The quality of a research is typically measured by reliability and validity and also by how generalisable the results are to a wider phenomenon (Braun & Clarke, 2013). However, qualitative business researchers are divided on whether they accept or reject reliability and validity as a proper means of evaluating the quality of research. Especially in constructivist research, the more suitable substitutes for reliability and validity are credibility, transferability, dependability, and conformability (Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2008).
For credibility, the researcher is supposed to question whether he or she is familiar with the researched topic, is the data sufficient enough for the claims made, and can other researchers with the same material achieve relatively similar interpretations and agree with the proposed claims (Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2008; Gummesson, 2000). One way to achieve credibility is to discuss the findings with the participants. This was done in Publications IV and V, where the findings were presented to the participating firms, and
their feedback was requested. Findings from Publications I, II, and III were presented to firms through reports. An important aspect of qualitative inquiry is triangulation, meaning the researcher does not rely on one data source and/or one method. This thesis used triangulation of multiple data sets (Metsämuuronen, 2006). The findings emerged from two different studies; from two different interview sets; and from interviews, diaries, and online reviews.
Transferability refers to the researcher’s responsibility of demonstrating the degree of similarity in the research or parts of it and also the similarity between the conducted research and existing research. The purpose is not to conduct a replication study but to demonstrate similarities between different research contexts (Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2008). The two studied phenomena, customer engagement and value co-destruction, were altogether studied in eight different firms and seven different contexts. Publications I, III, and V examined customer engagement and value co-destruction in a single company, and publications II and IV investigated the same concepts in six and seven organisations, respectively. Publications I and II confirmed some of the findings as generalisable between several industries, as did publications IV and V.
Dependability refers to how much information has been offered to the reader concerning the logic of research, traceability, and documentation; hence, the studies can be replicated (Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2008). All publications include a detailed methods section with an explanation of how the research was conducted and an explanation on the need for the research. The interviews were all recorded and transcribed, and both the recordings and the transcriptions were stored properly.
Conformability refers to “linking findings and interpretations to the data” in such a way that it is easy for others to understand (Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2008, p.294). In other words, conformability means that the data and interpretations made based on that data are not the product of one’s imagination (Braun & Clarke, 2013; Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2008). All of the publications included a detailed methods section with an explanation on how the research was performed. Publications I, II, IV, and V demonstrate the data analysis process through a framework, and the findings are demonstrated in a way that it is clear they emerged from the collected data.
4 THE PUBLICATIONS AND A REVIEW OF THE RESULTS
This chapter discusses the objectives, findings, and main contributions of the five publications that comprise the second part of this thesis. The purpose of this thesis was to investigate how customer engagement influences value co-destruction. Four different questions were asked in order to answer the main research question. The first sub-question investigated the antecedents of customer engagement, and publications I, II, and III shed light on this question. The second sub-question investigated the positive and negative outcomes of customer engagement, and publications I, II and III offered answers to this question. The third sub-question focused on understanding the antecedents of value co-destruction, and publications IV and V investigated this phenomenon. The final sub-question, which focused on investigating the temporal nature of value co-destruction, was explored in Publication IV. The chapter concludes with a summary of the publications’
findings.
4.1
Publication I - Customer engagement in the hotel industry:Perceptions of hotel staff and guests Objectives
The main objective of this study was to investigate the antecedents and outcomes of customer engagement in the hotel industry. Customer engagement plays a specific role the hotel industry because customers tend to rely on customer-engagement activities (e.g.
previous experiences or the firm’s social media presence) when making purchasing decisions. Hotel-specific customer engagement studies are scarce; thus, there is a need for producing more knowledge on hotel industry-specific antecedents.
Main findings
This study identified that customer engagement can be achieved through dialogue, customer engagement strategy, and service experience. These results stress that engagement requires investments from both the firm and the customer. For example, dialogue can happen only if both parties take part in the exchange of information. The results demonstrate that service experience plays a significant role in achieving and maintaining customer engagement because the service experience helps create a very personal relationship between the firm and the customer. Additionally, this publication explored the positive and negative outcomes of customer engagement. Customer engagement benefits firms through monetary benefits, WOM, and loyalty programmes.
Even though specific customer benefits were not identified, service experience can be said to be both an antecedent and a customer benefit because it brings the customer and firm close to each other. The negative outcomes of customer engagement relate to service failure that enforces customer engagement. This implies that firms need to have clear service recovery strategies in place to maintain engagement because if customers
experience service failure and a failed or absent service recovery, they can become disengaged. The results also shed light on how engaged customers can use their disruptive status, meaning how customers can turn a close personal and beneficial relationship into a very opportunistic and demanding relationship.
Contribution
This publication contributes to current customer engagement literature by studying both the antecedents and outcomes of customer engagement empirically. The previous empirical investigations on customer engagement are not extensive. This publication proposed that the antecedents of customer engagement are dialogue, service experience, and customer-engagement strategy. This publication offers empirical evidence on the connection of service experience and customer engagement, an approach which has been moderately addressed in previous studies. Additionally, this study proposed that the negative outcomes of customer engagement are a firm’s enforcement of disengagement and customer’s disruptive actions. Research on the negative outcomes of customer engagement is scarce, and this thesis contributes to current literature by proposing these two outcomes.