿FDQWO\PRUHDWWUDFWLYHLQWHUPVRI
SCU, comfort, and security
Of particular interest from a CRM
perspec-WLYHLVWKH¿QGLQJWKDWIUHTXHQWÀ\HUVHYDOXDWHG
IUHTXHQW À\HU LQIRUPDWLRQ 6&8 DV WKH OHDVW
interesting service This result requires further
investigation within the company to reveal the
reasons for it One reason may be that customers
cannot imagine what kind of information could be
communicated on the small screen, and what the
EHQH¿WVZRXOGEH3DLUZLVHt tests revealed that
the mean for customers’ perceived use of check-in
PRELOHVHUYLFHV 6&8 ZDVVLJQL¿FDQWO\KLJKHU
(p<0.01, two-tailed) than the means of other
pro-posed services One explanation is that check-in
via various technological devices is becoming
increasingly familiar to airline customers Thus,
ing other technologies may have a positive effect
on consumer interest in performing them also with their mobile phone In addition, paired-samples
t WHVWV VKRZHG WKDW FXVWRPHUV IHOW VLJQL¿FDQWO\ (p<0.01, two-tailed) more comfortable and secure booking (Comfort1 and Secure1) than paying for ÀLJKWV &RPIRUWDQG6HFXUH ZLWKWKHLUPRELOH phone This was the case in all customer groups (complete sample, adopters and non-adopters) M-feedback would be a novel service, offering customers the possibility of immediate feedback
to the company through a device that they always carry with them Even though customers believed that mobile feedback would be handled in the same way as other feedback (MFB2 M = 5.40), they expressed only a lukewarm interest in the service Means of MFB1 and MFB3-6 ranged from 3.46 to 4.35 for non-adopters, and from 3.98 to 4.88 for adopters Only the difference in WKHPHDQVRI0)%DQG0)%ZDVVLJQL¿FDQW between adopters and non-adopters, showing that adopters would be more comfortable using the mobile phone for feedback (MFB1) and that they would use it more regularly (MFB5) How-ever, the low means overall (adopters M= 4.14, non-adopters M = 3.46) for MFB5 suggests that most clients would hesitate in making mobile feedback their primary communication channel with the company
5HJDUGLQJ P&50 EHQH¿WV WR WKH ¿UP LQ the form of improved brand assets, there were QRVLJQL¿FDQWGLIIHUHQFHVEHWZHHQDGRSWHUVDQG non-adopters (Table 2) According to the mean values, offering mobile services might improve the image only slightly In particular Image4 (adopters M = 5.45 and non-adopters M = 4.96) showed that the airline with mobile services would
be perceived as a modern and technologically up-to-date company However, customers’ responses
to loyalty (M = 3.34 and M = 2.44) demonstrated that mobile services would probably not be a key factor in keeping customers from switching air-lines This mean score is the lowest in comparison
Trang 4(7-point scales)
Mobile Inter-net Adopters N=48
Mobile Internet Non-Adopters N=56
t test
p-value1
Total N=104 SD Service content and usability
0RELOHSKRQHEDVHGÀLJKWVFKHGXOHDQG
route information SCU(1) 4.80 3.81 0.004 4.35 1.945 )UHTXHQWÀ\HULQIRUPDWLRQDQGVSHFLDO
Flight booking and payment SCU(3) 4.68 3.77 0.008 4.26 1.926 Check-in services SCU(4) 5.84 4.71 0.000 5.32 1.541 Comfort and security
I would feel comfortable booking my
ÀLJKWWKURXJKDPRELOHSKRQHVHUYLFH
Comfort(1)
4.85 3.73 0.001 4.33 1.839 ,ZRXOGIHHOVHFXUHERRNLQJP\ÀLJKW
through a mobile phone service Secure(1) 5.24 4.17 0.000 4.74 1.754
I would feel comfortable paying for a
ÀLJKWWKURXJKDPRELOHSKRQHVHUYLFH
Comfort (2)
4.25 3.29 0.006 3.81 1.986 ,ZRXOGIHHOVHFXUHSD\LQJIRUDÀLJKW
through a mobile phone service
Se-cure(2)
4.40 3.64 0.014 4.05 1.793
Mobile feedback (MFB)
I would feel comfortable giving feedback
through a mobile phone service MFB(1) 4.71 3.98 0.026 4.37 1.927
I believe that the airline would handle
mobile feedback in the same way as
conventional feedback MFB(2)
5.41 5.40 0.430 5.40 1.523 Mobile feedback would make it easier
for me to contact the airline MFB(3) 4.88 4.35 0.072 4.63 1.790 Mobile feedback could help the airline
