Delivering service quality to increase brand loyalty

IMG-5907(C) M.A. Camilleri

This is an excerpt from my latest academic article.

How to Cite: Rather, R. A. & Camilleri, M.A. (2019). The effects of service quality and consumer-brand value congruity on hospitality brand loyalty, Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/13032917.2019.1650289

This study has proved that the combined effects of value congruity and service quality can have an impact on consumer-brand identification and engagement. The results from this study indicated that the consumer-brand identification as well as consumer-brand engagement were predicting the consumers’ loyalty toward the brand. The findings also reported that consumer-brand identification, perceived service quality as well as value congruity were significant antecedents of consumer-brand engagement. In addition, the service quality and value congruity had moderate, direct effects on consumer brand identification. Furthermore, the empirical results revealed that consumer brand identification has mediated the relationships between value congruity and brand loyalty, and between service quality and brand loyalty.

In a similar vein, a critical analysis of the relevant literature revealed that consumer-brand relationships are dependent on the customers’ identification with their favorite brands (Çifci et al., 2016; Rather & Camilleri, 2019; Rather, 2018; Tuskej & Podnar, 2018; So et al., 2013; 2014). Specifically, the consumer-brand identification is related with the consumer-brand value congruity (Rather, 2018). As a matter of fact, past research also reported that consumer-brand identification has a positive effect on customer behaviors and attitudes (in terms of loyalty and commitment) (Rather & Camilleri, 2019). However, in this case, the findings of this study suggest that both the consumer-brand value congruity and perceived service quality are the significant antecedents of consumer-brand identification and engagement.

The consumer-brand identification will inevitably trigger supporting behaviors like increased purchase / repurchase intentions (e.g., Kuenzel & Halliday, 2008) or positive word-of-mouth recommendations (Tuskej et al., 2013), among other positive outcomes. Therefore, hospitality practitioners ought to nurture physical and virtual relationships with their stakeholders via a multitude of approaches, if they want them to remain loyal to their business (Dedeoğlu & Demirer, 2015). Public activities such as sponsorship, charity events, social campaigns and so on can be used to enhance the brands’ image among interested parties, including customers (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003). For this reason, several hospitality brands are increasingly engaging in interactive communications either individually or in groups, via digital technologies, including social media, blogs, v-blogs, video clips, review sites, etc. (Camilleri, 2018a; So et al., 2017; Su, Mariadoss, & Reynolds, 2015). Very often, individuals are intrigued to share their travel experiences, including their hotel accommodation (Camilleri, 2018b).

In a nutshell, this contribution posited that the hotel guests will probably engage and remain loyal to particular hospitality brands if they feel and perceive that their values reflect their own values. This study reported that the consumer-brand value congruity had a very significant effect on the consumers’ identification and engagement with the upscale hospitality brands. It indicated that the hotel guests who have experienced excellent service quality are more likely to share their experience with other individuals. Hence, hospitality managers need to ensure that their brand consistently delivers high levels of tangible and intangible service quality (at all times) to their valued guests in order to create long-lasting relationships with them.

The hotels’ provision of the service quality and brand experience ought to meet and exceed their guests’ expectations to satisfy their self-enhancement needs and their sense of well-being.

 

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under branding, Business, Hospitality, Marketing

A SWOT Analysis of the Marketing Environment of Higher Education Institutions

This is an excerpt from a recent Working Paper.

How to Cite: Camilleri, M.A. (2019). The Internationalization of Higher Education in a Competitive Marketing Environment. Working Paper 0506-2019, Department of Corporate Communication, University of Malta, Malta.


Strengths

  • Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) raise their financial capital requirements by charging tuition fees to full time, part time and distance learning students; Government-funded HEIs may provide free or reduced tuition fees;
  • Many international courses are taught in English; The English language has become an important lever for international student mobility (ICEF, 2017);
  • Several HEIs provide work-integrated education; they deliver pragmatic, application-oriented programs. The students are may be expected to undertake industry placements as part of their studies. Therefore work-integrated education (WIE) may be a component of the HEIs’ curriculum.
  • Work-integrated education supports students to become all-round professionals with an appropriate level of operational experience. It equips students with a thorough understanding of the business and industry’s operations. WIE would usually take place in an organizational context that is relevant to the students’ future employment prospects. At the same time, the students would obtain communicative and transferable skills that will be valuable for their development. The focus is to help them acquire a range of valuable generic abilities, including people-skills through interactions with peers, subordinates and supervisors. After their working period, the students will be in a position to apply the theories that they have learnt in real-life settings. Hence, students develop their knowledge and skills in a professional environment, whilst increasing the chances of their employability prospects (Kolb & Kolb, 2005);
  • HEIs are increasingly establishing international collaboration agreements with other educational institutions, across borders. They enable student exchange programs and field trips. The classroom teaching is enriched with student exchanges and field trips that provide students relevant on-the-job training;
  • HEIs are building their alumni networks over the years. Many of their students have become business and industry professionals.
  • HEIs are often engaging with business and industry as they provide their consultancy and research services;
  • HEIs offer Executive Development Programs to industry practitioners, allowing them to update their skills, and to broaden their knowledge.

Weaknesses

  • Many HEIs are not managed as profitable organizations;
  • HEIs’ academic employees may become members in trade unions. The unions can use their bargaining power on the university’s administration;
  • HEIs can be slow to respond to the ongoing changes in the business and industry. They may need to adapt their curricula and courses to better meet the prospective employers’ requirements;
  • The HEIs’ academic members of staff may have long contact hours with their students (when compared to other institutions);
  • The HEIs’ academia are not always publishing adequate and sufficient research (when compared to other institutions);
  • The HEIs’ prospective students may be attracted to competitive institutions who are offering cheaper tuition fees. The international prospects will consider the HEIs’ locations and their living expenses;
  • The HEIs’ international marketing efforts may be focusing on limited catchment areas. They may be overlooking promising markets (Constantinides & Zinck Stagno, 2011).

Opportunities

  • HEIs may use educational technology to improve their students’ experience. Educational technologies could enhance the quality of online courses, particularly those that are offered to part-time, or distance learning students;
  • HEIs can utilize blogs, RSS feeds, podcasts, wikis, electronic fora, webinars, et cetera to reach their target audiences. They may use social media and word of mouth marketing by communicating student testimonials, online reviews and ratings, in order to attract students from different markets;
  • HEIs could incentivize their educators and researchers to participate in academic conferences and to publish their work in highly-indexed journals;
  • The setting up of research (or special interest) groups could improve collaboration and teamwork among the HEIs’ members of staff;
  • HEIs’ academics should be encouraged to become members in editorial boards of leading journals;
  • HEIs can offer high-level consultancy and professional advisory services to private and public organizations;
  • HEIs may organize international conferences and fora that can be used as a platform for insightful exchange amongst academics, industry practitioners and tourism policy-makers;
  • HEIs can engage with alumni by involving them in social events, webinars and continuous professional development programs;
  • Industry professionals can be invited to speak to students on specific subject lectures. These experts may help students gain a deeper understanding of the industry;
  • HEIs’ academia should be encouraged to share their research expertise with business and industry to pioneer developments. They should promote their research outputs (Duque, 2014; Parameswaran & Glowacka, 1995). Relevant research can enhance industry performance and influence policy making;
  • HEIs can extend collaborative agreements in many areas, with reputable education institutions;
  • HEIs can obtain quality assurance and accreditations from international awarding bodies, for their educational programs. The recognition of their courses would necessitate a thorough assessment of their leadership, curriculum programs and skills, assessment methods, project work, student placements, student support, feedback and resources, et cetera;
  • The HEIs’ international admissions pages should evidence their ‘global perspective’ and could highlight their extensive range of services they offer to international students. For example, their course prospectus should be available in different languages;
  • There is an increased demand for higher education from mature students as the concept of life-long learning is being promoted in developing and advanced economies;
  • There are still untapped markets in Asia where students can’t access quality education at home. There is a business case to attract students from Africa as the continent’s youth population is rising (British Council, 2018);
  • The HEIs’ international students could be used as brand ambassadors and should be featured in their digital media;
  • HEIs may be supported by student scholarships (from governments, foundations or NGOs) and sponsorships that may be donated by industry partners.

Threats

  • Many HEIs’ national governments have already decreased (or cut) their public funding to HEIs (Estermann, 2017; Estermann, Nokkala & Steinel, 2011; Hoecht, 2006; Maton, 2005). Therefore, HEIs may have to raise their capital requirements through tuition fees and fund-raising activities;
  • There is a very competitive environment (in the global market). HEIs are increasingly targeting international students from many markets;
  • Many countries (including developing economies) have improved (or are improving) their educational systems. However, there may be students who decide to go abroad because they believe that there is neither capacity nor high-quality education at their home country (ICEF, 2017);
  • The ageing populations in many parts of the world, their greater life expectancies, coupled with lower fertility rates, means that populations in many countries are getting older. At the same time, the 15-to-24-year-old cohorts are shrinking. This key college-aged demographic will peak in Asia somewhere around 2020. Then it will start a gradual decline from that high point (British Council, 2018);
  • There may be political, socio-cultural and legal factors affecting the marketing of HEIs. International students may face travel restrictions. Rigorous travel formalities including the issuance of national visas and immigration policies, can affect the students choice of their prospective HEI;
  • Reduced scholarships and student exchange programs from foreign governments can have an impact on the number of students who may afford international mobility;
  • A growing number of Asian students are choosing to stay within their own region to study, and students from other countries – including African nations– are adding Asian destinations to their list of attractive options. Asian countries, including China, Japan, South Korea, Singapore and Malaysia, among others, are increasing their capacity to absorb international students. Students and families are placing more emphasis on value, and on the return on investment from overseas education. Therefore, students may opt to study close to their home;
  • There are growing indications that major employers are placing less emphasis on reputable HEIs and their brand identities (ICEF, 2017).

