Abstract
This case study explored recreational boaters’ perceptions of a mobile app being developed in the context of a campaign to promote environmental responsibility in a U.S. Florida lagoon. Transcripts from six focus groups conducted with a target population of boaters to guide the conservation campaign were analyzed to identify and understand the barriers and benefits of the app that may influence its adoption with the desired behavior of better navigating the lagoon. Extant literature on social marketing and adoption and diffusion theory informed analysis. Overall, the results uncovered five perceived benefits and seven perceived barriers to adoption of the mobile app. Participants were interested in the app and had generally favorable reactions. They thought the app could fill a gap in boating technology and provide geographic information useful for improving the boating experience and health of the marine environment. However, there were also questions about the app’s purpose for the campaign and its ability to provide the quality and quantity of information desired for certain features. While some of this study’s identified benefits and barriers were consistent with the literature, others appeared unique to this social marketing and marine environment situation. The article concludes with a discussion of theoretical connections, practical implications, and future research recommendations.
Introduction
Social marketing campaigns are designed to promote a change in the target audience. This change could be an altered attitude or a change in behavior. To maximize the potential for change, it is important that social marketers identify and understand what barriers may prevent an individual from making a recommended change as well as what benefits an individual may gain from implementing a recommended change (McKenzie-Mohr, 2011). Knowledge about both the barriers and the benefits from the perspective of the target audience fosters better tailoring of messages to showcase the benefits while decreasing the barriers of the recommended change (McKenzie-Mohr, 2011).
This case study documents one aspect of the development phase of a social marketing campaign designed to promote environmentally responsible boating in Mosquito Lagoon, a marine environment located just north of Cape Canaveral Sea Shore in Central Florida. Mosquito Lagoon has unique characteristics including a nontidal/wind-driven system, complex waterways that can be challenging to navigate, very shallow waters in many locations, and dynamic water-level fluctuations. The lagoon is appreciated for its scenic natural beauty, biodiversity, and unique fishing opportunities, especially flats fishing for redfish.
Mosquito Lagoon was selected as the geographic focus because it has undergone serious damage to and a drastic reduction in several key marine species including seagrasses, mangroves, marsh cordgrass, and oyster reefs. These species are vital to the lagoon as they provide shelter and house nurseries for many of the fish and also play crucial roles in cleaning and filtering the water. In addition, these species have major local economic implications. For example, a loss in seagrasses results in large financial losses to the local fisheries. Reports estimate that seagrass losses in 2011 alone accounted for over US$235 million of lost value in commercial and recreational fishery in 2012 (Largin, 2013).
While government agencies, including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (n.d.), have yet to determine the underlying cause for the damage to and reduction in these species, local area stakeholders assert and some research indicates (e.g., Burfeind & Stunz, 2007; Fletcher & Fletcher, 1995; Grizzle, Adams, & Walters, 2002; Stiner & Walters, 2008; Virnstein, 1999) that improper recreational boating practices are largely to blame. For example, when boaters navigate too close to the shoreline, they can scar seagrass beds with their propellers. This practice, called prop scarring, uproots the seagrasses that can take years to regrow. Power boats can also hit submerged oyster reefs and dislodge oysters with their wakes. Boat wakes have also been associated with shoreline erosion that has a negative impact on mangroves and marsh cordgrass.
In response to this situation, a social marketing campaign is being developed and implemented with the goal of increasing voluntary careful and responsible boating by better navigating the lagoon to help protect its valued but sensitive marine resources. The campaign, which is targeting recreational boaters who visit the lagoon regularly, is an exploratory pilot study in the final phases of development. Stemming from a community-based social marketing approach (McKenzie-Mohr, 2011), the campaign is testing a variety of strategic behavioral change tools and techniques. Emphasis throughout the campaign activities and materials is on encouraging and obtaining commitment to the ultimate desired behavior of more careful lagoon navigation through signed pledges from those in the target population.
To promote a branded message of environmental responsibility, the campaign is utilizing digital technology (a website and a Facebook page), personal contact (presentations to community groups such as boating and fishing clubs and information booths at relevant events including local boat shows and fishing tournaments), and promotional products (tote bags, floatable keychains, and boat decals). An innovative component of the campaign being developed and tested is a targeted mobile application (mobile app). Mobile apps are special software programs that smartphone owners can download to their phones. There are many types of mobile apps including those for gaming (e.g., Angry Birds, Candy Crush Saga), information (e.g., news, weather, sports), and social networking (e.g., Twitter, Facebook, Instagram). While many apps are designed to appeal to mass audiences, this campaign’s targeted mobile app will first be introduced to a small niche audience with the expectation that it will support and facilitate achievement of the campaign’s goals. Overall, targeted mobile apps are similar to mass audience-oriented mobile apps except that they are tailored to meet the needs of a specialized group.
The mobile app in particular was deemed an innovative and interesting technological tool to explore in this pilot campaign context as its location-specific, interactive features would potentially allow the target population of boaters to map their exact location in real time while on the water, alert boaters when vulnerable marine species and habitats are in the vicinity, enable them to promptly adjust their boating techniques accordingly (i.e., slow down, navigate cautiously) and avoid certain shoreline areas. In addition, the app was selected for its potential to provide an engaging platform for integrating campaign-related and lagoon-specific environmental messages, resources, and materials.
The initial decision to develop and test these types of strategic tools and techniques, including the mobile app, was based on an analysis encompassing secondary research as well as consultations with local area stakeholders with ties to the boating community. This pilot campaign will test the viability of the mobile app as a product and as a promotional tool and offer guidance for possible expansion to a larger scale. It is well recognized that the purpose of piloting is to help determine the effectiveness of strategic tools and techniques and to provide information for future possible refinements (McKenzie-Mohr, 2011).
