Addressing Marketing Requirements in User

Addressing Marketing Requirements in User-Interface Design for Multiple Platforms Lia Patrício1, J. Falcão e Cunha2, Raymond P. Fisk3, Nuno J. Nunes4 1

2

3

Faculdade de Engenharia da Universidade do Porto Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal [email protected]

Faculdade de Engenharia da Universidade do Porto Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal [email protected]

College of Business Administration of the University of New Orleans New Orleans, LA 70148-1566, USA [email protected] 4

Universidade da Madeira Campus Universitário da Penteada, 9000-390 Funchal, Portugal [email protected]

Abstract. The commercial use of the Internet for service provision has deeply changed the environment where human-computer interaction takes place. Web interfaces are now integrated in overall service provision, and are designed for a huge and diversified set of potential users, in an uncontrolled context. With the aim of understanding customer interaction needs and improving the methods of requirements elicitation in the web context, a qualitative study of a multi-channel Portuguese bank was made. The results obtained so far indicate that Interaction Design and Services Marketing have strong complementarities. The Marketing perspective is especially useful with regard to the study of customer experience requirements, which are increasingly influential in customer decisions to adopt Internet services. Essential use cases are also very useful in the multiple platform service context, as they allow the elicitation of experience requirements in a technology-independent way, and therefore allow an integrated management of the different interaction channels.

Introduction In the 90’s, the opening of the Internet for commercial use radically widened the horizons of interactive systems usage. Web interactive systems are now used in a radically open environment, with little control over users, context of use and usage patterns. On the other hand, the commercial use of the Internet changes the purpose of interaction, from the improvement of work efficiency to the provision of a service. This deeply alters the nature of the interaction, with important consequences in terms of user requirements and interface design. In the Internet service environment, where the interface is integrated in service provision, it seems that two areas are worthy of further research: • What influences customers to adopt and use Internet services [1], [2]? Which user requirements are new or change when the interaction moves to the Internet service environment?

•

What new methods are needed in order to accurately capture and analyze user requirements in the Internet service context, characterized by a radically open and uncontrolled environment, with a huge and diverse set of potential users? This paper presents the results of a qualitative research of a multi-channel Portuguese bank, which provides services through bank branches (BB), Internet banking (IB), telephone banking (TB) and ATMs. This study aims at identifying web service interaction needs, and improving the methods of requirements gathering, integrating the perspectives of UCD and Services Marketing. It was based on in-depth and focus groups interviews with 36 bank customers and 13 bank senior staff in 3 Portuguese cities. The results obtained so far indicate that UCD and Services Marketing have complementary perspectives of web interaction for service provision. A multidisciplinary approach is especially useful when dealing with customer experience requirements in a multiple platform context.

Evolution of interaction environment Human-computer interaction has deeply changed in the last decades, driven by both technology developments and human’s usage of interaction systems. Sometimes, technology drove the way, creating new possibilities to perform certain tasks, and finding new ways to better satisfy user needs, as shown in Table 1. Other times usage led the way, by creating new challenges to which technology tried to respond. The major changes in this environment are presented in Table 2. Table 1. Evolution of Interaction Design Major breakthroughs

Interactive Systems

Xerox’s Star, the MacOS and Windows

NCSA Mosaic and the commercial use of the Internet

User interface

Command line interface

WIMP and WYSIWYG

Multimedia and Hypermedia

Design methods

Structured design

Object-oriented design

several proposals

Focus on requirements

Basic functional requirements

Functional and usability requirements

several proposals

Methods for eliciting and analyzing requirements

Knowledge of technical experts

User centered design (UCD) methods

several proposals

Table 2. The evolution of interaction environment User interaction environment

Machine environment

Work environment

Web service environment Market

Machine

Organization

Openness

Low

Medium

High

Degree of control

High

Medium

Low

Type of environment

Type of users

Technical experts

Office workers

Customers

Diversity of users

Low

Medium

Very high

Technical expertise

High

Medium

Low or inexistent

High

Medium

Inexistent

Training for usage System purpose

Work efficiency

Service provision

Increasing work efficiency of individuals and organizations.

Providing services and selling products.

Substituting work previously undertaken by humans. Well defined according to job description.

Creating new alternatives of interaction between customers and service providers. Defined by service provider, but can be changed according to user preferences and usage patterns.

