Exploring The Factors Affecting Purchasing Intention of Smartphone

INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF VIETNAM
SCHOOL OF BUSINESS Independence - Freedom - Happiness
ASSURANCE QUALIFIED THESIS
Students Name: Nguyen Thanh Trung Hieu

Student ID: MBA05010
Title of Thesis: EXPLORING THE FACTORS AFFECTING PURCHASE
INTENTION OF SMARTPHONE: A STUDY OF OFFICE
WORKERS IN HOCHIMINH CITY, VIETNAM
Advisor:
I assure that the content of this thesis has been qualified all requirements for a
research paper and able to participate in the final thesis defense.
Approved by
Dr. Pham Hong Hoa

EXPLORING THE FACTORS AFFECTING PURCHASE INTENTION OF
SMARTPHONE: A STUDY OF OFFICE WORKERS IN HOCHIMINH
CITY, VIETNAM
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of
MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
In International Business
By
Mr. Nguyen Thanh Trung Hieu
ID: MBA05010
International University - Vietnam National University HCMC
September 2014
SMARTPHONE: A STUDY OF OFFICE WORKERS IN HOCHIMINH CITY,
VIETNAM
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of
MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
In International Business
by
Mr. Nguyen Thanh Trung Hieu
ID: MBA05010
International University - Vietnam National University HCMC
September 2014
Under the guidance and approval of the committee, and approved by all its members,
this thesis has been accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree.
Approved:
---------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------
Chairperson Advisor: Dr. Pham Hong Hoa
---------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------
Committee member Committee member
---------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------
Committee member Committee member
Acknowledge
This study would not have been completed without the kind guidance and the support
of my supervisor, my family and friends.
First of all, I would like to express my profound gratitude and appreciation to my
supervisor Dr. Pham Hong Hoa for her valuable guidance, advices and
recommendations throughout this research. Thank you for your kind support every time
I am in need for consultation.
I would like to express my great appreciation to all the teachers of the Masters program
in the International University, who imparted their knowledge and experience to me
during the past two years.
I would like to give special thanks to my beloved family which has been my
inspiration throughout the past time and always been the endless source of joy in my
life.
It is also my pleasure to have the opportunity to study with classmates from MBAIU05
who have shared with me their impressive knowledge and skills during the challenging
courses of the MBA program.
Finally, I would like to thank the members of the Examination Committee for taking
time and giving valuable comments so that I could improve this thesis.
Plagiarism Statements
I would like to declare that, apart from the acknowledged references, this thesis
either does not use language, ideas, or other original material from anyone; or has not
been previously submitted to any other educational and research programs or
institutions. I fully understand that any writings in this thesis contradicted to the above
statement will automatically lead to the rejection from the MBA program at the
International University Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City.

Copyright Statement
This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is
understood to recognize that its copyright rests with its author and that no quotation
from the thesis and no information derived from it may be published without the
authors prior consent.
Nguyen Thanh Trung Hieu/MBA05010/2011-2014

Table of Contents
Chapter 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Research Background................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Research Problems .................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Research Questions ................................................................................................... 3
1.4 Research Objectives ................................................................................................... 3
1.5 Research scope and limitation ................................................................................... 3
1.6 Significant of the Research ........................................................................................ 4
1.7 Research Methodology .............................................................................................. 4
1.8 Structure of Research ................................................................................................ 5
Chapter One: Introduction ................................................................................... 5
Chapter Two: Literature review ........................................................................... 5
Chapter Three: Research Methodology ............................................................... 5
Chapter Four: Data Analysis and Findings ............................................................ 5
Chapter Five: Conclusion...................................................................................... 5
Chapter 2. Literature Review ................................................................................................. 6
2.1 Dependent Variable ................................................................................................... 6
Purchase intention ............................................................................................... 6
2.2 Independent variable ................................................................................................. 7
Price...................................................................................................................... 7
Brand .................................................................................................................... 8
Compatibility ........................................................................................................ 9
Product Feature ................................................................................................. 10
Relative Advantage ............................................................................................ 11
Social Influences ................................................................................................. 11
2.3 Review of relevant theory........................................................................................ 12
Diffusion of innovations ..................................................................................... 12
Social Identity Theory......................................................................................... 13
Theory of Materialism ........................................................................................ 14
2.4 Proposed Theoretical Framework............................................................................ 15
2.5 Hypothesis Development ......................................................................................... 15
Chapter 3. Methodology ...................................................................................................... 17
3.1 Research design ....................................................................................................... 17
3.2 Data collection methods .......................................................................................... 17
Primary data ....................................................................................................... 17
Secondary data................................................................................................... 18
Sampling design ................................................................................................. 18
Sampling Technique ........................................................................................... 19
Research instrument .......................................................................................... 20
3.3 Data analysis ............................................................................................................ 24
Descriptive statistics........................................................................................... 24
Reliability test ..................................................................................................... 24
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) ....................................................................... 24
Pearson Correlation Coefficient Test ................................................................. 25
Multiple regression analysis ............................................................................... 25
Chapter 4. DATA ANALYISIS AND Findings ........................................................................... 26
4.1 Sample description .................................................................................................. 26
Sample ................................................................................................................ 26
Demographic profile .......................................................................................... 26
4.2 Descriptive statistics ................................................................................................ 30
4.3 Cronbachs alpha reliability test .............................................................................. 33
4.4 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) ............................................................................ 36
4.5 Pearson Correlation Coefficient ............................................................................... 40
4.6 Multiple Regression Analysis ................................................................................... 43
4.7 Test of Hypothesis.................................................................................................... 45
Chapter 5. CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................... 50
5.1 Conclusion ................................................................................................................ 50
5.2 Practical implication ................................................................................................. 51
5.3 Limitation and further recommendation ................................................................. 52
Table 1 - Coded items of measurement scale .............................................................. 24
Table 2 - Rules of Thumb about Correlation Coefficient ............................................ 25
Table 3 - Demographic of Respondents....................................................................... 27
Table 4 - Crosstab between age and average income of respondents .......................... 29
Table 5 Descriptive statistics of respondents ............................................................ 31
Table 6 - Cronbach's Alpha rule based on George and Mallery .................................. 33
Table 7 - Reliability test for consumers purchase intention on smartphone .............. 33
Table 8 Reliability test of Brand (1st run) ................................................................. 34
Table 9 - Reliability test of Brand (2nd run) ................................................................. 35
Table 10 - Reliability test of Brand (3rd run) ............................................................... 36
Table 11 - The final table of Cronbachs alpha reliability test .................................... 36
Table 12 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) for independent variables ................. 38
Table 13 Group of EFA ............................................................................................ 39
Table 14 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) for independent variables ................. 39
Table 15 - Pearson Correlation Testing ....................................................................... 41
Table 16 - Multiple regression testing ......................................................................... 44
Table 17 - Reliability Test of Respondents.................................................................. 69
Figure 1 - Diffusion of innovations model. Rogers, E.M. (1995) ............................... 13
Figure 2 - Conceptual model: Factors affect purchase intention of smartphone ......... 15
Figure 3 - Sex of Respondents ..................................................................................... 27
Figure 4 - Age of Respondents .................................................................................... 28
Figure 5 - Average income of respondents .................................................................. 28

