Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Beyond Purchase
Shiri D. Vivek, Sharon E. Beatty, and Robert M. Morgan
Using qualitative studies involving executives and customers, this study explores the nature and scope
of customer engagement (CE), which is a vital component of relationship marketing. We define CE as
the intensity of an individuals participation in and connection with an organizations offerings and/
or organizational activities, which either the customer or the organization initiate. We argue that it is
composed of cognitive, emotional, behavioral, and social elements. Finally, we offer a model of CE, in
which the participation and involvement of current or potential customers serve as antecedents of CE,
while value, trust, affective commitment, word of mouth, loyalty, and brand community involvement
are potential consequences.
In its 20062008 Research Priorities, the Marketing Science Institute (MSI) called for a better understanding
of engagement. As rapid changes in communications
technology as well as globalization of markets are creating communities of customers and prospects rather than
a multitude of isolated customers . . . companies are
discovering new ways to create and sustain emotional
connections with the brand . . . thus engaging customers through innovation and design (MSI 2006, pp.2,4,
emphasis added). Customer engagement (CE) continues
to be a research priority of MSI in 201012. MSI considers
CE customers behavioral manifestation toward a brand
or firm beyond purchase (MSI 2010, p.4). In our view, interest in engagement beyond the purchase suggests that
researchers need to focus on individuals who interact with
the brand, without necessarily purchasing it or planning
on purchasing it, or on events and activities engaged in
by the consumer that are not directly related to search,
alternative evaluation, and decision making involving
BACKGROUND OF
CUSTOMER ENGAGEMENT
We begin with a discussion of the existing conceptualizations of engagement and CE. The Appendix summarizes a
selected set of existing literature on these constructs from
the fields of psychology, management, information systems,
marketing, education, and practitioner literature. As the Appendix shows, researchers and practitioners in a number of
disciplines, including marketing, address engagement, but
its domain and definition are far from consistent across
these disciplines and researchers. In psychology, several
researchers define engagement, either generally (Schaufeli
et al. 2002) or in the context of work (Maslach, Schaufeli,
and Leiter 2001), role (Watkins et al. 1991), or employment
(Avery, McKay, and Wilson 2007). A review and synthesis
of the elements of engagement in the last column of the
Appendix table show that engagement is a cognitive, affective, behavioral, or social construct. Next, drawing from
the Appendix, we briefly review the literature on employee
work and role engagement, followed by the research on CE.
Each description in the table is further classified in regard
to these elements (i.e., cognitive, affective, behavioral, and
social) to indicate the broad use of the construct of engagement in the literature.
Engagement
Work and role engagement has been primarily studied in
psychology. Kahn (1990) was the first to apply the concept
of engagement to work. Describing the behavior of engaged employees, he suggests that employees vary in their
expression of selves in work roles. Those who perceive
more supportive conditions for authentic expression tend
to be engaged. However, Maslach, Schaufeli, and Leiter
define work engagement as persistent, positive affectivemotivational state of fulfillment (2001, p.417). Researchers
characterize engagement in various subfields of psychology as involving vigor (energy and mental resilience),
dedication (sense of significance, enthusiasm, inspiration,
Customer Engagement
From the Gallup CE11 metric (2001), the Economist Intelligence Unit report (2007), and the special issues of the Journal of Service Research and the Journal of Services Marketing
on CE in 2010, the concept has evolved among practitioners
as well as academics. A collection of definitions in Table1
suggests that there are differing conceptualizations of the
term customer engagement. Practitioners look at CE from
the perspective of the organization and define it as activities facilitating repeated interactions that strengthen the
emotional, psychological or physical investment a customer
has in a brand (Sedley 2010, p.7). But academics in information systems look at CE as the intensity of customer
participation with both representatives of the organization
and with other customers in a collaborative knowledge
exchange process (Wagner and Majchrzak 2007, p.20). A
more recent framework of CE in marketing segments existing customers based on their transactional relationship
with a brand (Bowden 2009). Bowden (2009) provided a
conceptual framework of CE that, although focusing only
on existing customers, suggests that customerbrand relationships and strategies for engaging customers might
differ based on whether the customers are first-time or
repeat purchasers.
Considerable conceptual and descriptive work on engagement across various disciplines exists. However, there are
gaps as to what engagement means to marketing and its
stakeholders. It is evident from the review of the literature
that no agreement exists as to the exact nature of engagement and its role in marketing. However, practitioners appear to relate it to building relationships with customers
through programs aimed as getting individuals involved
with and connected with their brand. Thus, next we address how CE can aid in filling the potential gaps in RM
research priorities.
