KINH TE VI MO MARKETTING HEHEHE

Different value scales developed by different value conceptualizations Author(s) Product context Hartline and Jones (1996) Hotel No of Scale Items Oh (1999) Hotel Sweeney et al (1999) Appliances for relative price and for value for money Cronin et al (2000) Spectator sports; Health care; Participation sports; Long distance carriers; Entertainment; Fast food Services: dentist, auto service restaurant, and hairstylist for sacrifice, for value 9-point; Very low-very high 7-point; Strongly disagree – strongly agree McDougall and Levesque (2000) Scale points and anchors 5-point Poor value excellent value 6-point Much worse than expectedmuch better than expected Scale type and anchors unclear Scale items, statements or question Considering the time, effort, and money you spent while staying with us, how would you rate the overall value provided by our hotel? For your stay at XYZ hotel, please describe the overall value you received for the price you paid Relative price – Adapted from Conover (1986) Considering the price of the product, would you say the price is very low or very high compared to a (PRODUCT TYPE) with similar features? Considering as the least expensive (PRODUCT TYPE) with similar features available and as the most expensive (PRODUCT TYPE) with similar features available, how would you rate the (PRODUCT TYPE) you looked at/purchased? Perceived value for money – Adapted from Dodds et al (1991) At the price shown this product is economical This product is a good buy I would consider buying this Sacrifice The price charge to use this facility is; The time required to use this facility is; The effort that I must make to receive the services offered is; Service Value Overall, the value of this facility’s services to me is…; Compared to what I had to give up, the overall ability of this facility to satisfy my wants and needs is… The … offered good value for money Lapierre (2000) ICE (information, communication, entertainment) distribution, and finance 54 items - 10 benefit and sacrifice dimensions 7-point (anchors unclear) Alternative solutions - product related The range of alternatives offered by the supplier The supplier's capability to tailor their offerings to match your needs The supplier's helpfulness in terms of assisting you in solving your problems Product quality - product related The durability of products you buy The reliability of the products you buy over the years The performance of the products you buy The consistent improvement in product quality over the years Product customization - product related The customization of products for your firm The ability to meet unique specifications for products not offered by your IT supplier's competitors The supplier's ability to offer different products from (not similar to) many of their customers The ability to provide custom-built products for your firm Responsiveness – service related Provide quick answers and solutions to your problems Listen to your problems Visit your locations to better understand your business Flexibility - service related Their flexibility in responding to your requests Their ability to adjust their products and services to meet unforeseen needs The way they handle change Their ability to provide emergency product and service deliveries Reliability - service related The accuracy and clarity of the billing Their ability to things right the first time The overall competence of employees with whom you not have faceto-face contact Their ability to keep promises The accuracy of transactions Technical competence - service related Their creativity Their specialized expertize in your activity sector Their ability to demonstrate comprehensive process knowledge of your business The way they use new technology to generate solutions Their ability to provide system solutions in response to your problems Supplier’s image – relationship related Its reputation Its credibility Trust – relationship related Your confidence that the supplier is telling the truth, even when your supplier gives you a rather unlikely explanation The accuracy of the information provided by your major supplier The supplier's fulfillment of promises made to your organization The judgment or advice on your business operations that your supplier is sharing with you The sincerity of your supplier Supplier solidarity with customers - relationship related The help provided by your major supplier when you run into problems The supplier's problems sharing that arise in the course of your relationship with them The supplier's commitment to improvements which may benefit your overall relationship with them (not only of benefit for their own sakes) The supplier's willingness to meet your needs beyond the contract terms Price - product and service related Most prices of the products and services you buy Most prices you pay in relation to your major IT supplier's profitability The impact of competition on the prices you pay The justification of your major IT supplier in the prices they charge The fairness of most prices you pay Time/effort/energy - relationship related The number of meetings with the supplier's staff The bargaining effort with the supplier's staff in reaching an agreement Your time and effort spent for training a number of your employees Your time and effort spent in developing a working business relationship with your major IT supplier Your energy invested with your major IT supplier Sweeney and Soutar (2001) Various consumer products 19-item PERVAL developed to assess perceived value of consumer durable goods 7-point Strongly disagree– strongly agree Petrick (2002) Furthered Zeithaml model into SERVPERVAL Services 25-item SERVPERVAL To measure value of services 5-point Definitely False-definitely true Also used by Cruiselines Conflict - relationship related The frequent arguments you have with your supplier about business issues The controversial arguments you have with your supplier The disagreements you have with your supplier about how you can best achieve your respective goals Functional value (performance/quality) has consistent quality is well made has an acceptable standard of quality has poor workmanship would not last a long time would perform consistently Emotional value