Abstract
In a world of digital devices, people require more convenient and powerful gadgets on
hand to support for their daily works as well as their need for entertainment.
Smartphone is invented to fulfill those demands, furthermore, provided a most compact
assistant in the pocket. While replace some simple task of work from the traditional
computers, smartphone also play a vital role in peoples lifestyle. This leads to a
booming in the smartphone industry while more and more people want to own one
smartphone. Nevertheless, it is a fact that there are too many brand of smartphone
found at the current, making the process of choosing a smartphone become more
complicated.
The study aim to explore the factors affecting purchase intention of smartphone among
the office workers in Hochiminh City. The initial factors include: Price, Brand, Relative
Advantage, Compatibility, Product Features, Social Influence and Purchase Intention.
218 respondents have provided data for the study. The process of collecting is online
surveys via the Qualtrics electronic form using likert scale. The data was analyzed
through SPSS 20. The results of this research were unhide base on answering the
research questions.
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Research Background
Since the introduction of 1st IPhone generation, the consumer has inherited a rapid
innovation by smartphone manufacturers. Nowadays, smartphone is considered as a
must-have stuff by most urban persons. Thanks to its fabulous features, smartphone
users may experience things out of communicating: browsing webs, enjoying medias,
playing games, checking emails, using as a navigator, participating in social sites and
so on (Qiang Xu, 2011). In the other hands, smartphone is also named as an "indicator
of status, prestige and lifestyle" (Mohd Azam Osman, 2012). That leads to a trend of
switching from feature phone to smartphone.
It is a normal sense to see one working at office using a smartphone checking their
emails, reading feeds on their Facebook. From a C.E.O to an apprentice, they all
maintain a regularly online status throughout a day with office Wifi or broadband cell
signal. A recent survey conducted by Google an Ipsos Media CT in Vietnam (2013)
indicated that: 70 percent of interviewees using their smartphone daily in past seven
days, while 91 percent of them use their smartphone at works, meanwhile, 58 percent
spent more time online with their smartphone in the last 6 months (Google Our mobile
planet: Vietnam, quarter 3, 2013). Hence, smartphone is transforming the consumer
behaviors.
Nevertheless, a huge number of manufacturers in the smartphone industry, creates
plenty of models, lead to an embarrassment of consumer while choosing a smartphone.
This generates a hard task for one manufacturer to persuade their potential customers
distinguishing between its products and others. Therefore, it is essential to know what
factors influencing the purchase intention of smartphone.
1
1.2 Research Problems
Recent market research by Google has indicated that there are about 17 million
Vietnamese had been using smartphone (GlobalWebIndex, 2013). The figure is counted
as approximately 20% of Vietnam population. In this emerging market, there is still lot
of potential for mega smartphone manufacturers as Samsung, LG, and Apple as well as
Chinese or Vietnamese ones. Especially, in the group of office workers, who are in the
raising of income and spend on hi-tech products frequently. According to Gartner
(2013), trend of using smartphone and tablet to improve productivity as well as to
provide more entertainments might be required by half of office workers in 2017.
Despite the dramatic increasing of smartphone sales in Vietnam, there are not many
researches on the consumer's perception of purchasing smartphone, and there are no
static evidences to provide a better understanding between the enterprises and the end-
users purchase intention. Thus, it is an essential for the the
manufacturer/distributor/retailer to know what factors affecting to the consumer's
purchase intention of smartphone, particularly, to the office workers. Since then, they
might be benefited by understanding their potential perceptions.
As the above reasons, I have chosen the topic:
SMARTPHONE: A STUDY OF OFFICE WORKERS IN HOCHIMINH CITY,
VIETNAM
The study is to clarify the factors affecting the office workers purchase intention, and
then choose the right strategy for the real enterprises to approach the consumer in terms
of boosting their sales volume. Furthermore, the hi-tech topics are also my favorite.
2
1.3 Research Questions
Regarding to the research problems above, question has been raised for the research as
below:
Which factors will affect the consumer's purchase intention of smartphone?
Which factor will most influence the consumers purchase intention of
smartphone?
1.4 Research Objectives
At first, the research is aimed to identify the factors affecting to the office worker's
purchase intention of smartphone in Hochiminh City. To be more detailed, the research
is to manage these tasks:
To build a conceptual model for the research base on the previous researches
and literatures
To explore the factors affect the purchase intention of smartphone
To gather information and analyze the results, as well as, to give
recommendation to rate consumer's intention
1.5 Research scope and limitation
This research only apply to office workers to find out their purchase intention of
smartphone. Furthermore, the research only aims to ones who live in Hochiminh City,
as this is one of the two biggest city in Vietnam with high rate of smartphone users.
Moreover, there are plenty of enterprises operating in the city at the current.
However, this means that the data does not present the whole pictures of Vietnamese
consumers. In the other hand, the small size of sample might not be large enough due
to lack of resources.
3
1.6 Significant of the Research
One of the most important purpose of this study is to provide a deeper insight of
consumers in terms of factor affecting on purchase intention of smartphone. Since then,
smartphone manufacturer as Samsung, Nokia and Sony might obtain proper
information about their consumers requirement for a smartphones design, feature,
price settings and so on. Taking advantages of those knowledge, firms might have better
strategies planning to adjust their products in order to fulfill what an office worker
might want from their smartphone.
Firms also might concern on social influence on the consumers, which can be solved at
the end of this research. From the results, more appropriate marketing tactics might be
used as to persuade the consumers in terms of their social relations affection.
Finally, results of this thesis might be a reference for further research on the same topic,
especially to researchers who might want to explore those issues in a larger scope or
with different samples.
1.7 Research Methodology
Literature reviews are performed at first, based on these precious theories, conceptual
model would be made. Quantitative research method would be applied to design
questionnaire implementing in convenient sampling method. Data would be gathered
and analyzed with SPSS for further static findings. Since then, conclusions and
recommendations would be conducted.
4
1.8 Structure of Research
The research consist of five following chapters:
Chapter One: Introduction
Providing the introduction of the research with background, problem statements,
research questions and objectives, scope, limitation and research methodology
Chapter Two: Literature review
By providing the concepts and theories concerning the research problem, the whole
chapter concentrates in the purchase intention, perceived customer value, perceived
product quality, valance of experience, customer service, trust, brand etc.
Chapter Three: Research Methodology
The Chapter clarify the way to conduct the research and statistical method to be used
in the thesis, as well as providing the research process, questionnaire designing,
sampling method, survey implementation as a foundation for statistical analyzing
Chapter Four: Data Analysis and Findings
This chapter goes on details with figures and numbers recorded by previous steps,
which offers interviewees profile, analyzing the raw materials inputted throughout
Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS), since then, further discuss of the
research might be given
Chapter Five: Conclusion
Base on the above steps, the author provide conclusion according to his personal side
for the final results, furthermore, present the recommendations for future researches.
5
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW
Critical points of current knowledge will be presented in this chapter. The purpose is to
provide substantive findings as well as theoretical and methodological which to
contribute to the topic research process. Meanwhile, the literature reviews are also
considered as prestige secondary sources, which do not present any new research
information
2.1 Dependent Variable
Purchase intention
Defining as a plan to purchase certain good or service in the future, purchase intention
does not always confirm should the plan implement as it is also affected by ability to
perform (Warshaw & Davis, 1985). We could also consider the purchase intention as
what the consumers think and will buy (Blackwell, Miniard, & Engel, 2001).
Furthermore, purchase intention could be useful by understand the possibility of a
customer on that lead to a purchasing action, which can be understand that the stronger
the purchase intention is, the higher possibility to purchase particular product or service
occur (Schiffman & Kanuk, 2000). Through a process of consumer behavior toward
buying a product or a service, the consumers purchasing intention might formed by
recognition, information seeking, alternative products evaluating, purchasing behavior
and post-purchase step of mind (Schiffman & Kanuk, 2000)
The purchase intention should also be considered as consumers tendency on an object,
often measures the intention to buy of consumers (Kim & Kim, 2004). Final cognitive
step in decision making process is also the intention to purchase towards particular
products or services, according to Han (1990), Pecotich, Pressley and Roth (1996).
Furthermore, it is also a favorable topic in the marketers side as its ability to dig more
6
consumers insight, since then, they can find appropriate segmentation before deciding
to launch a new product into any markets (Silk & Urban, 1978). Kumar (2000) also
indicated that, purchase intention can be used to predict future demand. Finally, there
are evidence about an relationship between the relative advantage, price, social
influence and product compatibility with purchase intention (Juha, 2008;Yue & Suart
J, 2011; Ima Ilyani Ibrahim, 2013). There are also positive relations between brand
name and Product Features and purchase intention (Mei Min and Chow, 2012)
2.2 Independent variable
Price
It has been researched that price were always the most concerned issue from the
consumer whenever they were to make a buying decision (Smith and Carsky, 1996).
Meanwhile, Nagle and Holden (2002) indicated the role of price as a monetary value,
using by the consumers in order to trade with the sellers for products or services
Aaker (1991) stated that the image of a brand is mainly established by the price, in the
consumers side, the behavioral intentions are affected from the price positively. In
other words, a high (or low) price presents a high (or low) quality or image. Likewise,
two type of products by price has been provided: high-priced brands and low-priced
brands (Kunal et al., 2010). Image are indicated as the key factor of high-priced brands.
Similarly, people tend to consume high-priced brand products due to their image and
adapt for a premium price in order to perceive their value and status, which make the
consumers price-inelastic (Bolton, 1989). Meanwhile, low-priced brands are chosen to
utilize their value, often by consumers who tend to choose products in terms of price
par value. Thus, consumers would chose a low-priced brand product or looking for and
subtitled one for the best value (Kunal et al., 2010).
7
As a result, Rao and Monroe (1988) indicated that consumers have a tension to separate
the higher price with higher quality and the lower price with inferior quality. Etgar and
Malhotras (1981) found consensus to claim that high price goods and services are
equals to high quality in most of consumers perception. Therefore, if the quality or
features are comply to the consumers expectation, they should accept a price level at
peak to fulfill their demand; the consumers might consider the price at a fair deal and
willing to pay at a higher price if they could be deserved by what quality and service
they expect (Monroe, 2003)
More than dozen of mobile brands could be found in todays market, with plenty of
series, which offer different price levels. On the website of thegioididong.com, the
largest mobile phones retailer in Vietnam, consumer may find 14 various brands of
smartphone, this leads to wide range of price for each segment of products. The strong
brand may be an advantage to encourage the consumer choosing one product.
Nowadays, people sometimes does not consider price at the most important element.
There is a trend of consumers who might be willing to pay high price for their
smartphone and receive a higher quality or services. There is about 38.81% Vietnamese
consumers who ever own a smartphone believe that Iphone, a luxury product, is the
best smartphone they ever wanted (Jana, 2014 Smartphone preference and spending).
According to the research, Vietnamese consumers also acquire more on quality and
higher level of services.
Brand
In a world of massive production, brand presents as a special characteristic for a
product or service. It could be considered as a valuable asset to stand for quality and
suggest precise information about the brand (Srinivasan, 2002). It was also
distinguished as to improve products value (Dodds, Monroe and Grewal, 1991). Brand
8
was also stated to indicate a product by its name (Rotfled, 2009). The American
Marketing Association define brand as name, term, symbol, or design, or a
combination of them intended to identify the goods and services of one seller or group
of sellers and to differentiate them from those of competition.
The main function of a brand name is to confirm a products quality (Rao and Ruekert,
1994). Farquhar (1989) define the value of a brand was brand equity. And it was proven
that an important phase of building brand is developing brand equity (Keller, 1998).
Lastly, the consumers evaluation was influenced by the products brand, which might
lead to the buying decision (Khasawneh and Hasouneh, 2010)
After the survey in United States, England and Australian, The Wall Street Journal
announced that the smartphone owners show the power of brand loyalty. It was also
found the positive influence of consumer satisfaction on building positive brand, which
lead to purchase intention respectively (Zahra Seyed Ghorban, 2012). Chia and Hao
(2013) found that the myth impression of the specific brand existed prior to the decision
to buy the product. As a result, the amount of sales of smartphone mostly depends on
the brand itself.
Compatibility
When consumer perceives a product or service in their personal lifestyle choices, we
call that the compatibility. Consumers wants, beliefs, values, consumption patterns
might match with a product and service, we approve that they are highly compatible
(Joep W, Ruud T and Tammo H, 2011). It is believed that demand and purchase
intention of consumers is significantly affected by the compatibility (Gatignon and
Robertson, 1991). While product compatible is put at a high priority, consumers ideal
9
and expectation is getting closer to a product. Since then, more profit could be generated
due to a raise in demand, which has been affected by satisfying the consumers before.
Product Features
When buying or consuming a product, the consumers may be satisfy with a products
attribute, which might be a connection with their needs or demand, this attribute is
called a feature (Kotler, 2007). There is no doubt that various features might offer
different perception towards smartphone. Nowadays, Smartphone is considered to be
stand for a sustainable connection with internet, surfing the web, useful software,
ability to manage files, recording photos and videos, entertainment tools, bulky
memory of storage, GPS, navigation and large screen with high density of display
(Oulasvirta, 2011). Gowind (2010) also stated that operation system and camera were
two of the most favorite features consumers required from a smartphone. Meanwhile,
iOS, Android, Windows Phone and Blackberry OS are the most concerned operating
systems. Nevertheless, it is hoped to recognize that each of them has its own
characteristics and foundation (Chang and Chen, 2005).
It is also stated that products are chosen by their specific benefits created from attributes,
which might be usable to personal value (Wickliffe and Psyarchik, 2011). At the
current, mobile applications are introduced everyday, help the consumers to maximize
the usable time from smartphone. This leads to a fact that smartphone buyers put
functionality over the other factors when choosing smartphone (Kantar Media, 2014 -
The smartphone purchase experience, p.5). On the other hand, marketers trend to use
the attributes that the consumers tend to compare between brands to advertisement, this
aim to influence the consumers in choosing the appropriate product by enhancing the
attributes message. (Puth, 1999)
10
Relative Advantage
The degree for an innovation to be perceived as a higher level than other products in
the market is considered as relative advantage (Tidd, 2010). Moreover, product with
innovation placed in a long distance with the behind ones might gain a higher relative
advantage degree, this might be resulted in a lower price but higher eases of use,
enhanced Product Features and increased the products adoption are (L.Kurtz,
H.F.MacKenzie, & Snow, 2009). The relative advantages component can be reflect in
economic issues including: social status, convenience, economic gains and low cost.
Relative advantage from an innovation can achieve better acceptability and diffusion
speed (Ho and Wu, 2011). Roach (2009) stated that relative advantage was one of the
most consistent predictors of innovation adoption.
It also has been considered that relative advantage was in connection with the benefits
has been made by using new technology comparing to the cost. This means that the
consumers will experience low economic advantage in term of choosing a very
expensive product comparing to the competitors (Sypher, 1997). In the smartphone
markets perspective, relative advantage might be seen as the perception of the
consumers to be favor with one advertising message in comparison with the others
(Roach, 2009)
Social Influences
There are researches to confirm the relationship between virtual communities, an
important sources of social influences, with purchase intention (Bickart & Schindler,
2001). It is noted that persons choice, behaviors and belief may affect to others, this
theory can be found in most social sciences. People try to understand, relate to others
and be themselves; hence, influence motives appear with one person might change their
perception of an issue, product or brand. Up to date, the most important motive has
11
been researched is the expectation of one person to keep their value reference aligned
with his or her groups, as well as to be differentiated from devalued ones (Asch, 1951)
Raising in trend of using SNS (Social network sites) as Facebook, Instagram has been
found in smartphone recently. GlobalWebIndex (2014) announced that up to 20 percent
of Vietnamese use their social accounts on smartphone, especially, Facebook gained
the largest population of 95% of smartphone users. It is a nature that smartphone users
find more convenient in keeping relation with their friends, colleagues and families in
social network sites. Since then, user is probably affected by their friends, colleagues
and families somehow in their decision of buying a product or service. A person can be
gratefully influenced by the social, particularly when they are in a community with
same thought, attitude, feeling or behavior (Rashotte, 2007)
2.3 Review of relevant theory
Diffusion of innovations
A new product might be adopted by consumer in particular culture structure, this lively
illustrate the theory of diffusion of innovations. Consumer is to adopt or not adopt to a
new product affected by four different stages: knowledge, persuasion, decision and
confirmation (Rogers E., 1995; Fliegel, Frederick, & Joseph, 1966).
There are factors might affect the consumer adoption of new product in the stage of
persuasion. They could be defined as perceived characteristics of innovations or
product characteristics including: relative advantage, trial ability, compatibility,
complexity, and so on. Communication sources also might influence them (Rogers E.,
1995; Assael, 1992; Gatignon & Robertson, A propositional inventory for new
diffusion research, 1985). Lastly, those factors will affect purchase intention, which is
considered as the willingness to purchase one product, alongside with ability to
12
purchase this product form a demand (Rogers E., 1995; Fliegel, Frederick, & Joseph,
1966)
Figure 1 - Diffusion of innovations model. Rogers, E.M. (1995)
Social Identity Theory
Social identity express the idea that persons from a particular social group need to
match with the conditions of those group in order to avoid of discrimination.
Furthermore, those persons in group self-categorize themselves in the ways conform to
their group norms or do things to gain the groups favor (Tajfel and Turner, 1979).
Individual think, feel and action to his personal, family and so on might be affected by
different social contexts, according to the social identity theory (Turner, 1982; Jane and
Peter, 2000).
In the context of smartphone, if most persons in a particular group adopted the
smartphone, the rest who not yet adopt might be considering of an adaptation. Those
13
thoughts comes from an intention to be categorized into this group and being a part of
them (Jane & Peter, 2008)
Theory of Materialism
People are affected by materialism in their lives, they gain happiness in the possession
of particular luxury product, and hence they trend to persuade them different ways.
Materialistic persons are matched with desires and goals to achieve wealth, so that they
could own certain luxury products in order to take the senses of social recognition (Tim,
2002; Yusuf & Abdullah, 2003)
According to Vitzthum (1995) and Lange (1925), consumers might experience high
value on luxury product, this include new technology as well as innovative product, as
those products are always at a higher price, and those situations define the theory of
materialism. To be detail, high price product like smartphone might influence the
consumers purchase intention, however, it is a normal sense if the purchasing power
in general increases, opening chances for more people to own ones, then the social
status of using smartphone might no longer be available (Jee Han, Joseph, & Xavier,
2010)
14
2.4 Proposed Theoretical Framework
Ima Ilyani Ibrahim (2013) state on his study of purchase intention of smartphone in
Malaysia once again stated that the mentioned issued significantly affected by social
influence, even though the strength differ. It is also the factor hast most impact beside
the others are: Relative Advantage, Price and Compatibility. In connection with the
literature review above, it is proposed to the conceptual framework in which display
the independent and dependent variables and connection between them as below:
Price
H1
H2
Brand
Compatibility H3
Purchase
H4 intention
Product Features
H5
Relative Advantage
H6
Social Influence
(Independent variables) (Dependent variable)
Figure 2 - Conceptual model: Factors affect purchase intention of smartphone
2.5 Hypothesis Development
This paper studies the association between the six independent variables, such as Price,
Brand, Compatibility, Product Features, Relative Advantage and Social Influence, and
purchase intention of Smartphone among office workers in Hochiminh City. With this
goal, we propose to test the following hypotheses:
15
H1: There is an impact from price towards purchase intention of Smartphone among
office workers in Hochiminh City
H2: There is an impact from brand name towards purchase intention of Smartphone
among office workers in Hochiminh City
H3: There is an impact from compatibility towards purchase intention of Smartphone
H4: There is an impact from Product Features towards purchase intention of
Smartphone among office workers in Hochiminh City
H5: There is an impact from relative advantage towards purchase intention of
H6: There is an impact from social influences towards purchase intention of Smartphone
H7: At least one factor (Price, Brand, Compatibility, Product Features, Relative
Advantage and Social Influence) have the most significant influence on the purchase
intention of smartphone among office workers in Hochiminh City
16
CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY
3.1 Research design
As a descriptive research, this thesis may present the researchers intention to use
quantitative data to illustrate the characteristics of the population, as well as to study
the phenomenon. Advantage of this type of research is to collect unique data from case
studies. Data was collected to provide an insight from consumers in various aspects of
their lives, which other methods can not apply better (Swindells, 2004). Moreover, the
method could provide an ability to finalize the result and approve or disapprove
hypothesises
At last, questionnaire was considered as an instrumental to imply in the research. Group

of categorized questions would be provided to collect primary data. It is fast,
inexpensive, efficient, and effective method compared to others (Key & P., 1997).
3.2 Data collection methods
In general, the two types of data could be defined as primary data and secondary data.
While the primary data is usually collected throughout research and surveys to solve
specific purposes, the secondary data is considered as existing information. Both of the
two mentioned types are used in researches frequently to offer more reliability as well
as validaty.
Primary data
Quantitative research was applied in the research to determine the hypothesis. In
particular, questionnaire was used to gather information by their wide range of
questions from individuals. In the other hands, questionnaire could be used with
different type of sampling techniques, which can be easily administered via email,
telephone, face to face interview, internet electrical form and so on. The questionnaire
17
was provided into different sections, which covered all the required information for the
hypothesis, as well as the demographics from the interviewees for further exploration.
Secondary data
Literally, information analysis gathered from other sources (e.g., researcher and
institutions) is considered as secondary data (Cnossen & Christen, 1977). Two type of
secondary data could be known as electronic based sources and paper based sources.
Secondary data is also known as an efficient yet economic sources. In the limitation of
the research, electronic based sources are more preferable due to its ease of searching
and convenience. Throughout internet, the researchers acquire more knowledge on the
thesis topic, as well as understanding relevant theories, which helping in further step of
researching.
Sampling design
A process of selecting a smaller group of people with similar characteristics and

preferences as the total group where it is chosen is call sampling (Wrenn, Stevens, &
Loudon, 2006). To collect data effectively and efficiently, designing a sampling
framework is important to any researcher. Furthermore, selecting most appropriate
samples means to provide more accurate answer while collecting the questionnaire.
3.2.3.1 Sampling frame and sampling location
The data was gathered by an electronic survey provided by Qualtrics, a leading
quantitative research solutions has been used in the industry as well as cited in academic
journals Brunson, K. W (2008) and books (Modern marketing research concepts, 2012).
Qualtrics is known as other online survey tools as Google or Surveymonkey,
otherwise, it provide tons of features more
18
After the questionnaire has been formed, it was sent to respondent by two ways:
Emails: An email with provided link to the questionnaire was attached to invite
the receiver finished answering the questions. An disadvantage of this method
is the mistaken of email providers to categorize this email as junk mails
sometimes, in the other hands, receivers might have negative perception on this
type of email which might let them biased on the answers . However, it is the
cheapest and most convenient way. In this survey, 200 email invitations have
been sent to collect data
Social sites seeding: Facebook was used as a gentle invitation to conduct the
survey. In connection with a post of Facebook, which content is to introduce the
research, it was appeared to all new feeds of the target population as a
recommend topic. A reach of approximately 3,000 viewers has been taken to
collect data.
Sampling Technique
Convenience sampling was applied in the research. As a non-probability sampling
technique, convenience sampling is to obtain a sample of convenient elements. Its
advantage include relatively easy sample collection and data collection (Anderson,
Sweeney, & Williams, 2008). In the other hands, the technique requires least expensive
and time consuming. In the limitation of the research, the researcher distributed the
questionnaire to ones who were working in an office in the area of Hochiminh City.
3.2.4.1 Sampling size
According to Malhotra (1996) sample size refers to the number of elements to be
included. A quantity of 257 questionnaires have been finished during six days from
August 7th to August 14th. However, 39 results has been rejected due to unfinished
19
questionnaire and duplicated results (like all answers are 4 are 5 only). At last, a number
of 218 samples has been used to the data analyzing.
Research instrument
Used instrument would be explained in this part of the research. While a survey has
been chosen, it would be included the distributing of questionnaire to collect primary
data
3.2.5.1 Questionnaire
Questionnaire is defined as a set of questioned that prepared by the researchers to collect
answers from the respondents (Sekaran & Bougie, 2010). On this research,
questionnaires has been used to gather the information from the respondent to discover
the factors that influence the purchase intention of smartphone among the office
workers in Hochiminh City. Since then, the research analyze if there are any significant
relationship between the dependent and independent variables. Questionnaire has been
collected in one week as 257 respondents feedback their answers.
3.2.5.2 Questionnaire design
To obtain information effectively, the process of designing questionnaires play an
important role. In this research, the researcher has used fixed-alternative questions,
which responses are given and answers are chosen as one closet to the respondents
point of view. The whole questionnaire is divided into the three section to easily
categorize the data as below:
Section A
Three questions are provided to discover the respondents demographic. These
questions are designed to ask for age, income and sex typically.
20
Section B
As to learn the independent variables in the research from this section, 30 questions are
made to survey the respondent. Furthermore, those questions are categorized into six
different groups which are: Price, Brand, Compatibility, Product Features, Relative
Advantage and Social Influence. Likert scale is used as the measurement for the answer.
Five scale including strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), neutral (3), agree (4), and
strongly agree (5) are inserted in each question to gather the most consistent answers.
Section C
The five questions of this section are provided to survey for the dependent variable: the
purchase intention. Once again, likert scale questions with five scales of strongly
disagree (1), disagree (2), neutral (3), agree (4), and strongly agree (5) are used.
Variables Item Description References

P1 Price is my main consideration Cheong and Park
when deciding whether to buy a (2005), Grewal,
smartphone. Krishanan, Baker, &
P2 I will only buy smartphone on Borin, (1998), Sinhaa
price reduction or promotion. & Batrab (1999),
P3 I compare prices of other Steiner (2004)
Smartphones brands and store
Price brands before I choose one.
P4 I buy Smartphone because they are
worth to used regarding between
with their price & usage quality.
P5 The cheapness of some
Smartphones brand suggests to
me that they may have some risks,
such as low quality.
21
BR1 Brand name is a major factor that Rio,Vazquez and
will influence my decision towards Iglesias (2001)
buying a smartphone.
BR2 I prefer to choose globally brand
while buying smartphone.
BR3 I prefer to choose a trustworthy
Brand
smartphone brand.
BR4 I only choose smartphone brand of
my favourite
BR5 I am willing to choose a less well-
known brand if its products could
fulfill my needs.
C1 Smarphone is compatible and fit Yang (2005), Brown
my needs L., Cajee, Davies and
C2 Smartphone is compatible and fit Stroebel (2003),
my lifestyle and working style Monk, Hassenzahl,
C3 Smartphone fit with my habits of Blythe and Reed
Compatibility using cell phones (2002), He, Duan, Fu
C4 Smartphone is a good and Li (2006)
complement to the traditional

mobile phones to me
C5 Smartphone can fulfill my wants
and needs in current life
FE1 I like the smartphone ability of Mei Min, et al.
taking photos and videos (2012), Market
FE2 Smartphone provide high quality Analysis and
Product of games Consumer
Features FE3 Smartphone has lots of useful Research
applications Organization
FE4 Smartphone can connect to (MACRO)
internet easily (with wifi, 3G)
22
FE5 I choose smartphone due to its
operating system (iOS, Android,
Blackberry OS, Windows
Phone)
RA1 Smartphone are more convenient, (Brown I. , Cajee,
reliable, and useful than normal Davies, & Stroebel,
mobile phones. (2003), Holak &
RA2 Smartphone are more fashionable, Lehmann (1990),
stylish, and trendy. Yang (2005), Mei

