Customer experiences as drivers of customer

0 downloads 0 Views 167KB Size Report
(Mittal, Pankaj & Tsi- ros, 1999; Mittal, Ross, ... (1983); Mittal, Pankaj and Tsiros. (1999); Shankar .... same way as utilitarian product attri- butes do. We define the ...
Ilaria DALLA POZZA

IPAG Business School, Paris

Customer experiences as drivers of customer satisfaction

D

uring the past two decades, customer satisfaction (CS) management has emerged as a strategic imperative for many organizations and has become an extremely popular topic for academics, managers and consultants (Kumar, Dalla Pozza, & Ganesh, 2013). CS measures the extent to which a product or service has reached expectations or how a product performed compared to an ideal.

Traditionally, recent studies have investigated CS with specific products and services, focusing on attributes and features (Khaldoon & Kandampully, 2008; Anderson & Mittal, 2000; Garbarino & Johnson, 1999). CS is usually derived by comparing expected product performances or benefits with actual performances (Schmitt, 1999). So far, CS has reflected the traditional view of marketing focused on functional features, benefits and product characteristics. This traditional view of marketing has been criticized by Schmitt (1999), who stresses the relevance and importance of customer experiences in the marketing process. However, although the importance of focusing on customer experiences has been highlighted by previous mar-

keting literature (Schmitt, 1999; Brakus, Schmitt, & Zarantonello, 2009; Verhoef et al., 2009; Lemke, Clark, & Wilson, 2011), the research has ignored the customer experiential components of CS. According to the above premise, we want to show that customer experiences play a major role in the process of CS formation and, although this area has been neglected to date, should be considered as drivers of CS. Building on from Brakus et al. (2009), we define the “experiential unit” as the whole set of the five kinds of customer experiences (sense, feel, act, think and relate) arising from the dynamics of the purchasing process; customer experiences are triggered by various ele115

Gestion 2000

3

mai - juin 2014

ments of the marketing mix of an offer in the three stages of the purchasing process (pre-purchase, purchase, postpurchase phase) and ultimately are drivers of CS.

Johnson, 1999). Similarly, we suggest that multiple items capturing satisfaction in relation to customer experiences should be seen as drivers of a singleitem measure of overall CS.

Although the understanding and improvement of the customer experience is today considered a key to success in any customer-oriented strategy (Verhoef et al., 2009; Lemke et al., 2011; Brakus et al., 2009), the conceptualization of CS has not been fully linked to customer experiential dimensions. Previous literature has analyzed the interrelations between emotional experiences and CS judgments, but has neglected other experiential dimensions such as sensorial, behavioral and relational aspects.

To the best of our knowledge, no research has, as yet, specifically focused on the relation between CS and experiences during the customer buying process.

Our findings clearly show that customer experiences matter in CS generation by suggesting an approach that focuses more on customer experiences over the dynamics of the purchasing process. While traditional CS studies have presented utilitarian product attributes as drivers of CS (Khaldoon & Kandampully, 2008), we suggest that customer experiences should be thought of as drivers of CS. For instance, in some CS studies, we often have multiple items capturing the satisfaction of the customer in relation to different components of the product and service under study that represent the antecedents of a single-item measure of overall CS (Anderson & Mittal, 2000; Garbarino & 116

The paper is divided into the following sections. In the first part, we review the CS papers to highlight the specific limits of the CS approach based on the evaluation of utilitarian product attributes regarding CS. Second, we introduce the literature on customer experiences and the experiential unit. Third, we present our methodology. Fourth, we introduce our coding process. Then, data analysis, results and discussion will follow.

Literature on Customer Satisfaction CS has been one of the most investigated topics in the marketing literature (Dalla Pozza, 2005; Kumar et al., 2013). In the CS literature, we can identify three main streams of research: (1) studies that provide a conceptualization of CS, (2) studies on the drivers or antecedents of CS, (3) studies on the consequences of CS. Considering our

Customer experiences as drivers of customer satisfaction

research objectives, we here revise the studies on the conceptualization of CS and antecedents of CS.

Measuring Customer Satisfaction Even if the concept of CS can be easily understood by managers and customers and seems easy to define, there is no common consensus on how to measure it. In the literature, CS has been defined in many different ways and no one measure seems to outperform the others (Peterson & Wilson, 1992). CS in fact can have different acceptations. For instance, it can express the overall attitude that the customer has developed towards the company or the product over repeated interactions; this is the concept of “overall or cumulative satisfaction” that has been widely used in the literature (Agustin & Singh, 2005; Fornell et al., 1996; Anderson, Fornell, & Lehmann, 1994). On the other side, satisfaction can express the attitude of the customer regarding the last transaction or service encounter with the company and it is normally referred as “transactional satisfaction” (Oliver, 1993). Cumulative satisfaction can be variedly expressed as a single or multiple item measure. Another popular definition of CS expresses, instead, the CS across several attributes and features of the mar-

keting offer, both the product and the service, and it is generally defined as “attribute satisfaction”. In this particular situation, we have multiple items capturing the satisfaction of the customer regarding different attributes of the product and service under study (Rust, Zahorik & Keiningham, 1995; PerkinsMunn, Aksoy, Keiningham, & Estrin, 2005). These components can be called "component attitudes" (Garbarino & Johnson, 1999), "attribute satisfaction measures" (Johnson, Garbarino, & Sivadas, 2007), "attribute level performances" (Mittal, Ross, & Baldasare, 1998; Anderson & Mittal, 2000), or "attribute level ratings of satisfaction" (Perkins-Munn, Aksoy, Keiningham, & Estrin, 2005). For instance, Homburg and Giering (2001) define CS as a three-item construct (satisfaction with the product, the sale process, the after sale service). These components attitudes can then be used in two different ways: in some studies, these dimensions represent the multiple-item measure of CS (Homburg & Giering, 2001; Oliva, Oliver, & MacMillan, 1992), while, in some other studies, they represent the antecedents of a single-item measure of overall CS “Overall, how satisfied are you with …?” (Mittal, Pankaj & Tsiros, 1999; Mittal, Ross, & Baldasare, 1998; Garbarino & Johnson, 1999; Anderson & Mittal, 2000). For instance, Garbarino and Johnson (1999), in a theatre context, identify several 117

Gestion 2000

3

mai - juin 2014

Table 1: Measures of Customer Satisfaction CUSTOMER SATISFACTION Measure Single item

Multiple items

Overall Satisfaction

Articles

Examples

LaBarbera and Mazursky (1983); Mittal, Pankaj and Tsiros (1999); Shankar, Smith, Rangaswamy (2003); Baumann, Burton and Elliot (2005); Anderson and Sullivan (1993); Jones and Sasser (1995); Bloemer and Ko de (1998); Wangenheim and Bayon (2003); Mittal and Kamakura ( 2001); Bolton (1998); Bolton and Lemon (1999); Keiningham, Perkins-Munn and Evans (2003); Bowman and Das (2001)

Overall, how satisfied are you with the (product, company or service)?

