اثرات سلسله مراتبی کیفیت درک شده روی ارزش درک شده، رضایتمندی و وفاداری: نتایج عملی برگرفته از مراکز آبی روباز عمومی در اسـتـرالیـا The hierarchical effects of perceived quality on perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty: Empirical results from public, outdoor aquatic centres in Australia

۱٫ Introduction Service quality models for sport and leisure contexts are becoming more comprehensive in attempts to identify key antecedents of customer loyalty (e.g., Hightower, Brady, & Baker, 2002; Silcox & Soutar, 2009), with a growing body of research on hierarchical models, mainly based on the Brady and Cronin (2001) multi-dimensional conceptualisation of service quality, which help identify the important factors influencing loyalty (e.g., Clemes, Brush, & Collins, 2011; Ko & Pastore, 2005). Improved understanding of the drivers of loyalty behaviours (such as customer retention and positive word of mouth recommendation) can assist managers in improving organisational financial performance (Fornell, 2007). For example, public sport and leisure services such as aquatic centres in countries such as Australia and England tend to struggle financially thus increasing the importance of retaining current customers and attracting new ones (Howat & Crilley, 2007; Howat, Crilley, & Murray, 2005; Liu, Taylor, & Shibli, 2007). Consequently, pressure for these facilities to be operationally viable, has focused attention on aspects ofthe visitor experience thatfacility managers can influence directly, such as process service quality dimensions, which influence customer satisfaction (Dabholkar, Shepherd, & Thorpe, 2000; Zeithaml, Bitner, & Gremler, 2009). In turn customer satisfaction has a strong influence on loyalty, such as repeat visits, and word of mouth (WOM) recommendation to encourage new customers (Gallarza, Gil-Saura, & Holbrook, 2011; Ganesh, Arnold, & Reynolds, 2000; Voss, Roth, Rosenzweig, Blackmon, & Chase, 2004). The impact of customer satisfaction on loyalty translates into improved financial performance for organisations (Cronin, Brady, & Hult, 2000). Therefore, as a key antecedent to customer satisfaction, service quality has an important role in the financial viability of sport and leisure services such as public aquatic centres. Although sport and leisure researchers have examined service quality for over two decades (e.g., Alexandris, Dimitriadis, & Kasiara, 2001; Chelladurai & Chang, 2000; Crompton & MacKay, 1989; Crompton, MacKay, & Fesenmaier, 1991; Howat, Absher, Crilley, & Milne, 1996) Clemes et al. (2011) identified a need for more sport and leisure research that examines ‘‘. . .the relationships between service quality, satisfaction, customer value and behavioural intentions’’ (p. 371). For example, service quality models do not converge on a single model to explain relationships among perceived quality, value, overall satisfaction, and loyalty measures such as behavioural intentions. Alternative models included service quality as having both a direct and an indirect effect (via satisfaction) on loyalty (Cronin et al., 2000), whereas in other ‘comprehensive’ models, value and satisfaction were both found to meditate service quality, with direct links to behavioural intentions (Brady, Knight, Cronin, Hult, & Keillor, 2005). Several models in spectator sports (Brady, Voorhees, Cronin, & Bourdeau, 2006; Clemes et al., 2011; Hightower et al., 2002) and participant sport and recreation (Murray & Howat, 2002; Silcox & Soutar, 2009) found that perceived quality and perceived value impact loyalty indirectly through satisfaction. In addition, no consensus has been reached regarding the representation and content of the dimensions of perceived quality even within specific sport and leisure contexts. Several studies have focused on identifying the relevant attributes to measure the dimensions of service quality based mainly on either Parasuraman, Berry, and Zeithaml’s (1988) five dimensions of the SERVQUAL model; the functional and technical dimensions of Gro¨nroos’ model (1984, 2005); and more recently Brady and Cronin’s (2001) three dimensions model (i.e., interaction, physical environment, and outcome quality). These studies have tended to either link first-order service quality dimensions directly to other constructs such as value, overall satisfaction and loyalty (e.g., Alexandris, Zahariadis, Tsorbatzoudis, & Grouios, 2004; Howat, Crilley, & McGrath, 2008) or have parcelled service quality dimension items to arrive at an aggregate score for each dimension to subsequently link those aggregate dimensions to a first-order quality construct (Dabholkar et al., 2000). Other service quality literature, however, indicates that these primary service quality dimensions (identified in the context of Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry, 1988; Gro¨nroos, 1984; or Brady & Cronin, 2001) should