Cited by 187Customer Service Quality and LoyaltyConsumer Market Behavior and PricingService and Product Innovation

Switching barriers in business‐to‐business services: a qualitative study

Yanamandram, Venkata, White, Lesley·2006·International Journal of Service Industry Management

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the determinants of behavioural brand loyalty amongst dissatisfied customers in the business‐to‐business (B2B) services sector. Design/methodology/approach: A qualitative study was conducted, with 28 personal interviews undertaken with managers who are involved in the choice of service providers. The respondents belonged to 24 organisations located in Australia. Template analysis and eyeballing were techniques used to analyse the data collected. Findings: Assessment of the reasons why dissatisfied customers stayed with the service providers resulted in six categories. The categories were found to be, in order of decreasing frequency, impact of alternative providers, switching costs (18), others (17), inertia (14), investment in relationships (13), and service recovery (13). The results not only confirmed factors found in the literature, but also uncovered 11 other factors. Research limitations/implications: The sample size, whilst appropriate for qualitative research, should be considered adequate only for exploratory analysis and a further quantitative study is needed to validate the study. Practical implications: This study is important for those firms who have many prospective switchers because it is important to understand why these customers stay, and to what extent such firms can discourage such customers from leaving in both positive and negative ways. For those service firms that are attempting to attract these prospective switchers, an understanding of why they do not switch is important, as it will enable them to develop strategies to overcome these switching barriers and gain market share. Originality/value: This research is the first study to investigate in a single model a range of barriers to switching in a B2B services context. The results that confirmed categories found in the literature also discovered 11 other factors not evident in the extant literature.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/09564230610656980

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 164 · Cited by 187

Authors
Yanamandram, V., & White, L.
Affiliations
  • University of Wollongong (AU)
  • Macquarie University (AU)
Venue
International Journal of Service Industry Management
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2006-03-01
Volume
17
Issue
2
Pages
158-192
ISSN
0956-4233 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2106264609
Cited by
187
References
164
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 19
FWCI
22.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Service Industry Management (publishedVersion)
  • Research Online (University of Wollongong) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion)
Funders
University of Wollongong
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Customer Service Quality and Loyalty
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Market Behavior and Pricing
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Service and Product Innovation
Keywords
switching barriers, business-to-business services, brand loyalty, customer dissatisfaction, switching costs, inertia, relationship investment, service recovery, service provider selection, customer retention

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review