Services innovation impact to customer satisfaction and customer value enhancement in airport

Technology in Society xxx (2015) 1e12

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Technology in Society journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/techsoc

Services innovation impact to customer satisfaction and customer value enhancement in airport* James K.C. Chen*, Amrita Batchuluun, Javkhuu Batnasan Asia University, Taichung, Taiwan

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 1 January 2015 Received in revised form 15 May 2015 Accepted 19 May 2015 Available online xxx

Public transportation service is a crucial issue in every country; especially air transportation. It requires convenient, fast, comfortable, and reliable service from air companies. This research paper aims to create an evaluation model for service innovation impact, customer satisfaction and customer value enhancement in an airport. This paper uses means-end theory to investigate service innovation factors and examines influence to the relationship between customer satisfaction and customer value. 300 samples of data were collected through online survey and questionnaire within two months periods. The result shows that customer value was influenced by customer satisfaction and service innovation. This study conducted analysis on innovative services such as self-check-in kiosk, X-ray, social media communication, and micro-hotels in an airport. Result indicates all four services revealed a positive moderation effect. The security check was the most important evaluation factor in an airport service. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Customer satisfaction (CS) Customer value (CV) Airport service Service innovation (SI)

1. Introduction Air transport plays an important role in moving people and/or the transportation of products from one location to another, whether domestic or international travel. Additionally, air transport can be crucial when the origin and final destination are separated by difficult landscape. A country's economy gains large amount of incomparable benefits from airport industry. The airport and air transport promote an improved quality of life and help improve living standards. The most important contribution of the air transport industry is its impact on business growth in the global and national economy. The worldwide market for airport services exceeded $102 billion in 2012, as recorded 3% annual growth during four preceding years according to market line reports. Market volume increases almost 2% over the same four-year period. Entry and exit costs are high in this market, and at the national level, only a few large companies dominate and concentrate to the airport industry. According to the

* The authors thank the peer-reviewers, Arch G. Woodside, Boston College, and two Technology in Society reviewers, for their valuable comments of an early version of this manuscript. * Corresponding author. Department of Business Administration, Asia University, Taichung 41354, Taiwan. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (J.K.C. Chen), [email protected] (A. Batchuluun), [email protected] (J. Batnasan).

Xerfi report, the United States of America leads the global airport industry with the highest number of airports. Most airports in the world are located in European countries, North America and Asia [7]. According to the World Factbook [8], there are a total of 43,794 airports in the world. The top 10 airports by passenger volume are stated in Table 1: The air transport industry efficiently improves the economic activity of other businesses that enables a catalyst for world trade; positively influencing domestic and international tourism, and contributes to global productivity. Moreover, it increases the efficiency of the supply chain, facilitates access to international and domestic markets and investments, and stimulates innovation by providing consumer welfare benefits. Many scholars highlight customer value and its management, which is the next source of competitive advantage for modern companies [1e3]. In accordance to, this paper focuses on the following research questions (1) what are the most influential factors to gain customer satisfaction? (2) what is the relationship between customer satisfaction and customer value? (3) what is the moderating effect of service innovation impact to enhance customer value? Highlighting the customer perception in the airport industry provides competitive advantages for airports to increase service innovation. Zeithaml [4] stated that the means-end model and synthesis of evidence examine consumer perceptions of price quality and value. This paper uses means-end theory to investigate

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.05.010 0160-791X/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: J.K.C. Chen, et al., Services innovation impact to customer satisfaction and customer value enhancement in airport, Technology in Society (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.05.010

2

J.K.C. Chen et al. / Technology in Society xxx (2015) 1e12 Table 1 TOP 10 airport by passenger volume. Airports

Passengers

1. Atlanta (ATL) 2. Beijing (PEK) 3. London (LHR) 4. Tokyo (HND) 5. Chicago (ORD) 6. Los Angeles (LAX) 7. Paris (GDG) 8. Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW) 9. Dubai (DXB) 10. Jakarta (CGK)

95,672,104 81,908,740 70,051,902 67,824,747 67,124,607 63,849,335 61,478,475 58,887,570 58,392.171 57,839,056

Source: The World Factbook [8].

suitable products and services innovation to achieve the customer satisfaction and customer value at the airport. According to the definition given by Van Der Haart, Kemp, & Omta [5], the customer value concept assesses the value of a product or service, which is offered to a customer while taking its tangible and intangible features into account. Every airport management requires understanding the nature of customer satisfaction and customer value to improve the quality of service at the airports, which as “what is received and what is sacrificed by a customer” [6]. A survey-based quantitative research method was used to collect data. A total of 300 passengers were involved in the survey, who received served in different airports. This study explores the relationship between certain factors (airport accessibility, the security check and terminal facilities), customer satisfaction and the effect or influence of moderating variable, service innovation, on the relationship between customer satisfaction and customer value. The structural equation model (SEM) was employed to analyze relationships between variables and examine the hypothesis testing. This article has the following structure. Section 2 provides the theoretical background for support of this research. Section 3 describes the research method and process. Section 4 presents data analysis and discussion. Section 5 concludes and offers recommendations for future research. 2. Theoretical background Scholars dig deeper into the essence of customer-focus, so that the obvious questions have emerged as follows: What do we need to address to increase the number of customers at the airport [7]? and, How can we win customers in the competitive business environment [3]? These questions lead to discussion, which results in the concepts of customer satisfaction and value. Yet, its versatility and diverse interpretations to this day remains a relatively fragmented topic in management and marketing literatures of airport services. An airport must increase its customers' trust through a few distinctive issues, which are airport accessibility, the security check, and terminal facilities both for arrival and departure terminals that reflect customer satisfaction and customer value [10e13]. Moreover, investigation effects of service innovation concerning suitable products/services at the airport is useful for customer experience. It is based on a key paper “innovation as the core competency of a service organization [13]”. These innovation events include services of self-check-in kiosk, X-ray, social media communication, and micro-hotels. 2.1. Airport accessibility Accessibility refers to the ease of reaching goods, services, activities and destinations, which together are called opportunities.

Opportunities can be defined as the potential for interaction and exchange. Accessibility can be defined in terms of potential or in terms of activity (opportunities that are reached). Even people who don't currently use a particular form of access to the airport may value having it available for possible future use (called option value). Access is the goal of the most transport activities, except the small portion of travel for which mobility is an end in itself (e.g., jogging, cruising, leisure train rides). Airport accessibility (AA) in this paper will be discussed as how passengers rate the ease of leaving a terminal and dropping off passengers in front of a terminal; overall parking; the direction of traffic flow on airport grounds and the attractiveness of airport grounds [9]. Airport terminals sometimes have difficult or complicated access by public transit, particularly for people carrying heavy loads, people with children, or even people with disabilities. Also, it is often difficult to obtain accurate information on alternative modes for access. However, different countries have different regulations on transport accessibility. Some countries have their own regulations or norms to encourage disabled people to access particular destinations easily. Due to this difference, accessibility of the building by disabled travelers varies. Airport accessibility can include phone numbers, e-addresses, bus service, inter-terminal buses, car rentals/courtesy vehicles, taxicabs/shuttle services, airport parking, elevators in terminals so on. Within the airport itself, disabled travelers should have ease of access between check-in counters, the security check points and the boarding terminals. This is usually accommodated through lift and ramp access. 2.2. Security check Gkritza et al. [10] point out that an airport security check (SC) refers to techniques and methods used in protecting passengers, staff and the aircraft from accidental or malicious harm, crime and other threats. Every day, large numbers of people pass through airports that may cause them to be potential targets for terrorism and other forms of crime just because of the number of people gathered in a particular location. Similarly, the high concentration of people in a large airline may cause a potential high death rate because of attacks on the aircraft, and/or hijack of an airplane. A lethal weapon may provide the means for terrorism, regardless of whether or not they succeed, due to the documentation of their high profile following various attacks and attempts around the globe. Airport security can be evaluated by passengers and how they rate the amount of time required for a security check, the professionalism of a security staff, and confidence in the security process to make the passengers feel safe. Airport security attempts to prevent any threats or potential dangers from arising or entering the country through the airport. If airport security screening is high, then chances of any dangerous situations, illegal items or threats entering into an aircraft, an airport and country are greatly reduced. Therefore, airport security serves several purposes: to protect the airport and country from any threatening events, and to reassure the safety of all traveling people. Despite these fact, passengers may still find it hard to accept delays at the airport security screening checkpoints. There still remains a clear correlation between customer satisfaction, wait times and perceived quality in security [10]. Passenger satisfaction reports were reviewed to identify the crucial issues that passengers consider when determining whether their service experience by the airport was satisfactory. The sources of passenger satisfaction data are airline and airport passenger opinions based on the World Airport Awards and the North America Airport Satisfaction Study. “Queues at curbside, check in, and security” are common issues that

