Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing

A framework of satisfaction for continually delivered business services

Elten Briggs Timothy D. Landry Patricia J. Daugherty
Article information:
To cite this document:
Elten Briggs Timothy D. Landry Patricia J. Daugherty , (2016),"A framework of satisfaction for continually delivered business
services", Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 31 Iss 1 pp. 112 - 122
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-06-2014-0125
Downloaded on: 27 February 2016, At: 04:29 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 86 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 92 times since 2016*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Downloaded by Anelis Plus Association At 04:29 27 February 2016 (PT)

Anthony K. Asare, Thomas G. Brashear-Alejandro, Jun Kang, (2016),"B2B technology adoption in customer driven supply
chains", Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 31 Iss 1 pp. 1-12 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-02-2015-0022
Carlos Ferro, Carmen Padin, Göran Svensson, Janice Payan, (2016),"Trust and commitment as mediators between economic
and non-economic satisfaction in manufacturer-supplier relationships", Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 31
Iss 1 pp. 13-23 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-07-2013-0154
David Vidal, Hervé Fenneteau, Gilles Paché, (2016),"Should I stay or should I go? Customers’ reactions faced with the
deterioration of a business relationship", Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 31 Iss 1 pp. 47-58 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-06-2014-0124

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:365403 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics
(COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 A framework of satisfaction for continually
delivered business services
Elten Briggs
Department of Marketing, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, Texas, USA
Timothy D. Landry
Management and Marketing Department, University of Alabama-Huntsville, Huntsville, Alabama, USA, and
Patricia J. Daugherty
Department of Supply Chain Management, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA

Abstract
Purpose – The aim of this paper is to present a new framework for the evaluation of satisfaction in continually delivered business services (CDBS)
contexts based on applicable theoretical perspectives and extant empirical research.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper first describes and justifies the importance of the CDBS context. Then, a literature review of CDBS
satisfaction research over the past ten years is presented and utilized in conjunction with theoretical insights from expectancy disconfirmation theory
and social exchange theory to develop conceptual definitions, a general conceptual framework, and research propositions.
Downloaded by Anelis Plus Association At 04:29 27 February 2016 (PT)

Findings – The resulting conceptual framework focuses on global CDBS provider satisfaction as the outcome of three more specific satisfaction
assessments: service satisfaction (driven by the actual performance of the service), economic satisfaction (driven by the customers’ economic
outcomes from the exchange relationship) and social satisfaction (driven by the customers’ social outcomes and interactions in the exchange
relationship).
Originality/value – The study is the first to develop a framework of satisfaction for the CDBS context and presents propositions to guide future
satisfaction research. The conceptual framework leverages insights from two existing models of satisfaction formation: expectancy disconfirmation
(which provides deeper insight on service satisfaction) and social exchange theory (which provides deeper insights on social and economic
satisfaction). The integration of these two models results in a more comprehensive view of satisfaction formation in the CDBS context than by using
either model separately.
Keywords Social exchange theory, Disconfirmation, Economic satisfaction, Satisfaction formation, Service satisfaction, Social satisfaction
Paper type Conceptual paper

1. Introduction academic models of satisfaction should be revisited periodically

to assess their applicability. The expectancy-disconfirmation (E/
Business-to-business (B2B) service providers have long
D) model of satisfaction, for example, has been generically
acknowledged the importance of customer satisfaction to the
applied in both consumer and B2B contexts (Emerson and
development of healthy business relationships. Satisfaction
Grimm, 1999; Patterson et al., 1997; Oliver and Burke, 1999).
has been established as a key determinant of customers’
Given the context-dependent nature of satisfaction formation
relational outcomes, such as trust, commitment and loyalty
and the evolution in services delivery involving increased
(Caceres and Paparoidamis, 2007; Lam et al., 2004; Vickery
interconnectivity and deeper relationships (Fournier and
et al., 2004; Wiertz et al., 2004). As such, these service
Mick, 1999; Coviello et al., 2002; Vargo and Lusch, 2008),
providers have implemented programs to cultivate greater
revisiting the E/D conceptualization of satisfaction seems to be
levels of satisfaction among their customer base (Cina, 1989).
a logical starting point. Exploring how completely, and how
However, to improve the effectiveness of these programs,
accurately, B2B services delivered in the present era are
service managers must understand the process of how
explained by extant theoretical perspectives helps to frame
customers make satisfaction judgments.
what we know and what we can build upon.
As modern business relationships evolve and new marketing
The lack of context-specific conceptualizations for
paradigms influence firms to revise their understanding and
satisfaction for B2B services represents a gap in literature and
approach to exchange relationships with their customers,
a gap in managerial perspective on a critical business concept.
Due in part to technological advances, mainstream marketing
has become more like B2B services marketing (Rust, 2004).
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on More companies serving individual consumers now have
Emerald Insight at: www.emeraldinsight.com/0885-8624.htm access to the information and tools needed to customize

Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing Received 11 June 2014

31/1 (2016) 112–122 Revised 20 October 2014
© Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0885-8624] 4 December 2014
[DOI 10.1108/JBIM-06-2014-0125] Accepted 6 January 2015