Transactional Satisfaction

Bowman and Das (2001)

Overall, how would you describe your satisfaction with your final resolution or information provided to you?

Change in overall satisf.

Cooil et al (2007)

Change in satisfaction (four-pointsemantic scale) between two time periods

Overall Satisfaction

Olsen (2002); Gustafsson and Johnson (2004); Chandrashekaran, Rotte, Tax and Grewal (2007); Garbarino and Johson (1999); Cronin, Brady and Hult (2000); Lam, Shankar, Erramilli and Murphy (2004); Homburg and Furst (2005); Ngobo (1999); Wangenheim (2005); Ittner and Larcker (1998); Gustafsson, Johson and Roos (2005); Magi (2003)

Five items, B2B (Lam et al, 2004) - In general, my company is very satisfied with the service offered by___; - Overall, my company is very satisfied with its relationship with____; - Overall, ___is a good company to do business with: - Overall, ____treats my company very fairly; - Overall, the service of___ comes up to my expectations.

ACSI/SCSB

Anderson and Mittal (2000); Anderson (1998)

ACSI, three items -What is your overall satisfaction with_____? -To what extent have _____ met your expectations? - How well did the service you receive compare with your ideal?

118

Or Overall, how would you describe your Satisfaction with ___?

Customer experiences as drivers of customer satisfaction

Transactional Satisfaction

Homburg and Furst (2005); Agustin and Singh (2005)

Three- items complaint satisfaction (Homburg and Furst, 2005). To what extent do you agree with the following statements: - I was not satisfied with the handling of my compliant; - I had a positive experience when complaining to this company. - I was very satisfied with the complaint handling of the company

Attribute Satisfaction

Oliva, Oliver and MacMillan (1992); Mittal, Ross and Baldasare (1998); Homburg and Giering (2001); Liang and WenHung (2004); Wangenheim and Bayon (2004); Perkins-Munn, Aksoy, Keiningham and Estrin (2005); Capraro, Bronjarczyk and Srivastava (2003); Verheoef (2003); Seiders, Voss, Grewal and Godfrey (2005); Brown, Barry, Dacin and Gunst (2005); Verheof, Franses and Hoekstra (2001); Verhoef, Franses and Hoekstra (2002)

Three-items construct (Homburg and Giering, 2001) How satisfied are you with the (1) product, (2) the sales process and the (3) after sale service?

Relative Satisfaction

Bolton, Kannan and Bramlet Satisfaction with the focal pro(2000) vider and with a competitor is measured on four dimensions: billing process, product benefits, overall service and price. Then the corresponding values are subtracted and relative satisfaction calculated.

drivers of a one-item measure of CS (such as actor satisfaction, preference for familiar actors, play satisfaction and theater facility satisfaction).

Table 1 presents a summary of all the measures used for CS in the literature. Results are reported for single item and multiple-item measures.

When component attitudes are used as antecedents, they represent the “key drivers” of CS and can be used to plan resource allocation.

As it is possible to see from Table 1, CS is mainly related to attributes and characteristics of the product or service (such as the billing process, sales 119

Gestion 2000

3

mai - juin 2014

service, handling of complaints, information provided) or it expresses an overall evaluation of the product or service. For all these CS definitions, no attention has been paid to experiential elements that intimately refer to the experience the customer had with the marketing offer.

Antecedents of CS and emotions as drivers of CS An abundant literature has investigated the drivers of CS, such satisfaction with service representative and perception of justice (Chandrashekaran, Rotte, Tax, & Grewal, 2007), benefits for the customer in Liang and Wen-Hung (2004), customer value in Lam, Shankar and Erramilli (2004), service encounter satisfaction, prior experience with the service, ease of obtaining information in Shankar, Smith, Rangaswamy (2003), service quality and service value in Cronin, Brady and Hult (2000), store image in Bloemer and Ko de (1998), price level, performance of goods in Bolton and Lemon (1999), perceived fairness in Bowman and Das (2001). Traditionally, CS has been seen as a cognitive evaluation concerning a specific purchase selection (Westbrook, 1980; Westbrook & Oliver, 1991) or studies have focused on cognitive components (Mittal, Katrichis, & Kumar, 2001). However, several studies 120

have criticized this view, as it has been found that emotions could play an important role in determining satisfaction, especially in a service context (Oliver, 1993; Martin, O'Neill, Hubbard, & Palmer, 2008; Magnus & Rosengren, 2004; Wong, 2004; Westbrook, 1980). Oliver (1993) suggests that affect can be an independent contributor to CS. Westbrook (1980) found a positive relationship between positive affect and CS, and a negative relationship between negative affect and CS. Cognitive and affective responses to a product purchase have been seen as distinct and having a separate influence on satisfaction formation (Oliver, 1993). The research on emotions and CS has added to our understanding of the determinants of CS, which is traditionally represented in the confirmation/disconfirmation paradigm of expectations in terms of the perceived performances of various product attributes (Mano & Oliver, 1993). Emotional experiences can be present during the entire customer buying process, from the pre-purchase phase, during purchase, and through to the post-purchase phase (Muller, TSE, & Venkatasubramaniam, 1991).

Customer experiences in CS studies Emotions can be considered as a dimension of an overall multidimensional

Customer experiences as drivers of customer satisfaction

and multifaceted customer experience in which several experiences are generated (Verhoef et al., 2009; Brakus et al., 2009). The role of customer experiences in recent academic research has become central (Grewal, Levy, & Kumar, 2009; Verhoef et al., 2009; Voss, Roth, & Chase, 2008; Lemke et al., 2011). For instance, Schmitt (1999) calls for a more customer-centric focus in the marketing literature, traditionally focused on products seen as a bundle of functional characteristics. According to this vision, traditional CS is derived by comparing expected product performances or benefits with actual performances (Schmitt, 1999). Arnould and Price (1993) and Thompson and Troester (2002) stress the need of focusing on customer experiences in the study of services and CS. More precisely, Arnould and Price (1993) demonstrate the key role of the customer experience in driving service evaluations, while Schembri and Sandberg (2011) provide insights into how consumers experience service quality in a particular context. Verhoef et al. (2009) recognize that the customer experience as a response to any customer contact with the company or product across multiple touch points can be multifaceted, and it involves “cognitive, affective, emotional, social and physical responses to the retailer”.

Experiences can occur when consumers search for products, shop for them, and consume them (Verhoef et al., 2009; Lemke et al., 2011). In turn, the combinations of these experiences can affect product and service evaluations such as CS, attitudes and purchase intent (Huffman & Houston, 1993; Brakus et al., 2009).

The ‘experiential unit’ Grewal et al. (2009), Verhoef et al. (2009), Voss et al. (2008) point out the importance of assuming a holistic perspective in analyzing customer experiences, since research to date has focused more on specific and isolated elements, such as emotions (Lemke et al., 2011). Building on Schmitt (1999), Brakus et al. (2009), in their study of brand experience, identify five experiential components: sensory, affective, intellectual, behavioral and social. Experiences can occur in the various stages of the customer buying process (prepurchase, purchase, post-purchase) (Verhoef et al., 2009) and whenever there is a direct or indirect contact with the marketing offer (Meyer & Schwager, 2007). As indicated by Brakus et al. (2009), the five types of experience are closely related to previous authors’ categori121

Gestion 2000

3

mai - juin 2014

The ‘relate’ experience refers to connections the customer forms with others thanks to the brand or product (Brakus et al., 2009). Social experiences arise whenever products and services create connections between customers and non-customers (Muniz & O'Guinn, 2001).

zations of experiences, such as Dewey (1922), and Pinker (1997). The ‘sense’ experience is related to aesthetic and sensory aspects of the marketing offer, such as color (Gorn, Chattopadhyay, & Dahl, 1997), shape (Zhang, Feick, & Price, 2006), touch, sound and smell (Joy & Sherry, 2003).

More importantly, Brakus, Schmitt, & Zhang (2008) argue that customer experiences provide value and utility in the same way as utilitarian product attributes do. Customer experiences can be judged (Lemke et al., 2011). Ultimately, we assume that customer experiences can drive overall CS in the same way as utilitarian product attributes do.

As demonstrated within much of the research on emotions in the consumption process (Richins, 1997), ‘feel’ experiences encompass feelings, moods and emotions generated by the marketing offer. ‘Think’ experiences, on the other hand, represent cognitive thinking evoked by contact with the marketing offer (Cacioppo, Petty, Feinstein, & Jarvis, 1996).

We define the ‘experiential unit’ as the whole set of customer experiences (sense, feel, act, think and relate as defined by Brakus et al., 2008) in the pre-purchase, purchase and post-purchase steps (Figure 1). Experiences are triggered by a marketing mix of ele-

‘Act’ experiences refer to actions or changes in lifestyle induced by the marketing offer.

Figure 1: The Experiential Unit EXPERIENTIAL UNIT Pre-purchase process

Purchase process

Post-purchase process

Sensory Affective Behavioral

E

Cognitive Social

122

X

P

E

R

I

E

N

C

E

S

Customer experiences as drivers of customer satisfaction

ments that make up the marketing offer. Experiences can be generated at the point of sale, on the company’s website, during use of the product after purchase, by discussing it over the phone with a customer service representative, or by connecting with other customers through the brand. We argue that these experiences matter in the process of CS formation and can be thought of as drivers of CS. Our perspective of CS in experiential marketing terms encompasses the complexity of the marketing offer as the whole set of marketing mix elements, as well as the evolution of the different types of experiences over the dynamics of the purchasing process (pre-purchase, purchase and post-purchase). Our study includes all the relevant sensorial, emotional, behavioral, cogni-

tive, social experiences arising from the customer buying process that can drive CS.

Identification of the touchpoints How do customers build their sensorial, affective, behavioral, cognitive and relational experiences in the different stages of the buying process? The model we are relying on is represented in Figure 2. Customers experience the company’s marketing mix (marketing offer) across the experiential unit. Thus, they engage in different experiences as the experiential unit unfolds over time. Customer experiences are triggered by elements of the marketing mix under the company’s control (such as adverti-

Figure 2: How experiences and customer satisfaction are built

123

Gestion 2000

3

mai - juin 2014

sing, product, shop, customer service, etc.). These elements represent the touchpoints between the customer and the company. The whole set of these experiences will ultimately drive CS.

Methodology and data collection A qualitative research approach (using open-ended questionnaires) was planned with the following aims: – To understand whether the five experiences exist in the process of CS formation along the three stages of the buying process. – To understand which touchpoints elicit customer experiences in each phase. A total of 40 business and executive students aged between 22 and 48 volunteered to participate in the study, and received precise directions for completing the questionnaires. CS studies with business students are common in the literature (Westbrook, 1980). Considerable diversity was displayed by respondents in terms of age, which provided a broad range of experiential responses (Westbrook & Oliver, 1991). First of all, respondents were asked to identify a product that was important to them, and to describe their level of satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the entire purchasing process in an open manner. The study 124

deals with consumption situations that are important to a consumer, since experiences are likely to be strongest within this context (Richins, 1997). For the three stages of the experiential unit (pre-purchase, purchase and post-purchase phase), the respondents were asked to write about their satisfaction or dissatisfaction level with any particular aspects of the marketing offer (Westbrook, 1980), and to write sentences such as: “I am (very/somewhat/not) satisfied with the (advertising/ magazine/shop/customer service, product, etc.) because…” The answers were collected in a Word document. This preliminary study aimed to confirm that customer experiences matter in the CS process, as demonstrated in accordance with Brakus et al. (2009), and can be thought of as drivers of CS. Since we wanted customers to respond and write as freely as possible, we did not provide any suggestions of experiences in the questionnaires.