Please cite this article in press as: J.K.C. Chen, et al., Services innovation impact to customer satisfaction and customer value enhancement in airport, Technology in Society (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.05.010

J.K.C. Chen et al. / Technology in Society xxx (2015) 1e12

had a positive or negative effect from a number of passengers on their airport experience. Airport check-in uses service counters at commercial airports for air travel. The check-in is normally handled by an airline company or a handling agent working on behalf of an airline company. Passengers usually first hand over baggage that they do not wish or are not allowed to carry on an aircraft's cabin and then receive a boarding pass before they can proceed to board their aircraft. Check-in is usually the first procedure for a passenger when arriving at an airport, as airline regulations require passengers to check-in by certain times prior to the departure of a flight. The time between check-in and departure spans from 40 min to 4 h, depending on the destination and the airline. During this process, the passenger can request seating preference, inquire about flight or destination information, make changes to their reservations, accumulate frequent flyer program miles, or pay for upgrades [11]. 2.3. Services innovation There are several definitions for the concept of service innovation (SI) and all of them relate to performance improvement and capacity strengthening of the firm to compete with other firms. In many cases, provision of service can be more valuable to the company than the selling products since products tend to become commodities at a faster pace [12,13]. Service innovation means something new and beneficial for targeted groups [14,15] that create values for current and future customers [16]. The concept can encompass a variety of areas and different levels of interactivity in the development of the whole service process [17]. Consequently, to be considered successful in service innovation, all engaged parties must be efficient, since bottlenecks or barriers in certain areas of the process can undermine the effectiveness of the service innovation. Studies related to service innovation were undertaken by Refs. [18], embedding various ways of looking at service innovation, such as procedures to manage service innovation [19], processes for implementing service innovation [20] and user-involvement in innovating services [21]. Customer orientation is a strategy directly related to the concept of level of service (LOS) at the airport [22]. Although the use of the concept is established in the private sector, the researcher believes, it is necessary that state-owned airports also use it since their mission is to serve the population well. Customer-focused companies are always looking to create a continuous flow of customer value [23], without disregarding the user's perspective [24], a framework that is equally relevant to state-owned airports. There is service innovation events in the airport as follows: 2.3.1. Kiosk The adoption of self-service is gaining importance for two main reasons, which are to increase efficiency and to reduce costs and labor. Self-service puts control into the hands of customers. It has been observed that customers are more open to experiment with kiosks [24,25]. Other industries such as retail, finance, hotels are considering use self-service kiosks. Even libraries use self-service technologies to loan books. Customers are ready to handle bigger transactions with kiosks, thus many self-service models have been tested [25]. There is a new technology called self-service technology (SST). A self-service technology is an object which allows customers to interact with self-service software (SSS). Such kiosks can be found in various locations, and they typically employ software in a hard, protective case. A self-service kiosk (SSK) is also a computer placed at a table or desk in an accessible area for customers to use. Selfservice access that is internet-based must meet specific requirements of information technology as well as the general

3

requirements of the access system architecture. The integration of different functions, such as electronic payment, digital signature can enable electronic transactions that allow “one-stop-services or non-stop-services”. When consumers used a self-service transaction process [26], they felt spontaneous and enjoyed being spontaneous. However, for other consumers, the service technology transfer process brought their anxiety and doubts; so that consumers consider the emotional cost of new technologies, and whether it is worthwhile or not [27]. There are many studies of self-service technology [24], which mostly focused on the self-service technology attributes of the service quality performance, the impact of service providers, and the impact factors of the performance of self-service technologies (SSTs). 2.3.2. X-ray X-ray scanners take time, as they need to set up the passenger in an appropriate position, capture the image, have the image read by remote security personnel, and then relay results back to personnel at the security checkpoint. For any given individual, this does not take long time, but in major airports during peak travel times, it could lead to major delays. Many airports have already found their security checkpoints overwhelmed with a concern that additional delays could increase pressure on security personnel and make them less effective. Backscatter X-rays used in security checkpoints are much weaker than medical x-rays. These rays don't go through flesh and bones. Instead, they penetrate clothing and about an inch into the body, where the body tissues scatter and ricochet the rays back toward the sensor. 2.3.3. Use of social media by airports Airports are increasingly embracing social media as a means of communication [28] and there are now numerous examples of airports offering the opportunity to ‘Like’ them on Facebook, ‘Follow’ them on Twitter and ‘View’ videos and photos about them on YouTube and Flickr. In recent years, a number of airports have broaden the use of social media. And yet, it still appears to be biased towards larger airports and airports that are located in North America or Europe [30]. There may also be differences according to the way in which an airport is owned and operated because the use of social media is to some extent a reflection and a driver of the business transformation [29]. Social media can be defined as “the group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, and that allow the creation and exchange of user-generated content” [29,31]. During the last decade, the growth of social media usage has been remarkable. According to the respective sites, the number of users in 2013 exceeded 800 million on Facebook, 200 million on Twitter and 100 million on LinkedIn. YouTube has 490 million unique users worldwide per month with about 92 billion page views each month. Most social media applications are traditionally designed for, and used by, friends or people with mutual interests, as a means of connecting, communicating and interacting with each other [32]. However, an increasing number of businesses have a social media presence, offering direct links from their corporate websites, and use it to promote their brands and support the creation of brand communities [31]. Worldwide expenditure of businesses on online social network advertising, including building and maintaining a social media presence, is estimated to have reached US$6 billion in 2011. This includes general social networking sites where social networking is the primary activity. Facebook alone have attracted US$4 billion [33]. Academic literature increasingly calls for a need to investigate how best to manage the social media mix and whether it provides a

Please cite this article in press as: J.K.C. Chen, et al., Services innovation impact to customer satisfaction and customer value enhancement in airport, Technology in Society (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.05.010

4

J.K.C. Chen et al. / Technology in Society xxx (2015) 1e12

return on investment [34]. There have also been a number of high profile examples of misuse by businesses and/or their employees. For instance, Belkin was caught offering money to anybody who posted a 100% positive review of their products on Amazon. Honda's manager of product planning was caught secretly posting positive reviews about one of their new cars on Facebook stating that he would “get this car in a heartbeat”.

