Dimensions of e-service quality for brick and mortar retail

brands and its impact on consumer satisfaction and loyalty

by

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to

University of Liverpool

In partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of

MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

2010
 ABSTRACT

The objective of this study is to identify the dimensions of e-service quality for brick and
mortar retail brands’ e-tailing in order to determine its impact on consumer satisfaction
and loyalty, and then ultimately recommend e-service standards for brick and mortar retail
brands competing in the e-space marketplace. This study is important for two reasons.
Firstly, it enables managers in the brick and mortar retail brand industry to go beyond mere
expansion in the e-space, but in fact excel in the e-space market environment, thereby
preserving their vitality in the overall evolving marketplace. Secondly, this research
indicates the significance and impact of understanding and preserving academic interest in
the field of consumer behavior and retail, despite the recent and immensely radical
transitions to less traditional market environments and channels, hence e-space, which has
taken course over the recent years. To accomplish this study, a qualitative research
approach was followed and specific dimensions of e-service quality, with respect to two
retail brands (Babies “R” Us and Best Buy), were investigated.

Based on the responses gathered from the customers’ of these two brands as well as
researcher observations, it was concluded that informativeness, brand strength, expectancy
and involvement are the most critical dimensions of e-service quality in achieving a
successful expansion into e-space for brick and mortar retail brands. It was also found that
specific e-consumer populations have greater impact on and importance to brick and
mortar retail brands extending to e-space, which are: On-off Shoppers and Comparison
Shoppers. Recommendations to successfully optimizing business opportunities, based on
the results of this study, are provided.

1
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION 4
1.1 Background Information 4
1.2 Objective 5
1.3 Importance 5
1.4 Outline 5

2.0 LITERTURE REVIEW 6

3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 17

3.1 Introduction 17
3.2 Research Design 17
3.2.1 Data generation sources and method of communication 18
3.2.1.1Response matters 18
3.2.1.2 Methodological issues 18
3.2.1.3 Sampling considerations 18
3.2.1.4 Research constraints 19
3.2.2 Questionnaire and measure development 19
3.2.2.1 Information sought 19
3.2.2.2 Type of questionnaire and method of administration 19
3.2.2.3 Individual question content  20
3.2.2.4 The constructs under investigation 21
3.2.2.5 Forms of response 22
3.2.2.6 Question wording  22
3.2.2.7 Question sequence 23
3.2.2.8 Physical questionnaire characteristics 23
3.2.2.9 Re-examination and revision of the questionnaire 24
3.2.2.10 Questionnaire pre-testing 24
3.2.3 Methodology of the survey  24
3.2.3.1 Sampling method 24
3.2.3.2 Population 25
3.2.3.3 Sampling frame 25
3.2.3.4 Sampling process 25
3.2.3.5 Sampling unit informants 25
3.2.4 Administration of the survey 26
3.2.4.1 Administrative plan 26
3.2.4.2 Survey Response 26

4.0 CASE STUDY 27

4.1 Babies R Us Company History 27
4.1.1 Babies “R” Us Competition 27
4.1.2 Babies “R” Us Demographics 27
4.1.3 Babies “R” Us Dimension Assessment 27
4.2. Best Buy Company History 29
4.2.1 Best Buy Competition 29
4.2.2 Best Buy Demographics 30
4.2.3 Best Buy Dimension Assessment 30
4.3 Interview Analysis 31
4.4 Consumer Typology Analysis 36

2
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 38
5.1 Introduction 38
5.2 Conclusions Drawn Relating to the Dimensions of E-Service Quality 38
5.3 Conclusions Drawn Regarding the E-Consumer Topology 42
5.4 Recommendations Relating to the Dimensions of E-Service Quality 42
5.5 Recommendations Drawn Regarding the E-Consumer Topology 44

6.0 LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

6.1 Limitations 45
6.2 Future Research 45

REFERENCES 47

APPENDIX I 52

3
1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background Information

In 2009, the total sales for e-commerce retail (e-tail) accounted for 3.7 percent of total retail
sales (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010) in the United States (U.S.). Now considering that five years
prior(2004) total e-tail sales was measured to be less than 2.2 percent (U.S. Census Bureau,
2010) of the total retail sales in the U.S., it is made evident that consumer driven e-tail is a
growing industry. Pure brick and mortar retailers face intense competition from the e-tail
environment as this notable growth in e-tail sales is even resilient to general consumer
market downturns; as proven in 2009 when the U.S. Census bureau recorded a decrease of
7.0 percent (±0.2%) overall total retail sales since 2008 while reporting a 2.0 percent
(±1.8%) increase in e-commerce sales between this very same time span (U.S. Census
Bureau, 2010). It is for this reason countless traditional brick and mortar retail brands are
now expanding to offer analogous e-tail services (e-service).

Holloway & Beatty (2008) conducted a study that showed a notable challenge for e-tailers
in their efforts to meet consumer expectations with respect to merchandise quality, as it has
been determined that this is a critical dissatisfier for online shoppers. Though this is a
worthy threat to pure e-tailers, this finding, on the other hand, presents a great advantage
point for brick and mortar retailers entering electronic market space (e-space). This is
because brick and mortars have a favorable attribute, that pure e-tailers do not have-a pre-
established level of consumer satisfaction associated with their brand and merchandise
quality.

Lim & Dubinsky (2004) revealed that the e-tailers’ reputation significantly predicts a
consumers attitude towards executing an online purchase. Through this finding it is
understood that brick and mortar retailers extending to e-service have another clear
advantage. That is pre-established consumer loyalty in the offline market space can assist
brick and mortar business favorably swaying consumer attitudes towards committing an
online purchase out of loyalty. But unfortunately, despite the identified consumer
satisfaction and loyalty advantages and the substantial growth in U.S. e-tail consumer base
(Lim & Dubinsky, 2004; Holloway & Beatty, 2008), success in the e-service environment has
yet to manifest itself for brick and mortar retail brands expanding to the e-service industry.
Rajamma, Paswan & Ganesh (2007), verified this during a study on consumer motivation,
when it was revealed that many consumers showed a preference to purchase tangible
items, such as retail products, through a brick and mortar outlet stores over using e-service
shopping opportunities.

It is without question that e-service quality and its consequent impact on consumer
satisfaction and loyalty are critical components in e-service success (Theodosiou, Makri,
Samiee, & Katsikea, 2009). But somehow, the obvious advantage points for e-tailing brick
and mortar stores already identified is not enough. This acknowledges that, in terms of e-
service quality, there is something unique about the consumer behavior response to brick
and mortar retail brands e-tailing in comparison to pure virtual retailers which demands
closer examination.

4
1.2 Objective
Based upon the previous discussion, the objective of this dissertation is to identify the
dimensions of e-service quality for brick and mortar retail brands e-tailing, to determine its
impact on consumer satisfaction and loyalty, and then ultimately recommend e-service
standards for brick and mortar retail brands competing in the e-space marketplace.

1.3 Importance
The importance of this research study is pivotal. This is for two reasons. Firstly, it enables
managers in the brick and mortar retail brand industry to go beyond mere expansion in the
e-space, but in fact excel in e-space environment, thereby preserving their vitality in the
overall evolving marketplace. Secondly, and most importantly, this research presents to
industry experts and strategists the significance and impact of understanding and
preserving academic interest in the field of consumer behavior and retail, despite the recent
and immensely radical transitions to less traditional market environments and market
channels that has taken course over the present years.

1.4 Outline
This research effort is designed to identify the dimensions of e-service quality for brick and
mortar retail brands e-tailing to determine its impact on consumer satisfaction and loyalty
and ultimately recommend e-service standards for brick and mortar retail brands
competing in the e-space. To accomplish this, this research paper is made up of several
integral chapters.

In Chapter 1, the background information, the objective, the importance and the structure
of the study is discussed. The second Chapter reviews the critical and relevant literature. It
is in this chapter that an acclimated perspective and fundamental knowledge base,
regarding the subject of consumer behavior, quality of service, and virtual and non-virtual
retailing is communicated. Chapter 3, the methodology, focuses on the methods employed
by this research study to investigate the topic. In this chapter, aspects such as research
design, data generation sources, methods of communication, questionnaire and
measurement development, methodology of survey, administration of the survey and more
are explained. One of the most important components of Chapter 3 is the definitions
provided that articulate the dimensions and constructs of e-service quality which are later
used to execute this research study. In Chapter 4, a Case Study, presents and analyses the
data and information collected during the survey. It provides and elaborates description of
the information gathered in relation to the previously identified and articulated dimensions
of e-service quality. The conclusions gathered in this research study are described in
Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations. Also recommendations for industry experts
and business practitioners involved in the e-tailing of brick and mortar retail brands are
provided in this fifth chapter as well. Chapter 6 is the final chapter belonging to this
research study. In this chapter, the limitations and future Research opportunities are
identified for the benefit of the market and industry as a whole.

5
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

To formally and appropriately explore the “Dimensions of e-service quality for brick and
mortar retail brands and its impact on consumer satisfaction and loyalty”, it is only natural to
investigate what has already been explored and learned by industry experts thus far.
Previously published academic work has been a superior resource for this study. With a
focus on consumer behavior, brick and mortar retailing along with e-tailing, as well as
service and e-service quality, an abundance of information has been collected to make this
research both thorough and reflective. The following is a description of relevant published
findings.

In a study conducted by Kalyanam & McIntyre (2002), it was recognized that there is a
“lack of a common vocabulary regarding e-marketing, an inability to define and compare e-
marketing with traditional marketing, and difficulty in specifying an e-marketing plan
because of unclear scope”. These profound acknowledgements enabled Kalyanam &
McIntyre to pursue and formally define “e-marketing mix”. This research effort found that
very little of the information can be used to help assess the consumer behaviour in either
retail environments (online or brick and mortar). It is evident, that the e-marketing mix
provides guidance, structure and legitimacy to pursuing the formulation of
recommendations to the industry that will be based on the data results gathered, fully
analyzed and documented in this study.

In 2002, over 60% of individuals in either Denmark or Finland had access to the Internet,
yet only 18% carried out purchases over the Internet in Finland as opposed to Denmark in
which 38% did (OCED Observer, 2002). This is a critical finding for the purpose of our
study as it highlights the fact that the culture of online shopping is indeed affected by
geographical culture. Therefore it is proven that it was the right to ensure that all
participants in the case study conducted this research study were in fact consumers
currently living in the same country.

Unique to many other e-service centric research publications, Kau, Tang & Ghosh (2003),
published a typology of online shoppers. This study is very relevant to the dissertation at
hand because it explains that the motivation and concerns for online shoppers that
consequently form consumer e-service quality expectancies and demands. However the
importance of this study is its recognition that e-service quality and impending impact on
consumer satisfaction and loyalty is not only defined by the controllable attributes of e-tail
websites but it acknowledges that attitudinal variables that differentiated the various
clusters of online shoppers does show some impact. Therefore Kau, Tang & Ghosh’s (2003)
typology of online shoppers is an asset to the formation of this dissertation because partly it
will be used to form the details of the methodology but mostly as a tool to analyzing the
findings of this dissertation in order to help bring clarity on the topic e-service quality of
brick and mortar retails brands.

Wolfinbarger & Gilly (2003) conducted research in which their findings provide good
insight into the importance of dimensionalizing and measuring e-tail quality. However their
greatest contribution to this dissertation is the suggestion that such knowledge can also be

6
used to predict consumer perception of e-tail quality. This finding is radically different from
other similar studies because it goes beyond just analyzing e-tail quality or suggesting
measurement scales. Unfortunately it has been more than seven years since these
conclusions were presented and herein lays the shortfall of Wolfinbarger & Gilly’s (2003)
study but yet the importance of conducting the dissertation at hand. During this very short
time span much of the knowledge shared by Wolfinbarger & Gilly (2003) and other similar
research studies have been already applied in the market place to optimize consumer
interest, satisfaction and loyalty. The value of this dissertation will be its offering of an
updated substantiated perspective of the dimensions of e-service quality for brick and
mortar retail brands in addition to offering predictive capabilities as suggested.

In this research study the concept of customization is examined from a service quality
perspective. Considering that promotional activities are also an critical component of brand
marketing, Ansari & Mela (2003) study on ‘E-Customization’ bares essential information
that help develop a better analysis of the results collected in this research study. Ansari &
Mela (2003) determined that targeting promotions and marketing, especially customized
email, does increase in effectiveness in brand retailing and e-tailing as the level of
customization increases. It is for this reason, the customization recommendations
generated by the research study at hand will be derived not only from the customization
dimension examined, but through the application of Ansari & Mela (2003)’s explanation
within the context of other dimensions investigated.

Comegy & Brennan (2003) studied Students’ Online Shopping Behavior, and explained that
“marketers must understand that the buying process starts long before the actual purchase is
made”. In this profound finding they go on to explain that students are shopping and
growing into knowledgeable consumers even before the onset of their affluence in their
later life. It is critical to understand and take advantage of the importance e-marketing,
brand management and e-tail service quality. These finding reiterate the overall importance
of this research study at hand.

In another study that assessed ‘the roles of e-marketing in contemporary marketing

practices’, it was determined that incorporating all e-marketing technologies and
innovations is not always advantageous (Coviello, Brodie, Brookes & Palmer, 2003).
Furthermore, it is essential that the organizations unique composition in addition to their
specific customer needs are factored into deciding the appropriateness of the strategy
(Coviello et al., 2003). Relating these findings to the study at hand, it is apparent that the
recommendations to the industry to be proposed in this very research study, must
acknowledge differentiating needs and strategies between various organizations and
therefore can not assume the same goals for all brick and mortar e-tail success pursuits.

Lim & Dubinsky (2004) present an understanding of the relationship between offline and
online consumer shopping experience. The relevance of this study to the dissertation at
hand is that it provides ample relevant and substantiated statistical data regarding online
consumer behavior without neglecting to discuss the ramifications of having associated
brick and mortar retail shopping experience. This information can be used to help develop
the analysis and final conclusions of this dissertation especially since, unlike most other

7
research publications, the focus is not exclusive to pure virtual retailing services. Lim &
Dubinsky’s belief in expectancy will be used to form the finer details of the methodology
and analyze the findings of this research. This dissertation and Lim & Dubinsky’s (2004)
study share in common the subject of brick and mortar actively e-tailing .

Involvement refers to the degree a consumer is engages with a website’s services (Bart,
Shankar, Sultan, & Urban, 2005). Furthermore online trust drives consumer behavioral
intent (Bart et al., 2005). The importance of these understandings is apparent when
learning about the conclusions drawn from the study conducted by Bart et al. (2005). Here,
they verified that, with regards to online trust, hence consumer behavioral intent, brand
strength is critical for categories of e-services with high involvement. This proves that
branding is important category to investigate when examining e-service quality in addition
to supporting the intent to include branding related evaluations in this dissertation.