The advent of the Internet and its opening to commercial use in the 90’s, radically changed the interaction environment. These systems are now designed to provide services for a wide and diversified set of potential users, in a non-controlled environment. In Internet service, designers and service providers cannot control the objectives, the place, the situation, or the hardware of the interaction. The interaction can be influenced, but cannot be controlled. Far away from the work environment, where objectives are clearly stated, and a certain pattern of usage is demanded, in the Internet service environment, all that service providers and interaction designers can do is to make suggestions, and to provide incentives, which will (hopefully) motivate customers to behave as desired. On the other hand, in the Internet service environment, the interaction is part of the overall service, and is increasingly integrated in a multiplatform offering. As such, the web interface is but one alternative of interaction between customer and service provider, complementing, more than substituting, person to person or telephone channels. In this situation there is an increased need for accurate methods of requirements gathering for wide and diverse groups of customers, which analyze the interface in the context of overall service provision. From the Interaction Design field, some studies have identified the most relevant user requirements in the web interface [1] and other authors advocate the inclusion of experience requirements [2] and emotional requirements [3]. From the Services Marketing field, several research efforts have been made

in order to understand customer choice and usage of Internet service channels, especially what drives service quality on the web [6], [5], [8]. It seems consensual that requirements gathering should be the first step in user interface design [4], [9]. However, in spite of the paramount importance given to this task, it is also recognized that poor requirements definition is one of the most frequent factors underlying software failures [7]. If software engineers consider that the information received by analysts on user requirements is generally incomplete [11], marketers tend to consider that they are not sufficiently included in the early stages of customer interface design [12]. As such, it is important to join both perspectives for an integrated approach to Internet service design.

HCI and Services Marketing approaches to customer requirements in Internet service provision HCI and Services Marketing have strong complementarities, in terms of the concepts used and the methods applied, as shown in Table 3. Table 3. Joining the perspectives of Interaction Design and Marketing Interaction Design

Services Marketing

Web interaction

Web service provision

User requirements

Quality and satisfaction attributes

User profiles

Customer segments

Use cases and task analysis

Service specific needs

Predominance of objective measures of user requirements

Predominance of attitude and perceptual measures of customer needs

Expert reviews, usability testing

Interviews, focus groups and surveys

The HCI field has produced several measures of interface usability, which can be applied through a set of techniques, such as expert reviews, user testing, interviews, surveys, or user observation [2]. These studies have provided guidelines on the most important usability goals, such as time to learn, speed of performance, rate of errors, and user retention [9]; simplicity, clarity of function, and visibility [13], [12], [3]. However, in Internet service provision, another type of requirements is increasingly important: customer experience requirements. These requirements are related to user experience goals, and differ from usability goals as they are concerned with how users experience an interactive product from their perspective [2]. The elicitation of these requirements can be improved through the inclusion of the marketing perspective, especially the service quality and satisfaction research. Service quality, as perceived by customers, has been identified as a key determinant of the intention to use a service, whether it is provided through personal or computer interaction. The studies on e-Service quality can provide important insights, as quality is conceptualized as the gap between customer requirements and e-service performance [15]. As such, these measures can be used prior to development, as a tool to

identify design directions, and also as a follow-up tool, in order to detect major gaps between requirements and design that need further improvement. Service quality has been extensively studied in the marketing field (see for instance Brown et al. [16]), but it is also recognized as a critical factor on software development success. As stated by Dertouzos [17], “The most critical element is the ability to predict early in the product development cycle that a new product will yield superior customer satisfaction in the actual marketplace”. Understanding what drives e-service quality is therefore a fundamental step in identifying user requirements. SERVQUAL [18] has been extensively tested and used as a service quality measure, which captures quality as perceived by customers through questionnaire administration, but it has been primarily associated with interpersonal service provision. SERVQUAL research identified five main dimensions of service quality: tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy. The upsurge of the Internet has motivated several researchers to find new quality measures, which are better adapted to the web environment, such as e-SERVQUAL [8], Webqual [6], and Sitequal [5]. Theses studies identified new dimensions of eservice quality, such as efficiency, fulfillment, reliability and privacy (eSERVQUAL); ease of use, usefulness, entertainment and complementary relationship with other channels (WebQual). These measures provide information about customer interface evaluation, in the customers’ words, but they also provide important insights for designers, as they capture customer experience requirements, which developers can then translate into interaction design [19].