better solve my problems MFB(4) 3.98 3.75 0.258 3.88 1.810
I would use the mobile feedback
ser-vice regularly MFB(5) 4.14 3.46 0.024 3.83 1.765
I would give mobile feedback in
in-stances I otherwise would not MFB(6) 4.67 4.35 0.203 4.52 1.887 Brand assets
Mobile services would make the airline
more desirable as an airline carrier
Im-age(1)
4.52 3.92 0.033 4.24 1.726
1 WWHVWVEHWZHHQDGRSWHUVDQGQRQDGRSWHUVRQHWDLOHGVLJQL¿FDQFHUHSRUWHG
Table 2 Item means for mobile Internet adopters, non-adopters, and the total sample
Trang 5must be that customers do not expect the mobile
services to be a bonding factor in their
relation-ship with the company They might be perceived
as nice additions to existing services, but not as
a relationship strengthening factor
Speed of Mobile Feedback, Willingness
to Pay and Intentions to Use
One of the key features of mobile feedback is its
potential speed both in sending and in receiving
feedback (MFBSend and MFBReceive) Only 49%
said that they would send feedback immediately
when they had experienced a problem, while the
rest would do it later; 42.2% expected to get an
answer immediately, or within 2 hours, while
the rest expected to get it in one day or later
The results are presented in Table 3 Since quick
handling of mobile feedback would require extra
resources and thus added costs, customers were
asked if they would be willing to pay for the mobile
feedback service Not surprisingly, the majority
of customers were prepared to pay either nothing (31.4%), or the price of an SMS (54.9) Only a small percentage of customers (13.7%) were prepared WRSD\¼RUPRUHIRUWKHVHUYLFH6LPLODUUHVXOWV were obtained for customers’ willingness to pay IRUÀLJKWERRNLQJVHUYLFHV :LOO3D\)OLJKW 2QO\
ZHUH SUHSDUHG WR SD\ ¼ RU PRUH IRU WKH services, while the others were prepared to pay nothing (38.8%) or the price of an SMS (51.5%) 7KLV UHVXOW LV LQ OLQH ZLWK HDUOLHU ¿QGLQJV RQ customer willingness to pay for mobile services (Jarvenpaa, Lang, Takeda, & Tuunanen, 2003) Customers were also asked how soon they believed that they would start using these services
if they were offered (StartUse, Table 3) The an-swers revealed that 35% would begin to use them immediately, while 48.6% would wait until more people had adopted the service, and 16.5% said that they would probably never use them
Components
(7-point scales)
Mobile Inter-net Adopters N=48
Mobile Internet Non-Adopters N=56
t test
p-value1
Total N=104 SD Mobile services would improve my
picture of the airline as an airline carrier
Image(2)
4.80 4.23 0.041 4.54 1.683 Mobile services would distinguish the
airline from other airlines Image(3) 4.86 4.35 0.061 4.63 1.656 Mobile services are associated with a
modern and technologically up-to-date
company Image(4)
5.45 4.96 0.060 5.22 1.595 Mobile services could be a key factor that
keeps me from changing to another airline
Loyalty
3.34 2.44 0.005 2.92 1.810
1 WWHVWVEHWZHHQDGRSWHUVDQGQRQDGRSWHUVRQHWDLOHGVLJQL¿FDQFHUHSRUWHG
Table 2 Item means for mobile Internet adopters, non-adopters, and the total sample
Trang 6$NH\¿QGLQJRIWKHVWXG\LVWKDWFXVWRPHUVGR
not yet seem to be ready to fully embrace
mo-bile services as part of an airline’s relationship
marketing program Their attitudes towards the
SURSRVHGVHUYLFHVFDQEHGHVFULEHGDV³ZDLWDQG
VHH´DQG³OHWRWKHUVXVHLW¿UVW´7KLVLVDW\SLFDO
consumer response to many innovations, and it
does not in itself mean that they would not adopt
any of the services, if they were available
Re-sistance to innovations is an instinctive response
in many consumers, which is due to functional
and psychological barriers (Ram & Sheth, 1989)
So far, consumers have not embraced mobile commerce to the extent that was predicted at the beginning of this century (Anckar & D’Incau, 2002; Nordman & Liljander, 2004) However, consumers have expressed a higher interest in utility than in entertainment services (Anckar
