Pavel Andreev
email: andreevil@gmail.com

Aidan Duane
email: aduane@wit.ie

Philip O'reilly
email: philip.oreilly@ucc.ie

Philip O=reilly

Conceptualizing Consumer Perceptions of Making M-Payments Using Smart Phones in Ireland

Keywords: Smart phones, m-payment adoption, trust, consumer perceptions Conceptualizing Consumer Perceptions

des établissements d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

Introduction

Smart phones have developed and evolved to incorporate multiple applications and wide ranging functionality, including SMS, MMS, mobile web, GPS navigation, photo, and video camera. Such functionality is an enabler of a wide range of commercial products and services. Indeed, the notion that smart phones could become valuable and critical business tools for the delivery of electronic products and services has long been touted by academics, professionals, and the media [START_REF] Bauer | Driving Consumer Acceptance of Mobile Marketing: A Theoretical Framework and Empirical Study[END_REF][START_REF] Gao | Emerging Technologies for Mobile Commerce[END_REF][START_REF] Hsu | An Integrative Framework of Technology Acceptance Model and Personalisation in Mobile Commerce[END_REF][START_REF] Leppäniemi | Factors Influencing Consumers= Willingness to Accept Mobile Advertising: A Conceptual Model[END_REF]Varshney and Vetter 2002). From a commercial perspective, smart phone strategies are being adopted by major global organizations, and these organizations are eager to explore the personal, interactive, and ubiquitous features of smart phones to increase the effectiveness of their service provision and product commercialization beyond the use of traditional media channels. Furthermore, the growth of smart phones is phenomenal with global shipments of smart phones growing 50 percent each year, reaching 54 million units in the first quarter of 2010 [START_REF] Evans | Apple Beats Moto in USA as Global IPhone Sales Explode[END_REF]. The percentage of the population using mobile phones in Ireland is the largest in Europe, with market revenue of i2 billion in 2009, and 117.3 percent penetration based on a population of 4,459,300 people (ComReg 2009). In 2010, one out of every two mobile phones sold in Ireland were smart phones (Vodafone Ireland 2010). However, the realization of the remarkable commercial potential of smart phones is contingent on consumer willingness to employ these devices for transactional tasks, such as bookings, ticketing tasks, accessing GPS services, and gathering information on and purchasing products/services. Inherently, these tasks require a secure, efficient and reliable m-payment system. An m-payment may be defined, in the context of this paper, as any electronic payment where a smart phone is used to initiate, authorize, and confirm exchange of financial value in return for products and services.

While growth forecasts for m-payment services have been very positive, the reality is quite different with a study by the Gartner Group illustrating that in 2008, only 1 percent of all mobile phone users had used m-payment services. This observation leads to the question of why consumers have not adopted m-payments. [START_REF] Mallat | Exploring Consumer Adoption of Mobile PaymentsCA Qualitative Study[END_REF] notes that there is considerable evidence that users perceive significant risks and uncertainty in transacting with Internet vendors through computers, an issue yet to be explored in relation to smart phones. [START_REF] Mcknight | Developing and Validating Trust Measures for E-Commerce: An Integrative Typology[END_REF] argue this issue is compounded by extensive media coverage about privacy, security, and fraud on the Internet. While such research issues have been examined in the realm of computers, they are yet to be explored for smart phones.

The absence of standardized, interconnected, and widely accepted payment procedures, crucial for the successful diffusion of m-payments, is also a significant growth inhibitor of the commercialization of smart phones (Zhong 2009). This may be a consequence of the significant number of potential stakeholders and vested interests in the area of m-payments including banks, mobile network operators, credit card companies, and third-party payment companies, which all have proposed various models aimed at streamlining the m-payment market. Essentially, these proposed m-payment models center on (1) mobile network operator led, (2) bank and financial institution led, and (3) third-party led models, or numerous variations/combinations of these (Turner 2009). Despite these efforts, an accepted m-payment model to facilitate the widespread adoption of m-payments has not been adopted. Consumers will play a key role in determining the Awinning@ model as without consumer buy-in, any proposed m-payment model will not succeed.

While extant research [START_REF] Matthews | No Smart Phone is an Island: The Impact of Places, Situations, and Other Devices on Smart Phone Use[END_REF] illustrates that most users utilize the phone, SMS, MMS, and Internet services of the mobile phone, little is known about consumers= perceptions of m-payment using a smart phone or what factors impact their perceptions. Therefore, gaining insight into consumers= perceptions of m-payments using a smart phone is crucial as, within the extant literature, there remains a lack of insight into consumers= perceptions of m-payments. It is the objective of this paper to begin to bridge this gap in understanding by developing and applying a theoretical smart phone m-payment model to explore Irish consumers= perceptions of making a m-payments for products/services using their smart phones. The smart phone m-payment model is applied using an online survey hosted on www.SurveyMonkey.com, an online subscription based surveying tool. The target population of Irish mobile phone users were informed of this survey by email and through a private Irish mobile phone users= discussion group on www.Boards.ie. This paper also answers the call for research by Dahlberg et al. (2008, p. 178), who state Yet, we believe that more theory based empirical research is needed to enhance the current understanding of the m-payment services markets....to improve the quality and relevance of m-payment research, we also recommend that researchers collect more empirical data backed by guiding theories.

Conceptualization of Consumers Perceptions of M-Payment

Consumers= lack of willingness to make an m-payment is a significant barrier to m-payment adoption, and it is very much influenced by their assessment of the risk involved [START_REF] Mallat | Exploring Consumer Adoption of Mobile PaymentsCA Qualitative Study[END_REF]. Viehland and Leong (2007) state that in order for m-payments to succeed, they must be secure (consumer perception), convenient, and easy to use. Therefore, perceived payment reliabilityCa consumer=s perception of the reliability of making an m-payment using a smart phoneCand ease of use are important issues if smart phones are to realize their true commercial potential. Thus far, m-payment services have failed to entice consumers and several m-payment companies and initiatives in the EU have failed or have been abandoned [START_REF] Mallat | Exploring Consumer Adoption of Mobile PaymentsCA Qualitative Study[END_REF][START_REF] Dahlberg | Understanding Changes in Consumer Payment Habits: Do Mobile Payments and Electronic Invoices Attract Consumers?[END_REF]. With many and varied payment models proposed (Turner 2009), gaining an understanding of consumers= perceptions of making m-payments using smart phones is thus required in order to develop m-payment services successfully [START_REF] Dahlberg | Understanding Changes in Consumer Payment Habits: Do Mobile Payments and Electronic Invoices Attract Consumers?[END_REF].

In order to develop a model to explain consumers= willingness to make m-payments using smart phones, literature in the areas of trust and consumer behavior (including the theory of planned behavior, decision theory, and the theory of reasoned action) were reviewed. Several studies [START_REF] Chen | Initial Trust and Online Buyer Behaviour[END_REF][START_REF] Gefen | Trust and TAM in Online Shopping: An Integrated Model[END_REF][START_REF] Jarvenpaa | Consumer Trust in an Internet Store[END_REF]Vewrhagen et al. 2006) have found that trust is a significant determinant influencing consumers= willingness to conduct e-commerce transactions and a key obstacle to vendors succeeding on the Internet, as a lack of trust discourages consumers making an e-commerce transaction. Similar studies [START_REF] Mallat | Exploring Consumer Adoption of Mobile PaymentsCA Qualitative Study[END_REF][START_REF] Siau | A Qualitative Investigation on Consumer Trust in Mobile Commerce[END_REF]Xu and Gutierrez 2006) indicate that trust is also a significant determinant of consumers= willingness to make m-commerce transactions and m-payment. Trust is a significant factor for m-commerce transactions because of the spatial and temporal separation between buyers and sellers when buyers are required to provide personal and payment data to suppliers [START_REF] Grabner-Kräuter | Empirical Research in Online Trust: A Review and Critical Assessment[END_REF].

In the context of e-commerce, as illustrated in Table 1, Cheung and Lee (2000) captured a significant set of trust antecedents by synthesizing the literature on consumer trust including perceived security control, perceived privacy control, and perceived integrity. Refers to the perception of Internet users on the honesty of Internet vendors. For instance, whether it has consistent actions, whether its= actions are congruent with its own words and whether its transactions are fair.

