Effects of store loyalty on shopping mall loyalty

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 19 (2012) 271–278

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jretconser

Effects of store loyalty on shopping mall loyalty Fazlul K. Rabbanee a,n, B. Ramaseshan a, Chen Wu b, Amy Vinden c a b c

School of Marketing, Curtin University, Australia International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research, The University of Western Australia, Australia OmniSTAR Pty Ltd., Australia

a r t i c l e i n f o

abstract

Available online 29 February 2012

The key purpose of this paper is to bridge a research gap in shopping mall literature by investigating the relationship between store loyalty and shopping mall loyalty. The paper also examines the effects of perceived store value and store relationship commitment on store loyalty en-route to loyalty towards the shopping mall hosting the stores. The study shows that store loyalty influences shopping mall loyalty under certain conditions and that such an influence is moderated by the geographic distance between the consumer and the shopping mall. Further, the study found that distance has a moderating effect on the relationship between perceived store value and store loyalty, but not on the association between relationship commitment and store loyalty. The insights provided by this study offer academics, retailers and shopping mall managers a richer understanding of the relationships between store loyalty and its antecedents, customers’ distance from the mall, and shopping mall loyalty. & 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Shopping mall loyalty Store loyalty Relationship commitment Customer distance Perceived value

1. Introduction Shopping mall developers are always keen to attract, entice and retain the shoppers in the mall by creating exciting shopping experiences. Attracting shoppers and obtaining their loyalty are the key concerns of shopping mall developers and their management authority (Babin and Attaway, 2000). Shoppers’ loyalty enables the mall developers in gaining market share and attaining sustainable competitive advantage (Wright and Sparks, 1999). Subsequently, shopping mall loyalty has been receiving more attention from the retail marketing literature over the last decade (e.g. Chebat et al., 2009; Chebat and Morrin, 2007; Chebat et al., 2006; Lehew et al., 2002; Pan and Zinkhan, 2006). Existing literature on shopping mall focused more on factors influencing shopping mall loyalty. For example, Chebat et al. (2009) proposed and tested a conceptual model of psychological process of generating mall loyalty considering commitment to the mall as the key antecedent of shopping mall loyalty. Lehew et al. (2002) support the presence of both loyal vs. non-loyal mall customers. Their study revealed that mall attributes influence mall loyalty. Wakefield and Baker (1998) mentioned that store variety, mall environment, and shopping involvement influence shoppers’ excitement and desire to stay in mall and thus affect their patronage intentions. Therefore, some portion of shoppers’ n Correspondence to: Fazlul Rabbanee, School of Marketing, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (F.K. Rabbanee), [email protected] (B. Ramaseshan), [email protected] (C. Wu).

0969-6989/$ - see front matter & 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2012.02.001

loyalty toward the mall could actually be store specific loyalty, wherein loyalty is directed toward the specific stores of the mall. This may also raise question whether shoppers are loyal to the mall or to the store. Because shoppers may remain loyal to the stores but may not necessarily be loyal to the malls. Surprisingly, retail literature is largely silent whether store loyalty contributes to the shopping mall loyalty. In the light of these unexplored aspects of mall loyalty vs. store loyalty, the primary purpose of this research is to examine whether store loyalty has any influence on shopping mall loyalty. Shoppers often drive past weaker malls to reach desired malls that have the best variety of stores and merchandises (Ashley, 1997). Besides, with respect to rising competitive intensity among the shopping malls due to increased number of malls (Kirkup and Rafiq, 1994; Raajpoot et al., 2008) and similar stores carrying same merchandises (Ashley, 1997; Templin, 1997), it is imperative for the shopping malls to decide an optimum store mix as it affects the occupancy rate in shopping malls (Kirkup and Rafiq, 1994). On the other hand, shoppers often tend to patronise their nearest shopping malls more; hence, distance influences shopping mall attractiveness (Dennis et al., 2000). None of the previous research relating to store/shopping mall loyalty has focused on the moderating impact of distance either in the relationship between store loyalty and mall loyalty or in relationship between store loyalty and its antecedents. Chebat et al. (2009) found that mall image positively influences store image, however the reverse relationship whether store image and/or loyalty influence/s mall image and/or loyalty is largely unknown. Therefore, this study contributes to the literature in three ways: first, it investigates the impact of store loyalty on shopping

272

F.K. Rabbanee et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 19 (2012) 271–278

mall loyalty. In order to do this, we examine the impact of two store-related factors: store relationship commitment and perceived store value on store loyalty en-route to shoppers’ loyalty towards the shopping mall that hosts the stores. Secondly, this study examines whether distance moderates the relationship between store loyalty and shopping mall loyalty. This objective of the study is influenced by Chebat et al. (2009), who tested the moderating impact of gender in relationship between the antecedents of mall loyalty and encouraged future research on moderating impact of other variables on mall loyalty. Thirdly, the study proposes an alternative explanation for shopping behaviour by investigating the moderating effect of distance in the relationships between the antecedents of store loyalty (store relationship commitment and perceived value of the store) and mall loyalty. The paper is organised as follows. We begin by discussing two distinct type of loyalty namely mall loyalty and store loyalty followed by the antecedents of store loyalty used in this study—store relationship commitment and perceived value of store. Then we discuss the impact of distance on shopping behaviour followed by our conceptual framework reflecting the hypothesised relationships among the key constructs of the study (i.e. store relationship commitment, perceived value of the store, store loyalty, and mall loyalty) under the moderating impact of distance. The paper concludes by discussing the findings and the implications for managers with the key one being that store loyalty positively influences mall loyalty and distance moderates the stated relationship among the constructs.