Kim & Stoel (2005) identified seven dimensions of online customer service in which only
“ease in searching, availability of FAQs, availability of in-stock status information, and ease
of comparison shopping” (Kim & Stoel, 2005) were identified as top four dimensions that
increase online purchase intent. By relating the attributes of each of these four key
dimensions directly to the customer service experience pertaining to the brick and mortar
shopping environment it becomes evident that Kim & Stoel (2005) make significant
contributions to the more fundamental interest of brick and mortar retail branding
pursuing e-tail success. It is uncovered that these top four dimensions are most capable
supplements to the in-person advantages that customer services rendered by brick and
mortar shopping environments. Search functionality is similar to talking to a representative
in person as both actions equally make it “easy for shoppers to locate the products they are
looking for” (Kim & Stoel, 2005). FAQ is similar to talking to a representative in person as
both actions equally “allow shoppers to get immediate answers for common questions”
( Kim & Stoel, 2005). Stock availability is similar to looking at the shelf as opposed to the
classic e-commerce environment in which the customer is notified when the checkout takes
place (Kim & Stoel, 2005). Lastly, it is clear that comparison shopping is not a typical
opportunity provided directly in-person by the customer service staff of a brick and mortar
store, however in such an environment, if a customer is not discouraged to do so by staff
members, especially just by coexisting in a mall, the business is more likely increased
purchase intent. It for this reason the consumers’ excess ability to comparison shop online
has the same effect as in-person customer service respecting their customer’s decision to
examine the competition. Therefore, collectively Kim & Stoel (2005) provide ample
information that can be used to explain the purposefulness of the type of data that chosen
to be collected in this study, including as any potential reason for any inconsistencies
identified across the retail brands chosen for this study’s case study.

In a study on how consumer loyalty is determined it was found that “offline value appears to
rank slightly higher than online value, while online joy slightly outranks offline joy” (Semeijn,
van Riel, van Birgelen & Streukens, 2005). The importance of this finding is the recognition
that various shopping environments, whether offline or online, render different impact and
potential for retail stores. Furthermore it is unwise to expect that both environments can
harbor the exact same characteristics or sensations. In the context of this study, which

8
examines the e-service quality dimensions of brick and mortar retail brands pursuing e-tail
success, it important to use Semeijn et al.’s findings to ensure that the proposed
recommendation to the industry to be made by this very research study is far from a
shallow attempt to simply to replicate each environment online or offline.

Balabanis, Reynolds & Simintiras (2006) found that “familiarity” is the most “important”
switching barrier for e-stores. The significance of this finding, in relation to the research
study at hand, is the understanding that consumer loyalty for brick and mortar e-tailers has
the potential to combat the present wavering success in the e-market by using the influence
of familiarly. Though arguably branding recognition can emit sense familiarity between
traditional retailing and e-tailing of brick and mortar stores, Balabanis et al. (2006) study
fails to resolve the dissertation concerns because their study has one critical limitation.
Their definition of familiarity, relative to consumer e-service loyalty, is limited to
contemplating website layout and user orientation online. Moreover, Balabanis et al. (2006)
understanding of familiarity and loyalty does not appropriately acknowledge the existence
of other common cues (such as brand recognition) that is very much prevalent in the
uniqueness of brick and mortar retail brand e-service as oppose to pure e-tailers. For this
reason the pursuit of this research study remains merited.

Collier & Bienstock (2006) study of e-service quality revealed “that service quality in an
online setting is a summative judgment that takes place from evaluating numerous
dimensions” and that each dimension is very capable of imposing consumer related e-
service quality bias on each other. These findings support this dissertation topic, in addition
to possessing evidence of e-service quality priorities, because they acknowledge that
dimensions of e-service quality are not limited to a specific quantity- especially considering
the unpredictable growth and maturation of the online industry. Essentially Collier &
Bienstock (2006) are creditable advocates of future research, such as this dissertation at
hand, which intends to contemplate, propose and define possibly new dimension for e-
service quality.

Further, Allred, Smith, & Swinyard (2006) developed a typology of shoppers that aligned
with maket segment. In their research they concluded that “online shoppers differ
substantially from online non-shoppers. Compared with online non-shoppers, it shows that
online shoppers are younger, wealthier, better educated, have higher ‘computer literacy,’
and are bigger retail spenders. They also spend more time on their computer, and are less
fearful about financial loss resulting from online transactions”. These findings make a
significant contribution to this research study at hand as it verifies the relevancy of using
typologies to better analyze the results and provide recommendations for the future
industry standards. But more importantly, this study’s findings shed light into the
importance and influence of demographics in the subject of consumer behavior in online
shopping environments.

Additionally, Kennedy & Coughlan (2006) suggest that it is far better for traditional
retailers to use a marketing strategy that employs shopping portals rather than
independently trying to establish website traffic. The importance of this finding, in relation
to this research study, is the awareness that branding, whether recognition or recall, in a

9
traditional brick and mortar environment is not always sufficient to bring immediate online
success. Furthermore it also indicates that establishing brand identity virtually and non
virtually are not always the same or interchangeable. It is for this reason, examining the
dimension of branding is well merited for this study at hand.

Levenburg (2006), revealed that the majority of companies “use e-mail as the primary tool
to communicate with current customers and for customer service purposes” and these e-
mail applications “are likely to be viewed as ‘necessary’ and as expected in providing
customer service online” (Levenburg, 2006). As valuable as these findings are in providing
evidence that customer service is generally accepted as a critical component to successful e-
tailing, the study findings provide relevant insight to the challenges of the brick and mortar
retail brand pursuing growth and stamina in the online shopping environment. According
to Levenburg (2006), customer service extends beyond perspective and returning
customers initiated request for help. This is because customer service is involved in the
shopping process even before the purchase transaction is undergone: “Prior to making a
buying decision, prospective customers, according to the classical purchase decision model,
often engage in a search for alternatives, the extensiveness of which depends largely upon
their involvement level with the offering and prior purchase experience. This search
process can be facilitated online by providing company and product information, maps,
product comparisons, and so on, thereby taking initial steps to establish relationships with
prospective customers” (Levenburg, 2006). It is for this reason that in this very research
study’s topic of customer service for e-tailing brick and mortar retail brands are
investigated categorically and not by generalizing the subject through broaden categories
such a satisfaction, loyalty or quality of service.

In a study that examined shopper motivation Rajamma, Paswan & Ganesh (2007), found
that many consumers tend to associate tangible purchases, such as retail products with
brick and mortar outlet stores over e-service shopping opportunities (Rajamma et al.,
2007). This finding is relevant because it objectively verifies that indeed the brick and
mortar retailer struggles in e-space is not incidental and very much related to consumer
behavior rather than mere environmental factors. This study, furthermore, proves that this
phenomenon is measurably significant.

Demangeot & Broderick (2007) state that “involvement produces both hedonic and
utilitarian value”. This finding is of critical importance to this study. This primarily because
it expands the definition of one of the key constructs used in this study, involvement, by
indicating its relationship with other key constructs used in this study: the purpose of flow
experience/hedonism and navigation/traversal. This does not imply that there are any co-
dependencies between these constructs but it does mean that when analyzing the results
collected for this study, it must be considered that each of these constructs may potentially
manifest itself in a variety of ways. Such that involvement can be exposed through
hedonistic behaviors as well as navigational pursuits, while hedonism can be exposed
through a response that can resembles involvement behaviors and navigational traversal
pursuits (Demangeot & Broderick 2007).

10
Chen & Barnes (2007) investigated security and privacy through examining Initial Trust
and Online Buyer Behavior. It was found that by improving web site usefulness through
bettering informative content and more carefully selecting functionalities and features such
as: “clearly stating security and privacy policies and regulations, including third-party ratings
of web sites, and providing delivery-and-payment services via strategic alliance in
logistics”(Chen & Barnes, 2007) that trust and the sensation of privacy and security can ease
the encouragement of consumer patronage. These findings give merit to the ongoing
pursuit, by both industry analysts and this very research study, to use of e-commerce
structural standards to financially benefit e-tailers worldwide. Chen and Barnes also make
note that achieving a sense of familiarity is a prevailing opportunity to acquire security and
privacy trust. As promising as this finding may be, the Chen and Barnes research does fall
short here. This is because their research limits the concept of familiarity to the
understanding that primarily ads and web links is the means of achieving familiarity, they
thereby neglect to acknowledge the impact of retail branding to achieve familiarity and
consequently imposing a sense of a trustful shopping environment thus harboring security
and privacy too.

Holloway & Beatty (2008) present an explicit examination of satisfiers and dissatisfiers of
the online environment from the perspective of the potential customer. Here four
dimensions are articulated as critical components that contribute to measuring customer
satisfaction and dissatisfaction. But their most notable finding is indicating that satisfaction
and dissatisfaction drivers are in fact independent (Holloway & Beatty’, 2008, p. 361).
Holloway & Beatty’s (2008) research does have one identified shortfall that prevents its
findings, regarding consumer satisfaction, from entirely resolving the purpose of this very
dissertation. Holloway and Beatty’s (2008) study focused on the internal interaction of the
shopping experience. This is to the extent that it has neglected to contemplate the impact of
the external influences on the consumer e-shopping experience; such as the non-virtual
cues of a pre-existing brick and mortar retail brand shopping experience that may influence
or bias consumer satisfaction when interacting online.

It has been identified that “self-actualization” and “self-affiliation” are two critical
categories of online shoppers that must be targeted by retailer to encourage success in the
virtual market place (Koo, Kim, & Lee, 2008). Because of this, pursuing typographical
information regarding the participants of the case study executed in this study, is more than
justified. Koo et al. (2008) bring a unique perspective to the understanding of typologies
used in this research study at hand as they relate personal values and motivation to
personal fulfillment rather than lifestyle choices.

In another study that examined pricing strategies for businesses that retail online and in
brick and mortar locations, it was determined that it is far better to maintain consistency in
pricing (the same) in both channels than offering better discounts exclusively in-store or
exclusively online (Yan, 2008). This is primarily because it has been recognized that
consumers no longer see retail channels are competitive agents, but in fact extensions of
retail brands. With this in mind, though pricing was not pursued as dimension to focus on
for the study at hand, pricing strategy discussed and understood by Yan (2008) will be used
as tool to analyze the expectancy results of the study.

11
Herná ndez-Ortega, Jiménez-Martínez, & Martín-DeHoyos (2008) identified the differences
between potential, new and experienced e-customers. Though successfully determined that
there are some differentiating characteristics, their study makes a significant contribution
to this research at hand, mostly because of its ability to indicate that the online consumer
behavior is no longer simplistically generalizable since the online shopping environment
has evolved and stabilized to the degree that consumer’s exposure and knowledge now
consistently varies. Herná ndez-Ortega et el. (2008) findings support the methodological
approached used in the case study relating to this dissertation, which pursues a
categorization of the participants involved in terms of their online shopping habbits. But
because Herná ndez-Ortega et al. (2008) e-shopping categorizations are extremely
simplified, it remains important to employ Kau, Tang & Ghosh (2003) typology of online
shoppers instead of Herná ndez-Ortega et al. (2008) because it allows quality information to
be collected.

Most of the published literature examined thus far that relates to contrasting service quality
of online environments to that of brick and mortar have primarily taken the perspective of
the consumer as a the greatest priority. Zhang (2008) presents a contrasting perspective, by
discussing the differences between each environment from business perspective. Here the
author explains that the retail opportunity is optimal online specifically prior to a
consumers purchase decision as the priority at that time is information gathering and
internet satisfies this need with greater ease; whilst post consumer purchase selection,
which is the process of obtaining the products and services, is the greatest priority for the
consumer at that time, then the traditional environment is best at making this possible. The
significance of A. Zhang’s study, in relation to this research paper, is recognizing that though
understanding consumer behavior is of importance to deducting conclusions for the study
at hand, it remains critical to evaluate the information in such a way that the knowledge can
be applied to deriving sound recommendations for the industries pursuing e-tail success for
traditional brick and mortar retail brands.

Familiarity is directly related to online customers browsing decisions. Flaviá n & Gurrea
(2008) revealed this during an examination of the key attributes of web site the influence
online browsers to read newspapers on the Internet. They went further by concluding that
it is indeed possible to teach online browsers to become familiar with websites as well. This
is a notable finding relating to the research study at hand because it not only implicates the
importance of examining familiarity for brick and mortar stores e-tailing but indicates the
potential of achieving this characteristic. The shortfall of Flaviá n & Gurrea (2008) study is
that it only discusses familiarity and it potential in terms of positive associations. Flaviá n &
Gurrea (2008) study fails to discuss, and furthermore if there were a case negative
associations and whether or not related familiarity triggers use the same concepts. For this
reason this research study at hand remains merited.

Horppu, Kuivalainen, Tarkiainen & Ellonen (2008) examined online satisfaction, trust and
loyalty, and the impact of the offline parent brand. Though the focus of Horppu et al. (2008)
study may appear be quite similar to the interests and execution of this very research study
at hand, this is in fact not the case. Regarding e-service dimensions such as trust, this study
examined its various dimension by strictly focusing on the relationship between the brick

12
and mortar and e-tail environment of a retail brand, as compared to Horppu et al. (2008)
study which examined trust dimensions in terms of the impact of external factors such
other electronic environments such as discussion boards. It is in this differentiation that M.
Horppu et al. study provides useful information that can facilitate the development of this
research study. However, it must be noted that Horppu et al. (2008) study cannot replace
this study at hand because the number of dimensions are few (3 as opposed to the 11
suggested by this very research study at hand) and limited, therefore providing less than a
detail or understanding of the critical factors that have been identified.

Bigné-Alcañ iz, Ruiz-Mafé, Aldá s-Manzano & Sanz-Blas (2008) conducted a study titled
‘Influence of online shopping information dependency and innovativeness on internet
shopping adoption’ two critical conclusions were drawn. Firstly, that the consumers who
seek information online to develop their purchase decision have greater tendency to have
online “shopping intentions”. Secondly an overload of the information can be a significant
“shopping intention” reversing process, if it does not add value and usefulness in the means
of browsing and information gathering. Good examples of such obstructions are
“unstructured information, privacy concerns or poorly designed storefronts” (Bigné-Alcañ iz
et al., 2008). The combinations of these findings present that “differentiation in the amount
and quality of information on the product or service being offered thus becomes a
significant competitive instrument” (Bigné-Alcañ iz et al., 2008). All study findings bring
great value to the context of this research study at hand, which contrasts brick and mortar
and e-tail environments of the same retail brand. This is because examining informativeness
as a service quality factor is not only validitated but examining availability and quality of
the informational resources is justified as a shopping environment differentiator.

Huang (2008), concluded that “consumers tend to prefer entertainment-specific Websites and
such Websites more positively, which leads to positive perceptions of ease of use and attitude
toward the Websites. Again, consumers who prefer non-irritating Websites tend to assess
them more positively, which increases perceived ease of use and positive attitude toward such
Websites” (Huang, 2008). Huang (2008) indicates that e-commerce consumer behaviour is
not strictly dictated by traditional facets belonging to customer satisfaction and perceptions
of quality. Just as the brick and mortar shopping environment is largely influenced and
organized customers demands on non-ulitarian needs, such as excitement and indulgence,
so is the world of e-tail shopping.

