APPLICATION OF ACSI MODEL IN BRANDED COFFEE INDUSTRY …

APPLICATION OF ACSI MODEL IN BRANDED COFFEE

INDUSTRY TO PREDICT CUSTOMER LOYALTY

By

Ngakan Bagus Anugrah Wisesa

015201400062

A Skripsi presented to the

Faculty of Business President University

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for

Bachelor Degree in Business Administration

April 2018

i

ii

CONSENT FOR INTELECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHT

Title of

Skripsi

Application of ACSI Model in Branded Coffee Industry

to Predict Customer Loyalty

1. The Author hereby assigns to President University the copyright to the

Contribution named above whereby the University shall have the exclusive

right to publish the Contribution and translations of it wholly or in part

throughout the world during the full term of copyright including renewals and

extensions and all subsidiary rights.

2. The Author retains the right to re-publish the preprint version of the

Contribution without charge and subject only to notifying the University of

the intent to do so and to ensuring that the publication by the University is

properly credited and that the relevant copyright notice is repeated verbatim.

3. The Author retains moral and all proprietary rights other than copyright, such

as patent and trademark rights to any process or procedure described in the

Contribution.

4. The Author guarantees that the Contribution is original, has not been

published previously, is not under consideration for publication elsewhere and

that any necessary permission to quote or reproduce illustrations from another

iv source has been obtained (a copy of any such permission should be sent

with this form).

iii

5. The Author guarantees that the Contribution contains no violation of any

existing copyright or other third-party right or material of an obscene,

indecent, libelous or otherwise unlawful nature and will indemnify the

University against all claims arising from any breach of this warranty.

6. The Author declares that any named person as co-author of the Contribution is

aware of this agreement and has also agreed to the above warranties.

Name Ngakan Bagus Anugrah Wisesa

Date April 19th

, 2018

Signature

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would first like to thank my Savior, Ida Sang Hyang Widhi Wasa for his countless

blessings and strengths to finish this skripsi. I would also like to express my gratitude

towards the people who always support me throughout this skripsi, which are:

1. My dear family, especially my parents and my sister, thank you for all the

supports, prayers, and advice.

2. My advisor, Prof. Dr. Ajay Chauhan the Dean of Faculty of Business at

President University. Thank you for your time, guidance, patience, and

attention. It is an honored to have you as my advisor.

3. Ms. Lina as the Secretary of Business Administration study program and the

lecturers in President University. Thank you for the support, experience,

knowledge, and skills that you have given to me for the past three years.

4. My best friends, Ni Putu Ardilayanti and I Nyoman Krishna Dananjaya.

Thank you for your motivation, and support.

5. My friends and to all parties which I cannot mention one by one. Thank you

for your help and support.

Cikarang, April 2018

Ngakan Bagus Anugrah Wisesa

v

PLAGIARISM DOCUMENT

vi

TABLE OF CONTENT

PANEL OF EXAMINERS ............................................................................................ I

CONSENT FOR INTELECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHT ............................................ II

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .......................................................................................... IV

PLAGIARISM DOCUMENT ..................................................................................... V

TABLE OF CONTENT .............................................................................................. VI

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................. X

CHAPTER I .................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................ 1

1.2 RESEARCH PROBLEM ............................................................................... 2

1.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES ........................................................................... 2

1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ............................................................................ 3

1.5 SIGNIFICANT OF STUDY ........................................................................... 4

1.6 SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY ........................................... 5

1.7 ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY ............................................................. 5

CHAPTER II ................................................................................................................. 7

2.1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 7

2.2 EUROPEAN CONSUMER SATISFACTION INDEX (ECSI) ..................... 7

2.3 AMERICAN CUSTOMER SATISFACTION INDEX (ACSI) ..................... 8

2.4 CUSTOMER LOYALTY .............................................................................. 9

vii

2.5 CUSTOMER COMPLAINT ........................................................................ 10

2.6 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION ................................................................... 10

2.7 PERCEIVED VALUE .................................................................................. 11

2.8 PERCEIVED QUALITY ............................................................................. 11

2.9 CUSTOMER EXPECTATION .................................................................... 12

2.10 RESEARCH GAP ........................................................................................ 13

CHAPTER III ............................................................................................................. 15

3.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 15

3.2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ................................................................ 15

3.3 HYPOTHESIS ............................................................................................. 16

3.4 OPERATION DEFINITION ........................................................................ 16

3.5 RESEARCH INSTRUMENT ...................................................................... 18

3.5.1 QUESTIONNAIRE CONSTRUCTION ..................................................... 18

3.5.2 RELIABILITY ............................................................................................ 20

3.5.3 VALIDITY ................................................................................................. 20

3.6 SAMPLING PLAN ...................................................................................... 21

3.6.1 POPULATION .......................................................................................... 21

3.6.2 SAMPLING METHOD ............................................................................. 22

3.6.3 SAMPLE SIZE .......................................................................................... 22

3.7 DATA ANALYSIS PLAN ........................................................................... 23

CHAPTER IV ............................................................................................................. 24

4.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 24

viii

4.2 DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS ........................................................................ 24

4.2.1 CONFORMITY OF RELIABILITY ........................................................... 24

4.2.2 RESPONDENT PROFILE ........................................................................ 25

4.2.3 FREQUENCY ANALYSIS ......................................................................... 26

4.3 INFERENTIAL ANALYSIS ....................................................................... 32

4.3.1 INTERPRETATION OF SEM MODEL .................................................... 34

4.3.2 INTERPRETATION OF RESULT ............................................................ 37

CHAPTER V .............................................................................................................. 42

CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................... 42

5.1 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................ 42

5.2 FUTURE RECOMMENDATION ............................................................... 43

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................... 44

APPENDICES ............................................................................................................ 47

APPENDIX 1: QUESTIONNAIRE ........................................................................ 47

FIGURES .................................................................................................................... 56

FIGURE 2.1: FONELL SCSB MODEL .................................................................. 56

FIGURE 3.1: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK .................................................... 56

FIGURE 4.1: STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING (SEM) RESULT ......... 57

TABLES ..................................................................................................................... 58

TABLE 3.1: SOURCE OF THE QUESTION ......................................................... 58

ix

TABLE 3.2: PILOT TEST ....................................................................................... 60

TABLE 3.3: VALIDITY TESTING RESULT ........................................................ 61

TABLE 4.1: CONFORMITY OF RELIABILITY .................................................. 62

TABLE 4.2: RESPONDENT PROFILE ANALYSIS RESULT ............................. 63

TABLE 4.3: FREQUENCY TABLE OF CUSTOMER EXPECTATION .............. 64

TABLE 4.4: FREQUENCY TABLE OF PERCEIVED QUALITY ....................... 64

TABLE 4.5: FREQUENCY TABLE OF PERCEIVED VALUE ............................ 64

TABLE 4.6: FREQUENCY TABLE OF CUSTOMER SATISFACTION ............. 64

TABLE 4.7: FREQUENCY TABLE OF CUSTOMER COMPLAINT .................. 65

TABLE 4.8: FREQUENCY TABLE OF CUSTOMER LOYALTY ...................... 65

TABLE 4.9: SEM MODEL FIT TEST RESULT .................................................... 66

TABLE 4.10: REGRESSION WEIGHT RESULT ................................................. 66

TABLE 4.11: SQUARED MULTIPLE CORRELATION ...................................... 66

TABLE 4.11: HYPOTHESIS TESTING RESULT................................................. 67

x

ABSTRACT

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to apply the American Customer Satisfaction Index

(ACSI) Framework toward the branded coffee industry and find out the influences

between ACSI dimensions which are customer expectation, perceived quality,

perceived quality, customer satisfaction, customer complaint, and customer loyalty in

order to predict the customer loyalty in Indonesian branded coffee industry.

Design/Method/Approach

The online questionnaire spread randomly and 384 feedback in total were received.

The questionnaire distributed randomly to citizen of Jakarta who have already visited

the branded coffee shop. Validity and reliability analysis were tested using SPSS

v.24. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was conducted using SPSS v.24 and

AMOS v.24 to test the hypothesis given from this study.

Findings

From the Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) analysis can be found that all the

factor have the influence to the other factor inside ACSI framework and leading

toward customer satisfaction and loyalty. But in the finding, perceived quality do not

have a significant impact toward perceived value and customer satisfaction, and

customer satisfaction also do not have a significant impact toward customer

complaint.

xi

Originality/Value

The ACSI method or framework has been used by many other researchers that in case

of customer satisfaction and loyalty. Furthermore, the research that using ACSI

method or framework mostly conducted around United States of America. Therefore,

this study used the same approach and used in Indonesia which have different culture

from America.

Keywords: American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI), Branded Coffee Shop,

Customer Satisfaction, Customer Loyalty.

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

This study is about the analysis of the customer satisfaction towards branded

coffee industry in Indonesia. Representing International chain of coffee shop and

brand in Jakarta the author used Starbucks and Circle K Coffee. Representing

massive local brand, the author used J.CO Coffee and Maxx Coffee. The increasing

interest of society or customer’s in coffee shops is related to several aspects such as

branding, taste and place (Wicaksono & Sitompul, 2013). The interest has increased

by roughly ten percent for the past year. Although it might not be an equal interest of

which coffee shops or brand has the most interest increased of customers.

Since coffee consumption in Indonesia is expected to grow from 3.32 million

bags GBE (green been equivalent) in 2016-17 to 3.4 million bags GBE in 2017-18 (

(Global Agricultural Information Network, 2017). Consumption growth is being

driven by Indonesia’s expanding middle class, and their growing taste for coffee. This

is supported by the growth of retail coffee outlets and retail chains such as Starbucks,

J.CO, Maxx Coffee, and Circle K Coffee. Starbucks has grown to 326 retail outlets in

Indonesia since 2002 (Starbucks, 2018), while Maxx has grown to 70 outlets since

opening in 2015 (Global Agricultural Information Network, 2017) driven by the

growth of coffee consumption by the middle class. From this fact, there is a room to

2

increase the coffee consumption by make the branded coffee shop. Nowadays, many

branded coffee shop spread around Indonesia that offering branded coffee with a

premium taste. The branded coffee shop also offered for those who would like to

place to hang out with friends and family or even business colleagues. In this study,

the researcher try to predict the customer loyalty toward the branded coffee shop in

Indonesia using ACSI framework.

