Impact of customer experience on loyalty a multichannel examination

SAVE OFFLINE

The Service Industries Journal

ISSN: 0264-2069 (Print) 1743-9507 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fsij20

Impact of customer experience on loyalty: a multichannel examination Isabelle Brun, Lova Rajaobelina, Line Ricard & Bilitis Berthiaume To cite this article: Isabelle Brun, Lova Rajaobelina, Line Ricard & Bilitis Berthiaume (2017) Impact of customer experience on loyalty: a multichannel examination, The Service Industries Journal, 37:5-6, 317-340, DOI: 10.1080/02642069.2017.1322959 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2017.1322959

Published online: 09 May 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 897

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 4 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=fsij20

THE SERVICE INDUSTRIES JOURNAL, 2017 VOL. 37, NOS. 5–6, 317–340 https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2017.1322959

Impact of customer experience on loyalty: a multichannel examination Isabelle Bruna, Lova Rajaobelina

b

, Line Ricard

b

and Bilitis Berthiaumeb

a

Faculty of Business Administration, University of Moncton, Moncton, Canada; bSchool of Business and Management, ESG – University of Quebec in Montreal, Montreal, Canada ABSTRACT

ARTICLE HISTORY

This article examines the relation between the five dimensions of customer experience advocated by Schmitt [1999a. Experiential Marketing. Journal of Marketing Management, 15, 53–67] (cognitive, affective, sensory, behavioural and social) and service provider loyalty. The examination focuses on two different channels, namely branch/agency (physical) and online (Webbased). A total of 484 panellists of a large Canadian polling firm self-administered a Web-based questionnaire regarding banking experience. The exercise was subsequently replicated in the tourism sector. Findings demonstrate that the main dimension impacting loyalty is the affective dimension (negative), thereby contributing handsomely to experiential marketing literature since negative emotions are rarely investigated. Findings also reveal that choice of channel exerts a moderating effect on the different dimensions influencing loyalty and that results vary from one sector to another. The multidimensional, multichannel, multisector approach selected for this study substantiates customer experience as complex and context specific. The authors also suggest practical implications and set out avenues of future research.

Received 12 July 2016 Accepted 21 April 2017 KEYWORDS

Marketing; loyalty; service industry; multichannel; customer experience

Introduction For years now, large numbers of service providers have endeavoured to develop consumer loyalty for a variety of reasons such as to trim costs, enhance word of mouth and increase revenue per purchase (Cielle, 2014; Reichheld, 1996). Marketing researchers have also manifested an interest in loyalty (e.g. Guest, 1964; Jacoby & Kyner, 1973; Oliver, 1999), electing to focus mainly on the impact of antecedents such as satisfaction, perceived quality, reputation (Pan, Sheng, & Xie, 2012) and website characteristics (Hsu, Wang, & Chih, 2013). Despite these ongoing efforts by academics and practitioners, loyalty remains an enduring challenge. At a point in time when it is increasingly difficult for companies to distinguish themselves by service alone, some believe that the route to differentiation lies in customer experience. Indeed, since the introduction of an experiential view of consumption (Holbrook & Hirschman, 1982), the traditional economic theory whereby consumers are CONTACT Isabelle Brun

[email protected]

© 2017 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group

318

I. BRUN ET AL.

deemed logical thinkers has been revisited. Today, the emotional aspect of customer experience is now considered of equal importance (Gentile, Spiller, & Noci, 2007). Some academics (e.g. Hosany & Witham, 2010; Mathwick, Malhotra, & Rigdon, 2001; Pine II & Gilmore, 1998) even point to the emergence of an experiential economy. For these authors, the focus in marketing has shifted, first from product to service and then from service to customer experience (Chang & Horng, 2010; Maklan & Klaus, 2011). One of the chief buzzwords in marketing today, customer experience will doubtless prove a major priority in research going forward (Lemon & Verhoef, 2016). Schmitt (1999a) proffers a widely accepted conceptualization of the notion and considers five dimensions as representative of customer experience: cognitive (think), affective (feel), social or relational (relate), behavioural (act) and sensory (sense). These dimensions come replete with their own particularities and are distinguishable by their holistic conceptualization of customer experience. In light of ever-increasing competition and the ever-broadening scope of purchasing possibilities, could it be that service companies would be better advised to focus on the creation of positive customer experiences to more properly differentiate themselves from rivals and enhance customer loyalty? If so, appreciating that customer experience is a multidimensional concept, would it not follow that some dimensions are more important than others and should be prioritized in an effort to foster customer loyalty? Hence, the relevance of examining in detail the impact of each of these dimensions to bring differences to the fore and better grasp the factors that truly impact customer loyalty and help develop more targeted strategies. Although several authors have examined existing links between customer experience and loyalty (e.g. Brakus, Schmitt, & Zarantonello, 2009; Srivastava & Kaul, 2016), a more comprehensive treatment of customer experience and more in-depth analyses of the specific impact of each different dimension are lacking in academic literature. An investigation of this nature would address a knowledge gap relating to customer experience as a means of building a loyal customer base (Srivastava & Kaul, 2016). From another standpoint, Maklan and Klaus (2011, p. 785) postulate as follows: ‘It is likely that practising researchers will need to model customer experience for their unique context; current generic conceptualizations of experience may be too broad to be actionable and relevant in any one context.’ Indeed, key variables could differ based on the context (Lemke, Clark, & Wilson, 2011; Voss, Roth, & Chase, 2008), just as recent technologies spawn new kinds of experiences (Pine II & Gilmore, 1998). Nowadays, multiple touch points in a diversity of channels and media enable customers to interact with firms, rendering customer experience increasingly more complex and varied (Lemon & Verhoef, 2016). Consider the example of a Web-based environment (versus a physical setting) where consumers are exposed to different factors such as website interface, broader availability of information, round-the-clock accessibility from any location and absence of physical human presence. Differences such as these encountered in a virtual environment can stir emotions and elicit cognitive responses which, in turn, can cause individuals to adopt various behaviours. Hence the need for new studies to better comprehend customer experience in a multichannel environment (Klaus & Nguyen, 2013; Lemon & Verhoef, 2016). More precisely, it is relevant to investigate whether or not the impact of the dimensions of customer experience on customer loyalty differs based on the channel used (e.g. physical branch/agency versus Web-

THE SERVICE INDUSTRIES JOURNAL

319

based environment). If so, then service providers will be poised to tailor their strategies to the channel or channels of choice. Today’s well-informed consumers are demanding, use multiple channels and seek out rewarding, emotion-rich experiences. It is therefore important to better seize the notion of customer experience in all its magnitude and complexity, and investigate how it can be used to develop a loyal customer base. Accordingly, this article seeks to answer the following research questions: . .

What is the impact of customer experience on customer loyalty? Which dimensions of customer experience contribute most to customer loyalty? What is the nature of the moderating effect of the channel used (physical versus Webbased) on the impact of the dimensions of customer experience on loyalty?

To answer these research questions, this study advocates a multidimensional, multichannel and multisector examination to better understand the subtleties of the different experiential contexts, identify the key dimensions of customer experience and develop better adapted strategies. In the upcoming section, we provide an overview of literature on customer experience and the links between this concept and loyalty. Subsequently, we develop our research hypotheses and detail both the methodology employed and results obtained. In the discussion section, we substantiate the practical implications, limits and conclusions of the research conducted.

Theoretical background In this section, we define customer experience and expose the links between the concept and loyalty. We then examine the dimensions of customer experience with a view to formulating our research hypotheses.

