Author:
Egan-Wyer Carys,Valentin Sofia,Parsmo Åsa
Abstract
AbstractMany retail chains believe that the personal service encounter is the solution to declining sales figures. Via a large-scale study of Swedish fashion consumers, we demonstrate, that this may not necessarily be the case. We argue that retailers can potentially save money and convert more customers by providing a more automated journey, which includes self-service technologies, for some customers, and reserving personal service encounters for those that need it to be converted. The retail industry has a lot to gain (financially) from facilitating a more automated customer acquisition while streamlining and prioritising store employees’ time where it will generate most returns. Based on our findings, we suggest that the successful retail stores of the future will be the ones that can answer the following question: When is it worth investing in the personal service encounter and when are self-service technologies more appropriate? This chapter will help them to do so.
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Reference20 articles.
1. Adcock, M., & Sullivan, D. (2002). Retail Marketing. Thomson.
2. Alhouti, S., Gillespie, E. A., Chang, W., & Davis, L. (2015). The thin line between love and hate of attention: The customer shopping experience. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 23(4), 415–433.
3. Bäckström, K., & Johansson, U. (2017). An exploration of consumers’ experiences in physical stores: Comparing consumers’ and retailers’ perspectives in past and present time. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 27(3), 241–259.
4. Baker, J. (1986). The role of the environment in marketing services: The consumer perspective. In J. A. Czepiel, C. A. Congram, & J. Shanahan (Eds.), The services challenge: Integrating for competitive advantage (pp. 79–84). American Marketing Association.
5. Blázques, M. (2014). Fashion shopping in multichannel retail: The role of Technology in Enhancing the customer experience. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 18(4), 97–116.