is one that I would enjoy would make me want to use it is one that I would feel relaxed about using would make me feel good would give me pleasure Functional value (price/value for money) is reasonably priced offers value for money is a good product for the price would be economical Social value (enhancement of social self-concept) would help me to feel acceptable would improve the way I am perceived would make a good impression on other people would give its owner social approval Quality Is outstanding quality Is very reliable Is very dependable Is very consistent Emotional response Petrick (2003) Petrick (2004) Petrick and Backman (2002) Golf vacation 8- for overall, for transaction and for acquisition value 10-point Extremely poor value extremely good value 5-point Definitely False-definitely true Makes me feel good Gives me pleasure Gives me a sense of joy Makes me feel delighted Gives me happiness Monetary price Is a good buy Is worth the money Is fairly priced Is reasonably priced Is economical Appears to be a good bargain Behavioral price Is easy to buy Required little energy to purchase Is easy to shop for Required little effort to buy Is easily bought Reputation Has good reputation Is well respected Is well thought of Has status Is reputable Overall value Transaction value – Adapted from Grewal et al (1998) Taking advantage of the seasonal price deal on my golf vacation made me feel good I received a lot of pleasure knowing that I saved money with the reduced seasonal price on my golf vacation Beyond the money saved, taking advantage of the seasonal price deal on my golf vacation gave me a sense of joy I feel that I got my money’s worth for the money spent on my golf vacation Acquisition value – Adapted from Grewal et al (1998) Al-Sabbahy et al (2004) Adapted scale of by Grewal et al (1998) to hospitality services Hotels and restaurants semantic differential, Likert 7-point semantic differential, extremely bad value-extremely good value 7-point Strongly disagree– strongly agree Snoj et al (2004) Mobile phone 15 7-point (anchors unclear) Netemeyer et al (2004 Consumer products and fast food restaurants 7-point Strongly disagree – strongly agree I feel I received good quality for the price paid for my golf vacation After evaluating my golf vacation, I am confident that I received quality for the price paid on my golf vacation I feel that the purchase of my golf vacation met both my high-quality and low-price requirements Overall value Respondents were asked to rate their evaluation of the overall value of the hotel visit or meal experience on a semantic differential scale Acquisition value I received a good quality service for a reasonable price Considering the quality of the physical environment of the … the price was appropriate I valued this … as it met my needs at a reasonable price I got good value for the money I spent Given the features of the … it was good value for money This … fulfilled both my high quality and low price requirements Compared to what I was willing to pay, the price I actually paid was good value This …met my specific needs (e.g comfortable accommodation, convenient location) at a reasonable price If I had … in that … at a price lower than the price I paid, I would have got my money’s worth Transaction value Reflecting on the price I paid, I feel that I got a good deal It added to my pleasure knowing that I got a good deal on the price 3Beyond saving money, there was a good feeling attached to making a good deal—as was the case here Perceived prices (5 indicators), perceived risks (5 indicators) and perceived values (5 indicators) Items are not listed What I get from (brand name) brand of (product) is worth the cost All things considered (price, time, and effort), (brand) brand of (product) is a good buy Compared to other brands of (product), (brand name) is a good value for Tam (2004) Restaurants 7-point Lin et al (2005) Website 7-point Strongly disagree – strongly agree Pura (2005) Mobile service 17 7-point Totally disagree - totally agree the money When I use a (brand name) brand of (product), I feel I am getting my money’s worth Perceived Sacrifice Perceived Sacrifice Based on this service encounter, please rate on the following scales, the time you perceive to have spent waiting to be served (7-point semantic differential; little time / a long time; lower than I expected / higher than I expected) Please rate on the following scales, the price you perceive to have paid for the service received at this encounter (including food, service, and environment)? (7-point semantic differential; cheap / expensive; reasonable / unreasonable; lower than I expected / higher than I expected) Perceived Value Based on the service you received (including food, service, environment), how did you perceive the price you paid? Based on the service you received (including food, service, and environment), how did you perceive the time you spent waiting to be served? (7-point semantic differential scale, not worthwhile at all / very worthwhile) Monetary sacrifice You feel that the product (a good or a service) you purchased is expensive You think you paid much money Perceived value Compared with the price you paid, this web site provides good eTail service value Compared with the tangible and intangible costs you paid, purchasing from this web site is worthwhile You think you are getting good value for the money you spent Monetary value – Adapted from Chen and Dubinsky (2003), Dodds et al (1991) and Sweeney and Soutar (2001) The price of this mobile service is acceptable This mobile service is good value for money This mobile service is better value for money than what I would pay for the same service Convenience value – Adapted from Anderson and Srinivasan (2003) and Mathwick, Malhotra and Rigdon (2001) I value the ease of using this mobile service Using this mobile service is an efficient way to manage my time I value the possibility to use this service instantly via my mobile device (new) I value the convenience of using this mobile service (new) Social value – Adapted from Soutar and Sweeney (2003) and Sweeney and Soutar (2001) Using this mobile service helps me to feel accepted by others Using this mobile service makes a good impression on other