Hunter & Perreault (2009) discussed the topic of ‘Making Sales Technology Effective’ in a
recent research study. Here, achieving consumer interest and loyalty is examined through
studying the potential of using newer technology tools and processes rather than analyzing
benefits of carrying out improvements on existing arrangements. Their study proved that
managers should not limit their attention to technologies that influence existing processes
but should expand their consideration to the uses of technology that can enable sales
representatives to provide value in a new way. Hunter & Perreault’s (2009) study acts an
enabler to this dissertation because it gives credit to the pursuit of expanding this
dissertation’ findings to drawing e-service quality standards and recommendations that are
provide value in other aspects (sales) in the industry.

13
Theodosiou, Makri, Samiee and Katsikea (2009) proposed a higher-order formative-
indicator construct, comprising of six first order reflective indicators, for measuring
customers’ quality perceptions regarding online businesses. In their research, six quality
dimensions where defined and determined to be significant to capturing e-service quality
perceptions of the consumer. Beneficially, this study is of critical value to the dissertation
at hand because it suggests the most, relative to prior studies, thorough, accurate, and
updated substantiated method of evaluating is consumer perceptions of e-service quality
that is also relevant and applicable in different kinds of e-services. The study by
Theodosiou et al. (2009) provides confidence in the validity and reliability of the data and
results that will be collected in this dissertation in order to capture the dimensions of e-
service quality and its impact on consumer satisfaction and loyalty.

In a study by Lim, Widdows and Hooker (2009) the e-fulfillment for grocery e-tailers was
investigated and it was acknowledged that the traditional retailing environment as a whole
remains as the greatest competitive challenger. To achieve fulfillment satisfaction that could
eradicate the consumers dependency on the brick and mortar environment ability to
provide sensory information it was determined, by Lim et al. (2009), that increased centric
presentations of product quality was far more critical and influential than other factors
such as customer service and e-business processes (Lim et al. 2009). Lim et al. (2009)
study helps to support this research by presenting the understanding that retail brands
trying to extend to the virtual shopping environment can not assume immediate acceptance
and migration from their existing consumer base and that an in depth investigation of the
phenomenon is more than warranted.

In a recent study by Biswas & Burman (2009) the combination of the perception of risk and
consumer purchase intention was examined, in both the virtual and non-virtual shopping
environment, and it was found, that the advanced use of digitization can counter the de-
motivational affects of poor product and seller awareness that buyers often have. The
significance of this is the determination that digitization can also counter the common
consumer behaviour of resorting to traditional shopping practices, such as browsing brick
and mortar locations instead. In relation to the research at hand, Biswas & Burman’s (2009)
findings make critical contributions. It’s relevance is unequivocal as, firstly, it is recent
research, and secondly it presents an understanding that technology advancements can not
only better consumer traffic and purchase intent but can be a feasible solution to irradicate
conflict or competition that exists between co-existing virtual and non-virtual shopping
channels.

Cho & Fiorito (2009), it was determined that in achieving sense of trust and a perception of
low security risk, amongst its potential consumers, e-tail businesses have the opportunity
to make its future customer more accepting of suggested customization service for sale. This
finding is very relevant to the research study at hand as it provides validation that
customization offerings do affect consumer purchase motivation, thereby supporting this
study’s research methodology and choice of constructs. This finding is also relevant because
it goes further by describing triggers that encourage or discourage consumer interest in
customization. Unfortunately Cho and Fiorito (2009) study does have one major
insufficiency that, as a result, makes this very research study absolutely merited. Cho &

14
Fiorito (2009) neglect to acknowledge the whether or not these observed behaviors are
consistent or inconsistent with shopping in the brick and mortar shopping environment.
Without this facet being examined or even acknowledged Cho & Fiorito (2009) fail to prove
that such consumer behavior is strictly related to online shopping.

Hahn & Kim (2009) found that “consumers' trust in an offline store had a positive
relationship with their perceived internet confidence” and furthermore ‘consumers feel more
confident with online shopping when they shop through the company they trust” (Hahn &
Kim, 2009). This finding is very relevant to the study at hand as it gives evidence that brick
and mortar retail brands pursuing e-tail success do indeed have competitive advantage
because of branding. This study also explains how this advantage fails to transition into
consumer purchase intent because lack of trust in either environment deters consumers.
Though these findings are relevant and stand to be a valuable explanation to brick and
mortar store e-tailing struggles world wide the study remains to be an insufficient response
to the study at hand. Hahn & Kim’s study neglects to explain how strictly virtual businesses
were are able to achieve equal or greater brand strength and trust or even better purchase
intent. Perhaps there are other dimensions worth contrasting. Without this
acknowledgement, K. Hahn and J. Kim, fail to discuss or refute the possibility of other
dimensions that can affect purchase intent between both environments, such as customer
service, fulfillment or navigation, thereby making their study not completely objective and
this research study valuable.

Moreover, Cassab & MacLachlan (2009) provided a very unique insight into understanding
the complications of a retail brand coexisting in two radically different shopping
environments: online versus brick and mortar venues. Here it was determined that
rendering business in two different channels should not be considered internal competitive
situation for the retail brand, but a bidirectional co-dependency. To elaborate: “Multi-
channel customers evaluate the service interface in a more holistic way, which renders a
traditional single-channel view of service quality limited to assess the overall customer
experience” (Cassab & MacLachlan, 2009). With these findings in mind, it becomes
imperative, to this research study at hand, which examines the dimensions of quality
service rendered by brick and mortar retail brands e-tailling, to examine the challenges and
data results collected from a holistic perspective rather than an comparative perspective.

Oh & Kwon (2009) investigated consumer behaviour in a non-holiday retail season.

Acknowledging that consumer behaviour during holiday season does differ from off holiday
season, this study attempted to adequately assess the implications or potential limitations
of this dissertation. The authors revealed the following findings. First ,“holiday spending in
internet shopping channels influences store spending emphasizes the importance of the
retailer web site-store coordination” such that prices and promotions that are more
advantageous online than in the brick and mortar location can deter consumers from
shopping offline. Secondly, that “a retailer's web site has now become a front door to
physical stores, playing a key driver in burgeoning shopping demands”. These finding are
relevant because it indicates that consumer behaviour patterns being examined (online vs
brick and mortar) is unaffected by on or off holiday seasons, but in fact more dominated by
price motivations. These findings are also very important because it suggests that the sales

15
and revenue relationship between online and traditional shopping environments is not
driven by some order of existence, as online retail environments are driving traffic to brick
and mortar environment as easily as brick and mortar environment drive traffic to online
retail environments.

The terms and concepts of e-commerce and e-marketing are distinguished in great detail by
Xiaoming (2010) in his study of ‘Combining E-Commerce and E-Marketing’. Here it is
determined that though the both concepts are similar because they are virtual in existence,
neither are co-dependent. Furthermore Xiaoming (2010) explains the science in combining
both concepts to benefit business success. However the greatest importance of Xiaoming’s
(2010) research, relative to the study at hand, is recognizing that his findings indicate that
brick and mortar retail companies can achieve success through e-marketing strategies
which does not imply e-tail (e-commerce) success.

Significant research has proven that the act of browsing, by means of navigation and
traversal of the store environment, has critical influence on sales volume. With regards to
this study it is obvious that though the term ‘browsing’ is used the same, the activity varies
depending on the shopping environment: online or in store. Xia (2010) identified two kinds
of browsing activities: motivation and behavioural. Motivation entails browsing for either
functional or recreational purposes, while behavioural entails browsing due to internal
forces (consumer wants and needs) versus browsing to external forces (retail environment
layout and distractions) (Xia, 2010). Xia’s categorizations and descriptions, with regards to
consumer store navigation and traversal, is an important tool and resource for helping to
draw explanations and eventually conclusions about the results gathered in this very
research study.

In conclusion, it is gathered that the topic of retail brands seeking e-tail success is very
much related to the various dimensions of e- service quality. Furthermore in it has also
been determined that, through an intensive investigation previously published academic
works, the subject of brick and mortar brands extending into the virtual market is indeed
complex and multi-faceted as consumer behavior very much as integral part of the potential
success story. Though much has been explored and learned by industry experts, much
remain unanswered as the development of this unique market environment is still far from
its maturity or at the peak of its infusion into consumer behaviour strategists standard
knowledge based. The literature review discussed thus far reiterates the importance of this
research study at hand: “The Dimensions of e-service quality for brick and mortar
retail brands and its impact on consumer satisfaction and loyalty.”

16
3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction
Information was collected through a qualitative research methodology. An interview made
up of 14 questions was executed with a total of 16 participants (customers). The questions
posed in this study, gathered demographical information, consumer perception and
behavioral information as well as information to categorize consumer attitudes regarding
online lifestyle choices and environments. Two separate retail brands, Babies “R” Us and
Best Buy, were used as a specific sample to examine both online and brick and mortar
shopping environments; such that 8 out of 16 participants were exclusively asked about
Babies “R” Us and the other remaining 8 of 16 participants were exclusively asked about
Best Buy. This research was collected over a two month period and limited to Generation X
and Y middle class shoppers who predominantly live and shop within United States (U.S.).

3.2 Research Design

This study uses a qualitative research design consequently it is based upon the consumer
response and researcher observations.

Two retail brands were chosen for the purpose of executing this study: Babies “R” Us and
Best Buy. This is for several reasons. Firstly, both brands have been recognized by market
analysts as having significant and remarkable consumer traffic and revenue sourcing from
both online shopping and brick and mortar shopping environments (Agnello, 2010). This
implies that results gathered for this study, based on these stores, can appropriately
represent the general public’s perspective. Secondly it is for the reason that gathering
participants, and their associated opinions, will be achievable and meaningful as it is not
difficult to find and select participants who are recent customers that are capable of
providing reflective and indicative responses. Another reason Babies “R” Us and Best Buy
was selected was that these stores are not direct, competitors of each other, whether online
or offline, thereby creating no conflicts of interest during data analysis. Though it is
acknowledged that both retail brands have a large pool of consumers, and so it is possible
to study conduct the study based on just one retail brand, it was recognized that both
brands do not share the exact same demographics. Here is found that though age,
martial/family status and social-economic status, aligned, Babies “R” Us has a
predominately female consumer base and Best Buy has a predominately male consumer
base. This is highlights the final reason why using both Babies “R” Us and Best Buy to gather
information about e-service quality brick and mortar retail brand ensures a more balanced
and fair representation. Interviews for this study were mutually exclusive, hence,
participants were either interviewed about Babies “R” Us or about Best Buy.

The constructs used in this study were based on several related studies. Theodosiou, Makri,
Samiee & Katsikea’s (2009) integrated model for measuring e-service, which is a higher-
order formative construct comprising of six first-order reflective indictors, is chosen
because it suggests the most, relative to prior research endeavors, thorough, flexible, and
updated substantiated method of evaluating consumer perception of e-service quality.
Consumer “flow experience”, otherwise referred to as hedonism (Baur, Falk &
Hammerschmidt, 2006) and relevant cues of “familiarity” (Balabanis, Reynolds, &

17
Simintiras, 2006), such as branding recognition, identification and recall will also be
incorporated, as these aspects prove to be influential and critically related to the study
consumer loyalty and satisfaction of branded brick and mortar e-tail stores. Recalling that
Kau, Tang & Ghosh’s (2003) topology of online shoppers study revealed that consumer
satisfaction and loyalty is not only defined by the controllable attributes of e-tail websites
but by attitudinal variables to the significance that one can differentiate, cluster and
categorize online shoppers, profiling, based on Kau, Tang & Gosh’s (2003) topology of
online shoppers, will be operationalized as well.

3.2.1 Data generation sources and method of communication

3.2.1.1 Response matters

It is acknowledged that because the methodology had no restrictions on the location in

which the interview was conducted, it is possible that minor distractions could affect the
quality of the responses provided by the participants. This is primarily because all
interviews took place over the phone and an honor system was used. To elaborate, it is
known that some interviewees were at home, in the office or commuting at the time of the
interview but it will remain unverified, despite the interviewers request, whether or not
distractions, such as other people, computers or magazines, were truly removed during the
conduct of the study.

3.2.1.2 Methodological issues

It is acknowledged that because the methodology had no restrictions on time. For this
reason there is one minor methodological issue that should be documented. In this study
the data was collected over a two month time period, from mid May to mid July. This
happens to not only be the start of summer vacation season but it also marks the start of
retailers’ slow sales and revenue season. Since less are shopping at this time of year, it
possible that questions may require more memory recall by the responding participants,
thereby making the data collected slightly less detailed. Also because of the timing of the
survey, any recent advancements or changes to the shopping environments in which the
retail brands have undergone, whether online or in-store, may have yet to be experienced,
observed and therefore communicated by the interviewee.

3.2.1.3 Sampling considerations

The focus of the study was to target Generation X and Y and middle class consumers who
are comfortable shopping for household needs and are very familiar with various retail
brands and shopping environments. During the questionnaire pre-testing it was
determined that some retail brands do have a predominately male or female consumer
based. The potential threat of such a skew was removed simply by integrating into the
methodology the examination two sample retail brands that coexist virtually and non-
virtually, with an equal portion of interviewees for each, which then evened the sample
population’s gender demographics.  However, the most critical benefit to using two retail
brands for this study is that it ensures that the perspectives shared by interviewees about

18
shopping environments and e-service quality dimensions are not specific to a specific retail
brand but can be generalized. This is because consistency or inconsistency between the
findings belonging to each retail brand or shopping environment will highlight the
relevancy of the responses provided.

3.2.1.4 Research constraints

Two separate retail brands, Babies “R” Us and Best Buy, were used as a specific retail brand
sample to examine both online and brick and mortar shopping environments; such that 8
out of 16 participants were asked exclusively about Babies “R” Us and the other remaining 8
of 16 participants were asked exclusively about Best Buy. This research was collected over
a two month period and limited to Generation X and Y middle class U.S. consumers who are
comfortable shopping for household needs and are very familiar with various retail brands
and shopping environments.

3.2.2 Questionnaire and measure development

3.2.2.1 Information sought

Three sets of information were solicited from the participants who were interviewed for
this study:

(i) Basic demographical information regarding the each participant. This includes
Gender, Age and Marital/Family Status (Single, Married, with or without
children)
(ii) Each participant’s perception of each of the various dimensions the quality of
service. This includes contrasting the shopping experience between online stores
and brick and mortar stores.

(iii) Typological data from each participant to formally categorize each participant’s
attitudes and perception of online shopping.

The purpose was to collect data that provides relevant information about the topic at
hand: the dimensions of e-service quality for brick and mortar retail brands.