2.3.4. Airport micro hotels Airports are no place to sleep, as any weary traveler who has tried to grab a few minutes shut eye during a layover can attest [35]. However, it may be changing, thanks to a new breed of short-stay, pay by the hour micro-hotels popping up in airport terminals around the world. Based loosely on the concept of the Japanese “capsule hotel,” these cabins and boxes allow sleepy travelers to seal themselves off from the surrounding commotion for a 30 min power nap or a solid night's sleep without having to leave the terminal for a hotel. Some even contain toilets and showers. Moreover, they are spreading beyond the airport terminal. Yotel, which operates short-stay “cabins” in airports in London and Amsterdam, has also opened a hotel in Manhattan based on a similar concept, while Sleep-box, which has a demonstration model in Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport, will open 60 of its units in downtown Moscow in a matter of weeks. Here are five of the best micro-hotels proving that size is not everything. (a) Yotel Yotel has operated its pod hotels in London's Heathrow and Gatwick airports since 2007 and in Amsterdam's Schiphol since 2008. Yotel also operates a hotel based on a similar concept in New York City, with 669 slightly larger rooms. Yotel marketing director Jo Berrington said the airport cabins had very high occupancy rates, and the company planned to roll out its operations in other airports soon [35]. (b) Napcabs Napcabs are 4-square-meter, self-service booths operating in Terminal two of Munich Airport. Six cabins are currently in operation, with plans to add more in the coming months. They contain a bed, desk, air conditioning, internet access and a TV program [35]. (c) Sleep-box The cozy, 4-square-meter sleepbox contains a maximum of three bunk beds, bedside tables, electrical outlets, and reading lamps and can be equipped with a television and alarm clock. A model Sleepbox was installed in the Aeroexpress terminal of Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport in August, and will be put into commercial use in coming weeks when 60 are installed for use in downtown Moscow. The Sleepbox's designers envisage the units will also be used in train stations, shopping malls and exhibition centers [35]. (d) Minute suites Minute Suites provides private rest spaces for travelers to relax, nap or work inside the security areas at two U.S. airports. Atlanta's HartsfieldeJackson International Airport has hosted the microrooms since late 2009. Philadelphia International Airport also installed 13 suites in 2011. (e) Snooze cube

Situated in Terminal One of the Dubai International Airport, snooze cube offers compact and soundproof rooms complete with bed, touch screen TV and internet access. All snooze cubes are connected to the airport's flight information system to ensure that passengers do not miss their flights [35]. 2.4. Customer satisfaction In many cases, satisfaction is known to be a great value in understanding customer's perception and evaluation [36]. Many scholars try to make definition and theoretical framework about how services should be performed and how to delivery service quality to improve customer satisfaction (36e40). Customer satisfaction (CS) is customer's feeling on received products and services [36,40]. This feeling can be a reaction to an immediate use situation or an overall reaction to a series of use situation experience. Satisfaction is strictly tied to the customer's perception or product performance. Next, perceived product (or service) performance is compared with a standard representing the service performance that the customer expected [39]. It is said that “The expectancy disconfirmation with performance (EDP) framework [36] is one of the most common theories of consumer satisfaction”. A basic assumption is that satisfaction or dissatisfaction results from a comparison of expectations with actual performance. The disconfirmation effect, which is separated to the effect of expectations and performance, has been described as the subjective difference between expectation and performance. Confirmed or disconfirmed expectations affect whether one feels satisfied or dissatisfied with the service and implies an evaluation of better or worse than expected. Thus, satisfaction often starts with the expectations a person has. Expectations seem to be based on and influenced by personal needs, word-of-mouth communication, and past experiences [36,39,40]. The comparison of perceived performance can be compare with the comparison of the standard result in disconfirmation, or the difference between what was expected and what was received [37]. It means that an area immediately surrounding the comparison standard is labeled the “zone of indifference”. This zone indicates that, the customer's perspective, there may be some latitude within which product or service performance may vary but will still be evaluated as “meeting expectations”. 2.5. Customer value Value to the seller is realized when a transaction is finalized, i.e. value equals the money paid for the product. This is well-reflected in Porter's definitions of value: “In competitive terms, value is the amount buyers are willing to pay for what a firm provides them” [38]. Value in management literature can, on a general level, be divided into three categories: shareholder value, stakeholder value and customer value. From these values, customer value has been argued and shown to be the fundamental source of the other two value forms [41e43]. Even though maximizing shareholder value has been the axiom of financial economists as the basis for success, the fundamental value is created in the relationship to the customer. In the end, shareholder value is derived from profitable customer relationships [12], not from the stock market. Customer value success is a concept of continuing interest in the academic world and a plethora of research, which has emerged highlighting its importance in driving success as well as its relationship to other central concepts, such as customer satisfaction, loyalty and retention [46]. Currently, there is no widely accepted way of pulling the diverse views together and build a solid ground to further develop the research upon [44,45]. The use of the concept of value across different fields further complicates finding a

Please cite this article in press as: J.K.C. Chen, et al., Services innovation impact to customer satisfaction and customer value enhancement in airport, Technology in Society (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.05.010

J.K.C. Chen et al. / Technology in Society xxx (2015) 1e12

consistent definition “value as a concept is used in e.g. finance, management, economics, ethics, justice, aesthetics and marketing, and further within marketing in connection to pricing, CRM and consumer behavior” [46]. Ulaga [47] aptly stated “The fundamental question of how to conceptualize value still merits further investigation”. A further issue that may complicate the discussion of customer value is when the concepts “value” and “values” become mixed. To start off, the researcher will define the concept of “values” and clearly differentiate it from our notion of “value”.

2.5.1. Scholarly concepts of customer value Customer value (CV) are identified by some central, generally agreed characteristics surrounding value need to be clarified. Value agreed in management literature [3,4,44,46,48,49] is as follows: * Subjective: Customer value cannot be determined in one exact figure or amount, since “beauty is always in the eyes if the beholder.” * Customer focused: Customer value is determined by the customer's perception in the market place, not by the supplier's assumptions in the factory. * Evolving over time: The customer's perception of value may change over time both in terms of the value elements included as well as in terms of the relative value given to different elements. * Contextual: Customer value is linked to the use of some product, service or solution. There are two contrasting scholar's opinionsethe view that defines value as consisting of what the recipient receives, and the view that sees value as a trade-off between what is received and what is given up. What the customer receives (e.g. cost savings) are the named benefits, and what the customer gives up (e.g. price) sacrificed. Even though these scholars continue to debate over what the definition of customer value should be, they discuss in essence, two completely different things. Customer value, as perceived by academic thought, can be described as “the value a product offers to a customer, taking all its tangible and intangible features into account” [50]. The scholar's defines “value as whatever the consumer wants in a product” with value being built from all the benefits the product can contribute to a specific customer [45]. This sort of value is also called “utility value” by some researchers. Value, as a sum of benefits, is also widely named “customer desired value”. Customer desired value focuses on what the customer wants to have from a product or service offering in a specific use situation in order to achieve the customer's desired goals [50]. As customer desired value seeks to explain the customer's needs, wants and desires in an offering [51], researcher have used means-end theory as the theoretical background for interpreting customer value [52]. Means-end theory seeks to explain how the customer attempts to achieve the desired end-state or goal (end) by choosing products or services (means) that enable achieving this [4,46,52]. The theory assumes that the customer behaves rationally and strives to minimize undesirable consequences and maximize desirable outcome [51]. The second major academic thought chooses to include the sacrifice side of the interchange between customer and supplier, i.e. the time and effort needed to purchase and use the product, purchase price, etc. Rust and Oliver [6] explained the idea in a simple way as “value integrated with received and sacrificed to customer perceived value”. This view of value is called “customer perceived value” i.e. the perception of net value achieved considering all relevant benefits and sacrifices involved in purchasing and using the offering [2,51].

