No abstract

The Different Roles of Satisfaction, Trust, and Commitment in Customer RelationshipsSeveral theories of relationship marketing propose that customers vary in their relationships with a firm on a continuum from transactional to highly relational bonds. Few empirical studies have segmented the customer base of an organization into low and high relational groups to assess how evaluations vary for these groups. Using structural equation analysis, the authors analyze the relationships of satisfaction, trust, and commitment to component satisfaction attitudes and future intentions for the customers of a New York off-Broadway repertory theater company. For the low relational customers (individual ticket buyers and occasional subscribers), overall satisfaction is the primary mediating construct between the component attitudes and future intentions. For the high relational customers (consistent subscribers), trust and commitment, rather than satisfaction, are the mediators between component attitudes and future intentions.A fonnative idea in the development of relationship marketing thought states that there is a continuum of customer relationships, ranging from transactional to relational orientations (Dwyer, Schurr, and Oh 1987;Jackson 1985). Jackson (1985) was one of the first writers to suggest that the application of transactional or relational marketing should depend on the customer's orientation to a relationship. Following Jackson's ideas, Anderson and Narus (1991) propose that organizations should analyze the position of their customers on a continuum of transactional to collaborative exchanges. These authors argue that an organization may need to pursue both transactional and relational marketing simultaneously because not all customers want the same working relationship. Dwyer, Schurr, and Oh (1987) also emphasize the importance of a transactional/relational continuum by incorporating Macneil's (1980) writings on contract law. Macneil argues that transactional exchanges are discrete buyer-seller exchanges of a commodity or performance for money with minimal personal relationships and no anticipation or obligation of future exchanges. At the other end of the continuum are relational exchanges, which are characterized by cooperative actions and mutual adjustment of both parties, a sharing of the benefits and burdens of the exchange, and planning for future exchanges. Macneil maintains that pure-

No abstract

No abstract

Individual-level price discrimination, while not a new idea, is more than a theoretical possibility in the Internet age. Economic theory argues that dynamic pricing (i.e., individual-level price discrimination) is inherently good for the profitability of the firm, because it allows the firm to capture a larger share of the consumer surplus, but anecdotal evidence from recent retail experiments with Internet-based dynamic pricing suggests that consumers react strongly against this practice. Using a two-dimensional conceptualization of trust, based on benevolence and competence trust, the current experiment examines how the experience of a dynamic pricing event and the direction of the pricing discrimination (i.e., whether one is offered the higher or the lower price) affects both the mean levels of trust and the weight given to the separate trust dimensions in the formation of overall trust. Because demand-based pricing, such as dynamic pricing, is generally considered unfair, it is expected that trust levels will be lower and that more weight will be given to benevolence trust. Results show that mean benevolence trust is significantly lower (which leads to a marginal decrease in overall trust) and the weight given to benevolence trust in the formation of overall trust substantially increases. The direction-of-price-discrimination effects are generally unsupported. ᭧