The coding process The coding process was initially performed separately by two experienced coders. The two coders shared theoretical knowledge and had previously agreed on the theoretical bases, and the definitions of touchpoints and experiences, referring in particular to the

Customer experiences as drivers of customer satisfaction

studies by Brakus et al. (2009) and Schmitt (1999). Once the coding had been performed separately, the coders met to compare and share their coding of 50% of the questionnaires. Doubts and uncertainties were discussed, and inconsistencies eliminated, during this analysis. The coders then analyzed the coding within the remainder of the questionnaires, and met again to discuss the results. Inconsistencies were reduced to a minimum, and a satisfactory level of coding was considered to have been attained. As far as possible, we applied rigorous and strict rules to our coding process in order to achieve a maximum degree of objectivity.

How we coded In order to code, we agreed on the following three rules: 1. The words and expressions corresponding to the five different experiences were extracted from the answers and coded into sense, feel, act, think, relate. Consistent with the first part of the model in Figure 2, we considered only those experiences arising from elements of the marketing mix. To give an example: referring to an IKEA product in the post-purchase

process, a customer wrote: ‘I like assembling the product’. In this particular situation, the customer engaged in an ‘action’ as a consequence of their exposure to the marketing offer (“act” experience), and expressed a positive judgment on it. In this particular situation, we registered a behavioral experience where the touchpoint was the ‘product’ element of the marketing mix. 2. Once an experience coming from a touchpoint had been identified and classified, in order to retain it in our analysis, we needed to ensure that it had the potential to have an impact on CS. This analysis verified the second part of our model in Figure 2 at a qualitative level (the link from the customer experience to overall CS). To verify this, we formulated a ‘satisfaction question’ for each experience. CS represents an assessment and an evaluative judgment of an experience. Inspiration for the questions we used in the coding process was drawn from the traditional CS literature. In the literature, in its most common form, CS questions are expressed as items such as: “How satisfied are you with… (the after sales service, the performance of the product, etc..)?”. For instance, Garbarino and Johnson (1999) formulated items to express CS with actors, facilities and plays in a theater context. In turn, these CS items were conside125

Gestion 2000

3

mai - juin 2014

red as drivers, or antecedents, of a single-item measure of overall CS. Similarly, in our study, a more general CS question was adapted to each kind of experience we extracted from the text. Recalling the previous example, when we coded, we formulated the sentence: ‘How satisfied are you with the act (behavioral experience) of assembling the product?’ More generally, if sentences like this could be formulated and applied, the experience was retained as a driver of CS. In other words, we replaced utilitarian product attributes traditionally evaluated in CS studies with customer experiences. Consistent with Brakus et al. (2009), we considered that the same element of the marketing offer can trigger different types of experiences at the same time: a one-to-one correspondence cannot be identified. 3. Each experience was coded as positive or negative – thus, as positively or negatively affecting CS. In the IKEA example, the positive customer judgment leads to the conclusion that the impact on overall CS is positive. The behavioral experience of ‘assembling’ is thus coded as positive. To sum up, we established the following parent nodes with the corresponding child nodes: (1) phase of the purchasing process (divided up into pre-purchase, purchase and post-purchase), (2) touchpoints (such as website, store, product, ad, brand, catalogue, salesperson, 126

price, after-sales service, delivery service), (3) type of experience (sense, feel, think, act and relate) and (4) valence of the experience (positive and negative).

Data Analysis and Results The qualitative data analysis of the responses was performed via NVivo software, which is used for content analysis. Our goal was to show the presence, at the various stages of the purchasing process (pre-purchase, purchase and post-purchase), of the different experiences able to determine CS. The products that were most frequently cited by the respondents were mobile phones and iPhones, computers of various brands, clothes, furniture, cereals, beauty products, shoes and cars (Table 2). We produced NVivo tables showing the total of the different experiences (sense, feel, act, think and relate) arising in the three stages of the purchasing process. The results are shown in Tables 3. More precisely, Table 3 indicates the number of times each experience was cited by all 40 individuals, thus confirming the presence of the five customer experiences in the process of CS formation. For each experience counted here, a CS question was formulated, according to point 2 of our coding process.

Customer experiences as drivers of customer satisfaction

Table 2: Product categories cited by respondents (number and percentage) PRODUCT CATEGORY

N

%

11

27,5

Computers

9

22,5

Apparel

7

17,5

Beauty products and skincare

4

10,0

Furniture

2

5,0

Shoes

2

5,0

Food

2

5,0

Entertainement (CD)

1

2,5

Other electronics

1

2,5

Automotive

1

2,5

40

100,0

Mobile phones and iPhones

TOTAL

We identified the elements of the marketing mix that elicited experiences in the different phases of the purchasing process. In particular, we identified the following: – For the pre-purchase phase: the website (cited by 21 individuals), store (16 individuals), product, ad, brand, and catalogue;

– For the purchase phase: the store (21 individuals), product (13 individuals), salesperson (13 individuals), price, website, and brand; – For the post-purchase process: the product (31 individuals), after-sales service (6 individuals), brand, delivery service and price.

Table 3: Number of times each experience was cited for the different stages of the purchasing process Pre-purchase phase

Purchase phase

Post-purchase phase

N

N

N

Sense

35

26

12

Feel

29

24

18

Act

41

41

36

Think

33

30

29

Relate

12

5

14

Total

150

126

109

127

Gestion 2000

3

mai - juin 2014

First of all, as can be seen in Table 3, all five experiences were cited in the three stages of the purchasing process. This is an indication of their presence in the CS formation process, according to our main assumption. Generally speaking, the pre-purchase phase contained the highest number of recorded experiences, while the postpurchase phase registered the lowest number (Table 3). This result demonstrates the importance of the marketing mix in eliciting experiences before the customer starts using the product. We found that behavioral experiences (act) were predominant in all the three phases of the purchasing process, followed by cognitive experiences in the purchase and post-purchase phase, and by sensorial experiences in the pre-purchase phase (Table 3). Compared to the other kinds of experience, relational experiences were cited least. Each of the five experiences are described in more detail below.

Sense experience The ‘sense’ experience relates to the five senses: vision, hearing, smell, taste and touch (Brakus et al., 2009; Schmitt, 1999; Bellizzi & Hite, 1992). The marketing offer provides a positive sensorial experience when it incites, for instance, aesthetic pleasure, exci-

128

tement, and beauty through sensory stimulation (Bellizzi & Hite, 1992). The sentence: ‘I was attracted by [shop’s display],’suggests that the customer existence a visual response to the display. Thus, this element can affect CS: the customer can be more or less satisfied from this sensorial experience. Regarding sensorial experiences (vision, hearing, smell, taste and touch) in the pre-purchase phase, we noticed that customers displayed a visual sensibility to companies’ advertising (as one respondent said: 'I have been attracted by the communication campaign'), catalogue and website design, as well as the packaging and feel of the product, and the lights, sounds and general atmosphere in the shop. Some more examples from the collected data: 'The shop was quite bright and with a pleasant fragrance', 'Visually, products in the shops were well valorized and organized. This encouraged my purchase', 'The atmosphere in the shop was pleasant and intimate'.

