Examining customer evaluations across different self-service technologies

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to examine the influence of different self-service technologies (SSTs) on customer satisfaction with and continued usage of SSTs. Specifically, it compares an interactive voice response (IVR) SST and an online SST from the same provider to assess how to manage these parallel SSTs. Design/methodology/approach A tracking study was used, beginning with a survey of n = 957 SST users to test a model pertaining to SST satisfaction across IVR and online SSTs. These SST users were then tracked over 12 months. The association between customer satisfaction with and continued usage of the SSTs was examined using behavioural data from the service provider. Findings While the overall model was found to be valid across both types of SSTs, perceptions of factors including ease of use, perceived control and reliability differed for IVR and online SSTs. Satisfaction with SSTs is linked with users’ continued use of SSTs, but is not a barrier to users’ adoption of newer SST forms. Research limitations/implications Highlighting the rapid developments in this field, a new SST was introduced by the provider to respondents during the 12-month tracking period, thus complicating the results. Further studies could include the customer purpose for using SSTs as a variable. Practical implications The findings offer support for organisations offering a suite of SSTs, even if they serve the same purpose. Customers evaluate SST types differently, and even satisfied SST users switch to different SSTs when they become available. Allowing customers to choose the SST that best suits them appears to be good practice. Originality/value This study develops a comprehensive model of customer SST satisfaction that is used to undertake a comparison of two different types of SSTs, which has been missing from prior research.

Customer satisfaction under heterogeneous services of different self-service technologies

“…Consequently, this creates a scenario where customers' satisfaction determines the usability of the SST in future activities (Sierra and McQuitty, 2005;Sierra et al, 2009;Åkesson et al, 2014;Robertson et al, 2016). Past study found that reliability, user-friendly, enjoyment, and perceived control of the service associated positively with customer satisfaction for online and interactive voice response (IVR) (Robertson et al, 2016). However, here again, the evaluated SSTs provided the same services.…”

“…According to Curran and Meuter (2005), "self" indicates a customers' willingness to participate in the process during service encounter. Thus, customers' performance creates value for an organization's SSTs (Dabholkar,1990;Xue et al, 2005;Robertson et al, 2016). Therefore, during a service encounter, customers likely become an organization's "partial employees" (Bettencourt, 1997;Xue et al, 2005), i.e., customers provisionally involve with SSTs during service production by contributing some activities, such as effort.…”

“…According to Lawler's affect theory of social exchange (Lawer, 2001), customers "jointness" or joint responsibility with the system also becomes crucial for determining their satisfaction on SSTs during service delivering, mainly because of the high degree of inseparability between the SSTs and the customer. Consequently, this creates a scenario where customers' satisfaction determines the usability of the SST in future activities (Sierra and McQuitty, 2005;Sierra et al, 2009;Åkesson et al, 2014;Robertson et al, 2016). Past study found that reliability, user-friendly, enjoyment, and perceived control of the service associated positively with customer satisfaction for online and interactive voice response (IVR) (Robertson et al, 2016).…”

“…When customers use SSTs, many associated factors and functionalities of SSTs become vital for customer satisfaction (Dabholkar, 1994), the so-called features of the service: (i) reliability of service (Dabholkar, 1996;Dabholkar et al, 2003); (ii) usuability (Curran and Meuter, 2005;Dabholkar, 1996;Dabholkar et al, 2003;Robertson et al, 2016); (iii) enjoyment (Dabholkar, 1996;Dabholkar et al, 2003;Robertson et al, 2016); (iv) perceived control (Dabholkar, 1996;Dabholkar et al, 2003;Lee and Allaway, 2002;Robertson et al, 2016); and (v) perceived speed (Dabholkar, 1996;Dabholkar et al, 2003;Robertson et al, 2016;Jun and Palacios, 2016). All these features are considered by the customer when searching for the services provided by the SSTs, namely, Cash withdraws, Balance Inquiry, Money transfers, Account information, Mobile top up, and Utilities for Bill payments.…”

“…Therefore, studies on the customer satisfaction for SST technologies should take in to account the heterogeneity of services provided. This remains a challenge since actual empirical research focused only the homogeneous SSTs type (Robertson et al, 2016) and thus give an incomplete picture of customer satisfaction on the SST provided by the bank. The banking industry earlier adopted the self-service technology and always tried to develop innovative technology-related service in the search for differentiation from other competitors (Devlin, 1995).…”