Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of UK Essays.
This chapter consists of a comprehensive review on the previous published and unpublished relevant researches from the secondary sources such as Emerald, Ebscohost, Jstor, Routledge etc. An overall review towards the antecedents of credit card loyalty is conducted to provide a better insight through comparison of the knowledge by the practitioners. The proposed independent variables are corporate image, perceived value, switching cost and trust while the dependent variable involved is customer loyalty. Therein, an inclusive conceptual framework for this study is developed with the supporting evidence from the field and the relationships between constructs are discussed and hypotheses developed in line with the proposed framework with the attempt to address the issues.
2.1 Review of literature
2.1.1 Definition of customer loyalty
Dick and Basu (1994) defined loyalty as a customer commitment to the brand or approach to the brand (service, product category, etc.). Loyalty is also interpreted as an expectation to continue a relationship with a particular brand (Wilson, 1995). According to Aeker(1991), brand loyalty is defined as “the attachment that a customer has to a brand”.
According to Beerli et al.(2004) loyalty described based on inertia, when the user purchase brand again because he/she used to do it, however if the conditions allow the user will replace the product with the competitors brand. He also stated that, a true brand loyalty when the decision to repeat purchase is made on satisfactory experiences and positive attitude toward the preferred brand. Generally loyalty has been explained as an active loyalty when a consumer re-use the brand and recommend the brand to the others, and a passive loyalty, that is characterized as an intention of not switching even when brand provides less positive conditions. (Neringa and Vilte, 2009).
Early studies of brand loyalty, focused on behaviour or purchase brand loyalty by measuring consumer repeated purchase. (Newman and Werbel, 1973; De Ruyter, Wetzels and Bloemer, 1998). Based on Jacoby and Chestnut, 1978; Pritchard, 1991, definition of loyalty focused almost exclusively on its behavioural dimension. The behaviour dimension refers to a customer’s behaviour on repeat purchase, indicating a preference for a brand or a service overtime ( Sheth, 1986; Tucker, 1984;Bowen and Shoemaker, 1998). Additionally, Reichheld et al. (2000) suggest that “customer repeat purchase loyalty must be the yardstick of success”. If a business can successfully achieve repurchase behaviour, then it is on the way to generating customer loyalty. (Robert, Graham and Mike, 2008), Examples of loyalty behaviour include continuing to purchase services from the same supplier, increasing the scale and or scope of a relationship, or the act of recommendation (Yi, 1990).
However, some researchers criticized this behavioral approach for a lack of a conceptual basis. Day (1969), in particular, criticized behavioural conceptualizations of loyalty and argued brand loyalty develops as a result of a conscious effort to evaluate competing brands. After Day’s criticism, attitude gained increasing attention as an important dimension of loyalty (e.g., Jain, Pinson, and Malhotra 1987; Monroe and Guiltinan 1975).
Attitudinal loyalty is an attitude that causes a gradual long-term relationship with the brand. Based on Jarvis and Wilcox (1976) and Pritchard (1991),attitudinal dimension includes consumers’ preferences or intentions . Different feelings create an individual’s overall attachment to a product, service, or organization (Fornier, 1994). Strong positive attitude is a mandatory condition to build true loyalty toward the brand (Uncles, Dowling and Hammond, 2003). The attitude dimension reflects various aspect of customer insides that consist of willingness to recommend, strength of preference, feelings of attachment to a product or service, and altruistic behavior as well.(7 8 9 10) . In addition, Ahluwalia et al. 1999 have proved those attitudinal loyal customers are much less susceptive to negative information about the brand than non-loyal customer.
Even though the typically loyalty customer can be described as the one who repeats purchases, brand loyalty cannot always be measured by purchase behaviour since the decision to buy a brand can be influenced by other moderating variables such as social norms (Ajzen and Fishbien, 1980) and situational factors (Smith and Swinyard, 1983). Eventually, researchers founded out that customer loyalty should have two dimensions: behavioral and attitudinal (Day, 1969; Jacoby and Kyner, 1973; Synder, 1986; Dick and Basu, 1994; Dekimpe et al., 1997; Samuelson and Sandvik, 1997;; Julander et al., 1997; Ball et al., 2004). Oliver (1999) extends the notion of incorporating repeat purchase with loyalty by suggesting that psychological strategies are needed to achieve ultimate loyalty. Thus, Oliver (1999) defines loyalty as: “a deeply held commitment to re-buy or re-patronize a preferred product/service consistently in the future, thereby causing repetitive same-brand purchase or same brand-set purchasing, despite situational influences and marketing efforts having the potential to cause switching behavior. The use of both attitude and behavior in a loyalty definition substantially increase the predictive power of loyalty (Pritchard and Howard, 1997). According to Sheth and Park (1974) it is preferable to analyze purchase behavior that is repeated in contexts where the customer experiences competitive pressures aimed at changing buying habits. From this perspective loyalty truly exits when the customer resists pressures to switch to another brand (Newman and Werbel, 1973; Woodside et al., 1980).
