CONSUMER SWITCHING BEHAVIOR IN BANKING INDUSTRY: CAN CONSUMER BASE BE PURCHASED, OR EARNED?

Yıl 2019, Sayı: 22, 163 - 178, 01.01.2019

Mehmet Özer Demir , Zuhal Gök Demir

https://doi.org/10.18092/ulikidince.399671

Öz

Loyalty membership programs are widely used as a
strategical tool in banking. In the paper a unique loyalty membership program
in Turkey in which consumers are offered cash in order to convince them to
switch their financial service provider, bank, is studied. Literature supports
evidence for relationships between switching barriers and intention to switch,
however literature lacks studies testing the assumptions of
theories on consumer loyalty in specific industries. Exploratory in nature, the study tests the
literature supported relationships based on a real life case. The paper aims to
enligthen whether the consumers’ loyalty can be bougth with cash and other
provided benefits to make customers switch their current service provider into
new account after a special loyalty membership program offered for an
organization’s employees. The purpose of the paper is to research effects of
switching barriers on intention to switch in order to understand whether
consumer base can be purchased, or consumers are earned. Structural Equation
Modeling is performed with the data collected from a survey of 212 employees of
an organization. The results suggest that, in banking sector, imitable
switching barriers are not useful against switching intentions.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Switching Barriers, SEM, Banking, Loyalty Membership Programs

CONSUMER SWITCHING BEHAVIOR IN BANKING INDUSTRY: CAN CONSUMER BASE BE PURCHASED, OR EARNED?

Öz

Sık kullanıcı programları bankacılık sektöründe yaygın
olarak kullanılan stratejik bir araçtır. Çalışmada tüketicilerin mevcut
finansal hizmet sağlayıcıları bankayı değiştirmelerine ikna emek amacıyla nakit
paranın teklif edildiği Türkiye’ye özel bir sık kullanıcı programı
incelenmiştir. Yazında değiştirme engelleri ile değiştirme niyeti arasında
ilişki olduğu belirtilmiştir, ancak bu ilişkiler sektör spesifik olarak test
edilmemiştir. Keşfedici araştırma yapısında tasarlanan çalışmada literatür
tarafından önerilen ilişkiler gerçek hayat vakası üzerinden test edilmiştir.
Çalışmanın amacı tüketicilerin sadakatinin nakit para ve tüketicilere sunulan
diğer faydalar ile satın alınıp alınamayacağını, bir örgütün çalışanlarına
teklif edilen belirli bir sık kullanıcı programı sonrası tüketicilerin mevcut hizmet
sağlayıcılarını değiştirip yeni bir hesap açıp açmayacaklarını aydınlatmaya
çalışmaktır. Araştırmada tüketici değiştirme engellerinin değitirme niyeti
üzerindeki etkisini inceleyerek tüketici sadakatinin satın mı alındığı yoksa
kazanıldığı mı incelenmiştir. Yapısal eşitlik modellemesi kullanılarak 212
katılımcının yer aldığı veriler incelenmiştir. Araştırma bulguları bankacılık sektöründe
taklit edilebilir değiştirme engellerinin değiştirme niyetini sağlamakta
kullanışlı olmadığını göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

