Journal of Euromarketing
Journal of Euromarketing
200]
On: 30 November 2014, At: 09:33
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Euromarketing
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wjem20
To cite this article: Heikki Karjaluoto , Jari Karvonen , Manne Kesti , Timo Koivumäki , Marjukka Manninen , Jukka Pakola ,
Annu Ristola & Jari Salo (2005) Factors Affecting Consumer Choice of Mobile Phones: Two Studies from Finland, Journal of
Euromarketing, 14:3, 59-82, DOI: 10.1300/J037v14n03_04
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Factors Affecting Consumer Choice
of Mobile Phones:
Two Studies from Finland
Heikki Karjaluoto
Jari Karvonen
Manne Kesti
Downloaded by [134.117.10.200] at 09:33 30 November 2014
Timo Koivumäki
Marjukka Manninen
Jukka Pakola
Annu Ristola
Jari Salo
ABSTRACT. Mobile phone markets are one of the most turbulent mar-
ket environments today due to increased competition and change. Thus,
it is of growing concern to look at consumer buying decision process and
cast light on the factors that finally determine consumer choices between
different mobile phone brands. On this basis, this article deals with con-
sumers’ choice criteria in mobile phone markets by studying factors that
influence intention to acquire new mobile phones on one hand and fac-
tors that influence on mobile phone change on the other. With the use of
a series of focus group interviews (Study 1) with 79 graduate students
followed by a survey (Study 2) of 196 respondents, it was found that al-
though the choice of a mobile phone is a subjective choice situation,
there are some general factors that seem to guide the choices. The two
studies show that while technical problems are the basic reason to
change mobile phone among students; price, brand, interface, and prop-
erties are the most influential factors affecting the actual choice between
brands. [Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Deliv-
Downloaded by [134.117.10.200] at 09:33 30 November 2014
INTRODUCTION
not the only need mobile phones fulfill. Beyond voice, three main trends
shaping the so-called mobile culture have been identified: (1) commu-
nication services such as voice, text and pictures, (2) wireless Internet
services such as browsing, corporate access and e-mail, and (3) differ-
ent media services such as motion pictures, games and music (Hansen,
2003).
For example, telecommunications companies promote new services
such as multimedia messaging service (MMS) as a new way of enhanc-
ing one-to-one and one-to-many communicating. According to a fresh
study conducted in the UK, close to 40 percent of the youth market is us-
Downloaded by [134.117.10.200] at 09:33 30 November 2014
ing MMS (Enpocket, 2004). The research also found that MMS are
used more and more in connection to television programs. However, the
diffusion of MMS technology has been slow, mostly due to technical
constraints and pricing policies.
Mobile phone development has been rapid and new models are intro-
duced to the markets almost on a weekly basis. Especially 3G networks
and smart phones are expected to affect the evolution of the mobile
phone market in the short future (e.g., Slawsby, Leibovitch and Giusto,
2003) as shown in Figure 1.
However, at present the majority of new mobile phones purchased
are low-cost handsets without the latest technological features. Whereas
color displays have become common, with sales of over fifty percent in
2003 in some countries, e.g., in Finland (Poropudas, 2003), phones with
a built-in camera reached globally below 15 percent of the total sales in
the last quarter in 2003 (Gartner Dataquest, 2004; Strategy Analytics,
2003). However, more and more users are acquiring camera phones and
learning how to take, send and print photos. The sales of built-in camera
phones have contributed to an increase in mobile data usage and also en-
LITERATURE REVIEW:
CONSUMER CHOICE BEHAVIOR
(Wilska, 2003). The research showed that addictive use was common
among females and was related to trendy and impulsive consumption
styles. Instead, males were found to have more technology enthusiasm
and trend-consciousness. These attributes were then linked to impulsive
consumption. The study concluded that genders are becoming more
alike in mobile phone choice. Because individual differences in con-
sumption patterns are obviously identifiable, we hypothesize that back-
ground variables especially have an influence on mobile phone choice.
Another important aspect that has risen from different studies is that
consumers purchase new phones due to the fact that their existing one’s
Karjaluoto et al. 67
capacity is not appropriate referring to the idea that new technology fea-
tures such as built-in cameras, better memory, radio, more developed
messaging services, and color displays are influencing consumer deci-
sions to acquire new models (In-Stat/MDR, 2002; Liu, 2002; O’Keefe,
2004). Thus it can be expected that new features will influence the in-
tention to acquire new mobile phones, and therefore the following hy-
pothesis was developed:
In addition, it seems that size and brand play to some extent an impor-
tant role in decision making. Liu (2002) for instance surveyed Asian
mobile phone users and found that size of the phone had no impact on
mobile phone choice, but this finding might be due to the fact that all
competing brands have quite similar sized phones that are small enough.
