Contemporary Research in E-Marketing_5

94 Porter developing a Web site, UCD may actually lower the costs of design by minimizing the number and severity of problems that are only discovered after the system has been developed. Just as important, early detection of problems provides value to users by reducing system downtime and expensive maintenance costs. The concept of context of use is fundamental to understanding usability. For example, a marketer may claim to have a very usable Web site. In fact, it may only be usable in a certain range of contexts. Consider a Web site that allows travelers to quickly check flight availabilities and book frequently traveled routes with a single click. The Web site might be extremely usable for a business traveler who flies regularly but extremely unusable for a consumer wanting to plan a personal vacation. The context of use provides the frame of reference that allows the user to evaluate the usability or value of the system. Maguire (1999) argues that understanding the context in which a product is going to be used is essential to assessing the product’s usability. The importance of context in understanding usability is reflected in the International Standards community by defining usability in terms of context. The ISO 9241 (ISO, 1997) standard defines usability as being “the extent to which a product can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified context of use.” When it comes to assessing usability, users evaluate the effectiveness of the system in helping them accomplish their goals. However, even though the usability definition suggests a narrowly defined range of users and usage situations individual differences in user goals, expectations, and experiences are inevitable. As a result, usability perceptions are inherently subjective. Agarwal and Venkatesh (2002) argue that “usability is not intrinsically objective in nature, but rather is closely intertwined with an evaluator’s personal interpretation of the artifact and his or her interaction with it” (p. 170). Holbrook’s Theory of Consumer Value: The conceptual work on consumer value by Holbrook (1994) provides an alternative to the traditional cost-versus-benefits approach. Holbrook defines consumer value as “an interactive relativ-istic preference experience.” He further suggests that consumer value refers to the evaluation of some object (product, service, event, etc.) by some subject, usually a consumer. The four facets of Holbrook’s definition (interactive, relativistic, preference, and experience) make his theory of value broadly applicable and remarkably relevant to understanding value online. The interac-tive nature of value indicates that value is neither entirely subjective (in the eye of the beholder) nor entirely objective (imbued in the physical attributes of a product). Rather, value involves the interaction of an individual who appreciates the physical attributes of a product that can potentially create value. The relativistic nature of value suggests that consumer value is not absolute; rather, Copyright © 2006, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. User-Centered Design and Marketing: Online Customer Value 95 it depends on things such as the usage situation, the individual, and the competitive products with which value is assessed. The preferential nature of value highlights the notion that consumer value occurs as the result of an evaluative judgment the consumer makes of particular object. The experiential nature of value suggests that value resides not in the product itself but rather in the consumption experience derived from the product. The relativistic nature of consumer value provides a possible clue to understand-ing how consumers may make value judgments online where the price of use is not a factor. Expanding on Holbrook’s theory of value, Oliver (1999) suggests that value assessments can involve either intraproduct (benefits of product A compared to costs of product A) or interproduct (benefits of product A compared to benefits of product B). Intraproduct comparisons are consistent with the traditional costs compared to benefits judgment most commonly used in the marketing literature. Interproduct comparisons involve a comparison between an alternative and some referent. The referent can be an existing product or even an ideal prototype for the product category. The interproduct comparison approach appears to hold the key to understanding customer value in an online setting. Consumer’s value assessments for Web sites are likely to be made based on comparisons with experiences they have had using other Web sites that allow customers to accomplish similar goals. Holbrook’s definition appears to capture the most important characteristics of online value: it is a subjective judgment, based on an individual’s goals and use situation. Thus, Holbrook’s perspective recognizes the importance of context in assessing value. From a theoretical perspective Holbrook’s theory of value appears to be an important foundation in which to conceptualize online value. Woodruff’s Means-End Model of Customer Value: Means-end theory has been traditionally used to help explain how consumers understand and evaluate the physical attributes of the products they purchase (the means) to create desired consequences that help them achieve valued outcomes (the ends) (Gutman, 1982). The theory and its associated laddering methodology have typically been used to develop a better understanding of the factors influencing consumer choice or decision-making behavior (Mulvey, Olson, Celsi, & Walker, 1994; Klenosky, Gengler, & Mulvey, 1993). While Gutman’s (1982) work on means-end theory linked product attributes to higher order “values,” Woodruff adapted the theory to explain consumers’ perceptions of “value.”. Woodruff proposed a customer value hierarchy model in the form of a means-end chain. Woodruff (1997) defined customer value as “a customer’s perceived preference for and evaluation of those product at-tributes, attribute performances, and consequences arising from use that facili-tate (or block) achieving the customer’s goals and purposes in use situations” (p. Copyright © 2006, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. 