2. Theoretical background Shopping mall is an important retail setting that contributes to shoppers’ experience. A shopping mall is ‘‘a planned retail development comprising at least three shops, under one freehold, managed and marketed as a unit’’ (Guy, 1994). It includes a large number of stores that often complement one another in terms of quality, variety, and provides an appeal of one-stop shopping experience (Haytko and Baker, 2004). Shopping mall plays a key role in modern marketing distribution system. It dominates in the distribution of fashion-oriented merchandises (Finn and Louviere, 1996). Shopping mall industry employs over three-quarters of a million people in the USA (OXIRM, 1999; Davies et al., 1993), which proves the rising trends of shopping malls in retailing over recent decades (Teller, 2008). Research indicates that existing shopping malls face increasing competitive pressures due to increasing number of new and planned shopping malls (Kirkup and Rafiq, 1994; Raajpoot et al., 2008). Consumers often enjoy shopping experience by frequenting in shopping malls however, some consider shopping time precious, and wish to minimise trips to the malls. Store loyal customers are often time conscious and like to shop locally (Reynolds et al., 1974–1975). This preference poses great challenges to shopping malls, many of which aim to provide exciting experiences in order to entice more customers. This is one of the primary reasons why shopping mall managers emphasise on optimal store mix (Kirkup and Rafiq, 1994) and thus try to ensure increased number of shoppers in stores as well as in the malls hosting the stores.

customers expressed over time with respect to one store out of a set of stores, which is a function of psychological process (decision making and evaluative) resulting in brand commitment. Therefore, store loyalty is a deeply held commitment to repatronise a preferred store, and can be determined by two key antecedents such as store image and shopping mall loyalty (Sirgy and Samli, 1985). Increased store loyalty has numerous positive effects including positive word-of-mouth and increased customer retention that result in reduced marketing costs. Such relationships also create greater opportunities for cross-selling and the sales of additional products (Lavayssie re and Mullen, 2007). Consumers are more likely to become loyal to a store if they have relationship with employees, as many of such stores encourage their employees to become actively involved in the organisation sponsored loyalty programs (Macintosh and Lockshin, 1997) and build relationship with the consumers. Consumers receive value from these loyalty programs and/or from the merchandises bought from these stores and become loyal to the store. Loyal customers consider patronising a store as one of their highest priorities when making any shopping decision, regardless of any obstacles presented (Osman, 1993). 2.2. Perceived value The definitions of perceived value are often couched in terms of a trade-off between what an individual receives and what they give in return (Zeithaml, 1988). The value obtained from this trade-off extends past monetary considerations to encompass a wide array of variables. Having its root in equity theory, perceived value holds that customers are inclined to be treated equitably in terms of the ratio of their outcome to inputs comparing to the ratio of outcome to inputs received by the company (Oliver and DeSarbo, 1988). Customers often measure a company’s ratio of outcome to inputs by making comparisons with its competitors’ offerings (Yang and Peterson, 2004). Eggert and Ulaga (2002) also mentioned that perceived value is relative to competition, i.e. offering better value than competitors will help a company to create sustainable competitive advantage. Again, consumers who receive value for money tend to report higher levels of satisfaction than those who did not (McDougall and Levesque, 2000). For this study, we considered monetary aspect of perceived value relative to the competitors. Customer value is ‘‘the fundamental basis for all marketing strategy’’ (Holbrook, 1994, p. 22) as high value is a primary motivation for customer patronage (Yang and Peterson, 2004). Previous research shows that perceived value is one of the key determinants of customer loyalty (e.g. Bolton and Drew, 1991; Zeithaml, 1988; Salegna and Goodwin, 2005). Parasuraman and Grewal (2000) argued that one of the most effective means of generating customer loyalty is to deliver superior value derived from excellent services and quality products. Sirdeshmukh et al. (2002) mentioned that customer value leads to their behavioural intentions toward the service provider as long as such relational exchanges provide superior value. Surprisingly, research focusing on relationship between perceived value and customer loyalty in the context of individual stores within shopping malls is inadequate, which is one of the key focusing areas of this paper. 2.3. Relationship commitment

2.1. Store loyalty Store loyalty is perhaps the most important issue to consider for retailers. Store loyalty can be defined as the commitment towards the store and is influenced by satisfaction and trust towards the store (Bloemer and Odekerken-Schroder, 2002). Bloemer and Ruyter (1998) defined store loyalty as biased behavioural response (i.e. revisit) of the

Relationship commitment can be defined as an enduring desire to maintain a valued relationship (Moorman et al., 1992). Wilson (1995) mentioned that relationship commitment is a pledge of rationalised continuation with a brand, product or store. De Wulf et al. (2001) suggest that some consumers are more likely to engage in relationships than others, hence relationship

F.K. Rabbanee et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 19 (2012) 271–278