Customer experience In 1982, Holbrook and Hirschman demonstrated that consumer behaviour was not solely rational. Rather, the senses, imagination, feelings and even consumer involvement enter into the decision making equation. Customers are drawn not only to products but also to product sense and meaning (Carù & Cova, 2006). Since Holbrook and Hirschman’s (1982) paper, a number of researchers have manifested an interest in experiential marketing. They have attempted to better grasp the concept of customer experience, the dimensions of the latter, their impact on behaviour and their potential for aiding in the development of successful marketing strategies. More specifically, customer experience has been defined as a multidimensional, holistic evaluation (e.g. Gentile et al., 2007; Hosany & Witham, 2010; Schmitt, 1999b) involving a customer’s cognitive, affective, emotional, social and physical responses to a company (Verhoef et al., 2009) throughout the entirety of a purchase journey (Lemon & Verhoef, 2016). This experience represents the customer’s personal, internal and subjective response, a response shaped by all points of contact and interaction direct or indirect (Meyer & Schwager, 2007) with a product, company or part of an organization (Gentile et al., 2007):

320

I. BRUN ET AL.

This experience is created not only by those elements which the retailer can control (e.g., service interface, retail atmosphere, assortment, price), but also by elements that are outside of the retailer’s control (e.g. influence of others, purpose of shopping). … the customer experience encompasses the total experience, including the search, purchase, consumption and after-sale phases of the experience, and may involve multiple retail channels (Verhoef et al., 2009, p. 32).

Since customer experience manifests at various levels for consumers, different dimensions must be examined to substantiate the breadth of the concept. As the dimensions identified by Schmitt (1999a) – cognitive, affective, behavioural, sensory and social – offer a broad, holistic and comprehensive vision of customer experience, they have been privileged as the basis for research in the field (e.g. Brakus et al., 2009; Gentile et al., 2007; Tsaur, Chiu, & Wang, 2006; Verhoef et al., 2009) and have become widely accepted (Lemon & Verhoef, 2016). These dimensions are discussed in greater detail in the following sections. The trend to an experiential approach in marketing coincides with one of the weightiest challenges ever to impact the manner in which companies and consumers interact, namely the advent of the Internet (Maklan & Klaus, 2011). Novak, Hoffman, and Yung (2000) figure among the first to examine online customer experience based on a generally cognitive approach through the notion of flow, a state of total immersion in which the individual in an electronic environment is completely absorbed by the task at hand. An affective approach has since been added (Rose, Clark, Samouel, & Hair, 2012), characterized by the presence of emotions during the online experience. Ensuring quality online customer experience can indeed be key to commercial success in a fiercely competitive environment where customer retention is crucial. It is therefore interesting to identify which of the dimensions advocated by Schmitt (1999a) (cognitive, affective, social, behavioural and sensory) are deemed to be of the greatest importance in an online environment, the object being to create memorable, positive experiences with customers increasingly open unto the world. Lastly, despite services being highly experiential by nature, research into customer experience in this particular industry is scant or lacking according to Khan and Rahman (2015) who examined 73 studies on brand experience. Customer experience is, however, extremely important in the service industry by reason of the inherent intangibility of services and co-creation among players (Jaakkola, Helkkula, & Aarikka-Stenroos, 2015). ‘Conventional wisdom holds that the customer contact model of service implies that any contact or “moment of truth” is a customer experience’ (Voss et al., 2008, p. 248). For some, customer experience lies at the heart of the service offer (Shobeiri, Mazaheri, & Laroche, 2014; Zomerdijk & Voss, 2010), further supporting a need for investigating this important topic in service literature.

Links between customer experience and loyalty Constituting a pool of loyal customers represents a leading goal for many service companies. Loyalty is often associated with a favourable attitude and repetitive behaviour, thereby evidencing the conceptualization advocated by Jacoby and Kyner (1973) (1) the biased (i.e. non-random) (2) behavioural response (i.e. purchase) (3) expressed over time (4) by some decision making unit (5) with respect to one or more alternative brands

THE SERVICE INDUSTRIES JOURNAL

321

out of a set of such brands (6) is a function of psychological (decision making, evaluative) processes. (p. 2)

The study of the impact of customer experience on the latter is therefore consequential. Lemon and Verhoef (2016) indeed identify the consequences of customer experience as one of the critical areas for research in this field and call for further investigation respecting loyalty. An examination of previous literature has identified authors having investigated the links between customer experience and loyalty (research summarized in Table 1). From this table, it is plain to see that few researchers have broached Web-based environments, none has touched upon both channels and most tend to base their research on the hedonic (e.g. tourism). The studies appearing in the table nonetheless provide a theoretical framework for the research at hand. Basing ourselves on Table 1, we can confirm that the dimensions advocated by Schmitt (1999a) (sensory, affective, cognitive, behavioural and social) occur more frequently in experiential marketing research (e.g. Brakus et al., 2009; Iglesias, Singh, & Batista-Foguet, 2011; Sahin, Zehir, & Kitapçı, 2011; Tsaur et al., 2006), with few researchers having examined other dimensions of customer experience (e.g. dimensions of entertainment, education, aesthetics and escape pointed up by Pine II & Gilmore, 2011). This having been said, Brakus et al. (2009) eliminate the social dimension from Schmitt’s conceptualization, as do Iglesias et al. (2011) and Sahin et al. (2011) who stray from the scale developed by Brakus given correlation to the affective dimension (loading on the same factor). They conclude that ‘the socially worded items include strong emotional aspects’ (Brakus et al., 2009, p. 58). For the purpose of this study, the social dimension will be considered since multichannel differences could come to light, especially given that a physical branch/agency has a more tangible social component than the Web-based alternative. Customer experiences are more social than ever before (Lemon & Verhoef, 2016). Hence, the social dimension cannot be ignored. Lastly, the table evidences that no previous study has examined the direct and distinct impact of the different dimensions of customer experience advocated by Schmitt (1999a) on loyalty. Some investigate an indirect relation (e.g. Tsaur et al. 2006) and view the link to loyalty as emotion-based or focus on the integrative impact of the various dimensions (e.g. Brakus et al., 2009; Sahin et al., 2011), thereby rendering the contributions made by this research all the more important. In the next section, we explain the different dimensions of customer experience, present hypotheses relating to loyalty and expose the conceptual framework used.

Impact of the dimensions of customer experience on customer loyalty As mentioned, those researchers having examined customer experience based on the dimensions advocated by Schmitt (1999a) view it above all as an integrative concept (e.g. Brakus et al., 2009; Iglesias et al., 2011; Sahin et al., 2011). They indeed test ‘global’ or ‘integrated’ customer experience to ascertain the impact on loyalty. Since the dimensions are deemed to be separate and have their own individual idiosyncrasies, we believe it relevant to investigate the direct impact of each separately. Accordingly, this study nuances the importance of each of the dimensions and sheds light on the facets of customer experience that service companies would be well advised to prioritize to enhance customer loyalty.

Authors

Sector/ context Retail business

Tsaur et al. (2006)

Tourism

Brakus et al. (2009) Brand Slåtten, Tourism Mehmetoglu, Svensson, and Sværi, (2009) Iglesias et al. (2011) Brand

Objective

Study the relation between CE and brand loyalty

Luo et al. (2011)

Web

Study the relation between virtual experiential marketing, site browsing intentions, purchasing and loyalty

Sahin et al. (2011)

Brand

Identify the relations between CE, satisfaction, trust and loyalty

Zhou and Lu (2011) Mobile Identify mobile experience factors messaging impacting loyalty

Mhaya, Najjar, and Jannet (2013)

Web

Ali, Hussain, and Ragavan (2014)

Tourism

Srivastava and Kaul Retail (2016)

Dimensions of experience

Develop an instrument to measure Value of goods, store consumer satisfaction based on shopping environment, social experience interaction, assortment of goods, complaints management (Terblanche & Boshoff, 2006 ) Examine the effects of CE on consumer Sensory, affective, cognitive, behaviour physical/behavioural, social (Schmitt, 1999a) Determine whether CE can predict Sensory, affective, intellectual, consumer behaviour behavioural (adapted from Schmitt, 1999a) Describe and explain the relations between Social interaction, design, atmosphere, joy and loyalty ambience Sensory, affective, intellectual, behavioural (Brakus et al., 2009) Senses, interaction, pleasure, flow, relations with community (e.g. Mathwick et al., 2001; Pine II & Gilmore, 1998; Schmitt, 1999a) Sensory, affective, intellectual, behavioural (Brakus et al., 2009) Network: size and perceived complementarity (Lin & Bhattacherjee, 2008)/Flow: perceived amusement and concentration (Koufaris, 2002) Emotional reactions, social interaction

Methodology

Findings (impact on loyalty)

Questionnaire administered by e-mail, 3153 customers

Only one dimension of experience found not to impact loyalty (environment). The five others indirectly impact loyalty through satisfaction