Similar trust antecedents emerge from the literature on m-commerce. Shortcomings in security and privacy controls reduce people=s trust in m-payment systems and hinder the emergence of these systems [START_REF] Chou | Understanding M-Commerce Payment Systems through the Analytic Hierarchy Process[END_REF]. Consumers= concerns about the privacy and security of m-payments as they relate to authentication and confidentiality, and privacy and ethical issues relating to concerns about third-party use and unauthorized access to payments and user data [START_REF] Dewan | Mobile Payment Adoption in the USA: A Crossindustry, Cross-Platform Solution[END_REF], are notable in previous research. Thus, consumer trust in legal frameworks and independent regulatory bodies to protect and regulate their transactions and data, are also essential to reduce consumers perceived risks of m-commerce and making an m-payment [START_REF] Cleff | Implementing the Legal Criteria of Meaningful Consent in the Concept of Mobile Advertising[END_REF]. Regulation of data protection often clashes with commercial practices to maximize m-commerce activities via mobile technologies [START_REF] Cleff | Implementing the Legal Criteria of Meaningful Consent in the Concept of Mobile Advertising[END_REF]. Critically, [START_REF] Mallat | Exploring Consumer Adoption of Mobile PaymentsCA Qualitative Study[END_REF] found that trust in merchants and in m-payment and mobile network service providers was essential to encourage consumers to engage in m-commerce transactions and to reduce consumers perceived risks of m-payments. Trust has a positive impact on consumer loyalty and satisfaction towards m-commerce [START_REF] Lin | An Examination of the Determinants of Customer Loyalty in Mobile Commerce Contexts[END_REF] and it is, therefore, a critical component of any model seeking to explain consumers= willingness to transact in an m-commerce environment and to make an m-payment.

Reviewing these trust antecedents as they relate to consumers= willingness to engage in electronic commercial transactions and willingness to perform an m-payment, results in the identification of several trust measures, presented in Table 2, and the generation of two specific hypotheses: Hypothesis 1a: Consumer trust in the ethical, privacy, and data protection controls of service providers, and perception that the legal and regulatory frameworks are sufficiently robust and independent, positively impact con-sumers= willingness to engage in m-commerce transactions using a smart phone.

Hypothesis 1b: Consumer trust in the ethical, privacy, and data protection controls of service providers, and perception that the legal and regulatory frameworks are sufficiently robust and independent, positively impacts upon consumers= willingness to make m-payments using a smart phone. [START_REF] Kim | Individual Users= Adoption of Smart Phone Services[END_REF] state that an individual=s rationale for adopting smart phone services is under-investigated in the extant literature. Indeed, Kim and Zhang note that there can be numerous factors influencing people=s adoption of smart phone services. The technology acceptance model (TAM) proposed by [START_REF] Davis | Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology[END_REF] has been a widely cited model for predicting and explaining user behavior and IT usage through focusing on perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. Perceived usefulness refers to one=s tendency of using or not using an application to the extent that the person believes it will help them perform their tasks better [START_REF] Davis | Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology[END_REF]) Perceived ease of use is defined Aas the degree to which a prospective user expects the target system to be free of effort@ (Davis 1989, p. 321). Extant research has illustrated that perceived ease of use has a direct effect on perceived usefulness, and that both determine the consumer=s attitude toward use (Viehland and Leong 2007).

TAM has previously been utilized to explore m-payments. Viehland and Leong (2007) examined perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use on consumers= willingness to use m-payment services for retail point-of-sale payments. Given the technical limitations of mobile devices, ease of use becomes an imminent acceptance driver of mobile applications. [START_REF] Schierz | Understanding Consumer Acceptance of Mobile Payment Services: An Empirical Analysis[END_REF] note that this is especially true for m-payment services, which compete with established payment solutions and thus need to provide benefits when it comes to ease of use. Therefore, one of the main reasons for the slow diffusion of m-payments, in particular, could be a failure in understanding the perception among consumers of the ease of use of m-payments using smart phones.

Utilizing the logic inherent in extant research on TAM [START_REF] Davis | Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology[END_REF]; Venkatesh and Davis 1996), a system must be both easy to learn and easy to use. Applying this logic to smart phones, we hypothesize that the perceived ease of use of smart phones in relation to (1) transaction-based services and (2) m-payments will impact upon utilization of both of these categories of services on smart phones. These concepts can be incorporated into our model in order to determine the relationships between the perceived ease of use/usefulness of smart phones and their association with consumers= willingness to transact using a smart phone and consumers= willingness to make an m-payment for products/services using a smart phone. The supporting literature upon which these are based is outlined in Table 3. This leads to the generation of two additional hypotheses: Hypothesis 2a: The perceived ease of use of services available through smart phones positively impact consumers= willingness to engage in m-commerce transactions using smart phones.

Hypothesis 2b:

The perceived ease of use of services available through smart phones positively impact consumers= willingness to make an m-payment for products/services using a smart phone. [START_REF] Kim | An Empirical Examination of Factors Influencing the Intention to Use Mobile Payment[END_REF] note that there is a certain amount of empirical evidence in the mobile technology literature regarding users= intention to use mobile technology, with users using m-payment systems when they find the system to be useful for their transaction needs. From a commercial perspective, it would be beneficial to understand if there is an association between consumers= willingness to use smart phones for m-commerce transactions and consumers= willingness to make an m-payment for products/ services using a smart phone. This enables the generation of one final hypothesis:

Element

Literature Ease of Use: Consumers= perceptions of the overall ease of use of smart phones for transactional and payment purposes . Hypothesis 3: A consumer=s willingness to engage in m-commerce transactions through their smart phone will positively impact their perceptions of making smart phone m-payments.

By combining these hypotheses, we can present a smart phone m-payment model (Figure 1).

Figure 1. A Smart Phone M-Payment Model

In operationalizing the constructs in this study, indicators from the literature were adopted enabling questions to be developed for the data collection aspect of the study. These indicators and their associated questions are outlined in Appendix A, Table A1.

Method

Data Collection

In operationalizing the model (Figure 1), a survey instrument was developed. A number of previous studies (e.g., Verhagen et al. 2006;[START_REF] Davis | Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology[END_REF]) have utilized a number of the constructs documented in this study. We adopted these reflective constructs to smart phones to generate candidate items for each construct. Manifest variables representing these constructs were measured using a seven-point Likert scale. Once an initial iteration of the instrument documented in Appendix A was generated, as per [START_REF] Hair | Multivariate Data Analysis[END_REF], we pre-tested the instrument with targeted smart phones Aexperts@ (people who all possessed and actively utilized smart phones as part of their daily lives) in order to assess the semantic content of the items. Those items that best fit and reflect the definitions of the constructs were retained, a process that facilitated the refinement and streamlining of the items included in this survey. The next phase of this research involved posting the survey live on the web using www.SurveyMonkey.com, a subscription-based online surveying tool. The survey was posted live for a one month period in June 2010 with Irish mobile phone users specifically being targeted in order to eliminate environmental and cultural issues. Irish consumers were informed of the survey by email and through a private online mobile phone users= discussion group on www.boards.ie.

Data Analyses

Structural equation modeling, a second generation2 model testing tool, was used for the data analysis and hypotheses testing. Choosing the partial least squares (PLS) approach, which uses component-based estimation, is appropriate since it allows simultaneous exploration of both the measurement and the structural models. In addition, the PLS approach, compared to covariance-based SEM, allows testing the relationships in the model with less restrictive requirements. Another reason of choosing PLS is that this tool is considered to be appropriate for testing theories at earlier stages of development [START_REF] Fornell | Two Structural Equation Models: LISREL and PLS Applied to Consumer Exit-Voice Theory[END_REF]. PLS model might be described from the perspective of two models [START_REF] Chatelin | State-of-Art on PLS Path Modeling through the Available Software[END_REF][START_REF] Diamantopoulos | The Error Term in Formative Measurement Models: Interpretation and Modeling Implications[END_REF][START_REF] Tenenhaus | PLS Path Modeling[END_REF], the measurement (outer) model, relating the measurement variables (MV) to their latent variables (LV), and the structural (inner) model, relating the LVs to each other.

