The impact of customer-to-customer

interactions in a high personal contact service

setting
Robert Moore and Melissa L. Moore
Department of Marketing, Quantitative Analysis and Business Law, College of Business and Industry, Mississippi State University,
Mississippi State, Mississippi, USA, and
Michael Capella
Villanova University, Villanova, Pennsylvania, USA

Abstract
Purpose – To empirically examine the development and influence that customer-to-customer interactions (CCI) have in a high personal contact setting.
Design/methodology/approach – Using responses from patrons of different hair salons, the role that salon atmospherics had on the formation of
CCI was assessed. Then, the relative influence of CCI on satisfaction with the firm, loyalty to the firm and firm word-of-mouth, in a model of service
outcomes, was examined.
Findings – Results indicate that atmospherics do influence CCI, which in turn is a strong predictor of loyalty to the firm and positive word-of-mouth.
Research limitations/implications – Care should be taken when generalizing these findings to other service settings. It should be noted that all
female respondents were generally more educated and had higher incomes than the general population.
Practical implications – This study suggests that positive perceptions of atmospherics will lead to positive CCI effects. If managers determine that
they would like to enhance the quality of CCI, they should incorporate changes to the physical settings that enhance the type of interactions they desire.
Originality/value – In terms of how to assess CCI, the authors provide a simple four-item scale which can be used by managers to assess the degree in
which their customers interact and the effect that the interaction has on their experience.

Keywords Consumer behaviour, Interpersonal relations, Social interaction, Customer loyalty, Services marketing

Paper type Research paper

An executive summary for managers and executive
readers can be found at the end of this article.
Making your way in the world today takes everything you’ve got.
Taking a break from all your worries sure would help a lot.
Wouldn’t you like to get away?
Sometimes you want to go, where everybody knows your name . . .
(Theme from Paramount television series “Cheerse” – (Portnoy and Angelo).
As the opening lines from the classic sitcom “Cheerse”
suggests, sometimes part of the reason people frequent a
service firm is because they like the other customers – the
other customers add to the consumption experience beyond
the typical benefits associated with the service provider and
the service itself. Not only can these other customers
influence our evaluation of a service encounter, they can
also be the very reason why we choose one service firm over
another. For more than 20 years, the interaction between
The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0887-6045.htm
Journal of Services Marketing
19/7 (2005) 482– 491
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0887-6045]
[DOI 10.1108/08876040510625981]
customers (e.g. bumping into a neighbor at the grocery store
or saying “hello” to a fellow passerby) in the service setting
has been noted in the literature to be an important aspect of
the service experience and subsequent satisfaction and loyalty
with the service firm (Bitner et al., 1990; Langeard et al.,
1981; Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2000). During this time,
the scant research produced concerning customer-to-
customer interactions (hereafter referred to as CCI) has
evolved from the haphazard reporting of anecdotal evidence
and intuition to the directed use of the critical incident
technique to categorize types of CCI (Bitner et al., 1990;
Grove and Fisk, 1997; McGrath and Otnes, 1995). However,
there is a lack of empirical research that examines the role that
the effects of CCI have on service evaluations.
To address this dearth, we wed highly documented firm-
related aspects of the service encounter (i.e. atmospherics and
the role of the service provider), with the lesser understood
phenomena of CCI to directly examine how CCI influences
customer evaluations of three important outcome variables:
firm satisfaction, firm loyalty, and word-of-mouth (WOM)
communications concerning the firm. We investigate these
relationships in the context of a high personal contact setting
(i.e. hair salon). The remainder of this article is arranged in
the following manner. First, we review the literature regarding
three different forms of customer-based interactions:
customer-service provider, customer-service environment,
and customer-customer. From this review, we develop four
key hypotheses relating to CCI and firm satisfaction, firm
loyalty, and firm WOM. Next, using survey research we
describe and present the results of a study that empirically

482
 The impact of customer-to-customer interactions
Robert Moore, Melissa L. Moore and Michael Capella
tests our proposed relationships. We then discuss the
implications of our findings for both academics and
practitioners and conclude with some thoughts regarding
future research.
Background
Langeard et al. (1981) modeled the service delivery process as
a system of customer interactions in the service encounter.
Interactions occur between the customer and service contact
personnel, the service place environment and other
customers. Of these three interactions, the first two have
been extensively examined with respect to their effects on firm
satisfaction, firm loyalty, and firm WOM (see Beatty et al.,
1996; Bitner, 1990, 1992; Donovan and Rossiter, 1982;
Kotler, 1973; Parasuraman et al., 1985; Reynolds and Beatty,
1999). Such a research emphasis is not surprising given the
notion that the customer-service provider interaction and the
customer-service environment interaction are often deemed
firm controllable, while the behavior of other customers
during the service experience is not under complete control of
the firm (Martin and Pranter, 1989). Unlike firm-controllable
variables, Davies et al. (1999) note that it is often difficult to
disentangle the effects of CCI on purchase decisions as well as
subsequent feelings toward the firm. However, individually or
in combination, all elements of the service encounter are likely
to influence satisfaction, loyalty, and WOM intentions.
Indeed, Grove and Fisk (1997) specifically call for a need to
learn more about the effects of CCI during the service
encounter so that firms may better manage resources to
promote or discourage certain customer behaviors.
The remainder of this section briefly discusses the
customer-service provider interaction as well as the
customer-service environment interaction in order to
identify relevant managerial outcome measures pertaining to
the service encounter. This dialogue is followed by a larger
discussion concerning services research that directly examines
CCI. We conclude the section with a set of hypotheses derived
from the existing literature.