Self-administered questionnaire, 405 visitors Final face-to-face survey, 209 students

The five dimensions of experience positively impact emotions which subsequently impact satisfaction and loyalty Experience (integrated) directly impacts loyalty and indirectly through brand personality

Self-administered questionnaire, 162 visitors

Social interaction and design directly impact loyalty through a sense of joy

Online and paper questionnaire, 195 students Online questionnaire, 976 buyers

Experience (integrated) does not directly impact loyalty but does so indirectly through affective commitment Experience indirectly impacts loyalty through site browsing and purchasing intentions

Self-administered Experience (integrated) directly impacts loyalty and questionnaire, 258 indirectly through trust and satisfaction consumers Questionnaire All dimensions of experience indirectly impact loyalty administered: 223 mobile through perceived usefulness Internet users

Study the relational consequences of Online questionnaire, 226 No dimension of experience directly impacts loyalty. browsing experience on a nonrespondents Dimensions indirectly impact loyalty through transactional website satisfaction Examine the impact of CE on memory and Education, entertainment, Self-administered Each dimension of experience positively impacts loyalty aesthetics, escape (Pine II & questionnaire, 450 loyalty (intention) Gilmore, 2011) respondents Study the impact of CE on attitudinal Feel, relate, sense, think (Brakus Self-administered Experience (integrated) directly impacts attitudinal and behavioral loyalty et al., 2009) questionnaire, 840 retail and behavioral loyalty which in turn leads to greater customers share of wallet

I. BRUN ET AL.

Terblanche and Boshoff (2006)

322

Table 1. Studies on customer experience (CE) and loyalty.

THE SERVICE INDUSTRIES JOURNAL

323

In this segment, we present the five dimensions of customer experience and identify the potential impact of each on customer loyalty. Given the scarcity of work having examined the impact of each dimension on loyalty, for some hypotheses we present additional academic findings regarding derived consumer behaviour (e.g. word of mouth, purchase intentions, etc.). The cognitive dimension concerns the consumer’s cognitive processes. It seeks to lead consumers to think and engage their creativity by surprising, intriguing and provoking them (Fornerino, Helme-guizon, & De Gaudemaris, 2005; Schmitt, 1999b). In other words, the experience must be enriching, enhance teaching and discovery, and hone consumer skills (Holbrook, 2000; Pine II & Gilmore, 2011). In some cases, the cognitive experience can even empower customers to resolve certain issues (Gentile et al., 2007). Lastly, the cognitive experience provides a means of engaging consumers and developing loyalty to a company (Schmitt, 1999b). Donovan, Rossiter, Marcoolyn, and Nesdale (1994) demonstrate that awareness achieved by dint of the cognitive experience impacts the time spent in a store and purchases made. Moreover, a study by Swinyard (1993) reveals that when consumers are directly involved, they are more attentive to product quality and available information, two factors which influence purchase intentions. In a Web-based environment, flow impacts both consumer engagement and loyalty (Fuglsang & Sundbo, 2006). Hence, we hypothesize as follows: H1: The cognitive dimension of customer experience positively impacts loyalty.

‘The distinctive characteristics of services suggest that it is particularly apt that consumer emotional responses are now also being considered’ (Mudie, Cottam, & Raeside, 2003, p. 85). In eliciting consumer emotions, the affective dimension spawns a mental state accompanied by physical and physiological processes which can lead to concrete action (Bagozzi, Gopinath, & Nyer, 1999). For example, interest, joy, surprise, sadness, anger and disgust are all emotions which can be felt by consumers. The first three rank as positive, while the latter three qualify as negative. Researchers such as Schmitt (1999a), Brakus et al. (2009) and Tsaur et al. (2006) do not generally include negative emotions in their studies. The affective dimension is nonetheless enriched by taking into account both positive and negative emotions (Fornerino, Helme-Guizon, & Gotteland, 2006). Accordingly, we include and make allowance for each in this study. Eliciting positive emotions from consumers is a good means of enhancing word of mouth, enticing consumers to pay more and boosting repeat business (Barsky & Nash, 2002; Yu & Dean, 2001). Others have demonstrated the inverse impact of negative emotions on consumer behaviour, including decreased consumer loyalty (Roos, Friman, & Edvardsson, 2009). Chebat and Slusarczyk (2005) find that positive and negative emotions both impact consumer loyalty in the banking sector (bank branch environment), especially in instances of service recovery. We therefore hypothesize as follows: H2: The affective (+) dimension of customer experience positively impacts loyalty. H3: The affective (−) dimension of customer experience negatively impacts loyalty.

The sensory dimension relates to the perception of experience through the senses. Each of the five senses, namely sight, hearing, touch, taste and smell, can be solicited (Fornerino

324

I. BRUN ET AL.

et al., 2005; Schmitt, 1999b). The experience can transform an environment (e.g. physical branch/agency) and render it more pleasurable for the consumer (Filser, 2002; Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry, 1988; Pine II & Gilmore, 2011). Lastly, the sensory aspect can be experienced through different points of contact such as advertisements, the Web and points of sale (Filser, 2003). According to Babin and Attaway (2000), environment and atmosphere can enhance consumer retention by developing a lasting consumption relation with the customer. From a sports marketing perspective and in trying to understand how consumers experience the stadium through their senses, Lee, Heere, and Chung (2013) found that sight, touch and smell positively affected the team loyalty. We therefore hypothesize as follows: H4: The sensory dimension of customer experience positively impacts loyalty.

The behavioural dimension supposes that customer experience affects consumers physically by modifying action taken, habits and lifestyles (Carù & Cova, 2006; Fornerino et al., 2005; Schmitt, 1999b). This dimension, more than any of the others, begets confusion in existing literature, if only because it is not consistently defined or measured in the same manner by the different authors. For example, in topical literature, there are authors who refer to the amount of money disbursed (Bakini Driss, Jerbi, & Ben Lallouna Hafsia, 2009), time spent in the store or time devoted to unplanned purchases (Donovan et al., 1994). According to us, these forms of action could be confused with loyalty-associated behaviour or the consequences of customer experience (e.g. time allotted or dollar amount spent) and not the experiential act itself. Furthermore, ‘behavior analysis should move beyond choice processes that lead to purchase decisions and include experiences that customers have as a result of using a product or service’ (Payne, Storbacka, & Frow, 2008, p. 87); for example, engaging in physical actions and behaviours when using a brand (Brakus et al., 2009). Therefore, we are of the opinion that the behavioural dimension of customer experience must seek to point up behaviour linked to the act of consumption (e.g. take part in the co-creation of a product or service, share in its discovery, etc.). Such is the perspective retained for the purpose of this study. While literature regarding the distinct impact of the behavioural dimension of customer experience is rare, research conducted by Reniou (2009) demonstrates that customer participation in proposed activities generates word of mouth with consumers. Hence, the following assumption: H5: The behavioural dimension of customer experience positively impacts loyalty.

Customer experiences today are more social than ever before given the myriad channels, media and touch points that customers enjoy with companies and diversity of interaction involved (Lemon & Verhoef, 2016). The social dimension can be defined as ‘interaction or communion with other individuals’ (Fornerino et al., 2006, p. 10). An experience, albeit individual by nature, forms part of a social context where individuals interrelate with one another (e.g. employees and other consumers) (Yi & Gong, 2009). Accordingly, the social dimension broached in this research focuses on consumer interaction (HelmeGuizon, 2001), the sense of belonging (Nasermoadeli, Ling, & Maghnati, 2013), socialization and sustainment or perpetuation of links between companies and consumers (Nambisan, 2005), and identification.

THE SERVICE INDUSTRIES JOURNAL

325

Both customer-to-customer and customer-to-employee relationships contribute to the development of customer loyalty (Genzi & Pelloni, 2004). Regarding the presence of other consumers, Pareigis, Edvardsson, and Enquist (2011) demonstrate that this dimension cannot be neglected in a service context. Lemke et al. (2011) support the conceptualization of the influence of the role of other consumers on purchase behaviour, retention and word of mouth despite the indirect nature of the impact. Moreover, customers having entertained sound relations with employees tend to come back and recommend the company to their friends (Sivadas & Baker-Prewitt, 2000). We therefore hypothesize as follows: H6: The social dimension of customer experience positively impacts loyalty.

