Anda di halaman 1dari 138

THE EFFECT OF CUSTOMERS SATISFACTION TOWARDS CUSTOMER LOYALTY AMONG MOBILE TELECOMUNICATION PROVIDERS IN MALAYSIA

SARINA ISMAIL

UNIVERSITI UTARA MALAYSIA 2009

THE EFFECT OF CUSTOMERS SATISFACTION TOWARDS CUSTOMER LOYALTY AMONG MOBILE TELECOMUNICATION PROVIDERS IN MALAYSIA

A Thesis is submitted to Graduated School in partial Fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Administration, Universiti Utara Malaysia

by SARINA ISMAIL

Sarina Ismail, 2009. All rights reserved

Permission to Use

In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirement for a postgraduate degree for University Utara Malaysia, I agree that he University Library make it freely available for inspection. I further agree that permission for copying of this thesis in any manner, in whole or in part , for scholarly purpose may be granted by my supervisor or in their absence, by the Dean of the Graduate School. It is understood that any copying or publication or use of this thesis or part thereof for financial gain no t be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood that due recognition shall be give to me and to University Utara Malaysia for any scholarly use which may be made of any material for my thesis.

Request for permission to copy or to make other use of materials in this thesis, in whole or in part, should be address to:

Assistants Vice Chancellor College of Business University Utara Malaysia 06010 UUM Sintok Kedah Darul Aman

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study is to understand the effect between customer satisfaction and customer loyalty in the Malaysian mobile telecommunication services. This sector is highly competitive as new players coming in, with aggressive price offering, high promotion, better network quality and great customer service. 157 respondents participated in this study. Out of this five variable tested (Service Quality, Pricing, Switching Cost, and Brand Image) it is found that Responsiveness and Brand Image have a positive relationship on Customer Loyalty. The present study has its own limitation since this research is only conducted in Penang area. Therefore the finding of the study is unable to be generalize for the whole population of hand phone users in Malaysia as the sample size is considered small. In conclusion service providers must be able to understand the effect between customer satisfaction and customer loyal. It will be a great challenge for the service providers in preparing their strategic plan in maintaining customer loyalty, and at the same time expending their customer base.

ABSTRAK

Tujuan utama kajian ini diadakan adalah untuk mengetahui sejauhmana kesan di antara kepuasan pelanggan dan kesetiaan pelanggan terhadap penggunaan telekomunikasi mudah alih di Malaysia. Bidang ini telah menjadi semakin mencabar dan berdaya saing dengan adanya kemasukan syarikat baru yang menawarkan lebih banyak penjimatan, promosi hebat, liputan rangkaian yang meluas dan perkhidmatan pelanggan yang terbaik. Sebanyak 157 respondan telah mengambil bahagian di dalam menjayakan kajian ini. Dari hasil kajian yang dijalankan (Kualiti Perkhidmatan, Harga, Kos Pertukaran dan Imej Jenama) menunjukkan bahawa kerelaan memberi perkhidmatan yang terbaik dan Imej Jenama mempunyai hubungan yang positif ke atas kesetiaan pelanggan. Kajian ini mempunyai kekurangannya yang tersendiri dimana kajian ini hanya dijalankan disekitar Pulau Pinang sahaja, maka dengan itu hasil dari kajian ini tidak mampu untuk dinilai secara keseluruhan terhadap pengguna telefon mudah alih di Malaysia disebabkan contoh kajian yang dianggap terlalu kecil. Kesimpulannya perkhidmatan pelanggan haruslah dapat memahami kesan diantara kepuasan pelanggan dan kesetiaan pelanggan bagi menyediakan plan stategik dalam proses mengekal dan meningkatkan jumlah pelanggan.

ii

DEDICATION

I hereby dedicate this work to the following individuals:

To my late father, Ismail bin Ahmad who had always gave me strength and motivation in every ways, which make me who I am today;

To my loving mother, Kalsom Binti Sahat who nurtures me with all the love;

To my loving husband, Mohd Azizi Bin Aminurudin who is always by my side, with all his courage, support and sacrifice that inspires me to be where I am now.

May the Mighty Grace and Blessings of ALLAH be upon all of you.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Foremost,

In the name of ALLAH, The Beneficent, The Merciful, Praise be to ALLAH, Lord of the World, The Beneficent, The Merciful, Owner of the Day of Judgment; Thee (alone) we worship; Thee (alone) we ask for help, Show us the straight path, The path of those Thou hast favoured: Not (the path) of those who earn thine anger nor of those who go astray

I would like to express my gratitude and appreciation to the following people for making this study possible and hereby I dedicate this to them

I consider it a pleasure and privilege to pay regards and thanks to Hj. Mohamad Zainol Abidin bin Adam, Senior Lecturer University Utara Malaysia for his kind guidance and encouragement in the whole process of writing this research project paper. I really appreciate his patience, tolerance and his assistance in making this project a reality;

I thank all the lecturers that have taught me in this program I honestly appreciate their support, co-operation and teachings;

Lastly word of thanks is also extended to all my friends in the Master of Administration who have helped me in many ways, for all their support, tutoring and encouragement throughout the whole program.

May the Mighty Grace and Blessings of ALLAH be upon all of you.
iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract Abstract Dedication

.. .. ..

.. .. .. .. .. .. ..

.. .. .. .. .. .. ..

.. .. .. .. .. .. ..

.. .. .. .. .. .. ..

.. .. .. .. .. .. ..

.. .. .. .. .. .. ..

.. .. .. .. .. .. ..

.. .. .. .. .. .. ..

.. .. .. .. .. .. ..

i ii iii iv v ix xi

Acknowledgement Table Content .. List of Tables .. List of Figures ..

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1 3 4 4 10 10 11 11 11 12

An Overview of Customer Loyalty ..

1.1.1 The Importance of Customer Loyalty .. 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

An Overview of The Mobile Telecommunication Sector Research Questions .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

Research Objectives .. Research Contributions 1.5.1 Academic 1.5.2 Industry .. ..

1.6

Research Framework ..

CHAPTER 2 LITERATUE REVIEW 2.1 Service Quality .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 13 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 21 22 22 24 26

2.1.1 Dimensions of Service Quality 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 2.10 2.11 Price .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

Switching Cost Brand Image .. Customer Loyalty

Customer Loyalty and Customer Satisfaction Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction .. Service Quality and Customer Loyalty Pricing and Customer Loyalty .. .. .. .. ..

Switching Cost and Customer Loyalty Brand Image and Customer Loyalty ..

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 28 29 30 31 32 33


vi

The Questionnaire

Data Collection and Samples .. Hypothesis Development Pilot Test .. .. .. .. ..

Reliability Coefficient

CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS 4.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 34 34 34 35 36 37 37 37 38 39 39 40 41 41 43 43 49 50 51 54

Descriptive Statistic and Data Collection

4.1.1 Services Provider Used by Respondents 4.1.2 Type of Mobile Usage by Respondents

4.1.3 Method of Monthly Bill Payment by Respondents 4.2 Demographic Characteristic of Respondents .. 4.2.1 Gender of Respondents 4.2.2 Age of Respondents .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

4.2.3 Ethnic Group of Respondents .. 4.2.4 Religion of Respondents ..

4.2.5 Highest Education Qualification Achieved Respondents 4.2.6 Occupation of Respondents .. 4.2.7 Monthly Income of Respondents 4.2.8 Summary of Descriptive Statistic 4.3 Factor Analysis .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

4.3.1 Services Quality

4.3.2 Intercorelation of the items 4.3.3 Descriptive Statistic .. 4.3.4 Multiple Regressions .. 4.3.5 Hypothesis Testing ..

vii

CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION, MANAGERIAL IMPLCATIONS, LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSION .. 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 Discussion .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 58 58 60 61 62 64

Managerial Implications Limitation of the Study Conclusion .. .. .. ..

REFERENCES APPENDICES Appendix A Appendix B

.. ..

.. ..

.. ..

.. ..

.. ..

.. ..

.. ..

.. ..

.. ..

74 80

viii

List Of Tables

Table 1.1: Table 1.2: Table 1.3: Table 1.4:

Cellular Phone Subscribers Malaysia Basic Indicators 3G Subscriptions ..

.. .. ..

.. .. ..

.. .. ..

.. .. ..

.. .. ..

.. .. ..

7 8 9

Percentage Distribution of Cellular Phone Users by Urban and Rural Areas .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 9 32 33 34 35 36 37 37 38 39 39 40 41

Table 3.1: Table 3.2: Table 4.1: Table 4.2: Table 4.3: Table 4.4: Table 4.5: Table 4.6: Table 4.7: Table 4.8: Table 4.9: Table 4.10: Table 4.11:

Summary of the Hypotheses .. Pilot Test Reliability Output ..

Providers of Malaysian Telecommunication Services Type of Mobile Usage by Respondents .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

Method Monthly Bill Payment by Respondents Gender of Respondents Age of Respondents .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

Ethnic Group of Respondents .. Religion of Respondents ..

Highest Education Qualification Achieved .. Occupation of Respondents .. .. .. ..

Monthly Income of the Respondents ..

Summary of General & Demographical Characteristics of Respondent .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 42 43 44


ix

Table 4.12: Table 4.13:

KMO and Bartlett's Test Tangible .. KMO and Bartlett's Test- Reliability ..

Table 4.14: Table 4.15: Table 4.16: Table 4.17: Table 4.18: Table 4.19: Table 4.20: Table 4.21: Table 4.22: Table 4.23: Table 4.24: Table 4.25: Table 4.26: Table 4.27:

KMO and Bartlett's Test- Responsiveness KMO and Bartlett's Test Assurance .. KMO and Bartlett's Test Empathy .. KMO and Bartlett's Test Price ..

.. .. .. .. .. ..

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

45 45 46 46 47 47 48 49 50 51 52 52 54 57

KMO and Bartlett's Test- Switching Cost KMO and Bartlett's Test Brand Image

KMO and Bartlett's Test Customer Loyalty Reliability Statistics (Cronbachs Alpha) Descriptive Statistics .. ANOVA Coefficients .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

Model Summary

Summary of Regression Analysis The Results of Hypothesis Testing

List Of Figures

Figure 1: Figure 2:

Consolidation of Malaysia Mobile Market 1992-2002 Research Framework .. .. .. .. ..

.. ..

.. ..

6 12

xi

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

Success in delivering good services and to gain customer loyalty does not only depend on sales but also on other factors related to product, service and support. This study investigates three potential subscribers' decisions related to buying telecommunications products (accepting the purchase price), decision to use the products (satisfied to used the product), and the decision to stay and be loyal to the service provider. According to Service & Support Professionals Association news (SSPA 2007) that many service providers think an 80% satisfaction rating is a reasonable score but research done shows that at 80% perceive that is consider an average and the service has no point of differentiation and its show that the very satisfied customers who are truly loyal when everybody else feels indifferent about the provider service and will swap to another provider if they see a cost advantage. Base on the past experience in Europe and the USA has demonstrated that it is possible to gain many more customers on the basis of lower charges and cheaper sets, this experience can be seen in a Malaysian service provider trend in continuing dropping the call charges in the price war as a strategies to obtain high returns and increasing number of subscribers.

In Malaysia, the mobile telecommunication market has now reached its maturity stage, and as the net return on investments in mature markets could be much higher for retention strategies than for strategies to attract new customers, particularly for companies

with an established customer base Zeithaml, Berry and Parasuraman (1998). Compared to other consumer goods and services, mobile telecommunication services are relatively homogeneous in nature because of technological standards and regulations Fullerton, (1998) (as per Lim, Widdow and Park 2006). Service providers still try to provide innovative service offerings in the hope that consumers perceive their services as superior and leading in the mobile service sector Federal Communications Commission (FCC, 2004) (as per Lim, Widdow and Park 2006). The growth rate in the Malaysian telecommunication sector had been affected badly over the last decade by economic crisis of the late 1990's. When the economic recovers the market grew and attracted a new player to the business, which lead to the increases of competition among service provider. Nowadays they are trying to attract customer by offering aggressive price promotion. As competition is increasing among these companies, it is necessary for them to know about the customer perception about the price, promotion, product and the other important factors that are playing an important role to be loyal to the telecommunication service providers.

In order to attract new subscribers and as well to retain the current customer mobile services provider need to know the effect between customer satisfaction and customer loyalty so that steps can be undertaken to keep these customers. Customer loyalty is one of the most important elements in marketing and it shows how much the provider can afford to practice the loyalty program among its customers. Furthermore customer loyalty will generate positive word-of-mouth and it will be a great advantage to firms as it acts as free promotion to them. A research done by Malaysian Communication and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) related to customers satisfaction found that the satisfaction index has increased

from 3.56 percent in 2006 to 3.64 percent in the year 2007. This is due to the changes in the strategy, by providing a custom made service and good customer relationship programs. By understanding and identify the profile of individual customers, the services providers can therefore suggest appropriate products to meet their needs. Hence, this study is to identify the relationship between Service Quality, Pricing, Switching Cost and Brand Image on Customer Satisfaction and Customer Loyalty in Mobile Telecommunication service providers in Malaysia.

1.1

An Overview of Customer Loyalty

They are many studies being done on customer loyalty. Customer loyalty is viewed as the strength of the relationship between an individuals relative attitude and repeat patronage (Blery et. al., 2009). Customer loyalty is an attitude of loyalty in committing a relationship between the provider and the customer; the more loyal the customer the higher the positive level of loyalty will be and as such positive word of mouth and repeat patronage will commence.

Customer loyalty has been variously defined in the literature. Jones and Sasser (1995) (as in Blery at el., 2009) defined customer loyalty as the feeling of attachment to or affection for a companys, people, products or services. In this relation, customer loyalty can be considered as an attitude and behavioural of loyalty towards product, store or service.

1.1.1 The Importance of Customer Loyalty

There are claims saying that it is more expensive to win a new customer than to retain an existing customer. Loyalty initiates a series of economic effects, and the net return on investments for the services provider could be much higher than retention strategies or any other strategies to attract new customers. These strategies not only benefit the service provider but the customer as well. Research conducted by Peterson (1995) and Barnes (1994) (as in Blery at el., 2009) argued that for a long-term relationship to exist it should benefit both the company and the customer.

According to Anderson and Srinivasan, (2003) without customer loyalty, even the best-designed business model will soon fall apart. In their quest to develop a loyal customer base, most companies try their best to continually satisfy their customers and develop longrun relationship with them.

1.2

An Overview of the Mobile Telecommunication Sector in Malaysia

The first mobile system Nordic analogue technology NMT450 was introduced in Malaysia in the year 1985: Telekom Malaysia as a system provider at that time introduced ATUR011 to the public and claimed to be the first in Asia. Then in 1988 few licences were issued to STM

Cellular Sdn. Bhd. This licence enabled services provider to provide analogue ETACS 900 networks to the public. Later in 1989 Celcom Sdn. Bhd. took over the operation from Telekom Malaysia under the brand name of Celcom ART900. This was the pioneer provider of the Malaysian Telecommunication services provider. However in 1993 there are six more new licenses granted to newcomers in the business. The six licences granted were:-

1. Mobikom, a joint venture involving Telekom and Sapura Holding. This company was granted a licence to operate 800 MHz and GSM 1800. 2. Celcom, owned by TRI (Technology Resource Industries Sdn Bhd) and with close ties to Renong Group, received a 900MHz license. 3. Maxis, owned by Binaring received licence to launch Malaysias first satellite, Measat and offer broadcasting and internet service. 4. Mutiara Swisscom (later renamed Digi). 5. Sapura Digital was granted licence to operate GSM 1800 PCN 6. TimeWireless received licence to operate GSM 1800 PCN

With the licences granted to the above new service providers provide an advantage of a second generation digital platform and enable the provider to launch the GSM networks. However this licence has led to an oversupply of networks. Six networks are clearly too many for a 20 million population. As the Asian Financial crisis took place the Malaysian Government aggressively encouraged to rationalization of the sector. Merger took place and the structure of this merger remained in place as today. Telekom acquired Time.dot.com and Celcom. Maxis acquired TimeCel. Telenor increased its minority position in Digi. The entire

consolidated mobile operator has its own trunks networks and international gateway. Consolidation of Malaysian Mobile Market from 1992-2002 is shown in figure below.

