ABSTRACT This study evaluated the significance of price (call rate), service quality, service availability, promotion and brand image as it affect users’ perception in selecting a mobile telecommunication services provider in the Nigerian telecommunication market, using Ibadan, a Nigerian municipality as a case study. The study was a sample survey of a cross section of mobile phone users. Data was collected with an adapted questionnaire distributed to 367 users using convenience sampling technique. Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) approach was adopted in understanding the users’ choice process. The empirical evidence was based on a model fit from the result of factor analysis, regression analysis, and chi-square goodness-of-fit statistics. The result revealed that paths to call rate (p = 0.023), service quality (p = 0.034) and service availability (p = 0.037) were more significant in the users’ choice process than promotion and brand image. It was recommended that mobile operators should reduce their expenditure on promotional activities and brand building but rather invest on network extensions, quality service delivery and product and services outlets infrastructural development, while also concentrating on price reduction strategies as a way of increasing subscribers’ base.
Keyword: Mobile Service Provider, Service quality, Service availability, Price, Promotion, Brand image, User perception.
1. BACKGROUND Prior to 2001, the number of connected phone lines in Nigeria was 450,000 for an estimated population of 120 million at the time and the level of investment in the telecommunication sector was just about US$50 million only [4]. Six years after, foreign direct investment (FDI) in the telecommunication sector have reached $9.5billion, the largest after the oil and gas industry and is still growing both in terms of subscribers' base and infrastructural development [37]. The telecoms sector has turned Nigeria into one of the preferred investment destinations in the world as foreign investors now fall over themselves to establish presence in a country acknowledged as one of the most lucrative markets [37]. In January 2001, the Nigerian Communication Commission (NCC) conducted an auction for digital mobile licences. It was acclaimed to be one of the best in the world due to its high level of transparency. The auction brought about the emergence of three mobile operators: ECONET wireless now Airtel, MTN and MTEL, an offshoot of the incumbent operator NITEL [4].
African Journal of Computing & ICT Reference Format:
W. Olatokun & S. Nwonne (2012). Determinants of Users’ Choice of Mobile Service Providers in the Nigerian Telecommunications Market. Afr J. of Comp & ICTs. Vol 5, No. 4. pp 19-32.
In 2002, a forth Digital Mobile Licence (DML) was issued to Globacom through another transparent auction process. To further increase competition, a fifth mobile license (with GSM spectrum) was awarded to Emerging Market Telecommunications Services Limited, otherwise known as Starcomms, in 2005 [6] [52]. According to Roger, (2010), there are five GSM network and 13 CDMA-based network operators in Nigeria. The GSM operators include Airtel, MTN, MTEL, Globacom, and Etisalat while CDMA network operators include Multilinks, Starcomms, O’net, Visafone amongst others. Consumers of telecommunications products and services in Nigeria are varied and their tastes, needs and expectations are also varied [37]. User satisfaction is very important in today’s business world as according to Deng et al [12] the ability of a service provider to create high degree of satisfaction is crucial for product differentiation and developing strong relationship with the user. According to Hanif et al [20], user satisfaction makes the phone users loyal to one telecommunication service provider. Satisfaction of the user can help the brands to build long and profitable relationships with their users [14]. Although it is costly to generate satisfied and loyal users of a product or service, however, Anderson et al [7] noted that it would prove profitable in the long run for the firm.
It is therefore necessary according to Gustafsson et al. [18] for a telecommunication service provider to concentrate on the improvement of service quality and charge appropriate fair price in order to satisfy its users which will ultimately help the service provider to retain its users. On the other hand, Ahn et al [3] noted that users get satisfied to a brand more if they get all the needed services accumulated in that very brand. User satisfaction according to Herrmann et al. [22], is directly influenced by price perceptions while indirectly through the perception of price fairness. In today’s market, the mobile technology has been extremely competitive and service providers are moving aggressively to attract versatile users by offering some meaningful attractive promotions and services [45]. The image of a service provider is also a consideration to a subscriber and according to Lambert [31], brand plays an important role in user’s selection of service provider even when the call rate offered by that provider is high. The author affirmed that users often attribute quality to branded products on the basis of price, brand reputation, store image, market share, product features and country of manufacture. Service availability of a mobile provider is equally of utmost consideration to mobile phone users. In line with this position, Yoon and Kijewski 58] stated that the quality of a product is also related to the availability of the products’ main functional features on one hand, and the user’s experience-in-use of the other auxiliary features on the other. The liberalisation of the Nigerian telecommunication sector and the attendant benefits has made Nigerian mobile users to appreciate more the importance of telephone, especially mobile telephony. Users have become more sensitive to the characteristics and attributes of mobile operators. On the other hand, the mobile operators are equally concerned about changes in users’ behaviour in response to its service offerings. Hence any development in the telecom sector is of great concern to the mobile users and the mobile operators[8][11][17][22]. However consumers would most likely behave differently toward the various mobile operators’ products and services, hence, achieving optimum consumers’ satisfaction is of paramount interest to the mobile service providers. Evaluating the perception of a mobile user in a highly competitive telecommunication market is very crucial. According to Hennig-Thurau et al. [21], satisfaction of customers with products and services of a company is considered the most important factor leading toward competitiveness and success.