Moderating effect of channel Owing to the distinct differences between physical branch/agency settings and alternate online environments, we believe that the impact of the dimensions of customer experience on loyalty varies based on the channel used. However, given the dearth of studies having examined the experience-based differences between these contexts, academic support remains sparse. Accordingly, in this segment of our research, we have adopted an exploratory approach to the predicted moderating effect of the channel used (physical versus Web-based) on the impact of the dimensions of customer experience on loyalty. The hypothesis therefore remains general, hence the following assumption: H7: The impact of the dimensions of customer experience on loyalty will differ based on the channel used (physical versus Web-based).

In the following paragraphs, we discuss several predicted impacts in different contexts based on our examination of existing literature which we present in Table 2. To begin with, research substantiates the importance of the cognitive dimension of customer experience in an electronic context. More precisely, Novak, Hoffman, and Yung (2000), in their conceptualization of online experience flow, explain that it is a cognitive state determined by such factors as levels of focused attention, skill, challenge, arousal, etc. ‘Flow makes the user feel that he has solved a problem or obtained more knowledge’ (Fuglsang & Sundbo, 2006, p. 631). These authors, who examined Web-based travel booking, add that flow can help foster online consumer engagement and loyalty, especially when the service is complex. Engaging the customer’s cognitive responses appears to be extremely important in a Web-based setting. Hence, it can be predicted that this dimension exerts a greater impact on loyalty in a virtual environment. Table 2. Predicted moderating impact of channel used (physical versus Web-based). Predicted impact of channel Dimensions Cognitive Affective (−) Affective (+) Sensory Behavioural Social

Physical (branch)

Web-based + + +

+ + +

326

I. BRUN ET AL.

Regarding the affective dimension, Leelakulthanit and Hongcharu (2011) demonstrate that positive emotions impact online but not offline repurchase intentions in the banking sector. It therefore follows that the impact of positive emotions should be greater online than in an offline physical branch/agency location. The same likely applies to negative emotions such as in an online environment where consumers are oftentime left to their own devices. Frustrations can be addressed quickly and easily in a physical location given ready access to onsite personnel. Online, however, companies cannot pick up on negative consumer emotion until such time as it is actually expressed. As for the sensory dimension, the latter is more accessible in a physical commercial context (such as a branch/agency location) given potential solicitation of all five senses whereas touch, taste and smell are absent in a virtual environment (Eroglu, Machleit, & Davis, 2003). This dimension is therefore likely to have a greater impact on loyalty in a branch or agency setting. Subsequently, the behavioural dimension should also reveal differences. For example, in a physical setting, it is generally more difficult to draw comparisons with the service offers of rival companies. In a Web-based environment, however, consumer involvement is greater given that it is the consumers themselves who engage in browsing, information searches, etc. Accordingly, the impact of the behavioural dimension should be greater online than offline. Lastly, the impact of the social dimension could vary in accordance with the channel used. Compared with the branch/agency setting where employees and other customers are present, the Web-based context means that the consumer is alone in front of his or her computer screen. In their exploratory research, Pareigis et al. (2011) reveal that frontline staff and other consumers play an extremely important role in delivering a positive service experience in a traditional, non-electronic context. The social dimension would therefore appear to exert a greater impact in a branch or agency setting than in an online context. Study findings enable us to understand more fully the impact of the channel used on customer experience and loyalty. Figure 1 illustrates the conceptual framework of the study and the research hypotheses. The following section presents the methodology used to test the proposed model and related hypotheses.

Methodology In this section, we present the research sector, data collection process and questionnaire measurements.

Research sector The object of this research is to understand the impact of customer experience and the dimensions of the latter on customer loyalty in the service sector, and to ascertain whether there exist any differences based on the channel used (moderating impact of physical location versus virtual environment). Khan and Rahman (2015), who deplore the lack of experiential marketing research in the service industry, suggest that sectors such as hospitality, tourism, banking and airlines be examined. We therefore selected the banking industry to test hypotheses H1–H7. Since findings from a single sector are

THE SERVICE INDUSTRIES JOURNAL

327

Figure 1. Conceptual framework.

not particularly conducive to generalization, we deemed it appropriate to validate results by replicating our analyses in the tourism industry. With banking considered more utilitarian and tourism more hedonic, the investigation of these two industries should also shed light on contrasting settings. The choices made further reflect the importance of these service sectors for consumers in both offline and online offline contexts. For example, in Canada, 55% consider the Internet as their primary means of banking (Canadian Bankers Association, 2015). In tourism, when planning a trip, online platforms represent one of the principal sources of information for 65% of travellers (Google, 2014). That said, even though the banking and tourism industries are fairly well represented in topical marketing literature and journals (e.g. International Journal of Bank Marketing, Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing), no study on the impact of customer experience on customer loyalty has been conducted in a multichannel context despite the everincreasing presence and use of the Internet in these sectors.

Data collection An electronic survey was used as this method makes it possible to reach a large number of respondents in short order. For the purpose of this study, customers were required to have made use of both channels (physical and virtual).

328

I. BRUN ET AL.

Data collection took place in two stages, with banking customers targeted in the first phase and tourism customers targeted in the second phase. Data were collected in cooperation with one of the largest research firms in Canada, composed of more than 450,000 panelists at the time. They randomly dispatching invitations to panelists urging them to take part in the survey. For the banking sector, while 502 individuals answered the survey, the final number of useable Web-based, self-administered questionnaires represented a sample of 484 adult Canadians having one or more bank accounts or other products with a financial institution, and having visited their institution’s website and physical branch facilities during the past year. Although the final sample comprised 484 individuals, the total number of responses used in our analyses (n = 968) reflects our inclusion of both physical (n = 484) and virtual (n = 484) customer experience evaluations. For the tourism sector, while 720 participants took part in the survey, the final sample results in 289 respondents. The high number of non-usable questionnaires in this case is a consequence of the low incidence of people having visited both a physical travel agency and the latter’s website in the last year which was a prerequisite for the purpose of this study. Eleven respondents were removed owing to extreme values and contradictory or repetitive responses, resulting in a final sample of 289 adult Canadians. Survey respondents comprised equal proportions of women and men (50% for each of the two sectors, banking and tourism) and stemmed mainly from the ‘35–54’ (37% and 38%, respectively) and ‘54+’ (36% and 37%, respectively) age brackets. Unsurprisingly, respondent income in the banking sector varied more given that the majority of people are bank account holders (regardless of income). Income in the tourism industry tended to be higher given the necessity of being able to afford travel-related expenses (discretionary spending). More specifically, in the tourism sector some 80% of respondents indicated an income of $60 000+, while the corresponding figure for the banking sector dropped to 60%.

Measurements To ensure proper measurement of the concepts and a quality instrument, a pretest was administered which consisted of a Web-based survey completed by a convenience sample of 115 consumers. The survey was posted on researcher Facebook pages, and friends and acquaintances invited to respond provided that they met the criteria for participation: (1) Canadian citizen over 18 years of age, (2) conducted business with a financial institution, and (3) had completed in-branch and online banking transactions during the last year. This pretest allowed us to review, modify and refine the questionnaire by deleting, adding or reformulating items, or changing wording and layout as required, etc. For this pretest, an exploratory factor analysis was performed to detail the dimensions of customer experience. From this analysis, seven items associated with the cognitive, affective and behavioural dimensions were removed owing to factor loadings of less than 0.40 or cross-loadings. In the final questionnaire, consumer loyalty was measured based on three items. For customer experience, defined in accordance with the five dimensions advocated by Schmitt (1999a) and including negative affective experience, 23 statements were used to identify customer experience (see Appendix 1 for items and authors). All measurements

THE SERVICE INDUSTRIES JOURNAL

329

were presented using 7-point Likert-type scales where 1 = totally disagree and 7 = totally agree. It was necessary to complete and adapt existing items for the service sector, in particular the banking and tourism industries. The same questions were used to measure branch/agency and Web-based experiences. Since we used self-reported data, there exists the potential for the occurrence of common method variance. Two procedures were carried out to address the issue. Firstly, a Harmon one-factor test was conducted (Podsakoff & Organ, 1986). The results of the principal component factor analysis revealed that one factor accounted for 28.72% (less than 50%) of the variance, but did not account for a majority of the variance (Podsakoff, Mackenzie, & Lee, 2003). Further, as recommended by Podsakoff et al. (2003), the multifactor measurement model was tested using an additional method factor. Overall, this model demonstrated acceptable data fit (CFI of 0.91 and a root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] of 0.069). All paths remained significant and of similar amplitude which could not be explained by a systematic error inherent in the method (Grégoire, Laufer, & Tripp, 2010).