Before Merging TM Celular Celcom Mobikom DiGi Maxis Sapura Time

After Merging TM Celcom

As at 2002 TM Celcom DiGi.Com

TimeCel

Maxis

Figure 1: Consolidation of Malaysian Mobile Market 1992-2002

In 1998, the total number of analogue subscribers was highest in the GSM system with more than one million subscribers as compared to analogue system. As for the whole industry, the total number of subscribers has increased from 23,347 million at the end of 2007 to 27,125 million in 2008 while mobile penetration has also increased from 85.1 percent to 96.8 percent. In terms of services, prepaid product remains the driving force behind from 83.27 percent of total subscribers by the end of 2007, an increase of 0.57 percent from the year 2006. But there a decrease 3.83 percent of subscriber by the end of 2008 this is due to the increase of post paid subscriber by 20.56 percent compare to 16.72 percent by the end of 2007.

Table 1.1 summarise the number of mobile users in Malaysia from the year 2000 to the end of 2008.

Table 1.1: Cellular Phone Subscribers

Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Qtr

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Postpaid (000) 2,599 3,069 2,961 2,566 2,555 2,925 3,368 3,392 3,485 3,689 3,905 4,137 4,451 4,926 5,577

Prepaid (000) 2,523 4,316 6,092 8,558 12,057 16,620 16,096 17,427 17,734 18,380 19,442 20,116 20,635 21,236 21,548

Total 5,122 7,385 9,053 11,124 14,611 19,545 19,464 20,819 21,219 22,069 23,347 24,253 25,086 26,162 27,125

Penetration rate 100 inhabitants 21.8 30.8 36.9 43.9 56.5 74.1 72.3 77.0 78.2 80.8 85.1 87.9 90.6 93.9 96.8 101.2 103.1 105.0 106.9

2008

Forecast 2009

Source: Malaysian Communication and Multimedia Commission (2009)

The telecommunication industry in Malaysia is the fastest growing sector, especially in the mobile market. This telecommunication sector contributed much to the nation's economic development. The growth rate in the usage of telecommunication facilities has increased tremendously, especially in the increasing number of telephone subscribers. The penetration rates have increased gradually from the year 2000 to 2008 as shown in Table 1.3. From the table it also showed that 3G subscriptions for post paid user total to 2,014 million and prepaid 2,352 million in the years of 2008.

In Table 1.4 illustrated the percentage distribution of cellular phone user according to urban and rural areas, with the increase of rural area awareness on cellular phone indirectly contributed to the growth. Currently the population of Malaysia is around 28.02 million, out of these 5,577 million post paid subscribers and 21,548 million are prepaid subscribers.

Table 1.2: Malaysia Basic Indicators GDP (RM) Current Constant Price price 2000 (billion) (billion) 1 418,769 339,414 474,048 426,508 519,451 447,392 572,550 474,392 144,415 120,060 153,937 123,661 166,306 130,070 176,709 131,162 175,374 189,353 198,668 na 129,177 132,155 136,235 na Consumer Price Index (CPI) 2 95.7 97.1 100.0 103.6 105.0 105.1 105.4 105.7 107.8 109.0 110.9 111.8

Year Note 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Qtr

Population Households (Million) (000)

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

25.32 25.86 27.45 26.91 27.04 27.13 27.31 27.45 27.59 27.70 27.87 28.02

5,504 5,622 5,967 5,850 5,878 5,898 5,937 5,967 5,998 6,022 6,059 6,091

2008

Source: Malaysian Communication and Multimedia Commission (2009)

Table 1.3: 3G Subscriptions Postpaid (000) 265 825 1,083 1,315 1,646 2,014 Prepaid (000) 162 730 765 1,184 1,479 2,352 Total (000) 427 1,555 1,848 2,499 3,125 4,366

Year 2006 2007 2008

Qtr

1 2 3 4

Source: Malaysian Communication and Multimedia Commission (2009)

Table 1.4: Percentage Distributions of Cellular Phone Users by Urban and Rural Areas

Year 2004 2005 2006

Urban 81.9 80.5 78.0

Rural 18.1 19.5 22.0

Source: Malaysian Communication and Multimedia Commission (2009)

1.3

Research Questions

Research questions are posed to obtain the relevant information required to fulfil the objectives of this study. The proposed questions to be answered in this research are as follows: 1. What are the main factors that effect customer satisfaction towards loyalty in Mobile telecommunication service provider in Malaysia. 2. Is there any relationship between customer satisfaction and customer loyalty.

1.4

Research Objectives

The main concern of this study is to explore the effect of customer satisfaction towards customer loyalty. It will investigate customer loyalty and identify why customers are loyal or disloyal. This research also seeks to understand the factors effecting customer loyalty. The objectives of the study can be summarise as follows: 1. 2. To measure the effect of customer satisfaction towards customer loyalty To measure customer loyalty on customer experience (e.g. product, service, support) 3. To identify reason why customer are loyal or disloyal

10

1.5

Research Contributions

1.5.1 Academic

Firstly, the answer from this research will be highly importance to the academicians as the results from this research indicate how customers satisfaction determines their decision to use the selected and maintain their relationship with their mobile service provider. This type of information are of significance to marketers of they want to compete in the global market.

1.5.2 Industry

The findings of this study will have many important implications on the industry. The services provider will have better information on what makes customers loyal or disloyal. With all the information that they gather enable them to create new competitive advantage and provide better service to their customers. In lacking of this knowledge, service providers will incur higher cost due to the implication of wrong strategy. To face this special challenge in meeting customer needs while remaining economically competitive. The service provider needs to use automated processes that can make an impact to the services. There can be no substitute for high-quality personal interaction between service employees and customers but with the use quality practices able to make a different as per the following process:

i.

Understand and improve operational processes.

11

ii. iii. iv.

Identify problems quickly and systematically. Establish valid and reliable service performance measures. Measure customer satisfaction and other performance outcomes.

1.6

Research Framework Services Quality Adopted: Johnson & Sirikit (2002)

Pricing Adopted: Martin-Consuegra et. al (2007) Customer Loyalty Adopted: Martin-Consuegra et. al (2007))

Switching Cost Adopted: Albert Caruana (2003)

Brand Image Adopted: Arjun Choudhuri et. al (2006)

Figure 2: Research Framework

12

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1

Service Quality

According to Berry et al., (1988) (as in Parvez 2005), consider service quality is a significant differentiator and the most powerful competitive weapon which all the service organizations want to possess. Definitions of service quality hold the result of an evaluation process where customers compare their expectations about a service with their perception of the service to be received Lewis & Booms, (1983); Lehtinen & Lehtinen, (1982) (as in Parvez 2005); Grnroos, (1984); Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1985, 1988, 1994). Various studies explained that the service quality as a form of attitude of customers on the service provider in a long run and also their overall evaluation. These two constructs (service quality and attitude) are viewed as similar. Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1988). Attitude is defined as a learned predisposition to respond to an object in a consistently favourable or an unfavourable way. Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1988) developed a service quality measure, SERVQUAL which measure of the overall service quality dimensions.

13

2.1.1 Dimensions of Service Quality

The dimension of service quality has been defined by Kotler (2009) is the totality of feature and characteristic of services that bear on its ability to satisfy stated or implied need. There are five dimension stated as follows:-

i.

Reliability

According to Kotler (1999) (as in Parvez, 2005); Bitner, and Zeithaml, (2003) reliability is defines as the ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately is the reliability. Churchill, Jr. & Peter (1999) (as in Parvez, 2005) added that customers want performance to be consistent and dependable.

ii.

Responsiveness

According to Kotler (1999) (as in Parvez, 2005); Bitner, and Zeithaml, (2003) as responsiveness is the willingness to help customers and provide prompt service. Churchill, Jr. & Peter (1999), (as in Parvez 2005) added that customer must see service provider as ready and willing to perform their said service.

14

iii.

Tangibles

According to Kotler (1999) (as in Parvez, 2005); Bitner, and Zeithaml,(2003), Tangible a defined as the appearance of physical facilities, equipment, personnel, and communication material of an organization is the tangibles. Churchill, Jr. & Peter (1999) (as in Parvez 2005) added that customers look for quality in the equipment, facilities, and communication materials used to provide the service.

iv.

Empathy

According to Kotler (1999) (as in Parvez, 2005); Bitner, and Zeithaml, (2003), empathy means the provision of caring, individualized attention to the customer.

v.

Assurance

According to Kotler (1999) (as in Parvez, 2005); Bitner, and Zeithaml, (2003), assurance means the knowledge and courtesy of employees and their ability to convey trust and confidence.

2.2

Price

According to Martin-Consuegra, Molina and Esteban (2007) there are two factors such as price fairness and price acceptance of pricing that contributed towards customer behaviour or how consumers respond to price changes. This theory has been supported by Kahneman et

15

al., (1986) (as in Martin-Consuegra, Molina and Esteban, 2007). Fairness has been defined as a judgment of whether an outcome or process to reach an outcome in reasonable, acceptable Bolton et. al., (2003) (as in Martin-Consuegra, Molina and Esteban, 2007). The level of price acceptance can be defined as the maximum price that a buyer is prepared to pay for a product or services Monroe (1990) (as in Martin-Consuegra, Molina and Esteban, 2007).

Individuals, who are price conscious, are generally not willing to pay prices for a product if they perceived that the price is not reasonable. Furthermore, the range of acceptable price is relatively narrow for price conscious individuals Link, (1997) (as in Munnukka, 2005). According to Kollmann, (2000) the variable charges are the prime importance for the users decision. In telecommunication sector the users not only consider the purchase price and usage charges as criteria for acceptance but also they will consider from whom the services will be purchase.

2.3

Switching Cost

According to Caruana et al., (2003) defined switching cost as costs that deters customers from switching to competitors product or services. According to Porter (1998) (as in Caruana et al., 2003), switching cost is the cost involved in changing from one service provider to another. In addition to measurable monetary costs, switching costs also include time and psychological effort involved in facing the uncertainty of dealing with a new service provider Dick and Basu, (1994). According to Jackson (1985) (as in Caruana et al., 2003), it is the sum of economic, psychological cost, and physical costs. It includes the psychological

16

cost of becoming a customer of a new firm, and the time effort involved in buying new brand Klemperer, (1995); (as in Kim et al., 2004). Hence, switching cost varies from customer to customer Shy, (2002).

According Aydin et al., (2005) switching cost gives firms some advantage as follows:i. ii. The cost reduce customers sensitivity to price and satisfaction level Customer perceive functionally homogeneous brands

In another word even though customer had the opportunity to choose identical brands but they choose to stay loyal and continue to buy the same brand.

2.4

Brand Image

Brand is defined as a name, term, sign, symbol, or design or combination of these that identifies the maker or seller of a product or services. Consumers view a brand as an important part of the product, and branding can add value to a product Kotler and Amstrong, (2005). Brand image is perceptions about a brand as reflected by the brand association held in consumer memory Keller, (1993) (as in Parvez 2005). Brand, also referred as corporate image, has been defined as an accumulated attitude (experience based or not) towards the company Andreassen and Lindestad, (1998). Brand reputation has been defined as a perception of quality associated with according to Aaker and Keller, (1990) (as in Hung-Tseng, Foi, Bonilla) On the company

17

level, image has been defined as: perceptions of an organization reflected in the associations held in consumer memory Chaudhuri and Holbook (2001). It is said that brand equity creates customers preferences for a brand over competing brands Simon and Sullivan, (1993) (as in Chaudhuri and Holbook., 2001). Building strong brands is one of the most important goals of product and brand management. Strong brands result in revenue streams, both short term and long term Aaker, (1997).Oliver,(1999) defines brand loyalty as a deeply held commitment to re-buy or re-patronise a preferred product/service consistently in the future, thereby causing repetitive same-brand or same brand-set purchasing, despite situational influences and marketing

2.5

Customer Loyalty

Customer loyalty represents the repeat purchase, and referring the company to other customers Heskett et al., (1994) (as in Parvez, 2005). He also stated that customer loyalty is a figure that may be measured directly as measuring the actual repeated sales to customers. According to Duffy (2003) loyalty is the feeling that a customer has about a brand which ultimately generates positive and measurable financial results. Improvements in retention and increasing in the share of the company are the obvious economic benefits of customer loyalty.

According to Lee, Lee & Feick, (2001), customer loyalty has been measured as the long-term choice probability for a brand or as a minimum differential needed for switching.

18

Several earlier studies identified customer loyalty in several ways such as attitudinal approaches focused mainly on brand recommendations, resistance to superior products Narayandas (1996), (as in Parvez, 2005). repurchase intention Cronin & Taylor, (1992) and willingness to pay a price premium Bitner & Zeithaml,( 2003), define service loyalty as a specific attitude to continue in an exchange relationship based on past experiences. Their definition implies that levels of service loyalty can be assessed by attitudinal measures such as the ones based on intentions to re-patronize a service provider. Such attitudinal measures have an advantage over behavioural measures (e.g. repeat patronage) in that they can provide greater understanding of the factors associated with the development and modification of loyalty (Oliva et al., 1992).

Oliver (1999) defines customer loyalty as a deeply held commitment to re buy or repatronize a preferred product/service. Aydin et al., (2005) defined customer loyalty by encompassing all approaches as six necessary conditions:

i. ii. iii. iv. v. vi.

The biased (i.e. random) Behavioural response (i.e. purchase) Expressed over time By some decision-making unit With respect to one or more alternative brands out of a set of such brands Is a function of psychological (decision-making, evaluative) process

19

No matter how customer loyalty is defined, in order to create customer loyalty, any provider should: i. ii. iii. Increase subscribers satisfaction by raising service quality Ensure subscribers trust in the firm Develop a switching cost, making it costly for customers to change service providers and expand them.

2.6

Customer Loyalty and Customer Satisfaction

Satisfaction is a feeling which results from a process of evaluating what was received against that expected, the purchase decision itself and the fulfilment of needs or want Armstrong & Kotler, (2005). Kotler, (2009) also noted that satisfaction is a person feeling of pleasure or disappointment that result from comparing a products perceived performance (or outcome) to their expectation. Bitner and Zeithaml, (2003) stated that satisfaction is the customers evaluation of a product or service in terms of whether that product or service has met their needs and expectations. Fe and Ikova, (2004) added that the perception of the word "satisfaction" influences the activities which we conduct to achieve it. Researchers have also identified customer satisfaction from a multi dimensional nature and view overall satisfaction as a function of satisfaction with multiple experiences with the service provider (Sureshchandar et al., 2002) (as in Parvez, 2005).

According to Lee, Lee & Feick, (2001) while both service quality and customer satisfaction have certain things in common, satisfaction is generally viewed as a broader

20

concept than service quality assessment; thus, perceived service quality is a component of customer satisfaction Zeithaml and Bitner, (1996) (as in author Lee, Lee & Feick, 2001).

2.7

Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction

The service literature supports that perceived service quality and value serve as drivers of customer satisfaction and loyalty intention by Cronin, Brady and Hult, (2000).

The empirical studies show that two constructs service quality and customer satisfactions are conceptually distinct Boulding, Kalra, Staelin, & Zeithaml, (1993); Bitner, (1990) and Sureshchandar et al., (2002) (as in Parvez, 2005) identified that there are high relationships between service quality and customer satisfaction. They emphasized that the two constructs, service quality and customer satisfaction, do exhibit the independence and are indeed different constructs from the customers point of view.

In the research done by Spreng and Mackoy, (1996) (as in Parvez, 2005) the relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction is being addressed by using the model developed by Oliver et al., (1992). The model integrates the two constructs and suggests, among other things that perceived service quality is an antecedent to satisfaction. Spreng and Mackoy, (1996) (as in Parvez, 2005) showed that service quality leads to customer satisfaction. Bitner, (1990) (as in Parvez, 2005) developed a model of service encounter evaluation and empirically supported the effect of satisfaction on service quality.