Results

Data Statistics

A total of 82 valid responses to the survey were received. Respondents originated from 12 of Ireland=s 26 counties, including the 3 most densely populated cities of Dublin, Cork, and Waterford which, when combined, accounted for 68 percent of respondents. Of the respondents, 57 percent were in the 30B50 years age bracket, while 23 percent were between 18 and 30 years of age. In all, 85 percent of respondents were employed, with student respondents only accounting for 13 percent; 68 percent of respondents were educated to third (i.e., graduate diploma, master=s) and fourth level post-graduate level (i.e., post-doctorate, Ph.D.) including 11 percent at post-doctorate and Ph.D. level, while 32 percent were educated to undergraduate third level (i.e., degree, diploma, certificate). Income levels of respondents included 46 percent with an annual salary between 40,000 and 80,000 Euros, while 17 percent earned more than 80,000 Euros per year. A total of 85 percent of respondents already owned a store loyalty smart card and 76 percent had registered for electronic or paperless billing/statements. This would indicate that the demographic attributes of a typical respondent to this survey is a person $ between the ages of 30-50 years, $ living in a large Irish city, $ educated to a post-graduate level, $ in full-time employment earning between 40,000 and 80,000 Euros per year, and $ already using smart cards and electronic billing/statements. A total of 62 percent of respondents use the Internet for more than 2 hours per day, but 83 percent of respondents access the Internet using their mobile phone for less than 1 hour a day. In all, 90 percent of respondents talk on their phone for less than an hour per day, while 40 percent send more than 10 SMS messages per day. However, 78 percent of respondents never send an MMS from their mobile phone while 56 percent never send an email from their mobile phone. Of the respondents, 27 percent spend between 1 and 5 Euros per month on mobile phone services/applications, while 15 percent spend between 5 and 50 Euros per month.

This would indicate that the mobile technology profile of a typical respondent to this survey is a person who $ accesses the Internet via their mobile phone for less than an hour per day, $ talks on their mobile phone for less than an hour per day, $ regularly uses their mobile phone for SMS but rarely for MMS or email, and $ is currently using their mobile phone to purchase mobile services/applications. On average, respondents indicated that they perceived smart phone services to be easy to use, and not requiring a lot of knowledge or technical skills to use. Respondents also displayed a strong willingness to transact, particularly to use smart phones for pulling information, ticketing, bookings/reservations, and using GPS functionality. Interestingly, respondents considered using a secure and trusted third-party payment company as the most preferred method of payment for products/services using their smart phone, while using their existing mobile network operator (MNO) to pay for products/services was also rated highly. Respondents displayed significant levels of concern regarding perceived privacy control and the authority and independence of regulatory bodies, and in the robustness of the legislative frameworks governing m-commerce.

4.2

Model Evaluation [START_REF] Chin | The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling[END_REF] proposed the list of criteria to assess PLS models with reflective constructs. These criteria are highly accepted and adopted by researchers from different research fields (e.g., [START_REF] Gefen | Structural Equation Modeling and Regression: Guidelines for Research and Practice[END_REF][START_REF] Henseler | The Use of Partial Least Squares Path Modeling in International Marketing[END_REF][START_REF] Tenenhaus | PLS Path Modeling[END_REF]. The evaluation process of the PLS path model results involves two steps.

Step 1 necessitates the testing of the quality of the measurement (outer) models. As

Step 1 was successful and latent constructs were found reliable and valid, Step 2, which necessitates the assessment of the structural (inner) model, was conducted [START_REF] Henseler | The Use of Partial Least Squares Path Modeling in International Marketing[END_REF]. SmartPLS 2.0 M3 was employed for the PLS model assessment.

Assessment of Measurement Models

Reliability. The first criterion of assessment of measurement models is reliability, which is traditionally tested by internal consistency reliability and indicator reliability.

Internal consistency reliability might be tested either by Cronbach=s α, which indicates an estimation for the reliability assuming that all items are equally reliable, or by composite reliability, where different item loadings are taken into account. Although these two reliability measures differ, either of them may be used. As can be seen in Table 4, both parameters have high values (all values are above 0.91), while the requirement value should be above 0.7 at the earlier stage of the research and above 0.8B0.9 in the advanced stages (Henseler et al. 2005). Individual reliability of the indicators relies on the expectation that latent variable variance should explain at least 50 percent of the indicator. In other words, loadings of manifest variables should be not less than 0.707 [START_REF] Chin | The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling[END_REF][START_REF] Gefen | Structural Equation Modeling and Regression: Guidelines for Research and Practice[END_REF][START_REF] Henseler | The Use of Partial Least Squares Path Modeling in International Marketing[END_REF].

Figure 2 demonstrates that magnitude of all indicators is higher than required the 0.707, with the lowest value of 0.807. Based on the two tests, we can conclude that all indicators are reliable.

Validity. The convergent validity and the discriminant validity are employed to examine the validity of four reflective constructs. The first column in Table 5 shows that the average variance extracted (AVE) for all constructs is higher than 0.5, which indicates sufficient convergent validity and means that each latent variable explains more than 50 percent of their indicator variance on average. Discriminant validity refers to the appropriate patterns of inter indicators of a construct and other constructs. First, variance of a construct should be assigned more with their own indicators than with other constructs. For this purpose, construct cross-correlation and the square root of each construct=s AVE were compared. As can be seen in Table 5, all constructs have sufficient discriminant validity since the square root of each latent construct=s AVE (values on the diagonal) is much larger than the correlation of the specific construct with any other reflective constructs in our research model. We also tested discriminant validity with cross-loading test. Results of the test presented in Table 6 demonstrate that an indicator of any specific construct has higher loading on its own construct than on any other constructs. The results of the tests show that manifest variables (indicators) presented in the research model are reliable and valid.

Assessment of the Structural Model

In assessing the explanatory and predictive power of the structural model, we employed a number of recommendations [START_REF] Andreev | Validating Formative Partial Least Squares (PLS) Models: Methodological Review and Empirical Illustration[END_REF][START_REF] Chatelin | State-of-Art on PLS Path Modeling through the Available Software[END_REF][START_REF] Chin | The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling[END_REF][START_REF] Gefen | Structural Equation Modeling and Regression: Guidelines for Research and Practice[END_REF]Henseler et al. 2005). Explanatory Power. An overview of the structural model evaluation results is presented in Figure 3. The complete evaluation, containing both structural and measurement models, can be seen in Figure 2.

The central criterion for evaluating the structural model is the level of explained variance of the dependent construct Willingness to MPay, for which the R-square was 0.463. Thus, the model explained 46.3 percent of the construct=s variance. The variance of the construct was explained at the moderate level according to Chin=s (1998) criteria. R 2 values of 0.67, 0.33, or 0.19 for endogenous latent variables are described as substantial, moderate, or weak (Chin 1988, p. 323). The Willingness to Transact was explained at 29.3 percent by Trust and Perceived Ease of Use.

Figure 3. Evaluation of Structural Model

Changes in R-square were explored to investigate the substantive impact of each independent construct on the dependent constructs, carrying out the effect size technique by rerunning three PLS estimations, excluding in each run one of the explaining latent constructs. PLS estimations of each model can be found in Appendix B. [START_REF] Chin | The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling[END_REF] proposed using the effect size /5 of PLS constructs, which is similar to Cohen=s implementation for multiple regression and might be small (/5 = 0.02), medium (/5 = 0.15), or large (/5 = 0.35). The results of the effect size test presented in Table 7 show that while Perceived Ease of Use and Willingness to Transact have small effects (with /5=s equal to 0.03 and 0.04, respectively), Trust has a large effect with magnitude of /5 = 0.4.

Predictive power. The statistical significance of the path coefficients was tested by employing the bootstrapping re-sampling technique, using the SmartPLS software, with the graphical output for the structural model evaluation presented in in Appendix A, Figure A1. All path coefficients were found to be highly significant.

Willingness to MPay, as expected, was found to be positively affected by Trust (H1b supported with β = -0.637 and p < 0.001), Willingness to Transact (H3 supported with and p < 0.001), and Perceived Ease of Use (H2b supported with β = -0.193 and p < 0.001).

Willingness to Transact was found to be positively affected by Trust (H1a supported with β = -0.637 and p < 0.001), and Perceived Ease of Use (H2a supported with β = -0.193 and p < 0.001).