Findings In the following sections, the theoretical framework is tested using structural equation modelling (EQS 6.2). A maximum likelihood estimation procedure was favoured and deemed the most appropriate owing to the lack of normality in the population (Mardia’s (1970) coefficient = 59.2708), which could have led to an overestimation of the chi-square statistic and an underestimation of the fit indices (Byrne, 1994). The scaled chi-square and ‘robust’ standard errors using maximum likelihood estimation are advocated by Satorra and Bentler (1994), and appear to be a good general approach for dealing with non-normality (Hu, Bentler, & Kano, 1992). A two-step approach, such as recommended by Anderson and Gerbing (1988), is employed where we first estimate the measurement model and then the structural model. Table 3 synthesizes results obtained for the measurement and structural models tested in the banking industry. Lastly, we perform a multiple-group analysis to test the moderating effect of channel on the impact of the dimensions of customer experience on loyalty. This analysis is first carried out in the banking industry to test Hypothesis 7 and then replicated in the tourism industry to compare results.

Measurement model Firstly, for the measurement models and as indicated in Table 3, the goodness-of-fit indices show that results fit the data well when examined using EQS 6.2 software. While the χ2 value Table 3. Measurement and structural model results. Indices χ value Sig. Degrees of freedom (df) χ 2/df NNFI CFI RMSEA 90% confidence interval of RMEA 2

Measurement model

Structural model

1120.17 0.00 231 4.85 0.90 0.91 0.07 0.066–0.073

1114.66 0.00 231 4.82 0.90 0.91 0.07 0.066–0.073

330

I. BRUN ET AL.

is presented, the relative chi-square statistic (χ2/df) is increasingly used as a measure of fit since the likelihood ratio of the chi-square statistic is known to be sensitive to sample size (Byrne, 2006). The value in this study stands at 4.85 which indicates a good fit given the value of less than 5 (Schumacker & Lomax, 2004). The non-normed fit index (NNFI) works out to 0.90 which is consistent with the 0.90 threshold recommended by Kline (2005). As for the CFI, the recommended cut-off of 0.90 (Hu & Bentler, 1999) is respected, the figure for the model being 0.91. The RMSEA is an indicator of how well the model would fit the population covariance matrix if it were available; the values (between 0.066 and 0.073) obtained for this model indicate a satisfactory fit (Hu & Bentler, 1999). The final confirmatory factor analysis results determine unidimensionality and show that the indicators each load on their respective construct (see Appendix 1). More specifically, all coefficient alpha estimates are greater than 0.70 (Nunnally, 1978) (ranging from 0.72 for the behavioural dimension to 0.91 for the loyalty construct). As for composite reliabilities, they are all greater than 0.70 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981), ranging from 0.75 for the behavioural dimension to 0.92 for the loyalty construct. Reliability through internal consistency is thereby confirmed. To demonstrate convergent validity, it is recommended that factor loadings be significant and greater than or equal to 0.70 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). This threshold is achieved for all items (see Appendix 1) except for one (‘I tend to compare the financial institution’s/ travel agency’s products or services’) but the value of 0.67 remains close to the required threshold. In addition, the average variance extracted (AVE) is examined to see if it is greater than or equal to 0.50, demonstrating that variance owing to measurement error is less than variance explained by the construct (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). All values are equal or greater than the 0.50 threshold. To show discriminant validity of the constructs, AVE must be greater than the variance (squared correlations) between the proposed factor and all other factors (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Results in Table 3 show that discriminant validity is achieved in this study.

Structural model As for the structural model (see Table 3), it fits the data well (goodness-of-fit indices: χ2 (231) = 1114.66, χ2/df = 4.82, NNFI = 0.90, CFI = 0.91, RMSEA = 0.07 with a 90% confidence interval of 0.066–0.075). The results show that the conceptual model explains 23.5% of loyalty variance. By examining the structural model estimates (see Table 5 – Global impact on loyalty column), support is found for the hypothesized causal paths of the six dimensions except for affective (+) (H3) and sensory (H4) which do not significantly impact loyalty, as well as behavioural (H5) which has an impact albeit opposite to what had been estimated. More specifically, the behavioural dimension exerts a negative as opposed to a positive impact on loyalty. We elaborate further on these points in the discussion which follows. Regarding the importance of the impact of the various dimensions on loyalty, we observe that it is the affective dimension (−) which exerts the greatest impact (γ = −0.37, p < .01), followed by the (cognitive γ = 0.25, p < .01), social (γ = 0.20, p < .01) and behavioural (γ = −0.14, p < .01) dimensions (Table 4). As for the moderating variable (H7), the impact of certain dimensions on loyalty varies depending on channel for the banking sector as seen in Table 5. Hence, the results of the multiple-group analyses confirm Hypothesis 7. More specifically, the impact of the

THE SERVICE INDUSTRIES JOURNAL

331

Table 4. Discriminant validitya (Banking, n = 968). Constructs Cognitive (1) Affective (−) (2) Affective(+) (3) Sensory (4) Behavioural (5) Social (6) a

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

0.62 0.00 0.24 0.36 0.25 0.09

0.64 0.04 0.02 0.04 0.02

0.66 0.50 0.08 0.34

0.69 0.08 0.31

0.50 0.01

0.65

Average variance extracted on-diagonal and squared correlations among constructs off-diagonal.

Table 5. Standardized parameter estimates. Impacts of moderating variable (H7) Banking Constructs H1 cognitive H2 affective (−) H3 affective (+) H4 sensory H5 behavioural H6 social R2 (loyalty)

Global impact on loyalty γ = 0.25** γ = −0.37** γ = ns γ = ns γ = −0.14** γ = 0.20** 23.5%

Branch (n = 484) γ = 0.21** γ = −0.36** γ = ns γ = ns γ = −0.24** γ = 0.35** 31%

+ +

Tourism

Web (n = 484)

Branch (n = 289)

Web (n = 289)

γ = 0.22** γ = −0.33** γ = ns γ = ns γ = ns γ = 0.12* 17.8%

γ = 0.44** γ = −0.29** γ = ns γ = ns γ = ns γ = 0.29** 58.4%

γ = 0.41** γ = −0.28** γ = ns γ = 0.24* γ = −0.24* + γ = ns 32.4%

**Significant at 99%,*significant at 95%, ns – non-significant, (+) significant difference between branch and Web.

behavioural dimension is greater in a branch context (γ = −0.24, p < .01 versus non-significant for a Web-based environment). The same is true for the social dimension (γ = 0.35, p < .01) versus for a Web-based environment (γ = 0.12, p < .01). These results confirm that the impact of customer experience dimensions on loyalty differs based on the channel used (branch/agency versus Web-based). To see if these results were sector-specific or not, we retested our hypothesis in another industry. Accordingly, a multiple-group analysis was carried out in the tourism industry using a different database. Results substantiate that there are differences between agency and Webbased environments in this case, especially for the behavioural dimension (γ = −0.24, p < .01 for Web-based context versus non-significant for an agency setting). We also find that the sensory dimension exerts an impact in a Web-based environment but not in an agency-based setting. The opposite is true for the social dimension which exerts an impact in an agency-based setting but not in a Web-based environment. Customer experience and the dimensions of the latter therefore vary based on context regardless of channel or industry. We examine these findings more closely in the following section.

Discussion This study contributes handsomely to topical literature on a number of different levels. Indeed, to date, few authors have chosen to focus on an examination of the impact of the different dimensions of customer experience on loyalty. In addition, through the use of a multichannel approach (branch/agency versus Web-based), this research contributes to a broader understanding of customer experience. In fact, at present, there are precious few studies which measure the impact of channel-specific customer experience on

332

I. BRUN ET AL.

customer loyalty; Terblanche and Boshoff (2006) examined the impact of in-store shopping experience on retailer loyalty and Mhaya, Najjar, and Ben Jannet (2013), the impact of social interaction and emotional reactions on loyalty in the case of social media. In substantiating that customer experience can and does vary based on the sector under investigation, this study’s multisector examination (banking and tourism) demonstrates that consumers reap different types of experiences based on one or other of the channel or service targeted. The remaining sections highlight noteworthy findings and resultant managerial implications. Study limitations and possible avenues of future research are then presented.