5

In general, customer perceived value consists of two dimensions: product oriented perceived value and relationshiporiented perceived value. Product oriented value, which is characteristic of the goods-dominant logic (GDL), limits the value tradeoff to the transaction. Product oriented perceived value may thus be the difference between perceived quality and price, but may also be extended to include the difference between intrinsic indicators inherent to the product itself. Relationship-oriented perceived value broadens the scope to service-dominant logic (SDL) to include the relationship, the process and the risk components of € nroos [53] these the offering [51]. According to Ravald and Gro components become more important the longer the customer supplier relationship endures, and must be included in the evaluation of the transaction as benefits and sacrifices of preserving the relationship. 3. Research methodology 3.1. Research framework and hypotheses Based on literature review, the conceptual framework (Fig. 1) below is constructed as follows: (1) dependent variables are customer value (CV) and customer satisfaction (CS); (2) moderating variables is service innovation (SI); and (3) independent variables are airport accessibility (AA), the security check (SC) and terminal facilities (TF), to test significance of relationships among their theoretical statements in airport passengers. Based on this theoretical framework and the purpose of this study, five hypotheses are developed to answer research questions. The hypotheses are summarized in Table 2. 3.2. Research design In accordance with the developed hypothesis the questionnaire constructed by referring to the previous research which focused on customer value through customer satisfaction. The questionnaire's purpose is to identify factors that influence customer satisfaction toward the airport. Questionnaire developed with a total of 38 questions, of which 5 questions for airport accessibility as AA1eAA5, 6 questions for security check SC1eSC5, 9 questions for terminal facility TF1eTF7, 5 questions for customer satisfaction CS1-SC5, 8 questions for customer value CV1eCV8, and 5 questions for service innovation SI1eSI5, respectively as Appendix Table 1. A pre-test of the questionnaire was done to verify the reliability of the scale items. The main study questionnaires were collected. This study used a quantitative research design to: (1) investigate the most influential factors in gaining customer satisfaction, (2) investigate the relationship between customer satisfaction and customer value, and (3) investigate the effect of service innovation in relationship between customer satisfaction and customer value. The factors of this research were airport accessibility, the security check and terminal facilities. 3.3. Data collection and sampling The target population of this study were passengers from various Asian countries. Data was collected through online and asking respondent questionnaires for two months. A survey was conducted between 5th October to 2nd December 2013 and the questionnaires were filled out by respondents. First, the survey was posted on Google Docs and linked to the researcher's Facebook pages with a message asking any passenger of an airport in an Asian country for their cooperation. Second, in order to reach a higher response rate from participants, the researcher has sent private

Please cite this article in press as: J.K.C. Chen, et al., Services innovation impact to customer satisfaction and customer value enhancement in airport, Technology in Society (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.05.010

6

J.K.C. Chen et al. / Technology in Society xxx (2015) 1e12

Service Innovation (SI)

Airport Accessibility (AA)

H1 H5

Security Check

H2

Customer Value

Customer

(CV)

Satisfaction (CS)

(SC)

H4

H3 Terminal Facilities (TF)

Fig. 1. Conceptual framework.

Table 2 Summary of research hypothesis. Hypothesis

Describe hypothesis

H1 H2 H3 H4 H5

AA has a statistically significant influence on CS. SC has a statistically significant influence on CS. TF has a statistically significant influence on CS. CS has a statistically significant influence on CV. SI has a moderating effect on the relationship between CS and CV.

reliability. Descriptive statistics are procedures used to summaries large volumes of data. The role of descriptive statistics is to provide the reader with an understanding of what the data looks like by using a few indicative or typical values. The general objectives of the principle component analysis is to provide simple summaries about the sample and the observations. Once data was collected, it was necessary to employ statistical techniques to analyze the

Table 4 Rotated component matrix for exploratory factor analysis (EFA).

messages to random active members from the previously mentioned social networking. We gained of response 323 samples and 23 samples were defused from parent population. The total useful sample size was 300 passengers. 3.4. Pilot test A pilot test was done to assess the reliability of the attributes, and to ensure that the wordings of the questionnaire was clear. Thirty questionnaires were completed by the passengers in the presence of researcher. The purpose of pilot test questionnaire was to determine if the factors that influenced customer satisfaction were important. The result of pilot test questionnaire described the important factors of customer satisfaction, in general. Based on the results of Cronbach's alpha and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) that has 3 items were deleted from questionnaire. The following table represents the deleted questionnaire items and the reasons why they were deleted (Table 3). 3.5. Data analysis and tools The method of analysis of the sample was the quantitative method. This was chosen as the best method in order to draw conclusions utilizing techniques that emphasize validity and

Table 3 Deleted questionnaire items and reasons. #

Variables

Deleted items

Reason

1 2 3

Terminal facilities Terminal facilities Security check

TF 5 TF 6 SC 4

Low itemetotal correlation (.231) Low itemetotal correlation (.167) Low itemetotal correlation (.432)

Component Factor 1 AA 1 AA 2 AA 3 AA 4 AA 5 SC 1 SC 2 SC 3 SC 4 SC 5 TF 1 TF 2 TF 3 TF 4 TF 5 TF 6 TF 7 CS 1 CS 2 CS 3 CS 4 CS 5 SI 1 SI 2 SI 3 SI 4 SI 5 CV 1 CV 2 CV 3 CV 4 CV 5 CV 6 CV 7 CV 8

Factor 2

Factor 3

Factor 4

Factor 5

Factor 6

.800 .822 .797 .710 .775 .906 .903 .900 .898 .901 .762 .781 .742 .782 .760 .782 .703 .723 .814 .817 .723 .731 .687 .748 .726 .646 .625 .889 .892 .887 .892 .883 .891 .896 .873

Please cite this article in press as: J.K.C. Chen, et al., Services innovation impact to customer satisfaction and customer value enhancement in airport, Technology in Society (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.05.010

J.K.C. Chen et al. / Technology in Society xxx (2015) 1e12

7

Table 5 Reliability and validity. Variable

Code

Communalities

EFA loading

CFA loading

AA

AA1 AA2 AA3 AA4 AA5 SC1 SC2 SC3 SC4 SC5 TF1 TF2 TF3 TF4 TF5 TF6 TF7 CS1 CS2 CS3 CS4 CS5 SI1 SI2 SI3 SI4 SI5 CV1 CV2 CV3 CV4 CV5 CV6 CV7 CV8

.65 .69 .65 .52 .61 .90 .90 .92 .91 .90 .64 .69 .60 .65 .63 .70 .59 .60 .72 .72 .64 .63 .58 .64 .66 .56 .56 .85 .86 .85 .85 .84 .85 .86 .83

.80 .82 .80 .71 .78 .91 .90 .90 .90 .90 .76 .78 .74 .78 .76 .78 .70 .72 .81 .82 .72 .73 .69 .75 .73 .65 .63 .89 .89 .89 .89 .88 .89 .90 .87

.68 .81 .67 .63 .74 .93 .93 .95 .94 .93 .74 .78 .70 .73 .76 .83 .74 .71 .80 .79 .75 .74 .71 .69 .74 .74 .69 .90 .91 .91 .91 .91 .91 .92 .90

SC

TF

CS

SI

CV

Total

information, as this study is quantitative in nature. Descriptive analysis adopted the use of statistical software SPSS 20.

