International Journal of Market Research Vol.

53 Issue 6

Service quality perceptions of solely loyal customers

Svetlana Bogomolova
University of South Australia

Having. more. solely. loyal. customers. (those. who. only. use. one. supplier). is. an. aspiration.for.most.service.providers ..Yet,.it.is.unclear.whether,.or.in.what.way,. solely. loyal. customers. differ. from. customers. whose. loyalty. is. divided. between. more.than.one.service.provider ..One.loyalty.indicator.is.a.consumers.evaluation. of. the. quality. of. service. they. receive .. Using. seven. sets. of. cross-sectional. data,. this.research.reveals.that.solely.loyal.customers.give,.on.average,.approximately. 10%. more. positive. service. quality. evaluations. than. customers. of. the. same. provider.who.also.use.other.providers ..The.implication.of.this.finding.for.market. researchers. and. practitioners. is. that. service. quality. scores. could. be. moderated. by.the.distribution.of.solely.loyal.and.multiple-provider.users.in.a.given.sample .. Therefore,. every. service. quality. survey. should. measure. how. many. providers. a. customer. uses. and. control. for. the. proportion. of. solely. loyal. customers. when. tracking.change.using.cross-sectional.samples .

Introduction
Many.customer.relationship.management.(CRM).programmes,.particularly. cross-selling.initiatives,.are.aimed.at.growing.the.number.of.loyal.customers. a. brand. has .. The. attraction. of. loyal. customers. lies. in. the. understanding. that.they.bring.higher.returns.while.costing.less.to.keep,.when.compared. to. disloyal. customers. who. divide. their. loyalty. across. many. brands. (Reichheld. &. Sasser. 1990) .. In. addition,. the. more. products. customers. have.with.one.service.provider,.the.harder.it.is.for.them.to.switch.away,. hence.customer.retention.increases.(Reichheld.&.Sasser.1990;.de.Ruyter. et al. 1998) ..Furthermore,.the.literature.suggests.that.behaviourally.loyal. customers. also. tend. to. be. attitudinally. loyal,. which. means. they. are. less. demanding. of. the. service. and. easier. to. please. (de. Ruyter et al.. 1998).

Received.(in.revised.form):.15.June.2010

2011 The Market Research Society DOI: 10.2501/IJMR-53-6-793-810

793

Service quality perceptions of solely loyal customers

(Bloemer.et al. 1999) ..All.these.reasons.point.to.the.fact.that.growing.the. number.of.loyal.customers.is.an.attractive.goal.for.any.provider . From. the. perspective. of. a. service. provider,. its. customers. can. either. be. solely. loyal. (using. one. provider. exclusively. to. satisfy. all. their. product. category. needs). or. with. divided. loyalty. (using. multiple. providers) .. For. example,. in. the. context. of. a. finance. industry,. a. solely. loyal. customer. would.be.the.one.who.has.all.their.financial.products.(e .g ..a.credit.card,. a. savings. account. and. a. home. loan). with. the. same. bank .. A. customer. who. has. a. savings. account. with. one. bank. and. a. home. loan. and. a. credit. card.with.another.bank.would.be.an.example.of.a.customer.with.divided. loyalty . Surprisingly,. measuring. how. many. solely. loyal. customers. a. provider. has,.or.simply.how.many.other.providers.your.customers.use,.is.relatively. uncommon. in. the. marketing. industry. (Ambler. 2000),. particularly. within. service. quality. studies .. Yet,. prior. research. has. shown. that. differences. in. behavioural. loyalty. may. affect. perceptual. responses,. such. as. the. level. of. customer. satisfaction. (Ganesh. et al. 2000),. attitudinal. loyalty. or. wordof-mouth. (Wangenheim. &. Bayn. 2004),. and. perceived. importance. of. brand.attributes.(Mittal.&.Katrichis.2000) ..Service.quality.measurement,. a.form.of.perceptual.response,.could.also.be.subject.to.behavioural.loyalty. influences ..However,.no.research.has.examined.the.relationship.between. behavioural.loyalty.(in.particular,.sole.loyalty).and.service.quality.scores . This.study.empirically.tests.whether.solely.loyal.customers.give.different. service.quality.evaluations.than.do.customers.of.the.same.provider.whose. loyalty.is.divided ..This.research.provides.marketing.researchers,.academics. and.practitioners.with.a.better.understanding.of.how.sole.loyalty.impacts. on. service. quality. measurements. and. the. implications. this. relationship. entails.for.service.quality.tracking .

Background Service quality

Service.quality.measurements.are.the.cornerstone.of.performance.metrics. for. any. service. provider. (Brown. et al. 1993) .. Their. importance. is. partly. reflected. in. the. number. of. academic. studies. devoted. to. the. topic:. . Google. Scholar. shows. approximately. 3,790,000. academic. articles. using. the. key. words. service. quality .. In. addition,. the. way. in. which. service. providers. link. the. performance. of. their. top. managers. and. their. payment. bonuses.to.changes.in.satisfaction.scores.with.service.(Hauser.et al..1994;.

794

International Journal of Market Research Vol. 53 Issue 6

Boyd. 2010). demonstrates. the. importance. of. service. quality. measures. in. the.industry . One. of. the. most. commonly. used. frameworks. for. measuring. service. quality.is.the.SERVQUAL.instrument.(Parasuraman.et al. 1988;.Asubonteng. et al. 1996;.Morrison.Coulthard.2004) ..It.consists.of.five.core.dimensions. of. service. quality:. reliability,. responsiveness,. tangibles,. empathy. and. assurance .. This. framework. and. its. modifications. are. commonly. used. in. both.industry.and.academic.service.quality.research ..This.framework.will. be. used. in. the. current. research. to. examine. the. difference. in. responses. between.solely.loyal.customers.and.those.with.divided.loyalty,.in.relation. to.their.performance.assessment.of.their.service.provider . A. recent. study. by. Bogomolova. et al.. (2009). uncovered. that. consistent. patterns. in. service. quality. evaluations. were. associated. with. differences. in. consumer. behaviour .. The. study. showed. that. consumers. who. had. experienced. a. service. more. recently,. on. average,. provided. more. positive. service. quality. evaluations,. compared. to. those. who. had. experienced. the. same.service.by.the.same.provider.a.longer.time.ago ..The.current.research. builds. on. that. finding. and. extends. it. further. by. establishing. whether. the. difference. in. how many. providers. customers. use. simultaneously. also. affects.service.quality.evaluations .

