Customer satisfaction is always sought after by
various organizations that is more appropriate among the service industry. With
the introduction of service augmentation among these industries, the capability
of the organizations in delivering the quality type of service. The service
augmentation can be another influence promoted by the globalization. The
augmentation stands with the meaning of adding or supplementing other features
for the improvement of the service. When the service is augmented with other
features that the organization finds suitable to the needs of the customers, there
is a high possibility that the new kind of services can be improved and made
better.
We can say that every business has a mission in
prioritizing their customers’ first. Because of this simple idea, the firms are
challenged by their own understanding and asking questions like “how can we can
this possible?” Related to this question is through determining the preferences
of their customers and offering the products and services that they wanted.
Based on the economic theory, when the firm satisfies the needs and wants of
the customers, these needs can be saturated and then shifted in other focus.
Therefore, the area of consumer satisfaction is challenging and a never ending
chase. Within the retail supermarkets, products and services come together, the
conceptualized model of satisfaction is passed through business-to-business
level (Armstrong &Seng, 2000). This means that a supermarket or franchise
cannot achieve the customer satisfaction alone, because there are many
suppliers and other sub-contractors that offer the products and the retailer’s
job is to offer them to the customers. However, based on the assessment of Hackl&Westlund(2000),
the usefulness of the strategies pertaining to the customer satisfaction is to
determine in the earliest time with regards to the equity and customer
expectations. Catching the attention of the potential customers and keeping
them as loyal customers is what can be the most evidential idea of customer
satisfaction. Therefore, if the retailer managers to impress the customers and
satisfies their needs (either in terms of products, services, or prices), the firm
can realize a continuous success and have a ground in promoting its
relationship with the market. In addition, the most favourable outcome would be
the recognition of the customers in the improvement of the products and/or
services which can be evaluated through the use of their experiences. At the
same time, the organization can also experience the other benefits including
the maximization of the profits, reduction of the uncertainties, control and
management of the inventories, enhancement in the productivity, other have a
control on the financial aspects and use of human resources (Hansemark&Albinsson,
2004).
2.1 What is Customer
Satisfaction?
Customer satisfaction is very important and vital to the
overallmarketing concept, because it pertains on the concept and process
offulfilling needs, demands and desires of the consumers (Spreng andMacKenzie
1996). It is vital to consider the definition of customersatisfaction varies
from the different marketing studies andliteratures. It was defined by Howard
and Sheth (1969) as the cognitivestate of the buyers for being sufficiently or
insufficiently rewardedfor the sacrifices or efforts that he has experienced or
done. The saiddefinition mainly pertains on the result of sacrifices that have
beenexperienced in the entire duration of the consumption experience (Yi1990).
On the other hand, with regards to Oliver (1997) customersatisfaction is
considered as the summary of psychological state whichhappens when the emotion
which surrounds disconfirmed expectations ispartnered by the prior feelings of
the consumers about theirconsumption experiences. With this, it shows that
customer satisfactionhappens and considered as a result if the customers either
confirmstheir pre-purchase expectations and prospects for the purchased
serviceor positively disconfirm (exceed) their expectations about thepurchased
services, which result in some degree of post purchase impacttowards the said
experience (Cardozo 1965). In addition, WTO (1985)defined customer satisfaction
as a psychological concept which focus onthe feeling of well-being and pleasure
which comes when acquiring whata consumer hopes for and expects from a product
or service.
As aresult, the way by which customer satisfaction is measured has
alwaysbeen a great debate in terms of scales used and the format of questionsto
be applied (Wilson 2002). Customer satisfaction can be accounted forby a single
item (Cronin and Taylor 1992) or by different items (Sprengand Mackoy 1996). In
addition, customer satisfaction can also beaccounted for by two different
types, which include transactionspecific and the overall satisfaction.