Liu continues that the trend will actually be not towards smaller phones
but towards phones with better capability and larger screens. While
companies are advertising new models and services that do not yet ex-
ist, it according to the paper signals to the market that the company is at
the cutting edge of technology and shows what will be available in the
very near future. The sales of new phones will then be driven by re-
placement rather than adoption. Thus, it is hypothesized that size and
brand are related to mobile phone choice at some extent:
dled with the operator contract, phones are, generally speaking, free of
charge, whereas in Finland consumers pay relatively high prices for
their phones. In Finland, that kind of linked transactions are regulated
by law and currently illegal. In Finland, this kind of regulation has re-
sulted in a situation where people change their operator quite often,
and mostly on the basis of price (Alkio, 2004). On this basis, it should
be noted that price of the phone plays an important role in Finland and
thus, we hypothesize that:
METHODOLOGY
Dorsch, Grove and Garden Survey (n = 223) Suggests that two distinct frameworks can be used to
(2000) study consumer choice behavior: the classic problem-
solving paradigm and the progression of consumer
choice from product class through brand choice.
Beatty and Scott (1987) Survey (n = 351) Consumers make choices between alternatives based
on limited information search and processing.
Moorthy, Ratchford and Survey (n = 117) Similar to Beatty and Scott (1997).
Talukdar (1997)
Downloaded by [134.117.10.200] at 09:33 30 November 2014
Alba and Hutchinson Literature review Choice is made without detailed evaluation of alterna-
(2000) tives.
Chernev (2003) Four experiments Similar to Alba and Hutchinson (2000). In addition,
(n = 88) choices made from large assortments can lead to
weaker preferences.
Coupey, Irwin and Payne Three studies (n = Similar to Alba and Hutchinson (2000). Moreover, prod-
(1998) 48; n = 66; n = 28) uct familiarity influences preference construction. Pref-
erences are often labile due to limited evaluation of
alternatives.
Laroche, Kim and Matsui Two surveys (n = Suggesting that conjunctive heuristic is the most often
(2003) 234; n = 235) used decision model in the consideration set formation.
Swait and Adamovicz (2001), Survey (n = 280) Consumer decision making strategies can change due
see also Dhar, Nowlis and to person-, context-, and task-specific factors.
Sherman (2000)
Fitzsimons et al. (2002) Literature review Consumer choice often occurs outside conscious
awareness. Nonconscious influences affect choice
much more than many researchers believe.
Wilska (2003) Survey (n = 637) Choices are often driven by hedonistic considerations
(see also Dhar and Werterbroch, 2000; Batra and
Ahtola, 1990). Specifically, the younger the consumer
the more hedonistic features consumers tend to value in
mobile phones. Mobile phone choice and usage is con-
sistent to general consumption styles.
Riquelme (2001) Survey (n = 94) Suggesting that prior experience of mobile phone
choice affects future choice.
Jones (2002) Survey (n = 500) Consumers value personal time planning features in
mobile phones.
In-Stat/MDR (2002); O'Keefe Forecasts and sur- Suggesting that new technology features are driving
(2004) veys consumers to acquire new mobile phones.
Liu (2002) Survey (n = 800) Similar to In-Stat/MDR (2002) and O'Keefe (2004). Ad-
ditionally, size and brand of the phone are affecting
choice.
Karjaluoto et al. (2003a; Survey (n = 397) Price of the mobile phone affects choice in countries
2003b) where mobile phones are not linked to the operator con-
tract.
70 JOURNAL OF EUROMARKETING
RESULTS
Study 1
Focus group A B C D
Male 4 8 4 6
Female 12 11 11 10
Total 16 19 15 16
changing was that the old one was broken or did not work properly. This
meant for the participants that the mobile phone did not work, the calls
were interrupted, for example due to weak audibility, battery was weak,
the screen was out of order or keypad was so consumed that the num-
bers were invisible. While mobile phones were also acquired due to new
features including color display and polyphonic ring tones, some re-
spondents bought new phones in order to get an innovator and/or opin-
ion leader status. Fundamentally, respondents agreed that price, brand,
and size of the phone were the main factors affecting their choice of the
new model.
The importance of price might be related to the student sample. All
groups reported having a maximum price they are willing to pay for a
new mobile phone. The price range varied between 10 to 150 which
indicates that students are buying low-priced phones. The groups re-
garded new technological features as too expensive to use, an in fact
groups B and D felt new features as totally needless. On the other hand,
groups A and C considered new features such as multimedia messaging
service (MMS) handy but too expensive to use at present. Participants
were also skeptical about the quality of the pictures and video clips. A
general view seemed to be that mobile phones are still seen as talking
devices, and new properties were not commonly used. Other services
such as calendar, games or radio were not used by the participants.