& D’Incau, 2002), which seems promising also for m-CRM programs Our study showed that customers were most interested in utility mobile services that they were likely to have used pre-viously on other technological interfaces (e.g., check-in services)
Percentages MFBSend Total MFBReceive Total Immediately 49.0 Immediately 21.6 Sometime later 16.7 Within couple of
Same time frame as conventional feedback 22.5 The same day 24.5 Not at all 11.8 In due time 33.3
WillPay Feedback Total
¼RUPRUH 13.7 The price of SMS 54.9
WillPay Flight Total
The price of SMS 51.5
Immediately 35.0 Wait until more people have
adopted the services 48.6 Probably never 16.5
Table 3 Quickness of m-feedback, willingness to pay and intention to use the services
Trang 7When dividing the data into two groups,
adopt-ers and non-adoptadopt-ers of mobile Internet, we found
that the adopters had a more positive attitude than
non-adopters towards many of the services This
supports the results of Anckar and D’Incau (2002),
ZKHUHDGRSWHUVRIWKH¿[HG,QWHUQHWH[SUHVVHGD
higher interest in mobile services compared to
non-adopters The mobile Internet adopters in our
study were younger than non-adopters, indicating
that there is a new generation of customers who
are more positively tuned into this new channel
However, since all customers expressed a low
LQWHUHVWLQUHFHLYLQJIUHTXHQWÀ\HULQIRUPDWLRQ
through their mobile phone, its use in CRM will
have to be carefully considered The study also
revealed that customers are not prepared to pay
additional costs for being able to use the mobile
channel, whenever and wherever required
Cus-tomers expect the same feeless services through
the mobile channel as they have become used to
on the wired Internet They are also not prepared
to pay for quicker service, but probably see this as
a normal service improvement in a competitive
environment For example, immediate feedback
attracted customers to some extent but not enough
to be paid for However, although the new service
would require additional investments from the
companies, they should welcome customers’
com-plaints as part of a defensive marketing strategy
(Fornell & Wernerfelt, 1987)
Further, customers did not feel that the new
services would have a strong positive effect on
the company’s brand assets in terms of improved
image and retention One reason might be that
customers view mobile services as a hygiene
factor and not as a motivation factor Thus in the
same way as customers expect all companies to
have an online presence, they expect them to
offer mobile services Customers might not use
them regularly, but they expect them to be
avail-able when needed Moreover, business customers
probably know by experience that successful
services are easily copied by competitors and that
and stable competitive advantages to a company Further, customers may be afraid of their phones being cluttered with unwanted messages and may prefer companies to communicate with them in
a less obtrusive way
Since CRM aims to increase customer reten-WLRQWKH¿QGLQJVRIWKHVXUYH\LQGLFDWHWKDWDW SUHVHQWWKHVXJJHVWHGPVHUYLFHVWRIUHTXHQWÀ\HUV would not achieve this aim The new means of JHWWLQJÀLJKWLQIRUPDWLRQRUEX\LQJÀLJKWWLFNHWV GRQRWVHHPWREHVXI¿FLHQWO\DWWUDFWLYHWRHQKDQFH customer loyalty
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS
The study has several limitations, which have to be taken into account when interpreting the results
In addition to the obvious limitations of study-ing a small sample of a sstudy-ingle company, and the bias that comes from self-selection among those who received the survey, other limitations need
to be mentioned An important limitation is that customers had to imagine the proposed services DQG FRXOG QRW H[SHULHQFH WKHP ¿UVW KDQG ,W LV possible that they would have had a more positive attitude if they had been able to try the service
on a high quality mobile device Multiple items