Basis of Value
Interactions
Driven by organizations
Outcomes
Exchange-centric
MANAGERIAL PERSPECTIVE OF
CUSTOMER ENGAGEMENT
To understand the views of managers in regard to CE, we
conducted in-depth interviews with a series of executives.
The data collection and analysis procedures for this explo-
CUSTOMER-DRIVEN PERSPECTIVE OF
CUSTOMER ENGAGEMENT
In a second exploratory study aimed at consumers, we conducted a two-pronged study. First, the primary researcher
conducted two focus groups with senior undergraduate
Customer Initiated
Offerings Initiated
Activities Initiated
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF
CUSTOMER ENGAGEMENT
Before moving into how CE relates to other constructs,
based on our literature review and exploratory work, we
first define and delimit the nature of CE. CE is the intensity
of an individuals participation in and connection with
an organizations offerings or organizational activities,
which either the customer or the organization initiates.
The individuals may be current or potential customers. CE
may be manifested cognitively, affectively, behaviorally, or
socially. The cognitive and affective elements of CE incorporate the experiences and feelings of customers, and the
behavioral and social elements capture the participation by
current and potential customers, both within and outside
of the exchange situations. CE involves the connection that
individuals form with organizations, based on their experiences with the offerings and activities of the organization.
Potential or current customers build experience-based relationships through intense participation with the brand by
way of the unique experiences they have with the offerings
and activities of the organization.
Figure 1
Theoretical Model of Customer Engagement
Proposition 4: Increased value perceptions by the individual will be positively associated with his or her
(a)participation and (b)involvement with the focus of
engagement.
According to Morgan and Hunt, trust exists when one
party has confidence in an exchange partners reliability
and integrity (1994, p. 23). In the evolutionary model
of relational exchange, trust is important because it acts
as a relational governance mechanism assuring partner
reciprocity and nonopportunistic behavior (Ganesan
1994; Morgan and Hunt 1994). Research also indicates
that positive interactions in extra-exchange relationship
interactions contribute to trust in the exchange relationship (Ganesan 1994; Lambe, Spekman, and Hunt 2000;
Parkhe 1993). Dove successfully engages customers (or
potential customers) by inviting them to participate in its
campaign for real beauty, just as American Express builds
customer trust through its Members Project. Doves campaign aims to help in building the self-esteem of teenage
girls. Similarly, American Express, through its Members
Project, donates millions of dollars to projects voted on
by potential or current customers. When firms engage
customers, there is an opportunity for interactions that,
if satisf ying, can lead to trust. Thus, higher engagement
should produce more trust in the relationships because
This research provides an initial model of CE, articulating important antecedents and consequences and clearly
differenatiating it from many of these concepts, which are
sometimes confused with CE itself.
RESEARCH CONTRIBUTIONS
This research attempts to provide a comprehensive understanding of CE. We make several important contributions
by combining the existing literature on engagement with
a set of executives views of engagement, as well as a group
of customers perceptions of what engages them. We focus
on CE from the customers perspective to give organizations a better understanding of what engages customers. For
example, our matrix provides an initial classification of the
foci of engagement in marketing: provider versus customer
initiated and offer versus activity oriented. Our analysis
of the foci of engagement further suggests that customers
engage not only with high-involvement offerings but also
low-involvement offerings, as well as activities that either
providers or customers initiate.
Engagement strategies by organizations are an extension of developing relationships with customers (both
current and potential). The initial conceptualization of
RM and the recent work, ideas, and writings of Prahalad
and Ramaswamy (2000, 2002, 2003, 2004) and Vargo and
Lusch (2004, 2008) imply that the domain of RM should
encompass a focus beyond purchase. Our conceptualization of CE contributes to the area by reemphasizing the
importance of broadly understanding individuals interactions and connections with the brand or product and with
each other relative to the brand, regardless of whether they
are purchasing or even considering purchasing the brand.
The cognitive and emotional element of CE incorporates
experiences and feelings of individuals, irrespective of the
exchange; and the behavioral and social elements capture
the participation by individuals with the brand or product
both within and outside of the exchange situations. This
is important because in the evolving marketing paradigm,
relationships are not just between buyers and sellers, but
between any combination of (and among) prospects, potentials, society, buyers, and sellers.
MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS
LIMITATIONS AND
FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS
Our research is, of course, not free of limitations, which
introduce future research options. In this study, we use
convenience and snowball samples to find executives and
individuals willing to talk to us. Since our research is aimed
at the development of an initial conceptualization of engagement and its related constructs, rather than establishing
the strength or extent of this research area, convenience
sampling is reasonable at this point (Ferber 1977). However,
future research should explore the degree to which these
results and propositions are reasonable and generalizable
with a larger probability sample.