21

2.8

Service Quality and Customer Loyalty

The relationship between service quality and customer preference loyalty has been examined, by Boulding et al., (1993) and Cronin and Taylor, (1992). Cronin and Taylor (1992) focused solely on repurchase intentions, whereas Boulding et al., (1993) focused on the elements of repurchasing and willingness to recommend. In a study by Cronin and Taylor service quality did not appear to have a significant (positive) effect on repurchase intentions (in contrast to the significant positive relation between satisfaction and repurchase intention), while Boulding et al., (1993) found positive relationships between service quality and repurchase intentions and willingness to recommend. Furthermore, it has been argued that actually responding to dissatisfaction (e.g. complaining directly to the company or complaining to a third party) is negatively related to the level of service quality.

H1:

Service quality has a positive relationship on customer loyalty in mobile telecommunication service provider.

2.9

Pricing and Customer Loyalty

In this study we concentrate on studying how mobile service customers perceive the prices, do customers differ in their price sensitivity levels, Price has been observed as an important element affecting the diffusion of new products and services, but pricing of a new product or service is particularly difficult. According to Kollmann, (2000) the lower the charges, the more customers will commit themselves to the telephone network, so more call minutes are

22

achieved. Rather than the monthly fixed charge, it is precisely this (variable) income from the number of call minutes which determines basic commercial success for network providers.

In studies on price sensitivity in telecommunication industry three different consumer segments have been identified by Kollmann, (2000). He found that in both ends of pricing (high-end versus low-end) the price sensitivity is substantially lower or insensitive. Influencing on these two market segments with pricing would be most probably ineffective. Thus, for these market segments it would be most effective to pursue quality-focused marketing strategies (e.g. improvement of service/speech quality).

Price competition has become a cutthroat in mobile telecommunication industry. Trebing, (2001) mentioned that are three sets of strategies for pricing behavior. The first is limit entry pricing, which is used for protection of the market position of the firm Secondly, is the high access charges for new entrants, and thirdly one is tie-in sales to write off old plant or standard investment against captive customers. According to him limit entry pricing involves setting low prices in highly elastic markets to attract or retain large customers with monopolistic buying power, while maintaining high prices in inelastic markets.

Price plays a vital role in telecommunication market especially for the mobile telecommunication service providers Kollmann, (2000). These include not only the purchase price but also the call and rental charges. Generally, a price dominated mass market leads to customers having more choice and the opportunity to compare the pricing structures of

23

different providers. Therefore, the company that offer lower charges, the more customers will commit themselves to the telephone networks, so more call minutes will achieve. According to Kollmann (2000) income from the number of call minutes determine the basic commercial success for the network providers. He also added that the success of the telecommunication sector in market place depends. On continuing usage and pricing policies, which need to be considered on several levels. That is right from the beginning when purchasing the end-user set. Since, a common strategy for a company extending their product or service is to differentiate their offerings vertically.

H2:

Price has a positive relationship on customer loyalty in mobile telecommunication service provider.

2.10

Switching Cost and Customer Loyalty

A review of literature suggests that higher switching costs are positively related to customer loyalty. Switching costs are known to influence customer loyalty. This paper primarily investigates which dimensions of switching costs affect which dimensions of customer loyalty.

Switching costs are generally defined as costs that deter customers from switching to a competitors product or service. Switching costs are onetime costs facing the buyer of switching from one suppliers product to another. According to Caruana, (2004) Learning

24

costs represent the effort required by the customer to reach the same level of comfort of knowledge acquired of using a product but which may not be transferable to other brands of the same product. Contractual costs are directly firm-induced in order to penalise switching by customers. It includes examples such as repeat-purchase discounts or rewards and frequent flyer programmes. Contractual switching costs can also be created when the customer signs an undertaking to remain loyal for a certain period of time or pay an exit penalty. Switching costs may comprise psychological and emotional costs. For example, when social bonds, personal rapport and trust have been built up over a period of time between the service provider and the customer

According to Caruana, (2004) switching costs influence customer satisfaction and influence loyalty. Switching cost involved in customer perception and is, related to individual criterion. Alongside to the monetary value, switching cost gives firms some advantages: i. ii. The costs reduce customers sensitivity to price and satisfaction level and Customers perceive functionally homogeneous brands as differentiated

heterogeneous brands etc. in other words, in a market with switching cost,

Klemperer, (1987) stated that there are at least three types of switching costs: i. ii. iii. Transaction cost Learning cost Artificial or contractual costs. The transaction cost is the cost of a customer giving up their existing service provider and finding a new service provider.

25

Burnham et al., (2003) developed a switching cost typology that identifies three types of switching costs, each of which is composed of multiple faces:

i.

Procedural switching costs (consisting of economic risk costs, evaluation costs, learning costs and set-up costs)

ii.

Financial switching costs (consisting of benefit-loss costs and monetary-loss costs)

iii.

Relational-costs (consisting of personal relationship-loss costs and brand relationship-loss costs).

H3:

Switching cost has a positive effect on customer loyalty in mobile telecommunication service provider.

2.11

Brand Image and Customer Loyalty

Brand awareness refers to the strength of the brand node in memory. It refers to how easy it is for the consumer to remember the brand Keller, (1993) (as in Parvez 2005). Brand recall is the most common way to measure brand awareness. In a study that including various brand knowledge and behavioural variables, using one product category, candy bars, Agarwal and Rao, (1996) (as in Chaudhuri and Holbrook 2001) Brand image refers to strong, favourable and unique brand associations in memory Keller,(2003) which result in perceived quality, a positive attitude and overall positive affect. According to Chaudhuri and Holbrook (2001)

26

brand-loyal consumers may be willing to pay more for a brand because they perceive some unique value in the brand that no alternative can provide. Brand loyalty leads to greater market share when the same brand is repeatedly purchased by loyal consumers, irrespective of situational constraints.

Brands give consumers leverage over firms, encouraging firms to behave appropriately, by forcing firms to keep promises they make to consumers. Early research on the credibility of the communicator was adapted to the context of the brand by Erdem and Swait (1998, 2004), Erdem et al., (2002) and Swait and Erdem (2006) (as in Chaudhuri and Holbrook 2001) concluded that brand credibility comprises two key factors:

i. ii.

Trustworthiness (i.e. the belief that the firm is willing to deliver on its promises) Expertise (i.e. the belief that the firm is capable of delivering on its promises)

H4:

Brand Image has a positive effect on customer loyalty in mobile telecommunication service provider.

27

CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY

This study explores the effect of customer satisfaction toward customer loyalty in the mobile telecommunication service provider in Malaysia. In additional, this research will identify the factor that leads to why customer loyal or disloyal. Data collection on the effect of customer satisfaction towards customer loyalty is obtained by collecting the information through a questionnaire survey. A self structure questionnaire was developed to collect data from the customer, whereby it has served as primary data to answer the research questions and objectives.

The questionnaire consists of 2 sections, each of which contains questions pertaining different parts of the study. Convenience sampling questionnaire was distributed in public area, IPTA, IPTS and also government and private sector, we choose current users of Mobile Telecommunication Services provider in Malaysia that cover all four mobile operators in Malaysia which Maxis, Celcom, DiGI and U-Mobile. A convenience sampling method is used to collect data due to time, cost constraints and because of large population of mobile telecommunication services users in the country. Even though the sampling method adopted in this study has its limitations but it is assumed that the sample represents the whole population of mobile telecommunication services users in Malaysia. On October 2009, 170

28

questioners were distributed and collected; there are 157 valid questionnaire responses it about 92.3 percent. The survey was conducted mainly via face-to-face customer survey.

3.1

The Questionnaire

There are two major type of questions in the questionnaire. The first part of the questionnaire uses the Nominal Scale that obtains answers involving a range that can be calculated into percentage Cavana, Delahaye and Sekaran (2001). In this first part consists two section A and B. Section A asked the respondent General Characteristics such as the Service Provider Used, Type of Usage and Payment of Monthly bill. In section B Demographic Characteristic of the customers were asked, this include question related to Gender, Age, Race, Religion, and Highest Education Qualification Archived, Occupation and Monthly income.

In the second part of the questionnaire Likert Scales with rating of 1 to 5 were used. The respondents were requested to indicated the extent to which they agree or disagree to the questionnaire survey using the five point Likert Scales anchored by 1=strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree and 3= neutral (neither agree nor disagree) as a midpoint. This part consists of 43 questions. This second part the questionnaire measures the effect of Customer Satisfaction toward Customer Loyalty in Mobile Telecommunication Services Provider in Malaysia. This part is divided into four dimensions. The first dimensions Services Quality consists of 21 questions adopted from Johnson and Sirikit, (2002) which were divided into 5 sub

29

dimensions Tangible, Reliability, Responsiveness, Assurance, and Empathy. The second dimensions consists 3 questions which measure pricing and was adopted from MartinConsuegra, Molina and Esteban (2007). The third dimension measures Switching Cost and consist 5 questions and was adopted from Caruana, (2003). The fourth dimension, Brand Image, was adopted from Chaudhuri and Holbrook (2001) and has of 5 questions. The last part is the Customer Loyalty, dimension, contains 8 questions adopted from MartinConsuegra, Molina and Esteban (2007).

3.2

Data Collection and Samples

A total of 170 questionnaires were administered to respondent living in Penang who are telecommunication customers. A convenience sampling method was used. According to Hair et al,. (2007) a convenience sample are used because they enable the researcher to complete a large number of interviews quickly and cost effectively. A convenience sampling targets a particular group of people, consisting of young adults with wide ranging demographic characteristics.

30

3.3

Hypothesis Development

This study identifies the effect of customer satisfaction toward customer loyalty with the relevant attributes of service quality, price, switching cost and brand image. Each service dimension may have different effect on customer satisfaction and what makes them loyal to the services provider. In this relation, overall satisfaction refers to the consumers fulfilment response, the degree to which the level of fulfilment is pleasant or unpleasant Oliver (1993).

Mobile service is mainly used for a communication purpose and a consumers feeling of belonging and satisfied to a certain services provider play a major role for a customer to stay loyal. As we know satisfaction has been widely studied as a predictor of customer loyalty e.g. (Cronin, Brady and Hult (2000); Kim et al., 2004). Customer satisfaction is an important factor for a long-term relationship between a firm and a customer Anderson and Srinivasan, (2003). Consumers positive affect towards a service provider is likely to motivate the consumer to stay with the provider and then recommend the service to others Zeithaml, Berry and Parasuraman, (1996).

31

Hence, the hypothesis of this study is summarized as show in table 3.1 below:

Table 3.1: Summary of the Hypotheses Hypotheses H1 H2 H3 H4 Description Service quality has a positive relationship on customer loyalty in telecommunication service provider. Price has a positive relationship on customer loyalty in telecommunication service provider. Switching cost has a positive effect on customer loyalty in telecommunication service provider. Brand Image has positive effect on customer loyalty in telecommunication service provider. mobile mobile mobile mobile

3.4

Pilot Test

According to Cavana, Delahale and Sekaran, (2001) a questionnaire should be piloted with a reasonable sample of respondents who come from the target population or who closely resemble the target population. A total of 50 respondents are chosen for the pilot test randomly in Penang area in order to determine the reliability to measure the variable for this research before performing data collection in order to archive the objectives.

32

3.5

Reliability Coefficient

According to Cavana, Delahale and Sekaran, (2001) the reliability of a measure the extent to which the measure is without bias (error free). The reliability of a measure indicated the stability and consistency which the instrument measure the concept and helps to assess the goodness of a measure. Consistency reliability or Cronbachs alpha measures how well a set of items (or variables). Cronbachs alpha is computed in term of the average inter correlations among item measuring concept. The closer reliability coefficient gets to 1.0 the better.

Table 3.2: Pilot test reliability output Reliability Output 3 item 5 item 5 item 4 items 5 items 3 items 5 items 5 items 8 items

Type Tangible Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Empathy Pricing Switching Cost Brand Image Customer Loyalty

Cronbachs Alpha 0.566 0.713 0.660 0.622 0.636 0.604 0.634 0.601 0.788

In general reliability that less than 0.60 are considered to be poor, those in the 0.7 range are acceptable and those over 0.8 are good. The result of the reliability test is shown in the above Table 3.2.

33

CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS

This chapter will elaborate on the various statistic test and interpretation of the result of the analyses. This study evaluates the effect customers satisfaction toward customers loyalty.

4.1

Descriptive Statistic and Data Collection

4.1.1 Services Provider used by Respondents

Table 4.1: Providers of Malaysian Telecommunication Services

Service Providers Maxis Celcom DiGi U-Mobile Total

Frequency 42 67 37 11 157

Percent 26.8 42.7 23.6 7.0 100.0

Table 4.1 shows the General Characteristic of the Mobile Telecommunication Services Provider in Malaysia. It showed that 67 respondents (42.7%) were Celcom users. 42

34

respondents (26.8%) were Maxis users. 37 respondents (23.6%) were Digi customers. On the other hand the rest were using U-Mobile (11 respondents or 7%).

4.1.2 Types of Mobile Usage by Respondents

Table 4.2: Type of Mobile usage by Respondents

Type of Usage Business Personal Both Total

Frequency 16 118 23 157

Percent 10.2 75.2 14.6 100.0

The results of respondents Mobile usage is shown in Table 4.2 it shows that 10.2% of the respondent (16 respondents) used mobile telecommunication for business purposes while 75.2% of the respondent (118 respondents) usage it for personal purposes while 14.6% of the respondent (23 respondents) use it for both purposes.

35

4.1.3 Methods of Monthly Bill Payments by Respondents

Table 4.3: Methods of Monthly Bill Payments by Respondents

Payment Own By Others Both Total

Frequency 141 15 1 157

Percent 89.8 9.6 0.6 100.0

Table 4.3 shows the result on how respondents pay their monthly mobile bills. It shows that 89.8% of the respondent (141 respondents) makes their monthly payment by their own while 9.6% of the respondent (15 respondents) asked other party to make payments on their behalf. On the other hand only 0.6% of the respondent (1 respondent) makes the monthly payment by both payment channels.

36

4.2

Demographic Characteristic of the Respondents

4.2.1 Gender of Respondents Table 4.4: Gender of Respondents

Gander Male Female Total

Frequency 55 102 157

Percent 35.0 65.0 100.0

The result gender of respondents gender, is shown in Table 4.4. It shows that 35.0% of the respondents (55 respondents) are male while 65.0% of the respondents (102 respondents) are female.

4.2.2

Age of Respondents

Table 4.5 Age of Respondents

Age 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 Total

Frequency 70 53 27 6 1 157

Percent 44.59 33.76 17.20 3.82 0.63 100.0

37

Table 4.5 shows the result on the age of the respondents it shows that 44.59% of the respondent (70 respondents) is between 18-24 years old. 33.76% of the respondent (53 respondents) is between 25-34 years old. 17.20% of the respondent (27 respondents) is between 35-44 years old. 3.82% of the respondent (6 respondents) is between 45-54 years old. 0.63% of the respondent (1 respondent) is between 55-64 years old.

4.2.3

Ethnic Group of Respondents

Table 4.6: Ethnic Group of Respondents

Race Malay Chinese Indian Total

Frequency 85 43 29 157

Percent 54.1 27.4 18.5 100.0

The result in Table 4.6 shows on the ethnic group of the respondent. It shows that 54.1% of the respondents (85 respondents) are Malay. Follow by the Chinese respondent 27.4% (43 respondents). Lastly 18.5% of the respondents (29 respondents) are Indian.

38

4.2.4 Religion of the respondents

Table 4.7: Religion of the respondents

Religion Islam Buddhist Hindu Christian Total

Frequency 85 27 24 21 157

Percent 54.1 17.2 15.3 13.4 100.0

Table 4.7 shows the result on religion of the respondents shows that 54.1% of the respondents (85 respondents) is Islam. 17.2% of the respondent (27 respondents) is Buddhist. 15.3% of the respondent (24 respondents) is Hindu. 13.4% of the respondent (21 respondents) is Christian.

4.2.5 Highest Education Qualification Achieved of the Respondents

Table 4.8: Highest Education Qualification Achieved

Highest Education Qualification Achieved Secondary Diploma Degree Postgraduate Certificate Total

Frequency 72 29 40 15 1 157

Percent 45.9 18.5 25.5 9.6 0.6 100.0

39

The result of the highest education qualification archived of the respondents as shows in Table 4.8. It shows that 45.9% of the respondent (72 respondents) achieved Secondary education. 18.5% of the respondent (29 respondents) was Diploma holder. 25.5% of the respondent (40 respondents) holds a first Degree. 9.6% of the respondent (15 respondents) is postgraduate holder. 0.6% of the respondent (1 respondent) is Certificate holder.