In particular, a loyal customer base will generate more predictable sales, steady cash flow and improve profit stream ( Reichheld and Sasser, 1990; Aeker, 1991). The increased profit from loyalty comes from reduced marketing costs, increased sales, and marketing cost (John and Chen; 2001). Loyalty reduces the need to incur customer acquisition costs ( Reichheld, 1996), which is particularly salient in service markets. Reichheld (1993) cites a credit card example where in the first year acquisition costs for a new customer involved credit evaluation, card issuance and other expenses of setting up a new account on the data processing system. If the card holder stays for a second year, profits improve significantly because account set-up costs are not incurred in the second year. Previous research on loyalty has advocated that if customer loyalty is gained, profits will follow (Chen and Chang, 2006; Reichheld, 2002). Similarly, Reinartz and Kumar (2002) also stated that, “Win loyalty, therefore, and profits will follow as night follow day”. Garland (2005) agrees stating, “Customer loyalty has been widely regarded as a necessary precursor to individual customer profitability.”
Therefore, our research conceptualizes customer loyalty in line with Ken Butcher, Beverly Sparks and Frances O’Callaghan (2001) where loyalty is defined as the enduring psychological attachment of a customer to a particular service provider. Attachment is reflected through:
(1) Advocacy of the service to others (positive word-of-mouth),
(2) Tendency to resist switching to alternate service providers,
(3) Identification with the service provider, and
(4) Having the relative preference for the service ahead of the other competitors.
2.1.2 Definition of corporate image
Image is of utmost important to service firms (Gronroos, 1984). Numerous definitions of image are found in the marketing literatures. According to Reynolds and Gutman (1988), in the consumer’s mind, the meaning of image must be investigated at a higher level of abstraction. Image has been described as subjective knowledge (Boulding, 1956), as an attitude (Hirschman et al.,1978), and as combination of product characteristics that are different from the physical product but are nevertheless identified with the product (Erickson et al.,1984). Besides, image has also been described as the “overall impression” left on the minds of customers, as a “gestalt” (Zimmer and Golden, 1988; Barich and Kotler, 1991). Marursky and Jacoby (1986) described image as an “idiosyncratic cognitive configuration”. Image formation as a procedure by which ideas, feelings, and previous experiences with an organization are stored in memory and transformed into meaning based on stored categories (MacInnis and Price, 1987; Yuille and Catchpole, 1977).
According to Schladermundt (1960), corporate image is a kind of “trademark or insignia that symbolizes the company itself basically the most priceless asset a company have”. In addition, corporate image is a global impression, an attitude, formed in the minds of customers (Abratt , 1989). Corporate image is considered to have the ability to influence customers’ perception of the product and service (Zeithaml et al., 1996). Thus, image have an impact on customers’ buying behavior( Abratt, 1989; Osman, 1993), particularly on customer loyalty (Andreassen and Lindestad, 1998; Martineau, 1985; Sirgy and Samli, 1989; Kandampully and Suhartanto, 2000; Nguyen and LeBlanc, 2001).
Worcester’s “Managing the image of your bank: the glue that binds” (1997) concludes, “corporate image is the net results of the interaction of all experiences, impressions, beliefs, feelings and knowledge people have about a company”. In addition, corporate image may be considered as ” a function of the accumulation of purchasing/ consumption experience over time” ( Andreassen and Lindestad, 1998). As such, corporate image has two principal components of image, functional and emotional, are defined (Kennedy, 1977). The functional component is related to tangible cues that can be measured more easily, while the emotional component is associated with the psychological states that are manifested by feelings and attitudes. Gronroos (1984) defined that corporate image is built mainly by technical quality i.e. what the customer receives from the service experience, and functional quality, the manner in which the service is delivered. Crosby et al. (1990) also note that the performance of contact personnel is indicative of the level of quality offered by the service firm. From Nguyen and LeBlanc (1998), the customers who perceive service quality over repeated service encounter have an overall favorable image of the firm. Therefore, image viewed as cumulative construct that is updated each time the customer experiences the service. From the point of view of service management, contact personnel and physical environment are considered as the two crucial elements that determine the success of the service delivery process. In addition, they serve to attract target groups and help to define corporate image. (Nguyen and Leblanc, 2002). Gray and Smeltzer (1985) point out that image is a set of impressions that different kinds of public have of a certain company.