Sole loyalty
Solely. loyal. customers. are. those. who. use. only. one. provider. within. a. product. category. (Cannon. et al. 1970) .. Sole. loyalty. has. been. a. focus. of. academic. research. since. 1923. (Copeland. 1923),. when. sole. brand. usage. was. a. common. phenomenon. because. of. limited. competition .. Since. then,. industrial. development. has. created. a. more. competitive. environment,. making.it.more.difficult.for.a.provider.to.keep.its.current.customers.solely. loyal .. This. has. prompted. researchers. to. soften. the. definition. of. a. solely. loyal. customer,. to. include. those. who. primarily. use. one. provider. for. the. majority. of. category. purchases,. but. still. has. some. minor. or. infrequent. relationships.with.other.providers.(Segal.1989) . How.common.solely.loyal.customers.are.in.a.particular.market.depends. on. the. nature. of. that. market. (Ehrenberg. &. Scriven. 1997;. Wright. et al. 1998;.Sharp.&.Wright.1999;.McDonald.&.Ehrenberg.2003) ..Fast.moving. consumer.goods.(fmcg).markets.have.relatively.low.proportions.of.solely. loyal.customers.(less.than.10%).(Cannon et al..1970) ..This.is.because.the. vast.majority.of.customers.in.these.markets.tend.to.buy.from.a.repertoire. of.brands.(Ehrenberg.1972) .

795

Service quality perceptions of solely loyal customers

On. the. other. hand,. service. markets,. where. consumers. subscribe. to. a. product. or. service. for. a. lengthy. period. of. time. (for. example,. banking,. telecommunications. or. energy-supplying. services),. tend. to. have. a. higher. proportion.of.solely.loyal.customers.(up.to.5060%.of.the.customer.base). (Rundle-Thiele.&.Bennett.2001;.Sharp.et al. 2002) ..Such.high.sole.loyalty. is. partly. associated. with. the. high. switching. costs. involved. in. changing. or. adding. new. providers. to. a. customers. portfolio. (Sharp et al.. 2002) .. However,. recent. industry. deregulation. . price. wars,. developments. in. anti-monopoly. legislation. and. globalisation. (increasing. the. number. of. providers)..has.encouraged.more.and.more.consumers.to.diversify.their. portfolios.by.using.products.from.different.providers . In.stark.contrast.to.the.apparent.value.of.sole.loyalty.and.its.importance. to.providers,.this.phenomenon.is.considerably.under-researched ..The.best. attempt. at. exploring. the. difference. between. solely. loyal. customers. and. those. using. multiple. providers. has. been. undertaken. in. the. business-tobusiness.(B2B).literature ..From.this.literature,.Segal.(1989).has.found.that. firms.who.preferred.single.source.supply.(who.allocated.more.than.90%.of. category.requirements.to.one.supplier).had.different.choice.criteria.when. choosing. a. vendor,. compared. to. those. who. used. multiple. source. supply .. In.addition,.the.difference.between.those.two.groups.was.also.evident.in. the.perceptual.responses.they.provided ..Thus,.in.nine.out.of.ten.attributes. used. for. evaluating. the. suppliers. performance,. mean. scores. provided. by. respondents. using. sole. suppliers. were. higher. than. mean. scores. of. those. who.used.multiple.suppliers ..This.suggested.that.solely.loyal.customers.felt. more.positive.about.their.provider . Another. B2B. researcher. (Swift. &. Coe. 1994;. Swift. 1995). linked. an. attitudinal.measure.of.preference.for.single.vs.multiple.supplier.preference. with. the. level. of. importance. of. various. attributes. and. performance. evaluations.of.the.current.suppliers ..Similar.to.the.Segal.(1989).study,.the. results. showed. that,. in. 18. out. of. 21. items,. the. mean. scores. from. those. favouring. sole. suppliers. were. higher. than. of. those. favouring. multiple. suppliers ..A.more.recent.study,.by.Rutherford.et al ..(2006),.also.confirmed. that.there.are.differences.between.customers.preferring.single-.to.multiplesource.suppliers ..In.particular,.the.study.found.that.customers.preferring. single-source.suppliers.assigned.greater.importance.to.being.satisfied.with. the.sales.person . A.study.in.the.fmcg.category.(Bird.et al..1970).showed.that.solely.loyal. customers. provided. slightly. more. positive. brand. image. responses. than. multiple.brand.users.did.about.the.same.brand .

796

International Journal of Market Research Vol. 53 Issue 6

To.summarise,.the.few.studies.appearing.in.the.B2B.and.fmcg.literature. have.found.that.solely.loyal.customers.tend.to.provide.higher.performance. evaluations. or. more. positive. brand. image. responses. than. customers. of. the. same. brand. who. also. use. other. suppliers/brands .. Despite. this,. no. research.has.examined.the.perceptions.of.solely.loyal.customers.in.service. industries,.where.about.5060%.of.customers.are.typically.solely.loyal.to. one.provider.(Sharp et al..2002) ..This.study.fills.that.gap . Based.on.the.literature.presented.above,.it.appears.plausible.that:
Service. quality. evaluations. of. solely. loyal. customers. (those. who. only. use. one. provider). will. be. more. positive. than. service. quality. evaluations. of. divided. loyal. customers. (those. who. use. multiple. providers). for. the. same. provider,. from. the. same.category .

