Critique of the Linear-Compensatory Approach in Customer Satisfaction Measurement: An Empirical Study
- 1 Woxsen School of Business, Hyderabad, India
- 2 University of Ulster, Jordanstown, UK
- 3 University of Ulster, Jordanstown, UK
Abstract
Purpose of the Study: The researchers critique the linear-compensatory combinatorial rule used in the expectancy-value model that is widely applied to explain how customers integrate attribute-level information in satisfaction judgements. Data/Methodology: The data ha ve been collected from customers of an online travel agency. The surveys were administered via email, after their interaction with customer service advisor on telephone. The survey instrument is largely based on the SERVQUAL model, with a few additional items pertaining to the call centre context. A randomly selected sample of 626 usable responses was obtained based on completeness of data. As compared to the traditional methods, where a summary analysis of aggregated data is done, the present data analysis follows a deconstructive approach, involving assessing changes in degree of satisfaction brought about by change in each degree of performance for every quality attribute. Findings: By following a unique analytical approach to analysing survey data, the study classifies customer satisfaction as not unlike other evaluative judgements, such as morality and likableness, where summary evaluations are a result of a cumulative assessment of all attributes that constitute the particular context. Originality: This study explores the process of cognitive appraisal, which underlies the combination of varied service quality information, in the form of attributes of service quality into unitary satisfaction judgements.
- Wright, P.L. (1973) Analyzing Consumer Judgement Strategies: Paradigm, Pressures and Priorities. Faculty Working Paper No. 94, University of Illinois, IL.
- Asch, S.E. (1946) Forming Impressions of Personality. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41, 258-290. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0055756
- Fishbein, M. and Azjen, I. (1975) Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behaviour, an Introduction to Theory and Research. Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA.
- Oliver, R.L. (1980) A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17, 460-469. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378001700405
- Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1988) SERVQUAL: A Multiple-Item Scale for Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Service Quality. Journal of Retailing, 64, 12-40.
- Busacca, B. and Padula, G. (2005) Understanding the Relationship between Attribute Performance and Overall Satisfaction: Theory, Measurement and Implications. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 23, 543-561. https://doi.org/10.1108/02634500510624110
- Danaher, P.J. (1997) Using Conjoint Analysis to Determine the Relative Importance of Service Attributes Measured in Customer Satisfaction Surveys. Journal of Retailing, 73, 235-260. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(97)90005-1
- Wilkie, W.L. and Pessemier, E.A. (1973) Issues in Marketing’s Use of Multi-Attitude Models. Journal of Marketing Research, 10, 428-441. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224377301000411
- Bolton, R.N. and Drew, J.H. (1991) A Multi-Stage Model of Customer’s Assessments of Service Quality and Value. Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 375-384. https://doi.org/10.1086/208564
- Huang, R. and Sarigollü, E. (2008) Assessing Satisfaction with Core and Secondary Attributes. Journal of Business Research, 61, 942-949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.10.003
- Anderson, N.H. (1970) Functional Measurement and Psychophysical Judgment. Psychological Review, 77, 153-170. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0029064
- Birnbaum, M.H. (1972) Morality Judgments: Tests of an Averaging Model. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 93, 35-42. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0032589
- Birnbaum, H.M., Parducci, A. and Gifford, K.R. (1971) Contextual Effects in Information Integration. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 88, 158-170. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030880