• Journal of Distribution Research
• /
• v.16 no.4
• /
• pp.65-93
• /
• 2011

As relationship between buyer and seller has been brought closer and long-term relationship has been more important in B2B markets, the importance of service and service convenience increases as well as product. In homogeneous markets, where service offerings are similar and therefore not key competitive differentiator, providing greater convenience may enable a competitive advantage. Service convenience, as conceptualized by Berry et al. (2002), is defined as the consumers' time and effort perceptions related to buying or using a service. For this reason, B2B customers are interested in how fast the service is provided and how much save non-monetary cost like time or effort by the service convenience along with service quality. Therefore, this study attempts to investigate the impact of service convenience on relationship factors such as relationship satisfaction, relationship commitment, and relationship performance. The purpose of this study is to find out whether service convenience can be a new antecedent of relationship quality and relationship performance. In addition, this study tries to examine how five-dimensional service convenience constructs (decision convenience, access convenience, transaction convenience, benefit convenience, post-benefit convenience) affect customers' relationship satisfaction, relationship commitment, and relationship performance. The service convenience comprises five fundamental components - decision convenience (the perceived time and effort costs associated with service purchase or use decisions), access convenience(the perceived time and effort costs associated with initiating service delivery), transaction convenience(the perceived time and effort costs associated with finalizing the transaction), benefit convenience(the perceived time and effort costs associated with experiencing the core benefits of the offering) and post-benefit convenience (the perceived time and effort costs associated with reestablishing subsequent contact with the firm). Earlier studies of perceived service convenience in the industrial market are none. The conventional studies that have dealt with service convenience have usually been made in the consumer market, or they have dealt with convenience aspects in the service process. This service convenience measure for consumer market can be useful tool to estimate service quality in B2B market. The conceptualization developed by Berry et al. (2002) reflects a multistage, experiential consumption process in which evaluations of convenience vary at each stage. For this reason, the service convenience measure is good for B2B service environment which has complex processes and various types. Especially when categorizing B2B service as sequential stage of service delivery like Kumar and Kumar (2004), the Berry's service convenience measure which reflect sequential flow of service deliveries suitable to establish B2B service convenience. For this study, data were gathered from respondents who often buy business service and analyzed by structural equation modeling. The sample size in the present study is 119. Composite reliability values and average variance extracted values were examined for each variable to have reliability. We determine whether the measurement model supports the convergent validity by CFA, and discriminant validity was assessed by examining the correlation matrix of the constructs. For each pair of constructs, the square root of the average variance extracted exceeded their correlations, thus supporting the discriminant validity of the constructs. Hypotheses were tested using the Smart PLS 2.0 and we calculated the PLS path values and followed with a bootstrap re-sampling method to test the hypotheses. Among the five dimensional service convenience constructs, four constructs (decision convenience, transaction convenience, benefit convenience, post-benefit convenience) affected customers' positive relationship satisfaction, relationship commitment, and relationship performance. This result means that service convenience is important cue to improve relationship between buyer and seller. One of the five service convenience dimensions, access convenience, does not affect relationship quality and performance, which implies that the dimension of service convenience is not important factor of cumulative satisfaction. The Cumulative satisfaction can be distinguished from transaction-specific customer satisfaction, which is an immediate post-purchase evaluative judgment or an affective reaction to the most recent transactional experience with the firm. Because access convenience minimizes the physical effort associated with initiating an exchange, the effect on relationship satisfaction similar to cumulative satisfaction may be relatively low in terms of importance than transaction-specific customer satisfaction. Also, B2B firms focus on service quality, price, benefit, follow-up service and so on than convenience of time or place in service because it is relatively difficult to change existing transaction partners in B2B market compared to consumer market. In addition, this study using partial least squares methods reveals that customers' satisfaction and commitment toward relationship has