The. secondary. objective. of. this. research. is. to. examine. any. potential. confounding. factors. that. might. underpin. possible. differences. in. the. evaluations.of.sole-.and.multiple-provider.users ..Specifically,.the.study.will. examine. the. demographic. characteristics. of. sole-. and. multiple-provider. users,.to.establish.whether.a.skew.in.any.particular.demographic.variable. could. be. moderating. service. quality. responses. (as. suggested. in. Swift. &. Coe.1994;.Swift.1995) ..This.test.will.indicate.whether.the.differences.in. service.quality.evaluations.are.driven.by.sole/multiple.loyalty,.or.are.simply. a.function.of.the.skew.in.demographic.characteristics.of.the.two.groups .

Methodology
This. research. draws. on. seven. sets. of. cross-sectional. data. collected. at. different. points. in. time. from. three. service. industries:. personal. banking,. business. banking. and. telecommunication. services .. By. using. multiple. sets. of. data,. the. aim. is. to. empirically. observe. the. results. under. different. conditions.to.test.their.generalisability.and.assess.their.boundary.conditions. (Ehrenberg.1995) ..Table.1.summarises.all.conditions.that.were.tested . All. data. sets. were. collected. as. part. of. commercial. service. quality. tracking. projects. by. a. team. of. professional. interviewers. accredited. by. the. Interviewer. Quality. Control. Australia. Scheme .. The. data. collection. methods.varied.from.phone.to.mail,.with.response.rates.around.4460% .. This.means.that.the.data.used.in.this.analysis.are.of.high.quality.and.are. similar. to. any. service. quality. data. commercially. collected. for. a. market. research. study .. Hence,. the. results. of. this. research. would. be. directly. applicable.to.marketing.and.market.research.practitioners .

797

Service quality perceptions of solely loyal customers

Table 1 Description of the data sets

Personal banking (1 data set) Personal banking services 2004 Face-to-face, phone, writing 4 banks Phone 42 Random sample of population Over 60% Business banking (3 data sets) Business banking services 1997, 1998, 2000 Face-to-face, phone, writing 3 data sets 5 banks Mail 29, 13 and 13 Random sample of businesses 44%, 40%, 40% Telecommunications (3 data sets) Telecommunication services 1998 (quarters 2, 3, and 4) Face-to-face, phone, writing One leading provider Phone 18 in each data set Random sample of providers customers Over 50%

Industry Nature of the industry Year Form of interaction with a service provider Number of service providers evaluated Data collection method Number of SQ statements analysed Characteristics of the samples Response rate

Service.quality.(SQ).evaluations.in.all.data.sets.were.measured.by.asking. respondents. to. express. their. agreement. with. statements. regarding. their. main. service. provider. on. a. scale. of. zero. to. ten,. where. zero. indicates. a. 0%.agreement.with.the.statement,.three.a.30%.agreement,.seven.a.70%. agreement,. and. ten. a. 100%. agreement. with. the. statement .. A. dont. know/refused. option. was. also. available .. This. scale. had. been. validated. and.suggested.for.use.in.service.quality.research.by.Page.(1999) ..The.SQ. measurement.has.been.adopted.from.the.service.literature.and.contained. various. statements. representing. the. five. dimensions. of. SERVQUAL. (Parasuraman et al.. 1988) .. In. line. with. Cronin. and. Taylors. suggestions. (1994),. this. research. examines. only. evaluation. of. the. actual. providers. performance,. as. opposed. to. comparing. it. to. expectations .. Examples. of. the.exact.statements.tested.in.each.of.the.three.industries.are.presented.in. Tables.2,.3.and.4 .

Discussion of the results

First,. this. section. presents. the. results. from. the. personal. banking. data .. Following.this,.a.close.replication.of.the.results.is.conducted.across.three. data. sets. from. the. business. banking. data .. Finally,. the. results. from. the. telecommunication. services. demonstrate. generalisability. of. the. findings. from.another.industry .

798

International Journal of Market Research Vol. 53 Issue 6

Personal banking
In. the. personal. banking. data. set,. respondents. were. made. up. of. 290. metropolitan. residents. who. were. randomly. selected. from. the. electronic. telephone. directory. based. on. their. postcode .. Respondents. were. asked. to. evaluate. the. quality. of. service. they. received. from. their. respective. main. financial. service. providers .. Due. to. sample. size. restrictions,. the. analysis. was.limited.to.four.major.banks.within.Australia . Usage. of. financial. institutions. (FIs). was. captured. using. the. following. two.methods . 1 .. The.proportion.of.banking.products.held.with.each.FI ..Respondents. were. prompted. with. a. list. of. common. financial. services. products. (savings. or. transaction. account,. cheque. account,. credit. card,. home. loan. (both. primary. residence. and. investment),. personal. loan,. term. deposit.and.investments.(in.the.form.of.managed.funds,.direct.shares. or.self-managed.superannuation)) ..For.each.product,.respondents.were. asked.to.indicate.which.providers.they.used ..Then,.the.total.number. of.products.was.calculated.for.each.respondent.and.each.bank ..Those. whose. product. requirements. were. entirely. fulfilled. by. one. provider. were.provisionally.considered.solely.loyal,.with.the.rest.classified.as. multiple.provider.users . 2 .. Internal.validity.checks.of.the.solely.loyal.classification.were.conducted. by. asking. respondents. to. identify. which. bank. they. considered. to. be. their. main. financial. institution. (MFI). and. what. proportion. of. their. banking.was.allocated.to.their.MFI . The.second.testing.ensured.that. there. were. no. other. products. (apart. from. those. listed. in. the. survey). that.respondents.may.have.had.with.some.other.providers . The.proportion.of.solely.loyal.customers.was.about.the.same.across.the.four. banks.included.in.this.survey.(approximately.5155%.of.the.sample) ..This. distribution. has. naturally. occurred. in. the. sample,. as. it. was. not. designed. that. way .. Prior. research. has. indicated. that. this. proportion. of. solely. loyal. customers.is.typical.for.financial.services.data.(Sharp et al..2002) . Preliminary. descriptive. analysis. (cross-tabulations. and. Chi-square). conducted.at.a.brand.level.showed.consistent.results.across.all.competing. brands. . there. were. no. statistically. significant. differences. between. the. brands .. Therefore,. the. data. were. merged. to. achieve. higher. statistical. power ..Following.this,.mean.scores.for.each.SQ.statement.were.calculated. for. each. group. . sole. or. multiple. service. provider. users .. Comparisons. were.conducted.on.a.provider.level ..That.is,.SQ.evaluations.of.sole.users.

