Does the Effect of Customer Experience on Customer Satisfaction Create a Sustainable Competitive Advantage? A Comparative Study of Different Shopping Situations
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Basis and the Proposal of Research Hypothesis
2.1. Theoretical Analysis of the Relationship between Customer Experience and Customer Satisfaction
2.1.1. Customer Experience
2.1.2. Customer Satisfaction
2.1.3. Customer Experience, Customer Satisfaction, and Sustainable Competitive Advantage
2.1.4. Customer Experience with Product Experience and Customer Satisfaction
2.1.5. Customer Experience with Staff Service and Customer Satisfaction
2.1.6. Customer Experience with Shopping Environment and Customer Satisfaction
2.1.7. Customer Experience with Shopping Procedure and Customer Satisfaction
2.2. Theoretical Analysis of the Relationship between Customer Experience and Customer Satisfaction in Different Shopping Situations
2.2.1. Influence of Different Shopping Situations on the Relationship between Customer Experience with Product Experience and Customer Satisfaction
2.2.2. Influence of Different Shopping Situations on the Relationship between Customer Experience with Shopping Environment and Customer Satisfaction
2.2.3. Influence of Different Shopping Situations on the Relationship between Customer Experience with Staff Service and Customer Satisfaction
2.2.4. Influence of Different Shopping Situations on the Relationship between Customer Experience with the Shopping Procedure and Customer Satisfaction
2.3. Theoretical Analysis of the Influence of Gender on the Relationship between Customer Experience and Customer Satisfaction
2.3.1. The Influence of Gender on the Relationship between Customer Experience and Customer Satisfaction
2.3.2. The Influence of Gender on the Relationship between Customer Experience and Customer Satisfaction in Different Shopping Situations
3. Research Method and Data Survey
3.1. Measurement
3.1.1. Personal Information
3.1.2. Customer Experience of Physical Store
3.1.3. Customer Experience of Online Shops
3.1.4. Customer Satisfaction
3.2. Descriptive Statistics
3.3. Test of Reliability and Validity
4. Results
4.1. Relevant Analysis
4.2. Common Method Variance
4.3. Regression Analysis
4.4. Robustness of the Results
5. Findings and Discussion
5.1. Findings
5.2. Theoretical Contributions
5.3. Suggestions for Companies’ Practices
5.4. Limitations and Future Research
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Otterbring, T.; Lu, C. Clothes, condoms, and customer satisfaction: The effect of employee mere presence on customer satisfaction depends on the shopping situation. Psychol. Mark. 2018, 35, 454–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holmlund, M.; Van Vaerenbergh, Y.; Ciuchita, R.; Ravald, A.; Sarantopoulos, P.; Ordenes, F.V.; Zaki, M. Customer experience management in the age of big data analytics: A strategic framework. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 116, 356–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arijit, B.; Manjari, S. A framework of online customer experience: An Indian Perspective. Glob. Bus. Rev. 2020, 21, 800–817. [Google Scholar]
- Xiao, L.; Guo, F.; Yu, F.; Liu, S. The effects of online shopping context cues on consumers’ purchase intention for cross-border e-commerce sustainability. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Otto, A.S.; Szymanski, D.M.; Varadarajan, R. Customer satisfaction and firm performance: Insights from over a quarter century of empirical research. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2020, 48, 543–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soderlund, M.; Sagfossen, S. The consumer experience: The impact of supplier effort and consumer effort on customer satisfaction. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2017, 39, 219–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Levy, S.; Gvili, Y. Online shopper engagement in price negotiation: The roles of culture, involvement and eWOM. Int. J. Advert. 2020, 39, 232–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahman, O.; Fung, B.; Chen, Z. Young Chinese consumers’ choice between product-related and sustainable cues-The effects of gender differences and consumer innovativeness. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hult, G.T.M.; Sharma, P.N.; Morgeson, F.V.; Zhang, Y. Antecedents and consequences of customer satisfaction: Do they differ across online and offline purchases? J. Retail. 2019, 95, 10–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sebald, A.K.; Jacob, F. What help do you need for your fashion shopping? A typology of curated fashion shoppers based on shopping motivations. Eur. Manag. J. 2020, 38, 319–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, E.O.; Chae, B.K.; Kwon, J.; Kim, W.H. The effects of green restaurant attributes on customer satisfaction using the structural topic model on online customer reviews. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Krystallis, A.; Chrysochou, P. The effects of service brand dimensions on brand loyalty. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2014, 21, 139–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oliver, R.L.; Rust, R.T.; Varki, S. Customer delight: Foundations, findings and managerial insight. J. Retail. 1997, 73, 311–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zarantenello, L.; Schmitt, B.H. Using the brand experience scale to profile consumers and predict consumer behavior. J. Brand. Manag. 2000, 17, 532–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Šerić, M.; Ozretić-Došen, Đ.; Škare, V. How can perceived consistency in marketing communications influence customer–brand relationship outcomes? Eur. Manag. J. 2020, 38, 335–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chebat, J.C.; Michon, R. Impact of ambient odors on mall shoppers’ emotions, cognition, and spending a test of competitive causal theories. J. Bus. Res. 2003, 56, 529–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, T.J.; Gao, J.Y.; Wang, L.Y.; Yuan, K.S. Exploring links between polychronicity and job performance from the person–environment fit perspective-the mediating role of well-being. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 3711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ying, S.; Sindakis, S.; Aggarwal, S.; Chen, C.; Su, J. Managing big data in the retail industry of Singapore: Examining the impact on customer satisfaction and organizational performance. Eur. Manag. J. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Young, G.J.; Meterko, M.M.; Mohr, D.; Shwartz, M.; Lin, H. Congruence in the assessment of service quality between employees and customers: A study of a public health care delivery system. J. Bus. Res. 2009, 62, 1127–1135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dabholkar, P.A.; Abston, K.A. The role of customer contact employees as external customers: A conceptual framework for marketing strategy and future research. J. Bus. Res. 2008, 61, 959–967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ganesan, S. Determinants of long-term orientation in buyer-seller relationships. J. Mark. 1994, 58, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bae, S.; Jung, T.H.; Moorhouse, N.; Suh, M.; Kwon, O. The influence of mixed reality on satisfaction and brand loyalty in cultural heritage attractions: A brand equity perspective. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Orel, F.D.; Kara, A. Supermarket self-checkout service quality, customer satisfaction, and loyalty: Empirical evidence from an emerging market. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2014, 21, 118–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, R.; Lee, Y.D.; Wang, C.H. Total quality management and sustainable competitive advantage: Serial mediation of transformational leadership and executive ability. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. 2020, 31, 451–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quaye, D.; Mensah, I. Marketing innovation and sustainable competitive advantage of manufacturing SMEs in Ghana. Manag. Decis. 2019, 57, 1535–1553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amoako, G.K. A conceptual framework: Corporate environmental management activities and sustainable competitive advantage. Manag. Environ. Qual. 2019, 31, 331–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Artusi, F.; Bellini, E.; Dell’Era, C.; Verganti, R. Designing an omni-experience to save retailing: Lessons from an Italian book retailer. Res. Technol. Manag. 