1.2 Research Problem

The competition is fierce among coffee sellers. As on January, 2018

Starbucks leads the pack with 326 outlets in 22 cities but it is difficult to predict who

will lead in future. To make any business projection, it is important to see what drives

the coffee customers in Indonesia driven by the millennial generation. In short it is

important to see how coffee customer gets satisfied and what will make coffee

customer loyal to a particular coffee brand or coffee retail chain. The theoretical

background is provided by American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI), which

predicts the customer satisfaction and loyalty based on measures of customer

expectation, perceived quality and perceived value. The research problem taken up in

this study is to validate ACSI model with respect to the branded coffee consumption

in Indonesia.

1.3 Research Objectives

There are several research objective for this study which as explained in the below:

3

1. To find out the influence of customer expectation toward perceived quality for

Branded coffee industry in Indonesia

2. To find out the influence of customer expectation towards customer perceived

value for Branded coffee industry in Indonesia

3. To find out the influence of customer expectation towards customer

satisfaction for Branded coffee industry in Indonesia

4. To find out the influence of To find out the influence of perceived quality

towards perceived value for Branded coffee industry in Indonesia

5. To find out the influence of perceived quality towards customer satisfaction

for Branded coffee industry in Indonesia

6. To find out the influence of perceived value towards customer satisfaction for


7. To find out the influence of customer satisfaction towards customer complaint

or customer loyalty for Branded coffee industry in Indonesia

8. To find out the influence of customer satisfaction towards customer loyalty

for Branded coffee industry in Indonesia

9. To find out the influence of customer complain towards customer loyalty for


1.4 Research Questions

From the research objective, the objective can be translated into this following

research question:

4

1. Is there any influence of customer expectation toward perceived quality for

Branded coffee industry in Indonesia?

2. Is there any influence of customer expectation towards customer perceived

value for Branded coffee industry in Indonesia?

3. Is there any influence of customer expectation towards customer satisfaction

for Branded coffee industry in Indonesia?

4. Is there any influence of perceived quality towards perceived value for


5. Is there any influence of perceived quality towards customer satisfaction for


6. Is there any influence of perceived value towards customer satisfaction for


7. Is there any influence of customer satisfaction towards customer complain for


8. Is there any influence of customer satisfaction towards customer loyalty for


9. Is there any influence of customer complain towards customer loyalty for


1.5 Significant of Study

The theoretical significant is the ACSI framework has not been used for

branded coffee consumption in Indonesia. If the model fits the respondent data, it will

further establish the universal applicability of ACSI framework and the further

5

implication for satisfaction study. For the practical significant, the branded coffee

sellers can be advised about the importance of customer expectation, customer

satisfaction and customer loyalty and how to manage these variable.

1.6 Scope and Limitations of the Study

This research concentrates on the components influencing the buy aim

towards Coffee shops and products in Jakarta territory as it were. The elements

influencing which will be additionally talked about here is just constrained into

Customer desire may hold a wide range variable, however in this research, author

concentrate on Big Local brand coffee shops, Big International brand coffee shops,

convenient store coffee brands, and small local coffee mark. The aftereffect of this

examination may not be connected to different products advertising. In any case, this

research may tile the route for the more exhaustive approaching researches to be

broke down further.

1.7 Organization of the Study

This study consists of five chapter which are, introduction, literature review,

methodology, result and analysis, and conclusion. Introduction, as the first chapter,

will be explain about the source of the problem, phenomena in industry, and brief

explanation about the ACSI variable. The second chapter consist of all the variable

theory regarding the study. Since this chapter is literature review, in this chapter the

researcher will explain about the theory of ACSI and other theory that include in this

6

study. Methodology consist of the framework of the study, population and data

gathering plan, and also validity and reliability. The forth chapter will explain about

the result of the study, data processing, and the result interpretation. The last chapter

is conclusion, where the researcher conclude all of the study and give a

recommendation to future study.

7

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

In this chapter the author would like to break down the theory that are being

used in this very thesis. The importance of this chapter is to explain on how the

theory support the analysis in this research. Before the author analyze deeper through

the data that has been gathered it is imperative for the author to explained the theory

behind all the arguments made in this thesis. Whether or not the theory match might

be viewed from this chapter to understand better the research and to avoid confusion.

In this research the author is going to use American Customer’s satisfaction Index or

ACSI. However, other than ACSI there are another theory that the author would like

to explained first and then compare with ACSI to come into conclusion on why the

author used ACSI as the base theory in this research instead of the other theory that

exist.

2.2 European Consumer Satisfaction Index (ECSI)

European experts has been develop The ECSI model based on a set of requirements

(Sarantidou, 2017). According to Bayol et al (2000) & Kristensen et al (2000) The

initial ECSI model consists of seven variable that drives the model; there are five

remote variables which are customer expectations, perceived product quality,

8

perceived service quality, perceived value, and image that become the drivers of the

two central variables which are satisfaction and loyalty (Sarantidou, 2017). ACSI has

introduced a new indictor for satisfaction since 1996 which is consistency of

information while ECSI has not directly included information in their models even

though the effect of information in the selection of manifest variables and was

reflected in some of manifest variables (Yang, Tian, & Zhang, 2004). Due to this

circumstance, the researcher decided not to use ECSI for this study.

2.3 American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI)

Figure 2.1: Fonell SCSB Model

As can be found in the Figure 2.1 above. The ACSI (American Customer

Satisfaction Index), in view of SCSB show which was created by researchers at the

National Quality Research Center at the University of Michigan in 1994, is a measure

of quality of products or administrations as experienced by customer (ACSI, 2018).

The ACSI demonstrate is a circumstances and end results show which begins from

customer expectations to perceived quality, and to perceived value, then those

components affected on customer satisfaction (ACSI) in which the main point, in the

end it leading into two outcomes which is customer complaints or customer loyalty

(Fornell, et al., 2008).

The researcher uses ACSI methodology as it is a versatile model that is

applicable across industries by organizations to benchmark their own customer

9

satisfaction due to its consistent, reliable, and precise approach (ACSI, 2018). By

that, it has been commonly used to measure customer satisfaction and loyalty in retail

industry all over the world (Biscaia, Rosa, e Sa, & Sarrico, 2017). However, ACSI

has not been done in retail industry in Indonesia, particularly in Jabodetabek. Thus,

the researcher would like to see if the ACSI model is applicable in predicting the

customer loyalty on retail industry which in this study is branded coffee shop.

2.4 Customer Loyalty

Customer loyalty can be defined as someone who has a commitment to do a

repeat buying or revisit a chosen product or service constantly in the future; therefore

there will be repeat buying on the same brand, even when there are some situational

factors and marketing hard work that can affect switching behavior (Giovanis &

Athanasopoulou, 2014). On the other hand, Ergun (2013) stated since loyal customers

always make a repeat purchase, it makes the profitability of the firms increase in the

long run. Moreover, Jeong & Lee (2010) founded that customer loyalty means that

whoever make a repeat purchase on goods with exact subject such as product,

service, brand, etc. with the change of circumstance. Shafei & Tabaa (2016) add

another meaning of customer loyalty which it can be express as a level of

permanency in repetitive purchase with customer’s commitment toward the brand.

Customer loyalty can be defined as likelihood of repeat purchase, or repeat purchases

in spite of price increases or positive recommendation to other buyers (Giovanis &

Athanasopoulou, 2015; Shafei & Tabaa, 2016). The customer loyalty is the ultimate

goal or ACSI or similar satisfaction models because to retaining a loyal customer is

10

cheaper than acquiring a new customer (Othman, Kamarohim, & Nizam, 2017). In

conclusion, customer loyalty is a behavior of customers who always do a repeat

buying on the same brand, which driven by the satisfaction toward the

product/service.

2.5 Customer Complaint

Customer complaint can be defined as a response action form the customer

where they expresses their dissatisfaction with products or services. According to

Fornell et al. (1996) if the relationship between the level of customer complaints and

the level of customer loyalty is positive, then the company is successfully turning

complaining customers into loyal customers (Awwad, 2012). The more satisfied the

customers the less chance they will complain, therefore, satisfaction has a negative

relationship with customer complaints (ACSI, 2018).

2.6 Customer Satisfaction

Customer satisfaction has been defined as an evaluation of the perceived

discrepancy between prior expectations and the actual performance of the product as

perceived after its consumption (Othman, Kamarohim, & Nizam, 2017). Satisfaction

can be define as degree or level of meeting the needs or expectation at the end of a

purchase (ACSI, 2018). Customer satisfaction is widely recognized as a key influence

in the formation of consumers’ future purchase intentions. Therefore, customer

satisfaction has become a vital concern for companies and organizations in their

efforts to improve product and service quality, and maintain customer loyalty within

11

a highly competitive marketplace (Awwad, 2012). In the retail industry, Customer

satisfaction can be defined as a post-purchase evaluation of how well a product or

service meets or exceeds the customer expectations (Biscaia, Rosa, e Sa, & Sarrico,

2017).

2.7 Perceived Value

Perceived value is defined as comparison between value of the product or

service toward the price of the product or service in the mind of the customer

(Othman, Kamarohim, & Nizam, 2017). Although price (value for money) is often

very important to the customer's first purchase, it usually has a somewhat smaller

impact on satisfaction for repeat purchases (ACSI, 2018). In other hand, perceived

value can also be defined as the price that customer will accept when purchasing a

certain product or service, which means that when the price is lower than customer

acceptance the customer value will increase (Li, 2017). In the other means that the

customer do not know the price of the product or service. After purchasing, customer

will analyze whether the price is worthwhile for the product which may lead to

satisfaction or dissatisfaction (Othman, Kamarohim, & Nizam, 2017). This condition

will affect the increasing customer satisfaction while the customer think that they feel

satisfied about the product compared with the cost they paid.

2.8 Perceived Quality

Perceived quality can be defined as the overall assessment of the products or

services superiority or excellence based on the users point of view (Li, 2017). Other

12

relevant studies also reported that the consumers' judgment about a product or service

containing overall excellence or superiority considered as perceived quality

(Marakanon & Panjakajornsak, 2017). Perceived quality is measured by which is the

degree to which a product or service meets the customer's individual needs and how

reliable the product or service (ACSI, 2018). Moreover, Biscaia, e Sa, Moura, &

Sarrico (2017) define perceived quality as the perception of quality that relates to

judgments with the quality of the product or service being sold or delivered, both the

tangible aspect such as reliability of the product or service and intangible aspect such

as decency and waiting time. In the other hand, increasing the perceived quality of

product or service is important in formulating or building the customer satisfaction

that will also leading toward customer loyalty (Biscaia, Rosa, e Sa, & Sarrico, 2017).

