Robots at your service: value facilitation and value co-creation in restaurants

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to understand the process of guest-robot value co-creation in the restaurant context. It empirically examines the guest perception of value facilitation by service robots and its impact on guest value co-creation and advocacy intentions. It also investigates the moderating role of interaction comfort in the relationship between service robot value facilitation and guest value co-creation. Design/methodology/approach A mixed-methods approach was adopted. Ten customers who had dined at a service robot restaurant in China were interviewed in the qualitative study, followed by a quantitative study with 252 restaurant patrons to test the relationships between service robot value facilitation, guest value co-creation, interaction comfort and advocacy intentions. Findings Guest perceptions of six robot attributes, including role significance, competence, social presence, warmth, autonomy and adaptability, determine service robot value facilitation. Interaction comfort moderates the influence of service robot value facilitation on guest value co-creation. Additionally, guest value co-creation mediates the effect of service robot value facilitation on advocacy intentions. Research limitations/implications This study offers an understanding of six robot attributes that can improve service robot value facilitation. Nevertheless, the authors collected data from guests who had experience at service robot restaurants. The authors encourage future research to use random sampling methods to ensure study representativeness. Practical implications This study offers strategic guidance for managers to deploy service robots in frontline roles in restaurants and provides important implications for service robot design to improve their facilitating role in the guest value co-creation process. Originality/value This study responds to a recent call for research on the role of service robots in the guest value co-creation experience. Unlike prior studies that focused on the adoption or acceptance of service robots, it examines the role of service robots in the value co-creation process (post-adoption stage). Furthermore, it is one of the early studies to identify and empirically examine the service robot attributes that enable value facilitation and foster value co-creation in guest-robot service encounters.

You don’t have to tip the human waiters anymore, but … Unveiling factors that influence consumers’ willingness to pay a price premium for robotic restaurants

“…Third, while prior research has focused mostly on service robot attributes such as anthropomorphism (Zhu and Chang, 2020), warmth (Zhang et al , 2022), sense of humor (Zhang et al , 2021), interactivity (Shin and Jeong, 2020) and innovativeness (Cha, 2020), our study represents an initial attempt to unveil consumers’ personal characteristics. This allows us to distinguish individuals who are willing to pay a price premium for robotic restaurants from those who are not.…”

Ritual-based redesign of routines: an experimental approach in the restaurant industry

“…temperature checks, hygiene measures and social distancing) have produced emotional solidarity among employees and guests, facilitating the generation of group cohesion and future staff-guest interactions (Chan et al, 2021;Jeong et al, 2022;Xiang et al, 2022). Ritualized interactions have also been outlined in the context of robotic services in the hospitality field (Zhang et al, 2022), where consumers are becoming aware of predetermined sequences of actions that allow self-service ordering and autopayment systems (Guan et al, 2021;Wong et al, 2022). Bargeman and Richards (2020) explained the practice of going on a cruise as composed of ritual ingredients such as the bodily copresence of the participants (e.g.…”

How do consumers engage with proactive service robots? The roles of interaction orientation and corporate reputation

“…The effects of technical aspects (e.g. language style, technological autonomy; Jörling et al , 2019; Zhang et al , 2022) or physical attributes (e.g. humanoid features, Lu et al , 2021; Romero and Lado, 2021) on these interactions have been explored, but proactive robotic services (Tan et al , 2020) should be further considered.…”

“…humanoid features, Lu et al , 2021; Romero and Lado, 2021) on these interactions have been explored, but proactive robotic services (Tan et al , 2020) should be further considered. Service robots can facilitate value by enabling customers to access information, resources and solutions (Zhang et al , 2022), and thus, some researchers suggest that studies of robot proactivity in service interactions should be a priority (Blut et al , 2021).…”

“…First, we focus on customers’ engagement with service robots and reveal the consequences of robot-mediated service experiences through this relationship. Previous research has mainly focused on transactional outcomes, such as adoption intention (Shin and Jeong, 2020), online rating (Mariani and Borghi, 2021) and advocacy intention (Zhang et al , 2022). However, our focus reveals relational outcomes (Hollebeek et al , 2019) such as customers’ emotional connections with service robots (Hollebeek et al , 2021; Huang and Rust, 2021).…”