Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
measured using secondary data such as/ accounting measures of the (amount
and financial value) and frequency with which a customer purchases the firm's
goods or services. This requires that the firm should have a strong customer
information management department that can capture all the relevant metrics
that may be needed for analysis. In a typical firm, these may come from a
diverse set of departments such as accounting, sales, marketing, finance,
logistics, and other customer research.
Antecedents And drivers : Customer retention is an outcome that is the result of
several different antecedents as described below.
Customer satisfaction: Research shows that customer satisfaction is a direct
driver of customer retention in a wide variety of industries. Despite the claims
made by some one-off studies, the bulk of the evidence is unambiguously clear:
there is a positive association between customer satisfaction and customer
retention/ though the magnitude of the association can vary based on a whole
host of factors such as customer, product, and industry characteristics. Some
companies and individuals have created mathematical models to evaluate
customer satisfaction.
1. Customer delight: Some scholars argue that in today's competitive world,
merely satisfying customers is not enough; firms need to delight
customers by providing exceptionally strong service. It is delighted
customers who are likely to stay with the firm, and improve overall
customer retention. More recently, it has been argued that customer
delight may be more strongly applicable to hedonic goods and services
rather than for utilitarian products and services.
2. Customer switching costs: Burnham, Frels, and Mahajan(2003, p. 110)
define switching costs as one-time costs that customers associate with
the process of switching from one provider to another. Customers
usually encounter three types of switching costs: (1) financial switching
costs (e.g., fees to break contract, lost reward points); (2) procedural
switching costs (time, effort, and uncertainty in locating, adopting, and
using a new brand/provider); and (3) relational switching costs (personal
relationships and identification with brand and employees). A recent
meta-analysis examined 233 effects from over 133,000 customers and
found that all three types of switching costs increased customer retention
however, relational switching costs have the strongest association with
customer repurchase intentions and behavior.
quality). Likewise, a customer can be dissatisfied with the service encounter and
still perceive the overall quality to be good. This occurs when a quality service
is priced very high and the transaction provides little value.
This model then looks at the strength of the business relationship; it proposes
that this strength is determined by the level of satisfaction with recent
experience, overall perceptions of quality, customer commitment to the
relationship, and bonds between the parties. Customers are said to have a "zone
of tolerance" corresponding to a range of service quality between "barely
adequate" and "exceptional." A single disappointing experience may not
significantly reduce the strength of the business relationship if the customer's
overall perception of quality remains high, if switching costs are high, if there
are few satisfactory alternatives, if they are committed to the relationship, and if
there are bonds keeping them in the relationship. The existence of these bonds
acts as an exit barrier. There are several types of bonds, including: legal bonds
(contracts), technological bonds (shared technology), economic bonds
(dependence), knowledge bonds, social bonds, cultural or ethnic bonds,
ideological bonds, psychological bonds, geographical bonds, time bonds, and
planning bonds.
This model then examines the link between relationship strength and customer
loyalty. Customer loyalty is determined by three factors: relationship strength,
perceived alternatives and critical episodes. The relationship can terminate if:
1. the customer moves away from the company's service area,
2. the customer no longer has a need for the company's products or services,
3. more suitable alternative providers become available,
4. the relationship strength has weakened,
5. the company handles a critical episode poorly,
6. unexplainable change of price of the service provided.
The final link in the model is the effect of customer loyalty on profitability. The
fundamental assumption of all the loyalty models is that keeping existing
customers is less expensive than acquiring new ones. It is claimed
by Reichheld and Sasser (1990) that a 5% improvement in customer
retention can cause an increase in profitability between 25% and 85% (in terms
of net present value) depending upon the industry. However, Carrol and
Reichheld (1992) dispute these calculations, claiming that they result from
faulty cross-sectional analysis.
According to Buchanan and Gilles (1990), the increased profitability associated
with customer retention efforts occurs because:
Long term customers tend to be less inclined to switch and also tend to be
less price sensitive.
Expanded models
Virtuous Circle
Schlesinger and Heskett (1991) added employee loyalty to the basic customer
loyalty model. They developed the concepts of "cycle of success" and "cycle of
failure". In the cycle of success, an investment in your employees ability to
provide superior service to customers can be seen as a virtuous circle. Effort
spent in selecting and training employees and creating a corporate culture in
which they are empowered can lead to increased employee satisfaction and
employee competence. This will likely result in superior service delivery and
customer satisfaction. This in turn will create customer loyalty, improved sales
levels, and higher profit margins. Some of these profits can be reinvested in
employee development thereby initiating another iteration of a virtuous cycle.