112
 A framework of satisfaction for continually delivered business services
Elten Briggs, Timothy D. Landry and Patricia J. Daugherty
offerings and manage relationships to an extent that heretofore
had only been feasible when serving business customers.
Satisfaction theory has not kept pace with these developments.
A specific framework for satisfaction formation in continually
delivered business services (CDBS) can more effectively
account for issues pertaining to the central role of service in
the exchange, co-creation and ongoing business relationships.
To that end, this paper develops a general framework for
satisfaction formation in CDBS contexts with contributions to
both theory and practice. Propositions are further offered for
conducting satisfaction research in this context.
2. The nature of CDBS contexts: service
provision, customers and relationships
In CDBS contexts, business customers enter into a
membership or contractual relationship with a service
provider (Lovelock, 1983), and service is delivered to the
customer repeatedly over the course of the exchange
relationship. Many of the most critical and fastest growing
Downloaded by Anelis Plus Association At 04:29 27 February 2016 (PT)
business service sectors such as logistics, information
technology and financial services are representative of the
CDBS context. For example, third-party logistics is a classic
CDBS industry that has received an increased amount of
research attention due to its growth, importance and
distinctiveness (Bask, 2001; Lin and Pekkarinen, 2011). At
least three key characteristics differentiate the nature of
exchange in CDBS contexts from exchange in traditional
consumer purchase situations:
1 the core product – a service rather than a good;
2 the service customer – an organization rather than an
individual; and
3 the nature of service delivery – ongoing rather than discrete.
This paper incorporates these key differences in the development
of a satisfaction formation framework appropriate for CDBS
exchange contexts (Figure 1).
Core product
While intangibility is frequently used to describe services, it
has not been clearly applied to augment satisfaction theory. As
Figure 1 The key differentiators of continually delivered business
services exchanges vs traditional exchanges
Does the core exchange involve
a transfer in ownership of a
Core tangible commodity or consist
Product mainly of intangible deeds and
performances?
Is the service fulfilling the
needs of an individual (or
Goods Services group of individuals) or an
organization?
Consumer Business
Services Services
Discrete
Transactions
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Volume 31 · Number 1 · 2016 · 112–122
primary exchanges in services contexts often do not involve a
transfer in ownership of a tangible commodity, customers
often make use of cues external to the service provision as
information signals when forming satisfaction responses
(Crosby and Stephens, 1987; Arnold et al., 2007). Germane to
theory development for CDBS, service personnel influence
satisfaction, even those not directly involved in the provision
of the core service (Doorn, 2008; Doorn and Verhoef, 2008;
Jayawardhena, 2010). The service provider and related
contact personnel should be explicitly considered in models
addressing CDBS satisfaction formation.
Service customer
As the value of the transaction is higher in B2B settings,
organizational customers tend to participate to a greater
degree in designing the service. Thus, when evaluating service
providers, the quality of interactions involved in the
co-creation of the service plays a vital role (Mentzer et al.,
2001). Further, more rational business customers, who use
the service to fulfill an organizational rather than a personal
objective, often seek to maximize the economic value received
from exchange relationships – whereas satisfaction for end
consumers is influenced more by liking and affect (Mano and
Oliver, 1993; Oliver, 1993). Research in business contexts
indicates that social and economic factors influence buyer
evaluations in distinctive ways (Bolton et al., 2003; Schakett
et al., 2011). Models of satisfaction in CDBS should leverage
these factors toward better and more complete theory.
Service delivery
In CDBS contexts, satisfaction is derived from a series of
service encounters and deliveries over time. Expectations vary
from t1 ¡ t2 ¡ tn (Hoch and Deighthon, 1989) – with past
and present experiences with a service provider influencing
future expectations and performance perceptions. The time
element thus alters the core variables influential in the
satisfaction formation process, making satisfaction formation
markedly different than in discrete services transactions.
Rather than a single observation, customers may observe a
vector of performance outcomes that can reasonably be
projected into the future (Briggs et al., 2010). Also, multiple
service deliveries over time create relational dynamics,
supporting the occurrence of buyer/seller social interactions in
the midst of economic developments (Dwyer et al., 1987;
Wilson, 1995). Collectively, these three broad characteristics
should make the process of satisfaction formation in CDBS
contexts substantially different than what would be expected
in traditional consumer purchase situations.
3. Overview of CDBS research
To better understand existing conceptualizations of CDBS
satisfaction, this paper presents a compendium outlining the
Is each instance of
service delivery paid empirical research. Table I identifies studies published from
for separately or is
service delivered on an 2003-2013 involving antecedents to satisfaction in CDBS
ongoing basis? contexts services. Studies are included that specifically assess
satisfaction with a service (separate from satisfaction with
tangible goods included in the exchange). The table identifies
Ongoing the focus of the satisfaction assessment in the study, the
Delivery of
Service
CDBS industry and the significant antecedents of satisfaction
found in each study. Two studies appeared to draw on the
113
 A framework of satisfaction for continually delivered business services Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Elten Briggs, Timothy D. Landry and Patricia J. Daugherty Volume 31 · Number 1 · 2016 · 112–122

Table I Review of empirical studies involving antecedents to CDBS satisfaction (2003-2013)

Citation
Vize et al. (2013)
Chenet et al. (2010)
Khan et al. (2012)
Evanschitzky et al. (2012)
Gil et al. (2008)
Jayawardhena et al.
(2007)
Liu et al. (2005)
Lam et al. (2004)
Vickery et al. (2004)
Bolton et al. (2003)
Taylor and Hunter (2003)
Russell-Bennett (2007)
Downloaded by Anelis Plus Association At 04:29 27 February 2016 (PT)
Satisfaction
focus CDBS industry Significant antecedent(s)
Economic Web solutions Technology readiness; service quality
General Financial services Service quality; commitment
Provider Facilities management Technician performance; account representative performance;
product perceptions
Provider Financial services Service quality; product quality; value for money
Provider Financial intermediation Service encounter perception; service value
Provider Safety inspections Service encounter quality
Provider Financial staffing Customer value
Provider Courier service Customer value
Provider Third-party logistics Relational performance
Provider Telephone Social and economic resources
Provider Electronic customer relationship Trust; value
management
Purchase decision Telephone directory advertising Category involvement

Hsu et al. (2013) Relationship E-commerce Web site characteristics; trust

Caceres and Paparoidamis
(2007)
Krepapa et al. (2003)
Paluch and Blut (2013)
Schakett et al. (2011)
Briggs et al. (2010)
Jayawardhena (2010)
Spreng et al. (2009)
Doorn (2008), Doorn and
Verhoef (2008)
Molinari et al. (2008)
Bruhn and Frommeyer
(2004)
Wiertz et al. (2004)
Relationship Advertising agency Technical service quality; functional service quality
Relationship Corporate banking Customer perceptions of market orientation and market
orientation gap
Service Remote information technology Reliability; process integration; economic benefits;
documentation; service options; support service; individualization
Service Travel Social bonding; economic bonds; structural bond
Service Third-party logistics Positional performance; velocity performance
Service Janitorial Perceived value; service quality; service encounter quality
Service Distribution center Transaction satisfaction; services quality
Service Logistics Lagged service satisfaction; price satisfaction; attribute
satisfaction; sales interaction satisfaction; critical incidents
Service Freight forwarding Positive disconfirmation
Service Information technology Service quality; relationship quality
Service Customer interaction center Service quality; image quality

same sample (Doorn, 2008; Doorn and Verhoef, 2008) and
constituted a single entry in the table. The table illustrates that
the two most common approaches over the past ten years have
been to assess satisfaction with the service provider (nine
studies) or satisfaction with the services delivered (nine
studies). The most common CDBS industries examined in
our review were transportation/logistics (six studies),
information technology/Web services (five studies) and
financial services (four studies).
Though we assert that satisfaction is normally a determinant
of relational outcomes such as trust and commitment, some
studies included in our review conceptualize trust or
commitment as antecedent to satisfaction (Chenet et al.,
2010; Hsu et al., 2013; Taylor and Hunter, 2003). Deeper
investigation reveals that differences in the framing of the
constructs led to the apparent inconsistencies. The two studies
that consider trust as antecedent to satisfaction both rely on a
framework by Singh and Sirdeshmukh (2000) that
differentiates between consumers’ trust prior to a service
encounter (pre-encounter) and trust after a service encounter
(post-encounter). The authors frame pre-encounter trust
(which is not a relational outcome) as antecedent to
satisfaction. Consistent with our assertions, Singh and
Sirdeshmukh (2000) frame post-encounter trust as dependent
on satisfaction. The study that considers commitment to be
antecedent to satisfaction is based on a framework by Selnes
(1998) that considers the signaled commitment of the seller to
be antecedent to the customers’ satisfaction. This type of
commitment is unrelated to our assertions, as we frame
satisfaction as antecedent to customers’ relational outcomes.
4. Conceptual framework
4.1 Satisfaction with CDBS service providers
As noted in the review of the extant B2B services literature
(Table I), the antecedents of satisfaction vary widely across
studies, and there is even a lack of consensus as to what should
be the appropriate conceptual focus of satisfaction
assessments. Importantly, Giese and Cote (2000), in their
review of the customer satisfaction literature, identified three
components common to any conceptualization of satisfaction:
1 the type of response;
2 the focus of the response; and
3 the time of the response.