Our analysis revealed that all hypotheses were supported. For the evaluation of the predictive relevance of the structural model, the Stone and Geisser Q5 test was performed using the blindfolding procedure, for which [START_REF] Chin | The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling[END_REF] stated that Q5 reflects an index of goodness of reconstruction by model and parameter estimations. A positive Q5 provides evidence that the omitted observations were well-reconstructed and that predictive relevance is achieved, while a negative Q5 reflects absence of predictive relevance. As can be seen in Table 8, all values of Q5 were greater than zero, indicating predictive relevance for the endogenous constructs of the research model.

Discussion and Conclusions

Consumers= perceptions of using smart phones for m-transactions and m-payments is of scientific and practical interest. Smart phones present organizations with a vast potential for commercial opportunities. For commercial organizations, an understanding of consumer=s perceptions of smart phones is of paramount importance. Yet, in an academic context, the extant literature is still immature. This paper, by exploring consumer=s willingness to m-pay using smart phones, makes a number of contributions, which are of value to researchers and practitioners alike. A smart phone m-payment model is developed from a thorough analysis of the literature from a variety of fields including trust, consumer behavior (incorporating the theory of planned behavior, decision theory, and the theory of reasoned action). Extant literature (Malat 2007;Viehland and Leong 2007) illustrates that users perceive significant risks associated with m-payment. Indeed, [START_REF] Mallat | Exploring Consumer Adoption of Mobile PaymentsCA Qualitative Study[END_REF] noted that consumer=s unwillingness to make (conduct) m-payments is the greatest barrier to further adoption of this phenomenon. Extant literature (e.g., Viehland and Leong 2007) states that consumer=s willingness to make an m-payment using a smart phone is an issue impacted by perceived ease of use and trust. However, both factors are treated the same in the extant literature with no differentiation being made between these factors in relation to their impact upon consumer=s willingness to use m-payment. In explaining consumer=s willingness to use smart phones for m-payment, this study presents a conceptual framework and provides empirical evidence that trust, willingness to transact, and perceived ease of use are key factors in explaining consumer=s willingness to make an m-payment, with trust having the largest explanatory power.

Perceived ease of use has widely been documented in the literature (Venkatesh and Davis 1996) as having a key influence on the adoption and use of new technologies. However, the findings of this study, illustrate that while causation exists between perceived ease of use and willingness to make an m-payment, the association is relatively weak. This illustrates that perceived ease of use of the technology is not a key determinant of consumers= willingness to make an m-payment using a smart phone. Therefore, this study contradicts the findings of [START_REF] Schierz | Understanding Consumer Acceptance of Mobile Payment Services: An Empirical Analysis[END_REF] and illustrates that although perceived ease of use is important, it is not actually a key factor in explaining the slow diffusion of m-payments using smart phones. However, respondents did have a high level of education, which may also be a factor in determining their perceptions of the ease of use of smart phone services. However, perceived ease of use is a key determinant in explaining a consumer=s willingness to utilize smart phones for transactional tasks, such as bookings, ticketing, accessing GPS services, and pulling information on products/services. In interpreting these findings and trying to understand why perceived ease of use is a key determinant of a consumer=s willingness to transact but yet has much less of an influence on consumer=s willingness to make an m-payment, a possible explanation may be the current state of diffusion of the respective services, with consumers being much more familiar with, and having greater access to, transaction-based services. Furthermore, the findings illustrate that willingness to transact via a smart phone is a limited predictor of willingness to make an m-payment.

The findings of this study present conclusive evidence of the association between trust and consumer=s willingness to make an m-payment using a smart phone. By exploring trust in detail, our analysis illustrates that consumer=s perceptions of legal frameworks and the regulation of these frameworks are integral parts of trust. Analysis also revealed that consumer=s perceptions of the privacy controls employed by smart phone service providers is a critical element of trust. This analysis would be of interest to practice.

In order to increase consumer=s willingness to make an m-payment using smart phones, commercial entities need to communicate to consumers that they implement policies and utilize the latest technologies to protect the privacy and data of consumers. For government and commercial entities who wish to develop an m-payment culture, the implications of our findings are that a key step in getting consumers to utilize m-payment is to ensure that adequate legal frameworks are in place. Furthermore, the belief among consumers that regulatory bodies have sufficient powers to take actions against service providers who do not adhere to such frameworks is a key issue in building trust among consumers in order to get them to make m-payments using smart phones. Presently, among Irish consumers at least, this is not the case, with our findings illustrating that consumers perceive that regulatory bodies are not sufficiently authoritative or independent to regulate smart phone service providers. We are currently conducting a comparative study in an international context which will examine this further.

This paper is a response to calls for a better understanding of the emerging phenomenon of consumer utilization of smart phone m-payments and it represents a suitable response to the call for research by [START_REF] Dahlberg | APast, Present and Future of Mobile Payments Research: A Literature Review[END_REF] and [START_REF] Kim | Individual Users= Adoption of Smart Phone Services[END_REF]. Nevertheless, there are a number of limitations to this study. The study is limited by its sample size with findings based on 82 respondents participating in the study. Therefore, further research needs to be conducted to reexamine the model with a larger sample size. This model also needs to be tested on a younger population as the majority of respondents to this survey were between 30 and 50 years of age. The authors are currently engaged in an international study, specifically examining the perceptions of a younger population of mobile phone users.

In testing this smart phone m-payment model, we examined all possible products/ services without differentiation. Further research is in progress to investigate the explanatory power of the model for different socio-demographic groups and for specific products/services. Such research may provide further insight on the impact of ease of use of m-payments. As Mallet (2007) states, trust is a multi-object construct. Therefore, we call for further scientific investigation of trust as it pertains to m-payment using smart phones.

  Consumers= perceptions that the use of smart phones does not require a lot of knowledge. Viehland and Leong 2007; Davis 1989; Kim et al. 2010 Technical Skills: Consumers= perceptions that the use of smart phones does not require a lot of technical skills. Viehland and Leong 2007; Davis 1989

Figure 2 .

 2 Figure 2. PLS Results of Measurement and Structural Models

FigureFigure B1 .

 B1 Figure A1. Bootstrapping

Table 1 .

 1 Trust Antecedents for E-Commerce (adapted from Cheung and Lee 2000)

	Trust
	Antecedents	Description
	Perceived	User=s perception of Internet vendor=s ability in fulfilling security
	Security Control	requirements, such as authentication, integrity, encryption, and
		non-repudiation.
	Perceived	User=s perception on the ability of Internet vendor=s in protecting
	Privacy Control	consumers= personal information collected from electronic transactions,
		from unauthorized use or disclosure.
	Perceived
	Integrity

Table 2 .

 2 Trust Measures Utilized for this Study The perception by consumers that the legal frameworks governing transactions and payments using smart phones are sufficiently robust to protect consumers. Consumers perception that service providers act ethically when capturing, retaining, processing, and managing my personal data.Power of Regulatory Bodies: Consumers perceptions that regulatory bodies for service provision are sufficiently authoritative to regulate smart phone Service Providers.Independence of Regulatory Bodies: Consumers perceptions that the regulatory bodies for service provision are sufficiently independent to regulate smart phone service providers.

	Element	Literature
	Legal Frameworks: Cleff 2007; Johanssen
		2003
	Ethical Commitment: Mallet 2007; McKnight et
		al. 2003; Chou et al. 2004;
		Dewan and Chen 2005;
		Johanssen 2003
	Providers Perspectives on Consumer Privacy: Consumers perceptions that service providers are concerned with consumers= privacy.	Mallet 2007; McKnight et al. 2003; Chou et al. 2004; Dewan and Chen 2005;
		Johanssen 2003
	Privacy Controls of Service Providers: Consumers confidence in the privacy controls of Service Providers.	Mallet 2007; McKnight et al. 2003; Chou et al. 2004;
		Dewan and Chen 2005;
		Johanssen 2003
	Transfer of Consumer Data to Third Parties: Consumers beliefs that service providers will not divulge consumers= personal data to third parties.	Mallet 2007; McKnight et al. 2003; Johanssen 2003
		Clef 2007; Johanssen 2003
		Clef 2007; Johanssen 2003

Table 3 .

 3 Perceived Ease of Use Measures

Table 4 .