Feel experience Extant literature has extensively demonstrated that emotions can impact CS. For instance, by stating, ‘I feel excited when using the product,’ the customer recognizes that she/he is experiencing the feeling of excitement

Customer experiences as drivers of customer satisfaction

when using the product. This feeling of excitement contributes to the customer’s level of CS. Emotional experiences (we identified excitement, empathy, happiness, impatience, affection, positive mood, pleasure, frustration, surprise, seduction, pride and uniqueness) were most present during the first two phases of the purchasing process (Table 3). In the prepurchase phase, customers expressed happiness ('I was happy because my friend saw me considering this product'), excitement ('When I saw the trench, I felt excited, because I felt it was the one I wanted'), impatience ('I was impatient to have my new [name of the product]'), frustration in looking for information ('I was frustrated by my search on the website'), seduction and aesthetic pleasure; in the purchase phase, we noted excitement, empathy with the salesperson, happiness and frustration ('I was frustrated because the product was not available in the shop'); in the post-purchase stage, we derived happiness ('I was happy because the product is convenient for me'), pride in showing the product to friends, uniqueness, affection for the product, frustration with unclear instructions and long delivery time.

Act experience The ‘act’ experience refers to the actions a customer engages in as a

consequence of an encounter with a touchpoint (Brakus et al., 2009). The ‘act’ experience can also refer to a change in lifestyle triggered by the product, to an action induced by a touchpoint without too much thought, or to a bodily physical experience with the marketing offer (Schmitt, 1999). For example, in the pre-purchase phase, the customers stated that they looked for information on the company’s website, searched in shops, manipulated and tested the product in the shop ('The most important thing was that I could test the product'), asked for information from the shop assistants ('I asked for suggestions to the shop assistance') , and waited for the product with frustration if not in stock, or with excitement if the product was not yet available on the market. During the purchase phase, the customers stated that they interacted with the shop assistants, and waited with impatience at the counter. In the post-purchase phase, the customers wore or used the product ('I love wearing this product when my friends are there'), called customer services ('I called the customer service and my request was rapidly satisfied'), experienced frustration in using the product when instructions were not clear, and waited for delivery of the product. For a better classification of behavioral experiences, we identified four subcategories across the purchasing pro129

Gestion 2000

3

mai - juin 2014

cess: action induced by the touchpoint (buy, come back, enter the shop, pay, search, wait, walk), change in lifestyle (planning, relinquishing, studying), interaction (with the salesperson) and physical bodily experiences (manipulate, use, assemble, wear).

A few respondents indicated a change in their lifestyle after purchase of the product (‘I have totally abandoned the previous brand’ or ‘I think with this product I am more organized and modern’).

More precisely, in the pre-purchase phase, we identified the ‘search’ action in relation to the need for information customers looked for on the company’s website or in-store (cited by 13 individuals) and the ‘wait’ action in the purchase phase (cited by 12 individuals).

Think experience

The ‘wait’ action, which appeared several times in the answers, deserves particular attention. Very often, customers expressed their disappointment and frustration with the long waiting time experienced in the shop, or with the lack of product units in stock. However, some customers described the sense of excitement that came from waiting to become an owner of the product. Physical bodily experiences (such as ‘wear,’ ‘use’ and ‘assembly’) were predominant in the post-purchase phase, but they were also important in the prepurchase phase when the customers had to define their choices. More precisely, ‘use’ of the product in the postpurchase phase was cited by 18 individuals, while the ‘manipulate’ action in the pre-purchase phase was cited by 7 individuals. 130

In the ‘think’ experience, we highlighted four sub-categories: (a) re-evaluations, (b) evaluation-cognitive experiences, (c) comparisons, and (d) imaginative thinking. As stated by Schmitt (1999), ‘think’ can be convergent (analytical reasoning, evaluations) or divergent (imaginative thinking, dreams stimulated by the marketing offer). Customers have a cognitive (think) experience when the marketing offer leads them to engage in creative thought that may result in a re-evaluation of the company or the product, or in a change in the way of thinking; or when the marketing offer pushes them to think and to express rational evaluations. Similarly, according to Homburg, Koschate, & Hoyer (2006), responses are coded as ‘cognitive’ every time they are related to an evaluation of the functional and utilitarian attributes of the marketing offer that can affect the overall satisfaction level (for example: ‘I am happy with the performance of the product’).

Customer experiences as drivers of customer satisfaction

The ‘think’ dimension basically encompasses the traditional evaluations of functional product attributes and performances of CS studies. We also include in this category comparisons with other competitors’ marketing offers, and dreams (imaginative thinking) that the customer has about the product. Regarding cognitive experiences, in the pre-purchase phase customers mainly evaluated the completeness and correctness of information received on the product ('The information I found were very helpful'), expressed an opinion on the website and the catalogue ('The website is quite helpful', 'The catalogue presents all the products in an appropriate way'), made comparisons with other products ('This brand provides fashion items at a more affordable price that luxury brands'), evaluated promotions and prices ('I evaluated the price/quality ratio), and expressed an evaluation of the brand. In the purchase phase, customers made considerations on the price (one respondent stated: ‘for a lower price, I had the impression of buying a product of a well-known brand’), and evaluated the shop assistants ('the shop assistance was competent and nice'). In the postpurchase phase, customers evaluated the performance of the product and the customer service ('The product is very performing'), and compared the product with that of friends. In the ‘think’

category, during the three stages, the rational evaluations represented the majority of cognitive experiences (cited by 34 individuals in total), followed by comparative evaluations of the product with competitors’ products (13 individuals).