114
 A framework of satisfaction for continually delivered business services
Elten Briggs, Timothy D. Landry and Patricia J. Daugherty
Specific conceptualizations of the satisfaction formation
process should begin by putting forward a concise, yet
complete, definition of service provider satisfaction – in this
case, for CDBS contexts.
In reference to response type, CDBS satisfaction should be
considered an evaluation, similar to Fornell’s (1992)
conceptualization. Again, business customers are widely
regarded as being more rational than consumers (Rossomme,
2003). Considering satisfaction to be an evaluation more
clearly reflects the rational processing of business customers.
Affective responses, the other major response type in
consumer satisfaction, should matter less to business
customers. Our review found that some operationalizations of
satisfaction in CDBS contexts rely on measures derived from
these more affect-based conceptualizations (Liu et al., 2005;
Spreng et al., 2009; Jayawardhena, 2010). However, in
support of satisfaction-as-evaluation, long-term relationships
are common in CDBS settings, and importantly, cognition
Downloaded by Anelis Plus Association At 04:29 27 February 2016 (PT)
becomes more significant than affect over time in satisfaction
formation (Homburg et al., 2006).
Next, concerning the focus of the response, the CDBS
satisfaction evaluation should be viewed as global and focused
on the service provider. A global perspective of satisfaction is
suggested, as there are multiple facets of a service exchange
beyond just the service provision in B2B services. The
customer generally enters into a formalized relationship with
the service provider, allowing social and economic
considerations to influence the satisfaction evaluation. The
focus on the service provider is deemed especially appropriate
for the CDBS context. Different individuals in the
organization may assess differing services or service attributes,
with the service provider being the common thread tying these
assessments together.
Finally, regarding the response time, CDBS satisfaction
should be conceptualized as occurring during consumption of
the service. At the time of the satisfaction response, the
customer has already experienced prior delivery of service and
generally expects to receive service again in the future.
Considering these facets of the B2B service experience, we
modify Oliver’s (2010) popular conceptualization of
satisfaction to offer the following definition appropriate
specifically for the CDBS context:
CDBS provider satisfaction is a customer’s global evaluation of the degree to
which a service firm is providing an appropriate level of fulfillment for its
needs.
This definition deviates from Oliver (2010) on the type (i.e.
customer’s global evaluation vs consumer fulfillment
response), focus (i.e. service firm vs product/service feature or
product/service itself) and timing (is providing vs provided) of
the response. It is also less dependent on affect, in that Oliver’s
definition describes a “pleasurable” level of fulfillment, while
the present definition describes an “appropriate” level of
fulfillment. Finally, an emphasis is placed on the customer
“needs” in the present definition. For business customers,
needs are generally articulated more clearly than in the
consumer context. Thus, while generally assumed a basis of
satisfaction (Oliver, 2010), need fulfillment can be more
clearly determined in business contexts.
115
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Volume 31 · Number 1 · 2016 · 112–122
4.2 Expectancy disconfirmation and social exchange
theories
Having offered a working definition of CDBS provider
satisfaction, a general framework for CDBS satisfaction
formation can now be considered. The most widely applied
theoretical perspective in the customer satisfaction literature is
the E/D paradigm (Ilgen, 1971; Oliver, 1980). This
perspective is not, however, without its limitations. In CDBS
services contexts, the ongoing nature of service delivery
diminishes the influence of expectations in the satisfaction
formation process.
Social exchange theory (SET) (Blau, 1964; Chang et al., 2012)
has the potential to complement expectancy disconfirmation by
allowing for acknowledgment that there is a human component,
indeed often a relational aspect, to business service provision.
Originating in the psychology literature, the E/D (or
disconfirmation) paradigm suggests that satisfaction is formed by
considering the actual performance of a product or service and
the expected performance of a product or service. Alternatively,
SET, which originated in the sociology literature, suggests that
satisfaction is influenced primarily by social and economic
outcomes and the comparison of these outcomes to alternatives.
In keeping with the idea that satisfaction is largely an evaluative
process (rather than an emotional one), a key advantage of the
E/D framework is that it considers how satisfaction is formed.
Research in this area has carefully examined how individuals
compare expectations to performance and under what conditions
this comparison process results in increased or decreased levels of
satisfaction. A key advantage of SET is that it considers the
interpersonal variables influencing satisfaction, more effectively
identifying what variables influence satisfaction formation.
Research has identified a number of antecedents that influence
the satisfaction of an exchange partner, especially in relational
B2B contexts. Merging these theories together enables us to
better understand organizational processing and identify the
relational influences shaping business service satisfaction.
4.3 Specific satisfaction assessments
From a theory perspective, conceptualizing CDBS satisfaction
at the global level of analysis recognizes that it is a function of
multiple aspects of the exchange relationship (Crosby and
Stephens, 1987). As such, the framework for CDBS
satisfaction formation (Figure 2) takes into account that
specific satisfaction assessments influence the formation of the
more global satisfaction evaluation. This has managerial
relevance. as a global satisfaction score does not reveal where
or how the firm is succeeding or failing. Here, by merging the
disconfirmation framework with SET, three distinct
satisfaction assessments may now be identified: service
satisfaction, social satisfaction and economic satisfaction. Each of
these specific satisfaction assessments relate to an important
focal area for business customers. They have differing
antecedents which may be evaluated using distinct processes.
Research using the disconfirmation framework is especially
applicable to service satisfaction. Oliver’s (2010) definition of
performance-based satisfaction, which is grounded in the
disconfirmation paradigm, focuses on the actual product or
service provided to the customer. Service satisfaction does not
necessarily involve evaluations of the outcomes of the service
performance. Instead, service satisfaction is based on a
 A framework of satisfaction for continually delivered business services Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Elten Briggs, Timothy D. Landry and Patricia J. Daugherty Volume 31 · Number 1 · 2016 · 112–122

Figure 2 A framework for satisfaction formation in continually delivered business services

Specific Global
Customer Satisfaction Satisfaction
Observation Assessments Assessment

Derived from Service Consumer

Expectancy- Performance Service
Evaluative
Disconfirmation Satisfaction
Processes
Theory

