lecture 5 Flashcards
Service research system (what do we want to research?)
1) New service or existing service
2) New service design or test
3) Existing service event lever or relationship level
4) Objective or subjective event
Look at slides for the service system
New services
You cant evaluate them (dont exist yet)
Therefore Expectation (D, A, P) is central
(Desired, adequate, predicted)
Design: ask Key or lead customers (explorative) how you might introduce it, what is important
Focus group (same thing)
Laddering and related techniques
You can test this with:
Conjoint analysis or SMART
Means end-chain + Laddering
Laddering => To find out the criteria that a consumer uses when choosing a particular service and how these criteria help to reach his/her personal goals.
Example: Aircraft type:
You have a specific concrete attribute space: from that you get more space
The functional consequence of having more space is more physical comfort.
The psycho-social consequence of more physical comfort is that youll get more done.
An instrumental value therefore is accomplishment
And the terminal value is that you get more self esteem.
So by BUYING more space on the place, your self esteem will go up.
Attributes: what is different about these alternatives
Consequences: what does the difference mean
Values: how iportant is this for you?
Typical ladders
Concrete attribute: location
Abstract attributes: speed
Functional consequences: Minimum time expenditure
Psychological consequence: Efficiency and financial profit
Terminal values: accomplishment
conjoint analysis
A tool to test the idea of your new service
Data collection is important:
1) selecting the right important service attributes
2) Determine relevant levels (e.g. waiting time; is it max 2 min, 2-4 or more than 4 min)
3) constuct profiles (give people cards and ask to evaluate, how liekly are you to buy all of these)
4) evaluate the profiles between within subjects
Evaluation of existing service
Perception is central
We can look at an event or relationship
An event can be a process quality indicator = from process (e.g. dhl, was package delivered on time)
They are objective, can be easy to measure
Mystery shopping
Mystery shopping + advantages
Observation of service environment based on the process and not the outcome. (e.g. michelin star inspector)
What are the advantages?
Real - Observed behavior, natural environment, verbal capability (compared to questionairre where people are overthinking about their answers, employees in mystery shopping dont know they are being evaluated)
Objective measurement?
You should try to keep measurement objective. I.e. length of line, temperature of burger. Difficult with stuff like happiness
Shopper selection: you have to select the right shoppers that know what they are doing. I couldnt evaluate if a restaurant deserves a michelin star…
Trying to measure less objective constructs:
E.g. politeness of staff
10: excellent - very curteous. Smiling and eye contact and converstaion maintained
9-
8- Polite -smiling
7-
6- Polite mannger - perhaps lacking smile/welcome
you create as objective as possible categories
Mystery shopping: discriminant and convergent validity
Discriminant validity:
Shoppers should be able to differentiate quality of service provider A from service provider B.
Convergent validity:
Mystery shopper 1 should evaluate service provider A the same as mystery shopper 2. Same goes for shopper 1 & 2 and service provider B. This is very important if you want to do it properly
Evaluation of existing service - subjective
Customer cards = overall perceptions
Exit interviews = detailed perceptions
Critical incidents = extreme positive and negative
Complaint analysis = extreme negative adn acted
Critical incident technique
Ask people to mention extremely positive and negative events between customer and employee.
Generally, recovery, adaptability and spontaneity are mentioned the most.
To keep in mind: Customer employee related, but some companies have little customer employee interaction.
Influence of event on overall experience is hard to judge
Content analysis: Reliability and validation
How do we redirect all this info into results?
Intrajudge reliability: is concerned with how consistent a judge is in making categorical decisions over time
Interjudge reliabilty is the degree to which two or more judges agree that a given observation should be classified
Cohen’s Kappa of 0.95 or greater (to know if they have enough overlap on judging different services by different people) or 95% of the time evaluators came to the same conclusion
Content analysis Operationalization
Developing measures
Categories should be
Exhaustive: often use unable to determine
Mutually exclusive
Appropriate level of measurement (nominal, ordinal interval or ratio)
Critical incidents that cause swtiching (ranked)
1) Core service failure
2)Failed service encounter
3) Pricing
4)Inconvenience
5) Response to failed service
6) competition
…
Customer cards
Companies give them to customers, basically a survey to figure out data…