4. Data analysis and discussion 4.1. Data analysis This study collected 323 respondents and there were 300 usable, complete questionnaires with an overall response rate of 92%. The demographic data included information on gender, age, education, income, occupation, and nationality. Also, the researchers asked the respondents their frequency of usage of the airport per year. The gender for the sample was 148 male (49.3%) and 152 female (50.7%) respondents. In terms of nationality, the majority of the respondents were Mongolians (68 ¼ 22.7%), then Taiwanese (56 ¼ 18.7%), followed by Chinese (44 ¼ 14.7%), Indonesian Table 6 SEM goodness-of-fit statistics. GOF Index

Good fit

Acceptable fit

Structural model

2.0e5.0 .050 .85e.90 .85e.90 .85e.90 .85e.90 .06e.08

770.146 540 1.4262 .000 .917 .973 .872 .971 .038

2

X (chi-square) df (degrees of freedom) X2/df Probability NFI CFI GFI TLI RMSEA

<2 .000 >.90 >.90 >.90 >.90 <.06

Cronbach's a

Variance

AVE

CR

.84

KMO .82

61.57

.49

.83

.97

.92

90.30

.52

.84

.91

.91

63.96

.88

.97

.87

.88

65.67

.58

.91

.87

.81

59.39

.57

.87

.97

.95

84.78

.83

.97

0.91

0.92

72.14

(32 ¼ 10.7%), Vietnamese (23 ¼ 7.7%), Japanese (17 ¼ 5.7%), Korean (14 ¼ 4.7%) and other miscellaneous countries (46 ¼ 15.3%). Most of the respondents were from Asian countries. Respondents divided into fours levels of education: undergraduate or less, graduate, master and doctoral were contributed. 149 of the sample were (49.7%) graduate, 114 of the sample were (38%) with master's degree, followed by 30 of the sample were (10%) undergraduate students and other 7 of the sample were (2.3%) doctoral program respondents. The data analysis include the determination of descriptive statistics, frequency distribution analysis, and testing of reliability and validity. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was applied to test validity and the proposed hypotheses. SEM is particularly appropriate for the study of multiple dependent relationships, which is to investigate in the present research. SEM used to determine if the estimated population covariance matrix of the proposed model was consistent with the observed covariance matrix. This research used a user friendly AMOS statistical package in a SEM software program.

4.2. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) is an important tool for researchers. It can be useful for refining measures, evaluating construct validity, and in some cases testing hypotheses. An exploratory factor analysis was conducted to identify the undimensionality of all variables under investigation which were customer value, airport accessibility, the security check, terminal facilities, customer satisfaction and service innovation (Table 4).

Please cite this article in press as: J.K.C. Chen, et al., Services innovation impact to customer satisfaction and customer value enhancement in airport, Technology in Society (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.05.010

8

J.K.C. Chen et al. / Technology in Society xxx (2015) 1e12

However, the result of KaisereMeyereOlkin (KMO) and the Bartlett's Test of Sphericity needs to be considered as satisfactory before the factor analysis could proceed. 4.3. Reliability and validity Hair et al. [54] suggest that a reliability test should be performed before an assessment of its validity. “Reliability is an assessment of the degree of consistency between multiple measurements of a variable” [54]. According to Cronbach's Alpha, it is the most commonly reported estimate of reliability and also, Cronbach's Alpha values provide evidence for reliability. The reliability of the construct should be greater than .7. In this study, Cronbach's Alpha values was .91 which is higher than .7 (Table 5). 4.4. Confirmatory factor analysis Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) is another factor analytic strategy, and it is used to confirm an expected factor structure rather than to determine a structure [55]. In a departure from exploratory factor analysis, the desired factor structure needs to be explicated in confirmatory factor analysis. Confirmatory factor analysis provides an indication of how well the actual data conform to the specified factor pattern [55]. Confirmatory factor analysis is a theory-testing model, as opposed to a theory-generating method, like exploratory factor analysis. In confirmatory factor analysis, the researcher begins with a hypothesis prior to the analysis. This model, or hypothesis, specifies which variables will be correlated with other variables. The hypothesis is based on a strong theoretical and/or empirical foundation [56]. 4.5. Fit statistics As stated previously, the fit statistics test how well the competing models fit the data. Examples of these statistics include the chi square/degrees of freedom ratio, the Bentler comparative fit index (CFI) [57], the parsimony ratio, and the goodness-of-fit Index (GFI) [58]. The good-of-fit index “is a measure of the relative amount of variances and covariances jointly accounted for by the model” [58]. The GFI gives an indication of the relative amounts of the covariances among the latent variables that are accounted for by the model [59]. 4.6. Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) is a measure of approximate fit in the population [60]. The RMSEA has a value close to zero indicating perfect fit with values increasing as the model fit deteriorates. RMSEA values that are lower than .05 can be considered as a good fit, with values between .05 and .08 as an adequate fit, and values between .08 and .10 as a mediocre fit, whereas values >.10 are not acceptable [61]. 4.7. Confirmatory factor analysis in measurement model Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to examine the relationship between the items and their respective latent variables using AMOS 20. Relationships between the constructs and their latent variables were specified in the measurement model. 4.8. Structural model testing The framework model for this research was tested using AMOS 20. The following table shows of the results of the structural equation model. The hypothesis (H1~H5) of the proposed model

were tested for the sample. The first-fit index for the structural model indicated an acceptable fit (x2 ¼ 770.146; df ¼ 540; pvalue ¼ .000; RMSEA ¼ .038; CFI ¼ .973; GFI ¼ .872; TLI ¼ .971) (Table 6). Among the five hypothesis proposed, four paths were supported (airport accessibility to customer satisfaction; security check to customer satisfaction; customer satisfaction to customer value) and one paths (terminal facilities to customer satisfaction) was not supported Fig. 2 and Table 7 present the results of the structural model test. 4.8.1. Hypothesis 1 Airport accessibility has a statistically significant and positive influence on customer satisfaction. Based on standardized estimates of .15 and the associated p-value of .02 this hypothesis was accepted (p < 0.05). It implies that most passengers feel access to airport is one of the barriers for using the airport. More languages should be written to direct passengers and give other important information. Other additional services, like a free shuttle bus or a shuttle bus timetable should widely and visually publicized. 4.8.2. Hypothesis 2 The security check has a significant influence on customer satisfaction. Based on the standardized estimates of .45 and the associated p-value of .000 this hypothesis was accepted (p < 0.001). Based on hypothesis test, it appears the security check has a positive and statistically significant influence on customer satisfaction. Previous studies concluded that security related issues were the most prioritized issues for passengers and this study was consistent with these priors studies. It means passengers are willing to be more patient in order to follow security check procedures and are more satisfied with an airport that has high security check procedures. It also was the most influential factor for customer satisfaction. 4.8.3. Hypothesis 3 Based on standardized estimates of .08 and the associated pvalue of .158 this hypothesis was rejected. Based on the hypothesis test, it appears that terminal facilities have not a positive influence. However, the terminal facilities influence on customer satisfaction was revealed to be insignificant in this study. That means that customers think terminal facilities have not influenced their satisfaction because they are indifferent to it as a factor in their travel purposes. For example, business travelers are too busy to enjoy other facilities in the airport. It reflects that a terminal facility does not greatly influence the customer satisfaction. 4.8.4. Hypothesis 4 Value is some combination of what is received and what is sacrificed. Customer satisfaction has significant influence on customer value. Based on the standardized estimates of .51 and the associated p-value of .000, this hypothesis was accepted. Based on the hypothesis test, it appears that customer satisfaction has a positive and significant influence on customer value. Based on this result, we can conclude that the experience obtained after using a certain airport was valuable for these customers. 4.9. Hypothesis 5 and moderating analysis In general terms, a moderator is a qualitative or quantitative variable that affects the direction and/or strength of the relation between an independent or predictor variable and a dependent or criterion variable. Based on Baron and Kenny [62] the moderating effect was tested in this hypothesis. For hypothesis 5, the following variables were measured for the study. The independent variable is