4.2.6 Occupation of Respondents

Table 4.9: Occupation of Respondents

Occupation Government Private Self Employed Student Total

Frequency 36 49 23 49 157

Percent 22.9 31.2 14.6 31.2 100.0

Table 4.9 shows the result of occupation of the respondents. It shows that 22.9% of the respondent (36 respondents) is from Government Sector. 31.2% of the respondent (49 respondents) is from Private Sector. 14.6% of the respondent (23 respondents) is Self Employed. 31.2% of the respondent (49 respondents) is students.

40

4.2.7

Monthly Income of Respondents

Table 4.10: Monthly Incomes Respondents (RM)

Monthly Income(RM) < 1999 2000-3999 4000-5999 Total

Frequency 108 29 20 157

Percent 68.79 18.47 12.74 100.0

The result of monthly income of respondents is shown in Table 4.10. It shows that 68.79% of the respondents (108 respondents) have incomes below RM1999. On the other hand 18.47% of the respondents (29 respondents) have incomes between RM2000 to RM3999. 12.74% of the respondents (20 respondents) are in between RM4000 to RM5999.

4.2.8 Summary of Descriptive Statistics The summary of descriptive statistics from this research tabulated earlier can be summarized as follows:-

41

Table 4.11: Summary of General & Demographical Characteristics of Respondents


Model (N=157)

Item General Characteristic Service Provider Maxis Celcom DiGi U-Mobile Type of Usage Business Personal Both Payment of Monthly Bill Own By Others Both Demographic Characteristic Gender Male Female Age 18-24 25-24 35-44 45-54 55-64 Race Malay Chinese Indian Religion Islam Buddhist Hindu Christian Highest Education Secondary Diploma Degree Postgraduate Certificate Occupation Government Private Self-Employed Student Monthly Income <1999 2000-3999 4000-5999

Frequency

Percentage

42 67 37 11

26.8 42.7 23.6 7.0

16 118 23 141 15 1

10.2 75.2 14.6 89.8 9.6 0.6

55 102 70 53 27 6 1 85 43 29 85 27 24 21 72 29 40 15 1

35.0 65.0 44.59 33.76 17.20 3.82 0.63 54.1 27.4 18.5 54.1 17.2 15.3 13.4 45.9 18.5 25.5 9.6 0.6

36 49 23 49 108 29 20

22.9 31.2 14.6 31.2 68.79 18.47 12.74

42

4.3

Factor Analysis

The result that were obtained from 157 respondents have been thoroughly analysed and the output of the result are clearly explained in this section. Applying SPSS version 12 and the constructs validity was tested applying Bartlett's Test of Sphericity and The Kaiser-MayerOlkin Measure of sampling adequacy analyzing the strength of association among variables. The Kaiser--Mayer-Olkin measures of sampling adequacy (KMO) was first computed to determine the suitability of using factor analysis. It helps to predict whether data are suitable to perform factor analysis of not. KMO is used to assess which variables to drop from the model due to multicollinearity. The value of KMO varies from 0 to 1, and KMO overall should be .60 or higher to perform factor analysis. Result for the Bartlett's Test of Sphericity and the KMO reveal that both were highly significant and concluded that this variable was suitable for the factor analysis (Please refer the table 4.12 below). Factor analysis is a procedure aimed at finding out the underlying structure or dimension of a set of data. Data were factor using Principle Component Analysis (PCA).

4.3.1 Services quality

a. Tangible Table 4.12: KMO and Bartlett's Test - Tangible

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square Df Sig.

.642 58.721 3 .000

43

Based on recommendation from Kaiser, (1974), the variables that have value less than 0.50 were dropped from this study. The average according KMO value for the data set show in Table 4.12 is using two test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy and Bartlett's Test of Sphericity, whereby the test result for KMO = 0.642 the degree of common variance among the three variables in this tangible output is mediocre . Meanwhile the Test Results for Bartlett's Test of Sphericity = 2 = 58.721, df = 3, p < 0.001.

b. Reliability

Table 4.13: KMO and Bartlett's Test- Reliability Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square Df Sig. .785 218.26 8 10 .000

As shown in the above Table 4.13 the test result for KMO = 0.785 base on the degree of common variance among the five variables in this two test reliability output is middling. Meanwhile the test results for Bartlett's Test of Sphericity = 2 = 218.268, df = 10, p < 0.001.

44

c. Responsiveness

Table 4.14: KMO and Bartlett's Test- Responsiveness Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square Df Sig. .702 227.12 4 10 .000

As shown in the above Table 4.14 the test result for KMO = 0.702 base on the degree of common variance among the five variables in this responsiveness output is middling. Meanwhile the test results for Bartlett's Test of Sphericity = 2 = 227.124, df = 10, p < 0.001.

d. Assurance Table 4.15: KMO and Bartlett's Test - Assurance Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. ChiSquare Df Sig. .739 124.167 6 .000

As shown in the above Table 4.15 the test result for KMO = 0.739 base on the degree of common variance among the three variables in this assurance output is middling. Meanwhile the Test Results for Bartlett's Test of Sphericity = 2 = 124.167, df = 6, p < 0.001.

45

e. Empathy

Table 4.16: KMO and Bartlett's Test Empathy Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square Df Sig. .758 216.536 10 .000

As shown in the above Table 4.16 the test result for KMO = 0.758 base on the degree of common variance among the five variables in this empathy output is middling. Meanwhile the Test Results for Bartlett's Test of Sphericity = 2 = 216.536, df = 10, p < 0.001.

f. Price

Table 4.17: KMO and Bartlett's Test Price Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square Df Sig. .543 58.316 3 .000

As shown in the above Table 4.17 the test result for KMO = 0.543 base on the degree of common variance among the three variables in this price output is miserable. Meanwhile the Test Results for Bartlett's Test of Sphericity = 2 = 58.316, df = 3, p < 0.001.

46

g. Switching Cost

Table 4.18: KMO and Bartlett's Test- Switching Cost Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square Df Sig. .650 117.24 8 10 .000

As shown in the above Table 4.18 the test result for KMO = 0.650 base on the degree of common variance among the five variables in this switching cost output is mediocre. Meanwhile the test results for Bartlett's Test of Sphericity = 2 = 117.248, df = 10, p < 0.001.

h. Brand Image

Table 4.19: KMO and Bartlett's Test Brand Image Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square Df Sig. .782 248.21 5 10 .000

As shown in the above Table 4.19 the test result for KMO= 0.782 base on the degree of common variance among the five variables in this brand image output is middling. Meanwhile the test results for Bartlett's Test of Sphericity = 2 = 248.215, df = 10, p < 0.001. .

47

i. Customer Loyalty

Table 4.20: KMO and Bartlett's Test Customer Loyalty Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square Df Sig. .757 476.03 0 28 .000

As shown in the above Table 4.20 the test result for KMO = 0.757 bas on the degree of common variance among the eight variables in this customer loyalty output is middling. Meanwhile the test results for Bartlett's Test of Sphericity = 2 = 476.030, df = 28, p < 0.001.

4.3.2 Intercorelation of Items

Table 4.21: Reliability Statistics (Cronbachs Alpha) Reliability Output

Items

Cronbachs Alpha

48

Tangible Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Empathy Pricing Switching Cost Brand Image Customer Loyalty

3 item 5 item 5 item 4 items 5 items 3 items 5 items 5 items 8 items

0.638 0.791 0.780 0.731 0.764 0.549 0.642 0.810 0.742

According to (Cavana et al., 2001) Cronbachs Alpha is a reliability coefficient that indicates how well the item in a set is positively correlated to one another. This coefficient can hold a value a value of zero to 1.

The closer the reliability coefficient gets to 1.0, the better. In general, reliabilities of less than 0.60 are considered to be poor, those in the 0.70 range are acceptable, and those over 0.80 are good. The result in Table 4.21 indicates that the Cronbachs Alpha for the 43 items is between the ranges of 0.549 to 0.810, the consistency reliability of the measure used in this study can be consider as acceptable.

4.3.3 Descriptive Statistic

The Descriptive Statistic is shown in Table 4.22. It provides summary statistics for continuous, numeric variable, the mean, standard deviation and number of respondents (N). The output in this table is for all eight variables, as we note that N is 157. Looking at the

49

means or average is a measure of central tendency that offer a general picture of the data without unnecessarily inundating on with each of the observations in data set. The Standard deviation which another measure of dispersion for interval and ratio scaled data, offer an indication of the spread of a distribution or the variability in the data.

Table 4.22: Descriptive Statistics Variable Customer Loyalty SERVQUAL Tangible SERVQUAL Reliability SERVQUAL Responsiveness SERVQUAL Assurance SERVQUAL Empathy Price Switching Cost Brand Image Mean 3.1202 3.2548 3.1503 3.2025 3.2548 3.2191 3.2123 3.0981 3.1834 Std. Deviation .59122 .56631 .62127 .59441 .61529 .57190 .54453 .52556 .59741 N 157 157 157 157 157 157 157 157 157

4.3.4 Multiple Regressions

Table 4.23: ANOVA

50

ANOVA Model 1 Sum of Squares 33.071 21.457 54.528 df 8 148 156 Mean Square 4.134 .145 F 28.513 Sig. .000a

Regression Residual Total

a. Predictors: (Constant), BI, SQT, P, SC, SQR, SQA, SQE, SQRE b. Dependent Variable: CL

The ANOVA test result is shown in Table 4.23. It shows that F = 28.51 is significant at 0.001 level. In the column df (degree of freedom) in the table the first number represent the number of independent variable (8), the second number (148) is the total number of complete responses for all the variable in equation (N) minus the number independent variable (K) minus 1 (N-K -1) ((157-8-1) = 148). The F statistic produce (F = 28.513) is significant at the .001 level.

Therefore, we can conclude that with 60.6 percent of the variance (R2) in customers loyalty were significant. This indicated that the combination of the predictors significantly predict Customer Loyalty.

Table 4.24 illustrates the Coefficients, helps us to see which is among the eight independent variable is the most important in explaining the variance in Customer Loyalty. If we look at the column Beta under Standardised Coefficients, we see that the highest number in beta is 0.289 for Brand Image, which is significant at the 0.001 level.

Table 4.24: Coefficients

51

Coefficients Unstandardized Coefficients B Std. Error .133 .231 -.013 .070 .105 .080 .263 .089 .062 .084 .091 .093 .020 .073 .125 .078 .286 .079 Standardized Coefficients Beta -.013 .110 .265 .065 .088 .018 .111 .289 Collinearity Statistics Tolerance VIF .600 .380 .331 .346 .331 .588 .558 .422 1.668 2.631 3.020 2.890 3.017 1.701 1.793 2.372

Model 1

(Constant) SQT SQR SQRE SQA SQE P SC BI

t .575 -.193 1.316 2.953 .742 .983 .273 1.610 3.637

Sig. .566 .847 .190 .004 .459 .327 .785 .109 .000

a. Dependent Variable: CL

Table 4.25: Model Summary Model Summary


Model 1 Adjusted Std. Error of R R Square R Square the Estimate .779a .606 .585 .38076 DurbinWatson 1.980

a. Predictors: (Constant), BI, SQT, P, SC, SQR, SQA, SQE, SQRE b. Dependent Variable: CL

Table 4.25 illustrates the model summary by using all the predictors simultaneously and Customer Loyalty as the dependent variable. As we can see multiple correlation coefficient (R) is 0.78 (R2 = .606) and the adjusted R2 is .59, meaning that 59% of the variance in Customer Loyalty can be predicted from Brand Image, SERVQUAL Tangible, Price, Switching Cost, SERVQUAL Reliability, SERVQUAL Assurance, SERVQUAL Empathy, SERVQUAL Responsiveness combined. Note that the adjusted R2 is lower than the unadjusted R2. In this part it related to the number of variable in the equation. The adjustment

52

R2 is also affected by the magnitude of effect and the sample size if the figure are adjusted it can contribute more toward Customer Loyalty. If we run through the above coefficients in Table 4.25 only SERVQUAL Responsiveness and Brand Image are significant but the other five variables will always add a little to the predictions of Customer Loyalty. The DurbinWatson produce the Durbin-Watson test statistic, which test for correlation between errors, this option is important for testing whether the assumption of independent errors is tenable. The test statistic can vary between 0 and 4 with value of 2 meaning that the residuals are uncorrelated. A value greater than 2 indicated a negative correlation between adjacent residuals whereas a value below 2 indicates a positive correlation. Table 4.25 Model Summary show the result on Durbin-Watson=1.980 it indicate to have a positive correlation. The size of the Durbin-Watson statistic depends upon the number of predictors in the model, and the number of observations.

Table 4.26: Summary of Regression Analysis

Variable Constant SERVQUAL Tangible

Coefficients .133 -.013

SE .231 .070

T value .575 -.193

Sign .566 .847

VIF

1.668

53

SERVQUAL Reliability SERVQUAL Responsiveness SERVQUAL Assurance SERVQUAL Empathy Price Switching Cost Brand Image F statistic R Square Adjusted. R Square Durbin-Watson DV is Customer Loyalty (CL)

.105 .263 .062 .091 .020 .125 .286 28.51 60.6% 58.5% 1.98

.080 .089 .084 .093 .073 .078 .079 F sign

1.316 2.953 .742 .983 .273 1.610 3.637 0.00

.190 .004 .459 .327 .785 .109 .000

2.631 3.020 2.890 3.017 1.701 1.793 2.372

4.3.5 Hypothesis Testing

The below data were collected from the extraction of the four independent variables that have been tested though regression analysis, as per results for customer loyalty showed in Table 4.23 & 4.25 indicated that 60.6 percent of the variance in customer loyalty can be explained through the four independent variables with the significant F value = 28.513 and it is significant p<.000 (Table 4.23 & 4.25).

The hypotheses of this study related to an individual relationship from the four variables on customer satisfaction toward customer loyalty. The test of these hypotheses leads to an accomplishment to the study objectives. The strength of the output able to influence each and every independent variables relationship on customer satisfaction toward customer loyalty and this have been addressed as the results were shown in (Table 4.26).

54

Hypotheses 1a: There is no significant relationship between Service Quality Tangible and Customer Loyalty.

The result showed in Table 4.26 indicates that tangible has no significant relationship with Customer Loyalty p > 0.847. Therefore we reject H1a.

Hypotheses 1b: There is no significant relationship between Service Quality Reliability and Customer Loyalty.

The result showed in Table 4.26 indicates that Reliability has no significant relationship with Customer Loyalty p > 0.190. Therefore we reject H1b.

Hypotheses 1c: There is significant relationship between Service Quality Responsiveness and Customer Loyalty.

The result showed in Table 4.26 indicates that the combination of the variable is significant p < 0.004. It shows that Responsiveness emerge the important factor that make customer satisfied with the service. Good respond from the customer service staff able to make customer to be loyal to the service provider. Therefore base on this positive coefficient of the service quality, this study conclude that there is a significant positive effect of Service Quality Responsiveness and Customer Loyalty. Therefore we accept H1c.

Hypotheses 1d: There is no significant relationship between Service Quality Assurance and Customer Loyalty.

55

The result showed in Table 4.26 indicates that Assurance has no significant relationship with Customer Loyalty p > 0.459. Therefore we reject H1d.

Hypotheses 1e: There is no significant relationship between Service Quality Empathy and Customer Loyalty.

The result showed in Table 4.26 indicates that Empathy has no significant relationship with Customer Loyalty p > 0.327. Therefore we reject H1e.

Hypotheses 2: There is no significant relationship between Price and Customer Loyalty.

The result showed in Table 4.26 indicates that Price has no significant relationship with Customer Loyalty p > 0.785. Therefore we reject H2.

Hypotheses 3: There is no significant relationship between Switching Cost and Customer Loyalty.

The result showed in Table 4.26 indicates that Switching Cost has no significant relationship with Customer Loyalty p > 0.109. Therefore we reject H3.

56

Hypotheses 4: There is significant relationship between Brand Image and Customer Loyalty.

The result showed in Table 4.26 indicates that Brand Image is significant to Customer Loyalty p < 0.001. It shows that Band Image emerge the important factor that make customer satisfied. Therefore we accept H1c.

