以轉換障礙為干擾變數來探討顧客滿意度 和顧客忠誠度之間的關係

USING SWITCHING BARRIERS AS MODERATOR TO EXPLORE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CUSTOMER SATISFACTION AND CUSTOMER LOYALTY

王玲惠(Ling-Huei Wang)

指導教授 ： 陳美芳

大同大學/經營設計學院/事業經營學系所/碩士(2005年)

摘要

由於國民所得的增加導致人們更願意投保來降低自身風險。然而，由於壽險公司紛紛設立，造成壽險業的競爭較以往激烈。而吸引新顧客的成本日益增加的情況下，如何保留目前的顧客，以提高他們的忠誠度，已成為壽險業重要的任務。而在保留顧客的策略當中，似乎一直以來都將提高顧客滿意度奉為圭臬。然而，近年來的研究指出，雖然顧客滿意度與顧客忠誠度被視為抓住顧客的必要要素，但僅僅滿意公司的品質並不一定能使顧客忠誠。因為顧客現階段滿意此公司，並不意味未來他們仍會和此公司保有互助關係。這在在證明了顧客滿意度和顧客忠誠度間的關係已趨於貧弱。過去的學者在顧客滿意度和顧客忠誠度兩者間的關係上，往往皆強調「轉換成本」的干擾效果。但事實上，除了轉換成本之外，廠商仍會提供其他的障礙來保留顧客，如：關係投資、服務復原和替代品的吸引力。
本研究有別於先前學者所探討轉換成本的影響力，轉而針對轉換障礙對顧客滿意度和顧客忠誠度間關係的干擾效果進行研究。本研究選定在台灣的投保客戶進行抽樣，共取得160份有效問卷，利用結構方程式模型來探討轉換障礙的干擾效果，以作為壽險業提升顧客忠誠度之參考。
研究結果發現，(1) 核心服務品質和關係品質為顧客滿意度重要的前置因素，且呈現正相關；(2) 顧客滿意度為顧客忠誠度的重要影響因素，並呈現正相關；(3) 轉換障礙具有干擾效果，且高度轉換障礙較低度轉換障礙，對於顧客滿意度和顧客忠誠度兩者之間的關係具有較強的干擾效果；(4) 轉換成本無法充分解釋顧客的轉換行為。基於研究發現，本研究建議壽險服務業的管理者應針對轉換障礙的個別要素來發展較有效的顧客忠誠方案。

關鍵字

轉換障礙 ； 核心服務品質 ； 關係品質 ； 顧客滿意度 ； 顧客忠誠度

並列摘要

With national income increases, people are more and more willing to purchase life insurance policies to decrease their risks. However, the competition for life insurance companies is fierce than ever before, because there are more and more life insurance companies established. As costs of attracting new customers increase, how to maintain current customers to build a long-term relationship so as to enhance customer loyalty has become the life insurance company’s important tasks. Customer satisfaction has always been treated as a determinant component in many customer retention programs; however, recent studies found that although satisfaction is a necessary component of loyal or secure customers, the mere quality of being satisfied with a company does not necessarily make customers loyal. It shows that the connection between satisfaction and loyalty is tenuous. Prior researches focused on the moderating effect of “switching costs” between the relationship of customer satisfaction and customer loyalty. In face, in addition to the switching costs, companies still provide with other barriers to retain customers, such as relationship investment, attractiveness of alternatives, and service recovery.
The study emphasizes the moderating effect of switching barriers between the relationship of customer satisfaction and customer loyalty which differs from prior studies that focused on switching costs. This research contains 160 valid samples in Taiwan, and uses Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to evaluate the moderating effect of switching barriers on customer loyalty.
The main results are as follows: there is (1) the core service quality and relationship quality are important antecedents of customer satisfaction, and have positive relationships; (2) customer satisfaction is key factor of customer loyalty, and has positive relationship; (3) switching barriers have moderating effect, and the relationship between customer satisfaction and customer loyalty is stronger for customers with high switching barriers than for those with low switching barriers; (4) switching costs is insufficient to explain customers’ switching behavior. Based on the research findings, the study suggests that the management of life insurance service industry should focus on each element of switching barriers to develop more effective customer loyalty programs.

並列關鍵字

and switching barriers ； core service quality ； customer loyalty ； customer satisfaction ； relationship quality

參考文獻

Anderson, J. C. and D. Gerbing. “Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two Step Approach.” Psychological Bulletin 130 (May 1988): 411-423.

Bagozzi, R. P. and Y. Yi. “On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models.” Academy of Marketing Science 16 (1988): 74-94.

Bentler, P. M. and D. G. Bonett. “Significance Tests and Goodness of Fit in the Analysis of Covariance Structures.” Psychological Bulletin 80 (1980): 588-606.

Butcher, K., B. Spark, and F. O’Callaghan. “Beyond Core Service.” Psychology& Marketing 20 (2003): 187-208.

Bolton, R. N. and J. H. Drew. “A Multistage Model of Customers’ Assessments of Service Quality and Value.” Journal of Consumer Research 17 (1991): 375-384.