Relative
RA3 Smartphone can be synchronized Min, et al. (2012),
Advantage
with other gadgets Gourville (2006),
Park, Y., & Chen. J.
RA4 Smartphone bigger screen and full
V (2007), Ji-won
keyboard make different functions
Moon, Young-Gul
easier to use.
Kim (2001)
RA5 Smartphone sometimes help me to
solve my work instantly.
SI1 Friends and family are very helpful Isen (2011), Denise E.
to me in making decision of buying (2005), Pederson, n.d,
smartphone. Mei Min et al. (2012)
SI2 I will ask the opinions from my
friends and family when buying a
smartphone.
Social
SI3 Most of my friends and family
Influence
members are using smartphone
SI4 Friends and family members believe
that smartphone are useful to them
SI5 I will seek for information from
social network and forums before
buying a smartphone
PI1 I will continue using smartphone. Dalsang Chung, Sun
Purchase PI2 I intend to buy a smartphone. Gi Chun (2011);
intention PI3 I intend to replace my smartphone Kiwon Lee, Euiho
with a better one. Suh, Jihye Park
23
PI4 I will share about my smartphone (2012), Ling (2011),
with my friend and family member Hyuk Jun & Margaret
PI5 I am willing recommend my A (2008), Ching-Fu &
friend/family member to buy a Yu-Ying (2008)
smartphone.
Table 1 - Coded items of measurement scale
3.3 Data analysis
Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) 20.0 will be used to analyze collected
data. The section will present an overall view of various techniques to be used in the
research for data analysis
Descriptive statistics
As a tool to describe a set of factors characteristics in a particular context, descriptive
statistics might be presented as a form that provide information about the factors after
a transformation process from raw data. The techniques include of the popular
following information: frequencies, measures of central tendency and dispersion.
Reliability test
Cronbachs alpha is a reliability coefficient to indicate if items are positivily correlated
to one another in a set Cavana et al. (2001), while it is computed by the average of inter-
correlations among the items, its value can be vary from 0 to 1. According to Nunnally
(1978), Cronbachs alpha value of item at 0.6 and above is acceptable, especially for
investigations.
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA)
It is necessary to examines if provided items are completed by respondent are included
in particular factors or clusters, the technique of this process is called exploratory factor
analysis (Cavana et al, 2001). While EFA allows us to eliminate invalid items from the
24
scale, it also group the items into relevant group in accordance with the respondents
data. Low factor loading item (< 0.5) were deleted.
Pearson Correlation Coefficient Test
Pearson correlation coefficient is to measures the strength of the linear relationship of
two variables. In the other hand, it also confirm the significant and the strength of those
relationships. The strength of the relationship could be demonstrate as the table below:
Coefficient Range Strength of Association

0.91 to 1.00 Very Strong
0.71 to 0.90 High
0.41 to 0.70 Moderate
0.21 to 0.40 Small but definite relationship
0.00 to 0.20 Slight, almost negligible
Table 2 - Rules of Thumb about Correlation Coefficient
Multiple regression analysis
The techniques of multiple regression is to analyse the impact of the factors that
influence the purchase intention of smartphone among office workers in Hochiminh
City. Multiple regression analysis also form the independent variables into equation
and forecast the dependent variable. At last, multiple regression analysis will determine
how the independent variables (Price, Brand, Compatibility, Product Features, Relative
Advantage and Social Influence) are significant to explain the variance in confidence
level.
25
CHAPTER 4. DATA ANALYISIS AND FINDINGS
4.1 Sample description
Sample
A total of 257 questionnaires has been finished from the respondents who are office
workers in Hochiminh City. However, as the unexpected quality of 39 surveys has been
recorded, they were dropped from the final data collection. Those surveys were found
to be unfinished or rated as under expectation while supplying the same answers in all
fields (like all 4 or all 5 answers in the likert scale). After excluding those results, the
valid answer was 218 at a rate of 84% in total. The collected data was coded to be
analysed with the SPSS for further conclusions.
Demographic profile
Descriptive statistic was used to summary the profile of 218 surveys. Results could be
found in detail as the below table and figures:
26
Frequency Percentage
Demographic Characteristics
(n) (%)
Gender 218 100%
Male 109 50%
Female 109 50%
Age 218 100%
Under 22 20 9.2
From 22 to 29 140 64.2
From 30 to 39 49 22.5
From 40 to 49 7 3.2
50 or older 2 0.9
Income 218 100%
Less than 8,000,000 Vnd 92 42.2
From 8,000,000 to Less than 12,000,000 Vnd 72 33
From 12,000,000 to Less than 18,000,000 Vnd 29 13.3
From 18,000,000 to Less than 25,000,000 Vnd 13 6
Above 25,000,000 Vnd 12 5.5
Table 3 - Demographic of Respondents
Male
50% 50%
Female
Figure 3 - Sex of Respondents
The gender distribution in the research accidentally fall into an absolute balance
between male and female respondent. While 109 male respondents were recorded with
a percentage of 50, the same number has also been found in female respondents. This
could be surprisingly consider that male and female both paid their intention to the
smartphone topic.
27
3% 1%
9%
23% Under 22
From 22 to 29
From 30 to 39
From 40 to 49
50 or older
64%
Figure 4 - Age of Respondents
In terms of age, the group of respondents capture the largest portion was found from 22
to 29 years old. This age group gain a percentage of 64%. The group from 30 to 39
showed a percentage of 23% ranked in second. Meanwhile, the group of age from 50
and above have the least percentage of 1%. It is considered that most of office workers
are in range from 22 to 39 years old and they have a more high-tech consuming direction
comparing to other groups.
6% Less than 8,000,000 Vnd

6%
From 8,000,000 to Less
13% than 12,000,000 Vnd
42%
than 18,000,000 Vnd
than 25,000,000 Vnd
33% Above 25,000,000 Vnd
Figure 5 - Average income of respondents
28
Less From From From Above Total
than 8,000,00 12,000,0 18,000,0 25,000,0
8,000,00 0 to Less 00 to 00 to 00 Vnd
0 Vnd than Less Less
12,000,0 than than
00 Vnd 18,000,0 25,000,0
00 Vnd 00 Vnd
Under 22 16 2 0 0 0 18
From 22 to 29 70 52 14 4 2 142
From 30 to 39 6 16 10 7 10 49
From 40 to 49 0 0 5 2 0 7
50 or older 0 2 0 0 0 2
Total 92 72 29 13 12 218
Table 4 - Crosstab between age and average income of respondents
There might be a connection between the age and the average income of the respondents.
Most of them fall in the average income of under 12,000,000 Vnd. While 42% of them
have the income under 8,000,000 Vnd, a percentage of 33% has been recorded from the
group of income from 8,000,000 Vnd to less than 12,000,000 Vnd. The rest respondents
with average income from 12,000,000 and above gain a percentage of 25%, this could
also be a recognizable results. At last, it has been seen that while youngster show more
favor to smartphone, they are still in a lower average income in comparison with the
older ones. In cross-tabulation calculation, the respondents in the age from 22 to 29
show the largest portion in average income of under 8,000,000 Vnd (32% of total
respondents) and from 8,000,000 Vnd to 12,000,000 Vnd (24% of total respondents)
29
4.2 Descriptive statistics
Variable Label Mean Std. Deviation

Price is my main consideration when deciding PR1 3.56 .736
whether to buy a smartphone.
I will only buy smartphone on price reduction or PR2 3.37 .746
promotion.
I compare prices of other Smartphones brands PR3 3.99 .709
and store brands before I choose one.
I buy Smartphone because they are worth to used PR4 4.10 .664
regarding between with their price & usage
quality.
The cheapness of some Smartphones brand PR5 3.74 .859
suggests to me that they may have some risks,
such as low quality.
Brand name is a major factor that will influence BR1 3.90 .711
my decision towards buying a smartphone.
I prefer to choose globally brand while buying BR2 3.92 .720
smartphone.
I prefer to choose a trustworthy smartphone BR3 4.13 .673
brand.
I only choose smartphone brand of my favourite BR4 3.92 .767
I am willing to choose a less well-known brand BR5 3.94 .703
if its products could fulfill my needs.
Smartphone is compatible and fit with my needs. CO1 4.05 .670
Smartphone is compatible and fit with my C02 4.14 .583
lifestyle / working style.
Smartphone fit with my habits of using cell CO3 3.94 .732
phones.
Smartphone is a good complement to the CO4 4.04 .779
traditional mobile phones for me.
Smartphone can fulfill my want and needs in CO5 4.02 .692
current life.
I like the smartphone ability of taking photos and FE1 4.04 .646
videos
Smartphone provide high quality of games FE2 3.75 .739
Smartphone has lots of useful applications FE3 4.11 .552
Smartphone can connect to internet easily (with FE4 4.27 .639
wifi, 3G)
I choose smartphone due to its operating system FE5 3.98 .750
(iOS, Android, Blackberry OS, Windows
Phone,)
Smartphone are more convenient, reliable, and RA1 3.85 .803
useful than normal mobile phones.
30
Smartphone are more fashionable, stylish, and RA2 3.80 .929
trendy.
Smartphone can be synchronized with other RA3 4.07 .699
gadgets
Smartphone bigger screen and full keyboard RA4 3.99 .859
make different functions easier to use.
Smartphone sometimes help me to solve my RA5 4.04 .743
work instantly.
Friends and family are very helpful to me in SI1 2.63 .999
making decision of buying smartphone.
I will ask the opinions from my friends and SI2 3.31 1.027
family when buying a smartphone.
Most of my friends and family members are SI3 3.69 .700
using smartphone
Friends and family members believe that SI4 3.73 .722
smartphone are useful to them
I will seek for information from social network SI5 3.81 .784
and forums before buying a smartphone
I will continue using smartphone. PI1 3.94 .818
I intend to buy a smartphone. PI2 4.29 .655
I intend to replace my smartphone with a better PI3 4.06 .862
one.
I will share about my smartphone with my friend PI4 3.68 .836
and family member
I am willing recommend my friend/family PI5 3.64 .815
member to buy a smartphone.
Table 5 Descriptive statistics of respondents
Mean value of the variables have been display in the above table. Mean of Price vary
from 3.37 to 4.10, with the lowest value found in PR2 (I will only buy smartphone on
price reduction or promotion) at 3.37, which mean the marketing tactics base on price
may not preferred much from the office workers. In contrast, they have more consensus
in PR4 (I buy Smartphone because they are worth to used regarding between with their
price & usage quality) at value of 4.10. Which means that product in the balancing
between price and quality would attract more attention.
Brands items have rather high mean value ranging from 3.90 to 4.13. In particular, the
most high rated item is BR3 (I prefer to choose a trustworthy smartphone brand) with
31
mean value of 4.13, which means that unknown brand might not easy to capture the
intention of office workers. Meanwhile, BR1 (Brand name is a major factor that will
influence my decision towards buying a smartphone) get the lowest rate at mean of 3.90.
The mean of Compatibilitys items are extremely high in a narrow range from 3.94 to
4.14. This means that office workers have ideas in this factor consistently. The lowest
value is CO3 (Smartphone fit with my habits of using cell phones), while the highest
one is CO2 (Smartphone is compatible and fit with my lifestyle / working style).
Highest mean value of dependent variable found in Product Features item of FE4
(Smartphone can connect to internet easily (with wifi, 3G)) at 4.27. This raise a
potential of using smartphone as an ideal surfing gadget. Meanwhile, FE3 (Smartphone
provide high quality of games) with mean value of 3.75 is the lowest. We can consider
that office workers prefer need more connection ability than gaming.
The mean value of Relative advantage factor items found from 3.80 to 4.07. The most
important concern of consumers in the factor is the RA3 (Smartphone can be
synchronized with other gadgets) with mean value of 4.07, which provided function to
sync between users hi-tech stuffs with smartphone (E.g.: tablet of laptop). In the other
hand, respondents rate Smartphone are more fashionable, stylish, and trendy (RA2)
at a lower mean value of 3.80
In term of Social Influence, means of variables have high difference from 2.63 to 3.81,
in which, the lowest value of dependent variables found. At the value of 2.63, SI1
(Friends and family are very helpful to me in making decision of buying smartphone.)
have least rated among the office workers, this somehow proves that the consumers
tend to look for other sources rather than friends or families while choosing their
smartphone. In contrast, it is supposed that the office workers might find more
32
references on social network or forums as the I will seek for information from social
network and forums before buying a smartphone (SI5) item was recognized at the
highest mean value of 3.81.
For the independent variable, the mean of Purchasing Intention is valued from 3.64 to
4.29. While the PI5 (I am willing recommend my friend/family member to buy a
smartphone) has the lowest value of 3.64, the highest mean value is recorded in PI2 (I
intend to buy a smartphone) at 4.29.
4.3 Cronbachs alpha reliability test
According to Geogre and Mallery (2003), a Cronbachs Alpha calculation can be
categorized into various status which is shown as below table:
Cronbach's alpha Internal consistency
0.9 Excellent
0.8 Good
0.7 Acceptable
0.6 Questionable
0.5 Poor
< 0.5 Unacceptable
Table 6 - Cronbach's Alpha rule based on George and Mallery
Factor Number of Item Cronbach's Alpha