The summary of the Hypothesis Testing is shown in Table 4.27.

Table 4.27: Results of Hypothesis Testing Hypothesis H1a H1b H1c H1d H1e H2 H3 H4 Accept/Reject Reject Reject Accept Reject Reject Reject Reject Accept

CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION, MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS, LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSION

57

5.1

Discussion

The research found that most of the respondent are female with 55 percent and 45 percent are male respondents. The target age group are from 18 to 64 years old, the most of highest respondents is at the age of 18 till 24 years old with 44.59 percent. Majority of the respondents are Malay with 54.1 percent follow by Chinese 27.4 percent and Indian 18.5 percent. In term of religion Islam is the highest with 54.1 percent follows by the others Buddhist 17.2 percent, Hindu 15.3 percent and Christian 13.4 percent. The highest education level in this study are from the secondary level with 45.9 percent follow by Diploma level with 18.5 percent, Degree level 25.5 percent, Postgraduate level 9.6 percent and Certificate level at 0.6 percent. Majority of the respondents are student (31.2 percent) while from private sector with (31.2 percent) followed by the government sector with (22.9 percent).The rest are self employed (14.6 percent). The average monthly incomes of the respondents are from 0 to 5999 with the highest income is below RM2000 with (68.79 percent).

Base on the Summary Regressions Result Table 4.26 indicate that there are only two variables that are significant to Customer Loyalty that is Service Quality Responsiveness and Brand Image, this significant level indicate the combination of the variable significant predict the independent variable (p < .001). The ANOVA result showed that F = 28.51 is significant at 0.001 level. The significant level indicate that the combination of these variable significant (p < .001) predict the dependent variable. Model summary in Table 4.25 indicate that 60.6

58

percent of the variance (R2) in customers loyalty were significant. This indicated that the combination of the predictors significantly predict to Customer Loyalty.

The result shows us that the factor that contributing the effect of customer satisfaction and how loyal the customer to the telecommunication service provider is Service Quality Responsiveness and Brand Image. Both the demographic factor (age and occupation) has an effect on loyalty. The highest respondents are from the age of 18 till 24 years old with 44.59 percent. Other factors that contribute to loyalty is the Brand Image with the increase of expectation from the young adult, and what make them loyal to service provider. We can see from the current trend that youngster is loyal to certain brand image e.g Maxis, Celcom, DiGi, or U-Mobile. The brand image has become a determination for them to be loyal. According to Brakus, (2009) brands that consumer are highly involved with are not necessarily brand that evoke the strongest experiences. Price war doesnt leads to customer loyalty even though the service provider provides a better package and reasonable price. Similarly, switching cost does not determine customer loyalty due to the influence by the advertisement made by the service provider. According to Morris and Venkatesh, (2000) (as in Kumar and Lim, 2008) age is widely used as a demographic variable to characterize adoption of technologies between two or more consumer group. From this study the age group from 18-20 years old used prepaid as compared to postpaid services as long the service from the provider is good. Young adults are more focused on brand image which indicated status. They are willing to be loyal to the same service provider. Oliver, Rust and Varki (1997) (as in Brakus et al., (2009) In Brand attachment, customer delight is characterized by arousal and positive effect; it can be

59

considered the affective component of satisfaction. Price war will lead to customer switching to other provider as long it will benefit them even for a shorter period of time. With the launch of mobile number portability services recently it makes it easy for the customers to retain their mobile number although they are using other services provider.

In terms of Switching Cost customers especially young customers do not care less on the switching cost as long as they can swap services provider. This factor in fact have been increasing, this is due to the younger generation has no commitment; they can choose any service provider that they felt suit their needs. For professionals, corporate and young adults they will remain with the same service provider, due to the corporate package offered are better and able to make them loyal to the provider. In addition commitment fees that they need to pay is high if they switch providers.

5.2

Managerial Implications

Managers must be aware of how rapidly todays world is changing in terms of technology. Service providers should not only depend on the marketing department to deliver good strategies, but they have to maximise the contributions and commitments from each and everyone in the organization to seek customer reaction and suggestions in designing a new product and ways to offer more value to the customer. Similarly service providers must practice doing market segmentation strongly to benefit the customer seek (price, quality), their demographic background (teenagers, young adult, senior citizen or professional), usage level (heavy, medium, light user or non-user), lifestyle and others.

60

Managers also need to find new ways to improve their service quality by listening more to their customer and simultaneously gather more information for them to improve their services. This information is as follows:i. ii. iii. iv. v. 5.3 Gap between consumer expectation and management perception Gap between management perception and service-quality specifications Gap between service-quality specifications and service delivery Gap between service delivery and external communications Gap between perceived service and expected service Limitations of the study

The study has its own limitation. Firstly, the research is only limited in Penang area. Therefore the finding of the study is unable to be generalized for the whole population of mobile phone users in Malaysia. Secondly, the sample size is considered small. Future research should employ lager sample size from diverse locations. Thirdly, time constraint led to get narrower outcomes. 5.3 Conclusion

Malaysian telecommunication services is one of Malaysia fast growing sector and have be becoming the most highly developed sector. Accusations of poor quality network services have been a major reason why customers are lost among the providers. With the high levels of advertising spent by operators to gain market share and the battle to get new subscribers, The rapid growth of the pre-paid mobile segment has also increase it competition in the

61

market. This services it not only sold by the service provider or their authorize dealers but are now sold by variety of outlets including petrol stations, banks and retailers. As we known the pre-paid market is driven by convenience and has placed greater logistical constraints on the operators.

The changing landscape of the Malaysian mobile market has witnessed the restructuring of the main players in that market. The government has been a strong supporter in rationalisation on the overcrowded market and with the significant merger between Telekom and Celcom took place, it creating a lot of interest. At the same time, Maxis acquired Time dotComs mobile unit. These changes resulted in the number of operators being effectively reduced from five to three. By December 2008 Maxis Communications had a mobile subscriber base of 11.1 million, with Celcom in second place on 8.8 million, while DiGi was number three with 7.1 million subscribers. New operator, with its exclusively 3G offering, was trailing the field with just 200,000 subscribers at the time.

As competition is increasing among the companies especially in the mobile market today and this market has become extremely competitive and the service provider are moving aggressively to attract customer by offering attractive promotion and service therefore the service provider should take the necessary action for them to know the effect what make customer satisfied in able to retain customer loyalty in the telecommunication service, Finally, this research will encourage further study and useful guidelines for these type of researches.

62

REFERENCES

Aaker, Jennifer, (1997). Dimensions of Brand Personality. Journal of Marketing Research,

Anderson R E. and Srinivasan S.S (2003). E-Satisfaction and E-Loyalty: A Contingency Framework. Journal of Psychology & Marketing, Vol.20(2): 123-138.

63

Anderson, E. W. & Sullivan, M. W. (1993). The Antecedents and Consequences of Customer Satisfaction for Firms. Marketing Science, 12(2): 125-143.

Anderson, E. W., Fornell, C., & Lehmann, D. R. (1994). Customer Satisfaction, Market Share, and Profitability: Findings from Sweden. Journal of Marketing, 58(3): 53-66. Anderson, E.W. & Fornell, C. (1994). A framework for comparing customer satisfaction across individuals and product categories. Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 12, 267 86. Anderson, E.W. (1996), "Customer satisfaction and prince tolerance", Marketing Letters, Vol. 7 No.3, pp.265-74.

Anderson, E.W., Fornell, C., Lehmann, D.R. (1994), "Customer satisfaction, market share, and profitability: findings from Sweden", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58 No.July,pp.53-66. Anderson, E.W., Sullivan, M.W. (1993), "The antecedents and consequences of consumer satisfaction for firms", Marketing Science, Vol. 12 No.Spring, pp.125-43. Anderson, J.C. & Narus, J.A. (1990). A model of distributer firm and manufacturer firm working partnerships. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, January, 42-58. Anderson, J.C., Gerbing, D.W. (1988), "Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach", Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 103 No.3, pp.411-23. Andreasen, A.R. (1982). Consumer satisfaction in loose monopolies: the case of medical care. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, Vol. 2, 122-35. Andreassen, T. W. & Lindestad, B. (1998). Customer loyalty and complex services: the impact of corporate image on quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty for customers with varying degrees of service expertise. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 9(1): 7-23. Aydin S. & Ozer G.(2004). The analysis of antecedents of customer loyalty in the Turkish mobile telecommunication market. European Journal of Marketing Vol.39 No. 7/8 2005 pp 910-925. Aydin S. & Ozer G.(2005). How switching cost affect subscriber loyalty in Turkish mobile phone market: An exploratory study. Journal of Targeting Measurement and Analysis for Marketing Vol 14,2 141-155.

64

Bell S.J, Auh S, Smalley K.,(2005). Customer Relationship Dynamics Services Quality and Services Quality and Customer Loyalty in the Context of Varying Levels of Customer Expertise and Switching Cost. Journal of The Academy of Marketing Science Vol.33, No.2 pp 169-183. Bitner, M. J., & Zeithaml, V. A. (2003). Service marketing, third edition. Asian edition McGraw Hill.Blery et al (2009) Service quality and customer retention in mobile telephony Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing Vol 17, 1, 27-37. Brankus J.J Schmitt B.H., Zarantonllo L.(2009). Brand Experience: What is it? How is it measured? Does it Affect Loyalty?. American Marketing Association Journal of Marketing Vol 73 (May 2009), 52-68

Boulding, W., Kalra, A., Staelin, R. and Zeithaml, V.A. (1993). A dynamic process modelof service quality: from expectations to behavioral intentions. Journal of Marketing Research,30, February, 7-27.

Burnham, T. A., Frels, J. K. and Mahajan, V. (2003) Consumer switching costs: A typology, antecedents, and consequences, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 109126.

Carman, J.M. (1990). Consumer perceptions of service quality: an assessment of the SERVQUAL dimensions. Journal of Retailing, Vol. 66 (1), 33-55. Caruana, A. (2002).Service Loyalty the effect of services quality and the mediating role of customer satisfaction. European Journal of Marketing Vol 36 No 7/8, 2002 pp 811 Caruana, A. (2003). The Impact of switching cost on customer loyalty: A study among corporate customers of mobile telephony. Journal of Targeting Measurement and Analysis for Marketing Vol 12, 3, 256-268

Cavana, R. Y., Delahaye, B.D & Sekaran, U (2001). Applied business research: qualitative and quantitative method. Melbourne: John Wiley & Sons.

Chadha S.K & Kapoor D.,(2009) Effect of Switching Cost, Services Quality and CustomerSatisfaction on Customer Loyalty of Cellular Services Providers in Indian

65

Market.The Icfai University Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. VIII, No. 1 (2009).

Chaudhuri A. & Holbrook M.B. (2001) The Chain of Effect from Brand Trust and Brand Affect to Brand Performance: The Role of Band Loyalty. Journal Of Marketing Vol. 65 (April 2001),81-93.

Colgate, M., Stewart, K., & Kinsella, R. (1996). Customer defection: a study of the student market in Ireland. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 14(3): 23-29.

Cronin, J. J. & Taylor, S. A. (1992). Measuring Service Quality - a Reexamination and Extension. Journal of Marketing, 56(3): 55-68.

Cronin, J. Jr, Brady, M.K., Hult, G.T.M. (2000), "Assessing the effects of quality, value, and customer satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environments", Journal of Retailing, Vol. 76 No.2, pp.193-218.

Cronin, J.Joseph, Jr and Steven A. Taylor (1992). Measuring Service Quality: A Reexamination and Extension. Journal of Marketing, 56,55-68

Dick, A.S. and Basu, K. (1994). Customer loyalty: toward an integrated conceptual framework. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 22, 99-113.

Duffy, D. L. (2003). Internal and external factors which affect customers loyalty, Journalof Consumer Marketing, 20, 5, 480-485.

Esch et al (2006). Are brand forever? How brand knowledge and relationship affect current and future purchases. Journal of Product & Band Management 15/2 98-105.

Fe, I., & Ikova, C. (2004). An index method for measuring of customer satisfaction. The TQM Magazine, 16 (1), 57-66.

66

Feick, L., Lee, J. and Lee, J. (2001), The impact of switching costs on the customer satisfaction-loyalty link: mobile phone service in France, Journal of Services Marketing,Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 35-48. Gronroos, C. 1984. A Service Quality Model and its Marketing Implications. European Journal of Marketing, 18(4): pp. 36-44. Gronroos, C. 1985. Internal marketing-theory and practice. In T. Bloch & G. Upah & V. Zeithaml (Eds.), Services Marketing in a Changing Environment: 41-47. Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association. Gronroos, C. 1988. Service Quality: The Six Criteria Of Good Perceived Service Quality. Review of Business, 9(3): pp. 10-13. Hair J. F., (2007) Research methods for business. England: John Wiley & Sons. Inc. Huan Z.,Xu X & Li H.(2009) The Impact of Services Quality, Satisfaction, Value and Industry. IEEE Explore Hung Tseng, Foi, Bonilla Brand Influence On The Relationship Between Customer Perceptions Of Service Quality And Satisfaction In Mobile Telecomunications.

Jiang P. & LeBow B.R. (2005). Customer intention to return online: price perception attribute-level performance, and satisfaction unfolding over time. European Journal of Marketing. Vol 39 No1 / 2 (2005) pp 150-174.

Johnson W. C., & Sirikit A.(2002) Services quality in the Thai telecommunication industry: tool for achieving a sustainable competitive advantage. Management Decision 40/7 (2002).693-701.

Ken Zita Malaysia Telecom Brief http://www.ndaventures.com/Malaysia_Telecom_Brief.pdf

Kim M.K, Park M.C & Jeong D.H (2004). The effect of customer satisfaction and switching barrier on customer loyalty in Korean mobile telecommunication services. Elsevier Ltd

Kim, H. S. & Yoon, C. H. (2004). Determinants of subscriber churn and customer loyalty in the Korean mobile telephony market. Telecommunications Policy, 28(9-10): 751-765.

67

Kim, M. K., Park, M. C., & Jeong, D. H. (2004). The Effects of Customer Satisfaction and Switching Barrier on Customer Loyalty in Korean Mobile Telecommunication Services. Telecommunication Policy, 28: pp. 145-159.

Klemperer, P. (1987) Markets with consumer switching costs, The Quarterly Journal of Economics,Vol. 102, pp. 375394.

Kollmann T. (2000) The price/acceptance function: perspectives of pricing policy in European Telecommunication Markets. European Journal of Innovation Management Volume 3 Number -1-2000-pp-7-14.

Kotler P. & Amstrong G. (2005) Tenth Edition Principle of Marketing, Pearson Education

Kotler P. & Keller. (2009) Thirteen Edition Management Marketing, Pearson Education

Kumar A. & Lim H. (2008) Age difference in mobile services perception comparison of Generation Y and baby boomers. Journal of service Marketing Vol 22 No 7-2008-68 577. Kuo-Hung Tseng Brand influence on the relationship between customer perceptions of service quality and satisfaction in Mobile Telecommunication. Lee J., Lee J., & Feick L (2001). The impact of switching costs on customer satisfaction loyalty link: mobile phone services in France. Journal of Service Marketing vol. 15 No.1 2001.pp 35-48 .

Leech N. L, Barrett K.C., Morgan G.A, (2001) SPSS For Intermediate Statistics Use and Interpretation 2nd Edition Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.

Lim H., Widdow R. Park J.(2006). M-Loyalty: winning strategies for mobile carriers. Journal of Consumer Marketing 23/4 208-218

68

Martin-Consuegra D., Molina A., Esteban A. (2007). An Integrated Model of Price, satisfaction and loyalty: an empirical analysis in the service sector. Journal of Product & Brand Management 16/7 (2007) 459-468 Emerald

Mittal B. & Lassar M.W (1988).Why do Customer Switch? The dynamic of satisfactions versus loyalty. Journal of Services marketing Vol. 12 No3, 1988. mobile Telecommunication market.European Journal of Marketing Vol 39,7/8 pp 910-925. Mohamad N. (2004). Productivity Gowth In the Malaysian Mobile Telecommunication Industry IIUM Journal of Economics and Management 12, no.2 (2004). Munnukka J. (2005) Dynamics of price sensitivity among mobile service customers. Journal of Product & Brand Management 14/1 (2005) 65-73. of retail relationships. Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 17 No 5 2003, pp 495-513. Oliva, T.A., Oliver, R.L. and MacMillan, I.C. (1992). A catastrophe model for developing service satisfaction strategies, Journal of Marketing, 56, 83-95. Oliver, R. L. & Linda, G. (1981). Effect of Satisfaction and Its Antecedents on Consumer Preference and Intention. In K. B. Monroe (Ed.), In Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 8: 88-93. Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research.

Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(000004 - November): 460-469.Oliver, R. L. (1993). A conceptual model of service quality and service satisfaction: compatible goals, different concepts. Advances in Services Marketing and Management, 2: 65-85.

Oliver, R.L. (1980), "A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions", Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 17 No.4, pp.460-9.

Oliver, R.L. (1999). Whence consumer loyalty?. Journal of Markting, 63, pp.33-44

Oliver, R.L., DeSarbo, W.S. (1988), "Response determinants in satisfaction judgments", Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 14 pp.495-507.

69

Oliver, R.L., Swan, J.E. (1989), "Consumer perceptions of interpersonal equity and satisfaction in transactions: a field survey approach", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 53 No.2, pp.21-35.

Olsen, S. O. (2002). Comparative Evaluation and the Relationship Between Quality, Satisfaction, and Repurchase Loyalty. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30(3): 240.

Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1991a). Perceived service quality as a customer-based performance measure: an empirical examination of organizational barriers using an extended service quality model. Human Resource Management, 30(3): 335-364.

Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1991b). Refinement and Reassessment of the Servqual Scale. Journal of Retailing, 67(4): 420-450.

Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1991c). Understanding Customer Expectations of Service. Sloan Management Review, 32(3): pp. 39-48.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A Conceptual-Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future-Research. Journal of Marketing, 49(4): 41 50. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). Servqual - a Multiple-Item Scale for Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Service Quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1): 12-40.Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1993). Research note: more on improving service quality measurement. Journal of Retailing, 69(1): pp. 140-147.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1991), ``Refinement and reassessment of the SERVQUAL scale'', Journal of Retailing, Vol. 67, Winter, pp. 420-50. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1994). Reassessment of Expectations as a Comparison Standard in Measuring Service Quality - Implications for Further Research. Journal of Marketing, 58(1): 111-124.

70

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1994b). Alternative Scales for Measuring Service Quality - a Comparative-Assessment Based on Psychometric and DiagnosticCriteria. Journal of Retailing, 70(3): 201-230.

Parvez (2005). A Relationship Study on Service Quality, Switching Cost, Trust, Customer Satisfaction and Customer Loyalty in the context of Grameephone. Independent University, Bangladesh. Seth A.,Momaya K., & Gupta H.M.,(2005). An Exploratory Investigation of Customer Loyalty and Retention in Cellular Mobile Communication. Journal of Services Research, Special Issues, (December, 2005).

Shin D.H & Kim W.Y (2007). Mobile number portability on customer switching behaviour: in case of Korean Mobile market. Emerald Group Publishing Limited Vol 9 No 4 2007 Shy, O. (2002), A quick and easy method for estimating switching costs, International Journal of Industrial Organization, Vol. 20, pp. 71-87. Srinivasan S. S., Anderson R., & Ponnavolu K. (2002) Customer Loyalty in e-commerce: an exploration of its antecedents and consequences .Journal of Retailing 78 (2002) 41-50

Service

& Support Professionals Association www.thesspa/August07/article5.asp(1of8).

News

(SSPA)

August

2007

Taylor, S. A. & Baker, T. L. (1994). An Assessment of the Relationship Between Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction in the Formation of Consumers' Purchase Intentions. Journal of Retailing, 70(2): pp. 163-178.

Taylor, S. A. & Cronin Jr, J. J. (1994). Modeling patient satisfaction and service quality. Journal of Health Care Marketing, 14(1): 34-44.

The Malaysian Telecommunication Industry http://www.maxis.com.my/personal/about_us/investor/prospectus/prospectus4.pdf

71

Trebing, Harry M., (2001) "Emerging Market Structures and Options for Regulatory Reform inPublic Utility Industries", Telecom Reform: Principles, Policies and Regulatory Practices, Editor William H. Melody, Schultz DocuCenter, Denmark, 2001.

Wal, R. W. E., Van der, Pampallis, A. and Bond, C.,(2002) "Service Quality in a Cellular Telecommunications Company: A South African Experience", Managing Service Quality, Vol. 12 (5), 2002, 323-335.

Wong A. & Sohal A.,(2003) Services Quality and Customer Loyalty perspective on two level of retail relationships. Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 17 No 5. 2003, pp. 495 513.

Xia L.,Monroe B.K. & Cox L. J.,(2004). The price is unfair! A conceptual Framework of Price Fairness Perception. Journal of Marketing Vol.68 (October 2004),1-15.

Zeithaml, V. A. and Bitner, M. J., Services Marketing: Integrating Customer Focus Across the Firm, 2nd Edition, McGraw Hill, New York, NY, 2000.

Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1988). Communication and Control Processes in the Delivery of Service Quality. Journal of Marketing, 52(April): pp. 35 48.

Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996). The Behavioural Consequences of Service Quality. Journal of Marketing, 60(2): pp. 31-46.

Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A., & Berry, L. L. (1990). Delivering quality service: Balancing customer perceptions and expectations. New York, NY: The Free Press.

Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A., & Berry, L. L. (1993). The Nature and Determinants of Customer Expectations of Service. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 21(No. 1): pp. 1-12.

72

Zeithaml, V.A., "Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and Value: A Means-End Model and Synthesis of Evidence," Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52 (July), 1988, 2-22.

Zeithaml, V.A., "Service Quality, Probability and the Economic Worth of Custormers: What We Know, and What We Need to Learn", Journal of the Academy Marketing Science, Vol. 28 (1), 2000, 67-85.

73

APPENDIX A

UNIVERSITI UTARA MALAYSIA COLLEGE OF BUSINESS Research Questionnaire


74

Dear Sir/Madam/Ms:

My name is Sarina Binti Ismail and a student of University Utara Malaysia. As part of the course requirement for an MBA from University Utara Malaysia (UUM), I am conducting a study to investigate the effect of customer satisfaction toward customers loyalty in Mobile Telecommunication Services in Malaysia. The objective of this study is to measure the effect of customer satisfaction towards customer loyalty, customer loyalty on customer experience e.g. product, service, support) and to identified reason why customer are loyal or disloyal.

You participation on this evaluation is voluntary. All responses to this survey are anonymous; there is no way for your responses to be linked to you. Responses on individual surveys are confidential; only excellent opportunity for you to express your opinions about customer loyalty in Mobile Telecommunication Services.

I know that your time is valuable and hope that you will take the time (an estimated 15-20 minutes) to complete the survey. Please note completion of the survey implies consent to participate. Thank you very much for you time and assistance.

Regards Sarina Binti Ismail College of Business University Utara Malaysia

Instruction:
Please answer Part 1 and 2. Please tick () at the place that matches your opinion.

Part 1 A. General Characteristic

1.

Service provider use (you may tick more than one company)

75

a) Maxis 2. Type of Usage a) Business 3.

b) Celcom

c) DIGI

d) U-Mobile

e) Others ___________

b) Personal

c) Both

Payment of monthly bill a) Own b) By other parties/party ___________________

B. Demographic Characteristic

4.

Gender a) Male b) Female

5. 6.

Age _________________ years old Ethnic a) Malay b) Chinese c) Indian

7.

Religion a) Islam b) Buddhist c) Hindu d) Christian

e) Others _______________ (please specify) 8. Highest education qualification archived a) Primary 9. Occupation a) Government Sector e) Student 8 b) Private Sector f) Others ____________ c) Self employed b) Secondary c) Diploma e) Degree f) Others ___________

Monthly income RM ___________/ month

Part 2 Please circle the score provided that matches your opinion.
Strongly Disagree (1) Disagree (2) Natural (3) Agree (4) Strongly Agree (5)

1. The service provider has up-to-date equipment and outlook 2. The service providers physical facilities are visually appealing 3. The service providers customer services staff are well dress and appear neat

1 1 1

2 2 2

3 3 3

4 4 4

5 5 5

76

4. When a services provider promises to do something by certain time, it does do 5. When I have problem, a service provider show sincere interest in solving it 6. The service provider is dependable 7. The service provider provide its services at the time it promises to do so

1 1

2 2

3 3

4 4

5 5

8. The service provider always perform the service right at the first time 1 9. The service provider tell me exactly when services will be performed 10. Customer service staff gave me prompt services 11. Customer service are always courteous with customers 12. Customer service staffs are always ready to respond to customer requests promptly 13. Customer service staff have knowledge to answer customer question 14. I can trust the providers customer service staff 15. I feel save in the transaction with the service provider 16. Customer services staff are polite 17. Customer services staff have adequate support from the service provider to do their job well 18. The service provider gave customer individual attention 19. The service provider has customers best interest at heart 20. Customer service staffs understand customer specific needs 21. Customer service staffs gave their personal interest. 22. The service provider has operating hours and location convenient to all its customers 23. The service provider offers the best possible plan to meet my needs 1 24. The service provider offers overall superior best pricing plan compare 1 with other providers. 25. The price charge by the service provider is reasonable 26. The price charges by other services provider are reasonably priced 27. The service provider offer value for money 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5 5 5

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

2 2

3 3

4 4

5 5

2 2 2

3 3 3

4 4 4

5 5 5

77

28. The service provider provide good services for the price 29. The service provider would be economical 30. The service provider would make me want to use it 31. By using my mobile services that I am using now would make me feel good 32. By using this service provider would gave me pleasure 33. By using my mobile services provider would help me to feel acceptable by others

1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5 5 5 5

34. By using my mobile services provider would make a good impression 1 on other people 35. By using my mobile services provider would gave me social approved 1 36. As long as the present services continues, I doubt that I would switch 1 to other mobile services provider 37. I try to use this services provider whenever I need to have mobile services 38. When I need mobile services, this provider is my first choice 39. I like using mobile services from this provider 1

2 2

3 3

4 4

5 5

1 1

2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5 5

40. I believe that this is my favorite services provider for mobile services 1 41. I say positive things about this mobile service provider to others people 42. I would recommend this mobile service provider to those who seek my advice about such matter 43. I would encourage friend and relative to use this mobile service provider 1 1

Thank you for your cooperation and participation all Information provided will be confidential.

78

79

APPENDIX B

PILOT TEST OUTPUT


REALIABILITY
TANGIBLE

Warnings The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

80

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excludeda Total 50 0 50 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.


Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .569
Item Statistics SQT1 SQT2 SQT3 Mean 2.9800 3.0400 3.0000 Std. Deviation .58867 .57000 .63888 N 50 50 50

Cronbach's Alpha .566

N of Items 3

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix SQT1 SQT2 SQT3 SQT1 1.000 .307 .163 SQT2 .307 1.000 .448 SQT3 .163 .448 1.000

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.


Inter-Item Covariance Matrix SQT1 SQT2 SQT3 SQT1 .347 .103 .061 SQT2 .103 .325 .163 SQT3 .061 .163 .408

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

RELIABILITY

Warnings The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

81

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excludeda Total 50 0 50 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .711
Item Statistics SQR1 SQR2 SQR3 SQR4 SQR5 Mean 2.9800 2.9600 2.6800 2.9200 2.8600 Std. Deviation .62237 .69869 .68333 .69517 .60643 N 50 50 50 50 50

Cronbach's Alpha .713

N of Items 5

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix SQR1 SQR2 SQR3 SQR4 SQR5 SQR1 1.000 .608 .417 .421 .209 SQR2 .608 1.000 .357 .203 -.013 SQR3 .417 .357 1.000 .504 .136 SQR4 .421 .203 .504 1.000 .457 SQR5 .209 -.013 .136 .457 1.000

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Inter-Item Covariance Matrix SQR1 SQR2 SQR3 SQR4 SQR5 SQR1 .387 .264 .177 .182 .079 SQR2 .264 .488 .171 .099 -.006 SQR3 .177 .171 .467 .239 .056 SQR4 .182 .099 .239 .483 .193 SQR5 .079 -.006 .056 .193 .368

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

RESPONSIVENESS

82

Warnings The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excludeda Total 50 0 50 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .661 Item Statistics SQRE1 SQRE2 SQRE3 SQRE4 SQRE5 Mean 3.0200 2.9800 2.9800 2.9000 2.9200 Std. Deviation .74203 .58867 .71400 .70711 .66517 N 50 50 50 50 50

Cronbach's Alpha .660

N of Items 5

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix SQRE1 SQRE2 SQRE3 SQRE4 SQRE5 SQRE1 1.000 .375 .155 .276 .293 SQRE2 .375 1.000 .436 .289 .048 SQRE3 .155 .436 1.000 .562 .040 SQRE4 .276 .289 .562 1.000 .330 SQRE5 .293 .048 .040 .330 1.000

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Inter-Item Covariance Matrix SQRE1 SQRE2 SQRE3 SQRE4 SQRE5 SQRE1 .551 .164 .082 .145 .144 SQRE2 .164 .347 .183 .120 .019 SQRE3 .082 .183 .510 .284 .019 SQRE4 .145 .120 .284 .500 .155 SQRE5 .144 .019 .019 .155 .442

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

83

ASSURANCE

Warnings The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excludeda Total 50 0 50 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .626
Item Statistics SQA1 SQA2 SQA3 SQA4 Mean 3.0600 3.1400 3.1000 3.1000 Std. Deviation .65184 .70015 .67763 .73540 N 50 50 50 50

Cronbach's Alpha .622

N of Items 4

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix SQA1 SQA2 SQA3 SQA4 SQA1 1.000 .473 .217 .200 SQA2 .473 1.000 .314 .052 SQA3 .217 .314 1.000 .512 SQA4 .200 .052 .512 1.000

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

84

Inter-Item Covariance Matrix SQA1 SQA2 SQA3 SQA4 SQA1 .425 .216 .096 .096 SQA2 .216 .490 .149 .027 SQA3 .096 .149 .459 .255 SQA4 .096 .027 .255 .541

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

EMPATHY

Warnings The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excluded a Total 50 0 50 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

85

Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .651 Item Statistics SQE1 SQE2 SQE3 SQE4 SQE5 Mean 3.0400 3.0800 2.9600 2.9200 3.0800 Std. Deviation .63760 .69517 .60474 .56569 .75160 N 50 50 50 50 50

Cronbach's Alpha .636

N of Items 5

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix SQE1 SQE2 SQE3 SQE4 SQE5 SQE1 1.000 .591 .428 .235 -.007 SQE2 .591 1.000 .445 .276 .066 SQE3 .428 .445 1.000 .289 .142 SQE4 .235 .276 .289 1.000 .255 SQE5 -.007 .066 .142 .255 1.000

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis. Inter-Item Covariance Matrix SQE1 SQE2 SQE3 SQE4 SQE5 SQE1 .407 .262 .165 .085 -.003 SQE2 .262 .483 .187 .109 .034 SQE3 .165 .187 .366 .099 .064 SQE4 .085 .109 .099 .320 .109 SQE5 -.003 .034 .064 .109 .565

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

PRICE

Warnings The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

86

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excludeda Total 50 0 50 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .607
Item Statistics P1 P2 P3 Mean 3.1000 3.1800 3.1000 Std. Deviation .67763 .62890 .67763 N 50 50 50

Cronbach's Alpha .604

N of Items 3

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix P1 P2 P3 P1 1.000 .532 .244 P2 .532 1.000 .244 P3 .244 .244 1.000

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis. Inter-Item Covariance Matrix P1 P2 P3 P1 .459 .227 .112 P2 .227 .396 .104 P3 .112 .104 .459

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

SWITCHING COST

Warnings The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

87

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excludeda Total 50 0 50 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .635 Item Statistics SC1 SC2 SC3 SC4 SC5 Mean 3.0800 3.0000 2.9800 2.9000 3.0000 Std. Deviation .69517 .67006 .74203 .76265 .69985 N 50 50 50 50 50

