Hypotheses generation

Antivirus software usage doesn’t involve emotional factors, as maybe the case with photo retouching programs, or Instant Messaging. Nevertheless, it is a core function of our computer. The OS recalls antivirus functions for several tasks: to open a downloaded file, to install a software, to open an email etc. Since we don’t directly ask to compute these operations, we may, at times, experience a negative mood, given by the slowdown of the performance of our computer. Too frequent notices and operations will be annoying while I assume a moderate level of occurrence to be well accepted. I hypothesize that:

H1-a: The antivirus is generally perceived as the primer cause for a sudden slowing down of the computer’s performance.

H1-b: There exists an inverted U-shaped relationship between the number of times an antivirus starts operating and the consumer’s positive mood.

As I previously mentioned, there are two distinct profiles: expert users, and non expert users. Several further hypotheses will distinguish between these two segments because I intensively believe the dynamics of the two groups are significantly different.
Features like “ease to use”, “lightness (meant as low impact in the OS), “graphic interface” will have different weights according to the ability accurately evaluate a software. Therefore I hypothesize:

H2-a: Non-expert consumers will place a greater importance on antivirus “ease to use” compared to expert users.

H2-b: Expert consumers will place a greater importance on “antivirus lightness” compared to non-experts.

H2-c: Non expert users will have a more positive evaluation of an antivirus with a high quality of graphic interface compared to expert users.

In evaluating some more technical aspects, we can now see that all the major vendors provide automatic, or manual, definition updates as well as program updates. What differs, is the size and occurrence of these updates. 'Pulse updates' deliver more frequent and thus smaller signature updates; they cause several notices but provide an invisible updating process while few but bigger updates will stress the user less with notices but may cause more intense slowdowns:

H3: Several small size-updates with fast installation will contribute to a more positive evaluation rather than few big updates.

Scanning capabilities such as Email Protection, “On-access Scanning”, “On-demand Scanning” “Heuristic Scanning”, on virus, spyware, adware are now common features provided by almost all vendors. Though features such “Instant Messaging Protection”, “P2P/File Sharing Protection” and “Registry Start-up Protection” are not yet provided by all. Several vendors are already providing IM protection while almost nobody thought about P2P protection. I don’t overlook the importance of IM protection, but I have an observation to make: Skype, Windows Live Messenger users (just to mention the most popular), have a selected contact list and external contacts have to ask for permission to be become “friends”; in P2P programs they have open doors for strangers and dangers are higher since the philosophy behind P2P is based on the exchange of files. Given the extensive use of P2P, particularly among youth, I suppose:

H4: P2P/File Sharing Protection will generate a more positive evaluation rather than Registry Start-up Protection and Instant Messaging Protection.

Technical support for home users takes various forms: FAQs, Tutorials, User Forums, Email support, Live chat, and Phone support. The last one is not always provided for free. Although a business user with a big infrastructure may be willing to pay to solve a company’s critical problem, a home user may experience the $30 per call charged by Symantec as frustrating. FAQs, Tutorials, Forums may be perceived as a boring and non customized solution while Email Support doesn’t provide an immediate answer. 24h Live chats with experts may be a good alternative because it provides instant feedback and interaction as for a call; as of now, only a few vendors are equipped with it. I assume that:

H5-a: The existence of “pay for technical support” is negatively related to customer satisfaction.

H5-b: If the company wants to charge for technical support, a pay-per-incident (per call) system is better perceived than pay-per-minute of conversation.

H5-c: 24h Live chat technical support will generate a more positive evaluation of the antivirus rather than Manual/FAQ/Knowledge Base, Tutorials, Forum and Email technical support.

Expert users, geeks and curious persons may like new software experiences and their knowledge lets them surf over different antivirus installing and uninstalling trial versions. For them, the switching costs (or “perceived switching costs” for the reasons discussed in paragraph 3.8) are low. For inexperienced users the obstacles to change a delicate program such as the antivirus are significant and it is much easier for them to renew the licence of their antivirus, even though they may have experienced some trouble with it. Let’s imagine the generation that grew up without the computer and now sporadically surfs the web; the path to undertake in changing the antivirus and making all the new configurations is more than tortuous. I therefore hypothesize:

H6: A lower level of IT expertise strengthens the loyalty between consumer and his current antivirus, likewise, the higher the level of IT expertise, the higher the willingness to experiment and test different antivirus.

