Lazy User Model: Solution Selection and Discussion about Switching Costs

  • Mikael Collan
  • Franck Tétard
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 86)


Research on user acceptance and adoption of technology represents an important body of knowledge within the field of information systems. The Lazy User Model has been recently introduced as a new way to understand user acceptance and adoption of technology, when several competing solutions are available. This model asserts that user selection is based on factors such as the identified user need, the user state, and the overall effort related to the use of technology. In this paper, we suggest that a user will most often choose the solution that will fulfill a need with the least effort, discuss the concept of switching costs and learning in connection with technology selection. Lazy User Model seems to capture important elements of solution selection, implying that the model may help in better understanding the factors that determine the success of mobile services.


user adoption user selection switching costs learning 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Davis, F.D.: Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly 13, 319–340 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bagozzi, R.P., et al.: Development and Test of a theory of technological learning and usage. Human Relations 45, 660–686 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Venkatesh, V., et al.: User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly 27, 425–478 (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Goodhue, D.L.: Understanding User Evaluations of Information Systems. Management Science 41, 1827–1844 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Goodhue, D.L., Thompson, R.L.: Task-technology fit and individual performance. MIS Quarterly 19, 213–236 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vessey: Cognitive Fit: A Theory-Based Analysis of the Graphs Versus Tables Literature. Decision Sciences 22, 219–240 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vessey, Galletta, D.F.: Cognitive Fit: An Empirical Study of Information Acquisition. Information Systems Research 2, 63–84 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zipf, G.K.: Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1949)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ferrer i Cancho, R., Solé, R.V.: Least effort and the origins of scaling in human language. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100, 788–791 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mann, T.: A Guide to Library Research Methods. Oxford University Press, USA (1987)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Team, T.L.: Lazy Users and Automatic Video Retrieval Tools in (the) Lowlands. In: 10th Text Retrieval Conference, TREC, Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chu, D., et al.: UVa Bus.NET: Enhancing User Experiences on Smart Devices through Context-Aware Computing. In: 2004 IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conference, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, pp. 511–515 (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Raghavan, R., et al.: InterActive Feature Selection. In: 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Franks, J., Sussman, O.: Financial Distress and Bank Restructuring of Small to Medium Size UK Companies. Review of Finance 9, 65–96 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fishbein, M., Azjen, I.: Belief, Attitude and Behavior: an Introduction to Theory and Reseach. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1975)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sheppard, B., et al.: The Theory of Reasoned Action: A Meta-Analysis of Past Research with Recommendations for Modifications and Future Research. The Journal of Consumer Research 15, 325–343 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rogers, E.M.: Diffusion of Innovations, 5th edn. Free Press, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Moore, G.C., Benbasat, I.: Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation. Information Systems Research 2, 192–222 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Benbazat, Barki, H.: Quo vadis, TAM. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 8(4), 211–218 (2007)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Collan, M.: Lazy User Behaviour. In: RePEc 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Collan, M., Tetard, F.: Lazy User Theory of Solution Selection. In: CELDA 2007, Algarve, Portugal, pp. 273–279 (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tétard, F.: Lazy User Theory: A Dynamic Model to Understand User Selection of Products and Services. In: 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS-42, Hawaii (2009)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Collan, M., et al.: Understanding the User Selection Process of Mobile Services with the Lazy User Model: An Exploratory Study. In: GMR 2009 - Global Mobility Roundtable 2009, Cairo, Egypt (2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zanette, D.: Zipf’s law and the creation of musical context. Musicae Scientiae 10, 3–18 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Reichle, E., et al.: The Neural Bases of Strategy and Skill in Sentence - Picture Verification. Cognitive Psychology 40, 261–295 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Constantinou: Consumer behaviour and Advanced Mobile data Services: Opening the “Black Box” of the Individual’s Choice Process. International Journal of Social and Humanistic Computing 1, 67–80 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kotler, P.: Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, Implementation, and Control, 9th edn. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River (1997)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Newell, Simon, H.A.: Human Problem Solving. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1972)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Collan, M., et al.: Using E- and M-Busines Components in Business: Approaches, Cases, and Rules of Thumb. In: Lee, I. (ed.) Electronic Business: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications, vol. 1, pp. 550–564. IGI Publishing, Hershey (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chen, P.-Y., Hitt, L.M.: Information Technology and Switching Costs. In: Hendershott, T. (ed.) Handbooks in Information Systems. Economics and Information Systems, vol. 1, pp. 437–470. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2006)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Thompson, R.L., Cats-Baril, W.: Information Technology and Management. McGraw-Hill, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hess, M., Ricart, J.E.: Managing Customer Switching Costs: a Framework for Competing in the Networked Environment. Management Research 1, 93–110 (Winter 2002-2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Johnson, E., Bellman, S., Lohse, G.: Cognitive Lock-in and the Power Law of Practice. Journal of Marketing 67, 62–75 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Murray, K., Häubl, G.: Explaining Cognitive Lock-In: the Role of Skill-Based Habits of Use in Consumer Choice. Journal of Consumer Research 34(1), 77–88 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mikael Collan
    • 1
  • Franck Tétard
    • 2
  1. 1.School of EconomicsPori Unit, University of TurkuPoriFinland
  2. 2.Department of Information TechnologiesÅbo Akademi UniversityÅboFinland

Personalised recommendations