References (of the full paper)

Altbach,P.G. 2004.Globalisation and the university: Myths and realities in an unequal world. Tertiary Education and Management,10(1): 3-25.

Altbach, P. G., Reisberg, L., & Rumbley, L. E. 2009. Trends in global higher education: Tracking an academic revolution. A Report for UNESCO World Conference of Higher Education. http://www.cep.edu.rs/public/Altbach,_Reisberg,_Rumbley_Tracking_an_Academic_Revolution,_UNESCO_2009.pdf accessed 20th February, 2018.

Beine, M., Noël, R., & Ragot, L. 2014. Determinants of the international mobility of students. Economics of Education review, 41: 40-54.

Bharadwaj, S. G., Varadarajan, P. R., & Fahy, J. 1993. Sustainable competitive advantage in service industries: a conceptual model and research propositions. The Journal of Marketing, 57(4): 83-99.

Binsardi, A., & Ekwulugo, F. 2003. International marketing of British education: research on the students’ perception and the UK market penetration. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 21(5): 318-327.

British Council. 2018. International student mobility to 2027: Local investment, global outcomes. https://ei.britishcouncil.org/educationintelligence/ei-feature-international-student-mobility-2027-local-investment-global-outcome (accessed 17th February, 2018).

Budde-Sung, A. E. 2011. The increasing internationalization of the international business classroom: Cultural and generational considerations. Business Horizons, 54(4): 365-373.

Camilleri, M. A., & Camilleri, A. C. (2017). Digital learning resources and ubiquitous technologies in education. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 22(1), 65-82.

Constantinides, E., & Zinck Stagno, M. C. 2011. Potential of the social media as instruments of higher education marketing: a segmentation study. Journal of marketing for higher education, 21(1): 7-24.

Cronin Jr, J. J., & Taylor, S. A. 1992. Measuring service quality: a reexamination and extension. Journal of marketing, 56(3):55-68.

Doque, L. C. 2014. A framework for analysing higher education performance: students’ satisfaction, perceived learning outcomes, and dropout intentions. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 25(1-2): 1-21.

Estermann, T. 2017. Why university autonomy matters more than ever. University World News, (454), http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20170404132356742 (Accessed 28th February, 2018).

Estermann, T., Nokkala, T., & Steinel, M. 2011. University autonomy in Europe II. The Scorecard. Brussels: European University Association. http://agir-ups.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/University_Autonomy_in_Europe_II_-_The_Scorecard.sflb_.pdf (Accessed 28th February, 2018).

EUA 2017. EUA calls on governments to refrain from interference in university autonomy. http://www.eua.be/activities-services/news/newsitem/2017/04/03/eua-calls-on-governments-to-refrain-from-interference-in-university-autonomy (Accessed 26th February, 2018).

Friga, P.N., Bettis, R.A. & Sullivan, R.S. 2003. Changes. In graduate management education and new business school strategies for the 21st century. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 2(3): 233—249

Helms, M. M., & Nixon, J. 2010. Exploring SWOT analysis–where are we now? A review of academic research from the last decade. Journal of strategy and management, 3(3): 215-251.

Hemsley-Brown, J., & Oplatka, I. 2006. Universities in a competitive global marketplace: A systematic review of the literature on higher education marketing. International Journal of public sector management, 19(4): 316-338.

Hoecht, A. 2006. Quality assurance in UK higher education: Issues of trust, control, professional autonomy and accountability. Higher Education, 51(4): 541—563.

ICEF 2017. Mapping the trends that will shape international student mobility. http://monitor.icef.com/2017/07/mapping-trends-will-shape-international-student-mobility/ (Accessed 28th February, 2018).

Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. 2005. Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of management learning & education, 4(2): 193-212.

Kotler, P., & Fox, K. F. 1995. Strategic marketing for educational institutions. New York, USA: Prentice Hall.

Lee, J. T. 2014. Education hubs and talent development: Policy- making and implementation challenges. Higher Education, 68(6): 807—823.

Marginson, S. 2006. Dynamics of national and global competition in higher education. Higher Education, 52(1): 1-39.

Maton, K. 2005. A question of autonomy: Bourdieu’s field approach and higher education policy. Journal of education policy, 20(6): 687-704.

Mazzarol, T. 1998. Critical success factors for international education marketing. International Journal of Educational Management, 12(4): 163-175.

Mazzarol, T., & Soutar, G. N. 2002. “Push-pull” factors influencing international student destination choice. International Journal of Educational Management, 16(2): 82-90.

Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. 2011. Distance education: A systems view of online learning. Belmont, CA, USA: Cengage Learning.

Parameswaran, R., & Glowacka, A. E. 1995. University image: An information processing perspective. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 6(2): 41-56.

Pucciarelli, F., & Kaplan, A. 2016. Competition and strategy in higher education: Managing complexity and uncertainty. Business Horizons, 59(3): 311-320.

Russell, M. 2005. Marketing education: A review of service quality perceptions among international students. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 17(1): 65-77.

Schofield, C., Cotton, D., Gresty, K., Kneale, P., & Winter, J. 2013. Higher education provision in a crowded marketplace. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 35(2): 193-205.

Leave a comment

Filed under Business, Higher Education, Marketing

The Students Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations to Engage with Digital Learning Games

An Excerpt from one of my latest papers, entitled; “The Students’ Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations to Engage with Digital Learning Games”.

How to Cite: Camilleri, A.C. & Camilleri, M.A. (2019). The Students Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations to Engage with Digital Learning Games. In Shun-Wing N.G., Fun, T.S. & Shi, Y. (Eds.) 5th International Conference on Education and Training Technologies (ICETT 2019). Seoul, South Korea (May, 2019).


This contribution has explored the primary school’s grade three  students’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivations toward the use of educational games. It relied on the technology acceptance model to investigate the students’ perceived usefulness and ease of use of the  schools’ games ([7], [8], [15]). Moreover, the researchers have also  included the measuring items that explored the students’ perceived  enjoyment ([12], [13], [20]) as they investigated whether they  experienced normative pressures to play the educational games ([14], [22], [23]). The findings from the Wilcoxon test reported that the students played the school games at home, more than they did at school. They indicated that the school’s games were easy to play.

This study reported that the students recognized that the school’s games were useful and relevant as they were learning from them. Moreover, they indicated that the school’s educational games held their attention since they found them enjoyable and fun. The vast majority of the children played the educational games, both at home and at school. The findings in this study are consistent with the argument that digital natives are increasingly immersing
themselves in digital technologies ([2]), including educational games ([1], [4], [10], [11], [28]). However, the results have shown that there was no significant relationship between the perceived ease of the gameplay and the children’s enjoyment in them.

Furthermore, the stepwise regression analysis revealed that there was no significant relationship between the normative expectations and the children’s engagement with the educational games; although it was evident (from the descriptive statistics) that the parents were encouraging their children to play the games at home and at school.

This research relied on previously tried and tested measures that were drawn from the educational technology literature in order to explore the hypothesized relationships. There is common tendency  in academic literature to treat the validity and reliability of quantitative measures from highly cited empirical papers as given. In this case, the survey items in this study were designed and adapted for the primary school children who were in grade 3, in a
small European state. Future studies may use different sampling frames, research designs and methodologies to explore this topic. To the best of our knowledge, there is no other empirical study that has validated the technology acceptance model within a primary school setting. Further work is needed to replicate the findings of  this research in a similar context.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We thank the department of education, the school’s principal and her members of staff who have provided their invaluable support during the data gathering process.

REFERENCES
[1] Ge, X., and Ifenthaler, D. 2018. Designing engaging
educational games and assessing engagement in game-based
learning” In Gamification in Education: Breakthroughs in
Research and Practice, IGI Global, Hershey, USA, 1-19,

[2] Bourgonjon, J., Valcke, M., Soetaert, R., and Schellens, T.
2010, Students’ perceptions about the use of educational
games in the classroom. Comp. & Educ. 54, 4, 1145-1156.

[3] Hwang, G.J., and Wu, P.H. 2012. Advancements and trends
in digital game‐based learning research: a review of
publications in selected journals from 2001 to 2010. Brit. J.
of Educ. Tech. 43, 1, E6-E10.

[4] Carvalho, M.B., Bellotti, F., Berta, R., De Gloria, A.,
Sedano, C.I., Hauge, H.B., Hu, J., and Rauterberg, M. 2015.
An activity theory-based model for serious games analysis
and conceptual design. Comp. & Educ. 87, 166-181.

[5] Connolly, T.M., Boyle, E.A., MacArthur, E. Hainey, T., and
Boyle, J.M. 2012. A systematic literature review of empirical
evidence on computer games and serious games. Comp. &
Educ. 59, 2, 661-686.

[6] Burguillo, J.C. 2010. Using game theory and competitionbased
learning to stimulate student motivation and
performance. Comp. & Educ. 55, 2, 566-575.