The customer-service provider interaction
The interaction between the service provider and the
customer has been investigated from two distinct
viewpoints. The first viewpoint holds the role of the
customer as co-producer of the service encounter, especially
for customized offerings. Scripts or roles are established that
allow each actor (service provider or consumer) to understand
when they contribute to the service encounter (Solomon et al.,
1985; Surprenant and Solomon, 1987). As the co-producer of
the service (e.g. a custom fit pair of jeans or medical
treatment) the information that the customer provides affects
the quality of the service that is provided, subsequent
satisfaction with the service personnel and satisfaction with
the firm in general (Wind and Rangaswamy, 2001).
The second compatible viewpoint in which the relationship
between service provider and customer is examined suggests
that the service contact person is viewed as instrumental in
the formation of a long-term positive association between the
firm and the customer (Parasuraman et al., 1985). In their
study of long-term customer-salesperson relationships,
Reynolds and Beatty (1999) model the influence of accrued
relationship benefits as antecedents to satisfaction with the
483
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 19 · Number 7 · 2005 · 482 –491
service provider (see also Beatty et al., 1996). They then
utilize the extant literature to support their hypothesis that
satisfaction with the service provider is a driver of several key
outcome measures, including satisfaction with the firm,
loyalty to the firm and WOM about the firm. Beatty et al.
(1996) note that loyalty to the firm is highly contingent upon
the sales person. This dependency can be explained through
the importance of the interpersonal loyalty developed with the
contact person as part of a human relationship (Czepiel,
1990).
The customer-service environment interaction
The service environment has been examined using an
atmospherics context (Donovan and Rossiter, 1982; Kotler,
1973). Findings have shown that retail atmospherics, i.e.
characteristics of the actual physical surroundings, such as
music (North et al., 2003), smells (Spangenberg et al., 1996)
as well as ambient lighting and the number of employees
(Baker et al., 1992) can influence approach and avoidance
behaviors of customers. Findings from these studies have
generally supported the notion that atmospherics which
increase arousal and pleasantness have resulted in a greater
propensity to stay in the environment and increases purchase
amounts (Yoo et al., 1998).
To specifically examine service place atmospherics, Bitner
(1990, 1992) has introduced the servicescape context that
emphasizes how the perceived service setting environment
influences the interaction between and among customers and
service contact personnel. Bitner proposes that perceived
positive responses to the servicescape may enhance the quality
of between customer interactions as well as the overall
satisfaction with the service and subsequent firm loyalty and
WOM. Similarly, Harris et al. (1995) suggest that when
designing the servicescape, the firm should consider the
degree and type of CCI the firm wants to facilitate and
integrate appropriate environmental cues.
The customer-to-customer interaction
Despite being long noted as an important aspect of the service
encounter, CCI has been relatively ignored in the services
literature. Though other customers’ behavior cannot be
predicted, the establishment of customer scripts or roles
(Solomon et al., 1985; Surprenant and Solomon, 1987) and
compatibility between customers through behavior types
(Martin and Pranter, 1989) may increase the likelihood that
customers, at a minimum, behave in an expected manner.
Research that has focused on CCI has viewed other
customers as either a characteristic of the servicescape, such
as crowding effects (e.g., Eroglu and Machleit, 1990; Grewal
et al., 2003; Hui and Bateson, 1991) or an independent part
of the experience of the service (e.g. Grove and Fisk, 1997). It
is the latter that is of interest here.
A small but growing stream of research has begun to
examine the effects of the social behavior of individuals within
the service process and how it contributes to the overall
experience (e.g. Davies et al., 1999; Grove and Fisk, 1997;
Martin, 1996; Martin and Pranter, 1989). Though firms may
view the behavior of other customers as uncontrollable,
consumers consider firm management of guests and their
behavior (e.g. a sponsored guest at a country club, noisy
guests at a hotel, or someone smoking in a non-smoking area)
 The impact of customer-to-customer interactions
Robert Moore, Melissa L. Moore and Michael Capella
an important component of the service process which has
effects on their overall service evaluations (Bitner, 1990).
Martin and Pranter (1989), in their analysis of customer
segmentation and compatibility, suggest that positive CCI
influences satisfaction with the service experience, future
patronage intentions, and holistic evaluations. Additionally,
Grove and Fisk (1997) in their investigation of customer
experiences at Florida theme parks found that over half of
their respondents reported that other customers’ behavior,
both good and bad, affected their overall evaluation of their
experience. Grove and Fisk grouped their CCI effects into
two categories: protocol and sociability. The protocol category
was based on the extended amount of time in which
customers were sharing space and fellow customers’
adherence to expected rules of conduct. The sociability
category contained incidents concerning temporary
friendships as well as the mere presence of others
contributing to the experience.
We focus on the sociability category given the belief that in
certain service settings other customers are considered
essential inputs to the service experience. Arnould and Price
(1993), and also Price et al. (1995), in their analysis of river
rafting adventures, suggest that friendships between
customers are almost expected to develop from extended,
intimate experiences during the service delivery. Bloch et al.
(1994) in their study of the mall as habitat, note that the mall
serves as a meeting place and over 20 percent of their
respondents engaged in conversations with people they met
that day. Similarly, Harris et al. (1995) found that 12 percent
of a sample of visitors to a self-service furniture chain in
northern England engaged in conversations with strangers
and that females (over the age of 35) were most likely to
engage in conversations with 20 percent of them engaging in a
CCI. Recently, Davies et al. (1999), in their description of
CCI in a retail store setting, suggest that positive CCI that
occurs as one waits in line to pay may serve to highlight a
shared experience and enhances enjoyment of the service
experience. McGrath and Otnes (1995) further explored the
interpersonal influence of what they term “unacquainted
consumers” in the marketplace. Using qualitative techniques,
they identified 11 distinct forms of interpersonal behaviors
resulting from CCI in the marketplace that resulted in a range
of outcomes including visibly making others happy as well as
causing other customers to not purchase a product and even
leaving a store in disgust. McGrath and Otnes then provided
managerial guidelines with respect to when sales staff should
or should not intervene in customer interactions. Furthering
the role of the service setting as social space, Lebaron and
Jones (2002), in their description of a chance reunion at a
beauty salon, note that communication between the
customers adds to the total experience. Clearly, CCIs are
part of the service experience and influence outcomes
associated with the service encounter.