799

Service quality perceptions of solely loyal customers

for. provider. A,. were. compared. with. SQ. evaluation. of. those. users. who. claimed.provider.A.to.be.their.main.service.provider.but.also.used.other. providers.from.the.same.category ..Independent.samples.t-tests.were.used. to.determine.statistically.significant.differences.between.the.means.of.the. two.groups.(Table.2) .

Table 2 Personal banking aggregated results from four brands

Mult. Sole provider users users M SQ M M SQ score diff Dimension score emp 6.6 5.3 1.3* assu 6.7 5.4 1.3* assu assu assu res assu emp emp emp emp res emp tan ove emp emp ove emp rel assu rel assu rel 7.3 7.2 7.3 7.1 6.7 7.1 6.8 7.4 7.2 7.0 6.3 7.1 7.6 6.9 7.3 6.9 6.8 7.4 7.0 7.3 7.7 7.4 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.2 5.9 6.2 6.0 6.5 6.5 6.2 5.5 6.3 6.8 6.1 6.4 6.2 6.1 6.7 6.4 6.7 7.0 6.8 1.1* 0.9* 0.9* 0.9* 0.9* 0.9* 0.8* 0.8* 0.8* 0.8* 0.8* 0.8* 0.8* 0.8* 0.8* 0.7* 0.7* 0.7* 0.7* 0.7* 0.7* 0.6*

SQ statement Consistently demonstrate they can anticipate my needs Make suggestions about how I can get better use out of my accounts Show that they trust me The things they do lead me to trust them. Makes me feel totally safe, secure and at ease They are willing to accept responsibility for my satisfaction They are always coming out with new ideas and ways of banking The staff always use my name when they interact with me They always act like they have my best interests at heart They would go out of their way to assist me with help or advice Staff always show they have a genuine interest in me The information provided is always useful They make me feel important The brochures and other written material are always easy tounderstand Overall the quality of service I experience is excellent They make it enjoyable to do business with them They would be honest with me when mistakes happen They are service leaders They make me feel like a valued customer I am confident they would effectively resolve any complaints Employees instil confidence in me They are always available when I need them It is easy to do business with them When required, they would make every effort to solve my problems

(continued)

800

International Journal of Market Research Vol. 53 Issue 6

Table 2 (continued) Personal banking aggregated results from four brands

Mult. Sole provider users users M SQ M M SQ score diff Dimension score emp 7.1 6.5 0.6* res 7.3 6.7 0.6* rel 7.4 6.7 0.6* rel 7.8 7.3 0.6* rel emp res rel rel rel tan assu assu assu assu res rel tan 6.5 8.2 7.4 7.6 7.3 7.3 7.0 7.5 7.5 7.4 7.8 7.4 7.9 8.4 7.2 5.9 7.7 6.9 7.1 6.8 6.8 6.5 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.4 7.0 7.6 8.2 6.6 0.6* 0.5* 0.5* 0.5* 0.5* 0.5* 0.5* 0.5* 0.5* 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.7

SQ statement Employees show they care about me They would handle any complaints in a prompt manner Always keep the promises they make I am always able to get done what I need when I visit a branch or call them The staff dont blame rules, head office or systems when problems arise Employees treat me with the utmost courtesy They take responsibility to get my request done and dont pass me around They always demonstrate professionalism and expertise in alldealings Staff are consistently efficient in the way they do things They can be counted on to perform services right the first time Their facilities provide a comfortable and inviting experience Employees always provide educated and informed advice when needed The staff provide clear explanations for any issues that arise Employees behave with the utmost honesty and fairness Staff cooperate with each other When I want to ask a question, someone is always available The records are always correct Employees have a neat and professional appearance Average

* The difference is statistically significant at p < 0.05 The following abbreviations for SERVQUAL dimensions were used: assu assurance; res responsiveness; rel reliability; tan tangibles; emp empathy

The. results. show. that. sole. provider. users. were,. on. average,. 0 .7. scale. points. (on. an. 11-point. scale). more. positive. in. their. SQ. evaluations. than. multiple. provider. users. (or. about. 11%. of. the. multiple. users. score) .. This. pattern.was.consistent.across.all.29.SQ.statements.tested.in.this.data.set,. with.sole.users. being. consistently.more. positive.in. their. evaluations.than. multiple.provider.users ..The.magnitude.of.the.difference.varied.from.0 .2. scale. points. (for. the. statement. Employees. have. a. neat. and. professional. appearance).to.1 .3.(for.the.statement.Consistently.demonstrate.they.can.

