Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/153183
|
| Title: | 以轉換成本探討持續使用意願之研究—以生產力應用程式Notion為例
Exploring Continuance Intention through Switching Costs: A Case Study of the Productivity Application Notion |
| Authors: | 顏子娉
Yen, Tzu-Ping |
| Contributors: | 白佩玉
Pai, Pei-Yu
顏子娉
Yen, Tzu-Ping |
| Keywords: | 轉換成本
持續使用意願
生產力應用程式
Notion
替代品吸引力
Switching Costs
Continuance Intention
Productivity Application
Notion
Alternative Attractiveness |
| Date: | 2024 |
| Issue Date: | 2024-09-04 14:11:02 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 本研究旨在探討轉換成本如何影響使用者對於生產力應用程式 Notion 的持續使用意願，並採用 Burnham et al. (2003) 的轉換成本理論框架，將轉換成本分為程序成本、財務成本和關係成本，並結合替代品吸引力進行綜合分析。本研究採用深度訪談中的半結構式訪談，對 Notion 重度用戶進行一對一訪談，經分析和整理得出以下結論：
(1) 程序成本是構成用戶轉換成本的主要因素，這些成本包括用戶熟悉功能的學習成本，其中 Notion 資料庫（Database）是最需要投入時間學習的功能之一。此外，使用後需要定期優化 Notion 的版面和功能，也增加了學習成本。損失關鍵功能和資料搬遷所帶來的經濟風險成本，也是形成程序成本的關鍵要因。
(2) 由於 Notion 採用免費增值模式，財務成本對用戶的影響並不顯著。
(3) 關係成本則在需要強制性使用應用程式的組織團隊中尤為明顯。
(4) 替代產品的吸引力顯著影響用戶的持續使用意願。系統性能是促使用戶轉向替代品的主要原因，包含系統性能和使用體驗。而功能更強大、效能更佳的替代品對 Notion 使用者的持續使用意願構成了挑戰。
根據研究結果，本論文亦提出應用程式開發商開發和營運生產力應用程式的實務建議。首先，應降低學習成本，提供更直觀的教學資源，以幫助新用戶更快上手。其次，建立口碑，透過用戶反饋和社群互動，持續提升產品的名聲和信任度。此外，確保資料轉換之兼容也至關重要，提供簡便且可靠的資料匯出和匯入功能，減少用戶遷移資料的困難；並根據用戶需求，不斷改進現有功能、開發新功能和提升使用體驗，以保持產品競爭力。最後，可以針對重要功能和團隊情境設計付費方案，特別是針對企業和團隊用戶設計專屬的付費方案，提升團隊協作效率。上述實務建議旨在優化使用者體驗，減少用戶流失並提升企業的市場競爭力。
This study aims to explore the impact of switching costs on the continuance intention of users of the productivity application Notion. The study adopts Burnham et al. (2003) switching cost framework, which categorizes switching costs into procedural, financial, and relational costs, and integrates the attractiveness of alternatives for a comprehensive analysis. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with nine heavy users of Notion to derive the following conclusions:
Procedural costs are the primary factors constituting user switching costs. These costs include the learning costs associated with familiarizing users with various functions, among which the Notion database (Database) is one of the most time-consuming features to learn. Additionally, the need for regular optimization of Notion’s layout and functions after initial use also increases the learning costs. Economic risk costs arising from the loss of critical features and difficulties in data migration are also key contributors to procedural costs.
Due to Notion’s freemium model, financial costs have a negligible impact on users.
Relational costs are particularly evident in organizational teams that mandate the use of the application.
The attractiveness of alternative products significantly influences users' continuance intention. System performance, including system efficiency and user experience, is the main reason prompting users to switch to alternatives. More powerful and better-performing alternatives pose a challenge to the continuance intention of Notion users.