3.2.2.2 Type of questionnaire and method of administration

The questionnaire was developed based upon the relevant literature and included open-
ended questions. Each participant was interviewed individually, over the phone. There
were no constraints on the time of day or location of the individual being interviewed, as
each interview was conducted based on the participant’s availability. There were no time
limitations set for any of the questions posed and neither the responses. All participants
were informed prior to the interview that they would be sharing their opinions and
experiences regarding online shopping as well as brick and mortar shopping at either the
Babies ”R” Us retail brand or Best Buy retail brand. Nothing more was indicated before
hand. At the beginning of each interview, each participant was engaged in pleasant small

19
talk with the interviewee to help ease or remove the any proceeding stress or distractions
that would influence the tone of their interview responses to come. This strategy also
encouraged openness and authenticity in their answers. During the course of the interview
participants were encouraged to elaborate as well as speak casually and openly including
no restrictions on their vocabulary or opinions. Also participants were not provided,
neither prior nor during, any documentation regarding the questionnaire or structure of the
interview and therefore had no indication as how the interview would be organized or what
topics regarding retail service quality would be asked. All responses were recorded
electronically directly by the interviewer real time. None of the participants have been
made aware of the identities of fellow participants and none of the participants were
informed of the responses and opinions shared by previous interviewees.

3.2.2.3 Individual question content 

According to Kau, Tang, & Gosh (2003) there are 6 clusters of online shoppers. The
following is an Online Shopper Typology created by Kau, Tang, & Gosh (2003) used to pursue
this study. Each participant in the interview was categorized to help further an
understanding of the responses were collected:

“(1) On-off shopper. On-off shoppers are those who like to surf the Internet and
collect online information but prefer to shop offline. They enjoy looking for
advertisements, are frequent users of bookmarks and use the same search engine on
a regular basis. They are experienced in surfing and often look out for best deals.
Demographically, a person in this segment is likely to be single and in the younger
age group of 15 to 24 years. An Offline on-off shopper is equally likely to be a male or
female.

(2) Comparison shopper. Comparison shoppers are those who compare product
features, prices and brands before making purchase decisions. They also actively
look out for promotional offers. In terms of age, this group has a slightly higher
percentage of respondents in the age group of 25-29 years, although the gender
distribution is very similar to the overall sample.

(3) Traditional shopper. Traditional shoppers are those who buy from brick-and-
mortar store. They do not surf the Internet for comparative information, neither do
they look for bargains over the Internet. Although they may come from all different
age groups, a higher proportion of this group of shoppers is around 40 to 49 years
old (11 percent compared to 7 percent of the total sample).

(4) Dual shopper. Dual shoppers are more likely to be single, male and in the
younger age group of 15 to 24 years. They like to compare brands and product
features. They also rely on the Internet for information gathering. However, they are
not particularly deal prone.

(5) e-Laggard. An e-Laggard is slightly more likely to be a female (37 percent versus
34 percent for the whole sample) and in the older age group of 35 years and above

20
 (20 percent versus 16 percent for the whole sample). He or she has lower interest in
seeking information from the Internet. Only 7 percent of the e-Laggards could be
considered to possess a high level of navigation expertise, the second lowest group
after the traditional shoppers (4.5 percent).

(6) Information surfer. An information surfer is more likely to be married (43

percent compared to 30 percent for the whole sample). Only about 31 percent of
them are in the age group 15-24 years, compared to 41 percent of the sample. He or
she loves banner ads and clicks on them often. An information surfer also looks out
for promotional offers. He or she has good navigation expertise and online purchase
experience.” (Kau, Tang & Gosh, 2003)

3.2.2.4 The constructs under investigation

The following are the 12 dimensions used in this study to investigate the concept of e-
service quality:

Security/privacy. Security involves the reduction in the risk of financial loss or

financial information infringement while privacy refers to the protection of personal
information and anonymity (Culnan and Armstrong, 1999; Wolfinbarger and Gilly,
2003; Parasuraman et al. 2005; Holloway and Beatty, 2008, Theodosiou et al. 2009).

Fulfillment/reliability. It is the accuracy of the product presentation and delivery as

well as the absence of error (Zeithaml et al., 2002; Theodosiou et al. 2009).

Customer service. Customer service refers to appropriate responsiveness to

customer needs, interests and inquiries (Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2003; Theodosiou
et al. 2009).

Informativeness. This the completeness in the information provided with regards to

products that are made available and easily accessible (Collier and Bienstock 2006;
Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2003; Theodosiou et al. 2009).

Navigation and traversal. This relates to the layout of the store to achieve a
consumer utilitarian purpose and intent (Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2002; Collier and
Bienstock, 2006; Holloway and Beatty, 2008; Theodosiou et al. 2009).

Customization and personalization. This aspect relates to the stores ability to

tailor products, services, and the transactional environment to individual customers
(Srinivasan et al. 2002; Theodosiou et al. 2009).

Flow Experience/Hedonism. This aspect captures the intangible emotional

experience of shopping motivation that to relates to fun, excitement and indulgence.
It is the non utilitarian experience (Lim & Dubinsky, 2004; Baur, Falk &
Hammerschmidt, 2006)

21
 Expectancy. This is described as the expectations that consumers bring based on
prior shopping experience, at both brick and mortar and e-tailing store, whether
same brand or competitor(Lim & Dubinsky, 2004).

Familiarity/Recognition & Recall. Incorporates the shoppers knowledge of the

existing store on one hand and the unfamiliarity with other stores (Balabanis,
Reynolds & Simintiras, 2006).

Brand Strength. Brand strength is using concepts identification and association of

products and store to influence shopper trust and intent to shop (Bart, Shankar,
Sultan & Urban, 2005)

Involvement. Involvement refers to the degree to which consumers are encouraged

to engage with a store’s products and services while browsing and making purchase
decisions (Bart, Shankar, Sultan, & Urban, 2005)

3.2.2.5 Forms of response

During the course of the interview participants were encouraged to elaborate as well as
speak casually and openly. There were no restrictions on their vocabulary or opinions.
When lost for words, the questions were rephrased or practical examples that helped to
explain the concepts being discussed were used to entice responses. All responses were
communicated verbally and no written communication was included in this interview. The
goal was to discourage participants from filtering their thoughts and opinions thereby
allowing the data to be a truly indicative representation.

3.2.2.6 Question wording 

The interview was designed one-to-one, such that for every dimension that is examined in
this study there is one dedicated interview question. Furthermore each question,
representing a single construct under investigation, was organized and verbally
communicated as follows:

i) The title of dimension read to the participant by the interviewer.

ii) The definition of the construct/dimension and read to the participant by the interviewer.
Practical life examples of the construct are provided by the interviewer if clarification of the
definition is requested by participant.

iii) The participant is then verbally asked, by the interviewer, to verbally share their
opinion with regards to the shopping environments of specific store, either Babies “R” Us or
Best and Buy.

3.2.2.7 Question sequence

22
The interview had three sections in which associated questions were executed in the
following sequence:

(i) participant demographical information

(ii) participant opinions regarding retail bands and shopping environments

(iii) participant typographical information

Questions belonging to section (i) had no dependency on the sequence and therefore were
not executed in any specific order.

On a high level perspective, the questions belonging to section (ii) of the interview were,
however, conducted in a specific sequence. Each dimension and the associated interview
questions were arranged in order of lowest complexity to highest complexity, based on
Maslow Hierarchy of Needs (Vecchio, 2006); such that concepts that were easy to grasp,
like security and privacy were discussed first and dimensions that are more abstract, such
as brand image and involvement, were discussed later in the interview. This sequence was
carried out intentionally to prevent participants from feeling overwhelmed at the beginning
of the interview thereby providing consistently poor responses due poor attitudes about
participating in the study.

On a low level perspective, the questions belonging to section (ii) of the interview, were
also conducted in a specific sequence. Here, for each dimension discussed, interviewees
were asked to provide separated opinions regarding the shopping environments being
examined in this study; first in terms of the brick and mortar and then in terms online. As a
final element this sequence, participants were then asked to contrast, compare or state a
preference between the two environments with respect to each dimension being examined.
This specific low level sequence was used to ensure that participants’ perspectives’
regarding each shopping environment relative to the dimension were easily isolated and
properly record. In the final section, section (iii), participants were asked each question in
the order in had been written on the interview template. But adherence to this sequence
was obliged for no other reason than to allow the interviewer to maintain organized and
accurate data collection processes.

3.2.2.8 Physical questionnaire characteristics

Because the interview was conducted verbally, the physical characteristics of the
questionnaire were determined based on the interviewers’ needs. Hence ease of recording
data and ease of organizing collected data was of greatest concern. The questions (including
definitions as described earlier) were organized sequentially in the order that they would
be asked. The responses were recorded electronically using a Microsoft Word Document.
This provided enough flexibility and organization that there was no need too limit the
dedicated space (such as word count) for recording the participant answers and
interviewer observations for each question. Questions and answers/observations were
differentiated by use of font colors: blue and green respectively. Everything that was
recorded for each interview was given its own dedicated file, so that data between subjects

23
would remain isolated and easily comparable. Lastly, the layout of the questionnaire
remained the same for all differences, including retail brands of focus.

3.2.2.9 Re-examination and revision of the questionnaire

The questionnaire was revised three times. The first time was to rectify any ambiguity the
interviewed participants may have regarding the meaning of the dimensions being
discussed in each question. This was accomplished by including the definition of the
construct at hand, in each interview question posed. The second revision was to benefit the
interviewer. Instead of having one space to capture all of the responses belonging to each
question (e-tail, brick and mortar and the comparison, see Appendix I) the questionnaire
was further organized to have dedicated spaces for each section of each question. In doing
so, the interviewer was able to ensure every aspect of the question was asked and each
response was recorded in an organized manner. The final change was took place to ease the
process of data analysis. The questions and response were color coded (green and blue
respectively).

3.2.2.10 Questionnaire pre-testing

A pre-test was conducted such that 25 people were asked to indicate whether they have
shopped both online and in the mall any of the following stores: Babies “R” Us, Bed, Bath
and Beyond, Best Buy or Gap. This poll was taken via an electronic mailing system and the
sample people asked was randomly determined. The retail brands were not randomly
selected. These stores are all well established, consistent retail brands that coexist virtually
and non-virtually in which all of the dimensions of e-service quality can be examined and
evaluated by the future participants of this study. The purpose of pretest was twofold.
Firstly it was to isolate the best retail brand candidates for executing this study and
secondly it was to identify potential participant candidates for this study. It was during this
pre-testing, that it was discovered that some retail brands do have a predominately male or
female consumer base. Consequently, the finalized questionnaire was required to
incorporate two retail brands rather than just one in order to appropriately represent the
population of focus and to ensure perspectives presented by interviewees about shopping
environments and e-service quality dimensions were not specific to a specific brand but
could be generalized; such that any participant response consistencies or inconsistencies
will reveal the relevancy and validity to the research study at hand.

3.2.3 Methodology of the survey 

3.2.3.1 Sampling method

A probability sample was used to acquire a collection of candidates to participate in this

study. The actual participants were then determined through a random selection process.

3.2.3.2 Population

The population of interest has the following characteristics:

24
 Location: Living within the United States.

Age: Generation X or Y

Gender: Male and Female

Marital Status: No requirements.

Socio-Economic Status: middle-class yuppies who own and frequently use credit
cards to maintain a standard of living.

Usage: Frequent users of the internet and online lifestyle tools.

Shopping Awareness: Individuals who are aware of and make use of their
opportunity to shop online or in a brick or mortar store and have done so in the past.

3.2.3.3 Sampling frame

To acquire a collection of potential participants for this study who truly represent the
population being examined an online social network application (Facebook) was used. This
is because it provided accessible demographical information that allowed the researcher to
generate a list of potential candidates; thereby saving time, effort and administrative excess
that is associated with the process of filtering random selections people.

3.2.3.4 Sampling process

To acquire a sample, a survey was administered through an online social network

application (Facebook), to potential candidates who satisfied the population requirements
outlined earlier. In the survey, one question was posed: Have you shopped both online and in
the mall at any of the following stores: Babies “R” Us, Bed, Bath and Beyond, Best Buy or Gap?
Based on the responses gathered a representative sample was isolated and candidates were
requested to participate in this study by agreeing to be interviewed by phone at a later date.

3.2.3.5 Sampling unit informants

There were 16 participants in this interview. All participants were experienced in shopping
both the online and brick and mortar shopping environments, and have done so, several
times in the past 6 months. Eight of these participants were experienced shoppers of the
Babies “R” Us retail brand both virtually and non-virtually. Consequently these 8 candidates
were interviewed exclusively about this Babies “R” Us. The remaining 8 candidates were
experienced shoppers of the Best Buy retail brand - both virtually and non-virtually.
Consequently they were interviewed exclusively about this store. In total, there were 11
women and 5 men who participated in this study, such that 8 women and 0 men were
interviewed about Babies “R” Us, and 3 women and 5 men were interviewed about Best

25
Buy. All participants lived in the U.S., were either Generation X or Y’ers and satisfied the
social-economic requirements mentioned earlier.

3.2.4 Administration of the survey

3.2.4.1 Administrative plan

The questionnaire was prepared as an open-ended qualitative interview, in which each

participant was interviewed individually, over the phone. There were no constraints on the
time of day or location of the individual being interviewed, as each interview was
conducted based on the participant’s availability. There were no time limitations set for
any of the questions posed and neither the responses. Furthermore the surveys were
conducted over a two month period. Responses would be collected electronically by the
interviewer.

3.2.4.2 Survey Response

Of the 30 candidates that were identified as potential participants, only 23 candidates

responded to the pre-testing/sampling frame survey question. Of these 23 respondents
only 16 volunteered to participate in the full interview for this study. Therefore 16
interviews were conducted for this study. All questions for each interview conducted were
asked by the interviewers. All questions were responded to by the interviewees.

26
4.0 CASE STUDY: E-service quality for brick and mortar retail brands: Babies ‘R’ Us
versus Best Buy.

4.1 Babies “R” Us Company History

Established in 1996, Babies “R” Us, evolved from Toy “R” Us (established 1948) as a market
share expansion business strategy. By expanding Toys “R” Us’ business focus from
“consumers seeking the perfect birthday gift or she or he wishing to spend ones weekly
allowance” (Toyrus.com, “History”, 2010), to consumers seeking baby and juvenile
educational products the Toys “R” Us brainchild, Babies “R” Us, was pitched to the public
consumer as a retail brand that offered “new and expecting parents everything they need
for their baby, including an incredible selection of baby products and supplies, from leading
manufacturers, at prices moms love” (Toyrus.com, “History”, 2010). Fifteen years later 260
Babies “R” Us brick and mortar stores now exist nation wide. Though it is possible that the
successful growth of the Babies “R” Us retail brand may account for Toys “R” Us
sustainability during recent U.S. economy instability it is the Babies “R” Us (Mendelson &
Friedman, 1997) brand’s notable pursuit to conquer fierce competition from the online
retail market (fundinguniverse.com “Toys ‘R’ Us”, 2010a), that has created remarkable
intrigue among consumer behavior analysts. To be specific, despite consistent and growing
interest amongst shoppers, both online and within brick and mortar locations, persistent
conflicting remarks provided consumers, regarding the shopping experience and the
service quality, only justifies further analysis.