801

Service quality perceptions of solely loyal customers

anticipate.my.needs) ..The.differences.between.the.groups.were.statistically. significant. in. 24. out. of. 29. statements,. with. the. other. five. showing. the. results.in.the.same.direction . These. findings. support. the. proposed. hypothesis,. confirming. that. SQ. evaluations. of. solely. loyal. customers. are. slightly. more. positive. than. SQ. evaluations. by. those. customers. who. use. multiple. service. providers .. Looking.at.the.statements.by.the.dimensions.of.SERVQUAL,.no.consistent. pattern.was.noted.in.terms.of.the.magnitude.of.difference..there.were.no. differences.between.the.statements.that.constituted.different.dimensions . Comparisons. of. the. demographic. characteristics. between. sole. and. multiple. groups. showed. no. statistically. significant. differences .. Person. Chi-square. analysis. for. gender. distribution. (c2(1,. n=282). =. 0 .03,. p. =. 0 .89,. NS). showed. no. significant. difference .. Similarly,. there. was. no. difference. between. the. groups. based. on. household. income. (c2(3,. n=282). =. 5 .25,. p. =. 0 .15,. NS),. marital. status. (c2(3,. n=282). =. 4 .98,. p. =. 0 .17,. NS). or. age. of. the. respondent. (the. result. of. the. independent. samples. t-test. was. also. not. significant. (t(280). =. 0 .47,. p. =. 0 .64,. NS)) .. These. results. show. that. demographic.characteristics.were.very.similar.in.solely.loyal.and.multiple. provider.user.groups ..Therefore,.the.differences.in.SQ.scores.could.not.be. attributed.to.the.moderating.effect.of.any.of.these.demographic.variables .

Business banking
Next,. a. similar. analysis. was. conducted. using. three. business. banking. data. sets .. Business. relationships. are. characterised. by. higher. levels. of. interpersonal. relationships. between. customers. and. service. provider. employees,. than. between. a. provider. and. personal. customers. (van. der. Ven. 1976) .. This. condition. presents. an. opportunity. to. test. whether. the. same.pattern.in.service.quality.scores.is.evident.between.solely.loyal.and. multiple.provider.users.in.a.different.type.of.relationship . Three. waves. of. commercial. service. quality. tracking. studies. were. used .. All. data. sets. were. collected. through. mail. surveys .. The. questionnaires. were.mailed.to.a.random.sample.of.businesses.in.South.Australia,.asking. about. their. usage. and. perceptions. of. the. four. major. financial. service. providers ..Three.waves.of.data.were.collected,.in.1997,.1998.and.2000,. resulting. in. samples. of. 645,. 580. and. 500. small. and. medium. businesses. respectively ..Response.rates.of.44%,.40%.and.40%.were.achieved ..In.all. three. waves,. the. same. questionnaire. was. used,. with. the. exception. of. the. initial. wave. where. an. extended. version. was. used,. which. included. more. than.40.statements .

802

International Journal of Market Research Vol. 53 Issue 6

Loyalty.status.was.determined.by.using.the.same.technique.as.discussed. in. the. personal. banking. data .. The. proportions. of. sole. and. multiple. FI. users. were. also. similar. to. those. observed. in. the. personal. banking. study. (roughly. a. 50/50. split) .. This. distribution. further. verifies. the. validity. of. the.data ..Service.quality.scores.were.measured.using.a.SERVQUAL-based. instrument.and.an.11-point.agreement.scale,.as.with.the.personal.banking. data . The.results.from.the.business.banking.analysis.(see.Table.3.for.study.A. example).show.that.solely.loyal.users.of.service.providers.were,.on.average,. 0 .3.scale.points.(or.6%).more.positive.in.their.service.quality.evaluations. than.those.using.multiple.providers ..This.pattern.was.consistent.across.all. SQ.statements,.however.statistically.significant.differences.were.observed. only.for.three.statements ..The.magnitude.of.the.difference.between.the.two. groups.ranged.from.0 .02.(for.the.statement.My.MFI.provides.a.reliable. service).to.0 .5.scale.points.(for.the.statement.My.MFI.has.a.strong.interest. in.what.we.do) ..These.results.were.verified.by.close.replications.in.another.
Table 3 Business banking (study A) aggregated results
Mult. Sole provider users users M SQ M M SQ score diff Dimension score emp 4.2 3.7 0.5* emp 5.3 4.8 0.5* emp 4.3 3.9 0.4* emp 4.7 4.3 0.4 assu 5.1 4.8 0.3 rel 6.4 6.1 0.3 emp ove emp assu res emp rel 5.2 5.9 6.8 5.9 6.2 7.0 6.7 5.7 5.0 5.8 6.7 5.8 6.1 6.9 6.6 5.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.3

SQ statement My MFI has a strong interest in what we do Employees of my MFI know what our needs are Our business gets personal attention from my MFI My MFI makes us feel important I trust my MFI totally When my MFI promises to do something by a certain time, it does so To retain our business my MFI always tries hard to do its best for us The quality of my MFIs service is excellent I like the staff I deal with from my MFI My MFI is very cooperative We receive prompt service from my MFI I get along well with the people I deal with at my MFI My MFI provides a reliable service Average

* The difference is statistically significant at p < 0.05 The following abbreviations for SERVQUAL dimensions were used: assu assurance; res responsiveness; rel reliability; tan tangibles; emp empathy

803

Service quality perceptions of solely loyal customers

two.business.banking.data.sets.(B.and.C;.see.Table.5) ..Detailed.results.for. the.data.sets.not.reported.in.the.paper.are.available.upon.request . The. difference. between. solely. loyal. and. multiple-provider. users. in. business. banking. was. smaller. (on. average,. 6%. to. 8%). than. the. average. difference. in. personal. banking. (11%) .. Furthermore,. the. average. mean. score. for. business. customers. was. 5 .4. to. 5 .7. out. of. 10,. compared. to. 6 .6. to. 7 .2. on. the. same. scale. for. personal. customers. (Table. 5) .. Therefore,. business.customers.tended.to.provide.much.lower.SQ.evaluations.of.their. providers.than.personal.customers ..These.results.could.be.due.to.the.more. professional. nature. of. the. relationship. between. business. customers. and. service. providers .. Business. customers. are. more. likely. to. have. a. higher. volume. of. transactions. and. interaction. with. the. service. provider,. so. the. chance. of. experiencing. occasional. unsatisfactory. customer. service. is. increased ..In.addition,.possible.mistakes.that.service.providers.make.could. be. taken. more. seriously. by. business. customers. than. personal,. because. those. mistakes. could. mean. interruptions. to. the. business. and. potential. loss.of.profit ..This.could.also.explain.the.smaller.magnitude.of.differences. between. solely. loyal. and. multiple. provider. users. . even. solely. loyal. business.customers.appear.to.be.less.forgiving,.providing.more.critical.SQ. evaluations .