Some scholars expect that mobile apps will transform social marketing by providing information in real time, exactly when and where audiences need it (Bernhardt, Mays, & Hall, 2012). However, existing empirical research is limited. To date, the scholarly literature on the use of mobile technology (i.e., mobile apps, short messaging service [SMS], social media, text-based services) for social marketing purposes has concentrated primarily on health communication (e.g., Abroms & Lefebvre, 2009; Blaya, Fraser, & Holt, 2010; Boulos, Wheeler, Tavares, & Jones, 2011; Fjeldsoe, Marshall, & Miller, 2009; Lefebvre, 2007, 2009; Neiger et al., 2012). These studies highlight the importance of using mobile technology to increase audience engagement in health-related knowledge and offer suggestions for future health communication campaigns looking to incorporate new and social media into their campaign strategies. However, they are primarily focused on postcampaign evaluation and not on precampaign development assessments nor on understanding these considerations from the target audience’s point of view. As a result, a research gap remains on audience perceptions of mobile apps for social marketing campaigns and for environmental communication in particular.
Thus, the purpose of this exploratory study is to identify and understand the target audience’s perceived barriers and benefits of adopting a mobile app being developed as part of a campaign to promote voluntary environmentally responsible boating in a Florida lagoon. The theoretical foundation of this study stems from the literature on social marketing (e.g., Lee & Kotler, 2011; McKenzie-Mohr, 2011; McKenzie-Mohr, Lee, Schultz, & Kotler, 2012) and the adoption and diffusion of innovations (e.g., Rogers, 2003). Our research aims to advance knowledge on adoption of technological innovations in a new context, provide practical guidance for planning and introducing targeted mobile apps to niche audiences, and offer a foundation for future comparative investigations.
Assessing the target audience’s perceptions of the app while it is still in a development phase is important because these perceptions can influence future adoption patterns and in turn better boating navigation to protect the lagoon. For example, the app may replace or modify certain aspects of boaters’ existing routines and practices (e.g., replacing use of traditional paper maps with use of mobile app maps). This study’s analysis should assist the campaign’s mobile app designers in addressing perceived barriers to these changes by substituting similar innovative features (e.g., providing more interactive, detailed and useful features compared to traditional paper maps). According to Jonick et al. (2010) and Rogers (2003), understanding the audience’s existing routines and overall perceptions of the app is crucial to increase its likelihood of adoption and incorporation into their regular behaviors. With these ideas in mind, the following section provides an overview of social marketing and relevant research on diffusion of innovations with inferences drawn toward mobile apps and this campaign’s targeted boating population.
Literature Review
Social Marketing
Social marketing has been applied effectively to address variety of environmental issues (e.g., energy conservation, recycling, water conservation) in diverse contexts over the years (McKenzie-Mohr, 2011; McKenzie-Mohr et al., 2012; Takahashi, 2009; Tyson & Hurd, 2009), and there is a stream of scholarly research in this vein (e.g., Bates, 2010; DeLorme, Hagen, & Stout, 2003, 2005; Jonick et al., 2010; Shrum, Lowrey, & McCarty, 1995). However, few studies to our knowledge have examined mobile technology (i.e., mobile apps) in the context of environmental social marketing campaigns, especially from the perspective of the target audience. This seems somewhat surprising, given the vast number of mobile apps currently available, the growth expectations of the app market (Smith, 2012), and the forecast that apps will be the driving force behind the next web revolution (Anderson & Rainie, 2012).
Bernhardt, Mays, and Hall (2012) inferred that mobile apps are the beginning of what they have labeled Social Marketing 3.0 that involves incorporating mobile apps into a campaign’s overall mix of strategic tools as a new way to engage target audiences with the right message, at the right place, and at the right time. For instance, global positioning system (GPS)-enabled smartphones allow individuals to use mobile apps to share their exact location (right place) and then receive information tailored to their particular vicinity (right message) immediately (right time). Other appealing characteristics of mobile apps for campaign considerations include portability and potential for personalized communication (Lee & Kotler, 2011). Social Marketing 3.0 is also becoming increasingly attractive to campaign planners looking to take advantage of the low cost of mobile apps for message dissemination relative to traditional media advertising (Ledford, 2012). Further, mobile apps allow for more message control (i.e., free from third party and user manipulation) from sender to receiver and enable users to opt-in for “push” messages (e.g., automatic campaign messages sent through the mobile app interface) as well as “pull” messages (e.g., messages sought from users that are available directly from the mobile app interface; Ledford, 2012; Okazaki & Barwise, 2011).
In general, the scholarly discussion on the use of mobile technology for social marketing campaigns indicates that these strategic tools have the ability to engage audiences in new ways beyond traditional marketing but that knowledge regarding their effectiveness is lacking, including for location-specific message dissemination. Thus, the present study takes an audience-centered approach to first understand the target audience’s perspectives towards mobile app technology and to make recommendations for current and future campaigns that are considering incorporating mobile technology in their strategies. Insight into how the target audience of recreational boaters feels about mobile apps in general and what barriers and benefits they perceive about using a mobile app in a marine environment should help increase this app’s adoption, ensure its optimal integration in the campaign, and achieve the desired behavioral goal, which is to increase careful and responsible boating in the lagoon through better navigation.
Adoption and Diffusion of Innovations
Adoption occurs when an individual chooses to make use of a particular innovation. An innovation can be defined as anything that is perceived as new to an individual, including a new product, an idea, a way of performing a task, or in this instance—a targeted mobile app. The adoption process can be assessed based on two major factors of influence: the attributes of the individual and the attributes of the innovation (Rogers, 2003). Within Rogers’ (2003) Diffusion of innovations framework, individual-related attributes can be associated within five adopter categories (e.g., innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards). The categories are typically connected to demographic and socioeconomic factors such as age, income, and educational level as well as the characteristic of innovativeness (i.e., likelihood that an individual will be first to try a new innovation). These assessments can help to better predict whether or not an innovation will be adopted as well as the rate of adoption (Rogers, 2003; Wei & Zhang, 2006). While individual-related attributes are an important factor in adoption studies, the present study focuses on innovation-related attributes.
According to Rogers (2003), the key scholar in diffusion of innovations research, innovation-related attributes include: (1) relative advantage, (2) compatibility, (3) trialability, (4) observability, and (5) complexity. Applied to technological innovations, relative advantage is an individual’s perception that the new technology is better than or superior to its predecessor. Compatibility is the degree to which the technology fits with the individual’s lifestyle. Complexity is the perception of how easy or difficult it would be to use the technology. Trialability is how easy or difficult it would be for the individual to gain access to or try out the new technology, and observability is the ability to witness others using the technology successfully (Rogers, 2003).
