1. ADOPTION OF SMARTPHONES IN INDIA:

Smartphones has become an important part of human life. With the increasing use of technology for communication, it is used by both individual and organizational people. In today’s modern life it plays an important role and is used by people at all levels across the world. Indian smartphone witnessed a growth of 20% in Q4 2019. More than 5 crores smartphones were shipped in India in the first three months of this year. (IDC, 2019). This indicates that adoption or switching of smartphone in India is very encouraging for phone marketers across the world. Mobile phone penetration in India was predicted to rise to 85-90% by 2020 from the levels of 65-75% in 2017. (Livemint, 2017) In addition to this a statistical website stated that the smartphone penetration rate in India in 2018 was 26% and predicted to increase to 36% approximately by the end of year 2022 out of the mobile phone users. (Statista, 2017). China will soon have 1.3 billion smartphone users, followed by India with close to 530 million users. (Indian Express, 2018). It can safely be interpreted that half of Indian mobile users have shifted to smartphones. To capture the remaining half, which falls in bottom of pyramid or laggards, marketers are offering smartphones with basic features.

This paper addresses the changing needs of existing smartphones users. Frequent changes in the operating system of the devices offer more and more high- end services like GPS, gaming, media and file sharing, battery life and so on. In this research switching behavior of existing smartphone users is analyzed.

2. PAST RESEARCHES IN THIS AREA:

New technology adoption is one research are which is drawing lot of attention of researchers globally. Roger model of diffusion, Technology Adoption Model (TAM) are some of the established concepts that explains the changing patterns in adoption of new technology. However, consumer behavior towards purchase or adoption of new technology is not explained by these models. Past and recent studies have highlighted on the factors that influence consumers while making purchase decision of new technology products. Some of the factors identified through extensive literature review were disposable income (Dalberg, 2017), promotions or discount (Shamaout 2016), need to appear unique (Husnain, 2016) changes in the features of new mobile phones (Karjaluoto et al, 2005) and the physical appearance, size and menu of the mobile phone (Ling 2006). Similarly, Qazi (2011) investigated buying and re-buying mobile purchase behaviour of 500 University students in Pakistan for adoption and consumption patterns. Consumer prefers service provider offering services to suiting to their requirements and features of a mobile phone. In addition to this an in-depth interview was done to identify the factors that influences the existing smartphone users to switch to different handset.

3. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK:

Based on the findings of literature review and interview done five factors identified that influence the users to switch were namely, disposable income, promotions/discounts, lifestyle, new technology/feature, functional condition and physical condition of smartphone. The conceptual framework given below is the diagrammatic repetition of the objective of the study.

The objectives of the study were to mainly identify the following:

0. Factors influencing the switching of smartphone by the users.

1. Usage of old handset after switching to different or new smartphone.

To achieve the objectives hypothesis and research question s were framed as shown in fig.1.

Self-Construct

Figure 1: Conceptual Framework

4. HYPOTHESES/RESEARCH QUESTION FOR THE STUDY:

· H1: Disposable income of smartphone user positively influences the user to switch.

· H2: Promotions or discounts offered positively influences the user to switch.

· H3: Lifestyle (frequently changing handset) of smartphone user positively influences the user to switch.

· H4: New technology/new feature(s) positively influences the user to switch.

· H5: Software issues of smartphone in use positively influence the user to switch.

· RQ1: What happens to the old smartphone once the user switches to new or different device?

5. METHODOLOGY:

The study was descriptive in nature and tried to find out the influence of various factors over the switching behavior of smartphone users from one handset to another. The scope of the study comprises of the people residing within NCR region i.e. Noida and Gurugram in India. The Sample size of the study included 10 retail outlets and 100 individuals selling and using smartphones respectively. The Non-Probabilistic- Judgmental sampling techniques were used for the study. The study was based on primary data and secondary data, which was collected with help of questionnaire, personal interviews, magazines, newspapers, articles, research projects etc. The descriptive statistics and Z-test was applied to test the hypotheses and extract the underlying factors affect switching behavior of smartphone users.

6. DATA ANALYSIS:

Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) technique computer software version 23.0 is used to conducted data analysis in this research. The results are then analyze

6.1 Demographic characteristics of respondents (Age, Gender and Profession):

Based on gender background, 53.4% of the respondents are male, whereas the percentage of female respondents is 46.6%. The majority of the respondents fall in the age group from 21-30 years old which recorded at 42.7%, followed by 30.1% for the age level of 31-40, 14% for the age level of 11-20 and by combining both only 14% for the age level fall under 41 to 50 above. Considering the occupations, 24.3% are businessmen/ entrepreneurs, 24.3% are service professionals, 24.3% are housewives, and 27.2% are college students.