commitment may vary across customers. For the purposes of this research, a relationship commitment is defined as a belief of an exchange partner that an ongoing relationship with his/her partner is important and warrants maximum efforts to maintain it. This means that the committed party believes the relationship is worth working on to ensure that it endures indefinitely (Morgan and Hunt, 1994). Commitment is distinct from loyalty as it is more related to psychological attachments that the customer may have toward a store and/or a brand (Thomson et al., 2005). Such attachments are fundamental appraisal mechanisms through which customers determine whether and why they are loyal to a particular store and/or a brand (Beatty and Kahle, 1988). Hence relationship commitment is an antecedent to loyalty (Fullerton, 2003; Evanschitzky et al., 2006). In addition, previous research also shows that commitment has positive impact on various loyalty dimensions (e.g. Garbarino and Johnson, 1999; Gundlach et al., 1995). Evanschitzky et al. (2006) found that commitment has positive impact on both attitudinal and behavioural loyalty. Customers’ commitment i.e. their psychological attachments towards a store and/or brand reflect their self-evaluation of the consumption context, which has impact on their patronage of the same store or brand (Evanschitzky et al., 2006). 2.4. Shopping mall loyalty Shopping mall loyalty implies repeat patronage of a specific retail property. It is defined as ‘‘a shopper’s attitudinal predisposition consisting of intentions to continually patronise the mall in terms of repeated shopping at the mall and willingness to recommend the mall’’ (Chebat et al., 2009). Often consumers view shopping malls as a place not only for shopping, but also for other activities such as entertainment (Bloch et al., 1994). Shopping mall developers use loyalty strategy to increase sales of the mall’s tenants, which ultimately contributes to the profit of the mall owners since leases are typically based on percentage of sales (Lehew et al., 2002). Therefore, shoppers’ loyalty is one of the key factors in achieving competitive advantage for mall developers (Wright and Sparks, 1999). Previous shopping mall literature focused on infrastructure and planning of the mall (Gambill, 2000), effect of the mall de´cor (e.g. colour) on shoppers’ perception of the environment and the merchandises sold in the mall (Chebat and Morrin, 2007), database marketing efforts of retail stores and shopping malls (Gattuso, 1994; Shermach, 1995), impact of shoppers’ demographics on mall patronage and underlying motives of patronising specific shopping mall (Pan and Zinkhan, 2006; Roy, 1994). Chebat et al. (2009) argued that mall loyalty is significantly influenced by shoppers’ commitment towards the mall, which again is influenced by their positive awareness of the mall characteristics and shoppers’ self-congruity. Wakefield and Baker (1998) emphasised that shoppers’ excitement levels influence their re-patronage intention towards the mall. Their conceptual model revealed two key stimulus factors—mall environment and tenant variety that significantly influence shoppers’ excitement. Although previous research emphasised the importance of store variety in predicting mall loyalty, existing literature did not examine whether store loyalty can be considered as an antecedent of mall loyalty. Few researchers focused on the impact of store related characteristics on mall preference. For example— Nevin and Houston (1980) mentioned that presence of the preferred retailers attracts consumers to those shopping malls. Finn and Louviere (1996) claimed that specific anchor stores and other physical characteristics of the shopping centres have positive impact on consumers’ perception of image and their

273

choice for that shopping centres. However, Nevin and Houston (1980), and Finn and Louviere (1996) did not take the extra step to examine whether store loyalty has impact on shopping mall loyalty. This study also attempts to address this research gap. 2.5. Distance and shopping behaviour Shoppers are more likely to shop in attractive shopping centres, but the attractiveness decreases with distance (Dennis et al., 2002). Farther the consumers are from a store, the greater will be the number of intervening alternatives; hence the lower is their likelihood to patronise a store (Loudon and Della Bitta, 1993). The farther the outlet from the shopper in terms of time and effort to reach the outlet, or mileage to the outlet, the greater the cost for shoppers. Hence, distance of a shopping mall is related to travel time and cost which includes time, travel cost and psychic cost (Lusch and Lusch, 1987; cf. Darley and Lim, 1999). Current geographic studies of shopping behaviour that draw on the central place theory (Christaller, 1933; Christaller and Baskin, 1966), also state that shoppers often patronise their nearest retail shopping mall. For example, Dennis et al. (2000) focused on the relationship between shopping mall attractiveness and distance. The authors examined the influence of location and proximity and concluded that patronage of a shopping mall declines with increasing distance (Dennis et al., 2002). More recently, Dennis (2005) confirms that travel does play a strong role in a shopper’s choice of mall and found that customers’ relative spending is disproportional to relative distance from shopping malls. On the other hand, some researchers challenge the central place theory. Psychological factors such as ‘‘need for uniqueness’’ may lead to ‘‘non-rational’’ out-shopping behaviour. Piron (2002) pointed out that consumers engage in outshopping primarily for economic reasons. Burns and Warren (1995) recognised an individual’s need for personal differentiation as one of the key factors in shopping mall choice behaviour. In a similar study, Marjanen (1995) examines the usage of different shopping areas and changes in choice frequencies of different types of store location. Marjanen’s (1995) study finds that parking facilities, large size shopping area and availability of more diversified goods influence outshopping. In addition, customers’ multi-purpose shopping behaviour often leads them engaging in out-of-town shopping i.e. long distance shopping (e.g. O’Kelly, 1981; Hanson, 1980). Although distance of the shopping centre in terms of travel time and cost is often considered as one of the key considering factors (Runyon and Stewart, 1987), distance or travel time and cost are less likely to influence those shoppers who want to be dazzled and expect excitement out of shopping (Singer and Rosecky, 1995). Darley and Lim (1999) also mentioned that distance does not have any significant impact on shoppers’ patronisation when they hold more favourable store specific attitudes and favourable quality—availability perception about the store. Therefore, it is evident that distance does have impact on shopping mall patronage behaviour and existing research yields inconsistent results in this regard. Previous studies did not examine the moderating role of distance on shopping mall loyalty, which is one of the key purposes of this study.

3. Conceptual framework and hypotheses This research investigates the effects of store loyalty on shopping mall loyalty and whether distance moderates the relationship between these constructs. It also examines the moderating role of distance in relationship between store loyalty and its two

274

F.K. Rabbanee et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 19 (2012) 271–278

Store Relationship Commitment

H1b H1d

H 2a H 2b Store Loyalty

Perceived Value of Store

usually visited for grocery items (Marjanen, 1995). However, this can be explained more in terms of habitual buying than loyalty. Therefore, store loyalty contributes to mall loyalty in the context of long distance than short distance. Hence, we hypothesise that Mall Loyalty

H2a: Under short distance, store loyalty has no effect on shopping mall loyalty. H2b: Under long distance, store loyalty has a positive effect on shopping mall loyalty.