Oliver [42] submitted that customer satisfaction is defined as an evaluation of the perceived discrepancy between prior expectations and the actual performance of the product. However, not much is known about the determinants of satisfaction of the mobile user in relation to their choice of mobile network operators in the Nigerian telecommunication environment. A study by Amusa [6] on Consumer Behaviour in the GSM market using University of Ibadan and the Polytechnic as a case study, examined the factors affecting consumer behaviour in the GSM market and the factors that account for the demand and use of GSM facilities. In another study, Ojo [40], considered Consumer Satisfaction in the GSM Industry in Nigeria and the various constraints against users satisfaction. Olatokun and Bodunwa [41], in a related study, carried out a survey on GSM uses and benefits in University of Ibadan. In spite of all these studies, there has been no detailed one carried out yet to assess the influence of the attributes of the mobile operators on users’ choice of mobile service operators in the life of the Nigerian mobile users. The focal point of this study was to understand the factors that influence mobile phone users in their choice of a mobile phone service provider in the Nigerian mobile telecom market. It examined the influence of call rate (price), service quality, service availability, promotion, and brand image on mobile phone users’ perception in selecting a service provider using structural equation modelling (SEM).
2. CONCEPTUAL MODEL
Figure 1 presents the conceptual model adopted for the study. The first four constructs (price, service availability, service quality and promotion) were adopted from a similar study carried out by Rahman et al [45] using the Malaysian experience whereas, the last construct brand image, was from empirical literature (Kort, 2005). In the centre of the model are the latent variables (PRI = Price/Call rate, SVA = Service availability, BRA = Brand image, SVQ = Service quality, PRO = Promotion, UP = User perception) represented with circles, and towards the perimeter are manifest variables (PRI1...PRIn, SVA1...SVAn, BRA1...BRAn, SVQ1...SVQn, PRO1...PROn) represented with squares. The lines with an arrow in one direction show a hypothesized direct relationship between the variables. It should originate at the causal variable and point to the variable that is caused. For every endogenous variable, a residual term is added in the model. Generally, a residual term is a circle with the letter E written in it, which stands for error
Fig. 1 Structural Equation Model specification of relationship between user perception towards service quality (SVQ),
price or call rate (PRI), service availability (SVA), promotion (PRO) and brand image (BRI).
Based on the conceptual model in Fig 1, the following hypotheses were formulated. H01: Call rate (Price) has no significant influence on mobile phone user perception in selecting a mobile telecommunication service provider. H02: Service availability has no significant influence on mobile phone user perception in selecting a mobile telecommunication service provider. H03: Promotion has no significant influence on consumer perception in selecting a mobile telecommunication service provider. H04: Service quality has no significant influence on mobile phone user perception in selecting a mobile telecommunication service provider. H05: Brand image has no significant influence on mobile
phone user perception in selecting a mobile telecommunication service provider.
3. PREVIOUS STUDIES
Previous studies have found that satisfaction of customers can help the brands to build long and profitable relationships with their customers [14][23]. Customer satisfaction is defined as an "evaluation of the perceived discrepancy between prior expectations and actual performance of the product" [54][42]. According to Hennig-Thurau et al. [21], satisfaction of customers with products and services of a company is considered the most important factor leading toward competitiveness and success, and it is what makes customers loyal to one telecommunication service provider or the other. Turel et al. [55] however, observed that it is a common phenomenon that the services a brand offers and the price it charges actually determine the level of satisfaction among its customers, than any other measure. Matej et al. [35] noted that the number of subscribers and market share of a service operator are significant contributors to users’ selection of such a service provider.
In a study carried out by Wang and Lo [57] on comprehensive integrated framework for service quality, customer value, and customer satisfaction and behavioural intentions of customers in China’s mobile phone sector, they observed that competition between two mobile phone service providers is more intense than ever which is not only in ensuring network quality by a large amount of investment in network extension and upgrading but also in customer acquisition and retention by direct and indirect price reduction efforts. Price plays a vital role in the telecommunication market especially for the mobile telecommunication service providers [22]27]. This includes not only the buying price but also the call and rental charges. Generally, a price-dominated mass market leads to customers having more choices and opportunities to compare the pricing structures of diverse service providers. The success of the telecommunication sector in a marketplace largely depends on continuing usage and pricing policies which requires strategy in planning and management. Draganska and Jain [13] stated that a common strategy for a company extending its product or service is to differentiate offerings vertically. According to Leisen and Vance [33] service quality helps to create the necessary competitive advantage by being an effective differentiating factor. In addition, competitive advantage by firms is a value-creating strategy, simultaneously which is not implemented by any existing or potential competitors [9]. As a result, service quality can be used as a competitive advantage which is related to customers’ satisfaction and also leads to consumer loyalty and future purchases [24]. In particular, consumers prefer service quality when the price and other cost elements are held constant [10]. Service quality is essential and important for a telecommunication service provider company to ensure the quality service for establishing and maintaining loyal and profitable customer [17][59][33]. Wal et al. [56] stated that it has become a distinct and important aspect of the product and service offering, and a competitive advantage is sustained when other companies are unable to duplicate the benefits of this strategy. Lovelock [34] stated that this customer-driven quality replaced the traditional marketing philosophy which was based on products and process[29][50][51] Generally, service and product quality always lie in the minds of consumers depending on individual buying capacity, buying behaviour, demand, taste, and fashion criteria and obviously the competitive markets that provide significant differentiation strategies. Therefore, it seems a downright necessity for mobile telecommunication service providers to communicate directly with potential consumers to measure possible quality attributes. Johnson and Sirikit [24] state that service delivery systems have the ability to allow managers of company to identify the real customer feedback and satisfaction on their telecommunication service, since quality reflects customers’ expectations about a product or service. According to Wal et al [56] quality reflects the extent to which a product or service meets or exceeds consumers’ expectations. Customer perceptions of the quality of a service are traditionally measured immediately after the person has consumed the service.