E-mailing was a service that might be used if it was very cheap or free.
Although color display was after a little discussion regarded as a good
improvement, students were not ready to pay the high price just for get-
ting fancier color menus for their phones. Most felt that they never buy
the newest model because mobile phone manufacturers are well-known
for their pricing strategy in which new models while launched to the
market cost much more than after a couple of months when the price be-
gins to fall. Quite interestingly, relatively many were unaware of the
72 JOURNAL OF EUROMARKETING
properties new phones have. For instance, GPRS and WAP were un-
known for many. This was quite a surprising finding because the inter-
viewed can be considered as more aware of technical things than
average Finnish people of their age. Only around one out of ten clearly
knew what GPRS is and for what purposes it might be used. After the
moderator told the groups about the new services (e.g., that GPRS can
be used to get Internet access), students, after little consideration, seemed
to form a more positive attitude towards the new features. The group D
then summarized the discussion by saying that companies should edu-
cate consumers to use the new services.
Downloaded by [134.117.10.200] at 09:33 30 November 2014
Besides price and new features, brand was also found important, not
only among Finnish students but also among exchange students. It was
interesting to find out that even though Nokia’s brand was appreciated
by the Finns and by some of the foreign students as well, a couple of stu-
dents reported that Nokia’s brand has suffered in Germany from quality
problems, and thus the brand was not seen any better than competing
brands. Nokia’s brand was valued above all because of easy-to-use in-
terface, but also among Finnish students by its domestic origin. It was
mentioned that students rarely change their mobile phone brand owing
to the fact that it is much easier to stay with the same brand with familiar
user-interface and menus regardless of the model.
Size of the phone was found to have some importance. Although
many had changed their phones in order to get a smaller model, some
asserted that the phone should not be too small. Students felt that the
phone should be small enough to match into a pocket but still allowing
relatively convenient usage. In relation to size, fancy outlook was also
discussed. The groups felt that outlook and colored covers are for small
children and had very little influence on their choice of the model.
Other people’s influence was found to have slight impact on inten-
tion to buy a new model. The groups highlighted the importance of par-
ents by saying that in many Finnish families, parents get free phones
from their employers and thus get used to one brand. Friend’s influence
was two-handed. On one hand, through word-of-mouth it has an impact
on the choice whereas on the other groups reported knowing people
who want to have a different brand than their friends.
During the discussion some other factors arose from the discussion
such as salesman’s recommendation. However, for the majority sales-
man’s recommendation was found unimportant. This might relate to the
fact that quite many stores only sell one brand and limited amount of
models, thus allowing easier choice.
Karjaluoto et al. 73
Study 2
Downloaded by [134.117.10.200] at 09:33 30 November 2014
On the basis of the findings obtained from study 1 and previous liter-
ature, a questionnaire was prepared. Of the 196 usable questionnaires,
71 were from female respondents and 125 from male respondents. The
respondents had different had different educational backgrounds
ranging from matriculation (21.0 percent) to university degree (26.2
percent) and also quite different levels of employment ranging from
student status (42.6 percent) to white-collar workers (24.6 percent).
Most of the respondents belonged to the age category 18-34 (77.4 per-
cent). The respondents used their mobile phones mainly for calling, but
other services were also popular. The most popular service was send-
ing text messages (64 percent used daily), followed by downloading
Price***
Technical*** Interface***
-Max. 150
problems -Familiarity
Brand**
-Global
Innovator’s -Customer loyalty
status*
Properties*
Other factors*
-New features
-Salesman
logos and/or ring tones (49 percent used 1-2 times per month), phone’s
own services such as radio, calculator, calendar and games (49 percent
used daily), and value added SMS-services (39 percent used 1-2 times
per month). Thus, although the respondents can be considered as lead
users of mobile phones and mobile services, the sample represents rela-
tively well the actual mobile phone usage in Finland among this age
group.
We used 24 questions in order to analyze consumer motives in mo-
bile phone purchase. The correlation matrix and Bartlett’s test of
spherity showed highly significant correlations between variables sup-
Downloaded by [134.117.10.200] at 09:33 30 November 2014
Factors
E-mail .775
UMTS .743
Downloaded by [134.117.10.200] at 09:33 30 November 2014
Java .709
WAP-services .682
Multimedia .800
Appearance .815
Styling .811
Salesperson’s .810
recommendation
Friends’ .728
recommendation
Employer’s .677
recommendation
Reliability .712
Usability .595
Note: Only the loadings above 0.4 are presented in the component matrix.