H 1a H1c

Distance (Long vs. Short)

Fig. 1. Hypothesised model.

antecedents—perceived store value and store relationship commitment. Fig. 1 presents the conceptual framework. Store loyalty is a consequence of perceived store value and store relationship commitment. Perceived value is an important antecedent of customer loyalty (Parasuraman and Grewal, 2000). Therefore, perceived value of a store has a positive influence on loyalty toward a particular store located within a shopping mall. However, the strength of this relationship depends on customers’ distance from the shopping mall. Dennis et al. (2002) mentioned that although shoppers are more likely to shop in an attractive shopping centre, the attractiveness decreases with distance. Previous research also argued that driving time and distance to stores have significant impact on store patronage (Mackay and Olshavsky, 1975; Runyon and Stewart, 1987). The closer the consumers are to a store, the greater is the likelihood to buy from that store (Loudon and Della Bitta, 1993). According to Morgan and Hunt (1994) and De Wulf et al. (2001), store relationship commitment has a positive influence on store loyalty. When customers reside within a relatively short distance from a shopping mall, the influence of store relationship commitment on store loyalty is likely to be positive. On the other hand, when customers reside over a relatively long distance from the shopping mall, such influence is likely to be reduced. For customers who reside relatively far from the shopping mall/store, it is somewhat more difficult to gain their store loyalty compared to those who live close to the mall given the same level of store relationship commitment. Based on the above discussion, we hypothesise that H1a: Under short distance, perceived store value has a positive effect on store loyalty. H1b: Under short distance, store relationship commitment has a positive effect on store loyalty. H1c: Under long distance, perceived store value has no effect on store loyalty. H1d: Under long distance, store relationship commitment has no effect on store loyalty. Wakefield and Baker (1998) mentioned that consumers are motivated to spend more time in a mall if the mall has store variety. Sometimes shoppers visit a specific mall due to their positive impression about one or many of the stores hosted by that shopping mall. Therefore, store loyalty is highly likely to contribute to shopping mall loyalty. Previous research also found that attraction towards specific stores and store variety influence outshopping (e.g. Lumpkin et al., 1986; Samli et al., 1983). However, the longitudinal study of Marjanen (1995) did not find any correlation between market share of a shopping centre and its perceived distance. The study found that the market shares of shopping centres increase in nearby areas as local shops are

4. Method 4.1. Data collection In order to examine the hypothesised model, a survey was conducted among the shoppers of one of the eight anchor stores (selected at random) from a large shopping mall consisting of a total of ninety-three stores. These stores range from fashion, household/ gifts, mobile phones, travel, health, pharmacies, etc. that create a substantial cross-section of the shopping mall’s commercial offering. Thus, the population of this study comprises of all individuals who shop at these given stores within the shopping mall. The data was collected at one point in time over a period of four weeks. The questionnaire was pre-tested amongst numerous shoppers, spanning a wide cross-section of age, gender and education. We approached a representative sample of 470 shoppers selected at random within the shopping mall over a period of four weeks. For sample selection, we followed the procedure defined in Sudman (1980). Shoppers were intercepted when she/he was about to enter any of the eight anchor stores selected for the study. This is to avoid the biased situation, where people who spend more time in the shopping mall or store would have a higher probability of selection. A total of 230 responses were received. Of this, 20 responses were discarded due to incompleteness. This resulted in an effective response rate of 44.7%. Customer distance data was extracted from the demographic information provided in the survey. In particular, shoppers provided names of their residential suburbs. Respondents’ suburbs are considered as short distance if either (1) they reside in the same suburb where the shopping mall is located, or (2) the actual driving distance from that suburb to the exact location of the shopping mall is within 4 km based on the Google Map information. Suburbs are treated as over long distance if either they are not directly bordered with the suburb where the shopping mall is located or the actual driving distance is beyond 4 km. Based on this criterion, within these 210 usable surveys, 107 responses (51%) were within short distance and 103 responses (49%) were over long distance. 4.2. Measures For each construct (latent variable) specified in the hypotheses, we generated a list of items to measure the constructs based on existing literature (see Appendix A). Original scales developed by Yang and Peterson (2004) were used with minor adaptations to measure the perceived store value. In particular, this scale encourages respondents to compare their value perceptions of the retail store in comparison to other similar retail stores. Whilst numerous scales measure relationship commitment, the scale by Morgan and Hunt (1994) continues to be one of the most widely used, and was hence used for this research. The store loyalty and shopping mall loyalty were measured with established scales adapted from Rosenbaum et al. (2005), which uses both positively and negatively worded questions for a single construct, causing the respondent to undergo a higher level of cognitive thinking during response and reduces the possibility to inflate or

F.K. Rabbanee et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 19 (2012) 271–278

Table 1 Descriptive statistics of the indicators.

Perceived store value PVPRICE PVFAIR PVFREE PVPRESEN PVFUTURE

Table 2 The measurement model fit.

Long distance (N¼ 103)

Short distance (N¼107)

Mean

Mean

4.215 4.385 3.940 4.430 4.477

Std. deviation

1.246 1.063 0.893 1.176 1.191

275

4.75 4.96 4.121 5.141 5.234

Indicator

Factor loading

PVPRICE PVFAIR PVFREE PVPRESEN PVFUTURE

Construct: store perceived value .77 .079 .79 .074 .60 .081 .95 .067 .95 .066

13.52 14.00 9.77 18.83 18.80

RCIMPORT RCMAINTA RCFAMILY RCCARE RCEFFORT RCNSIGNI

Construct: store relationship commitment .87 .074 .82 .088 .88 .087 .95 .076 .83 .092 .72 .099

12.21 16.06 18.75 21.74 16.44 13.13

BLEND BLPAY BLNLOYAL BLNSPEAK BLNCOMPE

Construct: store loyalty .65 .76 .66 .21 .52

FFBLEND FFBLPAY FFBLNSPE FFBLNLOY FFBLNCOM

Construct: shopping mall loyalty .57 .16 .67 .18 .30 .13 .66 .20 .46 .14

Std. deviation

1.246 1.167 1.365 1.125 1.063

Relationship commitment RCIMPORT 2.923 RCNSIGNI 4.553 RCMAINTA 3.308 RCFAMILY 2.630 RCCARE 2.846 RCEFFORT 2.708