 4 Internal Consistency Reliability Test

	Construct	Composite	Cronbach=s
	Per Ease of Use	0.9451	0.9127
	Trust	0.9558	0.9461
	Willingness to MPay	0.9665	0.9535
	Willingness to Transact	0.9528	0.9341

Table 5 .

 5 Construct Cross-Correlation Matrix and AVE Analyses

	AVE	Construct	Per Ease	Trust	Wil to	Wil to
	0.8517	Perceived Ease of Use	0.9229
	0.7558	Trust	0.3324	0.8694
	0.8782	Willingness to MPay	0.4261	0.6183	0.9371
	0.8348	Willingness to Transact	0.5138	0.3323	0.4398	0.9137

Table 6 .

 6 Cross Loadings

	Construct	Items	Per Ease of	Trust	Wil to	Wil to
		PEEASY	0.8793	0.285	0.4119	0.526
	Perceived	PEKNOW	0.9483	0.302	0.394	0.4378
	Ease of Use	PETECH	0.9395	0.334	0.3676	0.4475
		LFROBUST	0.2838	0.9109	0.5394	0.2823
		PECETHIC	0.3189	0.876	0.5498	0.2636
		PPCCONCRNPRIV	0.2924	0.858	0.6147	0.2985
		PPCCONFPRIV	0.3241	0.907	0.6264	0.3461
		PPCDIVUL3RD	0.3549	0.8576	0.5137	0.2067
		REGAUTH	0.2079	0.8072	0.3921	0.2705
	Trust	REGINDEP	0.2246	0.8646	0.4741	0.3395
		PPRMNO	0.414	0.6083	0.9332	0.3931
		PPRSAFE3RD	0.3431	0.5043	0.8958	0.4294
	Willingness	PPRSAFECC	0.4564	0.5969	0.9602	0.4312
	to MPay	PPRSAFELASER	0.3766	0.6013	0.9578	0.3981
		PULLGPS	0.4215	0.2262	0.258	0.8628
		PULLINFO	0.5481	0.3255	0.4232	0.936
	Willingness	PULLRESERV	0.4779	0.2846	0.4085	0.9214
	to Transact	PULLTICK	0.4203	0.36	0.4843	0.9326

Table 7 .

 7 Effect Size Test

	Construct	R5 excl	R5 incl	/5	Effect
	Perceived Ease of Use	0.446	0.463	0.03	small
	Trust	0.248	0.463	0.40	large
	Willingness to Transact	0.439	0.463	0.04	small

Table 8 .

 8 Blindfolding Test for Predictive Relevance

	Construct	ΣSO	ΣSE	Q5
	Willingness to MPay	324	43.7389	0.865
	Willingness to Transact	324	63.1417	0.8051

The term second generation refers to the differentiation of classes of data analyses techniques rather than to a discrete point of time. This term has been used in IS research (and in other disciplines). For example, according toGefen et al. (2000, p. 55), ASecond generation data analysis techniques: Techniques enabling researchers to answer a set of interrelated research questions in a single, systematic, and comprehensive analysis by modeling the relationships among multiple independent and dependent constructs simultaneously.@

Willingness to MPay

PPRMNO I consider it safe to make an m-payment through my mobile network operator when using SMMS.

PPRSAFE3RD

I consider it safe to make an m-payment through a third party payment company when using SMMS.

PPRSAFECC I consider it safe to make an m-payment with my credit card when using SMMS.


Valentina Lichtner
email: v.lichtner@lse.ac.uk

Will Venters
email: w.venters@lse.ac.uk

Journey to DOR: A Retro Science-Fiction Story on Researching ePrescribing

Keywords: Future, technology, fiction, systems for electronic transmission of prescriptions, reflexivity, research methods

The core of this paper is a science fiction short story. We are on planet DOR. A group of scientists are working on an experiment, changing underlying mechanisms of transmissions of a colossus machineCa complex system of gears and levers, wires and pipes. Some of its mechanisms are also known as D for doctors, F for pharmacists, P for patients. Observers travel from Earth to study the experiment. Their dilemmas are unaided by their advanced research tools. The story is inspired by research carried out for the evaluation of the forthcoming electronic prescription service in England. Our story is fiction, but it is also a methodological means, a reflexive lever to elaborate and explore our research texts and to question the feasibility, meaning, and impact of researching future technology.

The core of this paper is a science fiction story. This preface provides the rationale for writing the story, which is then followed by reflections. Some readers may wish to begin by reading the story first (Section 2), then read this preface.

As researchers adopting a social constructionist perspective [START_REF] Crotty | The Foundations of Social Research[END_REF], we seek to produce coherent accounts of our research context through interpretation. We are involved in a project to evaluate the introduction of an electronic prescription service (EPS) in primary care and thus EPS is our research context. Our research project is evaluating EPS at the same time EPS is being developed. EPS compliant software applications are being piloted by a few prescriber (e.g., local doctors surgery) and dispenser (e.g., local pharmacy) sites in England. The challenges of evaluating a national IT project in development are perhaps self-evident: the lack of a definite set of IT systems in place and in use, changing requirements and specifications, and, more generally, shifting ground. The very existence of EPS has been under scrutiny. This is made more complex by major changes in the UK National Health Service (NHS) brought about by a newly elected government. Evaluating EPS in the present is thus researching its future, with all its uncertainties, and with very limited space for contributing to steering its course.

Our evaluation project is undertaking detailed observations of, and interviews with, general practitioners, pharmacists, technologists, and various other stakeholders. Such observations and interviews are recorded, transcribed, and entered into our evidence base as research texts. Our epistemology is that of interpretivismCwe seek not an objective truth but interpretations of the world of EPS. Yet as researchers we seem to face the gravitational pull of an enlightenment straightjacket, taught since our birth and embedded within our research culture; in our observations we naturally seek objective data, evidence, theory, and conclusions in order to produce research papers. Such papers rely heavily on research texts 1 produced from literature, project documents, transcripts, conversations, etc. Our papers are open to scrutiny and must be produced in this way; speculation and conjecture can have no place in an evaluation of such a politically charged context.

But what if we were to say that this is important but not sufficient? That as researchers we are always ethnographic, physically embedded within a research context we do not (and cannot) fully grasp? We constantly seek our own interprettations of this context in order to move forward to a future of modest understanding. We visit EPS sites, attend meetings, talk with people, read, reflect, and discuss, and in this we assimilate personal understanding which we struggle to record or express. Further, our interpretations of the EPS implementation include non-verbal clues, tacit perceptions, feelings, moods, incoherent contradictory ideas, and conspiracy theoriesCall emerging from our experience of the field, but Ainvalid@ for traditional research purposes.

Seeking to find a way to express this kind of Aunscientific@ understanding of EPS, we welcome the invitation to write a non-traditional paper. 2 We are thus challenging 1 By texts, we mean the broad set of evidential material produced in research: transcripts, videos, audio-recordings, written observations, etc.

2

This paper was written in response to the call for papers for the IFIP WG 8.2 conference AResearching the Future@ (https://www.wg82.abo.fi/callforpapers.php). The call invited nontraditional approaches and formats, such as science-fiction.

ourselves by seeking to use fiction and storytelling to reflexively elaborate our tacit knowledge so as to better understand the EPS research context in which we are undertaking research, and through this to improve our traditional research practices.

Fiction and storytelling have an important role in knowledge sharing and reflexive analysis [START_REF] Denning | The Springboard: How Storytelling Ignites Action in Knowledge-Era Organizations[END_REF][START_REF] Snowden | New Wine in Old Wineskins: From Organic to Complex Knowledge Management through the Use of Story[END_REF]) providing a fluid structure in which knowledge can be expressed and Ainfusing events with meaningYthrough the magic of plot@ (Gabriel 2000, p. 180). This allows concepts to be remembered, altered, and shared, and allows meaning to diffuse. Similarly, the use of metaphor can help in sharing tacit knowledge [START_REF] Nonaka | The Knowledge-Creating Company[END_REF]. Engagement with stories and the Aemotional mind@ has been promoted to teach software quality [START_REF] Mcbride | Using Performance Ethnography to Explore the Human Aspects of Software quality[END_REF] and used effecttively to communicate information systems leadership ideas [START_REF] Austin | The Adventures of an IT Leader[END_REF]. Most vitally, writing allows for a self-reflexive analysis of our understanding, turning the lens inward on the researcher.