Feed Reichheld (1996) expanded the loyalty business model beyond customers
and employees. He looked at the benefits of obtaining the loyalty of suppliers,
Affective commitment
Normative commitment
Economic commitment
Forced commitment
Habitual commitment
short, they will be disappointed and will likely rate their experience as less than
satisfying. For this reason, a luxury resort, for example, might receive a lower
satisfaction rating than a budget moteleven though its facilities and service
would be deemed superior in 'absolute' terms.
The importance of customer satisfaction diminishes when a firm has
increased bargaining power. For example, cell phone plan providers, such
as AT&T and Verizon, participate in an industry that is an oligopoly, where only
a few suppliers of a certain product or service exist. As such, many cell phone
plan contracts have a lot of fine print with provisions that they would never get
away if there were, say, 100 cell phone plan providers, because customer
satisfaction would be far too low, and customers would easily have the option of
leaving for a better contract offer.
purpose
On a five-point scale, "individuals who rate their satisfaction level as '5' are
likely to become return customers and might even evangelize for the firm. (A
second important metric related to satisfaction is willingness to recommend.
This metric is defined as "The percentage of surveyed customers who indicate
that they would recommend a brand to friends." When a customer is satisfied
with a product, he or she might recommend it to friends, relatives and
colleagues. This can be a powerful marketing advantage.) "Individuals who rate
their satisfaction level as '1,' by contrast, are unlikely to return. Further, they can
hurt the firm by making negative comments about it to prospective
customers. Willingness to recommend is a key metric relating to customer
satisfaction."[1]
Theoretical Ground
"In literature antecedents of satisfaction are studied from different aspects. The
considerations extend from psychological to physical and from normative to
positive aspects. However, in most of the cases the consideration is focused on
two basic constructs as customers expectations prior to purchase or use of a
product and his relative perception of the performance of that product after
using it.
Expectations of a customer on a product tell us his anticipated performance for
that product. As it is suggested in the literature, consumers may have various
"types" of expectations when forming opinions about a product's anticipated
performance. For example, four types of expectations are identified by Miller
(1977): ideal, expected, minimum tolerable, and desirable. While, Day (1977)
indicated among expectations, the ones that are about the costs, the product
nature, the efforts in obtaining benefits and lastly expectations of social values.
Perceived product performance is considered as an important construct due to
its ability to allow making comparisons with the expectations.
It is considered that customers judge products on a limited set of norms and
attributes. Olshavsky and Miller (1972) and Olson and Dover (1976) designed
their researches as to manipulate actual product performance, and their aim was
to find out how perceived performance ratings were influenced by expectations.
These studies took out the discussions about explaining the differences between
expectations and perceived performance."
In some research studies, scholars have been able to establish that customer
satisfaction has a strong emotional (i.e., affective component).[5] Still others
amenities in the room, with the restaurants, and so on. Additionally, in a holistic
sense, the hotel might ask about overall satisfaction 'with your stay.'"[1]
As research on consumption experiences grows, evidence suggests that
consumers purchase goods and services for a combination of two types of
benefits: hedonic and utilitarian. Hedonic benefits are associated with the
sensory and experiential attributes of the product. Utilitarian benefits of a
product are associated with the more instrumental and functional attributes of
the product (Batra and Athola 1990).[9]
Customer satisfaction is an ambiguous and abstract concept and the actual
manifestation of the state of satisfaction will vary from person to person and
product/service to product/service. The state of satisfaction depends on a
number of both psychological and physical variables which correlate with
satisfaction behaviors such as return and recommend rate. The level of
satisfaction can also vary depending on other options the customer may have
and other products against which the customer can compare the organization's
products.
Work done by Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry between 1985 and 1988
provides the basis for the measurement of customer satisfaction with a service
by using the gap between the customer's expectation of performance and their
perceived experience of performance. This provides the measurer with a
satisfaction "gap" which is objective and quantitative in nature. Work done by
Cronin and Taylor propose the "confirmation/disconfirmation" theory of
combining the "gap" described by Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry as two
different measures (perception and expectation of performance) into a single
measurement of performance according to expectation.
The usual measures of customer satisfaction involve a survey using a Likert
scale. The customer is asked to evaluate each statement in terms of their
perceptions and expectations of performance of the organization being
measured.
