Introduction
The importance of building and maintaining client relationships is well-recognized in the literature, particularly in enhancing logistics service quality, which can foster long-term partnerships (Ganesan, 1994) Strong logistics service quality (LSQ) relationships provide a competitive edge due to their potential to enhance customer loyalty (Day, 2000) Retaining existing customers is often more cost-effective than acquiring new ones, making it crucial for businesses to focus on developing their customer base and loyalty (Kandampully, 1998) Reichheld, Markey Jr., and Hopton (2000) emphasized that cultivating customer loyalty with select clients can lead to significant competitive advantages In today's market, where products are increasingly similar and tangible, exceptional service becomes a key differentiator for companies Investing in staff training, competitive salary policies, and a supportive environment is essential for adapting to customer needs In the logistics industry, where service quality is paramount, fostering customer loyalty is vital for profitability When customers trust a company's services, they are likely to refer others, and addressing any issues in service delivery can further strengthen these relationships.
Therearemanydifferentwaystogiveclienttrust,convenience,reliabilityandsupportw i t h i n c omplicatedrelationshipinbiggroup.Intheenergeticmarket,thesupplierstrytofindmanywa ystomaintainandenhancecustomerloyalty (Flint &Mentzer, 2000).Ak e y objecti vetoidentifykeyaccountclientsandgainabetterknowledgeinther e l a t i o n s h i p s bet weenincomeandoutcomes(Hennig-
Thurau,Gwinner,&Gremler,2002).Thiswillhelpbusinesstochoosewhichclientshouldbe morefocusedandwhichcli entcancreatemoreprofitandbenefits.
Moreover,theresearchexploretounderstandhowandwhythepsychologyofclient effectbyl o g i s t i c s s e r v i c e q u a l i t y o n c u s t o m e r l o y a l t y w h i c h e l e m e n t s b e h i n d client’sp s y c h o l o g y i n d e c i s i o n p u r c h a s e ( P r i t c h a r d , H a v i t z , & H o w a r d , 1 9 9 9 ) B a s e o n r e a l managerialissues,asenseofloyaltyisrathernotclear.Ther earesomebarriersbetweenS A T I S andLoyalty.
Q e f f e c t o n customerloyalty.T h e mainp u r p o s e i s t o h e l p c o m p a n y u n d e r s t a n d c l e a r l y th e impacto f L S Q o n c u s t o m e r loyalty.T h e r e s t o f t h i s r e s e a r c h i s r e v i e w i n g literatureandhypotheses,existingliteratureonthetheoriesofelements(LSQ,loyalty…)a r e r e v i e w e d fromp r e v i o u s s t u d i e s t o b u i l d c o n c e p t u a l m o d e l
Therea r e s o m e r e s e a r c h e s a b o u t customersatisfaction inl o g i s t i c s f i e l d s u c h a s analyzestheimpactofportservicequalityoncustomersatisfaction:Thecaseo fS i n g a p o r e ( B i e n s t o c k , 2 0 0 2 ) i d e n t i f y t h e T e c h n o l o g y a c c e p t a n c e a n d s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h logisticsservices.T h e p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h p r e s e n t e d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n l o g i s t i c s serviceq u a l i t y a n d customerl o y a l t y suchasa n a l y s i s t h e R o l e o f L o g i s t i c s S e r v i c e Q u a l i t y i n C r e a t i n g T h e r e f o r e , t h i s r e s e a r c h e x a m i n e s ― howl o g i s t i c s s e r v i c e q u a l i t y a f f e c t s customerl o y a l t y ‖,― whichi s c o n c e p t u a l i z e d a s a c a u s a l r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n a f f e c t i v e commitmentandpurchasebehavior‖.Thepreviousstudy isnotclearenoughtoex p l a in thep h e n o m e n a i n complexr e l a t i o n s h i p s T h e g a p s w i l l bef o l l o w e d r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n asbelow:
(i) WhatistherelationshipbetweenAC(theemotionalcomponent)andPB(the b e h a v i o r a l component)?