2.9 Customer Expectation

According to Zeithaml et al. (2006), Customer expectation defined as

customer beliefs toward the product or service delivery compared against the product

quality or service performance is done; which mean that customer expectation is the

relation between the customer prior expectation about the product or service and the

comprehension of product or service quality (William, Appiah, & Botchway, 2014).

Expectations is expressing both prior consumption experience that include

information like advertising and a forecast of the company's ability to deliver quality

in the future (ACSI, 2018). In the other hand, Reena & Singh (2017) stated that

customer expectations are comparison between expected service deliveries that work

as reference points against which performance is judged (Reena & Singh, 2017).

13

Moreover, Awwad (2012) founded that customer expectations refer to the

comparison of quality that customers expect to receive and the result of prior

consumption experience of products or services (Awwad, 2012). When the product or

service exceed customer expectation, this is where the customer satisfaction will

occurs (Othman, Kamarohim, & Nizam, 2017).

2.10 Research Gap

On some previous study, ACSI framework already used in many state

problem of customer satisfaction and also customer loyalty. In this study, the

researcher use ACSI framework toward the branded coffee shop industry to predict

the customer loyalty. When the customer of the branded coffee shop come and visit,

they will hope that they will get what they expected to archive satisfaction and

loyalty. Therefore, customer expectation is become a critical factor to both customer

value and customer satisfaction (Awwad, 2012). In other hand, to create customer

loyalty, customer satisfaction and complain is the important thing. In this research,

the customer complaint will badly impact the customer loyalty in the view of

complaint handling. While all these studies highlight the importance of the stated

variables which are Customer expectations, perceived quality, perceived value,

customer satisfaction, customer complaint, and customer loyalty, ACSI model is the

only model to put a structure to these loose relationships. For the methodology, the

researcher use ACSI rather than ECSI because ACSI model/methodology is more

popular or commonly used in researching customer satisfaction and loyalty for a

14

product or service. Therefore, the ACSI model is worth exploring further and

validating.

15

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

To understand and consider the elements that affect a particular phenomenon,

a methodology is required. This chapter will examine the methods and research

processes used and applied by researchers in this study. In more detail, the purpose of

this chapter is to describe theoretical frameworks, hypothesis, operational definitions

of variables, research instruments and sampling plan which includes population,

sample size, the margin of error, sampling technique, data collection method, validity

,and reliability.

3.2 Theoretical Framework

As mentioned before in the previous chapter, literature review, there are 5

variable that influences the customer loyalty on ACSI framework which are customer

expectation, perceived quality, perceived value, customer satisfaction, and customer

complain. These are the ASCI framework that become the research framework is

given in Figure 3.1 below:

Figure 3.1: Theoretical Framework

From the theoretical framework above, customer expectation and perceived

quality are the independent variable for perceived value, perceived value is the

independent variable for customer satisfaction, customer satisfaction is the

16

independent variable for customer complain, and customer satisfaction and customer

complain are the independent variable for customer loyalty. The dependent variable is

customer loyalty.

3.3 Hypothesis

There are several hypotheses that can be translated from the research

framework in case of the Branded Coffee industry which are:

H1: Customer expectation has positive influences towards customer perceived quality

H2: Customer expectation has positive influences towards customer perceived value

H3 Customer expectation has positive influences towards customer satisfaction

H4: Perceived quality has positive influences towards perceived value

H5: Perceived quality has positive influences towards customer satisfaction

H6: Perceived value has positive influences towards customer satisfaction

H7: Customer satisfaction has negative influences towards customer complain

H8: Customer satisfaction has positive influences towards customer loyalty

H9: Customer complain has negative influences towards customer loyalty

3.4 Operation Definition

Customer expectation: In this study customer expectations defines as what the

customer expected before they purchase in terms of product and service of the

branded coffee shop. The observation component of this variable is whether they

17

meet their expectation according to product customization, expected product

reliability, and overall product quality expectations.

Perceived quality: Perceived quality is the perceived quality that customers have

experienced inside the branded coffee shop in terms of service quality or product

quality, including the sense of reliability and product quality overall experience.

Perceived value: Perceived value means the value that customers get from the

integrated product or service and the price after visiting and have experience in the

branded coffee shop. What is measured is whether the price is under the condition of

a certain quality product or service and/or under certain quality conditions from

experience on price.

Customer satisfaction: In this research, customer satisfaction defines as overall

satisfaction with the product or service experience in the branded coffee shop. The

satisfaction measured from the actual customer experience compare with what

customer expected.

Customer complaint: Customer complaint in this research means how the branded

coffee shop handles the complaint from the customer. The more complain that the

branded coffee shop get which is mean the less customer satisfaction and loyalty.

Customer loyalty: The customer loyalty is the measure of the customer’s intention

to remain a customer to the branded coffee shop. The intention to recommend the

branded coffee shop to family and friends.

18

3.5 Research Instrument

3.5.1 Questionnaire Construction

In this research, the researcher used a questionnaire for its instrument. The

questionnaire consists of 31 questions in the purpose of collecting information from

the respondent.

These questionnaire divided into 3 part of question. The first part consists of

respondent profile. The second part consists of screening question about how many

times that respondent purchase or come to the branded coffee shop in a month,

respondents visiting habit, and the branded coffee shop that they have been visited

(Circle K Coffee, Starbucks, Maxx Coffee, and J.CO). This screening question is

needed because the target respondent of this research is the people that have

experienced the branded coffee shop that has been mentioned. The last part of the

questionnaire is the question related to measuring the main variable of interest. This

part contains six section. The first section is about the customer expectation and

consists of five questions, the second section asks about perceived value that consists

seven questions, next section is about customer value consisting five questions, forth

section asks about customer satisfaction also consists of six questions, fifth section is

about customer complain that consists of three questions and the last section asks

about customer loyalty that consists of five question.

Table 3.1: Source of the Question

19

In order to measure the variable of interest of this study, researcher use the

Likert scale. The scale commonly used in a research which in this case is the

questionnaire. By using Likert scale respondents will be given a choice of 1 to 5, 1 to

7 or even up to 11 responses with neutral points in the middle number. In the final

form, the Likert Scale is used by respondents to express whether they agree or

disagree with the given statement. In this study, researcher will use the 1 to 5 scale

which the most suitable for the purpose of this study because the respondent will not

confuse about their answer whether they agree or disagree with the statement. The 5

point of the scale that have been sufficiently considered by the researcher, which is:

1 = Strongly Disagree

2 = Disagree

3 = Neutral

4 = Agree

5 = Strongly Agree

There is section that use the deferent 5 point of scale which is the third part of

the questionnaire on the fifth section about customer complaint.

1 = Never

2 = Sometimes

3 = Neutral

4 = Often

5 = Frequently

20

3.5.2 Reliability

According to (Colin Phelan, 2005), the definition of reliability is the extent to

which assessment tools produce stable and consistent results. Researcher use

reliability to analyze the research question. Cronbach alpha is used to measure the

data reliability. It is commonly used to measure the data in a Likert scale

questionnaire (Tsoukatos, 2015). Suggest that a value of Cronbach alpha is 0.70 to

provide adequate evidence for internal consistency for the statements or questions.

The reliability can be confirmed by finding out the Cronbach’s Alpha of each

variable which is reported in the Table 3.2:

Table 3.2: Pilot Study

As written in Table 3.2, Cronbach’s Alpha of customer expectation is 0.790,

perceived quality is 0.853, customer value is 0.887, customer satisfaction is 0.939,

customer complain is 0.883 and customer loyalty is 0.932. This information prove

that each of variable’s variance are reliable.

3.5.3 Validity

To make sure there is a connection between each variable, validity is needed.

The researcher use validity method to adapt the concept of this study and prove that

the result of the concept is valid to this research’s purpose. There are two types of

validity that the researcher use in this study which are content validity and construct

validity. Content validity ensuring that the measurements have sufficient and

representative set of instruments that suitable and cover the broad range of areas of

21

the concept of the study. The more instruments of scale reflects the area or the whole

concept as measured, the greater validity that it gets. Construct validity is the validity

that indicates the extent to test that measures the theoretical constructs on which the

study is based on. Factor analysis is the most common use to find the construct

validity. The result of the factor analysis can be seen on Table 3.3 below:

Table 3.3: Validity Testing Result

From the result from the validity test in Table 3.3, all of the variable’s

variance have KMO values more than 0.500 and Barlett's test significance value .000

which mean the factor analysis are correct. For the base component of each variable’s

variance, can be explained that customer expectation is between 60.3% - 63.6%,

perceived quality is 55.2% - 67.3%, perceived value is 53.4% - 71.5%, customer

satisfaction 51.3% - 75.3%, customer complaint is 0.868%, and customer loyalty

63.0% - 79.0%. Furthermore, all of the variable have more than 60% of % of variance

and only one component that extracted for each of variable. This may conclude that

all of the variables are valid.

3.6 Sampling Plan

3.6.1 Population

The population can be defined as all of the individuals or units that include in

the study interest (Larget, 2011). The population of this study is all citizen who lives

in Jakarta, the capital city of Indonesia. By 2015, there are 10,177,900 of Jakarta

22

population. According to Indonesia population census in 2010, there are 9.607.787 of

Jakarta population (Badan Pusat Statistik DKI, 2010).

3.6.2 Sampling Method

There is two way to collect the sample data of the respondents for research

purpose which are random sampling and non-random sampling. Random sampling is

conducted when all of the population of the study has non-zero probability of being

selected as part of the sample of the study (Ochoa, 2017). A non-random sampling is

a sampling technique in which samples are collected under condition that all the

individuals in the population does not have the equal chances to be selected.

Therefore, the sampling method that used for this study is web-based questionnaire,

where the respondent are unknown and randomly selected. Hence, the sampling

method of this study may considered as a random sampling.

3.6.3 Sample Size

The sample size can be defined as the number of sample that selected from the

population. The sample size is important because it related to the percentage margin

of error. Therefore, the sample size is chosen by minimizing the margin of error so

the probability of the sample showing the true population parameter. According to

(Sekaran & Bougie, 2013), if the population is exceeding 1.000.000 the sample size

freeze at 384. Since the population around Jabodetabek is exceeding 1.000.000, the

ideal sample size for this study is 384.