Qualitative study of a multi-channel bank Since the usage of Internet for service provision is still a new area of research, qualitative methods are useful in gaining a deeper understanding of the phenomena [20]. Although the bank in question collects data on patterns of customer usage of electronic channels, there is the need for further research regarding what is behind this behavior in terms of customer attitudes. As such, this study began with 14 in-depth interviews and 4 focus groups with bank customers in three Portuguese cities, and 1 focus group and 3 in-depth interviews with bank staff, in an overall total of 49 interviewees. These semi-structured interviews focused on the process of channel choice for financial operations, letting customers identify the factors that influence their usage patterns. The interviews focused on the desired outcomes and influence factors, and not on the solutions suggested by customers, as bank customers in general are not technology experts [19]. The sample of customers was defined according to theoretical relevance of cases [21], and as such was divided into 4 groups of customers: (1) regular users of Internet banking, (2) stock trade users of Internet banking, (3) ex-users of Internet banking, and (4) non-users of Internet banking. In order to avoid the negative effect of excess diversity within focus groups [20], the under-representation of some segments in the focus groups was balanced through the purposeful selection of cases for in-depth interviews.

The interviews were transcribed and analyzed via the qualitative analysis software NUD*IST (www.qsr.com.au/products/n6.html), in order to develop categories of emergent influence factors. In a first step, the text was organized into concepts developed both from emergent ideas and literature review. As the analysis developed, the systematic comparison between the data and the concepts previously identified [15] allowed the development of a broader structure of categories, which aimed to explain the process of channel choice and its underlying factors. The qualitative analysis aimed at better understanding the process of customer channel choice, as well as eliciting potential factors driving or inhibiting the usage of Internet banking, which can be used for the identification of interface requirements. The qualitative study produced exploratory results that are not generalizable to the overall population of bank customers, but allowed the development of a survey questionnaire which will be administered to a statistically representative sample of bank customers. This quantitative study will further measure and validate the importance of these influence factors to the overall bank population.

Customer experience requirements In order to study the Internet banking interface in the context of the overall service offering, four different service channels were studied: Bank Branches (BB), Internet Banking (IB), Automatic Teller Machines (ATM), and Telephone Banking (TB). Data analysis was structured in terms of factors influencing positively and negatively the usage of each SDS, and organized into three main categories of influence factors: user profiles; essential use cases and customer experience requirements. From the analysis of the interviews, it is clear that customers do not express their preferences for each channel with technology features and functionalities, but with the service experience they can get, as shown in Table 4. Table 4. Customer perceptions of IB advantages and disadvantages IB service advantages

% of total

IB service disadvantages

Accessibility

67

Security concerns

64

Time saving

64

Incompleteness of functionalities

53

Ease of use

61

Lack of quality

47

Information quality

53

Technical failures

40

Feed-back control (visual capability)

53

Lack of personalization

28

Adequate functionalities

47

Lack of back-office response

19

Convenience

44

Autonomy

36

information

% of total

In the customers’ perspective, IB is usually seen as a more efficient interaction in terms of higher accessibility, convenience, ease of use and time saving. However, the view of IB as more efficient appears to be just one side of the overall perspective of the interviewees. IB also performs well in terms of usefulness of functionalities, quality and deepness of information, autonomy and feed-back control. It is interesting to note that customers enjoy the control and autonomy provided by IB, as they feel in charge of the interaction, which they can lead at their own pace. Feed-back control is also seen as an advantage of IB, which is related to its visual and printing capabilities, especially when compared with TB. Security concerns are still a major disadvantage of IB, both for users and non-users. IB users are still concerned with this problem, although it seems that IB advantages outweigh this issue. The perceived service experience appears to be a key determinant of IB usage. IB perceived insecurity and the negative issues associated with new technologies in general seem to be the main reasons why non-technology customers avoid it. On the other hand, its positive performance in terms of accessibility, convenience, time saving, and ease of use, seem to motivate time poor, technology oriented customers to use it, in spite of security concerns and a certain degree of depersonalization. On the other hand, the great advantage of the BB is the possibility of having person to person interaction, which is expected to bring mutual knowledge, individualized attention, and professional competence of employees, responsiveness in non-routine situations, and even some social interaction. The bank branch also has a negative side in terms of lack of convenience, lack of accessibility, and time loss. However, not all customers have the same perceptions or the same needs. Data analysis shows that the importance given to certain attributes, such as efficiency or personalization, depends both on customer profiles and the type of financial operation being performed, as shown in Fig 1. As such, it is important to understand how customer experience requirements change according to different customer segments and use cases. Customer profiles Customer Experience Requirements Use Cases