Price 5 0.713
Brand 5 0.702
Compatibility 5 0.742
Product Features 5 0.732
Relative Advantage 5 0.745
Social Influence 5 0.741
Purchase Intention 5 0.765
Table 7 - Reliability test for consumers purchase intention on smartphone
33
From the data analysed in the research, we can see that all the factors have the
Cronbachs Alpha as range between 0.70 and 0.77, which are considered to be
acceptable for the research. Or in the order words, those items were well designed and
data is reliable.
However, when analyzing into particular items, the researcher found that not all the
value of each item in the factor Brand are valid. According to Field (2005) and Pallant
(2007), values less than 0.3 indicate that the item is measuring something different from
the whole scale. Meanwhile, to determine the effect of removing items from each sub-
scale, Cronbachs alpha if deleted is used (Lemmens, 2010). Since then, the item
whose Cronbachs alpha if item deleted is larger than the overall Cronbachs alpha and
corrected item total correlation is less than 0.3 will be discarded from the variable list.
From the below table of the Cronbachs alpha from the factor Brand, the item BR5 was
removed at first (Corrected Item-Total Correlation of 0.286 and Cronbach's Alpha if
Item Deleted of 0.720).
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.702 5
Item-Total Statistics
Corrected Cronbach's
Scale Mean if Scale Variance Item-Total Alpha if Item
Item Deleted if Item Deleted Correlation Deleted
BR1 15.91 4.108 .425 .666
BR2 15.89 3.588 .636 .574
BR3 15.68 3.839 .586 .601
BR4 15.89 4.052 .388 .684
BR5 15.87 4.494 .286 .720
Table 8 Reliability test of Brand (1 run)
st
34
After re-run the SPSS reliability test for the items BR1, BR2, BR3, BR4, we continued
to remove the item of BR4 as its Corrected Item-Total Correlation is 0.297 and the
Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted is 0.786. In the last run including of BR1, BR2 and
BR3, all the value were well construct and will be used in the next step of calculating
the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.720 4
BR1 11.97 2.759 .520 .652

BR2 11.95 2.454 .675 .554
BR3 11.74 2.738 .584 .616
BR4 11.94 3.103 .297 .786
Table 9 - Reliability test of Brand (2nd run)
35
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.786 3
BR1 8.05 1.574 .573 .765

BR2 8.03 1.419 .680 .647
BR3 7.82 1.588 .625 .710
Table 10 - Reliability test of Brand (3rd run)
To sum up, all the items of the research will have a valid reliability shown in the below
table. More details of other items could be found in the Appendix.
Factor Number of Item Cronbach's Alpha

Price 5 0.713
Brand 5 0.786
Compatibility 5 0.742
Product Features 5 0.732
Relative Advantage 5 0.745
Social Influence 5 0.741
Purchase Intention 5 0.765
Table 11 - The final table of Cronbachs alpha reliability test
4.4 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)
In this section, the researcher present the results of the Exploratory factor analysis
(EFA), which might explain the number of underlying factors or dimensions of each
construct. By using the technique, we will drop some invalid items and group all items
into relevant groups. Varimax rotation would be used to minimize the number of
36
variables that have high loading in each factor. In the EFA calculation, there are several
criteria to be follow with:
The KMO value must be equal or greater than 0.5
Factor maximum absolute value loading must be greater than 0.5
The difference between the maximum absolute value and minimum absolute
value of loading factors must be greater than or equal to 0.3 for any item
(Jabnoun and Al-Tamimi, 2003)
Total variance explained must be greater than or equal to 50%
The KMO test of the research found a value of 0.669, which is above of the minimum
requirements. The Barletts test of schericity was recorded of 0.000, which is significant
at the level of 0.01, this means that factor analysis could be used in this study and the
scale is usable
KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling
.669
Adequacy.
Bartlett's Test of Approx. Chi-Square 2405.214
Sphericity df 378
Sig. .000
Rotated component matrix would show the items under each factor to be grouped in
relevant items. The minimal value of each item on the table should be 0.5. Regarding
to the research, all items were loaded in the range of 0.557 and 0.849 under new nine
dimension describe as below table:
37
Rotated Component Matrixa
Component
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
RA4 .782
RA1 .671
RA5 .642
RA2 .624
RA3 .603
FE1 .775
FE2 .695
FE5 .679
FE4 .677
PR2 .797
PR1 .731
PR5 .589
PR3 .586
BR2 .843
BR3 .833
BR1 .771
CO1 .837
CO2 .799
CO3 .732
SI1 .829
SI2 .793
SI5 .557
SI3 .849
SI4 .738
FE3 .635
PR4 .629
CO4 .760
CO5 .611
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 13 iterations.
Table 12 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) for independent variables
The new factor after the EFA test shall be categorized with new items as below:
38
Factor Variables included Name Label
Factor 1 RA1, RA2, RA3, Relative advantage RA
RA4, RA5
Factor 2 FE1, FE2, FE4, FE5 Product Features FE
Factor 3 PR1, PR2, PR3, PR5 Price PR
Factor 4 BR1, BR2, BR3 Brand BR
Factor 5 CO1, CO2, CO3 Compatibility CO
Factor 6 SI1, SI2, SI5 Social influence SI
Factor 7 SI3, SI4 Social interaction SIN
Factor 8 FE3, PR4 Performance PE
Factor 9 CO4, CO5 Preference PN
Table 13 Group of EFA
A similar test has been applied to the dependent variables of purchase intention in
order to examine if all the items are grouped into one or not:
KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling
.739
Adequacy.
Bartlett's Test of Approx. Chi-Square 297.187
Sphericity df 10
Sig. .000
Component Matrixa
Component
1
PI2 .774
PI4 .731
PI1 .721
PI5 .700
PI3 .686
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
a. 1 components extracted.
Table 14 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) for independent variables
39
As the above table, we could discover that the KMO is 0.739, meanwhile, the Bartletts
test of sphericity is 0.000. The both values show that the variable PI was retained and
was expectedly group into one group as proposed.
4.5 Pearson Correlation Coefficient
Pearson Correlation Coefficient is to indicate the direction, strength as well as the
significant of the bivariate relationships between the variables measured on interval
scale (Hair et al., 2007)
40
Correlations
RA FE PR BR CO SI SIN PE PN PI
RA Pearson
1 .207** .137* .183** .180** .007 .237** .111 .393** .459**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .002 .043 .007 .008 .912 .000 .104 .000 .000
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
FE Pearson
.207** 1 .028 .177** .319** -.047 .178** .353** .272** .447**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .002 .679 .009 .000 .487 .008 .000 .000 .000
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
PR Pearson
.137* .028 1 .195** -.062 .042 -.021 .369** -.035 .061
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .043 .679 .004 .359 .540 .757 .000 .611 .371
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
BR Pearson
.183** .177** .195** 1 .225** -.012 .086 .193** .156* .170*
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .007 .009 .004 .001 .865 .208 .004 .021 .012
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
CO Pearson
.180** .319** -.062 .225** 1 -.117 .060 .232** .417** .205**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .008 .000 .359 .001 .085 .381 .001 .000 .002
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
SI Pearson
.007 -.047 .042 -.012 -.117 1 .412** .022 .057 .008
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .912 .487 .540 .865 .085 .000 .752 .401 .911
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
SIN Pearson
.237** .178** -.021 .086 .060 .412** 1 .141* .108 .179**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .008 .757 .208 .381 .000 .038 .111 .008
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
PE Pearson
.111 .353** .369** .193** .232** .022 .141* 1 .233** .285**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .104 .000 .000 .004 .001 .752 .038 .001 .000
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
PN Pearson
.393** .272** -.035 .156* .417** .057 .108 .233** 1 .537**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .611 .021 .000 .401 .111 .001 .000
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
PI Pearson
.459** .447** .061 .170* .205** .008 .179** .285** .537** 1
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .371 .012 .002 .911 .008 .000 .000
N 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218 218
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Table 15 - Pearson Correlation Testing
The above table shows the correlations between independent variables and dependent
variable. There are two factors found to be insignificant with the dependent variables
Purchase intention: Price (PR) and Social Influence (SI) have the P value of 0.371 and
41
0.911 which are considerably higher than 0.05. The other factors with P value under
0.05 are acceptable.
The relation between Relative advantage (RA) and Purchase intention (PI) is considered
at a medium rate as the correlation value is 0.459. This value fall in a range of 0.41
to 0.70, which is said to be a moderate strength.
A similar relation also has been found between the Product Features (FE) and Purchase
intention. While the correlation value falls between 0.41 to 0.70, at the number of
0.447. It is concluded that there is a moderate correlation between Product Features and
Purchase intention.
There is a relationship between Brand (BR) and Purchase intention. However, as the
correlation value is just 0.170, in the range of 0.00 to 0.20, this relationship is just
considered as a slightly rate.
Meanwhile, there are stronger relationship between Compatibility (CO) and Purchase
intention. While falling in the range of 0.21 to 0.40, the correlation value is 0.205.
In conclusion, there is definite a relationship between Compatibility and Purchase
intention, however, at a small strength.
There is evidence to consider a relation between Preference (PN) and Purchase
intention. As the correlation value is 0.537, it falls between 0.41 to 0.70. This
indicates there is a moderate relationship between Preference and Purchase intention.
Social interaction (SIN) and Purchase intention are at a negligible relationship. The
correlation value appears to be 0.179, hence, there is just a slight relationship between
the two variables
42
There is surely a relationship between Performance (PE) and Purchase intention. As the
correlation value is 0.285, we can conclude that there is definite a relationship between
the two variables, nevertheless, this relationship is in a small strength.
4.6 Multiple Regression Analysis
Weiers (2008) stated that multiple regression analysis is an analysis with one dependent
variable and two or more dependent variables participate in. In the other hand, Zikmund
et al., (2010) demonstrate it to be an association in which the effects of two or more
independent variables on a single, interval-scaled dependent variable which are
investigated continuously.
Model Summaryb
Std. Error of the

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Estimate
1 a
.677 .458 .440 .43019
a. Predictors: (Constant), PN, SIN, BR, PE, FE, RA, CO
b. Dependent Variable: PI
According to the Model Summary table, the R Square value, which is determined for
the explained variation (variance) in Purchase intention from the seven factors
including Relative advantage, Product Features, Brand, Compatibility, Social
interaction, Performance and Preference is approximately 45.8%. This means that there
is also 55.2% unexplained still left in the study. Meanwhile, the multiple correlation
coefficient (R) provides the strength of the relationship between the dependent variable
and independent variables is 0.677
43
ANOVAa
Sum of Mean
Model Squares df Square F Sig.
1 Regression 32.883 7 4.698 25.384 .000b
Residual 38.863 210 .185
Total 71.745 217
a. Dependent Variable: PI
b. Predictors: (Constant), PN, SIN, BR, PE, FE, RA, CO
The p-value (Significant of 0.000) in the ANOVA table is less than 0.05. Its means that
the alternative hypothesis as the independent variables are significantly explains the
variance in consumers' level is supported by the data and will be accepted.
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Std.
Model B Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) .094 .369 .254 .800
RA .254 .058 .252 4.411 .000
FE .329 .065 .291 5.070 .000
BR .020 .052 .021 .387 .699
CO -.123 .061 -.119 -2.033 .043
SIN .017 .047 .019 .355 .723