[7] Dickey, M.D. 2011. Murder on Grimm Isle: The impact of
game narrative design in an educational game‐based learning
environment. Brit. J. of Educ. Tech, 42, 3, 456-469.

[8] Huang, W.H., Huang, W.Y., and Tschopp, J. 2010.
Sustaining iterative game playing processes in DGBL: The
relationship between motivational processing and outcome
processing. Comp. & Educ. 55, 2, 789-97.

[9] Harris, J. Mishra, P., and Koehler, M. 2009. Teachers’
technological pedagogical content knowledge and learning
activity types: Curriculum-based technology integration
reframed. J. of Res. on Tech. in Educ. 41, 4, 393-416.

[10] Wouters, P., Van Nimwegen, C., Van Oostendorp, H., and
Van Der Spek, E.D. 2013. A meta-analysis of the cognitive
and motivational effects of serious games. J. of Educ. Psych.
105, 2, 249-266.

[11] Camilleri, M.A., and Camilleri, A. 2017. The Students’
Perceptions of Digital Game-Based Learning, In Pivec, M.
and Grundler, J. 11th European Conference on Games Based
Learning Proceedings (London, UK, October 04-05, 2017),
University of Applied Sciences, Graz, Austria, 56-62.

[12] Davis, F.D. 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of
use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS
Quart. 319-340.

[13] Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., and Warshaw, P.R. 1989. User
acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two
theoretical models. Mgt. Science, 35, 8, 982-1003.

[14] Ajzen, I. 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Org. Behav.
and Human Dec. Proc. 50, 2, 179-211.

[15] Lee, M. K., Cheung, C. M., and Chen, Z. 2005. Acceptance
of Internet-based learning medium: the role of extrinsic and
intrinsic motivation. Inf. & Mgt. 42, 8, 1095-1104.

[16] Chen, K. C. and Jang, S. J. 2010. Motivation in online
learning: Testing a model of self-determination theory.
Comp. in Human Behav. 26, 4, 741-752.

[17] Dunne, Á., Lawlor, M. A., and Rowley, J. 2010. Young
people’s use of online social networking sites–a uses and
gratifications perspective. Journal of Res. in Int. Mktg. 4, 1,
46-58.

[18] Li, H., Liu, Y., Xu, X., Heikkilä, J., and Van Der Heijden, H.
2015. Modeling hedonic is continuance through the uses and
gratifications theory: An empirical study in online games.
Comp. in Human Behav. 48, 261-272.

[19] Teo, T., Beng Lee, C., Sing Chai, C., and Wong, S.L. 2009.
Assessing the intention to use technology among pre-service
teachers in Singapore and Malaysia: A multigroup invariance
analysis of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM).
Comp. & Educ. 53, 3, 1000-1009.

[20] Camilleri, M.A., and Camilleri, A.C. 2017. Digital learning
resources and ubiquitous technologies in education, Tech.,
Knowl. and Learng. 22, 1, 65-82.

[21] Park, S.Y. 2009. An analysis of the technology acceptance
model in understanding university students’ behavioral
intention to use e-learning, Educ. Tech. & Soc. 12, 3, 150-
162.

[22] Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B. and Davis, F.D.
2003. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a
unified view. MIS Quart. 425-478.

[23] Venkatesh, V., Thong, Y.T.L., and Xu, X. 2012.Consumer
acceptance and use of information technology: extending the
unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS
Quart. 157-178.

[24] Ryan, R. M., and Deci, E. L. 2000. Intrinsic and extrinsic
motivations: Classic definitions and new directions.
Contemp. Educ. Psych. 25, 1, 54-67.

[25] Cheon, J., Lee, S., Crooks, S. M. and Song, J. 2012. An
investigation of mobile learning readiness in higher
education based on the theory of planned behavior. Comp. &
Educ. 59, 3, 1054-1064.

[26] Chang, C.T., Hajiyev, J., and Su, C.R. 2017. Examining the
students’ behavioral intention to use e-learning in
Azerbaijan? The general extended technology acceptance
model for e-learning approach. Comp. & Educ. 111, 128-
143.

[27] Park, S. Y., Nam, M. W., and Cha, S. B. 2012. University
students’ behavioral intention to use mobile learning:
Evaluating the technology acceptance model. Brit. Journal of
Educ. Tech. 43, 4, 592-605.

[28] Camilleri, M.A. and Camilleri, A.C. 2017. The Technology
Acceptance of Mobile Applications in Education. In
Sánchez, I.A. and Isaias, P. (Eds) 13th
International Conference on Mobile Learning (London, UK,
10-11 April 2018). International Association for
Development of the Information Society Budapest, Hungary,
41-48.

Presentation is available at: https://www.slideshare.net/markanthonycamilleri/the-students-intrinsic-and-extrinsic-motivations-148006875

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under digital games, Digital Learning Resources, digital media, Education, internet technologies, internet technologies and society

Announcing a Call for Chapters (for Springer)

Call for Chapters

Strategic Corporate Communication and Stakeholder Engagement in the Digital Age

 

Abstract submission deadline: 30th June 2019 (EXTENDED to the 30th September 2019)
Full chapters due: 31st December 2019

 

Background

The latest advances in technologies and networks have been central to the expansion of electronic content across different contexts. Contemporary communication approaches are crossing boundaries as new media are offering both challenges and opportunities. The democratisation of the production and dissemination of information via the online technologies has inevitably led individuals and organisations to share content (including images, photos, news items, videos and podcasts) via the digital and social media. Interactive technologies are allowing individuals and organisations to co-create and manipulate electronic content. At the same time, they enable them to engage in free-flowing conversations with other online users, groups or virtual communities (Camilleri, 2017). Innovative technologies have empowered the organisations’ stakeholders, including; employees, investors, customers, local communities, government agencies, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), as well as the news media, among others. Both internal and external stakeholders are in a better position to scrutinise the organisations’ decisions and actions. For this reason, there is scope for the practitioners to align their corporate communication goals and activities with the societal expectations (Camilleri, 2015; Gardberg & Fombrun, 2006). Therefore, organisations are encouraged to listen to their stakeholders. Several public interest organisations, including listed businesses, banks and insurance companies are already sharing information about their financial and non-financial performance in an accountable and transparent manner. The rationale behind their corporate disclosures is to develop and maintain strong and favourable reputations among stakeholders (Camilleri, 2018; Cornelissen, 2008). The corporate reputation is “a perceptual representation of a company’s past actions and future prospects that describe the firm’s overall appeal to all of its key constituents when compared to other leading rivals” (Fombrun, 1996).

Business and media practitioners ought to be cognisant about the strategic role of corporate communication in leveraging the organisations’ image and reputation among stakeholders (Van Riel & Fombrun, 2007). They are expected to possess corporation communication skills as they need to forge relationships with different stakeholder groups (including employees, customers, suppliers, investors, media, regulatory authorities and the community at large). They have to be proficient in specialist areas, including; issues management, crises communication as well as in corporate social responsibility reporting, among other topics. At the same time, they should be aware about the possible uses of different technologies, including; artificial intelligence, augmented and virtual reality, big data analytics, blockchain and internet of things, among others; as these innovative tools are disrupting today’s corporate communication processes.

 

Objective

This title shall explain how strategic communication and media management can affect various political, economic, societal and technological realities. Theoretical and empirical contributions can shed more light on the existing structures, institutions and cultures that are firmly founded on the communication technologies, infrastructures and practices. The rapid proliferation of the digital media has led both academics and practitioners to increase their interactive engagement with a multitude of stakeholders. Very often, they are influencing regulators, industries, civil society organisations and activist groups, among other interested parties. Therefore, this book’s valued contributions may include, but are not restricted to, the following topics:

 

Artificial Intelligence and Corporate Communication

Augmented and Virtual Reality in Corporate Communication

Blockchain and Corporate Communication

Big Data and Analytics in Corporate Communication

Branding and Corporate Reputation

Corporate Communication via Social Media

Corporate Communication Policy

Corporate Culture

Corporate Identity

Corporate Social Responsibility Communications

Crisis, Risk and Change Management

Digital Media and Corporate Communication

Employee Communications

Fake News and Corporate Communication

Government Relationships

Integrated Communication

Integrated Reporting of Financial and Non-Financial Performance

Internet Technologies and Corporate Communication

Internet of Things and Corporate Communication

Investor Relationships

Issues Management and Public Relations

Leadership and Change Communication

Marketing Communications

Measuring the Effectiveness of Corporate Communications

Metrics for Corporate Communication Practice

Press and Media Relationships

Stakeholder Management and Communication

Strategic Planning and Communication Management

 

This publication shall present the academics’ conceptual discussions that cover the contemporary topic of corporate communication in a concise yet accessible way. Covering both theory and practice, this publication shall introduce its readers to the key issues of strategic corporate communication as well as stakeholder management in the digital age. This will allow prospective practitioners to critically analyse future, real-life situations. All chapters will provide a background to specific topics as the academic contributors should feature their critical perspectives on issues, controversies and problems relating to corporate communication.

This authoritative book will provide relevant knowledge and skills in corporate communication that is unsurpassed in readability, depth and breadth. At the start of each chapter, the authors will prepare a short abstract that summarises the content of their contribution. They are encouraged to include descriptive case studies to illustrate real situations, conceptual, theoretical or empirical contributions that are meant to help aspiring managers and executives in their future employment. In conclusion, each chapter shall also contain a succinct summary that should outline key implications (of the findings) to academia and / or practitioners, in a condensed form. This will enable the readers to retain key information.