Omotayo and Joachim [43] attempted to find the relationship between customers’ services on customer retention in telecommunication industry in Nigeria and found a strong relationship. They demonstrated the support for the application of customer service to enhance customer retention and further showed that the respondents had a positive impression towards their telecom company’s ability to meet their changing needs showing that respondents would likely stay with their telecom companies as long as their changing needs are satisfied. They concluded that if retention is not managed, customer’s loyalty may be lost. The quality of a product is also related to the availability of the product’s main functional features on one hand and a consumer’s experience-in-use of the other auxiliary features on the other [58]. A product’s main functional features are the sources of the primary benefits that the consumers expect to obtain when purchasing it. In general, consumers’ evaluations of a product’s overall quality are related to the availability of these features in comparison with the competition [39]. Satisfaction of customers is considered as the most important factor leading toward competitiveness and success [21]. According to Kim et al [26] customer satisfaction is customer’s reaction to the state of satisfaction, and customer’s judgement of satisfaction level. Customer satisfaction is very important in today’s business world as Deng et al [12] noted that the ability of a service provider to create high degree of satisfaction is crucial for product differentiation and developing strong relationship with customers. It is customer satisfaction that makes a customer loyal to one telecommunication service provider. Satisfaction of the customer can help a brand to build long and profitable relationships with its customers [14][53]. Promotion is concerned with ensuring that consumers are aware about the company/firm and its products that the organization makes available to them [47]. According to Kotler et al. [30] promotion is the activities that communicate about the products or services and its potential merits to the target customers and eventually persuade them to buy. They also noted that it is an important part for all companies, especially when penetrating new markets and making more or new customers. Rowley [49] considers promotion as one of the media which is used by organizations to communicate with consumers with respect to their product offerings. He identified the objectives of any promotional strategy as increase sales; maintaining or improving market share; creating or improving brand recognition; creating a favourable climate for future sales; informing and educating the market; creating a competitive advantage relative to competitor’s products or market position and improving promotional efficiency. Promotion goes beyond mere communication of product awareness but involves inducing the consumer to make a purchase.
Kotler and Armstrong [30] stated that promotion is when companies inform, persuade, or remind customers and the general public of its products. Promotions impact consumers’ purchasing behaviour and decisions towards that particular brand, especially during sales promotion period [15]. The impressions consumers have of a company extend well beyond the product or service the firm provides. Brand image is a mental image that reflects the way a brand is perceived, including all the identifying elements, the product or company personality, and the emotions and associations evoked in the consumer’s mind. It is defined as perceptions about a brand as reflected by the brand’s associations held in the consumer’s memory (Herzog, 1963); it is constituted by a series of pictures and ideas in people’s minds that sum up their knowledge of a brand [16]. A good brand image can increase brand loyalty as noted by Roth [48] who stated that the success of brand image strategies is contingent on their ‘fit’ with local market conditions. Research on brand equity and brand image management; Aaker and Kevin [1], Agoi [2], Keller [25] and Roth [48] suggests that marketers should develop brand image strategies before focusing on tactical marketing mix issues. In general, when the name of a brand is mentioned, the first idea that comes to the consumer’s mind is the corporate image associated with it. Thus, a brand image is also reflected by a consumer’s perception of the producing company reputation. Therefore, the image of a brand is mainly determined by corporate reputation, which means that corporate reputation can influence the performance of a branded product. Physically attaching a brand-name to a product costs little, so the brand’s capacity to command higher prices translates into substantial profit opportunities. Hence, a particular brand’s capacity to command higher prices is like a capital asset whose magnitude varies over time and that deserves to be managed carefully [28].
4. METHOD
4.1 Research Design and Sampling Procedures A cross sectional survey design was adopted to identify the determinants of choice of mobile service providers by users in Ibadan – a Nigerian municipality. The population cut across diverse groups, professions, institutions and age encompassing students’ in educational institutions, market women, artisans, workers in private and public institutions, businessmen, traders and customers in market places. A non-probabilistic sampling technique; convenience sampling was used to select 367 respondents from the study population.
4.2 Instrumentation A structured questionnaire was used to collect the required primary data from the mobile phone users. Questions on the constructs service quality, price, product availability and promotion were adapted from Rahman et al [45], while those on brand image were from Kort [28]. The questionnaire consisted of 8 sections. Section A contained two questions to determine how many mobile service providers a respondent uses.