In summary, the majority of research concerning CCI
suggests that as one experiences a service, interpersonal
encounters can add or detract from evaluations of the firm
and influence patronage decisions. The existing literature has
identified and categorized the form of the interaction, such as
the number of persons spoken to during the service
encounter, as well as qualitatively established that the
interactions affect how one feels, inferring that CCI can
influence common outcome measures of the service process
such as satisfaction with the firm and purchasing decisions. In
484
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 19 · Number 7 · 2005 · 482 –491
one of the few papers that attempt to empirically link CCI to
services outcomes, Harris et al. (1997) in an exploratory
controlled experiment found that an interaction with another
customer led to increased satisfaction during the purchase
process and comments from the other customer were deemed
as more credible than salespersons comments. However, with
the exception of the Harris et al. (1997) work, empirical
linkages between CCI and service outcomes have not been
clearly established. Figure 1 illustrates how we perceive CCI
can be incorporated into a theoretical model of service
outcomes.
Hypotheses
CCI interactions can be facilitated by the service environment
and atmospherics. How customers perceive the atmospherics
may assist in creating an overall feeling about the
servicescape. As noted, positive perceptions of the
servicescape lead to greater feelings of pleasure resulting in
positive evaluations of the store image as well as potentially
enhancing the propensity of CCI. We therefore propose:
H1. Higher levels of perceived service atmospherics will be
associated with more positive CCI effects.
Just as satisfaction with the service provider and atmospherics
have been shown to influence outcome measures, we expect
that perceptions of CCI are likely to have subsequent impact
on traditional measures of service satisfaction such as
satisfaction with the firm, loyalty to the firm, and word of
mouth. The positive effects of CCI may serve as an “extra”
benefit that contributes independently to the service
experience and subsequent established outcomes.
Therefore, based on the preceding discussion, we suggest
the following hypotheses:
H2. Positive CCI effects will be positively associated with
firm satisfaction.
H3. Positive CCI effects will be positively associated with
firm loyalty.
H4. Positive CCI effects will be positively associated with
firm WOM.
Method
Overview and research context
The hypotheses were tested using survey data. The survey
required respondents to evaluate their relational behaviors
toward a hair salon on the basis of their own experiences. The
target for the hypotheses was the salon they last visited. Hair
salons are considered high personal contact settings
representing situations where extensive customer contact
with the service provider is present due to the individually
customized service solution required (Bowen, 1990).
Customers are expected to be co-producers of the service
through the verbalization of wants and desires to the service
provider (Price and Arnould, 1999). The hair salon setting
also offers the customer the opportunity to interact with other
customers before, during and after the service delivery. In a
typical hair salon setting, several customers may be waiting for
their appointment in the same general area. Once seated for
their appointment, they are often in the view of other
customers getting their hair done and visible to those waiting.
Once service is completed, they will often cross back to a
service desk near the waiting area where a new group of
 The impact of customer-to-customer interactions
Robert Moore, Melissa L. Moore and Michael Capella
Figure 1 The incorporation of CCI in a theoretical model of services outcomes
customers are waiting; they then pay for services and arrange
for the next appointment. Throughout this process other
customers may engage in conversations with each other and
the engagements are visible to other customers (LeBaron and
Jones, 2002).
The objective of the study was to analyze the effect of CCI;
therefore, to eliminate a single hair salon or hair stylist from
introducing bias, we sought heterogeneity among service
providers. Similar to Grove and Fisk (1997), CCI were
collected from service encounters among different service
providers. Such an approach potentially allows variability in
perceptions of servicescape environments.
Respondents
Data were collected from a convenience sample of current
female customers of hair salons. Students served as data
collectors. This technique has been used in services marketing
and consumer research as well as CCI research (e.g. Grove
and Fisk, 1997). Data collection was carried out in the
following manner. In exchange for extra credit in an upper
level undergraduate business class, students were asked to
identify a female non-student over the age of 18 and request
that she complete the survey instrument. Student recruiters
were given the survey on the Friday prior to a Monday
holiday. This time was chosen because most students would
be returning to their home towns over the weekend and
increased heterogeneity in terms of hair salon choice would be
likely. Of the approximately 200 questionnaires sent out, 188
were returned the following week.
Demographically, the average age of the female respondents
was 36 years old with a median age of 32 years of age. The
vast majority of respondents have been patronizing their hair
salon and hairstylist for over six months, 83 percent and 80
percent respectively. Most subjects (90 percent) reported
485
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 19 · Number 7 · 2005 · 482 –491
visiting the salon at least once every three months, with a
negligible amount reporting a first visit to their salon (2
subjects). Approximately half of the subjects reported annual
incomes above $50,000 with 60 percent reporting at least a
bachelor degree. Ethnically, the respondents were primarily
Caucasian (66 percent) and African American (25 percent).
Results indicated that responses were from 90 different zip
codes across a three state region in the southeastern USA,
mentioning 157 different hair salons as the last salon visited.
Of these respondents, 11 were eliminated from further
analysis because they noted they were related to the hair stylist
they last visited, resulting in 177 sample cases.
Questionnaire
The questionnaire consisted of four sections. In section one,
we obtained the name of the salon the respondent last
frequented. Next, subjects were asked to think about their
interactions with other customers at that salon while
completing a battery of questions. Section two assessed
measures as they related to the service provider, the person
that last cut their hair. Section three assessed measures as they
related to the hair salon itself. Section four assessed basic
demographic information.
Measurement
The survey contained items to assess CCI, atmospherics,
satisfaction with the firm, satisfaction with the service
provider, loyalty to the firm, loyalty to the service provider,
and WOM. The items used for analysis and scale properties
are shown in the Appendix. When possible, existing items
were used to measure these constructs (see discussion below).
