1. Introduction
Rifkin (2001) said, "The era of ownership is over.” It is saying that the economic concept of modern society has been changing from owning to using. It means the current market economy has changed from the paradigm of private ownership and stakeholders (company, consumer, organization, society, etc.) should fulfill their social responsibilities and aim for the happy growth of everyone.
In this context, the importance of Sharing Economy is growing. A new business model based on the Sharing Economy is and specifically, it is growing rapidly as it is subdivided into accommodation sharing, vehicle sharing, shared office, and shared kitchen (Cohen & Kietzmann, 2014; Lessig, 2008).
In particular, the Sharing Economy is changing from traditional marketing concept to reformative direction including social values. It has a significant impact on management activities such as entrepreneurship, innovation, technology, and HR activity (Muñoz & Cohen, 2017), and is causing significant changes in the manufacturing and service market structure (Miller, 2016).
It can be said that Sharing Economy is an extended system in the process of transition that the principle of economic activities from the existing ownership-oriented mass production and mass consumption method to the sharing-oriented cooperative consumption method after the industrial revolution (Choi & Lee, 2013). Recently, Shared Kitchen has been evolving into a representative business model for the Sharing Economy (Miller, 2016).
Meanwhile, the restaurant industry which is hit hardest by the COVID-19 pandemic is seeking ways to maximize efficiency to generate profits (Kulshreshtha & Sharma, 2022). In a representative manner restaurant companies are developing delivery system using online apps which the demand became high according to the COVID-19 pandemic (Debrabandere, Farabaugh, & Giordano, 2021). It is a trend that the number of customers visiting stores is decreasing and the number of delivery app users is increasing due to this change in the dining culture (Choudhary, 2019; Kulshreshtha & Sharma, 2022). Shared Kitchen is becoming a new remarkable field in the restaurant industry in this background.
Shared kitchen is a service that rents a space equipped with kitchen facilities to restaurant companies in the rapidly changing restaurant/distribution industry, and has recently grown rapidly. Shared kitchen is being chosen as a good alternative in an environment such as excessive competition in the restaurant market, high closure rates, economic depression, and expensive rent/interior fee, etc. In particular, changes in the dining culture, the rapid increase in the size of delivery service apps and the transition according to the non-face-to-face consumption culture due to Covid-19 are causing the expansion of shared kitchens (Lee, 2020).
However, it is very insufficient situation on research on Shared Kitchen, and no discussion has been made on the continuous relationship from the B2B perspective (e.g., food distribution).
Therefore, this study believes that as Shared Kitchen develops into a new trend in the restaurant industry and the important success factors are not only physical environment support in terms of service characteristics but also operational support and aims to study the effect of Shared Kitchen service quality on experiential value, relational commitment and long-term orientation.
It aims to provide theoretical and practical implications for not only shared kitchen companies but also tenant companies to achieve results by presenting improvement points and alternatives about the systematic quality of Shared Kitchen through this.
2. Literature Review
2.1. Sharing Economy and Shared Kitchen
Sharing Economy is an economic principle of the collaborative consumption concept in which many people share products once produced (Belk, 2014).
Unlike the traditional marketing system, which has a clear role in company, consumer, and distribution, the sharing economy system is ambiguous in the areas of producers and consumers, and the relationship between all factors is complementary and unclear (Eckhardt et al., 2019).
These characteristics of Sharing Economy make it difficult to manage performance from a consumption perspective due to "community", "sustainability", and "ambiguity". Therefore, the consumption model in the Sharing Economy, like the traditional consumption model, should be based on practical (economic) motives (Belk, 2014; Binninger et al., 2015; Eckhardt & Bardhi, 2016; Eckhardt et al., 2019)
Shared Kitchen is a system that reduces the operating burden of start-up costs, rental fee, and fixed costs by renting out spaces equipped with kitchen facilities to delivery specialized restaurant companies. Shared Kitchen refers to providing rental services based on sharing kitchen space to packaging delivery specialized restaurant companies that cannot afford or do not have to own a kitchen from the sharing economy perspective (Lee, 2020).
Shared Kitchen is variously defined such as ‘Dark Kitchen’, ‘Cloud Kitchen’, ‘Ghost Kitchen’, ‘Satellite Kitchen’, etc. and is leading the growth of ‘virtual kitchen’, ‘Commissary Kitchen’.
In the frame of Sharing Economy, sharing behavior and social relationships among members play a key role (Benkler, 2004; Lessig, 2008), three elements of community theory: region & space, social interaction, and common culture & the factor of norms can be applicable (Nelson, 1984).
This means that the community model, which was not considered to be much related to consumption, has been applied to the Sharing Economy and is being developed in various fields (Bardhi & Eckhardt, 2012; Botsman & Rogers, 2010).
In other words, Sharing Economy can provide a new consumption system that positively affects market sustainability from the perspective of cooperative consumption and community theory (Benkler, 2004; Lessig, 2008; Lovelock & Gummesson, 2004; Wu & Zhi, 2016).