CDBS
Economic Consumer Economic Provider
Outcomes Evaluative
Satisfaction Satisfaction
Derived from Processes
Social
Exchange
Theory
Social Consumer
Outcomes Social
Evaluative
Satisfaction
Processes
Downloaded by Anelis Plus Association At 04:29 27 February 2016 (PT)

technical assessment of how a service performs is compared to
the established criteria of the business customer. The
following definition is provided for service satisfaction:
Service satisfaction refers to the business customer’s assessment of the
performance of services delivered by a service provider.
Doorn (2008) models satisfaction with service performance as
a positive antecedent of a global satisfaction evaluation in the
context of logistics services. This is consistent with earlier
research suggesting that perceptions of a service should be
transferred to the service provider in relational contexts
(Crosby and Stephens, 1987). Likewise, the satisfaction
framework developed in this study explicitly differentiates
between satisfaction with the service provider and satisfaction
with the services provision. By disentangling these differing
satisfaction assessments, research can generate better
understanding of the process of CDBS satisfaction formation.
While many studies applying ideas from the disconfirmation
paradigm tend to focus on the service being delivered, SET
focuses on the outcomes of an exchange relationship. The
outcomes are both social and economic (Emerson, 1962; Lambe
et al., 2001). Research suggests that customers form satisfaction
evaluations of these social and economic outcomes (Geyskens
and Steenkamp, 2000). The following definitions of social
satisfaction and economic satisfaction are based on the work of
Crosby et al. (1990) and Geyskens and Steenkamp (2000):
Social satisfaction refers to the business customer’s assessment of its
interaction experiences with a service provider.
Economic satisfaction is the business customer’s assessment of the economic
outcomes that flow from a relationship with its service provider.
Social and economic aspects have both been considered key
components of relationship satisfaction (Gassenheimer and
Ramsey, 1994; Gassenheimer et al., 1995). However, research
has demonstrated that social and economic satisfactions are
distinct constructs (Geyskens et al., 1999; Geyskens and
Steenkamp, 2000). Research has also demonstrated that
performance-based service satisfaction and outcome-based
service satisfaction offer unique influences on business
outcomes (Stan et al., 2004). Given the theoretical support for
the existence and distinctiveness of these constructs, it is
suggested that each will have a unique effect on global
satisfaction with a service provider. Social aspects of
satisfaction that positively influence global satisfaction
evaluations include fairness (Patterson et al., 1997), relational
performance (Stank et al., 1999; Vickery et al., 2004) and
service encounter quality (Jayawardhena, 2010). While review
of the CDBS satisfaction literature did uncover studies clearly
assessing the influence of economic satisfaction on global
satisfaction, economic outcomes have proven to be
instrumental in global evaluations of service providers (Briggs
et al., 2007). This leads to the following proposition:
P1. Service satisfaction, economic satisfaction and social
satisfaction are independent and important (specific)
predictors of (global) CDBS provider satisfaction.
5. Research propositions concerning services
satisfaction
The last section considered complementary theoretical
perspectives and developed a general conceptual framework of
satisfaction in the CDBS context involving three important
specific satisfaction assessments: service satisfaction, economic
satisfaction and social satisfaction. This section offers research
propositions regarding how the most prevalent of these
assessments, service satisfaction, should be operationally
formulated. Following Oliver (2010), we suggest that service
satisfaction is based on various types of evaluative processes.
That is, customers perceive service performance and then
process that performance directly or by integrating the
observation into a more comprehensive evaluation that
ultimately leads to the satisfaction assessment. There is strong
theoretical and/or empirical support for customers’ use of at
least four distinct evaluative processes in the formation of their
service satisfaction assessment:
1 cumulative disconfirmation;
2 velocity performance;
3 service quality; and
4 service value.