people Using this mobile service gives me social approval Emotional value – Adapted from Soutar and Sweeney (2003) and Sweeney and Soutar (2001) Using this mobile service gives me pleasure Using this mobile service makes me feel good Epistemic value – Adapted from Donthu and Garcia (1999) I used this mobile service to experiment with new ways of doing things I used this mobile service to test the new technologies (new) I used this mobile service out of curiosity (new) Conditional value (Created for this study) I value the information this service offers, with the help of which I get what I need in a certain situation (new) I value the customized information according to my location, that I get by using this location based mobile service (new) Sanchez et al (2006) Travel agency Also tested by Roig et al (2006) and by Moliner, Sánchez, Rodríguez, and Callarisa (2007) and by Moliner, Sánchez, Rodríguez, and Callarisa (2007) Banking services Travel agencies and tile sales establishments 24-item GLOVAL: GLObal purchase perceived VALue 5-point agreement scale (anchors unclear) Functional value of the travel agency (installations) The distribution of the interior favored confidentiality and privacy The establishment was neat and well organized The installations were spacious, modern and clean The establishment was well located (easily found, central and/or with good transport links) Functional value of the personnel of the travel agency (professionalism) They were good professionals and they were up-to-date about new items and trends They knew their job well Their advice was valuable They knew the tourism packages Functional value of the tourism package (quality) The tourism package purchased was well organized The quality of the tourism package was maintained throughout Relative to other tourism packages purchased it had an acceptable level of quality The result was as expected Functional value (price) It was a good purchase for the price paid The tourism package purchased was reasonably priced The price was the main criterion for the decision Emotional value of the purchase I am comfortable with the tourism package purchased The personnel were always willing to satisfy my wishes as a customer, whatever product I wanted to buy The personnel gave me a positive feeling Lee et al (2007) Destination 15 5-point Strongly disagree– strongly agree Gartner et al (2007) Later simplified by Tasci (2011) Destination 7-point Strongly disagree– strongly agree I felt relaxed in the travel agency The personnel didn’t pressure me to decide quickly Social value of the purchase Using its services has improved the way others perceive me This tour operator’s tourism packages are used by many people that I know Taking the tourism package improved the way I am perceived by others People who take that type of tourism packages obtain social approval The choice of visiting … was a right decision I obtained good results from visiting … Overall, visiting … was valuable and worth it … is a place where I want to travel The value of visiting … was more than what I expected Visiting … is a good quality tourism product Compared to other tourism destinations, visiting … is a good value for the money … is a destination that I enjoy Compared to travel expenses, I got reasonable quality from visiting … While visiting … I received good service Visiting … gave me pleasure Visiting … is reasonably priced After I visited …, my image of … was improved Visiting … made me feel better Visiting … was economical A vacation in …is money well spent A vacation in … is more of a hassle than a vacation Later simpl’ified by Tasci (2011) A vacation in … is very inexpensive A vacation in … is good value for money Tasci’s (2011) modifications A vacation in … is… Money well spent Too far from home More of a hassle than a vacation Very inexpensive Chen (2008) Airline Ryu et al (2008) Restaurant Boo et al (2009) Gambling destinations: Las Vegas and Atlantic City Hu et al (2009) Hotel Hutchinson et al (2009) Golf destination Kuo et al (2009) Telecom company 7-point Extremely disagreeextremely agree Scale point unclear Strongly disagree– strongly agree 7-point Strongly disagree – strongly agree 7-point (anchors unclear) 7-point (anchors unclear) 5-point Strongly disagree– strongly agree Good value for money Considering the ticket price I pay for the airline, I believe that the airline offers sufficient services The ticket price of this airline is reasonable The restaurant offered good value for the price The overall value of dining at the restaurant was high The dining experience was worth the money This destination has reasonable prices - Adopted from Ambler et al (2002), Sweeney and Soutar (2001) Considering what I would pay for a trip, I will get much more than my money’s worth by visiting this destination – Adopted from Lassar et al.(1995), Dodds et al (1991) The costs of visiting this destination are a bargain relative to the benefits I receive – Adopted from Lassar et al (1995), Dodds et al (1991) Visiting this destination is economical Visiting this destination is a good deal three items were adapted from Cronin et al (2000), and an additional item developed; items are not listed Received reasonable service quality Paid a reasonable price Received a superior net value I feel I am getting good mobile value-added services for a reasonable price (borrowed from Cronin et al., 2000) Using the value-added services provided by this telecom company is worth for me to sacrifice some time and efforts (borrowed from Tung, 2004) Compared with other telecom companies, it is wise to choose this telecom company (borrowed from Wang et al., 2004) ... this mobile service is acceptable This mobile service is good value for money This mobile service is better value for money than what I would pay for the same service Convenience value – Adapted... from visiting … While visiting … I received good service Visiting … gave me pleasure Visiting … is reasonably priced After I visited …, my image of … was improved Visiting … made me feel better Visiting... the ease of using this mobile service Using this mobile service is an efficient way to manage my time I value the possibility to use this service instantly via my mobile device (new) I value the