While we could further discuss fiction as a research method, we wish to leave center-stage to the fiction itself. We leave to the reader the interpretations of its meanings, in terms of technology for the electronic transmission of medical prescriptions and, more generally, in relation to more-or-less utopian IT systems in healthcare and other sectors, and the role researchers play in their implementation. In concluding this paper, we include some of the comments and reflections to our fiction and provide a set of questions as a starting point to the wider debate on researching the future.

The reader remains free to like or dislike the fiction, agree or disagree with the questions, although we hope this exercise will inspire others to consider writing fiction as part of their methodological arsenal, as a reflective Amode of thought to question and imagine change@ (Higgins 2001, p. 5). We should be humble of our inevitable limitations as researchersCand Asuch humility is essential in creating an environment in which we can learn about the complex systems in which we are embedded and work effectively to create the world we truly desire@ (Sterman 2002, p. 527).

2

Journey to DOR 3

The colossal machine was built on a tall thin grid that enabled scientists and observers to work on both sides. Dials, buttons, knobs, and levers were connected by a partially visible intricacy of pipes and wiresCa giant radio-like structure without its case. A 3 This text is loosely based on Stanislaw Lem=s book Solaris (2003( , first published in 1961( , translated to English in 1970)). Words taken literally from Solaris are highlighted in italics (with page numbers referenced in superscript); Lem=s words have been taken out of their original context and placed in this new, completely different story. constant luminous flow was running through the pipes, cylinders and drums moving regularly up and down, while interconnected gears turned one another at various speeds similar to the hour, minute, and second arms of a clock. A scaffold was erected around the machine, so that only the very upper part was accessible. This scaffold gave a bottomless view of the machine below, and its hazy boundaries on the eastern and western sides. It left a vague awareness that other scaffolds might exist at the edges.

A readoscope device connected amongst the pipes produced constant monitoring of inputs and outputs, rates of flows and volumes of stockCstate of health, volume of medicines, monetary value. Tiny fluorescent labels identified some of the main controls: D for doctors, F for pharmacists, M for the manufacturers of medicines, L for money, P for the patients and those caring for them.

Since the start of the new equinox, scientists had been working on an experiment to introduce a new layer into the apparatus, a new messaging system E, based not on pipes of liquid but on electrical impulses. The aim of this transition was to improve the quality of the readoscope results, and the flow and gearings. They had invited the observers to study the experiment and report back to the home planet on its outcome. The observers were expected to land at any time, their expedition having been delayed by an interstellar ethical storm. E was already in place, all wired-up, and the scientists were anxious to begin.

***

From the portholes of the spaceship they could see the stars, but this portion of the sky was unfamiliar to 2 them. Some of them had heard of it, but none of them had visited DOR before. As they got closer to the station, they realized they were landing on a shifting ground, moving at variable speed. They left their cabin at a point of temporary still, but as soon as their feet touched ground they had to take a step forward in order to keep their balance 5 . The expected welcoming party had been cancelled, and the observers were ushered through empty corridors and piles of papers, directly to the machine room. Were the scientists happy to see them?

The observers took a position behind the grid, providing them with a parallel view of all the mechanisms. The scientists were on the other side, with access to the controls. The machine was running its flows and glows, more or less smoothly. A roll of printed paper was spinning out of the readoscope, although little was made of it by those in the room; it simply fell through an opening in the scaffolding. Introductions were made, and the observers were given information materials on the experiment. It was explained to them that E had already been put in place, to save time, and that the countdown was ready to start. Did they have any questions?

The observers tried to pay attention but their eyes were distracted by the rhythmic move of this glowing apparatus with a life of its own, while their bodies were struggling to stay still on the shifting foot-base. They tried to decipher the mechanisms and their movementsCmake a map of them in their mindCbut they struggled to understand the roles and relationships in the little time available. They decided to focus on E, ask for further details on its inner working and expected benefits.

A transparent thin glass was layered in front of the machine and a projection of E was superimposed on its mechanisms. The scientists had used this method before quite successfully to illustrate their vision. The starting point was the doctors. E was expected to reduce the load on D; the corresponding gear would run more easily and transmit the effect on F; a temporary increased load on F would be transformed by its inner circuits in tighter controls on P, which at the same time would reduce volumes in M and pressure on L. The result was expected to be a smoother, more efficient, productive, effective, safer apparatus. The nonlinear equations in the underlying mathematical model had shown that E would also save energy and generally improve the health status of the planet. Minor glitches were expected in the transmission mechanisms, due to inertiaBresistance forces, but the scientists were confident that they could be greased and recast as and when necessary.

As the thin glass projection screen retracted, the countdown began B two-hundred and fifty, two-hundred and forty-nine, two-hundred and forty-eight 3 Y Keep a hold on thyself. Be open to see anything. That was the only advice they had been given before boarding. The observers could not think of anything better 11 . During the presentation the scaffold had temporarily paused its shifting, making ground for sound mathematical certitude 20 . But the rolling had slowly started again as soon as the countdown button had been pushed. And the strong starlight coming through the portholes cast double shadows 27 that were hindering the observations. The closer they tried to position themselves to the machine, the more defined were the double contours of their own shadows.

Yfive, four, three, two point nine, two point eight, two point seven nine, two point seven eightYroll-out. The start button pushed to its full length, the E gear began to slowly turn, steering D to a skewed angle. The transmissions led to a shaking of the whole machine, gear by gear, pipe by pipe, with jolts and scratches. The scientists were reading the readoscope prints, while tightening bolts, loosening belts, oiling pinsCmechanics tuning the engine. Speed began to increase, the shuffling of M more rapid. The scientists kept an eye on the observers, as if to read their minds and share enthusiasm for the new venture. The observers glanced back through the grid, almost hypnotized by the rhythmic movement of the machine but unsure what to read in the scientists= faces. The load on D initially increased, as expected, but it was now slowly diminishing; F was taking on the work and modifying its internal circuits to cope with the pressure, a groaning could be heard from that part of the machine, although P was running as usual, something only the scientists initially noticed. The gear did not seem to modify its behavior the way it should have. The scientists hoped the lack of change in P would be unnoticeable to the observers. Absence is more difficult to notice than presence, usually, isn=t it? That would give them time to fix the mal-function without the need to account for it. They turned to the readoscope. They knew the high volume of data it was producing was of great value.

***

The observers had prepared for this machine by reading books and papers, but the reality was far more complicated. It was made of more gears and control devices than those explained in the presentation: G.overnment, M.edia, M.ass and P.ersonalized M.edicine, I.T, G.enomics, to name but a few. Changes were appearing on these mechanisms too, but the observers couldn=t say if the changing was related to E. How were they going to report in simple terms such an immense, constantly moving, interconnected frenzy of relationships and differences, wires and gears? Each gear in itself was a rich, intricate lace. Their notebooks were filling up with data, text, numbers, sketches as they tried to capture the flow of events and changes in progress. It seemed it was not possible to observe the makeup of the flow itself but clearly it was vital to the operation of the machine. They struggled to see the simplicity the scientists had presented, so enthralled were they by the system=s complexity. Perhaps they could have interpreted the machine low-pitched murmuringCthe very voice of the machine itselfCbut they lacked the ears to hear it 126 . What were they missing, the whole for the gears? Were they focusing on the right layers? Where were the outcomes? More observation work was necessary.

The observers split into groups. The youngest gave themselves more precise tasks, capturing with stopwatches accurate timings of the flow and speed of dials. The most senior took a mimal out of their toolbox, the handheld micromagnetolens that had been applied in many successful projects before to produce real time picotgraphic representations of the combined smaller-and-bigger picture. Gears, pipes, and wires were coming in and out of focus. They tried positioning themselves at a different angle on the shifting platform. If only the ground would stop moving, their work would be much easier.