In the research literature, both Rogers (2003) and Wei and Zhang (2006) inferred that one or more of these attributes may play a dominant role in whether or not a particular technology is adopted. That is, an innovation is not necessarily adopted based on a combination of all five attributes but rather each attribute can play a distinct role based on the perception of the individual. For example, if an individual makes the decision to download a mobile app, they may have evaluated the app based on its financial cost (relative advantage) or after witnessing others use the mobile app successfully (observability). However, these two attributes become irrelevant if the individual does not have access (trialability) to a device (i.e., smartphone) required to run a mobile app.
Barriers to Targeted Mobile App Adoption
As discussed earlier, uncovering and addressing barriers is the key to influencing social marketing campaign-intended attitude and behavior change (McKenzie-Mohr, & Smith, 1999; McKenzie-Mohr, 2000) and increasing the adoption potential of a technological innovation (Mathieson, 1991; Reese & Beckland, 2011; Rogers, 2003; Verkasalo, López-Nicolás, Molina-Castillo, & Bouwman, 2010). A barrier can be considered anything that may prevent a person from performing a specific task, changing an attitude or behavior, or adopting a new technology.
Findings from the extant research literature indicate that common barriers to mobile app adoption are complexity, relative advantage, and trialability. Complexity barriers include lack of knowledge, such as knowledge about what a mobile app is, how to download a mobile app, and whether a type of cell phone has the capacity to download mobile apps (Purcell, 2011; Verkasalo et al., 2010). In a study on the adoption of location-based mobile services, Fortenberry and Brown (2011) found that the high financial cost (relative advantage) to run a mobile app can be a barrier as well. For example, some mobile apps have real-time features requiring the individual to purchase expensive data plans in order to operate these features. Also, lack of access to a smartphone or other mobile device needed to run an app has been found to be a significant barrier to mobile app adoption (Cakmak & Basoglu, 2012; Fortenberry & Brown, 2011). Especially for this study’s campaign, if an individual does not own a smartphone, they will not be able to download the app.
From a social marketing standpoint, knowing which of these attributes (or combination thereof) is most influential is essential in uncovering the barriers to adoption (McKenzie-Mohr & Smith, 1999). Since this campaign’s marine conservation mobile app is in a developmental phase, it is important to identify and understand what app-related barriers the target audience perceives. Thus, the study’s first research question is posed:
While identifying barriers is a crucial step in creating change or increasing the likelihood of new technology adoption, it is equally important to determine perceived benefits. For success in producing intended attitude change and adoption, the recommended aim is to achieve a balance of both, such that the perceived barriers are minimized and the perceived benefits are maximized (McKenzie-Mohr & Smith, 1999; Rogers, 2003).
Benefits of Targeted Mobile App Adoption
Social marketing experts, McKenzie-Mohr and Smith (1999, p. 3) note that, “People will naturally gravitate to[ward] actions that have high benefit and for which there are few barriers”; however, “a benefit to one person may be a barrier to another.” As discussed previously, technology (mobile app) adoption is likely based on the target audience’s perceptions of the innovation’s attributes (i.e., relative advantage, compatibility, trialability, observability, and complexity). These attributes can be barriers or benefits depending on both individual and situational factors (Rogers, 2003).
For example, research by Gerpott and Berg (2011) on the adoption of mobile location-based services suggests that an individual’s perception of the benefits of using a mobile app was positively related to its adoption. The study findings indicated that relative advantage (e.g., ability of the app to fit an individual’s needs and anytime, anywhere access) and reduced complexity (e.g., similarity to technologies the individual is using already) were indicators of mobile app adoption. Further, Hu, Li, and Hu (2008) found in their study on the adoption of mobile banking that mobile apps with a greater relative advantage (i.e., convenience and low cost) were better indicators of adoption, especially if the app saved the individual time when completing a task.
In contrast, research by Kim, Chan, and Gupta (2007) indicated that there is a unique balance of barriers and benefits which creates an overall perceived value in the mind of the audience. In their study of mobile Internet adoption, these scholars found that the audience’s perception of benefits was important, but perceived barriers were more significant factors for nonadoption. For example, if the barriers are too large and the benefits too small, an individual may perceive the mobile app as less valuable and therefore would be less likely to adopt it.
Verkasalo, López-Nicolás, Molina-Castillo, and Bouwman (2010) also reported mixed findings, where in some cases emphasizing perceived benefits (e.g., enjoyment of the mobile app’s interface) was a better indicator of adoption, while in other instances reducing barriers (e.g., lack of perceived usefulness) was more influential for app adoption intention. In their study of users and nonusers of mobile apps, nonusers were more influenced by the anticipated enjoyment they would receive from the app while users were more influenced by its utility. Therefore, current mobile app users are more likely to adopt an app for its’ utilitarian functions while potential adopters are more likely to download a mobile app based on the level of enjoyment they expect to receive (Verkasalo et al., 2010).
Together, these research findings highlight the importance of carefully examining and considering target audience perceptions of a mobile app based on the situational context rather than relying on assumptions of campaign developers and researchers. This prior work also emphasizes the necessity of exploring both barriers and benefits in order to foster optimal design and orchestration of mobile apps in social marketing campaigns and consequently improve the likelihood of adoption. Thus, the present study’s second research question is posed:
Method
To address the study’s research questions, transcript data from focus groups conducted as part of a marine conservation social marketing campaign were analyzed qualitatively. Approval from the researchers’ university Institutional Review Board for human subjects’ research was secured prior to focus group data collection and all participation involved informed consent and was voluntary. The focus group participants (N = 60) were all boaters who visited the campaign’s local lagoon regularly, most were male (85%) and Caucasian (95%). Across the groups, the ages ranged from 18 to 75, with 63.3% of the participants (n = 38) between 50 and 70 years old. Participants were recruited through face-to-face and electronic communication with professional contacts and those in relevant community networks (e.g., local environmental resource managers, recreational boating/waterways management representatives). A US$20.00 gift card for a retailer (e.g., Bass Pro Shop) was offered to each participant as an incentive.