2020, 63, 24–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vakulenko, Y.; Shams, P.; Hellstroem, D.; Hjort, K. Online retail experience and customer satisfaction: The mediating role of last mile delivery. Int. Rev. Retail. Distrib. 2019, 29, 306–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lee, J.; Ko, G. In-store shopping hassles: Conceptualization and classification. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2020, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Judd, C.V. Achieving a customer orientation using-people-power. Eur. J. Mark. 2003, 37, 1301–1313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weatherly, K.A.; Tansik, D.A. Tactics used by customer-contact workers: Effects of role stress, boundary spanning and control. Int. J. Serv. Ind. Manag. 1995, 4, 4–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ku, H.H. Consumer affects when making undesirable purchases to meet the minimum purchase requirement: Decision-related variables as moderators. J. Consum. Behav. 2019, 18, 53–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Puccinelli, N. Putting your best face forward: The impact of customer mood on salesperson evaluation. J. Consum. Psychol. 2006, 16, 156–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wright, L.; Newman, A.; Dennis, C. Enhancing consumer empowerment. Eur. J. Mark.. 2006, 40, 925–935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dennis, C.; Newman, A.; Michon, R.; Brakus, J.; Wright, L. The mediating effects of perception and emotion: Digital signage in mall atmospherics. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2010, 17, 205–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Webb, P.; Davidson, G.; Edge, R.; Falls, D.; Keenan, F.; Kelly, B.; McLaughlin, A.; Montgomery, L.; Mulvenna, C.; Norris, B.; et al. Service users’ experiences and views of support for decision-making. Health Soc. Care Comm. 2020, 28, 1282–1291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Turley, L.W.; Milliman, R.E. Atmospheric effects on shopping behavior: A review of the experimental evidence. J. Bus. Res. 2000, 49, 193–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yoo, J.; Kim, M. The effects of online product presentation on consumer responses: A mental imagery perspective. J. Bus. Res. 2014, 67, 2464–2472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, T.J.; Xu, T.; Li, L.Q.; Yuan, K.S. “Touching with heart, reasoning by truth”! The impact of Brand cues on mini-film advertising effect. Int. J. Advert. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, C.; Miller, J.K.; Woodard, M.S.; Miller, D.J.; Silvernail, K.D.; Aydin, M.D.; da Costa Lemos, A.H.; Kumpikaite-Valiuniene, V.; Nair, S.; Donnelly, P.F.; et al. Self-concept orientation and organizational identification: A mediated relationship. J. Manag. Psychol. 2018, 33, 358–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhang, J.; Bloemer, J.M. The impact of value congruence on consumer-service brand relationships. J. Serv. Res. 2008, 11, 161–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Guillet, B.D.; Mattila, A.; Gao, L. The effects of choice set size and information filtering mechanisms on online hotel booking. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2020, 87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hjort, K.; Hellström, D.; Karlsson, S.; Oghazi, P. Typology of practices for managing consumer returns in internet retailing. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2019, 49, 767–790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koyuncu, C.; Bhattacharya, G. The impacts of quickness, price, payment risk, and delivery issues on on-line shopping. J. Socio-Econ. 2004, 33, 241–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yoon, H.J.; Lee, Y.J. Gender differences in arousal priming effects on humor advertising. Int. J. Advert. 