For the purpose of this research, the measurement of corporate image is parallel with Nguyen and LeBlanc (2002) which are based on contact personnel and physical environment, such as the service provider, may be used to make its image more concrete and easily perceived. As reputation is important factor that influences and assists in the development of customer loyalty (Andreassen and Lindestad, 1998), therefore reputation is also included as a measurement factor. Since a company’s image may be considered as an exogenous variable, the task of measuring, tracking, and managing it constitutes a real challenge for management.
2.1.3 Definition of perceived value
Price is often used as the key measure to represent what customers have to sacrifice to obtain the service. However, Lovelock, (2001) noted that non-monetary costs such as time, physical and psychological effort are also considered as the outlays to obtain the service. (as cited in Tam J.L.M., 2004). Perceived value can be enhanced by either adding benefits to the service or by reducing the outlays associated with the purchase and use of the service. In the recent studies have shown that both executives and researchers considered perceived value as a consumer’s assessment of overall evaluation of a service than perceived service quality (Zeithmal, 1988). Perceived value equates to the result of the customer’s trade-off between perceived benefits and perceived sacrifices or costs. (McDougall and Levesque, 2000) In turn, customer perceived value is the results from an evaluation of the relative rewards and sacrifices associated with the offering (Chang, Wang and Yang, 2009) which is widely known as a ‘ get ‘ component – that is, the benefits a buyer derives from a seller ‘ s offering – and a ‘ give ‘ component – that is, the buyer ‘ s monetary and nonmonetary costs of acquiring the offering (Punniyamoorthy and M. Prasanna Mohan Raj, 2007), include time consumption, energy consumption and stress experienced by consumers.
Sweeney and Soutar (2001) develop a 19-item measure for perceived value (PERVAL), revealed a stable structure of four dimensions which are emotional value, social value, functional value (price/value for money) and functional value (performance/quality). According to Roig, Garcia and Tena (2006), there are two methods in conceptualisation and dimensionality of perceived value. The first approach consists of two divisions, one of benefits received (economic, social and relational) and another of sacrifices made (price, time, effort, risk and convenience). The second method is multifaceted construct which vary to different character: one of a functional and another of emotional or affective type. (Zeithmal, 2000; Roig et al. 2006; Patterson and Spreng,1997; Sweeney and Soutar, 2001) Opposing the finding of Sweeney and Soutar, Roig et al (2006) approach perceived value from six multidimensional formative construct (GLOVAL scale), corresponding four dimensions of functional value: functional value of the establishment (installations), functional value of the contact personnel (professionalism), functional value of the service purchased (quality) and functional value price with the two remaining composed of emotional value and social value. Parasuraman and Grewal focused on service quality as the benefits of customers deriving from credit card vendor’s offering (as cited in Qi, Li and Hao, 2007), and on spending effort as the costs of acquiring the offering.
Based on the discussions of the definitions of customer value, it is clear that factors influencing the benefits customers receive or sacrifices customers made will cause different evaluations of customer value, as different customers may form different opinions over time (Bolton & Drew, 1991; Zeithmal, 1988). Drawing from the vast literature on value, the definition employed in this study is from the marketing perspective whereby Bolton and Drew (1991) define perceived value as a “richer measure of customers’ overall evaluation of a service than perceived service quality. Previous researchers have indicated that service quality, customer-perceived value, and satisfaction are some of the key success factors in gaining competitive advantage within service providers (Bolton & Drew, 1991; McDougall & Levesque, 2000; Chang et al., 2009). The importance of perceived value is perceptible as it has been mentioned that for the researches which have not included perceived value as a determinant and have been regarded as a shortcoming of the approach.(Bolton & Drew, 1991; McDougall & Levesque, 2000; Chang et al., 2009). These factors are becoming the priority for all managers in the increasingly intense competition for customers in the customer-centred market today (Bolton & Drew, 1991; McDougall & Levesque, 2000; Zeithmal, 1988). According to Zeithmal(2000), customer perceived value is the result of marketing strategy henceforth by delivering customer value enable a firm to build competitive advantage, provided that is, a firm’s marketing strategy should be developed based on value creation for customers.