Telecommunication services
The.third.industry.used.to.examine.the.relationship.between.sole.loyalty. and. service. quality. evaluations. was. telecommunications .. Replication. of. the. same. analysis. in. the. telecommunication. context. further. tests. the. generalisability.of.the.observed.pattern.outside.the.banking.industry . These. data. were. also. collected. as. part. of. a. commercial. project. over. three. quarters. of. the. year. in. 1998 .. The. same. questionnaires. were. used. in. each. quarter .. Respondents. (N. =. 1849,. 2003. and. 1968;. managers. responsible. for. dealing. with. communication. providers. for. their. business. needs). were. approached. by. phone. using. randomly. drawn. numbers. from. the.electronic.telephone.directory ..The.provider.usage.was.captured.with. the. question. Which. telecommunication. providers. do. you. use. for. your. telecommunication.needs?.The.analysis.includes.only.evaluations.from.the. customers.who.consider.the.target.provider.(the.biggest.brand.in.the.market). as.their.main.provider ..Response.rates.of.more.than.50%.were.achieved.in. each.study ..The.proportion.of.sole.users.in.the.telecommunication.market. was,. on. average,. 43% .. This. was. slightly. lower. than. was. observed. in. the. financial.services.market.(on.average,.50%) .

804

International Journal of Market Research Vol. 53 Issue 6

Analysis. replicated. the. approach. undertaken. for. the. financial. services. data .. Mean. SQ. scores. (out. of. ten). for. each. usage. group. were. calculated. across. all. statements. and. the. differences. between. them. noted .. Table. 4. presents.a.sample.of.the.results.for.the.second.quarter . Sole. users. of. telecommunication. providers. were. found. to. provide. service. quality. evaluations. 0 .8. scale. points. (or. 13%). more. positive. than. those. customers. who. used. multiple. telecommunication. providers .. The. magnitude.of.the.difference.between.the.groups.varied.from.0 .6.for.the. statement. My. MTP. provides. me. with. accurate. accounts,. to. 1 .0. scale. point.for.the.statement.To.retain.our.business.my.MTP.always.tries.hard.
Table 4 Telecommunication data (Q2) results
Mult. Sole provider users users M SQ M M SQ score diff SQ statement Dimension score To retain our business my MTP always tries hard to do its best emp 6.5 5.5 1.0* for us I trust my MTP totally assu 6.1 5.2 0.9* We receive prompt service from my MTPs employees res 7.0 6.1 0.9* Employees of my MTP know what our needs are emp 6.1 5.2 0.9* Overall, I am very satisfied with my MTP ove 7.1 6.2 0.9* Our business gets personal attention from my MTP emp 5.5 4.6 0.9* My MTP is very cooperative assu 6.9 6.1 0.8* The quality of my MTPs service is excellent ove 6.9 6.1 0.8* When my MTP promises to do something by a certain time, rel 6.6 5.8 0.8* it does so I am very satisfied that my MTP keeps me up-to-date with res 6.6 5.9 0.7* new technologies and business solutions My MTP has a strong interest in what we do emp 5.2 4.5 0.7* I like the staff I deal with from my MTP emp 7.3 6.6 0.7* I have complete confidence in my MTP to behave ethically assu 6.9 6.2 0.7* I get along well with the people I deal with at my MTP emp 7.6 6.9 0.7* My MTP is proactive in its communications assu 6.6 6.0 0.6* My MTP provides a reliable service rel 7.8 7.1 0.6* My MTP makes us feel important emp 4.6 4.0 0.6* My MTP provides me with accurate accounts rel 7.5 6.9 0.6* Average 6.6 5.8 0.8
* The difference is statistically significant at p < 0.05 MTP stands for main telecommunication provider The following abbreviations for SERVQUAL dimensions were used: assu assurance; res responsiveness; rel reliability; tan tangibles; emp empathy

805

Service quality perceptions of solely loyal customers

to.do.its.best.for.us ..These.results.were.consistent.with.the.results.from. the. other. two. telecommunication. data. sets .. All. the. differences. observed. between.the.groups.across.the.three.data.sets.were.statistically.significant. at.p.<.0 .05 .

Overall discussion and conclusions

This. research. found. that. the. solely. loyal. customers. of. a. service. provider. (who.use.only.one.provider.for.all.their.category.needs).are.more.positive. in. their. service. quality. evaluations. than. customers. of. the. same. provider. who.also.use.other.providers . This.finding.was.consistent.across.all.seven.data.sets.from.the.personal. and. business. banking. and. telecommunication. industries. (Table. 5) .. On. average,. the. difference. between. the. scores. of. solely. loyal. customers. and. multiple-provider.users.was.0 .6.scale.points.(on.a.zero-.to.ten-point.scale),. or.about.10%.higher . One.potential.explanation.for.this.phenomenon.lies.in.the.expectation disconfirmation. paradigm. (Parasuraman. et al. 1985) .. Those. customers. who. use. only. one. provider. have. no. other. benchmark. for. comparison,. other.than.the.past.performance.they.have.received.from.the.same.provider .. However,. those. who. use. multiple. providers. have. more. opportunity. to. experience.different.levels.of.service,.which.could.impact.on.their.higher. expectations. and. more. critical. assessments. of. the. providers. quality. of. service . This.finding.is.consistent.across.all.SQ.statements,.regardless.of.whether. the.statement.describes.a.tangible.characteristic.of.a.service.or.the.speed.of. a.services.delivery ..The.magnitude.of.the.difference.between.evaluations. of. solely. loyal. and. multiple-provider. users. shows. no. particular. pattern.
Table 5 Summary of the results across all seven data sets
Sole users M SQ score 6.6 6.4 6.2 7.2 5.7 5.7 6.7 6.4 Mult. provider users M SQ score 5.8 5.7 5.5 6.6 5.3 5.4 6.3 5.8

Data sets Telecom Q2 Telecom Q3 Telecom Q4 Personal banking Business banking (Study B) Business banking (Study A) Business banking (Study C) Average

M diff 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.6

Diff. (%) 14 12 13 11 8 6 6 10

806

International Journal of Market Research Vol. 53 Issue 6

across. the. different. SQ. statements. within. SERVQUAL. dimensions .. This. suggests. that. the. effect. of. sole. loyalty. on. service. quality. evaluations. is. not. moderated. by. the. nature. of. SQ. statements,. but. is. evident. across. all. statements .