Degree of fit

Usage of each service platform

Satisfaction with each service platform

Performance evaluation of each service platform

Fig. 1 Proposed model for elicitation of customer experience requirements

Experience requirements for different customer profiles As expected, user profiles appear as an important factor influencing IB usage. Different customer groups have different service requirements and as such, they tend to define different patterns of channel usage. Data categorization led to the identification

of four user groups, according the factors used to justify interviewees’ usage or nonusage of the different channels. From this analysis, two dimensions of user profiles have a strong influence on the usage of Internet Banking: customer’s openness to technology and intensity of relationship with service provider. According to these two dimensions, four groups of customers were identified, with different interface requirements [23], as presented in Table 5. Table 5. Customer experience requirements for different segments of bank customers Customer segments / user profiles Regular Internet banking users – IB users (9 customers) These customers use the Internet service mostly for information search and transactions, which are strongly associated with current account.

Experience requirements (% of customers in the group) Ease of use Accessibility Time saving Convenience Autonomy Feedback control Usefulness of functionalities Information capabilities

Stock trading users – ST users (11 customers)

Completeness of functionalities

These customers use Internet banking intensively, especially for financial market’s operations. These customers value the efficiency attributes of the Internet Banking service, but as intensive users, they have strong demands on functionalities, information and back-office response.

Back-office response time

Attitude driven non-users – AD non-users (10 customers)

Personalization

In this group, IB non-usage is strongly associated with a negative attitude towards technology. These customers seem worried about the insecurity, loss of liberty and privacy, depersonalization, social problems, discomfort and lack of knowledge about new technologies.

Lack of involvement non-users – LI non-users (6 customers) This group of non-users is very similar to IB users in terms of attitude towards technology and performance evaluation of automatic channels, but their lack of involvement with financial products, or with the bank in particular, does not create the need to use IB. They even consider using IB whenever their relationship with the bank becomes stronger. This group is associated with younger customers, but also with non-loyal customers, who deal with most of their financial matters in another bank.

Deepness of information

Mutual knowledge between customer an the bank Individualized attention Courtesy of employees Responsiveness to customers’ questions and requests. Ease of use Accessibility Convenience Time saving (In this case, the adoption of IB is not an interface issue, but a bank’s involvement issue).

The results of the study indicate that customer profiles influence customer general preferences for a certain service provision experience, and this seems to determine the set of channels that customers use regularly. If cash-rich, time-poor customers give

priority to the efficiency of the Internet, older customers favor the personal interaction provided in the bank branch. Understanding experience requirements for the different customer segments can be useful both to interface design and service management. Service providers may customize each interface, in order to adapt to the specific needs of each segment and increase customer satisfaction with each channel. But on the overall service level, service providers can also offer a combination of interaction channels to each customer, in order to attain a high overall satisfaction level.

Experience requirements for different essential use cases From the analysis of the interviews, the type of financial operation seems to be a key determinant of channel usage. If customer profiles define the set of channels considered for use, each customer then chooses a specific interface according to the fit between the needs generated by the operation at hand, and the ability of each channel to satisfy those needs. Essential use cases are particular useful to understand customer interaction needs as they are independent from the platform through which the service is provided [24]. As essential use cases are technology independent, they are especially useful to elicit experience requirements when the same service is provided through different interface technologies [23]. Again, the Marketing framework, especially in the Consumer Behavior area, provided tools to categorize and understand experience requirements for the different essential use cases. In service provision, the consumer decision and consumption process can be divided into a sequence of different stages (stages of decision process): problem recognition, information search, evaluation of alternatives, product choice and product usage [26]. Previous studies point that the Internet may be more suited for search and evaluation functions [25], [28], as well as transaction processing [29]. As such, identifying the stage of the consumer decision process to which a use case belongs may help in identifying the most relevant experience requirements. On the other hand, use cases may be further characterized in terms of the type of decision process, which is related to perceived risk, complexity, and frequency [26]. Self-service interfaces are usually associated with a higher degree of participation and autonomy by the user, and as such, decision process characteristics, such as perceived risk [30], [31], complexity and frequency [32], are expected to influence Internet banking usage. The results of data analysis indicate that each essential use case is associated with different experience requirements, which influence strongly interaction choice [33]. In the interviewees’ perspective, financial operations which are considered routine, unimportant, low risk, and well known by customers – such as current account transactions - are usually undertaken in the IB, or other automatic channel, although they are also available in the bank branch. For these kinds of financial operations, customers give priority to the efficiency attributes of the Internet, such as convenience, ease of use, time saving and accessibility, as shown in Table 6.

