Qualitative Research on the Topic of Cellphones and Related Consumer Issues

2. Internet

2.1 Consumer Information vs. Education vs. Skills

Most participants considered themselves to be fairly adroit consumers. For all, at least some research went into the purchase of significant products and services, with the goal of obtaining the "best value" for their money, or put another way, that which "best meets [their] needs". When thinking about consumer information, they often think first about consumer protection, legislation, and warnings, and not product/service specifications and price. With perhaps the exception of the more senior participants, the Internet is a prime source of research, as are stores, and to a lesser extent catalogues.

The focus groups were designed to explore how consumers understand and differentiate between "consumer information", "consumer education", and "consumer skills". While participants put forward different meanings of the three terms, it was clear that the distinctions were either artificial or not really that different. Instead, they often used the same or similar examples to describe their understanding of two or even three of the terms. Definitions of "information" were relatively consistent, centering on objective product/service specifications: "It's like the number of horsepower, kilometres per litre, trunk space and price." Definitions of "education" and "skills" were muddled and most lucidly explained as the result of the sound analysis of consumer information or the ability to conduct the analysis: "It's being able to find the information and then making the right decision on what to buy. But I don't know if that's education or a skill." Thus, the skilled or educated consumer is one who gets the best deal. In addition, virtually none of the participants made a link between consumer information/education and consumer skills.

2.2 E-Consumer Guide

Most participants used the Internet for research/"surfing" and sending and receiving e-mail. Many were also involved in on-line banking and most had transacted at least one purchase on-line. Seniors, however, were more likely than others to say they had little or no experience with the Internet and were very reluctant to use it for purchasing goods and/or paying bills. Much of this uncertainty stemmed from the fact that either they lacked the confidence and/or ability to learn how, or that they simply did not trust technology to keep their personal and financial information out of the hands of criminals.

The apprehensions of seniors aside, almost everyone said that they had some concerns about Internet security, particularly around identity theft. Some said that their fear of being electronically violated limited their Internet activities: "I gave my credit card once because I was buying something I really wanted from overseas. I had no choice. But I haven't done it since. I just don't think it's secure enough."

Participants were aware of Internet security aspects such as viruses, spy ware, spam, etc. About half also said that they felt comfortable with their level of knowledge about these. Others said that they tended to rely on other informal or formal "experts" to advise and assist them: "My brother is sort of a computer nerd, so he takes care of that stuff for me." "At the office we have a tech guy but at home it's just me, so I'm not as secure there." Indeed, many participants noted that they were much less surefooted in using the Internet at home compared to the office.

Generally speaking, the overall level of interest in the types of issues described in the handout was high (rated 6 or higher). Although interest in the specific suggested issues varied, almost everyone agreed that it would be useful to have more information on such topics as online fraud and threats (i.e., virus protection, firewalls, detecting spam and spyware), online transactions, email/chat, and privacy and security. Compared to other issues, participants seemed less interested in doing research/conducting online searches; however, interest in this topic was still relatively high (with most indicating they are at least "moderately" interested in this topic).

Overall reaction to the concept of a consumer guide on Internet security was positive. Many expressed at least some interest in it, and it was agreed that the Government was simply doing their part to bring unbiased information to consumers: "The Government needs to protect those who are vulnerable, which is exactly what this is going to do." The involvement of the Government of Canada in developing the Guide was seen as a definite strong point in terms of objectivity and credibility.

There were, however, some concerns. For example, participants cautioned that the Guide would have to be constantly up-dated given the speed of change on the Internet, while others worried about the trustworthiness of the information available on individual sites being linked to the Gateway: "Why should we trust the information the government is giving us about these sites when they're supposed to be neutral?" A few were also surprised to learn that the Guide might be developed by the Government of Canada: "I don't understand why they're doing this. What are they getting out of it?" This is also related to the fact that many participants believed this type of information was already widely available elsewhere. However, the level of concern expressed by participants was relatively minor and did not detract from their interest in the Guide.

2.3 Overall Reactions to www.consumerinformation.ca

Participants' initial impressions of the consumerinformation.ca Gateway were very positive: "It looks like it has every topic you would want to know more about." Some participants did, however, point out that they thought the home page was a bit cluttered. On a more positive note, many liked the fact that the menu on the left-hand side of the screen remained stationary, making it easier for them to navigate the site.

Participants were then shown the "Take a Guided Tour" video in order to introduce them to the website. Initial reaction to the video and the website itself was positive; participants were particularly intrigued by the "File a Complaint" tool and information on product recalls. Virtually no one had either heard of the Gateway or visited it, and they were surprised to learn that it existed: "Why don't they advertise, people need this." Another participant remarked, "This is exactly what I would like to see. I didn't know it existed."

Focus On

The "Focus On" section of the site was intuitive to participants. They understood it as "highlighting" timely topics that are particularly interesting to people: "It's sort of like your hot topics". "It's the stuff that people are most interested in." Participants also expected that the Focus On topics would evolve based on events and circumstances: "Like when we had Mad Cow and people were worried about beef. Then you'd put something on eating beef in that section."

The Consumer Complaints topics appeared to be of particular interest to participants (although a few expressed disappointment after discovering that clicking on the link led them to a series of other links to external partner sites). Here, as well as with other aspects of the site, participants expressed mixed views about how information was presented once one "clicked" in order to find out more about an issue (e.g., spam). Some were disappointed at what they understood to be the amount of work or sorting/sifting they would seem to need to undertake in order to find information of a specific topic. For example, some were surprised that there could be 10 to 35 or more hits and that a number of these might have to be explored: "I kind of thought that there would be information on spam right away. I didn't think I'd have to read about all these links, then click on them, go to another site and read more." Others thought that the type of information that was presented, along with the way it was organized, was consistent with their expectations: "It's a portal, so that's what you'd expect to get. You have to do the research yourself, it just makes it easier." Others described the organization as "simplistic, but this is good."

Overall, the titles and descriptions of second page resources/links were thought to be clear and useful ("They are to the point"), although a few felt that the descriptions should be a little more detailed. For example, some suggested including definitions before having to click on any of the links. The inclusion of the source was an important feature, although some felt it should be given more prominence. The third page descriptions were also thought to be clear and helpful.

Suggestions for improving this section included adding more topics, such as product recalls and tips for purchasing a vacation.

Resources for Business

When their attention was initially directed to the Resources for Business page, it was well received. However, reaction to this section quickly became somewhat more mixed once participants were taken to the site. Participants anticipated seeing information aimed at assisting Canadians businesses with a number of aspects, such as obtaining a business loan/credit, obtaining Government funding/loans, starting a business, exporting, developing a business plan, etc., and were somewhat surprised to discover only two links on the page. It is, however, important to recognize that this information is included on the site, but not all participants were shown it. Those participants who did see this information obviously did not share these concerns.

Despite these concerns, the description of this topic made sense to most participants, and many of them were pleased to discover that the site focused on customers and customer satisfaction: "I like this a lot. Businesses should want to know whether or not their customers are happy with their products and services." Another participant remarked, "It's a full circle. I like the idea of knowing what businesses are being told, especially in relation to how to better serve customers."

On the second-level page, the link Resources for Business was seen as clear and intuitive: participants expected to find the aforementioned information there. The fact that this link availed them of information designed to help businesses deal more effectively with their customers (e.g., complaints, guarding against ID theft, etc.) was pleasantly surprising to participants: "It's not what I expected, but I like it because it has a consumer focus, which I guess makes sense given what the site is about."

The Canada Business link revealed information that was more in keeping with what participants expected from the homepage's "Resources for Business" title, as well as from the Resources for Business link. Thus, some suggested that the links on the second-level page be clarified: "Call the first one something like: 'Resources for Improving Customer Service' and call the second one 'Resources for Business'."

Almost everyone thought that it was fine to include information aimed at businesses on a consumer information site, mainly because some of the information is meant to help businesses improve their relationship with consumers: "If they deal more effectively with our complaints because of this, then it helps us." Others said that the information would be relevant to consumers who are thinking about starting a small business: "I've thought about starting something. If I go to this site to get information on product recalls and I stumble onto information on starting a business, I think that's great." Many expressed an interest in accessing the guide dealing with complaints management in order enhance their consumer education: "It's sort of like seeing the other team's playbook." "I want to know how they are supposed to deal with a complaint, so that I know when I'm getting the run around."

Consumer Policy and Research

Most participants were hard-pressed to speculate as to what would be found under the "Consumer and Policy Research" heading. As one participant remarked, "I have no idea." Many immediately thought of things like return policies and research in the context of product shopping. Others, who generally appeared to be relatively sophisticated/educated, guessed that the section included various research reports on consumer behaviour: "I imagine there would be statistics on consumer trends." "I'd think there would be government reports on things like ID theft."

