Does Customer Orientation Matter? Direct and Indirect Effects in a Service Quality-Sustainable Restaurant Satisfaction Framework in China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for the opportunity to read this interesting paper. I think  the paper presents interesting models but unfortunately, at  theoretically the paper is still  underdeveloped.

Changes which must be made before publication:

1. The abstract is not well written, there are no insights towards the study, which makes the readers, go with the paper. Try to include implications that are more useful but not exceeding the size limit.

2. Literature review is not enough to support the literature gap considered in this study. Extract the section "literature review". The current section 2 is chaotic.

Describe the relationship between your research and sustainable development and indicate the need for research in this area. Also carry out a broader review of the literature on consumer behavior.

It is worth to refer to the works of the following authors:

1. Lysenko-Ryba, K.; Zimon, D. Customer Behavioral Reactions to Negative Experiences during the Product Return. Sustainability 2021, 13, 448.
2. Wei, A.-P.; Peng, C.-L.; Huang, H.-C.; Yeh, S.-P. Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility on Firm Performance: Does Customer Satisfaction Matter? Sustainability 2020, 12, 7545.
etc.
3. Gajewska, T., Zimon, D., Kaczor, G., & Madzík, P. (2019). The impact of the level of customer satisfaction on the quality of e-commerce services. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management.
4. Križo, P., Madzík, P., Vilgová, Z., & Sirotiaková, M. (2018, August). Evaluation of the Most Frequented Forms of Customer Feedback Acquisition and Analysis. In International Conference on Knowledge Management in Organizations (pp. 562-573). Springer, Cham.

etc.

3. Methods: Methodology is appropriate for the study. However, some of the statements required more clarifications. Please discuss in detail how you analyzed the data in order to present the key findings.

4. I can't see the "conclusions" section. You absolutely need to develop it. In this section, further emphasize the relationship between research and sustainable development.

5. Tables are not readable - work on their quality.

Good Luck!

Author Response

First off, we would like to thank you and the two anonymous reviewers for offering constructive feedback on our manuscript. We felt that the thoughtful comments and recommendations have significantly improved the quality and presentation of the manuscript.

Reviewer 1:

Thank you for the opportunity to read this interesting paper. I think the paper presents interesting models but unfortunately, at theoretically the paper is still underdeveloped. Changes which must be made before publication:

We would like to thank you for your constructive comments again. Undoubtedly, your suggestions have significantly strengthened the quality of the manuscript. We have addressed all the concerns and present here a point-to-point response to all of your questions and suggestions (IN RED):

1. The abstract is not well written, there are no insights towards the study, which makes the readers, go with the paper. Try to include implications that are more useful but not exceeding the size limit.

Our action: Thank you so much for your comments. Based on your feedback, we have written an additional insight for readers as follow:

“The authors then provide a managerial framework that can be used to guide customer orientation improvement efforts”.

2. Literature review is not enough to support the literature gap considered in this study. Extract the section "literature review". The current section 2 is chaotic.

Describe the relationship between your research and sustainable development and indicate the need for research in this area. Also carry out a broader review of the literature on consumer behavior.

Our action: Thanks again. We have made some corrections including “Literature Review.” Furthermore, we have carried out a broader review of the literature on consumer behavior again.

It is worth to refer to the works of the following authors:

1. Lysenko-Ryba, K.; Zimon, D. Customer Behavioral Reactions to Negative Experiences during the Product Return. Sustainability 2021, 13, 448.
2. Wei, A.-P.; Peng, C.-L.; Huang, H.-C.; Yeh, S.-P. Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility on Firm Performance: Does Customer Satisfaction Matter? Sustainability 2020, 12, 7545.
etc.
3. Gajewska, T., Zimon, D., Kaczor, G., & Madzík, P. (2019). The impact of the level of customer satisfaction on the quality of e-commerce services. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management.
4. Križo, P., Madzík, P., Vilgová, Z., & Sirotiaková, M. (2018, August). Evaluation of the Most Frequented Forms of Customer Feedback Acquisition and Analysis. In International Conference on Knowledge Management in Organizations (pp. 562-573). Springer, Cham.

etc.

Our action: Thanks again. We have cited these references into the manuscript.

3. Methods: Methodology is appropriate for the study. However, some of the statements required more clarifications. Please discuss in detail how you analyzed the data in order to present the key findings.

Our action: Thank you so much. We have explained more detains in the section of Methodology as follows:

In particular, we used two-step approaches to analyze the data. First, we analyzed the direct effects using structural equation modeling with AMOS program. Second, we further analyzed the indirect effects using moderated moderation with Process Macro.

4. I can't see the "conclusions" section. You absolutely need to develop it. In this section, further emphasize the relationship between research and sustainable development.

Our action: We are very sorry. I have created the section of the conclusion as follows.

This study examined how two types of service quality influence restaurant image and customer satisfaction, how customer orientation directly influences restaurant image and customer satisfaction and how customer orientation changes dynamically in response to its moderating roles of the proposed relationships among service quality, restaurant image and customer satisfaction. We established a moderated moderation model implemented in a structural equation framework. The findings revealed that customer orientation has a positive impact on quality evaluations, restaurant image and customer satisfaction. Taken in sequence, customer orientation improved quality evaluations, which in turn improved restaurant image and customer satisfaction. Specially, restaurant image by itself was not significant in its impact on customer satisfaction, whereas higher levels of customer orientation moderated to strengthen the relationship of restaurant image with customer satisfaction. Finally, we presented specific implications for sustainable restaurant practice and directions for future research.

5. Tables are not readable - work on their quality.

Our action: Thank you so much again. All tables have been refined. Now, these tables are much clearer than previous tables.

Reviewer 2 Report

The article suggests a current and attractive topic for the academy. The effort made is evident, it needs minor adjustments. I hope you find the following observations helpful:

Manuscript

• It must be update in the new format given by the journal. Check the section "Instructions for authors"
• Has errors in references. See lines 46, 49, 78 among others.
• You have incomplete information for Author contributions (lines 449. 455); Funding (456-459); Acknowledgments (lines 460-462).
• Use of references. Line 117 uses Bitner's definition but does not expose the page, despite being a literal wording. Same with lines 120, 168.
• Check English. It has words that cause confusion when reading, for example, store (line 107, 109) when mentioning restaurants.

Introduction

• It is necessary to incorporate a paragraph that exposes information on service quality and its importance in the academic world, before entering the measurement and management approaches.
• Lines 21-22 “Extant literature”, should be more explicit and include references, if you are talking about a large amount of research and only two samples are present. Literature classics such as “Parasuraman et al 1993, 1994; Dabholkar et al 2000 ”. There are even reviews on the topic "Ladhari 2008 among others".
• Idem with lines 23 and 24. Please expose more references.
• Line 30-31. We agree that it is an excellent opportunity to unify these types of service quality. It should be stated that way, if possible some reference that recommends it and from there introduce the Chinese restaurant context.
• Lines 39 - 41. About “customer orientation influence customer satisfaction from direct or indirect influence perspectives has yet to be addressed”. Are you sure? Check for example Tseng 2019 (10.1108 / IJBM-10-2017-0222) or something older Henning-Thurau, 2004 (10.1108 / 09564230410564939). Perhaps it is good to rewrite the idea, perhaps there is a writing error.

Conceptual Background

• Section 2.1 "Research Model and Hypotheses should go to the end of the" Conceptual Background "section like figure 1.
• Line 122. Reference 29. It is a reference about stores and not restaurants, error in the use of the reference.
• Line 122. Reference 30. It is a reference about retail stores and not restaurants, error in the use of the reference. Also check reference 24 (line 123), 32 (line 128). • Line 135-136. When using reference 3, what has been said is true, but more than 20 years have passed since its publication and things have changed. See, for example, Schiffman & Kanuk (2004).
• Line 174. Reference 42 is too old to discuss limited research in the customer orientation - service context. Although there are some references that affirm the opposite (Keely, 1992; Donavan et al, 2004 among others).
• In figure 1, it shows H9.1, H9.2, and H9.3 while lines (184 - 186) show H9-1, H9-2 and H9-3

