Bruno L. YAWE & Tinah NASSALI College of Business and Management Sciences

1. Differences between Fee Structure of Mobile Money Technologies and Traditional Banking Systems, Social Psychological Determinants and Service Uptake: A Case Study of Uganda Bruno L. YAWE & Tinah NASSALI College of Business and Management Sciences Makerere University, Kampala, UGANDA December 07th 2011 1

2. Presentation Plan • Research Procedures Completed to date • Preliminary Findings • Reflections on the Research Process [What has Worked, Successes, Pitfalls, Setbacks] • New Questions that the Research to date has Posed • Research Procedures still to be Conducted • Next Steps 2

3. Research Procedures Completed to date • Some interviews with officials from Bank of Uganda and the Uganda Communications Commission (UCC); • Questionnaires • Participating in public dialogues like: The operator-consumer dialogue on quality of service by UCC 3

4. Preliminary Findings • (a) Fee Structure of the Various Mobile Money Providers in Uganda • (b) Relate the Fees Structure of the various Mobile Money Providers to Service Uptake • (c) Examine the Social and Psychological Determinants of Mobile Money Technology Use and Adoption in Uganda 4

5. Fee Structure of the Various Mobile Money Providers in Uganda

6. Fee Structure of the Various Mobile Money Providers in Uganda…..MTN-Uganda Mobile money Tariff Plan • Daily limit: UG SHS 1,000,000 per transaction • Minimum Account Balance: 0 • Maximum Account Balance UGX 1,000,000 • Depositing into Mobile money Account: 0

7. Fee Structure of the Various Mobile Money Providers in Uganda…Airtel-Uganda Mobile money Tariff Plan (UGX) • Maximum Transfer amount (per transaction): 1000000 • Maximum Transactions Buy Zap/Cash-In per day: 50 • Maximum Transactions Sell Zap/Cash-Out per day: 50 • * Rates determined by supply and demand • All values quoted above are in Ushs and are inclusive of VAT 7

8. (a) Fee Structure of the various Mobile Money Providers & Service Uptake

9. (b) Fee Structure of the various Mobile Money Providers & Service Uptake

10. Uganda; Mobile Money Services by Provider

11. Correlation Matrix for Mobile Money Facilitating Conditions

12. Correlation Matrix for Perceived Ease of Use

13. Facilitating Conditions and Perceived Ease of Use • The quality of MM services is dependent on amongst others the quality of mobile services and the agent-specific attributes [e.g. liquidity of agents, MM service-mix provided, security]. We delve into this on slide 14. • Further research should investigate the rationale for consumers subscribing to all MM providers; risk exposure associated with this;

14. Operator-Consumer Dialogue on Quality of Service • Accessibility to M.M services • Network coverage (no. of branches) • Liquidity availability for clients at all times • Possibility of inter-network transactions at reduced cost • Security of clients’ money ensured by providers • Perceived Ease of Use of M.M services (flexibility & convenience) • Perceived Usefulness of M.M services (reduced time costs)

15. Reflections on the Research Process What has Worked/Successes • Secondary data sources (from Bank of Uganda); • Questionnaire; • Focused-Group Discussions (operator-consumer dialogue); Pitfalls • Tariff plans not easily comparable across providers; • Service uptake information from Bank of Uganda is too aggregated and providers cannot easily release it; Next Steps • Complete remaining research procedures; • Prepare a manuscript for submission to a journal 15

16. New Questions that the Research to date has Posed • Who is the regulator of mobile money services? Providers; The Central Bank, Uganda Communications Commission? • Who set the tariff plans being implemented by agents? • If a client sends money and it does not get received where does one seek redress? BOU, UCC, National Information Technology Authority – Uganda (NITA-U) or providers? • The tariff plans differ depending upon the provider. What are the implications of this? 16

17. Mobile Money in Rural areas Thank You! 17