Please cite this article in press as: J.K.C. Chen, et al., Services innovation impact to customer satisfaction and customer value enhancement in airport, Technology in Society (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.05.010

J.K.C. Chen et al. / Technology in Society xxx (2015) 1e12

9

Fig. 2. Standardized structural model.

customer satisfaction; the moderator variable is service innovation; and the dependent variable is customer value. In this study, service innovation as a moderator has a significant impact between relationship of customer satisfaction and customer value. All the innovative items have increased the influence of customer satisfaction on customer value. Table 8 presented the total effect of service innovation items and this result showed that these items together have a strong influence on customer value (.65, p < 0.001). The findings state that service innovation play a moderating effect on the relationship of customer satisfaction and customer value, therefore hypothesis 5 was accepted. 4.10. Discussion on the result of the research analysis This part will explain the result of the research analysis. The objective of this study was to find the most influential factor in airport customers' satisfaction. In light of previous literature, the present study used three items, which were airport accessibility, the security check, and the terminal facilities to study relationships between customer satisfaction and finally, its influence on

customer value. In addition to that, the moderating effect of service innovation was examined. A total of five hypothesis were developed and tested using SEM. The results demonstrated as follows: First, demographic characteristics of respondents were summarized using descriptive statistics, respectively. Majority of the respondents in this study claimed that they worked in both the public and private sector. In terms of frequency usage of the airport, most respondents used airport 1e5 times a year (45%). Secondly, analysis of the findings reveals that the most influential factor on airport customer satisfaction was the security check (b ¼ .45, p < 0.001). Previously, the safety and security dimension of air travel has the most influential impact on customer satisfaction over other factors of assurance, convenience, comfort, and meals. This result was consistent with previous studies [63,64]. It means passengers are willing to be patient for security related airport service procedures that have high quality and reliable service, partly because traveling by air sometimes considered as a life-ordeath experience with many accidents happening at the airport. Therefore, passengers are more likely to obey security related issues and be satisfied that security means service. The next

Table 7 Standardized coefficient with standard errors. Hypothesis H1: H2: H3: H4: H5:

Airport accessibility / Customer satisfaction Security check / Customer satisfaction Terminal facilities / Customer satisfaction Customer satisfaction / Customer value SI has moderating effect on between CS & CV

Standardized estimate

Standard error

P

.147 .446 .083 .510 .650

.048 .039 .088 .074 .072

* *** .158 *** ***

***p < 0.001 **p < 0.01 *p < 0.05.

Please cite this article in press as: J.K.C. Chen, et al., Services innovation impact to customer satisfaction and customer value enhancement in airport, Technology in Society (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.05.010

10

J.K.C. Chen et al. / Technology in Society xxx (2015) 1e12

Table 8 Moderating analysis result. Testing step

Path

Predictor

Moderator

Outcome

Std b

Geographical display

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3

a b c

CS SI5 CS*SI5

No No

CV CV CV

.51*** .25*** .65***

CSƒ!CV :25 SI5ƒ!CV :65 Mod5ƒ!CV

:51

***p < 0.001 **p < 0.01 *p < 0.05.

influential factor on customer satisfaction was airport accessibility (b ¼ .15, p < 0.05). Access was defined as approachability and ease of reach. Scholars studied overall passenger perceptions of service quality through seven airport service dimensions (access, services and facilities, dining, shopping, service personnel, and security, the environment, and immigration/customs). As a result, the airport environment was revealed to be the most influential dimension of airport service quality which was followed by access, dining, and immigration/customs, which is supported in this study. In a person's day to day life, airport accessibility did not have that much influence. Thus, it had only moderate significance on customer satisfaction (.15, p < 0.05). However, airports need to provide an easy way to understandable direction or signs in different languages, as well as special transit operations for those who need special care to increase the satisfaction level. Unlike previous studies, this study concluded that the terminal facilities have not influenced customer satisfaction (.083, p > 0.05). Since passengers do not spend much time at the airport, they do not care much about its facilities or they just consider terminal facilities a given expectation. Third, we examined relationships between customer satisfaction and customer value. Some scholars indicated that airport service value resulted after experiencing the actual service by the airport. Therefore, satisfaction can be a good antecedent to examine customer value. Based on the hypothesis test, it appears that customer satisfaction has a positive and statistically significant influence on customer value (.51, p < 0.001). As soon as customer satisfaction is enhanced, when customers' value is increased, the customers' intention is to use it again. Fourthly, the moderating effect of innovation was examined in relationships between customer satisfaction and customer value. We have studied 4 main innovative airport services as moderator which are the self-check-in kiosk, the X-Ray, social media and micro hotels. The self-check-in kiosk moderates the relationship between customer satisfaction and customer value (b ¼ .60, p < 0.001). The X-ray does exert a moderating effect on the customer satisfaction and the customer value relationship (b ¼ .62, p < 0.001). Service innovation (SI3 social media) has an effect on the relationship between customer satisfaction and customer value (b ¼ .53, p < 0.001). Micro hotels do exert a moderating effect on the customer satisfaction and customer value relationship (b ¼ .56, p < 0.001). At last, a fifth service innovation moderator (SI5) was analyzed. This indicates that above all, service innovations do exert a moderating effect on the customer satisfaction and customer value relationship (b ¼ .65, p < 0.001). Like the above four moderators, analysis of this item also resulted as statistically significant at all three steps. In the questionnaire, SI5 was asking about all of those innovate services enhancing customer value, so in the end result, we can say that all these 4 kinds service innovation, entirely moderate the relationship between customer satisfaction (CS) and customer value (CV). In summary, all those moderators revealed as significant influence and increased the direct relationship between customer satisfaction and customer value. The findings indicated that these