Cronbach's Alpha .634

N of Items 5

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix SC1 SC2 SC3 SC4 SC5 SC1 1.000 .394 .241 -.139 .336 SC2 .394 1.000 .369 -.040 .218 SC3 .241 .369 1.000 .465 .314 SC4 -.139 -.040 .465 1.000 .421 SC5 .336 .218 .314 .421 1.000

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis. Inter-Item Covariance Matrix SC1 SC2 SC3 SC4 SC5 SC1 .483 .184 .124 -.073 .163 SC2 .184 .449 .184 -.020 .102 SC3 .124 .184 .551 .263 .163 SC4 -.073 -.020 .263 .582 .224 SC5 .163 .102 .163 .224 .490

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

BRAND IMAGE

88

Warnings The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excludeda Total 50 0 50 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .600 Item Statistics BI1 BI2 BI3 BI4 BI5 Mean 2.9200 2.9200 2.9400 3.0200 3.0800 Std. Deviation .60068 .63374 .61974 .51468 .60068 N 50 50 50 50 50

Cronbach's Alpha .601

N of Items 5

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix BI1 BI2 BI3 BI4 BI5 BI1 1.000 .465 .425 .137 .188 BI2 .465 1.000 .403 .068 .071 BI3 .425 .403 1.000 .132 -.042 BI4 .137 .068 .132 1.000 .457 BI5 .188 .071 -.042 .457 1.000

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis. Inter-Item Covariance Matrix BI1 BI2 BI3 BI4 BI5 BI1 .361 .177 .158 .042 .068 BI2 .177 .402 .158 .022 .027 BI3 .158 .158 .384 .042 -.016 BI4 .042 .022 .042 .265 .141 BI5 .068 .027 -.016 .141 .361

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

89

CUSTOMER LOYALTY

Warnings The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excludeda Total 50 0 50 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .789
Item Statistics CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4 CL5 CL6 CL7 CL8 Mean 2.9800 2.8400 2.8800 2.9800 2.9400 2.9600 2.9600 2.9800 Std. Deviation .65434 .61809 .68928 .62237 .58589 .60474 .63760 .55291 N 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50

Cronbach's Alpha .788

N of Items 8

90

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4 CL5 CL6 CL7 CL8 CL1 1.000 .648 .266 .300 .263 .307 .047 .450 CL2 .648 1.000 .481 .469 .086 .474 .139 .588 CL3 .266 .481 1.000 .470 .133 .282 .500 .315 CL4 .300 .469 .470 1.000 .388 .377 -.002 .355 CL5 .263 .086 .133 .388 1.000 .223 .048 .122 CL6 .307 .474 .282 .377 .223 1.000 .578 .425 CL7 .047 .139 .500 -.002 .048 .578 1.000 .171 CL8 .450 .588 .315 .355 .122 .425 .171 1.000

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.


Inter-Item Covariance Matrix CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4 CL5 CL6 CL7 CL8 CL1 .428 .262 .120 .122 .101 .122 .020 .163 CL2 .262 .382 .205 .180 .031 .177 .055 .201 CL3 .120 .205 .475 .202 .054 .118 .220 .120 CL4 .122 .180 .202 .387 .142 .142 -.001 .122 CL5 .101 .031 .054 .142 .343 .079 .018 .040 CL6 .122 .177 .118 .142 .079 .366 .223 .142 CL7 .020 .055 .220 -.001 .018 .223 .407 .060 CL8 .163 .201 .120 .122 .040 .142 .060 .306

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

91

OUTPUT
FREQUENCIES

Statistics N Valid Missing GC1 157 0 GC2 157 0 GC3 157 0

FREQUENCY TABLE- GENERAL CHARACTERISTIC Services Provider

GC1 Frequency 42 67 37 11 157 Percent 26.8 42.7 23.6 7.0 100.0 Valid Percent 26.8 42.7 23.6 7.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 26.8 69.4 93.0 100.0

Valid

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 Total

Type of Usage

92

GC2 Frequency 16 118 23 157 Percent 10.2 75.2 14.6 100.0 Valid Percent 10.2 75.2 14.6 100.0 Cumulative Percent 10.2 85.4 100.0

Valid

1.00 2.00 3.00 Total

Payment of Monthly Bill

GC3 Frequency 141 15 1 157 Percent 89.8 9.6 .6 100.0 Valid Percent 89.8 9.6 .6 100.0 Cumulative Percent 89.8 99.4 100.0

Valid

1.00 2.00 3.00 Total

FREQUENCY TABLE- DEMOGRAFICAL CHARACTERISTIC

Statistics N Valid Missing DC1 157 0 DC2 157 0 DC3 157 0 DC4 157 0 DC5 157 0 DC6 157 0 DC7 157 0

Gender

93

DC1 Frequency 55 102 157 Percent 35.0 65.0 100.0 Valid Percent 35.0 65.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 35.0 100.0

Valid

1.00 2.00 Total

Age

94

DC2 Frequency 1 35 6 1 7 8 7 5 13 2 4 6 8 12 1 2 3 2 5 5 3 4 6 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 157 Percent .6 22.3 3.8 .6 4.5 5.1 4.5 3.2 8.3 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.1 7.6 .6 1.3 1.9 1.3 3.2 3.2 1.9 2.5 3.8 1.3 1.3 1.3 .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 100.0 Valid Percent .6 22.3 3.8 .6 4.5 5.1 4.5 3.2 8.3 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.1 7.6 .6 1.3 1.9 1.3 3.2 3.2 1.9 2.5 3.8 1.3 1.3 1.3 .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 100.0 Cumulative Percent .6 22.9 26.8 27.4 31.8 36.9 41.4 44.6 52.9 54.1 56.7 60.5 65.6 73.2 73.9 75.2 77.1 78.3 81.5 84.7 86.6 89.2 93.0 94.3 95.5 96.8 97.5 98.1 98.7 99.4 100.0

Valid

2.00 18.00 19.00 20.00 21.00 22.00 23.00 24.00 25.00 26.00 27.00 28.00 29.00 30.00 31.00 32.00 33.00 34.00 35.00 36.00 37.00 39.00 40.00 41.00 42.00 45.00 46.00 47.00 48.00 53.00 58.00 Total

Ethnic

95

DC3 Frequency 85 43 29 157 Percent 54.1 27.4 18.5 100.0 Valid Percent 54.1 27.4 18.5 100.0 Cumulative Percent 54.1 81.5 100.0

Valid

1.00 2.00 3.00 Total

Religion

DC4 Frequency 85 27 24 21 157 Percent 54.1 17.2 15.3 13.4 100.0 Valid Percent 54.1 17.2 15.3 13.4 100.0 Cumulative Percent 54.1 71.3 86.6 100.0

Valid

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 Total

Highest Education Qualification Archive

DC5 Frequency 72 29 40 15 1 157 Percent 45.9 18.5 25.5 9.6 .6 100.0 Valid Percent 45.9 18.5 25.5 9.6 .6 100.0 Cumulative Percent 45.9 64.3 89.8 99.4 100.0

Valid

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 13.00 Total

Occupation

96

DC6 Frequency 36 49 23 49 157 Percent 22.9 31.2 14.6 31.2 100.0 Valid Percent 22.9 31.2 14.6 31.2 100.0 Cumulative Percent 22.9 54.1 68.8 100.0

Valid

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 Total

Monthly Income

DC7 Frequency Valid .00 200.00 400.00 500.00 750.00 800.00 890.00 900.00 955.00 1000.00 1050.00 1200.00 1205.00 1224.00 1251.00 1270.00 1308.00 1500.00 1523.00 1700.00 1800.00 1801.00 1845.00 1900.00 1990.00 2000.00 2100.00 2300.00 2500.00 2600.00 2800.00 2900.00 3000.00 3050.00 3200.00 3500.00 3800.00 4000.00 4011.00 4200.00 4500.00 4800.00 4900.00 5000.00 5500.00 5700.00 5800.00 Total 55 2 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 3 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 10 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 7 1 4 2 5 1 1 4 1 4 1 1 5 3 1 2 1 1 1 157 Percent 35.0 1.3 .6 .6 .6 3.8 .6 .6 .6 1.9 .6 3.2 .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 6.4 .6 .6 3.8 .6 .6 .6 .6 1.9 .6 1.3 4.5 .6 2.5 1.3 3.2 .6 .6 2.5 .6 2.5 .6 .6 3.2 1.9 .6 1.3 .6 .6 .6 100.0 Valid Percent 35.0 1.3 .6 .6 .6 3.8 .6 .6 .6 1.9 .6 3.2 .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 6.4 .6 .6 3.8 .6 .6 .6 .6 1.9 .6 1.3 4.5 .6 2.5 1.3 3.2 .6 .6 2.5 .6 2.5 .6 .6 3.2 1.9 .6 1.3 .6 .6 .6 100.0 Cumulative Percent 35.0 36.3 36.9 37.6 38.2 42.0 42.7 43.3 43.9 45.9 46.5 49.7 50.3 51.0 51.6 52.2 52.9 59.2 59.9 60.5 64.3 65.0 65.6 66.2 66.9 68.8 69.4 70.7 75.2 75.8 78.3 79.6 82.8 83.4 84.1 86.6 87.3 89.8 90.4 91.1 94.3 96.2 96.8 98.1 98.7 99.4 100.0

FACTOR ANALYSIS 97

TANGIBLE

KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square df Sig. .642 58.721 3 .000

Communalities SQT1 SQT2 SQT3 Initial 1.000 1.000 1.000 Extraction .635 .524 .583

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues % of Variance Cumulative % 58.037 58.037 23.031 81.068 18.932 100.000 Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Total % of Variance Cumulative % 1.741 58.037 58.037

Component 1 2 3

Total 1.741 .691 .568

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Component Matrixa Compone nt 1 .797 .724 .763

SQT1 SQT2 SQT3

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a. 1 components extracted.

98

RELIABILITY

KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square df Sig. .785 218.268 10 .000

Communalities SQR1 SQR2 SQR3 SQR4 SQR5 Initial 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Extraction .523 .614 .574 .581 .448

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues % of Variance Cumulative % 54.785 54.785 15.985 70.770 12.225 82.995 8.931 91.926 8.074 100.000 Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Total % of Variance Cumulative % 2.739 54.785 54.785

Component 1 2 3 4 5

Total 2.739 .799 .611 .447 .404

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.


a Component Matrix

SQR1 SQR2 SQR3 SQR4 SQR5

Compone nt 1 .723 .783 .757 .762 .669

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a. 1 components extracted.

99

RESPONSIVENESS

Warnings Only one component was extracted. Component plots cannot be produced.

KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square df Sig. .702 227.124 10 .000

Communalities SQRE1 SQRE2 SQRE3 SQRE4 SQRE5 Initial 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Extraction .462 .600 .521 .626 .463

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues % of Variance Cumulative % 53.449 53.449 16.400 69.849 14.988 84.837 9.000 93.837 6.163 100.000 Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Total % of Variance Cumulative % 2.672 53.449 53.449

Component 1 2 3 4 5

Total 2.672 .820 .749 .450 .308

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.


a Component Matrix

SQRE1 SQRE2 SQRE3 SQRE4 SQRE5

Compone nt 1 .680 .775 .722 .791 .681

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a. 1 components extracted.

100

ASSURANCE

Warnings Only one component was extracted. Component plots cannot be produced.

KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square df Sig. .739 124.167 6 .000

Communalities SQA1 SQA2 SQA3 SQA4 Initial 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Extraction .544 .501 .621 .552

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues % of Variance Cumulative % 55.447 55.447 18.007 73.454 14.549 88.003 11.997 100.000 Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Total % of Variance Cumulative % 2.218 55.447 55.447

Component 1 2 3 4

Total 2.218 .720 .582 .480

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.


Component Matrixa Compone nt 1 .737 .708 .788 .743

SQA1 SQA2 SQA3 SQA4

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a. 1 components extracted.

101

EMPHATY

Warnings Only one component was extracted. Component plots cannot be produced.

KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square df Sig. .758 216.536 10 .000

Communalities SQE1 SQE2 SQE3 SQE4 SQE5 Initial 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Extraction .636 .609 .670 .496 .236

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues % of Variance Cumulative % 52.958 52.958 17.523 70.481 13.662 84.143 9.059 93.203 6.797 100.000 Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Total % of Variance Cumulative % 2.648 52.958 52.958

Component 1 2 3 4 5

Total 2.648 .876 .683 .453 .340

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.


a Component Matrix

SQE1 SQE2 SQE3 SQE4 SQE5

Compone nt 1 .798 .780 .819 .704 .486

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a. 1 components extracted.

102

PRICE

Warnings Only one component was extracted. Component plots cannot be produced.

KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square df Sig. .543 58.316 3 .000

Communalities P1 P2 P3 Initial 1.000 1.000 1.000 Extraction .698 .718 .214

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues % of Variance Cumulative % 54.346 54.346 30.189 84.535 15.465 100.000 Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Total % of Variance Cumulative % 1.630 54.346 54.346

Component 1 2 3

Total 1.630 .906 .464

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.


a Component Matrix

P1 P2 P3

Compone nt 1 .836 .847 .463

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a. 1 components extracted.

103

SWITCHING COST

Warnings Only one component was extracted. Component plots cannot be produced.

KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square df Sig. .650 117.248 10 .000

Communalities SC1 SC2 SC3 SC4 SC5 Initial 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Extraction .165 .425 .639 .433 .475

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues % of Variance Cumulative % 42.718 42.718 19.194 61.913 16.377 78.290 13.465 91.755 8.245 100.000 Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Total % of Variance Cumulative % 2.136 42.718 42.718

Component 1 2 3 4 5

Total 2.136 .960 .819 .673 .412

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.


a Component Matrix

SC1 SC2 SC3 SC4 SC5

Compone nt 1 .406 .652 .799 .658 .689

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a. 1 components extracted.

104

BRAND IMAGE

Warnings Only one component was extracted. Component plots cannot be produced.

KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square df Sig. .782 248.215 10 .000

Communalities BI1 BI2 BI3 BI4 BI5 Initial 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Extraction .596 .523 .612 .631 .487

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues % of Variance Cumulative % 56.985 56.985 15.833 72.818 11.274 84.092 8.862 92.954 7.046 100.000 Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Total % of Variance Cumulative % 2.849 56.985 56.985

Component 1 2 3 4 5

Total 2.849 .792 .564 .443 .352

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.


a Component Matrix

BI1 BI2 BI3 BI4 BI5

Compone nt 1 .772 .723 .782 .795 .698

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a. 1 components extracted.

105

CUSTOMER LOYALTY

KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square df Sig. .757 476.030 28 .000

Communalities CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4 CL5 CL6 CL7 CL8 Initial 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Extraction .626 .738 .677 .630 .231 .584 .706 .705

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues % of Variance Cumulative % 44.378 44.378 16.836 61.213 11.291 72.504 9.553 82.057 6.359 88.417 5.108 93.524 3.904 97.429 2.571 100.000 Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Total % of Variance Cumulative % 3.550 44.378 44.378 1.347 16.836 61.213

Component 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Total 3.550 1.347 .903 .764 .509 .409 .312 .206

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

106

a Component Matrix

CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4 CL5 CL6 CL7 CL8

Component 1 2 .264 .746 .481 .712 .810 .141 .791 -.071 .326 -.354 .731 -.224 .801 -.255 .828 -.138

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a. 2 components extracted.