All items were measured on seven-point Likert scales. Scale
items were summed and averaged. Items were reverse scored
 The impact of customer-to-customer interactions
Robert Moore, Melissa L. Moore and Michael Capella
as needed, such that higher values reflect more positive
aspects of a construct.
As noted, the influence of CCI has had only limited
empirical testing with respect to its independent effects on
established service-oriented outcome measures. Therefore,
the authors developed a measure of perceived CCI effects that
would be appropriate in the present hair salon context. The
authors first examined the literature to determine the context
in which CCI are noted to have effects on behavior. The
primary manifestations of CCI have been in the formation of
interpersonal bonds such as friendships (e.g. Arnould and
Price, 1993; Price et al., 1993) and enjoyment of time spent in
the service encounter with other customers (e.g. Grove and
Fisk, 1997) and encountering friends in the service
environment (e.g. Lebaron and Jones, 2002). Based on the
literature, the authors initially generated 14 items that
emphasized the interpersonal nature of CCI in a hair salon
setting. To assess face validity and dimensionality, the
generated items were pretested with a panel of eight non-
academic female judges who were customers of different hair
salons. Based on comments from the judges and analysis of
responses, six items were retained. Prior to the analysis for the
main study, factor analysis was performed on the final six
items. Of the six items, the authors further eliminated two
items due to cross loading onto a second factor. The final
four-item scale exhibited acceptable reliability and internal
consistency (a ¼ 0:87).
We also included covariate measures of satisfaction with the
service provider and loyalty to the service provider. These
covariates have been identified as important contributors to
service outcomes as indicated by our previous literature
review. The covariate constructs were measured using
previously employed scales. Inspection of Figure 1 shows
the direct covariate relationships as dashed arrows leading to
each of the dependent variables.
Atmospherics was measured using six items selected from
Wu and Petroshius (1987) deemed appropriate for the hair
salon service setting. The items selected from Wu and
Petroshius’s scale reflected Bitner’s (1992, p. 58) definition of
the servicescape as “manmade, physical surroundings as
opposed to the social or natural environment” and contained
items that reflected the spatial layout and functionality, as well
as elements related to aesthetics, which include personnel and
facility cleanliness (Wakefield and Blodgett, 1994).
Satisfaction with the service provider (and firm) was
assessed using seven items, four items from Reynolds and
Beatty (1999) satisfaction scales and three items from Price
and Arnould’s (1999) satisfaction measures that were used in
a hair salon setting. The four-item loyalty to the firm (and
loyalty to the service provider) scales as well as firm WOM
measures were also from Reynolds and Beatty (1999). All
scales exhibited acceptable internal consistency and reliability
(all as . 0:80).
Analysis and results
The data were analyzed using multiple regression modeling
with SPSS V.11.0. Regression[1] was selected as the method
of analysis based on the relative exploratory nature of the
empirical study (Gefen et al., 2000). For each stated
hypothesis, a regression model, incorporating theoretically
derived covariates was developed. During analysis, cases were
486
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 19 · Number 7 · 2005 · 482 –491
eliminated listwise, due to missing data on individual surveys.
The regression results are provided in Table I.
All of the regression models were significant ( ps , 0.05).
For H1, results indicate that atmospherics are a significant
predictor of CCI effects. No covariates were included in this
model. Of note is that only 3 percent of the variance in CCI
can be explained by atmospherics. For H2, as theoretically
expected, we find that the covariates of satisfaction with the
service provider and atmospherics have significant
explanatory power in determining satisfaction with the firm
with 75 percent of the variance in satisfaction with the firm
explained by the these variables. However, our predicted
relationship between CCI and satisfaction with the firm is not
supported (p . 0:10). For H3, we find that loyalty to the
service provider, satisfaction with the firm and CCI account
for 59 percent of the variance in loyalty to the firm and all are
significant. For H4 we again find that our planned covariates
and loyalty to the firm and satisfaction with the firm along
with our proposed relationship with CCI are all significant
predictors of firm WOM accounting for 40 percent of the
variance. Therefore regression results indicate support for
three of our four hypotheses.
Discussion
Much of the focus on research concerning services has been
on either the role of the physical environment or the role that
contact personnel have on satisfaction, loyalty and WOM.
Though these two areas are indeed important and
controllable by management, they largely ignore an
important aspect of the service experience – the influence
of customer-to-customer interactions. The growing body of
research concerning CCI suggests that CCI has an important
and independent impact on services outcomes. Past research
on CCI has demonstrated the frequency in which CCI occurs
in the service experience (Grove and Fisk, 1997; Harris et al.,
1995) and has documented eleven distinct forms of
interpersonal behaviors resulting from CCI in the
marketplace (McGrath and Otnes, 1995). This research
extends our knowledge concerning CCI in that we empirically
establish the relative impact that CCI has on satisfaction with
the firm, loyalty to the firm and firm WOM in the context of
an individual’s last visit to a hair salon (a high personal
contact service setting). Our conceptualization of CCI is
independent of the form in which CCI occurs but rather is
based on the customer’s perceptions of the outcomes of the
CCI experiences. We examined the relative impact of CCI in
a model that incorporates core components of traditional
services research (e.g. Reynolds and Beatty, 1999).
Additionally, we provide empirical support for the influence
that service atmosphere has on CCI. Specific results
concerning each of our hypotheses are discussed next.
Our proposed relationship between atmospherics and CCI
is supported (H1). As suggested by the literature service
atmospherics settings can enhance the effects of CCI. Our
findings suggest that when customers of a hair salon view the
salon’s atmosphere more positively they are more likely to
have positive CCI. This finding is important for firms that
seek to establish CCI as part of their service experience as it
forms a linkage between an element that is more directly
controllable by the firm (i.e. atmospherics) and an element
that is often viewed as non-firm controllable (i.e. CCI).