Meanwhile, tangible space design and facility convenience are important factors when we view Shared Kitchen as a business type which a building or space are shared with each other by various companies. However, it can inevitably be only limited in increasing the innovation and efficiency of Shared Kitchen if it simply stays at the level of dividing and renting space.
Table 1: Summary of Previous Study: Sharing Economy and Shared Kitchen
The value of Shared Kitchen will be increased as well if it moves away from the concept of rental income and raises the system level of Shared Kitchen even though there is still a lack of theoretical establishment for Shared Kitchen and the characteristic of Shared Kitchen is different.
Therefore, if a clear standard for the service quality of Shared Kitchen is presented, it will contribute to the growth of Shared Kitchen and the improvement of the efficiency and productivity of the tenant companies.
2.2. Service Quality
Service quality refers to a disconfirmation between perceived quality and expectations when a customer uses a service provided by a company, and is defined as an overall evaluation of the company (Cronin Jr & Taylor, 1992; Lovelock & Patterson, 2015; Zeithaml et al., 1988). The expectation of service quality means "needs" and "wants" of the customer. In other words, service quality is a marketing mix that a company provides to customers. Companies should pay attention to how much service quality meets customer needs and wants based on customers' previous consumption experience (Lewis, 1993).
Service quality has been studied a lot in traditional service industries such as restaurants and hotels, and as a result of the study, it was said that it had a positive effect on the brand image and customer satisfaction of companies (Booms & Bitner, 1982; Zhong & Moon, 2020).
Recently, many service quality studies are also being conducted from the perspective of B2B.
At this time, it is said that the broad meant concept of customer solution, including the concept of clients and customers, should be applied, and specifically, it is necessary to provide high-quality products, services, and support activities to B2B clients and the process of helping them engage in smooth management activities (Kim et al., 2018).
Service quality, including the tangibility of Shared Kitchen, is a very important factor since shared kitchen is in which one space is physically shared by various companies each other. Recently, Shared Kitchen's services not only share space, but also provide various tangible and intangible services, eliciting satisfaction from companies. In other words, efforts are being made to improve service quality in an effort to elicit satisfaction from the tenant companies.
There is a need to clarify the service process of Shared Kitchen by comprehensively analyzing, from a service quality perspective, the service of shared kitchen regarding the recently growing Shared Kitchen (Dwyer et al., 1987; Ganesan, 1994).
Thus, this study examined the service quality of Shared Kitchen by dividing it into three dimensions: facilities, environment, and support based on the previous research.
2.3. Experiential Value
Customers do not always act rationally and reasonably when deciding on consumption. Sometimes it is subjectively determined by the emotional part even if there is a loss in terms of objective cost. For example, symbolic goods such as luxury goods will not be consumed if humans always consume rationally and reasonably. Holbrook and Hirschman (1982) approached the reason why customers' irrational consumption behavior appears from an empirical perspective.
Holbrook and Hirschman (1982) approached regarding the reason why customers’ irrational consumption behavior appears from an empirical perspective. In other words, it is seen that consumers evaluate the value of goods and services based on subjective perception rather than the objective attributes in front of them (Zeithaml et al., 1988).
Experiential value means that the purpose of consumption becomes experience itself rather than ownership, and that the emotions or senses experienced during the process of using goods and services become the dominant utility (Holbrook & Hirschman, 1982).
According to Holbrook (1994), experiential values can be divided into extrinsic values and intrinsic values.
He said extrinsic values refer to external values such as goods obtained through exchange in terms of the practical aspect of consumption experiences and intrinsic values refer to internal values such as pleasure and fun according to consumption. The experiential value of consumers can be seen as including both a functional value and a hedonic value since the customer makes consumption decisions to achieve or benefit from the objectives associated with consumption value (Mathwick et al., 2001; Wu & Liang, 2009).
Experiential values have been defined, classified, and studied in various fields of social science such as psychology, sociology, and anthropology according to their importance (Chang & Dibb, 2012) and to sum up, the experiential value can be defined as the intrinsic, extrinsic benefits perceived through experience by consumer and the exchange value accordingly (Choi & Lee, 2011).
It is necessary for companies to need forming positive feelings about their products and services by increasing their awareness of the experiential value since the experiential value perceived by customers is correlated with positive variables such as attitude, loyalty, and trust (Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001).
2.4. Relational Commitment
From the perspective of relationship marketing, relational commitment means an explicit or implied commitment to the continuation of the relationship between the exchange parties (Dwyer et al., 1987). Relational commitment can be seen as such that one transaction party believes that the other transaction party is important enough to justify the maximum effort to maintain a continuous relationship (Morgan & Hunt, 1994).
Previous studies on relational commitment focus on maintaining relationships continuously (Oh et al., 2003). This is because even customers who are satisfied with existing transactions can terminate the relationship and convert the transaction to a new company at any time if the conditions of other companies are more attractive. Relation termination happens more easily in situations where there are a number of competitors of similar levels involved and there is difficult to differentiate between service delivery and price (Morgan & Hunt, 1994).