PE .100 .064 .086 1.553 .122
PN .360 .057 .382 6.315 .000
Table 16 - Multiple regression testing
At last, the Coefficients table provides that the following independent variables are not
significant to predict the dependent variable including: Brand (p-value of 0.699), Social
interaction (p-value of 0.723) and Performance (p-value of 0.122). Those values are
excluded while they are higher than the alpha level of 0.05. In contrast, Relative
advantage (RA), Product Features (FE), Compatibility (CO) and Preference (PN) are
44
significant to predict the Purchase intention. Those independent variables have p-value
less than alpha of 0.05. Hence, the relationship between these variables can be formed
by the following equation, which is supported by the above table:
Purchase intention = 0.094 + 0.254(Relative Advantage) + 0.329(Product Features)
- 0.123(Compatibility) + 0.360(Preference)
4.7 Test of Hypothesis
After several stages of testing, the initial hypothesis has been seen to change as the
dependent variables transformed into various groups. The test of hypothesis would be
modified to match with the data collected and previous analyzing. In particular, they
were examined as follow:
Hypothesis 1
H0: There is no impact from compatibility towards purchase intention of Smartphone
H1: There is an impact from compatibility towards purchase intention of Smartphone
Reject H0, if p<0.05
As the multiple regression table shows that the p-value of compatibility is 0.043, which
is less than the significant level of 0.05. Hence, H0 was rejected, it means that
compatibility has an impact towards purchase intention.
Hypothesis 2
H0: There is no impact from Product Features towards purchase intention of
45
H1: There is an impact from Product Features towards purchase intention of
As the multiple regression table shows that the p-value of Product Features is 0.000,
which is less than the significant level of 0.05. Hence, H0 was rejected, it means that
Product Features has an impact towards purchase intention.
Hypothesis 3
H0: There is no impact from brand towards purchase intention of Smartphone among
H1: There is an impact from brand towards purchase intention of Smartphone among
As the multiple regression table shows that the p-value of brand is 0.699, which is
higher than the significant level of 0.05. Hence, H0 was accepted, it means that brand
has no impact towards purchase intention.
Hypothesis 4
H0: There is an impact from social interaction towards purchase intention of
H1: There is an impact from social interaction towards purchase intention of
46
As the multiple regression table shows that the p-value of social interaction is 0.723,
which is higher than the significant level of 0.05. Hence, H0 was accepted, it means that
social interaction has no impact towards purchase intention.
Hypothesis 5
H0: There is an impact from performance towards purchase intention of Smartphone
H1: There is an impact from performance towards purchase intention of Smartphone
As the multiple regression table shows that the p-value of performance is 0.723, which
is higher than the significant level of 0.05. Hence, H0 was accepted, it means that
performance has no impact towards purchase intention.
Hypothesis 6
H0: There is an impact from preference towards purchase intention of Smartphone
H1: There is an impact from preference towards purchase intention of Smartphone
As the multiple regression table shows that the p-value of preference is 0.000, which is
less than the significant level of 0.05. Hence, H0 was rejected, it means that preference
has an impact towards purchase intention.
47
Hypothesis 7
As the multiple regression table shows that the p-value of relative advantage is 0.000,
which is less than the significant level of 0.05. Hence, H0 was rejected, it means that
relative advantage has an impact towards purchase intention.
Hypothesis 8
H0: No factors (Brand, Relative Advantage, Compatibility, Performance, Preference,
Social Interaction and Product Features) have the most significant influence on the
purchase intention of smartphone among office workers in Hochiminh City
H1: At least one factor (Brand, Relative Advantage, Compatibility, Performance,
Preference, Social Interaction and Product Features) has the most significant influence
on the purchase intention of smartphone among office workers in Hochiminh City
Reject H0, if p < 0.05
There are four factors influence on the purchase intention of smartphone among the
office workers in Hochiminh City: Relative advantage, Product Features, Compatibility
and Preference. Those three factors have p-value of under the significant level of 0.05.
Step back to the table of Regression above, preference will be the factor most significant
48
influence on purchase intention of smartphone among office workers in Hochiminh
City as its highest Beta value of 0.382
49
CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSION
5.1 Conclusion
This study explores the factors influence on the purchase intention of smartphone. 218
respondents have been selected to measure the purchase intention of smartphone.
Questionnaires were provided, which will collect data into 5 groups of independent
variables.
The respondents of this study including of 50% males and 50% females unintentionally.
Meanwhile, most of respondents are at the age of 22 to 29 with 64%. Most of them have
an average income less than 8,000,000 VND (32% in detail). The Product Features of
connect to internet was founded to be an important items as its mean of 4.29. In contrast,
the least mean of item value was 2.63 of Friends and family are very helpful to me in
making decision of buying smartphone in Social influence.
The data analyze also presented some irrelevant points in the study. Two items were
excluded from the factor Brand after three times of Cronbachs alpha test. This stage
has also demonstrated that all factors had the reliability value in range of 0.7 to 0.8,
which is considered as a good rate.
Several factors have been examined if they have impact on the purchasing intention of
smartphone in this study. From the very beginning, the researchers spend efforts
analyzing this relationship between the dependent variables and the independent
variables including: Price, Brand, Compatibility, Relative Advantage, Product Features
and Social Influence. Nevertheless, collected data present that office workers in
Hochiminh City has been affected by Relative Advantage, Product Features,
Compatibility and Preference. While the first three variables as listed are proposed at
first, the last variables was surprisingly discovered after the validity test. The variable
50
was a part of the previous items found in Product Features and Price. Furthermore,
Preference is also known as the variable which most influence the purchase intention
with the highest Beta in Multiple Regression Calculation. However, Compatibility was
also found to have negative relationship with purchase intention. Meanwhile, the rest
three factors were known to play a vital role in affecting the dependent variable. Since
then, adjustments of those three factors will lead to changes of purchasing intention in
reality.
Evidences from the study demonstrated that, smartphone firms might be inherited from
the buying decision if they could enhance the effect of Relative Advantage, Product
Features, Compatibility and Preference into real product, as well as into their marketing
strategy.
5.2 Practical implication
From the academic findings, practical implication is also recommended, which might
support the managerial decisions of smartphone manufacturers in term of product
development, marketing and communication.
While Relative Advantage has been proven to have impact on purchase intention, it is
suggested to enhance the advantages of smartphone towards the old feature phones.
Instead of perceiving a just-enough-to-use phone, consumers nowadays require more
hi-tech complements, more fashion and style and higher integration. Invest on product
development with leading value continuously might raise an advantage for smartphone,
especially, in the segment of office workers, who are at intensive use of smartphone.
Product Features is yet another field to consider in product development. For office
workers, who are examined to prefer function of gaming, taking photos and connecting
to internet, those phone with ready feature to fulfill their requirements might take a
51
easily step to approach those group of consumers. As well as focus on these features
for firms marcom campaign. Especially, when the manufacturer has their ability on
offering high-quality of those features, take them as their unique selling points to
promote as a key road to conquer the consumers.
Last but not least, Preference has been analyzed to be the most significant impact on
the purchase intention, which means their items regarding the use of applications and
price per quality would be considered as most important things to smartphone producers.
It is essential to understand that office workers, who tend to have higher education
comparing to other group of society, may spend time and efforts in searching
information and review for a smartphone. Since then, those people logically require a
competitive price in connection with the quality they will perceive. Furthermore, as
employees work in environment of computing machines, applications with productivity
would be an useful tool into their smartphone. Firms might pay attention to provide
such appropriate price with meaningful software to satisfy their consumers.
In addition to the above implications, it is necessary for firm to collaborate with their
consumers. Review and feedback from consumers for a smartphone function, design,
price and build quality is required to build a strong relation between manufacturer and
consumers, as well as to deeply understand the consumers continuously.
5.3 Limitation and further recommendation
The data analyze has concerned about the precision of factors and items included. There
are items and factors removed from the initial proposal, which have let to changes of
analyzing factors and items. However, as the purpose to understand the relationship
between factors influencing the purchase intention of smartphone, later analyze has
52
significant discover to unhide the researchers questions. Alongside the usefulness
findings, this research has several limitation to be discussed.
Firstly, with a narrow scope of office workers in Hochiminh City with small samples,
this research does not have ability to generalize the results in term of the whole country.
It is recommended to have further studies in different cities and province with larger
samples. Since then, more accurate insights of smartphone consumers would be draw
out to represent for the Vietnamese smartphone market.
Secondly, the study sample has not include the other groups as teenager or students,
who are very fond of smartphone and have highly intention to use smartphone. Further
explanation for more segment insight should give a wider picture for firms to consider
while planning to launch new products.
Thirdly, various stages of the consumers buying decision have not included in this
research. Those stages also have important impact on the purchase intention of
consumers, it is suggested that researchers should also consider and fulfill other
determinants.
53
References
Aaker, D.A. (1991), Managing Brand Equity. Capitalizing on the Value of Brand Name,
Free Press, New York, NY.
Anderson, D. R., Sweeney, D. J., & Williams, T. A. (2008). Statistics for Business and
Economics. Cengage Learning.
Armstrong, J. S., Morwitz, V. G., & Kumar, V. (2000). Sales forecasts for existing
consumer products and services: Do purchase intentions contribute to accuracy.
International Journal of Forecasting, 16(3), 383-397.
Asch, S. E. (1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of
judgment. In H. Guetzkow (Ed.), Groups, leadership and men. Pittsburgh: PA:
Carnegie Press.
Bickart, B., & Schindler, R. (2001). Internet forums as influential sources of consumer.
Journal of Interactive Marketing, 15(3), 31-40.
Blackwell, R. D., Miniard, P. W., & Engel, J. F. (2001). Consumer behavior 9th. Mason,
Ohio: South-Western.
Bolton, R.N. (1989). The relationship between market characteristics and promotional
price elasticities. Marketing Science, 8(2), 153-69.
Brown, I., Cajee, Z., Davies, D., & Stroebel, S. (2003). Cell phone banking: Predictors
of adoption in South Africa - An exploratory study. International Journal of
Information Management, 23, 381-394.
54
Cavana, RY, Delahaye, BL & Sekaran, U (2001), Applied Business Research:
Qualitative and Quantitative Methods, John Wiley & Sons, Qld, Aust.
Chang, Y. F. and Chen, C. S. (2005). Smart phone the choice of client platform for
mobile commerce. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 27, 329-336.
Cheong, J.H. and Park, M.C. (2005). Mobile internet acceptance in Korea. Internet
Research, 15(2), 125-140.
Ching-Fu, C., & Yu-Ying, C. (2008). Airline brand equity, brand preference, and
purchase intentions. Journal of Air Transport Management, 14, 4042.
Ching-Han, K., Chun-Ming, Y., Yi-Chung, W., & Ming-Chuen, C (2010). User's
Preference Factors in the Development of Fashion Technology Products for Design
Background Using Smartphones as an Example.
Cnossen, & Christine. (1997). School of Public Administration and Law, the Robert
Gordon University. Retrieved June 14, 2012, from Secondary Research: Learning
Paper 7: jura2.eee.rgu.ac.uk/dsk5/research/mater
Dalsang Chung, Sun Gi Chun (2011), An exploratory study on determining factors for
the smartphone selection decision, Issues in Information Systems, Volume XII, No. 1,
pp. 291-300.
Denise E., A. (2005). People, places, and questions: An investigation of the everyday
life information-seeking behaviors of urban young adults. 27(2), 141-163.
Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B. and Gerwal, D. (1991). Effects of price, brand and store
information on buyers product evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research, 28, 307-
19.
55
Etgar, M. and Malhotra, N.K. (1981). Determinants of price dependency: Personal and
perceptual factors. Journal of Consumer Research, 8 (2), 217-222.
Farquhar, P. H. (1989). Managing Brand Equity. Marketing Research, 1, September,
24-33.
Field, A. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Gatignon, H., & Robertson, T. S. (1985). A propositional inventory for new diffusion
research. Journal of Consumer Research. 11, 849-866.
George D & Mallery P (2003) SPSS for windows step by step: A sample Guide
& reference, Boston; Allyn & Bacon.
Gourville, J. T. (2006). Eager Sellers and Stony Buyers: Understanding the Psychology
of New-Product Adoption. Harvard Business Review, 84 (6).
Grewal, D., Krishanan, R., Baker, J., & Borin, N. (1998). The Effect of Store Name,
Brand Name and Price Discounts on Consumers' Evaluations and Purchase Intentions.
Journal of Retailing, 74 (3), 331-352.
He, Q., Duan, Y., Fu, Z., & Li, D. (2006). An Innovation Adoption Study of Online E-
Payment in Chinese Companies. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations, 4,
48-64.
Ho, C. H., & Wu, W. (2011). Role of Innovativeness of Consumer in Relationship
between Perceived Attributes of New Products and Intention to Adopt. International
journal of electronic business management, 9, 258-266.
Holak, S. L., & Lehmann, D. R. (1990). Purchase Intentions and the Dimensions of
Innovation: An Exploratory Model. Product innovation management, 5973
56
Hyuk Jun, C., & Margaret A, M. (2008). Consumers' Reliance on Product Information
and Recommendations Found in UGC. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 8, 2.
Ima Ilyani Ibrahim, et al., (2013). Antecedent Stirring Purchase Intention of
Smartphone among Adolescents in Perlis. International Journal of Academic Research
in Business and Social Sciences, Vol. 3, No. 12
Fliegel, Frederick, C., & Joseph, E. K. (1966). Attributes of Innovations as Factors in
Diffusion. American Journal of Sociology, 72, 235 - 248.
Isen, A. M. (2011). An Influence of Positive Affect on Decision Making in Complex
Situations: Theoretical Issues with Practical Implications. Journal of Consumer
Psychology, 11(2), 75-85.
Jane, E. S., & Peter, J. B. (2000). Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 63 (3), 224-237.
Jee Han, Y., Joseph, C. N., & Xavier, D. (2010). Signaling Status with Luxury Goods:
The Role of Brand Prominence. Journal of Marketing, 74, 4.
Joep W, C. A., Ruud T, F., & Tammo H, A. B. (2011). Generalizations on consumer
innovation adoption: A meta-analysis on drivers of intention and behavior.
International Journal of Research in Marketing, 28(2), 134-144.
Juha, M. (2008). Customers' purchase intentions as a reflection of price perception.
Journal of Product & Brand Management, 17 (3), 188 196.
Key, & P., J. (1997). Questionnaire and interview as data-gathering tools. Retrieved
June 14, 2012, from Research Design in Occupational Education.
57
Khasawneh K and Hasouneh A. B. I. (2010). The effect of familiar brand names on
consumer behavior: A Jordanian Perspective. International Research Journal of
Finance Economics, 43.
Kim, E. Y., & Kim, Y. K. (2004). Predicting online purchase intentions for clothing
products. European Journal of Marketing, 38(7), 883-897.
Kiwon Lee, Euiho Suh, Jihye Park (2012), Pohang University of Science and
Technology, A study on determinant factors to purchase for tablet PC and
smartphone by a comparative analysis
Kotler, P., and Armstrong, G. (2007). Principles of Marketing (12th ed.). Boston:
Pearson Education.
Kunal, S. and Yoo, B.H (2010). Interaction between price and price deal. Journal of
Product & Brand Management, 19(2), 143-152.
L.Kurtz, D., H.F.MacKenzie, & Snow, K. (2009). Rate of Adoption Determinants,
Relative Advantage. In Contemporary Marketing. Cengage Learning.
Lange, F. A. (1925). The History of Materialism. New York: Harcourt, Brace, & Co.
Ling Chang (2011). Factors Influencing Changsha Teenagers Purchase Intention
towards Celebrities. Assumption University Press (p. 37)
Malhotra, N. K. (1996). Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation. Prentice Hall.
Mei Min, et al., (2012). Factors Affecting the Demand of Smartphone among Young
Adult. International Journal on Social Science Economics & Art, Vol.02, No.02
Mohd Azam Osman (2012). A Study of the Trend of Smartphone and its Usage
Behavior in Malaysia
58
Monk, A., Hassenzahl, M., Blythe, M., & Reed, D. (2002). Funology: designing
enjoyment proceedings of Conference on Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in
Computer Systems, 924.
Monroe, K.B. (2003). Pricing: Making Profitable Decisions. Satisfaction: A Behavioral
Perspective on the Consumer (3rd ed). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Nagle, T.T., and Holden, R.K. (2002). The Strategy and Tactics of Pricing: A Guide to
Profitable Decision Making, 3rd ed., New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Nebenzahl I.D., and McLeod L.E. (2005). Adolescent brand consciousness and product
placements: awareness, liking and perceived effects on self and others. International
Journal of Consumer Studies, 29(6),515-528.
Osman, A., Sabudin, M., Osman, A., & Shiang-Yen. (2011). Consumer Behaviors
toward Usage of Smartphone in Malaysia. International Conference on Software and
Computer Applications, 9, 158-164.
Oulasvirta, A., Wahlstrom, M. and Ericsson K. A. (2011). What does it mean to be good
at using mobile device?
Park, Y. and Chen, J. V. (2007). Acceptance and adoption of the innovative use of
Smartphone. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 107(9), 1349-1365.
Pecotich, A., Pressley, M., & Roth, D. (1996). The impact of ethnocentrism on the
origin effect in the service sector. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 12(4),
213-224.
59
Pederson, P.E. (n.d). Adoption of mobile internet services: an exploratory study of
mobile commerce early adopters. Retrieved July 17, 2011 from
http://ikt.hia.no/perep/earlyadopt_paper2.pdf
Peter, C. (1969). The Begrudging Index and the Subjective Value of Money in Pricing.
London: London, Staples Press, Ltd.
Puth, G., Mostert, P. and Ewing, M. (1999). Consumer perceptions of mentioned
product and brand attributes in magazine advertising. Journal of product and brand
management, 8(1), 38-49.
Qiang Xu et al. (2011). Identifying Diverse Usage Behaviors of Smartphone App
Rao, A. and Monroe, K.B. (1988), The moderating effect of prior knowledge on cue
utilizations in product evaluations, Journal of Consumer Research, 19 (2), 253-64.
Rao, A. R. and Ruekert, R. W. (1994). Brand alliances as signals of product quality.
Sloan Management Review, 4, Fall, 87-97.
Rashotte L. (2007). Social Influences. Retrieved July 17, 2011 from Blackwell
Publishing
Rio, A.B., Vazquez, R. and Iglesias, V. (2001). The role of the brand name in obtaining
differential advantages. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 10(7), 452-465.
Roach, G. (2009). Consumer Perceptions of Mobile Phone Marketing: A Direct
Marketing Innovation. Direct marketing: an international journal, 3 (2), 124 - 138.
Rogers, E. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th edition). New York: The Free Press.
Rogers, E. M. (1976). New Product Adoption and Diffusion. Journal of Consumer
research, 2, 192-208.
60
Schiffman, L. G., & Kanuk, L. L. (2000). Consumer Behavior (7th ed.). Wisconsin:
Prentice Hall.
Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2010). Research methods for business: A skill building
approach (5 ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Silk, A. J., & Urban, G. L. (1978). Pre-test-market evaluation of new packaged goods:
A model and measurement methodology. Journal of Marketing Research, 15(2), 171-
191.
Sinhaa, I., & Batrab, R. (1999). The Effect of Consumer Price Consciousness on Private
Label Purchase. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 16 (3), 237251.
Smith, M.F., and Carsky, M.L. (1996). Grocery Shopping Behavior: A Comparison of
Involved and Uninvolved Consumers. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 39
(2), 73-80
Srinivasan, S. S. and Till B. D. (2002). Evaluation of search, experience and credence
attributes: role of brand name and product trial. Journal of Product & Management,
11(7), 417-431.
Steiner, R. L. (2004). The Nature and Benefits of National Brand/Private Label
Competition. Review of Industrial Organization, 24, 105.
Swindells, J. (2004). Blurtit. Retrieved July 10, 2012, from What Are Some Advantages
And Disadvantages Of Descriptive Research?: http://www.blurtit.com/q950778.html
Sypher, B. D. (1997). Interorganizational Diffusion. In Case Studies in Organizational
Communication 2: Perspectives on Contemporary Work Life (p. 403). Guilford Press.
61
Tidd, J. (2010). Factor Influencing Adoption, Relative Advantages in Gaining
Momentum. World Scientific.
Tim, K. (2002). The High Price of Materialism. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Tseng, F. M., & Lo, H. Y. (2011). Antecedents of consumers intentions to upgrade
their mobile phones. Telecommunications Policy, 35, 74-86.
Turner, J. C. (1982). Towards a cognitive redefinition of the social group. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Vitzthum, R. C. (1995). Materialism: An Affirmative History and Definition. New York:
Prometheus Books.
Warshaw, P. R., & Davis, F. D. (1985). Disentangling behavioral intentions and
behavioral expectations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 213228.
Weiers, R. M. (2008). Introduction to business statistics (6 ed.). Mason, USA: Thomson
South-Western.
Wickliffe, V. P. and Pysarchik, D. T. (2001). A look at product attributes as enhances
of group integration among US and Korean consumers. International Journal of Retail
& Distribution Management, 29(2), 99-108.
Wrenn, B., Stevens, R. E., & Loudon, D. L. (2006). Marketing Research: Text And
Cases. Rutledge
Yang, K. C. (2005). Exploring factors affecting the adoption of mobile commerce in
Singapore. Telematics and Informatics, 22 (3), 257277.
Yang, K. C. (2005). Exploring factors affecting the adoption of mobile commerce in
Singapore. Telematics and Informatics, 22 (3), 257277.
62
Yue, G., & Stuart J, B. (2011). Explaining purchasing behavior within World of
Warcraft. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 52 (3), 18-30.
Yusuf, Z. ., & Abdullah, K. (2003). Research Note: A Need or a Status Symbol?: Use
of Cellular Telephones in Turkey. European Journal of Communication, 18 (2), 241-
254.
Zahra Seyed Ghorban 2012. Brand Attitude, Its Antecedents and Consequences.
Investigation into Smartphone Brands in Malaysia. IOSR Journal of Business and
Management (IOSRJBM), PP 31-35
Chia-Ju Liu, Hao-Yun Liang (2014). The Deep Impression of Smartphone Brand on the
Customers Decision Making.
63
Appendix
BNG KHO ST
NHNG YU T TC NG N NH MUA IN THOI THNG
MINH (SMARTPHONE)
Xin cho cc Anh/Ch,
Hin ti, ti ang thc hin lun vn cao hc ti trng i hc Quc t - i hc Quc
gia thnh ph H Ch Minh vi ti "Nghin cu cc yu t tc ng n nh mua
in thoi thng minh (Smartphone) ca Nhn vin vn phng ti khu vc Tp.HCM".
Knh mong cc anh/ch dnh cht thi gian tr li gip ti mt s cu hi sau y.
Thng tin c nhn
Vui lng nh du khoanh trn s anh/ch la chn. Cc thng tin bn di c s
dng cho mc ch thng k v m bo tnh an ton thng tin cho anh/ch
Vui lng cho bit gii tnh ca anh (ch)?
1. Nam
2. N
Vui lng cho bit thu nhp hng thng ca anh (ch)?
1. Di 8,000,000 ng
2. T 8,000,000 ng n t hn 12,000,000 ng
3. T 12,000,000 ng n t hn 18,000,000 ng
4. T 18,000,000 ng n t hn 25,000,000 ng
5. Nhiu hn 25,000,000 ng
64
Vui lng cho bit tui ca anh (ch)?
1. Di 22 tui
2. T 22 n 29 tui
3. T 30 n 39 tui
4. T 40 n 49 tui
5. Hn 50 tui
Cc yu t nh hng n quyt nh la chn mua smartphone
Cc cu hi ca phn ny cp n cc yu t gy nh hng n quyt nh chn
mua smartphone ca anh/ch. Xin anh ch vui lng cho bit kin ca mnh da trn
nh gi theo thang im t 1 n 5 m chng ti a ra di y [(1) = Hon ton
phn i, (2) = Phn i, (3) = Trung lp (Khng c kin), (4) = ng , (5) = Hon
ton ng ]. Vui lng ch khoanh trn mt s la chn ng nht theo kin ca
anh/ch.
Hon
Hon
ton Phn Trung ng
M GI C ton
phn i lp
ng
i
PR1 Gi c l yu t quan trng nht khi chn
1 2 3 4 5
mua smartphone
PR2 Ti ch mua smartphone trong cc
1 2 3 4 5
chng trnh gim gi
PR3 Ti s so snh gi c gia cc nhn hiu
1 2 3 4 5
v gia cc ca hng trc khi mua
PR4 Ti mua smartphone v n thc s ng
gi da trn gi thnh v cht lng n 1 2 3 4 5
mang li
PR5 Cc smartphone gi r to cho ti cm
1 2 3 4 5
gic khng an ton v cht lng thp
65
Hon
Hon
ton Phn Trung ng
M THNG HIU ton
phn i lp
ng
i
BR1 Thng hiu l yu t quan trng nht
1 2 3 4 5
khi chn mua smartphone
BR2 Ti thch chn thng hiu smartphone
1 2 3 4 5
c bit n ton cu
BR3 Ti thch chn mt thng hiu
1 2 3 4 5
smartphone c tin cy
BR4 Ti ch thch chn thng hiu
1 2 3 4 5
smartphone theo s thch ca mnh
BR5 Ti sn sng chn mt thng hiu
smartphone mi nu n p ng c 1 2 3 4 5
cc tiu ch ca ti
Hon
Hon
ton Phn Trung ng
M S PH HP ton
phn i lp
ng
i
CM1 Smartphone ph hp cho mi nhu cu
1 2 3 4 5
ti cn v mt chic in thoi
CM2 Smartphone ph hp vi cuc sng
1 2 3 4 5
hng ngy v cng vic ca ti
CM3 Smartphone ph hp vi thi quen s
dng in thoi ca ti 1 2 3 4 5
CM4 Smartphone l mt s thay i xng
1 2 3 4 5
ng cho in thoi truyn thng
CM5 Smartphone m bo cho cc nhu cu
1 2 3 4 5
cn s dng ca ti hin ti
Hon
Hon
ton Phn Trung ng
M TNH NNG ton
phn i lp
ng
i
PF1 Ti thch kh nng chp nh/quay phim
1 2 3 4 5
ca smartphone
PF2 Smartphone c nhiu games cht lng
1 2 3 4 5
cao
PF3 Smartphone c nhiu ng dng hu ch 1 2 3 4 5
PF4 Smartphone d dng kt ni internet
1 2 3 4 5
(wifi, 3G)
PF5 Ti dng smartphone bi ti thch h
iu hnh ca n (iOS, Blackberry OS, 1 2 3 4 5
Android, Windows Phone, )
66
Hon
Hon
ton Phn Trung ng
M LI TH SO SNH ton
phn i lp
ng
i
RA1 Smartphone tin li, ng tin cy v hu
1 2 3 4 5
ch hn in thoi thng thng
RA2 Smartphone thi trang, phong cch v
1 2 3 4 5
thi thng hn
RA3 Smartphone c th tng thch vi
nhiu thit b k thut s khc 1 2 3 4 5
RA4 Mn hnh v bn phm ln hn ca
smartphone gip cho vic s dng cc 1 2 3 4 5
tnh nng ca n d dng hn
RA5 Smartphone c th gip ti gii quyt
1 2 3 4 5
cng vic trong nhiu tnh hung
Hon
Hon
ton Phn Trung ng
M TC NG X HI ton
phn i lp
ng
i
SI1 Gia nh v bn b chn mua
1 2 3 4 5
smartphone gip ti
SI2 Ti hi kin bn b v ngi thn khi
1 2 3 4 5
mua smartphone
SI3 Bn b, ngi thn ti phn ln s dng
1 2 3 4 5
smartphone
SI4 Bn b, ngi thn ti tin rng
1 2 3 4 5
smartphone rt hu ch cho h
SI5 Ti tham kho thng tin trn cc din
n v mng x hi m ti tham gia khi 1 2 3 4 5
mua smartphone
67
D nh mua smartphone
Cc cu hi ca phn ny cp n nh mua smartphone ca anh/ch. Xin anh ch
vui lng cho bit kin ca mnh da trn nh gi theo thang im t 1 n 5 m
chng ti a ra di y [(1) = Hon ton phn i, (2) = Phn i, (3) = Trung lp
(Khng c kin), (4) = ng , (5) = Hon ton ng ]. Vui lng ch khoanh trn
mt s la chn ng nht theo kin ca anh/ch
Hon
M Hon
ton Phn Trung ng
cu NH MUA ton
phn i lp
hi ng
i
PI1 Ti s tip tc s dng smartphone
1 2 3 4 5
PI2 Ti c nh s mua smartphone 1 2 3 4 5
PI3 Ti c nh s mua smartphone tt hn
chic ang s dng 1 2 3 4 5
PI4 Ti s k vi bn b, ngi thn v chic
1 2 3 4 5
smartphone ti ang s dng
PI5 Ti s khuyn bn b v ng nghip
1 2 3 4 5
mua smartphone
XIN CHN THNH CM N S H TR CA QU ANH/CH
68
Table 17 - Reliability Test of Respondents
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.713 5
Corrected Item- Cronbach's
Scale Mean if Scale Variance Total Alpha if Item
PR1 15.20 4.583 .429 .682
PR2 15.39 4.202 .561 .628
PR3 14.78 4.470 .502 .654
PR4 14.66 4.714 .458 .672
PR5 15.02 4.244 .423 .692
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.702 5