Atmospherics have been suggested to be an important
 The impact of customer-to-customer interactions Journal of Services Marketing
Robert Moore, Melissa L. Moore and Michael Capella Volume 19 · Number 7 · 2005 · 482 –491

Table I Multiple regression analysis of CCI effects

Coefficients
Dependent variable Independent variable B Standard error b t
Customer-to-customer interaction Atmospherics 0.288 0.119 0.181 2.410a
Adj. R2 5 0.03 F (1,172) 5 5.81a (Constant) 2.645 0.701 3.784c
Satisfaction with the firm Atmospherics 0.469 0.047 0.463 9.877c
Adj. R2 5 0.75 F (3,167) 5 174.19 c
Satisfaction w/Service Provider 0.494 0.044 0.522 11.263c
CCI 20.012 0.025 2 0.018 20.472
(Constant) 0.465 0.261 1.782
Loyalty to the firm Adj. R2 5 0.59 F (3,169) 5 84.54c Loyalty to the service provider 0.465 0.059 0.503 7.818c
Satisfaction with the firm 0.426 0.084 0.314 5.038c
CCI 0.093 0.044 0.107 2.111a
(Constant) 20.087 0.431 20.203
Firm word-of-mouth Loyalty to the firm 0.485 0.106 0.365 4.571c
Adj. R2 5 0.40 F (3,170) 5 39.22c Satisfaction with the firm 0.376 0.138 0.209 2.719b
CCI 0.295 0.071 0.258 4.172c
(Constant) 21.034 0.693 21.49
Notes: a p , 0.05; b p , 0.01; c p , 0.001

antecedent to CCI (Bitner, 1992) and we show that it is a
significant contributor to CCI, however, our analysis also
indicates that the service atmosphere only explains a small
amount of the variance in CCI. As previously noted, the items
used for the construction of the service atmosphere construct
were selected based on their applicability to the hair salon
setting, but perhaps there are two constructs of interest here,
the actual setting and the perceived setting. Of the items in
the measure used here, only one – perceptions of the layout of
the salon, directly relates to the physical structure. A
servicescape measure that more directly taps the presence
and perceived impact of specific physical surroundings such as
background noise, size of waiting area and the number of
other customers, may provide more explanatory power.
Alternatively, factors relating to the individual, such as
introversion/extraversions as well as those customers who just
want to be left alone (Goodwin, 1996), may also be important
predictors of CCI. These factors offer an area for future
investigation as discussed in the next section.
The proposed relationship between CCI and satisfaction
with the firm was not supported (H2). After inclusion of
established paths between satisfaction with the service
provider and atmospherics toward satisfaction with the firm,
we find that those elements are the primary drivers of
satisfaction with the firm and CCI is not significantly related.
A possible explanation for this non-significant relationship
may be that the satisfaction with a hair salon is based on
outcomes, what the stylist does, not what other customers add
to the experience. In our sample, the majority of respondents
have been with the same stylist for a period of time inferring
that an acceptable level of service has been experienced. This
relationship may make certain aspects such as being able to
separate satisfaction with the firm from satisfaction with the
service provider in the mind of the consumer (Parasuraman
et al., 1985). Satisfaction has been defined as the fulfillment of
a need in that the consumer senses that the service outcome
has at least met what they expected (Oliver, 1999), which in
this case is the consumer’s mental focus on getting their hair
done properly.
For H3, as expected, the proposed direct linkage between
CCI and loyalty to the firm is supported. Oliver (1999) in his
expansion of the loyalty construct suggests that loyalty may be
enhanced when a social network is put in place to bring
consumers together. In the hair salon setting, the customers
are together for an extended duration of time (Price et al.,
1995) in a single service encounter. Goodwin (1996) suggests
that duration of a service encounter allows the opportunity to
develop a sense of a consumption community in which non-
essential communication occurs between service provider and
customer. Oliver (1999) extends this reasoning by suggesting
that a consumption community of customers may lead to
increased firm loyalty. Our finding that CCI impacts
satisfaction with the firm provides support for Oliver’s
(1999) expanded conceptualization of loyalty by
incorporating interpersonal aspects.
Our last proposed relationship between CCI and firm
WOM (H4) is also supported. Positive WOM is associated
with increased CCI. This finding is in agreement with
Bhattacharya and Sen’s (2003) modeling of the conditions
that are necessary to develop meaningful customer-firm
relationships. Bhattacharya and Sen use the term
“embeddedness” in their description of the extent to which
customers form bonds with other customers of an
organization and suggest that as a customer becomes
embedded in the social network of the firm they will recruit
other customers as well as exhibit positive company WOM.
A recent survey by Claycomb and Martin (2002) of over
200 US-based service firms concerning the relative
importance of 42 different relationship building objectives
(e.g. encouraging customers to think of us when considering a
purchase, add value to what our customers receive from us,
etc.) found that CCI objectives ranked near the bottom in
terms of priority for the firm. However, a valuable finding
from our research is that beyond the development of strong
bonds between the service personnel and customers, and the
firm and customers (which have been the focus of much of the
services literature), firms need to recognize that CCI is
strongly related to loyalty to the firm and firm WOM, two
extremely important objectives for most firms. Additionally,

487
 The impact of customer-to-customer interactions
Robert Moore, Melissa L. Moore and Michael Capella
CCI can be encouraged by the firm as illustrated by our
finding that CCI is related to the service atmospherics, albeit
in this case only a small proportion of explained variance. In
this study we found empirical support that quantifies the
impact that CCI has on services outcomes.
Managerial implications
In most service environments there is an interaction between
customers. The interactions occur along a continuum from
the mere observation of other customers in the service setting,
to asking a fellow customer for an opinion concerning a
potential purchase, to greeting and continuing a relationship
formed primarily in the service setting. In any service
experience a myriad of encounters can occur and each one has
the potential of affecting one’s satisfaction with the current
service experience, future patronage decisions and WOM
actions.