Practical implications
The. difference. of. 10%. in. service. quality. scores. for. solely. loyals. and. multiple-provider. users. indicates. that. there. is. potential. for. substantial. variations. in. the. results. caused. by. the. distribution. of. solely. loyal. vs. multiple.provider.users.in.a.given.sample . Commercial. service. quality. tracking. studies. typically. assess. the. shift. in. a.service.providers.performance.by.comparing.results.of.different.waves. conducted. with. cross-sectional. samples,. which. are. independently. drawn. from.the.providers.customer.base ..A.difference.in.the.proportion.of.solely. loyal.customers.between.the.two.waves.might.influence.the.findings.and. could.lead.to.misleading.interpretations ..A.decline.in.service.quality.scores. could. simply. be. due. to. the. second. wave. containing. fewer. solely. loyal. customers,.rather.than.an.actual.change.in.service.levels.as.feared . Based.on.the.results.of.this.research.marketing,.practitioners.are.advised. to: . include. a. measure. of. behavioural. loyalty. (that. is,. how. many. service. providers.customers.use.simultaneously) . use. this. information. to. estimate. and. control. for. the. proportion. of. solely. loyal. customers. in. a. given. sample. and. other. cross-sectional. samples.used.for.comparison.over.time.or.across.competing.brands . These. simple. steps. would. enable. marketing. researchers. and. managers. to. obtain.unbiased.service.quality.indicators .

Limitations and future research

This. research. investigated. only. the. current. usage. of. various. service. providers .. It. is. uncertain. whether. those. who. currently. claim. to. use. only. one. provider. have. ever. used. other. providers. in. the. past .. Such. past. experience. could. potentially. modify. their. expectations,. prompting. those. who.are.currently.solely.loyal.(but.have.used.other.providers.in.the.past). to.give.similar.evaluations.to.those.who.currently.use.multiple.providers .. This.is.the.area.for.future.research .

807

Service quality perceptions of solely loyal customers

This. study. asked. respondents. only. to. evaluate. service. quality. for. their. main.service.provider,.even.for.those.who.currently.use.multiple.providers .. It. is. possible. that. evaluations. of. service. quality. for. the. target. provider. might. be. even. lower. from. its. customers. who. consider. other. providers. to.be.their.main.provider ..This.implies.that.the.usage.bias.could.be.even. greater,. which. is. an. important. avenue. for. further. research. to. explore .. To. complement. this,. future. research. can. examine. how. the. total. number. of. products. a. customer. holds,. along. with. the. number. of. other. providers. customers.use,.impacts.on.service.quality.evaluations . Finally,. the. scope. of. this. paper. is. confined. to. three. Australian. service. industries ..Further.replications.of.these.findings.in.other.service.industries. are.required.to.ascertain.whether.the.same.pattern.is.present.in.the.context. of.other.industries.and.countries ..Further.investigation.of.other.dependent. variables,. such. as. product/service. satisfaction,. provider. attitudes. or. provider. image. perceptions,. would. indicate. whether. all. perceptual. and. attitudinal. responses. have. the. sole/multiple. provider. usage. bias .. Such. further. research. would. make. an. important. contribution. to. marketing. methodologies.and.metrics.research .

References
Ambler,.T ..(2000).Marketing.metrics ..Business Strategy Review,.11,.2,.pp ..5966 . Asubonteng,.P .,.McCleary,.K .J ..&.Swan,.J .E ..(1996).SERVQUAL.revisited:.a.critical.review.of. service.quality ..Journal of Services Marketing,.10,.6,.pp ..6281 . Bird,.M .,.Channon,.C ..&.Ehrenberg,.A .S .C ..(1970).Brand.image.and.brand.usage,.Journal of Marketing Research,.7,.3,.pp ..307314 . Bloemer,.J .,.de.Ruyter,.K ..&.Wetzels,.M ..(1999).Linking.perceived.service.quality.and.service. loyalty:.a.multi-dimensional.perspective ..European Journal of Marketing,.33,.11/12,. pp ..10821106 . Bogomolova,.S .,.Romaniuk,.J ..&.Sharp,.A ..(2009).Quantifying.the.extent.of.temporal.decay. in.service.quality.ratings ..International Journal of Market Research,.51,.1,.pp ..7191 . Boyd,.T ..(2010).Execs.close.in.on.higher.bonus ..Australian Financial Review,.Financial. Services,.25.February,.p ..25 . Brown,.T .J .,.Churchill.Jr,.G .A ..&.Peter,.J .P ..(1993).Research.note:.improving.the.measurement. of.service.quality ..Journal of Retailing,.69,.1,.p ..127 . Cannon,.T .,.Ehrenberg,.A .S .C ..&.Goodhardt,.G .J ..(1970).Regularities.in.sole.buying ..British Journal of Marketing,.4,.2,.pp ..8086 . Copeland,.M .T ..(1923).Relation.of.consumers.buying.habits.to.marketing.methods ..Harvard Business Review,.1,.3,.pp ..282289 . Cronin.Jr,.J .J ..&.Taylor,.S .A ..(1994).SERVPERF.versus.SERVQUAL:.reconciling.performancebased.and.perceptions-minus-expectations.measurement.of.service.quality ..Journal of Marketing,.58,.1,.pp ..125131 . de.Ruyter,.K .,.Wetzels,.M ..&.Bloemer,.J ..(1998).On.the.relationship.between.perceived. service.quality,.service.loyalty.and.switching.costs ..International Journal of Service Industry Management,.9,.5,.pp ..436453 .