107

RELIABILITY

TANGIBLE

Warnings The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excludeda Total 157 0 157 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .638

Cronbach's Alpha .638

N of Items 3

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix SQT1 SQT2 SQT3 SQT1 1.000 .370 .423 SQT2 .370 1.000 .316 SQT3 .423 .316 1.000

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis. Inter-Item Covariance Matrix SQT1 SQT2 SQT3 SQT1 .601 .199 .248 SQT2 .199 .482 .167 SQT3 .248 .167 .575

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

108

b ANOVA with Friedman's Test and Tukey's Test for Nonadditivity

Between People Within People

Between Items Residual

Nonadditivity Balance Total

Total Total

Sum of Squares 150.093 .777 .676a 107.880 108.556 109.333 259.427

df 156 2 1 311 312 314 470

Mean Square .962 .389 .676 .347 .348 .348 .552

Friedman's Chi-Square 1.117 1.950

Sig .329 .164

Grand Mean = 3.2548 a. Tukey's estimate of power to which observations must be raised to achieve additivity = -4.379. b. The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Hotelling's T-Squared Test Hotelling's T-Squared 2.327 F 1.156 df1 2 df2 155 Sig .317

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

REALIBILITY

Warnings The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excludeda Total 157 0 157 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .793

Cronbach's Alpha .791

N of Items 5

109

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix SQR1 SQR2 SQR3 SQR4 SQR5 SQR1 1.000 .542 .419 .364 .355 SQR2 .542 1.000 .535 .453 .328 SQR3 .419 .535 1.000 .480 .343 SQR4 .364 .453 .480 1.000 .514 SQR5 .355 .328 .343 .514 1.000

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis. Inter-Item Covariance Matrix SQR1 SQR2 SQR3 SQR4 SQR5 SQR1 .618 .398 .272 .226 .241 SQR2 .398 .870 .412 .333 .265 SQR3 .272 .412 .683 .312 .245 SQR4 .226 .333 .312 .621 .350 SQR5 .241 .265 .245 .350 .749

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.


b ANOVA with Friedman's Test and Tukey's Test for Nonadditivity

Between People Within People

Between Items Residual

Nonadditivity Balance Total

Total Total

Sum of Squares 301.062 1.982 .043a 251.175 251.218 253.200 554.262

df 156 4 1 623 624 628 784

Mean Square 1.930 .496 .043 .403 .403 .403 .707

Friedman's Chi-Square 1.231 .106

Sig .296 .744

Grand Mean = 3.1503 a. Tukey's estimate of power to which observations must be raised to achieve additivity = .252. b. The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Hotelling's T-Squared Test Hotelling's T-Squared 5.169 F 1.267 df1 4 df2 153 Sig .285

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

110

RESPONSIVENESS

Warnings The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excluded a Total 157 0 157 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .781

Cronbach's Alpha .780

N of Items 5

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix SQRE1 SQRE2 SQRE3 SQRE4 SQRE5 SQRE1 1.000 .492 .309 .332 .398 SQRE2 .492 1.000 .515 .428 .369 SQRE3 .309 .515 1.000 .562 .227 SQRE4 .332 .428 .562 1.000 .529 SQRE5 .398 .369 .227 .529 1.000

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis. Inter-Item Covariance Matrix SQRE1 SQRE2 SQRE3 SQRE4 SQRE5 SQRE1 .726 .330 .203 .245 .268 SQRE2 .330 .621 .312 .293 .230 SQRE3 .203 .312 .592 .375 .138 SQRE4 .245 .293 .375 .753 .363 SQRE5 .268 .230 .138 .363 .626

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

111

b ANOVA with Friedman's Test and Tukey's Test for Nonadditivity

Between People Within People

Between Items Residual

Nonadditivity Balance Total

Total Total

Sum of Squares 275.595 1.164 .253a 241.782 242.036 243.200 518.795

df 156 4 1 623 624 628 784

Mean Square 1.767 .291 .253 .388 .388 .387 .662

Friedman's Chi-Square .750 .653

Sig .558 .419

Grand Mean = 3.2025 a. Tukey's estimate of power to which observations must be raised to achieve additivity = -1.522. b. The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Hotelling's T-Squared Test Hotelling's T-Squared 3.241 F .795 df1 4 df2 153 Sig .530

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

ASSURANCE

Warnings The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excludeda Total 157 0 157 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .732

Cronbach's Alpha .731

N of Items 4

112

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix SQA1 SQA2 SQA3 SQA4 SQA1 1.000 .420 .427 .356 SQA2 .420 1.000 .377 .343 SQA3 .427 .377 1.000 .508 SQA4 .356 .343 .508 1.000

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis. Inter-Item Covariance Matrix SQA1 SQA2 SQA3 SQA4 SQA1 .638 .268 .285 .248 SQA2 .268 .640 .252 .239 SQA3 .285 .252 .697 .370 SQA4 .248 .239 .370 .760

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.


b ANOVA with Friedman's Test and Tukey's Test for Nonadditivity

Between People Within People

Between Items Residual

Nonadditivity Balance Total

Total Total

Sum of Squares 236.236 .662 .484a 189.854 190.338 191.000 427.236

df 156 3 1 467 468 471 627

Mean Square 1.514 .221 .484 .407 .407 .406 .681

Friedman's Chi-Square .543 1.190

Sig .653 .276

Grand Mean = 3.2548 a. Tukey's estimate of power to which observations must be raised to achieve additivity = -3.534. b. The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Hotelling's T-Squared Test Hotelling's T-Squared 1.500 F .494 df1 3 df2 154 Sig .687

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

113

EMPHATY

Warnings The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excludeda Total 157 0 157 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .769

Cronbach's Alpha .764

N of Items 5

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix SQE1 SQE2 SQE3 SQE4 SQE5 SQE1 1.000 .627 .498 .408 .268 SQE2 .627 1.000 .541 .362 .180 SQE3 .498 .541 1.000 .525 .329 SQE4 .408 .362 .525 1.000 .252 SQE5 .268 .180 .329 .252 1.000

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis. Inter-Item Covariance Matrix SQE1 SQE2 SQE3 SQE4 SQE5 SQE1 .636 .363 .327 .249 .186 SQE2 .363 .528 .324 .202 .114 SQE3 .327 .324 .678 .332 .235 SQE4 .249 .202 .332 .587 .167 SQE5 .186 .114 .235 .167 .753

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

114

b ANOVA with Friedman's Test and Tukey's Test for Nonadditivity

Between People Within People

Between Items Residual

Nonadditivity Balance Total

Total Total

Sum of Squares 255.113 3.982 .022a 241.196 241.218 245.200 500.313

df 156 4 1 623 624 628 784

Mean Square 1.635 .996 .022 .387 .387 .390 .638

Friedman's Chi-Square 2.575 .057

Sig .037 .812

Grand Mean = 3.2191 a. Tukey's estimate of power to which observations must be raised to achieve additivity = 1.420. b. The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Hotelling's T-Squared Test Hotelling's T-Squared 8.513 F 2.087 df1 4 df2 153 Sig .085

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

PRICE

Warnings The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excludeda Total 157 0 157 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .555

Cronbach's Alpha .549

N of Items 3

115

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix P1 P2 P3 P1 1.000 .535 .158 P2 .535 1.000 .188 P3 .158 .188 1.000

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis. Inter-Item Covariance Matrix P1 P2 P3 P1 .463 .289 .083 P2 .289 .632 .116 P3 .083 .116 .597

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.


b ANOVA with Friedman's Test and Tukey's Test for Nonadditivity

Between People Within People

Between Items Residual

Nonadditivity Balance Total

Total Total

Sum of Squares 138.769 2.807 1.354a 123.840 125.193 128.000 266.769

df 156 2 1 311 312 314 470

Mean Square .890 1.403 1.354 .398 .401 .408 .568

Friedman's Chi-Square 3.497 3.399

Sig .031 .066

Grand Mean = 3.2123 a. Tukey's estimate of power to which observations must be raised to achieve additivity = -3.110. b. The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Hotelling's T-Squared Test Hotelling's T-Squared 5.369 F 2.667 df1 2 df2 155 Sig .073

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

116

SWITCHING COST

Warnings The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excluded a Total 157 0 157 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .651

Cronbach's Alpha .642

N of Items 5

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix SC1 SC2 SC3 SC4 SC5 SC1 1.000 .204 .190 .115 .146 SC2 .204 1.000 .444 .130 .314 SC3 .190 .444 1.000 .457 .349 SC4 .115 .130 .457 1.000 .364 SC5 .146 .314 .349 .364 1.000

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis. Inter-Item Covariance Matrix SC1 SC2 SC3 SC4 SC5 SC1 .841 .151 .139 .083 .104 SC2 .151 .650 .286 .083 .197 SC3 .139 .286 .635 .288 .217 SC4 .083 .083 .288 .628 .224 SC5 .104 .197 .217 .224 .605

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

117

b ANOVA with Friedman's Test and Tukey's Test for Nonadditivity

Between People Within People

Between Items Residual

Nonadditivity Balance Total

Total Total

Sum of Squares 215.447 3.358 .001a 308.641 308.642 312.000 527.447

df 156 4 1 623 624 628 784

Mean Square 1.381 .839 .001 .495 .495 .497 .673

Friedman's Chi-Square 1.697 .002

Sig .149 .963

Grand Mean = 3.0981 a. Tukey's estimate of power to which observations must be raised to achieve additivity = .895. b. The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Hotelling's T-Squared Test Hotelling's T-Squared 6.099 F 1.495 df1 4 df2 153 Sig .206

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

BRAND IMAGE

Warnings The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excludeda Total 157 0 157 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .810

Cronbach's Alpha .810

N of Items 5

118

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix BI1 BI2 BI3 BI4 BI5 BI1 1.000 .496 .493 .448 .468 BI2 .496 1.000 .533 .425 .286 BI3 .493 .533 1.000 .545 .354 BI4 .448 .425 .545 1.000 .559 BI5 .468 .286 .354 .559 1.000

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis. Inter-Item Covariance Matrix BI1 BI2 BI3 BI4 BI5 BI1 .639 .294 .339 .275 .296 BI2 .294 .550 .339 .242 .168 BI3 .339 .339 .737 .360 .240 BI4 .275 .242 .360 .590 .339 BI5 .296 .168 .240 .339 .624

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.


b ANOVA with Friedman's Test and Tukey's Test for Nonadditivity

Between People Within People

Between Items Residual

Nonadditivity Balance Total

Total Total

Sum of Squares 278.385 5.776 .079a 211.346 211.424 217.200 495.585

df 156 4 1 623 624 628 784

Mean Square 1.785 1.444 .079 .339 .339 .346 .632

Friedman's Chi-Square 4.262 .232

Sig .002 .630

Grand Mean = 3.1834 a. Tukey's estimate of power to which observations must be raised to achieve additivity = .376. b. The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Hotelling's T-Squared Test Hotelling's T-Squared 14.223 F 3.487 df1 4 df2 153 Sig .009

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

119

CUSTOMER LOYALTY

Warnings The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Case Processing Summary N Cases Valid Excluded a Total 157 0 157 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items .794

Cronbach's Alpha .742

N of Items 8 Inter-Item Correlation Matrix

CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4 CL5 CL6 CL7 CL8

CL1 1.000 .436 .163 .112 .013 .126 .076 .103

CL2 .436 1.000 .471 .279 -.003 .156 .206 .278

CL3 .163 .471 1.000 .684 .148 .408 .529 .587

CL4 .112 .279 .684 1.000 .273 .486 .456 .592

CL5 .013 -.003 .148 .273 1.000 .177 .260 .187

CL6 .126 .156 .408 .486 .177 1.000 .660 .547

CL7 .076 .206 .529 .456 .260 .660 1.000 .684

CL8 .103 .278 .587 .592 .187 .547 .684 1.000

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.


Inter-Item Covariance Matrix CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4 CL5 CL6 CL7 CL8 CL1 .583 .276 .115 .070 .017 .082 .050 .063 CL2 .276 .686 .360 .187 -.005 .110 .148 .187 CL3 .115 .360 .849 .510 .234 .319 .423 .438 CL4 .070 .187 .510 .656 .380 .335 .320 .388 CL5 .017 -.005 .234 .380 2.947 .258 .387 .260 CL6 .082 .110 .319 .335 .258 .724 .488 .377 CL7 .050 .148 .423 .320 .387 .488 .753 .481 CL8 .063 .187 .438 .388 .260 .377 .481 .656

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

120

b ANOVA with Friedman's Test and Tukey's Test for Nonadditivity

Between People Within People

Between Items Residual

Nonadditivity Balance Total

Total Total

Sum of Squares 436.221 9.789 32.385a 756.451 788.836 798.625 1234.846

df 156 7 1 1091 1092 1099 1255

Mean Square 2.796 1.398 32.385 .693 .722 .727 .984

Friedman's Chi-Square 1.936 46.708

Sig .061 .000

Grand Mean = 3.1202 a. Tukey's estimate of power to which observations must be raised to achieve additivity = -8.630. b. The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

Hotelling's T-Squared Test Hotelling's T-Squared 8.562 F 1.176 df1 7 df2 150 Sig .320

The covariance matrix is calculated and used in the analysis.

121

REGRESSION
Variables Entered/Removedb Model 1 Variables Entered BI, SQT, P, SC, SQR, SQA, SQE, a SQRE Variables Removed . Method Enter

a. All requested variables entered. b. Dependent Variable: CL


Model Summary b Model 1 R .779a R Square .606 Adjusted R Square .585 Std. Error of the Estimate .38076 DurbinWatson 1.980

a. Predictors: (Constant), BI, SQT, P, SC, SQR, SQA, SQE, SQRE b. Dependent Variable: CL

Descriptive Statistics CL SQT SQR SQRE SQA SQE P SC BI Mean 3.1202 3.2548 3.1503 3.2025 3.2548 3.2191 3.2123 3.0981 3.1834 Std. Deviation .59122 .56631 .62127 .59441 .61529 .57190 .54453 .52556 .59741 N 157 157 157 157 157 157 157 157 157
b ANOVA

Model 1

Regression Residual Total

Sum of Squares 33.071 21.457 54.528

df 8 148 156

Mean Square 4.134 .145

F 28.513

Sig. .000a

a. Predictors: (Constant), BI, SQT, P, SC, SQR, SQA, SQE, SQRE b. Dependent Variable: CL

122

Coefficientsa Unstandardized Coefficients B Std. Error .133 .231 -.013 .070 .105 .080 .263 .089 .062 .084 .091 .093 .020 .073 .125 .078 .286 .079 Standardized Coefficients Beta -.013 .110 .265 .065 .088 .018 .111 .289 Collinearity Statistics Tolerance VIF .600 .380 .331 .346 .331 .588 .558 .422 1.668 2.631 3.020 2.890 3.017 1.701 1.793 2.372

Model 1

t .575 -.193 1.316 2.953 .742 .983 .273 1.610 3.637

(Constant) SQT SQR SQRE SQA SQE P SC BI

Sig. .566 .847 .190 .004 .459 .327 .785 .109 .000

a. Dependent Variable: CL
a Collinearity Diagnostics

Model 1

Dimension 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Eigenvalue 8.884 .027 .023 .014 .014 .012 .010 .009 .007

Condition Index 1.000 18.137 19.779 24.804 25.422 27.586 29.099 31.031 35.762

(Constant) .00 .18 .01 .30 .06 .35 .09 .00 .00

SQT .00 .07 .27 .06 .06 .25 .21 .08 .00

SQR .00 .07 .03 .02 .44 .03 .07 .07 .27

Variance Proportions SQRE SQA SQE .00 .00 .00 .03 .05 .01 .05 .00 .00 .00 .00 .01 .01 .02 .21 .00 .02 .02 .01 .42 .02 .59 .38 .08 .32 .11 .66

P .00 .10 .00 .70 .01 .06 .00 .01 .13

SC .00 .01 .19 .00 .09 .61 .01 .06 .03

BI .00 .04 .13 .04 .07 .04 .48 .03 .16

a. Dependent Variable: CL

Casewise Diagnosticsa Case Number 114 131 154 Std. Residual -3.090 3.009 6.120 CL 1.88 4.63 4.88 Predicted Value 3.0514 3.4794 2.5448 Residual -1.17640 1.14564 2.33019

a. Dependent Variable: CL

123

a Residuals Statistics

Predicted Value Std. Predicted Value Standard Error of Predicted Value Adjusted Predicted Value Residual Std. Residual Stud. Residual Deleted Residual Stud. Deleted Residual Mahal. Distance Cook's Distance Centered Leverage Value

Minimum 1.8562 -2.745 .046 1.8792 -1.17640 -3.090 -3.243 -1.29625 -3.354 1.242 .000 .008

Maximum 4.3980 2.775 .182 4.4149 2.33019 6.120 6.244 2.42562 7.251 34.708 .320 .222

Mean 3.1202 .000 .087 3.1178 .00000 .000 .003 .00246 .009 7.949 .010 .051

Std. Deviation .46043 1.000 .026 .45751 .37087 .974 1.014 .40263 1.064 6.015 .035 .039

N 157 157 157 157 157 157 157 157 157 157 157 157

a. Dependent Variable: CL

124