Two of the five links listed on the second-level page (i.e., Contribution Programs and Consumer Policy Forums and Consultations) had very little meaning for participants: "I really have no idea what we are going to find there." The other link titles were generally clear and led to information that was consistent with participants' expectations.

With the exception of the information on consumer organizations (information on credit), most felt that the materials contained in the "Consumer Research and Policy" section were too "specialized" to be of much use or relevance: "If I was back in university writing a paper, maybe, but I really can't see it today." Within this context, consideration should be given to renaming this section and/or making it clearer on the home page that this section of the website is not directed at consumers per se, but rather those who are active in the area of consumer policy, research and advocacy information. Likewise, consideration should be given to where this icon is located (i.e., should this icon be in a separate part given the different target audience?).

The general relevance of credit to Canadian consumers (e.g., record levels of indebtedness), as well as participants' positive reaction to the consumer credit information example presented in the focus groups suggests that consideration should be given to making this particular issue more prominent (e.g., amend "Money" topic listing to Money and Credit).

Compare Products/Services

No one was able to identify the "Compare Products and Services" icon as the one to "click" in order to obtain information on value-for-money products/services comparisons: "Do you do 'Search'?" "Is it 'Consumer Challenges'?" Part of the reason for participants' failure to locate the relevant icon was due to its relatively small size and obscure location on the screen that participants were looking at. More significantly, however, was the explanation given by many participants that they "ignored" the information located on the bottom of the homepage because they thought it pertained to the site's sponsors: "I thought it was some kind of advertising, or like the sponsors of the site." "Because it's white and the rest of the site is color, it looks like what's down there isn't really part of the site." "Yeah, it's like sponsors."

Many participants thought this type of information should be given more prominence: "This is the kind of stuff that's more important. It should be more obvious. It's kind of hidden now." At the same time, it is interesting to note that quite a few participants had anticipated that the Government of Canada might have to be circumspect about this issue: "I have a feeling it's sort hidden for a reason, I'm not sure the Government should be involved in product testing."

Participants' careful reading of the second-level page text revealed that it was clear, informative, but also wordy: "It's fine. It's clear, but I'd never read all that. I'm sure they could reduce the text." It was also very clear from their reading of the text that participants all understood that product and service comparisons were outside of the federal government's purview. It was also apparent why this was the case: "Well, it makes sense, the Government has to be seen as impartial and objective. They can't go around recommending products." "The idea that the Government would test products and make suggestions to consumers is ridiculous. So yes, of course I understand why they are saying that here."

That said, most thought that if a company's website is linked to the Gateway, the information found on it must therefore be reputable, which implies an assumed responsibility on the part of Government to choose their partnered sites carefully. To this end, one participant expressed apprehension about the ability of the Government to be neutral when selecting which sites to include: "They're supposed to be impartial, but by selecting one site over another they aren't. I'm not saying that's necessarily a bad thing; it's just risky." Others agreed with this concern.

Given the fact that many participants did not fully read everything, many did not understand why the Government was "choosing" the four links — Consumer Reports, Marketplace, La Facture, Protégez-Vous — as well as having "additional" sites. In other words, participants did not understand that the four organizations are actually partners of the website and the others are not. This is important as it is reasonable to assume that many visitors to the Gateway will have not clicked on the "About Us" section, which gives an overview of the 400 current partners.

As was the case with the Gateway itself, not all participants immediately understood the usefulness of this section, or why the Government would bother developing such a site in the first place: "I don't get it. What's in it for them?" "Why would the Government bother with this when anyone could find this information on Google? Who would think to visit a government site for this?"

Nevertheless, many participants appreciated that the Gateway provided them easy access to well-known consumer product and service comparison web sites. It was also the kind of information they expected to see, although several explicitly stated that they expected to find side-by-side comparisons of products, not simply a list of links to other sites.

Know Your Rights

Many participants found the "Know Your Rights" section heading to be clear and intuitive: "It'll be about laws and consumer rights, like your right to return a product." "I expect it will have things like the Landlord-Tenant Act." While others were not able to articulate the same, the icon was also a very good choice and helped to give participants a clear sense of what would be contained in this section.

Participants recognized the links contained on the second-level page as being essentially the same as those listed on the homepage. These categories were felt to be clear and comprehensive. Participants all understood why it was necessary for them to select a province before accessing the results: "Some laws are provincial and others are federal, so have to tell it where you are."

The manner in which the search results were listed came as no surprise to participants: "It's what I expected, it's listed just like in the other sections we looked at." The nature of the information however, specifically the fact that it consisted of legal texts, was surprising to some: "I guess I expected a sort of summary or something more for regular people. I can't imagine reading that without being a lawyer."

Most others, however, said that they could envisage a situation in which they would want to consult the text of an act, law or regulation: "It wouldn't happen often, but maybe once or twice in your life." "I could see it, say, before you decide to contact a lawyer. To judge for yourself if you might have a case." "I would look this up before going to small claims court." A couple of participants emphasized the importance looking at legislative and legal texts: "Lawyers and judges interpret these texts. A lawyer can only give you an opinion or an interpretation of what the law means and how it might apply to your case. At a certain point, it isn't a bad thing to look at it for yourself."

Consumer Challenges and Solutions

In the English groups, almost all participants correctly guessed that the Consumer Challenges and Solutions section would contain information pertaining to how one might go about finding a satisfactory resolution to a consumer-related problem. Though everyone expressed satisfaction with the title, many preferred "Consumer Problems and Solutions" when the moderator suggested it to them: "I like that title much better." "It makes more sense for this topic because a challenge isn't necessarily a problem, and that's what this addresses — problems you've had and how to solve them."

In Montreal, a number of participants had difficulty with the title, specifically with the word "challenges" (i.e., "défis"). They felt that it connoted a goal more so than a problem: "You talk about performing in the Olympics as a défis." "To me it means more like something you want to accomplish." Despite this problem, some participants correctly surmised that the section contained "consumer tips" on a variety of topics. Virtually no one expressed a preference for the title "Consumer Tips".

For participants in all groups, the second-level page was clear and thought to be consistent with the way the rest of the site appeared to be organized and labelled. The other organizational aspects of the section were also well-received — the headings were clear and participants appreciated the fact that they could quickly determine and select an area of potential interest: "You don't have to read a bunch of stuff like in some of the others. It's just the topic and there aren't pages of them." Participants were very impressed with the food recall example they were shown because of its importance, high relevance and timeliness: "They have stuff from last week, so obviously it's up to date." "That information alone is reason enough to bookmark this site." Likewise, the "Top 10 Challenges" and the "Submit Your Consumer Challenge" headings were also well received. Many assumed that the challenges in the Top 10 would be dynamic.

File a Complaint

The "File a Complaint" section was the best-received aspect of the site. It seemed to exceed participant expectations thanks to its depth of information, user-friendliness and potential effectiveness: "I thought it would be addresses and tips. I didn't think it would be so detailed, with all the steps and the assistance for writing a letter." "This would save weeks and weeks of research." "There are all these details. It's step by step."

Participants easily understood that the Complaint Courier mirrored the evolution of a typical complaint process, and that its six steps should be followed sequentially until the situation was resolved. Each of the specific steps was easily understood and thought to be relevant and helpful by participants. In particular, the Dialogue Coach and Letter Wizard were praised as innovative and useful: "I wish I had that thing last week. Seriously." "No, it's not hokey — it gives you someplace to start."

2.4 Specific Feedback on a Page-By-Page Basis

a) Canadian Consumer Information Gateway Homepage

Generally speaking, most participants liked the overall look and colour scheme of the site. They did, however, draw attention to some issues of concern.

• First and foremost, many thought that the homepage was much too crowded. One participant noted, "There's so much going on here that I don't know what's what."
• A few participants were not happy with the location of the descriptions of the various topics listed in the image of the magnifying glass.
• A small number of participants were surprised to learn that the four icons on the bottom of the screen ("Take A Guided Tour", "Canadian Consumer Handbook", "Compare Products and Services", and "Visit Canada's Office of Consumer Affairs") were actually links — ones that were integral components of the site: "I didn't even realize this was actually part of the site. I thought they were just links to advertisers." "I didn't pay much attention to them because I thought they were ads for the site's partners."
• The Consumer Policy and Research link is probably the least intuitive, and many participants had no idea what to expect. With the exception of some of the credit information, most of the information – by design – is not intended for consumers.