Shared Kitchen is a growing industry that has not been introduced in Korea for a long time, however it may not be easy to differentiate its composition and content if the market reaches saturation in the future. Therefore, it is necessary to identify in advance the needs and preference factors of customers that are expected to affect the relational commitment so that the relationship with the existing customers can be maintained constantly and make an effort to strengthen the relational commitment.
2.5. Long-Term Orientation
Long-term orientation means that performance is perceived to be interdependent in the expectation that not only supplier performance but also the common performance of trading entities will benefit the company in the long time.
While both parties of the transaction insist on their own activities from a long-term perspective, it is a transaction relationship in which there exists a "partnership thinking" that it is possible that one’s success can be determined by others. It should be remarkable here that long-term orientation does not simply mean long-term transaction possibilities, but the desire and expectation to maintain a long-term relationship with the other party are premised. At this time, the counterpart who wants to maintain a long-term relationship is a specific counterpart, not multiple counterparts, and it means the only willingness to continuously trade with the counterpart (Ganesan, 1994).
Long-term orientation can be seen as a broader concept that encompasses repetitive transaction intention and loyalty because it tries to unite with each other by all means to maintain a long-term relationship from both sides beyond simply hoping for a long-term transaction (Bearden et al., 2006).
3. Research Design
3.1. Research Model
This study established and analyzed a structural relationship to confirm how the service quality of Shared Kitchen affects experiential value, relationship commitment, and long-term orientation.
3.2. Hypotheses
3.2.1. Service Quality and Experiential Value
Service quality is a comprehensive assessment of the tangible and intangible environment that customers receive and is very important factor in measuring the experiential value perceived by customers (Wu, Cheng, & Ai, 2017; Wu et al., 2018). The experiential value measured by service quality in this way can lead to favorable consumption behavior of customers (Hong et al., 2020).
There are many studies which have been conducted on relationship that affects experiential value as service quality evaluation in the field of food service (Chang et al., 2020). Specifically, many studies have been conducted on the relationship between the physical environment and experiential value from the perspective of the service-scape on service quality and experiential value. According to Wu and Liang (2009), among the service contact point experienced by customers, the physical environment had a significant influence on the perceived customer's experiential value.
The services experienced by customers have a positive effect on experiential value in various dimensions of tangible and intangible including the physical environment (Wu et al., 2018; Yuan et al., 2008; Zeithaml et al., 1988).
In this context, it is expected that the experiential value will be increased if the tenant companies in the Shared Kitchen evaluate high the perceiving service quality while using the Shared Kitchen.
Therefore, this study classified the service quality of the shared kitchen store company as facilities, environment, and support, and predicted that it would have a positive effect on the experiential value, and established the following hypothesis.
H1: Facilities will have a positive effect on Experiential Value.
H2: Environment will have a positive effect on Experiential Value.
H3: Support will have a positive effect on Experiential Value.
3.2.2. Experiential Value, Relational Commitment, and Long-Term Orientation
Customers trust what the company provides and respond positively when customers experience value through activities that experience products and services.
Forming a favorable attitude toward experiential values can make it easier to unite a mutual relationship. According to Wu and Li (2017) and Wu et al. (2018), perception of experiential value is closely related to the interaction between direct experience and evaluation of generated emotions. These interactions help to recognize experiential values, and experiential values affect to decide the level of commitment with the object in the relationship.
Jin and Kim (2014) found that experiential value is an important preceding condition for relationship commitment as a result of a study on the effect of restaurant experiential value on relationship commitment.
In the same context, a high level of positive feelings for Shared Kitchen will be formed if Shared Kitchen stores perceive highly experiential value while using Shared Kitchen. As a result, it can be expected that expectations and support for companies will increase and the willingness to maintain the relationship will increase as they become immersed in the relationship.
Therefore, this study predicted that the experiential value of the shared kitchen tenant companies would have a positive effect on relationship commitment and established the following hypothesis.
H4: Experiential Value will have a positive effect on Relational Commitment.
Since long-term orientation focuses on achieving future goals and is interested in future performance as well as present, it includes variables of broad concepts such as re-transaction intention, continuous transaction intention, word of mouth, and recommendation intention (Bearden et al., 2006). In this study, previous studies that revealed that experiential value affects many variables constituting long-term orientation were examined. Keng et al. (2007) that the experiential value of customer experience has a significant effect on behavioral intention, and it effects on word of mouth, recommendation, and revisit intention. Kim et al. (2019) found that playfulness (perception of pleasure by experience) and benefits (perception of benefits by experience) constituting experiential value have a positive (+) effect on long-term orientation consisting of continuous use intention, recommendation intention, and long-term use intention.
Based on the preceding studies above, this study also predicted that the experiential value of shared kitchen store companies would have a positive effect on long-term orientation, and the following hypothesis was established.
H5: Experiential Value will have a positive effect on LongTerm Orientation.