4.1.1 Babies “R” Us Competition

Toys “R” Us and Babies “R” Us, are consistently identified as the markets strongest specialty
retail for children products. Competition from the brick and mortar market space, from
brands such as Walmart and Target, has become a growing challenge over the recent years
and this is partially attributed continued economic instability (Datamonitor, 2009).
Competition online, although sharing the same market competitors (Walmart and Target),
has not been as greatly turbulent especially for the Babies “R” Us brand of Toys “R” Us
(Kiley & Roman, 2004).

4.1.2 Babies “R” Us Demographics

The consumer base tends to be predominately female, part of the generation X or Y, affluent
middle class (quantcast.com, Babies “R” Us, 2010).

4.1.3 Babies “R” Us Dimension Assessment

Security & Privacy. Babies “R” Us has followed the industry standard for checkout processes
both online and in brick and mortar locations, thereby executing standards for maintaining
their customers security and privacy.

27
Fulfillment/reliability. Babies “R” Us has implemented a well organized, flexible and easy to
use, consumer product return system to address any fulfillment or reliability concerns
raised by is shoppers. Online purchase can be returned by mail or in-store and in-store
purchases can be returned in-store only.

Customer service. Babies “R” Us offers customer service options to the online shoppers by
providing them two options: a toll free phone in which a representative can help them by
phone or an online questionnaire that guides the customer to appropriate solution. Both
services are easily accessible and meet basic industry standards. The brick and mortar
stores have dedicated customer service stations for shoppers seeking help in addition to
floating staff members on the floor.

Informativeness. The Babies “R” Us e-tail site provides the manufacturer product
descriptions in addition to access to photos of the product. It also renders customer reviews
and comments. The quantity and quality of this informativeness is more advanced than the
competition. The brick and mortar store, on the other hand, provides information to the
consumer by means of verbal communication with staff members in addition to access to
the actual product packaging, thereby following industry standards.

Navigation and traversal. Babies “R” Us has an e-tail site that offers several navigational
options for the consumer: name search, category searches, brand searches and more, such
as links recommending product based on data-mining results. The ample options for
traversing the website, establishes this company ability to exceed industry standards.
Depending on the location brick and mortar store, the layout tends to vary. But some
consistency is maintained by using identical signs and similar shelf organization.

Customization and personalization. The Babies “R” Us online shopping environment

provides limited opportunity for the customization and personalization of the products sold
by this company. However, the experience of shopping is catered as the e-tail site provides
product browsing suggestions based on each shopper’s history of traversals as well as
“clicking and viewing”. The brick and mortar venues also do not provide customization and
personalization for the products sold but staff assistance in finding products and
transporting products from the shelf to checkout does provide some sense of catering.

Flow Experience/Hedonism. Babies “R” Us lures consumer indulgence online by an ample

use of data-mining and “product suggestion” tools. Online promotions are sparse and are
mostly limited to free shipping incentives and stock clearance advertisements. The brick
and mortar locations rely on paper coupons and news paper flyers to draw traffic, however,
the random placement of products and the mixing of product categories has proven to be an
effective strategy.

Expectancy. Generally the Babies “R” Us store, whether online and in-store, has successfully
managed to perform retailing industry standards and trends.

Familiarity/Recognition & Recall. Babies “R” Us online and in-store use the same
recognizable logo. The packaging of products and services share a resemblance due to the

28
consistent use of this logo. The online store, however, does however make less use of their
designated color schemes in addition abundantly integrating their parents store icons and
logos, Toys “R” Us, with greater frequency than that of the brick and mortar locations. The
organization of the product categories differs significantly from the brick and mortar
location and the product selection varies significantly enough to take notice immediately.

Brand Strength. This company has been recognized by market analysts as the leading retail
brand for baby and parenting products.

Involvement. In the online shopping environment the Babies “R” Us has employed the
industry standards of achieving a sense of involvement for the consumer. Resizable photos
and video of the product is available to the customers. In store, the company selectively
show cases big ticket items on the floor in order to gain customer trust, loyalty and
purchase decision confidence.

Service Quality, Loyalty, Satisfaction. It is stated in the company’s published investor

relations documents that achieving these characteristics are of great importance.

4.2 Best Buy Company History

Best Buy was established 1966 and rapidly expanded from being a local electronics store in
Minnesota to the leading electronics store in North America. With revenues surpassing 10
billion in1999 (fundinguniverse.com, “Best Buy”, 2010b), Best Buy proved its ability to
serve consumer product demands with great success for the past 45 years. The company
retail brand image is, “to meet the unique product and service needs of our customers, our
stores and operating models are being transformed to shift our focus from product-centric
to customer-centric — a move that poises Best Buy to truly offer the entertainment and
technology solutions that meet our customers' needs, end-to- end” (bestbuy.com/about us,
2010). Combining this retail brand image with the company’s desire to successfully
compete with the growing online market space, Best Buy, which once was a brick and
mortar centric company, released an expanded version of their e-tail environment in 2000
that has irrefutably helped to secure their market share and market presence(Datamonitor,
2010). But despite the consequent financial resiliency that has obviously benefited the
company, consumers of this brand have been far from consistent in their perception of the
company’s service quality whether shopping online or within a local brick and mortar
location. It is for this reason that Best Buy’s e-service quality is justly examined in this
study.

4.2.1 Best Buy Competition

Best Buy is noted to be the market forerunner for the electronic stores in North America
(Datamonitor, 2010). But examining more closely the company’s state between shopping
environments, online versus brick and mortar, there is more to examine. From a brick and
mortar perspective, the company has remarkably been able to remove their competition,
such as Futureshop and Circuit City, with little challenge (Datamonitor, 2010). However, in
the e-tail environment, pure e-tailers, such as Amazon and B&H photo video, remain as

29
significant competition and a consistent threat towards the company’s pursuit to achieve
market dominance in the virtual world of shopping (Datamonitor, 2010).

4.2.2 Best Buy Demographics

The consumer base tends to be predominately male, part of the generation X or Y, and
affluent middle class (quantcast.com, “Best Buy”, 2010).

4.2.3 Best Buy Dimension Assessment

Security & Privacy. Best Buy has followed the industry standard for checkout process both
online and in brick and mortar locations, thereby achieving a respectable reputation for
customer security and privacy.

Fulfillment/reliability. Best Buy has implemented a well organized and easy to use
consumer product return system to address fulfillment or reliability concerns raised by
shoppers. However, because of the kind of product offering they have (electronics), Best
Buy has less flexibility in attending consumer dissatisfaction; such that not all products are
fully refundable or even returnable. Some online purchases can be returned by mail or in-
store and some in-store purchases can be returned in-store only.

Customer service. Best Buy offers customer service options to the online shopper by
providing them two options: a toll free phone in which a representative can help them by
phone or email. Both solutions are easily accessible and meet the basic industry standards.
The brick and mortar store provides a dedicated customer service station for shoppers
seeking help, in addition to the staff members accessible on the store floor.

Informativeness. The Best Buy e-tail site provides product descriptions prepared by the
manufacturer in addition to several photos of the product. It also renders customer reviews
and comments. The quantity and quality of the informativeness is equally as advanced as
their top competition currently. The brick and mortar store, on the other hand, provides
information to the consumer by means of verbal communication with staff members, in
addition to being given access to the actual product packaging.

Navigation and traversal. Best Buy has an e-tail site the provides several navigational
options for the consumer: name search, category searches, brand searches and more such
as links recommending product based on data-mining results. The ample options for
traversing the website, establishes this company ability to exceed industry standards.
Depending on the location brick and mortar store, the layout tends to vary. But some
consistency is maintained by using identical signs and similar shelf organization.

Customization and personalization. Best Buy’s online shopping environment provides

limited customization and personalization to the products sold. However, the shopping
experience is catered as the e-tail site provides product browsing suggestions based on the
each shopper’s traversals “clicking” history. The brick and mortar venues also do not

30
provide customization and personalization for the products sold but staff assistance in
finding products and transporting products, from self to checkout, does provide some sense
of catering.

Flow Experience/Hedonism. Best Buy attempts to achieve consumer indulgence, online,

through their ample use of data-mining and product suggestion traversal. Online
promotions are sparse mostly limited to free shipping incentives and stock clearance
advertisements. The brick and mortar locations rely on interest free financing to draw
traffic.

Expectancy. Generally Best Buy, whether online and in-store, has successfully managed to
meet retailing industry standards.

Familiarity/Recognition & Recall. Best Buy online and in-store use the same recognizable
logo. Online makes equal use of their designated color scheme store icons and logos as the
brick and mortar locations. The organization of the product categories online resembles
significantly the brick and mortar location but the product selection varies significantly
enough, such that online has more, to take notice immediately.

Brand Strength. This company has been recognized by market analysts as the leading
consumer choice as a retail brand for electronics products.

Involvement. In the online shopping environment Best Buy has employed the industry
standards of achieving a sense of involvement for the consumer. Resizable photos and video
of the product is used and made available to the customers. In store, the company
selectively show cases only top selling items on the floor in order to gain customer trust,
loyalty and purchase decision confidence.

Service Quality, Loyalty, Satisfaction. It is stated in the company’s published investor

relations documents that achieving these qualities are of great importance.

4.3 Interview Analysis

The following is a collective examination of responses collected from the participants
interviewed in this study about their shopping experience at Babies “R” Us and Best Buy,
online and in brick and mortar locations.

Security & Privacy. Whether online or offline, all of the participants in this study, who were
interviewed about Babies “R” Us, indicated that security and privacy was not a severe
concern while shopping at this store. Interviewed consumers of Best Buy also believed that
there is no significant reason to be concerned about security or privacy when shopping at
either Best Buy’s e-tail or brick and mortar store. Investigating further the responses of
interviewees, it was determined that, collectively, consumers of Babies “R” Us and Best Buy
insisted that both the online and brick and mortar shopping environments are in fact
equally as safe. This is for two reasons. Firstly, commerce processing technology (such as
veri-sign, https and more) has advanced so well that threats of fraud and intrusion of
privacy online are no longer any likelier than occurring in-store and in person. Large scale

31
well established brick and mortar organizations, such as Babies “R” Us and Best Buy, have
already earned a reputation of accountability and responsibility, in terms of business
conduct, thereby instilling a sense of trust among consumers venturing to shop online such
that any negligent business conduct experienced by the shopper will be well attended to
and appropriately compensated.

Fulfillment/reliability. The majority of the participants in this study who shopped both
online and offline at Babies “R” Us, did not have issues with the product presentation or
product delivery. They found the experience of shopping at Babies “R” Us to be error free
regardless of the environment: online or brick and mortar. Best Buy shoppers who
participated in this study responded the same. Under close examination, it was determined
that both subsets of participants achieved this comfort and lack of disappointment through
limiting their potential losses by shopping online only for small ticket items or specific
items in which they had previously bought before. It was also determined that though the
majority of interviewees preferred to see and touch big tickets products in person at brick
and mortar locations in order to gain confidence prior to purchasing, the actual purchase of
these big ticket items only happened “on the spot” and “real time” at the brick and mortar
location about half of the time. Furthermore it was determined that very often consumers
who chose to delay their big ticket purchases do eventually execute their purchase through
the e-tail site, rather than the brick and mortar store as their confidence in their decision
was fully established by browsing the brick and mortar store first.

Customer service. All 8 Babies “R” Us shoppers and 8 Best Buys shoppers interviewed
unanimously indicated that they have never tried to use customer service online. One
participant explained further; “the psychology when shopping online is that ‘you are on
your own’ regarding getting help”. All participants, however, admit that they use resources,
such as customer reviews and published articles, to guide their purchase decision.
Regarding customer service at brick and mortar locations, the Babies “R” “Us interviewees
gave mixed sentiments about the quality of customer service. Half of the Babies “R” Us
interviewees believed that the customer service, in relation to obtaining product
information, was merely adequate, while the other half of the interviewees believed that the
customer service was barely available. Most of Best Buy interviewees (6 out of 8) in this
study feel that the customer service which involves knowledge sharing was less than
adequate. Under further examination it was determined the less comprehensive customer
service needs for both Babies “R” Us and Best Buy shoppers resulted in more positive
feedback. For instance, when asked about customer service involving either product
returns or locating products within the physical store both Babies “R” Us and Best Buy
participants rated the customer service to be very good. But the most critical finding, in
relation this particular study, is the fact that both sets of shoppers explained that the poor
customer service relating to inadequate knowledge sharing at the brick and mortar
locations, is a more noteworthy disappointment to be discussed during this interview than
the companies’ inability to encourage the use of online customer service.

Informativeness. All interviewees who were shoppers at Babies “R” Us revealed to be very
active users of Babies “R” Us online store’s information resources. All 8 Babies “R” Us
consumers responded highly positively and enthusiastically about the completeness in

32
information as well as the ease of accessibility to both the customer reviews and product
information. All 8 participants who were shoppers at Best Buy online were also enthusiastic
advocates of gathering information online, but they differed significantly from Babies “R” Us
respondents such that the majority of these participants preferred to use manufacturers to
documentation available online or the customer reviews and product description posted
on competitor websites. Regarding information availability at brick and mortar locations,
all participants in this study, Babies “R” Us and Best Buy combined (16 people), had the
opinion that gathering information through the brick and mortar channel is difficult and far
from sufficient regardless of being available in print or communicated by the stores staff
member in person. Under close examination, it was determined that though all
interviewees have a distinct preference to gather information online rather in-store, the
Babies “R” Us had better success at servicing this need as oppose to Best Buy mostly
because the Babies “R” Us business entity has less online competition.

Navigation and traversal. All 8 Babies “R” Us shoppers interviewed believed that navigating
and traversing the e-tail version of the store was exceptionally easy. Especially in
comparison to the physical store, interviewed shoppers of Babies “R” Us, indicated their
appreciation of “no commute” as the added convenience of using an e-tail site. Online
functionality such as “search”, “category” and “top rated” links were frequently mentioned
as the tools that made these consumers highly satisfied. Most Best Buy shoppers that were
interviewed responded positively to the layout of the online store, as well, with 2
participants pointing out that the abundance of products available can actually make the
search more challenging. Never the less, all Best Buy shopper participants feel that
navigating and traversing through the virtual store is preferred over the physical location
because the ease of finding products is still far faster online than in-store. Regarding, brick
and mortar shopping, both sets of participants, Babies “R” Us and Best Buy combined, found
that in-store signs, store layout and general organization to be marginally adequate. One
additional significant finding was uncovered. Some participants of either Babies “R” Us or
Best Buy, felt that the organizational confusion that exists within the brick and mortar
store, yet absent within the e-tail environment, was purposefully arranged to entice
impulse shopping.