Relate experience In the ‘relate’ category we include connections with other individuals or groups that are triggered by the marketing offer (Brakus et al., 2009; Schmitt, 1999). In particular, the customer may feel solidarity, sympathy, tolerance and trust with respect to relatives, friends or communities. Customers look for a social identity, and relate to others (or try to distinguish themselves) through the marketing offer, to a culture, reference group, social category, brand community, other users, etc., as evidenced by one respondent as follows: ‘I am happy with my Blackberry because now I am part of an exclusive community. I feel [proud] when […] others see me using it.’ As can be seen from Table 3, relational experiences were mainly cited in the pre-purchase and post-purchase phases, when the customers actually used the product and showed it to others. More precisely, in the pre-purchase phase, customers were happy if friends saw them considering a speci131

Gestion 2000

3

mai - juin 2014

fic product, or they decided to buy a product because friends already had it, while in the post-purchase phase, customers liked comparing their product with those owned by their friends, or were proud to show it to their friends. Customers related to communities such as friends (16 individuals), clubs, cultures, forums (5 individuals), or relatives (3 individuals). In addition, they displayed a need to distinguish themselves from others (3 individuals).

wait for it to be found in the stock'), the length of time spent waiting for the repair of a product ('I was impatience because the reparation took so long'), long delivery time and difficulties in using the product due to a lack of information ('It was frustrating using the product because instructions were not clear') or a long search on the web that did not provide all the information needed ('I was frustrated by my search on the website').

All the identified experiences were induced by a touchpoint, as our model in Figure 2 shows, and could be positive or negative, thus positively or negatively affecting CS. On the whole, 27 individuals out of 40 reported negative experiences across the purchasing process (Table 4).

The use of time is an important aspect of the customer experience (Lemke et al., 2011). Customer value the efficient use of their time on the part of the provider, however this is still an under researched area in marketing (Grewal et al., 2009). In terms of cognitive negative experiences, we mainly found considerations about high price, poor performance, and wrong or incomplete information received. The negative feelings were related to frustration and disappointment arising from the

Negative behavioral experiences came mainly from the ‘act’ of waiting for a product that was not in stock or not immediately available ('I was frustrated because the product was not available in the shop and I had to

Table 4: Experiences classified as positive or negative Total # of experiences Sense

Feel

Act

Think

Relate

N

N

N

N

N

9

9

20

12

0

Positive

24

26

33

33

20

Total

33

35

53

45

20

Negative

132

Customer experiences as drivers of customer satisfaction

act of waiting, and to the frustration stemming from a search for information that did not bring about the expected results. Negative sensorial experiences were often related to the atmosphere in the shop (crowded, too warm, etc.).

Conclusion and directions for future research The primary goals of this paper are to show that customer experiences matter in the process of CS formation and can be thought of as drivers of CS. As the literature stresses the importance of experiences evoked during the customer buying process, we posit that customer experiences play a major role in the process of CS formation. Our exploratory research clearly shows that the customer experiences of sense, feel, act, think and relate, as identified by Brakus et al. (2009), are important elements in the process of CS formation. Relevant customer experiences coming from the various elements of the marketing mix in a specific context should be considered drivers of CS. Similarly to utilitarian product attributes currently used to drive CS (Garbarino & Johnson, 1999), experiences can be evaluated by customers, and can drive CS.

Our theoretical basis is synthesized in the ‘experiential unit.’ This is the whole set of customer experiences arising during the purchasing process. It encompasses both the dynamic aspects over a length of time, and all the elements of the marketing offer (marketing mix elements or touchpoints) triggering the experiences. As our study demonstrated, sensorial, behavioral and relational experiences traditionally neglected in CS studies can play a role in driving CS. Our qualitative research presents some limitations that could represent an interesting avenue for future research. Regarding the nature of the study, this research should be complemented by a quantitative analysis, which could quantify the impact of each experience at the different stages of the purchasing process on CS. In each context, rather than formulating CS items capturing satisfaction with utilitarian product attributes, appropriate items capturing satisfaction with the different relevant experiences should be built (“How satisfied are you with the sensorial, cognitive, behavioral, relational, emotional experiences elicited by…?). In turn, similarly to past CS studies in the literature, these multiple items capturing satisfaction with the different experiences can be thought of as drivers of an overall single-item of CS (‘Overall, how satisfied are you with…?’). 133

Gestion 2000

3

mai - juin 2014

We also recognize the presence of several moderators that can influence the hypothesized relationships among variables, such as customer characteristics (Homburg & Giering, 2001), industry and product category (type of product and product versus services) (Groonros, 1998). Olsen (1992) identifies the moderating role of the type of product. An interesting further avenue for research could be to compare the differential impact of customer experiences for hedonic and utilitarian products.

Baumann, C., Burton, S., & Elliott, G. (2005). Determinants of customer loyalty and share of wallet in retail banking. Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 9(3), 231-248. Bellizzi, J. A., & Hite, R. E. (1992). Environmental Color, Consumer Feelings, and Purchase Likelihood. Psychology & Marketing, 9(5), 347-363. Bloemer, J., & Ko de, R. (1998). On the relationship between store image, store satisfaction and store loyalty. European Journal of Marketing, 32(5/6), 499-513. Bolton, R. N. (1998). A dynamic model of the duration of the customer’s relationship with a continuous service provider: The role of satisfaction. Marketing Science, 17(1), 45-65.

References

Bolton, R. N., & Lemon, K. N. (1999). A dynamic model of customers’ usage of services: Usage as an antecedent and consequence of satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(2), 171-186.

Agustin, C., & Singh, J. (2005). Curvilinear Effects of Consumer Loyalty Determinants in Relational Exchanges. Journal of Marketing Research, 42(1), 96-108.

Bolton, R. N., Kannan, P. K., & Bramlett, M. D. (2000). Implications of loyalty program membership and service experiences for customer retention and value. Academy of Marketing Science. Journal, 28(1), 95-108.

Anderson, E. W., & Mittal, V. (2000). Strengthening the Satisfaction-Profit Chain. Journal of Service Research, 3(2), 107-120. Anderson, E. W., & Sullivan, M. W. (1993). The antecedents and consequences of customer satisfaction for firms. Marketing Science, 12(2), 125-125. Anderson, E. W., Fornell, C., & Lehmann, D. R. (1994). Customer satisfaction, market share, and profitability: Findings from Sweden. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 53-53. Anderson, E.W. (1998) .Customer Satisfaction and Word-of-Mouth. Journal of Service Research, 1 (1), 1–14. Arnould, E. J., & Price, L. L. (1993). River magic: Extraordinary experience and the extended service encounter. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(1), 24-45.