In terms of how to assess CCI, we provide a simple four-
item scale which can be used by managers to assess the degree
in which their customers interact and the effect that the
interaction has on their experience. Customer responses to
such an instrument, compared to managerial beliefs, or across
customer segments can provide insight into how key customer
groups value customer interactions.
The physical aspect of the service setting also allows a
manager the opportunity to influence CCI. Atmospherics as
described by Bitner (1992) have the ability to enhance the
customer’s environment. Many techniques have been
identified to improve service settings such as color, lighting,
etc. This study suggests that positive perceptions of
atmospherics will lead to positive CCI effects. If managers
determine that they would like to enhance the quality of CCI,
they should incorporate changes to the physical settings that
enhance the type of interactions they desire.
Managers should inform service contact staff about the
importance of CCI and staff should be trained as to when
they should intervene in customer interactions (Martin, 1996)
as well as when they should not intervene (McGrath and
Otnes 1995). Martin (1996) suggests that the use of signage
cues (e.g. we’re a family restaurant) can encourage
homogenous customer groups thus encouraging similar
groups to congregate. The formation of bonds, which may
form between similar customers, may serve to keep customers
from trying other service providers (Martin and Pranter,
1989) or following service contact personnel if they defect.
Conversely, negative CCI can decrease customer satisfaction
and staff should be trained to monitor and intervene in CCI
that are not positive in nature.
For high personal contact service settings, the research
presented here stresses the potential of CCI. Our findings
show that firms that have positive CCI are likely to cultivate
loyalty to the firm and positive WOM, two desirable attributes
of a service encounter. Another possible benefit, though not
directly examined here, is the effect CCI may have on wait
time. By interacting with the other customers, the time may
seem to pass more quickly. This would be especially useful for
services such as auto repair centers, doctors or dentists that
may have a long perceived wait time.
488
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 19 · Number 7 · 2005 · 482 –491
Future research
First, care should be taken when generalizing these findings to
other service settings. It should be noted that our all female
respondents were generally more educated and had higher
incomes then the general population. Our respondents were
also fairly long-term customers of both the firm and service
provider. Future researchers may want to examine the role
that socio-economic factors as well as the time a customer has
been with the firm has on CCI.
Second, the nature of customer-to-customer interactions is
likely to be much more complex than initially assumed. This
study examined the impact that the perceived effect CCI has
on an individual. Our operationalization of CCI, based on
previously published qualitative analysis, focused on the social
aspect of CCI which suggests that aspects of friendships and
time spent together are the primary positive outcomes of CCI,
especially in the service context we investigated, a hair salon.
Though we feel our findings are unique and contribute to our
growing knowledge of CCI, they should be tested in other
service settings and customer-firm durations. For example,
another service setting in which a single service encounter
may be examined (e.g. a single trip to the local Home Depot)
may result in CCI taking on a multi-dimensional nature
incorporating social as well as hedonic and utilitarian aspects.
Hedonic aspects may include feelings that CCI may cause one
to simply feel good/warm or vice versa angry or annoyed. A
utilitarian component of CCI may include task-oriented
aspects such as whether an interaction with another customer
helped one find an item or was counterproductive, causing
one to take longer to find a product.
Third, situational and personal characteristic influences on
CCI can be examined. Certain personality types, such as
extroverts and introverts may view CCI completely
differently, with one group not wanting to have contact with
others while the other views shopping as a social event. And of
course, time constraints may impact patronage decisions due
to CCI. For example, customer A may choose to go to a less
preferred supermarket X if she feels that going to supermarket
Y will likely mean she will run into someone that will engage
her in conversation thus causing her to run late.
Lastly, we noted that a more expansive measure of
servicescape might be helpful in predicting CCI. Elements
such as seating arrangement (two rows facing each other
versus a single row), size of waiting area (large area vs small
area), the number of other consumers in the service setting,
the appearance of other consumers, the role of the service
provider in introducing customers to each other, background
sounds, and the ability to see other customers completing the
service process are potentially elements of a servicescape that
may prove to be important predictors of CCI.
The findings shown here also raise some questions about
what services managers should do to encourage or discourage
CCI. Should service personnel proactively encourage
customers to interact through service atmospherics? Another
interesting question that arises is that since CCI has a direct
and positive effect on loyalty to the firm, can managers
leverage CCI to reduce switching behavior of customers due
to service provider defection?
The decision for a consumer to return to a service provider
is driven by firm controllable and non-controllable factors.
Future research concerning customer-to-customer
interactions should consider the amount of service provider
 The impact of customer-to-customer interactions
Robert Moore, Melissa L. Moore and Michael Capella
interaction in the service (self service vs full service), a
customer’s expected level of interaction with other customers
and the effect that interactions have on the service experience.
Note
1 Attempts to analyze the data using SEM were
unsuccessful due to a lack of suitable convergence of the
measurement model.
References
Arnould, E.J. and Price, L.L. (1993), “River magic:
extraordinary experience and the extended service
encounter”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20, June,
pp. 24-45.
Baker, J., Levy, M. and Grewal, D. (1992), “An experimental
approach to making retail store environmental decisions”,
Journal of Retailing, Vol. 68 No. 4, pp. 445-60.
Beatty, S.E., Mayer, M.L., Coleman, J.E., Reynolds, K.E.
and Lee, J. (1996), “Customer-sales associate retail
relationships”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 72, Fall, pp. 223-47.
Bhattacharya, C.B. and Sen, S. (2003), “Consumer-company
identification: a framework for understanding consumers’
relationships with companies”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 67
No. 2, pp. 76-88.
Bitner, M.J. (1990), “Evaluating service encounters:
the effects of physical surroundings and employee
responses”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, April, pp. 69-82.
Bitner, M.J. (1992), “Servicescapes: the impact of physical
surroundings on customers and employees”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 56, April, pp. 57-71.
Bitner, M.J., Booms, B.H. and Tetreault, M.S. (1990),
“The service encounter: diagnosing favourable and
unfavourable incidents”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54,
January, pp. 71-84.
Bloch, P.H., Ridgway, N.M. and Dawson, S.A. (1994),
“The shopping mall as consumer habitat”, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 70, Spring, pp. 23-42.
Bowen, J. (1990), “Development of a taxonomy of services to
gain strategic marketing insights”, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 43-9.
Claycomb, C. and Martin, C.L. (2002), “Building customer
relationships: an inventory of service providers’ objectives
and practices”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 7,
pp. 615-35.
Czepiel, J.A. (1990), “Service encounters and service
relationships: implications for research”, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 20, January, pp. 13-21.
Davies, B., Baron, S. and Harris, K. (1999), “Observable oral
participation in the servuction system: toward a content and
process model”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 44,
January, pp. 47-53.
Donovan, R.J. and Rossiter, J.R. (1982), “Store atmosphere:
an environmental psychology approach”, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 58, Spring, pp. 34-57.
Eroglu, S.A. and Machleit, K.A. (1990), “An empirical study
of retail crowding: antecedents and consequences”, Journal
of Retailing, Vol. 66, Summer, pp. 201-21.
Gefen, D., Straub, D.W. and Boudreau, M.-C. (2000),
“Structural equation modeling and regression: guidelines
for research practice”, Communications of the Association for
Information Systems, Vol. 4 No. 7, pp. 1-70.
489
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 19 · Number 7 · 2005 · 482 –491
Goodwin, C. (1996), “Community as a dimension of service
relationships”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 5 No. 4,
pp. 387-415.
Grewal, D., Baker, J., Levy, M. and Voss, G.B. (2003),
“The effects of wait expectations and store atmosphere
evaluations on patronage intentions in service-intensive
retail stores”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 79 No. 4, pp. 259-68.
Grove, S.J. and Fisk, R.P. (1997), “The impact of other
customers on service experiences: a critical incident
examination of getting along”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 73,
Spring, pp. 63-85.
Harris, K., Baron, S. and Ratcliffe, J. (1995), “Customers as
oral participants in a service setting”, Journal of Services
Marketing, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 64-76.
Harris, K., Davies, B.J. and Baron, S. (1997), “Conversations
during purchase consideration: sales assistants and
customers”, International Review of Retail, Distribution &
Consumer Research, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 173-90.
Hui, M.K. and Bateson, J.E.G. (1991), “Perceived control
and the effects of crowding and consumer choice on the
service experience”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 18,
September, pp. 174-84.
Kotler, P. (1973), “Atmospherics as a marketing tool”,
Journal of Retailing, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 48-64.
Langeard, E., Bateson, J.E.G., Lovelock, C.H. and Eigler, P.
(1981), Marketing Services: New Insights from Consumers and
Managers, Marketing Science Institute, Cambridge, MA.
LeBaron, C.D. and Jones, S.E. (2002), “Closing up closings:
showing the relevance of the social and material surround to
the completion of interaction”, Journal of Communication,
Vol. 52, September, pp. 542-65.
McGrath, M.A. and Otnes, C. (1995), “Unacquainted
influencers: when strangers interact in the retail setting”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 32, March, pp. 261-72.
Martin, C.L. (1996), “Consumer-to-consumer relationships:
satisfaction with other consumers’ public behavior”, Journal
of Consumer Affairs, Vol. 30, Summer, pp. 146-69.
Martin, C.L. and Pranter, C.A. (1989), “Compatibility
management: customer-to-customer relationships in service
environments”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 3,
Summer, pp. 5-15.
North, A.C., Shilcock, A. and Hargreaves, D.J. (2003),
“The effect of musical style on restaurant customers’
spending”, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 35, September,
pp. 712-18.
Oliver, R.L. (1999), “Whence consumer loyalty?”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 63, October, pp. 33-44.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1985),
“A conceptual model of service quality and its implications
for future research”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49, Fall,
pp. 41-50.
Prahalad, C.K. and Ramaswamy, V. (2000), “Co-opting
customer competence”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 78
No. 1, pp. 79-87.
Price, L.L. and Arnould, E.J. (1999), “Commercial
friendships: service provider-client relationships in
context”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63, October, pp. 38-56.
Price, L.L., Arnould, E.J. and Tierney, P. (1995), “Going to
extremes: managing service encounters and assessing
provider performance”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 59
No. 2, pp. 83-97.
Reynolds, K.E. and Beatty, S.E. (1999), “Customer benefits
and company consequences of customer-salesperson
 The impact of customer-to-customer interactions
Robert Moore, Melissa L. Moore and Michael Capella
relationships in retailing”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 75,
Spring, pp. 11-32.
Solomon, M.R., Surprenant, C.F., Czepiel, J.A. and
Gutman, E.G. (1985), “A role theory perspective on
dyadic interactions: the service encounter”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 49, Winter, pp. 99-111.
Spangenberg, E.R., Crowley, A.E. and Henderson, P.W.
(1996), “Improving the store environment: do olfactory
cues affect evaluations and behaviors?”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 60, April, pp. 67-80.
Surprenant, C.F. and Solomon, M.R. (1987), “Predictability
and personalization in the service encounter”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 51, April, pp. 86-96.
Wakefield, K.L. and Blodgett, J.G. (1994), “The importance
of servicescapes in leisure service settings”, Journal of
Services Marketing, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 66-76.
Wind, J. and Rangaswamy, A. (2001), “Customerization:
the next revolution in mass customization”, Journal of
Interactive Marketing, Vol. 15, Winter, pp. 13-32.
Wu, B.T.W. and Petroshius, S.M. (1987), “The halo effect in
store image measurement”, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 44-51.
Yoo, C., Park, J. and MacInnis, D.J. (1998), “Effects of store
characteristics and in-store emotional experiences on store
attitude”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 42, July,
pp. 253-63.