Impact of the dimensions of customer experience on customer loyalty: A multichannel, multisector examination This study brings to the fore interesting results relating to the impact of the dimensions of customer experience (cognitive, affective, sensory, behavioural and social) on loyalty in both online and offline channels in each of the banking and tourism sectors. Hence, our discussion focuses on four different contexts, namely branch/banking, online/banking, agency/tourism and online/tourism. Firstly, topical literature had led us to believe that the cognitive dimension would have a greater impact in an electronic environment. However, this dimension was found to have an impact on customer loyalty in all four models whether in an online or offline context. Results show that the fact of causing consumers to learn something and remain attentive to events around them can result in enhanced customer loyalty all around. It is noteworthy to point out that this dimension is the one which exerts the greatest impact on loyalty in tourism both online and offline. Service providers in the tourism industry are thus encouraged to embrace strategies designed to foster positive cognitive responses. Respecting managerial implications, in a traditional physical setting, brochures, posters, prospectuses and lighted display panels may be available and used to detail current highlights and promotions. In instances where customers have recourse to services provided by employees, the latter should be trained to share their knowledge of the services on offer, including service characteristics, benefits and usefulness. In a Web-based context, ‘the service provider must provide opportunities for interaction and feedback through a personal backup system, typically a consumer-oriented help desk function’ (Fuglsang & Sundbo, 2006, p. 379). Additionally, to foster customer learning and discovery, it is also advisable to include in one’s Web strategy useful articles, forums, blogs, newsletters, infographics, reports, testimonials and studies. Secondly, topical literature purports that both positive and negative affective dimensions will have a greater impact in a Web-based environment. However, findings reveal that the positive affective dimension exerts no significant impact on loyalty, whatever the nature of the context. This finding could owe to the scale of measurement. Indeed, strong, spirited, positive emotions (surprise, entertainment, enchantment) were measured. People experience emotions of the like to a very slight extent in the cases under study (e.g. average of 3.05/7 in the branch/banking sector context). In the banking industry, could it be that customers are not especially fond of being surprised or caught off guard, especially given the utilitarian nature of the sector and the high level of personal involvement? Findings perhaps would have been different had simpler, less intense emotions been used (e.g.

THE SERVICE INDUSTRIES JOURNAL

333

joy, happiness). In future research, it would therefore be relevant to make allowance for the intensity of the emotions measured. Studies examining the affective dimension (e.g. Brakus et al., 2009; Tsaur et al., 2006) focus on positive emotions to the exclusion of their negative counterparts. Often neglected, inclusion of the negative aspect constitutes added value for the research at hand. More particularly, findings demonstrate that the negative affective dimension exerts a significant impact in all models especially in the banking context where it is found to be the most important dimension in both branch-based and Web-based environments. Results indeed substantiate that the arousal of negative consumer emotions is not conducive to building customer loyalty. This observation is not surprising given that consumers not wishing a repeat of a negative emotional experience will tend to avoid the company or service entity responsible in the future. In the hospitality industry, for example, negative emotions tend to have a greater impact on satisfaction than positive emotions (Han & Back, 2007). Ideally, action should be taken to avoid all manner of online and offline customer frustrations. Online, it would be important to ensure that browsing is easy and intuitive. In a branch setting, it would be important that staff be courteous, competent and properly trained. While upstream prevention remains the option of choice, service entities must be poised to react quickly and effectively when issues occur. Thirdly, the sensory dimension is found to have no real impact. In the image of the positive emotional dimension, the sensory dimension is ranked low by consumers (average of 3.21/7). This could be explained by the sector under investigation. Indeed, in the banking industry, services deemed generally more functional, structured and rigid can be perceived as less stimulating or sensorial. In the tourism sector, compared with their European counterparts, Canadian travel agencies have yet to deploy exceptional efforts at the servicescape level which could explain the absence of the sensory dimension in the agency/ tourism sector model. It had been predicted that the sensory dimension would have a lesser impact in an electronic context given the fact that three out of the five senses are not solicited. For example, Luo, Chen, Ching, and Liu (2011) do not find support for the impact of the senses on browsing and purchase intentions which, in their online study, impacted loyalty. This having been said, the sole context in which the sensory dimension is found to have a significant impact in our study is in the Web-based environment/tourism sector model. Hence in the context of a more hedonic service, such as travel, sensory stimuli present on the Web contribute to a positive customer experience and enhance customer loyalty. More precisely, according to Sindhav and Adidam (2012), hedonic goods and services are more experiential by nature, meaning that they procure greater affective gratification and come replete with more salient sensory attributes. For example, the viewing of a video in an online context will necessarily prove more important in the tourism sector than in the banking industry. In the tourism sector, more than half of all travellers viewed videos relating to chosen destinations (Google, 2014). From a practical point of view, auditory and visual cues, such as colour, hue, graphics, design and music, must be well utilized to engage and arouse customers in an electronic environment (Eroglu et al., 2003). For example, companies could use colour intensity and luminosity to highlight designs or certain services. The stimuli could then be congruent or different based on novelties, promotions, period of the year or simply brand image. As for the behavioural dimension, it negatively impacts customer loyalty in a branch/ banking sector context, as well as in an online/tourism sector context. Indeed, the

334

I. BRUN ET AL.

behavioural aspect of customer experience is difficult to grasp in the banking sector and not nearly as evident as readily observable audience reactions (body movements, singing, etc.) to the likes of live stage performances. Moreover, in both sectors, could it be that behaviour measured (e.g. reviewing bank accounts/travel plans, comparing products and services) corresponds to behaviour exhibited by customers neither satisfied nor engaged? This might explain the negative impact on loyalty. That said, in addition to the fact that this dimension is not consistently defined or measured by the different authors, this study confirms that it should be examined in greater depth in the future. Lastly, as predicted, the social dimension is found to have an impact in the physical/ branch or agency environment in both sectors. Albeit marginal, the effect of this dimension manifests in online environments in the tourism industry. Indeed, social context is more evident in a physical setting (e.g. with employees and other customers) but does also appear to be relevant in some online environments. This could be explained by the fact that in a Web-based environment, co-creation is commonplace. Employee help and support therefore remain crucial. Accordingly, it is extremely important for service providers to ensure courteous service and positive attitudes from frontline employees in a physical setting and from resources tasked with chat functions in a virtual environment. The social aspect of a website can be further enhanced in some instances through the use of avatars. Finally, service providers would be advised to foster communication among customers as the latter play a role in shaping the social dimension of customer experience (e.g. creation of online discussion forums).

Limitations and directions for future research Some limits respecting measurements and variables must be mentioned. When considering the affective dimension, we opted to measure powerful emotions (e.g. surprise, entertainment). However, in a utilitarian context such as banking, these emotions are little frequent. Simpler emotions (e.g. joy, pleasure) could have been chosen. Moreover, even if the constructs are discriminant, a high level of correlation (0.71) was observed between the ‘emotions +’ and ‘sensory’ constructs, a result also obtained by Brakus et al. (2009). This could have impacted overall results. From another standpoint, even if choosing the banking and tourism sectors made it possible to differentiate the impact of the dimensions of customer experience on customer loyalty, any generalization of findings and application to other service industries would present its lot of challenges since this study confirms the context-specific nature of customer experience. Further research could focus on investigating whether differences relate more specifically to utilitarian or hedonic services. Although the research at hand revealed differences between the banking and tourism industries, results remain generally exploratory. Moreover, the multichannel environments present in today’s world mean that consumer experiences in each of the channels impact consumer experiences in other channels (e.g. online experience is impacted by in-store experience and vice versa) (Verhoef et al., 2009). It would be interesting to examine the impact of the experience of one channel on the experience of another. Readers will wish to bear in mind that just two channels were examined for the purpose of this study and that consumers may also use other forms (e.g. mobile, etc.). A comparative study of the synergy between branch/agency, Web-based and

THE SERVICE INDUSTRIES JOURNAL

335

mobile experiences would be relevant in an era in which consumers ever increasingly use smartphones and tablets to seek out information and conduct business. Lastly, a comparison between different countries could bring to the fore cultural differences which impact customer experience. It could well be that cognitive, affective, sensory, behavioural and social dimensions are more or less important in some cultures than in others. In conclusion, given the growing theoretical and practical importance of experiential marketing for fostering loyalty and other behavioural constructs in the service sector, we believe the field to be ripe with potential for future research.

Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the Financial Services Management Chair of the University of Quebec in Montreal for making this research possible.

Disclosure statement No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

ORCID Lova Rajaobelina http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3953-9428 Line Ricard http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0145-842X

References Ali, F., Hussain, K., & Ragavan, N. A. (2014). Memorable customer experience: Examining the effects of customers experience on memories and loyalty in Malaysian resort hotels. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 144, 273–279. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423. Babin, B. J., & Attaway, J. S. (2000). Atmospheric affect as a tool for creating value and gaining share of customer. Journal of Business Research, 49, 91–99. Bagozzi, R. P., Gopinath, M., & Nyer, P. U. (1999). The role of emotions in marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(2), 184–206. Bakini Driss, F., Jerbi, S., & Ben Lallouna Hafsia, H. (2009). Effet de la valeur perçue de magasinage sur le comportement du consommateur: Cas d’un point de vente spécialisé. Revue des Sciences de Gestion, 237(3), 177–185. Barnes, S. T., & Vidgen, R. T. (2002). An integrative approach to the assessment of e-commerce quality. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 3(3), 114–125. Barsky, J., & Nash, L. (2002). Evoking emotion: Affective keys to hotel loyalty. The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quartely, 43(1), 39–46. 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, 52–68. Byrne, B. M. (1994). Structural equation modeling with EQS and EQS/Windows: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Byrne, B. M. (2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Canadian Bankers Association. (2015). How Canadians bank. Retrieved from http://www.cba.ca/en/ media-room/50-backgrounders-on-banking-issues/125-technology-and-banking

336

I. BRUN ET AL.

Carù, A., & Cova, B. (2006). Expériences de consommation et marketing expérientiel. Revue Française de Gestion, 32, 99–115. Chang, T.-Y., & Horng, S.-C. (2010). Conceptualizing and measuring experience quality: The customer’s perspective. The Service Industries Journal, 30(4), 2401–2419. Chebat, J.-C., & Slusarczyk, W. (2005). How emotions mediate the effects of perceived justice on loyalty in service recovery situations: An empirical study. Journal of Business Research, 58(5), 664–673. Cielle, A. (2014). Comment trouver et fidéliser vos clients: 7 clés pour vendre plus et mieux (2nd ed.). Paris: Dunod. Donovan, R. J., Rossiter, R. J., Marcoolyn, G., & Nesdale, A. (1994). Store atmosphere and purchasing behavior. Journal of Retailing, 70(3), 283–294. Eroglu, S. A., Machleit, K. A., & Davis, L. M. (2003). Empirical testing of a model of online store atmospherics and shopper responses. Psychology & Marketing, 20(2), 139–150. Filser, M. (2002). Le marketing de la production d’expérience: Statut théorique et implications managériales. Decisions Marketing, 28, 13–23. Filser, M. (2003). Le marketing sensoriel: La quête de l’intégration théorique et managériale. Revue Française du Marketing, 194(4), 5–11. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. Fornerino, M., Helme-guizon, A., & De Gaudemaris, C. (2005, November). L’immersion dans une expérience de consommation : vers une échelle de mesure. Presented at 10ème Journée de Recherche en Marketing de Bourgogne, Dijon. Fornerino, M., Helme-Guizon, A., & Gotteland, D. (2006, May). Mesurer l’immersion dans une expérience de consommation: premiers développements. Presented at 22ème Congrès de l’Association Française de Marketing, Nantes. Fuglsang, L., & Sundbo, J. (2006). Flow and consumers in e-based self-services: New provider–consumer relations. The Service Industries Journal, 26(4), 361–379. Gentile, C., Spiller, N., & Noci, G. (2007). How to sustain the customer experience: An overview of experience components that co-create value with the customer. European Management Journal, 25(5), 395–410. Genzi, P., & Pelloni, O. (2004). The impact of interpersonal relationships on customer satisfaction and loyalty to the service provider. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 15(3), 365– 384. Google. (2014). The 2014 traveler’s road to decision. Retrieved from https://storage.googleapis.com/ think/docs/2014-travelers-road-to-decision_research_studies.pdf Grégoire, Y., Laufer, D., & Tripp, T. M. (2010). A comprehensive model of customer direct and indirect revenge: Understanding the effects of perceived greed and customer power. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 38(6), 738–758. Guest, L. (1964). Brand loyalty revisited: A twenty-year report. Journal of Applied Psychology, 48(2), 93– 97. Han, H., & Back, K. J. (2007). Assessing customers’ emotional experiences influencing their satisfaction in the lodging industry. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 23(1), 43–56. Helme-Guizon, A. (2001). Le comportement du consommateur sur un site marchand est-il fondamentalement différent de son comportement en magasin? Proposition d’un cadre d’appréhension de ses spécificités. Recherche et Applications en Marketing, 16(3), 25–38. Holbrook, M. B., & Hirschman, E. C. (1982). The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings and Fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2), 132–140. Holbrook, M. B. (2000). The millennial consumer in the texts of our times: Experience and entertainment. Journal of Macromarketing, 20(2), 178–192. Hosany, S., & Witham, M. (2010). Dimensions of cruisers’ experiences, satisfaction, and intention to recommend. Journal of Travel Research, 49(3), 351–364. Hsu, L. C., Wang, K. Y., & Chih, W. H. (2013). Effects of web site characteristics on customer loyalty in B2B e-commerce: Evidence from Taiwan. The Service Industries Journal, 33(11), 1026–1050.

THE SERVICE INDUSTRIES JOURNAL

337

Hu, L., Bentler, P. M., & Kano, Y. (1992). Can test Statistics in Covariance Structure Analysis be Trusted? Psychological Bulletin, 112, 351–362. Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1−55. Iglesias, O., Singh, J. J., & Batista-Foguet, J. M. (2011). The role of brand experience and affective commitment in determining brand loyalty. Journal of Brand Management, 18(8), 570–582. Jaakkola, E., Helkkula, A., & Aarikka-Stenroos, L. (2015). Service experience co-creation: Conceptualization, implications, and future research directions. Journal of Service Management, 26(2), 182–205. Jacoby, J., & Kyner, D. B. (1973). Brand loyalty vs. repeat purchasing behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 10, 1–9. Khan, I., & Rahman, Z. (2015). A review and future directions of brand experience research. International Strategic Management Review, 3, 1–14. Klaus, P., & Nguyen, B. (2013). Exploring the role of the online customer experience in firms’ multichannel strategy: An empirical analysis of the retail banking services sector. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 21(5), 429–442. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: The Guildford Press. Koufaris, M. (2002). Applying the technology acceptance model and flow theory to online consumer behavior. Information Systems Research, 13(2), 205–223. Lee, S., Heere, B., & Chung, K. (2013). Which senses matter more? The impact of our senses on team identity and team loyalty. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 22(4), 203–213. Leelakulthanit, O., & Hongcharu, B. (2011). The determinants of brand loyalty in the online and offline banking sectors. Journal of Global Business Management, 7(1), 1–13. Lemke, F., Clark, M., & Wilson, H. (2011). Customer experience quality: An exploration in business and consumer contexts using repertory grid technique. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39 (6), 846–869. Lemon, K. N., & Verhoef, P. C. (2016). Understanding customer experience throughout the customer journey. Journal of Marketing, 80(6), 69–96. Lin, C. P., & Bhattacherjee, A. (2008). Elucidating individual intention to use interactive information technologies: The role of network externalities. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 13 (1), 85–108. Luo, M. M., Chen, J. S., Ching, R. K., & Liu, C. C. (2011). An examination of the effects of virtual experiential marketing on online customer intentions and loyalty. The Service Industries Journal, 31(13), 2163–2191. Ma, J., Gao, J., Scott, N., & Ding, P. (2013). Customer delight from theme park experiences: The antecedents of delight based on cognitive appraisal theory. Annals of Tourism Research, 42, 359–381. Maklan, S., & Klaus, P. (2011). Customer experience: Are we measuring the right things? International Journal of Market Research, 53(6), 771–792. Mardia, K. V. (1970). Measures of multivariate skewness and kurtosis with applications. Biometrika, 57, 519–530. Mathwick, C., Malhotra, N. K., & Rigdon, E. (2001). Experiential value: Conceptualization, measurement and application in the catalog and internet shopping environment. Journal of Retailing, 77(1), 39–56. Mehrabian, A., & Russell, J. A. (1974). An approach to environmental psychology. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Meyer, C., & Schwager, A. (2007). Understanding customer experience. Harvard Business Review, 85(2), 1–12. Mhaya, I., Najjar, H., & Ben Jannet, I. (2013). Effet de l’expérience en ligne sur la fidélité au site du réseau social: Le rôle médiateur de la satisfaction des internautes. Journal of Global Management Research, 9(1), 5–14. Montour-Brunet, I., Rajaobelina, L., Ricard, L., & Brun, I. (2015). Échelle de mesure de l’expérience client dans le secteur bancaire : une approche multicanale. Presented at 43e Congrs de l’Association des Sciences Administratives du Canada, Halifax, Canada.