23

3.7 Data Analysis Plan

In this study, the researcher uses the statistical analysis to analyze the sample

data and test the hypothesis using SPSS v.24 and AMOS v.24. Furthermore, the

researcher used descriptive analysis to analyze and find out if there was any outliner

or missing value of the sample.

The factor analysis was conducted to make sure the construct validity. For the

inferential analysis, the researcher considered using Structural Equation Modeling

(SEM) because the research framework is structural and non-linear, therefore

Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) analysis is necessary.

24

CHAPTER IV

RESULT AND ANALYSIS

4.1 Introduction

In this chapter, the researcher will discuss and analyze the result of the study.

As have been mentioned in the previous chapter, the researcher will conduct the

statistical analysis which is descriptive analysis and Structural Equation Modeling

(SEM). The result is this chapter is considered as the purpose of this study.

4.2 Descriptive Analysis

4.2.1 Conformity of Reliability

The reliability can be confirmed by comparing the Cronbach’s alpha of each

variable to the Cronbach’s alpha of each variable in the pilot test as can be seen on

the Table 4.1 below:

Table 4.1: Conformity of Reliability

From Table 4.1, the Cronbach’s alpha of each variable are above the standard

which is 0.7, for the customer expectation is 0.838, perceived quality is 0.870,

perceived value is 0.857, customer satisfaction is 0.903, customer complain is 0.848,

customer loyalty is 0.892. It can be explained that only small gap between the

Cronbach’s alpha achieved in Pilot Study (n = 30) and the Cronbach’s alpha achieved

25

in the final survey (n = 384). Therefore, the researcher conclude that the questions are

reliable and can be used on the similar study.

4.2.2 Respondent Profile

The respondent of this study are the citizen of Jakarta that have visit and

purchase coffee product in branded coffee shop which are Starbucks, J.CO, Maxx

Coffee, Circle K Coffee, and Local Coffee Shop. There are eight category in

respondent profile which are gender, age, current occupation, education, monthly

income, number of visit in a month, visiting habit, and the branded coffee shop that

have been visited. Analysis of the respondent profile can be seen in Table 4.2 below:

Table 4.2: Respondent Profile Analysis Result

From 384 respondents data are collected, for the gender section there are

47.9% (184 respondents) are male and 52.1% (200 respondents) are female. The

respondent mostly comes from 20 – 30 years old is 50.3% (193 respondents), 40.4%

(155 respondent) are below 20 years old, and 9.4% (36 respondents) are above 30

years. In occupation section, 71.9% (276 respondents) are student, 22.7% (87

respondents) are employee, 4.2% (16 respondents) are unemployed, and 1.3% (5

respondents) are entrepreneur. In education section, the respondent mostly came from

college student or above is 85.9% (330 respondents) and 14.1% (54 respondents) are

schooling (SMP, SMA, etc.). 52.1% (200 respondent) are below Rp. 2.000.000

monthly income, 33.9% (130 respondents) are between Rp. 2.000.000 – 5.000.000

monthly income, and 14.1% are above Rp. 5.000.000 monthly income.

26

There were 316 respondents (82.3%) that visit and purchase coffee in branded

coffee shop 1 – 3 times in a month, 57 respondents (14.8%) visit and purchase coffee

in branded coffee shop 3 – 7 times in a month, and 11 respondents (2.9%) visit and

purchase coffee in branded coffee shop above 8 times in a month.

From the visiting habit point of view, 181 respondents (47.1%) are come to

the branded coffee shop with their family or friends, 124 respondent (32.3%) are

come to the branded coffee shop by their self, 63 respondents (16.4%) are come to

the branded coffee shop with their couple, and 16 respondent (4.2%) are come to the

branded coffee shop with their business colleague.

From the branded coffee shop that the customer have been visited, most of the

customer have been visited Starbucks which are 162 respondent (42.2%), 113

respondents (29.4%) visited Circle K coffee shop, 60 respondents (15.6%) visited

Local coffee shop, 46 respondents (12.0%) visited J.CO, and 3 respondets (0.8%)

visited Maxx coffee.

4.2.3 Frequency Analysis

4.2.3.1 Customer Expectation

Table 4.3: Frequency Table of Customer Expectation

The scale of customer expectation consists of five question. The first question

is about the coffee on sale met the customer expectation and from 384 respondents

8.1% are disagree, 28.6% are neutral, and 63.3% agree that the coffee on sale are

meet their expectation. Furthermore, this variance has 3.72 as its mean, 4 as its

27

median, and 0.90 as its standard deviation. The second is about the expected service

and about 7.8% are disagree, 32.3% are neutral, and 59.9% are agree that they

expecting the branded coffee shop staff serve them with a good service. The variance

of this question has 3.69 as its mean, 4 as its median, and 0.93 as its standard

deviation. The third question is about the freshness and the taste of the coffee, 7.3%

are disagree, 27.3% are neutral, 65.4% are agree that they expecting a fresh and rich

taste coffee. The variance of this question has 3.77 as its mean, 4 as its median, and

0.92 as its standard deviation. The fourth question is about the problem solving inside

the branded coffee shop and 10.9% of the respondents are disagree, 34.1% are

neutral, and 54.5% are agree that the branded coffee shop would resolve the problem

quickly and efficiently. The variance of this question has 3.52 as its mean, 4 as its

median, and 0.93 as its standard deviation. The last question is about overall

expectation to the branded coffee shop and 7.0% of the respondents are disagree,

27.1% are neutral, and 65.9% are agree that their overall expectations about the

branded coffee shop are very high. The variance of this question has 3.84 as its mean,

4 as its median, and 0.99 as its standard deviation.

4.2.3.2 Perceived Quality

Table 4.4: Frequency Table of Perceived Quality

The scale of customer expectation consists of six question. The first question

is about the equipment and technology that used by the branded coffee shop and from

384 respondents 4.7% are disagree, 24.7% are neutral, and 70.6% agree that the

branded coffee shop has modern equipment and technology. Furthermore, this

28

variance has 3.95 as its mean, 4 as its median, and 0.93 as its standard deviation. The

second is about the staff attention to the customer and about 9.6% are disagree,

34.6% are neutral, and 55.7% are agree that the branded coffee shop staff pay

individual attention to the customer. The variance of this question has 3.60 as its

mean, 4 as its median, and 0.95 as its standard deviation. The third question is about

the branded coffee shop physical facilities, 4.9% are disagree, 17.2% are neutral,

77.9% are agree that the branded coffee shop physical facilities are visually

appealing. The variance of this question has 4.07 as its mean, 4 as its median, and

0.91 as its standard deviation. The fourth question is about the staff appearance and

3.9% of the respondents are disagree, 18.5% are neutral, and 77.6% are agree that the

branded coffee shop staff are well dressed and appear neat. The variance of this

question has 4.07 as its mean, 4 as its median, and 0.89 as its standard deviation. The

fifth question is about the information of the coffee and 13.0% of the respondents are

disagree, 32.0% are neutral, and 69.1% are agree that had access to clear and

complete information about the coffee that they purchased. The variance of this


last question is about the overall quality of experience in the branded coffee shop and

9.6% of the respondents are disagree, 31.3% are neutral, and 59.1% are agree that

overall quality of experience at the branded coffee shop is very high. The variance of

this question has 3.63 as its mean, 4 as its median, and 0.89 as its standard deviation.

4.2.3.3 Perceived value

Table 4.5: Frequency Table of Perceived Value

29

In the customer expectation, the scale consists of five question. The first

question is about the price of the coffee and from 384 respondents 14.8% are

disagree, 36.2% are neutral, and 49.0% agree that the price charged for the branded

coffee shop coffee is fully justified. Furthermore, this variance has 3.38 as its mean, 3

as its median, and 1.00 as its standard deviation. The second is about how other

people look at the respondent when they visit the branded coffee shop and about

13.0% are disagree, 29.7% are neutral, and 57.3% are agree that they looks good

when visit the branded coffee shop to the people that they know. The variance of this


third question is about the comparison of the price paid and the product value, 10.9%

are disagree, 38.3% are neutral, 50.8% are agree that the branded coffee shop coffee

provides good value compared with the price they paid. The variance of this question

has 3.54 as its mean, 4 as its median, and 0.98 as its standard deviation. The fourth

question is about the comparison of the cost paid and time spent and 16.4% of the

respondents are disagree, 39.3% are neutral, and 44.3% are agree that purchasing

coffee from the Branded Coffee Shop is worthwhile. The variance of this question

has 3.35 as its mean, 3 as its median, and 0.98 as its standard deviation. The last

question is value that the customer get for the money they spent and 9.6% of the

respondents are disagree, 37.5% are neutral, and 52.9% are agree that the customer

get good value for the money they spent in branded coffee shop. The variance of this

question has 3.52 as its mean, 4 as its median, and 0.89 as its standard deviation.

30

4.2.3.4 Customer Satisfaction

Table 4.6: Frequency Table of Customer Satisfaction

The scale of customer satisfaction consists of six question. The first question

is about the satisfaction with the branded coffee shop and from 384 respondents 6.3%

are disagree, 30.2% are neutral, and 63.5% agree that they totally satisfied with the

branded coffee shop. Furthermore, this variance has 3.72 as its mean, 4 as its median,

and 0.87 as its standard deviation. The second is about coming back to visit the

branded coffee and about 8.1% are disagree, 29.7% are neutral, and 62.2% are agree

that they will come back to visit the branded coffee shop again. The variance of this


third question is about how the respondent tell the other about their visit, 10.2% are

disagree, 34.9% are neutral, 54.9% are agree that they will tell others about my visit

to the Branded Coffee Shop in positive terms. The variance of this question has 3.60

as its mean, 4 as its median, and 0.95 as its standard deviation. The fourth question is

about how satisfied the respondent with the branded coffee shop and 8.1% of the

respondents are disagree, 34.9% are neutral, and 57.0% are agree that they are

extremely satisfied with the branded coffee shop. The variance of this question has

3.61 as its mean, 4 as its median, and 0.90 as its standard deviation. The fifth question

is about how the branded coffee shop meet the respondent expectation and 10.4% of

the respondents are disagree, 39.1% are neutral, and 50.5% are agree that the branded

coffee shop always meets my expectations. The variance of this question has 3.49 as

its mean, 4 as its median, and 0.90 as its standard deviation. The last question is about

31

the overall quality of service in the branded coffee shop and 6.0% of the respondents

are disagree, 31.3% are neutral, and 62.8% are agree that overall quality of service

provided by the branded coffee shop is excellent. The variance of this question has

3.73 as its mean, 4 as its median, and 0.90 as its standard deviation.