(iii) Whetherarethere e x a m i ne of t h e connectionbet wee n SATIS a n d th e beha vioralcomponentofloyalty?
Basedo n t h e a b o v e analysis,thef i r s t o b j e c t i v e o f t h i s r e s e a r c h i s t o r e v i e w p r e v i o u s l i t e r a t u r e byt a k i n g a ―morec o m p l e x o f t h e l o y a l t y p h e n o m e n o n , a n d confirmedt h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n a f f e c t i v e c o m m i t m e n t a n d p u r c h a s e b e h a v i o r ‖.
Inthispapercomparew i t h p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h , the( L S Q ) - l o y a l t y p h e n o m e n o n a r e t e s t i n g i n a supplier- r e t a i l e r t o e n h a n c e l o g i s t i c s s t r a t e g i c t o o l s c r e a t e c o m p e t i t i v e a d v a n t a g e T h e f i n a l objectiveofthisstudyistotestthepossibilityinnonlinearworkingb etweenSATISa n d thebehavioralofloyalty.
This research, conducted in Vietnam, addresses the limited studies on the impact of logistics service quality (LSQ) on customer loyalty, particularly in the B2B logistics sector It explores the intricate relationships between logistics service quality, customer satisfaction, and loyalty, extending existing knowledge by incorporating various aspects of these connections The study reveals a strong relationship between affective commitment and calculative commitment, highlighting the complexity of customer loyalty beyond simple repeat purchasing behaviors Additionally, it reconciles differing viewpoints on the LSQ-satisfaction-loyalty relationship, suggesting that different types of loyalty require distinct strategic approaches Firms should focus on meeting the diverse needs of customers across various market segments This research aims to provide actionable insights for businesses to enhance their logistics services and adapt their strategies to better fulfill customer expectations, ultimately contributing to the development of supply chain management practices.
&Flint,1 9 9 7 ) T h i s r e s e a r c h ish a v i n g 5 s e s s i o n s S e s s i o n 1 isi n t r o d u c t i o n s o f r e s e a r c h , session2isliteraturereviewandhypothesis,session3isresearch method,session4isresearch resultsandsession5islimitationandconclusion.
Literaturereviewandhypothesis
LogisticsServiceQuality(LSQ)
AccordingtoLaLonde,ZinszerandManagement(1977),customerserviceisscaledbya ccur acy , ordercycle,reliabilityandtimeliness.Onthesedays,businessknowsho wtou n d e r s t a n d whattheclientneedsbesidesmentionedaspect(Maltz&Maltz,1998
( S t a n k , Goldsby,& Vickery,1 9 9 9 ) s a i d t h a t e n h a n c i n g c l o s e n e s s a n d providinghigherlevelofserviceeffectivenessinthelogisticsservicetheory.Inlogisticsf i e l d , marketingt o o l s a r e a p p l i e d ; speciallyevaluatelogisticss e r v i c e q u a l i t y basedo n cu stomerloyalty.Theevaluationofserviceperformanceispresentedinmarketingfield.T h e servicequalityscalehasmeasuredintheservicemarketingtheory.Allisreviewedbypilot studyandqualitativestudywithperceivedmanagerandcustomers(Parasuraman,Zeithaml,&Berr y,1985).Thisresearchpresentedseveralgapsbetweensuppliercustomerservicean dclient.AccordingtoParasuramanetal.
