llustrative Example for 

article review
 
Article Reviewed:Matthias, M
.,
Sascha, V., & Jonathan, L. (2014). Identifying Customer Requirements for location-based Services.

The article
“Identifying
Customer
Requirements for location- based Services” by Matthias
Möller, Sascha Vukovic, Jonathan Landgrebe (2014 )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 additionallytailoring it to user characteristics and
personal details. Some examples of such services could becar navigation or tourist
tour planning (Schiller & Voisard, 2004). This technology cansignificantly reduce
user effort in finding information that is specific to his/her current locationand
time. Successful implementation of these strategies, according to the authors,
could helpcompanies to adapt customer orientation and to innovate in a way that
would best respond tocurrent needs of the users and achieve higher profits (Zairi
& Duggan, 1999).The article by Möller, Vukovic, and Landgrebe makes an
important contribution into ourunderstanding 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 furthercomplicated by the need of service providers to anticipate the needs of
the clients rather than tofollow 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 andManufacturer-Based Design introduced by Eric von Hippel
(von Hippel, 2005). Bearing thisframework in mind, Möller, Vukovic, and
Landgrebe provide readers with a structured approachto the research question and
developed a coherent an logical structure that initiates with problemdefinition and
discussion and ends with a discussion of the potential research limitations as
wellas of some future research areas.Although the authors critically evaluate their
studies in the end of the paper, the limitationsanalysis could be further expanded
to include some suggestion for further improvement.Firstly, although the ideas
behind Iterative User and Manufacturer-Based Design are extensivelyused in the
articles, the authors do not elaborate on the alternative methods to develop
researchand innovation process as suggested by von Hippel. This could give
readers a deeperunderstanding of the specific features of location-based services
that make it necessary to seekfor 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
facilitateunderstanding of the research by the readers, who do not have extensive
prior knowledge in thefield. Secondly, there are certain assumptions made in the
article that may not necessarily holdtrue in the real life. Thus, the article suggests
that the fulfilment of attractive and must-berequirements will necessarily foster
profitable relations and lead to customer loyalty. Althoughthis conclusion seems
logical, there are a number of exogenous factors, such as demand elasticityand the
cost of introducing new features that may alter the effect of new characteristics.
Thus, ifconsumers 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 ofpeople, 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
advancedtechnical knowledge may limit the satisfaction of the much wider user
group, who have no priortechnical experience. Another point worth consideration
is the status of technology used for theexperiment. 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 implicationsthat
rapid prototyping and Iterative User and Manufacturer-Based Design may have
on thelocation-based service industry. In particular, some discussion of the
potential replication of theexperiment 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 drawconclusions and to develop
long-term product development strategies could help to evaluate theresearch more
critically.Despite the limitations of the research by Möller, Vukovic, and
Landgrebe discussed above thearticle makes a significant contribution into the
research of location-based services, which can beused both for further research
and for practical application by service providers.
Compiled by: Muhammed Yismaw, Lecturer in Accounting and
FinanceEmail: muhyis39690@gmail.com 
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.

Read more at: https://www.wowessays.com/free-samples/example-of-article-review-on-identifying-

customer-requirements-for-location-based-services/