2.1.4 Definition of switching cost
Jones (2002) defined switching costs as a switching barrier of any factor that makes it difficult or costly for customers to change provider. It means that it will be expensive and hard for one supplier’s product switch to another supplier’s product. This is because high switching cost can discourage consumers from switching and stay with their current suppliers. It is argued that switching is related to poor service quality in banks (Benkenstein and Stuhlreier, 2004); reaction to high price (Gerrard and Cunnininggham, 2004); and customer satisfaction (Bowen and Chen, 2001). That is to say, some consumer may not change to other suppliers although they are offered lower price. Switching costs is also defined as the total costs incurred by a fully informed consumer through deciding to change suppliers that would not have been incurred by remaining with the current supplier by Wilson.C (2006). It can also be defined as time, money, and efforts associated with changing service providers by Burnham, Frels, and Mahajan (2003); Jones, Mothersbaugh, and Beatty (2000); Lam et al. (2004); Wirtz and Mattila (2003).
Fornell (1992) stated and included search costs, transaction costs, learning costs, artificial costs, emotional costs and cognitive effort in the switching costs construct. Moreover, Klemperer (1987) also distinguishes between three types of switching costs which are transaction costs, learning costs and artificial costs. As can be seen, both authors have the same common concept by using the same attributes such as search costs, transaction costs and artificial costs to construct the switching costs. However, there are others defined different attributes such as the technical, financial or psychological factors which also make it difficult or expensive for a customer to change brand by Selnes (1993). Different authors have their different types of factors but still, their objective remains the same which are obstructing their mobility and keeping them in their current suppliers. Therefore, to reduce the level of customers switching to other service providers in a dynamic competitive environment, service providers develop strategies to respond to consumers’ switching cost by Farrell and Shapiro (1988) and Zauberman (2003).
According to Kemplerer (1987), using transaction costs is one of the most appropriate costs because it incurred when the customer changes suppliers which is one of the factors for consumers to decide to switch costs. A consumer must always be aware that he/she can switch service provider before he/she takes steps. Then, the next step is to decide whether to search and whether to switch to another provider. Example by Kemplerer, if you change stock-broker, you have to close one account and open another with the new supplier, entailing some effort. As for learning costs, suppose the new stockbroker uses other routines or other contractual rules than the first one, then you have to learn these new rules, which can be seen as a switching cost. Therefore, consumers have to restart and find out all over again concerning the rules and procedure if they consider changing to another provider. These circumstances will consume a lot of time and effort and it may involve risk that choosing another bank might not satisfy consumer’s standpoint. The last features that mention by Klemperer, which are artificial cost that concerns what the firm does to retain and to lock in customers, generating an opportunity to raise prices above marginal cost. For examples, using frequent flyers programs, bundling or discount coupons valid for the next purchase. Mankila (1999) noted that bundling reduces selling, marketing and production costs but more importantly stimulates existing customers’ demand for additional services. Mankila (1999) further noted that bundling eases competition by creating switching costs and increasing customer loyalty. Reward programs are also effective in increasing customers’ perceptions of switching costs, thus further fostering customer retention declared by Bendapudi and Berry (1997), Guiltinan (1989). As many service firms suffer from undifferentiated offerings and low switching costs (Reinartz and Kumar 2000), loyalty reward programs might be an effective tool to relationship building.
