The impacts of omnichannel retailing properties on customer experience and brand loyalty: A study in the banking sector

Figures & data

Figure 1. The research framework.

Table 1. The demographic characteristics of respondents (N = 1547)

Factor	Variable	Frequency (n)	Percentage (%)
Gender	Male	473	3.6
	Female	1064	68.8
	Prefer not to answer	10	0.6
Age	From 18 to 22	1023	66.1
	From 23 to 30	382	24.7
	From 31 to 60	138	8.9
	More than 60	4	0.3
Current employment	Students	995	64.3
	Enterprise employees	114	7.4
	Institution staff	176	11.4
	Businesses	89	5.8
	Retired	79	5.1
	Others	94	6.1
Level of education	Junior college	118	7.6
	Undergraduate	1271	82.2
	Postgraduate	118	7.6
	Others	40	2.6
The banking channel used most frequently	Branches	107	6.9
	Websites	90	5.8
	ATMs	354	22.9
	Mobile apps	996	64.4
Frequency for using omnichannel bank services	First time	48	3.1
	Seldom	156	10.1
	Sometime	763	49.3
	Usually	580	37.5
TOTAL		1547	100%

Table 2. The results of confirmatory factor analysis

Constructs	Variables	Loading	C.R	AVE
PASS (Assurancequality)	APR (Privacy)		0.913	0.777
	APR1-My personal information across various channels of the bank is protected.	0.867
	APR2-My personal information across various channels of the bank is not shared with others.	0.894
	APR3-My financial information across various channels of the bank is not shared with others.	0.883
	ASE (Security)		0.904	0.825
	ASE1-All the channels of the bank have adequate security features.	0.910
	ASE2- I feel secure about using this bank’s multiple channels.	0.906
	ARE (Service recovery accessibility)		0.901	0.752
	ARE1-If there is any service problem, I can use multiple channels of the bank to report service failure.	0.869
	ARE2-The bank provides the means whereby I can voice my complaints.	0.885
	ARE3-I am aware of the channels through which I can report service issues to the bank.	0.846
IQUA (Integration quality)	IBR (Breadth of channel service choice)		0.886	0.722
	IBR1- At my bank, I can choose alternative channels for a given service	0.882
	IBR2- At my bank, I can carry out primary transactions through various channels of my choice	0.862
	IBR3- At my bank, regardless of the channel I choose, I can use other channels to get information or help	0.804
	ITR (Transparency of channel service)		0.880	0.710
	ITR1- I know all the service channels available from my bank	0.831
	ITR2- I am aware of the differences between service attributes across different channels.	0.872
	ITR3- I know how to use my bank’s different service channels to meet my needs	0.825
	ICT (Content consistency)		0.891	0.732
	ICT1- I obtain the same result or information regardless of the service channel that I use	0.827
	ICT2- When I interact with one channel, my interactions with other channels are always taken into account.	0.879
	ICT3- The information is consistent across different channels	0.860
	IPR (Process consistency)		0.875	0.700
	IPR1- The service feelings are consistent across different channels of the bank	0.839
	IPR2- The service images are consistent across different channels of the bank	0.852
	IPR3- The service performance is consistent across different channels of the bank	0.818
PFLU (Perceived fluency)	FTA (Task fluency)		0.863	0.677
	FTA1- I can migrate my transactions smoothly across different channels	0.858
	FTA2- I can carry out my transactions smoothly from one channel to another	0.848
	FTA3-The channel integration allows for fluently continuing on the task across different channels.	0.761
	FCT (Content fluency)		0.880	0.710
	FCT1- My bank supports my continuity of seeing/reading the same information on the new channel after my channels transition	0.826
	FCT2- My bank supports my continuity of seeing/reading certain content/information from where I left off after my channels transition	0.854
	FCT3- After the channels transition, I can easily find what I was seeing/reading on the previous channel	0.847
	FIN (Interaction fluency)		0.858	0.751
	FIN1- My interactions with the transaction across different channels are continuous	0.872
	FIN2- When I interact with my bank, there is no need to think about which service channel I am using	0.862
	FCO (Cognition fluency)		0.884	0.793
	FCO1- After the channel transition, I have the same understanding of the transactions	0.891
	FCO2- After the channel transition, I can correctly perform the transactions on the new channel	0.889
	FFE (Feeling fluency)		0.914	0.841
	FFE1- After the channel transition, I have the same level of satisfaction	0.919
	FFE2- After the channel transition, I have the same level of likeliness	0.915
Perceived utilitarian experience	EUT		0.912	0.674
	EUT1- Using multiple channels of this bank creates a positive value for its customers	0.785
	EUT2- Using multiple channels of this bank offers value for money	0.838
	EUT3- Using multiple channels of this bank saves my time	0.853
	EUT4- Using multiple channels of this bank is quick and easy	0.825
	EUT5- Using multiple channels of this bank is convenience	0.803
Perceived hedonic experience	EHE		0.908	0.663
	EHE1- When I experience the various service channels in an integrated way, I feel satisfied	0.793
	EHE2- When I experience the various service channels in an integrated way, I feel enjoyable	0.822
	EHE3- When I experience the various service channels in an integrated way, I feel excited	0.827
	EHE4- When I experience the various service channels in an integrated way, I feel pleasure	0.818
	EHE5- When I experience the various service channels in an integrated way, I feel interested	0.810
Brand Loyalty	BLO		0.923	0.706
	BLO1-I say positive things about this bank to other people	0.837
	BLO2- I recommend this bank to others	0.855
	BLO3- I encourage friends and relatives to do business with this bank	0.861
	BLO4- I consider this bank my first choice to avail of banking services	0.828
	BLO5- I will do more business with this bank in the future and also	0.819