 

Target Audience

This textbook introduces aspiring practitioners as well as under-graduate and post-graduate students to the subject of corporate communication – in a structured manner. More importantly, it will also be relevant to those course instructors who are teaching media, marketing communications and business-related subjects in higher education institutions, including; universities and colleges. It is hoped that course conveners will use this edited textbook as a basis for class discussions.

 

Submission Procedure

Senior and junior academic researchers are invited to submit a 300-word abstract on or before the 30th June 2019. Submissions should be sent to Mark.A.Camilleri@um.edu.mt. Authors will be notified about the editorial decision during July 2019. The length of the chapters should be between 6,000- 8,000 words (including references, figures and tables). These contributions will be accepted on or before the 31st December 2019. The references should be presented in APA style (Version 6). All submitted chapters will be critically reviewed on a double-blind review basis. The authors’ and the reviewers’ identities will remain anonymous. All authors will be requested to serve as reviewers for this book. They will receive a notification of acceptance, rejection or suggested modifications – on or before the 15th February 2020.

Note: There are no submission or acceptance fees for the publication of this book. All abstracts / proposals should be submitted via the editor’s email.

 

Editor

Mark Anthony Camilleri (Ph.D. Edinburgh)
Department of Corporate Communication,
Faculty of Media and Knowledge Sciences,
University of Malta, MALTA.
Email: mark.a.camilleri@um.edu.mt

 

Publisher

Following the double-blind peer review process, the full chapters will be submitted to Springer Nature for final review. For additional information regarding the publisher, please visit https://www.springer.com/gp. This prospective publication will be released in 2020.

 

Important Dates

Abstract Submission Deadline:          30th June 2019 30th September 2019
Notification of Acceptance:               31st July 2019 31st October 2019

Full Chapters Due:                             31st December 2019

Notification of Review Results:         15th February 2020
Final Chapter Submission:                 31st March 2020

Final Acceptance Notification:          30th April, 2020

References

Camilleri, M.A. (2015). Valuing Stakeholder Engagement and Sustainability Reporting. Corporate Reputation Review18(3), 210-222. https://link-springer-com.ejournals.um.edu.mt/article/10.1057/crr.2015.9

Camilleri, M.A. (2017). Corporate Sustainability, Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature. https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783319468488

Camilleri, M.A. (2018). Theoretical Insights on Integrated Reporting: The Inclusion of Non-Financial Capitals in Corporate Disclosures. Corporate Communications: An International Journal23(4), 567-581. https://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/CCIJ-01-2018-0016

Cornelissen, J.P. (2008). Corporate Communication. The International Encyclopedia of Communication. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781405186407.wbiecc143.pub2

Fombrun, C.J. (1995). Reputation: Realizing Value from the Corporate Image. Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard Business School Press.

Gardberg, N.A., & Fombrun, C. J. (2006). Corporate Citizenship: Creating Intangible Assets across Institutional Environments. Academy of Management Review31(2), 329-346. https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/AMR.2006.20208684

Van Riel, C.B., & Fombrun, C.J. (2007). Essentials of Corporate Communication: Implementing Practices for Effective Reputation Management. Oxford, UK: Routledge. http://repository.umpwr.ac.id:8080/bitstream/handle/123456789/511/Essentials%20of%20Corporate%20Communication.pdf?sequence=1

Leave a comment

Filed under Analytics, Big Data, blockchain, branding, Business, Corporate Governance, Corporate Social Responsibility, Corporate Sustainability and Responsibility, CSR, digital media, ESG Reporting, Higher Education, Human Resources, Impact Investing, Integrated Reporting, internet technologies, internet technologies and society, Marketing, online, Shared Value, Stakeholder Engagement, Sustainability, Web

The Students’ Perceived Use, Ease of Use and Enjoyment of Educational Games

This is an excerpt from one of my latest empirical papers.

How to Cite: Camilleri, A.C. & Camilleri, M.A. (2019). The Students’ Perceived Use, Ease of Use and Enjoyment of Educational Games at Home and at School. 13th Annual International Technology, Education and Development Conference. Valencia, Spain (10-13 March, 2019). International Academy of Technology, Education and Development (IATED). https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3339163


gamesThis contribution has explored the primary school’s grade three students’ attitudes toward educational games. It relied on the technology acceptance model to investigate the students’ perceived usefulness and ease of use of the schools’ games ([10], [12], [44]). Moreover, the researchers have also included the measuring items that explored the students’ perceived enjoyment ([19]) as they investigated whether they experienced normative pressures to play the educational games ([10], [14], [20]). The findings from the Wilcoxon test reported that the students played the school games at home, more than they did at school. They indicated that the school’s games were easy to play. This study reported that the students recognized that the school’s games were useful and relevant as they were learning from them. Moreover, they indicated that the school’s educational games held their attention since they found them enjoyable and fun.

The vast majority of the children played the educational games, both at home and at school. The findings in this study are consistent with the argument that digital natives are increasingly immersing themselves in digital technologies ([45]), including educational games ([1], [3]). However, the results have shown that there was no significant relationship between the perceived ease of the gameplay and the children’s enjoyment in them. Furthermore, the stepwise regression analysis revealed that there was no significant relationship between the normative expectations and the children’s engagement with the educational games; although it was evident (from the descriptive statistics) that the parents were encouraging their children to play the games at home and at school.

This research relied on previously tried and tested measures that were drawn from the educational technology literature in order to explore the hypothesized relationships. There is common tendency in academic literature to treat the validity and reliability of quantitative measures from highly cited empirical papers as given. In this case, the survey items in this study were designed and adapted for the primary school children who were in grade 3, in a small European state. Future studies may use different sampling frames, research designs and methodologies to explore this topic. To the best of our knowledge, there is no other empirical study that has validated the technology acceptance model within a primary school setting. Further work is needed to replicate the findings of this research in a similar context.

REFERENCES (this is a full list of references that appeared in the bibliography section of the paper)

 
[1] J. Bourgonjon, M. Valcke, R. Soetaert, and T. Schellens, “Students’ perceptions about the use of educational games in the classroom,” Computers & Education, vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 1145-1156, 2010.

[2] S. Bennett, K. Maton, and L. Kervin, “The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence,” British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 775-786, 2008.

[3] M. Prensky, “Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1,” On the horizon, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 1-6, 2001.

[4] W. Nadeem, D. Andreini, J. Salo, and T. Laukkanen, “Engaging consumers online through websites and social media: A gender study of Italian Generation Y clothing consumers.” International Journal of Information Management, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 432- 442, 2015.

[5] H.J. So, H. Choi, W.Y. Lim, and Y. Xiong, “Little experience with ICT: Are they really the Net Generation student-teachers?”, Computers & Education, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 1234- 1245, 2012.

[6] J.M. Twenge, “The evidence for generation me and against generation we.” Emerging Adulthood 1, no. 1, pp. 11-16, 2013.

[7] D. Oblinger, and J. Oblinger, “Is it age or IT: First steps toward understanding the net generation,” Educating the Net Generation, 2(1-2), 20, 2015.

[8] N. Howe, and W. Strauss, “Millennials go to college: Strategies for a new generation on campus,” American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO), 2003.

[9] K. Gregor, T. Judd, B. Dalgarno, and J. Waycott, “Beyond natives and immigrants: exploring types of net generation students,” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, vol. 26, no. 5, pp.332-343, 2010.

[10] T. Teo, “Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers,” Computers & Education 52, no. 2 (2009): 302-312, 2009.

[11] M. Fishbein, and I. Ajzen, “Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research,” 1975.

[12] F.D. Davis, “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology,” MIS Quarterly, pp. 319-340, 1989.

[13] F.D. Davis, R.P. Bagozzi, and P.R. Warshaw, “User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models,” Management Science, vol. 35, no. 8, pp. 982- 1003, 1989.

[14] I. Ajzen, “The theory of planned behavior,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 179-211, 1991.

[15] V. Venkatesh, M.G. Morris, G.B. Davis, and F.D. Davis, “User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view,” MIS Quarterly, pp. 425-478, 2003.

[16] V. Venkatesh, J.Y.L. Thong, and X. Xu, “Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology,” MIS Quarterly, pp. 157-178, 2012.

[17] S.Y. Park. “An analysis of the technology acceptance model in understanding university students’ behavioral intention to use e-learning,” Educational Technology & Society, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 150-162, 2009.

[18] P. Legris, J. Ingham, and P. Collerette, “Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model,” Information & Management, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 191-204, 2003.

[19] H. Nysveen, P.E. Pedersen, and H. Thorbjørnsen, “Intentions to use mobile services: Antecedents and cross-service comparisons,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 330-346, 2005.

[20] L.M. Maruping, B. Hillol, V. Venkatesh, and S.A. Brown, “Going beyond intention Integrating behavioral expectation into the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology,” Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 623-637, 2017.

[21] V. Venkatesh, and M.G. Morris, “Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior.” MIS Quarterly, pp. 115-139, 2000.

[22] M.A. Camilleri and A. Camilleri, “The Students’ Perceptions of Digital Game-Based Learning,” In M. Pivec and J. Grundler, 11th European Conference on Games Based Learning (October). Proceedings, University of Applied Sciences, Graz, Austria, pp 56- 62, 2017.

[23] T. Teo, and M. Zhou, “Explaining the intention to use technology among university students: a structural equation modeling approach,” Journal of Computing in Higher Education, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 124-142, 2014.

[24] T. Doleck, P. Bazelais, and D.J. Lemay, “Examining the antecedents of social networking sites use among CEGEP students,” Education and Information Technologies, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 2103-2123, 2017.

[25] B. Wu, and X. Chen, “Continuance intention to use MOOCs: Integrating the technology acceptance model (TAM) and task technology fit (TTF) model,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 67, pp. 221-232, 2017.

[26] C.T. Chang, J. Hajiyev, and C.R. Su, “Examining the students’ behavioral intention to use e-learning in Azerbaijan? The general extended technology acceptance model for elearning approach,” Computers & Education, vol. 111, pp. 128-143, 2017.

[27] I. Arpaci, K. Kilicer, and S. Bardakci, “Effects of security and privacy concerns on educational use of cloud services,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 45, pp. 93-98,
2015.

[28] A.F. Agudo-Peregrina, Á. Hernández-García, and F.J. Pascual-Miguel, “Behavioral intention, use behavior and the acceptance of electronic learning systems: Differences between higher education and lifelong learning,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 34,
pp. 301-314, 2014.

[29] F. Paraskeva, H. Bouta, and A. Papagianni. “Individual characteristics and computer self-efficacy in secondary education teachers to integrate technology in educational practice,” Computers & Education, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 1084-1091, 2008.

[30] D.R. Compeau, and C.A. Higgins, “Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test,” MIS Quarterly, pp. 189-211, 1995.

[31] S.A. Nikou, and A.A. Economides, “The impact of paper-based, computer-based and mobile-based self-assessment on students’ science motivation and achievement,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 55, pp. 1241-1248, 2016.

[32] L.A. Annetta, J. Minogue, S.Y. Holmes, and M.T. Cheng, “Investigating the impact of video games on high school students’ engagement and learning about genetics,” Computers & Education, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 74-85, 2009.

[33] E.W.T. Ngai, J. K. L. Poon, and Y.H.C. Chan, “Empirical examination of the adoption of WebCT using TAM,” Computers & Education, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 250-267, 2007.

[34] T.Teo, and C. Beng Lee, “Explaining the intention to use technology among student teachers: An application of the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB),” Campus-Wide Information Systems, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 60-67, 2010.

[35] T. Teo, and C. Beng Lee, C. Sing Chai, and S.L. Wong, “Assessing the intention to use technology among pre-service teachers in Singapore and Malaysia: A multigroup invariance analysis of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM),” Computers & Education, vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 1000-1009, 2009.

[36] J.Y.L. Thong, W. Hong, and K.Y. Tam, “Understanding user acceptance of digital libraries: what are the roles of interface characteristics, organizational context, and individual differences?” International journal of human-computer studies, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 215-242, 2002.

[37] M.A. Camilleri, and A.C. Camilleri, “Digital learning resources and ubiquitous technologies in education,” Technology, Knowledge and Learning, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 65- 82, 2017.

[38] D.Y. Lee, and M.R. Lehto, “User acceptance of YouTube for procedural learning: An extension of the Technology Acceptance Model.” Computers & Education, vol. 61, pp. 193-208, 2013.

[39] T. Teo, and P. Van Schalk, “Understanding technology acceptance in pre-service teachers: A structural-equation modeling approach,” The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 47-66, 2009.

[40] C. Smarkola, “Technology acceptance predictors among student teachers and experienced classroom teachers,” Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 65-82, 2007.

[41] M.A. Camilleri, and A.C. Camilleri, “Measuring The Educators’ Behavioural Intention, Perceived Use And Ease Of Use Of Mobile Technologies,” In Wood, G. (Ed) Reconnecting management research with the disciplines: Shaping the research agenda for the social sciences (University of Warwick, September). British Academy of Management, UK, 2017.

[42] M. Turner, B. Kitchenham, P. Brereton, S. Charters, and D. Budgen, “Does the technology acceptance model predict actual use? A systematic literature review,” Information and Software Technology, vol. 52, no. 5, pp. 463-479, 2010.

[43] R.P. Bagozzi, and Y. Youjae, “On the evaluation of structural equation models,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 16, no. 1, pp.74-94, 1988.

[44] M.A. Camilleri, and A.C. Camilleri, “The Technology Acceptance of Mobile Applications in Education,” In Sánchez, I.A. and Isaias, P. (Eds) 13th International Conference on Mobile Learning (Budapest, 11th April). pp41-48. International Association for Development of the Information Society, 2017.

[45] A. Colbert, N. Yee, and G. George, “The digital workforce and the workplace of the future,” Academy of Management Journal, vol. 59, no. 3, pp. 731-739, 2016.

Leave a comment

Filed under digital games, digital media, Education

The Customers’ Brand Identification with Luxury Hotels: A Social Identity Perspective

This is an excerpt from one of my latest papers.

How to Cite: Rather, R.A. & Camilleri, M.A. (2019). The Customers’ Brand Identification with Luxury Hotels: A Social Identity Perspective. In Harrison, T. & Brennan, M. (Eds.) 2019 AMS World Marketing Congress. University of Edinburgh, Scotland (July 2019). Academy of Marketing Science (Download Now).

 

Relevant theoretical underpinnings on the social identity theory (SIT) suggests that the consumers’ self-expressions are somewhat associated with their relationships with firms and brands (Rather & Hollebeek, 2019; Fujita, Harrigan & Soutar, 2018; Elbedweihy, Jayawardhena, Elsharnouby & Elsharnouby, 2016; So, King & Sparkes, 2014; So, King, Sparks & Wang, 2013; Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003). For this reason, this paper relied on the SIT perspective to explore the consumer-brand relationships (Elbedweihy et al., 2016; Lam, Ahearne, Mullins, Hayati, & Schillewaert, 2013; Ahearne, Bhattacharya & Gruen 2005).

The individual consumers form part of a social group who regularly experience the delivery of services (Fujita et al., 2018; Huang, Cheng, & Chen, 2017; Elbedweihet al., 2016; So et al., 2013; Kuenzel & Halliday, 2008; Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003). Hence, the service brands can be considered as the facilitators of the consumers’ social identity and expression as individuals can identify with brands if they perceive that they match their self-concept (Stokburger-Sauer, Ratneshwar, & Sen, 2012; Homburg, Wieseke & Hoyer, 2009). In a similar vein, the customer-brand identification (CBI) concept describes the relationships between the brands and their customers, as it explicates how the brands relate to the individuals’ self-concept (Martinez & Rodriguez del Bosque, 2013). Many brands are increasingly looking after their existing customers by satisfying their various needs, wants and desires (Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001; Martinez & Rodriguez del Bosque, 2014). They do so to retain their existing customers. The loyal customers are usually willing to pay more, spend more and recommend more than new prospects (Martinez & Rodriguez del Bosque, 2014; Harris & Goode, 2004).

The subject of brand loyalty has been explored extensively in the marketing literature. Past studies have often focused on the antecedents of loyalty, including;  customer satisfaction (Popp & Woratschek, 2017), trust (Martinez & Rodriguez del Bosque, 2014; So et al., 2013), perceived service quality (So et al., 2013), commitment (Narteh, Agbemabiese, Kodua, & Braimah, 2013; Su, Swanson, Chinchanachokchai, Hsu, & Chen, 2016), customer engagement (Rather, Hollebeek & Islam, 2019; So et al., 2014), as well as perceived value (So et al., 2013), among other constructs. Notwithstanding, CBI has been investigated in different research contexts, and has often yielded contradictory results. For instance, Su et al. (2016) indicated that brand identification was not significant in predicting customer loyalty. While other studies suggested that the relationship between customer retention, word-of-mouth and loyalty were positive and significant (Kuenzel & Halliday, 2008); other research reported that there is a correlation between CBI and customer loyalty (Rather & Hollebeek, 2019; Martinez & Rodriguez del Bosque, 2013; 2014). However, the literature did not devote sufficient attention to discover the antecedents of CBI, albeit a few exceptions (Su et al., 2016; So et al., 2013; Keh & Xie, 2009).

 

Research Question

Previous theoretical underpinnings and empirical studies have contributed to advancing our knowledge on brand loyalty and customer-brand relationships (Ahearne et al., 2005; Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003; Fujita et al., 2018; He, Li, & Harris, 2012; So et al., 2013). However, there is still a gap in the extent literature that explores CBI by using the social identity perspective (Ahearne, et al., 2005; Choo, Park, & Petrick, 2011; Elbedweihy et al., 2016; He et al., 2012; Martinez and Rodriguez del Bosque, 2014; Popp & Woratschek, 2017; So et al., 2013; Su et al., 2016). Hence, this paper addresses this lacuna in academic literature. The aim of this study is to provide further empirical evidence on the CBI construct (Keh & Xie, 2009; Su et al., 2016). To the best of our knowledge, few studies have combined the social identity theory with social exchange factors to explain the determinants of hotel brand loyalty. Many researchers maintain that by incorporating the social identity (Rindfleisch, Burroughs, & Wong, 2009; Homburg et al., 2009; Tajfel & Turner, 1986) and the service dynamics (Harris & Goode, 2004; Martinez & Rodriguez del Bosque, 2014) they would better understand the psychological processes that are linked to brand loyalty. Prior empirical studies in the hospitality context did not incorporate certain aspects of brand loyalty, including the mediating effects of commitment, satisfaction and trust. Hence, this research differentiates itself from other contributions; by building on the foundations of previous research on the social identity perspective of customer-brand loyalty. However, it considers the direct and indirect effects of social exchange variables from the marketing science literature, to explore the causal path from CBI to brand loyalty. In sum, this study addresses the following research questions: (i) How is CBI related to customer satisfaction? (ii) How is CBI related to trust? (iii) Is CBI different from customer commitment? (iv) Are CBI, customer satisfaction and commitment influencing brand loyalty?