A total of six audio-recorded focus groups, each averaging 10 participants and lasting approximately 90 min, were conducted in three different cities in the campaign’s geographic area and resulted in 300 total pages of transcripts. Six focus groups were planned and conducted due to the complexity of this campaign’s interdisciplinary topic, the scope of the study’s geographic domain, the diversity of the target population, and the point of information saturation (i.e., redundancy). At the end of each focus group, the researchers held debriefing meetings to discuss the range of opinions and ideas and to determine saturation status (Krueger & Casey, 2000). After the sixth group, both researchers concluded that saturation had been reached.
Focus groups were deemed appropriate for data collection as it was expected that this qualitative social science interviewing method would allow participants to share their views openly and spontaneously and generate points for discussion as they interacted with others in the group (e.g., Berg, 2008; Krueger & Casey, 2000, Morgan, 1997; Stewart, Shamdasani, & Rook, 2007). Further, focus groups enable researchers to learn a variety of opinions and perceptions in a short time that would not be possible through other methods (Lindlof & Taylor, 2011).
The moderator’s interview guide was based on a review of previous social marketing literature, the goals of the campaign, and project team collaboration. The guide was pretested and consisted of a series of open-ended questions on topics such as awareness and knowledge about the lagoon species and damage, attitudes toward voluntary careful and responsible boating, relevant boating experiences, and suggestions for the campaign, including perceptions of using mobile technology.
Among the topics, the present inquiry concentrates on mobile technology perceptions. Particular to this study’s analysis is the identification and characterization of the barriers and benefits of the target audience’s adoption of an app being developed as part of the marine conservation social marketing campaign. While questions about barriers and benefits of mobile apps were not asked in the focus groups directly, this theme emerged in the process of analyzing the broader data set and was deemed worthy of separate investigative attention.
The same moderator conducted all focus groups using the same interview guide as a flexible framework for the discussions. Before each group began, the moderator explained the purpose of the study and informed participants that the session would be audio recorded and that participation was voluntary. Then, in each group the moderator asked questions using the interview guide, listened attentively, and noted nonverbal communication and group dynamics. The same research assistant was involved with logistics and note taking for all groups. All focus group audio recordings were transcribed in their entirety by the research assistant and were double checked by the principle researcher for accuracy.
During each focus group, participants were asked a modified form of a question about their perceptions of the potential for using new technology, such as a mobile app in the campaign to help prevent boating-related damage to the lagoon marine life and habitats. Probing questions were also asked as needed for clarification and expansion of participant comments. While the purpose of this technology-related question was to gather general reactions to and perceived utility of a mobile app as part of this campaign’s strategy, data analysis revealed interesting patterns of barriers and benefits that prompted further inquiry.
Analysis involved constant comparative procedures of grounded theory (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). First, all transcripts were read carefully and open coded to identify general concepts and categories pertaining to any perceived barriers or benefits of incorporating a mobile app in this environmental social marketing campaign. Next, axial coding was performed in which each response within each category was compared with other responses to develop related themes. These themes were then interpreted within a framework of the diffusion of innovations literature to help explain perceived barriers and benefits of adoption of this app. The last step, which is selective coding, involved looking for unique dimensions or properties within those categories and synthesizing them to discover a core unifying theme (Strauss & Corbin, 1998).
Constant comparison was employed throughout the entire coding operation in an iterative fashion. This process involved comparing each participant’s response to other responses and identifying similarities and differences both within and outside of the response’s original category. Analysis continued until no new patterns emerged from the data (i.e., saturation).
Findings
Overall, the results revealed that participants were interested in the targeted mobile app, had generally favorable reactions, and perceived barriers as well as benefits of adopting this new technology. The emergent barriers and benefits were categorized based on data-derived themes developed by this study’s researchers. Rogers’ (2003) five attributes of an innovation that can influence adoption (relative advantage, observability, trialability, complexity, and compatibility) were incorporated into these themes to aid in explaining participants’ perceptions. It is important to note that Roger’s (2003) framework was not applied to the data set in a strict a priori fashion. Rather, connections were made with these attributes at later stages of analysis to inform and explain emerging patterns in participants’ perceptions.
Some findings were similar to those of previous diffusion of innovations research. However, the present study also uncovered new themes related to barriers and benefits that were not captured by the existing innovation attributes framework and mobile app adoption studies. In the following sections, the barriers and benefits will be discussed in terms of the emergent themes, supported by the diffusion of innovations framework and illustrated by verbatim comments from participants. Unique dimensions within these findings as related to this marine conservation campaign’s boating context will also be presented.
Targeted Mobile App Barriers
The first research question asked what barriers may prevent or interfere with a boater using the app or what instances would cause the mobile app to have a negative impact on the boating experience. Seven categories of perceived barriers to this campaign’s targeted app resulted from analysis: (1) lack of access to technology, (2) confusion about app’s purpose and use, (3) outdoor challenges, (4) app’s information quality limitations, (5) app’s information quantity limitations, (6) audience technophobia, and (7) belief that technology taints nature. Each of these barriers will be described and explained in relation to Rogers’ (2003) innovation attribute framework.
Lack of Access to Technology
Many participants in the focus groups used forms of new technology while boating (e.g., “I’ve got my GPS on my phone,” “on my boat I have a GPS unit,” and “it is the console GPS unit we’re using”). However, it was acknowledged that not all boaters have access to technological devices necessary to run a mobile app (i.e., a smartphones). Illustrative comments include, “You were mentioning who actually has the smartphones. I don’t have one” and in regards to mobile apps, “The apps are good but not all of your fishermen are smartphone users so you’re limiting your ability to reach that audience should you go with a smartphone or tablet based application.” This finding appears to support the literature indicating that lack of accessibility (trialability) to a smartphone or mobile device is a common barrier to mobile app adoption (Cakmak & Basoglu, 2012; Fortenberry & Brown, 2011)
At the same time, those who have access to a smartphone may not choose to download a mobile app because of cost. When asked why some did not use mobile apps, one participant stated, “I’m basically too cheap to get one yet” and in response to using boating-related features currently available on mobile technology, “you can get all the [water] depths and everything, like canals, [but] those cost a lot of money.” Accordingly, those who perceive mobile technology (i.e., smartphones and mobile apps) to be expensive are less likely to adopt it compared to other similar technologies (Lin, 2010). This perception of high financial cost is considered a relative disadvantage and a major barrier for new technology adoption (Rogers, 2003).