116
 A framework of satisfaction for continually delivered business services
Elten Briggs, Timothy D. Landry and Patricia J. Daugherty
Propositions related to these evaluative processes are
discussed in the following sections.
5.1 Disconfirmation
In many business service settings, disconfirmation – the extent
to which performance exceeds or falls short of expectations –
has been found to be a strong determinant of satisfaction
(Patterson et al., 1997; Patterson, 2000; Hill, 2006; Molinari
et al., 2008). However, most of these studies occur in settings
that do not fit with CDBS (i.e. the finished service product
had been delivered to the customer and consumption is not
ongoing). For example, Patterson et al. (1997) examines
satisfaction with a consulting project and Hill (2006) examines
satisfaction with a delivered advertising creative product. In
these cases, the consumer can consider expectations prior to
the services delivery and make comparisons to performance
after service delivery. This kind of assessment becomes more
complicated when service relationships stretch over several
years, as individuals have difficulty accessing the original
Downloaded by Anelis Plus Association At 04:29 27 February 2016 (PT)
expectation levels. In CDBS settings, disconfirmation is not
based on one but several instances of service delivery.
Cumulative disconfirmation, albeit not a perfect indicator,
would better reflect the overall degree that a service has
exceeded or fallen short of expectations. Cumulative
evaluations are not bounded by a defined period of time and
allow the customer to consider multiple experiences with a
service provider (Olsen and Johnson, 2003). Formally:
P2. When calling on the expectancy disconfirmation
paradigm for modeling CDBS contexts, cumulative
disconfirmation is a more appropriate antecedent than
traditional disconfirmation.
5.2 Velocity performance
In the satisfaction literature, research has overwhelmingly
supported a direct influence of performance on satisfaction in
both consumer contexts (Churchill and Surprenant, 1982;
Szymanski and Henard, 2001) and business services contexts
(Patterson et al., 1997; Hill, 2006). Oliver (2010) also
supports this direct influence of performance on satisfaction, a
process he refers to as “unappraised cognition”. For CDBS
contexts, however, performance is observed at multiple points
in time, so an alternative approach to conceptualizing the
performance¡satisfaction relationship should be considered.
One promising approach, based in psychology, is velocity
performance. Psychology research extends thinking on
satisfaction by expanding the traditional conceptualization of
performance to two dimensions: positional performance and
velocity performance (Hsee and Abelson, 1991; Hsee et al.,
1991; Hsee et al., 1994). Positional performance represents
the manner in which we ordinarily think about performance. A
performance level is observed at a certain point in time such
that the higher the observed level of performance, the higher
the satisfaction with that performance. Velocity performance
describes how performance is changing when observed at
multiple points in time. Changes in performance levels are
jointly considered with elapsed time to determine satisfaction
with performance. The faster performance is changing in a
positive direction, the higher the satisfaction.
Both the current level of service performance (positional) and
the rate at which the service performance is improving in a
117
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Volume 31 · Number 1 · 2016 · 112–122
positive direction (velocity) will have distinct influences on
satisfaction, though the importance of position and velocity will
vary across contexts. Hsee and Abelson (1991) demonstrate in
two experiments that velocity performance is positively related to
individuals’ satisfaction in non-purchasing situations. In B2B
service contexts, velocity performance can entail the speed with
which a service provider is able to reach desired performance
levels, make needed adjustments for changing customer
preferences and implement service enhancements. Briggs et al.
(2010) found empirical evidence of a distinct influence of
velocity performance on service satisfaction in the third-partly
logistics industry. While traditional positional performance
perceptions were generally more critical to service satisfaction
formation, velocity performance demonstrated increased
importance when business customers operated in environments
characterized by high levels of competitively intense or market
turbulence (Jaworski and Kohli, 1993). Considering the
theoretical arguments and empirical evidence from related
literature, it is proposed:
P3. When evaluating the direct influence of service
performance on service satisfaction in CDBS contexts,
velocity performance should be considered as an
additional explanatory variable, especially when the
customers operate in industries characterized by high
levels of competitive intensity or market turbulence.
5.3 Service quality and service value
Several CDBS studies have evaluated service quality, instead
of service performance, as an antecedent to service satisfaction
(Bruhn and Frommeyer, 2004; Wiertz et al., 2004; Spreng
et al., 2009; Jayawardhena, 2010; Vize et al., 2013). Oliver
(2010) describes service quality as “a judgment of
performance excellence”. Service quality has been commonly
conceptualized as multi-dimensional and based partly on
observed service performance in both industrial and consumer
settings (Gounaris, 2005; Parasuraman et al., 1988). These
conceptualizations imply that service performance perception
is integral to the service quality evaluation. Perhaps due to a
high degree of conceptual overlap, research studies in B2B
services have not evaluated both service performance and
services quality in the same research model. Quality
judgments may be more appropriate when service
performance is difficult to assess objectively. For example,
customers of janitorial services may find quality to be an
appropriate metric, whereas customers of logistics services will
be able to assess service performance in a more objective
manner.
In addition to service quality and performance, many
studies have found value to be an important antecedent of
satisfaction (Lapierre et al., 1999; Taylor and Hunter, 2003;
Lam et al., 2004; Liu et al., 2005; Whittaker et al., 2007; Gil
et al., 2008; Jayawardhena, 2010; Evanschitzky et al., 2012).
While a few researchers conceptualize value as a global
construct with several factors or dimensions (Whittaker et al.,
2007; Gil et al., 2008), value has most commonly been viewed
as a trade-off between the costs and or time invested by the
customer compared to the performance or quality of the
service received, and even broad global conceptualizations of
service value consider the quality/value tradeoff to be a key
 A framework of satisfaction for continually delivered business services
Elten Briggs, Timothy D. Landry and Patricia J. Daugherty
component. Thus, service quality has generally been modeled
as antecedent to value (Lapierre et al., 1999; Whittaker et al.,
2007; Jayawardhena, 2010).
Finally, a few research studies have evaluated the influence
of both service quality and service value on satisfaction
simultaneously (Lapierre et al., 1999; Whittaker et al., 2007;
Jayawardhena, 2010). These studies have generally found the
relationship between service value and satisfaction to be
stronger than the relationship between service quality and
satisfaction. Lapierre et al. (1999) argues that B2B service
providers should follow a value strategy rather than a quality
strategy to more effectively position themselves in the
marketplace. Value takes in the account the bottom line,
which should be especially meaningful for business customers.
These arguments lead to the following proposition:
P4. When mode0ling CDBS service satisfaction, service
quality should be considered instead of service
performance when performance is difficult to assess
Downloaded by Anelis Plus Association At 04:29 27 February 2016 (PT)
objectively and service value should be modeled in
addition to service performance or service quality.
6. Research propositions concerning social and
economic satisfaction
This section discusses the satisfaction assessments derived
from SET, economic satisfaction and social satisfaction.
These satisfaction assessments are distinct from service
satisfaction because they are formed based on a customer’s
evaluations of the social and economic benefits of an exchange
relationship rather than an evaluation of the actual service
being delivered. Blau (1964, p. 91) defines the concept of
social exchange as “[. . .] voluntary actions of individuals that
are motivated by the returns they are expected to bring from
others”. The returns can be social and/or economic (Emerson,
1976) and occur at some cost to each party in the exchange
(Homas, 1958). Over time, these returns produce some level
of dependency on the exchange relationship (Kelley and
Thibaut, 1978). The more satisfactory the returns, the more
inclined the party is to remain in the exchange relationship
(Lambe et al., 2001). However, while service performance has
commonly been incorporated into CDBS satisfaction studies,
economic and social outcomes have received little attention
(Bolton et al., 2003; Schakett et al., 2011).
The economic outcomes that a B2B service customer may
derive from its exchange with a service provider include
benefits such as sales growth, enhanced strategic positioning,
reduced operating costs and improved product offerings.
Social outcomes include camaraderie, respect, affirmation and