134

Bowman, D., & Das, N. (2001). Managing customer-initiated contacts with manufacturers: The impact on share of category requirements and word-of-mouth behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(3), 281-297. Brakus, J. J., Schmitt, B. H., & Zarantonello, L. (2009). Brand Experience: What Is It? How Is It Measured? Does It Affect Loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 73(3), 52-68. Brakus, J.J, Schmitt, B.H. & Zhang, S. (2008). Experiential Attributes and Consumer Judgments. In B. H. Schmitt and D. L. Rogers (eds), Handbook on Brand and Experience Management, pp. 174-187. Edward Elgar. Brown, T.J., Barry, T., Dacin, P., & Gunst, R. (2005) .Spreading the Word: Investigating Antecedents of Consumers’ Positive Word-of-Mouth Intentions and Behaviors in a Retailing Context. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 33 (Spring), 123–38.

Customer experiences as drivers of customer satisfaction

Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 197-200. Capraro, A. J., Broniarczyk, S., & Srivastava, R. K. (2003). Factors influencing the likelihood of customer defection: The role of consumer knowledge. Academy of Marketing Science. Journal, 31(2), 164-164. Chandrashekaran, M., Rotte, K., Tax, S. S., & Grewal, R. (2007). Satisfaction Strength and Customer Loyalty. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(1), 34-34. Cooil, B., Keiningham, T. L., Aksoy, L., & Hsu, M. (2007). A Longitudinal Analysis of Customer Satisfaction and Share of Wallet: Investigating the Moderating Effect of Customer Characteristics. Journal of Marketing, 71(1), 67-67. Cronin, J. J., Jr., Brady, M. K., & Hult, G. T. M. (2000). Assessing the effects of quality, value, and customer satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environments. Journal of Retailing, 76(2), 193-218. Dalla Pozza, I. (2005). Introducing a marketingbased perspective in alliance formation. Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management, Vol. 3, Issue 1, Spring 2005. Dewey, J. (1922). Human Nature and Conduct, New York: The Modern Library. Fornell, C., Johnson, M. D., Anderson, E. W., Cha, J., & Bryant, B. E. (1996). The American Customer Satisfaction Index: Nature, purpose, and findings. Journal of Marketing, 60(4), 7-18. Garbarino, E., & Johnson, M. S. (1999). The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment in customer relationships. Journal of Marketing, 63(2), 70-87. Grewal, D., Levy, M., & Kumar, V. (2009). Customer Experience Management in Retailing: An Organizing Framework. Journal of Retailing, 85(1), 1-14.

Gorn, G. J., Chattopadhyay, A., Yi, T., & Dahl, D. W. (1997). Effects of color as an executional cue in advertising: They’re in the shade. Management Science, 43(10), 1387-1400. Gronroos, C. (1998). Marketing services: the case of a missing product. The Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 13(4/5), 322-338. Gustafsson, A. & Johnson, M.D. (2004) .Determining Attribute Importance in a Service Satisfaction Model. Journal of Service Research, 7 (2), 124–41. Gustafsson, A., Johnson, M. D., & Roos, I. (2005). The Effects of Customer Satisfaction, Relationship Commitment Dimensions, and Triggers on Customer Retention. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 210-218. Homburg, C., & Fürst, A. (2005). How Organizational Complaint Handling Drives Customer Loyalty: An Analysis of the Mechanistic and the Organic Approach. Journal of Marketing, 69(3), 95-114. Homburg, C., & Giering, A. (2001). Personal characteristics as moderators of the relationship between customer satisfaction and loyalty - An empirical analysis. Psychology & Marketing, 18(1), 43-66. Homburg, C., Koschate, N. & Hoyer, W.D. (2006) .The Role of Cognition and Affect in the Formation of Customer Satisfaction: A Dynamic Perspective. Journal of Marketing,70 (3):pp. 2131. Huffman, C., & Houston, M. J. (1993). Goaloriented experiences and the development of knowledge. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(2), 190-207. Ittner, C. D., & Larcker, D. F. (1998). Are nonfinancial measures leading indicators of financial performance? An analysis of customer satisfaction. Journal of Accounting Research, 36, 1-35. Johnson, M. S., Garbarino, E., & Sivadas, E. (2006). Influences of customer differences of loyalty, perceived risk and category experience on customer satisfaction ratings. International Journal of Market Research, 48(5), 601-622. 135

Gestion 2000

3

mai - juin 2014

Jones, T. O., & Sasser, W. E., Jr. (1995). Why satisfied customers defect. Harvard Business Review, 73(6), 88-99. Joy, A., & Sherry, J. F., Jr. (2003). Speaking of art as embodied imagination: A multisensory approach to understanding aesthetic experience. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(2), 259-282. Keiningham, T. L., Perkins-Munn, T., & Evans, H. (2003). The Impact of Customer Satisfaction on Share-of-Wallet in a Business-to-Business Environment. Journal of Service Research, 6(1), 37-50. Khaldoon, N., & Kandampully, J. (2008). The antecedents of customer satisfaction with online travel services: A conceptual model. European Business Review, 20(1), pp. 4-19. Kumar, V., Dalla Pozza, I. D., & Ganesh, J. (2013). Revisiting the satisfaction-loyalty relationship: Empirical generalizations and directions for future research. Journal of Retailing, 89(3), 246-262. LaBarbera, P. A., & Mazursky, D. (1983). A longitudinal assessment of consumer satisfaction/ dissatisfaction: The dynamic aspect of the cognitive process. Journal of Marketing Research. Lam, S.Y., Shankar, V., Erramilli, M.K., & Murthy, B. (2004) .Customer Value, Satisfaction, Loyalty and Switching Costs: An Illustration from a Business to Business Service Context. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32 (3), 293–311. Lemke, F., Clark, M., & Wilson, H. (2011). Customer experience quality: an exploration in business and consumer contexts using repertory grid technique. Academy of Marketing Science. Journal, 39(6), 846-869. Liang, C.-J., & Wen-Hung, W. (2004). Attributes, benefits, customer satisfaction and behavioral loyalty-an integrative research of financial services industry in taiwan. Journal of Services Research, 4(1), 57-68,72-91. Magi, A. W. (2003). Share of wallet in retailing: the effects of customer satisfaction, loyalty cards and shopper characteristics. Journal of Retailing, 79(2), 97-106. 136