Customization and personalization. Babies “R” Us shoppers who were interviewed do not
expect to experience customization or personalization from this store, whether shopping
virtually or in-store. This is evident because all 8 subjects indicated that they never tried to
request customization or personalization in either the shopping environment (online or
offline). Best Buy customers, on the other hand, felt that the Best Buy organization has the
potential to offer customization and personalization both in the e-tail and physical retail
environment, but the company chooses not to render such services to the public. Therefore
consumers of the Best Buy retail brand expected customization and personalization but
have yet to be offered such services. An additional significant finding must be noted. The
most notable observation regarding this subject and this study is that the majority of the 16
subjects participating in this study considered the larger selection of products which is only
available through the e-tail environments of Babies “R” Us or Best Buy to be the companies’
primary form of customization and personalization. All subjects find this quality highly
favorable and valuable.

33
Flow Experience/Hedonism. All 8 participants who have shopped online at Babies “R” Us
have never made non utilitarian indulgent purchases. Also all 8 Best Buy e-tail shoppers
who were interviewed have never made non utilitarian indulgent purchases. For both cases,
poor motivational online promotions were attributed to this lack of online shopper
hedonism. Regarding the brick and mortar shopping experience, Babies “R” Us shoppers
who participated in this study admitted to non utilitarian indulgence. There was a great
variety in reasoning provided: some pursued expiring paper coupons and others found
enticing product offers during the course of walking through the store. In the case of Best
Buy, however, brick and mortar shoppers who were interviewed showed no significant
submission to non utilitarian purchases. There are two observed factors that would explain
the varying success in encouraging impulsive consumer shopping between the two brick
and mortar stores. The first is that in order to indulge in most Babies “R” Us products it
requires a purchase transaction and then manipulation at home, whilst indulgence in Best
Buy products does not have the same requirements. Many Best Buy products can be
impulsively used and indulged upon, through manipulation and play, immediately at no cost
because no purchase is required to use the products at the store. Secondly because Babies
“R” Us brick and mortar stores offers a greater selection of small ticket items to indulge
upon as oppose to Best Buy’s brick and mortar store having significantly fewer, the Babies
“R” Us brick and mortars store is able to increase its chances and volume of impulse
purchases.

Expectancy. All participants in this study who were interviewed about Babies “R” Us believe
that the Babies “R” Us’ e-tail site is equal to or better than their online competition in terms
of quality of the shopping experience. Every participant in this study that was interviewed
regarding Best Buy’s e-tail store believed that the associated shopping experience was
merely equal to its online competition but never better. Regarding the brick and mortar
shopping experience, the Babies “R” Us shoppers that we interviewed had the opinion that
the physical location met their expectation, marginally, compared the brick and mortar
competition, whilst Best Buy Shoppers who were interviewed felt that the brick and mortar
store met, and sometimes exceeded, their expectations of a shopping experience.
Examining closely such responses it is evident that availability of competitors in the market
was a strong influence in the response. Babies “R” Us, have little competition online but
greater competition in the brick and mortar channels and so this explains the more
favorable responses for the e-tail shopping experience versus the physical location. Best
Buy, on the other hand, has more significant competition online than at the physical
locations, therefore the interviewees provided more favorable responses for the brick
mortar locations than at the e-tails store.

Familiarity/Recognition & Recall. Babies “R” Us online shoppers who where interviewed,
collectively had the opinion that this shopping environment always gives a sense of
familiarity, recognition and recall, because of the appropriate use of logos, trademarks and
associated branding color schemes. Best Buy’s online shoppers who were interviewed,
attributed their sense of familiarity, recognition and recall, to the appropriate use of logos,
trademarks and associated branding color scheme as well. Both sets of shoppers, were also
consistent about brick and mortar locations. Both Babies “R” Us and Best Buy shoppers
indicated that all brick and mortar locations felt familiar but the organization, layout and

34
product selection varied significantly enough make the experience noticeably disorienting
or uncomfortable when the initiating the shopping process at the brick and mortar store. In
all cases, participant believed that shopping online was a better experience in terms of
achieving consistency in familiarity, recognition & recall.

Brand Strength. Whether virtual or non-virtual shopping the Babies “R” Us shoppers that
were interviewed perceived and described the Babies “R” Us retail brand with consistence
to the company’s official publications: “with the company’s foray into the baby products
market, Babies “R” Us has become the quintessential source for everything new and expectant
moms need when preparing for baby’s arrival, setting up a nursery, e with a newborn and
baby safety” (Toyrus.com, “History”, 2010). On the other hand, whether online or offline, all
Best Buy Shoppers who participated in this study provided insufficient responses regarding
their understanding of Best Buy’s brand strength. The company’s official stand on their
branding is stated as follows: “To meet the unique product and service needs of our
customers, our stores and operating models are being transformed to shift our focus from
product-centric to customer-centric — a move that poises Best Buy to truly offer the
entertainment and technology solutions that meet our customers' needs, end-to- end”
(Bestbuy.com, “About Us”, 2010). Though it may appear that the shopping environment had
little relevance to establishing brand strength and identity under closer examination of the
responses, it appeared that the consistency or lack thereof, in branding between the virtual
and non-virtual shopping environments created this overall disjointed response. Essentially
the Babies “R” Us branding used for the online stores is consistent with the branding used
for the brick and mortar stores, hence a consistency in the participant’s response. Best
Buy’s online stores branding, on the other hand, differs slightly from that of the brick and
mortar store, thereby triggering inconsistent responses from interviewees.

Involvement. Both Babies “R” Us and Best Buy interviewees felt that the associated online
shopping environment could not provide an adequate opportunity to be engaged in store
products while browsing or making purchase decisions. However, the majority of both sets
of interviewees (Babies “R” Us and Best Buy) found that the brick and mortar versions of
the stores were more than adequate. Using the details of the gathered responses from both
retail brands, involvement is best achieved though hands on experiences, such as seeing,
touching and trying in which only a brick and mortar store have an opportunity to offer.
Profoundly, it was also determined that both Babies “R” Us and Best Buy online shoppers
always substitute the lack of “hands on” involvement in the e-tail environment, by using a
specific kind of information gathering: “Customer Reviews”. Investigating closely it was
determined that customer reviews are probably preferred over other kinds of information
gathering, in order to achieve a sense of involvement, because customer reviews tend
include more testimonial descriptions relating to the experience of “seeing, touching and
trying” the product.

Service Quality, Loyalty, Satisfaction. The Babies “R” Us shoppers interviewed considered the
quality of service, likelihood of shopping there again out of loyalty and general satisfaction
with the experience as adequate for both the online and brick and mortar shopping
environments. But when asked which shopping environment, online or brick and mortar, is
better with regards to each of these same categories (service quality, loyalty and

35
satisfaction) all participants responded with adamancy “online”. Most Best Buy shoppers
interviewed considered the quality of service, likelihood of shopping there again out of
loyalty and general satisfaction with the experience as adequate for both the online and
offline shopping environments. But when asked which channel (online or brick and mortar)
is better relatively, it was determined that the brick and mortar Best Buy channel is
preferred.

4.4 Consumer Typology Analysis

The following is an examination of the participants’ general online consumer behaviors.

On-off shopper. There were 2 Babies “R” Us and 2 Best Buy participants that fell into this
category, in addition to this female and male ratio was 2:2 respectively. These results
indicate that interviewees collectively, 4 out of 16, are in shoppers who “like to surf the
Internet and collect online information but prefer to shop offline”(Kau, Tang & Ghosh ,
2003). As a result it can be deducted that on-off shoppers are not gender specific. These
findings also indicate that online shopping environment does not provide every online
savvy consumers a full sense of confidence in purchase decision. But most importantly it is
determined here that with the onset of mainstream internet technology and e-commerce,
there is exists a co-dependency for many shoppers, in their course of the decision making
process, to first browse the online shopping environment to gather information, inorder to
build more confidence while shopping in the brick and mortar store environment.

Comparison shopper. There was 1 Babies “R” Us and 3 Best Buy participants that fell into
this category. In addition to this, the female and male ratio was 2:2 respectively. These
results indicate that interviewees collectively, 4 out of 16, are in shoppers who “compare
product features, prices and brands before making purchase decision” (Kau, Tang & Ghosh ,
2003) do not bound their options to purchase by specific retail store brands. However
because most of the interviewee that fall into this category are Best Buy customers, it is
apparent that Best Buy’s online shopping environment face some significantly different
business strategy challenges as compared to Babies “R” Us. The most obvious is that Best
Buy experiences more competition online than Babies “R” Us.

Traditional shopper. No participants in this study fell into this category. This an appropriate
finding considering only participants who have shopped online with some frequency were
interviewed.

Dual shopper. There were 2 Babies “R” Us and 3 Best Buy participants that fell into this
category. In addition to this, the female and male ratio was 3:2, respectively. These findings
indicate that majority of interviewees collectively, 5 out of 16, are shoppers who “like to
compare brands and product features, and rely on the Internet for gathering information”
(Kau, Tang & Ghosh , 2003). Also it is indicated that the focus of the population being
studied, is not to purchase online instead of in brick and mortar channels, but infact this
populations primary focus is fundementally finding an opportunity for getting a good
“deal”.

36
e-Laggard. There were 2 Babies “R” Us and 0 Best Buy participants that fell into this
category. In addition to this, the female and male ratio was 2:0, respectively. Though no
significant deductions can be made from these results regarding e-service quality of brick
and mortar brands e-tailing, these results still do add great value to this study as a whole;
such that these results are consistent with Kau, Tag & Gosh’s (2003) statistical findings
-thereby providing evidence that this research study conducted is an accurate
representation of the general population being examined.

Information surfer. There was 1 Babies “R” Us and 0 Best Buy participants that fell into this
category. In addition to this the female and male ratio was 1:0, respectively. Despite their
confidence in shopping online and in-store, these findings indicate information surfers have
no significant impact on identifying significant factors effecting shopping environments of
either e-tail stores or brick and mortar store as their motivation and purchase decisions are
unaffected by branding or service quality.

37
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction
The dimensions of e-service quality for brick and mortar retail brands and its impact on
consumer satisfaction and loyalty are indeed complex. The following is description of the
conclusions drawn followed by recommendations for the industry.

5.2 Conclusions Drawn Relating to the Dimensions of e-Service Quality

Security & Privacy. Regarding security and privacy, it can be concluded that because of the
recent advancements in e-commerce technology alongside Generation X and Y’s increasing
familiarity with such, this dimension of e-service quality has little impact on the success of
retail brands trying to extend in the virtual market place. Furthermore it has also been
concluded that, in relation to security and privacy, consumers’ satisfaction and loyalty
regarding this dimension is mostly defined by a consumer’s recognition, perception and
association of the retail brands in traditional retail environment’s adherence to e-commerce
industry standards. Therefore consistent to Chen & Barnes (2007) published findings, this
study proves security and privacy to be easily achievable through means of familiarity, but
exceeds the contributions made by Chen and Barnes to the industry by indicating, that four
years later, the market place has changed to the degree that adherence to e-commerce
marketplace standard is a means of achieving a sufficient sense of familiarity and hence
consumer satisfaction and loyalty in terms of the security and privacy e-service dimension.

Fulfillment & Reliability. This research study has concluded that retail brands that
effectively satisfy the e-service quality dimension of fulfillment and reliability have a
positive impact on consumer satisfaction and loyalty. This is because achieving fulfillment
and reliability confidence in a consumer is capable of transitioning consumer’s purchase
intent to an actual purchase transaction. To elaborate, this study found that consumers rely
on the combination and cohabitation of brick and mortar retail locations and virtual retail
sites of brand to build confidence and motivation in pursuing purchases. Such that, the
traditional brick and mortar retail locations allow consumers to tangibly resolve any
concerns or questions about the perspective product or service but it is the corresponding
e-tail site enables the consumer to pursue the transaction at the exact moment that they are
ready to purchase. It must be noted that consumer apprehensiveness in pursuing purchase
increases as the cost of the product or service increases. Therefore it is imperative to
recognize that effectively executing this e-service quality dimension is not as critical with
regards to small ticket items. These conclusions provide an explanation to Lim, Widdows, &
Hooker’s (2009) recent findings which indicated that immediate acceptance and transition
of consumer base and traffic between shopping environments does comes with great ease
or simplicity.

Customer service. It has been determined that the impact of customer service, belonging to
brick and mortar brand’s e-tail sites, on consumer satisfaction and loyalty is noteworthy.
Though most consumers have low expectations regarding gaining help with purchase
logistics - for this they turn to the traditional retail environment - most consumers prefer

38
the e-tail site to gain assistance in knowledge gathering, as they believe that retail websites
are better at facilitating this part of their shopping process. Therefore it is concluded in this
research study, that the more intellectual facilitation the brand can offer the greater the
satisfaction. It also means the greater the likelihood of loyalty, by means of a motivated
purchase transaction, regardless of the overwhelming in competencies observed by
consumers of the brick and mortar locations. Furthermore since such conclusions are
consistent with the earlier conclusions drawn by Levenburg (2006), recommendations for
industry standards presented by this very paper, regarding the e-service dimension of
customer service, proves its absolute stability and consequent validity and implacability.

Informativeness. Unanimously, consumers have a distinct preference to gather product and

service information using the online e-tail site of a brick and mortar brand rather that the
resources offered in-person in traditional shopping environment. Furthermore, though
some retail brands sufficiently, or over succeed, in providing this dimension of e-service
quality the outcome only ensures consumer satisfaction but never consumer loyalty (by
means of purchases). As a result, retail brands, with regards to informativeness, can only
rely on this dimension to draw consumer traffic but never to guarantee consumer
transactions/purchases. The importance of this conclusion is recognizing that this is next
critical step to achieving consumer satisfaction and loyalty through informativeness after
Bigné-Alcañ iz, Ruiz-Mafé, Aldá s-Manzano & Sanz-Blas (2008) qualifications, which is high
quality and organization, of information is achieved.

Navigation and Traversal. This research concludes that generally consumers prefer to
traverse and navigate the virtual shopping environment than brick and mortar location of
the same retail brand. Even more importantly it was also concluded that though failing to
properly satisfy this dimension of service quality in the traditional shopping environment
was no consequence to consumer interest, failing to properly satisfy this dimension of
service in the virtual shopping environment can severely and negatively impact consumer
satisfaction and loyalty. Therefore navigation and traversal is in fact integral dimension of
e-service quality that enables retail brands to successfully extend into the competitive e-
market space. Relating this to the conclusions drawn by Xia (2010), in which she indicates
that behavioral aspects such as functional or recreational shopping influence the navigation
and traversal satisfaction and loyalty of consumers, it is understood that this e-service
dimension is indeed complex and that consumer behavior is a greater force, than market
place trends and competition, in driving brick and mortar success in the e-space.

Customization and personalization. Customization and personalization, in the traditional

sense and definition, is far from critical to consumers shopping online or offline. Currently
such offerings are limited, in the market, and not within standard expectation by
consumers. It has also been concluded that with the evolution of retailing, thereby
encompassing e-commerce and e-tailing, the meaning of customization and personalization
has now evolved too. Presently, it is considered that greater product selections only made
available through the e-tail environments of brick and mortar retail brands are the favored
for form of customization and personalization. This is to the extent of instilling notable
levels of satisfaction and loyalty. It is for this reason that this dimension of e-service quality
differentiates itself from service quality dimensions of traditional brick and mortar

39
locations. Differing expectations between shopping environment and more influential
results from the virtual shopping environment conclude the importance of retail brands
pursuing e-tailing as a distinct process of brand retailing.

