Abstract
Background: Growth in the ride-hailing sector has contributed to intense competition among Transportation Network Companies (TNCs), with many new platforms entering the market and TNC brands aiming to achieve market dominance. In this turbulent business environment, advocacy presents a viable tool for attracting customers and maintaining market share.
Aim: This research provides insight into the interrelationships between affective commitment, service quality, and perceived justice, their influence on advocacy in the ride-hailing sector, and the extent to which two viable generational cohorts (baby boomers and Generation Y), guided by different life perspectives, moderate the magnitude of the relationships established.
Setting: A self-administered survey was conducted among ride-hailing customers of a specific TNC brand in South Africa.
Method: The survey included previously validated measurement scales to assess the constructs of the study. The final sample comprised 150 baby boomers and 309 Generation Y individuals. Data analysis included multi-group structural equation modelling, bootstrapping, and the Wald test.
Results: Affective commitment positively influences perceived justice and service quality, with customer advocacy intention as the end result. Generational cohorts moderated most of the direct effects and the indirect effect between perceived justice and customer advocacy intention through service quality.
Conclusion: Overall, the study contributes to the conversation regarding affective states influencing cognition and provides a fresh perspective on the affect-cognition-behaviour relationship in a ride-hailing service context.
Contribution: The study provides a fresh perspective on the affect-cognition-behaviour relationship within a ride-hailing service context and advances knowledge of customer advocacy in relation to TNC brands.
Keywords: advocacy; customer citizenship; generational cohort; ride-hailing; sharing economy.
Introduction and background
The days of the sharing economy being considered a niche market have long passed, as the sharing economy has become a profitable and budding market, attracting large investments and a multitude of customers (Möhlmann 2015:193). Since their rapid growth in popularity following the 2008 financial crisis (Kuswanto et al. 2020:76), the sharing economy and platform business models have become part of many consumers’ daily existence in terms of accommodation-, entertainment- and transportation-related services (Lee et al. 2018:829; Wang et al. 2022:197). Of particular interest to this study are Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) and their ride-hailing platform business models. Typically, TNCs use smartphone application platforms to link drivers and customers requiring ride-hailing services. Drivers (fellow community members) cooperating with TNCs transfer customers (service recipients), using their own cars, receive payment by card or in cash, as is the case in some developing countries (Wadud 2020).
The long-term survival of TNC brands is important. In addition to stimulating economic development (Gao, Wang & Yao 2022), these companies may contribute to reducing road traffic and subsequently car pollution (Wang et al. 2022:198). Customers sharing rides may also benefit from greater flexibility, compared to public alternatives (Guan et al. 2022), and save on travel expenses. Nevertheless, in recent years, growth in the ride-hailing sector has contributed to intense competition among TNCs, with many new platforms entering the market and TNC brands aiming to achieve market dominance (Guo, Li & Zeng 2019:1044). Moreover, switching between ride-hailing companies does not require much effort, which poses a threat to the sustainability of TNC brands (Cohen, Fiszer & Kim 2021:2432).
In this turbulent business environment, advocacy presents a viable tool for attracting customers and maintaining market share. Advocacy behaviours are perceived by customers as more credible than commercial media, may enhance a firm’s reputation, and contribute to growth in market share (Iyer, Yazdanparast & Strutton 2017:647; Yi & Gong 2013:1280). Therefore, customers viewing the TNC brand positively, sharing their thoughts with other customers (fellow service recipients), and recommending the service of the TNC brand to them, may contribute to more customers hailing rides from the TNC brand and remaining loyal to it.
Of further interest is that particularly strong support has been found for the notion that customers experiencing service quality and relationship quality benefits, such as affective commitment, may be motivated to engage in favourable advocacy behaviours (Ahmadi 2019:51; Bendapudi & Berry 1997; De Matos & Rossi 2008:581; Nguyen-Phuoc et al. 2020:96; Ok et al. 2020:132; Yavas, Benkenstein & Stuhldreier 2004:144–145). Recent research in the ride-hailing industry has further elucidated the matter by indicating that affective commitment towards the TNC brand may influence advocacy behaviours, but is more likely to be fully mediated by service quality in a ride-hailing context. The authors claimed that, supported by the defensive motivation theory (Chen, Duckworth & Chaiken 1999), ride-hailing customers’ strong emotional bonds with the TNC brand may favourably affect their judgements of the service provided, which could stimulate further advocacy behaviours (Van Tonder & Petzer 2021).
The perspective of affective states influencing cognition also seems to be acknowledged within the broader research domain. For example, according to Kühn and Petzer (2018:262), the ‘affect-cognition link’ denotes a relationship between customers’ affective states and the assessment of their surroundings. Clore and Schnall (2005:439) affirmed that affective states may impact attitude formation. Additionally, in her widely cited experimental research, Edwards (1990:203) acknowledged the possibility that cognition may follow affect. However, still absent from the affect-cognition-behaviour relationship identified in the ride-hailing service context, is an understanding of the role of customers’ perceptions of perceived service justice received. Along with investigations of service quality, it seems necessary to account for the influencing effect of customers’ perceived justice (service fairness) experienced from the TNC brand. Fundamentally, customers are keen on not only favourable, but also equitable treatment from their providers (Chen et al. 2012:400). Subsequently, their reactions to services are dependent on judgements of both service quality (favourableness) and perceived justice experienced (Carr 2007:108). Previous research further denotes that perceived justice may positively influence customer satisfaction levels and behavioural intentions of loyalty towards the service provider, such as advocacy (Carr 2007:115; Chi, Wen & Ouyang 2020:1029) and service quality (Kwortnik & Han 2011). Moreover, considering the premises of the defensive motivation theory (Chen et al. 1999) and other scholarly findings in the field (Clore & Schnall 2005:439; Edwards 1990:203; Kühn & Petzer 2018:262; Van Tonder & Petzer 2021), it is plausible that perceived justice experienced may similarly be influenced by customers’ strong emotional bonds with the TNC brand.
A further related concern is the extent to which the potential interplay between affective commitment, service quality, and perceived justice motivates the baby boomer (born between 1943 and 1970) and the Generation Y (born between 1980 and 2000) cohorts to become involved in the promotional activities of TNC brands in the sharing economy. These cohorts were significant to this study, given that they appeared to have a vested interest in ride-hailing services. Ride-hailing services are beneficial to older adults who cannot drive anymore and may not want to rely on friends and family for transportation. It has also been noted that Generation Y consumers are less inclined to travel by private car and are open to alternative modes of transport, including ride-hailing services (Alemi et al. 2018:49, 60; Gurău 2012:103; Hole, Zhong & Schwartz 2010:88; Mitra, Bae & Ritchie 2019:700; Winter et al. 2020:5). However, the likelihood of the two cohorts to perform the role of a ‘marketing agent’ and advocate on behalf of the TNC brand, and the extent to which their emotions and service perceptions may stimulate these behaviours, is still poorly understood. Extant literature denotes that older customers may be more easily satisfied and more faithful towards their service provider (Trabelsi-Zoghlami, Berraies & Yahia 2020:1642). Generation Y consumers seem to be more doubtful, expecting high levels of service (Kueh & Voon 2007:656; Valentine & Powers 2013:598). Further investigation of the above matters would allow for greater understanding of the interrelationships between affective commitment, service quality, and perceived justice influencing advocacy behaviours of valuable baby boomers and Generation Y cohorts, and thus the extent to which they may act as marketing agents for the TNC brand.
Against this background, the objective of the current research was to explore the relationships between affective commitment, service quality, and perceived justice, their influence on customer advocacy intentions, and the extent to which the generational cohorts (i.e. baby boomers and Generation Y) moderate the magnitude of the relationships established. Subsequently, this research makes three important contributions to marketing and quality literature. Firstly, the study contributes to the conversation regarding affective states influencing cognition (perceived justice and service quality) and provides a fresh perspective of the affect-cognition-behaviour relationship within a ride-hailing service context. Secondly, the study advances knowledge of customer advocacy in relation to TNC brands. The proposed model provides a more comprehensive perspective of the extent to which customers’ overall service perceptions, as balanced by service quality and perceived justice, may impact advocacy in the sharing economy, as well as the mediating role that service quality and the moderating role that generational cohorts may play in influencing these behaviours. Third, the proposed model paves the way for further research on generational cohorts’ potential to perform a ‘marketing agent’ role in the sharing economy and to aid TNC brands in managing a competitive advantage amidst fierce competition.
