Heterogeneity in the Satisfaction-Retention Relationship – A Finite-mixture Approach

  • Dorian Quint
  • Marcel Paulssen
Conference paper
Part of the Studies in Classification, Data Analysis, and Knowledge Organization book series (STUDIES CLASS)

Abstract

Despite the claim that satisfaction ratings are linked to actual repurchase behavior, the number of studies that actually relate satisfaction ratings to actual repurchase behavior is limited (Mittal and Kamakura 2001). Furthermore, in those studies that investigate the satisfaction-retention link customers have repeatedly been shown to defect even though they state to be highly satisfied. In a dramatic illustration of the problem Reichheld (1996) reports that while around 90% of industry customers report to be satisfied or even very satisfied, only between 30% to 40% actually repurchase. In this contribution, the relationship between satisfaction and retention was examined using a sample of 1493 business clients in the market of light transporters of a major European market. To examine heterogeneity in the satisfactionrelationship, a finite-mixture approach was chosen to model a mixed logistic regression. The subgroups found by the algorithm do differ with respect to the relationship between satisfaction and loyalty, as well as with respect to the exogenous variables. The resulting model allows us to shed more light on the role of the numerous moderating and interacting variables on the satisfaction-loyalty link in a business-to-business context.

Keywords

Customer Satisfaction Latent Class Class Membership Repurchase Intention Concomitant Variable 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. ANDERSON, E. W., FORNELL, C., MAZVANCHERYL, S. K. (2004): Customer Satisfac-tion and Shareholder Value. Journal of Marketing, 68, 172-185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. BOLTON, R. N. (1998): A Dynamic Model of the Duration of the Customer’s Relationship with a Continuous Service Provider: The Role of Satisfaction. Marketing Science, 17, 45-65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. FOLLMANN, D. A., LAMBERT, D. (1991): Identifiability of finite mixtures of logistic re-gression models. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 27, 375-381.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. GIESE, J. L., COTE, J. A. (2000): Defining Consumer Satisfaction. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 2000, 1-24.Google Scholar
  5. GREMLER, D. D., BROWN, S. W. (1996): Service Loyalty: Its Nature, Importance, and Implications. Advancing Service Quality: A Global Perspective. International Service Quality Association, 171-180.Google Scholar
  6. HOMBURG, C., GIERING, A. (2001): Personal Characteristics as Moderators of the Rela-tionship Between Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty: An Empirical Analysis. Psychol-ogy & Marketing, 18, 43-U˝ 66.Google Scholar
  7. MCLACHLAN, G., PEEL, D. (2000): Finite Mixture Models. Wiley, New York.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. MITTAL, V., KAMAKURA, W. A. (2001): Satisfaction, Repurchase Intent, and Repurchase Behavior: Investigating the moderating Effect of Customer Characteristics. Journal of Marketing Research, 38, 131-142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. MORWITZ, V. G. (1997): Why Consumers Don’t Always Accurately Predict Their Own Fu-ture Behavior. Marketing Letters, 8, 57-70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. MUTHEN, L. K., MUTHEN, B. O. (2006): Mplus User’s Guide. Fourth issue, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  11. NYLUND, K. L., ASPAROUHOV, T., MUTHEN, B. (2006): Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling. A Monte Carlo simulation study. Accepted by Structural Equation Modeling.Google Scholar
  12. PAULSSEN, M., BIRK, M. (2006): It’s not demographics alone! How demographic, com-pany characteristics and manufacturer moderate the satisfaction retention link. Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät. Working Paper.Google Scholar
  13. REICHHELD, F. F. (1996): Learning from Customer Defections. Harvard Business Review, 74,56-69.Google Scholar
  14. RUST, R. T., ZAHORIK, A. J. (1993): Customer Satisfaction, Customer Retention, and Mar-ket Share. Journal of Retailing, 69, 193-215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. SEIDERS, K., VOSS, G. B., GREWAL, D., GODFREY A. L. (2005): Do Satisfied Customers Buy More? Examining Moderating Influences in a Retailing Context. Journal of Market-ing, 68, 26-43.Google Scholar
  16. SÖDERLUND, M., VILGON, M. (1999): Customer Satisfaction and Links to Customer Prof-itability: An Empirical Examination of the Association Between Attitudes and Behavior. Stockholm School of Economics, Working Paper Series in Business Administration, Nr. 1999:1.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dorian Quint
    • 1
  • Marcel Paulssen
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für Industrielles Marketing-ManagementHumboldt-UniversitÄt zu BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations