The article “Identifying Customer Requirements for location-based Services” by Matthias Möller, Sascha Vukovic, Jonathan Landgrebe aims to explore strategies that can be effectively used in the early development phase of location-based mobile technologies. They define location-based services as those providing location-specific information additionally tailoring it to user characteristics and personal details. Some examples of such services could be car navigation or tourist tour planning (Schiller & Voisard, 2004). This technology can significantly reduce user effort in finding information that is specific to his/her current location and time. Successful implementation of these strategies, according to the authors, could help companies to adapt customer orientation and to innovate in a way that would best respond to current needs of the users and achieve higher profits (Zairi & Duggan, 1999).
The research described in the article follows an Iterative four-step learning cycle outlined by Thomke (1998). In the first stage, “the design”, information was mainly collected from scenario analyses and mock-ups. The second “build” phase included rapid prototyping technique that used the findings of stage 1 and combined them with the technology evaluated. In the next step, the experiment was conducted with 20 candidates that were different in terms of gender, age and professional background. However, in order to facilitate the analysis and to get a better insight into the topic researchers selected mostly candidates with technical background. The “analysis” phase included the evaluation of the project according to Kano model by classifying user requirements into “must-be”, “one-dimensional”, “indifferent” and “reverse” based on the answer frequency and customer satisfaction coefficient (an index that measures customer satisfaction increase as a certain requirement is fulfilled). Such approach could help providers of location-based services understand what features of their products should be emphasized during the development phase, while avoiding investment into the features that lead to customer dissatisfaction.
The article by Möller, Vukovic, and Landgrebe makes an important contribution into our understanding of the way research can be don’t in the areas, where demand is “sticky”, therefore the findings will be hard to generalize and to transfer to other areas. The research is further complicated by the need of service providers to anticipate the needs of the clients rather than to follow them, therefore it is crucial to ensure that even latent demand is identified and met (Young & Pagoso, 2008). In order to address both the “stickiness” of demand and the need to work with customers on formulating product characteristics the authors used Iterative User and Manufacturer-Based Design introduced by Eric von Hippel (von Hippel, 2005). Bearing this framework in mind, Möller, Vukovic, and Landgrebe provide readers with a structured approach to the research question and developed a coherent an logical structure that initiates with problem definition and discussion and ends with a discussion of the potential research limitations as well as of some future research areas.
Although the authors critically evaluate their studies in the end of the paper, the limitations analysis could be further expanded to include some suggestion for further improvement.
Firstly, although the ideas behind Iterative User and Manufacturer-Based Design are extensively used in the articles, the authors do not elaborate on the alternative methods to develop research and innovation process as suggested by von Hippel. This could give readers a deeper understanding of the specific features of location-based services that make it necessary to seek for new ways to develop research in the field. Furthermore, clear definition of the “sticky” needs as well as more detailed discussion of the characteristics of sticky demand would facilitate understanding of the research by the readers, who do not have extensive prior knowledge in the field. Secondly, there are certain assumptions made in the article that may not necessarily hold true in the real life. Thus, the article suggests that the fulfilment of attractive and must-be requirements will necessarily foster profitable relations and lead to customer loyalty. Although this conclusion seems logical, there are a number of exogenous factors, such as demand elasticity and the cost of introducing new features that may alter the effect of new characteristics. Thus, if consumers will have to pay extra for location-based features they may decrease consumptions, thus lowering profitability.
Several limitation of the research methodology make it hard to generalize the results obtained. As it is already mentioned in the article, the user sample selected for the experiment consisted of people, who had technical background and prior experience with location-based services. Therefore, the results in terms of characteristics desirability must have been rather biased. Thus, some of the features that are considered a “must have” for sophisticated users may be just attractive or even indifferent for less experienced ones.
Moreover, new users may value other aspects of the service , such as “buddy service”, therefore limiting innovation scope to include only the features demanded by users with advanced technical knowledge may limit the satisfaction of the much wider user group, who have no prior technical experience. Another point worth consideration is the status of technology used for the experiment. As the idea of rapid prototyping is to allow users to experience new technology first-hand, the quality of the offered prototype may be far below that of the final product. Therefore, initial problems with using the new service may lead to frustration, thus the final customers’ opinions will not reflect the real utility of the final product.
The article could be further improved if the authors developed in greater details the implications that rapid prototyping and Iterative User and Manufacturer-Based Design may have on the location-based service industry. In particular, some discussion of the potential replication of the experiment for other services could help to enhance the value of the article for service providers. Moreover, some discussion of the dynamism of the industry that makes it hard to draw conclusions and to develop long-term product development strategies could help to evaluate the research more critically.
Despite the limitations of the research by Möller, Vukovic, and Landgrebe discussed above the article makes a significant contribution into the research of location-based services, which can be used both for further research and for practical application by service providers.
References
Schiller, J., & Voisard, A. (2004). Location-based services. San Franciso, CA: Elsevier. von Hippel, E. (2005, May). User Learning, "Sticky Information," and User-based Design. # WP 3815-95
Young, F. C., & Pagoso, C. M. (2008). Principles of marketing. (1st ed.). Sampaloc, Manila: Book Store.
Zairi, M., & Duggan, R. (1999). Best Practice. Process Innovation Management. Reed Educational and Professional Publishing.
