MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999791407 · doi:10.1108/ijbm-03-2019-0097

Impact of employee job satisfaction and commitment on customer perceived value

2019· article· en· W2999791407 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hanen Charni, Isabelle Brun‐Heath, Line Ricard

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Bank Marketing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJob satisfactionFormative assessmentMarketingCustomer satisfactionBusinessValue (mathematics)PsychologyPollingEmployee engagementPerceptionIndex (typography)Social psychologyEconomicsManagementComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyse the impact of employee job satisfaction and affective commitment as perceived by customers on customer perceived value, more specifically its benefits dimensions. Design/methodology/approach A total of 652 panellists from a large Canadian polling firm self-administer a web-based questionnaire. To measure customer perceived value, a formative index is used which contributes to topical literature through a unique methodology. Hypotheses are tested using a structural equation model. Findings An analysis of the direct, indirect and total effects confirms the unique positive impact of employee job satisfaction and affective commitment, as perceived by customers, on the emotional, social, relationship and epistemic benefits, as well as on the formative index of customer perceived value. Practical implications Customer perceptions of employee attitudes (job satisfaction and affective commitment) represent a unique opportunity for banks to differentiate their value proposition in a hypercompetitive market. Originality/value This study is the first to consider customer perceptions of employee job satisfaction and affective commitment in relation to a formative index of customer perceived value and its related benefits dimensions.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.714

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Bank MarketingSame topicCustomer Service Quality and LoyaltyFrench-language works237,207