be viewed as latent constructs consisting of various subdimensions that are distinct for specific industry contexts (Brady & Cronin, 2001). This suggests that the perceived quality construct is hierarchical and multidimensional in nature and is formed by several quality dimensions each of which is measured by a set of individual quality items (Ko & Pastore, 2005). The assumption is that customers’ perceptions of quality occur at multiple levels in a service setting. Customers first evaluate the quality of the interaction with the service provider at the individual attributes level. Then, the quality of the interaction is evaluated at the dimensions level, and finally perceived quality is evaluated at the level of the overall service (Clemes et al., 2011). Only recently, however, has the sport and leisure literature incorporated perceived quality as a hierarchical multidimensional construct, with research based mainly on Brady and Cronin’s (2001) three dimension representation ofthe service quality construct. The perceived quality construct is hypothesised as a third-order latent construct formed by three dimensions, with the three dimensions measured through nine sub-dimensions. These nine sub-dimensions, in turn, are measured through a set of individual attributes specific to the study’s context (e.g., Clemes et al., 2011). With several research disparities in mind, the present study presents and empirically tests a comprehensive conceptual model to examine the direct and indirect effects (through perceived value and satisfaction) of service quality on loyalty. Here, perceived quality is hypothesised as a hierarchical formative construct formed by four latent dimensions: facility presentation, core services, secondary services, and staff. The present study contributes to the sport and leisure service quality literature from both theoretical and managerial perspectives. First, it aligns with recent advances in the general marketing and consumer behaviour literature, which have endorsed the use of hierarchical models to represent or measure service quality in terms of conceptualising and identifying the dimensions of perceived service quality in a diverse range of service contexts (e.g., Collier & Bienstock, 2006; Fassnacht & Koese, 2006) including sport and leisure (Brady & Cronin, 2001). Second, the present study enhances our understanding of service quality evaluations in the sport and leisure literature regarding the role of measuring process dimensions and the role these dimensions play in forming the overall evaluation. As in the present study it is asserted that hierarchical models outperform single-level, multifactor models (Dabholkar et al., 2000) in terms of investigating causal relationships between constructs such as perceived quality, perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty. In single-level, multifactor quality models either formed or reflected by a set of observed service quality dimensions (in which dimension attributes are parcelled to result in an aggregate score for each dimension) aggregated item scores are statistically less reliable than individual scores, because they incorporate measurement errors in modelling the causal relationships between the constructs (Little, Cunningham, & Shahar, 2002). Hierarchical models using individual items (scores) to measure the dimensions of perceived quality provide enhanced diagnostics to understand individual attributes specific to each quality dimension and to investigate if and how quality, value, and satisfaction impact loyalty. In addition, compared to existing hierarchical, multidimensional models (based on Brady and Cronin’s [2001] three-quality dimensions model), process dimensions (facility presentation, core services, secondary services, and staff) are more appropriate in the specific context of aquatic centres. A focus on process dimensions can thus outperform existing models in terms of investigating the causal relationships between constructs such as perceived quality, perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty in the context of outdoor aquatic centres. This further contributes to the discussion in the literature about the direct and indirect effect of quality on loyalty (Clemes et al., 2011). In addition to strengthening theoretical understandings, the present study offers a service quality model that allows facility managers to identify specific attributes of their service that influence customers’ overall evaluations of quality. Identifying the most influential attributes allows managers to focus on those attributes (Crompton & MacKay, 1989; Sachdev & Verma, 2005) that have the strongest impact on overall satisfaction and subsequent behavioural intentions. In the following section of this paper a conceptual framework includes the proposed hypothetical model, overview of key constructs, and the hypotheses.