Based on the research findings, this paper also provides practical recommendations for application developers in developing and operating productivity applications. Firstly, learning costs should be reduced by offering more intuitive instructional resources and user guides to help new users get started more quickly. Secondly, building a good reputation through user feedback and community interaction is essential for continuously enhancing the product’s reputation and
trustworthiness. Additionally, ensuring compatibility for data migration is crucial; developers should provide simple and reliable data export and import functions to reduce the difficulty of data migration for users. Continuous development of features and enhancement of user experience is necessary; existing functions should be improved, and new ones should be developed according to user needs to maintain the product’s competitiveness. Lastly, designing paid plans for critical features and team scenarios, especially tailored plans for enterprise and team users, can improve team collaboration efficiency. These practical recommendations aim to optimize the user experience, reduce user churn, and enhance market competitiveness. |
| Reference: | 一、中文參考文獻
梁勝傑（2024）。混合式辦公者之專注生產力 APP 使用行為研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺灣師範大學圖書資訊學研究所。
林希中（2014）。從遊戲化觀點探討生產力 App 對學業拖延的改善成效〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺北科技大學創新設計研究所。
潘淑滿（2022）。質性研究：理論與應用。台北市: 心理出版社。
胡婉玲（2006）。消費者轉換成本類型對轉換意圖關係之研究：台灣行 動電話服務業為例。廣告學研究，第二十五期：81-105。
彭玉樹、梁奕忠、于卓民與梁晉嘉（2010）。台灣管理學門質性研究之回顧與展望。中山管理評論，第十八卷第一期：11-39。
林金定、嚴嘉楓、陳美花（2005）。質性研究方法：訪談模式與實施步 驟分析。身心障礙研究季刊，第三卷第二期：122-136。
二、英文文獻
Azfar, A., Choo, K. K. R., & Liu, L. (2017). Forensic taxonomy of android productivity apps. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 76, 3313-3341.
Balabanis, G., Reynolds, N., & Simintiras, A. (2006). Bases of e-store loyalty: Perceived switching barriers and satisfaction. Journal of Business Research, 59(2), 214-224.
Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-confirmation model. MIS Quarterly, 351-370.
Burnham, T. A., Frels, J. K., & Mahajan, V. (2003). Consumer switching costs: A typology, antecedents, and consequences. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31(2), 109-126.
Cardozo, R. N. (1965). An experimental study of customer effort, expectation, and satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research, 2(3), 244-249.
Chen, S. C., Yen, D. C., & Hwang, M. I. (2012). Factors influencing the continuance intention to the usage of Web 2.0: An empirical study. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 933-941.
Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3-21.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Technology acceptance model: TAM. Al-Suqri, MN, Al-Aufi, AS: Information Seeking Behavior and Technology Adoption, 205, 219.
Herrick, D. R. (2009, October). Google this! using Google apps for collaboration and productivity. In Proceedings of the 37th annual ACM SIGUCCS fall conference: communication and collaboration (pp. 55-64).
Jones, M. A., Mothersbaugh, D. L., & Beatty, S. E. (2000). Switching barriers and repurchase intentions in services. Journal of Retailing, 76(2), 259-274.
Jones, M. A., Mothersbaugh, D. L., & Beatty, S. E. (2002). Why customers stay: measuring the underlying dimensions of services switching costs and managing their differential strategic outcomes. Journal of Business Research, 55(6), 441-450.
Kim, J., Lee, J., & Zo, H. (2018). Toward sustainable freemium software: The roles of user satisfaction and use context. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 19(3), 201-222.
Lakshman, T. K., & Thuijs, X. (2011). Enhancing enterprise field productivity via cross platform mobile cloud apps. In Proceedings of the second international workshop on Mobile cloud computing and services (pp. 27-32).
Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park ,CA :Sage.
McCracken, G. (1988). The Long Interview. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Minichiello, V., Aroni, R., Timewell, E. & Alexander, L. (1995). In-depth Interviewing, Second Edition. South Melbourne: Longman.
Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(4), 460-469.
Patterson, P. G., & Smith, T. (2003). A cross-cultural study of switching barriers and propensity to stay with service providers. Journal of Retailing, 79(2), 107-120.