338

I. BRUN ET AL.

Mudie, P., Cottam, A., & Raeside, R. (2003). An exploratory study of consumption emotion in services. The Service Industries Journal, 23(5), 84–106. Nambisan, S. (2005). How to prepare tomorrow’s technologists for global networks of innovation. Communications of the ACM, 48(5), 29–31. Nasermoadeli, A., Ling, K. C., & Maghnati, F. (2013). Evaluating the impacts of customer experience on purchase intention. International Journal of Business and Management, 8(6), 128–138. Novak, T. P., Hoffman, D. L., & Yung, Y.-F. (2000). Measuring the customer experience in online environments: A structural modeling approach. Marketing Science, 19(1), 22–42. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Oliver, R. L. (1999). Whence consumer loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 63, 33–44. Pan, Y., Sheng, S., & Xie, F. T. (2012). Antecedents of customer loyalty: An empirical synthesis and reexamination. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 19(1), 150–158. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12–40. Pareigis, J., Edvardsson, B., & Enquist, B. (2011). Exploring the role of the service environment in forming customer’s service experience. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 3(1), 110–124. Payne, A. F., Storbacka, K., & Frow, P. J. (2008). Managing the co-creation of value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(1), 83–96. Pine II, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (1998). Welcome to the experience economy. Harvard Business Review, 76, 97–105. Pine II, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (2011). The experience economy (updated). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Review Press. Podsakoff, P. M., Mackenzie, S. B., & Lee, J.-Y. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 69–82. Reichheld, F. F. (1996). L’Effet Loyauté. Réussir en fidélisant ses clients, ses salariés et ses actionnaires. Paris: Dunod. Reniou, F. (2009). Opérations participatives des marques: Pourquoi et comment faire participer les consommateurs? (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Université de Paris–Dauphine & ESSEC, France. Richins, M. L. (1997). Measuring emotions in the consumption experience. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(2), 127–146. Roos, I., Friman, M., & Edvardsson, B. (2009). Emotions and stability in telecom-customer relationships. Journal of Service Management, 20(2), 192–208. Rose, S., Clark, M., Samouel, P., & Hair, N. (2012). Online customer experience in e-retailing: An empirical model of antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Retailing, 88(2), 308–322. Sahin, A., Zehir, C., & Kitapçı, H. (2011). The effects of brand experiences, trust and satisfaction on building brand loyalty; An empirical research on global brands. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 24, 1288–1301. Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (1994). Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. In A. von Eye & C. C. Clogg (Eds.), Latent variables analysis: Applications for developmental research (pp. 399–419). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Schmitt, B. (1999a). Experiential marketing. Journal of Marketing Management, 15, 53–67. Schmitt, B. (1999b). Experiential marketing: How to Get customers to sense, feel, think, Act, relate to your company and brands. New York: Free Press. Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Shobeiri, S., Mazaheri, E., & Laroche, M. (2014). Improving customer website involvement through experiential marketing. The Service Industries Journal, 34(11), 885–900. Sindhav, B., & Adidam, P. T. (2012). Hedonic and utilitarian values of a service experience with a nonprofit: The role of identification. International Management Review, 8(1), 37–43.

THE SERVICE INDUSTRIES JOURNAL

339

Sivadas, E., & Baker-Prewitt, J. L. (2000). An examination of the relationship between service quality, customer satisfaction, and store loyalty. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 28(2), 73–82. Slåtten, T., Mehmetoglu, M., Svensson, G., & Sværi, S. (2009). Atmospheric experiences that emotionally touch customers: A case study from a winter park. Managing Service Quality, 19(6), 721–746. Srivastava, M., & Kaul, D. (2016). Exploring the link between customer experience–loyalty–consumer spend. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 31, 277–286. Swinyard, W. R. (1993). The effects of mood, involvement, and quality of store experience on shopping intentions. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(2), 271–280. Terblanche, N. S., & Boshoff, C. (2006). The relationship between a satisfactory in-store shopping experience and retailer loyalty. South African Journal of Business Management, 37, 33–43. Tsaur, S.-H., Chiu, Y., & Wang, C. (2006). The visitors behavioral consequences of experiential marketing : An empirical study on Taipei Zoo. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 21(1), 47–64. 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. Yi, Y., & Gong, T. (2009). An integrated model of customer social exchange relationship: The moderating role of customer experience. The Service Industries Journal, 29(11), 1513–1528. Yu, Y.-T., & Dean, A. (2001). The contribution of emotional satisfaction to consumer loyalty. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 12(3), 234–250. Zhou, T., & Lu, Y. (2011). Examining mobile instant messaging user loyalty from the perspectives of network externalities and flow experience. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 883–889. Zomerdijk, L. G., & Voss, C. A. (2010). Service design for experience-centric services. Journal of Service Research, 13(1), 67–82.

340

I. BRUN ET AL.

Appendix 1. Items of the questionnaire (n = 968)

Constructs Loyalty In the future, I will be loyal to this financial institution (travel agency) In the future, I will conduct most of my (bank) transactions with this financial institution (travel agency) I recommend this financial institution (travel agency) to others Experience dimensions Cognitive I engage in a thinking process I am really focused My attention is captivated Affective (−) I sometimes feel disappointed I sometimes feel angry I sometimes get bored I sometimes get impatient Affective (+) I am sometimes surprised I sometimes feel entertained I sometimes feel enchanted Sensory My senses are involved My visual sense is stimulated My sense of hearing is stimulated Behavioural I tend to review my bank accounts (travel plans) I tend to take an active part in the management of my personal finances (travel arrangements) I tend to compare the financial institution’s (travel agency) products or services Social I live a pleasant social experience I feel that I am a part of a community I identify myself with the other customers I develop relationships with the staff I socialize

Mean 5.62

Standard deviation 1.29

Factor loadings

AVE 0.78

Alphas 0.91

Comp. Rel. (CFR) 0.92

0.94

Adapted from Brakus et al. (2009)

0.91

0.80

4.47

1.54

0.62

0.82

0.83

0.77 0.75 0.83 2.75

1.50

Brakus et al. (2009) and Fornerino et al. (2006) 0.64

0.87

0.88

0.76

Mehrabian and Russell (1974), Richins (1997) and Ma, Gao, Scott and Ding (2013)

0.81 0.82 0.81 3.05

1.53

0.66

0.85

0.85

0.70 0.87 0.86 3,21

1,69

Same as emotional (−) 0.69

0.86

0.87

0.89 0.84 0.76 4.37

1.65

Brakus et al. (2009)

0.50

0.72

0.75

0.70

Montour-Brunet, Rajaobelina, Ricard, and Brun (2015)

0.74

0.67

3.13

1.69

0.65 0.71 0.83 0.81 0.82 0.85

0.90

0.90 Barnes and Vidgen (2002) and Nasermoadeli et al. (2013)