Confusion About App’s Purpose and Use
A number of participants were unclear about the app’s purpose within the campaign and how they or others would use it in this context (i.e., for recreational boating, environmental protection, education, etc.). The following participant dialogue provides an illustration: P1: “I was just trying to figure out exactly … what we would use an app for?” P3: “What utility does it serve?” P1: “Is it going to be designed for planning your day, is it going to be designed for … conserving the water, is it, I mean, what is that for?” Another verbatim example of the lack of clarity is, “The question about the app for … conservation. Why would I use that, why would I even think about that?” Overall, this barrier seemed to stem from confusion over the purpose or the utility of the app.
Without a clear purpose, it was difficult for participants to imagine how the app could be incorporated in or compatible with their existing boating routines. For example, some thought the app would be of limited use for boaters who prepare in advance and search for information (e.g., weather, directions) prior to visiting the lagoon rather than during their boating trip. As stated by one participant, “like … probably most of us, I plan my trip before I go out on the water. So I’m not going to be looking for that information on the water.”
Potentially adding to the confusion, some participants stated that they already boat responsibly with respect to the environment and did not see a need or relative advantage for using the app for conservation causes. As acknowledged in previous studies (Cakmak & Basoglu, 2012; Kim, Seoh, Lee, & Lee, 2010; Reese & Beckland, 2011; Rogers, 2003), it is important that the target audience understands the advantages of using the app and how it can improve their experience in order to increase the app’s adoption likelihood.
Outdoor Challenges
A prominent barrier to using the app stemmed from the perception of how physically awkward it could be to use while boating. Several participants indicated that even bringing their phone on the boat posed potential problems requiring preparation for risks of water damage (e.g., “I’m not interested in bringing … my … phone on the boat. Water doesn’t really work well with electronics” and “I keep mine in two ziplocks when I get it out”). Concerns about environmental hazards to the phone can deter usage of and compound difficulties in physically operating a mobile app (e.g., maneuvering through a waterproofed or sealed phone casing).
Among those who already use mobile technology while boating, a few felt that the outdoor context created obstacles. Illustrative verbatims include “there is no connectivity in the area, in some areas” and “The thing is with a cell phone, it’s just so small, and then you’re wearing polarized sunglasses … you can’t see the screen anyway.” While the literature indicates that individuals who lack experience (i.e., experience gap) with mobile apps are more likely to perceive complexity barriers (Fortenberry & Brown, 2011), the present study’s results suggest that boaters’ prior experiences using mobile technology in a marine environment may actually be a barrier to adoption of this campaign’s app. While there seemed to be some experience in using mobile apps in the marine environment among these participants, they were nonetheless encountering visibility challenges that had yet to be addressed by mobile technology in general.
App’s Information Quality Limitations
Another perceived barrier with the mobile app pertains to its possible features. When asked which features they thought would be the most helpful for preventing boating-related damage to the lagoon’s marine life and habitats, participants indicated that general aerial maps, turn-by-turn navigation, and water depth charts would have a positive effect on their individual boating experiences as well as the health of the lagoon. However, some participants were skeptical about the app’s ability to deliver the same degree of precision in location information (relative advantage) compared to advanced or more expensive GPS units (“The cheaper GPSs, they’ll run you through an island. They give you a straight line but … mine … is a little bit expensive … it will run you through canals and all that”).
There was also some reservation about the capabilities of this app’s features given the unique physical characteristics of Mosquito Lagoon. This lagoon is known for being tedious to navigate, given its narrow channels and changing water depths (e.g., “tricky waterways … if you don’t know it” and “It takes a long time to learn how to get around over there because there’s a lot of ins and outs and shallow waters in places you wouldn’t expect,” “you have to know where the cuts and the channels are and the flows between the sandbars. You have to have pretty good local knowledge to navigate the entire lagoon … you could be running along and if you don’t know it’s there, you’re up on a sandbar”). Participants expressed concern that the app’s features may not have the accuracy necessary to prevent negative boating impacts in this dynamic environment (e.g., “I have mixed feelings about using technology because what your GPS might show you is not going to be what’s going to be out there on any given day,” and “it’s very difficult even if you have a good GPS”). In terms of Rogers’ (2003) framework, the app was judged to lack relative advantage over “local knowledge” (i.e., firsthand experience) of boating in this particular lagoon.
App’s Information Quantity Limitations
In addition to information quality, the app’s information quantity was also a perceived barrier. Participants questioned whether the amount of information that could be made available on the mobile app would be equivalent to that of similar technologies such as map-based websites (e.g., Google Earth) and other boating-related technologies (e.g., GPS). Often the comparison between the current technology (e.g., GPS, map-based websites) and the superseding technology (e.g., mobile app) is the most significant factor in the adoption decision (Rogers, 2003).
In this instance, the potential adopter must see a relative advantage of using the mobile app over their current boating-related technology. For example, some thought that the campaign’s mobile app may not have the capacity (relative advantage) to provide a sufficient amount of information for its intended purpose relative to other technological sources such as websites (e.g., “I think the person who goes and uses it [the Mosquito Lagoon] more often than anyone else would probably check a website. I would go check a website” and “The app can refer to it [short blurbs of environmental information]. There should be a [web]site that has lots of information for people.”).
Regarding using a smartphone mobile app as the primary messaging tool, participants voiced, “I think you can reach a wider audience with Internet [compared to only using mobile apps], if you can produce on multiple media” and “I would use a mobile app. It would be an extension of what I can get online.” This finding adds to previous research (Abroms & Lefebvre, 2009; Ledford, 2012; Lefebvre, 2007) on the importance of channel selection in social marketing campaigns, which indicate that not all people are completely receptive to new media as the single and primary source of campaign material. Moreover, when comparing the mobile app to boating-related technology (e.g., GPS, electronic chart plotters, map-based websites), the participants did not see a relative advantage of using the app as a primary source for boating and conservation information.