Magnus, S., & Rosengren, S. (2004). Dismantling “positive affect” and its effects on customer satisfaction: an empirical examination of customer joy in a service encounter. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 17, 27-41. Mano, H., & Oliver, R. L. (1993). Assessing the dimensionality and structure of the consumption experience: Evaluation, feeling, and satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(3), 451-466. Martin, D., O’Neill, M., Hubbard, S., & Palmer, A. (2008). The role of emotion in explaining consumer satisfaction and future behavioural intention. The Journal of Services Marketing, 22(3), 224-236. Meyer, C., & Schwager, A. (2007).Understanding customer experience. Harvard Business Review, 85, pp. 116-126. Mittal, V., & Kamakura, W. A. (2001). Satisfaction, repurchase intent, and repurchase behavior: Investigating the moderating effect of customer characteristics. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(1), 131-142. Mittal, V., Katrichis, J. M., & Kumar, P. (2001). Attribute performance and customer satisfaction over time: Evidence from two field studies. The Journal of Services Marketing, 15(4/5), 343-356. Mittal, V., Pankaj, & Tsiros, M. (1999). Attributelevel performance satisfaction, and behavioral intentions over time: A consumption-system approach. Journal of Marketing, 63(2), 88-101. Mittal, V., Ross, W. T., Jr., & Baldasare, P. M. (1998). The asymmetric impact of negative and positive attribute-level performance on overall satisfaction and repurchase intentions. Journal of Marketing, 62(1), 33-47. Muller, T. E., TSE, DK and Venkatasubramaniam, R. (1991). Post-consumption emotions: exploring their emergence and determinants. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 4, 13-20. Muniz, A. M., Jr., & O’Guinn, T. C. (2001). Brand community. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(4), 412-432.

Customer experiences as drivers of customer satisfaction

Ngobo, P.V. (1999) .Decreasing Returns in Customer Loyalty: Does It Really Matter to Delight the Customer. Advances in Consumer Research,26, 469–76.

Seiders, K., Voss, G. B., Grewal, D., & Godfrey, A. L. (2005). Do Satisfied Customers Buy More? Examining Moderating Influences in a Retailing Context. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 26-43.

Oliva, T. A., Oliver, R. L., & MacMillan, I. C. (1992). A Catastrophe Model for Developing Service Satisfaction Strategies. Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 83-83.

Shankar, V., Smith, A. K., & Rangaswamy, A. (2003). Customer satisfaction and loyalty in online and offline environments. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 20(2), 153-175.

Oliver, R. L. (1993). Cognitive, affective, and attribute bases of the satisfaction response. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(3), 418-430.

Thompson, C., & Maura Troester. (2002). Consumer Value Systems in the Age of Postmodern Fragmentation: The Case of the Natural Health Microculture. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(4), 550-571.

Olsen, S.O. (2002) .Comparative Evaluation and the Relationship Between Quality, Satisfaction, and Repurchase Loyalty. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30 (3), 240–9. Perkins-Munn, T., Aksoy, L., Keiningham, T. L., & Estrin, D. (2005). Actual Purchase as a Proxy for Share of Wallet. Journal of Service Research, 7(3), 245-256. Peterson, R. A., & Wilson, W. R. (1992). Measuring Customer Satisfaction: Fact and Artifact. Academy of Marketing Science. Journal, 20(1), 61-61. Pinker, S. (1997). How the Mind Works, New York: Norton. Plutchik, R. & Kellerman, H., eds. (1989), Emotion: Theory, Research, and Experience, San Diego: Academic Press. Richins, M. L. (1997). Measuring emotions in the consumption experience. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(2), 127-146. Rust, R. T., Zahorik, A. J., & Keiningham, T. L. (1995). Return on quality (ROQ): Making service quality financially accountable. Journal of Marketing, 59(2), 58-58. Schembri, S., & Sandberg, J. (2011). The experiential meaning of service quality. Marketing Theory, 11(2), 165-186. Schmitt, B. (1999). Experiential Marketing: How to get customers to Sense, Feel, Think, Act, Relate to your company and brands. Free Press, New York.

V Wangenheim, F., & Bayón, T. (2007). The chain from customer satisfaction via word-ofmouth referrals to new customer acquisition. Academy of Marketing Science. Journal, 35(2), 233-249. Verhoef, P. C. (2003). Understanding the Effect of Customer Relationship Management Efforts on Customer Retention and Customer Share Development. Journal of Marketing, 67(4), 30-45. Verhoef, P. C., Franses, P. H., & Hoekstra, J. C. (2001). The impact of satisfaction and payment equity on cross-buying: A dynamic model for a multi-service provider. Journal of Retailing, 77(3), 359-378. Verhoef, P. C., Franses, P. H., & Hoekstra, J. C. (2002). The effect of relational constructs on customer referrals and number of services purchased from a multiservice provider: Does age of relationship matter? Academy of Marketing Science. Journal, 30(3), 202-202. Verhoef, P. C., Lemon, K. N., Parasuraman, A., Roggeveen, A., Tsiros, M., & Schlesinger, L. A. (2009). Customer Experience Creation: Determinants, Dynamics and Management Strategies. Journal of Retailing, 85(1), 31-41. Voss, C., Roth, A. V., & Chase, R. B. (2008). Experience, Service Operations Strategy, and Services as Destinations: Foundations and Exploratory Investigation. Production and Operations Management, 17(3), 247-266.

137

Gestion 2000

3

mai - juin 2014

Wangenheim, F. v. (2005). Postswitching Negative Word of Mouth. Journal of Service Research : JSR, 8(1), 67-78. Wangenheim, F., & Bayon, T. (2004). Satisfaction, loyalty and word of mouth within the customer base of a utility provider: Differences between stayers, switchers and referral switchers. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 3(3), 211-220. Westbrook, R. A. (1980). A Rating Scale for Measuring Product/Service Satisfaction. Journal of Marketing, 44(4), 68-72.

138

Westbrook, R. A., & Oliver, R. L. (1991). The Dimensionality of Consumption Emotion Patterns and Consumer Satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(1), 84-91. Wong, A. (2004). The role of emotional satisfaction in service encounters. Managing Service Quality, 14(5), 365-376. Zhang, Y., Feick, L., & Price, L. J. (2006). The Impact of Self-Construal on Aesthetic Preference for Angular Versus Rounded Shapes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(6), 794-805.

Copyright of Gestion 2000 is the property of Recherches et Publications en Management and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.