A theoretical framework is presented next, providing more insight into perceived justice, affective commitment, service quality, and customer advocacy, as well as the theories grounding these constructs. Moreover, the hypotheses of the study are formulated for empirical testing. Subsequent to an outline of the research methodology, the research findings are addressed. Thereafter, theoretical and practical implications are highlighted and guidelines are provided for further research on this topic.
Theoretical framework
Customer citizenship and advocacy behaviour
Advocacy is perceived as a symbol of customer loyalty and a dimension of customer citizenship behaviour that is rooted in the social exchange theory (Yi & Gong 2013:1280). The principles of customer citizenship behaviour evolved from the theory of organisational citizenship behaviour (Choi & Lotz 2016:540; Fowler 2013:1–2). It is argued that customers could, similarly to full-time employees of a firm, voluntarily engage in citizenship behaviours that may benefit the firm to reciprocate the favourable treatment received (Blau 1964; Deckop, Cirka & Andersson 2003:104; Fowler 2013:1, 5; Kim & Choi 2016:387). Multiple studies have been undertaken to understand the factors that influence customers’ citizenship behaviours (Gong & Yi 2021:173–175). Moreover, several dimensions of customer citizenship behaviours have been previously identified that may benefit the firm, including customers helping other customers, customers giving feedback to the firm, and advocacy behaviours (Yi & Gong 2013).
Advocacy is perceived as the positive references that customers provide about service providers (Fullerton 2003:339). Customers engage in advocacy voluntarily and out of obligation to be good to the firm that benefitted them (Blau 1964; Kim & Choi 2016:387). Advocacy could assist in promoting the service provider to the advocating customer’s friends, family, and other contacts, including social media contacts (Arguello, Monferrer Tirado & Estrada Guillén 2020:192). In a sharing economy context, advocacy behaviours additionally involve customers writing positive online reviews about the service provider on independent websites (Zhang 2019:657). In this study, customer advocacy intention was considered (and measured) as the extent to which customers would speak positive words about the TNC brand and recommend it to fellow customers (Yi & Gong 2013).
Service perceptions
As noted earlier, customers’ reactions to services are dependent on judgements of both service quality, as well as perceived justice experienced.
Service quality
Service quality is grounded in services marketing (Fullerton 2005:1373) and is well-studied across various contexts (Izogo & Ogba 2015; Lepmets et al. 2012; Narteh 2018; Sadeh 2017). Previous research has provided extensive insight into dimensions of service quality (Izogo 2017:21).
The most ground-breaking research was presented by Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1988:16), who defined perceived service quality as ‘a global judgment, or attitude, relating to the superiority of the service’. Five dimensions were proposed for assessing service quality: reliability, assurance, tangibles, empathy, and responsiveness (Izogo 2017:21; Parasuraman et al. 1988:29). Subsequently, many studies have pinpointed different operationalisations of service quality across varying countries and contexts (Izogo 2017:22; Prakash 2019). Most notable are the studies by Cronin and Taylor (1992) (five dimensions), Rust and Oliver (1994) (three dimensions), and Brady and Cronin (2001) (three dimensions). Additionally, Dagger, Sweeney and Johnson (2007:137) proposed that service quality should be examined at overall, dimensional, and sub-dimensional levels. The authors opine that the customers’ perceptions of service quality at a particular level influence perceptions on a subsequent level, and they measure service quality in their study on an overall level (Dagger et al. 2007:137).
This research was interested in an overall assessment of service quality that would aid in obtaining a holistic perspective of customers’ beliefs regarding the level of service experienced from the TNC brand. Subsequently, the scale developed by Dagger et al. (2007) for measuring overall service quality was selected for further investigation in the study. More specifically, the construct was assessed by measuring the degree to which the respondents found the TNC brand to be superior, excellent, impressive, and of a high standard (Dagger et al. 2007:137).
Perceived justice
The concept of justice or fairness is rooted in the equity theory (Adams 1965), and has been widely applied in various fields to explain social interaction between human beings and their interaction during transactions (Xing et al. 2020:198). In a social exchange relationship, perceived justice is experienced when the level of input provided is in balance with the outcome received (Adams 1965; Kau & Loh 2006:102). Accordingly, marketing scholars view service fairness (justice) as ‘customers’ perceptions of the degree of justice in the service firm’s behaviour’ (Seiders & Berry 1998:9), in relation to their social exchange relationship with the firm.
Typically, perceived justice is measured in three dimensions: interactional justice, procedural justice, and distributive justice (Mohd-Any et al. 2019:664). Interactional justice refers to the outcomes of the communication between the customer and the firm providing the service. Justice perceived, depends on the extent to which customers having social exchanges with the firm experience empathy, politeness, and courtesy (La & Choi 2019:208). Procedural justice is experienced when the affected customer’s complaint is dealt with by the service provider through means, procedures, and policies (Ortiz et al. 2017:439–440), and consumers perceive the procedures followed by the service provider to be fair (Aurier & Siadou-Martin 2007:452). Blodgett, Hill and Tax (1997:188) opine that distributive justice refers to the sense of justice the customer experiences based on the outcome received from the firm providing the service. Therefore, the customer believes the treatment received from the firm is fair (Voorhees & Brady 2005:194).
The current research was interested in customers’ overall perceptions of service justice received from the TNC brand. Perceived justice was accordingly measured as the extent to which customers believe they receive fair treatment from the TNC brand overall and can count on them to be fair (Choi & Lotz 2018:628).
The relationship between service perceptions and customer advocacy
Previous research has confirmed positive relationships between service quality and positive customer recommendations (Chenet, Dagger & O’Sullivan 2010:340). Zeithaml, Berry and Parasuraman (1996:34) explain that customers praising the firm is a sign of them bonding with the firm and that these behaviours may be triggered by customers experiencing service quality. Customers’ relationships with service providers are improved when service quality is experienced, which may contribute to them saying positive things about the service provider to friends and peers (Roy et al. 2018:295). Additionally, grounded in the principles of customers’ citizenship behaviour and the social exchange theory (Blau 1964), it is plausible that customers of ride-hailing services will voluntarily engage in customer advocacy behaviours to reciprocate favourable treatment of service quality experienced.
Moreover, prior research has established positive relationships between customer perceptions of perceived justice (service fairness) and customers’ positive recommendations of the firm (Choi, Lotz & Kim 2014:15; Roy et al. 2018). Grounded in the principles of customers’ citizenship behaviour and the social exchange theory (Blau 1964), it is plausible that customers of ride-hailing services may also voluntarily engage in customer advocacy behaviours to reciprocate favourable treatment of service justice experienced. As per Van Tonder and Petzer (2021:1272), service quality influences customer advocacy intention in the ride-hailing sector. Furthermore, a conceptual model proposed by Bai and Li (2021:225) indirectly links justice to helping behaviour in a study on strategic alliances, while Bizri and Hamieh (2020:705) and Jnaneswar and Ranjit (2022:5) proposed that justice directly impacts citizenship behaviour in an organisational context. Consequently, it was hypothesised that in the context of TNC brands:
H1: Service quality positively and significantly predicts customer advocacy intention.
H2: Perceived justice positively and significantly predicts customer advocacy intention.
The relationship between individual service perceptions
Perceived justice (service fairness) and service quality are described as ‘inseparable’ (Berry 1995; Chi et al. 2020:1033), with a positive relationship between perceived justice and service quality having been identified (Kwortnik & Han 2011). Consumers may reflect on fairness when evaluating overall service quality (Chen et al. 2012:405). When individuals or groups are not favoured above others, customers may perceive this approach of fairness as a sign of good service quality (Carr 2007; Giovanis, Athanasopoulou & Tsoukatos 2015:749). Xing et al. (2020:206) found that perceived justice influences service quality in a study of patients concerning doctor-patient interaction. Accordingly, it was further proposed that customers perceiving the service provided by the TNC brand as fair, will also conclude that good service quality was achieved. Hence, perceived justice may be a signal of good service quality. Accordingly, it was hypothesised that in the context of TNC brands:
H3: Perceived justice positively and significantly predicts service quality.