“I make almost all my payments through the Internet. It’s faster, I don’t have to go anywhere, I don’t have to send a fax or a letter. (…) I use the Internet because it is easy, I save time, I don’t have to go to a bank for a money transfer or a cash withdrawal. Woman, 54, college graduate, regular user of IB Table 6. Use case for gathering information of account balance Use case

Basic functionalrequirements Customer Intentions

Gathering information about account balance

Most important experience requirements

Bank responsibilities

Request information of account balance Provide information of account balance

Rapidness Accessibility Ease of use Convenience

For complex, unknown, important operations - such as mortgage loans - customers prefer the personal interaction in the bank branch, which is associated with mutual knowledge, individualized attention, and professional competence of employees, which customers value in these situations, as shown in Table 7. “When I apply for a loan of 30.000€, I like that a physical person is on the other side, not a computer. I don’t like a depersonalized thing, I like to talk with a person and explain the situation, because there are always questions, and the information of the account manager is important.” Man, 48, college graduate, regular user of IB Table 7. Use case for mortgage loan application Use case


Loan application



Request loan Request formal and informal information about customer Provide information requested Analyze information Approve/reject loan Propose loan conditions (amount, price, term…)

Mutual knowledge between customer an the bank Professional knowledge Individualized attention Responsiveness to customer’s questions and requests

Accept/reject/negotiate loan conditions

For the same financial product, customers also use different channels according to the stage of product usage. Information gathering for decision or monitoring purposes

may be performed through the Web, even for mortgage loans. However, negotiation and contracting are usually undertaken in the BB, where customers can have a person to person interaction, as shown in Table 8. “For a mortgage loan, or for financial applications, the Internet is used more for information purposes. Because, if we want to make one of these things, we have to talk with someone, preferably someone we know personally, someone who gives advice, so we don’t make big mistakes”. Woman, 54, college graduate, regular user of IB Table 8. Essential use cases for information gathering and evaluation of alternatives of mortgage loans Use case


Information search on mortgage loan


Request information on mortgage loan conditions Provide information on mortgage loan conditions

Evaluation of alternatives of mortgage loan


Request information On loan conditions Provide information on loan conditions Analyze information: Comparing alternatives Provide opinion on what alternative is most suited

Deepness of information Clarity of information Autonomy Convenience Ease of use Deepness of information Clarity of information Mutual knowledge between customer an the bank Professional knowledge Individualized attention Responsiveness to customer’s questions and requests

Information search has been traditionally seen as an area of service provision where the Internet has great potential. In fact, the results of the study indicate that one of the strongest uses of IB is information search for decision purposes and for account monitoring. However, besides the routine information and transactions, IB is also used for a more detailed analysis of customers’ financial relationship with the bank. “People who access their bank at home have more time, more time to make a thorough analysis of accounts and sub-accounts, and all that. (…) Sometimes I am wondering by, seeing things that I even thought I did not have”. Man, 36, high-school graduate, ex-user of IB and a user of a competitor bank

Study Implications for Interaction Design A great number of bank operations can now be provided through the Internet, such as a simple view of current account balance, or the pre-approval of a complex mortgage loan. However, the study shows that, in spite of the availability of all these functions, customers are reluctant to undertake some operations through automatic channels. It seems that, more than just making the operations functionally available, it is important to provide the service experience that customers require, to convince them to use the service. In order to design Internet service interfaces, it is necessary to understand the influence of both user profiles and use cases on customer experience requirements, such as in the example shown in Figure 2.