4.2.3.5 Customer Complain

Table 4.7: Frequency Table of Customer Complain

In the customer complain, the scale only consists of two question. The first

question is about the complaint frequency to the branded coffee shop and from 384

respondents 10.9% are often - frequently, 18.5% are neutral, and 70.6% are never -

sometimes made a complaint to the branded coffee shop. Furthermore, the variance of

the scale has 1.97 as its mean, 2 as its median, and 1.09 as its standard deviation. The

second is about how often that the respondent think their friends made a complaint to

the branded coffee shop and about 12.0% of the respondent are answering often –

frequently, 22.7% are neutral, and 65.4% are never - sometimes made a complaint to

the branded coffee shop. The variance of this question has 2.18 as its mean, 2 as its

median, and 1.06 as its standard deviation.

4.2.3.6 Customer Loyalty

Table 4.8: Frequency Table of Customer Loyalty

The scale of customer loyalty consists of five question. The first question is

about how the respondents say about the branded coffee shop coffee and from 384

respondents 8.1% are disagree, 28.6% are neutral, and 63.3% agree that they say

32

positive things about the branded coffee shop coffee to other people. Furthermore,

this variance has 3.72 as its mean, 4 as its median, and 0.90 as its standard deviation.

The second is about give recommendation to other customer and about 7.8% are

disagree, 32.3% are neutral, and 59.9% are agree that they recommend the branded

coffee shop coffee to others customer. The variance of this question has 3.69 as its

mean, 4 as its median, and 0.93 as its standard deviation. The third question is about

encourage friends and relatives to visit the branded coffee shop, 7.3% are disagree,

27.3% are neutral, 65.4% are agree that they encourage friends and relatives to visit

branded coffee shop. The variance of this question has 3.77 as its mean, 4 as its

median, and 0.92 as its standard deviation. The fourth question is about how the

respondent consider branded coffee shop as the first choice if it comes to having

coffee and 10.9% of the respondents are disagree, 34.1% are neutral, and 54.5% are

agree that they consider the branded coffee shop are their first choice if it comes to

having coffee. The variance of this question has 3.52 as its mean, 4 as its median, and

0.93 as its standard deviation. The last question is about willingness to visit the

branded coffee shop in the future and 7.0% of the respondents are disagree, 27.1%

are neutral, and 65.9% are agree that they will visit the branded coffee shop to have

coffee in future. The variance of this question has 3.84 as its mean, 4 as its median,

and 0.99 as its standard deviation.

4.3 Inferential Analysis

To construct the inferential analysis of this study, the researcher use Structural

Equation Modeling (SEM) that performed using SPSS v.24 and AMOS v.24. The

33

variables consist in this study are Customer Expectation (CE), Perceived Quality

(PQ), Perceived Value (PV), Customer Satisfaction (CS), Customer Complaint (CC)

and Customer Loyalty (CL). Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was performed to

test of the possible hypothesis in this research. In the construct of SEM analysis, a

SEM model should be made in use to analyze the data that can be seen in the Figure

4.1 below:

Figure 4.1: Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Result

Testing the Goodness-of-Fit (GOF) or the fit-ness of the model is needed in

order to ensure that the model is suitable or fit to be analyze. There are some

requirement in order to ensure the model are fit or not which are X2 or Chi-square,

RMSEA, GFI, CMIN/DF, CFI, NFI, and IFI. The model can be considered as a fit

model if there are at least 4 criteria that meet the minimum requirement. The

minimum requirement for each criteria is X2 or Chi-square (>0.05), P value (<0.05),

RMSEA (<0.08), GFI (>0.90), CMIN/DF (<5.0 - >2.0), CFI (>0.90), NFI (>0.80),

TLI (>0.90) and IFI (>0.90) (Newsom, 2005) (Daire Hooper, 2008).

Table 4.9: SEM Model Fit Test Result

As been seen from Table 4.9, the result of the Goodness-of-Fit can be

interpreted the value of CMIN/DF is 2.722 which according to the requirement that

the value <5.0 - <2.0 and it can be considered as good fit. According to the minimum

requirement, P should have value is <0.05. Since the P value of the model is .000, it

indicates as good fit. The SEM model of this study have .917 for CFI value it is

34

considered as good fit. The value for NFI is .879 and it can considered as good fit. In

addition, TLI and IFI have more the 0.9 which is considered as good fit. In

conclusion, the SEM model of this study are more than 4 criteria of Goodness-of-Fit

which is mean the model is good fit.

4.3.1 Interpretation of SEM Model

Table 4.10: Regression Weight Result

In this section, it will be explain about the result of SEM analysis. As can be

seen in Table 4.10, each of the variable hypothesis have been determined whether the

hypothesis is significant or not. There are two indicator to determine it which are CR

or the Critical ratio and P value. The hypothesis is significant if the Critical ration is

above 1.96 and the P value is below 0.05. If the P value is higher than 0.05 it will be

cause a rejection of the hypothesis. The explanation of each variable can be interpret

as follow:

H1: Customer expectation has positive influences towards customer perceived

quality

The C.R value of Customer Expectation towards Perceived Quality is 11.749 and the

P value is *** (Below 0.01), which indicates that Customer Expectation significantly

influences Perceived Quality and H1 is accepted


value

35

The C.R value of Customer Expectation towards Perceived Value is 3.957 and the P

value is *** (Below 0.01), which indicates that Customer Expectation significantly

influences Perceived Value and H2 is accepted


The C.R value of Customer Expectation towards Customer Satisfaction is 2.019 and

the P value is 0.044, which indicates that Customer Expectation significantly

influences Customer Satisfaction and H3 is accepted


The C.R value of Perceived Quality towards Perceived Value is -1.901 and the P

value is 0.057, which indicates that Perceived Quality significantly influences

Perceived Value and H4 is rejected


The C.R value of Perceived Quality towards Customer Satisfaction is -0.459 and the

P value is 0.646, which indicates that Perceived Quality significantly influences

Customer Satisfaction and H5 is rejected


The C.R value of Perceived Value towards Customer Satisfaction is 3.477 and the P

value is *** (Below 0.01), which indicates that Perceived Value significantly

influences Customer Satisfaction and H6 is accepted


36

The C.R value of Customer Satisfaction towards Customer Complain is -1.373 and

the P value is 0.170, which indicates that Customer Satisfaction significantly

influences Customer Complain and H7 is rejected


The C.R value of Customer Satisfaction towards Customer Loyalty is 15.006 and the

P value is *** (Below 0.01), which indicates that Customer Satisfaction significantly

influences Customer Loyalty and H8 is accepted


The C.R value of Customer Complain towards Customer Loyalty is 2.131 and the P

value is 0.033, which indicates that Customer Complain significantly influences

Customer Loyalty and H9 is accepted

Table 4.11: Squared Multiple Correlation

Table 4.11 explain about the variance of each variable construct and it can be

explained by using Squared Multiple Correlation analysis. There are six variable that

connect each other and five of them the mediating variables which are perceived

quality, perceived value, customer satisfaction, customer complaint, and customer

loyalty. As can be seen in Table 4.11, perceived quality has presented .871 or 87.1%

of its variance, which mean that approximately 12.9% of the other indicators did not

mentioned in this research that are able to explain about perceived quality.

Furthermore, other variable is also applied by this condition which are perceived

value variable explained 76.2% of its variance, customer satisfaction variable

37

explained 0.5% of its variance, customer complaint variable explained 90.8% of its

variance, and customer loyalty variable explained 71.4% of its variance.

4.3.2 Interpretation of Result

In this section, the researcher will conduct the summary of the Structural

Equation Modeling (SEM) and regression model analysis result. The Table 4.12 show

the summary of the proposed analysis by the researcher and will be analyzed further.

Table 4.12: Hypothesis Testing Result


quality

Customer expectation has positive influences toward perceived quality and H1 is

accepted. This condition is supported by Howard (1977)’s theory that customer learn

and predict the quality and value from the product by using their expectation and

experience. The more close the quality and the value of product from the customer

expectation, the more satisfaction the customer get. Furthermore, (Biscaia, Rosa, e

Sa, & Sarrico, 2017) also states that customer expectations give or have a direct

influence on perceived quality, perceived value and satisfaction.


value

38

Customer expectation has positive influences toward perceived value and H2 is

accepted. Same as hypothesis 1 that this condition is supported by Howard (1977)’s

theory that customer learn and predict the quality and value from the product by using

their expectation and experience, which can be explain that the expectation of the

customer can influence the perceived value. This hypothesis is also used by (Biscaia,

Rosa, e Sa, & Sarrico, 2017) that find the expectation have a direct impact toward the

perceived value.


Customer expectation has positive influences toward perceived value and H2 is

accepted. Churchill & Surprenant (1982)’s theory support this hypothesis which is the

customer may use different types of expectation in order to determine the satisfaction.

This hypothesis also confirmed by (Almsalam, 2014) that customer expectation has a

positive influence toward customer satisfaction.


Perceived quality not has positive influences toward perceived value and H4 is

rejected. This result different from the research done by Snoj et al (2004) that conduct

the research in Slovenia and the result they found a significant influence between

perceived quality and perceived value (Boris Snoj, 2014). From the theory above, the

researcher conclude that the rejection of the researcher hypothesis could be happen

because of the differences of culture of respondent and the different of research

location.

39


Perceived quality not has positive influences toward customer satisfaction and H5 is

rejected. This is completely different from the research by Cronin and Taylor (1992)

that confirmed customer satisfaction affected by perceived quality and this also

confirmed by the previous research and theory from by Parasuraman, (1988),

Parasuraman et al., (1985), Woodside et al., (1989) (Almsalam, 2014). This rejection

could be happen because the customer that involved in this study do not care about

the perceived quality and they think they came to branded coffee shop which mean

they have nothing to worry about the quality of product not the service. In the other

hand, the cause of this rejection could also be the different of research location.


Perceived value has positive influences toward customer satisfaction and H6 is

accepted. This hypothesis supported by Patterson and Spreng (1997)’s theory that

perceived value give a positive and direct influence toward customer satisfaction

(Khan & Kadir, 2011). The more suitable or worth price for a product the more

satisfaction the customer get. Furthermore, (Biscaia, Rosa, e Sa, & Sarrico, 2017)

also find that perceived value have a positive direct impact toward the satisfaction

index.