1.373 1.569 1.508 1.431 1.439 1.356

4.174 3.565 4.804 3.891 4.163 4.082

1.552 1.712 1.514 1.738 1.646 1.747

Store loyalty BLNSPEAK BLEND BLNLOYAL BLPAY BLNCOMPE

5.754 4.400 3.908 3.277 2.523

1.415 1.680 1.716 1.504 1.125

5.619 5.815 5.268 3.870 3.060

1.897 1.309 1.606 1.830 1.423

Shopping mall loyalty FFBLNSPE 5.000 FFBLEND 4.908 FFBLNLOY 4.477 FFBLPAY 3.000 FFBLNCOM 2.538

2.008 1.506 1.719 1.579 1.229

5.076 5.674 5.261 3.700 3.054

2.012 1.407 1.676 1.642 1.401

deflate estimates of the correlation between the constructs. A sevenpoint Likert scale (7¼strongly agree, 6¼agree, 5¼slightly agree, 4¼neither agree nor disagree, 3¼slightly disagree, 2¼disagree, 1¼strongly disagree) was used to measure each of the constructs. General demographic information: gender, age, postcode, level of education and personal income was also collected for each respondent. Table 1 includes the descriptive statistics of the indicators. To minimise common method bias, the items of the questionnaire were randomized completely so that respondents are less likely to correlate questions or biased based on any prior belief or knowledge. Thus the validity of the constructs of this study is ensured.

Error

t-Value

.09 .14 .15 .12 .11

7.82 9.35 8.40 2.93 6.82

4.82 6.26 3.52 6.23 5.02

Short Distance

Store Relationship Commitment

0.64 (4.67)** 0.31 (1.25) Store Loyalty

Mall Loyalty

0.47 (4.07)** Perceived Value of Store

Long Distance

5. Analysis and results 5.1. The measurement model In this research, the total disaggregation model for measurement was used in which an underlying latent construct is measured through a number of true single-item measures (Anderson and Gerbing, 1984; Baumgartner and Homburg, 1996). This is because this method allows the ‘‘most explicit tests of the quality of construct measurement’’ (Baumgartner and Homburg, 1996). The measurement validity was assessed by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The CFA result reveals that the measures achieved convergent validity. Table 2 shows that the indicators well support most constructs with satisfactory statistics through coefficient, error, and t-value. The resulting total disaggregation analysis shows that the data fit the measurement model reasonably well. 5.2. The structural model Structural equation analysis was performed via LISREL to validate the structural model. We tested the hypothesis (H1a,c, H1b,d, and H2a,b) under both short and long distance conditions.

Store Relationship Commitment

0.68 (4.40)** 0.53 (3.03)* Store Loyalty

Mall Loyalty

0.15 (1.26) Perceived Value of Store

Fig. 2. The standardised structural model. Note: npo 0.005.

nn

p o0.0001.

For each hypothesis validation, in addition to the coefficient, the t-value, and R2 are examined. A t-value above 1.96 and an R2 value above 0.2 indicate the validity of the model. Fig. 2 presents the key results. In the short distance condition, the overall model showed a reasonable fit: Chi-Square (166) ¼288.74 (p¼0.00), the Goodnessof-Fit Index (GFI) ¼0.81, the Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI)¼0.78, the Comparative Fit Index (CFI) ¼0.94, the Normed Fit Index (NFI)¼0.88, and the Root Mean Square Residual (RMR)¼0.087. The overall GFIs for the long distance condition

276

F.K. Rabbanee et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 19 (2012) 271–278

Table 3 Short distance: standardized path coefficients. Short distance Hypothesised path

Coefficient (t-value) Hypothesis

.64 (4.67)nn Store RC-store loyalty (H1b) Perceived value-store loyalty (H1a) .47 (4.07)nn Store loyalty-shopping mall loyalty (H2a) .31 (1.25) nn

Supported Supported Supported

p o0.0001.

Table 4 Long distance: standardized path coefficients. Long distance Hypothesised path

Coefficient (t-value)

Hypothesis

Store RC-store loyalty (H1d) Perceived value-store loyalty (H1c) Store loyalty-shopping mall loyalty (H2b)

.68 (4.40)nn .15 (1.26) .53 (3.03)n

Not supported Supported Supported

n

p o 0.005. p o0.0001.

nn

were as follows: Chi-Square (166)¼382.59 (p ¼0.00), GFI ¼0.73, AGFI¼0.66, CFI ¼0.93, NFI ¼0.88, and RMR¼0.11. None of the gamma or beta modification indices exceeds 5.0, indicating no path changes will significantly improve the model. Taken together, the findings indicate a reasonably well fit between the proposed model and the data (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). Tables 3 and 4 show the structural model and the result. Model estimates are largely consistent with the hypotheses suggested in the proposed structural model (Fig. 1) except that H1d was not supported. For the short distance condition, the path coefficients and t-values are listed in Table 3. The first two path values (.64 (4.67) and .47 (4.07)) are both very significant. Thus both H1a and H1b are supported. Note that H2a posits that under short distance condition store loyalty has no effect on shopping mall loyalty. Given the insignificant coefficient with t-value (o1.96), this hypothesis is supported. Table 4 lists the path coefficients for the long distance condition. The last path value (.53 (3.03)) is very significant, thus H2b is supported. The coefficient and t-value in the path (Perceived value-store loyalty) indicates insignificant result, which supports the Hypothesis H1c. For the hypothesis H1d, the result shows that, under long distance, store relationship commitment still exerts a significantly positive influence on store loyalty. Therefore, the result does not support H1d. (Under long distance, store relationship commitment has no effect on store loyalty.) The resultant model suggests that relationship commitment has an effect on store loyalty regardless of distance. This corresponds with previous research (Garbarino and Johnson, 1999), in which the authors suggested that customer relationship proneness could have a mediating effect on customer loyalty, indicating that some consumers are more likely to engage in relationships than others.

6. Discussions and managerial implications Previous research on shopping mall appears to have focused on attributes of shopping malls per se and neglected the relationships between individual stores and the shopping mall hosting the stores. This study fills the research gap by investigating relationships among perceived value of store, store loyalty, store relationship commitment, distance and shopping mall loyalty.