(1985)exploredaserviceq u a l i t y m o d e l f o r t e s t i n g c u s t o m e r s a t i s f a c t i o n a n d p e r c e p t i o n o f s e r v i c e i n s e r v i c e companies.Thereare2sidesoflogisticsservice(Maltz&Ma ltz,1998),thefirstsideisb a si c b a s e m e n t r e l a t i n g time,d e l i v e r y a n d i n v e n t o r y a v a i l a b i l i t y T h e s e c o n d s i d e i s r e s p o n s i v e n e s s a n d a d a p t s market- d r i v e n
( C o l l i e r , 1 9 9 1 ) a d v i s e d t h a t t w o d i f f e r e n t m e a s u r e m e n t s : aninternalanda nexternal.Following(Stanketal.,1999)developedtheo p er a t i o n a l andrelationalelem entsoflogisticsserviceperformance.Basedontheexistingliterature,LSQcomprisedtwocom ponents:
Thef i r s t i s o p e r a t i o n a l L S Q a n d i s p r e s e n t e d a s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f l o g i s t i c s s e r v i c e activitieswhichprovidefromsuppliersthatapplycustomerquality,efficiency. Itshowsw i t h theliteraturealso.ThesecondisrelationalLSQ,itisconfirmedasunderstandin goflogisticsserviceactivitiestoadaptcustomer'sneeds,expectationsandhavetheabilityto p r o v i d e servicequalities Inknowledgecustomer satisfaction isincludingbot hinternalan dexternaloflogisticsservicequality,businessshouldfocusonwhatfactorsthatmak esthegreatimpactinfluencingfuturestrategic.
Satisfaction
Therea r e m a n y previousst u d i e s de f i n i n g c u s t o m e r s a t i s f a c t i o n a s a c c o r d i n g t o O l i v e r ( 1 9 8 0 ) , Satisfactionis afunction ofperceiveddiscrepancy frominitial reference point.Continuereadingandresearching,
( D a y , 1 9 8 4 ) s a i d t h a t s a t i s f a c t i o n i s a c o n s u m e r ' s evaluationof perceivedd i s c r e p a n c y b e t w e e n p r i o r e x p e c t a t i o n s a n d t h e a c t u a l performanceafteritsconsumption.BesideWangenheim(2003)alsogavehisopinionthat s a t i s f a c t i o n i s c o m p a r i s o n b e t w e e n e x p e c t e d a n d r e c e i v e d p e r f o r m a n c e A c c o r d i n g t o O l i v e r Richard(1997),satisfactionisconsumer'sfeedbackandthestan dardservesastheb a s i s forcomparison.Althoughtherehavebeenmeasuredinmanyways,f rompreviousr e s e a r c h havethreeaspects:general affective satisfaction, c o n f i r m a t i o n ofexpectation, t h e d i s t a n c e fromc u s t o m e r s p r o d u c e s Fromsomel i t e r a t u r e , c u s t o m e r s a t i s f a c t i o n i s a d v i s e d t h e r e s u l t s o f i n t e r n a l a n d e x t e r n a l c o n c e p t e v a l u a t i o n a n d c o m p a r i s o n w i t h ex p ect standard.
Customerloyalty
9 9 5 ) , s t r a t e g i c s u p p l i e r i n l o g i s t i c s f i e l d i s customerl o y a l t y i m p r o v i n g c u r r e n t c l i e n t t o d e v e l o p customerl o y a l t y M o s t o f p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h a b o u t c u s t o m e r lo y al ty buttheyareambiguousandhardtoimplement.
(Dick&Basu,1994)Loyaltyist h e strengthoftherelationshipbetweenacustomer’ srelativeattitudeandrepeatpatronage.
( E l l i n g e r , Daugherty,& Plair,1999) L o y a l t y isa long-term commitmentt o repurchasei n v o l v i n g b o t h r e p e a t e d p a t r o n a g e ( r e p u r c h a s e i n t e n t i o n s ) a n d a f a v o r a b l e attitude(commitmenttotherelationship).AccordingtoEstelami(2000),Loyaltyistheb e h a v i o r a l tendencyoftheconsumertorepurchasefromthefirm.AccordingtoDick&Basu (1994),loyaltyisrelationship betweenemotionsandbehavior.Accordingtoloyaltyliteraturebasesthatconceptloyaltyasinvolvingbehaviorandfeelin gs,aswellasDicka n d Basu(1994)productiveconcept,loyaltyisexplainedasthestr engthoftherelationb e t w e e n aconsumers’ACtowardthesellerandtherestatetPBwiththesell ingcompany.
