Does communicating the customer’s resource integrating role improve or diminish value proposition effectiveness?

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether explicitly communicating the customer’s resource integrating role in value propositions improves or diminishes value proposition effectiveness.

Design/methodology/approach

Based on existing research on value propositions, three effectiveness criteria are used: role clarity, expected customer value, and purchase intention. Two experiments manipulating the presence of the customer’s resource integrating role in value propositions test the conceptual model in both an indirect interaction (Study 1, toothpaste, n=207) and a direct interaction context (Study 2, fitness program, n=228). Additionally, Study 2 includes the moderating role of resource availability.

Findings

Explicitly communicating the customer’s resource integrating role in value propositions increases customers’ role clarity, which in turn influences customer’s attitude toward the service and purchase intention through a service-related (i.e. expected benefits and expected efforts) and an ad-related (i.e. ad credibility and attitude toward the ad) route. However, these results only hold for customers high in resource availability.

Originality/value

This research provides initial empirical support for the often-stated claim that value propositions should include the (potential) value of the offering as well as the (resource integrating) role of the customer. Taking a broader perspective, this research provides initial empirical support for recent calls to develop marketing communication practices that facilitate value-in-use. This paper’s findings show that adopting service logic in marketing communications seems to improve value propositions’ effectiveness.

Citation

Leroi-Werelds, S., Streukens, S., Van Vaerenbergh, Y. and Grönroos, C. (2017), "Does communicating the customer’s resource integrating role improve or diminish value proposition effectiveness?", Journal of Service Management, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 618-639. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-11-2015-0366