6.1.1 Total number of respondents:

Total number of responses received was 108, out of which 5 responses were incomplete or invalid. The invalid responses were when respondent failed to qualify as he or she was not a smartphone user.

6.1.2 Age:

Figure 2: Age

The majority of the respondents fall in the age group from 21-30 years old which recorded at 42.7%, followed by 30.1% for the age level of 31-40, 14% for the age level of 11-20 and by combining both only 14% for the age level fall under 41 to 50 above

6.1.3 Profession:

Fig 3: Profession

Respondents were quite equally distributed as far as profession is concerned. Considering the occupations, 24.3% are businessmen/ entrepreneurs, 24.3% are service professionals, 24.3% are housewives, and 27.2% are college students.

6.1.4 How long respondent have been using Smartphone

One of the filtering questions was that for how long respondent have been using smartphone. There were 5 respondents whose responses were not considered further as they were either not using smartphone or they recently started using smartphone.

Fig 4: Respondent Using Smartphone

The pie chart clearly indicated that the majority of the people are using smartphones from last 4 or more i.e. 50%, followed by those who are using from last 2-3 years i.e. 20% which clearly indicated that majority of the people using smartphones for a long time. More than 85 % of respondents are using smartphone form more than 2 years.

6.1.5 Last Smartphone Purchased:

Fig.5: Last Smartphone Purchased

As indicated in literature review the frequency of switching the device is increasing rapidly, more than 50 percent of the respondent had purchased smartphone not more than a year ago. Considering the last purchase of smartphone, the majority of the people said that they purchased their last smartphone from 1-2 year ago i.e. 35%, followed by the people who purchased their last smartphone from 6 months to 1 year ago i.e. 31%, which clearly shows that people who are using smartphones from last 2-3 years, changing it annually.

6.1.6 Factors that Influenced User to Switch:

After the literature review and interviewing retailers, the factors that influence users to switch were namely new technology, functional issues, lifestyle related, increase in disposable income and promotional or discount schemes. The figure and table given below summarizes the influence of each factor over respondent.

Table 1: Influencing factors

F1	Because of New Feature/ Technology	65
F2	Functional Issues	42
F3	“Lifestyle” to change smartphone frequently	32
F4	Increase in the Disposable Income	6
F5	Promotion/Discount Offered	6

Considering the reason to buy the last smartphone, 63% people said it is because of new feature & technology they have switched to new device, followed by 41% who stated that it is because of functional condition (software or hardware related issue). More than 31% of respondent said that they switch because they have lifestyle to frequently switch to new device, who said it’s their lifestyle to frequently change. It was found that change in disposable income and promotion were not the popular factors that influenced users to switch.

6.1.7 No. of smartphones switched in last five years.

Table No. 2: of Smartphones Switched

No of Smartphones	Frequency	Percent	Cumulative Percent
1	11	10.7	10.7
2	29	28.2	38.8
3	20	19.4	58.3
4	18	17.5	75.7
5	8	7.8	83.5
More than 6	17	16.5	100
Total	103	100	100

The result stated that 28% respondent switched to 2 Smartphones followed by, 19% who switched to 3 Smartphones and 17% who switched to 4-6 smartphones in last five years.

6.1.8 Disposal of Old Smartphone:

One of the objectives was to study the disposal of the old device and what happens to that device. The summary of the response is given below in a image of bar graph

When asked about the usage of old smartphones, more than 40 percent of respondent stated that they it is either unused or they are not aware. Next popular choice was that they give it to their family members, followed by resale to individual or exchange it. This gives us interesting insight that with the increase in frequency of changing device, there will be lot of devices which is unused. This is waste of resource, which may eventually generate lot of e-waste in every household.

6.1.9 Price of Smartphone Currently in Use:

To understand the popular segment of smartphone in terms pf price, respondents were asked to select the price segment of device currently in use.

Image No. 2: Pie chart for Price of Device in Use

The majority of respondents fall in to Rs.10000 to Rs. 20000 segments followed by Rs. 5000 to Rs. 10000 and Rs. 20000 to Rs. 30000

6.1.10 Hypothesis Testing:

Given below is the summary of the responses for hypothesis testing. Questions were asked related to the factors that influence the most while switching to another handset.

Table No. 4: Values of variables

	Sample Mean (x)	Pop. Mean (X)	Sample Size (n)
H1	3.45	3	103
H2	3.1	3	103
H3	3.5	3	103
H4	4.21	3	103
H5	4.05	3	103

Analyzing the values obtained (as mentioned in the above table) sample mean was computed. Population mean was kept as “important” value of which was recorded as 3. Z test was applied using formula.

Where

x = Sample Mean

µ = Population Mean

σ= standard deviation

n = sample mean.