The study shows a positive relationship between store loyalty and shopping mall loyalty. This is important considering that shopping mall tenants are crucial to the success of a shopping mall establishment. The findings reveal that store loyalty has positive effect on shopping mall loyalty under long distance but not under short distance. This study further shows that distance has a moderating effect on the relationship between perceived store value and store loyalty. Previous research suggests that perceived value is an antecedent of loyalty (McDougall and Levesque, 2000; Yang and Peterson, 2004). This study extended previous research concluding that impact of perceived value on loyalty varies on the basis of distance travelled i.e. distance moderates the relationship between perceived value and store loyalty. This study also shows that distance does moderate the impact of relationship commitment on store loyalty. As shown in the previous section, store relationship commitment significantly influences store loyalty regardless of distance. The results of this study suggest that customers’ commitment towards the relationship with a store is an important antecedent of store loyalty. This finding supports Hocutt (1998) that the level of commitment directly determines the strength of the relationship and the likelihood of maintaining it. Although long distance may be an undesirable aspect of this relationship, commitment implies that customers are willing to tolerate such undesirable attributes, leading to store loyalty. The finding that store loyalty has a significant positive effect on shopping mall loyalty has considerable managerial implications to shopping mall managers. Shopping mall managers need to understand the antecedents of shopping mall loyalty in order to create an enjoyable shopping mall experience. Findings of this study show that managers can enhance consumer shopping mall loyalty by improving store loyalty in addition to improvements to the mall per se. Shopping mall managers should not limit their marketing efforts to the mall itself. They should provide adequate support to the stores within the mall in order to enable them to enhance store loyalty which will ultimately contribute to mall loyalty. This strategy will be particularly useful for outshoppers. For example, shopping mall managers may wish to carry out outshopper customer segmentation based on their loyalty to different stores, and work together with stores that reside in the mall to formulate long-term business strategies to retain customer loyalty to the shopping mall. Based on our finding that under long distance, perceived store value has no effect on store loyalty, it is clear that providing adequate value does not automatically lead to store loyalty for outshoppers who need to bear extra travelling time to patronise the store. Given the rapid development of modern transportation infrastructure and urbanisation, the number of these outshoppers is increasing as they constantly travel beyond their communities for shopping. When more customers become outshoppers, store managers must come up with differentiated strategies that can gain loyalty from the growing number of outshoppers, thereby retaining these increasingly important customers in future. In other words, store managers must devise innovative ways of gaining loyalty from customers coming from long distances instead of merely relying on traditional methods of value related to their products and services. For customers who live nearby, store managers should keep them informed of the good features/ values of their products/services as perceived value is crucial for the store to retain them. The strong effect of relationship commitment on store loyalty regardless of distance suggests that it is possible to gain loyalty from customers coming from longer distances by establishing and maintaining smooth relationships. Store managers should have different relationship formation and further maintenance strategies for customers located in both short and long distances.

F.K. Rabbanee et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 19 (2012) 271–278

277

For long distance customers, store managers should try to build up a long-term personal relationship (i.e., between individual staffs and customers). Because efforts in increasing the perceived store value in terms of product and service only may not be sufficient enough to retain the current customers in future.

store of a shopping mall (e.g. Gwinner et al., 1998), which may influence their loyalty towards the store as well as to the shopping mall. This study does not consider the impact of such relational benefits. Hence future research could focus on this aspect.

7. Limitations and future research directions

Appendix A

The study has some limitations. First, shopper perception of different store attributes such as store quality of stores, its image, cleanliness, etc. determine the perceived attractiveness of the store (see McGoldrick and Thompson, 1992; Dennis et al., 2002) hence influence store loyalty. This study does not consider the effects of different store attributes on store loyalty and shopping mall loyalty. Second, although a shopping mall comprises both anchor stores as well as non-anchor stores, this study only considers the impact of anchor stores’ loyalty on shopping mall loyalty. It is beyond the scope of this study to consider the impact of non-anchor stores’ loyalty on shopping mall loyalty. Hence, future research could investigate the impact of loyalty towards non-anchor stores on shopping mall loyalty. Thirdly, this study primarily considers perceived value in terms of monetary aspect only. Further research could focus on examining the impact of perceived value in terms of other attributes such as availability of merchandises on store loyalty en-route to shopping mall loyalty. Last but not the least, shoppers might receive relational benefits such as social benefits and confidence benefits from a particular Table A1 Construct measurement. Construct Perceived store value PVPRICE Compared to alternative stores, Company X offers attractive prices for their products/services PVFAIR Compared to alternative stores, Company X charges me fairly for similar products/services PVFREE Compared to alternative stores, Company X provides more free services PVPRESEN Comparing what I paid at Company X to what I might get from competitive stores, I believe that so far Company X has provided me with good value PVFUTURE Comparing what I will pay at Company X to what I might get from competitive stores, I believe Company X will provide me with good value in the future Relationship commitment RCIMPORT y is very important to me RCNSIGNI y is of little significance to me (Reverse Coded) RCMAINTA y is something that I intend to maintain indefinitely RCFAMILY y is very much like being family RCCARE y is something that I really care about RCEFFORT y deserves my maximum effort to maintain Store loyalty BLNSPEAK I speak unfavorably about Company X to others (Reverse Coded) BLEND I can’t see me ending my relationship with Company X BLNLOYAL I do not consider myself loyal to Company X BLPAY I would pay more for products or services in order to buy them from Company X compared with prices at other stores BLNCOMPE I would be willing to try products or services from a competitor’s store Shopping mall loyalty FFBLNSPE I speak unfavorably about Shopping mall X to others (Reverse Coded) FFBLEND I can’t see me ending my relationship with Shopping mall X FFBLNLOY I do not consider myself loyal to Shopping mall X FFBLPAY I would pay more for products or services in order to buy them from Shopping mall X compared with prices at other stores FFBLNCOM I would be willing to try products or services from a competitive shopping mall (Reverse Coded)

See Table A1.