Key Suggestions

• Consideration should be given to streamlining the information on the site so that participants can easily focus on the key topics/issues available for perusal. To this end, it may be necessary to combine several topics under one heading or perhaps even group them by theme.
• As part of the site's re-organization/streamlining process, consideration should be given to placing the topic descriptions in closer proximity to the topics themselves (e.g., directly above it when the user places his or her mouse over the issue he or she is interested in learning more about).
• The four icons on the bottom part of the screen should be made larger and be given more prominence on the site, perhaps in a different location.
• Consideration should be given to renaming and moving the Consumer Policy and Research section, or possibly making a more visible distinction on the right-hand menu, which gives greater differentiation to the two links not designed for consumers (i.e., Consumer Policy and Research, and Resources for Business).

[See Figure 1]

b) "Resources for Business" Page

Generally speaking, most participants liked the overall look of this page. They did, however, note that the headings were either unclear or somewhat misleading.

• Initially, "Resources for Business" seemed to them to be a fairly straightforward title. Most thought they knew what they would find by clicking on this link, but many were surprised to find that clicking on this link took them directly to the website for Consumer Affairs: "I thought it was going to have more information on starting your own business or something." Some also thought that this section focused more on customer service that anything else.
• The "Canada Business" link contained more of the sort of information participants expected to find under the "Resources for Business" section (i.e., starting a business, taxes, human resources, etc.).

Key Suggestions

• Consideration should be given to changing the title of "Resources for Business" to "Resources for Improving Customer Service"
• It was also suggested that "Canada Business" be retitled "Resources for Business".

[See Figure 2]

Figure 1

Figure 2

c) "Compare Products and Services" Page

Participants very much liked the concept of this page, but did note one issue of concern.

• Almost everyone agreed that although the description of this section was well written, it was far too long. "I mean, it's written fine, it explains what this page is about, but I would never read it." "The amount of text really turned me off. They're going to have to think about reducing the size of the font or something." "The text takes up too much space on the page."

Key Suggestions

• Consideration should be given to paring down the amount of text on the page, as well as better explaining the distinction between the four main sub-links — Consumer Reports, Marketplace, La Facture, Protégez-Vous — and the additional sites.

[See Figure 3]

d) "Consumer Challenges and Solutions" Page

Once again, most participants liked the overall look of this page and were quite pleased with the range of topics listed. However, they did have one minor suggestion for improvement.

• A number of participants did not like the word "Challenges". This is especially true of those who took part in the French groups, who were confused by the use of the word "défi" and felt that it connoted a goal more so than a problem: "You talk about performing in the Olympics as a défis." In the English groups, everyone liked the use of the word "Challenges," but many expressed a strong preference for replacing it with "Problems" (a suggestion that was put forth by the moderator).

Key Suggestions

• Consideration should be given to changing the title of this section to "Consumer Problems and Challenges".

[See Figure 4]

Figure 3

Figure 4

3. Cellphones

Broad Perceptions and Experiences

The focus groups began by asking participants about some of the key factors when considering the purchase of a cellphone or subscribing to a particular service provider. As a starting point in understanding consumer behaviour and expectations, it is important to realize that there was a general sense that buying cellphones and plans/cards can be extremely complicated, particularly the first time around but also for experienced users. For first-time buyers, the complexity reflects the enormity of things to consider without really having a sense of how they would use a phone (e.g., how many minutes, will they use text messaging?). The process can also be intimidating (e.g., fears of asking "dumb" questions). For the experienced buyers, the complexity surrounds the large number of plans, service providers, and phones. As one participant remarked, "I have as much experience as anybody, but this cellphone stuff is overwhelming. Every company has a different plan and the quality of phones is anybody's guess. It's like going out there blind."

After their first cellphone, many people adjust and it becomes more like other purchases. That is, it gets easier as people become familiar with their plans and phones, and most importantly, their uses and habits: "I know my needs now. I know how much I talk, when I talk and what features I need. I didn't know this when I got my first phone." Moreover, some said that having a cellphone had a significant impact on their phone habits, so their original estimates about needs can end up being off.

As might be expected, people look for plans and phones that best meet their needs. Value for money tended to be the most important factor, with a full range of factors coming into play such as coverage, size/type of phone, a phone's warranty, a phone's features, the details of a particular plan, etc. The amount of research done before buying a cellphone/plan varies considerably, from snap decisions, to less than an hour, to more than a few weeks. Many participants said they rely on word of mouth and then talk to a salesperson in a store. Some go to a couple of stores to compare, while others go online to visit company web sites to make comparisons that way. While some decisions were made relatively quickly, the process took/could take a fair amount of time for others: "I'm 26 hours in. I don't like committing to a contract". Some regretted acting so quickly: "I shouldn't have done it on the spur of a moment. We will have a much better sense of how our family uses a phone the next time around".

The level of satisfaction with the information and advice out there ranged from moderate to extremely negative. For some, there is a certain expectation and resignation that the first time you buy a phone you will make mistakes: "The guy in the store doesn't know your needs and the first time you buy one, you might not either. That's not his fault. You learn. That's how it goes." Many others felt that the information they received in the stores was unsatisfactory, reflecting a lack of knowledge and not telling consumers all the information they should have: "I spoke to about three different salespeople at one store, and all of them told me different things." "It is so overwhelming. You get one answer from one salesperson, and another answer from another salesperson." For others, there was a sense that the amount of information was overwhelming: "I found the company's plans so difficult. They don't give you a straightforward answer on things." "If I had encountered honesty, I would have had a phone by now." "I'm on a $35 plan that costs me $65."

There was not an immediate connection between this type of information and the Government of Canada. In fact, virtually no one had thought of turning to the Government of Canada on this front and did not anticipate the Government's site/tools: "It never occurred to me. I just thought we were at the mercy of cellphone companies." "I didn't know how closely regulated this industry was." "I thought about it after the fact, but only on a complaint basis. I thought about contacting Industry Canada or Consumer Affairs."

There were a relatively large number of participants with some type of problems with their providers, many of which involved getting charged for services they did not have or knew they had, and what they thought of as "hidden" charges. Some of the things that surprised participants after getting the first bills included the actual costs far exceeding what was perceived as the advertised cost of the plan, the costs of getting out of a contract, roaming fees, and other fees that they did not know they would be charged. As might be expected, some participants looked at their monthly bill closely, while others did not pay much attention.

Almost everyone had at least one concern or issue with his or her cellphone or service. It was notable that overall impressions ranged from relatively neutral to extremely negative, and no one had anything positive to say about their experience to date. The nature of these complaints varied. Some participants were unhappy with the reliability of their cellphone company's network, while others had issues with customer service: "I got a voicemail message on Tuesday that was left for me on Saturday." "My son lost my phone not too long ago. I called the company to let them know, but they still charged me $50 a month — even though I never got a replacement phone." "I don't like to call my cellphone company because I end up waiting two hours to speak to somebody. When I finally get through, they always tell me to call them at nine o'clock at night, not during the day. It's so frustrating."

Reaction to the Checklist

The Checklist was extremely well received: "Where was this when I got my phone four years ago — this is tax dollars well spent." "This is the kind of thing that governments should be doing." "It's straightforward and makes you realize that it could be confusing."

The typical reaction, however, was that it was great for a "novice"/first time buyer, but was less useful for the seasoned cellphone user, particularly one who has switched plans a few times: "This would be good for the first time buyer, but it has no value to me. I know all this stuff. All the figures you write down I know by heart." The novice users in the groups thought it was extremely useful: "Oh yes, I would fill this out and bring it with me to the store." That said, other more seasoned cellphone users felt that the Checklist could be a useful "refresher": "It definitely has some value. There are a few things in there that I would not have thought of." "It would help you when you get caught up in the moment." Those who saw little personal value in it suggested that it would help a little to add a section on cellphone consumers' rights and "legal issues".

Initial reaction to the layout and design of the Checklist (and Guide) was overwhelmingly positive: "All the other guides out there are very lacklustre. This one is eye-catching and it tells you exactly what it's about." "I love the way they break down all the topics. I'm glad that this is itemized." Most interpreted the image on the cover as someone squeezing their cellphone out of frustration at the cost: "He's strangling his phone because he has had enough. The dollar signs mean it's costing him money." People thought this was bold for government, and appropriate given the issue.

After looking more closely at the cover and thinking about the topic of buying a cellphone, many participants felt that the cover did not accurately reflect the contents of the Checklist. Some did not feel the subtitle "Get a grip on your cellphone costs" was completely right because they felt that it focused on those who already have a cellphone, and not those without one or first time buyers. This is somewhat problematic given the fact that the actual contents of the Checklist are geared more towards first-time buyers. Some suggested changing the title to better reflect the purpose of the Checklist: "I think they should change it to something like, 'Steps to take when buying a cellphone' or something. I don't like that this focuses on cost. This kind of implies that you already have a cellphone." The image of a hand gripping a cellphone soon became another issue of concern: "I change my mind about the graphics. I think it looks more like a rolled up newspaper than a cellphone." "I don't like that the word "Grip" is over the picture. It's more difficult to figure out what it is he's holding."