3.2.3. Relational Commitment and Long-Term Orientation
Relationship commitment is considered the most common variable in relationship marketing research and is considered an important variable that can distinguish relationship continuation and departure, and is a key element to form a successful long-term relationship (Jin & Kim, 2014).
commitment involves the intention to make short-term sacrifices to realize long-term benefits and increases conviction in the safety of the relationship. In other words, relationship commitment is closely related to long-term orientation and is a key factor for a successful long-term relationship. Relationship commitment is an important factor in reducing the dissolution intention and the defection intention and at the same time, it is a factor in increasing the relationship continue intention (Antón et al., 2007; Halinen & Tähtinen, 2002; Wu et al., 2017).
In this study, as in previous studies, expecting that the relationship commitment between shared kitchen companies and store companies would have a positive effect on long-term orientation and the following hypothesis was established
H6: Relational Commitment will have a positive effect on Long-Term Orientation.
3.3. Measurement of Variables
In this study, all measurement items except demographics and technical statistics are Likert 5-point scale (1 point = Strongly disagree ~ 5 points = Strongly agree). The measurement questions used in this study were modified and used in line with this study in accordance with the measurement questions which proved validity in precedent research.
3.3.1. Service Quality
Service quality is defined as the perceived quality and overall evaluation of the company when the customer uses the services provided by the company (Lovelock & Patterson, 2015; Zeithaml et al., 1988). Therefore, this study defined the service quality of Shared Kitchen as a comprehensive evaluation of the services provided to tenant companies in shared kitchen and conducted a study.
The service quality measurement questions were measured in 5 facility questions, 4 environment questions, and 5 support questions by modifying them according to this study based on the studies of Parasuraman et al. (1991) and Lee (2020).
3.3.2. Experiential Value
Mathwick et al. (2001) defined experiential value as a perceived relative preference by consumers for product attributes and service performance within the consumption environment as a benefit perceived by consumers through product or service experience. Therefore, this study defined the experiential value of the shared kitchen as the perceived preference through the store operation and shared service experience of tenant companies in the shared kitchen and conducted the study. The measurement questions of experiential value were modified to fit the environment of this study based on the studies of Jones et al. (2006) and Jin and Kim (2014), and measured into three questions.
3.3.3. Relational Commitment
Relationship commitment is defined as the degree of belief for maintaining continuous relationship between the trading parties (Dwyer et al., 1987; Morgan & Hunt, 1994). Therefore, this study defined the relationship commitment of Shared Kitchen as the degree which tenant companies in the shared kitchen believe shared kitchen and maintain the relationship. The measurement questions of relationship commitment were modified to suit the environment of this study based on the studies of Morgan and Hunt (1994) and Cho (2005) measured as 4 questions.
4. Research Method
4.1. Data Collection and Analysis Method
In order to verify the research model of this study, a survey was conducted on tenant companies that actually entered domestic shared kitchen companies and operated stores. There are not many studies on Shared Kitchen which have been conducted yet, and studies on tenant companies in shared kitchen are very insignificant.
Therefore, in this study, in order to increase the contents validity of the survey, a preliminary interview was conducted to executives of shared kitchen based on the extracted contents about characteristics of the service environment of Shared Kitchen.
The measurement questions were revised based on the results of the pre-interview, and a pre-survey was conducted on 30 graduate students majoring in restaurant franchise management to increase the validity of the revised questions A total of 210 copies of the final questionnaire organized through a preliminary survey were collected from tenant companies in Shared Kitchen, and 188 copies of the data, excluding 22 copies of unfaithful data, were used for analysis.
4.2. Profile of Respondents
The characteristics of the sample (n=188) used in this study are as follows. First, the gender was 55.3% (n=104) for men and 44.7% (n=84) for women. The age was distributed as 23.9% (n=45) in 20s, 31.9% (n=60) in 30s, 28.7% (n=54) in 40s, 13.8% (n=26) in 50s, 1.6% (n=78) in 60s and older, and 41.5%(n=78) with start-up experience, 56.4% (n=106) with no start-up experience, 2.1%(n=4) with etc. were measured.
4.3. Hypotheses Testing
4.3.1. Assessment of Structural Model
The unidimensional of all research units of the constructed model verified in this study were analyzed with SmartPLS 4.0 (Hair Jr et al., 2021; Hult et al., 2018).
In this study, among the unidimensionality tests of research units, internal consistency and convergence validity are confirmed by Confirmatory Factor Analysis, Cronbach’s α, Composite Reliability (CR), and Average Variance Extracted (AVE) were analyzed. The confirmatory factor analysis values of the five research units were .726 to .917, which was confirmed to be higher than the recommended standard for confirmatory factor analysis, .7, with the reliability of .801 ~ .883 and conceptual reliability from .883 ~.919. It was confirmed to be more than .7, which is the recommended standard for reliability. In addition, the AVE values of all study units were measured from .762 to .790, which was confirmed to be above the recommended standard for AVE values of .5. Therefore, both internal consistency and convergent validity of this study were tested (See Appndix 1).