Good quality measures need to have high satisfaction loadings, good reliability,
and low error variances. In an empirical study comparing commonly used
satisfaction measures it was found that two multi-item semantic
differential scales performed best across both hedonic and utilitarian service
consumption contexts. A study by Wirtz& Lee (2003) found that a six-item 7point semantic differential scale (for example, Oliver and Swan 1983), which is
a six-item 7-point bipolar scale, consistently performed best across both hedonic
and utilitarian services. It loaded most highly on satisfaction, had the highest
item reliability, and had by far the lowest error variance across both studies. In
the study,[13]the six items asked respondents evaluation of their most recent
experience with ATM services and ice cream restaurant, along seven points
within these six items: pleased meto displeased me, contented
with to disgusted with, very satisfied with to very dissatisfied with, did a
good job for me to did a poor job for me, wise choice to poor choice and
happy with to unhappy with. A semantic differential (4 items) scale (e.g.,
Eroglu and Machleit 1990),[14] which is a four-item 7-point bipolar scale, was
the second best performing measure, which was again consistent across both
contexts. In the study, respondents were asked to evaluate their experience with
both products, along seven points within these four items:
satisfied to dissatisfied, favorable to unfavorable, pleasant to unpleasant
and I like it very much to I didnt like it at all.[13] The third best scale was
single-item percentage measure, a one-item 7-point bipolar scale (e.g.,
Westbrook 1980).[15] Again, the respondents were asked to evaluate their
experience on both ATM services and ice cream restaurants, along seven points
within delighted to terrible.[13]
Finally, all measures captured both affective and cognitive aspects of
satisfaction, independent of their scale anchors.[13] Affective measures capture a
consumers attitude (liking/disliking) towards a product, which can result from
any product information or experience. On the other hand, cognitive element is
defined as an appraisal or conclusion on how the products performance
compared against expectations (or exceeded or fell short of expectations), was
useful (or not useful), fit the situation (or did not fit), exceeded the requirements
of the situation (or did not exceed).
Recent research shows that in most commercial applications, such as firms
conducting customer surveys, a single-item overall satisfaction scale performs
just as well as a multi-item scale.[16] Especially in larger scale studies where a
researcher needs to gather data from a large number of customers, a single-item
scale may be preferred because it can reduce total survey error.[17]
Methodologies[edit]
American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) is a scientific standard of
customer satisfaction. Academic research has shown that the national ACSI
score is a strong predictor ofGross Domestic Product (GDP) growth, and an
even stronger predictor of Personal Consumption Expenditure (PCE) growth.
[18]
On the microeconomic level, academic studies have shown that ACSI data is
In the European Union member states, many methods for measuring impact and
satisfaction of e-government services are in use, which the eGovMoNet project
sought to compare and harmonize.[28]
These customer satisfaction methodologies have not been independently audited
by the Marketing Accountability Standards Board (MASB) according to MMAP
(Marketing Metric Audit Protocol).
definition
An assessment of the product or service quality provided by a business that
measures how loyal its customers are. Customer retention statistics are typically
expressed as a percentage of long term clients, and they are important to a
business since satisfied retained customers tend to spend more, cost less and
make valuable references to new potential customers.
Chapter
What is customer retention?
Customer retention rate is how well a company keeps its paying customers over a period of time. Peter
Drucker once said the purpose of a business is to make and keep a customer. Retention deals with the
latter.
A low retention rate is similar to filling a bucket with holes in the bottom
sure, you could keep piling on to make up for it, or you could figure out what caused the holes and how you
can patch them up. Retaining customers costs less than acquiring them, and both add to your companys
bottom line; revenue doesnt care where it comes from, earned or saved
In order to help you increase your own retention rates, we've compiled
a list of our 20 favorite techniques, many backed by academic research and case studies, on increasing
customer loyalty, divided into five easy-to-browse sections.
customers you want, you need to identify your target customers down to the last detail, then craft a message
that matches their pains, goals and aspirations. It's easier to fill this existing demand than to create one.
Additional research by Dr. Nunes on retention programs has shown that people love being VIP, or gold
members. There is one caveat, though this only works when people know there is a class below them on
the totem pole. Speaking to human nature, Nunes saw a notable increase in gold members participation as
soon as he implemented a silver class.
20. Label your customers
Research on voting patterns conducted by Stanford University revealed people are more likely to
participate in something if they are labeled with a positive trait. Buffer refer to their premium customers as
"awesome" members, and even named their upgraded payment plan the Awesome Plan a much easier
phrase to embrace than "paid member."