Porter, M. E., & Strategy, C. (1980). Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. Competitive Strategy. New York: Free.
Sällberg, H., Wang, S., & Numminen, E. (2023). The combinatory role of online ratings and reviews in mobile app downloads: an empirical investigation of gaming and productivity apps from their initial app store launch. Journal of Marketing Analytics, 11(3), 426-442.
Shapiro, C., & Varian, H. R. (1999). Information rules: A strategic guide to the network economy. Harvard Business Press.
Urueña, A., E Arenas, Á., & Hidalgo, A. (2018). Understanding workers’ adoption of productivity mobile applications: a fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA). Economic research-Ekonomska istraživanja, 31(1), 967-981.
Williams, M. (1997). Social Surveys: Design to Analysis. In: T. May (Ed.) Social Research Issues, Methods and Process. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Woisetschläger, D. M., Lentz, P., & Evanschitzky, H. (2011). How habits, social ties, and economic switching barriers affect customer loyalty in contractual service settings. Journal of Business Research, 64(8), 800-808.
Yan, M., Filieri, R., & Gorton, M. (2021). Continuance intention of online technologies: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Information Management, 58, 102315.
Zhou, T. (2013). An empirical examination of continuance intention of mobile payment services. Decision Support Systems, 54(2), 1085-1091.
三、網路文獻
Statista（2024）App - Revenue By Segment Worldwide from 2020 to 2025. https://www-statista-com.proxyone.lib.nccu.edu.tw:8443/outlook/dmo/app/worldwide 搜尋日期：2024 年 5 月 21 日。
Statista（2024） Productivity App - Revenue Worldwide from 2020 to 2025.
https://www-statista-com.proxyone.lib.nccu.edu.tw:8443/outlook/dmo/app/productivity/worldwide 搜尋日期：2024 年 5 月 21 日。
Statista（2024）Productivity App - Download Worldwide from 2020 to 2025.
https://www-statista-com.proxyone.lib.nccu.edu.tw:8443/outlook/dmo/app/productivity/worldwide 搜尋日期：2024 年 5 月 21 日。
Nicola K Smith.（2015）, “Are productivity apps more hype than help? “ BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-34506590 搜尋日期：2024 年 5 月 21 日。
We are social & KEPIOS（2024）,《Digital 2024: TAIWAN》, We are social&KEPIOS. https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2024-taiwan 搜尋日期：2024 年 5 月 21 日。
Notion 官方網站（2024）, https://www.notion.so/ 搜尋日期：2024 年 5 月 21 日。
Kenrick Cai.（2024）, “$10 Billion Productivity Startup Notion Wants To Build Your AI Everything App “ Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrickcai/2024/04/11/10-billion-productivity-startup-notion-wants-to-build-your-ai-everything-app/?sh=4a2f2d2c6607 搜尋日期：2024 年 5 月 21 日。
Readwise 官方網站（2024）, https://readwise.io/ 搜尋日期：2024 年 5 月 21 日。
Maryanne Brown Caughey（2023）, “How Notion Hires“ https://www.notion.so/blog/how-notion-hires 搜尋日期：2024 年 5 月 21 日。
Bullet（2024）, “The History of Notion: Everything from launch to now.“ https://bullet.so/blog/history-of-notion-everything-from-users-funding-and-more/ 搜尋日期：2024 年 5 月 21 日。
CNBC（2023）, “Disruptor 50 2023-Notion.“ https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/09/notion-disruptor-50.html 搜尋日期：2024 年 5 月 21 日。
David Jeans & Alex Konrad（2020）, “Buzzy Work App Notion Hits $2 Billion Valuation In New Raise.“ https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidjeans/2020/04/01/buzzy-work-app-notion-hits-2-billion-valuation/?sh=20af489478ec 搜尋日期：2024 年 5 月 21 日。 |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
企業管理研究所(MBA學位學程)
111363063 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0111363063 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [企業管理研究所（MBA學位學程）] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 306301.pdf | | 24551Kb | Adobe PDF | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