2.1.5 Definition of trust
Moorman, Deshpande, and Zaltman, (1993) define trust as the willingness to rely on an exchange partner in whom one has confidence and belief in an exchange partner’s reliability and integrity (Morgan & Hunt ,2004) Chaudhuri and Holbrook (2002) define brand trust as the customer’s willingness to rely on the ability of the brand to perform its stated function. While Rotter’s (1971) classic view that trust is “a generalized expectancy held by an individual or group that the word, promise, verbal, or written statement of another individual or group can be relied on” (as cited in Ndubisi N.O., Ndubisi G.C. and Chan, 2007) In social psychology, trust can be explained with two elements which are trust in the partner’s honesty, and trust in the partner’s benevolence where honesty is the belief that a partner stands by his word, while benevolence is the belief that the partner is interested in the customer’s welfare. (Afsar, Rehman, Qureshi and Shahjehan, 2010) On the other hand, Schurr and Ozanne(1985) define the term as belief that a partner’s word or promise is reliable and a party will fulfil his/her obligations in the relationship. According to Ndubisi et al. (2007) trust results from keeping promise and emphasize that an integral element of the relationship marketing approach is the promise concept. By fulfilling promises that have been given bring about trust and in turn enhances relationship quality. As cited in Ndubisi et al., 2007, some other authors have defined trust in terms of, shared values (Morgan and Hunt, 1994), mutual goals (Wilson,1995), opportunistic behavior (Dwyer, Schurr and Oh, 1987) making and keeping promises (Bitner, 1995), and actions with positive outcomes (Morgan and Hunt, 1994). Whereas McAllister (1995) distinguishes affect based and cognition based characteristics of trust: (1) Cognition-based characteristics are related to competence and reliability (2), affect or emotion-based characteristics are connected to openness and benevolence. (as cited by Pirson, 2006). Anderson and Narus (1990) focus on the perceived outcome of trust when they define it as “a partner’s belief that the other partner will perform actions that will result in positive outcomes, as well as not take unexpected actions that would result in negative outcomes” As such, one would expect a positive outcome from a partner on whose integrity one can rely on confidently (Morgan and Hunt, 1994). Reliability and dependability in previous interactions with the trustor give rise to positive expectations about the trustee’s intentions. Emotion enters into the relationship between the parties, because frequent, longer-term interaction leads to the formation of attachments based upon reciprocated interpersonal care and concern. Contact employees can also deliver high levels of trust by continually demonstrating that they have the customers’ best interest at heart, in line with Beatty et al. (1996) where consistency in providing quality service at promised time develop customer trust.
Ball (2004) affirm that trust and positive benevolence may not necessary lead to positive loyalty because in some market where all the vendors are trustworthy, one could expect trust as a normal part of doing business and one could trust nearly all vendors equally, and therefore loyal will not refer to trust. Understandable, trust-loyalty relationship while positive, maybe weak in some market. But as indicated by Loke (2008), trust and confidence towards a credit card payment system is one of the main drivers to Malaysia merchants and customers acceptance of credit card payment. Pirson (2006) categorized trust into 3 dimensional processes which are calculative trust, relational trust and identification based trust. Apparently, trust is a complex, dynamic social phenomenon that can take on various forms and multidimensional (Lewicki and Bunker 1995; McAllister, 1995). Henceforth, we conceptualize trust in parallel to Moorman et al. (1993), Ndubisi and Chan (2005) and Eakuru and Nik Mat (2008). Meanwhile, adaptation of concept has been done in order to fit the context of Malaysia credit card market, as such: Believe that a partner’s word or promise is reliable and a party will fulfil the obligations in a relationship; benevolence, care and integrity on the security for customers’ transactions; contact employees who deliver high levels of trust by providing consistent quality services at promised time etc.
2.2 Review of relevant theoretical models
2.2.1 Relevant theoretical model
Figure 2.1: Research Framework
Source: Eakuru N. and Nik Mat N. K.(2008). The Application of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) in Determining the Antecedents of Customer Loyalty in Banks in South Thailand. The Business Review, Cambridge
The purpose of this study is to examine the relationships of antecedents of customer loyalty in the banking sector in South Thailand. From the literature, six antecedents of customer loyalty were identified: perceived service quality, perceived value, trust, image, customer satisfaction and commitment. The literature indicates that customer satisfaction, commitment, trust and image are direct antecedents of customer loyalty. Perceived service quality is an indirect antecedent of customer loyalty through customer satisfaction. Perceived value is an indirect antecedent of customer loyalty through customer satisfaction and commitment.
The findings in this research lend some direction for banks in South Thailand to concentrate on improving trust and their image in order to win customer commitment and loyalty. Image is found to be the most significant factor that bank customer look for in order to be loyal to their banks. Whilst, trust and image are found to be important for customer commitment and service quality is found to be a significant factor for improving customer satisfaction.
2.2.2 Relevant Theoretical Model
Figure 2.2: Research Frameworkframework 2.jpg
Source: Qi W., Li Y. J. and Hao Y. Y. (2007) “The Determinants of Credit Card Customer Loyalty: An Empirical Study in a Chinese Context” International Conference on Management Science & Engineering.