Transaction specific focus on agiven encounter with a given objects, while the
overall satisfactionpertains on the cumulative construct which summarize the satisfactionwith
a given products or services with different important factors.With this, the
overall satisfaction can be based on differenttransaction or just a few, which
depends on the number of times thatcustomers use a given product (Lee and Back
2009). Customersatisfaction vitally affects the current and future performance
of anorganization (Anderson and Fornell 1994). Past researches suggest
thatcustomer satisfaction is a vital means of a competitive advantage(Anderson
and Fornell, 1994), which consequently leads to the customerloyalty and repeat
purchase (Lam et al., 2004). Other advantages andpositive impacts of customer
satisfaction are increase in revenues,decrease in customer-related transaction
costs, and the reduction ofprice elasticity among the repeat buyers (Fornell
1992). There aredifferent researches which show the different sources of
customersatisfaction, which include the positive relationship with sales of
thefirm and the customer service support personnel. The key contactemployees or
the service staffs have a positive influence over thecustomer satisfaction in
different settings, which include consumerservices (Heskett et al. 1994),
together with the different industrialmanufacturing as well as distribution
(Bendapudi and Leone 2002).Commonly, customers of business relationships with
their sales of thesuppliers and the customer-support personnel are considered
strong astheir connections with the vendor firms (Gwinner and Gremler 1998).
Inaddition, the relationships between the organizations are
commonlysupported in personal relationships among the different staffs
andemployees inside the respective organizations, such as purchasers aswell as
sales and support employees (Lian and Laing 2007). With this,the professional
and interpersonal connections within this boundaryspanner personal commonly
vitally affect the continued success of theinter-organizational relationship
(Granovetter 1985). As such,interpersonal and inter-firm connections can help
in order to improvesatisfaction when the technical performance fluctuates and
changes(Ennew and Ahmed 1999). With this, when the key employee contacts areno
longer accessible, the connections between the suppliers as well asthe
customers have become vulnerable and in order to be more competitive, there
should be a significant application of actions and strategies (Bendapudi and
Leone 2002).
2.2 Customer Satisfaction in
Supermarkets
Companies are focusing on continuous innovation in
order to maintain competitive advantage. Product innovation mainly focuses on
creating and updating current product offerings of an organization in order to
maintain the interests, satisfaction and loyalty of the current and possible
customers. However, it is important to take note that new product and service
can easily be copied and duplicated by competitors, therefore, it is vital to
focus on integration innovation process within the organizational culture and
management system. For, it will be harder for the competitors to copy an entire
management system, corporate and organizational system which creates a
continuous stream of successful product, improvements, innovations, adaptations
and extensions (Clemmern.d.). However, the nature in retailing/supermarkets is
far different to do a product innovation.
There are different studies which show the factors which affect the
customer satisfaction in the supermarket industry. Kotler (1973) develops a
systematic exposition of the “atmosphere” as a buying influence. According to
the author, the most important vital factors of the total product are the place
where the customers buy or consume their products. Atmospherics is considered
by Kotler (1973) as the effort of designing the buying environments in producing
a given emotional impacts in the buyer which improve the probability of
purchasing and buying. It is experienced via different senses – sight, sound,
scent and touch. In addition, Bitner (1992) added the term services capes which
focus on the idea of atmospherics in the service setting (cited in Abubakar and
Mavondon.d.). Thus, it adds the concept of the service personnel towards the
physical setting. He added that atmospherics, physical design and décor vitally
affect the customers and the employees or staffs of the supermarkets.
According to Lovelock, Patternsonand Walker (2001) services cape pertains
on the service facility, ambience, and background music – which vitally
influence the impression and satisfaction of the customers. On the other hand,
the service quality or known as the desired expectations pertains on the
mixture of what the customers believe it can and should be (Zeithaml and Bitner
1996). It can be measured by the degree of the discrepancy with the expectation
of the consumers and the perception of what they have received. This is described
by the SERQUAL scale (Bebko 2000). The satisfaction of the customers happens
when the value and the customer service offered via the retailing experience
meet or exceed the expectations of customers (Jackson 1999) (cited in Abubakar
and Mavondon.d.).
In more recent studies, the customer satisfaction is identified to be
linked with the customer relationship marketing (CRM). Studies
that shows that CRM in their academic and business topics has becoming more of
strategy of an organization in order to gain the customer satisfaction,
loyalty, retention, and so on in which the sales are made and the repeat
transactions are emphasized (Feinberg
&Kadam, 2002; Anton &Hoeck, 2002).Furthermore, Karimi,
et al., (2001) also stressed that the integration of CRM can offer the firm its
potential in improving the quality of services and/or production, higher
productivity, improvement in the financial health and market performance of the
firm, enhancing the delivery channels and building stronger barriers for entry
of the potential competitors. These effects are the based on the benefits that
organizations might experience after satisfying their goals in creating strong
relationship with the customers such as the satisfaction, and enhancing the
convenience and services that a customer can receive.
But the problem still
exists pertaining on the of what effective strategies should be provided to
make all the customers satisfied, despite of the fact that customers have
unique needs and want, buying perceptions and preferences, and other
characteristics.