 

References (featuring all the references that appeared in the full paper)

Ahearne, M., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Gruen, T. (2005). Antecedents and consequences of customer–company identification: expanding the role of relationship marketing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(3), 574-585.

Al-Wugayan, A., Pleshko, L., & Baqer, S. (2008). An investigation of the relationships among consumer satisfaction, loyalty, and market share in Kuwaiti loan services. Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 13(2), 95-106.

Anderson, E. W., Fornell, C., & Lehmann, D. R. (1994). Customer satisfaction, market share, and profitability: findings from Sweden.  Journal of Marketing, 5(8), 53-66.

Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14, 20-39.

Bai, B., Law, R., & Wen, I. (2008). The impact of website quality on customer satisfaction and purchase intentions: Evidence from Chinese online visitors. International journal of hospitality management27(3), 391-402.

Bentler, P. M., & Bonnett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588-606.

Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2003). Consumer company identification: a framework for understanding consumers’ relationships with companies. Journal of Marketing, 67(2), 76-88.

Bowden, J. L. H. (2009). The process of customer engagement: A conceptual framework. Journal of marketing theory and practice17(1), 63-74.

Bowden, J. L., Dagger, T, S., & Elliott, G. (2013). Engaging customers for loyalty in the restaurant industry: the role of satisfaction, trust, and delight. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 16(1), 52-75.

Camilleri, M. A. (2017). Understanding customer needs and wants. In Camilleri, M.A. (Ed.) Travel marketing, tourism economics and the airline product (pp. 29-50). Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature.

Camilleri, M.A. (2018). The Marketing Environment of Tourist Destinations. In Camilleri, M.A. (Ed.) The Branding of Tourist Destinations: Theoretical and Empirical Insights. Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing Limited.

Caruana, A. (2002). Service loyalty: The effects of service quality and the mediating role of customer satisfaction. European journal of marketing36(7/8), 811-828.

Chaudhuri, A., & Holbrook, M. (2001). The chain of effects from brand trust and brand affect to brand performance: The role of brand loyalty. Journal of Marketing, 65(2), 81-93.

Choo, H., Park, S.Y., & Petrick, J. F. (2011). The influence of the resident’s identification with a tourism destination brand on their behavior. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 20(2), 198-216.

Elbedweihy, A., Jayawardhena, C., Elsharnouby, M. H., & Elsharnouby, T. H. (2016). Customer relationship building: The role of brand attractiveness and consumer-brand identification. Journal of Business Research, 69, 2901-2910

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.

Fujita, M., Harrigan, P., & Soutar, G. N. (2018). Capturing and co-creating student experiences in social media: a social identity theory perspective. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice26(1-2), 55-71.

Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Babin, B. J., & Black, W. C. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (Vol. 7). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Han, H., & Hyun, S. S. (2013). Image congruence and relationship quality in predicting switching intention conspicuousness of product use as a moderator variable. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 37(3), 303-329.

Harris, L. C., & Goode, M. M. H. (2004). The four levels of loyalty and the pivotal role of trust: a study of online service dynamics. Journal of Retailing, 80(2), 139-158.

He, H., & Li, Y. (2011). CSR and service brand: the mediating effect of brand identification and moderating effect of service quality. Journal of Business Ethics, 100, 673-688.

He, H., Li, Y., & Harris, L. (2012). Social identity perspective on brand loyalty. Journal of Business Research, 65, 648-657.

Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K. P., & Gremler, D. D. (2002). Understanding relationship mmarketing outcomes: an integration of relational benefits and relationship quality. Journal of Service Research, 4(3), 230-247.

Homburg, C., Wieseke, J., & Hoyer, W. D. (2009). Social identity and the service-profit chain. Journal of Marketing, 73(2) 38-54.

Huang, C. C. (2017). The impacts of brand experiences on brand loyalty: mediators of brand love and trust. Management Decision55(5), 915-934.

Huang, M. H., Cheng, Z. H., & Chen, I. C. (2017). The importance of CSR in forming customer-company identification and long-term loyalty. Journal of Services Marketing31(1), 63-72.

Jani, D., & Han, H. (2011). Investigating the key factors affecting behavioral intentions: Evidence from a full-service restaurant setting. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 23(7), 1000-1018.

Keh, H. T., & Xie, Y. (2009). Corporate reputation and customer behavioral intentions: The role of trust, identification and commitment. Industrial Marketing Management, 38, 732-742.

Kuenzel, S., & Halliday, S.V. (2008). Investigating antecedents and consequences of brand identification. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 17, 293-304.

Lam, S. K., Ahearne, M., Mullins, R., Hayati, B., & Schillewaert, N. (2013). Exploring the dynamics of antecedents to consumer–brand identification with a new brand. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 41(2) 234-252.

Liat, C. B., Mansori, S., Chuan, G. C., & Imrie, B. C. (2017). Hotel service recovery and service quality: influences of corporate image and generational differences in the relationship between customer satisfaction and loyalty. Journal of Global Marketing, 30(1), 42-51.

Martinez, P., & Rodriguez Del Bosque Rodriguez, I. (2013). CSR and customer loyalty: The roles of trust, customer identification with the company and satisfaction. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 35, 89-99.

Martinez, P., & Rodriguez Del Bosque Rodriguez, I. (2014). Exploring the antecedents of hotel customer loyalty: A social identity perspective. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 24(1), 1-23.

Moorman, C., Zaltman, G., & Deshpande, R. (1992). Relationships between providers and users of marketing research: The dynamics of trust within and between organizations. Journal of Marketing Research, 29, 314-328.

Morgan, R., & Hunt, S. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58, 20-38.

Narteh, B., Agbemabiese, G. C., Kodua, P., & Braimah, M. (2013). Relationship marketing and customer loyalty: Evidence from the Ghanaian luxury hotel industry. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 22(4), 407-436.

Nam, J., Ekinci, Y., & Whyatt, G. (2011). Brand equity, brand loyalty and consumer satisfaction. Annals of tourism Research38(3), 1009-1030.

Oliver, R.L., (1997). Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer. McGraw- Hill, New York.

Popp, B., & Woratschek, H. (2017). Consumer-brand identification revisited: an integrative framework of brand identification, customer satisfaction, and price image and their role for brand loyalty and word of mouth. Journal of Brand Management, 1-21.

Rather, R. A., & Hollebeek, L. D. (2019). Exploring and validating social identification and social exchange-based drivers of hospitality customer loyalty.

International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. https://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/IJCHM-10-2017-0627

Rather, R. A., Hollebeek, L. D., & Islam, J. U. (2019). Tourism-based customer engagement: the construct, antecedents, and consequences. The Service Industries Journal. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02642069.2019.1570154?journalCode=fsij20

Rindfleisch, A., Burroughs, J., &Wong, N. (2009). The safety of objects: materialism, existential insecurity, and brand connection. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(1), 1-16.

So, K. K. F., King, C., Sparks, B., & Wang, Y. (2013). The influence of customer-brand identification on hotel brand evaluation and loyalty development. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 34, 31-41.

So, K. K. F., King, C., & Sparks, B. (2014). Customer engagement with tourism brands: Scale development and validation. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 38(3), 304-329.

Song, H., Li, G., van der Veen, R., & Chen, J. L. (2011). Assessing mainland Chinese tourists satisfaction with Hong Kong using tourist satisfaction index. International Journal of Tourism Research, 13, 82-96.

Stokburger-Sauer, N., Ratneshwar, S, & Sen, S. (2012) Drivers of consumer-brand identification. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 29(4), 406-418.

Su, L., Swanson, S. R., Chinchanachokchai, S., Hsu, M. K., & Chen, X. (2016). Reputation and intentions: the role of satisfaction, identification, and commitment. Journal of Business Research69(9), 3261-3269.

Sung, Y., & Campbell, W. K. (2009). Brand commitment in consumer–brand relationships: An investment model approach. Journal of Brand Management17(2), 97-113.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of inter-group behavior. In S. Worchel & L. W. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.

Tuskej, U., Golob, U., & Podnar, K. (2013). The role of consumer-brand identification in building brand relationships. Journal of Business Research, 66, 53-59.

Underwood, R., Bond, E., & Baer, R. (2001). Building service brands via social identity: lessons from the sports marketplace. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 9, 1-13.

Leave a comment

Filed under branding, consumer brand identification, Marketing

The Users’ Perceptions of the Electronic Government’s (e-gov) Services

This is an excerpt from one of my latest conference papers entitled; “Exploring the Behavioral Intention to Use E-Government Services: Validating the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology”.

How to Cite: Camilleri, M.A. (2019). Exploring the Behavioral Intention to Use E-Government Services: Validating the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. In Kommers, P., Hui, W., Isaias, P., & Tomayess, I. (Eds) 9th International Conference on Internet Technologies & Society, Lingnan University, Hong Kong (February 2019), International Association for Development of the Information Society.


The information and communication technologies (ICTs) as well as other web-based technologies can enhance the effectiveness, economies and efficiencies of service delivery in the public sector. Therefore, many governments are increasingly using the digital and mobile media to deliver public services to online users (Zuiderwijk Janssen & Dwivedi. 2015). The electronic or mobile government services (e-gov) are facilitators and instruments that are intended to better serve all levels of the governments’ operations, including its departments, agencies and their employees as well as individual citizens, businesses and enterprises (Rana & Dwivedi, 2015). The governments may use information and communication technologies, including computers, websites and business process re-engineering (BPR) to interact with their customers (Isaías, Pífano & Miranda, 2012; Weerakkody, Janssen & Dwivedi, 2011). E-gov services involve the transformational processes within the public administration; that add value to the governments’ procedures and services through the introduction and continued appropriation of information and communication technologies, as a facilitator of these transformations. These government systems have improved over the years.  In the past, online users relied on one-way communications, including emails. Today, online users may engage in two-way communications, as they communicate and interact with the government via the Internet, through instant-messaging (IM), graphical user interfaces (GUI) or audio/video presentations.

Traditionally, the public services were centered around the operations of the governments’ departments. However, e-governance also involves a data exchange between the government and other stakeholders, including the businesses and the general public (Rana & Dwivedi, 2015). The advances in technology have led to significant improvements in the delivery of service quality to online users (Isaías et al., 2012). As e-government services become more sophisticated, the online users will be intrigued to interact with the government as e-services are usually more efficient and less costly than offline services that are delivered by civil servants. However, there may be individuals who for many reasons, may not have access to computers and the internet. Such individuals may not benefit of the governments’ services as other citizens. As a result, the digital divide among citizens can impact their socio-economic status (Ebbers, Jansen & van Deursen, 2016). Moreover, there may be individuals who may be wary of using e-government systems. They may not trust the e-gov sites with their personal information, as they may be concerned on privacy issues. Many individuals still perceive the governments’ online sites as risky and unsecure.

This contribution addresses a knowledge gap in academic literature as it examines the online users’ perceptions on e-gov systems. It relies on valid and reliable measures from the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) (Zuiderwijk et al., 2015; Wang & Shih, 2009; Venkatesh, Morris, Davis & Davis, 2003;2012) to explore the respondents ’attitudes toward performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influences, facilitating conditions as well as their intentions to use the governments’ electronic services. Moreover, it also investigates how the demographic variables, including age, gender and experiences have an effect on the UTAUT constructs.. In a nutshell, this research explains the causal path that leads to the online users’ acceptance and use of e-gov.

References

Ebbers, W. E., Jansen, M. G., & van Deursen, A. J. 2016. Impact of the digital divide on e-government: Expanding from channel choice to channel usage. Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp. 685-692.

Isaías, P., Pífano, S., & Miranda, P. (2012). Web 2.0: Harnessing democracy’s potential. In Public Service, Governance and Web 2.0 Technologies: Future Trends in Social Media (pp. 223-236). IGI Global.

Rana, N. P., & Dwivedi, Y.K. 2015. Citizen’s adoption of an e-government system: Validating extended social cognitive theory (SCT). Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 172-181.

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., & Davis, F. D. 2003. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, pp. 425-478.

Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y., & Xu, X. 2012. Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, pp. 157-178.

Wang, Y.S., & Shih, Y.W. (2009). Why do people use information kiosks? A validation of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 158-165.

Weerakkody, V., Janssen, M., & Dwivedi, Y. K. 2011. Transformational change and business process reengineering (BPR): Lessons from the British and Dutch public sector. Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 320-328.

Zuiderwijk, A., Janssen, M., & Dwivedi, Y.K. 2015. Acceptance and use predictors of open data technologies: Drawing upon the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 429-440.

Leave a comment

Filed under digital media, e government, internet technologies, internet technologies and society, online, Web

Data-Driven Marketing Technologies and Disruptive Innovations

The latest disruptive technologies are supporting  the  marketing mix elements as they can improve the businesses’ interactive engagement with prospective customers, and enhance their personalization of services. They  may also provide secure pricing options.

Many firms are evolving from their passive, rigid, and product-centric state to a more flexible, dynamic, and customer-centric environment. Technology is enabling data-driven companies to monitor and detect any changes in consumer sentiment. Savvy technology giants including Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft and Google are capturing (and analyzing) the online and mobile activity of prospective customers. Their analytics captures the consumers’ interactions with brands and companies through digital media. Big data is enabling them to target and re-target individu­als and online communities with instantaneous pricing and access options, across multiple channels (via web-site activity, mobile,video, social media, e-commerce, among others). 

Mobile tracking technologies are being utilized by big technology conglomerates as they gather information on the consumer behaviours, including their shopping habits, lifestyle preferences , et cetera. Businesses have learnt how to take advantage of on-demand, real-time information from sensors, radio frequency identification and other location tracking devices to better understand their marketing environments at a more granular level (Storey and Song, 2017). This way business could come up with personalised products and services, that are demanded by individual customers. From a business perspective, it is important to acquire this data, quickly, and in high velocities.

Many businesses are already benefiting of the programmatic advertising environment; where buyers and sellers of digital advertising connect online to exchange available inventory (Busch,2016; Stevens et al., 2016).  The challenge for tomorrow’s businesses is to recognize the value of smart technologies as effective tools that can help them analyse their marketing environment; that comprise their customers as well as their competitors.

The predictive-analytical tools can examine different scenarios as they can anticipate what will happen, when it will happen, and can explain why it happens. These technologies can monetise data by identifying revenue generating opportunities and cost savings.

Other innovations, including; blockchain’s distributed ledger technologies are improving data privacy. This technology involves the verification and the secure recording of transactions among an interconnected set of users. Blockchain tracks the ownership of assets before, during, and after any online transaction. Therefore, this technology could be used by different businesses to facilitate their transactions with marketplace stakeholders, including; suppliers, intermediaries, and consumers across borders. The block chain will probably be more convenient than other payment options, in terms of time and money. Therefore, blockchain’s ledger technology can possibly lead to better customer service levels and operational efficiencies for businesses.

The smart tourism technologies, including big data analytics are shifting how organisations collect, analyze and utilise and distribute data. A thorough literature review suggests that the crunching of big data analytics is generating meaningful insights and supporting tourism marketers in their decision making. Moreover,other technologies, including the programmatic advertising and block chain are helping them to improve their financial and strategic performance, whilst minimizing costs. Table 1 illustrates how smart tourism businesses are capturing, analysing and distributing data.

Table 1. Data-driven approaches for smart tourism

(Camilleri, 2018)

Emerging Trends and Future Research

Tomorrow’s tourism businesses will be serving customers from geographically-diverse regions. There will be more travellers from emerging markets and developing economies. The tourism service providers will have to cater to different demographics, including senior citizens and individuals with special needs; as the populations are getting older in many countries.

Therefore,  smart technologies can be used to anticipate the discerned consumers’ requirements. For instance, the use of programmatic advertising will probably increase the individuals’ intuitive shopping experiences and can tap into the individuals’ discretionary purchases.

It is very likely, that the third-party retailers will continue to form part of the distribution mix. However, many service providers will be using their direct channels to reach out to their targeted customers. 

The sales of products will continue to rely on mobile devices with increased consumer interactions through speech and voice recognition software. The service providers may possibly rely on artificial intelligence and other forms of cognitive learning capabilities, like machine learning and deep learning.

The businesses’ distributive systems could interface with virtual reality software to help online intermediaries to merchandise their products in captivating customer experiences. Many online prospects may use blockchain’s secure technology to purchase tourism products, in the foreseeable future.

This contribution calls for further empirical research that could explore smart tourism innovations for individuals and organisations, including; mobile social networking, mobile visualisation, personalization and behavioural modelling for mobile apps, programmatic advertising, blockchain, AI, and the internet of things, among other areas.

References

Busch, O. (2016), “The programmatic advertising principle”, In Programmatic Advertising (pp. 3-15). Springer, Cham, Switzerland.

Camilleri, M.A. (2018) Data-Driven Marketing and Disruptive Technologies. Working Paper 08/2018, Department of Corporate Communication, University of Malta. 

Stevens, A., Rau, A., and McIntyre, M. (2016), “Integrated campaign planning in a programmatic world”, In Programmatic Advertising (pp. 193-210), Springer, Cham, Switzerland. 

Storey, V. C., and Song, I. Y. (2017), “Big data technologies and Management: What conceptual modeling can do?”, Data and Knowledge Engineering, Vol. 108, pp. 50-67.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Analytics, Big Data, blockchain, Business, digital media, Marketing

Product-Service Systems for Sustainable Businesses

This is an excerpt from my latest paper: Camilleri, M. A. (2018). The circular economy’s closed loop and product service systems for sustainable development: A review and appraisal. Sustainable Development. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/sd.1909

(c) The Sustainable Business Edit

Many academic commentators claim that product-service systems (PSS) are moving society towards a resource‐efficient, circular economy (CE) (Tukker, 2015; Piscicelli et al., 2015; Yuan et al., 2006). PSSs shift the businesses’ focus from designing and selling only physical products, to selling a marketable set of products, services, supporting networks, and infrastructures, by including repair and maintenance, updates/upgrades, help desk, training and consultancy, and disposal‐services such as recycling and take‐back (Gaiardelli et al., 2014). Therefore, PSS consists of tangible products as well as intangible services that are combined so that they are jointly capable of satisfying the consumers’ demands (Hockerts & Weaver, 2002).