Methodology Measures

• "Customer orientation was measured using four items adapted from Saxe and Weitz [51]"; Restaurant image was measured with four items adapted from Stern, Bush and Hair, [52]; physical service quality, with four items adapted 273 from Dabholkar et al. [7]; perceived service quality, with three items adapted from Yoo et al. 274 [32]; Customer satisfaction was measured with two items adapted from Ragunathan and Irwin [53]. These references do not appear in the Conceptual Background. There is a complete divorce between the proposed variables and their theoretical support. It is suggested to review both sections. It would be good to see a table with information about the sample and its characteristics (gender, age, etc).

Author Response

We would like to thank you for your constructive comments again. Undoubtedly, your suggestions have significantly strengthened the quality of the manuscript. We have addressed all the concerns and present here a point-to-point response to all of your questions and suggestions (IN RED):

Manuscript

• It must be update in the new format given by the journal. Check the section "Instructions for authors"

Our action: Thank you so much. The revision work has been modified from the Journal Format using Template.

• Has errors in references. See lines 46, 49, 78 among others.

Our action: Yes, we found them. These references have been corrected.

• You have incomplete information for Author contributions (lines 449. 455); Funding (456-459); Acknowledgments (lines 460-462).
•  
• Our action: Thanks again. Author contributions and funding have been updated but acknowledgement has been deleted.
•  
• Use of references. Line 117 uses Bitner's definition but does not expose the page, despite being a literal wording. Same with lines 120, 168.
•  
• Our action: We are very sorry about that. We have inserted all pages (e.g., p. 57, P. 15, and p. 1028) into the text.
•  
• Check English. It has words that cause confusion when reading, for example, store (line 107, 109) when mentioning restaurants.
•  
• Our action: We have checked and modified. Now, it is fine.
•  
• Introduction
•  

• It is necessary to incorporate a paragraph that exposes information on service quality and its importance in the academic world, before entering the measurement and management approaches.
•  
• Our action: Thank you so much. We have addressed this issue as follows: Although service quality has been applied to traditional restaurant service contexts, it is also important for the relatively new information on service quality. Researchers have developed new service scales that can reflect relevant information.
•  
• Lines 21-22 “Extant literature”, should be more explicit and include references, if you are talking about a large amount of research and only two samples are present. Literature classics such as “Parasuraman et al 1993, 1994; Dabholkar et al 2000 ”. There are even reviews on the topic "Ladhari 2008 among others".
•  
• Our action: Thanks again. We have slightly updated the sentence and included three references as follows:
•  
• Ladhari, R. Alternative measures of service quality: a review. Managing Service Quality. 2008, 18, 65-86.
• Keith, N.K.; Simmers, C.S. Measuring service quality perceptions of restaurant experiences: the disparity between comment cards and DINESERV. Journal of Foodservice Business Research. 2011, 14, 20-32.
•  
• Knutson, B.; Stevens, P.; Patton, M. DINESERV: measuring service quality in quick service, casual/theme, and fine dining restaurants. Journal of Hospitality & Leisure Marketing. 1996, 3, 35-44.
•  
• Idem with lines 23 and 24. Please expose more references.
•  
• Our action: We have inserted four references (15, 28, 69, 70).
•  
• Line 30-31. We agree that it is an excellent opportunity to unify these types of service quality. It should be stated that way, if possible some reference that recommends it and from there introduce the Chinese restaurant context.
•  
• Our action: Yes, we found relevant references (e.g., 71, 72) and inserted them into the text.
• Hussain, K.; Jing, F.; Parveen, K. How do foreigners perceive? Exploring foreign diners’ satisfaction with service quality of Chinese restaurants. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research. 2018, 23, 613-625.
• Sudhagar, D.P.; Rajendran, G. Selection criteria of customers of Chinese restaurants and their dining habits. International Journal of Knowledge Management in Tourism and Hospitality. 2017, 1, 57-75.
•  
• Lines 39 - 41. About “customer orientation influence customer satisfaction from direct or indirect influence perspectives has yet to be addressed”. Are you sure? Check for example Tseng 2019 (10.1108 / IJBM-10-2017-0222) or something older Henning-Thurau, 2004 (10.1108 / 09564230410564939). Perhaps it is good to rewrite the idea, perhaps there is a writing error.
•  
• Our action: This is our mistake. Thus, we have re-written the sentence as follows:…the important question as to how a customer orientation influence customer satisfaction from direct or indirect influence perspectives has been still limited.
•  
• Conceptual Background
•  