2.3
Models of Customer Satisfaction in the Concept of Retailing
There are two recognized
models that are related in achieving the customer satisfaction which are also
considered to be important ingredients in retailing/supermarkets and these are
relationship marketing and wheel of retailing.
2.3.1Relationship Marketing
Model
In emphasizing the ability of the retailers in
grasping the customer satisfaction, there is an idea that comprises to the
concept of “building relationship”;hence, the retailers’ needs to build the
relationship with their market in order to recognize the needs, wants and other
significant customer preferences. Relationship marketing has been recognized to
be a paradigm which can change the marketing theory. Several authors come
across that this concept has become an accepted marketing science. There are
two primary conditions in which many researchers considers the relationship
marketing a new concept in marketing and can guide the business’ future in
building the customer relationship (Rao& Perry, 2002; Spikes, 2006);
firstly, the new paradigm should cover the issues that do not only related to
the marketing theory but should include the facts and associated problems
within the field of its application (e.g. retail supermarkets). And second, is
the introduction of new method and tools for the analysing the theories
identified within the relationship marketing (Spikes, 2006).
In addition, the concept should be easy to implement
and can perform along with the business’s models and existing strategy.
However, there are many exceptions in applying the relationship marketing such
as the market exchange particularly on the FMCG (fast market consumer goods)
and retailing because of the transactional strategies. It does not mean that it
can promote the disadvantage but the relevancy might be low (Coates &
McDermott, 2002). It can be more applicable in creating solutions to form the
trust, customer satisfaction, quality in services or products, and commitment,
since it can maintain the business-customer relationship rather than creating a
new relationship (Hennig-Thurau& Hansen, 2000; Chaudhuri& Holbrook,
2001). At some point, the relationship marketing might not satisfy the need of
the firm (Hennig-Thurau& Hansen, 2000). However, because of the great
importance of the relationship and promoting the customer loyalty towards the
long term profitability, the relationship marketing is treated as the
modernizing marketing evolution (Chaudhuri& Holbrook, 2001).
2.3.2 Wheel of Retailing
As the changes appear, the “wheel of retailing” will
continue to turn and because of the improvement in the performance, the wheel
will move faster and the direction will change. The retailing became an
overwhelming business that can deliberately influence the market. Apparently,
in the investigation of the retail analysts, they predicted that the changes in
the retail environment will result in several key forces in the present retail
institutions (Dunne &Lusch, 2008). In addition, because of the accelerated
communication technology and changing consumer lifestyles, the potential of the
non-store retailing will emerge and can be felt in the competition. Of course,
the contributing factors are examined such as the (1) consumers’ need to save
time; (2) consumers’ desire to “time-shift”, that is, shop when they want, not
when a retailer wants to open a store; (3) the erosion of enjoyment in the
shopping experience; (4) the lack of qualified sales that helps in-stores to
provide the information; (5) the explosive development of the communication
devices, computers, and telecommunications equipment that can facilitate the
non-store shopping; and (6) the consumers’ preferences towards the lower prices
that often eliminates or reduces the middleman’s profit. Because of all these
strategies or advantages of the non-store retailing, many traditional retailers
“put an eye” and continuously monitoring other further developments in the
non-store retailing (Dunne &Lusch, 2008).
According to the wheel of retailing, the theory says
that retailers tend to emerge in the low end of the market and should manage to
win by offering customers appropriate approach. As an interpretation, the
retail supermarkets tend to offer their customer the products in low prices
through the high and efficient operations. With the continuous approach, the
retailers are letting their costs and margins increase which can intimidate the
new entrants or competitors. When this occurs, the long-standing retailers will
realize much of the benefit because the consumers will obviously look for the
retailers that will offer the same product and yet with the different price
range. The new entrants will therefore become like the conventional ones that
they replaced and the cycle will continue to turn and evolve and will repeat
itself again whenever there will be new types of retail forms with lower cost
and prices (Pride & Ferrell, 2007).
Based on the example, we can say that the retail
process and in order to gain the competitive advantage of the retailers is
because of the “pull” strategy like the strategy in lean manufacturing (Manotas
Duque &Cadavid, 2007). With the recognition of the retail changes, the new
demand can emerge and if met, the customer satisfaction is gained. In the continuous
activity, the previous demand diminishes while at the same time there are new
demands emerging in the retail market. Therefore, the “pull” force will emerge.
As contrast to the push strategy, where marketers are offering the products,
the customers in the modern-day are now looking for the products whenever they
really need and want it.
2.4CustomerSatisfaction Theories
Marketing researchers, social psychologists, andstudents of consumer
behaviours have widely studied and analyzed thesubject of customer
satisfaction. The research results had helped todevelop nine different theories
of customer satisfaction. Most of whichare dependent and connected to the
cognitive psychology; some havereceived moderate and mediocre attention, while
the others wasintroduced without other empirical research (Pizam and Ellis
1999). Thetheories are: Expectancy disconfirmation; Assimilation and Contrast
(Assimilation Cognitive dissonance and Assimilation-Contrast);
Equity;Attribution; Comparison-level; Generalized negativity; andValue-precept
(Oh and Parks 1997).
2.4.1. Expectancy Disconfirmation
Theory
While, there are different approacheswhich explain the satisfaction of
the customers, the widely applied isthe one which was proposed by Richard
Oliver – the expectancydisconfirmation theory (Oliver 1980), which was tested
and confirmed bydifferent studies. The customers buy products and services with
theirpre-purchase expectations regarding the anticipated performance. As
thegood or service is bought and utilized, the outcome will be compared tothat
of what he or she expected. When outcome matches expectations,then confirmation
will occur. Meanwhile, if the expectations andoutcomes did not meet, then
disconfirmation will occur. Positivedisconfirmation happens if the performance
of the product is betterthan what is expected, satisfaction commonly occurs by
the confirmationor positive disconfirmation of the expectation of the consumers
and thedissatisfaction occurs by the negative disconfirmation of theexpectation
of the consumer (Pizam and Ellis 1999).
Recently, the expectancy disconfirmation theory is put into tests
synthesizes as empirical theory pertains to the issue of customer regrets and
their engagement with the e-commerce environment. In the study of Liao et al.,
(2010), the roles of different service models like information quality
(IQ), system quality (SYQ), and service quality (SEQ) are assessed and
considered to interplay in determining customer regret and satisfaction. Through
the use of survey, the study showed the results that illustrate the IQ
disconfirmation, SYQ disconfirmation and SEQ disconfirmation are related to customer
regret and satisfaction. This means that customer satisfaction is not always
met and can be fall into category calling it as customer regrets. Furthermore,
the expectancy disconfirmation theory can mediate either the satisfaction or
regret in targeting the customer satisfaction. According to Yüksel
and Yüksel (2001), there should be an accurate measurement of customer
satisfaction because when the satisfaction has been determined and defined, the
management will develop the effective management strategies. Through the
expectancy disconfirmation theory, there is a paid attention in the paradigm in
using tools such as customer feedback and other programs in other to assess the
customer satisfaction.
Figure
1: Schematic of Expectancy Disconfirmation Theory
From the various applications and testing methods done
with the expectancy disconfirmation theory, Nevo (2005) explained that the
positive and negative disconfirmation in between expectations and performances is
the product of the four models illustrated above: expectations, performance,
disconfirmation, and satisfaction. The illustration above give meaning that
expectations are anticipated behaviour and predictive depending on the
attributes of the products or services. The expectations are also the model used
by consumers to evaluate the performance and for the disconfirmation judgment
which will lead to dissatisfaction (or regret as for Liao et al., 2010) or
satisfaction. Because of the predictive expectations and the perceived
performances that are most likely against on what the real life-situation, the
performance often leads to dissatisfaction.
2.4.2 Assimilation and Contrast
(Assimilation-Contrast)
Frewer, et al., (2001) and Peyton et
al., (2003) discussed the (a) assimilation, (b) contrast, and (c)
assimilation-contrast theories. Therefore, as part of the literature, these
theories will be explained based on how the respective authors presented them. The illustration represents the opposing idea
of Assimilation theory and Contrast theory particularly as based on the
expectancy level and the result of the performance or experience.
Figure
2: Schematic of Assimilation and Contrast Theory
(A)
Assimilation or Assimilation Cognitive Dissonance Theory
Assimilation theory is tightly tied
with the Cognitive Dissonance Theory (Festinger, 1975, as cited on Frewer and
his associates (2001). The assimilation theory suggests that idea that there is
an unconfirmed expectation which tends to crate the psychological effect of
discomfort. In relation to the consumer’s satisfaction, the actual performance
might contradict the designed hypothesis of the consumers. In order to reduce
the discomfort, the consumers are trying to change their perception to bring
their expectations more into reality. The perceived product performance in
between the actual and expected performance is then called assimilation which
targets the perceptual and hedonic attributes and then, provided the shift in
response incongruence of the same attribute.