2019, 38, 383–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodgers, S.; Harris, M.A. Gender and e-commerce: An exploratory study. J. Advert. Res. 2003, 43, 322–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Comegys, C.; Hannula, M.; Väisänen, J. Longitudinal comparison of Finnish and US online shopping behaviour among university students: The five-stage buying decision process. J. Target Meas. Anal. Mark. 2006, 14, 336–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lou, C.; Xie, Q. Something social, something entertaining? How digital content marketing augments consumer experience and brand loyalty. Int. J. Advert. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parasuraman, A.; Zeithaml, V.A.; Berry, L.L. SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumers’ perceptions of service quality. J. Retail. 1988, 64, 12–40. [Google Scholar]
- Guieford, J.P. Fundamental Statistics in Psychology and Education; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1965. [Google Scholar]
Dimension | Representative Literatures | Main Components |
---|---|---|
Product experience | Park et al. [11]; Krystallis and Chrysochou [12]; Oliver et al. [13]; Zarantenello and Schmitt [14] | Product design, label, package, information delivery, environment, shape, sign, mascot, and product characteristics |
Experience with service procedure | Šerić et al. [15] | Service delivery based on the quality of product, service, and experience |
Experience with shopping environment | Chebat and Michon [16]; Wu et al. [17]; Ying et al. [18] | Product display, scent, lighting, music, a pleasant mood, and environment |
Experience with staff service | Young et al. [19]; Dabholkar and Abston [20] | All contact with staff/authentic moments and tangible and intangible service factors |
Dimension | Item |
---|---|
Experience with shopping environment | 1. Proper and attractive arrangement of the shop 2. Complete service facilities 3. Guidance of service staff throughout the shopping |
Experience with staff service | 4. Good service attitude 5. Proficiency in business 6. Frequent communication with customers |
Experience with shopping procedure | 7. A simple and fast shopping procedure 8. Experience of touching and trying the clothes on 9. Comprehensive and reliable after-sales service |
Product experience | 10. Variety of categories and colors 11. Guarantee of product quality 12. Fast preparing and packaging of goods 13. Green and environmentally friendly product 14. Brand popularity |
Dimension | Item |
---|---|
Experience with shopping environment | 1. Neat and attractive web design 2. Easiness of online shopping 3. Guidance throughout the process |
Experience with staff service | 4. Good attitude 5. Business proficiency 6. Frequent communication with the customer and good service attitude |
Experience with shopping procedure | 7. Simple and fast procedure for online shopping 8. Availability of pictures and reviews at all times 9. Reliable and comprehensive after-sales service |
Product experience | 10. Variety of categories and colors 11. Guarantee of product quality 12. Fast delivery 13. Green and environmentally friendly product 14. Brand popularity |
Dimension | Item |
---|---|
Customer satisfaction | 1. I am very satisfied with the service during shopping |
2. I am very satisfied with the products during shopping | |
3. I am very satisfied with the speed of delivery after shopping | |
4. I am very satisfied with the shopping environment | |
5. I will buy the same kind of product again |
Variable | Category | Absolute Frequency | Relative Frequency (%) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Online | Physical Store | Total | |||
Gender | Male | 47 | 35 | 82 | 28.47 |
Female | 95 | 111 | 206 | 71.53 | |
Age | 18~25 | 71 | 62 | 133 | 46.18 |
26~35 | 36 | 45 | 81 | 28.13 | |
36~45 | 25 | 32 | 57 | 19.79 | |
46~55 | 9 | 4 | 13 | 4.51 | |
Over 55 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 1.39 | |
Education background | Below highschool-educated | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Highschool-educated | 2 | 2 | 4 | 1.39 | |
Higher education | 22 | 16 | 38 | 13.19 | |
Undergraduate education | 113 | 121 | 234 | 81.25 | |
Post-graduate education | 5 | 7 | 12 | 4.17 | |
Average monthly income | 0 | 41 | 33 | 74 | 25.69 |
0~2000 | 48 | 53 | 101 | 35.07 | |
2000~3500 | 36 | 36 | 72 | 25 | |