76 JOURNAL OF EUROMARKETING
The statistics reported are the means, standard deviations and the sta-
tistical significance of the mean differences. The results show that
white-collar workers value enhanced data and networking features sig-
nificantly higher than students and blue-collar workers. The only excep-
tion is the design, which is considered equally important between
white-collar workers and students. This result seems quite reasonable,
as it can be expected that white-collar workers can utilize these features
better in their work than blue-collar workers. The fact that the impor-
tance of networking features, such as e-mail or WAP services, is not
more valued by student is somewhat surprising.
CONCLUSION
viations (e.g., GPRS, EDGE, Bluetooth) that are fully understood only
by technology savvy consumers. Therefore, more attention should be
paid to educative advertising and marketing. The importance of the re-
seller becomes constantly more important as we are entering the smart
phone era–meaning that phones have so many properties and features
that users need both hands-on instructions and better post purchase ser-
vice than before. Furthermore, as Finland has high mobile phone pene-
tration and active mobile phone users, the results obtained with Finnish
consumers might guide other research conducted in other countries.
However, we should bear in mind that many factors, such as legislation
and international differences in culture for instance, definitely have an
impact on results.
Despite this piece of research provides some insights into the factors
that influence the choice of a mobile phone model, the work is still at an
early stage and certain limitations concerning the research setting
should be noted in order to guide future research of this phenomenon.
For example, general limitations are raised in regard to the use of focus
groups (Study 1) and the interpretation of the results obtained. It should
be noted that although four focus group interviews were conducted, the
results cannot be generalized and might be biased by other subjects.
Also, the fact that we used a student sample limits broader generaliza-
tions of the findings. Perhaps the most important limitation concerning
Study 2 is the relatively small sample size, which makes it difficult to
generalize the findings.
More research is needed to leverage the findings and provide better
and more in-depth implications for both theory and practice. To specify,
the research presented measured its subjects’ perceptions of different
factors affecting their choice of a mobile phone model at a given point in
time. In the future with the use of a longitudinal study it might be possi-
ble to get a broader and deeper picture of the phenomenon under scru-
tiny.
80 JOURNAL OF EUROMARKETING
REFERENCES
Alba, J.W., and Hutchinson, J.W. (2000). Knowledge calibration: What consumers
know and what they think they know. Journal of Consumer Research, 27 (Septem-
ber), 123-156.
Alkio, J. (2004). Suomi on kännykkäkaupan kummajainen [Finland is the oddity of
mobile phone commerce]. Helsingin Sanomat, B3 (March).
Assael, H. (1995). Consumer Behavior and Marketing Action. 5th ed. Cincinnati,
Ohio: ITP, South-Western College Publishing.
Batra, R. and Ahtola, O.T. (1990). Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian sources of
consumer attitudes. Marketing Letters, 2 (2), 159-170.
Downloaded by [134.117.10.200] at 09:33 30 November 2014
Beatty, S.E. and Smith, S.M. (1987). External search effort: An investigation across
several product categories. Journal of Consumer Research, 14 (1), 83-95.
Benady, D. (2002). As simple as one-two-3G. Marketing Week, 26-29.
Bockenholt, U. and Dillon, W.R. (2000). Inferring latent brand dependencies. Journal
of Marketing Research, 37 (1), 72-87.
Bristol, T., and Edward, F. (1996). Exploring the atmosphere created by focus group
interviews: Comparing consumers’ feelings across qualitative techniques. Journal
of the Market Research Society, 38 (2), 185-195.
Brown, J.S. (1991). Research that reinvents the corporation. Harvard Business Review,
69 (January/February), 102-111.
Chernev, A. (2003). When more is less and less is more: The role of ideal point avail-
ability and assortment in consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (2),
170-183.
Chintagunta, P.K. (1999). Variety seeking, purchase timing, and the “lightning bolt”
brand choice model. Management Science, 45 (4), 486-498.
Coupey, E., Irwin, J.R. and Payne, J.W. (1998). Product category familiarity and pref-
erence construction. Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (4), 459-468.
Dhar, R. and Wertenbroch, K. (2000). Consumer choice between hedonic and utilitar-
ian goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 37 (1), 60-71.
Dhar, R., Nowlis, S.M. and Sherman, S.J. (2000). Trying hard or hardly trying: An
analysis of context effects in choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9 (4),
189-200.
