The Different Roles of Satisfaction, Trust, and Commitment in Customer Relationships

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-

La confiance inter-organisationnelle : essai de conceptualisation et proposition de mesure

“…Marketing Sako et Helper, 1998 An expectation held by an agent that its trading partner will behave in a mutually acceptable manner Suppliercustomer Garbarino et Johnson, 1999 Trust in an organization, captured as customer confidence in the quality and reliability of the services offered.…”

“…Ce type de confiance trouve son origine dans la prédictibilité et la crédibilité du partenaire. Elle s'appuie, d'une part, sur la connaissance suffisante de l'autre qui permet d'anticiper son comportement, et, d'autre part, sur une information crédible concernant les intentions ou les compétences de l'autre (Garbarino et Johnson, 1999). Cette confiance repose sur les normes spécifiques partagées par les individus.…”

“…Goodwill trust Contrat Geyskens et al, 1998Garbarino et Johnson, 1999 Mesure globale Guibert, 1999 Mesure issue des travaux de Morgan et hunt 1994. Sirieix et Dubois, 1999 Bonnes intentions l'intérêt porté au client …”

The Role of Commitment Perceived by the Consumer in Service Industries

“…Thus, according to previous empirical research, commitment is a key relational variable mainly on the basis of the following hypothesis: the greater the level of trust within the relationship, the higher the degree of commitment between the partners (Bansal et al, 2004;Crotts & Turner, 1999;Garbarino & Johnson, 1999;Kwon & Suh, 2005;Morgan & Hunt, 1994;Sharma & Patterson, 2000).…”

“…Appendix Table A1 shows the items making up the measurement scales of each factor considered in this research. We measured relational results by adapting the scales used by Beckett et al (2000), Garbarino and Johnson (1999), and Price and Arnould (1999). The trust concept scale was adapted from Doney and Cannon (1997), Morgan and Hunt (1994), Price and Arnould (1999), and Sharma and Patterson (2000).…”