PSS providers are in a position to design need‐fulfilment systems with lower impacts to the environment, by either replacing an alternative product‐service mix or by influencing the customers’ activities to become more eco‐efficient. Tukker (2015) suggested that firms have an incentive to prolong the service life of their products and to make them as cost‐ and material‐efficient as possible. Moreover, PSSs would typically extend beyond purchase, affecting the use and disposal of resources. Hence, these systems could lead to the minimisation of material flows in the economy whilst maximising the businesses’ service output and their users’ satisfaction (Tukker & Tischner, 2006). There are three types of PSSs that prescribe different product service components and ownership packages:

(a) a product‐PSS that adds extra services but the ownership of the product(s) is transferred to the consumer(s);

(b) the results‐PSSs that would involve both parties agreeing to achieve target results, as they recast product(s) as utilised materials;

(c) in use‐PSSs, the provider(s) lease, share or pool their product(s); however, they retain the ownership of the product(s).

For instance, Koninklijke Philips N.V. (Royal Philips, commonly known as Philips), a diversified technology company utilises the use‐PSS approach, as it provides a lighting service to customers and is responsible for its technology risk. The Dutch company installs its lighting equipment (including street lighting), maintains it, and ensures that it runs for a very long time. Eventually, it reclaims back its equipment when it is the right time to recycle materials. This property rights are distributed amongst Philips and its clients, over the life time of the products. Philips has recognised an untapped opportunity to retain ownership of its products, as it has committed itself to dispose of the infrastructure and its constituent parts at their end of life. At the same time, customers (including the government) do not have to pay high upfront costs for their lighting equipment. Interestingly, Philips is also adopting a similar PSS within health care environments where it has established leasing relationships with clients for its medical infrastructure. Again, the company will eventually reclaim back its equipment and upgrades it when necessary. When the medical equipment is refurbished with the state‐of‐the art technology, the multinational firm will reuse it for another customer; it provides a warrantee cover and guarantees its products as new.

The idea of shared ownership is conspicuous with the results‐ and use‐PSSs. These systems have led to upstream effects (through sustainable designs) and increased throughput. As a result, they are sustainable in the long run, as there are less externalities, in terms of waste and emissions.

References

Camilleri, M. A.(2017). Corporate sustainability, social responsibility and 
environmental management: An introduction to theory and practice with 
case studies. Cham: Springer Nature.

Gaiardelli, P.,Resta, B., Martinez, V., Pinto, R., & Albores, P. (2014). A
classification model for product‐service offerings. Journal of cleaner 
production, 66,507–519.

Hockerts, K.,& Weaver, N. (2002). Are service systems worth our interest.
Assessing the eco‐efficiency of sustainable service systems. Working document, INSEADFontainebleau, France.

Piscicelli, L.,Cooper, T., & Fisher, T. (2015). The role of values in collaborative
consumption:Insights from a product service system for lending
and borrowing in the UK. Journal of Cleaner Production, 97, 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.07.032

Tukker, A. (2015). Product services for a resource‐efficient andcircular
economy—A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 97, 76–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.049

Tukker, A., &Tischner, U. (2006). Product‐services as a research field: Past, present and future. Reflections from a decade of research. Journal of 
Cleaner Production, 14(17),1552–1556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.01.02

Yuan, Z., Bi, J.,& Moriguichi, Y. (2006). The circular economy: A new development strategy in China.Journal of Industrial Ecology, 10(1), 4–8.



Leave a comment

Filed under Circular Economy, Sustainability, sustainable development

The Circular Economy and the Sustainability Agenda

This is excerpt from my latest paper that was accepted by ‘Sustainable Development’ (Wiley).

How to Cite: Camilleri, M.A. (2018). The Circular Economy’s Closed Loop and Product Service Systems for Sustainable Development: A Review and Appraisal. Sustainable Development. Forthcoming.

The Brundtland Report (WCED, 1987) defined sustainable development as; “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (p. 43). Its underlying assumption is that the world’s physical resources are not finite, therefore, they have to be managed responsibly to sustain future generations. Subsequently, the United Nations (UN) Conference on Environment and Development has put forward Agenda 21 that dedicated a chapter that was focused on unsustainable patterns of production and consumption. This document recommended that the UN’s member states ought to intensify their efforts to reduce the use of scarce resources during production processes, whilst minimising the environmental impacts from generation of waste and pollution (Agenda 21, 1992).

In 2002, the UN Report of the World Summit on Sustainable Development also made reference to unsustainable patterns of production and consumption. The UN’s member states were urged to manage their natural resources sustainably and with lower negative environmental impacts; by promoting the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and ecosystems, whilst reducing waste (WSSD, 2002, p 13). Moreover, in another resolution, entitled; “The future we want”, the General Assembly at the UN Conference on Sustainable Development has reaffirmed its commitment to implementing green economy policies in the context of sustainable development. The Heads of State and Government or their representatives have agreed to continue promoting the integrated and sustainable management of eco-systems; whilst facilitating their conservation, regeneration and restoration of resources (UNCSD, 2012). Furthermore, during the UN’s General Assembly Resolution of 25 September 2015, entitled; “Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” the world leaders have agreed to adopt the Sustainable Development Goals that replaced the previous millennium development goals that were established in the year 2000. Specifically, the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 12 of the 2030 agenda, namely; “Sustainable Consumption and Production” explained that there is an opportunity for business and industry to reap economic gains through resource and energy efficiencies. It also raised awareness on the use of sustainable infrastructures and urged the UN member states to address air, water and soil pollution to minimise their environmental impact (UNDP, 2015). Moreover, the Paris Climate Agreement (COP 21) and Resolutions 1/5 and 2/7 on chemicals and waste, and 2/8 on sustainable production and consumption, as adopted by the 1st and 2nd sessions of the United Nations Environment Assembly (that was held in Nairobi, Kenya on the 27th June 2014 and the 27th May 2016), are also considered as important policy instruments for many stakeholders, as they have paved the way for the transition toward the circular economy strategy.

These intergovernmental policy recommendations on sustainable consumption and production have led to increased regulatory pressures on business and industry toward controlled operations management and environmentally-responsible practices. In 2014, the European Union (EU) Commission anticipated that, “new business models, eco-designs and industrial symbiosis can move the community toward zero-waste; reduce greenhouse emissions and environmental impacts” (EU, 2018). Eventually, in March 2017, the EU Commission and the European Economic and Social Committee organised a Circular Economy Stakeholder Conference, where it reported on the delivery and progress of some of its Action Plan. It also established a Finance Support Platform with the European Investment Bank (EIB) and issued important guidance documents to Member States on the conversion of waste to energy.

Other EU Communications on this subject, comprised: “Innovation for a sustainable future – The Eco-innovation Action Plan“; “Building the Single Market for Green Products: Facilitating better information on the environmental performance of products and organisations“; “Green Action Plan for SMEs: enabling SMEs to turn environmental challenges into business opportunities“; “Closing the loop –An EU action plan for the Circular Economy” and the report on its implementation, and “Investing in a smart, innovative and sustainable Industry – A renewed EU Industrial Policy Strategy“, among others (EU, 2017). Recently, the EU commission has adopted a set of measures, including; a “Strategy for Plastics in the Circular Economy” that specified that all plastics packaging will have to be recyclable by 2030; It released a communication on the interface between chemical, product and waste legislation, as it explains how they relate to each other. Moreover, the commission launched a Monitoring Framework that may be used to assess the progress of its member states towards the implementation of the circular economy action plan. This framework is composed of a set of ten key indicators, comprising; 1) EU self-sufficiency for raw materials; 2) Green public procurement; 3a-c) Waste generation; 4) Food waste, 5a-b) Overall recycling rates, 6a-f) Recycling rates for specific waste streams, 7a-b) Contribution of recycled materials to raw materials demand, 8) Trade in recyclable raw materials, 9a-c) Private investments, jobs and gross value added, and 10) Patents. Furthermore, (EU, 2018) published a report on the supply and demand of critical raw materials that are used in mining, landfills, electrical and electronic equipment, batteries, automotive sector, renewable energy, defence industry as well as for chemicals and fertilizers.


References

Agenda 21. 1992. United Nations Conference on Environment & Development. Rio de Janerio, Brazil, 3 to 14 June 1992. United Nations Sustainable Development. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf [6 July 2018].

EU 2017. Council conclusions on eco-innovation: enabling the transition towards a circulareconomy. European Council of the European Union, Brussels, Belgium. http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/12/18/council-conclusions-on-eco-innovation-transition-towards-a-circular-economy/#[5th July 2018].

EU 2018. Implementation of the Circular Economy Action Plan. European Commission.  http://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/index_en.htm[5th July 2018].

UNCSD 2012. The Future We Want – Outcome document. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 27 July 2012. United Nations  General Assembly. http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/66/288&Lang=E [25 June 2018].

UNDP 2015. Transforming our World. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015. http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_RES_70_1_E.pdf [25 June 2018].

WSSD 2002. United Nations Report of the World Summit on Sustainable Development. Johannesburg, South Africa, 26 August- 4 September 2002.  http://www.un-documents.net/aconf199-20.pdf [29 June 2018].

Leave a comment

Filed under Circular Economy, Corporate Social Responsibility, Corporate Sustainability and Responsibility, CSR, Shared Value, Sustainability, sustainable development