Affective commitment
Customer commitment is rooted in the relationship marketing theory. Dwyer, Schurr and Oh (1987:19) define commitment as an implied and overt undertaking between a buyer (customer) and a seller (service provider) to continue their business relationship. This view is echoed by other key scholars in the field. Moorman, Zaltman and Deshpande (1992:316) consider commitment to be the lasting aspiration to continue a relationship that is valuable to both parties concerned. Morgan and Hunt (1994:23) perceive commitment as ‘an exchange partner believing that an ongoing relationship with another is so important as to warrant maximum efforts at maintaining it’.
Fullerton (2003:334) noted that commitment is frequently operationalised as affective commitment by marketing scholars and is considered important when building long-term relationships with customers (Panchapakesan, Amin & Herjanto 2022:315). Someone who is attached to an organisation (e.g. employees and customers) can be considered affectively committed (Al Samman & Mohammed 2021:850). Customers can be considered to be affectively committed when they have an affinity towards the firm providing the service, regardless of the type of service being provided (Fullerton 2005:1375). Furthermore, a customer who is affectively committed to a service provider has the propensity to exhibit emotions towards the service provider (Izogo 2017:20–21). In the context of this study, affective commitment related to customers’ feeling of belonging and attachment to the TNC brand (Choi & Lotz 2018:628).
The relationship between affective commitment and service perceptions
It is possible that both customers’ views of service quality and perceived justice are born out of their affective commitment to the TNC brand. According to Chen et al. (1999) and the defensive motivation theory, consumers with a particular level of commitment towards an object could want to guard their current beliefs and the attitudes they have developed towards this object in instances where novel information may be discovered. Given this state of affairs, also described as their ‘defense motivation’, consumers committed to the TNC brand could employ cognitive processing that is selective in nature when they are exposed to information contrary to their beliefs and attitudes of the brand, irrespective of whether these indeed align with reality (Ahluwalia, Unnava & Burnkrant 2001:460; Chen et al. 1999:45; Van Tonder, De Beer & Kuyper 2020:549). Van Tonder and Petzer (2021:1272) also found that affective commitment influences service quality in the ride-hailing sector. Thus, it was hypothesised that in the context of TNC brands:
H4: Affective commitment positively and significantly predicts service quality.
H5: Affective commitment positively and significantly predicts perceived justice.
The mediating effect of service quality
Considering the possibility that customers’ perceptions of service quality come from their views of perceived justice (Kwortnik & Han 2011:323) and the service quality which customers experience may voluntarily advocate the brand to reward the firm for the high service standard (Blau 1964), it is likely that service quality could provide an indirect path to connect perceived justice and customer advocacy behaviours. Customers perceiving the service provided by the TNC brand as fair, subsequently believing the service received from the TNC brand is of a superior standard, may want to engage in behaviours that would be advantageous to the TNC brand in return, such as advocating it to other customers. Therefore, it was hypothesised that with respect to TNC brands:
H6: Perceived justice has a significant positive indirect effect on customer advocacy intention as mediated by service quality.
The moderating effect of generational cohort
According to Koksal (2019), the generational cohort theory first introduced by Karl Mannheim in 1952 is premised on the fact that individuals born during the same time period, and so morphing into adulthood simultaneously, are exposed to equivalent economic, social, political, and cultural experiences that result in similar preferences, behaviours, and values throughout their lifetimes. Several generations have been identified based upon this premise. In this section, the focus is on baby boomers and Generation Y, as these consumers are of interest in this study.
Although they have almost all retired (Arora & Dhole 2019), baby boomers have proven themselves as adept users of new technologies, since they have lived through changes in technology throughout their lives and are important mobile services users (Kumar & Lim 2008). According to Gardiner, Grace and King (2013), baby boomers are in an intermediate phase of their lives, as they are stepping back from formal employment to retirement and have children who are leaving or have already left the household. All of these changes impact their behaviour as consumers (Koksal 2019).
In contrast, Generation Y exhibits significant differences from earlier generations with respect to how the gender roles in the workplace and family are defined (Melancon, Forbes & Fugate 2015). As stated by Melancon et al. (2015), numerous millennials (i.e. Generation Y) have been raised in non-traditional households, with many experiencing their parents playing non-traditional roles. In addition, they have experienced women entering the workforce in roles traditionally reserved for males (Melancon et al. 2015). Generation Y consumers are technologically literate and have media knowledge as a result of growing up in technology-enabled environments; are willing to take risks; and are sociable, fun-loving, and carefree (Farris, Chong & Dunning 2002; Naim & Lenkla 2016).
Concerning the relationships proposed in this study, it is plausible that age may affect perceptions of services. Almutawa, Muenjohn and Zhang (2018:657) opined that customers’ differences impact service quality. It seems easier to please older customers who have a greater tendency to be loyal to a service provider (Trabelsi-Zoghlami et al. 2020:1642). In contrast, Generation Y has been described as having a ‘strong sense of fairness and ethics’ (Hernaus & Vokic 2014:619). This generation tends to be sceptical (Valentine & Powers 2013:598) and has high service standards (Kueh & Voon 2007:656). Members are also characterised by their willingness to complain when service failures occur (Soares et al. 2017). Therefore, compared to older baby boomers, Generation Y may be less likely to develop views of service quality as a result of perceived justice experienced. Additionally, being more sceptical, Generation Y consumers may be less motivated to advocate in favour of the TNC brand when experiencing perceived justice and quality service. Hence, it was hypothesised that with respect to TNC brands:
H7: Generational cohort moderates the direct effect of service quality on customer advocacy intention.
H8: Generational cohort moderates the direct effect of perceived justice on (a) customer advocacy intention and (b) service quality.
In view of the above, it was expected that the indirect effect of perceived justice on customer advocacy intention through service quality would be weaker among ride-hailing customers of the Generation Y cohort. Consequently, it was also hypothesised that:
H9: The indirect effect of perceived justice on customer advocacy intention through service quality is moderated by generational cohort.
Finally, it is plausible that the relationships between affective commitment and service perceptions may also vary from cohort to cohort. Besides having higher service expectations and being more sceptical, Generation Y customers tend to be less loyal to service providers than other cohorts and are more willing to revert to another service provider if dissatisfaction is experienced (Soares et al. 2017:523). Similar behaviour has been observed in the workplace, where Generation Y employees tend to be less committed than the older generation and are more willing to revert to another employer if their expectations have not been met (Rani & Samuel 2016:1702). Subsequently, it is plausible to argue that ride-hailing customers from the Generation Y cohort are less likely to judge the service of the TNC brand favourably when they are affectively committed to it. Given their tendency to be more sceptical and keep their options of an alternative service provider open, Generation Y customers are less likely to employ selective cognitive processing when being affectively committed and having to judge the service of the TNC brand (Ahluwalia et al. 2001:460; Chen et al. 1999:45; Van Tonder et al. 2020:549). Hence, the impact of affective commitment on perceived justice and service quality may be lower among Generation Y ride-hailing customers, considering that they tend to be less loyal to service providers (Soares et al. 2017:523). Thus, it was hypothesised that with respect to TNC brands:
H10: Generational cohort moderates the direct effect of affective commitment on (a) service quality and (b) perceived justice.
Figure 1 depicts the conceptual model of this study.
Research methodology
Questionnaire and measurements
A self-administered survey was conducted to obtain more insight into ride-hailing customers’ affective commitment to the TNC brand, their perceptions of the service provided, and their intentions to advocate the brand. The survey included four measurement scales that were validated previously to assess affective commitment and perceived justice (Choi & Lotz 2018), service quality (Dagger et al. 2007), and customer advocacy intention (Yi & Gong 2013). The statement measuring pride was excluded from the affective commitment scale, as it did not fit appropriately with the other scale items. Appendix 1 contains the items used to measure the constructs and also cites the authors from whom the abovementioned authors either adopted or adapted the scales used in their respective studies. The responses were captured on a seven-point Likert-type scale that assessed the level of agreement, ranging from 1 (‘strongly disagree’) to 7 (‘strongly agree’).
Sample procedure, data collection, and analysis
The population included ride-hailing customers of a specific TNC brand in South Africa. Participation criteria included individuals older than 18 years who had ordered a ride at least once during the last year using the TNC brand’s mobile app. Since a sample frame did not exist, trained fieldworkers handed surveys to qualifying respondents for completion in public places, such as shopping malls. The survey included three screening questions aligned to the definition of the target population. Fieldworkers were instructed to fill age and gender quotas, and employed purposive sampling. The respondents voluntarily participated in the study and did not receive any form of remuneration for completing the printed survey. The fieldwork was supervised by an accredited research agency in South Africa. Data were collected over 3 months in 2018.
Gender representation was almost equal among the final realised samples, which consisted of 150 baby boomers (49% male and 51% female) and 309 Generation Y respondents (50.8% male and 48.9% female). In each cohort, one respondent did not reveal their gender. Most of the respondents from the baby boomer cohort were older than 55 (60.7%). Almost two thirds of the Generation Y cohort were older than 20 (65.4%). In both cohorts, the majority of the respondents have been hailing rides from the TNC brand for at least 2 years (baby boomers: 60.4%; and Generation Y: 72.2%), book a ride with the TNC brand at least twice a month (baby boomers: 64.7%; and Generation: Y 83.2%), and reported their main reason for booking rides with the TNC brand as needing a transfer for social- and not work-related visits (baby boomers: 72%; and Generation Y: 78.6%). Overall, these findings demonstrate that the respondents have utilised the services of the TNC brand and were in a position to relate to their own experiences in completing the survey.
The results were analysed using Mplus version 8.4. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and multi-group structural equation modelling (SEM) using maximum likelihood estimation with robust standard errors and a mean- and variance-adjusted test statistic were applied to test the research hypotheses. The χ2 difference test, bootstrapping (95% confidence interval and 5000 replications), and the Wald test were employed to assess the extent to which generational cohorts moderate the direct and indirect effects between perceived justice and customer advocacy intention through service quality (Wang & Wang 2012:278).
Ethical considerations
Ethical clearance was obtained from the University of Pretoria’s Gordon Institute of Business Science (GIBS) Ethics Committee chaired by Prof Gavin Price (04 June 2018).
Results
Individual measurement model results
Following the procedure prescribed by Wang and Wang (2012), individual measurement models were assessed. Table 1 denotes that adequate CFA fit statistics were obtained for the individual measurement models based on the cohorts (Hair et al. 2014).
| TABLE 1: Confirmatory factor analysis fit statistics for individual measurement models based on the cohorts. |
As further denoted by Table 2 and Table 3, for each measurement model, all standardised factor loadings were more than 0.7 and statistically significant (p < 0.001), all average variance extracted (AVE) values exceeded 0.5, and all composite reliability (CR) values were larger than 0.7, thereby evidencing convergent validity and reliability (Hair et al. 2014).
| TABLE 2: Assessment of latent variables. |
| TABLE 3: Latent factor correlation matrix with average variance extracted values on the diagonal in brackets. |
No discriminant validity problems were identified either. As shown in Table 3, in all instances, the AVE values of the respective latent variables exceeded the shared variance among them (Fornell & Larcker 1981; Hair et al. 2014).
Common method bias assessment
Harman’s single-factor test (Podsakoff et al. 2003) was applied to assess common method bias. In both cohorts, the total variance explained by a single factor was less than 70% (baby boomers = 63.52%; Generation Y = 54.73%). Previous investigations in business research denoted that significant potential for common-method bias only exists in the event of the common method variance bordering 70% or higher (Fuller et al. 2016:3196). Accordingly, common method bias was not a concern in this study.
Measurement invariance and multi-group measurement model results
Table 4 presents the fit statistics of the measurement invariance test. With respect to all models examined, the χ2/df values never exceeded 5, the CFI and TLI values were not lower than 0.90, all RMSEA values met the 0.08 cut-off criteria, and all three p-values were more than 0.05 (Hair et al. 2014). Accordingly, evidence was provided of strong measurement invariance.
| TABLE 4: Measurement invariance fit statistics. |
The multi-group measurement model, based on the cohorts, also presented acceptable fit statistics: χ2 = 419.83; df = 190; χ2/df = 2.21; CFI = 0.97; TLI = 0.97; RMSEA = 0.073. The χ2 contribution was 171.17 for the baby boomer cohort and 248.66 for the Generation Y cohort. All standardised factor loadings were more than 0.7, statistically significant (p < 0.001), and ranged between 0.90 and 0.98 for the baby boomer cohort, as well as between 0.82 and 0.96 for the Generation Y cohort. Regarding both cohorts, all AVE values exceeded 0.5 and all CR values were larger than 0.7, thereby evidencing convergent validity and reliability (Hair et al. 2014). In all instances, the AVE values of the respective latent variables exceeded the shared variance among them, subsequently evidencing discriminant validity (Fornell & Larcker 1981; Hair et al. 2014).
Multi-group structural equation modelling results
Adequate fit indices were obtained for the multi-group SEM model, as depicted in Figure 1: χ2 = 247.28; df = 192; χ2/df = 1.29; CFI = 0.98; TLI = 0.98; RMSEA = 0.035. The χ2 contribution for the baby boomer cohort was 100.83, and 146.45 for the Generation Y cohort.
A competing model was additionally assessed. Supported by the work of Choi and Lotz (2018), and Engizek and Yasin (2017), the effect of perceived justice and service quality on affective commitment with customer advocacy intention was measured. The impact of perceived justice on service quality remained intact. Compared to the initial model, the competing model presented inferior model fit statistics: χ2 = 310.34; df = 194; χ2/df = 1.60; CFI = 0.96; TLI = 0.96; RMSEA = 0.051. Subsequently, the initial model was retained for further investigation.
Table 5 further evidences that all standardised regression weights of the multi-group SEM model depicted in Figure 1, were positive and significant (p < 0.001), except for the relationship between perceived justice and customer advocacy intention in the baby boomer cohort. Therefore, H1 and H3 to H5 were supported in both cohorts, and H2 was supported in the Generation Y cohort (Hair et al. 2014).
| TABLE 5: Multi-group structural equation modelling results. |
Moderation and mediation tests
The χ2 difference test was conducted next to determine if generational cohorts moderate the relationships established (Wang & Wang 2012:275). Each individual path examined, was first constrained to be equal among the different cohorts and subsequently compared against the unconstrained path. Statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) between the constrained and unconstrained paths were found concerning the first three relationships denoted in Table 6, but not the last two relationships. Therefore, only H7, H8a, and H8b were supported, indicating that generational cohorts moderate these relationships (Wang & Wang 2012:276).
| TABLE 6: Moderation results of direct effects. |
Indirect effects were assessed, using the model constraint command in Mplus (Wang & Wang 2012). Regarding H6, the percentile bootstrapping results indicated that the indirect effect between perceived justice and customer advocacy intention through service quality was supported in both samples. Specifically, the indirect effect established in the baby boomer cohort (Estimate = 0.41, 95% CI [0.24, 0.63]) seems to be higher than the indirect effect noted in the Generation Y cohort (Estimate = 0.11, 95% CI [0.05, 0.20]). Therefore, H6 was supported in both cohorts. The Wald test further showed that the indirect effects established in each cohort are significantly different (χ2 = 10.96; df = 1; p < 0.05). Consequently, H9 was supported (Wang & Wang 2012:278). Considering that the direct relationship between perceived justice and customer citizenship advocacy intention (H2) is not significant when accounting for service quality in group one (baby boomers), indirect-only mediation is evident (Zhao, Lynch & Chen 2010:201). In contrast, as all three relationships (H1 to H3) remain significant when accounting for service quality in group two (Generation Y), the findings support complementary mediation (Zhao et al. 2010:201). Figure 2 provides a graphical depiction of the research findings.
Discussion and research implications
As positioned earlier, competition in the ride-hailing industry is fierce, with many TNC brands offering ride-hailing services. In this turbulent environment, customer advocacy behaviour presents a cost-effective and credible solution for enhancing TNC brand credibility and to grow market share (Iyer et al. 2017:647; Yi & Gong 2013:1280).
Consequently, the current investigation helps to explain the matter by providing novel insight into the extent to which overall assessment of service quality and perceived justice (service fairness) may be interrelated and impact on customer advocacy intentions and the magnitude to which customers’ emotional bonds with the TNC brand may be responsible for this development. The findings further indicate the degree to which generational cohorts moderate the direct and indirect relationships investigated. The investigation of the individual direct, indirect, and moderating effects further contributed to several theoretical and managerial implications.
Confirmation of affective commitment as an antecedent of service quality (H4) and perceived justice (H5) supports the argument that customers’ emotional bonds with the TNC brand may influence service perceptions (Chen et al. 1999; Van Tonder et al. 2020). It seems that affective commitment does not only impact service quality in a ride-hailing context (Van Tonder & Petzer 2021), but could also influence customers’ views of perceived justice experienced. Another interesting observation is that the relationships between affective commitment and the individual service perceptions do not seem to be moderated by generational cohorts (H10a and H10b). Hence, even though Generation Y may be less loyal to service providers than baby boomers (Soares et al. 2017:523), it seems that once they have established emotional bonds with the brand, they are, similar to baby boomers, likely to develop favourable perceptions of the service levels experienced. Furthermore, the impact appears to be strong in both cohorts, considering the large effect sizes that were obtained (H4 and H5). The implication of these findings is that, in the sharing economy, the value of affective commitment extends beyond mere relationship building with customers (Fullerton 2005) and behavioural consequences. Furthermore, affective commitment may strongly affect service perceptions, and thus the study’s findings offer further validation for the application of the defensive motivation theory (Chen et al. 1999) in an informal service context and within diverse age cohorts.
Grounded in social exchange theory (Blau 1964), it was expected that views of service quality and perceived justice would contribute to customers of ride-hailing services voluntarily engaging in customer advocacy behaviours to reciprocate favourable treatment experienced. Yet, the current findings evidence that only H1 was supported in both cohorts, while H2 was significant in the Generation Y cohort. Hence, it appears that at face value and considering H8a, views of perceived justice may not contribute to customer advocacy in the baby boomer cohort. However, further insight into the matter is obtained by also considering H6 and H9. It seems that service quality provides an indirect path for connecting perceived justice with customer advocacy intention and this indirect effect is significantly different and much stronger in the baby boomer cohort (β = 0.41) than in the Generation Y cohort (β = 0.11). Moreover, considering H7 and H8b, denoting significant differences between generational cohorts, it seems that as proposed, Generation Y (characterised by being sceptical with a strong sense of fairness and expectations of high service quality) may be less likely than older baby boomers to develop perceptions of service quality as a result of service justice experienced, and may also be less likely to be motivated to act as ‘partial employees’ of the TNC brand and engage in customer advocacy behaviours to reward the TNC brand for the service quality experienced.
Nevertheless, a further interesting observation is that, while a relatively low indirect effect was established in the Generation Y cohort, the direct effect between perceived justice and customer advocacy intention was still relatively large (H2). These findings are significant, as it seems that although the high service standards of Generation Y may contribute to them being more reluctant to develop perceptions of service quality when perceived justice is experienced, their ‘strong sense of fairness and ethics’ (Hernaus & Vokic 2014:619) may motivate them to reward the TNC brand with advocacy behaviours when service fairness is experienced. Perceived justice may not strongly convince Generation Y that a high service standard was experienced. However, their perceptions of perceived justice as informed by emotional bonds (affective commitment) with the TNC brand are significant, and could motivate them to still perform their ‘marketing agent’ role and engage in customer advocacy behaviours to reward the TNC brand for the service fairness experienced.
The implications of these findings are that, while it is important to focus on service quality as a key antecedent of customer advocacy (Ahmadi 2019:51; De Matos & Rossi 2008:581; Van Tonder & Petzer 2021; Yavas et al. 2004:144–145), perceived justice is also relevant and seems to directly or indirectly influence customer advocacy behaviours. In a sharing economy context, the service standards of the generational cohorts may further affect the magnitude of the indirect effect between perceived justice and customer advocacy intentions through service quality.
From a managerial perspective, the relationship between service quality and advocacy has been verified multiple times in the formal service environment (Ahmadi 2019:51; De Matos & Rossi 2008:581; Yavas et al. 2004:144–145) and appears to be relevant also in a ride-hailing context, as noted previously (Van Tonder & Petzer 2021) and confirmed in this study. Hence, TNC brands aiming to obtain a competitive advantage through customer advocacy may be doing well by focusing on service quality. It is especially important for baby boomers to perceive service quality, as they are most prone to show advocacy behaviours when high service standards are experienced. Service quality may be enhanced by, for example, ensuring drivers are always on time for scheduled appointments, the vehicle is always neat and clean, and driving rules are kept. Additional indicators of service quality may include the driver’s friendliness, playing the radio station requested by the customer, and providing occasional discounts, which demonstrate care towards the customer.
Furthermore, it could be useful for TNC brands to recognise the importance of fostering affective commitment between them and customers, and to build strong emotional bonds with customers to improve their perceptions of service quality. Based on the research findings, both the baby boomer and Generation Y cohorts may benefit from this strategy. In developing emotional bonds with customers, TNC brands could demonstrate care by ensuring that the interaction between drivers and customers is professional and the atmosphere inside the vehicles is pleasant and relaxing. Smartphone application platforms connecting customers and drivers also serve as a viable tool for obtaining constructive feedback from customers and strengthening emotional relationships with them. Transportation Network Companies brands should harness these big data opportunities to take advantage of customer feedback to foster affective commitment. Additionally, customers must be treated as individuals and feel recognised by the brands. Online chatbots assisting with booking services or dealing with customer questions could aid in personalising the service, while incentives to regular customers may further promote bonding.
However, TNC brands also need to concentrate on perceived justice (service fairness) to further enhance customer advocacy intentions. This is especially essential in motivating advocacy behaviours of Generation Y consumers, who have high service standards, but strongly value fair behaviour. Transportation Network Company brands are expected to focus on clearly defined service standards and staff training to ensure fair service is provided. Potential problems must be anticipated and problem-solving policies must be designed to ensure service failures are dealt with fairly. Fair service treatment could also include ensuring customers are appropriately informed about travel and service arrangements; customers are not confronted with unreasonable barriers when, for example, requesting refunds; and protection of consumer privacy.
Perceptions of perceived justice could be enhanced further by focusing on affective commitment and developing strong bonds with customers. By following this approach, customers who are emotionally attached to the TNC brand may develop heightened perceptions of fair treatment and perceived justice, as denoted by views of empathy, politeness, and courtesy experienced (La & Choi 2019:208; Ortiz et al. 2017:439–440; Voorhees & Brady 2005:194).
Finally, opportunities must be provided for the baby boomer and Generation Y cohorts to engage in customer advocacy behaviours through social-media platforms and online reviews. For instance, hashtags could generate interesting conversations among customers experiencing a sense of community and wanting to endorse the TNC brands. Key questions may prompt conversations and steer customer endorsements in the desired direction. Moreover, TNC brands could ask customers for testimonials and encourage them to share inspiring stories with other customers on online review platforms.
Conclusions, limitations and directions for further research
The current research provides more insight into the affect-cognition-behaviour relationship in a ride-hailing service context. Specifically, this study verified the extent to which ride-hailing customers’ views of service quality and perceived justice, as informed by affective commitment towards the TNC brand, may impact advocacy intentions, as well as the mediating role that service quality and the moderating role that generational cohort may play in influencing these behaviours. The research findings further advance the understanding of differences between baby boomers and Generation Y and their potential to aid brands in the sharing economy to manage a competitive advantage amidst fierce competition.
Future research could validate the model among other generational cohorts, including Generation X and Generation Z, and verify the extent to which the emotional bonds of these customers influence their service perceptions and customer advocacy behaviours. Most of the respondents in the current study indicated their main reason for booking rides with the TNC brand as needing a transfer for social visits. It would be interesting to draw comparisons between the perceptions and behaviour of the current sample and those of respondents who book rides with TNC brands for work-related purposes. The current study measured overall views of service quality and perceived justice. Greater insight is needed into the extent to which affective commitment may impact interactional, procedural, and distributive justice at an individual level (Blodgett et al. 1997:188; La & Choi 2019:208; Ortiz et al. 2017:439–440), as well as the various sub-levels of service quality (Dagger et al. 2007). The survey was conducted in South Africa, a developing country with a sub-standard public transportation system. It may be worthwhile to test the same model in a more developed country, considering that respondents with access to advanced public transportation systems may be less committed to TNC brands and less inclined to judge the services of a TNC brand favourably. Further research could explore the extent to which the intended levels of customer advocacy may vary if the communication is directed towards customers belonging to the same cohort as the respondent, or another cohort (Mazzarol, Sweeney & Soutar 2007:1488). Finally, the confounding effect of brand familiarity within the proposed model was not assessed and future research may want to further investigate this matter.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge and thank the anonymous reviewer and editor for their valuable guidance and contribution to an earlier draft of this article.
Competing interests
The author(s) declare that they have no financial or personal relationship(s) that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.
Authors’ contributions
The research model was conceptualised by E.v.T. who was also responsible for the introduction, methodology, statistical analysis and theoretical implications section. D.P. contributed to the literature review, managerial implications and conclusions, as well as the reviewing and editing of the article.
Funding information
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Data availability
The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article.
Disclaimer
A statement that the views expressed in the submitted article are his or her own and not an official position of the institution or funder.
References
Adams, J.S., 1965, ‘Inequity in social exchange’, in L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, 2, pp. 267–299, Academic Press, New York, NY.
Ahluwalia, R., Unnava, H.R. & Burnkrant, R.E., 2001, ‘The moderating role of commitment on the spillover effect of marketing communications’, Journal of Marketing Research 38(4), 458–470. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.38.4.458.18903
Ahmadi, A., 2019, ‘Thai Airways: Key influencing factors on customers’ word of mouth’, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 36(1), 40–57. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-02-2018-0024
Alemi, F., Circella, G., Mokhtarian, P. & Handy, S., 2018, ‘Exploring the latent constructs behind the use of ridehailing in California’, Journal of Choice Modelling 29, 47–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocm.2018.08.003
Almutawa, Z.H., Muenjohn, N. & Zhang, J., 2018, ‘Attitudes and behaviors as predictors of service quality in the telecommunications sector context’, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 35(3), 656–677. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-06-2016-0079
Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M., 2009, ‘The role of overall justice judgments in organizational justice research: A test of mediation,’ Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 491–500.
Al Samman, A.M. & Mohammed, A.T.I., 2021, ‘The mediating role of job satisfaction and affective commitment in the relationship between internal marketing practices and customer orientation’, International Journal of Organizational Analysis 29(4), 847–872. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-06-2020-2254
Arguello, M.I., Monferrer Tirado, D. & Estrada Guillén, M., 2020, ‘Service quality in a post-crisis context: Emotional effects and behaviours’, International Journal of Bank Marketing 38(1), 175–198. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBM-02-2019-0045
Arora, N. & Dhole, V., 2019, ‘Generation Y: Perspective, engagement, expectations, preferences and satisfactions from workplace; a study conducted in Indian context’, Benchmarking: An International Journal 26(5), 1378–1404. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-05-2018-0132
Aurier, P. & Siadou-Martin, B., 2007, ‘Perceived justice and consumption experience evaluations: A qualitative and experimental investigation’, International Journal of Service Industry Management 18(5), 450–471. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564230710826241
Bai, X. & Li, J.J., 2021, ‘Alliance justice and relational performance: The mediating role of boundary spanners’ citizenship behaviors’, Management Decision 59(2), 223–239. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-04-2019-0523
Bendapudi, N. & Berry, L.L., 1997, ‘Customers’ motivations for maintaining relationships with service providers’, Journal of Retailing 73(1), 15–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(97)90013-0
Berry, L.L., 1995, On great service: A framework for action, Simon & Schuster, New York, NY.
Bizri, R.M. & Hamieh, F., 2020, ‘Beyond the “give back” equation: The influence of perceived organizational justice and support on extra-role behaviors’, International Journal of Organizational Analysis 28(3), 699–718. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-07-2019-1838
Blau, P.M., 1964, Exchange and power in social life, Wiley, New York, NY.
Blodgett, J.G., Hill, D.J. & Tax, S.S., 1997, ‘The effects of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice on postcomplaint behavior’, Journal of Retailing 73(2), 185–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(97)90003-8
Brady, M.K. & Cronin, J.J., Jr., 2001, ‘Some new thoughts on conceptualizing perceived service quality: A hierarchical approach’, Journal of Marketing 65(3), 34–49. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.65.3.34.18334
Carr, C.L., 2007, ‘The FAIRSERV model: Consumer reactions to services based on a multidimensional evaluation of service fairness’, Decision Sciences 38(1), 107–130. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2007.00150.x
Chen, H.-G., Liu, J.Y.-C., Sheu, T.S. & Yang, M.-H., 2012, ‘The impact of financial services quality and fairness on customer satisfaction’, Managing Service Quality: An International Journal 22(4), 399–421. https://doi.org/10.1108/09604521211253496
Chen, S., Duckworth, K. & Chaiken, S., 1999, ‘Motivated heuristic and systematic processing’, Psychological Inquiry 10(1), 44–49. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli1001_6
Chenet, P., Dagger, T.S. & O’Sullivan, D., 2010, ‘Service quality, trust, commitment and service differentiation in business relationships’, Journal of Services Marketing 24(5), 336–346. https://doi.org/10.1108/08876041011060440
Chi, C.G.-Q., Wen, B. & Ouyang, Z., 2020, ‘Developing relationship quality in economy hotels: The role of perceived justice, service quality, and commercial friendship’, Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management 29(8), 1027–1051. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2020.1748158
Choi, L. & Lotz, S., 2016, ‘Motivations leading to customer citizenship behavior in services: Scale development and validation’, Journal of Consumer Marketing 33(7), 539–551. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-01-2016-1683
Choi, L. & Lotz, S.L., 2018, ‘Exploring antecedents of customer citizenship behaviors in services’, The Service Industries Journal 38(9–10), 607–628. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2017.1414194
Choi, L., Lotz, S.L. & Kim, M., 2014, ‘The impact of social exchange-based antecedents on customer organizational citizenship behaviors (COCBs) in service recovery’, Journal of Marketing Development & Competitiveness 8(3), 11–24.
Clore, G.L. & Schnall, S., 2005, ‘The influence of affect on attitude’, in D. Albarracín, B.T. Johnson & M.P. Zanna (eds.), The handbook of attitudes, pp. 437–489, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
Cohen, M.C., Fiszer, M.D. & Kim, B.J., 2021, ‘Frustration-based promotions: Field experiments in ride-sharing’, Management Science 68(4), 2432–2464. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2021.3991
Cronin, J.J., Jr. & Taylor, S.A., 1992, ‘Measuring service quality: A re-examination and extension’, Journal of Marketing 56(3), 55–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299205600304
Dagger, T.S., Sweeney, J.C. & Johnson, L.W., 2007, ‘A hierarchical model of health service quality: Scale development and investigation of an integrated model’, Journal of Service Research 10(2), 123–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670507309594
Deckop, J.R., Cirka, C.C. & Andersson, L.M., 2003, ‘Doing unto others: The reciprocity of helping behavior in organizations’, Journal of Business Ethics 47(2), 101–113. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026060419167
De Matos, C.A. & Rossi, C.A.V., 2008, ‘Word-of-mouth communications in marketing: A meta-analytic review of the antecedents and moderators’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 36(4), 578–596. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-008-0121-1
Dwyer, F.R., Schurr, P.H. & Oh, S., 1987, ‘Developing buyer-seller relationships’, Journal of Marketing 51(2), 11–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224298705100202
Edwards, K., 1990, ‘The interplay of affect and cognition in attitude formation and change’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 59(2), 202–216. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.2.202
Engizek, N. & Yasin, B., 2017, ‘How CSR and overall service quality lead to affective commitment: Mediating role of company reputation’, Social Responsibility Journal 13(1), 111–125. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-09-2015-0135
Farris, R., Chong, F. & Dunning, D., 2002, ‘Generation Y: Purchasing power and implications for marketing’, Academy of Marketing Studies Journal 6(2), 89–101.
Fornell, C. & Larcker, D.F., 1981, ‘Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error’, Journal of Marketing Research 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
Fowler, J.G., 2013, ‘Customer citizenship behavior: An expanded theoretical understanding’, International Journal of Business and Social Science 4(5), 1–8.
Fuller, C.M., Simmering, M.J., Atinc, G., Atinc, Y. & Babin, B.J., 2016, ‘Common methods variance detection in business research’, Journal of Business Research 69(8), 3192–3198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.008
Fullerton, G., 2003, ‘When does commitment lead to loyalty’, Journal of Service Research 5(4), 333–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670503005004005
Fullerton, G., 2005, ‘How commitment both enables and undermines marketing relationships’, European Journal of Marketing 39(11/12), 1372–1388. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560510623307
Gao, H., Wang, Z. & Yao, Q., 2022, ‘The improvements of sharing economy on the development of economy in the United States’, in C.G. Li, J.J. Lin, T. Huang, M.Z. Abedin & S. Ahmed (eds.), Proceeding of the 2022 7th International Conference on Financial Innovation and Economic Development (ICFIED 2022), January 21–23 2022, pp. 2510–2518, Atlantis Press, Dordrecht.
Gardiner, S., Grace, D. & King, C., 2013, ‘Challenging the use of generational segmentation through understanding self-identity’, Marketing Intelligence & Planning 31(6), 639–653. https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-06-2012-0062
Giovanis, A., Athanasopoulou, P. & Tsoukatos, E., 2015, ‘The role of service fairness in the service quality – Relationship quality – Customer loyalty chain: An empirical study’, Journal of Service Theory and Practice 25(6), 744–776. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTP-11-2013-0263
Gong, T. & Yi, Y., 2021, ‘A review of customer citizenship behaviors in the service context’, The Service Industries Journal 41(3–4), 169–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2019.1680641
Guan, L., Pei, J., Liu, X., Zhou, Z. & Pardalos, P.M., 2022, ‘Ridesharing in urban areas: Multi-objective optimisation approach for ride-matching and routeing with commuters’ dynamic mode choice’, International Journal of Production Research 60(5), 1439–1457. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2020.1859635
Guo, Y., Li, X. & Zeng, X., 2019, ‘Platform competition in the sharing economy: Understanding how ride-hailing services influence new car purchases’, Journal of Management Information Systems 36(4), 1043–1070. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2019.1661087
Gurău, C., 2012, ‘A life-stage analysis of consumer loyalty profile: Comparing Generation X and millennial consumers’, Journal of Consumer Marketing 29(2), 103–113. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363761211206357
Hair, J.F., Jr., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. & Anderson, R.E., 2014, Multivariate data analysis, Pearson, Essex.
Hernaus, T. & Vokic, N.P., 2014, ‘Work design for different generational cohorts: Determining common and idiosyncratic job characteristics’, Journal of Organizational Change Management 27(4), 615–641. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-05-2014-0104
Hole, D., Zhong, L. & Schwartz, J., 2010, ‘Talking about whose generation? Why western generational models can’t account for a global workforce’, Deloitte Review 18(6), 84–97, viewed 17 May 2022, from https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/insights/us/articles/talking-about-whose-generation-ages-and-attitudes-among-the-global-workforce/US_deloittereview_Talking_About_Whose_Generation_Jan10.pdf.
Huang, C., & You, C., 2011, ‘The three components of organizational commitment on in-role behaviors and organizational citizenship behaviors,’ African Journal of Business Management, 5(28), 11335–11344.
Iyer, P., Yazdanparast, A. & Strutton, D., 2017, ‘Examining the effectiveness of WOM/eWOM communications across age-based cohorts: Implications for political marketers’, Journal of Consumer Marketing 34(7), 646–663. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-11-2015-1605
Izogo, E.E., 2017, ‘Customer loyalty in telecom service sector: The role of service quality and customer commitment’, The TQM Journal 29(1), 19–36. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-10-2014-0089
Izogo, E.E. & Ogba, I.-E., 2015, ‘Service quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty in automobile repair services sector’, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 32(3), 250–269. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-05-2013-0075
Jnaneswar, K. & Ranjit, G., 2022, ‘Organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviour: The mediating role of psychological ownership’, Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance 9(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-01-2021-0012
Kau, A.-K. & Loh, E.W.-Y., 2006, ‘The effects of service recovery on consumer satisfaction: A comparison between complainants and non-complainants’, Journal of Services Marketing 20(2), 101–111. https://doi.org/10.1108/08876040610657039
Kim, H.S. & Choi, B., 2016, ‘The effects of three customer-to-customer interaction quality types on customer experience quality and citizenship behavior in mass service settings’, Journal of Services Marketing 30(4), 384–397. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-06-2014-0194
Koksal, M.H., 2019, ‘Differences among baby boomers, Generation X, millennials, and Generation Z wine consumers in Lebanon: Some perspectives’, International Journal of Wine Business Research 31(3), 456–472. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWBR-09-2018-0047
Kueh, K. & Voon, B.H., 2007, ‘Culture and service quality expectations: Evidence from Generation Y consumers in Malaysia’, Managing Service Quality: An International Journal 17(6), 656–680. https://doi.org/10.1108/09604520710834993
Kühn, S.W. & Petzer, D.J., 2018, ‘Fostering purchase intentions toward online retailer websites in an emerging market: An SOR perspective’, Journal of Internet Commerce 17(3), 255–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332861.2018.1463799
Kumar, A. & Lim, H., 2008, ‘Age differences in mobile service perceptions: Comparison of Generation Y and baby boomers’, Journal of Services Marketing 22(7), 568–577. https://doi.org/10.1108/08876040810909695
Kuswanto, A., Sundari, S., Harmadi, A. & Hariyanti, D.A., 2020, ‘The determinants of customer loyalty in the Indonesian ride-sharing services: Offline vs online’, Innovation & Management Review 17(1), 75–85. https://doi.org/10.1108/INMR-05-2019-0063
Kwortnik, R.J., Jr. & Han, X., 2011, ‘The influence of guest perceptions of service fairness on lodging loyalty in China’, Cornell Hospitality Quarterly 52(3), 321–332. https://doi.org/10.1177/1938965511409005
La, S. & Choi, B., 2019, ‘Perceived justice and CSR after-service recovery’, Journal of Services Marketing 33(2), 206–219. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-10-2017-0342
Lee, Z.W.Y., Chan, T.K.H., Balaji, M.S. & Chong, A.Y.-L., 2018, ‘Why people participate in the sharing economy: An empirical investigation of Uber’, Internet Research 28(3), 829–850. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-01-2017-0037
Lepmets, M., Cater-Steel, A., Gacenga, F. & Ras, E., 2012, ‘Extending the IT service quality measurement framework through a systematic literature review’, Journal of Service Science Research 4(1), 7–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12927-012-0001-6
Mazzarol, T., Sweeney, J.C. & Soutar, G.N., 2007, ‘Conceptualizing word-of-mouth activity, triggers and conditions: An exploratory study’, European Journal of Marketing 41(11/12), 1475–1494. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560710821260
Melancon, J.P., Forbes, L.P. & Fugate, D., 2015, ‘Selected dimensions of service gender: A study of perceptions of Generation Y’, Journal of Services Marketing 29(4), 293–301. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-04-2014-0148
Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Smith, C. A., 1993, ‘Commitment to organizations and occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 538–551.