Section B elicited the perception of respondents on the preferred service providers’ call rate, Section C ascertained the users’ preferred service based on providers’ service quality. Section D asked questions on service availability while E and F measured respondents’ perception on service providers’ promotional offers and brand image respectively. Then in section G, the respondents were asked to rank in order of preference the factors considered most important in selecting their service provider amongst the five major factors (price, service quality, service availability, promotion, and brand image) using a scale of one (1) to five (5). One (1) being the most preferred factor while five (5) the least. The last section (H) elicited respondents’ demographic characteristics such as age, gender, highest educational qualification, religion and occupation. The reliability coefficient for the constructs using Cronbach’s alpha were; service quality (α = 0.711), call rate (α =0.743), service availability (α =0.880), brand image (α = 0.799), promotion (α = 0.843). 4.3 Data Collection and Analyses The survey was conducted through face-to-face contact with mobile phone users. In all, 600 copies of the questionnaire were distributed but 367 (61.2%) copies were retrieved and used for analysis. First, a frequency distribution was carried out on all variables. Next, the variables used to measure the influencing factors (Price, Service quality, Service availability, Promotion, and Brand image) using the 4-point Likert scale were re-coded as (1=strongly disagree + 2=disagree) = (1=disagree), (3=strongly agree + 4=agree) = (2=agree). Next, Factor Analysis was performed to explore the underlying factors associated with all the items. The aim was to bring out the parsimonious few variables that can absorb the other variables. These variables were grouped into five namely; call rate (price) of the service provider, service quality, service availability, promotion, and the brand image of the service provider. Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity and the Kaiser Mayer Olkin (KMO) was applied to test the validity of the constructs and also measured the sampling adequacy by analysing the strength of association among the variables. The KMO helped to determine which variable was to be dropped from the model due to multicollinearity problem. It also determined the suitability of performing factor analysis. The value of KMO varies from 0 to 1. Regression analysis was used to determine the strength of association among the variables. The hypotheses were tested at 0.05% level of significance. 5. RESULTS 5.1 Demographic Characteristics of the Respondents
The demographic characteristics of the respondents revealed that males accounted for (37.6%), while (60.2%) were females. The largest proportion of the respondents was within the age group of 25-30 years. Most have tertiary education (89.1%). Those with secondary level education accounted for (5.7%) while only (1.4%) had primary education. Majority was Christian (81.7%), Moslem accounted for only (16.1%).
The public sector accounted for the largest number of respondents (40.9%) in the occupation category, whereas private sector accounted for (18.8%). Student respondents accounted for (34.3%), traders and the unemployed had the least proportion with (1.9%) and (1.6%) respectively. The respondents whose monthly income was less than =N= 20,000 topped with (39.2%) as against only (4.9%) of those that earn more than =N= 200,000 monthly. Those whose income fall between the range of =N=21,000 to =N=50,000 and =N=51,000 to =N=100,000 was (29.7%) and (11.7%) respectively. Only (8.2%) earn between =N=101,000 and =N=200,000. In the monthly expenditure on mobile services category, about (50%) of the respondents spend less than =N=2,000 monthly on mobile services.
Those that spend between =N=2,000 and =N=5,000 were about (34%) compared to (10.6%) that spend more than =N=5000 on mobile services monthly. 5.2 Factor Analysis Table 1 shows that the result of the Barlett’s Test of Sphericity and the KMO statistics for each group (call rate, service quality, service availability, promotion and brand image) were quite significant and hence, show a good measure of adequacy. Call rate had the least KMO value (0.546) and Brand image had the highest KMO statistics (0.808).
Table 1 KMO measure of Sampling Adequacy for the 5 constructs
To determine the minimum loading necessary to include an item in its respective constructs, items with loading of 0.50 or greater were acceptable. However, to narrow the factors, the Principal axis factoring was carried out on the variables in each of the constructs of service quality, service availability, call rate, brand image and promotion. The results in Table 1 show the dimensions that loaded into the five different factors.
5.3 Descriptive Analysis of Components Extraction and
Factor loadings Table 2 present the summary of the principal axis factoring extracted variables that explains users perception in selecting a mobile service provider with their factor loadings and the corresponding mean and standard deviation. From the table, “call rate does not have an impact on my choice of a network operator” has the highest mean score (1.75) compared to other factors within the group. “Call rate does not have an impact on my choice of a network provider” has the greatest deviation from the mean with a standard deviation of 0.453. There cumulative eigenvalues (0.725, 0.426, 0.598) accounted for (51.3%) of the total variation which is sufficient to represent the group.
Under service quality section, “Quality of service is just one of the reasons why I chose my service provider” has the highest mean score (1.87) with a standard deviation of (0.34), while “my network service provider is very assuring” has the least mean (1.74) and the highest standard deviation (0.438). “I chose my network provider strictly because of the quality of service it offers” has mean (1.79) and standard deviation of (0.408). The three components accounted for (57.368%) of the total variability and can be used to represent the entire group. In the service availability section, “I chose my network provider because its network coverage is available within the area I call” and “Product outlet of my service provider is hardly reachable” both had the least mean score (1.60) as well as the highest deviation from the mean (0.5), while “product service availability is as important to me as service quality” has the highest mean (1.74) and a (0.4) deviation from the mean score. Together the four components extracted accounted for (58.688%) of the total variability and is considered sufficient to represent that group.