As the scientists attempted to repair the reaction mechanisms in P, they saw that M was having an increased effect on the whole system. They knew there was a risk but they didn=t think it would reveal itself so soon. Critical massCand timeCis usually needed before such transformations take place. M=s power was increasingly influencing P=s behavior now that E had freed P from D=s control. P was freely turning to F, generating an exponential growth of M and corresponding value of L. The scientists tried to intervene on F by pulling a few levers, but with limited effect. Humming and glowing, the machine had found a new equilibrium, leading to a steady and more fluid growth of M and a more rapid turning of P, but no signs yet of dramatic change in the health of the nation, nor energy saving. The readoscope printouts were now showing alarming figures of L and risks for P, but no alarm bells were ringing. The scientists stood back to discuss the variables in the mathematical model. So much for the mathematicians 22 Y The observers were still at work and had not realized the experiment had ended. It seemed changes were still in progress, the machine was still moving. They did notice, though, that the scientists had stopped working on the machine, and they took the opportunity to ask for a few clarifications. Why was E implemented? An easy, straightforward question.

The scientists looked at each other. Apparently the reasons kept changing as the years passed and the project developed, and nobody could recall why it had begun. But they were sure it could be done; it was technically feasible and therefore desirable, a certain technical improvement to the system. In fact, the experiment had demonstrated its success, with the machine moving more fluidly, smoothlyCmore efficiently.

***

The observers were on their capsule back to Earth. The night stared them in the face, amorphous, blind, infinite, without frontiers 26 . Traveling gave them a quiet time to write their report. Unfortunately the assiduous efforts of so many years had not resulted in a single indisputable conclusion 23 . They were concerned, but they were back down to Earth. Looking back, they could see that they had flown to DOR not so much to observe the experiment but to acquaint themselves with the machine. With a muffled sigh of resignation, the spaceship expelled its hot air. They were free 5 .

Reflections

Postmodernist critical theory suggests reflexivity as one way in which researchers can come to terms with their own research circumstances [START_REF] Gouldner | The Coming Crisis of Western Sociology[END_REF]Calás and Smircich1999). Reflexivity Aaims at interpretation, open, language sensitive, identity-conscious, historical, political, non-authoritative and textually aware understanding of the subject matter@ (Alvesson and Deetz 2000, p. 115). It concerns recognizing the ambivalent relationship of the research texts and evidence to the realities studied [START_REF] Ashmore | The Reflexive Thesis[END_REF]) and focuses on the researchers themselves and their experience. Yet a significant constraint to such research practices is the act of writing academic papers. The traditional academic paper defines some limits of our writing [START_REF] Calás | Past Postmodernism? Reflections and Tentative Directions[END_REF] and reflexive research should seek alternative writing styles in order to explore the social, historical, and political context of their research (Ashmore 19899), in particular to explore the tacit dimension [START_REF] Polanyi | The Tacit Dimension[END_REF]) of research knowledge which researchers develop in their experience of the field. Perhaps it is the duty of all researchers to come to terms with their own circumstances Abefore allowing [themselves] the arrogant luxury of disengaged pronouncements on the circumstances of others@ [START_REF] Gouldner | The Coming Crisis of Western Sociology[END_REF], cited in Ashmore 1989, p. 78).

For this reason, we here explore the writing of explicit fiction as a means to elaborate our research Areality@ and come to terms with our own research circumstances, drawing on our reflexive understanding, but expressly avoiding Afacts@ and factual text. As Aevery reality depends upon the ceaseless reflexive use of a body of knowledge in interaction@ (Mehan and Wood 1975, p. 21), so the authoring of this fictional account provided an opportunity to reify and discuss dissatisfaction, concern, and self-critique within EPS and within our EPS evaluation project. Ensuring a focus away from the specifics of the current research project and creating projections and extrapolationsCfictionCand especially the sci-fi genre based in the future [START_REF] Mchugh | AGive Me Your Mirrorshades@: Science Fiction AMethodology@ Meets the Social and Organizational Sciences[END_REF] avoids or reifies ethical and moral concerns so allowing them to be expanded upon but in a less threatening manner (although interestingly we were asked to highlight the disclaimer on the fictional nature of the piece).

Our fictional account is an exercise in futureology; it is inspired by the novel Solaris, by a socio-technical view of the world [START_REF] Petrakaki | Sociotechnical Changing in Healthcare[END_REF], and by Peter Checkland=s (1981) soft systems thinking. The text is clearly and explicitly not of this world, of this time, of this reality, and thus cannot be seen as a direct representation of our research project. Writing science fiction provided us with the freedom from our own inner academic self-censor. Our story is retro: Aa sci-fi vision from the 1950s about a social and political reality now,@ as one reader described it. The story is about our now, and in particular our problems today in identifying outcomes. It is science fiction, but like all science fiction it is based on the social reality of the present, for why else would it be possible to have retro-sci-fi?

Similarly to writing about the future, researching the future is also always based on the present, or rather the Aremembered past@ [START_REF] Lukacs | Historical Consciousness: The Remembered Past[END_REF]. In a dialectical perspective, Awhether studying the past or the future, it is chiefly a matter of looking back, deriving presuppositions from the forms that contain them@ (Ollman 2003, p. 122). Just as the hindsight bias skews any research of the past, so the past skews any projection of the future. Look in either direction and the researcher can only see the present.

Solaris was chosen as the basis for our story for its literary strengths and conceptual rather than narrative or plot based structure, and yet this novel can offer us an additional layer for reflection. The book recounts the story of four men in a space station, on a planet, Solaris, a live ocean-like creature with whom Man has been striving to establish contact for centuries. Human theories and models of the ocean fill the space station=s library. The ocean resounds like an amorphous, threatening, marvelous, incomprehensible being. It is a psychological story, as the ocean communicates with the four men by presenting them embodiments of their own remorse, hidden in their subconscious. We read it as an epistemological tale: humans are unable to communicate with an entity that they can only know and describe through the humans= own theories and nomenclature (our hermeneutic bind, that we are limited by our socially constructed language); the positivism of the Solarian scientists is replaced by the skepticism over their possible achievements and the limitations of the human minds. The ocean is a multiple metaphorCin this case, one of our attempts to research the present/future of EPS, or the observers= attempt to draw outcomes out of the E experiment on the machine of DOR.

When facing the E, the observers found themselves in a struggle to know and judge its effect on the system. Technology is embedded in complex socio-technical systems; it is not neutral [START_REF] Winner | Do Artifacts Have Politics?[END_REF]; it affects/is affected by the relations that surround it and the expressed intentions for its coming to be, the expressed goals might easily turn into unexpected/unwanted ones (Lem calls this effect the Abifurcation of goals@4 ). The view of the whole is complex, and made more complex, and both more and less knowable, by an interpretative perspective.

In contrast the scientists in our story had a clearer purpose and a narrower perspective; a pragmatic approach to get the job done. Perhaps we should have called them engineers, as engineers design and build, while in science fiction, especially movies, scientists Abeing a clearly labeled species of intellectualYare always liable to crack up or go off the deep end@ (Sontag 1966, p. 45).

As researchers we find ourselves in dilemmas that leave behind an inability to act. The question is how to overcome them and contribute shaping the technology of our present and future. The difficulty is that what is required is often an answer to trans-scientific questions, ethical questions not answerable with science (Weinberg 1972), a matter of choice, trade-offs, power, values, accountability. Often we are under considerable pressure to provide simple rational answersCand to be servants of the powerful sponsors of research [START_REF] Baritz | Servants of Power[END_REF]. We must at least attempt to resist.

Postscript

This fictional piece was inspired by research undertaken to evaluate the electronic prescription service, a Connecting for Health project, part of the NHS National Programme for IT. This paper is a creative reflexive account of researching the future, inspired by the work carried out for the Evaluation of the Electronic Prescription Service in Primary Care. We must explicitly state that this account is not, and cannot be interpreted as, a direct representation of the NHS Electronic Prescription Service or preempt the outcomes of the independent evaluation still in progress. EPS builds on a set of electronic messaging functionalities newly implemented in existing prescribers= and dispensers= software applications already available on the market (i.e., electronic patient records systems currently used in GP surgeries and pharmacies). The program is being developed in a series of releases: the purpose of EPS-Release 1 was mainly to introduce and test the infrastructure; at the time of writing, EPS-Release 2 compliant systems/functionalities are in the testing phase and getting ready for wider roll-out. Release 2 will introduce electronic signatures and potentially replace paper prescriptions. More information on EPS can be found on the NHS website. 5The evaluation of EPS focuses on Release 2. It is an independent research project structured in four different work packages, aimed at assessing different aspects of EPS, including safety of dispensing, changes of work practices in doctors= surgeries and pharmacies, views of patients, and effects on the wider context (e.g., market structures). The different themes are investigated with a mix of qualitative and quantitative research methods, including observations, interviews, participants= selfreported activities, task analysis, stakeholder mapping, etc. The wider EPS context has been the subject of semi-structured face-to-face interviews with representatives of prescribers, dispensers, software suppliers, and other stakeholders. Thirty interviews/meetings were conducted between June 2009 and July 2010. The process of identifying and mapping stakeholders has been described and discussed in [START_REF] Lichtner | Mapping Stakeholders for System Evaluation: The Case of the Electronic Prescription Service in England[END_REF]. Research is still in progress at the time of writing.

