1. Relationship Quality and Purchase
Intention and Behavior: The Moderating
Impact of Relationship Strength
Presenter : Sharon Chang
Instructor : Dr. Teresa Hsu
Nov. 12, 2012
1
2. Cannière, M., Pelsmacker, P., & Geuens, M.
(2010). Relationship Quality and Purchase
Intention and Behavior: The Moderating
Impact of Relationship Strength. J Bus
Psychol, 25, 87-98.
2
3. Introduction
Literature Review
Methodology
Result & Conclusion
Reflection
3
5. In the business world, research is increasingly
focusing on the customer-firm relationship.
Marketing shifts away from brands to
customers as the focal object of research.
5
6. The purpose of this study-
To investigate the link between perceived
relationship quality, purchase intention and
behavior, and the moderating role of
relationship strength
6
9. Literature Review
Relationship strength is the intensity of the
relationship between the customer and the
firm, as reflected in the length and the
regularity if the customer’s buying history.
(Grayson & Ambler, 1999; Jap & Ganesan, 2000;
Kumar et al., 2003; Verhoef et al., 2001)
9
10. Literature Review
Loyalty is built up of attitudinal loyalty,
which leads to repeat patronage
intentions, which in turn lead to loyal
behavior and, finally, to more profits.
(Reinartz & Kumar, 2000)
10
11. Hypothesis 1
H1a A positive perception of relationship quality
has a positive impact on buying intention.
H1b A positive buying intention has a positive
impact on various aspects of buying intention.
11
12. Hypothesis 2
H2a
A stronger relationship has a positive
impact on buying intention.
H2b A stronger relationship has a positive
impact on various aspects of buying
intention.
12
13. Hypothesis 3
H3a The impact of relationship quality on buying
intention is stronger for customers with a
stronger relation with the company.
H3b The impact of buying intention on buying
behavior is stronger for customers with a
stronger relation with company.
13
15. Time-
Survey data-
During a 4-days period in
Gathered from apparel retailers, beginning of the summer season
are in the low-to mid-price range. (February-July)and winter
season(August-January).
Procedure
Total : 1,226 questionnaires
Total : 4,806 questionnaires
Return the questionnaire- Questionnaire-
★960 questionnaires were ★2,306 questionnaires were
received in summer season. distributed in summer season.
★266 questionnaires were ★2,500 questionnaires were
received in winter season. distributed in winter season.
15
16. 7.7%
less than 30 years old
1226 questionnaires were received
30.8%
Linkable-634 questionnaires
Between 30 & 40
Nonlinkable-575 questionnaires
90.1% 31.5%
Between 41 & 50
Female
634 20.8%
Participants
Between 51 & 60
9.9%
male 9.1%
Older than 60
16
17. The three indicators measure
partially different aspects of
Number of visits buying behavior.
with buying event
Total
expenditure
Criterion Number of
Variables product types
17
18. Length and buying frequency reinforce each other in this
multiplicative definition of relationship strength.
Length of relationship with retailer
Moderating (1-10 seasons)
Variables
Number of seasons with buying
event (1-10)
18
19. Predictor Variables
A pretest of the remaining items among 30 customers of the shop
under study confirmed the relevance, validity, and reliability of
the scales used. Each scale contained three items.
19
21. Result
Confirmatory Factor Analysis(CFA)
It is used to test whether measures of a construct are
consistent with a researcher's understanding of the
nature of that construct (or factor).
Trust
0.91 0.98
0.91
Commitment satisfaction
Each of the pairs of relationship quality
Constructs were highly correlated.
21
22. Result
The means and standard deviations of the variables
used in the analyses is given.
Table 2
22
24. Result
A regression analysis as in the
relationship quality-intention
section was carried out for
each behavioral outcome
variable.
24
25. Result
In all three models purchase intention had a significant
impact on actual purchase behavior.
25
26. Result
Supported/
Hypotheses
Confirmed
H1a A positive perception of relationship quality
has a positive impact on buying intention. √
H1b A positive buying intention has a positive impact
on various aspects of buying intention. √
A stronger relationship has a positive
H2a impact on buying intention. √
A stronger relationship has a positive impact on
H2b various aspects of buying intention. √
The impact of relationship quality on buying
H3a intention relation withfor customers with a
stronger
is stronger
the company.
The impact of buying intention on buying
H3b behavior is stronger for customers with a
stronger relation with company.
√
26
27. Conclusion
In this study, a strong correlation was found between
the various components of relationship quality, which
has led us to consider them as one “relationship
quality” construct.
27
29. Reflection
Further research should focus upon the development
of better survey items that would discriminate these
conceptually related, but distinct constructs.
29