communication. Social aspects of service encounters tend to
be a greater determinant of service encounter quality
perception (Paulin et al., 2000), so service encounter quality
may be viewed as a type of social outcome. Intercompany
relational dynamics may add complexity to the processes
by which social outcomes influence satisfaction in CDBS
contexts where the individual that communicates with the
service provider is not the principle evaluator of the service.
Given that social exchange is indeed a separate concept
from economic exchange, the question arises, “Which social
aspects of a business relationship should be conceptualized?”
This, of course, depends on the purpose of the research and
118
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Volume 31 · Number 1 · 2016 · 112–122
the corresponding research sample but some generalities can
be offered for CDBS satisfaction. One observation is that
social satisfaction for purchasers of the service (e.g. small
business owners and procurement specialists) is markedly
different from the employees consuming the service. In CDBS
contexts, social interaction with the service’s sales team, and
the social capital derived from being associated with
industry-leading service providers, should be explicitly tapped.
Indeed, it is at higher levels within organization that global
concepts such as service provider satisfaction are likely to be
managerially germane. Stated differently, social interactions at
the employee level, despite their critical role in the co-creation
of services, should matter less in organizational assessments of
CDBS satisfaction. Moreover, even with continual performance
feedback mechanisms, social feedback from employees (e.g.
dock workers interacting with a 3PL) is not likely to be
regularly reported – making the concept at the “typical” level
of analysis for satisfaction studies (i.e. the service’s consumer)
impractical and likely inconsequential.
Prior research in business services confirms the importance
of both economic and social considerations given that business
customers seek economic returns from their relationships with
other organizations and desire to have quality interactions
with long-term exchange partners (Bolton et al., 2003;
Schakett et al., 2011). These interactions are dyadic and occur
at both the interpersonal and interorganizational level
(Wilson, 1995). Importantly, Geyskens et al. (1999) observe
that economic satisfaction is likely to have differing
antecedents and consequences than noneconomic
satisfaction. Bolton et al. (2003) experimentally manipulated
social and economic resources, finding that social resources
have a greater influence on the interpersonal form of
satisfaction, while economic resources have a greater influence
on an interorganizational satisfaction, suggesting the two
primarily operate at differing levels. Thus, while some
research in SET combines these two aspects of satisfaction
together into a single relationship satisfaction construct
(Gassenheimer and Ramsey, 1994; Ping, 2003), social
satisfaction and economic satisfaction are conceptualized in
our model as distinct assessments (Figure 2) that operate at
differing levels in a service provider– customer relationship
(i.e. interpersonal vs interorganizational. Thus:
P5a. In CDBS service contexts, the influence of economic
outcomes on customers’ economic satisfaction is best
captured at the interorganizational level.
P5b. In CDBS service contexts, the influence of social
outcomes on customers’ social satisfaction is best
captured at the interpersonal level.
As with service performance, social and economic outcomes
are expected to both directly affect their respective satisfaction
assessment and influence satisfaction through a set of
evaluative processes (Figure 2). SET identifies several
evaluative processes that can be utilized by customers to assess
social and economic outcomes, including outcomes given
comparison level, equity and distributive justice (Emerson,
1976). However, in our review of CDBS research, it appears
these approaches have been largely ignored.
 A framework of satisfaction for continually delivered business services
Elten Briggs, Timothy D. Landry and Patricia J. Daugherty
7. Discussion
7.1 Managerial implications
To create effective service satisfaction programs (Cina, 1989),
business practices derived from an understanding of consumer
transactional contexts must be expanded to incorporate the
dynamics of relational exchange with business customers.
Given the rational and evaluative nature of these customers,
services should be designed to provide value not just quality
(Lapierre et al., 1999). Continually delivered business service
(CDBS) providers should consider that fully satisfying their
customers depends on success on three fronts:
1 monitoring and managing delivery performance to
enhance service satisfaction;
2 managing customer relationships to enhance social
satisfaction; and
3 designing service offerings to enhance economic
satisfaction.
Customer relationship management approaches must be
Downloaded by Anelis Plus Association At 04:29 27 February 2016 (PT)
adapted over time as recent customer experiences modify
existing satisfaction levels (Doorn, 2008; Spreng et al., 2009).
When multiple service deliveries take place over time,
expectations at any single point in time become less impactful
and cumulative assessments become critical to customer
satisfaction.
Further, velocity performance can become an important
consideration, especially when service delivery approaches
continuous levels. Importantly, motives may moderate the
relative weighting individuals assign to the two types of
performance in satisfaction evaluations (Hsee et al., 1991).
Those customers weighting velocity performance heavily will
not be satisfied by simply receiving adequate levels of service
performance, but will desire for service levels to improve at an
acceptable rate over the duration of the exchange relationship.
Effective customer satisfaction programs in CDBS industries
will include performance metrics that can accurately capture
information on velocity performance.
Managers in CDBS contexts should consider that
customers evaluate social and economic outcomes in a variety
of ways. Effective customer satisfaction programs will monitor
social and economic satisfaction separately at differing levels
of analysis, the interpersonal level for social satisfaction and
the firm level for economic satisfaction. Distinct outcomes
drive each type of satisfaction. To truly maximize social
satisfaction, resources including boundary spanning personnel
must be allocated to cultivate interpersonal relationships,
which may be an additional cost for a service provider. When
faced with such trade-offs, however, managers should be
careful about increasing service costs, thereby sacrificing
economic satisfaction for the sake of social satisfaction, given
the rational nature of business customer evaluations. An
important exception would arise in cases where social factors
facilitate the co-creation of the core service offering, thereby
enhancing the economic value of the service offering to the
customer.
7.2 Contributions and future research
The satisfaction formation model presented in this paper
provides a framework for future research studies (Figure 2).
Propositions are developed to guide future satisfaction
119
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Volume 31 · Number 1 · 2016 · 112–122
research in CDBS contexts. Focusing on this specific service
category, the overarching model proposition is that service
satisfaction, economic satisfaction and social satisfaction can
be modeled as distinct antecedents to global satisfaction with
a service provider. While many variations of satisfaction scales
have been utilized in previous studies, service satisfaction is
the most common of the three specific assessments. It is far
less common for studies to assess social and/or economic
satisfaction (Vize et al., 2013), though the relationship
satisfaction may be considered as a combination of the two
(Caceras, 2007; Hsu et al., 2013; Krepapa et al., 2003).
Several measures of global satisfaction exist, though many of
the existing measures also include items relating to satisfaction
with aspects of the relationship (Lam et al., 2004; Liu et al.,
2005; Vickery et al., 2004), which could be based in social
and/or economic rewards. Rigorous scale development on
discriminant measures is a clear research opportunity.
P2-P4 provide direction for the modeling of service
satisfaction. The propositions provide a standardized set of
guidelines to researchers regarding variables to model under
certain conditions. Researchers following these guidelines for
satisfaction studies in CDBS contexts can produce studies that
are more comparable to one another. One key antecedent of
CDBS service satisfaction discussed in these propositions was
velocity performance, which has received only a limited amount
of research attention in the business literature (Briggs et al.,
2010). Variables such as velocity performance that take into
account changes in performance over time have become
increasingly relevant in the present business environment.
P5 relates to economic and social satisfaction. Despite
strong supporting theory from the social exchange literature,
there is scant research involving separate treatment of social
satisfaction and/or economic satisfaction. A key premise is
that social and economic interactions should be investigated at
differing levels, specifically the interpersonal and
interorganizational levels, respectively, which would help
future researchers make clearer distinctions between the
