MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735721501 · doi:10.1108/josm-03-2016-0065

The impact of service bundles on the mechanism through which functional value and price value affect WOM intent

2017· article· en· W2735721501 on OpenAlex
Chatura Ranaweera, Heikki Karjaluoto

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of service management · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBundlePurchasingValue (mathematics)MarketingService (business)BusinessProduct (mathematics)AdvertisingMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to contribute toward the current limited understanding of service bundles by investigating how purchasers of combined product-service bundles (bundle customers) differ from those purchasing a product and associated service separately (non-bundle customers). Design/methodology/approach The hypothesized effects were tested on a representative sample of mobile phone subscribers in Finland, through a multi-group moderated analysis using variance-based structural equation modeling. Findings While functional value had a stronger effect on attitude for bundle customers, price value is a stronger determinant of attitude for non-bundle customers. There was no difference between the groups in terms of how attitude determines the word-of-mouth (WOM) intent. The total influence of functional value on positive WOM intent was stronger for bundle customers vs non-bundle customers; in contrast, the total influence of price value on positive WOM was weaker for the bundle customers. Research limitations/implications Two interrelated frameworks, prospect theory and mental accounting theory, are used to analyze customer response to service bundles. The results demonstrate that bundles play a powerful role in determining engagement behaviors critical to firms. Purchasing a service bundle vs a non-bundle influences how price value and functional value determine attitude and WOM intent in fundamentally different ways. Practical implications In devising communication strategies to maximize positive WOM, managers need to emphasize functional benefits for bundle purchasers and price benefits for non-bundle customers. The results also demonstrate that it is more important for firms to track perceived value, as value and not attitude differentiates WOM generation in the two groups. Originality/value This is the first study to demonstrate how bundle and non-bundle customers determine value, and how functional value and price value determine WOM generation and attitude toward service provider in fundamentally different ways. The comparison of the bundle group where the firm acts as the main resource integrator to a non-bundle group where the customer is the main resource integrator in creating value helps demonstrate the need for firms to treat the two groups in distinct ways.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.594
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it