Table 3. Discriminant validity assessment

	APR	ARE	ASE	BLO	EHE	EUT	FCO	FCT	FFE	FIN	FTA	IBR	ICT	IPR
APR	.882
ARE	.607	.867
ASE	.715	.669	.908
BLO	.490	.528	.501	.840
EHE	.486	.572	.542	.623	.814
EUT	.603	.588	.634	.636	.749	.821
FCO	.458	.537	.510	.550	.654	.620	.890
FCT	.465	.520	.502	.561	.669	.643	.615	.843
FFE	.397	.488	.424	.541	.596	.547	.615	.602	.917
FIN	.450	.542	.488	.524	.648	.612	.667	.647	.583	.867
FTA	.503	.549	.481	.572	.633	.631	.644	.631	.590	.643	.823
IBR	.607	.614	.616	.550	.537	.614	.504	.497	.399	.494	.558	.850
ICT	.571	.594	.607	.513	.500	.588	.515	.507	.395	.491	.520	.672	.856
IPR	.504	.602	.523	.505	.543	.474	.498	.489	.482	.499	.529	.577	.602	.837

Notes: The main diagonal shows the square of the AVE (averaged variance extracted). Significance at p < 0.05 level is shown in bold.

APR = Privacy; ASE = Security; ARE = Service recovery accessibility; IBR = Breadth of channel service choice; ITR = Transparency of channel service; ICT = Content consistency; IPR = Process consistency; FTA = Task fluency; FCT = Content fluency; FIN = Interaction fluency; FCO = Cognition fluency; FFE = Feeling fluency; EUT = Perceived utilitarian experience; EHE = Perceived hedonic experience; BLO = Brand loyalty.

Table 4. Relation weights between first-order constructs and second-order constructs

Second-order constructs	C.R	AVE	First-order constructs	Weights	T-values
Integration quality (IQUA)	0.923	0.501	IBR-Breadth of channel service choice	0.838	**82.063
			ITR- Transparency of channel service	0.811	**65.062
			ICT-Content consistency	0.867	**107.328
			IPR-Process consistency	0.826	**66.546
Perceived fluency (PFLU)	0.929	0.521	FTA-Task fluency	0.850	**83.748
			FCT-Content fluency	0.854	**80.754
			FIN-Interaction fluency	0.832	**74.936
			FCO-Cognition fluency	0.837	**74.346
			FFE-Feeling fluency	0.800	**67.397
Assurance quality (PASS)	0.924	0.604	APR-Privacy	0.889	**110.105
			ASE-Security	0.882	**114.313
			ARE-Service recovery accessibility	0.869	**92.473

Notes: *p < 0.05, **p <0.01.