constructs. Further, there is a need for more research on the
evaluative processes that customers apply to social and
economic outcomes.
8. Conclusion
As exchanges in mainstream marketing are becoming more
characteristic of the exchanges in B2B service environments, it
is important for key constructs in the field to be re-examined
within this context. In this paper, we developed a conceptual
model of the satisfaction formation process in B2B service
contexts which integrated key theoretical frameworks:
● the E/D paradigm (prevalent in consumer research);
● velocity performance (psychology); and
● SET (prevalent in channels research).
The conceptual model contributes to current marketing
thought by:
● offering a theoretically based conceptualization of
satisfaction within the CDBS context; and
● organizing relevant antecedents of satisfaction formation
in B2B service contexts from the extant literature.
These ideas and considerations offer marketing managers a
generalizable framework, as they strive to maintain and
 A framework of satisfaction for continually delivered business services
Elten Briggs, Timothy D. Landry and Patricia J. Daugherty
improve customer satisfaction levels in an ever-evolving
marketplace and provide satisfaction researchers with
challenging new directions.
References
Arnold, T.J., Landry, T.D. and Reynolds, J.K. (2007), “Retail
online assurances: typology development and empirical
analysis”, The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice,
Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 299-313.
Bask, A.H. (2001), “Relationships among TPL providers and
members of supply chains – a strategic perspective”, Journal
of Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 26 No. 6,
pp. 470-486.
Blau, P.M. (1964), Exchange and Power in Social Life, John
Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.
Bolton, R.N., Smith, A.K. and Wagner, J. (2003), “Striking
the right balance: designing service to enhance
business-to-business relationships”, Journal of Service
Research, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 271-291.
Downloaded by Anelis Plus Association At 04:29 27 February 2016 (PT)
Briggs, E., Landry, T.D. and Daugherty, P.J. (2007),
“Patronage in continually delivered business service
contexts”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 60 No. 11,
pp. 1144-1151.
Briggs, E., Landry, T.D. and Daugherty, P.J. (2010),
“Investigating the influence of velocity performance on
satisfaction with third party logistics service”, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 39 No. 4, pp. 640-649.
Bruhn, M. and Frommeyer, A. (2004), “Development of
relationship marketing constructs over time: antecedents
and consequences of customer satisfaction in a
business-to-business environment”, Journal of Relationship
Marketing, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 61-76.
Caceres, R.C. and Paparoidamis, N.G. (2007), “Service
quality, relationship satisfaction, trust, commitment and
business-to-business loyalty”, European Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 41 Nos 7/8, pp. 836-867.
Chang, S., Wang, K., Chih, W. and Tsai, W. (2012),
“Building customer commitment in business-to-business
markets”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 41 No. 6,
pp. 940-950.
Chenet, P., Dagger, T.S. and O’Sullivan, D. (2010), “Service
quality, trust, commitment and service differentiation in
business relationships”, Journal of Services Marketing,
Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 336-346.
Churchill, G.A. and Surprenant, C. (1982), “An investigation
into the determinants of customer satisfaction”, Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 491-504.
Cina, C. (1989), “Creating an effective customer satisfaction
program”, Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing,
Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 33-42.
Coviello, N.E., Brodie, R.J., Danaher, P.J. and Johnston, W.J.
(2002), “How firms relate to their markets: an empirical
examination of contemporary marketing practices”, Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 66 No. 3, pp. 33-46.
Crosby, L.A., Evans, K.A. and Cowles, D. (1990),
“Relationship quality in services selling: an interpersonal
influence perspective”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54 No. 3,
pp. 68-81.
Crosby, L.A. and Stephens, N. (1987), “Effects of
relationship marketing on satisfaction, retention, and prices
120
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Volume 31 · Number 1 · 2016 · 112–122
in the life insurance industry”, Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 404-411.
Doorn, J.V. (2008), “Is there a halo effect in satisfaction
formation in business-to-business services?”, Journal of
Service Research, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 123-141.
Doorn, J.V. and Verhoef, P. (2008), “Critical incidents and
the impact of satisfaction on customer share”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 72 No. 4, pp. 123-142.
Dwyer, F.R., Schurr, P.H. and Oh, S. (1987), “Developing
buyer-seller relationships”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 51
No. 2, pp. 11-27.
Emerson, R.M. (1962), “Power-dependence relations”,
American Sociological Review, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 31-41.
Emerson, R.M. (1976), “Social exchange theory”, Annual
Review of Sociology, Vol. 2, pp. 335-362.
Emerson, C.J. and Grimm, C.M. (1999), “Buyer-seller
customer satisfaction: the influence of the environment and
customer service”, Journal of Business and Industrial
Marketing, Vol. 14 Nos 5/6, pp. 403-415.
Evanschitzky, H., Sharma, A. and Prykop, C. (2012), “The
role of the sales employee in securing customer satisfaction”,
European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 46 Nos 3/4, pp. 489-508.
Fornell, C. (1992), “A national customer satisfaction
barometer: the swedish experience”, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 6-21.
Fournier, S. and Mick, D.G. (1999), “Rediscovering
satisfaction”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63 No. 4, pp. 5-23.
Gassenheimer, J.B., Calantone, R.J. and Scully, J.I. (1995),
“Supplier involvement and dealer satisfaction”, Journal of
Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 7-19.
Gassenheimer, J.B. and Ramsey, R. (1994), “The impact of
dependence on dealer satisfaction: a comparison of
reseller-supplier relationships”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 70
No. 3, pp. 253-266.
Geyskens, I. and Steenkamp, J.E.M. (2000), “Economic and
social satisfaction: measurement and relevance to marketing
channel relationships”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 76 No. 1,
pp. 11-32.
Geyskens, I., Steenkamp, J.E.M., Benedict, E.M. and
Kumar, N. (1999), “A meta-analysis of satisfaction in
marketing channel relationships”, Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 223-238.
Giese, J.L. and Cote, J.A. (2000), “Defining consumer
satisfaction”, Academy of Marketing Science Review, Vol. 1
No. 1, pp. 1-27.
Gil, I., Berenguer, G. and Cervera, A. (2008), “The roles of
service encounters, service value, and job satisfaction in
achieving customer satisfaction in business relationships”,
Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 37 No. 8,
pp. 921-939.
Gounaris, S. (2005), “Measuring service quality in B2B
services: an evaluation of the SERVQUAL scale vis-à-vis
the INDSERV scale”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 19
No. 6, pp. 421-435.
Hill, R.M. (2006), “Advertiser satisfaction with advertising
agency creative product”, European Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 40 Nos 11/12, pp. 1254-1270.
Hoch, S.J. and Deighthon, J. (1989), “Managing what
consumers learn from experience”, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 1-20.
 A framework of satisfaction for continually delivered business services
Elten Briggs, Timothy D. Landry and Patricia J. Daugherty
Homas, G.C. (1958), “Social behavior as exchange”, The
American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 63 No. 6, pp. 597-606.
Homburg, C., Koschate, N. and Hoyer, W.D. (2006), “The
role of cognition and affect in the formation of customer
satisfaction”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 70 No. 3, pp. 21-31.
Hsee, C.K. and Abelson, R.P. (1991), “Velocity relation:
satisfaction as a function of the first derivative of outcome
over time”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
Vol. 60 No. 3, pp. 341-347.
Hsee, C.K., Abelson, R.P. and Salovey, P. (1991), “The
relative weighting of position and velocity in satisfaction”,
Psychological Science, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 263-266.
Hsee, C.K., Salovey, P. and Abelson, R.P. (1994), “The
quasi-acceleration relation: satisfaction as a function of the
change of velocity over time”, Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 96-111.
Hsu, L., Wang, K. and Chih, W. (2013), “Effects of web site
characteristics on customer loyalty in B2B e-commerce:
evidence from Taiwan”, Service Industries Journal, Vol. 33
Downloaded by Anelis Plus Association At 04:29 27 February 2016 (PT)
No. 11, pp. 1026-1050.
Ilgen, D.R. (1971), “Satisfaction with performance as a
function of the initial level of expected performance and the
deviation from expectations”, Organizational Behavior and
Human Performance, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 345-361.
Jaworski, B.J. and Kohli, A.K. (1993), “Market orientation:
antecedents and consequences”, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 57 No. 3, pp. 53-70.
Jayawardhena, C. (2010), “The impact of service encounter
quality in service evaluation: evidence from a