Discriminant validity was tested by Fornell-Larcker correlation analysis and HTMT (Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio) analysis of the heterogeneity-homogeneity characteristic ratio. First, as a result of the Fornell-Larcker correlation analysis, it was found that the correlation and correlation coefficient between all study units were appropriate. higher, and discriminant validity was tested (Fornell & Larcker, 1981) (See Table 2). In addition, as a result of HTMT analysis, the correlation coefficient values of all research units were measured from .689 to .896, which was confirmed to be less than the recommended standard of .9, confirming discriminant validity (Henseler et al., 2015) (See Appendix 2, 3).
Table 2: Demographic Profiles
N=Frequency
The fitness of the derived research model of this study is as follows. Multicollinearity is tested when the variance inflation factor (VIF) is 5 or less. As the result show, all VIF values ranged from 1.576 to 2.973, indicating that there was no multicollinearity problem.
In addition, predictive fitness should have ℛ2 , the variance indicating the explanatory power of exogenous variables, greater than or equal to .1, and judged based on criteria of greater than or equal to .26 (Substantial), .13 (Moderate), and .02 (Weak) (Cohen, 2016). As a result of the analysis, it was found that ℛ2 of empirical value (.611), relationship solidarity (.504), and long-term orientation (.644) was more than the test standard of .1, so the predictive fit was tested (Fornell & Larcker, 1981) (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).
On the other hand, when 𝒬 2 (Construct cross-validated redundancy), which indicates the redundancy of endogenous variables, is equal to or greater than 0, the predictive fit is tested. As a result of the analysis, the standard of 𝒬 2 for empirical value (.593), relationship bond (.612), and long-term orientation (.466) were more than 0, so the predictive fit was tested (Falk & Miller, 1992; Hair Jr et al., 2021) (See Appendix 4).
4.3.2. The Hypotheses Testing Result of Structural Model
The results of the analysis of the structural relationship of shared kitchen service quality on experiential value, relational commitment, and long-term orientation derived in this study are as follows (See Figure 2).
Figure 1: Research Model
Hypotheses H1-H3 are hypotheses that indicate the relationship between facilities, environment, support, and experiential value.
As results show, facilities (β=.269, t-value=3.015, p<.05), support (β=.518, t-value=5.924, p<.001) have significant positive (+) effects on experiential value. Thus, H1 and H3 are supported
But H2 was not supported (β=.053, t-value=0.650, p=.516) as the environment does not have significant effects on experiential value.
Also, the experiential value does have a significantly positive (+) effect on long-term orientation, Thus H5 was also supported (β=.462, t-value=4.749, p<.001).
Finally, hypothesis H6 is a hypothesis that indicates the relationship between relational commitment and long-term orientation. As a result of the analysis, it was found that relationship bonding had a significantly positive (+) effect on long-term orientation, so H6 was supported (β=.405, t-value=4.721, p <.001) (See Figure 1, Appendix 4).
As a result of the analysis, it was found that facilities and support among the service quality of the shared kitchen had a significant effect on the experiential value, and the environment did not. In addition, it was found that experiential value had a significant effect on long-term orientation, and long-term orientation had a significant effect on relational commitment. In particular, it was found that support had a relatively higher effect on experiential value than facilities. This shows that systematic services are the most important in shared kitchens.
4.3.3. Effect Size Analysis
𝑓 2 is the amount of change of ℛ2 when exogenous variables are removed from the research model and explains the relative sizes of exogenous variables about endogenous variables (Chin et al., 1988). The criteria for the effect size of 𝑓 2 are .02 (Small), .15 (Medium), and .35 (Large), and the analysis results of this study are as follows.
The effect size of environment of service quality on experiential value was found to be rather weak (.004), however, there are the effect of Support of service quality on experiential value (.345), the effect of experiential value on relationship commitment (1.016) was found to be large. The effect size of experiential value on long-term orientation, the effect of relationship commitment on long-term orientation was found to be medium (Cohen, 1988; Cohen, 2016) (See Appendix 4).
5. Conclusions
This study derived and analyzed a structural model to find out how the service quality of Shared Kitchen affects experiential value, relationship commitment, and long-term orientation for Korean owners of tenant company entering and operating in Shared Kitchen.
First, the theoretical implications of this study are as follows.
As a result of the analysis, it was found that facilities and support among the service quality of Shared Kitchen had a significant positive effect on the experiential value, but the environment did not significantly affect the experiential value. These research results can be interpreted that of tenant companies in shared kitchen perceived facilities and support importantly that can directly help management among service quality. This shows the characteristics of B2B company service and is different from restaurant companies that provide general services. This shows the characteristics of B2B company service alike food distribution and is showing difference from restaurant companies that provide general services. In particular, the support quality among service quality was found to have the greatest positive effect on experiential quality relatively. In other words, it means that B2B service should pay more actively attention to activities that stably support management activities (Kim et al., 2018).
The practical implications of these research results are as follows.
This study has been continuously developed, however, as an empirical analysis of Shared Kitchen where many studies have not been conducted, it is possible to present implications for establishing differential marketing strategies to practitioners.