References Anderson, J.C., Gerbing, D.W., 1984. The effects of sampling error on convergence, impropoer soutions and goodness-of-fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika 49, 155–173. Ashley, B., 1997. Are malls in America’s future? Arthur Andersen Retailing Issues Letter 9 (6). (Texas A & M University Center for Retailing Studies). Babin, B.J., Attaway, J.S., 2000. Atmospheric affect as a tool for creating value and gaining share of customer. Journal of Business Research 49 (2), 91–99. Bagozzi, R., Yi, Y., 1988. On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 16, 74–94. Baumgartner, H., Homburg, C., 1996. Applications of structural equation modeling in marketing and consumer research: a review. International Journal of Research in Marketing 13 (2), 139–161. Beatty, S.E., Kahle, L.R., 1988. Alternative hierarchies of the attitude–behaviour relationship: the impact of brand commitment and habit. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Sciences 16, 1–10. Bloch, P.H., Ridgway, N.M., Dawson, S.A., 1994. The shopping mall as consumer habitat. Journal of Retailing 70 (1), 23–42. Bloemer, J., Odekerken-Schroder, G., 2002. Store satisfaction and store loyalty explained by customer and store-related factors. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Disstatisfaction and Complaining Behavior 15, 68–80. Bloemer, J., Ruyter, K.D., 1998. On the relationship between store image, store satisfaction and store loyalty. European Journal of Marketing 32 (5/6), 499–513. Bolton, R.N., Drew, J.H., 1991. A longitudinal analysis of the impact of services changes on customer attitudes. Journal of Marketing 55, 1–9. Burns, D., Warren, H., 1995. Need for uniqueness: shopping mall preference and choice activity. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 23 (12), 4–12. Chebat, J.C., Hedhli, K.E., Sirgy, M.J., 2009. How does shopper-based mall equity generate mall loyalty? A conceptual model and empirical evidence. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 16, 50–60. Chebat, J.C., Morrin, M., 2007. Colors and cultures: exploring the effects of mall de´cor on consumer perceptions. Journal of Business Research 60, 189–196. Chebat, J.C., Sirgy, M.J., St-James, V., 2006. Upscale image transfer from malls to stores: a self-image congruence explanation. Journal of Business Research 59, 1288–1296. Christaller, W., 1933. Central Places in Southern Germany (translated by CW Baskin, 1966). Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Christaller, W., Baskin, C., 1966. Central Places in Southern Germany. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. Darley, W.K., Lim, J.S., 1999. Effects of store image and attitude toward second hand stores on shopping frequency and distance traveled. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 27 (8), 311–318. Davies, R.L., Howard, E., Reynolds, J., 1993. The Shopping Industry 1993: Thirty Years of Growth. Oxford Institute of Retail Management/British Council for Shopping Centres, Oxford. ¨ De Wulf, K., Odekerken-Schroder, G., Iacobucci, D., 2001. Investments in consumer relationships: a cross-country and cross-industry exploration. Journal of Marketing 65, 33–50. Dennis, C., 2005. Objects of Desire: Consumer Behavior in Shopping Centre Choices. Palgrave Macmillan, London. Dennis, C., Murphy, J., Marsland, D., Cockett, T., Patel, T., 2002. Measuring image: shopping centre case studies. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research 12, 355–373. Dennis, C.E., Marsland, D., Cockett, W.A., 2000. Objects of desire: attraction and distance in shopping centre choice. International Journal of New Product Development and Innovation Management 2, 43–60. Dennis, C.E., Marsland, D., Cockett, W.A., 2002. Central place practice: shopping centre attractiveness measures, hinterland boundaries and the UK retail hierarchy. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 9, 185–199. Eggert, A., Ulaga, W., 2002. Customer perceived value: a substitute for satisfaction in business markets? Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing 17 (2/3), 107–118. Evanschitzky, H., Iyer, G.R., Plassmann, H., Niessing, J., Meffert, H., 2006. The relative strength of affective commitment in securing loyalty in service relationships. Journal of Business Research 59, 1207–1213. Finn, A., Louviere, J.J., 1996. Shopping centre image, consideration and choice: anchor store contribution. Journal of Business Research 35, 241–251.

278

F.K. Rabbanee et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 19 (2012) 271–278