Aside from these comments, the suggested refinements to the contents of the Checklist were relatively minor, and included things like reordering some aspects (e.g., putting Steps 4 and 5 after Step 2, combining Steps 4 and 5 into one step), making the contact information more prominent, and including a telephone number. Closely related to the online calculator, many participants said that they would struggle with estimating the number of minutes they would use in a typical month. This is a key consideration that relates to both the Checklist/Guide as well as the online calculator.

The draft table of contents for the Guide also tested well. At worst, some say they are more interested in the Checklist and they assume that it would be a pain to download. At best, the topics are seen as really interesting and comprehensive, particularly the chapter about disposing of an old cellphone battery (which was thought by many to be a novel concept that they had not considered prior to the groups). The suggestions for improvement were also minor and included things like adding to the chapter on "Telephone Features" (e.g., voice mail, accessories, expanding the technology section, warranty issues), and more details about costs (e.g., what to look for in monthly costs). Some thought it would be useful to include a list of service providers organized by province. Several participants also pointed out that Guide would have to be updated frequently to keep up with rapidly changing technology.

Reflecting the perceived value in the Checklist, participants thought that it should be available at wide range of places, including stores that sell cellphones, grocery stores and home stores (like Home Depot), as well as online. Some thought CEGEP and colleges/universities were a good place to distribute it because young people like cellphones and students who go to school out of town will all have plans. They are also most likely to have difficulties in buying a phone because they are young and inexperienced: "I'd say that they would be a prime target for unscrupulous sales people." Many agree that it is a good idea to put posters in schools with a web link so they can download information. "The reputable stores wouldn't have a problem with this."

Reaction to www.comparecellular.ca and to the calculator concept

Participants were shown the www.comparecellular.ca website to help explain the concept of the online calculator (see Appendix D for a mock-up of the cellphone details page). In broad terms, the website received mostly positive reviews. No one had seen it or anything like it for cellphones. However, a few participants, particularly older ones or those with little to no Internet experience, found the information given on the Results page was too overwhelming and felt that the site would not necessarily make it easier for them to choose a phone: "There's too much information on the page. And it makes it difficult to compare the different types of phones and plans." "There's so much to choose from, I wouldn't even know how to go about selecting from the different phones on the site." "How do I know if these phones suit my needs? I'd rather be able to input my own parameters and get customized results." "I wouldn't want to have to go through all these phones in order to pick one out. I'd rather be able to choose from a list of phones that have the features and prices I'm looking for."

Of those who did like the Compare Cellular website, a key consideration was the objectivity of the information: "I'd like to know who runs this site. Is it the companies? Do they promote some products more than others?" To that end, several participants were rather wary of the cellphone ratings on the site, and doubted the extent to which these ratings were/could be accurate and impartial: "I don't know about that. Who's rating these phones?" Others wondered how up to date the information was, an important point given the speed at which technology evolves. Finally, some thought it would be great if the site could provide users with an idea of monthly cost or to allow them to input information about their anticipated usage. In other words, a few were able to anticipate what Industry Canada has in mind in relation to their proposed calculator. Others said that they would make the calculation on paper in order to be able to compare plans.

When the Industry Canada concept was raised, the reactions were very positive: "That sounds excellent. I would love to be able to use something like that." "That would really boost my confidence in dealing with the salespeople." Almost all participants agreed that the information on a government-run site would be impartial, and therefore trustworthy: "I can count on this to be unbiased. A private site probably takes money from the phone companies in exchange for a good rating. The government wouldn't do something like that." "The government wouldn't have anything to gain by favouring one company over another, so I know I can trust the site to help me make a good choice."

The concept was intuitive to virtually all participants, as they had seen similar tools elsewhere. The main appeal rests in the ability to compare prices all in one site: "It's all there. You don't have to go on all these sites, you don't have to print out a bunch of stuff and you're comparing apples and apples because it's using a common profile."

The idea of the profile and how the information would be used to generate top results was easily understood. People said they would spend 5 to 15 minutes inputting stuff. Most expressed a personal preference for having a more detailed profile, and thus, more precise results. In the end, however, there was agreement that some questions should be mandatory and others be optional. That way, people get as personalized a profile as they want. It also allows people who do not know an answer to a question to skip it. This approach would facilitate both novice and seasoned users who want to use the site. The reasons why some participants said they would not be willing to input some of the information that was tested revolved around two main concerns: not wanting to overly narrow down their search results and not being able to answer a question. In other words, the reasons did not involve a reluctance to submit this information online.

The proposed cellphone calculator questions tested well, although a number of participants tripped over some of the technical jargon. Many agreed that one should be able to "click" on a word/term to get the meaning. Related to the Checklist, many participants, especially those who had never had a cellphone, suggested that they would have difficulty answering certain questions given that they have never had any experience with a cellphone (e.g., how many minutes they would use in a month, how many text messages they would send). Others simply did not care enough about certain features (colour, video and photo capabilities, etc.) to bother answering some of the suggested questions: "I really don't care whether or not my phone is a flip phone, so I don't think I should have to answer that question."

In terms of displaying the results, most participants thought that they should be able to sort the order in which they are presented. The ability to sort by price was seen as key. In general, the number of results to display ranged from the Top 3 to Top 10 results, with an ability to see all the results. Virtually everyone agreed that it was important to see the estimated total monthly costs for each plan, and that it would be helpful to see side-by-side comparisons of the results. Some participants thought the Government of Canada was putting itself in a tough position by de facto "recommending" plans, but assumed the Government knows what it is doing in this regard.

Everyone thought the federal government was credible and that it was a plus to have them develop and host the site: "This way you know that it's objective." There were, however, some participants who did not fully understand what was in it for the federal government to undertake such an initiative: "Why are they bothering? What's in it for them?"

The "Details on Selected Cellphone Plans" handout that showed the potential display of results from a search was also well received. Virtually everyone agreed that this sort of tool is both useful and long overdue. With respect to the display of results, one participant thought it was too dense, and had too much information. Others were fine with it, and some were even surprised to learn of all the extra charges on top of the monthly fee: "It's got a lot of things on it that I wasn't even aware of. Activation fee, licensing fee, emergency access fee? I didn't realize I would have to pay for this stuff."

There were a few suggestions about information that should be included on the page. These include information about optional versus standard features and details about penalties levied against those who cancel their contracts early. Most also wanted to ensure that the Details page would indeed contain information on the service provider through which such a plan would be available. In the "Details" section, it was also suggested by a few participants that "Monthly Cellphone Budget" be given a new name. With respect to the "My Specifications" portion of the page, participants agreed that they should be able to input a range of estimated local and long-distance minutes per month, rather than having to estimate a specific number of minutes: "I don't know if I'll use 100 minutes a month or 150 minutes until I've actually had the phone for a while."

Most liked the "Plan Overview" section of the document. It was suggested that the cost of text messaging be included under the "Minutes Included" section, and that fixed prices for particular services be colour-coded (e.g., "Price" and "Licensing fee"). All the proposed features on the bottom of the page were seen as both useful and necessary (adjust profile, see other hits, etc.). Many participants understood that the "Resubmit with 20% increase/decrease in usage" button meant that selecting this would generate a new approximate cost based on the estimated monthly usage, but some were a bit confused at first. As such, a brief explanation of this feature (perhaps one that popped up when the user's mouse is placed over it) would be very useful. It was also suggested that another feature be added to the bottom of the screen, one that helped users trim their monthly cellphone costs by highlighting optional features that might be cancelled. This feature could be titled, "Where Can I Cut My Costs?"

As noted earlier, one suggestion that was raised most frequently is the side-by-side comparison, and some suggested having the inputted data beside the relevant information rather than above or below it. There was near consensus that any results continue to include the total approximate monthly cost.

3.1 Specific Feedback

a) "A Checklist" — Front and Back Cover

Participants loved the idea of the Checklist and initially reacted positively to the design of the front cover. After looking at it more carefully, however, they noted a few issues of concern.

• Some thought the title "Get a Grip on Your Cellphone Costs" was a bit misleading because it focused on decreasing costs, rather than tips for purchasing a new phone: "It talks about cost, but that only matters if you already have a cellphone. This Checklist seems to be for people who don't."
• A couple of participants noted that the graphic of the cellphone was somewhat confusing: "I think it looks more like a rolled up newspaper than a cellphone."
• It was suggested that contact information be put on the back cover, rather than on the last page. This would allow for more overall space in the Guide, or more white space in between existing text.

Key Suggestions

• Rephrase the text on the cover so that it better reflects the purpose of the Guide and peaks the interest of intended readers (i.e., those who are thinking abut purchasing a cellphone for the first time).
• Consider selecting another image for the cover, one that more closely resembles a cellphone or is unobstructed by overlapping text.
• Consider moving the contact information to the back cover.

[See Figure 6]

b) Steps 1-4

The information in the Checklist was thought to be comprehensive and valuable to consumers. However, there were a few suggestions for improvement.

• The description in Step 1 was thought to be well written and on the right track. However, some participants felt more information was needed to help users of the Checklist better determine how much they may use the phone (i.e., how many minutes). This is particularly the case for someone who wants a cellphone for emergency use only.
• Many participants agreed that the questions asked in Step 2 and 3 are somewhat difficult to answer, particularly for those who have never had a cellphone (e.g., what is text messaging?).
• A few suggested that a number of steps be placed in a different sequence than the one presently being used.

Key Suggestions

• Reword the text in Step 1 so that it provides more information about how one may go about estimating their cellphone usage.
• Consider reordering Steps 1-3, as they relate to plans. Consider placing Step 4 first.

[See Figure 7]

c) Steps 5-7

Most participants appreciated the information these steps provided, but did feel that there was some room for improvement.

• A few participants pointed out that Steps 5 and 6 are really the same process. That is, a person needs to decide which type of plan to go with in the same step.
• Some noticed why a phone number was not included with the contact information. It was also suggested that the contact information, in its entirety, be moved to the back page, thereby reducing the clutter noted on some of the other ages.

Key Suggestions

• Consider combining Steps 5 and 6 into one, as they are part of the same process.
• Consider moving the contact information to the back page, and providing users with a telephone number.
• Consider reordering Steps 1-3 and Steps 5-7, as they relate to plans. Consider placing Step 4 first.

[See Figure 8]

d) Table of Contents

Generally speaking, all participants were quite satisfied with the range of topics listed in the Table of Contents, although there were a few minor suggestions for improvement.

• Although almost everyone liked the term "cellphone minutes", some participants felt that it didn't really convey the full meaning of the type of information this section would likely contain.
• The section on "Cellphone Technology" (listed under "Telephone Features") was thought to be too broad.
• While they appreciated having a chapter on dealing with unsatisfactory products and services, a number of participants thought that the title of the chapter was a bit too negative.

Key Suggestions

• Consider changing the title of the section on 'Cellphone Minutes" to "Cellphone Usage".
• Consider expanding or disaggregating the section on cellphone technology so that it includes a wider range of more specific topics (rather than lumping everything under one heading).
• Consider changing the name of the "Complaining Effectively" section too something less negative, such as "Resolving Customer Service Problems" or "Know Your Rights as a Consumer".

[See Figure 9]

Figure 9

4. Conclusions and Recommendations

Internet

• At this stage, it would not appear to make sense to develop tools or promote awareness around a taxonomy using consumer tools, consumer education and consumer skills. In testing, these words often meant the same thing to participants. Moreover, there was virtually no connection made between information/education and skills.
• The concept of an Internet guide was positively received, although it was recognized that much of the potential information was already out there. Despite availability elsewhere, the positive reception typically reflected the perceived objectivity and credibility of a guide developed by the Government of Canada. It was, however, unclear the extent to which such a guide could be expected to change behaviour. At the same time, Canadians would expect that such a guide be updated frequently given how fast things can change in this area. Within this context, careful consideration should be given to how any such guide can differentiate itself from what is currently available, and what internal resources/expertise would be necessary to ensure it would be up to date.
• The Canadian Consumer Information Gateway website continues to test extremely well. One of the main issues remains not with the website itself, but the lack of familiarity with it in the first place. This latest round of testing found only small refinements that should be considered, varying from looking at the layout of the home page to increasing the profile of certain features, to refining the labelling of some of the links (e.g., Consumer Policy and Research).
• The proposed involvement of the OCA in developing the cellular phone-related information tools is extremely well received, reflecting that many participants were unsatisfied with the information currently available.

Cellphones

• The proposed tools (the Checklist, Guide and Online Calculator) appear to meet a clear need in the marketplace, as buying cellphones and plans can be extremely complicated, particularly for the first time buyer. In fact, these tools are among the most well received in similar testing that EKOS has done in recent years.
• One of the main reasons behind the support for this work was the fact that the Government of Canada was seen as being objective and neutral on this front. It is, however, important to realize that the Government of Canada is not thought of as providing this type of information to consumers. Many of the suggestions around promoting the fact that the Government of Canada is providing this type of information involved having the Checklist and posters in various retail stores, along with other more traditional advertising methods. The Checklist and posters can also refer consumers to the Consumer Gateway website for further information.
• As might be expected, there are notable differences between first time buyers and those already with a cellphone. This distinction is a key consideration in the design of these tools as many without any experience with a cellphone will have much more difficulty answering questions relating to anticipated future usage (e.g., how many minutes they expect to use in a month). This can be largely addressed by having optional questions, which more seasoned users are in a better position to answer.
• There is a clear recognition that the cellphone industry is constantly evolving, both in the selection of phones and the choice of plans. While the Checklist and the Guide can be designed in such a way to stay relevant in light of change, it will be essential that the online calculator be based on the most up to date information and that end-users perceive it to be up to date if it is to be a relevant tool.

Appendix A: Location and Date of Groups

Location and Date of Focus Groups

Location	Date	Group	Group Type	Language
Halifax	October 11, 2006	Group 1	Internet	English
	October 11, 2006	Group 2	Internet	English
Halifax	October 12, 2006	Group 1	Cellular Phone	English
	October 12, 2006	Group 2	Cellular Phone	English
Montreal	October 16, 2006	Group 1	Internet	French
	October 16, 2006	Group 2	Internet	French
Montreal	October 17, 2006	Group 1	Cellular Phone	French
	October 17, 2006	Group 2	Cellular Phone	French
Calgary	October 18, 2006	Group 1	Internet	English
	October 18, 2006	Group 2	Internet	English
Calgary	October 19, 2006	Group 1	Cellular Phone	English
	October 19, 2006	Group 2	Cellular Phone	English

Appendix B: Screeners

14890 — Industry

Respondent Name: ___________________________________
Home Phone #: _______________________________________
Business Phone #: _____________________________________
E-Mail:_____________________________________________
Group #:_______________________ Recruiter:_____________

Recruit 10 per group

---

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Group 4

Wednesday

Wednesday

Thursday

Thursday

October 11^th

October 11^th

October 12^th

October 12^th

5:30 PM

5:30 PM

7:30 PM

7:30 PM

Internet

Internet

Cellphone

Cellphone

Halifax

Halifax

Halifax

Halifax

Group 5

Group 6

Group 7

Group 8

Monday

Monday

Tuesday

Tuesday

October 16^th

October 16^th

October 17^th

October 17^th

5:30 PM

7:30 PM

5:30 PM

7:30 PM

Cellphone

Cellphone

Internet

Internet

Montreal

Montreal

Montreal

Montreal

Group 9

Group 10

Group 11

Group 12

Wednesday

Wednesday

Thursday

Thursday

October 18^th

October 18^th

October 19^th

October 19^th

5:30 PM

7:30 PM

5:30 PM

7:30 PM

Internet

Internet

Cellphone

Cellphone

Calgary

Calgary

Calgary

Calgary

Hello, my name is _________ from Research House Inc., we are calling today on behalf of the Government of Canada to invite you to a focus group discussion scheduled for (See above dates). Your participation in the research is completely voluntary and your decision to participate or not will not affect any dealings you may have with Research House Inc. All information collected, used and/or disclosed will be used for research purposes only and administered as per the requirements of the Privacy Act. You will also be asked to sign a waiver to acknowledge that you may be audio and/or video taped during the session and will also participate in Qualitative Central. The session will last a maximum of 2 hours and you will receive a cash honorarium as a thank you for attending the session. May we have your permission to ask you some further questions to see if you fit in our study?