Appendix
All items measured on a seven-point scale. The scales for
customer-to-customer interaction, service atmospherics,
loyalty to the service provider and loyalty to the firm were
anchored by the labels Strongly disagree-Strongly agree. All
other items were anchored as noted.
Customer-to-customer interaction (CCI) a ¼ 0:87,
M ¼ 4:3, s ¼ 1:4:
.
I have developed friendships with other customers I met at
the salon.
.
I enjoy spending time with other customers at the salon.
.
The other customers in the salon make my time there
more enjoyable.
.
There is a good chance I will run into one of my friends at
the salon.
Service atmospherics a ¼ 0:83, M ¼ 5:8, s ¼ 0:9:
.
The hair salon has a pleasant atmosphere.
.
The hair salon has low quality products (r).
.
The hair salon’s employees are well dressed.
.
The hair salon has knowledgeable employees.
.
The hair salon has an attractive layout.
.
The hair salon is clean.
Satisfaction w/service provider a ¼ 0:89, M ¼ 6:1, s ¼ 1:0:
.
Pleased/displeased (r).
.
Unhappy/happy.
.
Disgusted/contented.
.
Frustrating/enjoyable.
.
Wise choice/poor choice (r).
.
Good job/bad job (r).
.
Bad value/good value.
Satisfaction w/service firm a ¼ 0:89, M ¼ 6:1, s ¼ 0:9:
. Pleased/displeased (r)
.
Unhappy/happy.
490
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 19 · Number 7 · 2005 · 482 –491
.
Disgusted/contented.
.
Frustrating/enjoyable
. Wise choice/poor choice (r).
.
Good job/bad job (r).
. Bad value/good value.
Loyalty to the service provider a ¼ 0:88, M ¼ 5:6, s ¼ 1:4:
.
I am very loyal to my hairstylist.
.
I am very committed to my hairstylist.
.
I don’t consider myself very loyal to my hairstylist (r).
.
I don’t plan to use my hair stylist in the future (r).
Loyalty to the firm a ¼ 0:82, M ¼ 5:5, s ¼ 1:2:
.
I am very loyal to the hair salon.
.
I am very committed to the hair salon.
.
I don’t consider myself a loyal customer (r).
.
I don’t plan to use this hair salon in the future (r).
Company word-of-mouth, M ¼ 5:3, s ¼ 1:7:
.
About how often do you recommend the hair salon? Not
very often/very often.
(r) Denotes reverse scored
Executive summary and implications for
managers and executives
This summary has been provided to allow managers and executives
a rapid appreciation of the content of this article. Those with a
particular interest in the topic covered may then read the article in
toto to take advantage of the more comprehensive description of the
research undertaken and its results to get the full benefits of the
material present.
The influence of customer-to-customer interactions on
service evaluations
In most service environments there is interaction between
customers. This may range from simply watching other
customers, to asking a fellow customer for an opinion about a
potential purchase, to continuing a relationship formed
mainly in the service setting. Sometimes, part of the reason
that people frequent a service firm is that they like the other
customers. Other customers may not only influence a person’s
evaluation of the service encounter, they can also be the
reason the person chooses one service firm over another.
While there has been a lot of research into the role of the
physical environment in which a service is delivered, or the
role that contact personnel have on customer satisfaction,
loyalty and word-of-mouth, there has been relatively little
investigation of the influence of customer-to-customer
interactions on service evaluations. Moore et al. examine the
impact of customer-to-customer interactions in hair salons,
which are commonly assessed to be “high personal contact”
service settings.
The customer-service provider interaction and the
customer-service environment interaction are often deemed
to be controllable by the firm, while the behaviour of other
customers during the service experience is not under the
complete control of the firm. However, the firm can, for
example, take action against a noisy guest in an hotel or a
restaurant patron who smokes at a non-smoking table.
 The impact of customer-to-customer interactions
Robert Moore, Melissa L. Moore and Michael Capella
The role of atmospherics
The research finds that, when customers of a hair salon view
the salon’s atmosphere more positively, they are more likely to
have positive customer-to-customer interactions.
Atmospherics are a significant contributor to customer-to-
customer interactions, although the research shows that the
service atmosphere explains only a small amount of the
variance in customer-to-customer interactions. Nevertheless,
this finding shows a linkage between an element that is
directly controllable by the firm (atmospherics) and one that
is often viewed as difficult for the firm to control (customer-
to-customer interactions). If managers determine that they
would like to enhance the quality of customer-to-customer
interactions, they should incorporate changes to the physical
settings that enhance the type of interactions they desire.
Customer-to-customer interactions and loyalty
The research reveals a direct link between customer-to-
customer interactions and loyalty to the firm. This may be
because customers in a hair salon are together for an extended
period of time, which allows a sense of “community” to
develop and, through this, loyalty to the firm.
Customer-to-customer interactions and word-of-
mouth
The research also reveals that positive word-of-mouth is
associated with increased customer-to-customer interactions.
491
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 19 · Number 7 · 2005 · 482 –491
This may be because, as the customers form bonds with other
clients of the company and become more embedded in its
social network, they will recruit other customers as well as
exhibit positive word-of-mouth.
The research does not find a relationship between
customer-to-customer interactions and satisfaction with the
firm. This may be because satisfaction with a hair salon is
based on what the stylist does, not what other customers add
to the experience.
Managerial implications
Managers should inform service contact staff about the
importance of customer-to-customer interactions and should
train staff about when they should, and should not, intervene
in such interactions. The use of signs saying, for example,
“We are a family restaurant”, can encourage homogenous
customer groups and so encourage similar groups to
congregate.
Moreover, customer-to-customer interactions may affect
perceived waiting time. When customers interact with other
clients, the time spent waiting for a service to be delivered
may seem to pass more quickly.
(A précis of the article “The impact of customer-to-customer
interactions in a high personal contact service setting”. Supplied by
Marketing Consultants for Emerald.)