Fullerton, G., 2003. When does commitment lead to loyalty? Journal of Service Research 5 (4), 333–344. Gambill, M.G., 2000. Shopping centre branding does it make sense. Real Estate Issues 25, 13–27. Garbarino, E., Johnson, M.S., 1999. The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment in customer relationships. Journal of Marketing 63, 70–87. Gattuso, G., 1994. Kiosks build mall loyalty and database. Direct Marketing 57 (6), 26–27. Gundlach, G.T., Archol, R.S., Mentzer, J.T., 1995. The structure of commitment in exchange. Journal of Marketing 59, 78–92. Guy, C.M., 1994. The Retail Development Process: Location, Property and Planning. Routledge, London. Gwinner, K.P., Gremler, D.D., Bitner, M.J., 1998. Relational benefits in service industries: the customer’s perspective. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 26 (2), 101–114. Hanson, S., 1980. Spatial diversification and multipurpose travel: implications for choice theory. Geographical Analysis 12, 245–257. Haytko, D., Baker, J., 2004. It’s all at the mall: exploring adolescent girls’ experiences. Journal of Retailing 80, 67–83. Hocutt, M.A., 1998. Relationship dissolution model: antecedents of relationship commitment and the likelihood of dissolving a relationship. International Journal of Service Industry Management 9, 189–200. Holbrook, M.B., 1994. The nature of customer’s value: an axiology of service in consumption experience. In: Rust, R.T., Oliver, R.L. (Eds.), Service Quality: New Directions in Theory and Practice. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 21–71. Kirkup, M., Rafiq, M., 1994. Managing tenant mix in new shopping centres. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 22, 29–37. Lavayssie re, B., Mullen, J., 2007. Customer satisfaction does not always guarantee loyalty. LIMRA’s MarketFacts Quarterly 26 (1), 8–14. Lehew, M.L.A., Burgess, B., Wesley, S., 2002. Expanding the loyalty concept to include preference for a shopping mall. International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research 12 (3), 225–236. Loudon, D.L., Della Bitta, A.J., 1993. Consumer Behaviour: Concepts and Applications. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Lumpkin, J.R., Hawes, J.M., Darden, W.R., 1986. Shopping patterns of the rural consumer: exploring the relationship between shopping orientations and out shopping. Journal of Business Research 14, 63–81. Lusch, R.F., Lusch, V.N., 1987. Principles of Marketing. Kent Publishing Company, Boston, MA. Macintosh, G., Lockshin, L.S., 1997. Retail relationships and store loyalty: a multilevel perspective. International Journal of Research in Marketing 14, 487–497. Mackay, D.B., Olshavsky, R.W., 1975. Cognitive maps of retail locations: an investigation of some basic issues. Journal of Consumer Research 2, 197–205. Marjanen, H., 1995. Longitudinal study on consumer spatial shopping behavior with special reference to out-of-town shopping experiences from Turku, Finland. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 2, 163–174. McDougall, G.H.G., Levesque, T., 2000. Customer satisfaction with services: putting perceived value into the equation. Journal of Services Marketing 14, 392–410. McGoldrick, P.J., Thompson, M.G., 1992. The role of image in the attraction of the out of town centre. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research 2 (1), 81–98. Moorman, C., Zaltman, G., Deshpande, R., 1992. Relationships between providers and users of market research: The dynamics of trust within and between organizations. Journal of Marketing Research XXIX, 314–328. Morgan, R.M., Hunt, S.D., 1994. The commitment–trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing 58, 20–38. Nevin, J., Houston, M., 1980. Image as a component of attraction to intra-urban shopping areas. Journal of Retailing 56, 77–93. O’Kelly, M., 1981. A model of the demand for retail facilities, incorporating multistop, multipurpose trips. Geographical Analysis 13, 134–148.

Oliver, R.L., DeSarbo, W.S., 1988. Response determinants in satisfaction judgments. Journal of Consumer Research 14, 495–508. Osman, M.Z., 1993. A conceptual model of retail image influences on loyalty patronage behavior. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research 31, 149–166. OXIRM, 1999. The Shopping Centre Industry: Its Importance to the UK Economy. Oxford Institute of Retail Management, Oxford, MCB. Pan, Y., Zinkhan, G., 2006. Determinants of retail patronage: a meta-analytical perspective. Journal of Retailing 82, 229–243. Parasuraman, A., Grewal, D., 2000. The impact of technology on the quality-valueloyalty chain: a research agenda. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 28 (1), 168–174. Piron, Francis, 2002. International out shopping and ethnocentrism. European Journal of Marketing 36 (1/2), 189–210. Raajpoot, N.A., Sharma, A., Chebat, J.C., 2008. The role of gender and work status in shopping center patronage. Journal of Business Research 61, 825–833. Reynolds, E.D., Darden, W.B., Martin, W.S., 1974–1975. Developing an image of store-loyal customer. Journal of Retailing 50 (4), 73–84. Rosenbaum, M.S., Ostrom, A.L., Kuntze, R., 2005. Loyalty programs and a sense of community. Journal of Services Marketing 19, 222–233. Roy, A., 1994. Correlates of mall visit frequency. Journal of Retailing 70 (2), 139–161. Runyon, K.E., Stewart, D.W., 1987. Consumer Behaviour and the Practice of Marketing. Merrill Publishing Company, Columbus, OH. Salegna, G.J., Goodwin, S.A., 2005. Consumer loyalty to service providers: an integrated conceptual model. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior 18, 51–67. Samli, A., Riecken, C.G., Yavas, U., 1983. Inter-market shopping behaviour and the small community: problems and prospects of a widespread phenomenon. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 11, 1–14. Shermach, K., 1995. Shopping Malls Becoming ‘Pretty Sophisticated’. Marketing News. Singer, D.D., Rosecky, R., 1995. Reshaping the community shopping center. Journal of Property Management 60, 36–40. Sirdeshmukh, D., Singh, J., Sabol, B., 2002. Consumer trust, value, and loyalty in relational exchanges. The Journal of Marketing 66, 15–37. Sirgy, M.J., Samli, A.C., 1985. A path analytic model of store loyalty involving selfconcept, store image, geographic loyalty, and socioeconomic status. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Sciences 13 (3), 265–291. Sudman, S., 1980. Improving the quality of shopping center sampling. Journal of Marketing Research XVII, 423–431. Teller, C., 2008. Shopping streets versus shopping malls—determinants of agglomeration format attractiveness from the consumers’ point of view. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research 18, 381–403. Templin, Neal, 1997. Mall designer is master of (Ersatz) regional flavour. The Wall Street Journal, B1. Thomson, M., MacInnis, D.J., Park, C.W., 2005. The ties that bind: measuring the strength of consumers’ emotional attachments to brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology 15 (1), 77–91. Wakefield, K.L., Baker, J., 1998. Excitement at the mall: determinants and effects on shopping response. Journal of Retailing 74 (4), 515–539. Wilson, D.T., 1995. An integrated model of buyer–seller relationships. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 23 (4), 335–345. Wright, C., Sparks, L., 1999. Loyalty saturation in retailing: exploring the end of retail loyalty cards? International Journal of Retail Distribution Management 27, 429–440. Yang, Z., Peterson, R.T., 2004. Customer perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty: the role of switching costs. Psychology & Marketing 21 (10), 799–822. Zeithaml, V.A., 1988. Consumer perceptions of price, quality and value: a meansend model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing 52, 2–22.