Audience Technophobia
The participants also perceived that certain audiences may be reluctant to use technology in general. The key demographic factor discussed was age. It was thought that older boaters may have greater difficulty accepting and using mobile apps compared to their younger counterparts (e.g., “the generation now is … definitely more comfortable with the technology”). While previous studies show age has been negatively associated with adoption (Atkin, 1995; Leung & Wei, 1999; Wei & Zhang, 2006), more recent studies (e.g., Smith, 2013; Zickuhr & Madden, 2012) have been finding that older adults are becoming more comfortable with new technology and that their adoption numbers with respect to these types of innovations are rising. This finding indicates that other characteristics of the audience (e.g., attitudes toward technology, skills and experience in using technology) as well as demographics deserve examination and consideration in an effort to avoid making incorrect assumptions regarding the campaign app’s target audience. It also suggests that a combination of traditional and new technological outreach venues for this campaign would be an appropriate strategy (e.g., “if you can produce on multiple media then you’re going to increase your audience so technology will help. It will not reach everybody”).
Belief That Technology Taints Nature
Some participants felt that adopting technology, including a mobile app, into their boating routine was incompatible with their valued experience of nature (e.g., fishing). They believed that using a smartphone while boating would tarnish the purity of the peace and aesthetics of the outdoors. Distractions associated with mobile technology (e.g., phone calls, texting, app use) were perceived as incongruent with their cherished enjoyment of the serenity of nature. Illustrative verbatim comments include, “I’m always hoping I’m out far enough that I don’t have reception,” “When I go out, it’s to get away from … everything,” and “I’m a purest … I don’t want … my brain to be bothered with it.” These comments add to the importance of uncovering not only how barriers such as boating routines may deter mobile app adoption but also how the audience’s underlying values can play a role within this marine context. While compatibility with existing values is not always considered a major barrier compared to factors such as usability (Rogers, 2003), understanding how these values affect the target audience’s likelihood of adoption does appear to play a role, making it important and worthy of future investigation.
Targeted Mobile App Benefits
Although understanding the barriers that may hinder adoption is important, it is equally important to understand the benefits that can increase the likelihood of adoption. The second research question asked what benefits may encourage boaters to use this campaign’s app or how the app may enhance the boating experience. Five benefits resulted from analysis: (1) detailed map presentations, (2) efficient real-time information resource, (3) low-cost features, (4) environmental education, and (5) training tool for the next generation. Each benefit is described, subsequently illustrated by verbatim participant comments, and explained in terms of Rogers’ (2003) five attributes of an innovation.
Detailed Map Presentations
Limitations of current boating navigation tools (e.g., printed maps, GPS, websites, electronic chart plotters, and existing apps) were thought by some to create an opportunity for this campaign’s mobile app to fill that void. For example, a few participants stated that Google Earth was great for navigating the lagoon area but its lack of lagoon-specific information created new opportunities for the mobile app designers (i.e., “Google Earth – I consider it perfect [but] it doesn’t show any of the signs … the no wake sign or the manatee zones” and “It’s zooming in from the top. It’s not going to give you the depths … changes of the water.”)
Further, participants also felt that, in general, the current boating navigation tools were lacking in their level of map-based detail (e.g., “The GPS map for Android … actually fit for this area … I’ve got it on my phone … it just shows the main channel ways” and “There’s nothing that goes into the granular detail that you would need to run around the Lagoon or to be able to operate safely around the Lagoon so I think something that went to that granular level would be helpful”). Incorporating such features in the app to address these limitations may increase its perceived usefulness and relative advantage compared to other boating technologies. According to the literature, the greater the innovation’s perceived usefulness and relative advantage over similar technologies, the greater the likelihood for adoption (Rogers, 2003; Verkasalo et al., 2010).
Efficient Real-Time Information Resource
Another perceived benefit of this app was that it could improve efficiency by combining multiple features and information (e.g., maps, weather, slot limits, GPS, navigation) into a single resource that could be used in real-time while boating (e.g., fishing) as well as prior to boating (i.e., planning trips and activities). An example of this benefit is a comment by a participant who remarked about how incorporating multiple features into the app could help him prepare for a fishing trip: “bringing some of these key things that we’ve talked about: having the water level on kind of an overlay map, marking key points within the lagoon, weather … having that all kind of in a one-stop shop … having it all in one place on an app would be ideal.” This view seems in line with the findings from previous studies suggesting that the relative advantage of convenience and saving time are important benefits to those looking to adopt a mobile app (Gerpott & Berg, 2011; Hu, Li, & Hu, 2008).
Low-Cost Features
According to participants, there are a number of features that would aid boaters in navigating the lagoon successfully. However, current boating technology lacks these features, requires a boater to purchase multiple separate devices (e.g., GPS, chart plotter, depth finder, weather app), and/or is expensive. Thus, another benefit that emerged in the focus groups was that the campaign app could provide features such as GPS at a relatively low cost compared to other boating technologies. For example, one participant mentioned paying US$120 for a yearly sea surface temperature web-based mobile application while another stated paying US$1,500 for a GPS unit to aid him when navigating the lagoon area (i.e.,“Mine was fifteen hundred dollars. It’s the regular boater out there [who] would probably be able to afford it but not a guy in a little Jon boat”). Therefore, it was thought this combination would be especially beneficial for boaters who, because of budgetary constraints, may not own technology capable of helping them adequately monitor their location, speed, and navigation to avoid damaging lagoon species and habitats. As noted in the following participant comment, “I would say, unfortunately, at this point, the majority of the abuses are done by people that aren’t using top technology.” Similar to the previous studies, the lower the cost, the higher the relative advantage that increases the likelihood of adoption (Hu et al., 2008; Rogers, 2003).
It is important to note that while many participants thought GPS would be an optimal feature since it would be able to provide maps of key areas in the lagoon and information about the species, others thought that it would not be able to provide a relative advantage compared to the level of detail (e.g., water depths, location accuracy) offered by more sophisticated boating technologies. These divergent results warrant further research.