service innovation in the airport are prerequisite for service providers. 5. Conclusion 5.1. Research result This study explores factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and structural equation modeling to examine the hypothesis. Chronbach's alpha was .906 which means that the data had strong internal consistency. Measurement validity was made upon exploratory factor analysis and some items were deleted upon its consistency and factor loading, while consistent factors were retained in order to run the next statistics analysis. The confirmatory factor analysis was applied by the AMOS 20 version, showing that the outcomes of the CFA do not differ from the EFA. Thus, the study moved on to the next convergent validity test. The value of each latent variable ranged from .83 to .97, indicated a strong composite reliability. The average variance extracted (AVE) value of each latent variable ranged from .49 to .88, demonstrating strong convergent validity. Discriminate validity of the variables ranged from .96 to 4.01. The results for all the criteria were valid. Before the hypotheses testing, the researcher checked the model fit indexes. For this step, all the fit indexes for the structural model indicated an acceptable fit (x2 ¼ 770,146; df ¼ 540; p-value ¼ .000; RMSEA ¼ .038; CFI ¼ .973; GFI ¼ .872; TLI ¼ .971; NFI ¼ .917). The data indicated that the researcher could move on to the last analysis. Based on the result of structural equation modeling, the proposed hypotheses were analyzed. The result of hypotheses tests were shown in Table 7. 5.2. Research finding Analysis of the findings reveals that the most influential factor on airport customer satisfaction was the security check. This result was consistent with previous studies [10]. It means that passengers are willing to be patient for security related airport service procedures and expect it to provide more reliability and quality for their safety. The result similar Handberg [65] point out creating transportation infrastructure is very important issues in state spaceport. The next influential factor on customer satisfaction was airport accessibility. As a result, the airport environment was revealed to be the most influential dimension of airport service quality, which was followed by access, dining and immigration/ customs, which was supported in this study. Unlike with previous studies, this study found that terminal facilities did not influence customer satisfaction. In addition, the present study found there is a strong positive relation between customer satisfaction and customer value. The customers who benefit or receive an advantage from the airport services tend to value the airport. Lastly, the moderating effect of innovation was examined in the relationships between customer satisfaction and customer value. We studied 4 main innovative airport services as moderators which were the self-check-in kiosk, the X-Ray, social media and micro hotels. All those moderators were revealed as significant and

Please cite this article in press as: J.K.C. Chen, et al., Services innovation impact to customer satisfaction and customer value enhancement in airport, Technology in Society (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.05.010

J.K.C. Chen et al. / Technology in Society xxx (2015) 1e12

increased the direct relationship between customer satisfaction and customer value.

5.3. Practical implication Based on the above findings and results, managers need to be concerned about the following issues: First, the research proves that the security check is the strongest significant factor influencing customer satisfaction. It implies that airports should be concerned in the development and the process of enhancing the security check to increase customer satisfaction. The more they are satisfied, the more they value the airports. Secondly, the influence of airport accessibility was significant on customer satisfaction. Therefore, ease of reach to the airport, such as convenient transit service at the airport, frequent transportation service, or sufficient parking etc., is the next issue that airports should consistently enhance for airport customer satisfaction. Thirdly, passengers just consider terminal facilities as a basic requirement and it no longer influences passengers. Although, it does not mean to decrease or assume less importance in consideration of the physical facilities of the airport, such as the internal organization, seating and heating comfort, availability of banking services, as well as facilities for the disabled and children. Airports should make their policies and activities pleasing in the terminal facilities. Fourthly, some researchers indicated that airport service value is a result after the experience of the actual service. Therefore, satisfaction can be a good antecedent in examining customer value. From the findings of this research, it appears customer satisfaction has a positive and significant influence on customer value. As soon as customer satisfaction is enhanced, an airport customers' value has increased and it causes the customers to use it again. Hence, managers of airports should be concerned about increasing sales per customer by retaining customers longer and keeping flexibility in the cost to serve. Lastly, according to the findings of this research, service innovation plays a great role into the value for the customer. Hence, this study suggests that airports should pay more attention and invest in their improvement and development for service innovations.

5.4. Originality/value Despite numerous studies about airport service, this study has some significance. Many researchers have used different factors to measure airport service. In this study, the researcher used the most important factors to evaluate airport service which are airport accessibility, the security check, and terminal facilities. Moreover, the moderating effect of service innovation has been revealed in this study. The airport is one of the places where technology advancement is employed as a main necessity. We used the selfcheck-in kiosk, the X-ray, social media communication, and micro-hotels as the innovative items at the airport. In the result, all four innovation items revealed positive moderation effects. The respondents viewed the security check as the most important factor in airport service which produced the most satisfied customers while airport accessibility was ranked as the second most important factor. Moreover, customer satisfaction has influenced the customer value which means more satisfied customers can view the airport as a valuable place to use again. This study creates an evaluation model for evaluating customer satisfaction and customer value which can be helpful for future researchers, the airport management team, and airport passengers.

11

5.5. Suggestions and recommendations There are some suggestions for future researchers. First, in this study, we used the following independent variables (accessibility, the terminal facility, and the security check) which are from SERVQUAL dimensions and the wording has been modified to be more appropriate for the airport service industry. Future researchers may wish to use other questionnaire items from other alternatives. Secondly, the researchers understand the culture and regulation difference in different countries, which is limitation of the paper. Thus future researchers may wish to study (a) involving a sufficiently large sample size for entire industry, or (b) including specific target groups by geographic location or culture difference factors. Finally, this research study used closed-ended questions to examine the factors that influenced customer satisfaction, and the relationships among the variables. Future researchers may wish to use other methods for collecting data, such as interviews and openended questions to have more extensive understanding. Further studies could be carried out to develop and validate the models by adding external constructs within a more specific context.

Appendix A. Supplementary data Supplementary data related to this article can be found at http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.05.010.

References [1] H.E. Butz, L.D. Goodstein, Measuring customer value: gaining the strategic advantage, Organ. Dyn. 24 (3) (1996) 63e77. [2] S.F. Gardial, R.B. Woodruff, Know Your Customer: New Approaches to Customer Value and Satisfaction, Blackwell Publishers, Cambridge, 1996. [3] F. Huber, A. Herrmann, R.E. Morgan, Gaining competitive advantage through customer value oriented management, J. Consum. Mark. 18 (1) (2001) 41e53. [4] V.A. Zeithaml, Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence, J. Mark. 52 (2) (1988) 2e22. [5] J.W. Van Der Haart, R.G. Kemp, O. Omta, Creating value that cannot be copied, Ind. Mark. Manag. 30 (8) (2001) 627e636. [6] R.T. Rust, R.L. Oliver, Service quality: insights and managerial implications from the frontier, J. Mark. Manag. 20 (7,8) (1994) 897e917. [7] Airport Industry, Market Research Reports, Statistics and Analysis, 2013. http://www.reportlinker.com/ci02329/Airport.html. [8] The World Factbook, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-worldfactbook/geos/xx.htm, 2013. [9] A. Parasuraman, Reflections on gaining competitive advantage through customer value, Acad. Mark. Sci. 25 (2) (1997) 154e161. [10] K.D. Gkritza, F.L. Niemeier, Mannering airport security screening and changing passenger satisfaction, J. Air Transp. Manag. 12 (5) (2006) 213e219. [11] S. Solak, J.P. Clarke, E. Johnson, Airport terminal capacity planning, Transp. Res. Part B 43 (6) (2009) 659e676. [12] C. Gronroos, Service Management and Marketing: a Customer Relationship Management Approach, second ed., Wiley, London, UK, 2000. [13] J. Kandampully, Innovation as the core competency of a service organisation: the role of technology, knowledge, and networks, Eur. J. Innov. Manag. 5 (1) (2002) 18e26. [14] R.M. Grant, The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: implications for strategic formation, Calif. Manag. Rev. 33 (2) (1991) 114e135. [15] D. Flint, J.E. Larsson, B. Gammelgaard, J.T. Mentzer, Logistics innovation: a customer value-oriented social process, J. Bus. Logist. 26 (1) (2005) 113e147. €ller, R. Rajala, M. Westerlund, Service innovation myopia, Calif. Manag. [16] K. Mo Rev. 50 (3) (2008) 31e48. [17] I. Alam, An exploratory investigation of user involvement in new service development, J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 30 (3) (2002) 250e261. [18] H. Dreoge, D. Hildebrand, M.A. Heras Forcada, Innovation in services: present findings and future pathways, J. Serv. Manag. 20 (2) (2009) 131e155. [19] J. Sundho, Management of innovation in services, Serv. Ind. J. 17 (3) (1997) 432e455. [20] S. Thomke, R&D comes to services: Bank of America's pathbreaking experiments, Harv. Bus. Rev. 81 (4) (2003) 70e79. [21] P. Magnusson, J. Matthing, P. Kristensson, Managing user involvement in service innovation, J. Serv. Res. 6 (2) (2003) 111e124. [22] J.C. Narver, S.F. Slater, The effect of a market orientation on business profitability, J. Mark. 54 (4) (1990) 20e35.