Customer satisfaction not has negative or significant influences toward customer

complain and H7 is rejected. According Fornell et al. (1996)’s theory that the

40

decreasing in customer complaint give immediate consequence of increase in

customer satisfaction (Awwad, 2012). This rejection also find by (Awwad, 2012) that

there is no significant influence from customer satisfaction toward customer

complaint. It show in this study, customer satisfaction does not have any influences

toward customer satisfaction. This rejection could be cause by different approach of

the variable’s construct and/or the different customer perspective regarding the

complaint.


Customer satisfaction has negative influences toward customer loyalty and H9 is

accepted. According to Anderson and Sullivan, (1993) and Fornell, (1992) greater

customer loyalty can be driven by customer satisfaction (Awwad, 2012). This

condition also supported by Reichheld& Sasser, (1990)’s theory that the increased of

customer loyalty can be caused by increased overall customer satisfaction (Zekiri,

2011). Furthermore, (Biscaia, Rosa, e Sa, & Sarrico, 2017) also state the variable that

have highest contribution to customer loyalty is customer satisfactions.


Customer complain has negative influences toward customer loyalty and H9 is

accepted. According to Hirschman’s (1970) theory, when the customer satisfaction is

increasing this will has immediate impact that the decreased customer complaints and

increased customer loyalty (Fornell, et al., 2008). With this theory, can be explained

41

that the increase of the decrease of customer complain affecting the increase of the

customer satisfaction. (Awwad, 2012) Also found that customer complaint have a

significant influence toward the customer loyalty.

42

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION

5.1 Conclusion

The study was purposed to find and predict the customer loyalty of the

branded coffee industry using the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI)

framework with one independent variable which is customer expectation; four

mediating variable which are perceived value, perceived quality, customer

satisfaction, and customer loyalty; and one ultimate dependent variable which is

customer loyalty. This study intend whether all five variable on the ACSI model have

a significant influence toward the customer loyalty regarding branded coffee shop in

Indonesia and the result is of this study as follow:

a. Customer expectation has a positive and significant influence toward

customer perceived quality, perceived value, and customer satisfaction

b. Perceived quality does not have any significant influence toward customer

value and customer satisfaction.

c. Perceived value has a significant influence toward customer satisfaction.

d. Customer satisfaction has a no significant influence toward customer

complaint but a great positive or very significant influence toward

customer loyalty

e. Customer complain has a negative influence toward customer loyalty

43

From this conclusion, can be explained that three hypothesis that the

researcher proposed is rejected.

5.2 Future Recommendation

The study was about the prediction of the customer loyalty of branded coffee

industry in Indonesia by using the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI).

This study focused on the branded coffee industry that bring the question about how

satisfied Indonesian coffee drinker toward branded coffee industry in Indonesia in

intention to capture or predict the customer loyalty. For the future research, this study

could be added as reference toward ACSI study or any customer satisfaction and

loyalty study. Since this study conducted in Jakarta, Indonesia, any changes in the

variable construct is accepted especially for perceived quality of the product or

services to capture more accurate data from the similar population, and it also can

considered as further research that perceived quality influence customer satisfaction

on ACSI or any satisfaction and loyalty study.

For the industry sector, this study can be referred as how the to build customer

satisfaction and loyalty from customer expectation, perceived value, and customer

complain. This study conclude that the pricing for the product and the overall services

inside the coffee shop can be considered as the most important factor to increase the

customer satisfaction. If the customer satisfaction is increasing then the customer

loyalty is increasing to. In the other hand the complaint handling is also important

because when the business can handle the complaint positively that mean the

company is success to turn complaint to loyalty.

44

References

ACSI. (2018). The Science of Customer Satisfaction. Retrieved December 2017, from

American Customer Satisfaction Index: http://www.theacsi.org/about-

acsi/the-science-of-customer-satisfaction

Almsalam, S. (2014). The Effects of Customer Expectation and Perceived Service

Quality on Customer Satisfaction. International Journal of Business and

Management Invention, 79-84.

Awwad, M. S. (2012). "An application of the American Customer Satisfaction Index

(ACSI) in the Jordanian mobile phone sector. The TQM Journal, Vol. 24 ,

529-541.

Badan Pusat Statistik DKI. (2010, May 31). Badan Pusat Statistik DKI Jakarta.

Retrieved from Badan Pusat Statistik DKI Jakarta:

http://sp2010.bps.go.id/index.php/site?id=3100000000&wilayah=DKI-Jakarta

Balmer, J. M., & Chen, &. W. (2017). Corporate heritage brands, augmented role

identity and customer satisfaction. European Journal of Marketing, 1510-

1521.

Biscaia, A. R., Rosa, M. J., e Sa, P. M., & Sarrico, C. s. (2017). Assessing customer

satisfaction and loyalty in the retail sector. International Journal of Quality &

Reliability Management, 34(9), 1508 - 1515.

Boris Snoj, A. P. (2014). The relationships among perceived quality, perceived risk

and perceived product value. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 156-

167.

Colin Phelan, J. W. (2005, July 20). EXPLORING RELIABILITY IN ACADEMIC

ASSESSMENT. Retrieved from chfasoa:

https://chfasoa.uni.edu/reliabilityandvalidity.htm

Daire Hooper, J. C. (2008). Structural Equation Modelling: Guidelines for

Determining Model Fit. The Electronic Journal of Business Research

Methods Volume 6, 53 - 60.

Ergun, H. S., & Kuscu, &. Z. (2013). Innovation orientation, market orientation and

e-loyalty: evidence from Turkish e-commerce customers. International

Strategic Management Conference , 509 – 516 .

Fornell, C., Cook, D. C., VanAmburg, D., Morgeson, F., Bryant, B. E., Vanderwill,

L., . . . Trombly, &. J. (2008). ACSI Methodology Report. Michigan: National

Quality Research Center.

Giovanis, A. N., & Athanasopoulou, &. P. (2014). Gaining customer loyalty in the e-

tailing marketplace: the role of e-service quality, e-satisfaction and e-trust .

International Journal Technology Marketing, 288 - 304.

45

Global Agricultural Information Network. (2017). Indonesia Coffee Annual Report

2017. Jakarta: USDA Foreign Agricultural Service.

Jeong, Y., & Lee, &. Y. (2010). A study on the customer satisfaction and customer

loyalty of furniture purchaser in on‐line shop. Asian Journal on Quality, 146-

156.

Khan, N., & Kadir, &. S. (2011). The impact of perceived value dimension on

satisfaction and behavior intention: Young-adult consumers in banking

industry. African Journal of Business Management Vol.5, 4087-4099.

Larget, B. H. (2011). Samples and Populations. Samples and Populations, 1 - 21.

Li, C.-P. (2017). Effects of Brand Image, Perceived Price, Perceived Quality, and

Perceived Value on the Purchase Intention towards Sports and Tourism

Products of the 2016 Taichung International Travel Fair . The Journal of

International Management Studies, 97 - 107.

Marakanon, L., & Panjakajornsak, &. V. (2017). Perceived quality, perceived risk

and customer trust affecting customer loyalty of environmentally friendly

electronics products . Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 24 - 30.

Miguel, M. A. (2009). Loyalty, perceived value and relationship quality in healthcare

services . Journal of Service Management, 20(1).

Newsom. (2005). Some Clarifications and Recommendations on Fit Indices. USP 655

SEM, 1 - 14.

Ochoa, C. (2017, January 12). Random and non-random sampling. Retrieved from

netquest: https://www.netquest.com/blog/en/random-non-random-sampling

Othman, M., Kamarohim, N., & Nizam, &. F. (2017). Brand Credibility, Perceived

Quality and Perceived Value: A Study of Customer Satisfaction. International

Journal of Economics and Management, 763 – 775.

Reena, K., & Singh, &. M. (2017). A Study on Nature of Services and customers’

expectations and perceptions regarding service quality. IOSR Journal of

Business and Management , 12 - 20.

Sarantidou, P. (2017). Enriching the ECSI model using brand strength in the retail

setting . European Journal of Management and Business Economics, 26(3),

294 - 312.

Sekaran, U., & Bougie, &. R. (2013). Research Method for Business: A Skill Building

Approach. United Kingdom: Jhon Wiley & Sons Ltd: Jhon Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Shafei, I., & Tabaa, &. H. (2016). Factors affecting customer loyalty for mobile

telecommunication industry. EuroMed Journal of Business, 347-361.

46

Starbucks. (2018, January ). Starbucks - About Us - Company Information. Retrieved

December 2017, from Starbucks: https://www.starbucks.com/about-

us/company-information

The Statistics Portal. (2017, May 16). Total coffee consumption in Indonesia from

1990 to 2017. Retrieved from The Statistics Portal:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/314982/indonesia-total-coffee-

consumption/

Tsai, M. T., Tsai, C. L., & Chang, H. C. (2010). “The effect of customer value,

customer satisfaction and switching costs on customer loyalty: an empirical

study of hypermarkets in Taiwan”. Social Behavior and Personality, 28(6).

Tsoukatos, A. G. (2015). The role of service fairness in the service quality –

relationship quality – customer loyalty chain An empirical study. Journal of

Service Theory and Practice, 758.

Vinita Kaura, C. S. (2015). Service quality, service convenience, price and fairness,

customer loyalty, and the mediating role of customer satisfactio. International

Journal of Bank Marketing, 33(4).

Wicaksono, A., & Sitompul, L. (2013). A REVIEW BASED ON YOUNG ADULT

CONSUMERS’ PERSPECTIVE: WHAT SHOULD MCCAFE DO? THE

INDONESIAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, 2(19).

William, O., Appiah, E. E., & Botchway, &. E. (2014). ASSESSMENT OF

CUSTOMER EXPECTATION AND PERCEPTION OF SERVICE

QUALITY DELIVERY IN GHANA COMMERCIAL BANK. 1 - 18.

Yang, X., Tian, P., & Zhang, &. Z. (2004). A Comparative Study on Several National

Customer Satisfaction Indices (CSI). National Science Foundation of China, 1

- 5.

Zainuddin. S, A. W. (2016). Building Brand Aura. International Journal of Scientific

and Research Publications, 6(10).

Zekiri, B. A. (2011). Measuring Customer Satisfaction with Service Quality Using

American Customer Satisfaction Model (ACSI Model). International Journal

of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences , 232 - 258.

47

APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Questionnaire

APPLICATION OF ACSI MODEL IN BRANDED COFFEE INDUSTRY TO

PREDICT CUSTOMER LOYALTY

APLIKASI MODEL ACSI PADA INDUSTRI KOPI BRANDED UNTUK

MEMPREDIKSI LOYALITAS PELANGGAN

Dear respected respondent,

I am Business Administration students concentrated in Retail Business from President

University. I am currently working on my research to complete my final assignment,

Thesis/Skripsi. In addition, the survey is made in order to know how perceived quality,

customer expectation and perceived value of Branded Coffee Shop could affect the

customer's satisfaction and customer loyalty. If you would like to spare your time to fill out

this survey intended for Branded Coffee Shop in Indonesia, we would be very grateful. This

questionnaire should only take 3-5 minutes of your time. Please be assured that all answers

you provide will be kept in the strictest confidentially and will be used for the study purpose

only. I would like to thank you for taking the time to complete the survey.

(Kepada responden yang terhormat,

Saya adalah mahasiswa Universitas President Jurusan Administrasi Bisnis yang

terkonsentrasi di Bisnis Ritel. Saat ini saya sedang melakukan penelitian untuk

menyelesaikan tugas akhir saya, Skripsi. Survei ini dilakukan untuk mengetahui bagaimana

persepsi kualitas, harapan pelanggan dan persepsi nilai dari Branded Coffee Shop yang

dapat mempengaruhi kepuasan pelanggan dan loyalitas pelanggan. Jika Anda berkehendak

meluangkan waktu untuk mengisi survei yang ditujukan untuk Branded Coffee Shop di

Indonesia, saya akan sangat berterima kasih. Survei ini akan mengambil waktu anda sekitar

3-5 menit. Hasil survei ini tidak akan disebarluaskan dan hanya akan digunakan sebagai

bahan pembelajaran. Kami mengucapkan terima kasih telah meluangkan waktu untuk

mengisi survei ini.).

I. RESPONDENT PROFILE (PROFIL RESPONDEN)

Check the square (Ceklis dalam kotak nya)

1 Gender Male (Pria)

Jenis kelamin Female (Wanita)

48

2 Age Below 20 years old (Dibawah 20 tahun)

Umur 20-30 years old (20-30 tahun)

Above 30 years old (Diatas 30 tahun)

3 Occupation Student (Pelajar, Mahasiswa)

Pekerjaan Unemployee (Tidak bekerja)

Employee (Karyawan)

Entrepreneur (Pengusaha)

4 Education College student or above (Mahasiswa dan diatasnya)

Tingkat pendidikan Schooling (SMP, SMA, Etc.)

Other

5 Monthly income Above Rp 5.000.000 (Diatas Rp 5.000.000)

Pemasukan per bulan Rp 2.000.000 - Rp 5.000.000

Below Rp. 2.000.000 (Dibawah Rp. 2.000.000)

6

How many times in a month you purchased coffee in Branded Coffee Shop?

(1 - 2)

(2 - 7)

Seberapa sering kah anda membeli kopi di Branded Coffee Shop dalam sebulan?

Above 8 (Diatas 8)

7

Can you tell us about your visiting habit?

Single (Sendiri)

Couple (Pasangan)

Bisakah Anda ceritakan tentang kebiasaan Anda dalam berkunjung?

Family or Friends (Keluarga atau Teman)

Colleague and Business (Client dan rekan bisnis)

8

Have you consumed coffee from any of the Branded Coffee Shops on this list?

Starbucks

Circle K Coffee

Bisakah Sudahkah Anda mengkonsumsi kopi dari salah satu Toko Kopi Bermerek dalam daftar ini?

Maxx Coffee

J.CO

Other Branded Coffee Shop

49

II. QUESTION (PERTANYAAN) (Circle the Number (Lingkari Angka nya))

SECTION A

No. Statement Item (Pernyataan)

Strongly Disagree - Strongly Agree

Sangat Tidak Setuju - Sangat Setuju

1 2 3 4 5

1

The Branded Coffee Shop has modern equipment and technology

1 2 3 4 5 Branded Coffee Shop memiliki peralatan dan teknologi modern

2

The Branded Coffee Shop staff pay individual attention to customers

1 2 3 4 5 Staf Branded Coffee Shop memberi perhatian individual kepada pelanggan

3

The Branded Coffee Shop physical facilities are visually appealing 1 2 3 4 5 Fasilitas fisik Branded Coffee Shop menarik secara visual

4

The Branded Coffee Shop staff are well dressed and appear neat

1 2 3 4 5 Staf Branded Coffee Shop berpakaian bagus dan tampil rapi

5

I had access to clear and complete information about the coffee that I purchased

1 2 3 4 5 Saya memiliki akses untuk mendapatkan informasi yang jelas dan lengkap tentang kopi yang saya beli

6

The overall quality of experience at the Branded Coffee Shop was very high

1 2 3 4 5 Keseluruhan kualitas pengalaman di Branded Coffee Shop sangat tinggi

7 In general, I purchased a coffee of high quality

1 2 3 4 5

50

Secara umum, saya membeli kopi dengan kualitas tinggi

SECTION B




1 2 3 4 5

1

The coffee on sale at the Branded Coffee Shop met my expectations

1 2 3 4 5 Kopi yang dijual di Branded Coffee Shop memenuhi harapan saya

2

The Branded Coffee Shop staff would understand my needs, and serve me in a competent and exemplary way

1 2 3 4 5 Staf Branded Coffee Shop akan memahami kebutuhan saya, dan melayani saya dengan cara yang kompeten dan patut dicontoh

3

The coffee that I was going to buy was totally fresh and rich in taste

1 2 3 4 5 Kopi yang akan saya beli benar-benar segar dan kaya rasanya

4

If there was a problem with the coffee, then the Branded Coffee Shop would resolve it quickly and efficiently

1 2 3 4 5 Jika ada masalah dengan kopi-nya, maka Branded Coffee Shop akan menyelesaikannya dengan cepat dan efisien

5

My overall expectations in relation to the Branded Coffee Shop Coffee were very high

1 2 3 4 5 Harapan saya secara keseluruhan berhubungan dengan kopi Branded Coffee Shop sangat tinggi

51

SECTION C




1 2 3 4 5

1

The price charged for the Branded Coffee Shop coffee is fully justified

1 2 3 4 5 Harga yang dikenakan untuk kopi Branded Coffee Shop sepenuhnya disesuaikan

2

The fact that I visit Branded Coffee Shop looks good to the people I know

1 2 3 4 5 Fakta bahwa saya mengunjungi Branded Coffee Shop terlihat bagus bagi orang-orang yang saya kenal

3

Compared with the price paid, the Branded Coffee Shop coffee provides good value

1 2 3 4 5 Dibandingkan dengan harga yang harus dibayar, kopi Branded Coffee Shop memberikan kualitas yang bagus

4

Compared with the costs paid and time spent, purchasing coffee from the Branded Coffee Shop is worthwhile

1 2 3 4 5 Dibandingkan dengan biaya yang harus dibayar dan waktu yang dihabiskan, membeli kopi dari Branded Coffee Shop sangat berharga

5

Customers get good value for the money they spent in Branded Coffee Shop 1 2 3 4 5 Pelanggan mendapatkan nilai/kualitas terbaik untuk

52

uang yang mereka habiskan di Branded Coffee Shop

SECTION D




1 2 3 4 5

1

As a regular customer, in general, I am totally satisfied with the Branded Coffee Shop

1 2 3 4 5 Sebagai pelanggan tetap, secara umum, saya benar-benar puas dengan Branded Coffee Shop

2

I will come back to visit the Branded Coffee Shop again

1 2 3 4 5 Saya akan kembali mengunjungi Branded Coffee Shop lagi

3

I will tell others about my visit to the Branded Coffee Shop in positive terms

1 2 3 4 5 Saya akan memberitahu orang lain tentang kunjungan saya ke Branded Coffee Shop secara positif

4

Considering everything, I am extremely satisfied with the Branded Coffee Shop products

1 2 3 4 5 Mengingat semuanya, saya sangat puas dengan produk Branded Coffee Shop Coffee

5

The Branded Coffee Shop always meets my expectations Branded Coffee Shop selalu memenuhi harapan saya

1 2 3 4 5

6

The overall quality of the services provided by the Branded Coffee Shop is excellent

1 2 3 4 5

53

Keseluruhan kualitas layanan yang diberikan oleh Branded Coffee Shop sangat baik

SECTION E


Strongly Disagree - Strongly Agree (In case of question E.1 and E.2 read Never –

Frequently)

Sangat Tidak Setuju - Sangat Setuju (Dalam pertanyaan E.1 dan E.2 dibaca Tidak

pernah – Sangat sering)

1 2 3 4 5

1

How often have you made a complaint to the Branded Coffee Shop?

1 2 3 4 5 Seberapa sering Anda mengajukan keluhan ke Branded Coffee Shop?

2

How often do you think your friends made a complaint to the Branded Coffee Shop?

1 2 3 4 5 Seberapa sering Anda mengira teman Anda mengajukan keluhan ke Branded Coffee Shop?

3

If you had to complain, do you disagree that the problem would be resolved well at Branded Coffee Shop?

1 2 3 4 5 Jika Anda harus mengeluh, apakah menurut Anda masalahnya tidak akan terselesaikan dengan baik di Branded Coffee Shop?