First, it could be confirmed that among the service quality of Shared Kitchen, facility quality and support quality have an effect on the formation of long-term relationships if the customer's experiential value is increased in this study. In particular, the support quality can be said to be a special service of Shared Kitchen. Shared Kitchen is a representative field of Sharing Economy, and it seems that support such as sharing information and systems should be made as a key activity, away from the aspects of simply sharing space.
It is necessary to increase the experiential value of the tenant companies to maintain a long-term relationship with the tenant companies of Shared Kitchen. It is essential to increase the experiential value through service quality, however, at the same time, it is necessary to form a community between tenant companies that are characteristic of Shared Kitchen and practices to increase the experiential value by sharing each other's know-how and experience.
Shared Kitchen is a sharing economy model born on the premise of cost advantage. Environmental changes such as rising rent, expansion of non-face-to-face, rising labor costs, and the food technology evolution are acting as factors that undermine the competitiveness of existing restaurant self-employed people and are emerging as national problems. In addition, the COVID-19 Pandemic is demanding a new paradigm shift for restaurant self-employed people. The Shared Kitchen platform service need to be strengthened to strengthen the competitiveness of restaurant self-employed people. It is determined that the quality of customer service is expected to be improve and it is expected to have a significant impact on strengthening the competitiveness of the self-employed people if the efficiency and satisfaction of the store companies increase by increasing the quality of the shared kitchen
Shared Kitchen can be predicted to lead the change in the restaurant market in four aspects.
First, it can be predicted that the ICT-based Shared Kitchen platform will provide new marketing opportunities to self-employed people who lack self-sustaining power and are vulnerable to the IT field due to the mitigation of asymmetry in the information system.
Second, the low start-up cost, which has been drastically lowered due to the reduction of the total social cost, is expected to ease the hardships of self-employed people, and has great implications in terms of reducing the total social cost. Third, it can be predicted that efficiency will be increased in the aspects of role sharing through sharing in the kitchen. In other words, tenant companies will concentrate on cooking and shared kitchen company will increase the efficiency and contribute to strengthen competitiveness of restaurant self-employed people by sharing the expertise such as ordering, customer management, sales analysis, marketing, etc. Fourth, because of creating synergy through sharing ideas shared kitchen refers to sharing space, which can be expected to reduce trial and error and increase the possibility of development through mutual motivation by watching, learning, and sharing know-how such as operation and customer management.
In the era of the platform economy, Shared Kitchen is expected to spread rapidly, especially in the Korean market, where the size of the restaurant self-employment market is large. Therefore, it is judged by an area that can be expected to globalize the Korean shared kitchen model if the shared kitchen company secures know-how and competitiveness to increase the efficiency of operation and work. It is considered to be necessary to break away from the aspect of simply sharing space and create synergy through chemical bonding, that is, sharing information and systems.
6. Limitations and Future Research
This study is meaningful in that it presented theoretical and practical implications for how Shared Kitchen's service quality is perceived differentially by tenant companies and can continue long-term relationships. Nevertheless, this study can present the following limitations and future research directions.
First, this Shared Kitchen research environment was conducted for one Shared Kitchen company in the Korean market. Therefore, there is a limitation that does not reflect all Shared Kitchen companies. If research is conducted on a large number of companies in the future, better research implications could be presented.
Second, in this study, it was not possible to consider corporate characteristics such as the size and sales of tenant companies, and the gender and age of managers. In the future, comparison and adjustment analysis should be conducted through these variables.
Third, the empirical research of Shared Kitchen is very insufficient. It seems necessary to check about the service quality of Shared Kitchen. The future research needs to conduct a study on the environmental characteristics of stores through experiments or field studies, and it seems that a scale study on service quality that collects opinions from experts and various tenant companies need to be done.
Fourth, it is necessary to measure the quality of shared kitchen services from a consumer's point of view by conducting research on consumers who have experience using Shared Kitchen services.
Shared Kitchen is also important in that consumer value should ultimately be a top priority and consumer choice ensures the sustainability of Shared Kitchen.
Fifth, it seems that a study to verify the usefulness of Shared Kitchen is also needed by comparing the startup cost and operation cost required for general personal start-up with Shared Kitchen
Appendixes
참고문헌
- Anton, C., Camarero, C., & Carrero, M. (2007). Analysing firms' failures as determinants of consumer switching intentions. European Journal of Marketing, 41(1/2), 135-158. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560710718157
- Bardhi, F., & Eckhardt, G. M. (2012). Access-based consumption: The case of car sharing. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(4), 881-898. https://doi.org/10.1086/666376
- Bearden, W. O., Money, R. B., & Nevins, J. L. (2006). A measure of long-term orientation: Development and validation. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 34(3), 456-467. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070306286706
- Belk, R. (2014). You are what you can access: Sharing and collaborative consumption online. Journal of Business Research, 67(8), 1595-1600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.10.001
- Benkler, Y. (2004). Sharing nicely: On shareable goods and the emergence of sharing as a modality of economic production. Yale Law Journal, 114, 273-358. https://doi.org/10.2307/4135731
- Binninger, A.-S., Ourahmoune, N., & Robert, I. (2015). Collaborative consumption and sustainability: A discursive analysis of consumer representations and collaborative website narratives. Journal of Applied Business Research, 31(3), 969-986. https://doi.org/10.19030/jabr.v31i3.9229
- Booms, B. H., & Bitner, M. J. (1982). Marketing services by managing the environment. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 23(1), 35-40. https://doi.org/10.1177/001088048202300107
- Botsman, R., & Rogers, R. (2010). What's mine is yours: The rise of collaborative consumption. NY: Harper Collins.