Dorsch, M.J., Grove, S.J. and Darden, W.R. (2000). Consumer intentions to use a ser-
vice category. Journal of Services Marketing, 14 (2), 92-117.
Drucker, E. (2004). Perceived speed key to 3G success. 3G’s commercial success
depends on carriers’ ability to deliver coverage and account for channel loading.
Wireless Week, (February), available at: http://www.wirelessweek.com/article/
CA381643
Enpocket (2004). Enpocket mobile media monitor (UK). Research Report, (February).
Fitzsimons, G.J., Hutchinson, J.W., Williams, P., Alba, J.W., Chartrand, T.L., Huber,
J., Kardes, F.R., Menon, G., Raghubir, P., Russo, J.E., Shiv, B. and Tavassoli, N.T.
(2002). Non-conscious influences on consumer choice. Marketing Letters, 13 (3),
269-279.
Gartner Dataquest (2004). Mobile phone sales expected to reach 560 million in 2004.
Research Report.
Karjaluoto et al. 81
Karjaluoto, H., Karvonen, J., Pakola, J., Pietilä, M., Salo, J. and Svento, R. (2003a).
Exploring consumer motives in mobile phone industry: An investigation of Finnish
mobile phone users. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Business
Economics, Management, and Marketing (Athens, Greece), 3, 335-342.
Karjaluoto, H., Pakola, J., Pietilä, M. and Svento, R. (2003b). An exploratory study on
antecedents and consequences of mobile phone usage in Finland. Proceedings of
the AMA Summer Marketing Educators’ Conference (Chicago, USA), 14, 170-178.
Kivetz, R. and Simonson, I. (2000). The effects of incomplete information on con-
sumer choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 37 (4), 427-448.
Kumar, N. (1997). The revolution in retailing: From market driven to market driving.
Long Range Planning, 30 (6), 830-835.
Laroche, M., Kim, C. and Matsui, T. (2003). Which decision heuristics are used in con-
sideration set formation. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 20 (3), 192-209.
Liu, C.M. (2002). The effects of promotional activities on brand decision in the cellular
telephone industry. The Journal of Product & Brand Management, 11 (1), 42-51.
Malhorta, N.K. (2002). Basic Marketing Research. (1st ed.). NJ: Prentice-Hall.
McDaniel, C. and Gates, R. (2001). Marketing Research Essentials. (3rd ed.). Ohio:
South-Western College Publishing.
Morgan, D. (1996). Focus groups. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 129-152.
Morgan, D.L. (1990). Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage Publications.
Moorthy, S., Ratchford, B. and Talukdar, D. (1997). Consumer information search re-
visited. Journal of Consumer Research, 23 (4), 263-277.
Nagel, A. (2003). Beyond Knut Holt’s Fusion model, balancing market pull and tech-
nology push. International Journal of Technology Management, 25 (6-7), 614-622.
Nokia (2004). Nokia closes 2003 with excellent fourth quarter. Press Release 2004,
(January), available at: http://press.nokia.com/PR/200401/931562_5.html
Nykänen, P. (2002). Nokia’s market share in Finland 80 percent. Kauppalehti Online,
31, (October), available at: http://www.kauppalehti.fi/sis/etusivu/435110.shtml
O’Keefe, M. (2004). 2004 worldwide camera phone and photo messaging forecast.
InfoTrends Research Group, Inc. Research Report.
Papatla, P., Zahedi, F.M. and Zekic-Susac, M. (2002). Leveraging the strengths of
choice models and neural networks: A multiproduct comparative analysis. Decision
Sciences, 33 (3), 433-468.
82 JOURNAL OF EUROMARKETING
Poropudas, T. (2003). Yli puolet puhelimista värinäyttöisiä [Over half of phones with
color display]. Digitoday.fi, (December).
Riquelme, H. (2001). Do consumers know what they want? Journal of Consumer Mar-
keting, 18 (5), 437-448.
Sehovic, A. (2003). The whole world in 3G: The right choice . . . GSMBOX, Ltd., Mobile
News, Third Generation, available at: http://uk.gsmbox.com/news/mobile_news/all/
95639.gsmbox
Sehovic, A. (2004). The end of the beginning? GSMBOX, Ltd., Mobile News, Third
Generation, available at: http://uk.gsmbox.com/news/mobile_news/all/97957.gsmbox
Slawsby, A. and Chute, C. (2003). Moving pictures 2003: worldwide camera phone
survey, forecast, and analysis, 2003-2007. IDC Group Research Report.
Slawsby, A., Leibovitch, A.M. and Giusto, R. (2003). Worldwide mobile phone fore-
Downloaded by [134.117.10.200] at 09:33 30 November 2014