Table 2: Components Extracted with Mean, Standard deviation and factor loadings
User Perception on Service Providers Attributes Factors
Mean Standard
Deviation
F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
Call Rate
Call rate was the only factor I considered 1.48 .500 .725
Call rate does not have an impact 1.29 .453 .426
Call rate was one of the factors I considered 1.75 .435 .598
Service Quality
Quality of Service is just one of the reasons 1.87 0.336 0.771
I chose provider because of quality service 1.79 0.408 0.802
My network service provider is assuring 1.74 0.438 0.938
Service Availability
Service availability important as service quality 1.74 .442 .827
Service availability is one of factors I considered 1.70 .458 .700
I chose provider because its network coverage 1.60 .490 .747
Service outlet provider is hardly reachable 1.60 .490 .844
Promotion
I bought SIM card provider not minding call rate. 1.13 .339 .898
Attractive promotional offer made me chose 1.37 .483 -.898
Brand Image
Brand image made me to choose my network 1.38 .486 .629
Hooked to provider because of the brand image. 1.31 .461 -.678
Popular brand is indication of good service 1.34 .475 -.839
In the Promotion section, two variables were extracted, “I bought the SIM card of my service provider not minding the call rate” has the least mean score (1.38) and the least deviation from the mean (0.339), while “attractive promotional offer made me to chose my service provider” has a mean score of (1.37) with standard deviation of (0.48). The two components accounted for about (55%) of the total variation and is therefore considered sufficient to represent the group. The Brand Image section has three factor loadings. “I am hooked to my service provider because of the brand image” has the least mean score (1.31) and standard deviation of (0.46). “Brand image made me to choose my network service provider”, has the highest mean score (1.38) and deviation from the mean (0.49). “Popular brand image is an indication of good service quality” has a mean (1.34) with a deviation from the mean (0.48). The three components together represented (56.5%) of the overall variability. This number is sufficient to represent the variables in that group.
6. TEST OF HYPOTHESES The results of test of hypotheses are presented in this section. Figure 2 depicts the full model of the 5 paths hypothesized. Price (.023), service availability (.037), service quality (.034) were significant at p < 0.05 while Promotion (.083) and Brand image (.155) were not.
H01: Call rate has no significant influence on mobile phone user perception in selecting a mobile telecommunication service provider.
The results in Figure 2 showed that Call rate (price) emerged as the most important factor that affects customers’ perception in selecting mobile operator. The model diagram shows that call rate (Price) has a direct effect on users’ perception in selection process of telecom services. Our results (r² = .023, p<0.05) shows the degree of significance. Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected at p > 0.000. H02: Service availability has no significant influence on mobile phone user perception in selecting mobile telecommunication service provider. The result (r² = 0.037, p<0.05) in Figure 2 showed that Service availability directly affects customers’ perceptions in selecting mobile telecommunication services provider. Therefore the null hypothesis is rejected at 0.5 level of significance, p > 0.000 and we therefore infer that service availability significantly influence users’ choice of mobile operators.
H03: Promotion has no significant influence on consumer perception in selecting mobile telecommunication service provider. The result in Figure 2 showed that Promotion does not have a significant effect on users’ intention in buying telecom service and therefore, no positive impact on the users’ perceptions in selecting a mobile operator. Thus we do not reject the null hypothesis (r² = 0.83, p > 0.05). H04: Service quality has no significant influence on mobile phone user perception in selecting mobile telecommunication service provider. Service quality emerged as the most important factor next to Call rate (price) that affects customers’ perception in selecting telecom service (see Figure 2). The study shows that service quality has positive impact on users’ perceptions. Therefore, we reject the null hypothesis and conclude that Service quality has a significant influence on users’ choice of a mobile operator. (r² = 0.034, p < 0.05).
H05: Brand image has no significant influence on mobile phone user perception in selecting mobile telecommunication service provider. The result revealed that brand image remains the least preferred (amongst other factors considered in this study) from the perspective of mobile users’ in selecting a mobile operator in the Nigerian telecommunication market (see Figure 2). The null hypothesis is therefore not rejected. (r² = 0.155, p > 0.05).
6. DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS Among all the significant variables, price was the most important among the respondents followed by service quality and service/product availability. The study showed that promotion and brand image were not “choice indicators” and hence, did not significantly influence users’ perception in selection of mobile operator. The next sections present a discussion of these findings in greater detail starting with service quality. Service Quality Findings showed that service quality significantly influenced users’ choice of a mobile operator in the Nigerian telecommunication market. A study by Wal et al [56] measured service quality at cellular retail outlets in the South African environment. The authors categorically focused on perception and expectation of service quality from the consumer’s perspective. Results in that study also showed that a significant relationship exists between the importance of a dimension to the mobile users and their perception about the service quality. The result of Rahman et al [45] on critical factors for choice of mobile service providers on Malaysian consumers also showed that service quality positively and significantly influenced the mobile phone user when choosing a telecom service. In line with the importance of service quality, Gustafsson et al [18] suggested that firms should concentrate on the improvement of service quality and charge appropriate fair price in order to satisfy and retain their customers. So, based on this positive coefficient of the service quality, this study concludes that there is a significant positive effect associated with service quality of a mobile telecoms operator in lieu of the perception of the mobile user.
