No abstract

No abstract

Bank and credit union customers were surveyed to determine bank and credit union service quality performance. The results of our study indicate that credit unions rate significantly higher than banks on 11 of the 14 service quality questions: access; courtesy; communication; credibility; security; empathy; tangibles; basic service; fairness; fixing mistakes; and guarantees. The findings also indicate that neither banks nor credit unions do a good job of surveying customer needs or retaining customers. Other results indicate that 50 percent of total respondents surveyed reported that they had stopped using a financial service provider because of poor service performance. The vast majority of that group reported that their decision was made because a bank failed to provide adequate service.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine the usefulness of disgust imagery in a nonprofit organization context as one part of the broader social marketing paradigm. Design/methodology/approach An experiment was conducted in the child victim segment of the market using disgust and nondisgust images. Data were collected from 167 subjects via Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Dependent variables measured included donation intention, empathy and guilt. Control variables included religiosity and attitude toward helping others, along with demographic factors. Findings MANCOVA results indicate that while the disgust image evoked greater empathy, the nondisgust image evoked greater donation intentions. The disgust image had a nonsignificant effect on the level of guilt felt by subjects. Mediation analysis indicates that empathy serves as a competitive mediator for the disgust–donation intentions relationship. Research limitations/implications This study examines the effects of disgust images on empathy, guilt and donation intentions. Although the findings indicate a contrasting effect of disgust on empathy and donation intentions, more research is needed to validate these findings with diverse samples, contexts and various donation behavior measures. Regarding charitable giving, the current findings suggest caution should be used when using disgust images to evoke empathy, as the tactic may also negatively affect donation intentions. Social implications Nonprofits that effectively apply marketing can change individual and community behavior. To continue their work, they rely on donors and volunteers. This study provides social marketers. Originality/value Past research has demonstrated the effectiveness of disgust appeals for deterring behavior. In contrast, this research provides unique insights into disgust appeals as a catalyst for motivating behavior. This research provides a much-needed empirical evaluation of disgust appeals in a social marketing context.

PurposeThe reported study was designed to provide insight into gift cards as gifts and their place among gifts of cash and goods. It also was designed to identify promising avenues for further research.Design/methodology/approachData were collected using a structured questionnaire administered to a convenience sample of 317 respondents of both sexes who varied greatly in age.FindingsEffective liquidity served largely as the basis for categorizing gift cards. The greater a card's effective liquidity, the more its economic impact on the recipient resembles that of cash. The results indicated the following: face value affects recipient preference for effective liquidity; the giver‐getter relationship affects recipient preference for effective liquidity; the gift cards givers give tend to have less effective liquidity than those they prefer to get; some gift cards are more appropriate gifts than others and some, but not all, gift cards are more appropriate gifts than cash; and people feel less guilt when paying for personal luxuries with gift cards than with cash.Research limitationsThe study was largely exploratory insofar as its breadth greatly exceeded its depth and findings derived from a convenience sample.Originality/valueThe study introduced effective liquidity as a basis for assessing similarities and differences between gift cards and gifts of cash and goods. Findings enhance scholarly understanding of gift cards and their place among gifts of cash and goods. Moreover, they afford insights into marketing gift cards and into promising paths for further research.