Demographics

Yes	1
No	2	Thank and Terminate

Indicate:

Demographics

Male	1	(5) per group
Female	2	(5) per group

1. Are you or is any member of your household or immediate family employed in, or ever been employed in:

Demographics

	1		Ever
	No	Yes	No	Yes
Market Research	( )	( )	( )	( )
Marketing	( )	( )	( )	( )
Public Relations	( )	( )	( )	( )
Any media (Print, Radio, TV)	( )	( )	( )	( )
A member of ACTRA	( )	( )	( )	( )
Advertising	( )	( )	( )	( )
Municipal Government	( )	( )	( )	( )
Provincial Government	( )	( )	( )	( )
Federal Government	( )	( )	( )	( )
IT or IM or Computer experts, including Web design or Web masters	( )	( )	( )	( )
Telecommunications Service or Product providers including Bell or Rogers,AT & T, Telus/Clearnet	( )	( )	( )	( )

If Yes to any of the above — Thank and Terminate

2a. May I have your age, please?
_________________________ Specify

Demographics

Under 18 years	1	Thank and Terminate
18-24 years	2	(1) per group
25-34 years	3	(2) per group
35-44 years	4	(2) per group
45-54 years	5	(2) per group
55-65 year	6	(2) per group
Over 65 years	7	(1) per group

2b. What is your marital status?

Demographics

Married / Common - Law	1	Ensure Good Mix
Single / Div. / Wid. / Sep	2

3a. What is your current employment status?

Demographics

Full Time Employed	( )
Part Time Employed	( )
Homemaker	( )	Max.2
Student	( )	Max.1
Retired	( )	Max.1
Unemployed	( )	Max.1

3b. What is your occupation?

Job title_________________
Type/Name of Company________________

If married/common–law ask — what is your spouse's occupation?

Job title_________________
Type/Name of Company________________

If any connection to standard or project related occupation — Thank and Terminate

4a. As we need to speak with people from all walks of life, could you please tell me into which category I may place your total annual household income? Would that be…

Demographics

Under $40,000	1
$40,000 - $60,000	2
$60,000 - $80,000	3
Over $80,000	4

4b. Could you please tell me, what is the last level of education that you have completed?

Demographics

Some High School	1	Thank and Terminate
High School	2
Some College / University	3
Completed College / University	4

5a. Do you have any children living at home?

Demographics

Yes	1
No	2	Skip to Q.6

5b. What are the ages of your children, living at home?

_______________________________________

6a. Which of the following do you currently have and personally use for personal use?

Computer	1	All must mention
Internet	2	All must mention
Printer	3
Cellular Telephone	4	5 per groups 3,4,5,6,11 and 12 (Cellphone groups must mention)
Other	5	5 per groups 3,4,5,6,11 and 12 - must not mention

6b. Do you intend on purchasing or renewing a new cellphone and or plan in the next 6 months?

Cellphone

Yes	1	5 per groups 3,4,5,6,11 and 12 (Cellphone groups must mention)
No	2	Thank and Terminate (Cellphone groups)

Ask all Internet Users

7a. Do you currently use the Internet for reasons other than email?

Internet

Yes	1
No	2	Thank and discontinue

7b. How comfortable are you using the internet and navigating websites?

Internet

Very comfortable	1	Ensure a spread
Somewhat comfortable	2
Somewhat uncomfortable	3
Very uncomfortable	4

7c. How long have you personally been using the internet?

Internet

Under 2 years	1	Ensure a Spread
2 – 5 years	2
Over 5 years	3

7d. Which of the following have you recently experienced online?

Internet

Email	1
Downloaded music	2
Searched a product or service	3	5 per group 1,2,7,8,9 and 10 (Internet) Must Mention
Banking	4
Purchased a product	5

Ask all Cellphone Users

8a. You mentioned that you currently have a cellphone. Are you personally responsible for choosing this phone and its plan and are you responsible for the payment?

Cellphone

Yes	1
No	2	Thank and Terminate

8b. Is this a company cellphone?

Cellphone

Yes	1	Thank and Terminate
No	2

8c. You mentioned that you were personally responsible for the selection of your cellphone and its plan and or renewal. Was this within the past two years or more than two years ago?

Cellphone

Past 2 years	1	5 per group - Ask Q.8e
Over 2 years ago	2	Terminate

8d. Did you personally do any comparison shopping or other research into which cellphone products and service plans you should choose? For example, this could have included talking to cellular providers about your options in terms of plans and prices, reading brochures, searching online, talking to family/friends.

Cellphone

Yes	1
No	2	Thank and Terminate

8e. Did you do any of this research online?

Cellphone

Yes	1	Ensure a Good Mix
No	2

9a Participants in group discussions are asked to voice their opinions and thoughts, how comfortable are you, in voicing your opinions in front of others? Are you…

Voice opinions

Very Comfortable	1	Min 50% per group
Fairly Comfortable	2
Comfortable	3
Not Very Comfortable	4	Thank and Terminate
Very Uncomfortable	5	Thank and Terminate

9b. Have you ever attended a focus group or one to one discussion for which you have received a sum of money, here or elsewhere?

Focus group

Yes	1	Min 50% per group
No	2	Skip to Q.10

9c. When did you last attend one of these discussions?

_______________________________________
Terminate if in the past 6 months

9d. How many focus group or one–to-one discussions have you attended in the past 5 years?

__________________________________
(Specify) if more than 5 — Thank and Terminate

9e. Would you please tell me the topics discussed?

_______________________________________

10. Have you been invited to another of these focus groups or interviews in the near future?

Focus groups

Yes	1	Thank and Terminate
No	2

11. Sometimes participants are asked to write out their answers on a questionnaire or watch a Video during the discussion. Is there any reason why you could not participate?

Discussion

Yes	1	Thank and Terminate
No	2

Note: If respondent offers any reason such as sight or hearing problem, a written or verbal language problem, a concern with not being able to communicate effectively — Thank and Terminate

---

Important:

The session is 2 hours in length, but we are asking that all participants arrive 10 minutes prior to the start time of the session. Are you able to be at the research facility 10 minutes prior to the session time?

Research facility

Yes	1
No	2	Terminate

All participants in this study are asked to bring to the group Picture Identification. If you do not bring your personal identification then you will not be able to participate in the session and you will not receive the incentive fee. Are you going to bring along your ID?

ID

Yes	1
No	2	Terminate

The group discussion will last approximately 2 hours and we offer each participant a $50.00 cash gift as a token of our appreciation. I should also tell you that the groups will be audio — taped for research purposes and members of the research team will be observing the discussion from an adjoining room. Everything you say will be kept confidential.

[ ] Check to indicate you have read the statement to the respondent

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Group 4

Wednesday

Wednesday

Thursday

Thursday

October 11^th

October 11^th

October 12^th

October 12^th

5:30 PM

5:30 PM

7:30 PM

7:30 PM

Internet

Internet

Cellphone

Cellphone

Halifax

Halifax

Halifax

Halifax

Group 5

Group 6

Group 7

Group 8

Monday

Monday

Tuesday

Tuesday

October 16^th

October 16^th

October 17^th

October 17^th

5:30 PM

7:30 PM

5:30 PM

7:30 PM

Cellphone

Cellphone

Internet

Internet

Montreal

Montreal

Montreal

Montreal

Group 9

Group 10

Group 11

Group 12

Wednesday

Wednesday

Thursday

Thursday

October 18^th

October 18^th

October 19^th

October 19^th

5:30 PM

7:30 PM

5:30 PM

7:30 PM

Internet

Internet

Cellphone

Cellphone

Calgary

Calgary

Calgary

Calgary

Incentive: $50

Length of group: 2 hours

Locations:

Halifax
Corporate Research Associates
7051 Bayers Road
Suite 400
Telephone: 902-722-3100

October 16th and October 17th
Montreal
MBA (Mayer, Bourbonnais & Aube)
1470 Peel St
Suite 800
Telephone: 514-284-9644

October 18th and October 19th
Calgary
E-Style Studios
1011 1st Street SW
Suite 520
Telephone: 403-770-0296

Appendix C: Moderators Guides

ConsumerInformation.ca
Internet-Related Focus Groups

Final Moderator's Guide
October 10, 2006

1. Introduction (5 minutes)

• Purpose of the discussion.
• Explanation of format and "ground rules":
  • Discussions are being audio taped and observed by members of the research team.
  • Your comments will remain confidential.
  • Please try to speak one at a time.
  • There aren't any right or wrong answers to the things we'll be talking about — we're just looking for your honest opinions.
  • It's okay to disagree. Please speak up even if you think you're the only one who feels a certain way about an issue.
  • Moderator's role: raise issues for discussion, watch for time and make sure everyone has a chance to participate.
• Participant introductions: First name, employment status, length of time living in the city.

2. Ice-Breaker (5 minutes)

Let's begin by talking about being consumers. How would you describe yourself as a consumer? What kind of consumer are you? Please jot down up to three words or phrases that characterize you as a consumer. [Prompt with example of consumer types if needed.]