Customer profile: Technology orientation Financial knowledge

Experience Requirements: Autonomy Information quality convenience

IB usage

Experience Requirements: Personal knowledge Clarity of information Trust

BB usage

Use case: Information on mortgage loan

Customer profile: Technology avoidance Lack of financial knwoledge

Fig. 2. Example of the Influence of use cases and customer profiles in channel choice

Each essential use case previously described has a specific set of functional requirements, which are well studied, given the long tradition of the banking industry. The development of new technologies has made it possible to satisfy these functional requirements through web interfaces, and has expanded the potential use of the Internet for service provision. However, it seems that, more than just making services functionally available in new channels, it is important to understand what customer experience requirements are associated with each essential use case, in order to identify what platforms are best suited to provide the desired service. The application of essential use cases, which allows the elicitation of requirements in a technology-independent way, can therefore improve requirements gathering before any commitment to technology is made. With this analysis, service providers are better positioned to make their decisions on what services are best suited to each

channel, in order to effectively address customer needs, to make an efficient allocation of resources among channels, and design successful interfaces. Patrício et al. [23] has identified the relevance of experience requirements in the context of several cases of Internet Banking user interaction. Patrício et al. [33] has showed that in multi-platform banking services, essential use cases are an effective way to structure consistent offerings. This work further enriches on the previous ones, by identifying and describing how different user profiles and selected simple use cases are associated with different customer experience requirements, and how these dimensions are important in customer decision to use new service platforms. Considering that for each customer profile and for each essential use case there are variations in experience requirements, this proposal may allow an improved specification and design of both multiple platform interaction and user adaptable interfaces.

Conclusions Internet service provision creates a new interaction context, characterized by an open and uncontrolled environment - the market environment, and a different nature of interaction - service provision. These deep changes require a different approach to interface design. As functional requirements are already well understood, experiences make the difference, and efforts should be made in improving the methods to elicit experience requirements. As such, the integration of HCI and Services Marketing concepts and methods are fundamental to explore Internet service provision to its full potential. To respond to the increased complexity of multi-platform service environment, there is also the need to develop new methods of requirements elicitation which are flexible enough to accommodate different user profiles, different essential use cases and different service platforms in an integrated way. In particular, the application of essential use cases can significantly improve interaction design in a multi-platform service, as they are technology-independent. The elicitation of experience requirements for each essential use case allows designers and marketers to understand what experiences customers do prefer, and what interaction platform is best suited to provide it. On the other hand, more attention should be driven to customer evaluations of the different service platforms, according to customer perceptions and experiences, in order to understand how the different service channels can satisfy the requirements associated with different user profiles and use cases. With this approach, service providers are better positioned to make their decisions on what services are best suited to each platform or service channel, to effectively address customer needs, offer a consistent service across different interaction modes, and make an efficient allocation of resources among channels. Interaction design decisions can then be taken to a higher level: customer and overall service level. Finally, designing the web interface in isolation may not be the best way to design the best overall service interaction, which best satisfies overall customer needs. With an integrated approach, addressing marketing requirements, the web interface can

therefore be designed in order to best leverage its own capabilities and its complementarity with the other service platforms. This paper focuses on a qualitative study which allowed a better understanding of experience requirements for this sample of bank customers, but has limitations in terms of generalizability for the entire population. More research is needed and is being undertaken to further validate these exploratory findings to the overall population of bank customers, as it is believed that an understanding of the processes underlying customer usage patterns is an important basis for providing more robust recommendations for Internet service designers.

References 1. Parasuraman, A. and Grewal, D.: Serving Customers and Consumers Effectively in the Twenty-First Century: A Conceptual Framework and Overview, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 28, No. 1 (2000) 9-16 2. Bitner, M. J., Brown, S., and Meuter, M. L: Technology Infusion in Service Encounters, Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 28, No. 1 (2000) 138-149 3. Nielsen, J.: Designing Web Usability: The Practice of Simplicity. New Riders Publishing, Indianapolis (2000) 4. Preece, J., Rogers, Y. and Sharp, H.: Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction. John Wiley & Sons, New York (2000) 5. Norman, D. A: Progress Report: Emotional Design; Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things, http://www.jnd.org/books.html#E&Dbook_notes (2003) 6. Loiacono, E. T.: WebQual?: A Web site quality instrument. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Georgia (2000) 7. Yoo, B. and Donthu, N.: Developing a Scale to Measure the Perceived Quality of an Internet Shopping Site (SITEQUAL), Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol. 2, No. 1 (2001) 31-45. 8. Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A. and Malhotra, A.: Service Quality Delivery through Web Sites: A Critical View of Extant Knowledge. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 30, No. 4 (2002) 362-375 9. Shneiderman, B.: Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction. 3rd edn. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts (1998) 10. Taylor, A.: IT Projects: Sink or Swim, The Computer Bulletin, January, (2000) 24-26. 11. Browne, G. J. and Rogich, M. B.: An Empirical Investigation of User Requirements Elicitation: Comparing the Effectiveness of Prompting Techniques, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 17, No. 4, (2001) 223-249 12. Fisk, R. P., Grove, S. J. and John, J: Interactive Services Marketing, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company (2001) 13. Norman, D. A.: The Invisible Computer, 3rd printing. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts (1998) 14. Raskin, J.: The Humane Interface: New Directions for Designing Interactive Systems, Reading: Massachusetts, Addison Wesley (2000) 15. Zeithaml, V. A.: Service Excellence in Electronic Channels, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 12, No. 3 (2002) 135-138 16. Brown, S. W, Fisk, R. P., and Bitner, M. J.: The Development and Emergence of Services Marketing Thought, International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 5, No. 1 (1994) 22-48