I expect the idiosyncratic nature of women to appear in this field as well. The ties that women have with brands (for example clothing brands) are very strong. Women are fulfilled by being loyal, while men are generally less attached to brands. Moreover I believe men to be more demanding with their computer and they are more likely to look for new solutions to improve the performance of their computer. I expect women, even expert ones, to be less experimental and to feel satisfied with less.

H7: Women, both expert and non-expert are more loyal with their antivirus software compared to men.

In paragraph 3.16, I introduced an important hypothesis; consumers that buy Symantec or McAfee do so primarily for brand recognition and marketing. This doesn’t mean that they are fools, but that they may rely more on a well-known company with an exclusive curriculum in the field, or perhaps they don’t have enough experience to look up less well-known programs. People with more expertise may experience higher satisfaction using less known, less expensive and perhaps lighter software. Moreover, I assume that since Microsoft has top marketing skills and top name recognition, it may capture some customers of “industry leaders” but hardly any consumers from “second tier” and “follower” companies. In fact, after they have made a conscious decision for reasons that go beyond brand recognition, users would hardly go back to “industry leaders” or MS OneCare. I therefore hypothesise:

H8-a: The higher the level of IT expertise the higher the usage of “second tiers” or “followers” software.

H8-b: The usage of “second tiers” or “followers” software, lowers the likelihood to switch to Norton, McAfee or MS OneCare in the future.

H8-c: Users of “industry leaders” are more likely to switch to Microsoft OneCare compared to “second tiers” or “followers”.

The new trends brought by industry leaders are all-in-one suites (see Norton 360 or McAfee Total Protection) where several functions are included. Symantec is continuously looking for opportunities to broaden its product portfolio. The recent purchase of PC Tools Veritas are clear signs of the expansion strategy pursued by Symantec. In the future, we can expect Norton to bundle other utilities regarding Pc maintenance. Costs of these big suites increase and well as the impact on the OS. I expect these solutions to have a different impact on the expert and non expert. Expert users may like the concept of “diversity” a little more, while non experts may perceive it as a powerful safety belt. Therefore:

H9-a: Expert users perceive an all-in-one suite as a too heavy and invasive solution.

H9-b: Non expert users perceive an all-in-one suite as a useful solution.

H9-c: The higher the level of IT expertise the higher the consumer willingness to rely on separate security applications rather than all-in-one solutions.

The competition between freeware and shareware is compelling. Major freeware developers in the last years have also developed their shareware version, with more features. The presence of both freeware and shareware can confuse a non expert user that wonders if the freeware is trustworthy enough. Expert users may rely on freeware with a basic antivirus protection, with no other features (such Avast! Free edition or Avira AntiVir Personal) and they use their expertise to find and configure complementary security applications such as firewalls and anti-spyware and perhaps freeware as well. A free and effective solution generates a sense of gratification and satisfaction among experts. My hypotheses:

H10-a: The higher the level of IT expertise the higher the usage of freeware.

H10-b: Non expert users consider freeware antivirus more risky and less reliable than shareware.

Beside the attitude towards freeware, I want to test the general awareness of the existence of freeware. Freeware developers have less advertising and marketing resources to promote their products, and companies offering both freeware and shareware have few incentives to promote the freeware due to the obvious cannibalization effect. I believe that:

H-11: An increase in awareness of the existence of freeware antivirus will lead to a decreasing shareware usage.

Customer price sensitivity can significantly affect choice between freeware rather than shareware; but if we only look at the shareware group, given the similarity of prices, I expect price sensitivity of experts to be low and their decision is driven by personal preferences. Non-experts may have an higher price sensitivity. Therefore:

H12-a: Price sensitivity doesn’t support a direct relationship with the antivirus expert user and his intent to purchase.

H12-b Price sensitivity supports a direct relationship with the non-expert user and his intent to purchase.

The usage of pirated software is a disturbing coefficient for my results. It is obvious that the probability for a non-expert to use pirated software is inferior than for an expert, given the different skills. The nature of my research doesn’t let me study this phenomenon accurately, but I want to investigate the percentage of the usage of pirated software within the sample. In particular, I want to find the niche of consumers that make more use of piracy. Usage of piracy speeds up and facilitates the software turnover; therefore, pirate users are more prone to experiment new programs. I expect youth to make a higher use of piracy software of “second tier” or “follower” companies, while adults may rely more on Norton and other industry leaders:

H13-a Expert youth make more use of “second tiers” and “followers” software compared to adults.

H13-b Expert youth make higher use of antivirus pirated software than expert adults.

H13-c Expert youth are less loyal than expert adults.