Flow Experience/Hedonism. It is concluded the impulse and indulgent purchases are rare for
the consumers of the online the shopping environment. Though consumer feedback
indicated that online promotional strategist dedicated to encouraging online purchases are
weak and less than motivating, it is not a indication that there is a general discontent in
satisfaction and loyalty, in terms of the flow experience and hedonism dimension of e-service
quality. But because consumers admitted their tendency to impulsively and indulgently
purchase in brick and mortar environments, as in this scenario they are able to overcome
the most functional shopping deterrents (by means of low price or physically manipulate
more expensive products), it was concluded that flow experience and hedonism is e-service
quality dimension is not of any significance in gaining consumer satisfaction and loyalty but
indeed presents a challenge for brick and mortar stores seeking to transition consumer
traffic flow and optimize sales opportunities in e-space. Contrary to belief, these
conclusions do not contradict Huang (2008) conclusions, because though his findings
indicate there is opportunity to encourage indulgence online, he never makes mention that
the indulgence online will manifest itself in financial transactions as most industry experts
in e-promotions and e-markets attempt. E. Huang (2008) just suggest, just as this research
conclusions do, that merely more time spent on the e-tail site and an increased sense of
consumer satisfaction and loyalty can be achieved through providing more entertainment
even if it is in the form of informational services.

Expectancy. It can be concluded that expectancy, as dimension of e-service quality, for brick
and mortar brands, has no unusual impact on consumer satisfaction or loyalty, especially as
compared to the traditional market space shopping environment. Expectancy success in
either virtual or non virtual shopping environments is radically sensitive to competition in
the market space. This conclusion not only supports Kim and Stoel (2005) findings but
indicates that such a dimension in e-service quality has not changed under the influence
and advancements of e-space technology but in fact supports the understanding that what
is already known about expectancy remains very relevant to the evolving retail industry.

Familiarity/Recognition & Recall. Regarding this e-service quality dimension, it is concluded

that sufficient use of logo, branding, color schemes, and trademarks, the consumer
satisfaction and loyalty is very easily achievable. It is further determined that this
dimension is the first line in acquiring consumer interest, satisfaction and loyalty even
though it doesn’t guarantee it. It is for this reason, projecting a positive association of
familiarity, recognition and recall in the e-tail environment is considered critical element in
enabling traditional retail brands to generate consumer interest and traffic in their
coexisting e-tail shopping environment. This study’s conclusions bring significant
contributions to the industry as supplements Flaviá n & Gurrea’s (2008) study by revealing
that negative associations, in terms of familiarity, recognition and recall, is a lesser obstacle
in achieving consumer satisfaction and loyalty in e-tail.

40
Brand Strength. Consistency in brand strength, between the various shopping channels of a
retail brand (virtual and non virtual), does not directly relate to e-tail success, such that
inconsistencies and consistencies detected by consumers were never indicated as
deterrents or motivators, respectively, with regards to purchase intent. However it was
determined that a lack of consistency between environments directly affects consumers’
ability to consider a retail store existing in both shopping environments to have a unified
presence and be interchangeable. This disables consumers from transitioning their
browsing activities and purchase intent between shopping environments. Consequently it
can be concluded that brand strength, in terms of dimensions of e-service quality, is an
important factor in sustaining consumer satisfaction and loyalty but not necessary in
acquiring it. These conclusions contribute significantly to the industry’s understanding of
branding and e-branding because it expands most research thus far, such as Hahn & Kim
(2009), where branding strategies are limited to understanding that it is for the purpose of
achieving sales through acquiring trust.

Involvement. Most consumers believe that the brick and mortar locations of retail brands
are superior to their online locations in terms of achieving a sense of involvement. But
though this e-service dimension of service quality is not satisfactory, relative to the
standards of the brick and mortar shopping environment, loyalty is still achievable by this
e-service dimension. It was concluded that with the evolution of retail in the virtual space,
consumers have adapted their understanding of involvement in order to build confidence in
their purchase decision. To elaborate, though it may not be their own first hand experience,
consumers find fellow consumer testimonials, otherwise referred to as “customer reviews”,
are just as satisfying as the in-person brick and mortar shopping experience. Furthermore,
it was determined that greater quantity of customer reviews offered by e-tailer’s on their
website, the greater the loyalty to both shopping environment. Therefore this e-service
dimension has the ability to increase brick and mortar consumer satisfaction and loyalty in
addition to e-tail consumer satisfaction and loyalty. This conclusion remind well supported
by external research as Demangeot & Broderick (2007) indicated in their research that with
advancement of technology the retail involvement is no longer interpreted and experienced
in a traditional sense.

Service Quality, Loyalty, Satisfaction. It is concluded that consumer perception of service

quality, loyalty and satisfaction is highly influenced by competitiveness within the
marketplace. Greater online competition lowers consumer perception of quality service,
loyalty and satisfaction, just as brick and mortar locations are susceptible to competition in
the traditional shopping environments. This is primarily because more differences and
insufficiencies can be detected by comparison, regardless of the shopping environment. It is
from this understanding that it can also be concluded that increased competition in a
shopping environment betters a consumer’s perception of the retail brand’s presence in an
alternative retail space, such as online channels. Theodosiou et al. (2009) provided a
superior foundation for these conclusions to be drawn as their study explained that only a
complex combination of dimensions can contribute to developing thorough understanding
of e-service quality, consumer satisfaction and loyalty.

5.3 Conclusions Drawn Regarding the E-Consumer Topology

41
On-off shopper. It can be concluded that targeting the the on-off shopper is a worthwhile
marketing strategy as their presence accounts for a substantial portion of the targeted
consumer base. Furthermore it is critical to recognize that the consistency- also suggested
by research conducted by Biswas & Burman (2009) - between the product and service
offerings made in both shopping channels, in terms of price, information and more, is of
greatest importance, as failing to accomplish this would threaten e-consumer satisfaction
and loyalty.

Comparison shopper. Once again it concluded that consistency is of utmost importance to

this significantly sized consumer base. However, contrary to the appealing to the on-off
shopper, it is important to comparison shopper’s to maintain consistency with the e-
competitors product and services offering, thereby expanding on the some the findings of
Yan (2008) conducted the past. Therefore a business pursuing e-tailing success must show
no deficiency in information, promotions or pricing competitiveness so that there is no
opportunity for the retail brand to lose consumer loyalty due to some dissatisfaction.

Traditional shopper. It is concluded that this consumer base is of no interest to retail brand
pursuing strategies to successfully expand into e-tail space.

Dual shopper. In alignment with Theodosiou et al. (2009) philosophy in eventful e-service
quality, in order to satisfy and encourage loyalty from this consumer base, it is concluded
that the e-tail site of the brick and mortar retail brand must render the highest of quality for
as many of e-service dimensions that were determined to be critical, by this study.

e-Laggard. This study has concluded that the e-laggard demographic should not be used to
define the e-space marketing strategies of a brick and mortar retail brand pursuing e-tail
success.

Information surfer. Mysteries revealed about e-consumer behavior by Kalyanam &

McIntyre (2002) are now explained with the conclusions drawn about this demographic.
Regarding the information surfer consumer base, it is concluded that other than providing
an acceptable standard of information, there is no benefit to entice this demographic with
the use of branding or affiliations.

5.4 Recommendations Relating to the Dimensions of e-Service Quality

Security & Privacy. It is recommended that security and privacy practices of retail brands e-
tailing adhere to the most up to date trends and practices of the e-space industry and
maintain a brand image that is consistently identifiable online and relatable to the
traditional shopping venues.

Fulfillment & Reliability. It is recommended that all brick and mortar retail brands not only
establish an online presence but in fact an e-tail site capable of the e-commerce
transactions. Furthermore it must present prices and promotions for big ticket items that
are consistent to the prices and promotions available in their retail stores existing in the
traditional shopping environment.

42
Customer service. It is recommended that all brick and mortar retail brands ensure that
their e-tail extension recognize the provision of product related information as critical form
of customer service and furthermore heavily market this e-service.

Informativeness. It is recommended that all brick and mortar retail brands ensure that their
e-tail extension provide exhaustive opportunities for consumer to sufficiently execute their
information gathering stage of their shopping process.

Navigation and Traversal. It is recommended that brick and mortar retail sites design their
e-tail sites provide navigation and traversal tools that offer the greatest ease and simplicity
to its potential consumers rather than strategically using distracting promotional e-tools.

Customization and personalization. It is recommended that all brick and mortar retail
brands that pursue e-tailing success must have a quantity and range of products offered
online that exceed the quantity and range of products available in the traditional store
environment.

Flow Experience/Hedonism. It is recommended that brick and mortar retail brands devote
expensive resources on some other dimension of e-service quality to gain more beneficial
use of market presence virtually and non-virtually, followed by using less costly resources
and smaller budgets to generate entertainment online.

Expectancy. It is recommended that brick and mortar retail stores ensure that the e-tail
presence and presentation keep up to up-to-date with virtual technology advancements and
e-commerce trends.

Familiarity/Recognition & Recall. It is recommended that brick and mortar retail brands
make consistent use of logos, color schemes and trademarks in both online and traditional
shopping environments.

Brand Strength. It is recommended that brick and mortar retail brands make extensive use
branding online to foster a positive association with the traditional shopping environment
locations.

Involvement. It is recommended that retail brands pursuing e-tail success must provide the
e-service of “customer reviews” and “testimonials”.

Service Quality, Loyalty, Satisfaction. It is recommended that brick and mortar retail brands
pursuing e-tail success, must pursue long term marketing strategies to support coexistence
in both shopping environment to ensure a stable presence in the general industry of
retailing.

5.5 Recommendations Drawn Regarding the E-Consumer Topology

43
On-off shopper. It is recommended that this demographic be targeted by establishing
consistency between the product and service offering made in both shopping channels, in
terms of price, information and more.

Comparison shopper. It is necessary for business to remain at least consistent with their e-
competitors with regards to their provision of information, promotional activity and
pricing.

Traditional shopper. It is recommended that no action is taken to pursue this shopper

demographic since any resources dedicated to drawing revenues this group has not the
potential create a return on investment (ROI).

Dual shopper. The e-tail site of the brick and mortar retail brand must render the highest of
quality for most of e-service dimensions that were determined, by this study, to be critical.

e-Laggard. It is recommended that no action is taken to pursue this shopper demographic

since the mechansim for drawing this groups interest and loyalty is personal referrals and
Word of Mouth.

Information surfer. It is recommended that the e-tail site should host a substantial quanity
of relevant information, including testimonials and customer reviews, regarding the
product and services renders.

44
6.0 LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

6.1 Limitations

The limitations of the present study are depicted subsequently.

Consider a survey conducted by Saad in 2006. He determined that “despite the hassles and
protestations about commercialization, Americans still describe holiday shopping as more of a
‘joyful experience’ that they look forward to than as a ‘chore’ they have to put up with (55%
vs. 40%, respectively)” (Saad, 2006). Combining this finding with the fact that the case study
for this research study at hand was conducted over a short period of time during an off-
season shopping cycle, a realization is made. Responses provided by the participants
interviewed may have had lesser detail and articulation as compared to responses that
could have been collected during a more active prolonged shopping season. This is simply
because shopping experiences during off-season may not be as abundant, recent or even
associated with excitement. With this in mind, the first of two identified limitations of this
research study is now noted.

Inyoung (2009) indicated that “social media sites including Facebook Inc. and Twitter Inc.
have influenced 28 percent of U.S. holiday shoppers in gift-buying decisions this year,
according to a survey by ComScore Inc.” This finding introduces a second limitation
identified belonging this research study at hand. That is, during the interview, participants
were not asked to distinguish their shopping experiences according to intent. More
specifically, during the conduct of the case study the participants were not required to
articulate who these purchases were intended for learning from Inyoung’s (2009) finding, it
is realized that further opportunities exist to gather information regarding online versus
brick and mortar consumer behavior that could benefit the community’s understanding of
the industry and market.

However, despite these limitations, the conducted study and the associated findings that
have been published in this paper remains more than noteworthy as these limitations far
from challenge the significance of the findings discovered and articulated but merely
present an opportunity for additional knowledge to be gathered.

6.2 Future Research

By combining the results collected and described in this very research study with the
established limitations noted earlier, it is clear that future research opportunities exist
which would be beneficial to both industry strategist and experts. Grégoire, Tripp, & Legoux
(2009 determined that consumer perception of shopping experience is more than
spontaneous. But more importantly, Grégoire et al. (2009) proved in their study the value
and impact of longitudinal examinations of consumer behavior interacting with retail
brands. With this in mind, it is firstly recommended that for future research a longitudinal
study is conducted to examine consumer behavior and attitude according to shopping
season in both brick and mortar and e-tailing shopping environments. In doing so, it will

45
help verify any potential aberrations of service quality dimensions and priorities that exist
during varying retail cycles.

Dolliver (2009) determined that during the Christmas holiday season, that gift shopping
will be integral and increasing part of the consumer shopping motivator once again, thereby
diffusing mere functional shopping intent. Therefore a second recommendation for future
research has become apparent. It is recommended that an examination of purchase intent
(gift or non-gift) be examined more closely. In doing so, the industry of retailing, whether
virtual or brick and mortar, will benefit from understanding the potential affects of
consumer decision making process and preferences in service quality dimensions.
Conclusively, because its complexity and continuing evolution, it should be expected that
the topic of the ‘dimension of e-service quality for brick and mortar retail brands’ will
continue to be of interest to all industry experts for years to come.

46
REFERENCES

Allred, C.R., Smith, S. M. & Swinyard, W. R. (2006) ‘E-shopping lovers and fearful
conservatives: a market segmentation analysis’ International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management 34 (4/5), pp. 308-333 (Accessed: 6 August 2010).