The aim of this study is to develop and validate a customer loyalty model for credit card commerce in China, based on which the credit card service providers could have more specific knowledge about their customer or potential customer which enable them establish marketing strategy with enhanced competitiveness. This paper proposes a comprehensive set of constructs and hypotheses including commitment, switching cost, customer satisfaction, and perceived value. From the major findings, switching cost appears to be a significant factor of customer loyalty. All the calculation results lead to the conclusion that commitment, switching cost, perceived value and customer satisfaction has great influence on customer loyalty.
Nevertheless, the total effect of perceived value was the greatest influence on customer loyalty. While switching cost also has obvious impact on customer loyalty. Apparently, credit card context in China is very difficult to achieve sustainable competitive advantage in the marketplace with just superior products and reasonable price, the contribution of overall value, service and satisfaction are much more sustainable and difficult for competitors to copy effectively.
2.3 Conceptual framework
Figure: Proposed Theoretical/ Conceptual Framework
Source: Developed for research
The sketch above showed the proposed theoretical framework that implement to serve as the foundation of the research project. The purpose of this study is to observe the relationship among the proposed variables. This study mainly focuses on the relationship among five variables which consists of customer loyalty, company image, customer perceived value, switching cost and trust. This proposed framework is adopted from Qi, Li and Hao (2007) and Eakuru and Nik Mat (2008). Modification has been done to the previous researches to provide a better fitting framework for credit card market in Malaysia.There are five hypotheses to test the relationships which is to discussed in the subsequent chapters.
2.4 Hypothesis development
2.4.1 Relationship between company image and loyalty
An organization’s image is an important variable that positively or negatively influences marketing activities. Image is considered to have the ability to influence customers’ perception of the goods and services offered (Zeithaml and Bitner, 1996). Perceptions of image become instrumental in representing the overall impression of service and validate the promises made to customer by service firm. Therefore, this global attitude has the potential of influencing customer loyalty (Barich and Kotler, 1991).
In addition, according to Martineau (1958), a degree of customer loyalty will be form correspond to the favorableness of the image of an individual is having. Dick and Basu (1994) agree to Martineau’s statement and they concluded that, “The notion that a favourable store image can influence repeat patronage.”
Corporate image role in the formulation of company strategy (Gray and Smeltzer, 1985), its impact on the consumer behavior (Abratt, 1989), particularly on customer loyalty (Andreassen and Lindestad, 1998). Subsequently, it was concluded that reputation may be loyalty’s strongest driver (Andreassen, 1994; Ryan, Rayner, and Morrison, 1999). -In addition, Mazanec (1995) found image to be positively associated with customer satisfaction and customer preference (a dimension of customer loyalty). This indicates that a desirable image leads to customer satisfaction and customer loyalty.
Nguyen and LeBlance (2001) demonstrate the corporate image relates positively with customer loyalty in service sectors such as telecommunication, banking, and education. Customers’ overall assessment of corporate image is also deemed to influence customer loyalty ( Renolds et al., 1974-1975). Based on the reported research, the hypothesis between corporate image and customer loyalty is formed:
H1: There is significant relationship between corporate image and customer loyalty.
2.4.2 Relationship between perceived value and loyalty
Ever-change environment and nature of market is the reason for competing firms to seek to develop their firms’ superior quality of service, customer-perceived value, and image in order to gain customer loyalty (Hua S.H.H., Jay Kandampullyb and Thanika Devi Juwaheerc, 2009) Perceived value is critical to the success of buyer-seller relationships, eg. Customer loyalty. Luarn and Lin (2003) support the general notion that perceived value contributes to customer loyalty (As cited by Eakuru and Nik Mat, 2010). Among the factors that exert a fundamental influence on customer loyalty, the role of perceived value has reported influence on loyalty towards the service provider particularly in the context of the retailing(Mar í a-Eugenia Ruiz-Molina, Irene Gil-Saura 2008) In order to successfully carry out a relational strategy and to achieve the complete loyalty of the customer, a strategic change is necessary within the organisations, orienting management around the value perceived by the customer (Roig et al., 2009)
Therefore, the literature supports marketing strategy and perceived value as antecedents of customer loyalty and thus our research study suggest that perceived value contr
If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!Find out more
Cite This Work
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:
Related ServicesView all
DMCA / Removal Request
If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have the essay published on the UK Essays website then please: