Current Satisfaction

The ability to continue an ongoing relationship, to retain the customer, is generally believed to be a result of customer satisfaction in a business-to-customer context (Buttle, 1997, p.143). In contrast, perhaps unsurprisingly, in the business-to-business context, satisfaction is not antecedent that Morgan and Hunt (1994a) included in their original model. However Gruen (1995), when adapting the Commitment Trust Theory model to the Business to Customer context was clear, satisfaction is not only an important antecedent, it is also one which directly impacts on both Commitment and Trust.

Satisfaction has many definitions in the literature (Egan, 2008, p.127) however satisfaction as an “evaluation of emotion” (Hunt, 1977, p.160) perhaps best summarises the meaning used in this study. In entertainment

products in particular, satisfaction is a key driver of customer retention (Dick and Basu, 1994; Vogel, 2007) with the term product elicited positive affect (or just positive effect) used to describe the feelings of happiness, fun, relaxation that the product brings to the user.

It is clear when examining an ongoing entertainment subscriptions relationship that satisfaction is a key variable (Bolton and Lemon, 1999;

Gustafsson et al., 2005) which exhibits a feedback loop with itself as a forthcoming decision antecedent (Oliver, 1997). The customer, on a month-by-month basis evaluates the satisfaction they have derived from his previous month’s expenditure and evaluates that forthcoming expenditure.

In the MMO environment there have been many attempts by academics to classify the drivers of satisfaction. Bartle’s (2003) four player types and Yee’s (2006) taxonomy of eleven motivations are widely used as classifications, and are external, observation based listings of characteristics that customers may display. Within these classification structures however, measurement problems exist. The first issue with these classifications is that customers shift characteristics in a fluid, imprecise way, which in the Bartle (2003) analysis is built into the classification model. The second is that as academic, sociological classifications, these differing motivational categories are both unknown to the majority of customers, and the act of educating the customers to these categories (or asking them to describe themselves as a member of one of the other) may significantly alter the outcomes of any testing through the psychological issue of reactance. Lastly, perceived (or espoused) customer motivations and actual motivations may be significantly different. As Yee (2006) notes a customer may even be embarrassed to admit some reasons to himself. For example, examining Yee’s (2006) classifications, the category of “Escapism—Using the online environment to avoid thinking about real life problems” (p.774) may be something the customer may not wish to face or discuss.

Consequently, as play motivations are unknown, difficult to measure and a

can be known and perceived by the customer, it would be expected that satisfaction is a useful overall surrogate measure for the outcome of play motivation, whatever that motivation actually is. While an understanding of the drivers of satisfaction is potentially interesting, from the business perspective of re-subscription it is the output of satisfaction, the positive elicited affect that the product brings, which is important. This type of approach to defining satisfaction is seen by Bloemer and Odekerken-Schroder (2002) as an outcome-type definition as categorised by Oliver (1989), as opposed to an expectancy definition. This type of outcome-type designation according to Bloemer and Odekerken-Schroder (2002) defines satisfaction in terms of a “…state of fulfilment, which is connected to reinforcement and arousal.” (p.70), concluding that this type of perspective takes “contentment, pleasure, satisfaction-as-relief, satisfaction-as-novelty and satisfaction-as-surprise” (p.70).

Current Satisfaction is…a pleasurable level of consumption related fulfilment.

Box 12: Operational Definition of Current Satisfaction

In line with the definitions of satisfaction proposed by Oliver (1997, p.13) and assumed by Bloemer and Odekerken-Schroder (2002, p.70) this study defines Satisfaction in terms of its consumption related component, its pleasurable element and its fulfilment element. The definition is a “post-consumption evaluation” (Bloemer and Odekerken-Schroder, 2002, p.70) of the happiness and fun an MMO customer gains from the consumption activities with both directly (playing) and indirectly (reading about etc.) of their entertainment product.