business-to-business context”, Journal of Business and
Industrial Marketing, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 338-348.
Jayawardhena, C., Souchon, A.L., Farrell, A.M. and
Glanville, K. (2007), “Outcomes of service encounter
quality in a business-to-business context”, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 575-588.
Kelley, H.H. and Thibaut, J.W. (1978), Interpersonal
Relations: A Theory of Interdependence, John Wiley and Sons,
New York, NY.
Khan, M.S., Naumann, E. and Williams, P. (2012),
“Identifying the key drivers of customer satisfaction and
repurchase intentions: an empirical investigation of
Japanese B2B services”, Journal of Consumer Satisfaction,
Dissatisfaction & Complaining Behavior, Vol. 25 No. 3,
pp. 159-178.
Krepapa, A., Berthon, P., Webb, D. and Pitt, L. (2003),
“Mind the gap: an analysis of service provider versus
customer perceptions of market orientation and the
impact on satisfaction”, European Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 37 Nos 1/2, pp. 197-218.
Lam, S.Y., Shankar, V., Erramilli, M.K. and Murthy, B.
(2004), “Customer value, satisfaction, loyalty, and
switching costs: an illustration from a business-to-business
service context”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 293-311.
Lambe, C.J., Wittman, C.M. and Spekman, R.E. (2001),
“Social exchange theory and research on business-to-
business relational exchange”, Journal of Business-to-Business
Marketing, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 1-36.
Lapierre, J., Filiatrault, P. and Chebat, J. (1999), “Value
strategy rather than quality strategy: a case of
121
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Volume 31 · Number 1 · 2016 · 112–122
business-to-business professional services”, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 235-246.
Lin, Y. and Pekkarinen, S. (2011), “QFD-based modular
logistics service design”, Journal of Business and Industrial
Marketing, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 344-356.
Liu, A.H., Leach, M.P. and Bernhardt, K.L. (2005),
“Examining customer value perceptions of organizational
buyers when sourcing from multiple vendors”, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 58 No. 5, pp. 559-568.
Lovelock, C.H. (1983), “Classifying services to gain strategic
marketing insights”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 47 No. 3,
pp. 9-20.
Mano, H. and Oliver, R.L. (1993), “Assessing the
dimensionality and structure of the consumption
experience: evaluation, feeling, and satisfaction”, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 451-466.
Mentzer, J.T., Flint, D.J. and Hult, T.G.M. (2001),
“Logistics service quality as a segment-customized
process”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 65 No. 4, pp. 82-104.
Molinari, L.K., Abratt, R. and Dion, P. (2008), “Satisfaction,
quality and value and effects on repurchase and positive
word-of-mouth behavioral intentions in a B2B services
context”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 22 Nos 4/5,
pp. 363-373.
Oliver, R.L. (1980), “A cognitive model of the antecedents
and consequences of satisfaction decisions”, Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 460-469.
Oliver, R.L. (1993), “Cognitive, affective, and attribute bases
of the satisfaction response”, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 418-430.
Oliver, R.L. (2010), Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on
the Consumer, 2nd ed., M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY.
Oliver, R.L. and Burke, R.R. (1999), “Expectation processes
in satisfaction formation”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 1
No. 3, pp. 196-214.
Olsen, L.L. and Johnson, M.D. (2003), “Service equity,
satisfaction, and loyalty: from transaction-specific to
cumulative evaluations”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 5
No. 3, pp. 184-195.
Paluch, S. and Blut, M. (2013), “Service separation and
customer satisfaction assessing the service separation/
customer integration paradox”, Journal of Service Research,
Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 415-427.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1988),
“SERVQUAL: a multiple-item scale for measuring
consumer perceptions of service quality”, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 64 No. 1, pp. 12-40.
Patterson, P.G. (2000), “A contingency approach to modeling
satisfaction with management consultancy services”,
Journal of Service Research, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 138-153.
Patterson, P.G., Johnson, L.W. and Spreng, R.A. (1997),
“Modeling the determinants of customer satisfaction for
business-to-business professional services”, Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 4-17.
Paulin, M., Ferguson, R.J. and Payaud, M. (2000), “Business
effectiveness and professional service personnel relational or
transactional managers?”, European Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 34 Nos 3/4, pp. 453-472.
Ping, R.A. (2003), “Antecedents of satisfaction in a marketing
channel”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 79 No. 4, pp. 237-248.
 A framework of satisfaction for continually delivered business services
Elten Briggs, Timothy D. Landry and Patricia J. Daugherty
Rossomme, J. (2003), “Customer satisfaction measurement in
a business-to-business context: a conceptual framework”,
The Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 18
Nos 2/3, pp. 179-195.
Russell-Bennett, R., McColl-Kennedy, J.R. and Coote, L.V.
(2007), “Involvement, satisfaction, and brand loyalty in a
small business services setting”, Journal of Business Research,
Vol. 60 No. 12, pp. 1253-1260.
Rust, R.T. (2004), “If everything is a service, why is this
happening now, and what difference does it make?”, Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 68 No. 1, pp. 23-24.
Schakett, T., Flaschner, A., Gao, T. and El-Ansary, A.
(2011), “Effects of social bonding in business-to-business
relationships”, Journal of Relationship Marketing, Vol. 10
No. 4, pp. 264-280.
Selnes, F. (1998), “Antecedents and consequences of trust
and satisfaction in buyer-seller relationships”, European
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 32 Nos 3/4, pp. 305-322.
Singh, J. and Sirdeshmukh, D. (2000), “Agency and trust
Downloaded by Anelis Plus Association At 04:29 27 February 2016 (PT)
mechanisms in consumer satisfaction and loyalty
judgments”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 28 No. 11, pp. 150-167.
Spreng, R.A., Hui, S.L. and Page, T.F. (2009), “Service
quality and satisfaction in business-to-business services”,
Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 24 Nos 7/8,
pp. 537-548.
Stan, S., Landry, T.D. and Evans, K.R. (2004), “Boundary
spanners’ satisfaction with organizational support services:
an internal communications perspective”, Journal of
Relationship Marketing, Vol. 3 Nos 2/3, pp. 43-63.
Stank, T.P., Goldsby, T.J. and Vickery, S.K. (1999), “Effect
of service supplier performance on satisfaction and loyalty
of store managers in the fast food industry”, Journal of
Operations Management, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 429-447.
Szymanski, D.M. and Henard, D.H. (2001), “Customer
satisfaction: a meta-analysis of the empirical evidence”,
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 29 No. 1,
pp. 16-35.
Taylor, S.A. and Hunter, G. (2003), “An exploratory
investigation into the antecedents of satisfaction, brand
attitude, and loyalty within the (B2B) ecrm industry”,
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
122
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Volume 31 · Number 1 · 2016 · 112–122
Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction, and
Complaining Behavior, Vol. 16, pp. 19-35.
Vargo, S.L. and Lusch, R.F. (2008), “Service-dominant logic:
continuing the evolution”, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 1-10.
Vickery, S.K., Droge, C., Stank, T.P., Goldsby, T.J. and
Markland, R.E. (2004), “The performance implications
of media richness in a business-to-business service
environment: direct vs indirect effects”, Management
Science, Vol. 50 No. 8, pp. 1106-1119.
Vize, R., Coughlan, J., Kennedy, A. and Ellis-Chadwick, F.
(2013), “Technology readiness in a B2B online retail
context: an examination of antecedents and outcomes”,
Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 42 No. 6,
pp. 909-918.
Whittaker, G., Ledden, L. and Kalafatis, S.P. (2007), “A
re-examination of the relationship between value,
satisfaction and intention in business services”, Journal of
Services Marketing, Vol. 21 No. 5, pp. 345-357.
Wiertz, C., Ruyter, K., Keen, C. and Streukens, S. (2004),
“Cooperating for excellence in a multichannel service
systems: an empirical assessment”, Journal of Business
Research, Vol. 57 No. 4, pp. 424-436.
Wilson, D.T. (1995), “An integrated model of buyer-seller
relationships”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 335-345.
Further reading
Oliver, R.L. (1997), Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on
the Consumer, M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY.
Patterson, P.G. and Spreng, R.A. (1997), “Modeling the
relationship between perceived value, satisfaction and
repurchase intentions in a business-to-business, service
context: an empirical examination”, International Journal of
Service Industry Management, Vol. 8 No. 5, pp. 414-434.
Vargo, S.L. and Lusch, R.F. (2004), “Evolving to a new
dominant logic for marketing”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 68
No. 1, pp. 1-17.
Corresponding author
Elten Briggs can be contacted at: ebriggs@uta.edu