At 95% confidence the value of the z computed is mentioned in the table.

Table No. 5 : Z value for Hypothesis Testing

Hypothesis	Z Cal.	Z Crit.	Accepted/Rejected
H1	4.91	1.96	Reject Ho
H2	1.62	1.96	Do not reject Ho
H3	6.05	1.96	Reject Ho
H4	18.88	1.96	Reject Ho
H5	15.48	1.96	Reject Ho

Hypothesis 1:

There is no significance influence on the switching behavior of smartphone users with the change in disposable income. As per the rejection rule, when z-calculated is more than z-alpha we reject null hypotheses. The result shows that the z-calculated (4.91) for H1 is more than the value of alpha (1.96). Hence, we reject the null hypotheses and stated that there is a significance influence on the switching behavior of smartphone users with the change in disposable income.

Hypothesis 2:

There is no significance influence on the switching behavior of smartphone users with the increase use of promotions/discounts. As per the rejection rule, when z-calculated is more than z-alpha we reject null hypotheses. The result shows that the z-calculated (1.62) for H2 is less than the value of alpha (1.96). Hence, we do not reject the null hypotheses and stated that there is no significance influence on the switching behavior of smartphone users with the increase use of promotions/ Discounts

Hypothesis 3:

There is no significance influence on the switching behavior of smartphone users with the change in lifestyle. As per the rejection rule, when z-calculated is more than z-alpha we reject null hypotheses. The result shows that the z-calculated (6.05) for H3 is more the value of alpha (1.96). Hence, we reject the null hypotheses and stated that there is a significance influence on the switching behavior of smartphone users with the change in lifestyle.

Hypothesis 4:

There is no significance influence on the switching behavior of smartphone users with the change in new technology/features. As per the rejection rule, when z-calculated is more than z-alpha we reject null hypotheses. The result shows that the z-calculated (18.88) for H4 is more the value of alpha (1.96). Hence, we reject the null hypotheses and stated that there is a significance influence on the switching behavior of smartphone users with the change new technology/features.

Hypothesis 5:

There is no significance influence on the switching behavior of smartphone users with the changing functional conditions. As per the rejection rule, when z-calculated is more than z-alpha we reject null hypotheses. The result shows that the z-calculated (15.48) for H5 is more the value of alpha (1.96). Hence, we reject the null hypotheses and stated that there is a significance influence on the switching behavior of smartphone users with the changing functional conditions.

7. FINDINGS:

After the comprehensive review of literature and pilot study, factors identified that influence the switching behavior of smartphone user were namely disposable income, promotions/discounts, lifestyle, new technology or new features and functional issues in smartphone in use. Apart from these factors some of the other factors identified were phone received as a gift and device lost. But the percentage of respondents was too small to consider it for further analysis.

Out of all the factors identified, it was found that respondents didn’t agree that promotion or discounts were significant factor in switching from one smartphone to another. However, respondents did mention that discount and promotion was significant factor in finalizing the brand of smartphone they intended to purchase. Hence it can be concluded that promotion and discounts offered have no significant effect on consumers mind to switch to another smartphone. Rest all the factors were found significant. However the strength of significance varied. In decreasing order the most significant factors were (i) New Technology/new feature (ii) Software issues in smartphone in use followed by (iii) Lifestyle and lastly (iv) Increase in disposable income.

The only research question of the study was to understand the post purchase behavior of consumer towards disposal of old handset. Interesting findings have emerged from the study. Majority of respondents were of the opinion that it is kept unused. The next popular response was that it is given to sibling, wife or any other family member to be used further. The next popular option was smartphone being used simultaneously with new smartphone. The second last option was availing the exchange offer scheme. The last option was that they trash it or dispose the older handset. It is important to highlight here that the rate at which consumers are switching to newer handset has increased significantly. The volume of unused handset will increase proportionately. The volume of e-waste especially in terms of rejected smartphones may cause some ecological imbalance in future. Marketers should assert more on recycling of rejected handsets as more and more unused devices would be generated by every household in future.

8. REFERENCES:

1. Agarwal, V. (2017, 11 24). Economic TImes. Retrieved from economictimes.indiatimes.com: //economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/61781192.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

2. Ahmed, I., and Qazi, T. F. (2011). Mobile phone adoption & consumption patterns of university students in Pakistan. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(9).