96 Porter 142). A key aspect of this definition is the contextual nature of value perceptions. Value is perceived in the context of how the consumer would like use the product or service. In Woodruff’s model, value perceptions can occur either before or after a consumption experience. The value desired by consumers is rooted in a means-end way of thinking. Consumers form preferences for product features and attributes based on their ability to help consumers achieve desired conse-quences. Likewise, consumers form preferences for certain consequences based on their desire to achieve their higher-order goals. Following a consump-tion experience, consumers assess received value using the same type of analysis. If product consumption facilitates goal accomplishment, then the product is viewed as delivering value. For example, a consumer takes a breath mint to relieve bad breath. The value of the breath mint is evaluated in the context of how effective it was in accomplishing the consumer’s goal of relieving the offensive odor. In addition, goals also provide the context that allows consumers to ultimately evaluate a product’s features and attributes. For example, based on the effectiveness of the breath mint, the consumer can form a judgment about the importance of the product attribute “retsin.” In addition, Woodruff also describes how value in use can be integrated into a disconfirmation model of customer satisfaction. The value desired by a con-sumer prior to product consumption evokes a set of expectations and hence a comparison standard against which the received value is evaluated. If the value received exceeds the value desired, then a positive disconfirmation occurs and the result is a positive impact on feelings of satisfaction. Online Customer Value: A Proposed Definition and Theoretical Model The objective of this section is to introduce and support a theoretical model and definition of online customer value that recognizes the “human as doer” nature of consumer behavior online. The different perspectives on value and usability provide a basis for understanding and defining the meaning of “online value” among goal-directed customers. To help address this issue, it is appropriate to revisit the definitions of usability and value offered by the ISO (1997), Holbrook (1994), and Woodruff (1997). These definitions are included in Table 1 to allow for easier comparison. A key commonality among these definitions is that value/ usability is derived as a result of a customer/user achieving his/her goals. Thus, these definitions appear to be grounded in the value-in-use model in which value resides not in the product but occurs as a result of product usage. Another similarity is that value is inherently related to the usage context. This is explicit Copyright © 2006, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. User-Centered Design and Marketing: Online Customer Value 97 Table 1. Usability (ISO, 1997) Value (Woodruff, 1997) Value (Holbrook, 1994) Definition “The extent to which a product can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified context of use” (ISO 9241-11 – Part 11). “A customer’s perceived preference for and evaluation of those product attributes, attribute performances, and consequences arising from use that facilitate (or block) achieving the customer’s goals and purposes in use situations” (p. 142). “An interactive relativistic preference experience” (p. 5). in both the ISO and Woodruff’s definitions and is a key aspect to the relativistic nature of value highlighted by Holbrook. Integrating these various perspectives and building on the work of Woodruff, online value is defined as “a customer’s perceived preference for and evaluation of those Web site features and functions that facilitate (or block) the perfor-mance of the tasks that are instrumental in achieving the customer’s goals and purposes associated with the Web site visit.” Conceptualizing online customer value as a means-end model provides a theoretical explanation for linking Web site features and functions to perceptions of value by consumers. The means-end model of online customer value (see Figure 1) indicates that consumers’ value perceptions are based on the extent to which the Web site facilitates the accomplishment of specific usage goals and tasks. Likewise, customers’ goals Figure 1. Customer perceived value for goal-directed behavior Customer’s goals and purposes Taskss customer wowould like to perform Web site e features and functions Copyright © 2006, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. 98 Porter and tasks provide the context in which the Web site features, content, and functionality are assessed. Just as Woodruff’s definition links goals to product attributes, this definition links goals to Web site features. The only difference is the critical role that tasks play in the online environment. The next sections highlight the key elements of the model: goals, tasks, and Web site features. Goals and Tasks: The means-end model of online value integrates the concepts of goals from the CB literature and tasks from the UCD literature within a unified framework. Goals and tasks are clearly related concepts and each serves a similar purpose. While the consumer behavior literature describes consumers motivated by goals, the UCD literature focuses on users motivated to accomplish tasks. The challenge in relating and differentiating these concepts is the inconsistency in how the term “goal” is used in the UCD literature. Sometimes researchers in the field of UCD distinguish between tasks and goals. For example, Maguire (2001) indicates that “Tasks are the activities undertaken to achieve a goal.” However, it is not uncommon for the terms “task” and “goal” to be used interchangeably. For example, Van Duyne, Landay, and Hong (2003) recognize that tasks such as “I want to find the best digital camera for under $500 and buy it” are referred to as goals by some authors. Research on goal hierarchies (Bagozzi & Dholakia, 1999; Bettman, 1979) provides a way to distinguish between goals and tasks. Goal hierarchies are conceptually related to means-end chains. In fact, Gutman (1997) in an effort to integrate these concepts define a means-end chain as a hierarchy of goals. Goal hierarchies are useful for understanding the relationship between goals that occur at different levels of abstraction. A goal hierarchy is essentially an interrelated sequence of goals that allows consumer to break up a complex problem into a series of smaller problems. For example, a consumer’s goal to lose weight can be broken down into multiple subgoals such as to join a gym and eat a healthier diet. Each subgoal can in turn be broken down further into action steps. Thus the subgoal of joining a gym may lead the customer to conduct an online information search in order to find a gym that is appropriate for his/her needs. These lower-level goals or “action steps” are clearly related to the concept of a task in the UCD literature. By characterizing a task as an action step undertaken to achieve a higher-order goal, we are able to integrate and position the concept of a task into theory from CB on the structure of goals. The UCD literature suggests that tasks can also be represented hierarchically based on their level of abstraction. The hierarchical nature of tasks is clearly illustrated in the design methodology of task analysis (Richardson, Ormerod, & Shepherd, 1998) in which the requirements for a system are assessed by evaluating the procedures, actions, and decisions that must be achieved to reach the user’s goal. Copyright © 2006, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. ... - tailieumienphi.vn