Environmental Education
Across the focus groups, there was appreciation for the potential of this mobile app not only for its utilitarian boating purposes but also for improving public awareness and education about ecological issues in the lagoon (e.g., characteristics, importance, vulnerability, and locations of certain species of marine life and their habitats such as oysters and mangroves). For example, one participant felt that the app should warn boaters of the locations of these species and habitats: “if you got a GPS map of the lagoon that was strictly an app. A Mosquito Lagoon app … that might show the fish species, the birds, the alligators, but then it should also show you where the seagrass beds are, the shallows are, and [there] should be a warning on there … Caution.” Many participants valued education, including environmental education, and thought that if the app promoted these ideals it would be compatible with their conservation-based values (“I think in terms of an educational tool, that new technology is the way to go with so much education and outreach … I think it certainly should be utilized every chance we get”).
Further, some participants were involved in environmental outreach activities at the lagoon (e.g., trash clean-ups, crab trap removal, oyster bed restoration) and thought the app could help promote these events and increase the number of volunteers and awareness of lagoon damage. One especially noteworthy idea that was shared was to charge a fee to download the app and use the proceeds to help restore existing damage in the lagoon (“you could use that money to … reverse damage that’s done … and actually put it to good use”). In this instance, information features (e.g., environmental outreach, potential sales proceeds being used to restore the lagoon) were considered compatible with existing values by benefitting the lagoon and in turn boaters, especially anglers, who rely on a healthy marine environment for enjoyable and productive fishing. Moreover, while compatibility is considered less important to adoption than other attributes (e.g., relative advantage), the more compatible an innovation is with the existing values of the target audience, the more likely it will be adopted in the future (Rogers, 2003).
Training Tool for the Next Generation
Common across the focus groups was the perception that compared to older boaters, the younger generation tended to be more skilled and comfortable with new technology and would be more likely to adopt the campaign’s app. This age distinction was viewed as an opportunity to reach and train the next generation and help create a more careful and responsible future boating population. As expressed by one participant, “You can have an app for that kid that gets out there and it’s his first time on Mosquito Lagoon … it’s a real-time app that says, I’m about to go in an area that’s got a foot of water.” The app could reduce the complexity of boating in the lagoon by making it easier for younger boaters to watch their speeds and better navigate the fluctuating water depths. As previous research has found, younger users are typically more comfortable than older users with using new technology (Atkin, 1995; Leung & Wei, 1999; Wei & Zhang, 2006). However, as recent trend reports are showing all ages are becoming increasingly comfortable with new technology (e.g., Smith, 2013; Zickuhr & Madden, 2012), this app could provide a dynamic new venue with which to disseminate messages, information, and resources regarding environmentally responsible boating and engage multiple age groups within the target audience.
Discussion
This case study aimed to uncover and understand the target audience’s perceived barriers and benefits of a mobile app being developed and tested as part of a social marketing campaign to increase environmentally responsible boating in a Florida lagoon. Analysis of transcripts from six focus groups conducted to help guide the conservation campaign provided insight on using this new mobile technology in an understudied context. With respect to the marketing mix, this analysis suggests that the mobile app can play an influential role in addressing the environmental situation as a product (i.e., boating navigation support tool) and as a promotional vehicle (i.e., engaging interactive platform for campaign-related information); however, price (i.e., certain barriers) and place (i.e., geographic and virtual location) should also be considered from the target population’s perspective and deserve future research. Incorporation of assessment and further study of all of the marketing mix elements is anticipated as the app is released and the campaign is implemented.
Overall reactions to the app were favorable. This study’s boaters seemed interested in the app and shared ideas for desired features such as real-time maps and water depth charts. They thought the app has potential to provide relatively inexpensive, locally specific informational resources and navigational tools for improving boating and fishing experiences as well as addressing the campaign’s desired behavior of better navigation to protect the lagoon’s marine species and habitats.
Many participants indicated that they were already using mobile apps at the lagoon but felt that existing technologies lacked important useful features. This finding seems to parallel that by Verkasalo et al. (2010) who reported that those who already use mobile apps are more likely to seek apps judged to be useful compared to those pertaining to more hedonistic uses (e.g., escape and gameplay). Limitations of current boating technology provide an opportunity for social marketers to align these utilitarian needs with the campaign goals (i.e., provide detailed maps that also include the locations of the vulnerable marine habitats). Mobile app technology is also advantageous in terms of being generally less expensive than advanced GPS units. While some participants thought low-cost app features (e.g., maps, GPS, navigation) may not provide the same accuracy compared to more expensive GPS units, there was still a desire within the target audience for these map-based features.
Regarding lifestyles and personal values, the mobile app was expected to enhance fishing experiences (e.g., insuring a future stock of fish by preventing boating impacts to species) as well as raise awareness and educate others about the lagoon conservation efforts. Further, it was felt that the app would be especially worthwhile in training younger boaters. However, as all age groups are becoming more comfortable with new technology, the app’s potential to creatively engage diverse audiences with messages, information, and resources about environmentally responsible boating was recognized.
The perceived benefits of the app can be aligned with Rogers’ (2003) diffusion of innovations framework including relative advantage (e.g., detailed map presentations, efficient real-time information source, low cost features), reduced complexity (e.g., training tool for the next generation), and compatibility (e.g., environmental education). While some of these findings were unique to this marine context (i.e., compatibility with boaters’ values through environmental education opportunities), many were in line with previous research including the importance of incorporating useful features lacking in current technology (Rogers, 2003; Verkasalo et al., 2010) and that the innovation saves the user time (Gerpott & Berg, 2011; Hu et al., 2008) at a relatively low cost (Hu et al., 2008; Rogers, 2003). These theoretical ties are worthy of consideration in campaign planning and implementation as they suggest a structure for systematic consideration of influential factors for increasing and directing the target audience’s mobile app adoption likelihood.
Perceived barriers were also identified in the study and included the target audience’s lack of clarity about the app’s purpose and perceived need for this app while boating. Participants questioned the capability of the desired features in providing accurate and sufficient information to improve the boating experience and the marine environment. Like the benefits, many barriers can be connected to diffusion of innovations theory and Rogers’ (2003) innovation attributes framework including trialability (e.g., lack of access to technology), complexity (e.g., audience technophobia), compatibility (e.g., confusion about app’s purpose and use), and relative advantage (e.g., app’s information quality and quantity limitations). Consistent with previous empirical studies were findings pertaining to access to technology—trialability (Cakmak & Basoglu, 2012; Fortenberry & Brown, 2011) and confusion about the app’s purpose (Cakmak & Basoglu, 2012; Kim et al., 2010; Reese & Beckland, 2011; Rogers, 2003).