mediating role between the service convenience and relationship performance. The result shows that management and investment to improve service convenience make customers' positive relationship satisfaction, and then the positive relationship satisfaction can enhance the relationship commitment and relationship performance. And to conclude, service convenience management is an important part of successful relationship performance management, and the service convenience is an important antecedent of relationship between buyer and seller such as the relationship commitment and relationship performance. Therefore, it has more important to improve relationship performance that service providers enhance service convenience although competitive service development or service quality improvement is important. Given the pressure to provide increased convenience, it is not surprising that organizations have made significant investments in enhancing the convenience aspect of their product and service offering.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.30 no.10
• /
• pp.1210-1219
• /
• 2001

Introduction : The purpose of this study was to analyze the safety, pullout strength and radiographic characteristics of unicortical and bicortical screws of cervical facet within cadaveric specimens and evaluate the influence of level of training on the positioning of these screws. Methods : Twenty-one cadavers, mean 78.9 years of age, underwent bilateral placement of 3.5mm AO lateral mass screw from C3-C6(n=168) using a slight variation of the Magerl technique. Intraoperative imaging was not used. The right side(unicortical) utilized only 14mm screws(effective length of 11mm) while on the left side to determine the length of the screw after the ventral cortex had been drilled. Three spine surgeons(attending, fellow, chief resident) with varying levels of spine training performed the procedure on seven cadavers each. All spines were harvested and lateral radiographs were taken. Individual cervical vertebrae were carefully dissected and then axial radiographs were taken. The screws were evaluated clinically and radiographically for their safety. Screws were graded clinically for their safety with respect to the spinal cord, facet joint, nerve root and vertebral artery. The grades consisted of the following categories : "satisfactory", "at risk" and "direct injury". Each screw was also graded according to its zone placement. Screw position was quantified by measuring a sagittal angle from the lateral radiograph and an axial angle from the axial radiograph. Pull-out force was determined for all screws using a material testing machine. Results : Dissection revealed that fifteen screws on the left side actually had only unicortical and not bicortical purchase as intended. The majority of screws(92.8%) were satisfactory in terms of safety. There were no injuries to the spinal cord. On the right side(unicortical), 98.9% of the screws were "satisfactory" and on the left side(bicortical) 68.1% were "satisfactory". There was a 5.8% incidence of direct arterial injury and a 17.4% incidence of direct nerve root injury with the bicortical screws. There were no "direct injuries" with the unicortical screws for the nerve root or vertebral artery. The unicortical screws had a 21.4% incidence of direct injury of the facet joint, while the bicortical screws had a 21.7% incidence. The majority of "direct injury" of bicortical screws were placed by the surgeon with the least experience. The performance of the resident surgeon was significantly different from the attending or fellow(p<0.05) in terms of safety of the nerve root and vertebral artery. The attending's performance was significantly better than the resident or fellow(p<0.05) in terms of safety of the facet joint. There was no relationship between the safety of a screw and its zone placement. The axial deviation angle measured $23.5{\pm}6.6$ degrees and $19.8{\pm}7.9$ degrees for the unicortical and bicortical screws, respectively. The resident surgeon had a significantly lower angle than the attending or fellow(p<0.05). The sagittal angle measured $66.3{\pm}7.0$ degrees and $62.3{\pm}7.9$ degrees for the unicortical and bicortical screws, respectively. The attending had a significantly lower sagittal angle than the fellow or resident(p<0.05). Thirty-three screws that entered the facet joint were tested for pull-out strength but excluded from the data because they were not lateral mass screws per-se and had deviated substantially from the intended final trajectory. The mean pull-out force for all screws was $542.9{\pm}296.6N$. There was no statistically significant difference between the pull-out force for unicortical($519.9{\pm}286.9N$) and bicortical($565.2{\pm}306N$) screws. There was no significant difference in pull-out strengths with respect to zone placement. Conclusion : It is our belief that the risk associated with bicortical purchase mandates formal spine training if it is to be done safely and accurately. Unicortical screws are safer regardless of level of training. It is apparent that 14mm lateral mass screws placed in a supero-lateral trajectory in the adult cervical spine provide an equivalent strength with a much lower risk of injury than the longer bicortical screws placed in a similar orientation.