Revina, Sharon, Lily, Eve

Queuing

Before

During

After

You really want to buy it (leader) Saw the procession, you might be attracted

(follower) The feeling during queuing

Long time or short time Happy or boring

Purchase feeling(happy? Convenient? Confortable?) Feel worth with the waiting

Buy again, or not?

Purchasing process

Background

Taiwanese love queuing

Background

How do foreigners though about Taiwan’s line-up phenomenon ?

Krispy Kreme You had to wait in line at least 3hr

The Krispy Kreme phenomenon was exhibiting a similar “followship” to what happened with the yellow duck

Background

Followship phenomenon

One brand our product show-up

Media and social network start to sensationalize news

Queuing

Many shops start to sell similar product

Feeling of freshness ↓

Related shops close down

Background

Successful queuing - Disneyland

Background

- from CommonWealth Magazine

There’s a happy economic theory said that：Queuing can bring a sense of value. Many times, something that’s hard-won make you feel particularly valuable.

Enterprise must know how to design a happy line up experience. Use line up phenomenon to enhance the value of the product, and happy feeling of customers.

Waiting may cause customers’ dissatisfaction, but also can enhance the sense of the value of customers.

Objective

2. How the happy queuing experience influence customer evaluation towards brand value?

1. What kind of activity will make you feel happy during queuing?

Literature review- What’s queuing

Definition of queue• Queuing occur when demand exceeding the capacity of the delivery system

(Houston, Bettencourt, Wenger 1998). • For example, when customers arrive at a rate that exceeds a travel agent

capacity to serve; they form a queue to wait for inquiry. • Waits typically take place at the pre-process stage of the service delivery and

tend to have a strong 'first impression' effect. The first impression is a particularly important factor in shaping client's perception of service quality.

Dimension• Three of dimension of consumption process:

⁻ Negative experience (additional cost and effort) ⁻ Symbol of service attractiveness⁻ Desired break or more time in the consumption process

Literature review-Pre process

Queuing as Sacrifice – Negative Experience• Marketers have investigated the psychology of waiting:

⁻ Waiting for service is typically a negative consumer experience and causes unhappiness, frustration, and anxiety (Larson 1987).

⁻ Also, time costs, physiological (fatigue), emotional (depression) all enter explicitly or implicitly into consumer’s perception of sacrifice (Zeithaml 1988).

⁻ When consumers judge on queue, the queue gives contrary signals to the consumers, thus the two forces may cancel off each other making queue length not a good predictor of purchase intention.

Literature review-Pre process

Symbol of service attractiveness• The longer the waiting line, the more attractive seems to be the purpose of

waiting; thus waits may encourage sales or stimulate search for information. • Numerous waiting lines are also caused by price rigidity. The more the value in

use exceeds the price (the value in exchange) the longer is the waiting line (e.g. a line at the entrance of a swimming pool on a hot day).

Desired break or more time in the consumption process• Consumers may be willing to wait because they desire a break (e.g. in a theatre) or

because they want to mark a difference before starting a new activity. Waits may at times increase the consumer's satisfaction because the consumer prefers to slow down the consumption process (e.g. in a restaurant) or to be better prepared for the forthcoming consumption.

Literature review-Pre process

Social Proof: the Positive Signal of Queue • The longer the waiting line, the more attractive seems to be the purpose of

waiting; thus waits may encourage sales or stimulate search for information. • When the queue occurs, it can trigger the attention of passersby and lead to

the effect of Social proof. It presumes that if a lot of people are doing the same thing, they must know something we do not (Cialdini 1993).

• The previous researches indicated as the size of stimulus crowd increased, a greater proportion of passersby adopted the crowd’s behavior (Milgram 1969; Knowles 1976).

Literature review- What’s queuing

• Baker and Cameron suggested that service environment variables could influence the perception of waiting time by either changing customer perception of time or their perception of queue. • Variables related to time perception included music, lighting,

color, employee visibility, filled time, and social interactions. Playing music was found to have positive effects on customer emotional response to the wait and the service organization although positive valence (mood) music resulted in more positive response than negatively valence (mood) music. However, playing music did not change customers’ perceived waiting duration, which was negatively correlated to customer satisfaction.