• The Researcher
• The Impulse Buyer
• The Bargain Hunter
• The Loyal Consumer (i.e., likes to purchase goods and services from the same suppliers)
• The Adventurous Consumer (i.e., like to purchase goods and services from a variety of suppliers)

3. Consumer Information vs. Education (10 Minutes)

• How satisfied are you with your overall abilities and knowledge as a consumer? Are you as effective a consumer as you would like to be?
  • What are you lacking most? What do you wish you were better at or had more of, in order for you to be a better consumer (e.g., information, education, skills)?
• What are some examples of consumer information
• What are some examples of consumer education
• What are some examples of consumer skills
• In your own mind, what are the differences between consumer information (e.g., pros and cons of competing products), consumer education (e.g., knowledge of rights, complaint mechanisms, etc), and consumer skills (e.g., negotiating, researching, math skills)?

4. E-Consumer Guide to the Internet (10 minutes)

• Let's talk about your use of the Internet. What are the main things you use the Internet for?
• What type of activities don't you do online?
  • What types of concerns, if any, do you have?
  • Have you ever tried to obtain information on these Internet-related concerns, such as virus protection and how to install it, firewalls, detecting spyware, spam, ID theft, shopping on-line, trusted sites, online safety for kids, etc.? Were you successful? Where would you obtain information on these issues?
• [Moderator distributes handout and asks participants to rate their interest in five potential E-Consumer Guide topics.] How interested would you be in an on-line guide that provided information on the following topics?
  • What do you think of the Government of Canada developing an on-line guide on these topics, something like how it developed the Canada Food Guide?

5. ConsumerInformation.ca (90 minutes)

• I would like to obtain your input on a site that aims to provide Canadians with access to a wide variety of consumer information from a range of government and non-government organizations. [Moderator shows participants the "Take a Guided Tour Video" in order to provide context for the rest of the discussion].
• What are your first impressions of the Gateway based on what you learned from the video (e.g., interesting, useful, redundant, etc.)?
  • Have ever visited or heard of the Gateway before?
  • Do you think you would ever visit a site like this?

Let's look at some specific Gateway features, starting with the "Focus On" section.

• What would you say the point of this feature is? How might it be different from the Gateway's other aspects? What would you expect to find there?
• [Moderator walks participants through one of the Focus On issues (e.g., Consumer Complaints, Identity Theft and Spam) and probes the following:]
  • [Before clicks on Identity Theft link] What would you expect to find by clicking here?
  • Is this what you expected?
  • How well is the information organized?
  • How clear are the titles and document descriptions?
  • Do you have any suggestions for improving the way information is provided?
  • Would you expect the Focus On topics highlighted in box change over time? Why?
  • Do you have any suggestion for Focus On topics?

Let's have a quick look at the "Resources for Business" section.

• What would you expect to find by clicking here?
• What do you think of the Gateway providing tools and information to help businesses improve the way they deal with consumers, such as handling complaints, guarding customers' information and earning the trust of on-line customers?
  • Would you ever use this type of information?
  • What do you think of the fact that this information, which is intended for business, is on a website for consumers?

Let's have a quick look at the "Consumer and Policy Research" section.

• What would you expect to find by clicking here?
• Is this the type of information and resources you would expect to find under a section entitled Consumer and Policy Research? Is this title appropriate given what the section offers?
  • How useful/relevant is this type of information to you personally? Would you ever want to access this information?
  • Can you think of anything to ad to this section?
• [Moderator returns to the Homepage] Let's say I was in the market for a consumer product, such as a lawnmower, and wanted some reliable information about various features and value for money. Does the Gateway have anything that might help me?
  • How easy or difficult was the "Compare Products/Information" icon to locate?

Let's have a quick look at the Compare Products/Information section.

• What would you expect to find by clicking here?
• [Moderator allows participants to read the text on the screen.] What does this text mean to you? [Moderator then clicks on link].
• Is this the type of information and resources you would expect to find under a section entitled Compare Products/Information? Is this title appropriate given what the section offers?
• Is it clear that the information is not being provided by the Government of Canada but by some of its partners?
• How useful/relevant is this type of information to you? Would you ever want to access this information?
• Can you think of any ways of improving this section?

"Know Your Rights" Section

• What do you think we will find under the "Know Your Rights" section?
• Let's have a look. [Moderator walks participants through the section, explaining its purpose and the type of information it provides access to.]
  • Is this what you expected?
  • How clear are the subject headings?
  • Are any subjects missing?
  • Why would you need to select a province or territory in order to generate a list of documents?
  • How well is the information organized?
  • How useful/relevant is this type of information to you personally? Would you ever want to access this information? Under what circumstances?
  • Can you think of any ways of improving this section?

"Consumer Challenges and Solutions" section

• What do you think we will find under the "Consumer Challenges and Solutions" section?
• Let's have a look. [Moderator walks participants through the section, explaining its purpose and the type of information it provides access to.]
  • Is this what you expected?
  • What do you think of the way the information is organized into headings? Are any subjects missing?
  • How comprehensive does this section seem to you? Does it look like there are a lot of challenges and solutions addressed?
  • What do you think of the opportunity to submit your consumer challenge to their experts for a response? Would you ever make use of this opportunity?
  • How useful/relevant is this type of information to you personally? Would you ever want to access this information?
  • Can you think of any ways of improving this section?
• The working title of the section is: Consumer Challenges and Solutions. What do you think of this title? Can you think of a title that might be better? What do you think of "Consumer Tips" as an alternative?

"File a Complaint" icon

• What would you expect to find under the "File a Complaint" icon?
• Let's have a look at what we find. [Explains the "Complaint Courier" tool concept to participants, including an overview of the six progressive steps].
  • Is this the type of information or tool you would have expected to find under the "Filea Complaint" icon?
  • What do you think of this tool overall?
  • Would you ever use it?
  • Can you think of any ways that this concept might be improved?

Final Suggestions

• You have had a quick chance to view a good part of the website. I want you to write down any suggestions you have to improve the website, including what information or services you would want to see on the website.
• Any final suggestions/comments?

Thank you very much for your participation!

ConsumerInformation.ca
Cellular Phone Focus Groups

Final Moderator's Guide
October 10, 2006

1. Introduction (5 minutes)

• Purpose of the discussion.
• Explanation of format and "ground rules":
  • Discussions are being audio taped and observed by members of the research team.
  • Your comments will remain confidential.
  • Please try to speak one at a time.
  • There aren't any right or wrong answers to the things we'll be talking about — we're just looking for your honest opinions.
  • It's okay to disagree. Please speak up even if you think you're the only one who feels a certain way about an issue.
  • Moderator's role: raise issues for discussion, watch for time and make sure everyone has a chance to participate.
• Participant introductions: First name, employment status, length of time living in the city.

2. General Views on Cellphones (20 Minutes)

• Some of you are considering the first purchase of a cellphone and cellphone service, while others are already cellphone users. Given that we will be talking a lot about personal experiences and consumer preferences, I thought it would be good to start by having you briefly describe what your current cellphone situation is. Let's go around the table…
  • Looking to purchase a cellphone and service for first time
  • Looking to buy a new cellphone but keeping the service
  • Looking to switch service but keeping cellphone
  • Looking for new cellphone and service
  • Monthly plan (length of contract)/Prepaid-pay as you go
• What are some of the key factors you consider when purchasing a cellphone?
  • Price
  • Phone features (e.g., camera, e-mail, video, ability to download, etc.)
  • The phone's style/appearance
  • Technical superiority (e.g., clarity of reception)
  • Service provider
  • Other
• Let's talk a little bit more about research and comparison-shopping. How much time and effort do you devote to gathering and considering information on cellphone and service prior to making a purchase or selecting a provider and a plan?
  • Where do you obtain information?
  • Who has the most reliable information?
  • How comprehensive is the information?
  • How easy is the information to digest?
• What are some of the key factors you consider when subscribing to a particular cellphone service?
  • Costs (e.g., price, monthly plan vs. pay as you go)
  • Bundling
  • Simplicity
  • Roaming capabilities
  • Specific features (e.g., weekend rates, long-distance rates, etc.)
  • Reliability/familiarity of the provider
  • Other
• What would you say are some of the biggest challenges involved in purchasing cellphones and subscribing to a particular service/service provider and selecting a plan?
  • Understanding technical aspects and jargon
  • The ability to make a reliable comparison between competing options
  • Dealing with salespeople
  • Understanding contracts/agreements
• How satisfied are you with the information and advice available to help you make sound cellphone and cellphone service purchasing decisions?
  • Have you ever considered looking to the Government of Canada for consumer information on cellphone and cellphone service? Why not?
• For those who have a cellular phone, was there anything that surprised you after you had signed up for particular phone service or after you got your bill?
  • How closely do you examine your monthly bills?
• Have you ever had any concerns or issues with your cellphone or your cellphone service?
  • What was the nature of your concerns or issues?
  • Who did you do?
  • Was the issue dealt with to your satisfaction?
• Others, have you ever wanted to complain about either your cellphone or your cellphone service?
  • What were you unhappy about?
  • Why didn't you follow through and lodge a complaint?