Conceptualmodelandhypothesis
RelationalLSQ r e la t e d thecu st ome r’ sp er cep ti ons ab ou tl og ist ics co mpa ny staf f.O p e r a t i o n a l e l e m e n t s i n c l u d e d c o m m i t m e n t a s p r o m i s e d s e r v i c e d e p e n d a b l y a n d a c c u r a t e l y (Stanketal.,1999).AccordingtoMentzer,Flint,and Hult(2001)AffectiveC o m m i t m e n t affectsPurchaseBehaviorLoyalty.
Thisincludedwhetherthecustomersunderstandthelogistics companystaffen oughe x p e r i e n c e andknowledgeable,listenwiththeirsituation,andhelpedthemresolveissues. SomepreviousresearchesshowthatstaffcontactsqualityaffectedpositivelyoperationalL S
Q elements―(e.g.,timeliness,orderaccuracy,ordercondition)‖.Thishelpscompanyu n d e r s t a n d clearlywhatthecustomerneeds.Then,whenleaningtheseneeds,thesupplierc a n focuso ntheirguide(Stanketal.,1999)
15 satisfactionsobusinessshouldkeepownperformancesuchasrightamountrightp r o d u c t s r i g h t p l a c e a n d timew i t h r i g h t i n f o r m a t i o n ( C o y l e , B a r d i , & Langley,1 9 9 6 ) (Lambert& S t o c k , 1 9 9 3 ) W i t h n u m e r o u s measurements,t h e r e a r e t h r e e a s p e c t s o f s a t i s f a c t i o n , including:fullsatisfaction,expectations,andsomerealevide nces.A c co r d i n g toDaugherty,StankandEllinger ( 1 9 9 8 ) t he research hav e botho perational a n d relationalperformancehavepositiveconnecttocustomersatisfacti on.
(Stanketal.,1 9 9 9 ) indicatedthattherelationshipbetweenOPandCSwaspositivelylin kedtogether,leadingthemtoimprovewithhigher levelofconsumersatisfaction.Whetherrelationshipb e t w e e n r e l a t i o n a l a p p e a r a n c e a n d s a t i s f a c t i o n ( S t a n k , G o l d s b y , V i c k e r y , & S a v i t s k i e , 20 03 ) foundthatrelati onalappearanceprovesapositiverelationwithsatisfaction.Theyc o n c l u d e d t h a t OP i s a n ― o r d e r q u a l i f i e r ‖ ViewingL S Q froma p r o c e s s v i e w p o i n t (Mentzere t a l , 2 0 0 1 ) a l s o f o u n d t h a t f o r d i f f e r e n t consumerp a r t s s a t i s f a c t i o n w a s p o s i t i v e l y a f f e c t e d byd i f f e r e n t L S Q s i g n i f i c a n c e T h e f i n d i n g s a r e measured;t h e r e i s signtosupposethatbothoperationalLSQandrelationalLSQresultssati sfaction.T her efo r e,
Affective commitment is a crucial emotional component of loyalty, reflecting the desire of channel members to maintain relationships with specific partners (Mahoney, Madrigal, and Howard, 2000; Geyskens et al., 1996; Mattila, 2004) It encompasses a positive emotional orientation towards exchange partners, extending beyond mere instrumental value (Ruyter and Wetzels, 1999) Research indicates that affective commitment is vital for fostering and sustaining mutually beneficial relationships between partners (Kumar, Hibbard, and Stern, 1994) In this context, affective commitment is defined as the strength of emotional attachment and positive feelings a customer holds for a supplier.
Loyalty is demonstrated through purchasing patterns over time, indicating the likelihood of a customer using a supplier again in the future It encompasses the duration of the customer's relationship with the supplier, the current and future share of supply compared to other suppliers, and the probability of future purchases Consequently, purchase behavior is defined as the likelihood of a customer choosing a supplier's products or services again.