in the questionnaire on customers’ current mo-bile service use and on their loyalty to different service channels would have provided valuable information that would have helped in explain-ing the results The study was conducted in close cooperation with the company, which put severe limitations on the constructs that were used for the study Thus, future studies should include more
of the well-established concepts in the consumer adoption literature For example, future studies should include more information on customer innovation characteristics and behavior, which would make it possible to categorize customers LQWRPRUHVSHFL¿FDGRSWHUVHJPHQWV'HVSLWHWKH
Trang 8face usage of technology (Nysveen, Pedersen,
& Thorbjørnsen, 2005) to explain the adoption
of mobile CRM, measures from the consumer
innovativeness and/or technology acceptance
literature could also be used
Our study should be seen as exploratory, in
SURYLGLQJVRPHLQLWLDO¿QGLQJVRQFXVWRPHUSHU-ceptions of mobile CRM services More studies
are obviously needed, in other companies, on other
services, and on complete customer relationship
programs Since consumer innovativeness
re-search has concentrated on tangible products (for
a review, see Roehrich, 2004), it would be
fruit-ful to apply this line of research on services and
technologically novel products, and in particular
on a combination of m- and e-services Further, it
would be of interest to study customers’ reasons
for their choice of channel to contact a company
and to receive communications from it Research
on bank services has shown that customers use
different channels for different purposes (Patrício,
Fisk, & Falcão e Cunha, 2003), but there is also
evidence that the new generation of customers
make little difference between channels
(Lind-strom, 2003) Finally, our study could be extended
WRH[DPLQHVSHFL¿FXVHFRQWH[WVWKDWPD\LQÀX-ence the usability of mobile services (Kim, Kim,
& Lee, 2005)
Managerial Implications
MIDlet technologies offer companies the
opportu-nity to develop new, specialized services; bringing
EHQH¿WVDQGWKHUHE\DGGHGYDOXHWRFXVWRPHU
relationships In the hype and speed of
techno-logical development, it is easy for companies to
be fascinated by technological developments that
may seem to improve both current services and
brand image, but which attract little interest when
WKH\DUH¿UVWLQWURGXFHGRQWKHPDUNHW&XVWRPHUV¶
habits change slowly Although mobile banking
has enjoyed a remarkable success throughout
Eu-rope, it is in many ways a unique context (Riivari,
2005) In other contexts, such as travel services
(Wang & Cheung, 2004), neither the market, nor the devices seem to be ready for the complexity of mobile travel services Therefore, companies that consider developing wireless services as part of WKHLU&50VWUDWHJ\VKRXOG¿UVWWKRURXJKO\LQYHV-tigate its potential in relation to costs Our study showed that most customers expect companies to offer new CRM mobile services free of charge,
as part of customer relationship maintenance costs Companies need to carefully consider what charges can be claimed for services that are intended to add value to customer relationships Further, companies need to educate customers LQ WKH XVH DQG EHQH¿WV RI PRELOH VHUYLFHV DQG provide incentives to encourage trial
In addition, when developing mobile services,
it is important that the logic of using the service strongly resembles that which the customers have grown used to through other channels, or through other service providers This is a huge challenge, since different channels differ considerably in how the service is presented to customers, and different applications result in different service logics and scripts To give an example from airlines, customers already have had to learn different logics for checking in on the Internet and through an automat at the airport In addi-tion, the Internet check-in services and automats
of different airlines have different interfaces and work in different ways Thus, it is understandable
if customers are unwilling to learn yet a third way