- Chang, C., & Dibb, S. (2012). Reviewing and conceptualising customer-perceived value. The marketing review, 12(3), 253-274. https://doi.org/10.1362/146934712X13420906885395
- Chang, W.-J., Liao, S.-H., Chung, Y.-C., & Chen, H.-P. (2020). Service quality, experiential value and repurchase intention for medical cosmetology clinic: Moderating effect of generation. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 31(9-10), 1077-1097. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2018.1463156
- Chaudhuri, A., & Holbrook, M. B. (2001). The chain of effects from brand trust and brand affect to brand performance: The role of brand loyalty. Journal of Marketing, 65(2), 81-93. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.65.2.81.18255
- Chin, J. P., Diehl, V. A., & Norman, K. L. (1988). Development of an instrument measuring user satisfaction of the human-computer interface. NY: ACM Press.
- Cho, H. j. (2005). The effects of internal polity on commitment and relationship performance between franchisors and franchisees. Journal of Channel and Retailing, 10(2), 27-47.
- Choi, H. M., & Lee, H.-R. (2011). The effect of coffee shop customers' experiential value on brand attitude and brand loyalty: A focus on the moderating effect of brand nationality. Journal of Tourism Sciences, 35(3), 243-266.
- Choi, Y., & Lee, J. (2013). Effects of digital cultural capital on the perception of sharing economy. Korean Journal of Communication Studies, 21(1), 89-110.
- Choudhary, N. (2019). Strategic analysis of cloud kitchen: A case study. Management Today, 9(3), 184-190. https://doi.org/10.11127/gmt.2019.09.05
- Cohen, B., & Kietzmann, J. (2014). Ride on! Mobility business models for the sharing economy. Organization & Environment, 27(3), 279-296. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026614546199
- Cohen, J. (2016). A power primer. NY: American Psychological Association.
- Cronin Jr, J. J., & Taylor, S. A. (1992). Measuring service quality: A reexamination and extension. Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 55-68. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252296
- Debrabandere, M. L., Farabaugh, D. C., & Giordano, C. (2021). A review on mode of delivery during covid-19 between december 2019 and april 2020. American journal of perinatology, 38(4), 332-341. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1721658
- Dwyer, F. R., Schurr, P. H., & Oh, S. (1987). Developing buyer-seller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 51(2), 11-27. https://doi.org/10.2307/1251126
- Eckhardt, G. M., & Bardhi, F. (2016). The relationship between access practices and economic systems. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 1(2), 210-225. https://doi.org/10.1086/684684
- Eckhardt, G. M., Houston, M. B., Jiang, B., Lamberton, C., Rindfleisch, A., & Zervas, G. (2019). Marketing in the sharing economy. Journal of Marketing, 83(5), 5-27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242919861929
- Falk, R. F., & Miller, N. B. (1992). A primer for soft modeling. Akron: University of Akron Press.
- Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. CA: Sage Publications
- Ganesan, S. (1994). Determinants of long-term orientation in buyer-seller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 58(2), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252265
- Hair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2021). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). NY: Sage publications.
- Halinen, A., & Tahtinen, J. (2002). A process theory of relationship ending. International Journal of service industry management, 13(2), 163-180. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564230210425359
- Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 43(1), 115-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
- Holbrook, M. B. (1994). The nature of customer value: An axiology of services in the consumption experience. Service quality: New directions in theory and practice, 21(1), 21-71. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452229102.n2
- Holbrook, M. B., & Hirschman, E. C. (1982). The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2), 132-140. https://doi.org/10.1086/208906
- Hong, J.-P., Kim, B.-Y., & Oh, S.-H. (2020). The perceived-experiential value and service quality of auto maintenance and repair service. Journal of Distribution Science, 18(1), 59-69. https://doi.org/10.15722/jds.17.12.20201.59
- Hult, G. T. M., Hair, J. F., Proksch, D., Sarstedt, M., Pinkwart, A., & Ringle, C. M. (2018). Addressing endogeneity in international marketing applications of partial least squares structural equation modeling. Journal of International Marketing, 26(3), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1509/jim.17.0151
- Jin, H., & Kim, M. J. (2014). The effect of control mechanism on relational commitment: Evidence from the china's petrochemical product market. The Journal of Business Education, 28(5), 173-191.