In addition, marketers need to consider how to assess
the value of engaging noncustomers or future customers.
For example, how successful are the efforts of Microsoft
or Apple at providing computers to schools? Do programs
such as these generate engagement, positive attitudes, and
potential brand purchases later in life? What is the return on
investment on these programs? Can these programs be seen
as manipulative and thus backfire? If so, how? How can researchers adequately measure these goodwill efforts? Should
individuals be contacted at some interval after the engagement to ascertain attitudes or change in attitudes? When do
potential customers see the engagement as high-handed or
too blatant? How much should companies push the products
and accessories on these would-be customers for trial usage?
When do customers see the programs, such as the Clinique
clinics, as simply ways to make them feel obligated to make
a purchase? What are the negative connotations involved
and how can marketers avoid these connotations?
In order to enable practitioners to make full use of the
construct and academics to continue exploring the construct, future research should develop a CE scale and test
its applicability across contexts.
Marketing strategies focused on engaging the individual,
as well as the surveys used to measure the effectiveness of
these strategies, tend to focus on engagement from the perspective of organizations, not customers. Future research
should focus on understanding the elements of CE to help
practitioners build customer-focused engagement strategies
from a customer perspective. Research should ascertain
which dimensions are most effective with which customer
bases. In addition, how can firms use customer-initiated
programs (such as customer blogs) effectively and profit-
REFERENCES
Anderson, Eugene W. (1998), Customer Satisfaction and Word of
Mouth, Journal of Service Research, 1 (1), 517.
Appelbaum, Alec (2001), The Constant Customer, Gallup Management Journal, June 17 (available at http://gmj.gallup.com/
content/745/Constant-Customer.aspx).
Ashby, Alicia (2009), 10% of Build-A-Bear Store Customers
Influenced by Virtual World, Engage Digital, February 19
(available at www.engagedigital.com/blog/2009/02/19/10-ofbuildabear-store-customers-influenced-by-virtual-world/).
Avery, Derek R., Patrick F. McKay, and David C. Wilson (2007),
Engaging the Aging Workforce: The Relationship Between
Perceived Age Similarity, Satisfaction with Coworkers, and
Employee Engagement, Journal of Applied Psychology, 92
(6), 15421556.
Bagozzi, Richard P. (1995), Reflections on Relationship Marketing
in Consumer Markets, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, 23 (4), 272277.
, and Utpal M. Dholakia (2006), Antecedents and Purchase
Consequences of Customer Participation in Small Group
Brand Communities, International Journal of Research in
Marketing, 23 (1), 4561.
Bakker, Arnold B., Jari J. Hakanen, Evangelia Demerouti, and
Despoina Xanthopoulou (2007), Job Resources Boost Work
Engagement, Particularly When Job Demands Are High,
Journal of Educational Psychology, 99 (2), 274284.
Band, William, and John Guaspari (2003), Creating the CustomerEngaged Organization, Marketing Management Journal, 12
(4), 3439.
Bansal, Harvir S., P. Gregory Irving, and Shirley F. Taylor (2004),
A Three-Component Model of Customer Commitment to
Service Providers, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32 (3), 234250.
Beatty, Sharon E., and Scott M. Smith (1987), External Search
Effort: An Investigation Across Several Product Categories,
Journal of Consumer Research, 14 (1), 8395.
Bendapudi, Neeli, and Leonard L. Berry (1997), Customers
Motivations for Maintaining Relationships with Service
Providers, Journal of Retailing, 73 (1), 1537.
Berry, Leonard L. (1983), Relationship Marketing, in Emerging
Perspectives on Services Marketing, Leonard L. Berry, G.Lynn
Shostack, and Gregory Upah, eds., Chicago: American Marketing Association, 2528.
, and A. Parasuraman (1991), Marketing Services, New York:
Free Press.
Bone, Paula F. (1995), Word-of-Mouth Effects on Short-Term and
Long-Term Product Judgments, Journal of Business Research,
32 (3), 213223.
Bowden, Jana Lay-Hwa (2009), The Process of Customer Engagement: A Conceptual Framework, Journal of Marketing Theory
and Practice, 17 (1), 6374.
Prahalad, C.K. (2004), The Cocreation of Value, Journal of Marketing, 68 (January), 23.
, and Venkatram Ramaswamy (2000), Co-Opting Customer
Competence, Harvard Business Review, 78 (1), 7988.
, and (2002), The Co-Creation Connection, Strategy
and Business, 27 (2), 5061.
, and (2003), The New Frontier of Experience Innovation, MIT Sloan Management Review, 44 (4), 1218.
