MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955718733 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v12n7p133

Relationship Marketing as an Orientation to Customer Retention: Evidence from Banks of Pakistan

2019· article· en· W2955718733 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Benazir Solangi, Urooj Talpur, Sanober Salman Shaikh, Tania Mushatque, Muhammad Asif Channa

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarketingLikert scaleLoyalty business modelCustomer retentionCustomer satisfactionContext (archaeology)Relationship marketingBusinessLoyaltySample (material)VariablesMarketing managementService qualityMathematicsStatisticsService (business)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to underpin the relationship marketing as an orientation to customer retention. Further, this study undertakes the case study of banking sector from Sindh province, Pakistan. The reason of conducting this study was to analyze the impact of relationship marketing on customer’s retention in the banking sector. Relationship marketing is getting more attention and popularity around the world and helps in developing customers satisfaction and loyalty. Quantitative research approach was used to measure the response of the sample. A field survey was conducted from customers of 20 banks operating in Larkana. An adopted questionnaire was used with five variables, four independent (Trust, commitment, communication and conflict handling) to predict one dependent variable (Customer retention) at 5-point Likert scale. The response was collected through close-ended questionnaire. The study has found that all the independent variables are positive and significant predictors of dependent variable with a good fit between their reliability and sample size adequacy. The major contribution of this study for the managers of banks particularly in Pakistani context is to take serious efforts to implement CRM effectively for customer retention in challenging marketing landscape due to technological and business extensions. The study has self-report nature so it cannot be generalized in all aspects. Research has left a gap for future research in the same set as well.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business ResearchSame topicCustomer Service Quality and LoyaltyFrench-language works237,207