Figure 2. The results of the structural model.

Table 5. The results of the structural model

Hypotheses	Std. β	T-values	VIF	Result
H1a: Integration quality → Perceived utilitarian experience	0.084	*2,496	2.908	Supported
H1b: Integration quality → Perceived hedonic experience	0.094	*3,013	2.908	Supported
H2: Integration quality → Perceived fluency	0.696	**32,149	1.000	Supported
H3a: Perceived fluency → Perceived utilitarian experience	0.467	**15,203	2.102	Supported
H3b: Perceived fluency → Perceived hedonic experience	0.623	**22,432	2.102	Supported
H4a: Assurance quality → Perceived utilitarian experience	0.313	**10,553	2.693	Supported
H4b: Assurance quality → Perceived hedonic experience	0.117	**3,837	2.693	Supported
H5a: Perceived utilitarian experience → Brand loyalty	0.385	**13,417	2.278	Supported
H5b: Perceived hedonic experience → Brand loyalty	0.335	**10,250	2.278	Supported

Notes: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.

Table 6. Results of invariance measurement testing using permutation

Constructs	Configural invariance (sample algorithms for both groups)	Compositional invariance (Correlation = 1)		Partial measurement invariance established	Equal mean assessments			Equal variance assessments			Full measurement invariance established
		Original correlation	Confidence Interval		Mean original differences	Confidence interval	Equal	Variance original differences	Confidence interval	Equal
PASS	Yes	1.000	[1.000; 1.000]	Yes	0.169	[−0.109;0.108]	No	−0.410	[−0.201;0.210]	No	No
IQUA	Yes	1.000	[1.000; 1.000]	Yes	0.218	[−0.106;0.112]	No	−0.526	[−0.206;0.213]	No	No
PFLU	Yes	1.000	[1.000; 1.000]	Yes	0.170	[−0.111;0.111]	No	−0.470	[−0.208;0.248]	No	No
EUT	Yes	1.000	[1.000; 1.000]	Yes	0.219	[−0.123;0.116]	No	−0.349	[−0.217;0.239]	No	No
EHE	Yes	1.000	[1.000; 1.000]	Yes	0.216	[−0.115;0.114]	No	−0.330	[−0.191;0.239]	No	No
BLO	Yes	1.000	[1.000; 1.000]	Yes	0.259	[−0.114;0.107]	No	−0.262	[−0.182;0.221]	No	No

Table 7. Multigroup analysis results

Relationship	Coefficient—physical channels	Coefficient—digital channels	Coefficient difference	p-value different (Two-tailed)		Supported
				Henseler’s MGA	Permutation test
IQUA → EUT	0.055^n.s	0.094*	0.039	0.595	0.636	No/No
IQUA → EHE	0.101^n.s	0.086*	−0.015	0.843	0.852	No/No
IQUA → PFLU	0.756***	0.649***	−0.107	0.022	0.038	Yes/Yes
PFLU → EUT	0.565***	0.414***	−0.150	0.025	0.032	Yes/Yes
PFLU → EHE	0.713***	0.575***	−0.319	0.024	0.030	Yes/Yes
PASS → EUT	0.285***	0.330***	0.045	0.490	0.504	No/No
PASS → EHE	0.070^n.s	0.139***	0.069	0.308	0.354	No/No
EUT → BLO	0.342***	0.389***	0.056	0.401	0.398	No/No
EHE → BLO	0.368***	0.324***	−0.044	0.565	0.538	No/No

Notes: ***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01; *p < 0.05; n.s = not support.

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, upon reasonable request.