Please cite this article in press as: J.K.C. Chen, et al., Services innovation impact to customer satisfaction and customer value enhancement in airport, Technology in Society (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.05.010

12

J.K.C. Chen et al. / Technology in Society xxx (2015) 1e12

[23] R. Deshpande, J.U. Farley, F.E. Webster, Corporate culture customer orientation and innovativeness in Japanese firms: a quadrad analysis, J. Mark. 57 (1) (1993) 23e37. [24] S. Murphy, Kiosk 411. Chain Store Age, 2007. [25] E. Maras, Self-serve Kiosk Addres a Changing Customer, Automatic Merchandiser, 2006. [26] F. Bodendorf, Self-service e-transactions for citizens concept and case study, in: IEEE Computer Society, Third International Conference on Digital Society, 2009. [27] J. Bennett, Opportunities Emerge for Self-service in Retail and Hospitality, White Paper, published by NetWorld Alliance and sponsored by NCR Inc, 2009. [28] J. Twentyman, Twitter time, Airpt. World 14 (1) (2010) 34e36. [29] ACI-Europe, Airports 2.0: How European Airports Are Embracing Social Media, ACI-Europe, Brussels, 2011. [30] Airgate solutions, Lists and Polls, 2012. http://airgatesolutions.com. [31] A.M. Kaplan, M. Haenlein, Users of the world unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media, Bus. Horiz. 53 (1) (2010) 59e68. [32] T. Correa, A.W. Hinsley, H.G. DeZuniga, Who interacts on the web? The intersection of users' personality and social media use, Comput. Hum. Behav. 26 (2) (2010) 247e253. [33] D. Williamson, Worldwide Social Network Ad Spending: 2011 outlook, eMarketer, NY, 2011. [34] B.D. Weinberg, E. Pehlivan, Social spending: managing the social mix, Bus. Horiz. 54 (3) (2011) 275e282. [35] T. Hume, E. Macguire, Airports' Tiniest Hotels: Sleeping in a Box, CNN News, 2013. http://edition.cnn.com/2012/06/19/travel/airport-microhotels/. [36] R. Oliver, Satisfaction: a behavioural perspective on the consumer, McGrawHill, New York, NY, 1997. [37] R.B. Woodruff, S.F. Gardial, Know Your Customer: New Approach to Understanding Value and Satisfaction, USA: Blackwell Publishers, Inc, 1996. [38] M. Porter, Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance, in: M.E. Porter (Ed.), Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, Free Press, New York, 1985, p. 38. [39] R. Hallowell, The relationships of customer satisfaction, customer loyalty, and profitability: an empirical study, Int. J. Serv. Ind. Manag. 7 (4) (1996) 27e42. [40] E.W. Anderson, M.W. Sullivan, The antecedents and consequences of customer satisfaction for firms, Mark. Sci. 12 (2) (1993) 125e143. [41] M. Treacy, F. Wiersima, The Discipline of Market Leaders, Harper Collins, London, 1995. [42] K.N. Lemon, R.T. Rust, V.A. Ziethaml, What drives customer equity? Mark. Manag. 10 (1) (2001) 20e25. [43] J.L. Heskett, W.E. Sasser, L.A. Schlesinger, The Service Profit Chain: How Leading Companies Link Profit to Loyalty, Satisfaction, and Value, Free Press, New York, NY, 1997. [44] Y. Wang, H.P. Lo, R. Chi, Y. Yang, An integrated framework for customer value and customer-relationship-management performance: a customer-based perspective from China, Manag. Serv. Qual. 14 (2/3) (2004) 169e182.

ndez, A.M. Iniesta-Bonillo, Consumer perception of value: [45] R. S anchez-Ferna literature review and a new conceptual framework, J. Consum. Satisf. Dissatisfaction Complain. Behav. 19 (1) (2006) 40e59. [46] A.S. Khalifa, Customer value: a review of recent literature and an integrative configuration, Manag. Decis. 42 (5/6) (2004) 645e667. [47] W. Ulaga, Customer value in business markets, Ind. Mark. Manag. 30 (4) (2001) 315e319. [48] J.C. Anderson, J.A. Narus, Business marketing: understand what customers value, Harv. Bus. Rev. 76 (NoveDec.) (1998) 53e65. [49] R.B. Woodruff, Customer value: the next source for competitive advantage, Acad. Mark. Sci. 25 (2) (1997) 139e153. [50] R.B. Woodruff, D.J. Flint, The initiators of changes in customer's desired value: results from a theory building study, Ind. Mark. Manag. 30 (4) (2001) 321e337. [51] A. Graf, P. Maas, Customer value from a customer perspective: a comprehensive review, J. für Betr. 58 (1) (2008) 1e20. [52] J. Gutman, Means-end chains as goal hierarchies, Psychol. Mark. 14 (6) (1997) 45e60. €nroos, The value concept and relationship marketing, Eur. J. [53] A. Ravald, C. Gro Mark. 30 (2) (1996) 19e33. [54] J.F. Hair, R.E. Anderson, W.C. Black, B.J. Babin, Multivariate Data Analysis, seventh ed., Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, NJ, 2010. [55] R.F. DeVellis, Scale Development: Theory and Applications, Sage, Newbury Park, CA, 1991. [56] J. Stevens, Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences, third ed., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 1996. [57] P.M. Bentler, Comparative fit indices in structural models, Psychol. Bull. 107 (2) (1990) 238e246. [58] K.G. Joreskog, D. Sorbom, Analysis of Linear Structural Relationships by Maximum Likelihood, Instrumental Variables, and Least Squares, fourth ed., University of Uppsula Department of Statistics, Uppsula, Sweden, 1986. [59] J.E. Mathieu, S.I. Tannenbaum, E. Salas, Influences of individuals and situational characteristics on measures of training effectiveness, Acad. Manag. J. 35 (4) (1992) 828e847. [60] K. Schermelleh-Engel, H. Moosbrugger, H. Muller, Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures, Methods Psychol. Res. Online 5 (2) (2003) 23e74. [61] M.W. Browne, R. Cudeck, Alternative ways of assessing model fit, in: K.A. Bollen, J.S. Long (Eds.), Testing Structural Equation Models, Sage, Newbury Park, CA, 1993. [62] R.M. Baron, D.A. Kenny, The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations, J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 51 (6) (1986) 1173e1182. [63] M.D. Clemes, C. Gan, T.H. Kao, M. Choong, An empirical analysis of customer satisfaction in international air, Innov. Mark. 4 (2) (2008) 49e62. [64] J. Swartz, Security systems for a mobile world, Technol. Soc. 25 (1) (2003) 5e25. [65] R. Handberg, Creating transportation infrastructure through state spaceport initiatives: Florida and other exles, Technol. Soc. 24 (3) (2002) 225e241.

Please cite this article in press as: J.K.C. Chen, et al., Services innovation impact to customer satisfaction and customer value enhancement in airport, Technology in Society (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.05.010