Literature review - Activity during queuing

Mood influence the customer's perception • As found by Kamins, Marks, and Skinner (1991)"a happy commercial viewed in

the context of a happy program was evaluated more favorably then in the context of a sad program" and conversely.

• In the same vein, Hornik (1992) found that "positive and negative moods resulted in underestimation and overestimation of duration, respectively" in consumers' temporal judgments.

• Even more convincingly, lsen et al. (1978) confirmed the effects of good mood on cognitive processes of consumers: one the mood of consumers in a shopping mall is enhanced (by giving them a gift), good mood improves consumers' evaluations of the per- formance and services records of products they owned.

Literature review-Mood influence

Impact of process change• As customers’ satisfaction with the service will be affected by the perception of

waiting time. The amount of waiting time has been shown to negatively correlate with customer satisfaction.

• When consumers have imperfect information toward the shop, it can be used as a non-paid promotion to create a good quality impression toward consumers’ perception and then indirectly influences consumers’ purchase intention.

• Further, customer evaluation of service quality is partly determined by how long they have waited for the service.

Literature review- Evaluation towards Brand value

Perceived Product Quality• From Kotler (2000) value is given by:

Value = Benefits/Costs = Functional benefits + emotional benefits/ Monetary costs + time cost + energy costs + psychic costs

• For a queue, it signals two type of information to the consumer:• A longer queue leads to higher perceived product quality and greater purchase

intention. • At the same time, it represents more time, physical and psychic cost to consumer,

and then reduces the willingness to buy. • When consumers judge on queue, the queue gives contrary signals to the consumers,

thus the two forces may cancel off each other making queue length not a good predictor of purchase intention.

Literature review- Evaluation towards Brand value

Anticipated Result

Design a happy queuing process to promote brand value

VIDEO: http://youtu.be/0lGcqHnwyf0

Research Method

Case Study

Questionnaire Experience sampling

Leader Follower

Comparison

Case selected

Reference

• Houston Mark B, Betthencourt Lance A., Wenger Sutha (1998) “The relationship between Waiting in a service Queue and Evaluation of Service Quality: A Field Theory Perspective,” Psychology & Marketing: 1998, Dec 15, 8

• Larson Richard (1987), “Perspectives on Queues: Social Justice and the Psychology of Queuing,” Operations Research: 35, Nov/Dec, P.895-905

• Zeithaml Valarie A. (1988) “Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and Value: A Means-End Model and Synthesis of Evidence,” Journal of Marketing: 1988, Jul, 52, 3, P.2-22

• Chebat Jean-Charles, Filiatrault Pierre (1993) “The impact of waiting in line on consumers,” The International Journal of Bank Marketing.Bradford: 1993.11, 2, P.35- 41

• Cialdini, R.1993 Influence: Science and Practice. New York: Harper Collins.Davis Mark M., Heineke, Janelle (1994) “Understanding the Roles of the Customer and the Operation for Better Queue Management,” International Journal of Operations and Production Management Bradford: 1994, 14, 5, P.21-35

• Milgram S., Bickman L., Berkowitz L. (1969) “Note of the Drawing Power ofCrowds of Different size,” The journal of personality and social psychology: 1969, 13, P.79-82.

• Asch S.E. (1951) “Effect of the Group Pressure upon the Modification and Distortion of the Judgement,” in H. Guetzkow (ED.) Groups, leadership, and men, Pittsburgh PA: Carnegie

• Kotler, Philip (2000): Marketing management, N.J.: Prentice Hall, c2000 • Larson Richard (1987), “Perspectives on Queues: Social Justice and the Psychology of Queuing,” Operations Research: 35,

Nov/Dec, P.895-905 • Zhou Rongrong , Soman Dilip (2003), “Looking back: Exploring the psychology of queuing and the effect of the number of

people behind,” Journal of Consumer Research: 2003, Mar, 29, 4, P.517-531

Fung, W. T. (2006). A study of queue: consumers' purchase intention trade off between perceived product and perceived sacrifice.