Call Rate (Price) Findings showed that call rate charged by the telecoms operators can significantly influence mobile phone users to make switching decision. The special significance of price for the decision to purchase is as undisputed in the telecommunications sector as it is elsewhere. This is particularly true in the mobile telecommunication sector as available studies suggest. Rahman et al [45], in a similar study in the Malaysian telecommunication market, observed that price is a significant contributor in the decision of mobile users in selecting a mobile operator. A study on factors affecting customer satisfaction, by Hanif et al [20], in Pakistan, revealed that there is a high correlation between price fairness and customer satisfaction. A study on the choice of mobile operator carried out by Matej et al [35] in Slovia, while observing that the number of subscribers and market share have a significant positive impact on the probability of choosing a mobile operator, however observed that on-net and off-net call prices have a negative impact. Kollmann [27] also noted that the choice of the telecommunication service provider is often connected with purchasing a new end-user set, since the users consider the fixed connection costs and variable call charges. Furthermore, it is a common phenomenon that the services a brand offers and the price it charges actually determine the level of satisfaction among its customers, than any other measure [55]. Hence, we conclude that price has a significant positive impact on consumer perception in selecting telecommunication service provider in Nigeria. Service/Product Availability Findings also showed that mobile users would most likely prefer a mobile operator with good service and product availability to an operator that is deficient in the same. Users are increasingly becoming mobile and as such would prefer mobility in terms of products and services. Product quality from the marketer’s perspective is associated with specification, feature, function, or performance of a product. In general, consumer’s post-purchase or after-use evaluation of a product’s overall quality is positively related to the availability of the product’s main functional features on one hand and the consumer’s experience-in-use of other auxiliary features on the other hand. A product’s main functional features are the sources of the primary benefits that the users expect to obtain when purchasing a product [58]. According to Quelch and Hoff [44], consumer response to product quality also changes dynamically as experience builds up, information accumulates, and the cost of quality changes. Moreover, Nowlis and Simonson [39] and Zeithaml [59] show the consumers’ evaluations of a product’s overall quality are related to the availability of these features in comparison with the competition. However, our study shows that product quality and availability has a significant impact on consumer choice in selecting mobile telecommunication service provider.
Promotion It is interesting to observe that despite the huge amount spent on advertisement and promotional activities by the mobile telecommunication operators in Nigeria to drive profit vertically and remain competitive, this study reveals that promotion does not significantly impose on users perception in selecting a mobile operator. The finding of this study differ in this regard from that of Rahman et al [45], which reported that promotion significantly impacts on the Malaysian mobile user. The Nigerian mobile users differ significantly in their view of promotional offers by the mobile operators. The mobile users in Nigeria appear to be more price-sensitive than promotion-sensitive when selecting mobile telecommunication service provider. However, promotion has an impact on consumer’s perception in selecting mobile telecommunication service provider since it is used to communicate with the consumers with respect to product offerings. Promotion possesses a significant key role in determining profitability and market success. According to the findings of Alvarez and Casielles [5], promotional offer of a product states at the moment of purchase as an explanatory element of the process. Promotion is a tool that can help manufacturers and/or retailers in the achievement of their objectives. Immediate price reduction however, remains a more desirable technique that wields greatest influence on the brand choice process. Brand Image Amongst the indicators measured in this study, brand image was observed not to be significant in influencing users’ choice of a mobile operator. Although brand image did not significantly improve on users’ choice process, this researcher, however, observed that the mobile operators with the largest subscribers are those with popular brand. Matej [35] stated that network operator with the most users holds the greatest value for a new user. In this regard, this researcher notes that subscribers indirectly pays for this brand effects, though silently, since good brand and quality are often synonymous. According to Lee, [32] customers get satisfied to a brand more if they get all the needed services accumulated in that very brand. The author noted that if the users do not get their complaints considered properly, they start looking for other brands. Brand may not be significant in influencing a user’s choice. However, users remain sensitive to brand image than corporate image [45]. 7. CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND FUTURE
STUDIES This study examined the factors that played significant role in the users’ choice process. Empirical evidence shows that call rate remains the most significant of the factors considered in users’ perception when selecting a service provider while brand image is the least preferred. The findings could help mobile service operators in their operation and strategic plan of marketing and also provide them with indicators for maximum utilization of resources.
They could also reinforce the position of Nigerian Communication Commission (NCC), the telecommunication regulatory body in Nigeria in its commitment toward ensuring optimum user satisfaction, through policy guidelines that would address specifically the observed dimensions in this study. Also with the planned introduction of mobile number portability (NMP) in Nigerian telecoms market, a move that would favour service providers with the best customer satisfaction, findings from this study will provide them with indicators to focus their business and marketing strategies. Based on this background, the following recommendations are made:
1. The Nigerian Communication Commission should, by way of policy, assume the control and management of base stations from the network operators such that all mobile network operators would make use of same base stations but operate on different frequencies and pay rental fees to NCC or her designated agent. This would eliminate the high cost of building and maintaining base stations incurred by the various operators and consequently reduces operational cost.
2. The network operators should reduce their expenditure on promotional activities and brand building, but rather invest on network extensions, quality service delivery and product and services outlets infrastructures, while also concentrating on price reduction strategies as a way of increasing subscribers’ base.
3. With the planned introduction of Mobile Number Portability (MNP) by Nigerian Communication Commission (NCC), which favours mobile operators with the best customer satisfaction, the finding of this study would provide these operators with the indicators to focus their business and marketing strategies[38].
Further research effort could be made using a larger sample before any generalization could be made. This study did not observe the significance of demographic factors, hence further studies could help to unravel how demographic characteristics such as income, education, gender, etc could influence users’ perception toward selecting service providers. In addition, this study used only five factors to analyse users’ choice of mobile providers. No doubt, there might also be other factors that could impact on users’ perception. Further studies could thus focus on more indicators capable of influencing users’ perception.
REFERENCES
1. Aaker, D. A. and Kevin, L. K. (1990). Consumer Evaluations of brand extensions. Journal of
Marketing 54, 24-41.
2. Agoi, J. O. (2008). Mobile telecom boom works changes in Nigeria. http://www.chinapost.com.tw/business/africa/2008/08/25/171758/Mobile-telecom.htm. 5th September 2010.
3. Ahn, J. H., Han, S. P. and Lee, U. S. (2006). Customer
chain analysis: Chain determinants and mediation effects of partial defection in the Korean mobile telecommunications services industry. Telecommunications Policy 30, 552-568.