to check in through their mobile phone These types of problems have to be minimized through service development that gives the customers’ SHUVSHFWLYH¿UVWSULRULW\
From a relationship marketing perspective, it
is important that customers are provided with a choice of how to interact with the company Rela-tionships are not enhanced by forcing customers
to interact with certain channels Therefore, we adopt a different standpoint from Winer (2001, S ZKR VXJJHVWV WKDW ³>WKH@ HVVHQFH RI WKH information technology revolution and, in par-ticular, the World Wide Web is the opportunity
Trang 9afforded companies to choose how they interact
with their customers.” Instead, we suggest that
the new channels afford customers an opportunity
to choose how to interact with the company, and
that strong customer relationships can be built
only through voluntary use of new technologies
When designing strategies, all channels need to
be considered from a customer relationship
per-spective, designing the services of each channel
VRWKDWLWPD[LPL]HVLWVEHQH¿WVWRFXVWRPHUV
Concluding Remarks
Our study on mobile CRM contributes to the
lit-HUDWXUHRQPRELOHVHUYLFHVE\EHLQJRQHRIWKH¿UVW
empirical investigations of customer attitudes
to-wards loyalty program services provided through
a mobile device Although the study showed that
loyalty program customers have little interest in
mobile CRM services, it can be concluded that
mobile CRM to some extent enhances the brand
image of a company, which over time may have a
positive effect also on customer retention In
ad-dition, offering mobile services will demonstrate
that the company is at the forefront of service
technology development This will attract early
adopters with a strong interest in new
technolo-gies, whose expertise can be used, for example,
by involving them in the service development
process Thus it is clear that the mobile channel
should be included in companies’ future CRM
strategies, but also that more research is needed
RQWKHEHQH¿WVRIPRELOH&50WRERWKFXVWRPHUV
and companies
REFERENCES
Aaker, D A (1996) Building strong brands New
York: The Free Press
Aaker, D A., & Joachimsthaler, E (2000) Brand
leadership New York: The Free Press.
Adjari, J (2001) Java 2 mobile information GHYLFHSUR¿OH 0,'3 Retrieved July 22, 2003,
IURP KWWS ZZZWPOKXW¿6WXGLHV7LN 2001s/papers/jafar_ajdari.pdf
Akhgar, B., Siddiqi, J., Foster, M., Siddiqi, H., & Akhgar, A (2002) Applying customer relation-ship management (CRM) in the mobile commerce
market International Conference on Mobile Computing, Sponsored by EU (IST), Greece.
Anckar, B., & D’Incau, D (2002) Value creation
in mobile commerce: Findings from a consumer
survey Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application, 4(1), 43-64.
Balasubramanian, S., Peterson, R A., & Jarv-enpaa, S L (2002) Exploring the implications
of m-commerce for markets and marketing
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30(4), 348-361.
Bitner, M J., Brown, S W., & Meuter, M L (2000) Technology infusion in service encounters
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(1), 138-149.
Chae, M., Kim, J., Kim, H., & Ryu, H (2002) Information quality for mobile internet services:
A theoretical model with empirical validation
Electronic Markets, 12(1), 38-46.
Cho, Y., Im, I., Hiltz, R., & Fjermestad, J (2002) The effects of post-purchase evaluation factors on RQOLQHYVRIÀLQHFXVWRPHUFRPSODLQLQJEHKDYLRU
Implications for customer loyalty Advances in Consumer Research, 29(1), 318-327.
Crosby, L A., & Johnson, S L (2001) Technol-ogy: Friend or foe to customer relationships?
Marketing Management, 10(4), 10-11.
Davis, F D (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information
technology MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
Featherman, M S., & Pavlou, P A (2003) Predict-ing e-services adoption: A perceived risk facets
Trang 10perspective International Journal of
Human-Computer Studies, 59, 451-474.