SEM, Değiştirme Engelleri, Bankacılık, Sık Kullanıcı Programları

Kaynakça

• Augusto de Matos, C., Luiz Henrique, J., & de Rosa, F. (2013). Customer reactions to service failure and recovery in the banking industry: the influence of switching costs. Journal of Services Marketing, 27(7), 526-538. doi:10.1108/jsm-01-2012-0019
• Barroso, C., & Picón, A. (2012). Multi-dimensional analysis of perceived switching costs. Industrial Marketing Management, 41(3), 531-543. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2011.06.020
• Burnham, T. A., Frels, J. K., & Mahajan, V. (2003). Consumer switching costs: a typology, antecedents, and consequences. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31(2), 109-126.
• Chebat, J.-C., Davidow, M., & Borges, A. (2011). More on the role of switching costs in service markets: A research note. Journal of Business Research, 64(8), 823-829. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2010.10.003
• Chiu, H.-C., Hsieh, Y.-C., Li, Y.-C., & Lee, M. (2005). Relationship marketing and consumer switching behavior. Journal of Business Research, 58(12), 1681-1689. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2004.11.005
• Ehrenberg, A. S., Goodhardt, G. J., & Barwise, T. P. (1990). Double jeopardy revisited. The Journal of Marketing, 82-91.
• Ganesh, J., Arnold, M. J., & Reynolds, K. E. (2000). Understanding the customer base of service providers: an examination of the differences between switchers and stayers. Journal of marketing, 64(3), 65-87.
• Han, H., Kim, W., & Hyun, S. S. (2011). Switching intention model development: Role of service performances, customer satisfaction, and switching barriers in the hotel industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30(3), 619-629. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2010.11.006
• Hsu, J. S.-C. (2014). Understanding the role of satisfaction in the formation of perceived switching value. Decision Support Systems, 59, 152-162. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2013.11.003
• Jones, M. A., Mothersbaugh, D. L., & Beatty, S. E. (2002). Why customers stay: measuring the underlying dimensions of services switching costs and managing their differential strategic outcomes. Journal of Business Research, 55(6), 441-450.
• Jones, T. O., & Sasser Jr, W. E. (1995). Why Satisfied Customers Defect. Harvard business review, 73(6), 88-91.
• Jung, H. S., & Yoon, H. H. (2012). Why do satisfied customers switch? Focus on the restaurant patron variety-seeking orientation and purchase decision involvement. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(3), 875-884.
• Juntunen, J., Grant, D. B., & Juga, J. (2010). Short-run vs long-run trade-offs in outsourcing relationships: Impacts on loyalty and switching propensity. Strategic Outsourcing: An International Journal, 3(3), 211-225.
• Matzler, K., Strobl, A., Thurner, N., & Füller, J. (2015). Switching experience, customer satisfaction, and switching costs in the ICT industry. Journal of Service Management, 26(1), 117-136.
• Ngobo, P.-V. (1999). Decreasing returns in customer loyalty: Does it really matter to delight the customers? Advances in Consumer Research, 26, 469-476.
• Oliver, R. L. (1993). Cognitive, affective, and attribute bases of the satisfaction response. Journal of Consumer Research, 418-430.
• Oliver, R. L., & Swan, J. E. (1989). Consumer perceptions of interpersonal equity and satisfaction in transactions: a field survey approach. The Journal of Marketing, 21-35.
• Park, J.-Y., & Jang, S. S. (2014). Why do customers switch? More satiated or less satisfied. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 37, 159-170.
• Patterson, P. G., & Smith, T. (2003). A cross-cultural study of switching barriers and propensity to stay with service providers. Journal of Retailing, 79(2), 107-120. doi:10.1016/s0022-4359(03)00009-5
• Ranaweera, C. (2007). Are satisfied long-term customers more profitable? Evidence from the telecommunication sector. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 15(2), 113-120.
• Schreiber, J. B. (2008). Core reporting practices in structural equation modeling. Res Social Adm Pharm, 4(2), 83-97. doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2007.04.003
• Shin, D.-H., & Kim, W.-Y. (2008). Forecasting customer switching intention in mobile service: An exploratory study of predictive factors in mobile number portability. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 75(6), 854-874. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2007.05.001
• Stauss, B., & Neuhaus, P. (1997). The Dissatisfaction Potential of Satisfied Customers—The Qualitative Satisfaction Model— Advances in Services Marketing (pp. 111-131): Springer.
• Suh, J.-C., & Youjae, Y. (2006). When brand attitudes affect the customer satisfaction-loyalty relation: The moderating role of product involvement. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(2), 145-155.
• Te’eni-Harari, T., Lehman-Wilzig, S. N., & Lampert, S. I. (2009). The importance of product involvement for predicting advertising effectiveness among young people. International Journal of Advertising, 28(2), 203-229.
• Vázquez‐Carrasco, R., & Foxall, G. R. (2006). Positive vs. negative switching barriers: The influence of service consumers' need for variety. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 5(4), 367-379.
• Wu, J., DeSarbo, W. S., Chen, P.-J., & Fu, Y.-Y. (2006). A latent structure factor analytic approach for customer satisfaction measurement. Marketing Letters, 17(3), 221-238.