808

International Journal of Market Research Vol. 53 Issue 6

Ehrenberg,.A .S .C ..(1972).Repeat Buying: Theory and Applications . New.York:.American.Elsevier . Ehrenberg,.A .S .C ..(1995).Empirical.generalisations,.theory,.and.method ..Marketing Science,.14,. 3,.pp ..G20G28 . Ehrenberg,.A .S .C ..&.Scriven,.J ..(1997).Added.values.or.propensities.to.buy?.Admap,. September,.pp ..3640 . Ganesh,.J .,.Arnold,.M .J ..&.Reynolds,.K .E ..(2000).Understanding.the.customer.base.of.service. providers:.an.examination.of.the.differences.between.switchers.and.stayers ..Journal of Marketing,.64,.July,.pp ..6587 . Hauser,.J .R .,.Simester,.D .I ..&.Wernerfelt,.B ..(1994).Customer.satisfaction.incentives .. Marketing Science,.13,.4,.pp ..327350 . McDonald,.C ..&.Ehrenberg,.A .S .C ..(2003).What.happens.when.brands.gain.or.lose.share?. Customer.acquisition.or.increased.loyalty?.Report 31 for Corporate Members..Adelaide:. Ehrenberg-Bass.Institute.for.Marketing.Science . Mittal,.V ..&.Katrichis,.J .M ..(2000).Distinctions.between.new.and.loyal.customers ..Marketing Research,.12,.1,.pp ..2632 . Morrison.Coulthard,.L .J ..(2004).Measuring.service.quality ..A.review.and.critique.of.research. using.SERVQUAL ..International Journal of Market Research,.46,.4,.pp ..479497 . Page,.N ..(1999).Developing.subjective.and.objective.measures.of.relationship.quality.and. investigating.the.discriminant.validity.between.relationship.quality.and.service.quality ..PhD,. University.of.South.Australia . Parasuraman,.A .,.Zeithaml,.V ..&.Berry,.L ..(1988).SERVQUAL:.a.multiple-item.scale.for. measuring.consumer.perceptions.of.service.quality ..Journal of Retailing,.64,.1,.pp ..1240 . Parasuraman,.A .,.Zeithaml,.V .A ..&.Berry,.L .L ..(1985).A.conceptual.model.of.service.quality. and.its.implications.for.future.research ..Journal of Marketing,.49,.4,.pp ..4150 . Reichheld,.F .F ..&.Sasser,.W .E .J ..(1990).Zero.defections:.quality.comes.to.services ..Harvard Business Review,.68,.5,.pp ..105111 . Rundle-Thiele,.S ..&.Bennett,.R ..(2001).A.brand.for.all.seasons?.A.discussion.of.brand.loyalty. approaches.and.their.applicability.for.different.markets ..Journal of Product & Brand Management,.10,.1,.pp ..2537 . Rutherford,.B .N .,.Boles,.J .S .,.Barksdale.Jr,.H .C ..&.Johnson,.J .T ..(2006).Single.source.supply. versus.multiple.source.supply:.a.study.into.the.relationship.between.satisfaction.and. propensity.to.stay.within.a.service.setting ..Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management,. 26,.4,.pp ..371379 . Segal,.M .N ..(1989).Implications.of.single.vs.multiple.buying.sources ..Industrial Marketing Management,.18,.3,.pp ..163178 . Sharp,.B ..&.Wright,.M ..(1999).There.are.two.types.of.repeat.purchase.markets,.28th. European.Marketing.Academy.Conference,.Berlin,.Germany . Sharp,.B .,.Wright,.M ..&.Goodhardt,.G ..(2002).Purchase.loyalty.is.polarised.into.either. repertoire.or.subscription.patterns ..Australasian Marketing Journal,.10,.3,.pp ..720 . Swift,.C .O ..(1995).Preferences.for.single.sourcing.and.supplier.selection.criteria ..Journal of Business Research,.32,.2,.pp ..105111 . Swift,.C .O ..&.Coe,.B .J ..(1994).Sourcing.preference.scale:.measuring.preferences.of.purchasing. managers.for.single.sourcing.or.multiple.sourcing.of.products ..Industrial Marketing Management,.23,.2,.pp ..171180 . van.der.Ven,.A .H ..(1976).On.the.nature,.formation,.and.maintenance.of.relations.among. organisations ..Academy of Management Review,.1,.4,.pp ..2436 . Wangenheim,.F ..&.Bayn,.T ..(2004).Satisfaction,.loyalty.and.word.of.mouth.within.the. customer.base.of.a.utility.provider:.differences.between.stayers,.switchers.and.referral. switchers ..Journal of Consumer Behaviour,.3,.3,.pp ..211220 . Wright,.M .,.Sharp,.A ..&.Sharp,.B ..(1998).Are.Australasian.brands.different?.Journal of Brand and Product Management,.7,.6,.pp ..465480 .

809

Service quality perceptions of solely loyal customers

About the author

Svetlana. Bogomolova. is. a. Senior. Research. Associate. at. the. EhrenbergBass. Institute. for. Marketing. Science,. University. of. South. Australia .. Her. research. interests. lie. in. the. areas. of. consumer. behaviour,. service. quality. and. brand. equity .. Svetlana. is. also. actively. involved. in. market. research. consultancy . Address. correspondence. to:. Svetlana. Bogomolova,. Ehrenberg-Bass. Institute. for. Marketing. Science,. University. of. South. Australia,. GPO. Box.2471,.Adelaide.SA.5000,.Australia . Email:.svetlana .bogomolova@marketingscience .info

810

Copyright of International Journal of Market Research is the property of Warc LTD and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.