• Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science
• /
• v.17 no.4
• /
• pp.1-22
• /
• 2007

Customer satisfaction is important in an increasingly competitive and global marketplace. This implies that customer service is a critical factor for many organizations. In service encounter context, customer satisfaction is affected by employees' attitudes and behaviors. Accordingly, service firms have been focusing on selecting high quality of service employees, which resulted the ability to identify and select quality service- or customer- oriented employees to become critical for an organization's success. It was suggested that customer service orientation links to performance and subsequent organizational revenue. Moreover, it was found that service encounter failures were among the major reasons for customers' service switch. Therefore, the selection of customer service oriented employees is a key factor in establishing customer service - a potential source of sustained competitive advantage. However, the measurement of employee service orientation is more confusing than that of definitive answers. The difficulty of measuring service orientation is attributed to the use of broad versus narrow measures of personality. Advocates for the broad perspective prefer using basic personality constructs, such as the Big Five personality traits. On the contrary, the latter prefer a construct-oriented approach of personality research that provides a better measure of job performance because it requires the specification of the relationship of the personality traits with multiple dimensions of job performance. The customer service orientation was defined as "a set of basic individual predispositions and an inclination to provide service, to be courteous and to be helpful in dealing with customers and associates." Similarly, it is a fact that the Big five personality traits are predictors of customer orientation, and employee's self- and supervisor performance. They propose that basic personality traits may be too far removed from focal service behaviors to be able to predict specific service behaviors (customer orientation) and service worker performance. Also, customer orientation is defined as "an employee's tendency or predisposition to meet customer needs in an on-the-job context." This means that people who have job-relevant personality traits such as concern, empathy, and conscientiousness will be more adept at customer service than people who do not possess these traits. However, little attention has been given to the exploration of the service orientation of customer-contact employees who play a key role in creating satisfactory service encounters in the hospitality industry except for Kim, McCahon, & Miller (2003)'s study, especially in family restaurants context. Thus, the purposes of this study are to examine and validate the customer service orientation of customer-contact employees using the instrument developed by Donavan (1999) in Korean family restaurants, because the scale was developed to measure the personality traits related job behaviors. And this study explores the relationships between customer service orientation, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and self service performance using structural equation modeling (SEM). And this study explores the relationships between customer service orientation, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and self service performance using structural equation modeling (SEM). For these purposes the author developed several hypotheses as follows: H1: Employee's service orientation is associated with service performance. H2: Employee's service orientation is positively associated with job satisfaction. H3: Employee's service orientation is positively associated with organizational commitment. H4: Service performance is positively associated with job satisfaction. H5: Service performance is positively associated with organizational commitment. H6: Job satisfaction is negatively associated with organizational commitment. The data were collected from 278 employees in 5 deluxe hotels located in Pusan, Korea. The researcher contacted the manager of the restaurants, and managers consented to administer surveys to their employees. The survey was executed during one month period in the October of 2007. The data were analyzed with structural equation modeling with LISREL 8.7 W. The result of the overall model analysis appeared as follows: $X^2$=122.638 (p = 0.00), df=59, GFI=.936, AGFI=.901, NFI=.948, CFI=.971, RMSEA=.0625. Since the result of the overall model analysis demonstrated a good fit, we could further analyze our data. The findings can be summarized as follows: First, the greater the employee service orientation, the greater the service performance. Second, the greater the employee service orientation, the greater the job satisfaction. Third, the greater the employee service orientation, the greater the organizational commitment. Fourth, the greater the service performance, the greater the job satisfaction. Fifth, the greater the service performance, the greater the organizational commitment. Finally, the greater the job satisfaction, the greater the organizational commitment. Seventh, the greater the customer satisfaction, the greater the customer loyalty.

• Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science
• /
• v.19 no.4
• /
• pp.24-31
• /
• 2009

Firms produce various products that differ by function, design, color, etc. Product proliferation occurs for three different reasons. When there exist economies of scope, the unit cost for a product is lower when it is produced in conjunction with another product than when it is produced separately. Second, consumers are heterogeneous in the sense that they have different tastes, preferences, or price elasticities. A firm can earn more profit by segmenting consumers into different groups with similar characteristics. For example, product proliferation helps a firm increase profits by satisfying various consumer needs more precisely. The third reason for product proliferation is based on strategy. Producing a number of products can not only deter entry by providing few niches, but can also cause a firm to react efficiently to a low-price entry. By producing various products, a firm can reduce niches so that potential entrants have less incentive to enter. Moreover, a firm can produce new products in response to entry, which is called fighting brands. That is, when an entrant tries to attract consumers with a low price, an incumbent introduces a new lower-quality product while maintaining the price of the existing product. The drawback of product proliferation, however, is cannibalization. Some consumers who would have bought a high-price product switch to a low-price product. Moreover, it is possible that proliferation can decrease profits when a new product is less differentiated from a rival’s than is the existing product because of more severe competition. Many studies have analyzed the effect of product line rivalry in the areas of economics and marketing. They show how a monopolist can solve the problem of cannibalization by adjusting quality in a market where consumers differ in their preferences for quality. They find that a consumer who prefers high-quality products will obtain his or her most preferred quality, but a consumer who has not such preference will obtain less than his or her preferred quality to reduce cannibalization. This study analyzed the effects of product line rivalry in a duopoly market with two types of consumers differentiated by quality preference. I assume that the two firms are asymmetric in the sense that an incumbent can produce both high- and low-quality products, while an entrant can produce only a low-quality product. The effects of product proliferation can be explained by comparing the market outcomes when an incumbent produces both products to those when it produces only one product. Compared to the case in which an incumbent produces only a high-quality product, the price of a low-quality product tends to decrease in a consumer segment that prefers low-quality products because of more severe competition. Prices, however, tend to increase in a segment with high preferences because of less severe competition. It is known that when firms compete over prices, it is optimal for a firm to increase its price when its rival increases its price, which is called a strategic complement. Since prices are strategic complements, we have two opposing effects. It turns out that the price of a high-quality product increases because the positive effect of reduced competition outweighs the negative effect of strategic complements. This implies that an incumbent needs to increase the price of a high-quality product when it is also introducing a low-quality product. However, the change in price of the entrant’s low-quality product is ambiguous. Second, compared to the case in which an incumbent produces only a low-quality product, prices tend to increase in a consumer segment with low preferences but decrease in a segment with high preferences. The prices of low-quality products decrease because the negative effect outweighs the positive effect. Moreover, when an incumbent produces both kinds of product, the price of an incumbent‘s low-quality product is higher, even though the quality of both firms’ low-quality products is the same. The reason for this is that the incumbent has less incentive to reduce the price of a low-quality product because of the negative impact on the price of its high-quality product. In fact, the effects of product line rivalry on profits depend not only on changes in price, but also on sales and cannibalization. If the difference in marginal cost is moderate compared to the difference in product quality, the positive effect of product proliferation outweighs the negative effect, thereby increasing the profit. Furthermore, if the cost difference is very large (small), an incumbent is better off producing only a low (high) quality product. Moreover, this study also analyzed the effect of product line rivalry when a firm can determine product characteristics by focusing on the issue of fighting brands. Recently, Korean air and Asiana airlines have established budget airlines called Jin air and Air Busan, respectively, to confront the launching of budget airlines such as Hansung airline and Jeju air, among others. In addition, as more online bookstores have entered the market, a leading off-line bookstore Kyobo began its own online bookstore. Through fighting brands, an incumbent with a high-quality product can increase profits by producing an additional low-quality product when its low-quality product is more differentiated from that of the entrant than is its high-quality product.