سوابق و نتایج نگرش مصرف کننده نسبت به نام های تجاری (برند) رستوران : مطالعه مقایسه ای بین رستوران غذاخوری خوب و اتفاقی

This study examined a theoretical model examining interrelationships among three service qualities (i.e., physical environment quality, interactional quality, and outcome quality). In addition, this study investigated the effects of three service qualities on utilitarian and hedonic attitudes toward restaurant brands and the mediating effects of such attitudes in forming brand preference in full-service restaurants. To further understand unique differences, this study conducted a multi-group analysis comparing the proposed relationships between 318 casual and 303 fine dining patrons (621 full-service restaurant patrons in total). In the full-service restaurant setting, the results of data analysis indicated significant interrelationships among three service qualities. Physical environment quality explained a large amount of variation in both interactional and outcome quality. In turn, interactional quality had a positive effect on outcome quality. Physical environment quality had a significant effect only on hedonic attitude. Interactional and outcome qualities had significant effects on utilitarian and hedonic attitudes toward restaurant brands. Finally, utilitarian and hedonic attitudes toward restaurant brands enhanced brand preference. When separately analyzed, the effect of physical environment quality on hedonic attitude became not significant in casual dining segment. Further, the effect of outcome quality on utilitarian attitude became not significant in fine dining segment. Both theoretical and managerial implications of the results are discussed.

Hospitality service is complex, so restaurateurs should focus not only on food quality but also other elements such as physical environment and employee service to attract more customers, serve them better, and keep them returning (Kivela, 1997 and Reuland et al., 1985). The level of performance in serving customers has been the barometer of customer satisfaction and behavioral intentions (Brady and Cronin, 2001), so measuring service quality by comparing customers’ expectations with perceived performance has received much attention from both marketers and researchers. To measure service quality specifically in the hospitality industry, previous studies have developed diverse measurements like LODGSERV (Knutson et al., 1990), DINESERV (Stevens et al., 1995), TANGSERV (Raajpoot, 2002), and DINESCAPE (Ryu and Jang, 2008). Such scales commonly stress the importance of physical environment quality and interactional quality. Outcome quality, the result of a service transaction (Grönroos, 1984 and Grönroos, 1990), is evaluated after going through process quality. Food quality is the core of the overall dining experience (Auty, 1992, Kivela et al., 1999 and Raajpoot, 2002). Since the level of performance in those three service qualities significantly affects a business's ability to sustain its competitive status (Andaleeb and Caskey, 2007 and Andaleeb and Conway, 2006), existing studies have focused on how to enhance service quality as evaluated by customers. Further, many studies empirically confirmed the relationship of these dimensions with core outcome variables like customer satisfaction and behavioral intentions. For example, Han and Ryu (2009) showed that a high quality physical environment (using décor and artifacts, spatial layout, and ambient conditions) creates more customer satisfaction. Kim et al. (2010) noted that interactional quality affects customer satisfaction. In addition, Namkung and Jang (2007) examined the role of food quality, especially presentation, menu variety, taste, freshness, and temperature, in predicting customer satisfaction. However, there has been little research, focusing on the interrelationships among all three of these service qualities. Customers may first perceive a poor quality physical environment, which could then negatively affect their perception of interactional and outcome qualities. In other words, if the physical environment is not satisfactory, customers may not feel fully satisfied even if restaurants provide great service and food. The results of this study should enable researchers and restaurateurs to better understand how these three service qualities interact. In addition to such performance qualities, brands are important to customers. According to Zhou and Wong (2008), some consumers focus more on brand than product quality. Customers do not consider all attributes when dining out, but they select a restaurant based on a broad attitude toward a particular restaurant brand. Thus, understanding how consumer attitude toward a brand (i.e., the comprehensive evaluation of a brand) is formed is critical. Voss et al. (2003) introduced utilitarian and hedonic components of attitude to better understand customers’ consumption experience. This multidimensional understanding of consumer attitude has special implications for the restaurant industry. People dine out to satisfy their hunger (utilitarian aspect), but also for other purposes, like fun and playfulness (hedonic aspect). Therefore, understanding of how dining experiences affect consumers’ utilitarian and hedonic attitude toward a brand is critical in designing and developing product positioning and increasing satisfaction and behavioral intention. Because brand preference is indispensable in highly competitive businesses, practitioners and researchers have long spotlighted the concept. From a business standpoint, the challenge is that customers could change their favorite brands as they are exposed to variety of attractive brands (Mathur et al., 2003). That is, customers tend to seek better brands of products or services, so their brand preference can change. For businesses to reduce that risk, they should understand what affects brand preference and how to build brand preference. Despite the importance of brand preference, few studies have explored its importance in the restaurant industry. Therefore, the purposes of this study were to (1) investigate the interrelationships among three service qualities including physical environment, interactional, and outcome qualities, (2) examine the effects of three service qualities on consumer attitudes including utilitarian and hedonic attitudes toward restaurant brands, and (3) explore the influences of consumer attitudes toward restaurant brands on brand preference. Further, knowing that diners may visit restaurants with various needs for different restaurants and consequently evaluate performance differently, this study conducted a multi-group analysis of structural parameter invariance test between casual and fine dining restaurants.