Mitra, S.K., Bae, Y. & Ritchie, S.G., 2019, ‘Use of ride-hailing services among older adults in the United States’, Transportation Research Record 2673(3), 700–710. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198119835511
Mohd-Any, A.A., Mutum, D.S., Ghazali, E.M. & Mohamed-Zulkifli, L., 2019, ‘To fly or not to fly? An empirical study of trust, post-recovery satisfaction and loyalty of Malaysia Airlines passengers’, Journal of Service Theory and Practice 29(5/6), 661–690. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTP-10-2018-0223
Möhlmann, M., 2015, ‘Collaborative consumption: Determinants of satisfaction and the likelihood of using a sharing economy option again’, Journal of Consumer Behaviour 14(3), 193–207. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1512
Moorman, C., Zaltman, G. & Deshpande, R., 1992, ‘Relationships between providers and users of market research: The dynamics of trust within and between organizations’, Journal of Marketing Research 29(3), 314–328. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224379202900303
Morgan, R.M. & Hunt, S.D., 1994, ‘The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing’, Journal of Marketing 58(3), 20–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299405800302
Naim, M.F. & Lenkla, U., 2016, ‘Knowledge sharing as an intervention for Gen Y employees’ intention to stay’, Industrial and Commercial Training 48(3), 142–148. https://doi.org/10.1108/ICT-01-2015-0011
Narteh, B., 2018, ‘Service quality and customer satisfaction in Ghanaian retail banks: The moderating role of price’, International Journal of Bank Marketing 36(1), 68–88. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBM-08-2016-0118
Nguyen-Phuoc, D.Q., Su, D.N., Tran, P.T.K., Le, D.-T.T. & Johnson, L.W., 2020, ‘Factors influencing customer’s loyalty towards ride-hailing taxi services – A case study of Vietnam’, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 134(C), 96–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2020.02.008
Ok, C.M., Park, K., Park, S.B. & Jeon, H.H., 2020, ‘Event participation and advocacy: Assessing the role of affective commitment and perceived benefits’, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 37(1), 128–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2020.1722783
Ortiz, J., Chiu, T.-S., Wen-Hai, C. & Hsu, C.-W., 2017, ‘Perceived justice, emotions, and behavioral intentions in the Taiwanese food and beverage industry’, International Journal of Conflict Management 28(4), 437–463. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCMA-10-2016-0084
Panchapakesan, P., Amin, M. & Herjanto, H., 2022, ‘How luxury restaurants will enhance the concept of guest delight’, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights 5(2), 311–330. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTI-10-2020-0198
Parasuraman, A., Valarie A. Zeithaml, & A. Malhotra., 2005, ‘E-SQUAL: A Multiple-Item Scale for Assessing Electronic Service Quality’, Journal of Service Research, 7(3), 213–33.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. & Berry, L.L., 1988, ‘SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality’, Journal of Retailing 64(1), 12–40.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.-Y. & Podsakoff, N.P., 2003, ‘Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies’, Journal of Applied Psychology 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
Prakash, G., 2019, ‘Understanding service quality: Insights from the literature’, Journal of Advances in Management Research 16(1), 64–90. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAMR-01-2018-0008
Rani, N. & Samuel, A., 2016, ‘A study on generational differences in work values and person-organization fit and its effect on turnover intention of Generation Y in India’, Management Research Review 39(12), 1695–1719. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-10-2015-0249
Roy, S.K., Shekhar, V., Lassar, W.M. & Chen, T., 2018, ‘Customer engagement behaviors: The role of service convenience, fairness and quality’, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 44(C), 293–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2018.07.018
Rust, R.T. & Oliver, R.L., 1994, ‘Service quality: Insights and managerial implications from the frontier’, in R.T. Rust & R.L. Oliver (eds.), Service quality: New directions in theory and practice, pp. 1–20, Sage, London.
Sadeh, E., 2017, ‘Interrelationships among quality enablers, service quality, patients’ satisfaction and loyalty in hospitals’, The TQM Journal 29(1), 101–117. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-02-2015-0032
Samman, A.M. & Mohammed, A.T.I., 2021, ‘The mediating role of job satisfaction and affective commitment in the relationship between internal marketing practices and customer orientation’, International Journal of Organizational Analysis 29(4), 847–872. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-06-2020-2254
Seiders, K. & Berry, L.L., 1998, ‘Service fairness: What it is and why it matters’, Academy of Management Perspectives 12(2), 8–20. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.1998.650513
Soares, R.R., Zhang, T.T.C., Proença, J.F. & Kandampully, J., 2017, ‘Why are Generation Y consumers the most likely to complain and repurchase?’, Journal of Service Management 28(3), 520–540. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-08-2015-0256
Trabelsi-Zoghlami, A., Berraies, S. & Yahia, K.B., 2020, ‘Service quality in a mobile-banking-applications context: Do users’ age and gender matter?’, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 31(15–16), 1639–1668. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2018.1492874
Valentine, D.B. & Powers, T.L., 2013, ‘Generation Y values and lifestyle segments’, Journal of Consumer Marketing 30(7), 597–606. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-07-2013-0650
Van Tonder, E., De Beer, L.T. & Kuyper, T., 2020, ‘New perspective on informal knowledge sharing in the self-service environment’, The Service Industries Journal 40(7–8), 542–564. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2018.1560425
Van Tonder, E. & Petzer, D.J., 2021, ‘Affective commitment, service quality and selected sub-dimensions of customer citizenship behaviour: A study of ride-hailing services’, The TQM Journal 33(6), 1263–1280. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-08-2020-0185
Voorhees, C.M. & Brady, M.K., 2005, ‘A service perspective on the drivers of complaint intentions’, Journal of Service Research 8(2), 192–204. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670505279702
Wadud, Z., 2020, ‘An examination of the effects of ride-hailing services on airport parking demand’, Journal of Air Transport Management 84, 101783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2020.101783
Wang, J. & Wang, X., 2012, Structural equation modeling: Applications using Mplus, Wiley, Chichester.
Wang, Z., Li, L., Tang, J., Xie, B. & Ge, J., 2022, ‘Effect of ride sharing on air quality: Evidence from Shenzhen, China’, Journal of Applied Economics 25(1), 197–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/15140326.2021.2023421
Winter, K., Cats, O., Martens, K. & Van Arem, B., 2020, ‘Identifying user classes for shared and automated mobility services’, European Transport Research Review 12, 36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-020-00420-y
Xing, W., Hsu, P.Y., Chang, Y.-W. & Shiau, W.-L., 2020, ‘How does online doctor-patient interaction affect online consultation and offline medical treatment?’, Industrial Management & Data Systems 120(1), 196–214. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-05-2019-0261
Yavas, U., Benkenstein, M. & Stuhldreier, U., 2004, ‘Relationships between service quality and behavioral outcomes: A study of private bank customers in Germany’, International Journal of Bank Marketing 22(2), 144–157. https://doi.org/10.1108/02652320410521737
Yi, Y. & Gong, T., 2013, ‘Customer value co-creation behavior: Scale development and validation’, Journal of Business Research 66(9), 1279–1284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.02.026
Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L. & Parasuraman, A., 1996, ‘The behavioral consequences of service quality’, Journal of Marketing 60(2), 31–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299606000203
Zhang, J., 2019, ‘What’s yours is mine: Exploring customer voice on Airbnb using text-mining approaches’, Journal of Consumer Marketing 36(5), 655–665. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-02-2018-2581
Zhao, X., Lynch, J.G., Jr. & Chen, Q., 2010, ‘Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis’, Journal of Consumer Research 37(2), 197–206. https://doi.org/10.1086/651257
Appendix 1
Items used to measure the constructs of the study
Perceived justice(Items from Ambrose & Schminke 2009 validated in Choi & Lotz 2018)
PJUST1: I am treated fairly by X.
PJUST2: I can count on X to be fair.
PJUST3: The treatment I receive from X is fair.
PJUST4: X treats its customers fairly.
Affective commitment (Items from Meyer, Allen & Smith (1993) and Huang and You (2011) validated in Choi & Lotz 2018)
AC1: I feel a strong sense of belonging to X.
AC2: X has a great deal of personal meaning for me.
AC3: I feel emotionally attached to X.
AC4: I feel like part of the family at X.
Service quality(Items from Brady & Cronin 2001 and Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry 1988 validated in Dagger et al. 2007)
SQ1: The quality of the service provided by X is excellent.
SQ2: The quality of the service provided by X is impressive.
SQ3: The service provided by X is of a high standard.
SQ4: I believe X offers services that are superior in every way.
Customer advocacy intention(Yi & Gong 2013)
CCBA1: Say positive things about X to others.
CCBA2: Recommend X to others.
CCBA3: Encourage friends and relatives to use X.
|
Email this article 
Hide
Show all