HansenandHetn(2004)summarizeloyaltybyexplainingthatifacustomer’saffectivec o m m i t m e n t ishigh,itshouldbringaboutawishandmotivationtocontinuether el at i o n sh ip S i n c e t h i s typeo f c o m m i t m e n t d o e s n o t i n c l u d e anyi n s t r u m e n t a l c o s t - b e n e f i t evaluations,itisderivedfromtheemotionalpleasureassociatedwithther ela tio nshi p partner,andthefeelingsoffondnessdevelopedwithintherelationship.As
Purchase Behavior Relational LSQ such,affectivecommitmentpartiesareinclinedtomaintaintherelationshipandexhibit r e p e a t purchasingbehavior.
Thefinalistherelationshipbetweensatisfactionandloyalty.AccordingtoWetzel s,D e RuyterandVanBirgelen(1998), thereis th e relation be tw een S A T I S andA
C thatmores a t i s f i e d customera r e moree f f e c t i v e l y committedt o t h e sellingcompan y.
( J o h n s o n , Gustafsson,Andreassen,Lervik,&Cha,2001)arguedthatsatisfactionaff ectsr e p u rc h a s e intentionbehaviorandstrongrelationshipwithcustomerloyaltyalsofoun dap osit ive r e l a t i o n a n d s u g g e s t t h a t A C d i f f e r e n t i a t e s b e t w e e n t r u e l o y a l t y a n d s p u r i o u s loyalty.―Themostimportantdifferencebetweenthetwoconceptsisthattr ueloyaltyisb a s e d onaffectivecommitmentandspuriousloyaltyisnotbasedonanycom mitmentata l l (butmaybepurchasebehaviorbaseduponalackof alternatives)‖.
An interview of 10 respondents Revision Final questionnaire
Researchmethodology
Researchprocess
Afteridentifying researchproblem,research objectivesandreviewingthe lite rature,t h e draftquestionnairewasshownbasedonmeasurementusedinsamepreviousstud ies.I n researchdesignstep,thereare2sub-steps:
Pilot survey:wasconductedbyi n t e r v i e w i n g 10Logisticsmanagersinsuppliercompaniesab outthecontents,thestructureofthequestionnairetestthemeaningofthemeasur eme n tscales.Afterthat,thedraftquestionnairewasrevisedandthesamplesizew a s determine d.
Regardingthistopicformasterthesis,from10.May.2018to19.May.2018,Onesurveyw a s do neinmyNewStarLogistics-
56YenThe,Ward2,TanBinhDistrict.Thereare15r e s p o n d e n t s i n t h i s survey.A l l r e s p o n d e n t s a r e c u r r e n t NSL’sc u s t o m e r ; theya r e w o r k i n g asprofessionalandlo ngyearexperienceinexport- importfield.Thepurposeoft h i s s u r v e y i s t o r e v i e w t h e d r a f t q u e s t i o n n a i r e , c l a r i f y s o m e w o r d s a n d c o r r e c t r i g h t w o r d s togetfinalquestionnaire.Thenthere isonesurveywithbigsamplewillbedoneandgetdataanalysistoprepareforthepresentation.
Firstofall,thesurveyparticipantswere3memberswhoareholdingthepositionSalesManager,P lanningExecutiveandTechnicalExecutiveinForeignCompanies.Ther e a s o n isthattheyd on’thaveenoughrighttochooseforwarderintheircompany.Thef ir s t mistakeinth esurveywastoselect t h e w ro ng audiences S o t he questionaire wasf o r w a r d e d to
20GeneralDirectororPurchasingManagerwhohaveenoughrighttochoosef or ward er fort heircompany.Inaddtion,theparticipantssuggestedthatit’snecessaryto add―CouriersExpressService‖inquestion2Part1andshouldhavedefinitionbeforesta rtingeachpartsofquestionaire.
Mainsurvey:Final questionnaireweredelivered directlya n d i n d i r e c t l y t o r e s p o n d e n t s whoworkinginLogisticsCompanyinHoChiMinhCit y.Datawasc o l l e c t e d intwoweeks.
Indataanalysisstep,thecollecteddatawasusedtotestreliabilityandvalidityofthem e a s u r e m e n t scalesbyCronbach’salphacoefficient.Then,AMOSusedmethodtotestt h e hypothesesproposedinthisstudy.Thefinalstep,theauthordiscussedthefinding sa n d conclusionsbasedontheresultsoftheabovestep.