Agnello, A. (2010) Borders, Toys “R” Us Use Pop Up Stores to Spur Holiday Sales [Online]
www.investorplace.com. Available from: http://www.investorplace.com/news-
opinion/borders-toys-r-us-use-pop-up stores-spur-holiday-sales.html (Accessed: 7
October 2010)

Ansari, A., & Mela, C. (2003) ‘E-Customization’ Journal of Marketing Research 40 (2), pp.
131-145. (Accessed: 13 September 2010)

Balabanis, G., Reynolds, N., & Simintiras, A. (2006) ‘Bases of e-store loyalty: perceived
switching barriers and satisfaction’ Journal of Business Research, 59 (2), pp. 214-224.
(Accessed: 5 April, 2010)

Bart, Y., Shankar, V., Sultan, F., & Urban, G (2005) ‘Are the drivers and role of online trust
the same for all web sites and consumers? a large-scale exploratory empirical study’,
Journal of Marketing, 69 (4) pp. 133-152. (Accessed: April 8, 2010)

Bauer, H. H., Falk, T., & Hammerschmidt, M. (2006) ‘eTransQual: A transaction process-
based approach for approach for capturing service quality in online shopping’,
Journal of Business Research, 59 (7), pp. 866-875. (Accessed: 5 April, 2010)

BestBuy.com (2010) About Us [Online] www.BestBuy.com Available from:

http://www.bby.com/about/ (Accessed: 17 July 2010)

BestBuy.com (2010) Timeline [Online] www.bestbuy.com Available from:

http://www.bby.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/BBY_TimeLine.pdf
(Accessed: 19 July 2010)

Bigné-Alcañ iz, E., Carla Ruiz-Mafé, C., Aldá s-Manzano, J. & Sanz-Blas, S. (2008) ‘Influence of
online shopping information dependency and innovativeness on internet shopping
adoption’ Online Information Review 32 (5), pp. 648-667 (Accessed: 5 August 2010)

Biswas, D. & Burman, B. (2009) ‘The effects of product digitalization and price dispersion
on search intentions in offline versus online settings: the mediating effects of
perceived risks’ Journal of Product & Brand Management 18 (7), pp. 477-
486(Accessed: 6 August 2010)

Cassab, H. & MacLachlan, D. (2009) ‘A consumer-based view of multi- channel service’

Journal of Service Management 20 (1), pp. 52-75 (Accessed: 7 August 2010)

47
Chen, Yu-Hei & Barnes, Stuart (2007) ‘Initial trust and online buyer behaviour’ Industrial
Management & Data Systems 107 (1), pp. 21-36 (Accessed: August 4, 2010)

Cho, H. & Fiorito S.S. (2009) ‘Acceptance of online customization for apparel shopping’
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 37 (5), pp. 389-407
(Accessed: 6 August 2010)

Collier, J. E., & Bienstock, C. C. (2006) ‘Measuring service quality in e- retailing’ Journal of
Service Research, 8 (3), pp. 260-275 (Accessed: 5 April, 2010)

Comegys, C., & Brennan, M. (2003). ‘Students' Online Shopping Behavior: A Dual-Country
Perspective.’ Journal of Internet Commerce, 2 (2), pp. 69 (Accessed: 13 September
2010)

Coviello, N. E., Brodie, R. J., Brookes, R. W. & Palmer, R. (2003) ‘Assessing the Role of e-
Marketing in Contemporary Marketing Practice’ Journal of Marketing Management
19 (7/8), pp. 857-881(Accessed: 13 September 2010)

Datamonitor (2009) Toys 'R' Us, Inc. (TRU) SWOT Analysis pp. 1-8 (Accessed: 22 July 2010)

Datamonitor (2010) Best Buy Co, Inc. SWOT Analysis pp. 1-9 (Accessed: 22 July 2010)

Demangeot, C. & Broderick A.J. (2007) ‘Conceptualising consumer behaviour in online

shopping environments’ International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
35 (11), pp. 878-894(Accessed on: 5 August 2010)

Dolliver, M. (2010) ‘A Holiday-Shopping Rebound -- Sort Of.’ Sales & Marketing Management
161 (6), p. 1 (Accessed on: September 20, 2010).

Dong-Mo, K., Jae-Jin K., & Sang-Hwan, L. (2008) ‘Personal values as underlying motives of
shopping online’ Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics 20 (2), pp.156-173
(Accessed on: 6 August 2010).

Grégoire, Y., Tripp, T.M., & Legoux, R. (2009) ‘When Customer Love Turns into Lasting Hate:
The Effects of Relationship Strength and Time on Customer Revenge and Avoidance.’
Journal of Marketing 73 (6), pp. 18-32. (Accessed on: September 20, 2010).

Flaviá n, C. & Gurrea, R. (2008) ‘Reading newspapers on the Internet: the influence of web
sites' attributes’ Internet Research 18 (1), pp. 26-45. (Accessed on: 6 August 2010).

Fundinguniverse.com (2010a) ‘Best Buy’ www.fundinguniverse.com [Online]. Available

from: http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/Best-Buy-Co-Inc-
Company-History.html (Accessed on: 19 July 2010)

48
Fundinguniverse.com (2010b) ‘Toys R Us’ www.fundinguniverse.com [Online]. Available at:
http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/Toys-R- Us-Inc-Company-
History.html (Accessed on: 14 July 2010)

Hahn, K. & Kim, J (2009) ‘The effect of offline brand trust and perceived internet confidence
on online shopping intention in the integrated multi-channel context’ International
Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 37 (2), pp. 126-141 (Accessed on: 6
August 2010)

Heejin Lim & Alan J. Dubinsky (2004) ‘Consumers' perceptions of e-shopping

characteristics: An expectancy-value approach’ Journal of Services Marketing, 18 (7)
pp. 500- 513. (Accessed on: 5 April, 2010)

Herná ndez-Ortega, B. & Jiménez-Martínez, J. & Martín-DeHoyos, M. J. (2008) ‘Differences

between potential, new and experienced e-customers’, Internet Research 18 (3), pp.
248-265. (Accessed on: 6 August 2010)

Holloway, B. B., & Beatty, S. A. (2008) ‘Satisfiers and dissatisfiers in the online environment:
a critical incident assessment’ Journal of Service Research, 10 (4), pp. 347-364.
(Accessed on: 5 April, 2010)

Horppu, M. & Kuivalainen, O. & Tarkiainen, A. & Ellonen, H.K. (2008) ‘Online satisfaction,
trust and loyalty, and the impact of the offline parent brand’ Journal of Product &
Brand Management 17 (6), pp. 403- 413 (Accessed on: 7 August 2010)

Huang, E. (2008) ‘Use and gratification in e-consumers’ Internet Research, 18 (4) pp. 405-
426 (Accessed on: 6 August, 2010)

Hunter, G. K., & Perreault, W. D. Jr. (2007). ‘Making sales technology effective.’ Journal of
Marketing, 71(1), 16-34. (Accessed on: 5 April, 2010)

Internet Library of Law and Court Decisions (2010) Toys R Us.com, LLC v. Amazon.com
[Online]. www.internetlibrary.com Available at:
http://www.internetlibrary.com/cases/lib_case424.cfm (Accessed on: 14 July 2010)

Inyoung, Hwang (2009) ‘Facebook, Twitter Influence Holiday Gift Buying.’

BusinessWeek.com (December 10, 2009) pp. 4 (Accessed on: September 20, 2010).

Kalyanam, K. & Mclntyre, S. (2002) ‘The e-marketing mix: a contribution of the e-tailing
wars’ Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 30 (4), pp. 487-499. Available
from:http://www.springerlink.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/content/18025850252x6144/
fulltext.pdf (Accessed: 13 September 2010)

Kau, Ah Keng., Tang, Yingchan E. & Ghose, Sanjoy (2003) ‘Typology of online shoppers’
Journal of Consumer Marketing, 20 (2/3), pp.139. (Accessed on: 5 April, 2010)

49
Kennedy, A. & Coughlan, J. (2006) ‘Online shopping portals: an option for traditional
retailers?’ International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 34 (7), pp. 516-
528 (Accessed on: 7 August 2010)

Kiley, David & Roman, Monica (2004) ‘R’ they or R’nt They?’ Business Week Issue 3898 pp.
56-56 (Accessed on: 8 October 2010)

Kim, M & Stoel, L (2005) ‘Salesperson roles: are online retailers meeting customer
expectations?’ International Journal of Retail &Distribution Management 33 (4) pp.
284-297 (Accessed on: 6 August 2010)

Koo, Dong-Mo., Kim, Jae-Jin. & Lee, Sang-Hwan (2008) ‘Personal values as underlying
motives of shopping online’ Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics 20 (2), pp.
156-173 297 (Accessed on: 7 August 2010)

Levenburg, Nancy M. (2006) ‘Benchmarking customer service on the internet: best

practices from family businesses’ Benchmarking: An International Journal 13 (3) pp.
355-373 (Accessed on: 9 August 2010)

Lim, Heejin & Widdows, Richard & Hoooker, Neal H. (2009) ‘Web content analysis of e-
grocery retailers: a longitudinal study International’ Journal of Retail & Distribution
Management 37 (10), pp. 839 – 851 (Accessed on: 13 September 2010)

Mathur, A., Moschis, G. P. and Lee, E. (2008) ‘A longitudinal study of the effects of life status
changes on changes in consumer preferences.’ Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science 36 (2) pp. 234-246. (Accessed on: September 20, 2010).

Mendelson, Seth & Friedman, Jeff (1997) ‘I Don’t Wanna Grow Up’ Discount Merchandiser 37
(2), pp.7 (Accessed on: 8 October 2010)

OECD Observer (2002) ‘E-commerce or just e-marketing?’ OECD Observer 235 (39)
(Accessed on: 13 September 2010)

Oh, H. & Kwon, K.N. (2009) ‘An exploratory study of sales promotions for multi-channel
holiday shopping’ International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 37 (10),
pp. 867-887 (Accessed on: 7 August 2010)

Quantcast (2010a) ‘Toys “R” Us/Babies “R” Us’ [Online]. www.quantcast.com Available from:
http://www.quantcast.com/babiesrus.com#demographics (Accessed on: 19 July
2010)

Quantcast (2010b) “Best Buy” [Online]. www.quantcast.com Available at:

http://www.quantcast.com/bestbuy.com#demographics (Accessed on: 19 July
2010)

50
Rajamma, R.K., Audhesh K. Paswan, A.K. & Ganesh, G. (2007) ‘Services purchased at brick
and mortar versus online stores, and shopping motivation’. Journal of Services
Marketing 21 (3), pp.200-212. (Accessed on: 5 April, 2010)

Saad, Lydia (2006) ‘Christmas Shopping Brings Holiday Cheer: Majority of Americans are
not highly stressed by the season.’ Gallup Poll Briefing pp. 1-5 (Accessed on:
September 20, 2010).

Semeijn, J. & van Riel, A.C.R. & van Birgelen, M. J.H.& Streukens, S. (2005) ‘E-services and
offline fulfilment: how e-loyalty is created’ Managing Service Quality 15 (2), pp. 182-
194 (Accessed on: 7 August 2010)

Theodosiou, M., Makri, K., Samiee, S. and Katsikea, E. (2009) ‘A Proposed Conceptualization
of Electronic Service Quality as a Higher Order Formative Construct’, World
Marketing Congress, Oslo, Norway. 

Toysrus.com (2010) Our History [Online]. www.toysrus.com Available from:

http://www4.toysrus.com/about/ourHistory.cfm (Accessed on: 17 July 2010)

U.S. Census Bureau (2010) QUARTERLY RETAIL E-COMMERCE SALES

4th QUARTER 2009 [Online]. Available from:
http://www.census.gov/retail/mrts/www/data/html/09Q4.html (Accessed on: 5
April, 2010)

Vecchio, Robert P. (2006) Organizational Behavior 6th ed. Minster, Ohio : South-
Western/Thomson Press

Wolfinbarger, M., & Gilly, M. C. (2003) ‘eTailQ: dimensionalizing, measuring and predicting
etail quality’ Journal of Retailing, 79(3), pp.183-198. (Accessed on: 5 April, 2010)

Xia, L. (2010) ‘An examination of consumer browsing behaviors’ Qualitative Market

Research: An International Journal 13 (2), pp. 154-173 (Accessed on: 5 August, 2010)

Xiaoming, Meng (2010) ‘Combining e-commerce and e-marketing’ Journal of Software 5 (5)
pp. 546-553 (Accessed on: 13 September 2010)

Yan, R. (2008) ‘Pricing strategy for companies with mixed online and traditional retailing
distribution markets’ Journal of Product & Brand Management 7 (1), pp. 48-56.
(Accessed on: 7 August 2010).

Zhang, A. (2008) ‘Examining product and process effects on consumer preferences for
online and offline channels’ Business Process Management Journal 14 (1), pp. 85-95
(Accessed on: 7 August 2010).

51
 APPENDIX I
QUESTIONNAIRE

Brand:
Best Buy or Babies R Us

Consumer Experience:
1. Security/privacy
Tell me about your confidence in the security and privacy of your shopping experience
at the store.
Online:
Offline:
Which channel is better and why?

2. Fulfillment/reliability
Tell me about the purchase process and products delivered; when you make a purchase
at this store does the process tend to be error free? Were the products and services
delivered exactly as you expected.
Online:
Offline:
Which channel is better and why?

3. Customer service
Do you think good help was always available at this store? Was it provided on demand
and did it fully intend to all your needs.
Online:
Offline:
Which channel is better and why?

4. Informativeness
Was there a lot of information accessible through the store’s resources (staff, previous
customers, documents and etc) which helped you build confidence in your purchase
decisions.
Online:
Offline:
Which channel is better and why?

5. Navigation and traversal

The store is organized in a way that it is easy to find what you are looking for? Tell me
what course do you take to find you want you need?
Online:
Offline:
Which channel is better and why?

52
6. Customization and personalization
Did the store provide a shopping experience that was capable of meeting your unique
interests and special needs?
Online:
Offline:
Which channel is better and why?

7. Flow Experience/Hedonism
Did the store have exciting promotions and special offers for the products and services
they render?
Online:
Offline:
Which channel is better and why?

8. Expectancy
Did the store’s delivery of display, transaction process, and products & services meet or
exceed your standards especially in comparison to its competitors?
Online:
Offline:
Which channel is better and why?

9. Familiarity/ & Recall

Do all stores of the same brand look and feel the same? Whenever you visit this store
does it feel comfortable, familiar and easy to remember to where to find things and go
about purchasing what I want?
Online:
Offline:
Which channel is better and why?

10. Brand Strength /Identification & Association

Describe the company’s reputation and image. Did the product and services rendered
matched or exceed the company’s brand reputation?
Online:
Offline:
Which channel is better and why?

11. Involvement
While browsing did you feel encouraged to test try and/or manipulate the stores
products and services to facilitate your purchase decisions?
Online:
Offline:
Which channel is better and why?

12. Service quality

From beginning to end, was the services rendered by this store outstanding?

53
 Online:
Offline:
Which channel is better and why?

13. Loyalty
Would you choose to browse this retail brand’s store again before examining its
competitors?
Online:
Offline:
Which channel is better and why?

14. Satisfaction
Were you happy with the overall experience of shopping here?
Online:
Offline:
Which channel is better and why?

15. Topology*
Questions posed here are general not exclusive to the any experience at Best Buy or
Babies R Us.
Tell me, what’s the greatest advantage to shopping in-store? Why?

Tell me, what are the advantages to shopping online? Why?

Tell me about how you spend most of your time online? Why?

Tell me which kind of activities you are reluctant to do online? Why?

Additional comments from interviewee:

Additional observations by interviewer:

Name and contact info:

Gender:
Age:
Income/Salary:
Marital status:
*(Responses were interpreted by use of the topology instrument designed by Kau, Tang, &
Gosh, 2003).

54