In linking the theory with the
cognitive dissonance Peyton et al., (2003) states that dissonance theory posits
the idea that consumers make some kind of cognitive comparison between expectations about
the product and the perceived product performance. From this idea, the
cognitive dissonance arises, if there is a discrepancy between expectations and
perceived performance. Gained from the theory introduced by Anderson in 1973,
the consumer evaluates their own idea of satisfaction and Anderson linked this
technique in assimilation. According to Anderson (cited in Peyton et al.,
2003), the consumers seek to avoiddissonance and this done though adjusting the
perceptions for the product or services and bring it more in line with
expectations. By doing so, the consumers can reduce the tensions that may be
seen in the discrepancy between the expectations and performance. In observing
more thoroughly, this theory is somehow relative with the disconfirmation
theory.
(B) Contrast Theory
This theory assumes that humans (e.g.
consumers) anticipate the certain level of stimulation (Frewer et al., 2001). The unexpected
stimulus results in exaggeration of the disparity in between the expected and
actual performance. The expectation, in this case, is related with the level on
the consumer’s perceptions or behaviour. This is also related in the problems
that most marketers finds. For an instance, the advertisement has a little
information or slight understatement might lead to the higher consumer
satisfaction on the product or service being offered. On the other hand, if the
promise made through the advertisement is not fulfilled, it will result on the
decrease of consumer satisfaction. The important element that plays in this
theory is the reactions of the consumers in which the consumers can use as a
tool in judging if they were satisfied or not.
The contrast theory as introduced by Hovland, Harvey and Sherif (1957; cited
in the work of Peyton et al., 2003) presents an alternative view of the
consumer evaluation that was described in assimilation theory. Based on the
definition and example given in the preceding paragraph, the approach is in
effect when consumers experience disconfirmation they seek to minimize the
discrepancy between prior expectations and actual product performance by
shifting their evaluations away from the expectations. In can be based on the
attitude of the consumers that seeks the effort in minimizing the discrepancy
which are often exaggerated and far from what the real situation is(Dawes,
Singer, and Lemons (1972) cited in Peyton et al., 2003).
(C) Assimilation-Contrast Theory
In looking in the Figure 2, it is
obscuring that assimilation-contrast theory is not defined clear or showed in
the illustration. In this stance, we can say that assimilation-contrast theory
lies in the middle r in between the assimilation theory and contrast theory. In
order to clarify this claim Hovland, Harvey and Sherif (1957; cited in Frewer et al., 2001) defined that this
theory is more related to the social psychology that can be drawn upon based on
under certain conditions and the subjects (i.e. consumers) opinions. According
to the proprietors of the theory, the most important aspect of
assimilation-contrast theory is highly based on the size of the discrepancy
that was recognized in between the expectations and actual performance. From
the study of Frewer et al., (2001), they presented the cases that distinguish
the “size” of discrepancy on the expectancy level and actual performance.
‘First idea is
when the perceived discrepancies are small, there is a tendency that the
consumers ignores the deviation because of their awareness in the elements that
are incorporated in making a product and in the end, accept the product or
service performance. In this case, there is traced reduction of cognitive
dissonance through minimizing the perceived discrepancy and the responses will
exhibit the assimilation theory.
‘Second idea is
that large discrepancies are obviously not acceptable and this will fall on the
latitude of rejection and the perceived discrepancy might be exaggerated (or in
contrast).
Clearly, the assimilation-contrast
theory is the combination of the assimilation and contrast theories that posits
in the idea of satisfaction and measuring the magnitude in between the
expectations and the experience received from the performance. Peyton et al., (2003)
elaborates the acceptance and rejection that respects the consumer’s
perceptions. In concern of the two cases, the assimilation and contrast theory
still depends on the perceived disparity as a result of the expectations and
performance. Peyton et al., (2003) related the assimilation-contrast theory as a manifestation of the two paradigms (assimilation and
contrast) has applicability in the study of consumer satisfaction. The assimilation-contrast
approach enables the literature to explain the customer satisfaction in the
matter of expectations whereas performance is difficult to judge.
2.4.3 Equity
The theory of equity concentrates on the idea of fairness. When this is
applied in the topic of customer satisfaction, it relates to the exchanges of
ideas or perception that can help in understanding the consumer satisfaction or
dissatisfaction. The equity theory perceived that fairness in the exchange of
the perception that people’s inputs are equal to their outputs as an exchange
(Jones, 2007). In addition to Jones (2007), the
equity theory highlights the importance of fairness inmarketing exchanges.Therefore, marketers must work toward providing
fair exchanges.This is not easy because consumers’ perceptions offairness tend
to be biased toward themselves. The equity, however, can be manipulated through
the promoting the increase of perceptions. This might include providing
consumers with lower prices, free merchandise to make them feel they are
getting more for their money.
Figure 3: Schematic of Equity Theory
Source: Wu &Batmunkh, 2010
The figure depicts the three sources of satisfaction
which are Value equity, Brand equity, Relationship equity, and Satisfaction.
(A) Value equity
Value
equity is the consumers’ objective assessment of the usage ofa brand based on
understanding of things that is given up for what is received. Brand equity is
more subjective and emotional. It has a tight connection with the intangible assessment
of a brand, above and beyond its objectively perceived value (Palmatier, 2008;
cited in Wu &Batmunkh, 2010). Value equity, the first driver of loyalty,
can be understood as the perceived ratio between what is received and what has
to be sacrificed. Value equity is consisted of the following three drivers:
quality, price, convenience. Furthermore, researchers pointed out that value
equity has an impact on a customer’s switching propensity, a measure similar to
satisfaction and loyalty intentions (Lemon et al, 2000; cited in Wu &Batmunkh,
2010).
(B) Brand Equity
According to Keller (2000), brand equity is the
subjective estimation of a customer’s choice. Brand equity is defined as a
financial assessment of the value of a brand identity that a customer is willing
to pay price premium to a certain brand identityversus others. A strong brand
can be an umbrella under which to launch new products existing ones, a
resiliency to survive crisis situations, and protection from competitive attack
periods of lack of corporate support or shifts in consumer tastes (Rust &
Chung, 2006 cited in Wu &Batmunkh, 2010). Lemon eta al., (2000; cited in Wu
&Batmunkh, 2010) states that brand equity is hopefully to influence
customer willingness staying, considering repurchases, or to recommend the
brand. Brand equity is consisted of the following drivers: (1) customer brand
awareness, (2) customer attitude toward the brand, and (3) customer perception
of brand ethics.
(C)
Relationship Equity
According to Chang &Chieng (2005; cited in Wu &Batmunkh,
2010), relationship equity is a customer`s tendency to stick with the brand,
above and beyond objective and subjective assessment of the brand. It resulted
from the elements that link a customer to a brand or a company. If the
perceivedrelationship equity is high, the consumers will be satisfied and it
would lead to repurchase (Rust et al, 2004). If the perceived relationship
equity is high, the consumers will feel well treated and handled with special
care (Kristof et al, 2001). Relationship equity results from the following
drivers: (1) Loyalty, (2) Special Recognition and Treatment Programs, (3)
Affinity/Community Programs, (4) Knowledge Building Programs.
2.4.4. Attribution
Attribution theory refers on how individuals find
explanations for events. When a product or service does not fulfil needs the
consumer will attempt to find an explanation.There are three factors that
influencethis explanation and these are (Jones, 2007):
(A)
Stability: is the cause of the event temporary or permanent?
(B)
Focus: Is the problem consumer or marketer related?
(C)
Controllability: Is the event under the customer s or marketer s control?
The customers are more likely to be dissatisfied ifthe
cause is perceived to be permanent,market related and not under the
customerscontrol.The attribution theory provides marketerswith guidance in how
to deal with potential orexisting perceptions of consumerdissatisfaction.
2.4.5 Comparison-level
This theory proposes that consumers use comparison
levels for the relationship under consideration andalso use comparison levels
for alternative relationships to determine satisfaction with and propensity
toremain in a relationship. The comparison level is“the standard against which
a member evaluates the‘attractiveness’ of the relationship.”(Nicoleta-Cristina,
2008).
2.4.6 Generalized negativity
The generalized theory of negativity is alike with the assimilation,
contrast, and assimilation-contrast because it has its foundations in the
disconfirmation process. From the introduction of Anderson (1973; cited in
Peyton et al., 2003) on customer satisfaction, the negativity theory points out
the idea in when the consumers’ expectations were strong, the consumers will
then respond negatively in any disconfirmation. In the further study of
Anderson, the dissatisfaction
will occur if perceived performance is less than expectations or if perceived
performance exceeds expectations.