, and (2004), Co-Creation Experiences: The Next Practice in Value Creation, Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18
(3), 514.
Preston, Rob ( 2007), Engage with Customers, Dont Just Humor
Them, InformationWeek, 1127 (February 26), 60.
Resnick, Evan (2001), Defining Engagement, Journal of International Affairs, 54 (2), 551566.
Richins, Marsha L., and Peter H. Bloch (1986), After the New
Wears Off: The Temporal Context of Product Involvement,
Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (2), 280285.
Rieger, Tom, and Craig Kamins (2006), Are You Failing to Engage? Gallup Management Journal, November 9 (available at
http://gmj.gallup.com/content/25345/failing-engage.aspx).
Roberts, Darryl R., and Thomas O. Davenport (2002), Job Engagement: Why Its Important and How to Improve It, Employment Relations Today, 29 (3), 2129.
Robertson, Thomas S. (1976), Low-Commitment Consumer Behavior, Journal of Advertising Research, 16 (April), 1924.
Rothbard, Nancy P. (2001), Enriching or Depleting? The Dynamics of Engagement in Work and Family Roles, Administrative
Science Quarterly, 46 (4), 655684.
Saks, Alan M. (2006), Antecedents and Consequences of Employee Engagement, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21
(7), 600619.
Sawhney, Mohanbir, Gianmario Verona, and Emanuela Prandelli
(2005), Collaborating to Create: The Internet as a Platform
for Customer Engagement in Product Innovation, Journal
of Interactive Marketing, 19 (4), 517.
Schau, Hope Jensen, Albert M. Muiz, Jr., and Eric J. Arnould
(2009), How Brand Community Practices Create Value,
Journal of Marketing, 73 (5), 3051.
Schaufeli, Wilmar B., Isabel M. Martinez., Alexandra M. Pinto,
Marisa Salanova, and Arnold B. Bakker (2002), Burnout and
Engagement in University Students: A Cross-National Study,
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33 (5), 464481.
Sedley, Richard (2010), 4th Annual Online Customer Engagement
Report 2010 (available at http://issuu.com/richardsedley/
docs/customer-engagement-report2010/).
Sheth, Jagdish N., Bruce I. Newman, and Barbara L. Gross (1991),
Why We Buy What We Buy: A Theory of Consumption
Values, Journal of Business Research, 22 (2), 159170.
Smith, Stephen L.J., and Geoffrey C. Godbey (1991), Leisure,
Recreation and Tourism, Annals of Tourism Research, 18
(3), 85100.
Trent, Ashley (2008), Get the Party Started, Marketing News
(October 1), 22 (available at https://docs.google.com/viewer
?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.marketingpower.com%2F
Calendar%2FDocuments%2F2009%2FHot%2520Topics
%25202009%2F22_MN%252010%252001%252008%2520kb
.pdf).
van Doorn, Jenny, Katherine N. Lemon, Vikas Mittal, Stephan
Nass, Doren Pick, Peter Pirner, and Peter C. Verhoef (2010),
Customer Engagement Behavior: Theoretical Foundations
Appendix
Summary Review of Relevant Engagement Literature
Authors (Year) Study
Definition of Engagement
(Element Emphasized)
Main Contributions
Academic LiteratureMarketing
Bowden (2009)
Whelan and Wohlfeil (2006)
McEwen (2004)
Winsor (2004)
(Behavioral)
Behavioral manifestations with a brand or
firm focus, beyond purchase, resulting from
motivational drives. (Behavioral)
Active interactions of a customer with a firm, with
prospects and with other customers, whether
they are transactional or non-transactional in
nature (p.297). (Behavioral)
(Behavioral)
None
None
None
Academic LiteraturePsychology
Bakker et al. (2007)
Gravenkemper (2007)
None
None
Kahn (1990)
Definition of Engagement
(Element Emphasized)
Main Contributions
Academic LiteratureManagement
Noland and Phillips (2010)
Ghuneim (2008)
Definition of Engagement
(Element Emphasized)
Main Contributions
Discusses four themes: interaction patterns,
knowledge creation, customer motivation, and
virtual communitynew product development
team integration.
Increasing job engagement makes economic sense.
None
Practitioner Literature
Narayen (2007)
Haven (2007)
Sedley (2010)
Preston (2007)
Heath (2007)
Campanelli (2007)
Pasikoff (2006)
Harris (2006)
Appelbaum (2001)
PeopleMetrics (www.peoplemetrics.com)
Wikipedia
Main Contributions
Definition of Engagement
(Element Emphasized)
Other Disciplines
Lutz, Guthrie, and Davis (2006)
Fredericks, Blumenfeld, and Paris
(2004)
Resnick (2001)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.