54

SECTION F




1 2 3 4 5

1

I say positive things about the Branded Coffee Shop coffee to other people

1 2 3 4 5 Saya mengatakan hal positif tentang kopi Branded Coffee Shop kepada orang lain

2

I recommend the Branded Coffee Shop coffee to others

1 2 3 4 5 Saya sarankan kopi Branded Coffee Shop ke orang lain

3

I encourage friends and relatives to visit Branded Coffee Shop

1 2 3 4 5 Saya mendorong teman dan kerabat untuk mengunjungi Branded Coffee Shop

4

I consider Branded Coffee Shop my first choice if it comes to having coffee

1 2 3 4 5 Saya menganggap Branded Coffee Shop adalah pilihan pertama saya jika membeli kopi

5

I will visit Branded Coffee Shop to have coffee in future also

1 2 3 4 5 Saya akan mengunjungi Branded Coffee Shop untuk minum kopi di masa depan juga

55

56

FIGURES

Figure 2.1: Fonell SCSB Model

Figure 3.1: Theoretical Framework

Customer Satisfaction ( SCSB )

Perceived Performance ( Value )

Customer Expectation Customer

Loyalty

Customer Complaints

57

Figure 4.1: Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Result

58

TABLES

Table 3.1: Source of the Question

Variable Original question Adjusted question Source(s)

Customer

Expectatio

n

The variety of goods on sale at

the store met my expectations

The coffee on sale at the

Branded Coffee Shop met my

expectations

(Biscaia et

al., 2017)

The store staff would

understand my needs, and

serve me in a competent and

exemplary way

The Branded Coffee Shop staff

would understand my needs,

and serve me in a competent

and exemplary way

The good that I was going to

buy was totally reliable and

would not breakdown during

use

The coffee that I was going to

buy was totally fresh and rich

in taste

If there was a problem with the

good, then the store would

resolve it quickly and

efficiently

If there was a problem with the

coffee, then the Branded

Coffee Shop would resolve it

quickly and efficiently

My overall expectations in

relation to the store were very

high

My overall expectations in

relation to the Branded Coffee

Shop were very high

Perceived

Quality

The store has modern

equipment and technology

The Branded Coffee Shop has

modern equipment and

technology

(Esen

Gürbüz,

2008)

Employees pay individual

attention to customers


pay individual attention to

customers

(Allameh et

al., 2015)

Their physical facilities should

be visually appealing

The Branded Coffee Shop

physical facilities are visually

appealing

(Biscaia et

al., 2017)

Their employee should be well

dressed and appear neat


are well dressed and appear

neat

I had access to clear and

transparent information about

the good that I purchased

I had access to clear and

complete information about the

coffee that I purchased

The overall quality of customer

service at the store was very

high

The overall quality of

experience at the Branded

Coffee Shop was very high

In general, I purchased a good

of high quality

In general, I purchased a coffee

of high quality

59

Perceived

Value

The payment of interest or

commission is fully justified

The price charged for the

Branded Coffee Shop coffee is

fully justified

(Roig et al.,

2006)

The fact that I come here looks

good to the people I know

The fact that I visit Branded

Coffee Shop looks good to the

people I know

(Lin et al.,

2005)

Compared with the price you

paid, this web site provides

good eTail service value

Compared with the price paid,

the Branded Coffee Shop

coffee provides good value

Compared with the tangible

and intangible costs you paid,

purchasing from this web site

is worthwhile

Compared with the costs paid

and time spent, purchasing

coffee from the Branded

Coffee Shop is worthwhile

You think you are getting good

value for the money you spent

Customers get good value for

the money they spent in

Branded Coffee Shop

Customer

Satisfactio

n

As a regular customer, in

general, I am totally satisfied

with the store

As a regular customer, in

general, I am totally satisfied

with the Branded Coffee Shop

(Biscaia et

al., 2017)

I will come back to visit TRT

again

I will come back to visit the

Branded Coffee Shop again

(Balmer &

Chen,

2017)

I will tell others about my visit

to TRT in positive terms

I will tell others about my visit

to the Branded Coffee Shop in

positive terms

(Levesque

&

McDougall,

1996)

Considering everything, I am

extremely satisfied with my

bank

Considering everything, I am

extremely satisfied with the

Branded Coffee Shop Fresh

Cafe products

My bank always meets my

expectations

The Branded Coffee Shop

always meets my expectations

The overall quality of the

services provided by my bank

is excellent

The overall quality of the

services provided by the

Branded Coffee Shop is

excellent

Customer

Complain

Have you ever made a

complaint at this store?

How often you have made a

complaint at the Branded

Coffee Shop?

(Biscaia et

al., 2017)

The problem was resolved well How often do you think your

friends made a complaint at the

Branded Coffee Shop?

60

If you had to complain, do you

think that the problem would

be resolved well?

If you had to complain, do you

think that the problem would

not be resolved well at Branded

Coffee Shop?

Customer

Loyalty

I say positive things about this

bank to other people

I say positive things about the

Branded Coffee Shop coffee to

other people

(Kaura et

al., 2015)

I recommend this bank to

others

I recommend the Branded

Coffee Shop coffee to others

I encourage friends and

relatives to do business with

this bank

I encourage friends and

relatives to visit Branded

Coffee Shop

I consider this bank my first

choice to avail banking

services

I consider Branded Coffee

Shop my first choice, if it

comes to having coffee

I will do more business with

this bank in future also

I will visit Branded Coffee

Shop to have coffee in future

also

Table 3.2: Pilot Test

Cronbach's

Alpha

CE .790

PQ .853

PV .887

CS .939

CC .883

CL .932

61

Table 3.3: Validity Testing Result

Research

Instruments KMO

Barlett's

Test

Significance

Extraction % of

Variance

Component

Matrix

Component

Extracted

CE1

.854 .000

.621

60.788

.788

1

CE2 .636 .797

CE3 .627 .792

CE4 .603 .776

CE5 .553 .744

PQ1

.836 .000

.673

60.777

.821

1

PQ2 .576 .759

PQ3 .646 .804

PQ4 .589 .767

PQ5 .552 .743

PQ6 .611 .782

PV1

.857 .000

.543

64.064

.737

1

PV2 .597 .773

PV3 .709 .842

PV4 .639 .799

PV5 .715 .846

CS1

.895 .000

.715

67.660

.715

1

CS2 .686 .686

CS3 .645 .645

CS4 .753 .753

CS5 .748 .748

CS6 .513 .513

CC1 .500 .000

.868 86.807

.932 1

CC2 .868 .932

CL1

.860 .000

.647

70.716

.647

1

CL2 .790 .790

CL3 .751 .751

CL4 .717 .717

CL5 .630 .630

62

Table 4.1: Conformity of Reliability

Pilot Study Whole Study

Cronbach's

Alpha

Cronbach's

Alpha

CE .790 CE .838

PQ .853 PQ .870

PV .887 PV .857

CS .939 CS .903

CC .883 CC .848

CL .932 CL .892

63

Table 4.2: Respondent Profile Analysis Result

Measure Item Frequency

Percentage

(Based on

384 sample

size)

Gender Male 184 47.9%

Female 200 52.1%

Age <20 years old 155 40.4%

20 - 30 years old 193 50.3%

>30 years old 36 9.4%

Occupation Student 276 71.9%

Employee 87 22.7%

Entrepreneur 5 1.3%

Unemployed 16 4.2%

Education Schooling 54 14.1%

College Student or above 330 85.9%

Monthly

Income

< Rp. 2.000.000 200 52.1%

Rp. 2.000.000 - 5.000.000 130 33.9%

> Rp. 5.000.000 54 14.1%

Visit in a

month

(1 - 3) 316 82.3%

(3 - 7) 57 14.8%

>8 11 2.9%

Visiting habit Single 124 32.3%

Couple 63 16.4%

Family or friend 181 47.1%

Colleague and business 16 4.2%

Coffee shop

that have been

visited

Starbucks 162 42.2%

J.Co 46 12.0%

Maxx Coffee 3 0.8%

Circle K Coffee 113 29.4%

Local coffee shop 60 15.6%

64

Table 4.3: Frequency Table of Customer Expectation

Variable Mean Median Std Dev Disagree Neutral Agree

CE1 3.72 4 0.90 8.1 28.6 63.3

CE2 3.69 4 0.93 7.8 32.3 59.9

CE3 3.77 4 0.92 7.3 27.3 65.4

CE4 3.52 4 0.93 10.9 34.1 54.9

CE5 3.84 4 0.99 7.0 27.1 65.9

Table 4.4: Frequency Table of Perceived Quality


PQ1 3.95 4 0.93 4.7 24.7 70.6

PQ2 3.60 4 0.95 9.6 34.6 55.7

PQ3 4.07 4 0.91 4.9 17.2 77.9

PQ4 4.07 4 0.89 3.9 18.5 77.6

PQ5 3.53 4 1.00 13.0 32.0 54.9

PQ6 3.63 4 0.89 9.6 31.3 59.1

Table 4.5: Frequency Table of Perceived Value


PV1 3.38 3 1.00 14.8 36.2 49.0

PV2 3.57 4 1.02 13.0 29.7 57.3

PV3 3.54 4 0.98 10.9 38.3 50.8

PV4 3.35 3 0.98 16.4 39.3 44.3

PV5 3.52 4 0.89 9.6 37.5 52.9

Table 4.6: Frequency Table of Customer Satisfaction


65

CS1 3.72 4 0.87 6.3 30.2 63.5

CS2 3.74 4 0.94 8.1 29.7 62.2

CS3 3.60 4 0.95 10.2 34.9 54.9

CS4 3.61 4 0.90 8.1 34.9 57.0

CS5 3.49 4 0.90 10.4 39.1 50.5

CS6 3.73 4 0.90 6.0 31.3 62.8

Table 4.7: Frequency Table of Customer Complaint


CC1 1.97 2 1.09 70.6 18.5 10.9

CC2 2.18 2 1.06 65.4 22.7 12.0

Table 4.8: Frequency Table of Customer Loyalty


CL1 3.65 4 0.88 7.6 34.6 57.8

CL2 3.54 4 0.91 11.2 34.4 54.4

CL3 3.43 3 0.97 16.1 34.1 49.7

CL4 3.15 3 1.19 28.6 30.5 40.9

CL5 3.55 4 0.98 13.0 33.6 53.4

66

Table 4.9: SEM Model Fit Test Result

Goodness-of Fit

Index

Cut-off

Value Result Evaluation

CMIN/DF (<5.0 - >2.0) 2.722 Accepted

P value (<0.05) 0.000 Accepted

CFI (>0.90) 0.917 Accepted

NFI (<0.80) 0.879 Accepted

TLI (>0.90) 0.906 Accepted

IFI (>0.90) 0.920 Accepted

Table 4.10: Regression Weight Result

Table 4.11: Squared Multiple Correlation

Estimate

PERCEIVED_QUALITY .871

PERCEIVED_VALUE .762

CUSTOMER_COMPLAINT .908

CUSTOMER_SATISFACTION .005

CUSTOMER_LOYALTY .714

67

Table 4.11: Hypothesis Testing Result

Hypothesis CR P Conclusion

Customer expectation Perceived quality 11.749 *** Accepted

Customer expectation Perceived value 3.957 *** Accepted

Customer expectation Customer satisfaction 2.019 .044 Accepted

Perceived quality Perceived value -1.901 .057 Rejected

Perceived quality Customer satisfaction -0.459 .646 Rejected

Perceived value Customer satisfaction 3.477 *** Accepted

Customer satisfaction Customer complain -1.373 .170 Rejected

Customer satisfaction Customer loyalty 15.006 *** Accepted

Customer complain Customer loyalty 2.131 .033 Accepted

Documents

APPLICATION OF ACSI MODEL IN BRANDED COFFEE INDUSTRY …