SampleDesign
Accordingt o B o l l e n ( 1 9 8 9 ) , thes a m p l e s i z e s h o u l d b e a s l a r g e asp o s s i b l e w i t h t h e m i n i m u m s h o u l d b e atl e a s t f i v e t i m e s a s t h e n u m b e r o f itemstob e a n a l y z e d a n d preferablynotl essthan100.Asthereare22variables usedforthefactoranalysis,then ecessary s a m p l e s i z e s h o u l d b e : 2 2 * 5 = 1 1 0 o b s e r v a t i o n s I n a d d i t i o n , f o r s t a n d a r d analysis,therequiredsampleisrecommendedby(Tabachnick&Fidell,2001)shouldbe: n > 5 0 + 8 m (whichm:numberofindependentvariables).Thereare04independentv a r i a b l e s inthisresearch.Hencetheminimumsamplerequiredtorunis:n>50+8*4o b s e r v a t i o n s Thesamplesizeis280observationswhichareappropriateforthisresearch.
Samplesw e r e s e l e c t e d byc o n v e n i e n c e samplingmethodc o m b i n e d withc r i t e r i a : r e s p o n d e n t s usedtouselogisticsservices.Pilotstudyheld200emailssurvey,alo ngwith discussionsw i t h l o g i s t i c s managert o d e v e l o p t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e i n t h i s study.F o r t h e emailsurvey,participantsfrombothsexeswereselected.Duringtheseinterviews,p a r t i c i p a n t s werequestionedonvariousaspectsconcerningthelogisticsservices,andonhowthe ye v a l u a t e d t h e i r s a t i s f a c t i o n t o l o g i s t i c s s e r v i c e A f t e r t e s t i n g t h e survey,t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e wasrevisedandpreparedforthemainsurvey.
MeasurementScales
(2003),―OperationalLSQisdefinedasperceptionsoflogisticsactivitiesperformedbyservicep rovidersthatcontributetoconsistentquality,p ro du ct iv ity andefficiency‖.Thisfactorwas measuredona seven-pointLikert-type scaler a n g i n g from1=StronglyDisagreeto7=StronglyAgreeinordertoexploretheopinionof therespondentsbystatementasbelow:
―RelationalLSQisdefinedastheperceptionsoflogisticsactivitiesthatbringthefirmcl o ser t o i t s c u s t o m e r s , i n o r d e r t o u n d e r s t a n d c u s t o m e r s ’ n e e d s a n d e x p e c t a t i o n s a n d h ave theabilitytoprovidequalityservicestomeettheminanefficientmanner(Stanketa l , 2003)‖.Thestatementofthisfactorasbelow:
Itemsa d a p t e d fromp r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h w i t h p r e s t i g e r e s e a r c h e r s T h e s e i t e m s measuref o l l o w byKim&Frazier(1997).Thestatementforthisfactorasbelow:
AccordingtoToo,Souchon,&Thirkell(2001),PurchaseBehaviorspresentedstatementa s b elow:
Data analysismethod
Thedatawas analyzedthrough the SPSS software whichcouldenablethe Cronb ach’s A l p ha AnalysisandAMOSsoftwarecouldabletoCFAandSEManalysis.
Cronbach’sAlphaAnalysiswasusedtotestthereliabilityofthemeasurementscalesisbi gger0.7(Pallant,2005).―PrincipalAxisFactoringwasusedasamethodtoextractthef a c t o r s in thisstudy,togetherwithPromaxasarotationtechnique.Inordertoassurethesuitabilityofthe dataforfactoranalysis,thefollowingconditionsshouldbemet(Pallant,2 0 0 5 ) : -
Confirmatory factoranalysis(CFA)
Researchers often prefer the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) method for measuring scale validity due to its advantages CFA enables the assessment of relationships between concepts in a model without relying on standard error Additionally, it allows for testing convergent and discriminant validity without the need for multiple traditional methods To evaluate model fit, indicators such as CMIN/df (ideally