• Section 2.1 "Research Model and Hypotheses should go to the end of the" Conceptual Background "section like figure 1.
•  
• Our action: We have deleted the heading, “2.1. Research Model and Hypotheses”. This is because this section does not deal with research hypotheses.
•  
• Line 122. Reference 29. It is a reference about stores and not restaurants, error in the use of the reference.
•  
• Our action: Thanks again. Yes, we agree. We have deleted the original reference (29) and then, added the new reference as follows:
• Yi, S.; Zhao, J.; Joung, H. Influence of price and brand image on restaurant customers’ restaurant selection attribute. Journal of Foodservice Business Research. 2018, 21, 200-217.
•  
• Line 122. Reference 30. It is a reference about retail stores and not restaurants, error in the use of the reference. Also check reference 24 (line 123), 32 (line 128). • Line 135-136. When using reference 3, what has been said is true, but more than 20 years have passed since its publication and things have changed. See, for example, Schiffman & Kanuk (2004).
•  
• Our action: Thank you so much. Reference 30 has been also deleted and replaced (see the section of references). References, 24 and 32, have been deleted from the text. Regarding the reference 3, we agree with your comment. Thus, we have added the following sentence:…and how customer satisfaction have been changed [73,74].
•  
• Schiffman, L.; Kanuk, L.L. Consumer behavior. 2004, Pearson Prentice Hall: New Jersey.
• Oliver, R.L. Satisfaction: a behavioral perspective on the consumer. 2010, (2th), M.E. Sharpe: New York.
•  
• Line 174. Reference 42 is too old to discuss limited research in the customer orientation - service context. Although there are some references that affirm the opposite (Keely, 1992; Donavan et al, 2004 among others).
•  
• Our action: Thanks. Yes, we agree. Thus, we have deleted it and replaced a relevant new reference as follows.
• Yoo, J.J.; Kim, T.T.; Lee, G. When customer complain: the value of customer orientation in service recovery. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly. 2015, 56, 411-426.
•  
• In figure 1, it shows H9.1, H9.2, and H9.3 while lines (184 - 186) show H9-1, H9-2 and H9-3
•  
• Our action: We are very sorry about that. We have modified these hypotheses to the same type (e.g., H9.1, H9.2 and H9.3).
•  
• Methodology Measures
•  

• "Customer orientation was measured using four items adapted from Saxe and Weitz [51]"; Restaurant image was measured with four items adapted from Stern, Bush and Hair, [52]; physical service quality, with four items adapted 273 from Dabholkar et al. [7]; perceived service quality, with three items adapted from Yoo et al. 274 [32]; Customer satisfaction was measured with two items adapted from Ragunathan and Irwin [53]. These references do not appear in the Conceptual Background. There is a complete divorce between the proposed variables and their theoretical support. It is suggested to review both sections. It would be good to see a table with information about the sample and its characteristics (gender, age, etc).
•  
• Our action: Thank you for your valuable comments. Now, these references have been carefully cited into the text. Finally, we would like to establish a table with sample characteristics but the current word template (provided by MDPI publisher) is very hard to make a table. Thus, we have provided more detailed characteristics into the text. 

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors,

thank you for your answers and explanations.

After the review, I consider the necessary points have been incorporated, achieving the expected quality.

I encourage you to continue researching in this field.Congratulations

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

Thank you so much for your positive evaluation again.

As you mentioned, we will do our best in this area. Once again, we appreciate your warm assisstance.

Best regards,