BR1 15.91 4.108 .425 .666
BR2 15.89 3.588 .636 .574
BR3 15.68 3.839 .586 .601
BR4 15.89 4.052 .388 .684
BR5 15.87 4.494 .286 .720
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.742 5
69
CO1 16.13 4.125 .500 .699
CO2 16.04 4.104 .631 .661
CO3 16.24 3.703 .602 .658
CO4 16.14 3.957 .443 .725
CO5 16.16 4.329 .392 .738
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.732 5
FE1 16.11 3.549 .590 .649
FE2 16.40 3.560 .465 .699
FE3 16.04 4.141 .426 .711
FE4 15.89 3.545 .603 .645
FE5 16.17 3.656 .414 .722
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.745 5
RA1 15.89 5.385 .565 .680
RA2 15.94 5.075 .526 .697
RA3 15.67 6.018 .476 .714
RA4 15.75 5.229 .553 .684
RA5 15.71 5.987 .440 .725
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.741 5
70
SI1 14.55 5.742 .481 .711
SI2 13.87 5.167 .604 .656
SI3 13.49 6.970 .428 .724
SI4 13.45 6.442 .567 .680
SI5 13.37 6.482 .487 .703
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.765 5
PI1 15.67 5.549 .531 .724
PI2 15.32 5.906 .606 .707
PI3 15.56 5.547 .486 .742
PI4 15.94 5.406 .556 .715
PI5 15.97 5.594 .521 .728
71