Feinberg, R., & Kadam, R (2002) E-CRM Web
service attributes as determinants of customer
satisfaction with retail Web sites International
Journal of Service Industry Management, 13(5),
432-451
Fjermestad, J., & Romano, N C., Jr (2003)
Electronic customer relationship management
Revisiting the general principles of usability
and resistance—An integrative implementation
framework Business Process Management
Jour-nal, 9(5), 572-591.
Fornell, C., & Wernerfelt, B (1987, November)
Defensive marketing strategy by customer
com-plaint management: A theoretical analysis
Jour-nal of Marketing Research, 24, 337-346.
Gilbert, A L., & Han, H (2005) Understanding
mobile data services adoption: Demography,
at-titudes or needs? Technological Forecasting &
Social Change, 72, 327-337.
Grönroos, C (2000) Service management and
marketing—A customer relationship management
approach New York: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
Heinonen, K (2004) Reconceptualizing customer
perceived value—The value of time and place
Managing Service Quality, 14(2/3), 205-215.
Heinonen, K (2006) Temporal and spatial
e-service value International Journal of Service
Industry Management, 17(4), 380-400.
Helenius, J., & Liljander, V (2005) Developing
brand assets with wireless devices In I Clarke
III & T B Flatherty (Eds.), Advances in
elec-tronic marketing (pp 176-192) Hershey PA:
Idea Group
Jarvenpaa, S L., Lang, K R., Takeda, Y., &
Tuunanen, V K (2003) Mobile commerce at
crossroads Communications of the ACM, 46(12),
41-44
Johnston, R., & Mehra, S (2002) Best-practice
complaint management Academy of Management Journal, 16(4), 145-154.
Jukic, N., Sharma, A., Jukic, B., & Parameswaran,
M (2002, May 19-22) M-commerce: Analysis of
impact on marketing orientation Information Re-sources Management Association International Conference, Seattle, WA.
Kaapu, T (2005) The concept of information privacy in e-commerce: A phenomenographical
analysis of consumers’ views Conference Paper IRIS’28, Kristiansand, Norway.
Kannan, P K., Chang, A.-M., & Whinston, A B (2001) Wireless commerce: Marketing issues and
possibilities In Proceedings of the 34th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences,
Hawaii
Kim, H., Kim, J., & Lee, Y (2005) An empirical study of use context in the mobile internet, focus-ing on the usability of information architecture
Information Systems Frontier, 7(2), 175-186.
Kindberg, T., Sellen, A., & Geelhoed, E (2004,
July 7) Security and trust in mobile interactions:
A study of users’ perceptions and reasoning
Con-sumer Applications and Systems Laboratory, HP Laboratories Bristol, HPL-2004-113 Retrieved September 29, 2005, from http://www.hpl.hp.com/ techreports/2004/HPL-2004-113.pdf
Lam, J., & Chan, S S (2003) Exploring CRM implementation on the internet and mobile chan-nels Chicago: Seminar, DePaul University, School
of Computer Science, Telecommunication and Information Systems
Liljander, V., Gillberg, F., Gummerus J., & van Riel, A (2006) Technology readiness and the evaluation and adoption of self-service
technolo-gies Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 13(3), 177-191.
Lin, H.-H & Wang, Y.-S (2006) An examination
of the determinants of customer loyalty in mobile
... (2004,July 7) Security and trust in mobile interactions:
A study of users’ perceptions and reasoning
Con-sumer Applications and Systems Laboratory, HP Laboratories... Science, Telecommunication and Information Systems
Liljander, V., Gillberg, F., Gummerus J., & van Riel, A (2006) Technology readiness and the evaluation and adoption of self-service... would be handled in the same way as other feedback (MFB2 M = 5.40), they expressed only a lukewarm interest in the service Means of MFB1 and MFB3-6 ranged from 3.46 to 4.35 for non-adopters, and from