3. DALBERG: www.dalberg.com. (2017, 07 1). Retrieved from Dalberg Advisors: https://www.dalberg.com/our-ideas/accelerating-affordable-smartphone-ownership-emerging-markets

4. DESK, T. (2017, 8 16). The Indian Express. Retrieved from indianexpress.com: https://indianexpress.com/article/technology/mobile-tabs/indian-smartphone-market-shows-signs-of-revival-samsung-still-no-1-xiaomi-no-2-4799077/

5. Flannery, R. (2015, 4 9). FORBES. Retrieved from www.forbes.com: https://www.forbes.com/sites/russellflannery/2015/04/09/xiaomi-breaks-world-record-for-smartphone-sales-in-a-day/#64a97b425609

6. Husnain. (2015-16). Impact of Lifestyle on Brand Preferences (Genuine versus Counterfeits Smartphones). Journal of Business Administration Research, 30,31.

7. Indian Express. (2017, 8 16). Retrieved from indianexpress.com: http://indianexpress.com/article/technology/mobile-tabs/indian-smartphone-market-shows-signs-of-revival-samsung-still-no-1-xiaomi-no-2-4799077/

8. International Data Corporation (IDC), 2018: https://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prAP44210918

9. Innovations, I. (2017). Economic TImes. Retrieved from //economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/59892542.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

10. Iyengar, R. (2017, 9 28). CNNBusiness. Retrieved from money.cnn.com: https://money.cnn.com/2017/09/26/technology/india-mobile-congress-market-numbers/index.html

11. Karjaluoto H., Karvonen J., Kesti M., Koivumäki T., Manninen M., Pakola J., Ristola A., and Salo J. (2005). Factors Affecting Consumer Choice of Mobile Phones: Two Studies from Finland. Journal of Euromarketing, Vol. 14(3), pp. 59-82

12. Kaushal, S. K and Rakesh Kumar.(2016) "Factors Affecting The Purchase Intension Of Smartphone: A Study Of Young Consumers In The City Of Lucknow". Pacific Business Review International 1-16. Print.

13. Ling, W. Hwang and G. Salvendy (2006). Diversified users’ satisfaction with advanced mobile phone features, Universal Access in the Information Society, 5(2), 239-249.

14. Liu. (n.d.). Economic Web Institute. Retrieved from www.economicswebinstitute.org: https://www.economicswebinstitute.org/essays/mobilefin.pdf

15. Neilson and Mcleod, M. M. (2005, January). www.researchgate.net. Retrieved from Research Gate: Research https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249649354_Conceptual_Paper_Factors_Affecting_the_Demand_of_Smartphone_among_Young_Adult

16. Network, O. (2017, 5 17). LIVEMINT. Retrieved from linkmint.com: http://www.livemint.com/Consumer/zxupEDYD560LJrnoRxcn4L/Mobile-phone-penetration-in-India-set-to-rise-to-8590-by-2.html?utm_source=scroll&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=scroll

17. Rahim, Azira et al. "Factors Influencing Purchasing Intention Of Smartphone Among University Students". Procedia Economics and Finance 37 (2016): 245-253. Web.

18. Sanket Vijayasarathy. (2017, 9 22). Gadget360. Retrieved from www.gadget360.ndtv.com: https://gadgets.ndtv.com/mobiles/news/flipkart-big-billion-days-sale-record-1-3-million-smartphones-sold-1753705

19. Shamout, M. D. (2016, January). ijbssnet. Retrieved from ijbssnet.com: https://ijbssnet.com/journals/Vol_7_No_1_January_2016/9.pdf

20. Solomon A. Keelson, T. P. (2012). Factors Affecting Consumer Choice Of Multiple Mobile Services. Global Journal Of Business Research, Volume 6, 59.

21. Statista. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/467163/forecast-of-smartphone-users-in-india/

22. Statista. (2018). Retrieved from statista.com: https://www.statista.com/statistics/257048/smartphone-user-penetration-in-india/

23. Uddin, M. R. (2014, 6 2). Factors Affecting Customers’ Buying Decisions Of Mobile Phone: A Study On Khulna City, Bangladesh. International Journal of Managing Value and Supply Chains (IJMVSC) Vol.5, 22. Retrieved from airccse.org: http://airccse.org/journal/mvsc/papers/5214ijmvsc03.pdf

24. Zenith. (2017, 10 16). Indian Express. Retrieved from indianexpress.com: http://indianexpress.com/article/technology/india-set-to-have-530-million-smartphone-users-in-2018-study-4893159/

Received on 29.09.2021 Modified on 18.12.2021

Asian Journal of Management. 2022;13(2):139-144.

DOI: 10.52711/2321-5763.2022.00025

	Not at Important (1)	Little Important (2)	Important (3)	Fairly Important (4)	Very Important (5)
Disposable Income	6	14	22	50	11
Promotion/Discount	2	21	53	19	8
Lifestyle	4	16	26	39	18
New features/Technology	2	3	10	44	44
Functional Issues	0	1	21	53	28