Exploring The Factors Affecting Purchasing Intention of Smartphone

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Exploring The Factors Affecting Purchasing Intention of Smartphone

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF VIETNAM

SCHOOL OF BUSINESS Independence - Freedom - Happiness

ASSURANCE QUALIFIED THESIS

Students Name: Nguyen Thanh Trung Hieu

Dr. Pham Hong Hoa

SMARTPHONE: A STUDY OF OFFICE WORKERS IN HOCHIMINH

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of

MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Mr. Nguyen Thanh Trung Hieu

International University - Vietnam National University HCMC

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of

MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Mr. Nguyen Thanh Trung Hieu

International University - Vietnam National University HCMC

of my supervisor, my family and friends.

First of all, I would like to express my profound gratitude and appreciation to my

I am in need for consultation.

in the International University, who imparted their knowledge and experience to me

during the past two years.

courses of the MBA program.

been previously submitted to any other educational and research programs or

International University Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City.

authors prior consent.

Nguyen Thanh Trung Hieu/MBA05010/2011-2014

Chapter 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1

Table 2 - Rules of Thumb about Correlation Coefficient ............................................ 25

Table 3 - Demographic of Respondents....................................................................... 27

Table 4 - Crosstab between age and average income of respondents .......................... 29

Table 5 Descriptive statistics of respondents ............................................................ 31

Table 6 - Cronbach's Alpha rule based on George and Mallery .................................. 33

Table 7 - Reliability test for consumers purchase intention on smartphone .............. 33

Table 8 Reliability test of Brand (1st run) ................................................................. 34

Table 9 - Reliability test of Brand (2nd run) ................................................................. 35

Table 10 - Reliability test of Brand (3rd run) ............................................................... 36

Table 11 - The final table of Cronbachs alpha reliability test .................................... 36

Table 12 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) for independent variables ................. 38

Table 13 Group of EFA ............................................................................................ 39

Table 14 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) for independent variables ................. 39

Table 15 - Pearson Correlation Testing ....................................................................... 41

Table 16 - Multiple regression testing ......................................................................... 44

Table 17 - Reliability Test of Respondents.................................................................. 69

Figure 1 - Diffusion of innovations model. Rogers, E.M. (1995) ............................... 13

Figure 2 - Conceptual model: Factors affect purchase intention of smartphone ......... 15

Figure 3 - Sex of Respondents ..................................................................................... 27

Figure 4 - Age of Respondents .................................................................................... 28

Figure 5 - Average income of respondents .................................................................. 28

Smartphone is invented to fulfill those demands, furthermore, provided a most compact

Advantage, Compatibility, Product Features, Social Influence and Purchase Intention.

1.1 Research Background

innovation by smartphone manufacturers. Nowadays, smartphone is considered as a

switching from feature phone to smartphone.

signal. A recent survey conducted by Google an Ipsos Media CT in Vietnam (2013)

planet: Vietnam, quarter 3, 2013). Hence, smartphone is transforming the consumer

Nevertheless, a huge number of manufacturers in the smartphone industry, creates

plenty of models, lead to an embarrassment of consumer while choosing a smartphone.

factors influencing the purchase intention of smartphone.

raising of income and spend on hi-tech products frequently. According to Gartner

(2013), trend of using smartphone and tablet to improve productivity as well as to

provide more entertainments might be required by half of office workers in 2017.

researches on the consumer's perception of purchasing smartphone, and there are no

users purchase intention. Thus, it is an essential for the the

manufacturer/distributor/retailer to know what factors affecting to the consumer's

might be benefited by understanding their potential perceptions.