Surprisingly, few participants admitted that their age limited their ability to use mobile apps, and recent trend data (Smith, 2013; Zickuhr & Madden, 2012) show that an increasing number of older adults are using new media. At the same time, future research will need to determine how many boaters within the target population have access to mobile apps and offer alternative sources of campaign-related information for nonadopters. It may also be helpful to conduct follow-up studies with segments of the target audience in terms of their level of innovativeness to determine additional benefits and barriers unique to these individuals and to map their diffusion over time once the mobile app is released.
Barriers unique to this marine context included complexity (e.g., outdoor challenges including poor visibility of the mobile interface due to sunglare and polarized lenses, operating the phone through protective surfaces such as plastic bags), relative advantage (e.g., concerns about the app's information quality and quantity), and compatibility (e.g., belief that technology taints enjoyment of the pure nature experience). Alignment of this study’s empirical insights with this theoretical structure offers direction on how social marketing techniques may be used to help address factors that may be preventing the target audience’s adoption of the mobile app.
Common across the focus groups was a shared appreciation of the natural environment and emotional attachment to place (i.e., Mosquito Lagoon), which influenced perceptions of the benefits and barriers of the campaign’s mobile app. A unifying theme across the barriers and benefits was that although the context is recreational, the mobile app was assessed by these boaters based on its anticipated utilitarian functions (e.g., usefulness of features that aid in preventing damage and increasing their boating efficiency). Participants’ perceptions and evaluations of the planned app stemmed from their own previous experiences of using technology in general as well as their experiences of boating. This interpretation highlights the importance of context in considering the adoption of targeted mobile apps and the need for further research focusing on situational variables such as those in the environment.
This study contributes to the scholarly literature in social marketing and the adoption and diffusion of innovations by providing insights on audience perceptions of a new form of technology in an understudied context, identification of factors that may influence this technology’s adoption, and a foundation for further inquiry. While many of the findings regarding barriers and benefits were in line with previous research on mobile technology in general, some appeared unique to this marine conservation campaign and are worthy of closer investigation and future comparative research.
The findings of this study also have practical implications. These results were shared with the project team, including the individuals responsible for developing the app and the campaign’s advisory board of stakeholders. Development of the mobile app is proceeding and recommendations from this study are being taken into consideration for implementation into the final product. The various barriers and benefits are being assessed in an effort to make optimal decisions about designing the app and integrating it into the campaign to maximize the likelihood of adoption and achieving the desired behavioral goal of better lagoon navigation.
To facilitate greater adoption by the target audience, the strategy may involve methods of reducing the identified barriers by clearly communicating the app’s purpose and solidifying its positioning; insuring that its features are useful, accurate, and compatible with the audience’s current boating routines; addressing visibility and other outdoor challenges with using mobile devices in a marine environment; and working with experienced Mosquito Lagoon boaters to determine what specific types of “local knowledge” information could be incorporated in the app to prevent and decrease boating-related damage to the lagoon’s vulnerable species and habitats.
With respect to the app’s purpose, a positioning approach that emphasizes its utilitarian benefits as well as environmental cause-related benefits should be pursued. For example, supporting and promoting the utilitarian benefits of using the mobile app by positioning it as a relatively low-cost but high-tech decision support tool for boat operation that could be used to aid navigation through the complex waterways of this lagoon. The low cost would include not only comparison of the mobile app to traditional GPS units based on monetary price for the product but also in reducing potential for expenses associated with boat damage and repair due to more accurate location awareness. There are also economic implications for the local community in terms of protecting key marine species and habitats and promoting a healthy lagoon, pleasurable boating experiences, and productive fishing stocks now and into the future.
By minimizing barriers and maximizing benefits, this campaign expects to generate greater adoption of the app and in turn the desired behavior of better navigation to protect the lagoon. Future research will need to address how many boaters within the target population have access to mobile apps and offer alternative sources of campaign-related information for nonadopters. Assessing whether mobile apps could be the single and primary source of information dissemination is beyond the scope of this study; however, it is believed that the app will offer new opportunities to engage the target audience, increase awareness of the importance and location of the lagoon’s key species in a branded message, and influence more environmentally responsible boating through better navigation, which is the campaign’s ultimate desired behavioral goal.
As with most research, our study has methodological limitations. We acknowledge the problem of external validity associated with the small, nonrandom sample. Expanded qualitative investigations that encompass more participants from this target audience are encouraged. It would also be worthwhile to conduct and compare focus groups with homogeneous subsets of boaters based on characteristics such as demographics (e.g., age) and degree of technology innovativeness (i.e., adopter segments) to identify benefits and barriers that may be unique to these individuals and refine market segmentation and positioning strategies. Future quantitative studies comprising larger representative samples of boaters are also recommended, as well as studies that map the app’s diffusion over time once the mobile app is released.
Another limitation of the present investigation is that exploring perceptions of the mobile app was just one facet of the focus group research for this campaign and thus may have constrained the researchers’ ability to fully understand these concepts within the boating community. Future research concentrated solely on the targeted mobile app should provide a deeper understanding of audience perceptions and build the knowledge base on adoption of this technological innovation for social marketing in a marine environment.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge Dr. Jennifer Sandoval, Assistant Professor in the Nicholson School of Communication at the University of Central Florida, for her feedback on earlier versions of this paper. Also, special thanks to Dr. Linda Walters, Professor of Biology at the University of Central Florida, Dr. Robert Swett, Associate Professor of Fisheries and Aquatic Science at the University of Florida, and Kathy Hill, Outreach and Education Coordinator at the Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported in part by funding from a Florida Sea Grant Contract No. R/C-S-53, (NA10OAR4170079), subcontract No. UF12045. The statements and conclusions are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Florida Sea Grant or its affiliates.