3500~5000 | 12 | 17 | 29 | 10.07 | |
Over 5000 | 5 | 7 | 12 | 4.17 |
Variables | Mean | Standard Deviation | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Experience with shopping environment | 3.566 | 0.798 | - | |||||
Experience with staff service | 3.615 | 0.815 | 0.809 *** | - | ||||
Experience with shopping procedure | 3.743 | 0.848 | 0.666 *** | 0.676 *** | - | |||
Product experience | 3.564 | 0.793 | 0.707 *** | 0.687 *** | 0.802 *** | - | ||
Customer satisfaction | 3.587 | 0.783 | 0.719 *** | 0.711 *** | 0.767 *** | 0.842 *** | - | |
Shopping situation | - | - | 0.003 | 0.007 | −0.016 | −0.021 | −0.055 | - |
Gender | - | - | −0.014 | 0.043 | 0.015 | −0.035 | −0.044 | 0.000 |
Variables | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Variables | Model 4 | Model 5 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
β | β | β | β | β | ||
Experience with shopping environment (ESE) | 0.126 * | 0.127 * | 0.151 ** | ESE | 0.123 * | 0.139 ** |
Experience with staff service (ESS) | 0.133 * | 0.134 * | 0.121 * | ESS | 0.138 ** | 0.123 * |
Experience with shopping procedure (ESP) | 0.174 *** | 0.173 *** | 0.182 *** | ESP | 0.177 *** | 0.178 *** |
Product experience (PE) | 0.522 *** | 0.520 *** | 0.493 *** | PE | 0.517 *** | 0.519 *** |
Shopping situation (SS) | −0.043 | −0.044 | Gender (GE) | −0.033 | −0.033 | |
SS*ESE | 0.092 | GE * ESE | 0.140 ** | |||
SS*ESS | 0.061 | GE * ESS | −0.095 | |||
SS*ESP | 0.022 | GE * ESP | 0.073 | |||
SS*PE | −0.114* | GE * PE | −0.109 * | |||
R2 | 0.755 | 0.759 | 0.763 | R2 | 0.755 | 0.760 |
ΔR2 | 0.755 | 0.004 | 0.008 | ΔR2 | 0.000 | 0.005 |
Sig. of R2 | 0.000 | 0.140 | 0.014 | Sig. of R2 | 0.261 | 0.052 |
F | 232.239 | 179.771 | 104.336 | F | 179.014 | 102.440 |
Sig. of Model | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | Sig. of Model | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Variables | Model 6 | Model 7 |
---|---|---|
β | β | |
Experience with shopping environment (ESE) | 0.123 * | 0.215 *** |
Experience with staff service (ESS) | 0.140 ** | 0.130 ** |
Experience with shopping procedure (ESP) | 0.176 *** | 0.319 *** |
Product experience (PE) | 0.515 *** | 0.349 *** |
Female*Store SS | 0.054 * | 0.058 * |
Female*Online SS | 0.032 | 0.033 |
Male* Store SS | 0.046 | 0.050 |
Female * Store SS * ESE | −0.178 ** | |
Female * Store SS * ESS | 0.029 | |
Female * Store SS * ESP | −0.061 | |
Female * Store SS * PE | 0.115 * | |
Female * Online SS * ESE | −0.044 | |
Female * Online SS * ESS | −0.034 | |
Female * Online SS * ESP | −0.164 *** | |
Female * Online SS *PE | 0.095 | |
Male * Store SS * ESE | −0.009 | |
Male * Store SS * ESS | −0.059 | |
Male * Store SS * ESP | −0.092 | |
Male * Store SS * PE | 0.102 | |
R2 | 0.755 | 0.767 |
ΔR2 | 0.000 | 0.012 |
Sig. of R2 | 0.319 | 0.011 |
F | 128.304 | 51.120 |
Sig. of Model | 0.000 | 0.000 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Pei, X.-L.; Guo, J.-N.; Wu, T.-J.; Zhou, W.-X.; Yeh, S.-P. Does the Effect of Customer Experience on Customer Satisfaction Create a Sustainable Competitive Advantage? A Comparative Study of Different Shopping Situations. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7436. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187436
Pei X-L, Guo J-N, Wu T-J, Zhou W-X, Yeh S-P. Does the Effect of Customer Experience on Customer Satisfaction Create a Sustainable Competitive Advantage? A Comparative Study of Different Shopping Situations. Sustainability. 2020; 12(18):7436. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187436
Chicago/Turabian StylePei, Xue-Liang, Jia-Ning Guo, Tung-Ju Wu, Wen-Xin Zhou, and Shang-Pao Yeh. 2020. "Does the Effect of Customer Experience on Customer Satisfaction Create a Sustainable Competitive Advantage? A Comparative Study of Different Shopping Situations" Sustainability 12, no. 18: 7436. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187436
APA StylePei, X.-L., Guo, J.-N., Wu, T.-J., Zhou, W.-X., & Yeh, S.-P. (2020). Does the Effect of Customer Experience on Customer Satisfaction Create a Sustainable Competitive Advantage? A Comparative Study of Different Shopping Situations. Sustainability, 12(18), 7436. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187436