17. Dertouzos, M. L., Lester, R. K., and Solow, R. M.: Made in America: Regaining the Productivity Edge, Cambridge: MA: MIT Press (1989) 18. Parasuraman, A., Berry, L and Zeithaml, V.: SERVQUAL: A Multi-item scale for Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Service Quality, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 64 No. 2, (1988) 12-37 19. Ulwick, A. W.: Turn Customer Input into Innovation, Harvard Business Review, January (2002) 91-97. 20. Parasuraman, A., and Zinkhan G. M.: Marketing and Serving Customers through the Internet: An Overview and Research Agenda, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 30, No. 4 (2002) 286-295 21. Strauss, A. and Corbin, J.: Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. 2nd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1998) 22. Krueger, Richard A.: Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research, 2nd edition, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications (1994) 23. Patrício, L., Cunha and J. F., Fisk [2003a]: The Relevance of User Experience Requirements in Interface Design: A Study of Internet Banking, in Mario Piattini, Luca Cernuzzi, Francisco Ruíz (eds.): Proceedings of IDEAS 2003 - 6º Workshop Iberoamericano de Ingeniería de Requisitos y Ambientes Software (2003) 39-49 24. Constantine, L. L., Lockwood, L. A. D.: Structure and Style in Use Cases for User Interface Design. In: Harmelen, M. V. (ed.): Object Modeling and User Interface Design. AddisonWesley, Boston (2001) 245-280 25. Bidle, R., Noble, J. and Tempero, E.: Essential Use Cases and Responsibility in ObjectOriented Development, Conferences in Research and Practice in Information technology, Vol. 4 (2002) 7-16 26. Solomon, M., Bamossy, G. and Askegaard, S.: Consumer Behaviour: A European Perspective, Financial Times Prentice Hall, Harlow (1998) 27. Kolesar, M. B. and Galbraith, R. W.: A Services-marketing Perspective on E-Retailing: Implications for E-Retailers and Directions for Further Research, Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, Vol. 10, No. 5 (2000) 424-438 28. Peterson, R. A. and Balasubramanian. S.: Exploring the Implications of the Internet for Consumer Marketing, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 25, No. 4 (1997) 329-347 29. Yakhlef, A.: Does the Internet Compete with or Complement Bricks-and-mortar Bank Branches?, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 2, No. 6 (2001) 272-281 30. Keen, C., Ruyter, K. D., and Wetzels, M.: An Empirical Analysis of Consumer Preferences Regarding Alternative Service Delivery Modes in Emerging Electronic Service Markets, Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2000) 31-47 31. Beckett, A., Hewer, P., and Howcroft, B.: An exposition of Consumer Behavior in Financial Services, The International Journal of Education Management, Vol. 18, No. 2 (2000) 15-26 32. Krishnan, M. S and Ramaswamy, V.: Customer Satisfaction for Financial Service: The Role of Products, Services, and Information Technology, Management Science, Vol. 45, No. 9 (1999) 1194-1200 33. Patrício, L., Cunha, J. F., Fisk, R. P. and Pastor, O.: Essential Use Cases in the Design of Multi-Channel Service Offerings: A Study of Internet Banking, accepted for presentation in ICWE’03 – 3rd International Conference on Web Engineering, Oviedo, Spain, July 16-18 (2003b)