This study proposed interrelationships among service qualities and the effects of three service qualities on consumer attitudes toward restaurant brands. In addition, the consequence of customer attitudes toward restaurant brands was derived: brand preference. After integrating the theoretical relationships, a model of 11 hypotheses was proposed and tested using both casual and fine dining respondents and then separately. Overall, physical environment quality had positive influences on both interactional and outcome qualities. In addition, interactional quality had a positive effect on outcome quality. These results suggest that each service quality is not separate but connected to all other service qualities. In the restaurant business, the physical environment provides the first impression, inducing positive emotions like pleasure and arousal in customers. Customers first experience the physical environment so that physical environment quality gradually affects interactional and outcome qualities. The findings imply that restaurant owners need to focus on appealing to customers with eye-catching exterior and interior designs to maximize interactional and outcome qualities. In addition, the results indicated that interactional quality affects outcome quality. This means that delivering comfortable, timely, and dependable service might enhance the customer's evaluation of outcome quality. Therefore, although training employees may be expensive, restaurant operators should consider systematic training to help enhance interactional quality. In the full-service restaurant, physical environment quality did not affect the utilitarian attitude toward a restaurant's brand, but physical environment quality did improve the hedonic attitude toward a restaurant's brand. When separately examined, the effect of physical environment quality on hedonic attitude toward a restaurant's brand was supported only in the fine dining restaurant segment. These results can be explained by the M-R model, suggesting that physical environments could induce human emotions like pleasure and arousal (Mehrabian and Russell, 1974). As mentioned earlier, the hedonic aspect is more associated with emotional arousal (Batra and Ahtola, 1990 and Strahilevitz and Myers, 1998). That is, as physical environments stimulate customers’ emotions such as fun and excitement, customers may build a positive hedonic attitude toward the brand. Therefore, the fine dining restaurant would be able to maximize their customers’ hedonic attitudes toward the restaurant's brand by creating surroundings suited to fine dining. Using subdued, comfortable, and warm lighting (c.f., Ryu and Jang, 2007) or playing classical music (c.f., Areni, 2003) could be ways to create the image of a fine dining restaurant, enhancing customer's hedonic attitude toward the brand. For casual dining restaurant, hedonic attitude toward a restaurant brand can be enhanced through interactional and outcome quality. Interactional quality positively affected the utilitarian attitude and hedonic attitude toward a restaurant's brand. The same results were supported when data for the casual dining and the fine dining were separated. These findings stress the important role of interactional quality, indicating that as customers experience great service at restaurants, they are more likely to have better utilitarian and hedonic attitudes toward restaurant brands. The findings suggest that delivering assured, empathetic, reliable, and responsive services might improve both utilitarian and hedonic attitudes toward restaurant brands. This study further revealed that outcome quality had positive influences on both utilitarian and hedonic attitudes toward a restaurant's brand in the full-service restaurant. However, when separately examined, the relationship between outcome quality and the utilitarian attitude was not supported in the fine dining restaurant segment, although outcome quality did have a positive influence on hedonic attitude toward a restaurant's brand in both segments. This result can be explained by considering the purpose of visiting a fine dining restaurant. Customers dine out at fine dining restaurants for hedonic reasons (Ryu and Han, 2011). That is, fine dining restaurant patrons expect excitement, fun, and enjoyment (hedonic attributes), not functionality, effectiveness, and practicality (utilitarian attributes). These results have practical implications for both casual and fine dining restaurant owners. Providing artistic presentation, extensive menu, etc. (see Table 1) are necessary to build customers’ hedonic attitudes toward a restaurant's brand. Moreover, for casual dining restaurant owners, serving proper food portions, high standards of freshness, and foods held at proper temperatures is also important because these actions will increase customers’ utilitarian attitude toward a restaurant's brand. Consequently, for fine dining restaurants, it is particularly critical to provide great employee services to enhance the utilitarian attitude toward a restaurant brand since interactional quality was the only significant predictor of the utilitarian attitude in this study. This study found that both utilitarian and hedonic attitudes toward a restaurant's brand had positive effects on brand preference. The same results were supported in both casual and fine dining restaurants. Further, tests of differences in path coefficients between the two restaurant segments found no significant difference. The findings imply that consumers who have positive utilitarian and hedonic attitudes toward a restaurant brand are more likely to consider the restaurant a viable choice. Further, the effect of the hedonic attitude found to be stronger than the utilitarian attitude on brand preference both in casual and fine dining restaurants. That is, customers are more likely to develop brand preference based on pleasure-oriented attitude than goal-oriented attitude in dining consumption. From the managerial standpoint, although the functional side is still critical in developing brand preference toward restaurants, restaurateurs need to focus more on hedonics to make customers prefer their restaurant brand.