 Profiling
Mobile Phone Users
By Fiona Mathieson
Last month's article entitled ‘Mapping
Success Across Space’ discussed how
understanding the ‘space’ and context
in which an individual uses their mobile phone could
aid companies in promoting new functions and services
more successfully. There is however a further dimension
to this argument – who is the mobile phone
user?
Understanding whom the individual at the end of
the phone is, and what their usage patterns are, would
enable organisations to promote increased and more
varied use, and therefore increase the average user
spend.
Within our research we identified three distinctive
user groups or profiles; ‘Cyborgs’, ‘Prosthetics’
and ‘Attached but Unattached’.
Cyborgs are simply defined as the generations who
can’t remember life without a mobile phone.
It is part of the fabric of their lifestyle. It is
organically connected to their work, home and social
lives, each space would not be complete without it.
They see the phone as being part of the self and functioning
would be virtually impossible it if was not present,
it would compare to trying to function without a limb.
In fact Cyborgs have frequently compared the loss
of a mobile phone to bereavement
Prosthetics are marginally less reliant or attached
to the mobile phone. They are aware of the possibilities
of life without the device – although this would
not be favourable. They perceive the mobile as an
essential social tool but are less reliant upon it
within their working life. It is seen as an extension
of themselves as opposed to being part of them.
The final typology, ‘Attached but Unattached’
are quite different from the others. They do have
a use for their mobile phone within their life, but
they have no real sense of attachment to it, and in
no way is it a representation of themselves. This
grouping would be the most likely to be without their
mobile phone – and the most likely to use it
for voice only.
So, who makes up each of these groups? Analysis of
the Cyborg group in particular revealed that we are
unable to use traditional demographics to define them.
Although we know that 46% of Cyborgs are aged between
25 and 34 years old, and 54% are male, it is factors
such as length of ownership and volume of use that
must be considered in order to truly define them and
therefore understand their behaviour and how they
become attached.
For example, 71% of Cyborgs (as opposed to 59% of
Prosthetics) have had a mobile phone for longer than
3 years. 89% of Cyborgs have their phone switched
on 24 hours a day; this figure reduces by 10% when
looking at the Prosthetic group. Meanwhile, only 21%
of Prosthetics would consider themselves heavy users
compared to 34% of Cyborgs.
Therefore we can assume that greater and more varied
use of the mobile phone forms greater reliance and
attachment. Each user initially begins in the ‘attached
but unattached’ group, and as their use and
experience increases, so will their attachment and
need for the device. Therefore it is highly likely
that an ‘Attached but Unattached’ will
become a ‘Prosthetic’, and a ‘Prosthetic’
will become a ‘Cyborg’. And as was evident
within the qualitative research, individuals are surprised
at how much, and how easily, they come to need their
mobile phone and progress to the next level of reliance
and attachment.
Due to their increase in use and varieties of functionality,
it is within the Cyborg group that the uptake of new
functionality, or new services, are the most likely
to succeed.
What we must work on as organisations, therefore,
is applying the understanding of these groups to our
own customer base – nurturing Prosthetics into
Cyborgs, developing functions and services that may
support and speed up this move. Finally we need to
link this understanding to that of location, emotion
and space, as discussed last month.
|
FEEDBACK