2.4.7 Value-precept
The value-percept disparity theory is one of the
popular theories in management literature used to explain the phenomenon of
customer satisfaction within various contexts. Meng, Tepanon and Uysal (2008)
suggested that, in addition to this theory, expectancy disconfirmation,
cognitive dissonance, contrast, generalized negativity, attribution and equity
theories are other popularly used theories for explaining satisfaction. This
section on theoretical foundation will present a discussion on the
value-percept theory (base theory for this study) and provides a synopsis of
the other satisfaction theories that are tangential to the study.
Figure 4: Schematic of Value-precept
Theory
Source: Smith & Spencer, 2011
Based on the above figure on the value precept theory
is considered as base theory. The attributes that linked in satisfaction leads
the value of money of the customers and the other customer satisfaction
theories follows.
Many researchers have recognized the importance of
value as a means of explaining satisfaction (Bloemer& Dekker, 2007) and the
value-percept disparity model is one of these models that is popularly used in
this regard (Sinclair et al.,2002; Bloemer& Dekker, 2007). From the lens of
the value-percept theory, satisfaction is viewed as an emotional response that
is cognitively evaluative in nature and provides the comparison of the
‗object‘or attribute to one‘s value rather than to his or her expectation
(Parker & Mathews, 2001). The value-percept model purports that the
customer‘s perception of satisfaction with ―aspects of a product or institution
or marketplace behaviour (p. 258) is associated with the value he or she
ascribes to these ‗objects‘; and smaller disparity between perception and value
will trend towards satisfaction while larger disparity will result in
dissatisfaction. Satisfaction may thus be determined as a function of the
amount of discrepancy between a perception and a value as well as a function of
the importance of the value to an individual (Smith & Spencer, 2011).
References:
Anton, J., &Hoeck, M., (2002).E-business Customer Service, The Anton
Press: Santa Monica, CA.
Armstrong, R.W. and Seng, T.B. (2000).
Corporate-Customer Satisfaction in the Banking Industry of Singapore, International Journal of Bank Marketing,
18(3)
Bloemer, J. & Dekker, D., (2007).
Effects of personal values on customer satisfaction: An empirical test of the
value percept disparity model and the value disconfirmation model. International Journal of Bank Marketing,
25(5): 276-291.
Chaudhuri, A., & Holbrook, M., (2001).
The Chain of Effects from Brand Trust and Brand Affect to Brand Performance:
The Role of Brand Loyalty. Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 65.
Clemmer,
J., (n.d.). A Process for Continuous
Innovation and Controlled Chaos,[Online] Available at:<http://www.jimclemmer.com/content/view/224/31/> [Accessed 23 November 2011].
Coates, T.T., & McDermott, C.M., (2002).
An Exploratory Analysis of New Competencies: A Resource Based View Perspective,
Journal of Operations Management,
20(5).
Dunne, P.M., &Lusch, R.F., (2008).Retailing, 6th Edition. Thomson Higher
Education: Mason, USA
Dunstable Official Website [Online] Available at: <http://www.dunstable-ma.gov/Pages/DunstableMA_WebDocs/About>[Accessed 23 November 2011].
Feinberg, R., &Kadam, R., (2002).
e-CRM Web Service Attributes as Determinants of Customer Satisfaction with
Retail Web Sites. International Journal
of Service Industry Management, 13(5): 432 – 451
Frewer, L.,
Risvik, E., &Schifferstein, H., (Eds) (2001). Food People, and Society: A European Perspective of Consumer’s Food
Choices. Berlin, Germany:
Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
Gitman, L., & McDaniel, C.,
(2005).The Future of Business: The
Essentials, Mason, Ohio: South-Western.
Hackl, P., &Westlund, A.H.,
(2000). On Structural Equation Modeling for Customer Satisfaction Measurement, Total Quality Management, 11(4)
Hansemark, O.C.,&Albinsson, M.,
(2004). Customer Satisfaction and Retention: The Experiences of Individual
Employees, Managing Service Quality,
14(1)
Hennig-Thurau, T., & Hansen, U.,
(Eds), (2000).Relationship
Marketing.Gaining Competitive Advantage through Customer Satisfaction and
Customer Retention, Berlin: Springer Verlag.