4. Ajala, I. (2005). GIS and GSM network quality
monitoring: A Nigeria Case study. Directions Magazine, 2005.
5. Alvarez, B. A. and Casielles, R.V. (2005). Consumer
Evaluations of Sales Promotion: The Effect on Brand Choice. European Journal of Marketing 39(2), 54-70.
6. Amusa, A. M. (2005). Consumer’s Behaviour in the
GSM Market. A Case Study of University of Ibadan
and Polytechnic Students. (Master’s degree project), Africa Regional Centre for Information Science, University of Ibadan, Nigeria, 52-54p.
7. Anderson, E. W., Fornell, C. and Mazvancheryl, S.K.
(2004). Customer Satisfaction and Shareholder Value, Journal of Marketing 68, 172-185.
8. Archibald, R. B., Haulman, C. A. and Moody, C. E. Jr.
(1983). Quality, Price, advertising, and published quality ratings, Journal of Consumer resources. 9(3),347-56.
9. Barney, J. B., (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained
Competitive Advantage, Journal of Management
17(3), 99-120.
10. Boyer, K. K. and Hult, G.T. (2005). Customer Behaviour in an Online Ordering Application: A Decision Scoring Model. Decision Science Journal
36(4), 569-598.
11. Business Monitor (2008). Business Monitor International. The Nigeria Telekommunikation Report 2008.
12. Deng, Zu., Lu, Y., Wie, K. K. and Zhang, J. (2009).
Understanding customer satisfaction and loyalty: An empirical study of mobile instant messages in China. International Journal of Information Management 30, 289-468.
13. Draganska, M. and Jain, D. C. (2003). Consumer Preferences and Product line Pricing Strategies: An Empirical Analysis, Conference Paper, Marketing Science Conference, Maryland, Available at: http://facultygsb.stanford.edu/draganska/PDF_Files/1linelength_FL61.pdf, Accessed on 28 November 2010.
14. Eshghi, A., Haughton, D. and Topi, H. (2007).
Determinants of customer loyalty in the wireless telecommunication industry. Telecommunication
policy 31(2), 93-106.
15. Freo, M. (2005). The impact of wal-mart supercenters on supermarket concentration in US metropolitan areas. Agricbusiness 17(1), 105-111.
16. Gensch, D. H. (1978). Image-Measurement
Segmentation. Journal of Marketing Research 15, 384-394.
17. Global Systems One (2008). Mobile Commerce:
Opportunities and Challenges. A GS1 Mobile Communication White Paper (internet) www.gs1.org. 4th October 2010.
18. Gustafssoon, A., Johnson, M. D. and Roos, I. (2005).
The effects of Customer Satisfaction, Relationship Commitment Dimensions, Triggers on Customer Retention. Journal of Marketing 69, 210-218.
(1992). Multivariate Data Analysis, 3rd Edition, Macmillan, New York. pp. 47-82.
20. Hanif, M., Sehrish, H., Adnan, R., (2010). “Factors
Affecting Customer Satisfaction”, International
Research Journal of Finance and Economics. 60 http://www.eurojournals.com/finance.htm Accessed on 20 October 2010.
21. Hennig-Thurau, T. and Klee, P. (1997). The Impact of
Customer Satisfaction and Relationship Quality on Customer Retention: A Critical Reassessment and Model Development. Psychology & Marketing 14(8), 737-764.
22. Herrmann, A., Xia, L., Monroe, K.B. and Huber, F.
(2007). The Influence of Price Fairness on Consumer Satisfaction: An Empirical Test in the Context of Automobile Purchases. Journal of
Product and Brand Management 16(1), 49-58.
23. Herzog, H. (1963). Behavioral Science Concepts for
Analyzing the Consumer. Marketing and the
Behavioural Sciences. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Incorporation. 76-86p.
24. Johnson W. C. and Sirikit, A. (2002). Service Quality in the Thai Telecommunication Industry: A tool for Achieving a sustainable Competitive Advantage. Management Decision Journal 40(7), 693-701.
25. Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and
managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of
Marketing 1(Fall/Winter), 85-103.
26. Kim, M. K., Park, M.C. and Jeong, D. H. (2004). The effects of customer satisfaction and switching barrier on customer loyalty in Korean mobile telecommunication services, Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute, School of Business, Information and Communications University, Yusong-gu, Hwaam-dong, Taejon 305-348, South Korea.
27. Kollmann, T. (2000). The Price /Acceptance Function:
Perspectives of a Pricing Policy in European Telecommunication Markets, European Journal of
Innovation Management 3(1), 7-14.
28. Kort, P. M. (2005). Brand Image and Brand dilution in the fashion industry. Tilburg University, Department of Econometrics and Operations Research & Center, Tilburg, The Netherlands and University of Antwerp, Department of Economics, Antwerp, Belgium, 2-5p.
29. Kotler, P. And Armstrong, G. (2003). Principles of
Marketing 11th ed. U.S.A: Prentice Hall Incorporation, 56p.
30. Kotler, P, Armstrong, G., Saunders, J. and Wong, V.
(1999). Principles of Marketing. Second Edition. New York: Prentice Hall Incorporation, 168p.
31. Lambert, D. R. (1980). Price as a quality signal: the
tip of the iceberg. Economics Inquiry 18(1),144- 50.