- Jones, M. A., Reynolds, K. E., & Arnold, M. J. (2006). Hedonic and utilitarian shopping value: Investigating differential effects on retail outcomes. Journal of Business Research, 59(9), 974-981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.03.006
- Keng, C. J., Huang, T. L., Zheng, L. J., & Hsu, M. K. (2007). Modeling service encounters and customer experiential value in retailing: An empirical investigation of shopping mall customers in taiwan. International Journal of service industry management, 18(4), 349-367. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564230710778137
- Kim, S. A., Park, J. E., & Park, S. C. (2019). Impacts that university students' experiential values through mediators, the brand image and customer satisfaction has on long-term orientation. The Journal of Business Education, 33(3), 201-234. https://doi.org/10.34274/krabe.2019.33.3.009
- Kim, S. H., Kim, J. H., & Lee, W. J. (2018). Exploring the impact of product service quality on buyer commitment and loyalty in b to b relationships. Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, 25(2), 91-117. https://doi.org/10.1080/1051712X.2018.1454628
- Kulshreshtha, K., & Sharma, G. (2022). From restaurant to cloud kitchen: Survival of the fittest during covid-19 an empirical examination. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 179, 121629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121629
- Lee, S. M. (2020). The effect of quality of shared kitchen service on satisfaction: Focusing on the adjustment effect of brand recognition. Journal of Foodservice Management Society of Korea, 23(4), 221-242.
- Lessig, L. (2008). Remix: Making art and commerce thrive in the hybrid economy. NY: Penguin.
- Lewis, B. R. (1993). Service quality measurement. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 11(4), 4-12. https://doi.org/10.1108/02634509310044199
- Lovelock, C., & Gummesson, E. (2004). Whither services marketing? In search of a new paradigm and fresh perspectives. Journal of service research, 7(1), 20-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670504266131
- Lovelock, C., & Patterson, P. (2015). Services marketing. RMD: Pearson Australia.
- Mathwick, C., Malhotra, N., & Rigdon, E. (2001). Experiential value: Conceptualization, measurement and application in the catalog and internet shopping environment☆. Journal of retailing, 77(1), 39-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(00)00045-2
- Miller, S. R. (2016). First principles for regulating the sharing economy. Harvard Journal of Legislation, 53, 147-202.
- Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 20-38. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252308
- Munoz, P., & Cohen, B. (2017). Mapping out the sharing economy: A configurational approach to sharing business modeling. Technological forecasting and social change, 125, 21-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.03.035
- Nelson, S. (1984). Ulster's uncertain defenders: Protestant political, paramilitary and community groups and the northern ireland conflict. MN: Appletree Press.
- Oh, S., Kim, S. D., & Oh, I. (2003). The effects of bureaucracy and control mechanisms based on the length of relationship on commitment and relational satisfaction of franchisee. Journal of Channel and Retailing, 8(1), 21-47.
- Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1991). Perceived service quality as a customer-based performance measure: An empirical examination of organizational barriers using an extended service quality model. Human resource management, 30(3), 335-364. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.3930300304
- Rifkin, J. (2001). The age of access: The new culture of hypercapitalism. NY: Penguin.
- Wu, C. H.-J., & Liang, R.-D. (2009). Effect of experiential value on customer satisfaction with service encounters in luxury-hotel restaurants. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 28(4), 586-593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2009.03.008
- Wu, H.-C., Cheng, C.-C., & Ai, C.-H. (2017). A study of experiential quality, equity, happiness, rural image, experiential satisfaction, and behavioral intentions for the rural tourism industry in china. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 18(4), 393-428. https://doi.org/10.1080/15256480.2017.1289138
- Wu, H.-C., Cheng, C.-C., & Ai, C.-H. (2018). A study of experiential quality, experiential value, trust, corporate reputation, experiential satisfaction and behavioral intentions for cruise tourists: The case of hong kong. Tourism management, 66, 200-220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.12.011
- Wu, H.-C., Li, M.-Y., & Li, T. (2018). A study of experiential quality, experiential value, experiential satisfaction, theme park image, and revisit intention. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 42(1), 26-73. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348014563396
- Wu, H.-C., & Li, T. (2017). A study of experiential quality, perceived value, heritage image, experiential satisfaction, and behavioral intentions for heritage tourists. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 41(8), 904-944. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348014525638
- Wu, X., & Zhi, Q. (2016). Impact of shared economy on urban sustainability: From the perspective of social, economic, and environmental sustainability. Energy Procedia, 104, 191-196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2016.12.033
- Yuan, Y.-H. E., & Wu, C. K. (2008). Relationships among experiential marketing, experiential value, and customer satisfaction. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 32(3), 387-410. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348008317392
- Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1988). Communication and control processes in the delivery of service quality. Journal of Marketing, 52(2), 35-48. https://doi.org/10.2307/1251263
- Zhong, Y., & Moon, H. C. (2020). What drives customer satisfaction, loyalty, and happiness in fast-food restaurants in china? Perceived price, service quality, food quality, physical environment quality, and the moderating role of gender. Foods, 9(4), 460. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9040460