Jones,
K.L., (2007). Post-Decision Processes [Online] Available at: http://kcku1w_jC9sJ:202.205.89.79/download/materials/2007f/discipline/Understanding_Consumer/Kevin%2520Jones/10a.%2520Post-Decision%2520process%255E.ppt+
[Accessed 23 November 2011].
Karimi, J., Somers, T., & Gupta,
Y., (2001). Impact of Information Technology Management Practices on Customer
Service, Journal of Management
Information Systems, 17(4): 125 – 158
Kristof, D.W.,Odekerken-Schröder, G.,
&Iacobucci.D., (2001) Investments in Consumer Relationships: A
Cross-Country and Cross-Industry Exploration. Journal of Marketing.65(4): 33-50.
Liao, C., Liu, C.C., Liu, Y.P., To,
P.L., & Lin, H.N., (2010). Applying the Expectancy Disconfirmation and
Regret Theories to Online Consumer Behavior.CyberpsycholBehavSocNetw.
14(4):241-6.
Manotas Duque, D.F., &Cadavid,
L.R., (2007). Lean Manufacturing Measurement: The Relationships between Lean
Activities and Lean Metrics, EstudiosGerenciales,
23(105).
Meng, F., Tepanon, Y., &Uysal,
M., (2008).Measuring tourist satisfaction by attribute and motivation.Journal of Vacation Marketing, 14(1):
41-55.
Nevo, D., (2005).Expectation
Confirmation Theory. Theories Used in IS Research [Online] Available at: <http://www.istheory.yorku.ca/ect.htm> [Accessed 23 November 2011].
Nicoleta-Cristina, V., (2008) Are
your Satisfied Customers Loyal? [Online] Available at: <http://steconomice.uoradea.ro/anale/volume/2008/v2-economy-and-business-administration/144.pdf>
[Accessed 23 November 2011].
Oliver, R.L., (1980). A Cognitive
Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions.JMR, Journal of Marketing Research,
17(3): 460.
Parker, C., & Mathews, B. (2001).
Customer satisfaction: Contrasting academic and consumers‘ interpretations. Marketing Intelligence & Planning,
19(1): 38-44.
Peyton, R.M., Pitts, S., &Kamery,
R.H., (2003) Consumer Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction (CS/D): A Review of the
Literature Prior to the 1990s Allied Academies International Conference
Proceedings of the Academy of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict,
7(2) Las Vegas
Pride, WM., & Ferrell, OC., (2007).
Foundations of Marketing, 2nd
Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company: Boston MA.
Rao, S., & Perry, C., (2002).
Thinking About Relationship Marketing: Where are we now?,The Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 17(7)
Rust, R.T., Lemon, K.N.,&Zeithaml.V.A.,
(2004) Return on Marketing: Using Customer Equity to Focus Marketing Strategy. Journal of Marketing. 68 (1): 109-27.
Sinclair, R. R., Fleming, W. D.,
Radwinsky, R., Clupper, D. R. &Clupper J. H. (2002). Understanding
patients‘ reactions to services: The role of personal service values in heart
patient satisfaction and wellness. Journal
of Applied Social Psychology, 32(2): 424-442.
Smith, T., & Spencer, A.J.,
(2011).Predictors of Value for Money in Jamaican All-Inclusive Hotels, International Journal of Humanities and
Social Science, 1(4).
Spikes, W.F., (2006). Future
Direction in Workplace Learning, New
Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 1995(68)
Tidd, J., Bessant, J., &Pavitt, K.,
(2001). Managing Innovation: Integrating
Technological, Market and Organizational Change. John Wiley & Sons, New
York.
Vasquez-Nicholson, J., (2011) United
Kingdom Retail Foods, 2010 [Online] Available at:
<http://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/Retail%20Foods_London_United%20Kingdom_2-3-2011.pdf>
[Accessed 23 November 2011]
Wu, T-F., &Batmunkh, M-U., (2010)
Exploring the Relationship between Customer Equity and Satisfaction: An
Empirical Study of Mongolian Gas Station Channels, International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, 1(2)
Yoruk, D.E., &Radosevic, S.,
(2000). International Expansion and Buyer-Driven Commodity Chain: The Case of
Tesco [Online] Available at:
http://profesores.ie.edu/enrique_dans/TESCO/international%20expansion.pdf
[Accessed 23 November 2011].
Yüksel.A.,
&Yüksel, F., (2001). The Expectancy-Disconfirmation Paradigm: A Crtitique.
Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 25(2): 107-131
No comments:
Post a Comment