32. Lee, C., (2001). “Telecommunications Reforms in Malaysia”, A research paper supported by the Centre on Regulation and Competition at the Institute for Development Policy and Management, University of Manchester, http://www.cassey.com/fea2001-6.pdf, Accessed on 26 November 2010.
33. Leisen, B. And Vance, C. (2001). Cross-national
Assessment of service Quality in the Telecommunication Industry: Evidence from the USA and Germany. Management Services Quarterly 11(5), 307-317.
34. Lovelock, C. H. (1996). Services Marketing, 3
rd
Edition. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Incorporation, 47-82p.
35. Matej, S. and Nevenka, H. (2010). The choice of mobile operator in Slovenia. University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Economics, Slovenia.
36. Matej, S. and Nevenka, H. (2010). The choice of mobile operator in Slovenia. Universityof Ljubljana, Faculty of Economics, Slovenia Unpublished Article
37. NCC Press Release, (2007). Quarterly Summary of
Telephone Subscribers In Nigeria, (internet) http://www.ncc.gov.ng/. 19th September 2010.
38. NCC Press Release, (2011). Quarterly Summary Of
Telephone Subscribers In Nigeria, (internet) http://www.ncc.gov.ng/. 24th April 2011.
39. Nowlis, S. M. and Simonson, I. (1996). The Effect of
New Product Features on Brand Choice. Journal of
Marketing Resources 33(2), 36-46.
40. Ojo, O. A. (2005). Consumer Satisfaction in the GSM
Industry. (Master’s degree project), Africa Regional Centre for Information Science, University of Ibadan, Nigeria, 40-42p.
41. Olatokun, W. M. and Bodunwa, I. O. (2006) Global
System for Mobile Communications (GSM) Usage at the University of Ibadan: A Survey. The Electronic
42. Oliver, R. L. (1999). Whence Consumer Loyalty. The
Journal of Marketing, Fundamental Issues and
Directions for Marketing 63, 33-44.
43. Omotayo, O., Joachim, A.A., (2008). “Customer service in the retention of mobile phone Users in Nigeria”, African Journal of Business Management, 2(2) 26-31p.
44. Quelch, J. A. and Hoff, E. J. (1986). Customizing
global marketing Harvard Business Review 64, 59-68. 45. Rahman, S., Haque, A. and Ismail, S. A. (2010).
Exploring influencing factors for the selection of mobile phone service providers: A structural equational modelling (SEM) approach on Malaysian consumers. African Journal of Business Management
4(13), 2885-2898.
46. Roger, F. (2010). Nigeria rises (Internet). http://www.arabianbusiness.com/580722nigeriarises 9th February 2010.
47. Root, R. R. (1994). Entity Strategies for International
Markets. New York: Macmillan Inc., 115-129p.
48. Roth, M. S. (1995). The effects of culture and socioeconomics on the performance of global brand image strategies. Journal of Marketing Research 32, 163-175.
49. Rowley, J. (1998). Promotion and marketing
Communications in the Information Marketplace. Library Reference Journal 47(8), 383-387.
Insight and Managerial Implications from the Frontier”, Service Quality: New Directions in Theory
and Practice, Sage Publications, London.
51. Sjolander, R., (1992). Cross-cultural Effects of Price
on Perceived Product Quality. European Journal of
Marketing 26(7), 34-44.
52. Tella, A., Adetoro, N. and Adekunle, P. A. (2009). A Case Study of the Global System of Mobile Communication (GSM) in Nigeria. The Spanish
CEPIS society 5(3), 2-7.
53. Trebing, H. M. (2001). Emerging Market Structures and Options for Regulatory Reform in Public Utility Industries In: William, H. M. (Editor) Telecom
Consumer Satisfaction Formation: An Extension. Journal of Marketing Research 25, 204-12.
55. Turel, O. and Serenko, A. (2006). Satisfaction with
mobile services in Canada: An empirical investigation. Telecommunication policy 30(5, 6), 314-331.
56. Wal, R. W. E., Vander, P. A. and Bond, C. (2002).
Service Quality in a Cellular Telecommunications Company: A south African Experience. Managing
Services Quality 12(5), 323-335.
57. Wang, Y. and Lo, H. P. (2002). Service Quality, Customer Satisfaction and Behaviour Intentions: Evidence from China’s Telecommunication Industry. Information Journal 4(6), 50-60.
58. Yoon, E. Kijewski, V. (1997). Dynamics of the
Relationship between Product Features, Quality Evaluation, and Pricing. Pricing Strategy Practices 5(2), 45-60.
59. Zeithaml, V. A. (2000). Service Quality, Probability
and the Economic Worth of Customers: What We Know, and What We Need to Learn. Journal of
Dr Wole Michael Olatokun holds Master and PhD degrees in Information Science from the University of Ibadan, Nigeria. He teaches information science at the Africa Regional Centre for Information Science (ARCIS) in the
same university. His research interests include: information and communica¬tion technology (ICT) policy issues, Social Informatics, knowledge management, ICT for development, indigenous knowledge systems and e-governance. He can be contacted at: [email protected]
Nwone, Simeon Ambrose obtained a first degree in Computer Science from the University of Benin, and a Master of Information Science degree from the University of Ibadan, Nigeria. He has designed and implemented network and power solutions for major companies
such as British American Tobacco (BAT), FinBank, and Multichioce while working as a Network Manager with Synetics Technologies in Nigeria. His research interests cover information technology for policy development, global telecommunication, urban/rural divide in IT usage and indigenous knowledge management. Email: [email protected]