3.3.7 Commitment

In this study the nature of the relationship has been defined as a membership (Gruen, 1995). Commitment is the bond between the individual and the MMO product producing company, with this bond a link between the product and the customer, which the customer feels is worth the effort to maintain (Moorman et al., 1992; Morgan and Hunt, 1994a). Importantly,

Commitment is seen as a behavioural output which can maintain the relationship when both Trust and Satisfaction either do not function or fail (Moorman et al., 1992; Gruen, 1995). A dissatisfied MMO player may even continue paying his subscription and thus maintain the relationship, however that dissatisfaction would be expected to affect the commitment over time,

“…commitment can operate independently of satisfaction and trust, it is important to note here that the constructs of satisfaction and trust also affect commitment” (Gruen, 1995, p.454). Gruen (1995) specifically links high levels of commitment to the future intentions of the customer. The more committed the customer, the more likely he is to remain as customer. Trust and Satisfaction affect the Relationship Commitment, but do not themselves affect the propensity to leave.

MMO games have unique methods of maintaining and increasing the level of commitment through the use of the game mechanics, content patches and expansion releases (Bainbridge, 2009). Analysing MMO gameplay habits Ducheneaut et al. (2006a) studied more than 220,000 avatars over eight months and found “commitment spikes” (p.287) and troughs at various points. In particular they link the process of commitment spikes to behavioural conditioning principles found within the mechanics of the game itself. For example they found:

…Level 39 characters were played on average 1,032.43 minutes (N = 510, SD = 1,033.55), whereas Level 40 characters were played on average 774.62 minutes (N = 952, SD = 877.27) over the 1-week period (Ducheneaut et al., 2006a, p.287)

In the incarnation of the World of Warcraft game at the time of their data collection (circa November 2004) getting to level 40 gave a customer large in-game bonuses. Thus as Ducheneaut et al. (2006a) found, the average customer’s time committed spiked to 17.2 hours at level 39 and returned to an average 12.9 hours. Indeed in MMO games these “..incentives and rewards are distributed to maximize player commitment” (Ducheneaut et al., 2006a, p.293) with particular built-in milestones which mean that to attain the incentives or rewards the player must spend more time playing. Furthermore,

as an entertainment game product which is updated constantly with new content, customers experience this incentive and reward structure as a constant endless game feature. One of the main differences between a normal single player game and an MMO is that you can finish a normal computer game; an MMO is never-ending. The game designers keep up the

“commitment spikes” (Ducheneaut et al., 2006a, p.287) by updating the game regularly with new content for the customers to beat, and new rewards and incentives, thus creating a constant flow of spikes and troughs. In an MMO game the customer will always have one more mountain to climb, one more carrot to try for (Bainbridge, 2009).

Thus, to return to Gruen’s (1995) definition of Commitment being able to maintain the relationship to continue when both satisfaction and trust failed, this links well to the MMO context. Specifically, an MMO emotionally conditions the behaviour of a customer (Ducheneaut et al., 2006a) to accept the highs and lows of satisfaction, of attainment and wanting to attain.

Consequently, Moorman et al.’s (1992, p. 316) emotionally rooted definition of Commitment, used by both Morgan and Hunt (1994a) in the business-to-business context and Gruen (1995) in the business-to-business-to-customer one is applicable.

Commitment is… an enduring desire to maintain a valued relationship.

Box 13: Operational Definition of Commitment

The focus of Moorman et al.’s (1992) definition is on an emotional component: desire. Desire (as an emotion) doesn’t have to make sense, and indeed, can be illogical. Desire can ignore satisfaction and trust and be based on just its own merits. Likewise the “value” (Moorman et al., 1992, p.

316) of the valued relationship is perceptual and emotional with the value being self evaluated by the relationship partner.

Enduring is also a key word in the definition, an enduring commitment is an on-going one which can sustain despite challenges and setbacks. As De Wulf et al. (2001) describe, the endurance concept in combination with

desire “…implies the presence and consistency over time of both the desire to continue a relationship and the willingness to make efforts directed at sustaining this relationship.” (p.37).