3. Cellphone Checklist and Guide (25 Minutes)

[Moderator distributes handout of the draft Checklist and asks participants to read it carefully once. Participants are also encouraged to highlight parts that are particularly helpful/interesting, or conversely confusing/useless.] Let's see what you thought of the Checklist…

• What is your overall reaction to the Checklist?
  • Do you find it useful/helpful?
  • How easy is it to understand? Were you confused by anything?
  • What did you think of the cover (e.g., appeal, appropriateness, connotations, etc.)?
  • What about the title (e.g., appeal, appropriateness, connotations, etc.)?
  • How about the layout, graphics and fonts used inside the Checklist?
  • Can you think of other ways of improving the Checklist?
  
  

  [Moderator displays the two Guide boards: 1) cover, and 2) table of contents, and explains that the Guide would provide consumers with more detailed information about cellphone choices.] Let's turn to the Guide…

• As you can see, the Guide's cover is essentially the same as the Checklist's. Is there anything else you would like to say about the cover title and picture (e.g., appeal, appropriateness, connotations, etc.)?
• The table of contents outlines the main topics covered in the Guide. What do you think of the issues that are proposed to be covered in the Guide?
  • Are the topics clear? Do you get a sense of what they are?
  • To what extent are the topics relevant/interesting/useful?
  • Can you think of a key issue or topic that might be missing?
• How interested would you be in using the Checklist? What about the Guide?
  • Why: What benefit(s) do these provide you with? What value do they have?
  • Why not?
• Would you rather access the Checklist and Guide on-line or would you prefer to have a paper version or both? Why do you say that? Where would you expect to get a copy?
• One of the challenges faced by the Government of Canada lies in letting Canadians know that the Guide and Checklist exist. Related to that is the challenge of distribution. What are some of the best ways of let people know that these documents exists and where/how should they be available? Please write down some suggestions, and as you do this, think of the following:
  • Websites that you visit (e.g., Government of Canada, commercial/consumer, pop culture, etc.)
  • Places that you shop (Rogers, Home Depot, etc.)
  • Public places that you tend to frequent (e.g., malls, public transit, university/college)
  • Other?

4. Online Interactive Cellphone Calculator Needs Assessment (70 Minutes)

• Some of you talked earlier about how you had conducted some on-line research into cellphones and/or cellphone service. There are a few websites that provide consumers with information on the various cellphones and service options that exist in Canada. I would like to show one of these…
• [Moderator walks participants through key features of the www.comparecellular.ca as follows:]
  1. Review phones, select Bell Mobility, scroll through phones and select a particular phone and show what information is given
  2. Hit home, and then select Rate Plans, select Rogers Wireless/Alberta, select Couples and Family Plan, select one particular plan and display information, then go back and select Prepaid Plans, select one particular plan, and display information.
  3. Hit return to Rate Plans and select Compare Rate Plans, select Calgary/Alberta, select Small Plans $25-$34, and display information.
• What do you think of the information contained on this website?
  • Have you ever visited a site such as this one before?
  • How useful does the information contained on this site appear to be?
  • Would you ever visit a site such as this one?
  • Do you see any drawbacks to this site? Is anything missing from it?
  • If you were to redesign the site to suit your own needs, would you do anything differently?
• As you can see, this site (as well as others like it) gathers information that is publicly available from cellphone and cellphone service providers and organizes it a manner that allows consumer to make side-by-side product and service comparisons. What do you think of a website that would, instead, provide you with a customized list of potential cellphone plans based on information that you input about how you expect to use your phone?
  • What is your initial reaction to this concept?
  • Are you interested enough to hear more?
• The basic idea is that you would answer some questions designed to obtain key information about your needs, preferences and budget. The system would analyze this information and provide you with options that best meet your profile (i.e., the answers to you questions).
  • What do you think of the concept now?
  • What if I told you that this site would be designed and administered by the Government of Canada? Do you have any reaction to that? Is the Government's involvement mainly a good, bad or neutral thing?
• How interested are you in this concept? Would you want to use this tool? Why/Why not?
• In the time that we have left, I'd like to obtain your input on how best to turn this concept into a reality. How much time would you spend completing the on-line questionnaire/profile?
• Would you rather spend more time providing more detailed information in order to get more precise options, or vice versa? That is, you provide less information and the website would provide you with a much larger range of options, some of which could potentially not suit your needs at all.
• I would like to get a more precise idea of the type of information that you be willing and able to provide for the development of your profile. [Moderator distributes handout of potential specifications for cellphone service.] Please take a few minutes to identify the information that you would be unwilling or unable to provide, as well as information that you find completely irrelevant to the development of a profile for most users (e.g., very expensive and esoteric features).
• Let's turn to the cellphone/cellphone service specifications.
  • Which would you be unwilling to provide?
  • Which would you be unable to provide?
  • Are there any specifications that you feel are irrelevant to the development of a profile and related recommended options? Which one(s)?
• Now let's turn to the production and display of results. How would you prefer the results be displayed?
  • How many results would you want to see (e.g., top 3 then others, top 5)?
  • Should they be ordered (e.g., best match to profile, price, etc.)? Should there be an ability to sort based on these?
  • How important would it be to see the estimated total monthly cost (i.e., it would have to be an estimate based on the anticipated minutes of usage, etc)?
  • Would you want to be able to see a side-by-side comparison of the recommended options?
  • What key information should be displayed in the results (e.g., refer to earlier specification handouts)? [Moderator distributes handout.]
  • Would you like to be able to add or remove specifications from the recommended options in order to see its impact on price and the ordering of the recommendations?
  • Do you have any other ideas about the display of results?
• Thinking about what we have just discussed, do you think that this is a useful initiative for the Government of Canada? Could you see yourselves using?
• As I mentioned earlier in our discussion of the Checklist and Guide, the Government faces a big challenge in letting Canadians know about the products and service they have for them. What would be an effective way of letting people like you know about the existence of the tool? On what type of website should this tool be housed?
• Any final suggestions/comments?

Thank you very much for your participation!

Appendix D: "Details on Selected Cellphone Plan" Mock-Up

Details on Selected Cellphone Plan

Details on Selected Cellphone Plan

My Profile
Details		My Specifications
Monthly Cellphone Budget		$30.00
Ideal Contract Term		1 year
Estimated Weekday Minutes/Month		120
Estimated Nighttime Minutes/Month		500
Estimated Weekend Minutes/Month		300
Estimated Long Distance Minutes (within Canada)/Month		30
Estimated Long Distance Minutes (to US)/Month		0
Caller ID		Yes
Call Forwarding		Yes
Call Waiting		Yes
Voice Mail		Yes
Email		No
Megatime Evening and Weekend 25
Plan Overview		My Costs
Price	$25.00 (Paid monthly)	$25.00
Contract Length	1 year, 2 years, 3 years	1 year
Activation Fee	$35	One time fee paid
Licencing Fee	$6.95 per month	$6.95 per month
Emergency Access Fee	50¢ per month	$0.50
Security Deposit	-
Minutes Includes
Base Minutes	100	$0.00
Base Minutes Average Charge	30¢ per minute	$6.00
Evening/Weekend Minutes	Included (1000)	$0.00
Evening/Weekends Time Period	9 pm-8 am (Mon to Fri), 9 pm (Fri)-8 am (Mon)
Free Incoming	Not included
Mobile to Mobile	Included (1000)
Walkie Talkie	Not applicable
Additional	For a limited time, this plan includes 50 Bonus Weekday minutes. Also for a limited time, on 2 or 3 year service agreements, you receive 3 months unlimited local calling along with text, picture, and video messaging. You also receive 3 ring tunes over a three month period.
Billing Increments	Per minute
Long Distance and Roaming
Long Distance within Canada	25¢ per minute	$7.50
Long Distance to US	25¢ per minute	$0.00
Long Distance from US to Canada	95¢ per minute	$0.00
Extras
Voicemail	$5 per month	$5.00
Call Waiting	Included	$0.00
Caller ID	$5 per month	$5.00
Call Forwarding	Included	$0.00
Conference Calling	Included	N/A
Web Browsing	2¢ per page	N/A
Email	15¢ per message	N/A
Approximate Monthly cost		$55.95

Plans

Adjust my Profile

Re-submit with 20% increase/decrease in Usage

View Top Three Plans

View All Plans