See Stanislaw Lem, AThe Official Site,@ at http://english.lem.pl/works/essays/summatechnologiae/108-a-look-inside-summa-technologiae.

http://www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk/systemsandservices/eps.

Acknowledgments

The EPS evaluation project is lead by the School of Pharmacy/University of London, in collaboration with the University of Nottingham and the London School of Economics and Political Sciences. More information on CfHEP004 is available on the project website: http://project.epsevaluation.org.uk/.

Investigations on the micro and macro scenarios of EPS have been shared with and supported by the CfHEP004 team, especially (in alphabetical order) Tony Cornford and Dimitra Petrakaki (London School of Economics); Nick Barber, James Davies, and Ralph Hibberd (School of Pharmacy/University of London); and Anthony Avery, Matthew Boyd, Jasmine Harvey, and Justin Waring (Nottingham University). Our thanks to Nick Barber and Tony Cornford for the useful comments on an earlier version of this paper. Special thanks also to the anonymous reviewers, especially for a suggestion on the title. We are indebted to Stanislaw Lem=s fictional masterpiece Solaris. Our thanks to Lou Alba for recommending Solaris.

About the Authors

Valentina Lichtner is a postdoctoral research officer at the London School of Economics and Political Sciences. She is interested in adoption and adaptation of IT in healthcare, evaluation of systems, identity and identification technology, humanBcomputer interaction, and patient safety. She is currently conducting research into the introduction of electronic health records and electronic transfer of prescriptions in the English NHS.

Will Venters is a lecturer in the Department of Management at the London School of Economics and Political Sciences. His research focuses on distributed work practice, and in particular the development of distributed systems to support distributed work. He is currently conducting research on socio-material understanding of information systems, and agile systems development practices within contexts including Particle Physics at the LHC, UK electronic prescribing, and general practices.


Erran Carmel
email: a.carmel@american.edu

Michel Avital
email: avital@uva.nl

Paul Gray
email: paul.gray@cgu.edu

Jannis Kallinikos
email: j.kallinikos@lse.ac.uk

John Leslie King
email: a.jlking@umich.edu

Teaching Foresight and the Future

Keywords: Futures studies, strategic foresight, prospective thinking, curriculum development, teaching information systems

à la diffusion de documents scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

Introduction

Based in the sciences, we train students as retrospective observers who specialize in evidence-based post hoc analysis. Building on action research and a cry for relevance, we witness the emergence of engaged scholarship and focus on the present and ongoing affairs. However, the future appears to be virtually neglected in information systems management curricula and organizational studies. Dealing with the future is considered by many to be something between speculation and reading tea leaves. In keeping with the theme of the meeting, the objective of the panel is to tear down the myth and demonstrate not only the relevance of foresight and analysis of the future in our curriculum but also its critical role in nurturing the next generation.

We live the future. Students love dabbling in it. Faculty members in other disciplines thrive teaching it. Futures Studies is a discipline with its own methodologies that is taught in social science programs around the world. Sometimes it is its own discipline, as is the case with Turku=s Finland Futures Research Centre. The Institute for Alternative Futures (in the United States) lists 18 futures or foresight graduate programs around the world (see http://www.fernweb.org). Many of us teach information systems in business schools, where teaching futures thinking has been remarkably sparse,1 perhaps because IS faculty assume that futures thinking is part of the epistemology of business strategy and the IS capstone courses. In general, the discipline of Futures Studies never progressed beyond a niche discipline.

Controversy

The panelists will take opposing yet complementary positions with respect to the role of futures studies in the IS curriculum. They will argue that 1. Futures studies should be taught in independent courses. 2. The area of futures should be best infused into other courses, such as IS strategy and as a tool for doctoral research. 3. Futures techniques have advanced to the point where they are taken seriously as a scholarly environment in other fields but technology transfer has not yet reached the point where these techniques can be widely adopted in the IS field.

Panel Structure

The panel topic is intended to generate responses to several specific questions. After a brief introduction by the panel moderator, the panelists will present short overviews in response to guiding questions that aim to contextualize the discussion and raise core issues. Specifically, panelists will be asked to draw on their experience in both the futures and IS fields to answer two initial questions:

$ Why should we deal with the future in the IS curriculum? $ What methodologies can be used in the classroom environment for learning about the IS future and the effect of ICT on possible futures?

Then the discussion will move to a forward-looking perspective. Questions for this portion of the panel discussion are $ What IS research topics and domains would best be illuminated by futures research? $ Should we entrust only Forrester and Gartner with forecasting and understanding future technologies and environments?

The panel will conclude with a deliberation among the panelists and facilitated discussion with the audience. Examples of expected questions and topics include $ Are we seriously suggesting gut feel, crystal balls, tea leaves, and palm reading as appropriate approaches? $ Since futures studies are both quantitative and qualitative, should they be part of a course in analytics, or one about the social side of information systems, or both? $ How should we infuse or mesh futures studies in current IS courses? $ Should we deal with the future in a standalone course? Can it be done? Should the course be interdisciplinary in business schools? $ What is the future of Futures Studies as a discipline?

Panelists

Michel Avital, Associate Professor at the University of Amsterdam and Visiting Professor at Viktoria Institute. Building on his interest in how information technology promotes innovation and extraordinary outcomes, Michel has studied and published articles on topics such as design, creativity, innovation, generative systems, collaboration and competition, green IT and sustainable value, positive organizational scholarship, and appreciative inquiry. In lieu of prediction, he relies on a constructive approach that links positive image with positive action. That is, the more collectives or individuals accustom to dealing with the future and to nurturing desired scenarios, the more likely they are to realize them. Michel designs courses with a prospective orientation and regularly incorporates elements of envisioning and future thinking into his graduate and post-graduate classes.

Erran Carmel (panel moderator), Professor of Information Technology and International Business Research Professor at the Kogod School of Business, American University. He is a recognized thought leader on the globalization of technology work and offshoring. He began teaching the MBA course Future & Foresight in 2010.

Paul Gray, Emeritus Professor at Claremont Graduate University, is one of the early members of the Association for Information Systems, and a recipient of the LEO Award for Lifetime Achievement. Before retiring, Paul taught Futures as part of courses and IS doctoral seminars. He was a member of the Center for Futures Research at the University of Southern California from 1972 to 1980 where he conducted several futures studies. He has published on the future of IS. He is particularly concerned with IS researchers taking a futures perspective on the field so that we lead the thinking about the information systems future rather than depending on the opinions of consulting firms.

Jannis Kallinikos, Professor in the Department of Management at the London School of Economics. Recent publications include the The Consequences of Information: Institutional Implications of Technological Change (Elgar, 2006), and Governing through Technology: Information Artefacts and Social Practice (Palgrave, MacMillan, 2010). Both of his books and other recent writings deal extensively with the technological and social processes that shape the future, paying attention to how the diffusion of information and digital content are negotiating the functional habitat of organizations and the patterns of everyday living.

John Leslie King, Vice Provost for Strategy, and W. W. Bishop Professor in the School of Information at the University of Michigan. His research focuses on the relationship between technical change and social change, especially the transforming role of information technology in highly institutionalized production sectors such as transport, health, education, financial services, and government. The best predictor of the future is the past, for the simple reason that it is the only predictor. But as Marx said, people don't create the future as they please. The trick lies in seeing the persistent features of the world, the patterns, and figuring out where things are likely to go. The great ice hockey star Wayne Gretzky summed it up well: skate to where the puck is going to be. It's easier said than done, but it can be done.

With some notable exceptions, for example, in

the University of Notre Dame became the first undergraduate business program requiring all business students to take a foresight course.