3.3.8 Trust

Commitment Trust Theory examinations of Trust in virtual communities (Wu et al., 2009, p.6) have specifically separated the benevolence aspect of trust from the concepts of confidence or expectancy in product gratification. In a study of 381 respondents in an online survey Wu et al. (2009) found clear statistical evidence of the ability to discriminate benevolence trust and product expectancy based constructs by respondents. This is reinforced by McKnight and Chervany’s (2002) typology of e-commerce based Trust which clearly separates the two trusting beliefs.

In line with these findings this study interprets Trust as a multi-dimensional construct that has two key dimensions; expectancy in product satisfaction based on past experience, and Trust in service provider benevolence (Anderson and Weitz, 1992; Ganesan, 1994; Kumar et al., 1995; Ganeson and Hess, 1997; McKnight and Chervany, 2002). In consumer markets the belief that the service provider is acting in the best interests of the customer is an important perceived part of the service interaction (Ball et al., 2004;

2006). This is separate though from actual performance of the service (McKnight and Chervany, 2002).

Trust can be thought of as having two components, performance or credibility trust and benevolence trust (Ball et al., 2006, p.392)

In a business-to-business relationship, and in Morgan and Hunt’s (1994b) conceptualisation of Trust for partnerships, in the automobile tyre industry, both benevolence and credibility were used in the definition of Trust. As Gruen (1995) makes clear though, business-to-customer relationships are very different. An important part of Trust is risk, and the ability to mitigate the unknown with the expectancy and confidence Trust brings (Gruen, 1995, p.445). In the business-to-customer realm though, the risks are much smaller

on the part of the customer. The financial investment is smaller, the importance and dependence on the relationship is less significant, an entertainment MMO product failing may be annoying but not life-threatening, and in mass market situations the interaction with the company is very far removed (Gruen, 1995, p.451).

Benevolence Trust in a mass market is communicated by artefacts such as company generated items like warranties and societal generated conditions such as consumer protection laws. As Ball et al. (2004; 2006) explain, these artefacts of benevolence Trust are further reinforced by communication from the company, the image of concern for customers that a company either projects or manages to garner through a reputation and importantly, how it handles complaints and other critical events.

These mechanisms of reinforcement and the artefacts themselves are substantially different from how expectancy of satisfaction occurs for the customer. In gratification expectancy a customer experiences the product and the performance of the product. In an MMO this experience is on a monthly basis with a continuous series of evaluation points for the customer where they will reflect on the performance. Benevolence is a perception though, and indeed for the majority of mass market customers who have products which experience no issues at all, that perception of benevolence trust may never be tested. As such the customers’ basis of evaluating the benevolence Trust they hold in a products producers is a completely different basis than their assessment of performance credibility.

Benevolence Trust is a “critical” (Ball et al., 2006, p.392) part of generating loyalty and commitment in the business-to-customer market. As Lindgreen (2001) found, perceptions of benevolence trust by customers is seen as a fundamental building block of customer retention. A relationship in which the customer perceives trust is one the customer holds in high esteem, with the trust “…cementing the bond between customer and company.” (Harrison, 2003, p.209)

Thus benevolence Trust contributes towards the relationship quality which together with Commitment directly affects customer retention (Lindgreen, 2001, p.60). This study defines the Trust construct as benevolence Trust using Ganesan and Hess’s (1997, p.440) designation, this definition is based on the perception of benevolent attitudes or intentions on the part of one of the partners.

Trust is… based on the qualities, intentions, and characteristics attributed to the focal partner that demonstrate a genuine concern and care for the partner.

Box 14: Operational Definition of Trust

The definition encompasses perceived care and concern about the on-going relationship, and in an MMO context covers all parts of the customer’s view of the MMO company’s benevolence towards him, the customer. As a perceptual definition taken from the customer’s viewpoint, it is not a dyadic perception and may differ from actual reality. However the reality of the levels of benevolence isn’t important to this study as perfect information isn’t available to the customer at the re-subscription decision point; his perception is.